10-Q
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-Q
x |
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2013
or
¨ |
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
|
|
For the transition period
from
to |
|
|
Commission File Number: 001-14965
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
13-4019460
|
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
|
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
|
|
200 West Street, New York, N.Y. |
|
10282 |
(Address of principal executive offices) |
|
(Zip Code) |
(212) 902-1000
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
x Yes ¨ No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any,
every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit
and post such files).
x Yes ¨
No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a
non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
|
|
|
Large accelerated
filer x Accelerated
filer ¨ |
|
Non-accelerated filer ¨ (Do not check if a smaller reporting
company) Smaller reporting company ¨ |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
¨ Yes x
No
APPLICABLE ONLY TO CORPORATE ISSUERS
As of April 26, 2013, there were 458,505,280 shares of the registrants common stock outstanding.
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC.
QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2013
INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Form 10-Q Item Number |
|
Page No. |
|
PART I |
|
FINANCIAL INFORMATION |
|
2 |
|
Item 1 |
|
Financial Statements (Unaudited) |
|
2 |
|
|
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Earnings for the three months ended March 31,
2013 and March 31, 2012 |
|
2 |
|
|
|
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the three months ended March 31,
2013 and March 31, 2012 |
|
3 |
|
|
|
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition as of March 31,
2013 and December 31, 2012 |
|
4 |
|
|
|
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders Equity for the three months ended March 31, 2013
and year ended December 31, 2012 |
|
5 |
|
|
|
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the three months ended March 31,
2013 and March 31, 2012 |
|
6 |
|
|
|
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements |
|
7 |
|
|
|
Note 1. Description of Business |
|
7 |
|
|
|
Note 2. Basis of Presentation |
|
7 |
|
|
|
Note 3. Significant Accounting
Policies |
|
8 |
|
|
|
Note 4.
Financial Instruments Owned, at Fair Value and Financial Instruments Sold, But Not Yet Purchased, at Fair Value |
|
13 |
|
|
|
Note 5. Fair Value Measurements |
|
14 |
|
|
|
Note 6. Cash Instruments |
|
16 |
|
|
|
Note 7. Derivatives and Hedging
Activities |
|
25 |
|
|
|
Note 8. Fair Value Option |
|
41 |
|
|
|
Note 9. Collateralized Agreements and
Financings |
|
50 |
|
|
|
Note 10. Securitization Activities |
|
56 |
|
|
|
Note 11. Variable Interest Entities |
|
59 |
|
|
|
Note 12. Other Assets |
|
64 |
|
|
|
Note 13. Goodwill and Identifiable Intangible
Assets |
|
65 |
|
|
|
Note 14. Deposits |
|
67 |
|
|
|
Note 15. Short-Term Borrowings |
|
68 |
|
|
|
Note 16. Long-Term Borrowings |
|
69 |
|
|
|
Note 17. Other Liabilities and Accrued
Expenses |
|
72 |
|
|
|
Note 18. Commitments, Contingencies and
Guarantees |
|
73 |
|
|
|
Note 19. Shareholders Equity |
|
79 |
|
|
|
Note 20. Regulation and Capital Adequacy |
|
82 |
|
|
|
Note 21. Earnings Per Common Share |
|
87 |
|
|
|
Note 22. Transactions with Affiliated Funds |
|
88 |
|
|
|
Note 23. Interest Income and Interest
Expense |
|
89 |
|
|
|
Note 24. Income Taxes |
|
89 |
|
|
|
Note 25. Business Segments |
|
90 |
|
|
|
Note 26. Credit Concentrations |
|
94 |
|
|
|
Note 27. Legal Proceedings |
|
95 |
|
|
|
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm |
|
108 |
|
|
|
Statistical Disclosures |
|
109 |
|
Item 2 |
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
|
|
111 |
|
Item 3 |
|
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk |
|
179 |
|
Item 4 |
|
Controls and Procedures |
|
179 |
|
PART II |
|
OTHER INFORMATION |
|
179 |
|
Item 1 |
|
Legal Proceedings |
|
179 |
|
Item 2 |
|
Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds |
|
180 |
|
Item 6 |
|
Exhibits |
|
181 |
|
SIGNATURES |
|
182 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
1 |
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements (Unaudited)
THE GOLDMAN
SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Earnings
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions, except per share amounts |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment banking |
|
|
$ 1,568 |
|
|
|
$1,160 |
|
|
|
Investment management |
|
|
1,250 |
|
|
|
1,105 |
|
|
|
Commissions and fees |
|
|
829 |
|
|
|
860 |
|
|
|
Market making |
|
|
3,437 |
|
|
|
3,905 |
|
|
|
Other principal transactions |
|
|
2,081 |
|
|
|
1,938 |
|
Total non-interest revenues |
|
|
9,165 |
|
|
|
8,968 |
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
|
2,608 |
|
|
|
2,833 |
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
1,852 |
|
Net interest income |
|
|
925 |
|
|
|
981 |
|
Net revenues, including net interest income |
|
|
10,090 |
|
|
|
9,949 |
|
Operating
expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation and benefits |
|
|
4,339 |
|
|
|
4,378 |
|
|
|
Brokerage, clearing, exchange and
distribution fees |
|
|
561 |
|
|
|
567 |
|
|
|
Market development |
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
Communications and technology |
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
Occupancy |
|
|
218 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
|
|
Professional fees |
|
|
246 |
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
Insurance reserves |
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
Other expenses |
|
|
595 |
|
|
|
474 |
|
Total non-compensation expenses |
|
|
2,378 |
|
|
|
2,390 |
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
6,717 |
|
|
|
6,768 |
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
3,373 |
|
|
|
3,181 |
|
|
|
Provision for taxes |
|
|
1,113 |
|
|
|
1,072 |
|
Net earnings |
|
|
2,260 |
|
|
|
2,109 |
|
|
|
Preferred stock dividends |
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Net earnings applicable to common shareholders |
|
|
$ 2,188 |
|
|
|
$2,074 |
|
Earnings per common
share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
$ 4.53 |
|
|
|
$ 4.05 |
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
4.29 |
|
|
|
3.92 |
|
|
|
Dividends declared per common
share |
|
|
$ 0.50 |
|
|
|
$ 0.35 |
|
|
|
Average common shares
outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
482.1 |
|
|
|
510.8 |
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
509.8 |
|
|
|
529.2 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part
of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Net earnings |
|
|
$2,260 |
|
|
|
$2,109 |
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income/(loss), net of tax: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency translation adjustment, net of tax |
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
Pension and postretirement liability adjustments, net of tax |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains on available-for-sale securities, net of tax |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Other comprehensive income/(loss) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
9 |
|
Comprehensive income |
|
|
$2,245 |
|
|
|
$2,118 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated
financial statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
3 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions, except share and per share amounts |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
$ 63,333 |
|
|
|
$ 72,669 |
|
|
|
Cash and securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes (includes $22,676 and $30,484 at fair value as of March 2013 and
December 2012, respectively) |
|
|
41,044 |
|
|
|
49,671 |
|
|
|
Collateralized agreements: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities purchased under agreements to resell and federal funds sold (includes $158,283 and $141,331 at fair value as of
March 2013 and December 2012, respectively) |
|
|
158,506 |
|
|
|
141,334 |
|
|
|
Securities borrowed (includes $54,879 and $38,395 at fair value as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively) |
|
|
172,041 |
|
|
|
136,893 |
|
|
|
Receivables from brokers, dealers and clearing organizations |
|
|
20,501 |
|
|
|
18,480 |
|
|
|
Receivables from customers and counterparties (includes $7,154 and $7,866 at fair value as of March 2013 and
December 2012, respectively) |
|
|
77,917 |
|
|
|
72,874 |
|
|
|
Financial instruments owned, at fair value (includes $67,891 and $67,177 pledged as collateral as of March 2013 and
December 2012, respectively) |
|
|
387,393 |
|
|
|
407,011 |
|
|
|
Other assets (includes $13,448 and $13,426 at fair value as of March 2013 and
December 2012, respectively) |
|
|
38,488 |
|
|
|
39,623 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
$959,223 |
|
|
|
$938,555 |
|
Liabilities and
shareholders equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits (includes $7,070 and $5,100 at fair value as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively) |
|
|
$ 72,685 |
|
|
|
$ 70,124 |
|
|
|
Collateralized financings: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase, at fair value |
|
|
155,356 |
|
|
|
171,807 |
|
|
|
Securities loaned (includes $2,423 and $1,558 at fair value as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively) |
|
|
20,669 |
|
|
|
13,765 |
|
|
|
Other secured financings (includes $28,482 and $30,337 at fair value as of March 2013
and December 2012, respectively) |
|
|
29,468 |
|
|
|
32,010 |
|
|
|
Payables to brokers, dealers and clearing organizations |
|
|
6,949 |
|
|
|
5,283 |
|
|
|
Payables to customers and counterparties |
|
|
196,578 |
|
|
|
189,202 |
|
|
|
Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value |
|
|
153,749 |
|
|
|
126,644 |
|
|
|
Unsecured short-term borrowings, including the current portion of unsecured long-term borrowings (includes $18,298 and $17,595 at fair
value as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively) |
|
|
40,980 |
|
|
|
44,304 |
|
|
|
Unsecured long-term borrowings (includes $12,248 and $12,593 at fair value as of March 2013 and
December 2012, respectively) |
|
|
167,008 |
|
|
|
167,305 |
|
|
|
Other liabilities and accrued expenses (includes $11,842 and $12,043 at fair value as of
March 2013 and December 2012, respectively) |
|
|
38,553 |
|
|
|
42,395 |
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
881,995 |
|
|
|
862,839 |
|
|
|
Commitments, contingencies and
guarantees |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders
equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, par value $0.01 per share; aggregate liquidation preference of $6,200 as of both March 2013 and
December 2012 |
|
|
6,200 |
|
|
|
6,200 |
|
|
|
Common stock, par value $0.01 per share; 4,000,000,000 shares authorized, 822,358,425 and 816,807,400 shares issued as of
March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, and 460,782,218 and 465,148,387 shares outstanding as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
Restricted stock units and employee stock options |
|
|
3,679 |
|
|
|
3,298 |
|
|
|
Nonvoting common stock, par value $0.01 per share; 200,000,000 shares authorized, no shares issued and outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
48,732 |
|
|
|
48,030 |
|
|
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
67,164 |
|
|
|
65,223 |
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(208 |
) |
|
|
(193 |
) |
|
|
Stock held in treasury, at cost, par value $0.01 per share; 361,576,209 and 351,659,015 shares as
of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively |
|
|
(48,347 |
) |
|
|
(46,850 |
) |
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
77,228 |
|
|
|
75,716 |
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
|
$959,223 |
|
|
|
$938,555 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders Equity
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
Year Ended |
|
in millions |
|
|
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year |
|
|
|
|
$ 6,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 3,100 |
|
|
|
Issued |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,100 |
|
Balance, end of period |
|
|
|
|
6,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,200 |
|
|
|
Common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year |
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
Issued |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of period |
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
Restricted stock units and employee stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year |
|
|
|
|
3,298 |
|
|
|
|
|
5,681 |
|
|
|
Issuance and amortization of restricted stock units and employee stock options |
|
|
|
|
1,502 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,368 |
|
|
|
Delivery of common stock underlying restricted stock units |
|
|
|
|
(1,099 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(3,659 |
) |
|
|
Forfeiture of restricted stock units and employee stock options |
|
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(90 |
) |
|
|
Exercise of employee stock options |
|
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
Balance, end of period |
|
|
|
|
3,679 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,298 |
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year |
|
|
|
|
48,030 |
|
|
|
|
|
45,553 |
|
|
|
Delivery of common stock underlying share-based awards |
|
|
|
|
1,102 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,939 |
|
|
|
Cancellation of restricted stock units in satisfaction of withholding tax requirements |
|
|
|
|
(458 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(1,437 |
) |
|
|
Preferred stock issuance costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
Excess net tax benefit/(provision) related to share-based awards |
|
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
Cash settlement of share-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Balance, end of period |
|
|
|
|
48,732 |
|
|
|
|
|
48,030 |
|
|
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year |
|
|
|
|
65,223 |
|
|
|
|
|
58,834 |
|
|
|
Net earnings |
|
|
|
|
2,260 |
|
|
|
|
|
7,475 |
|
|
|
Dividends and dividend equivalents declared on common stock and restricted stock units |
|
|
|
|
(247 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(903 |
) |
|
|
Dividends declared on preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(183 |
) |
Balance, end of period |
|
|
|
|
67,164 |
|
|
|
|
|
65,223 |
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year |
|
|
|
|
(193 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(516 |
) |
|
|
Other comprehensive income/(loss) |
|
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
323 |
|
Balance, end of period |
|
|
|
|
(208 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(193 |
) |
|
|
Stock held in treasury, at cost |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year |
|
|
|
|
(46,850 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(42,281 |
) |
|
|
Repurchased |
|
|
|
|
(1,525 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(4,637 |
) |
|
|
Reissued |
|
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
Balance, end of period |
|
|
|
|
(48,347 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(46,850 |
) |
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
|
|
$ 77,228 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 75,716 |
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
condensed consolidated financial statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
5 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings |
|
|
$ 2,260 |
|
|
|
$ 2,109 |
|
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net earnings to net cash provided by/(used for) operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
Share-based compensation |
|
|
1,509 |
|
|
|
643 |
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes |
|
|
8,527 |
|
|
|
11,165 |
|
|
|
Net receivables from brokers, dealers and clearing organizations |
|
|
(339 |
) |
|
|
(2,671 |
) |
|
|
Net payables to customers and counterparties |
|
|
3,356 |
|
|
|
7,290 |
|
|
|
Securities borrowed, net of securities loaned |
|
|
(28,245 |
) |
|
|
(14,813 |
) |
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase, net of securities purchased under agreements to resell
and federal funds sold |
|
|
(33,576 |
) |
|
|
15,328 |
|
|
|
Financial instruments owned, at fair value |
|
|
20,028 |
|
|
|
(22,023 |
) |
|
|
Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value |
|
|
27,227 |
|
|
|
6,304 |
|
|
|
Other, net |
|
|
(6,747 |
) |
|
|
11 |
|
Net cash provided by/(used for) operating activities |
|
|
(5,698 |
) |
|
|
3,776 |
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of property, leasehold improvements and equipment |
|
|
(171 |
) |
|
|
(390 |
) |
|
|
Proceeds from sales of property, leasehold improvements and equipment |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
Business acquisitions, net of cash acquired |
|
|
(160 |
) |
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
Proceeds from sales of investments |
|
|
526 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
Purchase of available-for-sale securities |
|
|
(501 |
) |
|
|
(653 |
) |
|
|
Proceeds from sales of available-for-sale securities |
|
|
709 |
|
|
|
699 |
|
|
|
Loans held for investment, net |
|
|
(1,373 |
) |
|
|
(238 |
) |
Net cash used for investing activities |
|
|
(953 |
) |
|
|
(478 |
) |
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unsecured short-term borrowings, net |
|
|
(435 |
) |
|
|
(869 |
) |
|
|
Other secured financings (short-term), net |
|
|
(4,824 |
) |
|
|
(483 |
) |
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of other secured financings (long-term) |
|
|
1,829 |
|
|
|
798 |
|
|
|
Repayment of other secured financings (long-term), including the current portion |
|
|
(969 |
) |
|
|
(4,334 |
) |
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of unsecured long-term borrowings |
|
|
13,069 |
|
|
|
9,358 |
|
|
|
Repayment of unsecured long-term borrowings, including the current portion |
|
|
(12,530 |
) |
|
|
(11,134 |
) |
|
|
Derivative contracts with a financing element, net |
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
Deposits, net |
|
|
2,562 |
|
|
|
4,765 |
|
|
|
Common stock repurchased |
|
|
(1,525 |
) |
|
|
(365 |
) |
|
|
Dividends and dividend equivalents paid on common stock, preferred stock and restricted stock units |
|
|
(319 |
) |
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock, including stock option exercises |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
Excess tax benefit related to share-based compensation |
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
Cash settlement of share-based compensation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Net cash used for financing activities |
|
|
(2,685 |
) |
|
|
(2,168 |
) |
Net increase/(decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(9,336 |
) |
|
|
1,130 |
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year |
|
|
72,669 |
|
|
|
56,008 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period |
|
|
$ 63,333 |
|
|
|
$ 57,138 |
|
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURES:
Cash payments for interest, net of capitalized interest, were $1.96 billion and $4.04 billion during the three months ended March 2013 and March 2012, respectively.
Cash payments for income taxes, net of refunds were $464 million during the three months ended March 2013. Income tax refunds, net of cash
payments were $29 million during the three months ended March 2012.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these
condensed consolidated financial statements.
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 1. Description of Business
Note 1.
Description of Business
The
Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (Group Inc.), a Delaware corporation, together with its consolidated subsidiaries (collectively, the firm), is a leading global investment banking, securities and investment management firm that provides a wide range of
financial services to a substantial and diversified client base that includes corporations, financial institutions, governments and high-net-worth individuals. Founded in 1869, the firm is headquartered in New York and maintains offices in all major
financial centers around the world.
The firm reports its activities in the following four business segments:
Investment Banking
The
firm provides a broad range of investment banking services to a diverse group of corporations, financial institutions, investment funds and governments. Services include strategic advisory assignments with respect to mergers and acquisitions,
divestitures, corporate defense activities, risk management, restructurings and spin-offs, and debt and equity underwriting of public offerings and private placements, including domestic and cross-border transactions, as well as derivative
transactions directly related to these activities.
Institutional Client Services
The firm facilitates client transactions and makes markets in fixed income, equity, currency and commodity products, primarily with
institutional clients such as corporations, financial institutions, investment funds and governments. The firm also makes markets in and clears client transactions on major stock, options and futures exchanges worldwide and provides financing,
securities lending and other prime brokerage services to institutional clients.
Investing & Lending
The firm invests in and originates loans to provide financing to clients. These investments and loans are typically longer-term in nature.
The firm makes investments, directly and indirectly through funds that the firm manages, in debt securities and loans, public and private equity securities, real estate, consolidated investment entities and power generation facilities.
Investment Management
The firm provides investment management services and offers investment products (primarily through separately managed accounts and commingled vehicles, such as mutual funds and private investment funds)
across all major asset classes to a diverse set of institutional and individual clients. The firm also offers wealth advisory services, including portfolio management and financial counseling, and brokerage and other transaction services to
high-net-worth individuals and families.
Note 2. Basis of Presentation
Note 2.
Basis of Presentation
These condensed consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (U.S. GAAP) and include the accounts of Group Inc. and all other entities in which the firm has a controlling financial interest. Intercompany transactions and balances have been
eliminated.
These condensed consolidated financial statements are unaudited and should be read in conjunction with the audited
consolidated financial statements included in the firms Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012. References to the firms Annual Report on Form 10-K are to the firms Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012. The condensed consolidated financial information as of December 31, 2012 has been derived from audited consolidated financial statements not included herein.
These unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements reflect all adjustments that are, in the opinion of management,
necessary for a fair statement of the results for the interim periods presented. These adjustments are of a normal, recurring nature. Interim period operating results may not be indicative of the operating results for a full year.
All references to March 2013 and March 2012 refer to the firms periods ended, or the dates, as the context requires,
March 31, 2013 and March 31, 2012, respectively. All references to December 2012 refer to the date December 31, 2012. Any reference to a future year refers to a year ending on December 31 of that year. Certain
reclassifications have been made to previously reported amounts to conform to the current presentation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
7 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 3. Significant Accounting Policies
Note 3.
Significant Accounting Policies
The firms significant accounting policies include when and how to measure the fair
value of assets and liabilities, accounting for goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, and when to consolidate an entity. See Notes 5 through 8 for policies on fair value measurements, Note 13 for policies on goodwill and
identifiable intangible assets, and below and Note 11 for policies on consolidation accounting. All other significant accounting policies are either discussed below or included in the following footnotes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Instruments Owned, at Fair Value
and Financial Instruments Sold, But Not Yet
Purchased, at Fair Value |
|
|
Note 4 |
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements |
|
|
Note 5 |
|
|
|
Cash Instruments |
|
|
Note 6 |
|
|
|
Derivatives and Hedging Activities |
|
|
Note 7 |
|
|
|
Fair Value Option |
|
|
Note 8 |
|
|
|
Collateralized Agreements and Financings |
|
|
Note 9 |
|
|
|
Securitization Activities |
|
|
Note 10 |
|
|
|
Variable Interest Entities |
|
|
Note 11 |
|
|
|
Other Assets |
|
|
Note 12 |
|
|
|
Goodwill and Identifiable Intangible Assets |
|
|
Note 13 |
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
Note 14 |
|
|
|
Short-Term Borrowings |
|
|
Note 15 |
|
|
|
Long-Term Borrowings |
|
|
Note 16 |
|
|
|
Other Liabilities and Accrued Expenses |
|
|
Note 17 |
|
|
|
Commitments, Contingencies and Guarantees |
|
|
Note 18 |
|
|
|
Shareholders Equity |
|
|
Note 19 |
|
|
|
Regulation and Capital Adequacy |
|
|
Note 20 |
|
|
|
Earnings Per Common Share |
|
|
Note 21 |
|
|
|
Transactions with Affiliated Funds |
|
|
Note 22 |
|
|
|
Interest Income and Interest Expense |
|
|
Note 23 |
|
|
|
Income Taxes |
|
|
Note 24 |
|
|
|
Business Segments |
|
|
Note 25 |
|
|
|
Credit Concentrations |
|
|
Note 26 |
|
|
|
Legal Proceedings |
|
|
Note 27 |
|
Consolidation
The firm consolidates entities in which the firm has a controlling financial interest. The firm determines whether it has a controlling financial interest in an entity by first evaluating whether the
entity is a voting interest entity or a variable interest entity (VIE).
Voting Interest Entities.
Voting interest entities are entities in which (i) the total equity investment at risk is sufficient to enable the entity to finance its activities independently and (ii) the equity holders have the power to direct the activities of the
entity that most significantly impact its economic performance, the obligation to absorb the losses of the entity and the right to receive the residual returns of the entity. The usual condition for a controlling financial interest in a voting
interest entity is ownership of a majority voting interest. If the firm has a majority voting interest in a voting interest entity, the entity is consolidated.
Variable Interest
Entities. A VIE is an entity that lacks one or more of the characteristics of a voting interest entity. The firm has a controlling financial interest in a VIE when the firm has a variable
interest or interests that provide it with (i) the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the VIEs economic performance and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses of the VIE or the right to receive
benefits from the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE. See Note 11 for further information about VIEs.
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Equity-Method
Investments. When the firm does not have a controlling financial interest in an entity but can exert significant influence over the entitys operating and financial policies, the
investment is accounted for either (i) under the equity method of accounting or (ii) at fair value by electing the fair value option available under U.S. GAAP. Significant influence generally exists when the firm owns 20% to 50% of the
entitys common stock or in-substance common stock.
In general, the firm accounts for investments acquired after the fair
value option became available, at fair value. In certain cases, the firm applies the equity method of accounting to new investments that are strategic in nature or closely related to the firms principal business activities, when the firm has a
significant degree of involvement in the cash flows or operations of the investee or when cost-benefit considerations are less significant. See Note 12 for further information about equity-method investments.
Investment Funds. The firm has formed numerous investment funds with third-party investors. These funds are typically organized as limited partnerships or limited liability companies for which the firm acts as general
partner or manager. Generally, the firm does not hold a majority of the economic interests in these funds. These funds are usually voting interest entities and generally are not consolidated because third-party investors typically have rights to
terminate the funds or to remove the firm as general partner or manager. Investments in these funds are included in Financial instruments owned, at fair value. See Notes 6, 18 and 22 for further information about investments in
funds.
Use of Estimates
Preparation of these condensed consolidated financial statements requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions, the most important of which relate to fair value measurements, accounting
for goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, discretionary compensation accruals and the provision for losses that may arise from litigation, regulatory proceedings and tax audits. These estimates and assumptions are based on the best available
information but actual results could be materially different.
Revenue Recognition
Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities at Fair Value. Financial instruments owned, at
fair value and Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value are recorded at fair value either under the fair value option or in accordance with other U.S. GAAP. In addition, the firm has elected to account for certain of its
other financial assets and financial liabilities at fair value by electing the fair value option. The fair value of a financial instrument is the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly
transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Financial assets are marked to bid prices and financial liabilities are marked to offer prices. Fair value measurements do not include transaction costs. Fair value gains or losses are
generally included in Market making for positions in Institutional Client Services and Other principal transactions for positions in Investing & Lending. See Notes 5 through 8 for further information about fair
value measurements.
Investment Banking. Fees from financial advisory assignments and underwriting revenues are recognized in earnings when the services related to the underlying transaction are completed under the terms of the assignment.
Expenses associated with such transactions are deferred until the related revenue is recognized or the assignment is otherwise concluded. Expenses associated with financial advisory assignments are recorded as non-compensation expenses, net of
client reimbursements. Underwriting revenues are presented net of related expenses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
9 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Investment Management. The firm earns management fees and incentive fees for investment management services. Management fees are calculated as a percentage of net asset value, invested capital or commitments, and are
recognized over the period that the related service is provided. Incentive fees are calculated as a percentage of a funds or separately managed accounts return, or excess return above a specified benchmark or other performance target.
Incentive fees are generally based on investment performance over a 12-month period or over the life of a fund. Fees that are based on performance over a 12-month period are subject to adjustment prior to the end of the measurement period. For fees
that are based on investment performance over the life of the fund, future investment underperformance may require fees previously distributed to the firm to be returned to the fund. Incentive fees are recognized only when all material contingencies
have been resolved. Management and incentive fee revenues are included in Investment management revenues.
Commissions and Fees. The
firm earns Commissions and fees from executing and clearing client transactions on stock, options and futures markets. Commissions and fees are recognized on the day the trade is executed.
Transfers of Assets
Transfers of assets are accounted for as sales when the firm has relinquished control over the assets transferred. For transfers of assets
accounted for as sales, any related gains or losses are recognized in net revenues. Assets or liabilities that arise from the firms continuing involvement with transferred assets are measured at fair value. For transfers of assets that are not
accounted for as sales, the assets remain in Financial instruments owned, at fair value and the transfer is accounted for as a collateralized financing, with the related interest expense recognized over the life of the transaction. See
Note 9 for further information about transfers of assets accounted for as collateralized financings and Note 10 for further information about transfers of assets accounted for as sales.
Receivables from Customers and Counterparties
Receivables from customers and counterparties generally relate to collateralized transactions. Such receivables are primarily comprised of
customer margin loans, certain transfers of assets accounted for as secured loans rather than purchases at fair value, collateral posted in connection with certain derivative transactions, and loans held for investment. Certain of the firms
receivables from customers and counterparties are accounted for at fair value under the fair value option, with changes in fair value generally included in Market making revenues. Receivables from customers and counterparties not
accounted for at fair value are accounted for at amortized cost net of estimated uncollectible amounts. Interest on receivables from customers and counterparties is recognized over the life of the transaction and included in Interest
income. See Note 8 for further information about receivables from customers and counterparties.
Payables to Customers and Counterparties
Payables to customers and counterparties primarily consist of customer credit balances related to the firms prime brokerage
activities. Payables to customers and counterparties are accounted for at cost plus accrued interest, which generally approximates fair value. While these payables are carried at amounts that approximate fair value, they are not accounted for at
fair value under the fair value option or at fair value in accordance with other U.S. GAAP and therefore are not included in the firms fair value hierarchy in Notes 6, 7 and 8. Had these payables been included in the firms fair
value hierarchy, substantially all would have been classified in level 2 as of March 2013 and December 2012.
Receivables from and Payables to Brokers,
Dealers and Clearing Organizations
Receivables from and payables to brokers, dealers and clearing organizations are
accounted for at cost plus accrued interest, which generally approximates fair value. While these receivables and payables are carried at amounts that approximate fair value, they are not accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or at
fair value in accordance with other U.S. GAAP and therefore are not included in the firms fair value hierarchy in Notes 6, 7 and 8. Had these receivables and payables been included in the firms fair value hierarchy, substantially
all would have been classified in level 2 as of March 2013 and December 2012.
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Offsetting Assets and Liabilities
To reduce credit exposures on derivatives and securities financing transactions, the firm may enter into netting agreements with
counterparties that permit it to offset receivables and payables with such counterparties. Derivatives are reported on a net-by-counterparty basis (i.e., the net payable or receivable for derivative assets and liabilities for a given counterparty)
in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition when a legal right of setoff exists under an enforceable netting arrangement or similar agreement. Resale and repurchase agreements and securities borrowed and loaned transactions with
the same term and currency may be presented on a net-by-counterparty basis in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition when such transactions meet certain settlement criteria and are subject to agreements that provide for rights
of setoff upon a termination event.
The firm receives and posts cash and securities collateral with respect to its
derivatives, resale and repurchase agreements, and securities borrowed and loaned transactions. Such collateral is subject to the terms of the related credit support agreements. In the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition,
derivatives are reported net of cash collateral received and posted under enforceable credit support agreements, when transacted under an enforceable netting agreement. In the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition, resale and
repurchase agreements, and securities borrowed and loaned are not reported net of the related cash and securities received or posted as collateral. See Note 9 for further information about collateral received and pledged, including rights to
deliver or repledge collateral.
In order to assess enforceability of the firms right of setoff under netting and
credit support agreements, the firm evaluates various factors including applicable bankruptcy laws, local statutes and regulatory provisions in the jurisdiction of the parties to the agreement. See Notes 7 and 9 for further information about
offsetting.
Insurance Activities
Certain of the firms insurance and reinsurance contracts are accounted for at fair value under the fair value option, with changes in fair value included in Market making revenues. See
Note 8 for further information about the fair values of these insurance and reinsurance contracts. See Note 12 for further information about the firms reinsurance business classified as held for sale as of March 2013 and
December 2012.
Revenues from variable annuity and life insurance and reinsurance contracts not accounted
for at fair value generally consist of fees assessed on contract holder account balances for mortality charges, policy administration fees and surrender charges. These revenues are recognized in earnings over the period that services are provided
and are included in Market making revenues. Changes in reserves, including interest credited to policyholder account balances, are recognized in Insurance reserves.
Premiums earned for underwriting property catastrophe reinsurance are recognized in earnings over the coverage period, net of premiums
ceded for the cost of reinsurance, and are included in Market making revenues. Expenses for liabilities related to property catastrophe reinsurance claims, including estimates of losses that have been incurred but not reported, are
included in Insurance reserves.
Share-based Compensation
The cost of employee services received in exchange for a share-based award is generally measured based on the grant-date fair value of the
award. Share-based awards that do not require future service (i.e., vested awards, including awards granted to retirement-eligible employees) are expensed immediately. Share-based awards that require future service are amortized over the relevant
service period. Expected forfeitures are included in determining share-based employee compensation expense.
The firm pays cash
dividend equivalents on outstanding restricted stock units (RSUs). Dividend equivalents paid on RSUs are generally charged to retained earnings. Dividend equivalents paid on RSUs expected to be forfeited are included in compensation expense. The
firm accounts for the tax benefit related to dividend equivalents paid on RSUs as an increase to additional paid-in capital.
In certain cases, primarily related to conflicted employment (as outlined in the applicable award agreements), the firm may cash settle
share-based compensation awards accounted for as equity instruments. For these awards, whose terms allow for cash settlement, additional paid-in capital is adjusted to the extent of the difference between the value of the award at the time of cash
settlement and the grant-date value of the award.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
11 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Foreign Currency Translation
Assets and liabilities denominated in non-U.S. currencies are translated at rates of exchange prevailing on the date of the condensed
consolidated statements of financial condition and revenues and expenses are translated at average rates of exchange for the period. Foreign currency remeasurement gains or losses on transactions in nonfunctional currencies are recognized in
earnings. Gains or losses on translation of the financial statements of a non-U.S. operation, when the functional currency is other than the U.S. dollar, are included, net of hedges and taxes, in the condensed consolidated statements of
comprehensive income.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The firm defines cash equivalents as highly liquid overnight deposits held in the ordinary course of business. As of March 2013 and December 2012, Cash and cash equivalents included
$5.95 billion and $6.75 billion, respectively, of cash and due from banks, and $57.38 billion and $65.92 billion, respectively, of interest-bearing deposits with banks.
Recent Accounting Developments
Derecognition of in Substance Real Estate (ASC 360). In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-10, Property, Plant, and Equipment (Topic 360) Derecognition of in Substance Real Estate a Scope
Clarification. ASU No. 2011-10 clarifies that in order to deconsolidate a subsidiary (that is in substance real estate) as a result of a parent no longer controlling the subsidiary due to a default on the subsidiarys nonrecourse
debt, the parent also must satisfy the sale criteria in ASC 360-20, Property, Plant, and Equipment Real Estate Sales. The ASU was effective for fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2012. The firm applied the
provisions of the ASU to such events occurring on or after January 1, 2013. Adoption of ASU No. 2011-10 did not materially affect the firms financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities (ASC 210). In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11, Balance Sheet (Topic 210) Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities. ASU No. 2011-11, as amended
by ASU 2013-01, Balance Sheet (Topic 210): Clarifying the Scope of Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities, requires disclosure of the effect or potential effect of offsetting arrangements on the firms financial
position as well as enhanced disclosure of the rights of setoff associated with the firms recognized derivative instruments, resale and repurchase agreements, and securities borrowing and lending transactions. ASU No. 2011-11 was
effective for periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. Since these amended principles require only additional disclosures concerning offsetting and related arrangements, adoption did not affect the firms financial condition,
results of operations or cash flows. See Notes 7 and 9 for further information about the firms offsetting and related arrangements.
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
Note 4. Financial Instruments Owned, at Fair Value and Financial Instruments Sold, But Not Yet Purchased, at Fair Value
Note 4.
Financial Instruments Owned, at Fair Value and Financial Instruments Sold, But Not Yet Purchased, at Fair Value |
|
|
|
|
Financial instruments owned, at fair value and financial instruments sold, but not yet
purchased, at fair value are accounted for at fair value either under the fair value option or in accordance with other U.S. GAAP. See Note 8 for further information about the fair value option. The table below presents the firms
financial instruments owned, at fair value, including those pledged as collateral, and financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair
value. The firm held $8.90 billion and $9.07 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, of securities accounted for as available-for-sale related to the
firms reinsurance business. As of March 2013 and December 2012, such assets were classified as held for sale and were included in Other assets. See Note 12 for further information about assets held for sale.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Financial Instruments Owned |
|
|
|
Financial Instruments Sold, But Not Yet Purchased |
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Instruments Owned |
|
|
|
Financial Instruments Sold, But Not Yet Purchased |
|
Commercial paper, certificates of deposit, time deposits and other money market instruments |
|
|
$ 5,705 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 6,057 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
U.S. government and federal agency obligations |
|
|
96,930 |
|
|
|
25,894 |
|
|
|
|
|
93,241 |
|
|
|
15,905 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. government and agency obligations |
|
|
57,657 |
|
|
|
42,754 |
|
|
|
|
|
62,250 |
|
|
|
32,361 |
|
|
|
Mortgage and other asset-backed loans and securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by commercial real estate |
|
|
6,909 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
9,805 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by residential real estate |
|
|
7,570 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
8,216 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
Bank loans and bridge loans |
|
|
22,467 |
|
|
|
1,479 |
3 |
|
|
|
|
22,407 |
|
|
|
1,779 |
3 |
|
|
Corporate debt securities |
|
|
20,442 |
|
|
|
6,874 |
|
|
|
|
|
20,981 |
|
|
|
5,761 |
|
|
|
State and municipal obligations |
|
|
2,219 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,477 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
Other debt obligations |
|
|
2,481 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,251 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equities and convertible debentures |
|
|
89,278 |
|
|
|
24,381 |
|
|
|
|
|
96,454 |
|
|
|
20,406 |
|
|
|
Commodities 1 |
|
|
7,695 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives 2 |
|
|
68,040 |
|
|
|
52,347 |
|
|
|
|
|
71,176 |
|
|
|
50,427 |
|
Total |
|
|
$387,393 |
|
|
|
$153,749 |
|
|
|
|
|
$407,011 |
|
|
|
$126,644 |
|
1. |
Includes commodities that have been transferred to third parties, which were accounted for as collateralized financings rather than sales, of
$2.77 billion and $4.29 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. |
2. |
Reported on a net-by-counterparty basis when a legal right of setoff exists under an enforceable netting agreement and reported net of cash collateral
received or posted under enforceable credit support agreements. |
3. |
Primarily relates to the fair value of unfunded lending commitments for which the fair value option was elected. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
13 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Gains and Losses from Market Making and Other Principal Transactions
The table below presents, by major product type, the firms Market making and Other principal transactions
revenues. These gains/(losses) are primarily related to the firms financial instruments owned, at fair value and financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value, including both derivative and non-derivative financial
instruments. These gains/(losses) exclude related interest income and interest expense. See Note 23 for further information about interest income and interest expense.
The gains/(losses) in the table are not representative of the manner in which the firm manages its business activities because many of the
firms market-making, client facilitation, and investing and lending strategies utilize financial instruments across various product types. Accordingly, gains or losses in one product type frequently offset gains or losses in other product
types. For example, most of the firms longer-term derivatives are sensitive to changes in interest rates and may be economically hedged with interest rate swaps. Similarly, a significant portion of the firms cash instruments and
derivatives has exposure to foreign currencies and may be economically hedged with foreign currency contracts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Interest rates |
|
|
$(1,141 |
) |
|
|
$1,889 |
|
|
|
Credit |
|
|
1,828 |
|
|
|
1,710 |
|
|
|
Currencies |
|
|
2,460 |
|
|
|
(724 |
) |
|
|
Equities |
|
|
1,908 |
|
|
|
1,973 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
493 |
|
|
|
471 |
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
524 |
|
Total |
|
|
$ 5,518 |
|
|
|
$5,843 |
|
Note 5. Fair Value Measurements
Note 5.
Fair Value Measurements
The fair value of a financial instrument is the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an
orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Financial assets are marked to bid prices and financial liabilities are marked to offer prices. Fair value measurements do not include transaction costs. The firm measures
certain financial assets and financial liabilities as a portfolio (i.e., based on its net exposure to market and/or credit risks).
The best evidence of fair value is a quoted price in an active market. If quoted prices in active markets are not available, fair value is determined by reference to prices for similar instruments, quoted
prices or recent transactions in less active markets, or internally developed models that primarily use market-based or independently sourced parameters as inputs including, but not limited to, interest rates, volatilities, equity or debt prices,
foreign exchange rates, commodity prices, credit spreads and funding spreads (i.e., the spread, or difference, between the interest rate at which a borrower could finance a given financial instrument relative to a benchmark interest rate).
U.S. GAAP has a three-level fair value hierarchy for disclosure of fair value measurements. The fair value hierarchy
prioritizes inputs to the valuation techniques used to measure fair value, giving the highest priority to level 1 inputs and the lowest priority to level 3 inputs. A financial instruments level in the fair value hierarchy is based on
the lowest level of input that is significant to its fair value measurement.
The fair value hierarchy is as follows:
Level 1.
Inputs are unadjusted quoted prices in active markets to which the firm had access at the measurement date for identical, unrestricted assets or liabilities.
Level 2. Inputs to valuation techniques are observable, either directly or indirectly.
Level 3.
One or more inputs to valuation techniques are significant and unobservable.
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
The fair values for substantially all of the firms financial assets and financial
liabilities are based on observable prices and inputs and are classified in levels 1 and 2 of the fair value hierarchy. Certain level 2 and level 3 financial assets and financial liabilities may require appropriate valuation
adjustments that a market participant would require to arrive at fair value for factors such as counterparty and the firms credit quality, funding risk, transfer restrictions, liquidity and bid/offer spreads. Valuation adjustments are
generally based on market evidence.
See Notes 6 and 7 for further information about fair value measurements of cash
instruments and derivatives, respectively, included in Financial instruments owned, at fair value and Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value, and Note 8 for further information about fair value
measurements of other financial assets and financial liabilities accounted for at fair value under the fair value option.
Financial assets and financial liabilities accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or in accordance with other U.S. GAAP
are summarized below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Total level 1 financial assets |
|
|
$175,729 |
|
|
|
$ 190,737 |
|
|
|
Total level 2 financial assets |
|
|
512,909 |
|
|
|
502,293 |
|
|
|
Total level 3 financial assets |
|
|
46,023 |
|
|
|
47,095 |
|
|
|
Cash collateral and counterparty netting 1 |
|
|
(90,828 |
) |
|
|
(101,612 |
) |
Total financial assets at fair value |
|
|
$643,833 |
|
|
|
$ 638,513 |
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
|
$959,223 |
|
|
|
$ 938,555 |
|
|
|
Total level 3 financial assets as a percentage of Total assets |
|
|
4.8 |
% |
|
|
5.0 |
% |
|
|
Total level 3 financial assets as a percentage of Total financial assets at fair value |
|
|
7.1 |
% |
|
|
7.4 |
% |
|
|
Total level 1 financial
liabilities |
|
|
$ 90,186 |
|
|
|
$ 65,994 |
|
|
|
Total level 2 financial liabilities |
|
|
304,217 |
|
|
|
318,764 |
|
|
|
Total level 3 financial liabilities |
|
|
24,759 |
|
|
|
25,679 |
|
|
|
Cash collateral and counterparty netting 1 |
|
|
(29,694 |
) |
|
|
(32,760 |
) |
Total financial liabilities at fair value |
|
|
$389,468 |
|
|
|
$ 377,677 |
|
|
|
Total level 3 financial liabilities as a percentage of Total financial liabilities at fair
value |
|
|
6.4 |
% |
|
|
6.8 |
% |
1. |
Represents the impact on derivatives of cash collateral, and counterparty netting across levels of the fair value hierarchy. Netting among positions
classified in the same level is included in that level. |
Level 3 financial assets as of March 2013 decreased compared with
December 2012, primarily reflecting a decrease in level 3 derivative assets, principally due to unrealized losses on currency derivative assets and settlements of credit derivative assets.
See Notes 6, 7 and 8 for further information about level 3 cash instruments,
derivatives and other financial assets and financial liabilities accounted for at fair value under the fair value option, respectively, including information about significant unrealized gains and losses, and transfers in and out of level 3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
15 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 6. Cash Instruments
Note 6.
Cash Instruments
Cash instruments include U.S. government and federal agency obligations, non-U.S.
government and agency obligations, bank loans and bridge loans, corporate debt securities, equities and convertible debentures, and other non-derivative financial instruments owned and financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased. See below for
the types of cash instruments included in each level of the fair value hierarchy and the valuation techniques and significant inputs used to determine their fair values. See Note 5 for an overview of the firms fair value
measurement policies.
Level 1 Cash Instruments
Level 1 cash instruments include U.S. government obligations and most non-U.S. government obligations, actively traded listed equities, certain government agency obligations and money market
instruments. These instruments are valued using quoted prices for identical unrestricted instruments in active markets.
The
firm defines active markets for equity instruments based on the average daily trading volume both in absolute terms and relative to the market capitalization for the instrument. The firm defines active markets for debt instruments based on both the
average daily trading volume and the number of days with trading activity.
Level 2 Cash Instruments
Level 2 cash instruments include commercial paper, certificates of deposit, time deposits, most government agency obligations, certain non-U.S. government obligations, most corporate debt securities,
commodities, certain mortgage-backed loans and securities, certain bank loans and bridge loans, restricted or less liquid listed equities, most state and municipal obligations and certain lending commitments.
Valuations of level 2 cash instruments can be verified to quoted prices, recent trading activity for identical or similar
instruments, broker or dealer quotations or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency. Consideration is given to the nature of the quotations (e.g., indicative or firm) and the relationship of recent market activity to
the prices provided from alternative pricing sources.
Valuation adjustments are typically made to level 2 cash
instruments (i) if the cash instrument is subject to transfer restrictions and/or (ii) for other premiums and liquidity discounts that a market participant would require to arrive at fair value. Valuation adjustments are generally based on
market evidence.
Level 3 Cash Instruments
Level 3 cash instruments have one or more significant valuation inputs that are not observable. Absent evidence to the contrary, level 3 cash instruments are initially valued at transaction
price, which is considered to be the best initial estimate of fair value. Subsequently, the firm uses other methodologies to determine fair value, which vary based on the type of instrument. Valuation inputs and assumptions are changed when
corroborated by substantive observable evidence, including values realized on sales of financial assets.
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Valuation Techniques and Significant Inputs
The table below presents the valuation techniques and the nature of
significant inputs generally used to determine the
fair values of each type of level 3 cash instrument.
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Cash Instruments |
|
|
|
Valuation Techniques and Significant Inputs |
Loans and securities backed by commercial real estate
Collateralized by a single commercial real estate property or a portfolio of properties
May include tranches of varying levels of subordination |
|
|
|
Valuation techniques vary by instrument, but are generally based on discounted cash flow techniques. |
|
|
Significant inputs are generally determined based on relative value analyses and include: |
|
|
Transaction prices in both the underlying
collateral and instruments with the same or similar underlying collateral and the basis, or price difference, to such prices |
|
|
Market yields implied by transactions of
similar or related assets and/or current levels and changes in market indices such as the CMBX (an index that tracks the performance of commercial mortgage bonds) |
|
|
Recovery rates implied by the value of the
underlying collateral, which is mainly driven by current performance of the underlying collateral, capitalization rates and multiples |
|
|
Timing of expected future cash flows (duration) |
Loans and securities backed by residential real estate
Collateralized by portfolios of residential real estate
May include tranches of varying levels of subordination |
|
|
|
Valuation techniques vary by instrument, but are generally based on discounted cash flow techniques. |
|
|
Significant inputs are generally determined based on relative value analyses, which incorporate comparisons to instruments with similar collateral and risk profiles, including relevant indices such as the
ABX (an index that tracks the performance of subprime residential mortgage bonds). Significant inputs include: |
|
|
Transaction prices in both the underlying
collateral and instruments with the same or similar underlying collateral |
|
|
Market yields implied by transactions of
similar or related assets |
|
|
Cumulative loss expectations, driven by
default rates, home price projections, residential property liquidation timelines and related costs |
|
|
Duration, driven by underlying loan prepayment speeds and residential property liquidation timelines
|
Bank loans and bridge loans |
|
|
|
Valuation techniques vary by instrument, but are generally based on discounted cash flow techniques. |
|
|
Significant inputs are generally determined based on relative value analyses, which incorporate comparisons both to prices of credit default swaps that reference the same or similar underlying instrument
or entity and to other debt instruments for the same issuer for which observable prices or broker quotations are available. Significant inputs include: |
|
|
Market yields implied by transactions of
similar or related assets and/or current levels and trends of market indices such as CDX and LCDX (indices that track the performance of corporate credit and loans, respectively) |
|
|
Current performance and recovery
assumptions and, where the firm uses credit default swaps to value the related cash instrument, the cost of borrowing the underlying reference obligation |
|
|
Duration |
Non-U.S. government and agency obligations
Corporate debt securities
State and municipal obligations
Other debt obligations |
|
|
|
Valuation techniques vary by instrument, but are generally based on discounted cash flow techniques. |
|
|
Significant inputs are generally determined based on relative value analyses, which incorporate comparisons both to prices of credit default swaps that reference the same or similar underlying instrument
or entity and to other debt instruments for the same issuer for which observable prices or broker quotations are available. Significant inputs include: |
|
|
Market yields implied by transactions of
similar or related assets and/or current levels and trends of market indices such as CDX, LCDX and MCDX (an index that tracks the performance of municipal obligations) |
|
|
Current performance and recovery
assumptions and, where the firm uses credit default swaps to value the related cash instrument, the cost of borrowing the underlying reference obligation |
|
|
Duration |
Equities and convertible debentures (including private equity investments and investments in real estate entities) |
|
|
|
Recent third-party completed or pending transactions (e.g., merger proposals, tender offers, debt restructurings) are considered to be the best evidence for any change in fair value. When these are not
available, the following valuation methodologies are used, as appropriate: |
|
|
Industry multiples (primarily EBITDA
multiples) and public comparables |
|
|
Transactions in similar
instruments |
|
|
Discounted cash flow
techniques |
|
|
Third-party
appraisals |
|
|
The firm also considers changes in the outlook for the relevant industry and financial performance of the issuer as compared to projected performance. Significant inputs include: |
|
|
Market and transaction
multiples |
|
|
Discount rates, long-term growth rates,
earnings compound annual growth rates and capitalization rates |
|
|
For equity instruments with debt-like features: market yields implied by transactions of similar or related assets, current performance and recovery assumptions, and
duration |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
17 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Significant Unobservable Inputs
The tables below present the ranges of significant unobservable inputs used to value the
firms level 3 cash instruments. These ranges represent the significant unobservable inputs that were used in the valuation of each type of cash instrument. The ranges and weighted averages of these inputs are not representative of the
appropriate inputs to use when calculating the fair value of any one cash instrument.
For example, the highest multiple presented in the tables below for private equity investments is appropriate for valuing a specific private equity investment but may not be appropriate for
valuing any other private equity investment. Accordingly, the ranges of inputs presented below do not represent uncertainty in, or possible ranges of, fair value measurements of the firms level 3 cash instruments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Cash
Instruments |
|
Level 3 Assets as of March 2013
(in millions) |
|
Significant Unobservable Inputs
by Valuation Technique |
|
Range of Significant Unobservable Inputs (Weighted
Average 1) as of March 2013
|
Loans and securities backed by commercial real estate
Collateralized by a single commercial real estate property or a portfolio of properties
May include tranches of varying levels of subordination |
|
$3,164 |
|
Discounted cash flows: |
|
|
|
|
|
Yield |
|
3.6% to 27.9% (8.6%) |
|
|
|
Recovery rate 3 |
|
36.0% to 98.3% (71.4%) |
|
|
|
Duration
(years) 4 |
|
0.6 to 7.0 (2.9) |
|
|
|
Basis
|
|
(19) points to 16 points (3 points) |
Loans and securities backed by residential real estate
Collateralized by portfolios of residential real estate
May include tranches of varying levels of subordination |
|
$1,683 |
|
Discounted cash flows: |
|
|
|
|
|
Yield |
|
3.6% to 16.9% (9.1%) |
|
|
|
Cumulative loss rate |
|
0.0% to 61.8% (29.6%) |
|
|
|
Duration (years) 4 |
|
1.4 to 8.7 (3.5) |
Bank loans and bridge loans |
|
$11,688 |
|
Discounted cash flows: |
|
|
|
|
|
Yield |
|
0.4% to 36.5% (8.6%) |
|
|
|
Recovery rate 3 |
|
28.1% to 85.0% (59.5%) |
|
|
|
Duration (years) 4 |
|
0.4 to 4.6 (2.2) |
Non-U.S. government and agency obligations Corporate debt securities
State and municipal obligations
Other debt obligations |
|
$3,678 |
|
Discounted cash flows: |
|
|
|
|
|
Yield |
|
0.5% to 35.3% (7.8%) |
|
|
|
Recovery rate 3 |
|
0.0% to 70.0% (64.9%) |
|
|
|
Duration (years) 4 |
|
0.4 to 14.6 (4.0) |
Equities and convertible debentures (including private equity investments and investments in real estate entities) |
|
$15,224 2 |
|
Comparable multiples: |
|
|
|
|
|
Multiples |
|
0.7x to 25.7x (7.0x) |
|
|
|
Discounted cash flows: |
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate |
|
10.0% to 25.0% (13.9%) |
|
|
|
Long-term growth rate/compound annual growth rate |
|
0.7% to 25.0% (9.0%) |
|
|
|
Capitalization rate
|
|
3.3% to 11.4% (6.9%) |
1. |
Weighted averages are calculated by weighting each input by the relative fair value of the respective financial instruments. |
2. |
The fair value of any one instrument may be determined using multiple valuation techniques. For example, market comparables and discounted cash flows may
be used together to determine fair value. Therefore, the level 3 balance encompasses both of these techniques. |
3. |
Recovery rate is a measure of expected future cash flows in a default scenario, expressed as a percentage of notional or face value of the instrument, and
reflects the benefit of credit enhancement on certain instruments. |
4. |
Duration is an estimate of the timing of future cash flows and, in certain cases, may incorporate the impact of other unobservable inputs (e.g., prepayment
speeds). |
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3
Cash Instruments |
|
Level 3 Assets as of December 2012
(in millions) |
|
Significant Unobservable Inputs
by Valuation Technique |
|
Range of Significant Unobservable Inputs (Weighted
Average 1) as of December 2012
|
Loans and securities backed by commercial real estate
Collateralized by a single commercial real estate property or a portfolio of properties
May include tranches of varying levels of subordination |
|
$3,389 |
|
Discounted cash flows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yield |
|
4.0% to 43.3% (9.8%) |
|
|
|
Recovery rate 3 |
|
37.0% to 96.2% (81.7%) |
|
|
|
Duration (years) 4
|
|
0.1 to 7.0 (2.6) |
|
|
|
Basis |
|
(13) points to 18 points (2 points) |
Loans and securities backed by residential real estate
Collateralized by portfolios of residential real estate
May include tranches of varying levels of subordination |
|
$1,619 |
|
Discounted cash flows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yield |
|
3.1% to 17.0% (9.7%) |
|
|
|
Cumulative loss rate |
|
0.0% to 61.6% (31.6%) |
|
|
|
Duration
(years) 4 |
|
1.3 to 5.9 (3.7) |
Bank loans and bridge loans |
|
$11,235 |
|
Discounted cash flows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yield |
|
0.3% to 34.5% (8.3%) |
|
|
|
Recovery rate 3 |
|
16.5% to 85.0% (56.0%) |
|
|
|
Duration
(years) 4 |
|
0.2 to 4.4 (1.9) |
Non-U.S. government and agency obligations Corporate debt securities
State and municipal obligations
Other debt obligations |
|
$4,651 |
|
Discounted cash flows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yield |
|
0.6% to 33.7% (8.6%) |
|
|
|
Recovery rate 3 |
|
0.0% to 70.0% (53.4%) |
|
|
|
Duration
(years) 4 |
|
0.5 to 15.5 (4.0) |
Equities and convertible debentures (including private equity investments and investments in real estate entities) |
|
$14,855 2 |
|
Comparable multiples:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multiples |
|
0.7x to 21.0x (7.2x) |
|
|
|
Discounted cash flows: |
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate |
|
10.0% to 25.0% (14.3%) |
|
|
|
Long-term growth rate/ compound annual growth rate |
|
0.7% to 25.0% (9.3%)
|
|
|
|
Capitalization rate |
|
3.9% to 11.4% (7.3%) |
1. |
Weighted averages are calculated by weighting each input by the relative fair value of the respective financial instruments. |
2. |
The fair value of any one instrument may be determined using multiple valuation techniques. For example, market comparables and discounted cash flows may
be used together to determine fair value. Therefore, the level 3 balance encompasses both of these techniques. |
3. |
Recovery rate is a measure of expected future cash flows in a default scenario, expressed as a percentage of notional or face value of the instrument, and
reflects the benefit of credit enhancement on certain instruments. |
4. |
Duration is an estimate of the timing of future cash flows and, in certain cases, may incorporate the impact of other unobservable inputs (e.g.,
prepayment speeds). |
Increases in yield, discount rate, capitalization rate, duration or cumulative loss rate
used in the valuation of the firms level 3 cash instruments would result in a lower fair value measurement, while increases in recovery rate, basis, multiples, long-term growth rate or compound annual
growth rate would result in a higher fair value measurement. Due to the distinctive nature of each of the firms level 3 cash instruments, the interrelationship of inputs is not
necessarily uniform within each product type.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
19 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Fair Value of Cash Instruments by Level
The tables below present, by level within the fair value hierarchy, cash instrument assets
and liabilities, at fair value. Cash instrument assets and liabilities are included in
Financial instruments owned, at fair value and Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value, respectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Instrument Assets at Fair Value as of March
2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Commercial paper, certificates of deposit, time deposits and other money market instruments |
|
|
$ 1,294 |
|
|
|
$ 4,411 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 5,705 |
|
|
|
U.S. government and federal agency obligations |
|
|
46,973 |
|
|
|
49,957 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
96,930 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. government and agency obligations |
|
|
40,379 |
|
|
|
17,231 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
57,657 |
|
|
|
Mortgage and other asset-backed loans and
securities 1: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by commercial real estate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,745 |
|
|
|
3,164 |
|
|
|
6,909 |
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by residential real estate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,887 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
7,570 |
|
|
|
Bank loans and bridge loans |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,779 |
|
|
|
11,688 |
|
|
|
22,467 |
|
|
|
Corporate debt securities 2 |
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
17,868 |
|
|
|
2,442 |
|
|
|
20,442 |
|
|
|
State and municipal obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,885 |
|
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
2,219 |
|
|
|
Other debt obligations 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,626 |
|
|
|
855 |
|
|
|
2,481 |
|
|
|
Equities and convertible debentures |
|
|
64,850 |
|
|
|
9,204 |
|
|
|
15,224 |
3 |
|
|
89,278 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,695 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,695 |
|
Total |
|
|
$153,628 |
|
|
|
$130,288 |
|
|
|
$35,437 |
|
|
|
$319,353 |
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Instrument Liabilities at Fair Value as of March
2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
U.S. government and federal agency obligations |
|
|
$ 25,665 |
|
|
|
$ 229 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 25,894 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. government and agency obligations |
|
|
41,389 |
|
|
|
1,365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,754 |
|
|
|
Mortgage and other asset-backed loans and securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by commercial real estate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by residential real estate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
Bank loans and bridge loans |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,044 |
|
|
|
435 |
|
|
|
1,479 |
|
|
|
Corporate debt securities |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
6,862 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
6,874 |
|
|
|
State and municipal obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
Equities and convertible debentures |
|
|
22,974 |
|
|
|
1,403 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
24,381 |
|
Total |
|
|
$ 90,038 |
|
|
|
$ 10,923 |
|
|
|
$ 441 |
|
|
|
$101,402 |
|
1. |
Includes $609 million and $452 million of collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) backed by real estate in level 2 and level 3,
respectively. |
2. |
Includes $583 million and $1.46 billion of CDOs and collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) backed by corporate obligations in level 2 and
level 3, respectively. |
3. |
Includes $13.27 billion of private equity investments, $1.45 billion of investments in real estate entities and $508 million of convertible
debentures. |
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Instrument Assets at Fair Value as of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Commercial paper, certificates of deposit, time deposits and other money market instruments |
|
|
$ 2,155 |
|
|
|
$ 3,902 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 6,057 |
|
|
|
U.S. government and federal agency obligations |
|
|
42,856 |
|
|
|
50,385 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93,241 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. government and agency obligations |
|
|
46,715 |
|
|
|
15,509 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
62,250 |
|
|
|
Mortgage and other asset-backed loans and
securities 1: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by commercial real estate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,416 |
|
|
|
3,389 |
|
|
|
9,805 |
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by residential real estate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,597 |
|
|
|
1,619 |
|
|
|
8,216 |
|
|
|
Bank loans and bridge loans |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,172 |
|
|
|
11,235 |
|
|
|
22,407 |
|
|
|
Corporate debt securities 2 |
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
18,049 |
|
|
|
2,821 |
|
|
|
20,981 |
|
|
|
State and municipal obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,858 |
|
|
|
619 |
|
|
|
2,477 |
|
|
|
Other debt obligations 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,066 |
|
|
|
1,185 |
|
|
|
2,251 |
|
|
|
Equities and convertible debentures |
|
|
72,875 |
|
|
|
8,724 |
|
|
|
14,855 |
3 |
|
|
96,454 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,696 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,696 |
|
Total |
|
|
$164,712 |
|
|
|
$135,374 |
|
|
|
$35,749 |
|
|
|
$335,835 |
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Instrument Liabilities at Fair Value as of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
U.S. government and federal agency obligations |
|
|
$ 15,475 |
|
|
|
$ 430 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 15,905 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. government and agency obligations |
|
|
31,011 |
|
|
|
1,350 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,361 |
|
|
|
Mortgage and other asset-backed loans and securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by residential real estate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
Bank loans and bridge loans |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,143 |
|
|
|
636 |
|
|
|
1,779 |
|
|
|
Corporate debt securities |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
5,731 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5,761 |
|
|
|
State and municipal obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
Equities and convertible debentures |
|
|
19,416 |
|
|
|
986 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
20,406 |
|
Total |
|
|
$ 65,930 |
|
|
|
$ 9,645 |
|
|
|
$ 642 |
|
|
|
$ 76,217 |
|
1. |
Includes $489 million and $446 million of CDOs backed by real estate in level 2 and level 3, respectively. |
2. |
Includes $284 million and $1.76 billion of CDOs and CLOs backed by corporate obligations in level 2 and level 3, respectively.
|
3. |
Includes $12.67 billion of private equity investments, $1.58 billion of investments in real estate entities and $600 million of convertible
debentures. |
Transfers Between Levels of the Fair Value Hierarchy
Transfers between levels of the fair value hierarchy are reported at the beginning of the
reporting period in which they occur.
During the three months ended March 2013, transfers into level 2 from level 1 of cash instruments were $43 million, reflecting transfers of public equity securities due to less market activity in
these securities.
During the three months ended March 2012, transfers into level 2 from
level 1 of cash instruments were $728 million, consisting of transfers of public equity investments, primarily reflecting the impact of transfer restrictions. See level 3 rollforwards below for further information about transfers
between level 2 and level 3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
21 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Level 3 Rollforward
If a cash instrument asset or liability was transferred to level 3 during a reporting
period, its entire gain or loss for the period is included in level 3.
Level 3 cash instruments are frequently
economically hedged with level 1 and level 2 cash instruments and/or level 1, level 2 or level 3 derivatives. Accordingly, gains or losses that are reported in level 3 can be partially offset by gains or losses
attributable to level 1 or level 2 cash
instruments and/or level 1, level 2 or level 3 derivatives. As a result, gains or losses included in the level 3 rollforward below do not necessarily represent the overall
impact on the firms results of operations, liquidity or capital resources.
The tables below present changes in fair value for all cash instrument assets and liabilities categorized as
level 3 as of the end of the period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Cash Instrument Assets at Fair Value for the Three Months Ended March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
|
|
Net realized gains/ (losses) |
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains/(losses) relating to instruments still held at
period-end |
|
|
|
Purchases |
1 |
|
|
Sales |
|
|
|
Settlements |
|
|
|
Transfers into level 3 |
|
|
|
Transfers out of level 3 |
|
|
|
Balance, end of
period |
|
Non-U.S. government and agency obligations |
|
|
$ 26 |
|
|
|
$ 3 |
|
|
|
$ 2 |
|
|
|
$ 28 |
|
|
|
$ (9 |
) |
|
|
$ (1 |
) |
|
|
$ 1 |
|
|
|
$ (3 |
) |
|
|
$ 47 |
|
|
|
Mortgage and other asset-backed loans and securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by commercial real estate |
|
|
3,389 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
(249 |
) |
|
|
(277 |
) |
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
(194 |
) |
|
|
3,164 |
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by residential real estate |
|
|
1,619 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
(172 |
) |
|
|
(56 |
) |
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
(143 |
) |
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
Bank loans and bridge loans |
|
|
11,235 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
1,460 |
|
|
|
(543 |
) |
|
|
(1,361 |
) |
|
|
1,688 |
|
|
|
(1,041 |
) |
|
|
11,688 |
|
|
|
Corporate debt securities |
|
|
2,821 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
301 |
|
|
|
(728 |
) |
|
|
(141 |
) |
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
(200 |
) |
|
|
2,442 |
|
|
|
State and municipal obligations |
|
|
619 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
(269 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
Other debt obligations |
|
|
1,185 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
(210 |
) |
|
|
(201 |
) |
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
(212 |
) |
|
|
855 |
|
|
|
Equities and convertible debentures |
|
|
14,855 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
481 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
(378 |
) |
|
|
(543 |
) |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
(446 |
) |
|
|
15,224 |
|
Total |
|
|
$35,749 |
|
|
|
$437 |
2 |
|
|
$875 |
2 |
|
|
$2,503 |
|
|
|
$(2,558 |
) |
|
|
$(2,581 |
) |
|
|
$3,288 |
|
|
|
$(2,276 |
) |
|
|
$35,437 |
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Cash Instrument Liabilities at Fair Value for the Three Months Ended March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
|
|
Net realized (gains)/ losses |
|
|
|
Net unrealized (gains)/losses relating to instruments still held at period-end |
|
|
|
Purchases |
1 |
|
|
Sales |
|
|
|
Settlements |
|
|
|
Transfers into level 3 |
|
|
|
Transfers out of level 3 |
|
|
|
Balance, end of
period |
|
Total |
|
|
$ 642 |
|
|
|
$ (4 |
) |
|
|
$ (11 |
) |
|
|
$ (147 |
) |
|
|
$ 97 |
|
|
|
$ 3 |
|
|
|
$ 22 |
|
|
|
$ (161 |
) |
|
|
$ 441 |
|
1. |
Includes both originations and secondary market purchases. |
2. |
The aggregate amounts include approximately $317 million, $687 million and $308 million reported in Market making, Other
principal transactions and Interest income, respectively. |
The net unrealized gain on level 3 cash instruments of $886 million (reflecting
$875 million on cash instrument assets and $11 million on cash instrument liabilities) for the three months ended March 2013 primarily consisted of gains on private equity investments, corporate debt securities and mortgage and other
asset-backed loans and securities. Unrealized gains during the three months ended March 2013 primarily reflected the impact of an increase in equity prices and generally tighter credit spreads.
Transfers into level 3 during the three months ended March 2013 primarily
reflected transfers of certain bank loans and bridge loans and private equity investments from level 2, principally due to a lack of market transactions in these instruments.
Transfers out of level 3 during the three months ended March 2013 primarily reflected transfers of certain bank loans and
bridge loans and private equity investments to level 2. Transfers of bank loans and bridge loans to level 2 were principally due to market transactions in certain loans and unobservable inputs no longer being significant to the
valuation of other loans. Transfers of private equity investments to level 2 were principally due to market transactions in these instruments.
