UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014

Commission file number 1-9924

Citigroup Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Delaware 52-1568099
(State or other jurisdiction of (I.R.S. Employer
incorporation or organization) Identification No.)
399 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10022
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code)
(212) 559-1000
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: See Exhibit 99.01

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: none

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes  No 
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes  No 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes  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). Yes  No 
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained
herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference
in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. 
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  Accelerated filer  Non-accelerated filer  Smaller reporting company 
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes  No 
The aggregate market value of Citigroup Inc. common stock held by non-affiliates of Citigroup Inc. on June 30, 2014 was approximately
$142.6 billion.

Number of shares of Citigroup Inc. common stock outstanding on January 31, 2015: 3,033,851,309

Documents Incorporated by Reference: Portions of the registrant’s proxy statement for the annual meeting of stockholders scheduled to be held
on April 28, 2015, are incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K in response to Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 of Part III.
Available on the web at www.citigroup.com
FORM 10-K CROSS-REFERENCE INDEX

Item Number Page Part III

Part I 10. Directors, Executive Officers and

Corporate Governance. . . . . . . . . . . . . 305-306*
1. Business. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-30, 33, 124-126,
129, 158, 11. Executive Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . **
301-302
12. Security Ownership of Certain
1A. Risk Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  54–65 Beneficial Owners and Management
and Related Stockholder Matters . . . . ***
1B. Unresolved Staff Comments. . . . . . . . . Not Applicable
2. Properties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302 13. Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions and Director
3. Legal Proceedings—See Note 28 Independence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ****
to the Consolidated
Financial Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289-298 14. Principal Accountant Fees and
Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *****
4. Mine Safety Disclosures. . . . . . . . . . . . Not Applicable
Part IV
Part II
15. Exhibits and Financial Statement
5. Market for Registrant’s Common Schedules. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Equity, Related Stockholder Matters,
and Issuer Purchases of Equity * For additional information regarding Citigroup’s Directors, see “Corporate Governance,”
Securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138, 164, “Proposal 1: Election of Directors” and “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting
Compliance” in the definitive Proxy Statement for Citigroup’s Annual Meeting of Stockholders
303-304 scheduled to be held on April 28, 2015, to be filed with the SEC (the Proxy Statement),
incorporated herein by reference.
6. Selected Financial Data. . . . . . . . . . . . 9-10 ** See “Executive Compensation—The Personnel and Compensation Committee Report,” “—
Compensation Discussion and Analysis” and “—2014 Summary Compensation Table and
7. Management’s Discussion and Compensation Information” in the Proxy Statement, incorporated herein by reference.
*** See “About the Annual Meeting,” “Stock Ownership” and “Proposal 4: Approval of Additional
Analysis of Financial Condition and Authorized Shares under the Citigroup 2014 Stock Incentive Plan” in the Proxy Statement,
Results of Operations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-35, 68-123 incorporated herein by reference.
**** See “Corporate Governance—Director Independence,” “—Certain Transactions and
7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Relationships, Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation,” and “—
Indebtedness” in the Proxy Statement, incorporated herein by reference.
Disclosures About Market Risk. . . . . . 68-123, 159-161, ***** See “Proposal 2: Ratification of Selection of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm”
186–218, 226-282 in the Proxy Statement, incorporated herein by reference.

8. Financial Statements and

Supplementary Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134-300
9. Changes in and Disagreements with
Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Not Applicable
9A. Controls and Procedures. . . . . . . . . . . 127-128
9B. Other Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Not Applicable

2
CITIGROUP’S 2014 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

OVERVIEW 4 SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND

SIGNIFICANT ESTIMATES 124
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES 127
OF OPERATIONS 6 MANAGEMENT’S ANNUAL REPORT
Executive Summary 6 ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER
Summary of Selected Financial Data 9 FINANCIAL REPORTING 128
SEGMENT AND BUSINESS—INCOME (LOSS) FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS 129
AND REVENUES 11 REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
CITICORP 13 PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM—INTERNAL
14 CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING 130
Global Consumer Banking (GCB)
North America GCB 16 REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
EMEA GCB 18 PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM—
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 131
Latin America GCB 20
Asia GCB 22 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES
TABLE OF CONTENTS 133
Institutional Clients Group 24
Corporate/Other 28 CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 134
CITI HOLDINGS 29 NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 141
BALANCE SHEET REVIEW 31
FINANCIAL DATA SUPPLEMENT 300
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS 34
SUPERVISION, REGULATION AND OTHER 301
CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS 35
Supervision and Regulation 301
CAPITAL RESOURCES 36 301
Competition
Current Regulatory Capital Standards 36 302
Properties
Overview 36 Disclosure Pursuant to Section 219 of the Iran Threat Reduction
Basel III Transition Arrangements 37 and Syria Human Rights Act 302
Basel III (Full Implementation) 46 Unregistered Sales of Equity, Purchases of Equity
Securities, Dividends 303
Supplementary Leverage Ratio 51
Performance Graph 304
Regulatory Capital Standards Developments 53
Tangible Common Equity, Tangible Book Value Per Share CORPORATE INFORMATION 305
and Book Value Per Share 53 Citigroup Executive Officers 305
RISK FACTORS 54 Citigroup Board of Directors 305
Managing Global Risk Table of Contents—Credit,
Market (Including Funding and Liquidity), Operational and
Country and Cross-Border Risk Sections 67
MANAGING GLOBAL RISK 68
Overview 68
Citi’s Risk Management Organization 68
Citi’s Compliance Organization 71

3
OVERVIEW

Citigroup’s history dates back to the founding of the City Bank of New York Throughout this report, “Citigroup,” “Citi” and “the Company” refer to
in 1812. Citigroup’s original corporate predecessor was incorporated in 1988 Citigroup Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries.
under the laws of the State of Delaware. Following a series of transactions Additional information about Citigroup is available on Citi’s website
over a number of years, Citigroup Inc. was formed in 1998 upon the merger at www.citigroup.com. Citigroup’s recent annual reports on Form 10-K,
of Citicorp and Travelers Group Inc. quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, proxy statements, as well as other filings
Citigroup is a global diversified financial services holding company, whose with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), are available
businesses provide consumers, corporations, governments and institutions free of charge through Citi’s website by clicking on the “Investors” page and
with a broad range of financial products and services, including consumer selecting “All SEC Filings.” The SEC’s website also contains current reports,
banking and credit, corporate and investment banking, securities brokerage, information statements, and other information regarding Citi at www.sec.gov.
trade and securities services and wealth management. Citi has approximately Certain reclassifications, including a realignment of certain businesses,
200 million customer accounts and does business in more than 160 have been made to the prior periods’ financial statements to conform to
countries and jurisdictions. the current period’s presentation. For information on certain recent such
At December 31, 2014, Citi had approximately 241,000 full-time reclassifications, see Note 3 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
employees, compared to approximately 251,000 full-time employees at
December 31, 2013.
Citigroup currently operates, for management reporting purposes, via two
primary business segments: Citicorp, consisting of Citi’s Global Consumer Please see “Risk Factors” below for a discussion of the
Banking businesses and Institutional Clients Group; and Citi Holdings, most significant risks and uncertainties that could impact
consisting of businesses and portfolios of assets that Citigroup has determined Citigroup’s businesses, financial condition and results
are not central to its core Citicorp businesses. For a further description of the of operations.
business segments and the products and services they provide, see “Citigroup
Segments” below, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations” and Note 3 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements.

4
As described above, Citigroup is managed pursuant to the following segments:

CITIGROUP SEGMENTS

Citicorp
Citi Holdings*

- Consumer loans,
including Consumer
Global Institutional loans originated by Citi’s
legacy CitiFinancial North
Consumer Clients Corporate/
America business
Banking* Group* Other - Certain international
(GCB) (ICG) consumer portfolios
- Certain portfolios of
• North America • Banking - Treasury securities, loans and
• EMEA - Investment banking - Operations and other assets
• Latin America -T  reasury and trade technology - Certain retail alternative
• Asia solutions - Global staff investments
-C  orporate lending functions and
Consisting of: - Private Bank other corporate
• Retail banking, local • Markets and securities expenses
commercial banking services - Discontinued
and branch-based -F
 ixed income operations
financial advisors markets
- Residential real estate -E
 quity markets
- Asset management in -S
 ecurities services
Latin America
•C iti-branded cards in
all of the regions
•C iti retail services in
North America

* As previously announced, Citigroup intends to exit its consumer businesses in 11 markets and its consumer finance business in Korea in GCB and certain businesses in ICG. Effective in the first quarter of 2015,
these businesses will be reported as part of Citi Holdings. For additional information, see “Executive Summary,” “Global Consumer Banking” and “Institutional Clients Group” below. Citi intends to release a
revised Quarterly Financial Data Supplement reflecting this realignment prior to the release of its first quarter of 2015 earnings information.

The following are the four regions in which Citigroup operates. The regional results are fully reflected in the segment results above.

CITIGROUP REGIONS(1)

Europe,
North Middle East
Latin America Asia
America and Africa
(EMEA)

(1) North America includes the U.S., Canada and Puerto Rico, Latin America includes Mexico, and Asia includes Japan.

5
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY risks that could impact Citi’s businesses, results of operations and financial
condition during 2015, see each respective business’ results of operations,
Steady Progress on Execution Priorities Despite Continued “Risk Factors” and “Managing Global Risk” below.
Challenging Operating Environment While Citi may not be able to completely control these and other factors
As discussed further throughout this Form 10-K, Citi’s 2014 results reflected affecting its operating environment in 2015, it will remain focused on its
a continued challenging operating environment for Citi and its businesses in execution priorities, as described above, and remains committed to achieving
several respects, including: its 2015 financial targets for Citicorp’s operating efficiency ratio and
• the impact of macroeconomic uncertainty on the markets, trading Citigroup’s return on assets.
environment and customer activity, particularly during the latter part of 2014 Summary Results
the year;
• significant costs associated with legal settlements as Citi resolved Citigroup
its significant legacy legal issues and continued to work through its Citigroup reported net income of $7.3 billion or $2.20 per diluted share,
outstanding legal matters; compared to $13.7 billion or $4.35 per share in 2013. In 2014, Citi’s
results included negative $390 million (negative $240 million after-tax)
• uneven global economic growth; and
of CVA/DVA, compared to negative $342 million (negative $213 million
• a continued low interest rate environment. after-tax) in 2013 (for additional information, including Citi’s adoption
In addition, as part of its execution priorities to improve its efficiency and of funding valuation adjustments, or FVA, in 2014, see Note 25 to the
reduce expenses, Citi incurred higher repositioning costs during the year, Consolidated Financial Statements). Citi’s results in 2014 also included
which also impacted its 2014 results of operations. a charge of $3.8 billion ($3.7 billion after-tax) related to the mortgage
Despite these difficult decisions and challenges, Citi continued to make settlement announced in July 2014 regarding certain of Citi’s legacy
progress on its execution priorities in 2014, including: residential mortgage-backed securities and CDO activities, recorded in Citi
Holdings. Results in 2014 further included a tax charge of approximately
• Efficient resource allocation and disciplined expense management: As $210 million related to corporate tax reforms enacted in two states, compared
noted above, Citi continued to take actions to simplify and streamline the to a tax benefit of $176 million in 2013 related to the resolution of certain
organization as well as improve productivity. As part of these efforts, Citi tax audit items, both recorded in Corporate/Other. In addition, Citi’s 2013
announced strategic actions to exit its consumer businesses in certain results included a net fraud loss in Mexico of $360 million ($235 million
international markets in Global Consumer Banking (GCB) and certain after-tax) recorded in ICG, and a $189 million after-tax benefit related to the
businesses in Institutional Clients Group (ICG) to focus on those markets divestiture of Credicard, Citi’s non-Citibank branded cards and consumer
and businesses where it believes it has the greatest scale, growth potential finance business in Brazil (Credicard), recorded in Corporate/Other.
and ability to provide meaningful returns to its shareholders. Excluding these items, Citi reported net income of $11.5 billion in 2014,
• Wind down of Citi Holdings: Citi continued to wind down Citi Holdings, or $3.55 per diluted share, compared to $13.8 billion, or $4.37 per share, in
including reducing its assets by $19 billion, or 16%, from year end 2013. the prior year. The 16% decrease from 2013 was driven by higher expenses,
• Utilization of deferred tax assets (DTAs): Citi utilized approximately a lower net loan loss reserve release and a higher effective tax rate due
$3.3 billion in DTAs during 2014 (for additional information, see primarily to non-deductible legal and related expenses incurred during the
“Income Taxes” below). year (for additional information, see Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements), partially offset by increased revenues in Citi Holdings and a
While making progress on these initiatives in 2014, Citi expects the
decline in net credit losses. (Citi’s results of operations excluding the impacts
operating environment in 2015 to remain challenging. Regulatory changes
of CVA/DVA, the mortgage settlement, the tax items, the net fraud loss and
and requirements continue to create uncertainties for Citi and its businesses.
the Credicard divestiture are non-GAAP financial measures. Citi believes the
While the U.S. economy continues to improve, it remains susceptible to
presentation of its results of operations excluding these impacts provides a
global events and volatility. The economic and fiscal situations of several
more meaningful depiction for investors of the underlying fundamentals of
European countries remain fragile, and geopolitical tensions in the region
its businesses.)
have added to the uncertainties. Although most emerging market economies
Citi’s revenues, net of interest expense, were $76.9 billion in 2014, up 1%
continue to grow, growth has slowed in some markets and these economies
versus the prior year. Excluding CVA/DVA, revenues were $77.3 billion, also up
are also susceptible to outside macroeconomic events and challenges. The
1% from 2013, as revenues rose 28% in Citi Holdings, partially offset by a 1%
frequency with which legal and regulatory proceedings are initiated against
decline in Citicorp. Net interest revenues of $48.0 billion were 3% higher than
financial institutions, and the severity of the remedies sought in these
2013, mostly driven by lower funding costs. Excluding CVA/DVA, non-interest
proceedings, has increased substantially over the past several years, including
revenues were $29.3 billion, down 2% from 2013, driven by lower revenues in
2014. Financial institutions also remain a target for an increasing number
ICG and GCB in Citicorp, partially offset by higher non-interest revenues in
of cybersecurity attacks. For a more detailed discussion of these and other
Citi Holdings.

6
Expenses Citi Holdings’ net reserve release, excluding the impact of the mortgage
Citigroup expenses increased 14% versus 2013 to $55.1 billion. Excluding settlement in 2014, decreased 53% to $958 million, primarily due to lower
the impact of the mortgage settlement in 2014 and the net fraud loss in releases related to the North America mortgage portfolio (which also had
2013, operating expenses increased 7% versus the prior year to $51.3 billion lower net credit losses).
driven by higher legal and related expenses ($5.8 billion compared to Citigroup’s total allowance for loan losses was $16.0 billion at year end, or
$3.0 billion in the prior year) and repositioning costs ($1.6 billion compared 2.50% of total loans, compared to $19.6 billion, or 2.97%, at the end of 2013.
to $590 million in the prior year). The decline in the total allowance for loan losses reflected the continued
Excluding the legal and related expenses, net fraud loss in 2013, wind down of Citi Holdings and overall continued improvement in the credit
repositioning charges and the impact of foreign exchange translation into quality of Citi’s loan portfolios. The consumer allowance for loan losses
U.S. dollars for reporting purposes (FX translation), which lowered reported was $13.6 billion, or 3.68% of total consumer loans, at year end, compared
expenses by approximately $503 million in 2014 compared to 2013, expenses to $17.1 billion, or 4.34% of total loans, at the end of 2013. The consumer
were roughly unchanged at $43.9 billion as repositioning savings, expense 90+ days past due delinquencies were $4.6 billion, or 1.27% of consumer
reductions in Citi Holdings and other productivity initiatives were fully offset loans, at year end, a decline from $5.7 billion or 1.49% of loans in the prior
by the impact of higher regulatory and compliance and volume-related year. Total non-accrual assets fell to $7.4 billion, a 22% reduction compared
costs. (Citi’s results of operations excluding the impact of legal and related to 2013. Corporate non-accrual loans declined 38% to $1.2 billion, while
expenses, repositioning charges and FX translation are non-GAAP financial Consumer non-accrual loans declined 17% to $5.9 billion, both reflecting the
measures. Citi believes the presentation of its results of operations excluding continued improvement in credit trends.
these impacts provides a more meaningful depiction for investors of the
Capital
underlying fundamentals of its businesses.)
Despite the challenging operating environment and elevated legal and
Excluding the impact of the net fraud loss in 2013, Citicorp’s expenses
related expenses during 2014, Citi was able to maintain its regulatory
were $47.3 billion, up 12% from the prior year, primarily reflecting higher
capital, primarily through net income and the further reduction of its DTAs.
legal and related expenses, largely in Corporate/Other ($4.8 billion
Citigroup’s Basel III Tier 1 Capital and Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratios,
compared to $432 million in 2013), higher repositioning costs ($1.6 billion
on a fully implemented basis, were 11.5% and 10.6% as of December 31,
compared to $547 million in 2013), higher regulatory and compliance
2014, respectively, compared to 11.3% and 10.6% as of December 31, 2013
costs and higher volume-related costs, partially offset by efficiency savings.
(all based on the Advanced Approaches for determining risk-weighted
Excluding the impact of the mortgage settlement in 2014, Citi Holdings’
assets). Citigroup’s estimated Basel III Supplementary Leverage ratio as
expenses were $4.0 billion, down 34% from 2013, reflecting lower legal and
of December 31, 2014 was 6.0% compared to 5.4% as of December 31,
related expenses as well as the ongoing decline in Citi Holdings’ assets.
2013, each based on the revised final U.S. Basel III rules. For additional
Credit Costs and Allowance for Loan Losses information on Citi’s capital ratios and related components, see “Capital
Citi’s total provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims of Resources” below.
$7.5 billion declined 12% from 2013. Excluding the impact of the mortgage
Citicorp
settlement in 2014, total provisions for credit losses and for benefits and
Citicorp net income decreased 32% from the prior year to $10.7 billion.
claims declined 13% to $7.4 billion versus the prior year. Net credit losses
CVA/DVA, recorded in ICG, was negative $343 million (negative $211 million
of $9.0 billion were down 14% versus the prior year. Consumer net credit
after-tax) in 2014, compared to negative $345 million (negative
losses declined 15% to $8.7 billion, reflecting continued improvements in
$214 million after-tax) in the prior year (for a summary of CVA/DVA by
the North America mortgage portfolio within Citi Holdings, as well as North
business within ICG, see “Institutional Clients Group” below).
America Citi-branded cards and Citi retail services in Citicorp. Corporate
Excluding CVA/DVA as well as the impact of the net fraud loss in Mexico,
net credit losses increased 43% to $288 million in 2014. Corporate net credit
the tax items and the divestiture of Credicard noted above, Citicorp’s net
losses in 2014 included approximately $113 million of incremental net
income was $11.1 billion, down 29% from the prior year, as higher expenses,
credit losses related to the Pemex supplier program in Mexico (for additional
a higher effective tax rate and lower revenues were partially offset by
information regarding the Pemex supplier program, see “Institutional
continued improvement in credit costs.
Clients Group” below).
Citicorp revenues, net of interest expense, decreased 1% from the prior
The net release of allowance for loan losses and unfunded lending
year to $71.1 billion. Excluding CVA/DVA, Citicorp revenues were $71.4 billion
commitments was $2.3 billion in 2014. Excluding the impact of the
in 2014, also down 1% from the prior year. GCB revenues of $37.8 billion
mortgage settlement in 2014, the net release of allowance for loan losses
decreased 1% versus the prior year. North America GCB revenues declined
and unfunded lending commitments was $2.4 billion in 2014 compared
1% to $19.6 billion driven by lower retail banking revenues, partially offset
to a $2.8 billion release in the prior year. Citicorp’s net reserve release
by higher revenues in Citi-branded cards and Citi retail services. Retail
increased to $1.4 billion from $736 million in 2013 due to higher reserve
banking revenues declined 9% to $4.9 billion versus the prior year, primarily
releases in North America GCB and ICG, reflecting improved credit trends.
reflecting lower mortgage origination revenues and spread compression in

7
the deposits portfolios, partially offset by volume-related growth and gains rose 15% versus the prior year to $1.7 billion, primarily reflecting growth
from branch sales during the year. Citi-branded cards revenues of $8.3 billion in average loans and improved funding costs. Treasury and trade solutions
were up 1% versus the prior year as purchase sales grew and an improvement revenues increased by 1% versus the prior year to $7.9 billion as volume and
in spreads driven by a reduction in promotional rate balances mostly offset fee growth was largely offset by the impact of spread compression globally.
the impact of lower average loans. Citi retail services revenues increased Markets and securities services revenues of $16.5 billion, excluding
4% to $6.5 billion, mainly reflecting the impact of the Best Buy portfolio CVA/DVA, decreased 8% from the prior year. Fixed income markets
acquisition in September 2013, partially offset by continued declines in fee revenues of $11.8 billion, excluding CVA/DVA, decreased 11% from the
revenues primarily reflecting higher yields and improving credit and the prior year, reflecting weakness across rates and currencies, credit markets
resulting increase in contractual partner payments. North America GCB and municipals due to challenging trading conditions, partially offset by
average deposits of $171 billion grew 3% year-over-year and average retail increased securitized products and commodities revenues. The first half of
loans of $46 billion grew 9%. Average card loans of $110 billion increased 2013 included a strong performance in rates and currencies, driven in part
2%, and purchase sales of $252 billion increased 5% versus the prior year. For by the impact of quantitative easing globally. Equity markets revenues of
additional information on the results of operations of North America GCB $2.8 billion, excluding CVA/DVA, declined 1% versus the prior year, mostly
for 2014, see “Global Consumer Banking—North America GCB” below. reflecting weakness in cash equities in EMEA driven by volatility in Europe,
International GCB revenues (consisting of EMEA GCB, Latin America partially offset by strength in prime finance. Securities services revenues of
GCB and Asia GCB) decreased 2% versus the prior year to $18.1 billion. $2.3 billion increased 3% versus the prior year primarily due to increased
Excluding the impact of FX translation, international GCB revenues rose volumes, assets under custody and overall client activity. For additional
2% from the prior year, driven by 4% growth in Latin America GCB and information on the results of operations of ICG for 2014, see “Institutional
1% growth in Asia GCB, partially offset by a 1% decline in EMEA GCB (for Clients Group” below.
the impact of FX translation on 2014 results of operations for each of EMEA Corporate/Other revenues decreased to $47 million from $121 million
GCB, Latin America GCB and Asia GCB, see the table accompanying in the prior year, driven mainly by lower revenues from sales of
the discussion of each respective business’ results of operations below). available-for-sale securities as well as hedging activities. For additional
The growth in international GCB revenues, excluding the impact of FX information on the results of operations of Corporate/Other in 2014, see
translation, mainly reflected volume growth in all regions, partially offset “Corporate/Other” below.
by spread compression, the ongoing impact of regulatory changes and the Citicorp end-of-period loans were roughly unchanged at $572 billion,
repositioning of Citi’s franchise in Korea, as well as market exits in EMEA with 1% growth in corporate loans offset by a 2% decline in consumer loans.
GCB in 2013. For additional information on the results of operations of Excluding the impact of FX translation, Citicorp loans grew 3%, with 4%
EMEA GCB, Latin America GCB and Asia GCB for 2014, see “Global growth in corporate loans and 2% growth in consumer loans.
Consumer Banking” below. Year-over-year, international GCB average
Citi Holdings
deposits increased 2%, average retail loans increased 7%, investment sales
Citi Holdings’ net loss was $3.4 billion in 2014 compared to a net loss
increased 8%, average card loans increased 2% and card purchase sales
of $1.9 billion in 2013. CVA/DVA was negative $47 million (negative
increased 5%, all excluding the impact of Credicard’s results in the prior year
$29 million after-tax) in 2014, compared to positive $3 million (positive
period and FX translation.
$1 million after-tax) in the prior year. Excluding the impact of CVA/DVA
ICG revenues were $33.3 billion in 2014, down 1% from the prior year.
and the mortgage settlement in 2014, Citi Holdings’ net income was
Excluding CVA/DVA, ICG revenues were $33.6 billion, also down 1% from
$385 million, reflecting lower expenses, higher revenues and lower net credit
the prior year. Banking revenues of $17.0 billion, excluding CVA/DVA and
losses, partially offset by a lower net loan loss reserve release.
the impact of mark-to-market gains/(losses) on hedges related to accrual
Citi Holdings’ revenues increased 27% to $5.8 billion from the prior year.
loans within corporate lending (see below), increased 5% from the prior year,
Excluding CVA/DVA, Citi Holdings’ revenues increased 28% to $5.9 billion
primarily reflecting growth in investment banking, corporate lending and
from the prior year. Net interest revenues increased 11% year-over-year to
private bank revenues. Investment banking revenues increased 7% versus the
$3.5 billion, largely driven by lower funding costs. Non-interest revenues,
prior year, driven by an 11% increase in advisory revenues to $949 million
excluding CVA/DVA, increased 68% to $2.3 billion from the prior year,
and an 18% increase in equity underwriting to $1.2 billion. Debt
primarily driven by higher gains on assets sales and the absence of
underwriting revenues of $2.5 billion were largely unchanged from 2013.
repurchase reserve builds for representation and warranty claims in 2014. For
Private bank revenues, excluding CVA/DVA, increased 7% to $2.7 billion from
additional information on the results of operations of Citi Holdings in 2014,
the prior year, driven by increased client volumes and growth in investment
see “Citi Holdings” below.
and capital markets products, partially offset by spread compression.
Citi Holdings’ assets were $98 billion, 16% below the prior year, and
Corporate lending revenues rose 52% to $1.9 billion, including $116 million
represented approximately 5% of Citi’s total GAAP assets and 14% of its
of mark-to-market gains on hedges related to accrual loans compared to a
risk-weighted assets under Basel III as of year end (based on the Advanced
$287 million loss in the prior year. Excluding the mark-to-market impact on
Approaches for determining risk-weighted assets).
hedges related to accrual loans in both periods, corporate lending revenues

8
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

SUMMARY OF SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA—PAGE 1 Citigroup Inc. and Consolidated Subsidiaries

In millions of dollars, except per-share amounts and ratios 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
Net interest revenue $47,993 $ 46,793 $ 46,686 $ 47,649 $ 53,539
Non-interest revenue 28,889 29,626 22,504 29,612 32,210
Revenues, net of interest expense $76,882 $ 76,419 $ 69,190 $ 77,261 $ 85,749
Operating expenses 55,051 48,408 50,036 50,180 46,824
Provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims 7,467 8,514 11,329 12,359 25,809
Income from continuing operations before income taxes $14,364 $ 19,497 $ 7,825 $ 14,722 $ 13,116
Income taxes 6,864 5,867 7 3,575 2,217
Income from continuing operations $ 7,500 $ 13,630 $ 7,818 $ 11,147 $ 10,899
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes (1) (2) 270 (58) 68 (16)
Net income before attribution of noncontrolling interests $ 7,498 $ 13,900 $ 7,760 $ 11,215 $ 10,883
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests 185 227 219 148 281
Citigroup’s net income $ 7,313 $ 13,673 $ 7,541 $ 11,067 $ 10,602
Less:
Preferred dividends-Basic $ 511 $ 194 $ 26 $ 26 $ 9
Dividends and undistributed earnings allocated to employee restricted
and deferred shares that contain nonforfeitable rights to dividends,
applicable to basic EPS 111 263 166 186 90
Income allocated to unrestricted common shareholders for basic EPS $ 6,691 $ 13,216 $ 7,349 $ 10,855 $ 10,503
Add: Interest expense, net of tax, dividends on convertible securities and
adjustment of undistributed earnings allocated to employee restricted
and deferred shares with nonforfeitable rights to dividends,
applicable to diluted EPS — 1 11 17 2
Income allocated to unrestricted common shareholders for diluted EPS $ 6,691 $ 13,217 $ 7,360 $ 10,872 $ 10,505
Earnings per share
Basic
Income from continuing operations $ 2.21 $ 4.27 $ 2.53 $ 3.71 $ 3.64
Net income 2.21 4.35 2.51 3.73 3.65
Diluted
Income from continuing operations $ 2.20 $ 4.26 $ 2.46 $ 3.60 $ 3.53
Net income 2.20 4.35 2.44 3.63 3.54
Dividends declared per common share 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 —

Table and notes continue on the next page.

9
SUMMARY OF SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA—PAGE 2 Citigroup Inc. and Consolidated Subsidiaries

In millions of dollars, except per-share amounts, ratios and direct staff 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
At December 31:
Total assets $1,842,530 $1,880,382 $1,864,660 $1,873,878 $1,913,902
Total deposits (2) 899,332 968,273 930,560 865,936 844,968
Long-term debt 223,080 221,116 239,463 323,505 381,183
Citigroup common stockholders’ equity 200,066 197,601 186,487 177,494 163,156
Total Citigroup stockholders’ equity 210,534 204,339 189,049 177,806 163,468
Direct staff (in thousands) 241 251 259 266 260
Performance metrics
Return on average assets 0.39% 0.73% 0.39% 0.55% 0.53%
Return on average common stockholders’ equity (3) 3.4 7.0 4.1 6.3 6.8
Return on average total stockholders’ equity (3) 3.5 6.9 4.1 6.3 6.8
Efficiency ratio (Operating expenses/Total revenues) 72 63 72 65 55
Basel III ratios - full implementation
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital (4) 10.58% 10.59% 8.74% N/A N/A
Tier 1 Capital (4) 11.47 11.25 9.05 N/A N/A
Total Capital (4) 12.81 12.65 10.83 N/A N/A
Estimated supplementary leverage ratio (5) 5.96 5.43 N/A N/A N/A
Citigroup common stockholders’ equity to assets 10.86% 10.51% 10.00% 9.47% 8.52%
Total Citigroup stockholders’ equity to assets 11.43 10.87 10.14 9.49 8.54
Dividend payout ratio (6) 1.8 0.9 1.6 0.8 NM
Book value per common share $ 66.16 $ 65.23 $ 61.57 $ 60.70 $ 56.15
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges and preferred stock dividends 1.98x 2.16x 1.37x 1.60x 1.51x
(1) Discontinued operations include Credicard, Citi Capital Advisors and Egg Banking credit card business. See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on Citi’s discontinued operations.
(2) Reflects reclassification of approximately $21 billion of deposits to held-for-sale (Other liabilities) at December 31, 2014 as a result of the agreement to sell Citi’s retail banking business in Japan. See “Asia GCB” below
and Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(3) The return on average common stockholders’ equity is calculated using net income less preferred stock dividends divided by average common stockholders’ equity. The return on average total Citigroup stockholders’
equity is calculated using net income divided by average Citigroup stockholders’ equity.
(4) Capital ratios based on the final U.S. Basel III rules, with full implementation assumed for capital components; risk-weighted assets based on the Advanced Approaches for determining total risk-weighted assets. See
“Capital Resources” below.
(5) Citi’s estimated Supplementary Leverage ratio is based on the revised final U.S. Basel III rules issued in September 2014 and represents the ratio of Tier 1 Capital to Total Leverage Exposure (TLE). TLE is the sum of the
daily average of on-balance sheet assets for the quarter and the average of certain off-balance sheet exposures calculated as of the last day of each month in the quarter, less applicable Tier 1 Capital deductions. See
“Capital Resources” below.
(6) Dividends declared per common share as a percentage of net income per diluted share.
N/A Not applicable to 2012, 2011 and 2010. See “Capital Resources” below.
NM Not meaningful

10
SEGMENT AND BUSINESS—INCOME (LOSS) AND REVENUES

The following tables show the income (loss) and revenues for Citigroup on a segment and business view:
CITIGROUP INCOME
% Change % Change
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Income (loss) from continuing operations
CITICORP
Global Consumer Banking
North America $ 4,421 $ 3,910 $ 4,564 13% (14)%
EMEA (7) 35 (61) NM NM
Latin America 1,204 1,337 1,382 (10) (3)
Asia 1,320 1,481 1,712 (11) (13)
Total $ 6,938 $ 6,763 $ 7,597 3% (11)%
Institutional Clients Group
North America $ 3,896 $ 3,143 $ 1,598 24% 97%
EMEA 1,984 2,432 2,467 (18) (1)
Latin America 1,337 1,628 1,879 (18) (13)
Asia 2,304 2,211 1,890 4 17
Total $ 9,521 $ 9,414 $ 7,834 1% 20%
Corporate/Other $ (5,593) $ (630) $ (1,048) NM 40%
Total Citicorp $10,866 $15,547 $14,383 (30)% 8%
Citi Holdings $ (3,366) $ (1,917) $ (6,565) (76)% 71%
Income from continuing operations $ 7,500 $13,630 $ 7,818 (45)% 74%
Discontinued operations $ (2) $ 270 $ (58) NM NM
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests 185 227 219 (19)% 4%
Citigroup’s net income $ 7,313 $13,673 $ 7,541 (47)% 81%
NM Not meaningful

11
CITIGROUP REVENUES
% Change % Change
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
CITICORP
Global Consumer Banking
North America $ 19,645 $ 19,776 $ 20,950 (1)% (6)%
EMEA 1,358 1,449 1,485 (6) (2)
Latin America 9,204 9,316 8,742 (1) 7
Asia 7,546 7,624 7,928 (1) (4)
Total $ 37,753 $ 38,165 $ 39,105 (1)% (2)%
Institutional Clients Group
North America $ 12,345 $ 11,473 $ 8,973 8% 28%
EMEA 9,513 10,020 9,977 (5) —
Latin America 4,237 4,692 4,710 (10) —
Asia 7,172 7,382 7,102 (3) 4
Total $ 33,267 $ 33,567 $ 30,762 (1)% 9%
Corporate/Other $ 47 $ 121 $ 128 (61)% (5)%
Total Citicorp $ 71,067 $ 71,853 $ 69,995 (1)% 3%
Citi Holdings $ 5,815 $ 4,566 $ (805) 27% NM
Total Citigroup net revenues $ 76,882 $ 76,419 $ 69,190 1% 10%
NM Not meaningful

12
CITICORP

Citicorp is Citigroup’s global bank for consumers and businesses and represents Citi’s core franchises. Citicorp is focused on providing best-in-class products and
services to customers and leveraging Citigroup’s unparalleled global network, including many of the world’s emerging economies. Citicorp is physically present
in approximately 100 countries, many for over 100 years, and offers services in over 160 countries and jurisdictions. Citi believes this global network provides
a strong foundation for servicing the broad financial services needs of its large multinational clients and for meeting the needs of retail, private banking,
commercial, public sector and institutional clients around the world.
Citicorp consists of the following operating businesses: Global Consumer Banking (which consists of consumer banking in North America, EMEA, Latin
America and Asia) and Institutional Clients Group (which includes Banking and Markets and securities services). Citicorp also includes Corporate/Other.
At December 31, 2014, Citicorp had $1.7 trillion of assets and $889 billion of deposits, representing 95% of Citi’s total assets and 99% of Citi’s total
deposits, respectively.

% Change % Change
In millions of dollars except as otherwise noted 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Net interest revenue $ 44,452 $ 43,609 $ 44,067 2% (1)%
Non-interest revenue 26,615 28,244 25,928 (6) 9
Total revenues, net of interest expense $ 71,067 $ 71,853 $ 69,995 (1)% 3%
Provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims
Net credit losses $ 7,327 $ 7,393 $ 8,389 (1)% (12)%
Credit reserve build (release) (1,252) (826) (2,222) (52) 63
Provision for loan losses $ 6,075 $ 6,567 $ 6,167 (7)% 6%
Provision for benefits and claims 199 212 236 (6) (10)
Provision for unfunded lending commitments (152) 90 40 NM NM
Total provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims $ 6,122 $ 6,869 $ 6,443 (11)% 7%
Total operating expenses $ 47,336 $ 42,438 $ 44,773 12% (5)%
Income from continuing operations before taxes $ 17,609 $ 22,546 $ 18,779 (22)% 20%
Income taxes 6,743 6,999 4,396 (4) 59
Income from continuing operations $ 10,866 $ 15,547 $ 14,383 (30)% 8%
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes (2) 270 (58) NM NM
Noncontrolling interests 181 211 216 (14) (2)
Net income $ 10,683 $ 15,606 $ 14,109 (32)% 11%
Balance sheet data (in billions of dollars)
Total end-of-period (EOP) assets $ 1,745 $ 1,763 $ 1,709 (1)% 3%
Average assets 1,788 1,749 1,717 2 2
Return on average assets 0.60% 0.89% 0.82%
Efficiency ratio (Operating expenses/Total revenues) 67 59 64
Total EOP loans $ 572 $ 573 $ 540 — 6
Total EOP deposits 889 932 863 (5) 8
NM Not meaningful

13
GLOBAL CONSUMER BANKING
Global Consumer Banking (GCB) consists of Citigroup’s four geographical consumer banking businesses that provide traditional banking services to
retail customers through retail banking, commercial banking, Citi-branded cards and Citi retail services (for additional information on these businesses, see
“Citigroup Segments” above). GCB is a globally diversified business with 3,280 branches in 35 countries around the world as of December 31, 2014. For the year
ended December 31, 2014, GCB had $399 billion of average assets and $331 billion of average deposits.
GCB’s overall strategy is to leverage Citi’s global footprint and seek to be the preeminent bank for the emerging affluent and affluent consumers in large
urban centers. In credit cards and in certain retail markets, Citi serves customers in a somewhat broader set of segments and geographies.
Consistent with its strategy to continue to optimize its branch footprint and further concentrate its presence in major metropolitan areas, during 2014, Citi
announced that it intends to exit its consumer businesses in the following markets: Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, Panama and Peru (in
Latin America); Japan, Guam and its consumer finance business in Korea (in Asia); and the Czech Republic, Egypt and Hungary (in EMEA). Citi expects to
substantially complete its exit from these businesses by the end of 2015. These consumer businesses, consisting of $28 billion of assets, $7 billion of consumer
loans and $3 billion of deposits (excluding approximately $21 billion of deposits reclassified to held-for-sale as a result of Citi’s agreement in December 2014
to sell its Japan retail banking business) as of December 31, 2014, contributed approximately $1.6 billion of revenues, $1.4 billion of expenses and a net loss of
$40 million in 2014, with the loss primarily attributable to repositioning and other actions directly related to the exit plans. These businesses will be reported as
part of Citi Holdings beginning in the first quarter of 2015. For additional information, see “Executive Summary” above and “Latin America GCB” and “Asia
GCB” below.

% Change % Change
In millions of dollars except as otherwise noted 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Net interest revenue $ 28,910 $28,648 $28,665 1% —%
Non-interest revenue 8,843 9,517 10,440 (7) (9)
Total revenues, net of interest expense $ 37,753 $38,165 $39,105 (1)% (2)%
Total operating expenses $ 21,277 $21,187 $21,872 —% (3)%
Net credit losses $ 7,051 $ 7,211 $ 8,107 (2)% (11)%
Credit reserve build (release) (1,162) (669) (2,176) (74) 69
Provision (release) for unfunded lending commitments (23) 37 — NM —
Provision for benefits and claims 199 212 237 (6) (11)
Provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims $ 6,065 $ 6,791 $ 6,168 (11)% 10%
Income from continuing operations before taxes $ 10,411 $10,187 $11,065 2% (8)%
Income taxes 3,473 3,424 3,468 1 (1)
Income from continuing operations $ 6,938 $ 6,763 $ 7,597 3% (11)%
Noncontrolling interests 26 17 3 53 NM
Net income $ 6,912 $ 6,746 $ 7,594 2% (11)%
Balance Sheet data (in billions of dollars)
Average assets $ 399 $ 395 $ 388 1% 2%
Return on average assets 1.73% 1.71% 1.98%
Efficiency ratio 56 56 56
Total EOP assets $ 396 $ 405 $ 404 (2) —
Average deposits 331 327 322 1 2
Net credit losses as a percentage of average loans 2.37% 2.51% 2.87%
Revenue by business
Retail banking $ 16,354 $16,941 $18,167 (3)% (7)%
Cards (1) 21,399 21,224 20,938 1 1
Total $ 37,753 $38,165 $39,105 (1)% (2)%
Income from continuing operations by business
Retail banking $ 1,776 $ 1,907 $ 2,794 (7)% (32)%
Cards (1) 5,162 4,856 4,803 6 1
Total $ 6,938 $ 6,763 $ 7,597 3% (11)%

Table and notes continue on the next page.

14
Foreign currency (FX) translation impact
Total revenue-as reported $ 37,753 $38,165 $39,105 (1)% (2)%
Impact of FX translation (2) — (674) (890)
Total revenues-ex-FX $ 37,753 $37,491 $38,215 1% (2)%
Total operating expenses-as reported $ 21,277 $21,187 $21,872 —% (3)%
Impact of FX translation (2) — (373) (630)
Total operating expenses-ex-FX $ 21,277 $20,814 $21,242 2% (2)%
Total provisions for LLR & PBC-as reported $ 6,065 $ 6,791 $ 6,168 (11)% 10%
Impact of FX translation (2) — (122) (136)
Total provisions for LLR & PBC-ex-FX $ 6,065 $ 6,669 $ 6,032 (9)% 11%
Net income-as reported $ 6,912 $ 6,746 $ 7,594 2% (11)%
Impact of FX translation (2) — (120) (79)
Net income-ex-FX $ 6,912 $ 6,626 $ 7,515 4% (12)%

(1) Includes both Citi-branded cards and Citi retail services.

(2) Reflects the impact of foreign exchange (FX) translation into U.S. dollars at the fourth quarter of 2014 average exchange rates for all periods presented.
NM Not meaningful

15
NORTH AMERICA GCB
North America GCB provides traditional banking and Citi-branded cards and Citi retail services to retail customers and small to mid-size businesses in the
U.S. North America GCB’s 849 retail bank branches as of December 31, 2014 are largely concentrated in the greater metropolitan areas of New York, Chicago,
Miami, Washington, D.C., Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco.
At December 31, 2014, North America GCB had approximately 11.7 million retail banking customer accounts, $46.8 billion of retail banking loans and
$171.4 billion of deposits. In addition, North America GCB had approximately 111.7 million Citi-branded and Citi retail services credit card accounts, with
$114.0 billion in outstanding card loan balances.

% Change % Change
In millions of dollars, except as otherwise noted 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Net interest revenue $ 17,200 $ 16,658 $ 16,460 3% 1%
Non-interest revenue 2,445 3,118 4,490 (22) (31)
Total revenues, net of interest expense $ 19,645 $ 19,776 $ 20,950 (1)% (6)%
Total operating expenses $ 9,676 $ 9,850 $ 10,204 (2)% (3)%
Net credit losses $ 4,203 $ 4,634 $ 5,756 (9)% (19)%
Credit reserve build (release) (1,241) (1,036) (2,389) (20) 57
Provisions for benefits and claims 41 60 70 (32) (14)
Provision for unfunded lending commitments (8) 6 1 NM NM
Provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims $ 2,995 $ 3,664 $ 3,438 (18)% 7%
Income from continuing operations before taxes $ 6,974 $ 6,262 $ 7,308 11% (14)%
Income taxes 2,553 2,352 2,744 9 (14)
Income from continuing operations $ 4,421 $ 3,910 $ 4,564 13% (14)%
Noncontrolling interests (1) 2 1 NM 100
Net income $ 4,422 $ 3,908 $ 4,563 13% (14)%
Balance Sheet data (in billions of dollars)
Average assets $ 178 $ 175 $ 172 2% 2%
Return on average assets 2.48% 2.23% 2.65%
Efficiency ratio 49 50 49
Average deposits $ 170.7 $ 166.0 $ 153.9 3 8
Net credit losses as a percentage of average loans 2.69% 3.09% 3.83%
Revenue by business
Retail banking $ 4,901 $ 5,376 $ 6,687 (9)% (20)%
Citi-branded cards 8,282 8,211 8,234 1 —
Citi retail services 6,462 6,189 6,029 4 3
Total $ 19,645 $ 19,776 $ 20,950 (1)% (6)%
Income from continuing operations by business
Retail banking $ 349 $ 411 $ 1,136 (15)% (64)%
Citi-branded cards 2,402 1,942 1,988 24 (2)
Citi retail services 1,670 1,557 1,440 7 8
Total $ 4,421 $ 3,910 $ 4,564 13% (14)%

NM Not meaningful

16
2014 vs. 2013 Expenses decreased 2% as ongoing cost reduction initiatives were
Net income increased by 13% due to lower net credit losses, higher loan loss partially offset by higher repositioning charges, increased investment
reserve releases and lower expenses, partially offset by lower revenues. spending and an increase in Citi retail services expenses due to the impact
Revenues decreased 1%, with lower revenues in retail banking, partially of the Best Buy portfolio acquisition. Cost reduction initiatives included
offset by higher revenues in Citi-branded cards and Citi retail services. the ongoing repositioning of the mortgage business due to the decline in
Net interest revenue increased 3% primarily due to an increase in average mortgage refinancing activity, as well as continued rationalization of the
loans in Citi retail services driven by the Best Buy portfolio acquisition in branch footprint, including reducing the number of overall branches, as
September 2013 and continued volume growth in retail banking, which discussed above.
more than offset lower average loans in Citi-branded cards. Non-interest Provisions decreased 18% due to lower net credit losses (9%) and higher
revenue decreased 22%, driven by lower mortgage origination revenues due loan loss reserve releases (21%). Net credit losses declined in Citi-branded
to significantly lower U.S. mortgage refinancing activity and a continued cards (down 14% to $2.2 billion) and in Citi retail services (down 2% to
decline in revenues in Citi retail services, primarily reflecting improving $1.9 billion). The loan loss reserve release increased to $1.2 billion due to the
credit and the resulting impact on contractual partner payments, partially continued improvement in Citi-branded cards, partially offset by a lower loan
offset by a 5% increase in total card purchase sales to $252 billion and gains loss reserve release in Citi retail services due to reserve builds for new loans
during the year from branch sales (approximately $130 million). originated in the Best Buy portfolio. Given the improvement in credit within
Retail banking revenues of $4.9 billion decreased 9% due to the lower the cards portfolios during 2014, NA GCB would not expect to see similar
mortgage origination revenues and spread compression in the deposit levels of loan loss reserve releases in 2015.
portfolios, which began to abate during the latter part of the year, partially 2013 vs. 2012
offset by continued volume-related growth and the gains from branch sales. Net income decreased 14%, mainly driven by lower revenues and lower loan
Consistent with GCB’s strategy, during 2014, NA GCB closed or sold over loss reserve releases, partially offset by lower net credit losses and expenses.
130 branches (a 14% decline from the prior year), with announced plans Revenues decreased 6% primarily due to lower retail banking revenues.
to sell or close an additional 60 branches in early 2015. Average loans of The decline in retail banking revenues was primarily due to lower mortgage
$46 billion increased 9% and average deposits of $171 billion increased 3%. origination revenues driven by the significantly lower U.S. mortgage
Cards revenues increased 2% as average loans of $110 billion increased refinancing activity and ongoing spread compression in the deposit
3% versus 2013. In Citi-branded cards, revenues increased 1% as a 4% portfolios, partially offset by growth in average deposits, average commercial
increase in purchase sales and higher net interest spreads, driven by the loans and average retail loans.
continued reduction of promotional balances in the portfolio, mostly offset Cards revenues increased 1%. In Citi-branded cards, revenues were
lower average loans (3% decline from 2013). The decline in average loans unchanged as continued improvement in net interest spreads, reflecting
was driven primarily by the reduction in promotional balances, and to a higher yields as promotional balances represented a smaller percentage of
lesser extent, increased customer payment rates during the year. In addition, the portfolio total as well as lower funding costs, were offset by a decline in
while the business experienced modest full rate loan growth during 2014, average loans. Citi retail services revenues increased 3% primarily due to the
growth in full rate loan balances began to slow during the latter part of the acquisition of the Best Buy portfolio, partially offset by improving credit and
year. Combined with the continued reduction in promotional balances, NA the resulting impact on contractual partner payments.
GCB could experience pressure on full rate loan growth during 2015. Expenses decreased 3%, primarily due to lower legal and related costs and
Citi retail services revenues increased 4% primarily due to a 12% increase repositioning savings, partially offset by higher mortgage origination costs
in average loans driven by the Best Buy acquisition, partially offset by and expenses in cards as a result of the Best Buy portfolio acquisition.
continued declines in fee revenues primarily reflecting higher yields and Provisions increased 7%, as lower net credit losses in the Citi-branded
improving credit and the resulting increase in contractual partner payments. cards and Citi retail services portfolios were offset by lower loan loss reserve
Citi retail services revenues also benefited from lower funding costs, partially releases ($1.0 billion in 2013 compared to $2.4 billion in 2012), primarily
offset by a decline in net interest spreads due to a higher percentage of related to cards, as well as reserve builds for new loans originated in the Best
promotional balances within the portfolio. Purchase sales in Citi retail Buy portfolio.
services increased 7% from 2013, driven by the acquisition of the Best
Buy portfolio.
With respect to both cards portfolios, as widely publicized, U.S. gas prices
declined during 2014, particularly in the fourth quarter. The decline in
gas prices has negatively impacted purchase sales in the fuel portfolios,
particularly in Citi retail services, and consumer savings from lower gas
prices may not result in higher spending in other spend categories. NA GCB
will continue to monitor trends in this area going into 2015.

17
EMEA GCB
EMEA GCB provides traditional banking and Citi-branded card services to retail customers and small to mid-size businesses, primarily in Central and Eastern
Europe and the Middle East. The countries in which EMEA GCB has the largest presence are Poland, Russia and the United Arab Emirates.
At December 31, 2014, EMEA GCB had 137 retail bank branches with approximately 3.1 million retail banking customer accounts, $5.4 billion in retail
banking loans, $12.8 billion in deposits, and 2.0 million Citi-branded card accounts with $2.2 billion in outstanding card loan balances.

% Change % Change
In millions of dollars, except as otherwise noted 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Net interest revenue $ 899 $ 948 $ 1,010 (5)% (6)%
Non-interest revenue 459 501 475 (8) 5
Total revenues, net of interest expense $ 1,358 $ 1,449 $ 1,485 (6)% (2)%
Total operating expenses $ 1,283 $ 1,359 $ 1,469 (6)% (7)%
Net credit losses $ 61 $ 68 $ 105 (10)% (35)%
Credit reserve build (release) 24 (18) (5) NM NM
Provision for unfunded lending commitments 2 — (1) 100 100
Provisions for credit losses $ 87 $ 50 $ 99 74% (49)%
Income (loss) from continuing operations before taxes $ (12) $ 40 $ (83) NM NM
Income taxes (benefits) (5) 5 (22) NM NM
Income (loss) from continuing operations $ (7) $ 35 $ (61) NM NM
Noncontrolling interests 20 11 4 82% NM
Net income (loss) $ (27) $ 24 $ (65) NM NM
Balance Sheet data (in billions of dollars)
Average assets $ 10 $ 10 $ 9 —% 11%
Return on average assets (0.27)% 0.24% (0.72)%
Efficiency ratio 94 94 99
Average deposits $ 13.1 $ 12.6 $ 12.6 4 —
Net credit losses as a percentage of average loans 0.75% 0.85% 1.40%
Revenue by business
Retail banking $ 844 $ 868 $ 873 (3)% (1)%
Citi-branded cards 514 581 612 (12) (5)
Total $ 1,358 $ 1,449 $ 1,485 (6)% (2)%
Income (loss) from continuing operations by business
Retail banking $ (30) $ (42) $ (109) 29% 61%
Citi-branded cards 23 77 48 (70) 60
Total $ (7) $ 35 $ (61) NM NM
Foreign currency (FX) translation impact
Total revenues-as reported $ 1,358 $ 1,449 $ 1,485 (6)% (2)%
Impact of FX translation (1) — (72) (77)
Total revenues-ex-FX $ 1,358 $ 1,377 $ 1,408 (1)% (2)%
Total operating expenses-as reported $ 1,283 $ 1,359 $ 1,469 (6)% (7)%
Impact of FX translation (1) — (59) (79)
Total operating expenses-ex-FX $ 1,283 $ 1,300 $ 1,390 (1)% (6)%
Provisions for credit losses-as reported $ 87 $ 50 $ 99 74% (49)
Impact of FX translation (1) — (6) (6)
Provisions for credit losses-ex-FX $ 87 $ 44 $ 93 98% (53)%
Net income (loss)-as reported $ (27) $ 24 $ (65) NM NM
Impact of FX translation (1) — 7 9
Net income (loss)-ex-FX $ (27) $ 31 $ (56) NM NM

(1) Reflects the impact of foreign exchange (FX) translation into U.S. dollars at the fourth quarter of 2014 average exchange rates for all periods presented.
NM Not meaningful

18
The discussion of the results of operations for EMEA GCB below excludes the impact of FX translation for all periods presented. Presentations of the
results of operations, excluding the impact of FX translation, are non-GAAP financial measures. Citi believes the presentation of EMEA GCB’s results
excluding the impact of FX translation is a more meaningful depiction of the underlying fundamentals of the business. For a reconciliation of certain
of these metrics to the reported results, see the table above.
2014 vs. 2013 Russia
Net income declined $58 million to a net loss of $27 million as higher credit Citi’s ability to grow its consumer business in Russia has been negatively
costs and lower revenues were partially offset by lower expenses. impacted by actions Citi has taken to mitigate its risks and exposures in
Revenues decreased 1%, driven by lower revenues resulting from the response to the ongoing political instability, such as limiting its exposure
sales of Citi’s consumer operations in Turkey and Romania during 2013, to additional credit risk. In addition, the ongoing economic situation in
spread compression and the absence of the prior-year gain related to the Russia, coupled with consumer overleveraging in the market, has negatively
Turkey sale, largely offset by volume growth. Net interest revenue was roughly impacted consumer credit, particularly delinquencies in the Russian card
unchanged as spread compression was offset by growth in average retail and personal installment loan portfolios (which totaled $1.2 billion as of
loans. Non-interest revenue decreased 4%, mainly reflecting lower revenues December 31, 2014, or 0.4% of total GCB loans), and Citi currently expects
due to the sales of the consumer operations in Turkey and Romania, partially these trends could continue into 2015. Citi has taken these trends into
offset by higher investment fees due to increased sales of higher spread consideration in determining its allowance for loan loss reserves. Any further
investment products. actions Citi may take to mitigate its exposures or risks, or the imposition
Retail banking revenues increased 2%, primarily due to increases in of additional sanctions (such as asset freezes) involving Russia or against
investment sales (3%), average deposits (5%) and average retail loans (11%), Russian entities, business sectors, individuals or otherwise, could further
partially offset by the impact of the sales of the consumer operations in negatively impact the results of operations of EMEA GCB. For additional
Turkey and Romania. Cards revenues declined 6%, primarily due to spread information on Citi’s exposures in Russia, see “Managing Global Risk—
compression, interest rate caps, particularly in Poland, and the impact of Country and Cross-Border Risk” below.
the sales of the consumer operations in Turkey and Romania. Continued
2013 vs. 2012
regulatory changes, including caps on interchange rates in Poland, and
Net income of $31 million compared to a net loss of $56 million in 2012
spread compression will likely continue to negatively impact revenues in
as lower expenses and lower net credit losses were partially offset by lower
EMEA GCB in 2015.
revenues, primarily due to the impact of the sales of Citi’s consumer
Expenses decreased 1%, primarily due to the impact of the sales of the
operations in Turkey and Romania.
consumer operations in Turkey and Romania and efficiency savings, which
Revenues decreased 2%, mainly driven by the lower revenues resulting
were largely offset by higher repositioning charges, continued investment
from the sales of the consumer operations in Turkey and Romania,
spending on new internal operating platforms and volume-related expenses.
partially offset by higher volumes in core markets and a gain related to the
Provisions increased 98% to $87 million driven by a loan loss reserve
Turkey sale.
build mainly related to Citi’s consumer business in Russia due to the ongoing
Retail banking revenues decreased 1%, driven by the sales of the consumer
economic situation in Russia (as discussed below), partially offset by a 1%
operations in Turkey and Romania, partially offset by increases in average
decline in net credit losses.
deposits (1%) and average retail loans (13%) as well as the gain related
to the Turkey sale. Cards revenues declined 4%, primarily due to spread
compression and interest rate caps, particularly in Poland, and an 8%
decrease in average cards loans, primarily due to the sales of the consumer
operations in Turkey and Romania.
Expenses declined 6%, primarily due to repositioning savings as
well as lower repositioning charges, partially offset by higher volume-
related expenses and continued investment spending on new internal
operating platforms.
Provisions declined 53% due to a 37% decrease in net credit losses largely
resulting from the impact of the sales of the consumer operations in Turkey
and Romania and a net credit recovery in the second quarter 2013.

19
LATIN AMERICA GCB
Latin America GCB provides traditional banking and Citi-branded card services to retail customers and small to mid-size businesses, with the largest presence
in Mexico and Brazil. Latin America GCB includes branch networks throughout Latin America as well as Banco Nacional de Mexico, or Banamex, Mexico’s
second-largest bank, with 1,542 branches as of December 31, 2014. As previously announced, in the fourth quarter of 2014, Citi entered into an agreement to
sell its consumer business in Peru (for additional information, see “Executive Summary” and “Global Consumer Banking” above).
At December 31, 2014, Latin America GCB had 1,829 retail branches, with approximately 31.5 million retail banking customer accounts, $27.7 billion in
retail banking loans and $45.5 billion in deposits. In addition, the business had approximately 8.8 million Citi-branded card accounts with $10.9 billion in
outstanding loan balances.

% Change % Change
In millions of dollars, except as otherwise noted 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Net interest revenue $ 6,230 $ 6,286 $ 6,041 (1)% 4%
Non-interest revenue 2,974 3,030 2,701 (2) 12
Total revenues, net of interest expense $ 9,204 $ 9,316 $ 8,742 (1)% 7%
Total operating expenses $ 5,422 $ 5,392 $ 5,301 1% 2%
Net credit losses $ 2,008 $ 1,727 $ 1,405 16% 23%
Credit reserve build (release) 151 376 254 (60) 48
Provision (release) for unfunded lending commitments (1) — — (100) —
Provision for benefits and claims 158 152 167 4 (9)
Provisions for loan losses and for benefits and claims (LLR & PBC) $ 2,316 $ 2,255 $ 1,826 3% 23%
Income from continuing operations before taxes $ 1,466 $ 1,669 $ 1,615 (12)% 3%
Income taxes 262 332 233 (21) 42
Income from continuing operations $ 1,204 $ 1,337 $ 1,382 (10)% (3)%
Noncontrolling interests 7 4 (2) 75 NM
Net income $ 1,197 $ 1,333 $ 1,384 (10)% (4)%
Balance Sheet data (in billions of dollars)
Average assets $ 80 $ 82 $ 80 (2)% 3%
Return on average assets 1.50% 1.65% 1.82%
Efficiency ratio 59 58 61
Average deposits $ 46.4 $ 45.6 $ 44.5 2 2
Net credit losses as a percentage of average loans 4.85% 4.19% 3.83%
Revenue by business
Retail banking $ 6,000 $ 6,133 $ 5,841 (2)% 5%
Citi-branded cards 3,204 3,183 2,901 1 10
Total $ 9,204 $ 9,316 $ 8,742 (1)% 7%
Income from continuing operations by business
Retail banking $ 719 $ 752 $ 837 (4)% (10)%
Citi-branded cards 485 585 545 (17) 7
Total $ 1,204 $ 1,337 $ 1,382 (10)% (3)%
Foreign currency (FX) translation impact
Total revenues-as reported $ 9,204 $ 9,316 $ 8,742 (1)% 7%
Impact of FX translation (1) — (446) (426)
Total revenues-ex-FX $ 9,204 $ 8,870 $ 8,316 4% 7%
Total operating expenses-as reported $ 5,422 $ 5,392 $ 5,301 1% 2%
Impact of FX translation (1) — (232) (297)
Total operating expenses-ex-FX $ 5,422 $ 5,160 $ 5,004 5% 3%
Provisions for LLR & PBC-as reported $ 2,316 $ 2,255 $ 1,826 3% 23%
Impact of FX translation (1) — (100) (103)
Provisions for LLR & PBC-ex-FX $ 2,316 $ 2,155 $ 1,723 7% 25%
Net income-as reported $ 1,197 $ 1,333 $ 1,384 (10)% (4)%
Impact of FX translation (1) — (97) (31)
Net income-ex-FX $ 1,197 $ 1,236 $ 1,353 (3)% (9)%

(1) Reflects the impact of foreign exchange (FX) translation into U.S. dollars at the fourth quarter of 2014 average exchange rates for all periods presented.
NM Not Meaningful

20
The discussion of the results of operations for Latin America GCB below excludes the impact of FX translation for all periods presented. Presentations
of the results of operations, excluding the impact of FX translation, are non-GAAP financial measures. Citi believes the presentation of Latin America
GCB’s results excluding the impact of FX translation is a more meaningful depiction of the underlying fundamentals of the business. For a
reconciliation of certain of these metrics to the reported results, see the table above.
2014 vs. 2013 Argentina/Venezuela
Net income decreased 3% as higher expenses and credit costs were partially For additional information on Citi’s exposures in Argentina and Venezuela
offset by higher revenues. and the potential impact to Latin America GCB results of operations as a
Revenues increased 4%, primarily due to volume growth and spread and result of certain developments in these countries, see “Managing Global
fee growth in Mexico, partially offset by continued spread compression in Risk—Country and Cross-Border Risk” below.
the region and slower overall economic growth in certain Latin America
2013 vs. 2012
markets, including Mexico and Brazil. Net interest revenue increased 4%
Net income decreased 9% as higher credit costs, higher expenses and a
due to increased volumes and stable spreads in Mexico, partially offset by the
higher effective tax rate were partially offset by higher revenues.
ongoing spread compression in other Latin America markets. Non-interest
Revenues increased 7%, primarily due to volume growth in retail banking
revenue increased 3%, primarily due to higher fees from increased volumes
and cards, partially offset by spread compression. Retail banking revenues
in retail banking and cards.
increased 5% as average loans increased 12%, investment sales increased 13%
Retail banking revenues increased 3% as average loans increased 6%,
and average deposits increased 2%. Cards revenues increased 10% as average
investment sales increased 19% and average deposits increased 6%, partially
loans increased 10% and purchase sales increased 12%, excluding the impact
offset by lower spreads in Brazil and Colombia. Cards revenues increased 6%
of Credicard’s results.
as average loans increased 5% and purchase sales increased 1%, excluding
Expenses increased 3% due to increased volume-related costs, mandatory
the impact of Credicard’s results in the prior year period (for additional
salary increases in certain countries and higher regulatory costs, partially
information, see Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). The
offset by lower repositioning charges and higher repositioning savings.
increase in cards revenues was partially offset by lower economic growth and
Provisions increased 25%, primarily due to higher net credit losses as well
slowing cards purchase sales in Mexico due to the previously disclosed fiscal
as a higher loan loss reserve build. Net credit losses increased 25%, primarily
reforms enacted in 2013 in Mexico, which included, among other things,
in the Mexico cards and personal loan portfolios, reflecting both volume
higher income and other taxes that negatively impacted consumer behavior
growth and portfolio seasoning. The loan loss reserve build increased 52%,
and spending. Citi expects these trends, as well as spread compression, could
primarily due to an increase in reserves in Mexico related to the top three
continue to negatively impact revenues in Latin America GCB in 2015.
Mexican homebuilders, with the remainder due to portfolio growth and
Expenses increased 5%, primarily due to mandatory salary increases in
seasoning and the impact of potential losses related to hurricanes in the
certain countries, higher legal and related costs, increased repositioning
region during September 2013.
charges and higher technology spending, partially offset by productivity and
repositioning savings.
Provisions increased 7%, primarily due to higher net credit losses, which
were partially offset by a lower loan loss reserve build. Net credit losses
increased 22%, driven by portfolio growth and continued seasoning in the
Mexico cards portfolio. Net credit losses were also impacted by both the
slower economic growth and fiscal reforms in Mexico (as discussed above)
as well as a $71 million charge-off in the fourth quarter of 2014 related to
Citi’s homebuilder exposure in Mexico, which was offset by a related release
of previously established loan loss reserves and thus neutral to the cost of
credit. The continued impact of the fiscal reforms and economic slowdown
in Mexico is likely to cause net credit losses in Latin America GCB to
remain elevated.

21
ASIA GCB
Asia GCB provides traditional banking and Citi-branded card services to retail customers and small to mid-size businesses, with the largest Citi presence in
Korea, Singapore, Australia, Hong Kong, Taiwan, India, Japan, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines as of December 31, 2014. As previously
announced, Citi entered into an agreement in December 2014 to sell its retail banking business in Japan (for additional information, see “Executive Summary”
and “Global Consumer Banking” above).
At December 31, 2014, Asia GCB had 465 retail branches, approximately 16.4 million retail banking customer accounts, $71.8 billion in retail banking loans
and $77.9 billion in deposits (excluding approximately $21 billion of deposits reclassified to held-for-sale as a result of Citi’s agreement in December 2014 to
sell its Japan retail banking business). In addition, the business had approximately 16.5 million Citi-branded card accounts with $18.4 billion in outstanding
loan balances.

% Change % Change
In millions of dollars, except as otherwise noted 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Net interest revenue $4,581 $4,756 $5,154 (4)% (8)%
Non-interest revenue 2,965 2,868 2,774 3 3
Total revenues, net of interest expense $7,546 $7,624 $7,928 (1)% (4)%
Total operating expenses $4,896 $4,586 $4,898 7% (6)%
Net credit losses $ 779 $ 782 $ 841 —% (7)%
Credit reserve build (release) (96) 9 (36) NM NM
Provision for unfunded lending commitments (16) 31 — NM —
Provisions for loan losses $ 667 $ 822 $ 805 (19)% 2%
Income from continuing operations before taxes $1,983 $2,216 $2,225 (11)% —%
Income taxes 663 735 513 (10) 43
Income from continuing operations $1,320 $1,481 $1,712 (11)% (13)%
Noncontrolling interests — — — — —
Net income $1,320 $1,481 $1,712 (11)% (13)%
Balance Sheet data (in billions of dollars)
Average assets $ 131 $ 129 $ 127 2% 2%
Return on average assets 1.01% 1.15% 1.35%
Efficiency ratio 65 60 62
Average deposits $101.2 $102.6 $110.8 (1) (7)
Net credit losses as a percentage of average loans 0.84% 0.88% 0.95%
Revenue by business
Retail banking $4,609 $4,564 $4,766 1% (4)%
Citi-branded cards 2,937 3,060 3,162 (4) (3)
Total $7,546 $7,624 $7,928 (1)% (4)%
Income from continuing operations by business
Retail banking $ 738 $ 786 $ 930 (6)% (15)%
Citi-branded cards 582 695 782 (16) (11)
Total $1,320 $1,481 $1,712 (11)% (13)%
Foreign currency (FX) translation impact
Total revenues-as reported $7,546 $7,624 $7,928 (1)% (4)%
Impact of FX translation (1) — (156) (387)
Total revenues-ex-FX $7,546 $7,468 $7,541 1% (1)%
Total operating expenses-as reported $4,896 $4,586 $4,898 7% (6)%
Impact of FX translation (1) — (82) (254)
Total operating expenses-ex-FX $4,896 $4,504 $4,644 9% (3)%
Provisions for loan losses-as reported $ 667 $ 822 $ 805 (19)% 2%
Impact of FX translation (1) — (16) (27)
Provisions for loan losses-ex-FX $ 667 $ 806 $ 778 (17)% 4%
Net income-as reported $1,320 $1,481 $1,712 (11)% (13)%
Impact of FX translation (1) — (30) (57)
Net income-ex-FX $1,320 $1,451 $1,655 (9)% (12)%

(1) Reflects the impact of foreign exchange (FX) translation into U.S. dollars at the fourth quarter of 2014 average exchange rates for all periods presented.
NM Not meaningful

22
The discussion of the results of operations for Asia GCB below excludes the impact of FX translation for all periods presented. Presentations of the results
of operations, excluding the impact of FX translation, are non-GAAP financial measures. Citi believes the presentation of Asia GCB’s results excluding
the impact of FX translation is a more meaningful depiction of the underlying fundamentals of the business. For a reconciliation of certain of these
metrics to the reported results, see the table above.
2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Net income decreased 9%, primarily due to higher expenses, partially offset Net income decreased 12%, primarily due to a higher effective tax rate and
by lower credit costs and higher revenues. lower revenues, partially offset by lower expenses.
Revenues increased 1%, as higher non-interest revenue was partially Revenues decreased 1%, as lower net interest revenue was partially offset
offset by a decline in net interest revenue. Non-interest revenue increased by higher non-interest revenue. Net interest revenue declined 5%, primarily
5%, primarily driven by higher fee revenues (largely due to the previously driven by spread compression and the repositioning of the franchise in Korea.
disclosed distribution agreement that commenced during the first quarter of Non-interest revenue increased 7%, mainly driven by growth in investment
2014), partially offset by a decline in investment sales revenues. Net interest sales volume, despite a decrease in volumes in the second half of the year due
revenue declined 2%, driven by the ongoing impact of regulatory changes, to investor sentiment, reflecting overall market uncertainty. Retail banking
continued spread compression and the repositioning of the franchise revenues decreased 3%, primarily driven by spread compression and the
in Korea. impact of regulatory changes, partially offset by a 12% increase in investment
Retail banking revenues increased 2%, due to the higher insurance sales revenues. Cards revenues increased 2%, as cards purchase sales
fee revenues, partially offset by lower investment sales revenues and the increased 7% with growth across the region, partially offset by the continued
repositioning of the franchise in Korea. Investment sales revenues decreased impact of regulatory changes and customer deleveraging.
2%, due to weaker investor sentiment reflecting overall market trends and Expenses declined 3%, as lower repositioning charges and efficiency and
strong prior year performance, particularly in the first half of 2013. Citi repositioning savings were partially offset by increased investment spending,
expects investment sales revenues will continue to reflect the overall capital particularly in China cards.
markets environment in the region, including seasonal trends. Average Provisions increased 4%, reflecting a higher loan loss reserve build due
retail deposits increased 1% (2% excluding Korea) and average retail loans to volume growth in China, Hong Kong, India and Singapore as well as
increased 7% (9% excluding Korea). regulatory requirements in Korea, partially offset by lower net credit losses.
Cards revenues decreased 1%, due to the impact of regulatory changes,
particularly in Korea, Indonesia and Singapore, spread compression and
customer deleveraging, largely offset by a 2% increase in average loans and
a 5% increase (8% excluding Korea) in purchase sales driven by growth in
China, India, Singapore and Hong Kong.
While repositioning in Korea continued to have a negative impact on
year-over-year revenue comparisons in Asia GCB, revenues in Korea largely
stabilized in the second half of 2014. Citi expects spread compression and
regulatory changes in several markets across the region will continue to have
a negative impact on Asia GCB revenues in 2015.
Expenses increased 9%, primarily due to higher repositioning charges in
Korea, investment spending and volume-related growth, partially offset by
higher efficiency savings.
Provisions decreased 17%, primarily due to higher loan loss reserve
releases. Overall credit quality remained stable across the region during 2014.

23
INSTITUTIONAL CLIENTS GROUP
Institutional Clients Group (ICG) provides corporate, institutional, public sector and high-net-worth clients around the world with a full range of wholesale
banking products and services, including fixed income and equity sales and trading, foreign exchange, prime brokerage, derivative services, equity and fixed
income research, corporate lending, investment banking and advisory services, private banking, cash management, trade finance and securities services. ICG
transacts with clients in both cash instruments and derivatives, including fixed income, foreign currency, equity and commodity products.
ICG revenue is generated primarily from fees and spreads associated with these activities. ICG earns fee income for assisting clients in clearing transactions,
providing brokerage and investment banking services and other such activities. Revenue generated from these activities is recorded in Commissions and fees
and Investment banking. In addition, as a market maker, ICG facilitates transactions, including holding product inventory to meet client demand, and earns
the differential between the price at which it buys and sells the products. These price differentials and the unrealized gains and losses on the inventory are
recorded in Principal transactions. Interest income earned on inventory and loans held less interest paid to customers on deposits is recorded as Net interest
revenue. Revenue is also generated from transaction processing and assets under custody and administration.
ICG’s international presence is supported by trading floors in approximately 80 countries and a proprietary network in over 95 countries and jurisdictions. At
December 31, 2014, ICG had approximately $1.0 trillion of assets and $559 billion of deposits, while two of its businesses, securities services and issuer services,
managed approximately $16.2 trillion of assets under custody compared to $14.3 trillion at the end of 2013.
As previously announced, Citi intends to exit certain businesses in ICG, including hedge fund services within Securities services, the prepaid cards business
in Treasury and trade solutions, certain transfer agency operations and wealth management administration. These businesses, consisting of approximately
$4 billion of assets and deposits as of December 31, 2014, contributed approximately $460 million of revenues, $600 million of operating expenses and a net
loss of $80 million in 2014, with roughly half of the pre-tax loss primarily attributable to repositioning and other actions directly related to the exit plans. These
businesses will be reported as part of Citi Holdings beginning in the first quarter of 2015. For additional information, see “Executive Summary” above.

% Change % Change
In millions of dollars, except as otherwise noted 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Commissions and fees $ 4,386 $ 4,344 $ 4,171 1% 4%
Administration and other fiduciary fees 2,577 2,626 2,741 (2) (4)
Investment banking 4,269 3,862 3,618 11 7
Principal transactions 5,908 6,491 4,330 (9) 50
Other 363 674 (76) (46) NM
Total non-interest revenue $ 17,503 $ 17,997 $ 14,784 (3)% 22%
Net interest revenue (including dividends) 15,764 15,570 15,978 1 (3)
Total revenues, net of interest expense $ 33,267 $ 33,567 $ 30,762 (1)% 9%
Total operating expenses $ 19,960 $ 20,218 $ 20,631 (1)% (2)%
Net credit losses $ 276 $ 182 $ 282 52% (35)%
Provision (release) for unfunded lending commitments (129) 53 39 NM 36
Credit reserve release (90) (157) (45) 43 NM
Provisions for credit losses $ 57 $ 78 $ 276 (27)% (72)%
Income from continuing operations before taxes $ 13,250 $ 13,271 $ 9,855 —% 35%
Income taxes 3,729 3,857 2,021 (3) 91
Income from continuing operations $ 9,521 $ 9,414 $ 7,834 1% 20%
Noncontrolling interests 111 110 128 1 (14)
Net income $ 9,410 $ 9,304 $ 7,706 1% 21%
Average assets (in billions of dollars) $ 1,058 $ 1,066 $ 1,044 (1)% 2%
Return on average assets 0.89% 0.87% 0.74%
Efficiency ratio 60 60 67
Revenues by region
North America $ 12,345 $ 11,473 $ 8,973 8% 28%
EMEA 9,513 10,020 9,977 (5) —
Latin America 4,237 4,692 4,710 (10) —
Asia 7,172 7,382 7,102 (3) 4
Total $ 33,267 $ 33,567 $ 30,762 (1)% 9%

Table continues on the next page.

24
Income from continuing operations by region
North America $ 3,896 $ 3,143 $ 1,598 24% 97%
EMEA 1,984 2,432 2,467 (18) (1)
Latin America 1,337 1,628 1,879 (18) (13)
Asia 2,304 2,211 1,890 4 17
Total $ 9,521 $ 9,414 $ 7,834 1% 20%
Average loans by region (in billions of dollars)
North America $ 111 $ 98 $ 83 13% 18%
EMEA 58 55 53 5 4
Latin America 40 38 35 5 9
Asia 68 65 63 5 3
Total $ 277 $ 256 $ 234 8% 9%
EOP deposits by business (in billions of dollars)
Treasury and trade solutions $ 380 $ 380 $ 325 — 17%
All other ICG businesses 179 194 199 (8) (3)
Total $ 559 $ 574 $ 524 (3)% 10%

Icg Revenue Details—Excluding Cva/Dva and Gain/(Loss) on Loan Hedges

% Change % Change
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Investment banking revenue details
Advisory $ 949 $ 852 $ 715 11% 19%
Equity underwriting 1,246 1,059 731 18 45
Debt underwriting 2,508 2,500 2,656 — (6)
Total investment banking $ 4,703 $ 4,411 $ 4,102 7% 8%
Treasury and trade solutions 7,882 7,819 8,026 1 (3)
Corporate lending - excluding gain/(loss) on loan hedges 1,742 1,513 1,576 15 (4)
Private bank 2,653 2,487 2,394 7 4
Total banking revenues (ex-CVA/DVA and gain/(loss)
on loan hedges) $ 16,980 $ 16,230 $ 16,098 5% 1%
Corporate lending - gain/(loss) on loan hedges (1)
$ 116 $ (287) $ (698) NM 59%
Total banking revenues (ex-CVA/DVA and including gain/(loss)
on loan hedges) $ 17,096 $ 15,943 $ 15,400 7% 4%
Fixed income markets $ 11,815 $ 13,322 $ 14,361 (11)% (7)%
Equity markets 2,776 2,818 2,281 (1) 24
Securities services 2,333 2,272 2,214 3 3
Other (410) (443) (1,007) 7 56
Total Markets and securities services (ex-CVA/DVA) $ 16,514 $ 17,969 $ 17,849 (8)% 1%
Total ICG (ex-CVA/DVA) $ 33,610 $ 33,912 $ 33,249 (1)% 2%
CVA/DVA (excluded as applicable in lines above) (2) (343) (345) (2,487) 1 86
Fixed income markets (359) (300) (2,048) (20) 85
Equity markets 24 (39) (424) NM 91
Private bank (8) (6) (15) (33) 60
Total revenues, net of interest expense $ 33,267 $ 33,567 $ 30,762 (1)% 9%

(1) Hedges on accrual loans reflect the mark-to-market on credit derivatives used to economically hedge the corporate loan accrual portfolio. The fixed premium costs of these hedges are netted against the corporate
lending revenues to reflect the cost of credit protection.
(2) 2014 includes the impact of a one-time pretax charge of $430 million related to the implementation of funding valuation adjustments (FVA) on derivatives in the third quarter of 2014. For additional information, see
Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. FVA is included within CVA for presentation purposes.
NM Not meaningful

25
The discussion of the results of operations for ICG below excludes the impact of CVA/DVA for all periods presented. Presentations of the results of
operations, excluding the impact of CVA/DVA and the impact of gains/(losses) on hedges on accrual loans, are non-GAAP financial measures. Citi
believes the presentation of ICG’s results excluding the impact of these items is a more meaningful depiction of the underlying fundamentals of the
business. For a reconciliation of these metrics to the reported results, see the table above.
2014 vs. 2013 Within Markets and securities services:
Net income increased 1%, primarily driven by lower expenses and lower
• Fixed income markets revenues decreased 11%, driven by a decrease
credit costs, largely offset by lower revenues. Excluding the impact of the net
in rates and currencies revenues, partially offset by increased securitized
fraud loss in 2013 (see “Executive Summary” above), net income decreased
products and commodities revenues. Rates and currencies revenues
1%, primarily driven by the lower revenues and higher expenses, largely offset
declined due to historically muted levels of volatility, uncertainties around
by the lower credit costs.
Russia and Greece and lower client activity in the first half of 2014. In
• Revenues decreased 1%, reflecting lower revenues in Markets and addition, the first half of 2013 included a strong performance in rates and
securities services (decrease of 8%), partially offset by higher revenues in currencies, driven in part by the impact of quantitative easing globally.
Banking (increase of 7%, 5% excluding the gains/(losses) on hedges on Municipals and credit markets revenues declined due to challenging
accrual loans). Citi expects revenues in ICG, particularly in its Markets trading conditions resulting from macroeconomic uncertainties,
and securities services businesses, will likely continue to reflect the particularly in the fourth quarter of 2014. These declines were partially
overall market environment. offset by increased securitized products and commodities revenues, largely
in North America.
Within Banking:
• Equity markets revenues decreased 1%, primarily reflecting weakness in
• Investment banking revenues increased 7%, reflecting a stronger overall EMEA, particularly cash equities, driven by volatility in Europe, largely
market environment and improved wallet share with ICG’s target clients, offset by improved performance in prime finance due to increased
partially offset by a modest decline in overall wallet share. The decline in customer flows.
overall wallet share was primarily driven by equity and debt underwriting • Securities services revenues increased 3% due to increased volumes, assets
and reflected market fragmentation. Advisory revenues increased 11%,
under custody and overall client activity.
reflecting the increased target client activity and an expansion of the
overall M&A market. Equity underwriting revenues increased 18% largely Expenses decreased 1%, as efficiency savings, the absence of the net
in line with overall growth in market fees. Debt underwriting revenues fraud loss in 2014 and lower performance-based compensation was partially
were largely unchanged. offset by higher repositioning charges and legal and related expenses as
• Treasury and trade solutions revenues increased 1%, as continued well as increased regulatory and compliance costs. Excluding the impact
higher deposit balances, fee growth and trade activity were partially offset of the net fraud loss, expenses increased 1%, as higher repositioning
by the impact of spread compression globally. End-of-period deposit charges and legal and related expenses as well as increased regulatory
balances were unchanged, but increased 3% excluding the impact of and compliance costs were partially offset by efficiency savings and lower
FX translation, largely driven by North America. Average trade loans performance-based compensation.
decreased 9% (7% excluding the impact of FX translation), as the Provisions decreased 27%, primarily reflecting an improvement in the
business maintained origination volumes while reducing lower spread provision for unfunded lending commitments in the corporate loan portfolio,
assets and increasing asset sales to optimize returns (see “Balance Sheet partially offset by higher net credit losses and a lower loan loss reserve release
Review” below). driven by the overall economic environment. Net credit losses increased 52%,
• Corporate lending revenues increased 52%. Excluding the impact of largely related to the Petróleos Mexicanos (Pemex) supplier program in the
gains/(losses) on hedges on accrual loans, revenues increased 15%, first quarter of 2014 (for additional information, see Citi’s Form 8-K filed
primarily due to continued growth in average loan balances and lower with the SEC on February 28, 2014) as well as write-offs related to a specific
funding costs. (For information on Citi’s corporate credit exposure to counterparty. For information on certain legal and regulatory matters
the energy sector, see “Managing Global Risk—Credit Risk—Corporate related to the Pemex supplier program, see Note 28 to the Consolidated
Credit Details” below.) Financial Statements.
• Private bank revenues increased 7% due to growth in client business
volumes and improved spreads in banking, higher capital markets activity
and an increase in assets under management in managed investments,
partially offset by continued spread compression in lending.

26
Russia Within Markets and securities services:
Citi continues to monitor and manage its exposures in ICG resulting from • Fixed income markets revenues decreased 7%, primarily reflecting
the instability in Russia and Ukraine. As discussed above, the ongoing
industry-wide weakness in rates and currencies, partially offset by strong
uncertainties created by the instability in the region have impacted markets
performance in credit-related and securitized products and commodities.
in the region, including certain of Citi’s markets businesses, and could
Rates and currencies performance was lower compared to a strong 2012
continue to do so in the future. Any actions Citi may take to mitigate its
that benefited from increased client revenues and a more liquid market
exposures or risks, or the imposition of additional sanctions (such as asset
environment, particularly in EMEA. 2013 results also reflected a general
freezes) involving Russia or against Russian entities, business sectors,
slowdown in client activity exacerbated by uncertainty around the
individuals or otherwise, could negatively impact the results of operations of
tapering of quantitative easing as well as geopolitical issues. Credit-related
EMEA ICG. For additional information on Citi’s exposures in these countries,
and securitized products results reflected increased client activity driven by
see “Managing Global Risk—Country and Cross-Border Risk” below.
improved market conditions and demand for spread products.
2013 vs. 2012 • Equity markets revenues increased 24%, primarily due to market
Net income increased 3%, primarily driven by higher revenues and lower share gains, continued improvement in cash and derivative trading
expenses and credit costs, partially offset by a higher effective tax rate. performance and a more favorable market environment.
• Revenues increased 2%, primarily reflecting higher revenues in Banking • Securities services revenues increased 3%, as settlement volumes
(increase of 4%, 1% excluding the gains/(losses) on hedges on accrual increased 15% and assets under custody increased 8%, partially offset by
loans) and in Markets and securities services (increase of 1%). spread compression related to deposits.
Within Banking: Expenses decreased 2%, primarily reflecting repositioning savings, the
• Investment banking revenues increased 8%, reflecting gains in overall impact of lower performance-based compensation, lower repositioning
charges and the impact of FX translation, partially offset by the net fraud
investment banking wallet share. Advisory revenues increased 19%,
loss in 2013 as well as higher legal and related costs and volume-related
reflecting an improvement in wallet share, despite a contraction in the
expenses. Excluding the impact of the net fraud loss, expenses decreased 4%,
overall M&A market wallet. Equity underwriting revenues increased
primarily reflecting repositioning savings, the impact of lower performance-
45%, driven by improved wallet share and increased market activity,
based compensation, lower repositioning charges and the impact of FX
particularly initial public offerings. Debt underwriting revenues decreased
translation, partially offset by higher legal and related costs and volume-
6%, primarily due to lower bond underwriting fees and a decline in wallet
related expenses.
share during the year.
Provisions decreased 72%, primarily reflecting higher loan loss reserve
• Treasury and trade solutions revenues decreased 3%, as the ongoing
releases and lower net credit losses.
impact of spread compression globally was partially offset by higher
balances and fee growth. Average deposits increased 7% and average
trade loans increased 22%, including the impact of the consolidation of
approximately $7 billion of trade loans during the second quarter of 2013.
• Corporate lending revenues increased 40%. Excluding the impact of
gains/(losses) on hedges on accrual loans, revenues decreased 4%,
primarily due to increased hedge premium costs and moderately lower
loan balances, partially offset by higher spreads.
• Private bank revenues increased 4%, with growth across all regions and
products, particularly in managed investments, where growth reflected
both higher client assets under management and increased placement
fees, as well as in capital markets. Revenue growth in lending and
deposits, primarily driven by growth in client volumes, was partially offset
by continued spread compression.

27
CORPORATE/OTHER
Corporate/Other includes certain unallocated costs of global staff functions (including finance, risk, human resources, legal and compliance), other corporate
expenses and unallocated global operations and technology expenses, Corporate Treasury and discontinued operations. At December 31, 2014, Corporate/Other
had $329 billion of assets, or 18% of Citigroup’s total assets, consisting primarily of Citi’s liquidity portfolio (approximately $80 billion of cash and cash
equivalents and $197 billion of liquid investment securities). For additional information, see “Balance Sheet Review” and “Managing Global Risk—Market
Risk—Funding and Liquidity” below.

% Change % Change
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Net interest revenue $ (222) $ (609) $ (576) 64% (6)%
Non-interest revenue 269 730 704 (63) 4
Total revenues, net of interest expense $ 47 $ 121 $ 128 (61)% (5)%
Total operating expenses $ 6,099 $ 1,033 $ 2,270 NM (54)%
Provisions for loan losses and for benefits and claims — — (1) —% 100
Loss from continuing operations before taxes $(6,052) $ (912) $(2,141) NM 57%
Benefits for income taxes (459) (282) (1,093) (63)% 74
Loss from continuing operations $(5,593) $ (630) $(1,048) NM 40%
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes (2) 270 (58) NM NM
Net loss before attribution of noncontrolling interests $(5,595) $ (360) $(1,106) NM 67%
Noncontrolling interests 44 84 85 (48)% (1)
Net loss $(5,639) $ (444) $(1,191) NM 63%

NM Not meaningful

2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012

The net loss increased $5.2 billion to $5.6 billion, primarily due to higher The net loss decreased $747 million to $444 million, primarily due to lower
legal and related expenses. expenses and the $189 million after-tax benefit from the sale of Credicard,
Revenues decreased 61%, primarily driven by lower revenues from sales of partially offset by a lower tax benefit.
available-for-sale (AFS) securities as well as hedging activities. Revenues decreased $7 million, driven by lower revenue from sales of AFS
Expenses increased $5.1 billion to $6.1 billion, largely driven by the securities in 2013, partially offset by higher revenues from debt repurchases
higher legal and related expenses ($4.4 billion compared to $172 million and hedging gains.
in 2013) as well as increased regulatory and compliance costs and higher Expenses decreased 54%, largely driven by lower legal and related costs
repositioning charges. and repositioning charges.

28
CITI HOLDINGS

Citi Holdings contains businesses and portfolios of assets that Citigroup has determined are not central to its core Citicorp businesses. Consistent with this
determination, as previously announced, beginning in the first quarter of 2015, Citi’s consumer operations in 11 markets, as well as the consumer finance
business in Korea, and certain businesses in ICG, will be reported as part of Citi Holdings (see “Executive Summary,” “Global Consumer Banking” and
“Institutional Clients Group” above).
As of December 31, 2014, Citi Holdings assets were approximately $98 billion, a decrease of 16% year-over-year and 5% from September 30, 2014. The decline
in assets of $5 billion from September 30, 2014 primarily consisted of divestitures and run-off. As of December 31, 2014, consumer assets in Citi Holdings were
approximately $87 billion, or approximately 89% of Citi Holdings assets. Of the consumer assets, approximately $59 billion, or 68%, consisted of North America
mortgages (residential first mortgages and home equity loans), including consumer mortgages originated by Citi’s legacy CitiFinancial North America business
(approximately $10 billion, or 17%, of the $59 billion as of December 31, 2014). As of December 31, 2014, Citi Holdings represented approximately 5% of Citi’s
GAAP assets and 14% of its risk-weighted assets under Basel III (based on the Advanced Approaches for determining risk-weighted assets).

% Change % Change
In millions of dollars, except as otherwise noted 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Net interest revenue $ 3,541 $ 3,184 $ 2,619 11% 22%
Non-interest revenue 2,274 1,382 (3,424) 65 NM
Total revenues, net of interest expense $ 5,815 $ 4,566 $ (805) 27% NM
Provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims
Net credit losses $ 1,646 $ 3,070 $ 5,842 (46)% (47)%
Credit reserve release (893) (2,033) (1,551) 56 (31)
Provision for loan losses $ 753 $ 1,037 $ 4,291 (27)% (76)%
Provision for benefits and claims 602 618 651 (3) (5)
Release for unfunded lending commitments (10) (10) (56) — 82
Total provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims $ 1,345 $ 1,645 $ 4,886 (18)% (66)%
Total operating expenses $ 7,715 $ 5,970 $ 5,263 29% 13%
Loss from continuing operations before taxes $(3,245) $(3,049) $ (10,954) (6)% 72%
Income taxes (benefits) 121 (1,132) (4,389) NM 74
Loss from continuing operations $(3,366) $(1,917) $ (6,565) (76)% 71%
Noncontrolling interests $ 4 $ 16 $ 3 (75)% NM
Citi Holdings net loss $(3,370) $(1,933) $ (6,568) (74)% 71%
Total revenues, net of interest expense (excluding CVA/DVA)
Total revenues-as reported $ 5,815 $ 4,566 $ (805) 27% NM
CVA/DVA(1) (47) 3 157 NM (98)%
Total revenues-excluding CVA/DVA $ 5,862 $ 4,563 $ (962) 28% NM
Balance sheet data (in billions of dollars)
Average assets $ 109 $ 135 $ 194 (19)% (30)%
Return on average assets (3.09)% (1.43)% (3.39)%
Efficiency ratio 133% 131% (654)%
Total EOP assets $ 98 $ 117 $ 156 (16) (25)
Total EOP loans 73 93 116 (21) (20)
Total EOP deposits 10 36 68 (72) (47)
(1) 2014 includes the impact of a one-time pretax charge of $44 million related to the implementation of funding valuation adjustments (FVA) on derivatives in the third quarter of 2014. For additional information, see
Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. FVA is included within CVA for presentation purposes.
NM Not meaningful

29
The discussion of the results of operations for Citi Holdings below excludes the impact of CVA/DVA for all periods presented. Presentations of the results
of operations, excluding the impact of CVA/DVA, are non-GAAP financial measures. Citi believes the presentation of Citi Holdings’ results excluding the
impact of CVA/DVA is a more meaningful depiction of the underlying fundamentals of the business. For a reconciliation of these metrics to the reported
results, see the table above.
2014 vs. 2013 Expenses increased 13%, primarily due to higher legal and related costs
The net loss increased by $1.4 billion to $3.3 billion, largely due to the ($2.6 billion in 2013 compared to $1.2 billion in 2012), driven largely
impact of the mortgage settlement in July 2014 (see “Executive Summary” by legacy private-label securitization and other mortgage-related issues,
above), partially offset by higher revenues and lower cost of credit. partially offset by lower overall assets. Excluding legal and related costs,
Excluding the mortgage settlement, net income increased by $2.3 billion to expenses declined 18% versus 2012.
$385 million, primarily due to lower expenses, higher revenues and lower net Provisions decreased 66%, driven by the absence of incremental net
credit losses, partially offset by a lower net loan loss reserve release. credit losses relating to the national mortgage settlement and those required
Revenues increased 28%, primarily driven by gains on asset sales, by Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) guidance during 2012
including the sales of the consumer operations in Greece and Spain in the (for additional information, see Note 16 to the Consolidated Financial
third quarter of 2014, lower funding costs and the absence of residential Statements), as well as improved credit in North America mortgages
mortgage repurchase reserve builds for representation and warranty claims and overall lower asset levels. Loan loss reserve releases increased 27% to
in 2014, partially offset by losses on the redemption of debt associated with $2 billion, which included a loan loss reserve release of approximately
funding Citi Holdings assets. $2.2 billion related to the North America mortgage portfolio, partially offset
Expenses increased 29%, principally reflecting higher legal and related by losses on asset sales.
costs ($4.7 billion compared to $2.6 billion in 2013) due to the mortgage
Japan Consumer Finance
settlement, partially offset by lower expenses driven by the ongoing decline
In 2008, Citi decided to exit its Japan Consumer Finance business and
in assets. Excluding the impact of the mortgage settlement, expenses
has liquidated approximately 95% of the portfolio since that time. As
declined 34%, primarily driven by lower legal and related costs ($986 million
of December 31, 2014, Citi’s Japan Consumer Finance business had
compared to $2.6 billion in 2013) as well as the ongoing decline in assets.
approximately $151 million in outstanding loans that currently charge
Provisions decreased 18%, driven by lower net credit losses, partially
or have previously charged interest rates in the “gray zone” (interest at
offset by a lower net loss reserve release. Excluding the impact of the
rates that are legal but may not be enforceable and thus may subject Citi
mortgage settlement, provisions declined 22%, driven by a 46% decline in
to customer refund claims), compared to approximately $278 million as
net credit losses primarily due to continued improvements in North America
of December 31, 2013. Although the portfolio has largely been liquidated,
mortgages and overall lower asset levels. The net reserve release decreased
Citi could be subject to refund claims on previously outstanding loans that
56% to $903 million, primarily due to lower releases related to the North
charged gray zone interest and thus could be subject to losses on loans in
America mortgage portfolio, partially offset by lower losses on asset sales.
excess of these amounts.
Excluding the impact of the mortgage settlement, the net reserve release
At December 31, 2014, Citi’s reserves related to customer refunds in
decreased 53%. Loan loss reserves related to the North America mortgage
the Japan Consumer Finance business were $442 million, compared to
portfolio were utilized to nearly fully offset net credit losses in the portfolio
$434 million at December 31, 2013. The increase in the total reserve year-
in 2014.
over-year primarily resulted from net reserve builds in 2014 ($248 million
2013 vs. 2012 compared to $28 million in 2013) due to less than expected declines in
The net loss decreased by 71% to $1.9 billion. 2012 included the pretax customer refund claims, partially offset by payments made to customers and
loss of $4.7 billion ($2.9 billion after-tax) related to the sale of the Morgan a continuing reduction in the population of current and former customers
Stanley Smith Barney joint venture (MSSB) to Morgan Stanley. Excluding who are eligible to make refund claims.
the MSSB loss, the net loss decreased to $1.9 billion from a net loss of Citi continues to monitor and evaluate trends and developments relating
$3.8 billion in 2012, due to significantly lower provisions for credit losses and to the charging of gray zone interest, including customer defaults, refund
higher revenues, partially offset by higher expenses. claims and litigation, and financial, legislative, regulatory, judicial and
Revenues increased to $4.6 billion, primarily due to the absence of the other political developments, as well as the potential impact to both currently
MSSB loss. Excluding the MSSB loss, revenues increased 23%, primarily and previously outstanding loans in this legacy business and its reserves
driven by lower funding costs and lower residential mortgage repurchase related thereto. Citi could be subject to additional losses as a result of these
reserve builds for representation and warranty claims ($470 million, developments and the impact on Citi is subject to uncertainty and continues
compared to $700 million in 2012). to be difficult to predict.

30
BALANCE SHEET REVIEW

The following sets forth a general discussion of the changes in certain of the more significant line items of Citi’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. For a description
of and additional information on each of these balance sheet categories, see Notes 11, 13, 14, 15 and 18 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. For additional
information on Citigroup’s liquidity resources, including its deposits, short-term and long-term debt and secured financing transactions, see “Managing Global
Risk—Market Risk—Funding and Liquidity Risk” below.

EOP EOP
4Q14 vs. 3Q14 4Q14 vs. 4Q13
December 31, September 30, December 31, Increase % Increase %
In billions of dollars 2014 2014 2013 (decrease) Change (decrease) Change
Assets
Cash and deposits with banks $ 160 $ 179 $ 199 $(19) (11)% $ (39) (20)%
Federal funds sold and securities borrowed
or purchased under agreements to resell 243 245 257 (2) (1) (14) (5)
Trading account assets 297 291 286 6 2 11 4
Investments 333 333 309 — — 24 8
Loans, net of unearned income 645 654 665 (9) (1) (20) (3)
Allowance for loan losses (16) (17) (19) 1 (6) 3 (16)
Loans, net 629 637 646 (8) (1) (17) (3)
Other assets 181 198 183 (17) (9) (2) (1)
Total assets $1,843 $1,883 $1,880 $(40) (2)% $ (37) (2)%
Liabilities
Deposits $ 899 $ 943 $ 968 $(44) (5)% $ (69) (7)%
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold
under agreements to repurchase 173 176 204 (3) (2) (31) (15)
Trading account liabilities 139 137 109 2 1 30 28
Short-term borrowings 58 65 59 (7) (11) (1) (2)
Long-term debt 223 224 221 (1) — 2 1
Other liabilities 139 124 113 15 12 26 23
Total liabilities $1,631 $1,669 $1,674 $(38) (2)% $ (43) (3)%
Total equity 212 214 206 (2) (1) 6 3
Total liabilities and equity $1,843 $1,883 $1,880 $(40) (2)% $ (37) (2)%

ASSETS
Cash and Deposits with Banks Trading Account Assets
Cash and deposits with banks decreased from the prior-year period as Citi Trading account assets increased from the prior-year period, as increased
continued to grow its investment portfolio to manage its interest rate position market volatility, particularly in rates and currencies within Markets
and deploy its excess liquidity. Average cash balances were $182 billion in and securities services within ICG, increased the carrying value of Citi’s
the fourth quarter of 2014 compared to $204 billion in the fourth quarter derivatives positions. Average trading account assets were $309 billion in
of 2013. the fourth quarter of 2014 compared to $292 billion in the fourth quarter
of 2013.
Federal Funds Sold and Securities Borrowed or
Purchased Under Agreements to Resell (Reverse Repos) Investments
The decline in reverse repos and securities borrowing transactions from the The increase in investments year-over-year reflected Citi’s continued
prior-year period was due to the impact of FX translation and continued deployment of its excess cash (as discussed above) by investing in
optimization of Citi’s secured lending (for additional information, see available-for-sale securities, particularly in U.S. treasuries.
“Managing Global Risk—Market Risk—Funding and Liquidity Risk”
below), partially offset by increased short trading in the Markets and
securities services businesses within ICG.

31
Loans LIABILITIES
The impact of FX translation on Citi’s reported loans was a negative Deposits
$17 billion versus the prior-year period and negative $10 billion sequentially. For a discussion of Citi’s deposits, see “Managing Global Risk—Market
Excluding the impact of FX translation, Citi’s loans decreased 1% Risk—Funding and Liquidity Risk” below.
from the prior-year period, as 3% loan growth in Citicorp was offset by
the continued declines in Citi Holdings. Consumer loans grew 2% year- Federal Funds Purchased and Securities Loaned or Sold
over-year, driven by 4% growth internationally. Corporate loans grew 4% Under Agreements to Repurchase (Repos)
year-over-year. Traditional corporate lending balances grew 4%, with growth Citi’s federal funds purchased were not significant for the periods presented.
in North America driven by higher client transaction activity. Treasury and The decrease in repos and securities lending transactions was due to the
trade solutions loans decreased 8%, as Citi maintained trade origination impact of FX translation and the continued optimization of secured funding.
volumes while reducing lower spread assets and increasing asset sales to For further information on Citi’s secured financing transactions, see
optimize returns. Private bank and markets loans increased 16%, led by “Managing Global Risk—Market Risk—Funding and Liquidity” below.
growth in the North America private bank, contributing to the revenue
Trading Account Liabilities
growth in that business. Citi Holdings loans decreased 21% year-over-year,
The increase in trading account liabilities from the prior-year period was
mainly due to continued runoff and asset sales in the North America
consistent with and driven by the increase in trading account assets, as
mortgage portfolio as well as the sales of the Greece and Spain consumer
discussed above. Average trading account liabilities were $147 billion during
operations in the third quarter of 2014.
the fourth quarter of 2014, compared to $112 billion in the fourth quarter
Sequentially, loans were relatively unchanged, excluding the impact of
of 2013.
FX translation, as the decline in Citi Holdings loans was offset by continued
growth in Citicorp, driven by consumer loans. Debt
During the fourth quarter of 2014, average loans of $651 billion yielded For information on Citi’s long-term and short-term debt borrowings,
an average rate of 6.7%, compared to $659 billion and 6.7% in the third see “Managing Global Risk—Market Risk—Funding and Liquidity
quarter of 2014 and $659 billion and 7.0% in the fourth quarter of 2013. Risk” below.
For further information on Citi’s loan portfolios, see “Managing Global
Risk—Credit Risk” and “— Country Risk” below. Other Liabilities
The increase in other liabilities from the prior-year period was driven by the
Other Assets reclassification to held-for-sale of approximately $21 billion of deposits as
The fluctuations in other assets during the periods presented were largely a result of Citi’s entry into an agreement in December 2014 to sell its Japan
changes in brokerage receivables driven by normal business activities. retail banking business, as well as changes in the levels of brokerage payables
driven by normal business activities.

32
Segment Balance Sheet (1)

Citigroup
Parent Company-
Issued
Corporate/Other Long-Term
Global Institutional and Debt and
Consumer Clients Consolidating Subtotal Citi Stockholders’ Total Citigroup
In millions of dollars Banking Group Eliminations (2) Citicorp Holdings Equity (3) Consolidated
Assets
Cash and deposits with banks $ 17,192 $ 62,245 $ 79,701 $ 159,138 $ 1,059 $ — $ 160,197
Federal funds sold and securities borrowed or purchased
under agreements to resell 5,317 236,211 — 241,528 1,042 — 242,570
Trading account assets 7,328 284,922 754 293,004 3,782 — 296,786
Investments 26,395 90,434 205,805 322,634 10,809 — 333,443
Loans, net of unearned income and
allowance for loan losses 287,934 272,002 — 559,936 68,705 — 628,641
Other assets 51,885 74,259 42,284 168,428 12,465 — 180,893
Total assets $396,051 $1,020,073 $328,544 $1,744,668 $ 97,862 $ — $1,842,530
Liabilities and equity
Total deposits (4) $307,626 $ 558,926 $ 22,803 $ 889,355 $ 9,977 $ — $ 899,332
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold
under agreements to repurchase 5,826 167,500 — 173,326 112 — 173,438
Trading account liabilities 19 138,195 — 138,214 822 — 139,036
Short-term borrowings 396 46,664 11,229 58,289 46 — 58,335
Long-term debt 1,939 35,411 29,349 66,699 6,869 149,512 223,080
Other liabilities 39,210 74,353 15,181 128,744 8,520 — 137,264
Net inter-segment funding (lending) 41,035 (976) 248,471 288,530 71,516 (360,046) —
Total liabilities $396,051 $1,020,073 $327,033 $1,743,157 $ 97,862 $(210,534) $1,630,485
Total equity — — 1,511 1,511 — 210,534 212,045
Total liabilities and equity $396,051 $1,020,073 $328,544 $1,744,668 $ 97,862 $ — $1,842,530

(1) The supplemental information presented in the table above reflects Citigroup’s consolidated GAAP balance sheet by reporting segment as of December 31, 2014. The respective segment information depicts the assets
and liabilities managed by each segment as of such date. While this presentation is not defined by GAAP, Citi believes that these non-GAAP financial measures enhance investors’ understanding of the balance sheet
components managed by the underlying business segments, as well as the beneficial inter-relationships of the asset and liability dynamics of the balance sheet components among Citi’s business segments.
(2) Consolidating eliminations for total Citigroup and Citigroup parent company assets and liabilities are recorded within the Corporate/Other segment.
(3) The total stockholders’ equity and the majority of long-term debt of Citigroup reside in the Citigroup parent company Consolidated Balance Sheet. Citigroup allocates stockholders’ equity and long-term debt to its
businesses through inter-segment allocations as shown above.
(4) Reflects reclassification of approximately $21 billion of deposits to held-for-sale (Other liabilities) at December 31, 2014 as a result of the agreement to sell Citi’s retail banking business in Japan.

33
OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS

Citigroup enters into various types of off-balance sheet arrangements in the

ordinary course of business. Citi’s involvement in these arrangements can
take many different forms, including without limitation:
• purchasing or retaining residual and other interests in unconsolidated
special purpose entities, such as credit card receivables and mortgage-
backed and other asset-backed securitization entities;
• holding senior and subordinated debt, interests in limited and general
partnerships and equity interests in other unconsolidated special
purpose entities;
• providing guarantees, indemnifications, loan commitments, letters of
credit and representations and warranties; and
• entering into operating leases for property and equipment.
Citi enters into these arrangements for a variety of business purposes. For
example, securitization arrangements offer investors access to specific cash
flows and risks created through the securitization process. Securitization
arrangements also assist Citi and Citi’s customers in monetizing their
financial assets and securing financing at more favorable rates than Citi or
the customers could otherwise obtain.
The table below shows where a discussion of Citi’s various off-balance
sheet arrangements may be found in this Form 10-K. In addition, see Notes 1,
22 and 27 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Types of Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements Disclosures in
this Form 10-K

Variable interests and other obligations, See Note 22 to the Consolidated

including contingent obligations, Financial Statements.
arising from variable interests in
nonconsolidated VIEs
Letters of credit, and lending See Note 27 to the Consolidated
and other commitments Financial Statements.
Guarantees See Note 27 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements.
Leases See Note 27 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements.

34
CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS

The following table includes information on Citigroup’s contractual obligations, as specified and aggregated pursuant to SEC requirements.

Contractual obligations by year

In millions of dollars 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Thereafter Total
Long-term debt obligations—principal (1) $31,070 $42,128 $40,249 $22,017 $22,117 $ 65,499 $223,080
Long-term debt obligations—interest payments (2) 6,932 5,710 4,334 3,294 2,557 33,895 56,722
Operating and capital lease obligations 1,415 1,192 964 771 679 4,994 10,015
Purchase obligations (3) 1,245 676 657 408 188 223 3,397
Other liabilities (4) 31,120 693 955 264 213 4,282 37,527
Total $71,782 $50,399 $47,159 $26,754 $25,754 $108,893 $330,741

(1) For additional information about long-term debt obligations, see “Managing Global Risk—Market Risk—Funding and Liquidity” below and Note 18 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(2) Contractual obligations related to interest payments on long-term debt for 2015—2019 are calculated by applying the December 31, 2014 weighted- average interest rate (3.34%) on average outstanding long-term
debt to the average remaining contractual obligations on long-term debt for each of those years. The “Thereafter” interest payments on long-term debt for the remaining years to maturity (for 2020—2098) are
calculated by applying interest rates on the remaining contractual obligations on long-term debt for each of those years.
(3) Purchase obligations consist of obligations to purchase goods or services that are enforceable and legally binding on Citi. For presentation purposes, purchase obligations are included in the table above through the
termination date of the respective agreements, even if the contract is renewable. Many of the purchase agreements for goods or services include clauses that would allow Citi to cancel the agreement with specified
notice; however, that impact is not included in the table above (unless Citi has already notified the counterparty of its intention to terminate the agreement).
(4) Other liabilities reflected on Citigroup’s Consolidated Balance Sheet includes accounts payable, accrued expenses, uncertain tax positions and other liabilities that have been incurred and will ultimately be paid in
cash; legal reserve accruals are not included in the table above. Also includes discretionary contributions in 2015 for Citi’s non-U.S. pension plans and the non-U.S. postretirement plans, as well as employee benefit
obligations accounted for under SFAS 87 (ASC 715), SFAS 106 (ASC 715) and SFAS 112 (ASC 712).

35
CAPITAL RESOURCES

Overview Current Regulatory Capital Standards

Capital is used principally to support assets in Citi’s businesses and to
Overview
absorb credit, market and operational losses. Citi primarily generates
Citi is subject to regulatory capital standards issued by the Federal Reserve
capital through earnings from its operating businesses. Citi may augment
Board which, commencing with 2014, constitute the substantial adoption of
its capital through issuances of common stock, noncumulative perpetual
the final U.S. Basel III rules (Final Basel III Rules), such as those governing
preferred stock and equity issued through awards under employee benefit
the composition of regulatory capital (including the application of regulatory
plans, among other issuances. During 2014, Citi continued to raise capital
capital adjustments and deductions) and, initially for the second quarter of
through noncumulative perpetual preferred stock issuances amounting to
2014 in conjunction with the granting of permission by the Federal Reserve
approximately $3.7 billion, resulting in a total of approximately $10.5 billion
Board to exit parallel reporting, approval to apply the Basel III Advanced
outstanding as of December 31, 2014.
Approaches framework in deriving risk-based capital ratios. Further, the
Further, Citi’s capital levels may also be affected by changes in regulatory
Final Basel III Rules implement the “capital floor provision” of the so-called
and accounting standards as well as the impact of future events on Citi’s
“Collins Amendment” of the Dodd-Frank Act, which requires Advanced
business results, such as corporate and asset dispositions.
Approaches banking organizations, such as Citi and Citibank, N.A., upon
Capital Management exiting parallel reporting, to calculate each of the three risk-based capital
Citigroup’s capital management framework is designed to ensure that ratios (Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, Tier 1 Capital and Total Capital)
Citigroup and its principal subsidiaries maintain sufficient capital consistent under both the Standardized Approach starting on January 1, 2015 (or, for
with each entity’s respective risk profile and all applicable regulatory 2014, prior to the effective date of the Standardized Approach, the Basel I
standards and guidelines. Citi assesses its capital adequacy against a series credit risk and Basel II.5 market risk capital rules, subsequently referred to in
of internal quantitative capital goals, designed to evaluate the Company’s this section as the Basel III 2014 Standardized Approach) and the Advanced
capital levels in expected and stressed economic environments. Underlying Approaches and publicly report (as well as measure compliance against) the
these internal quantitative capital goals are strategic capital considerations, lower of each of the resulting capital ratios.
centered on preserving and building financial strength. Senior management, Under the Final Basel III Rules, Citi, as with principally all U.S. banking
with oversight from Citigroup’s Board of Directors, is responsible for the organizations, is also required to maintain a minimum Tier 1 Leverage ratio
capital assessment and planning process, which is integrated into Citi’s of 4% commencing in 2014. The Tier 1 Leverage ratio, a non-risk-based
capital plan. Implementation of the capital plan is carried out mainly measure of capital adequacy, is defined as Tier 1 Capital as a percentage
through Citigroup’s Asset and Liability Committee, with oversight from the of quarterly adjusted average total assets less amounts deducted from
Risk Management Committee of Citigroup’s Board of Directors. Asset and Tier 1 Capital.
liability committees are also established globally and for each significant
legal entity, region, country and/or major line of business.

36
Basel III Transition Arrangements The following chart sets forth the transitional progression to full
The Final Basel III Rules contain several differing, largely multi-year implementation by January 1, 2019 of the regulatory capital components
transition provisions (i.e., “phase-ins” and “phase-outs”) with respect to (i.e., inclusive of the mandatory 2.5% Capital Conservation Buffer and at
the stated minimum Common Equity Tier 1 Capital and Tier 1 Capital least a 2% global systemically important bank holding company (GSIB)
ratio requirements, substantially all regulatory capital adjustments and surcharge, but exclusive of the potential imposition of an additional
deductions, non-qualifying Tier 1 and Tier 2 Capital instruments (such Countercyclical Capital Buffer) comprising the effective minimum risk-based
as non-grandfathered trust preferred securities and certain subordinated capital ratios.
debt issuances), and the capital buffers. All of these transition provisions,
with the exception of the phase-out of non-qualifying trust preferred
securities from Tier 2 Capital, will be fully implemented by January 1, 2019
(full implementation).

Basel III Transition Arrangements: Minimum Risk-Based Capital Ratios

14%
Total Capital ratio
12.5% (effective minimum)
12%
11.375% 2% GSIB surcharge(1)
10.25% 1.5%
10%
9.125% 1% Capital Conservation
2.5%
0.5% 1.875% Buffer
1.25%
0.625%
8%

2% 2% 2% 2% 2%
2.5%
6% 8% Total Capital ratio
1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% 1.5% (stated minimum)
1.5%
4%
6% Tier 1 Capital ratio
(stated minimum)
2% 4% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5%
4.5% Common Equity
Tier 1 Capital ratio
0% (stated minimum)

1/1/14 1/1/15 1/1/16 1/1/17 1/1/18 1/1/19

Common Equity Tier 1 Capital Additional Tier 1 Capital Tier 2 Capital

(1) The Final Basel III Rules do not address GSIBs. The transitional progression reflected in the chart above is consistent with the phase-in arrangement under the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s (Basel
Committee) GSIB rules, which would subject Citi to at least a 2% GSIB surcharge. In December 2014, however, the Federal Reserve Board issued a notice of proposed rulemaking which would impose risk-based
capital surcharges upon U.S. bank holding companies that are identified as GSIBs, including Citi. As of December 31, 2014, Citi estimates its GSIB surcharge under the Federal Reserve Board’s proposal would be 4%,
compared to at least 2% under the Basel Committee requirements. For additional information regarding the Federal Reserve Board’s proposed rule, see “Regulatory Capital Standards Developments” below.

37
The following chart presents the transition arrangements (phase-in and phase-out) under the Final Basel III Rules for significant regulatory capital
adjustments and deductions relative to Citi.

Basel III Transition Arrangements: Significant Regulatory Capital Adjustments and Deductions

January 1
2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Phase-in of Significant Regulatory Capital Adjustments and Deductions

Common Equity Tier 1 Capital(1) 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Common Equity Tier 1 Capital(2) 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Additional Tier 1 Capital(2)(3) 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Phase-out of Significant AOCI Regulatory Capital Adjustments

Common Equity Tier 1 Capital(4) 80% 60% 40% 20% 0%

(1) Includes the phase-in of Common Equity Tier 1 Capital deductions for all intangible assets other than goodwill and mortgage servicing rights (MSRs); and excess over 10%/15% limitations for deferred tax assets
(DTAs) arising from temporary differences, significant common stock investments in unconsolidated financial institutions and MSRs. Goodwill (including goodwill “embedded” in the valuation of significant common
stock investments in unconsolidated financial institutions) is fully deducted in arriving at Common Equity Tier 1 Capital commencing January 1, 2014. The amount of other intangible assets, aside from MSRs, not
deducted in arriving at Common Equity Tier 1 Capital are risk-weighted at 100%, as are the excess over the 10%/15% limitations for DTAs arising from temporary differences, significant common stock investments
in unconsolidated financial institutions and MSRs prior to full implementation of the Final Basel III Rules. Upon full implementation, the amount of temporary difference DTAs, significant common stock investments in
unconsolidated financial institutions and MSRs not deducted in arriving at Common Equity Tier 1 Capital are risk-weighted at 250%.
(2) Includes the phase-in of Common Equity Tier 1 Capital deductions related to DTAs arising from net operating loss, foreign tax credit and general business credit carry-forwards and defined benefit pension plan net
assets; and the phase-in of the Common Equity Tier 1 Capital adjustment for cumulative unrealized net gains (losses) related to changes in fair value of financial liabilities attributable to Citi’s own creditworthiness.
(3) To the extent Additional Tier 1 Capital is not sufficient to absorb regulatory capital adjustments and deductions, such excess is to be applied against Common Equity Tier 1 Capital.
(4) Includes the phase-out from Common Equity Tier 1 Capital of adjustments related to unrealized gains (losses) on available-for-sale (AFS) debt securities; unrealized gains on AFS equity securities; unrealized gains
(losses) on held-to-maturity (HTM) securities included in AOCI; and defined benefit plans liability adjustment.

38
Citigroup’s Capital Resources Under Current
Regulatory Standards
During 2014, Citi was required to maintain stated minimum Common
Equity Tier 1 Capital, Tier 1 Capital and Total Capital ratios of 4%, 5.5%
and 8%, respectively. Furthermore, to be “well capitalized” under current
federal bank regulatory agency definitions, a bank holding company must
have a Tier 1 Capital ratio of at least 6%, a Total Capital ratio of at least 10%,
and not be subject to a Federal Reserve Board directive to maintain higher
capital levels.
The following table sets forth the capital tiers, risk-weighted assets,
quarterly adjusted average total assets and capital ratios under current
regulatory standards (reflecting Basel III Transition Arrangements) for Citi as
of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013.

Citigroup Capital Components and Ratios Under Current Regulatory Standards (Basel III Transition Arrangements)

December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013 (1)

Advanced Standardized Advanced Standardized
In millions of dollars, except ratios Approaches Approach (2) Approaches Approach (2)
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital $ 166,984 $ 166,984 $ 157,473 $ 157,473
Tier 1 Capital 166,984 166,984 157,473 157,473
Total Capital (Tier 1 Capital + Tier 2 Capital) (3) 185,280 196,379 176,748 187,374
Risk-Weighted Assets 1,275,012 1,080,716 1,177,736 1,103,045
Quarterly Adjusted Average Total Assets (4) 1,849,297 1,849,297 1,830,896 1,830,896
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio (5) 13.10% 15.45% 13.37% 14.28%
Tier 1 Capital ratio (5) 13.10 15.45 13.37 14.28
Total Capital ratio (5) 14.53 18.17 15.01 16.99
Tier 1 Leverage ratio 9.03 9.03 8.60 8.60

(1) Pro forma presentation based on application of the Final Basel III Rules consistent with current period presentation.
(2) Basel III 2014 Standardized Approach which reflects the application of the Basel I credit risk and Basel II.5 market risk capital rules.
(3) Under the Advanced Approaches framework eligible credit reserves that exceed expected credit losses are eligible for inclusion in Tier 2 Capital to the extent the excess reserves do not exceed 0.6% of credit risk-
weighted assets, which differs from the Standardized Approach in which the allowance for credit losses is includable in Tier 2 Capital up to 1.25% of credit risk-weighted assets, with any excess allowance for credit
losses being deducted in arriving at credit risk-weighted assets.
(4) Tier 1 Leverage ratio denominator.
(5) As of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, Citi’s reportable Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, Tier 1 Capital, and Total Capital ratios were the lower derived under the Basel III Advanced Approaches framework.

As indicated in the table above, Citigroup’s capital ratios at December 31,

2014 were in excess of the stated minimum requirements under the Final
Basel III Rules. In addition, Citi was also “well capitalized” under current
federal bank regulatory agency definitions as of December 31, 2014 and
December 31, 2013.

39
Components of Citigroup Capital Under Current Regulatory Standards
(Basel III Advanced Approaches with Transition Arrangements)

December 31, December 31,

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 (1)
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital
Citigroup common stockholders’ equity (2) $200,190 $197,694
Add: Qualifying noncontrolling interests 539 597
Regulatory Capital Adjustments and Deductions:
Less: Net unrealized gains (losses) on securities AFS, net of tax (3)(4) 46 (1,312)
Less: Defined benefit plans liability adjustment, net of tax (4) (4,127) (3,191)
Less: Accumulated net unrealized losses on cash flow hedges, net of tax (5) (909) (1,245)
Less: Cumulative unrealized net gain related to changes in fair value of financial liabilities
attributable to own creditworthiness, net of tax (4)(6) 56 35
Less: Intangible assets:
Goodwill, net of related deferred tax liabilities (DTLs) (7) 22,805 24,518
Identifiable intangible assets other than mortgage servicing rights (MSRs), net of related DTLs (4) 875 990
Less: Defined benefit pension plan net assets (4) 187 225
Less: Deferred tax assets (DTAs) arising from net operating loss, foreign tax credit and general
business credit carry-forwards (4)(8) 4,726 5,288
Less: Excess over 10%/15% limitations for other DTAs, certain common stock investments,
and MSRs (4)(8)(9) 2,003 2,343
Less: Deductions applied to Common Equity Tier 1 Capital due to insufficient amount of Additional
Tier 1 Capital to cover deductions (4) 8,083 13,167
Total Common Equity Tier 1 Capital $166,984 $157,473
Additional Tier 1 Capital
Qualifying perpetual preferred stock (2) $ 10,344 $ 6,645
Qualifying trust preferred securities (10) 1,719 2,616
Qualifying noncontrolling interests 7 8
Regulatory Capital Adjustment and Deductions:
Less: Cumulative unrealized net gain related to changes in fair value of financial liabilities
attributable to own creditworthiness, net of tax (4)(6) 223 142
Less: Minimum regulatory capital requirements of insurance underwriting subsidiaries (11) 279 243
Less: Defined benefit pension plan net assets (4) 749 900
Less: DTAs arising from net operating loss, foreign tax credit and general
business credit carry-forwards (4)(8) 18,902 21,151
Less: Deductions applied to Common Equity Tier 1 Capital due to insufficient amount of Additional
Tier 1 Capital to cover deductions (4) (8,083) (13,167)
Total Additional Tier 1 Capital $ — $ —
Total Tier 1 Capital (Common Equity Tier 1 Capital + Additional Tier 1 Capital) $166,984 $157,473
Tier 2 Capital
Qualifying subordinated debt (12) $ 17,386 $ 16,594
Qualifying trust preferred securities (10) — 1,242
Qualifying noncontrolling interests 12 13
Excess of eligible credit reserves over expected credit losses (13) 1,177 1,669
Regulatory Capital Deduction:
Less: Minimum regulatory capital requirements of insurance underwriting subsidiaries (11) 279 243
Total Tier 2 Capital $ 18,296 $ 19,275
Total Capital (Tier 1 Capital + Tier 2 Capital) $185,280 $176,748

Table and notes continue on the next page.