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Cash Instrument Assets at Fair Value for the Three Months Ended March 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
|
|
Net realized gains/ (losses) |
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains/(losses) relating to instruments still held at
period-end |
|
|
|
Purchases |
1 |
|
|
Sales |
|
|
|
Settlements |
|
|
|
Transfers into level 3 |
|
|
|
Transfers out of level 3 |
|
|
|
Balance, end of
period |
|
Commercial paper, certificates of deposit, time deposits and other money market instruments |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 8 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 8 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. government and agency obligations |
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
Mortgage and other asset-backed loans and securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by commercial real estate |
|
|
3,346 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
(276 |
) |
|
|
(289 |
) |
|
|
486 |
|
|
|
(541 |
) |
|
|
3,156 |
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by residential real estate |
|
|
1,709 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
(181 |
) |
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
(151 |
) |
|
|
1,610 |
|
|
|
Bank loans and bridge loans |
|
|
11,285 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
206 |
|
|
|
1,188 |
|
|
|
(1,246 |
) |
|
|
(792 |
) |
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
(700 |
) |
|
|
11,051 |
|
|
|
Corporate debt securities |
|
|
2,480 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
(422 |
) |
|
|
(128 |
) |
|
|
260 |
|
|
|
(223 |
) |
|
|
2,512 |
|
|
|
State and municipal obligations |
|
|
599 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
612 |
|
|
|
Other debt obligations |
|
|
1,451 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
(120 |
) |
|
|
(56 |
) |
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
1,549 |
|
|
|
Equities and convertible debentures |
|
|
13,667 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
332 |
|
|
|
558 |
|
|
|
(150 |
) |
|
|
(194 |
) |
|
|
779 |
|
|
|
(157 |
) |
|
|
14,874 |
|
Total |
|
|
$34,685 |
|
|
|
$408 |
2 |
|
|
$788 |
2 |
|
|
$2,724 |
|
|
|
$(2,442 |
) |
|
|
$(1,562 |
) |
|
|
$2,667 |
|
|
|
$(1,791 |
) |
|
|
$35,477 |
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Cash Instrument Liabilities at Fair Value for the Three Months Ended March 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
|
|
Net realized (gains)/ losses |
|
|
|
Net unrealized (gains)/losses relating to instruments still held at period-end |
|
|
|
Purchases |
1 |
|
|
Sales |
|
|
|
Settlements |
|
|
|
Transfers into level 3 |
|
|
|
Transfers out of level 3 |
|
|
|
Balance, end of
period |
|
Total |
|
|
$ 905 |
|
|
|
$ (34 |
) |
|
|
$ (68 |
) |
|
|
$ (326 |
) |
|
|
$ 87 |
|
|
|
$ 195 |
|
|
|
$ 102 |
|
|
|
$ (114 |
) |
|
|
$ 747 |
|
1. |
Includes both originations and secondary market purchases. |
2. |
The aggregate amounts include approximately $167 million, $654 million and $375 million reported in Market making, Other
principal transactions and Interest income, respectively. |
The net unrealized gain on level 3 cash instruments of $856 million (reflecting
$788 million on cash instrument assets and $68 million on cash instrument liabilities) for the three months ended March 2012 primarily consisted of gains on private equity investments, bank loans and bridge loans, and corporate debt
securities, primarily reflecting an increase in global equity prices and tighter credit spreads.
Transfers into level 3
during the three months ended March 2012 primarily reflected transfers from level 2 of certain bank loans and bridge loans, private equity investments, and loans and securities backed by commercial real estate, principally due to reduced
transparency of market prices as a result of less market activity in these instruments.
Transfers out of level 3 during the three months ended March 2012 primarily
reflected transfers to level 2 of certain bank and bridge loans, and loans and securities backed by commercial real estate, principally due to improved transparency of market prices as a result of market activity in these instruments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
23 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
Investments in Funds That Calculate Net Asset Value Per Share |
|
|
|
|
Cash instruments at fair value include investments in funds that are valued based on the
net asset value per share (NAV) of the investment fund. The firm uses NAV as its measure of fair value for fund investments when (i) the fund investment does not have a readily determinable fair value and (ii) the NAV of the investment
fund is calculated in a manner consistent with the measurement principles of investment company accounting, including measurement of the underlying investments at fair value.
The firms investments in funds that calculate NAV primarily consist of investments in firm-sponsored funds where
the firm co-invests with third-party investors. The private equity, credit and real estate funds are primarily closed-end funds in which the firms investments are not eligible for redemption. Distributions will be received from these funds as
the underlying assets are liquidated and it is estimated that substantially all of the underlying assets of existing funds will be liquidated over the next seven years. The firm continues to manage its existing funds taking into
account the transition periods under the Volcker Rule of the U.S. Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), although the rules have not yet been finalized.
The firms investments in hedge funds are generally redeemable on a quarterly basis with 91 days notice,
subject to a maximum redemption level of 25% of the firms initial investments at any quarter-end. The firm currently plans to comply with the Volcker Rule by redeeming certain of its interests in hedge funds. Since March 2012, the firm
has redeemed approximately $1.32 billion of these interests in hedge funds, including approximately $260 million during the three months ended March 2013.
The table below presents the fair value of the firms investments in, and unfunded commitments to, funds that calculate NAV.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Fair Value of Investments |
|
|
|
Unfunded Commitments |
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value of Investments |
|
|
|
Unfunded Commitments |
|
Private equity funds 1 |
|
|
$ 7,183 |
|
|
|
$2,453 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 7,680 |
|
|
|
$2,778 |
|
|
|
Credit funds 2 |
|
|
3,976 |
|
|
|
2,884 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,927 |
|
|
|
2,843 |
|
|
|
Hedge funds 3 |
|
|
2,339 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate
funds 4 |
|
|
2,058 |
|
|
|
868 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,006 |
|
|
|
870 |
|
Total |
|
|
$15,556 |
|
|
|
$6,205 |
|
|
|
|
|
$15,780 |
|
|
|
$6,491 |
|
1. |
These funds primarily invest in a broad range of industries worldwide in a variety of situations, including leveraged buyouts, recapitalizations, growth
investments and distressed investments. |
2. |
These funds generally invest in loans and other fixed income instruments and are focused on providing private high-yield capital for mid- to large-sized
leveraged and management buyout transactions, recapitalizations, financings, refinancings, acquisitions and restructurings for private equity firms, private family companies and corporate issuers. |
3. |
These funds are primarily multi-disciplinary hedge funds that employ a fundamental bottom-up investment approach across various asset classes and strategies
including long/short equity, credit, convertibles, risk arbitrage, special situations and capital structure arbitrage. |
4. |
These funds invest globally, primarily in real estate companies, loan portfolios, debt recapitalizations and direct property. |
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 7. Derivatives and Hedging Activities
Note 7.
Derivatives and Hedging Activities
Derivative Activities
Derivatives are instruments that derive their value from underlying asset prices, indices,
reference rates and other inputs, or a combination of these factors. Derivatives may be traded on an exchange (exchange-traded) or they may be privately negotiated contracts, which are usually referred to as over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives.
Certain of the firms OTC derivatives are cleared and settled through central clearing counterparties (OTC-cleared), while others are bilateral contracts between two counterparties (bilateral OTC).
Market-Making. As a
market maker, the firm enters into derivative transactions to provide liquidity and to facilitate the transfer and hedging of risk. In this capacity, the firm typically acts as principal and is consequently required to commit capital to provide
execution. As a market maker, it is essential to maintain an inventory of financial instruments sufficient to meet expected client and market demands.
Risk Management. The firm also enters into derivatives to actively manage risk exposures
that arise from market-making and investing and lending activities in derivative and cash instruments. The firms holdings and exposures are hedged, in many cases, on either a portfolio or risk-specific basis, as opposed to an
instrument-by-instrument basis. The offsetting impact of this economic hedging is reflected in the same business segment as the related revenues. In addition, the firm may enter into derivatives designated as hedges under U.S. GAAP. These
derivatives are used to manage foreign currency exposure on the net investment in certain non-U.S. operations and to manage interest rate exposure in certain fixed-rate unsecured long-term and short-term borrowings, and deposits.
The firm enters into various types of derivatives, including:
|
|
Futures and Forwards. Contracts
that commit counterparties to purchase or sell financial instruments, commodities or currencies in the future. |
|
|
Swaps. Contracts that require
counterparties to exchange cash flows such as currency or interest payment streams. The amounts exchanged are based on the specific terms of the contract with reference to specified rates, financial instruments, commodities, currencies
or indices. |
|
|
Options. Contracts in which the
option purchaser has the right, but not the obligation, to purchase from or sell to the option writer financial instruments, commodities or currencies within a defined time period for a specified price. |
Derivatives are accounted for at fair value, net of cash collateral received or posted under enforceable credit support agreements.
Derivatives are reported on a net-by-counterparty basis (i.e., the net payable or receivable for derivative assets and liabilities for a given counterparty) when a legal right of setoff exists under an enforceable netting agreement. Derivative
assets and liabilities are included in Financial instruments owned, at fair value and Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value, respectively. Substantially all gains and losses on derivatives not
designated as hedges under ASC 815 are included in Market making and Other principal transactions.
The table below
presents the fair value of derivatives on a net-by-counterparty basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Derivative Assets |
|
|
|
Derivative Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative Assets |
|
|
|
Derivative Liabilities |
|
Exchange-traded |
|
|
$ 4,455 |
|
|
|
$ 3,581 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 3,772 |
|
|
|
$ 2,937 |
|
|
|
OTC |
|
|
63,585 |
|
|
|
48,766 |
|
|
|
|
|
67,404 |
|
|
|
47,490 |
|
Total |
|
|
$68,040 |
|
|
|
$52,347 |
|
|
|
|
|
$71,176 |
|
|
|
$50,427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
25 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
The table below presents the fair value and the notional amount of derivative contracts by
major product type on a gross basis. Gross fair values exclude the effects of both counterparty netting and collateral, and therefore are not representative of the firms exposure. OTC derivatives that are cleared with certain clearing
organizations are reflected as settled each day. The table below also presents the amounts of counterparty netting and cash collateral that have been offset in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition, as well as cash and
securities collateral
posted and received under enforceable credit support agreements that do not meet the criteria for netting under U.S. GAAP. Where the firm has received or posted collateral under credit support
agreements, but has not yet determined such agreements are enforceable, the related collateral has not been netted in the table below. Notional amounts, which represent the sum of gross long and short derivative contracts, provide an indication of
the volume of the firms derivative activity, and do not represent anticipated losses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Derivative
Assets |
|
|
|
Derivative
Liabilities |
|
|
|
Notional
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative
Assets |
|
|
|
Derivative
Liabilities |
|
|
|
Notional
Amount |
|
Derivatives not accounted for as hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rates |
|
|
$ 518,022 |
|
|
|
$ 482,433 |
|
|
|
$36,083,019 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 584,584 |
|
|
|
$ 545,605 |
|
|
|
$34,891,763 |
|
|
|
Exchange-traded |
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
2,621,038 |
|
|
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
2,502,867 |
|
|
|
OTC-cleared |
|
|
14,700 |
|
|
|
15,837 |
|
|
|
16,298,152 |
|
|
|
|
|
8,847 |
|
|
|
11,011 |
|
|
|
14,678,349 |
|
|
|
Bilateral OTC |
|
|
503,236 |
|
|
|
466,526 |
|
|
|
17,163,829 |
|
|
|
|
|
575,690 |
|
|
|
534,568 |
|
|
|
17,710,547 |
|
|
|
Credit |
|
|
81,669 |
|
|
|
72,495 |
|
|
|
3,632,242 |
|
|
|
|
|
85,816 |
|
|
|
74,927 |
|
|
|
3,615,757 |
|
|
|
OTC-cleared |
|
|
3,595 |
|
|
|
3,348 |
|
|
|
323,457 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,359 |
|
|
|
2,638 |
|
|
|
304,100 |
|
|
|
Bilateral OTC |
|
|
78,074 |
|
|
|
69,147 |
|
|
|
3,308,785 |
|
|
|
|
|
82,457 |
|
|
|
72,289 |
|
|
|
3,311,657 |
|
|
|
Currencies |
|
|
69,534 |
|
|
|
62,197 |
|
|
|
4,053,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
72,128 |
|
|
|
60,808 |
|
|
|
3,833,114 |
|
|
|
Exchange-traded |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
13,815 |
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
12,341 |
|
|
|
OTC-cleared |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
8,723 |
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
5,487 |
|
|
|
Bilateral OTC |
|
|
69,458 |
|
|
|
62,109 |
|
|
|
4,030,955 |
|
|
|
|
|
72,083 |
|
|
|
60,712 |
|
|
|
3,815,286 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
22,246 |
|
|
|
21,752 |
|
|
|
819,726 |
|
|
|
|
|
23,320 |
|
|
|
24,350 |
|
|
|
774,115 |
|
|
|
Exchange-traded |
|
|
5,491 |
|
|
|
4,640 |
|
|
|
396,230 |
|
|
|
|
|
5,360 |
|
|
|
5,040 |
|
|
|
344,823 |
|
|
|
OTC-cleared |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
874 |
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
327 |
|
|
|
Bilateral OTC |
|
|
16,724 |
|
|
|
17,072 |
|
|
|
422,622 |
|
|
|
|
|
17,934 |
|
|
|
19,287 |
|
|
|
428,965 |
|
|
|
Equities |
|
|
51,672 |
|
|
|
48,082 |
|
|
|
1,339,285 |
|
|
|
|
|
49,483 |
|
|
|
43,681 |
|
|
|
1,202,181 |
|
|
|
Exchange-traded |
|
|
9,636 |
|
|
|
9,606 |
|
|
|
495,994 |
|
|
|
|
|
9,409 |
|
|
|
8,864 |
|
|
|
441,494 |
|
|
|
Bilateral OTC |
|
|
42,036 |
|
|
|
38,476 |
|
|
|
843,291 |
|
|
|
|
|
40,074 |
|
|
|
34,817 |
|
|
|
760,687 |
|
Subtotal |
|
|
743,143 |
|
|
|
686,959 |
|
|
|
45,927,765 |
|
|
|
|
|
815,331 |
|
|
|
749,371 |
|
|
|
44,316,930 |
|
Derivatives accounted for as hedges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rates |
|
|
20,825 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
132,886 |
|
|
|
|
|
23,772 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
128,302 |
|
|
|
OTC-cleared |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bilateral OTC |
|
|
20,816 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
132,820 |
|
|
|
|
|
23,772 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
128,302 |
|
|
|
Currencies |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
8,427 |
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
8,452 |
|
|
|
OTC-cleared |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
Bilateral OTC |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
8,343 |
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
8,449 |
|
Subtotal |
|
|
20,862 |
|
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
141,313 |
|
|
|
|
|
23,793 |
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
136,754 |
|
Gross fair value/notional amount of derivatives |
|
|
$ 764,005 |
1 |
|
|
$ 687,178 |
1 |
|
|
$46,069,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 839,124 |
1 |
|
|
$ 749,523 |
1 |
|
|
$44,453,684 |
|
Amounts that have been offset in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Counterparty netting |
|
|
(607,096 |
) |
|
|
(607,096 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(668,460 |
) |
|
|
(668,460 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange-traded |
|
|
(10,803 |
) |
|
|
(10,803 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,075 |
) |
|
|
(11,075 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTC-cleared |
|
|
(17,146 |
) |
|
|
(17,146 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,507 |
) |
|
|
(11,507 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bilateral OTC |
|
|
(579,147 |
) |
|
|
(579,147 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(645,878 |
) |
|
|
(645,878 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash collateral |
|
|
(88,869 |
) |
|
|
(27,735 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(99,488 |
) |
|
|
(30,636 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTC-cleared |
|
|
(335 |
) |
|
|
(2,028 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(468 |
) |
|
|
(2,160 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bilateral OTC |
|
|
(88,534 |
) |
|
|
(25,707 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(99,020 |
) |
|
|
(28,476 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Fair value included in financial instruments owned/financial instruments sold, but not
yet purchased |
|
|
$ 68,040 |
|
|
|
$ 52,347 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 71,176 |
|
|
|
$ 50,427 |
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts that have not been offset in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash collateral received/posted |
|
|
(937 |
) |
|
|
(3,706 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(812 |
) |
|
|
(2,994 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities collateral received/posted |
|
|
(16,172 |
) |
|
|
(14,384 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17,225 |
) |
|
|
(14,262 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
$ 50,931 |
|
|
|
$ 34,257 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 53,139 |
|
|
|
$ 33,171 |
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Includes derivative assets and derivative liabilities of $25.43 billion and $27.30 billion, respectively, as of March 2013, and derivative
assets and derivative liabilities of $24.62 billion and $25.73 billion, respectively, as of December 2012, which are not subject to an enforceable netting agreement or are subject to a netting agreement that the firm has not yet
determined to be enforceable. |
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Valuation Techniques for Derivatives
The firms level 2 and level 3 derivatives are valued using derivative pricing models (e.g., models that incorporate option
pricing methodologies, Monte Carlo simulations and discounted cash flows). Price transparency of derivatives can generally be characterized by product type.
Interest Rate. In general, the prices and other inputs used to value interest rate
derivatives are transparent, even for long-dated contracts. Interest rate swaps and options denominated in the currencies of leading industrialized nations are characterized by high trading volumes and tight bid/offer spreads. Interest rate
derivatives that reference indices, such as an inflation index, or the shape of the yield curve (e.g., 10-year swap rate vs. 2-year swap rate) are more complex, but the prices and other inputs are generally observable.
Credit. Price
transparency for credit default swaps, including both single names and baskets of credits, varies by market and underlying reference entity or obligation. Credit default swaps that reference indices, large corporates and major sovereigns generally
exhibit the most price transparency. For credit default swaps with other underliers, price transparency varies based on credit rating, the cost of borrowing the underlying reference obligations, and the availability of the underlying reference
obligations for delivery upon the default of the issuer. Credit default swaps that reference loans, asset-backed securities and emerging market debt instruments tend to have less price transparency than those that reference corporate bonds. In
addition, more complex credit derivatives, such as those sensitive to the correlation between two or more underlying reference obligations, generally have less price transparency.
Currency. Prices for
currency derivatives based on the exchange rates of leading industrialized nations, including those with longer tenors, are generally transparent. The primary difference between the price transparency of developed and emerging market currency
derivatives is that emerging markets tend to be observable for contracts with shorter tenors.
Commodity. Commodity derivatives include transactions referenced to energy (e.g., oil and natural gas), metals (e.g., precious and base) and soft commodities (e.g., agricultural). Price transparency varies based on
the underlying commodity, delivery location, tenor and product quality (e.g., diesel fuel compared to unleaded gasoline). In general, price transparency for commodity derivatives is greater for contracts with shorter tenors and contracts that are
more closely aligned with major and/or benchmark commodity indices.
Equity. Price
transparency for equity derivatives varies by market and underlier. Options on indices and the common stock of corporates included in major equity indices exhibit the most price transparency. Equity derivatives generally have observable market
prices, except for contracts with long tenors or reference prices that differ significantly from current market prices. More complex equity derivatives, such as those sensitive to the correlation between two or more individual stocks, generally
have less price transparency.
Liquidity is essential to observability of all product types. If transaction volumes
decline, previously transparent prices and other inputs may become unobservable. Conversely, even highly structured products may at times have trading volumes large enough to provide observability of prices and other inputs. See Note 5 for an
overview of the firms fair value measurement policies.
Level 1 Derivatives
Level 1 derivatives include short-term contracts for future delivery of securities when the underlying security is a level 1
instrument, and exchange-traded derivatives if they are actively traded and are valued at their quoted market price.
Level 2 Derivatives
Level 2 derivatives include OTC derivatives for which all significant valuation inputs are corroborated by market
evidence and exchange-traded derivatives that are not actively traded and/or that are valued using models that calibrate to market-clearing levels of OTC derivatives.
The selection of a particular model to value a derivative depends on the contractual terms of and specific risks inherent in the instrument, as well as the availability of pricing information in the
market. For derivatives that trade in liquid markets, model selection does not involve significant management judgment because outputs of models can be calibrated to market-clearing levels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
27 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Valuation models require a variety of inputs, such as contractual terms, market prices,
yield curves, discount rates (including those derived from interest rates on collateral received and posted as specified in credit support agreements for collateralized derivatives), credit curves, measures of volatility, prepayment rates, loss
severity rates and correlations of such inputs. Inputs to the valuations of level 2 derivatives can be verified to market transactions, broker or dealer quotations or other alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price
transparency. Consideration is given to the nature of the quotations (e.g., indicative or firm) and the relationship of recent market activity to the prices provided from alternative pricing sources.
Level 3 Derivatives
Level 3 derivatives are valued using models which utilize observable level 1 and/or level 2 inputs, as well as unobservable
level 3 inputs.
|
|
For the majority of the firms interest rate and currency derivatives classified within level 3, significant unobservable inputs include
correlations of certain currencies and interest rates (e.g., the correlation between Euro inflation and Euro interest rates) and specific interest rate volatilities. |
|
|
For level 3 credit derivatives, significant unobservable inputs include illiquid credit spreads, which are unique to specific reference
obligations and reference entities, recovery rates and certain correlations required to value credit and mortgage derivatives (e.g., the likelihood of default of the underlying reference obligation relative to one another).
|
|
|
For level 3 equity derivatives, significant unobservable inputs generally include equity volatility inputs for options that are very long-dated
and/or have strike prices that differ significantly from current market prices. In addition, the valuation of certain structured trades requires the use of level 3 correlation inputs, such as the correlation of the price performance of two or
more individual stocks or the correlation of the price performance for a basket of stocks to another asset class such as commodities.
|
|
|
For level 3 commodity derivatives, significant unobservable inputs include volatilities for options with strike prices that differ
significantly from current market prices and prices or spreads for certain products for which the product quality or physical location of the commodity is not aligned with benchmark indices. |
Subsequent to the initial valuation of a level 3 derivative, the firm updates the level 1 and level 2 inputs to reflect
observable market changes and any resulting gains and losses are recorded in level 3. Level 3 inputs are changed when corroborated by evidence such as similar market transactions, third-party pricing services and/or broker or dealer
quotations or other empirical market data. In circumstances where the firm cannot verify the model value by reference to market transactions, it is possible that a different valuation model could produce a materially different estimate of fair
value. See below for further information about significant unobservable inputs used in the valuation of level 3 derivatives.
Valuation
Adjustments
Valuation adjustments are integral to determining the fair value of derivative portfolios and are used to
adjust the mid-market valuations produced by derivative pricing models to the appropriate exit price valuation. These adjustments incorporate bid/offer spreads, the cost of liquidity, credit valuation adjustments (CVA) and funding valuation
adjustments, which account for the credit and funding risk inherent in the uncollateralized portion of derivative portfolios. Market-based inputs are generally used when calibrating valuation adjustments to market-clearing levels.
In addition, for derivatives that include significant unobservable inputs, the firm makes model or exit price adjustments to account for
the valuation uncertainty present in the transaction.
|
|
|
|
|
28 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Significant Unobservable Inputs
The tables below present the ranges of significant unobservable inputs used to value the
firms level 3 derivatives. These ranges represent the significant unobservable inputs that were used in the valuation of each type of derivative. The ranges, averages and medians of these inputs are not representative of the appropriate
inputs to use when calculating the fair value of any one derivative.
For example, the highest correlation presented in the tables below for interest rate derivatives is appropriate for valuing a specific interest rate derivative but may not be appropriate for
valuing any other interest rate derivative. Accordingly, the ranges of inputs presented below do not represent uncertainty in, or possible ranges of, fair value measurements of the firms level 3 derivatives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Derivative Product Type |
|
Net Level 3 Assets/(Liabilities)
as of March 2013 (in millions) |
|
Significant Unobservable Inputs of Derivative Pricing Models |
|
Range of Significant Unobservable
Inputs (Average / Median) 1
as of March 2013 |
Interest rates |
|
$(305) |
|
Correlation 2
Volatility |
|
22% to 84% (64% / 65%) 37
basis points per annum (bpa) to 59 bpa (48 bpa / 47 bpa)
|
Credit |
|
$5,882 |
|
Correlation 2
Credit spreads Recovery rates |
|
5% to 96% (52% / 50%)
3 bps to 6,149 bps (319 bps /
136 bps) 3 20% to 88% (53% / 50%) |
Currencies |
|
$(289) |
|
Correlation 2 |
|
65% to 84% (75% / 77%) |
Commodities |
|
$(27) |
|
Volatility
Spread per million British Thermal units (MMBTU) of natural gas
Price per megawatt hour of power
Price per barrel of oil
|
|
9% to 56% (23% / 23%)
$(0.71) to $3.80 ($(0.02) / $(0.01))
$17.26 to $60.18 ($36.21 / $35.82)
$88.68 to $103.73 ($94.06 / $94.31) |
Equities |
|
$(1,135) |
|
Correlation 2
Volatility |
|
29% to 98% (55% / 53%) 9% to
67% (27% / 25%) |
1. |
Averages represent the arithmetic average of the inputs and are not weighted by the relative fair value or notional of the respective financial instruments.
An average greater than the median indicates that the majority of inputs are below the average. |
2. |
The range of unobservable inputs for correlation across derivative product types (i.e., cross-asset correlation) was (58)% to 82% (Average: 24% /
Median: 33%) as of March 2013. |
3. |
The difference between the average and the median for the credit spreads input indicates that the majority of the inputs fall in the lower end of the range.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
29 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Derivative Product Type |
|
Net Level 3 Assets/(Liabilities)
as of December 2012 (in millions) |
|
Significant Unobservable Inputs of Derivative Pricing Models |
|
Range of
Significant Unobservable Inputs (Average /
Median) 1 as of December 2012 |
Interest rates |
|
$(355) |
|
Correlation 2
Volatility
|
|
22% to 97% (67% / 68%) 37
bpa to 59 bpa (48 bpa / 47 bpa) |
Credit |
|
$6,228 |
|
Correlation 2
Credit spreads
Recovery rates
|
|
5% to 95% (50% / 50%)
9 bps to 2,341 bps (225 bps /
140 bps) 3 15% to 85% (54% / 53%) |
Currencies |
|
$35 |
|
Correlation 2 |
|
65% to 87% (76% / 79%) |
Commodities |
|
$(304) |
|
Volatility
Spread per MMBTU of natural gas
Price per megawatt hour of power
Price per barrel of oil
|
|
13% to 53% (30% / 29%)
$(0.61) to $6.07 ($0.02 / $0.00)
$17.30 to $57.39 ($33.17 / $32.80)
$86.64 to $98.43 ($92.76 / $93.62) |
Equities |
|
$(1,248) |
|
Correlation 2
Volatility |
|
48% to 98% (68% / 67%) 15%
to 73% (31% / 30%) |
1. |
Averages represent the arithmetic average of the inputs and are not weighted by the relative fair value or notional of the respective financial instruments.
An average greater than the median indicates that the majority of inputs are below the average. |
2. |
The range of unobservable inputs for correlation across derivative product types (i.e., cross-asset correlation) was (51)% to 66% (Average: 30% /
Median: 35%) as of December 2012. |
3. |
The difference between the average and the median for the credit spreads input indicates that the majority of the inputs fall in the lower end of the range.
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Range of Significant Unobservable Inputs
The following provides further information about the ranges of significant unobservable inputs used to value the firms level 3
derivative instruments.
|
|
Correlation: Ranges for correlation cover a variety of underliers both within one market (e.g., equity index and equity single stock names) and
across markets (e.g., correlation of a commodity price and a foreign exchange rate), as well as across regions. Generally, cross-asset correlation inputs are used to value more complex instruments and are lower than correlation inputs on assets
within the same derivative product type. |
|
|
Volatility: Ranges for volatility cover numerous underliers across a variety of markets, maturities and strike prices. For example, volatility of
equity indices is generally lower than volatility of single stocks. |
|
|
Credit spreads and recovery rates: The ranges for credit spreads and recovery rates cover a variety of underliers (index and single names), regions,
sectors, maturities and credit qualities (high-yield and investment-grade). The broad range of this population gives rise to the width of the ranges of significant unobservable inputs. |
|
|
Commodity prices and spreads: The ranges for commodity prices and spreads cover variability in products, maturities and locations, as well as peak
and off-peak prices. |
Sensitivity of Fair Value Measurement to Changes in Significant Unobservable Inputs
The following provides a description of the directional sensitivity of the firms level 3 fair value
measurements to changes in significant unobservable inputs, in isolation. Due to the distinctive nature of each of the firms level 3 derivatives, the interrelationship of inputs is not necessarily uniform within each product type.
|
|
Correlation: In general, for contracts where the holder benefits from the convergence of the underlying asset or index prices (e.g., interest rates,
credit spreads, foreign exchange rates, inflation rates and equity prices), an increase in correlation results in a higher fair value measurement. |
|
|
Volatility: In general, for purchased options an increase in volatility results in a higher fair value measurement. |
|
|
Credit spreads and recovery rates: In general, the fair value of purchased credit protection increases as credit spreads increase or recovery rates
decrease. Credit spreads and recovery rates are strongly related to distinctive risk factors of the underlying reference obligations, which include reference entity-specific factors such as leverage, volatility and industry, market-based risk
factors, such as borrowing costs or liquidity of the underlying reference obligation, and macro-economic conditions. |
|
|
Commodity prices and spreads: In general, for contracts where the holder is receiving a commodity, an increase in the spread (price difference from
a benchmark index due to differences in quality or delivery location) or price results in a higher fair value measurement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
31 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Fair Value of Derivatives by Level
The tables below present the fair value of derivatives on a gross basis by level and
major product type. Gross fair values exclude the effects of both counterparty
netting and collateral, and therefore are not representative of the firms exposure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative Assets at Fair Value as of March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Cross-Level Netting |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Interest rates |
|
|
$ 26 |
|
|
|
$ 538,655 |
|
|
|
$ 166 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 538,847 |
|
|
|
Credit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
71,039 |
|
|
|
10,630 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,669 |
|
|
|
Currencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
68,953 |
|
|
|
618 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69,571 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,765 |
|
|
|
481 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,246 |
|
|
|
Equities |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
51,062 |
|
|
|
582 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51,672 |
|
Gross fair value of derivative assets |
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
751,474 |
|
|
|
12,477 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
764,005 |
|
|
|
Counterparty
netting 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(601,944 |
) |
|
|
(3,193 |
) |
|
|
(1,959 |
) 3 |
|
|
(607,096 |
) |
Subtotal |
|
|
$ 54 |
|
|
|
$ 149,530 |
|
|
|
$ 9,284 |
|
|
|
$(1,959 |
) |
|
|
$ 156,909 |
|
|
|
Cash
collateral 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(88,869 |
) |
Fair value included in financial instruments owned |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 68,040 |
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative Liabilities at Fair Value as of March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Cross-Level
Netting |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Interest rates |
|
|
$ 29 |
|
|
|
$ 482,113 |
|
|
|
$ 471 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 482,613 |
|
|
|
Credit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
67,747 |
|
|
|
4,748 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,495 |
|
|
|
Currencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
61,329 |
|
|
|
907 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62,236 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,244 |
|
|
|
508 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21,752 |
|
|
|
Equities |
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
46,246 |
|
|
|
1,717 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,082 |
|
Gross fair value of derivative liabilities |
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
678,679 |
|
|
|
8,351 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
687,178 |
|
|
|
Counterparty
netting 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(601,944 |
) |
|
|
(3,193 |
) |
|
|
(1,959 |
) 3 |
|
|
(607,096 |
) |
Subtotal |
|
|
$148 |
|
|
|
$ 76,735 |
|
|
|
$ 5,158 |
|
|
|
$(1,959 |
) |
|
|
$ 80,082 |
|
|
|
Cash
collateral 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27,735 |
) |
Fair value included in financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 52,347 |
|
1. |
Represents the netting of receivable balances with payable balances for the same counterparty under enforceable netting agreements.
|
2. |
Represents the netting of cash collateral received and posted on a counterparty basis under enforceable credit support agreements.
|
3. |
Represents the netting of receivable balances with payable balances for the same counterparty across levels of the fair value hierarchy under enforceable
netting agreements. |
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative Assets at Fair Value as of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Cross-Level Netting |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Interest rates |
|
|
$13 |
|
|
|
$ 608,151 |
|
|
|
$ 192 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 608,356 |
|
|
|
Credit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,907 |
|
|
|
10,909 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85,816 |
|
|
|
Currencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
71,157 |
|
|
|
992 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,149 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,697 |
|
|
|
623 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,320 |
|
|
|
Equities |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
48,698 |
|
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,483 |
|
Gross fair value of derivative assets |
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
825,610 |
|
|
|
13,458 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
839,124 |
|
|
|
Counterparty
netting 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(662,798 |
) |
|
|
(3,538 |
) |
|
|
(2,124 |
) 3 |
|
|
(668,460 |
) |
Subtotal |
|
|
$56 |
|
|
|
$ 162,812 |
|
|
|
$ 9,920 |
|
|
|
$(2,124 |
) |
|
|
$ 170,664 |
|
|
|
Cash
collateral 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(99,488 |
) |
Fair value included in financial instruments owned |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 71,176 |
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative Liabilities at Fair Value as of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Cross-Level
Netting |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Interest rates |
|
|
$14 |
|
|
|
$ 545,110 |
|
|
|
$ 547 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 545,671 |
|
|
|
Credit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
70,246 |
|
|
|
4,681 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,927 |
|
|
|
Currencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
59,937 |
|
|
|
957 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,894 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,423 |
|
|
|
927 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,350 |
|
|
|
Equities |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
41,641 |
|
|
|
1,990 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,681 |
|
Gross fair value of derivative liabilities |
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
740,357 |
|
|
|
9,102 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
749,523 |
|
|
|
Counterparty
netting 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(662,798 |
) |
|
|
(3,538 |
) |
|
|
(2,124 |
) 3 |
|
|
(668,460 |
) |
Subtotal |
|
|
$64 |
|
|
|
$ 77,559 |
|
|
|
$ 5,564 |
|
|
|
$(2,124 |
) |
|
|
$ 81,063 |
|
|
|
Cash
collateral 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,636 |
) |
Fair value included in financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 50,427 |
|
1. |
Represents the netting of receivable balances with payable balances for the same counterparty under enforceable netting agreements.
|
2. |
Represents the netting of cash collateral received and posted on a counterparty basis under enforceable credit support agreements.
|
3. |
Represents the netting of receivable balances with payable balances for the same counterparty across levels of the fair value hierarchy under enforceable
netting agreements. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
33 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Level 3 Rollforward
If a derivative was transferred to level 3 during a reporting period, its entire gain
or loss for the period is included in level 3. Transfers between levels are reported at the beginning of the reporting period in which they occur. In the tables below, negative amounts for transfers into level 3 and positive amounts for
transfers out of level 3 represent net transfers of derivative liabilities.
Gains and losses on level 3 derivatives
should be considered in the context of the following:
|
|
A derivative with level 1 and/or level 2 inputs is classified in level 3 in its entirety if it has at least one significant
level 3 input. |
|
|
If there is one significant level 3 input, the entire gain or loss from adjusting only observable inputs (i.e., level 1 and level 2
inputs) is classified as level 3. |
|
|
Gains or losses that have been reported in level 3 resulting from changes in level 1 or level 2 inputs are frequently offset by gains
or losses attributable to level 1 or level 2 derivatives and/or level 1, level 2 and level 3 cash instruments. As a result, gains/(losses) included in the level 3 rollforward below do not necessarily represent the
overall impact on the firms results of operations, liquidity or capital resources. |
The tables below present changes in fair value for all derivatives categorized as level 3 as of the end of the
period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Derivative Assets and Liabilities at Fair Value for the Three Months Ended
March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Asset/
(liability) balance, beginning of period |
|
|
|
Net
realized gains/ (losses) |
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains/(losses) relating to instruments still held at period-end |
|
|
|
Purchases |
|
|
|
Sales |
|
|
|
Settlements |
|
|
|
Transfers into
level 3 |
|
|
|
Transfers out
of level 3 |
|
|
|
Asset/
(liability) balance, end
of period |
|
Interest rates net |
|
|
$ (355 |
) |
|
|
$ (6 |
) |
|
|
$ 30 |
|
|
|
$ 5 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 51 |
|
|
|
$ (14 |
) |
|
|
$ (16 |
) |
|
|
$ (305 |
) |
|
|
Credit net |
|
|
6,228 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(527 |
) |
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
(93 |
) |
|
|
5,882 |
|
|
|
Currencies net |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(329 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
(289 |
) |
|
|
Commodities net |
|
|
(304 |
) |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
Equities net |
|
|
(1,248 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(170 |
) |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
(488 |
) |
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
674 |
|
|
|
(1,135 |
) |
Total derivatives net |
|
|
$ 4,356 |
|
|
|
$(27 |
) 1 |
|
|
$(284 |
) 1, 2 |
|
|
$159 |
|
|
|
$(558 |
) |
|
|
$(331 |
) |
|
|
$224 |
|
|
|
$587 |
|
|
|
$ 4,126 |
|
1. |
The aggregate amounts include approximately $(193) million and $(118) million reported in Market making and Other principal
transactions, respectively. |
2. |
Principally resulted from changes in level 2 inputs. |
The net unrealized loss on level 3 derivatives of $284 million for the three
months ended March 2013 was primarily attributable to changes in foreign exchange rates on certain currency derivatives and increases in equity prices on certain equity derivatives, partially offset by the impact of a decline in volatility on
certain commodity derivatives.
Transfers into level 3 derivatives during the three months ended March 2013 primarily
reflected transfers of certain credit derivative assets from level 2, principally due to reduced transparency of credit spread inputs used to value these derivatives.
Transfers out of level 3 derivatives during the three months ended March 2013
primarily reflected transfers of certain equity derivative liabilities to level 2, principally due to unobservable inputs no longer being significant to the valuation of these derivatives.
|
|
|
|
|
34 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Derivative Assets and Liabilities at Fair Value for the Three Months Ended March 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Asset/
(liability) balance, beginning of period |
|
|
|
Net
realized gains/ (losses) |
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains/(losses) relating to instruments still held at period-end |
|
|
|
Purchases |
|
|
|
Sales |
|
|
|
Settlements |
|
|
|
Transfers into
level 3 |
|
|
|
Transfers out
of level 3 |
|
|
|
Asset/
(liability) balance, end
of period |
|
Interest rates net |
|
|
$ (371 |
) |
|
|
$(63 |
) |
|
|
$ 32 |
|
|
|
$ 3 |
|
|
|
$ (1 |
) |
|
|
$ 164 |
|
|
|
$ 8 |
|
|
|
$ (12 |
) |
|
|
$ (240 |
) |
|
|
Credit net |
|
|
6,300 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
(308 |
) |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
(73 |
) |
|
|
(553 |
) |
|
|
1,332 |
|
|
|
(281 |
) |
|
|
6,502 |
|
|
|
Currencies net |
|
|
842 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(266 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(234 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
Commodities net |
|
|
(605 |
) |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
206 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
(99 |
) |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
(99 |
) |
|
|
Equities net |
|
|
(432 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
(277 |
) |
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
(100 |
) |
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
(80 |
) |
|
|
(520 |
) |
Total derivatives net |
|
|
$5,734 |
|
|
|
$(44 |
) 1 |
|
|
$(613 |
) 1, 2 |
|
|
$251 |
|
|
|
$(280 |
) |
|
|
$(276 |
) |
|
|
$1,457 |
|
|
|
$(196 |
) |
|
|
$6,033 |
|
1. |
The aggregate amounts include approximately $(444) million and $(213) million reported in Market making and Other principal
transactions, respectively. |
2. |
Principally resulted from changes in level 2 inputs. |
The net unrealized loss on level 3 derivatives of $613 million for the three
months ended March 2012 was primarily attributable to the impact of tighter credit spreads, increases in equity prices and changes in foreign exchange rates on the underlying derivatives, partially offset by the impact of changes in commodity
prices.
Transfers into level 3 derivatives during the three months ended March 2012 primarily reflected transfers of
certain credit derivative assets from level 2, primarily due to unobservable inputs becoming significant to the valuation of these derivatives.
Transfers out of level 3 derivatives during the three months ended March 2012 primarily reflected transfers to level 2 of certain credit derivative assets, principally due to unobservable
inputs no longer being significant to the valuation of these derivatives.
Impact of Credit Spreads on Derivatives
On an ongoing basis, the firm realizes gains or losses relating to changes in credit risk through the unwind of derivative contracts and
changes in credit mitigants.
The net loss, including hedges, attributable to the impact of changes in credit exposure and
credit spreads (counterparty and the firms) on derivatives was $83 million and $179 million for the three months ended March 2013 and March 2012, respectively.
Bifurcated Embedded Derivatives
The table below presents the fair value and the
notional amount of derivatives that have been bifurcated from their related borrowings. These derivatives, which are recorded at fair value, primarily consist of interest rate, equity and commodity products and are included in Unsecured
short-term borrowings and Unsecured long-term borrowings with the related borrowings. See Note 8 for further information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Fair value of assets |
|
|
$ 275 |
|
|
|
$ 320 |
|
|
|
Fair value of liabilities |
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
398 |
|
Net asset/(liability) |
|
|
$ (92 |
) |
|
|
$ (78 |
) |
Notional amount |
|
|
$10,188 |
|
|
|
$10,567 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
35 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
OTC Derivatives
The tables below present the fair values of OTC derivative assets and liabilities by tenor
and by product type. Tenor is based on expected duration for mortgage-related credit
derivatives and generally on remaining contractual maturity for other derivatives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in millions |
|
|
OTC Derivatives as of March 2013 |
|
Assets Product Type |
|
|
0 - 12
Months |
|
|
|
1 - 5
Years |
|
|
|
5 Years or Greater |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Interest rates |
|
|
$ 8,817 |
|
|
|
$27,020 |
|
|
|
$72,111 |
|
|
|
$107,948 |
|
|
|
Credit |
|
|
2,025 |
|
|
|
11,105 |
|
|
|
7,804 |
|
|
|
20,934 |
|
|
|
Currencies |
|
|
11,086 |
|
|
|
7,780 |
|
|
|
8,561 |
|
|
|
27,427 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
4,037 |
|
|
|
3,666 |
|
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
8,101 |
|
|
|
Equities |
|
|
5,326 |
|
|
|
7,626 |
|
|
|
6,235 |
|
|
|
19,187 |
|
|
|
Netting across product types 1 |
|
|
(2,279 |
) |
|
|
(5,857 |
) |
|
|
(4,380 |
) |
|
|
(12,516 |
) |
Subtotal |
|
|
$29,012 |
|
|
|
$51,340 |
|
|
|
$90,729 |
|
|
|
$171,081 |
|
|
|
Cross maturity netting 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18,627 |
) |
|
|
Cash
collateral 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(88,869 |
) |
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 63,585 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities Product Type |
|
|
0 - 12
Months |
|
|
|
1 - 5
Years |
|
|
|
5 Years or Greater |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Interest rates |
|
|
$ 4,126 |
|
|
|
$17,437 |
|
|
|
$30,165 |
|
|
|
$ 51,728 |
|
|
|
Credit |
|
|
764 |
|
|
|
7,645 |
|
|
|
3,352 |
|
|
|
11,761 |
|
|
|
Currencies |
|
|
9,732 |
|
|
|
5,161 |
|
|
|
5,176 |
|
|
|
20,069 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
3,815 |
|
|
|
2,597 |
|
|
|
2,046 |
|
|
|
8,458 |
|
|
|
Equities |
|
|
6,189 |
|
|
|
5,487 |
|
|
|
3,952 |
|
|
|
15,628 |
|
|
|
Netting across product types 1 |
|
|
(2,279 |
) |
|
|
(5,857 |
) |
|
|
(4,380 |
) |
|
|
(12,516 |
) |
Subtotal |
|
|
$22,347 |
|
|
|
$32,470 |
|
|
|
$40,311 |
|
|
|
$ 95,128 |
|
|
|
Cross maturity netting 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18,627 |
) |
|
|
Cash
collateral 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27,735 |
) |
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 48,766 |
|
1. |
Represents the netting of receivable balances with payable balances for the same counterparty across product types within a tenor category under enforceable
netting agreements. Receivable and payable balances with the same counterparty in the same product type and tenor category are netted within such product type and tenor category. |
2. |
Represents the netting of receivable balances with payable balances for the same counterparty across tenor categories under enforceable netting agreements.
|
3. |
Represents the netting of cash collateral received and posted on a counterparty basis under enforceable credit support agreements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
36 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in millions |
|
|
OTC Derivatives as of December 2012 |
|
Assets Product Type |
|
|
0 - 12
Months |
|
|
|
1 - 5
Years |
|
|
|
5 Years or
Greater |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Interest rates |
|
|
$10,318 |
|
|
|
$28,445 |
|
|
|
$ 80,449 |
|
|
|
$119,212 |
|
|
|
Credit |
|
|
2,190 |
|
|
|
12,244 |
|
|
|
7,970 |
|
|
|
22,404 |
|
|
|
Currencies |
|
|
11,100 |
|
|
|
8,379 |
|
|
|
11,044 |
|
|
|
30,523 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
3,840 |
|
|
|
3,862 |
|
|
|
304 |
|
|
|
8,006 |
|
|
|
Equities |
|
|
3,757 |
|
|
|
7,730 |
|
|
|
6,957 |
|
|
|
18,444 |
|
|
|
Netting across product types 1 |
|
|
(2,811 |
) |
|
|
(5,831 |
) |
|
|
(5,082 |
) |
|
|
(13,724 |
) |
Subtotal |
|
|
$28,394 |
|
|
|
$54,829 |
|
|
|
$101,642 |
|
|
|
$184,865 |
|
|
|
Cross maturity netting 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17,973 |
) |
|
|
Cash
collateral 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(99,488 |
) |
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 67,404 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities Product Type |
|
|
0 - 12
Months |
|
|
|
1 - 5
Years |
|
|
|
5 Years or
Greater |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Interest rates |
|
|
$ 6,266 |
|
|
|
$17,860 |
|
|
|
$ 32,422 |
|
|
|
$ 56,548 |
|
|
|
Credit |
|
|
809 |
|
|
|
7,537 |
|
|
|
3,168 |
|
|
|
11,514 |
|
|
|
Currencies |
|
|
8,586 |
|
|
|
4,849 |
|
|
|
5,782 |
|
|
|
19,217 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
3,970 |
|
|
|
3,119 |
|
|
|
2,267 |
|
|
|
9,356 |
|
|
|
Equities |
|
|
3,775 |
|
|
|
5,476 |
|
|
|
3,937 |
|
|
|
13,188 |
|
|
|
Netting across product types 1 |
|
|
(2,811 |
) |
|
|
(5,831 |
) |
|
|
(5,082 |
) |
|
|
(13,724 |
) |
Subtotal |
|
|
$20,595 |
|
|
|
$33,010 |
|
|
|
$ 42,494 |
|
|
|
$ 96,099 |
|
|
|
Cross maturity netting 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17,973 |
) |
|
|
Cash
collateral 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,636 |
) |
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 47,490 |
|
1. |
Represents the netting of receivable balances with payable balances for the same counterparty across product types within a tenor category under enforceable
netting agreements. Receivable and payable balances with the same counterparty in the same product type and tenor category are netted within such product type and tenor category. |
2. |
Represents the netting of receivable balances with payable balances for the same counterparty across tenor categories under enforceable netting agreements.
|
3. |
Represents the netting of cash collateral received and posted on a counterparty basis under enforceable credit support agreements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
37 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Derivatives with Credit-Related Contingent Features
Certain of the firms derivatives have been transacted under bilateral agreements with counterparties who may require the firm to
post collateral or terminate the transactions based on changes in the firms credit ratings. The firm assesses the impact of these bilateral agreements by determining the collateral or termination payments that would occur assuming a downgrade
by all rating agencies. A downgrade by any one rating agency, depending on the agencys relative ratings of the firm at the time of the downgrade, may have an impact which is comparable to the impact of a downgrade by all rating agencies. The
table below presents the aggregate fair value of net derivative liabilities under such agreements (excluding application of collateral posted to reduce these liabilities), the related aggregate fair value of the assets posted as collateral, and the
additional collateral or termination payments that could have been called at the reporting date by counterparties in the event of a one-notch and two-notch downgrade in the firms credit ratings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Net derivative liabilities under bilateral agreements |
|
|
$27,925 |
|
|
|
$27,885 |
|
|
|
Collateral posted |
|
|
24,378 |
|
|
|
24,296 |
|
|
|
Additional collateral or termination payments for a one-notch downgrade |
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
1,534 |
|
|
|
Additional collateral or termination payments for a two-notch downgrade |
|
|
2,476 |
|
|
|
2,500 |
|
Credit Derivatives
The firm enters into a broad array of credit derivatives in locations around the world to facilitate client transactions and to manage the
credit risk associated with market-making and investing and lending activities. Credit derivatives are actively managed based on the firms net risk position.
Credit derivatives are individually negotiated contracts and can have various settlement and payment conventions. Credit events include failure to pay, bankruptcy, acceleration of indebtedness,
restructuring, repudiation and dissolution of the reference entity.
Credit Default Swaps.
Single-name credit default swaps protect the buyer against the loss of principal on one or more bonds, loans or mortgages (reference obligations) in the event the issuer (reference entity) of the reference obligations suffers a credit event. The
buyer of protection pays an initial or periodic premium to the seller and receives
protection for the period of the contract. If there is no credit event, as defined in the contract, the seller of protection makes no payments to the buyer of protection. However, if a credit
event occurs, the seller of protection is required to make a payment to the buyer of protection, which is calculated in accordance with the terms of the contract.
Credit Indices, Baskets and Tranches. Credit derivatives may reference a basket of
single-name credit default swaps or a broad-based index. If a credit event occurs in one of the underlying reference obligations, the protection seller pays the protection buyer. The payment is typically a pro-rata portion of the transactions
total notional amount based on the underlying defaulted reference obligation. In certain transactions, the credit risk of a basket or index is separated into various portions (tranches), each having different levels of subordination. The most junior
tranches cover initial defaults and once losses exceed the notional amount of these junior tranches, any excess loss is covered by the next most senior tranche in the capital structure.
Total Return Swaps. A total return swap transfers the risks relating to economic performance of a reference obligation from the protection buyer to the protection seller. Typically, the protection buyer receives from the
protection seller a floating rate of interest and protection against any reduction in fair value of the reference obligation, and in return the protection seller receives the cash flows associated with the reference obligation, plus any increase in
the fair value of the reference obligation.
Credit
Options. In a credit option, the option writer assumes the obligation to purchase or sell a reference obligation at a specified price or credit spread. The option purchaser buys the
right, but does not assume the obligation, to sell the reference obligation to, or purchase it from, the option writer. The payments on credit options depend either on a particular credit spread or the price of the reference obligation.
The firm economically hedges its exposure to written credit derivatives primarily by entering into offsetting purchased credit
derivatives with identical underlyings. Substantially all of the firms purchased credit derivative transactions are with financial institutions and are subject to stringent collateral thresholds. In addition, upon the occurrence of a specified
trigger event, the firm may take possession of the reference obligations underlying a particular written credit derivative, and consequently may, upon liquidation of the reference obligations, recover amounts on the underlying reference obligations
in the event of default.
|
|
|
|
|
38 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
As of March 2013, written and purchased credit derivatives had total gross notional
amounts of $1.77 trillion and $1.86 trillion, respectively, for total net notional purchased protection of $88.75 billion. As of December 2012, written and purchased credit derivatives had total gross notional amounts of
$1.76 trillion and $1.86 trillion, respectively, for total net notional purchased protection of $98.33 billion.
The table below presents certain information about credit derivatives. In the table below:
|
|
fair values exclude the effects of both netting of receivable balances with payable balances under enforceable netting agreements, and netting of
cash received or posted under enforceable credit support agreements, and therefore are not representative of the firms credit exposure;
|
|
|
tenor is based on expected duration for mortgage-related credit derivatives and on remaining contractual maturity for other credit
derivatives; and |
|
|
the credit spread on the underlying, together with the tenor of the contract, are indicators of payment/performance risk. The firm is less likely to
pay or otherwise be required to perform where the credit spread and the tenor are lower. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum Payout/Notional Amount
of Written Credit Derivatives by Tenor |
|
|
|
|
Maximum Payout/Notional Amount of Purchased Credit Derivatives |
|
|
|
|
Fair Value of
Written Credit Derivatives |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
0 - 12
Months |
|
|
|
1 - 5
Years |
|
|
|
5 Years
or Greater |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
Offsetting Purchased Credit Derivatives |
1
|
|
|
Other Purchased Credit Derivatives |
2
|
|
|
|
|
Asset |
|
|
|
Liability |
|
|
|
Net Asset/
(Liability) |
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit spread on underlying
(basis points) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0-250 |
|
|
$364,116 |
|
|
|
$ 990,658 |
|
|
|
$118,650 |
|
|
|
$1,473,424 |
|
|
|
|
|
$1,353,367 |
|
|
|
$203,517 |
|
|
|
|
|
$29,211 |
|
|
|
$ 7,923 |
|
|
|
$21,288 |
|
|
|
251-500 |
|
|
12,780 |
|
|
|
143,576 |
|
|
|
37,314 |
|
|
|
193,670 |
|
|
|
|
|
174,983 |
|
|
|
19,548 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,290 |
|
|
|
8,350 |
|
|
|
(4,060 |
) |
|
|
501-1,000 |
|
|
5,061 |
|
|
|
42,215 |
|
|
|
5,520 |
|
|
|
52,796 |
|
|
|
|
|
50,663 |
|
|
|
5,137 |
|
|
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
3,326 |
|
|
|
(2,886 |
) |
|
|
Greater than 1,000 |
|
|
10,214 |
|
|
|
40,936 |
|
|
|
2,936 |
|
|
|
54,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
47,216 |
|
|
|
8,291 |
|
|
|
|
|
520 |
|
|
|
20,588 |
|
|
|
(20,068 |
) |
Total |
|
|
$392,171 |
|
|
|
$1,217,385 |
|
|
|
$164,420 |
|
|
|
$1,773,976 |
|
|
|
|
|
$1,626,229 |
|
|
|
$236,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
$34,461 |
|
|
|
$40,187 |
|
|
|
$ (5,726 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit spread on underlying
(basis points) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0-250 |
|
|
$360,289 |
|
|
|
$ 989,941 |
|
|
|
$103,481 |
|
|
|
$1,453,711 |
|
|
|
|
|
$1,343,561 |
|
|
|
$201,459 |
|
|
|
|
|
$28,817 |
|
|
|
$ 8,249 |
|
|
|
$20,568 |
|
|
|
251-500 |
|
|
13,876 |
|
|
|
126,659 |
|
|
|
35,086 |
|
|
|
175,621 |
|
|
|
|
|
157,371 |
|
|
|
19,063 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,284 |
|
|
|
7,848 |
|
|
|
(3,564 |
) |
|
|
501-1,000 |
|
|
9,209 |
|
|
|
52,012 |
|
|
|
5,619 |
|
|
|
66,840 |
|
|
|
|
|
60,456 |
|
|
|
8,799 |
|
|
|
|
|
769 |
|
|
|
4,499 |
|
|
|
(3,730 |
) |
|
|
Greater than 1,000 |
|
|
11,453 |
|
|
|
49,721 |
|
|
|
3,622 |
|
|
|
64,796 |
|
|
|
|
|
57,774 |
|
|
|
10,812 |
|
|
|
|
|
568 |
|
|
|
21,970 |
|
|
|
(21,402 |
) |
Total |
|
|
$394,827 |
|
|
|
$1,218,333 |
|
|
|
$147,808 |
|
|
|
$1,760,968 |
|
|
|
|
|
$1,619,162 |
|
|
|
$240,133 |
|
|
|
|
|
$34,438 |
|
|
|
$42,566 |
|
|
|
$ (8,128 |
) |
1. |
Offsetting purchased credit derivatives represent the notional amount of purchased credit derivatives to the extent they economically hedge written credit
derivatives with identical underlyings. |
2. |
This purchased protection represents the notional amount of purchased credit derivatives in excess of the notional amount included in Offsetting
Purchased Credit Derivatives. |
Hedge Accounting
The firm applies hedge accounting for (i) certain interest rate swaps used to manage
the interest rate exposure of certain fixed-rate unsecured long-term and short-term borrowings and certain fixed-rate certificates of deposit and (ii) certain foreign currency forward contracts and foreign currency-denominated debt used to
manage foreign currency exposures on the firms net investment in certain non-U.S. operations.
To qualify for hedge accounting, the derivative hedge must be highly effective at reducing
the risk from the exposure being hedged. Additionally, the firm must formally document the hedging relationship at inception and test the hedging relationship at least on a quarterly basis to ensure the derivative hedge continues to be highly
effective over the life of the hedging relationship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
39 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Interest Rate Hedges
The firm designates certain interest rate swaps as fair value hedges. These interest rate swaps hedge changes in fair value attributable to the relevant benchmark interest rate (e.g., London Interbank
Offered Rate (LIBOR)), effectively converting a substantial portion of fixed-rate obligations into floating-rate obligations.
The firm applies a statistical method that utilizes regression analysis when assessing the effectiveness of its fair value hedging relationships in achieving offsetting changes in the fair values of the
hedging instrument and the risk being hedged (i.e., interest rate risk). An interest rate swap is considered highly effective in offsetting changes in fair value attributable to changes in the hedged risk when the regression analysis results in a
coefficient of determination of 80% or greater and a slope between 80% and 125%.
For qualifying fair value hedges, gains
or losses on derivatives are included in Interest expense. The change in fair value of the hedged item attributable to the risk being hedged is reported as an adjustment to its carrying value and is subsequently amortized into interest
expense over its remaining life. Gains or losses resulting from hedge ineffectiveness are included in Interest expense. When a derivative is no longer designated as a hedge, any remaining difference between the carrying value and par
value of the hedged item is amortized to interest expense over the remaining life of the hedged item using the effective interest method. See Note 23 for further information about interest income and interest expense.
The table below presents the gains/(losses) from interest rate derivatives accounted for as hedges, the related hedged
borrowings and bank deposits, and the hedge ineffectiveness on these derivatives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Interest rate hedges |
|
|
$(1,843 |
) |
|
|
$(2,238 |
) |
|
|
Hedged borrowings and bank deposits |
|
|
1,393 |
|
|
|
1,778 |
|
Hedge
ineffectiveness 1 |
|
|
$ (450 |
) |
|
|
$ (460 |
) |
1. |
Primarily consisted of amortization of prepaid credit spreads resulting from the passage of time. |
Net Investment Hedges
The firm seeks to reduce the impact of fluctuations in foreign exchange rates on its net investment in certain non-U.S. operations through the use of foreign currency forward contracts and foreign
currency-denominated debt. For foreign currency forward contracts designated as hedges, the effectiveness of the hedge is assessed based on the overall changes in the fair value of the forward contracts (i.e., based on changes in forward rates). For
foreign currency-denominated debt designated as a hedge, the effectiveness of the hedge is assessed based on changes in spot rates.
For qualifying net investment hedges, the gains or losses on the hedging instruments, to the extent effective, are included in Currency translation adjustment, net of tax within the condensed
consolidated statements of comprehensive income.
The table below presents the gains/(losses) from net investment hedging.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Currency hedges |
|
|
$220 |
|
|
|
$(212 |
) |
|
|
Foreign currency-denominated debt hedges |
|
|
220 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
The gain/(loss) related to ineffectiveness and the gain/(loss) reclassified to earnings from accumulated other
comprehensive income were not material for the three months ended March 2013 and March 2012.
As of March 2013
and December 2012, the firm had designated $2.55 billion and $2.77 billion, respectively, of foreign currency-denominated debt, included in Unsecured long-term borrowings and Unsecured short-term borrowings, as
hedges of net investments in non-U.S. subsidiaries.
|
|
|
|
|
40 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 8. Fair Value Option
Note 8.
Fair Value Option
|
|
|
|
|
Other Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities at Fair Value |
|
|
|
|
In addition to all cash and derivative instruments included in Financial instruments
owned, at fair value and Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value, the firm has elected to account for certain of its other financial assets and financial liabilities at fair value under the fair
value option.
The primary reasons for electing the fair value option are to:
|
|
reflect economic events in earnings on a timely basis; |
|
|
mitigate volatility in earnings from using different measurement attributes (e.g., transfers of financial instruments owned accounted for as
financings are recorded at fair value whereas the related secured financing would be recorded on an accrual basis absent electing the fair value option); and |
|
|
address simplification and cost-benefit considerations (e.g., accounting for hybrid financial instruments at fair value in their entirety versus
bifurcation of embedded derivatives and hedge accounting for debt hosts). |
Hybrid financial instruments are
instruments that contain bifurcatable embedded derivatives and do not require settlement by physical delivery of non-financial assets (e.g., physical commodities). If the firm elects to bifurcate the embedded derivative from the associated debt, the
derivative is accounted for at fair value and the host contract is accounted for at amortized cost, adjusted for the effective portion of any fair value hedges. If the firm does not elect to bifurcate, the entire hybrid financial instrument is
accounted for at fair value under the fair value option.
Other financial assets and financial liabilities accounted for at
fair value under the fair value option include:
|
|
repurchase agreements and substantially all resale agreements; |
|
|
securities borrowed and loaned within Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution; |
|
|
substantially all other secured financings, including transfers of assets accounted for as financings rather than sales;
|
|
|
certain unsecured short-term borrowings, consisting of all promissory notes and commercial paper and certain hybrid financial instruments;
|
|
|
certain unsecured long-term borrowings, including certain prepaid commodity transactions and certain hybrid financial instruments;
|
|
|
certain insurance and reinsurance contract assets and liabilities and certain guarantees; |
|
|
certain receivables from customers and counterparties, including transfers of assets accounted for as secured loans rather than purchases and
certain margin loans; |
|
|
certain time deposits issued by the firms bank subsidiaries (deposits with no stated maturity are not eligible for a fair value option
election), including structured certificates of deposit, which are hybrid financial instruments; and |
|
|
certain subordinated liabilities issued by consolidated VIEs. |
These financial assets and financial liabilities at fair value are
generally valued based on discounted cash flow techniques, which incorporate inputs with reasonable levels of price transparency, and are generally classified as level 2 because the inputs are observable. Valuation adjustments may be made for
liquidity and for counterparty and the firms credit quality.
See below for information about the significant inputs used to value other financial assets and financial liabilities
at fair value, including the ranges of significant unobservable inputs used to value the level 3 instruments within these categories. These ranges represent the significant unobservable inputs that were used in the valuation of each type of
other financial assets and financial liabilities at fair value. The ranges and weighted averages of these inputs are not representative of the appropriate inputs to use when calculating the fair value of any one instrument. For example, the highest
yield presented below for resale and repurchase agreements is appropriate for valuing a specific agreement in that category but may not be appropriate for valuing any other agreements in that category. Accordingly, the ranges of inputs presented
below do not represent uncertainty in, or possible ranges of, fair value measurements of the firms level 3 other financial assets and financial liabilities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
41 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Resale and Repurchase
Agreements and Securities Borrowed and Loaned. The significant inputs to the valuation of resale and repurchase agreements and
securities borrowed and loaned are collateral funding spreads, the amount and timing of expected future cash flows and interest rates.
The ranges of significant unobservable inputs used to value level 3 resale and repurchase agreements are as follows:
As of March 2013:
|
|
Yield: 1.8% to 5.2% (weighted average: 1.9%) |
|
|
Duration: 1.1 to 4.4 years (weighted average: 4.2 years) |
As of December 2012:
|
|
Yield: 1.7% to 5.4% (weighted average: 1.9%) |
|
|
Duration: 0.4 to 4.5 years (weighted average: 4.1 years) |
Generally, increases in yield or duration, in isolation, would result in a lower fair value measurement. Due to the distinctive nature of
each of the firms level 3 resale and repurchase agreements, the interrelationship of inputs is not necessarily uniform across such agreements.
See Note 9 for further information about collateralized agreements.
Other Secured
Financings. The significant inputs to the valuation of other secured financings at fair value are the amount and timing of
expected future cash flows, interest rates, collateral funding spreads, the fair value of the collateral delivered by the firm (which is determined using the amount and timing of expected future cash flows, market prices, market yields and recovery
assumptions) and the frequency of additional collateral calls.
The ranges of significant unobservable inputs used to value level 3 other secured financings are as follows:
As of March 2013:
|
|
Funding spreads: 42 bps to 210 bps (weighted average: 111 bps) |
|
|
Yield: 2.7% to 15.9% (weighted average: 10.0%) |
|
|
Duration: 0.6 to 10.5 years (weighted average: 3.8 years) |
As of December 2012:
|
|
Yield: 0.3% to 20.0% (weighted average: 4.2%) |
|
|
Duration: 0.3 to 10.8 years (weighted average: 2.4 years) |
Generally, increases in funding spreads, yield or duration, in isolation, would result in a lower fair value measurement. Due to the
distinctive nature of each of the
firms level 3 other secured financings, the interrelationship of inputs is not necessarily uniform across such financings.
See Note 9 for further information about collateralized financings.
Unsecured Short-term and
Long-term Borrowings. The significant inputs to the valuation of unsecured short-term and long-term borrowings at fair value are
the amount and timing of expected future cash flows, interest rates, the credit spreads of the firm, as well as commodity prices in the case of prepaid commodity transactions. The inputs used to value the embedded derivative component of hybrid
financial instruments are consistent with the inputs used to value the firms other derivative instruments. See Note 7 for further information about derivatives. See Notes 15 and 16 for further information about unsecured short-term
and long-term borrowings, respectively.
Certain of the firms unsecured short-term and long-term instruments are
included in level 3, substantially all of which are hybrid financial instruments. As the significant unobservable inputs used to value hybrid financial instruments primarily relate to the embedded derivative component of these borrowings, these
inputs are incorporated in the firms derivative disclosures related to unobservable inputs in Note 7.
Insurance and Reinsurance Contracts. Insurance and reinsurance contracts at fair value are
primarily included in Receivables from customers and counterparties and Other liabilities and accrued expenses. In addition, assets related to the firms reinsurance business that were classified as held for sale as of
March 2013 and December 2012 are included in Other assets. The insurance and reinsurance contracts for which the firm has elected the fair value option are contracts that can be settled only in cash and that qualify for the
fair value option because they are recognized financial instruments. These contracts are valued using market transactions and other market evidence where possible, including market-based inputs to models, calibration to market-clearing transactions
or other alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency. Significant inputs are interest rates, inflation rates, volatilities, funding spreads, yield and duration, which incorporates policy lapse and projected mortality
assumptions. When unobservable inputs to a valuation model are significant to the fair value measurement of an instrument, the instrument is classified in level 3.
The ranges of significant unobservable inputs used to value level 3 insurance and reinsurance contracts are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
42 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
As of March 2013:
|
|
Funding spreads: 33 bps to 49 bps (weighted average: 40 bps) |
|
|
Yield: 3.6% to 11.3% (weighted average: 6.2%) |
|
|
Duration: 7.6 to 10.5 years (weighted average: 9.1 years) |
As of December 2012:
|
|
Funding spreads: 39 bps to 61 bps (weighted average: 49 bps) |
|
|
Yield: 4.4% to 15.1% (weighted average: 6.2%) |
|
|
Duration: 5.3 to 8.8 years (weighted average: 7.6 years) |
Generally, increases in funding spreads, yield or duration, in isolation, would result in a lower fair value measurement. Due to the
distinctive nature of each of the firms level 3 insurance and reinsurance contracts, the interrelationship of inputs is not necessarily uniform across such contracts.
Receivables from Customers
and Counterparties. Receivables from customers and counterparties at fair value, excluding insurance and reinsurance contracts,
are primarily comprised of transfers of assets accounted for as secured loans rather than purchases. The significant inputs to the valuation of such receivables are commodity prices, interest rates, the amount and timing of expected future cash
flows and funding spreads. The ranges of significant unobservable inputs used to value level 3 receivables from customers and counterparties are as follows:
As of March 2013:
|
|
Funding spreads: 74 bps to 84 bps (weighted average: 81 bps) |
As of December 2012:
|
|
Funding spreads: 85 bps to 99 bps (weighted average: 99 bps) |
Generally, an increase in funding spreads would result in a lower fair value measurement.
Receivables from customers and counterparties not accounted for at fair value are accounted
for at amortized cost net of estimated uncollectible amounts, which generally approximates fair value. Such receivables are primarily comprised of customer margin loans and collateral posted in connection with certain derivative transactions. While
these items are carried at amounts that approximate fair value, they are not accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or at fair value in accordance with other U.S. GAAP and therefore are not included in the firms fair value
hierarchy in Notes 6, 7 and 8. Had these items been included in the firms fair value hierarchy, substantially all would have been classified in level 2 as of March 2013. Receivables from customers and counterparties not
accounted for at fair value also includes loans held for investment, which are primarily comprised of collateralized loans to private wealth management clients and corporate loans. As of March 2013 and December 2012, the carrying value of
such loans was $7.88 billion and $6.50 billion, respectively, which generally approximated fair value. As of March 2013, had these loans been carried at fair value and included in the fair value hierarchy, $2.77 billion and
$5.09 billion would have been classified in level 2 and level 3, respectively. As of December 2012, had these loans been carried at fair value and included in the fair value hierarchy, $2.41 billion and $4.06 billion
would have been classified in level 2 and level 3, respectively.
Deposits. The significant inputs to the valuation of time deposits are interest rates and the amount and timing of future cash flows. The inputs used to value the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial
instruments are consistent with the inputs used to value the firms other derivative instruments. See Note 7 for further information about derivatives. See Note 14 for further information about deposits.
The firms deposits that are included in level 3 are hybrid financial instruments. As the significant
unobservable inputs used to value hybrid financial instruments primarily relate to the embedded derivative component of these deposits, these inputs are incorporated in the firms derivative disclosures related to unobservable inputs in
Note 7.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
43 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value of Other Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities by Level |
|
|
|
|
The tables below present, by level within the fair value hierarchy, other financial assets
and financial liabilities
accounted for at fair value primarily under the fair value option.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Financial Assets at Fair Value as of March
2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Securities segregated for regulatory and other
purposes 1 |
|
|
$17,670 |
|
|
|
$ 5,006 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 22,676 |
|
|
|
Securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
|
|
|
|
|
158,179 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
158,283 |
|
|
|
Securities borrowed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
54,879 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
54,879 |
|
|
|
Receivables from customers and counterparties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,521 |
|
|
|
633 |
|
|
|
7,154 |
|
|
|
Other
assets 2 |
|
|
4,377 |
|
|
|
8,506 |
|
|
|
565 |
3 |
|
|
13,448 |
|
Total |
|
|
$22,047 |
|
|
|
$233,091 |
|
|
|
$ 1,302 |
|
|
|
$256,440 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other Financial Liabilities at Fair Value as of March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Deposits |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 6,672 |
|
|
|
$ 398 |
|
|
|
$ 7,070 |
|
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
|
|
|
|
153,579 |
|
|
|
1,777 |
|
|
|
155,356 |
|
|
|
Securities loaned |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,423 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,423 |
|
|
|
Other secured financings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,317 |
|
|
|
1,165 |
|
|
|
28,482 |
|
|
|
Unsecured short-term borrowings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,563 |
|
|
|
2,735 |
|
|
|
18,298 |
|
|
|
Unsecured long-term borrowings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,440 |
|
|
|
1,808 |
|
|
|
12,248 |
|
|
|
Other liabilities and accrued expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
565 |
|
|
|
11,277 |
4 |
|
|
11,842 |
|
Total |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$216,559 |
|
|
|
$19,160 |
|
|
|
$235,719 |
|
1. |
Includes securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes accounted for at fair value under the fair value option, which consists of securities
borrowed and resale agreements. The table above includes $17.67 billion of level 1 securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes accounted for at fair value under other U.S. GAAP, consisting of U.S. Treasury securities and money
market instruments. |
2. |
Consists of assets classified as held for sale related to the firms reinsurance business, primarily consisting of securities accounted for as
available-for-sale and insurance separate account assets which are accounted for at fair value under other U.S. GAAP. |
3. |
Substantially all of the balance consists of insurance contracts and derivatives classified as held for sale. See Insurance and Reinsurance
Contracts above and Note 7 for further information about valuation techniques and inputs related to insurance contracts and derivatives, respectively. |
4. |
Includes $873 million of liabilities classified as held for sale related to the firms reinsurance business accounted for at fair value under the
fair value option. |
|
|
|
|
|
44 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Financial Assets at Fair Value as of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Securities segregated for regulatory and other
purposes 1 |
|
|
$21,549 |
|
|
|
$ 8,935 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 30,484 |
|
|
|
Securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
|
|
|
|
|
141,053 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
141,331 |
|
|
|
Securities borrowed |
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,395 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,395 |
|
|
|
Receivables from customers and counterparties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,225 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
7,866 |
|
|
|
Other
assets 2 |
|
|
4,420 |
|
|
|
8,499 |
|
|
|
507 |
3 |
|
|
13,426 |
|
Total |
|
|
$25,969 |
|
|
|
$204,107 |
|
|
|
$ 1,426 |
|
|
|
$231,502 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other Financial Liabilities at Fair Value as of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Deposits |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 4,741 |
|
|
|
$ 359 |
|
|
|
$ 5,100 |
|
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
|
|
|
|
169,880 |
|
|
|
1,927 |
|
|
|
171,807 |
|
|
|
Securities loaned |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,558 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,558 |
|
|
|
Other secured financings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,925 |
|
|
|
1,412 |
|
|
|
30,337 |
|
|
|
Unsecured short-term borrowings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,011 |
|
|
|
2,584 |
|
|
|
17,595 |
|
|
|
Unsecured long-term borrowings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,676 |
|
|
|
1,917 |
|
|
|
12,593 |
|
|
|
Other liabilities and accrued expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
769 |
|
|
|
11,274 |
4 |
|
|
12,043 |
|
Total |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$231,560 |
|
|
|
$19,473 |
|
|
|
$251,033 |
|
1. |
Includes securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes accounted for at fair value under the fair value option, which consists of securities
borrowed and resale agreements. The table above includes $21.55 billion of level 1 securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes accounted for at fair value under other U.S. GAAP, consisting of U.S. Treasury securities and money
market instruments. |
2. |
Consists of assets classified as held for sale related to the firms reinsurance business, primarily consisting of securities accounted for as
available-for-sale and insurance separate account assets which are accounted for at fair value under other U.S. GAAP. |
3. |
Consists of insurance contracts and derivatives classified as held for sale. See Insurance and Reinsurance Contracts above and Note 7 for
further information about valuation techniques and inputs related to insurance contracts and derivatives, respectively. |
4. |
Includes $692 million of liabilities classified as held for sale related to the firms reinsurance business accounted for at fair value under the
fair value option. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
45 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Transfers Between Levels of the Fair Value Hierarchy
Transfers between levels of the fair value hierarchy are reported at the beginning of the reporting period in which they occur. There were
no transfers of other financial assets and financial liabilities between level 1 and level 2 during the three months ended March 2013 and March 2012. The tables below present information about transfers between level 2 and
level 3.
Level 3 Rollforward
If a financial asset or financial liability was transferred to level 3 during a reporting period, its entire gain or loss for the
period is included in level 3.
The tables below present changes in fair value for other financial assets and financial
liabilities accounted for at fair value categorized as level 3 as of the end of the period. Level 3 other financial assets and liabilities are frequently economically hedged with cash instruments and derivatives. Accordingly, gains or
losses that are reported in level 3 can be partially offset by gains or losses attributable to level 1, 2 or 3 cash instruments or derivatives. As a result, gains or losses included in the level 3 rollforward below do not necessarily
represent the overall impact on the firms results of operations, liquidity or capital resources.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Other Financial Assets at Fair Value for the Three Months Ended March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
|
|
Net realized gains/ (losses) |
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains/(losses) relating to instruments still held at period-end |
|
|
|
Purchases |
|
|
|
Sales |
|
|
|
Issuances |
|
|
|
Settlements |
|
|
|
Transfers
into level 3 |
|
|
|
Transfers out of level 3 |
|
|
|
Balance, end of period |
|
Securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
|
$ 278 |
|
|
|
$ 1 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ (16 |
) |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$(159 |
) |
|
|
$ 104 |
|
|
|
Receivables from customers and counterparties |
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
633 |
|
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
507 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
565 |
|
Total |
|
|
$ 1,426 |
|
|
|
$ 1 |
1 |
|
|
$ (4 |
) 1 |
|
|
$ 7 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ (16 |
) |
|
|
$ 47 |
|
|
|
$(159 |
) |
|
|
$ 1,302 |
|
1. The aggregate amounts include gains/(losses) of approximately $(4) million and $1 million
reported in Market making and Interest income, respectively. |
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Other Financial Liabilities at Fair Value for the Three Months Ended March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
|
|
Net realized (gains)/ losses |
|
|
|
Net unrealized (gains)/losses relating to instruments still held at
period-end |
|
|
|
Purchases |
|
|
|
Sales |
|
|
|
Issuances |
|
|
|
Settlements |
|
|
|
Transfers
into level 3 |
|
|
|
Transfers out of level 3 |
|
|
|
Balance, end of period |
|
Deposits |
|
|
$ 359 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 4 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 36 |
|
|
|
$ (1 |
) |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 398 |
|
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase, at fair value |
|
|
1,927 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(150 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,777 |
|
|
|
Other secured financings |
|
|
1,412 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
394 |
|
|
|
(750 |
) |
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,165 |
|
|
|
Unsecured short-term borrowings |
|
|
2,584 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
453 |
|
|
|
(491 |
) |
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
(93 |
) |
|
|
2,735 |
|
|
|
Unsecured long-term borrowings |
|
|
1,917 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
(214 |
) |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
(93 |
) |
|
|
1,808 |
|
|
|
Other liabilities and accrued expenses |
|
|
11,274 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(191 |
) |
|
|
304 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,277 |
|
Total |
|
|
$19,473 |
|
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$(259 |
) 1 |
|
|
$301 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$1,058 |
|
|
|
$(1,703 |
) |
|
|
$476 |
|
|
|
$(186 |
) |
|
|
$19,160 |
|
1. |
The aggregate amounts include gains/(losses) of approximately $337 million, $(77) million and $(1) million reported in Market
making, Other principal transactions and Interest expense, respectively. |
The net unrealized gain on level 3 other financial liabilities of $259 million
for the three months ended March 2013 primarily reflected a net gain on certain insurance liabilities, principally due to changes in foreign exchange rates, partially offset by the impact of changes in inflation and tighter
funding spreads.
Transfers out of level 3 of other financial assets during the three months ended
March 2013 reflected transfers of certain resale agreements to level 2, principally due to increased price transparency as a result of market transactions in similar instruments.
|
|
|
|
|
46 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Transfers into level 3 of other financial liabilities during the three months ended
March 2013 primarily reflected transfers of certain hybrid financial instruments from level 2, principally due to reduced transparency of certain correlation and volatility inputs used to value these instruments.
Transfers out of level 3 of other financial liabilities during the three months ended
March 2013 primarily reflected transfers of certain hybrid financial instruments to level 2, principally due to increased transparency of certain correlation and volatility inputs used to value certain instruments, and unobservable inputs
no longer being significant to the valuation of other instruments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Other Financial Assets at Fair Value for the Three Months Ended March 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
|
|
Net realized gains/
(losses) |
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains/(losses) relating to instruments still held at period-end |
|
|
|
Purchases |
|
|
|
Sales |
|
|
|
Issuances |
|
|
|
Settlements |
|
|
|
Transfers
into level 3 |
|
|
|
Transfers out of level 3 |
|
|
|
Balance, end of period |
|
Securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
|
$ 557 |
|
|
|
$ 1 |
|
|
|
$ 30 |
|
|
|
$535 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$(167 |
) |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 956 |
|
|
|
Receivables from customers and counterparties |
|
|
795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(373 |
) |
|
|
431 |
|
Total |
|
|
$ 1,352 |
|
|
|
$ 1 |
1 |
|
|
$ 39 |
1 |
|
|
$535 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$(167 |
) |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$(373 |
) |
|
|
$ 1,387 |
|
1. The aggregate amounts include gains of approximately $37 million and $3 million reported
in Market making and Interest income, respectively. |
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Other Financial Liabilities at Fair Value for the Three Months Ended March 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
|
|
Net realized (gains)/ losses |
|
|
|
Net unrealized (gains)/losses relating to instruments still held at
period-end |
|
|
|
Purchases |
|
|
|
Sales |
|
|
|
Issuances |
|
|
|
Settlements |
|
|
|
Transfers
into level 3 |
|
|
|
Transfers out of level 3 |
|
|
|
Balance, end of period |
|
Deposits |
|
|
$ 13 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ (6 |
) |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 89 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 96 |
|
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase, at fair value |
|
|
2,181 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(133 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,048 |
|
|
|
Other secured financings |
|
|
1,752 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
(465 |
) |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
1,282 |
|
|
|
Unsecured short-term borrowings |
|
|
3,294 |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
(118 |
) |
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
|
3,375 |
|
|
|
Unsecured long-term borrowings |
|
|
2,191 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
(116 |
) |
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
(241 |
) |
|
|
2,310 |
|
|
|
Other liabilities and accrued expenses |
|
|
8,996 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,965 |
|
Total |
|
|
$18,427 |
|
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$371 |
1 |
|
|
$ (13 |
) |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$397 |
|
|
|
$(917 |
) |
|
|
$315 |
|
|
|
$(504 |
) |
|
|
$18,076 |
|
1. |
The aggregate amounts include losses of approximately $355 million, $15 million and $1 million reported in Market making,
Other principal transactions and Interest expense, respectively. |
The net unrealized gain/(loss) on level 3 other financial assets and liabilities at
fair value of $(332) million (reflecting $39 million on other financial assets and $(371) million on other financial liabilities) for the three months ended March 2012 primarily consisted of losses on unsecured short-term and
long-term borrowings. These losses primarily reflected losses on certain equity-linked notes, principally due to an increase in global equity prices, which are level 2 inputs.
Transfers out of level 3 related to other financial assets during the three months ended March 2012 reflected transfers to
level 2 of certain insurance receivables, primarily due to increased transparency of the mortality inputs used to value these receivables.
Transfers into level 3 related to other financial liabilities during the three months
ended March 2012 primarily reflected transfers from level 2 of certain unsecured short-term and long-term borrowings, principally due to reduced transparency of the correlation and volatility inputs used to value certain hybrid financial
instruments.
Transfers out of level 3 related to other financial liabilities during the three months ended
March 2012 primarily reflected transfers to level 2 of certain unsecured short-term and long-term borrowings, principally due to increased transparency of the correlation and volatility inputs used to value certain hybrid financial
instruments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
47 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
Gains and Losses on Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities Accounted for at Fair Value Under the Fair Value Option |
|
|
|
|
The table below presents the gains and losses recognized as a result of the firm electing
to apply the fair value option to certain financial assets and financial liabilities. These gains and losses are included in Market making and Other principal transactions. The table below also includes gains and losses on
the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments included in unsecured short-term borrowings, unsecured long-term borrowings and deposits. These gains and losses would have been recognized under
other U.S. GAAP even if the firm had not elected to account for the entire hybrid instrument at fair value.
The amounts in the table exclude contractual interest, which is included in Interest income and Interest expense, for all instruments other than hybrid financial instruments. See
Note 23 for further information about interest income and interest expense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gains/(Losses) on Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities at Fair Value
Under the Fair Value Option |
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Receivables from customers and
counterparties 1 |
|
|
$ (12 |
) |
|
|
$ 44 |
|
|
|
Other secured financings |
|
|
(110 |
) |
|
|
(148 |
) |
|
|
Unsecured short-term borrowings 2 |
|
|
(148 |
) |
|
|
(895 |
) |
|
|
Unsecured long-term borrowings 3 |
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
(599 |
) |
|
|
Other liabilities and accrued expenses 4 |
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
Other 5 |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
Total |
|
|
$ 105 |
|
|
|
$(1,671 |
) |
1. |
Primarily consists of gains/(losses) on certain reinsurance contracts and certain transfers accounted for as receivables rather than purchases.
|
2. |
Includes losses on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments of $130 million and $853 million for the three months ended
March 2013 and March 2012, respectively. |
3. |
Includes gains/(losses) on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments of $284 million and $(368) million for the three months
ended March 2013 and March 2012, respectively. |
4. |
Primarily consists of gains/(losses) on certain insurance contracts. |
5. |
Primarily consists of gains/(losses) on resale and repurchase agreements, securities borrowed and loaned and deposits. |
Excluding the gains and losses on the instruments accounted for under the fair value option
described above, Market making and Other principal transactions
primarily represent gains and losses on Financial instruments owned, at fair value and Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value.
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Loans and Lending Commitments
The table below presents the difference between the aggregate fair value and the aggregate contractual principal amount for loans and long-term receivables for which the fair value option was elected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Aggregate contractual principal amount of performing loans and long-term receivables in excess of the related fair
value |
|
|
$ 2,105 |
|
|
|
$ 2,742 |
|
|
|
Aggregate contractual principal amount of loans on nonaccrual status and/or more
than 90 days past due in excess of the related fair value |
|
|
21,830 |
|
|
|
22,610 |
|
Total 1 |
|
|
$23,935 |
|
|
|
$25,352 |
|
Aggregate fair value of loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than 90 days past
due |
|
|
$ 2,232 |
|
|
|
$ 1,832 |
|
1. |
The aggregate contractual principal exceeds the related fair value primarily because the firm regularly purchases loans, such as distressed loans, at values
significantly below contractual principal amounts. |
As of March 2013 and December 2012, the fair value of unfunded lending commitments for which the fair value
option was elected was a liability of $1.43 billion and $1.99 billion, respectively, and the related total contractual amount of these lending commitments was $55.92 billion and $59.29 billion, respectively. See Note 18 for
further information about lending commitments.
Long-term Debt Instruments
The aggregate contractual principal amount of long-term other secured financings for which the fair value option was elected exceeded the related fair value by $134 million and $115 million as
of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. The fair value of unsecured long-term borrowings for which the fair value option was elected exceeded the related aggregate contractual principal amount by $140 million and
$379 million as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. The amounts above include both principal and non-principal-protected long-term borrowings.
Impact of Credit Spreads on Loans and Lending Commitments
The estimated net gain
attributable to changes in instrument-specific credit spreads on loans and lending commitments for which the fair value option was elected was $794 million and $973 million for the three months ended March 2013 and March 2012,
respectively. Changes in the fair value of loans and lending commitments are primarily attributable to changes in instrument-specific credit spreads. Substantially all of the firms performing loans and lending commitments are floating-rate.
Impact of Credit Spreads on Borrowings
The table below presents the net gains/(losses) attributable to the impact of changes in the firms own credit spreads on borrowings for which the fair value option was elected. The firm calculates
the fair value of borrowings by discounting future cash flows at a rate which incorporates the firms credit spreads.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Net gains/(losses) including hedges |
|
|
$ (77 |
) |
|
|
$(224 |
) |
|
|
Net gains/(losses) excluding hedges |
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
|
(289 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
49 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
Note 9. Collateralized Agreements and Financings
Note 9.
Collateralized Agreements and Financings |
|
|
|
|
Collateralized agreements are securities purchased under agreements to resell (resale
agreements) and securities borrowed. Collateralized financings are securities sold under agreements to repurchase (repurchase agreements), securities loaned and other secured financings. The firm enters into these transactions in order to, among
other things, facilitate client activities, invest excess cash, acquire securities to cover short positions and finance certain firm activities.
Collateralized agreements and financings are presented on a
net-by-counterparty basis when a legal right of setoff exists. Interest on collateralized agreements and collateralized financings is recognized over the life of the transaction and included in Interest income and Interest
expense, respectively. See Note 23 for further information about interest income and interest expense.
The table below presents the carrying value of resale and repurchase agreements and securities borrowed and
loaned transactions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Securities purchased under agreements
to resell 1 |
|
|
$158,506 |
|
|
|
$141,334 |
|
|
|
Securities borrowed 2 |
|
|
172,041 |
|
|
|
136,893 |
|
|
|
Securities sold under agreements
to repurchase 1 |
|
|
155,356 |
|
|
|
171,807 |
|
|
|
Securities
loaned 2 |
|
|
20,669 |
|
|
|
13,765 |
|
1. |
Substantially all resale and repurchase agreements are carried at fair value under the fair value option. See Note 8 for further information about the
valuation techniques and significant inputs used to determine fair value. |
2. |
As of March 2013 and December 2012, $54.88 billion and $38.40 billion of securities borrowed, and $2.42 billion and
$1.56 billion of securities loaned were at fair value, respectively. |
Resale and Repurchase Agreements
A resale agreement is a transaction in which the firm purchases financial instruments from a seller, typically in exchange for cash, and simultaneously enters into an agreement to resell the same or
substantially the same financial instruments to the seller at a stated price plus accrued interest at a future date.
A
repurchase agreement is a transaction in which the firm sells financial instruments to a buyer, typically in exchange for cash, and simultaneously enters into an agreement to repurchase the same or substantially the same financial instruments from
the buyer at a stated price plus accrued interest at a future date.
The financial instruments purchased or sold in resale and
repurchase agreements typically include U.S. government and federal agency, and investment-grade sovereign obligations.
The firm receives financial instruments purchased under resale agreements, makes delivery of financial instruments sold under repurchase
agreements, monitors the market value of these financial instruments on a daily basis, and delivers or obtains additional collateral due to changes in the market value of the financial instruments, as appropriate. For resale agreements, the firm
typically requires delivery of collateral with a fair value approximately equal to the carrying value of the relevant assets in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition.
Even though repurchase and resale agreements involve the legal
transfer of ownership of financial instruments, they are accounted for as financing arrangements because they require the financial instruments to be repurchased or resold at the maturity of the agreement. However, repos to maturity are
accounted for as sales. A repo to maturity is a transaction in which the firm transfers a security under an agreement to repurchase the security where the maturity date of the repurchase agreement matches the maturity date of the underlying
security. Therefore, the firm effectively no longer has a repurchase obligation and has relinquished control over the underlying security and, accordingly, accounts for the transaction as a sale. The firm had no repos to maturity outstanding as of
March 2013 or December 2012.
|
|
|
|
|
50 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Securities Borrowed and Loaned Transactions
In a securities borrowed transaction, the firm borrows securities from a counterparty in
exchange for cash. When the firm returns the securities, the counterparty returns the cash. Interest is generally paid periodically over the life of the transaction.
In a securities loaned transaction, the firm lends securities to a counterparty typically in exchange for cash or securities, or a letter of credit. When the counterparty returns the securities, the firm
returns the cash or securities posted as collateral. Interest is generally paid periodically over the life of the transaction.
The firm receives securities borrowed, makes delivery of securities loaned, monitors the market value of these securities on a daily basis, and delivers or obtains additional collateral due to changes in
the market value of the securities, as appropriate. For securities borrowed transactions, the firm typically requires collateral with a fair value approximately equal to the carrying value of the securities borrowed transaction.
Securities borrowed and loaned within Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client
Execution are recorded at fair value under the fair value option. See Note 8 for further information about securities borrowed and loaned accounted for at fair value.
Securities borrowed and loaned within Securities Services are
recorded based on the amount of cash collateral advanced or received plus accrued interest. As these arrangements generally can be terminated on demand, they exhibit little, if any, sensitivity to changes in interest rates. Therefore, the carrying
value of such arrangements approximates fair value. While these arrangements are carried at amounts that approximate fair value, they are not accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or at fair value in accordance with other U.S. GAAP
and therefore are not included in the firms fair value hierarchy in Notes 6, 7 and 8. Had these arrangements been included in the firms fair value hierarchy, they would have been classified in level 2 as of March 2013 and
December 2012.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
51 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Offsetting Arrangements
The tables below present the gross and net resale and repurchase agreements and securities
borrowed and loaned transactions, and the related amount of netting with the same counterparty under enforceable netting agreements (counterparty netting) included in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition.
Substantially all of the gross carrying values of these arrangements are subject to enforceable netting agreements. The tables below also present the amounts not offset in the
condensed consolidated statements of financial condition including counterparty netting that does not meet the criteria for netting under U.S. GAAP and the fair value of cash or securities
collateral received or posted subject to enforceable credit support agreements. Where the firm has received or posted collateral under credit support agreements, but has not yet determined such agreements are enforceable, the related collateral has
not been netted in the table below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
in millions |
|
|
Securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
|
|
Securities borrowed |
|
|
|
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
|
Securities loaned |
|
Amounts included in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross carrying value |
|
|
$ 202,217 |
|
|
|
$ 182,905 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 194,714 |
|
|
|
$ 30,894 |
|
|
|
Counterparty netting |
|
|
(39,162 |
) |
|
|
(10,225 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(39,162 |
) |
|
|
(10,225 |
) |
Total |
|
|
163,055 |
1, 2 |
|
|
172,680 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
155,552 |
2 |
|
|
20,669 |
|
Amounts that have not been offset in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Counterparty netting |
|
|
(15,014 |
) |
|
|
(4,797 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(15,014 |
) |
|
|
(4,797 |
) |
|
|
Collateral |
|
|
(134,711 |
) |
|
|
(143,812 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(105,163 |
) |
|
|
(14,077 |
) |
Total |
|
|
$ 13,330 |
|
|
|
$ 24,071 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 35,375 |
|
|
|
$ 1,795 |
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
in millions |
|
|
Securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
|
|
Securities borrowed |
|
|
|
|
|
Securities sold under
agreements to repurchase |
|
|
|
Securities loaned |
|
Amounts included in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross carrying value |
|
|
$ 175,656 |
|
|
|
$ 151,162 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 201,688 |
|
|
|
$ 23,509 |
|
|
|
Counterparty netting |
|
|
(29,766 |
) |
|
|
(9,744 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(29,766 |
) |
|
|
(9,744 |
) |
Total |
|
|
145,890 |
1, 2 |
|
|
141,418 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
171,922 |
2 |
|
|
13,765 |
|
Amounts that have not been offset in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Counterparty netting |
|
|
(27,512 |
) |
|
|
(2,583 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(27,512 |
) |
|
|
(2,583 |
) |
|
|
Collateral |
|
|
(104,344 |
) |
|
|
(117,552 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(106,638 |
) |
|
|
(10,990 |
) |
Total |
|
|
$ 14,034 |
|
|
|
$ 21,283 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 37,772 |
|
|
|
$ 192 |
|
1. |
As of March 2013 and December 2012, the firm had $4.37 billion and $4.41 billion, respectively, of securities received under resale
agreements and $639 million and $4.53 billion, respectively, of securities borrowed transactions that were segregated to satisfy certain regulatory requirements. These securities are included in Cash and securities segregated for
regulatory and other purposes. |
2. |
As of March 2013 and December 2012, the firm classified $183 million and $148 million, respectively, of resale agreements and
$196 million and $115 million, respectively, of repurchase agreements as held for sale. See Note 12 for further information. |
|
|
|
|
|
52 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Other Secured Financings
In addition to repurchase agreements and securities lending transactions, the firm funds
certain assets through the use of other secured financings and pledges financial instruments and other assets as collateral in these transactions. These other secured financings consist of:
|
|
liabilities of consolidated VIEs; |
|
|
transfers of assets accounted for as financings rather than sales (primarily collateralized central bank financings, pledged commodities, bank loans
and mortgage whole loans); and |
|
|
other structured financing arrangements. |
Other secured financings include arrangements that are nonrecourse. As of March 2013 and December 2012,
nonrecourse other secured financings were $1.51 billion and $1.76 billion, respectively.
The firm has elected to apply the fair value option to
substantially all other secured financings because the use of fair value eliminates non-economic volatility in earnings that would arise from using different measurement attributes. See Note 8 for further information about other secured
financings that are accounted for at fair value.
Other secured financings that are not recorded at fair value are recorded
based on the amount of cash received plus accrued interest, which generally approximates fair value. While these financings are carried at amounts that approximate fair value, they are not accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or
at fair value in accordance with other U.S. GAAP and therefore are not included in the firms fair value hierarchy in Notes 6, 7 and 8. Had these financings been included in the firms fair value hierarchy, they would have primarily
been classified in level 3 as of March 2013 and December 2012.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
53 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
The table below presents information about other secured financings. In the table below:
|
|
short-term secured financings include financings maturing within one year of the financial statement date and financings that are redeemable within
one year of the financial statement date at the option of the holder;
|
|
|
long-term secured financings that are repayable prior to maturity at the option of the firm are reflected at their contractual maturity dates; and
|
|
|
long-term secured financings that are redeemable prior to maturity at the option of the holders are reflected at the dates such options become
exercisable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
U.S. Dollar |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. Dollar |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Dollar |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. Dollar |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Other secured financings (short-term): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At fair value |
|
|
$15,109 |
|
|
|
$5,362 |
|
|
|
$20,471 |
|
|
|
|
|
$16,504 |
|
|
|
$6,181 |
|
|
|
$22,685 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At amortized cost |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
326 |
|
|
|
360 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rates 1 |
|
|
6.37 |
% |
|
|
|
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.18 |
% |
|
|
0.10 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other secured financings (long-term): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At fair value |
|
|
6,134 |
|
|
|
1,877 |
|
|
|
8,011 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,134 |
|
|
|
1,518 |
|
|
|
7,652 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At amortized cost |
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
713 |
|
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
|
|
577 |
|
|
|
736 |
|
|
|
1,313 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
rates 1 |
|
|
4.67 |
% |
|
|
2.54 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.38 |
% |
|
|
2.55 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Total 2 |
|
|
$21,516 |
|
|
|
$7,952 |
|
|
|
$29,468 |
|
|
|
|
|
$23,249 |
|
|
|
$8,761 |
|
|
|
$32,010 |
|
Amount of other secured financings collateralized by: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial instruments 3 |
|
|
$21,307 |
|
|
|
$7,517 |
|
|
|
$28,824 |
|
|
|
|
|
$22,323 |
|
|
|
$8,442 |
|
|
|
$30,765 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
assets 4 |
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
435 |
|
|
|
644 |
|
|
|
|
|
926 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
1,245 |
|
1. |
The weighted average interest rates exclude secured financings at fair value and include the effect of hedging activities. See Note 7 for further
information about hedging activities. |
2. |
Includes $9.23 billion and $8.68 billion related to transfers of financial assets accounted for as financings rather than sales as of
March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. Such financings were collateralized by financial assets included in Financial instruments owned, at fair value of $9.74 billion and $8.92 billion as of March 2013 and
December 2012, respectively. |
3. |
Includes $15.32 billion and $17.24 billion of other secured financings collateralized by financial instruments owned, at fair value as of
March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, and includes $13.50 billion and $13.53 billion of other secured financings collateralized by financial instruments received as collateral and repledged as of March 2013 and
December 2012, respectively. |
4. |
Primarily real estate and cash. |
The table below presents other secured financings by maturity.
|
|
|
|
|
in millions |
|
|
As of
March 2013 |
|
Other secured financings (short-term) |
|
|
$20,497 |
|
|
|
Other secured financings (long-term): |
|
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
4,766 |
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
1,663 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
954 |
|
|
|
2017 |
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
2018 |
|
|
652 |
|
|
|
2019-thereafter |
|
|
693 |
|
Total other secured financings (long-term) |
|
|
8,971 |
|
Total other secured financings |
|
|
$29,468 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
54 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Collateral Received and Pledged
The firm receives cash and securities (e.g., U.S. government and federal agency, other
sovereign and corporate obligations, as well as equities and convertible debentures) as collateral, primarily in connection with resale agreements, securities borrowed, derivative transactions and customer margin loans. The firm obtains cash and
securities as collateral on an upfront or contingent basis for derivative instruments and collateralized agreements to reduce its credit exposure to individual counterparties.
In many cases, the firm is permitted to deliver or repledge financial instruments received as collateral when entering into repurchase agreements and securities lending agreements, primarily in connection
with secured client financing activities. The firm is also permitted to deliver or repledge these financial instruments in connection with other secured financings, collateralizing derivative transactions and meeting firm or customer
settlement requirements.
The firm also pledges certain financial instruments owned, at fair value in connection with
repurchase agreements, securities lending agreements and other secured financings, and other assets (primarily real estate and cash) in connection with other secured financings to counterparties who may or may not have the right to deliver or
repledge them.
The table below presents financial instruments at fair value received as collateral that were available to be delivered or repledged and were delivered or repledged by the firm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Collateral available to be delivered or repledged |
|
|
$614,337 |
|
|
|
$540,949 |
|
|
|
Collateral that was delivered or repledged |
|
|
459,267 |
|
|
|
397,652 |
|
The table below presents information about assets pledged by the firm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Financial instruments owned, at fair value pledged to counterparties that: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Had the right to deliver or repledge |
|
|
$ 67,891 |
|
|
|
$ 67,177 |
|
|
|
Did not have the right to deliver or repledge |
|
|
114,701 |
|
|
|
120,980 |
|
|
|
Other assets pledged to counterparties that: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Did not have the right to deliver or repledge |
|
|
1,148 |
|
|
|
2,031 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
55 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 10. Securitization Activities
Note 10.
Securitization Activities
The firm securitizes residential and commercial mortgages, corporate bonds, loans and other
types of financial assets by selling these assets to securitization vehicles (e.g., trusts, corporate entities and limited liability companies) and acts as underwriter of the beneficial interests that are sold to investors. The firms
residential mortgage securitizations are substantially all in connection with government agency securitizations.
Beneficial interests issued by securitization entities are debt or equity securities that give the investors rights to receive all or
portions of specified cash inflows to a securitization vehicle and include senior and subordinated shares of principal, interest and/or other cash inflows. The proceeds from the sale of beneficial interests are used to pay the transferor for the
financial assets sold to the securitization vehicle or to purchase securities which serve as collateral.
The firm accounts for
a securitization as a sale when it has relinquished control over the transferred assets. Prior to securitization, the firm accounts for assets pending transfer at fair value and therefore does not typically recognize significant gains or losses upon
the transfer of assets. Net revenues from underwriting activities are recognized in connection with the sales of the underlying beneficial interests to investors.
For transfers of assets that are not accounted for as sales, the assets remain in
Financial instruments owned, at fair value and the transfer is accounted for as a collateralized financing, with the related interest expense recognized over the life of the transaction. See Notes 9 and 23 for further information
about collateralized financings and interest expense, respectively.
The firm generally receives cash in exchange for the transferred assets but may also have continuing involvement with
transferred assets, including ownership of beneficial interests in securitized financial assets, primarily in the form of senior or subordinated securities. The firm may also purchase senior or subordinated securities issued by securitization
vehicles (which are typically VIEs) in connection with secondary market-making activities.
The primary risks included in
beneficial interests and other interests from the firms continuing involvement with securitization vehicles are the performance of the underlying collateral, the position of the firms investment in the capital structure of the
securitization vehicle and the market yield for the security. These interests are accounted for at fair value and are included in Financial instruments owned, at fair value and are generally classified in level 2 of the fair value
hierarchy. See Notes 5 through 8 for further information about fair value measurements.
|
|
|
|
|
56 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
The table below presents the amount of financial assets securitized and the cash flows
received on retained interests in securitization entities in which the firm had continuing involvement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Residential mortgages |
|
|
$7,387 |
|
|
|
$10,989 |
|
|
|
Commercial mortgages |
|
|
2,352 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
$9,739 |
|
|
|
$10,989 |
|
Cash flows on retained interests |
|
|
$ 165 |
|
|
|
$ 147 |
|
The table below presents the firms continuing involvement in nonconsolidated
securitization entities to which the firm sold assets, as well as the total outstanding principal amount of transferred assets in which the firm has continuing involvement. In this table:
|
|
the outstanding principal amount is presented for the purpose of providing information about the size of the securitization entities in which the
firm has continuing involvement and is not representative of the firms risk of loss; |
|
|
for retained or purchased interests, the firms risk of loss is limited to the fair value of these interests; and |
|
|
purchased interests represent senior and subordinated interests, purchased in connection with secondary market-making activities, in securitization
entities in which the firm also holds retained interests. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Outstanding Principal Amount |
|
|
|
Fair Value of Retained Interests |
|
|
|
Fair Value of Purchased Interests |
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding Principal Amount |
|
|
|
Fair Value of Retained Interests |
|
|
|
Fair Value of
Purchased Interests |
|
U.S. government agency-issued collateralized
mortgage obligations 1 |
|
|
$58,541 |
|
|
|
$4,761 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
$57,685 |
|
|
|
$4,654 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
Other residential mortgage-backed 2 |
|
|
3,465 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,656 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other commercial mortgage-backed 3 |
|
|
2,874 |
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,253 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
CDOs, CLOs and
other 4 |
|
|
8,592 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
331 |
|
|
|
|
|
8,866 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
331 |
|
Total 5 |
|
|
$73,472 |
|
|
|
$5,151 |
|
|
|
$413 |
|
|
|
|
|
$71,460 |
|
|
|
$4,812 |
|
|
|
$387 |
|
1. |
Outstanding principal amount and fair value of retained interests primarily relate to securitizations during 2013, 2012 and 2011 as of March 2013,
and securitizations during 2012 and 2011 as of December 2012. |
2. |
Outstanding principal amount and fair value of retained interests as of both March 2013 and December 2012 primarily relate to prime and Alt-A
securitizations during 2007 and 2006. |
3. |
Outstanding principal amount as of both March 2013 and December 2012 primarily relate to securitizations during 2012 and 2007. Fair value of
retained interests as of both March 2013 and December 2012 primarily relate to securitizations during 2012. |
4. |
Outstanding principal amount and fair value of retained interests as of both March 2013 and December 2012 primarily relate to CDO and CLO
securitizations during 2007 and 2006. |
5. |
Outstanding principal amount includes $631 million and $835 million as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, related to
securitization entities in which the firms only continuing involvement is retained servicing which is not a variable interest. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
57 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
In addition to the interests in the table above, the firm had other continuing involvement
in the form of derivative transactions and guarantees with certain nonconsolidated VIEs. The carrying value of these derivatives and guarantees was a net asset of $39 million and $45 million as of March 2013 and December 2012,
respectively. The notional amounts of these derivatives and guarantees are included in maximum exposure to loss in the nonconsolidated VIE tables in Note 11.
The table below presents the weighted average key economic assumptions used in measuring
the fair value of retained interests and the sensitivity of this fair value to immediate adverse changes of 10% and 20% in those assumptions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
|
|
Type of Retained Interests |
|
|
|
|
Type of Retained Interests |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
Mortgage-Backed |
|
|
|
Other |
1 |
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-Backed |
|
|
|
Other |
1 |
Fair value of retained interests |
|
|
$5,079 |
|
|
|
$ 72 |
|
|
|
|
|
$4,761 |
|
|
|
$ 51 |
|
|
|
Weighted average life (years) |
|
|
8.3 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
8.2 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
Constant prepayment rate 2 |
|
|
8.6 |
% |
|
|
N.M. |
|
|
|
|
|
10.9 |
% |
|
|
N.M. |
|
|
|
Impact of 10% adverse change 2 |
|
|
$ (39 |
) |
|
|
N.M. |
|
|
|
|
|
$ (57 |
) |
|
|
N.M. |
|
|
|
Impact of 20% adverse change 2 |
|
|
(81 |
) |
|
|
N.M. |
|
|
|
|
|
(110 |
) |
|
|
N.M. |
|
|
|
Discount rate 3 |
|
|
3.8 |
% |
|
|
N.M. |
|
|
|
|
|
4.6 |
% |
|
|
N.M. |
|
|
|
Impact of 10% adverse change |
|
|
$ (86 |
) |
|
|
N.M. |
|
|
|
|
|
$ (96 |
) |
|
|
N.M. |
|
|
|
Impact of 20% adverse change |
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
N.M. |
|
|
|
|
|
(180 |
) |
|
|
N.M. |
|
1. |
Due to the nature and current fair value of certain of these retained interests, the weighted average assumptions for constant prepayment and discount rates
and the related sensitivity to adverse changes are not meaningful as of March 2013 and December 2012. The firms maximum exposure to adverse changes in the value of these interests is the carrying value of $72 million and
$51 million as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. |
2. |
Constant prepayment rate is included only for positions for which constant prepayment rate is a key assumption in the determination of fair value.
|
3. |
The majority of mortgage-backed retained interests are U.S. government agency-issued collateralized mortgage obligations, for which there is no anticipated
credit loss. For the remainder of retained interests, the expected credit loss assumptions are reflected in the discount rate. |
The preceding table does not give effect to the offsetting benefit of other financial
instruments that are held to mitigate risks inherent in these retained interests. Changes in fair value based on an adverse variation in assumptions generally cannot be extrapolated because the relationship of the change in assumptions to the change
in fair value is
not usually linear. In addition, the impact of a change in a particular assumption in the preceding table is calculated independently of changes in any other assumption. In practice, simultaneous
changes in assumptions might magnify or counteract the sensitivities disclosed above.
|
|
|
|
|
58 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 11. Variable Interest Entities
Note 11.
Variable Interest Entities
VIEs generally finance the purchase of assets by issuing debt and equity securities that
are either collateralized by or indexed to the assets held by the VIE. The debt and equity securities issued by a VIE may include tranches of varying levels of subordination. The firms involvement with VIEs includes securitization of financial
assets, as described in Note 10, and investments in and loans to other types of VIEs, as described below. See Note 10 for additional information about securitization activities, including the definition of beneficial interests. See
Note 3 for the firms consolidation policies, including the definition of a VIE.
The firm is principally involved
with VIEs through the following business activities:
Mortgage-Backed VIEs
and Corporate CDO and CLO VIEs. The firm sells residential and commercial mortgage loans and securities to mortgage-backed VIEs and corporate bonds and loans to corporate CDO and CLO VIEs
and may retain beneficial interests in the assets sold to these VIEs. The firm purchases and sells beneficial interests issued by mortgage-backed and corporate CDO and CLO VIEs in connection with market-making activities. In addition, the firm may
enter into derivatives with certain of these VIEs, primarily interest rate swaps, which are typically not variable interests. The firm generally enters into derivatives with other counterparties to mitigate its risk from derivatives with
these VIEs.
Certain mortgage-backed and corporate CDO and CLO VIEs, usually referred to as synthetic CDOs or
credit-linked note VIEs, synthetically create the exposure for the beneficial interests they issue by entering into credit derivatives, rather than purchasing the underlying assets. These credit derivatives may reference a single asset, an index, or
a portfolio/basket of assets or indices. See Note 7 for further information about credit derivatives. These VIEs use the funds from the sale of beneficial interests and the premiums received from credit derivative counterparties to purchase
securities which serve to collateralize the beneficial interest holders and/or the credit derivative counterparty. These VIEs may enter into other derivatives, primarily interest rate swaps, which are typically not variable interests. The firm may
be a counterparty to derivatives with these VIEs and generally enters into derivatives with other counterparties to mitigate its risk.
Real Estate, Credit-Related and Other
Investing VIEs. The firm purchases equity and debt securities issued by and makes loans to VIEs that hold real estate, performing and nonperforming debt, distressed loans and equity
securities. The firm typically does not sell assets to, or enter into derivatives with, these VIEs.
Other Asset-Backed VIEs. The firm structures VIEs that issue notes to clients and purchases and sells beneficial interests issued by other
asset-backed VIEs in connection with market-making activities. In addition, the firm may enter into derivatives with certain other asset-backed VIEs, primarily total return swaps on the collateral assets held by these VIEs under which the firm pays
the VIE the return due to the note holders and receives the return on the collateral assets owned by the VIE. The firm generally can be removed as the total return swap counterparty. The firm generally enters into derivatives with other
counterparties to mitigate its risk from derivatives with these VIEs. The firm typically does not sell assets to the other asset-backed VIEs it structures.
Power-Related VIEs. The firm purchases debt and equity securities issued by, and may
provide guarantees to, VIEs that hold power-related assets. The firm typically does not sell assets to, or enter into derivatives with, these VIEs.
Investment Funds. The firm purchases equity securities issued by and may provide guarantees
to certain of the investment funds it manages. The firm typically does not sell assets to, or enter into derivatives with, these VIEs.
Principal-Protected Note VIEs. The firm structures VIEs that issue principal-protected
notes to clients. These VIEs own portfolios of assets, principally with exposure to hedge funds. Substantially all of the principal protection on the notes issued by these VIEs is provided by the asset portfolio rebalancing that is required under
the terms of the notes. The firm enters into total return swaps with these VIEs under which the firm pays the VIE the return due to the principal-protected note holders and receives the return on the assets owned by the VIE. The firm may enter into
derivatives with other counterparties to mitigate the risk it has from the derivatives it enters into with these VIEs. The firm also obtains funding through these VIEs.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
59 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
VIE Consolidation Analysis
A variable interest in a VIE is an investment (e.g., debt or equity securities) or other interest (e.g., derivatives or loans and lending commitments) in a VIE that will absorb portions of the VIEs
expected losses and/or receive portions of the VIEs expected residual returns.
The firms variable interests in
VIEs include senior and subordinated debt in residential and commercial mortgage-backed and other asset-backed securitization entities, CDOs and CLOs; loans and lending commitments; limited and general partnership interests; preferred and common
equity; derivatives that may include foreign currency, equity and/or credit risk; guarantees; and certain of the fees the firm receives from investment funds. Certain interest rate, foreign currency and credit derivatives the firm enters into with
VIEs are not variable interests because they create rather than absorb risk.
The enterprise with a controlling financial interest in a VIE is
known as the primary beneficiary and consolidates the VIE. The firm determines whether it is the primary beneficiary of a VIE by performing an analysis that principally considers:
|
|
which variable interest holder has the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the VIEs economic performance;
|
|
|
which variable interest holder has the obligation to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits from the VIE that could potentially be
significant to the VIE; |
|
|
the VIEs purpose and design, including the risks the VIE was designed to create and pass through to its variable interest holders;
|
|
|
the VIEs capital structure; |
|
|
the terms between the VIE and its variable interest holders and other parties involved with the VIE; and |
|
|
related-party relationships. |
The firm reassesses its initial evaluation of whether an entity is a VIE when certain reconsideration events occur. The firm reassesses its determination of whether it is the primary beneficiary of a VIE
on an ongoing basis based on current facts and circumstances.
Nonconsolidated VIEs
The firms exposure to the obligations of VIEs is generally limited to its interests in these entities. In certain instances, the firm provides guarantees, including derivative guarantees, to VIEs or
holders of variable interests in VIEs.
The tables below present information about nonconsolidated VIEs in which the firm holds
variable interests. Nonconsolidated VIEs are aggregated based on principal business activity. The nature of the firms variable interests can take different forms, as described in the rows under maximum exposure to loss. In the tables below:
|
|
The maximum exposure to loss excludes the benefit of offsetting financial instruments that are held to mitigate the risks associated with these
variable interests. |
|
|
For retained and purchased interests and loans and investments, the maximum exposure to loss is the carrying value of these interests.
|
|
|
For commitments and guarantees, and derivatives, the maximum exposure to loss is the notional amount, which does not represent anticipated losses
and also has not been reduced by unrealized losses already recorded. As a result, the maximum exposure to loss exceeds liabilities recorded for commitments and guarantees, and derivatives provided to VIEs. |
The carrying values of the firms variable interests in nonconsolidated VIEs are included in the condensed consolidated statement of
financial condition as follows:
|
|
Substantially all assets held by the firm related to mortgage-backed, corporate CDO and CLO, real estate, credit-related and other investing, and
other asset-backed VIEs and investment funds are included in Financial instruments owned, at fair value. Substantially all liabilities held by the firm related to corporate CDO and CLO, real estate, credit-related and other investing,
and other asset-backed VIEs are included in Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value. |
|
|
Assets held by the firm related to power-related VIEs are primarily included in Financial instruments owned, at fair value and
Other assets. |
|
|
|
|
|
60 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonconsolidated VIEs |
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Mortgage-
backed |
|
|
|
Corporate CDOs and CLOs |
|
|
|
Real estate, credit-related and other investing |
|
|
|
Other asset-
backed |
|
|
|
Power-
related |
|
|
|
Investment funds |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Assets in VIE |
|
|
$86,199 |
2 |
|
|
$21,037 |
|
|
|
$6,900 |
|
|
|
$3,373 |
|
|
|
$110 |
|
|
|
$1,840 |
|
|
|
$119,459 |
|
|
|
Carrying Value of the Firms Variable Interests |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
7,027 |
|
|
|
1,107 |
|
|
|
1,695 |
|
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
10,162 |
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
Maximum Exposure to Loss in Nonconsolidated VIEs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained interests |
|
|
5,079 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,151 |
|
|
|
Purchased interests |
|
|
1,596 |
|
|
|
576 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,435 |
|
|
|
Commitments and guarantees 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
414 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
527 |
|
|
|
Derivatives 1 |
|
|
1,487 |
|
|
|
5,666 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
854 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,007 |
|
|
|
Loans and investments |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,695 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1,786 |
|
Total |
|
|
$ 8,200 |
2 |
|
|
$ 6,314 |
|
|
|
$2,109 |
|
|
|
$1,118 |
|
|
|
$160 |
|
|
|
$ 5 |
|
|
|
$ 17,906 |
|
|
|
|
|
Nonconsolidated VIEs |
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Mortgage-
backed |
|
|
|
Corporate CDOs and CLOs |
|
|
|
Real estate, credit-related and other investing |
|
|
|
Other asset-
backed |
|
|
|
Power-
related |
|
|
|
Investment funds |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Assets in VIE |
|
|
$79,171 |
2 |
|
|
$23,842 |
|
|
|
$9,244 |
|
|
|
$3,510 |
|
|
|
$147 |
|
|
|
$1,898 |
|
|
|
$117,812 |
|
|
|
Carrying Value of the Firms Variable Interests |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
6,269 |
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
|
|
1,801 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
9,519 |
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
Maximum Exposure to Loss in Nonconsolidated VIEs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained interests |
|
|
4,761 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,812 |
|
|
|
Purchased interests |
|
|
1,162 |
|
|
|
659 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,025 |
|
|
|
Commitments and guarantees 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
438 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
Derivatives 1 |
|
|
1,574 |
|
|
|
6,761 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
952 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,287 |
|
|
|
Loans and investments |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,801 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1,876 |
|
Total |
|
|
$ 7,536 |
2 |
|
|
$ 7,472 |
|
|
|
$2,239 |
|
|
|
$1,156 |
|
|
|
$ 32 |
|
|
|
$ 5 |
|
|
|
$ 18,440 |
|
1. |
The aggregate amounts include $3.08 billion and $3.25 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, related to guarantees and
derivative transactions with VIEs to which the firm transferred assets. |
2. |
Assets in VIE and maximum exposure to loss include $4.48 billion and $1.80 billion, respectively, as of March 2013, and $3.57 billion and
$1.72 billion, respectively, as of December 2012, related to CDOs backed by mortgage obligations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
61 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Consolidated VIEs
The tables below present the carrying amount and classification of assets and liabilities
in consolidated VIEs, excluding the benefit of offsetting financial instruments that are held to mitigate the risks associated with the firms variable interests. Consolidated VIEs are aggregated based on principal business activity and their
assets and liabilities are presented net of intercompany eliminations. The majority of the assets in principal-protected notes VIEs are intercompany and are eliminated in consolidation.
Substantially all the assets in consolidated VIEs can only be used to settle obligations of the VIE.
The tables below exclude VIEs in which the firm holds a majority voting interest if (i) the VIE meets the definition of a
business and (ii) the VIEs assets can be used for purposes other than the settlement of its obligations.
The
liabilities of real estate, credit-related and other investing VIEs and CDOs, mortgage-backed and other asset-backed VIEs do not have recourse to the general credit of the firm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated VIEs |
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Real estate, credit-related and other investing |
|
|
|
CDOs,
mortgage- backed and
other asset- backed |
|
|
|
Principal- protected notes |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
$ 336 |
|
|
|
$245 |
|
|
|
$ 1 |
|
|
|
$ 582 |
|
|
|
Cash and securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes |
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
Receivables from brokers, dealers and clearing organizations |
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
Financial instruments owned, at fair value |
|
|
2,188 |
|
|
|
494 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
3,030 |
|
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
903 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
903 |
|
Total |
|
|
$3,538 |
|
|
|
$739 |
|
|
|
$ 441 |
|
|
|
$4,718 |
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other secured financings |
|
|
$ 484 |
|
|
|
$578 |
|
|
|
$ 301 |
|
|
|
$1,363 |
|
|
|
Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
Unsecured short-term borrowings, including the current portion of unsecured long-term borrowings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,466 |
|
|
|
1,466 |
|
|
|
Unsecured long-term borrowings |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
Other liabilities and accrued expenses |
|
|
1,096 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,096 |
|
Total |
|
|
$1,584 |
|
|
|
$665 |
|
|
|
$2,077 |
|
|
|
$4,326 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
62 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated VIEs |
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Real estate, credit-related and other investing |
|
|
|
CDOs,
mortgage-backed
and other
asset-backed |
|
|
|
Principal- protected notes |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
$ 236 |
|
|
|
$107 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 343 |
|
|
|
Cash and securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes |
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
Receivables from brokers, dealers and clearing organizations |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
Financial instruments owned, at fair value |
|
|
2,958 |
|
|
|
763 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
3,845 |
|
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
1,080 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,080 |
|
Total |
|
|
$4,413 |
|
|
|
$870 |
|
|
|
$ 216 |
|
|
|
$5,499 |
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other secured financings |
|
|
$ 594 |
|
|
|
$699 |
|
|
|
$ 301 |
|
|
|
$1,594 |
|
|
|
Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
Unsecured short-term borrowings, including the current portion of unsecured long-term borrowings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,584 |
|
|
|
1,584 |
|
|
|
Unsecured long-term borrowings |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
Other liabilities and accrued expenses |
|
|
1,478 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,478 |
|
Total |
|
|
$2,076 |
|
|
|
$806 |
|
|
|
$2,219 |
|
|
|
$5,101 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
63 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 12. Other Assets
Note 12.
Other Assets
Other assets are generally less liquid, non-financial assets. The table below presents
other assets by type.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Property, leasehold improvements
and equipment 1 |
|
|
$ 7,960 |
|
|
|
$ 8,217 |
|
|
|
Goodwill and identifiable intangible
assets 2 |
|
|
4,683 |
|
|
|
5,099 |
|
|
|
Income tax-related assets 3 |
|
|
5,345 |
|
|
|
5,620 |
|
|
|
Equity-method investments 4 |
|
|
455 |
|
|
|
453 |
|
|
|
Miscellaneous receivables and other 5 |
|
|
20,045 |
|
|
|
20,234 |
|
Total |
|
|
$38,488 |
|
|
|
$39,623 |
|
1. |
Net of accumulated depreciation and amortization of $8.66 billion and $9.05 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively.
|
2. |
Includes $152 million and $149 million of intangible assets classified as held for sale as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively.
See Note 13 for further information about goodwill and identifiable intangible assets. |
3. |
See Note 24 for further information about income taxes. |
4. |
Excludes investments accounted for at fair value under the fair value option where the firm would otherwise apply the equity method of accounting of
$5.08 billion and $5.54 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, which are included in Financial instruments owned, at fair value. The firm has generally elected the fair value option for such
investments acquired after the fair value option became available. |
5. |
Includes $16.65 billion and $16.77 billion of assets related to the firms reinsurance business which were classified as held for sale as of
March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. |
Assets Held for Sale
In the fourth quarter of 2012, the firm classified its reinsurance business within its Institutional Client Services segment as held for sale. Assets related to this business of $16.80 billion and
$16.92 billion, as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, consisting primarily of available-for-sale securities and separate account assets at fair value, are included in Other assets. Liabilities related to this
business of $14.52 billion and $14.62 billion, as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, are included in Other liabilities and accrued expenses. See Note 8 for further information about insurance-related
assets and liabilities held for sale at fair value.
The firm completed the sale of a majority stake in its reinsurance
business in April 2013 and, as a result, the firm will no longer consolidate this business.
Property, Leasehold Improvements and Equipment
Property, leasehold improvements and equipment included $6.07 billion and $6.20 billion as of March 2013
and December 2012, respectively, related to property, leasehold improvements and equipment that the firm uses in
connection with its operations. The remainder is held by investment entities, including VIEs, consolidated by the firm.
Substantially all property and equipment are depreciated on a straight-line basis
over the useful life of the asset. Leasehold improvements are amortized on a straight-line basis over the useful life of the improvement or the term of the lease, whichever is shorter. Certain costs of software developed or obtained for internal use
are capitalized and amortized on a straight-line basis over the useful life of the software.
Property, leasehold
improvements and equipment are tested for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances suggest that an assets or asset groups carrying value may not be fully recoverable. The firms policy for impairment testing of
property, leasehold improvements and equipment is the same as is used for identifiable intangible assets with finite lives. See Note 13 for further information.
Impairments
The firm tests property, leasehold improvements and equipment, intangible assets and other assets for impairment in accordance with ASC
360. To the extent the carrying value of an asset exceeds the projected undiscounted cash flows over the estimated remaining useful life of the asset, the firm determines the asset is impaired and records an impairment loss. In addition, the firm
will recognize an impairment loss prior to the sale of an asset if the carrying value of the asset exceeds its estimated fair value.
During the first quarter of 2012, as a result of a decline in the market conditions in which certain of the firms consolidated investments operated, the firm determined certain assets were impaired
and recorded an impairment loss of $116 million ($90 million related to property, leasehold improvements and equipment, $20 million related to commodity-related intangible assets and $6 million related to other assets),
substantially all of which was included in Depreciation and amortization. These impairment losses were included in the firms Investing & Lending segment and represented the excess of the carrying values of these assets
over their estimated fair values, which are level 3 measurements, using a combination of discounted cash flow analyses and relative value analyses, including the estimated cash flows expected to be received from the disposition of certain of
these assets.
|
|
|
|
|
64 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
Note 13. Goodwill and Identifiable Intangible Assets
Note 13.
Goodwill and Identifiable Intangible Assets |
|
|
|
|
The tables below present the carrying values of goodwill and identifiable intangible
assets, which are included in Other assets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill |
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Investment Banking: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Advisory |
|
|
$ 98 |
|
|
|
$ 98 |
|
|
|
Underwriting |
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
Institutional Client Services: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution |
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
Equities Client Execution |
|
|
2,402 |
|
|
|
2,402 |
|
|
|
Securities Services |
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
Investing & Lending |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
Investment Management |
|
|
586 |
|
|
|
586 |
|
Total |
|
|
$3,702 |
|
|
|
$3,702 |
|
|
|
|
|
Identifiable Intangible Assets |
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Investment Banking: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial Advisory |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 1 |
|
|
|
Institutional Client Services: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities
Client Execution 1 |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
421 |
|
|
|
Equities Client Execution |
|
|
556 |
|
|
|
565 |
|
|
|
Investing & Lending |
|
|
260 |
|
|
|
281 |
|
|
|
Investment Management |
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
Total |
|
|
$ 981 |
|
|
|
$1,397 |
|
1. |
The decrease from December 2012 to March 2013 is related to the sale of the firms television broadcast royalties in the first quarter of 2013.
|
Goodwill
Goodwill is the cost of acquired companies in excess of the fair value of net assets, including identifiable intangible assets, at the acquisition date.
Goodwill is assessed annually in the fourth quarter for impairment or more frequently if events occur or circumstances change that
indicate an impairment may exist. Qualitative factors are assessed to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If results of the qualitative assessment are not conclusive,
a quantitative goodwill impairment test is performed.
The quantitative goodwill impairment test consists of two steps.
|
|
The first step compares the estimated fair value of each reporting unit with its estimated net book value (including goodwill and identified
intangible assets). If the reporting units fair value exceeds its estimated net book value, goodwill is not impaired. |
|
|
If the estimated fair value of a reporting unit is less than its estimated net book value, the second step of the goodwill impairment test is
performed to measure the amount of impairment loss, if any. An impairment loss is equal to the excess of the carrying amount of goodwill over its fair value. |
Goodwill was tested for impairment, using a quantitative test, during the fourth quarter of 2012 and goodwill was not impaired.
To estimate the fair value of each reporting unit, both relative value and residual income valuation techniques are used
because the firm believes market participants would use these techniques to value the firms reporting units.
Relative
value techniques apply average observable price-to-earnings multiples of comparable competitors to certain reporting units net earnings. For other reporting units, fair value is estimated using price-to-book multiples based on residual income
techniques, which consider a reporting units return on equity in excess of the firms cost of equity capital. The net book value of each reporting unit reflects an allocation of total shareholders equity and represents the estimated
amount of shareholders equity required to support the activities of the reporting unit under guidelines issued by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (Basel Committee) in December 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
65 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Identifiable Intangible Assets
The table below presents the gross carrying amount, accumulated amortization and net
carrying amount of
identifiable intangible assets and their weighted average remaining lives.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
Weighted Average Remaining Lives (years) |
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Customer lists |
|
Gross carrying amount |
|
|
$ 1,099 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 1,099 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated amortization |
|
|
(659 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(643 |
) |
|
|
Net carrying amount |
|
|
440 |
|
|
8 |
|
|
456 |
|
|
|
Commodities-related intangibles 1 |
|
Gross carrying amount |
|
|
508 |
|
|
|
|
|
513 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated amortization |
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(226 |
) |
|
|
Net carrying amount |
|
|
266 |
|
|
10 |
|
|
287 |
|
|
|
Television broadcast royalties 2 |
|
Gross carrying amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
560 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(186 |
) |
|
|
Net carrying amount |
|
|
|
|
|
N/A 2 |
|
|
374 |
|
|
|
Insurance-related intangibles 3 |
|
Gross carrying amount |
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated amortization |
|
|
(228 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(231 |
) |
|
|
Net carrying amount |
|
|
152 |
|
|
N/A 3 |
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
Other 4 |
|
Gross carrying amount |
|
|
941 |
|
|
|
|
|
950 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated amortization |
|
|
(818 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(819 |
) |
|
|
Net carrying amount |
|
|
123 |
|
|
12 |
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Gross carrying amount |
|
|
2,928 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,502 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated amortization |
|
|
(1,947 |
) |
|
|
|
|
(2,105 |
) |
|
|
Net carrying amount |
|
|
$ 981 |
|
|
9 |
|
|
$ 1,397 |
|
1. |
Primarily includes commodity-related customer contracts and relationships, permits and access rights. |
2. |
These assets were sold in the first quarter of 2013 and total proceeds received approximated carrying value. |
3. |
Related to the firms reinsurance business, which is classified as held for sale. See Note 12 for further information. |
4. |
Primarily includes the firms exchange-traded fund lead market maker rights. |
Substantially all of the firms identifiable intangible assets are
considered to have finite lives and are amortized (i) over their estimated lives, (ii) based on economic usage for certain commodity-related intangibles or (iii) in proportion
to estimated gross profits or premium revenues. Amortization expense for identifiable intangible assets is included in Depreciation and amortization.
|
|
|
|
|
66 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
The tables below present amortization expense for identifiable intangible assets for the
three months ended March 2013 and March 2012, and the estimated future amortization expense through 2018 for identifiable intangible assets as of March 2013.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Amortization expense |
|
|
$42 |
|
|
|
$70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
in millions |
|
|
As of
March 2013 |
|
Estimated future amortization expense: |
|
|
|
|
Remainder of 2013 |
|
|
$121 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
2017 |
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
2018 |
|
|
82 |
|
Identifiable intangible assets are tested for recoverability whenever events
or changes in circumstances indicate that an assets or asset groups carrying value may not be recoverable.
If
a recoverability test is necessary, the carrying value of an asset or asset group is compared to the total of the undiscounted cash flows expected to be received over the remaining useful life and from the disposition of the asset or
asset group.
|
|
If the total of the undiscounted cash flows exceeds the carrying value, the asset or asset group is not impaired. |
|
|
If the total of the undiscounted cash flows is less than the carrying value, the asset or asset group is not fully recoverable and an impairment
loss is recognized as the difference between the carrying amount of the asset or asset group and its estimated fair value. |
See Note 12 for information about impairments of the firms identifiable intangible assets.
Note 14. Deposits
Note 14.
Deposits
The table below presents
deposits held in U.S. and non-U.S. offices, substantially all of which were interest-bearing. Substantially all U.S. deposits were held at Goldman Sachs Bank USA (GS Bank USA) as of March 2013 and December 2012. Substantially all non-U.S.
deposits were held at Goldman Sachs International Bank (GSIB) as of March 2013 and held at Goldman Sachs Bank (Europe) plc (GS Bank Europe) and GSIB as of December 2012. On
January 18, 2013, GS Bank Europe surrendered its banking license to the Central Bank of Ireland after transferring its deposits to GSIB and subsequently changed its name to Goldman
Sachs Ireland Finance plc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
U.S. offices |
|
|
$63,424 |
|
|
|
$62,377 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. offices |
|
|
9,261 |
|
|
|
7,747 |
|
Total |
|
|
$72,685 |
1 |
|
|
$70,124 |
1 |
The table below presents maturities of time deposits held in U.S. and non-U.S. offices.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
U.S. |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Remainder of 2013 |
|
|
$ 4,760 |
|
|
|
$4,025 |
|
|
|
$ 8,785 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
4,023 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
4,153 |
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
4,054 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,054 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
1,919 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,919 |
|
|
|
2017 |
|
|
2,502 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,502 |
|
|
|
2018 |
|
|
1,421 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,421 |
|
|
|
2019 - thereafter |
|
|
4,096 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,096 |
|
Total |
|
|
$22,775 |
2 |
|
|
$4,155 |
3 |
|
|
$26,930 |
1 |
1. |
Includes $7.07 billion and $5.10 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, of time deposits accounted for at fair value
under the fair value option. See Note 8 for further information about deposits accounted for at fair value. |
2. |
Includes $40 million greater than $100,000, of which $24 million matures within three months, $6 million matures within three to six months,
$6 million matures within six to twelve months, and $4 million matures after twelve months. |
3. |
Substantially all were greater than $100,000. |
As of March 2013 and December 2012, savings and demand deposits, which represent deposits with no stated
maturity, were $45.76 billion and $46.51 billion, respectively, which were recorded based on the amount of cash received plus accrued interest, which approximates fair value. In addition, the firm designates certain derivatives as fair
value hedges on substantially all of its time deposits for which it has not elected the fair value option. Accordingly, $19.86 billion and $18.52 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, of time deposits were
effectively converted from fixed-rate obligations to floating-rate obligations and were recorded at amounts that generally approximate fair value. While these savings and demand deposits and time deposits are carried at amounts that approximate fair
value, they are not accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or at fair value in accordance with other U.S. GAAP and therefore are not included in the firms fair value hierarchy in Notes 6, 7 and 8. Had these deposits been
included in the firms fair value hierarchy, they would have been classified in level 2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
67 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 15. Short-Term Borrowings
Note 15.
Short-Term Borrowings
Short-term borrowings were comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Other secured financings (short-term) |
|
|
$20,497 |
|
|
|
$23,045 |
|
|
|
Unsecured short-term borrowings |
|
|
40,980 |
|
|
|
44,304 |
|
Total |
|
|
$61,477 |
|
|
|
$67,349 |
|
See Note 9 for further information about other secured financings.