40
Citigroup Risk-Weighted Assets (Basel III Advanced Approaches with Transition Arrangements)

December 31, December 31,

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 (14)
Credit Risk (15) $ 862,031 $ 834,082
Market Risk 100,481 112,154
Operational Risk (16) 312,500 231,500
Total Risk-Weighted Assets $1,275,012 $1,177,736

(1) Pro forma presentation of regulatory capital components and tiers based on application of the Final Basel III Rules consistent with current period presentation.
(2) Issuance costs of $124 million and $93 million related to preferred stock outstanding at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, are excluded from common stockholders’ equity and netted against
preferred stock in accordance with Federal Reserve Board regulatory reporting requirements, which differ from those under U.S. GAAP.
(3) In addition, includes the net amount of unamortized loss on held-to-maturity (HTM) securities. This amount relates to securities that were previously transferred from AFS to HTM, and non-credit related factors such as
changes in interest rates and liquidity spreads for HTM securities with other-than-temporary impairment.
(4) The transition arrangements for significant regulatory capital adjustments and deductions impacting Common Equity Tier 1 Capital and/or Additional Tier 1 Capital are set forth above in the table entitled “Basel III
Transition Arrangements: Significant Regulatory Capital Adjustments and Deductions.”
(5) Common Equity Tier 1 Capital is adjusted for accumulated net unrealized gains (losses) on cash flow hedges included in AOCI that relate to the hedging of items not recognized at fair value on the balance sheet.
(6) The cumulative impact of changes in Citigroup’s own creditworthiness in valuing liabilities for which the fair value option has been elected and own-credit valuation adjustments on derivatives are excluded from
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, in accordance with the Final Basel III Rules.
(7) Includes goodwill “embedded” in the valuation of significant common stock investments in unconsolidated financial institutions.
(8) Of Citi’s approximately $49.5 billion of net DTAs at December 31, 2014, approximately $25.5 billion of such assets were includable in regulatory capital pursuant to the Final Basel III Rules, while approximately
$24.0 billion of such assets were excluded in arriving at regulatory capital. Comprising the excluded net DTAs was an aggregate of approximately $25.6 billion of net DTAs arising from net operating loss, foreign tax
credit and general business credit carry-forwards as well as temporary differences, of which $14.4 billion were deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 Capital and $11.2 billion were deducted from Additional Tier 1
Capital. In addition, approximately $1.6 billion of net DTLs, primarily consisting of DTLs associated with goodwill and certain other intangible assets, partially offset by DTAs related to cash flow hedges, are permitted to
be excluded prior to deriving the amount of net DTAs subject to deduction under these rules. Separately, under the Final Basel III Rules, goodwill and these other intangible assets are deducted net of associated DTLs in
arriving at Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, while Citi’s current cash flow hedges and the related deferred tax effects are not required to be reflected in regulatory capital.
(9) Aside from MSRs, reflects DTAs arising from temporary differences and significant common stock investments in unconsolidated financial institutions.
(10) Represents Citigroup Capital XIII trust preferred securities, which are permanently grandfathered as Tier 1 Capital under the Final Basel III Rules, as well as 50% of non-grandfathered trust preferred securities. The
remaining 50% of non-grandfathered trust preferred securities are eligible for inclusion in Tier 2 Capital during 2014 in accordance with the transition arrangements for non-qualifying capital instruments under the
Final Basel III Rules.
(11) 50% of the minimum regulatory capital requirements of insurance underwriting subsidiaries must be deducted from each of Tier 1 Capital and Tier 2 Capital.
(12) Under the transition arrangements of the Final Basel III Rules, non-qualifying subordinated debt issuances which consist of those with a fixed-to-floating rate step-up feature where the call/step-up date has not passed
are eligible for 50% inclusion in Tier 2 Capital during 2014, with the threshold based upon the aggregate outstanding principal amounts of such issuances as of January 1, 2014.
(13) Advanced Approaches banking organizations are permitted to include in Tier 2 Capital eligible credit reserves that exceed expected credit losses to the extent that the excess reserves do not exceed 0.6% of credit
risk-weighted assets.
(14) Risk-weighted assets at December 31, 2013 are presented on a pro forma basis, assuming the application of the Final Basel III Rules consistent with current period presentation, including the resultant impact on credit
risk-weighted assets.
(15) Under the Final Basel III Rules, credit risk-weighted assets during the transition period reflect the effects of transitional arrangements related to regulatory capital adjustments and deductions and, as a result, will differ
from credit risk-weighted assets derived under full implementation of the rules.
(16) During 2014, Citi’s operational risk-weighted assets were increased by $81 billion, of which $56 billion was in conjunction with the granting of permission by the Federal Reserve Board to exit the parallel run period
and commence applying the Basel III Advanced Approaches framework, effective with the second quarter of 2014. Further, an additional $25 billion was recognized during the last six months of 2014, reflecting an
evaluation of ongoing events in the banking industry.

41
Citigroup Capital Rollforward Under Current Regulatory Standards
(Basel III Advanced Approaches with Transition Arrangements)

Three Months Ended Twelve Months Ended

In millions of dollars December 31, 2014 December 31, 2014
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital
Balance, beginning of period (1) $166,425 $157,473
Net income 350 7,313
Dividends declared (190) (633)
Net increase in treasury stock (380) (1,232)
Net increase in additional paid-in capital (2) 229 778
Net increase in foreign currency translation adjustment net of hedges, net of tax (2,716) (4,946)
Net decrease in unrealized losses on securities AFS, net of tax (3) 94 339
Net increase in defined benefit plans liability adjustment, net of tax (3) (213) (234)
Net increase in cumulative unrealized net gain related to changes in fair value of
financial liabilities attributable to own creditworthiness, net of tax (17) (21)
Net decrease in goodwill, net of related deferred tax liabilities (DTLs) 873 1,713
Net change in other intangible assets other than mortgage servicing rights (MSRs),
net of related DTLs (14) 115
Net decrease in defined benefit pension plan net assets 49 38
Net decrease in deferred tax assets (DTAs) arising from net operating loss, foreign
tax credit and general business credit carry-forwards 205 562
Net change in excess over 10%/15% limitations for other DTAs, certain common stock
investments and MSRs (88) 340
Net decrease in regulatory capital deduction applied to Common Equity Tier 1 Capital
due to insufficient Additional Tier 1 Capital to cover deductions 2,402 5,084
Other (25) 295
Net increase in Common Equity Tier 1 Capital $ 559 $ 9,511
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital Balance, end of period $166,984 $166,984
Additional Tier 1 Capital
Balance, beginning of period (1) $ — $ —
Net increase in qualifying perpetual preferred stock (4) 1,493 3,699
Net decrease in qualifying trust preferred securities (7) (897)
Net increase in cumulative unrealized net gain related to changes in fair value of
financial liabilities attributable to own creditworthiness, net of tax (69) (81)
Net decrease in defined benefit pension plan net assets 194 151
Net decrease in DTAs arising from net operating loss, foreign tax credit and general
business credit carry-forwards 822 2,249
Net decrease in regulatory capital deduction applied to Common Equity Tier 1 Capital
due to insufficient Additional Tier 1 Capital to cover deductions (2,402) (5,084)
Other (31) (37)
Net change in Additional Tier 1 Capital $ — $ —
Tier 1 Capital Balance, end of period $166,984 $166,984
Tier 2 Capital
Balance, beginning of period (1) $ 18,382 $ 19,275
Net increase in qualifying subordinated debt 401 792
Net decrease in qualifying trust preferred securities — (1,242)
Net decrease in excess of eligible credit reserves over expected credit losses (456) (492)
Other (31) (37)
Net decrease in Tier 2 Capital $ (86) $ (979)
Tier 2 Capital Balance, end of period $ 18,296 $ 18,296
Total Capital (Tier 1 Capital + Tier 2 Capital) $185,280 $185,280

(1) Pro forma presentation based on application of the Final Basel III Rules consistent with current period presentation.
(2) Primarily represents an increase in additional paid-in capital related to employee benefit plans.
(3) Presented net of impact of transition arrangements related to unrealized losses on securities AFS and defined benefit plans liability adjustment under the Final Basel III Rules.
(4) Citi issued approximately $3.7 billion and approximately $1.5 billion of qualifying perpetual preferred stock during the twelve months and three months ended December 31, 2014, respectively, which were partially
offset by the netting of issuance costs of $31 million and $7 million during those periods.

42
Citigroup Risk-Weighted Assets Rollforward (Basel III Advanced Approaches with Transition Arrangements)

Three Months Ended Twelve Months Ended

In millions of dollars December 31, 2014 December 31, 2014 (1)
Total Risk-Weighted Assets, beginning of period $1,282,986 $1,103,045
Impact of adoption of Basel III Advanced Approaches (2) — 74,691
Changes in Credit Risk-Weighted Assets
Net change in retail exposures (3) 5,222 (29,820)
Net change in wholesale exposures (4) (9,316) 31,698
Net change in repo-style transactions (444) 4,483
Net change in securitization exposures (166) 2,470
Net decrease in equity exposures (893) (1,605)
Net change in over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives (5) (10,158) 9,148
Net increase in derivatives CVA 1,834 4,544
Net change in other (6) (5,004) 5,706
Net change in supervisory 6% multiplier (7) (1,245) 1,325
Net change in Credit Risk-Weighted Assets $ (20,170) $ 27,949
Changes in Market Risk-Weighted Assets
Net change in risk levels (8) $ 650 $ (17,803)
Net change due to model and methodology updates (954) 6,130
Net decrease in Market Risk-Weighted Assets $ (304) $ (11,673)
Net increase in Operational Risk-Weighted Assets (9) $ 12,500 $ 81,000
Total Risk-Weighted Assets, end of period $1,275,012 $1,275,012

(1) Total risk-weighted assets at the beginning of the period (i.e., as of December 31, 2013) are presented on a pro forma basis to reflect application of the Final Basel III Rules related to the effect of transition
arrangements on regulatory capital components, consistent with current period presentation.
(2) Reflects the effect of adjusting credit risk-weighted assets at the beginning of the period from a Basel I basis to a Basel III Advanced Approaches basis; adjusting market risk-weighted assets from a Basel II.5 basis to a
Basel III Advanced Approach basis; and including operational risk-weighted assets as required under the Basel III Advanced Approaches rules.
(3) Retail exposures decreased from year-end 2013, driven by reduction in loans and commitments, sale of consumer businesses in Spain and Greece and the impact of FX translation, offset by enhancements to credit
risk models.
(4) Wholesale exposures decreased from September 30, 2014, driven by model parameter updates and reductions in loans and commitments. The increase from year-end 2013 was driven by enhancements to credit
risk models.
(5) OTC derivatives decreased from September 30, 2014, driven by model parameter updates. The increase from year-end 2013 was largely due to enhancements to credit risk models, partially offset by model
parameter updates.
(6) Other includes cleared transactions, unsettled transactions, assets other than those reportable in specific exposure categories and non-material portfolios of exposures.
(7) Supervisory 6% multiplier does not apply to derivatives CVA.
(8) Market risk-weighted assets risk levels decreased from year-end 2013 driven by movement in securitization positions from trading book to banking book, as well as reductions in inventory positions.
(9) During the first quarter of 2014, Citi increased operational risk-weighted assets by $56 billion in conjunction with the granting of permission by the Federal Reserve Board to exit the parallel run period and commence
applying the Basel III Advanced Approaches framework, effective with the second quarter of 2014. Citi’s operational risk-weighted assets were further increased by $12.5 billion during each of the third and fourth
quarters of 2014, reflecting an evaluation of ongoing events in the banking industry.

43
Capital Resources of Citigroup’s Subsidiary U.S. Depository
Institutions Under Current Regulatory Standards
Citigroup’s subsidiary U.S. depository institutions are also subject to
regulatory capital standards issued by their respective primary federal
bank regulatory agencies, which are similar to the standards of the Federal
Reserve Board.
The following table sets forth the capital tiers, risk-weighted assets,
quarterly adjusted average total assets and capital ratios under current
regulatory standards (reflecting Basel III Transition Arrangements) for
Citibank, N.A., Citi’s primary subsidiary U.S. depository institution, as of
December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013.
Citibank, N.A. Capital Components and Ratios Under Current Regulatory Standards (Basel III Transition Arrangements)
December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013 (1)
Advanced Standardized Advanced Standardized
In millions of dollars, except ratios Approaches Approach (2) Approaches Approach (2)
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital $ 129,135 $ 129,135 $ 128,317 $ 128,317
Tier 1 Capital 129,135 129,135 128,317 128,317
Total Capital (Tier 1 Capital + Tier 2 Capital) (3) 140,119 150,215 137,277 146,267
Risk-Weighted Assets 946,333 906,250 893,390 910,553
Quarterly Adjusted Average Total Assets (4) 1,367,444 1,367,444 1,321,440 1,321,440
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio (5) 13.65% 14.25% 14.36% 14.09%
Tier 1 Capital ratio (5) 13.65 14.25 14.36 14.09
Total Capital ratio (5) 14.81 16.58 15.37 16.06
Tier 1 Leverage ratio 9.44 9.44 9.71 9.71

(1) Pro forma presentation based on application of the Final Basel III Rules consistent with current period presentation.
(2) Basel III 2014 Standardized Approach which reflects the application of the Basel I credit risk and Basel II.5 market risk capital rules.
(3) Under the Advanced Approaches framework eligible credit reserves that exceed expected credit losses are eligible for inclusion in Tier 2 Capital to the extent the excess reserves do not exceed 0.6% of credit
risk-weighted assets, which differs from the Standardized Approach in which the allowance for credit losses is includable in Tier 2 Capital up to 1.25% of credit risk-weighted assets, with any excess allowance for
credit losses being deducted in arriving at credit risk-weighted assets.
(4) Tier 1 Leverage ratio denominator.
(5) As of December 31, 2014, Citibank, N.A.’s reportable Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, Tier 1 Capital, and Total Capital ratios were the lower derived under the Basel III Advanced Approaches. As of December 31, 2013,
Citibank, N.A.’s reportable Common Equity Tier 1 Capital and Tier 1 Capital ratios were the lower derived under the Basel III 2014 Standardized Approach (Basel I credit risk and Basel II.5 market risk capital rules),
whereas the reportable Total Capital ratio was the lower derived under the Advanced Approaches framework.

44
Impact of Changes on Citigroup and Citibank, N.A. Capital
Ratios Under Current Regulatory Capital Standards
The following table presents the estimated sensitivity of Citigroup’s and
Citibank, N.A.’s capital ratios to changes of $100 million in Common Equity
Tier 1 Capital, Tier 1 Capital and Total Capital (numerator), and changes of
$1 billion in Advanced Approaches and Standardized Approach risk-weighted
assets as well as quarterly adjusted average total assets (denominator),
under current regulatory capital standards (reflecting Basel III Transition
Arrangements), as of December 31, 2014. This information is provided for
the purpose of analyzing the impact that a change in Citigroup’s or Citibank,
N.A.’s financial position or results of operations could have on these ratios.
These sensitivities only consider a single change to either a component
of capital, risk-weighted assets, or quarterly adjusted average total assets.
Accordingly, an event that affects more than one factor may have a larger
basis point impact than is reflected in this table.

Common Equity
Tier 1 Capital ratio Tier 1 Capital ratio Total Capital ratio Tier 1 Leverage ratio
Impact of Impact of
$100 million $1 billion
change in Impact of Impact of Impact of Impact of Impact of Impact of change in
Common $1 billion $100 million $1 billion $100 million $1 billion $100 million quarterly
Equity change in change in change in change in change in change adjusted
Tier 1 risk-weighted Tier 1 risk-weighted Total risk-weighted in Tier 1 average total
Capital assets Capital assets Capital assets Capital assets
Citigroup
Advanced Approaches 0.8 bps 1.0 bps 0.8 bps 1.0 bps 0.8 bps 1.1 bps 0.5 bps 0.5 bps
Standardized Approach (1) 0.9 bps 1.4 bps 0.9 bps 1.4 bps 0.9 bps 1.7 bps 0.5 bps 0.5 bps
Citibank, N.A.
Advanced Approaches 1.1 bps 1.4 bps 1.1 bps 1.4 bps 1.1 bps 1.6 bps 0.7 bps 0.7 bps
Standardized Approach (1) 1.1 bps 1.6 bps 1.1 bps 1.6 bps 1.1 bps 1.8 bps 0.7 bps 0.7 bps

(1) Basel III 2014 Standardized Approach which reflects the application of the Basel I credit risk and Basel II.5 market risk capital rules.

Citigroup Broker-Dealer Subsidiaries

At December 31, 2014, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., a U.S. broker-dealer
registered with the SEC that is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of
Citigroup, had net capital, computed in accordance with the SEC’s net
capital rule, of $5.5 billion, which exceeded the minimum requirement
by $4.4 billion.
In addition, certain of Citi’s other broker-dealer subsidiaries are subject
to regulation in the countries in which they do business, including
requirements to maintain specified levels of net capital or its equivalent.
Citigroup’s other broker-dealer subsidiaries were in compliance with their
capital requirements at December 31, 2014.

45
Basel III (Full Implementation)
Citigroup’s Capital Resources Under Basel III
(Full Implementation)
Citi currently anticipates that its effective minimum Common Equity Tier 1
Capital, Tier 1 Capital and Total Capital ratio requirements under the Final
Basel III Rules, on a fully implemented basis, will be at least 9%, 10.5% and
12.5%, respectively. However, Citi’s effective minimum ratio requirements
will be higher if the Federal Reserve Board’s GSIB surcharge rule were to be
adopted as proposed.
Further, under the Final Basel III Rules, Citi must also comply with a 4%
minimum Tier 1 Leverage ratio requirement and an effective 5% minimum
Supplementary Leverage ratio requirement.
The following table sets forth the capital tiers, risk-weighted assets,
quarterly adjusted average total assets and capital ratios under the Final
Basel III Rules for Citi, assuming full implementation, as of December 31,
2014 and December 31, 2013.
Citigroup Capital Components and Ratios Under Basel III (Full Implementation)

December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

Advanced Standardized Advanced Standardized
In millions of dollars, except ratios Approaches Approach (1) Approaches Approach (1)
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital $ 136,806 $ 136,806 $ 125,597 $ 125,597
Tier 1 Capital 148,275 148,275 133,412 133,412
Total Capital (Tier 1 Capital + Tier 2 Capital) (2) 165,663 178,625 150,049 161,782
Risk-Weighted Assets 1,292,878 1,228,748 1,185,766 1,176,886
Quarterly Adjusted Average Total Assets (3) 1,835,497 1,835,497 1,814,368 1,814,368
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio (4)(5) 10.58% 11.13% 10.59% 10.67%
Tier 1 Capital ratio (4)(5) 11.47 12.07 11.25 11.34
Total Capital ratio (4)(5) 12.81 14.54 12.65 13.75
Tier 1 Leverage ratio (5) 8.08 8.08 7.35 7.35

(1) Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, Tier 1 Capital, and Total Capital ratios as well as related components reflect application of the Basel III Standardized Approach framework effective January 1, 2015.
(2) Under the Advanced Approaches framework eligible credit reserves that exceed expected credit losses are eligible for inclusion in Tier 2 Capital to the extent the excess reserves do not exceed 0.6% of credit
risk-weighted assets, which differs from the Standardized Approach in which the allowance for credit losses is includable in Tier 2 Capital up to 1.25% of credit risk-weighted assets, with any excess allowance for
credit losses being deducted in arriving at credit risk-weighted assets.
(3) Tier 1 Leverage ratio denominator.
(4) As of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, Citi’s Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, Tier 1 Capital, and Total Capital ratios were the lower derived under the Basel III Advanced Approaches framework.
(5) Citi’s Basel III capital ratios and certain related components are non-GAAP financial measures. Citi believes these ratios and their related components provide useful information to investors and others by measuring
Citi’s progress against future regulatory capital standards.

Common Equity Tier 1 Capital Ratio

Citi’s Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio was 10.6% at December 31, 2014,
unchanged from that estimated as of December 31, 2013 (both based on
application of the Advanced Approaches for determining total risk-weighted
assets). The ratio remained stable year-over-year as the growth in Common
Equity Tier 1 Capital largely reflecting net income of $7.3 billion and the
favorable effects attributable to DTA utilization of approximately $3.3 billion,
was offset by a decline in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss),
and higher credit and operational risk-weighted assets.

46
Components of Citigroup Capital Under Basel III (Advanced Approaches with Full Implementation)

December 31, December 31,

In millions of dollars 2014 2013
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital
Citigroup common stockholders’ equity (1) $ 200,190 $ 197,694
Add: Qualifying noncontrolling interests 165 182
Regulatory Capital Adjustments and Deductions:
Less: Accumulated net unrealized losses on cash flow hedges, net of tax (2) (909) (1,245)
Less: Cumulative unrealized net gain related to changes in fair value of financial liabilities attributable to own creditworthiness, net of tax (3) 279 177
Less: Intangible assets:
Goodwill, net of related deferred tax liabilities (DTLs) (4) 22,805 24,518
Identifiable intangible assets other than mortgage servicing rights (MSRs), net of related DTLs 4,373 4,950
Less: Defined benefit pension plan net assets 936 1,125
Less: Deferred tax assets (DTAs) arising from net operating loss, foreign tax credit and general business credit carry-forwards (5) 23,628 26,439
Less: Excess over 10%/15% limitations for other DTAs, certain common stock investments, and MSRs (5)(6) 12,437 16,315
Total Common Equity Tier 1 Capital $ 136,806 $ 125,597
Additional Tier 1 Capital
Qualifying perpetual preferred stock (1) $ 10,344 $ 6,645
Qualifying trust preferred securities (7) 1,369 1,374
Qualifying noncontrolling interests 35 39
Regulatory Capital Deduction:
Less: Minimum regulatory capital requirements of insurance underwriting subsidiaries (8) 279 243
Total Additional Tier 1 Capital $ 11,469 $ 7,815
Total Tier 1 Capital (Common Equity Tier 1 Capital + Additional Tier 1 Capital) $ 148,275 $ 133,412
Tier 2 Capital
Qualifying subordinated debt (9) $ 16,094 $ 14,414
Qualifying trust preferred securities (10) 350 745
Qualifying noncontrolling interests 46 52
Excess of eligible credit reserves over expected credit losses (11) 1,177 1,669
Regulatory Capital Deduction:
Less: Minimum regulatory capital requirements of insurance underwriting subsidiaries (8) 279 243
Total Tier 2 Capital $ 17,388 $ 16,637
Total Capital (Tier 1 Capital + Tier 2 Capital) (12) $ 165,663 $ 150,049

(1) Issuance costs of $124 million and $93 million related to preferred stock outstanding at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, are excluded from common stockholders’ equity and netted against
preferred stock in accordance with Federal Reserve Board regulatory reporting requirements, which differ from those under U.S. GAAP.
(2) Common Equity Tier 1 Capital is adjusted for accumulated net unrealized gains (losses) on cash flow hedges included in AOCI that relate to the hedging of items not recognized at fair value on the balance sheet.
(3) The cumulative impact of changes in Citigroup’s own creditworthiness in valuing liabilities for which the fair value option has been elected and own-credit valuation adjustments on derivatives are excluded from
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, in accordance with the Final Basel III Rules.
(4) Includes goodwill “embedded” in the valuation of significant common stock investments in unconsolidated financial institutions.
(5) Of Citi’s approximately $49.5 billion of net DTAs at December 31, 2014, approximately $15.2 billion of such assets were includable in regulatory capital pursuant to the Final Basel III Rules, while approximately
$34.3 billion of such assets were excluded in arriving at Common Equity Tier 1 Capital. Comprising the excluded net DTAs was an aggregate of approximately $35.9 billion of net DTAs arising from net operating loss,
foreign tax credit and general business credit carry-forwards as well as temporary differences that were deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 Capital. In addition, approximately $1.6 billion of net DTLs, primarily
consisting of DTLs associated with goodwill and certain other intangible assets, partially offset by DTAs related to cash flow hedges, are permitted to be excluded prior to deriving the amount of net DTAs subject to
deduction under these rules. Separately, under the Final Basel III Rules, goodwill and these other intangible assets are deducted net of associated DTLs in arriving at Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, while Citi’s current
cash flow hedges and the related deferred tax effects are not required to be reflected in regulatory capital.
(6) Aside from MSRs, reflects DTAs arising from temporary differences and significant common stock investments in unconsolidated financial institutions.
(7) Represents Citigroup Capital XIII trust preferred securities, which are permanently grandfathered as Tier 1 Capital under the Final Basel III Rules.
(8) 50% of the minimum regulatory capital requirements of insurance underwriting subsidiaries must be deducted from each of Tier 1 Capital and Tier 2 Capital.
(9) Non-qualifying subordinated debt issuances which consist of those with a fixed-to-floating rate step-up feature where the call/step-up date has not passed are excluded from Tier 2 Capital.
(10) Represents the amount of non-grandfathered trust preferred securities eligible for inclusion in Tier 2 Capital under the Final Basel III Rules, which will be fully phased-out of Tier 2 Capital by January 1, 2022.
(11) Advanced Approaches banking organizations are permitted to include in Tier 2 Capital eligible credit reserves that exceed expected credit losses to the extent that the excess reserves do not exceed 0.6% of credit
risk-weighted assets.
(12) Total Capital as calculated under Advanced Approaches, which differs from the Standardized Approach in the treatment of the amount of eligible credit reserves includable in Tier 2 Capital.

47
Citigroup Capital Rollforward Under Basel III (Advanced Approaches with Full Implementation)

Three Months Ended Twelve Months Ended

In millions of dollars December 31, 2014 December 31, 2014
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital
Balance, beginning of period $138,762 $125,597
Net income 350 7,313
Dividends declared (190) (633)
Net increase in treasury stock (380) (1,232)
Net increase in additional paid-in capital (1) 229 778
Net increase in foreign currency translation adjustment net of hedges, net of tax (2,716) (4,946)
Net decrease in unrealized losses on securities AFS, net of tax 470 1,697
Net increase in defined benefit plans liability adjustment, net of tax (1,064) (1,170)
Net increase in cumulative unrealized net gain related to changes in fair value of financial liabilities attributable
to own creditworthiness, net of tax (86) (102)
Net decrease in goodwill, net of related deferred tax liabilities (DTLs) 873 1,713
Net change in other intangible assets other than mortgage servicing rights (MSRs), net of related DTLs (66) 577
Net decrease in defined benefit pension plan net assets 243 189
Net decrease in deferred tax assets (DTAs) arising from net operating loss, foreign tax credit and general business
credit carry-forwards 1,027 2,811
Net change in excess over 10%/15% limitations for other DTAs, certain common stock investments and MSRs (639) 3,878
Other (7) 336
Net change in Common Equity Tier 1 Capital $ (1,956) $ 11,209
Common Equity Tier 1 Capital Balance, end of period $136,806 $136,806
Additional Tier 1 Capital
Balance, beginning of period $ 10,010 $ 7,815
Net increase in qualifying perpetual preferred stock (2) 1,493 3,699
Net decrease in qualifying trust preferred securities (1) (5)
Other (33) (40)
Net increase in Additional Tier 1 Capital $ 1,459 $ 3,654
Tier 1 Capital Balance, end of period $148,275 $148,275
Tier 2 Capital
Balance, beginning of period $ 17,482 $ 16,637
Net increase in qualifying subordinated debt 401 1,680
Net decrease in excess of eligible credit reserves over expected credit losses (456) (492)
Other (39) (437)
Net change in Tier 2 Capital $ (94) $ 751
Tier 2 Capital Balance, end of period $ 17,388 $ 17,388
Total Capital (Tier 1 Capital + Tier 2 Capital) $165,663 $165,663

(1) Primarily represents an increase in additional paid-in capital related to employee benefit plans.
(2) Citi issued approximately $3.7 billion and approximately $1.5 billion of qualifying perpetual preferred stock during the twelve months and three months ended December 31, 2014, respectively, which were partially
offset by the netting of issuance costs of $31 million and $7 million for those periods.

48
Citigroup Risk-Weighted Assets Under Basel III (Full Implementation) at December 31, 2014 (1)

Advanced Approaches Standardized Approach

Citi Citi
In millions of dollars Citicorp Holdings Total Citicorp Holdings Total
Credit Risk $ 760,690 $119,207 $ 879,897 $1,033,064 $ 95,203 $1,128,267
Market Risk 95,835 4,646 100,481 95,835 4,646 100,481
Operational Risk (2) 258,693 53,807 312,500 — — —
Total Risk-Weighted Assets $1,115,218 $177,660 $1,292,878 $1,128,899 $ 99,849 $1,228,748

Citigroup Risk-Weighted Assets Under Basel III (Full Implementation) at December 31, 2013 (1)

Advanced Approaches Standardized Approach

Citi Citi
In millions of dollars Citicorp Holdings Total Citicorp Holdings Total
Credit Risk $693,469 $148,644 $ 842,113 $ 962,456 $102,277 $1,064,733
Market Risk 106,919 5,234 112,153 106,919 5,234 112,153
Operational Risk 159,500 72,000 231,500 — — —
Total Risk-Weighted Assets $959,888 $225,878 $1,185,766 $1,069,375 $107,511 $1,176,886

(1) Calculated based on the Final Basel III Rules.

(2) During 2014, Citi’s operational risk-weighted assets were increased by $81 billion, of which $56 billion was in conjunction with the granting of permission by the Federal Reserve Board to exit the parallel run period
and commence applying the Basel III Advanced Approaches framework, effective with the second quarter of 2014. Further, an additional $25 billion was recognized during the last six months of 2014, reflecting an
evaluation of ongoing events in the banking industry.

Total risk-weighted assets under the Basel III Advanced Approaches

increased from year-end 2013 largely due to the previously mentioned
increases in operational risk-weighted assets throughout 2014 as well as
enhancements to Citi’s credit risk models, partially offset by model parameter
updates, the impact of FX translation and the ongoing decline in Citi
Holdings assets.
Total risk-weighted assets under the Basel III Standardized Approach
increased during 2014 substantially due to an increase in credit risk-weighted
assets attributable to an increase in derivative exposures and corporate
lending products within the ICG businesses, partially offset by the ongoing
decline in Citi Holdings assets.

49
Citigroup Risk-Weighted Assets Rollforward (Basel III Advanced Approaches with Full Implementation)

Three Months Ended Twelve Months Ended

In millions of dollars December 31, 2014 (1) December 31, 2014 (1)
Total Risk-Weighted Assets, beginning of period $1,301,958 $1,185,766
Changes in Credit Risk-Weighted Assets
Net change in retail exposures (2) 5,222 (29,820)
Net change in wholesale exposures (3) (9,316) 31,698
Net change in repo-style transactions (444) 4,483
Net change in securitization exposures (166) 2,470
Net decrease in equity exposures (770) (1,681)
Net change in over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives (4) (10,158) 9,148
Net increase in derivatives CVA 1,834 4,544
Net change in other (5) (6,170) 12,638
Net change in supervisory 6% multiplier (6) (1,308) 4,305
Net change in Credit Risk-Weighted Assets $ (21,276) $ 37,785
Changes in Market Risk-Weighted Assets
Net change in risk levels (7) $ 650 $ (17,803)
Net change due to model and methodology updates (954) 6,130
Net decrease in Market Risk-Weighted Assets $ (304) $ (11,673)
Net increase in Operational Risk-Weighted Assets (8) $ 12,500 $ 81,000
Total Risk-Weighted Assets, end of period $1,292,878 $1,292,878

(1) Calculated based on the Final Basel III Rules.

(2) Retail exposures decreased from year-end 2013, driven by reduction in loans and commitments, the sales of consumer businesses in Spain and Greece and the impact of FX translation, offset by enhancements to
credit risk models.
(3) Wholesale exposures decreased from September 30, 2014, driven by model parameter updates and reductions in loan and commitments. The increase from year-end 2013 was driven by enhancements to credit
risk models.
(4) OTC derivatives decreased from September 30, 2014, driven by model parameter updates. The increase from year-end 2013 was largely due to enhancements to credit risk models, partially offset by model
parameter updates.
(5) Other includes cleared transactions, unsettled transactions, assets other than those reportable in specific exposure categories and non-material portfolios of exposures.
(6) Supervisory 6% multiplier does not apply to derivatives CVA.
(7) Market risk-weighted assets risk levels decreased from year-end 2013 driven by movement in securitization positions from trading book to banking book, as well as reductions in inventory positions.
(8) During the first quarter of 2014, Citi increased operational risk-weighted assets by approximately $56 billion in conjunction with the granting of permission by the Federal Reserve Board to exit the parallel run period
and commence applying the Basel III Advanced Approaches framework, effective with the second quarter of 2014. Citi’s operational risk-weighted assets were further increased by $12.5 billion during each of the third
and fourth quarters of 2014, reflecting an evaluation of ongoing events in the banking industry.

50
Supplementary Leverage Ratio Consistent with the Final Basel III Rules, Advanced Approaches banking
Under the Final Basel III Rules, Advanced Approaches banking organizations, organizations will be required to disclose the Supplementary Leverage ratio
including Citi and Citibank, N.A., are also required to calculate a commencing January 1, 2015. Further, U.S. GSIBs and their subsidiary
Supplementary Leverage ratio, which significantly differs from the Tier 1 insured depository institutions, including Citi and Citibank, N.A., will be
Leverage ratio by also including certain off-balance sheet exposures within subject to enhanced Supplementary Leverage ratio standards. The enhanced
the denominator of the ratio (Total Leverage Exposure). Supplementary Leverage ratio standards establish a 2% leverage buffer for
In September 2014, the U.S. banking agencies adopted revisions to the U.S. GSIBs in addition to the stated 3% minimum Supplementary Leverage
Final Basel III Rules (Revised Final Basel III Rules) with respect to the ratio requirement in the Final Basel III Rules. If a U.S. GSIB failed to
definition of Total Leverage Exposure as well as the frequency with which exceed the 2% leverage buffer, it would be subject to increasingly onerous
certain components of the Supplementary Leverage ratio are calculated. As restrictions (depending upon the extent of the shortfall) regarding capital
revised, the Supplementary Leverage ratio represents end of period Tier 1 distributions and discretionary executive bonus payments. Accordingly,
Capital to Total Leverage Exposure, with the latter defined as the sum of U.S. GSIBs are effectively subject to a 5% minimum Supplementary Leverage
the daily average of on-balance sheet assets for the quarter and the average ratio requirement. Additionally, the final rule requires that insured depository
of certain off-balance sheet exposures calculated as of the last day of each institution subsidiaries of U.S. GSIBs, including Citibank, N.A., maintain
month in the quarter, less applicable Tier 1 Capital deductions. a Supplementary Leverage ratio of 6% to be considered “well capitalized”
Under the Revised Final Basel III Rules, the definition of Total Leverage under the revised prompt corrective action framework established by the
Exposure has been modified from that of the Final Basel III Rules in certain Final Basel III Rules. Citi and Citibank, N.A. are required to be compliant
respects, such as by permitting limited netting of repo-style transactions with these higher effective minimum ratio requirements on January 1, 2018.
(i.e., qualifying repurchase or reverse repurchase and securities borrowing
or lending transactions) with the same counterparty and allowing for the
application of cash variation margin to reduce derivative exposures, both of
which are subject to certain specific conditions, as well as by distinguishing
and expanding the measure of exposure for written credit derivatives.
Moreover, the credit conversion factors (CCF) to be applied to certain off-
balance sheet exposures have been conformed to those under the Basel III
Standardized Approach for determining credit risk-weighted assets, with the
exception of the imposition of a 10% CCF floor.

51
The following table sets forth Citi’s estimated Basel III Supplementary Leverage ratio and related components, under the Revised Final Basel III Rules, for the
three months ended December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013.
Citigroup Estimated Basel III Supplementary Leverage Ratios and Related Components (1)

December 31, December 31,

In millions of dollars, except ratios 2014 2013 (2)
Tier 1 Capital $ 148,275 $ 133,412
Total Leverage Exposure (TLE)
On-balance sheet assets (3) $1,899,955 $1,886,613
Certain off-balance sheet exposures: (4)
Potential future exposure (PFE) on derivative contracts 240,712 240,534
Effective notional of sold credit derivatives, net (5) 96,869 102,061
Counterparty credit risk for repo-style transactions (6) 21,894 26,035
Unconditionally cancellable commitments 61,673 63,782
Other off-balance sheet exposures 229,672 210,571
Total of certain off-balance sheet exposures $ 650,820 $ 642,983
Less: Tier 1 Capital deductions 64,458 73,590
Total Leverage Exposure $2,486,317 $2,456,006
Supplementary Leverage ratio 5.96% 5.43%

(1) Citi’s estimated Basel III Supplementary Leverage ratio and certain related components are non-GAAP financial measures. Citi believes this ratio and its components provide useful information to investors and others by
measuring Citigroup’s progress against future regulatory capital standards.
(2) Pro forma presentation based on application of the Revised Final Basel III Rules consistent with current period presentation.
(3) Represents the daily average of on-balance sheet assets for the quarter.
(4) Represents the average of certain off-balance sheet exposures calculated as of the last day of each month in the quarter.
(5) Under the Revised Final Basel III Rules, banking organizations are required to include in TLE the effective notional amount of sold credit derivatives, with netting of exposures permitted if certain conditions are met.
(6) Repo-style transactions include repurchase or reverse repurchase transactions and securities borrowing or securities lending transactions.

Citigroup’s estimated Basel III Supplementary Leverage ratio under Citibank, N.A.’s estimated Basel III Supplementary Leverage ratio under
the Revised Final Basel III Rules was 6.0% for the fourth quarter of 2014, the Revised Final Basel III Rules was 6.3% for the fourth quarter of 2014,
unchanged from the third quarter of 2014, and increased from 5.4% for the unchanged from the third quarter of 2014 and, on a pro forma basis, from
fourth quarter of 2013 (on a pro forma basis to conform to current period the fourth quarter of 2013. Tier 1 Capital benefits resulting from quarterly
presentation). Citi’s estimated Basel III Supplementary Leverage ratio and annual net income and DTA utilization were largely offset by an
remained unchanged quarter-over-quarter as the Tier 1 Capital benefits increase in Total Leverage Exposure and a reduction in Accumulated other
resulting from preferred stock issuances and a decrease in goodwill were comprehensive income (loss) and, for the year only, cash dividends paid by
offset by a decrease in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), Citibank, N.A. to its parent, Citicorp, and which were subsequently remitted
with Total Leverage Exposure also remaining substantially unchanged. to Citigroup.
The growth in the ratio from the fourth quarter of 2013 was principally
driven by an increase in Tier 1 Capital attributable largely to net income of
$7.3 billion, approximately $3.3 billion of DTA utilization and approximately
$3.7 billion of perpetual preferred stock issuances, offset in part by a
reduction in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) and a
marginal increase in Total Leverage Exposure.

52
Regulatory Capital Standards Developments Tangible Common Equity, Tangible Book Value Per Share
and Book Value Per Share
GSIB Surcharge
Tangible common equity (TCE), as currently defined by Citi, represents
In December 2014, the Federal Reserve Board issued a notice of proposed
common equity less goodwill and other intangible assets (other than MSRs).
rulemaking which would impose risk-based capital surcharges upon
Other companies may calculate TCE in a different manner. TCE and tangible
U.S. bank holding companies that are identified as GSIBs, including Citi.
book value per share are non-GAAP financial measures. Citi believes these
Under the Federal Reserve Board’s proposed rule, consistent with the Basel
capital metrics provide useful information, as they are used by investors and
Committee’s methodology, identification as a GSIB would be based primarily
industry analysts.
on quantitative measurement indicators underlying five equally weighted
broad categories of systemic importance: (i) size, (ii) interconnectedness, December 31, December 31,
(iii) cross-jurisdictional activity, (iv) substitutability, and (v) complexity. In millions of dollars or shares, except per share amounts 2014 2013
With the exception of size, each of the other categories are comprised of Total Citigroup stockholders’ equity $210,534 $204,339
multiple indicators also of equal weight, and amounting to 12 indicators Less: Preferred stock 10,468 6,738
in total. Common equity $200,066 $197,601
Less: Intangible assets:
A U.S. banking organization that is designated a GSIB under the proposed
Goodwill 23,592 25,009
methodology would calculate a surcharge using two methods and would Other intangible assets (other than MSRs) 4,566 5,056
be subject to the higher of the resulting two surcharges. The first method Goodwill related to assets held-for-sale 71 —
(“method 1”) would be based on the same five broad categories of systemic Tangible common equity (TCE) $171,837 $167,536
importance used to identify a GSIB, whereas under the second method Common shares outstanding (CSO) 3,023.9 3,029.2
(“method 2”) the substitutability indicator would be replaced with a measure Tangible book value per share (TCE/CSO) $ 56.83 $ 55.31
intended to assess the extent of a GSIB’s reliance on short-term wholesale Book value per share (common equity/CSO) $ 66.16 $ 65.23
funding. As proposed, given that the calculation under method 2 involves, in
part, the doubling of the indicator scores related to size, interconnectedness,
cross-jurisdictional activity and complexity, method 2 would generally result
in higher surcharges as compared to method 1.
Estimated GSIB surcharges under the proposed rule, which would be
required to be comprised entirely of Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, would
initially range from 1.0% to 4.5% of total risk-weighted assets. Moreover, the
GSIB surcharge would be an extension of the Capital Conservation Buffer
and, if invoked, any Countercyclical Capital Buffer, and would result in
restrictions on earnings distributions (e.g., dividends, equity repurchases,
and discretionary executive bonuses) should the surcharge be drawn upon to
absorb losses during periods of financial or economic stress, with the degree
of such restrictions based upon the extent to which the surcharge is drawn.
Under the proposal, like that of the Basel Committee’s rule, the GSIB
surcharge would be introduced in parallel with the Capital Conservation
Buffer and, if applicable, any Countercyclical Capital Buffer, commencing
phase-in on January 1, 2016 and becoming fully effective on January 1, 2019.
As of December 31, 2014, Citi estimates its GSIB surcharge under the
Federal Reserve Board’s proposal would be 4%, compared to at least 2% under
the Basel Committee requirements.
For additional information regarding the Federal Reserve Board’s GSIB
surcharge proposal, as well as the Financial Stability Board’s total loss-
absorbing capacity, or TLAC, consultative document, see “Risk Factors—
Regulatory Risks” and “Managing Global Risk—Market Risk—Funding
and Liquidity Risk” below.

53
RISK FACTORS

The following discussion sets forth what management currently believes information. These regulations could conflict with anti-money laundering
could be the most significant regulatory, credit and market, liquidity, and other requirements in other jurisdictions, impede information sharing
legal and business and operational risks and uncertainties that could between Citi’s businesses and increase Citi’s compliance risks and costs.
impact Citi’s businesses, results of operations and financial condition. They could also impede or potentially reverse Citi’s centralization or
Other risks and uncertainties, including those not currently known to Citi standardization efforts, which provide expense efficiencies.
or its management, could also negatively impact Citi’s businesses, results Unless and until there is sufficient regulatory certainty, Citi’s business
of operations and financial condition. Thus, the following should not be planning and/or proposed pricing for affected businesses necessarily include
considered a complete discussion of all of the risks and uncertainties Citi assumptions based on possible or proposed rules, requirements or outcomes.
may face. Business planning is further complicated by management’s continual need to
review and evaluate the impact on Citi’s businesses of ongoing rule proposals,
REGULATORY RISKS final rules, and implementation guidance from numerous regulatory
Citi Faces Ongoing Significant Regulatory Changes and bodies worldwide, often within compressed timeframes. In some cases,
Uncertainties in the U.S. and Non-U.S. Jurisdictions in management’s implementation of a regulatory requirement and assessment
Which It Operates That Negatively Impact the Management of its impact is occurring simultaneously with changing regulatory guidance,
of Its Businesses and Increase Its Compliance Risks legal challenges or legislative action to modify or repeal final rules, thus
and Costs. increasing management uncertainty.
Citi continues to be subject to a significant number of regulatory changes Ongoing regulatory changes also result in higher regulatory and
and uncertainties across the U.S. and the non-U.S. jurisdictions in which compliance risks and costs. Citi estimates its regulatory and compliance costs
it operates. Not only has the heightened regulatory environment facing have grown approximately 10% annually since 2011. These higher regulatory
financial institutions such as Citi resulted in a tendency toward more and compliance costs partially offset Citi’s continued cost reduction
regulation, but also in some cases toward the most prescriptive regulation as initiatives that are part of its execution priorities and negatively impact its
regulatory agencies have often taken a restrictive approach to rulemaking, results of operations. Ongoing regulatory changes and uncertainties also
interpretive guidance, approvals and their general ongoing supervisory or require management to continually manage Citi’s expenses and potentially
prudential authority. Moreover, even when U.S. and international regulatory reallocate resources, including potentially away from ongoing business
initiatives overlap, such as with derivatives reforms, in many instances they investment initiatives.
have not been undertaken on a coordinated basis, and areas of divergence
There Continue to Be Changes and Uncertainties Relating
have developed with respect to the scope, interpretation, timing, structure or
to the Regulatory Capital Requirements Applicable to Citi
approach, leading to additional, inconsistent or even conflicting regulations.
and the Ultimate Impact of These Requirements on Citi’s
Ongoing regulatory changes and uncertainties make Citi’s business
Businesses, Products and Results of Operations.
planning difficult and could require Citi to change its business models or
Despite the adoption of the final U.S. Basel III rules, there continue to be
even its organizational structure, all of which could ultimately negatively
changes and uncertainties regarding the regulatory capital requirements
impact Citi’s individual businesses, overall strategy and results of operations
applicable to, and, as a result, the ultimate impact of these requirements
as well as realization of its deferred tax assets (DTAs). For example, several
on, Citi.
jurisdictions, including in Asia, Latin America and Europe, continue to enact
Citi’s Basel III capital ratios and related components are subject to,
fee and rate limits on debit and credit card transactions as well as various
among other things, ongoing regulatory supervision, including review and
limits on sales practices for these and other areas of consumer lending, which
approval of Citi’s credit, market and operational risk models, additional
could, among other things, negatively impact GCB’s businesses and revenues.
refinements, modifications or enhancements (whether required or otherwise)
In addition, during 2014, financial reform legislation was enacted in Mexico
to these models and any further implementation guidance in the U.S.
that required an antitrust study of the Mexican financial sector. The study
Modifications or requirements resulting from these ongoing reviews, as well
has been issued and its recommendations include additional regulations
as the ongoing efforts by U.S. banking agencies to finalize and enhance the
intended to increase competition in the financial services industry in Mexico,
regulatory capital framework, have resulted and could continue to result
which could negatively impact Citi’s Banamex subsidiary, Mexico’s second
in changes to Citi’s risk-weighted assets, total leverage exposure or other
largest bank. In certain jurisdictions, including in the European Union (EU),
components of Citi’s capital ratios. These changes can negatively impact
there is discussion of adopting a financial transaction tax or similar fees on
Citi’s capital ratios and its ability to achieve its capital requirements as it
large financial institutions such as Citi, which could increase the costs to
projects or as required. Further, because operational risk is measured based
engage in certain transactions or otherwise negatively impact Citi’s results
not only upon Citi’s historical loss experience but also upon ongoing events
of operations. In addition, various regulators globally continue to consider
in the banking industry generally, Citi’s level of operational risk-weighted
adoption of data privacy and/or “onshoring” requirements, such as the EU
assets is likely to remain elevated for the foreseeable future, despite Citi’s
data protection framework, that would restrict the storage and use of client
continuing efforts to reduce its risk-weighted assets and exposures.

54
 Moreover, in December 2014, the Federal Reserve Board issued a notice of Citi’s Inability to Enhance its 2015 Resolution Plan
proposed rulemaking that would establish a risk-based capital surcharge for Submission Could Subject Citi to More Stringent Capital,
global systemically important bank holding companies (GSIB) in the U.S., Leverage or Liquidity Requirements, or Restrictions on Its
including Citi. The Federal Reserve Board’s proposal is based on the Basel Growth, Activities or Operations, and Could Eventually
Committee on Banking Supervision’s (Basel Committee) GSIB surcharge Require Citi to Divest Assets or Operations in Ways That
framework, but adds an alternative method for calculating a U.S. GSIBs score Could Negatively Impact Its Operations or Strategy.
(and thus its GSIB surcharge), which Citi expects will result in a significantly Title I of The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
higher surcharge than the 2% calculated under the Basel Committee’s of 2010 (Dodd-Frank Act) requires Citi to prepare and submit annually a
framework (for additional information on the details of the proposal, see plan for the orderly resolution of Citigroup (the bank holding company)
“Capital Resources—Regulatory Capital Standards Developments” above). and its significant legal entities under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code or other
The Federal Reserve Board’s GSIB proposal creates ongoing uncertainty applicable insolvency law in the event of future material financial distress
with respect to the ultimate surcharge applicable to Citi due to, among other or failure. Citi is also required to prepare and submit an annual resolution
things, the (i) requirement to recalculate the surcharge on an annual basis; plan for its primary insured depository institution subsidiary, Citibank, N.A.,
(ii) complex calculations required to determine the amount of the surcharge; and to demonstrate how Citibank, N.A. is adequately protected from the risks
and (iii) the score for the indicators aligned with the Basel Committee GSIB presented by non-bank affiliates. These plans, which require substantial
framework is to be determined by converting Citi’s indicators into Euros and effort, time and cost across all of Citi’s businesses and geographies, are
calibrating proportionally against a denominator based upon the aggregate subject to review by the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC.
indicator scores of other large global banking organizations, meaning In August 2014, the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC announced
that Citi’s score will fluctuate based on actions taken by these banking the completion of reviews of the 2013 resolution plans submitted by Citi
organizations, as well as movements in foreign exchange rates. Moreover, and 10 other financial institutions. The agencies identified shortcomings
based on the Financial Stability Board’s (FSB) proposed “total loss-absorbing with the firms’ 2013 resolution plans, including Citi’s. These shortcomings
capacity” (TLAC) requirements, a higher GSIB surcharge would limit the generally included (i) assumptions that the agencies regarded as unrealistic
amount of Common Equity Tier 1 Capital otherwise available to satisfy, in or inadequately supported, such as assumptions about the likely behavior
part, the TLAC requirements and thus potentially result in the need for Citi of customers, counterparties, investors, central clearing facilities, and
to issue higher levels of qualifying debt and preferred equity (for additional regulators; and (ii) the failure to make, or identify, the kinds of changes in
information, see “Regulatory Risks” and “Managing Global Risk—Market firm structure and practices that would be necessary to enhance the prospects
Risk—Funding and Liquidity Risk” below). for orderly resolution. At the same time, the Federal Reserve Board and FDIC
In addition to the Federal Reserve Board’s GSIB proposal, various other indicated that if the identified shortcomings are not addressed in the firms’
proposals which could impact Citi’s regulatory capital framework are also 2015 plan submissions, the agencies expect to use their authority under Title
being considered by regulatory bodies both in the U.S. and internationally, I of the Dodd-Frank Act.
which further contribute to the uncertainties faced by financial institutions, Under Title I, if the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC jointly determine
including Citi. For example, the SEC has indicated that it is considering that Citi’s 2015 resolution plan is not “credible” (which, although not
adopting rules that would impose a leverage ratio requirement for U.S. defined, is generally believed to mean the regulators do not believe the
broker-dealers, which could result in the reduction of certain types of short- plan is feasible or would otherwise allow the regulators to resolve Citi in a
term funding, among other potential negative impacts. In addition, the way that protects systemically important functions without severe systemic
Basel Committee continues to review and revise various aspects of its rules, disruption), Citi could be subjected to more stringent capital, leverage or
including its model-based capital framework and standardized approaches to liquidity requirements or restrictions, or restrictions on its growth, activities
market, credit and operational risk. or operations, and eventually be required to divest certain assets or operations
As a result of these ongoing uncertainties, Citi’s capital planning and in ways that could negatively impact its operations and strategy. In August
management remains challenging. The Federal Reserve Board’s GSIB 2014, the FDIC determined that the 2013 resolution plans submitted by the
surcharge and other U.S. and international proposals could require Citi to 11 “first wave” filers, including Citi, were “not credible.”
further increase its capital and limit or otherwise restrict how Citi utilizes its Other jurisdictions, such as the U.K., have also requested or are expected
capital, which could negatively impact its businesses, product offerings and to request resolution plans from financial institutions, including Citi, and
results of operations. It also remains uncertain as to what the overall impact the requirements and timing relating to these plans are or are expected to
of these regulatory capital changes will be on Citi’s competitive position, be different from the U.S. requirements and from each other. Responding
among both domestic and international peers. to these additional requests will require additional effort, time and cost,
and regulatory review and requirements in these jurisdictions could be in
addition to, or conflict with, changes required by Citi’s regulators in the U.S.

55
There Continues to Be Significant Uncertainty Regarding overall liquidity requirements by reducing the fungibility of its funding
the Implementation of Orderly Liquidation Authority and sources and require certain of Citi’s subsidiaries to replace lower cost funding
the Impact It Could Have on Citi’s Funding and Liquidity, with other higher cost funding. Furthermore, Citi could be at a competitive
Results of Operations and Competitiveness. disadvantage versus financial institutions that are not subject to such
Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act grants the FDIC the authority, under certain minimum requirements, such as non-regulated financial intermediaries,
circumstances, to resolve systemically important financial institutions, smaller financial institutions and entities in jurisdictions with less onerous or
including Citi. The FDIC has released a notice describing its preferred “single no such requirements.
point of entry strategy” for such resolution, pursuant to which, generally,
a bank holding company would be placed in receivership, the unsecured The Impact to Citi’s Derivatives Businesses, Results of
long-term debt of the holding company would bear losses and the operating Operations and Competitive Position Resulting from the
subsidiaries would be recapitalized. Ongoing Implementation of Derivatives Regulation in the
Consistent with this strategy, in November 2014, the FSB issued a U.S. and Globally Continues to Be Difficult to Predict.
consultative document designed to ensure that GSIBs have sufficient The ongoing implementation of derivatives regulations in the U.S. as
loss-absorbing and recapitalization capacity in resolution to implement well as in non-U.S. jurisdictions has impacted, and will likely continue to
an orderly resolution. Specifically, the proposal would (i) establish a new substantially impact, the derivatives markets. However, given the additional
firm-specific minimum requirement for TLAC; (ii) stipulate which liabilities rulemaking expected to occur as well as the ongoing interpretive issues
of the GSIB would be eligible TLAC; and (iii) the location of the TLAC within across jurisdictions, it is not yet possible to determine what the ultimate
the firm’s overall funding structure, including the “pre-positioning” of impact to Citi’s global derivatives businesses, results of operations and
specified amounts of TLAC to identified material subsidiaries within the competitive position will be.
firm’s structure, including international entities (for additional information For example, under the CFTC’s rules relating to the registration of swap
on the TLAC proposal, see “Managing Global Risk—Market Risk—Funding execution facilities (SEF), certain non-U.S. trading platforms that do not
and Liquidity Risk” below). It is expected that the Federal Reserve Board want to register with the CFTC as a SEF are prohibiting firms with U.S.
will issue a proposal to establish similar TLAC requirements for U.S. GSIBs contacts, such as Citi, from trading on their non-U.S. platforms. In addition,
during 2015. pursuant to the CFTC’s mandatory clearing requirements for the overseas
There are significant uncertainties and interpretive issues arising from the branches of Citibank, N.A., certain of Citi’s non-U.S. clients have ceased to
FSB proposal, including (i) the minimum TLAC requirement for Citi; (ii) the clear their swaps with Citi given the mandatory requirement. More broadly,
amount of Citi’s TLAC that must be pre-positioned to material subsidiaries under the CFTC’s cross-border guidance, overseas clients who transact their
within Citi’s structure, and the identification of those entities; and (iii) which derivatives business with overseas branches of U.S. banks, including Citi,
of Citi’s existing long-term liabilities constitute eligible TLAC. Moreover, could be subject to additional U.S. registration and derivatives requirements,
based on the FSB’s proposal, the minimum TLAC requirement must be met and these clients continue to look for alternatives to dealing with overseas
excluding regulatory capital instruments used to satisfy Citi’s regulatory branches of U.S. banks as a result. All of these and similar changes have
capital buffers, resulting in a higher overall TLAC requirement consisting resulted in some bifurcated activity in the swaps marketplace, between U.S.-
of the required TLAC minimum plus required capital buffers. As a result, as person and non-U.S.-person markets, which could disproportionately impact
discussed in the regulatory capital risk factor above, a higher GSIB surcharge Citi given its global footprint.
would potentially result in the need for Citi to issue higher levels of qualifying In addition, in September 2014, U.S. regulators re-proposed rules relating
debt and preferred equity. The FSB’s proposal also provides guidance for to margin requirements for uncleared swaps. As re-proposed, the rules would
regulatory authorities to determine additional TLAC requirements, specific to require Citibank, N.A. to both collect and post margin to counterparties,
individual financial institutions. Accordingly, similar to the Federal Reserve as well as collect and post margin to its affiliates, in connection with any
Board’s U.S. GSIB proposal, the Federal Reserve Board could propose TLAC uncleared swap, with the initial margin required to be held by unaffiliated
requirements for Citi that are higher or more stringent than its international third-party custodians. As a result, any new margin requirements could
peers or even its U.S. peers. significantly increase the cost to Citibank, N.A. and its counterparties of
To the extent Citi does not meet any final minimum TLAC requirement, conducting uncleared swaps. In addition, the requirements would also apply
it would need to re-position its funding profile, including potentially issuing to the non-U.S. branches of Citibank, N.A. and certain non-U.S. affiliates,
additional TLAC-eligible instruments and/or replacing existing non-TLAC which could result in further competitive disadvantages for Citi if it is
eligible funding with TLAC-eligible funding. This could increase Citi’s costs required to collect margin on uncleared swaps in non-U.S. jurisdictions prior
of funds, alter its current funding and liquidity planning and management to competitors in those jurisdictions being required to do so, if required to do
and/or negatively impact its revenues and results of operations. In addition, so at all.
the requirement to pre-position TLAC-eligible instruments with material Further, the EU continues to finalize various aspects of its European
subsidiaries could result in significant funding inefficiencies, increase Citi’s Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR), and the EU and CFTC have yet to
render any “equivalency” determinations (i.e., regulatory acknowledgment

56
of the equivalency of derivatives regimes), which has compounded the of certain trading activities into a trading entity legally, economically and
bifurcation of the swaps market, as noted above. Regulators in Asia also operationally separate from the legal entity holding the banking activities of
continue to finalize their derivatives reforms which, to date, have taken a firm.
a different approach as compared to the EU or the U.S. Because most of It is likely that, given Citi’s worldwide operations, some form of these or
these non-U.S. reforms are not yet finalized, it is uncertain to what extent other proposals for the regulation of proprietary trading will eventually be
the non-U.S. reforms will impose different, additional or even inconsistent applicable to a portion of Citi’s operations. While the Volcker Rule and these
requirements on Citi’s derivatives activities. non-U.S. proposals are intended to address similar concerns—separating
While the implementation and effectiveness of individual derivatives the perceived risks of proprietary trading and certain other investment
reforms may not in every case be significant, the cumulative impact of these banking activities in order not to affect more traditional banking and retail
reforms continues to be uncertain and could be material to Citi’s results of activities—they would do so under different structures, which could result in
operations and the competitive position of its derivatives businesses. inconsistent regulatory regimes and additional compliance risks and costs for
In addition, numerous aspects of the new derivatives regime require Citi in light of its global activities.
extensive compliance systems and processes to be maintained, including
electronic recordkeeping, real-time public transaction reporting and Recently Adopted and Future Regulations Applicable
external business conduct requirements (e.g., required swap counterparty to Securitizations Could Impose Additional Costs and
disclosures). This compliance risk increases to the extent the final non-U.S. May Discourage Citi from Performing Certain Roles
reforms are different from or inconsistent with the final U.S. reforms. Citi’s in Securitizations.
failure to effectively maintain such systems, across jurisdictions, could Citi endeavors to play a variety of roles in asset securitization transactions,
subject it to increased compliance costs and regulatory and reputational including acting as underwriter, issuer, sponsor, depositor, trustee and
risks, particularly given the heightened regulatory environment in which Citi counterparty. During the latter part of 2014, numerous regulatory
operates globally. changes relating to securitizations were finalized, including risk retention
requirements for securitizers of certain assets and extensive changes to the
The Continued Implementation of the Volcker Rule and SEC’s Regulation AB, including changes to the registration, disclosure and
Similar Reform Efforts Subject Citi to Regulatory and reporting requirements for asset-backed securities and other structured
Compliance Risks and Costs. finance products.
Although the rules implementing the restrictions under the Volcker Rule Because certain of these rules were recently adopted, the multi-agency
were finalized in December 2013, and the conformance period was generally implementation has just begun and extensive interpretive issues remain.
extended to July 2015, the final rules require Citi to develop an extensive As a result, the cumulative impact of these changes, as well as additional
compliance regime for the “permitted” activities under the Volcker Rule, regulations yet to be finalized, both on Citi’s participation in these
including documentation of historical trading activities with clients, transactions as well as on the securitization markets generally, is uncertain.
individual testing and training, regulatory reporting, recordkeeping and It is likely that many aspects of the new rules will increase the costs of
similar requirements as well as an annual CEO certification with respect securitization transactions. It is also possible that these changes may hinder
to the processes Citi has in place to ensure compliance with the final the recovery of previously active securitization markets or decrease the
rules. Moreover, despite the passage of time since the adoption of the final attractiveness of Citi’s executing or participating in certain securitization
rules, there continues to be uncertainty regarding the interpretation of transactions, including securitization transactions which Citi previously
certain provisions of the final rules, including with respect to the covered executed or in which it participated, such as private-label mortgage
funds provisions and the permitted activities under the rules. As a result, securitizations. This could in turn reduce the income Citi earns from
Citi is required to make certain assumptions as to the degree to which these transactions or hinder Citi’s ability to use such transactions to hedge
its activities are permitted to continue. If Citi’s implementation of the risks, reduce exposures or reduce assets with adverse risk-weighting within
required compliance regime is not consistent with regulatory expectations its businesses.
or requirements, or if Citi’s assumptions in implementation of the final
rules are not accurate, Citi could be subject to increased regulatory and
compliance risks and costs as well as potential reputational harm.
Proposals for structural reform of banking entities, including restrictions
on proprietary trading, also continue to be introduced in various non-U.S.
jurisdictions, thus leading to overlapping or potentially conflicting regimes.
For example, in the EU, the Bank Structural Reform draft directive (formerly
known as the “Liikanen” or “Barnier” Proposal) would prohibit proprietary
trading by in-scope credit institutions and banking groups, such as certain
of Citi’s EU branches, and potentially result in the mandatory separation

57
CREDIT AND MARKET RISKS future economic growth in the emerging markets has impacted and could
continue to negatively impact Citi’s businesses and results of operations, and
Macroeconomic Challenges in the U.S. and Globally,
Citi could be disproportionately impacted as compared to its competitors.
Including in the Emerging Markets, Could Have a Negative
Further, if a particular country’s economic situation were to deteriorate below
Impact on Citi’s Businesses and Results of Operations.
a certain level, U.S. regulators can and have imposed mandatory loan loss
Citi has experienced, and could experience in the future, negative impacts to
and other reserve requirements on Citi, which could negatively impact its cost
its businesses and results of operations, such as elevated credit costs and/or
of credit and earnings, perhaps significantly (see, e.g., “Managing Global
decreased revenues in its Markets and securities services businesses, as
Risk—Country and Cross-Border Risk—Argentina” below).
a result of macroeconomic challenges, uncertainties and volatility. While
the U.S. economy continues to improve, it remains susceptible to global Citi’s Extensive Global Network Subjects It to Various
events and volatility. Moreover, U.S. fiscal and monetary actions, or expected International and Emerging Markets Risks as well as
actions, can also impact not only the U.S. but global markets and economies Increased Compliance and Regulatory Risks and Costs.
as well as Citi’s businesses and results of operations. For example, the Federal During 2014, international revenues accounted for approximately 58%,
Reserve Board may begin to increase short-term interest rates during 2015. and emerging markets revenues accounted for approximately 40%, of Citi’s
Speculation about the timing of such a change has previously resulted in total revenues (for additional information on how Citi defines the emerging
significant volatility in the U.S. and global markets. While Citi expects certain markets as well as its exposures in certain of these markets, see “Managing
positive impacts as a result, such as an increase in net interest revenue Global Risk—Country and Cross-Border Risk” below).
(for additional information, see “Managing Global Risk—Market Risk— Citi’s extensive global network subjects it to a number of risks associated
Price Risk” below), the ultimate impact to Citi’s businesses and results of with international and emerging markets. These risks can include sovereign
operations will depend on the timing, amount and market and consumer or volatility, political events, foreign exchange controls, limitations on
other reactions to any such increases. foreign investment, sociopolitical instability, fraud, nationalization or loss
In addition, concerns remain regarding various U.S. government fiscal of licenses, sanctions, potential criminal charges, closure of branches or
challenges and events that could occur as a result, such as a potential U.S. subsidiaries and confiscation of assets. For example, Citi operates in several
government shutdown or default. In recent years, these issues, including countries that have strict foreign exchange controls, such as Argentina and
potential or actual ratings downgrades of U.S. debt obligations, have Venezuela, that limit its ability to convert local currency into U.S. dollars
adversely affected U.S. and global financial markets, economic conditions and/or transfer funds outside the country. During 2014, Citi discovered
and Citi’s businesses, results of operations and financial condition, and they certain frauds involving its Mexico subsidiary, Banamex. There have also
could do so again in the future. been instances of political turmoil and other instability in certain countries
Outside of the U.S., the global economic recovery remains uneven and in which Citi operates, such as in Russia, Ukraine and the Middle East, which
uncertain. The economic and fiscal situations of several European countries have required management time and attention (e.g., monitoring the impact
remain fragile, and geopolitical tensions throughout the region, including of sanctions on Russian entities, business sectors, individuals or otherwise on
in Russia, have added to the uncertainties. Fiscal and monetary actions, or Citi’s businesses and results of operations).
expected actions, throughout the region have further impacted the global Citi’s extensive global operations also increase its compliance and
financial markets as well as Citi’s businesses and results of operations. While regulatory risks and costs. For example, Citi’s operations in emerging
concerns relating to sovereign defaults or a partial or complete break-up of markets, including facilitating cross-border transactions on behalf of its
the European Monetary Union (EMU), including potential accompanying clients, subject it to higher compliance risks under U.S. regulations primarily
redenomination risks and uncertainties, seemed to have abated during 2014, focused on various aspects of global corporate activities, such as anti-money-
such concerns have resurfaced with the election of a new government in laundering regulations and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. These risks
Greece in January 2015 (for Citi’s third-party assets and liabilities in Greece can be more acute in less developed markets and thus require substantial
as of December 31, 2014, see “Managing Global Risk—Country and Cross- investment in compliance infrastructure or could result in a reduction
Border Risk” below). in certain of Citi’s business activities. Any failure by Citi to comply with
Slower growth in certain emerging markets, such as China, has also applicable U.S. regulations, as well as the regulations in the countries and
occurred, whether due to global macroeconomic conditions or geopolitical markets in which it operates as a result of its global footprint, could result in
tensions, governmental or regulatory policies or economic conditions within fines, penalties, injunctions or other similar restrictions, any of which could
the particular region or country (for additional information on risks specific negatively impact Citi’s earnings and its reputation.
to the emerging markets, see the risk factor below). Given Citi’s strategy and
focus on the emerging markets, actual or perceived uncertainty regarding

58
Citi’s Results of Operations Could Be Negatively Impacted LIQUIDITY RISKS
as Its Revolving Home Equity Lines of Credit Continue
to “Reset.” Citi’s Liquidity Planning, Management and Funding Could
As of December 31, 2014, Citi’s home equity loan portfolio of approximately Be Negatively Impacted by the Heightened Regulatory
$28.1 billion included approximately $16.7 billion of home equity lines of Focus on and Continued Changes to Liquidity Standards
credit that were still within their revolving period and had not commenced and Requirements.
amortization, or “reset” (Revolving HELOCs). Of these Revolving HELOCs, In September 2014, the U.S. banking agencies adopted final rules with
approximately 78% will commence amortization during the period of respect to the U.S. Basel III Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) (for additional
2015–2017 (for additional information, see “Managing Global Risk—Credit information on the final LCR requirements, see “Managing Global Risk—
Risk—North America Consumer Mortgage Lending” below). Market Risk—Funding and Liquidity Risk” below). Implementation of
Before commencing amortization, Revolving HELOC borrowers are the final LCR requirements requires Citi to maintain extensive compliance
required to pay only interest on their loans. Upon amortization, these procedures and systems, including systems to calculate Citi’s LCR daily
borrowers are required to pay both interest, usually at a variable rate, and once the rules are fully implemented. Moreover, Citi’s liquidity planning,
principal that typically amortizes over 20 years, rather than the typical stress testing and management remains subject to heightened regulatory
30-year amortization. As a result, Citi’s customers with Revolving HELOCs scrutiny and review, including pursuant to the Federal Reserve Board’s
that reset could experience “payment shock” due to the higher required Comprehensive Liquidity Analysis and Review (CLAR) as well as regulators’
payments on the loans. Increases in interest rates could further increase enhanced prudential standards authority. If Citi’s interpretation or
these payments, given the variable nature of the interest rates on these loans implementation of the LCR requirements, or its overall liquidity planning
post-reset. and management, is not consistent with regulatory expectations or
Based on the limited number of Citi’s Revolving HELOCs that have reset requirements, Citi’s funding and liquidity could be negatively impacted and
as of December 31, 2014, Citi has experienced a higher 30+ days past due it could incur increased compliance risks and costs.
delinquency rate on its amortizing home equity loans as compared to its total In addition, in October 2014, the Basel Committee adopted final rules
outstanding home equity loan portfolio (amortizing and non-amortizing). relating to the Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR), and the U.S. banking
Moreover, a portion of the resets that have occurred to date occurred during agencies are expected to propose U.S. NSFR rules during 2015 (for additional
a period of declining interest rates, which Citi believes likely reduced the information on the Basel Committee’s final NSFR rules, see “Managing
overall payment shock to borrowers. While Citi continues to monitor this Global Risk—Market Risk—Funding and Liquidity Risk” below). Several
reset risk closely and review and take additional actions to offset potential aspects of the Basel Committee’s final NSFR rules will likely require further
reset risk, increasing interest rates, stricter lending criteria and high borrower analysis and clarification, including with respect to the calculation of
loan-to-value positions could limit Citi’s ability to reduce or mitigate this derivative assets and liabilities and netting of these assets. The final rules also
reset risk going forward. Accordingly, as these loans continue to reset, Citi leave discretion to national supervisors (i.e., the U.S. banking agencies) in
could experience higher delinquency rates and increased loan loss reserves several areas. Accordingly, like other areas of regulatory reform, it remains
and net credit losses in future periods, which could be significant and would uncertain whether the U.S. NSFR rules might be more restrictive than the
negatively impact its results of operations. Basel Committee’s final NSFR. It also remains uncertain whether other
entities or subsidiaries within Citi’s structure will be required to comply with
Concentrations of Risk Can Increase the Potential for Citi the NSFR requirements, as well as the parameters of any such requirements.
to Incur Significant Losses. Until these parameters are known, it is not possible to determine
Concentrations of risk, particularly credit and market risk, can increase Citi’s the potential impact to Citi’s, or its subsidiaries’, liquidity planning,
risk of significant losses. As of December 31, 2014, Citi’s most significant management or funding. Moreover, to the extent other jurisdictions propose
concentration of credit risk was with the U.S. government and its agencies, or adopt quantitative liquidity requirements that differ from any of the Basel
which primarily results from trading assets and investments issued by the Committee’s or the U.S. liquidity requirements, Citi could be at a competitive
U.S. government and its agencies (for additional information, see Note disadvantage because of its global footprint or could be required to meet
24 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). Citi also routinely executes different minimum liquidity standards in some or all of the jurisdictions in
a high volume of securities, trading, derivative and foreign exchange which it operates.
transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including For a discussion of the potential negative impacts to Citi’s liquidity
banks, other financial institutions, insurance companies, investment banks planning, management and funding resulting from the U.S. GSIB
and government and central banks. To the extent regulatory or market capital surcharge proposal and the FSB’s TLAC proposal, see “Regulatory
developments lead to increased centralization of trading activity through Risks” above.
particular clearing houses, central agents or exchanges, this could also
increase Citi’s concentration of risk in this industry. Concentrations of risk
can limit, and have limited, the effectiveness of Citi’s hedging strategies and
have caused Citi to incur significant losses, and they may do so again in
the future.

59
The Maintenance of Adequate Liquidity and Funding The Credit Rating Agencies Continuously Review the
Depends on Numerous Factors, Including Those Outside of Credit Ratings of Citi and Certain of Its Subsidiaries,
Citi’s Control, Such as Market Disruptions and Increases in and Ratings Downgrades Could Have a Negative Impact
Citi’s Credit Spreads. on Citi’s Funding and Liquidity Due to Reduced Funding
As a global financial institution, adequate liquidity and sources of funding Capacity and Increased Funding Costs, Including
are essential to Citi’s businesses. Citi’s liquidity and sources of funding can Derivatives Triggers That Could Require Cash Obligations
be significantly and negatively impacted by factors it cannot control, such or Collateral Requirements.
as general disruptions in the financial markets, governmental fiscal and The credit rating agencies, such as Fitch, Moody’s and S&P, continuously
monetary policies, or negative investor perceptions of Citi’s creditworthiness. evaluate Citi and certain of its subsidiaries, and their ratings of Citi
In addition, Citi’s cost and ability to obtain deposits, secured funding and its more significant subsidiaries’ long-term/senior debt and
and long-term unsecured funding are directly related to its credit spreads. short-term/commercial paper, as applicable, are based on a number of
Changes in credit spreads constantly occur and are market driven, including factors, including standalone financial strength, as well as factors not
both external market factors and factors specific to Citi, and can be highly entirely within the control of Citi and its subsidiaries, such as the agencies’
volatile. Citi’s credit spreads may also be influenced by movements in the proprietary rating agency methodologies and assumptions, the rating
costs to purchasers of credit default swaps referenced to Citi’s long-term debt, agencies’ “government support uplift” assumptions, and conditions affecting
which are also impacted by these external and Citi-specific factors. Moreover, the financial services industry and markets generally.
Citi’s ability to obtain funding may be impaired if other market participants Citi and its subsidiaries may not be able to maintain their current
are seeking to access the markets at the same time, or if market appetite is respective ratings. Ratings downgrades could negatively impact Citi’s ability
reduced, as is likely to occur in a liquidity or other market crisis. In addition, to access the capital markets and other sources of funds as well as the costs of
clearing organizations, regulators, clients and financial institutions with those funds, and its ability to maintain certain deposits. A ratings downgrade
which Citi interacts may exercise the right to require additional collateral could also have a negative impact on Citi’s funding and liquidity due to
based on these market perceptions or market conditions, which could further reduced funding capacity, including derivative triggers, which could take the
impair Citi’s access to and cost of funding. form of cash obligations and collateral requirements. In addition, a ratings
As a holding company, Citi relies on dividends, distributions and other downgrade could also have a negative impact on other funding sources,
payments from its subsidiaries to fund dividends as well as to satisfy its debt such as secured financing and other margined transactions for which there
and other obligations. Several of Citi’s U.S. and non-U.S. subsidiaries are are no explicit triggers, as well as on contractual provisions, which contain
or may be subject to capital adequacy or other regulatory or contractual minimum ratings thresholds in order for Citi to hold third-party funds.
restrictions on their ability to provide such payments, including any local Moreover, credit ratings downgrades can have impacts, which may
regulatory stress test requirements or the proposed TLAC requirements (see not be currently known to Citi or which are not possible to quantify. For
“Regulatory Risks” above). Limitations on the payments that Citi receives example, some entities may have ratings limitations as to their permissible
from its subsidiaries could also impact its liquidity. counterparties, of which Citi may or may not be aware. In addition, certain
of Citi’s corporate customers and trading counterparties, among other clients,
could re-evaluate their business relationships with Citi and limit the trading
of certain contracts or market instruments with Citi in response to ratings
downgrades. Changes in customer and counterparty behavior could impact
not only Citi’s funding and liquidity but also the results of operations of
certain Citi businesses. For additional information on the potential impact of
a reduction in Citi’s or Citibank, N.A.’s credit ratings, see “Managing Global
Risk—Market Risk—Funding and Liquidity—Credit Ratings” below.

60
LEGAL RISKS in the U.S. have increasingly sought and obtained criminal guilty pleas
or deferred prosecution agreements against corporate entities and other
Citi Is Subject to Extensive Legal and Regulatory
criminal sanctions from those institutions. Such actions can have significant
Proceedings, Investigations and Inquiries That Could
collateral consequences for a subject financial institution, including loss
Result in Significant Penalties and Other Impacts on Citi,
of customers and business, and the inability to offer certain products or
Its Businesses and Results of Operations.
services and/or operate certain businesses. In addition, in recent years Citi
At any given time, Citi is defending a significant number of legal and
has entered into consent orders and paid substantial fines and penalties,
regulatory proceedings and is subject to numerous governmental and
or provided monetary and other relief, in connection with the resolution
regulatory examinations, investigations and other inquiries. The frequency
of its extensive legal and regulatory matters. Citi may be required to accept
with which such proceedings, investigations and inquiries are initiated,
or be subject to similar types of criminal or other remedies, fines, penalties
and the severity of the remedies sought (and in several cases obtained),
and other requirements in the future, any of which could materially and
have increased substantially over the last few years, and the global judicial,
negatively affect Citi’s businesses, business practices, financial condition or
regulatory and political environment generally remains hostile to large
results of operations, require material changes in Citi’s operations, or cause
financial institutions such as Citi.
Citi reputational harm. Resolution of these matters also results in significant
Continued heightened scrutiny of the financial services industry by
time, expense and diversion of management’s attention.
regulators and other enforcement authorities has led to questioning of
Further, many large claims asserted against Citi are highly complex
industry practices and additional expectations regarding Citi’s management
and slow to develop, and may involve novel or untested legal theories. The
and oversight of third parties doing business with Citi (e.g., vendors). In
outcome of such proceedings is difficult to predict or estimate until late in the
addition, U.S. and non-U.S. regulators are increasingly focused on “conduct
proceedings, which may last several years. Although Citi establishes accruals
risk,” a term that is used to describe the risks associated with misconduct
for its legal and regulatory matters according to accounting requirements,
by employees and agents that could harm consumers, investors, or the
the amount of loss ultimately incurred in relation to those matters may
markets, such as failures to safeguard consumers’ and investors’ personal
be substantially higher than the amounts accrued. In addition, certain
information and improperly creating, selling and marketing products and
settlements are subject to court approval and may not be approved.
services, among other forms of misconduct. The increased scrutiny and
For additional information relating to Citi’s legal and regulatory
expectations of financial institutions, including Citi, and the questioning of
proceedings, see Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
the overall “culture” of Citi and the financial services industry generally as
well as the effectiveness of Citi’s control functions, has and could continue to
lead to more regulatory or other enforcement proceedings. While Citi takes
numerous steps to prevent and detect misconduct by employees and agents,
misconduct may not always be deterred or prevented.
In addition, the complexity of the federal and state regulatory and
enforcement regimes in the U.S., coupled with the global scope of Citi’s
operations and the continued aggressiveness of the regulatory environment
worldwide, also means that a single event may give rise to a large number
of overlapping investigations and regulatory proceedings, either by multiple
federal and state agencies in the U.S. or by multiple regulators and other
governmental entities in different jurisdictions.
For example, Citi is subject to extensive legal and regulatory inquiries,
actions and investigations, including by the Antitrust Division and the
Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, relating to Citi’s
contribution to, or trading in products linked to, rates or benchmarks.
These rates and benchmarks may relate to foreign exchange rates (such as
the WM/Reuters fix), interest rates (such as the London Inter-Bank Offered
Rate (LIBOR) or ISDAFIX), or other prices. Like other banks with operations
in the U.S., Citi is also subject to continuing oversight by bank regulators,
and inquiries and investigations by other governmental and regulatory
authorities, with respect to its anti-money laundering program.
The severity of the remedies sought in these and the other legal and
regulatory proceedings to which Citi is subject has increased substantially
in recent years. U.S. and certain international governmental entities
have emphasized a willingness to bring criminal actions against, or seek
criminal convictions from, financial institutions, and criminal prosecutors

61
BUSINESS AND OPERATIONAL RISKS Citi’s Ability to Achieve Its 2015 Efficiency and Return
on Assets Targets Will Depend in Part on the Successful
Citi’s Ability to Return Capital to Shareholders
Achievement of Its Execution Priorities.
Substantially Depends on the CCAR Process and the Results
In March 2013, Citi established 2015 financial targets for Citicorp’s operating
of Regulatory Stress Tests.
efficiency ratio and Citigroup’s return on assets. Citi’s ability to achieve these
In addition to Board of Directors’ approval, any decision by Citi to return
targets will depend in part on the successful achievement of its execution
capital to shareholders, whether through an increase in its common stock
priorities, including efficient resource allocation, which includes disciplined
dividend or through a share repurchase program, substantially depends on
expense management; a continued focus on the wind-down of Citi Holdings
regulatory approval, including through the annual Comprehensive Capital
and maintaining Citi Holdings at or above “break even”; and utilization
Analysis and Review (CCAR) process required by the Federal Reserve Board
of its DTAs (see below). Citi’s ability to achieve its targets will also depend
and the supervisory stress tests required under the Dodd-Frank Act.
on factors which it cannot control, such as ongoing regulatory changes,
In March 2014, the Federal Reserve Board announced that it objected
continued higher regulatory and compliance costs and macroeconomic
to the capital plan submitted by Citi as part of the 2014 CCAR process,
conditions, among others. While Citi continues to take actions to achieve its
meaning Citi was not able to increase its return of capital to shareholders
execution priorities, there is no guarantee that Citi will be successful.
as it had requested. Citi must address the Federal Reserve Board’s concerns,
Citi continues to pursue its disciplined expense-management strategy,
expectations and requirements regarding Citi’s capital planning process
including re-engineering, restructuring operations and improving efficiency.
in order to return additional capital to shareholders under the 2015 CCAR
However, there is no guarantee that Citi will be able to reduce its level of
process. Restrictions on Citi’s ability to return capital to shareholders as a
expenses as a result of announced repositioning actions, efficiency initiatives
result of the 2014 CCAR process negatively impacted market and investor
or otherwise, and investments Citi has made in its businesses, or may make
perceptions of Citi, and continued restrictions could do so in the future.
in the future, may not be as productive or effective as Citi expects or at all.
Citi’s ability to accurately predict or explain to stakeholders the outcome
Citi’s expenses also depend, in part, on factors not entirely within its control.
of the CCAR process, and thus address any such market or investor
For example, during 2014, Citi incurred significant legal and related costs
perceptions, is complicated by the Federal Reserve Board’s evolving criteria
in order to resolve various of its extensive legal and regulatory proceedings
employed in its overall aggregate assessment of Citi. The Federal Reserve
and inquiries. In order to achieve its 2015 financial targets, Citi will need
Board’s assessment of Citi is conducted not only by using the Board’s
to significantly reduce its legal and related costs, as well as repositioning
proprietary stress test models, but also a number of qualitative factors,
expenses, from 2014 levels.
including a detailed assessment of Citi’s “capital adequacy process,” as
In addition, while Citi has made significant progress in winding-down Citi
defined by the Federal Reserve Board. These qualitative factors were cited
Holdings over the last several years, maintaining Citi Holdings at or above
by the Federal Reserve Board in its objection to Citi’s 2014 capital plan, and
“break even” in 2015 will be important to achieving its return on assets
the Board has stated that it expects leading capital adequacy practices will
target. As discussed under “Global Consumer Banking” and “Institutional
continue to evolve and will likely be determined by the Board each year as a
Clients Group” above, beginning in the first quarter of 2015, Citi will be
result of its cross-firm review of capital plan submissions.
reporting certain of its non-core consumer and institutional businesses
Similarly, the Federal Reserve Board has indicated that, as part of its stated
as part of Citi Holdings. While Citi expects to maintain Citi Holdings at or
goal to continually evolve its annual stress testing requirements, several
above “break even” in 2015 even with the inclusion of these businesses,
parameters of the annual stress testing process may be altered from time to
it may not be able to do so due to factors it cannot control, as described
time, including the severity of the stress test scenario, Federal Reserve Board
above. In addition, as described under “Citi Holdings” above, the remaining
modeling of Citi’s balance sheet and the addition of components deemed
assets in Citi Holdings as of December 31, 2014 consisted of North America
important by the Federal Reserve Board (e.g., a counterparty failure). In
consumer mortgages as well as larger remaining businesses, including
addition, as part of the Federal Reserve Board’s U.S. GSIB proposal, the
Citi’s legacy CitiFinancial business, and, beginning in the first quarter of
Federal Reserve Board indicated that it may consider, at some point in
2015, the non-core consumer and institutional businesses referenced above.
the future, that some or all of Citi’s GSIB surcharge be integrated into its
While Citi’s strategy continues to be to reduce the assets in Citi Holdings as
post-stress test minimum capital requirements. These parameter and other
quickly as practicable in an economically rational manner, and it expects
alterations could further increase the level of capital Citi must meet as
to substantially complete the exit of the consumer businesses moved to
part of the stress tests, thus potentially impacting levels of capital returns
Citi Holdings in the first quarter by the end of 2015, sales of the remaining
to shareholders.
larger businesses in Citi Holdings will also depend on factors outside of Citi’s
Further, because it is not clear how the Federal Reserve Board’s proprietary
control, such as market appetite and buyer funding, and the remaining
stress test models and qualitative assessment may differ from the modeling
mortgage assets will largely continue to be subject to ongoing run-off and
techniques and capital planning practices employed by Citi, it is likely that
opportunistic sales. As a result, Citi Holdings’ remaining assets could have a
Citi’s stress test results (using its own models, estimation methodologies and
negative impact on Citi’s overall results of operations or financial condition.
processes) may not be consistent with those disclosed by the Federal Reserve
Board, thus potentially leading to additional confusion and impacts to Citi’s
perception in the market.

62
Citi’s Ability to Utilize Its DTAs, and Thus Reduce The Value of Citi’s DTAs Could Be Significantly Reduced If
the Negative Impact of the DTAs on Citi’s Regulatory Corporate Tax Rates in the U.S. or Certain State or Foreign
Capital, Will Be Driven by Its Ability to Generate U.S. Jurisdictions Decline or as a Result of Other Changes in the
Taxable Income. U.S. Corporate Tax System.
At December 31, 2014, Citi’s net DTAs were $49.5 billion, of which Congress and the Obama Administration have discussed decreasing the U.S.
approximately $34.3 billion was excluded from Citi’s Common Equity Tier 1 corporate tax rate. Similar discussions have taken place in certain local,
Capital, on a fully implemented basis, under the final U.S. Basel III rules (for state and foreign jurisdictions, including in New York City and Japan. While
additional information, see “Capital Resources—Components of Capital Citi may benefit in some respects from any decrease in corporate tax rates,
under Basel III (Advanced Approaches with Full Implementation)” above). a reduction in the U.S., state or foreign corporate tax rates could result in a
In addition, of the net DTAs as of year-end 2014, approximately $17.6 billion decrease, perhaps significant, in the value of Citi’s DTAs, which would result
related to foreign tax credit carry-forwards (FTCs). The carry-forward in a reduction to Citi’s net income during the period in which the change is
utilization period for FTCs is 10 years and represents the most time-sensitive enacted. There have also been recent discussions of more sweeping changes
component of Citi’s DTAs. Of the FTCs at year-end 2014, approximately to the U.S. tax system. It is uncertain whether or when any such tax reform
$1.9 billion expire in 2017, $5.2 billion expire in 2018 and the remaining proposals will be enacted into law, and whether or how they will affect
$10.5 billion expire over the period of 2019–2023. Citi must utilize any FTCs Citi’s DTAs.
generated in the then-current year prior to utilizing any carry-forward FTCs.
The accounting treatment for realization of DTAs, including FTCs, is Citi’s Interpretation or Application of the Extensive Tax
complex and requires significant judgment and estimates regarding future Laws to Which It Is Subject Could Differ from Those of the
taxable earnings in the jurisdictions in which the DTAs arise and available Relevant Governmental Authorities, Which Could Result in
tax planning strategies. Citi’s ability to utilize its DTAs, including the the Payment of Additional Taxes and Penalties.
FTC components, and thus use the capital supporting the DTAs for more Citi is subject to the various tax laws of the U.S. and its states and
productive purposes, will be dependent upon Citi’s ability to generate U.S. municipalities, as well as the numerous foreign jurisdictions in which
taxable income in the relevant tax carry-forward periods. Failure to realize it operates. These tax laws are inherently complex and Citi must make
any portion of the DTAs would also have a corresponding negative impact on judgments and interpretations about the application of these laws to its
Citi’s net income. entities, operations and businesses. Citi’s interpretations and application
In addition, with regard to FTCs, utilization will be influenced by of the tax laws, including with respect to withholding tax obligations and
actions to optimize U.S. taxable earnings for the purpose of consuming the stamp and other transactional taxes, could differ from that of the relevant
FTC carry-forward component of the DTAs prior to expiration. These FTC governmental taxing authority, which could result in the potential for the
actions, however, may serve to increase the DTAs for other less time sensitive payment of additional taxes, penalties or interest, which could be material.
components. Moreover, tax return limitations on FTCs and general business Citi’s Operational Systems and Networks Have Been, and
credits that cause Citi to incur current tax expense, notwithstanding its tax Will Continue to Be, Subject to an Increasing Risk of
carry-forward position, could impact the rate of overall DTA utilization. Continually Evolving Cybersecurity or Other Technological
DTA utilization will also continue to be driven by movements in Citi’s Risks Which Could Result in the Disclosure of Confidential
Accumulated other comprehensive income, which can be impacted by Client or Customer Information, Damage to Citi’s
changes in interest rates and foreign exchange rates. Reputation, Additional Costs to Citi, Regulatory Penalties
For additional information on Citi’s DTAs, including the FTCs, see and Financial Losses.
“Significant Accounting Policies and Significant Estimates—Income Taxes” A significant portion of Citi’s operations relies heavily on the secure
below and Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. processing, storage and transmission of confidential and other information
as well as the monitoring of a large number of complex transactions on
a minute-by-minute basis. For example, through its Global Consumer
Banking, credit card and securities services businesses, Citi obtains and
stores an extensive amount of personal and client-specific information
for its retail, corporate and governmental customers and clients and must
accurately record and reflect their extensive account transactions. With the
evolving proliferation of new technologies and the increasing use of the
Internet and mobile devices to conduct financial transactions, large, global
financial institutions such as Citi have been, and will continue to be, subject
to an increasing risk of cyber incidents from these activities.

63
 Citi’s computer systems, software and networks are subject to ongoing Third parties with which Citi does business may also be sources of
cyber incidents such as unauthorized access; loss or destruction of cybersecurity or other technological risks. Citi outsources certain functions,
data (including confidential client information); account takeovers; such as processing customer credit card transactions, uploading content
unavailability of service; computer viruses or other malicious code; cyber on customer-facing websites, and developing software for new products and
attacks; and other events. These threats may arise from human error, services. These relationships allow for the storage and processing of customer
fraud or malice on the part of employees or third parties, or may result information by third-party hosting of or access to Citi websites, which could
from accidental technological failure. Additional challenges are posed result in service disruptions or website defacements, and the potential to
by external parties, including extremist parties and certain foreign state introduce vulnerable code, resulting in security breaches impacting Citi
actors that engage in cyber activities as a means to promote political ends. customers. While Citi engages in certain actions to reduce the exposure
As further evidence of the increasing and potentially significant impact of resulting from outsourcing, such as performing onsite security control
cyber incidents, during 2014, certain U.S. financial institutions reported assessments, limiting third-party access to the least privileged level necessary
cyber incidents affecting their computer systems that resulted in the data to perform job functions and restricting third-party processing to systems
of millions of customers being compromised. In addition, several U.S. stored within Citi’s data centers, ongoing threats may result in unauthorized
retailers and other multinational companies reported cyber incidents that access, loss or destruction of data or other cyber incidents with increased
compromised customer data. costs and consequences to Citi such as those discussed above. Furthermore,
While these incidents did not impact, or did not have a material impact, because financial institutions are becoming increasingly interconnected
on Citi, Citi has been subject to other intentional cyber incidents from with central agents, exchanges and clearing houses, including as a result of
external sources over the last several years, including (i) denial of service the derivatives reforms over the last few years, Citi has increased exposure to
attacks, which attempted to interrupt service to clients and customers; operational failure or cyber attacks through third parties.
(ii) data breaches, which aimed to obtain unauthorized access to customer While Citi maintains insurance coverage that may, subject to policy terms
account data; and (iii) malicious software attacks on client systems, which and conditions including significant self-insured deductibles, cover certain
attempted to allow unauthorized entrance to Citi’s systems under the guise aspects of cyber risks, such insurance coverage may be insufficient to cover
of a client and the extraction of client data. While Citi’s monitoring and all losses.
protection services were able to detect and respond to the incidents targeting
its systems before they became significant, they still resulted in limited losses Citi Maintains Co-Branding and Private Label
in some instances as well as increases in expenditures to monitor against the Relationships with Various Retailers and Merchants
threat of similar future cyber incidents. There can be no assurance that such Within Its U.S. Credit Card Businesses in NA GCB, and the
cyber incidents will not occur again, and they could occur more frequently Failure to Maintain These Relationships Could Have a
and on a more significant scale. Significant Negative Impact on the Results of Operations
Although Citi devotes significant resources to implement, maintain, or Financial Condition of Those Businesses.
monitor and regularly upgrade its systems and networks with measures Through its U.S. Citi-branded cards and Citi retail services credit card
such as intrusion detection and prevention and firewalls to safeguard businesses within North America Global Consumer Banking (NA GCB),
critical business applications, there is no guarantee that these measures or Citi maintains numerous co-branding and private label relationships with
any other measures can provide absolute security. In addition, because the third-party retailers and merchants in the ordinary course of business
methods used to cause cyber attacks change frequently or, in some cases, are pursuant to which Citi issues credit cards to customers of the retailers or
not recognized until launched, Citi may be unable to implement effective merchants. Citi’s co-branding and private label agreements provide for
preventive measures or proactively address these methods. shared economics between the parties and generally have a fixed term.
If Citi were to be subject to a cyber incident, it could result in the Competition among card issuers such as Citi for these relationships is
disclosure of confidential client information, damage to Citi’s reputation significant and these agreements may not be extended or renewed by
with its clients and the market, customer dissatisfaction, additional costs to the parties. These agreements could also be terminated due to, among
Citi (such as repairing systems, replacing customer payment cards or adding other factors, a breach by Citi of its responsibilities under the applicable
new personnel or protection technologies), regulatory penalties, exposure to agreement, a breach by the retailer or merchant under the agreement,
litigation and other financial losses to both Citi and its clients and customers. or external factors, including bankruptcies, liquidations, restructurings
Such events could also cause interruptions or malfunctions in the operations or consolidations and other similar events that may occur. While various
of Citi (such as the lack of availability of Citi’s online banking system or mitigating factors could be available in the event of the loss of one or more
mobile banking platform), as well as the operations of its clients, customers of these relationships, such as replacing the retailer or merchant or by Citi
or other third parties. Given Citi’s global footprint and the high volume of offering new card products, the results of operations or financial condition of
transactions processed by Citi, certain errors or actions may be repeated or Citi-branded cards or Citi retail services, as applicable, or NA GCB could be
compounded before they are discovered and rectified, which would further negatively impacted, and the impact could be significant.
increase these costs and consequences.

64
Citi May Incur Significant Losses If Its Risk Management Incorrect Assumptions or Estimates in Citi’s Financial
Models, Processes or Strategies Are Ineffective. Statements Could Cause Significant Unexpected Losses
Citi employs a broad and diversified set of risk management and mitigation in the Future, and Changes to Financial Accounting and
processes and strategies, including the use of various risk models, in Reporting Standards or Interpretations Could Have a
analyzing and monitoring the various risks Citi assumes in conducting Material Impact on How Citi Records and Reports Its
its activities, such as credit, market and operational risks (for additional Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
information regarding these areas of risk as well as risk management at Citi, Citi is required to use certain assumptions and estimates in preparing its
see “Managing Global Risk” below). For example, Citi uses models as part of financial statements under U.S. GAAP, including determining credit loss
its various stress testing initiatives across the firm. Management of these risks reserves, reserves related to litigation and regulatory exposures, valuation of
is made even more challenging within a global financial institution such as DTAs and the fair values of certain assets and liabilities, among other items.
Citi, particularly given the complex, diverse and rapidly changing financial If Citi’s assumptions or estimates underlying its financial statements are
markets and conditions in which Citi operates. incorrect or differ from actual future events, Citi could experience unexpected
These models, processes and strategies are inherently limited because losses, some of which could be significant.
they involve techniques, including the use of historical data in some Moreover, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) is currently
circumstances, and judgments that cannot anticipate every economic reviewing, or has proposed or issued, changes to several financial accounting
and financial outcome in the markets in which Citi operates nor can they and reporting standards that govern key aspects of Citi’s financial statements
anticipate the specifics and timing of such outcomes. Citi could incur or interpretations thereof, including those areas where Citi is required to
significant losses if its risk management models, processes or strategies are make assumptions or estimates. For example, the FASB has proposed a new
ineffective in properly anticipating or managing these risks. accounting model intended to require earlier recognition of credit losses
on financial instruments. The proposed accounting model would require
Citi’s Performance and the Performance of Its Individual that lifetime “expected credit losses” on financial assets not recorded at fair
Businesses Could Be Negatively Impacted If Citi Is Not Able value through net income, such as loans and held-to-maturity securities, be
to Hire and Retain Qualified Employees for Any Reason. recorded at inception of the financial asset, replacing the multiple existing
Citi’s performance and the performance of its individual businesses is impairment models under U.S. GAAP which generally require that a loss be
largely dependent on the talents and efforts of highly skilled employees. “incurred” before it is recognized. For additional information on this and
Specifically, Citi’s continued ability to compete in its businesses, to manage other proposed changes, see Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
its businesses effectively and to continue to execute its overall global strategy Changes to financial accounting or reporting standards or interpretations,
depends on its ability to attract new employees and to retain and motivate its whether promulgated or required by the FASB or other regulators, could
existing employees. Citi’s ability to attract and retain employees depends on present operational challenges and could require Citi to change certain of
numerous factors, including its culture, compensation, the management and the assumptions or estimates it previously used in preparing its financial
leadership of the company as well as its individual businesses, Citi’s presence statements, which could negatively impact how it records and reports its
in the particular market or region at issue and the professional opportunities financial condition and results of operations generally and/or with respect
it offers. to particular businesses. In addition, the FASB is seeking to converge U.S.
The banking industry has and may continue to experience more stringent GAAP with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) to the extent
regulation of employee compensation, including limitations relating to IFRS provides an improvement to accounting standards. Any transition to
incentive-based compensation, clawback requirements and special taxation. IFRS could further have a material impact on how Citi records and reports
Moreover, given its continued focus on the emerging markets, Citi is often its financial results. For additional information on the key areas for which
competing for qualified employees in these markets with entities that have a assumptions and estimates are used in preparing Citi’s financial statements,
significantly greater presence in the region or are not subject to significant see “Significant Accounting Policies and Significant Estimates” below and
regulatory restrictions on the structure of incentive compensation. If Citi Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
is unable to continue to attract and retain qualified employees for any
reason, Citi’s performance, including its competitive position, the successful
execution of its overall strategy and its results of operations could be
negatively impacted.

65
This page intentionally left blank.

66
MANAGING GLOBAL RISK TABLE OF CONTENTS

MANAGING GLOBAL RISK 68 Price Risk 102

Overview 68 Price Risk Measurement and Stress Testing 102
Citi’s Risk Management Organization 68 Price Risk—Non-Trading Portfolios (including Interest
Citi’s Compliance Organization 71 Rate Exposure) 102
Price Risk—Trading Portfolios (including VAR) 110
CREDIT RISK (1) 73
Credit Risk Management 73 OPERATIONAL RISK 115
Credit Risk Measurement and Stress Testing 73 Operational Risk Management 115
Loans Outstanding 74 Operational Risk Measurement and Stress Testing 115
Details of Credit Loss Experience 75
Allowance for Loan Losses 76 COUNTRY AND CROSS-BORDER RISK 116
Non-Accrual Loans and Assets, and Renegotiated Loans 77 Country Risk 116
North America Consumer Mortgage Lending 80 Cross-Border Risk 119
Consumer Loan Details 87 (1) For additional information regarding certain credit risk, market risk and other quantitative and
Corporate Credit Details 90 qualitative information, refer to Citi’s Pillar 3 Basel III Advanced Approaches Disclosures, as required
by the rules of the Federal Reserve Board, on Citi’s Investor Relations website.

MARKET RISK (1) 93

Market Risk Management 93
Funding and Liquidity Risk 93
Overview 93
High Quality Liquid Assets 94
Deposits 95
Long-Term Debt 95
Secured Funding Transactions and Short-Term Borrowings 98
Liquidity Management, Stress Testing and Measurement 99
Credit Ratings 100

67
MANAGING GLOBAL RISK

Overview Citi’s Risk Management Organization

Citigroup believes that effective risk management is of primary importance to Citi’s Risk function is an independent control function within Franchise
its overall operations. Accordingly, Citi’s risk management process has been Risk and Strategy. Citi’s Chief Risk Officer, with oversight from the Risk
designed to monitor, evaluate and manage the principal risks it assumes in Management Committee of the Citigroup Board of Directors, as well as the
conducting its activities. Specifically, the activities that Citi engages in—and full Board of Directors, is responsible for:
the risks those activities generate—must be consistent with Citi’s underlying • establishing core standards for the management, measurement and
commitment to the principles of “responsible finance” and in line with Citi’s reporting of risk arising from business risk taking activities and the
risk appetite. For Citi, responsible finance means conduct that is transparent, macroeconomic and market environments;
prudent and dependable, and that delivers better outcomes for Citi’s
• identifying, assessing, communicating and monitoring risks on a
clients and society. Citi’s risk appetite framework includes principle-based
company-wide basis;
qualitative boundaries to guide behavior and quantitative boundaries within
which the firm will operate, including capital strength and earnings power. • engaging with senior management on a frequent basis on material
Citi selectively takes risks in support of its underlying customer-centric matters with respect to risk-taking activities in the businesses and related
business strategy, while striving to ensure it operates within the principles risk management processes; and
of responsible finance. Reaching the goal of becoming an indisputably • ensuring that the Risk function has adequate independence, authority,
strong and stable institution goes beyond financial performance; ethics is an expertise, staffing, technology and resources.
area where Citi has zero tolerance for breaches. Citi evaluates and rewards
As set forth in the chart below, Citi’s independent risk management
employees with specific consideration to their risk behaviors, including
organization is structured to facilitate the management of risk across three
transparency, communication and escalation of concerns.
dimensions: businesses, regions and critical products.
Citi’s risks are generally categorized into credit risk, market risk,
Each of Citi’s major businesses has a Business Chief Risk Officer who is
operational risk and country and cross-border risk. Compliance risk can be
the focal point for risk decisions, such as setting risk limits or approving
found in all of these risk types.
transactions in the business. The majority of staff in Citi’s risk management
Citi’s risk programs are based on three lines of defense: (i) business
organization report to these Business Chief Risk Officers. There are also Chief
management, (ii) independent control functions and (iii) Internal Audit.
Risk Officers for Citibank, N.A. and the Citi Holdings segment.
• Business Management. Each of Citi’s businesses, including in-business Regional Chief Risk Officers, for each of Asia, EMEA and Mexico and
risk personnel, own and manage the risks, including compliance risks, Latin America, are accountable for the risks in or affecting their geographic
inherent in or arising from the business, and are responsible for having areas, including the legal entities in their region, and are the primary risk
controls in place to mitigate key risks, performing manager assessments contacts for the regional business heads and local regulators.
of internal controls, and promoting a culture of compliance and control. Citi also has Product Chief Risk Officers for those risk areas of critical
• Independent Control Functions. Citi’s independent control functions, importance to Citi, currently fundamental credit, market and real estate risk,
including Compliance, Finance, Legal and Risk, set standards according treasury, model validation and systemic risks. Product Chief Risk Officers
to which Citi and its businesses are expected to manage and oversee risks, are accountable for the risks within their specialties across businesses and
including compliance with applicable laws, regulatory requirements, regions. Product Chief Risk Officers also serve as a resource to Citi’s Chief
policies and standards of ethical conduct. In addition, among other Risk Officer, as well as to the Business and Regional Chief Risk Officers, to
things, the independent control functions provide advice and training better enable the Business and Regional Chief Risk Officers to focus on day-
to Citi’s businesses and establish tools, methodologies, processes to-day management of risks and responsiveness to the business. The Head of
and oversight of controls used by the businesses to foster a culture of the Risk Governance Group ensures the ongoing development, enhancement
compliance and control and to satisfy those standards. and implementation of a proactive, prudent, and effective risk management
• Internal Audit. Citi’s Internal Audit function independently reviews framework and organization.
activities of the first two lines of defense discussed above based on a Each of the Business, Regional, Legal Entity and Product Chief Risk
risk-based audit plan and methodology approved by the Citigroup Board Officers reports to Citi’s Chief Risk Officer, who has a direct reporting line to
of Directors. the Risk Management Committee of the Citigroup Board of Directors and
a dual reporting line to both Citi’s Chief Executive Officer and the Head of
Franchise Risk and Strategy.

68
 Risk Management Organization

Global Commercial

Global Consumer

Institutional Clients Group

Private Bank

Business Chief Risk

Officers

Asia
Fundamental Credit Risk
Regions / EMEA
Product Chief Risk Legal
Chief Risk Officer Mexico & Latin America
Entities /
Market and Real Estate Risk, Officers
Segment Citi Holdings Segment
Treasury, Model Validation &
Systemic Risk Citibank, N.A. & Japan

Global Risk Management

Risk Governance Group & Chief Risk Officer Global Functions

Policies and Processes Key Risk Committees. Citi has established risk committees across the
Citi has established robust processes to oversee the creation, ownership and Company that broadly cover either overall governance, or new or complex
ongoing management of Citi’s risk policy. Specifically, Citi’s Chief Risk product governance:
Officer and the risk management executive committee (as described below), • Risk Management Executive Committee: Citi’s Chief Risk Officer
in some cases through established committees: chairs this committee. Members include all direct reports of Citi’s Chief
• establish core policies to articulate rules and behaviors for activities where Risk Officer, as well as certain reports of the Head of Franchise Risk and
capital is at risk; and Strategy. The committee reviews key risk issues across businesses, products
• establish policy standards, procedures, guidelines, risk limits and limit and regions.
adherence processes covering new and current risk exposures across Citi • Citibank, N.A. Risk Committee: Citibank, N.A.’s Chief Risk Officer chairs
that are aligned with Citi’s risk appetite. this committee. Members include the Citibank, N.A Chief Executive Officer,
Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer, Chief Compliance Officer, Chief Lending
Citi’s risk management processes include (i) key risk committees, (ii) risk Officer and General Counsel. The committee reviews the risk appetite
aggregation and stress testing and (iii) risk capital. framework, thresholds and usage against the established thresholds for
Citibank, N.A. The committee also reviews reports designed to monitor
market, credit, operational and other risk types within the bank.
• Business and Regional Consumer Risk Committees: These committees
exist in all regions, with broad engagement from the businesses, risk and
other control functions. These committees include the Global Consumer
Banking Risk Committee, which is chaired by the GCB Chief Executive
Officer with the GCB Chief Risk Officer as the vice chair. The committee
monitors key performance trends, significant regulatory and control
events and management actions.

69
• ICG Risk Management Committee: This committee reviews ICG’s risk • Investment Products Risk Committee: This committee oversees two
profile, discusses pertinent risk issues in trading, global transaction product approval committees that facilitate analysis and discussion of new
services, structuring and lending businesses and reviews strategic risk retail investment products and services created and/or distributed by Citi.
decisions for consistency with Citi’s risk appetite. Members include Citi’s - Manufacturing Product Approval Committee: This committee has
Chief Risk Officer and Head of Franchise Risk and Strategy, as well as the responsibility for reviewing new or modified products or transactions
Global Head of Markets and the ICG Chief Executive Officer and Chief created by Citi that are distributed to individual investors as well as
Risk Officer. third-party retail distributors.
• Business Risk, Compliance and Control Committees: These committees, - Distribution Product Approval Committee: This committee approves
which exist at both sector and function levels, serve as a forum for senior new investment products and services, including those created by third
management to review key internal control, legal, compliance, regulatory parties as part of Citi’s “open architecture” distribution model, before
and other risk and control issues. they are offered to individual investors via Citi distribution businesses
• Business Practices Committee: This Citi-wide governance committee (e.g., private bank, consumer, etc.). This committee also sets
reviews practices involving potentially significant reputational or requirements for the periodic review of existing products and services.
franchise issues. Each business also has its own business practices • Commercial Bank Product Approval Committee: This committee is
committee. These committees review whether Citi’s business practices designed to ensure that significant risks in a new or complex product,
have been designed and implemented in a way that meets the highest service, business line manufactured or provided by the Consumer and
standards of professionalism, integrity and ethical behavior. Commercial Bank (CCB) or by third parties for distribution to CCB clients,
• Risk Policy Coordination Group: This group ensures a consistent or certain modifications to existing products, services or business lines,
approach to risk policy architecture and risk management requirements undergo an appropriate and consistent level of review for CCB and its
across Citi. Members include independent risk representatives from each customers and are properly recorded and controlled.
business, region and Citibank, N.A.
Citi also has other committees that play critical risk management roles,
Citi has established the following committees to ensure that product such as Citi’s Asset and Liability Committee (ALCO) and the Operational Risk
risks are identified, evaluated and determined to be appropriate for Citi Council. For example, Citi’s ALCO sets the strategy of the liquidity portfolio
and its customers, including the existence of necessary approvals, controls and monitors its performance, including approving significant changes to
and accountabilities: portfolio asset allocations.
• New Product Approval Committee: This committee is designed to Risk Aggregation and Stress Testing
ensure that significant risks, including reputation and franchise risks, While Citi’s major risk areas are discussed individually on the following
in a new ICG product or service or complex transaction, are identified pages, these risks are also reviewed and managed in conjunction with one
and evaluated, determined to be appropriate, properly recorded for risk another and across Citi’s various businesses via its risk aggregation and stress
aggregation purposes, effectively controlled, and have accountabilities testing processes. Moreover, Citi has established a formal policy governing its
in place. Functions that participate in this committee’s reviews global systemic stress testing.
include Legal, Bank Regulatory, Risk, Compliance, Accounting Policy, As noted above, independent risk management monitors and controls
Product Control, and the Basel Interpretive Committee. Citibank, N.A. major risk exposures and concentrations across the organization. This
management participates in reviews of proposals contemplating the use requires the aggregation of risks, within and across businesses, as well
of bank chain entities. as subjecting those risks to various stress scenarios in order to assess the
• Consumer Product Approval Committee (CPAC): This committee, which potential economic impact they may have on Citi.
includes senior, multidisciplinary members, approves new products, Stress tests are in place across Citi’s entire portfolio (i.e., trading,
services, channels or geographies for GCB. Each region has a regional available-for-sale and accrual portfolios). These company-wide stress
CPAC, and a global CPAC addresses initiatives with high anti-money- reports measure the potential impact to Citi and its component businesses of
laundering (AML) risk or cross-border elements. Members include senior changes in various types of key risk factors (e.g., interest rates, credit spreads,
Risk, Legal, Compliance, Bank Regulatory, Operations and Technology etc.). The reports also measure the potential impact of a number of historical
and Operational Risk executives, supported by other specialists, including and hypothetical forward-looking systemic stress scenarios, as developed
fair lending. A member of Citibank, N.A. senior management also internally by independent risk management. These company-wide stress tests
participates in the CPAC process. are produced on a monthly basis, and results are reviewed by Citi’s senior
management and Board of Directors.

70
 Supplementing the stress testing described above, independent risk Citi’s Compliance Organization
management, with assistance from its businesses and Finance function, Compliance is an independent control function within Franchise Risk and
provides periodic updates to Citi’s senior management and Board of Directors Strategy that is designed to protect Citi not only by managing adherence
on significant potential areas of concern across Citi that can arise from risk to applicable laws, regulations and other standards of conduct, but also
concentrations, financial market participants and other systemic issues. by promoting business behavior and activity that is consistent with global
These areas of focus are intended to be forward-looking assessments of the standards for responsible finance.
potential economic impacts to Citi that may arise from these exposures. While principal responsibility for compliance rests with business
The stress-testing and focus-position exercises described above supplement managers and their teams, all employees of Citi are responsible for protecting
the standard limit-setting and risk-capital exercises described below, as the franchise by (i) engaging in responsible finance; (ii) understanding
these processes incorporate events in the marketplace and within Citi that and adhering to the compliance requirements that apply to their day-
impact the firm’s outlook on the form, magnitude, correlation and timing to-day activities, including Citi’s Code of Conduct and other Citi policies,
of identified risks that may arise. In addition to enhancing awareness standards and procedures; and (iii) seeking advice from the Compliance
and understanding of potential exposures, the results of these processes function with questions regarding compliance requirements and promptly
then serve as the starting point for developing risk management and reporting violations of laws, rules, regulations, Citi policies or relevant
mitigation strategies. ethical standards. Citi’s compliance risk management starts with Citi’s
In addition to Citi’s ongoing, internal stress testing described above, Citi Board of Directors and senior management, who set the tone from the top by
is also required to perform stress testing on a periodic basis for a number of promoting a strong culture of ethics, compliance and control.
regulatory exercises, including the Federal Reserve Board’s Comprehensive Citi’s compliance program is based on the three lines of defense, as
Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) and the OCC’s Dodd-Frank Act Stress described above.
Testing (DFAST). These regulatory exercises typically prescribe certain
Compliance Risk Appetite Framework
defined scenarios under which stress testing should be conducted, and
Guided by the principle of responsible finance, Citi seeks to eliminate,
they also provide defined forms for the output of the results. For additional
minimize, or mitigate compliance risk. Compliance risk is the risk arising
information, see “Risk Factors-Business and Operational Risks” above.
from violations of, or non-conformance with, local, national, or cross-border
Risk Capital laws, rules, or regulations, Citi’s own internal policies and procedures, or
Citi calculates and allocates risk capital across the Company in order to relevant ethical standards.
consistently measure risk taking across business activities and to assess risk- Citi manages its compliance risk appetite through a three-pillar approach:
reward relationships. Risk capital is defined as the amount of capital required • Setting risk appetite: Citi establishes its compliance risk appetite by setting
to absorb potential unexpected economic losses resulting from extremely limits on the types of business in which Citi will engage, the products
severe events over a one-year time period. and services Citi will offer, the types of customers which Citi will service,
• “Economic losses” include losses that are reflected on Citi’s Consolidated the counterparties with which Citi will deal, and the locations where Citi
Statements of Income and fair value adjustments to the Consolidated will do business. These limits are guided by adherence to the highest
Financial Statements, as well as any further declines in value not captured ethical standards.
on the Consolidated Statements of Income. • Adhering to risk appetite: Citi manages adherence to its compliance
• “Unexpected losses” are the difference between potential extremely severe risk appetite through the execution of its compliance program, which
losses and Citi’s expected (average) loss over a one-year time period. includes customer onboarding processes, product development processes,
• “Extremely severe” is defined as potential loss at a 99.97% confidence transaction monitoring processes, conduct risk program, ethics program,
level, based on the distribution of observed events and scenario analysis. and new products, services, and complex transactions approval processes.
• Evaluating the effectiveness of risk appetite controls: The business and
The drivers of economic losses are risks which, for Citi, are broadly compliance evaluate the effectiveness of controls governing compliance
categorized as credit risk, market risk and operational risk. Citi’s risk capital risk appetite through the Manager’s Control Assessment (MCA) processes;
framework is reviewed and enhanced on a regular basis in light of market compliance testing; compliance monitoring processes; compliance
developments and evolving practices. risk assessments; compliance metrics related to key operating risks, key
risk indicators and control effectiveness indicators; and the Internal
Audit function.

71
 The elements supporting these three pillars are discussed in greater • Engage with the Board, business management, operating committees
detail below. and Citi’s regulators to foster effective global governance. Compliance
provides regular reports on emerging risks and other issues and their
Citi’s Compliance Function
implications for Citi, as well as compliance program performance, to the
Compliance aims to execute Citi’s compliance risk appetite framework-
Citigroup and Citibank, N.A. Boards of Directors, including the Audit and
and thus eliminate, minimize, or manage compliance risk-through Citi’s
Ethics and Culture Committees, as well as other committees of the Boards.
compliance program. To achieve this mission, the Compliance function
Compliance also engages with business management on an ongoing
seeks to:
basis through various mechanisms, including governance committees,
• Understand the regulatory environment, requirements and and it supports and advises the businesses and other global functions in
expectations to which Citi’s activities are subject. Compliance managing regulatory relationships.
coordinates with Legal and other independent control functions,
as appropriate, to identify, communicate and document key • Advise and train Citi personnel across businesses, functions,
regulatory requirements. regions and legal entities in how to comply with laws, regulations
and other standards of conduct. Compliance helps promote a
• Assess the compliance risks of business activities and the state of
strong culture of compliance and control by increasing awareness and
mitigating controls, including the risks and controls in legal entities
capability across Citi on key compliance issues through training and
in which activity is conducted. To facilitate the identification and
communication programs. A fundamental element of Citi’s culture is
assessment of compliance risk, Compliance works with the businesses and
the requirement that Citi conducts itself in accordance with the highest
other independent control functions to review significant compliance and
standards of ethical behavior. Compliance plays a key role in developing
regulatory issues and the results of testing, monitoring, and internal and
company-wide initiatives designed to further embed ethics in Citi’s
external exams and audits.
culture. These initiatives include training for more than 40,000 senior
• In conjunction with Citi’s Board of Directors and senior employees that fosters ethical decision-making and underscores the
management, define Citi’s appetite for prudent compliance and importance of escalating issues. The initiatives also include a video series
regulatory risk consistent with its culture for compliance, control and featuring senior leaders discussing difficult ethical decisions, regular
responsible finance. As noted above, Citi has developed a compliance communications on ethics and culture, and the development of enhanced
risk appetite framework designed to eliminate, minimize or mitigate tools to support ethical decision-making. Compliance partners with the
compliance risk. businesses and other functions to develop and implement these and other
• Develop controls and execute programs reasonably designed to limit ethics and culture initiatives.
conduct to that consistent with Citi’s compliance and regulatory risk • Enhance the Compliance Program. Compliance fulfills its obligation
appetite and promptly detect and mitigate behavior that violates those to enhance the compliance program in part by using its annual
limits. Compliance has business-specific compliance functions (e.g., compliance risk assessment results to shape annual and multi-year
Global Consumer Banking and Institutional Clients Group), regional program enhancements.
programs, and thematic groups and programs (e.g., the AML Program
and the Conduct, Governance, and Emerging Risk Management group)
Organization Structure and Staff Independence
that aim to mitigate Citi’s exposure to conduct that is inconsistent with its
Citi’s Chief Compliance Officer manages the Compliance function. The Chief
compliance risk appetite.
Compliance Officer or a designee is responsible for reporting significant
• Detect, report on, escalate and remediate key compliance and compliance matters to Citi’s senior management, the Boards of Directors,
franchise risks and control issues; test controls for design and their designated committees, and other relevant forums.
operating effectiveness, promptly address issues, and track Citi’s Chief Compliance Officer reports to the Head of Franchise Risk and
remediation efforts. Compliance designs and implements policies, Strategy, who reports directly to Citi’s Chief Executive Officer. All compliance
standards, procedures, guidelines, surveillance reports and other solutions officers report directly to Citi’s Chief Compliance Officer through one of
for use by the business and compliance to promptly detect, address and the above mentioned direct reports. This structure provides the required
remediate issues, test controls for design and operating effectiveness, and independence of Compliance from the revenue-producing lines of business.
track remediation efforts.

72
Credit Risk
Credit risk is the potential for financial loss resulting from the failure of a Credit Risk Measurement and Stress Testing
borrower or counterparty to honor its financial or contractual obligations. Credit exposures are generally reported in notional terms for accrual loans,
Credit risk arises in many of Citigroup’s business activities, including: reflecting the value at which the loans as well as loan and other off-balance
sheet commitments are carried on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Credit
• wholesale and retail lending;
exposure arising from capital markets activities is generally expressed as the
• capital markets derivative transactions; current mark-to-market, net of margin, reflecting the net value owed to Citi
• structured finance; and by a given counterparty.
• repurchase and reverse repurchase transactions. The credit risk associated with these credit exposures is a function of
the creditworthiness of the obligor, as well as the terms and conditions
Credit risk also arises from settlement and clearing activities, when Citi of the specific obligation. Citi assesses the credit risk associated with its
transfers an asset in advance of receiving its counter-value or advances funds credit exposures on a regular basis through its loan loss reserve process
to settle a transaction on behalf of a client. Concentration risk, within credit (see “Significant Accounting Policies and Significant Estimates” and Notes 1
risk, is the risk associated with having credit exposure concentrated within a and 16 to the Consolidated Financial Statements), as well as through regular
specific client, industry, region or other category. stress testing at the company, business, geography and product levels. These
Credit Risk Management stress-testing processes typically estimate potential incremental credit costs
Credit risk is one of the most significant risks Citi faces as an institution. As that would occur as a result of either downgrades in the credit quality or
a result, Citi has a well established framework in place for managing credit defaults of the obligors or counterparties.
risk across all businesses. This includes a defined risk appetite, credit limits
and credit policies, both at the business level as well as at the company-wide
level. Citi’s credit risk management also includes processes and policies with
respect to problem recognition, including “watch lists,” portfolio review,
updated risk ratings and classification triggers.
With respect to Citi’s settlement and clearing activities, intra-day client
usage of lines is closely monitored against limits, as well as against “normal”
usage patterns. To the extent a problem develops, Citi typically moves
the client to a secured (collateralized) operating model. Generally, Citi’s
intra-day settlement and clearing lines are uncommitted and cancellable at
any time.
To manage concentration of risk within credit risk, Citi has in place a
concentration management framework consisting of industry limits, obligor
limits and single-name triggers. In addition, as noted under “Managing
Global Risk—Risk Aggregation and Stress Testing” above, independent
risk management reviews concentration of risk across Citi’s regions and
businesses to assist in managing this type of risk.

73
Loans Outstanding

December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
Consumer loans
In U.S. offices
Mortgage and real estate (1) $ 96,533 $108,453 $125,946 $139,177 $151,469
Installment, revolving credit, and other 14,450 13,398 14,070 15,616 28,291
Cards 112,982 115,651 111,403 117,908 122,384
Commercial and industrial 5,895 6,592 5,344 4,766 5,021
Lease financing — — — 1 2
$229,860 $244,094 $256,763 $277,468 $307,167
In offices outside the U.S.
Mortgage and real estate (1) $ 54,462 $ 55,511 $ 54,709 $ 52,052 $ 52,175
Installment, revolving credit, and other 31,128 33,182 33,958 32,673 36,132
Cards 32,032 36,740 40,653 38,926 40,948
Commercial and industrial 22,561 24,107 22,225 21,915 18,028
Lease financing 609 769 781 711 665
$140,792 $150,309 $152,326 $146,277 $147,948
Total Consumer loans $370,652 $394,403 $409,089 $423,745 $455,115
Unearned income (682) (572) (418) (405) 69
Consumer loans, net of unearned income $369,970 $393,831 $408,671 $423,340 $455,184
Corporate loans
In U.S. offices
Commercial and industrial $ 35,055 $ 32,704 $ 26,985 $ 20,830 $ 13,669
Loans to financial institutions 36,272 25,102 18,159 15,113 8,995
Mortgage and real estate (1) 32,537 29,425 24,705 21,516 19,770
Installment, revolving credit, and other 29,207 34,434 32,446 33,182 34,046
Lease financing 1,758 1,647 1,410 1,270 1,413
$134,829 $123,312 $103,705 $ 91,911 $ 77,893
In offices outside the U.S.
Commercial and industrial $ 79,239 $ 82,663 $ 82,939 $ 79,764 $ 72,166
Loans to financial institutions 33,269 38,372 37,739 29,794 22,620
Mortgage and real estate (1) 6,031 6,274 6,485 6,885 5,899
Installment, revolving credit, and other 19,259 18,714 14,958 14,114 11,829
Lease financing 356 527 605 568 531
Governments and official institutions 2,236 2,341 1,159 1,576 3,644
$140,390 $148,891 $143,885 $132,701 $116,689
Total Corporate loans $275,219 $272,203 $247,590 $224,612 $194,582
Unearned income (554) (562) (797) (710) (972)
Corporate loans, net of unearned income $274,665 $271,641 $246,793 $223,902 $193,610
Total loans—net of unearned income $644,635 $665,472 $655,464 $647,242 $648,794
Allowance for loan losses—on drawn exposures (15,994) (19,648) (25,455) (30,115) (40,655)
Total loans—net of unearned income and allowance for credit losses $628,641 $645,824 $630,009 $617,127 $608,139
Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans—net of
unearned income (2) 2.50% 2.97% 3.92% 4.69% 6.31%
Allowance for Consumer loan losses as a percentage of total Consumer
loans—net of unearned income (2) 3.68% 4.34% 5.57% 6.45% 7.81%
Allowance for Corporate loan losses as a percentage of total Corporate
loans—net of unearned income (2) 0.89% 0.97% 1.14% 1.31% 2.75%

(1) Loans secured primarily by real estate.

(2) All periods exclude loans that are carried at fair value.

74
Details of Credit Loss Experience

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010

Allowance for loan losses at beginning of period $19,648 $25,455 $30,115 $ 40,655 $36,033
Provision for loan losses
Consumer $ 6,693 $ 7,603 $10,371 $ 12,075 $24,886
Corporate 135 1 87 (739) 75
$ 6,828 $ 7,604 $10,458 $ 11,336 $24,961
Gross credit losses
Consumer
In U.S. offices (1)(2) $ 6,780 $ 8,402 $12,226 $ 15,767 $24,183
In offices outside the U.S. 3,901 3,998 4,139 4,932 6,548
Corporate
Commercial and industrial, and other
In U.S. offices 66 125 154 392 1,222
In offices outside the U.S. 283 144 305 649 571
Loans to financial institutions
In U.S. offices 2 2 33 215 275
In offices outside the U.S. 13 7 68 391 111
Mortgage and real estate
In U.S. offices 8 62 59 182 953
In offices outside the U.S. 55 29 21 171 286
$11,108 $12,769 $17,005 $ 22,699 $34,149
Credit recoveries (3)
Consumer
In U.S. offices $ 1,122 $ 1,073 $ 1,302 $ 1,467 $ 1,323
In offices outside the U.S. 874 1,065 1,055 1,159 1,209
Corporate
Commercial & industrial, and other
In U.S. offices 64 62 243 175 591
In offices outside the U.S. 63 52 95 93 115
Loans to financial institutions
In U.S. offices 1 1 — — —
In offices outside the U.S. 11 20 43 89 132
Mortgage and real estate
In U.S. offices — 31 17 27 130
In offices outside the U.S. — 2 19 2 26
$ 2,135 $ 2,306 $ 2,774 $ 3,012 $ 3,526
Net credit losses
In U.S. offices (1)(2) $ 5,669 $ 7,424 $10,910 $ 14,887 $24,589
In offices outside the U.S. 3,304 3,039 3,321 4,800 6,034
Total $ 8,973 $10,463 $14,231 $ 19,687 $30,623
Other - net (4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9) $ (1,509) $ (2,948) $ (887) $ (2,189) $10,284
Allowance for loan losses at end of period $15,994 $19,648 $25,455 $ 30,115 $40,655
Allowance for loan losses as a % of total loans (10) 2.50% 2.97% 3.92% 4.69% 6.31%
Allowance for unfunded lending commitments (11) $ 1,063 $ 1,229 $ 1,119 $ 1,136 $ 1,066
Total allowance for loan losses and unfunded lending commitments $17,057 $20,877 $26,574 $ 31,251 $41,721
Net Consumer credit losses (1)(2) $ 8,685 $10,262 $14,008 $ 18,073 $28,199
As a percentage of average Consumer loans 2.28% 2.63% 3.43% 4.15% 5.72%
Net Corporate credit losses $ 288 $ 201 $ 223 $ 1,614 $ 2,424
As a percentage of average Corporate loans 0.10% 0.08% 0.09% 0.79% 1.27%
Allowance for loan losses at end of period (12)
Citicorp $11,465 $13,174 $14,623 $ 16,699 $22,366
Citi Holdings 4,529 6,474 10,832 13,416 18,289
Total Citigroup $15,994 $19,648 $25,455 $ 30,115 $40,655
Allowance by type
Consumer $13,605 $17,064 $22,679 $ 27,236 $35,406
Corporate 2,389 2,584 2,776 2,879 5,249
Total Citigroup $15,994 $19,648 $25,455 $ 30,115 $40,655

Notes to the table are on the next page.

75
(1) 2012 includes approximately $635 million of incremental charge-offs related to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) guidance issued in the third quarter of 2012, which required mortgage loans to
borrowers that have gone through Chapter 7 U.S. Bankruptcy Code to be written down to collateral value. There was a corresponding approximate $600 million release in the third quarter of 2012 allowance for loans
losses related to these charge-offs. 2012 also includes a benefit to charge-offs of approximately $40 million related to finalizing the impact of the OCC guidance in the fourth quarter of 2012.
(2) 2012 includes approximately $370 million of incremental charge-offs related to previously deferred principal balances on modified loans in the first quarter of 2012. These charge-offs were related to anticipated
forgiveness of principal in connection with the national mortgage settlement. There was a corresponding approximate $350 million reserve release in the first quarter of 2012 related to these charge-offs.
(3) Recoveries have been reduced by certain collection costs that are incurred only if collection efforts are successful.
(4) Includes all adjustments to the allowance for credit losses, such as changes in the allowance from acquisitions, dispositions, securitizations, foreign currency translation, purchase accounting adjustments, etc.
(5) 2014 includes reductions of approximately $1.1 billion related to the sale or transfer to held-for-sale (HFS) of various loan portfolios, which includes approximately $411 million related to the transfer of various
real estate loan portfolios to HFS, approximately $204 million related to the transfer to HFS of a business in Greece, approximately $177 million related to the transfer to HFS of a business in Spain, approximately
$29 million related to the transfer to HFS of a business in Honduras and approximately $108 million related to the transfer to HFS of various EMEA loan portfolios. Additionally, 2014 includes a reduction of
approximately $463 million related to foreign currency translation.
(6) 2013 includes reductions of approximately $2.4 billion related to the sale or transfer to held-for-sale of various loan portfolios, which includes approximately $360 million related to the sale of Credicard and
approximately $255 million related to a transfer to held-for-sale of a loan portfolio in Greece, approximately $230 million related to a non-provision transfer of reserves associated with deferred interest to Other assets
which includes deferred interest and approximately $220 million related to foreign currency translation.
(7) 2012 includes reductions of approximately $875 million related to the sale or transfer to held-for-sale of various U.S. loan portfolios.
(8) 2011 includes reductions of approximately $1.6 billion related to the sale or transfer to held-for-sale of various U.S. loan portfolios, approximately $240 million related to the sale of the Egg Banking PLC credit card
business, approximately $72 million related to the transfer of the Citi Belgium business to held-for-sale and approximately $290 million related to FX translation.
(9) 2010 primarily includes an addition of $13.4 billion related to the impact of consolidating entities in connection with Citi’s adoption of SFAS 166/167, reductions of approximately $2.7 billion related to the sale or
transfer to held-for-sale of various U.S. loan portfolios and approximately $290 million related to the transfer of a U.K. first mortgage portfolio to held-for-sale.
(10) December 31, 2014, December 31, 2013, December 31, 2012, December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 exclude $5.9 billion, $5.0 billion, $5.3 billion, $5.3 billion and $4.4 billion, respectively, of loans which are
carried at fair value.
(11) Represents additional credit loss reserves for unfunded lending commitments and letters of credit recorded in Other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.
(12) Allowance for loan losses represents management’s best estimate of probable losses inherent in the portfolio, as well as probable losses related to large individually evaluated impaired loans and troubled debt
restructurings. See “Significant Accounting Policies and Significant Estimates” and Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements below. Attribution of the allowance is made for analytical purposes only and the entire
allowance is available to absorb probable credit losses inherent in the overall portfolio.

Allowance for Loan Losses

The following tables detail information on Citi’s allowance for loan losses, loans and coverage ratios as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013:

December 31, 2014

In billions of dollars Allowance for loan losses Loans, net of unearned income Allowance as a percentage of loans (1)
North America cards (2) $ 4.9 $ 114.0 4.3%
North America mortgages (3)(4) 3.7 95.9 3.9
North America other 1.2 21.6 5.6
International cards 1.9 31.5 6.0
International other (5) 1.9 106.9 1.8
Total Consumer $13.6 $ 369.9 3.7%
Total Corporate 2.4 274.7 0.9
Total Citigroup $16.0 $ 644.6 2.5%

(1) Allowance as a percentage of loans excludes loans that are carried at fair value.
(2) Includes both Citi-branded cards and Citi retail services. The $4.9 billion of loan loss reserves represented approximately 15 months of coincident net credit loss coverage.
(3) Of the $3.7 billion, approximately $3.5 billion was allocated to North America mortgages in Citi Holdings. The $3.7 billion of loan loss reserves represented approximately 53 months of coincident net credit loss
coverage (for both total North America mortgages and Citi Holdings North America mortgages).
(4) Of the $3.7 billion in loan loss reserves, approximately $1.2 billion and $2.5 billion are determined in accordance with ASC 450-20 and ASC 310-10-35 (troubled debt restructurings), respectively. Of the $95.9 billion
in loans, approximately $80.4 billion and $15.2 billion of the loans are evaluated in accordance with ASC 450-20 and ASC 310-10-35 (troubled debt restructurings), respectively. For additional information, see Note 16
to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(5) Includes mortgages and other retail loans.

December 31, 2013

In billions of dollars Allowance for loan losses Loans, net of unearned income Allowance as a percentage of loans (1)
North America cards (2)
$ 6.2 $ 116.8 5.3%
North America mortgages (3)(4) 5.1 107.5 4.8
North America other 1.2 21.9 5.4
International cards 2.3 36.2 6.5
International other (5) 2.2 111.4 2.0
Total Consumer $17.0 $ 393.8 4.3%
Total Corporate 2.6 271.7 1.0
Total Citigroup $19.6 $ 665.5 3.0%

(1) Allowance as a percentage of loans excludes loans that are carried at fair value.
(2) Includes both Citi-branded cards and Citi retail services. The $6.2 billion of loan loss reserves represented approximately 18 months of coincident net credit loss coverage.
(3) Of the $5.1 billion, approximately $4.9 billion was allocated to North America mortgages in Citi Holdings. The $5.1 billion of loan loss reserves represented approximately 26 months of coincident net credit loss
coverage (for both total North America mortgages and Citi Holdings North America mortgages).
(4) Of the $5.1 billion in loan loss reserves, approximately $2.4 billion and $2.7 billion are determined in accordance with ASC 450-20 and ASC 310-10-35 (troubled debt restructurings), respectively. Of the $107.5 billion
in loans, approximately $88.6 billion and $18.5 billion of the loans are evaluated in accordance with ASC 450-20 and ASC 310-10-35 (troubled debt restructurings), respectively. For additional information, see Note 16
to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(5) Includes mortgages and other retail loans.

76
Non-Accrual Loans and Assets, and Renegotiated Loans • North America Citi-branded cards and Citi retail services are not included
The following pages include information on Citi’s “Non-Accrual Loans because under industry standards, credit card loans accrue interest
and Assets” and “Renegotiated Loans.” There is a certain amount of until such loans are charged off, which typically occurs at 180 days
overlap among these categories. The following summary provides a general contractual delinquency.
description of each category:
Renegotiated Loans:
Non-Accrual Loans and Assets:
• Includes both corporate and consumer loans whose terms have been
• Corporate and consumer (commercial market) non-accrual status
modified in a troubled debt restructuring (TDR).
is based on the determination that payment of interest or principal
is doubtful. • Includes both accrual and non-accrual TDRs.
• Consumer non-accrual status is generally based on aging, i.e., the
Non-Accrual Loans and Assets
borrower has fallen behind in payments.
The table below summarizes Citigroup’s non-accrual loans as of the periods
• Mortgage loans in regulated bank entities discharged through Chapter 7
indicated. Non-accrual loans may still be current on interest payments. In
bankruptcy, other than Federal Housing Administration (FHA) insured situations where Citi reasonably expects that only a portion of the principal
loans, are classified as non-accrual. Non-bank mortgage loans discharged owed will ultimately be collected, all payments received are reflected as a
through Chapter 7 bankruptcy are classified as non-accrual at 90 days or reduction of principal and not as interest income. For all other non-accrual
more past due. In addition, home equity loans in regulated bank entities loans, cash interest receipts are generally recorded as revenue.
are classified as non-accrual if the related residential first mortgage loan
is 90 days or more past due.

Non-Accrual Loans

December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
Citicorp $3,062 $3,791 $ 4,096 $ 4,018 $ 4,909
Citi Holdings 4,045 5,212 7,434 7,050 14,498
Total non-accrual loans $7,107 $9,003 $11,530 $11,068 $19,407
Corporate non-accrual loans (1)
North America $ 321 $ 736 $ 735 $ 1,246 $ 2,112
EMEA 267 766 1,131 1,293 5,337
Latin America 416 127 128 362 701
Asia 179 279 339 335 470
Total Corporate non-accrual loans $1,183 $1,908 $ 2,333 $ 3,236 $ 8,620
Citicorp $1,126 $1,580 $ 1,909 $ 2,217 $ 3,091
Citi Holdings 57 328 424 1,019 5,529
Total Corporate non-accrual loans $1,183 $1,908 $ 2,333 $ 3,236 $ 8,620
Consumer non-accrual loans (1)
North America $4,412 $5,238 $ 7,149 $ 5,888 $ 8,540
EMEA 32 138 380 387 652
Latin America 1,188 1,426 1,285 1,107 1,019
Asia 292 293 383 450 576
Total Consumer non-accrual loans $5,924 $7,095 $ 9,197 $ 7,832 $10,787
Citicorp $1,936 $2,211 $ 2,187 $ 1,801 $ 1,818
Citi Holdings 3,988 4,884 7,010 6,031 8,969
Total Consumer non-accrual loans $5,924 $7,095 $ 9,197 $ 7,832 $10,787

(1) Excludes purchased distressed loans, as they are generally accreting interest. The carrying value of these loans was $421 million at December 31, 2014, $703 million at December 31, 2013, $537 million at
December 31, 2012, $511 million at December 31, 2011, and $469 million at December 31, 2010.

77
The table below summarizes Citigroup’s other real estate owned (OREO) assets as of the periods indicated. This represents the carrying value of all real estate
property acquired by foreclosure or other legal proceedings when Citi has taken possession of the collateral.

December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
OREO (1)
Citicorp $ 96 $ 79 $ 49 $ 86 $ 840
Citi Holdings 164 338 391 480 863
Total OREO $ 260 $ 417 $ 440 $ 566 $ 1,703
North America $ 195 $ 305 $ 299 $ 441 $ 1,440
EMEA 8 59 99 73 161
Latin America 47 47 40 51 47
Asia 10 6 2 1 55
Total OREO $ 260 $ 417 $ 440 $ 566 $ 1,703
Other repossessed assets $ — $ — $ 1 $ 1 $ 28

Non-accrual assets—Total Citigroup

Corporate non-accrual loans $1,183 $1,908 $ 2,333 $ 3,236 $ 8,620
Consumer non-accrual loans 5,924 7,095 9,197 7,832 10,787
Non-accrual loans (NAL) $7,107 $9,003 $11,530 $11,068 $19,407
OREO $ 260 $ 417 $ 440 $ 566 $ 1,703
Other repossessed assets — — 1 1 28
Non-accrual assets (NAA) $7,367 $9,420 $11,971 $11,635 $21,138
NAL as a percentage of total loans 1.10% 1.35% 1.76% 1.71% 2.99%
NAA as a percentage of total assets 0.40 0.50 0.64 0.62 1.10
Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of NAL (2) 225 218 221 272 209

Non-accrual assets—Total Citicorp 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010

Non-accrual loans (NAL) $3,062 $3,791 $ 4,096 $ 4,018 $ 4,909
OREO 96 79 49 86 840
Other repossessed assets N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Non-accrual assets (NAA) $3,158 $3,870 $ 4,145 $ 4,104 $ 5,749
NAA as a percentage of total assets 0.18% 0.22% 0.24% 0.25% 0.36%
Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of NAL (2) 374 348 357 416 456

Non-accrual assets—Total Citi Holdings

Non-accrual loans (NAL) $4,045 $5,212 $ 7,434 $ 7,050 $14,498
OREO 164 338 391 480 863
Other repossessed assets N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Non-accrual assets (NAA) $4,209 $5,550 $ 7,825 $ 7,530 $15,361
NAA as a percentage of total assets 4.29% 4.74% 5.02% 3.35% 4.91%
Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of NAL (2) 112 124 146 190 126

(1) 2014 reflects a decrease of $130 million related to the adoption of ASU 2014-14, which requires certain government guaranteed mortgage loans to be recognized as separate other receivables upon foreclosure. Prior
periods have not been restated. For additional information, see Note 1 of the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(2) The allowance for loan losses includes the allowance for Citi’s credit card portfolios and purchased distressed loans, while the non-accrual loans exclude credit card balances (with the exception of certain international
portfolios) and purchased distressed loans as these continue to accrue interest until charge-off.
N/A Not available at the Citicorp or Citi Holdings level.

78
Renegotiated Loans Forgone Interest Revenue on Loans (1)
The following table presents Citi’s loans modified in TDRs.
In non-
Dec. 31, Dec. 31, In U.S. U.S. 2014
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 In millions of dollars offices offices total
Corporate renegotiated loans (1) Interest revenue that would have been accrued at
In U.S. offices original contractual rates (2) $1,708 $715 $ 2,423
Commercial and industrial (2) $ 12 $ 36 Amount recognized as interest revenue (2) 996 261 1,257
Mortgage and real estate (3) 106 143 Forgone interest revenue $ 712 $454 $ 1,166
Loans to financial institutions — 14
Other 316 364 (1) Relates to Corporate non-accrual loans, renegotiated loans and Consumer loans on which accrual of
interest has been suspended.
$ 434 $ 557 (2) Interest revenue in offices outside the U.S. may reflect prevailing local interest rates, including the
In offices outside the U.S. effects of inflation and monetary correction in certain countries.
Commercial and industrial (2) $ 105 $ 161
Mortgage and real estate (3) 1 18
Other 39 58
$ 145 $ 237
Total Corporate renegotiated loans $ 579 $ 794

Consumer renegotiated loans (4)(5)(6)(7)

In U.S. offices
Mortgage and real estate (8) $15,514 $18,922
Cards 1,751 2,510
Installment and other 580 626
$17,845 $22,058
In offices outside the U.S.
Mortgage and real estate $ 695 $ 641
Cards 656 830
Installment and other 586 834
$ 1,937 $ 2,305
Total Consumer renegotiated loans $19,782 $24,363

(1) Includes $135 million and $312 million of non-accrual loans included in the non-accrual assets
table above at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. The remaining loans are
accruing interest.
(2) In addition to modifications reflected as TDRs at December 31, 2014, Citi also modified $15 million
and $34 million of commercial loans risk rated “Substandard Non-Performing” or worse (asset
category defined by banking regulators) in offices inside and outside the U.S., respectively. These
modifications were not considered TDRs because the modifications did not involve a concession (a
required element of a TDR for accounting purposes).
(3) In addition to modifications reflected as TDRs at December 31, 2014, Citi also modified $22 million
of commercial real estate loans risk rated “Substandard Non-Performing” or worse (asset category
defined by banking regulators) in offices inside the U.S. These modifications were not considered
TDRs because the modifications did not involve a concession (a required element of a TDR for
accounting purposes).
(4) Includes $3,132 million and $3,637 million of non-accrual loans included in the non-accrual assets
table above at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The remaining loans are accruing interest.
(5) Includes $124 million and $29 million of commercial real estate loans at December 31, 2014 and
2013, respectively.
(6) Includes $184 million and $295 million of other commercial loans at December 31, 2014 and
2013, respectively.
(7) Smaller-balance homogeneous loans were derived from Citi’s risk management systems.
(8) Reduction in 2014 includes $2,901 million related to TDRs sold or transferred to held-for-sale.

79
North America Consumer Mortgage Lending primarily to high-credit-quality borrowers who have on average significantly
higher origination and refreshed FICO scores than other loans in the
Overview
residential first mortgage portfolio, and have exhibited significantly lower
Citi’s North America consumer mortgage portfolio consists of both
30+ delinquency rates as compared with residential first mortgages without
residential first mortgages and home equity loans. At December 31, 2014,
this payment feature. As such, Citi does not believe the residential mortgage
Citi’s North America consumer mortgage portfolio was $95.9 billion
loans with this payment feature represent substantially higher risk in
(compared to $107.5 billion at December 31, 2013), of which the residential
the portfolio.
first mortgage portfolio was $67.8 billion (compared to $75.9 billion at
Citi does not offer option-adjustable rate mortgages/negative-amortizing
December 31, 2013), and the home equity loan portfolio was $28.1 billion
mortgage products to its customers. As a result, option-adjustable rate
(compared to $31.6 billion at December 31, 2013). At December 31,
mortgages/negative-amortizing mortgages represent an insignificant portion
2014, $34.4 billion of first mortgages was recorded in Citi Holdings, with
of total balances, since they were acquired only incidentally as part of prior
the remaining $33.4 billion recorded in Citicorp. At December 31, 2014,
portfolio and business purchases.
$24.8 billion of home equity loans was recorded in Citi Holdings, with the
remaining $3.3 billion recorded in Citicorp.
Citi’s residential first mortgage portfolio included $5.2 billion of loans
with FHA insurance or Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) guarantees
at December 31, 2014, compared to $7.7 billion at December 31, 2013.
The decline during the year was primarily attributed to approximately
$2.3 billion of mortgage loans with FHA insurance sold and transferred to
held-for-sale, including $0.9 billion during the fourth quarter of 2014. Citi’s
FHA/VA portfolio consists of loans to low-to-moderate-income borrowers
with lower FICO (Fair Isaac Corporation) scores and generally higher
loan-to-value ratios (LTVs). Credit losses on FHA loans are borne by the
sponsoring governmental agency, provided that the insurance terms have not
been rescinded as a result of an origination defect. With respect to VA loans,
the VA establishes a loan-level loss cap, beyond which Citi is liable for loss.
While FHA and VA loans have high delinquency rates, given the insurance
and guarantees, respectively, Citi has experienced negligible credit losses on
these loans.
In addition, Citi’s residential first mortgage portfolio included $0.8 billion
of loans with origination LTVs above 80% that have insurance through
mortgage insurance companies at December 31, 2014, compared to
$1.1 billion at December 31, 2013. At December 31, 2014, the residential
first mortgage portfolio also had $0.6 billion of loans subject to long-term
standby commitments (LTSCs) with U.S. government-sponsored entities
(GSEs) for which Citi has limited exposure to credit losses, compared to
$0.8 billion at December 31, 2013. At December 31, 2014, Citi’s home equity
loan portfolio also included $0.2 billion of loans subject to LTSCs with GSEs,
compared to $0.3 billion at December 31, 2013, for which Citi also has
limited exposure to credit losses. These guarantees and commitments may
be rescinded in the event of loan origination defects. Citi’s allowance for loan
loss calculations takes into consideration the impact of the guarantees and
commitments described above.
As of December 31, 2014, Citi’s North America residential first mortgage
portfolio contained approximately $3.8 billion of adjustable rate mortgages
that are currently required to make a payment consisting of only accrued
interest for the payment period, or an interest-only payment, compared to
$5.0 billion at December 31, 2013. This decline resulted primarily from
repayments, conversions to amortizing loans and loans sold/transferred
to held-for-sale. Residential first mortgages with this payment feature are

80
North America Consumer Mortgage Quarterly Credit North America Residential First Mortgage —
Trends—Net Credit Losses and Delinquencies—Residential Net Credit Losses
First Mortgages In millions of dollars
The following charts detail the quarterly credit trends for Citigroup’s
Citi Holdings - CMI Citi Holdings - CFNA Citicorp
residential first mortgage portfolio in North America.
$218
North America Residential First Mortgage — EOP Loans $193
In billions of dollars 5 $156
3 $139
Citi Holdings - CMI Citi Holdings - CFNA Citicorp 7 $122
117 95 2
5
$76 $75 $73 90
$72 $68 83
91
31 32 95 95
33 59 54
34 33 26
9 9 4Q’13 (1)(2)
1Q’14 2Q’14 (3)
3Q’14 4Q’14
8 8 8
Total NCL 1.1% 1.0% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7%
36 35 32 29 27 Citi Holdings CMI 1.0% 1.1% 0.7% 0.7% 0.4%

Citi Holdings CFNA 5.0% 4.4% 4.2% 4.0% 4.6%(4)

4Q’13 1Q’14 2Q’14 3Q’14 4Q’14 Citi Holdings Total 1.9% 1.8% 1.4% 1.4% 1.3%

Citicorp 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.02% 0.05%

S&P/Case Shiller Home

Price Index(5) 13.4% 12.4% 8.0% 4.8% 4.5%(6)

Note: CMI refers to loans originated by CitiMortgage. CFNA refers to loans originated by CitiFinancial. Totals
may not sum due to rounding.
(1) 4Q’13 includes $6 million of charge-offs related to Citi’s fulfillment of its obligations under the national
mortgage and independent foreclosure review settlements.
(2) 4Q’13 excludes approximately $84 million of net credit losses consisting of (i) approximately $69 million
of charge-offs related to a change in the charge-off policy for mortgages originated in CitiFinancial to
more closely align to policies used in the CitiMortgage business, and (ii) approximately $15 million of
charge-offs related to a change in the estimate of net credit losses related to collateral dependent loans
to borrowers who have gone through Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
(3) 2Q’14 excludes a recovery of approximately $58 million in CitiMortgage.
(4) Increase in 4Q’14 CitiFinancial residential first mortgage loss driven by portfolio seasoning and loss
mitigation activities.
(5) Year-over-year change in the S&P/Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index.
(6) Year-over-year change as of October 2014.

81
North America Residential First Mortgage Delinquencies—Citi Holdings
In billions of dollars

Days Past Due: 30-89 90-179 180+ 30+ DPD

6.03
6
4.87
1.95
4.32
3.94
4 1.61 3.66
3.34 3.39
1.17 1.50
1.30 2.77
1.13
0.85 1.18 1.20 2.31
0.61
0.63 0.64 0.94
2 0.59 0.55
0.41 0.84
2.91
2.41 0.34
2.21 2.02 1.88
1.58 1.64 1.43 1.12
0
4Q’12 1Q’13 2Q’13 3Q’13 4Q’13 1Q’14 2Q’14 3Q’14 4Q’14

Note: Days past due excludes (i) U.S. mortgage loans that are guaranteed by U.S. government-sponsored agencies because the potential loss predominantly resides with the U.S. agencies, and (ii) loans recorded at fair value.
Totals may not sum due to rounding.

Credit performance (net credit losses and delinquencies) of the residential During 2014, continued management actions, primarily assets sales and
first mortgage portfolio continued to improve during 2014, although the loans transferred to held-for-sale and, to a lesser extent, loan modifications,
home price index (HPI), which varies from market to market (as indicated were the primary drivers of the overall improvement in delinquencies in Citi
in the table below), moderated throughout 2014 compared to the prior Holdings’ residential first mortgage portfolio. Citi sold or transferred to held-
year. The decline in net credit losses during 2014 was driven by continued for-sale approximately $1.2 billion of delinquent residential first mortgages
improvement in credit, HPI, the economic environment and continued in 2014 (compared to $2.1 billion in 2013), including $0.6 billion during
management actions, primarily asset sales and loans transferred to held- the fourth quarter of 2014. Credit performance from quarter to quarter could
for-sale and, to a lesser extent, loan modifications. CitiFinancial’s net credit continue to be impacted by the volume of delinquent loan sales (or lack of
losses improved more modestly in 2014 compared to CitiMortgage, including significant sales) and HPI, as well as increases in interest rates.
an increase in net credit losses in the fourth quarter of 2014 due to portfolio
seasoning and loss mitigation activities.
Residential first mortgages originated by CitiFinancial have a higher
net credit loss rate (4.6%, compared to 0.4% for CitiMortgage as of the
fourth quarter of 2014), as CitiFinancial borrowers tend to have higher LTVs
and lower FICOs than CitiMortgage borrowers. CitiFinancial’s residential
first mortgages also have a significantly different geographic distribution,
with different mortgage market conditions that tend to lag the overall
improvements in HPI.

82
North America Residential First Mortgages—State Delinquency Trends
The following tables set forth, for total Citigroup, the six states and/or regions with the highest concentration of Citi’s residential first mortgages as of
December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013.

In billions of dollars December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

% %
ENR 90+DPD LTV > Refreshed ENR 90+DPD LTV > Refreshed
State (1) ENR (2) Distribution % 100% (3) FICO ENR (2) Distribution % 100% (3) FICO
CA $18.9 31% 0.6% 2% 745 $19.2 30% 1.0% 4% 738
NY/NJ/CT (4)(5) 12.2 20 1.9 2 740 11.7 18 2.6 3 733
FL (4) 2.8 5 3.0 14 700 3.1 5 4.4 25 688
IN/OH/MI (4) 2.5 4 2.9 10 667 3.1 5 3.9 21 659
IL (4) 2.5 4 2.5 9 713 2.7 4 3.8 16 703
AZ/NV 1.3 2 1.9 18 715 1.5 2 2.7 25 710
Other 19.9 33 3.4 5 679 23.1 36 4.1 8 671
Total $60.1 100% 2.1% 4% 715 $64.4 100% 2.9% 8% 705

Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.

(1) Certain of the states are included as part of a region based on Citi’s view of similar HPI within the region.
(2) Ending net receivables. Excludes loans in Canada and Puerto Rico, loans guaranteed by U.S. government agencies, loans recorded at fair value and loans subject to LTSCs. Excludes balances for which FICO or LTV data
are unavailable.
(3) LTV ratios (loan balance divided by appraised value) are calculated at origination and updated by applying market price data.
(4) New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Indiana, Ohio, Florida and Illinois are judicial states.
(5) Increase in ENR year-over-year was due to originations in Citicorp.

The significant improvement in Citigroup’s residential first mortgages Citi’s foreclosure inventory continues to be impacted by the ongoing
LTV percentages at year-end 2014 compared to the prior year end was driven extensive state and regulatory requirements related to the foreclosure process,
by HPI improvements across substantially all metropolitan statistical areas, which continue to result in longer foreclosure timelines. Citi’s average
thereby increasing values used in the determination of LTV. Additionally, timeframes to move a loan out of foreclosure are two to three times longer
delinquent and re-performing asset sales of high LTV loans and, to a lesser than historical norms, and continue to be even more pronounced in judicial
extent, modification programs involving principal forgiveness during 2014 states, where Citi has a higher concentration of residential first mortgages
further reduced the amount of loans with greater than 100% LTV. While 90+ in foreclosure. As of December 31, 2014, approximately 21% of Citi’s total
days past due delinquency rates have improved for the states and regions foreclosure inventory was active foreclosure units in process for over two
above, the continued longer foreclosure timelines (see discussion under years, compared to 29% as of December 31, 2013, with the decline primarily
“Foreclosures” below) could result in less improvement in these rates in the attributed to CitiMortgage loans sold or transferred to held-for-sale.
future, especially in judicial states (i.e., states that require foreclosures to be
processed via court approval).
Foreclosures
A substantial majority of Citi’s foreclosure inventory consists of residential
first mortgages. At December 31, 2014, Citi’s foreclosure inventory included
approximately $0.6 billion, or 0.9%, of residential first mortgages, compared
to $0.8 billion, or 1.2%, at December 31, 2013 (based on the dollar amount
of ending net receivables of loans in foreclosure inventory, excluding loans
that are guaranteed by U.S. government agencies and loans subject to
LTSCs). This decline in 2014 was largely attributed to CitiMortgage loans
sold or transferred to held-for-sale.

83
North America Consumer Mortgage Quarterly Credit Revolving HELOCs
Trends—Net Credit Losses and Delinquencies—Home At December 31, 2014, Citi’s home equity loan portfolio of $28.1 billion
Equity Loans included approximately $16.7 billion of home equity lines of credit
Citi’s home equity loan portfolio consists of both fixed-rate home equity loans (Revolving HELOCs) that are still within their revolving period and have
and loans extended under home equity lines of credit. Fixed-rate home equity not commenced amortization, or “reset,” compared to $18.9 billion at
loans are fully amortizing. Home equity lines of credit allow for amounts December 31, 2013. The following chart indicates the FICO and combined
to be drawn for a period of time with the payment of interest only and then, loan-to-value (CLTV) characteristics of Citi’s Revolving HELOCs portfolio and
at the end of the draw period, the then-outstanding amount is converted to the year in which they reset:
an amortizing loan (the interest-only payment feature during the revolving
period is standard for this product across the industry). After conversion, the
home equity loans typically have a 20-year amortization period.

North America Home Equity Lines of Credit Amortization—Citigroup

Total ENR by Reset Year
In billions of dollars as of December 31, 2014

FICO 660+,CLTV>100 FICO<660,CLTV>100 FICO 660+,CLTV>=80<=100 FICO<660,CLTV>=80<=100

FICO 660+,CLTV<80 FICO<660,CLTV<80 %ENR

$6.0 25.6% 24.9%

$5.0 19.4% $4.8

$4.6

$4.0
$3.6
13.3%
$3.0
$2.5
7.0%
$2.0
5.3%
$1.3
2.3% 2.2% $1.0
$1.0
$0.4 $0.4

$0.0
<2013 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019+
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.

Approximately 10% of Citi’s total Revolving HELOCs portfolio had While it is not certain what, if any, impact this payment shock could have
commenced amortization as of December 31, 2014. Of the remaining on Citi’s delinquency rates and net credit losses, Citi currently estimates that
Revolving HELOCs portfolio, approximately 78% will commence the monthly loan payment for its Revolving HELOCs that reset during 2015–
amortization during 2015–2017. Before commencing amortization, 2017 could increase on average by approximately $360, or 170%. Increases in
Revolving HELOC borrowers are required to pay only interest on their interest rates could further increase these payments given the variable nature
loans. Upon amortization, these borrowers will be required to pay both of the interest rates on these loans post-reset. Of the Revolving HELOCs that
interest, usually at a variable rate, and principal that amortizes typically will commence amortization during 2015–2017, approximately $1.6 billion,
over 20 years, rather than the typical 30-year amortization. As a result, Citi’s or 12%, of the loans have a CLTV greater than 100% as of December 31, 2014.
customers with Revolving HELOCs that reset could experience “payment Borrowers’ high loan-to-value positions, as well as the cost and availability
shock” due to the higher required payments on the loans. of refinancing options, could limit borrowers’ ability to refinance their
Revolving HELOCs as these loans begin to reset.

84
 Based on the limited number of Revolving HELOCs that have begun North America Home Equity — Net Credit Losses
amortization as of December 31, 2014, approximately 6.4% of the amortizing In millions of dollars
home equity loans were 30+ days past due, compared to 2.7% of the total
Citi Holdings Citicorp
outstanding home equity loan portfolio (amortizing and non-amortizing).
This compared to 6.0% and 2.8%, respectively, as of December 31, 2013. $173
However, these resets have generally occurred during a period of historically 3 $143
low interest rates, which Citi believes has likely reduced the overall “payment 2 $117
3 $100
shock” to the borrower. $88
2
Citi continues to monitor this reset risk closely and will continue to consider 1
169
any potential impact in determining its allowance for loan loss reserves. In 140 114
addition, management continues to review and take additional actions to offset 98 87
potential reset risk, such as establishment of a borrower outreach program to
provide reset risk education, establishment of a reset risk mitigation unit and 4Q’13(1)(2) 1Q’14 2Q’14 3Q’14 4Q’14
proactively contacting high-risk borrowers. For further information on reset
Total NCL 2.1% 1.9% 1.5% 1.3% 1.2%
risk, see “Risk Factors—Credit and Market Risks” above.
Citi Holdings 2.3% 2.0% 1.7% 1.5% 1.4%
Net Credit Losses and Delinquencies Citicorp 0.5% 0.3% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2%
The following charts detail the quarterly credit trends for Citi’s home equity
loan portfolio in North America. Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
(1) 4Q’13 includes $15 million of charge-offs related to Citi’s fulfillment of its obligations under the
national mortgage and independent foreclosure review settlements.
(2) 4Q’13 excludes approximately $100 million of net credit losses consisting of (i) approximately
North America Home Equity — EOP Loans $64 million for the acceleration of accounting losses associated with modified home equity loans
In billions of dollars determined to be collateral dependent, (ii) approximately $22 million of charge-offs related to a
change in the charge-off policy for mortgages originated in CitiFinancial to more closely align to
Citi Holdings Citicorp policies used in the CitiMortgage business, and (iii) approximately $14 million of charge-offs related
to a change in the estimate of net credit losses related to collateral dependent loans to borrowers that
have gone through Chapter 7 bankruptcy.
$32 $31 $30 $29 $28
3 3 3 3 3

29 28 27 26 25

4Q’13 1Q’14 2Q’14 3Q’14 4Q’14

North America Home Equity Loan Delinquencies — Citi Holdings

In billions of dollars

Days Past Due: 30-89 90-179 180+ 30+ DPD

2.0

1.45
1.5
1.24
1.16
0.35 1.07
1.00
0.35 0.89 0.85 0.84
1.0 0.35 0.82
0.47 0.34
0.33
0.37 0.32
0.33 0.31 0.30 0.31
0.30 0.25
0.5 0.23 0.21 0.20 0.19
0.63
0.52 0.48 0.43 0.42 0.35 0.34 0.33 0.32
0.0
4Q’12 1Q’13 2Q’13 3Q’13 4Q’13 1Q’14 2Q’14 3Q’14 4Q’14
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.

85
 As evidenced by the tables above, home equity loan net credit losses Statements), Citi’s ability to reduce delinquencies or net credit losses
and delinquencies improved during 2014, albeit at a slower pace than the in its home equity loan portfolio in Citi Holdings, whether pursuant to
prior year, primarily due to continued modifications and liquidations. deterioration of the underlying credit performance of these loans, the reset of
Given the limited market in which to sell delinquent home equity loans, as the Revolving HELOCs (as discussed above) or otherwise, is more limited as
well as the relatively smaller number of home equity loan modifications compared to residential first mortgages.
and modification programs (see Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial
North America Home Equity Loans—State Delinquency Trends
The following tables set forth, for total Citigroup, the six states and/or regions with the highest concentration of Citi’s home equity loans as of December 31,
2014 and December 31, 2013.

In billions of dollars December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

% %
ENR 90+DPD CLTV > Refreshed ENR 90+DPD CLTV > Refreshed
State (1) ENR (2) Distribution % 100% (3) FICO ENR (2) Distribution % 100% (3) FICO
CA $ 7.4 28% 1.5% 10% 729 $ 8.2 28% 1.6% 17% 726
NY/NJ/CT (4) 6.7 25 2.4 11 721 7.2 24 2.3 12 718
FL (4) 1.8 7 2.2 36 707 2.1 7 2.9 44 704
IL (4) 1.1 4 1.4 35 716 1.2 4 1.6 42 713
IN/OH/MI (4) 0.8 3 1.7 31 688 1.0 3 1.6 47 686
AZ/NV 0.6 2 2.2 46 716 0.7 2 2.1 53 713
Other 8.1 30 1.7 19 703 9.5 32 1.7 26 699
Total $26.6 100% 1.8% 17% 715 $29.9 100% 1.9% 23% 712

Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.

(1) Certain of the states are included as part of a region based on Citi’s view of similar HPI within the region.
(2) Ending net receivables. Excludes loans in Canada and Puerto Rico and loans subject to LTSCs. Excludes balances for which FICO or LTV data are unavailable.
(3) Represents combined loan-to-value (CLTV) for both residential first mortgages and home equity loans. CLTV ratios (loan balance divided by appraised value) are calculated at origination and updated by applying market
price data.
(4) New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Indiana, Ohio, Florida and Illinois are judicial states.

Citigroup Residential Mortgages—Representations and Citi has recorded a repurchase reserve for purposes of its potential
Warranties Repurchase Reserve representation and warranty repurchase liability resulting from its whole
In connection with Citi’s sales of residential mortgage loans to the GSEs loan sales to the GSEs and, to a lesser extent, private investors, which are
and private investors, as well as through private-label residential mortgage made through Citi’s consumer business in CitiMortgage. The repurchase
securitizations, Citi typically makes representations and warranties that the reserve was approximately $224 million and $341 million as of December 31,
loans sold meet certain requirements, such as the loan’s compliance with 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively.
any applicable loan criteria established by the buyer and the validity of the For additional information, see Notes 27 and 28 to the Consolidated
lien securing the loan. The specific representations and warranties made by Financial Statements.
Citi in any particular transaction depend on, among other things, the nature
of the transaction and the requirements of the investor (e.g., whole loan sale
to the GSEs versus loans sold through securitization transactions), as well as
the credit quality of the loan (e.g., prime, Alt-A or subprime).
These sales expose Citi to potential claims for alleged breaches of its
representations and warranties. In the event of such a breach, Citi could be
required either to repurchase the mortgage loans with the identified defects
(generally at unpaid principal balance plus accrued interest) or to indemnify
(“make whole”) the investors for their losses on these loans.

86
CONSUMER LOAN DETAILS
Consumer Loan Delinquency Amounts and Ratios

Total
loans (1) 90+ days past due (2) 30-89 days past due (2)
December 31, December 31, December 31,
In millions of dollars, except EOP loan amounts in billions 2014 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012
Citicorp (3)(4)

Total $297.2 $2,664 $2,973 $3,081 $2,820 $3,220 $3,509

Ratio 0.90% 0.99% 1.05% 0.95% 1.07% 1.19%
Retail banking
Total $151.7 $ 840 $ 952 $ 879 $ 902 $1,049 $1,112
Ratio 0.56% 0.63% 0.61% 0.60% 0.70% 0.77%
North America 46.8 225 257 280 212 205 223
Ratio 0.49% 0.60% 0.68% 0.46% 0.48% 0.54%
EMEA 5.4 19 34 48 42 51 77
Ratio 0.35% 0.61% 0.94% 0.78% 0.91% 1.51%
Latin America 27.7 410 470 323 315 395 353
Ratio 1.48% 1.55% 1.15% 1.14% 1.30% 1.26%
Asia 71.8 186 191 228 333 398 459
Ratio 0.26% 0.27% 0.33% 0.46% 0.56% 0.66%
Cards
Total $145.5 $1,824 $2,021 $2,202 $1,918 $2,171 $2,397
Ratio 1.25% 1.34% 1.47% 1.32% 1.44% 1.60%
North America—Citi-branded 67.5 593 681 786 568 661 771
Ratio 0.88% 0.97% 1.08% 0.84% 0.94% 1.06%
North America—Citi retail services 46.5 678 771 721 748 830 789
Ratio 1.46% 1.67% 1.87% 1.61% 1.79% 2.04%
EMEA 2.2 30 32 48 34 42 63
Ratio 1.36% 1.33% 1.66% 1.55% 1.75% 2.17%
Latin America 10.9 345 349 413 329 364 432
Ratio 3.17% 2.88% 2.79% 3.02% 3.01% 2.92%
Asia 18.4 178 188 234 239 274 342
Ratio 0.97% 0.98% 1.15% 1.30% 1.43% 1.68%
Citi Holdings (5)(6)
Total $ 72.6 $1,975 $2,756 $4,611 $1,699 $2,724 $4,228
Ratio 2.88% 3.28% 4.42% 2.48% 3.24% 4.05%
International 1.8 12 162 345 36 200 393
Ratio 0.67% 2.75% 4.54% 2.00% 3.39% 5.17%
North America 70.8 1,963 2,594 4,266 1,663 2,524 3,835
Ratio 2.94% 3.33% 4.41% 2.49% 3.24% 3.96%
Other (7) 0.2
Total Citigroup $370.0 $4,639 $5,729 $7,692 $4,519 $5,944 $7,737
Ratio 1.27% 1.49% 1.93% 1.24% 1.54% 1.94%

(1) Total loans include interest and fees on credit cards.

(2) The ratios of 90+ days past due and 30–89 days past due are calculated based on end-of-period (EOP) loans, net of unearned income.
(3) The 90+ days past due balances for North America—Citi-branded and North America—Citi retail services are generally still accruing interest. Citigroup’s policy is generally to accrue interest on credit card loans until
180 days past due, unless notification of bankruptcy filing has been received earlier.
(4) The 90+ days and 30–89 days past due and related ratios for Citicorp North America exclude U.S. mortgage loans that are guaranteed by U.S. government-sponsored entities since the potential loss predominantly
resides within the U.S. government-sponsored entities. The amounts excluded for loans 90+ days past due and (EOP loans) were $562 million ($1.1 billion), $690 million ($1.2 billion) and $742 million ($1.4 billion)
at December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The amounts excluded for loans 30–89 days past due (EOP loans have the same adjustment as above) were $122 million, $141 million and $122 million at
December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
(5) The 90+ days and 30–89 days past due and related ratios for Citi Holdings North America exclude U.S. mortgage loans that are guaranteed by U.S. government-sponsored entities since the potential loss
predominantly resides within the U.S. government-sponsored entities. The amounts excluded for loans 90+ days past due (and EOP loans) for each period were $2.2 billion ($4.0 billion), $3.3 billion ($6.4 billion) and
$4.0 billion ($7.1 billion) at December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The amounts excluded for loans 30–89 days past due (EOP loans have the same adjustment as above) for each period were $0.5 billion,
$1.1 billion and $1.2 billion at December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
(6) The December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 loans 90+ days past due and 30–89 days past due and related ratios for North America exclude $14 million, $0.9 billion and $1.2 billion, respectively, of loans that are
carried at fair value.
(7) Represents loans classified as Consumer loans on the Consolidated Balance Sheet that are not included in the Citi Holdings consumer credit metrics.

87
Consumer Loan Net Credit Losses and Ratios

Average
loans (1) Net credit losses (2)
In millions of dollars, except average loan amounts in billions 2014 2014 2013 2012
Citicorp
Total $297.8 $7,051 $ 7,211 $ 8,107
Ratio 2.37% 2.51% 2.87%
Retail banking
Total $155.6 $1,429 $ 1,343 $ 1,258
Ratio 0.92% 0.91% 0.89%
North America 46.4 140 184 247
Ratio 0.30% 0.43% 0.60%
EMEA 5.7 20 26 46
Ratio 0.35% 0.48% 0.98%
Latin America 29.8 948 844 648
Ratio 3.18% 2.86% 2.49%
Asia 73.7 321 289 317
Ratio 0.44% 0.41% 0.46%
Cards
Total $142.2 $5,622 $ 5,868 $ 6,849
Ratio 3.95% 4.18% 4.82%
North America—Citi-branded 66.4 2,197 2,555 3,187
Ratio 3.31% 3.72% 4.43%
North America—Retail services 43.2 1,866 1,895 2,322
Ratio 4.32% 4.92% 6.29%
EMEA 2.4 41 42 59
Ratio 1.71% 1.62% 2.11%
Latin America 11.6 1,060 883 757
Ratio 9.14% 7.55% 7.07%
Asia 18.6 458 493 524
Ratio 2.46% 2.59% 2.65%
Citi Holdings
Total $ 82.9 $1,626 $ 3,045 $ 5,873
Ratio 1.96% 3.02% 4.72%
International 4.0 68 217 536
Ratio 1.70% 3.39% 5.70%
North America 78.9 1,558 2,828 5,337
Ratio 1.97% 2.99% 4.64%
Other (3) — 8 6 28
Total Citigroup $380.7 $8,685 $10,262 $14,008
Ratio 2.28% 2.64% 3.44%

(1) Average loans include interest and fees on credit cards.

(2) The ratios of net credit losses are calculated based on average loans, net of unearned income.
(3) Represents NCLs on loans classified as Consumer loans on the Consolidated Balance Sheet that are not included in the Citi Holdings consumer credit metrics.

88
Loan Maturities and Fixed/Variable Pricing U.S.
Consumer Mortgages
Greater
Due than 1 year Greater
within but within than
In millions of dollars at year end 2014 1 year 5 years 5 years Total
U.S. Consumer mortgage loan
portfolio
Residential first mortgages $ 116 $ 1,260 $68,199 $69,575
Home equity loans 5,262 12,708 8,988 26,958
Total $5,378 $13,968 $77,187 $96,533
Fixed/variable pricing of U.S.
Consumer mortgage loans
with maturities due after
one year
Loans at fixed interest rates $ 1,463 $56,023
Loans at floating or adjustable
interest rates 12,505 21,164
Total $13,968 $77,187

89
CORPORATE CREDIT DETAILS The following table sets forth Citi’s corporate credit portfolio (excluding
Consistent with its overall strategy, Citi’s corporate clients are typically large, private bank in ICG), before consideration of collateral or hedges, by
multinational corporations that value Citi’s global network. Citi aims to remaining tenor at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013. The
establish relationships with these clients that encompass multiple products, vast majority of Citi’s corporate credit portfolio resides in ICG; as of
consistent with client needs, including cash management and trade services, December 31, 2014, less than 1% of Citi’s corporate credit exposure resided in
foreign exchange, lending, capital markets and M&A advisory. For additional Citi Holdings.
information on corporate credit risk management, see “Country and
Cross-Border Risk—Emerging Markets Exposures” below.

At December 31, 2014 At December 31, 2013

Greater Greater
Due than 1 year Greater Due than 1 year Greater
within but within than Total within but within than Total
In billions of dollars 1 year 5 years 5 years Exposure 1 year 5 years 5 years exposure
Direct outstandings (on-balance sheet) (1) $ 95 $ 85 $ 33 $ 213 $ 108 $ 80 $ 29 $ 217
Unfunded lending commitments (off-balance sheet) (2) 92 207 33 332 87 204 21 312
Total exposure $ 187 $ 292 $ 66 $ 545 $ 195 $ 284 $ 50 $ 529

(1) Includes drawn loans, overdrafts, bankers’ acceptances and leases.

(2) Includes unused commitments to lend, letters of credit and financial guarantees.

Portfolio Mix—Geography, Counterparty and Industry Citigroup also has incorporated climate risk assessment and reporting
Citi’s corporate credit portfolio is diverse across geography and counterparty. criteria for certain obligors, as necessary. Factors evaluated include
The following table shows the percentage by region based on Citi’s internal consideration of climate risk to an obligor’s business and physical assets and,
management geography: when relevant, consideration of cost-effective options to reduce greenhouse
gas emissions.
December 31, December 31, The following table presents the corporate credit portfolio by facility risk
2014 2013
rating at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, as a percentage of the
North America 55% 51%
total corporate credit portfolio:
EMEA 25 27
Asia 13 14 Total Exposure
Latin America 7 8 December 31, December 31,
2014 2013
Total 100% 100%
AAA/AA/A 49% 52%
BBB 33 30
The maintenance of accurate and consistent risk ratings across the
BB/B 16 16
corporate credit portfolio facilitates the comparison of credit exposure across
CCC or below 1 2
all lines of business, geographic regions and products. Counterparty risk
Unrated 1 —
ratings reflect an estimated probability of default for a counterparty and are
derived primarily through the use of validated statistical models, scorecard Total 100% 100%
models and external agency ratings (under defined circumstances), Note: Total exposure includes direct outstandings and unfunded lending commitments.
in combination with consideration of factors specific to the obligor or
market, such as management experience, competitive position, regulatory
environment and commodity prices. Facility risk ratings are assigned that
reflect the probability of default of the obligor and factors that affect the
loss-given-default of the facility, such as support or collateral. Internal
obligor ratings that generally correspond to BBB and above are considered
investment grade, while those below are considered non-investment grade.

90
Citi’s corporate credit portfolio is also diversified by industry. The following At December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, the credit protection was
table shows the allocation of Citi’s total corporate credit portfolio by industry: economically hedging underlying corporate credit portfolio exposures with
the following risk rating distribution:
Total Exposure
December 31, December 31, Rating of Hedged Exposure
2014 2013
Transportation and industrial 21% 22% December 31, December 31,
2014 2013
Consumer retail and health 17 15
Power, chemicals, commodities and AAA/AA/A 24% 26%
metals and mining 10 10 BBB 42 36
Energy (1) 10 10 BB/B 28 29
Technology, media and telecom 9 10 CCC or below 6 9
Banks/broker-dealers 8 10 Total 100% 100%
Real estate 6 5
Public sector 5 6 At December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, the credit protection was
Insurance and special purpose entities 5 5 economically hedging underlying corporate credit portfolio exposures with
Hedge funds 5 4 the following industry distribution:
Other industries 4 3
Industry of Hedged Exposure
Total 100% 100%

Note: Total exposure includes direct outstandings and unfunded lending commitments. December 31, December 31,
(1) In addition to this exposure, Citi also has energy-related exposure within the “Public sector” 2014 2013
(e.g., energy-related state-owned entities) and “Transportation and industrial” sector (e.g., off-shore
drilling entities) included in the table above. As of December 31, 2014, Citi’s total exposure to these Transportation and industrial 30% 31%
energy-related entities was approximately $7 billion, of which approximately $4 billion consisted of Power, chemicals, commodities and metals
direct outstanding funded loans. and mining 15 15
Technology, media and telecom 15 14
There has recently been a focus on the energy sector, given the decline
Consumer retail and health 11 9
in oil prices during the latter part of 2014. As of December 31, 2014, Citi’s
Energy 10 8
total corporate credit exposure to the energy and energy-related sector
Banks/broker-dealers 7 8
(see footnote 1 to the table above) was approximately $60 billion, with
Public Sector 6 6
approximately $22 billion, or 3%, of Citi’s total outstanding loans consisting
of direct outstanding funded loans. In addition, as of December 31, 2014, Insurance and special purpose entities 4 7
approximately 70% of Citi’s total corporate credit energy and energy-related Other industries 2 2
exposure (based on the methodology described above) was in the United Total 100% 100%
States, United Kingdom and Canada. Also as of year-end 2014, approximately
85% of Citi’s total energy and energy-related exposures were rated For additional information on Citi’s corporate credit portfolio, including
investment grade. allowance for loan losses, coverage ratios and corporate non-accrual loans,
see “Credit Risk—Loans Outstanding, Details of Credit Loss Experience,
Credit Risk Mitigation
Allowance for Loan Losses and Non-Accrual Loans and Assets” above.
As part of its overall risk management activities, Citigroup uses credit
derivatives and other risk mitigants to hedge portions of the credit risk in
its corporate credit portfolio, in addition to outright asset sales. The results
of the mark-to-market and any realized gains or losses on credit derivatives
are reflected in Principal transactions on the Consolidated Statement
of Income.
At December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, $27.6 billion and
$27.2 billion, respectively, of the corporate credit portfolio was economically
hedged. Citigroup’s expected loss model used in the calculation of its loan
loss reserve does not include the favorable impact of credit derivatives
and other mitigants that are marked-to-market. In addition, the reported
amounts of direct outstandings and unfunded lending commitments in
the tables above do not reflect the impact of these hedging transactions.

91
Loan Maturities and Fixed/Variable Pricing Corporate
Loans

Due Over 1 year

In millions of dollars at within but within Over 5
December 31, 2014 1 year 5 years years Total
Corporate loan portfolio
maturities
In U.S. offices
Commercial and industrial loans $ 17,348 $ 11,403 $ 6,304 $ 35,055
Financial institutions 17,950 11,799 6,523 36,272
Mortgage and real estate 16,102 10,584 5,851 32,537
Lease financing 870 572 316 1,758
Installment, revolving credit, other 14,455 9,500 5,252 29,207
In offices outside the U.S. 93,124 36,387 10,879 140,390
Total corporate loans $159,849 $ 80,245 $ 35,125 $275,219
Fixed/variable pricing of
Corporate loans with
maturities due after one
year (1)
Loans at fixed interest rates $ 9,960 $ 11,453
Loans at floating or adjustable
interest rates 70,283 23,673
Total $ 80,243 $ 35,126

(1) Based on contractual terms. Repricing characteristics may effectively be modified from time to time
using derivative contracts. See Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

92
Market Risk
Market risk encompasses funding and liquidity risk and price risk, each Overview
of which arises in the normal course of business of a global financial Citi’s funding and liquidity objectives are to maintain adequate liquidity
intermediary such as Citi. to (i) fund its existing asset base; (ii) grow its core businesses in Citicorp;
Market Risk Management (iii) maintain sufficient liquidity, structured appropriately, so that it can
Each business is required to establish, with approval from Citi’s market risk operate under a wide variety of market conditions, including market
management, a market risk limit framework for identified risk factors that disruptions for both short- and long-term periods; and (iv) satisfy regulatory
clearly defines approved risk profiles and is within the parameters of Citi’s requirements. Citigroup’s primary liquidity objectives are established by
overall risk tolerance. These limits are monitored by independent market entity, and in aggregate, across three major categories:
risk, Citi’s country and business Asset and Liability Committees and the • the parent entity, which includes the parent holding company (Citigroup)
Citigroup Asset and Liability Committee. In all cases, the businesses are and Citi’s broker-dealer subsidiaries that are consolidated into Citigroup
ultimately responsible for the market risks taken and for remaining within (collectively referred to in this section as “parent”);
their defined limits. • Citi’s significant Citibank entities, which consist of Citibank, N.A.
Funding and Liquidity Risk units domiciled in the U.S., Western Europe, Hong Kong, Japan and
Adequate liquidity and sources of funding are essential to Citi’s businesses. Singapore (collectively referred to in this section as “significant Citibank
Funding and liquidity risks arise from several factors, many of which Citi entities”); and
cannot control, such as disruptions in the financial markets, changes in key • other Citibank and Banamex entities.
funding sources, credit spreads, changes in Citi’s credit ratings and political
and economic conditions in certain countries. For additional information, At an aggregate level, Citigroup’s goal is to maintain sufficient funding
see “Risk Factors” above. in amount and tenor to fully fund customer assets and to provide an
appropriate amount of cash and high quality liquid assets (as discussed
further below), even in times of stress. The liquidity framework provides that
entities be self-sufficient or net providers of liquidity, including in conditions
established under their designated stress tests.
Citi’s primary sources of funding include (i) deposits via Citi’s bank
subsidiaries, which are Citi’s most stable and lowest cost source of long-
term funding, (ii) long-term debt (primarily senior and subordinated
debt) primarily issued at the parent and certain bank subsidiaries, and
(iii) stockholders’ equity. These sources may be supplemented by short-term
borrowings, primarily in the form of secured funding transactions.
As referenced above, Citigroup works to ensure that the structural tenor of
these funding sources is sufficiently long in relation to the tenor of its asset
base. The goal of Citi’s asset/liability management is to ensure that there is
excess tenor in the liability structure so as to provide excess liquidity after
funding the assets. The excess liquidity resulting from a longer-term tenor
profile can effectively offset potential decreases in liquidity that may occur
under stress. This excess funding is held in the form of high-quality liquid
assets (HQLA), as set forth in the table below.

93
High-Quality Liquid Assets
Significant Other Citibank and
Parent Citibank Entities Banamex Entities Total
Dec. 31, Sept. 30, Dec. 31, Sept. 30, Dec. 31, Sept. 30, Dec. 31, Sept. 30,
In billions of dollars 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014 2014
Available cash $37.5 $27.3 $ 54.6 $ 77.8 $10.6 $ 8.5 $102.7 $113.6
Unencumbered liquid securities 35.0 31.8 203.1 197.5 71.8 73.6 $309.9 $302.9
Total $72.5 $59.1 $257.7 $275.3 $82.4 $82.1 $412.6 $416.4

Note: Amounts as of December 31, 2014 and September 30, 2014 set forth in the table above are estimated based on the final U.S. Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) rules (see “Liquidity Management, Stress Testing and
Measurement” below). All amounts are as of period end and may increase or decrease intra-period in the ordinary course of business.

As set forth in the table above, Citi’s HQLA under the final U.S. LCR rules Citi’s HQLA as set forth above does not include additional potential
as of December 31, 2014 was $412.6 billion, compared to $416.4 billion liquidity in the form of Citigroup’s borrowing capacity from the various
as of September 30, 2014. The decrease in HQLA quarter-over-quarter was FHLB, which was approximately $26 billion as of December 31, 2014
primarily driven by a reduction in deposits in the significant Citibank entities (compared to $22 billion as of September 30, 2014 and $30 billion as of
(see “Deposits” below), partially offset by long-term debt issuance, increased December 31, 2013) and is maintained by pledged collateral to all such
short-term borrowings and replacement of non-HQLA securities with banks. The HQLA shown above also does not include Citi’s borrowing capacity
HQLA-eligible securities, each in the parent entity. at the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank discount window or international central
Prior to September 30, 2014, Citi reported its HQLA based on the banks, which would be in addition to the resources noted above.
Basel Committee’s final LCR rules. On this basis, Citi’s total HQLA was In general, Citigroup can freely fund legal entities within its bank
$423.7 billion as of December 31, 2013. Year-over-year, the decrease in Citi’s vehicles. Citigroup’s bank subsidiaries, including Citibank, N.A., can lend
HQLA was primarily due to the impact of the final U.S. LCR rules, which to the Citigroup parent and broker-dealer entities in accordance with
excluded municipal securities, covered bonds and residential mortgage- Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act. As of December 31, 2014, the amount
backed securities from the definition of HQLA, partially offset by an increase available for lending to these entities under Section 23A was approximately
in credit card securitizations and Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLB) $17 billion (unchanged from September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013),
advances, each in Citibank, N.A. subject to collateral requirements.
The following table shows further detail of the composition of Citi’s
HQLA by type of asset as of December 31, 2014 and September 30, 2014. For
securities, the amounts represent the liquidity value that potentially could be
realized, and thus exclude any securities that are encumbered, as well as the
haircuts that would be required for secured financing transactions.

Dec. 31, Sept. 30,

In billions of dollars 2014 2014
Available cash $102.7 $113.6
U.S. Treasuries 139.5 117.1
U.S. Agencies/Agency MBS 57.1 60.7
Foreign government (1) 110.2 121.6
Other investment grade 3.1 3.4
Total $412.6 $416.4

Note: Amounts set forth in the table above are estimated based on the final U.S. LCR rules.
(1) Foreign government includes securities issued or guaranteed by foreign sovereigns, agencies and
multilateral development banks. Foreign government securities are held largely to support local
liquidity requirements and Citi’s local franchises and principally included government bonds from
Brazil, Hong Kong, India, Japan, Korea, Mexico, Poland, Singapore and Taiwan.

94
Deposits Citi monitors its deposit base across multiple dimensions, including what
Deposits are the primary and lowest cost funding source for Citi’s bank Citi refers to as “LCR value” or the liquidity value of the deposit base under
subsidiaries. The table below sets forth the end-of-period deposits, by the LCR rules. Under LCR rules, deposits are assigned liquidity values based
business and/or segment, and the total average deposits for each of the on expected behavior under stress, the type of deposit and the type of client.
periods indicated. Generally, the final U.S. LCR rules prioritize operating accounts of consumers
(including retail and commercial banking deposits) and corporations, while
Dec. 31, Sept. 30, Dec. 31, assigning lower liquidity values to non-operating balances of financial
In billions of dollars 2014 2014 2013
institutions. Citi estimates that as of December 31, 2014, its total deposits had
Global Consumer Banking
North America $171.4 $171.7 $170.2
a liquidity value of approximately 73% under the LCR rules, up from 72% as
EMEA 12.8 13.0 13.1 of September 30, 2014 and 71% as of December 31, 2013, with the gradual
Latin America 45.5 45.9 47.4 increase primarily driven by reductions in lower LCR value deposits.
Asia (1) 77.9 101.3 101.4
Total $307.6 $331.9 $332.1 Long-Term Debt
ICG Long-term debt (generally defined as debt with original maturities of one
Treasury and trade solutions (TTS) $378.6 $381.1 $379.8 year or more) represents the most significant component of Citi’s funding
Banking ex-TTS 85.9 91.0 97.4 for the parent entities and is a supplementary source of funding for the
Markets and securities services 94.4 95.3 96.9
bank entities.
Total $558.9 $567.4 $574.1
Corporate/Other 22.8 29.0 26.1
Long-term debt is an important funding source due in part to its multi-
Total Citicorp $889.3 $928.3 $932.3 year maturity structure. The weighted-average maturities of unsecured
Total Citi Holdings (2) 10.0 14.4 36.0 long-term debt issued by Citigroup and its affiliates (including Citibank,
Total Citigroup deposits (EOP) $899.3 $942.7 $968.3 N.A.) with a remaining life greater than one year (excluding remaining
Total Citigroup deposits (AVG) $938.7 $954.2 $956.4
trust preferred securities outstanding) was approximately 6.9 years as of
December 31, 2014, largely unchanged from the prior quarter and year. Citi
(1) December 31, 2014 deposit balance reflects the reclassification to held-for-sale of approximately
$21 billion of deposits as a result of Citigroup’s entry into an agreement in December 2014 to sell its
believes this term structure enables it to meet its business needs and maintain
Japan retail banking business. adequate liquidity.
(2) Included within Citi Holding’s end-of-period deposit balance as of December 31, 2014 was
approximately $9 billion of deposits related to Morgan Stanley Smith Barney (MSSB) customers that,
Citi’s long-term debt outstanding at the parent includes benchmark debt
as previously disclosed, will be transferred to Morgan Stanley by MSSB, with remaining balances and what Citi refers to as customer-related debt, consisting of structured
transferred in the amount of approximately $5 billion per quarter through the end of the second
quarter of 2015. notes, such as equity- and credit-linked notes, as well as non-structured
notes. Citi’s issuance of customer-related debt is generally driven by customer
End-of-period deposits decreased 7% year-over-year and 5% quarter- demand and supplements benchmark debt issuance as a source of funding
over-quarter, each primarily due to the reclassification to held-for-sale of for Citi’s parent entities. Citi’s long-term debt at the bank includes FHLB
approximately $21 billion of deposits as a result of Citigroup’s entry into an advances and securitizations.
agreement in December 2014 to sell its Japan retail banking business, as well
as the impact of FX translation.
Excluding these items, Citigroup deposits declined 2% year-over-year,
as 1% growth in Citicorp deposits was more than offset by the continued
decline in Citi Holdings due to the ongoing transfer of MSSB deposits to
Morgan Stanley. Within Citicorp, GCB deposits increased 2% year-over-year,
with growth in all four regions. North America GCB deposits increased
1% year-over-year, with a continued focus on growing checking account
balances, and international deposits grew 3% year-over-year. ICG deposits
increased 1% year-over-year, with 3% growth in treasury and trade solutions
balances, partially offset by reductions in markets-related businesses. Average
deposits were relatively unchanged year-over-year and quarter-over-quarter,
as growth in Citicorp was offset by the ongoing transfer of MSSB deposits to
Morgan Stanley.

95
Long-Term Debt Outstanding Year-over-year, Citi’s total long-term debt outstanding increased slightly, as
The following table sets forth Citi’s total long-term debt outstanding for the modest reductions at the parent company were more than offset by continued
periods indicated: increases in the bank due to increased credit card securitizations and FHLB
advances, given the lower-cost nature of these funding sources. Sequentially,
Dec. 31, Sept. 30, Dec. 31, Citi’s total long-term debt decreased slightly due to maturities and continued
In billions of dollars 2014 2014 2013 liability management at the parent and decreases in FHLB advances at
Parent $158.0 $155.9 $164.7 the bank.
Benchmark debt:
As part of its liability management, Citi has considered, and may continue
Senior debt 96.7 96.3 98.5
Subordinated debt 25.5 24.2 28.1 to consider, opportunities to repurchase its long-term debt pursuant to
Trust preferred 1.7 1.7 3.9 open market purchases, tender offers or other means. Such repurchases
Customer-Related debt: help reduce Citi’s overall funding costs. During 2014, Citi repurchased an
Structured debt 22.3 22.3 22.2 aggregate of approximately $9.8 billion of its outstanding long-term debt,
Non-structured debt 5.9 6.4 7.8
including approximately $1.5 billion in the fourth quarter of 2014. Included
Local Country and Other (1)(2) 5.9 5.0 4.2
Bank $ 65.1 $ 67.9 $ 56.4
in this total for the year, Citi redeemed $2.1 billion of trust preferred securities
FHLB Borrowings 19.8 23.3 14.0 during 2014 (for Citi’s remaining trust preferred securities outstanding as of
Securitizations (3) 38.1 38.2 33.6 December 31, 2014, see Note 18 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).
Local Country and Other (2) 7.2 6.4 8.8 Going forward, changes in Citi’s long-term debt outstanding will continue
Total long-term debt $223.1 $223.8 $221.1 to reflect the funding needs of its businesses as well as the market and
Note: Amounts represent the current value of long-term debt on Citi’s Consolidated Balance Sheet which,
economic environment and any regulatory changes or requirements. For
for certain debt instruments, includes consideration of fair value, hedging impacts and unamortized additional information on regulatory changes and requirements impacting
discounts and premiums.
(1) Includes securitizations of $2.0 billion for the third and fourth quarter of 2014 and $0.2 billion for the
Citi’s overall funding and liquidity, see “Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity” and
fourth quarter of 2013. “Liquidity Management, Stress Testing and Measurement” below and “Risk
(2) Local country debt includes debt issued by Citi’s affiliates in support of their local operations.
(3) Predominantly credit card securitizations, primarily backed by Citi-branded credit cards.
Factors” above.

Long-Term Debt Issuances and Maturities

The table below details Citi’s long-term debt issuances and maturities (including repurchases and redemptions) during the periods presented:

2014 2013 2012

In billions of dollars Maturities Issuances Maturities Issuances Maturities Issuances
Parent $38.3 $36.0 $46.0 $30.7 $ 75.3 $17.3
Benchmark debt:
Senior debt 18.9 18.6 25.6 17.8 34.9 9.1
Subordinated debt 5.0 2.8 1.0 4.6 1.8 —
Trust preferred 2.1 — 6.4 — 5.9 —
Customer-related debt:
Structured debt 7.5 9.5 8.5 7.3 8.2 8.0
Non-structured debt 2.4 1.4 3.7 1.0 22.1 —
Local Country and Other 2.4 3.7 0.8 — 2.4 0.2
Bank $20.6 $30.8 $17.8 $23.7 $ 42.3 $10.4
TLGP — — — — 10.5 —
FHLB borrowings 8.0 13.9 11.8 9.5 2.7 8.0
Securitizations 8.9 13.6 2.4 11.5 25.2 0.5
Local Country and Other 3.7 3.3 3.6 2.7 3.9 1.9
Total $58.9 $66.8 $63.8 $54.4 $ 117.6 $27.7

96
The table below shows Citi’s aggregate long-term debt maturities (including repurchases and redemptions) during 2014, as well as its aggregate expected
annual long-term debt maturities as of December 31, 2014:

Maturities
In billions of dollars 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Thereafter Total
Parent $38.3 $16.6 $20.9 $26.1 $12.9 $20.0 $61.5 $ 158.0
Benchmark debt:
Senior debt 18.9 10.0 14.4 19.7 9.5 14.9 28.2 96.7
Subordinated debt 5.0 0.7 1.5 3.1 1.2 1.5 17.5 25.5
Trust preferred 2.1 — — — — — 1.7 1.7
Customer-related debt:
Structured debt 7.5 4.0 4.0 2.7 1.7 1.8 8.1 22.3
Non-structured debt 2.4 1.8 1.0 0.6 0.5 0.2 1.8 5.9
Local Country and Other 2.4 0.1 — — — 1.6 4.2 5.9
Bank $20.6 $14.5 $21.2 $14.2 $ 9.1 $ 2.1 $ 4.0 65.1
FHLB borrowings 8.0 3.8 9.2 6.3 0.5 — — 19.8
Securitizations 8.9 7.7 10.2 6.4 8.3 1.9 3.6 38.1
Local Country and Other 3.7 3.0 1.8 1.5 0.3 0.2 0.4 7.2
Total long-term debt $58.9 $31.1 $42.1 $40.3 $22.0 $22.1 $65.5 $ 223.1

Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity (TLAC) As proposed, TLAC-eligible instruments generally would include Common
In November 2014, the Financial Stability Board (FSB) issued a consultative Equity Tier 1 Capital, preferred stock and unsecured senior and subordinated
document proposing requirements designed to ensure that global debt issued by the parent holding company with at least one year remaining
systemically important banks (GSIBs), including Citi, maintain sufficient until maturity. Although there is uncertainty regarding the eligibility of
loss-absorbing and recapitalization capacity to facilitate an orderly certain debt instruments, TLAC-eligible instruments would generally exclude
resolution. In this regard, the FSB’s proposal builds upon and is consistent debt instruments that are secured, issued by operating subsidiaries, or include
with the FDIC’s preferred “single point of entry strategy” for orderly derivatives or derivative-linked features (e.g., certain structured notes).
resolution of GSIBs under Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act (for additional Moreover, a GSIB’s eligible TLAC may be reduced by holdings of TLAC-eligible
information, see “Risk Factors—Regulatory Risks” above). instruments issued by other GSIBs.
The FSB’s proposal would establish firm-specific minimum requirements The FSB’s TLAC proposal would also establish “internal TLAC”
for “total loss-absorbing capacity” (TLAC), set by reference to the requirements, which would require that each foreign “material subsidiary”
Consolidated Balance Sheet of the “resolution group” (in Citi’s case, (as proposed to be defined under the proposal) of a GSIB that is not otherwise
Citigroup, the parent bank holding company, and its subsidiaries that are not a resolution entity maintain a minimum of 75%–90% of the external TLAC
themselves resolution entities). The proposed minimum TLAC requirement, requirement that would apply if the subsidiary was a resolution entity.
referred to as “external TLAC,” would be (i) 16%–20% of the resolution While many aspects of this requirement are uncertain, the internal TLAC
group’s risk-weighted assets (RWA) and (ii) at least double the amount proposal would effectually require “pre-positioning” of TLAC to the required
of capital required to meet the relevant Tier 1 Leverage ratio. Qualifying subsidiaries.
regulatory capital instruments in the form of debt plus other eligible TLAC Pursuant to the FSB’s proposal, the conformance period regarding the
that is not regulatory capital would need to constitute 33% of external TLAC. minimum TLAC requirements would not occur before January 1, 2019. The
Regulatory capital instruments used by the GSIB to satisfy its applicable U.S. banking agencies are expected to propose rules to establish similar TLAC
regulatory capital buffers (i.e., the Capital Conservation Buffer, GSIB requirements for U.S. GSIBs during 2015. There are significant uncertainties
surcharge and, if imposed, the Countercyclical Capital Buffer) could not be and interpretive issues arising from the FSB proposal. For additional
counted toward the external TLAC requirement. information, see “Risk Factors—Regulatory Risks” above.

97
Secured Funding Transactions and Short-Term Borrowings The remainder of the secured funding activity in the broker-dealer
subsidiaries serves to fund trading inventory. To maintain reliable funding
Secured Funding
under a wide range of market conditions, including under periods of stress,
Secured funding is primarily conducted through Citi’s broker-dealer
Citi manages these activities by taking into consideration the quality of the
subsidiaries to fund efficiently both secured lending activity and a portion of
underlying collateral, and stipulating financing tenor. The weighted average
trading inventory. Citi also conducts a smaller portion of its secured funding
maturity of Citi’s secured funding of less liquid trading inventory was greater
transactions through its bank entities, which is typically collateralized by
than 110 days as of December 31, 2014.
foreign government securities. Generally, daily changes in the level of Citi’s
Citi manages the risks in its secured funding by conducting daily stress
secured funding are primarily due to fluctuations in secured lending activity
tests to account for changes in capacity, tenors, haircut, collateral profile and
in the matched book (as described below) and trading inventory.
client actions. Additionally, Citi maintains counterparty diversification by
Secured funding declined to $173 billion as of December 31, 2014,
establishing concentration triggers and assessing counterparty reliability and
compared to $176 billion as of September 30, 2014 and $204 billion as of
stability under stress. Citi generally sources secured funding from more than
December 31, 2013, due to the impact of FX translation and Citi’s continued
150 counterparties.
optimization of secured funding. Average balances for secured funding
were approximately $187 billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2014, Short-Term Borrowings
compared to $182 billion for the quarter ended September 30, 2014 and $211 As referenced above, Citi supplements its primary sources of funding with
billion for the quarter ended December 31, 2013. short-term borrowings. Short-term borrowings generally include (i) secured
The portion of secured funding in the broker-dealer subsidiaries that funding transactions (securities loaned or sold under agreements to
funds secured lending is commonly referred to as “matched book” activity. repurchase, or repos) and (ii) to a lesser extent, short-term borrowings
The majority of this activity is secured by high quality, liquid securities such consisting of commercial paper and borrowings from the FHLB and other
as U.S. Treasury securities, U.S. agency securities and foreign sovereign market participants (see Note 18 to the Consolidated Financial Statements
debt. Other secured funding is secured by less liquid securities, including for further information on Citigroup’s and its affiliates’ outstanding
equity securities, corporate bonds and asset-backed securities. The tenor short-term borrowings).
of Citi’s matched book liabilities is equal to or longer than the tenor of the
corresponding matched book assets.

The following table contains the year-end, average and maximum month-end amounts for the following respective short-term borrowings categories at the
end of each of the three prior fiscal years.

Federal funds purchased and

Short-term borrowings (1)
securities sold under
agreements to repurchase Commercial paper (2) Other short-term borrowings (3)
In billions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012
Amounts outstanding at year end $173.4 $203.5 $211.2 $16.2 $17.9 $11.5 $42.1 $41.0 $40.5
Average outstanding during the year (4)(5) 190.0 229.4 223.8 16.8 16.3 17.9 45.3 39.6 36.3
Maximum month-end outstanding 200.1 239.9 237.1 17.9 18.8 21.9 47.1 44.7 40.6
Weighted-average interest rate
During the year (4)(5)(6) 1.00% 1.02% 1.26% 0.21% 0.28% 0.47% 1.20% 1.39% 1.77%
At year end (7) 0.49 0.59 0.81 0.23 0.26 0.38 0.53 0.87 1.06

(1) Original maturities of less than one year.

(2) Substantially all commercial paper outstanding was issued by significant Citibank entities for the periods presented. The increase in commercial paper outstanding during 2013 was due to the consolidation of $7 billion
of borrowings related to trade loans in the second quarter of 2013.
(3) Other short-term borrowings include borrowings from the FHLB and other market participants.
(4) Interest rates and amounts include the effects of risk management activities associated with the respective liability categories.
(5) Average volumes of securities loaned or sold under agreements to repurchase are reported net pursuant to FIN 41 (ASC 210-20-45); average rates exclude the impact of FIN 41 (ASC 210-20-45).
(6) Average rates reflect prevailing local interest rates, including inflationary effects and monetary correction in certain countries.
(7) Based on contractual rates at respective year ends; non-interest-bearing accounts are excluded from the weighted average interest rate calculated at year end.

98
Liquidity Management, Stress Testing and Measurement addition, the final U.S. rules require that banks estimate net outflows based
on the highest individual day’s mismatch between contractual and certain
Liquidity Management
non-defined maturity inflows and outflows, known as the “peak day” outflow
Citi’s HQLA is managed by the Citi Treasurer. Liquidity is managed via
requirement. Citi’s LCR is subject to a minimum requirement of 100%.
a centralized treasury model by Corporate Treasury and by in-country
The table below sets forth the components of Citi’s estimated
treasurers. Pursuant to this structure, Citi’s HQLA is managed with a goal of
LCR calculation and HQLA in excess of estimated net outflows as of
ensuring the asset/liability match and that liquidity positions are appropriate
December 31, 2014 and September 30, 2014.
in every entity and throughout Citi (for additional information on Citi’s
Dec. 31, Sept. 30,
liquidity objectives, see “Overview” above). in billions of dollars 2014 2014
Citi’s Chief Risk Officer is responsible for the overall risk profile of Citi’s High quality liquid assets $ 412.6 $ 416.4
HQLA. The Chief Risk Officer and Citi’s Chief Financial Officer co-chair Estimated net outflows $ 368.6 $ 374.5
Citi’s Asset Liability Management Committee (ALCO), which includes Citi’s Liquidity coverage ratio 112% 111%
Treasurer and senior executives. ALCO sets the strategy of the liquidity HQLA in excess of estimated net outflows $ 44.0 $ 42.0
portfolio and monitors its performance. Significant changes to portfolio asset Note: Amounts set forth in the table above are estimated based on the final U.S. LCR rules.
allocations need to be approved by ALCO.
As set forth in the table above, Citi’s estimated LCR under the final U.S. LCR
Stress Testing rules was 112% as of December 31, 2014 and 111% as of September 30, 2014.
Liquidity stress testing is performed for each of Citi’s major entities, operating The increase quarter-over-quarter was primarily driven by deposit flows and
subsidiaries and/or countries. Stress testing and scenario analyses are improvements in the quality of Citi’s deposit base.
intended to quantify the potential impact of a liquidity event on the balance Prior to September 30, 2014, Citi reported its LCR based on the Basel
sheet and liquidity position, and to identify viable funding alternatives that Committee’s final LCR rules. On this basis, Citi’s estimated LCR was 117%
can be utilized. These scenarios include assumptions about significant as of December 31, 2013. Year-over-year, the decrease in Citi’s estimated LCR
changes in key funding sources, market triggers (such as credit ratings), was primarily due to the impact of the final U.S. LCR rules. Specifically, as
potential uses of funding and political and economic conditions in certain discussed under “High Quality Liquid Assets” above, the final U.S. LCR rules
countries. These conditions include standard and stressed market conditions excluded certain assets from the calculation of HQLA. In addition, estimated
as well as Company-specific events. net outflows are higher under the final U.S. LCR rules, primarily due to the
A wide range of liquidity stress tests is important for monitoring purposes. “peak day” outflow requirement discussed above as well as higher deposit
These potential liquidity events are useful to ascertain potential mismatches outflow assumptions resulting from the more stringent deposit classifications
between liquidity sources and uses over a variety of time horizons (overnight, (e.g., the nature of the deposit balance or counterparty designation) under
one week, two weeks, one month, three months, one year, two years) and the final U.S. LCR rules.
over a variety of stressed conditions. Liquidity limits are set accordingly. To
monitor the liquidity of a unit, these stress tests and potential mismatches are Long-Term Liquidity Measurement: Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR)
calculated with varying frequencies, with several tests performed daily. For 12-month liquidity stress periods, Citi uses several measures, including
Given the range of potential stresses, Citi maintains a series of its internal long-term liquidity measure, based on a 12-month scenario
contingency funding plans on a consolidated basis and for individual assuming market, credit and economic conditions are moderately to highly
entities. These plans specify a wide range of readily available actions for a stressed with potential further deterioration. It is broadly defined as the ratio
variety of adverse market conditions or idiosyncratic disruptions. of unencumbered liquidity resources to net stressed cumulative outflows over
a 12-month period.
Short-Term Liquidity Measurement; Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) In addition, in October 2014, the Basel Committee issued final standards
In addition to internal measures that Citi has developed for a 30-day stress for the implementation of the Basel III NSFR, with full compliance required
scenario, Citi also monitors its liquidity by reference to the LCR, as calculated by January 1, 2018. Similar to Citi’s internal long-term liquidity measure, the
pursuant to the final U.S. LCR rules. NSFR is intended to measure the stability of a banking organization’s stable
Generally, the LCR is designed to ensure that banks maintain an funding over a one-year time horizon. The NSFR is calculated by dividing the
adequate level of HQLA to meet liquidity needs under an acute 30-day level of its available stable funding by its required stable funding. The ratio
stress scenario. Under the final U.S. rules, the LCR is calculated by dividing is required to be greater than 100%. Under the Basel III standards, available
HQLA by estimated net outflows over a stressed 30-day period, with the net stable funding includes portions of equity, deposits and long-term debt, while
outflows determined by applying assumed outflow factors, prescribed in the required stable funding includes the portion of long-term assets which are
rules, to various categories of liabilities, such as deposits, unsecured and deemed illiquid. Citi anticipates that the U.S. regulators will propose a U.S.
secured wholesale borrowings, unused commitments and derivatives-related version of the NSFR during 2015.
exposures, partially offset by inflows from assets maturing within 30 days. In

99
Credit Ratings
Citigroup’s funding and liquidity, its funding capacity, ability to access
capital markets and other sources of funds, the cost of these funds, and its
ability to maintain certain deposits are partially dependent on its credit
ratings. The table below sets forth the ratings for Citigroup and Citibank, N.A.
as of December 31, 2014. While not included in the table below, Citigroup
Global Markets Inc. (CGMI) is rated A/A-1 by Standard & Poor’s and A/F1 by
Fitch as of December 31, 2014.

Debt Ratings as of December 31, 2014

Citigroup Inc. Citibank, N.A.
Senior Commercial Long- Short-
debt paper Outlook term term Outlook
Fitch Ratings (Fitch) A F1 Stable A F1 Stable
Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s) Baa2 P-2 Stable A2 P-1 Stable
Standard & Poor’s (S&P) A- A-2 Negative A A-1 Stable

Recent Credit Rating Developments Potential Impacts of Ratings Downgrades

On December 17, 2014, Fitch issued a bank “criteria exposure draft.” The Ratings downgrades by Moody’s, Fitch or S&P could negatively impact
document consolidates all bank rating criteria into one report and refines Citigroup’s and/or Citibank, N.A.’s funding and liquidity due to reduced
certain aspects of the criteria, including clarification as to when the agency funding capacity, including derivatives triggers, which could take the form of
might rate an operating company’s long-term rating above its unsupported cash obligations and collateral requirements.
rating due to the protection offered to senior creditors by loss absorbing The following information is provided for the purpose of analyzing the
junior instruments. Since March 2014, Fitch has been contemplating the potential funding and liquidity impact to Citigroup and Citibank, N.A. of
introduction of a ratings differential between U.S. bank holding companies a hypothetical, simultaneous ratings downgrade across all three major
and operating companies due to the evolving regulatory landscape. rating agencies. This analysis is subject to certain estimates, estimation
Currently, Fitch equalizes holding company and operating company ratings, methodologies, and judgments and uncertainties. Uncertainties include
reflecting what it views as the close correlation between default probabilities. potential ratings limitations that certain entities may have with respect
On November 24, 2014, S&P issued a proposal to add a component to its to permissible counterparties, as well as general subjective counterparty
bank rating methodology to address how a bank’s long-term rating may be behavior. For example, certain corporate customers and trading
higher than the bank’s unsupported rating due to “additional loss absorbing counterparties could re-evaluate their business relationships with Citi
capacity” (ALAC). The ALAC proposal considers that loss absorption by and limit the trading of certain contracts or market instruments with Citi.
instruments subject to bail-in could partly or fully replace a government Changes in counterparty behavior could impact Citi’s funding and liquidity,
bail-out and could reduce the likelihood of default on an operating as well as the results of operations of certain of its businesses. The actual
company’s senior unsecured debt obligations. S&P continues to evaluate impact to Citigroup or Citibank, N.A. is unpredictable and may differ
government support into the ratings of systemically important U.S. bank materially from the potential funding and liquidity impacts described below.
holding companies. For additional information on the impact of credit rating changes on Citi
On September 9, 2014, Moody’s also released for comment a new bank and its applicable subsidiaries, see “Risk Factors—Liquidity Risks” above.
rating methodology. The new methodology proposed a streamlined baseline
credit assessment (with removal of the bank financial strength rating) and
introduced a “loss given failure” assessment into the ratings. The comment
period has closed and resolution is expected in early 2015.

100
Citigroup Inc. and Citibank, N.A.—Potential Derivative Triggers Citibank, N.A.—Additional Potential Impacts
As of December 31, 2014, Citi estimates that a hypothetical one-notch In addition to the above derivative triggers, Citi believes that a potential
downgrade of the senior debt/long-term rating of Citigroup Inc. across all one-notch downgrade of Citibank, N.A.’s senior debt/long-term rating by
three major rating agencies could impact Citigroup’s funding and liquidity S&P and Fitch could also have an adverse impact on the commercial paper/
due to derivative triggers by approximately $0.8 billion, unchanged from short-term rating of Citibank, N.A. As of December 31, 2014, Citibank, N.A.
September 30, 2014. Other funding sources, such as secured financing had liquidity commitments of approximately $16.1 billion to consolidated
transactions and other margin requirements, for which there are no explicit asset-backed commercial paper conduits, compared to $17.6 billion
triggers, could also be adversely affected. as of September 30, 2014 (as referenced in Note 22 to the Consolidated
As of December 31, 2014, Citi estimates that a hypothetical one-notch Financial Statements).
downgrade of the senior debt/long-term rating of Citibank, N.A. across all In addition to the above-referenced liquidity resources of Citi’s significant
three major rating agencies could impact Citibank, N.A.’s funding and Citibank entities and other Citibank and Banamex entities, Citibank,
liquidity by approximately $1.3 billion, compared to $1.7 billion as of N.A. could reduce the funding and liquidity risk, if any, of the potential
September 30, 2014, due to derivative triggers. downgrades described above through mitigating actions, including repricing
In total, Citi estimates that a one-notch downgrade of Citigroup and or reducing certain commitments to commercial paper conduits. In the
Citibank, N.A., across all three major rating agencies, could result in event of the potential downgrades described above, Citi believes that certain
aggregate cash obligations and collateral requirements of approximately corporate customers could re-evaluate their deposit relationships with
$2.1 billion, compared to $2.5 billion as of September 30, 2014 (see also Citibank, N.A. This re-evaluation could result in clients adjusting their
Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). As set forth under discretionary deposit levels or changing their depository institution, which
“High Quality Liquid Assets” above, the liquidity resources of Citi’s parent could potentially reduce certain deposit levels at Citibank, N.A. However,
entities were approximately $73 billion, and the liquidity resources of Citi’s Citi could choose to adjust pricing, offer alternative deposit products to its
significant Citibank entities and other Citibank and Banamex entities were existing customers or seek to attract deposits from new customers, in addition
approximately $340 billion, for a total of approximately $413 billion as to the mitigating actions referenced above.
of December 31, 2014. These liquidity resources are available in part as a
contingency for the potential events described above.
In addition, a broad range of mitigating actions are currently included
in Citigroup’s and Citibank, N.A.’s contingency funding plans. For Citigroup,
these mitigating factors include, but are not limited to, accessing surplus
funding capacity from existing clients, tailoring levels of secured lending,
and adjusting the size of select trading books and collateralized borrowings
from Citi’s significant bank subsidiaries. Mitigating actions available to
Citibank, N.A. include, but are not limited to, selling or financing highly
liquid government securities, tailoring levels of secured lending, adjusting
the size of select trading books, reducing loan originations and renewals,
raising additional deposits, or borrowing from the FHLB or central banks. Citi
believes these mitigating actions could substantially reduce the funding and
liquidity risk, if any, of the potential downgrades described above.

101
Price Risk Mitigation and Hedging of Interest Rate Risk
Price risk losses arise from fluctuations in the market value of non-trading In order to manage changes in interest rates effectively, Citi may modify
and trading positions resulting from changes in interest rates, credit pricing on new customer loans and deposits, purchase fixed rate securities,
spreads, foreign exchange rates, equity and commodity prices, and in their issue debt that is either fixed or floating or enter into derivative transactions
implied volatilities. that have the opposite risk exposures. Citi regularly assesses the viability of
these and other strategies to reduce its interest rate risks and implements
Price Risk Measurement and Stress Testing
such strategies when it believes those actions are prudent.
Price risks are measured in accordance with established standards to
Citi manages interest rate risk as a consolidated company-wide position.
ensure consistency across businesses and the ability to aggregate risk. The
Citi’s client-facing businesses create interest rate sensitive positions,
measurements used for non-trading and trading portfolios, as well as
including loans and deposits, as part of their ongoing activities. Citi Treasury
associated stress testing processes, are described below.
aggregates these risk positions and manages them centrally. Operating within
Price Risk—Non-Trading Portfolios established limits, Citi Treasury makes positioning decisions and uses tools,
Net Interest Revenue and Interest Rate Risk such as Citi’s investment securities portfolio, company-issued debt, and
Net interest revenue, for interest rate exposure purposes, is the difference interest rate derivatives, to target the desired risk profile. Changes in Citi’s
between the yield earned on the non-trading portfolio assets (including interest rate risk position reflect the accumulated changes in all non-trading
customer loans) and the rate paid on the liabilities (including customer assets and liabilities, with potentially large and offsetting impacts, as well as
deposits or company borrowings). Net interest revenue is affected by changes Citi Treasury’s positioning decisions.
in the level of interest rates, as well as the amounts of assets and liabilities, Stress Testing
and the timing of repricing of assets and liabilities to reflect market rates. Citigroup employs additional measurements, including stress testing the
Interest Rate Risk Measurement—IRE impact of non-linear interest rate movements on the value of the balance
Citi’s principal measure of risk to net interest revenue is interest rate sheet; the analysis of portfolio duration and volatility, particularly as they
exposure (IRE). IRE measures the change in expected net interest revenue relate to mortgage loans and mortgage-backed securities; and the potential
in each currency resulting solely from unanticipated changes in forward impact of the change in the spread between different market indices.
interest rates. Interest Rate Risk Measurement—OCI at Risk
Citi’s estimated IRE incorporates various assumptions including Citi also measures the potential impacts of changes in interest rates on the
prepayment rates on loans, customer behavior, and the impact of pricing value of its Other Comprehensive Income (OCI), which can in turn impact
decisions. For example, in rising interest rate scenarios, portions of the Citi’s Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio. Citi’s goal is to benefit from an
deposit portfolio may be assumed to experience rate increases that are less increase in the market level of interest rates, while limiting the impact of
than the change in market interest rates. In declining interest rate scenarios, changes in OCI on its regulatory capital position.
it is assumed that mortgage portfolios experience higher prepayment rates. OCI at risk is managed as part of the company-wide interest rate
IRE assumes that businesses and/or Citi Treasury make no additional risk position. OCI at risk considers potential changes in OCI (and the
changes in balances or positioning in response to the unanticipated corresponding impact on the Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio) relative to
rate changes. Citi’s capital generation capacity.

102
The following table sets forth the estimated impact to Citi’s net interest revenue, OCI and the Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio (on a fully implemented
basis), each assuming an unanticipated parallel instantaneous 100 basis point increase in interest rates.

Dec. 31, Sept. 30, Dec. 31,

In millions of dollars (unless otherwise noted) 2014 2014 2013
Estimated annualized impact to net interest revenue
U.S. dollar (1) $ 1,123 $ 1,159 $ 1,229
All other currencies 629 713 609
Total $ 1,752 $ 1,872 $ 1,838
As a % of average interest-earning assets 0.11% 0.11% 0.11%
Estimated initial impact to OCI (after-tax) (2) $(3,961) $(3,621) (3,070)
Estimated initial impact on Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio (bps) (3) (44) (41) (37)

(1) Certain trading-oriented businesses within Citi have accrual-accounted positions that are excluded from the estimated impact to net interest revenue in the table since these exposures are managed economically
in combination with mark-to-market positions. The U.S. dollar interest rate exposure associated with these businesses was $(148) million for a 100 basis point instantaneous increase in interest rates as of
December 31, 2014.
(2) Includes the effect of changes in interest rates on OCI related to investment securities, cash flow hedges and pension liability adjustments.
(3) The estimated initial impact to the Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio considers the effect of Citi’s deferred tax asset position and is based on only the estimated initial OCI impact above.

The decrease in the estimated impact to net interest revenue from the prior As of December 31, 2014, Citi expects that the negative $4.0 billion impact
year primarily reflected Citi Treasury actions (as described under “Mitigation to OCI in such a scenario could potentially be offset over approximately
and Hedging of Interest Rate Risk” above), which more than offset changes 22 months.
in balance sheet composition, including the continued seasoning of Citi’s As noted above, Citi routinely evaluates multiple interest rate scenarios,
deposit balances and increases in Citi’s capital base. The change in the including interest rate increases and decreases and steepening and flattening
estimated impact to OCI and the Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio of the yield curve, to anticipate how net interest revenue and OCI might
from the prior year primarily reflected changes in the composition of Citi be impacted in different interest rate environments. The following table
Treasury’s investment and interest rate derivatives portfolio. sets forth the estimated impact to Citi’s net interest revenue, OCI and the
In the event of an unanticipated parallel instantaneous 100 basis point Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio (on a fully implemented basis) under
increase in interest rates, Citi expects the negative impact to OCI would four different changes in interest rates for the U.S. dollar and Citi’s other
be offset in shareholders’ equity through the combination of expected currencies. While Citi also monitors the impact of a parallel decrease
incremental net interest revenue and the expected recovery of the impact on in interest rates, a 100 basis point decrease in short-term interest rates
OCI through accretion of Citi’s investment portfolio over a period of time. is not meaningful, as it would imply negative interest rates in many of
Citi’s markets.

In millions of dollars (unless otherwise noted) Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

Overnight rate change (bps) 100 100 — —
10-year rate change (bps) 100 — 100 (100)
Estimated annualized impact to net interest revenue
U.S. dollar $ 1,123 $ 1,082 $ 95 $ (161)
All other currencies 629 586 36 (36)
Total $ 1,752 $ 1,668 $ 131 $ (197)
Estimated initial impact to OCI (after-tax) (1) $(3,961) $(2,543) $(1,597) $1,372
Estimated initial impact to Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio (bps) (2) (44) (28) (18) 15

Note: Each scenario in the table above assumes that the rate change will occur instantaneously. Changes in interest rates for maturities between the overnight rate and the 10-year are interpolated.
(1) Includes the effect of changes in interest rates on OCI related to investment securities, cash flow hedges and pension liability adjustments.
(2) The estimated initial impact to the Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio considers the effect of Citi’s deferred tax asset position and is based on only the estimated OCI impact above.

As shown in the table above, the magnitude of the impact to Citi’s

net interest revenue and OCI is greater under scenario 2 as compared to
scenario 3. This is because the combination of changes to Citi’s investment
portfolio, partially offset by changes related to Citi’s pension liabilities, results
in a net position that is more sensitive to rates at shorter and intermediate
term maturities.

103
Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates—Impacts on OCI and Capital
As of December 31, 2014, Citi estimates that a simultaneous 5% appreciation
of the U.S. dollar against all of Citi’s other currencies could reduce Citi’s
tangible common equity (TCE) by approximately $1.5 billion, or 0.8% of
TCE, as a result of changes to Citi’s foreign currency translation adjustment
in AOCI, net of hedges. This impact would be primarily due to changes in the
value of the Mexican peso, the British pound sterling, the euro, the Chinese
yuan and the Korean won.
Despite this decrease in TCE, Citi believes its business model and
management of foreign currency translation exposure work to minimize
the effect of changes in foreign exchange rates on its Common Equity Tier 1
Capital ratio. Specifically, as currency movements change the value of Citi’s
net investments in foreign-currency-denominated capital, these movements
also change the value of Citi’s risk-weighted assets denominated in those
currencies. This, coupled with Citi’s foreign currency hedging strategies, such
as foreign currency borrowings, foreign currency forwards and other currency
hedging instruments, lessens the impact of foreign currency movements on
Citi’s Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio.
The effect of Citi’s business model and management strategies on changes
in foreign exchange rates are shown in the table below. For additional
information in the changes in AOCI, see Note 20 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements.
For the quarter ended
Dec. 31, Sept. 30, Dec. 31,
In millions of dollars (unless otherwise noted) 2014 2014 2013
Change in FX spot rate (1) (4.9)% (4.4)% (0.4)%
Change in TCE due to foreign currency
translation, net of hedges $(1,932) $(1,182) $(241)
As a % of Tangible Common Equity (1.1)% (0.7)% (0.1)%
Estimated impact to Common Equity Tier 1
Capital ratio (on a fully implemented
basis) due to changes in foreign currency
translation, net of hedges (bps) (1) 3 (2)

(1) FX spot rate change is a weighted average based upon Citi’s quarterly average GAAP capital exposure
to foreign countries.

104
Interest Revenue/Expense and Yields

Average Rates-Interest Revenue, Interest Expense, and Net Interest Margin

Interest Revenue-Average Rate

Interest Expense-Average Rate
Net Interest Margin
4.50% 4.18%
4.03% 4.01% 4.00% 3.94%
4.00% 3.85% 3.77% 3.77% 3.77% 3.73% 3.70% 3.68%
3.50%
2012: 2.82% 2013: 2.85% 2014: 2.90%
3.00%
2.84% 2.81% 2.88% 2.88% 2.85% 2.88% 2.90% 2.87% 2.91% 2.92%
2.50% 2.75% 2.81%

2.00%
1.58% 1.52% 1.43% 1.36% 1.29%
1.50% 1.21% 1.16% 1.09% 1.08% 1.07% 0.98% 0.95%
1.00%

0.50%
1Q12 2Q12 3Q12 4Q12 1Q13 2Q13 3Q13 4Q13 1Q14 2Q14 3Q14 4Q14

Change Change
In millions of dollars, except as otherwise noted 2014 2013 2012 2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012
Interest revenue (1) $62,180 $63,491 $67,840 (2)% (6)%
Interest expense 13,690 16,177 20,612 (15) (22)
Net interest revenue (1)(2)(3) $48,490 $47,314 $47,228 2% —%
Interest revenue—average rate 3.72% 3.83% 4.06% (11)bps (23)bps
Interest expense—average rate 1.02 1.19 1.47 (17)bps (28)bps
Net interest margin 2.90% 2.85% 2.82% 5bps 3bps
Interest-rate benchmarks
Two-year U.S. Treasury note—average rate 0.46% 0.31% 0.28% 15bps 3bps
10-year U.S. Treasury note—average rate 2.54 2.35 1.80 19bps 55bps
10-year vs. two-year spread 208bps 204bps 152bps

(1) Net interest revenue includes the taxable equivalent adjustments (based on the U.S. federal statutory tax rate of 35%) of $498 million, $521 million and $542 million for 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
(2) Excludes expenses associated with certain hybrid financial instruments, which are classified as Long-term debt and accounted for at fair value with changes recorded in Principal transactions.
(3) Interest revenue, expense, rates and volumes exclude Credicard (Discontinued operations) for all periods presented. See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Citi’s net interest margin (NIM) is calculated by dividing gross interest Going into 2015, while Citi currently expects its NIM to remain relatively
revenue less gross interest expense by average interest earning assets. Citi’s stable to full-year 2014 levels, the continued run-off and sales of assets from
NIM improved to 290 basis points in 2014, up from 285 basis points in 2013, Citi Holdings could impact NIM quarter-to-quarter.
primarily reflecting lower cost of funds, including continued declines in the
cost of deposits and long-term debt (see “Funding and Liquidity” above),
partially offset by continued lower loan yields.

105
Average Balances and Interest Rates—Assets (1)(2)(3)(4)
Taxable Equivalent Basis

Average volume Interest revenue % Average rate

In millions of dollars, except rates 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012
Assets
Deposits with banks (5) $ 161,359 $ 144,904 $ 157,911 $ 959 $ 1,026 $ 1,261 0.59% 0.71% 0.80%
Federal funds sold and securities borrowed or
purchased under agreements to resell (6)
In U.S. offices $ 153,688 $ 158,237 $ 156,837 $ 1,034 $ 1,133 $ 1,471 0.67% 0.72% 0.94%
In offices outside the U.S. (5) 101,177 109,233 120,400 1,332 1,433 1,947 1.32 1.31 1.62
Total $ 254,865 $ 267,470 $ 277,237 $ 2,366 $ 2,566 $ 3,418 0.93% 0.96% 1.23%
Trading account assets (7)(8)
In U.S. offices $ 114,910 $ 126,123 $ 124,633 $ 3,472 $ 3,728 $ 3,899 3.02% 2.96% 3.13%
In offices outside the U.S. (5) 119,801 127,291 126,203 2,538 2,683 3,077 2.12 2.11 2.44
Total $ 234,711 $ 253,414 $ 250,836 $ 6,010 $ 6,411 $ 6,976 2.56% 2.53% 2.78%
Investments
In U.S. offices
Taxable $ 193,816 $ 174,084 $ 169,307 $ 3,286 $ 2,713 $ 2,880 1.70% 1.56% 1.70%
Exempt from U.S. income tax 15,480 18,075 16,405 626 811 816 4.04 4.49 4.97
In offices outside the U.S. (5) 113,163 114,122 114,549 3,627 3,761 4,156 3.21 3.30 3.63
Total $ 322,459 $ 306,281 $ 300,261 $ 7,539 $ 7,285 $ 7,852 2.34% 2.38% 2.62%
Loans (net of unearned income) (9)
In U.S. offices $ 361,769 $ 354,707 $ 359,794 $26,076 $25,941 $ 27,077 7.21% 7.31% 7.53%
In offices outside the U.S. (5) 296,656 292,852 286,025 18,723 19,660 20,676 6.31 6.71 7.23
Total $ 658,425 $ 647,559 $ 645,819 $44,799 $45,601 $ 47,753 6.80% 7.04% 7.39%
Other interest-earning assets (10) $ 40,375 $ 38,233 $ 40,766 $ 507 $ 602 $ 580 1.26% 1.57% 1.42%
Total interest-earning assets $1,672,194 $1,657,861 $1,672,830 $62,180 $63,491 $ 67,840 3.72% 3.83% 4.06%
Non-interest-earning assets (7) $ 224,721 $ 222,526 $ 234,437
Total assets from discontinued operations — 2,909 3,432
Total assets $1,896,915 $1,883,296 $1,910,699

(1) Net interest revenue includes the taxable equivalent adjustments (based on the U.S. federal statutory tax rate of 35%) of $498 million, $521 million and $542 million for 2014, 2013, and 2012, respectively.
(2) Interest rates and amounts include the effects of risk management activities associated with the respective asset and liability categories.
(3) Monthly or quarterly averages have been used by certain subsidiaries where daily averages are unavailable.
(4) Detailed average volume, Interest revenue and Interest expense exclude Discontinued operations. See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(5) Average rates reflect prevailing local interest rates, including inflationary effects and monetary corrections in certain countries.
(6) Average volumes of securities borrowed or purchased under agreements to resell are reported net pursuant to FIN 41 (ASC 210-20-45). However, Interest revenue excludes the impact of FIN 41 (ASC 210-20-45).
(7) The fair value carrying amounts of derivative contracts are reported net, pursuant to FIN 39 (ASC 815-10-45), in Non-interest-earning assets and Other non-interest-bearing liabilities.
(8) Interest expense on Trading account liabilities of ICG is reported as a reduction of Interest revenue. Interest revenue and Interest expense on cash collateral positions are reported in interest on Trading account assets
and Trading account liabilities, respectively.
(9) Includes cash-basis loans.
(10) Includes brokerage receivables.

106
Average Balances and Interest Rates—Liabilities and Equity,
and Net Interest Revenue (1)(2)(3)(4)
Taxable Equivalent Basis

Average volume Interest expense % Average rate

In millions of dollars, except rates 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012
Liabilities
Deposits
In U.S. offices (5) $ 289,669 $ 262,544 $ 233,100 $ 1,432 $ 1,754 $ 2,137 0.49% 0.67% 0.92%
In offices outside the U.S. (6) 465,144 481,134 487,437 4,260 4,482 5,553 0.92 0.93 1.14
Total $ 754,813 $ 743,678 $ 720,537 $ 5,692 $ 6,236 $ 7,690 0.75% 0.84% 1.07%
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned
or sold under agreements to repurchase (7)
In U.S. offices $ 102,246 $ 126,742 $ 121,843 $ 656 $ 677 $ 852 0.64% 0.53% 0.70%
In offices outside the U.S. (6) 87,777 102,623 101,928 1,239 1,662 1,965 1.41 1.62 1.93
Total $ 190,023 $ 229,365 $ 223,771 $ 1,895 $ 2,339 $ 2,817 1.00% 1.02% 1.26%
Trading account liabilities (8)(9)
In U.S. offices $ 30,451 $ 24,834 $ 29,486 $ 75 $ 93 $ 116 0.25% 0.37% 0.39%
In offices outside the U.S. (6) 45,205 47,908 44,639 93 76 74 0.21 0.16 0.17
Total $ 75,656 $ 72,742 $ 74,125 $ 168 $ 169 $ 190 0.22% 0.23% 0.26%
Short-term borrowings (10)
In U.S. offices $ 79,028 $ 77,439 $ 78,747 $ 161 $ 176 $ 203 0.20% 0.23% 0.26%
In offices outside the U.S. (6) 39,220 35,551 31,897 419 421 524 1.07 1.18 1.64
Total $ 118,248 $ 112,990 $ 110,644 $ 580 $ 597 $ 727 0.49% 0.53% 0.66%
Long-term debt (11)
In U.S. offices $ 194,295 $ 194,140 $ 255,093 $ 5,093 $ 6,602 $ 8,896 2.62% 3.40% 3.49%
In offices outside the U.S. (6) 7,761 10,194 14,603 262 234 292 3.38 2.30 2.00
Total $ 202,056 $ 204,334 $ 269,696 $ 5,355 $ 6,836 $ 9,188 2.65% 3.35% 3.41%
Total interest-bearing liabilities $1,340,796 $1,363,109 $1,398,773 $13,690 $16,177 $ 20,612 1.02% 1.19% 1.47%
Demand deposits in U.S. offices $ 26,216 $ 21,948 $ 13,170
Other non-interest-bearing liabilities (8) 317,351 299,052 311,529
Total liabilities from discontinued operations — 362 729
Total liabilities $1,684,363 $1,684,471 $1,724,201
Citigroup stockholders’ equity (12) $ 210,863 $ 196,884 $ 184,592
Noncontrolling interest 1,689 1,941 1,906
Total equity (12) $ 212,552 $ 198,825 $ 186,498
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity $1,896,915 $1,883,296 $1,910,699
Net interest revenue as a percentage of average
interest-earning assets (13)
In U.S. offices $ 953,394 $ 926,291 $ 941,367 $27,497 $25,591 $ 24,586 2.88% 2.76% 2.61%
In offices outside the U.S. (6) 718,800 731,570 731,463 20,993 21,723 22,642 2.92 2.97 3.10
Total $1,672,194 $1,657,861 $1,672,830 $48,490 $47,314 $ 47,228 2.90% 2.85% 2.82%

(1) Net interest revenue includes the taxable equivalent adjustments (based on the U.S. federal statutory tax rate of 35%) of $498 million, $521 million and $542 million for 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
(2) Interest rates and amounts include the effects of risk management activities associated with the respective asset and liability categories.
(3) Monthly or quarterly averages have been used by certain subsidiaries where daily averages are unavailable.
(4) Detailed average volume, Interest revenue and Interest expense exclude Discontinued operations. See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(5) Consists of other time deposits and savings deposits. Savings deposits are made up of insured money market accounts, NOW accounts, and other savings deposits. The interest expense on savings deposits includes
FDIC deposit insurance fees and charges.
(6) Average rates reflect prevailing local interest rates, including inflationary effects and monetary corrections in certain countries.
(7) Average volumes of securities sold under agreements to repurchase are reported net pursuant to FIN 41 (ASC 210-20-45). However, Interest expense excludes the impact of FIN 41 (ASC 210-20-45).
(8) The fair value carrying amounts of derivative contracts are reported net, pursuant to FIN 39 (ASC 815-10-45), in Non-interest-earning assets and Other non-interest-bearing liabilities.
(9) Interest expense on Trading account liabilities of ICG is reported as a reduction of Interest revenue. Interest revenue and Interest expense on cash collateral positions are reported in interest on Trading account assets
and Trading account liabilities, respectively.
(10) Includes brokerage payables.
(11) Excludes hybrid financial instruments and beneficial interests in consolidated VIEs that are classified as Long-term debt, as these obligations are accounted for in changes in fair value recorded in Principal transactions.
(12) Includes stockholders’ equity from discontinued operations.
(13) Includes allocations for capital and funding costs based on the location of the asset.

107
Analysis of Changes in Interest Revenue (1)(2)(3)

2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012

Increase (decrease) Increase (decrease)
due to change in: due to change in:
Average Average Net Average Average Net
In millions of dollars volume rate change volume rate change
Deposits with banks (4) $ 109 $ (176) $ (67) $ (99) $ (136) $ (235)
Federal funds sold and securities borrowed or
purchased under agreements to resell
In U.S. offices $ (32) $ (67) $ (99) $ 13 $ (351) $ (338)
In offices outside the U.S. (4) (106) 5 (101) (169) (345) (514)
Total $(138) $ (62) $ (200) $ (156) $ (696) $ (852)
Trading account assets (5)

In U.S. offices $(337) $ 81 $ (256) $ 46 $ (217) $ (171)

In offices outside the U.S. (4) (159) 14 (145) 26 (420) (394)
Total $(496) $ 95 $ (401) $ 72 $ (637) $ (565)
Investments (1)
In U.S. offices $ 319 $ 69 $ 388 $ 125 $ (297) $ (172)
In offices outside the U.S. (4) (31) (103) (134) (15) (380) (395)
Total $ 288 $ (34) $ 254 $ 110 $ (677) $ (567)
Loans (net of unearned income) (6)
In U.S. offices $ 512 $ (377) $ 135 $ (379) $ (757) $(1,136)
In offices outside the U.S. (4) 253 (1,190) (937) 485 (1,501) (1,016)
Total $ 765 $(1,567) $ (802) $ 106 $(2,258) $(2,152)
Other interest-earning assets (7) $ 32 $ (127) $ (95) $ (37) $ 59 $ 22
Total interest revenue $ 560 $(1,871) $(1,311) $ (4) $(4,345) $(4,349)

(1) The taxable equivalent adjustment is based on the U.S. federal statutory tax rate of 35% and is included in this presentation.
(2) Rate/volume variance is allocated based on the percentage relationship of changes in volume and changes in rate to the total net change.
(3) Detailed average volume, Interest revenue and Interest expense exclude Discontinued operations. See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(4) Changes in average rates reflect changes in prevailing local interest rates, including inflationary effects and monetary corrections in certain countries.
(5) Interest expense on Trading account liabilities of ICG is reported as a reduction of Interest revenue. Interest revenue and Interest expense on cash collateral positions are reported in interest on Trading account assets
and Trading account liabilities, respectively.
(6) Includes cash-basis loans.
(7) Includes brokerage receivables.

108
Analysis of Changes in Interest Expense and Interest Revenue (1)(2)(3)

2014 vs. 2013 2013 vs. 2012

Increase (decrease) Increase (decrease)
due to change in: due to change in:
Average Average Net Average Average Net
In millions of dollars volume rate change volume rate change
Deposits
In U.S. offices $ 168 $ (490) $ (322) $ 247 $ (630) $ (383)
In offices outside the U.S. (4) (147) (75) (222) (71) (1,000) (1,071)
Total $ 21 $ (565) $ (544) $ 176 $(1,630) $(1,454)
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned
or sold under agreements to repurchase
In U.S. offices $(144) $ 123 $ (21) $ 33 $ (208) $ (175)
In offices outside the U.S. (4) (224) (199) (423) 13 (316) (303)
Total $(368) $ (76) $ (444) $ 46 $ (524) $ (478)
Trading account liabilities (5)

In U.S. offices $ 18 $ (36) $ (18) $ (18) $ (5) $ (23)

In offices outside the U.S. (4) (4) 21 17 5 (3) 2
Total $ 14 $ (15) $ (1) $ (13) $ (8) $ (21)
Short-term borrowings (6)
In U.S. offices $ 4 $ (19) $ (15) $ (3) $ (24) $ (27)
In offices outside the U.S. (4) 41 (43) (2) 55 (158) (103)
Total $ 45 $ (62) $ (17) $ 52 $ (182) $ (130)
Long-term debt
In U.S. offices $ 5 $(1,514) $(1,509) $(2,078) $ (216) $(2,294)
In offices outside the U.S. (4) (65) 93 28 (97) 39 (58)
Total $ (60) $(1,421) $(1,481) $(2,175) $ (177) $(2,352)
Total interest expense $(348) $(2,139) $(2,487) $(1,914) $(2,521) $(4,435)
Net interest revenue $ 908 $ 268 $ 1,176 $ 1,910 $(1,824) $ 86

(1) The taxable equivalent adjustment is based on the U.S. federal statutory tax rate of 35% and is included in this presentation.
(2) Rate/volume variance is allocated based on the percentage relationship of changes in volume and changes in rate to the total net change.
(3) Detailed average volume, Interest revenue and Interest expense exclude Discontinued operations. See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(4) Changes in average rates reflect changes in prevailing local interest rates, including inflationary effects and monetary corrections in certain countries.
(5) Interest expense on Trading account liabilities of ICG is reported as a reduction of Interest revenue. Interest revenue and Interest expense on cash collateral positions are reported in interest on Trading account assets
and Trading account liabilities, respectively.
(6) Includes brokerage payables.

109
Price Risk—Trading Portfolios The following histogram of total daily trading-related revenue (loss)
Price risk in Citi’s trading portfolios is monitored using a series of measures, captures trading volatility and shows the number of days in which revenues
including but not limited to: for Citi’s trading businesses fell within particular ranges. As shown in the
• Value at risk (VAR) histogram, positive trading-related revenue was achieved for 94% of the
trading days in 2014.
• Stress testing
• Factor sensitivity
Each trading portfolio across Citi’s business segments has its own market
risk limit framework encompassing these measures and other controls,
including trading mandates, permitted product lists and a new product
approval process for complex products. All trading positions are marked-to-
market, with the results reflected in earnings.

Histogram of Daily Trading-Related Revenue(1)(2)—Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2014

In millions of dollars

35

30

25
Number of Days

20

15

10

0
(110) to (100)
(100) to (90)
(90) to (80)
(80) to (70)
(70) to (60)
(60) to (50)
(50) to (40)
(40) to (30)
(30) to (20)
(20) to (10)
(10) to (0)
0 to 10
10 to 20
20 to 30
30 to 40
40 to 50
50 to 60
60 to 70
70 to 80
80 to 90
90 to 100
100 to 110
110 to 120
120 to 130
130 to 140
140 to 150
150 to 160
160 to 170
170 to 180
180 to 190
190 to 200
(120) to (110)(3)

(1) Daily trading-related revenue includes trading, net interest and other revenue associated with Citi’s trading businesses. It excludes DVA, FVA and CVA adjustments incurred due to changes in the credit quality of
counterparties as well as any associated hedges to that CVA. In addition, it excludes fees and other revenue associated with capital markets origination activities.
(2) Reflects the effects of asymmetrical accounting for economic hedges of certain available-for-sale (AFS) debt securities. Specifically, the change in the fair value of hedging derivatives is included in Trading related
revenue, while the offsetting change in the fair value of hedged AFS debt securities is included in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) and not reflected above.
(3) Principally related to the impact of significant market movements and volatility on the trading revenue for ICG on October 15, 2014.

110
Value at Risk December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013
Value at risk (VAR) estimates, at a 99% confidence level, the potential decline In millions of dollars 2014 Average 2013 Average
in the value of a position or a portfolio under normal market conditions Interest rate $ 68 N/A N/A N/A
assuming a one-day holding period. VAR statistics, which are based on Credit spread 87 N/A N/A N/A
Covariance adjustment (1) (36) N/A N/A N/A
historical data, can be materially different across firms due to differences in
Fully diversified interest rate
portfolio composition, differences in VAR methodologies, and differences in and credit spread $119 $114 $115 $114
model parameters. As a result, Citi believes VAR statistics can be used more Foreign exchange 27 31 34 35
effectively as indicators of trends in risk taking within a firm, rather than as a Equity 17 24 26 27
basis for inferring differences in risk-taking across firms. Commodity 23 16 13 12
Covariance adjustment (1) (56) (73) (63) (75)
Citi uses a single, independently approved Monte Carlo simulation VAR
Total Trading VAR—all
model (see “VAR Model Review and Validation” below), which has been
market risk factors,
designed to capture material risk sensitivities (such as first- and second- including general and
order sensitivities of positions to changes in market prices) of various asset specific risk (excluding
classes/risk types (such as interest rate, credit spread, foreign exchange, credit portfolios) (2) $130 $112 $125 $113
equity and commodity risks). Citi’s VAR includes positions which are Specific risk-only
measured at fair value; it does not include investment securities classified as component (3) $ 10 $ 12 $ 15 $ 14
Total Trading VAR—
available-for-sale or held-to-maturity. For information on these securities, see general market risk
Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. factors only
Citi believes its VAR model is conservatively calibrated to incorporate (excluding credit
fat-tail scaling and the greater of short-term (approximately the most portfolios) (2) $120 $100 $110 $ 99
recent month) and long-term (three years) market volatility. The Monte Incremental Impact of the
Credit Portfolio (4) $ 18 $ 21 $ 19 $ 8
Carlo simulation involves approximately 300,000 market factors, making
use of approximately 180,000 time series, with sensitivities updated daily, Total Trading and
Credit Portfolios VAR $148 $133 $144 $121
volatility parameters updated daily to weekly and correlation parameters
updated monthly. The conservative features of the VAR calibration contribute (1) Covariance adjustment (also known as diversification benefit) equals the difference between the
total VAR and the sum of the VARs tied to each individual risk type. The benefit reflects the fact that
an approximate 21% add-on to what would be a VAR estimated under the the risks within each and across risk types are not perfectly correlated and, consequently, the total
assumption of stable and perfectly, normally distributed markets. VAR on a given day will be lower than the sum of the VARs relating to each individual risk type.
The determination of the primary drivers of changes to the covariance adjustment is made by an
As set forth in the table below, Citi’s average Trading VAR was relatively examination of the impact of both model parameter and position changes.
unchanged from 2013 to 2014. Citi’s average Trading and Credit Portfolio (2) The total Trading VAR includes mark-to-market and certain fair value option trading positions from ICG
and Citi Holdings, with the exception of hedges to the loan portfolio, fair value option loans, and all
VAR increased from 2013 to 2014 due to increased hedging activity associated CVA exposures. Available-for-sale and accrual exposures are not included.
with non-trading positions and increased credit spread volatility of (3) The specific risk-only component represents the level of equity and fixed income issuer-specific risk
embedded in VAR.
benchmark indices resulting from idiosyncratic events. (4) The credit portfolio is composed of mark-to-market positions associated with non-trading business
units including Citi Treasury, the CVA relating to derivative counterparties and all associated CVA
hedges. FVA and DVA are not included. The credit portfolio also includes hedges to the loan portfolio,
fair value option loans and hedges to the leveraged finance pipeline within capital markets origination
within ICG.
N/A Not applicable

The table below provides the range of market factor VARs associated
with Citi’s Total Trading VAR, inclusive of specific risk, that was experienced
during 2014 and 2013:

2014 2013
In millions of dollars Low High Low High
Interest rate N/A N/A N/A N/A
Credit spread N/A N/A N/A N/A
Fully diversified interest rate and credit spread $84 $158 $ 92 $142
Foreign exchange 20 59 21 66
Equity 14 48 18 60
Commodity 11 27 8 24
Covariance adjustment (1) N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total Trading 84 163 85 151
Total Trading and Credit Portfolio 96 188 93 175

(1) No covariance adjustment can be inferred from the above table as the high and low for each market
factor will be from different close of business dates.
N/A Not applicable

111
 The following table provides the VAR for ICG during 2014, excluding the Citi uses the same independently validated VAR model for both Regulatory
CVA relating to derivative counterparties, hedges of CVA, fair value option VAR and Risk Management VAR (i.e., Total Trading and Total Trading and
loans and hedges to the loan portfolio. Credit Portfolios VARs) and, as such, the model review and oversight process
for both purposes is as described above.
In millions of dollars Dec. 31, 2014 Regulatory VAR, which is calculated in accordance with Basel III, differs
Total—all market risk from Risk Management VAR due to the fact that certain positions included
factors, including general and specific risk $122
in Risk Management VAR are not eligible for market risk treatment in
Average—during year $109
High—during year 159 Regulatory VAR. The composition of Risk Management VAR is discussed
Low—during year 82 under “Value at Risk” above. The applicability of the VAR model for positions
eligible for market risk treatment under U.S. regulatory capital rules is
VAR Model Review and Validation periodically reviewed and approved by Citi’s U.S. banking regulators.
Generally, Citi’s VAR review and model validation process entails reviewing In accordance with Basel III, Regulatory VAR includes all trading book
the model framework, major assumptions, and implementation of the covered positions and all foreign exchange and commodity exposures.
mathematical algorithm. In addition, as part of the model validation Pursuant to Basel III, Regulatory VAR excludes positions that fail to meet
process, product specific back-testing on portfolios is periodically completed the intent and ability to trade requirements and are therefore classified as
and reviewed with Citi’s U.S. banking regulators. Furthermore, Regulatory non-trading book and categories of exposures that are specifically excluded
VAR (as described below) back-testing is performed against buy-and-hold as covered positions. Regulatory VAR excludes CVA on derivative instruments
profit and loss on a monthly basis for approximately 167 portfolios across the and DVA on Citi’s own fair value option liabilities. With the April 2014
organization (trading desk level, ICG business segment and Citigroup) and implementation of the U.S. final Basel III rules, CVA hedges are excluded
the results are shared with the U.S. banking regulators. from Regulatory VAR and included in credit risk-weighted assets as computed
Significant VAR model and assumption changes must be independently under the Advanced Approaches for determining risk-weighted assets.
validated within Citi’s risk management organization. This validation
process includes a review by Citi’s model validation group and further
approval from its model validation review committee, which is composed
of senior quantitative risk management officers. In the event of significant
model changes, parallel model runs are undertaken prior to implementation.
In addition, significant model and assumption changes are subject to the
periodic reviews and approval by Citi’s U.S. banking regulators.
In the second quarter of 2014, Citi implemented two VAR model
enhancements that were reviewed by Citi’s U.S. banking regulators as well
as Citi’s model validation group. Specifically, Citi enhanced the correlation
among mortgage products as well as introduced industry sectors (financial
and non-financial) into the credit spread component of the VAR model.