Unsecured short-term borrowings include the portion of unsecured long-term borrowings maturing within one year of the financial statement
date and unsecured long-term borrowings that are redeemable within one year of the financial statement date at the option of the holder.
The firm accounts for promissory notes, commercial paper and certain hybrid financial instruments at fair value under the fair value option. See Note 8 for further information about unsecured
short-term borrowings that are accounted for at fair value. The carrying value of unsecured short-term borrowings that are not recorded at fair value generally approximates fair value due to the short-term nature of the obligations. While these
unsecured short-term borrowings are carried at amounts that approximate fair value, they are not accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or at fair value in accordance with other U.S. GAAP and therefore are not included in the
firms fair value hierarchy in Notes 6, 7 and 8. Had these borrowings been included in the firms fair value hierarchy, substantially all would have been classified in level 2 as of March 2013 and December 2012.
The table below presents unsecured short-term borrowings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Current portion of unsecured long-term borrowings |
|
|
$23,053 |
|
|
|
$25,344 |
|
|
|
Hybrid financial instruments |
|
|
12,531 |
|
|
|
12,295 |
|
|
|
Promissory notes |
|
|
356 |
|
|
|
260 |
|
|
|
Commercial paper |
|
|
999 |
|
|
|
884 |
|
|
|
Other short-term borrowings |
|
|
4,041 |
|
|
|
5,521 |
|
Total |
|
|
$40,980 |
|
|
|
$44,304 |
|
Weighted average interest rate 1 |
|
|
1.56 |
% |
|
|
1.57 |
% |
1. |
The weighted average interest rates for these borrowings include the effect of hedging activities and exclude financial instruments accounted for at fair
value under the fair value option. See Note 7 for further information about hedging activities. |
|
|
|
|
|
68 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 16. Long-Term Borrowings
Note 16.
Long-Term Borrowings
Long-term
borrowings were comprised of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Other secured financings (long-term) |
|
|
$ 8,971 |
|
|
|
$ 8,965 |
|
|
|
Unsecured long-term borrowings |
|
|
167,008 |
|
|
|
167,305 |
|
Total |
|
|
$175,979 |
|
|
|
$176,270 |
|
See Note 9 for further information about other secured financings. The table below
presents unsecured long-term
borrowings extending through 2061 and consisting principally of senior borrowings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
U.S.
Dollar |
|
|
|
Non-U.S.
Dollar |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
Dollar |
|
|
|
Non-U.S.
Dollar |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Fixed-rate obligations 1 |
|
|
$ 91,305 |
|
|
|
$34,911 |
|
|
|
$126,216 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 88,561 |
|
|
|
$36,869 |
|
|
|
$125,430 |
|
|
|
Floating-rate
obligations 2 |
|
|
21,110 |
|
|
|
19,682 |
|
|
|
40,792 |
|
|
|
|
|
20,794 |
|
|
|
21,081 |
|
|
|
41,875 |
|
Total |
|
|
$112,415 |
|
|
|
$54,593 |
|
|
|
$167,008 |
|
|
|
|
|
$109,355 |
|
|
|
$57,950 |
|
|
|
$167,305 |
|
1. |
Interest rates on U.S. dollar-denominated debt ranged from 0.20% to 10.04% (with a weighted average rate of 5.02%) and 0.20% to 10.04% (with a weighted
average rate of 5.48%) as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. Interest rates on non-U.S. dollar-denominated debt ranged from 0.10% to 14.85% (with a weighted average rate of 4.47%) and 0.10% to 14.85% (with a weighted average
rate of 4.66%) as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. |
2. |
Floating interest rates generally are based on LIBOR or the federal funds target rate. Equity-linked and indexed instruments are included in
floating-rate obligations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
69 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
The table below presents unsecured long-term borrowings by maturity date. In the table
below:
|
|
unsecured long-term borrowings maturing within one year of the financial statement date and unsecured long-term borrowings that are redeemable
within one year of the financial statement date at the option of the holders are included as unsecured short-term borrowings; |
|
|
unsecured long-term borrowings that are repayable prior to maturity at the option of the firm are reflected at their contractual maturity dates; and
|
|
|
unsecured long-term borrowings that are redeemable prior to maturity at the option of the holders are reflected at the dates such options become
exercisable. |
|
|
|
|
|
in millions |
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
2014 |
|
|
$ 15,154 |
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
21,967 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
21,594 |
|
|
|
2017 |
|
|
20,675 |
|
|
|
2018 |
|
|
17,443 |
|
|
|
2019 - thereafter |
|
|
70,175 |
|
Total 1 |
|
|
$167,008 |
|
1. |
Includes $9.84 billion related to interest rate hedges on certain unsecured long-term borrowings, by year of maturity as follows: $487 million in
2014, $443 million in 2015, $1.01 billion in 2016, $1.30 billion in 2017, $1.36 billion in 2018 and $5.24 billion in 2019 and thereafter. |
The firm designates certain derivatives as fair value hedges to effectively convert a
substantial portion of its fixed-rate unsecured long-term borrowings which are not accounted for at fair value into floating-rate obligations. Accordingly, excluding the cumulative impact of changes in the firms credit spreads, the carrying
value of unsecured long-term borrowings approximated fair value as of March 2013 and December 2012. See Note 7 for further information about hedging activities. For unsecured long-term borrowings for which the firm did not elect the
fair value option, the cumulative impact due to changes in the firms own credit spreads would be an increase of less than 2% in the carrying value of total unsecured long-term borrowings as of both March 2013 and December 2012. As
these borrowings are not accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or at fair value in accordance with other U.S. GAAP, their fair value is not included in the firms fair value hierarchy in Notes 6, 7 and 8. Had these
borrowings been included in the firms fair value hierarchy, substantially all would have been classified in level 2 as of March 2013 and December 2012.
The table below presents unsecured long-term borrowings, after giving effect to hedging activities that converted a substantial portion of fixed-rate obligations to floating-rate obligations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Fixed-rate obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At fair value |
|
|
$ 153 |
|
|
|
$ 122 |
|
|
|
At amortized cost 1 |
|
|
20,225 |
|
|
|
24,547 |
|
|
|
Floating-rate obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At fair value |
|
|
12,095 |
|
|
|
12,471 |
|
|
|
At amortized
cost 1 |
|
|
134,535 |
|
|
|
130,165 |
|
Total |
|
|
$167,008 |
|
|
|
$167,305 |
|
1. |
The weighted average interest rates on the aggregate amounts were 2.36% (5.25% related to fixed-rate obligations and 1.96% related to floating-rate
obligations) and 2.47% (5.26% related to fixed-rate obligations and 1.98% related to floating-rate obligations) as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. These rates exclude financial instruments accounted for at fair value under
the fair value option. |
|
|
|
|
|
70 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Subordinated Borrowings
Unsecured long-term borrowings include subordinated debt and junior subordinated debt.
Junior subordinated debt is junior in right of payment to other subordinated borrowings, which are junior to senior borrowings. As of
both March 2013 and December 2012, subordinated debt had maturities ranging from 2015 to 2038. The table below presents subordinated borrowings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
Par
Amount |
|
|
|
Carrying
Amount |
|
|
|
Rate |
1 |
|
|
|
|
Par
Amount |
|
|
|
Carrying
Amount |
|
|
|
Rate |
1 |
Subordinated debt |
|
|
$14,270 |
|
|
|
$17,106 |
|
|
|
4.19 |
% |
|
|
|
|
$14,409 |
|
|
|
$17,358 |
|
|
|
4.24 |
% |
|
|
Junior subordinated debt |
|
|
2,835 |
|
|
|
4,135 |
|
|
|
3.01 |
% |
|
|
|
|
2,835 |
|
|
|
4,228 |
|
|
|
3.16 |
% |
Total subordinated borrowings |
|
|
$17,105 |
|
|
|
$21,241 |
|
|
|
3.99 |
% |
|
|
|
|
$17,244 |
|
|
|
$21,586 |
|
|
|
4.06 |
% |
1. |
Weighted average interest rate after giving effect to fair value hedges used to convert these fixed-rate obligations into floating-rate obligations. See
Note 7 for further information about hedging activities. See below for information about interest rates on junior subordinated debt. |
Junior Subordinated Debt
Junior Subordinated Debt Held by 2012
Trusts. In 2012, the Vesey Street Investment Trust I (Vesey Street Trust) and the Murray Street Investment Trust I (Murray Street Trust) (together, the 2012 Trusts) issued an aggregate of
$2.25 billion of senior guaranteed trust securities to third parties. The proceeds of that offering were used to fund purchases of $1.75 billion of junior subordinated debt securities issued by Group Inc. that pay interest semi-annually at
a fixed annual rate of 4.647% and mature on March 9, 2017, and $500 million of junior subordinated debt securities issued by Group Inc. that pay interest semi-annually at a fixed annual rate of 4.404% and mature on
September 1, 2016.
The 2012 Trusts purchased the junior subordinated debt from Goldman Sachs Capital II and Goldman
Sachs Capital III (APEX Trusts). The APEX Trusts used the proceeds from such sales to purchase shares of Group Inc.s Perpetual Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series E (Series E Preferred Stock) and Perpetual Non-Cumulative Preferred
Stock, Series F (Series F Preferred Stock). See Note 19 for more information about the Series E and Series F Preferred stock.
The 2012 Trusts are required to pay distributions on their senior guaranteed trust securities in the same amounts and on the same dates that they are scheduled to receive interest on the junior
subordinated debt they hold, and are required to redeem their respective senior guaranteed trust securities upon the maturity or earlier redemption of the junior subordinated debt they hold.
The firm has the right to defer payments on the junior subordinated debt, subject to
limitations. During any such deferral period, the firm will not be permitted to, among other things, pay dividends on or make certain repurchases of its common or preferred stock. However, as Group Inc. fully and unconditionally guarantees the
payment of the distribution and redemption amounts when due on a senior basis on the senior guaranteed trust securities issued by the 2012 Trusts, if the 2012 Trusts are unable to make scheduled distributions to the holders of the senior guaranteed
trust securities, under the guarantee, Group Inc. would be obligated to make those payments. As such, the $2.25 billion of junior subordinated debt held by the 2012 Trusts for the benefit of investors is not classified as junior
subordinated debt.
The APEX Trusts and the 2012 Trusts are Delaware statutory trusts sponsored by the firm and
wholly-owned finance subsidiaries of the firm for regulatory and legal purposes but are not consolidated for accounting purposes.
The firm has covenanted in favor of the holders of Group Inc.s 6.345% Junior Subordinated Debentures due February 15, 2034, that, subject to certain exceptions, the firm will not redeem or
purchase the capital securities issued by the APEX Trusts or shares of Group Incs Series E or Series F Preferred Stock prior to specified dates in 2022 for a price that exceeds a maximum amount determined by reference to the net cash
proceeds that the firm has received from the sale of qualifying securities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
71 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Junior Subordinated Debt Issued in
Connection with Trust Preferred Securities. Group Inc. issued $2.84 billion of junior subordinated debentures in 2004 to Goldman Sachs Capital I (Trust), a Delaware statutory trust.
The Trust issued $2.75 billion of guaranteed preferred beneficial interests to third parties and $85 million of common beneficial interests to Group Inc. and used the proceeds from the issuances to purchase the junior subordinated
debentures from Group Inc. The Trust is a wholly-owned finance subsidiary of the firm for regulatory and legal purposes but is not consolidated for accounting purposes.
The firm pays interest semi-annually on the debentures at an annual rate of 6.345% and the debentures mature on February 15, 2034. The coupon rate and the payment dates applicable to the
beneficial interests are the same as the interest rate and payment dates for the debentures. The firm has the right, from time to time, to defer payment of interest on the debentures, and therefore cause payment on the Trusts preferred
beneficial interests to be deferred, in each case up to ten consecutive semi-annual periods. During any such extension period, the firm will not be permitted to, among other things, pay dividends on or make certain repurchases of its common stock.
The Trust is not permitted to pay any distributions on the common beneficial interests held by Group Inc. unless all dividends payable on the preferred beneficial interests have been paid in full.
Note 17. Other Liabilities and Accrued Expenses
Note 17.
Other Liabilities and Accrued Expenses
The table below presents other liabilities and accrued expenses by type.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Compensation and benefits |
|
|
$ 4,898 |
|
|
|
$ 8,292 |
|
|
|
Insurance-related liabilities 1 |
|
|
10,178 |
|
|
|
10,274 |
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interests 2 |
|
|
432 |
|
|
|
508 |
|
|
|
Income tax-related liabilities 3 |
|
|
3,086 |
|
|
|
2,724 |
|
|
|
Employee interests in consolidated funds |
|
|
245 |
|
|
|
246 |
|
|
|
Subordinated liabilities issued by consolidated VIEs |
|
|
993 |
|
|
|
1,360 |
|
|
|
Accrued expenses and
other 4 |
|
|
18,721 |
|
|
|
18,991 |
|
Total |
|
|
$38,553 |
|
|
|
$42,395 |
|
1. |
Represents liabilities for future benefits and unpaid claims carried at fair value under the fair value option as of March 2013 and
December 2012, respectively. |
2. |
Includes $367 million and $419 million related to consolidated investment funds as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively.
|
3. |
See Note 24 for further information about income taxes. |
4. |
Includes $14.52 billion and $14.62 billion of liabilities related to the firms reinsurance business which were classified as held for sale as
of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. See Note 12 for further information. |
|
|
|
|
|
72 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 18. Commitments, Contingencies and Guarantees
Note 18.
Commitments, Contingencies and Guarantees
Commitments
The table below presents the firms commitments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitment Amount by Period
of Expiration as of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
Total Commitments
as of |
|
in millions |
|
|
Remainder of 2013 |
|
|
|
2014-
2015 |
|
|
|
2016-
2017 |
|
|
|
2018-
Thereafter |
|
|
|
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Commitments to extend credit 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lending: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment-grade |
|
|
$ 6,301 |
|
|
|
$11,203 |
|
|
|
$30,997 |
|
|
|
$ 5,702 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 54,203 |
|
|
|
$ 53,736 |
|
|
|
Non-investment-grade |
|
|
1,603 |
|
|
|
5,086 |
|
|
|
8,976 |
|
|
|
3,450 |
|
|
|
|
|
19,115 |
|
|
|
21,102 |
|
|
|
Warehouse financing |
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
783 |
|
|
|
784 |
|
Total commitments to extend credit |
|
|
8,163 |
|
|
|
16,813 |
|
|
|
39,973 |
|
|
|
9,152 |
|
|
|
|
|
74,101 |
|
|
|
75,622 |
|
|
|
Contingent and forward starting resale and securities borrowing agreements 2 |
|
|
72,068 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,068 |
|
|
|
47,599 |
|
|
|
Forward starting repurchase and secured lending
agreements 2 |
|
|
13,268 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,268 |
|
|
|
6,144 |
|
|
|
Letters of credit 3 |
|
|
533 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
727 |
|
|
|
789 |
|
|
|
Investment commitments |
|
|
1,627 |
|
|
|
1,908 |
|
|
|
239 |
|
|
|
3,608 |
|
|
|
|
|
7,382 |
|
|
|
7,339 |
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
3,483 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,659 |
|
|
|
4,624 |
|
Total commitments |
|
|
$99,142 |
|
|
|
$18,980 |
|
|
|
$40,239 |
|
|
|
$12,844 |
|
|
|
|
|
$171,205 |
|
|
|
$142,117 |
|
1. |
Commitments to extend credit are presented net of amounts syndicated to third parties. |
2. |
These agreements generally settle within three business days. |
3. |
Consists of commitments under letters of credit issued by various banks which the firm provides to counterparties in lieu of securities or cash to satisfy
various collateral and margin deposit requirements. |
Commitments to Extend Credit
The firms commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend with fixed termination
dates and depend on the satisfaction of all contractual conditions to borrowing. The total commitment amount does not necessarily reflect actual future cash flows because the firm may syndicate all or substantial portions of these commitments and
commitments can expire unused or be reduced or cancelled at the counterpartys request.
The firm generally accounts for commitments to extend credit at fair value.
Losses, if any, are generally recorded, net of any fees in Other principal transactions.
As of March 2013 and December 2012, approximately $18.55 billion and $16.09 billion, respectively,
of the firms lending commitments were held for investment and were accounted for on an accrual basis. The carrying value and the estimated fair value of such lending commitments were liabilities of $78 million and $624 million,
respectively, as of March 2013, and $63 million and $523 million, respectively, as of December 2012. As these lending
commitments are not accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or at fair value in accordance with other U.S. GAAP, their fair value is not included in the firms fair value
hierarchy in Notes 6, 7 and 8. Had these commitments been included in the firms fair value hierarchy, they would have primarily been classified in level 3 as of March 2013 and December 2012.
Commercial Lending. The
firms commercial lending commitments are extended to investment-grade and non-investment-grade corporate borrowers. Commitments to investment-grade corporate borrowers are principally used for operating liquidity and general corporate
purposes. The firm also extends lending commitments in connection with contingent acquisition financing and other types of corporate lending as well as commercial real estate financing. Commitments that are extended for contingent acquisition
financing are often intended to be short-term in nature, as borrowers often seek to replace them with other funding sources.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
73 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc. (SMFG) provides the firm with credit loss protection
on certain approved loan commitments (primarily investment-grade commercial lending commitments). The notional amount of such loan commitments was $30.95 billion and $32.41 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012,
respectively. The credit loss protection on loan commitments provided by SMFG is generally limited to 95% of the first loss the firm realizes on such commitments, up to a maximum of approximately $950 million. In addition, subject to the
satisfaction of certain conditions, upon the firms request, SMFG will provide protection for 70% of additional losses on such commitments, up to a maximum of $1.13 billion, of which $300 million of protection had been provided as of
both March 2013 and December 2012. The firm also uses other financial instruments to mitigate credit risks related to certain commitments not covered by SMFG. These instruments primarily include credit default swaps that reference the same
or similar underlying instrument or entity or credit default swaps that reference a market index.
Warehouse Financing. The firm provides financing to clients who warehouse financial assets. These arrangements are secured by the warehoused assets,
primarily consisting of commercial mortgage loans.
Contingent and Forward Starting Resale and Securities Borrowing Agreements/Forward
Starting Repurchase and Secured Lending Agreements
The firm enters into resale and securities borrowing agreements and
repurchase and secured lending agreements that settle at a future date. The firm also enters into commitments to provide contingent financing to its clients and counterparties through resale agreements. The firms funding of these commitments
depends on the satisfaction of all contractual conditions to the resale agreement and these commitments can expire unused.
Investment Commitments
The firms investment commitments consist of commitments to invest in private equity, real estate and other assets directly and through funds that the firm raises and manages. These commitments
include $1.04 billion and $872 million as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, related to real estate private investments and $6.34 billion and $6.47 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012,
respectively, related to corporate and other private investments. Of these amounts, $5.96 billion and $6.21 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, relate to commitments to invest in funds managed by the firm,
which will be funded at market value on the date of investment.
Leases
The firm has contractual obligations under long-term noncancelable lease agreements, principally for office space, expiring on various dates through 2069. Certain agreements are subject to periodic
escalation provisions for increases in real estate taxes and other charges. The table below presents future minimum rental payments, net of minimum sublease rentals.
|
|
|
|
|
in millions |
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
Remainder of 2013 |
|
|
$ 304 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
393 |
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
288 |
|
|
|
2017 |
|
|
270 |
|
|
|
2018 |
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
2019 - thereafter |
|
|
1,144 |
|
Total |
|
|
$2,955 |
|
Operating leases include office space held in excess of current
requirements. Rent expense relating to space held for growth is included in Occupancy. The firm records a liability, based on the fair value of the remaining lease rentals reduced by any potential or existing sublease rentals, for leases
where the firm has ceased using the space and management has concluded that the firm will not derive any future economic benefits. Costs to terminate a lease before the end of its term are recognized and measured at fair value on termination.
|
|
|
|
|
74 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Contingencies
Legal Proceedings. See Note 27 for information about legal proceedings, including certain mortgage-related matters.
Certain Mortgage-Related Contingencies. There are multiple areas of focus by regulators,
governmental agencies and others within the mortgage market that may impact originators, issuers, servicers and investors. There remains significant uncertainty surrounding the nature and extent of any potential exposure for participants in
this market.
|
|
Representations and Warranties. The
firm has not been a significant originator of residential mortgage loans. The firm did purchase loans originated by others and generally received loan-level representations of the type described below from the originators. During the period 2005
through 2008, the firm sold approximately $10 billion of loans to government-sponsored enterprises and approximately $11 billion of loans to other third parties. In addition, the firm transferred loans to trusts and other mortgage
securitization vehicles. As of March 2013 and December 2012, the outstanding balance of the loans transferred to trusts and other mortgage securitization vehicles during the period 2005 through 2008 was approximately $33 billion and
$35 billion, respectively. This amount reflects paydowns and cumulative losses of approximately $92 billion ($21 billion of which are cumulative losses) as of March 2013 and approximately $90 billion ($20 billion of
which are cumulative losses) as of December 2012. A small number of these Goldman Sachs-issued securitizations with an outstanding principal balance of $520 million and total paydowns and cumulative losses of $1.54 billion
($516 million of which are cumulative losses) as of March 2013, and an outstanding principal balance of $540 million and total paydowns and cumulative losses of $1.52 billion ($508 million of which are cumulative losses) as
of December 2012, were structured with credit protection obtained from monoline insurers. In connection with both sales of loans and securitizations, the firm provided loan level representations of the type described below and/or assigned the
loan level representations from the party from whom the firm purchased the loans.
|
|
|
The loan level representations made in connection with the sale or securitization of mortgage loans varied among transactions but were generally detailed representations applicable to each loan
in the portfolio and addressed matters relating to the property, the borrower and the note. These representations generally included, but were not limited to, the following: (i) certain attributes of the borrowers financial status;
(ii) loan-to-value ratios, owner occupancy status and certain other characteristics of the property; (iii) the lien position; (iv) the fact that the loan was originated in compliance with law; and (v) completeness of the loan
documentation. |
|
The firm has received repurchase claims for residential mortgage loans based on alleged breaches of representations, from government-sponsored enterprises, other
third parties, trusts and other mortgage securitization vehicles, which have not been significant. During the three months ended March 2013 and March 2012, the firm repurchased loans with an unpaid principal balance of less than
$10 million. The loss related to the repurchase of these loans was not material for both the three months ended March 2013 and March 2012. |
|
Ultimately, the firms exposure to claims for repurchase of residential mortgage loans based on alleged breaches of representations will depend on a number
of factors including the following: (i) the extent to which these claims are actually made; (ii) the extent to which there are underlying breaches of representations that give rise to valid claims for repurchase; (iii) in the case of
loans originated by others, the extent to which the firm could be held liable and, if it is, the firms ability to pursue and collect on any claims against the parties who made representations to the firm; (iv) macro-economic factors,
including developments in the residential real estate market; and (v) legal and regulatory developments. |
|
Based upon the large number of defaults in residential mortgages, including those sold or securitized by the firm, there is a potential for increasing claims for
repurchases. However, the firm is not in a position to make a meaningful estimate of that exposure at this time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
75 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
|
Foreclosure and Other Mortgage Loan Servicing Practices and Procedures. The firm had received a number of requests for information from regulators and other agencies, including state attorneys general and banking regulators, as part of an industry-wide focus on the practices
of lenders and servicers in connection with foreclosure proceedings and other aspects of mortgage loan servicing practices and procedures. The requests sought information about the foreclosure and servicing protocols and activities of Litton, a
residential mortgage servicing subsidiary sold by the firm to Ocwen Financial Corporation (Ocwen) in the third quarter of 2011. The firm is cooperating with the requests and these inquiries may result in the imposition of fines or other regulatory
action. In the third quarter of 2010, prior to the firms sale of Litton, Litton had temporarily suspended evictions and foreclosure and real estate owned sales in a number of states, including those with judicial foreclosure procedures. Litton
resumed these activities beginning in the fourth quarter of 2010. |
|
In connection with the sale of Litton, the firm provided customary representations and warranties, and indemnities for breaches of these representations and
warranties, to Ocwen. These indemnities are subject to various limitations, and are capped at approximately $50 million. The firm has not yet received any claims under these indemnities. The firm also agreed to provide specific indemnities to
Ocwen related to claims made by third parties with respect to servicing activities during the period that Litton was owned by the firm and which are in excess of the related reserves accrued for such matters by Litton at the time of the sale. These
indemnities are capped at approximately $125 million. The firm has recorded a reserve for the portion of these potential losses that it believes is probable and can be reasonably estimated. As of March 2013, claims under these indemnities,
and payments made in connection with these claims, were not material to the firm. |
|
The firm further agreed to provide indemnities to Ocwen not subject to a cap, which primarily relate to potential liabilities constituting fines or civil
monetary penalties which could be imposed in settlements with certain terms with U.S. states attorneys general or in consent orders with certain terms with the Federal Reserve, the Office of Thrift Supervision, the Office of the Comptroller of
the Currency, the FDIC or the New York State Department of Financial Services, in each case relating to Littons
|
|
|
foreclosure and servicing practices while it was owned by the firm. The firm has entered into a settlement with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Federal Reserve Board)
relating to foreclosure and servicing matters as described below. |
|
Under the Litton sale agreement the firm also retained liabilities associated with claims related to Littons failure to maintain lender-placed mortgage
insurance, obligations to repurchase certain loans from government-sponsored enterprises, subpoenas from one of Littons regulators, and fines or civil penalties imposed by the Federal Reserve or the New York State Department of Financial
Services in connection with certain compliance matters. Management is unable to develop an estimate of the maximum potential amount of future payments under these indemnities because the firm has received no claims under these indemnities other than
an immaterial amount with respect to government-sponsored enterprises. However, management does not believe, based on currently available information, that any payments under these indemnities will have a material adverse effect on the firms
financial condition. |
|
On September 1, 2011, Group Inc. and GS Bank USA entered into a Consent Order (the Order) with the Federal Reserve Board relating to the servicing of
residential mortgage loans. The terms of the Order were substantially similar and, in many respects, identical to the orders entered into with the Federal Reserve Board by other large U.S. financial institutions. The Order set forth
various allegations of improper conduct in servicing by Litton, requires that Group Inc. and GS Bank USA cease and desist such conduct, and required that Group Inc. and GS Bank USA, and their boards of directors, take various affirmative
steps. The Order required (i) Group Inc. and GS Bank USA to engage a third-party consultant to conduct a review of certain foreclosure actions or proceedings that occurred or were pending between January 1, 2009 and
December 31, 2010; (ii) the adoption of policies and procedures related to management of third parties used to outsource residential mortgage servicing, loss mitigation or foreclosure; (iii) a validation report from
an independent third-party consultant regarding compliance with the Order for the first year; and (iv) submission of quarterly progress reports as to compliance with the Order by the boards of directors (or committees thereof) of Group Inc. and
GS Bank USA. |
|
|
|
|
|
76 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
|
On January 16, 2013, Group Inc. and GS Bank USA entered into a settlement in principle with the Federal Reserve Board relating to the servicing of residential mortgage loans and
foreclosure processing. This settlement in principle amends the Order which is described above, provides for the termination of the independent foreclosure review under the Order and calls for Group Inc. and GS Bank USA collectively to:
(i) make cash payments into a settlement fund for distribution to eligible borrowers; and (ii) provide other assistance for foreclosure prevention and loss mitigation over the next two years. The other provisions of the Order will remain
in effect. On February 28, 2013, Group Inc. and GS Bank USA entered into final documentation with the Federal Reserve Board relating to the settlement. |
Guarantees
The firm enters into various derivatives that meet the definition of a
guarantee under U.S. GAAP, including written equity and commodity put options, written currency contracts and interest rate caps, floors and swaptions. Disclosures about derivatives are not required if they may be cash settled and the firm has no
basis to conclude it is probable that the counterparties held the underlying instruments at inception of the contract. The firm has concluded that these conditions have been met for certain large, internationally active commercial and investment
bank counterparties, central clearing counterparties and certain other counterparties. Accordingly, the firm has not included such contracts in the table below.
The firm, in its capacity as an agency lender, indemnifies most of its securities lending
customers against losses incurred in the event that borrowers do not return securities and the collateral held is insufficient to cover the market value of the securities borrowed.
In the ordinary course of business, the firm provides other financial guarantees of the obligations of third parties (e.g., standby
letters of credit and other guarantees to enable clients to complete transactions and fund-related guarantees). These guarantees represent obligations to make payments to beneficiaries if the guaranteed party fails to fulfill its obligation under a
contractual arrangement with that beneficiary.
The table below presents certain information about derivatives that meet
the definition of a guarantee and certain other guarantees. The maximum payout in the table below is based on the notional amount of the contract and therefore does not represent anticipated losses. See Note 7 for further information about
credit derivatives that meet the definition of a guarantee which are not included below.
Because derivatives are accounted for
at fair value, the carrying value is considered the best indication of payment/performance risk for individual contracts. However, the carrying values below exclude the effect of a legal right of setoff that may exist under an enforceable netting
agreement and the effect of netting of cash collateral posted under enforceable credit support agreements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum Payout/Notional Amount by Period of Expiration |
|
in millions |
|
|
Carrying Value of Net Liability |
|
|
|
|
|
Remainder of 2013 |
|
|
|
2014- 2015 |
|
|
|
2016- 2017 |
|
|
|
2018- Thereafter |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Derivatives 1 |
|
|
$8,083 |
|
|
|
|
|
$318,426 |
|
|
|
$275,467 |
|
|
|
$53,158 |
|
|
|
$58,370 |
|
|
|
$705,421 |
|
|
|
Securities lending indemnifications 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,360 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,360 |
|
|
|
Other financial
guarantees 3 |
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
|
|
751 |
|
|
|
455 |
|
|
|
1,268 |
|
|
|
1,028 |
|
|
|
3,502 |
|
1. |
These derivatives are risk managed together with derivatives that do not meet the definition of a guarantee, and therefore these amounts do not reflect the
firms overall risk related to its derivative activities. As of December 2012, the carrying value of the net liability and the notional amount related to derivative guarantees were $8.58 billion and $663.15 billion, respectively.
|
2. |
Collateral held by the lenders in connection with securities lending indemnifications was $31.24 billion as of March 2013. Because the contractual
nature of these arrangements requires the firm to obtain collateral with a market value that exceeds the value of the securities lent to the borrower, there is minimal performance risk associated with these guarantees. As of December 2012, the
maximum payout and collateral held related to securities lending indemnifications were $27.12 billion and $27.89 billion, respectively. |
3. |
Other financial guarantees excludes certain commitments to issue standby letters of credit that are included in Commitments to extend credit. See
table in Commitments above for a summary of the firms commitments. As of December 2012, the carrying value of the net liability and the maximum payout related to other financial guarantees were $152 million and
$3.48 billion, respectively. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
77 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Guarantees of Securities Issued by
Trusts. The firm has established trusts, including Goldman Sachs Capital I, the APEX Trusts, the 2012 Trusts, and other entities for the limited purpose of issuing securities to third
parties, lending the proceeds to the firm and entering into contractual arrangements with the firm and third parties related to this purpose. The firm does not consolidate these entities. See Note 16 for further information about the
transactions involving Goldman Sachs Capital I, the APEX Trusts, and the 2012 Trusts.
The firm effectively provides for the
full and unconditional guarantee of the securities issued by these entities. Timely payment by the firm of amounts due to these entities under the guarantee, borrowing, preferred stock and related contractual arrangements will be sufficient to cover
payments due on the securities issued by these entities.
Management believes that it is unlikely that any circumstances will
occur, such as nonperformance on the part of paying agents or other service providers, that would make it necessary for the firm to make payments related to these entities other than those required under the terms of the guarantee, borrowing,
preferred stock and related contractual arrangements and in connection with certain expenses incurred by these entities.
Indemnities and Guarantees of Service Providers. In the ordinary course of business, the firm indemnifies and guarantees certain service providers, such as clearing and custody agents, trustees and administrators, against specified potential losses in
connection with their acting as an agent of, or providing services to, the firm or its affiliates.
The firm may also be
liable to some clients for losses caused by acts or omissions of third-party service providers, including sub-custodians and third-party brokers. In addition, the firm is a member of payment, clearing and settlement networks as well as securities
exchanges around the world that may require the firm to meet the obligations of such networks and exchanges in the event of member defaults.
In connection with its prime brokerage and clearing businesses, the firm agrees to clear
and settle on behalf of its clients the transactions entered into by them with other brokerage firms. The firms obligations in respect of such transactions are secured by the assets in the clients account as well as any proceeds received
from the transactions cleared and settled by the firm on behalf of the client. In connection with joint venture investments, the firm may issue loan guarantees under which it may be liable in the event of fraud, misappropriation, environmental
liabilities and certain other matters involving the borrower.
The firm is unable to develop an estimate of the maximum payout
under these guarantees and indemnifications. However, management believes that it is unlikely the firm will have to make any material payments under these arrangements, and no material liabilities related to these guarantees and indemnifications
have been recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition as of March 2013 or December 2012.
Other Representations, Warranties and Indemnifications. The firm provides representations
and warranties to counterparties in connection with a variety of commercial transactions and occasionally indemnifies them against potential losses caused by the breach of those representations and warranties. The firm may also provide
indemnifications protecting against changes in or adverse application of certain U.S. tax laws in connection with ordinary-course transactions such as securities issuances, borrowings or derivatives.
In addition, the firm may provide indemnifications to some counterparties to protect them in the event additional taxes are owed or
payments are withheld, due either to a change in or an adverse application of certain non-U.S. tax laws.
These
indemnifications generally are standard contractual terms and are entered into in the ordinary course of business. Generally, there are no stated or notional amounts included in these indemnifications, and the contingencies triggering the obligation
to indemnify are not expected to occur. The firm is unable to develop an estimate of the maximum payout under these guarantees and indemnifications. However, management believes that it is unlikely the firm will have to make any material payments
under these arrangements, and no material liabilities related to these arrangements have been recognized in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition as of March 2013 or December 2012.
|
|
|
|
|
78 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Guarantees of Subsidiaries. Group Inc. fully and unconditionally guarantees the securities issued by GS Finance Corp., a wholly-owned finance subsidiary of the firm.
Group Inc. has guaranteed the payment obligations of Goldman, Sachs & Co. (GS&Co.), GS Bank USA and Goldman Sachs
Execution & Clearing, L.P. (GSEC), subject to certain exceptions.
In November 2008, the firm contributed
subsidiaries into GS Bank USA, and Group Inc. agreed to guarantee the reimbursement of certain losses, including credit-related losses, relating to assets held by the contributed entities. In connection with this guarantee, Group Inc. also agreed to
pledge to GS Bank USA certain collateral, including interests in subsidiaries and other illiquid assets.
In addition, Group
Inc. guarantees many of the obligations of its other consolidated subsidiaries on a transaction-by-transaction basis, as negotiated with counterparties. Group Inc. is unable to develop an estimate of the maximum payout under its subsidiary
guarantees; however, because these guaranteed obligations are also obligations of consolidated subsidiaries, Group Inc.s liabilities as guarantor are not separately disclosed.
Note 19. Shareholders' Equity
Note 19.
Shareholders Equity
Common Equity
On April 15, 2013, Group Inc. declared a dividend of $0.50 per common share to be paid on June 27, 2013 to common
shareholders of record on May 30, 2013.
The firms share repurchase program is intended to help maintain the
appropriate level of common equity. The repurchase program is effected primarily through regular open-market purchases, the amounts and timing of which are determined primarily by the firms current and projected capital positions (i.e.,
comparisons of the firms desired level and composition of capital to its actual level and composition of capital), but which may also be influenced by general market conditions and the prevailing price and trading volumes of the firms
common stock. Any repurchase of the firms common stock requires approval by the Federal Reserve Board.
During the three
months ended March 2013, the firm repurchased 10.1 million shares of its common stock at an average cost per share of $150.53, for a total cost of $1.52 billion, under the share repurchase program. In addition, pursuant to the terms
of certain share-based compensation plans, employees may remit shares to the firm or the firm may cancel RSUs to satisfy minimum statutory employee tax withholding requirements. Under these plans, during the three months ended March 2013,
employees remitted 70,754 shares with a total value of $10 million and the firm cancelled 3.2 million of RSUs with a total value of $458 million.
On March 25, 2013, the firm amended its warrant agreement with Berkshire Hathaway Inc. and certain of its subsidiaries (collectively, Berkshire Hathaway) to require net share settlement and to
specify the exercise date as October 1, 2013. Under the amended agreement, the firm will deliver to Berkshire Hathaway the number of shares of common stock equal in value to the difference between the average closing price of the
firms common stock over the 10 trading days preceding October 1, 2013 and the exercise price of $115.00 multiplied by the number of shares of common stock (43.5 million) covered by the warrant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
79 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Preferred Equity
The table below presents perpetual preferred stock issued and outstanding as of March 2013.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series |
|
Shares Authorized |
|
|
Shares Issued |
|
|
Shares Outstanding |
|
|
Dividend Rate |
|
Redemption Value (in millions) |
|
A |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
30,000 |
|
|
|
29,999 |
|
|
3 month LIBOR + 0.75%, with floor of 3.75% per annum |
|
|
$ 750 |
|
|
|
B |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
32,000 |
|
|
|
32,000 |
|
|
6.20% per annum |
|
|
800 |
|
|
|
C |
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
3 month LIBOR + 0.75%, with floor of 4.00% per annum |
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
D |
|
|
60,000 |
|
|
|
54,000 |
|
|
|
53,999 |
|
|
3 month LIBOR + 0.67%, with floor of 4.00% per annum |
|
|
1,350 |
|
|
|
E |
|
|
17,500 |
|
|
|
17,500 |
|
|
|
17,500 |
|
|
3 month LIBOR + 0.77%, with floor of 4.00% per annum |
|
|
1,750 |
|
|
|
F |
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
3 month LIBOR + 0.77%, with floor of 4.00% per annum |
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
I |
|
|
34,500 |
|
|
|
34,000 |
|
|
|
34,000 |
|
|
5.95% per annum |
|
|
850 |
|
|
|
|
242,000 |
|
|
|
180,500 |
|
|
|
180,498 |
|
|
|
|
|
$6,200 |
|
Each share of non-cumulative Series A Preferred Stock, Series B Preferred Stock,
Series C Preferred Stock and Series D Preferred Stock issued and outstanding has a par value of $0.01, has a liquidation preference of $25,000, is represented by 1,000 depositary shares and is redeemable at the firms option, at a
redemption price equal to $25,000 plus declared and unpaid dividends.
Each share of non-cumulative Series E and
Series F Preferred Stock issued and outstanding has a par value of $0.01, has a liquidation preference of $100,000 and is redeemable at the option of the firm at any time subject to certain covenant restrictions governing the firms
ability to redeem or purchase the preferred stock without issuing common stock or other instruments with equity-like characteristics, at a redemption price equal to $100,000 plus declared and unpaid dividends. See Note 16 for further
information about the replacement capital covenants applicable to the Series E and Series F Preferred Stock.
Each
share of non-cumulative Series I Preferred Stock issued and outstanding has a par value of $0.01, has a liquidation preference of $25,000, is represented by 1,000 depositary shares and is redeemable at the firms option beginning
November 10, 2017 at a redemption price equal to $25,000 plus accrued and unpaid dividends.
Any redemption of preferred stock by the firm requires the approval of the Federal Reserve
Board. All series of preferred stock are pari passu and have a preference over the firms common stock on liquidation. Dividends on each series of preferred stock, if declared, are payable quarterly in arrears. The firms ability to
declare or pay dividends on, or purchase, redeem or otherwise acquire, its common stock is subject to certain restrictions in the event that the firm fails to pay or set aside full dividends on the preferred stock for the latest completed dividend
period.
On April 25, 2013, Group Inc. issued 40,000 shares of perpetual 5.50% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative
Preferred Stock, Series J, par value $0.01 per share (Series J Preferred Stock), out of a total of 46,000 shares of Series J Preferred Stock authorized for issuance. Each share of Series J Preferred Stock issued and outstanding
has a liquidation preference of $25,000, is represented by 1,000 depositary shares and is redeemable at the firms option beginning May 10, 2023, at a redemption price equal to $25,000 plus accrued and unpaid dividends. Dividends on
Series J Preferred Stock, if declared, will be payable quarterly at a fixed rate per annum of 5.50% from the issuance date to, but excluding, May 10, 2023, and thereafter at a rate per annum equal to three-month LIBOR plus 3.64%.
|
|
|
|
|
80 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
The table below presents preferred dividends declared on preferred stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March |
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
|
2012 |
|
|
|
|
per share |
|
|
|
in millions |
|
|
|
|
|
per share |
|
|
|
in millions |
|
Series A |
|
|
$234.38 |
|
|
|
$ 7 |
|
|
|
|
|
$239.58 |
|
|
|
$ 7 |
|
|
|
Series B |
|
|
387.50 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
387.50 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
Series C |
|
|
250.00 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
255.56 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
Series D |
|
|
250.00 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
255.56 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
Series E |
|
|
977.78 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series F |
|
|
977.78 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series I |
|
|
437.99 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$72 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$35 |
|
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(Loss)
The tables below present accumulated other comprehensive income/(loss) by type.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Currency translation adjustment, net of tax |
|
|
|
Pension and postretirement liability adjustments, net of tax |
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains/(losses) on available-for-sale securities, net of tax |
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income/(loss),
net of tax |
|
Balance, beginning of year |
|
|
$(314 |
) |
|
|
$(206 |
) |
|
|
$327 |
|
|
|
$(193 |
) |
|
|
Other comprehensive income/(loss) |
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
Balance, end of period |
|
|
$(340 |
) |
|
|
$(210 |
) |
|
|
$342 |
1 |
|
|
$(208 |
) |
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Currency translation adjustment, net of tax |
|
|
|
Pension and postretirement liability adjustments, net of tax |
|
|
|
Net unrealized gains/(losses) on available-for-sale securities, net of tax |
|
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income/(loss), net of tax |
|
Balance, beginning of year |
|
|
$(225 |
) |
|
|
$(374 |
) |
|
|
$ 83 |
|
|
|
$(516 |
) |
|
|
Other comprehensive income/(loss) |
|
|
(89 |
) |
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
323 |
|
Balance, end of year |
|
|
$(314 |
) |
|
|
$(206 |
) |
|
|
$327 |
1 |
|
|
$(193 |
) |
1. |
Substantially all consists of net unrealized gains on securities held by the firms insurance subsidiaries as of both March 2013 and
December 2012. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
81 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 20. Regulation and Capital Adequacy
Note 20.
Regulation and Capital Adequacy
The Federal Reserve Board is the primary regulator of Group Inc., a bank holding company
under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (BHC Act) and a financial holding company under amendments to the BHC Act effected by the U.S. Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. As a bank holding company, the firm is subject to consolidated regulatory
capital requirements that are computed in accordance with the Federal Reserve Boards risk-based capital regulations (which are based on the Basel 1 Capital Accord of the Basel Committee) reflecting the Federal Reserve
Boards revised market risk regulatory capital requirements which became effective on January 1, 2013. These capital requirements are expressed as capital ratios that compare measures of capital to risk-weighted assets (RWAs). The
firms U.S. bank depository institution subsidiaries, including GS Bank USA, are subject to similar capital requirements.
Under the Federal Reserve Boards capital adequacy requirements and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action that is
applicable to GS Bank USA, the firm and its U.S. bank depository institution subsidiaries must meet specific capital requirements that involve quantitative measures of assets, liabilities and certain off-balance-sheet items as calculated under
regulatory reporting practices. The firm and its U.S. bank depository institution subsidiaries capital amounts, as well as GS Bank USAs prompt corrective action classification, are also subject to qualitative judgments by the regulators
about components, risk weightings and other factors.
Many of the firms subsidiaries, including GS&Co. and the
firms other broker-dealer subsidiaries, are subject to separate regulation and capital requirements as described below.
Group Inc.
Federal Reserve Board regulations require bank holding companies to maintain a minimum Tier 1 capital ratio of 4% and
a minimum total capital ratio of 8%. The required minimum Tier 1 capital ratio and total capital ratio in order to be considered a well-capitalized bank holding company under the Federal Reserve Board guidelines are 6% and 10%,
respectively. Bank holding companies may be expected to maintain ratios well above the minimum levels, depending on their particular condition, risk profile and growth plans. The minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio is 3% for bank holding companies
that have received the highest supervisory rating under Federal Reserve Board guidelines
or that have implemented the Federal Reserve Boards risk-based capital measure for market risk. Other bank holding companies must have a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4%.
The table below presents information regarding Group Inc.s regulatory capital ratios under Basel 1, as implemented
by the Federal Reserve Board. The information as of March 2013 reflects the revised market risk regulatory capital requirements, which became effective on January 1, 2013. The information as of December 2012 is prior to the
implementation of these revised market risk regulatory capital requirements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
March 2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Tier 1 capital |
|
|
$ 69,371 |
|
|
|
$ 66,977 |
|
|
|
Tier 2 capital |
|
|
$ 13,445 |
|
|
|
$ 13,429 |
|
|
|
Total capital |
|
|
$ 82,816 |
|
|
|
$ 80,406 |
|
|
|
Risk-weighted assets |
|
|
$480,080 |
|
|
|
$399,928 |
|
|
|
Tier 1 capital ratio |
|
|
14.4 |
% |
|
|
16.7 |
% |
|
|
Total capital ratio |
|
|
17.3 |
% |
|
|
20.1 |
% |
|
|
Tier 1 leverage ratio |
|
|
7.5 |
% |
|
|
7.3 |
% |
Changes to the market risk regulatory capital requirements referenced above introduced a new methodology for determining
RWAs for market risk and are designed to implement the new market risk framework of the Basel Committee, as well as the prohibition on the use of external credit ratings, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act. These revised market risk regulatory
capital requirements are a significant part of the regulatory capital changes that will ultimately be reflected in the firms capital ratios under the guidelines issued by the Basel Committee in December 2010 (Basel 3).
RWAs under the Federal Reserve Boards risk-based capital requirements are calculated based on measures of credit risk and market
risk. Credit risk for on-balance sheet assets is based on the balance sheet value. For off-balance sheet exposures, including OTC derivatives and commitments, a credit equivalent amount is calculated based on the notional amount of each trade. All
such assets and exposures are then assigned a risk weight depending on, among other things, whether the counterparty is a sovereign, bank or a qualifying securities firm or other entity (or if collateral is held, depending on the nature of
the collateral).
|
|
|
|
|
82 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Under Basel 1, prior to the implementation of the revised market risk regulatory
capital requirements outlined above, RWAs for market risk were determined by reference to the firms Value-at-Risk (VaR) model, supplemented by the standardized measurement method used to determine RWAs for specific risk for certain positions.
Under the Federal Reserve Boards revised market risk regulatory capital requirements, which became effective on January 1, 2013, the methodology for calculating the RWAs for market risk was changed. RWAs for market risk are now
determined using VaR, stressed VaR, incremental risk, comprehensive risk and a standardized measurement method for specific risk.
Tier 1 leverage ratio is defined as Tier 1 capital divided by average adjusted total assets (which includes adjustments for disallowed goodwill and intangible assets, and the carrying value of
equity investments in non-financial companies that are subject to deductions from Tier 1 capital).
Regulatory Reform
The firm is currently working to implement the requirements set out in the Federal Reserve Boards Risk-Based Capital
Standards: Advanced Capital Adequacy Framework Basel 2 (Basel 2), as applicable to Group Inc. as a bank holding company and as an advanced approach banking organization. These requirements are based on the advanced
approaches under the Revised Framework for the International Convergence of Capital Measurement and Capital Standards issued by the Basel Committee. Basel 2, among other things, revises the regulatory capital framework for credit risk and
equity investments, and introduces a new operational risk capital requirement. The firm will implement Basel 2 once approved to do so by regulators following the completion of a parallel run period. Based on the parallel run calculations, the
firm currently meets the minimum capital requirements calculated in accordance with Basel 2, including the revised market risk regulatory capital requirements. The firms capital adequacy ratio will also be impacted by the further changes
outlined below under Basel 3 and provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act.
The Collins Amendment of the Dodd-Frank
Act requires advanced approach banking organizations to continue, upon adoption of Basel 2, to calculate risk-based capital ratios under both Basel 2 and Basel 1 (in each case reflecting the Federal Reserve Boards revised market
risk regulatory
capital requirements). For each of the Tier 1 and Total capital ratios, the lower of the Basel 1 and Basel 2 ratios calculated will be used to determine whether such advanced
approach banking organizations meet their minimum risk-based capital requirements. Furthermore, the June 2012 proposals described below include provisions which, if enacted as proposed, would modify these minimum risk-based capital
requirements.
In June 2012, the U.S. federal bank regulatory agencies (Agencies) proposed further modifications to their
capital adequacy regulations to address aspects of both the Dodd-Frank Act and Basel 3. If enacted as proposed, the most significant changes that would impact the firm include (i) revisions to the definition of Tier 1 capital,
including new deductions from Tier 1 capital, (ii) higher minimum capital and leverage ratios, (iii) a new minimum ratio of Tier 1 common equity to RWAs, (iv) new capital conservation and counter-cyclical capital buffers,
(v) an additional leverage ratio that includes measures of off-balance sheet exposures, (vi) revisions to the methodology for calculating RWAs, particularly for credit risk capital requirements for derivatives and (vii) a new
standardized approach to the calculation of RWAs that would replace the Federal Reserve Boards current Basel 1 risk-based capital framework in 2015, including for purposes of calculating the requisite capital floor under the
Collins Amendment. In November 2012, the Agencies announced that the proposed effective date of January 1, 2013 for these modifications would be deferred, but have not indicated a revised effective date. These proposals incorporate
the phase-out of Tier 1 capital treatment for the firms junior subordinated debt issued to trusts; such capital would instead be eligible as Tier 2 capital under the proposals. Under the Collins Amendment, this phase-out was
scheduled to begin on January 1, 2013. Due to the aforementioned deferral of the effective date of the proposed capital rules, the required application of this phase-out remains uncertain at this time. However, beginning on
January 1, 2013, the firm has begun the phase-out of the firms Tier 1 capital treatment of its junior subordinated debt issued to trusts. The firm has assumed a phase-out period allowing for only 75% of the capital instrument to
be included in additional Tier 1 capital in calendar year 2013 reflecting the Federal Reserve Boards proposed capital rules. Phased-out amounts that are no longer eligible as Tier 1 capital treatment are eligible for Tier 2
capital treatment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
83 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
In November 2011, the Basel Committee published its final provisions for assessing the
global systemic importance of banking institutions and the range of additional Tier 1 common equity that should be maintained by banking institutions deemed to be globally systemically important. The additional capital for these institutions
would initially range from 1% to 2.5% of Tier 1 common equity and could be as much as 3.5% for a banking institution that increases its systemic footprint (e.g., by increasing total assets). In November 2012, the Financial Stability Board
(established at the direction of the leaders of the Group of 20) indicated that the firm, based on its 2011 financial data, would be required to hold an additional 1.5% of Tier 1 common equity as a globally systemically important banking
institution under the Basel Committees methodology. The final determination of the amount of additional Tier 1 common equity that the firm will be required to hold will be based on the firms 2013 financial data and the manner and
timing of the U.S. banking regulators implementation of the Basel Committees methodology. The Basel Committee indicated that globally systemically important banking institutions will be required to meet the capital surcharges on a
phased-in basis from 2016 through 2019.
In October 2012, the Basel Committee published its final provisions for
calculating incremental capital requirements for domestic systemically important banking institutions. The provisions are complementary to the framework outlined above for global systemically important banking institutions, but are more
principles-based in order to provide an appropriate degree of national discretion. The impact of these provisions on the regulatory capital requirements of GS Bank USA and the firms other subsidiaries, including Goldman Sachs International
(GSI), will depend on how they are implemented by the banking and non-banking regulators in the United States and other jurisdictions.
The Basel Committee has released other consultation papers that may result in further
changes to the regulatory capital requirements, including a Fundamental review of the trading book and Revisions to the Basel Securitization Framework. In addition, the Basel Committee has issued other proposals on regulatory
changes including a Supervisory framework for measuring and controlling large exposures. The full impact of these developments on the firm will not be known with certainty until after any resulting rules are finalized.
The Dodd-Frank Act contains provisions that require the registration of all swap dealers, major swap participants, security-based swap
dealers and major security-based swap participants. The firm has registered certain subsidiaries as swap dealers under the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) rules, including GS&Co., GS Bank USA, GSI and J.
Aron & Company. These entities and other entities that would require registration under the CFTC or SEC rules will be subject to regulatory capital requirements, which have not yet been finalized by the CFTC and SEC.
The interaction among the Dodd-Frank Act, other reform initiatives contemplated by the Agencies, the Basel Committees proposed and
announced changes and other proposed or announced changes from other governmental entities and regulators (including the European Union (EU) and the U.K.s Financial Services Authority (FSA)) adds further uncertainty to the firms future
capital and liquidity requirements and those of the firms subsidiaries. The EU has recently finalized legislation which implements Basel 3 and it is expected to be in force for the European Union on January 1, 2014. As of
April 1, 2013, GSI is regulated by the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) which replaced the FSA.
|
|
|
|
|
84 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Bank Subsidiaries
GS Bank USA, an FDIC-insured, New York State-chartered bank and a member of the Federal
Reserve System, is supervised and regulated by the Federal Reserve Board, the FDIC, the New York State Department of Financial Services and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and is subject to minimum capital requirements (described below)
that are calculated in a manner similar to those applicable to bank holding companies. GS Bank USA computes its capital ratios in accordance with the regulatory capital requirements currently applicable to state member banks, which are based on
Basel 1 reflecting the revised market risk regulatory capital requirements as implemented by the Federal Reserve Board, for purposes of assessing the adequacy of its capital. Under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action that is
applicable to GS Bank USA, in order to be considered a well-capitalized depository institution, GS Bank USA must maintain a Tier 1 capital ratio of at least 6%, a total capital ratio of at least 10% and a Tier 1 leverage ratio
of at least 5%. GS Bank USA has agreed with the Federal Reserve Board to maintain minimum capital ratios in excess of these well-capitalized levels. Accordingly, for a period of time, GS Bank USA is expected to maintain a Tier 1
capital ratio of at least 8%, a total capital ratio of at least 11% and a Tier 1 leverage ratio of at least 6%. As noted in the table below, GS Bank USA was in compliance with these minimum capital requirements as of March 2013 and
December 2012.
The table below presents information regarding GS Bank USAs regulatory capital ratios under
Basel 1, as implemented by the Federal Reserve Board. The information as of March 2013 reflects the revised market risk regulatory capital requirements, which became effective on January 1, 2013. These changes resulted in
increased regulatory capital requirements for market risk. The information as of December 2012 is prior to the implementation of these revised market risk regulatory capital requirements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
March 2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Tier 1 capital 1 |
|
|
$ 19,089 |
|
|
|
$ 20,704 |
|
|
|
Tier 2 capital |
|
|
$ 56 |
|
|
|
$ 39 |
|
|
|
Total capital |
|
|
$ 19,145 |
|
|
|
$ 20,743 |
|
|
|
Risk-weighted assets |
|
|
$120,010 |
|
|
|
$109,669 |
|
|
|
Tier 1 capital ratio |
|
|
15.9 |
% |
|
|
18.9 |
% |
|
|
Total capital ratio |
|
|
16.0 |
% |
|
|
18.9 |
% |
|
|
Tier 1 leverage ratio |
|
|
16.1 |
% |
|
|
17.6 |
% |
1. |
The decrease from December 2012 to March 2013 is related to GS Bank USAs $2.00 billion dividend to Group Inc. in the first quarter of
2013. |
GS Bank USA is also currently working to implement the Basel 2 framework, as
implemented by the Federal Reserve Board. GS Bank USA will implement Basel 2 once approved to do so by regulators following the completion of a parallel run period. Based on the parallel run calculations, GS Bank USA currently meets
the minimum capital requirements calculated in accordance with Basel 2, including the revised market risk regulatory requirements.
In addition, the capital requirements for GS Bank USA are expected to be impacted by the June 2012 proposed modifications to the Agencies capital adequacy regulations outlined above, including
the requirements of a floor to the advanced risk-based capital ratios. If enacted as proposed, these proposals would also change the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action that is applicable to GS Bank USA by, among other things,
introducing a common equity Tier 1 ratio requirement, increasing the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio requirement and introducing a supplementary leverage ratio as a component of the prompt corrective action analysis. GS Bank USA will also be
impacted by aspects of the Dodd-Frank Act, including new stress tests.
The deposits of GS Bank USA are insured by the FDIC to
the extent provided by law. The Federal Reserve Board requires depository institutions to maintain cash reserves with a Federal Reserve Bank. The amount deposited by the firms depository institution held at the Federal Reserve Bank was
approximately $49.64 billion and $58.67 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, which exceeded required reserve amounts by $49.54 billion and $58.59 billion as of March 2013 and
December 2012, respectively.
Transactions between GS Bank USA and its subsidiaries and Group Inc. and its
subsidiaries and affiliates (other than, generally, subsidiaries of GS Bank USA) are regulated by the Federal Reserve Board. These regulations generally limit the types and amounts of transactions (including credit extensions from GS Bank USA) that
may take place and generally require those transactions to be on market terms or better to GS Bank USA.
The firms
principal non-U.S. bank subsidiary, GSIB, is a wholly-owned credit institution, which was regulated by the FSA through March 2013, and is subject to minimum capital requirements. As of April 1, 2013, GSIB is regulated by the PRA and
the FCA, which replaced the FSA. As of March 2013 and December 2012, GSIB was in compliance with all regulatory capital requirements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
85 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Broker-Dealer Subsidiaries
The firms U.S. regulated broker-dealer subsidiaries include GS&Co. and GSEC. GS&Co. and GSEC are registered U.S. broker-dealers and futures commission merchants, and are subject to
regulatory capital requirements, including those imposed by the SEC, the CFTC, Chicago Mercantile Exchange, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (FINRA) and the National Futures Association. Rule 15c3-1 of the SEC and
Rule 1.17 of the CFTC specify uniform minimum net capital requirements, as defined, for their registrants, and also effectively require that a significant part of the registrants assets be kept in relatively liquid form. GS&Co. and
GSEC have elected to compute their minimum capital requirements in accordance with the Alternative Net Capital Requirement as permitted by Rule 15c3-1.
As of March 2013 and December 2012, GS&Co. had regulatory net capital, as defined by Rule 15c3-1, of $14.80 billion and $14.12 billion, respectively, which exceeded the amount
required by $12.85 billion and $12.42 billion, respectively. As of March 2013 and December 2012, GSEC had regulatory net capital, as defined by Rule 15c3-1, of $2.05 billion and $2.02 billion, respectively, which
exceeded the amount required by $1.94 billion and $1.92 billion, respectively.
In addition to its alternative
minimum net capital requirements, GS&Co. is also required to hold tentative net capital in excess of $1 billion and net capital in excess of $500 million in accordance with the market and credit risk standards of Appendix E of
Rule 15c3-1. GS&Co. is also required to notify the SEC in the event that its tentative net capital is less than $5 billion. As of March 2013 and December 2012, GS&Co. had tentative net capital and net capital in
excess of both the minimum and the notification requirements.
Insurance Subsidiaries
The firm has U.S. insurance subsidiaries that are subject to state insurance regulation and oversight in the states in which they are
domiciled and in the other states in which they are licensed. In addition, certain of the firms insurance subsidiaries outside of the U.S. were regulated by the FSA through March 2013. As of April 1, 2013, such entities are
regulated by the PRA and the FCA, which replaced the FSA. Additionally, certain other non-U.S. insurance subsidiaries are regulated by the Bermuda Monetary Authority. The firms insurance subsidiaries were in compliance with all regulatory
capital requirements as of March 2013 and December 2012.
Other Non-U.S. Regulated Subsidiaries
The firms principal non-U.S. regulated subsidiaries include GSI and Goldman Sachs Japan Co., Ltd. (GSJCL). GSI, the firms regulated U.K. broker-dealer, was subject to the capital requirements
imposed by the FSA through March 2013. As of April 1, 2013, GSI is regulated by the PRA and the FCA, which replaced the FSA. GSJCL, the firms regulated Japanese broker-dealer, is subject to the capital requirements imposed by
Japans Financial Services Agency. As of March 2013 and December 2012, GSI and GSJCL were in compliance with their local capital adequacy requirements. Certain other non-U.S. subsidiaries of the firm are also subject to capital
adequacy requirements promulgated by authorities of the countries in which they operate. As of March 2013 and December 2012, these subsidiaries were in compliance with their local capital adequacy requirements.
Restrictions on Payments
The
regulatory requirements referred to above restrict Group Inc.s ability to withdraw capital from its regulated subsidiaries. As of March 2013 and December 2012, Group Inc. was required to maintain approximately $30.48 billion and
$31.01 billion, respectively, of minimum equity capital in these regulated subsidiaries. This minimum equity capital requirement includes certain restrictions imposed by federal and state laws as to the payment of dividends to Group Inc. by its
regulated subsidiaries. In addition to limitations on the payment of dividends imposed by federal and state laws, the Federal Reserve Board, the FDIC and the New York State Department of Financial Services have authority to prohibit or to limit the
payment of dividends by the banking organizations they supervise (including GS Bank USA) if, in the relevant regulators opinion, payment of a dividend would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice in the light of the financial condition
of the banking organization.
|
|
|
|
|
86 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 21. Earnings Per Common Share
Note 21.
Earnings Per Common Share
Basic earnings per common share (EPS) is calculated by dividing net earnings applicable to
common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding. Common shares outstanding includes common stock and RSUs for which no future service is required as a condition to the delivery of the underlying common stock. Diluted
EPS includes the determinants of
basic EPS and, in addition, reflects the dilutive effect of the common stock deliverable for stock warrants and options and for RSUs for which future service is required as a condition to the
delivery of the underlying common stock.
The table below presents the computations of basic and diluted EPS.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions, except per share amounts |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Numerator for basic and diluted EPS net earnings applicable to common
shareholders |
|
|
$2,188 |
|
|
|
$2,074 |
|
Denominator for basic
EPS weighted average number of common shares |
|
|
482.1 |
|
|
|
510.8 |
|
|
|
Effect of dilutive securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSUs |
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
9.2 |
|
|
|
Stock options and warrants |
|
|
21.6 |
|
|
|
9.2 |
|
Dilutive potential common shares |
|
|
27.7 |
|
|
|
18.4 |
|
Denominator for diluted EPS weighted average number of common shares and
dilutive potential common shares |
|
|
509.8 |
|
|
|
529.2 |
|
Basic EPS |
|
|
$ 4.53 |
|
|
|
$ 4.05 |
|
|
|
Diluted EPS |
|
|
4.29 |
|
|
|
3.92 |
|
In the table above, unvested share-based payment awards that have non-forfeitable rights to
dividends or dividend equivalents are treated as a separate class of securities in calculating EPS. The impact of applying this methodology
was a reduction in basic EPS of $0.01 for both the three months ended March 2013 and March 2012.
The diluted EPS computations in the table above do not include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Number of antidilutive RSUs and common shares underlying antidilutive stock options and
warrants |
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
52.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
87 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 22. Transactions with Affiliated Funds
Note 22.
Transactions with Affiliated Funds
The firm has formed numerous nonconsolidated investment funds with third-party investors.
As the firm generally acts as the investment manager for these funds, it is entitled to receive management fees and, in certain cases, advisory fees or incentive fees from these funds. Additionally, the firm invests alongside the third-party
investors in certain funds.
The tables below present fees earned from affiliated funds, fees receivable from affiliated funds
and the aggregate carrying value of the firms interests in affiliated funds.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Fees earned from affiliated funds |
|
|
$ 700 |
|
|
|
$ 594 |
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Fees receivable from funds |
|
|
$ 569 |
|
|
|
$ 704 |
|
|
|
Aggregate carrying value of interests in funds |
|
|
14,114 |
|
|
|
14,725 |
|
As of March 2013 and December 2012, the firm had outstanding loans and guarantees
to certain of its funds of $89 million and $582 million, respectively, which are collateralized by certain fund assets. These amounts relate primarily to certain real estate funds for which the firm voluntarily provided financial support
to alleviate liquidity constraints during the financial crisis and, more recently, to enable them to fund investment opportunities. As of March 2013 and December 2012, the firm had no outstanding commitments to extend credit to these
funds.
The Volcker Rule, as currently drafted, would restrict the firm from providing additional voluntary financial support
to these funds after July 2014 (subject to extension by the Federal Reserve Board). As a general matter, in the ordinary course of business, the firm does not expect to provide additional voluntary financial support to these funds;
however, in the event that such support is provided, the amount of any such support is not expected to be material. In addition, in the ordinary course of business, the firm may also engage in other activities with these funds including, among
others, securities lending, trade execution, market making, custody, and acquisition and bridge financing. See Note 18 for the firms investment commitments related to these funds.
|
|
|
|
|
88 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 23. Interest Income and Interest Expense
Note 23.
Interest Income and Interest Expense
Interest income is recorded on an accrual basis based on contractual interest rates. The
table below presents the
sources of interest income and interest expense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits with banks |
|
|
$ 48 |
|
|
|
$ 38 |
|
|
|
Securities borrowed, securities purchased under agreements to resell and federal funds sold 1 |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
Financial instruments owned, at fair value |
|
|
2,238 |
|
|
|
2,442 |
|
|
|
Other
interest 2 |
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
367 |
|
Total interest income |
|
|
2,608 |
|
|
|
2,833 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
Securities loaned and securities sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value |
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
525 |
|
|
|
Short-term borrowings 3 |
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
Long-term borrowings 3 |
|
|
910 |
|
|
|
1,009 |
|
|
|
Other
interest 4 |
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
(152 |
) |
Total interest expense |
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
1,852 |
|
Net interest income |
|
|
$ 925 |
|
|
|
$ 981 |
|
1. |
Includes rebates paid and interest income on securities borrowed. |
2. |
Includes interest income on customer debit balances and other interest-earning assets. |
3. |
Includes interest on unsecured borrowings and other secured financings. |
4. |
Includes rebates received on other interest-bearing liabilities and interest expense on customer credit balances. |
Note 24. Income Taxes
Note 24.
Income Taxes
Provision for Income Taxes
Income taxes are provided for using the asset and liability method under which deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of
assets and liabilities. The firm reports interest expense related to income tax matters in Provision for taxes and income tax penalties in Other expenses.
Deferred Income Taxes
Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary
differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities. These temporary differences result in taxable or deductible amounts in future years and are measured using the tax rates and laws that will be in effect when such
differences are expected to
reverse. Valuation allowances are established to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount that more likely than not will be realized. Tax assets and liabilities are presented as a component of
Other assets and Other liabilities and accrued expenses, respectively.