112
Regulatory VAR Back-testing The following graph shows the daily buy-and-hold profit and loss
In accordance with Basel III, Citi is required to perform back-testing to associated with Citi’s covered positions compared to Citi’s one-day Regulatory
evaluate the effectiveness of its Regulatory VAR model. Regulatory VAR back- VAR during 2014. As the graph indicates, for the 12-month period ending
testing is the process in which the daily one-day VAR, at a 99% confidence December 31, 2014, there was one back testing exception where trading
interval, is compared to the buy-and-hold profit and loss (e.g., the profit and losses exceeded the VAR estimate at the Citigroup level. This occurred
loss impact if the portfolio is held constant at the end of the day and re-priced on October 15, 2014, a day on which significant market movements
the following day). Buy-and-hold profit and loss represents the daily mark- and volatility impacted various fixed income as well as equities trading
to-market profit and loss attributable to price movements in covered positions businesses. The difference between the 56% of days with buy-and-hold gains
from the close of the previous business day. Buy-and-hold profit and loss for Regulatory VAR back-testing and the 94% of days with buy-and-hold
excludes realized trading revenue, net interest, fees and commissions, intra- gains shown in the histogram of daily trading related revenue above reflects,
day trading profit and loss, and changes in reserves. among other things, that a significant portion of Citi’s trading-related
Based on a 99% confidence level, Citi would expect two to three days in revenue is not generated from daily price movements on these positions and
any one year where buy-and-hold losses exceeded the Regulatory VAR. Given exposures, as well as differences in the portfolio composition of Regulatory
the conservative calibration of Citi’s VAR model (as a result of taking the VAR and Risk Management VAR.
greater of short- and long-term volatilities and fat-tail scaling of volatilities),
Citi would expect fewer exceptions under normal and stable market
conditions. Periods of unstable market conditions could increase the number
of back-testing exceptions.

Regulatory Trading VAR and Associated Buy-and-Hold Profit and Loss(1) — Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2014
In millions of dollars

Total Regulatory VAR Buy-and-Hold Profit and Loss

Regulatory VAR

150

100

50

-50

-100

-150

-200
Jan-14 Feb-14 Mar-14 Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14 Sep-14 Oct-14 Nov-14 Dec-14

(1) Buy-and-hold profit and loss, as defined by the banking regulators under Basel III, represents the daily mark-to-market revenue movement attributable to the trading position from the close of the previous business day.
Buy-and-hold profit and loss excludes realized trading revenue, net interest, intra-day trading profit and loss on new and terminated trades, as well as changes in reserves. Therefore it is not comparable to the trading-
related revenue presented in the previous histogram of Daily Trading-Related Revenue.

113
Stress Testing Factor Sensitivities
Citi performs stress testing on a regular basis to estimate the impact of Factor sensitivities are expressed as the change in the value of a position for
extreme market movements. It is performed on individual positions and a defined change in a market risk factor, such as a change in the value of a
trading portfolios, as well as in aggregate inclusive of multiple trading Treasury bill for a one-basis-point change in interest rates. Citi’s independent
portfolios. Citi’s independent market risk management organization, after market risk management ensures that factor sensitivities are calculated,
consultations with the businesses, develops both systemic and specific stress monitored, and in most cases, limited, for all material risks taken in a
scenarios, reviews the output of periodic stress testing exercises, and uses the trading portfolio.
information to assess the ongoing appropriateness of exposure levels and
limits. Citi uses two complementary approaches to market risk stress testing
across all major risk factors (i.e., equity, foreign exchange, commodity,
interest rate and credit spreads): top-down systemic stresses and bottom-
up business specific stresses. Systemic stresses are designed to quantify the
potential impact of extreme market movements on a firm-wide basis, and are
constructed using both historical periods of market stress and projections of
adverse economic scenarios. Business specific stresses are designed to probe
the risks of particular portfolios and market segments, especially those risks
that are not fully captured in VAR and systemic stresses.
The systemic stress scenarios and business specific stress scenarios at
Citi are used in several reports reviewed by senior management and also to
calculate internal risk capital for trading market risk. In general, changes in
market factors are defined over a one-year horizon. However, for the purpose
of calculating internal risk capital, changes in a very limited number of
the most liquid market factors are defined over a shorter three-month
horizon. The limited set of market factors subject to the shorter three-month
time horizon are those that in management’s judgment have historically
remained very liquid during financial crises, even as the trading liquidity of
most other market factors materially decreased.

114
Operational Risk
Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal An Operational Risk Council provides oversight for operational risk across
processes, systems or human factors, or from external events. It includes the Citigroup. The council’s members include senior members of Citi’s Franchise
reputation and franchise risk associated with business practices or market Risk and Strategy group and Citi’s Chief Risk Officer’s organization covering
conduct in which Citi is involved. Operational risk is inherent in Citigroup’s multiple dimensions of risk management, with representatives of the
global business activities, as well as the internal processes that support those Business and Regional Chief Risk Officers’ organizations. The council’s focus
business activities, and can result in losses arising from events related to the is on identification and mitigation of operational risk and related incidents.
following, among others: The council works with the business segments and the control functions
• fraud, theft and unauthorized activities; (e.g., Compliance, Finance, Risk and Legal) with the objective of ensuring
a transparent, consistent and comprehensive framework for managing
• employment practices and workplace environment;
operational risk globally.
• clients, products and business practices; In addition, Operational Risk Management, within Citi’s Franchise
• physical assets and infrastructure; and Risk and Strategy group, proactively assists the businesses, operations and
• execution, delivery and process management. technology and the other independent control groups in enhancing the
effectiveness of controls and managing operational risks across products,
Operational Risk Management business lines and regions.
Citi’s operational risk is managed through the overall framework described
in “Managing Global Risk—Overview” above. Operational Risk Measurement and Stress Testing
The goal is to keep operational risk at appropriate levels relative to the As noted above, information about the businesses’ operational risk, historical
characteristics of Citigroup’s businesses, the markets in which it operates, operational risk losses and the control environment is reported by each major
its capital and liquidity, and the competitive, economic and regulatory business segment and functional area. The information is summarized and
environment. reported to senior management, as well as to the Audit Committee of Citi’s
To anticipate, mitigate and control operational risk, Citigroup Board of Directors.
maintains a system of policies and has established a consistent framework Operational risk is measured and assessed through risk capital (see
for monitoring, assessing and communicating operational risks and the “Managing Global Risk—Risk Capital” above). Projected operational risk
overall operating effectiveness of the internal control environment across losses under stress scenarios are also required as part of the Federal Reserve
Citigroup. As part of this framework, Citi has established a Manager’s Control Board’s CCAR process.
Assessment process (as described under “Citi’s Compliance Organization”
above) to help managers self-assess key operational risks and controls and
identify and address weaknesses in the design and/or operating effectiveness
of internal controls that mitigate significant operational risks.
As noted above, each major business segment must implement an
operational risk process consistent with the requirements of this framework.
The process for operational risk management includes the following steps:
• identify and assess key operational risks;
• design controls to mitigate identified risks;
• establish key risk and control indicators;
• implement a process for early problem recognition and timely escalation;
• produce a comprehensive operational risk report; and
• ensure that sufficient resources are available to actively improve the
operational risk environment and mitigate emerging risks.
As new products and business activities are developed, processes are
designed, modified or sourced through alternative means and operational
risks are considered.

115
COUNTRY AND CROSS-BORDER RISK

OVERVIEW COUNTRY RISK

Generally, country risk is the risk that an event in a country (precipitated by
Emerging Markets Exposures
developments internal or external to a country) could directly or indirectly
Citi generally defines emerging markets as countries in Latin America, Asia
impair the value of Citi’s franchise or adversely affect the ability of obligors
(other than Japan, Australia and New Zealand), central and eastern Europe,
within that country to honor their obligations to Citi, any of which could
the Middle East and Africa.
negatively impact Citi’s results of operations or financial condition. Country
The following table presents Citicorp’s principal emerging markets assets
risk events could include sovereign volatility or defaults, banking failures or
as of December 31, 2014. For purposes of the table below, loan amounts
defaults and/or redenomination events (which could be accompanied by a
are generally based on the domicile of the borrower. For example, a loan
revaluation (either devaluation or appreciation) of the affected currency).
to a Chinese subsidiary of a Switzerland-based corporation will generally
While there is some overlap, cross-border risk is generally the risk that
be categorized as a loan in China. Trading account assets and investment
actions taken by a non-U.S. government may prevent the conversion of
securities are generally categorized below based on the domicile of the issuer
local currency into non-local currency (i.e., exchange controls) and/or the
of the security or the underlying reference entity.
transfer of funds outside the country, among other risks, thereby impacting
the ability of Citigroup and its customers to transact business across borders.
Certain of the events described above could result in mandatory loan loss
and other reserve requirements imposed by U.S. regulators due to a particular
country’s economic situation. While Citi continues to work to mitigate its
exposures to potential country and cross-border risk events, the impact of any
such event is highly uncertain and will ultimately be based on the specific
facts and circumstances. As a result, there can be no assurance that the
various steps Citi has taken to mitigate its exposures and risks and/or protect
its businesses, results of operations and financial condition against these
events will be sufficient. In addition, there could be negative impacts to Citi’s
businesses, results of operations or financial condition that are currently
unknown to Citi and thus cannot be mitigated as part of its ongoing
contingency planning.
For additional information on country and cross-border risk at Citi,
including its risk management processes, see “Managing Global Risk” above.
See also “Risk Factors” above.

116
 As of As of
Sept. 30, Dec. 31,
As of December 31, 2014 2014 2013 GCB NCL Rate
Trading
Account Investment
In billions of dollars Assets (1) Securities (2) ICG Loans (3)(4) GCB Loans (3) Aggregate (5) Aggregate (5) Aggregate (5) 4Q’14 3Q’14 4Q’13
Mexico (6) $ 2.8 $20.3 $ 9.0 $28.0 $60.0 $67.6 $74.2 5.7% 4.9% 4.2%
Korea (0.9) 9.9 3.2 23.5 35.7 39.0 39.9 0.8 0.9 1.2
Singapore 0.4 5.9 8.0 14.4 28.8 31.4 29.1 0.2 0.2 0.3
Hong Kong 1.3 4.2 10.2 10.7 26.3 27.1 25.7 0.5 0.6 0.4
Brazil 3.8 3.4 15.1 3.9 26.2 27.4 25.6 6.8 5.5 5.7
India 2.2 7.7 9.7 6.1 25.6 25.2 25.7 0.9 0.8 1.0
China 2.5 3.5 11.2 4.9 22.0 22.3 20.8 0.9 0.3 0.6
Taiwan 1.4 0.9 4.4 7.2 13.9 14.1 14.4 0.2 0.1 0.2
Poland 1.1 4.5 1.5 2.9 10.0 11.2 11.2 (1.7) 0.2 0.2
Malaysia 0.8 0.6 1.6 5.5 8.5 9.4 8.9 0.7 0.6 0.6
Russia (7) 0.3 0.5 4.6 1.2 6.5 8.8 10.3 2.8 2.8 1.8
Indonesia 0.2 0.8 4.1 1.3 6.5 7.1 6.4 3.3 2.2 2.0
Turkey (8) 0.4 1.8 2.8 0.8 5.7 5.4 4.9 (0.1) (0.1) 0.1
Colombia — 0.4 2.5 2.0 4.9 5.2 5.4 3.4 3.5 4.9
Thailand 0.3 1.2 1.1 2.1 4.6 4.9 4.8 2.8 2.6 2.0
UAE (0.1) — 3.0 1.5 4.4 4.3 4.1 1.9 2.6 2.4
South Africa 0.6 0.7 2.0 — 3.3 3.0 2.0 — — —
Philippines 0.4 0.4 1.3 1.0 3.1 3.2 3.1 3.8 4.2 3.3
Argentina (7) 0.1 0.3 1.5 1.1 3.0 2.7 2.8 1.0 1.0 1.1
Peru (0.1) 0.2 1.7 0.5 2.2 2.2 2.1 3.6 3.5 3.3

Note: Aggregate may not cross-foot due to rounding.

(1) Trading account assets are shown on a net basis. Citi’s trading account assets will vary as it maintains inventory consistent with customer needs.
(2) Investment securities include securities available-for-sale, recorded at fair market value, and securities held-to-maturity, recorded at historical cost.
(3) Reflects funded loans, net of unearned income. In addition to the funded loans disclosed in the table above, through its ICG businesses, Citi had unfunded commitments to corporate customers in the emerging markets
of approximately $34 billion as of December 31, 2014 (approximately unchanged from September 30, 2014 and down from approximately $37 billion as of December 31, 2013); no single country accounted for more
than $4 billion of this amount.
(4) As of December 31, 2014, non-accrual loans represented 0.6% of total ICG loans in the emerging markets. For the countries in the table above, non-accrual loan ratios as of December 31, 2014 ranged from
0.0% to 0.4%, other than in Hong Kong and Brazil. In Hong Kong, the non-accrual loan ratio was 1.6% as of December 31, 2014 (compared to 1.5% and 2.5% as of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013,
respectively), primarily reflecting the impact of one counterparty. In Brazil, the non-accrual loan ratio was 1.0% as of December 31, 2014 (compared to 1.6% and 0.3% as of September 30, 2014 and
December 31, 2013, respectively), primarily reflecting the impact of one counterparty.
(5) Aggregate of Trading account assets, Investment securities, ICG loans and GCB loans.
(6) 4Q’14 NCL rate included a charge-off of approximately $70 million related to homebuilder exposure that was fully offset with previously established reserves.
(7) For additional information on certain risks relating to Russia and Argentina, see “Cross-Border Risk” below.
(8) Investment securities in Turkey include Citi’s remaining $1.6 billion investment in Akbank T.A.S. For additional information, see Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

117
Emerging Markets Trading Account Assets and Investment Securities Emerging Markets Corporate Lending
In the ordinary course of business, Citi holds securities in its trading accounts Consistent with ICG’s overall strategy, Citi’s corporate clients in the emerging
and investment accounts, including those above. Trading account assets are markets are typically large, multinational corporations that value Citi’s
marked-to-market daily, with asset levels varying as Citi maintains inventory global network. Citi aims to establish relationships with these clients that
consistent with customer needs. Investment securities are recorded at either encompass multiple products, consistent with client needs, including
fair value or historical cost, based on the underlying accounting treatment, cash management and trade services, foreign exchange, lending, capital
and are predominantly held as part of the local entity asset and liability markets and M&A advisory. Citi believes that its target corporate segment
management program, or to comply with local regulatory requirements. is more resilient under a wide range of economic conditions, and that
In the markets in the table above, 96% of Citi’s investment securities were its relationship-based approach to client service enables it to effectively
related to sovereign issuers as of December 31, 2014. manage the risks inherent in such relationships. Citi has a well-established
risk appetite framework around its corporate lending activities, including
Emerging Markets Consumer Lending
risk-based limits and approval authorities and portfolio concentration
GCB’s strategy within the emerging markets is consistent with GCB’s overall
boundaries.
strategy, which is to leverage its global footprint to serve its target clients.
As of December 31, 2014, ICG had approximately $118 billion of
The retail bank seeks to be the preeminent bank for the emerging affluent
loans outstanding to borrowers in the emerging markets, representing
and affluent consumers in large urban centers. In credit cards and in certain
approximately 43% of ICG total loans outstanding, compared to
retail markets, Citi serves customers in a somewhat broader set of segments
$125 billion (45%) and $126 billion (47%) as of September 30, 2014
and geographies. Commercial banking generally serves small- and middle-
and December 31, 2013, respectively. No single emerging market country
market enterprises operating in GCB’s geographic markets, focused on clients
accounted for more than 6% of Citi’s ICG loans as of the end of the fourth
that value Citi’s global capabilities. Overall, Citi believes that its customers
quarter of 2014.
are more resilient than the overall market under a wide range of economic
As of December 31, 2014, approximately 70% of Citi’s emerging markets
conditions. Citi’s consumer business has a well-established risk appetite
corporate credit portfolio (excluding private bank in ICG), including loans
framework across geographies and products that reflects the business strategy
and unfunded lending commitments, was rated investment grade, which
and activities and establishes boundaries around the key risks that arise from
Citi considers to be ratings of BBB or better according to its internal risk
the strategy and activities.
measurement system and methodology (for additional information on
As of December 31, 2014, GCB had approximately $123 billion of
Citi’s internal risk measurement system for corporate credit, see “Corporate
consumer loans outstanding to borrowers in the emerging markets, or
Credit Details” above). The vast majority of the remainder was rated BB or B
approximately 41% of GCB’s total loans, compared to $128 billion (43%)
according to Citi’s internal risk measurement system and methodology.
and $127 billion (42%) as of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013,
Overall ICG net credit losses in the emerging markets were 0.4% of average
respectively. Of the approximate $123 billion as of December 31, 2014, the
loans in the fourth quarter of 2014, compared to 0.0% in each of the third
five largest emerging markets—Mexico, Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong and
quarter of 2014 and fourth quarter of 2013, primarily driven by a charge-off
Taiwan—comprised approximately 28% of GCB’s total loans.
related to a single exposure. The ratio of non-accrual ICG loans to total loans
Within the emerging markets, 29% of Citi’s GCB loans were mortgages,
in the emerging markets remained stable at 0.6% as of December 31, 2014.
26% were commercial markets loans, 24% were personal loans and 22% were
credit cards loans, each as of December 31, 2014.
Overall consumer credit quality remained generally stable in the fourth
quarter of 2014, as net credit losses in the emerging markets were 2.2%
of average loans, compared to 2.1% and 1.9% in the third quarter of 2014
and fourth quarter of 2013, respectively, consistent with Citi’s target market
strategy and risk appetite framework.

118
CROSS-BORDER RISK

FFIEC—Cross Border Outstandings

Citi’s cross-border disclosures are based on the country exposure bank
regulatory reporting guidelines of the Federal Financial Institutions
Examination Council (FFIEC), as revised in December 2013. The following
summarizes some of the FFIEC key reporting guidelines:
• Amounts are based on the domicile of the ultimate obligor, counterparty,
collateral, issuer or guarantor, as applicable.
• Amounts do not consider the benefit of collateral received for securities
financing transactions (i.e., repurchase agreements, reverse repurchase
agreements and securities loaned and borrowed) and are reported based
on notional amounts.
• Netting of derivatives receivables and payables, reported at fair value, is
permitted, but only under a legally binding netting agreement with the
same specific counterparty, and does not include the benefit of margin
received or hedges.
• The netting of long and short positions for AFS securities and trading
portfolios is not permitted.
• Credit default swaps (CDS) are included based on the gross notional
amount sold and purchased and do not include any offsetting CDS on the
same underlying entity.
• Loans are reported without the benefit of hedges.
Given the requirements noted above, Citi’s FFIEC cross-border exposures
and total outstandings tend to fluctuate, in some cases, significantly, from
period to period. As an example, because total outstandings under FFIEC
guidelines do not include the benefit of margin or hedges, market volatility
in interest rates, foreign exchange rates and credit spreads may cause
significant fluctuations in the level of total outstandings, all else being equal.

119
The tables below set forth each country whose total outstandings exceeded 0.75% of total Citigroup assets as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013:

December 31, 2014

Cross-Border Claims on Third Parties and Local Country Assets
Other Short Commitments Credit Credit
(Corporate Trading Term Total and Derivatives Derivatives
In billions of U.S. dollars Banks Public NBFIs (1) and Households) Assets (2) Claims (2) Outstanding (3) Guarantees (4) Purchased (5) Sold (5)
United Kingdom $23.9 $18.0 $47.0 $27.7 $12.8 $62.4 $116.6 $19.0 $104.0 $105.5
Mexico 7.9 29.7 6.5 37.3 8.9 41.4 81.4 4.6 6.8 6.4
Japan 12.8 32.0 9.6 4.6 7.0 42.3 59.0 4.3 22.6 21.7
Cayman Islands 0.1 — 47.5 3.3 2.0 35.8 50.9 2.1 — —
France 23.2 3.5 16.2 6.1 7.0 29.7 49.0 12.5 87.0 88.0
Korea 1.1 18.5 1.0 27.5 2.2 39.3 48.1 14.6 11.4 9.3
Germany 12.4 17.3 3.1 6.1 6.6 16.1 38.9 10.7 80.0 81.0
China 8.9 10.5 2.2 13.7 5.2 24.5 35.3 1.6 11.5 12.0
India 5.8 11.4 2.7 15.1 5.9 23.2 35.0 4.2 1.8 1.5
Australia 8.0 5.3 3.6 17.0 6.6 12.5 33.9 10.7 12.1 11.7
Singapore 2.5 7.9 6.4 17.0 0.6 20.2 33.8 1.8 1.4 1.3
Brazil 5.1 11.5 1.1 14.7 4.6 20.5 32.4 5.7 11.9 10.2
Netherlands 8.7 7.6 8.4 7.2 2.3 11.3 31.9 7.0 30.4 30.6
Hong Kong 1.1 8.0 2.6 15.2 3.4 15.9 26.9 2.4 2.6 1.9
Canada 6.6 4.5 6.0 7.3 4.7 11.1 24.4 7.6 6.7 7.1
Switzerland 5.0 13.7 0.7 4.0 0.4 16.2 23.4 4.6 25.9 26.4
Taiwan 1.9 6.9 1.1 9.8 1.7 13.3 19.7 13.3 0.1 —
Italy 2.0 12.1 0.8 0.9 4.6 5.9 15.8 3.5 71.3 68.3
Ireland 4.6 0.4 8.0 1.8 1.3 8.9 14.8 2.9 4.3 4.2

December 31, 2013

Cross-Border Claims on Third Parties and Local Country Assets
Other Short Commitments Credit Credit
(Corporate Trading Term Total and Derivatives Derivatives
In billions of U.S. dollars Banks Public NBFIs (1) and Households) Assets (2) Claims (2) Outstanding (3) Guarantees (4) Purchased (5) Sold (5)
United Kingdom $29.4 $12.3 $37.8 $31.6 $14.5 $62.9 $111.1 $17.7 $ 119.2 $119.4
Mexico 6.8 37.1 5.9 40.8 8.2 42.5 90.6 5.4 6.2 6.3
Japan 14.9 29.0 12.8 6.4 11.4 45.0 63.1 3.5 23.8 22.7
Cayman Islands 0.2 — 46.5 6.6 2.9 41.8 53.3 1.3 0.1 —
France 19.7 2.8 13.9 5.9 5.3 28.8 42.3 12.3 100.6 98.8
Korea 1.5 16.3 0.5 28.9 2.8 35.8 47.2 19.1 11.7 9.5
Germany 11.7 18.5 1.9 4.8 6.5 20.3 36.9 9.4 98.6 97.6
China 9.3 8.7 1.9 12.7 3.1 23.0 32.6 1.6 7.3 7.6
India 6.7 10.9 1.3 15.0 4.8 23.1 33.9 3.8 2.2 2.0
Australia 7.2 4.0 5.1 18.1 7.5 13.6 34.4 11.9 15.5 14.6
Singapore 2.3 9.4 1.4 16.1 0.8 14.0 29.2 2.1 1.4 1.3
Brazil 3.8 11.0 0.3 17.1 5.1 23.6 32.2 7.3 7.7 7.3
Netherlands 7.6 8.6 3.3 6.5 2.8 14.2 26.0 8.0 35.8 35.1
Hong Kong 1.7 7.5 2.6 15.2 3.7 16.4 27.0 2.1 2.6 2.4
Canada 4.5 4.1 3.6 8.2 4.9 10.8 20.4 7.3 6.6 6.3
Switzerland 4.2 9.6 0.8 4.6 0.6 14.5 19.2 5.7 32.2 31.9
Taiwan 1.6 7.0 0.3 9.9 1.6 11.7 18.8 14.0 0.2 0.1
Italy 2.8 15.0 0.4 1.3 6.3 7.0 19.5 3.2 78.9 72.4
Ireland 5.0 0.7 4.0 1.5 1.5 8.1 11.2 2.6 4.1 4.1

(1) Non-bank financial institutions.

(2) Included in total outstanding.
(3) Total outstanding includes cross-border claims on third parties, as well as local country assets. Cross-border claims on third parties includes cross-border loans, securities, deposits with banks and other monetary
assets, as well as net revaluation gains on foreign exchange and derivative products.
(4) Commitments (not included in total outstanding) include legally binding cross-border letters of credit and other commitments and contingencies as defined by the FFIEC guidelines. The FFIEC definition of commitments
includes commitments to local residents to be funded with local currency liabilities originated within the country.
(5) CDS are not included in total outstanding.

120
Argentina for Citi, and the decline in the non-ASC 815 qualifying hedges held in Citi
Since 2011, the Argentine government has been tightening its foreign Argentina, were due to increased foreign currency limitations imposed by
exchange controls. As a result, Citi’s access to U.S. dollars and other foreign the Argentine government during 2014 that have limited Citi’s ability to hold
currencies, which apply to capital repatriation efforts, certain operating U.S. dollar hedges in Argentina.
expenses and discretionary investments offshore, is limited. Although Citi currently uses the Argentine peso as the functional
As of December 31, 2014, Citi’s net investment in its Argentine operations currency for its operations in Argentina, an increase in inflation resulting
was approximately $780 million, compared to $720 million at each of in a cumulative three-year inflation rate of 100% or more would result in a
September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013. During 2014, Citi Argentina change in the functional currency to the U.S. dollar. Citi bases its evaluation
paid dividends to Citi of approximately $60 million. of the cumulative three-year inflation rate on the official inflation statistics
Citi uses the Argentine peso as the functional currency in Argentina published by INDEC, the Argentine government’s statistics agency. The
and translates its financial statements into U.S. dollars using the official cumulative three-year inflation rate as of December 31, 2014, based on
exchange rate as published by the Central Bank of Argentina. According to statistics published by INDEC, was approximately 52% (compared to 50%
the official exchange rate, the Argentine peso devalued to 8.55 pesos to one as of September 30, 2014). The official inflation statistics are believed
U.S. dollar at December 31, 2014 compared to 8.43 pesos to one U.S. dollar to be underestimated, however, and unofficial inflation statistics suggest
at September 30, 2014 and 6.52 to one U.S. dollar at December 31, 2013. It the cumulative three-year inflation rate was approximately 123% as of
is expected that the devaluation of the Argentine peso will continue for the December 31, 2014 (compared to approximately 119% as of September 30,
foreseeable future. 2014). While a change in the functional currency to the U.S. dollar would
The impact of devaluations of the Argentine peso on Citi’s net investment not result in any immediate gains or losses to Citi, it would result in future
in Argentina is reported as a translation loss in stockholders’ equity offset, to devaluations of the Argentine peso being recorded in earnings for Citi’s
the extent hedged, by: Argentine peso-denominated assets and liabilities.
• gains or losses recorded in stockholders’ equity on net investment hedges As of December 31, 2014, Citi had total third-party assets of approximately
that have been designated as, and qualify for, hedge accounting under $4.1 billion in Citi Argentina (compared to approximately $3.8 billion at
ASC 815 Derivatives and Hedging; and September 30, 2014 and $3.9 billion at December 31, 2013), primarily
composed of corporate and consumer loans and cash on deposit with and
• gains or losses recorded in earnings for its U.S. dollar-denominated
short-term paper issued by the Central Bank of Argentina. A significant
monetary assets or currency futures held in Argentina that do not qualify
portion of these assets was funded with local deposits. Included in the total
as net investment hedges under ASC 815.
assets were U.S. dollar-denominated assets of approximately $550 million,
At December 31, 2014, Citi had cumulative translation losses related compared to approximately $520 million at September 30, 2014 and
to its investment in Argentina, net of qualifying net investment hedges, of $920 million at December 31, 2013. (For additional information on Citi’s
approximately $1.51 billion (pretax), which were recorded in stockholders’ exposures related to Argentina, see “Emerging Market Exposures” above,
equity. This compared to $1.46 billion (pretax) as of September 30, 2014 and which sets forth Citi’s trading account assets, investment securities, ICG
$1.30 billion (pretax) as of December 31, 2013. The cumulative translation loans and GCB loans in Argentina, based on the methodology described in
losses would not be reclassified into earnings unless realized upon sale or such section. As described in such section, these assets totaled approximately
liquidation of substantially all of Citi’s Argentine operations. $3.0 billion as of December 31, 2014. Approximately $190 million of such
As noted above, Citi hedges currency risk in its net investment in exposure is held by non-Argentine Citi subsidiaries and thus is not included
Argentina to the extent possible and prudent. Suitable hedging alternatives in the $4.1 billion amount set forth above, which pertains only to Citi
have become less available and more expensive and may not be available in Argentina, as disclosed.)
the future to offset future currency devaluation. As of December 31, 2014, As widely reported, Argentina is currently engaged in litigation in the
Citi’s total hedges against its net investment in Argentina were approximately U.S. with certain “holdout” bond investors who did not accept restructured
$810 million (compared to $920 million as of September 30, 2014 and $940 bonds in the restructuring of Argentine debt after Argentina defaulted on
million as of December 31, 2013). Of this amount, approximately $420 its sovereign obligations in 2001. Based on U.S. court rulings to date,
million consisted of foreign currency forwards that were recorded as net Argentina has been ordered to negotiate a settlement with “holdout” bond
investment hedges under ASC 815 (compared to approximately $430 million investors and, absent a negotiated settlement, not pay interest on certain of
as of September 30, 2014 and $160 million as of December 31, 2013). The its restructured bonds unless it simultaneously pays all amounts owed to the
remaining hedges of approximately $390 million as of December 31, 2014 “holdout” investors that are the subject of the litigation. During the third
(compared to $490 million as of September 30, 2014 and $780 million as quarter of 2014, Argentina’s June 30, 2014 interest payment on certain of the
of December 31, 2013) were net U.S. dollar-denominated assets and foreign restructured bonds was not paid by the trustee as such payment would have
currency futures in Citi Argentina that do not qualify for hedge accounting violated U.S. court orders and, as a result, Argentina has been deemed to be
under ASC 815. The increase in ASC 815 designated foreign currency in technical default.
forwards, which are held outside Argentina and generally more expensive

121
 The ongoing economic and political situation in Argentina could Venezuela
negatively impact Citi’s results of operations, including revenues in its foreign Since 2003, the Venezuelan government has implemented and operated
exchange business and/or potentially increase its funding costs. It could restrictive foreign exchange controls. These exchange controls have limited
also lead to further governmental intervention or regulatory restrictions Citi’s ability to obtain U.S. dollars in Venezuela; Citi has not been able to
on foreign investments in Argentina, including further devaluation of the acquire U.S. dollars from the Venezuelan government since 2008.
Argentine peso, further limits to foreign currency holdings or hedging As of December 31, 2014, the Venezuelan government operates three
activities, or the potential redenomination of certain U.S. dollar assets and separate official foreign exchange rates:
liabilities into Argentine pesos, which could be accompanied by a devaluation • the preferential foreign exchange rate offered by the National Center for
of the Argentine peso. In addition, in January 2015, U.S. regulators informed Foreign Trade (CENCOEX), fixed at 6.3 bolivars to one U.S. dollar;
Citi of its decision to downgrade Argentina’s transfer risk rating, which will
• the SICAD I rate, which was 12 bolivars to one U.S. dollar; and
result in mandatory transfer risk reserve requirements to be recognized in the
first quarter of 2015. • beginning in the second quarter of 2014, the SICAD II rate, which was 50
Further, as widely reported, Citi acts as a custodian in Argentina for bolivars to one U.S. dollar.
certain of the restructured bonds that are part of the “holdout” bond On February 10, 2015, the Venezuelan government published changes
litigation; specifically, U.S. dollar denominated restructured bonds governed to its foreign exchange controls, which continue to maintain a three-tiered
by Argentina law and payable in Argentina. During the third quarter of 2014, system. The new exchange controls maintain the CENCOEX rate at 6.3
the U.S. court overseeing the Argentina litigation ruled that Citi Argentina’s bolivars per U.S. dollar; however, the new exchange controls merge SICAD II
payment of interest on these bonds, as custodian, was covered by the court’s into SICAD I, which will be referred to as “SICAD.” The SICAD auctions will
order and thus could not be made without violating the order prohibiting the begin at 12 bolivars per U.S. dollar and are expected to devalue progressively
payments. While the court has granted a stay and permitted Citi Argentina in the future. In addition, the new exchange controls establish the Marginal
to make the required 2014 interest payments, future interest payments on Foreign Exchange System (SIMADI), which is intended to be a free floating
these bonds could place Citi Argentina in violation of the court’s order, absent exchange. The SIMADI exchange limits the volume of foreign currency that
relief from the court. Conversely, Citi Argentina’s failure to pay future interest companies can purchase each month, and banks and brokers, which include
on these bonds could result in significant negative consequences to Citi’s Citi, are prohibited from accessing this market for their own needs.
franchise in Argentina, including sanctions, confiscation of assets, criminal Citi uses the U.S. dollar as the functional currency for its operations in
charges, or even loss of licenses in Argentina, as well as expose Citi and Citi Venezuela. As of December 31, 2014, Citi uses the SICAD I rate to remeasure
Argentina to litigation. The next interest payment on the bonds for which Citi its net bolivar-denominated monetary assets as the SICAD I rate is the only
Argentina serves as custodian is due March 31, 2015. rate at which Citi is legally eligible to acquire U.S. dollars from CENCOEX,
despite the limited availability of U.S. dollars and although the SICAD I
rate may not necessarily be reflective of economic reality. Re-measurement
of Citi’s bolivar-denominated assets and liabilities due to changes in the
exchange rate is recorded in earnings. Further devaluation in the SICAD I
exchange rate, a change by Citi to a less favorable rate or other changes to
the foreign exchange mechanisms would result in foreign exchange losses in
the period in which such devaluation or changes occur.
At December 31, 2014, Citi’s net investment in its Venezuelan operations
was approximately $180 million (unchanged from September 30, 2014
and compared to $240 million at December 31, 2013), which included
net monetary assets denominated in Venezuelan bolivars of approximately
$140 million (compared to approximately $130 million at September 30,
2014 and $220 million at December 31, 2013). Total third-party assets of
Citi Venezuela were approximately $900 million at December 31, 2014
(unchanged from September 30, 2014 and a decrease from $1.2 billion as of
December 31, 2013), primarily composed of cash on deposit with the Central
Bank of Venezuela, corporate and consumer loans, and government bonds. A
significant portion of these assets was funded with local deposits.

122
Russia Greece
Russia’s engagement in recent events in Ukraine has continued to be a As of December 31, 2014, Citi had total third-party assets and liabilities of
cause of concern to investors in Russian assets and parties doing business approximately $36 million and $915 million, respectively, in Citi’s Greek
in Russia or with Russian entities, including as a result of the potential risk branch. Included in the total third-party assets and liabilities as of such
of wider repercussions on the Russian economy and trade and investment date were non-euro denominated assets and liabilities of $0.3 million and
as well as the imposition of additional sanctions, such as asset freezes, $174 million, respectively.
involving Russia or against Russian entities, business sectors, individuals Greece elected a new government in January 2015. As a result of the
or otherwise. The Russian ruble has depreciated 43% against the U.S. dollar impact of austerity measures on Greece, the newly elected government has
from September 30, 2014 to December 31, 2014, and over the same period, committed to renegotiating the country’s debt with the European Union and
the MICEX Index of leading Russian stocks decreased 1% in ruble terms. the International Monetary Fund. If these negotiations are unsuccessful, it
Citi operates in Russia through a subsidiary of Citibank, N.A., which uses could lead to Greece’s defaulting on its debt obligations and possibly even to
the Russian ruble as its functional currency. Citi’s net investment in Russia a withdrawal of Greece from the European Monetary Union (EMU).
was approximately $1.1 billion at December 31, 2014, compared to $1.6 If Greece were to leave the EMU, certain of its obligations could be
billion at September 30, 2014. Substantially all of Citi’s net investment was redenominated from the euro to a new country currency (e.g., drachma).
hedged (subject to related tax adjustments) as of December 31, 2014, using While alternative scenarios could develop, redenomination could be
forward foreign exchange contracts. Total third-party assets of the Russian accompanied by an immediate devaluation of the new currency as compared
Citibank subsidiary were approximately $6.1 billion as of December 31, to the euro and the U.S. dollar.
2014, compared to $7.4 billion at September 30, 2014. These assets were Citi is exposed to potential redenomination and devaluation risks arising
primarily composed of corporate and consumer loans, local government debt from (i) euro-denominated assets and/or liabilities located or held within
securities, and cash on deposit with the Central Bank of Russia. A significant Greece that are governed by local country law (local exposures), as well
majority of these third-party assets were funded with local deposit liabilities. as (ii) other euro-denominated assets and liabilities, such as loans and
For additional information on Citi’s exposures related to Russia, see securitized products, between entities outside of Greece and a client within
“Emerging Market Exposures” above, which sets forth Citi’s trading account Greece that are governed by local country law (offshore exposures).
assets, investment securities, ICG loans and GCB loans in Russia, based on If Greece were to withdraw from the EMU, and assuming a symmetrical
the methodology described in such section. As disclosed in such section, redenomination and devaluation occurred, Citi believes its risk of loss would
these assets totaled approximately $6.5 billion as of December 31, 2014. be limited as its liabilities subject to redenomination exceeded assets held
Approximately $2.7 billion of such exposure is held on non-Russian Citi both locally and offshore as of December 31, 2014. However, the actual assets
subsidiaries and thus is not included in the $6.1 billion amount set forth and liabilities that could be subject to redenomination and devaluation
above, which pertains only to the Russian Citibank subsidiary, as disclosed. risk, as well as whether any redenomination is asymmetrical, are subject
to substantial legal and other uncertainty. In addition, other events outside
of Citi’s control—such as the extent of any deposit flight and devaluation,
imposition by U.S. regulators of mandatory loan reserve requirements or
any functional currency change and the accounting impact thereof—could
further negatively impact Citi in such an event.

123
SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND SIGNIFICANT ESTIMATES

Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements contains a summary of These judgments have the potential to impact the Company’s financial
Citigroup’s significant accounting policies, including a discussion of recently performance for instruments where the changes in fair value are recognized
issued accounting pronouncements. These policies, as well as estimates made in either the Consolidated Statement of Income or in Accumulated other
by management, are integral to the presentation of Citi’s results of operations comprehensive income (loss) (AOCI).
and financial condition. While all of these policies require a certain level of Moreover, for certain investments, decreases in fair value are only
management judgment and estimates, this section highlights and discusses recognized in earnings in the Consolidated Statement of Income if such
the significant accounting policies that require management to make highly decreases are judged to be an other-than-temporary impairment (OTTI).
difficult, complex or subjective judgments and estimates at times regarding Adjudicating the temporary nature of fair value impairments is also
matters that are inherently uncertain and susceptible to change (see also inherently judgmental.
“Risk Factors—Business and Operational Risks” above). Management has The fair value of financial instruments incorporates the effects of
discussed each of these significant accounting policies, the related estimates, Citi’s own credit risk and the market view of counterparty credit risk, the
and its judgments with the Audit Committee of the Citigroup Board of quantification of which is also complex and judgmental. For additional
Directors. Additional information about these policies can be found in Note 1 information on Citi’s fair value analysis, see Notes 1, 6, 25 and 26 to the
to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Consolidated Financial Statements.
Valuations of Financial Instruments Allowance for Credit Losses
Citigroup holds debt and equity securities, derivatives, retained interests Management provides reserves for an estimate of probable losses inherent in
in securitizations, investments in private equity and other financial the funded loan portfolio and in unfunded loan commitments and standby
instruments. Substantially all of these assets and liabilities are reflected at letters of credit on the Consolidated Balance Sheet in the Allowance for loan
fair value on Citi’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. losses and in Other liabilities, respectively.
Citi purchases securities under agreements to resell (reverse repos) and Estimates of these probable losses are based upon (i) Citigroup’s internal
sells securities under agreements to repurchase (repos), a majority of which system of credit-risk ratings, which are analogous to the risk ratings of
are carried at fair value. In addition, certain loans, short-term borrowings, the major credit rating agencies; and (ii) historical default and loss data,
long-term debt and deposits, as well as certain securities borrowed and including rating agency information regarding default rates from 1983
loaned positions that are collateralized with cash, are carried at fair value. to 2013, and internal data dating to the early 1970s on severity of losses
Citigroup holds its investments, trading assets and liabilities, and resale in the event of default. Adjustments may be made to this data, including
and repurchase agreements on the Consolidated Balance Sheet to meet (i) statistically calculated estimates to cover the historical fluctuation
customer needs and to manage liquidity needs, interest rate risks and private of the default rates over the credit cycle, the historical variability of loss
equity investing. severity among defaulted loans, and the degree to which there are large
When available, Citi generally uses quoted market prices to determine obligor concentrations in the global portfolio; and (ii) adjustments made
fair value and classifies such items within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy for specifically known items, such as current environmental factors and
established under ASC 820-10, Fair Value Measurement. If quoted market credit trends.
prices are not available, fair value is based upon internally developed In addition, representatives from both the risk management and finance
valuation models that use, where possible, current market-based or staffs who cover business areas with delinquency-managed portfolios
independently sourced market parameters, such as interest rates, currency containing smaller homogeneous loans present their recommended reserve
rates and option volatilities. Such models are often based on a discounted balances based upon leading credit indicators, including loan delinquencies
cash flow analysis. In addition, items valued using such internally generated and changes in portfolio size, as well as economic trends, including housing
valuation techniques are classified according to the lowest level input or prices, unemployment and GDP. This methodology is applied separately
value driver that is significant to the valuation. Thus, an item may be for each individual product within each geographic region in which these
classified under the fair value hierarchy as Level 3 even though there may be portfolios exist.
some significant inputs that are readily observable. This evaluation process is subject to numerous estimates and judgments.
The credit crisis caused some markets to become illiquid, thus reducing The frequency of default, risk ratings, loss recovery rates, the size and
the availability of certain observable data used by Citi’s valuation techniques. diversity of individual large credits, and the ability of borrowers with foreign
This illiquidity, in at least certain markets, continued through 2014. When currency obligations to obtain the foreign currency necessary for orderly debt
or if liquidity returns to these markets, the valuations will revert to using the servicing, among other things, are all taken into account during this review.
related observable inputs in verifying internally calculated values. Changes in these estimates could have a direct impact on Citi’s credit costs
Citi is required to exercise subjective judgments relating to the and the allowance in any period.
applicability and functionality of internal valuation models, the significance For a further description of the loan loss reserve and related accounts, see
of inputs or value drivers to the valuation of an instrument, and the degree Notes 1 and 16 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
of illiquidity and subsequent lack of observability in certain markets.

124
Goodwill the updated long-range financial forecasts as a basis for its annual goodwill
Citi tests goodwill for impairment annually on July 1 and between annual impairment test. Management may engage an independent valuation
tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more-likely- specialist to assist in Citi’s valuation process.
than-not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount, Citigroup engaged an independent valuation specialist in 2013 and 2014
such as a significant adverse change in the business climate, a decision to assist in Citi’s valuation for most of the reporting units employing both the
to sell or dispose of all or a significant portion of a reporting unit, or a market approach and DCF method. Citi believes that the DCF method, using
significant decline in Citi’s stock price. No goodwill impairment was recorded management projections for the selected reporting units and an appropriate
during 2014, 2013 and 2012. risk-adjusted discount rate, is most reflective of a market participant’s view
As of December 31, 2014, Citigroup consists of the following business of fair values given current market conditions. For the reporting units where
segments: Global Consumer Banking, Institutional Clients Group, both methods were utilized in 2013 and 2014, the resulting fair values were
Corporate/Other and Citi Holdings. Goodwill impairment testing is relatively consistent and appropriate weighting was given to outputs from
performed at the level below the business segment (referred to as a reporting both methods.
unit). Goodwill is allocated to Citi’s eight reporting units at the date the The DCF method used at the time of each impairment test used discount
goodwill is initially recorded. Once goodwill has been allocated to the rates that Citi believes adequately reflected the risk and uncertainty in the
reporting units, it generally no longer retains its identification with a financial markets generally and specifically in the internally generated cash
particular acquisition, but instead becomes identified with the reporting unit flow projections. The DCF method employs a capital asset pricing model in
as a whole. As a result, all of the fair value of each reporting unit is available estimating the discount rate. Citi continues to value the remaining reporting
to support the allocated goodwill. units where it believes the risk of impairment to be low, using primarily the
The carrying value used in the impairment test for each reporting unit is market approach.
derived by allocating Citigroup’s total stockholders’ equity to each component Since none of the Company’s reporting units are publicly traded,
(defined below) of the Company based on regulatory capital and tangible individual reporting unit fair value determinations cannot be directly
common equity assessed for each component. The assigned carrying value of correlated to Citigroup’s common stock price. The sum of the fair values of
the eight reporting units and Corporate/Other (together the “components”) the reporting units at July 1, 2014 exceeded the overall market capitalization
is equal to Citigroup’s total stockholders’ equity. Regulatory capital is derived of Citi as of July 1, 2014. However, Citi believes that it is not meaningful to
using each component’s Basel III risk-weighted assets. Specifically identified reconcile the sum of the fair values of the Company’s reporting units to its
Basel III capital deductions are then added to the components’ regulatory market capitalization due to several factors. The market capitalization of
capital to assign Citigroup’s total Tangible Common Equity. In allocating Citigroup reflects the execution risk in a transaction involving Citigroup due
Citigroup’s total stockholders’ equity to each component, the reported to its size. However, the individual reporting units’ fair values are not subject
goodwill and intangibles associated with each reporting unit are specifically to the same level of execution risk or a business model that is perceived to be
included in the carrying amount of the respective reporting units and the as complex.
remaining stockholders’ equity is then allocated to each component based on See Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional
the relative tangible common equity associated with each component. information on goodwill, including the changes in the goodwill
Goodwill impairment testing involves management judgment, requiring balance year-over-year and the reporting unit goodwill balances as of
an assessment of whether the carrying value of the reporting unit can be December 31, 2014.
supported by the fair value of the individual reporting unit using widely During the fourth quarter of 2014, Citi announced its intention to exit
accepted valuation techniques, such as the market approach (earnings its consumer businesses in 11 markets in Latin America, Asia and EMEA,
multiples and/or transaction multiples) and/or the income approach as well as its consumer finance business in Korea. Citi also announced its
(discounted cash flow (DCF) method). In applying these methodologies, intention to exit several non-core transactions businesses within ICG. These
Citi utilizes a number of factors, including actual operating results, future businesses were transferred to Citi Holdings effective January 1, 2015.
business plans, economic projections, and market data. Citi prepares Goodwill balances associated with the transfers were allocated to each of
a formal three-year plan for its businesses on an annual basis. These the component businesses based on their relative fair values to the legacy
projections incorporate certain external economic projections developed at reporting units.
the point in time the plan is developed. For the purpose of performing any As required by ASC 350, a goodwill impairment test is being performed as
impairment test, the most recent three-year forecast available is updated by of January 1, 2015 under the legacy and new reporting structures, which may
Citi to reflect current economic conditions as of the testing date. Citi used result in an impairment for one or more of the new reporting units. Such
impairment, if any, is not expected to be significant.

125
Income Taxes Citi has concluded that two components of positive evidence support the
full realization of its DTAs. First, Citi forecasts sufficient U.S. taxable income
Overview
in the carry-forward periods, exclusive of ASC 740 tax planning strategies.
Citi is subject to the income tax laws of the U.S., its states and local
Citi’s forecasted taxable income, which will continue to be subject to overall
municipalities and the foreign jurisdictions in which Citi operates. These
market and global economic conditions, incorporates geographic business
tax laws are complex and are subject to differing interpretations by the
forecasts and taxable income adjustments to those forecasts (e.g., U.S.
taxpayer and the relevant governmental taxing authorities. Disputes over
tax exempt income, loan loss reserves deductible for U.S. tax reporting in
interpretations of the tax laws may be subject to review and adjudication by
subsequent years), and actions intended to optimize its U.S. taxable earnings.
the court systems of the various tax jurisdictions or may be settled with the
Second, Citi has sufficient tax planning strategies available to it under
taxing authority upon audit.
ASC 740 that would be implemented, if necessary, to prevent a carry-forward
In establishing a provision for income tax expense, Citi must make
from expiring. These strategies include repatriating low-taxed foreign source
judgments and interpretations about the application of these inherently
earnings for which an assertion that the earnings have been indefinitely
complex tax laws. Citi must also make estimates about when in the future
reinvested has not been made; accelerating U.S. taxable income into, or
certain items will affect taxable income in the various tax jurisdictions, both
deferring U.S. tax deductions out of, the latter years of the carry-forward
domestic and foreign. Deferred taxes are recorded for the future consequences
period (e.g., selling appreciated assets, electing straight-line depreciation);
of events that have been recognized in the financial statements or tax
accelerating deductible temporary differences outside the U.S.; and selling
returns, based upon enacted tax laws and rates. Deferred tax assets (DTAs)
certain assets that produce tax-exempt income, while purchasing assets that
are recognized subject to management’s judgment that realization is more-
produce fully taxable income. In addition, the sale or restructuring of certain
likely-than-not.
businesses can produce significant U.S. taxable income within the relevant
DTAs carry-forward periods.
At December 31, 2014, Citi had recorded net DTAs of $49.5 billion, a Based upon the foregoing discussion, Citi believes the U.S. federal and
decrease of $3.3 billion (including approximately $400 million in the fourth New York state and city net operating loss carry-forward period of 20 years
quarter of 2014) from $52.8 billion at December 31, 2013. The decrease provides enough time to fully utilize the DTAs pertaining to the existing
in total DTAs year-over-year was primarily due to the earnings in Citicorp. net operating loss carry-forwards and any net operating loss that would be
Foreign tax credits (FTCs) composed approximately $17.6 billion of Citi’s created by the reversal of the future net deductions that have not yet been
DTAs as of December 31, 2014, compared to approximately $19.6 billion taken on a tax return.
as of December 31, 2013. The decrease in FTCs year-over-year was due With respect to the FTCs component of the DTAs, the carry-forward period
to the generation of U.S. taxable income and represented $2.0 billion is 10 years. Citi believes that it will generate sufficient U.S. taxable income
of the $3.3 billion decrease in Citi’s overall DTAs noted above. The FTCs within the 10-year carry-forward period to be able to fully utilize the FTCs, in
carry-forward periods represent the most time-sensitive component of Citi’s addition to any FTCs produced in such period, which must be used prior to
DTAs. Accordingly, in 2015, Citi will continue to prioritize reducing the FTC any carry-forward utilization.
carry-forward component of the DTAs. Secondarily, Citi’s actions will focus For additional information on Citi’s income taxes, including its income
on reducing other DTA components and, thereby, reduce the total DTAs. tax provision, tax assets and liabilities, and a tabular summary of Citi’s
While Citi’s net total DTAs decreased year-over-year, the time remaining for net DTAs balance as of December 31, 2014 (including the FTCs and
utilization has shortened, given the passage of time, particularly with respect applicable expiration dates of the FTCs), see Note 9 to the Consolidated
to the FTCs component of the DTAs. Although realization is not assured, Financial Statements.
Citi believes that the realization of the recognized net DTAs of $49.5 billion Litigation Accruals
at December 31, 2014 is more-likely-than-not based upon expectations as See the discussion in Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for
to future taxable income in the jurisdictions in which the DTAs arise and information regarding Citi’s policies on establishing accruals for litigation
available tax planning strategies (as defined in ASC 740, Income Taxes) that and regulatory contingencies.
would be implemented, if necessary, to prevent a carry-forward from expiring.
In general, Citi would need to generate approximately $81 billion of U.S. Accounting Changes and Future Application of
taxable income during the FTCs carry-forward periods to prevent Citi’s DTAs Accounting Standards
from expiring. Citi’s net DTAs will decline primarily as additional domestic See Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a
GAAP taxable income is generated. discussion of “Accounting Changes” and the “Future Application of
Accounting Standards.”

126
DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Citi’s disclosure controls and procedures are designed to ensure that

information required to be disclosed under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within
the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, including without
limitation that information required to be disclosed by Citi in its SEC filings
is accumulated and communicated to management, including the Chief
Executive Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO) as appropriate to
allow for timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Citi’s Disclosure Committee assists the CEO and CFO in their
responsibilities to design, establish, maintain and evaluate the effectiveness
of Citi’s disclosure controls and procedures. The Disclosure Committee
is responsible for, among other things, the oversight, maintenance and
implementation of the disclosure controls and procedures, subject to the
supervision and oversight of the CEO and CFO.
Citi’s management, with the participation of its CEO and CFO, has
evaluated the effectiveness of Citigroup’s disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) as
of December 31, 2014 and, based on that evaluation, the CEO and CFO have
concluded that at that date Citigroup’s disclosure controls and procedures
were effective.

127
MANAGEMENT’S ANNUAL REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL
REPORTING
Citi’s management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate Citi management assessed the effectiveness of Citigroup’s internal
internal control over financial reporting. Citi’s internal control over control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2014 based on the
financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework
statements for external reporting purposes in accordance with U.S. generally (2013). Based on this assessment, management believes that, as of
accepted accounting principles. Citi’s internal control over financial December 31, 2014, Citi’s internal control over financial reporting was
reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the effective. In addition, there were no changes in Citi’s internal control over
maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect financial reporting during the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2014 that
the transactions and dispositions of Citi’s assets; (ii) provide reasonable materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, Citi’s internal
assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation control over financial reporting.
of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting The effectiveness of Citi’s internal control over financial reporting as
principles, and that Citi’s receipts and expenditures are made only in of December 31, 2014 has been audited by KPMG LLP, Citi’s independent
accordance with authorizations of Citi’s management and directors; and registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report below, which
(iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection expressed an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of Citi’s internal
of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of Citi’s assets that could have control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2014.
a material effect on its financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial
reporting may not prevent or detect all misstatements. Also, projections of
any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that
controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that
the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In addition, given Citi’s large size, complex operations and global footprint,
lapses or deficiencies in internal controls may occur from time to time.

128
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Certain statements in this Form 10-K, including but not limited to statements
included within the Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations, are “forward-looking statements”
within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995. In addition, Citigroup also may make forward-looking statements in its
other documents filed with or furnished to the SEC, and its management may
make forward-looking statements orally to analysts, investors, representatives
of the media and others.
Generally, forward-looking statements are not based on historical facts
but instead represent Citigroup’s and its management’s beliefs regarding
future events. Such statements may be identified by words such as believe,
expect, anticipate, intend, estimate, may increase, may fluctuate, and
similar expressions or future or conditional verbs such as will, should, would
and could.
Such statements are based on management’s current expectations and are
subject to risks, uncertainties and changes in circumstances. Actual results
and capital and other financial conditions may differ materially from those
included in these statements due to a variety of factors, including without
limitation the precautionary statements included within each individual
business’ discussion and analysis of its results of operations and the factors
listed and described under “Risk Factors” above.
Any forward-looking statements made by or on behalf of Citigroup speak
only as to the date they are made, and Citi does not undertake to update
forward-looking statements to reflect the impact of circumstances or events
that arise after the date the forward-looking statements were made.

129
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM—
INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable
detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the
assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
The Board of Directors and Stockholders are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in
Citigroup Inc.: accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts
We have audited Citigroup Inc. and subsidiaries’ (the “Company” and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance
or “Citigroup”) internal control over financial reporting as of with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and
December 31, 2014, based on criteria established in Internal Control- (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection
Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s could have a material effect on the financial statements.
management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial
over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of
internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that
management’s annual report on internal control over financial reporting. controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
over financial reporting based on our audit. In our opinion, Citigroup maintained, in all material respects, effective
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2014, based
Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was Treadway Commission.
maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public
understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated
risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design balance sheets of Citigroup as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, and the
and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, changes
Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered in stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a period ended December 31, 2014, and our report dated February 25, 2015
reasonable basis for our opinion. expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial
reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes
in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s New York, New York
internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and February 25, 2015

130
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM—
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for
our opinion.
The Board of Directors and Stockholders In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above
Citigroup Inc.: present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Citigroup as
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of of December 31, 2014 and 2013, and the results of its operations and its cash
Citigroup Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company” or “Citigroup”) as of flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2014,
December 31, 2014 and 2013, and the related consolidated statements of in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
income, comprehensive income, changes in stockholders’ equity and cash We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Citigroup’s internal
2014. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2014, based on criteria
Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by
consolidated financial statements based on our audits. the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public (COSO), and our report dated February 25, 2015 expressed an unqualified
Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance financial reporting.
about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.
An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the
amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made New York, New York
February 25, 2015

131
This page intentionally left blank.

132
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Consolidated Statement of Income—
For the Years Ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 134
Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income—
For the Years Ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 135
Consolidated Balance Sheet—December 31, 2014 and 2013 136
Consolidated Statement of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity—
For the Years Ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 138
Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows—
For the Years Ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 139

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL

STATEMENTS
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies 141 Note 16 – Allowance for Credit Losses 212
Note 2 – Discontinued Operations and Significant Disposals 155 Note 17 – Goodwill and Intangible Assets 214
Note 3 – Business Segments 158 Note 18 – Debt 217
Note 4 – Interest Revenue and Expense 159 Note 19 – Regulatory Capital and Citigroup Inc. Parent
Note 5 – Commissions and Fees 160 Company Information 219
Note 6 – Principal Transactions 161 Note 20 – Changes in Accumulated Other Comprehensive
Note 7 – Incentive Plans 162 Income (Loss) 222
Note 8 – Retirement Benefits 166 Note 21 – Preferred Stock 225
Note 9 – Income Taxes 181 Note 22 – Securitizations and Variable Interest Entities 226
Note 10 – Earnings per Share 186 Note 23 – Derivatives Activities 245
Note 11 – Federal Funds, Securities Borrowed, Loaned and Note 24 – Concentrations of Credit Risk 257
Subject to Repurchase Agreements 187 Note 25 – Fair Value Measurement 258
Note 12 – Brokerage Receivables and Brokerage Payables 189 Note 26 – Fair Value Elections 279
Note 13 – Trading Account Assets and Liabilities 189 Note 27 – Pledged Assets, Collateral, Guarantees and Commitments 283
Note 14 – Investments 190 Note 28 – Contingencies 289
Note 15 – Loans 200 Note 29 – Selected Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited) 299

133
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME Citigroup Inc. and Subsidiaries

Years ended December 31,
In millions of dollars, except per share amounts 2014 2013 2012
Revenues (1)
Interest revenue $ 61,683 $ 62,970 $ 67,298
Interest expense 13,690 16,177 20,612
Net interest revenue $ 47,993 $ 46,793 $ 46,686
Commissions and fees $ 13,032 $ 12,941 $ 12,584
Principal transactions 6,698 7,302 4,980
Administration and other fiduciary fees 4,013 4,089 4,012
Realized gains on sales of investments, net 570 748 3,251
Other-than-temporary impairment losses on investments
Gross impairment losses (432) (633) (5,037)
Less: Impairments recognized in AOCI 8 98 66
Net impairment losses recognized in earnings $ (424) $ (535) $ (4,971)
Insurance premiums $ 2,110 $ 2,280 $ 2,395
Other revenue 2,890 2,801 253
Total non-interest revenues $ 28,889 $ 29,626 $ 22,504
Total revenues, net of interest expense $ 76,882 $ 76,419 $ 69,190
Provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims
Provision for loan losses $ 6,828 $ 7,604 $ 10,458
Policyholder benefits and claims 801 830 887
Provision (release) for unfunded lending commitments (162) 80 (16)
Total provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims $ 7,467 $ 8,514 $ 11,329
Operating expenses (1)
Compensation and benefits $ 23,959 $ 23,967 $ 25,119
Premises and equipment 3,178 3,165 3,266
Technology/communication 6,436 6,136 5,829
Advertising and marketing 1,844 1,888 2,164
Other operating 19,634 13,252 13,658
Total operating expenses $ 55,051 $ 48,408 $ 50,036
Income from continuing operations before income taxes $ 14,364 $ 19,497 $ 7,825
Provision for income taxes 6,864 5,867 7
Income from continuing operations $ 7,500 $ 13,630 $ 7,818
Discontinued operations
Income (loss) from discontinued operations $ 10 $ (242) $ (109)
Gain on sale — 268 (1)
Provision (benefit) for income taxes 12 (244) (52)
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes $ (2) $ 270 $ (58)
Net income before attribution of noncontrolling interests $ 7,498 $ 13,900 $ 7,760
Noncontrolling interests 185 227 219
Citigroup’s net income $ 7,313 $ 13,673 $ 7,541
Basic earnings per share (2)

Income from continuing operations $ 2.21 $ 4.27 $ 2.53

Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes — 0.09 (0.02)
Net income $ 2.21 $ 4.35 $ 2.51
Weighted average common shares outstanding 3,031.6 3,035.8 2,930.6
Diluted earnings per share (2)

Income from continuing operations $ 2.20 $ 4.26 $ 2.46

Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes — 0.09 (0.02)
Net income $ 2.20 $ 4.35 $ 2.44
Adjusted weighted average common shares outstanding 3,037.0 3,041.6 3,015.5
(1) Certain prior-period revenue and expense lines and totals were reclassified to conform to the current period’s presentation. See Note 3 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(2) Due to rounding, earnings per share on continuing operations and discontinued operations may not sum to earnings per share on net income.
The Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these Consolidated Financial Statements.

134
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
Citigroup Inc. and Subsidiaries
Years ended December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Net income before attribution of noncontrolling interests $ 7,498 $13,900 $ 7,760
Citigroup’s other comprehensive income (loss)
Net change in unrealized gains and losses on investment securities, net of taxes $ 1,697 $ (2,237) $ 632
Net change in cash flow hedges, net of taxes 336 1,048 527
Benefit plans liability adjustment, net of taxes (1) (1,170) 1,281 (988)
Net change in foreign currency translation adjustment, net of taxes and hedges (4,946) (2,329) 721
Citigroup’s total other comprehensive income (loss) $(4,083) $ (2,237) $ 892
Other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests
Net change in unrealized gains and losses on investment securities, net of taxes $ 6 $ (27) $ 32
Net change in foreign currency translation adjustment, net of taxes (112) 10 58
Total other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests $ (106) $ (17) $ 90
Total comprehensive income before attribution of noncontrolling interests $ 3,309 $11,646 $ 8,742
Total net income attributable to noncontrolling interests 185 227 219
Citigroup’s comprehensive income $ 3,124 $11,419 $ 8,523

(1) Reflects adjustments based on the actuarial valuations of the Company’s significant pension and postretirement plans, including changes in the mortality assumptions at December 31, 2014, and amortization of
amounts previously recognized in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). See Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
The Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these Consolidated Financial Statements.

135
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET Citigroup Inc. and Subsidiaries
December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013
Assets
Cash and due from banks (including segregated cash and other deposits) $ 32,108 $ 29,885
Deposits with banks 128,089 169,005
Federal funds sold and securities borrowed or purchased under agreements to resell (including $144,191 and
$144,083 as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 242,570 257,037
Brokerage receivables 28,419 25,674
Trading account assets (including $106,217 and $106,695 pledged to creditors at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively) 296,786 285,928
Investments:
Available for Sale (including $13,808 and $22,258 pledged to creditors as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively) 300,143 286,511
Held to Maturity (including $2,974 and $4,730 pledged to creditors as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively) 23,921 10,599
Non-Marketable Equity Securities (including $2,758 and $4,705 at fair value as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 respectively) 9,379 11,870
Total investments $ 333,443 $ 308,980
Loans:
Consumer (including $43 and $957 as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 369,970 393,831
Corporate (including $5,858 and $4,072 as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 274,665 271,641
Loans, net of unearned income $ 644,635 $ 665,472
Allowance for loan losses (15,994) (19,648)
Total loans, net $ 628,641 $ 645,824
Goodwill 23,592 25,009
Intangible assets (other than MSRs) 4,566 5,056
Mortgage servicing rights (MSRs) 1,845 2,718
Other assets (including $7,762 and $7,123 as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 122,471 125,266
Total assets $1,842,530 $1,880,382

The following table presents certain assets of consolidated variable interest entities (VIEs), which are included in the Consolidated Balance Sheet above. The
assets in the table below include those assets that can only be used to settle obligations of consolidated VIEs, presented on the following page, and are in excess
of those obligations. Additionally, the assets in the table below include third-party assets of consolidated VIEs only and exclude intercompany balances that
eliminate in consolidation.

December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013
Assets of consolidated VIEs to be used to settle obligations of consolidated VIEs
Cash and due from banks $ 300 $ 362
Trading account assets 671 977
Investments 8,014 10,950
Loans, net of unearned income
Consumer (including $0 and $910 as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 66,383 63,493
Corporate (including $0 and $14 as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 29,596 31,919
Loans, net of unearned income $ 95,979 $ 95,412
Allowance for loan losses (2,793) (3,502)
Total loans, net $ 93,186 $ 91,910
Other assets 619 1,234
Total assets of consolidated VIEs to be used to settle obligations of consolidated VIEs $102,790 $105,433

Statement continues on the next page.

136
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(Continued) Citigroup Inc. and Subsidiaries
December 31,
In millions of dollars, except shares and per share amounts 2014 2013
Liabilities
Non-interest-bearing deposits in U.S. offices $ 128,958 $ 128,399
Interest-bearing deposits in U.S. offices (including $994 and $988 as of December 31, 2014 and
December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 284,978 284,164
Non-interest-bearing deposits in offices outside the U.S. 70,925 69,406
Interest-bearing deposits in offices outside the U.S. (including $690 and $689 as of December 31, 2014 and
December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 414,471 486,304
Total deposits $ 899,332 $ 968,273
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under agreements to repurchase
(including $36,725 and $54,147 as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 173,438 203,512
Brokerage payables 52,180 53,707
Trading account liabilities 139,036 108,762
Short-term borrowings (including $1,496 and $3,692 as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 58,335 58,944
Long-term debt (including $26,180 and $26,877 as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 223,080 221,116
Other liabilities (including $1,776 and $2,011 as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 85,084 59,935
Total liabilities $1,630,485 $1,674,249
Stockholders’ equity
Preferred stock ($1.00 par value; authorized shares: 30 million), issued shares: 418,720 as of
December 31, 2014 and 269,520 as of December 31, 2013, at aggregate liquidation value $ 10,468 $ 6,738
Common stock ($0.01 par value; authorized shares: 6 billion), issued shares: 3,082,037,568 as of
December 31, 2014 and 3,062,098,976 as of December 31, 2013 31 31
Additional paid-in capital 107,979 107,193
Retained earnings 118,201 111,168
Treasury stock, at cost: December 31, 2014—58,119,993 shares and December 31, 2013—32,856,062 shares (2,929) (1,658)
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (23,216) (19,133)
Total Citigroup stockholders’ equity $ 210,534 $ 204,339
Noncontrolling interest 1,511 1,794
Total equity $ 212,045 $ 206,133
Total liabilities and equity $1,842,530 $1,880,382

The following table presents certain liabilities of consolidated VIEs, which are included in the Consolidated Balance Sheet above. The liabilities in the table
below include third-party liabilities of consolidated VIEs only and exclude intercompany balances that eliminate in consolidation. The liabilities also exclude
amounts where creditors or beneficial interest holders have recourse to the general credit of Citigroup.

December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013
Liabilities of consolidated VIEs for which creditors or beneficial interest holders do not have
recourse to the general credit of Citigroup
Short-term borrowings $20,254 $21,793
Long-term debt (including $0 and $909 as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, at fair value) 40,078 34,743
Other liabilities 901 999
Total liabilities of consolidated VIEs for which creditors or beneficial interest holders do not have
recourse to the general credit of Citigroup $61,233 $57,535

The Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these Consolidated Financial Statements.

137
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY Citigroup Inc. and Subsidiaries
Years ended December 31,
Amounts Shares
In millions of dollars, except shares in thousands 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012
Preferred stock at aggregate liquidation value
Balance, beginning of year $ 6,738 $ 2,562 $ 312 270 102 12
Issuance of new preferred stock 3,730 4,270 2,250 149 171 90
Redemption of preferred stock — (94) — — (3) —
Balance, end of period $ 10,468 $ 6,738 $ 2,562 419 270 102
Common stock and additional paid-in capital
Balance, beginning of year $107,224 $106,421 $105,833 3,062,099 3,043,153 2,937,756
Employee benefit plans 798 878 597 19,928 18,930 9,037
Preferred stock issuance expense (31) (78) — — — —
Issuance of shares and T-DEC for TARP repayment — — — — — 96,338
Other 19 3 (9) 11 16 22
Balance, end of period $108,010 $107,224 $106,421 3,082,038 3,062,099 3,043,153
Retained earnings
Adjusted balance, beginning of period $111,168 $ 97,809 $ 90,413
Citigroup’s net income 7,313 13,673 7,541
Common dividends (1) (122) (120) (120)
Preferred dividends (511) (194) (26)
Tax benefit 353 — —
Other — — 1
Balance, end of period $118,201 $111,168 $ 97,809
Treasury stock, at cost
Balance, beginning of year $ (1,658) $ (847) $ (1,071) (32,856) (14,269) (13,878)
Employee benefit plans (2) (39) 26 229 (483) (1,629) (253)
Treasury stock acquired (3) (1,232) (837) (5) (24,780) (16,958) (138)
Balance, end of period $ (2,929) $ (1,658) $ (847) (58,119) (32,856) (14,269)
Citigroup’s accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
Balance, beginning of year $ (19,133) $ (16,896) $ (17,788)
Citigroup’s total other comprehensive income (loss) (4,083) (2,237) 892
Balance, end of period $ (23,216) $ (19,133) $ (16,896)
Total Citigroup common stockholders’ equity $200,066 $197,601 $186,487 3,023,919 3,029,243 3,028,884
Total Citigroup stockholders’ equity $210,534 $204,339 $189,049
Noncontrolling interests
Balance, beginning of year $ 1,794 $ 1,948 $ 1,767
Initial origination of a noncontrolling interest — 6 88
Transactions between noncontrolling-interest shareholders and the
related consolidated subsidiary — (2) —
Transactions between Citigroup and the noncontrolling-interest shareholders (96) (118) 41
Net income attributable to noncontrolling-interest shareholders 185 227 219
Dividends paid to noncontrolling-interest shareholders (91) (63) (33)
Other comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling-interest shareholders (106) (17) 90
Other (175) (187) (224)
Net change in noncontrolling interests $ (283) $ (154) $ 181
Balance, end of period $ 1,511 $ 1,794 $ 1,948
Total equity $212,045 $206,133 $190,997

(1) Common dividends declared were $0.01 per share in the first, second, third and fourth quarters of 2014, 2013 and 2012.
(2) Includes treasury stock related to (i) certain activity on employee stock option program exercises where the employee delivers existing shares to cover the option exercise, or (ii) under Citi’s employee restricted or
deferred stock programs where shares are withheld to satisfy tax requirements.
(3) For 2014 and 2013, primarily consists of open market purchases under Citi’s Board of Directors-approved common stock repurchase program.
The Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these Consolidated Financial Statements.

138
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS Citigroup Inc. and Subsidiaries
Years ended December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Cash flows from operating activities of continuing operations
Net income before attribution of noncontrolling interests $ 7,498 $ 13,900 $ 7,760
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests 185 227 219
Citigroup’s net income $ 7,313 $ 13,673 $ 7,541
Loss from discontinued operations, net of taxes (2) (90) (57)
Gain (loss) on sale, net of taxes — 360 (1)
Income from continuing operations—excluding noncontrolling interests $ 7,315 $ 13,403 $ 7,599
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities of continuing operations
Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs and present value of future profits 210 194 203
(Additions) reductions to deferred policy acquisition costs (64) (54) 85
Depreciation and amortization 3,589 3,303 2,507
Deferred tax provision (benefit) 3,014 2,380 (4,091)
Provision for loan losses 6,828 7,604 10,458
Realized gains from sales of investments (570) (748) (3,251)
Net impairment losses recognized in earnings 426 535 4,971
Change in trading account assets (10,858) 35,001 (29,195)
Change in trading account liabilities 30,274 (6,787) (10,533)
Change in brokerage receivables net of brokerage payables (4,272) (6,490) 945
Change in loans held-for-sale (1,144) 4,321 (1,106)
Change in other assets 709 13,332 (530)
Change in other liabilities 4,544 (7,880) (1,457)
Other, net 5,433 5,130 13,033
Total adjustments $ 38,119 $ 49,841 $ (17,961)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities of continuing operations $ 45,434 $ 63,244 $ (10,362)
Cash flows from investing activities of continuing operations
Change in deposits with banks $ 40,916 $ (66,871) $ 53,650
Change in federal funds sold and securities borrowed or purchased under agreements to resell 14,467 4,274 14,538
Change in loans 1,170 (30,198) (31,591)
Proceeds from sales and securitizations of loans 4,752 9,123 7,287
Purchases of investments (258,992) (220,823) (256,907)
Proceeds from sales of investments 135,824 131,100 143,853
Proceeds from maturities of investments 94,117 84,831 102,020
Capital expenditures on premises and equipment and capitalized software (3,386) (3,490) (3,604)
Proceeds from sales of premises and equipment, subsidiaries and affiliates, and repossessed assets 623 716 1,089
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities of continuing operations $ 29,491 $ (91,338) $ 30,335
Cash flows from financing activities of continuing operations
Dividends paid $ (633) $ (314) $ (143)
Issuance of preferred stock 3,699 4,192 2,250
Redemption of preferred stock — (94) —
Treasury stock acquired (1,232) (837) (5)
Stock tendered for payment of withholding taxes (508) (452) (194)
Change in federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under agreements to repurchase (30,074) (7,724) 12,863
Issuance of long-term debt 66,836 54,405 27,843
Payments and redemptions of long-term debt (58,923) (63,994) (117,575)
Change in deposits (48,336) 37,713 64,624
Change in short-term borrowings (1,099) 199 (2,164)

Statement continues on the next page.

139
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
(Continued) Citigroup Inc. and Subsidiaries
Years ended December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities of continuing operations $ (70,270) $ 23,094 $ (12,501)
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents $ (2,432) $ (1,558) $ 274
Discontinued operations
Net cash used in discontinued operations $ — $ (10) $ 6
Change in cash and due from banks $ 2,223 $ (6,568) $ 7,752
Cash and due from banks at beginning of period 29,885 36,453 28,701
Cash and due from banks at end of period $ 32,108 $ 29,885 $ 36,453
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information for continuing operations
Cash paid during the year for income taxes $ 4,632 $ 4,495 $ 3,900
Cash paid during the year for interest 12,868 14,383 19,739
Non-cash investing activities
Change in loans due to consolidation/deconsolidation of VIEs $ (374) $ 6,718 $ —
Transfers to loans held-for-sale from loans 12,700 17,300 8,700
Transfers to OREO and other repossessed assets 321 325 500
Non-cash financing activities
Decrease in deposits associated with reclassification to HFS $ (20,605) $ — $ —
Increase in short-term borrowings due to consolidation of VIEs 500 6,718 —
Decrease in long-term debt due to deconsolidation of VIEs (864) — —

The Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements are an integral part of these Consolidated Financial Statements.

140
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

1. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES In addition to variable interests held in consolidated VIEs, the Company
Throughout these Notes, “Citigroup,” “Citi” and the “Company” refer to has variable interests in other VIEs that are not consolidated because the
Citigroup Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries. Company is not the primary beneficiary. These include multi-seller finance
Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior periods’ financial companies, certain collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), many structured
statements and notes to conform to the current period’s presentation. finance transactions and various investment funds. However, these VIEs
Principles of Consolidation and all other unconsolidated VIEs are monitored by the Company to assess
The Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of Citigroup whether any events have occurred to cause its primary beneficiary status to
and its subsidiaries prepared in accordance with U.S. Generally Accepted change. These events include:
Accounting Principles (GAAP). The Company consolidates subsidiaries in • purchases or sales of variable interests by Citigroup or an unrelated
which it holds, directly or indirectly, more than 50% of the voting rights or third party, which cause Citigroup’s overall variable interest
where it exercises control. Entities where the Company holds 20% to 50% of ownership to change;
the voting rights and/or has the ability to exercise significant influence, other • changes in contractual arrangements that reallocate expected losses and
than investments of designated venture capital subsidiaries or investments residual returns among the variable interest holders;
accounted for at fair value under the fair value option, are accounted for • changes in the party that has power to direct the activities of a VIE that
under the equity method, and the pro rata share of their income (loss) is most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance; and
included in Other revenue. Income from investments in less than 20% owned
• providing financial support to an entity that results in an implicit
companies is recognized when dividends are received. As discussed in more
variable interest.
detail in Note 22 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Citigroup also
consolidates entities deemed to be variable interest entities when Citigroup is All other entities not deemed to be VIEs with which the Company has
determined to be the primary beneficiary. Gains and losses on the disposition involvement are evaluated for consolidation under other subtopics of
of branches, subsidiaries, affiliates, buildings, and other investments are ASC 810.
included in Other revenue.
Foreign Currency Translation
Citibank, N.A. Assets and liabilities of Citi’s foreign operations are translated from their
Citibank, N.A. is a commercial bank and wholly owned subsidiary of respective functional currencies into U.S. dollars using period-end spot
Citigroup Inc. Citibank’s principal offerings include: consumer finance, foreign-exchange rates. The effects of those translation adjustments are
mortgage lending and retail banking products and services; investment reported in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), a component
banking, commercial banking, cash management and trade finance; and of stockholders’ equity, along with any related hedge and tax effects, until
private banking products and services. realized upon sale or substantial liquidation of the foreign operation.
Revenues and expenses of Citi’s foreign operations are translated monthly
Variable Interest Entities
from their respective functional currencies into U.S. dollars at amounts that
An entity is referred to as a variable interest entity (VIE) if it meets the
approximate weighted average exchange rates.
criteria outlined in Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 810,
For transactions whose terms are denominated in a currency other than
Consolidation, which are: (i) the entity has equity that is insufficient to
the functional currency, including transactions denominated in the local
permit the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated
currencies of foreign operations with the U.S. dollar as their functional
financial support from other parties; or (ii) the entity has equity investors
currency, the effects of changes in exchange rates are primarily included
that cannot make significant decisions about the entity’s operations or that
in Principal transactions, along with the related effects of any economic
do not absorb their proportionate share of the entity’s expected losses or
hedges. Instruments used to hedge foreign currency exposures include
expected returns.
foreign currency forward, option and swap contracts and in certain instances,
The Company consolidates a VIE when it has both the power to direct the
designated issues of non-U.S. dollar debt. Foreign operations in countries
activities that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance
with highly inflationary economies designate the U.S. dollar as their
and a right to receive benefits or the obligation to absorb losses of the
functional currency, with the effects of changes in exchange rates primarily
entity that could be potentially significant to the VIE (that is, Citi is the
included in Other revenue.
primary beneficiary).

141
Investment Securities Trading Account Assets and Liabilities
Investments include fixed income and equity securities. Fixed income Trading account assets include debt and marketable equity securities,
instruments include bonds, notes and redeemable preferred stocks, as well as derivatives in a receivable position, residual interests in securitizations and
certain loan-backed and structured securities that are subject to prepayment physical commodities inventory. In addition, as described in Note 26 to
risk. Equity securities include common and nonredeemable preferred stock. the Consolidated Financial Statements, certain assets that Citigroup has
Investment securities are classified and accounted for as follows: elected to carry at fair value under the fair value option, such as loans and
• Fixed income securities classified as “held-to-maturity” are securities that purchased guarantees, are also included in Trading account assets.
Trading account liabilities include securities sold, not yet purchased
the Company has both the ability and the intent to hold until maturity
(short positions) and derivatives in a net payable position, as well as certain
and are carried at amortized cost. Interest income on such securities is
liabilities that Citigroup has elected to carry at fair value (as described in
included in Interest revenue.
Note 26 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).
• Fixed income securities and marketable equity securities classified
Other than physical commodities inventory, all trading account assets
as “available-for-sale” are carried at fair value with changes in fair and liabilities are carried at fair value. Revenues generated from trading
value reported in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), assets and trading liabilities are generally reported in Principal transactions
a component of Stockholders’ equity, net of applicable income taxes and include realized gains and losses as well as unrealized gains and losses
and hedges. Realized gains and losses on sales are included in income resulting from changes in the fair value of such instruments. Interest income
primarily on a specific identification cost basis. Interest and dividend on trading assets is recorded in Interest revenue reduced by interest expense
income on such securities is included in Interest revenue. on trading liabilities.
• Certain investments in non-marketable equity securities and certain Physical commodities inventory is carried at the lower of cost or market
investments that would otherwise have been accounted for using the with related losses reported in Principal transactions. Realized gains
equity method are carried at fair value, since the Company has elected to and losses on sales of commodities inventory are included in Principal
apply fair value accounting. Changes in fair value of such investments are transactions. Investments in unallocated precious metals accounts (gold,
recorded in earnings. silver, platinum and palladium) are accounted for as hybrid instruments
• Certain non-marketable equity securities are carried at cost and are containing a debt host contract and an embedded non-financial derivative
periodically assessed for other-than-temporary impairment, as described instrument indexed to the price of the relevant precious metal. The embedded
in Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. derivative instrument is separated from the debt host contract and accounted
for at fair value. The debt host contract is accounted for at fair value
For investments in fixed income securities classified as held-to-maturity or
under the fair value option, as described in Note 26 to the Consolidated
available-for-sale, the accrual of interest income is suspended for investments
Financial Statements.
that are in default or for which it is likely that future interest payments will
Derivatives used for trading purposes include interest rate, currency,
not be made as scheduled.
equity, credit, and commodity swap agreements, options, caps and floors,
Investment securities are subject to evaluation for other-than-temporary
warrants, and financial and commodity futures and forward contracts.
impairment as described in Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Derivative asset and liability positions are presented net by counterparty on
The Company uses a number of valuation techniques for investments
the Consolidated Balance Sheet when a valid master netting agreement exists
carried at fair value, which are described in Note 25 to the Consolidated
and the other conditions set out in ASC 210-20, Balance Sheet—Offsetting,
Financial Statements. Realized gains and losses on sales of investments are
are met. See Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
included in earnings.
The Company uses a number of techniques to determine the fair value
of trading assets and liabilities, which are described in Note 25 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.

142
Securities Borrowed and Securities Loaned Loans
Securities borrowing and lending transactions generally do not constitute a Loans are reported at their outstanding principal balances net of any
sale of the underlying securities for accounting purposes and are treated as unearned income and unamortized deferred fees and costs except that
collateralized financing transactions. Such transactions are recorded at the credit card receivable balances also include accrued interest and fees. Loan
amount of proceeds advanced or received plus accrued interest. As described origination fees and certain direct origination costs are generally deferred
in Note 26 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, the Company has and recognized as adjustments to income over the lives of the related loans.
elected to apply fair value accounting to a number of securities borrowing As described in Note 26 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Citi has
and lending transactions. Fees paid or received for all securities lending and elected fair value accounting for certain loans. Such loans are carried at fair
borrowing transactions are recorded in Interest expense or Interest revenue value with changes in fair value reported in earnings. Interest income on
at the contractually specified rate. such loans is recorded in Interest revenue at the contractually specified rate.
The Company monitors the fair value of securities borrowed or loaned on Loans for which the fair value option has not been elected are classified
a daily basis and obtains or posts additional collateral in order to maintain upon origination or acquisition as either held-for-investment or held-for-sale.
contractual margin protection. This classification is based on management’s initial intent and ability with
As described in Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, the regard to those loans.
Company uses a discounted cash flow technique to determine the fair value Loans that are held-for-investment are classified as Loans, net of
of securities lending and borrowing transactions. unearned income on the Consolidated Balance Sheet, and the related cash
Repurchase and Resale Agreements flows are included within the cash flows from investing activities category
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase (repos) and securities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows on the line Change in loans.
purchased under agreements to resell (reverse repos) generally do not However, when the initial intent for holding a loan has changed from
constitute a sale of the underlying securities for accounting purposes and are held-for-investment to held-for-sale, the loan is reclassified to held-for-
treated as collateralized financing transactions. As described in Note 26 to the sale, but the related cash flows continue to be reported in cash flows from
Consolidated Financial Statements, the Company has elected to apply fair investing activities in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows on the line
value accounting to the majority of such transactions, with changes in fair Proceeds from sales and securitizations of loans.
value reported in earnings. Any transactions for which fair value accounting
has not been elected are recorded at the amount of cash advanced or received
plus accrued interest. Irrespective of whether the Company has elected fair
value accounting, interest paid or received on all repo and reverse repo
transactions is recorded in Interest expense or Interest revenue at the
contractually specified rate.
Where the conditions of ASC 210-20-45-11, Balance Sheet-Offsetting:
Repurchase and Reverse Repurchase Agreements, are met, repos and
reverse repos are presented net on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.
The Company’s policy is to take possession of securities purchased under
reverse repurchase agreements. The Company monitors the fair value of
securities subject to repurchase or resale on a daily basis and obtains or posts
additional collateral in order to maintain contractual margin protection.
As described in Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, the
Company uses a discounted cash flow technique to determine the fair value
of repo and reverse repo transactions.

143
Consumer loans Consumer charge-off policies
Consumer loans represent loans and leases managed primarily by the Global Citi’s charge-off policies follow the general guidelines below:
Consumer Banking businesses and Citi Holdings. • Unsecured installment loans are charged off at 120 days contractually
Consumer non-accrual and re-aging policies past due.
As a general rule, interest accrual ceases for installment and real estate (both • Unsecured revolving loans and credit card loans are charged off at
open- and closed-end) loans when payments are 90 days contractually past 180 days contractually past due.
due. For credit cards and other unsecured revolving loans, however, Citi • Loans secured with non-real estate collateral are written down to
generally accrues interest until payments are 180 days past due. As a result the estimated value of the collateral, less costs to sell, at 120 days
of OCC guidance, home equity loans in regulated bank entities are classified contractually past due.
as non-accrual if the related residential first mortgage is 90 days or more • Real estate-secured loans are written down to the estimated value of the
past due. Also as a result of OCC guidance, mortgage loans in regulated bank
property, less costs to sell, at 180 days contractually past due.
entities discharged through Chapter 7 bankruptcy, other than FHA-insured
• Real estate-secured loans are charged off no later than 180 days
loans, are classified as non-accrual. Commercial market loans are placed on
a cash (non-accrual) basis when it is determined, based on actual experience contractually past due if a decision has been made not to foreclose on
and a forward-looking assessment of the collectability of the loan in full, that the loans.
the payment of interest or principal is doubtful or when interest or principal • Non-bank real estate-secured loans are charged off at the earlier of
is 90 days past due. 180 days contractually past due, if there have been no payments within
Loans that have been modified to grant a concession to a borrower the last six months, or 360 days contractually past due, if a decision has
in financial difficulty may not be accruing interest at the time of the been made not to foreclose on the loans.
modification. The policy for returning such modified loans to accrual status • Non-bank loans secured by real estate are written down to the estimated
varies by product and/or region. In most cases, a minimum number of value of the property, less costs to sell, at the earlier of the receipt of
payments (ranging from one to six) is required, while in other cases the loan title, the initiation of foreclosure (a process that must commence when
is never returned to accrual status. For regulated bank entities, such modified payments are 120 days contractually past due), when the loan is 180 days
loans are returned to accrual status if a credit evaluation at the time of, or contractually past due if there have been no payments within the past
subsequent to, the modification indicates the borrower is able to meet the six months or 360 days contractually past due.
restructured terms, and the borrower is current and has demonstrated a • Non-bank unsecured personal loans are charged off at the earlier of
reasonable period of sustained payment performance (minimum six months 180 days contractually past due if there have been no payments within the
of consecutive payments). last six months, or 360 days contractually past due.
For U.S. consumer loans, generally one of the conditions to qualify for • Unsecured loans in bankruptcy are charged off within 60 days of
modification is that a minimum number of payments (typically ranging notification of filing by the bankruptcy court or in accordance with Citi’s
from one to three) must be made. Upon modification, the loan is re-aged to charge-off policy, whichever occurs earlier.
current status. However, re-aging practices for certain open-ended consumer • Consistent with OCC guidance, real estate-secured loans that were
loans, such as credit cards, are governed by Federal Financial Institutions
discharged through Chapter 7 bankruptcy, other than FHA-insured loans,
Examination Council (FFIEC) guidelines. For open-ended consumer loans
are written down to the estimated value of the property, less costs to sell.
subject to FFIEC guidelines, one of the conditions for the loan to be re-aged
Other real estate-secured loans in bankruptcy are written down to the
to current status is that at least three consecutive minimum monthly
estimated value of the property, less costs to sell, at the later of 60 days
payments, or the equivalent amount, must be received. In addition, under
after notification or 60 days contractually past due.
FFIEC guidelines, the number of times that such a loan can be re-aged is
• Non-bank loans secured by real estate that are discharged through
subject to limitations (generally once in 12 months and twice in five years).
Furthermore, Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and Department of Chapter 7 bankruptcy are written down to the estimated value of the
Veterans Affairs (VA) loans may only be modified under those respective property, less costs to sell, at 60 days contractually past due.
agencies’ guidelines and payments are not always required in order to re-age • Non-bank unsecured personal loans in bankruptcy are charged off when
a modified loan to current. they are 30 days contractually past due.
• Commercial market loans are written down to the extent that principal is
judged to be uncollectable.

144
Corporate loans Consumer loans
Corporate loans represent loans and leases managed by ICG or, to a much For consumer loans, each portfolio of non-modified smaller-balance,
lesser extent, Citi Holdings. Corporate loans are identified as impaired and homogeneous loans is independently evaluated by product type
placed on a cash (non-accrual) basis when it is determined, based on actual (e.g., residential mortgage, credit card, etc.) for impairment in accordance
experience and a forward-looking assessment of the collectability of the loan with ASC 450-20. The allowance for loan losses attributed to these loans
in full, that the payment of interest or principal is doubtful or when interest is established via a process that estimates the probable losses inherent in
or principal is 90 days past due, except when the loan is well collateralized the specific portfolio. This process includes migration analysis, in which
and in the process of collection. Any interest accrued on impaired corporate historical delinquency and credit loss experience is applied to the current
loans and leases is reversed at 90 days and charged against current earnings, aging of the portfolio, together with analyses that reflect current and
and interest is thereafter included in earnings only to the extent actually anticipated economic conditions, including changes in housing prices and
received in cash. When there is doubt regarding the ultimate collectability unemployment trends. Citi’s allowance for loan losses under ASC 450 only
of principal, all cash receipts are thereafter applied to reduce the recorded considers contractual principal amounts due, except for credit card loans
investment in the loan. where estimated loss amounts related to accrued interest receivable are
Impaired corporate loans and leases are written down to the extent that also included.
principal is deemed to be uncollectable. Impaired collateral-dependent loans Management also considers overall portfolio indicators, including
and leases, where repayment is expected to be provided solely by the sale historical credit losses, delinquent, non-performing and classified loans,
of the underlying collateral and there are no other available and reliable trends in volumes and terms of loans, an evaluation of overall credit quality,
sources of repayment, are written down to the lower of cost or collateral the credit process, including lending policies and procedures, and economic,
value. Cash-basis loans are returned to accrual status when all contractual geographical, product and other environmental factors.
principal and interest amounts are reasonably assured of repayment and Separate valuation allowances are determined for impaired smaller-
there is a sustained period of repayment performance in accordance with the balance homogeneous loans whose terms have been modified in a troubled
contractual terms. debt restructuring (TDR). Long-term modification programs, as well as
short-term (less than 12 months) modifications originated beginning
Loans Held-for-Sale January 1, 2011 that provide concessions (such as interest rate reductions)
Corporate and consumer loans that have been identified for sale are classified to borrowers in financial difficulty, are reported as TDRs. In addition, loan
as loans held-for-sale and included in Other assets. The practice of Citi’s U.S. modifications that involve a trial period are reported as TDRs at the start
prime mortgage business has been to sell substantially all of its conforming of the trial period. The allowance for loan losses for TDRs is determined
loans. As such, U.S. prime mortgage conforming loans are classified as in accordance with ASC 310-10-35 considering all available evidence,
held-for-sale and the fair value option is elected at origination, with changes including, as appropriate, the present value of the expected future cash flows
in fair value recorded in Other revenue. With the exception of those loans discounted at the loan’s original contractual effective rate, the secondary
for which the fair value option has been elected, held-for-sale loans are market value of the loan and the fair value of collateral less disposal costs.
accounted for at the lower of cost or market value, with any write-downs or These expected cash flows incorporate modification program default rate
subsequent recoveries charged to Other revenue. The related cash flows are assumptions. The original contractual effective rate for credit card loans is
classified in the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows in the cash flows from the pre-modification rate, which may include interest rate increases under
operating activities category on the line Change in loans held-for-sale. the original contractual agreement with the borrower.
Valuation allowances for commercial market loans, which are classifiably
Allowance for Loan Losses
managed Consumer loans, are determined in the same manner as for
Allowance for loan losses represents management’s best estimate of probable
Corporate loans and are described in more detail in the following section.
losses inherent in the portfolio, including probable losses related to large
Generally, an asset-specific component is calculated under ASC 310-10-35
individually evaluated impaired loans and troubled debt restructurings.
on an individual basis for larger-balance, non-homogeneous loans
Attribution of the allowance is made for analytical purposes only, and
that are considered impaired and the allowance for the remainder of
the entire allowance is available to absorb probable loan losses inherent
the classifiably managed Consumer loan portfolio is calculated under
in the overall portfolio. Additions to the allowance are made through the
ASC 450 using a statistical methodology that may be supplemented by
Provision for loan losses. Loan losses are deducted from the allowance and
management adjustment.
subsequent recoveries are added. Assets received in exchange for loan claims
in a restructuring are initially recorded at fair value, with any gain or loss
reflected as a recovery or charge-off to the provision.

145
Corporate loans legal limitations on simultaneously pursuing guarantors and foreclosure.
In the corporate portfolios, the Allowance for loan losses includes A guarantor’s reputation does not impact Citi’s decision or ability to seek
an asset-specific component and a statistically based component. The performance under the guarantee.
asset-specific component is calculated under ASC 310-10-35, Receivables— In cases where a guarantee is a factor in the assessment of loan losses, it
Subsequent Measurement (formerly SFAS 114) on an individual basis for is included via adjustment to the loan’s internal risk rating, which in turn
larger-balance, non-homogeneous loans, which are considered impaired. is the basis for the adjustment to the statistically based component of the
An asset-specific allowance is established when the discounted cash flows, Allowance for loan losses. To date, it is only in rare circumstances that an
collateral value (less disposal costs) or observable market price of the impaired commercial loan or commercial real estate loan is carried at a
impaired loan are lower than its carrying value. This allowance considers the value in excess of the appraised value due to a guarantee.
borrower’s overall financial condition, resources, and payment record, the When Citi’s monitoring of the loan indicates that the guarantor’s
prospects for support from any financially responsible guarantors (discussed wherewithal to pay is uncertain or has deteriorated, there is either no
further below) and, if appropriate, the realizable value of any collateral. change in the risk rating, because the guarantor’s credit support was never
The asset-specific component of the allowance for smaller balance impaired initially factored in, or the risk rating is adjusted to reflect that uncertainty
loans is calculated on a pool basis considering historical loss experience. or deterioration. Accordingly, a guarantor’s ultimate failure to perform or
The allowance for the remainder of the loan portfolio is determined under a lack of legal enforcement of the guarantee does not materially impact
ASC 450, Contingencies (formerly SFAS 5) using a statistical methodology, the allowance for loan losses, as there is typically no further significant
supplemented by management judgment. The statistical analysis considers adjustment of the loan’s risk rating at that time. Where Citi is not seeking
the portfolio’s size, remaining tenor and credit quality as measured by performance under the guarantee contract, it provides for loan losses as if
internal risk ratings assigned to individual credit facilities, which reflect the loans were non-performing and not guaranteed.
probability of default and loss given default. The statistical analysis considers
historical default rates and historical loss severity in the event of default, Reserve Estimates and Policies
including historical average levels and historical variability. The result is an Management provides reserves for an estimate of probable losses inherent
estimated range for inherent losses. The best estimate within the range is in the funded loan portfolio on the Consolidated Balance Sheet in the
then determined by management’s quantitative and qualitative assessment form of an allowance for loan losses. These reserves are established in
of current conditions, including general economic conditions, specific accordance with Citigroup’s credit reserve policies, as approved by the
industry and geographic trends, and internal factors including portfolio Audit Committee of the Board of Directors. Citi’s Chief Risk Officer and
concentrations, trends in internal credit quality indicators, and current and Chief Financial Officer review the adequacy of the credit loss reserves each
past underwriting standards. quarter with representatives from the risk management and finance staffs
For both the asset-specific and the statistically based components of the for each applicable business area. Applicable business areas include those
Allowance for loan losses, management may incorporate guarantor support. having classifiably managed portfolios, where internal credit-risk ratings
The financial wherewithal of the guarantor is evaluated, as applicable, are assigned (primarily Institutional Clients Group and Global Consumer
based on net worth, cash flow statements and personal or company financial Banking) or modified Consumer loans, where concessions were granted due
statements which are updated and reviewed at least annually. Citi seeks to the borrowers’ financial difficulties.
performance on guarantee arrangements in the normal course of business. The above-mentioned representatives for these business areas present
Seeking performance entails obtaining satisfactory cooperation from the recommended reserve balances for their funded and unfunded lending
guarantor or borrower in the specific situation. This regular cooperation portfolios along with supporting quantitative and qualitative data
is indicative of pursuit and successful enforcement of the guarantee; the discussed below:
exposure is reduced without the expense and burden of pursuing a legal Estimated probable losses for non-performing, non-homogeneous
remedy. A guarantor’s reputation and willingness to work with Citigroup exposures within a business line’s classifiably managed portfolio and
is evaluated based on the historical experience with the guarantor and impaired smaller-balance homogeneous loans whose terms have been
the knowledge of the marketplace. In the rare event that the guarantor modified due to the borrowers’ financial difficulties, where it was
is unwilling or unable to perform or facilitate borrower cooperation, Citi determined that a concession was granted to the borrower. Consideration
pursues a legal remedy; however, enforcing a guarantee via legal action may be given to the following, as appropriate, when determining this
against the guarantor is not the primary means of resolving a troubled estimate: (i) the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the
loan situation and rarely occurs. If Citi does not pursue a legal remedy, loan’s original effective rate; (ii) the borrower’s overall financial condition,
it is because Citi does not believe that the guarantor has the financial resources and payment record; and (iii) the prospects for support from
wherewithal to perform regardless of legal action or because there are

146
financially responsible guarantors or the realizable value of any collateral. Mortgage Servicing Rights
In the determination of the allowance for loan losses for TDRs, management Mortgage servicing rights (MSRs) are recognized as intangible assets
considers a combination of historical re-default rates, the current economic when purchased or when the Company sells or securitizes loans acquired
environment and the nature of the modification program when forecasting through purchase or origination and retains the right to service the loans.
expected cash flows. When impairment is measured based on the present Mortgage servicing rights are accounted for at fair value, with changes in
value of expected future cash flows, the entire change in present value is value recorded in Other revenue in the Company’s Consolidated Statement
recorded in the Provision for loan losses. of Income.
Statistically calculated losses inherent in the classifiably managed Additional information on the Company’s MSRs can be found in Note 22
portfolio for performing and de minimis non-performing exposures. to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
The calculation is based on: (i) Citi’s internal system of credit-risk ratings, Citigroup Residential Mortgages—Representations and
which are analogous to the risk ratings of the major rating agencies; and Warranties
(ii) historical default and loss data, including rating agency information In connection with Citi’s sales of residential mortgage loans to the U.S.
regarding default rates from 1983 to 2013 and internal data dating to the government-sponsored entities (GSEs) and private investors, as well as
early 1970s on severity of losses in the event of default. Adjustments may through private-label securitizations, Citi typically makes representations
be made to this data. Such adjustments include: (i) statistically calculated and warranties that the loans sold meet certain requirements, such as the
estimates to cover the historical fluctuation of the default rates over the credit loan’s compliance with any applicable loan criteria established by the buyer
cycle, the historical variability of loss severity among defaulted loans, and the and the validity of the lien securing the loan. The specific representations
degree to which there are large obligor concentrations in the global portfolio; and warranties made by Citi in any particular transaction depend on,
and (ii) adjustments made for specific known items, such as current among other things, the nature of the transaction and the requirements of
environmental factors and credit trends. the investor.
In addition, representatives from each of the risk management and These sales expose Citi to potential claims for alleged breaches of its
finance staffs that cover business areas with delinquency-managed representations and warranties. In the event of a breach of its representations
portfolios containing smaller-balance homogeneous loans present their and warranties, Citi could be required either to repurchase the mortgage
recommended reserve balances based on leading credit indicators, including loans with the identified defects (generally at unpaid principal balance plus
loan delinquencies and changes in portfolio size as well as economic trends, accrued interest) or to indemnify (make-whole) the investors for their losses
including current and future housing prices, unemployment, length of time on these loans.
in foreclosure, costs to sell and GDP. This methodology is applied separately Citi has recorded a repurchase reserve for its potential repurchase
for each individual product within each geographic region in which these or make-whole liability regarding residential mortgage representation
portfolios exist. and warranty claims. Since the first quarter of 2013, Citi has considered
This evaluation process is subject to numerous estimates and judgments. private-label residential mortgage securitization representation and
The frequency of default, risk ratings, loss recovery rates, the size and warranty claims as part of its litigation accrual analysis and not as part of its
diversity of individual large credits, and the ability of borrowers with foreign repurchase reserve. See Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for
currency obligations to obtain the foreign currency necessary for orderly debt additional information on Citi’s potential private-label residential mortgage
servicing, among other things, are all taken into account during this review. securitization exposure. Accordingly, Citi’s repurchase reserve has been
Changes in these estimates could have a direct impact on the credit costs in recorded for purposes of its potential representation and warranty repurchase
any period and could result in a change in the allowance. liability resulting from its whole loan sales to the GSEs and, to a lesser extent
private investors, which are made through Citi’s Consumer business in
Allowance for Unfunded Lending Commitments
CitiMortgage.
A similar approach to the allowance for loan losses is used for calculating
In the case of a repurchase, Citi will bear any subsequent credit loss on
a reserve for the expected losses related to unfunded loan commitments
the mortgage loan and the loan is typically considered a credit-impaired
and standby letters of credit. This reserve is classified on the balance
loan and accounted for under AICPA Statement of Position (SOP) 03-3,
sheet in Other liabilities. Changes to the allowance for unfunded
“Accounting of Certain Loans and Debt Securities Acquired in a Transfer”
lending commitments are recorded in the Provision for unfunded
(now incorporated into ASC 310-30, Receivables-Loans and Debt Securities
lending commitments.
Acquired with Deteriorated Credit Quality) (SOP 03-3).

147
 In the case of a repurchase of a credit-impaired SOP 03-3 loan, the Intangible Assets
difference between the loan’s fair value and unpaid principal balance at the Intangible assets, including core deposit intangibles, present value of future
time of the repurchase is recorded as a utilization of the repurchase reserve. profits, purchased credit card relationships, other customer relationships,
Make-whole payments to the investor are also treated as utilizations and and other intangible assets, but excluding MSRs, are amortized over their
charged directly against the reserve. The repurchase reserve is estimated estimated useful lives. Intangible assets deemed to have indefinite useful
when Citi sells loans (recorded as an adjustment to the gain on sale, which is lives, primarily certain asset management contracts and trade names, are
included in Other revenue in the Consolidated Statement of Income) and is not amortized and are subject to annual impairment tests. An impairment
updated quarterly. Any change in estimate is recorded in Other revenue. exists if the carrying value of the indefinite-lived intangible asset exceeds its
fair value. For other intangible assets subject to amortization, an impairment
Goodwill is recognized if the carrying amount is not recoverable and exceeds the fair
Goodwill represents the excess of acquisition cost over the fair value value of the intangible asset.
of net tangible and intangible assets acquired. Goodwill is subject to Similar to the goodwill impairment analysis, in performing the annual
annual impairment testing and between annual tests if an event occurs or impairment analysis for indefinite-lived intangible assets, Citi may and has
circumstances change that would more-likely-than-not reduce the fair value elected to bypass the optional qualitative assessment, choosing instead to
of a reporting unit below its carrying amount. perform a quantitative analysis.
Under ASC 350, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other, the Company has an
option to assess qualitative factors to determine if it is necessary to perform Other Assets and Other Liabilities
the goodwill impairment test. If, after assessing the totality of events or Other assets include, among other items, loans held-for-sale, deferred tax
circumstances, the Company determines that it is not more-likely-than-not assets, equity method investments, interest and fees receivable, premises and
that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, no equipment (including purchased and developed software), repossessed assets,
further testing is necessary. If, however, the Company determines that it and other receivables. Other liabilities include, among other items, accrued
is more-likely-than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than expenses and other payables, deferred tax liabilities, and reserves for legal
its carrying amount, then the Company must perform the first step of the claims, taxes, unfunded lending commitments, repositioning reserves, and
two-step goodwill impairment test. other matters.
The Company has an unconditional option to bypass the qualitative
Other Real Estate Owned and Repossessed Assets
assessment for any reporting unit in any reporting period and proceed
Real estate or other assets received through foreclosure or repossession are
directly to the first step of the goodwill impairment test. Furthermore, on any
generally reported in Other assets, net of a valuation allowance for selling
business dispositions, goodwill is allocated to the business disposed of based
costs and subsequent declines in fair value.
on the ratio of the fair value of the business disposed of to the fair value of
the reporting unit. Securitizations
The first step requires a comparison of the fair value of the individual The Company primarily securitizes credit card receivables and mortgages.
reporting unit to its carrying value, including goodwill. If the fair value of Other types of securitized assets include corporate debt instruments (in cash
the reporting unit is in excess of the carrying value, the related goodwill and synthetic form).
is considered not to be impaired and no further analysis is necessary. If There are two key accounting determinations that must be made
the carrying value of the reporting unit exceeds the fair value, this is an relating to securitizations. Citi first makes a determination as to whether the
indication of potential impairment and a second step of testing is performed securitization entity must be consolidated. Second, it determines whether the
to measure the amount of impairment, if any, for that reporting unit. transfer of financial assets to the entity is considered a sale under GAAP. If
If required, the second step involves calculating the implied fair value the securitization entity is a VIE, the Company consolidates the VIE if it is the
of goodwill for each of the affected reporting units. The implied fair value primary beneficiary (as discussed in “Variable Interest Entities” above). For
of goodwill is determined in the same manner as the amount of goodwill all other securitization entities determined not to be VIEs in which Citigroup
recognized in a business combination, which is the excess of the fair value of participates, consolidation is based on which party has voting control of
the reporting unit determined in step one over the fair value of the net assets the entity, giving consideration to removal and liquidation rights in certain
and identifiable intangibles as if the reporting unit were being acquired. partnership structures. Only securitization entities controlled by Citigroup
If the amount of the goodwill allocated to the reporting unit exceeds the are consolidated.
implied fair value of the goodwill in the pro forma purchase price allocation, Interests in the securitized and sold assets may be retained in the form
an impairment charge is recorded for the excess. A recognized impairment of subordinated or senior interest-only strips, subordinated tranches, spread
charge cannot exceed the amount of goodwill allocated to a reporting unit accounts and servicing rights. In credit card securitizations, the Company
and cannot subsequently be reversed even if the fair value of the reporting retains a seller’s interest in the credit card receivables transferred to the trusts,
unit recovers. which is not in securitized form. In the case of consolidated securitization
Additional information on Citi’s goodwill impairment testing can be entities, including the credit card trusts, these retained interests are not
found in Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

148
reported on Citi’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. The securitized loans remain Risk Management Activities—Derivatives Used for
on the balance sheet. Substantially all of the Consumer loans sold or Hedging Purposes
securitized through non-consolidated trusts by Citigroup are U.S. prime The Company manages its exposures to market rate movements outside its
residential mortgage loans. Retained interests in non-consolidated mortgage trading activities by modifying the asset and liability mix, either directly
securitization trusts are classified as Trading account assets, except for or through the use of derivative financial products, including interest-rate
MSRs, which are included in Mortgage servicing rights on Citigroup’s swaps, futures, forwards, and purchased options, as well as foreign-exchange
Consolidated Balance Sheet. contracts. These end-user derivatives are carried at fair value in Other assets,
Other liabilities, Trading account assets and Trading account liabilities.
Debt To qualify as an accounting hedge under the hedge accounting rules
Short-term borrowings and Long-term debt are accounted for at amortized (versus an economic hedge where hedge accounting is not sought), a
cost, except where the Company has elected to report the debt instruments, derivative must be highly effective in offsetting the risk designated as being
including certain structured notes at fair value, or the debt is in a fair value hedged. The hedge relationship must be formally documented at inception,
hedging relationship. detailing the particular risk management objective and strategy for the
Transfers of Financial Assets hedge. This includes the item and risk being hedged, the derivative being
For a transfer of financial assets to be considered a sale: (i) the assets must used and how effectiveness will be assessed and ineffectiveness measured.
have been legally isolated from the Company, even in bankruptcy or other The effectiveness of these hedging relationships is evaluated both on a
receivership; (ii) the purchaser must have the right to pledge or sell the assets retrospective and prospective basis, typically using quantitative measures
transferred or, if the purchaser is an entity whose sole purpose is to engage in of correlation with hedge ineffectiveness measured and recorded in
securitization and asset-backed financing activities through the issuance of current earnings.
beneficial interests and that entity is constrained from pledging the assets it If a hedge relationship is not highly effective, it no longer qualifies as an
receives, each beneficial interest holder must have the right to sell or pledge accounting hedge and hedge accounting may not be applied. Any gains or
their beneficial interests; and (iii) the Company may not have an option or losses attributable to the derivatives, as well as subsequent changes in fair
obligation to reacquire the assets. value, are recognized in Other revenue or Principal transactions with no
If these sale requirements are met, the assets are removed from the offset to the hedged item, similar to trading derivatives.
Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. If the conditions for sale are not The foregoing criteria are applied on a decentralized basis, consistent with
met, the transfer is considered to be a secured borrowing, the assets remain the level at which market risk is managed, but are subject to various limits
on the Consolidated Balance Sheet and the sale proceeds are recognized as and controls. The underlying asset, liability or forecasted transaction may be
the Company’s liability. A legal opinion on a sale generally is obtained for an individual item or a portfolio of similar items.
complex transactions or where the Company has continuing involvement For fair value hedges, in which derivatives hedge the fair value of assets
with assets transferred or with the securitization entity. For a transfer to or liabilities, changes in the fair value of derivatives are reflected in Other
be eligible for sale accounting, those opinions must state that the asset revenue, together with changes in the fair value of the hedged item related
transfer would be considered a sale and that the assets transferred would to the hedged risk. These amounts are expected to, and generally do, offset
not be consolidated with the Company’s other assets in the event of the each other. Any net amount, representing hedge ineffectiveness, is reflected in
Company’s insolvency. current earnings. Citigroup’s fair value hedges are primarily hedges of fixed-
For a transfer of a portion of a financial asset to be considered a sale, rate long-term debt and available-for-sale securities.
the portion transferred must meet the definition of a participating interest. For cash flow hedges, in which derivatives hedge the variability of cash
A participating interest must represent a pro rata ownership in an entire flows related to floating- and fixed-rate assets, liabilities or forecasted
financial asset; all cash flows must be divided proportionately, with the transactions, the accounting treatment depends on the effectiveness of
same priority of payment; no participating interest in the transferred asset the hedge. To the extent these derivatives are effective in offsetting the
may be subordinated to the interest of another participating interest holder; variability of the hedged cash flows, the effective portion of the changes
and no party may have the right to pledge or exchange the entire financial in the derivatives’ fair values will not be included in current earnings, but
asset unless all participating interest holders agree. Otherwise, the transfer is is reported in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). These
accounted for as a secured borrowing. changes in fair value will be included in earnings of future periods when
See Note 22 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion. the hedged cash flows impact earnings. To the extent these derivatives are
not effective, changes in their fair values are immediately included in Other
revenue. Citigroup’s cash flow hedges primarily include hedges of floating-
rate debt and floating-rate assets, including loans and securities purchased
under agreement to resell, as well as rollovers of short-term fixed-rate
liabilities and floating-rate liabilities and forecasted debt issuances.

149
 For net investment hedges in which derivatives hedge the foreign Stock-Based Compensation
currency exposure of a net investment in a foreign operation, the accounting The Company recognizes compensation expense related to stock and option
treatment will similarly depend on the effectiveness of the hedge. The effective awards over the requisite service period, generally based on the instruments’
portion of the change in fair value of the derivative, including any forward grant-date fair value, reduced by expected forfeitures. Compensation cost
premium or discount, is reflected in Accumulated other comprehensive related to awards granted to employees who meet certain age plus years-of-
income (loss) as part of the foreign currency translation adjustment. service requirements (retirement-eligible employees) is accrued in the year
For those accounting hedge relationships that are terminated or when prior to the grant date, in the same manner as the accrual for cash incentive
hedge designations are removed, the hedge accounting treatment described compensation. Certain stock awards with performance conditions or certain
in the paragraphs above is no longer applied. Instead, the end-user derivative clawback provisions are subject to variable accounting, pursuant to which
is terminated or transferred to the trading account. For fair value hedges, any the associated compensation expense fluctuates with changes in Citigroup’s
changes in the fair value of the hedged item remain as part of the basis of the stock price. See Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
asset or liability and are ultimately reflected as an element of the yield. For
Income Taxes
cash flow hedges, any changes in fair value of the end-user derivative remain
The Company is subject to the income tax laws of the U.S. and its states and
in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) and are included in
municipalities, and the foreign jurisdictions in which it operates. These tax
earnings of future periods when the hedged cash flows impact earnings.
laws are complex and subject to different interpretations by the taxpayer and
However, if it becomes probable that some or all of the hedged forecasted
the relevant governmental taxing authorities. In establishing a provision for
transactions will not occur, any amounts that remain in Accumulated other
income tax expense, the Company must make judgments and interpretations
comprehensive income (loss) related to these transactions are immediately
about the application of these inherently complex tax laws. The Company
reflected in Other revenue.
must also make estimates about when in the future certain items will affect
End-user derivatives that are economic hedges, rather than qualifying
taxable income in the various tax jurisdictions, both domestic and foreign.
for hedge accounting, are also carried at fair value, with changes in value
Disputes over interpretations of the tax laws may be subject to review and
included in Principal transactions or Other revenue. Citigroup often
adjudication by the court systems of the various tax jurisdictions or may be
uses economic hedges when qualifying for hedge accounting would be too
settled with the taxing authority upon examination or audit. The Company
complex or operationally burdensome. Examples are hedges of the credit
treats interest and penalties on income taxes as a component of Income
risk component of commercial loans and loan commitments. Citigroup
tax expense.
periodically evaluates its hedging strategies in other areas and may designate
Deferred taxes are recorded for the future consequences of events that
either a qualifying hedge or an economic hedge, after considering the
have been recognized for financial statements or tax returns, based upon
relative cost and benefits. Economic hedges are also employed when the
enacted tax laws and rates. Deferred tax assets are recognized subject
hedged item itself is marked to market through current earnings, such as
to management’s judgment that realization is more-likely-than-not.
hedges of commitments to originate one-to-four-family mortgage loans to be
FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
held for sale and MSRs. See Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements
Taxes” (FIN 48) (now incorporated into ASC 740, Income Taxes), sets
for a further discussion of the Company’s hedging and derivative activities.
out a consistent framework to determine the appropriate level of tax
Employee Benefits Expense reserves to maintain for uncertain tax positions. This interpretation uses
Employee benefits expense includes current service costs of pension and a two-step approach wherein a tax benefit is recognized if a position is
other postretirement benefit plans (which are accrued on a current basis), more-likely-than-not to be sustained. The amount of the benefit is then
contributions and unrestricted awards under other employee plans, the measured to be the highest tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely to
amortization of restricted stock awards and costs of other employee benefits. be realized. ASC 740 also sets out disclosure requirements to enhance
For its most significant pension and postretirement benefit plans (Significant transparency of an entity’s tax reserves.
Plans), the Company measures and discloses plan obligations, plan assets See Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a further
and periodic plan expense quarterly, instead of annually. The effect of description of the Company’s tax provision and related income tax assets
remeasuring the Significant Plan obligations and assets by updating plan and liabilities.
actuarial assumptions on a quarterly basis is reflected in Accumulated other Commissions, Underwriting and Principal Transactions
comprehensive income (loss) and periodic plan expense. All other plans Commissions revenues are recognized in income when earned. Underwriting
(All Other Plans) are remeasured annually. See Note 8 to the Consolidated revenues are recognized in income typically at the closing of the transaction.
Financial Statements. Principal transactions revenues are recognized in income on a trade-date
basis. See Note 5 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a description
of the Company’s revenue recognition policies for commissions and fees,
and Note 6 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for details of principal
transactions revenue.

150
Earnings per Share Cash Flows
Earnings per share (EPS) is computed after deducting preferred stock Cash equivalents are defined as those amounts included in Cash and due
dividends. The Company has granted restricted and deferred share awards from banks. Cash flows from risk management activities are classified in the
with dividend rights that are considered to be participating securities, same category as the related assets and liabilities.
which are akin to a second class of common stock. Accordingly, a portion
Related Party Transactions
of Citigroup’s earnings is allocated to those participating securities in the
EPS calculation. The Company has related party transactions with certain of its subsidiaries
Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing income available to and affiliates. These transactions, which are primarily short-term in nature,
common stockholders after the allocation of dividends and undistributed include cash accounts, collateralized financing transactions, margin
earnings to the participating securities by the weighted average number accounts, derivative trading, charges for operational support and the
of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings per share borrowing and lending of funds, and are entered into in the ordinary course
reflects the potential dilution that could occur if securities or other contracts of business.
to issue common stock were exercised. It is computed after giving
consideration to the weighted average dilutive effect of the Company’s stock
options and warrants and convertible securities and after the allocation of
earnings to the participating securities.
Use of Estimates
Management must make estimates and assumptions that affect the
Consolidated Financial Statements and the related footnote disclosures. Such
estimates are used in connection with certain fair value measurements. See
Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussions
on estimates used in the determination of fair value. Moreover, estimates
are significant in determining the amounts of other-than-temporary
impairments, impairments of goodwill and other intangible assets, provisions
for probable losses that may arise from credit-related exposures and probable
and estimable losses related to litigation and regulatory proceedings, and tax
reserves. While management makes its best judgment, actual amounts or
results could differ from those estimates. Current market conditions increase
the risk and complexity of the judgments in these estimates.

151
ACCOUNTING CHANGES This ASU became effective for Citi on January 1, 2014 and was applied on
Accounting for Share-Based Payments with a prospective basis. The accounting prescribed in this ASU is consistent with
Performance Targets Citi’s prior practice and, as a result, adoption did not result in any impact
In June 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) to Citi.
No. 2014-12, Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of OCC Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Guidance
an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after In the third quarter of 2012, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
the Requisite Service Period (a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues (OCC) issued guidance relating to the accounting for mortgage loans
Task Force). The ASU prescribes the accounting to be applied to share-based discharged through bankruptcy proceedings pursuant to Chapter 7 of the
awards that contain performance targets, the outcome of which will only U.S. Bankruptcy Code (Chapter 7 bankruptcy). Under this OCC guidance,
be confirmed after the employee’s service period associated with the award the discharged loans are accounted for as troubled debt restructurings
has ended. Citi elected to adopt this ASU from the third quarter of 2014. The (TDRs). These TDRs, other than FHA-insured loans, are written down to their
impact of adopting the ASU was not material. collateral value less cost to sell. FHA-insured loans are reserved for, based on
Discontinued Operations and Significant Disposals a discounted cash flow model. As a result of implementing this guidance,
The FASB issued ASU No. 2014-08, Presentation of Financial Statements Citigroup recorded an incremental $635 million of charge-offs in the third
(Topic 810) and Property, Plant, and Equipment (Topic 360), Reporting quarter of 2012, the vast majority of which related to loans that were current.
Discontinued Operations and Disclosures of Disposals of Components of These charge-offs were substantially offset by a related loan loss reserve
an Entity (ASU 2014-08) in April 2014. ASU 2014-08 changes the criteria release of approximately $600 million, with a net reduction in pretax income
for reporting discontinued operations while enhancing disclosures. Under of $35 million. In the fourth quarter of 2012, Citigroup recorded a benefit
the ASU, only disposals representing a strategic shift having a major effect to charge-offs of approximately $40 million related to finalizing the impact
on an entity’s operations and financial results, such as a disposal of a of this OCC guidance. Furthermore, as a result of this OCC guidance, TDRs
major geographic area, a major line of business or a major equity method increased by $1.7 billion and non-accrual loans increased by $1.5 billion in
investment, may be presented as discontinued operations. Additionally, the the third quarter of 2012 ($1.3 billion of which was current).
ASU requires expanded disclosures about discontinued operations that will Fair Value Measurement
provide more information about the assets, liabilities, income and expenses In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement
of discontinued operations. (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement
The Company early-adopted the ASU in the second quarter of 2014 on and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRS. The ASU created
a prospective basis for all disposals (or classifications as held-for-sale) of a common definition of fair value for GAAP and IFRS and aligned the
components of an entity that occurred on or after April 1, 2014. As a result measurement and disclosure requirements. It required significant additional
of the adoption of the ASU, fewer disposals will now qualify for reporting disclosures both of a qualitative and quantitative nature, particularly for
as discontinued operations; however, disclosure of the pretax income those instruments measured at fair value that are classified in Level 3 of
attributable to a disposal of a significant part of an organization that does the fair value hierarchy. Additionally, the ASU provided guidance on when
not qualify for discontinued operations reporting is required. The impact of it is appropriate to measure fair value on a portfolio basis and expanded
adopting the ASU was not material. the prohibition on valuation adjustments where the size of the Company’s
Accounting for the Cumulative Translation Adjustment position is a characteristic of the adjustment from Level 1 to all levels of the
upon Derecognition of Certain Foreign Subsidiaries fair value hierarchy.
In March 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-05, Foreign Currency The ASU became effective for Citigroup on January 1, 2012. As a result of
Matters (Topic 830): Parent’s Accounting for the Cumulative Translation implementing the prohibition on valuation adjustments where the size of
Adjustment upon Derecognition of Certain Subsidiaries or Groups of the Company’s position is a characteristic, the Company released reserves of
Assets within a Foreign Entity or of an Investment in a Foreign Entity approximately $125 million, increasing pretax income in the first quarter
(a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force). This ASU clarifies of 2012.
the accounting for the cumulative translation adjustment (CTA) when a
parent either sells a part or all of its investment in a foreign entity or no
longer holds a controlling financial interest in a subsidiary or group of assets
that is a nonprofit activity or a business within a foreign entity. The ASU
requires the CTA to remain in equity until the foreign entity is disposed of or
it is completely or substantially liquidated.

152
Deferred Asset Acquisition Costs FUTURE APPLICATION OF ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
In October 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-26, Financial Services- Accounting for Investments in Tax Credit Partnerships
Insurance (Topic 944): Accounting for Costs Associated with Acquiring In January 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-01, Investments-Equity Method
or Renewing Insurance Contracts. The ASU amended the guidance for and Joint Ventures (Topic 323): Accounting for Investments in Qualified
insurance entities that required deferral and subsequent amortization of Affordable Housing Projects. Any transition adjustment is reflected
certain costs incurred during the acquisition of new or renewed insurance as an adjustment to retained earnings in the earliest period presented
contracts, commonly referred to as deferred acquisition costs (DAC). The (retrospective application).
new guidance limited DAC to those costs directly related to the successful The ASU is applicable to Citi’s portfolio of low income housing tax
acquisition of insurance contracts; all other acquisition-related costs must be credit (LIHTC) partnership interests. The new standard widens the scope
expensed as incurred. Under prior guidance, DAC consisted of those costs that of investments eligible to elect to apply a new alternative method, the
vary with, and primarily relate to, the acquisition of insurance contracts. proportional amortization method, under which the cost of the investment is
The ASU became effective for Citigroup on January 1, 2012 and was amortized to tax expense in proportion to the amount of tax credits and other
adopted using the retrospective method. As a result of implementing the ASU, tax benefits received. Citi qualifies to elect the proportional amortization
in the first quarter of 2012, DAC was reduced by approximately $165 million method under the ASU for its entire LIHTC portfolio. These investments are
and a $58 million deferred tax asset was recorded with an offset to opening currently accounted for under the equity method, which results in losses (due
retained earnings of $107 million (net of tax). to amortization of the investment) being recognized in Other revenue and
Classification of Certain Government-Guaranteed tax credits and benefits being recognized in the Income tax expense line. In
Mortgage Loans upon Foreclosure contrast, the proportional amortization method combines the amortization
In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-14, Receivables-Troubled of the investment and receipt of the tax credits/benefits into one line, Income
Debt Restructuring by Creditors (Subtopic 310-40): Classification of tax expense.
Certain Government-Guaranteed Mortgage Loans upon Foreclosure, Citi adopted ASU 2014-01 in the first quarter of 2015. The adoption of
which requires that a mortgage loan be derecognized and a separate other this ASU will reduce Retained earnings by approximately $349 million,
receivable be recognized upon foreclosure if the following conditions are met: Other assets by approximately $178 million, and deferred tax assets by
(i) the loan has a government guarantee that is not separable from the loan approximately $171 million, each in the first quarter of 2015.
before foreclosure; (ii) at the time of foreclosure, the creditor has the intent
Revenue Recognition
to convey the real estate property to the guarantor and make a claim on the
In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts
guarantee, and the creditor has the ability to recover under that claim; and
with Customers, which requires an entity to recognize the amount of
(iii) at the time of foreclosure, any amount of the claim that is determined
revenue to which it expects to be entitled for the transfer of promised
on the basis of the fair value of the real estate is fixed. Upon foreclosure,
goods or services to customers. The ASU will replace most existing revenue
the separate other receivable is measured based on the amount of the loan
recognition guidance in GAAP when it becomes effective on January 1, 2017.
balance (principal and interest) expected to be recovered from the guarantor.
Early application is not permitted. The standard permits the use of either
Citi early adopted the ASU on a modified retrospective basis in the fourth
the retrospective or cumulative effect transition method. The Company is
quarter of 2014, which resulted in reclassifying approximately $130 million
evaluating the effect that ASU 2014-09 will have on its consolidated financial
of foreclosed assets from Other Real Estate Owned to a separate other
statements and related disclosures. The Company has not yet selected a
receivable that is included in Other assets. Given the modified retrospective
transition method nor has it determined the effect of the standard on its
approach to adoption, prior periods have not been restated.
financial statements.
Accounting for Repurchase-to-Maturity Transactions
In June 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-11, Transfers and Servicing
(Topic 860): Repurchase-to-Maturity Transactions, Repurchase
Financings, and Disclosures. The ASU changes the accounting for
repurchase-to-maturity transactions and linked repurchase financings
to secured borrowed accounting, which is consistent with the accounting
for other repurchase agreements. The ASU also requires disclosures about
transfers accounted for as sales in transactions that are economically similar
to repurchase agreements and about the types of collateral pledged in
repurchase agreements and similar transactions accounted for as secured
borrowings. The ASU’s provisions became effective for Citi from the first
quarter of 2015, with the exception of the collateral disclosures which will

153
be effective from the second quarter of 2015. The effect of adopting the ASU Accounting for Financial Instruments-Credit Losses
is required to be reflected as a cumulative effect adjustment to retained In December 2012, the FASB issued a proposed ASU, Financial Instruments-
earnings as of the beginning of the period of adoption. Adoption of the ASU Credit Losses. This proposed ASU, or exposure draft, was issued for public
did not have a material effect on the Company’s financial statements. comment in order to allow stakeholders the opportunity to review the
proposal and provide comments to the FASB and does not constitute
Measuring the Financial Assets and Liabilities of a accounting guidance until a final ASU is issued.
Consolidated Collateralized Financial Entity
The exposure draft contains proposed guidance developed by the FASB
In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-13, Consolidation (Topic
with the goal of improving financial reporting about expected credit losses on
810): Measuring the Financial Assets and the Financial Liabilities
loans, securities and other financial assets held by financial institutions and
of a Consolidated Collateralized Financing Entity, which provides
other organizations. The exposure draft proposes a new accounting model
two alternative methods for measuring the fair value of a consolidated
intended to require earlier recognition of credit losses, while also providing
Collateralized Financing Entity’s (CFE) financial assets and financial
additional transparency about credit risk.
liabilities. This election is made separately for each CFE subject to the scope
The FASB’s proposed model would utilize an “expected credit loss”
of the ASU. The first method requires the fair value of the financial assets
measurement objective for the recognition of credit losses for loans,
and liabilities to be measured using the requirements of ASC Topic 820, Fair
held-to-maturity securities and other receivables at the time the financial
Value Measurements and Disclosures, with any differences between the
asset is originated or acquired and adjusted each period for changes in
fair value of the financial assets and financial liabilities being attributed to
expected credit losses. For available-for-sale securities where fair value is
the CFE and reflected in earnings in the consolidated statement of income.
less than cost, impairment would be recognized in the allowance for credit
The alternative method requires measuring both the financial assets and
losses and adjusted each period for changes in credit. This would replace the
financial liabilities using the more observable of the fair value of the assets
multiple existing impairment models in GAAP, which generally require that a
or liabilities. The alternative method would also take into consideration
loss be “incurred” before it is recognized.
the carrying value of any beneficial interests of the CFE held by the parent,
The FASB’s proposed model represents a significant departure from
including those representing compensation for services, and the carrying
existing GAAP, and may result in material changes to the Company’s
value of any nonfinancial assets held temporarily. The ASU will be effective
accounting for financial instruments. The impact of the FASB’s final ASU
for Citi from the first quarter of 2016 and is not expected to have a material
on the Company’s financial statements will be assessed when it is issued.
effect on the Company.
The exposure draft does not contain a proposed effective date; this would be
Accounting for Derivatives: Hybrid Financial Instruments included in the final ASU, when issued.
In November 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-16, Derivatives and
Consolidation
Hedging (Topic 815): Determining Whether the Host Contract in a Hybrid
In February 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-02, Consolidation
Financial Instrument Issued in the Form of a Share Is More Akin to
(Topic 810): Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis, which is intended
Debt or to Equity. The ASU will require an entity to evaluate the economic
to improve certain areas of consolidation guidance for legal entities such
characteristics and risks of an entire hybrid financial instrument issued in
as limited partnerships, limited liability companies, and securitization
the form of a share (including the embedded derivative feature) in order to
structures. The ASU will reduce the number of consolidation models. The ASU
determine whether the nature of the host contract is more akin to debt or
will be effective on January 1, 2016. Early adoption is permitted, including
equity. Additionally, the ASU clarifies that no single term or feature would
adoption in an interim period. The Company is evaluating the effect that ASU
necessarily determine the economic characteristics and risks of the host
2015-02 will have on its Consolidated Financial Statements.
contract; therefore, an entity should use judgment based on an evaluation of
all the relevant terms and features.
This ASU is effective for Citi from the first quarter of 2016 with early
adoption permitted. Citi may choose to report the effects of initial adoption as
a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of January 1, 2016 or
apply the guidance retrospectively to all prior periods. The impact of adopting
this ASU is not expected to be material to Citi.

154
2. DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS AND SIGNIFICANT
DISPOSALS
Discontinued Operations
The following Discontinued operations are recorded within the
Corporate/Other segment.
Sale of Brazil Credicard Business
On December 20, 2013, Citi sold its non-Citibank-branded cards and
consumer finance business in Brazil (Credicard) for approximately
$1.24 billion. The sale resulted in a pretax gain of $206 million
($325 million after-tax). In the fourth quarter of 2014, resolution of
certain contingencies related to the disposal are reported as Income (loss)
from discontinued operations. Credicard is reported as Discontinued
operations for all periods presented. Summarized financial information
for Discontinued operations for Credicard follows:
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Total revenues, net of interest expense (1) $ 69 $1,012 $1,045
Income (loss) from discontinued operations $ 63 $ (48) $ 110
Gain on sale — 206 —
Provision (benefit) for income taxes 11 (138) 19
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes $ 52 $ 296 $ 91

(1) Total revenues include gain or loss on sale, if applicable.

Cash Flows from Discontinued Operations Summarized financial information for Discontinued operations for the
operations related to CCA follows:
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Cash flows from operating activities $— $ 197 $ (205) In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Cash flows from investing activities — (207) 195 Total revenues, net of interest expense (1) $— $ 74 $ 60
Cash flows from financing activities — — 16 Income (loss) from discontinued operations $ (7) $ (158) $ (123)
Net cash provided by discontinued operations $— $ (10) $ 6 Gain on sale — 62 —
Provision (benefit) for income taxes (3) (30) (44)
Sale of Certain Citi Capital Advisors Business Income (loss) from discontinued
operations, net of taxes $ (4) $ (66) $ (79 )
During the third quarter of 2012, Citi executed definitive agreements to
transition a carve-out of its liquid strategies business within Citi Capital (1) Total revenues include gain or loss on sale, if applicable.
Advisors (CCA). The sale occurred pursuant to two separate transactions in
Cash Flows from Discontinued Operations
2013, creating two separate management companies. The first transaction
closed in February 2013, and Citigroup retained a 24.9% passive equity In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
interest in the management company (which is held in Citi’s Institutional Cash flows from operating activities $— $(43) $ (4)
Clients Group segment). The second transaction closed in August 2013. CCA Cash flows from investing activities — — 4
is reported as Discontinued operations for all periods presented. Cash flows from financing activities — 43 —
Net cash provided by discontinued operations $— $— $—

155
Sale of Egg Banking plc Credit Card Business Significant Disposals
In April 2011, Citi completed the sale of the Egg Banking plc (Egg) credit The following sales were identified as significant disposals, including the
card business. Summarized financial information for Discontinued assets and liabilities that were reclassified to held-for-sale within Other assets
operations for the operations related to Egg follows: and Other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet and the Income
(loss) before taxes (benefits) related to each business.
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Agreement to Sell Japan Retail Banking Business
Total revenues, net of interest expense (1)
$ 5 $— $ 1
Income (loss) from discontinued operations $(46) $(62) $ (96) On December 25, 2014, Citi entered into an agreement to sell its Japan
Gain (loss) on sale — — (1) retail banking business that will be reported as part of Citi Holdings effective
Provision (benefit) for income taxes (16) (22) (34) January 1, 2015. The sale, which is subject to regulatory approvals and other
Income (loss) from discontinued customary closing conditions, is expected to occur by the fourth quarter of
operations, net of taxes $(30) $(40) $ (63) 2015 and result in an after-tax gain upon completion. Income before taxes
(1) Total revenues include gain or loss on sale, if applicable. for the period in which the individually significant component was classified
as held-for-sale and for all prior periods are as follows:
Cash flows from Discontinued operations related to Egg were not
material for all periods presented. In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Audit of Citi German Consumer Tax Group Income before taxes $(5) $31 $(4)
Citi sold its German retail banking operations in 2007 and reported them
as Discontinued operations. During the third quarter of 2013, German The following assets and liabilities for the Japan retail banking business
tax authorities concluded their audit of Citi’s German consumer tax group were identified and reclassified to held-for-sale within Other assets and
for the years 2005-2008. This resolution resulted in a pretax benefit of Other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2014:
$27 million and a tax benefit of $57 million ($85 million total net income
In millions of dollars December 31, 2014
benefit) during the third quarter of 2013, all of which was included in
Assets
Discontinued operations. During 2014, residual costs associated with Cash and deposits with banks $ 151
German retail banking operations resulted in a tax expense of $20 million. Loans (net of allowance of $2 million) 544
Combined Results for Discontinued Operations Goodwill 51
Other assets, advances to/from subs 19,854
The following is summarized financial information for Credicard, CCA, Egg Other assets 66
and previous Discontinued operations for which Citi continues to have
Total assets $ 20,666
minimal residual costs associated with the sales:
Liabilities
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 Deposits $ 20,605
Total revenues, net of interest expense (1) $74 $1,086 $1,106 Other liabilities 61
Income (loss) from discontinued operations $10 $ (242) $ (109) Total liabilities $ 20,666
Gain on sale — 268 (1)
Provision (benefit) for income taxes 12 (244) (52)
Income (loss) from discontinued
operations, net of taxes $ (2) $ 270 $ (58)

(1) Total revenues include gain or loss on sale, if applicable.

Cash Flows from Discontinued Operations

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012

Cash flows used in operating activities $— $ 154 $ (209)
Cash flows from investing activities — (207) 199
Cash flows from financing activities — 43 16
Net cash provided by discontinued operations $— $ (10) $ 6

156
Sale of Spain Consumer Operations
On September 22, 2014, Citi sold its consumer operations in Spain, which
was part of Citi Holdings, including $1.7 billion of consumer loans (net
of allowance), $3.4 billion of assets under management, $2.2 billion of
customer deposits, 45 branches, 48 ATMs and 938 employees, with the
buyer assuming the related current pension commitments at closing. The
transaction generated a pretax gain on sale of $243 million ($131 million
after-tax). Income before taxes for the period in which the individually
significant component was classified as held for sale and for all prior periods
are as follows:

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012

Income before taxes $373 $59 $6

Sale of Greece Consumer Operations

On September 30, 2014, Citi sold its consumer operations in Greece, which
were part of Citi Holdings, including $353 million of consumer loans (net
of allowance), $1.1 billion of assets under management, $1.2 billion of
customer deposits, 20 branches, 85 ATMs and 719 employees, with the buyer
assuming certain limited pension obligations related to Diners’ Club’s
employees at closing. The transaction generated a pretax gain on sale of
$209 million ($91 million after-tax). Income before taxes for the period in
which the individually significant component was classified as held-for-sale
and for all prior periods are as follows:

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012

Income before taxes $133 $(113) $(258)

157
3. BUSINESS SEGMENTS Citi Holdings is composed of businesses and portfolios of assets that
Citigroup has determined are not central to its core Citicorp businesses.
Citigroup’s activities are conducted through the Global Consumer Banking The accounting policies of these reportable segments are the same as
(GCB), Institutional Clients Group (ICG), Corporate/Other and Citi those disclosed in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Holdings business segments. The prior-period balances reflect reclassifications to conform the
GCB includes a global, full-service consumer franchise delivering a presentation in those periods to the current period’s presentation. Effective
wide array of banking, credit card lending and investment services through January 1, 2014, certain business activities within the former Securities
a network of local branches, offices and electronic delivery systems and is and Banking and Transaction Services were realigned and aggregated as
composed of four GCB businesses: North America, EMEA, Latin America Banking and Markets and securities services within ICG. This change was
and Asia. due to the realignment of the management structure within ICG and did
ICG is composed of Banking and Markets and securities services and not have an impact on any total segment-level information. In addition,
provides corporate, institutional, public sector and high-net-worth clients in during the first quarter of 2014, reclassifications were made related to Citi’s
approximately 100 countries with a broad range of banking and financial re-allocation of certain administrative, operations and technology costs
products and services. among Citi’s businesses, the allocation of certain costs from Corporate/Other
Corporate/Other includes certain unallocated costs of global functions, to Citi’s businesses as well as certain immaterial reclassifications between
other corporate expenses and net treasury results, unallocated corporate revenues and expenses affecting ICG.
expenses, offsets to certain line-item reclassifications and eliminations, the The following table presents certain information regarding the Company’s
results of discontinued operations and unallocated taxes. continuing operations by segment:

Revenues, Provision (benefits) Income (loss) from

net of interest expense (1) for income taxes continuing operations (2) Identifiable assets
In millions of dollars, except
identifiable assets in billions 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013
Global Consumer Banking $37,753 $38,165 $39,105 $3,473 $ 3,424 $ 3,468 $ 6,938 $ 6,763 $ 7,597 $ 396 $ 405
Institutional Clients Group 33,267 33,567 30,762 3,729 3,857 2,021 9,521 9,414 7,834 1,020 1,045
Corporate/Other 47 121 128 (459) (282) (1,093) (5,593) (630) (1,048) 329 313
Total Citicorp $71,067 $71,853 $69,995 $6,743 $ 6,999 $ 4,396 $10,866 $15,547 $14,383 $1,745 $1,763
Citi Holdings 5,815 4,566 (805) 121 (1,132) (4,389) (3,366) (1,917) (6,565) 98 117
Total $76,882 $76,419 $69,190 $6,864 $ 5,867 $ 7 $ 7,500 $13,630 $ 7,818 $1,843 $1,880

(1) Includes Citicorp (excluding Corporate/Other) total revenues, net of interest expense, in North America of $32.0 billion, $31.2 billion and $29.9 billion; in EMEA of $10.9 billion, $11.5 billion and $11.5 billion; in
Latin America of $13.4 billion, $14.0 billion and $13.5 billion; and in Asia of $14.7 billion, $15.0 billion and $15.0 billion in 2014, 2013, and 2012, respectively.
(2) Includes pretax provisions (credits) for credit losses and for benefits and claims in GCB of $6.1 billion, $6.8 billion and $6.2 billion; in ICG of $57 million, $78 million and $276 million; and in Citi Holdings of
$1.3 billion, $1.6 billion and $4.9 billion in 2014, 2013, and 2012, respectively.

158
4. INTEREST REVENUE AND EXPENSE

For the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 Interest revenue and Interest expense consisted of the following:

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012

Interest revenue
Loan interest, including fees $44,776 $45,580 $47,712
Deposits with banks 959 1,026 1,261
Federal funds sold and securities borrowed or purchased under agreements to resell 2,366 2,566 3,418
Investments, including dividends 7,195 6,919 7,525
Trading account assets (1) 5,880 6,277 6,802
Other interest 507 602 580
Total interest revenue $61,683 $62,970 $67,298
Interest expense
Deposits (2) $ 5,692 $ 6,236 $ 7,690
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under agreements to repurchase 1,895 2,339 2,817
Trading account liabilities (1) 168 169 190
Short-term borrowings 580 597 727
Long-term debt 5,355 6,836 9,188
Total interest expense $13,690 $16,177 $20,612
Net interest revenue $47,993 $46,793 $46,686
Provision for loan losses 6,828 7,604 10,458
Net interest revenue after provision for
loan losses $41,165 $39,189 $36,228

(1) Interest expense on Trading account liabilities of ICG is reported as a reduction of interest revenue from Trading account assets.
(2) Includes deposit insurance fees and charges of $1,038 million, $1,132 million and $1,262 million for 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

159
5. COMMISSIONS AND FEES Credit card and bank card fees are primarily composed of interchange
revenue and certain card fees, including annual fees, reduced by reward
The primary components of Commissions and fees revenue are investment program costs and certain partner payments. Interchange revenue and fees
banking fees, trading-related fees, credit card and bank card fees and fees are recognized when earned, including annual card fees that are deferred
related to treasury and securities services in ICG. and amortized on a straight-line basis over a 12-month period. Reward costs
Investment banking fees are substantially composed of underwriting and are recognized when points are earned by the customers. The following table
advisory revenues and are recognized when Citigroup’s performance under presents Commissions and fees revenue for the years ended December 31:
the terms of a contractual arrangement is completed, which is typically at the
closing of the transaction. Underwriting revenue is recorded in Commissions In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
and fees, net of both reimbursable and non-reimbursable expenses, Investment banking $ 3,687 $ 3,315 $ 2,991
consistent with the AICPA Audit and Accounting Guide for Brokers and Trading-related 2,503 2,563 2,331
Dealers in Securities (codified in ASC 940-605-05-1). Expenses associated Credit cards and bank cards 2,227 2,472 2,775
Trade and securities services 1,871 1,847 1,733
with advisory transactions are recorded in Other operating expenses, net of
Other consumer (1) 885 911 908
client reimbursements. Out-of-pocket expenses are deferred and recognized Checking-related 531 551 615
at the time the related revenue is recognized. In general, expenses incurred Corporate finance (2) 531 516 516
related to investment banking transactions that fail to close (are not Loan servicing 380 500 313
consummated) are recorded gross in Other operating expenses. Other 417 266 402
Trading-related fees primarily include commissions and fees from the Total commissions and fees $13,032 $12,941 $12,584
following: executing transactions for clients on exchanges and over-the- (1) Primarily consists of fees for investment fund administration and management, third-party collections,
counter markets; sale of mutual funds, insurance and other annuity commercial demand deposit accounts and certain credit card services.
(2) Consists primarily of fees earned from structuring and underwriting loan syndications.
products; and assisting clients in clearing transactions, providing brokerage
services and other such activities. Trading-related fees are recognized
when earned in Commissions and fees. Gains or losses, if any, on these
transactions are included in Principal transactions (see Note 6 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements).

160
6. PRINCIPAL TRANSACTIONS
Principal transactions revenue consists of realized and unrealized gains
and losses from trading activities. Trading activities include revenues
from fixed income, equities, credit and commodities products and foreign
exchange transactions. Not included in the table below is the impact of
net interest revenue related to trading activities, which is an integral part
of trading activities’ profitability. See Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements for information about net interest revenue related to trading
activities. Principal transactions include CVA (credit valuation adjustments
on derivatives), FVA (funding valuation adjustments) on over-the-counter
derivatives and DVA (debt valuation adjustments on issued liabilities for
which the fair value option has been elected).
The following table presents principal transactions revenue for the years
ended December 31:

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012

Global Consumer Banking $ 787 $ 863 $ 808
Institutional Clients Group 5,908 6,494 4,330
Corporate/Other (383) (80) (189)
Subtotal Citicorp $ 6,312 $ 7,277 $ 4,949
Citi Holdings 386 25 31
Total Citigroup $ 6,698 $ 7,302 $ 4,980

Interest rate contracts (1) $ 3,657 $ 4,055 $ 2,380

Foreign exchange contracts (2) 2,008 2,307 2,493
Equity contracts (3) (260) 319 158
Commodity and other contracts (4) 590 277 108
Credit products and derivatives (5) 703 344 (159)
Total $ 6,698 $ 7,302 $ 4,980

(1) Includes revenues from government securities and corporate debt, municipal securities, mortgage
securities and other debt instruments. Also includes spot and forward trading of currencies and
exchange-traded and over-the-counter (OTC) currency options, options on fixed income securities,
interest rate swaps, currency swaps, swap options, caps and floors, financial futures, OTC options and
forward contracts on fixed income securities.
(2) Includes revenues from foreign exchange spot, forward, option and swap contracts, as well as FX
translation gains and losses.
(3) Includes revenues from common, preferred and convertible preferred stock, convertible corporate
debt, equity-linked notes and exchange-traded and OTC equity options and warrants.
(4) Primarily includes revenues from crude oil, refined oil products, natural gas and other
commodities trades.
(5) Includes revenues from structured credit products.

161
7. INCENTIVE PLANS In addition, deferred cash awards made to certain employees in
Discretionary Annual Incentive Awards February 2013 and later are subject to a discretionary performance-based
Citigroup grants immediate cash bonus payments, deferred cash awards, vesting condition under which an amount otherwise scheduled to vest
stock payments and restricted and deferred stock awards as part of its may be reduced in the event of a “material adverse outcome” for which a
discretionary annual incentive award program involving a large segment of participant has “significant responsibility.” Deferred cash awards made to
Citigroup’s employees worldwide. Most of the shares of common stock issued these employees in February 2014 and later are subject to an additional
by Citigroup as part of its equity compensation programs are to settle the clawback provision pursuant to which unvested awards may be canceled
vesting of the stock components of these awards. if the employee engaged in misconduct or exercised materially imprudent
Discretionary annual incentive awards are generally awarded in the first judgment, or failed to supervise or escalate the behavior of other employees
quarter of the year based upon the previous year’s performance. Awards who did.
valued at less than U.S. $100,000 (or the local currency equivalent) are Certain CAP and other stock-based awards, including those to participants
generally paid entirely in the form of an immediate cash bonus. Pursuant in the EU that are subject to certain discretionary clawback provisions, are
to Citigroup policy and/or regulatory requirements, certain employees and subject to variable accounting, pursuant to which the associated value of the
officers are subject to mandatory deferrals of incentive pay and generally award fluctuates with changes in Citigroup’s common stock price until the
receive 25% to 60% of their awards in a combination of restricted or deferred date that the award is settled, either in cash or shares. For these awards, the
stock and deferred cash. Discretionary annual incentive awards to many total amount that will be recognized as expense cannot be determined in full
employees in the EU are subject to deferral requirements regardless of the until the settlement date.
total award value, with 50% of the immediate incentive delivered in the form Compensation Allowances
of a stock payment or stock unit award subject to a restriction on sale or In 2013 and 2014, certain employees of Citigroup’s U.K. regulated entities
transfer or hold back (generally, for six months). were granted fixed allowances, in addition to salary and annual incentive
Deferred annual incentive awards are generally delivered as two awards. Generally, these cash allowances are payable in equal installments
awards—a restricted or deferred stock award under Citi’s Capital during the service year and the following year or two years. The payments
Accumulation Program (CAP) and a deferred cash award. The applicable cease if the employee does not continue to meet applicable service or other
mix of CAP and deferred cash awards may vary based on the employee’s requirements. The allowance payments are not subject to performance
minimum deferral requirement and the country of employment. In some conditions or clawback. Discretionary incentives awarded for performance
cases, the entire deferral will be in the form of either a CAP or deferred years 2013 and 2014 to employees receiving allowances were at reduced levels
cash award. and subject to greater deferral requirements, of up to 100% in some cases.
Subject to certain exceptions (principally, for retirement-eligible Sign-on and Long-Term Retention Awards
employees), continuous employment within Citigroup is required to vest Stock awards, deferred cash awards and grants of stock options may be made
in CAP and deferred cash awards. Post-employment vesting by retirement- at various times during the year as sign-on awards to induce new hires to
eligible employees and participants who meet other conditions is generally join Citi or to high-potential employees as long-term retention awards.
conditioned upon their refraining from competition with Citigroup during Vesting periods and other terms and conditions pertaining to these awards
the remaining vesting period, unless the employment relationship has been tend to vary by grant. Generally, recipients must remain employed through
terminated by Citigroup under certain conditions. the vesting dates to vest in the awards, except in cases of death, disability or
Generally, the CAP and deferred cash awards vest in equal annual involuntary termination other than for “gross misconduct.” These awards
installments over three- or four-year periods. Vested CAP awards are delivered do not usually provide for post-employment vesting by retirement-eligible
in shares of common stock. Deferred cash awards are payable in cash participants. Any stock option grants are for Citigroup common stock with
and earn a fixed notional rate of interest that is paid only if and when the exercise prices that are no less than the fair market value at the time of grant.
underlying principal award amount vests. Generally, in the EU, vested CAP
shares are subject to a restriction on sale or transfer after vesting, and vested Outstanding (Unvested) Stock Awards
deferred cash awards are subject to hold back (generally, for six months in A summary of the status of unvested stock awards granted as discretionary
each case). annual incentive or sign-on and long-term retention awards for the 12
Unvested CAP and deferred cash awards made in January 2011 or months ended December 31, 2014, is presented below:
later are subject to one or more clawback provisions that apply in certain
Weighted-average
circumstances, including in the case of employee risk-limit violations or grant date
other misconduct, or where the awards were based on earnings that were fair value
misstated. CAP awards made to certain employees in February 2013 and Unvested stock awards Shares per share
later, and deferred cash awards made to certain employees in January 2012, Unvested at January 1, 2014 61,136,782 $39.71
are subject to a formulaic performance-based vesting condition pursuant New awards 17,729,497 49.65
Canceled awards (2,194,893) 41.31
to which amounts otherwise scheduled to vest will be reduced based on the
Vested awards (1) (26,666,993) 40.94
amount of any pretax loss in the participant’s business in the calendar year
preceding the scheduled vesting date. For CAP awards made in February 2013 Unvested at December 31, 2014 50,004,393 $42.52
and later, a minimum reduction of 20% applies for the first dollar of loss. (1) The weighted-average fair value of the shares vesting during 2014 was approximately $52.02
per share.

162
 Total unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested stock Stock Option Programs
awards, excluding the impact of forfeiture estimates, was $659 million Stock options have not been granted to Citi’s employees as part of the annual
at December 31, 2014. The cost is expected to be recognized over a incentive award programs since 2009.
weighted-average period of 0.7 years. However, the value of the portion On February 14, 2011, Citigroup granted options exercisable for
of these awards that is subject to variable accounting will fluctuate with approximately 2.9 million shares of Citigroup common stock to certain of
changes in Citigroup’s common stock price. its executive officers. The options have six-year terms and vested in three
Performance Share Units
equal annual installments. The exercise price of the options is $49.10, equal
Certain executive officers were awarded a target number of performance to the closing price of a share of Citigroup common stock on the grant date.
share units (PSUs) on February 19, 2013, for performance in 2012, and to Upon exercise of the options before the fifth anniversary of the grant date, the
a broader group of executives on February 18, 2014, and February 18, 2015, shares received on exercise (net of the amount required to pay taxes and the
for performance in 2013 and 2014, respectively. PSUs will be earned only exercise price) are subject to a one-year transfer restriction.
to the extent that Citigroup attains specified performance goals relating to The February 14, 2011, grant is the only prior stock option grant that
Citigroup’s return on assets and relative total shareholder return against was not fully vested by January 1, 2014, and as a result, is the only grant
peers over the three-year period beginning with the year of award. The actual that resulted in an amount of compensation expense in 2014. All other stock
dollar amounts ultimately earned could vary from zero, if performance option grants were fully vested at December 31, 2013, and as a result Citi will
goals are not met, to as much as 150% of target, if performance goals not incur any future compensation expense related to those grants.
are meaningfully exceeded. The value of each PSU is equal to the value
of one share of Citi common stock. The value of the award will fluctuate
with changes in Citigroup’s stock price and the attainment of the specified
performance goals for each award, until it is settled solely in cash after the
end of the performance period.

163
Information with respect to stock option activity under Citigroup’s stock option programs for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 is as follows:

2014 2013 2012

Weighted- Weighted- Weighted-
average Intrinsic average Intrinsic average Intrinsic
exercise value exercise value exercise value
Options price per share Options price per share Options price per share
Outstanding, beginning of period 31,508,106 $ 50.72 $ 1.39 35,020,397 $ 51.20 $ — 37,596,029 $ 69.60 $—
Forfeited (28,257) 40.80 — (50,914) 212.35 — (858,906) 83.84 —
Expired (602,093) 242.43 — (86,964) 528.40 — (1,716,726) 438.14 —
Exercised (4,363,637) 40.82 11.37 (3,374,413) 40.81 9.54 — — —
Outstanding, end of period 26,514,119 $ 48.00 $ 6.11 31,508,106 $ 50.72 $1.39 35,020,397 $ 51.20 $—
Exercisable, end of period 26,514,119 30,662,588 32,973,444

The following table summarizes information about stock options outstanding under Citigroup’s stock option programs at December 31, 2014:

Options outstanding Options exercisable

Weighted-average
Number contractual life Weighted-average Number Weighted-average
Range of exercise prices outstanding remaining exercise price exercisable exercise price
$29.70—$49.99 (1) 25,617,659 1.1 years $ 42.87 25,617,659 $ 42.87
$50.00—$99.99 69,956 6.1 years 56.76 69,956 56.76
$100.00—$199.99 502,416 4.0 years 147.13 502,416 147.13
$200.00—$299.99 124,088 3.1 years 240.28 124,088 240.28
$300.00—$399.99 200,000 3.1 years 335.50 200,000 335.50
Total at December 31, 2014 26,514,119 1.2 years $ 48.02 26,514,119 $ 48.02

(1) A significant portion of the outstanding options are in the $40 to $45 range of exercise prices.

164
Profit Sharing Plan The 2014 Stock Incentive Plan and predecessor plans permit the use of
The 2010 Key Employee Profit Sharing Plan (KEPSP) entitled participants treasury stock or newly issued shares in connection with awards granted
to profit-sharing payments calculated with reference to the pretax income of under the plans. Newly issued shares were distributed to settle the vesting of
Citicorp (as defined in the KEPSP) over a performance measurement period annual deferred stock awards in January 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015. The use
of January 1, 2010, through December 31, 2013. Generally, if a participant of treasury stock or newly issued shares to settle stock awards does not affect
remained employed and all other conditions to vesting and payment were the compensation expense recorded in the Consolidated Statement of Income
satisfied, the participant became entitled to payment. Payments were made in for equity awards.
cash, except for U.K. participants who, pursuant to regulatory requirements,
Incentive Compensation Cost
received 50% of their payment in Citigroup common stock that was subject to
The following table shows components of compensation expense, relating
a six-month sale restriction.
to the above incentive compensation programs, recorded during 2014, 2013
Independent risk function employees were not eligible to participate in the
and 2012:
KEPSP, as the independent risk function participates in the determination of
whether payouts will be made under the KEPSP. Instead, they were eligible to In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
receive deferred cash retention awards. Charges for estimated awards
Other Variable Incentive Compensation to retirement-eligible employees $ 525 $ 468 $ 444
Amortization of deferred cash awards,
Citigroup has various incentive plans globally that are used to motivate and deferred cash stock units and performance
reward performance primarily in the areas of sales, operational excellence stock units 311 323 345
and customer satisfaction. Participation in these plans is generally limited to Immediately vested stock award expense (1) 51 54 60
employees who are not eligible for discretionary annual incentive awards. Amortization of restricted and deferred
stock awards (2) 668 862 864
Summary Option expense 1 10 99
Except for awards subject to variable accounting, the total expense Other variable incentive compensation 803 1,076 670
recognized for stock awards represents the grant date fair value of such Profit sharing plan 1 78 246
awards, which is generally recognized as a charge to income ratably over the Total $ 2,360 $ 2,871 $ 2,728
vesting period, other than for awards to retirement-eligible employees and
immediately vested awards. Whenever awards are made or are expected to be (1) Represents expense for immediately vested stock awards that generally were stock payments in lieu
of cash compensation. The expense is generally accrued as cash incentive compensation in the year
made to retirement-eligible employees, the charge to income is accelerated prior to grant.
based on when the applicable conditions to retirement eligibility were or will (2) All periods include amortization expense for all unvested awards to non-retirement-eligible employees.
Amortization is recognized net of estimated forfeitures of awards.
be met. If the employee is retirement eligible on the grant date, or the award
is vested at grant date, the entire expense is recognized in the year prior
to grant. Future Expenses Associated with Outstanding (Unvested) Awards
Recipients of Citigroup stock awards generally do not have any Citi expects to record compensation expense in future periods as a result of
stockholder rights until shares are delivered upon vesting or exercise, or awards granted for performance in 2014 and years prior. Because the awards
after the expiration of applicable required holding periods. Recipients of contain service or other conditions that will be satisfied in the future, the
restricted or deferred stock awards and stock unit awards, however, may be expense of these already-granted awards is recognized over those future
entitled to receive dividends or dividend-equivalent payments during the period(s). Citi’s expected future expenses, excluding the impact of forfeitures,
vesting period. Recipients of restricted stock awards generally are entitled to cancellations, clawbacks and repositioning-related accelerations that have
vote the shares in their award during the vesting period. Once a stock award not yet occurred, are summarized in the table below. The portion of these
vests, the shares are freely transferable, unless they are subject to a restriction awards that is subject to variable accounting will cause the expense amount
on sale or transfer for a specified period. Pursuant to a stock ownership to fluctuate with changes in Citigroup’s common stock price.
commitment, certain executives have committed to holding most of their 2018 and
vested shares indefinitely. In millions of dollars 2015 2016 2017 beyond (1) Total (2)
All equity awards granted since April 19, 2005, have been made pursuant Awards granted in 2014 and prior:
to stockholder-approved stock incentive plans that are administered by the Deferred Stock Awards $ 357 $ 204 $ 92 $ 6 $ 659
Personnel and Compensation Committee of the Citigroup Board of Directors, Deferred Cash Awards 232 123 51 3 409
which is composed entirely of independent non-employee directors. Future expense related to awards
already granted $ 589 $ 327 $ 143 $ 9 $ 1,068
At December 31, 2014, approximately 51.6 million shares of Citigroup
Future expense related to awards
common stock were authorized and available for grant under Citigroup’s granted in 2015 (3) $ 400 $ 290 $ 188 $ 164 $ 1,042
2014 Stock Incentive Plan, the only plan from which equity awards are
Total $ 989 $ 617 $ 331 $ 173 $ 2,110
currently granted.
(1) Principally 2018.
(2) $1.8 billion of which is attributable to ICG.
(3) Refers to awards granted on or about February 16, 2015, as part Citi’s discretionary annual incentive
awards for services performed in 2014, and 2015 compensation allowances.

165
8. RETIREMENT BENEFITS In the second quarter of 2013, the Company changed the method of
Pension and Postretirement Plans accounting for its most significant pension and postretirement benefit plans
The Company has several non-contributory defined benefit pension plans (Significant Plans) such that plan obligations, plan assets and periodic
covering certain U.S. employees and has various defined benefit pension and plan expense are remeasured and disclosed quarterly, instead of annually.
termination indemnity plans covering employees outside the United States. The Significant Plans captured approximately 80% of the Company’s global
The U.S. qualified defined benefit plan was frozen effective January 1, pension and postretirement plan obligations as of December 31, 2014. All
2008 for most employees. Accordingly, no additional compensation-based other plans (All Other Plans) are remeasured annually with a December 31
contributions were credited to the cash balance portion of the plan for measurement date.
existing plan participants after 2007. However, certain employees covered Net (Benefit) Expense
under the prior final pay plan formula continue to accrue benefits. The The following table summarizes the components of net (benefit) expense
Company also offers postretirement health care and life insurance benefits to recognized in the Consolidated Statement of Income for the Company’s U.S.
certain eligible U.S. retired employees, as well as to certain eligible employees qualified and nonqualified pension plans and postretirement plans, and
outside the United States. pension and postretirement plans outside the United States, for Significant
The Company also sponsors a number of non-contributory, nonqualified Plans and All Other Plans, for the years indicated.
pension plans. These plans, which are unfunded, provide supplemental
defined pension benefits to certain U.S. employees. With the exception
of certain employees covered under the prior final pay plan formula, the
benefits under these plans were frozen in prior years.
Pension plans Postretirement benefit plans
U.S. plans Non-U.S. plans U.S. plans Non-U.S. plans
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012
Qualified plans
Benefits earned during the year $ 6 $ 8 $ 12 $ 178 $ 210 $ 199 $— $— $— $ 15 $ 43 $ 29
Interest cost on benefit obligation 541 538 565 376 384 367 33 33 44 120 146 116
Expected return on plan assets (878) (863) (897) (384) (396) (399) (1) (2) (4) (121) (133) (108)
Amortization of unrecognized
Prior service (benefit) cost (3) (4) (1) 1 4 4 — (1) (1) (12) — —
Net actuarial loss 105 104 96 77 95 77 — — 4 39 45 25
Curtailment loss (1) — 21 — 14 4 10 — — — — — —
Settlement (gain) loss (1) — — — 53 13 35 — — — — (1) —
Special termination benefits (1) — — — 9 8 1 — — — — — —
Net qualified plans (benefit) expense $(229) $ (196) $ (225) $ 324 $ 322 $ 294 $ 32 $ 30 $ 43 $ 41 $ 100 $ 62
Nonqualified plans expense 45 46 42 — — — — — — — — —
Cumulative effect of change in
accounting policy (2) — (23) — — — — — — — — 3 —
Total adjusted net (benefit) expense $(184) $ (173) $ (183) $ 324 $ 322 $ 294 $ 32 $ 30 $ 43 $ 41 $ 103 $ 62

(1) Losses due to curtailment, settlement and special termination benefits relate to repositioning actions.
(2) Cumulative effect of adopting quarterly remeasurement for Significant Plans.

166
Contributions The following table summarizes the actual Company contributions for
The Company’s funding practice for U.S. and non-U.S. pension plans is the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, as well as estimated expected
generally to fund to minimum funding requirements in accordance with Company contributions for 2015. Expected contributions are subject to
applicable local laws and regulations. The Company may increase its change since contribution decisions are affected by various factors, such as
contributions above the minimum required contribution, if appropriate. In market performance and regulatory requirements.
addition, management has the ability to change its funding practices. For the
U.S. pension plans, there were no required minimum cash contributions for
2014 or 2013.

Pension plans (1) Postretirement plans (1)

U.S. plans (2) Non-U.S. plans U.S. plans Non-U.S. plans
In millions of dollars 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014 2013 2015 2014 2013
Cash contributions paid by the Company $— $100 $— $ 86 $130 $308 $— $— $— $ 77 $ 6 $251
Benefits paid directly by the Company 60 58 51 47 100 49 63 56 52 6 6 5
Total Company contributions $ 60 $158 $ 51 $133 $230 $357 $ 63 $ 56 $ 52 $ 83 $12 $256

(1) Payments reported for 2015 are expected amounts.

(2) The U.S. pension plans include benefits paid directly by the Company for the nonqualified pension plans.

The estimated net actuarial loss and prior service cost that will be Funded Status and Accumulated Other
amortized from Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) into Comprehensive Income
net expense in 2015 are approximately $245 million and $1 million, The following table summarizes the funded status and amounts recognized
respectively, for defined benefit pension plans. For postretirement plans, the in the Consolidated Balance Sheet for the Company’s U.S. qualified and
estimated 2015 net actuarial loss and prior service cost amortizations are nonqualified pension plans and postretirement plans, and pension and
approximately $45 million and $(12) million, respectively. postretirement plans outside the United States.

Net Amount Recognized

Pension plans Postretirement benefit plans
U.S. plans Non-U.S. plans U.S. plans Non-U.S. plans
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013
Change in projected benefit obligation
Qualified plans
Projected benefit obligation at beginning of year $12,137 $13,268 $7,194 $7,399 $780 $1,072 $1,411 $2,002
Cumulative effect of change in accounting policy (1) — (368) — 385 — — — 81
Benefits earned during the year 6 8 178 210 — — 15 43
Interest cost on benefit obligation 541 538 376 384 33 33 120 146
Plan amendments — — 2 (28) — — (14) (171)
Actuarial (gain) loss (2) 2,077 (671) 790 (733) 184 (253) 262 (617)
Benefits paid, net of participants’ contributions (701) (661) (352) (296) (91) (85) (93) (64)
Expected government subsidy — — — — 11 13 — —
Divestitures — — (18) — — — (1) —
Settlements — — (184) (57) — — — (2)
Curtailment (gain) loss — 23 (58) (2) — — (3) (3)
Special/contractual termination benefits — — 9 8 — — — —
Foreign exchange impact and other — — (685) (76) — — (170) (4)
Qualified plans $14,060 $12,137 $7,252 $7,194 $917 $ 780 $1,527 $1,411
Nonqualified plans (3) 779 692 — — — — — —
Projected benefit obligation at year end $14,839 $12,829 $7,252 $7,194 $917 $ 780 $1,527 $1,411

(1) Represents the cumulative effect of adopting quarterly remeasurement for Significant Plans.
(2) 2014 amounts for the U.S. plans include impact of the adoption of updated mortality tables (see “Mortality Tables” below).
(3) These plans are unfunded.

167
 Pension plans Postretirement benefit plans
U.S. plans Non-U.S. plans U.S. plans Non-U.S. plans
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013
Change in plan assets
Qualified plans
Plan assets at fair value at beginning of year $12,731 $12,656 $ 6,918 $ 7,154 $ 32 $ 50 $1,472 $1,497
Cumulative effect of change in accounting policy (1) — (53) — 126 — 3 — 21
Actual return on plan assets 941 789 1,108 (256) 2 (1) 166 (223)
Company contributions 100 — 230 357 56 52 12 256
Plan participants’ contributions — — 5 6 51 50 — —
Divestitures — — (11) — — — — —
Settlements — — (184) (61) — — — —
Benefits paid (701) (661) (357) (302) (131) (122) (93) (64)
Foreign exchange impact and other — — (652) (106) — — (173) (15)
Qualified plans $13,071 $12,731 $ 7,057 $ 6,918 $ 10 $ 32 $1,384 $1,472
Nonqualified plans (2) — — — — — — — —
Plan assets at fair value year end $13,071 $12,731 $ 7,057 $ 6,918 $ 10 $ 32 $1,384 $1,472
Funded status of the plans
Qualified plans (3) $ (989) $ 593 $ (195) $ (276) $(907) $(748) $ (143) $ 61
Nonqualified plans (2) (779) (692) — — — — — —
Funded status of the plans at year end $ (1,768) $ (99) $ (195) $ (276) $(907) $(748) $ (143) $ 61
Net amount recognized
Qualified plans
Benefit asset $ — $ 593 $ 921 $ 709 $ — $ — $ 196 $ 407
Benefit liability (989) — (1,116) (985) (907) (748) (339) (346)
Qualified plans $ (989) $ 593 $ (195) $ (276) $(907) $(748) $ (143) $ 61
Nonqualified plans (2) (779) (692) — — — — — —
Net amount recognized on the balance sheet $ (1,768) $ (99) $ (195) $ (276) $(907) $(748) $ (143) $ 61
Amounts recognized in Accumulated other
comprehensive income (loss)
Qualified plans
Net transition asset (obligation) $ — $ — $ (1) $ (1) $ — $ — $ — $ (1)
Prior service benefit (cost) 3 7 13 (2) — 1 157 173
Net actuarial gain (loss) (5,819) (3,911) (1,690) (2,007) (56) 129 (658) (555)
Qualified plans $ (5,816) $ (3,904) $(1,678) $(2,010) $ (56) $ 130 $ (501) $ (383)
Nonqualified plans (2) (325) (226) — — — — — —
Net amount recognized in equity - pretax $ (6,141) $ (4,130) $(1,678) $(2,010) $ (56) $ 130 $ (501) $ (383)
Accumulated benefit obligation
Qualified plans $14,050 $12,122 $ 6,699 $ 6,652 $ 917 $ 780 $1,527 $1,411
Nonqualified plans (2) 771 668 — — — — — —
Accumulated benefit obligation at year end $14,821 $12,790 $ 6,699 $ 6,652 $ 917 $ 780 $1,527 $1,411

(1) Represents the cumulative effect of adopting quarterly remeasurement for Significant Plans.
(2) These plans are unfunded.
(3) The U.S. qualified pension plan is fully funded under specified Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) funding rules as of January 1, 2015 and no minimum required funding is expected for 2015.

168
 The following table shows the change in Accumulated other
comprehensive income (loss) related to Citi’s pension and postretirement
benefit plans (for Significant Plans and All Other Plans) for the
years indicated.

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012

Beginning of period balance, net of tax (1)(2) $(3,989) $(5,270) $(4,282)
Cumulative effect of change in accounting policy (3) — (22) —
Actuarial assumptions changes
and plan experience (4) (3,404) 2,380 (2,400)
Net asset gain (loss) due to difference
between actual and expected returns 833 (1,084) 963
Net amortizations 202 271 214
Prior service credit 13 360 —
Curtailment/settlement loss (5) 67 — —
Foreign exchange impact and other 459 74 (155)
Change in deferred taxes, net 660 (698) 390
Change, net of tax $(1,170) $ 1,281 $ (988)
End of period balance, net of tax (1)(2) $(5,159) $(3,989) $(5,270)

(1) See Note 20 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of net Accumulated other
comprehensive income (loss) balance.
(2) Includes net-of-tax amounts for certain profit sharing plans outside the U.S.
(3) Represents the cumulative effect of adopting quarterly remeasurement for Significant Plans.
(4) Includes $111 million, $(58) million and $62 million of actuarial losses (gains) related to the
U.S. nonqualified pension plans for 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
(5) Curtailment and settlement losses relate to repositioning actions.

At December 31, 2014 and 2013, for both qualified and nonqualified
pension plans and for both funded and unfunded plans, the aggregate
projected benefit obligation (PBO), the aggregate accumulated benefit
obligation (ABO), and the aggregate fair value of plan assets are presented
for pension plans with a projected benefit obligation in excess of plan assets
and for pension plans with an accumulated benefit obligation in excess of
plan assets as follows:

PBO exceeds fair value of plan assets ABO exceeds fair value plan assets
U.S. plans (1) Non-U.S. plans (2) U.S. plans (1) Non-U.S. plans (2)
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013
Projected benefit obligation $14,839 $692 $2,756 $2,765 $14,839 $692 $2,570 $2,408
Accumulated benefit obligation 14,821 668 2,353 2,375 14,821 668 2,233 2,090
Fair value of plan assets 13,071 — 1,640 1,780 13,071 — 1,495 1,468

(1) At December 31, 2014, for both the U.S. qualified and nonqualified plans, the aggregate PBO and the aggregate ABO exceeded plan assets. At December 31, 2013, assets for the U.S. qualified plan exceeded both the
PBO and ABO. The U.S. nonqualified plans are not funded and thus the PBO and ABO exceeded plan assets as of this date.
(2) At December 31, 2014, the aggregate PBO and the aggregate ABO exceeded the aggregate plan assets for non-U.S. plans. Assets for certain non-U.S. plans exceed both the PBO and ABO and, as such, only the
aggregate PBO, ABO, and asset values for underfunded non-U.S. plans are presented in the table above.

At December 31, 2014, combined accumulated benefit obligations for

the U.S. and non-U.S. pension plans, excluding U.S. nonqualified plans,
were more than plan assets by $0.6 billion. At December 31, 2013, combined
accumulated benefit obligations for the U.S. and non-U.S. pension plans,
excluding U.S. nonqualified plans, were less than plan assets by $0.9 billion.

169
Plan Assumptions During the year 2014 2013
The Company utilizes a number of assumptions to determine plan Discount rate
obligations and expense. Changes in one or a combination of these U.S. plans (1)
assumptions will have an impact on the Company’s pension and Qualified pension 4.75%/4.55%/ 3.90%/4.20%/
4.25%/4.25% 4.75%/4.80%
postretirement PBO, funded status and benefit expense. Changes in the plans’ Nonqualified pension 4.75 3.90
funded status resulting from changes in the PBO and fair value of plan assets Postretirement 4.35/4.15/ 3.60/3.60/
will have a corresponding impact on Accumulated other comprehensive 3.95/4.00 4.40/ 4.30
income (loss). Non-U.S. pension plans
Certain assumptions used in determining pension and postretirement Range 1.60 to 29.25 1.50 to 28.00
Weighted average (2) 5.60 5.24
benefit obligations and net benefit expense for the Company’s plans are Non-U.S. postretirement plans
shown in the following table: Range 3.50 to 11.90 3.50 to 10.00
Weighted average (2) 8.65 7.46
At year end 2014 2013 Future compensation increase rate
Discount rate U.S. plans (3) N/A N/A
U.S. plans (1) Non-U.S. pension plans
Qualified pension 4.00% 4.75% Range 1.00 to 26.00 1.20 to 26.00
Nonqualified pension 3.90 4.75 Weighted average (2) 3.40 3.93
Postretirement 3.80 4.35 Expected return on assets
Non-U.S. pension plans (2) U.S. plans 7.00 7.00
Range 1.00 to 32.50 1.60 to 29.25 Non-U.S. pension plans
Weighted average 4.74 5.60 Range 1.20 to 11.50 0.90 to 11.50
Non-U.S. postretirement plans (2) Weighted average (2) 5.68 5.76
Range 2.25 to 12.00 3.50 to 11.90 Non-U.S. postretirement plans
Weighted average 7.50 8.65 Range 8.50 to 8.90 8.50 to 9.60
Future compensation increase rate Weighted average (2) 8.50 8.50
U.S. plans (3) N/A N/A
(1) For the U.S. qualified pension and postretirement plans, the 2014 and 2013 rates shown above
Non-U.S. pension plans were utilized to calculate the expense in each of the respective four quarters in 2014 and 2013,
Range 1.00 to 30.00 1.00 to 26.00 respectively. For the U.S. nonqualified pension plans, the 2014 and 2013 rates shown above were
Weighted average 3.27 3.40 utilized to calculate expense for 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Expected return on assets (2) For the Significant non-U.S. plans, the 2014 and 2013 weighted averages shown above reflect the
rates utilized to calculate expense in the first quarters of 2014 and 2013, respectively. For all other
U.S. plans 7.00 7.00 non-U.S. plans, the weighted averages shown above reflect the rates utilized to calculate expense for
Non-U.S. pension plans 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Range 1.30 to 11.50 1.20 to 11.50 (3) Since the U.S. qualified pension plan has been frozen, a compensation increase rate applies only to
certain small groups of grandfathered employees accruing benefits under a final pay plan formula.
Weighted average 5.08 5.68 Only the future compensation increases for these grandfathered employees will affect future pension
Non-U.S. postretirement plans expense and obligations. Compensation increase rates for these small groups of participants range
Range 8.50 to 10.40 8.50 to 8.90 from 3.00% to 4.00%.
Weighted average 8.51 8.50

(1) Effective April 1, 2013, Citigroup changed to a quarterly remeasurement approach for its Significant
Plans, including the U.S. qualified pension and postretirement plans.
For the U.S. qualified pension and postretirement plans, the 2014 rates shown above were utilized
to calculate the December 31, 2014 benefit obligation and will be used to determine the 2015 first
quarter expense. The 2013 rates shown above were utilized to calculate the December 31, 2013
benefit obligation and used for the 2014 first quarter expense.
For the U.S. nonqualified pension plans, the 2014 rates shown above were utilized to calculate the
December 31, 2014 benefit obligation and will be used to determine the 2015 first quarter expense.
The 2013 rates shown above were utilized to calculate the December 31, 2013 benefit obligations
and were used to determine the expense for 2014.
(2) Effective April 1, 2013, Citigroup changed to a quarterly remeasurement approach for its Significant
non-U.S. pension and postretirement plans. For the Significant non-U.S. pension and postretirement
plans, the 2014 rates shown above were utilized to calculate the December 31, 2014 benefit
obligation and will be used to determine the 2015 first quarter expense. The 2013 rates shown
above were utilized to calculate the December 31, 2013 benefit obligation and the 2014 first quarter
expense. For all other non-U.S. pension and postretirement plans, the 2014 rates shown above were
utilized to calculate the December 31, 2014 benefit obligations and will be used to determine the
expense for 2015. The 2013 rates shown above were utilized to calculate the December 31, 2013
benefit obligations and the expense for 2014.
(3) Since the U.S. qualified pension plan has been frozen, a compensation increase rate applies only to
certain small groups of grandfathered employees accruing benefits under a final pay plan formula.
Only the future compensation increases for these grandfathered employees will affect future pension
expense and obligations. Compensation increase rates for these small groups of participants range
from 3.00% to 4.00%.

170
Discount Rate For the non-U.S. plans, pension expense for 2014 was reduced by
The discount rates for the U.S. pension and postretirement plans were selected the expected return of $384 million, compared with the actual return of
by reference to a Citigroup-specific analysis using each plan’s specific $1,108 million. Pension expense for 2013 and 2012 was reduced by expected
cash flows and compared with high-quality corporate bond indices for returns of $396 million and $399 million, respectively. Actual returns were
reasonableness. Citigroup’s policy is to round to the nearest five hundredths lower in 2013, but higher in 2014 and 2012 than the expected returns in
of a percent. The discount rates for the non-U.S. pension and postretirement those years.
plans are selected by reference to high-quality corporate bond rates in
Mortality Tables
countries that have developed corporate bond markets. However, where
At December 31, 2014, the Company adopted the Retirement Plan 2014
developed corporate bond markets do not exist, the discount rates are selected
(RP-2014) and Mortality Projection 2014 (MP-2014) mortality tables for
by reference to local government bond rates with a premium added to reflect
U.S. plans.
the additional risk for corporate bonds in certain countries.
Expected Rate of Return 2014 2013
Mortality
The Company determines its assumptions for the expected rate of return
U.S. plans (1)(2)
on plan assets for its U.S. pension and postretirement plans using a Pension RP-2014/MP-2014 IRS RP-2000(2014)
“building block” approach, which focuses on ranges of anticipated rates Postretirement RP-2014/MP-2014 IRS RP-2000(2014)
of return for each asset class. A weighted average range of nominal rates
(1) The RP-2014 table is the white-collar RP-2014 table, with a 4% increase in rates to reflect the
is then determined based on target allocations to each asset class. Market Citigroup-specific mortality experience. The MP-2014 projection scale includes a phase-out of the
performance over a number of earlier years is evaluated covering a wide assumed rates of improvements from 2015 to 2027.
(2) The IRS mortality table (static version) includes a 7-year projection (from the measurement date) after
range of economic conditions to determine whether there are sound reasons retirement and 15-year projection (from the measurement date) prior to retirement using Projection
Scale AA.
for projecting any past trends.
The Company considers the expected rate of return to be a long-term
Adjustments were made to the RP-2014 tables and to the long-term rate
assessment of return expectations and does not anticipate changing this
of mortality improvement to reflect Citigroup specific experience. As a result,
assumption unless there are significant changes in investment strategy
the U.S. qualified and nonqualified pension and postretirement plans’ PBO
or economic conditions. This contrasts with the selection of the discount
at December 31, 2014 increased by $1,209 million and its funded status and
rate and certain other assumptions, which are reconsidered annually
AOCI decreased by $1,209 million ($737 million, net of tax). In addition, the
(or quarterly for the Significant Plans) in accordance with GAAP.
2015 qualified and nonqualified pension and postretirement benefit expense
The expected rate of return for the U.S. pension and postretirement plans
is expected to increase by approximately $73 million.
was 7.00% at December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012. The expected return on
assets reflects the expected annual appreciation of the plan assets and reduces Sensitivities of Certain Key Assumptions
the Company’s annual pension expense. The expected return on assets is The following tables summarize the effect on pension expense of a one-
deducted from the sum of service cost, interest cost and other components of percentage-point change in the discount rate:
pension expense to arrive at the net pension (benefit) expense. Net pension
One-percentage-point increase
(benefit) expense for the U.S. pension plans for 2014, 2013 and 2012 reflects
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
deductions of $878 million, $863 million and $897 million of expected
U.S. plans $ 28 $ 16 $ 18
returns, respectively. Non-U.S. plans (39) (52) (48)
The following table shows the expected rates of return used in
determining the Company’s pension expense compared to the actual rate of One-percentage-point decrease
return on plan assets during 2014, 2013 and 2012 for the U.S. pension and In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
postretirement plans: U.S. plans $(45) $(57) $(36)
Non-U.S. plans 56 79 64
2014 2013 2012
Expected rate of return (1) 7.00% 7.00% 7.50%
Actual rate of return (2) 7.80% 6.00% 11.00%

(1) Effective December 31, 2012, the expected rate of return was changed from 7.50% to 7.00%.
(2) Actual rates of return are presented net of fees.

171
 Since the U.S. qualified pension plan was frozen, the majority of the A one-percentage-point change in assumed health care cost-trend rates
prospective service cost has been eliminated and the gain/loss amortization would have the following effects:
period was changed to the life expectancy for inactive participants. As a
result, pension expense for the U.S. qualified pension plan is driven more One- One-
percentage- percentage-
by interest costs than service costs, and an increase in the discount rate point increase point decrease
would increase pension expense, while a decrease in the discount rate would In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2014 2013
decrease pension expense. Effect on benefits earned and interest
The following tables summarize the effect on pension expense of a one- cost for U.S. postretirement plans $ 2 $ 1 $ (1) $ (1)
percentage-point change in the expected rates of return: Effect on accumulated postretirement benefit
obligation for U.S. postretirement plans 40 24 (34) (19)
One-percentage-point increase
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 One- One-
U.S. plans $(129) $(123) $(120) percentage- percentage-
Non-U.S. plans (67) (68) (64) point increase point decrease
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2014 2013
One-percentage-point decrease Effect on benefits earned and interest cost
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 for non-U.S. postretirement plans $ 17 $ 37 $ (14) $ (29)
Effect on accumulated postretirement benefit
U.S. plans $ 129 $123 $120
obligation for non-U.S. postretirement plans 197 181 (161) (137)
Non-U.S. plans 67 68 64

Health Care Cost-Trend Rate

Assumed health care cost-trend rates were as follows:

2014 2013
Health care cost increase rate for U.S. plans
Following year 7.50% 8.00%
Ultimate rate to which cost increase is assumed to decline 5.00 5.00
Year in which the ultimate rate is reached (1) 2020 2020

(1) Weighted average for plans with different following year and ultimate rates.

2014 2013
Health care cost increase rate for Non-U.S. plans
(weighted average)
Following year 6.94% 6.95%
Ultimate rate to which cost increase is assumed to decline 6.93 6.94
Year in which the ultimate rate is reached 2027 2029

172
Plan Assets
Citigroup’s pension and postretirement plans’ asset allocations for the U.S.
plans at December 31, 2014 and 2013 and the target allocations for 2015 by
asset category based on asset fair values, are as follows:

Target asset U.S. pension assets U.S. postretirement assets

allocation at December 31, at December 31,
Asset category (1) 2015 2014 2013 2014 2013
Equity securities (2) 0 - 30% 20% 19% 20% 19%
Debt securities 25 - 73 44 42 44 42
Real estate 0-7 4 5 4 5
Private equity 0 - 10 8 11 8 11
Other investments 0 - 22 24 23 24 23
Total 100% 100% 100% 100%

(1) Asset allocations for the U.S. plans are set by investment strategy, not by investment product. For example, private equities with an underlying investment in real estate are classified in the real estate asset category,
not private equity.
(2) Equity securities in the U.S. pension and postretirement plans do not include any Citigroup common stock at the end of 2014 and 2013.

Third-party investment managers and advisors provide their services to Citigroup’s pension and postretirement plans’ weighted-average asset
Citigroup’s U.S. pension and postretirement plans. Assets are rebalanced as allocations for the non-U.S. plans and the actual ranges at the end of 2014
Citi’s Pension Plan Investment Committee deems appropriate. Citigroup’s and 2013, and the weighted-average target allocations for 2015 by asset
investment strategy, with respect to its assets, is to maintain a globally category based on asset fair values are as follows:
diversified investment portfolio across several asset classes that, when
combined with Citigroup’s contributions to the plans, will maintain the
plans’ ability to meet all required benefit obligations.

Non-U.S. pension plans

Weighted-average Actual range Weighted-average
target asset allocation at December 31, at December 31,
Asset category (1) 2015 2014 2013 2014 2013
Equity securities 17% 0 - 67% 0 - 69% 17% 20%
Debt securities 78 0 - 100 0 - 99 77 72
Real estate 1 0 - 21 0 - 19 — 1
Other investments 4 0 - 100 0 - 100 6 7
Total 100% 100% 100%

Non-U.S. postretirement plans

Weighted-average Actual range Weighted-average
target asset allocation at December 31, at December 31,
Asset category (1) 2015 2014 2013 2014 2013
Equity securities 41% 0 - 42% 0 - 41% 42% 41%
Debt securities 56 54 - 100 51 - 100 54 51
Other investments 3 0-4 0-8 4 8
Total 100% 100% 100%

(1) Similar to the U.S. plans, asset allocations for certain non-U.S. plans are set by investment strategy, not by investment product.

173
Fair Value Disclosure
For information on fair value measurements, including descriptions of
Level 1, 2 and 3 of the fair value hierarchy and the valuation methodology
utilized by the Company, see Note 1 and Note 25 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements.
Certain investments may transfer between the fair value hierarchy
classifications during the year due to changes in valuation methodology and
pricing sources. There were no significant transfers of investments between
Level 1 and Level 2 during the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013.
Plan assets by detailed asset categories and the fair value hierarchy are as follows:

In millions of dollars U.S. pension and postretirement benefit plans (1)

Fair value measurement at December 31, 2014
Asset categories Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
Equity securities
U.S. equity $ 773 $ — $ — $ 773
Non-U.S. equity 601 — — 601
Mutual funds 214 — — 214
Commingled funds — 939 — 939
Debt securities
U.S. Treasuries 1,178 — — 1,178
U.S. agency — 113 — 113
U.S. corporate bonds — 1,533 — 1,533
Non-U.S. government debt — 357 — 357
Non-U.S. corporate bonds — 405 — 405
State and municipal debt — 132 — 132
Hedge funds — 2,462 731 3,193
Asset-backed securities — 41 — 41
Mortgage-backed securities — 76 — 76
Annuity contracts — — 59 59
Private equity — — 1,631 1,631
Derivatives 12 637 — 649
Other investments — 101 260 361
Total investments at fair value $ 2,778 $ 6,796 $ 2,681 $12,255
Cash and short-term investments $ 111 $ 1,287 $ — $ 1,398
Other investment receivables — 28 35 63
Total assets $ 2,889 $ 8,111 $ 2,716 $13,716
Other investment liabilities $ (17) $ (618) $ — $ (635)
Total net assets $ 2,872 $ 7,493 $ 2,716 $13,081

(1) The investments of the U.S. pension and postretirement benefit plans are commingled in one trust. At December 31, 2014, the allocable interests of the U.S. pension and postretirement benefit plans were 99.9% and
0.1%, respectively.

174
In millions of dollars U.S. pension and postretirement benefit plans (1)
Fair value measurement at December 31, 2013
Asset categories Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
Equity securities
U.S. equity $ 793 $ — $ — $ 793
Non-U.S. equity 442 — — 442
Mutual funds 203 — — 203
Commingled funds — 977 — 977
Debt securities
U.S. Treasuries 1,112 — — 1,112
U.S. agency — 91 — 91
U.S. corporate bonds — 1,387 — 1,387
Non-U.S. government debt — 349 — 349
Non-U.S. corporate bonds — 398 — 398
State and municipal debt — 137 — 137
Hedge funds — 2,132 1,126 3,258
Asset-backed securities — 61 — 61
Mortgage-backed securities — 64 — 64
Annuity contracts — — 91 91
Private equity — — 2,106 2,106
Derivatives 8 601 — 609
Other investments — 29 150 179
Total investments at fair value $ 2,558 $ 6,226 $ 3,473 $12,257
Cash and short-term investments $ 107 $ 957 $ — $ 1,064
Other investment receivables — 49 52 101
Total assets $ 2,665 $ 7,232 $ 3,525 $13,422
Other investment liabilities $ (9) $ (650) $ — $ (659)
Total net assets $ 2,656 $ 6,582 $ 3,525 $12,763

(1) The investments of the U.S. pension and postretirement benefit plans are commingled in one trust. At December 31, 2013, the allocable interests of the U.S. pension and postretirement benefit plans were 99.7% and
0.3%, respectively.

175
In millions of dollars Non-U.S. pension and postretirement benefit plans
Fair value measurement at December 31, 2014
Asset categories Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
Equity securities
U.S. equity $ 6 $ 15 $ — $ 21
Non-U.S. equity 86 271 45 402
Mutual funds 207 3,334 — 3,541
Commingled funds 10 25 — 35
Debt securities
U.S. corporate bonds — 357 — 357
Non-U.S. government debt 3,293 246 1 3,540
Non-U.S. corporate bonds 103 811 5 919
Hedge funds — — 10 10
Mortgage-backed securities — 1 — 1
Annuity contracts — 1 32 33
Derivatives 11 — — 11
Other investments 7 13 163 183
Total investments at fair value $3,723 $5,074 $ 256 $ 9,053
Cash and short-term investments $ 112 $ 2 $ — $ 114
Total assets $3,835 $5,076 $ 256 $ 9,167
Other investment liabilities $ (3) $ (723) $ — $ (726)
Total net assets $3,832 $4,353 $ 256 $ 8,441

In millions of dollars Non-U.S. pension and postretirement benefit plans

Fair value measurement at December 31, 2013
Asset categories Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total
Equity securities
U.S. equity $ 6 $ 13 $ — $ 19
Non-U.S. equity 117 292 49 458
Mutual funds 257 3,593 — 3,850
Commingled funds 7 22 — 29
Debt securities
U.S. corporate bonds — 392 — 392
Non-U.S. government debt 2,547 232 — 2,779
Non-U.S. corporate bonds 107 780 5 892
Hedge funds — — 11 11
Mortgage-backed securities 3 1 — 4
Annuity contracts — 1 32 33
Derivatives 42 — — 42
Other investments 7 12 202 221
Total investments at fair value $3,093 $5,338 $ 299 $ 8,730
Cash and short-term investments $ 92 $ 4 $ — $ 96
Total assets $3,185 $5,342 $ 299 $ 8,826
Other investment liabilities $ — $ (436) $ — $ (436)
Total net assets $3,185 $4,906 $ 299 $ 8,390

176
Level 3 Roll Forward
The reconciliations of the beginning and ending balances during the year for Level 3 assets are as follows:

In millions of dollars U.S. pension and postretirement benefit plans

Beginning Level 3 Realized Unrealized Purchases, Transfers in Ending Level 3
fair value at gains gains sales, and and/or out of fair value at
Asset categories Dec. 31, 2013 (losses) (losses) issuances Level 3 Dec. 31, 2014
Hedge funds $1,126 $ 63 $ (25) $ (264) $ (169) $ 731
Annuity contracts 91 — (1) (31) — 59
Private equity 2,106 241 (187) (529) — 1,631
Other investments 150 (1) (5) 109 7 260
Total investments $3,473 $ 303 $ (218) $ (715) $ (162) $ 2,681
Other investment receivables 52 — — (17) — 35
Total assets $3,525 $ 303 $ (218) $ (732) $ (162) $ 2,716

In millions of dollars U.S. pension and postretirement benefit plans

Beginning Level 3 Realized Unrealized Purchases, Transfers in Ending Level 3
fair value at gains gains sales, and and/or out of fair value at
Asset categories Dec. 31, 2012 (losses) (losses) issuances Level 3 Dec. 31, 2013
Hedge funds $1,524 $ 45 $ 69 $ 19 $ (531) $ 1,126
Annuity contracts 130 — (9) (33) 3 91
Private equity 2,419 264 (10) (564) (3) 2,106
Other investments 142 — 7 8 (7) 150
Total investments $4,215 $ 309 $ 57 $ (570) $ (538) $ 3,473
Other investment receivables 24 — — 28 — 52
Total assets $4,239 $ 309 $ 57 $ (542) $ (538) $ 3,525

In millions of dollars Non-U.S. pension and postretirement benefit plans

Beginning Level 3 Unrealized Purchases, Transfers in Ending Level 3
fair value at gains sales, and and/or out of fair value at
Asset categories Dec. 31, 2013 (losses) issuances Level 3 Dec. 31, 2014
Equity securities
Non-U.S. equity $ 49 $ (3) $— $ (1) $ 45
Debt securities
Non-U.S. government debt — — — 1 1
Non-U.S. corporate bonds 5 — 1 (1) 5
Hedge funds 11 (1) — — 10
Annuity contracts 32 — — — 32
Other investments 202 (1) (33) (5) 163
Total investments $ 299 $ (5) $(32) $ (6) $ 256
Cash and short-term investments — — — — —
Total assets $ 299 $ (5) $(32) $ (6) $ 256

In millions of dollars Non-U.S. pension and postretirement benefit plans

Beginning Level 3 Unrealized Purchases, Transfers in Ending Level 3
fair value at gains sales, and and/or out of fair value at
Asset categories Dec. 31, 2012 (losses) issuances Level 3 Dec. 31, 2013
Equity securities
Non-U.S. equity $ 48 $ 5 $— $ (4) $ 49
Debt securities
Non-U.S. government bonds 4 — — (4) —
Non-U.S. corporate bonds 4 (1) 2 — 5
Hedge funds 16 1 (6) — 11
Annuity contracts 6 3 (1) 24 32
Other investments 219 — 3 (20) 202
Total investments $ 297 $ 8 $ (2) $ (4) $ 299
Cash and short-term investments 3 — — (3) —
Total assets $ 300 $ 8 $ (2) $ (7) $ 299

177
Investment Strategy Significant Concentrations of Risk in Plan Assets
The Company’s global pension and postretirement funds’ investment The assets of the Company’s pension plans are diversified to limit the impact
strategies are to invest in a prudent manner for the exclusive purpose of of any individual investment. The U.S. qualified pension plan is diversified
providing benefits to participants. The investment strategies are targeted across multiple asset classes, with publicly traded fixed income, hedge funds,
to produce a total return that, when combined with the Company’s publicly traded equity, and private equity representing the most significant
contributions to the funds, will maintain the funds’ ability to meet all asset allocations. Investments in these four asset classes are further diversified
required benefit obligations. Risk is controlled through diversification across funds, managers, strategies, vintages, sectors and geographies,
of asset types and investments in domestic and international equities, depending on the specific characteristics of each asset class. The pension
fixed-income securities and cash and short-term investments. The target assets for the Company’s non U.S. Significant Plans are primarily invested in
asset allocation in most locations outside the U.S. is primarily in equity publicly traded fixed income and publicly traded equity securities.
and debt securities. These allocations may vary by geographic region and
country depending on the nature of applicable obligations and various other
regional considerations. The wide variation in the actual range of plan
asset allocations for the funded non-U.S. plans is a result of differing local
statutory requirements and economic conditions. For example, in certain
countries local law requires that all pension plan assets must be invested in
fixed-income investments, government funds, or local-country securities.

178
Oversight and Risk Management Practices • periodic asset/liability management studies and strategic asset
The framework for the Company’s pensions oversight process includes allocation reviews;
monitoring of retirement plans by plan fiduciaries and/or management • periodic monitoring of funding levels and funding ratios;
at the global, regional or country level, as appropriate. Independent risk • periodic monitoring of compliance with asset allocation guidelines;
management contributes to the risk oversight and monitoring for the
• periodic monitoring of asset class and/or investment manager
Company’s U.S. qualified pension plan and non-U.S. Significant Pension
performance against benchmarks; and
Plans. Although the specific components of the oversight process are tailored
to the requirements of each region, country and plan, the following elements • periodic risk capital analysis and stress testing.
are common to the Company’s monitoring and risk management process:

Estimated Future Benefit Payments

The Company expects to pay the following estimated benefit payments in
future years:

Pension plans Postretirement benefit plans

In millions of dollars U.S. plans Non-U.S. plans U.S. plans Non-U.S. plans
2015 $ 835 $ 368 $ 73 $ 65
2016 860 339 72 70
2017 868 366 71 75
2018 882 383 70 81
2019 900 413 68 88
2020—2024 4,731 2,452 317 574

Prescription Drugs Certain provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of
In December 2003, the Medicare Prescription Drug Improvement and 2010 improved the Medicare Part D option known as the Employer Group
Modernization Act of 2003 (Act of 2003) was enacted. The Act of 2003 Waiver Plan (EGWP) with respect to the Medicare Part D subsidy. The
established a prescription drug benefit under Medicare known as “Medicare EGWP provides prescription drug benefits that are more cost effective for
Part D,” and a federal subsidy to sponsors of U.S. retiree health care benefit Medicare-eligible participants and large employers. Effective April 1, 2013,
plans that provide a benefit that is at least actuarially equivalent to Medicare the Company began sponsoring and implementing an EGWP for eligible
Part D. The benefits provided to certain participants are at least actuarially retirees. The Company subsidy received under EGWP during 2014 and 2013
equivalent to Medicare Part D and, accordingly, the Company is entitled to was $11.0 million and $10.5 million, respectively.
a subsidy. The other provisions of the Act of 2010 are not expected to have a
The subsidy reduced the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation significant impact on Citigroup’s pension and postretirement plans.
(APBO) by approximately $5 million as of December 31, 2014 and $4 million
as of December 31, 2013 and the postretirement expense by approximately
$0.2 million and $3 million for 2014 and 2013, respectively. The reduction in
the impact on expense was due to the Company’s adoption of the Employee
Group Waiver Plan during 2013, as described below.
The following table shows the estimated future benefit payments
without the effect of the subsidy and the amounts of the expected subsidy in
future years:

Expected U.S.
postretirement benefit payments
Before Medicare Medicare After Medicare
In millions of dollars Part D subsidy Part D subsidy Part D subsidy
2015 $ 73 $— $ 73
2016 72 — 72
2017 71 — 71
2018 70 — 70
2019 68 — 68
2020—2024 319 2 317

179
Postemployment Plans Early Retiree Reinsurance Program
The Company sponsors U.S. postemployment plans that provide income The Company participates in the Early Retiree Reinsurance Program
continuation and health and welfare benefits to certain eligible U.S. (ERRP), which provides federal government reimbursement to eligible
employees on long-term disability. employers to cover a portion of the health benefit costs associated with
As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, the plans’ funded status recognized early retirees. Of the $8 million the Company received in reimbursements,
in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet was $(256) million and approximately $3 million and $5 million were used to reduce the health
$(252) million, respectively. The amounts recognized in Accumulated benefit costs for certain eligible employees for the years ended December 31,
other comprehensive income (loss) as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 2013 and 2012, respectively.
were $24 million and $46 million, respectively. Effective January 1, 2014, the
Defined Contribution Plans
Company made changes to its postemployment plans that limit the period
for which future disabled employees are eligible for continued company The Company sponsors defined contribution plans in the U.S. and in certain
subsidized medical benefits. non-U.S. locations, all of which are administered in accordance with
The following table summarizes the components of net expense local laws. The most significant defined contribution plan is the Citigroup
recognized in the Consolidated Statement of Income for the Company’s U.S. 401(k) Plan sponsored by the Company in the U.S.
postemployment plans. Under the Citigroup 401(k) Plan, eligible U.S. employees received
matching contributions of up to 6% of their eligible compensation for 2014
Net expense and 2013, subject to statutory limits. Additionally, for eligible employees
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 whose eligible compensation is $100,000 or less, a fixed contribution of
Service related expense up to 2% of eligible compensation is provided. All Company contributions
Service cost $ — $ 20 $ 22 are invested according to participants’ individual elections. The pretax
Interest cost 5 10 13 expense associated with this plan amounted to approximately $383 million,
Prior service cost (benefit) (31) (3) 7
$394 million and $384 million in 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
Net actuarial loss 14 17 13
Total service related expense $ (12) $ 44 $ 55
Non-service related expense (benefit) $ 37 $(14) $ 24
Total net expense $ 25 $ 30 $ 79

The following table summarizes certain assumptions used in determining

the postemployment benefit obligations and net benefit expenses for the
Company’s U.S. postemployment plans.

2014 2013
Discount rate 3.45% 4.05%
Health care cost increase rate
Following year 7.50% 8.00%
Ultimate rate to which cost increase is assumed to decline 5.00 5.00
Year in which the ultimate rate is reached 2020 2020

180
9. INCOME TAXES Tax Rate
Details of the Company’s income tax provision for the years ended The reconciliation of the federal statutory income tax rate to the Company’s
December 31 are presented in the table below: effective income tax rate applicable to income from continuing operations
(before non-controlling interests and the cumulative effect of accounting
Income Taxes
changes) for the years ended December 31 was as follows:
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
2014 2013 2012
Current
Federal $ 181 $ (260) $ (71) Federal statutory rate 35.0% 35.0% 35.0%
Foreign 3,281 3,788 3,869 State income taxes, net of federal benefit 3.5 1.7 3.0
State 388 (41) 300 Foreign income tax rate differential (0.9) (2.2) (4.6)
Audit settlements (1) (2.4) (0.6) (11.8)
Total current income taxes $ 3,850 $ 3,487 $ 4,098 Effect of tax law changes (2) 1.2 (0.3) (0.1)
Deferred Nondeductible legal and related expenses 18.7 0.8 0.2
Federal $ 2,184 $ 2,550 $(4,943) Basis difference in affiliates (2.5) — (9.2)
Foreign 361 (716) 900 Tax advantaged investments (5.2) (4.2) (12.4)
State 469 546 (48) Other, net 0.4 (0.1) —
Total deferred income taxes $ 3,014 $ 2,380 $(4,091) Effective income tax rate 47.8% 30.1% 0.1%
Provision (benefit) for income tax
on continuing operations before (1) For 2014, relates to the conclusion of the audit of various issues in the Company’s 2009-2011 U.S.
federal tax audit and the conclusion of a New York State tax audit for 2006-2008. For 2013, relates
non-controlling interests (1) $ 6,864 $ 5,867 $ 7 to the settlement of U.S. federal issues for 2003-2005 at IRS appeals. For 2012, relates to the
Provision (benefit) for income taxes on conclusion of the audit of various issues in the Company’s 2006-2008 U.S. federal tax audits and the
discontinued operations 12 (244) (52) conclusion of a New York City tax audit for 2006-2008.
(2) For 2014, includes the results of corporate tax reforms enacted in New York and South Dakota which
Provision (benefit) for income taxes on
resulted in a DTA charge of approximately $210 million.
cumulative effect of accounting changes — — (58)
Income tax expense (benefit) reported in
stockholders’ equity related to:
As set forth in the table above, Citi’s effective tax rate for 2014 was 47.8%,
Foreign currency translation 65 (48) (709) which included a tax benefit of $347 million for the resolution of certain tax
Investment securities 1,007 (1,300) 369 items during the year. This was higher than the effective tax rate for 2013
Employee stock plans (87) 28 265 of 30.1% due primarily to the effect of the level of non-deductible legal and
Cash flow hedges 207 625 311 related expenses on the comparably lower level of pretax income in 2014.
Benefit plans (660) 698 (390)
Retained earnings (2) (353) — —
Also included in 2013 is a $127 million tax benefit related to the resolution of
certain tax audit items during that year.
Income taxes before non-controlling interests $ 7,055 $ 5,626 $ (257)
In addition, as previously disclosed, during 2013, Citi decided that
(1) Includes the effect of securities transactions and other-than-temporary-impairment losses resulting earnings in certain foreign subsidiaries would no longer be indefinitely
in a provision (benefit) of $200 million and $(148) million in 2014, $262 million and $(187) million in
2013 and $1,138 million and $(1,740) million in 2012, respectively. reinvested outside the U.S. (as asserted under ASC 740, Income Taxes).
(2) See “Consolidated Statement of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity” above. This decision increased Citi’s 2014 and 2013 tax provisions on these foreign
subsidiary earnings to the higher U.S. tax rate and thus increased Citi’s
effective tax rate for 2014 and 2013 and reduced its after-tax earnings.
For additional information on Citi’s foreign earnings, see “Foreign
Earnings” below.

181
Deferred Income Taxes Unrecognized Tax Benefits
Deferred income taxes at December 31 related to the following: The following is a roll-forward of the Company’s unrecognized tax benefits.

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012

Deferred tax assets Total unrecognized tax benefits at January 1 $ 1,574 $ 3,109 $ 3,923
Credit loss deduction $ 7,010 $ 8,356 Net amount of increases for current year’s tax positions 135 58 136
Deferred compensation and employee benefits 4,676 4,067 Gross amount of increases for prior years’ tax positions 175 251 345
Restructuring and settlement reserves 1,599 1,806 Gross amount of decreases for prior years’ tax positions (772) (716) (1,246)
Unremitted foreign earnings 6,368 6,910 Amounts of decreases relating to settlements (28) (1,115) (44)
Investment and loan basis differences 4,979 4,409 Reductions due to lapse of statutes of limitation (30) (15) (3)
Cash flow hedges 529 736 Foreign exchange, acquisitions and dispositions 6 2 (2)
Tax credit and net operating loss carry-forwards 23,395 26,097 Total unrecognized tax benefits at December 31 $ 1,060 $ 1,574 $ 3,109
Fixed assets and leases 2,093 666
Other deferred tax assets 2,334 2,734 The total amounts of unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2014,
Gross deferred tax assets $52,983 $55,781 2013 and 2012 that, if recognized, would affect Citi’s effective tax rate,
Valuation allowance — —
are $0.8 billion, $0.8 billion and $1.3 billion, respectively. The remaining
Deferred tax assets after valuation allowance $52,983 $55,781 uncertain tax positions have offsetting amounts in other jurisdictions or are
Deferred tax liabilities
temporary differences, except for $0.4 billion at December 31, 2013, which
Deferred policy acquisition costs
and value of insurance in force $ (415) $ (455) was recognized in Retained earnings in 2014.
Intangibles (1,636) (1,076) Interest and penalties (not included in “unrecognized tax benefits”
Debt issuances (866) (811) above) are a component of the Provision for income taxes.
Other deferred tax liabilities (559) (640)
Gross deferred tax liabilities $ (3,476) $ (2,982)
Net deferred tax assets $49,507 $52,799

2014 2013 2012

In millions of dollars Pretax Net of tax Pretax Net of tax Pretax Net of tax
Total interest and penalties in the Consolidated Balance Sheet at January 1 $ 277 $ 173 $ 492 $ 315 $ 404 $ 261
Total interest and penalties in the Consolidated Statement of Income (1) (1) (108) (72) 114 71
Total interest and penalties in the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31 (1) 269 169 277 173 492 315

(1) Includes $2 million, $2 million, and $10 million for foreign penalties in 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Also includes $3 million for state penalties in 2014, and $4 million for 2013 and 2012.

As of December 31, 2014, Citi is under audit by the Internal Revenue at December 31, 2014 are as much as $214 million. In addition, there
Service and other major taxing jurisdictions around the world. It is thus is gross interest of as much as $146 million. The potential tax benefit to
reasonably possible that significant changes in the gross balance of continuing operations could be anywhere between $0 and $230 million,
unrecognized tax benefits may occur within the next 12 months, although including interest.
Citi does not expect such audits to result in amounts that would cause a
significant change to its effective tax rate, other than as discussed below.
Citi expects to conclude its IRS audit for the 2012-2013 cycle within the
next 12 months. The gross uncertain tax positions at December 31, 2014
for the items that may be resolved are as much as $120 million. Because of
the number and nature of the issues remaining to be resolved, the potential
tax benefit to continuing operations could be anywhere in a range between
$0 to $120 million. In addition, Citi may conclude certain state and local
tax audits within the next 12 months. The gross uncertain tax positions

182
 The following are the major tax jurisdictions in which the Company and Deferred Tax Assets
its affiliates operate and the earliest tax year subject to examination: As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, Citi had no valuation allowance on
its DTAs.
Jurisdiction Tax year
United States 2012 In billions of dollars
Mexico 2009 DTAs balance DTAs balance
New York State and City 2006 Jurisdiction/component December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013
United Kingdom 2013 U.S. federal (1)
India 2010 Net operating losses (NOLs) (2) $ 2.3 $ 1.4
Brazil 2010 Foreign tax credits (FTCs) (3) 17.6 19.6
Singapore 2007 General business credits (GBCs) 1.6 2.5
Hong Kong 2008 Future tax deductions and credits 21.3 21.5
Ireland 2010 Total U.S. federal $42.8 $45.0
State and local
Foreign Earnings New York NOLs $ 1.5 $ 1.4
Foreign pretax earnings approximated $10.1 billion in 2014, $13.1 Other state NOLs 0.4 0.5
Future tax deductions 2.0 2.4
billion in 2013 (of which $0.1 billion was in Discontinued operations)
and $14.7 billion in 2012. As a U.S. corporation, Citigroup and its U.S. Total state and local $ 3.9 $ 4.3
subsidiaries are subject to U.S. taxation on all foreign pretax earnings earned Foreign
APB 23 subsidiary NOLs $ 0.2 $ 0.2
by a foreign branch. Pretax earnings of a foreign subsidiary or affiliate are
Non-APB 23 subsidiary NOLs 0.5 1.2
subject to U.S. taxation when effectively repatriated. The Company provides Future tax deductions 2.1 2.1
income taxes on the undistributed earnings of non-U.S. subsidiaries except Total foreign $ 2.8 $ 3.5
to the extent that such earnings are indefinitely reinvested outside the
Total $49.5 $52.8
United States.
At December 31, 2014, $43.8 billion of accumulated undistributed (1) Included in the net U.S. federal DTAs of $42.8 billion as of December 31, 2014 were deferred tax
liabilities of $2 billion that will reverse in the relevant carry-forward period and may be used to support
earnings of non-U.S. subsidiaries was indefinitely invested. At the existing the DTAs.
U.S. federal income tax rate, additional taxes (net of U.S. foreign tax (2) Includes $0.6 billion in both 2014 and 2013 of NOL carry-forwards related to non-consolidated tax
return companies that are expected to be utilized separately from Citigroup’s consolidated tax return,
credits) of $11.6 billion would have to be provided if such earnings were and $1.7 billion and $0.8 billion of non-consolidated tax return NOL carry-forwards for 2014 and
remitted currently. The current year’s effect on the income tax expense 2013, respectively, that are eventually expected to be utilized in Citigroup’s consolidated tax return.
(3) Includes $1.0 billion and $0.7 billion for 2014 and 2013, respectively, of non-consolidated tax return
from continuing operations is included in the “Foreign income tax rate FTC carry-forwards that are eventually expected to be utilized in Citigroup’s consolidated tax return.
differential” line in the reconciliation of the federal statutory rate to the
Company’s effective income tax rate in the table above.
Income taxes are not provided for the Company’s “savings bank base year
bad debt reserves” that arose before 1988, because under current U.S. tax
rules, such taxes will become payable only to the extent such amounts are
distributed in excess of limits prescribed by federal law. At December 31, 2014,
the amount of the base year reserves totaled approximately $358 million
(subject to a tax of $125 million).

183
 The following table summarizes the amounts of tax carry-forwards and While Citi’s net total DTAs decreased year-over-year, the time remaining
their expiration dates as of December 31, 2014 and 2013: for utilization has shortened, given the passage of time, particularly with
respect to the FTC component of the DTAs. Realization of the DTAs will
In billions of dollars continue to be driven by Citi’s ability to generate U.S. taxable earnings in the
December 31, December 31,
Year of expiration 2014 2013
carry-forward periods, including through actions that optimize Citi’s U.S.
taxable earnings.
U.S. tax return foreign tax credit
carry-forwards Although realization is not assured, Citi believes that the realization of
2017 $ 1.9 $ 4.7 the recognized net DTAs of $49.5 billion at December 31, 2014 is more-
2018 5.2 5.2 likely-than-not based upon expectations as to future taxable income in the
2019 1.2 1.2 jurisdictions in which the DTAs arise and available tax planning strategies
2020 3.1 3.1
(as defined in ASC 740, Income Taxes) that would be implemented, if
2021 1.8 1.4
2022 3.4 3.3 necessary, to prevent a carry-forward from expiring. In general, Citi would
2023 (1) 1.0 0.7 need to generate approximately $81 billion of U.S. taxable income during the
Total U.S. tax return foreign tax credit FTC carry-forward periods to prevent this most time-sensitive component of
carry-forwards $17.6 $19.6 Citi’s DTAs from expiring. Citi’s net DTAs will decline primarily as additional
U.S. tax return general business credit domestic GAAP taxable income is generated.
carry-forwards Citi has concluded that two components of positive evidence support the
2028 $ — $ 0.4
2029 — 0.4
full realizability of its DTAs. First, Citi forecasts sufficient U.S. taxable income
2030 0.4 0.4 in the carry-forward periods, exclusive of ASC 740 tax planning strategies.
2031 0.3 0.4 Citi’s forecasted taxable income, which will continue to be subject to overall
2032 0.4 0.5 market and global economic conditions, incorporates geographic business
2033 0.3 0.4 forecasts and taxable income adjustments to those forecasts (e.g., U.S.
2034 0.2 —
tax-exempt income, loan loss reserves deductible for U.S. tax reporting in
Total U.S. tax return general business credit
carry-forwards $ 1.6 $ 2.5
subsequent years), and actions intended to optimize its U.S. taxable earnings.
U.S. subsidiary separate federal NOL Second, Citi has sufficient tax planning strategies available to it under
carry-forwards ASC 740 that would be implemented, if necessary, to prevent a carry-forward
2027 $ 0.2 $ 0.2 from expiring. These strategies include: repatriating low-taxed foreign source
2028 0.1 0.1 earnings for which an assertion that the earnings have been indefinitely
2030 0.3 0.3
reinvested has not been made; accelerating U.S. taxable income into, or
2031 1.7 1.7
2033 1.9 1.7 deferring U.S. tax deductions out of, the latter years of the carry-forward
2034 2.3 — period (e.g., selling appreciated assets, electing straight-line depreciation);
Total U.S. subsidiary separate federal NOL accelerating deductible temporary differences outside the U.S.; and selling
carry-forwards (2) $ 6.5 $ 4.0 certain assets that produce tax-exempt income, while purchasing assets that
New York State NOL carry-forwards produce fully taxable income. In addition, the sale or restructuring of certain
2027 $ — $ 0.1 businesses can produce significant U.S. taxable income within the relevant
2028 — 6.5
2030 — 2.0
carry-forward periods.
2031 — 0.1
2032 — 0.9
2033 — —
2034 12.3 —
Total New York State NOL carry-forwards (2) $12.3 $ 9.6
New York City NOL carry-forwards
2027 $ — $ 0.1
2028 3.8 3.9
2029 — 1.5
2031 0.1 —
2032 0.5 0.6
Total New York City NOL carry-forwards (2) $ 4.4 $ 6.1
APB 23 subsidiary NOL carry-forwards
Various $ 0.2 $ 0.2
Total APB 23 subsidiary NOL carry-forwards $ 0.2 $ 0.2

(1) The $1.0 billion in FTC carry-forwards that expires in 2023 is in a non-consolidated tax return entity
but is eventually expected to be utilized in Citigroup’s consolidated tax return.
(2) Pretax.

184
 Based upon the foregoing discussion, Citi believes the U.S. federal and
New York state and city NOL carry-forward period of 20 years provides enough
time to fully utilize the DTAs pertaining to the existing NOL carry-forwards
and any NOL that would be created by the reversal of the future net
deductions that have not yet been taken on a tax return.
The U.S. FTC carry-forward period is 10 years and represents the most
time-sensitive component of Citi’s DTAs. Utilization of FTCs in any year is
restricted to 35% of foreign source taxable income in that year. However,
overall domestic losses that Citi has incurred of approximately $59 billion as
of December 31, 2014 are allowed to be reclassified as foreign source income
to the extent of 50% of domestic source income produced in subsequent
years. Such resulting foreign source income would cover the FTCs being
carried forward. As such, Citi believes the foreign source taxable income
limitation will not be an impediment to the FTC carry-forward usage, as long
as Citi can generate sufficient domestic taxable income within the 10-year
carry-forward period.
As noted in the tables above, Citi’s FTC carry-forwards were $17.6 billion
as of December 31, 2014, compared to $19.6 billion as of December 31,
2013. This decrease represented $2.0 billion of the $3.3 billion decrease in
Citi’s overall DTAs during 2014. Citi believes that it will generate sufficient
U.S. taxable income within the 10-year carry-forward period referenced
above to be able to fully utilize the FTC carry-forward, in addition to
any FTCs produced in such period, which must be used prior to any
carry-forward utilization.

185
10. EARNINGS PER SHARE
The following is a reconciliation of the income and share data used in the basic and diluted earnings per share (EPS) computations for the years ended
December 31:

In millions, except per-share amounts 2014 2013 2012

Income from continuing operations before attribution of noncontrolling interests $ 7,500 $ 13,630 $ 7,818
Less: Noncontrolling interests from continuing operations 185 227 219
Net income from continuing operations (for EPS purposes) $ 7,315 $ 13,403 $ 7,599
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes (2) 270 (58)
Citigroup’s net income $ 7,313 $ 13,673 $ 7,541
Less: Preferred dividends (1) 511 194 26
Net income available to common shareholders $ 6,802 $ 13,479 $ 7,515
Less: Dividends and undistributed earnings allocated to employee restricted and
deferred shares with nonforfeitable rights to dividends, applicable to basic EPS 111 263 166
Net income allocated to common shareholders for basic EPS $ 6,691 $ 13,216 $ 7,349
Add: Interest expense, net of tax, and dividends on convertible securities and
adjustment of undistributed earnings allocated to employee restricted and
deferred shares with nonforfeitable rights to dividends, applicable to diluted EPS — 1 11
Net income allocated to common shareholders for diluted EPS $ 6,691 $ 13,217 $ 7,360
Weighted-average common shares outstanding applicable to basic EPS 3,031.6 3,035.8 2,930.6
Effect of dilutive securities
T-DECs (2) — — 84.2
Options (3) 5.1 5.3 —
Other employee plans 0.3 0.5 0.6
Convertible securities (4) — — 0.1
Adjusted weighted-average common shares outstanding applicable to diluted EPS 3,037.0 3,041.6 3,015.5
Basic earnings per share (5)
Income from continuing operations $ 2.21 $ 4.27 $ 2.53
Discontinued operations — 0.09 (0.02)
Net income $ 2.21 $ 4.35 $ 2.51
Diluted earnings per share (5)
Income from continuing operations $ 2.20 $ 4.26 $ 2.46
Discontinued operations — 0.09 (0.02)
Net income $ 2.20 $ 4.35 $ 2.44

(1) See Note 21 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for the potential future impact of preferred stock dividends.
(2) Pursuant to the terms of Citi’s previously outstanding Tangible Dividend Enhanced Common Stock Securities (T-DECs), on December 17, 2012, the Company delivered 96,337,772 shares of Citigroup common stock
for the final settlement of the prepaid stock purchase contract. The impact of the T-DECs is fully reflected in the basic shares for 2013 and diluted shares for 2012.
(3) During 2014, 2013 and 2012, weighted-average options to purchase 2.8 million, 4.8 million and 35.8 million shares of common stock, respectively, were outstanding but not included in the computation of earnings
per share because the weighted-average exercise prices of $153.91, $101.11 and $54.23 respectively, were anti-dilutive.
(4) Warrants issued to the U.S. Treasury as part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) and the loss-sharing agreement (all of which were subsequently sold to the public in January 2011), with an exercise price of
$178.50 and $106.10 for approximately 21.0 million and 25.5 million shares of Citigroup common stock, respectively. Both warrants were not included in the computation of earnings per share in 2014, 2013 and
2012 because they were anti-dilutive.
(5) Due to rounding, earnings per share on continuing operations and discontinued operations may not sum to earnings per share on net income.

186
11. FEDERAL FUNDS, SECURITIES BORROWED, A substantial portion of the resale and repurchase agreements is
LOANED AND SUBJECT TO REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS recorded at fair value, as described in Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial
Federal funds sold and securities borrowed or purchased under Statements. The remaining portion is carried at the amount of cash
agreements to resell, at their respective carrying values, consisted of the initially advanced or received, plus accrued interest, as specified in the
following at December 31: respective agreements.
The securities borrowing and lending agreements also represent
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 collateralized financing transactions similar to the resale and repurchase
Federal funds sold $ — $ 20 agreements. Collateral typically consists of government and government-
Securities purchased under agreements to resell 123,979 136,649 agency securities and corporate debt and equity securities.
Deposits paid for securities borrowed 118,591 120,368 Similar to the resale and repurchase agreements, securities borrowing
Total $242,570 $257,037 and lending agreements are generally documented under industry standard
agreements that allow the prompt close-out of all transactions (including
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under the liquidation of securities held) and the offsetting of obligations to return
agreements to repurchase, at their respective carrying values, consisted of cash or securities by the non-defaulting party, following a payment default
the following at December 31: or other default by the other party under the relevant master agreement.
Events of default and rights to use securities under the securities borrowing
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 and lending agreements are similar to the resale and repurchase agreements
Federal funds purchased $ 334 $ 910 referenced above.
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase 147,204 175,691 A substantial portion of securities borrowing and lending agreements is
Deposits received for securities loaned 25,900 26,911
recorded at the amount of cash advanced or received. The remaining portion
Total $173,438 $203,512 is recorded at fair value as the Company elected the fair value option for
certain securities borrowed and loaned portfolios, as described in Note 26
The resale and repurchase agreements represent collateralized financing to the Consolidated Financial Statements. With respect to securities loaned,
transactions. The Company executes these transactions primarily through its the Company receives cash collateral in an amount generally in excess
broker-dealer subsidiaries to facilitate customer matched-book activity and of the market value of the securities loaned. The Company monitors the
to efficiently fund a portion of the Company’s trading inventory. Transactions market value of securities borrowed and securities loaned on a daily basis
executed by the Company’s bank subsidiaries primarily facilitate customer and obtains or posts additional collateral in order to maintain contractual
financing activity. margin protection.
It is the Company’s policy to take possession of the underlying collateral, The enforceability of offsetting rights incorporated in the master netting
monitor its market value relative to the amounts due under the agreements agreements for resale and repurchase agreements and securities borrowing
and, when necessary, require prompt transfer of additional collateral in order and lending agreements is evidenced to the extent that a supportive legal
to maintain contractual margin protection. Collateral typically consists of opinion has been obtained from counsel of recognized standing that
government and government-agency securities, corporate and municipal provides the requisite level of certainty regarding the enforceability of these
bonds, equities, and mortgage-backed and other asset-backed securities. agreements, and that the exercise of rights by the non-defaulting party to
The resale and repurchase agreements are generally documented terminate and close-out transactions on a net basis under these agreements
under industry standard agreements that allow the prompt close-out of all will not be stayed or avoided under applicable law upon an event of default
transactions (including the liquidation of securities held) and the offsetting including bankruptcy, insolvency or similar proceeding.
of obligations to return cash or securities by the non-defaulting party, A legal opinion may not have been sought or obtained for certain
following a payment default or other type of default under the relevant jurisdictions where local law is silent or sufficiently ambiguous to determine
master agreement. Events of default generally include (i) failure to deliver the enforceability of offsetting rights or where adverse case law or conflicting
cash or securities as required under the transaction, (ii) failure to provide regulation may cast doubt on the enforceability of such rights. In some
or return cash or securities as used for margining purposes, (iii) breach jurisdictions and for some counterparty types, the insolvency law for a
of representation, (iv) cross-default to another transaction entered into particular counterparty type may be nonexistent or unclear as overlapping
among the parties, or, in some cases, their affiliates, and (v) a repudiation regimes may exist. For example, this may be the case for certain sovereigns,
of obligations under the agreement. The counterparty that receives the municipalities, central banks and U.S. pension plans.
securities in these transactions is generally unrestricted in its use of the
securities, with the exception of transactions executed on a tri-party basis,
where the collateral is maintained by a custodian and operational limitations
may restrict its use of the securities.

187
 The following tables present the gross and net resale and repurchase would be eligible for offsetting to the extent that an event of default occurred
agreements and securities borrowing and lending agreements and the related and a legal opinion supporting enforceability of the offsetting rights has
offsetting amount permitted under ASC 210-20-45, as of December 31, 2014 been obtained. Remaining exposures continue to be secured by financial
and December 31, 2013. The tables also include amounts related to financial collateral, but the Company may not have sought or been able to obtain a
instruments that are not permitted to be offset under ASC 210-20-45 but legal opinion evidencing enforceability of the offsetting right.

As of December 31, 2014

Gross amounts Net amounts of Amounts not offset on the
Gross amounts offset on the assets included on Consolidated Balance Sheet
of recognized Consolidated the Consolidated but eligible for offsetting Net
In millions of dollars assets Balance Sheet (1) Balance Sheet (2) upon counterparty default (3) amounts (4)
Securities purchased under agreements to resell $180,318 $56,339 $123,979 $ 94,353 $ 29,626
Deposits paid for securities borrowed 118,591 — 118,591 15,139 103,452
Total $298,909 $56,339 $242,570 $109,492 $133,078

Gross amounts Net amounts of Amounts not offset on the

Gross amounts offset on the liabilities included Consolidated Balance Sheet
of recognized Consolidated on the Consolidated but eligible for offsetting Net
In millions of dollars liabilities Balance Sheet (1) Balance Sheet (2) upon counterparty default (3) amounts (4)
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase $203,543 $56,339 $147,204 $72,928 $ 74,276
Deposits received for securities loaned 25,900 — 25,900 5,190 20,710
Total $229,443 $56,339 $173,104 $78,118 $ 94,986

As of December 31, 2013

Gross amounts Net amounts of Amounts not offset on the
Gross amounts offset on the assets included on Consolidated Balance Sheet
of recognized Consolidated the Consolidated but eligible for offsetting upon Net
In millions of dollars assets Balance Sheet (1) Balance Sheet (2) counterparty default (3) amounts (4)
Securities purchased under agreements to resell $179,894 $43,245 $136,649 $105,226 $ 31,423
Deposits paid for securities borrowed 120,368 — 120,368 26,728 93,640
Total $300,262 $43,245 $257,017 $131,954 $125,063

Gross amounts Net amounts of Amounts not offset on the

Gross amounts offset on the liabilities included Consolidated Balance Sheet
of recognized Consolidated on the Consolidated but eligible for offsetting upon Net
In millions of dollars liabilities Balance Sheet (1) Balance Sheet (2) counterparty default (3) amounts (4)
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase $218,936 $43,245 $175,691 $ 80,082 $ 95,609
Deposits received for securities loaned 26,911 — 26,911 3,833 23,078
Total $245,847 $43,245 $202,602 $ 83,915 $118,687

(1) Includes financial instruments subject to enforceable master netting agreements that are permitted to be offset under ASC 210-20-45.
(2) The total of this column for each period excludes Federal funds sold/purchased. See table above.
(3) Includes financial instruments subject to enforceable master netting agreements that are not permitted to be offset under ASC 210-20-45 but would be eligible for offsetting to the extent that an event of default has
occurred and a legal opinion supporting enforceability of the offsetting right has been obtained.
(4) Remaining exposures continue to be secured by financial collateral, but the Company may not have sought or been able to obtain a legal opinion evidencing enforceability of the offsetting right.

188
12. BROKERAGE RECEIVABLES AND BROKERAGE 13. TRADING ACCOUNT ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
PAYABLES
Trading account assets and Trading account liabilities are carried at fair
The Company has receivables and payables for financial instruments sold value, other than physical commodities accounted for at the lower of cost or
to and purchased from brokers, dealers and customers, which arise in the fair value, and consist of the following at December 31, 2014 and 2013:
ordinary course of business. The Company is exposed to risk of loss from the
inability of brokers, dealers or customers to pay for purchases or to deliver the In millions of dollars 2014 2013
financial instruments sold, in which case the Company would have to sell or Trading account assets
purchase the financial instruments at prevailing market prices. Credit risk Mortgage-backed securities (1)
U.S. government-sponsored agency guaranteed $ 27,053 $ 23,955
is reduced to the extent that an exchange or clearing organization acts as a Prime 1,271 1,422
counterparty to the transaction and replaces the broker, dealer or customer Alt-A 709 721
in question. Subprime 1,382 1,211
The Company seeks to protect itself from the risks associated with Non-U.S. residential 1,476 723
customer activities by requiring customers to maintain margin collateral Commercial 4,343 2,574
in compliance with regulatory and internal guidelines. Margin levels are Total mortgage-backed securities $ 36,234 $ 30,606
U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities
monitored daily, and customers deposit additional collateral as required.
U.S. Treasury $ 18,906 $ 13,537
Where customers cannot meet collateral requirements, the Company will Agency obligations 1,568 1,300
liquidate sufficient underlying financial instruments to bring the customer Total U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities $ 20,474 $ 14,837
into compliance with the required margin level. State and municipal securities $ 3,402 $ 3,207
Exposure to credit risk is impacted by market volatility, which may impair Foreign government securities 66,274 74,856
the ability of clients to satisfy their obligations to the Company. Credit limits Corporate 26,460 30,534
are established and closely monitored for customers and for brokers and Derivatives (2) 67,957 52,821
Equity securities 57,846 61,776
dealers engaged in forwards, futures and other transactions deemed to be Asset-backed securities (1) 4,546 5,616
credit sensitive. Other trading assets (3) 13,593 11,675
Brokerage receivables and Brokerage payables consisted of the Total trading account assets $296,786 $285,928
following at December 31:
Trading account liabilities
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 Securities sold, not yet purchased $ 70,944 $ 61,508
Derivatives (2) 68,092 47,254
Receivables from customers $10,380 $ 5,811
Receivables from brokers, dealers, and clearing organizations 18,039 19,863 Total trading account liabilities $139,036 $108,762
Total brokerage receivables (1)
$28,419 $25,674 (1) The Company invests in mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities. These securitizations are
generally considered VIEs. The Company’s maximum exposure to loss from these VIEs is equal to
Payables to customers $33,984 $34,751 the carrying amount of the securities, which is reflected in the table above. For mortgage-backed
Payables to brokers, dealers, and clearing organizations 18,196 18,956 and asset-backed securitizations in which the Company has other involvement, see Note 22 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Total brokerage payables (1) $52,180 $53,707 (2) Presented net, pursuant to enforceable master netting agreements. See Note 23 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements for a discussion regarding the accounting and reporting for derivatives.
(1) Brokerage receivables and payables are accounted for in accordance with ASC 940-320. (3) Includes investments in unallocated precious metals, as discussed in Note 26 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements. Also includes physical commodities accounted for at the lower of cost or
fair value.

189
14. INVESTMENTS
Overview

December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013
Securities available-for-sale (AFS) $300,143 $286,511
Debt securities held-to-maturity (HTM) (1) 23,921 10,599
Non-marketable equity securities carried at fair value (2) 2,758 4,705
Non-marketable equity securities carried at cost (3) 6,621 7,165
Total investments $333,443 $308,980

(1) Carried at amortized cost basis, including any impairment for securities that have credit-related impairment.
(2) Unrealized gains and losses for non-marketable equity securities carried at fair value are recognized in earnings.
(3) Primarily consists of shares issued by the Federal Reserve Bank, Federal Home Loan Banks, foreign central banks and various clearing houses of which Citigroup is a member.

The following table presents interest and dividends on investments for the
years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012:

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012

Taxable interest $ 6,311 $ 5,750 $ 6,509
Interest exempt from U.S. federal income tax 439 732 683
Dividends 445 437 333
Total interest and dividends $ 7,195 $ 6,919 $ 7,525

The following table presents realized gains and losses on the sale of
investments for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012. The
gross realized investment losses exclude losses from other-than-temporary
impairment (OTTI):

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012

Gross realized investment gains $1,020 $1,606 $3,663
Gross realized investment losses (450) (858) (412)
Net realized gains on sale of investments $ 570 $ 748 $3,251

The Company has sold certain debt securities that were classified as acquisition has been collected. Because the Company generally intends to sell
HTM. These sales were in response to significant deterioration in the the securities, Citi recorded OTTI on the securities. The following table sets
creditworthiness of the issuers or securities. In addition, other securities were forth, for the periods indicated, gain (loss) on HTM securities sold, securities
reclassified to AFS investments in response to significant credit deterioration reclassified to AFS and OTTI recorded on AFS securities reclassified.
or because a substantial portion of the securities’ principal outstanding at

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012

Carrying value of HTM securities sold $ 8 $ 935 $ 2,110
Net realized gain (loss) on sale of HTM securities — (128) (187)
Carrying value of securities reclassified to AFS 889 989 244
OTTI losses on securities reclassified to AFS (25) (156) (59)

190
Securities Available-for-Sale
The amortized cost and fair value of AFS securities at December 31, 2014 and 2013 were as follows:

2014 2013
Gross Gross Gross Gross
Amortized unrealized unrealized Fair Amortized unrealized unrealized Fair
In millions of dollars cost gains (1) losses (1) value cost gains (1) losses (1) value
Debt securities AFS
Mortgage-backed securities (2)
U.S. government-sponsored agency guaranteed $ 35,647 $ 603 $ 159 $ 36,091 $ 42,494 $ 391 $ 888 $ 41,997
Prime 12 — — 12 33 2 3 32
Alt-A 43 1 — 44 84 10 — 94
Subprime — — — — 12 — — 12
Non-U.S. residential 8,247 67 7 8,307 9,976 95 4 10,067
Commercial 551 6 3 554 455 6 8 453
Total mortgage-backed securities $ 44,500 $ 677 $ 169 $ 45,008 $ 53,054 $ 504 $ 903 $ 52,655
U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities
U.S. Treasury $110,492 $ 353 $ 127 $110,718 $ 68,891 $ 476 $ 147 $ 69,220
Agency obligations 12,925 60 13 12,972 18,320 123 67 18,376
Total U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities $123,417 $ 413 $ 140 $123,690 $ 87,211 $ 599 $ 214 $ 87,596
State and municipal (3) $ 13,526 $ 150 $ 977 $ 12,699 $ 20,761 $ 184 $ 2,005 $ 18,940
Foreign government 90,249 734 286 90,697 96,608 403 540 96,471
Corporate 12,033 215 91 12,157 11,039 210 119 11,130
Asset-backed securities (2) 12,534 30 58 12,506 15,352 42 120 15,274
Other debt securities 661 — — 661 710 1 — 711
Total debt securities AFS $296,920 $ 2,219 $ 1,721 $297,418 $284,735 $ 1,943 $ 3,901 $282,777
Marketable equity securities AFS $ 2,461 $ 308 $ 44 $ 2,725 $ 3,832 $ 85 $ 183 $ 3,734
Total securities AFS $299,381 $ 2,527 $ 1,765 $300,143 $288,567 $ 2,028 $ 4,084 $286,511

(1) Gross unrealized gains and losses, as presented, do not include the impact of minority investments and the related allocations and pick-up of unrealized gains and losses of AFS securities. These amounts totaled
unrealized gains of $27 million and $36 million as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
(2) The Company invests in mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities. These securitizations are generally considered VIEs. The Company’s maximum exposure to loss from these VIEs is equal to the carrying amount
of the securities, which is reflected in the table above. For mortgage-backed and asset-backed securitizations in which the Company has other involvement, see Note 22 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(3) The gross unrealized losses on state and municipal debt securities are primarily attributable to the effects of fair value hedge accounting. Specifically, Citi hedges the LIBOR-benchmark interest rate component
of certain fixed-rate tax-exempt state and municipal debt securities utilizing LIBOR-based interest rate swaps. During the hedge period, losses incurred on the LIBOR-hedging swaps recorded in earnings were
substantially offset by gains on the state and municipal debt securities attributable to changes in the LIBOR swap rate being hedged. However, because the LIBOR swap rate decreased significantly during the hedge
period while the overall fair value of the municipal debt securities was relatively unchanged, the effect of reclassifying fair value gains on these securities from Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (AOCI) to
earnings, attributable solely to changes in the LIBOR swap rate, resulted in net unrealized losses remaining in AOCI that relate to the unhedged components of these securities.

At December 31, 2014, the amortized cost of approximately 7,600 government-sponsored agency securities, and $8,917 million of privately
investments in equity and fixed income securities exceeded their fair value by sponsored securities, substantially all of which were backed by non-U.S.
$1,765 million. Of the $1,765 million, the gross unrealized losses on equity residential mortgages.
securities were $44 million. Of the remainder, $400 million represented As discussed in more detail below, the Company conducts periodic reviews
unrealized losses on fixed income investments that have been in a gross- of all securities with unrealized losses to evaluate whether the impairment
unrealized-loss position for less than a year and, of these, 92% were rated is other-than-temporary. Any credit-related impairment related to debt
investment grade; $1,321 million represented unrealized losses on fixed securities is recorded in earnings as OTTI. Non-credit-related impairment is
income investments that have been in a gross-unrealized-loss position for a recognized in AOCI if the Company does not plan to sell and is not likely to
year or more and, of these, 95% were rated investment grade. be required to sell. For other debt securities with OTTI, the entire impairment
At December 31, 2014, the AFS mortgage-backed securities portfolio is recognized in the Consolidated Statement of Income.
fair value balance of $45,008 million consisted of $36,091 million of

191
The table below shows the fair value of AFS securities that have been in an unrealized loss position for less than 12 months or for 12 months or longer as of
December 31, 2014 and 2013:

Less than 12 months 12 months or longer Total

Gross Gross Gross
Fair unrealized Fair unrealized Fair unrealized
In millions of dollars value losses value losses value losses
December 31, 2014
Securities AFS
Mortgage-backed securities
U.S. government-sponsored agency guaranteed $ 4,198 $ 30 $ 5,547 $ 129 $ 9,745 $ 159
Prime 5 — 2 — 7 —
Non-U.S. residential 1,276 3 199 4 1,475 7
Commercial 124 1 136 2 260 3
Total mortgage-backed securities $ 5,603 $ 34 $ 5,884 $ 135 $ 11,487 $ 169
U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities
U.S. Treasury $ 36,581 $ 119 $ 1,013 $ 8 $ 37,594 $ 127
Agency obligations 5,698 9 754 4 6,452 13
Total U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities $ 42,279 $ 128 $ 1,767 $ 12 $ 44,046 $ 140
State and municipal $ 386 $ 15 $ 5,802 $ 962 $ 6,188 $ 977
Foreign government 18,495 147 5,984 139 24,479 286
Corporate 3,511 63 1,350 28 4,861 91
Asset-backed securities 3,701 13 3,816 45 7,517 58
Marketable equity securities AFS 51 4 218 40 269 44
Total securities AFS $ 74,026 $ 404 $ 24,821 $ 1,361 $ 98,847 $ 1,765
December 31, 2013
Securities AFS
Mortgage-backed securities
U.S. government-sponsored agency guaranteed $ 19,377 $ 533 $ 5,643 $ 355 $ 25,020 $ 888
Prime 85 3 3 — 88 3
Non-U.S. residential 2,103 4 5 — 2,108 4
Commercial 206 6 28 2 234 8
Total mortgage-backed securities $ 21,771 $ 546 $ 5,679 $ 357 $ 27,450 $ 903
U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities
U.S. Treasury $ 34,780 $ 133 $ 268 $ 14 $ 35,048 $ 147
Agency obligations 6,692 66 101 1 6,793 67
Total U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities $ 41,472 $ 199 $ 369 $ 15 $ 41,841 $ 214
State and municipal $ 595 $ 29 $ 11,447 $ 1,976 $ 12,042 $ 2,005
Foreign government 35,783 477 5,778 63 41,561 540
Corporate 4,565 108 387 11 4,952 119
Asset-backed securities 11,207 57 1,931 63 13,138 120
Marketable equity securities AFS 1,271 92 806 91 2,077 183
Total securities AFS $116,664 $ 1,508 $ 26,397 $ 2,576 $143,061 $ 4,084

192
The following table presents the amortized cost and fair value of AFS debt securities by contractual maturity dates as of December 31, 2014 and 2013:

2014 2013
Amortized Fair Amortized Fair
In millions of dollars cost value cost value
Mortgage-backed securities (1)
Due within 1 year $ 44 $ 44 $ 87 $ 87
After 1 but within 5 years 931 935 346 354
After 5 but within 10 years 1,362 1,387 2,898 2,932
After 10 years (2) 42,163 42,642 49,723 49,282
Total $ 44,500 $ 45,008 $ 53,054 $ 52,655
U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities
Due within 1 year $ 13,070 $ 13,084 $ 15,789 $ 15,853
After 1 but within 5 years 104,982 105,131 66,232 66,457
After 5 but within 10 years 2,286 2,325 2,129 2,185
After 10 years (2) 3,079 3,150 3,061 3,101
Total $123,417 $123,690 $ 87,211 $ 87,596
State and municipal
Due within 1 year $ 590 $ 590 $ 576 $ 581
After 1 but within 5 years 3,672 3,677 3,731 3,735
After 5 but within 10 years 532 546 439 482
After 10 years (2) 8,732 7,886 16,015 14,142
Total $ 13,526 $ 12,699 $ 20,761 $ 18,940
Foreign government
Due within 1 year $ 31,355 $ 31,382 $ 37,005 $ 36,959
After 1 but within 5 years 41,913 42,467 51,344 51,304
After 5 but within 10 years 16,008 15,779 7,314 7,216
After 10 years (2) 973 1,069 945 992
Total $ 90,249 $ 90,697 $ 96,608 $ 96,471
All other (3)

Due within 1 year $ 1,248 $ 1,251 $ 2,786 $ 2,733

After 1 but within 5 years 10,442 10,535 10,934 11,020
After 5 but within 10 years 7,282 7,318 5,632 5,641
After 10 years (2) 6,256 6,220 7,749 7,721
Total $ 25,228 $ 25,324 $ 27,101 $ 27,115
Total debt securities AFS $296,920 $297,418 $284,735 $282,777

(1) Includes mortgage-backed securities of U.S. government-sponsored agencies.

(2) Investments with no stated maturities are included as contractual maturities of greater than 10 years. Actual maturities may differ due to call or prepayment rights.
(3) Includes corporate, asset-backed and other debt securities.