Unrecognized Tax Benefits
The firm recognizes tax positions in the financial statements only when it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained on
examination by the relevant taxing authority based on the technical merits of the position. A position that meets this standard is measured at the largest amount of benefit that will more likely than not be realized on settlement. A liability is
established for differences between positions taken in a tax return and amounts recognized in the financial statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
89 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Regulatory Tax Examinations
The firm is subject to examination by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and other taxing authorities in jurisdictions where the firm has significant business operations, such as the United Kingdom,
Japan, Hong Kong, Korea and various states, such as New York. The tax years under examination vary by jurisdiction. The firm believes that during 2013, certain audits have a reasonable possibility of being completed. The firm does not expect
completion of these audits to have a material impact on the firms financial condition but it may be material to operating results for a particular period, depending, in part, on the operating results for that period.
The table below presents the earliest tax years that remain subject to examination by major jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
Jurisdiction |
|
|
As of
March 2013 |
|
U.S. Federal 1 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
New York State and City 2 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
United Kingdom |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
Japan 3 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
Hong Kong |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
Korea |
|
|
2008 |
|
1. |
IRS examination of fiscal 2008 through calendar 2010 began in 2011. IRS examination of fiscal 2005, 2006 and 2007 began in 2008. IRS examination of
fiscal 2003 and 2004 has been completed, but the liabilities for those years are not yet final. The firm anticipates that the audits of fiscal 2005 through calendar 2010 should be completed in 2013. The audit of 2011 began in 2013 and the audit of
2012 is expected to begin in 2013. |
2. |
New York State and City examination of fiscal 2004, 2005 and 2006 began in 2008. The examination of fiscal 2007 through 2010 began in 2013.
|
3. |
Japan National Tax Agency examination of fiscal 2005 through 2009 began in 2010. The examinations have been completed, but the liabilities for 2008 and 2009
are not yet final. |
All years subsequent to the above remain open to examination by the taxing authorities. The firm believes that the
liability for unrecognized tax benefits it has established is adequate in relation to the potential for additional assessments.
In January 2013, the firm was accepted into the Compliance Assurance Process program by the IRS. This program will allow the firm to
work with the IRS to identify and resolve potential U.S. federal tax issues before the filing of tax returns. The 2013 tax year will be the first year examined under the program.
Note 25. Business Segments
Note 25.
Business Segments
The firm reports
its activities in the following four business segments: Investment Banking, Institutional Client Services, Investing & Lending and Investment Management.
Basis of Presentation
In reporting segments, certain of the firms business
lines have been aggregated where they have similar economic characteristics and are similar in each of the following areas: (i) the nature of the services they provide, (ii) their methods of distribution, (iii) the types of clients
they serve and (iv) the regulatory environments in which they operate.
The cost drivers of the firm taken as a
whole compensation, headcount and levels of business activity are broadly similar in each of the firms business segments. Compensation and benefits expenses in the firms segments reflect, among other factors, the
overall performance of the firm as well as the performance of individual businesses. Consequently, pre-tax margins in one segment of the firms business may be significantly affected by the performance of the firms other business
segments.
The firm allocates assets (including allocations of excess liquidity and cash, secured client financing and other
assets), revenues and expenses among the four reportable business segments. Due to the integrated nature of these segments, estimates and judgments are made in allocating certain assets, revenues and expenses. The allocation process is based on the
manner in which management currently views the performance of the segments. Transactions between segments are based on specific criteria or approximate third-party rates. Total operating expenses include corporate items that have not been allocated
to individual business segments.
|
|
|
|
|
90 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
The segment information presented in the table below is prepared according to the following
methodologies:
|
|
Revenues and expenses directly associated with each segment are included in determining pre-tax earnings. |
|
|
Net revenues in the firms segments include allocations of interest income and interest expense to specific securities, commodities and other
positions in relation to the cash generated by, or funding requirements of, such underlying positions. Net interest is included in segment
|
|
|
net revenues as it is consistent with the way in which management assesses segment performance. |
|
|
Overhead expenses not directly allocable to specific segments are allocated ratably based on direct segment expenses.
|
Management believes that the following information provides a reasonable representation of each
segments contribution to consolidated pre-tax earnings and total assets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Three Months Ended or as of March |
|
in millions |
|
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Investment Banking |
|
Net revenues |
|
|
$ 1,568 |
|
|
|
$ 1,154 |
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
1,064 |
|
|
|
871 |
|
|
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 504 |
|
|
|
$ 283 |
|
|
|
Segment assets |
|
|
$ 1,873 |
|
|
|
$ 1,944 |
|
Institutional Client
Services |
|
Net revenues 1 |
|
|
$ 5,139 |
|
|
|
$ 5,709 |
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
3,566 |
|
|
|
3,938 |
|
|
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 1,573 |
|
|
|
$ 1,771 |
|
|
|
Segment assets |
|
|
$848,375 |
|
|
|
$842,587 |
|
Investing &
Lending |
|
Net revenues |
|
|
$ 2,068 |
|
|
|
$ 1,911 |
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
996 |
|
|
|
958 |
|
|
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 1,072 |
|
|
|
$ 953 |
|
|
|
Segment assets |
|
|
$ 97,303 |
|
|
|
$ 94,457 |
|
Investment
Management |
|
Net revenues |
|
|
$ 1,315 |
|
|
|
$ 1,175 |
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
1,090 |
|
|
|
989 |
|
|
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 225 |
|
|
|
$ 186 |
|
|
|
Segment assets |
|
|
$ 11,672 |
|
|
|
$ 11,944 |
|
Total |
|
Net revenues |
|
|
$ 10,090 |
|
|
|
$ 9,949 |
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
6,717 |
|
|
|
6,768 |
|
|
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 3,373 |
|
|
|
$ 3,181 |
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
|
$959,223 |
|
|
|
$950,932 |
|
1. |
Includes $40 million and $29 million for the three months ended March 2013 and March 2012, respectively, of realized gains on
available-for-sale securities held in the firms reinsurance subsidiaries. |
Total operating expenses in the table above include the following expenses that have not
been allocated to the firms segments:
|
|
charitable contributions of $12 million for the three months ended March 2012; and |
|
|
real estate-related exit costs of $1 million for the three months ended March 2013. Real estate-related exit costs are included in
Depreciation and amortization in the condensed consolidated statements of earnings.
|
Operating expenses related to net provisions for litigation and regulatory proceedings,
previously not allocated to the firms segments, have now been allocated. This allocation is consistent with the manner in which management currently views the performance of the firms segments. Reclassifications have been made to
previously reported segment amounts to conform to the current presentation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
91 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
The tables below present the amounts of net interest income or interest expense included in
net revenues, and the amounts of depreciation and amortization expense included in pre-tax earnings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Investment Banking |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ (6 |
) |
|
|
Institutional Client Services |
|
|
909 |
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
Investing & Lending |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
Investment Management |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Total net interest income |
|
|
$925 |
|
|
|
$981 |
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Investment Banking |
|
|
$ 33 |
|
|
|
$ 42 |
|
|
|
Institutional Client Services |
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
Investing & Lending |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
Investment Management |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
Total depreciation and amortization 1 |
|
|
$302 |
|
|
|
$433 |
|
1. |
Includes real estate-related exit costs of $1 million for the three months ended March 2013 that have not been allocated to the firms
segments. |
Geographic Information
Due to the highly integrated nature of international financial markets, the firm manages its businesses based on the profitability of the enterprise as a whole. The methodology for allocating
profitability to geographic regions is dependent on estimates and management judgment because a significant portion of the firms activities require cross-border coordination in order to facilitate the needs of the firms clients.
Geographic results are generally allocated as follows:
|
|
Investment Banking: location of the client and investment banking team. |
|
|
Institutional Client Services: Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution, and Equities (excluding Securities Services): location of
the market-making desk; Securities Services: location of the primary market for the underlying security. |
|
|
Investing & Lending: Investing: location of the investment; Lending: location of the client. |
|
|
Investment Management: location of the sales team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
92 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
The table below presents the total net revenues and pre-tax earnings of the firm by
geographic region allocated based on the methodology referred to above, as well as the
percentage of total net revenues and pre-tax earnings (excluding Corporate) for each geographic region.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Net revenues |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americas 1 |
|
|
$ 6,005 |
|
|
|
60 |
% |
|
|
$5,787 |
|
|
|
58 |
% |
|
|
EMEA 2 |
|
|
2,421 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
2,708 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
Asia 3 |
|
|
1,664 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
1,454 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Total net revenues |
|
|
$10,090 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
$9,949 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americas 1 |
|
|
$ 1,851 |
|
|
|
55 |
% |
|
|
$1,668 |
|
|
|
52 |
% |
|
|
EMEA 2 |
|
|
907 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
1,062 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
Asia 3 |
|
|
616 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
463 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Subtotal |
|
|
3,374 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
3,193 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
Corporate 4 |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Total pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 3,373 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$3,181 |
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
Substantially all relates to the U.S. |
2. |
EMEA (Europe, Middle East and Africa). |
3. |
Asia also includes Australia and New Zealand. |
4. |
Consists of real estate-related exit costs of $1 million for the three months ended March 2013, and charitable contributions of $12 million for
the three months ended March 2012. Net provisions for litigation and regulatory proceedings, previously included in Corporate, have now been allocated to the geographic regions. Reclassifications have been made to previously reported geographic
region amounts to conform to the current presentation. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
93 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 26. Credit Concentrations
Note 26.
Credit Concentrations
Credit concentrations may arise from market making, client facilitation, investing,
underwriting, lending and collateralized transactions and may be impacted by changes in economic, industry or political factors. The firm seeks to mitigate credit risk by actively monitoring exposures and obtaining collateral from counterparties as
deemed appropriate.
While the firms activities expose it to many different industries and counterparties, the firm
routinely executes a high volume of transactions with asset managers, investment funds, commercial banks, brokers and dealers, clearing houses and exchanges, which results in significant credit concentrations.
In the ordinary course of business, the firm may also be subject to a concentration of credit risk to a particular counterparty, borrower
or issuer, including sovereign issuers, or to a particular clearing house or exchange.
The table below presents the
credit concentrations in cash instruments held by the firm. As of March 2013 and December 2012, the firm did not have credit exposure to any other counterparty that exceeded 2% of total assets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
U.S. government and federal
agency obligations 1 |
|
|
$114,268 |
|
|
|
$114,418 |
|
|
|
% of total assets |
|
|
11.9 |
% |
|
|
12.2 |
% |
|
|
Non-U.S. government and
agency obligations 1 |
|
|
$ 57,666 |
|
|
|
$ 62,252 |
|
|
|
% of total assets |
|
|
6.0 |
% |
|
|
6.6 |
% |
1. |
Substantially all included in Financial instruments owned, at fair value and Cash and securities segregated for regulatory and other
purposes. |
To reduce credit exposures, the firm may enter into agreements with counterparties that
permit the firm to offset receivables and payables with such counterparties and/or enable the firm to obtain collateral on an upfront or contingent basis. Collateral obtained by the firm related to derivative assets is principally cash and is held
by the firm or a third-party custodian. Collateral obtained by the firm related to resale agreements and securities borrowed transactions is primarily U.S. government and federal agency obligations and non-U.S. government and agency obligations. See
Note 9 for further information about collateralized agreements and financings.
The table below presents U.S.
government and federal agency obligations, and non-U.S. government and agency obligations, that collateralize resale agreements and securities borrowed transactions (including those in Cash and securities segregated for regulatory and other
purposes). Because the firms primary credit exposure on such transactions is to the counterparty to the transaction, the firm would be exposed to the collateral issuer only in the event of counterparty default.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
U.S. government and federal agency obligations |
|
|
$75,935 |
|
|
|
$73,477 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. government and agency obligations 1 |
|
|
98,908 |
|
|
|
64,724 |
|
1. |
Principally consisting of securities issued by the governments of Germany and France. |
|
|
|
|
|
94 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Note 27. Legal Proceedings
Note 27.
Legal Proceedings
The firm is involved in a number of judicial, regulatory and arbitration proceedings
(including those described below) concerning matters arising in connection with the conduct of the firms businesses. Many of these proceedings are in early stages, and many of these cases seek an indeterminate amount of damages.
Under ASC 450, an event is reasonably possible if the chance of the future event or events occurring is more than remote
but less than likely and an event is remote if the chance of the future event or events occurring is slight. Thus, references to the upper end of the range of reasonably possible loss for cases in which the firm is able
to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss mean the upper end of the range of loss for cases for which the firm believes the risk of loss is more than slight.
With respect to proceedings described below for which management has been able to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss where (i) plaintiffs have claimed an amount of money damages,
(ii) the firm is being sued by purchasers in an underwriting and is not being indemnified by a party that the firm believes will pay any judgment, or (iii) the purchasers are demanding that the firm repurchase securities, management has
estimated the upper end of the range of reasonably possible loss as being equal to (a) in the case of (i), the amount of money damages claimed, (b) in the case of (ii), the amount of securities that the firm sold in the underwritings and
(c) in the case of (iii), the price that purchasers paid for the securities less the estimated value, if any, as of March 2013 of the relevant securities, in each of cases (i), (ii) and (iii), taking into account any factors believed
to be relevant to the particular proceeding or proceedings of that type. As of the date hereof, the firm has estimated the upper end of the range of reasonably possible aggregate loss for such proceedings and for any other proceedings described
below where management has been able to estimate a range of reasonably possible aggregate loss to be approximately $3.5 billion in excess of the aggregate reserves for such proceedings.
Management is generally unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible loss for proceedings other than those included in the estimate
above, including where (i) plaintiffs have not claimed an amount of money damages, unless management can otherwise determine an appropriate
amount, (ii) the proceedings are in early stages, (iii) there is uncertainty as to the likelihood of a class being certified or the ultimate size of the class, (iv) there is
uncertainty as to the outcome of pending appeals or motions, (v) there are significant factual issues to be resolved, and/or (vi) there are novel legal issues presented. However, for these cases, management does not believe, based on
currently available information, that the outcomes of such proceedings will have a material adverse effect on the firms financial condition, though the outcomes could be material to the firms operating results for any particular period,
depending, in part, upon the operating results for such period.
IPO
Process Matters. Group Inc. and GS&Co. are among the numerous financial services companies that have been named as defendants in a variety of lawsuits alleging improprieties in the
process by which those companies participated in the underwriting of public offerings.
GS&Co. has been named as a
defendant in an action commenced on May 15, 2002 in New York Supreme Court, New York County, by an official committee of unsecured creditors on behalf of eToys, Inc., alleging that the firm intentionally underpriced eToys, Inc.s
initial public offering. The action seeks, among other things, unspecified compensatory damages resulting from the alleged lower amount of offering proceeds. On appeal from rulings on GS&Co.s motion to dismiss, the New York Court of
Appeals dismissed claims for breach of contract, professional malpractice and unjust enrichment, but permitted claims for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud to continue. On remand, the lower court granted GS&Co.s motion for summary
judgment and, on December 8, 2011, the appellate court affirmed the lower courts decision. On September 6, 2012, the New York Court of Appeals granted the creditors motion for leave to appeal.
Group Inc. and certain of its affiliates have, together with various underwriters in certain offerings, received subpoenas and requests
for documents and information from various governmental agencies and self-regulatory organizations in connection with investigations relating to the public offering process. Goldman Sachs has cooperated with these investigations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
95 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
World Online Litigation. In March 2001, a Dutch shareholders association initiated legal proceedings for an unspecified amount of damages against GSI and others in Amsterdam District Court in connection with the
initial public offering of World Online in March 2000, alleging misstatements and omissions in the offering materials and that the market was artificially inflated by improper public statements and stabilization activities. Goldman Sachs and
ABN AMRO Rothschild served as joint global coordinators of the approximately 2.9 billion offering. GSI underwrote 20,268,846 shares and GS&Co. underwrote 6,756,282 shares for a total offering price of approximately
1.16 billion.
The district court rejected the claims against GSI and ABN AMRO, but found World Online liable in an
amount to be determined. On appeal, the Netherlands Court of Appeals affirmed in part and reversed in part the decision of the district court, holding that certain of the alleged disclosure deficiencies were actionable as to GSI and ABN AMRO. On
further appeal, the Netherlands Supreme Court affirmed the rulings of the Court of Appeals, except that it found certain additional aspects of the offering materials actionable and held that individual investors could potentially hold GSI and ABN
AMRO responsible for certain public statements and press releases by World Online and its former CEO. The parties entered into a definitive settlement agreement, dated July 15, 2011, and GSI has paid the full amount of its contribution. In
the first quarter of 2012, GSI and ABN AMRO, on behalf of the underwriting syndicate, entered into a settlement agreement with respect to a claim filed by another shareholders association, and has paid the settlement amount in full. Other
shareholders have made demands for compensation of alleged damages, and GSI and other syndicate members are discussing the possibility of settlement with certain of these shareholders.
Adelphia Communications Fraudulent
Conveyance Litigation. GS&Co. is named as a defendant in two proceedings commenced in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, one on July 6, 2003 by
a creditors committee, and the second on or about July 31, 2003 by an equity committee of Adelphia Communications, Inc. Those proceedings were consolidated in a single amended complaint filed by the Adelphia Recovery Trust on
October 31, 2007. The complaint seeks, among other things, to recover, as fraudulent conveyances, approximately $62.9 million allegedly paid to GS&Co. by Adelphia Communications, Inc. and its affiliates in respect of margin calls
made in the ordinary course of business on accounts owned by members of the family that formerly controlled Adelphia Communications, Inc. The district court assumed jurisdiction over the action and, on April 8, 2011, granted
GS&Co.s motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff appealed on May 6, 2011.
Specialist Matters. Spear, Leeds & Kellogg Specialists LLC, Spear, Leeds &
Kellogg, L.P. and Group Inc. are among numerous defendants named in purported class actions brought beginning in October 2003 on behalf of investors in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York alleging violations of the
federal securities laws and state common law in connection with NYSE floor specialist activities. On October 24, 2012, the parties entered into a definitive settlement agreement, subject to court approval. The firm has reserved the full
amount of its proposed contribution to the settlement.
|
|
|
|
|
96 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Fannie Mae Litigation. GS&Co. was added as a defendant in an amended complaint filed on August 14, 2006 in a purported class action pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The complaint
asserts violations of the federal securities laws generally arising from allegations concerning Fannie Maes accounting practices in connection with certain Fannie Mae-sponsored REMIC transactions that were allegedly arranged by GS&Co. The
complaint does not specify a dollar amount of damages. The other defendants include Fannie Mae, certain of its past and present officers and directors, and accountants. By a decision dated May 8, 2007, the district court granted
GS&Co.s motion to dismiss the claim against it. The time for an appeal will not begin to run until disposition of the claims against other defendants. A motion to stay the action filed by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), which
took control of the foregoing action following Fannie Maes conservatorship, was denied on November 14, 2011.
Compensation-Related Litigation. On January 17, 2008, Group Inc., its Board, executive officers and members of its management committee were named as defendants in a purported shareholder derivative action in the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of New York predicting that the firms 2008 Proxy Statement would violate the federal securities laws by undervaluing certain stock option awards and alleging that senior management received excessive compensation
for 2007. The complaint seeks, among other things, an equitable accounting for the allegedly excessive compensation. Plaintiffs motion for a preliminary injunction to prevent the 2008 Proxy Statement from using options valuations that the
plaintiff alleges are incorrect and to require the amendment of SEC Forms 4 filed by certain of the executive officers named in the complaint to reflect the stock option valuations alleged by the plaintiff was denied, and plaintiffs
appeal from this denial was dismissed. On February 13, 2009, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint, which added purported direct (i.e., non-derivative) claims based on substantially the same theory. The plaintiff filed a further amended
complaint on March 24, 2010, and the defendants motion to dismiss this further amended complaint was granted on the ground that dismissal of the shareholder plaintiffs prior action relating to the firms 2007 Proxy
Statement based on the failure to make a demand to
the Board precluded relitigation of demand futility. On December 19, 2011, the appellate court vacated the order of dismissal, holding only that preclusion principles did not mandate
dismissal and remanding for consideration of the alternative grounds for dismissal. On April 18, 2012, plaintiff disclosed that he no longer is a Group Inc. shareholder and thus lacks standing to continue to prosecute the action. On
January 7, 2013, the district court dismissed the claim due to the plaintiffs lack of standing and the lack of any intervening shareholder.
On March 24, 2009, the same plaintiff filed an action in New York Supreme Court, New York County, against Group Inc., its directors and certain senior executives alleging violation of Delaware
statutory and common law in connection with substantively similar allegations regarding stock option awards. On January 4, 2013, another purported shareholder moved to intervene as plaintiff, which defendants have opposed. On
January 15, 2013, the court dismissed the action only as to the original plaintiff with prejudice due to his lack of standing.
Mortgage-Related Matters. On April 16, 2010, the SEC brought an action (SEC
Action) under the U.S. federal securities laws in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against GS&Co. and Fabrice Tourre, a former employee, in connection with a CDO offering made in early 2007 (ABACUS 2007-AC1
transaction), alleging that the defendants made materially false and misleading statements to investors and seeking, among other things, unspecified monetary penalties. Investigations of GS&Co. by FINRA and of GSI by the FSA were subsequently
initiated and resolved, and Group Inc. and certain of its affiliates have received subpoenas and requests for information from other regulators, regarding CDO offerings, including the ABACUS 2007-AC1 transaction, and related matters. On
July 14, 2010, GS&Co. entered into a consent agreement with the SEC, settling all claims made against GS&Co. in the SEC Action, pursuant to which GS&Co. paid $550 million of disgorgement and civil penalties, and which was
approved by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on July 20, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
97 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
On January 6, 2011, ACA Financial Guaranty Corp. filed an action against
GS&Co. in respect of the ABACUS 2007-AC1 transaction in New York Supreme Court, New York County. The complaint includes allegations of fraudulent inducement, fraudulent concealment and unjust enrichment and seeks at least $30 million in
compensatory damages, at least $90 million in punitive damages and unspecified disgorgement. On April 25, 2011, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint and, on June 3, 2011, GS&Co. moved to dismiss the amended
complaint. By a decision dated April 23, 2012, the court granted the motion to dismiss as to the unjust enrichment claim and denied the motion as to the other claims, and on May 29, 2012, GS&Co. appealed the decision to the
extent that its motion was denied and filed counterclaims for breach of contract and fraudulent inducement, and third-party claims against ACA Management, LLC for breach of contract, unjust enrichment and indemnification. ACA Financial Guaranty
Corp. and ACA Management, LLC moved to dismiss GS&Co.s counterclaims and third-party claims on August 31, 2012. On January 31, 2013, ACA filed an amended complaint naming a third party to the ABACUS 2007-AC1 transaction
as an additional defendant.
Beginning April 26, 2010, a number of purported securities law class actions have been
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York challenging the adequacy of Group Inc.s public disclosure of, among other things, the firms activities in the CDO market and the SEC investigation that led to the SEC
Action. The purported class action complaints, which name as defendants Group Inc. and certain officers and employees of Group Inc. and its affiliates, have been consolidated, generally allege violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange
Act and seek unspecified damages. Plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint on July 25, 2011. On October 6, 2011, the defendants moved to dismiss, and by a decision dated June 21, 2012, the district court
dismissed the claims based on Group Inc.s not disclosing that it had received a Wells notice from the staff of the SEC related to the ABACUS 2007-AC1 transaction, but permitted the plaintiffs other claims to proceed.
On February 1, 2013, a putative shareholder derivative action was filed in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Group Inc. and certain of its officers and directors in connection with mortgage-related activities during 2006 and 2007, including three CDO offerings. The derivative complaint,
which is based on similar allegations to those at issue in the consolidated class action discussed above and purported shareholder derivative actions that were previously dismissed, includes allegations of breach of fiduciary duty, challenges the
accuracy and adequacy of Group Inc.s disclosure and seeks, among other things, declaratory relief, unspecified compensatory and punitive damages and restitution from the individual defendants and certain corporate governance reforms.
In June 2012, the Board received a demand from a shareholder that the Board investigate and take action relating to the
firms mortgage-related activities and to stock sales by certain directors and executives of the firm. On February 15, 2013, this shareholder filed a putative shareholder derivative action in New York Supreme Court, New York County,
against Group Inc. and certain current or former directors and employees, based on these activities and stock sales. The derivative complaint includes allegations of breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, abuse of control, gross mismanagement
and corporate waste, and seeks, among other things, unspecified monetary damages, disgorgement of profits and certain corporate governance and disclosure reforms.
|
|
|
|
|
98 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Since April 23, 2010, the Board has received other letters from shareholders
demanding that the Board take action to address alleged misconduct by GS&Co., the Board and certain officers and employees of Group Inc. and its affiliates. These demands, which the Board has rejected, generally alleged misconduct in connection
with the firms securitization practices, including the ABACUS 2007-AC1 transaction, the alleged failure by Group Inc. to adequately disclose the SEC investigation that led to the SEC Action, and Group Inc.s 2009
compensation practices.
In addition, the Board has received books and records demands from several shareholders for
materials relating to, among other subjects, the firms mortgage servicing and foreclosure activities, participation in federal programs providing assistance to financial institutions and homeowners, loan sales to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
mortgage-related activities and conflicts management.
GS&Co., Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company (GSMC) and GS Mortgage
Securities Corp. (GSMSC) and three current or former Goldman Sachs employees are defendants in a putative class action commenced on December 11, 2008 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York brought on behalf of
purchasers of various mortgage pass-through certificates and asset-backed certificates issued by various securitization trusts established by the firm and underwritten by GS&Co. in 2007. The complaint generally alleges that the registration
statement and prospectus supplements for the certificates violated the federal securities laws, and seeks unspecified compensatory damages and rescission or rescissionary damages. Following dismissals of certain of the plaintiffs claims under
the initial and three amended complaints, on May 5, 2011, the court granted plaintiffs motion for entry of a final judgment dismissing all its claims, thereby allowing plaintiff to appeal. The plaintiff appealed from the dismissal
with respect to all 17 of the offerings included in its original complaint. By a decision dated September 6, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the district courts dismissal of plaintiffs claims
with respect to 10 of the offerings included
in plaintiffs original complaint but vacated the dismissal and remanded the case to the district court with instructions to reinstate the plaintiffs claims with respect to the other
seven offerings. On March 18, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the defendants petition for certiorari from the Second Circuit decision. On October 31, 2012, the plaintiff served a fourth amended complaint relating to
those seven offerings, plus seven additional offerings. On June 3, 2010, another investor (who had unsuccessfully sought to intervene in the action) filed a separate putative class action asserting substantively similar allegations
relating to one of the offerings included in the initial plaintiffs complaint. The district court twice granted defendants motions to dismiss this separate action, both times with leave to replead. On July 9, 2012, that
separate plaintiff filed a second amended complaint, and the defendants moved to dismiss on September 21, 2012. On December 26, 2012, that separate plaintiff filed a motion to amend the second amended complaint to add claims with
respect to two additional offerings included in the initial plaintiffs complaint, which defendants have opposed. The securitization trusts issued, and GS&Co. underwrote, approximately $11 billion principal amount of certificates to
all purchasers in the fourteen offerings at issue in the complaints.
On September 30, 2010, a putative class
action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against GS&Co., Group Inc. and two former GS&Co. employees on behalf of investors in $821 million of notes issued in 2006 and 2007 by two synthetic CDOs
(Hudson Mezzanine 2006-1 and 2006-2). The complaint, which was amended on February 4, 2011, asserts federal securities law and common law claims, and seeks unspecified compensatory, punitive and other damages. The defendants moved to
dismiss on April 5, 2011, and the motion was granted as to plaintiffs claim of market manipulation and denied as to the remainder of plaintiffs claims by a decision dated March 21, 2012. On May 21, 2012, the
defendants counterclaimed for breach of contract and fraud. On December 17, 2012, the plaintiff moved for class certification.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
99 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
GS&Co., GSMC and GSMSC are among the defendants in a lawsuit filed in August 2011
by CIFG Assurance of North America, Inc. (CIFG) in New York Supreme Court, New York County. The complaint alleges that CIFG was fraudulently induced to provide credit enhancement for a 2007 securitization sponsored by GSMC, and seeks, among other
things, the repurchase of $24.7 million in aggregate principal amount of mortgages that CIFG had previously stated to be non-conforming, an accounting for any proceeds associated with mortgages discharged from the securitization and unspecified
compensatory damages. On October 17, 2011, the Goldman Sachs defendants moved to dismiss. By a decision dated May 1, 2012, the court dismissed the fraud and accounting claims but denied the motion as to certain breach of contract
claims that were also alleged. On June 6, 2012, the Goldman Sachs defendants filed counterclaims for breach of contract. In addition, the parties have each appealed the courts May 1, 2012 decision to the extent adverse. By
an order dated May 7, 2013, the appellate court reversed the dismissal of the fraud claim but otherwise affirmed the trial courts May 1, 2012 decision.
In addition, on January 15, 2013, CIFG filed a complaint against GS&Co. in New York Supreme Court, New York County, alleging
that GS&Co. falsely represented that a third party would independently select the collateral for a 2006 CDO. CIFG seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, including claims for approximately $10 million in connection with its
purchase of notes, which CIFG has agreed to refer to arbitration with FINRA, and claims for over $30 million for payments to discharge alleged liabilities arising from its issuance of a financial guaranty insurance policy guaranteeing payment
on a credit default swap referencing the CDO, which CIFG has agreed to stay until the arbitration of the notes-related claims has concluded.
Various alleged purchasers of, and counterparties involved in transactions relating to, mortgage pass-through certificates, CDOs and other mortgage-related products (including certain Allstate affiliates,
Aozora Bank, Ltd., Bank Hapoalim B.M., Basis Yield Alpha Fund (Master), Bayerische Landesbank, the Charles Schwab Corporation, Deutsche Zentral-Genossenschaftbank, the FDIC (as receiver for Guaranty Bank), the Federal Home Loan Banks of Boston,
Chicago, Indianapolis and Seattle, the FHFA (as conservator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac), HSH Nordbank, IKB Deutsche Industriebank AG, Landesbank Baden-Württemberg, Joel I. Sher (Chapter 11 Trustee) on
behalf of TMST, Inc. (TMST), f/k/a Thornburg Mortgage, Inc. and certain TMST affiliates, John Hancock and related parties, Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company, MoneyGram Payment Systems,
Inc., National Australia Bank, the National Credit Union Administration, Phoenix Light SF Limited and related parties, Prudential Insurance Company of America and related parties, Royal Park Investments SA/NV, Sealink Funding Limited, The Union
Central Life Insurance Company, Ameritas Life Insurance Corp., Acacia Life Insurance Company, Watertown Savings Bank, and The Western and Southern Life Insurance Co.) have filed complaints or summonses with notice in state and federal court or
initiated arbitration proceedings against firm affiliates, generally alleging that the offering documents for the securities that they purchased contained untrue statements of material fact and material omissions and generally seeking rescission
and/or damages. Certain of these complaints allege fraud and seek punitive damages. Certain of these complaints also name other firms as defendants.
A number of other entities (including American International Group, Inc. (AIG), Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, John Hancock and related parties, M&T Bank, Norges Bank Investment Management,
Selective Insurance Company and U.S. Bank) have threatened to assert claims of various types against the firm in connection with various mortgage-related transactions, and the firm has entered into agreements with a number of these entities to toll
the relevant statute of limitations.
As of the date hereof, the aggregate notional amount of mortgage-related securities
sold to plaintiffs in active cases brought against the firm where those plaintiffs are seeking rescission of such securities was approximately $19.7 billion (which does not reflect adjustment for any subsequent paydowns or distributions or any
residual value of such securities, statutory interest or any other adjustments that may be claimed). This amount does not include the threatened claims noted above, potential claims by these or other purchasers in the same or other mortgage-related
offerings that have not actually been brought against the firm, or claims that have been dismissed.
Group Inc. and GS
Bank USA have entered into a Consent Order and a settlement with the Federal Reserve Board relating to the servicing of residential mortgage loans and foreclosure practices. See Note 18 for information about this settlement.
|
|
|
|
|
100 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Group Inc., GS&Co. and GSMC are among the numerous financial services firms named as
defendants in a qui tam action originally filed by a relator on April 7, 2010 purportedly on behalf of the City of Chicago and State of Illinois in Cook County, Illinois Circuit Court asserting claims under the Illinois
Whistleblower Reward and Protection Act and Chicago False Claims Act, based on allegations that defendants had falsely certified compliance with various Illinois laws, which were purportedly violated in connection with mortgage origination and
servicing activities. The complaint, which was originally filed under seal, seeks treble damages and civil penalties. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on December 28, 2011, naming GS&Co. and GSMC, among others, as additional
defendants and a second amended complaint on February 8, 2012. On March 12, 2012, the action was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, and on September 17, 2012 the district court
granted the plaintiffs motion to remand the action to state court. On November 16, 2012, the defendants moved to dismiss, and discovery has been stayed pending a ruling on the motion to dismiss.
Group Inc., Litton and Ocwen are defendants in a putative class action filed on January 23, 2013 in the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of New York generally challenging the procurement manner and scope of force-placed hazard insurance arranged by Litton when homeowners failed to arrange for insurance as required by their mortgages. The complaint
asserts claims for breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, misappropriation, conversion, unjust enrichment and violation of Florida unfair practices law, and seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages as well as declaratory and
injunctive relief.
On February 25, 2013, Group Inc. was added as a defendant through an amended
complaint in a putative class action, originally filed on April 6, 2012 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, against Litton, Ocwen and Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC (Ocwen Servicing). The amended complaint
generally alleges that Litton and Ocwen Servicing systematically breached agreements and violated various federal and state consumer protection laws by failing to modify the mortgage loans of homeowners participating in the federal Home Affordable
Modification Program, and names Group Inc. based on its prior ownership of Litton. The plaintiffs seek unspecified compensatory, statutory and punitive damages as well as declaratory and injunctive relief. On April 29, 2013, Group Inc.
moved to dismiss.
The firm has also received, and continues to receive, requests for information and/or subpoenas from
federal, state and local regulators and law enforcement authorities, relating to the mortgage-related securitization process, subprime mortgages, CDOs, synthetic mortgage-related products, particular transactions involving these products, and
servicing and foreclosure activities, and is cooperating with these regulators and other authorities, including in some cases agreeing to the tolling of the relevant statute of limitations. See also Financial Crisis-Related Matters
below.
The firm expects to be the subject of additional putative shareholder derivative actions, purported class actions,
rescission and put back claims and other litigation, additional investor and shareholder demands, and additional regulatory and other investigations and actions with respect to mortgage-related offerings, loan sales, CDOs, and servicing
and foreclosure activities. See Note 18 for further information regarding mortgage-related contingencies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
101 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Private Equity-Sponsored Acquisitions
Litigation. Group Inc. and GS Capital Partners are among numerous private equity firms and investment banks named as defendants in a federal antitrust action filed in the U.S.
District Court for the District of Massachusetts in December 2007. As amended, the complaint generally alleges that the defendants have colluded to limit competition in bidding for private equity-sponsored acquisitions of public companies,
thereby resulting in lower prevailing bids and, by extension, less consideration for shareholders of those companies in violation of Section 1 of the U.S. Sherman Antitrust Act and common law. The complaint seeks, among other things, treble
damages in an unspecified amount. Defendants moved to dismiss on August 27, 2008. The district court dismissed claims relating to certain transactions that were the subject of releases as part of the settlement of shareholder actions
challenging such transactions, and by an order dated December 15, 2008 otherwise denied the motion to dismiss. On April 26, 2010, the plaintiffs moved for leave to proceed with a second phase of discovery encompassing additional
transactions. On August 18, 2010, the court permitted discovery on eight additional transactions, and the plaintiffs filed a fourth amended complaint on October 7, 2010. On January 13, 2011, the court granted
defendants motion to dismiss certain aspects of the fourth amended complaint. On March 1, 2011, the court granted the motion filed by certain defendants, including Group Inc., to dismiss another claim of the fourth amended complaint
on the grounds that the transaction was the subject of a release as part of the settlement of a shareholder action challenging the transaction. On June 14, 2012, the plaintiffs filed a fifth amended complaint encompassing additional
transactions. On July 18, 2012, the court granted defendants motion to dismiss certain newly asserted claims on the grounds that certain transactions are subject to releases as part of settlements of shareholder actions challenging
those transactions, and denied defendants motion to dismiss certain additional claims as time-barred. On July 23, 2012, the defendants filed motions for summary judgment. On March 13, 2013, the court granted
defendants motions in part and denied them in part, rejecting plaintiffs theory of overarching collusion, but permitting plaintiffs claims to proceed based on narrower theories. On April 16, 2013, the defendants filed
renewed motions for summary judgment as to the certain claims and, on April 22, 2013, certain defendants, including Group Inc., filed a motion for reconsideration of the courts summary judgment denial as to an additional claim.
IndyMac Pass-Through Certificates
Litigation. GS&Co. is among numerous underwriters named as defendants in a putative securities class action filed on May 14, 2009 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York. As to the underwriters, plaintiffs allege that the offering documents in connection with various securitizations of mortgage-related assets violated the disclosure requirements of the federal securities laws. The defendants
include IndyMac-related entities formed in connection with the securitizations, the underwriters of the offerings, certain ratings agencies which evaluated the credit quality of the securities, and certain former officers and directors of IndyMac
affiliates. On November 2, 2009, the underwriters moved to dismiss the complaint. The motion was granted in part on February 17, 2010 to the extent of dismissing claims based on offerings in which no plaintiff purchased, and the
court reserved judgment as to the other aspects of the motion. By a decision dated June 21, 2010, the district court formally dismissed all claims relating to offerings in which no named plaintiff purchased certificates (including all
offerings underwritten by GS&Co.), and both granted and denied the defendants motions to dismiss in various other respects. On November 16, 2012, the district court denied the plaintiffs motion seeking reinstatement of
claims relating to 42 offerings previously dismissed for lack of standing (one of which was co-underwritten by GS&Co.) without prejudice to renewal depending on the outcome of the now-denied petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme
Court with respect to the Second Circuits decision described under Mortgage-Related Matters above. By an order dated March 26, 2013, the district court stayed the action for 60 days and directed the parties to
mediate. On May 17, 2010, four additional investors filed a motion seeking to intervene in order to assert claims based on additional offerings (including two underwritten by GS&Co.). The defendants opposed the motion on the ground
that the putative intervenors claims were time-barred and, on June 21, 2011, the court denied the motion to intervene with respect to, among others, the claims based on the offerings underwritten by GS&Co. Certain of the putative
intervenors (including those seeking to assert claims based on two offerings underwritten by GS&Co.) have appealed. GS&Co. underwrote approximately $751 million principal amount of securities to all purchasers in the offerings at issue
in the May 2010 motion to intervene.
On July 11, 2008, IndyMac Bank was placed under an FDIC receivership,
and on July 31, 2008, IndyMac Bancorp, Inc. filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Los Angeles, California.
|
|
|
|
|
102 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
RALI Pass-Through Certificates
Litigation. GS&Co. is among numerous underwriters named as defendants in a putative securities class action initially filed in September 2008 in New York Supreme Court, and
subsequently removed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. As to the underwriters, plaintiffs allege that the offering documents in connection with various offerings of mortgage-backed pass-through certificates violated
the disclosure requirements of the federal securities laws. In addition to the underwriters, the defendants include Residential Capital, LLC (ResCap), Residential Accredit Loans, Inc. (RALI), Residential Funding Corporation (RFC), Residential
Funding Securities Corporation (RFSC), and certain of their officers and directors. On March 31, 2010, the defendants motion to dismiss was granted in part and denied in part by the district court, resulting in dismissal on the basis
of standing of all claims relating to offerings in which no plaintiff purchased securities. In June and July 2010, the lead plaintiff and five additional investors moved to intervene in order to assert claims based on additional offerings
(including two underwritten by GS&Co.). On April 28, 2011, the court granted defendants motion to dismiss as to certain of these claims (including those relating to one offering underwritten by GS&Co. based on a release in an
unrelated settlement), but otherwise permitted the intervenor case to proceed. By an order dated January 3, 2013, the district court denied the defendants motions to dismiss certain of the intervenors remaining claims as time
barred. Class certification of the claims based on the pre-intervention offerings was initially denied by the district court, and that denial was upheld on appeal; however, following remand, on October 15, 2012, the district court
certified a class in connection with the pre-intervention offerings. By an order dated January 3, 2013, the district court granted plaintiffs application to modify the class definition to include only initial purchasers who bought
the securities directly from the underwriters or their agents no later than ten trading days after the offering date (rather than just on the offering date). On March 26, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied
the defendants petition seeking leave to appeal the district courts class certification orders. On April 30, 2013, the district court granted, in part, plaintiffs request to reinstate a number of the claims,
including claims related to seven offerings underwritten by GS&Co., that were previously dismissed on March 31, 2010.
GS&Co. underwrote approximately $5.51 billion principal amount of securities to
all purchasers in the offerings for which claims have not been dismissed or which have been reinstated. On May 14, 2012, ResCap, RALI and RFC filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New
York and the action has been stayed with respect to them, RFSC and certain of their officers and directors.
MF Global Securities Litigation. GS&Co. is among numerous underwriters named as defendants in class action complaints filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York commencing November 18, 2011. These complaints generally allege that the offering materials for two offerings of MF Global Holdings Ltd. convertible notes (aggregating approximately
$575 million in principal amount) in February 2011 and July 2011, among other things, failed to describe adequately the nature, scope and risks of MF Globals exposure to European sovereign debt, in violation of the disclosure
requirements of the federal securities laws. On August 20, 2012, the plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint and on October 19, 2012, the defendants filed motions to dismiss the amended complaint. Numerous parties,
including GS&Co., have commenced a mediation relating to various MF Global-related proceedings. GS&Co. underwrote an aggregate principal amount of approximately $214 million of the notes. On October 31, 2011, MF Global
Holdings Ltd. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Manhattan, New York.
GS&Co. has also
received inquiries from various governmental and regulatory bodies and self-regulatory organizations concerning certain transactions with MF Global prior to its bankruptcy filing. Goldman Sachs is cooperating with all such inquiries.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
103 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Employment-Related Matters. On September 15, 2010, a putative class action was filed in the U.S. District for the Southern District of New York by three former female employees alleging that Group Inc. and GS&Co. have
systematically discriminated against female employees in respect of compensation, promotion, assignments, mentoring and performance evaluations. The complaint alleges a class consisting of all female employees employed at specified levels by Group
Inc. and GS&Co. since July 2002, and asserts claims under federal and New York City discrimination laws. The complaint seeks class action status, injunctive relief and unspecified amounts of compensatory, punitive and other damages. Group
Inc. and GS&Co. filed a motion to stay the claims of one of the named plaintiffs and to compel individual arbitration with that individual, based on an arbitration provision contained in an employment agreement between Group Inc. and the
individual. On April 28, 2011, the magistrate judge to whom the district judge assigned the motion denied the motion, and the district court affirmed the magistrate judges decision on November 15, 2011. On
March 21, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed the district courts decision, holding that arbitration should be compelled. On June 13, 2011, Group Inc. and GS&Co. moved to strike the class
allegations of one of the three named plaintiffs based on her failure to exhaust administrative remedies. On September 29, 2011, the magistrate judge recommended denial of the motion to strike and, on January 10, 2012, the
district court denied the motion to strike. On July 22, 2011, Group Inc. and GS&Co. moved to strike all of the plaintiffs class allegations, and for partial summary judgment as to plaintiffs disparate impact claims. By a
decision dated January 19, 2012, the magistrate judge recommended that defendants motion be denied as premature. The defendants filed objections to that recommendation with the district judge and on July 17, 2012, the
district court issued a decision granting in part Group Inc.s and GS&Co.s motion to strike plaintiffs class allegations on the ground that plaintiffs lacked standing to pursue certain equitable remedies and denying in part
Group Inc.s and GS&Co.s motion to strike plaintiffs class allegations in their entirety as premature.
Investment Management
Services. Group Inc. and certain of its affiliates are parties to various civil litigation and arbitration proceedings and other disputes with clients relating to losses allegedly
sustained as a result of the firms investment management services. These claims generally seek, among other things, restitution or other compensatory damages and, in some cases, punitive damages. In addition, Group Inc. and its affiliates are
subject from time to time to investigations and reviews by various governmental and regulatory bodies and self-regulatory organizations in connection with the firms investment management services. Goldman Sachs is cooperating with all such
investigations and reviews.
Goldman Sachs Asset Management International (GSAMI) is the defendant in an action filed on
July 9, 2012 with the High Court of Justice in London by certain entities representing Vervoer, a Dutch pension fund, alleging that GSAMI was negligent in performing its duties as investment manager in connection with the allocation of the
plaintiffs funds among asset managers in accordance with asset allocations provided by plaintiffs and that GSAMI breached its contractual and common law duties to the plaintiffs. Specifically, plaintiffs allege that GSAMI caused their assets
to be invested in unsuitable products for an extended period, thereby causing in excess of 67 million in losses, and caused them to be under-exposed for a period of time to certain other investments that performed well, thereby resulting
in foregone potential gains. The plaintiffs are seeking unspecified monetary damages. On November 2, 2012, GSAMI served its defense to the allegations and on December 21, 2012, the plaintiffs served their reply to
the defense.
|
|
|
|
|
104 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Financial Advisory Services. Group Inc. and certain of its affiliates are parties to various civil litigation and arbitration proceedings and other disputes with clients and third parties relating to the firms financial
advisory activities. These claims generally seek, among other things, compensatory damages and, in some cases, punitive damages, and in certain cases allege that the firm did not appropriately disclose or deal with conflicts of interest. In
addition, Group Inc. and its affiliates are subject from time to time to investigations and reviews by various governmental and regulatory bodies and self-regulatory organizations in connection with conflicts of interest. Goldman Sachs is
cooperating with all such investigations and reviews.
Group Inc., GS&Co. and The Goldman, Sachs & Co. L.L.C.
are defendants in an action brought by the founders and former majority shareholders of Dragon Systems, Inc. (Dragon) on November 18, 2008, alleging that the plaintiffs incurred losses due to GS&Co.s financial advisory services
provided in connection with the plaintiffs exchange of their purported $300 million interest in Dragon for stock of Lernout & Hauspie Speech Products, N.V. (L&H) in 2000. L&H filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in the U.S.
Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Delaware on November 29, 2000. The action is pending in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The complaint sought unspecified compensatory, punitive and other damages, and
alleged breach of fiduciary duty, violation of Massachusetts unfair trade practices laws, negligence, negligent and intentional misrepresentation, gross negligence, willful misconduct and bad faith. Former minority shareholders of Dragon brought a
similar action against GS&Co. with respect to their purported $49 million interest in Dragon, and this action was consolidated with the action described above. By an order dated October 31, 2012, the court granted summary judgment
with respect to certain counterclaims and an indemnification claim brought by the Goldman Sachs defendants against one of the shareholders, but denied summary judgment with respect to all other claims. On January 23, 2013, a jury found in
favor of the Goldman Sachs defendants on the plaintiffs claims for negligence, negligent and intentional misrepresentation, gross negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty. The plaintiffs claims for violation of Massachusetts unfair trade
practices laws will be addressed by the district court and have not yet been decided.
Sales, Trading and Clearance
Practices. Group Inc. and certain of its affiliates are subject to a number of investigations and reviews, certain of which are industry-wide, by various governmental and regulatory
bodies and self-regulatory organizations relating to the sales, trading and clearance of corporate and government securities and other financial products, including compliance with the SECs short sale rule, algorithmic and quantitative
trading, futures trading, transaction reporting, securities lending practices, trading and clearance of credit derivative instruments, commodities trading, private placement practices and compliance with the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
The European Commission announced in April 2011 that it was initiating proceedings to investigate further numerous
financial services companies, including Group Inc., in connection with the supply of data related to credit default swaps and in connection with profit sharing and fee arrangements for clearing of credit default swaps, including potential
anti-competitive practices. The proceedings in connection with the supply of data related to credit default swaps are ongoing. Group Inc.s current understanding is that the proceedings related to profit sharing and fee arrangements for
clearing of credit default swaps have been suspended indefinitely. The firm has received civil investigative demands from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) for information on similar matters. Goldman Sachs is cooperating with the investigations
and reviews.
GS&Co. is among the numerous defendants in a putative antitrust class action filed on
May 3, 2013 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The complaint generally alleges that defendants violated federal antitrust laws by conspiring to inflate bid-ask spreads for credit derivatives. The complaint
seeks declaratory and injunctive relief as well as treble damages in an unspecified amount.
Insider Trading Investigations. From time to time, the firm and its employees are the subject of or otherwise involved in regulatory investigations
relating to insider trading, the potential misuse of material nonpublic information and the effectiveness of the firms insider trading controls and information barriers. It is the firms practice to cooperate fully with any
such investigations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
105 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Research Investigations. From time to time, the firm is the subject of or otherwise involved in regulatory investigations relating to research practices, including research independence and interactions between research analysts
and other firm personnel, including investment banking personnel. It is the firms practice to cooperate fully with any such investigations.
EU Price-Fixing Matter. On July 5, 2011, the European Commission issued a
Statement of Objections to Group Inc. raising allegations of an industry-wide conspiracy to fix prices for power cables, including by an Italian cable company in which certain Goldman Sachs-affiliated investment funds held ownership interests from
2005 to 2009. The Statement of Objections proposes to hold Group Inc. jointly and severally liable for some or all of any fine levied against the cable company under the concept of parental liability under EU competition law.
Municipal Securities Matters. Group Inc. and certain of its affiliates are subject to a number of investigations and reviews by various governmental and regulatory bodies and self-regulatory organizations relating to
transactions involving municipal securities, including wall-cross procedures and conflict of interest disclosure with respect to state and municipal clients, the trading and structuring of municipal derivative instruments in connection
with municipal offerings, political contribution rules, underwriting of Build America Bonds, municipal advisory services and the possible impact of credit default swap transactions on municipal issuers. Goldman Sachs is cooperating with the
investigations and reviews.
Group Inc., Goldman Sachs Mitsui Marine Derivative Products, L.P. (GSMMDP) and GS Bank USA
are among numerous financial services firms that have been named as defendants in numerous substantially identical individual antitrust actions filed beginning on November 12, 2009 that have been coordinated with related antitrust class
action litigation and individual actions, in which no Goldman Sachs affiliate is named, for pre-trial proceedings in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The plaintiffs include individual California municipal entities and
three New York non-profit entities. All of these complaints against Group Inc., GSMMDP and GS Bank USA generally allege that the Goldman Sachs defendants participated in a conspiracy to arrange bids, fix prices and
divide up the market for derivatives used by municipalities in refinancing and hedging transactions from 1992 to 2008. The complaints assert claims under the federal antitrust laws and either
Californias Cartwright Act or New Yorks Donnelly Act, and seek, among other things, treble damages under the antitrust laws in an unspecified amount and injunctive relief. On April 26, 2010, the Goldman Sachs defendants
motion to dismiss complaints filed by several individual California municipal plaintiffs was denied. On August 19, 2011, Group Inc., GSMMDP and GS Bank USA were voluntarily dismissed without prejudice from all actions except one brought by
a California municipal entity.
On August 21, 2008, GS&Co. entered into a settlement in principle with the
Office of the Attorney General of the State of New York and the Illinois Securities Department (on behalf of the North American Securities Administrators Association) regarding auction rate securities. Under the agreement, Goldman Sachs agreed,
among other things, (i) to offer to repurchase at par the outstanding auction rate securities that its private wealth management clients purchased through the firm prior to February 11, 2008, with the exception of those auction rate
securities where auctions were clearing, (ii) to continue to work with issuers and other interested parties, including regulatory and governmental entities, to expeditiously provide liquidity solutions for institutional investors, and
(iii) to pay a $22.5 million fine. The settlement is subject to approval by the various states. GS&Co. has entered into consent orders with New York, Illinois and most other states and is in the process of doing so with the
remaining states.
On September 4, 2008, Group Inc. was named as a defendant, together with numerous other
financial services firms, in two complaints filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York alleging that the defendants engaged in a conspiracy to manipulate the auction securities market in violation of federal antitrust
laws. The actions were filed, respectively, on behalf of putative classes of issuers of and investors in auction rate securities and seek, among other things, treble damages in an unspecified amount. Defendants motion to dismiss was granted on
January 26, 2010 and, by an order dated March 5, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upheld the dismissal. Plaintiffs have agreed not to seek further review of that decision.
|
|
|
|
|
106 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
(Unaudited)
Beginning in February 2012, GS&Co. was named as respondent in four FINRA
arbitrations filed, respectively, by the cities of Houston, Texas and Reno, Nevada, a California school district and a North Carolina municipal power authority, based on GS&Co.s role as underwriter and broker-dealer of the claimants
issuances of an aggregate of over $1.8 billion of auction rate securities from 2003 through 2007 (in the Houston arbitration, two other financial services firms were named as respondents, and in the North Carolina arbitration, one other
financial services firm was named). Each claimant alleges that GS&Co. failed to disclose that it had a practice of placing cover bids on auctions, and failed to offer the claimant the option of a formulaic maximum rate (rather than a fixed
maximum rate), and that, as a result, the claimant was forced to engage in a series of expensive refinancing and conversion transactions after the failure of the auction market (at an estimated cost, in the case of Houston, of approximately
$90 million). Houston and Reno also allege that GS&Co. advised them to enter into interest rate swaps in connection with their auction rate securities issuances, causing them to incur additional losses (including, in the case of Reno, a
swap termination obligation of over $8 million). The claimants assert claims for breach of fiduciary duty, fraudulent concealment, negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract, violations of the Exchange Act and state securities laws, and
breach of duties under the rules of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board and the NASD, and seek unspecified damages. In federal court, GS&Co. has filed complaints and motions seeking to enjoin the Reno, California school district and North
Carolina arbitrations pursuant to the exclusive forum selection clauses in the transaction documents. On November 26, 2012, GS&Co.s motion to enjoin was denied with regard to the Reno arbitration, and GS&Co. appealed on
March 11, 2013. On February 8, 2013, GS&Co.s motion to enjoin was granted with regard to the California school district arbitration, and the California school district appealed on March 5, 2013. On
April 26, 2013, GS&Co. filed its formal motion to enjoin the North Carolina arbitration, and the North Carolina municipal power authority filed a motion to dismiss GS&Co.s complaint for lack of venue.
Financial Crisis-Related
Matters. Group Inc. and certain of its affiliates are subject to a number of investigations and reviews by various governmental and regulatory bodies and self-regulatory organizations and
litigation relating to the 2008 financial crisis. Goldman Sachs is cooperating with the investigations and reviews.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
107 |
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors and the Shareholders
of
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc.:
We have reviewed the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of financial condition
of The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. and its subsidiaries (the Company) as of March 31, 2013, the related condensed consolidated statements of earnings for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, the condensed consolidated
statements of comprehensive income for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, the condensed consolidated statement of changes in shareholders equity for the three months ended March 31, 2013, and the condensed
consolidated statements of cash flows for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012. These condensed consolidated interim financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management.
We conducted our review in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). A review of
interim financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with the
standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the objective of which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.
Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made to
the accompanying condensed consolidated interim financial statements for them to be in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
We previously audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated statement of financial condition as of
December 31, 2012, and the related consolidated statements of earnings, comprehensive income, changes in shareholders equity and cash flows for the year then ended (not presented herein), and in our report dated
February 28, 2013, we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements. In our opinion, the information set forth in the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of financial condition as of
December 31, 2012, and the condensed consolidated statement of changes in shareholders equity for the year ended December 31, 2012, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the consolidated financial
statements from which it has been derived.
/s/ PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
New York, New York
May 8, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
108 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Statistical Disclosures
Distribution of Assets, Liabilities and
Shareholders Equity
The table below presents a summary of consolidated average balances and interest rates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March |
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
|
2012 |
|
in millions, except rates |
|
|
Average
balance |
|
|
|
Interest |
|
|
|
Average
Rate
(annualized) |
|
|
|
|
|
Average
balance |
|
|
|
Interest |
|
|
|
Average rate
(annualized) |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits with banks |
|
|
$ 64,007 |
|
|
|
$ 48 |
|
|
|
0.30 |
% |
|
|
|
|
$ 48,029 |
|
|
|
$ 38 |
|
|
|
0.32 |
% |
|
|
U.S. |
|
|
60,919 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
0.29 |
|
|
|
|
|
43,939 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
0.27 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. |
|
|
3,088 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
0.66 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,090 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
0.89 |
|
|
|
Securities borrowed, securities purchased under agreements to resell and federal funds sold |
|
|
316,390 |
|
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(0.03 |
) |
|
|
|
|
348,873 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
U.S. |
|
|
180,008 |
|
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
(0.19 |
) |
|
|
|
|
200,486 |
|
|
|
(112 |
) |
|
|
(0.22 |
) |
|
|
Non-U.S. |
|
|
136,382 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
0.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
148,387 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
0.27 |
|
|
|
Financial instruments owned, at fair value 1,
2 |
|
|
316,072 |
|
|
|
2,238 |
|
|
|
2.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
294,257 |
|
|
|
2,442 |
|
|
|
3.34 |
|
|
|
U.S. |
|
|
193,652 |
|
|
|
1,510 |
|
|
|
3.16 |
|
|
|
|
|
181,376 |
|
|
|
1,590 |
|
|
|
3.53 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. |
|
|
122,420 |
|
|
|
728 |
|
|
|
2.41 |
|
|
|
|
|
112,881 |
|
|
|
852 |
|
|
|
3.04 |
|
|
|
Other interest-earning assets 3 |
|
|
134,889 |
|
|
|
346 |
|
|
|
1.04 |
|
|
|
|
|
133,707 |
|
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
1.10 |
|
|
|
U.S. |
|
|
82,295 |
|
|
|
239 |
|
|
|
1.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
87,609 |
|
|
|
236 |
|
|
|
1.08 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. |
|
|
52,594 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
0.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
46,098 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
1.14 |
|
Total interest-earning assets |
|
|
831,358 |
|
|
|
2,608 |
|
|
|
1.27 |
|
|
|
|
|
824,866 |
|
|
|
2,833 |
|
|
|
1.38 |
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks |
|
|
6,074 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,770 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-interest-earning assets 2 |
|
|
124,476 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110,222 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
|
$961,908 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$941,858 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
$ 69,118 |
|
|
|
$ 93 |
|
|
|
0.55 |
% |
|
|
|
|
$ 48,096 |
|
|
|
$ 91 |
|
|
|
0.76 |
% |
|
|
U.S. |
|
|
61,704 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
0.58 |
|
|
|
|
|
40,571 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
0.80 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. |
|
|
7,414 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
0.27 |
|
|
|
|
|
7,525 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
0.53 |
|
|
|
Securities loaned and securities sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
187,101 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
0.36 |
|
|
|
|
|
176,115 |
|
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
0.48 |
|
|
|
U.S. |
|
|
122,299 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
0.27 |
|
|
|
|
|
121,092 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
0.28 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. |
|
|
64,802 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
0.53 |
|
|
|
|
|
55,023 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
0.93 |
|
|
|
Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair
value 1, 2 |
|
|
95,490 |
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
2.17 |
|
|
|
|
|
91,587 |
|
|
|
525 |
|
|
|
2.31 |
|
|
|
U.S. |
|
|
37,028 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
1.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
40,292 |
|
|
|
162 |
|
|
|
1.62 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. |
|
|
58,462 |
|
|
|
344 |
|
|
|
2.39 |
|
|
|
|
|
51,295 |
|
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
2.85 |
|
|
|
Short-term borrowings 4 |
|
|
62,993 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
0.68 |
|
|
|
|
|
75,367 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
0.90 |
|
|
|
U.S. |
|
|
43,053 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
0.91 |
|
|
|
|
|
49,891 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
1.10 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. |
|
|
19,940 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
0.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
25,476 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
0.51 |
|
|
|
Long-term borrowings 4 |
|
|
177,257 |
|
|
|
910 |
|
|
|
2.08 |
|
|
|
|
|
182,239 |
|
|
|
1,009 |
|
|
|
2.23 |
|
|
|
U.S. |
|
|
170,652 |
|
|
|
881 |
|
|
|
2.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
175,006 |
|
|
|
947 |
|
|
|
2.18 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. |
|
|
6,605 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
1.78 |
|
|
|
|
|
7,233 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
3.45 |
|
|
|
Other interest-bearing liabilities 5 |
|
|
197,393 |
|
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
(0.21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
204,166 |
|
|
|
(152 |
) |
|
|
(0.30 |
) |
|
|
U.S. |
|
|
141,253 |
|
|
|
(221 |
) |
|
|
(0.63 |
) |
|
|
|
|
150,736 |
|
|
|
(251 |
) |
|
|
(0.67 |
) |
|
|
Non-U.S. |
|
|
56,140 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
0.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
53,430 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
0.75 |
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities |
|
|
789,352 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
0.86 |
|
|
|
|
|
777,570 |
|
|
|
1,852 |
|
|
|
0.96 |
|
|
|
Non-interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-interest-bearing liabilities 2 |
|
|
95,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93,280 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
885,206 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
871,034 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock |
|
|
6,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock |
|
|
70,502 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
67,724 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
76,702 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70,824 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
|
$961,908 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$941,858 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate spread |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.41 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.42 |
% |
|
|
Net interest income and net yield on interest-earning assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 925 |
|
|
|
0.45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 981 |
|
|
|
0.48 |
|
|
|
U.S. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
615 |
|
|
|
0.48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
584 |
|
|
|
0.46 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
0.40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
397 |
|
|
|
0.51 |
|
|
|
Percentage of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities attributable to non-U.S. operations 6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37.83 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37.76 |
% |
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25.72 |
|
1. |
Consists of cash financial instruments, including equity securities and convertible debentures. |
2. |
Derivative instruments and commodities are included in other non-interest-earning assets and other non-interest-bearing liabilities.
|
3. |
Primarily consists of cash and securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes and certain receivables from customers and counterparties.
|
4. |
Interest rates include the effects of interest rate swaps accounted for as hedges. |
5. |
Primarily consists of certain payables to customers and counterparties. |
6. |
Assets, liabilities and interest are attributed to U.S. and non-U.S. based on the location of the legal entity in which the assets and liabilities are held.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
109 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Statistical Disclosures
Ratios
The table below presents selected financial ratios.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Annualized net earnings to average assets |
|
|
0.9 |
% |
|
|
0.9 |
% |
|
|
Annualized return on average common shareholders
equity 1 |
|
|
12.4 |
|
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
|
Annualized return on average total shareholders
equity 2 |
|
|
11.8 |
|
|
|
11.9 |
|
|
|
Total average equity to average assets |
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
|
Dividend payout
ratio 3 |
|
|
11.7 |
|
|
|
8.9 |
|
1. |
Based on annualized net earnings applicable to common shareholders divided by average monthly common shareholders equity. |
2. |
Based on annualized net earnings divided by average monthly total shareholders equity. |
3. |
Dividends declared per common share as a percentage of diluted earnings per common share. |
|
|
|
|
|
110 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
111 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Introduction
The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (Group Inc.) is a leading global investment banking, securities and investment management firm that provides
a wide range of financial services to a substantial and diversified client base that includes corporations, financial institutions, governments and high-net-worth individuals. Founded in 1869, the firm is headquartered in New York and maintains
offices in all major financial centers around the world.
We report our activities in four business segments: Investment
Banking, Institutional Client Services, Investing & Lending and Investment Management. See Results of Operations below for further information about our business segments.
This Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations should be read in conjunction with our
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012. References to our Annual Report on Form 10-K are to our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2012.
When we use the terms Goldman Sachs, the firm, we,
us and our, we mean Group Inc., a Delaware corporation, and its consolidated subsidiaries.
References
to this Form 10-Q are to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2013. All references to March 2013 and March 2012 refer to our periods ended, or the dates, as the context
requires, March 31, 2013 and March 31, 2012, respectively. All references to December 2012 refer to the date December 31, 2012. Any reference to a future year refers to a year ending on December 31 of that
year. Certain reclassifications have been made to previously reported amounts to conform to the current presentation.
Executive Overview
The firm generated net earnings of $2.26 billion and diluted earnings per common share of $4.29 for the first
quarter of 2013, compared with $2.11 billion and $3.92 per common share, respectively, for the first quarter of 2012. Annualized return on average common shareholders equity (ROE) 1 was 12.4% for the first quarter of 2013, compared with 12.2% for the
first quarter of 2012.
Book value per common share was $148.41 and tangible book value per common
share 2 was $138.62 as of March 2013, both
approximately 3% higher compared with the end of 2012. During the quarter, the firm repurchased 10.1 million shares of its common stock for a total cost of $1.52 billion. Our Tier 1 capital ratio was 14.4% and our Tier 1 common
ratio 3 was 12.7% as of March 2013, in each case
under Basel 1 and reflecting the revised market risk regulatory capital requirements which became effective on January 1, 2013. As of December 2012, our Tier 1 capital ratio under Basel 1 was 16.7% and our Tier 1
common ratio under Basel 1 was 14.5% (prior to the implementation of the revised market risk regulatory capital requirements).
The firm generated net revenues of $10.09 billion for the first quarter of 2013, compared with $9.95 billion for the first quarter of 2012. These results reflected significantly higher net
revenues in Investment Banking, as well as higher net revenues in both Investing & Lending and Investment Management compared with the first quarter of 2012. These increases were largely offset by lower net revenues in Institutional Client
Services compared with the first quarter of 2012.
An overview of net revenues for each of our business segments is
provided below.
1. |
See Results of Operations Financial Overview below for further information about our calculation of annualized ROE.
|
2. |
Tangible book value per common share is a non-GAAP measure and may not be comparable to similar non-GAAP measures used by other companies. See Equity
Capital Other Capital Metrics below for further information about our calculation of tangible book value per common share. |
3. |
Tier 1 common ratio is a non-GAAP measure and may not be comparable to similar non-GAAP measures used by other companies. See Equity Capital
Consolidated Regulatory Capital Ratios below for further information about our Tier 1 common ratio. |
|
|
|
|
|
112 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Investment Banking
Net revenues in Investment Banking increased significantly compared with the first quarter of 2012 due to significantly higher net revenues in our Underwriting business. This increase primarily reflected
significantly higher net revenues in debt underwriting, due to leveraged finance and commercial mortgage-related activity. Net revenues in equity underwriting were also significantly higher compared with the first quarter of 2012, reflecting an
increase in client activity. Net revenues in Financial Advisory were essentially unchanged compared with the first quarter of 2012.
Institutional
Client Services
Net revenues in Institutional Client Services decreased compared with the first quarter of 2012,
reflecting lower net revenues in both Equities and Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution.
The decrease in
Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution compared with the first quarter of 2012 was due to lower net revenues across most businesses, primarily reflecting significantly lower net revenues in interest rate products compared with a
strong first quarter of 2012. Net revenues in mortgages were higher compared with the first quarter of 2012. During the quarter, Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution operated in an environment characterized by generally tighter
credit spreads and improved client activity levels compared with the fourth quarter of 2012.
The decrease in Equities compared
with the first quarter of 2012 primarily reflected lower net revenues in equities client execution. This decrease reflected significantly lower net revenues in derivatives compared with a strong first quarter of 2012, partially offset by higher net
revenues in cash products. Commissions and fees were lower compared with the first quarter of 2012, reflecting lower market volumes. In addition, securities services net revenues were lower compared with the first quarter of 2012. During the
quarter, Equities operated in an environment generally characterized by an increase in global equity prices, lower volatility levels and improved client activity levels compared with the fourth quarter of 2012.