193
Debt Securities Held-to-Maturity
The carrying value and fair value of debt securities HTM at December 31, 2014 and 2013 were as follows:

Net unrealized
gains (losses) Gross Gross
Amortized recognized in Carrying unrealized unrealized Fair
In millions of dollars cost basis (1) AOCI value (2) gains (losses) value
December 31, 2014
Debt securities held-to-maturity
Mortgage-backed securities (3)
U.S. government agency guaranteed $ 8,795 $ 95 $ 8,890 $ 106 $ (6) $ 8,990
Prime 60 (12) 48 6 (1) 53
Alt-A 1,125 (213) 912 537 (287) 1,162
Subprime 6 (1) 5 15 — 20
Non-U.S. residential 983 (137) 846 92 — 938
Commercial 8 — 8 1 — 9
Total mortgage-backed securities $10,977 $(268) $10,709 $ 757 $(294) $11,172
State and municipal (4) $ 8,443 $(494) $ 7,949 $ 227 $ (57) $ 8,119
Foreign government 4,725 — 4,725 77 — 4,802
Corporate — — — — — —
Asset-backed securities (3) 556 (18) 538 50 (10) 578
Total debt securities held-to-maturity (5) $24,701 $(780) $23,921 $ 1,111 $(361) $24,671
December 31, 2013
Debt securities held-to-maturity
Mortgage-backed securities (3)
Prime $ 72 $ (16) $ 56 $ 5 $ (2) $ 59
Alt-A 1,379 (287) 1,092 449 (263) 1,278
Subprime 2 — 2 1 — 3
Non-U.S. residential 1,372 (206) 1,166 60 (20) 1,206
Commercial 10 — 10 1 — 11
Total mortgage-backed securities $ 2,835 $ (509) $ 2,326 $ 516 $ (285) $ 2,557
State and municipal $ 1,394 $ (62) $ 1,332 $ 50 $ (70) $ 1,312
Foreign government 5,628 — 5,628 70 (10) 5,688
Corporate 818 (78) 740 111 — 851
Asset-backed securities (3) 599 (26) 573 22 (10) 585
Total debt securities held-to-maturity $11,274 $ (675) $10,599 $ 769 $ (375) $10,993

(1) For securities transferred to HTM from Trading account assets, amortized cost basis is defined as the fair value of the securities at the date of transfer plus any accretion income and less any impairments recognized
in earnings subsequent to transfer. For securities transferred to HTM from AFS, amortized cost is defined as the original purchase cost, adjusted for the cumulative accretion or amortization of any purchase discount or
premium, plus or minus any cumulative fair value hedge adjustments, net of accretion or amortization, and less any other-than-temporary impairment recognized in earnings.
(2) HTM securities are carried on the Consolidated Balance Sheet at amortized cost basis, plus or minus any unamortized unrealized gains and losses and fair value hedge adjustments recognized in AOCI prior to
reclassifying the securities from AFS to HTM. Changes in the values of these securities are not reported in the financial statements, except for the amortization of any difference between the carrying value at the
transfer date and par value of the securities, and the recognition of any non-credit fair value adjustments in AOCI in connection with the recognition of any credit impairment in earnings related to securities the
Company continues to intend to hold until maturity.
(3) The Company invests in mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities. These securitizations are generally considered VIEs. The Company’s maximum exposure to loss from these VIEs is equal to the carrying amount
of the securities, which is reflected in the table above. For mortgage-backed and asset-backed securitizations in which the Company has other involvement, see Note 22 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(4) The net unrealized losses recognized in AOCI on state and municipal debt securities are primarily attributable to the effects of fair value hedge accounting applied when these debt securities were classified as AFS.
Specifically, Citi hedged the LIBOR-benchmark interest rate component of certain fixed-rate tax-exempt state and municipal debt securities utilizing LIBOR-based interest rate swaps. During the hedge period, losses
incurred on the LIBOR-hedging swaps recorded in earnings were substantially offset by gains on the state and municipal debt securities attributable to changes in the LIBOR swap rate being hedged. However, because
the LIBOR swap rate decreased significantly during the hedge period while the overall fair value of the municipal debt securities was relatively unchanged, the effect of reclassifying fair value gains on these securities
from AOCI to earnings attributable solely to changes in the LIBOR swap rate resulted in net unrealized losses remaining in AOCI that relate to the unhedged components of these securities. Upon transfer of these debt
securities to HTM, all hedges have been de-designated and hedge accounting has ceased.
(5) During the second quarter of 2014, securities with a total fair value of approximately $11.8 billion were transferred from AFS to HTM and comprised $5.4 billion of U.S. government agency mortgage-backed securities
and $6.4 billion of obligations of U.S. states and municipalities. The transfer reflects the Company’s intent to hold these securities to maturity or to issuer call in order to reduce the impact of price volatility on AOCI
and certain capital measures under Basel III. While these securities were transferred to HTM at fair value as of the transfer date, no subsequent changes in value may be recorded, other than in connection with the
recognition of any subsequent other-than-temporary impairment and the amortization of differences between the carrying values at the transfer date and the par values of each security as an adjustment of yield over
the remaining contractual life of each security. Any net unrealized holding losses within AOCI related to the respective securities at the date of transfer, inclusive of any cumulative fair value hedge adjustments, will be
amortized over the remaining contractual life of each security as an adjustment of yield in a manner consistent with the amortization of any premium or discount.

194
 The Company has the positive intent and ability to hold these securities to HTM securities that have suffered credit impairment recorded in earnings.
maturity or, where applicable, the exercise of any issuer call options, absent The AOCI balance related to HTM securities is amortized over the remaining
any unforeseen significant changes in circumstances, including deterioration contractual life of the related securities as an adjustment of yield in a
in credit or changes in regulatory capital requirements. manner consistent with the accretion of any difference between the carrying
The net unrealized losses classified in AOCI primarily relate to debt value at the transfer date and par value of the same debt securities. The table
securities previously classified as AFS that have been transferred to HTM, and below shows the fair value of debt securities in HTM that have been in an
include any cumulative fair value hedge adjustments. The net unrealized unrecognized loss position as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 for less than
loss amount also includes any non-credit-related changes in fair value of 12 months and for 12 months or longer:

Less than 12 months 12 months or longer Total

Gross Gross Gross
Fair unrecognized Fair unrecognized Fair unrecognized
In millions of dollars value losses value losses value losses
December 31, 2014
Debt securities held-to-maturity
Mortgage-backed securities $ 4 $— $ 1,134 $294 $ 1,138 $294
State and municipal 2,528 34 314 23 2,842 57
Foreign government — — — — — —
Asset-backed securities 9 1 174 9 183 10
Total debt securities held-to-maturity $ 2,541 $ 35 $ 1,622 $326 $ 4,163 $361
December 31, 2013
Debt securities held-to-maturity
Mortgage-backed securities $ — $— $ 358 $285 $ 358 $285
State and municipal 235 20 302 50 537 70
Foreign government 920 10 — — 920 10
Asset-backed securities 98 6 198 4 296 10
Total debt securities held-to-maturity $ 1,253 $ 36 $ 858 $339 $ 2,111 $375

Excluded from the gross unrecognized losses presented in the above table
are $(780) million and $(675) million of net unrealized losses recorded in
AOCI as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 respectively, primarily related to the
difference between the amortized cost and carrying value of HTM securities
that were reclassified from AFS. Substantially all of these net unrecognized
losses relate to securities that have been in a loss position for 12 months or
longer at December 31, 2014 and 2013.

195
The following table presents the carrying value and fair value of HTM debt securities by contractual maturity dates as of December 31, 2014 and 2013:

2014 2013
In millions of dollars Carrying value Fair value Carrying value Fair value
Mortgage-backed securities
Due within 1 year $ — $ — $ — $ —
After 1 but within 5 years — — — —
After 5 but within 10 years 863 869 10 11
After 10 years (1) 9,846 10,303 2,316 2,546
Total $10,709 $11,172 $ 2,326 $ 2,557
State and municipal
Due within 1 year $ 36 $ 38 $ 8 $ 9
After 1 but within 5 years 24 24 17 17
After 5 but within 10 years 144 148 69 72
After 10 years (1) 7,745 7,909 1,238 1,214
Total $ 7,949 $ 8,119 $ 1,332 $ 1,312
Foreign government
Due within 1 year $ — $ — $ — $ —
After 1 but within 5 years 4,725 4,802 5,628 5,688
After 5 but within 10 years — — — —
After 10 years (1) — — — —
Total $ 4,725 $ 4,802 $ 5,628 $ 5,688
All other (2)
Due within 1 year $ — $ — $ — $ —
After 1 but within 5 years — — 740 851
After 5 but within 10 years — — — —
After 10 years (1) 538 578 573 585
Total $ 538 $ 578 $ 1,313 $ 1,436
Total debt securities held-to-maturity $23,921 $24,671 $10,599 $10,993

(1) Investments with no stated maturities are included as contractual maturities of greater than 10 years. Actual maturities may differ due to call or prepayment rights.
(2) Includes corporate and asset-backed securities.

Evaluating Investments for Other-Than-Temporary For securities transferred to HTM from AFS, amortized cost is defined as the
Impairment original purchase cost, adjusted for the cumulative accretion or amortization
Overview of any purchase discount or premium, plus or minus any cumulative fair
The Company conducts periodic reviews of all securities with unrealized value hedge adjustments, net of accretion or amortization, and less any
losses to evaluate whether the impairment is other-than-temporary. impairment recognized in earnings.
An unrealized loss exists when the current fair value of an individual Regardless of the classification of the securities as AFS or HTM, the
security is less than its amortized cost basis. Unrealized losses that are Company assesses each position with an unrealized loss for OTTI. Factors
determined to be temporary in nature are recorded, net of tax, in AOCI for considered in determining whether a loss is temporary include:
AFS securities. Losses related to HTM securities generally are not recorded, • the length of time and the extent to which fair value has been below cost;
as these investments are carried at amortized cost basis. However, for HTM • the severity of the impairment;
securities with credit-related losses, the credit loss is recognized in earnings • the cause of the impairment and the financial condition and near-term
as OTTI and any difference between the cost basis adjusted for the OTTI and
prospects of the issuer;
fair value is recognized in AOCI and amortized as an adjustment of yield
• activity in the market of the issuer that may indicate adverse credit
over the remaining contractual life of the security. For securities transferred
to HTM from Trading account assets, amortized cost is defined as the fair conditions; and
value of the securities at the date of transfer, plus any accretion income • the Company’s ability and intent to hold the investment for a period of
and less any impairment recognized in earnings subsequent to transfer. time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery.

196
The Company’s review for impairment generally entails: For impaired equity method investments that management does not plan
• identification and evaluation of impaired investments; to sell and is not likely to be required to sell prior to recovery of value, the
evaluation of whether an impairment is other-than-temporary is based on
• analysis of individual investments that have fair values less than
(i) whether and when an equity method investment will recover in value and
amortized cost, including consideration of the length of time the
(ii) whether the investor has the intent and ability to hold that investment for
investment has been in an unrealized loss position and the expected
a period of time sufficient to recover the value. The determination of whether
recovery period;
the impairment is considered other-than-temporary considers the following
• consideration of evidential matter, including an evaluation of factors indicators, regardless of the time and extent of impairment:
or triggers that could cause individual investments to qualify as having
other-than-temporary impairment and those that would not support • the cause of the impairment and the financial condition and near-term
other-than-temporary impairment; and prospects of the issuer, including any specific events that may influence
the operations of the issuer;
• documentation of the results of these analyses, as required under
business policies. • the intent and ability to hold the investment for a period of time sufficient
to allow for any anticipated recovery in market value; and
Debt • the length of time and extent to which fair value has been less than the
The entire difference between amortized cost basis and fair value is carrying value.
recognized in earnings as OTTI for impaired debt securities that the
Company has an intent to sell or for which the Company believes it will The sections below describe the Company’s process for identifying
more-likely-than-not be required to sell prior to recovery of the amortized credit-related impairments for security types that have the most significant
cost basis. However, for those securities that the Company does not intend to unrealized losses as of December 31, 2014.
sell and is not likely to be required to sell, only the credit-related impairment Akbank
is recognized in earnings and any non-credit-related impairment is recorded As of December 31, 2014, Citi’s remaining 9.9% stake in Akbank T.A.S., an
in AOCI. equity investment in Turkey (Akbank), is recorded within marketable equity
For debt securities, credit impairment exists where management does not securities available-for-sale. The revaluation of the Turkish lira was hedged,
expect to receive contractual principal and interest cash flows sufficient to so the change in the value of the currency related to Akbank investment did
recover the entire amortized cost basis of a security. not have a significant impact on earnings during the year.
Equity Mortgage-backed securities
For equity securities, management considers the various factors described For U.S. mortgage-backed securities (and in particular for Alt-A and other
above, including its intent and ability to hold the equity security for a period mortgage-backed securities that have significant unrealized losses as a
of time sufficient for recovery to cost or whether it is more-likely-than-not percentage of amortized cost), credit impairment is assessed using a cash
that the Company will be required to sell the security prior to recovery of flow model that estimates the principal and interest cash flows on the
its cost basis. Where management lacks that intent or ability, the security’s underlying mortgages using the security-specific collateral and transaction
decline in fair value is deemed to be other-than-temporary and is recorded structure. The model distributes the estimated cash flows to the various
in earnings. AFS equity securities deemed to be other-than-temporarily tranches of securities, considering the transaction structure and any
impaired are written down to fair value, with the full difference between fair subordination and credit enhancements that exist in that structure. The cash
value and cost recognized in earnings. flow model incorporates actual cash flows on the mortgage-backed securities
Management assesses equity method investments that have fair values through the current period and then estimates the remaining cash flows
that are less than their respective carrying values for OTTI. Fair value is using a number of assumptions, including default rates, prepayment rates,
measured as price multiplied by quantity if the investee has publicly listed recovery rates (on foreclosed properties) and loss severity rates (on non-
securities. If the investee is not publicly listed, other methods are used (see agency mortgage-backed securities).
Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). Management develops specific assumptions using market data, internal
For impaired equity method investments that Citi plans to sell prior to estimates and estimates published by rating agencies and other third-party
recovery of value or would likely be required to sell, with no expectation that sources. Default rates are projected by considering current underlying
the fair value will recover prior to the expected sale date, the full impairment mortgage loan performance, generally assuming the default of (i) 10%
is recognized in earnings as OTTI regardless of severity and duration. The of current loans, (ii) 25% of 30-59 day delinquent loans, (iii) 70% of
measurement of the OTTI does not include partial projected recoveries 60-90 day delinquent loans and (iv) 100% of 91+ day delinquent loans.
subsequent to the balance sheet date. These estimates are extrapolated along a default timing curve to estimate the

197
total lifetime pool default rate. Other assumptions contemplate the actual and any insurers providing default protection in the form of financial
collateral attributes, including geographic concentrations, rating actions and guarantee insurance. The average external credit rating, ignoring any
current market prices. insurance, is Aa3/AA-. In the event of an external rating downgrade or
Cash flow projections are developed using different stress test scenarios. other indicator of credit impairment (i.e., based on instrument-specific
Management evaluates the results of those stress tests (including the estimates of cash flows or probability of issuer default), the subject bond is
severity of any cash shortfall indicated and the likelihood of the stress specifically reviewed for adverse changes in the amount or timing of expected
scenarios actually occurring based on the underlying pool’s characteristics contractual principal and interest payments.
and performance) to assess whether management expects to recover the For state and municipal bonds with unrealized losses that Citigroup plans
amortized cost basis of the security. If cash flow projections indicate that the to sell (for AFS only), would likely be required to sell (for AFS only) or will
Company does not expect to recover its amortized cost basis, the Company be subject to an issuer call deemed probable of exercise prior to the expected
recognizes the estimated credit loss in earnings. recovery of its amortized cost basis (for AFS and HTM), the full impairment is
recognized in earnings.
State and municipal securities
The process for identifying credit impairments in Citigroup’s AFS and HTM
state and municipal bonds is primarily based on a credit analysis that
incorporates third-party credit ratings. Citigroup monitors the bond issuers
Recognition and Measurement of OTTI
The following table presents the total OTTI recognized in earnings for the year ended December 31, 2014:

OTTI on Investments and Other Assets Year ended December 31, 2014
In millions of dollars AFS (1) HTM Other Assets Total
Impairment losses related to securities that the Company does not intend to sell nor will
likely be required to sell:
Total OTTI losses recognized during the period $ 21 $ 5 $— $ 26
Less: portion of impairment loss recognized in AOCI (before taxes) 8 — — 8
Net impairment losses recognized in earnings for securities that the Company does not intend
to sell nor will likely be required to sell $ 13 $ 5 $— $ 18
Impairment losses recognized in earnings for securities that the Company intends to sell
or more-likely-than-not will be required to sell before recovery 380 26 — 406
Total impairment losses recognized in earnings $393 $ 31 $— $424

(1) Includes OTTI on non-marketable equity securities.

The following table presents the total OTTI recognized in earnings for the year ended December 31, 2013:

OTTI on Investments and Other Assets Year ended December 31, 2013
In millions of dollars AFS (1) HTM Other Assets (2) Total
Impairment losses related to securities that the Company does not intend to sell nor will
likely be required to sell:
Total OTTI losses recognized during the period $ 9 $154 $ — $163
Less: portion of impairment loss recognized in AOCI (before taxes) — 98 — 98
Net impairment losses recognized in earnings for securities that the Company does not intend
to sell nor will likely be required to sell $ 9 $ 56 $ — $ 65
Impairment losses recognized in earnings for securities that the Company intends to sell
or more-likely-than-not will be required to sell before recovery (2) 269 — 201 470
Total impairment losses recognized in earnings $278 $ 56 $ 201 $535

(1) Includes OTTI on non-marketable equity securities.

(2) The impairment charge relates to the carrying value of Citi’s then-remaining 35% interest in the Morgan Stanley Smith Barney joint venture (MSSB), offset by the equity pickup from MSSB during the respective periods
that was recorded in Other revenue.

198
The following is a 12-month roll-forward of the credit-related impairments recognized in earnings for AFS and HTM debt securities held as of December 31,
2014 that the Company does not intend to sell nor likely will be required to sell:

Cumulative OTTI credit losses recognized in earnings on securities still held

Credit impairments
Credit impairments recognized in Reductions due to
recognized in earnings on credit-impaired
earnings on securities that have securities sold,
Dec. 31, 2013 securities not been previously transferred or Dec. 31, 2014
In millions of dollars balance previously impaired impaired matured balance
AFS debt securities
Mortgage-backed securities $ 295 $— $— $— $295
Foreign government securities 171 — — — 171
Corporate 113 8 — (3) 118
All other debt securities 144 5 — — 149
Total OTTI credit losses recognized for
AFS debt securities $ 723 $ 13 $— $ (3) $733
HTM debt securities
Mortgage-backed securities (1) $ 678 $ 5 $— $(13) $670
Corporate 56 — — (56) —
All other debt securities 133 — — — 133
Total OTTI credit losses recognized for
HTM debt securities $ 867 $ 5 $— $(69) $803

(1) Primarily consists of Alt-A securities.

Investments in Alternative Investment Funds That Company and investments in funds that are managed by third parties.
Calculate Net Asset Value per Share Investments in funds are generally classified as non-marketable equity
The Company holds investments in certain alternative investment funds securities carried at fair value. The fair values of these investments are
that calculate net asset value (NAV) per share, including hedge funds, estimated using the NAV per share of the Company’s ownership interest in the
private equity funds, funds of funds and real estate funds. The Company’s funds, where it is not probable that the Company will sell an investment at a
investments include co-investments in funds that are managed by the price other than the NAV.

Redemption frequency
(if currently eligible)
Fair value Unfunded commitments monthly, quarterly, annually Redemption notice period
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2014 2013
Hedge funds $ 8 $ 751 $ — $ — Generally quarterly 10-95 days
Private equity funds (1)(2) 796 794 205 170 — —
Real estate funds (2)(3) 166 294 24 36 — —
Total (4) $ 970 $1,839 $229 $206 — —

(1) Private equity funds include funds that invest in infrastructure, leveraged buyout transactions, emerging markets and venture capital.
(2) With respect to the Company’s investments in private equity funds and real estate funds, distributions from each fund will be received as the underlying assets held by these funds are liquidated. It is estimated that the
underlying assets of these funds will be liquidated over a period of several years as market conditions allow. Private equity and real estate funds do not allow redemption of investments by their investors. Investors are
permitted to sell or transfer their investments, subject to the approval of the general partner or investment manager of these funds, which generally may not be unreasonably withheld.
(3) Includes several real estate funds that invest primarily in commercial real estate in the U.S., Europe and Asia.
(4) Included in the total fair value of investments above are $0.8 billion and $1.6 billion of fund assets that are valued using NAVs provided by third-party asset managers as of December 31, 2014 and
December 31, 2013, respectively.

199
15. LOANS Delinquency Status
Delinquency status is monitored and considered a key indicator of credit
Citigroup loans are reported in two categories—consumer and corporate.
quality of consumer loans. Principally the U.S. residential first mortgage
These categories are classified primarily according to the segment and
loans use the Mortgage Banking Association (MBA) method of reporting
subsegment that manage the loans.
delinquencies, which considers a loan delinquent if a monthly payment has
Consumer Loans not been received by the end of the day immediately preceding the loan’s
Consumer loans represent loans and leases managed primarily by the next due date. All other loans use a method of reporting delinquencies, which
Global Consumer Banking businesses in Citicorp and in Citi Holdings. The considers a loan delinquent if a monthly payment has not been received by
following table provides information by loan type for the periods indicated: the close of business on the loan’s next due date.
As a general policy, residential first mortgages, home equity loans and
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 installment loans are classified as non-accrual when loan payments are
Consumer loans 90 days contractually past due. Credit cards and unsecured revolving loans
In U.S. offices
generally accrue interest until payments are 180 days past due. Home equity
Mortgage and real estate (1) $ 96,533 $108,453
Installment, revolving credit, and other 14,450 13,398 loans in regulated bank entities are classified as non-accrual if the related
Cards 112,982 115,651 residential first mortgage is 90 days or more past due. Mortgage loans in
Commercial and industrial 5,895 6,592 regulated bank entities discharged through Chapter 7 bankruptcy, other
$229,860 $244,094 than Federal Housing Administration (FHA)-insured loans, are classified as
In offices outside the U.S. non-accrual. Commercial market loans are placed on a cash (non-accrual)
Mortgage and real estate (1) $ 54,462 $ 55,511 basis when it is determined, based on actual experience and a forward-
Installment, revolving credit, and other 31,128 33,182 looking assessment of the collectability of the loan in full, that the payment
Cards 32,032 36,740
of interest or principal is doubtful or when interest or principal is 90 days
Commercial and industrial 22,561 24,107
Lease financing 609 769 past due.
$140,792 $150,309 The policy for re-aging modified U.S. consumer loans to current status
Total Consumer loans $370,652 $394,403
varies by product. Generally, one of the conditions to qualify for these
Net unearned income (682) (572) modifications is that a minimum number of payments (typically ranging
from one to three) be made. Upon modification, the loan is re-aged to
Consumer loans, net of unearned income $369,970 $393,831
current status. However, re-aging practices for certain open-ended consumer
(1) Loans secured primarily by real estate. loans, such as credit cards, are governed by Federal Financial Institutions
Examination Council (FFIEC) guidelines. For open-ended consumer loans
Citigroup has established a risk management process to monitor, evaluate
subject to FFIEC guidelines, one of the conditions for the loan to be re-aged
and manage the principal risks associated with its consumer loan portfolio.
to current status is that at least three consecutive minimum monthly
Credit quality indicators that are actively monitored include delinquency
payments, or the equivalent amount, must be received. In addition, under
status, consumer credit scores (FICO), and loan to value (LTV) ratios, each as
FFIEC guidelines, the number of times that such a loan can be re-aged is
discussed in more detail below.
subject to limitations (generally once in 12 months and twice in five years).
Included in the loan table above are lending products whose terms may
Furthermore, FHA and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) loans are modified
give rise to greater credit issues. Credit cards with below-market introductory
under those respective agencies’ guidelines and payments are not always
interest rates and interest-only loans are examples of such products. These
required in order to re-age a modified loan to current.
products are closely managed using credit techniques that are intended to
mitigate their higher inherent risk.
During the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company sold
and/or reclassified to held-for-sale $7.9 billion and $11.5 billion, respectively,
of consumer loans. The Company did not have significant purchases of
consumer loans during the year ended December 31, 2014. During the year
ended December 31, 2013, Citi also acquired approximately $7 billion of
loans related to the acquisition of Best Buy’s U.S. credit card portfolio.

200
The following tables provide details on Citigroup’s consumer loan delinquency and non-accrual loans as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013:
Consumer Loan Delinquency and Non-Accrual Details at December 31, 2014

Past due
Total 30-89 days ≥ 90 days government Total Total 90 days past due
In millions of dollars current (1)(2) past due (3) past due (3) guaranteed (4) loans (2) non-accrual and accruing
In North America offices
Residential first mortgages $ 61,730 $ 1,280 $ 1,371 $ 3,443 $ 67,824 $ 2,746 $ 2,759
Home equity loans (5) 27,262 335 520 — 28,117 1,271 —
Credit cards 111,441 1,316 1,271 — 114,028 — 1,273
Installment and other 12,361 229 284 — 12,874 254 3
Commercial market loans 8,630 31 13 — 8,674 135 15
Total $221,424 $ 3,191 $ 3,459 $ 3,443 $231,517 $ 4,406 $ 4,050
In offices outside North America
Residential first mortgages $ 44,782 $ 312 $ 223 $ — $ 45,317 $ 454 $ —
Home equity loans (5) — — — — — — —
Credit cards 30,327 602 553 — 31,482 413 322
Installment and other 29,297 328 149 — 29,774 216 —
Commercial market loans 31,280 86 255 — 31,621 405 —
Total $135,686 $ 1,328 $ 1,180 $ — $138,194 $ 1,488 $ 322
Total GCB and Citi Holdings $357,110 $ 4,519 $ 4,639 $ 3,443 $369,711 $ 5,894 $ 4,372
Other 238 10 11 — 259 30 —
Total Citigroup $357,348 $ 4,529 $ 4,650 $ 3,443 $369,970 $ 5,924 $ 4,372

(1) Loans less than 30 days past due are presented as current.
(2) Includes $43 million of residential first mortgages recorded at fair value.
(3) Excludes loans guaranteed by U.S. government-sponsored entities.
(4) Consists of residential first mortgages that are guaranteed by U.S. government-sponsored entities that are 30–89 days past due of $0.6 billion and 90 days past due of $2.8 billion.
(5) Fixed rate home equity loans and loans extended under home equity lines of credit, which are typically in junior lien positions.

Consumer Loan Delinquency and Non-Accrual Details at December 31, 2013

Past due
Total 30-89 days ≥ 90 days government Total Total 90 days past due
In millions of dollars current (1)(2) past due (3) past due (3) guaranteed (4) loans (2) non-accrual and accruing
In North America offices
Residential first mortgages $ 66,612 $ 2,044 $ 1,975 $ 5,271 $ 75,902 $ 3,415 $ 3,997
Home equity loans (5) 30,603 434 605 — 31,642 1,452 —
Credit cards 113,886 1,491 1,452 — 116,829 — 1,452
Installment and other 12,609 225 243 — 13,077 247 7
Commercial market loans 8,630 26 28 — 8,684 112 7
Total $232,340 $ 4,220 $ 4,303 $ 5,271 $246,134 $ 5,226 $ 5,463
In offices outside North America
Residential first mortgages $ 46,067 $ 435 $ 332 $ — $ 46,834 $ 584 $ —
Home equity loans (5) — — — — — — —
Credit cards 34,733 780 641 — 36,154 402 413
Installment and other 30,138 398 158 — 30,694 230 —
Commercial market loans 33,242 111 295 — 33,648 610 —
Total $144,180 $ 1,724 $ 1,426 $ — $147,330 $ 1,826 $ 413
Total GCB and Citi Holdings $376,520 $ 5,944 $ 5,729 $ 5,271 $393,464 $ 7,052 $ 5,876
Other 338 13 16 — 367 43 —
Total Citigroup $376,858 $ 5,957 $ 5,745 $ 5,271 $393,831 $ 7,095 $ 5,876

(1) Loans less than 30 days past due are presented as current.
(2) Includes $0.9 billion of residential first mortgages recorded at fair value.
(3) Excludes loans guaranteed by U.S. government-sponsored entities.
(4) Consists of residential first mortgages that are guaranteed by U.S. government-sponsored entities that are 30–89 days past due of $1.2 billion and 90 days past due of $4.1 billion.
(5) Fixed rate home equity loans and loans extended under home equity lines of credit, which are typically in junior lien positions.

201
Consumer Credit Scores (FICO) LTV distribution in U.S. portfolio (1)(2) December 31, 2014
In the U.S., independent credit agencies rate an individual’s risk for > 80% but less Greater
assuming debt based on the individual’s credit history and assign every Less than or than or equal to than
In millions of dollars equal to 80% 100% 100%
consumer a “FICO” (Fair Isaac Corporation) credit score. These scores
Residential first mortgages $48,163 $ 9,480 $ 2,670
are continually updated by the agencies based upon an individual’s credit Home equity loans 14,638 7,267 4,641
actions (e.g., taking out a loan or missed or late payments).
Total $62,801 $16,747 $ 7,311
The following tables provide details on the FICO scores attributable
to Citi’s U.S. consumer loan portfolio as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 (1) Excludes loans guaranteed by U.S. government entities, loans subject to LTSCs with U.S.
government-sponsored entities and loans recorded at fair value.
(commercial market loans are not included in the table since they are (2) Excludes balances where LTV was not available. Such amounts are not material.
business-based and FICO scores are not a primary driver in their credit
evaluation). FICO scores are updated monthly for substantially all of the LTV distribution in U.S. portfolio (1)(2) December 31, 2013
portfolio or, otherwise, on a quarterly basis, for the remaining portfolio. > 80% but less Greater
Less than or than or equal to than
FICO score distribution in U.S. portfolio (1)(2) December 31, 2014 In millions of dollars equal to 80% 100% 100%
Equal to or Residential first mortgages $45,809 $13,458 $ 5,269
Less than ≥ 620 but less greater Home equity loans 14,216 8,685 6,935
In millions of dollars 620 than 660 than 660
Total $60,025 $22,143 $12,204
Residential first mortgages $ 8,911 $ 5,463 $ 45,783
Home equity loans 3,257 2,456 20,957 (1) Excludes loans guaranteed by U.S. government entities, loans subject to LTSCs with U.S. government-
sponsored entities and loans recorded at fair value.
Credit cards 7,647 10,296 92,877
(2) Excludes balances where LTV was not available. Such amounts are not material.
Installment and other 4,015 2,520 5,150
Total $23,830 $20,735 $164,767 Impaired Consumer Loans
Impaired loans are those loans where Citigroup believes it is probable all
(1) Excludes loans guaranteed by U.S. government entities, loans subject to long-term standby
commitments (LTSCs) with U.S. government-sponsored entities and loans recorded at fair value. amounts due according to the original contractual terms of the loan will
(2) Excludes balances where FICO was not available. Such amounts are not material. not be collected. Impaired consumer loans include non-accrual commercial
market loans, as well as smaller-balance homogeneous loans whose terms
FICO score distribution in U.S. portfolio (1)(2) December 31, 2013
Equal to or
have been modified due to the borrower’s financial difficulties and where
Less than ≥ 620 but less greater Citigroup has granted a concession to the borrower. These modifications
In millions of dollars 620 than 660 than 660 may include interest rate reductions and/or principal forgiveness. Impaired
Residential first mortgages $11,860 $ 6,426 $ 46,207 consumer loans exclude smaller-balance homogeneous loans that have not
Home equity loans 4,093 2,779 23,152 been modified and are carried on a non-accrual basis. In addition, impaired
Credit cards 8,125 10,693 94,437 consumer loans exclude substantially all loans modified pursuant to Citi’s
Installment and other 3,900 2,399 5,186
short-term modification programs (i.e., for periods of 12 months or less) that
Total $27,978 $22,297 $168,982 were modified prior to January 1, 2011.
(1) Excludes loans guaranteed by U.S. government entities, loans subject to LTSCs with U.S.
government-sponsored entities and loans recorded at fair value.
(2) Excludes balances where FICO was not available. Such amounts are not material.

Loan to Value (LTV) Ratios

LTV ratios (loan balance divided by appraised value) are calculated at
origination and updated by applying market price data.
The following tables provide details on the LTV ratios attributable to Citi’s
U.S. consumer mortgage portfolios as of December 31, 2014 and 2013. LTV
ratios are updated monthly using the most recent Core Logic Home Price
Index data available for substantially all of the portfolio applied at the
Metropolitan Statistical Area level, if available, or the state level if not. The
remainder of the portfolio is updated in a similar manner using the Federal
Housing Finance Agency indices.

202
 As a result of OCC guidance issued in the third quarter of 2012, mortgage The following tables present information about total impaired consumer
loans to borrowers who have gone through Chapter 7 bankruptcy are loans at and for the periods ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively,
classified as troubled debt restructurings (TDRs). These TDRs, other than and for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 for interest income
FHA-insured loans, are written down to collateral value less cost to sell. FHA- recognized on impaired consumer loans:
insured loans are reserved based on a discounted cash flow model.

At and for the year ended December 31, 2014

Related
Recorded Unpaid specific Average Interest income
In millions of dollars investment (1)(2) principal balance allowance (3) carrying value (4) recognized (5)(6)
Mortgage and real estate
Residential first mortgages $13,551 $14,387 $ 1,909 $15,389 $ 690
Home equity loans 2,029 2,674 599 2,075 74
Credit cards 2,407 2,447 849 2,732 196
Installment and other
Individual installment and other 948 963 450 975 124
Commercial market loans 423 599 110 381 22
Total $19,358 $21,070 $ 3,917 $21,552 $ 1,106

(1) Recorded investment in a loan includes net deferred loan fees and costs, unamortized premium or discount and direct write-downs and includes accrued interest only on credit card loans.
(2) $1,896 million of residential first mortgages, $554 million of home equity loans and $158 million of commercial market loans do not have a specific allowance.
(3) Included in the Allowance for loan losses.
(4) Average carrying value represents the average recorded investment ending balance for the last four quarters and does not include the related specific allowance.
(5) Includes amounts recognized on both an accrual and cash basis.
(6) Cash interest receipts on smaller-balance homogeneous loans are generally recorded as revenue. The interest recognition policy for commercial market loans is identical to that for corporate loans, as described below.

At and for the year ended December 31, 2013

Recorded Unpaid Related Average Interest income
In millions of dollars investment (1)(2) principal balance specific allowance (3) carrying value (4) recognized (5)(6)(7)
Mortgage and real estate
Residential first mortgages $16,801 $17,788 $ 2,309 $17,616 $ 790
Home equity loans 2,141 2,806 427 2,116 81
Credit cards 3,339 3,385 1,178 3,720 234
Installment and other
Individual installment and other 1,114 1,143 536 1,094 153
Commercial market loans 398 605 183 404 22
Total $23,793 $25,727 $ 4,633 $24,950 $ 1,280

(1) Recorded investment in a loan includes net deferred loan fees and costs, unamortized premium or discount and direct write-downs and includes accrued interest only on credit card loans.
(2) $2,169 million of residential first mortgages, $568 million of home equity loans and $111 million of commercial market loans do not have a specific allowance.
(3) Included in the Allowance for loan losses.
(4) Average carrying value represents the average recorded investment ending balance for last four quarters and does not include the related specific allowance.
(5) Includes amounts recognized on both an accrual and cash basis.
(6) Cash interest receipts on smaller-balance homogeneous loans are generally recorded as revenue. The interest recognition policy for commercial market loans is identical to that for corporate loans, as described below.
(7) Interest income recognized for the year ended December 31, 2012 was $1,520 million.

203
Consumer Troubled Debt Restructurings
The following tables present consumer TDRs occurring during the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013:

At and for the year ended December 31, 2014

Contingent Average
In millions of dollars except Number of Post-modification Deferred principal Principal interest rate
number of loans modified loans modified recorded investment (1)(2) principal (3) forgiveness (4) forgiveness (5) reduction
North America
Residential first mortgages 20,114 $2,478 $ 52 $ 36 $ 16 1%
Home equity loans 7,444 279 3 — 14 2
Credit cards 185,962 808 — — — 15
Installment and other revolving 46,838 351 — — — 7
Commercial markets (6) 191 35 — — 1 —
Total (7) 260,549 $3,951 $ 55 $ 36 $ 31
International
Residential first mortgages 3,150 $ 103 $— $— $ 1 1%
Home equity loans 67 11 — — — —
Credit cards 139,128 447 — — 9 13
Installment and other revolving 61,563 292 — — 7 9
Commercial markets (6) 346 200 — — — —
Total (7) 204,254 $1,053 $— $— $ 17

At and for the year ended December 31, 2013

Contingent Average
In millions of dollars except Number of Post-modification Deferred principal Principal interest rate
number of loans modified loans modified recorded investment (1)(8) principal (3) forgiveness (4) forgiveness (5) reduction
North America
Residential first mortgages 32,116 $ 4,160 $ 68 $ 25 $158 1%
Home equity loans 12,774 552 1 — 92 1
Credit cards 172,211 826 — — — 14
Installment and other revolving 53,332 381 — — — 7
Commercial markets (6) 202 39 — — — —
Total (7) 270,635 $ 5,958 $ 69 $ 25 $250
International
Residential first mortgages 3,598 $ 159 $— $— $ 2 1%
Home equity loans 68 2 — — — —
Credit cards 165,350 557 — — 10 13
Installment and other revolving 59,030 342 — — 7 7
Commercial markets (6) 413 104 2 — — —
Total (7) 228,459 $ 1,164 $ 2 $— $ 19

(1) Post-modification balances include past due amounts that are capitalized at the modification date.
(2) Post-modification balances in North America include $322 million of residential first mortgages and $80 million of home equity loans to borrowers who have gone through Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the year ended
December 31, 2014. These amounts include $179 million of residential first mortgages and $69 million of home equity loans that were newly classified as TDRs in the year ended December 31, 2014 as a result of
OCC guidance, as described above.
(3) Represents portion of contractual loan principal that is non-interest bearing but still due from the borrower. Such deferred principal is charged off at the time of permanent modification to the extent that the related loan
balance exceeds the underlying collateral value.
(4) Represents portion of contractual loan principal that is non-interest bearing and, depending upon borrower performance, eligible for forgiveness.
(5) Represents portion of contractual loan principal that was forgiven at the time of permanent modification.
(6) Commercial markets loans are generally borrower-specific modifications and incorporate changes in the amount and/or timing of principal and/or interest.
(7) The above tables reflect activity for loans outstanding as of the end of the reporting period that were considered TDRs.
(8) Post-modification balances in North America include $502 million of residential first mortgages and $101 million of home equity loans to borrowers who have gone through Chapter 7 bankruptcy in the year ended
December 31, 2013. These amounts include $332 million of residential first mortgages and $85 million of home equity loans that were newly classified as TDRs in the year ended December 31, 2013 as a result of
OCC guidance, as described above.

204
 The following table presents consumer TDRs that defaulted during the
years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, for which the payment
default occurred within one year of a permanent modification. Default is
defined as 60 days past due, except for classifiably managed commercial
markets loans, where default is defined as 90 days past due.

Years ended December 31,

In millions of dollars 2014 2013
North America
Residential first mortgages $ 715 $1,532
Home equity loans 72 183
Credit cards 194 204
Installment and other revolving 95 91
Commercial markets 9 3
Total $1,085 $2,013
International
Residential first mortgages $ 24 $ 54
Home equity loans — —
Credit cards 217 198
Installment and other revolving 104 104
Commercial markets 105 15
Total $ 450 $ 371

205
Corporate Loans The Company sold and/or reclassified (to held-for-sale) $4.8 billion and
Corporate loans represent loans and leases managed by the Institutional $5.8 billion of corporate loans during the years ended December 31, 2014
Clients Group in Citicorp or, to a much lesser extent, in Citi Holdings. and 2013, respectively. The Company did not have significant purchases
The following table presents information by corporate loan type as of of corporate loans classified as held-for-investment for the years ended
December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013: December 31, 2014 or 2013.
Corporate loans are identified as impaired and placed on a cash (non-
December 31, December 31, accrual) basis when it is determined, based on actual experience and a
In millions of dollars 2014 2013
forward-looking assessment of the collectability of the loan in full, that the
Corporate
In U.S. offices
payment of interest or principal is doubtful or when interest or principal
Commercial and industrial $ 35,055 $ 32,704 is 90 days past due, except when the loan is well collateralized and in the
Financial institutions 36,272 25,102 process of collection. Any interest accrued on impaired corporate loans
Mortgage and real estate (1) 32,537 29,425 and leases is reversed at 90 days and charged against current earnings,
Installment, revolving credit and other 29,207 34,434 and interest is thereafter included in earnings only to the extent actually
Lease financing 1,758 1,647
received in cash. When there is doubt regarding the ultimate collectability
$134,829 $123,312
of principal, all cash receipts are thereafter applied to reduce the recorded
In offices outside the U.S. investment in the loan. While corporate loans are generally managed based
Commercial and industrial $ 79,239 $ 82,663
Financial institutions 33,269 38,372
on their internally assigned risk rating (see further discussion below), the
Mortgage and real estate (1) 6,031 6,274 following tables present delinquency information by corporate loan type as
Installment, revolving credit and other 19,259 18,714 of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013.
Lease financing 356 527
Governments and official institutions 2,236 2,341
$140,390 $148,891
Total Corporate loans $275,219 $272,203
Net unearned income (554) (562)
Corporate loans, net of unearned income $274,665 $271,641

(1) Loans secured primarily by real estate.

Corporate Loan Delinquency and Non-Accrual Details at December 31, 2014

30-89 days ≥ 90 days

past due past due and Total past due Total Total Total
In millions of dollars and accruing (1) accruing (1) and accruing non-accrual (2) current (3) loans (4)
Commercial and industrial $ 50 $— $ 50 $ 575 $109,764 $110,389
Financial institutions 2 — 2 250 67,580 67,832
Mortgage and real estate 86 — 86 252 38,135 38,473
Leases — — — 51 2,062 2,113
Other 49 1 50 55 49,844 49,949
Loans at fair value 5,858
Purchased Distressed Loans 51
Total $187 $ 1 $188 $1,183 $267,385 $274,665

(1) Corporate loans that are 90 days past due are generally classified as non-accrual. Corporate loans are considered past due when principal or interest is contractually due but unpaid.
(2) Citi generally does not manage corporate loans on a delinquency basis. Non-accrual loans generally include those loans that are ≥ 90 days past due or those loans for which Citi believes, based on actual experience
and a forward-looking assessment of the collectability of the loan in full, that the payment of interest or principal is doubtful.
(3) Corporate loans are past due when principal or interest is contractually due but unpaid. Loans less than 30 days past due are presented as current.
(4) Total loans include loans at fair value, which are not included in the various delinquency columns.

206
Corporate Loan Delinquency and Non-Accrual Details at December 31, 2013

30-89 days ≥ 90 days

past due past due and Total past due Total Total Total
In millions of dollars and accruing (1) accruing (1) and accruing non-accrual (2) current (3) loans (4)
Commercial and industrial $ 72 $ 5 $ 77 $ 769 $112,985 $113,831
Financial institutions — — — 365 61,704 62,069
Mortgage and real estate 183 58 241 515 34,027 34,783
Leases 9 1 10 189 1,975 2,174
Other 47 2 49 70 54,476 54,595
Loans at fair value 4,072
Purchased Distressed Loans 117
Total $ 311 $ 66 $ 377 $1,908 $265,167 $271,641

(1) Corporate loans that are 90 days past due are generally classified as non-accrual. Corporate loans are considered past due when principal or interest is contractually due but unpaid.
(2) Citi generally does not manage corporate loans on a delinquency basis. Non-accrual loans generally include those loans that are ≥ 90 days past due or those loans for which Citi believes, based on actual experience
and a forward-looking assessment of the collectability of the loan in full, that the payment of interest or principal is doubtful.
(3) Corporate loans are past due when principal or interest is contractually due but unpaid. Loans less than 30 days past due are presented as current.
(4) Total loans include loans at fair value, which are not included in the various delinquency columns.

Citigroup has a risk management process to monitor, evaluate and

manage the principal risks associated with its corporate loan portfolio. As
part of its risk management process, Citi assigns numeric risk ratings to its
corporate loan facilities based on quantitative and qualitative assessments
of the obligor and facility. These risk ratings are reviewed at least annually
or more often if material events related to the obligor or facility warrant.
Factors considered in assigning the risk ratings include financial condition
of the obligor, qualitative assessment of management and strategy, amount
and sources of repayment, amount and type of collateral and guarantee
arrangements, amount and type of any contingencies associated with the
obligor, and the obligor’s industry and geography.
The obligor risk ratings are defined by ranges of default probabilities. The
facility risk ratings are defined by ranges of loss norms, which are the product
of the probability of default and the loss given default. The investment grade
rating categories are similar to the category BBB-/Baa3 and above as defined
by S&P and Moody’s. Loans classified according to the bank regulatory
definitions as special mention, substandard and doubtful will have risk
ratings within the non-investment grade categories.

207
Corporate Loans Credit Quality Indicators at Corporate loans and leases identified as impaired and placed on non-
December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 accrual status are written down to the extent that principal is judged to
be uncollectible. Impaired collateral-dependent loans and leases, where
Recorded investment in loans (1)
repayment is expected to be provided solely by the sale of the underlying
December 31, December 31,
collateral and there are no other available and reliable sources of repayment,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013
are written down to the lower of cost or collateral value, less cost to sell.
Investment grade (2)
Commercial and industrial $ 80,812 $ 79,360 Cash-basis loans are returned to an accrual status when all contractual
Financial institutions 56,154 49,699 principal and interest amounts are reasonably assured of repayment and
Mortgage and real estate 16,068 13,178 there is a sustained period of repayment performance, generally six months,
Leases 1,669 1,600 in accordance with the contractual terms of the loan.
Other 46,284 51,370
Total investment grade $200,987 $195,207
Non-investment grade (2)
Accrual
Commercial and industrial $ 29,003 $ 33,702
Financial institutions 11,429 12,005
Mortgage and real estate 3,587 4,205
Leases 393 385
Other 3,609 3,155
Non-accrual
Commercial and industrial 575 769
Financial institutions 250 365
Mortgage and real estate 252 515
Leases 51 189
Other 55 70
Total non-investment grade $ 49,204 $ 55,360
Private bank loans managed on a
delinquency basis (2) $ 18,616 $ 17,002
Loans at fair value 5,858 4,072
Corporate loans, net of unearned income $274,665 $271,641

(1) Recorded investment in a loan includes net deferred loan fees and costs, unamortized premium or
discount, less any direct write-downs.
(2) Held-for-investment loans are accounted for on an amortized cost basis.

208
The following tables present non-accrual loan information by corporate loan type at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 and interest income recognized
on non-accrual corporate loans for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively:

Non-Accrual Corporate Loans

At and for the year ended December 31, 2014

Recorded Unpaid Related specific Average Interest income
In millions of dollars investment (1) principal balance allowance carrying value (2) recognized (3)
Non-accrual corporate loans
Commercial and industrial $ 575 $ 863 $155 $ 658 $ 32
Financial institutions 250 262 7 278 4
Mortgage and real estate 252 287 24 263 8
Lease financing 51 53 29 85 —
Other 55 68 21 60 3
Total non-accrual corporate loans $ 1,183 $1,533 $236 $1,344 $ 47

At and for the year ended December 31, 2013

Recorded Unpaid Related specific Average Interest income
In millions of dollars investment (1) principal balance allowance carrying value (2) recognized (3)
Non-accrual corporate loans
Commercial and industrial $ 769 $1,074 $ 79 $ 967 $ 30
Financial institutions 365 382 3 378 9
Mortgage and real estate 515 651 35 585 3
Lease financing 189 190 131 189 —
Other 70 216 20 64 1
Total non-accrual corporate loans $ 1,908 $2,513 $268 $2,183 $ 43

December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

Recorded Related specific Recorded Related specific
In millions of dollars investment (1) allowance investment (1) allowance
Non-accrual corporate loans with valuation allowances
Commercial and industrial $ 224 $155 $ 401 $ 79
Financial institutions 37 7 24 3
Mortgage and real estate 70 24 253 35
Lease financing 47 29 186 131
Other 55 21 61 20
Total non-accrual corporate loans with specific allowance $ 433 $236 $ 925 $268
Non-accrual corporate loans without specific allowance
Commercial and industrial $ 351 $ 368
Financial institutions 213 341
Mortgage and real estate 182 262
Lease financing 4 3
Other — 9
Total non-accrual corporate loans without specific allowance $ 750 N/A $ 983 N/A

(1) Recorded investment in a loan includes net deferred loan fees and costs, unamortized premium or discount, less any direct write-downs.
(2) Average carrying value represents the average recorded investment balance and does not include related specific allowance.
(3) Interest income recognized for the year ended December 31, 2012 was $98 million.
N/A Not Applicable

209
Corporate Troubled Debt Restructurings
The following table presents corporate TDR activity at and for the year ended December 31, 2014.

TDRs
TDRs TDRs involving changes
involving changes involving changes in the amount
in the amount in the amount and/or timing of
Carrying and/or timing of and/or timing of both principal and
In millions of dollars Value principal payments (1) interest payments (2) interest payments
Commercial and industrial $ 48 $ 30 $ 17 $ 1
Financial institutions — — — —
Mortgage and real estate 8 5 1 2
Other — — — —
Total $ 56 $ 35 $ 18 $ 3

(1) TDRs involving changes in the amount or timing of principal payments may involve principal forgiveness or deferral of periodic and/or final principal payments. Because forgiveness of principal is rare for commercial
loans, modifications typically have little to no impact on the loans’ projected cash flows and thus little to no impact on the allowance established for the loan. Charge-offs for amounts deemed uncollectable may be
recorded at the time of the restructuring or may have already been recorded in prior periods such that no charge-off is required at the time of the modification.
(2) TDRs involving changes in the amount or timing of interest payments may involve a below-market interest rate.

The following table presents corporate TDR activity at and for the year ended December 31, 2013.

TDRs
TDRs TDRs involving changes
involving changes involving changes in the amount
in the amount in the amount and/or timing of
Carrying and/or timing of and/or timing of both principal and
In millions of dollars Value principal payments (1) interest payments (2) interest payments
Commercial and industrial $130 $ 55 $ 58 $ 17
Financial institutions — — — —
Mortgage and real estate 34 19 14 1
Other 5 — — 5
Total $169 $ 74 $ 72 $ 23

(1) TDRs involving changes in the amount or timing of principal payments may involve principal forgiveness or deferral of periodic and/or final principal payments. Because forgiveness of principal is rare for commercial
loans, modifications typically have little to no impact on the loans’ projected cash flows and thus little to no impact on the allowance established for the loan. Charge-offs for amounts deemed uncollectable may be
recorded at the time of the restructuring or may have already been recorded in prior periods such that no charge-off is required at the time of the modification.
(2) TDRs involving changes in the amount or timing of interest payments may involve a below-market interest rate.

The following table presents total corporate loans modified in a TDR at December 31, 2014 and 2013, as well as those TDRs that defaulted during the three
months ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 and for which the payment default occurred within one year of a permanent modification. Default is defined as
60 days past due, except for classifiably managed commercial markets loans, where default is defined as 90 days past due.

TDR loans TDR loans

in payment default in payment default
TDR balances at during the year ended TDR balances at during the year ended
In millions of dollars December 31, 2014 December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013 December 31, 2013
Commercial and industrial $117 $— $197 $ 27
Loans to financial institutions — — 14 —
Mortgage and real estate 107 — 161 17
Other 355 — 422 —
Total $579 $— $794 $ 44

210
Purchased Distressed Loans loan require a build of an allowance so the loan retains its level yield.
Included in the corporate and consumer loans outstanding tables above are However, increases in the expected cash flows are first recognized as a
purchased distressed loans, which are loans that have evidenced significant reduction of any previously established allowance and then recognized as
credit deterioration subsequent to origination but prior to acquisition by income prospectively over the remaining life of the loan by increasing the
Citigroup. In accordance with SOP 03-3 (codified as ASC 310-30), the loan’s level yield. Where the expected cash flows cannot be reliably estimated,
difference between the total expected cash flows for these loans and the the purchased distressed loan is accounted for under the cost recovery
initial recorded investment is recognized in income over the life of the loans method. The carrying amount of the Company’s purchased distressed
using a level yield. Accordingly, these loans have been excluded from the loan portfolio was $361 million and $590 million, net of an allowance of
impaired loan table information presented above. In addition, per SOP 03-3, $60 million and $113 million, at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
subsequent decreases in the expected cash flows for a purchased distressed

The changes in the accretable yield, related allowance and carrying amount net of accretable yield for 2014 and 2013 are as follows:

Carrying
Accretable amount of loan
In millions of dollars yield receivable Allowance
Balance at December 31, 2012 $ 22 $ 537 $ 98
Purchases (1) $ 46 $ 405 $ —
Disposals/payments received (5) (199) (8)
Accretion (10) 10 —
Builds (reductions) to the allowance 22 — 25
Increase to expected cash flows 3 — —
FX/other — (50) (2)
Balance at December 31, 2013 (2) $ 78 $ 703 $113
Purchases (1) $ 1 $ 46 $ —
Disposals/payments received (6) (307) (15)
Accretion (24) 24 —
Builds (reductions) to the allowance (36) — (27)
Increase to expected cash flows 23 — —
FX/other (9) (45) (11)
Balance at December 31, 2014 (2) $ 27 $ 421 $ 60

(1) The balance reported in the column “Carrying amount of loan receivable” consists of $46 million and $405 million in 2014 and 2013, respectively, of purchased loans accounted for under the level-yield method. No
purchased loans were accounted for under the cost-recovery method. These balances represent the fair value of these loans at their acquisition date. The related total expected cash flows for the level-yield loans at
their acquisition dates were $46 million and $451 million in 2014 and 2013, respectively.
(2) The balance reported in the column “Carrying amount of loan receivable” consists of $413 million and $691 million of loans accounted for under the level-yield method and $8 million and $12 million accounted for
under the cost-recovery method in 2014 and 2013, respectively.

211
16. ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Allowance for loan losses at beginning of period $ 19,648 $ 25,455 $ 30,115
Gross credit losses (11,108) (12,769) (17,005)
Gross recoveries (1)(2)(3) 2,135 2,306 2,774
Net credit losses (NCLs) $ (8,973) $(10,463) $(14,231)
NCLs $ 8,973 $ 10,463 $ 14,231
Net reserve releases (1,879) (1,961) (1,908)
Net specific reserve releases (266) (898) (1,865)
Total provision for credit losses $ 6,828 $ 7,604 $ 10,458
Other, net (4) (1,509) (2,948) (887)
Allowance for loan losses at end of period $ 15,994 $ 19,648 $ 25,455
Allowance for credit losses on unfunded lending commitments at beginning of period (5) $ 1,229 $ 1,119 $ 1,136
Provision (release) for unfunded lending commitments (162) 80 (16)
Other, net (4) 30 (1)
Allowance for credit losses on unfunded lending commitments at end of period (5) $ 1,063 $ 1,229 $ 1,119
Total allowance for loans, leases, and unfunded lending commitments $ 17,057 $ 20,877 $ 26,574

(1) Recoveries have been reduced by certain collection costs that are incurred only if collection efforts are successful.
(2) 2012 includes approximately $635 million of incremental charge-offs related to OCC guidance issued in the third quarter of 2012 (see Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). There was a corresponding
approximately $600 million release in the third quarter of 2012 allowance for loan losses related to these charge-offs. 2012 also includes a benefit to charge-offs of approximately $40 million related to finalizing the
impact of this OCC guidance in the fourth quarter of 2012.
(3) 2012 includes approximately $370 million of incremental charge-offs related to previously deferred principal balances on modified loans in the first quarter of 2012. These charge-offs were related to anticipated
forgiveness of principal in connection with the national mortgage settlement. There was a corresponding approximately $350 million reserve release in the first quarter of 2012 related to these charge-offs.
(4) 2014 includes reductions of approximately $1.1 billion related to the sale or transfer to held-for-sale (HFS) of various loan portfolios, which includes approximately $411 million related to the transfer of various
real estate loan portfolios to HFS, approximately $204 million related to the transfer to HFS of a business in Greece, approximately $177 million related to the transfer to HFS of a business in Spain, approximately
$29 million related to the transfer to HFS of a business in Honduras, and approximately $108 million related to the transfer to HFS of various EMEA loan portfolios. Additionally, 2014 includes a reduction of
approximately $463 million related to foreign currency translation. 2013 includes reductions of approximately $2.4 billion related to the sale or transfer to held-for-sale of various loan portfolios, which includes
approximately $360 million related to the sale of Credicard and approximately $255 million related to a transfer to held-for-sale of a loan portfolio in Greece, approximately $230 million related to a non-provision
transfer of reserves associated with deferred interest to other assets which includes deferred interest and approximately $220 million related to foreign currency translation. 2012 includes reductions of approximately
$875 million related to the sale or transfer to held-for-sale of various U.S. loan portfolios.
(5) Represents additional credit loss reserves for unfunded lending commitments and letters of credit recorded in Other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.

212
Allowance for Credit Losses and Investment in Loans at December 31, 2014

In millions of dollars Corporate Consumer Total

Allowance for loan losses at beginning of period $ 2,584 $ 17,064 $ 19,648
Charge-offs (427) (10,681) (11,108)
Recoveries 139 1,996 2,135
Replenishment of net charge-offs 288 8,685 8,973
Net reserve releases (133) (1,746) (1,879)
Net specific reserve releases (20) (246) (266)
Other (42) (1,467) (1,509)
Ending balance $ 2,389 $ 13,605 $ 15,994
Allowance for loan losses
Determined in accordance with ASC 450 $ 2,110 $ 9,673 $ 11,783
Determined in accordance with ASC 310-10-35 235 3,917 4,152
Determined in accordance with ASC 310-30 44 15 59
Total allowance for loan losses $ 2,389 $ 13,605 $ 15,994
Loans, net of unearned income
Loans collectively evaluated for impairment in accordance with ASC 450 $267,271 $350,199 $617,470
Loans individually evaluated for impairment in accordance with ASC 310-10-35 1,485 19,358 20,843
Loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality in accordance with ASC 310-30 51 370 421
Loans held at fair value 5,858 43 5,901
Total loans, net of unearned income $274,665 $369,970 $644,635

Allowance for Credit Losses and Investment in Loans at December 31, 2013

In millions of dollars Corporate Consumer Total

Allowance for loan losses at beginning of period $ 2,776 $ 22,679 $ 25,455
Charge-offs (369) (12,400) (12,769)
Recoveries 168 2,138 2,306
Replenishment of net charge-offs 201 10,262 10,463
Net reserve releases (199) (1,762) (1,961)
Net specific reserve releases (1) (897) (898)
Other 8 (2,956) (2,948)
Ending balance $ 2,584 $ 17,064 $ 19,648
Allowance for loan losses
Determined in accordance with ASC 450 $ 2,232 $ 12,402 $ 14,634
Determined in accordance with ASC 310-10-35 268 4,633 4,901
Determined in accordance with ASC 310-30 84 29 113
Total allowance for loan losses $ 2,584 $ 17,064 $ 19,648
Loans, net of unearned income
Loans collectively evaluated for impairment in accordance with ASC 450 $265,230 $368,449 $633,679
Loans individually evaluated for impairment in accordance with ASC 310-10-35 2,222 23,793 26,015
Loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality in accordance with ASC 310-30 117 632 749
Loans held at fair value 4,072 957 5,029
Total loans, net of unearned income $271,641 $393,831 $665,472

Allowance for Credit Losses at December 31, 2012

In millions of dollars Corporate Consumer Total

Allowance for loan losses at beginning of period $ 2,879 $ 27,236 $ 30,115
Charge-offs (640) (16,365) (17,005)
Recoveries 417 2,357 2,774
Replenishment of net charge-offs 223 14,008 14,231
Net reserve build (releases) 2 (1,910) (1,908)
Net specific reserve releases (138) (1,727) (1,865)
Other 33 (920) (887)
Ending balance $ 2,776 $ 22,679 $ 25,455

213
17. GOODWILL AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS
Goodwill
The changes in Goodwill during 2014 and 2013 were as follows:

In millions of dollars
Balance at December 31, 2012 $25,673
Foreign exchange translation (577)
Smaller acquisitions/divestitures, purchase accounting adjustments and other (25)
Sale of Brazil Credicard (62)
Balance at December 31, 2013 $25,009
Foreign exchange translation and other (1,214)
Smaller acquisitions/divestitures, purchase accounting adjustments and other (203)
Balance at December 31, 2014 $23,592

The changes in Goodwill by segment during 2014 and 2013 were as follows:

Global Institutional
Consumer Clients
In millions of dollars Banking Group Citi Holdings Total
Balance at December 31, 2012 $14,539 $10,981 $ 153 $25,673
Goodwill disposed of during 2013 (1) $ (82) $ — $ — $ (82)
Other (2) (472) (113) 3 (582)
Balance at December 31, 2013 $13,985 $10,868 $ 156 $25,009
Goodwill disposed of during 2014 (3) $ (86) $ (1) $(116) $ (203)
Other (2) (505) (711) 2 (1,214)
Balance at December 31, 2014 $13,394 $10,156 $ 42 $23,592

(1) Primarily related to the sale of Credicard. See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(2) Other changes in Goodwill primarily reflect foreign exchange effects on non-dollar-denominated goodwill and purchase accounting adjustments.
(3) Primarily related to the sale of the Spain consumer operations and the agreement to sell the Japan retail banking business. See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Goodwill impairment testing is performed at the level below the business (Markets). An interim goodwill impairment test was performed on the
segments (referred to as a reporting unit). The Company performed impacted reporting units as of January 1, 2014, resulting in no impairment.
its annual goodwill impairment test as of July 1, 2014 resulting in no Subsequent to January 1, 2014, goodwill was allocated to disposals and tested
impairment for any of the reporting units. The reporting unit structure in for impairment under Banking and Markets. Furthermore, on September
2014 was the same as the reporting unit structure in 2013, except for the 22, 2014, Citi sold its consumer operations in Spain, which included the Citi
effect of the ICG reorganization during the first quarter of 2014 noted below Holdings—Cards reporting unit. As a result, 100% of the Citi Holdings—
and the sale involving the Citi Holdings—Cards reporting unit during the Cards goodwill balance was allocated to the sale. No other interim goodwill
third quarter of 2014. impairment tests were performed during 2014, other than the test performed
Effective January 1, 2014, the businesses within the legacy ICG reporting related to the ICG reorganization discussed above.
units, Securities and Banking and Transaction Services, were realigned No goodwill was deemed impaired in 2014, 2013 and 2012.
and aggregated as Banking and Markets and securities services

214
 The following table shows reporting units with goodwill balances as of
December 31, 2014 and the fair value as a percentage of allocated book value
as of the annual impairment test.

In millions of dollars
Fair Value as a % of
Reporting Unit (1) allocated book value Goodwill
North America Global Consumer Banking 260% $ 6,756
EMEA Global Consumer Banking 178 332
Asia Global Consumer Banking 264 4,704
Latin America Global Consumer Banking 214 1,602
Banking 404 3,481
Markets and Securities Services 200 6,675
Latin America Retirement Services 193 42

(1) Citi Holdings—Other is excluded from the table as there is no goodwill allocated to it.

During the fourth quarter of 2014, Citi announced its intention to exit
its consumer businesses in 11 markets in Latin America, Asia and EMEA,
as well as its consumer finance business in Korea. Citi also announced
its intention to exit several non-core transactions businesses within ICG.
Effective January 1, 2015, these businesses were transferred to Citi Holdings
and aggregated to five new reporting units: Citi Holdings—Consumer
EMEA, Citi Holdings—Consumer Latin America, Citi Holdings—
Consumer Japan, Citi Holdings—Consumer Finance South Korea, and
Citi Holdings—ICG. Goodwill balances associated with the transfers were
allocated to each of the component businesses based on their relative fair
values to the legacy reporting units.

215
Intangible Assets
The components of intangible assets as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 were as follows:

December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

Gross Net Gross Net
carrying Accumulated carrying carrying Accumulated carrying
In millions of dollars amount amortization amount amount amortization amount
Purchased credit card relationships $ 7,626 $ 6,294 $1,332 $ 7,552 $ 6,006 $1,546
Core deposit intangibles 1,153 1,021 132 1,255 1,052 203
Other customer relationships 579 331 248 675 389 286
Present value of future profits 233 154 79 238 146 92
Indefinite-lived intangible assets 290 — 290 323 — 323
Other (1) 5,217 2,732 2,485 5,073 2,467 2,606
Intangible assets (excluding MSRs) $15,098 $10,532 $4,566 $15,116 $10,060 $5,056
Mortgage servicing rights (MSRs) (2) 1,845 — 1,845 2,718 — 2,718
Total intangible assets $16,943 $10,532 $6,411 $17,834 $10,060 $7,774

(1) Includes contract-related intangible assets.

(2) For additional information on Citi’s MSRs, including the roll-forward from 2013 to 2014, see Note 22 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Intangible assets amortization expense was $756 million, $808 million

and $856 million for 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Intangible assets
amortization expense is estimated to be $659 million in 2015, $634 million
in 2016, $938 million in 2017, $411 million in 2018 and $368 million
in 2019.

The changes in intangible assets during the 12 months ended December 31, 2014 were as follows:

Net carrying Net carrying

amount at FX amount at
December 31, Acquisitions/ and December 31,
In millions of dollars 2013 divestitures Amortization Impairments other (1) 2014
Purchased credit card relationships $1,546 $110 $(324) $— $— $1,332
Core deposit intangibles 203 (6) (59) — (6) 132
Other customer relationships 286 14 (28) — (24) 248
Present value of future profits 92 — (12) — (1) 79
Indefinite-lived intangible assets 323 (2) — — (31) 290
Other 2,606 157 (333) (2) 57 2,485
Intangible assets (excluding MSRs) $5,056 $273 $(756) $ (2) $ (5) $4,566
Mortgage servicing rights (MSRs) (2) 2,718 1,845
Total intangible assets $7,774 $6,411

(1) Includes foreign exchange translation and purchase accounting adjustments.

(2) For additional information on Citi’s MSRs, including the roll-forward from 2013 to 2014, see Note 22 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

216
18. DEBT Long-Term Debt
Short-Term Borrowings Balances at
December 31,
2014 2013 Weighted
Weighted Weighted average
average average In millions of dollars coupon Maturities 2014 2013
In millions of dollars Balance coupon Balance coupon
Citigroup Inc. (1)
Commercial paper Senior debt 3.85% 2015-2098 $122,323 $124,857
Significant Citibank entities (1) $16,085 0.22% $17,677 0.25% Subordinated debt (2) 4.48 2015-2044 25,464 28,039
Parent (2) 70 0.95 201 1.11 Trust preferred securities 6.90 2036-2067 1,725 3,908
Total Commercial paper $16,155 0.23% $17,878 0.26% Bank (3)
Other borrowings (3) $42,180 0.53% $41,066 0.87% Senior debt 1.74 2015-2038 65,146 56,039
Total $58,335 $58,944 Subordinated debt (2) — — — 418
Broker-dealer (4)
(1) Significant Citibank Entities consist of Citibank, N.A. units domiciled in the U.S., Western Europe, Hong Senior debt 4.06 2015-2039 8,399 7,831
Kong and Singapore.
Subordinated debt (2) 2.07 2016-2037 23 24
(2) Parent includes the parent holding company (Citigroup Inc.) and Citi’s broker-dealer subsidiaries that
are consolidated into Citigroup. Total (5) 3.34% $223,080 $221,116
(3) Includes borrowings from the Federal Home Loan Banks and other market participants. At both
December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, collateralized short-term advances from the Federal Senior debt $195,868 $188,727
Home Loan Banks were $11.2 billion.
Subordinated debt (2) 25,487 28,481
Trust preferred securities 1,725 3,908
Borrowings under bank lines of credit may be at interest rates based on
Total $223,080 $221,116
LIBOR, CD rates, the prime rate or bids submitted by the banks. Citigroup
pays commitment fees for its lines of credit. (1) Parent holding company, Citigroup Inc.
(2) Includes notes that are subordinated within certain countries, regions or subsidiaries.
Some of Citigroup’s non-bank subsidiaries have credit facilities with (3) Represents the Significant Citibank Entities as well as other Citibank and Banamex entities. At
Citigroup’s subsidiary depository institutions, including Citibank, N.A. December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, collateralized long-term advances from the Federal
Home Loan Banks were $19.8 billion and $14.0 billion, respectively.
Borrowings under these facilities are secured in accordance with Section 23A (4) Represents broker-dealer subsidiaries that are consolidated into Citigroup Inc., the parent
of the Federal Reserve Act. holding company.
(5) Includes senior notes with carrying values of $87 million issued to outstanding Safety First Trusts at
Citigroup Global Markets Holdings Inc. (CGMHI) has borrowing December 31, 2013. As of December 31, 2014, no amounts were outstanding to these trusts.
agreements consisting of facilities that CGMHI has been advised are
available, but where no contractual lending obligation exists. These The Company issues both fixed and variable rate debt in a range of
arrangements are reviewed on an ongoing basis to ensure flexibility in currencies. It uses derivative contracts, primarily interest rate swaps, to
meeting CGMHI’s short-term requirements. effectively convert a portion of its fixed rate debt to variable rate debt and
variable rate debt to fixed rate debt. The maturity structure of the derivatives
generally corresponds to the maturity structure of the debt being hedged.
In addition, the Company uses other derivative contracts to manage
the foreign exchange impact of certain debt issuances. At December 31,
2014, the Company’s overall weighted average interest rate for long-term
debt was 3.34% on a contractual basis and 2.48% including the effects of
derivative contracts.

217
Aggregate annual maturities of long-term debt obligations (based on final maturity dates) including trust preferred securities are as follows:

In millions of dollars 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Thereafter Total

Bank $14,459 $21,248 $14,190 $ 9,128 $ 2,146 $ 3,975 $ 65,146
Broker-dealer 760 708 210 141 1,725 4,878 8,422
Citigroup Inc. 15,851 20,172 25,849 12,748 18,246 56,646 149,512
Total $31,070 $42,128 $40,249 $22,017 $22,117 $65,499 $223,080

The following table summarizes the Company’s outstanding trust preferred securities at December 31, 2014:

Junior subordinated debentures owned by trust

Common
shares Redeemable
Issuance Securities Liquidation Coupon issued by issuer
Trust date issued value (1) rate (2) to parent Amount Maturity beginning
In millions of dollars, except share amounts
Citigroup Capital III Dec. 1996 194,053 $ 194 7.625% 6,003 $ 200 Dec. 1, 2036 Not redeemable
Citigroup Capital XIII Sept. 2010 89,840,000 2,246 7.875 1,000 2,246 Oct. 30, 2040 Oct. 30, 2015
Citigroup Capital XVIII Jun. 2007 99,901 156 6.829 50 156 June 28, 2067 June 28, 2017
Total obligated $ 2,596 $2,602

Note: Distributions on the trust preferred securities and interest on the subordinated debentures are payable semiannually for Citigroup Capital III and Citigroup Capital XVIII and quarterly for Citigroup Capital XIII.

(1) Represents the notional value received by investors from the trusts at the time of issuance.
(2) In each case, the coupon rate on the subordinated debentures is the same as that on the trust preferred securities.

218
19. REGULATORY CAPITAL AND CITIGROUP INC. Banking Subsidiaries—Constraints on Dividends
PARENT COMPANY INFORMATION There are various legal limitations on the ability of Citigroup’s subsidiary
Citigroup is subject to risk-based capital and leverage guidelines issued by the depository institutions to extend credit, pay dividends or otherwise supply
Federal Reserve Board. Citi’s U.S. insured depository institution subsidiaries, funds to Citigroup and its non-bank subsidiaries. The approval of the Office
including Citibank, N.A., are subject to similar guidelines issued by their of the Comptroller of the Currency is required if total dividends declared
respective primary federal bank regulatory agencies. These guidelines are in any calendar year exceed amounts specified by the applicable agency’s
used to evaluate capital adequacy and include the required minimums regulations. State-chartered depository institutions are subject to dividend
shown in the following table. The regulatory agencies are required by law limitations imposed by applicable state law.
to take specific prompt actions with respect to institutions that do not meet In determining the dividends, each depository institution must also
minimum capital standards. consider its effect on applicable risk-based capital and leverage ratio
The following table sets forth Citigroup’s and Citibank, N.A.’s regulatory requirements, as well as policy statements of the federal regulatory
capital tiers, risk-weighted assets, quarterly adjusted average total assets, and agencies that indicate that banking organizations should generally pay
capital ratios as of December 31, 2014 in accordance with current regulatory dividends out of current operating earnings. Citigroup received $8.9 billion
standards (reflecting Basel III Transition Arrangements): and $12.2 billion in dividends from Citibank, N.A. during 2014 and
2013, respectively.
Well
In millions of dollars, Stated capitalized Citibank, Non-Banking Subsidiaries
except ratios minimum minimum Citigroup (1) N.A.(1) Citigroup also receives dividends from its non-bank subsidiaries. These
Common Equity non-bank subsidiaries are generally not subject to regulatory restrictions
Tier 1 Capital $ 166,984 $ 129,135 on dividends, although their ability to declare dividends can be restricted by
Tier 1 Capital 166,984 129,135 capital considerations, as set forth in the table below.
Total Capital (2) 185,280 140,119
Risk-weighted assets 1,275,012 946,333 In millions of dollars
Quarterly adjusted Net Excess over
average total capital or minimum
assets (3) 1,849,297 1,367,444 Subsidiary Jurisdiction equivalent requirement
Common Equity
Citigroup Global Markets Inc. U.S. Securities and
Tier 1 Capital ratio 4.0% N/A 13.10% 13.65%
Exchange
Tier 1 Capital ratio 5.5 6.0% 13.10 13.65
Commission
Total Capital ratio 8.0 10.0 14.53 14.81
Uniform Net
Tier 1 Leverage ratio 4.0 5.0 (4) 9.03 9.44
Capital Rule
(1) As of December 31, 2014, Citigroup’s and Citibank, N.A.’s reportable Common Equity Tier 1 (Rule 15c3-1) $5,521 $4,376
Capital, Tier 1 Capital, and Total Capital ratios were the lower derived under the Basel III Advanced
Approaches framework. Citigroup Global Markets Limited United Kingdom’s
(2) Total Capital includes Tier 1 Capital and Tier 2 Capital.
(3) Tier 1 Leverage ratio denominator.
Prudential
(4) Applicable only to depository institutions. Regulatory
N/A Not Applicable Authority (PRA) $7,162 $2,482

As indicated in the table above, Citigroup and Citibank, N.A. were well
capitalized under the current federal bank regulatory definitions as of
December 31, 2014.

219
Citigroup Inc. Parent Company Only Income Statement and Statement of Comprehensive Income

Years ended December 31,

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Revenues
Interest revenue $ 3,121 $ 3,234 $ 3,384
Interest expense 4,437 5,559 6,573
Net interest expense $(1,316) $ (2,325) $ (3,189)
Dividends from subsidiaries 8,900 13,044 20,780
Non-interest revenue 247 139 613
Total revenues, net of interest expense $ 7,831 $ 10,858 $ 18,204
Total operating expenses $ 1,980 $ 851 $ 1,497
Income before taxes and equity in undistributed income of subsidiaries $ 5,851 $ 10,007 $ 16,707
Benefit for income taxes (643) (1,637) (2,062)
Equity in undistributed income (loss) of subsidiaries 819 2,029 (11,228)
Parent company’s net income $ 7,313 $ 13,673 $ 7,541
Comprehensive income
Parent company’s net income $ 7,313 $ 13,673 $ 7,541
Other comprehensive income (loss) (4,083) (2,237) 892
Parent company’s comprehensive income $ 3,230 $ 11,436 $ 8,433

Citigroup Inc. Parent Company Only Balance Sheet

Years ended December 31,

In millions of dollars 2014 2013
Assets
Cash and due from banks $ 125 $ 233
Trading account assets 604 184
Investments 830 1,032
Advances to subsidiaries 77,951 83,110
Investments in subsidiaries 211,353 203,739
Other assets (1) 110,908 106,170
Total assets $401,771 $394,468
Liabilities
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under agreements to repurchase $ 185 $ 185
Trading account liabilities 762 165
Short-term borrowings 1,075 382
Long-term debt 149,512 156,804
Advances from subsidiaries other than banks 27,430 24,181
Other liabilities 12,273 8,412
Total liabilities $191,237 $190,129
Total equity 210,534 204,339
Total liabilities and equity $401,771 $394,468

(1) Other assets included $42.7 billion of placements to Citibank, N.A. and its branches at December 31, 2014, of which $33.9 billion had a remaining term of less than 30 days. Other assets at December 31, 2013
included $43.3 billion of placements to Citibank, N.A. and its branches, of which $33.6 billion had a remaining term of less than 30 days.

220
Citigroup Inc. Parent Company Only Cash Flows Statement

Years ended December 31,

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Net cash provided by (used in ) operating activities of continuing operations $ 5,940 $ (7,881) $ 1,598
Cash flows from investing activities of continuing operations
Purchases of investments $ — $ — $ (5,701)
Proceeds from sales of investments 41 385 37,056
Proceeds from maturities of investments 155 233 4,286
Changes in investments and advances—intercompany (7,986) 7,226 (397)
Other investing activities 5 4 994
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities of continuing operations $(7,785) $ 7,848 $ 36,238
Cash flows from financing activities of continuing operations
Dividends paid $ (633) $ (314) $ (143)
Issuance of preferred stock 3,699 4,192 2,250
Proceeds (repayments) from issuance of long-term debt—third-party, net (3,636) (13,426) (33,434)
Net change in short-term borrowings and other advances—intercompany 3,297 11,402 (6,160)
Other financing activities (990) (1,741) (199)
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities of continuing operations $ 1,737 $ 113 $(37,686)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and due from banks $ (108) $ 80 $ 150
Cash and due from banks at beginning of period 233 153 3
Cash and due from banks at end of period $ 125 $ 233 $ 153
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information for continuing operations
Cash paid (received) during the year for
Income taxes $ 235 $ (71) $ 78
Interest 5,632 6,514 7,883

Note: With respect to the tables above, “Citigroup Inc. Parent Company Only” refers to the parent holding company Citigroup Inc., excluding consolidated subsidiaries. Citigroup Funding Inc. (CFI) was previously a first-tier
subsidiary of Citigroup Inc., issuing commercial paper, medium-term notes and structured equity-linked and credit-linked notes. The debt of CFI was guaranteed by Citigroup Inc. On December 31, 2012, CFI was
merged into Citigroup Inc., the parent holding company.

221
20. CHANGES IN ACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)

Changes in each component of Citigroup’s Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) for the three years ended December 31, 2014 are as follows:

Foreign
currency
Net translation
unrealized adjustment, Accumulated
gains (losses) net of other
on investment Cash flow Benefit hedges comprehensive
In millions of dollars securities hedges (1) plans (2) (CTA) (3)(4) income (loss)
Balance, December 31, 2011 $ (35) $(2,820) $(4,282) $ (10,651) $ (17,788)
Change, net of taxes (5)(6) 632 527 (988) 721 892
Balance, December 31, 2012 $ 597 $(2,293) $(5,270) $ (9,930) $ (16,896)
Other comprehensive income before reclassifications $(1,962) $ 512 $ 1,098 $ (2,534) $ (2,886)
Increase (decrease) due to amounts reclassified from AOCI (7) (275) 536 183 205 649
Change, net of taxes (7) $(2,237) $ 1,048 $ 1,281 $ (2,329) $ (2,237)
Balance, December 31, 2013 $(1,640) $(1,245) $(3,989) $ (12,259) $ (19,133)
Other comprehensive income before reclassifications $ 1,790 $ 85 $(1,346) $ (4,946) $ (4,417)
Increase (decrease) due to amounts reclassified from AOCI (93) 251 176 — 334
Change, net of taxes $ 1,697 $ 336 $(1,170) $ (4,946) $ (4,083)
Balance at December 31, 2014 $ 57 $ (909) $(5,159) $(17,205) $(23,216)

(1) Primarily driven by Citigroup’s pay fixed/receive floating interest rate swap programs that hedge the floating rates on liabilities.
(2) Primarily reflects adjustments based on the quarterly actuarial valuations of the Company’s significant pension and postretirement plans, annual actuarial valuations of all other plans, and amortization of amounts
previously recognized in other comprehensive income. Reflects the adoption of new mortality tables effective December 31, 2014 (see Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements).
(3) Primarily reflects the movements in (by order of impact) the Mexican peso, euro, Japanese yen, and Russian ruble against the U.S. dollar, and changes in related tax effects and hedges for the year ended
December 31, 2014. Primarily reflects the movements in (by order of impact) the Japanese yen, Mexican peso, Australian dollar, and Indian rupee against the U.S. dollar, and changes in related tax effects and hedges
for the year ended December 31, 2013. Primarily reflects the movements in (by order of impact) the Mexican peso, Japanese yen, euro, and Brazilian real against the U.S. dollar, and changes in related tax effects and
hedges for the year ended December 31, 2012.
(4) During 2014, $137 million ($84 million net of tax) was reclassified to reflect the allocation of foreign currency translation between net unrealized gains (losses) on investment securities to CTA.
(5) Includes the after-tax impact of realized gains from the sales of minority investments: $672 million from the Company’s entire interest in Housing Development Finance Corporation Ltd. (HDFC); and $421 million from
the Company’s entire interest in Shanghai Pudong Development Bank (SPDB).
(6) The after-tax impact due to impairment charges and the loss related to Akbank included within the foreign currency translation adjustment, during 2012 was $667 million (see Note 14 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements).
(7) On December 20, 2013, the sale of Credicard was completed (see Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). The total impact to the gross CTA (net CTA including hedges) was a pretax loss of $314 million
($205 million net of tax).

The pretax and after-tax changes in each component of Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) for the three years ended December 31, 2014
are as follows:

In millions of dollars Pretax Tax effect After-tax

Balance, December 31, 2011 $ (25,807) $ 8,019 $ (17,788)
Change in net unrealized gains (losses) on investment securities 1,001 (369) 632
Cash flow hedges 838 (311) 527
Benefit plans (1,378) 390 (988)
Foreign currency translation adjustment 12 709 721
Change $ 473 $ 419 $ 892
Balance, December 31, 2012 $ (25,334) $ 8,438 $ (16,896)
Change in net unrealized gains (losses) on investment securities (3,537) 1,300 (2,237)
Cash flow hedges 1,673 (625) 1,048
Benefit plans 1,979 (698) 1,281
Foreign currency translation adjustment (2,377) 48 (2,329)
Change $ (2,262) $ 25 $ (2,237)
Balance, December 31, 2013 $ (27,596) $ 8,463 $ (19,133)
Change in net unrealized gains (losses) on investment securities 2,704 (1,007) 1,697
Cash flow hedges 543 (207) 336
Benefit plans (1,830) 660 (1,170)
Foreign currency translation adjustment (4,881) (65) (4,946)
Change $ (3,464) $ (619) $ (4,083)
Balance, December 31, 2014 $(31,060) $ 7,844 $(23,216)

222
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company recognized a pretax loss of $542 million ($334 million net of tax) related to amounts reclassified out
of Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) into the Consolidated Statement of Income. See details in the table below:

Increase (decrease) in AOCI due to

amounts reclassified to Consolidated
Statement of Income
In millions of dollars Year ended December 31, 2014
Realized (gains) losses on sales of investments $(570)
OTTI gross impairment losses 424
Subtotal, pretax $(146)
Tax effect 53
Net realized (gains) losses on investment securities, after-tax (1) $ (93)
Interest rate contracts $ 260
Foreign exchange contracts 149
Subtotal, pretax $ 409
Tax effect (158)
Amortization of cash flow hedges, after-tax (2) $ 251
Amortization of unrecognized
Prior service cost (benefit) $ (40)
Net actuarial loss 243
Curtailment/settlement impact (3) 76
Subtotal, pretax $ 279
Tax effect (103)
Amortization of benefit plans, after-tax (3) $ 176
Foreign currency translation adjustment $ —
Total amounts reclassified out of AOCI, pretax $ 542
Total tax effect (208)
Total amounts reclassified out of AOCI, after-tax $ 334

(1) The pretax amount is reclassified to Realized gains (losses) on sales of investments, net and Gross impairment losses on the Consolidated Statement of Income. See Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements
for additional details.
(2) See Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details.
(3) See Notes 1 and 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details.

223
During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company recognized a pretax loss of $1,071 million ($649 million net of tax) related to amounts reclassified out
of Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) into the Consolidated Statement of Income. See details in the table below:

Increase (decrease) in AOCI due to

amounts reclassified to Consolidated
Statement of Income
In millions of dollars Year ended December 31, 2013
Realized (gains) losses on sales of investments $ (748)
OTTI gross impairment losses 334
Subtotal, pretax $ (414)
Tax effect 139
Net realized (gains) losses on investment securities, after-tax (1) $ (275)
Interest rate contracts $ 700
Foreign exchange contracts 176
Subtotal, pretax $ 876
Tax effect (340)
Amortization of cash flow hedges, after-tax (2) $ 536
Amortization of unrecognized
Prior service cost (benefit) $ —
Net actuarial loss 271
Curtailment/settlement impact (3) 44
Cumulative effect of change in accounting policy (3) (20)
Subtotal, pretax $ 295
Tax effect (112)
Amortization of benefit plans, after-tax (3) $ 183
Foreign currency translation adjustment $ 205
Total amounts reclassified out of AOCI, pretax $1,071
Total tax effect (422)
Total amounts reclassified out of AOCI, after-tax $ 649

(1) The pretax amount is reclassified to Realized gains (losses) on sales of investments, net and Gross impairment losses on the Consolidated Statement of Income. See Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements
for additional details.
(2) See Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details.
(3) See Notes 1 and 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details.

224
21. PREFERRED STOCK

The following table summarizes the Company’s preferred stock outstanding at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013:

Carrying value
in millions of dollars
Redemption
price per Number
depositary of
Redeemable by Dividend share/preference depositary December 31, December 31,
Issuance date issuer beginning rate share shares 2014 2013
Series AA (1) January 25, 2008 February 15, 2018 8.125% $ 25 3,870,330 $ 97 $ 97
Series E (2) April 28, 2008 April 30, 2018 8.400% 1,000 121,254 121 121
Series A (3) October 29, 2012 January 30, 2023 5.950% 1,000 1,500,000 1,500 1,500
Series B (4) December 13, 2012 February 15, 2023 5.900% 1,000 750,000 750 750
Series C (5) March 26, 2013 April 22, 2018 5.800% 25 23,000,000 575 575
Series D (6) April 30, 2013 May 15, 2023 5.350% 1,000 1,250,000 1,250 1,250
Series J (7) September 19, 2013 September 30, 2023 7.125% 25 38,000,000 950 950
Series K (8) October 31, 2013 November 15, 2023 6.875% 25 59,800,000 1,495 1,495
Series L (9) February 12, 2014 February 12, 2019 6.875% 25 19,200,000 480 —
Series M (10) April 30, 2014 May 15, 2024 6.300% 1,000 1,750,000 1,750 —
Series N (11) October 29, 2014 November 15, 2019 5.800% 1,000 1,500,000 1,500 —
$10,468 $ 6,738

(1) Issued as depositary shares, each representing a 1/1,000 interest in a share of the corresponding series of non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock. Dividends payable quarterly on February 15, May 15, August 15
th

and November 15 when, as and if declared by the Citi Board of Directors.

(2) Issued as depositary shares, each representing a 1/25th interest in a share of the corresponding series of non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock. Dividends payable semi-annually on April 30 and October 30 at a
fixed rate until April 30, 2018, thereafter payable quarterly on January 30, April 30, July 30 and October 30 at a floating rate, in each case when, as and if declared by the Citi Board of Directors.
(3) Issued as depositary shares, each representing a 1/25th interest in a share of the corresponding series of non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock. Dividends payable semi-annually on January 30 and July 30 at a
fixed rate until January 30, 2023, thereafter payable quarterly on January 30, April 30, July 30 and October 30 at a floating rate, in each case when, as and if declared by the Citi Board of Directors.
(4) Issued as depositary shares, each representing a 1/25th interest in a share of the corresponding series of non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock. Dividends payable semi-annually on February 15 and August 15 at a
fixed rate until February 15, 2023, thereafter payable quarterly on February 15, May 15, August 15 and November 15 at a floating rate, in each case when, as and if declared by the Citi Board of Directors.
(5) Issued as depositary shares, each representing a 1/1,000th interest in a share of the corresponding series of non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock. Dividends payable quarterly on January 22, April 22, July 22 and
October 22 when, as and if declared by the Citi Board of Directors.
(6) Issued as depositary shares, each representing a 1/25th interest in a share of the corresponding series of non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock. Dividends payable semi-annually on May 15 and November 15 at a
fixed rate until May 15, 2023, thereafter payable quarterly on February 15, May 15, August 15 and November 15 at a floating rate, in each case when, as and if declared by the Citi Board of Directors.
(7) Issued as depositary shares, each representing a 1/1,000th interest in a share of the corresponding series of non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock. Dividends payable quarterly on March 30, June 30,
September 30 and December 30 at a fixed rate until September 30, 2023, thereafter payable quarterly on the same dates at a floating rate, in each case when, as and if declared by the Citi Board of Directors.
(8) Issued as depositary shares, each representing a 1/1,000th interest in a share of the corresponding series of non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock. Dividends payable quarterly on February 15, May 15, August 15
and November 15 at a fixed rate until November 15, 2023, thereafter payable quarterly on the same dates at a floating rate, in each case when, as and if declared by the Citi Board of Directors.
(9) Issued as depositary shares, each representing a 1/1,000th interest in a share of the corresponding series of non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock. Dividends payable quarterly on February 12, May 12, August 12
and November 12 at a fixed rate, in each case when, as and if declared by the Citi Board of Directors.
(10) Issued as depository shares, each representing a 1/25th interest in a share of the corresponding series of non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock. Dividends payable semi-annually on May 15 and November 15 at a
fixed rate until May 15, 2024, thereafter payable quarterly on February 15, May 15, August 15, and November 15 at a floating rate, in each case when, as and if declared by the Citi Board of Directors.
(11) Issued as depository shares, each representing a 1/25th interest in a share of the corresponding series of non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock. Dividends payable semi-annually on May 15 and November 15 at
a fixed rate until, but excluding, November 15, 2019, and thereafter payable quarterly on February 15, May 15, August 15 and November 15 at a floating rate, in each case when, as and if declared by the Citi Board
of Directors.

During 2014, Citi distributed approximately $511 million in dividends

on its outstanding preferred stock. Based on its preferred stock outstanding
as of December 31, 2014, Citi estimates it will distribute preferred dividends
of approximately $656 million during 2015, in each case assuming such
dividends are approved by the Citi Board of Directors.

225
22. SECURITIZATIONS AND VARIABLE INTEREST Variable Interest Entities
ENTITIES VIEs are entities that have either a total equity investment that is insufficient
Uses of Special Purpose Entities to permit the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated
A special purpose entity (SPE) is an entity designed to fulfill a specific financial support, or whose equity investors lack the characteristics of a
limited need of the company that organized it. The principal uses of SPEs controlling financial interest (i.e., ability to make significant decisions
by Citi are to obtain liquidity and favorable capital treatment by securitizing through voting rights and a right to receive the expected residual returns
certain financial assets, to assist clients in securitizing their financial assets of the entity or an obligation to absorb the expected losses of the entity).
and to create investment products for clients. SPEs may be organized in Investors that finance the VIE through debt or equity interests or other
various legal forms, including trusts, partnerships or corporations. In a counterparties providing other forms of support, such as guarantees,
securitization, the company transferring assets to an SPE converts all (or a subordinated fee arrangements or certain types of derivative contracts are
portion) of those assets into cash before they would have been realized in variable interest holders in the entity.
the normal course of business through the SPE’s issuance of debt and equity The variable interest holder, if any, that has a controlling financial interest
instruments, certificates, commercial paper or other notes of indebtedness. in a VIE is deemed to be the primary beneficiary and must consolidate the
These issuances are recorded on the balance sheet of the SPE, which may VIE. Citigroup would be deemed to have a controlling financial interest and
or may not be consolidated onto the balance sheet of the company that be the primary beneficiary if it has both of the following characteristics:
organized the SPE. • power to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the
Investors usually have recourse only to the assets in the SPE, but may entity’s economic performance; and
also benefit from other credit enhancements, such as a collateral account, • an obligation to absorb losses of the entity that could potentially be
a line of credit or a liquidity facility, such as a liquidity put option or asset significant to the VIE, or a right to receive benefits from the entity that
purchase agreement. Because of these enhancements, the SPE issuances could potentially be significant to the VIE.
typically obtain a more favorable credit rating than the transferor could
obtain for its own debt issuances. This results in less expensive financing The Company must evaluate each VIE to understand the purpose
costs than unsecured debt. The SPE may also enter into derivative contracts and design of the entity, the role the Company had in the entity’s design
in order to convert the yield or currency of the underlying assets to match and its involvement in the VIE’s ongoing activities. The Company then
the needs of the SPE investors or to limit or change the credit risk of the SPE. must evaluate which activities most significantly impact the economic
Citigroup may be the provider of certain credit enhancements as well as the performance of the VIE and who has the power to direct such activities.
counterparty to any related derivative contracts. For those VIEs where the Company determines that it has the power
Most of Citigroup’s SPEs are variable interest entities (VIEs), as to direct the activities that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic
described below. performance, the Company must then evaluate its economic interests, if any,
and determine whether it could absorb losses or receive benefits that could
potentially be significant to the VIE. When evaluating whether the Company
has an obligation to absorb losses that could potentially be significant, it
considers the maximum exposure to such loss without consideration of
probability. Such obligations could be in various forms, including, but not
limited to, debt and equity investments, guarantees, liquidity agreements and
certain derivative contracts.
In various other transactions, the Company may: (i) act as a derivative
counterparty (for example, interest rate swap, cross-currency swap, or
purchaser of credit protection under a credit default swap or total return
swap where the Company pays the total return on certain assets to the SPE);
(ii) act as underwriter or placement agent; (iii) provide administrative,
trustee or other services; or (iv) make a market in debt securities or other
instruments issued by VIEs. The Company generally considers such
involvement, by itself, not to be variable interests and thus not an indicator
of power or potentially significant benefits or losses.
See Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of
impending changes to targeted areas of consolidation guidance.

226
This page intentionally left blank.

227
Citigroup’s involvement with consolidated and unconsolidated VIEs with which the Company holds significant variable interests or has continuing involvement
through servicing a majority of the assets in a VIE, each as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, is presented below:

In millions of dollars As of December 31, 2014

Maximum exposure to loss in significant unconsolidated VIEs (1)
Funded exposures (2) Unfunded exposures
Total
involvement Significant Guarantees
with SPE Consolidated unconsolidated Debt Equity Funding and
Citicorp assets VIE / SPE assets VIE assets (3) investments investments commitments derivatives Total
Credit card securitizations $ 60,211 $ 60,211 $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ —
Mortgage securitizations (4)
U.S. agency-sponsored 236,771 — 236,771 5,063 — — 19 5,082
Non-agency-sponsored 8,071 1,239 6,832 560 — — — 560
Citi-administered asset-backed
commercial paper conduits (ABCP) 29,181 29,181 — — — — — —
Collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) 3,382 — 3,382 45 — — — 45
Collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) 13,099 — 13,099 1,692 — — — 1,692
Asset-based financing 62,577 1,149 61,428 22,891 63 2,185 333 25,472
Municipal securities tender option bond
trusts (TOBs) 12,280 6,671 5,609 3 — 3,670 — 3,673
Municipal investments 16,825 70 16,755 2,012 2,021 1,321 — 5,354
Client intermediation 1,745 137 1,608 10 — — 10 20
Investment funds (5) 31,474 1,096 30,378 16 382 124 — 522
Trust preferred securities 2,633 — 2,633 — 6 — — 6
Other 5,685 296 5,389 183 1,451 23 73 1,730
Total $483,934 $100,050 $383,884 $32,475 $3,923 $ 7,323 $ 435 $ 44,156
Citi Holdings
Credit card securitizations $ 292 $ 60 $ 232 $ — $ — $ — $ — $ —
Mortgage securitizations
U.S. agency-sponsored 28,077 — 28,077 150 — — 91 241
Non-agency-sponsored 9,817 65 9,752 17 — — 1 18
Collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) 2,235 — 2,235 174 — — 86 260
Collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) 1,020 — 1,020 54 — — — 54
Asset-based financing 1,323 2 1,321 37 3 86 — 126
Municipal investments 6,881 — 6,881 2 176 904 — 1,082
Investment funds 518 — 518 — — — — —
Other 2,613 2,613 — — — — — —
Total $ 52,776 $ 2,740 $ 50,036 $ 434 $ 179 $ 990 $ 178 $ 1,781
Total Citigroup $536,710 $102,790 $433,920 $32,909 $4,102 $ 8,313 $ 613 $ 45,937

(1) The definition of maximum exposure to loss is included in the text that follows this table.
(2) Included on Citigroup’s December 31, 2014 Consolidated Balance Sheet.
(3) A significant unconsolidated VIE is an entity where the Company has any variable interest or continuing involvement considered to be significant, regardless of the likelihood of loss or the notional amount of exposure.
(4) Citicorp mortgage securitizations also include agency and non-agency (private-label) re-securitization activities. These SPEs are not consolidated. See “Re-securitizations” below for further discussion.
(5) Substantially all of the unconsolidated investment funds’ assets are related to retirement funds in Mexico managed by Citi. See “Investment Funds” below for further discussion.

228
In millions of dollars As of December 31, 2013
Maximum exposure to loss in significant unconsolidated VIEs (1)
Funded exposures (2) Unfunded exposures
Total
involvement Significant Guarantees
with SPE Consolidated unconsolidated Debt Equity Funding and
Citicorp assets VIE / SPE assets VIE assets (3) investments investments commitments derivatives Total
Credit card securitizations $ 52,229 $ 52,229 $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ —
Mortgage securitizations (4)
U.S. agency-sponsored 239,204 — 239,204 3,583 — — 36 3,619
Non-agency-sponsored 7,711 598 7,113 583 — — — 583
Citi-administered asset-backed
commercial paper conduits (ABCP) 31,759 31,759 — — — — — —
Collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) 4,204 — 4,204 34 — — — 34
Collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) 16,883 — 16,883 1,938 — — — 1,938
Asset-based financing 45,884 971 44,913 17,341 74 1,004 195 18,614
Municipal securities tender option bond
trusts (TOBs) 12,716 7,039 5,677 29 — 3,881 — 3,910
Municipal investments 15,962 223 15,739 1,846 2,073 1,173 — 5,092
Client intermediation 1,778 195 1,583 145 — — — 145
Investment funds (5) 32,324 3,094 29,230 191 264 81 — 536
Trust preferred securities 4,822 — 4,822 — 51 — — 51
Other 2,439 225 2,214 143 649 20 78 890
Total $467,915 $ 96,333 $371,582 $ 25,833 $ 3,111 $ 6,159 $ 309 $ 35,412
Citi Holdings
Credit card securitizations $ 1,867 $ 1,448 $ 419 $ — $ — $ — $ — $ —
Mortgage securitizations
U.S. agency-sponsored 73,549 — 73,549 549 — — 77 626
Non-agency-sponsored 13,193 1,695 11,498 35 — — 2 37
Student loan securitizations 1,520 1,520 — — — — — —
Collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) 3,879 — 3,879 273 — — 87 360
Collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) 2,733 — 2,733 358 — — 111 469
Asset-based financing 3,508 3 3,505 629 3 258 — 890
Municipal investments 7,304 — 7,304 3 204 939 — 1,146
Investment funds 1,237 — 1,237 — 61 — — 61
Other 4,494 4,434 60 — — — — —
Total $113,284 $ 9,100 $104,184 $ 1,847 $ 268 $ 1,197 $ 277 $ 3,589
Total Citigroup $581,199 $105,433 $475,766 $ 27,680 $ 3,379 $ 7,356 $ 586 $ 39,001

(1) The definition of maximum exposure to loss is included in the text that follows this table.
(2) Included on Citigroup’s December 31, 2013 Consolidated Balance Sheet.
(3) A significant unconsolidated VIE is an entity where the Company has any variable interest or continuing involvement considered to be significant, regardless of the likelihood of loss or the notional amount of exposure.
(4) Citicorp mortgage securitizations also include agency and non-agency (private-label) re-securitization activities. These SPEs are not consolidated. See “Re-securitizations” below for further discussion.
(5) Substantially all of the unconsolidated investment funds’ assets are related to retirement funds in Mexico managed by Citi. See “Investment Funds” below for further discussion.

229
The previous tables do not include: The asset balances for consolidated VIEs represent the carrying amounts
• certain venture capital investments made by some of the Company’s of the assets consolidated by the Company. The carrying amount may
represent the amortized cost or the current fair value of the assets depending
private equity subsidiaries, as the Company accounts for these investments
on the legal form of the asset (e.g., security or loan) and the Company’s
in accordance with the Investment Company Audit Guide (codified in
standard accounting policies for the asset type and line of business.
ASC 946);
The asset balances for unconsolidated VIEs where the Company has
• certain limited partnerships that are investment funds that qualify for
significant involvement represent the most current information available
the deferral from the requirements of ASC 810 where the Company is the to the Company. In most cases, the asset balances represent an amortized
general partner and the limited partners have the right to replace the cost basis without regard to impairments in fair value, unless fair value
general partner or liquidate the funds; information is readily available to the Company. For VIEs that obtain
• certain investment funds for which the Company provides investment asset exposures synthetically through derivative instruments (for example,
management services and personal estate trusts for which the Company synthetic CDOs), the tables generally include the full original notional
provides administrative, trustee and/or investment management services; amount of the derivative as an asset balance.
• VIEs structured by third parties where the Company holds securities in The maximum funded exposure represents the balance sheet carrying
inventory, as these investments are made on arm’s-length terms; amount of the Company’s investment in the VIE. It reflects the initial
• certain positions in mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities amount of cash invested in the VIE adjusted for any accrued interest and
held by the Company, which are classified as Trading account assets cash principal payments received. The carrying amount may also be
or Investments, where the Company has no other involvement with adjusted for increases or declines in fair value or any impairment in value
the related securitization entity deemed to be significant (for more recognized in earnings. The maximum exposure of unfunded positions
information on these positions, see Notes 13 and 14 to the Consolidated represents the remaining undrawn committed amount, including liquidity
Financial Statements); and credit facilities provided by the Company, or the notional amount
• certain representations and warranties exposures in legacy Securities and of a derivative instrument considered to be a variable interest. In certain
Banking-sponsored mortgage-backed and asset-backed securitizations, transactions, the Company has entered into derivative instruments or
where the Company has no variable interest or continuing involvement other arrangements that are not considered variable interests in the VIE
as servicer. The outstanding balance of mortgage loans securitized during (e.g., interest rate swaps, cross-currency swaps, or where the Company is
2005 to 2008 where the Company has no variable interest or continuing the purchaser of credit protection under a credit default swap or total return
involvement as servicer was approximately $14 billion and $16 billion at swap where the Company pays the total return on certain assets to the SPE).
December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively; and Receivables under such arrangements are not included in the maximum
• certain representations and warranties exposures in Citigroup residential exposure amounts.
mortgage securitizations, where the original mortgage loan balances are
no longer outstanding.

230
Funding Commitments for Significant Unconsolidated
VIEs—Liquidity Facilities and Loan Commitments
The following table presents the notional amount of liquidity facilities and
loan commitments that are classified as funding commitments in the VIE
tables above as of December 31, 2014 and 2013:

December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

In millions of dollars Liquidity facilities Loan commitments Liquidity facilities Loan commitments
Citicorp
Asset-based financing $ 5 $ 2,180 $ 5 $ 999
Municipal securities tender option bond trusts (TOBs) 3,670 — 3,881 —
Municipal investments — 1,321 — 1,173
Investment funds — 124 — 81
Other — 23 — 20
Total Citicorp $3,675 $ 3,648 $3,886 $2,273
Citi Holdings
Asset-based financing $ — $ 86 $ — $ 258
Municipal investments — 904 — 939
Total Citi Holdings $ — $ 990 $ — $1,197
Total Citigroup funding commitments $3,675 $ 4,638 $3,886 $3,470

Citicorp and Citi Holdings Consolidated VIEs transactions involving the VIE. Thus, the Company’s maximum legal
The Company engages in on-balance sheet securitizations, which are exposure to loss related to consolidated VIEs is significantly less than the
securitizations that do not qualify for sales treatment; thus, the assets remain carrying value of the consolidated VIE assets due to outstanding third-party
on the Company’s balance sheet, and any proceeds received are recognized financing. Intercompany assets and liabilities are excluded from the table.
as secured liabilities. The consolidated VIEs included in the tables below All VIE assets are restricted from being sold or pledged as collateral. The cash
represent hundreds of separate entities with which the Company is involved. flows from these assets are the only source used to pay down the associated
In general, the third-party investors in the obligations of consolidated VIEs liabilities, which are non-recourse to the Company’s general assets.
have legal recourse only to the assets of the respective VIEs and do not have The following table presents the carrying amounts and classifications of
such recourse to the Company, except where the Company has provided consolidated assets that are collateral for consolidated VIE obligations as of
a guarantee to the investors or is the counterparty to certain derivative December 31, 2014 and 2013:

In billions of dollars December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

Citicorp Citi Holdings Citigroup Citicorp Citi Holdings Citigroup
Cash $ 0.1 $ 0.2 $ 0.3 $ 0.2 $0.2 $ 0.4
Trading account assets 0.7 — 0.7 1.0 — 1.0
Investments 8.0 — 8.0 10.9 — 10.9
Total loans, net 90.6 2.5 93.1 83.2 8.7 91.9
Other 0.6 — 0.6 1.1 0.2 1.3
Total assets $ 100.0 $ 2.7 $ 102.7 $96.4 $9.1 $105.5
Short-term borrowings $ 22.7 $ — $ 22.7 $24.3 $— $ 24.3
Long-term debt 38.1 2.0 40.1 32.8 2.0 34.8
Other liabilities 0.8 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.1 1.0
Total liabilities $ 61.6 $ 2.1 $ 63.7 $58.0 $2.1 $ 60.1

231
Citicorp and Citi Holdings Significant Interests in
Unconsolidated VIEs—Balance Sheet Classification
The following table presents the carrying amounts and classification of
significant variable interests in unconsolidated VIEs as of December 31, 2014
and 2013:

In billions of dollars December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

Citicorp Citi Holdings Citigroup Citicorp Citi Holdings Citigroup
Trading account assets $ 7.4 $ 0.2 $ 7.6 $ 4.8 $0.6 $ 5.4
Investments 2.4 0.2 2.6 3.7 0.4 4.1
Total loans, net 24.9 0.1 25.0 18.2 0.6 18.8
Other 1.8 0.2 2.0 2.2 0.5 2.7
Total assets $36.5 $ 0.7 $37.2 $28.9 $2.1 $31.0

Credit Card Securitizations impact the economic performance of the trusts, Citigroup holds a seller’s
The Company securitizes credit card receivables through trusts established to interest and certain securities issued by the trusts, and also provides liquidity
purchase the receivables. Citigroup transfers receivables into the trusts on a facilities to the trusts, which could result in potentially significant losses or
non-recourse basis. Credit card securitizations are revolving securitizations; benefits from the trusts. Accordingly, the transferred credit card receivables
as customers pay their credit card balances, the cash proceeds are used to remain on Citi’s Consolidated Balance Sheet with no gain or loss recognized.
purchase new receivables and replenish the receivables in the trust. The debt issued by the trusts to third parties is included in Citi’s Consolidated
Substantially all of the Company’s credit card securitization activity is Balance Sheet.
through two trusts—Citibank Credit Card Master Trust (Master Trust) and The Company utilizes securitizations as one of the sources of funding for
the Citibank Omni Master Trust (Omni Trust), with the substantial majority its business in North America. The following table reflects amounts related
through the Master Trust. These trusts are consolidated entities because, as to the Company’s securitized credit card receivables as of December 31, 2014
servicer, Citigroup has the power to direct the activities that most significantly and 2013:

Citicorp Citi Holdings

December 31, December 31, December 31, December 31,
In billions of dollars 2014 2013 2014 2013
Ownership interests in principal amount of trust credit card receivables
Sold to investors via trust-issued securities $ 37.0 $32.3 $— $—
Retained by Citigroup as trust-issued securities 10.1 8.1 — 1.3
Retained by Citigroup via non-certificated interests 14.2 12.1 — —
Total ownership interests in principal amount of trust credit card receivables $ 61.3 $52.5 $— $1.3

Credit Card Securitizations—Citicorp Credit Card Securitizations—Citi Holdings

The following table summarizes selected cash flow information related to The following table summarizes selected cash flow information related to
Citicorp’s credit card securitizations for the years ended December 31, 2014, Citi Holdings’ credit card securitizations for the years ended December 31,
2013 and 2012: 2014, 2013 and 2012:

In billions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 In billions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Proceeds from new securitizations $12.5 $11.5 $ 0.5 Proceeds from new securitizations $0.1 $ 0.2 $ 1.7
Pay down of maturing notes (7.8) (2.1) (20.4) Pay down of maturing notes — (0.1) (0.1)

232
Managed Loans Mortgage Securitizations
After securitization of credit card receivables, the Company continues to The Company provides a wide range of mortgage loan products to a diverse
maintain credit card customer account relationships and provides servicing customer base. Once originated, the Company often securitizes these loans
for receivables transferred to the trusts. As a result, the Company considers through the use of VIEs. These VIEs are funded through the issuance of trust
the securitized credit card receivables to be part of the business it manages. certificates backed solely by the transferred assets. These certificates have
As Citigroup consolidates the credit card trusts, all managed securitized card the same life as the transferred assets. In addition to providing a source of
receivables are on-balance sheet. liquidity and less expensive funding, securitizing these assets also reduces
the Company’s credit exposure to the borrowers. These mortgage loan
Funding, Liquidity Facilities and Subordinated Interests
securitizations are primarily non-recourse, thereby effectively transferring
As noted above, Citigroup securitizes credit card receivables through two
the risk of future credit losses to the purchasers of the securities issued by the
securitization trusts—Master Trust, which is part of Citicorp, and Omni
trust. However, the Company’s U.S. consumer mortgage business generally
Trust, which is also substantially all part of Citicorp. The liabilities of the
retains the servicing rights and in certain instances retains investment
trusts are included in the Consolidated Balance Sheet, excluding those
securities, interest-only strips and residual interests in future cash flows
retained by Citigroup.
from the trusts and also provides servicing for a limited number of ICG
Master Trust issues fixed- and floating-rate term notes. Some of the term
securitizations. ICG and Citi Holdings do not retain servicing for their
notes are issued to multi-seller commercial paper conduits. The weighted
mortgage securitizations.
average maturity of the term notes issued by the Master Trust was 2.8 years as
The Company securitizes mortgage loans generally through either a
of December 31, 2014 and 3.1 years as of December 31, 2013.
government-sponsored agency, such as Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae or Freddie
Master Trust Liabilities (at par value) Mac (U.S. agency-sponsored mortgages), or private-label (non-agency-
sponsored mortgages) securitization. The Company is not the primary
Dec. 31, Dec. 31, beneficiary of its U.S. agency-sponsored mortgage securitizations because
In billions of dollars 2014 2013
Citigroup does not have the power to direct the activities of the VIE that most
Term notes issued to third parties $35.7 $27.9 significantly impact the entities’ economic performance. Therefore, Citi does
Term notes retained by Citigroup affiliates 8.2 6.2
not consolidate these U.S. agency-sponsored mortgage securitizations.
Total Master Trust liabilities $43.9 $34.1 The Company does not consolidate certain non-agency-sponsored
The Omni Trust issues fixed- and floating-rate term notes, some of which mortgage securitizations because Citi is either not the servicer with the power
are purchased by multi-seller commercial paper conduits. The weighted to direct the significant activities of the entity or Citi is the servicer but the
average maturity of the third-party term notes issued by the Omni Trust was servicing relationship is deemed to be a fiduciary relationship and, therefore,
1.9 years as of December 31, 2014 and 0.7 years as of December 31, 2013. Citi is not deemed to be the primary beneficiary of the entity.
In certain instances, the Company has (i) the power to direct the
Omni Trust Liabilities (at par value) activities and (ii) the obligation to either absorb losses or the right to receive
benefits that could be potentially significant to its non-agency-sponsored
Dec. 31, Dec. 31, mortgage securitizations and, therefore, is the primary beneficiary and thus
In billions of dollars 2014 2013
consolidates the VIE.
Term notes issued to third parties $1.3 $4.4
Term notes retained by Citigroup affiliates 1.9 1.9
Total Omni Trust liabilities $3.2 $6.3

233
Mortgage Securitizations—Citicorp
The following table summarizes selected cash flow information related to
Citicorp mortgage securitizations for the years ended December 31, 2014,
2013 and 2012:

2014 2013 2012

Agency- and Agency- and
U.S. agency- Non-agency- non-agency- non-agency-
sponsored sponsored sponsored sponsored
In billions of dollars mortgages mortgages mortgages mortgages
Proceeds from new securitizations $27.4 $11.8 $72.5 $56.5
Contractual servicing fees received 0.4 — 0.4 0.5
Cash flows received on retained interests and other net cash flows 0.1 — 0.1 0.1

Agency and non-agency securitization gains for the year ended

December 31, 2014 were $160 million and $53 million, respectively.
Agency and non-agency securitization gains for the years ended
December 31, 2013 and 2012 were $203 million and $30 million, respectively.

Key assumptions used in measuring the fair value of retained interests at the date of sale or securitization of mortgage receivables for the years ended
December 31, 2014 and 2013 were as follows:

December 31, 2014

Non-agency-sponsored mortgages (1)
U.S. agency- Senior Subordinated
sponsored mortgages interests interests
Discount rate 0.0% to 14.7% 1.4% to 6.6% 2.6% to 9.1%
Weighted average discount rate 11.0% 4.2% 7.8%
Constant prepayment rate 0.0% to 23.1% 0.0% to 7.0% 0.5% to 8.9%
Weighted average constant prepayment rate 6.2% 5.4% 3.2%
Anticipated net credit losses (2) NM 40.0% to 67.1% 8.9% to 58.5%
Weighted average anticipated net credit losses NM 56.3% 43.1%
Weighted average life 0.0 to 9.7 years 2.6 to 11.1 years 3.0 to 14.5 years

December 31, 2013

Non-agency-sponsored mortgages (1)
U.S. agency- Senior Subordinated
sponsored mortgages interests interests
Discount rate 0.0% to 12.4% 2.3% to 4.3% 0.1% to 19.2%
Weighted average discount rate 10.1% 3.4% 7.8%
Constant prepayment rate 0.0% to 21.4% 5.4% to 10.0% 0.1% to 11.2%
Weighted average constant prepayment rate 5.5% 7.2% 7.5%
Anticipated net credit losses (2) NM 47.2% to 53.0% 0.1% to 89.0%
Weighted average anticipated net credit losses NM 49.3% 49.2%
Weighted average life 0.0 to 12.4 years 2.9 to 9.7 years 2.5 to 16.5 years

(1) Disclosure of non-agency-sponsored mortgages as senior and subordinated interests is indicative of the interests’ position in the capital structure of the securitization.
(2) Anticipated net credit losses represent estimated loss severity associated with defaulted mortgage loans underlying the mortgage securitizations disclosed above. Anticipated net credit losses, in this instance, do not
represent total credit losses incurred to date, nor do they represent credit losses expected on retained interests in mortgage securitizations.
NM Not meaningful. Anticipated net credit losses are not meaningful due to U.S. agency guarantees.

234
 The interests retained by the Company range from highly rated and/or below. The negative effect of each change is calculated independently,
senior in the capital structure to unrated and/or residual interests. holding all other assumptions constant. Because the key assumptions may
At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the key assumptions used to value not be independent, the net effect of simultaneous adverse changes in the key
retained interests, and the sensitivity of the fair value to adverse changes assumptions may be less than the sum of the individual effects shown below.
of 10% and 20% in each of the key assumptions, are set forth in the tables

December 31, 2014

Non-agency-sponsored mortgages (1)
U.S. agency- Senior Subordinated
sponsored mortgages interests interests
Discount rate 0.0% to 21.2% 1.1% to 17.7% 1.3% to 19.6%
Weighted average discount rate 8.0% 4.9% 8.2%
Constant prepayment rate 6.0% to 41.4% 2.0% to 100.0% 0.5% to 16.2%
Weighted average constant prepayment rate 14.7% 10.1% 7.2%
Anticipated net credit losses (2) NM 0.0% to 92.4% 13.7% to 83.8%
Weighted average anticipated net credit losses NM 54.6% 52.5%
Weighted average life 0.0 to 16.0 years 0.3 to 14.4 years 0.0 to 24.4 years

December 31, 2013

Non-agency-sponsored mortgages (1)
U.S. agency- Senior Subordinated
sponsored mortgages interests interests
Discount rate 0.1% to 20.9% 0.5% to 17.4% 2.1% to 19.6%
Weighted average discount rate 6.9% 5.5% 11.2%
Constant prepayment rate 6.2% to 30.4% 1.3% to 100.0% 1.4% to 23.1%
Weighted average constant prepayment rate 11.1% 6.4% 7.4%
Anticipated net credit losses (2) NM 0.1% to 80.0% 25.5% to 81.9%
Weighted average anticipated net credit losses NM 49.5% 52.8%
Weighted average life 2.1 to 14.1 years 0.0 to 11.9 years 0.0 to 26.0 years

(1) Disclosure of non-agency-sponsored mortgages as senior and subordinated interests is indicative of the interests’ position in the capital structure of the securitization.
(2) Anticipated net credit losses represent estimated loss severity associated with defaulted mortgage loans underlying the mortgage securitizations disclosed above. Anticipated net credit losses, in this instance, do not
represent total credit losses incurred to date, nor do they represent credit losses expected on retained interests in mortgage securitizations.
NM Not meaningful. Anticipated net credit losses are not meaningful due to U.S. agency guarantees.

Non-agency-sponsored mortgages (1)

U.S. agency- Senior Subordinated
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2014 sponsored mortgages interests interests
Carrying value of retained interests $ 2,224 $ 285 $554
Discount rates
Adverse change of 10% $ (64) $ (5) $ (30)
Adverse change of 20% (124) (9) (57)
Constant prepayment rate
Adverse change of 10% (86) (1) (9)
Adverse change of 20% (165) (2) (18)
Anticipated net credit losses
Adverse change of 10% NM (2) (9)
Adverse change of 20% NM (3) (16)

235
 U.S. agency- Non-agency-sponsored mortgages (1)
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2013 sponsored mortgages Senior interests Subordinated interests
Carrying value of retained interests $2,519 $293 $429
Discount rates
Adverse change of 10% $ (76) $ (6) $ (25)
Adverse change of 20% (148) (11) (48)
Constant prepayment rate
Adverse change of 10% (96) (1) (7)
Adverse change of 20% (187) (2) (14)
Anticipated net credit losses
Adverse change of 10% NM (2) (7)
Adverse change of 20% NM (3) (14)

(1) Disclosure of non-agency-sponsored mortgages as senior and subordinated interests is indicative of the interests’ position in the capital structure of the securitization.
NM Not meaningful. Anticipated net credit losses are not meaningful due to U.S. agency guarantees.

Mortgage Securitizations—Citi Holdings

The following table summarizes selected cash flow information related to Citi
Holdings mortgage securitizations for the years ended December 31, 2014,
2013 and 2012:

2014 2013 2012

U.S. agency- Non-agency- U.S. agency- U.S. agency-
In billions of dollars sponsored mortgages sponsored mortgages sponsored mortgages sponsored mortgages
Proceeds from new securitizations $0.4 $— $0.2 $0.4
Contractual servicing fees received 0.1 — 0.3 0.4

Gains recognized on the securitization of U.S. agency-sponsored At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the key assumptions used to value
mortgages during 2014 were $54 million. Agency securitization gains for the retained interests, and the sensitivity of the fair value to adverse changes of
years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 were $20 million and $45 million, 10% and 20% in each of the key assumptions, are set forth in the tables below.
respectively. The negative effect of each change is calculated independently, holding all
The Company did not securitize non-agency-sponsored mortgages for the other assumptions constant. Because the key assumptions may not in fact
years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012. be independent, the net effect of simultaneous adverse changes in the key
Similar to Citicorp mortgage securitizations discussed above, the range assumptions may be less than the sum of the individual effects shown below.
in the key assumptions is due to the different characteristics of the interests
retained by the Company. The interests retained range from highly rated
and/or senior in the capital structure to unrated and/or residual interests.

236
 December 31, 2014
Non-agency-sponsored mortgages (1)
U.S. agency- Senior Subordinated
sponsored mortgages interests interests (2)
Discount rate 1.9% to 19.2% 5.1% to 47.1% —
Weighted average discount rate 13.7% 36.3% —
Constant prepayment rate 20.4% to 32.3% 6.7% to 20.0% —
Weighted average constant prepayment rate 23.9% 16.6% —
Anticipated net credit losses NM 0.3% to 73.7% —
Weighted average anticipated net credit losses NM 19.2% —
Weighted average life 3.3 to 4.6 years 3.9 to 6.4 years —

December 31, 2013

Non-agency-sponsored mortgages (1)
U.S. agency- Senior Subordinated
sponsored mortgages interests interests (2)
Discount rate 0.0% to 49.3% 9.9% —
Weighted average discount rate 9.5% 9.9% —
Constant prepayment rate 9.6% to 26.2% 12.3% to 27.3% —
Weighted average constant prepayment rate 20.0% 15.6% —
Anticipated net credit losses NM 0.3% —
Weighted average anticipated net credit losses NM 0.3% —
Weighted average life 2.3 to 7.6 years 5.2 years —

(1) Disclosure of non-agency-sponsored mortgages as senior and subordinated interests is indicative of the interests’ position in the capital structure of the securitization.
(2) Citi Holdings held no subordinated interests in mortgage securitizations as of December 31, 2014 and 2013.
NM Not meaningful. Anticipated net credit losses are not meaningful due to U.S. agency guarantees.

Non-agency-sponsored mortgages (1)

U.S. agency- Senior Subordinated
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2014 sponsored mortgages interests interests
Carrying value of retained interests $150 $25 $—
Discount rates
Adverse change of 10% $ (5) $ (2) $—
Adverse change of 20% (10) (4) —
Constant prepayment rate
Adverse change of 10% (7) (2) —
Adverse change of 20% (14) (3) —
Anticipated net credit losses
Adverse change of 10% NM (4) —
Adverse change of 20% NM (7) —

Non-agency-sponsored mortgages (1)

U.S. agency- Senior Subordinated
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2013 sponsored mortgages interests interests
Carrying value of retained interests $585 $ 50 $—
Discount rates
Adverse change of 10% $ (16) $ (3) $—
Adverse change of 20% (32) (5) —
Constant prepayment rate —
Adverse change of 10% (33) (3) —
Adverse change of 20% (65) (6) —
Anticipated net credit losses
Adverse change of 10% NM (5) —
Adverse change of 20% NM (11) —

(1) Disclosure of non-agency-sponsored mortgages as senior and subordinated interests is indicative of the interests’ position in the capital structure of the securitization.
NM Not meaningful. Anticipated net credit losses are not meaningful due to U.S. agency guarantees.

237
Mortgage Servicing Rights Re-securitizations
In connection with the securitization of mortgage loans, the Company’s The Company engages in re-securitization transactions in which debt
U.S. consumer mortgage business generally retains the servicing rights, securities are transferred to a VIE in exchange for new beneficial interests.
which entitle the Company to a future stream of cash flows based on the During the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, Citi transferred non-
outstanding principal balances of the loans and the contractual servicing agency (private-label) securities with an original par value of approximately
fee. Failure to service the loans in accordance with contractual requirements $1.2 billion and $955 million, respectively, to re-securitization entities. These
may lead to a termination of the servicing rights and the loss of future securities are backed by either residential or commercial mortgages and are
servicing fees. often structured on behalf of clients.
These transactions create an intangible asset referred to as mortgage As of December 31, 2014, the fair value of Citi-retained interests in
servicing rights (MSRs), which are recorded at fair value on Citi’s private-label re-securitization transactions structured by Citi totaled
Consolidated Balance Sheet. The fair value of Citi’s capitalized MSRs was approximately $545 million (including $194 million related to
$1.8 billion and $2.7 billion at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. re-securitization transactions executed in 2014), which has been recorded
Of these amounts, approximately $1.7 billion and $2.1 billion, respectively, in Trading account assets. Of this amount, approximately $133 million
were specific to Citicorp, with the remainder to Citi Holdings. The MSRs was related to senior beneficial interests and approximately $412 million
correspond to principal loan balances of $224 billion and $286 billion as of was related to subordinated beneficial interests. As of December 31, 2013,
December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The following table summarizes the fair value of Citi-retained interests in private-label re-securitization
the changes in capitalized MSRs for the years ended December 31, 2014 transactions structured by Citi totaled approximately $425 million (including
and 2013: $131 million related to re-securitization transactions executed in 2013).
Of this amount, approximately $58 million was related to senior beneficial
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 interests, and approximately $367 million was related to subordinated
Balance, beginning of year $2,718 $1,942 beneficial interests. The original par value of private-label re-securitization
Originations 217 634
transactions in which Citi holds a retained interest as of December 31, 2014
Changes in fair value of MSRs due to changes
in inputs and assumptions (344) 640 and 2013 was approximately $5.1 billion and $6.1 billion, respectively.
Other changes (1) (429) (496) The Company also re-securitizes U.S. government-agency guaranteed
Sale of MSRs (317) (2) mortgage-backed (agency) securities. During the years ended
Balance, as of December 31 $1,845 $2,718 December 31, 2014 and 2013, Citi transferred agency securities with a fair
value of approximately $22.5 billion and $26.3 billion, respectively, to
(1) Represents changes due to customer payments and passage of time.
re-securitization entities.
The fair value of the MSRs is primarily affected by changes in As of December 31, 2014, the fair value of Citi-retained interests in agency
prepayments of mortgages that result from shifts in mortgage interest rates. re-securitization transactions structured by Citi totaled approximately
Specifically, higher interest rates tend to lead to declining prepayments, $1.8 billion (including $1.5 billion related to re-securitization transactions
which causes the fair value of the MSRs to increase. In managing this risk, executed in 2014) compared to $1.5 billion as of December 31, 2013
the Company economically hedges a significant portion of the value of its (including $1.2 billion related to re-securitization transactions executed in
MSRs through the use of interest rate derivative contracts, forward purchase 2013), which is recorded in Trading account assets. The original fair value
and sale commitments of mortgage-backed securities and purchased of agency re-securitization transactions in which Citi holds a retained interest
securities classified as Trading account assets. as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 was approximately $73.0 billion and
The Company receives fees during the course of servicing previously $75.5 billion, respectively.
securitized mortgages. The amounts of these fees for the years ended As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company did not consolidate any
December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 were as follows: private-label or agency re-securitization entities.

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012

Servicing fees $638 $800 $ 990
Late fees 25 42 65
Ancillary fees 56 100 122
Total MSR fees $719 $942 $1,177

These fees are classified in the Consolidated Statement of Income as

Other revenue.

238
Citi-Administered Asset-Backed Commercial Paper Conduits a letter of credit from the Company, which is equal to at least 8% to 10% of
The Company is active in the asset-backed commercial paper conduit the conduit’s assets with a minimum of $200 million. The letters of credit
business as administrator of several multi-seller commercial paper conduits provided by the Company to the conduits total approximately $2.3 billion as
and also as a service provider to single-seller and other commercial paper of December 31, 2014 and 2013. The net result across multi-seller conduits
conduits sponsored by third parties. administered by the Company, other than the government guaranteed
Citi’s multi-seller commercial paper conduits are designed to provide loan conduit, is that, in the event defaulted assets exceed the transaction-
the Company’s clients access to low-cost funding in the commercial paper specific credit enhancements described above, any losses in each conduit are
markets. The conduits purchase assets from or provide financing facilities to allocated first to the Company and then the commercial paper investors.
clients and are funded by issuing commercial paper to third-party investors. The Company also provides the conduits with two forms of liquidity
The conduits generally do not purchase assets originated by the Company. agreements that are used to provide funding to the conduits in the event
The funding of the conduits is facilitated by the liquidity support and credit of a market disruption, among other events. Each asset of the conduits is
enhancements provided by the Company. supported by a transaction-specific liquidity facility in the form of an asset
As administrator to Citi’s conduits, the Company is generally responsible purchase agreement (APA). Under the APA, the Company has generally
for selecting and structuring assets purchased or financed by the conduits, agreed to purchase non-defaulted eligible receivables from the conduit at par.
making decisions regarding the funding of the conduits, including The APA is not generally designed to provide credit support to the conduit,
determining the tenor and other features of the commercial paper issued, as it generally does not permit the purchase of defaulted or impaired assets.
monitoring the quality and performance of the conduits’ assets, and Any funding under the APA will likely subject the underlying conduit clients
facilitating the operations and cash flows of the conduits. In return, the to increased interest costs. In addition, the Company provides the conduits
Company earns structuring fees from customers for individual transactions with program-wide liquidity in the form of short-term lending commitments.
and earns an administration fee from the conduit, which is equal to the Under these commitments, the Company has agreed to lend to the conduits
income from the client program and liquidity fees of the conduit after in the event of a short-term disruption in the commercial paper market,
payment of conduit expenses. This administration fee is fairly stable, since subject to specified conditions. The Company receives fees for providing
most risks and rewards of the underlying assets are passed back to the clients. both types of liquidity agreements and considers these fees to be on fair
Once the asset pricing is negotiated, most ongoing income, costs and fees are market terms.
relatively stable as a percentage of the conduit’s size. Finally, the Company is one of several named dealers in the commercial
The conduits administered by the Company do not generally invest paper issued by the conduits and earns a market-based fee for providing
in liquid securities that are formally rated by third parties. The assets are such services. Along with third-party dealers, the Company makes a market
privately negotiated and structured transactions that are generally designed in the commercial paper and may from time to time fund commercial
to be held by the conduit, rather than actively traded and sold. The yield paper pending sale to a third party. On specific dates with less liquidity in
earned by the conduit on each asset is generally tied to the rate on the the market, the Company may hold in inventory commercial paper issued
commercial paper issued by the conduit, thus passing interest rate risk to the by conduits administered by the Company, as well as conduits administered
client. Each asset purchased by the conduit is structured with transaction- by third parties. Separately, in the normal course of business, the Company
specific credit enhancement features provided by the third-party client seller, invests in commercial paper, including commercial paper issued by the
including over collateralization, cash and excess spread collateral accounts, Company’s conduits. At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company owned
direct recourse or third-party guarantees. These credit enhancements are $10.6 billion and $13.9 billion, respectively, of the commercial paper issued
sized with the objective of approximating a credit rating of A or above, based by its administered conduits. The Company’s investments were not driven by
on the Company’s internal risk ratings. At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the market illiquidity and the Company is not obligated under any agreement to
conduits had approximately $29.2 billion and $31.8 billion of purchased purchase the commercial paper issued by the conduits.
assets outstanding, respectively, and had incremental funding commitments The asset-backed commercial paper conduits are consolidated by the
with clients of approximately $15.3 billion and $13.5 billion, respectively. Company. The Company determined that, through its roles as administrator
Substantially all of the funding of the conduits is in the form of short- and liquidity provider, it had the power to direct the activities that most
term commercial paper. At the respective periods ended December 31, 2014 significantly impacted the entities’ economic performance. These powers
and 2013, the weighted average remaining lives of the commercial paper included its ability to structure and approve the assets purchased by the
issued by the conduits were approximately 57 and 67 days, respectively. conduits, its ongoing surveillance and credit mitigation activities, its ability
The primary credit enhancement provided to the conduit investors is in to sell or repurchase assets out of the conduits, and its liability management.
the form of transaction-specific credit enhancements described above. One In addition, as a result of all the Company’s involvement described above,
conduit holds only loans that are fully guaranteed primarily by AAA-rated it was concluded that the Company had an economic interest that could
government agencies that support export and development financing potentially be significant. However, the assets and liabilities of the conduits
programs. In addition to the transaction-specific credit enhancements, the are separate and apart from those of Citigroup. No assets of any conduit are
conduits, other than the government guaranteed loan conduit, have obtained available to satisfy the creditors of Citigroup or any of its other subsidiaries.

239
 During the second quarter of 2013, Citi consolidated the government The Company’s continuing involvement in synthetic CDOs/CLOs generally
guaranteed loan conduit it administers that was previously not consolidated includes purchasing credit protection through credit default swaps with
due to changes in the primary risks and design of the conduit that were the CDO/CLO, owning a portion of the capital structure of the CDO/CLO in
identified as a reconsideration event. Citi, as the administrator and liquidity the form of both unfunded derivative positions (primarily “super-senior”
provider, previously determined it had an economic interest that could exposures discussed below) and funded notes, entering into interest-rate
potentially be significant. Upon the reconsideration event, it was determined swap and total-return swap transactions with the CDO/CLO, lending to the
that Citi had the power to direct the activities that most significantly CDO/CLO, and making a market in the funded notes.
impacted the conduit’s economic performance. The impact of the Where a CDO/CLO entity issues preferred shares (or subordinated notes
consolidation resulted in an increase of assets and liabilities of approximately that are the equivalent form), the preferred shares generally represent an
$7 billion each and a net pretax gain to the Consolidated Statement of insufficient amount of equity (less than 10%) and create the presumption
Income of approximately $40 million. that preferred shares are insufficient to finance the entity’s activities
without subordinated financial support. In addition, although the preferred
Collateralized Debt and Loan Obligations shareholders generally have full exposure to expected losses on the collateral
A securitized collateralized debt obligation (CDO) is a VIE that purchases a and uncapped potential to receive expected residual returns, they generally
pool of assets consisting of asset-backed securities and synthetic exposures do not have the ability to make decisions significantly affecting the entity’s
through derivatives on asset-backed securities and issues multiple tranches of financial results because of their limited role in making day-to-day decisions
equity and notes to investors. and their limited ability to remove the asset manager. Because one or both
A cash CDO, or arbitrage CDO, is a CDO designed to take advantage of of the above conditions will generally be met, the Company has concluded,
the difference between the yield on a portfolio of selected assets, typically even where a CDO/CLO entity issued preferred shares, the entity should be
residential mortgage-backed securities, and the cost of funding the CDO classified as a VIE.
through the sale of notes to investors. “Cash flow” CDOs are entities in which In general, the asset manager, through its ability to purchase and sell
the CDO passes on cash flows from a pool of assets, while “market value” assets or—where the reinvestment period of a CDO/CLO has expired—the
CDOs pay to investors the market value of the pool of assets owned by the ability to sell assets, will have the power to direct the activities of the entity
CDO at maturity. In these transactions, all of the equity and notes issued by that most significantly impact the economic performance of the CDO/CLO.
the CDO are funded, as the cash is needed to purchase the debt securities. However, where a CDO/CLO has experienced an event of default or an
A synthetic CDO is similar to a cash CDO, except that the CDO obtains optional redemption period has gone into effect, the activities of the asset
exposure to all or a portion of the referenced assets synthetically through manager may be curtailed and/or certain additional rights will generally be
derivative instruments, such as credit default swaps. Because the CDO does provided to the investors in a CDO/CLO entity, including the right to direct
not need to raise cash sufficient to purchase the entire referenced portfolio, the liquidation of the CDO/CLO entity.
a substantial portion of the senior tranches of risk is typically passed on to The Company has retained significant portions of the “super-senior”
CDO investors in the form of unfunded liabilities or derivative instruments. positions issued by certain CDOs. These positions are referred to as “super-
The CDO writes credit protection on select referenced debt securities to the senior” because they represent the most senior positions in the CDO and, at
Company or third parties. Risk is then passed on to the CDO investors in the time of structuring, were senior to tranches rated AAA by independent
the form of funded notes or purchased credit protection through derivative rating agencies.
instruments. Any cash raised from investors is invested in a portfolio of The Company does not generally have the power to direct the activities of
collateral securities or investment contracts. The collateral is then used the entity that most significantly impact the economic performance of the
to support the obligations of the CDO on the credit default swaps written CDOs/CLOs, as this power is generally held by a third-party asset manager
to counterparties. of the CDO/CLO. As such, those CDOs/CLOs are not consolidated. The
A securitized collateralized loan obligation (CLO) is substantially similar Company may consolidate the CDO/CLO when: (i) the Company is the asset
to the CDO transactions described above, except that the assets owned by manager and no other single investor has the unilateral ability to remove
the VIE (either cash instruments or synthetic exposures through derivative the Company or unilaterally cause the liquidation of the CDO/CLO, or the
instruments) are corporate loans and to a lesser extent corporate bonds, Company is not the asset manager but has a unilateral right to remove the
rather than asset-backed debt securities. third-party asset manager or unilaterally liquidate the CDO/CLO and receive
A third-party asset manager is typically retained by the CDO/CLO to select the underlying assets, and (ii) the Company has economic exposure to the
the pool of assets and manage those assets over the term of the VIE. entity that could be potentially significant to the entity.
The Company earns fees for warehousing assets prior to the creation of
a “cash flow” or “market value” CDO/CLO, structuring CDOs/CLOs and
placing debt securities with investors. In addition, the Company has retained
interests in many of the CDOs/CLOs it has structured and makes a market in
the issued notes.

240
 The Company continues to monitor its involvement in unconsolidated December 31, 2014
CDOs/CLOs to assess future consolidation risk. For example, if the Company In millions of dollars CDOs CLOs
were to acquire additional interests in these entities and obtain the right, due Carrying value of retained interests $ 6 $ 10
to an event of default trigger being met, to unilaterally liquidate or direct Discount rates
Adverse change of 10% $ (1) $—
the activities of a CDO/CLO, the Company may be required to consolidate
Adverse change of 20% (2) —
the asset entity. For cash CDOs/CLOs, the net result of such consolidation
would be to gross up the Company’s balance sheet by the current fair value
of the securities held by third parties and assets held by the CDO/CLO, which December 31, 2013
amounts are not considered material. For synthetic CDOs/CLOs, the net result In millions of dollars CDOs CLOs
of such consolidation may reduce the Company’s balance sheet, because Carrying value of retained interests $19 $ 31
intercompany derivative receivables and payables would be eliminated in Discount rates
consolidation, and other assets held by the CDO/CLO and the securities held Adverse change of 10% $ (1) $—
by third parties would be recognized at their current fair values. Adverse change of 20% (2) —

Key Assumptions and Retained Interests—Citicorp Asset-Based Financing

At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the key assumptions used to value retained The Company provides loans and other forms of financing to VIEs that hold
interests in CLOs, and the sensitivity of the fair value to adverse changes of assets. Those loans are subject to the same credit approvals as all other loans
10% and 20% are set forth in the tables below: originated or purchased by the Company. Financings in the form of debt
securities or derivatives are, in most circumstances, reported in Trading
December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013
account assets and accounted for at fair value through earnings. The
Discount rate 1.4% to 1.6% 1.5% to 1.6% Company generally does not have the power to direct the activities that most
significantly impact these VIEs’ economic performance, and thus it does not
December 31, 2014
consolidate them.
In millions of dollars CLO
Asset-Based Financing—Citicorp
Carrying value of retained interests $1,539
The primary types of Citicorp’s asset-based financings, total assets of the
Value of underlying portfolio
Adverse change of 10% $ (9)
unconsolidated VIEs with significant involvement, and the Company’s
Adverse change of 20% (18) maximum exposure to loss at December 31, 2014 and 2013 are shown below.
For the Company to realize the maximum loss, the VIE (borrower) would
have to default with no recovery from the assets held by the VIE.
December 31, 2013
In millions of dollars CLO December 31, 2014
Carrying value of retained interests $1,333 Total Maximum
unconsolidated exposure to
Value of underlying portfolio
In millions of dollars VIE assets unconsolidated VIEs
Adverse change of 10% $ (7)
Type
Adverse change of 20% (14)
Commercial and other real estate $25,978 $ 9,426
Corporate loans 460 473
Key Assumptions and Retained Interests—Citi Holdings Airplanes, ships and other assets 34,990 15,573
At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the key assumptions used to value retained Total $61,428 $25,472
interests, and the sensitivity of the fair value to adverse changes of 10% and
20% are set forth in the tables below:
December 31, 2013
December 31, 2014 Total Maximum
CDOs CLOs unconsolidated exposure to
In millions of dollars VIE assets unconsolidated VIEs
Discount rate 44.7% to 49.2% 4.5% to 5.0%
Type
Commercial and other real estate $14,042 $ 3,902
Corporate loans 2,221 1,754
December 31, 2013 Airplanes, ships and other assets 28,650 12,958
CDOs CLOs
Total $44,913 $18,614
Discount rate 44.3% to 48.7% 4.5% to 5.0%

241
 The following table summarizes selected cash flow information related Asset-Based Financing—Citi Holdings
to asset-based financings for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 The primary types of Citi Holdings’ asset-based financing, total assets of
and 2012: the unconsolidated VIEs with significant involvement and the Company’s
maximum exposure to loss at December 31, 2014 and 2013 are shown below.
In billions of dollars 2014 2013 2012 For the Company to realize the maximum loss, the VIE (borrower) would
Proceeds from new securitizations $0.5 $0.5 $— have to default with no recovery from the assets held by the VIE.
Cash flows received on retained
interest and other net cash flows $0.2 $0.7 $0.3 December 31, 2014
Total Maximum
unconsolidated exposure to
The key assumption used to value retained interests and the sensitivity In millions of dollars VIE assets unconsolidated VIEs
of the fair value to adverse changes of 10% and 20% is set forth in the tables Type
below for the following periods presented: Commercial and other real estate $ 168 $ 50
Corporate loans — —
Dec. 31, 2014 Dec. 31, 2013 Airplanes, ships and other assets 1,153 76
Discount rate N/A 3.0% Total $ 1,321 $ 126

December 31, 2013 December 31, 2013

Asset-based Total Maximum
In millions of dollars financing unconsolidated exposure to
Carrying value of retained interests (1) $1,316 In millions of dollars VIE assets unconsolidated VIEs
Value of underlying portfolio Type
Adverse change of 10% $ (11) Commercial and other real estate $ 774 $ 298
Adverse change of 20% (23) Corporate loans 112 96
Airplanes, ships and other assets 2,619 496
(1) Citicorp held no retained interests in asset-based financings as of December 31, 2014.
Total $ 3,505 $ 890

The following table summarizes selected cash flow information related

to asset-based financings for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013
and 2012:

In billions of dollars 2014 2013 2012

Cash flows received on retained
interest and other net cash flows $0.1 $0.2 $1.7

At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the effects of adverse changes of 10% and
20% in the discount rate used to determine the fair value of retained interests
are set forth in the tables below:

December 31, 2013

Asset-based
In millions of dollars financing
Carrying value of retained interests (1) $ 95
Value of underlying portfolio
Adverse change of 10% $—
Adverse change of 20% —

(1) Citi Holdings held no retained interests in asset-based financings as of December 31, 2014.

242
Municipal Securities Tender Option Bond (TOB) Trusts The Company provides liquidity to many of the outstanding trusts. If
TOB trusts hold fixed- and floating-rate, taxable and tax-exempt securities a trust is unwound early due to an event other than a credit event on the
issued by state and local governments and municipalities. The trusts are underlying municipal bond, the underlying municipal bonds are sold in the
typically single-issuer trusts whose assets are purchased from the Company market. If there is a shortfall in the trust’s cash flows between the redemption
or from other investors in the municipal securities market. The TOB trusts price of the tendered Floaters and the proceeds from the sale of the
fund the purchase of their assets by issuing long-term, putable floating rate underlying municipal bonds, the trust draws on a liquidity agreement in an
certificates (Floaters) and residual certificates (Residuals). The trusts are amount equal to the shortfall. For customer TOBs where the Residual is less
referred to as TOB trusts because the Floater holders have the ability to tender than 25% of the trust’s capital structure, the Company has a reimbursement
their interests periodically back to the issuing trust, as described further agreement with the Residual holder under which the Residual holder
below. The Floaters and Residuals evidence beneficial ownership interests in, reimburses the Company for any payment made under the liquidity
and are collateralized by, the underlying assets of the trust. The Floaters are arrangement. Through this reimbursement agreement, the Residual holder
held by third-party investors, typically tax-exempt money market funds. The remains economically exposed to fluctuations in value of the underlying
Residuals are typically held by the original owner of the municipal securities municipal bonds. These reimbursement agreements are generally subject
being financed. to daily margining based on changes in value of the underlying municipal
The Floaters and the Residuals have a tenor that is equal to or shorter bond. In cases where a third party provides liquidity to a non-customer TOB
than the tenor of the underlying municipal bonds. The Residuals entitle their trust, a similar reimbursement arrangement is made whereby the Company
holders to the residual cash flows from the issuing trust, the interest income (or a consolidated subsidiary of the Company) as Residual holder absorbs
generated by the underlying municipal securities net of interest paid on the any losses incurred by the liquidity provider.
Floaters and trust expenses. The Residuals are rated based on the long-term At December 31, 2014 and 2013, liquidity agreements provided with
rating of the underlying municipal bond. The Floaters bear variable interest respect to customer TOB trusts totaled $3.7 billion and $3.9 billion,
rates that are reset periodically to a new market rate based on a spread to a respectively, of which $2.6 billion and $2.8 billion, respectively, were offset
high grade, short-term, tax-exempt index. The Floaters have a long-term by reimbursement agreements. For the remaining exposure related to TOB
rating based on the long-term rating of the underlying municipal bond and transactions, where the Residual owned by the customer was at least 25%
a short-term rating based on that of the liquidity provider to the trust. of the bond value at the inception of the transaction, no reimbursement
There are two kinds of TOB trusts: customer TOB trusts and non-customer agreement was executed. The Company also provides other liquidity
TOB trusts. Customer TOB trusts are trusts through which customers agreements or letters of credit to customer-sponsored municipal investment
finance their investments in municipal securities. The Residuals are held funds, which are not variable interest entities, and municipality-related
by customers and the Floaters by third-party investors, typically tax-exempt issuers that totaled $7.4 billion and $5.4 billion as of December 31, 2014 and
money market funds. Non-customer TOB trusts are trusts through which 2013, respectively. These liquidity agreements and letters of credit are offset
the Company finances its own investments in municipal securities. In such by reimbursement agreements with various term-out provisions.
trusts, the Company holds the Residuals, and third-party investors, typically The Company considers the customer and non-customer TOB trusts to
tax-exempt money market funds, hold the Floaters. be VIEs. Customer TOB trusts are not consolidated by the Company. The
The Company serves as remarketing agent to the trusts, placing the Company has concluded that the power to direct the activities that most
Floaters with third-party investors at inception, facilitating the periodic significantly impact the economic performance of the customer TOB trusts
reset of the variable rate of interest on the Floaters, and remarketing any is primarily held by the customer Residual holder, which may unilaterally
tendered Floaters. If Floaters are tendered and the Company (in its role cause the sale of the trust’s bonds.
as remarketing agent) is unable to find a new investor within a specified Non-customer TOB trusts generally are consolidated. Similar to customer
period of time, it can declare a failed remarketing, in which case the trust is TOB trusts, the Company has concluded that the power over the non-
unwound. The Company may, but is not obligated to, buy the Floaters into customer TOB trusts is primarily held by the Residual holder, which may
its own inventory. The level of the Company’s inventory of Floaters fluctuates unilaterally cause the sale of the trust’s bonds. Because the Company holds
over time. At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company held $3 million the Residual interest, and thus has the power to direct the activities that most
and $176 million, respectively, of Floaters related to both customer and non- significantly impact the trust’s economic performance, it consolidates the
customer TOB trusts. non-customer TOB trusts.
For certain non-customer trusts, the Company also provides credit
enhancement. At December 31, 2014 and 2013 approximately $198 million
and $230 million, respectively, of the municipal bonds owned by TOB trusts
have a credit guarantee provided by the Company.

243
Municipal Investments Investment Funds
Municipal investment transactions include debt and equity interests in The Company is the investment manager for certain investment funds
partnerships that finance the construction and rehabilitation of low-income and retirement funds that invest in various asset classes including private
housing, facilitate lending in new or underserved markets, or finance equity, hedge funds, real estate, fixed income and infrastructure. The
the construction or operation of renewable municipal energy facilities. Company earns a management fee, which is a percentage of capital under
The Company generally invests in these partnerships as a limited partner management, and may earn performance fees. In addition, for some of these
and earns a return primarily through the receipt of tax credits and grants funds the Company has an ownership interest in the investment funds. The
earned from the investments made by the partnership. The Company may Company has also established a number of investment funds as opportunities
also provide construction loans or permanent loans for the development or for qualified employees to invest in private equity investments. The Company
operation of real estate properties held by partnerships. These entities are acts as investment manager to these funds and may provide employees with
generally considered VIEs. The power to direct the activities of these entities financing on both recourse and non-recourse bases for a portion of the
is typically held by the general partner. Accordingly, these entities are not employees’ investment commitments.
consolidated by the Company. The Company has determined that a majority of the investment entities
managed by Citigroup are provided a deferral from the requirements of
Client Intermediation
ASC 810, because they meet the criteria in Accounting Standards Update
Client intermediation transactions represent a range of transactions
No. 2010-10, Consolidation (Topic 810), Amendments for Certain
designed to provide investors with specified returns based on the returns
Investment Funds (ASU 2010-10). These entities continue to be evaluated
of an underlying security, referenced asset or index. These transactions
under the requirements of ASC 810-10, prior to the implementation of
include credit-linked notes and equity-linked notes. In these transactions,
SFAS 167 (FIN 46(R), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities), which
the VIE typically obtains exposure to the underlying security, referenced
required that a VIE be consolidated by the party with a variable interest that
asset or index through a derivative instrument, such as a total-return swap
will absorb a majority of the entity’s expected losses or residual returns, or
or a credit-default swap. In turn the VIE issues notes to investors that pay a
both. See Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion
return based on the specified underlying security, referenced asset or index.
of ASU 2015-02 which includes impending changes to targeted areas of
The VIE invests the proceeds in a financial asset or a guaranteed insurance
consolidation guidance. When ASU 2015-02 becomes effective on January 1,
contract that serves as collateral for the derivative contract over the term of
2016, it will eliminate the above noted deferral for certain investment entities
the transaction. The Company’s involvement in these transactions includes
pursuant to ASU 2010-10.
being the counterparty to the VIE’s derivative instruments and investing in a
portion of the notes issued by the VIE. In certain transactions, the investor’s Trust Preferred Securities
maximum risk of loss is limited, and the Company absorbs risk of loss above The Company has previously raised financing through the issuance of trust
a specified level. The Company does not have the power to direct the activities preferred securities. In these transactions, the Company forms a statutory
of the VIEs that most significantly impact their economic performance, and business trust and owns all of the voting equity shares of the trust. The trust
thus it does not consolidate them. issues preferred equity securities to third-party investors and invests the gross
The Company’s maximum risk of loss in these transactions is defined proceeds in junior subordinated deferrable interest debentures issued by the
as the amount invested in notes issued by the VIE and the notional amount Company. The trusts have no assets, operations, revenues or cash flows other
of any risk of loss absorbed by the Company through a separate instrument than those related to the issuance, administration and repayment of the
issued by the VIE. The derivative instrument held by the Company may preferred equity securities held by third-party investors. Obligations of the
generate a receivable from the VIE (for example, where the Company trusts are fully and unconditionally guaranteed by the Company.
purchases credit protection from the VIE in connection with the VIE’s Because the sole asset of each of the trusts is a receivable from the
issuance of a credit-linked note), which is collateralized by the assets owned Company and the proceeds to the Company from the receivable exceed
by the VIE. These derivative instruments are not considered variable interests, the Company’s investment in the VIE’s equity shares, the Company is not
and any associated receivables are not included in the calculation of permitted to consolidate the trusts, even though it owns all of the voting
maximum exposure to the VIE. equity shares of the trust, has fully guaranteed the trusts’ obligations, and
The proceeds from new securitizations related to the Company’s client has the right to redeem the preferred securities in certain circumstances.
intermediation transactions for the year ended December 31, 2014 totaled The Company recognizes the subordinated debentures on its Consolidated
approximately $2.0 billion. Balance Sheet as long-term liabilities. (For additional information, see Note
18 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.)

244
23. DERIVATIVES ACTIVITIES Derivatives may expose Citigroup to market, credit or liquidity risks in
excess of the amounts recorded on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. Market
In the ordinary course of business, Citigroup enters into various types of
risk on a derivative product is the exposure created by potential fluctuations
derivative transactions. These derivative transactions include:
in interest rates, foreign-exchange rates and other factors and is a function
• Futures and forward contracts, which are commitments to buy or of the type of product, the volume of transactions, the tenor and terms of
sell at a future date a financial instrument, commodity or currency at a the agreement and the underlying volatility. Credit risk is the exposure to
contracted price and may be settled in cash or through delivery. loss in the event of nonperformance by the other party to the transaction
• Swap contracts, which are commitments to settle in cash at a future date where the value of any collateral held is not adequate to cover such losses.
or dates that may range from a few days to a number of years, based on The recognition in earnings of unrealized gains on these transactions is
differentials between specified indices or financial instruments, as applied subject to management’s assessment of the probability of counterparty
to a notional principal amount. default. Liquidity risk is the potential exposure that arises when the size of a
• Option contracts, which give the purchaser, for a premium, the right, derivative position may not be able to be monetized in a reasonable period of
but not the obligation, to buy or sell within a specified time a financial time and at a reasonable cost in periods of high volatility and financial stress.
instrument, commodity or currency at a contracted price that may also be Derivative transactions are customarily documented under industry
settled in cash, based on differentials between specified indices or prices. standard master agreements that provide that, following an uncured
payment default or other event of default, the non-defaulting party may
Swaps and forwards and some option contracts are over-the-counter promptly terminate all transactions between the parties and determine the
(OTC) derivatives that are bilaterally negotiated with counterparties and net amount due to be paid to, or by, the defaulting party. Events of default
settled with those counterparties, except for swap contracts that are novated include: (i) failure to make a payment on a derivatives transaction that
and “cleared” through central counterparties (CCPs). Futures contracts remains uncured following applicable notice and grace periods, (ii) breach
and other option contracts are standardized contracts that are traded on of agreement that remains uncured after applicable notice and grace periods,
an exchange with a CCP as the counterparty from the inception of the (iii) breach of a representation, (iv) cross default, either to third-party debt
transaction. Citigroup enters into these derivative contracts relating to or to other derivative transactions entered into between the parties, or, in
interest rate, foreign currency, commodity and other market/credit risks for some cases, their affiliates, (v) the occurrence of a merger or consolidation
the following reasons: which results in a party’s becoming a materially weaker credit, and (vi) the
• Trading Purposes: Citigroup trades derivatives as an active market cessation or repudiation of any applicable guarantee or other credit support
maker. Citigroup offers its customers derivatives in connection with their document. Obligations under master netting agreements are often secured
risk management actions to transfer, modify or reduce their interest rate, by collateral posted under an industry standard credit support annex to the
foreign exchange and other market/credit risks or for their own trading master netting agreement. An event of default may also occur under a credit
purposes. Citigroup also manages its derivative risk positions through support annex if a party fails to make a collateral delivery that remains
offsetting trade activities, controls focused on price verification, and daily uncured following applicable notice and grace periods.
reporting of positions to senior managers. The netting and collateral rights incorporated in the master netting
• Hedging: Citigroup uses derivatives in connection with its risk- agreements are considered to be legally enforceable if a supportive legal
management activities to hedge certain risks or reposition the risk profile opinion has been obtained from counsel of recognized standing that provides
of the Company. For example, Citigroup issues fixed-rate long-term the requisite level of certainty regarding enforceability and that the exercise
debt and then enters into a receive-fixed, pay-variable-rate interest rate of rights by the non-defaulting party to terminate and close-out transactions
swap with the same tenor and notional amount to convert the interest on a net basis under these agreements will not be stayed or avoided under
payments to a net variable-rate basis. This strategy is the most common applicable law upon an event of default including bankruptcy, insolvency or
form of an interest rate hedge, as it minimizes interest cost in certain yield similar proceeding.
curve environments. Derivatives are also used to manage risks inherent A legal opinion may not be sought for certain jurisdictions where local
in specific groups of on-balance-sheet assets and liabilities, including law is silent or unclear as to the enforceability of such rights or where adverse
AFS securities and borrowings, as well as other interest-sensitive assets case law or conflicting regulation may cast doubt on the enforceability
and liabilities. In addition, foreign-exchange contracts are used to hedge of such rights. In some jurisdictions and for some counterparty types, the
non-U.S.-dollar-denominated debt, foreign-currency-denominated AFS insolvency law may not provide the requisite level of certainty. For example,
securities and net investment exposures. this may be the case for certain sovereigns, municipalities, central banks and
U.S. pension plans.

245
 Exposure to credit risk on derivatives is affected by market volatility, Information pertaining to Citigroup’s derivative activity, based on notional
which may impair the ability of counterparties to satisfy their obligations amounts, as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, is presented in
to the Company. Credit limits are established and closely monitored for the table below. Derivative notional amounts are reference amounts from
customers engaged in derivatives transactions. Citi considers the level of which contractual payments are derived and, in Citigroup’s view, do not
legal certainty regarding enforceability of its offsetting rights under master accurately represent a measure of Citi’s exposure to derivative transactions.
netting agreements and credit support annexes to be an important factor in Rather, as discussed above, Citi’s derivative exposure arises primarily from
its risk management process. Specifically, Citi generally transacts much lower market fluctuations (i.e., market risk), counterparty failure (i.e., credit
volumes of derivatives under master netting agreements where Citi does not risk) and/or periods of high volatility or financial stress (i.e., liquidity
have the requisite level of legal certainty regarding enforceability, because risk), as well as any market valuation adjustments that may be required on
such derivatives consume greater amounts of single counterparty credit the transactions. Moreover, notional amounts do not reflect the netting of
limits than those executed under enforceable master netting agreements. offsetting trades (also as discussed above). For example, if Citi enters into an
Cash collateral and security collateral in the form of G10 government interest rate swap with $100 million notional, and offsets this risk with an
debt securities is often posted by a party to a master netting agreement to identical but opposite position with a different counterparty, $200 million in
secure the net open exposure of the other party; the receiving party is free derivative notionals is reported, although these offsetting positions may result
to commingle/rehypothecate such collateral in the ordinary course of its in de minimus overall market risk. Aggregate derivative notional amounts
business. Nonstandard collateral such as corporate bonds, municipal bonds, can fluctuate from period-to-period in the normal course of business based
U.S. agency securities and/or MBS may also be pledged as collateral for on Citi’s market share as well as levels of client activity.
derivative transactions. Security collateral posted to open and maintain a
master netting agreement with a counterparty, in the form of cash and/or
securities, may from time to time be segregated in an account at a third-party
custodian pursuant to a tri-party account control agreement.

246
Derivative Notionals

Hedging instruments
under ASC 815 (1)(2) Other derivative instruments
Trading derivatives Management hedges (3)
December 31, December 31, December 31, December 31, December 31, December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2014 2013 2014 2013
Interest rate contracts
Swaps $163,348 $132,823 $31,906,549 $36,370,196 $ 31,945 $ 93,286
Futures and forwards — 20 7,044,990 6,129,742 42,305 61,398
Written options — — 3,311,751 3,342,832 3,913 3,103
Purchased options — — 3,171,056 3,240,990 4,910 3,185
Total interest rate contract notionals $163,348 $132,843 $45,434,346 $49,083,760 $ 83,073 $160,972
Foreign exchange contracts
Swaps $ 25,157 $ 22,402 $ 4,567,977 $ 3,298,500 $ 23,990 $ 20,013
Futures and forwards 73,219 79,646 2,154,773 1,982,303 7,069 14,226
Written options — 101 1,343,520 1,037,433 432 —
Purchased options — 106 1,363,382 1,029,872 432 71
Total foreign exchange contract notionals $ 98,376 $102,255 $ 9,429,652 $ 7,348,108 $ 31,923 $ 34,310
Equity contracts
Swaps $ — $ — $ 131,344 $ 100,019 $ — $ —
Futures and forwards — — 30,510 23,161 — —
Written options — — 305,627 333,945 — —
Purchased options — — 275,216 266,570 — —
Total equity contract notionals $ — $ — $ 742,697 $ 723,695 $ — $ —
Commodity and other contracts
Swaps $ — $ — $ 90,817 $ 81,112 $ — $ —
Futures and forwards 1,089 — 106,021 98,265 — —
Written options — — 104,581 100,482 — —
Purchased options — — 95,567 97,626 — —
Total commodity and other contract notionals $ 1,089 $ — $ 396,986 $ 377,485 $ — $ —
Credit derivatives (4)
Protection sold $ — $ — $ 1,063,858 $ 1,143,363 $ — $ —
Protection purchased — 95 1,100,369 1,195,223 16,018 19,744
Total credit derivatives $ — $ 95 $ 2,164,227 $ 2,338,586 $ 16,018 $ 19,744
Total derivative notionals $262,813 $235,193 $58,167,908 $59,871,634 $131,014 $215,026
(1) The notional amounts presented in this table do not include hedge accounting relationships under ASC 815 where Citigroup is hedging the foreign currency risk of a net investment in a foreign operation by issuing a
foreign-currency-denominated debt instrument. The notional amount of such debt was $3,752 million and $6,450 million at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively.
(2) Derivatives in hedge accounting relationships accounted for under ASC 815 are recorded in either Other assets/Other liabilities or Trading account assets/Trading account liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.
(3) Management hedges represent derivative instruments used to mitigate certain economic risks, but for which hedge accounting is not applied. These derivatives are recorded in either Other assets/Other liabilities or
Trading account assets/Trading account liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.
(4) Credit derivatives are arrangements designed to allow one party (protection buyer) to transfer the credit risk of a “reference asset” to another party (protection seller). These arrangements allow a protection seller
to assume the credit risk associated with the reference asset without directly purchasing that asset. The Company enters into credit derivative positions for purposes such as risk management, yield enhancement,
reduction of credit concentrations and diversification of overall risk.

The following tables present the gross and net fair values of the amount if a legal opinion supporting enforceability of netting and collateral
Company’s derivative transactions, and the related offsetting amounts rights has been obtained. GAAP does not permit similar offsetting for security
permitted under ASC 210-20-45 and ASC 815-10-45, as of December 31, collateral. The table also includes amounts that are not permitted to be
2014 and December 31, 2013. Under ASC 210-20-45, gross positive fair offset under ASC 210-20-45 and ASC 815-10-45, such as security collateral
values are offset against gross negative fair values by counterparty pursuant posted or cash collateral posted at third-party custodians, but would be
to enforceable master netting agreements. Under ASC 815-10-45, payables eligible for offsetting to the extent an event of default occurred and a legal
and receivables in respect of cash collateral received from or paid to a given opinion supporting enforceability of the netting and collateral rights has
counterparty pursuant to a credit support annex are included in the offsetting been obtained.

247
Derivative Mark-to-Market (MTM) Receivables/Payables

Derivatives classified in Trading Derivatives classified in Other

In millions of dollars at December 31, 2014 account assets / liabilities (1)(2)(3) assets / liabilities (2)(3)
Derivatives instruments designated as ASC 815 hedges Assets Liabilities Assets Liabilities
Over-the-counter $ 1,508 $ 204 $ 3,117 $ 414
Cleared 4,300 868 — 25
Interest rate contracts $ 5,808 $ 1,072 $ 3,117 $ 439
Over-the-counter $ 3,885 $ 743 $ 678 $ 588
Foreign exchange contracts $ 3,885 $ 743 $ 678 $ 588
Total derivative instruments designated as ASC 815 hedges $ 9,693 $ 1,815 $ 3,795 $ 1,027
Derivatives instruments not designated as ASC 815 hedges
Over-the-counter $ 376,778 $ 359,689 $ 106 $ —
Cleared 255,847 261,499 6 21
Exchange traded 20 22 141 164
Interest rate contracts $ 632,645 $ 621,210 $ 253 $ 185
Over-the-counter $ 151,736 $ 157,650 $ — $ 17
Cleared 366 387 — —
Exchange traded 7 46 — —
Foreign exchange contracts $ 152,109 $ 158,083 $ — $ 17
Over-the-counter $ 20,425 $ 28,333 $ — $ —
Cleared 16 35 — —
Exchange traded 4,311 4,101 — —
Equity contracts $ 24,752 $ 32,469 $ — $ —
Over-the-counter $ 19,943 $ 23,103 $ — $ —
Exchange traded 3,577 3,083 — —
Commodity and other contracts $ 23,520 $ 26,186 $ — $ —
Over-the-counter $ 39,412 $ 39,439 $ 265 $ 384
Cleared 4,106 3,991 13 171
Credit derivatives (4) $ 43,518 $ 43,430 $ 278 $ 555
Total derivatives instruments not designated as ASC 815 hedges $ 876,544 $ 881,378 $ 531 $ 757
Total derivatives $ 886,237 $ 883,193 $ 4,326 $ 1,784
Cash collateral paid/received (5)(6) $ 6,523 $ 9,846 $ 123 $ 7
Less: Netting agreements (7) (777,178) (777,178) — —
Less: Netting cash collateral received/paid (8) (47,625) (47,769) (1,791) (15)
Net receivables/payables included on the Consolidated Balance Sheet (9) $ 67,957 $ 68,092 $ 2,658 $ 1,776
Additional amounts subject to an enforceable master netting agreement but not offset on
the Consolidated Balance Sheet
Less: Cash collateral received/paid $ (867) $ (11) $ — $ —
Less: Non-cash collateral received/paid (10,043) (6,264) (1,293) —
Total net receivables/payables (9) $ 57,047 $ 61,817 $ 1,365 $ 1,776

(1) The trading derivatives fair values are presented in Note 13 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(2) Derivative mark-to-market receivables/payables related to management hedges are recorded in either Other assets/Other liabilities or Trading account assets/Trading account liabilities.
(3) Over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives are derivatives executed and settled bilaterally with counterparties without the use of an organized exchange or central clearing house. Cleared derivatives include derivatives
executed bilaterally with a counterparty in the OTC market but then novated to a central clearing house, whereby the central clearing house becomes the counterparty to both of the original counterparties. Exchange
traded derivatives include derivatives executed directly on an organized exchange that provides pre-trade price transparency.
(4) The credit derivatives trading assets comprise $18,430 million related to protection purchased and $25,088 million related to protection sold as of December 31, 2014. The credit derivatives trading liabilities comprise
$25,972 million related to protection purchased and $17,458 million related to protection sold as of December 31, 2014.
(5) For the trading account assets/liabilities, reflects the net amount of the $54,292 million and $57,471 million of gross cash collateral paid and received, respectively. Of the gross cash collateral paid, $47,769 million
was used to offset trading derivative liabilities and, of the gross cash collateral received, $47,625 million was used to offset trading derivative assets.
(6) For cash collateral paid with respect to non-trading derivative liabilities, reflects the net amount of $138 million the gross cash collateral received, of which $15 million is netted against OTC non-trading derivative
positions within Other liabilities. For cash collateral received with respect to non-trading derivative liabilities, reflects the net amount of $1,798 million of the gross cash collateral received, of which $1,791 million is
netted against OTC non-trading derivative positions within Other assets.
(7) Represents the netting of derivative receivable and payable balances with the same counterparty under enforceable netting agreements. Approximately $510 billion, $264 billion and $3 billion of the netting against
trading account asset/liability balances is attributable to each of the OTC, cleared and exchange traded derivatives, respectively.
(8) Represents the netting of cash collateral paid and received by counterparty under enforceable credit support agreements. Substantially all cash collateral received is netted against OTC derivative assets. Cash collateral
paid of approximately $46 billion and $2 billion is netted against each of the OTC and cleared derivative liabilities, respectively.
(9) The net receivables/payables include approximately $11 billion derivative asset and $10 billion of derivative liability fair values not subject to enforceable master netting agreements.

248
 Derivatives classified in Trading Derivatives classified in Other
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2013 account assets / liabilities (1)(2)(3) assets / liabilities (2)(3)
Derivatives instruments designated as ASC 815 hedges Assets Liabilities Assets Liabilities
Over-the-counter $ 956 $ 306 $ 3,082 $ 854
Cleared 2,505 585 5 —
Interest rate contracts $ 3,461 $ 891 $ 3,087 $ 854
Over-the-counter $ 1,540 $ 1,244 $ 989 $ 293
Foreign exchange contracts $ 1,540 $ 1,244 $ 989 $ 293
Over-the-counter $ — $ — $ — $ 2
Credit derivatives $ — $ — $ — $ 2
Total derivative instruments designated as ASC 815 hedges $ 5,001 $ 2,135 $ 4,076 $1,149
Derivatives instruments not designated as ASC 815 hedges
Over-the-counter $ 313,772 $ 297,115 $ 37 $ 9
Cleared 311,114 319,190 27 5
Exchange traded 33 30 — —
Interest rate contracts $ 624,919 $ 616,335 $ 64 $ 14
Over-the-counter $ 89,847 $ 86,147 $ 79 $ 3
Cleared 1,119 1,191 — —
Exchange traded 48 55 — —
Foreign exchange contracts $ 91,014 $ 87,393 $ 79 $ 3
Over-the-counter $ 19,080 $ 28,458 $ — $ —
Exchange traded 5,797 5,834 — —
Equity contracts $ 24,877 $ 34,292 $ — $ —
Over-the-counter $ 7,921 $ 9,059 $ — $ —
Exchange traded 1,161 1,111 — —
Commodity and other contracts $ 9,082 $ 10,170 $ — $ —
Over-the-counter $ 38,496 $ 38,247 $ 71 $ 563
Cleared 1,850 2,547 — —
Credit derivatives (4) $ 40,346 $ 40,794 $ 71 $ 563
Total Derivatives instruments not designated as ASC 815 hedges $ 790,238 $ 788,984 $ 214 $ 580
Total derivatives $ 795,239 $ 791,119 $ 4,290 $1,729
Cash collateral paid/received (5)(6) $ 6,073 $ 8,827 $ 82 $ 282
Less: Netting agreements (7) (713,598 ) (713,598) — —
Less: Netting cash collateral received/paid (8) (34,893 ) (39,094) (2,951 ) —
Net receivables/payables included on the Consolidated Balance Sheet (9) $ 52,821 $ 47,254 $ 1,421 $2,011
Additional amounts subject to an enforceable master netting agreement
but not offset on the Consolidated Balance Sheet
Less: Cash collateral received/paid $ (365 ) $ (5) $ — $ —
Less: Non-cash collateral received/paid (7,478 ) (3,345) (341 ) —
Total net receivables/payables (9) $ 44,978 $ 43,904 $ 1,080 $2,011

(1) The trading derivatives fair values are presented in Note 13 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(2) Derivative mark-to-market receivables/payables related to management hedges are recorded in either Other assets/Other liabilities or Trading account assets/Trading account liabilities.
(3) Over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives include derivatives executed and settled bilaterally with counterparties without the use of an organized exchange or central clearing house. Cleared derivatives include derivatives
executed bilaterally with a counterparty in the OTC market but then novated to a central clearing house, whereby the central clearing house becomes the counterparty to both of the original counterparties. Exchange
traded derivatives include derivatives executed directly on an organized exchange that provides pre-trade price transparency.
(4) The credit derivatives trading assets comprise $13,673 million related to protection purchased and $26,673 million related to protection sold as of December 31, 2013. The credit derivatives trading liabilities comprise
$28,158 million related to protection purchased and $12,636 million related to protection sold as of December 31, 2013.
(5) For the trading account assets/liabilities, reflects the net amount of the $45,167 million and $43,720 million of gross cash collateral paid and received, respectively. Of the gross cash collateral paid, $39,094 million
was used to offset derivative liabilities and, of the gross cash collateral received, $34,893 million was used to offset derivative assets.
(6) For cash collateral received with respect to non-trading derivative liabilities, reflects the net amount of $3,233 million of gross cash collateral received of which $2,951 million is netted against non-trading derivative
positions within other assets.
(7) Represents the netting of derivative receivable and payable balances with the same counterparty under enforceable netting agreements. Approximately $392 billion, $317 billion and $5 billion of the netting against
trading account asset/liability balances is attributable to each of the OTC, cleared and exchange-traded derivatives, respectively.
(8) Represents the netting of cash collateral paid and received by counterparty under enforceable credit support agreements. Substantially all cash collateral received is netted against OTC derivative assets. Cash collateral
paid of approximately $33 billion and $6 billion is netted against OTC and cleared derivative liabilities, respectively.
(9) The net receivables/payables include approximately $16 billion of both derivative asset and liability fair values not subject to enforceable master netting agreements.

249
 For the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, the amounts If certain hedging criteria specified in ASC 815 are met, including
recognized in Principal transactions in the Consolidated Statement testing for hedge effectiveness, hedge accounting may be applied. The hedge
of Income related to derivatives not designated in a qualifying hedging effectiveness assessment methodologies for similar hedges are performed
relationship, as well as the underlying non-derivative instruments, are in a similar manner and are used consistently throughout the hedging
presented in Note 6 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Citigroup relationships. For fair value hedges, changes in the value of the hedging
presents this disclosure by business classification, showing derivative gains derivative, as well as changes in the value of the related hedged item due to
and losses related to its trading activities together with gains and losses the risk being hedged are reflected in current earnings. For cash flow hedges
related to non-derivative instruments within the same trading portfolios, as and net investment hedges, changes in the value of the hedging derivative
this represents the way these portfolios are risk managed. are reflected in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) in
The amounts recognized in Other revenue in the Consolidated Statement Citigroup’s stockholders’ equity to the extent the hedge is highly effective.
of Income for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 related to Hedge ineffectiveness, in either case, is reflected in current earnings.
derivatives not designated in a qualifying hedging relationship are shown For asset/liability management hedging, fixed-rate long-term debt is
below. The table below does not include any offsetting gains/losses on the recorded at amortized cost under GAAP. However, by designating an interest
economically hedged items to the extent such amounts are also recorded in rate swap contract as a hedging instrument and electing to apply ASC 815
Other revenue. fair value hedge accounting, the carrying value of the debt is adjusted for
changes in the benchmark interest rate, with such changes in value recorded
Gains (losses) included in Other revenue in current earnings. The related interest-rate swap also is recorded on the
Year ended December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
balance sheet at fair value, with any changes in fair value also reflected in
earnings. Thus, any ineffectiveness resulting from the hedging relationship is
Interest rate contracts $ 291 $(376) $ (427)
Foreign exchange (2,894) 221 182 captured in current earnings.
Credit derivatives (135) (595) (1,022) Alternatively, for management hedges, that do not meet the ASC 815
Total Citigroup $(2,738) $(750) $(1,267)
hedging criteria, only the derivative is recorded at fair value on the balance
sheet, with the associated changes in fair value recorded in earnings,
while the debt continues to be carried at amortized cost. Therefore, current
Accounting for Derivative Hedging
earnings are affected only by the interest rate shifts and other factors that
Citigroup accounts for its hedging activities in accordance with ASC 815,
cause a change in the swap’s value. This type of hedge is undertaken when
Derivatives and Hedging. As a general rule, hedge accounting is permitted
hedging requirements cannot be achieved or management decides not to
where the Company is exposed to a particular risk, such as interest-rate or
apply ASC 815 hedge accounting.
foreign-exchange risk, that causes changes in the fair value of an asset or
Another alternative is to elect to carry the debt at fair value under the
liability or variability in the expected future cash flows of an existing asset,
fair value option. Once the irrevocable election is made upon issuance of
liability or a forecasted transaction that may affect earnings.
the debt, the full changes in fair value of the debt are reported in earnings.
Derivative contracts hedging the risks associated with changes in fair
The related interest rate swap, with changes in fair value, is also reflected in
value are referred to as fair value hedges, while contracts hedging the
earnings, which provides a natural offset to the debt’s fair value change. To
variability of expected future cash flows are cash flow hedges. Hedges that
the extent the two offsets are not exactly equal because the full change in the
utilize derivatives or debt instruments to manage the foreign exchange
fair value of the debt includes risks not offset by the interest rate swap, the
risk associated with equity investments in non-U.S.-dollar-functional-
difference is captured in current earnings.
currency foreign subsidiaries (net investment in a foreign operation) are net
investment hedges.

250
 The key requirements to achieve ASC 815 hedge accounting are Citigroup also hedges exposure to changes in the fair value of fixed-rate
documentation of a hedging strategy and specific hedge relationships at assets, including available-for-sale debt securities and loans. The hedging
hedge inception and substantiating hedge effectiveness on an ongoing basis. instruments used are receive-variable, pay-fixed interest rate swaps. These
A derivative must be highly effective in accomplishing the hedge objective of fair value hedging relationships use either regression or dollar-offset ratio
offsetting either changes in the fair value or cash flows of the hedged item analysis to assess whether the hedging relationships are highly effective at
for the risk being hedged. Any ineffectiveness in the hedge relationship is inception and on an ongoing basis.
recognized in current earnings. The assessment of effectiveness may exclude
Hedging of foreign exchange risk
changes in the value of the hedged item that are unrelated to the risks being
Citigroup hedges the change in fair value attributable to foreign-exchange
hedged. Similarly, the assessment of effectiveness may exclude changes
rate movements in available-for-sale securities that are denominated in
in the fair value of a derivative related to time value that, if excluded, are
currencies other than the functional currency of the entity holding the
recognized in current earnings.
securities, which may be within or outside the U.S. The hedging instrument
Fair Value Hedges employed is generally a forward foreign-exchange contract. In this hedge,
Hedging of benchmark interest rate risk the change in fair value of the hedged available-for-sale security attributable
Citigroup hedges exposure to changes in the fair value of outstanding fixed- to the portion of foreign exchange risk hedged is reported in earnings, and
rate issued debt and certificates of deposit. These hedges are designated as fair not Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)—which serves to
value hedges of the benchmark interest rate risk associated with the currency offset the change in fair value of the forward contract that is also reflected in
of the hedged liability. The fixed cash flows of the hedged items are converted earnings. Citigroup considers the premium associated with forward contracts
to benchmark variable-rate cash flows by entering into receive-fixed, (i.e., the differential between spot and contractual forward rates) as the
pay-variable interest rate swaps. These fair value hedge relationships use cost of hedging; this is excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness
either regression or dollar-offset ratio analysis to assess whether the hedging and reflected directly in earnings. The dollar-offset method is used to assess
relationships are highly effective at inception and on an ongoing basis. hedge effectiveness. Since that assessment is based on changes in fair value
attributable to changes in spot rates on both the available-for-sale securities
and the forward contracts for the portion of the relationship hedged, the
amount of hedge ineffectiveness is not significant.

251
The following table summarizes the gains (losses) on the Company’s fair value hedges for the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 and 2012:

Gains (losses) on fair value hedges (1)

Year ended December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Gain (loss) on the derivatives in designated and qualifying fair value hedges
Interest rate contracts $ 1,546 $(3,288) $ 122
Foreign exchange contracts 1,367 265 377
Commodity contracts (221) — —
Total gain (loss) on the derivatives in designated and qualifying fair value hedges $ 2,692 $(3,023) $ 499
Gain (loss) on the hedged item in designated and qualifying fair value hedges
Interest rate hedges $(1,496) $ 3,204 $(371)
Foreign exchange hedges (1,422) (185) (331)
Commodity hedges 250 — —
Total gain (loss) on the hedged item in designated and qualifying fair value hedges $(2,668) $ 3,019 $(702)
Hedge ineffectiveness recognized in earnings on designated and qualifying fair value hedges
Interest rate hedges $ 53 $ (84) $(249)
Foreign exchange hedges (16) (4) 16
Total hedge ineffectiveness recognized in earnings on designated and qualifying fair value hedges $ 37 $ (88) $(233)
Net gain (loss) excluded from assessment of the effectiveness of fair value hedges
Interest rate contracts $ (3) $ — $ —
Foreign exchange contracts (2) (39) 84 30
Commodity hedges (2) 29 — —
Total net gain (loss) excluded from assessment of the effectiveness of fair value hedges $ (13) $ 84 $ 30

(1) Amounts are included in Other revenue on the Consolidated Statement of Income. The accrued interest income on fair value hedges is recorded in Net interest revenue and is excluded from this table.
(2) Amounts relate to the premium associated with forward contracts (differential between spot and contractual forward rates). These amounts are excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness and are reflected
directly in earnings.

Cash Flow Hedges Hedging of foreign exchange risk

Hedging of benchmark interest rate risk Citigroup locks in the functional currency equivalent cash flows of long-
Citigroup hedges variable cash flows associated with floating-rate liabilities term debt and short-term borrowings that are denominated in currencies
and the rollover (re-issuance) of liabilities. Variable cash flows from those other than the functional currency of the issuing entity. Depending on the
liabilities are converted to fixed-rate cash flows by entering into receive- risk management objectives, these types of hedges are designated as either
variable, pay-fixed interest rate swaps and receive-variable, pay-fixed cash flow hedges of only foreign exchange risk or cash flow hedges of both
forward-starting interest rate swaps. Citi also hedges variable cash flows from foreign exchange and interest rate risk, and the hedging instruments used
recognized and forecasted floating-rate assets. Variable cash flows from those are foreign exchange cross-currency swaps and forward contracts. These
assets are converted to fixed-rate cash flows by entering into receive-fixed, cash flow hedge relationships use dollar-offset ratio analysis to determine
pay-variable interest rate swaps. These cash-flow hedging relationships use whether the hedging relationships are highly effective at inception and on an
either regression analysis or dollar-offset ratio analysis to assess whether ongoing basis.
the hedging relationships are highly effective at inception and on an Hedging of overall changes in cash flows
ongoing basis. When certain variable interest rates, associated with hedged Citigroup makes purchases of certain “to-be-announced” (TBA) mortgage-
items, do not qualify as benchmark interest rates, Citigroup designates the backed securities that meet the definition of a derivative (i.e. a forward
risk being hedged as the risk of overall changes in the hedged cash flows. securities purchase). Citigroup commonly designates these derivatives as
Since efforts are made to match the terms of the derivatives to those of the hedges of the overall cash flow variability related to the forecasted acquisition
hedged forecasted cash flows as closely as possible, the amount of hedge of the TBA mortgage-backed securities. Since the hedged transaction is the
ineffectiveness is not significant. gross settlement of the forward contract, hedge effectiveness is assessed by
assuring that the terms of the hedging instrument and the hedged forecasted
transaction are the same and that delivery of the securities remains probable.

252
Hedging total return The amount of hedge ineffectiveness on the cash flow hedges recognized
Citigroup generally manages the risk associated with leveraged loans it in earnings for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 is not
has originated or in which it participates by transferring a majority of its significant. The pretax change in Accumulated other comprehensive
exposure to the market through SPEs prior to or shortly after funding. income (loss) from cash flow hedges is presented below:
Retained exposures to leveraged loans receivable are generally hedged using
total return swaps.

Year ended December 31,

In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
Effective portion of cash flow hedges included in AOCI
Interest rate contracts $ 299 $ 749 $ (322)
Foreign exchange contracts (167) 34 143
Credit derivatives 2 14 —
Total effective portion of cash flow hedges included in AOCI $ 134 $ 797 $ (179)
Effective portion of cash flow hedges reclassified from AOCI to earnings
Interest rate contracts $(260) $(700) $ (837)
Foreign exchange contracts (149) (176) (180)
Total effective portion of cash flow hedges reclassified from AOCI to earnings (1) $(409) $(876) $(1,017)

(1) Included primarily in Other revenue and Net interest revenue on the Consolidated Income Statement.

For cash flow hedges, the changes in the fair value of the hedging For derivatives designated as net investment hedges, Citigroup follows the
derivative remaining in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) forward-rate method outlined in ASC 815-35-35-16 through 35-26. According
on the Consolidated Balance Sheet will be included in the earnings of future to that method, all changes in fair value, including changes related to the
periods to offset the variability of the hedged cash flows when such cash forward-rate component of the foreign currency forward contracts and the
flows affect earnings. The net loss associated with cash flow hedges expected time value of foreign currency options, are recorded in the Foreign currency
to be reclassified from Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) translation adjustment account within Accumulated other comprehensive
within 12 months of December 31, 2014 is approximately $0.4 billion. income (loss).
The maximum length of time over which forecasted cash flows are hedged For foreign-currency-denominated debt instruments that are designated
is 10 years. as hedges of net investments, the translation gain or loss that is recorded in
The after-tax impact of cash flow hedges on AOCI is shown in Note 20 to the Foreign currency translation adjustment account is based on the spot
the Consolidated Financial Statements. exchange rate between the functional currency of the respective subsidiary
Net Investment Hedges and the U.S. dollar, which is the functional currency of Citigroup. To the
Consistent with ASC 830-20, Foreign Currency Matters—Foreign extent the notional amount of the hedging instrument exactly matches the
Currency Transactions, ASC 815 allows hedging of the foreign currency hedged net investment and the underlying exchange rate of the derivative
risk of a net investment in a foreign operation. Citigroup uses foreign hedging instrument relates to the exchange rate between the functional
currency forwards, options and foreign-currency-denominated debt currency of the net investment and Citigroup’s functional currency (or, in the
instruments to manage the foreign exchange risk associated with Citigroup’s case of a non-derivative debt instrument, such instrument is denominated in
equity investments in several non-U.S.-dollar-functional-currency foreign the functional currency of the net investment), no ineffectiveness is recorded
subsidiaries. Citigroup records the change in the carrying amount of these in earnings.
investments in the Foreign currency translation adjustment account The pretax gain (loss) recorded in the Foreign currency translation
within Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). Simultaneously, adjustment account within Accumulated other comprehensive income
the effective portion of the hedge of this exposure is also recorded in the (loss), related to the effective portion of the net investment hedges, is
Foreign currency translation adjustment account and the ineffective $2,890 million, $2,370 million and $(3,829) million for the years ended
portion, if any, is immediately recorded in earnings. December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

253
Credit Derivatives A total return swap typically transfers the total economic performance of
Citi is a market maker and trades a range of credit derivatives. Through these a reference asset, which includes all associated cash flows, as well as capital
contracts, Citi either purchases or writes protection on either a single name appreciation or depreciation. The protection buyer receives a floating rate of
or a portfolio of reference credits. Citi also uses credit derivatives to help interest and any depreciation on the reference asset from the protection seller
mitigate credit risk in its corporate and consumer loan portfolios and other and, in return, the protection seller receives the cash flows associated with
cash positions, and to facilitate client transactions. the reference asset plus any appreciation. Thus, according to the total return
Citi monitors its counterparty credit risk in credit derivative contracts. As swap agreement, the protection seller will be obligated to make a payment
of December 31, 2014 and 2013, approximately 98% of the gross receivables any time the floating interest rate payment plus any depreciation of the
are from counterparties with which Citi maintains collateral agreements. reference asset exceeds the cash flows associated with the underlying asset.
A majority of Citi’s top 15 counterparties (by receivable balance owed to A total return swap may terminate upon a default of the reference asset or
Citi) are banks, financial institutions or other dealers. Contracts with these a credit event with respect to the reference entity subject to the provisions of
counterparties do not include ratings-based termination events. However, the related total return swap agreement between the protection seller and the
counterparty ratings downgrades may have an incremental effect by lowering protection buyer.
the threshold at which Citi may call for additional collateral. A credit option is a credit derivative that allows investors to trade or hedge
The range of credit derivatives entered into includes credit default swaps, changes in the credit quality of a reference entity. For example, in a credit
total return swaps, credit options and credit-linked notes. spread option, the option writer assumes the obligation to purchase or sell
A credit default swap is a contract in which, for a fee, a protection seller credit protection on the reference entity at a specified “strike” spread level.
agrees to reimburse a protection buyer for any losses that occur due to a The option purchaser buys the right to sell credit default protection on the
predefined credit event on a reference entity. These credit events are defined reference entity to, or purchase it from, the option writer at the strike spread
by the terms of the derivative contract and the reference credit and are level. The payments on credit spread options depend either on a particular
generally limited to the market standard of failure to pay on indebtedness credit spread or the price of the underlying credit-sensitive asset or other
and bankruptcy of the reference credit and, in a more limited range of reference. The options usually terminate if a credit event occurs with respect
transactions, debt restructuring. Credit derivative transactions that reference to the underlying reference entity.
emerging market entities will also typically include additional credit events A credit-linked note is a form of credit derivative structured as a debt
to cover the acceleration of indebtedness and the risk of repudiation or a security with an embedded credit default swap. The purchaser of the note
payment moratorium. In certain transactions, protection may be provided effectively provides credit protection to the issuer by agreeing to receive a
on a portfolio of reference entities or asset-backed securities. If there is no return that could be negatively affected by credit events on the underlying
credit event, as defined by the specific derivative contract, then the protection reference credit. If the reference entity defaults, the note may be cash settled
seller makes no payments to the protection buyer and receives only the or physically settled by delivery of a debt security of the reference entity. Thus,
contractually specified fee. However, if a credit event occurs as defined in the maximum amount of the note purchaser’s exposure is the amount paid
the specific derivative contract sold, the protection seller will be required to for the credit-linked note.
make a payment to the protection buyer. Under certain contracts, the seller of
protection may not be required to make payment until a specified amount of
losses has occurred with respect to the portfolio and/or may only be required
to pay for losses up to a specified amount.

254
The following tables summarize the key characteristics of Citi’s credit derivatives portfolio by counterparty and derivative form as of December 31, 2014 and
December 31, 2013:

Fair values Notionals

Protection Protection
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2014 Receivable (1) Payable (2) purchased sold
By industry/counterparty
Banks $24,828 $23,189 $ 574,764 $ 604,700
Broker-dealers 8,093 9,309 204,542 199,693
Non-financial 91 113 3,697 1,595
Insurance and other financial institutions 10,784 11,374 333,384 257,870
Total by industry/counterparty $43,796 $43,985 $1,116,387 $1,063,858
By instrument
Credit default swaps and options $42,930 $42,201 $1,094,199 $1,054,671
Total return swaps and other 866 1,784 22,188 9,187
Total by instrument $43,796 $43,985 $1,116,387 $1,063,858
By rating
Investment grade $17,432 $17,182 $ 824,831 $ 786,848
Non-investment grade 26,364 26,803 291,556 277,010
Total by rating $43,796 $43,985 $1,116,387 $1,063,858
By maturity
Within 1 year $ 4,356 $ 4,278 $ 250,489 $ 229,502
From 1 to 5 years 34,692 35,160 790,251 772,001
After 5 years 4,748 4,547 75,647 62,355
Total by maturity $43,796 $43,985 $1,116,387 $1,063,858

(1) The fair value amount receivable is composed of $18,708 million under protection purchased and $25,088 million under protection sold.
(2) The fair value amount payable is composed of $26,527 million under protection purchased and $17,458 million under protection sold.

Fair values Notionals

Protection Protection
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2013 Receivable (1) Payable (2) purchased sold
By industry/counterparty
Banks $24,992 $23,455 $ 739,646 $ 727,748
Broker-dealers 8,840 9,820 254,250 224,073
Non-financial 138 162 4,930 2,820
Insurance and other financial institutions 6,447 7,922 216,236 188,722
Total by industry/counterparty $40,417 $41,359 $1,215,062 $1,143,363
By instrument
Credit default swaps and options $40,233 $39,930 $1,201,716 $1,141,864
Total return swaps and other 184 1,429 13,346 1,499
Total by instrument $40,417 $41,359 $1,215,062 $1,143,363
By rating
Investment grade $17,150 $17,174 $ 812,918 $ 752,640
Non-investment grade 23,267 24,185 402,144 390,723
Total by rating $40,417 $41,359 $1,215,062 $1,143,363
By maturity
Within 1 year $ 2,901 $ 3,262 $ 254,305 $ 221,562
From 1 to 5 years 31,674 32,349 883,879 853,391
After 5 years 5,842 5,748 76,878 68,410
Total by maturity $40,417 $41,359 $1,215,062 $1,143,363

(1) The fair value amount receivable is composed of $13,744 million under protection purchased and $26,673 million under protection sold.
(2) The fair value amount payable is composed of $28,723 million under protection purchased and $12,636 million under protection sold.

255
 Fair values included in the above tables are prior to application of any as such payments would be calculated after netting all derivative exposures,
netting agreements and cash collateral. For notional amounts, Citi generally including any credit derivatives with that counterparty in accordance
has a mismatch between the total notional amounts of protection purchased with a related master netting agreement. Due to such netting processes,
and sold, and it may hold the reference assets directly, rather than entering determining the amount of collateral that corresponds to credit derivative
into offsetting credit derivative contracts as and when desired. The open risk exposures alone is not possible. The Company actively monitors open credit-
exposures from credit derivative contracts are largely matched after certain risk exposures and manages this exposure by using a variety of strategies,
cash positions in reference assets are considered and after notional amounts including purchased credit derivatives, cash collateral or direct holdings
are adjusted, either to a duration-based equivalent basis or to reflect the level of the referenced assets. This risk mitigation activity is not captured in the
of subordination in tranched structures. The ratings of the credit derivatives table above.
portfolio presented in the tables and used to evaluate payment/performance Credit-Risk-Related Contingent Features in Derivatives
risk are based on the assigned internal or external ratings of the referenced Certain derivative instruments contain provisions that require the Company
asset or entity. Where external ratings are used, investment-grade ratings are to either post additional collateral or immediately settle any outstanding
considered to be ‘Baa/BBB’ and above, while anything below is considered liability balances upon the occurrence of a specified event related to the
non-investment grade. Citi’s internal ratings are in line with the related credit risk of the Company. These events, which are defined by the existing
external rating system. derivative contracts, are primarily downgrades in the credit ratings of the
Citigroup evaluates the payment/performance risk of the credit derivatives Company and its affiliates. The fair value (excluding CVA) of all derivative
for which it stands as a protection seller based on the credit rating assigned to instruments with credit-risk-related contingent features that were in a
the underlying referenced credit. Credit derivatives written on an underlying net liability position at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 was
non-investment grade reference credit represent greater payment risk to $30 billion and $26 billion, respectively. The Company had posted $27 billion
the Company. The non-investment grade category in the table above also and $24 billion as collateral for this exposure in the normal course of
includes credit derivatives where the underlying referenced entity has been business as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively.
downgraded subsequent to the inception of the derivative. Each downgrade would trigger additional collateral or cash settlement
The maximum potential amount of future payments under credit requirements for the Company and its affiliates. In the event that each
derivative contracts presented in the table above is based on the notional legal entity was downgraded a single notch by the three rating agencies
value of the derivatives. The Company believes that the notional amount for as of December 31, 2014, the Company would be required to post an
credit protection sold is not representative of the actual loss exposure based additional $2.0 billion as either collateral or settlement of the derivative
on historical experience. This amount has not been reduced by the value transactions. Additionally, the Company would be required to segregate
of the reference assets and the related cash flows. In accordance with most with third-party custodians collateral previously received from existing
credit derivative contracts, should a credit event occur, the Company usually derivative counterparties in the amount of $0.1 billion upon the single
is liable for the difference between the protection sold and the value of the notch downgrade, resulting in aggregate cash obligations and collateral
reference assets. Furthermore, the notional amount for credit protection sold requirements of approximately $2.1 billion.
has not been reduced for any cash collateral paid to a given counterparty,

256
24. CONCENTRATIONS OF CREDIT RISK
Concentrations of credit risk exist when changes in economic, industry or
geographic factors similarly affect groups of counterparties whose aggregate
credit exposure is material in relation to Citigroup’s total credit exposure.
Although Citigroup’s portfolio of financial instruments is broadly diversified
along industry, product, and geographic lines, material transactions are
completed with other financial institutions, particularly in the securities
trading, derivatives and foreign exchange businesses.
In connection with the Company’s efforts to maintain a diversified
portfolio, the Company limits its exposure to any one geographic region,
country or individual creditor and monitors this exposure on a continuous
basis. At December 31, 2014, Citigroup’s most significant concentration of
credit risk was with the U.S. government and its agencies. The Company’s
exposure, which primarily results from trading assets and investments issued
by the U.S. government and its agencies, amounted to $216.3 billion and
$168.4 billion at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The Japanese
and Mexican governments and their agencies, which are rated investment
grade by both Moody’s and S&P, were the next largest exposures. The
Company’s exposure to Japan amounted to $32.0 billion and $29.0 billion at
December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and was composed of investment
securities, loans and trading assets. The Company’s exposure to Mexico
amounted to $29.7 billion and $37.0 billion at December 31, 2014 and
2013, respectively, and was composed of investment securities, loans and
trading assets.
The Company’s exposure to states and municipalities amounted to
$31.0 billion and $33.1 billion at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively,
and was composed of trading assets, investment securities, derivatives and
lending activities.

257
25. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENT the position being valued. The market activity and the amount of the bid-ask
spread are among the factors considered in determining the liquidity of
ASC 820-10 Fair Value Measurement, defines fair value, establishes a
markets and the relevance of observed prices from those markets. If relevant
consistent framework for measuring fair value and requires disclosures about
and observable prices are available, those valuations may be classified as
fair value measurements. Fair value is defined as the price that would be
Level 2. When less liquidity exists for a security or loan, a quoted price is
received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction
stale, a significant adjustment to the price of a similar security is necessary
between market participants at the measurement date. Among other things,
to reflect differences in the terms of the actual security or loan being valued,
the standard requires the Company to maximize the use of observable inputs
or prices from independent sources are insufficient to corroborate the
and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value.
valuation, the “price” inputs are considered unobservable and the fair value
Under ASC 820-10, the probability of default of a counterparty is factored
measurements are classified as Level 3.
into the valuation of derivative positions and includes the impact of
If quoted market prices are not available, fair value is based upon
Citigroup’s own credit risk on derivatives and other liabilities measured at
internally developed valuation techniques that use, where possible, current
fair value.
market-based parameters, such as interest rates, currency rates and
Fair Value Hierarchy option volatilities. Items valued using such internally generated valuation
ASC 820-10 specifies a hierarchy of inputs based on whether the inputs are techniques are classified according to the lowest level input or value driver
observable or unobservable. Observable inputs are developed using market that is significant to the valuation. Thus, an item may be classified as Level 3
data and reflect market participant assumptions, while unobservable inputs even though there may be some significant inputs that are readily observable.
reflect the Company’s market assumptions. These two types of inputs have Fair value estimates from internal valuation techniques are verified,
created the following fair value hierarchy: where possible, to prices obtained from independent vendors or brokers.
• Level 1: Quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets. Vendors and brokers’ valuations may be based on a variety of inputs ranging
from observed prices to proprietary valuation models.
• Level 2: Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted
The following section describes the valuation methodologies used by
prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not
the Company to measure various financial instruments at fair value,
active; and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs and
including an indication of the level in the fair value hierarchy in which each
significant value drivers are observable in active markets.
instrument is generally classified. Where appropriate, the description includes
• Level 3: Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or details of the valuation models, the key inputs to those models and any
more significant inputs or significant value drivers are unobservable. significant assumptions.
As required under the fair value hierarchy, the Company considers Market valuation adjustments
relevant and observable market inputs in its valuations where possible. The Generally, the unit of account for a financial instrument is the individual
frequency of transactions, the size of the bid-ask spread and the amount of financial instrument. The Company applies market valuation adjustments
adjustment necessary when comparing similar transactions are all factors in that are consistent with the unit of account, which does not include
determining the liquidity of markets and the relevance of observed prices in adjustment due to the size of the Company’s position, except as follows.
those markets. ASC 820-10 permits an exception, through an accounting policy election,
The Company’s policy with respect to transfers between levels of the fair to measure the fair value of a portfolio of financial assets and financial
value hierarchy is to recognize transfers into and out of each level as of the liabilities on the basis of the net open risk position when certain criteria are
end of the reporting period. met. Citi has elected to measure certain portfolios of financial instruments,
Determination of Fair Value such as derivatives, that meet those criteria on the basis of the net open risk
For assets and liabilities carried at fair value, the Company measures such position. The Company applies market valuation adjustments, including
value using the procedures set out below, irrespective of whether these assets adjustments to account for the size of the net open risk position, consistent
and liabilities are measured at fair value as a result of an election or whether with market participant assumptions and in accordance with the unit
they are required to be measured at fair value. of account.
When available, the Company generally uses quoted market prices to Liquidity adjustments are applied to items in Level 2 or Level 3 of the
determine fair value and classifies such items as Level 1. In some cases fair-value hierarchy in an effort to ensure that the fair value reflects the
where a market price is available, the Company will make use of acceptable price at which the net open risk position could be liquidated. The liquidity
practical expedients (such as matrix pricing) to calculate fair value, in which adjustment is based on the bid/offer spread for an instrument. When Citi
case the items are classified as Level 2. has elected to measure certain portfolios of financial investments, such as
The Company may also apply a price-based methodology, which utilizes, derivatives, on the basis of the net open risk position, the liquidity adjustment
where available, quoted prices or other market information obtained from is adjusted to take into account the size of the position.
recent trading activity in positions with the same or similar characteristics to

258
 Credit valuation adjustments (CVA) and, effective in the third quarter The table below summarizes the CVA and FVA applied to the fair value of
of 2014, funding valuation adjustments (FVA), are applied to over-the- derivative instruments for the periods indicated:
counter (OTC) derivative instruments in which the base valuation generally
discounts expected cash flows using the relevant base interest rate curve Credit and funding valuation
adjustments
for the currency of the derivative (e.g., LIBOR for uncollateralized U.S. contra-liability (contra-asset)
dollar derivatives). As not all counterparties have the same credit risk as December 31, December 31,
that implied by the relevant base curve, a CVA is necessary to incorporate In millions of dollars 2014 2013
the market view of both counterparty credit risk and Citi’s own credit risk Counterparty CVA $(1,853) $(1,733)
in the valuation. FVA reflects a market funding risk premium inherent in Asset FVA (518) —
the uncollateralized portion of derivative portfolios, and in collateralized Citigroup (own-credit) CVA 580 651
Liability FVA 19 —
derivatives where the terms of the agreement do not permit the reuse of the
Total CVA—derivative instruments (1) $(1,772) $(1,082)
collateral received.
Citi’s CVA methodology is composed of two steps. First, the credit exposure (1) FVA is included with CVA for presentation purposes.
profile for each counterparty is determined using the terms of all individual The table below summarizes pretax gains (losses) related to changes in
derivative positions and a Monte Carlo simulation or other quantitative CVA on derivative instruments, net of hedges, FVA on derivatives and debt
analysis to generate a series of expected cash flows at future points in time. valuation adjustments (DVA) on Citi’s own fair value option (FVO) liabilities
The calculation of this exposure profile considers the effect of credit risk for the periods indicated:
mitigants, including pledged cash or other collateral and any legal right
of offset that exists with a counterparty through arrangements such as Credit/funding/debt valuation
netting agreements. Individual derivative contracts that are subject to an adjustments gain (loss)
enforceable master netting agreement with a counterparty are aggregated In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2012
for this purpose, since it is those aggregate net cash flows that are subject to Counterparty CVA $ (43) $ 291 $ 805
nonperformance risk. This process identifies specific, point-in-time future Asset FVA (518) — —
Own-credit CVA (65) (223) (1,126)
cash flows that are subject to nonperformance risk, rather than using the Liability FVA 19 — —
current recognized net asset or liability as a basis to measure the CVA. Second, Total CVA—derivative instruments $(607) $ 68 $ (321)
market-based views of default probabilities derived from observed credit DVA related to own FVO liabilities $ 217 $ (410) $(2,009)
spreads in the credit default swap (CDS) market are applied to the expected Total CVA and DVA (1) $(390) $ (342) $(2,330)
future cash flows determined in step one. Citi’s own-credit CVA is determined
using Citi-specific CDS spreads for the relevant tenor. Generally, counterparty (1) FVA is included with CVA for presentation purposes.

CVA is determined using CDS spread indices for each credit rating and tenor.
Valuation Process for Fair Value Measurements
For certain identified netting sets where individual analysis is practicable
(e.g., exposures to counterparties with liquid CDSs), counterparty-specific Price verification procedures and related internal control procedures are
CDS spreads are used. governed by the Citigroup Pricing and Price Verification Policy and
The CVA and FVA are designed to incorporate a market view of the credit Standards, which is jointly owned by Finance and Risk Management.
and funding risk, respectively, inherent in the derivative portfolio. However, Finance has implemented the ICG Pricing and Price Verification
most unsecured derivative instruments are negotiated bilateral contracts Standards and Procedures to facilitate compliance with this policy.
and are not commonly transferred to third parties. Derivative instruments For fair value measurements of substantially all assets and liabilities
are normally settled contractually or, if terminated early, are terminated at held by the Company, individual business units are responsible for valuing
a value negotiated bilaterally between the counterparties. Thus, the CVA and the trading account assets and liabilities, and Product Control within
FVA may not be realized upon a settlement or termination in the normal Finance performs independent price verification procedures to evaluate
course of business. In addition, all or a portion of these adjustments may be those fair value measurements. Product Control is independent of the
reversed or otherwise adjusted in future periods in the event of changes in the individual business units and reports to the Global Head of Product Control.
credit or funding risk associated with the derivative instruments. It has authority over the valuation of financial assets and liabilities. Fair
value measurements of assets and liabilities are determined using various
techniques, including, but not limited to, discounted cash flows and internal
models, such as option and correlation models.

259
 Based on the observability of inputs used, Product Control classifies the prices from various sources and may apply matrix pricing for similar bonds
inventory as Level 1, Level 2 or Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. When or loans where no price is observable. A price-based methodology utilizes,
a position involves one or more significant inputs that are not directly where available, quoted prices or other market information obtained from
observable, price verification procedures are performed that may include recent trading activity of assets with similar characteristics to the bond
reviewing relevant historical data, analyzing profit and loss, valuing or loan being valued. The yields used in discounted cash flow models are
each component of a structured trade individually, and benchmarking, derived from the same price information. Trading securities and loans priced
among others. using such methods are generally classified as Level 2. However, when less
Reports of inventory that is classified within Level 3 of the fair value liquidity exists for a security or loan, a quoted price is stale, a significant
hierarchy are distributed to senior management in Finance, Risk and the adjustment to the price of a similar security or loan is necessary to reflect
business. This inventory is also discussed in Risk Committees and in monthly differences in the terms of the actual security or loan being valued, or
meetings with senior trading management. As deemed necessary, reports may prices from independent sources are insufficient to corroborate valuation,
go to the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors or to the full Board of a loan or security is generally classified as Level 3. The price input used in
Directors. Whenever an adjustment is needed to bring the price of an asset or a price-based methodology may be zero for a security, such as a subprime
liability to its exit price, Product Control reports it to management along with CDO, that is not receiving any principal or interest and is currently written
other price verification results. down to zero.
In addition, the pricing models used in measuring fair value are governed Where the Company’s principal market for a portfolio of loans is the
by an independent control framework. Although the models are developed securitization market, the Company uses the securitization price to determine
and tested by the individual business units, they are independently validated the fair value of the portfolio. The securitization price is determined from
by the Model Validation Group within Risk Management and reviewed by the assumed proceeds of a hypothetical securitization in the current market,
Finance with respect to their impact on the price verification procedures. The adjusted for transformation costs (i.e., direct costs other than transaction
purpose of this independent control framework is to assess model risk arising costs) and securitization uncertainties such as market conditions and
from models’ theoretical soundness, calibration techniques where needed, liquidity. As a result of the severe reduction in the level of activity in
and the appropriateness of the model for a specific product in a defined certain securitization markets since the second half of 2007, observable
market. To ensure their continued applicability, models are independently securitization prices for certain directly comparable portfolios of loans
reviewed annually. In addition, Risk Management approves and maintains have not been readily available. Therefore, such portfolios of loans are
a list of products permitted to be valued under each approved model for a generally classified as Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. However, for other
given business. loan securitization markets, such as commercial real estate loans, price
verification of the hypothetical securitizations has been possible, since these
Securities purchased under agreements to resell and
markets have remained active. Accordingly, this loan portfolio is classified as
securities sold under agreements to repurchase
Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
No quoted prices exist for such instruments, so fair value is determined using
a discounted cash-flow technique. Cash flows are estimated based on the Trading account assets and liabilities—derivatives
terms of the contract, taking into account any embedded derivative or other Exchange-traded derivatives, measured at fair value using quoted
features. Expected cash flows are discounted using interest rates appropriate (i.e., exchange) prices in active markets, where available, are classified as
to the maturity of the instrument as well as the nature of the underlying Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy.
collateral. Generally, when such instruments are held at fair value, they are Derivatives without a quoted price in an active market and derivatives
classified within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, as the inputs used in the executed over the counter are valued using internal valuation techniques.
valuation are readily observable. However, certain long-dated positions are These derivative instruments are classified as either Level 2 or Level 3
classified within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. depending upon the observability of the significant inputs to the model.
The valuation techniques and inputs depend on the type of derivative
Trading account assets and liabilities—trading securities
and the nature of the underlying instrument. The principal techniques used
and trading loans
to value these instruments are discounted cash flows and internal models,
When available, the Company generally uses quoted market prices in active
including Black-Scholes and Monte Carlo simulation.
markets to determine the fair value of trading securities; such items are
The key inputs depend upon the type of derivative and the nature
classified as Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy. Examples include some
of the underlying instrument and include interest rate yield curves,
government securities and exchange-traded equity securities.
foreign-exchange rates, volatilities and correlation. The Company uses
For bonds and secondary market loans traded over the counter, the
overnight indexed swap (OIS) curves as fair value measurement inputs
Company generally determines fair value utilizing valuation techniques,
for the valuation of certain collateralized derivatives. Citi uses the relevant
including discounted cash flows, price-based and internal models, such as
benchmark curve for the currency of the derivative (e.g., the London
Black-Scholes and Monte Carlo simulation. Fair value estimates from these
Interbank Offered Rate for U.S. dollar derivatives) as the discount rate for
internal valuation techniques are verified, where possible, to prices obtained
uncollateralized derivatives.
from independent sources, including third-party vendors. Vendors compile

260
 As referenced above, during the third quarter of 2014, Citi incorporated Short-term borrowings and long-term debt
FVA into the fair value measurements due to what it believes to be an Where fair value accounting has been elected, the fair value of non-
industry migration toward incorporating the market’s view of funding risk structured liabilities is determined by utilizing internal models using the
premium in OTC derivatives. In connection with its implementation of FVA appropriate discount rate for the applicable maturity. Such instruments are
in 2014, Citigroup incurred a pretax charge of $499 million, which was generally classified as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy when all significant
reflected in Principal transactions as a change in accounting estimate. inputs are readily observable.
Citi’s FVA methodology leverages the existing CVA methodology to estimate a The Company determines the fair value of hybrid financial instruments,
funding exposure profile. The calculation of this exposure profile considers including structured liabilities, using the appropriate derivative valuation
collateral agreements where the terms do not permit the firm to reuse methodology (described above in “Trading account assets and liabilities—
the collateral received, including where counterparties post collateral to derivatives”) given the nature of the embedded risk profile. Such instruments
third-party custodians. are classified as Level 2 or Level 3 depending on the observability of
significant inputs to the model.
Subprime-related direct exposures in CDOs
The valuation of high-grade and mezzanine asset-backed security (ABS) Alt-A mortgage securities
CDO positions utilizes prices based on the underlying assets of each high- The Company classifies its Alt-A mortgage securities as held-to-maturity,
grade and mezzanine ABS CDO. available-for-sale or trading investments. The securities classified as trading
For most of the lending and structured direct subprime exposures, fair and available-for-sale are recorded at fair value with changes in fair value
value is determined utilizing observable transactions where available, other reported in current earnings and AOCI, respectively. For these purposes, Citi
market data for similar assets in markets that are not active and other defines Alt-A mortgage securities as non-agency residential mortgage-backed
internal valuation techniques. securities (RMBS) where (i) the underlying collateral has weighted average
FICO scores between 680 and 720 or (ii) for instances where FICO scores
Investments
are greater than 720, RMBS have 30% or less of the underlying collateral
The investments category includes available-for-sale debt and marketable
composed of full documentation loans.
equity securities whose fair value is generally determined by utilizing similar
Similar to the valuation methodologies used for other trading securities
procedures described for trading securities above or, in some cases, using
and trading loans, the Company generally determines the fair values of
vendor pricing as the primary source.
Alt-A mortgage securities utilizing internal valuation techniques. Fair value
Also included in investments are nonpublic investments in private equity
estimates from internal valuation techniques are verified, where possible, to
and real estate entities. Determining the fair value of nonpublic securities
prices obtained from independent vendors. Consensus data providers compile
involves a significant degree of management resources and judgment, as
prices from various sources. Where available, the Company may also make
no quoted prices exist and such securities are generally very thinly traded.
use of quoted prices for recent trading activity in securities with the same or
In addition, there may be transfer restrictions on private equity securities.
similar characteristics to the security being valued.
The Company’s process for determining the fair value of such securities
The valuation techniques used for Alt-A mortgage securities, as with other
utilizes commonly accepted valuation techniques, including comparables
mortgage exposures, are price-based and yield analysis. The primary market-
analysis. In determining the fair value of nonpublic securities, the Company
derived input is yield. Cash flows are based on current collateral performance
also considers events such as a proposed sale of the investee company,
with prepayment rates and loss projections reflective of current economic
initial public offerings, equity issuances or other observable transactions. As
conditions of housing price change, unemployment rates, interest rates,
discussed in Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, the Company
borrower attributes and other market indicators.
uses net asset value to value certain of these investments.
Alt-A mortgage securities that are valued using these methods are
Private equity securities are generally classified as Level 3 of the fair
generally classified as Level 2. However, Alt-A mortgage securities backed
value hierarchy.
by Alt-A mortgages of lower quality or subordinated tranches in the capital
structure are mostly classified as Level 3 due to the reduced liquidity that
exists for such positions, which reduces the reliability of prices available from
independent sources.

261
Items Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis category is not limited to other financial instruments (hedging instruments)
The following tables present for each of the fair value hierarchy levels that have been classified as Level 3, but also instruments classified as Level 1
the Company’s assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on or Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. The effects of these hedges are presented
a recurring basis at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013. The gross in the following table.
Company’s hedging of positions that have been classified in the Level 3

Fair Value Levels

Gross Net
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2014 Level 1 (1) Level 2 (1) Level 3 inventory Netting (2) balance
Assets
Federal funds sold and securities borrowed or purchased under
agreements to resell $ — $187,922 $ 3,398 $191,320 $ (47,129) $144,191
Trading non-derivative assets
Trading mortgage-backed securities
U.S. government-sponsored agency guaranteed $ — $ 25,968 $ 1,085 $ 27,053 $ — $ 27,053
Residential — 2,158 2,680 4,838 — 4,838
Commercial — 3,903 440 4,343 — 4,343
Total trading mortgage-backed securities $ — $ 32,029 $ 4,205 $ 36,234 $ — $ 36,234
U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities $ 15,991 $ 4,483 $ — $ 20,474 $ — $ 20,474
State and municipal — 3,161 241 3,402 — 3,402
Foreign government 39,332 26,736 206 66,274 — 66,274
Corporate — 25,640 820 26,460 — 26,460
Equity securities 51,346 4,281 2,219 57,846 — 57,846
Asset-backed securities — 1,252 3,294 4,546 — 4,546
Other trading assets — 9,221 4,372 13,593 — 13,593
Total trading non-derivative assets $106,669 $106,803 $15,357 $228,829 $ — $228,829
Trading derivatives
Interest rate contracts $ 74 $634,318 $ 4,061 $638,453
Foreign exchange contracts — 154,744 1,250 155,994
Equity contracts 2,748 19,969 2,035 24,752
Commodity contracts 647 21,850 1,023 23,520
Credit derivatives — 40,618 2,900 43,518
Total trading derivatives $ 3,469 $871,499 $11,269 $886,237
Cash collateral paid (3) $ 6,523
Netting agreements $ (777,178)
Netting of cash collateral received (7) (47,625)
Total trading derivatives $ 3,469 $871,499 $11,269 $892,760 $ (824,803) $ 67,957
Investments
Mortgage-backed securities
U.S. government-sponsored agency guaranteed $ — $ 36,053 $ 38 $ 36,091 $ — $ 36,091
Residential — 8,355 8 8,363 — 8,363
Commercial — 553 1 554 — 554
Total investment mortgage-backed securities $ — $ 44,961 $ 47 $ 45,008 $ — $ 45,008
U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities $110,710 $ 12,974 $ 6 $123,690 $ — $123,690
State and municipal $ — $ 10,519 $ 2,180 $ 12,699 $ — $ 12,699
Foreign government 39,014 51,005 678 90,697 — 90,697
Corporate 5 11,480 672 12,157 — 12,157
Equity securities 1,770 274 681 2,725 — 2,725
Asset-backed securities — 11,957 549 12,506 — 12,506
Other debt securities — 661 — 661 — 661
Non-marketable equity securities — 233 2,525 2,758 — 2,758
Total investments $151,499 $144,064 $ 7,338 $302,901 $ — $302,901

262
 Gross Net
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2014 Level 1 (1) Level 2 (1) Level 3 inventory Netting (2) balance
Loans (4) $ — $ 2,793 $ 3,108 $ 5,901 $ — $ 5,901
Mortgage servicing rights — — 1,845 1,845 — 1,845
Non-trading derivatives and other financial assets measured
on a recurring basis, gross $ — $ 9,352 $ 78 $ 9,430
Cash collateral paid (5) 123
Netting of cash collateral received (8) $ (1,791)
Non-trading derivatives and other financial assets measured
on a recurring basis $ — $ 9,352 $ 78 $ 9,553 $ (1,791) $ 7,762
Total assets $261,637 $1,322,433 $42,393 $1,633,109 $ (873,723) $759,386
Total as a percentage of gross assets (6) 16.1% 81.3% 2.6%
Liabilities
Interest-bearing deposits $ — $ 1,198 $ 486 $ 1,684 $ — $ 1,684
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under
agreements to repurchase — 82,811 1,043 83,854 (47,129) 36,725
Trading account liabilities
Securities sold, not yet purchased 59,463 11,057 424 70,944 — 70,944
Trading derivatives
Interest rate contracts 77 617,933 4,272 622,282
Foreign exchange contracts — 158,354 472 158,826
Equity contracts 2,955 26,616 2,898 32,469
Commodity contracts 669 22,872 2,645 26,186
Credit derivatives — 39,787 3,643 43,430
Total trading derivatives $ 3,701 $ 865,562 $13,930 $ 883,193
Cash collateral received (7) $ 9,846
Netting agreements $ (777,178)
Netting of cash collateral paid (47,769)
Total trading derivatives $ 3,701 $ 865,562 $13,930 $ 893,039 $ (824,947) $ 68,092
Short-term borrowings $ — $ 1,152 $ 344 $ 1,496 $ — $ 1,496
Long-term debt — 18,890 7,290 26,180 — 26,180
Non-trading derivatives and other financial liabilities measured
on a recurring basis, gross $ — $ 1,777 $ 7 $ 1,784
Cash collateral received (8) 7
Netting of cash collateral paid (5) $ (15)
Total non-trading derivatives and other financial liabilities measured
on a recurring basis $ — $ 1,777 $ 7 $ 1,791 $ (15) $ 1,776
Total liabilities $ 63,164 $ 982,447 $23,524 $1,078,988 $ (872,091) $206,897
Total as a percentage of gross liabilities (6) 5.9% 91.9% 2.2%

(1) For the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company transferred assets of approximately $4.1 billion from Level 1 to Level 2, primarily related to foreign government securities not traded in active markets and
Citi refining its methodology for certain equity contracts to reflect the prevalence of off-exchange trading. During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company transferred assets of approximately $4.2 billion
from Level 2 to Level 1, primarily related to foreign government bonds traded with sufficient frequency to constitute a liquid market. During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company transferred liabilities of
approximately $1.4 billion from Level 1 to Level 2, as Citi refined its methodology for certain equity contracts to reflect the prevalence of off-exchange trading. During the year ended December 31, 2014, there were no
material transfers of liabilities from Level 2 to Level 1.
(2) Represents netting of: (i) the amounts due under securities purchased under agreements to resell and the amounts owed under securities sold under agreements to repurchase; and (ii) derivative exposures covered by
a qualifying master netting agreement and cash collateral offsetting.
(3) Reflects the net amount of $54,292 million of gross cash collateral paid, of which $47,769 million was used to offset derivative liabilities.
(4) There is no allowance for loan losses recorded for loans reported at fair value.
(5) Reflects the net amount of $138 million of gross cash collateral paid, of which $15 million was used to offset non-trading derivative liabilities.
(6) Because the amount of the cash collateral paid/received has not been allocated to the Level 1, 2 and 3 subtotals, these percentages are calculated based on total assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a
recurring basis, excluding the cash collateral paid/received on derivatives.
(7) Reflects the net amount of $57,471 million of gross cash collateral received, of which $47,625 million was used to offset derivative assets.
(8) Reflects the net amount of $1,798 million of gross cash collateral received, of which $1,791 million was used to offset non-trading derivative assets.

263
Fair Value Levels
Gross Net
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2013 Level 1 (1) Level 2 (1) Level 3 inventory Netting (2) balance
Assets
Federal funds sold and securities borrowed or purchased under
agreements to resell $ — $ 172,848 $ 3,566 $ 176,414 $ (32,331) $144,083
Trading non-derivative assets
Trading mortgage-backed securities
U.S. government-sponsored agency guaranteed — 22,861 1,094 23,955 — 23,955
Residential — 1,223 2,854 4,077 — 4,077
Commercial — 2,318 256 2,574 — 2,574
Total trading mortgage-backed securities $ — $ 26,402 $ 4,204 $ 30,606 $ — $ 30,606
U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities $ 12,080 $ 2,757 $ — $ 14,837 $ — $ 14,837
State and municipal — 2,985 222 3,207 — 3,207
Foreign government 49,220 25,220 416 74,856 — 74,856
Corporate — 28,699 1,835 30,534 — 30,534
Equity securities 58,761 1,958 1,057 61,776 — 61,776
Asset-backed securities — 1,274 4,342 5,616 — 5,616
Other trading assets — 8,491 3,184 11,675 — 11,675
Total trading non-derivative assets $120,061 $ 97,786 $15,260 $ 233,107 $ — $233,107
Trading derivatives
Interest rate contracts $ 11 $ 624,902 $ 3,467 $ 628,380
Foreign exchange contracts 40 91,189 1,325 92,554
Equity contracts 5,793 17,611 1,473 24,877
Commodity contracts 506 7,775 801 9,082
Credit derivatives — 37,336 3,010 40,346
Total trading derivatives $ 6,350 $ 778,813 $10,076 $ 795,239
Cash collateral paid (3) $ 6,073
Netting agreements $(713,598)
Netting of cash collateral received (6) (34,893)
Total trading derivatives $ 6,350 $ 778,813 $10,076 $ 801,312 $(748,491) $ 52,821
Investments
Mortgage-backed securities
U.S. government-sponsored agency guaranteed $ — $ 41,810 $ 187 $ 41,997 $ — $ 41,997
Residential — 10,103 102 10,205 — 10,205
Commercial — 453 — 453 — 453
Total investment mortgage-backed securities $ — $ 52,366 $ 289 $ 52,655 $ — $ 52,655
U.S. Treasury and federal agency securities $ 69,139 $ 18,449 $ 8 $ 87,596 $ — $ 87,596
State and municipal $ — $ 17,297 $ 1,643 $ 18,940 $ — $ 18,940
Foreign government 35,179 60,948 344 96,471 — 96,471
Corporate 4 10,841 285 11,130 — 11,130
Equity securities 2,583 336 815 3,734 — 3,734
Asset-backed securities — 13,314 1,960 15,274 — 15,274
Other debt securities — 661 50 711 — 711
Non-marketable equity securities — 358 4,347 4,705 — 4,705
Total investments $106,905 $ 174,570 $ 9,741 $ 291,216 $ — $291,216

Table and notes continue on the next page.

264
 Gross Net
In millions of dollars at December 31, 2013 Level 1 (1) Level 2 (1) Level 3 inventory Netting (2) balance
Loans (4) $ — $ 886 $ 4,143 $ 5,029 $ — $ 5,029
Mortgage servicing rights — — 2,718 2,718 — 2,718
Non-trading derivatives and other financial assets measured
on a recurring basis, gross $ — $ 9,811 $ 181 $ 9,992
Cash collateral paid 82
Netting of cash collateral received (7) $ (2,951)
Non-trading derivatives and other financial assets measured
on a recurring basis $ — $ 9,811 $ 181 $ 10,074 $ (2,951) $ 7,123
Total assets $233,316 $1,234,714 $ 45,685 $1,519,870 $ (783,773) $736,097
Total as a percentage of gross assets (5) 15.4% 81.6% 3.0%
Liabilities
Interest-bearing deposits $ — $ 787 $ 890 $ 1,677 $ — $ 1,677
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under
agreements to repurchase — 85,576 902 86,478 (32,331) 54,147
Trading account liabilities
Securities sold, not yet purchased 51,035 9,883 590 61,508 61,508
Trading account derivatives
Interest rate contracts 12 614,586 2,628 617,226
Foreign exchange contracts 29 87,978 630 88,637
Equity contracts 5,783 26,178 2,331 34,292
Commodity contracts 363 7,613 2,194 10,170
Credit derivatives — 37,510 3,284 40,794
Total trading derivatives $ 6,187 $ 773,865 $ 11,067 $ 791,119
Cash collateral received (6) $ 8,827
Netting agreements $ (713,598)
Netting of cash collateral paid (3) (39,094)
Total trading derivatives $ 6,187 $ 773,865 $ 11,067 $ 799,946 $ (752,692) $ 47,254
Short-term borrowings $ — $ 3,663 $ 29 $ 3,692 $ — $ 3,692
Long-term debt — 19,256 7,621 26,877 — 26,877
Non-trading derivatives and other financial liabilities measured
on a recurring basis, gross $ — $ 1,719 $ 10 $ 1,729
Cash collateral received (7) $ 282
Non-trading derivatives and other financial liabilities measured
on a recurring basis — 1,719 10 2,011 2,011
Total liabilities $ 57,222 $ 894,749 $ 21,109 $ 982,189 $ (785,023) $197,166
Total as a percentage of gross liabilities (5) 5.9% 92.0% 2.2%

(1) For the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company transferred assets of approximately $2.5 billion from Level 1 to Level 2, primarily related to foreign government securities, which were not traded with sufficient
frequency to constitute an active market. During the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company transferred assets of approximately $49.3 billion from Level 2 to Level 1, substantially all related to U.S. Treasury
securities held across the Company’s major investment portfolios where Citi obtained additional information from its external pricing sources to meet the criteria for Level 1 classification. There were no material liability
transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 during the year ended December 31, 2013.
(2) Represents netting of: (i) the amounts due under securities purchased under agreements to resell and the amounts owed under securities sold under agreements to repurchase; and (ii) derivative exposures covered by
a qualifying master netting agreement and cash collateral offsetting.
(3) Reflects the net amount of $45,167 million of gross cash collateral paid, of which $39,094 million was used to offset derivative liabilities.
(4) There is no allowance for loan losses recorded for loans reported at fair value.
(5) Because the amount of the cash collateral paid/received has not been allocated to the Level 1, 2 and 3 subtotals, these percentages are calculated based on total assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a
recurring basis, excluding the cash collateral paid/received on derivatives.
(6) Reflects the net amount of $43,720 million of gross cash collateral received, of which $34,893 million was used to offset derivative assets.
(7) Reflects the net amount of $3,233 million of gross cash collateral received, of which $2,951 million was used to offset derivative assets.

265
Changes in Level 3 Fair Value Category The Company often hedges positions with offsetting positions that are
The following tables present the changes in the Level 3 fair value category for classified in a different level. For example, the gains and losses for assets
the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013. As discussed above, the Company and liabilities in the Level 3 category presented in the tables below do not
classifies financial instruments as Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy when reflect the effect of offsetting losses and gains on hedging instruments that
there is reliance on at least one significant unobservable input to the valuation have been classified by the Company in the Level 1 and Level 2 categories. In
model. In addition to these unobservable inputs, the valuation models for addition, the Company hedges items classified in the Level 3 category with
Level 3 financial instruments typically also rely on a number of inputs that are instruments also classified in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. The effects of
readily observable either directly or indirectly. The gains and losses presented these hedges are presented gross in the following tables.
below include changes in the fair value related to both observable and
unobservable inputs.

Level 3 Fair Value Rollforward

Net realized/unrealized Unrealized

gains (losses) incl. in Transfers gains
Dec. 31, Principal into out of Dec. 31, (losses)
In millions of dollars 2013 transactions Other (1)(2) Level 3 Level 3 Purchases Issuances Sales Settlements 2014 still held (3)
Assets
Federal funds sold and securities
borrowed or purchased under
agreements to resell $ 3,566 $ (61) $ — $ 84 $ (8) $ 75 $ — $ — $ (258) $ 3,398 $ 133
Trading non-derivative assets
Trading mortgage-backed
securities
U.S. government-sponsored
agency guaranteed 1,094 117 — 854 (966) 714 26 (695) (59) 1,085 8
Residential 2,854 457 — 442 (514) 2,582 — (3,141) — 2,680 132
Commercial 256 17 — 187 (376) 758 — (402) — 440 (4)
Total trading mortgage-
backed securities $ 4,204 $ 591 $ — $ 1,483 $(1,856) $ 4,054 $ 26 $ (4,238) $ (59) $ 4,205 $ 136
U.S. Treasury and federal
agency securities $ — $ 3 $ — $ — $ — $ 7 $ — $ (10) $ — $ — $ —
State and municipal 222 10 — 150 (105) 34 — (70) — 241 1
Foreign government 416 (56) — 130 (253) 676 — (707) — 206 5
Corporate 1,835 (127) — 465 (502) 1,988 — (2,839) — 820 (139)
Equity securities 1,057 87 — 142 (209) 1,437 — (295) — 2,219 337
Asset-backed securities 4,342 876 — 158 (332) 3,893 — (5,643) — 3,294 3
Other trading assets 3,184 269 — 2,637 (2,278) 5,427 — (4,490) (377) 4,372 31
Total trading non-derivative assets $15,260 $ 1,653 $ — $ 5,165 $(5,535) $17,478 $ 26 $(18,292) $ (398) $15,357 $ 374
Trading derivatives, net (4)
Interest rate contracts $ 839 $ (818) $ — $ 24 $ (98) $ 113 $ — $ (162) $ (109) $ (211) $ (414)
Foreign exchange contracts 695 92 — 47 (39) 59 — (59) (17) 778 56
Equity contracts (858) 482 — (916) 766 435 — (279) (493) (863) (274)
Commodity contracts (1,393) (338) — 92 (12) — — — 29 (1,622) (174)
Credit derivatives (274) (567) — 4 (156) 103 — (3) 150 (743) (369)
Total trading derivatives, net (4) $ (991) $(1,149) $ — $ (749) $ 461 $ 710 $ — $ (503) $ (440) $ (2,661) $(1,175)

Table and notes continue on the next page.

266
 Net realized/unrealized Unrealized
gains (losses) incl. in Transfers gains
Dec. 31, Principal into out of Dec. 31, (losses)
In millions of dollars 2013 transactions Other (1)(2) Level 3 Level 3 Purchases Issuances Sales Settlements 2014 still held (3)
Investments
Mortgage-backed securities
U.S. government-sponsored
agency guaranteed $ 187 $ — $ 52 $ 60 $ (203) $ 17 $ — $ (73) $ (2) $ 38 $ (8)
Residential 102 — 33 31 (2) 17 — (173) — 8 —
Commercial — — (6) 4 (7) 10 — — — 1 —
Total investment mortgage-
backed securities $ 289 $ — $ 79 $ 95 $ (212) $ 44 $ — $ (246) $ (2) $ 47 $ (8)
U.S. Treasury and federal
agency securities $ 8 $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ (2) $ — $ 6 $ —
State and municipal 1,643 — (64) 811 (584) 923 — (549) — 2,180 49
Foreign government 344 — (27) 286 (105) 851 — (490) (181) 678 (17)
Corporate 285 — (6) 26 (143) 728 — (218) — 672 (4)
Equity securities 815 — 111 19 (19) 10 — (255) — 681 (78)
Asset-backed securities 1,960 — 41 — (47) 95 — (195) (1,305) 549 (18)
Other debt securities 50 — (1) — — 116 — (115) (50) — —
Non-marketable equity securities 4,347 — 94 67 — 707 — (787) (1,903) 2,525 81
Total investments $ 9,741 $ — $ 227 $ 1,304 $(1,110) $ 3,371 $ — $ (2,857) $(3,338) $ 7,338 $ 5
Loans $ 4,143 $ — $(233) $ 92 $ 6 $ 951 $ 197 $ (895) $(1,153) $ 3,108 $ 37
Mortgage servicing rights 2,718 — (390) — — — 217 (317) (383) 1,845 (390)
Other financial assets
measured on a recurring basis 181 — 100 (83) — 3 164 (10) (277) 78 14
Liabilities
Interest-bearing deposits $ 890 $ — $ 357 $ 5 $ (12) $ — $ 127 $ — $ (167) $ 486 $ (69)
Federal funds purchased and
securities loaned or sold under
agreements to repurchase 902 (6) — 54 — 78 — 220 (217) 1,043 (34)
Trading account liabilities
Securities sold, not yet purchased 590 (81) — 79 (111) — — 534 (749) 424 (58)
Short-term borrowings 29 (31) — 323 (12) — 49 — (76) 344 (8)
Long-term debt 7,621 109 49 2,701 (4,206) — 3,893 — (2,561) 7,290 (446)
Other financial liabilities measured
on a recurring basis 10 — (5) 5 (3) — 1 (3) (8) 7 (4)

(1) Changes in fair value for available-for-sale investments are recorded in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), unless other-than-temporarily impaired, while gains and losses from sales are recorded in
Realized gains (losses) from sales of investments on the Consolidated Statement of Income.
(2) Unrealized gains (losses) on MSRs are recorded in Other revenue on the Consolidated Statement of Income.
(3) Represents the amount of total gains or losses for the period, included in earnings (and Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) for changes in fair value of available-for-sale investments), attributable to the
change in fair value relating to assets and liabilities classified as Level 3 that are still held at December 31, 2014.
(4) Total Level 3 derivative assets and liabilities have been netted in these tables for presentation purposes only.

267
 Net realized/unrealized Unrealized
gains (losses) incl. in Transfers gains
Dec. 31, Principal into out of Dec. 31, (losses)
In millions of dollars 2012 transactions Other (1)(2) Level 3 Level 3 Purchases Issuances Sales Settlements 2013 still held (3)
Assets
Federal funds sold and securities
borrowed or purchased under
agreements to resell $ 5,043 $ (137) $ — $ 627 $(1,871) $ 59 $— $ 71 $ (226) $ 3,566 $ (124)
Trading non-derivative assets
Trading mortgage-backed securities
U.S. government-sponsored
agency guaranteed 1,325 141 — 1,386 (1,477) 1,316 68 (1,310) (355) 1,094 52
Residential 1,805 474 — 513 (372) 3,630 — (3,189) (7) 2,854 10
Commercial 1,119 114 — 278 (304) 244 — (1,178) (17) 256 14
Total trading mortgage-backed
securities $ 4,249 $ 729 $ — $ 2,177 $(2,153) $ 5,190 $ 68 $ (5,677) $ (379) $ 4,204 $ 76
U.S. Treasury and federal
agency securities $ — $ (1) $ — $ 54 $ — $ — $— $ (53) $ — $ — $ —
State and municipal 195 37 — 9 — 107 — (126) — 222 15
Foreign government 311 (21) — 156 (67) 326 — (289) — 416 5
Corporate 2,030 (20) — 410 (410) 2,864 — (2,116) (923) 1,835 (406)
Equity securities 264 129 — 228 (210) 829 — (183) — 1,057 59
Asset-backed securities 4,453 544 — 181 (193) 5,165 — (5,579) (229) 4,342 123
Other trading assets 2,321 202 — 960 (1,592) 3,879 — (2,253) (333) 3,184 (7)
Total trading non-derivative assets $13,823 $1,599 $ — $ 4,175 $(4,625) $18,360 $ 68 $(16,276) $(1,864) $15,260 $ (135)
Trading derivatives, net (4)
Interest rate contracts $ 181 $ 292 $ — $ 692 $ (226) $ 228 $— $ (155) $ (173) $ 839 $ 779
Foreign exchange contracts — 625 — 29 (35) 26 — (10) 60 695 146
Equity contracts (1,448) 96 — 25 295 298 — (149) 25 (858) (453)
Commodity contracts (771) (164) — — (527) 15 — (25) 79 (1,393) (246)
Credit derivatives (342) (368) — 106 (183) 20 — — 493 (274) (544)
Total trading derivatives, net (4) $ (2,380) $ 481 $ — $ 852 $ (676) $ 587 $— $ (339) $ 484 $ (991) $ (318)
Investments
Mortgage-backed securities
U.S. government-sponsored
agency guaranteed $ 1,458 $ — $ (7) $ 2,058 $(3,820) $ 593 $— $ (38) $ (57) $ 187 $ 11
Residential 205 — 30 60 (265) 212 — (140) — 102 7
Commercial — — — 4 (21) 17 — — — — —
Total investment mortgage-
backed securities $ 1,663 $ — $ 23 $ 2,122 $(4,106) $ 822 $— $ (178) $ (57) $ 289 $ 18
U.S. Treasury and federal
agency securities $ 12 $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $— $ (4) $ — $ 8 $ —
State and municipal 849 — 10 12 (122) 1,236 — (217) (125) 1,643 (75)
Foreign government 383 — 2 178 (256) 506 — (391) (78) 344 (28)
Corporate 385 — (27) 334 (119) 104 — (303) (89) 285 —
Equity securities 773 — 56 19 (1) 1 — (33) — 815 47
Asset-backed securities 2,220 — 117 1,192 (1,684) 1,475 — (337) (1,023) 1,960 —
Other debt securities 258 — — — (205) 50 — (53) — 50 —
Non-marketable equity securities 5,364 — 249 — — 653 — (342) (1,577) 4,347 241
Total investments $11,907 $ — $ 430 $ 3,857 $(6,493) $ 4,847 $— $ (1,858) $(2,949) $ 9,741 $ 203

Table and notes continue on the next page.

268
 Net realized/unrealized Unrealized
gains (losses) incl. in Transfers gains
Dec. 31, Principal into out of Dec. 31, (losses)
In millions of dollars 2012 transactions Other (1)(2) Level 3 Level 3 Purchases Issuances Sales Settlements 2013 still held (3)
Loans $ 4,931 $ — $ (24) $ 353 $ — $ 179 $ 652 $ (192) $(1,756) $ 4,143 $ (122)
Mortgage servicing rights 1,942 — 555 — — — 634 (2) (411) 2,718 553
Other financial assets measured on
a recurring basis 2,452 — 63 1 — 216 474 (2,046) (979) 181 (5)
Liabilities
Interest-bearing deposits $ 786 $ — $ (125) $ 32 $ (21) $ — $ 86 $ — $ (118) $ 890 $ (41)
Federal funds purchased and
securities loaned or sold under
agreements to repurchase 841 91 — 216 (17) 36 — 40 (123) 902 50
Trading account liabilities
Securities sold, not yet purchased 365 42 — 89 (52) — — 612 (382) 590 73
Short-term borrowings 112 53 — 2 (10) — 316 — (338) 29 (5)
Long-term debt 6,726 292 153 3,738 (2,531) — 1,466 (1) (1,332) 7,621 758
Other financial liabilities measured
on a recurring basis 24 — (215) 5 (2) (5) 104 — (331) 10 (9)

(1) Changes in fair value for available-for-sale investments are recorded in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), unless other-than-temporarily impaired, while gains and losses from sales are recorded in
Realized gains (losses) from sales of investments on the Consolidated Statement of Income.
(2) Unrealized gains (losses) on MSRs are recorded in Other revenue on the Consolidated Statement of Income.
(3) Represents the amount of total gains or losses for the period, included in earnings (and Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) for changes in fair value of available-for-sale investments), attributable to the
change in fair value relating to assets and liabilities classified as Level 3 that are still held at December 31, 2013.
(4) Total Level 3 derivative assets and liabilities have been netted in these tables for presentation purposes only.

Level 3 Fair Value Rollforward • Transfers of U.S. government-sponsored agency guaranteed mortgage-
The following were the significant Level 3 transfers for the period backed securities in Investments of $2.1 billion from Level 2 to Level 3,
December 31, 2013 to December 31, 2014: and of $3.8 billion from Level 3 to Level 2, due to changes in the level of
• Transfers of Long-term debt of $2.7 billion from Level 2 to Level 3, and price observability for the specific securities. Similarly, there were transfers
of $4.2 billion from Level 3 to Level 2, mainly related to structured debt, of U.S. government-sponsored agency guaranteed mortgage-backed
reflecting changes in the significance of unobservable inputs as well as securities in Trading securities of $1.4 billion from Level 2 to Level 3, and
certain underlying market inputs becoming less or more observable. of $1.5 billion from Level 3 to Level 2.
• Transfers of Other trading assets of $2.6 billion from Level 2 to Level 3, • Transfers of asset-backed securities in Investments of $1.2 billion from
and of $2.3 billion from Level 3 to Level 2, related to trading loans, Level 2 to Level 3, and of $1.7 billion from Level 3 to Level 2. These
reflecting changes in the volume of market quotations. transfers were related to collateralized loan obligations, reflecting changes
in the level of price observability.
The following were the significant Level 3 transfers from December 31, • Transfers of Long-term debt of $3.7 billion from Level 2 to Level 3,
2012 to December 31, 2013:
included $1.3 billion related to the transfer of a previously bifurcated
• Transfers of Federal funds sold and securities borrowed or purchased hybrid debt instrument from Level 2 to Level 3 to reflect the host contract
under agreements to resell of $1.9 billion from Level 3 to Level 2 related and the reclassification of Level 3 commodity contracts into Long-term
to shortening of the remaining tenor of certain reverse repos. There is debt. The remaining amounts of Long-term debt transferred from Level 2
more transparency and observability for repo curves used in the valuation to Level 3 as well as the $2.5 billion transfer from Level 3 to Level 2 were
of structured reverse repos with tenors up to five years; thus, structured related mainly to structured debt reflecting changes in the significance
reverse repos maturing within five years are generally classified as Level 2. of unobservable inputs as well as certain underlying market inputs
becoming less or more observable.

269
Valuation Techniques and Inputs for Level 3 Fair Value one significant input has been adjusted to make it more representative of the
Measurements position being valued, or the price quote available does not reflect sufficient
The Company’s Level 3 inventory consists of both cash securities and trading activities.
derivatives of varying complexities. The valuation methodologies applied The following tables present the valuation techniques covering the
to measure the fair value of these positions include discounted cash majority of Level 3 inventory and the most significant unobservable inputs
flow analyses, internal models and comparative analysis. A position is used in Level 3 fair value measurements as of December 31, 2014 and
classified within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy when at least one input December 31, 2013. Differences between this table and amounts presented
is unobservable and is considered significant to its valuation. The specific in the Level 3 Fair Value Rollforward table represent individually immaterial
reason an input is deemed unobservable varies. For example, at least one items that have been measured using a variety of valuation techniques other
significant input to the pricing model is not observable in the market, at least than those listed.

Valuation Techniques and Inputs for Level 3 Fair Value Measurements

Fair Value (1) Weighted

As of December 31, 2014 (in millions) Methodology Input Low (2)(3) High (2)(3) Average (4)
Assets
Federal funds sold and securities
borrowed or purchased under
agreements to resell $3,156 Model-based Interest rate 1.27% 1.97% 1.80%
Mortgage-backed securities $2,874 Price-based Price $ — $ 127.87 $ 81.43
1,117 Yield analysis Yield 0.01% 19.91% 5.89%
State and municipal, foreign
government, corporate and
other debt securities $5,937 Price-based Price $ — $ 124.00 $ 90.62
1,860 Cash flow Credit spread 25 bps 600 bps 233 bps
Equity securities (5) $2,163 Price-based Price (5) $ — $ 141.00 $ 91.00
679 Cash flow Yield 4.00% 5.00% 4.50%
WAL 0.01 years 3.14 years 1.07 years
Asset-backed securities $3,607 Price-based Price $ — $ 105.50 $ 67.01
Non-marketable equity $1,224 Price-based Discount to price —% 90.00% 4.04%
1,055 Comparables analysis EBITDA multiples 2.90x 13.10x 9.77x
PE ratio 8.10x 13.10x 8.43x
Price-to-book ratio 0.99x 1.56x 1.15x
Fund NAV (5) $ 1 $ 64,668,171 $ 29,975,777
Derivatives—Gross (6)
Interest rate contracts (gross) $8,309 Model-based Interest rate (IR)
lognormal volatility 18.05% 90.65% 30.21%
Mean reversion 1.00% 20.00% 10.50%
Foreign exchange contracts (gross) $1,428 Model-based Foreign exchange (FX) volatility 0.37% 58.40% 8.57%
294 Cash flow Interest rate 3.72% 8.27% 5.02%
IR-FX correlation 40.00% 60.00% 50.00%
Equity contracts (gross) (7) $4,431 Model-based Equity volatility 9.56% 82.44% 24.61%
502 Price-based Equity forward 84.10% 100.80% 94.10%
Equity-FX correlation (88.20)% 48.70% (25.17)%
Equity-equity correlation (66.30)% 94.80% 36.87%
Price $ 0.01 $ 144.50 $ 93.05

Table and notes continue on the next pages.

270
 Fair Value (1) Weighted
As of December 31, 2014 (in millions) Methodology Input Low (2)(3) High (2)(3) Average (4)
Commodity contracts (gross) $3,606 Model-based Commodity volatility 5.00% 83.00% 24.00%
Commodity correlation (57.00)% 91.00% 30.00%
Forward price 35.34% 268.77% 101.74%
Credit derivatives (gross) $4,944 Model-based Recovery rate 13.97% 75.00% 37.62%
1,584 Price-based Credit correlation —% 95.00% 58.76%
Price $ 1.00 $ 144.50 $ 53.86
Credit spread 1 bps 3,380 bps 180 bps
Upfront points 0.39 100.00 52.26
Nontrading derivatives and other financial
assets and liabilities measured on a
recurring basis (gross) (6) $ 74 Model-based Redemption rate 13.00% 99.50% 68.73%
11 Price-based Forward Price 107.00% 107.10% 107.05%
Fund NAV $ 12,974 $ 10,087,963 $ 9,308,012
Loans $1,095 Cash flow Yield 1.60% 4.50% 2.23%
832 Model-based Price $ 4.72 $ 106.55 $ 98.56
740 Price-based Credit spread 35 bps 500 bps 199 bps
441 Yield analysis
Mortgage servicing rights $1,750 Cash flow Yield 5.19% 21.40% 10.25%
WAL 3.31 years 7.89 years 5.17 years
Liabilities
Interest-bearing deposits $ 486 Model-based Equity-IR correlation 34.00% 37.00% 35.43%
Commodity correlation (57.00)% 91.00% 30.00%
Commodity volatility 5.00% 83.00% 24.00%
Forward price 35.34% 268.77% 101.74%
Federal funds purchased and securities
loaned or sold under agreements
to repurchase $1,043 Model-based Interest rate 0.74% 2.26% 1.90%
Trading account liabilities
Securities sold, not yet purchased $ 251 Model-based Credit-IR correlation (70.49)% 8.81% 47.17%
$ 142 Price-based Price $ — $ 117.00 $ 70.33
Short-term borrowings and
long-term debt $7,204 Model-based IR lognormal volatility 18.05% 90.65% 30.21%
Mean reversion 1.00% 20.00% 10.50%
Equity volatility 10.18% 69.65% 23.72%
Credit correlation 87.50% 87.50% 87.50%
Equity forward 89.50% 100.80% 95.80%
Forward price 35.34% 268.77% 101.80%
Commodity correlation (57.00)% 91.00% 30.00%
Commodity volatility 5.00% 83.00% 24.00%

Table and notes continue on the next pages.

271
 Fair Value (1) Weighted
As of December 31, 2013 (in millions) Methodology Input Low (2)(3) High (2)(3) Average (4)
Assets
Federal funds sold and securities
borrowed or purchased under
agreements to resell $3,299 Model-based Interest rate 1.33% 2.19% 2.04%
Mortgage-backed securities $2,869 Price-based Price $ 0.10 $ 117.78 $ 77.60
1,241 Yield analysis Yield 0.03% 21.80% 8.66%
State and municipal, foreign
government, corporate and
other debt securities $5,361 Price-based Price $ — $ 126.49 $ 87.47
2,014 Cash flow Credit spread 11 bps 375 bps 213 bps
Equity securities (5) $ 947 Price-based Price (5) $ 0.31 $ 93.66 $ 86.90
827 Cash flow Yield 4.00% 5.00% 4.50%
WAL 0.01 years 3.55 years 1.38 years
Asset-backed securities $4,539 Price-based Price $ — $ 135.83 $ 70.89
1,300 Model-based Credit spread 25 bps 378 bps 302 bps
Non-marketable equity $2,324 Price-based Fund NAV (5) $ 612 $336,559,340 $124,080,454
1,470 Comparables analysis EBITDA multiples 4.20x 16.90x 9.78x
533 Cash flow Discount to price —% 75.00% 3.47%
Price-to-book ratio 0.90x 1.05x 1.02x
PE ratio 9.10x 9.10x 9.10x
Derivatives—Gross (6)
Interest rate contracts (gross) $5,721 Model-based Interest rate (IR)
lognormal volatility 10.60% 87.20% 21.16%
Foreign exchange contracts (gross) $1,727 Model-based Foreign exchange (FX) volatility 1.00% 28.00% 13.45%
189 Cash flow Interest rate 0.11% 13.88% 6.02%
IR-FX correlation 40.00% 60.00% 50.00%
IR-IR correlation 40.00% 68.79% 40.52%
Credit spread 25 bps 419 bps 162 bps
Equity contracts (gross) (7) $3,189 Model-based Equity volatility 10.02% 73.48% 29.87%
563 Price-based Equity forward 79.10% 141.00% 100.24%
Equity-equity correlation (81.30)% 99.40% 48.45%
Equity-FX correlation (70.00)% 55.00% 0.60%
Price $ — $ 118.75 $ 88.10
Commodity contracts (gross) $2,988 Model-based Commodity volatility 4.00% 146.00% 15.00%
Commodity correlation (75.00)% 90.00% 32.00%
Forward price 23.00% 242.00% 105.00%
Credit derivatives (gross) $4,767 Model-based Recovery rate 20.00% 64.00% 38.11%
1,520 Price-based Credit correlation 5.00% 95.00% 47.43%
Price $ 0.02 $ 115.20 $ 29.83
Credit spread 3 bps 1,335 bps 203 bps
Upfront points 2.31 100.00 57.69

Table and notes continue on the next page.