The net loss attributable to the impact of changes in our own credit spreads on borrowings
for which the fair value option was elected was $77 million ($42 million and $35 million related to Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution and equities client execution, respectively) for the first quarter of 2013,
compared with a net loss of $224 million ($117 million and $107 million related to Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution and equities client execution, respectively) for the first quarter of 2012.
Investing & Lending
Net
revenues in Investing & Lending were $2.07 billion for the first quarter of 2013, compared with $1.91 billion for the first quarter of 2012. During the first quarter of 2013, Investing & Lending net revenues were
positively impacted by an increase in equity prices and generally tighter credit spreads. Results for the first quarter of 2013 included a gain of $24 million from our investment in the ordinary shares of Industrial and Commercial
Bank of China Limited (ICBC), net gains of $1.10 billion from other investments in equities, primarily in private equities, net gains and net interest income of $566 million from debt securities and loans, and
other net revenues of $375 million related to our consolidated investments.
Investment Management
Net revenues in Investment Management increased compared with the first quarter of 2012, due to higher incentive fees
and higher management and other fees. During the quarter, assets under supervision 1 increased $3 billion to $968 billion, reflecting net market appreciation of $12 billion, primarily in equity assets. Net outflows in assets under supervision were $9 billion, as
outflows in money market assets and, to a lesser extent, alternative investment assets, were partially offset by inflows in fixed income and equity assets.
Our businesses, by their nature, do not produce predictable earnings. Our results in any given period can be materially affected by conditions in global financial markets, economic conditions generally
and other factors. For a further discussion of the factors that may affect our future operating results, see Certain Risk Factors That May Affect Our Businesses below, as well as Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A
of our Annual Report on Form 10-K.
1. |
Assets under supervision include assets under management and other client assets. Assets under management include client assets where we earn a fee for
managing assets on a discretionary basis. Other client assets include client assets invested with third-party managers, private bank deposits and advisory relationships where we earn a fee for advisory and other services, but do not have investment
discretion. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
113 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Business Environment
Global
Global economic conditions improved during the first quarter of 2013, as real gross domestic product (GDP) appeared to increase in most major economies. However, real GDP in the Euro area appeared to
decline due to continued concerns about European sovereign debt risk and ongoing fiscal retrenchment. Political developments in the Euro area temporarily increased market volatility, although the continued supportive stance of the European Central
Bank (ECB) to address funding risks for European financial institutions and sovereigns helped to improve global market conditions. Positive U.S. economic data also contributed to the improvement in market sentiment. These developments contributed to
generally tighter credit spreads, higher global equity prices and lower levels of volatility. In addition, the price of crude oil increased during the quarter. The U.S. dollar appreciated significantly against the Japanese yen, and appreciated
against both the British pound and the Euro. In investment banking, activity levels were mixed during the quarter, as industry-wide debt underwriting activity continued at a robust pace, industry-wide equity underwriting activity improved, although
initial public offerings activity remained low, and industry-wide announced and completed mergers and acquisitions activity declined compared with the fourth quarter of 2012.
United States
In the United States, real GDP growth accelerated during the quarter,
reflecting an increase in the growth of consumer spending and a positive turn in the inventory cycle. The expiration of the payroll tax cuts and the increase in some income tax rates did not appear to have had a large impact on personal consumption
during the quarter, but cuts in government spending continued to have a negative effect on growth. Measures of consumer and business confidence were mixed over the quarter. Housing market activity continued to improve as sales increased and housing
starts were at their highest levels since mid-2008. Unemployment levels declined, although the rate of unemployment remained elevated. Measures of inflation remained subdued during the quarter. The U.S. Federal Reserve maintained its federal
funds rate at a target range of zero to 0.25% and continued its program to purchase U.S. Treasury securities and mortgage-backed securities. The 10-year U.S. Treasury note yield ended the quarter at 1.87%, 9 basis points higher than at the
end of 2012. In equity markets, the Dow Jones Industrial Average, the S&P 500 Index, and the NASDAQ Composite Index increased by 11%, 10% and 8%, respectively, compared with the end of 2012.
Europe
In the Euro area, real GDP appeared to decline for the sixth consecutive quarter, although at a lower rate than in the fourth quarter of 2012. This reflected a smaller decrease in consumer spending, which
was partially offset by a downturn in government spending. Political uncertainty around the Italian elections and the debt crisis in Cyprus increased uncertainty in financial markets. Measures of inflation were slightly lower compared with the
fourth quarter of 2012, and unemployment levels remained elevated. The ECB maintained its main refinancing operations rate at 0.75% and received payments on parts of the loans made through its longer-term refinancing operations program. The Euro
depreciated by 3% against the U.S. dollar. In the United Kingdom, real GDP increased during the quarter, after having contracted during the fourth quarter of 2012. The Bank of England maintained its official bank rate at 0.50% and the British pound
depreciated by 6% against the U.S. dollar. The movements in long-term government bond yields were mixed, as yields increased in Greece and Italy, declined in Spain, and only marginally changed in France, Germany and the United Kingdom. In equity
markets, the FTSE 100 Index increased by 9%, the DAX Index and the CAC 40 Index both increased by 2%, and the Euro Stoxx 50 Index was essentially unchanged compared with the end of 2012.
Asia
In Japan, real GDP growth appeared to accelerate during the quarter, reflecting
an upturn in private investment. In the midst of a leadership transition, the Bank of Japan introduced a 2% price stability target and made its asset purchase program open-ended. As a result of expectations for an aggressive monetary easing program,
the yield on 10-year Japanese government bonds declined to near record lows, the Japanese yen depreciated against the U.S. dollar by 9% and the Nikkei 225 Index increased by 19% compared with the end of 2012. In China, real GDP growth moderated
during the quarter, reflecting a slowdown in retail sales. Measures of inflation increased slightly compared with the fourth quarter of 2012. The Peoples Bank of China left its reserve requirement ratio unchanged during the quarter. The
Chinese yuan appreciated slightly against the U.S. dollar. In equity markets, the Hang Seng Index decreased 2%, while the Shanghai Composite Index and the KOSPI Composite Index were both essentially unchanged compared with the end of 2012. In India,
economic growth appeared to increase during the quarter, although growth rates are still at the lower end of the historical range. The rate of wholesale inflation declined during the quarter, but remained elevated. The Indian rupee appreciated
slightly against the U.S. dollar, and the BSE Sensex Index decreased by 3% compared with the end of 2012.
|
|
|
|
|
114 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Critical Accounting Policies
Fair Value
Fair Value Hierarchy. Financial instruments owned, at fair value and Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value (i.e., inventory), as well as certain other financial assets and financial liabilities, are
reflected in our condensed consolidated statements of financial condition at fair value (i.e., marked-to-market), with related gains or losses generally recognized in our condensed consolidated statements of earnings. The use of fair value to
measure financial instruments is fundamental to our risk management practices and is our most critical accounting policy.
The
fair value of a financial instrument is the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. In determining fair value, the hierarchy under
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP) gives (i) the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical, unrestricted assets or liabilities (level 1 inputs), (ii) the next priority to
inputs other than level 1 inputs that are observable, either directly or indirectly (level 2 inputs), and (iii) the lowest priority to inputs that cannot be observed in market activity (level 3 inputs). Assets and liabilities are
classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of input that is significant to their fair value measurement.
The
fair values for substantially all of our financial assets and financial liabilities are based on observable prices and inputs and are classified in levels 1 and 2 of the fair value hierarchy. Certain level 2 and level 3 financial
assets and financial liabilities may require appropriate valuation adjustments that a market participant would require to arrive at fair value for factors such as counterparty and the firms credit quality, funding risk, transfer restrictions,
liquidity and bid/offer spreads. Valuation adjustments are generally based on market evidence.
Instruments categorized within level 3 of the fair value hierarchy are those which
require one or more significant inputs that are not observable. As of March 2013 and December 2012, level 3 assets represented 4.8% and 5.0%, respectively, of the firms total assets. Absent evidence to the contrary, instruments
classified within level 3 of the fair value hierarchy are initially valued at transaction price, which is considered to be the best initial estimate of fair value. Subsequent to the transaction date, we use other methodologies to determine fair
value, which vary based on the type of instrument. Estimating the fair value of level 3 financial instruments requires judgments to be made. These judgments include:
|
|
determining the appropriate valuation methodology and/or model for each type of level 3 financial instrument; |
|
|
determining model inputs based on an evaluation of all relevant empirical market data, including prices evidenced by market transactions, interest
rates, credit spreads, volatilities and correlations; and |
|
|
determining appropriate valuation adjustments related to illiquidity or counterparty credit quality. |
Regardless of the methodology, valuation inputs and assumptions are only changed when corroborated by substantive evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
115 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Controls Over Valuation of Financial
Instruments. Market makers and investment professionals in our revenue-producing units are responsible for pricing our financial instruments. Our control infrastructure is independent of
the revenue-producing units and is fundamental to ensuring that all of our financial instruments are appropriately valued at market-clearing levels. In the event that there is a difference of opinion in situations where estimating the fair value of
financial instruments requires judgment (e.g., calibration to market comparables or trade comparison, as described below), the final valuation decision is made by senior managers in control and support functions that are independent of the
revenue-producing units (independent control and support functions). This independent price verification is critical to ensuring that our financial instruments are properly valued.
Price Verification. All
financial instruments at fair value in levels 1, 2 and 3 of the fair value hierarchy are subject to our independent price verification process. The objective of price verification is to have an informed and independent opinion with regard to
the valuation of financial instruments under review. Instruments that have one or more significant inputs which cannot be corroborated by external market data are classified within level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. Price verification
strategies utilized by our independent control and support functions include:
|
|
Trade Comparison. Analysis of trade data (both internal and external where available) is
used to determine the most relevant pricing inputs and valuations. |
|
|
External Price Comparison. Valuations and prices are compared to pricing data obtained from third
parties (e.g., broker or dealers, MarkIt, Bloomberg, IDC, TRACE). Data obtained from various sources is compared to ensure consistency and validity. When broker or dealer quotations or third-party pricing vendors are used for valuation or price
verification, greater priority is generally given to executable quotations. |
|
|
Calibration to Market Comparables. Market-based transactions are used to corroborate the valuation of positions with similar characteristics, risks and components. |
|
|
Relative Value Analyses.
Market-based transactions are analyzed to determine the similarity, measured in terms of risk, liquidity and return, of one instrument relative to another or, for a given instrument, of
one maturity relative to another. |
|
|
Collateral Analyses. Margin disputes on derivatives are examined and investigated to
determine the impact, if any, on our valuations. |
|
|
Execution of Trades. Where appropriate, trading desks are instructed to execute trades in
order to provide evidence of market-clearing levels. |
|
|
Backtesting. Valuations are corroborated by comparison to values realized upon
sales. |
See Notes 5 through 8 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I,
Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information about fair value measurements.
Review of Net Revenues. Independent control and support functions ensure adherence to our
pricing policy through a combination of daily procedures, including the explanation and attribution of net revenues based on the underlying factors. Through this process we independently validate net revenues, identify and resolve potential fair
value or trade booking issues on a timely basis and seek to ensure that risks are being properly categorized and quantified.
Review of Valuation Models. The firms independent model validation group, consisting
of quantitative professionals who are separate from model developers, performs an independent model approval process. This process incorporates a review of a diverse set of model and trade parameters across a broad range of values (including extreme
and/or improbable conditions) in order to critically evaluate:
|
|
the models suitability for valuation and risk management of a particular instrument type; |
|
|
the models accuracy in reflecting the characteristics of the related product and its significant risks; |
|
|
the suitability of the calculation techniques incorporated in the model; |
|
|
the models consistency with models for similar products; and |
|
|
the models sensitivity to input parameters and assumptions. |
New or changed models are reviewed and approved prior to being put into use. Models are evaluated and re-approved annually to assess the
impact of any changes in the product or market and any market developments in pricing theories.
|
|
|
|
|
116 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Level 3 Financial Assets at Fair
Value. The table below presents financial assets measured at fair value and the amount of such assets that are classified within level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.
Total level 3 financial assets were $46.02 billion and $47.10 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012,
respectively.
See Notes 5 through 8 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in
Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information about changes in level 3 financial assets and fair value measurements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Total at
Fair Value |
|
|
|
Level 3 Total |
|
|
|
|
|
Total at Fair
Value |
|
|
|
Level 3
Total |
|
Commercial paper, certificates of deposit, time deposits and other money market instruments |
|
|
$ 5,705 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 6,057 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
U.S. government and federal agency obligations |
|
|
96,930 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93,241 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-U.S. government and agency obligations |
|
|
57,657 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
|
|
62,250 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
Mortgage and other asset-backed loans and securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by commercial real estate |
|
|
6,909 |
|
|
|
3,164 |
|
|
|
|
|
9,805 |
|
|
|
3,389 |
|
|
|
Loans and securities backed by residential real estate |
|
|
7,570 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
|
|
8,216 |
|
|
|
1,619 |
|
|
|
Bank loans and bridge loans |
|
|
22,467 |
|
|
|
11,688 |
|
|
|
|
|
22,407 |
|
|
|
11,235 |
|
|
|
Corporate debt securities |
|
|
20,442 |
|
|
|
2,442 |
|
|
|
|
|
20,981 |
|
|
|
2,821 |
|
|
|
State and municipal obligations |
|
|
2,219 |
|
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,477 |
|
|
|
619 |
|
|
|
Other debt obligations |
|
|
2,481 |
|
|
|
855 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,251 |
|
|
|
1,185 |
|
|
|
Equities and convertible debentures |
|
|
89,278 |
|
|
|
15,224 |
|
|
|
|
|
96,454 |
|
|
|
14,855 |
|
|
|
Commodities |
|
|
7,695 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,696 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total cash instruments |
|
|
319,353 |
|
|
|
35,437 |
|
|
|
|
|
335,835 |
|
|
|
35,749 |
|
|
|
Derivatives |
|
|
68,040 |
|
|
|
9,284 |
|
|
|
|
|
71,176 |
|
|
|
9,920 |
|
Financial instruments owned, at fair value |
|
|
387,393 |
|
|
|
44,721 |
|
|
|
|
|
407,011 |
|
|
|
45,669 |
|
|
|
Securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes |
|
|
22,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,484 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
|
158,283 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
|
|
141,331 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
Securities borrowed |
|
|
54,879 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,395 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables from customers and counterparties |
|
|
7,154 |
|
|
|
633 |
|
|
|
|
|
7,866 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
Other
assets 1 |
|
|
13,448 |
|
|
|
565 |
|
|
|
|
|
13,426 |
|
|
|
507 |
|
Total |
|
|
$643,833 |
|
|
|
$46,023 |
|
|
|
|
|
$638,513 |
|
|
|
$47,095 |
|
1. |
Consists of assets classified as held for sale related to our reinsurance business, primarily consisting of securities accounted for as available-for-sale and
insurance separate account assets. See Note 12 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information about assets held for sale. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
117 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Goodwill and Identifiable Intangible Assets
Goodwill. Goodwill is the cost of acquired companies in excess of the fair value of net assets, including identifiable intangible assets, at the acquisition date. Goodwill is assessed annually for impairment, or
more frequently if events occur or circumstances change that indicate an impairment may exist, by first assessing qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying
amount. If the results of the qualitative assessment are not conclusive, a quantitative goodwill impairment test is performed by comparing the estimated fair value of each reporting unit with its estimated net book value.
Estimating the fair value of our reporting units requires management to make judgments. Critical inputs to the fair value estimates
include (i) projected earnings, (ii) estimated long-term growth rates and (iii) cost of equity. The net book value of each reporting unit reflects an allocation of total shareholders equity and represents the estimated amount of
shareholders equity required to support the activities of the reporting unit under guidelines issued by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (Basel Committee) in December 2010.
Our market capitalization was below book value during 2012. Accordingly, we performed a quantitative impairment test during the fourth
quarter of 2012 and determined that goodwill was not impaired. The estimated fair value of our reporting units in which we hold substantially all of our goodwill significantly exceeded the estimated carrying values. We believe that it is appropriate
to consider market capitalization, among other factors, as an indicator of fair value over a reasonable period of time.
If we
return to a prolonged period of weakness in the business environment or financial markets, our goodwill could be impaired in the future. In addition, significant changes to critical inputs of the goodwill impairment test (e.g., cost of equity) could
cause the estimated fair value of our reporting units to decline, which could result in an impairment of goodwill in the future.
See Note 13 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further
information about our goodwill.
Identifiable Intangible
Assets. We amortize our identifiable intangible assets (i) over their estimated lives, (ii) based on economic usage or (iii) in proportion to estimated gross profits or
premium revenues. Identifiable intangible assets are tested for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances suggest that an assets or asset groups carrying value may not be fully recoverable.
An impairment loss, generally calculated as the difference between the estimated fair value and the carrying value of an asset or asset
group, is recognized if the sum of the estimated undiscounted cash flows relating to the asset or asset group is less than the corresponding carrying value. See Note 13 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I,
Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for the carrying value and estimated remaining lives of our identifiable intangible assets by major asset class and impairments of our identifiable intangible assets.
A prolonged period of market weakness could adversely impact our businesses and impair the value of our identifiable intangible assets. In
addition, certain events could indicate a potential impairment of our identifiable intangible assets, including (i) decreases in revenues from commodity-related customer contracts and relationships, (ii) an adverse action or assessment by
a regulator or (iii) adverse actual experience on the contracts in our variable annuity and life insurance business. Management judgment is required to evaluate whether indications of potential impairment have occurred, and to test intangibles
for impairment if required.
|
|
|
|
|
118 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Use of Estimates
The use of generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make certain
estimates and assumptions. In addition to the estimates we make in connection with fair value measurements, the accounting for goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, and discretionary compensation accruals, the use of estimates and assumptions
is also important in determining provisions for losses that may arise from litigation, regulatory proceedings and tax audits.
A substantial portion of our compensation and benefits represents discretionary compensation, which is finalized at year-end. We believe
the most appropriate way to allocate estimated annual discretionary compensation among interim periods is in proportion to the net revenues earned in such periods. In addition to the level of net revenues, our overall compensation expense in any
given year is also influenced by, among other factors, overall financial performance, prevailing labor markets, business mix, the structure of our share-based compensation programs and the external environment. See Results of
Operations Financial Overview Operating Expenses below for information regarding our ratio of compensation and benefits to net revenues.
We estimate and provide for potential losses that may arise out of litigation and
regulatory proceedings to the extent that such losses are probable and can be reasonably estimated. In accounting for income taxes, we estimate and provide for potential liabilities that may arise out of tax audits to the extent that uncertain tax
positions fail to meet the recognition standard under FASB Accounting Standards Codification 740. See Note 24 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information about
accounting for income taxes.
Significant judgment is required in making these estimates and our final liabilities may
ultimately be materially different. Our total estimated liability in respect of litigation and regulatory proceedings is determined on a case-by-case basis and represents an estimate of probable losses after considering, among other factors, the
progress of each case or proceeding, our experience and the experience of others in similar cases or proceedings, and the opinions and views of legal counsel. See Notes 18 and 27 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in
Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for information on certain judicial, regulatory and legal proceedings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
119 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Results of Operations
The composition of our net revenues has varied over time as financial markets and the scope
of our operations have changed. The composition of net revenues can also vary over the shorter term due to fluctuations in U.S. and global economic and market conditions. See Certain Risk Factors That May Affect Our Businesses below
and Risk Factors
in Part I, Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for a further discussion of the impact of economic and market conditions on our results of operations.
Financial Overview
The table below
presents an overview of our financial results.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
$ in millions, except per share amounts |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Net revenues |
|
|
$10,090 |
|
|
|
$9,949 |
|
|
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
3,373 |
|
|
|
3,181 |
|
|
|
Net earnings |
|
|
2,260 |
|
|
|
2,109 |
|
|
|
Net earnings applicable to common shareholders |
|
|
2,188 |
|
|
|
2,074 |
|
|
|
Diluted earnings per common share |
|
|
4.29 |
|
|
|
3.92 |
|
|
|
Annualized return on average common shareholders equity 1 |
|
|
12.4 |
% |
|
|
12.2 |
% |
1. |
Annualized ROE is computed by dividing annualized net earnings applicable to common shareholders by average monthly common shareholders equity. The
table below presents our average common shareholders equity. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average for the
Three Months Ended
March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
$76,702 |
|
|
|
$70,824 |
|
|
|
Preferred stock |
|
|
(6,200 |
) |
|
|
(3,100 |
) |
Common shareholders equity |
|
|
$70,502 |
|
|
|
$67,724 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
120 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Net Revenues
Three Months Ended March 2013 versus March 2012. Net revenues on the condensed
consolidated statements of earnings were $10.09 billion for the first quarter of 2013, essentially unchanged compared with the first quarter of 2012. Net revenues in the first quarter of 2013 included significantly higher investment banking
revenues, as well as higher investment management revenues and higher other principal transactions revenues compared with the first quarter of 2012. These increases were largely offset by lower market-making revenues and, to a lesser extent, lower
net interest income and lower commissions and fees compared with the first quarter of 2012.
Non-interest Revenues
Investment banking
During the
first quarter of 2013, investment banking revenues reflected an operating environment generally characterized by mixed activity levels as a result of continued macroeconomic concerns. Industry-wide debt underwriting activity continued at a robust
pace, as interest rates remained low and credit spreads generally tightened. In addition, industry-wide equity underwriting activity improved, although initial public offerings activity remained low. Industry-wide announced and completed mergers and
acquisitions activity declined compared with the fourth quarter of 2012. If macroeconomic concerns continue and result in lower levels of client activity, investment banking revenues would likely be negatively impacted.
Three Months Ended March 2013 versus March 2012. Investment banking revenues on the condensed consolidated statements of earnings were $1.57 billion for the first quarter of 2013, 35% higher than the first quarter of 2012, due to significantly
higher revenues in our underwriting business. This increase primarily reflected significantly higher revenues in debt underwriting, due to leveraged finance and commercial mortgage-related activity. Revenues in equity underwriting were also
significantly higher compared with the first quarter of 2012, reflecting an increase in client activity. Revenues in financial advisory were essentially unchanged compared with the first quarter of 2012.
Investment management
During the first quarter of 2013, investment management revenues reflected an operating environment generally characterized by improved asset prices, resulting in appreciation in the value of client
assets. In addition, the mix of assets under supervision has shifted slightly compared with the fourth quarter of 2012 from asset classes that typically generate lower fees to asset classes that typically generate higher fees. In the future, if
asset prices were to decline, or investors favor asset classes that typically generate lower fees or investors continue to withdraw their assets, investment management revenues would likely be negatively impacted. In addition, continued concerns
about the global economic outlook could result in downward pressure on assets under supervision.
Three Months Ended March 2013 versus March 2012. Investment management revenues on the condensed consolidated statements of earnings were
$1.25 billion for the first quarter of 2013, 13% higher than the first quarter of 2012, due to higher incentive fees and higher management and other fees.
Commissions and fees
During the first quarter of 2013, commissions and fees
reflected an operating environment generally characterized by an increase in global equity prices and lower volatility levels. Although macroeconomic concerns persisted, positive developments during the quarter contributed to higher market volumes
compared with the fourth quarter of 2012. If macroeconomic concerns continue and result in lower market volumes, commissions and fees would likely be negatively impacted.
Three Months Ended March 2013 versus March 2012. Commissions and fees on the
condensed consolidated statements of earnings were $829 million for the first quarter of 2013, 4% lower than the first quarter of 2012, reflecting lower market volumes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
121 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Market making
During the first quarter of 2013, market-making revenues reflected an operating environment generally characterized by positive developments in the U.S. economy early in the quarter, specifically in
housing and unemployment. These improvements contributed to improved client activity levels, generally tighter credit spreads, higher global equity prices and lower levels of volatility. However, later in the quarter, market sentiment was mixed, as
political uncertainty in Europe and the United States began to resurface, contributing to client risk aversion and lower client activity levels. Also, uncertainty over financial regulatory reform persisted. If these concerns and uncertainties
continue over the long term, market-making revenues would likely continue to be negatively impacted.
Three Months Ended March 2013 versus March 2012. Market-making revenues on the condensed consolidated statements of earnings were
$3.44 billion for the first quarter of 2013, 12% lower than the first quarter of 2012. Revenues were lower across most products, primarily reflecting significantly lower revenues in interest rate products and equity derivatives both compared
with a strong first quarter of 2012. Revenues in mortgages were higher compared with the first quarter of 2012.
Other principal transactions
During the first quarter of 2013, other principal transactions revenues reflected an operating environment characterized
by an increase in equity prices and generally tighter credit spreads. However, concerns about the outlook for the global economy and uncertainty over financial regulatory reform continues to be a meaningful consideration for the global marketplace.
If equity markets decline or credit spreads widen, other principal transactions revenues would likely be negatively impacted.
Three Months Ended March 2013
versus March 2012. Other principal transactions revenues on the condensed consolidated statements of earnings were $2.08 billion for the first quarter of 2013, compared with
$1.94 billion for the first quarter of 2012. Results for the first quarter of 2013 included a gain from our investment in the ordinary shares of ICBC, net gains from other investments in equities, primarily in private equities, net gains from
debt securities and loans, and revenues related to our consolidated investments. In the first quarter of 2012, other principal transactions revenues included a gain from our investment in the ordinary shares of ICBC, net gains from other investments
in equities (with public and private equities each contributing approximately one-half of the net gains), net gains from debt securities and loans, and revenues related to our consolidated investments.
Net Interest Income
Three Months Ended March 2013 versus March 2012. Net interest income on the condensed consolidated statements of earnings was
$925 million for the first quarter of 2013, 6% lower than the first quarter of 2012. The decrease compared with the first quarter of 2012 was primarily due to lower average yields on financial instruments owned, at fair value, partially offset
by lower interest expense related to our short- and long-term borrowings.
|
|
|
|
|
122 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Operating Expenses
Our operating expenses are primarily influenced by compensation, headcount and levels of business activity. Compensation and benefits includes salaries, estimated year-end discretionary compensation,
amortization of equity awards and other items such as benefits. Discretionary compensation is significantly impacted by, among other factors, the level of net revenues, overall financial performance, prevailing labor markets, business mix, the
structure of our share-based compensation programs and the external environment.
The table below presents our operating
expenses and total staff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Compensation and benefits |
|
|
$ 4,339 |
|
|
|
$ 4,378 |
|
|
|
Brokerage, clearing, exchange and
distribution fees |
|
|
561 |
|
|
|
567 |
|
|
|
Market development |
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
Communications and technology |
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
Occupancy |
|
|
218 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
|
|
Professional fees |
|
|
246 |
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
Insurance reserves 1 |
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
Other expenses |
|
|
595 |
|
|
|
474 |
|
Total non-compensation expenses |
|
|
2,378 |
|
|
|
2,390 |
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
$ 6,717 |
|
|
|
$ 6,768 |
|
Total staff at
period-end 2 |
|
|
32,000 |
|
|
|
32,400 |
|
1. |
Related revenues are included in Market making on the condensed consolidated statements of earnings. |
2. |
Includes employees, consultants and temporary staff.
|
Three Months Ended March 2013
versus March 2012. Operating expenses on the condensed consolidated statements of earnings were $6.72 billion for the first quarter of 2013, essentially unchanged compared with
the first quarter of 2012. The accrual for compensation and benefits expenses on the condensed consolidated statements of earnings was $4.34 billion for the first quarter of 2013, essentially unchanged compared with the first quarter of 2012.
The ratio of compensation and benefits to net revenues for the first quarter of 2013 was 43.0%, compared with 44.0% for the first quarter of 2012. Total staff decreased 1% during the first quarter of 2013.
Non-compensation expenses on the condensed consolidated statements of earnings were $2.38 billion for the first quarter of 2013,
essentially unchanged compared with the first quarter of 2012. Non-compensation expenses for the first quarter of 2013 included lower depreciation and amortization expenses, primarily reflecting lower impairment charges related to consolidated
investments. This decrease was largely offset by higher other expenses, primarily reflecting increased net provisions for litigation and regulatory proceedings and higher expenses related to consolidated investments. The first quarter of 2013
included net provisions for litigation and regulatory proceedings of $110 million.
Provision for Taxes
The effective income tax rate for the first quarter of 2013 was 33.0%, essentially unchanged from the full year tax rate of 33.3% for
2012.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
123 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Segment Operating Results
The table below presents the net revenues, operating expenses and pre-tax earnings of our segments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Investment Banking |
|
Net revenues |
|
|
$ 1,568 |
|
|
|
$1,154 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
1,064 |
|
|
|
871 |
|
|
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 504 |
|
|
|
$ 283 |
|
Institutional Client
Services |
|
Net revenues |
|
|
$ 5,139 |
|
|
|
$5,709 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
3,566 |
|
|
|
3,938 |
|
|
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 1,573 |
|
|
|
$1,771 |
|
Investing &
Lending |
|
Net revenues |
|
|
$ 2,068 |
|
|
|
$1,911 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
996 |
|
|
|
958 |
|
|
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 1,072 |
|
|
|
$ 953 |
|
Investment
Management |
|
Net revenues |
|
|
$ 1,315 |
|
|
|
$1,175 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
1,090 |
|
|
|
989 |
|
|
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 225 |
|
|
|
$ 186 |
|
Total |
|
Net revenues |
|
|
$10,090 |
|
|
|
$9,949 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
6,717 |
|
|
|
6,768 |
|
|
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 3,373 |
|
|
|
$3,181 |
|
Total operating expenses in the table above include the following expenses that have not
been allocated to our segments:
|
|
charitable contributions of $12 million for the three months ended March 2012; and |
|
|
real estate-related exit costs of $1 million for the three months ended March 2013. Real estate-related exit costs are included in
Depreciation and amortization in the condensed consolidated statements of earnings. |
Operating
expenses related to net provisions for litigation and regulatory proceedings, previously not allocated to our segments, have now been allocated. This allocation is consistent with the manner in which management currently views the performance of our
segments. Reclassifications have been made to previously reported segment amounts to conform to the current presentation.
Net revenues in our segments include allocations of interest income and interest expense to
specific securities, commodities and other positions in relation to the cash generated by, or funding requirements of, such underlying positions. See Note 25 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this
Form 10-Q for further information about our business segments.
The cost drivers of Goldman Sachs taken as a
whole compensation, headcount and levels of business activity are broadly similar in each of our business segments. Compensation and benefits expenses within our segments reflect, among other factors, the overall performance
of Goldman Sachs as well as the performance of individual businesses. Consequently, pre-tax margins in one segment of our business may be significantly affected by the performance of our other business segments. A discussion of segment operating
results follows.
|
|
|
|
|
124 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Investment Banking
Our Investment Banking segment is comprised of:
Financial Advisory.
Includes strategic advisory assignments with respect to mergers and acquisitions, divestitures, corporate defense activities, risk management, restructurings and spin-offs, and derivative transactions directly related to these client advisory
assignments.
Underwriting. Includes public offerings and private placements, including domestic and cross-border transactions, of a wide range of securities, loans and other financial instruments, and derivative transactions
directly related to these client underwriting activities.
The table below presents the operating results of our Investment
Banking segment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Financial Advisory |
|
|
$ 484 |
|
|
|
$ 489 |
|
|
|
Equity underwriting |
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
255 |
|
|
|
Debt underwriting |
|
|
694 |
|
|
|
410 |
|
Total Underwriting |
|
|
1,084 |
|
|
|
665 |
|
Total net revenues |
|
|
1,568 |
|
|
|
1,154 |
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
1,064 |
|
|
|
871 |
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 504 |
|
|
|
$ 283 |
|
The table below presents our financial advisory and underwriting transaction
volumes. 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in billions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Announced mergers and acquisitions |
|
|
$ 134 |
|
|
|
$ 117 |
|
|
|
Completed mergers and acquisitions |
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
Equity and equity-related offerings 2 |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
Debt
offerings 3 |
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
1. |
Source: Thomson Reuters. Announced and completed mergers and acquisitions volumes are based on full credit to each of the advisors in a transaction. Equity
and equity-related offerings and debt offerings are based on full credit for single book managers and equal credit for joint book managers. Transaction volumes may not be indicative of net revenues in a given period. In addition, transaction volumes
for prior periods may vary from amounts previously reported due to the subsequent withdrawal or a change in the value of a transaction. |
2. |
Includes Rule 144A and public common stock offerings, convertible offerings and rights offerings. |
3. |
Includes non-convertible preferred stock, mortgage-backed securities, asset-backed securities and taxable municipal debt. Includes publicly registered and
Rule 144A issues. Excludes leveraged loans.
|
Three Months Ended March 2013
versus March 2012. Net revenues in Investment Banking were $1.57 billion for the first quarter of 2013, 36% higher than the first quarter of 2012.
Net revenues in Financial Advisory were $484 million, essentially unchanged compared with the first quarter of 2012. Net revenues in
our Underwriting business were $1.08 billion, 63% higher than the first quarter of 2012. This increase primarily reflected significantly higher net revenues in debt underwriting, due to leveraged finance and commercial mortgage-related
activity. Net revenues in equity underwriting were also significantly higher compared with the first quarter of 2012, reflecting an increase in client activity.
During the first quarter of 2013, Investment Banking operated in an environment generally characterized by mixed activity levels as a result of continued macroeconomic concerns. Industry-wide debt
underwriting activity continued at a robust pace, as interest rates remained low and credit spreads generally tightened. In addition, industry-wide equity underwriting activity improved, although initial public offerings activity remained low.
Industry-wide announced and completed mergers and acquisitions activity declined compared with the fourth quarter of 2012. If macroeconomic concerns continue and result in lower levels of client activity, net revenues in Investment Banking would
likely be negatively impacted.
Our investment banking transaction backlog decreased compared with the end of 2012,
reflecting lower estimated net revenues from potential advisory transactions and lower estimated net revenues from potential equity underwriting transactions, due to a decrease in potential initial public offerings transactions. Estimated net
revenues from potential debt underwriting transactions were higher compared with the end of 2012, primarily reflecting an increase in potential transactions across a broad range of products.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
125 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Our investment banking transaction backlog represents an estimate of our future net
revenues from investment banking transactions where we believe that future revenue realization is more likely than not. We believe changes in our investment banking transaction backlog may be a useful indicator of client activity levels which, over
the long term, impact our net revenues. However, the time frame for completion and corresponding revenue recognition of transactions in our backlog varies based on the nature of the assignment, as certain transactions may remain in our backlog for
longer periods of time and others may enter and leave within the same reporting period. In addition, our transaction backlog is subject to certain limitations, such as assumptions about the likelihood that individual client transactions will occur
in the future. Transactions may be cancelled or modified, and transactions not included in the estimate may also occur.
Operating expenses were $1.06 billion for the first quarter of 2013, 22% higher than the first quarter of 2012, due to increased
compensation and benefits expenses, primarily resulting from higher net revenues. Pre-tax earnings were $504 million in the first quarter of 2013, 78% higher than the first quarter of 2012.
Institutional Client Services
Our
Institutional Client Services segment is comprised of:
Fixed Income,
Currency and Commodities Client Execution. Includes client execution activities related to making markets in interest rate products, credit products, mortgages, currencies and
commodities.
We generate market-making revenues in these activities, in three ways:
|
|
In large, highly liquid markets (such as markets for U.S. Treasury bills or certain mortgage pass-through certificates), we execute a high volume of
transactions for our clients for modest spreads and fees. |
|
|
In less liquid markets (such as mid-cap corporate bonds, growth market currencies or certain non-agency mortgage-backed securities), we execute
transactions for our clients for spreads and fees that are generally somewhat larger. |
|
|
We also structure and execute transactions involving customized or tailor-made products that address our clients risk exposures, investment
objectives or other complex needs (such as a jet fuel hedge for an airline).
|
Given the focus on the mortgage market, our mortgage activities are further described
below.
Our activities in mortgages include commercial mortgage-related securities, loans and derivatives, residential
mortgage-related securities, loans and derivatives (including U.S. government agency-issued collateralized mortgage obligations, other prime, subprime and Alt-A securities and loans), and other asset-backed securities, loans and derivatives.
We buy, hold and sell long and short mortgage positions, primarily for market making for our clients. Our inventory therefore
changes based on client demands and is generally held for short-term periods.
See Notes 18 and 27 to the condensed
consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for information about exposure to mortgage repurchase requests, mortgage rescissions and mortgage-related litigation.
Equities. Includes client
execution activities related to making markets in equity products, as well as commissions and fees from executing and clearing institutional client transactions on major stock, options and futures exchanges worldwide. Equities also includes our
securities services business, which provides financing, securities lending and other prime brokerage services to institutional clients, including hedge funds, mutual funds, pension funds and foundations, and generates revenues primarily in the form
of interest rate spreads or fees, and revenues related to our reinsurance activities.
The table below presents the operating
results of our Institutional Client Services segment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution |
|
|
$3,217 |
|
|
|
$3,458 |
|
|
|
Equities client execution 1 |
|
|
809 |
|
|
|
1,050 |
|
|
|
Commissions and fees |
|
|
793 |
|
|
|
834 |
|
|
|
Securities services |
|
|
320 |
|
|
|
367 |
|
Total Equities |
|
|
1,922 |
|
|
|
2,251 |
|
Total net revenues |
|
|
5,139 |
|
|
|
5,709 |
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
3,566 |
|
|
|
3,938 |
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$1,573 |
|
|
|
$1,771 |
|
1. |
Includes net revenues related to reinsurance of $233 million and $211 million for the three months ended March 2013 and March 2012,
respectively. |
|
|
|
|
|
126 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Three Months Ended March 2013
versus March 2012. Net revenues in Institutional Client Services were $5.14 billion for the first quarter of 2013, 10% lower than the first quarter of 2012.
Net revenues in Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution were $3.22 billion, 7% lower than the first quarter of 2012.
Net revenues were lower across most businesses, primarily reflecting significantly lower net revenues in interest rate products compared with a strong first quarter of 2012. Net revenues in mortgages were higher compared with the first quarter of
2012. During the quarter, Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution operated in an environment characterized by generally tighter credit spreads and improved client activity levels compared with the fourth quarter of 2012.
Net revenues in Equities were $1.92 billion, 15% lower than the first quarter of 2012, primarily reflecting lower net revenues in
equities client execution. This decrease reflected significantly lower net revenues in derivatives compared with a strong first quarter of 2012, partially offset by higher net revenues in cash products. Commissions and fees were lower compared with
the first quarter of 2012, reflecting lower market volumes. In addition, securities services net revenues were lower compared with the first quarter of 2012. During the quarter, Equities operated in an environment generally characterized by an
increase in global equity prices, lower volatility levels and improved client activity levels compared with the fourth quarter of 2012.
The net loss attributable to the impact of changes in our own credit spreads on borrowings for which the fair value option was elected was $77 million ($42 million and $35 million related
to Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution and equities client execution, respectively) for the first quarter of 2013, compared with a net loss of $224 million ($117 million and $107 million related to Fixed Income,
Currency and Commodities Client Execution and equities client execution, respectively) for the first quarter of 2012.
During the first quarter of 2013, Institutional Client Services operated in an environment
generally characterized by positive developments in the U.S. economy early in the quarter, specifically in housing and unemployment. These improvements contributed to improved client activity levels, generally tighter credit spreads, higher global
equity prices and lower levels of volatility. However, later in the quarter, market sentiment was mixed, as political uncertainty in Europe and the United States began to resurface, contributing to client risk aversion and lower client activity
levels. Also, uncertainty over financial regulatory reform persisted. If these concerns and uncertainties continue over the long term, net revenues in Fixed Income, Currency and Commodities Client Execution and Equities would likely continue to be
negatively impacted.
Operating expenses were $3.57 billion for the first quarter of 2013, 9% lower than the first
quarter of 2012, due to decreased compensation and benefits expenses, primarily resulting from lower net revenues, partially offset by higher net provisions for litigation and regulatory proceedings. Pre-tax earnings were $1.57 billion in the
first quarter of 2013, 11% lower than the first quarter of 2012.
Investing & Lending
Investing & Lending includes our investing activities and the origination of loans to provide financing to clients. These
investments and loans are typically longer-term in nature. We make investments, directly and indirectly through funds that we manage, in debt securities and loans, public and private equity securities, real estate, consolidated investment entities
and power generation facilities.
The table below presents the operating results of our Investing & Lending segment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
ICBC |
|
|
$ 24 |
|
|
|
$ 169 |
|
|
|
Equity securities (excluding ICBC) |
|
|
1,103 |
|
|
|
891 |
|
|
|
Debt securities and loans |
|
|
566 |
|
|
|
585 |
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
Total net revenues |
|
|
2,068 |
|
|
|
1,911 |
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
996 |
|
|
|
958 |
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$1,072 |
|
|
|
$ 953 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
127 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Three Months Ended March 2013
versus March 2012. Net revenues in Investing & Lending were $2.07 billion for the first quarter of 2013, compared with $1.91 billion for the first quarter of 2012.
During the first quarter of 2013, Investing & Lending net revenues were positively impacted by an increase in equity prices and generally tighter credit spreads. Results for the first quarter of 2013 included a gain of $24 million from
our investment in the ordinary shares of ICBC, net gains of $1.10 billion from other investments in equities, primarily in private equities, net gains and net interest income of $566 million from debt securities and loans, and other net
revenues of $375 million related to our consolidated investments.
During the first quarter of 2012, an increase in
global equity prices and tighter credit spreads contributed to positive results in Investing & Lending. These results included a gain of $169 million from our investment in the ordinary shares of ICBC, net gains of $891 million
from other investments in equities (with public and private equities each contributing approximately one-half of the net gains), net gains and net interest of $585 million from debt securities and loans, and other net revenues of
$266 million related to our consolidated investments.
Operating expenses were $996 million for the first
quarter of 2013, 4% higher than the first quarter of 2012, due to increased compensation and benefits expenses, primarily resulting from higher net revenues, partially offset by lower non-compensation expenses related to our consolidated
investments. Pre-tax earnings were $1.07 billion in the first quarter of 2013, 12% higher than the first quarter of 2012.
Investment
Management
Investment Management provides investment management services and offers investment products (primarily through
separately managed accounts and commingled vehicles, such as mutual funds and private investment funds) across all major asset classes to a diverse set of institutional and individual clients. Investment Management also offers wealth advisory
services, including portfolio management and financial counseling, and brokerage and other transaction services to high-net-worth individuals and families.
Assets under supervision include assets under management and other client assets. Assets
under management include client assets where we earn a fee for managing assets on a discretionary basis. This includes net assets in our mutual funds, hedge funds, credit funds and private equity funds (including real estate funds), and separately
managed accounts for institutional and individual investors. Other client assets include client assets invested with third-party managers, private bank deposits and advisory relationships where we earn a fee for advisory and other services, but do
not have investment discretion. Assets under supervision do not include the self-directed brokerage assets of our clients.
Assets under management and other client assets typically generate fees as a percentage of net asset value, which vary by asset class and
are affected by investment performance as well as asset inflows and redemptions.
In certain circumstances, we are also
entitled to receive incentive fees based on a percentage of a funds return or when the return exceeds a specified benchmark or other performance targets. Incentive fees are recognized only when all material contingencies are resolved.
The table below presents the operating results of our Investment Management segment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
in millions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Management and other fees |
|
|
$1,060 |
|
|
|
$1,003 |
|
|
|
Incentive fees |
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
Transaction revenues |
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
Total net revenues |
|
|
1,315 |
|
|
|
1,175 |
|
|
|
Operating expenses |
|
|
1,090 |
|
|
|
989 |
|
Pre-tax earnings |
|
|
$ 225 |
|
|
|
$ 186 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
128 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
The tables below present our assets under supervision, including assets under management by
asset class and other client assets, as well as a summary of the changes in our assets under supervision.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
|
December 31, |
|
in billions |
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
2012 |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
Alternative investments 1 |
|
|
$130 |
|
|
|
$139 |
|
|
|
|
|
$133 |
|
|
|
$142 |
|
|
|
Equity |
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
Fixed income |
|
|
378 |
|
|
|
347 |
|
|
|
|
|
370 |
|
|
|
340 |
|
Total non-money market assets |
|
|
657 |
|
|
|
622 |
|
|
|
|
|
636 |
|
|
|
608 |
|
|
|
Money markets |
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
|
|
218 |
|
|
|
220 |
|
Total assets under management (AUM) |
|
|
860 |
|
|
|
824 |
|
|
|
|
|
854 |
|
|
|
828 |
|
|
|
Other client assets |
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
Total assets under supervision (AUS) |
|
|
$968 |
|
|
|
$900 |
|
|
|
|
|
$965 |
|
|
|
$895 |
|
1. |
Primarily includes hedge funds, credit, funds, private equity, real estate, currencies, commodities and asset allocation strategies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months
Ended March 31, |
|
in billions |
|
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Balance, beginning of period |
|
|
|
|
$965 |
|
|
|
$895 |
|
|
|
Net inflows/(outflows) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alternative investments |
|
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
Equity |
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
Fixed income |
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Total non-money market net inflows/(outflows) |
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
Money markets |
|
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
Total AUM net inflows/(outflows) |
|
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(26 |
) |
Other client assets net inflows/(outflows) |
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
Total AUS net inflows/(outflows) |
|
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
Net market appreciation/(depreciation) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AUM |
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
Other client assets |
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Total AUS net market appreciation/(depreciation) |
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Balance, end of period |
|
|
|
|
$968 |
|
|
|
$900 |
|
Three Months Ended March 2013
versus March 2012. Net revenues in Investment Management were $1.32 billion for the first quarter of 2013, 12% higher than the first quarter of 2012, due to higher incentive
fees and higher management and other fees. During the quarter, assets under supervision increased $3 billion to $968 billion, reflecting net market appreciation of $12 billion, primarily in equity assets. Net outflows in assets under
supervision were $9 billion, as outflows in money market assets and, to a lesser extent, alternative investment assets, were partially offset by inflows in fixed income and equity assets.
During the first quarter of 2013, Investment Management operated in an environment generally characterized by improved asset prices,
resulting in appreciation in the value of client assets. In addition, the mix of assets under supervision has shifted slightly compared with the fourth quarter of 2012 from asset classes that typically generate lower fees to asset classes that
typically generate higher fees. In the future, if asset prices were to decline, or investors favor asset classes that typically generate lower fees or investors continue to withdraw their assets, net revenues in Investment Management would likely be
negatively impacted. In addition, continued concerns about the global economic outlook could result in downward pressure on assets under supervision.
Operating expenses were $1.09 billion for the first quarter of 2013, 10% higher than the first quarter of 2012, primarily due to increased compensation and benefits expenses, primarily resulting from
higher net revenues. Pre-tax earnings were $225 million in the first quarter of 2013, 21% higher than the first quarter of 2012.
Geographic Data
See Note 25 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for
a summary of our total net revenues and pre-tax earnings by geographic region.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
129 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Regulatory Developments
The U.S. Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act),
enacted in July 2010, significantly altered the financial regulatory regime within which we operate. The implications of the Dodd-Frank Act for our businesses will depend to a large extent on the rules that will be adopted by the Federal
Reserve Board, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the SEC, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and other agencies to implement the legislation, as well as the development of market practices and structures under the
regime established by the legislation and the implementing rules. Other reforms have been adopted or are being considered by other regulators and policy makers worldwide and these reforms may affect our businesses. We expect that the principal areas
of impact from regulatory reform for us will be:
|
|
the Dodd-Frank prohibition on proprietary trading and the limitation on the sponsorship of, and investment in, hedge funds and private
equity funds by banking entities, including bank holding companies, referred to as the Volcker Rule; |
|
|
increased regulation of and restrictions on over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives markets and transactions; and |
|
|
increased regulatory capital requirements. |
In October 2011, the proposed rules to implement the Volcker Rule were issued and included an extensive request for comments on the proposal. The proposed rules are highly complex, and many aspects
of the Volcker Rule remain unclear. The full impact of the rule on us will depend upon the detailed scope of the prohibitions, permitted activities, exceptions and exclusions, and will not be known with certainty until the rules are finalized and
market practices and structures develop under the final rules. Currently, companies are expected to be required to be in compliance by July 2014 (subject to possible extensions).
While many aspects of the Volcker Rule remain unclear, we evaluated the prohibition on proprietary trading and determined that
businesses that engage in bright line proprietary trading are most likely to be prohibited. In 2011 and 2010, we liquidated substantially all of our Principal Strategies and Global Macro Proprietary trading positions.
In addition, we have evaluated the limitations on sponsorship of, and investments in, hedge funds and private equity funds. The firm earns
management fees and incentive fees for investment management services from hedge funds and private equity funds, which are included in our Investment Management segment. The firm also makes
investments in funds, and the gains and losses from these investments are included in our Investing & Lending segment; these gains and losses will be impacted by the Volcker Rule. The
Volcker Rule limitation on investments in hedge funds and private equity funds requires the firm to reduce its investment in each hedge fund and private equity fund to 3% or less of the funds net asset value, and to reduce the firms
aggregate investment in all such funds to 3% or less of the firms Tier 1 capital. The firms aggregate net revenues from its investments in hedge funds and private equity funds were not material to the firms aggregate total net
revenues over the period from 1999 through the first quarter of 2013. We continue to manage our existing private equity funds, taking into account the transition periods under the Volcker Rule. With respect to our hedge funds, we currently plan to
comply with the Volcker Rule by redeeming certain of our interests in the funds. Since March 2012, we have been redeeming up to approximately 10% of certain hedge funds total redeemable units per quarter, and expect to continue to do so
through June 2014. Since March 2012, we have redeemed approximately $1.32 billion of these interests in hedge funds, including approximately $260 million during the three months ended March 2013. In addition, we have limited
the firms initial investment to 3% for certain new investments in hedge funds and private equity funds.
As required by
the Dodd-Frank Act, the Federal Reserve Board and FDIC have jointly issued a rule requiring each bank holding company with over $50 billion in assets and each designated systemically important financial institution to provide to regulators an
annual plan for its rapid and orderly resolution in the event of material financial distress or failure (resolution plan). Our resolution plan must, among other things, demonstrate that Goldman Sachs Bank USA (GS Bank USA) is adequately protected
from risks arising from our other entities. The regulators joint rule sets specific standards for the resolution plans, including requiring a detailed resolution strategy and analyses of the companys material entities, organizational
structure, interconnections and interdependencies, and management information systems, among other elements. We submitted our first resolution plan to the regulators on June 29, 2012. GS Bank USA also submitted its first resolution plan on
June 29, 2012, as required by the FDIC. In April 2013, the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC provided additional guidance to the firm relating to its 2013 resolution plan. At the same time, they extended the deadline for submission
of our 2013 resolution plan to October 1, 2013. The deadline for submission of GS Bank USAs 2013 resolution plan was also extended by the FDIC to October 1, 2013.
|
|
|
|
|
130 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
In September 2011, the SEC proposed rules to implement the Dodd-Frank Acts
prohibition against securitization participants engaging in any transaction that would involve or result in any material conflict of interest with an investor in a securitization transaction. The proposed rules would except bona fide
market-making activities and risk-mitigating hedging activities in connection with securitization activities from the general prohibition. We will also be affected by rules to be adopted by federal agencies pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act that
require any person who organizes or initiates an asset-backed security transaction to retain a portion (generally, at least five percent) of any credit risk that the person conveys to a third party.
In December 2011, the Federal Reserve Board proposed regulations designed to strengthen the regulation and supervision of large bank
holding companies and systemically important nonbank financial institutions. These proposals address, among other things, risk-based capital and leverage requirements, liquidity requirements, overall risk management requirements, single counterparty
limits and early remediation requirements that are designed to address financial weakness at an early stage. Although many of the proposals mirror initiatives to which bank holding companies are already subject, their full impact on the firm will
not be known with certainty until the rules are finalized and market practices and structures develop under the final rules. In addition, in October 2012, the Federal Reserve Board issued final rules for stress testing requirements for certain
bank holding companies, including the firm. See Equity Capital below for further information about our Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR).
The Dodd-Frank Act also contains provisions that include (i) requiring the registration of all swap dealers and major swap participants with the CFTC and of security-based swap dealers and major
security-based swap participants with the SEC, the clearing and execution of certain swaps and security-based swaps through central counterparties, regulated exchanges or electronic facilities and real-time public and regulatory reporting of trade
information,
(ii) placing new business conduct standards and other requirements on swap dealers, major swap participants, security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants, covering
their relationships with counterparties, their internal oversight and compliance structures, conflict of interest rules, internal information barriers, general and trade-specific record-keeping and risk management, (iii) establishing mandatory
margin requirements for trades that are not cleared through a central counterparty, (iv) position limits that cap exposure to derivatives on certain physical commodities and (v) entity-level capital requirements for swap dealers, major
swap participants, security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants.
The CFTC is responsible for issuing
rules relating to swaps, swap dealers and major swap participants, and the SEC is responsible for issuing rules relating to security-based swaps, security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants. Although the CFTC has not yet
finalized its capital regulations, certain of the requirements, including registration of swap dealers and real-time public trade reporting, have taken effect already under CFTC rules, and the SEC and the CFTC have finalized the definitions of a
number of key terms. The CFTC adopted final rules requiring the mandatory clearing of certain credit default swaps and interest rate swaps between dealers beginning in March 2013, which include a phase-in for covered transactions with
non-dealer financial entities in June 2013 and end-users in September 2013. The CFTC has finalized a number of other implementing rules and laid out a series of implementation deadlines in 2013, covering rules for business conduct
standards for swap dealers and clearing requirements.
The SEC has proposed rules to impose margin, capital and segregation
requirements for security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants. The SEC has also proposed rules relating to registration of security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants, trade reporting and
real-time reporting, and business conduct requirements for security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
131 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
We have registered certain subsidiaries as swap dealers under the CFTC rules,
including Goldman, Sachs & Co. (GS&Co.), GS Bank USA, Goldman Sachs International (GSI) and J. Aron & Company. We expect that these entities, and our businesses more broadly, will be subject to significant and developing
regulation and regulatory oversight in connection with swap-related activities. Similar regulations have been proposed or adopted in jurisdictions outside the United States and, in July 2012 and February 2013, the Basel Committee and the
International Organization of Securities Commissions released consultative documents proposing margin requirements for non-centrally-cleared derivatives. The full impact of the various U.S. and non-U.S. regulatory developments in this area will not
be known with certainty until the rules are implemented and market practices and structures develop under the final rules.
The
Dodd-Frank Act also establishes the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which has broad authority to regulate providers of credit, payment and other consumer financial products and services, and has oversight over certain of our products and
services.
In February 2013, the European Commission published a proposal for enhanced
cooperation in the area of financial transactions tax in response to a request from certain member states of the European Union. The proposed financial transactions tax is broad in scope and would apply to transactions in a wide variety of
financial instruments and derivatives. The proposed date for implementation of the tax is January 1, 2014. We are currently evaluating the impact of the draft legislation, which is still subject to further revisions. The full impact of
these proposals will not be known with certainty until the legislation is finalized.
See Note 20 to the condensed
consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for additional information about regulatory developments as they relate to our regulatory capital ratios.
See Business Regulation in Part I, Item 1 of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for more information on
the laws, rules and regulations and proposed laws, rules and regulations that apply to us and our operations.
|
|
|
|
|
132 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Balance Sheet and Funding Sources
Balance Sheet Management
One of our most important risk management disciplines is our ability to manage the size and
composition of our balance sheet. While our asset base changes due to client activity, market fluctuations and business opportunities, the size and composition of our balance sheet reflect (i) our overall risk tolerance, (ii) our ability
to access stable funding sources and (iii) the amount of equity capital we hold.
Although our balance sheet
fluctuates on a day-to-day basis, our total assets and adjusted assets at quarterly and year-end dates are generally not materially different from those occurring within our reporting periods.
In order to ensure appropriate risk management, we seek to maintain a liquid balance sheet and have processes in place to dynamically
manage our assets and liabilities which include:
|
|
business-specific limits; |
|
|
monitoring of key metrics; and |
Quarterly Planning. We prepare a quarterly balance sheet plan that combines our projected total assets and composition of assets with our expected funding sources and capital levels for the upcoming quarter. The objectives
of this quarterly planning process are:
|
|
to develop our near-term balance sheet projections, taking into account the general state of the financial markets and expected business activity
levels; |
|
|
to ensure that our projected assets are supported by an adequate amount and tenor of funding and that our projected capital and liquidity metrics
are within management guidelines and regulatory requirements; and |
|
|
to allow business risk managers and managers from our independent control and support functions to objectively evaluate balance sheet limit requests
from business managers in the context of the firms overall balance sheet constraints. These constraints include the firms liability profile and equity capital levels, maturities and plans for new debt and equity issuances, share
repurchases, deposit trends and secured funding transactions. |
To prepare our quarterly balance sheet plan,
business risk managers and managers from our independent control and support functions meet with business managers to review current and prior period metrics and discuss expectations for the upcoming quarter. The specific metrics reviewed include
asset and liability size and composition, aged inventory, limit utilization, risk and performance measures, and capital usage.
Our consolidated quarterly plan, including our balance sheet plans by business, funding and capital projections, and projected capital and
liquidity metrics, is reviewed by the Firmwide Finance Committee. See Overview and Structure of Risk Management for an overview of our risk management structure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
133 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Business-Specific Limits. The Firmwide Finance Committee sets asset and liability limits for each business and aged inventory limits for certain financial instruments as a disincentive to hold inventory over longer periods of
time. These limits are set at levels which are close to actual operating levels in order to ensure prompt escalation and discussion among business managers and managers in our independent control and support functions on a routine basis. The
Firmwide Finance Committee reviews and approves balance sheet limits on a quarterly basis and may also approve changes in limits on an ad hoc basis in response to changing business needs or market conditions.
Monitoring of Key
Metrics. We monitor key balance sheet metrics daily both by business and on a consolidated basis, including asset and liability size and composition, aged inventory, limit utilization,
risk measures and capital usage. We allocate assets to businesses and review and analyze movements resulting from new business activity as well as market fluctuations.
Scenario Analyses. We conduct scenario analyses to determine how we would manage the size
and composition of our balance sheet and maintain appropriate funding, liquidity and capital positions in a variety of situations:
|
|
These scenarios cover short-term and long-term time horizons using various macro-economic and firm-specific assumptions. We use these analyses to
assist us in developing longer-term funding plans, including the level of unsecured debt issuances, the size of our secured funding program and the amount and composition of our equity capital. We also consider any potential future constraints, such
as limits on our ability to grow our asset base in the absence of appropriate funding. |
|
|
Through our Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process (ICAAP), CCAR, the Dodd-Frank Act Stress Tests (DFAST), and our resolution and recovery
planning, we further analyze how we would manage our balance sheet and risks through the duration of a severe crisis and we develop plans to access funding, generate liquidity, and/or redeploy or issue equity capital, as appropriate.
|
Balance Sheet Allocation
In addition to preparing our condensed consolidated statements of financial condition in accordance with U.S. GAAP, we prepare a balance sheet that generally allocates assets to our businesses, which is a
non-GAAP presentation and may not be comparable to similar non-GAAP presentations used by other companies. We believe that presenting our assets on this basis is meaningful because it is consistent with the way management views and manages risks
associated with the firms assets and better enables investors to assess the liquidity of the firms assets. The table below presents a summary of this balance sheet allocation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Excess liquidity (Global Core Excess) |
|
|
$174,435 |
|
|
|
$174,622 |
|
|
|
Other cash |
|
|
7,440 |
|
|
|
6,839 |
|
Excess liquidity and cash |
|
|
181,875 |
|
|
|
181,461 |
|
|
|
Secured client financing |
|
|
238,029 |
|
|
|
229,442 |
|
|
|
Inventory |
|
|
297,813 |
|
|
|
318,323 |
|
|
|
Secured financing agreements |
|
|
106,491 |
|
|
|
76,277 |
|
|
|
Receivables |
|
|
41,897 |
|
|
|
36,273 |
|
Institutional Client Services |
|
|
446,201 |
|
|
|
430,873 |
|
|
|
ICBC 1 |
|
|
1,110 |
|
|
|
2,082 |
|
|
|
Public equity (excluding ICBC) |
|
|
2,931 |
|
|
|
3,866 |
|
|
|
Private equity |
|
|
17,164 |
|
|
|
17,401 |
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
23,788 |
|
|
|
25,386 |
|
|
|
Receivables and other |
|
|
9,637 |
|
|
|
8,421 |
|
Investing & Lending |
|
|
54,630 |
|
|
|
57,156 |
|
Total inventory and related assets |
|
|
500,831 |
|
|
|
488,029 |
|
|
|
Other
assets 2 |
|
|
38,488 |
|
|
|
39,623 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
$959,223 |
|
|
|
$938,555 |
|
1. |
In January 2013, we sold approximately 45% of the ordinary shares of ICBC. |
2. |
Includes assets related to our reinsurance business classified as held for sale as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. See Note 12
to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information.
|
|
|
|
|
|
134 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
The following is a description of the captions in the table above.
Excess Liquidity and Cash.
We maintain substantial excess liquidity to meet a broad range of potential cash outflows and collateral needs in the event of a stressed environment. See Liquidity Risk
Management below for details on the composition and sizing of our excess liquidity pool or Global Core Excess (GCE). In addition to our excess liquidity, we maintain other operating cash balances, primarily for use in specific
currencies, entities, or jurisdictions where we do not have immediate access to parent company liquidity.
Secured Client Financing. We provide collateralized financing for client positions, including margin loans secured by client collateral, securities
borrowed, and resale agreements primarily collateralized by government obligations. As a result of client activities, we are required to segregate cash and securities to satisfy regulatory requirements. Our secured client financing arrangements,
which are generally short-term, are accounted for at fair value or at amounts that approximate fair value, and include daily margin requirements to mitigate counterparty credit risk.
Institutional Client
Services. In Institutional Client Services, we maintain inventory positions to facilitate market-making in fixed income, equity, currency and commodity products. Additionally, as part of
client market-making activities, we enter into resale or securities borrowing arrangements to obtain securities which we can use to cover transactions in which we or our clients have sold securities that have not yet been purchased. The receivables
in Institutional Client Services primarily relate to securities transactions.
Investing & Lending. In Investing & Lending, we make investments and originate loans to provide financing to clients. These
investments and loans are typically longer-term in nature. We make investments, directly and indirectly through funds that we manage, in debt securities, loans, public and private equity securities, real estate and other investments.
Other Assets. Other
assets are generally less liquid, non-financial assets, including property, leasehold improvements and equipment, goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, income tax-related receivables, equity-method investments, assets classified as held for
sale and miscellaneous receivables.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
135 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
The tables below present the reconciliation of this balance sheet allocation to our U.S.
GAAP balance sheet. In the tables below, total assets for Institutional Client Services and Investing & Lending represent the inventory and related assets. These amounts differ from total assets by
business segment disclosed in Note 25 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q because total assets disclosed in Note 25
include allocations of our excess liquidity and cash, secured client financing and other assets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Excess Liquidity and Cash |
1 |
|
|
Secured Client Financing |
|
|
|
Institutional Client Services |
|
|
|
Investing & Lending |
|
|
|
Other Assets |
|
|
|
Total
Assets |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
$ 63,333 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 63,333 |
|
|
|
Cash and securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,044 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41,044 |
|
|
|
Securities purchased under agreements to resell and federal funds sold |
|
|
37,803 |
|
|
|
73,253 |
|
|
|
46,832 |
|
|
|
618 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
158,506 |
|
|
|
Securities borrowed |
|
|
36,913 |
|
|
|
75,469 |
|
|
|
59,659 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
172,041 |
|
|
|
Receivables from brokers, dealers and clearing organizations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,662 |
|
|
|
14,802 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,501 |
|
|
|
Receivables from customers and counterparties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
42,601 |
|
|
|
27,095 |
|
|
|
8,221 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77,917 |
|
|
|
Financial instruments owned, at fair value |
|
|
43,826 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
297,813 |
|
|
|
45,754 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
387,393 |
|
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,488 |
|
|
|
38,488 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
$181,875 |
|
|
|
$238,029 |
|
|
|
$446,201 |
|
|
|
$54,630 |
|
|
|
$38,488 |
|
|
|
$959,223 |
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
in millions |
|
|
Excess Liquidity and Cash |
1 |
|
|
Secured Client Financing |
|
|
|
Institutional Client Services |
|
|
|
Investing &
Lending |
|
|
|
Other Assets |
|
|
|
Total
Assets |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
$ 72,669 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 72,669 |
|
|
|
Cash and securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,671 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49,671 |
|
|
|
Securities purchased under agreements to resell and federal funds sold |
|
|
28,018 |
|
|
|
84,064 |
|
|
|
28,960 |
|
|
|
292 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
141,334 |
|
|
|
Securities borrowed |
|
|
41,699 |
|
|
|
47,877 |
|
|
|
47,317 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136,893 |
|
|
|
Receivables from brokers, dealers and clearing organizations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,400 |
|
|
|
14,044 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,480 |
|
|
|
Receivables from customers and counterparties |
|
|
|
|
|
|
43,430 |
|
|
|
22,229 |
|
|
|
7,215 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,874 |
|
|
|
Financial instruments owned, at fair value |
|
|
39,075 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
318,323 |
|
|
|
49,613 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
407,011 |
|
|
|
Other assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,623 |
|
|
|
39,623 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
$181,461 |
|
|
|
$229,442 |
|
|
|
$430,873 |
|
|
|
$57,156 |
|
|
|
$39,623 |
|
|
|
$938,555 |
|
1. |
Includes unencumbered cash, U.S. government and federal agency obligations (including highly liquid U.S. federal agency mortgage-backed obligations), and
German, French, Japanese and United Kingdom government obligations. |
|
|
|
|
|
136 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Balance Sheet Analysis and Metrics
As of March 2013, total assets on our condensed consolidated statements of financial
condition were $959.22 billion, an increase of $20.67 billion from December 2012. This increase was primarily due to an increase in collateralized agreements of $52.32 billion, primarily due to firm and client activities. This
increase was partially offset by a decrease in financial instruments owned, at fair value of $19.62 billion, primarily due to decreases in equities and convertible debentures, non-U.S. government and agency obligations, commodities
and derivatives.
As of March 2013, total liabilities on our condensed consolidated statements of financial condition
were $882.00 billion, an increase of $19.16 billion from December 2012. This increase was primarily due to an increase in financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value of $27.11 billion, primarily due to
increases in non-U.S. government and agency obligations, U.S. government and federal agency obligations, and equities and convertible debentures. This increase was partially offset by a decrease in securities sold under agreements to repurchase, at
fair value of $16.45 billion, primarily due to firm financing activities.
As of March 2013 and
December 2012, our total securities sold under agreements to repurchase, at fair value, accounted for as collateralized financings, were $155.36 billion and $171.81 billion, respectively, which were 8% lower and essentially unchanged,
respectively, compared with the daily average amount of repurchase agreements over the respective quarters. As of March 2013, the decrease in our repurchase agreements relative to the daily average during the quarter was primarily due to firm
financing activities. The level of our repurchase agreements fluctuates between and within periods, primarily due to providing clients with access to highly liquid collateral, such as U.S. government and federal agency, and investment-grade
sovereign obligations through collateralized financing activities.
The table below presents information on our assets, unsecured long-term borrowings,
shareholders equity and leverage ratios.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ in millions |
|
As of |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
$959,223 |
|
|
|
$938,555 |
|
|
|
Adjusted assets |
|
|
$689,034 |
|
|
|
$686,874 |
|
|
|
Unsecured long-term borrowings |
|
|
$167,008 |
|
|
|
$167,305 |
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
$ 77,228 |
|
|
|
$ 75,716 |
|
|
|
Leverage ratio |
|
|
12.4x |
|
|
|
12.4x |
|
|
|
Adjusted leverage ratio |
|
|
8.9x |
|
|
|
9.1x |
|
|
|
Debt to equity ratio |
|
|
2.2x |
|
|
|
2.2x |
|
Adjusted assets. Adjusted assets equals total assets less (i) low-risk collateralized assets generally associated with our secured client financing transactions, federal funds sold and excess liquidity (which
includes financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value, less derivative liabilities) and (ii) cash and securities we segregate for regulatory and other purposes. Adjusted assets is a non-GAAP measure and may not be comparable
to similar non-GAAP measures used by other companies.
The table below presents the reconciliation of total assets to
adjusted assets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
$ 959,223 |
|
|
|
$ 938,555 |
|
|
|
Deduct: |
|
Securities borrowed |
|
|
(172,041 |
) |
|
|
(136,893 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Securities purchased under agreements to resell and federal funds sold |
|
|
(158,506 |
) |
|
|
(141,334 |
) |
|
|
Add: |
|
Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value |
|
|
153,749 |
|
|
|
126,644 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less derivative liabilities |
|
|
(52,347 |
) |
|
|
(50,427 |
) |
|
|
Subtotal |
|
|
(229,145 |
) |
|
|
(202,010 |
) |
|
|
Deduct: |
|
Cash and securities segregated for regulatory and other purposes |
|
|
(41,044 |
) |
|
|
(49,671 |
) |
Adjusted assets |
|
|
$ 689,034 |
|
|
|
$ 686,874 |
|
Leverage ratio. The leverage ratio equals total assets divided by total shareholders equity and measures the proportion of equity and debt the firm is using to finance assets. This ratio is different from the
Tier 1 leverage ratio included in Equity Capital Consolidated Regulatory Capital Ratios below, and further described in Note 20 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this
Form 10-Q.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
137 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Adjusted leverage ratio. The adjusted leverage ratio equals adjusted assets divided by total shareholders equity. We believe that the adjusted leverage ratio is a more meaningful measure of our capital adequacy than the
leverage ratio because it excludes certain low-risk collateralized assets that are generally supported with little or no capital. The adjusted leverage ratio is a non-GAAP measure and may not be comparable to similar non-GAAP measures used by
other companies.
Our adjusted leverage ratio decreased to 8.9x as of March 2013 from 9.1x as of December 2012
as our total shareholders equity increased.
Debt to equity
ratio. The debt to equity ratio equals unsecured long-term borrowings divided by total shareholders equity.
Funding Sources
Our primary sources of funding are secured financings, unsecured
long-term and short-term borrowings, and deposits. We seek to maintain broad and diversified funding sources globally.
We
raise funding through a number of different products, including:
|
|
collateralized financings, such as repurchase agreements, securities loaned and other secured financings; |
|
|
long-term unsecured debt (including structured notes) through syndicated U.S. registered offerings, U.S. registered and Rule 144A medium-term
note programs, offshore medium-term note offerings and other debt offerings; |
|
|
savings and demand deposits through deposit sweep programs and time deposits through internal and third-party broker-dealers; and
|
|
|
short-term unsecured debt through U.S. and non-U.S. commercial paper and promissory note issuances and other methods.
|
We generally distribute our funding products through our own sales force and third-party distributors, to a
large, diverse creditor base in a variety of markets in the Americas, Europe and Asia. We believe that our relationships with our creditors are critical to our liquidity. Our creditors include banks, governments, securities lenders, pension funds,
insurance companies, mutual funds and individuals. We have imposed various internal guidelines to monitor creditor concentration across our funding programs.
Secured Funding. We fund a significant amount of inventory on a secured basis. Secured funding is less sensitive to changes in our credit quality than unsecured funding, due to our posting of collateral to our lenders.
Nonetheless, we continually analyze the refinancing risk of our secured funding activities, taking into account trade tenors, maturity profiles, counterparty concentrations, collateral eligibility and counterparty rollover probabilities. We seek to
mitigate our refinancing risk by executing term trades with staggered maturities, diversifying counterparties, raising excess secured funding, and pre-funding residual risk through our GCE.
We seek to raise secured funding with a term appropriate for the liquidity of the assets that are being financed, and we seek longer
maturities for secured funding collateralized by asset classes that may be harder to fund on a secured basis especially during times of market stress. Substantially all of our secured funding, excluding funding collateralized by liquid government
obligations, is executed for tenors of one month or greater. Assets that may be harder to fund on a secured basis during times of market stress include certain financial instruments in the following categories: mortgage and other asset-backed loans
and securities, non-investment grade corporate debt securities, equities and convertible debentures and emerging market securities. Assets that are classified as level 3 in the fair value hierarchy are generally funded on an unsecured basis.
See Note 6 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information about the classification of financial instruments in the fair value hierarchy and see
Unsecured Long-Term Borrowings below for further information about the use of unsecured long-term borrowings as a source of funding.
The weighted average maturity of our secured funding, excluding funding collateralized by highly liquid securities eligible for inclusion in our GCE, exceeded 100 days as of March 2013.
A majority of our secured funding for securities not eligible for inclusion in the GCE is executed through term repurchase
agreements and securities lending contracts. We also raise financing through other types of collateralized financings, such as secured loans and notes.
GS Bank USA has access to funding through the Federal Reserve Bank discount window. While we do not rely on this funding in our liquidity planning and stress testing, we maintain policies and procedures
necessary to access this funding and test discount window borrowing procedures.
|
|
|
|
|
138 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Unsecured Long-Term
Borrowings. We issue unsecured long-term borrowings as a source of funding for inventory and other assets and to finance a portion of our GCE. We issue in different tenors, currencies,
and products to
maximize the diversification of our investor base. The table below presents our quarterly unsecured long-term borrowings maturity profile through the first quarter of 2019 as of March 2013.
The weighted average maturity of our unsecured long-term borrowings as of March 2013
was approximately eight years. To mitigate refinancing risk, we seek to limit the principal amount of debt maturing on any one day or during any week or year. We enter into interest rate swaps to convert a substantial portion of our long-term
borrowings into floating-rate obligations in order to manage our exposure to interest rates. See Note 16 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of
this Form 10-Q for further information about our unsecured long-term borrowings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
139 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Deposits. As part of our efforts to diversify our funding base, deposits have become a more meaningful share of our funding activities. GS Bank USA has been actively growing its deposit base with an emphasis on
issuance of long-term certificates of deposit and on expanding our deposit sweep program, which involves long-term contractual agreements with several U.S. broker-dealers who sweep client cash to FDIC-insured deposits. We utilize deposits to finance
activities in our bank subsidiaries. The table below presents the sourcing of our deposits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
Type of Deposit |
|
in millions |
|
|
Savings and Demand |
1 |
|
|
Time |
2 |
Private bank deposits 3 |
|
|
$30,022 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
Certificates of deposit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,749 |
|
|
|
Deposit sweep programs |
|
|
15,431 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Institutional |
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
4,181 |
|
Total 4 |
|
|
$45,755 |
|
|
|
$26,930 |
|
1. |
Represents deposits with no stated maturity. |
2. |
Weighted average maturity in excess of three years. |
3. |
Substantially all were from overnight deposit sweep programs related to private wealth management clients. |
4. |
Deposits insured by the FDIC as of March 2013 were approximately $43.98 billion. |
Unsecured Short-Term Borrowings. A significant portion of our short-term borrowings was originally long-term debt that is scheduled to mature within one year of the reporting date. We use short-term borrowings to finance liquid assets
and for other cash management purposes. We primarily issue commercial paper, promissory notes, and other hybrid instruments.
As of March 2013, our unsecured short-term borrowings, including the current portion of unsecured long-term borrowings, were $40.98 billion. See Note 15 to the condensed consolidated
financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form
10-Q for further information about our unsecured short-term borrowings.
Equity Capital
Capital adequacy is of critical importance to us. Our objective is to be conservatively capitalized in terms of the amount and composition
of our equity base. Accordingly, we have in place a comprehensive capital management policy that serves as a guide to determine the amount and composition of equity capital we maintain.
The level and composition of our equity capital are determined by multiple factors
including our current and future consolidated regulatory capital requirements, our ICAAP, CCAR and results of stress tests, and may also be influenced by other factors such as rating agency guidelines, subsidiary capital requirements, the business
environment, conditions in the financial markets and assessments of potential future losses due to adverse changes in our business and market environments. In addition, we maintain a capital plan which projects sources and uses of capital given a
range of business environments, and a contingency capital plan which provides a framework for analyzing and responding to an actual or perceived capital shortfall.
As part of the Federal Reserve Boards annual CCAR, U.S. bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or greater are required to submit annual capital plans for review by
the Federal Reserve Board. The purpose of the Federal Reserve Boards review is to ensure that these institutions have robust, forward-looking capital planning processes that account for their unique risks and that permit continued operations
during times of economic and financial stress. The Federal Reserve Board will evaluate a bank holding company based on whether it has the capital necessary to continue operating under the baseline and stressed scenarios provided by the Federal
Reserve. As part of the capital plan review, the Federal Reserve Board evaluates an institutions plan to make capital distributions, such as increasing dividend payments or repurchasing or redeeming stock, across a range of macro-economic and
firm-specific assumptions. In addition, the DFAST rules require us to conduct stress tests on a semi-annual basis and publish a summary of certain results. The Federal Reserve Board also conducts its own annual stress tests and publishes a summary
of certain results.
We submitted our 2013 CCAR to the Federal Reserve on January 7, 2013 and published a summary of
our DFAST results under the Federal Reserve Boards severely adverse scenario in March 2013. As part of our 2013 CCAR submission, the Federal Reserve informed us that it did not object to our proposed capital actions, including the
repurchase of outstanding common stock, a potential increase in our quarterly common stock dividend and the possible issuance, redemption and modification of other capital securities through the first quarter of 2014. However, as required by the
Federal Reserve, we will resubmit our capital plan by the end of the third quarter of 2013, incorporating certain enhancements to our stress test processes.
|
|
|
|
|
140 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Our consolidated regulatory capital requirements are determined by the Federal Reserve
Board, as described below. Our ICAAP incorporates an internal risk-based capital assessment designed to identify and measure material risks associated with our business activities, including market risk, credit risk and operational risk, in a manner
that is closely aligned with our risk management practices. Our internal risk-based capital assessment is supplemented with the results of stress tests.
As of March 2013, our total shareholders equity was $77.23 billion (consisting of common shareholders equity of $71.03 billion and preferred stock of $6.20 billion). As of
December 2012, our total shareholders equity was $75.72 billion (consisting of common shareholders equity of $69.52 billion and preferred stock of $6.20 billion). In addition, as of both March 2013 and
December 2012, $2.75 billion of our junior subordinated debt issued to trusts qualified as capital for regulatory and certain rating agency purposes. See Consolidated Regulatory Capital Ratios below for information
regarding the impact of regulatory developments.
Consolidated Regulatory Capital
The Federal Reserve Board is the primary regulator of Group Inc., a bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (BHC
Act) and a financial holding company under amendments to the BHC Act effected by the U.S. Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999. As a bank holding company, we are subject to consolidated regulatory capital requirements that are computed in accordance with
the Federal Reserve Boards risk-based capital regulations (which are based on the Basel 1 Capital Accord of the Basel Committee) reflecting the Federal Reserve Boards revised market risk regulatory capital
requirements which became effective on January 1, 2013. These capital requirements are expressed as capital ratios that compare measures of capital to risk-weighted assets (RWAs). See Note 20 to the condensed consolidated financial
statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for additional information regarding the firms RWAs. The firms capital levels are also subject to qualitative judgments by its regulators about components, risk weightings and
other factors.
Federal Reserve Board regulations require bank holding companies to maintain a minimum
Tier 1 capital ratio of 4% and a minimum total capital ratio of 8%. The required minimum Tier 1 capital ratio and total capital ratio in order to be considered a well-capitalized bank holding company under the Federal
Reserve Board guidelines are 6% and 10%, respectively. Bank holding companies may be expected to maintain ratios well above the minimum levels, depending on their particular condition, risk profile and growth plans. The minimum Tier 1 leverage
ratio is 3% for bank holding companies that have received the highest supervisory rating under Federal Reserve Board guidelines or that have implemented the Federal Reserve Boards risk-based capital measure for market risk. Other bank holding
companies must have a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4%.
Consolidated Regulatory Capital Ratios
The table below presents information about our regulatory capital ratios, which are based on Basel 1, as implemented by the Federal
Reserve Board. The information as of March 2013 reflects the revised market risk regulatory capital requirements, which became effective on January 1, 2013. The information as of December 2012 is prior to the implementation of
these revised market risk regulatory capital requirements. In the table below:
|
|
Equity investments in certain entities primarily represent a portion of our equity investments in non-financial companies.
|
|
|
Debt valuation adjustment represents the cumulative change in the fair value of our unsecured borrowings attributable to the impact of changes in
our own credit spreads (net of tax at the applicable tax rate). |
|
|
Other adjustments within our Tier 1 common capital include net unrealized gains/(losses) on available-for-sale securities (net of tax at the
applicable tax rate), the cumulative change in our pension and postretirement liabilities (net of tax at the applicable tax rate) and investments in certain nonconsolidated entities. |
|
|
Qualifying subordinated debt represents subordinated debt issued by Group Inc. with an original term to maturity of five years or greater. The
outstanding amount of subordinated debt qualifying for Tier 2 Capital is reduced, or discounted, upon reaching a remaining maturity of five years. See Note 16 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1
of this Form 10-Q for additional information about the subordinated debt. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
141 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
$ in millions |
|
|
March 2013 |
|
|
|
December 2012 |
|
Common shareholders equity |
|
|
$ 71,028 |
|
|
|
$ 69,516 |
|
|
|
Less: Goodwill |
|
|
(3,702 |
) |
|
|
(3,702 |
) |
|
|
Less: Intangible assets |
|
|
(981 |
) |
|
|
(1,397 |
) |
|
|
Less: Equity investments in certain entities |
|
|
(3,959 |
) |
|
|
(4,805 |
) |
|
|
Less: Disallowed deferred tax assets |
|
|
(1,002 |
) |
|
|
(1,261 |
) |
|
|
Less: Debt valuation adjustment |
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
(180 |
) |
|
|
Less: Other adjustments |
|
|
(134 |
) |
|
|
(124 |
) |
Tier 1 Common Capital |
|
|
61,135 |
|
|
|
58,047 |
|
|
|
Perpetual non-cumulative preferred stock |
|
|
6,200 |
|
|
|
6,200 |
|
|
|
Junior subordinated debt issued
to trusts 1 |
|
|
2,063 |
|
|
|
2,750 |
|
|
|
Other adjustments |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
Tier 1 Capital |
|
|
69,371 |
|
|
|
66,977 |
|
Qualifying subordinated debt |
|
|
12,721 |
|
|
|
13,342 |
|
|
|
Junior subordinated debt issued
to trusts 1 |
|
|
687 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other adjustments |
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
Tier 2 Capital |
|
|
13,445 |
|
|
|
13,429 |
|
Total Capital |
|
|
$ 82,816 |
|
|
|
$ 80,406 |
|
Risk-Weighted Assets |
|
|
$480,080 |
|
|
|
$399,928 |
|
|
|
Tier 1 Capital Ratio |
|
|
14.4 |
% |
|
|
16.7 |
% |
|
|
Total Capital Ratio |
|
|
17.3 |
% |
|
|
20.1 |
% |
|
|
Tier 1 Leverage Ratio 2 |
|
|
7.5 |
% |
|
|
7.3 |
% |
|
|
Tier 1 Common
Ratio 3 |
|
|
12.7 |
% |
|
|
14.5 |
% |
1. |
Beginning on January 1, 2013, we began to incorporate the Dodd-Frank Acts phase-out of Tier 1 capital treatment for junior subordinated
debt issued to trusts. The firm has assumed a phase-out period allowing for only 75% of the capital instrument to be included in Tier 1 capital in calendar year 2013, reflecting the Federal Reserve Boards proposed capital rules.
Phased-out amounts that are no longer eligible as Tier 1 capital treatment are eligible for Tier 2 capital treatment. See Note 16 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q
for additional information about the junior subordinated debt issued to trusts. |
2. |
See Note 20 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for additional information about the
firms Tier 1 leverage ratio. |
3. |
The Tier 1 common ratio equals Tier 1 common capital divided by RWAs. We believe that the Tier 1 common ratio is meaningful because it is one
of the measures that we and investors use to assess capital adequacy and is of increasing importance to regulators. The Tier 1 common ratio is a non-GAAP measure and may not be comparable to similar non-GAAP measures used by other companies.
|
Our Tier 1 capital ratio decreased to 14.4% as of March 2013 from 16.7% as of December 2012
primarily reflecting an increase in RWAs. The increase in RWAs was primarily driven by the implementation of the revised market risk regulatory capital requirements which introduced a new methodology for determining RWAs for market risk and are
designed to implement the new market risk framework of the Basel Committee, as well as the prohibition on the use of external credit ratings, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act. These revised market risk capital requirements are a significant part of
the regulatory capital changes that will ultimately be reflected in our Basel 3 capital ratios.
The table below presents the changes in Tier 1 common capital, Tier 1 capital and
Tier 2 capital for the three months ended March 2013.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in millions |
|
Three Months Ended March 2013 |
|
Tier 1 Common Capital |
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year |
|
|
$58,047 |
|
|
|
Increase in common shareholders equity |
|
|
1,512 |
|
|
|
Decrease in intangible assets |
|
|
416 |
|
|
|
Decrease in equity investments in certain entities |
|
|
846 |
|
|
|
Decrease in disallowed deferred tax assets |
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
Decrease in debt valuation adjustment |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
Increase in other adjustments |
|
|
(10 |
) |
Balance, end of period |
|
|
61,135 |
|
Tier 1 Capital |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year |
|
|
66,977 |
|
|
|
Net increase in Tier 1 common capital |
|
|
3,088 |
|
|
|
Redesignation of junior subordinated debt issued to trusts |
|
|
(687 |
) |
|
|
Increase in other adjustments |
|
|
(7 |
) |
Balance, end of period |
|
|
69,371 |
|
Tier 2 Capital |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, beginning of year |
|
|
13,429 |
|
|
|
Decrease in qualifying subordinated debt |
|
|
(621 |
) |
|
|
Redesignation of junior subordinated debt issued to trusts |
|
|
687 |
|
|
|
Decrease in other adjustments |
|
|
(50 |
) |
Balance, end of period |
|
|
13,445 |
|
Total Capital |
|
|
$82,816 |
|
See Business Regulation in Part I, Item 1 of our Annual Report on
Form 10-K and Note 20 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for additional information about our regulatory capital ratios and the related regulatory requirements, including
pending and proposed regulatory changes.
|
|
|
|
|
142 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Risk-Weighted Assets
RWAs under the Federal Reserve Boards risk-based capital requirements are calculated
based on measures of credit risk and market risk.
RWAs for credit risk reflect amounts for on-balance sheet and
offbalance sheet exposures. Credit risk requirements for on-balance sheet assets, such as receivables and cash, are generally based on the balance sheet value. Credit risk requirements for securities financing transactions are determined based
upon the positive net exposure for each trade, and include the effect of counterparty netting and collateral, as applicable. For off-balance sheet exposures, including commitments and guarantees, a credit equivalent amount is calculated based on the
notional amount of each trade. Requirements for OTC derivatives are based on a combination of positive net exposure and a percentage of the notional amount of each trade, and include the effect of counterparty netting and collateral, as applicable.
All such assets and exposures are then assigned a risk weight depending on, among other things, whether the counterparty is a sovereign, bank or a qualifying securities firm or other entity (or if collateral is held, depending on the nature of
the collateral).
Under Basel 1, prior to the implementation of the revised market risk regulatory capital
requirements, RWAs for market risk were determined by reference to the firms Value-at-Risk (VaR) model, supplemented by the standardized measurement method used to determine RWAs for specific risk for certain positions.
Under the Federal Reserve Boards revised market risk regulatory capital requirements, which became effective on
January 1, 2013, the methodology for calculating RWAs for market risk was changed. RWAs for market risk are now determined using VaR, stressed VaR, incremental risk, comprehensive risk and a standardized measurement method for specific
risk.
VaR is the potential loss in value of inventory positions due to adverse market movements over a defined time horizon
with a specified confidence level. For both risk management purposes and regulatory capital calculations we use a single VaR model which captures risks including interest rates, equity prices, currency rates and commodity prices. VaR used for
regulatory capital requirements (Regulatory VaR) differs from risk management VaR due to different time horizons (10-day vs. 1-day), confidence levels (99% vs. 95%) and differences in the scope of positions on which VaR is calculated. Stressed VaR
is the potential loss in value of inventory positions during a period of significant market
stress. Incremental risk is the potential loss in value of non-securitized inventory positions due to the default or credit migration of issuers of financial instruments over a one-year time
horizon. Comprehensive risk is the potential loss in value, due to price risk and defaults, within the firms credit correlation positions. The standardized measurement method is used to determine RWAs for specific risk for certain
positions by applying supervisory defined risk-weighting factors to such positions after applicable netting is performed.
We will provide additional information on Regulatory VaR, stressed VaR, incremental risk, comprehensive risk and the standardized
measurement method for specific risk on our web site as described under Available Information below.
The
table below presents information on the components of RWAs within our consolidated regulatory capital ratios.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March 2013 |
|
|
|
December 2012 |
|
Credit RWAs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTC derivatives |
|
|
$ 93,903 |
|
|
|
$107,269 |
|
|
|
Commitments and guarantees 1 |
|
|
41,067 |
|
|
|
46,007 |
|
|
|
Securities financing transactions 2 |
|
|
38,054 |
|
|
|
47,069 |
|
|
|
Other 3 |
|
|
99,791 |
|
|
|
87,181 |
|
Total Credit RWAs |
|
|
$272,815 |
|
|
|
$287,526 |
|
Total Market RWAs |
|
|
207,265 |
|
|
|
112,402 |
|
Total
RWAs 4 |
|
|
$480,080 |
|
|
|
$399,928 |
|
1. |
Principally includes certain commitments to extend credit and letters of credit. |
2. |
Represents resale and repurchase agreements and securities borrowed and loaned transactions. |
3. |
Principally includes receivables from customers, other assets, cash and cash equivalents and available-for-sale securities. |
4. |
Under the current regulatory capital framework, there is no explicit requirement for Operational Risk. |
The table below presents information on the components of market RWAs within our consolidated regulatory capital ratios as of
March 2013.
|
|
|
|
|
in millions |
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
Regulatory VaR |
|
|
$ 12,600 |
|
|
|
Stressed VaR |
|
|
43,875 |
|
|
|
Incremental risk |
|
|
23,388 |
|
|
|
Comprehensive risk |
|
|
22,700 |
|
|
|
Specific risk |
|
|
104,702 |
|
Total Market RWAs |
|
|
$207,265 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
143 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process
We perform an ICAAP with the objective of ensuring that the firm is appropriately capitalized relative to the risks in our business.
As part of our ICAAP, we perform an internal risk-based capital assessment. This assessment incorporates market risk, credit
risk and operational risk. Market risk is calculated by using VaR calculations supplemented by risk-based add-ons which include risks related to rare events (tail risks). Credit risk utilizes assumptions about our counterparties probability of
default, the size of our losses in the event of a default and the maturity of our counterparties contractual obligations to us. Operational risk is calculated based on scenarios incorporating multiple types of operational failures. Backtesting
is used to gauge the effectiveness of models at capturing and measuring relevant risks.
We evaluate capital adequacy based on
the result of our internal risk-based capital assessment and regulatory capital ratios, supplemented with the results of stress tests which measure the firms estimated performance under various market conditions. Our goal is to hold sufficient
capital to ensure we remain adequately capitalized after experiencing a severe stress event. Our assessment of capital adequacy is viewed in tandem with our assessment of liquidity adequacy and is integrated into the overall risk management
structure, governance and policy framework of the firm.
We attribute capital usage to each of our businesses based upon our
internal risk-based capital and regulatory frameworks and manage the levels of usage based upon the balance sheet and risk limits established.
Rating Agency Guidelines
The credit rating agencies assign credit ratings to the obligations of Group Inc., which directly issues or guarantees substantially all of the firms senior unsecured obligations. GS&Co. and GSI
have been assigned long- and short-term issuer ratings by certain credit rating agencies. GS Bank USA has also been assigned long-term issuer ratings as well as ratings on its long-term and short-term bank deposits. In addition, credit rating
agencies have assigned ratings to debt obligations of certain other subsidiaries of Group Inc.
The level and composition of
our equity capital are among the many factors considered in determining our credit ratings. Each agency has its own definition of eligible capital and methodology for evaluating capital adequacy, and assessments are generally based on a combination
of factors rather than a single calculation. See Liquidity Risk Management Credit Ratings for further information about credit ratings of Group Inc., GS&Co., GSI and GS Bank USA.
Subsidiary Capital Requirements
Many of our subsidiaries, including GS Bank USA and our broker-dealer subsidiaries, are subject to separate regulation and capital
requirements of the jurisdictions in which they operate.
GS Bank USA is subject to minimum capital requirements that are
calculated in a manner similar to those applicable to bank holding companies and computes its capital ratios in accordance with the regulatory capital requirements currently applicable to state member banks, which are based on Basel 1, as
implemented by the Federal Reserve Board. As of March 2013 and December 2012, GS Bank USAs Tier 1 capital ratio under Basel 1 as implemented by the Federal Reserve Board was 15.9% and 18.9%, respectively. See Note 20
to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information about GS Bank USAs regulatory capital ratios under Basel 1, as implemented by the Federal Reserve Board.
Effective January 1, 2013, GS Bank USA also implemented the revised market risk regulatory capital requirements outlined above. These revised market risk regulatory capital requirements are a significant part of the regulatory capital
changes that will ultimately be reflected in GS Bank USAs Basel 3 capital ratios.
|
|
|
|
|
144 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
For purposes of assessing the adequacy of its capital, GS Bank USA has established an ICAAP
which is similar to that used by Group Inc. In addition, the rules adopted by the Federal Reserve Board under the Dodd-Frank Act require GS Bank USA to conduct stress tests on an annual basis and publish a summary of certain results. GS Bank USA
submitted its annual stress results to the Federal Reserve on January 7, 2013 and published a summary of its results in March 2013. GS Bank USAs capital levels and prompt corrective action classification are subject to
qualitative judgments by its regulators about components, risk weightings and other factors.
We expect that the capital
requirements of several of our subsidiaries are likely to increase in the future due to the various developments arising from the Basel Committee, the Dodd-Frank Act, and other governmental entities and regulators. See Note 20 to the condensed
consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for information about the capital requirements of our other regulated subsidiaries and the potential impact of regulatory reform.
Subsidiaries not subject to separate regulatory capital requirements may hold capital to satisfy local tax and legal guidelines, rating
agency requirements (for entities with assigned credit ratings) or internal policies, including policies concerning the minimum amount of capital a subsidiary should hold based on its underlying level of risk. In certain instances, Group Inc. may be
limited in its ability to access capital held at certain subsidiaries as a result of regulatory, tax or other constraints. As of March 2013 and December 2012, Group Inc.s equity investment in subsidiaries was $71.68 billion and
$73.32 billion, respectively, compared with its total shareholders equity of $77.23 billion and $75.72 billion, respectively.
Group Inc. has guaranteed the payment obligations of GS&Co., GS Bank USA, and Goldman Sachs Execution & Clearing, L.P. (GSEC) subject to certain exceptions. In November 2008, Group Inc.
contributed subsidiaries into GS Bank USA, and Group Inc. agreed to guarantee certain losses, including credit-related losses, relating to assets held by the contributed entities. In connection with this guarantee, Group Inc. also agreed to pledge
to GS Bank USA certain collateral, including interests in subsidiaries and other illiquid assets.
Our capital invested in
non-U.S. subsidiaries is generally exposed to foreign exchange risk, substantially all of which is managed through a combination of derivatives and non-U.S. denominated debt.
Contingency Capital Plan
Our contingency capital plan provides a framework for analyzing and responding to a perceived or actual capital deficiency, including, but not limited to, identification of drivers of a capital
deficiency, as well as mitigants and potential actions. It outlines the appropriate communication procedures to follow during a crisis period, including internal dissemination of information as well as ensuring timely communication with external
stakeholders.
Equity Capital Management
Our objective is to maintain a sufficient level and optimal composition of equity capital. We principally manage our capital through issuances and repurchases of our common stock. We may also, from time
to time, issue or repurchase our preferred stock, junior subordinated debt issued to trusts and other subordinated debt or other forms of capital as business conditions warrant and subject to approval of the Federal Reserve Board. We manage our
capital requirements principally by setting limits on balance sheet assets and/or limits on risk, in each case both at the consolidated and business levels. We attribute capital usage to each of our businesses based upon our internal risk-based
capital and regulatory frameworks and manage the levels of usage based upon the balance sheet and risk limits established.
See Notes 16 and 19 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further
information about our preferred stock, junior subordinated debt issued to trusts and other subordinated debt.
Berkshire Hathaway Warrant. On March 25, 2013, the firm amended its warrant agreement with Berkshire Hathaway Inc. and certain of its
subsidiaries (collectively, Berkshire Hathaway) to require net share settlement and to specify the exercise date as October 1, 2013. Under the amended agreement, the firm will deliver to Berkshire Hathaway the number of shares of common
stock equal in value to the difference between the average closing price of the firms common stock over the 10 trading days preceding October 1, 2013 and the exercise price of $115.00 multiplied by the number of shares of common
stock (43.5 million) covered by the warrant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
145 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Share Repurchase Program. We seek to use our share repurchase program to help maintain the appropriate level of common equity. The repurchase program is effected primarily through regular open-market purchases, the amounts and
timing of which are determined primarily by our current and projected capital positions (i.e., comparisons of our desired level and composition of capital to our actual level and composition of capital), but which may also be influenced by general
market conditions and the prevailing price and trading volumes of our common stock.
On April 15, 2013, the
Board of Directors of Group Inc. (Board), authorized the repurchase of an additional 75.0 million shares of common stock pursuant to the firms existing share repurchase program. As of April 15, 2013, under the share repurchase
program approved by the Board, we can repurchase up to 86.4 million additional shares of common stock, including the newly authorized amount; however, any such repurchases are subject to the approval of the Federal Reserve Board. See
Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds in Part II, Item 2 and Note 19 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for additional information on
our repurchase program and see above for information about the annual CCAR.
Other Capital Metrics
The table below presents information on our shareholders equity and book value per common share.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions, except per share amounts |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
$77,228 |
|
|
|
$75,716 |
|
|
|
Common shareholders equity |
|
|
71,028 |
|
|
|
69,516 |
|
|
|
Tangible common shareholders equity |
|
|
66,345 |
|
|
|
64,417 |
|
|
|
Book value per common share |
|
|
148.41 |
|
|
|
144.67 |
|
|
|
Tangible book value per common share |
|
|
138.62 |
|
|
|
134.06 |
|
Tangible common shareholders
equity. Tangible common shareholders equity equals total shareholders equity less preferred stock, goodwill and identifiable intangible assets. We believe that tangible common
shareholders equity is meaningful because it is a measure that we and investors use to assess capital adequacy. Tangible common shareholders equity is a non-GAAP measure and may not be comparable to similar non-GAAP measures used by
other companies.
The table below presents the reconciliation of total shareholders equity to tangible common
shareholders equity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
$77,228 |
|
|
|
$75,716 |
|
|
|
Deduct: Preferred stock |
|
|
(6,200 |
) |
|
|
(6,200 |
) |
Common shareholders equity |
|
|
71,028 |
|
|
|
69,516 |
|
|
|
Deduct: Goodwill and identifiable intangible assets |
|
|
(4,683 |
) |
|
|
(5,099 |
) |
Tangible common shareholders equity |
|
|
$66,345 |
|
|
|
$64,417 |
|
Book value and tangible book value per common
share. Book value and tangible book value per common share are based on common shares outstanding, including restricted stock units granted to employees with no future service
requirements, of 478.6 million and 480.5 million as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. We believe that tangible book value per common share (tangible common shareholders equity divided by common shares
outstanding) is meaningful because it is a measure that we and investors use to assess capital adequacy. Tangible book value per common share is a non-GAAP measure and may not be comparable to similar non-GAAP measures used by other companies.
|
|
|
|
|
146 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Off-Balance-Sheet Arrangements
and Contractual Obligations
Off-Balance-Sheet
Arrangements
We have various types of off-balance-sheet arrangements that we enter into in the ordinary
course of business. Our involvement in these arrangements can take many different forms, including:
|
|
purchasing or retaining residual and other interests in special purpose entities such as mortgage-backed and other asset-backed securitization
vehicles; |
|
|
holding senior and subordinated debt, interests in limited and general partnerships, and preferred and common stock in other nonconsolidated
vehicles; |
|
|
entering into interest rate, foreign currency, equity, commodity and credit derivatives, including total return swaps;
|
|
|
entering into operating leases; and |
|
|
providing guarantees, indemnifications, loan commitments, letters of credit and representations and warranties. |
We enter into these arrangements for a variety of business purposes, including securitizations. The securitization vehicles that purchase
mortgages, corporate bonds, and other types of financial assets are critical to the functioning
of several significant investor markets, including the mortgage-backed and other asset-backed securities markets, since they offer investors access to specific cash flows and risks created
through the securitization process.
We also enter into these arrangements to underwrite client securitization transactions;
provide secondary market liquidity; make investments in performing and nonperforming debt, equity, real estate and other assets; provide investors with credit-linked and asset-repackaged notes; and receive or provide letters of credit to satisfy
margin requirements and to facilitate the clearance and settlement process.
Our financial interests in, and derivative
transactions with, such nonconsolidated entities are generally accounted for at fair value, in the same manner as our other financial instruments, except in cases where we apply the equity method of accounting.
The table below presents where a discussion of our various off-balance-sheet arrangements may be found in Part I, Items 1 and 2 of
this Form 10-Q. In addition, see Note 3 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for a discussion of our consolidation policies.
|
|
|
|
|
Type of Off-Balance-Sheet Arrangement |
|
|
|
Disclosure in Form 10-Q |
Variable interests and other obligations, including contingent obligations, arising from variable interests in nonconsolidated VIEs |
|
|
|
See Note 11 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q. |
|
Leases, letters of credit, and lending and other commitments |
|
|
|
See Contractual Obligations below and Note 18 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this
Form 10-Q. |
|
Guarantees |
|
|
|
See Contractual Obligations below and Note 18 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this
Form 10-Q. |
|
Derivatives |
|
|
|
See Credit Risk Management Credit Exposures OTC Derivatives below and
Notes 4, 5, 7 and 18 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
147 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Contractual Obligations
We have certain contractual obligations which require us to make future cash payments.
These contractual obligations include our unsecured long-term borrowings, secured long-term financings, time deposits, contractual interest payments and insurance agreements, all of which are included in our condensed consolidated statements of
financial condition. Our obligations to make future cash
payments also include certain off-balance-sheet contractual obligations such as purchase obligations, minimum rental payments under noncancelable leases and commitments and guarantees.
The table below presents our contractual obligations, commitments and guarantees as of March 2013.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in millions |
|
|
Remainder of 2013 |
|
|
|
2014-
2015 |
|
|
|
2016-
2017 |
|
|
|
2018-
Thereafter |
|
|
|
Total |
|
Amounts related to on-balance-sheet obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time deposits 1 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 6,781 |
|
|
|
$ 4,421 |
|
|
|
$ 5,517 |
|
|
|
$ 16,719 |
|
|
|
Secured long-term financings 2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,429 |
|
|
|
1,197 |
|
|
|
1,345 |
|
|
|
8,971 |
|
|
|
Unsecured long-term borrowings 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
37,121 |
|
|
|
42,269 |
|
|
|
87,618 |
|
|
|
167,008 |
|
|
|
Contractual interest payments 4 |
|
|
4,933 |
|
|
|
12,974 |
|
|
|
9,959 |
|
|
|
33,812 |
|
|
|
61,678 |
|
|
|
Insurance liabilities 5 |
|
|
355 |
|
|
|
923 |
|
|
|
905 |
|
|
|
13,731 |
|
|
|
15,914 |
|
|
|
Subordinated liabilities issued by consolidated VIEs |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
901 |
|
|
|
993 |
|
|
|
Amounts related to off-balance-sheet arrangements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments to extend credit |
|
|
8,163 |
|
|
|
16,813 |
|
|
|
39,973 |
|
|
|
9,152 |
|
|
|
74,101 |
|
|
|
Contingent and forward starting resale and securities borrowing agreements |
|
|
72,068 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,068 |
|
|
|
Forward starting repurchase and secured lending agreements |
|
|
13,268 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,268 |
|
|
|
Letters of credit |
|
|
533 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
727 |
|
|
|
Investment commitments |
|
|
1,627 |
|
|
|
1,908 |
|
|
|
239 |
|
|
|
3,608 |
|
|
|
7,382 |
|
|
|
Other commitments |
|
|
3,483 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
3,659 |
|
|
|
Minimum rental payments |
|
|
304 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
558 |
|
|
|
1,363 |
|
|
|
2,955 |
|
|
|
Derivative guarantees |
|
|
318,426 |
|
|
|
275,467 |
|
|
|
53,158 |
|
|
|
58,370 |
|
|
|
705,421 |
|
|
|
Securities lending indemnifications |
|
|
30,360 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,360 |
|
|
|
Other financial guarantees |
|
|
751 |
|
|
|
455 |
|
|
|
1,268 |
|
|
|
1,028 |
|
|
|
3,502 |
|
1. |
Excludes $10.21 billion of time deposits maturing within one year. |
2. |
The aggregate contractual principal amount of secured long-term financings for which the fair value option was elected, primarily consisting of transfers of
financial assets accounted for as financings rather than sales and certain other nonrecourse financings, exceeded their related fair value by $134 million. |
3. |
Includes $9.84 billion related to interest rate hedges on certain unsecured long-term borrowings. In addition, the fair value of unsecured long-term
borrowings (principal and non-principal-protected) for which the fair value option was elected exceeded the related aggregate contractual principal amount by $140 million. Excludes $82 million of unsecured long-term borrowings related to
our reinsurance business classified as held for sale as of March 2013. See Note 17 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information. |
4. |
Represents estimated future interest payments related to unsecured long-term borrowings, secured long-term financings and time deposits based on applicable
interest rates as of March 2013. Includes stated coupons, if any, on structured notes. |
5. |
Represents estimated undiscounted payments related to future benefits and unpaid claims arising from policies associated with our insurance activities,
excluding separate accounts and estimated recoveries under reinsurance contracts. Excludes $13.02 billion of insurance liabilities related to our reinsurance business classified as held for sale as of March 2013. See Note 17 to the
condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information. |
In the table above:
|
|
Obligations maturing within one year of our financial statement date or redeemable within one year of our financial statement date at the option of
the holder are excluded and are treated as short-term obligations. |
|
|
Obligations that are repayable prior to maturity at our option are reflected at their contractual maturity dates and obligations that are redeemable
prior to maturity at the option of the holders are reflected at the dates such options become exercisable.
|
|
|
Amounts included in the table do not necessarily reflect the actual future cash flow requirements for these arrangements because commitments and
guarantees represent notional amounts and may expire unused or be reduced or cancelled at the counterpartys request. |
|
|
Due to the uncertainty of the timing and amounts that will ultimately be paid, our liability for unrecognized tax benefits has been excluded. See
Note 24 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information about our unrecognized tax benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
148 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
See Notes 15 and 18 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I,
Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information about our short-term borrowings and commitments and guarantees, respectively.
As of March 2013, our unsecured long-term borrowings were $167.01 billion, with maturities extending to 2061, and consisted principally of senior borrowings. See Note 16 to the condensed
consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information about our unsecured long-term borrowings.
As of March 2013, our future minimum rental payments net of minimum sublease rentals under noncancelable leases were $2.96 billion. These lease commitments, principally for office space, expire
on various dates through 2069. Certain agreements are subject to periodic escalation provisions for increases in real estate taxes and other charges. See Note 18 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of
this Form 10-Q for further information about our leases.
Our occupancy expenses include costs associated with office
space held in excess of our current requirements. This excess space, the cost of which is charged to earnings as incurred, is being held for potential growth or to replace currently occupied space that we may exit in the future. We regularly
evaluate our current and future space capacity in relation to current and projected staffing levels. During the three months ended March 2013, total occupancy expenses for space held in excess of our current requirements were not material. In
addition, during the three months ended March 2013, we incurred exit costs of $1 million related to our office space. We may incur exit costs in the future to the extent we (i) reduce our space capacity or (ii) commit to, or
occupy, new properties in the locations in which we operate and, consequently, dispose of existing space that had been held for potential growth. These exit costs may be material to our results of operations in a given period.
Overview and Structure of Risk Management
Overview
We believe that effective
risk management is of primary importance to the success of the firm. Accordingly, we have comprehensive risk management processes through which we monitor, evaluate and manage the risks we assume in conducting our activities. These include market,
credit, liquidity, operational, legal, regulatory and reputational risk exposures. Our risk management framework is built around three core components: governance, processes and people.
Governance. Risk
management governance starts with our Board, which plays an important role in reviewing and approving risk management policies and practices, both directly and through its Risk Committee, which consists of all of our independent directors. The Board
also receives regular briefings on firmwide risks, including market risk, liquidity risk, credit risk and operational risk from our independent control and support functions, including the chief risk officer. The chief risk officer, as part of the
review of the firmwide risk package, regularly advises the Risk Committee of the Board of relevant risk metrics and material exposures. Next, at the most senior levels of the firm, our leaders are experienced risk managers, with a sophisticated and
detailed understanding of the risks we take. Our senior managers lead and participate in risk-oriented committees, as do the leaders of our independent control and support functions including those in compliance, controllers, credit risk
management, human capital management, legal, market risk management, operations, operational risk management, tax, technology and treasury.
The firms governance structure provides the protocol and responsibility for decision-making on risk management issues and ensures implementation of those decisions. We make extensive use of
risk-related committees that meet regularly and serve as an important means to facilitate and foster ongoing discussions to identify, manage and mitigate risks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
149 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
We maintain strong communication about risk and we have a culture of collaboration in
decision-making among the revenue-producing units, independent control and support functions, committees and senior management. While we believe that the first line of defense in managing risk rests with the managers in our revenue-producing units,
we dedicate extensive resources to independent control and support functions in order to ensure a strong oversight structure and an appropriate segregation of duties. We regularly reinforce the firms strong culture of escalation and
accountability across all divisions and functions.
Processes. We maintain various processes and procedures that are critical components of our risk management. First and foremost is our daily discipline of marking substantially all of the firms inventory to
current market levels. Goldman Sachs carries its inventory at fair value, with changes in valuation reflected immediately in our risk management systems and in net revenues. We do so because we believe this discipline is one of the most effective
tools for assessing and managing risk and that it provides transparent and realistic insight into our financial exposures.
We also apply a rigorous framework of limits to control risk across multiple transactions, products, businesses and markets. This includes
setting credit and market risk limits at a variety of levels and monitoring these limits on a daily basis. Limits are typically set at levels that will be periodically exceeded, rather than at levels which reflect our maximum risk appetite. This
fosters an ongoing dialogue on risk among revenue-producing units, independent control and support functions, committees and senior management, as well as rapid escalation of risk-related matters. See Market Risk Management and
Credit Risk Management for further information on our risk limits.
Active management of our positions is another
important process. Proactive mitigation of our market and credit exposures minimizes the risk that we will be required to take outsized actions during periods of stress.
We also focus on the rigor and effectiveness of the firms risk systems. The goal of our risk management technology is to get the right information to the right people at the right time, which
requires systems that are comprehensive, reliable and timely. We devote significant time and resources to our risk management technology to ensure that it consistently provides us with complete, accurate and timely information.
People. Even the best technology serves only as a tool for helping to make informed decisions in real time about the risks we are taking. Ultimately, effective risk management requires our people to interpret
our risk data on an ongoing and timely basis and adjust risk positions accordingly. In both our revenue-producing units and our independent control and support functions, the experience of our professionals, and their understanding of the nuances
and limitations of each risk measure, guide the firm in assessing exposures and maintaining them within prudent levels.
Structure
Ultimate oversight of risk is the responsibility of the firms Board. The Board oversees risk both directly and through its Risk
Committee. Within the firm, a series of committees with specific risk management mandates have oversight or decision-making responsibilities for risk management activities. Committee membership generally consists of senior managers from both our
revenue-producing units and our independent control and support functions. We have established procedures for these committees to ensure that appropriate information barriers are in place. Our primary risk committees, most of which also have
additional sub-committees or working groups, are described below. In addition to these committees, we have other risk-oriented committees which provide oversight for different businesses, activities, products, regions and legal entities.
Membership of the firms risk committees is reviewed regularly and updated to reflect changes in the responsibilities of
the committee members. Accordingly, the length of time that members serve on the respective committees varies as determined by the committee chairs and based on the responsibilities of the members within the firm.
In addition, independent control and support functions, which report to the chief financial officer, the general counsel and the chief
administrative officer, or in the case of Internal Audit, to the Audit Committee of the Board, are responsible for day-to-day oversight or monitoring of risk, as discussed in greater detail in the following sections. Internal Audit, which includes
professionals with a broad range of audit and industry experience, including risk management expertise, is responsible for independently assessing and validating key controls within the risk management framework.
|
|
|
|
|
150 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
The chart below presents an overview of our risk management governance structure,
highlighting the
oversight of our Board, our key risk-related committees and the independence of our control and support functions.
Management Committee. The Management Committee oversees the global activities of the firm, including all of the firms independent control and support functions. It provides this oversight directly and through authority
delegated to committees it has established. This committee is comprised of the most senior leaders of the firm, and is chaired by the firms chief executive officer. The Management Committee has established various committees with delegated
authority and the chairperson of the Management Committee appoints the chairpersons of these committees. Most members of the Management Committee are also members of other firmwide, divisional and regional committees. The following are the
committees that are principally involved in firmwide risk management.
Firmwide Client and Business Standards
Committee. The Firmwide Client and Business Standards Committee assesses and makes determinations regarding business standards and practices, reputational risk management, client
relationships and client service, is chaired by the firms president and chief operating officer, and reports to the Management Committee. This committee also has responsibility for overseeing the implementation of the recommendations of the
Business Standards Committee. This committee has established the following two risk-related committees that report to it:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
151 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
|
|
Firmwide New Activity Committee.
The Firmwide New Activity Committee is responsible for reviewing new activities and for establishing a process to identify and review previously approved activities that are significant and that have changed in complexity and/or structure or present
different reputational and suitability concerns over time to consider whether these activities remain appropriate. This committee is co-chaired by the firms head of operations/chief operating officer for Europe, Middle East and Africa and the
chief administrative officer of our Investment Management Division who are appointed by the Firmwide Client and Business Standards Committee chairperson. |
|
|
Firmwide Suitability Committee. The
Firmwide Suitability Committee is responsible for setting standards and policies for product, transaction and client suitability and providing a forum for consistency across divisions, regions and products on suitability assessments. This committee
also reviews suitability matters escalated from other firm committees. This committee is co-chaired by the firms international general counsel and the co-head of our Investment Management Division who are appointed by the Firmwide
Client and Business Standards Committee chairperson. |
Firmwide Risk Committee.
The Firmwide Risk Committee is globally responsible for the ongoing monitoring and management of the firms financial risks. Through both direct and delegated authority, the Firmwide Risk Committee approves firmwide, product, divisional and
business-level limits for both market and credit risks, approves sovereign credit risk limits and reviews results of stress tests and scenario analyses. This committee is co-chaired by the firms chief financial officer and a senior managing
director from the firms executive office, and reports to the Management Committee. The following four committees report to the Firmwide Risk Committee. The chairperson of the Securities Division Risk Committee is appointed by the chairpersons
of the Firmwide Risk Committee; the chairpersons of the Credit Policy and Firmwide Operational Risk Committees are appointed by the firms chief risk officer; and the chairpersons of the Firmwide Finance Committee are appointed by the
Firmwide Risk Committee.
|
|
Securities Division Risk Committee.
The Securities Division Risk Committee sets market risk limits, subject to overall firmwide risk limits, for the Securities Division based on a number of risk measures, including but not limited to VaR, stress tests, scenario analyses and balance
sheet levels. This committee is chaired by the chief risk officer of our Securities Division. |
|
|
Credit Policy Committee. The Credit
Policy Committee establishes and reviews broad firmwide credit policies and parameters that are implemented by our Credit Risk Management department (Credit Risk Management). This committee is chaired by the firms chief credit officer.
|
|
|
Firmwide Operational Risk
Committee. The Firmwide Operational Risk Committee provides oversight of the ongoing development and implementation of our operational risk policies, framework and methodologies, and
monitors the effectiveness of operational risk management. This committee is chaired by a managing director in Credit Risk Management. |
|
|
Firmwide Finance Committee. The
Firmwide Finance Committee has oversight responsibility for liquidity risk, the size and composition of our balance sheet and capital base, and credit ratings. This committee regularly reviews our liquidity, balance sheet, funding position and
capitalization, approves related policies, and makes recommendations as to any adjustments to be made in light of current events, risks, exposures and regulatory requirements. As a part of such oversight, this committee reviews and approves balance
sheet limits and the size of our GCE. This committee is co-chaired by the firms chief financial officer and the firms global treasurer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
152 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
The following committees report jointly to the Firmwide Risk Committee and the Firmwide
Client and Business Standards Committee:
|
|
Firmwide Commitments Committee. The
Firmwide Commitments Committee reviews the firms underwriting and distribution activities with respect to equity and equity-related product offerings, and sets and maintains policies and procedures designed to ensure that legal, reputational,
regulatory and business standards are maintained on a global basis. In addition to reviewing specific transactions, this committee periodically conducts general strategic reviews of sectors and products and establishes policies in connection with
transaction practices. This committee is co-chaired by the firms senior strategy officer and the co-head of Global Mergers & Acquisitions who are appointed by the Firmwide Client and Business Standards Committee chairperson.
|
|
|
Firmwide Capital Committee. The
Firmwide Capital Committee provides approval and oversight of debt-related transactions, including principal commitments of the firms capital. This committee aims to ensure that business and reputational standards for underwritings and capital
commitments are maintained on a global basis. This committee is co-chaired by the firms global treasurer and the head of credit finance for Europe, Middle East and Africa who are appointed by the Firmwide Risk Committee chairpersons.
|
Investment Management Division Risk Committee. The Investment Management Division Risk Committee is responsible for the ongoing monitoring and control of global market, counterparty credit and liquidity risks associated with the activities of our
investment management businesses. The head of Investment Management Division risk management is the chair of this committee. The Investment Management Division Risk Committee reports to the firms chief risk officer.
Conflicts Management
Conflicts of interest and the firms approach to dealing with them are fundamental to our client relationships, our reputation and our long-term success. The term conflict of interest
does not have a universally accepted meaning, and conflicts can arise in many forms within a business or between businesses. The responsibility for identifying potential conflicts, as well as complying with the firms policies and procedures,
is shared by the entire firm.
We have a multilayered approach to resolving conflicts and addressing reputational risk. The
firms senior management oversees policies related to conflicts resolution. The firms senior management, the Business Selection and Conflicts Resolution Group, the Legal Department and Compliance Division, the Firmwide Client and Business
Standards Committee and other internal committees all play roles in the formulation of policies, standards and principles and assist in making judgments regarding the appropriate resolution of particular conflicts. Resolving potential conflicts
necessarily depends on the facts and circumstances of a particular situation and the application of experienced and informed judgment.
At the transaction level, various people and groups have roles. As a general matter, the Business Selection and Conflicts Resolution Group reviews all financing and advisory assignments in Investment
Banking and certain investing, lending and other activities of the firm. Various transaction oversight committees, such as the Firmwide Capital, Commitments and Suitability Committees and other committees across the firm, also review new
underwritings, loans, investments and structured products. These committees work with internal and external lawyers and the Compliance Division to evaluate and address any actual or potential conflicts.
We regularly assess our policies and procedures that address conflicts of interest in an effort to conduct our business in accordance with
the highest ethical standards and in compliance with all applicable laws, rules, and regulations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
153 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Liquidity Risk Management
Liquidity is of critical importance to financial institutions. Most of the recent failures
of financial institutions have occurred in large part due to insufficient liquidity. Accordingly, the firm has in place a comprehensive and conservative set of liquidity and funding policies to address both firm-specific and broader industry or
market liquidity events. Our principal objective is to be able to fund the firm and to enable our core businesses to continue to serve clients and generate revenues, even under adverse circumstances.
We manage liquidity risk according to the following principles:
Excess Liquidity. We
maintain substantial excess liquidity to meet a broad range of potential cash outflows and collateral needs in a stressed environment.
Asset-Liability Management. We assess anticipated holding periods for our assets and their
expected liquidity in a stressed environment. We manage the maturities and diversity of our funding across markets, products and counterparties, and seek to maintain liabilities of appropriate tenor relative to our asset base.
Contingency Funding Plan.
We maintain a contingency funding plan to provide a framework for analyzing and responding to a liquidity crisis situation or periods of market stress. This framework sets forth the plan of action to fund normal business activity in emergency and
stress situations. These principles are discussed in more detail below.
Excess Liquidity
Our most important liquidity policy is to pre-fund our estimated potential cash and collateral needs during a liquidity crisis and hold
this excess liquidity in the form of unencumbered, highly liquid securities and cash. We believe that the securities held in our global core excess would be readily convertible to cash in a matter of days, through liquidation, by entering into
repurchase agreements or from maturities of resale agreements, and that this cash would allow us to meet immediate obligations without needing to sell other assets or depend on additional funding from credit-sensitive markets.
As of March 2013 and December 2012, the fair value of the securities and certain
overnight cash deposits included in our GCE totaled $174.44 billion and $174.62 billion, respectively. Based on the results of our internal liquidity risk model, discussed below, as well as our consideration of other factors including, but
not limited to, an assessment of our potential intraday liquidity needs and a qualitative assessment of the condition of the financial markets and the firm, we believe our liquidity position as of March 2013 was appropriate.
The table below presents the fair value of the securities and certain overnight cash deposits that are included in our GCE.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average for the |
|
in millions |
|
|
Three Months Ended March 2013 |
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 2012 |
|
U.S. dollar-denominated |
|
|
$136,228 |
|
|
|
$125,111 |
|
|
|
Non-U.S. dollar-denominated |
|
|
44,278 |
|
|
|
46,984 |
|
Total |
|
|
$180,506 |
|
|
|
$172,095 |
|
The U.S. dollar-denominated excess is composed of (i) unencumbered U.S. government and federal agency
obligations (including highly liquid U.S. federal agency mortgage-backed obligations), all of which are eligible as collateral in Federal Reserve open market operations and (ii) certain overnight U.S. dollar cash deposits. The non-U.S.
dollar-denominated excess is composed of only unencumbered German, French, Japanese and United Kingdom government obligations and certain overnight cash deposits in highly liquid currencies. We strictly limit our excess liquidity to this narrowly
defined list of securities and cash because they are highly liquid, even in a difficult funding environment. We do not include other potential sources of excess liquidity, such as less liquid unencumbered securities or committed credit facilities,
in our GCE.
|
|
|
|
|
154 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
The table below presents the fair value of our GCE by asset class.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average for the |
|
in millions |
|
|
Three Months Ended March 2013 |
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 2012 |
|
Overnight cash deposits |
|
|
$ 63,045 |
|
|
|
$ 52,233 |
|
|
|
U.S. government obligations |
|
|
73,106 |
|
|
|
72,379 |
|
|
|
U.S. federal agency obligations, including highly liquid U.S. federal agency mortgage-backed
obligations |
|
|
1,580 |
|
|
|
2,313 |
|
|
|
German, French, Japanese and United Kingdom government obligations |
|
|
42,775 |
|
|
|
45,170 |
|
Total |
|
|
$180,506 |
|
|
|
$172,095 |
|
The GCE is held at Group Inc. and our major broker-dealer and bank subsidiaries, as presented in the
table below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average for the |
|
in millions |
|
|
Three Months Ended March 2013 |
|
|
|
Year Ended
December 2012 |
|
Group Inc. |
|
|
$ 25,656 |
|
|
|
$ 37,405 |
|
|
|
Major broker-dealer subsidiaries |
|
|
87,895 |
|
|
|
78,229 |
|
|
|
Major bank subsidiaries |
|
|
66,955 |
|
|
|
56,461 |
|
Total |
|
|
$180,506 |
|
|
|
$172,095 |
|
Our GCE reflects the following principles:
|
|
The first days or weeks of a liquidity crisis are the most critical to a companys survival. |
|
|
Focus must be maintained on all potential cash and collateral outflows, not just disruptions to financing flows. Our businesses are diverse, and our
liquidity needs are determined by many factors, including market movements, collateral requirements and client commitments, all of which can change dramatically in a difficult funding environment. |
|
|
During a liquidity crisis, credit-sensitive funding, including unsecured debt and some types of secured financing agreements, may be unavailable,
and the terms (e.g., interest rates, collateral provisions and tenor) or availability of other types of secured financing may change. |
|
|
As a result of our policy to pre-fund liquidity that we estimate may be needed in a crisis, we hold more unencumbered securities and have larger
debt balances than our businesses would otherwise require. We believe that our liquidity is stronger with greater balances of highly liquid unencumbered securities, even though it increases our total assets and our funding costs.
|
We believe that our GCE provides us with a resilient source of funds that would be
available in advance of potential cash and collateral outflows and gives us significant flexibility in managing through a difficult funding environment.
In order to determine the appropriate size of our GCE, we use an internal liquidity model, referred to as the Modeled Liquidity Outflow, which captures and quantifies the firms liquidity risks. We
also consider other factors including, but not limited to, an assessment of our potential intraday liquidity needs and a qualitative assessment of the condition of the financial markets and the firm.
We distribute our GCE across entities, asset types, and clearing agents to provide us with sufficient operating liquidity to ensure timely
settlement in all major markets, even in a difficult funding environment.
We maintain our GCE to enable us to meet current and
potential liquidity requirements of our parent company, Group Inc., and our major broker-dealer and bank subsidiaries. The Modeled Liquidity Outflow incorporates a consolidated requirement as well as a standalone requirement for each of our major
broker-dealer and bank subsidiaries. Liquidity held directly in each of these subsidiaries is intended for use only by that subsidiary to meet its liquidity requirements and is assumed not to be available to Group Inc. unless (i) legally
provided for and (ii) there are no additional regulatory, tax or other restrictions. We hold a portion of our GCE directly at Group Inc. to support consolidated requirements not accounted for in the major subsidiaries. In addition to the GCE,
we maintain operating cash balances in several of our other operating entities, primarily for use in specific currencies, entities, or jurisdictions where we do not have immediate access to parent company liquidity.
In addition to our GCE, we have a significant amount of other unencumbered cash and financial instruments, including other government
obligations, high-grade money market securities, corporate obligations, marginable equities, loans and cash deposits not included in our GCE. The fair value of these assets averaged $92.03 billion and $87.09 billion for the three months
ended March 2013 and year ended December 2012, respectively. We do not consider these assets liquid enough to be eligible for our GCE liquidity pool and therefore conservatively do not assume we will generate liquidity from these assets in
our Modeled Liquidity Outflow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
155 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Modeled Liquidity Outflow. Our Modeled Liquidity Outflow is based on a scenario that includes both a market-wide stress and a firm-specific stress, characterized by the following qualitative elements:
|
|
Severely challenged market environments, including low consumer and corporate confidence, financial and political instability, adverse changes in
market values, including potential declines in equity markets and widening of credit spreads. |
|
|
A firm-specific crisis potentially triggered by material losses, reputational damage, litigation, executive departure, and/or a ratings downgrade.
|
The following are the critical modeling parameters of the Modeled Liquidity Outflow:
|
|
Liquidity needs over a 30-day scenario. |
|
|
A two-notch downgrade of the firms long-term senior unsecured credit ratings. |
|
|
A combination of contractual outflows, such as upcoming maturities of unsecured debt, and contingent outflows (e.g., actions though not
contractually required, we may deem necessary in a crisis). We assume that most contingent outflows will occur within the initial days and weeks of a crisis. |
|
|
No issuance of equity or unsecured debt. |
|
|
No support from government funding facilities. Although we have access to various central bank funding programs, we do not assume reliance on them
as a source of funding in a liquidity crisis. |
|
|
We do not assume asset liquidation, other than the GCE. |
The Modeled Liquidity Outflow is calculated and reported to senior management on a daily basis. We regularly refine our model to reflect changes in market or economic conditions and the firms
business mix.
The potential contractual and contingent cash and collateral outflows covered in our
Modeled Liquidity Outflow include:
Unsecured Funding
|
|
Contractual: All upcoming maturities of unsecured long-term debt, commercial paper, promissory notes and other unsecured funding products. We assume
that we will be unable to issue new unsecured debt or rollover any maturing debt. |
|
|
Contingent: Repurchases of our outstanding long-term debt, commercial paper and hybrid financial instruments in the ordinary course of business as a
market maker. |
Deposits
|
|
Contractual: All upcoming maturities of term deposits. We assume that we will be unable to raise new term deposits or rollover any maturing term
deposits. |
|
|
Contingent: Withdrawals of bank deposits that have no contractual maturity. The withdrawal assumptions reflect, among other factors, the type of
deposit, whether the deposit is insured or uninsured, and the firms relationship with the depositor. |
Secured Funding
|
|
Contractual: A portion of upcoming contractual maturities of secured funding due to either the inability to refinance or the ability to refinance
only at wider haircuts (i.e., on terms which require us to post additional collateral). Our assumptions reflect, among other factors, the quality of the underlying collateral, counterparty roll probabilities (our assessment of the
counterpartys likelihood of continuing to provide funding on a secured basis at the maturity of the trade) and counterparty concentration. |
|
|
Contingent: Adverse changes in value of financial assets pledged as collateral for financing transactions, which would necessitate additional
collateral postings under those transactions. |
|
|
|
|
|
156 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
OTC Derivatives
|
|
Contingent: Collateral postings to counterparties due to adverse changes in the value of our OTC derivatives, excluding those that are cleared and
settled through central counterparties (OTC-cleared). |
|
|
Contingent: Other outflows of cash or collateral related to OTC derivatives, excluding OTC-cleared, including the impact of trade terminations,
collateral substitutions, collateral disputes, collateral calls or termination payments required by a two-notch downgrade in our credit ratings, and collateral that has not been called by counterparties, but is available to them.
|
Exchange-Traded and OTC-cleared Derivatives
|
|
Contingent: Variation margin postings required due to adverse changes in the value of our outstanding exchange-traded and OTC-cleared derivatives.
|
|
|
Contingent: An increase in initial margin and guaranty fund requirements by derivative clearing houses. |
Customer Cash and Securities
|
|
Contingent: Liquidity outflows associated with our prime brokerage business, including withdrawals of customer credit balances, and a reduction in
customer short positions, which serve as a funding source for long positions. |
Unfunded Commitments
|
|
Contingent: Draws on our unfunded commitments. Draw assumptions reflect, among other things, the type of commitment and counterparty.
|
Other
|
|
Other upcoming large cash outflows, such as tax payments. |
Asset-Liability Management
Our liquidity risk management policies are designed to
ensure we have a sufficient amount of financing, even when funding markets experience persistent stress. We seek to maintain a long-dated and diversified funding profile, taking into consideration the characteristics and liquidity profile of
our assets.
Our approach to asset-liability management includes:
|
|
Conservatively managing the overall characteristics of our funding book, with a focus on maintaining long-term, diversified sources of funding in
excess of our current requirements. See Balance Sheet and Funding Sources Funding Sources for additional details. |
|
|
Actively managing and monitoring our asset base, with particular focus on the liquidity, holding period and our ability to fund assets on a secured
basis. This enables us to determine the most appropriate funding products and tenors. See Balance Sheet and Funding Sources Balance Sheet Management for more detail on our balance sheet management process and
Funding Sources Secured Funding for more detail on asset classes that may be harder to fund on a secured basis. |
|
|
Raising secured and unsecured financing that has a long tenor relative to the liquidity profile of our assets. This reduces the risk that our
liabilities will come due in advance of our ability to generate liquidity from the sale of our assets. Because we maintain a highly liquid balance sheet, the holding period of certain of our assets may be materially shorter than their contractual
maturity dates. |
Our goal is to ensure that the firm maintains sufficient liquidity to fund its assets and
meet its contractual and contingent obligations in normal times as well as during periods of market stress. Through our dynamic balance sheet management process (see Balance Sheet and Funding Sources Balance Sheet
Management), we use actual and projected asset balances to determine secured and unsecured funding requirements. Funding plans are reviewed and approved by the Firmwide Finance Committee on a quarterly basis. In addition, senior managers in
our independent control and support functions regularly analyze, and the Firmwide Finance Committee reviews, our consolidated total capital position (unsecured long-term borrowings plus total shareholders equity) so that we maintain a level of
long-term funding that is sufficient to meet our long-term financing requirements. In a liquidity crisis, we would first use our GCE in order to avoid reliance on asset sales (other than our GCE). However, we recognize that orderly asset sales may
be prudent or necessary in a severe or persistent liquidity crisis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
157 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Subsidiary Funding Policies. The majority of our unsecured funding is raised by Group Inc. which lends the necessary funds to its subsidiaries, some of which are regulated, to meet their asset financing, liquidity and capital
requirements. In addition, Group Inc. provides its regulated subsidiaries with the necessary capital to meet their regulatory requirements. The benefits of this approach to subsidiary funding are enhanced control and greater flexibility to meet the
funding requirements of our subsidiaries. Funding is also raised at the subsidiary level through a variety of products, including secured funding, unsecured borrowings and deposits.
Our intercompany funding policies assume that, unless legally provided for, a subsidiarys funds or securities are not freely
available to its parent company or other subsidiaries. In particular, many of our subsidiaries are subject to laws that authorize regulatory bodies to block or reduce the flow of funds from those subsidiaries to Group Inc. Regulatory action of that
kind could impede access to funds that Group Inc. needs to make payments on its obligations. Accordingly, we assume that the capital provided to our regulated subsidiaries is not available to Group Inc. or other subsidiaries and any other financing
provided to our regulated subsidiaries is not available until the maturity of such financing.
Group Inc. has provided
substantial amounts of equity and subordinated indebtedness, directly or indirectly, to its regulated subsidiaries. For example, as of March 2013, Group Inc. had $30.03 billion of equity and subordinated indebtedness invested in
GS&Co., its principal U.S. registered broker-dealer; $29.77 billion invested in GSI, a regulated U.K. broker-dealer; $2.63 billion invested in GSEC, a U.S. registered broker-dealer; $3.50 billion invested in Goldman Sachs Japan
Co., Ltd., a regulated Japanese broker-dealer; and $19.06 billion invested in GS Bank USA, a regulated New York State-chartered bank. Group Inc. also provided, directly or indirectly, $74.24 billion of unsubordinated loans and
$10.28 billion of collateral to these entities, substantially all of which was to GS&Co., GSI and GS Bank USA, as of March 2013. In addition, as of March 2013, Group Inc. had significant amounts of capital invested in and loans to
its other regulated subsidiaries.
Contingency Funding Plan
The Goldman Sachs contingency funding plan sets out the plan of action we would use to fund business activity in crisis situations and periods of market stress. The contingency funding plan outlines a
list of potential risk factors, key reports and metrics that are reviewed on an ongoing basis to assist in assessing the severity of, and managing through, a liquidity crisis and/or market dislocation. The contingency funding plan also describes in
detail the firms potential responses if our assessments indicate that the firm has entered a liquidity crisis, which include pre-funding for what we estimate will be our potential cash and collateral needs as well as utilizing secondary
sources of liquidity. Mitigants and action items to address specific risks which may arise are also described and assigned to individuals responsible for execution.
The contingency funding plan identifies key groups of individuals to foster effective coordination, control and distribution of information, all of which are critical in the management of a crisis or
period of market stress. The contingency funding plan also details the responsibilities of these groups and individuals, which include making and disseminating key decisions, coordinating all contingency activities throughout the duration of the
crisis or period of market stress, implementing liquidity maintenance activities and managing internal and external communication.
Proposed Liquidity
Framework
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervisions international framework for liquidity risk measurement,
standards and monitoring calls for imposition of a liquidity coverage ratio, designed to ensure that banks and bank holding companies maintain an adequate level of unencumbered high-quality liquid assets based on expected cash outflows under an
acute liquidity stress scenario, and a net stable funding ratio, designed to promote more medium- and long-term funding of the assets and activities of these entities over a one-year time horizon. While the principles behind the new framework are
broadly consistent with our current liquidity management framework, it is possible that the implementation of these standards could impact our liquidity and funding requirements and practices. Under the Basel Committee framework, the liquidity
coverage ratio would be introduced on January 1, 2015; however, there would be a phase-in period whereby firms would have a 60% minimum in 2015 which would be raised 10% per year until it reaches 100% in 2019. The net stable funding
ratio is not expected to be introduced as a requirement until January 1, 2018.
|
|
|
|
|
158 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Credit Ratings
The table below presents the unsecured credit ratings and outlook of Group Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
Short-Term
Debt |
|
|
|
Long-Term
Debt |
|
|
|
Subordinated Debt |
|
|
|
Trust Preferred |
1 |
|
|
Preferred
Stock |
|
|
|
Ratings
Outlook |
|
DBRS, Inc. |
|
|
R-1 (middle |
) |
|
|
A (high |
) |
|
|
A |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
BBB |
3 |
|
|
Stable |
|
|
|
Fitch, Inc. |
|
|
F1 |
|
|
|
A |
2 |
|
|
A- |
|
|
|
BBB- |
|
|
|
BB+ |
3 |
|
|
Stable |
|
|
|
Moodys Investors Service (Moodys) |
|
|
P-2 |
|
|
|
A3 |
2 |
|
|
Baa1 |
|
|
|
Baa3 |
|
|
|
Ba2 |
3 |
|
|
Negative |
4 |
|
|
Standard & Poors Ratings Services (S&P) |
|
|
A-2 |
|
|
|
A- |
2 |
|
|
BBB+ |
|
|
|
BB+ |
|
|
|
BB+ |
3 |
|
|
Negative |
|
|
|
Rating and Investment Information, Inc. |
|
|
a-1 |
|
|
|
A+ |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
Negative |
|
1. |
Trust preferred securities issued by Goldman Sachs Capital I. |
2. |
Includes the senior guaranteed trust securities issued by Murray Street Investment Trust I and Vesey Street Investment Trust I. |
3. |
Includes Group Inc.s non-cumulative preferred stock and the APEX issued by Goldman Sachs Capital II and Goldman Sachs Capital III.
|
4. |
The ratings outlook for trust preferred and preferred stock is stable. |
The table below presents the unsecured credit ratings of GS Bank USA, GS&Co. and GSI.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
|
Short-Term
Debt |
|
|
|
Long-Term Debt |
|
|
|
Short-Term
Bank Deposits |
|
|
|
Long-Term
Bank Deposits |
|
Fitch, Inc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GS Bank USA |
|
|
F1 |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
F1 |
|
|
|
A+ |
|
|
|
GS&Co. |
|
|
F1 |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
GSI |
|
|
F1 |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
Moodys |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GS Bank USA |
|
|
P-1 |
|
|
|
A2 |
|
|
|
P-1 |
|
|
|
A2 |
|
|
|
S&P |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GS Bank USA |
|
|
A-1 |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
GS&Co. |
|
|
A-1 |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
GSI |
|
|
A-1 |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
We rely on the short-term and long-term debt capital markets to fund a significant portion
of our day-to-day operations and the cost and availability of debt financing is influenced by our credit ratings. Credit ratings are also important when we are competing in certain markets, such as OTC derivatives, and when we seek to engage in
longer-term transactions. See Certain Risk Factors That May Affect Our Businesses below and Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A of our Annual Report on
Form 10-K for a discussion of the risks associated with a reduction in our credit ratings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
159 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
We believe our credit ratings are primarily based on the credit rating agencies
assessment of:
|
|
our liquidity, market, credit and operational risk management practices; |
|
|
the level and variability of our earnings; |
|
|
our franchise, reputation and management; |
|
|
our corporate governance; and |
|
|
the external operating environment, including the assumed level of government support. |
Certain of the firms derivatives have been transacted under bilateral agreements with counterparties who may require us to post
collateral or terminate the transactions based on changes in our credit ratings. We assess the impact of these bilateral agreements by determining the collateral or termination payments that would occur assuming a downgrade by all rating agencies. A
downgrade by any one rating agency, depending on the agencys relative ratings of the firm at the time of the downgrade, may have an impact which is comparable to the impact of a downgrade by all rating agencies. We allocate a portion of
our GCE to ensure we would be able to make the additional collateral or termination payments that may be required in the event of a two-notch reduction in our long-term credit ratings, as well as collateral that has not been called by
counterparties, but is available to them. The table below presents the additional collateral or termination payments that could have been called at the reporting date by counterparties in the event of a one-notch and two-notch downgrade in our
credit ratings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Additional collateral or termination payments for a one-notch downgrade |
|
|
$1,597 |
|
|
|
$1,534 |
|
|
|
Additional collateral or termination payments for a two-notch downgrade |
|
|
2,476 |
|
|
|
2,500 |
|
Cash Flows
As a global financial institution, our cash flows are complex and bear little relation to our net earnings and net assets. Consequently, we believe that traditional cash flow analysis is less meaningful
in evaluating our liquidity position than the excess liquidity and asset-liability management policies described above. Cash flow analysis may, however, be helpful in highlighting certain macro trends and strategic initiatives in
our businesses.
Three Months Ended March 2013. Our cash and cash equivalents decreased by $9.34 billion to $63.33 billion at the end of the first quarter of 2013. We used net cash of $5.70 billion for operating activities. We used
$3.64 billion in net cash for investing and financing activities for net repayments of unsecured and secured short-term borrowings and repurchases of common stock, partially offset by an increase in bank deposits.
Three Months Ended March 2012. Our cash and cash equivalents increased by $1.13 billion to $57.14 billion at the end of the first quarter of 2012. We generated $3.78 billion in net cash from operating activities. We
used net cash of $2.65 billion in investing and financing activities, primarily from the net repayments of secured and unsecured borrowings, partially offset by a net increase in bank deposits.
|
|
|
|
|
160 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Market Risk Management
Overview
Market risk is the risk of loss in the value of our inventory due to changes in market prices. We hold inventory primarily for market making for our clients and for our investing and lending activities.
Our inventory therefore changes based on client demands and our investment opportunities. Our inventory is accounted for at fair value and therefore fluctuates on a daily basis, with the related gains and losses included in Market
making, and Other principal transactions. Categories of market risk include the following:
|
|
Interest rate risk: results from exposures to changes in the level, slope and curvature of yield curves, the volatilities of interest rates,
mortgage prepayment speeds and credit spreads. |
|
|
Equity price risk: results from exposures to changes in prices and volatilities of individual equities, baskets of equities and equity indices.
|
|
|
Currency rate risk: results from exposures to changes in spot prices, forward prices and volatilities of currency rates.
|
|
|
Commodity price risk: results from exposures to changes in spot prices, forward prices and volatilities of commodities, such as electricity, natural
gas, crude oil, petroleum products, and precious and base metals. |
Market Risk Management Process
We manage our market risk by diversifying exposures, controlling position sizes and establishing economic hedges in related securities or
derivatives. This includes:
|
|
accurate and timely exposure information incorporating multiple risk metrics; |
|
|
a dynamic limit setting framework; and |
|
|
constant communication among revenue-producing units, risk managers and senior management. |
Market Risk Management, which is independent of the revenue-producing units and reports to the firms chief risk officer, has primary
responsibility for assessing, monitoring and managing market risk at the firm. We monitor and control risks through strong firmwide oversight and independent control and support functions across the firms global businesses.
Managers in revenue-producing units are accountable for managing risk within prescribed
limits. These managers have in-depth knowledge of their positions, markets and the instruments available to hedge their exposures.
Managers in revenue-producing units and Market Risk Management discuss market information, positions and estimated risk and loss scenarios on an ongoing basis.
Risk Measures
Market Risk
Management produces risk measures and monitors them against market risk limits set by our firms risk committees. These measures reflect an extensive range of scenarios and the results are aggregated at trading desk, business and
firmwide levels.
We use a variety of risk measures to estimate the size of potential losses for both moderate and more
extreme market moves over both short-term and long-term time horizons. Our primary risk measures are VaR, which is used for shorter-term periods, and stress tests. Our risk reports detail key risks, drivers and changes for each desk and
business, and are distributed daily to senior management of both our revenue-producing units and our independent control and support functions.
Value-at-Risk
VaR is the potential loss in value of inventory positions due to
adverse market movements over a defined time horizon with a specified confidence level. We typically employ a one-day time horizon with a 95% confidence level. We use a single VaR model which captures risks including interest rates, equity prices,
currency rates and commodity prices. As such, VaR facilitates comparison across portfolios of different risk characteristics. VaR also captures the diversification of aggregated risk at the firmwide level.
We are aware of the inherent limitations to VaR and therefore use a variety of risk measures in our market risk management process.
Inherent limitations to VaR include:
|
|
VaR does not estimate potential losses over longer time horizons where moves may be extreme. |
|
|
VaR does not take account of the relative liquidity of different risk positions. |
|
|
Previous moves in market risk factors may not produce accurate predictions of all future market moves.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
161 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
When calculating VaR, we use historical simulations with full valuation of approximately
70,000 market factors. VaR is calculated at a position level based on simultaneously shocking the relevant market risk factors for that position. We sample from 5 years of historical data to generate the scenarios for our VaR calculation. The
historical data is weighted so that the relative importance of the data reduces over time. This gives greater importance to more recent observations and reflects current asset volatilities, which improves the accuracy of our estimates of potential
loss. As a result, even if our inventory positions were unchanged, our VaR would increase with increasing market volatility and vice versa.
Given its reliance on historical data, VaR is most effective in estimating risk exposures in markets in which there are no sudden fundamental changes or shifts in market conditions.
Our VaR measure does not include:
|
|
positions that are best measured and monitored using stress testing; and |
|
|
the impact of changes in counterparty and our own credit spreads on derivatives, as well as changes in our own credit spreads on unsecured
borrowings for which the fair value option was elected. |
Stress Testing
Stress testing is a method of determining the effect on the firm of various hypothetical stress scenarios. We use stress testing to
examine risks of specific portfolios as well as the potential impact of significant risk exposures across the firm. We use a variety of stress testing techniques to calculate the potential loss from a wide range of market moves on the firms
portfolios, including sensitivity analysis, scenario analysis and firmwide stress tests. The results of our various stress tests are analyzed together for risk management purposes.
Sensitivity analysis is used to quantify the impact of a market move in a single risk factor across all positions (e.g., equity prices or
credit spreads) using a variety of defined market shocks, ranging from those that could be expected over a one-day time horizon up to those that could take many months to occur. We also use sensitivity analysis to quantify the impact of the
default of a single corporate entity, which captures the risk of large or concentrated exposures.
Scenario analysis is used to quantify the impact of a specified event, including how the
event impacts multiple risk factors simultaneously. For example, for sovereign stress testing we calculate potential direct exposure associated with our sovereign inventory as well as the corresponding debt, equity and currency exposures associated
with our non-sovereign inventory that may be impacted by the sovereign distress. When conducting scenario analysis, we typically consider a number of possible outcomes for each scenario, ranging from moderate to severely adverse market impacts. In
addition, these stress tests are constructed using both historical events and forward-looking hypothetical scenarios.
Firmwide stress testing combines market, credit, operational and liquidity risks into a single combined scenario. Firmwide stress tests
are primarily used to assess capital adequacy as part of the ICAAP process; however, we also ensure that firmwide stress testing is integrated into our risk governance framework. This includes selecting appropriate scenarios to use for the ICAAP
process. See Equity Capital Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process above for further information about our ICAAP process.
Unlike VaR measures, which have an implied probability because they are calculated at a specified confidence level, there is generally no implied probability that our stress test scenarios will occur.
Instead, stress tests are used to model both moderate and more extreme moves in underlying market factors. When estimating potential loss, we generally assume that our positions cannot be reduced or hedged (although experience demonstrates that we
are generally able to do so).
Stress test scenarios are conducted on a regular basis as part of the firms routine
risk management process and on an ad hoc basis in response to market events or concerns. Stress testing is an important part of the firms risk management process because it allows us to quantify our exposure to tail risks, highlight potential
loss concentrations, undertake risk/reward analysis, and assess and mitigate our risk positions.
|
|
|
|
|
162 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Limits
We use risk limits at various levels in the firm (including firmwide, product and business) to govern risk appetite by controlling the size of our exposures to market risk. Limits are set based on VaR and
on a range of stress tests relevant to the firms exposures. Limits are reviewed frequently and amended on a permanent or temporary basis to reflect changing market conditions, business conditions or tolerance for risk.
The Firmwide Risk Committee sets market risk limits at firmwide and product levels and our Securities Division Risk Committee sets
sub-limits for market-making and investing activities at a business level. The purpose of the firmwide limits is to assist senior management in controlling the firms overall risk profile. Sub-limits set the desired maximum amount of exposure
that may be managed by any particular business on a day-to-day basis without additional levels of senior management approval, effectively leaving day-to-day trading decisions to individual desk managers and traders. Accordingly, sub-limits are a
management tool designed to ensure appropriate escalation rather than to establish maximum risk tolerance. Sub-limits also distribute risk among various businesses in a manner that is consistent with their level of activity and client demand, taking
into account the relative performance of each area.
Our market risk limits are monitored daily by Market Risk Management,
which is responsible for identifying and escalating, on a timely basis, instances where limits have been exceeded. The business-level limits that are set by the Securities Division Risk Committee are subject to the same scrutiny and limit escalation
policy as the firmwide limits.
When a risk limit has been exceeded (e.g., due to changes in market conditions, such as
increased volatilities or changes in correlations), it is reported to the appropriate risk committee and a discussion takes place with the relevant desk managers, after which either the risk position is reduced or the risk limit is temporarily or
permanently increased.
Model Review and Validation
Our VaR and stress testing models are subject to review and validation by our independent model validation group at least annually. This review includes:
|
|
a critical evaluation of the model, its theoretical soundness and adequacy for intended use; |
|
|
verification of the testing strategy utilized by the model developers to ensure that the model functions as intended; and
|
|
|
verification of the suitability of the calculation techniques incorporated in the model. |
Our VaR and stress testing models are regularly reviewed and enhanced in order to incorporate changes in the composition of inventory
positions, as well as variations in market conditions. Prior to implementing significant changes to our assumptions and/or models, we perform model validation and test runs. Significant changes to our VaR and stress testing models are reviewed with
the firms chief risk officer and chief financial officer, and approved by the Firmwide Risk Committee.
We evaluate
the accuracy of our VaR model through daily backtesting (i.e., comparing daily trading net revenues to the VaR measure calculated as of the prior business day) at the firmwide level and for each of our businesses and major
regulated subsidiaries.
Systems
We have made a significant investment in technology to monitor market risk including:
|
|
an independent calculation of VaR and stress measures; |
|
|
risk measures calculated at individual position levels; |
|
|
attribution of risk measures to individual risk factors of each position; |
|
|
the ability to report many different views of the risk measures (e.g., by desk, business, product type or legal entity); and
|
|
|
the ability to produce ad hoc analyses in a timely manner.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
163 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Metrics
We analyze VaR at the firmwide level and a variety of more detailed levels, including by
risk category, business, and region. The tables below present, by risk category, average daily VaR and period-end VaR, as well as the high and low VaR for the period. Diversification effect in the tables below represents the difference between total
VaR and the sum of the VaRs for the four risk categories. This effect arises because the four market risk categories are not perfectly correlated.
Average Daily VaR
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in millions
Risk Categories |
|
Three Months
Ended March |
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
Interest rates |
|
|
$ 62 |
|
|
|
$ 90 |
|
|
|
Equity prices |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
Currency rates |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
Commodity prices |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
Diversification effect |
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
(65 |
) |
Total |
|
|
$ 76 |
|
|
|
$ 95 |
|
Our average daily VaR decreased to $76 million for the first quarter of 2013 from $95 million
for the first quarter of 2012, primarily reflecting a decrease in the interest rates category due to lower levels of volatility, partially offset by a decrease in the diversification benefit across risk categories.
Quarter-End VaR and High and Low VaR
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in millions
Risk Categories |
|
As of |
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
March 2013 |
|
|
March |
|
|
December |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
High |
|
|
|
Low |
|
Interest rates |
|
|
$ 67 |
|
|
|
$ 64 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 70 |
|
|
|
$55 |
|
|
|
Equity prices |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
90 |
1 |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
Currency rates |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
Commodity prices |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
Diversification effect |
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
$ 83 |
|
|
|
$ 71 |
|
|
|
|
|
$127 |
|
|
|
$64 |
|
1. |
Reflects the impact of temporarily increased exposures as a result of equity underwriting transactions. |
Our daily VaR increased to $83 million as of March 2013 from $71 million as of December 2012, primarily reflecting an
increase in the currency rates category, principally due to increased exposures.
During the first quarter of 2013, the
firmwide VaR risk limit was not exceeded, raised or reduced.
|
|
|
|
|
164 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
The chart below reflects the VaR over the last four quarters.
The chart below presents the frequency distribution of our daily trading net revenues for
substantially all inventory
positions included in VaR for the quarter ended March 2013.
Daily trading net revenues are compared with VaR calculated as of the end of the prior
business day. Trading losses incurred on a single day did not exceed our 95% one-day VaR during the first quarter of 2013 (i.e., a VaR exception).
During periods in which the firm has significantly more positive net revenue days than net revenue loss days, we expect to have fewer VaR exceptions because, under
normal conditions, our business model generally produces positive net revenues. In periods in which our franchise revenues are adversely affected, we generally have more loss days, resulting in
more VaR exceptions. In addition, VaR backtesting is performed against total daily market-making revenues, including bid/offer net revenues, which are more likely than not to be positive by their nature.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
165 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Sensitivity Measures
Certain portfolios and individual positions are not included in VaR because VaR is not the
most appropriate risk measure. The market risk of these positions is determined by estimating the potential reduction in net revenues of a 10% decline in the underlying asset value.
The table below presents market risk for positions that are not included in VaR. These measures do not reflect diversification benefits
across asset categories and therefore have not been aggregated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset Categories |
|
10% Sensitivity |
|
|
|
Amount as of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
ICBC |
|
|
$ 111 |
|
|
|
$ 208 |
|
|
|
Equity (excluding ICBC) 1 |
|
|
2,235 |
|
|
|
2,263 |
|
|
|
Debt 2 |
|
|
1,568 |
|
|
|
1,676 |
|
1. |
Relates to private and restricted public equity securities, including interests in firm-sponsored funds that invest in corporate equities and real estate and
interests in firm-sponsored hedge funds. |
2. |
Primarily relates to interests in our firm-sponsored funds that invest in corporate mezzanine and senior debt instruments. Also includes loans backed by
commercial and residential real estate, corporate bank loans and other corporate debt, including acquired portfolios of distressed loans. |
The decrease in our 10% sensitivity measure for ICBC as of March 2013 from December 2012 was due to the sale of approximately 45% of the ordinary shares in January 2013.
VaR excludes the impact of changes in counterparty and our own credit spreads on derivatives as well as changes in our own credit spreads
on unsecured borrowings for which the fair value option was elected. The estimated sensitivity to a one basis point increase in credit spreads (counterparty and our own) on derivatives was a $3 million gain (including hedges) as of
March 2013. In addition, the estimated sensitivity to a one basis point increase in our own credit spreads on unsecured borrowings for which the fair value option was elected was an $8 million gain (including hedges) as of March 2013.
However, the actual net impact of a change in our own credit spreads is also affected by the liquidity, duration and convexity (as the sensitivity is not linear to changes in yields) of those unsecured borrowings for which the fair value option was
elected, as well as the relative performance of any hedges undertaken.
The firm engages in insurance activities where we
reinsure and purchase portfolios of insurance risk and pension liabilities. The risks associated with these activities include, but are not limited to: equity price, interest rate, reinvestment and mortality risk. The firm mitigates risks
associated with insurance activities through the use of reinsurance and hedging. Certain of the assets associated with the firms insurance activities are included in VaR. In addition to the
positions included in VaR, we held $8.90 billion of securities accounted for as available-for-sale as of March 2013, which support the firms reinsurance business. As of March 2013, our available-for-sale securities primarily
consisted of $3.38 billion of corporate debt securities with an average yield of 4%, the majority of which will mature after five years, $3.50 billion of mortgage and other asset-backed loans and securities with an average yield of 7%, the
majority of which will mature after ten years, $682 million of state and municipal obligations with an average yield of 6%, the majority of which will mature after ten years, and $637 million of U.S. government and federal agency
obligations with an average yield of 3%, the majority of which will mature after ten years. As of December 2012, we held $9.07 billion of securities accounted for as available-for-sale, primarily consisting of $3.63 billion of
corporate debt securities with an average yield of 4%, the majority of which will mature after five years, $3.38 billion of mortgage and other asset-backed loans and securities with an average yield of 6%, the majority of which will mature
after ten years, and $856 million of U.S. government and federal agency obligations with an average yield of 3%, the majority of which will mature after five years. As of March 2013 and December 2012, such assets were classified as
held for sale and were included in Other assets. See Note 12 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information about assets held for sale.
In addition, as of March 2013 and December 2012, we had commitments and held loans for which we have obtained credit loss
protection from Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, Inc. See Note 18 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information about such lending commitments. As of
March 2013, the firm also had $7.88 billion of loans held for investment which were accounted for at amortized cost and included in Receivables from customers and counterparties, substantially all of which had floating interest
rates. The estimated sensitivity to a 100 basis point increase in interest rates on such loans was $74 million of additional interest income over a 12-month period, which does not take into account the potential impact of an increase in costs
to fund such loans. See Note 8 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for further information about loans held for investment.
|
|
|
|
|
166 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Additionally, we make investments accounted for under the equity method and we also make
direct investments in real estate, both of which are included in Other assets in the condensed consolidated statements of financial condition. Direct investments in real estate are accounted for at cost less accumulated depreciation. See
Note 12 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for information on Other assets.
Credit Risk Management
Overview
Credit risk represents the potential for loss due to the default or deterioration in credit quality of a counterparty (e.g., an OTC
derivatives counterparty or a borrower) or an issuer of securities or other instruments we hold. Our exposure to credit risk comes mostly from client transactions in OTC derivatives and loans and lending commitments. Credit risk also comes from cash
placed with banks, securities financing transactions (i.e., resale and repurchase agreements and securities borrowing and lending activities) and receivables from brokers, dealers, clearing organizations, customers and counterparties.
Credit Risk Management, which is independent of the revenue-producing units and reports to the firms chief risk officer,
has primary responsibility for assessing, monitoring and managing credit risk at the firm. The Credit Policy Committee and the Firmwide Risk Committee establish and review credit policies and parameters. In addition, we hold other positions that
give rise to credit risk (e.g., bonds held in our inventory and secondary bank loans). These credit risks are captured as a component of market risk measures, which are monitored and managed by Market Risk Management, consistent with other
inventory positions.
Policies authorized by the Firmwide Risk Committee and the Credit Policy Committee prescribe the
level of formal approval required for the firm to assume credit exposure to a counterparty across all product areas, taking into account any applicable netting provisions, collateral or other credit
risk mitigants.
Credit Risk Management Process
Effective management of credit risk requires accurate and timely information, a high level of communication and knowledge of customers, countries, industries and products. Our process for managing credit
risk includes:
|
|
approving transactions and setting and communicating credit exposure limits; |
|
|
monitoring compliance with established credit exposure limits; |
|
|
assessing the likelihood that a counterparty will default on its payment obligations; |
|
|
measuring the firms current and potential credit exposure and losses resulting from counterparty default; |
|
|
reporting of credit exposures to senior management, the Board and regulators; |
|
|
use of credit risk mitigants, including collateral and hedging; and |
|
|
communication and collaboration with other independent control and support functions such as operations, legal and compliance.
|
As part of the risk assessment process, Credit Risk Management performs credit reviews which include initial
and ongoing analyses of our counterparties. A credit review is an independent judgment about the capacity and willingness of a counterparty to meet its financial obligations. For substantially all of our credit exposures, the core of our process is
an annual counterparty review. A counterparty review is a written analysis of a counterpartys business profile and financial strength resulting in an internal credit rating which represents the probability of default on financial obligations
to the firm. The determination of internal credit ratings incorporates assumptions with respect to the counterpartys future business performance, the nature and outlook for the counterpartys industry, and the economic environment. Senior
personnel within Credit Risk Management, with expertise in specific industries, inspect and approve credit reviews and internal credit ratings.
Our global credit risk management systems capture credit exposure to individual counterparties and on an aggregate basis to counterparties and their subsidiaries (economic groups). These systems also
provide management with comprehensive information on our aggregate credit risk by product, internal credit rating, industry, country and region.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
167 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Risk Measures and Limits
We measure our credit risk based on the potential loss in an event of non-payment by a counterparty. For derivatives and securities financing transactions, the primary measure is potential exposure, which
is our estimate of the future exposure that could arise over the life of a transaction based on market movements within a specified confidence level. Potential exposure takes into account netting and collateral arrangements. For loans and lending
commitments, the primary measure is a function of the notional amount of the position. We also monitor credit risk in terms of current exposure, which is the amount presently owed to the firm after taking into account applicable netting
and collateral.
We use credit limits at various levels (counterparty, economic group, industry, country) to control the
size of our credit exposures. Limits for counterparties and economic groups are reviewed regularly and revised to reflect changing appetites for a given counterparty or group of counterparties. Limits for industries and countries are based on the
firms risk tolerance and are designed to allow for regular monitoring, review, escalation and management of credit risk concentrations.
Stress Tests/Scenario Analysis
We
use regular stress tests to calculate the credit exposures, including potential concentrations that would result from applying shocks to counterparty credit ratings or credit risk factors (e.g., currency rates, interest rates, equity prices). These
shocks include a wide range of moderate and more extreme market movements. Some of our stress tests include shocks to multiple risk factors, consistent with the occurrence of a severe market or economic event. In the case of sovereign default, we
estimate the direct impact of the default on our sovereign credit exposures, changes to our credit exposures arising from potential market moves in response to the default, and the impact of credit market deterioration on corporate borrowers and
counterparties that may result from the sovereign default. Unlike potential exposure, which is calculated within a specified confidence level, with a stress test there is generally no assumed probability of these events occurring.
We run stress tests on a regular basis as part of our routine risk management processes and conduct tailored stress tests on an ad hoc
basis in response to market developments. Stress tests are regularly conducted jointly with the firms market and liquidity risk functions.
Risk Mitigants
To reduce our credit exposures on derivatives and securities financing transactions, we may enter into netting agreements with counterparties that permit us to offset receivables and payables with such
counterparties. We may also reduce credit risk with counterparties by entering into agreements that enable us to obtain collateral from them on an upfront or contingent basis and/or to terminate transactions if the counterpartys credit rating
falls below a specified level.
For loans and lending commitments, depending on the credit quality of the borrower and
other characteristics of the transaction, we employ a variety of potential risk mitigants. Risk mitigants include: collateral provisions, guarantees, covenants, structural seniority of the bank loan claims and, for certain lending commitments,
provisions in the legal documentation that allow the firm to adjust loan amounts, pricing, structure and other terms as market conditions change. The type and structure of risk mitigants employed can significantly influence the degree of credit risk
involved in a loan.
When we do not have sufficient visibility into a counterpartys financial strength or when we
believe a counterparty requires support from its parent company, we may obtain third-party guarantees of the counterpartys obligations. We may also mitigate our credit risk using credit derivatives or participation agreements.
|
|
|
|
|
168 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Credit Exposures
The firms credit exposures are described further below.
Cash and Cash
Equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents include both interest-bearing and non-interest-bearing deposits. To mitigate the risk of credit loss, we place substantially all of our deposits
with highly rated banks and central banks.
OTC Derivatives. Derivatives are accounted for at fair value, net of cash collateral received or posted under enforceable credit support agreements. Derivatives are reported on a net-by-counterparty basis (i.e., the net
payable or receivable for derivative assets and liabilities for a given counterparty) when a legal right of setoff exists under an enforceable netting agreement.
As credit risk is an essential component of fair value, the firm includes a credit valuation adjustment (CVA) in the fair value of derivatives to reflect counterparty credit risk, as described in
Note 7 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q. CVA is a function of the present value of expected exposure, the probability of counterparty default and the assumed recovery
upon default.
The tables below present the distribution of our exposure to OTC derivatives by tenor,
based on expected duration for mortgage-related credit derivatives and generally on remaining contractual maturity for other derivatives, both before and after the effect of collateral and netting agreements. Receivable and payable balances for the
same counterparty across tenor categories are netted under enforceable netting agreements, and cash collateral received is netted under enforceable credit support agreements. Receivable and payable balances with the same counterparty in the same
tenor category are netted within such tenor category. Net credit exposure in the tables below represents OTC derivative assets included in Financial instruments owned, at fair value less the fair value of securities collateral and cash
collateral received under credit support agreements, which management considers when determining credit risk, but such collateral is not eligible for netting under U.S. GAAP. The categories shown reflect our internally determined public rating
agency equivalents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
in millions
Credit Rating Equivalent |
|
|
0 - 12
Months |
|
|
|
1 - 5
Years |
|
|
|
5 Years or Greater |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Netting |
|
|
|
OTC Derivative Assets |
|
|
|
Net Credit
Exposure |
|
AAA/Aaa |
|
|
$ 650 |
|
|
|
$ 1,655 |
|
|
|
$ 2,798 |
|
|
|
$ 5,103 |
|
|
|
$ (1,505 |
) |
|
|
$ 3,598 |
|
|
|
$ 3,243 |
|
|
|
AA/Aa2 |
|
|
4,990 |
|
|
|
6,706 |
|
|
|
21,383 |
|
|
|
33,079 |
|
|
|
(16,128 |
) |
|
|
16,951 |
|
|
|
10,039 |
|
|
|
A/A2 |
|
|
12,439 |
|
|
|
25,669 |
|
|
|
37,078 |
|
|
|
75,186 |
|
|
|
(52,356 |
) |
|
|
22,830 |
|
|
|
13,592 |
|
|
|
BBB/Baa2 |
|
|
7,316 |
|
|
|
11,174 |
|
|
|
24,935 |
|
|
|
43,425 |
|
|
|
(31,695 |
) |
|
|
11,730 |
|
|
|
4,061 |
|
|
|
BB/Ba2 or lower |
|
|
2,941 |
|
|
|
5,183 |
|
|
|
4,214 |
|
|
|
12,338 |
|
|
|
(5,782 |
) |
|
|
6,556 |
|
|
|
4,830 |
|
|
|
Unrated |
|
|
676 |
|
|
|
953 |
|
|
|
321 |
|
|
|
1,950 |
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
1,920 |
|
|
|
1,509 |
|
Total |
|
|
$29,012 |
|
|
|
$51,340 |
|
|
|
$ 90,729 |
|
|
|
$171,081 |
|
|
|
$(107,496 |
) |
|
|
$63,585 |
|
|
|
$37,274 |
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
in millions
Credit Rating Equivalent |
|
|
0 - 12
Months |
|
|
|
1 - 5
Years |
|
|
|
5 Years or Greater |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
Netting |
|
|
|
OTC Derivative Assets |
|
|
|
Net Credit
Exposure |
|
AAA/Aaa |
|
|
$ 494 |
|
|
|
$ 1,934 |
|
|
|
$ 2,778 |
|
|
|
$ 5,206 |
|
|
|
$ (1,476 |
) |
|
|
$ 3,730 |
|
|
|
$ 3,443 |
|
|
|
AA/Aa2 |
|
|
4,631 |
|
|
|
7,483 |
|
|
|
20,357 |
|
|
|
32,471 |
|
|
|
(16,026 |
) |
|
|
16,445 |
|
|
|
10,467 |
|
|
|
A/A2 |
|
|
13,422 |
|
|
|
26,550 |
|
|
|
42,797 |
|
|
|
82,769 |
|
|
|
(57,868 |
) |
|
|
24,901 |
|
|
|
16,326 |
|
|
|
BBB/Baa2 |
|
|
7,032 |
|
|
|
12,173 |
|
|
|
27,676 |
|
|
|
46,881 |
|
|
|
(32,962 |
) |
|
|
13,919 |
|
|
|
4,577 |
|
|
|
BB/Ba2 or lower |
|
|
2,489 |
|
|
|
5,762 |
|
|
|
7,676 |
|
|
|
15,927 |
|
|
|
(9,116 |
) |
|
|
6,811 |
|
|
|
4,544 |
|
|
|
Unrated |
|
|
326 |
|
|
|
927 |
|
|
|
358 |
|
|
|
1,611 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
1,598 |
|
|
|
1,259 |
|
Total |
|
|
$28,394 |
|
|
|
$54,829 |
|
|
|
$101,642 |
|
|
|
$184,865 |
|
|
|
$(117,461 |
) |
|
|
$67,404 |
|
|
|
$40,616 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
169 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Lending Activities. We manage the firms traditional credit origination activities, including funded loans and lending commitments (both fair value and held for investment loans and lending commitments), using the
credit risk process, measures and limits described above. Other lending positions, including secondary trading positions, are risk-managed as a component of market risk.
Other Credit Exposures. The firm is exposed to credit risk from its receivables from
brokers, dealers and clearing organizations and customers and counterparties. Receivables from brokers, dealers and clearing organizations are primarily comprised of initial margin placed with clearing organizations and receivables related to sales
of securities which have traded, but not yet settled. These receivables have minimal credit risk due to the low probability of clearing organization default and the short-term nature of receivables related to securities settlements. Receivables from
customers and counterparties are generally comprised of collateralized receivables related to customer securities transactions and have minimal credit risk due to both the value of the collateral received and the short-term nature of
these receivables.
Credit Exposures
As of March 2013, our credit exposures decreased as compared with December 2012, reflecting a decrease in cash and OTC derivative exposures, partially offset by an increase in loans and lending
commitments. The percentage of our credit exposure arising from non-investment-grade counterparties (based on our internally determined public rating agency equivalents) increased from December 2012 reflecting an increase in loans and lending
commitments. During the three months ended March 2013, counterparty defaults and the estimated losses associated with these counterparty defaults were lower as compared with the same prior year period.
The tables below present the firms credit exposures related to cash, OTC derivatives, and loans and lending commitments associated
with traditional credit origination activities broken down by industry, region and internal credit rating.
|
|
|
|
|
170 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Credit Exposure by Industry
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash |
|
|
|
|
OTC Derivatives |
|
|
|
|
Loans and
Lending Commitments 1 |
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Asset Managers & Funds |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 9,836 |
|
|
|
$10,552 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 2,111 |
|
|
|
$ 1,673 |
|
|
|
Banks, Brokers & Other Financial Institutions |
|
|
10,398 |
|
|
|
10,507 |
|
|
|
|
|
17,397 |
|
|
|
21,310 |
|
|
|
|
|
8,474 |
|
|
|
6,192 |
|
|
|
Consumer Products, Non-Durables & Retail |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,156 |
|
|
|
1,516 |
|
|
|
|
|
14,139 |
|
|
|
13,304 |
|
|
|
Government & Central Banks |
|
|
52,935 |
|
|
|
62,162 |
|
|
|
|
|
15,178 |
|
|
|
14,729 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,695 |
|
|
|
1,782 |
|
|
|
Healthcare & Education |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,952 |
|
|
|
3,764 |
|
|
|
|
|
8,220 |
|
|
|
7,717 |
|
|
|
Insurance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,628 |
|
|
|
4,214 |
|
|
|
|
|
3,224 |
|
|
|
3,199 |
|
|
|
Natural Resources & Utilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,830 |
|
|
|
4,383 |
|
|
|
|
|
16,972 |
|
|
|
16,360 |
|
|
|
Real Estate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
|
|
4,332 |
|
|
|
3,796 |
|
|
|
Technology, Media, Telecommunications & Services |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,744 |
|
|
|
2,016 |
|
|
|
|
|
16,403 |
|
|
|
17,674 |
|
|
|
Transportation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
904 |
|
|
|
1,207 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,415 |
|
|
|
6,557 |
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,630 |
|
|
|
3,332 |
|
|
|
|
|
5,373 |
|
|
|
4,650 |
|
Total 2 |
|
|
$63,333 |
|
|
|
$72,669 |
|
|
|
|
|
$63,585 |
|
|
|
$67,404 |
|
|
|
|
|
$87,358 |
|
|
|
$82,904 |
|
Credit Exposure by Region
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash |
|
|
|
|
OTC Derivatives |
|
|
|
|
Loans and
Lending Commitments 1 |
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
Americas |
|
|
$55,124 |
|
|
|
$65,193 |
|
|
|
|
|
$28,793 |
|
|
|
$32,968 |
|
|
|
|
|
$60,433 |
|
|
|
$59,792 |
|
|
|
EMEA 3 |
|
|
2,486 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
|
|
27,858 |
|
|
|
26,739 |
|
|
|
|
|
24,485 |
|
|
|
21,104 |
|
|
|
Asia |
|
|
5,723 |
|
|
|
5,793 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,934 |
|
|
|
7,697 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,440 |
|
|
|
2,008 |
|
Total 2 |
|
|
$63,333 |
|
|
|
$72,669 |
|
|
|
|
|
$63,585 |
|
|
|
$67,404 |
|
|
|
|
|
$87,358 |
|
|
|
$82,904 |
|
Credit Exposure by Credit Quality
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash |
|
|
|
|
OTC Derivatives |
|
|
|
|
Loans and
Lending Commitments 1 |
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
in millions Credit Rating Equivalent |
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
March
2013 |
|
|
|
December
2012 |
|
AAA/Aaa |
|
|
$50,679 |
|
|
|
$59,825 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 3,598 |
|
|
|
$ 3,730 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 2,164 |
|
|
|
$ 2,179 |
|
|
|
AA/Aa2 |
|
|
5,580 |
|
|
|
6,356 |
|
|
|
|
|
16,951 |
|
|
|
16,445 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,996 |
|
|
|
7,220 |
|
|
|
A/A2 |
|
|
5,850 |
|
|
|
5,068 |
|
|
|
|
|
22,830 |
|
|
|
24,901 |
|
|
|
|
|
21,887 |
|
|
|
21,901 |
|
|
|
BBB/Baa2 |
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
326 |
|
|
|
|
|
11,730 |
|
|
|
13,919 |
|
|
|
|
|
27,903 |
|
|
|
26,313 |
|
|
|
BB/Ba2 or lower |
|
|
996 |
|
|
|
1,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
6,556 |
|
|
|
6,811 |
|
|
|
|
|
28,243 |
|
|
|
25,291 |
|
|
|
Unrated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,920 |
|
|
|
1,598 |
|
|
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total 2 |
|
|
$63,333 |
|
|
|
$72,669 |
|
|
|
|
|
$63,585 |
|
|
|
$67,404 |
|
|
|
|
|
$87,358 |
|
|
|
$82,904 |
|
1. |
Includes approximately $17 billion and $12 billion of loans as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, and approximately
$70 billion and $71 billion of lending commitments as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively. Excludes certain bank loans and bridge loans and certain lending commitments that are risk managed as part of market risk using
VaR and sensitivity measures. |
2. |
The firm bears credit risk related to resale agreements and securities borrowed only to the extent that cash advanced or the value of securities pledged or
delivered to the counterparty exceeds the value of the collateral received. The firm also has credit exposure on repurchase agreements and securities loaned to the extent that the value of securities pledged or delivered to the counterparty for
these transactions exceeds the amount of cash or collateral received. We had approximately $40 billion and $37 billion as of March 2013 and December 2012, respectively, in credit exposure related to securities financing
transactions reflecting both netting agreements and collateral that management considers when determining credit risk. |
3. |
EMEA (Europe, Middle East and Africa). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
171 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Selected Country Exposures
There have been continuing concerns about European sovereign debt risk and its impact on
the European banking system and a number of European member states have been experiencing significant credit deterioration. The most pronounced market concerns relate to Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain. The tables below present our credit
exposure (both gross and net of hedges) to all sovereigns, financial institutions and corporate counterparties or borrowers in these countries. Credit exposure represents the potential for loss due to the default or deterioration in credit quality
of a counterparty or borrower. In addition, the tables include the market
exposure of our long and short inventory for which the issuer or underlier is located in these countries. Market exposure represents the potential for loss in value of our inventory due to
changes in market prices. There is no overlap between the credit and market exposures in the tables below.
The country of
risk is determined by the location of the counterparty, issuer or underliers assets, where they generate revenue, the country in which they are headquartered, and/or the government whose policies affect their ability to repay
their obligations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 2013 |
|
|
|
Credit Exposure |
|
|
|
Market Exposure |
|
in millions |
|
|
Loans |
|
|
|
OTC Derivatives |
|
|
Other |
|
Gross Funded |
|
|
Hedges |
|
|
Total Net Funded Credit
Exposure |
|
Unfunded
Credit Exposure |
|
Total Credit Exposure |
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
|
Equities and Other |
|
|
|
Credit Derivatives |
|
|
|
Total
Market Exposure |
|
Greece |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sovereign |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 92 |
|
|
$ |
|
$ 92 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ 92 |
|
$ |
|
$ 92 |
|
|
|
|
$ 36 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 36 |
|
|
|
Non-Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
6 |
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
64 |
|
Total Greece |
|
|
|
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
6 |
|
116 |
|
|
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
Ireland |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(240 |
) |
|
|
(251 |
) |
|
|
Non-Sovereign |
|
|
454 |
|
|
|
281 |
|
|
83 |
|
818 |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
805 |
|
28 |
|
833 |
|
|
|
|
210 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
419 |
|
Total Ireland |
|
|
454 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
83 |
|
819 |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
806 |
|
28 |
|
834 |
|
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
(91 |
) |
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
Italy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,809 |
|
|
64 |
|
1,873 |
|
|
(1,717 |
) |
|
156 |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
|
(566 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(418 |
) |
|
|
(984 |
) |
|
|
Non-Sovereign |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
611 |
|
|
114 |
|
825 |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
796 |
|
439 |
|
1,235 |
|
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1,492 |
) |
|
|
(1,324 |
) |
Total Italy |
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
2,420 |
|
|
178 |
|
2,698 |
|
|
(1,746 |
) |
|
952 |
|
439 |
|
1,391 |
|
|
|
|
(399 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1,910 |
) |
|
|
(2,308 |
) |
|
|
Portugal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
53 |
|
181 |
|
|
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(188 |
) |
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
Non-Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
2 |
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(322 |
) |
|
|
(163 |
) |
Total Portugal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
55 |
|
205 |
|
|
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
|
424 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(510 |
) |
|
|
(94 |
) |
|
|
Spain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
Non-Sovereign |
|
|
1,173 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
80 |
|
1,435 |
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
1,370 |
|
735 |
|
2,105 |
|
|
|
|
1,465 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
(278 |
) |
|
|
1,248 |
|
Total Spain |
|
|
1,173 |
|
|
|
236 |
|
|
80 |
|
1,489 |
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
1,424 |
|
735 |
|
2,159 |
|
|
|
|
1,442 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
(272 |
) |
|
|
1,231 |
|
Total |
|
|
$1,727 |
1 |
|
|
$3,198 |
2 |
|
$402 |
|
$5,327 |
|
|
$(1,824 |
) 3 |
|
$3,503 |
|
$1,202 |
|
$4,705 |
|
|
|
|
$1,762 |
|
|
|
$146 |
|
|
|
$(2,811 |
) 3 |
|
|
$ (903 |
) |
1. |
Principally consists of collateralized loans. |
2. |
Includes the benefit of $6.6 billion of cash and U.S. Treasury securities collateral and excludes non-U.S. government and agency obligations and
corporate securities collateral of $393 million. |
3. |
Includes written and purchased credit derivative notionals reduced by the fair values of such credit derivatives. |
In addition, during the first quarter of 2013, Cyprus experienced significant credit
deterioration and there are market concerns about its sovereign debt risk. Our total
credit and market exposure to Cyprus was not material as of March 2013.
|
|
|
|
|
172 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 2012 |
|
|
|
Credit Exposure |
|
|
|
|
Market Exposure |
|
in millions |
|
|
Loans |
|
|
|
OTC Derivatives |
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
Gross Funded |
|
|
|
Hedges |
|
|
|
Total Net Funded Credit Exposure |
|
|
|
Unfunded
Credit Exposure |
|
|
|
Total Credit Exposure |
|
|
|
|
|
Debt |
|
|
|
Equities and Other |
|
|
|
Credit Derivatives |
|
|
|
Total
Market Exposure |
|
Greece |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sovereign |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
$ 30 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ 30 |
|
|
|
Non-Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
75 |
|
Total Greece |
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
Ireland |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(150 |
) |
|
|
(142 |
) |
|
|
Non-Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
162 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
162 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
162 |
|
|
|
|
|
801 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
1,030 |
|
Total Ireland |
|
|
|
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
266 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
266 |
|
|
|
|
|
809 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
888 |
|
|
|
Italy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,756 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1,757 |
|
|
|
(1,714 |
) |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
(415 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(603 |
) |
|
|
(1,018 |
) |
|
|
Non-Sovereign |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
560 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
732 |
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
699 |
|
|
|
587 |
|
|
|
1,286 |
|
|
|
|
|
434 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
(996 |
) |
|
|
(497 |
) |
Total Italy |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
2,316 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
2,489 |
|
|
|
(1,747 |
) |
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
587 |
|
|
|
1,329 |
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
(1,599 |
) |
|
|
(1,515 |
) |
|
|
Portugal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(226 |
) |
|
|
(71 |
) |
|
|
Non-Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(133 |
) |
|
|
29 |
|
Total Portugal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
248 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
248 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
248 |
|
|
|
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(359 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
Spain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sovereign |
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
986 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(268 |
) |
|
|
718 |
|
|
|
Non-Sovereign |
|
|
1,048 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
1,330 |
|
|
|
(95 |
) |
|
|
1,235 |
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
1,968 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,268 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
(186 |
) |
|
|
1,165 |
|
Total Spain |
|
|
1,048 |
|
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
1,405 |
|
|
|
(95 |
) |
|
|
1,310 |
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
2,043 |
|
|
|
|
|
2,254 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
(454 |
) |
|
|
1,883 |
|
Total |
|
|
$1,091 |
1 |
|
|
$2,967 |
2 |
|
|
$356 |
|
|
|
$4,414 |
|
|
|
$(1,842 |
) 3 |
|
|
$2,572 |
|
|
|
$1,320 |
|
|
|
$3,892 |
|
|
|
|
|
$3,500 |
|
|
|
$231 |
|
|
|
$(2,412 |
) 3 |
|
|
$1,319 |
|
1. |
Principally consists of collateralized loans. |
2. |
Includes the benefit of $6.6 billion of cash and U.S. Treasury securities collateral and excludes non-U.S. government and agency obligations and
corporate securities collateral of $357 million. |
3. |
Includes written and purchased credit derivative notionals reduced by the fair values of such credit derivatives. |
We economically hedge our exposure to written credit derivatives by entering into
offsetting purchased credit derivatives with identical underlyings. Where possible, we endeavor to match the tenor and credit default terms of such hedges to that of our written credit derivatives. Substantially all purchased credit derivatives
included above are bought from investment-grade counterparties domiciled outside of these countries and are collateralized with cash or U.S. Treasury securities. The gross purchased and written credit derivative notionals across the above countries
for single-name and index credit default swaps (included in Hedges and Credit Derivatives in the tables above) were $178.1 billion and $167.6 billion, respectively, as of March 2013, and $179.4 billion and
$168.6 billion, respectively, as of December 2012. Including netting under legally enforceable netting agreements, within each and across all of the countries above, the purchased and written credit derivative notionals for single-name and
index credit default swaps were $25.8 billion and $15.1 billion,
respectively, as of March 2013, and $26.0 billion and $15.3 billion, respectively, as of December 2012. These notionals are not representative of our exposure because they
exclude available netting under legally enforceable netting agreements on other derivatives outside of these countries and collateral received or posted under credit support agreements.
In credit exposure above, Other principally consists of deposits, secured lending transactions and other secured receivables,
net of applicable collateral. As of March 2013 and December 2012, $8.3 billion and $4.8 billion, respectively, of secured lending transactions and other secured receivables were fully collateralized.
For information about the nature of or payout under trigger events related to written and purchased credit protection contracts see
Note 7 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
173 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
We conduct stress tests intended to estimate the direct and indirect impact that might
result from a variety of possible events involving the above countries, including sovereign defaults and the exit of one or more countries from the Euro area. In the stress tests, described in Market Risk Management Stress
Testing and Credit Risk Management Stress Tests/Scenario Analysis, we estimate the direct impact of the event on our credit and market exposures resulting from shocks to risk factors including, but not limited to,
currency rates, interest rates, and equity prices. The parameters of these shocks vary based on the scenario reflected in each stress test. We also estimate the indirect impact on our exposures arising from potential market moves in response to the
event, such as the impact of credit market deterioration on corporate borrowers and counterparties along with the shocks to the risk factors described above. We review estimated losses produced by the stress tests in order to understand their
magnitude, highlight potential loss concentrations, and assess and mitigate our exposures where necessary.
Euro area exit
scenarios include analysis of the impacts on exposure that might result from the redenomination of assets in the exiting country or countries. Constructing stress tests for these scenarios requires many assumptions about how exposures might be
directly impacted and how resulting secondary market moves would indirectly impact such exposures. Given the multiple parameters involved in such scenarios, losses from such events are inherently difficult to quantify and may materially differ from
our estimates. In order to prepare for any market disruption that might result from a Euro area exit, we test our operational and risk management readiness and capability to respond to a redenomination event.
See Liquidity Risk Management Modeled Liquidity Outflow, Market Risk Management Stress
Testing and Credit Risk Management Stress Tests/Scenario Analysis for further discussion.
Credit
events which occurred subsequent to March 2013 related to these countries did not have a material effect on our financial condition, results of operations, liquidity or capital resources.
Operational Risk Management
Overview
Operational risk is the
risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems or from external events. Our exposure to operational risk arises from routine processing errors as well as extraordinary incidents, such as major systems
failures. Potential types of loss events related to internal and external operational risk include:
|
|
clients, products and business practices; |
|
|
execution, delivery and process management; |
|
|
business disruption and system failures; |
|
|
employment practices and workplace safety; |
|
|
damage to physical assets; |
The firm maintains a comprehensive control framework designed to provide a well-controlled environment to minimize operational risks. The Firmwide Operational Risk Committee, along with the support of
regional or entity-specific working groups or committees, provides oversight of the ongoing development and implementation of our operational risk policies and framework. Our Operational Risk Management department (Operational Risk Management) is a
risk management function independent of our revenue-producing units, reports to the firms chief risk officer, and is responsible for developing and implementing policies, methodologies and a formalized framework for operational risk management
with the goal of minimizing our exposure to operational risk.
|
|
|
|
|
174 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Operational Risk Management Process
Managing operational risk requires timely and accurate information as well as a strong control culture. We seek to manage our operational risk through:
|
|
the training, supervision and development of our people; |
|
|
the active participation of senior management in identifying and mitigating key operational risks across the firm;
|
|
|
independent control and support functions that monitor operational risk on a daily basis and have instituted extensive policies and procedures and
implemented controls designed to prevent the occurrence of operational risk events; |
|
|
proactive communication between our revenue-producing units and our independent control and support functions; and
|
|
|
a network of systems throughout the firm to facilitate the collection of data used to analyze and assess our operational risk exposure.
|
We combine top-down and bottom-up approaches to manage and measure operational risk. From a top-down
perspective, the firms senior management assesses firmwide and business level operational risk profiles. From a bottom-up perspective, revenue-producing units and independent control and support functions are responsible for risk management on
a day-to-day basis, including identifying, mitigating, and escalating operational risks to senior management.
Our operational
risk framework is in part designed to comply with the operational risk measurement rules under Basel 2 and has evolved based on the changing needs of our businesses and regulatory guidance. Our framework comprises the following practices:
|
|
Risk identification and reporting; |
Internal Audit performs an independent review of our operational risk framework, including our key controls, processes and applications, on an annual basis to assess the effectiveness of our framework.
Risk Identification and Reporting
The core of our operational risk management framework is risk identification and reporting. We have a comprehensive data collection process, including firmwide policies and procedures, for operational
risk events.
We have established policies that require managers in our revenue-producing units and our independent control and
support functions to escalate operational risk events. When operational risk events are identified, our policies require that the events be documented and analyzed to determine whether changes are required in the firms systems and/or processes
to further mitigate the risk of future events.
In addition, our firmwide systems capture internal operational risk event data,
key metrics such as transaction volumes, and statistical information such as performance trends. We use an internally-developed operational risk management application to aggregate and organize this information. Managers from both revenue-producing
units and independent control and support functions analyze the information to evaluate operational risk exposures and identify businesses, activities or products with heightened levels of operational risk. We also provide periodic operational risk
reports to senior management, risk committees and the Board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
175 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Risk Measurement
We measure the firms operational risk exposure over a twelve-month time horizon using both statistical modeling and scenario analyses, which involve qualitative assessments of the potential
frequency and extent of potential operational risk losses, for each of the firms businesses. Operational risk measurement incorporates qualitative and quantitative assessments of factors including:
|
|
internal and external operational risk event data; |
|
|
assessments of the firms internal controls; |
|
|
evaluations of the complexity of the firms business activities; |
|
|
the degree of and potential for automation in the firms processes; |
|
|
new product information; |
|
|
the legal and regulatory environment; |
|
|
changes in the markets for the firms products and services, including the diversity and sophistication of the firms customers and
counterparties; and |
|
|
the liquidity of the capital markets and the reliability of the infrastructure that supports the capital markets. |
The results from these scenario analyses are used to monitor changes in operational risk and to determine business lines that may have
heightened exposure to operational risk. These analyses ultimately are used in the determination of the appropriate level of operational risk capital to hold.
Risk Monitoring
We evaluate changes in the operational risk profile of the firm and its businesses, including changes in business mix or jurisdictions in which the firm operates, by monitoring the factors noted above at
a firmwide level. The firm has both detective and preventive internal controls, which are designed to reduce the frequency and severity of operational risk losses and the probability of operational risk events. We monitor the results of assessments
and independent internal audits of these internal controls.
Recent Accounting Developments
See Note 3 to the condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for information
about Recent Accounting Developments.
|
|
|
|
|
176 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
Certain Risk Factors That May Affect Our Businesses |
|
|
|
|
We face a variety of risks that are substantial and inherent in our businesses, including
market, liquidity, credit, operational, legal, regulatory and reputational risks. For a discussion of how management seeks to manage some of these risks, see Overview and Structure of Risk Management. A summary of the more important
factors that could affect our businesses follows. For a further discussion of these and other important factors that could affect our businesses, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and liquidity, see
Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K.
|
|
Our businesses have been and may continue to be adversely affected by conditions in the global financial markets and economic conditions generally.
|
|
|
Our businesses have been and may be adversely affected by declining asset values. This is particularly true for those businesses in which we have
net long positions, receive fees based on the value of assets managed, or receive or post collateral. |
|
|
Our businesses have been and may be adversely affected by disruptions in the credit markets, including reduced access to credit and higher costs of
obtaining credit. |
|
|
Our market-making activities have been and may be affected by changes in the levels of market volatility. |
|
|
Our investment banking, client execution and investment management businesses have been adversely affected and may continue to be adversely affected
by market uncertainty or lack of confidence among investors and CEOs due to general declines in economic activity and other unfavorable economic, geopolitical or market conditions. |
|
|
Our investment management business may be affected by the poor investment performance of our investment products. |
|
|
We may incur losses as a result of ineffective risk management processes and strategies. |
|
|
Our liquidity, profitability and businesses may be adversely affected by an inability to access the debt capital markets or to sell assets or by a
reduction in our credit ratings or by an increase in our credit spreads. |
|
|
Conflicts of interest are increasing and a failure to appropriately identify and address conflicts of interest could adversely affect our
businesses. |
|
|
Group Inc. is a holding company and is dependent for liquidity on payments from its subsidiaries, many of which are subject to restrictions.
|
|
|
Our businesses, profitability and liquidity may be adversely affected by deterioration in the credit quality of, or defaults by, third parties who
owe us money, securities or other assets or whose securities or obligations we hold. |
|
|
Concentration of risk increases the potential for significant losses in our market-making, underwriting, investing and lending activities.
|
|
|
The financial services industry is highly competitive. |
|
|
We face enhanced risks as new business initiatives lead us to transact with a broader array of clients and counterparties and expose us to new asset
classes and new markets. |
|
|
Derivative transactions and delayed settlements may expose us to unexpected risk and potential losses. |
|
|
Our businesses may be adversely affected if we are unable to hire and retain qualified employees. |
|
|
Our businesses and those of our clients are subject to extensive and pervasive regulation around the world. |
|
|
We may be adversely affected by increased governmental and regulatory scrutiny or negative publicity. |
|
|
A failure in our operational systems or infrastructure, or those of third parties, could impair our liquidity, disrupt our businesses, result in the
disclosure of confidential information, damage our reputation and cause losses. |
|
|
Substantial legal liability or significant regulatory action against us could have material adverse financial effects or cause us significant
reputational harm, which in turn could seriously harm our business prospects. |
|
|
The growth of electronic trading and the introduction of new trading technology may adversely affect our business and may increase competition.
|
|
|
Our commodities activities, particularly our power generation interests and our physical commodities activities, subject us to extensive regulation,
potential catastrophic events and environmental, reputational and other risks that may expose us to significant liabilities and costs. |
|
|
In conducting our businesses around the world, we are subject to political, economic, legal, operational and other risks that are inherent in
operating in many countries. |
|
|
We may incur losses as a result of unforeseen or catastrophic events, including the emergence of a pandemic, terrorist attacks, extreme weather
events or other natural disasters. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
177 |
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
Managements Discussion and Analysis
Available Information
Our internet address is www.gs.com and the investor relations section of our web site is located at www.gs.com/shareholders.
We make available free of charge through the investor relations section of our web site, annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished
pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act), as well as proxy statements, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC. Also
posted on our web site, and available in print upon request of any shareholder to our Investor Relations Department, are our certificate of incorporation and by-laws, charters for our Audit Committee, Risk Committee, Compensation Committee, and
Corporate Governance, Nominating and Public Responsibilities Committee, our Policy Regarding Director Independence Determinations, our Policy on Reporting of Concerns Regarding Accounting and Other Matters, our Corporate Governance Guidelines and
our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics governing our directors, officers and employees. Within the time period required by the SEC, we will post on our web site any amendment to the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and any waiver applicable to
any executive officer, director or senior financial officer.
In addition, our web site includes information concerning
purchases and sales of our equity securities by our executive officers and directors, as well as disclosure relating to certain non-GAAP financial measures (as defined in the SECs Regulation G) that we may make public orally, telephonically,
by webcast, by broadcast or by similar means from time to time. In addition, we make available on the Investor Relations section of our web site information regarding DFAST results and intend to make available, on a quarterly basis, information on
the firms risk management practices and regulatory capital ratios, as required under the disclosure-related provisions of the Federal Reserve Boards market risk capital rules.
Our Investor Relations Department can be contacted at The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., 200 West Street, 29th Floor, New York, New York
10282, Attn: Investor Relations, telephone: 212-902-0300, e-mail: gs-investor-relations@gs.com.
Cautionary Statement Pursuant to the U.S. Private Securities Litigation
Reform Act of 1995
We have included or incorporated by reference in this Form 10-Q, and from time to time our
management may make, statements that may constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the safe harbor provisions of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements are not historical
facts, but instead represent only our beliefs regarding future events, many of which, by their nature, are inherently uncertain and outside our control. It is possible that our actual results and financial condition may differ, possibly materially,
from the anticipated results and financial condition indicated in these forward-looking statements. For a discussion of some of the risks and important factors that could affect our future results and financial condition, see Certain Risk
Factors That May Affect Our Businesses above, as well as Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Statements about our investment banking transaction backlog also may constitute forward-looking statements. Such statements are subject to the risk that the terms of these transactions may be modified or
that they may not be completed at all; therefore, the net revenues, if any, that we actually earn from these transactions may differ, possibly materially, from those currently expected. Important factors that could result in a modification of the
terms of a transaction or a transaction not being completed include, in the case of underwriting transactions, a decline or continued weakness in general economic conditions, outbreak of hostilities, volatility in the securities markets generally or
an adverse development with respect to the issuer of the securities and, in the case of financial advisory transactions, a decline in the securities markets, an inability to obtain adequate financing, an adverse development with respect to a party
to the transaction or a failure to obtain a required regulatory approval. For a discussion of other important factors that could adversely affect our investment banking transactions, see Certain Risk Factors That May Affect Our
Businesses above, as well as Risk Factors in Part I, Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K.
|
|
|
|
|
178 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About
Market Risk
Quantitative and qualitative disclosures about market risk are set forth under Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Market Risk Management in Part I, Item 2 above.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
As of the end of the period covered by this report, an evaluation was carried out by Goldman Sachs management, with the
participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act)). Based upon that
evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of the end of the period covered by this report. In addition, no change in our internal control over
financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act) occurred during our most recent quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
We
are involved in a number of judicial, regulatory and arbitration proceedings concerning matters arising in connection with the conduct of our businesses. Many of these proceedings are in early stages, and many of these cases seek an indeterminate
amount of damages. However, we believe, based on currently available information, that the results of such proceedings, in the aggregate, will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, but may be material to our operating
results for any particular period, depending, in part, upon the operating results for such period. Given the range of litigation and investigations presently under way, our litigation expenses can be expected to remain high. See
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Use of Estimates in Part I, Item 2 of this Form 10-Q. See Note 27 to the condensed consolidated financial
statements in Part I, Item 1 of this Form 10-Q for information on certain judicial, regulatory and legal proceedings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
179 |
|
|
|
|
|
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds |
|
|
|
|
The table below sets forth the information with respect to purchases made by or on behalf
of The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. (Group Inc.) or any affiliated purchaser (as
defined in Rule 10b-18(a)(3) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) of our common stock during the three months ended March 31, 2013.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period |
|
|
Total Number
of Shares Purchased |
|
|
|
Average Price
Paid per Share |
|
|
|
Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs |
1 |
|
|
Maximum Number of Shares That May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs |
1
|
Month #1
(January 1, 2013 to January 31, 2013) |
|
|
2,701,284 |
2 |
|
|
$144.82 |
|
|
|
2,630,530 |
|
|
|
18,858,321 |
|
|
|
Month #2
(February 1, 2013 to February 28, 2013) |
|
|
4,761,527 |
|
|
|
152.15 |
|
|
|
4,761,527 |
|
|
|
14,096,794 |
|
|
|
Month #3
(March 1, 2013 to March 31, 2013) |
|
|
2,738,346 |
|
|
|
153.11 |
|
|
|
2,738,346 |
|
|
|
11,358,448 |
3 |
Total |
|
|
10,201,157 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,130,403 |
|
|
|
|
|
1. |
On March 21, 2000, we announced that the Board of Directors of Group Inc. (Board) had approved a repurchase program, pursuant to which up to
15 million shares of our common stock may be repurchased. This repurchase program was increased by an aggregate of 355 million shares by resolutions of our Board adopted from June 2001 through July 2011. We use our
share repurchase program to help maintain the appropriate level of common equity. The repurchase program is effected primarily through regular open-market purchases, the amounts and timing of which are determined primarily by the firms current
and projected capital position (i.e., comparisons of our desired level and composition of capital to our actual level and composition of capital), but which may also be influenced by general market conditions and the prevailing price and trading
volumes of our common stock. The repurchase program has no set expiration or termination date. Any repurchase of our common stock requires approval by the Federal Reserve Board. |
2. |
Includes 70,754 shares remitted by employees to satisfy minimum statutory withholding taxes on equity-based awards that were delivered to employees during
the period. |
3. |
On April 15, 2013, the Board authorized the repurchase of an additional 75.0 million shares of common stock pursuant to the firms
existing share repurchase program. As of April 15, 2013, under the share repurchase program approved by the Board, we can repurchase up to 86.4 million additional shares of common stock, including the newly authorized amount; however,
any such repurchases are subject to the approval of the Federal Reserve Board. |
|
|
|
|
|
180 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|
Item 6. Exhibits
Exhibits
|
|
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
Restated Certificate of Incorporation of The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., amended as of May 6, 2013. |
|
|
4.1 |
|
Form of Amendment to Warrant (originally issued on October 1, 2008), dated as of March 25, 2013, between The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. and
each Warrantholder named therein (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrants Current Report on Form 8-K, filed March 26, 2013). |
|
|
12.1 |
|
Statement re: Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Ratios of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred Stock
Dividends. |
|
|
15.1 |
|
Letter re: Unaudited Interim Financial Information. |
|
|
31.1 |
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certifications. |
|
|
32.1 |
|
Section 1350 Certifications.* |
|
|
101 |
|
Interactive data files pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T: (i) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Earnings for the three months ended
March 31, 2013 and March 31, 2012, (ii) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and March 31, 2012, (iii) the Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Financial Condition as of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, (iv) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders Equity for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and year
ended December 31, 2012, (v) the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and March 31, 2012, and (vi) the notes to the Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements. |
|
|
|
|
* This
information is furnished and not filed for purposes of Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
181 |
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. |
|
|
By: |
|
/s/ Harvey M. Schwartz |
|
|
Name: Harvey M. Schwartz |
|
|
Title: Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
By: |
|
/s/ Sarah E. Smith |
|
|
Name: Sarah E. Smith |
|
|
Title: Principal Accounting Officer |
Date: May 8, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
182 |
|
Goldman Sachs March 2013 Form 10-Q |
|
|