272
 Fair Value (1) Weighted
As of December 31, 2013 (in millions) Methodology Input Low (2)(3) High (2)(3) Average (4)
Nontrading derivatives and other financial
assets and liabilities measured on a
recurring basis (gross) (6) $ 82 Price-based EBITDA multiples 5.20x 12.60x 12.08x
60 Comparables analysis PE ratio 6.90x 6.90x 6.90x
38 Model-based Price-to-book ratio 1.05x 1.05x 1.05x
Price $ — $ 105.10 $ 71.25
Fund NAV $ 1.00 $ 10,688,600 $ 9,706,488
Discount to price —% 35.00% 16.36%
Loans $2,153 Price-based Price $ — $ 103.75 $ 91.19
1,422 Model-based Yield 1.60% 4.50% 2.10%
549 Yield analysis Credit spread 49 bps 1,600 bps 302 bps
Mortgage servicing rights $2,625 Cash flow Yield 3.64% 12.00% 7.19%
WAL 2.27 years 9.44 years 6.12 years
Liabilities
Interest-bearing deposits $ 890 Model-based Equity volatility 14.79% 42.15% 27.74%
Mean reversion 1.00% 20.00% 10.50%
Equity-IR correlation 9.00% 20.50% 19.81%
Forward price 23.00% 242.00% 105.00%
Commodity correlation (75.00)% 90.00% 32.00%
Commodity volatility 4.00% 146.00% 15.00%
Federal funds purchased and
securities loaned or sold under
agreements to repurchase $ 902 Model-based Interest rate 0.47% 3.66% 2.71%
Trading account liabilities
Securities sold, not yet purchased $ 289 Model-based Credit spread 166 bps 180 bps 175 bps
$ 273 Price-based Credit-IR correlation (68.00)% 5.00% (50.00)%
Price $ — $ 124.25 $ 99.75
Short-term borrowings and
long-term debt $6,781 Model-based IR lognormal volatility 10.60% 87.20% 20.97%
868 Price-based Equity forward 79.10% 141.00% 99.51%
Equity volatility 10.70% 57.20% 19.41%
Equity-FX correlation (70.00)% 55.00% 0.60%
Equity-equity correlation (81.30)% 99.40% 48.30%
Interest rate 4.00% 10.00% 5.00%
Price $ 0.63 $ 103.75 $ 80.73
Forward price 23.00% 242.00% 101.00%
(1) The fair value amounts presented in this table represent the primary valuation technique or techniques for each class of assets or liabilities.
(2) Some inputs are shown as zero due to rounding.
(3) When the low and high inputs are the same, there is either a constant input applied to all positions, or the methodology involving the input applies to one large position only.
(4) Weighted averages are calculated based on the fair value of the instrument.
(5) For equity securities, the price and fund NAV inputs are expressed on an absolute basis, not as a percentage of the notional amount.
(6) Both trading and nontrading account derivatives—assets and liabilities—are presented on a gross absolute value basis.
(7) Includes hybrid products.

273
Sensitivity to Unobservable Inputs and Interrelationships short option positions (liabilities) will suffer losses. Some instruments are
between Unobservable Inputs more sensitive to changes in volatility than others. For example, an at-the-
The impact of key unobservable inputs on the Level 3 fair value money option would experience a larger percentage change in its fair value
measurements may not be independent of one another. In addition, the than a deep-in-the-money option. In addition, the fair value of an option
amount and direction of the impact on a fair value measurement for a given with more than one underlying security (for example, an option on a basket
change in an unobservable input depends on the nature of the instrument as of bonds) depends on the volatility of the individual underlying securities as
well as whether the Company holds the instrument as an asset or a liability. well as their correlations.
For certain instruments, the pricing, hedging and risk management are
sensitive to the correlation between various inputs rather than on the analysis Yield
and aggregation of the individual inputs. Adjusted yield is generally used to discount the projected future principal and
The following section describes the sensitivities and interrelationships of interest cash flows on instruments, such as asset-backed securities. Adjusted
the most significant unobservable inputs used by the Company in Level 3 fair yield is impacted by changes in the interest rate environment and relevant
value measurements. credit spreads.
In some circumstances, the yield of an instrument is not observable in
Correlation the market and must be estimated from historical data or from yields of
Correlation is a measure of the co-movement between two or more variables. similar securities. This estimated yield may need to be adjusted to capture the
A variety of correlation-related assumptions are required for a wide range of characteristics of the security being valued. In other situations, the estimated
instruments, including equity and credit baskets, foreign-exchange options, yield may not represent sufficient market liquidity and must be adjusted as
CDOs backed by loans or bonds, mortgages, subprime mortgages and many well. Whenever the amount of the adjustment is significant to the value of
other instruments. For almost all of these instruments, correlations are not the security, the fair value measurement is classified as Level 3.
observable in the market and must be estimated using historical information.
Estimating correlation can be especially difficult where it may vary over time. Prepayment
Extracting correlation information from market data requires significant Voluntary unscheduled payments (prepayments) change the future cash
assumptions regarding the informational efficiency of the market (for flows for the investor and thereby change the fair value of the security. The
example, swaption markets). Changes in correlation levels can have a major effect of prepayments is more pronounced for residential mortgage-backed
impact, favorable or unfavorable, on the value of an instrument, depending securities. An increase in prepayments—in speed or magnitude—generally
on its nature. A change in the default correlation of the fair value of the creates losses for the holder of these securities. Prepayment is generally
underlying bonds comprising a CDO structure would affect the fair value of negatively correlated with delinquency and interest rate. A combination
the senior tranche. For example, an increase in the default correlation of the of low prepayment and high delinquencies amplify each input’s negative
underlying bonds would reduce the fair value of the senior tranche, because impact on mortgage securities’ valuation. As prepayment speeds change, the
highly correlated instruments produce larger losses in the event of default weighted average life of the security changes, which impacts the valuation
and a part of these losses would become attributable to the senior tranche. either positively or negatively, depending upon the nature of the security and
That same change in default correlation would have a different impact on the direction of the change in the weighted average life.
junior tranches of the same structure. Recovery
Volatility Recovery is the proportion of the total outstanding balance of a bond or loan
Volatility represents the speed and severity of market price changes and is that is expected to be collected in a liquidation scenario. For many credit
a key factor in pricing options. Typically, instruments can become more securities (such as asset-backed securities), there is no directly observable
expensive if volatility increases. For example, as an index becomes more market input for recovery, but indications of recovery levels are available
volatile, the cost to Citi of maintaining a given level of exposure increases from pricing services. The assumed recovery of a security may differ from
because more frequent rebalancing of the portfolio is required. Volatility its actual recovery that will be observable in the future. The recovery rate
generally depends on the tenor of the underlying instrument and the strike impacts the valuation of credit securities. Generally, an increase in the
price or level defined in the contract. Volatilities for certain combinations recovery rate assumption increases the fair value of the security. An increase
of tenor and strike are not observable. The general relationship between in loss severity, the inverse of the recovery rate, reduces the amount of
changes in the value of a portfolio to changes in volatility also depends on principal available for distribution and, as a result, decreases the fair value of
changes in interest rates and the level of the underlying index. Generally, the security.
long option positions (assets) benefit from increases in volatility, whereas

274
Credit Spread Credit Spread
Credit spread is a component of the security representing its credit quality. Credit spread is relevant primarily for fixed income and credit instruments;
Credit spread reflects the market perception of changes in prepayment, however, the ranges for the credit spread input can vary across instruments.
delinquency and recovery rates, therefore capturing the impact of other For example, certain fixed income instruments, such as certificates of deposit,
variables on the fair value. Changes in credit spread affect the fair value of typically have lower credit spreads, whereas certain derivative instruments
securities differently depending on the characteristics and maturity profile of with high-risk counterparties are typically subject to higher credit spreads
the security. For example, credit spread is a more significant driver of the fair when they are uncollateralized or have a longer tenor. Other instruments,
value measurement of a high yield bond as compared to an investment grade such as credit default swaps, also have credit spreads that vary with the
bond. Generally, the credit spread for an investment grade bond is also more attributes of the underlying obligor. Stronger companies have tighter credit
observable and less volatile than its high yield counterpart. spreads, and weaker companies have wider credit spreads.
Qualitative Discussion of the Ranges of Significant Price
Unobservable Inputs The price input is a significant unobservable input for certain fixed income
The following section describes the ranges of the most significant instruments. For these instruments, the price input is expressed as a
unobservable inputs used by the Company in Level 3 fair value percentage of the notional amount, with a price of $100 meaning that the
measurements. The level of aggregation and the diversity of instruments held instrument is valued at par. For most of these instruments, the price varies
by the Company lead to a wide range of unobservable inputs that may not be between zero to $100, or slightly above $100. Relatively illiquid assets that
evenly distributed across the Level 3 inventory. have experienced significant losses since issuance, such as certain asset-
backed securities, are at the lower end of the range, whereas most investment
Correlation
grade corporate bonds will fall in the middle to the higher end of the range.
There are many different types of correlation inputs, including credit
For certain structured debt instruments with embedded derivatives, the price
correlation, cross-asset correlation (such as equity-interest rate correlation),
input may be above $100 to reflect the embedded features of the instrument
and same-asset correlation (such as interest rate-interest rate correlation).
(for example, a step-up coupon or a conversion option).
Correlation inputs are generally used to value hybrid and exotic instruments.
The price input is also a significant unobservable input for certain equity
Generally, same-asset correlation inputs have a narrower range than cross-
securities; however, the range of price inputs varies depending on the nature
asset correlation inputs. However, due to the complex and unique nature
of the position, the number of shares outstanding and other factors.
of these instruments, the ranges for correlation inputs can vary widely
across portfolios.
Volatility
Similar to correlation, asset-specific volatility inputs vary widely by asset type.
For example, ranges for foreign exchange volatility are generally lower and
narrower than equity volatility. Equity volatilities are wider due to the nature
of the equities market and the terms of certain exotic instruments. For most
instruments, the interest rate volatility input is on the lower end of the range;
however, for certain structured or exotic instruments (such as market-linked
deposits or exotic interest rate derivatives), the range is much wider.
Yield
Ranges for the yield inputs vary significantly depending upon the type of
security. For example, securities that typically have lower yields, such as
municipal bonds, will fall on the lower end of the range, while more illiquid
securities or securities with lower credit quality, such as certain residual
tranche asset-backed securities, will have much higher yield inputs.

275
Items Measured at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis The fair value of loans-held-for-sale is determined where possible using
Certain assets and liabilities are measured at fair value on a nonrecurring quoted secondary-market prices. If no such quoted price exists, the fair value
basis and therefore are not included in the tables above. These include assets of a loan is determined using quoted prices for a similar asset or assets,
measured at cost that have been written down to fair value during the periods adjusted for the specific attributes of that loan. Fair value for the other real
as a result of an impairment. In addition, these assets include loans held- estate owned is based on appraisals. For loans whose carrying amount is
for-sale and other real estate owned that are measured at the lower of cost based on the fair value of the underlying collateral, the fair values depend
or market. on the type of collateral. Fair value of the collateral is typically estimated
The following table presents the carrying amounts of all assets that were based on quoted market prices if available, appraisals or other internal
still held as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, for which a valuation techniques.
nonrecurring fair value measurement was recorded: Where the fair value of the related collateral is based on an unadjusted
appraised value, the loan is generally classified as Level 2. Where significant
In millions of dollars Fair value Level 2 Level 3
adjustments are made to the appraised value, the loan is classified as Level 3.
December 31, 2014 Additionally, for corporate loans, appraisals of the collateral are often based
Loans held-for-sale $ 4,152 $ 1,084 $ 3,068
Other real estate owned 102 21 81
on sales of similar assets; however, because the prices of similar assets require
Loans (1) 3,367 2,881 486 significant adjustments to reflect the unique features of the underlying
collateral, these fair value measurements are generally classified as Level 3.
Total assets at fair value on a
nonrecurring basis $ 7,621 $ 3,986 $ 3,635

(1) Represents impaired loans held for investment whose carrying amount is based on the fair value of
the underlying collateral, including primarily real-estate secured loans.

In millions of dollars Fair value Level 2 Level 3

December 31, 2013
Loans held-for-sale $ 3,483 $ 2,165 $ 1,318
Other real estate owned 138 15 123
Loans (1) 4,713 3,947 766
Total assets at fair value on a
nonrecurring basis $ 8,334 $ 6,127 $ 2,207

(1) Represents impaired loans held for investment whose carrying amount is based on the fair value of
the underlying collateral, including primarily real-estate secured loans.

Valuation Techniques and Inputs for Level 3 Nonrecurring Fair Value Measurements
The following tables present the valuation techniques covering the majority of Level 3 nonrecurring fair value measurements and the most significant
unobservable inputs used in those measurements as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013:

Fair Value (1) Weighted

As of December 31, 2014 (in millions) Methodology Input Low High average (2)
Loans held-for-sale $ 2,740 Price-based Price $ 92.00 $ 100.00 $ 99.54
Credit spread 5 bps 358 bps 175 bps
Other real estate owned $ 76 Price-based Appraised Value $11,000 $ 11,124,137 $4,730,129
Discount to price (4) 13.00% 64.00% 28.80%
Loans (3) $ 437 Price-based Discount to price (4) 13.00% 34.00% 28.92%

(1) The fair value amounts presented in this table represent the primary valuation technique or techniques for each class of assets or liabilities.
(2) Weighted averages are calculated based on the fair value of the instrument.
(3) Represents loans held for investment whose carrying amounts are based on the fair value of the underlying collateral.
(4) Includes estimated costs to sell.

276
 Fair Value (1) Weighted
As of December 31, 2013 (in millions) Methodology Input Low High average (2)
Loans held-for-sale $912 Price-based Price (3) $ 60.00 $ 100.00 $ 98.77
393 Cash Flow Credit Spread 45 bps 80 bps 64 bps
Other real estate owned $ 98 Price-based Discount to price (4) 34.00% 59.00% 39.00%
17 Cash Flow Price (3) $ 60.46 $ 100.00 $ 96.67
Appraised Value 636,249 15,897,503 11,392,478
Loans (5) $581 Price-based Discount to price (4) 34.00% 39.00% 35.00%
109 Model-based Price (3) $ 52.40 $ 68.00 $ 65.32
Appraised Value 6,500,000 86,000,000 43,532,719

(1) The fair value amounts presented in this table represent the primary valuation technique or techniques for each class of assets or liabilities.
(2) Weighted averages are based on the fair value of the instrument.
(3) Prices are based on appraised values.
(4) Includes estimated costs to sell.
(5) Represents loans held for investment whose carrying amounts are based on the fair value of the underlying collateral.

Nonrecurring Fair Value Changes

The following table presents total nonrecurring fair value measurements
for the period, included in earnings, attributable to the change in fair
value relating to assets that are still held at December 31, 2014 and
December 31, 2013:

Year ended
In millions of dollars December 31, 2014
Loans held-for-sale $ 34
Other real estate owned (16)
Loans (1) (533)
Total nonrecurring fair value gains (losses) $(515)

(1) Represents loans held for investment whose carrying amount is based on the fair value of the
underlying collateral, including primarily real-estate loans.

Year ended
In millions of dollars December 31, 2013
Loans held-for-sale $ —
Other real estate owned (6)
Loans (1) (761)
Total nonrecurring fair value gains (losses) $ (767)

(1) Represents loans held for investment whose carrying amount is based on the fair value of the
underlying collateral, including primarily real-estate loans.

277
Estimated Fair Value of Financial Instruments Not The fair value represents management’s best estimates based on a
Carried at Fair Value range of methodologies and assumptions. The carrying value of short-term
The table below presents the carrying value and fair value of Citigroup’s financial instruments not accounted for at fair value, as well as receivables
financial instruments that are not carried at fair value. The table below and payables arising in the ordinary course of business, approximates fair
therefore excludes items measured at fair value on a recurring basis value because of the relatively short period of time between their origination
presented in the tables above. and expected realization. Quoted market prices are used when available
The disclosure also excludes leases, affiliate investments, pension for investments and for liabilities, such as long-term debt not carried
and benefit obligations and insurance policy claim reserves. In addition, at fair value. For loans not accounted for at fair value, cash flows are
contract-holder fund amounts exclude certain insurance contracts. Also, as discounted at quoted secondary market rates or estimated market rates if
required, the disclosure excludes the effect of taxes, any premium or discount available. Otherwise, sales of comparable loan portfolios or current market
that could result from offering for sale at one time the entire holdings of a origination rates for loans with similar terms and risk characteristics are
particular instrument, excess fair value associated with deposits with no fixed used. Expected credit losses are either embedded in the estimated future
maturity, and other expenses that would be incurred in a market transaction. cash flows or incorporated as an adjustment to the discount rate used. The
In addition, the table excludes the values of non-financial assets and value of collateral is also considered. For liabilities such as long-term debt
liabilities, as well as a wide range of franchise, relationship and intangible not accounted for at fair value and without quoted market prices, market
values, which are integral to a full assessment of Citigroup’s financial borrowing rates of interest are used to discount contractual cash flows.
position and the value of its net assets.

December 31, 2014 Estimated fair value

In billions of dollars Carrying value Estimated fair value Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Assets
Investments $ 30.5 $ 32.2 $4.5 $ 25.2 $ 2.5
Federal funds sold and securities borrowed or purchased under agreements to resell 98.4 98.4 — 89.7 8.7
Loans (1)(2) 620.0 617.6 — 5.6 612.0
Other financial assets (2)(3) 213.8 213.8 8.3 151.9 53.6
Liabilities
Deposits $ 897.6 $ 894.0 $— $746.2 $147.8
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under agreements to repurchase 136.7 136.7 — 136.5 0.2
Long-term debt (4) 196.9 202.5 — 172.7 29.8
Other financial liabilities (5) 136.2 136.2 — 41.4 94.8

December 31, 2013 Estimated fair value

In billions of dollars Carrying value Estimated fair value Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Assets
Investments $ 17.8 $ 19.3 $5.3 $ 11.9 $ 2.1
Federal funds sold and securities borrowed or purchased under agreements to resell 115.6 115.6 — 107.2 8.4
Loans (1)(2) 637.9 635.1 — 5.6 629.5
Other financial assets (2)(3) 250.7 250.7 9.4 189.5 51.8
Liabilities
Deposits $ 966.6 $ 965.6 $— $ 776.4 $189.2
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under agreements to repurchase 152.0 152.0 — 151.8 0.2
Long-term debt (4) 194.2 201.3 — 175.6 25.7
Other financial liabilities (5) 136.2 136.2 — 41.2 95.0

(1) The carrying value of loans is net of the Allowance for loan losses of $16.0 billion for December 31, 2014 and $19.6 billion for December 31, 2013. In addition, the carrying values exclude $0.0 billion and $2.9 billion
of lease finance receivables at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively.
(2) Includes items measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis.
(3) Includes cash and due from banks, deposits with banks, brokerage receivables, reinsurance recoverable and other financial instruments included in Other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheet, for all of which the
carrying value is a reasonable estimate of fair value.
(4) The carrying value includes long-term debt balances under qualifying fair value hedges.
(5) Includes brokerage payables, separate and variable accounts, short-term borrowings (carried at cost) and other financial instruments included in Other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet, for all of which the
carrying value is a reasonable estimate of fair value.

Fair values vary from period to period based on changes in a wide range The estimated fair values of the Company’s corporate unfunded lending
of factors, including interest rates, credit quality and market perceptions commitments at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 were liabilities
of value, and as existing assets and liabilities run off and new transactions of $5.5 billion and $5.2 billion, respectively, substantially all of which are
are entered into. The estimated fair values of loans reflect changes in credit classified as Level 3. The Company does not estimate the fair values of
status since the loans were made, changes in interest rates in the case of consumer unfunded lending commitments, which are generally cancelable
fixed-rate loans, and premium values at origination of certain loans. by providing notice to the borrower.

278
26. FAIR VALUE ELECTIONS All servicing rights are recognized initially at fair value. The Company has
elected fair value accounting for its mortgage servicing rights. See Note 22 to
The Company may elect to report most financial instruments and certain
the Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussions regarding the
other items at fair value on an instrument-by-instrument basis with
accounting and reporting of MSRs.
changes in fair value reported in earnings. The election is made upon the
The following table presents the changes in fair value gains and losses for
initial recognition of an eligible financial asset, financial liability or firm
the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 associated with those items for
commitment or when certain specified reconsideration events occur. The fair
which the fair value option was elected:
value election may not be revoked once an election is made. The changes in
fair value are recorded in current earnings. Additional discussion regarding
the applicable areas in which fair value elections were made is presented in
Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Changes in fair value gains

(losses) for the Years
ended December 31,
In millions of dollars 2014 2013
Assets
Federal funds sold and securities borrowed or purchased under agreements to resell $ 812 $ (628)
Selected portfolios of securities purchased under agreements to resell and securities borrowed
Trading account assets 190 (190)
Investments 30 (48)
Loans
Certain corporate loans (1) (135) 72
Certain consumer loans (1) (41) (155)
Total loans $(176) $ (83)
Other assets
MSRs $(344) $ 553
Certain mortgage loans held for sale (2) 474 951
Total other assets $ 130 $ 1,504
Total assets $ 986 $ 555
Liabilities
Interest-bearing deposits $ (77) $ 141
Federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under agreements to repurchase
Selected portfolios of securities sold under agreements to repurchase and securities loaned (5) 110
Trading account liabilities 29 3
Short-term borrowings 8 73
Long-term debt (307) (186)
Total liabilities $(352) $ 141

(1) Includes mortgage loans held by mortgage loan securitization VIEs consolidated upon the adoption of ASC 810 Consolidation (SFAS 167) on January 1, 2010.
(2) Includes gains (losses) associated with interest rate lock-commitments for those loans that have been originated and elected under the fair value option.

279
Own Debt Valuation Adjustments by broker-dealer entities in the United States, United Kingdom and Japan.
Own debt valuation adjustments are recognized on Citi’s liabilities for which In each case, the election was made because the related interest-rate risk is
the fair value option has been elected using Citi’s credit spreads observed in managed on a portfolio basis, primarily with derivative instruments that are
the bond market. The fair value of liabilities for which the fair value option accounted for at fair value through earnings.
is elected (other than non-recourse and similar liabilities) is impacted by Changes in fair value for transactions in these portfolios are recorded in
the narrowing or widening of the Company’s credit spreads. The estimated Principal transactions. The related interest revenue and interest expense are
change in the fair value of these liabilities due to such changes in the measured based on the contractual rates specified in the transactions and
Company’s own credit risk (or instrument-specific credit risk) was a gain of are reported as interest revenue and expense in the Consolidated Statement
$218 million and a loss of $412 million for the years ended December 31, of Income.
2014 and 2013, respectively. Changes in fair value resulting from changes
Certain loans and other credit products
in instrument-specific credit risk were estimated by incorporating the
Citigroup has elected the fair value option for certain originated and
Company’s current credit spreads observable in the bond market into the
purchased loans, including certain unfunded loan products, such as
relevant valuation technique used to value each liability as described above.
guarantees and letters of credit, executed by Citigroup’s lending and trading
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial businesses. None of these credit products are highly leveraged financing
Liabilities commitments. Significant groups of transactions include loans and
Selected portfolios of securities purchased under unfunded loan products that are expected to be either sold or securitized in
agreements to resell, securities borrowed, securities sold the near term, or transactions where the economic risks are hedged with
under agreements to repurchase, securities loaned and derivative instruments, such as purchased credit default swaps or total return
certain non-collateralized short-term borrowings swaps where the Company pays the total return on the underlying loans to a
The Company elected the fair value option for certain portfolios of fixed- third party. Citigroup has elected the fair value option to mitigate accounting
income securities purchased under agreements to resell and fixed-income mismatches in cases where hedge accounting is complex and to achieve
securities sold under agreements to repurchase, securities borrowed, securities operational simplifications. Fair value was not elected for most lending
loaned, and certain non-collateralized short-term borrowings held primarily transactions across the Company.

The following table provides information about certain credit products carried at fair value at December 31, 2014 and 2013:

December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

In millions of dollars Trading assets Loans Trading assets Loans
Carrying amount reported on the Consolidated Balance Sheet $10,290 $5,901 $9,262 $4,105
Aggregate unpaid principal balance in excess of (less than) fair value (26) 125 4 (79)
Balance of non-accrual loans or loans more than 90 days past due 13 3 97 5
Aggregate unpaid principal balance in excess of fair value for non-accrual
loans or loans more than 90 days past due 28 1 41 5

In addition to the amounts reported above, $2,335 million and $2,308 elects the fair value option for the debt host contract, and reports the debt
million of unfunded loan commitments related to certain credit products host contract within Trading account assets on the Company’s Consolidated
selected for fair value accounting were outstanding as of December 31, 2014 Balance Sheet. The total carrying amount of debt host contracts across
and 2013, respectively. unallocated precious metals accounts was approximately $1.2 billion and
Changes in fair value of funded and unfunded credit products are $1.3 billion at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The amounts are
classified in Principal transactions in the Company’s Consolidated expected to fluctuate based on trading activity in future periods.
Statement of Income. Related interest revenue is measured based on the As part of its commodity and foreign currency trading activities, Citi
contractual interest rates and reported as Interest revenue on Trading sells (buys) unallocated precious metals investments and executes forward
account assets or loan interest depending on the balance sheet classifications purchase (sale) derivative contracts with trading counterparties. When
of the credit products. The changes in fair value for the years ended Citi sells an unallocated precious metals investment, Citi’s receivable from
December 31, 2014 and 2013 due to instrument-specific credit risk totaled to its depository bank is repaid and Citi derecognizes its investment in the
a loss of $155 million and a gain of $4 million, respectively. unallocated precious metal. The forward purchase (sale) contract with the
trading counterparty indexed to unallocated precious metals is accounted
Certain investments in unallocated precious metals
for as a derivative, at fair value through earnings. As of December 31, 2014,
Citigroup invests in unallocated precious metals accounts (gold, silver,
there were approximately $7.2 billion and $6.7 billion notional amounts
platinum and palladium) as part of its commodity and foreign currency
of such forward purchase and forward sale derivative contracts
trading activities or to economically hedge certain exposures from issuing
outstanding, respectively.
structured liabilities. Under ASC 815, the investment is bifurcated into a debt
host contract and a commodity forward derivative instrument. Citigroup

280
Certain investments in private equity and real estate Citigroup also elects the fair value option for certain non-marketable
ventures and certain equity method and other investments equity securities whose risk is managed with derivative instruments that are
Citigroup invests in private equity and real estate ventures for the purpose accounted for at fair value through earnings. These securities are classified as
of earning investment returns and for capital appreciation. The Company Trading account assets on Citigroup’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. Changes
has elected the fair value option for certain of these ventures, because such in the fair value of these securities and the related derivative instruments are
investments are considered similar to many private equity or hedge fund recorded in Principal transactions.
activities in Citi’s investment companies, which are reported at fair value.
Certain mortgage loans HFS
The fair value option brings consistency in the accounting and evaluation of
Citigroup has elected the fair value option for certain purchased and
these investments. All investments (debt and equity) in such private equity
originated prime fixed-rate and conforming adjustable-rate first mortgage
and real estate entities are accounted for at fair value. These investments are
loans HFS. These loans are intended for sale or securitization and are hedged
classified as Investments on Citigroup’s Consolidated Balance Sheet.
with derivative instruments. The Company has elected the fair value option
Changes in the fair values of these investments are classified in Other
to mitigate accounting mismatches in cases where hedge accounting is
revenue in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Income.
complex and to achieve operational simplifications.
The following table provides information about certain mortgage loans HFS carried at fair value at December 31, 2014 and 2013:

In millions of dollars December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

Carrying amount reported on the Consolidated Balance Sheet $1,447 $2,089
Aggregate fair value in excess of unpaid principal balance 67 48
Balance of non-accrual loans or loans more than 90 days past due — —
Aggregate unpaid principal balance in excess of fair value for non-accrual loans or loans more than 90 days past due — —

The changes in fair values of these mortgage loans are reported in Other of mortgage loans in each VIE is derived from the security pricing. When
revenue in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Income. There was no substantially all of the long-term debt of a VIE is valued using Level 2 inputs,
net change in fair value during the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 the corresponding mortgage loans are classified as Level 2. Otherwise, the
due to instrument-specific credit risk. Related interest income continues to mortgage loans of a VIE are classified as Level 3.
be measured based on the contractual interest rates and reported as Interest With respect to the consolidated mortgage VIEs for which the fair
revenue in the Consolidated Statement of Income. value option was elected, the mortgage loans are classified as Loans on
Citigroup’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. The changes in fair value of
Certain consolidated VIEs the loans are reported as Other revenue in the Company’s Consolidated
The Company has elected the fair value option for all qualified assets Statement of Income. Related interest revenue is measured based on the
and liabilities of certain VIEs that were consolidated upon the adoption contractual interest rates and reported as Interest revenue in the Company’s
of SFAS 167 on January 1, 2010, including certain private label mortgage Consolidated Statement of Income. Information about these mortgage loans
securitizations, mutual fund deferred sales commissions and collateralized is included in the table below. The change in fair value of these loans due to
loan obligation VIEs. The Company elected the fair value option for these instrument-specific credit risk was a loss of $48 million and $156 million for
VIEs, as the Company believes this method better reflects the economic risks, the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
since substantially all of the Company’s retained interests in these entities are The debt issued by these consolidated VIEs is classified as long-term debt
carried at fair value. on Citigroup’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. The changes in fair value for the
With respect to the consolidated mortgage VIEs, the Company determined majority of these liabilities are reported in Other revenue in the Company’s
the fair value for the mortgage loans and long-term debt utilizing internal Consolidated Statement of Income. Related interest expense is measured
valuation techniques. The fair value of the long-term debt measured using based on the contractual interest rates and reported as Interest expense in
internal valuation techniques is verified, where possible, to prices obtained the Consolidated Statement of Income. The aggregate unpaid principal
from independent vendors. Vendors compile prices from various sources and balance of long-term debt of these consolidated VIEs exceeded the aggregate
may apply matrix pricing for similar securities when no price is observable. fair value by $9 million and $223 million as of December 31, 2014 and
Security pricing associated with long-term debt that is valued using 2013, respectively.
observable inputs is classified as Level 2, and debt that is valued using one or
more significant unobservable inputs is classified as Level 3. The fair value

281
The following table provides information about corporate and consumer loans of consolidated VIEs carried at fair value at December 31, 2014 and 2013:

December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

In millions of dollars Corporate loans Consumer loans Corporate loans Consumer loans
Carrying amount reported on the Consolidated Balance Sheet $— $— $ 14 $910
Aggregate unpaid principal balance in excess of fair value 9 — 7 212
Balance of non-accrual loans or loans more than 90 days past due — — — 81
Aggregate unpaid principal balance in excess of fair value for non-accrual
loans or loans more than 90 days past due — — — 106

Certain structured liabilities considered to be trading-related positions and, therefore, are managed on a
The Company has elected the fair value option for certain structured fair value basis. These positions will continue to be classified as debt, deposits
liabilities whose performance is linked to structured interest rates, inflation, or derivatives (Trading account liabilities) on the Company’s Consolidated
currency, equity, referenced credit or commodity risks (structured liabilities). Balance Sheet according to their legal form.
The Company elected the fair value option, because these exposures are

The following table provides information about the carrying value of structured notes, disaggregated by type of embedded derivative instrument at December 31,
2014 and 2013:

In billions of dollars December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

Interest rate linked $10.9 $ 9.8
Foreign exchange linked 0.3 0.5
Equity linked 8.0 7.0
Commodity linked 1.4 1.8
Credit linked 2.5 3.5
Total $23.1 $22.6

The change in fair value of these structured liabilities is reported in of such liabilities is economically hedged with derivative contracts or the
Principal transactions in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Income. proceeds are used to purchase financial assets that will also be accounted
Changes in fair value of these structured liabilities include an economic for at fair value through earnings. The election has been made to mitigate
component for accrued interest, which is included in the change in fair value accounting mismatches and to achieve operational simplifications. These
reported in Principal transactions. positions are reported in Short-term borrowings and Long-term debt on
the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. The change in fair value of
Certain non-structured liabilities these non-structured liabilities is reported in Principal transactions in the
The Company has elected the fair value option for certain non-structured Company’s Consolidated Statement of Income. Related interest expense on
liabilities with fixed and floating interest rates (non-structured liabilities). non-structured liabilities is measured based on the contractual interest rates
The Company has elected the fair value option where the interest-rate risk and reported as Interest expense in the Consolidated Statement of Income.

The following table provides information about long-term debt carried at fair value, excluding debt issued by consolidated VIEs, at December 31, 2014 and 2013:

In millions of dollars December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

Carrying amount reported on the Consolidated Balance Sheet $ 26,180 $25,968
Aggregate unpaid principal balance in excess of (less than) fair value (151) (866)

The following table provides information about short-term borrowings carried at fair value at December 31, 2014 and 2013:

In millions of dollars December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

Carrying amount reported on the Consolidated Balance Sheet $1,496 $3,692
Aggregate unpaid principal balance in excess of (less than) fair value 31 (38)

282
27. PLEDGED ASSETS, COLLATERAL, GUARANTEES Lease Commitments
AND COMMITMENTS Rental expense (principally for offices and computer equipment) was
Pledged Assets $1.4 billion, $1.5 billion and $1.5 billion for the years ended December 31,
In connection with the Company’s financing and trading activities, the 2014, 2013 and 2012 respectively.
Company has pledged assets to collateralize its obligations under repurchase Future minimum annual rentals under noncancelable leases, net of
agreements, secured financing agreements, secured liabilities of consolidated sublease income, are as follows:
VIEs and other borrowings. At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the approximate
In millions of dollars
carrying values of the significant components of pledged assets recognized on
2015 $ 1,415
the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet included: 2016 1,192
2017 964
In millions of dollars 2014 2013 2018 771
Investment securities $173,015 $183,071 2019 679
Loans 214,530 228,513 Thereafter 4,994
Trading account assets 111,832 118,832
Total $10,015
Total $499,377 $530,416
Guarantees
In addition, included in Cash and due from banks at December 31, Citi provides a variety of guarantees and indemnifications to its customers
2014 and 2013 were $6.2 billion and $8.8 billion, respectively, of cash to enhance their credit standing and enable them to complete a wide variety
segregated under federal and other brokerage regulations or deposited with of business transactions. For certain contracts meeting the definition of a
clearing organizations. guarantee, the guarantor must recognize, at inception, a liability for the fair
value of the obligation undertaken in issuing the guarantee.
Collateral
In addition, the guarantor must disclose the maximum potential amount
At December 31, 2014 and 2013, the approximate fair value of collateral
of future payments that the guarantor could be required to make under
received by the Company that may be resold or repledged, excluding
the guarantee, if there were a total default by the guaranteed parties. The
the impact of allowable netting, was $346.7 billion and $308.3 billion,
determination of the maximum potential future payments is based on
respectively. This collateral was received in connection with resale
the notional amount of the guarantees without consideration of possible
agreements, securities borrowings and loans, derivative transactions and
recoveries under recourse provisions or from collateral held or pledged. As
margined broker loans.
such, Citi believes such amounts bear no relationship to the anticipated
At December 31, 2014 and 2013, a substantial portion of the collateral
losses, if any, on these guarantees.
received by the Company had been sold or repledged in connection with
repurchase agreements, securities sold, not yet purchased, securities
borrowings and loans, pledges to clearing organizations, segregation
requirements under securities laws and regulations, derivative transactions
and bank loans.
In addition, at December 31, 2014 and 2013, the Company had pledged
$376 billion and $397 billion, respectively, of collateral that may not be sold
or repledged by the secured parties.

283
The following tables present information about Citi’s guarantees at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013:

Maximum potential amount of future payments

Expire within Expire after Total amount Carrying value
In billions of dollars at December 31, 2014 except carrying value in millions 1 year 1 year outstanding (In millions of dollars)
Financial standby letters of credit $ 25.4 $ 73.0 $ 98.4 $ 242
Performance guarantees 7.1 4.8 11.9 29
Derivative instruments considered to be guarantees 12.5 79.2 91.7 2,806
Loans sold with recourse — 0.2 0.2 15
Securities lending indemnifications (1) 127.5 — 127.5 —
Credit card merchant processing (1) 86.0 — 86.0 —
Custody indemnifications and other — 48.9 48.9 54
Total $258.5 $206.1 $464.6 $ 3,146

Maximum potential amount of future payments

Expire within Expire after Total amount Carrying value
In billions of dollars at December 31, 2013 except carrying value in millions 1 year 1 year outstanding (in millions of dollars)
Financial standby letters of credit $ 28.8 $ 71.4 $100.2 $ 429
Performance guarantees 7.6 4.9 12.5 42
Derivative instruments considered to be guarantees 6.0 61.6 67.6 797
Loans sold with recourse — 0.3 0.3 22
Securities lending indemnifications (1) 79.2 — 79.2 —
Credit card merchant processing (1) 85.9 — 85.9 —
Custody indemnifications and other — 36.3 36.3 53
Total $207.5 $174.5 $382.0 $ 1,343

(1) The carrying values of securities lending indemnifications and credit card merchant processing were not material for either period presented, as the probability of potential liabilities arising from these guarantees
is minimal.

Financial standby letters of credit Derivative instruments considered to be guarantees include only those
Citi issues standby letters of credit which substitute its own credit for that of instruments that require Citi to make payments to the counterparty based on
the borrower. If a letter of credit is drawn down, the borrower is obligated changes in an underlying instrument that is related to an asset, a liability or
to repay Citi. Standby letters of credit protect a third party from defaults an equity security held by the guaranteed party. More specifically, derivative
on contractual obligations. Financial standby letters of credit include: instruments considered to be guarantees include certain over-the-counter
(i) guarantees of payment of insurance premiums and reinsurance risks written put options where the counterparty is not a bank, hedge fund or
that support industrial revenue bond underwriting; (ii) settlement of broker-dealer (such counterparties are considered to be dealers in these
payment obligations to clearing houses, including futures and over-the- markets and may, therefore, not hold the underlying instruments). Credit
counter derivatives clearing (see further discussion below); (iii) support derivatives sold by Citi are excluded from the tables above as they are
options and purchases of securities in lieu of escrow deposit accounts; and disclosed separately in Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. In
(iv) letters of credit that backstop loans, credit facilities, promissory notes and instances where Citi’s maximum potential future payment is unlimited, the
trade acceptances. notional amount of the contract is disclosed.

Performance guarantees Loans sold with recourse

Performance guarantees and letters of credit are issued to guarantee a Loans sold with recourse represent Citi’s obligations to reimburse the buyers
customer’s tender bid on a construction or systems-installation project or to for loan losses under certain circumstances. Recourse refers to the clause
guarantee completion of such projects in accordance with contract terms. in a sales agreement under which a seller/lender will fully reimburse the
They are also issued to support a customer’s obligation to supply specified buyer/investor for any losses resulting from the purchased loans. This may be
products, commodities, or maintenance or warranty services to a third party. accomplished by the seller taking back any loans that become delinquent.
In addition to the amounts shown in the tables above, Citi has recorded
Derivative instruments considered to be guarantees a repurchase reserve for its potential repurchases or make-whole liability
Derivatives are financial instruments whose cash flows are based on a regarding residential mortgage representation and warranty claims related
notional amount and an underlying instrument, reference credit or index, to its whole loan sales to the U.S. government-sponsored enterprises
where there is little or no initial investment, and whose terms require or (GSEs) and, to a lesser extent, private investors. The repurchase reserve was
permit net settlement. For a discussion of Citi’s derivatives activities, see approximately $224 million and $341 million at December 31, 2014 and
Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. December 31, 2013, respectively, and these amounts are included in Other
liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.

284
Securities lending indemnifications Custody indemnifications
Owners of securities frequently lend those securities for a fee to other parties Custody indemnifications are issued to guarantee that custody clients will
who may sell them short or deliver them to another party to satisfy some be made whole in the event that a third-party subcustodian or depository
other obligation. Banks may administer such securities lending programs for institution fails to safeguard clients’ assets.
their clients. Securities lending indemnifications are issued by the bank to
guarantee that a securities lending customer will be made whole in the event Other guarantees and indemnifications
that the security borrower does not return the security subject to the lending Credit Card Protection Programs
agreement and collateral held is insufficient to cover the market value of Citi, through its credit card businesses, provides various cardholder protection
the security. programs on several of its card products, including programs that provide
Credit card merchant processing insurance coverage for rental cars, coverage for certain losses associated with
Credit card merchant processing guarantees represent the Company’s indirect purchased products, price protection for certain purchases and protection
obligations in connection with: (i) providing transaction processing services for lost luggage. These guarantees are not included in the table, since the
to various merchants with respect to its private-label cards; and (ii) potential total outstanding amount of the guarantees and Citi’s maximum exposure
liability for bank card transaction processing services. The nature of the to loss cannot be quantified. The protection is limited to certain types of
liability in either case arises as a result of a billing dispute between a purchases and losses, and it is not possible to quantify the purchases that
merchant and a cardholder that is ultimately resolved in the cardholder’s would qualify for these benefits at any given time. Citi assesses the probability
favor. The merchant is liable to refund the amount to the cardholder. In and amount of its potential liability related to these programs based on the
general, if the credit card processing company is unable to collect this extent and nature of its historical loss experience. At December 31, 2014 and
amount from the merchant, the credit card processing company bears the December 31, 2013, the actual and estimated losses incurred and the carrying
loss for the amount of the credit or refund paid to the cardholder. value of Citi’s obligations related to these programs were immaterial.
With regard to (i) above, Citi has the primary contingent liability with
respect to its portfolio of private-label merchants. The risk of loss is mitigated Other Representation and Warranty Indemnifications
as the cash flows between Citi and the merchant are settled on a net basis and In the normal course of business, Citi provides standard representations
Citi has the right to offset any payments with cash flows otherwise due to the and warranties to counterparties in contracts in connection with numerous
merchant. To further mitigate this risk, Citi may delay settlement, require a transactions and also provides indemnifications, including indemnifications
merchant to make an escrow deposit, include event triggers to provide Citi that protect the counterparties to the contracts in the event that additional
with more financial and operational control in the event of the financial taxes are owed due either to a change in the tax law or an adverse
deterioration of the merchant or require various credit enhancements interpretation of the tax law. Counterparties to these transactions provide Citi
(including letters of credit and bank guarantees). In the unlikely event with comparable indemnifications. While such representations, warranties
that a private-label merchant is unable to deliver products, services or a and indemnifications are essential components of many contractual
refund to its private-label cardholders, Citi is contingently liable to credit or relationships, they do not represent the underlying business purpose for the
refund cardholders. transactions. The indemnification clauses are often standard contractual
With regard to (ii) above, Citi has a potential liability for bank card terms related to Citi’s own performance under the terms of a contract and
transactions where Citi provides the transaction processing services as well are entered into in the normal course of business based on an assessment
as those where a third party provides the services and Citi acts as a secondary that the risk of loss is remote. Often these clauses are intended to ensure
guarantor, should that processor fail to perform. that terms of a contract are met at inception. No compensation is received
Citi’s maximum potential contingent liability related to both bank card for these standard representations and warranties, and it is not possible to
and private-label merchant processing services is estimated to be the total determine their fair value because they rarely, if ever, result in a payment.
volume of credit card transactions that meet the requirements to be valid In many cases, there are no stated or notional amounts included in the
charge-back transactions at any given time. At December 31, 2014 and indemnification clauses, and the contingencies potentially triggering the
December 31, 2013, this maximum potential exposure was estimated to be obligation to indemnify have not occurred and are not expected to occur. As a
$86 billion for both periods. result, these indemnifications are not included in the tables above.
However, Citi believes that the maximum exposure is not representative
of the actual potential loss exposure based on its historical experience.
This contingent liability is unlikely to arise, as most products and services
are delivered when purchased and amounts are refunded when items are
returned to merchants. Citi assesses the probability and amount of its
contingent liability related to merchant processing based on the financial
strength of the primary guarantor, the extent and nature of unresolved
charge-backs and its historical loss experience. At December 31, 2014
and December 31, 2013, the losses incurred and the carrying amounts
of Citi’s contingent obligations related to merchant processing activities
were immaterial.

285
Value-Transfer Networks Futures and over-the-counter derivatives clearing
Citi is a member of, or shareholder in, hundreds of value-transfer networks Citi provides clearing services for clients executing exchange-traded
(VTNs) (payment, clearing and settlement systems as well as exchanges) futures and over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives contracts with central
around the world. As a condition of membership, many of these VTNs require counterparties (CCPs). Based on all relevant facts and circumstances,
that members stand ready to pay a pro rata share of the losses incurred by Citi has concluded that it acts as an agent for accounting purposes in its
the organization due to another member’s default on its obligations. Citi’s role as clearing member for these client transactions. As such, Citi does
potential obligations may be limited to its membership interests in the VTNs, not reflect the underlying exchange-traded futures or OTC derivatives
contributions to the VTN’s funds, or, in limited cases, the obligation may contracts in its Consolidated Financial Statements. See Note 23 for a
be unlimited. The maximum exposure cannot be estimated as this would discussion of Citi’s derivatives activities that are reflected in its Consolidated
require an assessment of future claims that have not yet occurred. Citi Financial Statements.
believes the risk of loss is remote given historical experience with the VTNs. As a clearing member, Citi collects and remits cash and securities
Accordingly, Citi’s participation in VTNs is not reported in the guarantees collateral (margin) between its clients and the respective CCP. There are
tables above, and there are no amounts reflected on the Consolidated Balance two types of margin: initial margin and variation margin. Where Citi
Sheet as of December 31, 2014 or December 31, 2013 for potential obligations obtains benefits from or controls cash initial margin (e.g., retains an
that could arise from Citi’s involvement with VTN associations. interest spread), cash initial margin collected from clients and remitted to
the CCP is reflected within Brokerage Payables (payables to customers)
Long-Term Care Insurance Indemnification and Brokerage Receivables (receivables from brokers, dealers and clearing
In the sale of an insurance subsidiary, the Company provided an organizations), respectively. However, for OTC derivatives contracts where
indemnification to an insurance company for policyholder claims and Citi has contractually agreed with the client that (a) Citi will pass through
other liabilities relating to a book of long-term care (LTC) business (for the to the client all interest paid by the CCP on cash initial margin; (b) Citi
entire term of the LTC policies) that is fully reinsured by another insurance will not utilize its right as clearing member to transform cash margin into
company. The reinsurer has funded two trusts with securities whose fair other assets; and (c) Citi does not guarantee and is not liable to the client for
value (approximately $6.2 billion at December 31, 2014, compared to the performance of the CCP, cash initial margin collected from clients and
$5.4 billion at December 31, 2013) is designed to cover the insurance remitted to the CCP is not reflected on Citi’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. The
company’s statutory liabilities for the LTC policies. The assets in these trusts total amount of cash initial margin collected and remitted in this manner
are evaluated and adjusted periodically to ensure that the fair value of the was approximately $3.2 billion and $1.4 billion as of December 31, 2014 and
assets continues to cover the estimated statutory liabilities related to the LTC December 31, 2013, respectively.
policies, as those statutory liabilities change over time. Variation margin due from clients to the respective CCP, or from the CCP
If the reinsurer fails to perform under the reinsurance agreement for any to clients, reflects changes in the value of the client’s derivative contracts for
reason, including insolvency, and the assets in the two trusts are insufficient each trading day. As a clearing member, Citi is exposed to the risk of non-
or unavailable to the ceding insurance company, then Citi must indemnify performance by clients (e.g., failure of a client to post variation margin to
the ceding insurance company for any losses actually incurred in connection the CCP for negative changes in the value of the client’s derivative contracts).
with the LTC policies. Since both events would have to occur before Citi In the event of non-performance by a client, Citi would move to close out
would become responsible for any payment to the ceding insurance company the client’s positions. The CCP would typically utilize initial margin posted
pursuant to its indemnification obligation, and the likelihood of such events by the client and held by the CCP, with any remaining shortfalls required to
occurring is currently not probable, there is no liability reflected in the be paid by Citi as clearing member. Citi generally holds incremental cash or
Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 securities margin posted by the client, which would typically be expected to be
related to this indemnification. Citi continues to closely monitor its potential sufficient to mitigate Citi’s credit risk in the event the client fails to perform.
exposure under this indemnification obligation. As required by ASC 860-30-25-5, securities collateral posted by clients is
not recognized on Citi’s Consolidated Balance Sheet.
Carrying Value—Guarantees and Indemnifications
At December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, the total carrying amounts
of the liabilities related to the guarantees and indemnifications included in
the tables above amounted to approximately $3.1 billion and $1.3 billion,
respectively. The carrying value of financial and performance guarantees is
included in Other liabilities. For loans sold with recourse, the carrying value
of the liability is included in Other liabilities.

286
Collateral Performance risk
Cash collateral available to Citi to reimburse losses realized under these Citi evaluates the performance risk of its guarantees based on the assigned
guarantees and indemnifications amounted to $63 billion and $52 billion referenced counterparty internal or external ratings. Where external ratings
at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. Securities and are used, investment-grade ratings are considered to be Baa/BBB and above,
other marketable assets held as collateral amounted to $70 billion and while anything below is considered non-investment grade. Citi’s internal
$39 billion at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. The ratings are in line with the related external rating system. On certain
majority of collateral is held to reimburse losses realized under securities underlying referenced assets or entities, ratings are not available. Such
lending indemnifications. Additionally, letters of credit in favor of Citi held referenced assets are included in the “not rated” category. The maximum
as collateral amounted to $4.0 billion and $5.3 billion at December 31, 2014 potential amount of the future payments related to the outstanding
and December 31, 2013, respectively. Other property may also be available to guarantees is determined to be the notional amount of these contracts, which
Citi to cover losses under certain guarantees and indemnifications; however, is the par amount of the assets guaranteed.
the value of such property has not been determined. Presented in the tables below are the maximum potential amounts of
future payments that are classified based upon internal and external credit
ratings as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013. As previously
mentioned, the determination of the maximum potential future payments
is based on the notional amount of the guarantees without consideration
of possible recoveries under recourse provisions or from collateral held or
pledged. As such, Citi believes such amounts bear no relationship to the
anticipated losses, if any, on these guarantees.

Maximum potential amount of future payments

Investment Non-investment Not
In billions of dollars at December 31, 2014 grade grade rated Total
Financial standby letters of credit $ 73.0 $15.9 $ 9.5 $ 98.4
Performance guarantees 7.3 3.9 0.7 11.9
Derivative instruments deemed to be guarantees — — 91.7 91.7
Loans sold with recourse — — 0.2 0.2
Securities lending indemnifications — — 127.5 127.5
Credit card merchant processing — — 86.0 86.0
Custody indemnifications and other 48.8 0.1 — 48.9
Total $129.1 $19.9 $315.6 $464.6

Maximum potential amount of future payments

Investment Non-investment Not
In billions of dollars at December 31, 2013 grade grade rated Total
Financial standby letters of credit $ 76.2 $14.8 $ 9.2 $100.2
Performance guarantees 7.4 3.6 1.5 12.5
Derivative instruments deemed to be guarantees — — 67.6 67.6
Loans sold with recourse — — 0.3 0.3
Securities lending indemnifications — — 79.2 79.2
Credit card merchant processing — — 85.9 85.9
Custody indemnifications and other 36.2 0.1 — 36.3
Total $119.8 $18.5 $243.7 $382.0

287
Credit Commitments and Lines of Credit
The table below summarizes Citigroup’s credit commitments as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013:
Outside December 31, December 31,
In millions of dollars U.S. of U.S. 2014 2013
Commercial and similar letters of credit $ 1,369 $ 5,265 $ 6,634 $ 7,341
One- to four-family residential mortgages 3,243 2,431 5,674 4,946
Revolving open-end loans secured by one- to four-family residential properties 13,535 2,563 16,098 16,781
Commercial real estate, construction and land development 8,045 1,197 9,242 8,003
Credit card lines 492,391 119,658 612,049 641,111
Commercial and other consumer loan commitments 154,923 88,757 243,680 225,447
Other commitments and contingencies 1,584 4,091 5,675 7,863
Total $675,090 $223,962 $899,052 $911,492

The majority of unused commitments are contingent upon customers’ Both secured-by-real-estate and unsecured commitments are included in
maintaining specific credit standards. Commercial commitments generally this line, as well as undistributed loan proceeds, where there is an obligation
have floating interest rates and fixed expiration dates and may require to advance for construction progress payments. However, this line only
payment of fees. Such fees (net of certain direct costs) are deferred and, upon includes those extensions of credit that, once funded, will be classified as
exercise of the commitment, amortized over the life of the loan or, if exercise Total loans, net on the Consolidated Balance Sheet.
is deemed remote, amortized over the commitment period.
Credit card lines
Commercial and similar letters of credit Citigroup provides credit to customers by issuing credit cards. The credit card
A commercial letter of credit is an instrument by which Citigroup substitutes lines are cancellable by providing notice to the cardholder or without such
its credit for that of a customer to enable the customer to finance the notice as permitted by local law.
purchase of goods or to incur other commitments. Citigroup issues a letter
on behalf of its client to a supplier and agrees to pay the supplier upon Commercial and other consumer loan commitments
presentation of documentary evidence that the supplier has performed in Commercial and other consumer loan commitments include overdraft and
accordance with the terms of the letter of credit. When a letter of credit is liquidity facilities, as well as commercial commitments to make or purchase
drawn, the customer is then required to reimburse Citigroup. loans, to purchase third-party receivables, to provide note issuance or
revolving underwriting facilities and to invest in the form of equity. Amounts
One- to four-family residential mortgages include $53 billion and $58 billion with an original maturity of less than one
A one- to four-family residential mortgage commitment is a written year at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively.
confirmation from Citigroup to a seller of a property that the bank will In addition, included in this line item are highly leveraged financing
advance the specified sums enabling the buyer to complete the purchase. commitments, which are agreements that provide funding to a borrower with
higher levels of debt (measured by the ratio of debt capital to equity capital
Revolving open-end loans secured by one- to four-family of the borrower) than is generally considered normal for other companies.
residential properties This type of financing is commonly employed in corporate acquisitions,
Revolving open-end loans secured by one- to four-family residential management buy-outs and similar transactions.
properties are essentially home equity lines of credit. A home equity line
of credit is a loan secured by a primary residence or second home to the Other commitments and contingencies
extent of the excess of fair market value over the debt outstanding for the Other commitments and contingencies include committed or unsettled
first mortgage. regular-way reverse repurchase agreements and all other transactions related
to commitments and contingencies not reported on the lines above.
Commercial real estate, construction and land development
Commercial real estate, construction and land development include
unused portions of commitments to extend credit for the purpose of
financing commercial and multifamily residential properties as well as land
development projects.

288
28. CONTINGENCIES Litigation and Regulatory Contingencies
Accounting and Disclosure Framework Overview. In addition to the matters described below, in the ordinary
ASC 450 governs the disclosure and recognition of loss contingencies, course of business, Citigroup, its affiliates and subsidiaries, and current
including potential losses from litigation and regulatory matters. ASC 450 and former officers, directors and employees (for purposes of this section,
defines a “loss contingency” as “an existing condition, situation, or set of sometimes collectively referred to as Citigroup and Related Parties) routinely
circumstances involving uncertainty as to possible loss to an entity that are named as defendants in, or as parties to, various legal actions and
will ultimately be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail to proceedings. Certain of these actions and proceedings assert claims or seek
occur.” It imposes different requirements for the recognition and disclosure relief in connection with alleged violations of consumer protection, fair
of loss contingencies based on the likelihood of occurrence of the contingent lending, securities, banking, antifraud, antitrust, anti-money laundering,
future event or events. It distinguishes among degrees of likelihood using the employment and other statutory and common laws. Certain of these actual
following three terms: “probable,” meaning that “the future event or events or threatened legal actions and proceedings include claims for substantial
are likely to occur”; “remote,” meaning that “the chance of the future event or indeterminate compensatory or punitive damages, or for injunctive relief,
or events occurring is slight”; and “reasonably possible,” meaning that “the and in some instances seek recovery on a class-wide basis.
chance of the future event or events occurring is more than remote but less In the ordinary course of business, Citigroup and Related Parties also
than likely.” These three terms are used below as defined in ASC 450. are subject to governmental and regulatory examinations, information-
Accruals. ASC 450 requires accrual for a loss contingency when it is gathering requests, investigations and proceedings (both formal and
“probable that one or more future events will occur confirming the fact informal), certain of which may result in adverse judgments, settlements,
of loss” and “the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated.” In fines, penalties, restitution, disgorgement, injunctions or other relief. In
accordance with ASC 450, Citigroup establishes accruals for contingencies, addition, certain affiliates and subsidiaries of Citigroup are banks, registered
including the litigation and regulatory matters disclosed herein, when broker-dealers, futures commission merchants, investment advisers or
Citigroup believes it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the other regulated entities and, in those capacities, are subject to regulation
amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. When the reasonable by various U.S., state and foreign securities, banking, commodity futures,
estimate of the loss is within a range of amounts, the minimum amount consumer protection and other regulators. In connection with formal and
of the range is accrued, unless some higher amount within the range is a informal inquiries by these regulators, Citigroup and such affiliates and
better estimate than any other amount within the range. Once established, subsidiaries receive numerous requests, subpoenas and orders seeking
accruals are adjusted from time to time, as appropriate, in light of additional documents, testimony and other information in connection with various
information. The amount of loss ultimately incurred in relation to those aspects of their regulated activities. From time to time Citigroup and Related
matters may be substantially higher or lower than the amounts accrued for Parties also receive grand jury subpoenas and other requests for information
those matters. or assistance, formal or informal, from federal or state law enforcement
Disclosure. ASC 450 requires disclosure of a loss contingency if “there is agencies including, among others, various United States Attorneys’ Offices,
at least a reasonable possibility that a loss or an additional loss may have the Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section and other divisions of
been incurred” and there is no accrual for the loss because the conditions the Department of Justice, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of
described above are not met or an exposure to loss exists in excess of the the United States Department of the Treasury, and the Federal Bureau of
amount accrued. In accordance with ASC 450, if Citigroup has not accrued Investigation relating to Citigroup and its customers.
for a matter because Citigroup believes that a loss is reasonably possible but Because of the global scope of Citigroup’s operations, and its presence
not probable, or that a loss is probable but not reasonably estimable, and in countries around the world, Citigroup and Related Parties are subject to
the matter thus does not meet the criteria for accrual, and the reasonably litigation and governmental and regulatory examinations, information-
possible loss is material, it discloses the loss contingency. In addition, gathering requests, investigations and proceedings (both formal and
Citigroup discloses matters for which it has accrued if it believes a reasonably informal) in multiple jurisdictions with legal and regulatory regimes that
possible exposure to material loss exists in excess of the amount accrued. may differ substantially, and present substantially different risks, from those
In accordance with ASC 450, Citigroup’s disclosure includes an estimate of Citigroup and Related Parties are subject to in the United States. In some
the reasonably possible loss or range of loss for those matters as to which an instances Citigroup and Related Parties may be involved in proceedings
estimate can be made. ASC 450 does not require disclosure of an estimate involving the same subject matter in multiple jurisdictions, which may result
of the reasonably possible loss or range of loss where an estimate cannot in overlapping, cumulative or inconsistent outcomes.
be made. Neither accrual nor disclosure is required for losses that are Citigroup seeks to resolve all litigation and regulatory matters in the
deemed remote. manner management believes is in the best interests of Citigroup and its
shareholders, and contests liability, allegations of wrongdoing and, where
applicable, the amount of damages or scope of any penalties or other relief
sought as appropriate in each pending matter.

289
 Inherent Uncertainty of the Matters Disclosed. Certain of the matters Matters as to Which an Estimate Cannot Be Made. For other matters
disclosed below involve claims for substantial or indeterminate damages. disclosed below, Citigroup is not currently able to estimate the reasonably
The claims asserted in these matters typically are broad, often spanning a possible loss or range of loss. Many of these matters remain in very
multi-year period and sometimes a wide range of business activities, and preliminary stages (even in some cases where a substantial period of time has
the plaintiffs’ or claimants’ alleged damages frequently are not quantified passed since the commencement of the matter), with few or no substantive
or factually supported in the complaint or statement of claim. Other matters legal decisions by the court or tribunal defining the scope of the claims, the
relate to regulatory investigations or proceedings, as to which there may class (if any), or the potentially available damages, and fact discovery is still
be no objective basis for quantifying the range of potential fine, penalty, or in progress or has not yet begun. In many of these matters, Citigroup has
other remedy. As a result, Citigroup is often unable to estimate the loss in not yet answered the complaint or statement of claim or asserted its defenses,
such matters, even if it believes that a loss is probable or reasonably possible, nor has it engaged in any negotiations with the adverse party (whether
until developments in the case or investigation have yielded additional a regulator or a private party). For all these reasons, Citigroup cannot at
information sufficient to support a quantitative assessment of the range this time estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of loss, if any, for
of reasonably possible loss. Such developments may include, among other these matters.
things, discovery from adverse parties or third parties, rulings by the court Opinion of Management as to Eventual Outcome. Subject to the
on key issues, analysis by retained experts, and engagement in settlement foregoing, it is the opinion of Citigroup’s management, based on current
negotiations. Depending on a range of factors, such as the complexity of knowledge and after taking into account its current legal accruals, that the
the facts, the novelty of the legal theories, the pace of discovery, the court’s eventual outcome of all matters described in this Note would not be likely
scheduling order, the timing of court decisions, and the adverse party’s to have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial condition
willingness to negotiate in good faith toward a resolution, it may be months of Citigroup. Nonetheless, given the substantial or indeterminate amounts
or years after the filing of a case or commencement of an investigation before sought in certain of these matters, and the inherent unpredictability of such
an estimate of the range of reasonably possible loss can be made. matters, an adverse outcome in certain of these matters could, from time
Matters as to Which an Estimate Can Be Made. For some of the matters to time, have a material adverse effect on Citigroup’s consolidated results of
disclosed below, Citigroup is currently able to estimate a reasonably possible operations or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods.
loss or range of loss in excess of amounts accrued (if any). For some of the
Commodities Financing Contracts
matters included within this estimation, an accrual has been made because
a loss is believed to be both probable and reasonably estimable, but an Beginning in May 2014, Citigroup became aware of reports of potential fraud
exposure to loss exists in excess of the amount accrued. In these cases, the relating to the financing of physical metal stored at the Qingdao and Penglai
estimate reflects the reasonably possible range of loss in excess of the accrued ports in China. Citigroup has contracts with a counterparty in relation to
amount. For other matters included within this estimation, no accrual has Citigroup’s providing financing collateralized by physical metal stored at
been made because a loss, although estimable, is believed to be reasonably these ports, with the agreements providing that the counterparty would
possible, but not probable; in these cases the estimate reflects the reasonably repurchase the inventory at a specified date in the future (typically three to
possible loss or range of loss. As of December 31, 2014, Citigroup estimates six months). Pursuant to the agreements, the counterparty is responsible for
that the reasonably possible unaccrued loss in future periods for these providing clean title to the inventory, insuring it, and attesting that there are
matters ranges up to approximately $4 billion in the aggregate. no third party encumbrances. The counterparty is a non-Chinese subsidiary
These estimates are based on currently available information. As available of a large multinational corporation, and the counterparty’s obligations
information changes, the matters for which Citigroup is able to estimate will under the contracts are guaranteed by the parent company.
change, and the estimates themselves will change. In addition, while many On July 22, 2014, Citigroup commenced proceedings in the Commercial
estimates presented in financial statements and other financial disclosures Court in London to enforce its rights against the counterparty under the
involve significant judgment and may be subject to significant uncertainty, relevant agreements in relation to approximately $285 million in financing.
estimates of the range of reasonably possible loss arising from litigation and That counterparty and a Chinese warehouse provider previously brought
regulatory proceedings are subject to particular uncertainties. For example, actions in the English courts to establish the parties’ rights and obligations
at the time of making an estimate, (i) Citigroup may have only preliminary, under these agreements. In early December 2014, the English court
incomplete, or inaccurate information about the facts underlying the claim; conducted a preliminary trial concerning, among other issues, the question
(ii) its assumptions about the future rulings of the court or other tribunal of whether Citigroup appropriately accelerated its counterparty’s obligation
on significant issues, or the behavior and incentives of adverse parties or to repay Citigroup under the applicable agreements given these facts and
regulators, may prove to be wrong; and (iii) the outcomes it is attempting to circumstances. The court has not yet issued a ruling following trial.
predict are often not amenable to the use of statistical or other quantitative The financings at issue are carried at fair value. As with any position
analytical tools. In addition, from time to time an outcome may occur that carried at fair value, Citigroup adjusts the positions and records a gain or loss
Citigroup had not accounted for in its estimate because it had deemed such in the Consolidated Statements of Income in accordance with GAAP.
an outcome to be remote. For all these reasons, the amount of loss in excess
of accruals ultimately incurred for the matters as to which an estimate has
been made could be substantially higher or lower than the range of loss
included in the estimate.

290
Credit Crisis-Related Litigation and Other Matters of Justice, several state attorneys general, and the Federal Deposit Insurance
Citigroup and Related Parties have been named as defendants in numerous Corporation (FDIC) relating to MBS and CDOs issued, structured, or
legal actions and other proceedings asserting claims for damages and related underwritten by Citigroup between 2003 and 2008. It included a $4.0 billion
relief for losses arising from the global financial credit crisis that began civil monetary payment to the Department of Justice, $500 million in
in 2007. Such matters include, among other types of proceedings, claims payments to certain state attorneys general and the FDIC, and $2.5 billion in
asserted by: (i) individual investors and purported classes of investors in consumer relief (to be provided by the end of 2018). The consumer relief will
securities issued by Citigroup alleging violations of the federal securities laws, be in the form of financing provided for the construction and preservation of
foreign laws, state securities and fraud law, and the Employee Retirement affordable multifamily rental housing, principal reduction and forbearance
Income Security Act (ERISA); and (ii) investors in securities and other for residential loans, as well as other direct consumer benefits from various
investments underwritten, issued or marketed by Citigroup, including relief programs.
securities issued by other public companies, collateralized debt obligations Mortgage-Backed Securities and CDO Investor Actions: Beginning in
(CDOs), mortgage-backed securities (MBS), auction rate securities (ARS), July 2010, Citigroup and Related Parties have been named as defendants in
investment funds, and other structured or leveraged instruments, which have complaints filed by purchasers of MBS and CDOs sold or underwritten by
suffered losses as a result of the credit crisis. Citigroup. The complaints generally assert that defendants made material
In addition to these matters, Citigroup continues to cooperate fully in misrepresentations and omissions about the credit quality of the assets
response to subpoenas and requests for information from the Securities underlying the securities or the manner in which those assets were selected,
and Exchange Commission (SEC), FINRA, state attorneys general, the and typically assert claims under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933,
Department of Justice and subdivisions thereof, the Office of the Special state blue sky laws, and/or common-law misrepresentation-based causes
Inspector General for the Troubled Asset Relief Program, bank regulators, of action.
and other government agencies and authorities, in connection with various The majority of these matters have been resolved through settlement or
formal and informal (and, in many instances, industry-wide) inquiries otherwise. As of December 31, 2014, the aggregate original purchase amount
concerning Citigroup’s mortgage-related conduct and business activities, as of the purchases at issue in the pending litigations was approximately
well as other business activities affected by the credit crisis. These business $4.9 billion, and the aggregate original purchase amount of the purchases
activities include, but are not limited to, Citigroup’s sponsorship, packaging, covered by tolling agreements with investors threatening litigation was
issuance, marketing, trading, servicing and underwriting of CDOs and MBS, approximately $1.4 billion. Additional information concerning certain
its origination, sale or other transfer, servicing, and foreclosure of residential of these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket
mortgages, and its origination, servicing, and securitization of auto loans. numbers 08 Civ. 8781 (S.D.N.Y.) (Failla, J.), 654464/2013 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.)
(Friedman, J.), 653990/2013 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.) (Ramos, J.), and CL 14-399
Mortgage-Related Litigation and Other Matters (Vir. Cir. Ct.) (Hughes, J.).
Securities Actions: Citigroup and Related Parties have been named as Mortgage-Backed Security Repurchase Claims: Various parties to
defendants in a variety of putative class actions and individual actions MBS securitizations and other interested parties have asserted that certain
arising out of Citigroup’s exposure to CDOs and other assets that declined in Citigroup affiliates breached representations and warranties made in
value during the financial crisis. Many of these matters have been dismissed connection with mortgage loans sold into securitization trusts (private-label
or settled. These actions assert a wide range of claims, including claims securitizations). Typically, these claims are based on allegations that
under the federal securities laws, foreign securities laws, ERISA, and state securitized mortgages were not underwritten in accordance with the
law. Additional information concerning certain of these actions is publicly applicable underwriting standards. Citigroup also has received numerous
available in court filings under the docket numbers 10 Civ. 9646 (S.D.N.Y.) inquiries, demands for loan files, and requests to toll (extend) the applicable
(Stein, J.), 11 Civ. 7672 (S.D.N.Y.) (Koeltl, J.), 12 Civ. 6653 (S.D.N.Y.) statutes of limitation for representation and warranty claims relating to its
(Stein, J.), 13-4488, 13-4504, 14-2545, and 14-3014 (2d Cir.). private-label securitizations. These inquiries, demands and requests have
Beginning in November 2007, certain Citigroup affiliates also have been made by trustees of securitization trusts and others.
been named as defendants arising out of their activities as underwriters On April 7, 2014, Citigroup entered into an agreement with
of securities in actions brought by investors in securities issued by public 18 institutional investors represented by Gibbs & Bruns LLP regarding
companies adversely affected by the credit crisis. Many of these matters the resolution of representation and warranty repurchase claims related
have been dismissed or settled. As a general matter, issuers indemnify to certain legacy securitizations. Pursuant to the agreement, Citigroup
underwriters in connection with such claims, but in certain of these matters made a binding offer to the trustees of 68 Citigroup-sponsored mortgage
Citigroup affiliates are not being indemnified or may in the future cease to be securitization trusts to pay $1.125 billion to the trusts to resolve these claims,
indemnified because of the financial condition of the issuer. plus certain fees and expenses. The 68 trusts covered by the agreement
Regulatory Actions: On July 14, 2014, Citigroup reached a settlement of represent all of the trusts established by Citigroup’s legacy Securities and
the Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities Working Group’s investigation. Banking business during 2005-2008 for which Citigroup affiliates made
The settlement resolved actual and potential civil claims by the Department representations and warranties to the trusts.

291
 On December 19, 2014, Citigroup, the 18 institutional investors, and the Counterparty and Investor Actions
trustees for these securitizations executed a revised settlement agreement In 2010, Abu Dhabi Investment Authority (ADIA) commenced an arbitration
resolving a substantial majority of the claims contemplated by the (ADIA I) against Citigroup and Related Parties before the International
April 7, 2014 offer of settlement. On December 31, 2014, the trustees amended Center for Dispute Resolution (ICDR), alleging statutory and common
the settlement agreement to accept the offer as to certain additional claims. law claims in connection with its $7.5 billion investment in Citigroup in
As of December 31, 2014, the trustees have accepted the settlement for 64 December 2007. ADIA sought rescission of the investment agreement or, in
trusts in whole, and the trustees have accepted in part and excluded in part the alternative, more than $4 billion in damages. Following a hearing in
four trusts from the settlement. Pursuant to the terms of the settlement May 2011 and post-hearing proceedings, on October 14, 2011, the arbitration
agreement, the trustees’ acceptance is subject to a judicial approval panel issued a final award and statement of reasons finding in favor of
proceeding, which was initiated by the trustees on December 21, 2014. Citigroup on all claims asserted by ADIA. On March 4, 2013, the United
Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court States District Court for the Southern District of New York denied ADIA’s
filings under the docket number 653902/2014 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.) (Friedman, J.). petition to vacate the arbitration award and granted Citigroup’s cross-petition
To date, trustees have filed six actions against Citigroup seeking to to confirm. ADIA appealed and, on February 19, 2014, the United States
enforce certain of these contractual repurchase claims in connection with Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the judgment. ADIA filed a
four private-label securitizations. Each of the six actions is in the early petition for review in the United States Supreme Court, which was denied on
stages of proceedings. In the aggregate, plaintiffs are asserting repurchase October 6, 2014. Additional information concerning this action is publicly
claims as to approximately 6,700 loans that were securitized into these available in court filings under the docket numbers 12 Civ. 283 (S.D.N.Y.)
four securitizations, as well as any other loans that are later found to have (Daniels, J.),13-1068-cv (2d Cir.), and 13-1500 (U.S.).
breached representations and warranties. Additional information concerning On August 20, 2013, ADIA commenced a second arbitration (ADIA II)
these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers against Citigroup before the ICDR, alleging common law claims arising out
13 Civ. 2843 (S.D.N.Y.) (Daniels, J.), 13 Civ. 6989 (S.D.N.Y.) (Daniels, J.), of the same investment at issue in ADIA I. On August 28, 2013, Citigroup
653816/2013 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.) (Kornreich, J.), and 653930/2014 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.). filed a complaint against ADIA in the United States District Court for the
Mortgage-Backed Securities Trustee Actions. On June 18, 2014, a group Southern District of New York seeking to enjoin ADIA II on the ground that it
of investors in 48 MBS trusts for which Citibank, N.A. served or currently is barred by the court’s judgment confirming the arbitral award in ADIA I. On
serves as trustee filed a complaint in New York State Supreme Court in September 23, 2013, ADIA filed motions to dismiss Citigroup’s complaint and
BLACKROCK ALLOCATION TARGET SHARES: SERIES S. PORTFOLIO, ET to compel arbitration. On November 25, 2013, the court denied Citigroup’s
AL. v. CITIBANK, N.A. The complaint, like those filed against other MBS motion for a preliminary injunction and granted ADIA’s motions to dismiss
trustees, alleges that Citibank, N.A. failed to pursue contractual remedies and to compel arbitration. On December 23, 2013, Citigroup appealed
against loan originators, securitization sponsors and servicers. This action that ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. On
was withdrawn without prejudice, effective December 17, 2014. Additional January 14, 2015, the Second Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling.
information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court
under the docket number 651868/2014 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.) (Ramos, J.). On filings under the docket numbers 13 Civ. 6073 (S.D.N.Y.) (Castel, J.) and
November 24, 2014, largely the same group of investors filed an action in the 13-4825 (2d Cir.).
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, captioned
FIXED INCOME SHARES: SERIES M ET AL. V. CITIBANK, N.A., alleging Alternative Investment Fund-Related Litigation and
similar claims relating to 27 MBS trusts sponsored by UBS, Lehman Brothers, Other Matters
American Home Mortgage, Goldman Sachs, Country Place, PHH Mortgage, Since mid-2008, the SEC has been investigating the management and
Wachovia and Washington Mutual. Additional information concerning marketing of the ASTA/MAT and Falcon funds, alternative investment
this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number funds managed and marketed by certain Citigroup affiliates that suffered
14-cv-9373 (S.D.N.Y.) (Furman, J.). substantial losses during the credit crisis. In addition to the SEC inquiry,
On June 27, 2014, a separate group of MBS investors filed a summons on June 11, 2012, the New York Attorney General served a subpoena on a
with notice in FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK OF TOPEKA, ET AL. v. CITIBANK, Citigroup affiliate seeking documents and information concerning certain
N.A. The summons alleges that Citibank, N.A., as trustee for an unspecified of these funds, and, on August 1, 2012, the Massachusetts Attorney General
number of MBS, failed to pursue remedies on behalf of the trusts. This served a Civil Investigative Demand on a Citigroup affiliate seeking similar
action was withdrawn without prejudice on November 10, 2014. Additional documents and information. Citigroup is cooperating fully with these
information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings inquiries. Citigroup has entered into tolling agreements with the SEC
under the docket number 651973/2014 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.). and the New York Attorney General concerning certain claims related to
the investigations.

292
 Citigroup and Related Parties have been named as defendants in a Terra Firma Litigation
putative class action lawsuit filed in October 2012 on behalf of investors In December 2009, the general partners of two related private equity funds
in CSO Ltd., CSO US Ltd., and Corporate Special Opportunities Ltd., whose filed a complaint in New York state court, subsequently removed to the
investments were managed indirectly by a Citigroup affiliate. Plaintiffs United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, asserting
assert a variety of state common law claims, alleging that they and other multi-billion-dollar fraud and other common law claims against certain
investors were misled into investing in the funds and, later, not redeeming Citigroup affiliates arising out of the May 2007 auction of the music
their investments. The complaint seeks to recover more than $400 million on company EMI, in which Citigroup acted as advisor to EMI and as a lender to
behalf of a putative class of investors. Additional information concerning this plaintiffs’ acquisition vehicle. Following a jury trial, a verdict was returned
action is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 12-cv- in favor of Citigroup on November 4, 2010. Plaintiffs appealed from the entry
7717 (S.D.N.Y.) (Castel, J.). of the judgment. On May 31, 2013, the United States Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit vacated the November 2010 jury verdict in favor of Citigroup
Auction Rate Securities-Related Litigation and and ordered that the case be retried. On March 7, 2014, the parties stipulated
Other Matters to the dismissal of all remaining claims in the action, without prejudice to
Citigroup and Related Parties have been named as defendants in numerous plaintiffs’ rights to re-file those claims in England. Additional information
actions and proceedings brought by Citigroup shareholders and purchasers concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket
or issuers of ARS and an issuer of variable rate demand obligations, asserting numbers 09 Civ. 10459 (S.D.N.Y.) (Rakoff, J.) and 11-0126-cv (2d Cir.).
federal and state law claims arising from the collapse of the market in 2008, In August and September 2013, plaintiffs in the New York proceedings,
which plaintiffs contend Citigroup and other ARS underwriters and broker- together with their affiliates and principal, filed fraud and negligent
dealers foresaw or should have foreseen, but failed adequately to disclose. misrepresentation claims arising out of the EMI auction in the High Court
Many of these matters have been dismissed or settled. Most of the remaining of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Manchester District Registry Mercantile
matters are in arbitrations pending before FINRA. Court in Manchester, England, against certain Citigroup affiliates. The cases
have since been transferred to the High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench
Lehman Brothers Bankruptcy Proceedings
Division, Commercial Court in London. On March 7, 2014, the parties to the
Beginning in September 2010, Citigroup and Related Parties have been
separate proceedings brought by Terra Firma in 2013 before the High Court
named as defendants in various adversary proceedings and claim objections
of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Commercial Court in London consented
in the Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc.
to the service by plaintiffs of an Amended Claim Form incorporating the
(LBHI) and the liquidation proceedings of Lehman Brothers Inc. (LBI) and
claims that would have proceeded to trial in the United States District Court
Lehman Brothers Finance AG, a/k/a Lehman Brothers Finance SA (LBF).
for the Southern District of New York in July 2014 had the New York action
Additional information concerning these actions is publicly available in
not been dismissed. The Amended Claim Form was served on March 10,
court filings under the docket numbers 08-13555, 08-01420, and 09-10583
2014, and discovery is ongoing. A trial is scheduled to begin in 2016.
(Bankr. S.D.N.Y.) (Chapman, J.).
Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court
On February 8, 2012, Citibank, N.A. and certain Citigroup affiliates were
filings under the claim number Terra Firma Investments (GP) 2 Ltd. &
named as defendants in an adversary proceeding asserting objections to
Ors v Citigroup Global Markets Ltd. & Ors (2014 Folio 267).
proofs of claim totaling approximately $2.6 billion filed by Citibank, N.A. and
those affiliates, and claims under federal bankruptcy and state law to recover Tribune Company Bankruptcy
$2 billion deposited by LBHI with Citibank, N.A. against which Citibank, Certain Citigroup affiliates have been named as defendants in adversary
N.A. asserts a right of setoff. Plaintiffs also seek avoidance of a $500 million proceedings related to the Chapter 11 cases of Tribune Company (Tribune)
transfer and an amendment to a guarantee in favor of Citibank, N.A. and filed in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware,
other relief. Plaintiffs filed amended complaints on November 16, 2012, asserting claims arising out of the approximately $11 billion leveraged
January 29, 2014, and December 9, 2014, asserting additional claims and buyout of Tribune in 2007. On August 2, 2013, the Litigation Trustee, as
factual allegations, and amending certain previously asserted claims. successor plaintiff to the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors, filed
Discovery is ongoing. Additional information concerning this action is a fifth amended complaint in the adversary proceeding KIRSCHNER v.
publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers 12-01044 and FITZSIMONS, ET AL. The complaint seeks to avoid and recover as actual
08-13555 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.) (Chapman, J.). fraudulent transfers the transfers of Tribune stock that occurred as a part of
On July 21, 2014, an adversary proceeding was filed against Citibank, the leveraged buyout. Several Citigroup affiliates are named as “Shareholder
N.A., Citibank Korea Inc., and Citigroup Global Markets Ltd., asserting Defendants” and are alleged to have tendered Tribune stock to Tribune as a
that defendants improperly have withheld termination payments under part of the buyout.
certain derivatives contracts. An amended complaint was filed on August Several Citigroup affiliates are named as defendants in certain actions
6, 2014, and defendants filed an answer on October 6, 2014. Plaintiffs seek brought by Tribune noteholders, also seeking to recover the transfers of
to recover approximately $70 million, plus interest. Discovery is ongoing. Tribune stock that occurred as a part of the leveraged buyout, as alleged
Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court state-law constructive fraudulent conveyances. Finally, Citigroup Global
filings under the docket numbers 09-10583 and 14-02050 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.) Markets Inc. (CGMI) has been named in a separate action as a defendant in
(Chapman, J.).

293
connection with its role as advisor to Tribune. A motion to dismiss the claim Foreign Exchange Matters
against the Shareholder Defendants in the FITZSIMONS action is pending. Regulatory Actions: Government and regulatory agencies in the U.S.,
The noteholders’ claims were previously dismissed, and an appeal to the including the Antitrust Division and the Criminal Division of the Department
Second Circuit is pending. A motion to dismiss the action against CGMI in of Justice, as well as agencies in other jurisdictions, including the U.K.
its role as advisor to Tribune is pending. Additional information concerning Serious Fraud Office, the Swiss Competition Commission, and the Australian
these actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers Competition and Consumer Commission, are conducting investigations or
08-13141 (Bankr. D. Del.) (Carey, J.), 11 MD 02296 (S.D.N.Y.) (Sullivan, J.), making inquiries regarding Citigroup’s foreign exchange business. Citigroup
12 MC 2296 (S.D.N.Y.) (Sullivan, J.), and 13-3992 (2d Cir.). is fully cooperating with these and related investigations and inquiries.
On November 12, 2014, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Credit Default Swaps Matters (CFTC), the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), and the Office of
In April 2011, the European Commission (EC) opened an investigation the U.S. Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) announced settlements with
(Case No COMP/39.745) into the credit default swap (CDS) industry. The Citibank, N.A. resolving their foreign exchange investigations. Citibank, N.A.
scope of the investigation initially concerned the question of “whether 16 was among five banks settling the CFTC’s and the FCA’s investigations and
investment banks and Markit, the leading provider of financial information among three banks settling the OCC’s investigation. As part of the settlements,
in the CDS market, have colluded and/or may hold and abuse a dominant Citibank, N.A. agreed to pay penalties of approximately $358 million to the
position in order to control the financial information on CDS.” On July FCA, $350 million to the OCC, and $310 million to the CFTC and to enhance
2, 2013, the EC issued to Citigroup, CGMI, Citigroup Global Markets Ltd., further the control framework governing its foreign exchange business.
Citicorp North America Inc., and Citibank, N.A., as well as Markit, ISDA, and Antitrust and Other Litigation: Numerous foreign exchange dealers,
12 other investment bank dealer groups, a Statement of Objections alleging including Citigroup and Citibank, N.A., are named as defendants in putative
that Citigroup and the other dealers colluded to prevent exchanges from class actions that are proceeding on a consolidated basis in the United States
entering the credit derivatives business in breach of Article 101 of the Treaty District Court for the Southern District of New York under the caption IN RE
on the Functioning of the European Union. The Statement of Objections sets FOREIGN EXCHANGE BENCHMARK RATES ANTITRUST LITIGATION. The
forth the EC’s preliminary conclusions, does not prejudge the final outcome plaintiffs in these actions allege that the defendants colluded to manipulate
of the case, and does not benefit from the review and consideration of the WM/Reuters rate (WMR), thereby causing the putative classes to
Citigroup’s arguments and defenses. Citigroup filed a Reply to the Statement suffer losses in connection with WMR-based financial instruments. The
of Objections on January 23, 2014, and made oral submissions to the EC plaintiffs assert federal and state antitrust claims and claims for unjust
on May 14, 2014. enrichment, and seek compensatory damages, treble damages where
In July 2009 and September 2011, the Antitrust Division of the U.S. authorized by statute, restitution, and declaratory and injunctive relief. On
Department of Justice served Civil Investigative Demands (CIDs) on Citigroup March 31, 2014, plaintiffs in the putative class actions filed a consolidated
concerning potential anticompetitive conduct in the CDS industry. Citigroup amended complaint.
has responded to the CIDs and is cooperating with the investigation. Citibank, N.A., Citigroup, and Citibank Korea Inc., as well as numerous
In addition, putative class action complaints have been filed by various other foreign exchange dealers, were named as defendants in a putative
entities against Citigroup, CGMI and Citibank, N.A., among other defendants, class action captioned SIMMTECH CO. v. BARCLAYS BANK PLC, ET AL.
alleging anticompetitive conduct in the CDS industry and asserting various (SIMMTECH) that was proceeding before the same court. The plaintiff
claims under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act as well as a state law sought to represent a putative class of persons who traded foreign currency
claim for unjust enrichment. On October 16, 2013, the U.S. Judicial Panel with the defendants in Korea, alleging that the class suffered losses as a
on Multidistrict Litigation centralized these putative class actions and result of the defendants’ alleged WMR manipulation. The plaintiff asserted
ordered that those actions pending in the United States District Court for the federal and state antitrust claims, and sought compensatory damages, treble
Northern District of Illinois be transferred to the United States District Court damages, and declaratory and injunctive relief.
for the Southern District of New York for coordinated or consolidated pretrial Additionally, Citibank, N.A. and Citigroup, as well as numerous other
proceedings before Judge Denise Cote. foreign exchange dealers, were named as defendants in a putative class
On September 4, 2014, the United States District Court for the Southern action captioned LARSEN v. BARCLAYS BANK PLC, ET AL. (LARSEN), that
District of New York granted in part and denied in part defendants’ motion to was proceeding before the same court. Plaintiff sought to represent a putative
dismiss the second consolidated amended complaint, dismissing plaintiffs’ class of persons or entities in Norway who traded foreign currency with
claim for violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act and certain claims for defendants, alleging that the class suffered losses as a result of defendants’
damages, but permitting the case to proceed as to plaintiffs’ claims for alleged WMR manipulation. Plaintiff asserted federal antitrust and unjust
violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and unjust enrichment. Additional enrichment claims, and sought compensatory damages, treble damages
information relating to this action is publicly available in court filings under where authorized by statute, and declaratory and injunctive relief.
the docket number 13 MD 2476 (S.D.N.Y.) (Cote, J.).

294
 Citigroup and Citibank, N.A., along with other defendants, moved The plaintiffs seek compensatory damages and restitution for losses caused
to dismiss all of these actions. On January 28, 2015, the court issued an by the alleged violations, as well as treble damages under the Sherman Act.
opinion and order denying the motion as to the IN RE FOREIGN EXCHANGE The Schwab and OTC plaintiffs also seek injunctive relief.
BENCHMARK RATES ANTITRUST LITIGATION plaintiffs, but dismissing Additional actions have been consolidated in the MDL proceeding,
the claims of the SIMMTECH and LARSEN plaintiffs in their entirety on the including (i) lawsuits filed by, or on behalf of putative classes of, community
grounds that their federal claims were barred by the Foreign Trade Antitrust and other banks, savings and loans institutions, credit unions, municipalities
Improvements Act and their state claims had an insufficient nexus to New and purchasers and holders of LIBOR-linked financial products; and,
York. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly available in (ii) lawsuits filed by putative classes of lenders and adjustable rate mortgage
court filings under the docket numbers 13 Civ. 7789, 13 Civ. 7953, and 14 Civ. borrowers. The plaintiffs allege that defendant panel banks artificially
1364 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.). suppressed USD LIBOR in violation of applicable law and seek compensatory
Additionally, Citigroup and Citibank, N.A., as well as numerous other and other damages.
foreign exchange dealers, are named as defendants in a putative class Additional information relating to these actions is publicly available
action captioned TAYLOR v. BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION, ET AL. in court filings under the following docket numbers: 12 Civ. 4205; 12 Civ.
The plaintiffs seek to represent a putative class of investors that transacted 5723; 12 Civ. 5822; 12 Civ. 6056; 12 Civ. 6693; 12 Civ. 7461; 13 Civ.
in exchange-traded foreign exchange futures contracts and/or options on 346; 13 Civ. 407; 13 Civ. 1016, 13 Civ. 1456, 13 Civ. 1700, 13 Civ. 2262,
foreign exchange futures contracts on certain exchanges, alleging that the 13 Civ. 2297; 13 Civ. 4018; 13 Civ. 7720; 14 Civ. 146 (Buchwald, J.);
putative class was harmed as a result of the defendants’ manipulation of the 12 Civ. 6294 (E.D.N.Y.) (Seybert, J.); 12 Civ. 6571 (N.D. Cal.) (Conti, J.);
foreign exchange market. The plaintiffs assert violations of the Commodity 12 Civ. 10903 (C.D. Cal.) (Snyder, J.); 13 Civ. 48 (S.D. Cal.) (Sammartino,
Exchange Act and federal antitrust claims. Additional information J.); 13 Civ. 62 (C.D. Cal.) (Phillips, J.); 13 Civ. 106 (N.D. Cal.) (Beller, J.);
concerning this action is publicly available in court filings under the docket 13 Civ. 108 (N.D. Cal.) (Ryu, J.); 13 Civ. 109 (N.D. Cal.) (Laporte, J.); 13 Civ.
number 1:15-cv-1350 (S.D.N.Y.) (Schofield, J.). 122 (C.D. Cal.) (Bernal, J.); 13 Civ. 334, 13 Civ. 335 (S.D. Iowa) (Pratt, J);
13 Civ. 342 (E.D. Va.) (Brinkema, J.); 13 Civ. 1466 (S.D. Cal.) (Lorenz, J.);
Interbank Offered Rates-Related Litigation and 13 Civ. 1476 (E.D. Cal.) (Mueller, J.); 13 Civ. 2149 (S.D. Tex.) (Hoyt, J.);
Other Matters 13 Civ. 2244 (N.D. Cal.) (Hamilton, J.); 13 Civ. 2921 (N.D. Cal.) (Chesney,
Regulatory Actions: Government agencies in the U.S., including the J.); 13 Civ. 2979 (N.D. Cal.) (Tigar, J.); 13 Civ. 4352 (E.D. Pa.) (Restrepo, J.);
Department of Justice, the CFTC, and a consortium of state attorneys general, and 13 Civ. 5278 (N.D. Cal.) (Vadas, J.)
as well as agencies in other jurisdictions, including the Swiss Competition On June 30, 2014, the United States Supreme Court granted a petition
Commission, are conducting investigations or making inquiries regarding for a writ of certiorari in GELBOIM, ET AL. v. BANK OF AMERICA CORP.,
submissions made by panel banks to bodies that publish various interbank ET AL. with respect to the dismissal by the United States Court of Appeals
offered rates and other benchmark rates. As members of a number of such for the Second Circuit of an appeal by the plaintiff class of indirect OTC
panels, Citigroup subsidiaries have received requests for information and purchasers of U.S. debt securities. On January 21, 2015, the Supreme Court
documents. Citigroup is cooperating with the investigations and inquiries ruled that, contrary to the Second Circuit’s opinion, the plaintiffs had a right
and is responding to the requests. to appeal, and remanded the case to the Second Circuit for consideration
Antitrust and Other Litigation: Citigroup and Citibank, N.A., along of the plaintiffs’ appeal on the merits. Additional information concerning
with other U.S. Dollar (USD) LIBOR panel banks, are defendants in a this appeal is publicly available in court filings under the docket numbers
multi-district litigation (MDL) proceeding before the United States District 13-3565 (2d Cir.), 13-3636 (2d Cir.), and 13-1174 (U.S.).
Court for the Southern District of New York captioned IN RE LIBOR-BASED Citigroup and Citibank, N.A., along with other USD LIBOR panel
FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION (the LIBOR MDL). banks, also are named as defendants in an individual action filed in
Following motion practice, consolidated amended complaints were filed on the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
behalf of two separate putative classes of plaintiffs: (i) OTC purchasers of on February 13, 2013, captioned 7 WEST 57th STREET REALTY CO. v.
derivative instruments tied to USD LIBOR; and, (ii) purchasers of exchange- CITIGROUP, INC., ET AL. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant panel
traded derivative instruments tied to USD LIBOR. Each of these putative banks manipulated USD LIBOR to keep it artificially high and that this
classes alleges that the panel bank defendants conspired to suppress USD manipulation affected the value of plaintiffs’ OTC municipal bond portfolio
LIBOR: (i) OTC purchasers assert claims under the Sherman Act and for in violation of federal and state antitrust laws and federal RICO law. The
unjust enrichment and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and plaintiff seeks compensatory damages, treble damages where authorized by
fair dealing; and, (ii) purchasers of exchange-traded derivative instruments statute, and declaratory relief. Additional information concerning this action
assert claims under the Commodity Exchange Act and the Sherman Act is publicly available in court filings under the docket number 13 Civ. 981
and for unjust enrichment. Individual actions commenced by various (Gardephe, J.).
Charles Schwab entities also were consolidated into the MDL proceeding.

295
 Separately, on April 30, 2012, an action was filed in the United States final class settlement approval order with the United States Court of Appeals
District Court for the Southern District of New York captioned LAYDON for the Second Circuit. Additional information concerning these consolidated
v. MIZUHO BANK LTD. ET AL. against defendant banks that are or were actions is publicly available in court filings under the docket number MDL
members of the panels making submissions used in the calculation of 05-1720 (E.D.N.Y.) (Brodie, J.) and 12-4671 (2d Cir.).
Japanese yen LIBOR and TIBOR, and certain affiliates of those banks, Numerous merchants, including large national merchants, have
including Citigroup, Citibank, N.A., Citibank Japan Ltd. and Citigroup Global requested exclusion from the class settlements, and some of those opting out
Markets Japan Inc. The plaintiff asserts claims under federal antitrust law have filed complaints against Visa, MasterCard, and in some instances one or
and the Commodity Exchange Act, as well as a claim for unjust enrichment, more issuing banks. Two of these suits, 7-ELEVEN, INC., ET AL. v. VISA INC.,
and seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, including treble ET AL., and SPEEDY STOP FOOD STORES, LLC, ET AL. v. VISA INC., ET AL.,
damages under certain statutes, as well as costs and expenses. Additional name Citigroup as a defendant. On December 5, 2014, the Interchange
information concerning this action is publicly available in court filings MDL, including the opt out cases, was transferred from Judge Gleeson to
under the docket number 12 Civ. 3419 (S.D.N.Y.) (Daniels, J.). Judge Brodie. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly
On May 2, 2014, plaintiffs in the class action SULLIVAN v. BARCLAYS PLC, available in court filings under the docket numbers 05-md-1720 (E.D.N.Y.)
ET AL pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of (Brodie, J.); 13-cv-4442 (S.D.N.Y.) (Hellerstein, J.), and 13-10-75377A
New York filed a second amended complaint naming Citigroup and Citibank, (Tex. Dist. Ct.).
N.A. as defendants. Plaintiffs claim to have suffered losses as a result of
purported EURIBOR manipulation and assert claims under the Commodity ISDAFIX-Related Litigation and Other Matters
Exchange Act, the Sherman Act and the federal RICO law, and for unjust Regulatory Actions: Government agencies in the U.S., including the
enrichment. On September 11, 2014, the court granted the Department Department of Justice and the CFTC, are conducting investigations or
of Justice’s motion to stay discovery for eight months, until May 12, 2015. making inquiries concerning submissions for the global benchmark for
Additional information concerning this action is publicly available in court fixed interest rate swaps (ISDAFIX) and trading in products that reference
filings under the docket number 13 Civ. 2811 (S.D.N.Y.) (Castel, J.). ISDAFIX. Citigroup is fully cooperating with these and related investigations
and inquiries.
Interchange Fees Litigation Antitrust and Other Litigation. Beginning in September 2014, various
Beginning in 2005, several putative class actions were filed against Citigroup plaintiffs filed putative class action complaints in the United States District
and Related Parties, together with Visa, MasterCard and other banks and their Court for the Southern District of New York against Citigroup and other U.S.
affiliates, in various federal district courts and consolidated with other related dollar (USD) ISDAFIX panel banks, which are proceeding on a consolidated
cases in a multi-district litigation proceeding before Judge Gleeson in the basis. On February 12, 2015, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint alleging
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Interchange that the defendants colluded to manipulate ISDAFIX, thereby causing the
MDL). This proceeding is captioned IN RE PAYMENT CARD INTERCHANGE putative class to suffer losses in connection with USD interest rate derivatives
FEE AND MERCHANT DISCOUNT ANTITRUST LITIGATION. purchased from the defendants. Plaintiffs assert federal and various
The plaintiffs, merchants that accept Visa- and MasterCard-branded common law claims and seek compensatory damages, treble damages
payment cards as well as membership associations that claim to represent where authorized by statute, restitution and declaratory and injunctive
certain groups of merchants, allege, among other things, that defendants relief. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly available
have engaged in conspiracies to set the price of interchange and merchant in court filings under the consolidated lead docket number 14 Civ. 7126
discount fees on credit and debit card transactions and to restrain trade (S.D.N.Y.) (Furman, J.).
through various Visa and MasterCard rules governing merchant conduct,
all in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act and certain California Money Laundering Inquiries
statutes. Supplemental complaints also have been filed against defendants Citigroup and Related Parties, including Citigroup’s indirect, wholly-owned
in the putative class actions alleging that Visa’s and MasterCard’s respective subsidiary Banamex USA (BUSA), a California state-chartered bank, have
initial public offerings were anticompetitive and violated Section 7 of the received grand jury subpoenas issued by the United States Attorney’s Office
Clayton Act, and that MasterCard’s initial public offering constituted a for the District of Massachusetts concerning, among other issues, policies,
fraudulent conveyance. procedures and activities related to compliance with Bank Secrecy Act (BSA)
On January 14, 2014, the court entered a final judgment approving and anti-money laundering (AML) requirements under applicable federal
the terms of a class settlement providing for, among other things, a total laws and banking regulations. Banamex USA also has received a subpoena
payment to the class of $6.05 billion; a rebate to merchants participating in from the FDIC related to its BSA and AML compliance program. Citigroup
the damages class settlement of 10 basis points on interchange collected for a and BUSA also have received inquiries and requests for information from
period of eight months by the Visa and MasterCard networks; and changes to other regulators, including the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
certain network rules. A number of objectors have noticed an appeal from the and the California Department of Business Oversight, concerning BSA- and
AML-related issues. Citigroup is cooperating fully with these inquiries.

296
Oceanografia Fraud and Related Matters Parmalat Litigation and Related Matters
On February 28, 2014, Citigroup announced that it was adjusting downward On July 29, 2004, Dr. Enrico Bondi, the Extraordinary Commissioner
its earnings for the fourth quarter of 2013 and full year 2013 by $235 million appointed under Italian law to oversee the administration of various
after tax ($360 million pretax) as a result of a fraud discovered in a Petróleos Parmalat companies, filed a complaint in New Jersey state court against
Mexicanos (Pemex) supplier program involving Oceanografía SA de CV Citigroup and Related Parties alleging, among other things, that the
(OSA), a Mexican oil services company and a key supplier to Pemex. During defendants “facilitated” a number of frauds by Parmalat insiders. On
the first quarter of 2014, Citigroup incurred approximately $165 million of October 20, 2008, following trial, a jury rendered a verdict in Citigroup’s
incremental credit costs related to the Pemex supplier program. The vast favor on Parmalat’s claims and in favor of Citibank, N.A. on three
majority of the credit costs were associated with Citigroup’s $33 million counterclaims. Parmalat has exhausted all appeals, and the judgment is now
of direct exposure to OSA as of December 31, 2013 and uncertainty about final. Additional information concerning this action is publicly available
Pemex’s obligation to pay Citigroup for a portion of the accounts receivable in court filings under the docket number A-2654-08T2 (N.J. Sup. Ct.).
Citigroup validated with Pemex as of year-end 2013 (approximately Following the jury verdict awarding $431 million in damages on Citigroup’s
$113 million). The remaining incremental credit costs were associated with counterclaim, Citigroup has taken steps to enforce that judgment in the
an additional supplier to Pemex within the Pemex supplier program that was Italian Courts. On August 29, 2014, the Court of Appeal of Bologna affirmed
found to have similar issues. the decision in the full amount of $431 million, to be paid in Parmalat
In the United States, the SEC has commenced a formal investigation shares. The judgment is subject to appeal by Parmalat.
and the Department of Justice has requested information regarding Prosecutors in Parma and Milan, Italy, have commenced criminal
Banamex’s dealings with OSA. Citigroup continues to cooperate fully with proceedings against certain current and former Citigroup employees (along
these inquiries. with numerous other investment banks and certain of their current and
In Mexico, the Mexican National Banking and Securities Commission former employees, as well as former Parmalat officers and accountants).
(CNBV) conducted an in situ extraordinary review of the facts and In the event of an adverse judgment against the individuals in question,
circumstances of the fraud. As a result of its review, the CNBV issued a the authorities could seek administrative remedies against Citigroup.
corrective action order that must be implemented by Banamex and imposed On April 18, 2011, the Milan criminal court acquitted the sole Citigroup
a fine of approximately $2.2 million. The CNBV continues to review defendant of market-rigging charges. The Milan prosecutors have appealed
Banamex’s compliance with the corrective action order. In addition, the part of that judgment and seek administrative remedies against Citigroup,
CNBV has initiated a formal process to impose additional fines on Banamex which may include disgorgement of 70 million Euro and a fine of 900,000
with respect to the manner in which OSA’s debt was recorded by Banamex. Euro. On April 4, 2013, the Italian Supreme Court granted the appeal of
Citigroup continues to cooperate fully with all of the inquiries related to the Milan Public Prosecutors and referred the matter to the Milan Court
the OSA fraud. of Appeal for further proceedings concerning the administrative liability, if
Derivative Actions and Related Proceedings: Beginning in April 2014, any, of Citigroup. Additionally, the Parmalat administrator filed a purported
Citigroup has been named as a defendant in two complaints filed by its civil complaint against Citigroup in the context of the Parma criminal
stockholders seeking to inspect Citigroup’s books and records pursuant to proceedings, which seeks 14 billion Euro in damages. The trial in the Parma
Section 220 of Chapter 8 of the Delaware Corporations Law with regard to criminal proceedings is ongoing. Judgment is expected during the summer
various matters, including the OSA fraud. On September 30, 2014, in the of 2015. In January 2011, certain Parmalat institutional investors filed a
action brought by Oklahoma Firefighters Pension & Retirement System, the civil complaint seeking damages of approximately 130 million Euro against
Master of the Court of Chancery issued a final report recommending that the Citigroup and other financial institutions.
court enter an order granting in part and denying in part plaintiff’s request
for inspection. On October 7, 2014, Citigroup filed a notice of exception to
the final report. Additional information concerning these actions is publicly
available in court filings under the docket numbers C.A. No. 9587-ML
(Del. Ch.) (LeGrow, M.) and C.A. No. 10468-ML (Del. Ch.) (LeGrow, M).

297
Regulatory Review of Consumer “Add-On” Products Allied Irish Bank Litigation
Certain of Citi’s consumer businesses, including its Citi-branded and retail In 2003, Allied Irish Bank (AIB) filed a complaint in the United States District
services cards businesses, offer or have in the past offered or participated Court for the Southern District of New York seeking to hold Citibank, N.A.
in the marketing, distribution, or servicing of products, such as payment and Bank of America, N.A., former prime brokers for AIB’s subsidiary Allfirst
protection and identity monitoring, that are ancillary to the provision of Bank (Allfirst), liable for losses incurred by Allfirst as a result of fraudulent
credit to the consumer (add-on products). These add-on products have been and fictitious foreign currency trades entered into by one of Allfirst’s traders.
the subject of enforcement actions against other institutions by regulators, AIB seeks compensatory damages of approximately $500 million, plus
including the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), the OCC, punitive damages, from Citibank, N.A. and Bank of America, N.A. collectively.
and the FDIC, that have resulted in orders to pay restitution to customers In 2006, the court granted in part and denied in part defendants’ motion
and penalties in substantial amounts. Citi has made restitution to certain to dismiss. In 2009, AIB filed an amended complaint. In 2012, the parties
customers in connection with certain add-on products. In light of the current completed discovery and the court granted Citibank, N.A.’s motion to strike
regulatory focus on add-on products and the actions regulators have taken AIB’s demand for a jury trial. Citibank, N.A. also filed a motion for summary
in relation to other credit card issuers, one or more regulators may order judgment, which is pending. AIB has announced a settlement with Bank
that Citi pay additional restitution to customers and/or impose penalties of America, N.A. for an undisclosed amount, leaving Citibank, N.A. as the
or other relief arising from Citi’s marketing, distribution, or servicing of sole remaining defendant. Additional information concerning this matter
add-on products. is publicly available in court filings under docket number 03 Civ. 3748
(S.D.N.Y.) (Batts, J.).
Settlement Payments
Payments required in settlement agreements described above have been
made or are covered by existing litigation accruals.

298
29. SELECTED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA (UNAUDITED)

2014 2013
In millions of dollars, except per share amounts Fourth Third Second First Fourth Third Second First
Revenues, net of interest expense $17,812 $19,604 $19,342 $20,124 $17,779 $17,904 $20,488 $20,248
Operating expenses 14,426 12,955 15,521 12,149 12,293 11,679 12,149 12,288
Provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims 2,013 1,750 1,730 1,974 2,072 1,959 2,024 2,459
Income from continuing operations before income taxes $ 1,373 $ 4,899 $ 2,091 $ 6,001 $ 3,414 $ 4,266 $ 6,315 $ 5,501
Income taxes (benefits) 991 1,985 1,838 2,050 1,090 1,080 2,127 1,570
Income from continuing operations $ 382 $ 2,914 $ 253 $ 3,951 $ 2,324 $ 3,186 $ 4,188 $ 3,931
Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes (1) (16) (22) 37 181 92 30 (33)
Net income before attribution of noncontrolling interests $ 381 $ 2,898 $ 231 $ 3,988 $ 2,505 $ 3,278 $ 4,218 $ 3,898
Noncontrolling interests 31 59 50 45 50 51 36 90
Citigroup’s net income $ 350 $ 2,839 $ 181 $ 3,943 $ 2,455 $ 3,227 $ 4,182 $ 3,808
Earnings per share (1)

Basic
Income from continuing operations $ 0.06 $ 0.89 $ 0.03 $ 1.22 $ 0.71 $ 0.98 $ 1.34 $ 1.24
Net income 0.06 0.88 0.03 1.24 0.77 1.01 1.35 1.23
Diluted
Income from continuing operations 0.06 0.88 0.03 1.22 0.71 0.98 1.33 1.24
Net income 0.06 0.88 0.03 1.23 0.77 1.00 1.34 1.23
Common stock price per share
High $ 56.37 $ 53.66 $ 49.58 $ 55.20 $ 53.29 $ 53.00 $ 53.27 $ 47.60
Low 49.68 46.90 45.68 46.34 47.67 47.67 42.50 41.15
Close 54.11 51.82 47.10 47.60 52.11 48.51 47.97 44.24
Dividends per share of common stock 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01

This Note to the Consolidated Financial Statements is unaudited due to the Company’s individual quarterly results not being subject to an audit.
(1) Due to averaging of shares, quarterly earnings per share may not add up to the totals reported for the full year.

[End of Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements]

299
FINANCIAL DATA SUPPLEMENT

RATIOS

2014 2013 2012

Citigroup’s net income to average assets 0.39% 0.73% 0.39%
Return on average common stockholders’ equity (1) 3.4 7.0 4.1
Return on average total stockholders’ equity (2) 3.5 6.9 4.1
Total average equity to average assets (3) 11.1 10.5 9.7
Dividends payout ratio (4) 1.8 0.9 1.6

(1) Based on Citigroup’s net income less preferred stock dividends as a percentage of average common
stockholders’ equity.
(2) Based on Citigroup’s net income as a percentage of average total Citigroup stockholders’ equity.
(3) Based on average Citigroup stockholders’ equity as a percentage of average assets.
(4) Dividends declared per common share as a percentage of net income per diluted share.

AVERAGE DEPOSIT LIABILITIES IN OFFICES OUTSIDE THE U.S. (1)

2014 2013 2012

Average Average Average Average Average Average
In millions of dollars at year end except ratios interest rate balance interest rate balance interest rate balance
Banks 0.48% $ 61,705 0.68% $ 63,759 0.71% $ 71,624
Other demand deposits 0.58 229,880 0.57 220,599 0.84 217,806
Other time and savings deposits (2) 1.08 243,630 1.06 262,924 1.24 259,025
Total 0.80% $535,215 0.82% $547,282 1.01% $548,455

(1) Interest rates and amounts include the effects of risk management activities and also reflect the impact of the local interest rates prevailing in certain countries.
(2) Primarily consists of certificates of deposit and other time deposits in denominations of $100,000 or more.

MATURITY PROFILE OF TIME DEPOSITS

($100,000 OR MORE) IN U.S. OFFICES

In millions of dollars Under 3 Over 3 to 6 Over 6 to 12 Over 12

at December 31, 2014 months months months months
Certificates of deposit (1) $17,271 $6,250 $2,024 $655
Other time deposits (2) 3,286 596 115 1,439

(1) Includes approximately $20.5 billion of certificates of deposit with balance of $250,000 or more.
(2) Includes approximately $4.5 billion of other time deposits with balance of $250,000 or more.

300
SUPERVISION, REGULATION AND OTHER

SUPERVISION AND REGULATION Citi also has subsidiaries that are members of futures exchanges. In the
Citi is subject to regulation under U.S. federal and state laws, as well as U.S., CGMI is a member of the principal U.S. futures exchanges, and Citi
applicable laws in the other jurisdictions in which it does business. has subsidiaries that are registered as futures commission merchants and
commodity pool operators with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
General
(CFTC). Citibank, N.A., CGMI, Citigroup Energy Inc. and CGML also have
Citigroup is a registered bank holding company and financial holding
registered as swap dealers with the CFTC. CGMI is also subject to SEC
company and is regulated and supervised by the Federal Reserve Board.
and CFTC rules that specify uniform minimum net capital requirements.
Citigroup’s nationally chartered subsidiary banks, including Citibank, N.A.,
Compliance with these rules could limit those operations of CGMI that
are regulated and supervised by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
require the intensive use of capital and also limits the ability of broker-
(OCC) and its state-chartered depository institution by the relevant state’s
dealers to transfer large amounts of capital to parent companies and other
banking department and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).
affiliates. See also “Capital Resources” and Note 19 to the Consolidated
The FDIC also has examination authority for banking subsidiaries whose
Financial Statements for a further discussion of capital considerations of
deposits it insures. Overseas branches of Citibank, N.A. are regulated and
Citi’s non-banking subsidiaries.
supervised by the Federal Reserve Board and OCC and overseas subsidiary
banks by the Federal Reserve Board. These overseas branches and subsidiary Transactions with Affiliates
banks also are regulated and supervised by regulatory authorities in the host Transactions between Citi’s U.S. subsidiary depository institutions and their
countries. In addition, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) non-bank affiliates are regulated by the Federal Reserve Board, and are
regulates consumer financial products and services. For more information generally required to be on arm’s-length terms. See also “Managing Global
on U.S. and foreign regulation affecting or potentially affecting Citi and its Risk—Market Risk—Funding and Liquidity” above.
subsidiaries, see “Risk Factors” above.
COMPETITION
Other Bank and Bank Holding Company Regulation The financial services industry is highly competitive. Citi’s competitors
Citi, including its banking subsidiaries, is subject to regulatory limitations, include a variety of financial services and advisory companies. Citi competes
including requirements for banks to maintain reserves against deposits, for clients and capital (including deposits and funding in the short- and
requirements as to risk-based capital and leverage (see “Capital Resources” long-term debt markets) with some of these competitors globally and with
above and Note 19 to the Consolidated Financial Statements), restrictions others on a regional or product basis. Citi’s competitive position depends
on the types and amounts of loans that may be made and the interest that on many factors, including the value of Citi’s brand name, reputation, the
may be charged, and limitations on investments that can be made and types of clients and geographies served, the quality, range, performance,
services that can be offered. The Federal Reserve Board may also expect Citi innovation and pricing of products and services, the effectiveness of and
to commit resources to its subsidiary banks in certain circumstances. Citi access to distribution channels, technology advances, customer service
is also subject to anti-money laundering and financial transparency laws, and convenience, effectiveness of transaction execution, interest rates and
including standards for verifying client identification at account opening and lending limits, regulatory constraints and the effectiveness of sales promotion
obligations to monitor client transactions and report suspicious activities. efforts. Citi’s ability to compete effectively also depends upon its ability to
attract new employees and retain and motivate existing employees, while
Securities and Commodities Regulation
managing compensation and other costs. For additional information on
Citi conducts securities underwriting, brokerage and dealing activities
competitive factors and uncertainties impacting Citi’s businesses, see “Risk
in the U.S. through Citigroup Global Markets Inc. (CGMI), its primary
Factors” above.
broker-dealer, and other broker-dealer subsidiaries, which are subject to
regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and certain exchanges. Citi conducts
similar securities activities outside the U.S., subject to local requirements,
through various subsidiaries and affiliates, principally Citigroup Global
Markets Limited in London (CGML), which is regulated principally by the
U.K. Financial Conduct Authority, and Citigroup Global Markets Japan
Inc. in Tokyo, which is regulated principally by the Financial Services
Agency of Japan.

301
PROPERTIES Citi has developed programs for its properties to achieve long-term
Citi’s principal executive offices are currently located at 399 Park Avenue in energy efficiency objectives and reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to
New York City and are the subject of a lease. Citi also has additional office lessen its impact on climate change. These activities could help to mitigate,
space at 601 Lexington Avenue in New York City under a long-term lease but will not eliminate, Citi’s potential risk from future climate change
and at 111 Wall Street in New York City under a lease of the entire building. regulatory requirements.
Citibank, N.A. leases a building in Long Island City, New York that is fully For further information concerning leases, see Note 27 to the Consolidated
occupied by Citi. Financial Statements.
Citigroup Global Markets Holdings Inc.’s principal offices are located at
388 and 390 Greenwich Street in New York City, with both buildings subject to DISCLOSURE PURSUANT TO SECTION 219 OF THE
IRAN THREAT REDUCTION AND SYRIA HUMAN
long term-leases and fully occupied by Citi.
RIGHTS ACT
Citigroup’s principal executive offices in EMEA are located at 25 and 33
Pursuant to Section 219 of the Iran Threat Reduction and Syria Human
Canada Square in London’s Canary Wharf, with both buildings subject to
Rights Act of 2012 (Section 219), which added Section 13(r) to the Securities
long-term leases. Citi is the largest or sole tenant of these buildings.
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, Citi is required to disclose in its annual
In Asia, Citi’s principal executive offices are in leased premises located
or quarterly reports, as applicable, whether it or any of its affiliates knowingly
at Citibank Tower in Hong Kong. Citi also has significant leased premises
engaged in certain activities, transactions or dealings relating to Iran or with
in Singapore and Japan. Citi has major or full ownership interests in
individuals or entities that are subject to sanctions under U.S. law. Disclosure
country headquarters locations in Shanghai, Seoul, Kuala Lumpur, Manila,
is generally required even where the activities, transactions or dealings
and Mumbai.
were conducted in compliance with applicable law. Citi has previously
Citi’s principal executive offices in Mexico, which also serve as the
disclosed reportable activities pursuant to Section 219 for each of the first,
headquarters of Banamex, are located in Mexico City. Citi’s principal
second and third quarters of 2014 in its related quarterly reports on Form
executive offices for Latin America (other than Mexico) are located in leased
10-Q. Citi has no reportable activities pursuant to Section 219 for the fourth
premises located in Miami.
quarter of 2014.
Citi also owns or leases over 69 million square feet of real estate in 101
countries, consisting of over 10,000 properties.
Citi continues to evaluate its global real estate footprint and space
requirements and may determine from time to time that certain of its
premises are no longer necessary. There is no assurance that Citi will be
able to dispose of any excess premises or that it will not incur charges in
connection with such dispositions, which could be material to Citi’s operating
results in a given period.

302
UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY, PURCHASES
OF EQUITY SECURITIES, DIVIDENDS
Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities
None.
Equity Security Repurchases
The following table summarizes Citi’s equity security repurchases, which
consisted entirely of common stock repurchases, during the three months
ended December 31, 2014:

Approximate dollar
value of shares that
Average may yet be purchased
Total shares price paid under the plan or
In millions, except per share amounts purchased per share programs
October 2014
Open market repurchases (1) 2.8 $50.82 $532
Employee transactions (2) — — N/A
November 2014
Open market repurchases (1) 1.0 53.73 479
Employee transactions (2) — — N/A
December 2014
Open market repurchases (1) 3.4 53.86 297
Employee transactions (2) — — N/A
Amounts as of December 31, 2014 7.2 $52.65 $297

(1) Represents repurchases under the $1.2 billion 2014 common stock repurchase program (2014 Repurchase Program) that was approved by Citigroup’s Board of Directors and announced on April 23, 2014, which was
part of the planned capital actions included by Citi in its 2014 Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review. The 2014 Repurchase Program extends through the first quarter of 2015. Shares repurchased under the
2014 Repurchase Program are treasury stock.
(2) Consisted of shares added to treasury stock related to (i) certain activity on employee stock option program exercises where the employee delivers existing shares to cover the option exercise, or (ii) under Citi’s
employee restricted or deferred stock programs where shares are withheld to satisfy tax requirements.
N/A Not applicable

Dividends
In addition to Board of Directors’ approval, Citi’s ability to pay common
stock dividends substantially depends on regulatory approval, including an
annual regulatory review of the results of the Comprehensive Capital Analysis
and Review (CCAR) process required by the Federal Reserve Board and the
supervisory stress tests required under the Dodd-Frank Act. See “Risk Factors-
Business and Operational Risks” above. For information on the ability of
Citigroup’s subsidiary depository institutions and non-bank subsidiaries to
pay dividends, see Note 19 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Any
dividend on Citi’s outstanding common stock would also need to be made in
compliance with Citi’s obligations to its outstanding preferred stock.

303
PERFORMANCE GRAPH
Comparison of Five-Year Cumulative Total Return
The following graph and table compare the cumulative total return on Citi’s
common stock, which is listed on the NYSE under the ticker symbol “C” and
held by 89,655 common stockholders of record as of January 31, 2015, with
the cumulative total return of the S&P 500 Index and the S&P Financial
Index over the five-year period through December 31, 2014. The graph
and table assume that $100 was invested on December 31, 2009 in Citi’s
common stock, the S&P 500 Index and the S&P Financial Index, and that all
dividends were reinvested.

Comparison of Five-Year Cumulative Total Return

For the years ended

Citigroup
S&P 500 Index
S&P Financial Index

250

200

150

100

50

0
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

DATE CITI S&P 500 S&P FINANCIALS

31-Dec-2009 100.0 100.0 100.0
31-Dec-2010 142.9 112.8 110.8
30-Dec-2011 79.5 112.8 90.4
31-Dec-2012 119.5 127.9 114.2
31-Dec-2013 157.4 165.8 152.1
31-Dec-2014 163.5 184.6 172.0

304
CORPORATE INFORMATION

CITIGROUP EXECUTIVE OFFICERS • Mr. Weerasinghe joined Citi in June 2012. Prior to joining Citi,
Citigroup’s executive officers as of February 25, 2015 are: Mr. Weerasinghe was Senior Partner at Shearman & Sterling.

Name Age Position and office held Code of Conduct, Code of Ethics
Citi has a Code of Conduct that maintains its commitment to the highest
Francisco Aristeguieta 49 CEO, Latin America
Stephen Bird 48 CEO, Asia Pacific
standards of conduct. The Code of Conduct is supplemented by a Code
Don Callahan 58 Head of Operations and Technology; of Ethics for Financial Professionals (including accounting, controllers,
Chief Operations and Technology Officer financial reporting operations, financial planning and analysis, treasury,
Michael L. Corbat 54 Chief Executive Officer tax, strategy and M&A, investor relations and regional/product finance
James C. Cowles 59 CEO, Europe, Middle East and Africa professionals and administrative staff) that applies worldwide. The Code of
Barbara Desoer 62 CEO, Citibank, N.A. Ethics for Financial Professionals applies to Citi’s principal executive officer,
James A. Forese 52 Co-President; principal financial officer and principal accounting officer. Amendments
CEO, Institutional Clients Group and waivers, if any, to the Code of Ethics for Financial Professionals will be
John C. Gerspach 61 Chief Financial Officer disclosed on Citi’s website, www.citigroup.com.
Brad Hu 51 Chief Risk Officer
Both the Code of Conduct and the Code of Ethics for Financial
Brian Leach 55 Head of Franchise Risk and Strategy
Professionals can be found on the Citi website by clicking on “About Us,”
Manuel Medina-Mora 64 Co-President;
and then “Corporate Governance.” Citi’s Corporate Governance Guidelines
CEO, Global Consumer Banking;
can also be found there, as well as the charters for the Audit Committee, the
Chairman, Mexico
William J. Mills 59 CEO, North America
Ethics and Culture Committee, the Nomination, Governance and Public
Michael Murray 50 Head of Human Resources and Talent Affairs Committee, the Personnel and Compensation Committee and the Risk
Jeffrey R. Walsh 57 Controller and Chief Accounting Officer Management Committee of the Board. These materials are also available by
Rohan Weerasinghe 64 General Counsel and Corporate Secretary writing to Citigroup Inc., Corporate Governance, 601 Lexington Avenue, 19th
Floor, New York, New York 10022.
Each executive officer has held executive or management positions with
Citigroup for at least five years, except that:
• Ms. Desoer joined Citi in April 2014. Prior to joining Citi, Ms. Desoer had
a 35-year career at Bank of America, where she was President, Bank of
America Home Loans, a Global Technology & Operations Executive, and
President, Consumer Products, among other roles.

CITIGROUP BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Michael L. Corbat Gary M. Reiner Joan E. Spero James S. Turley
Chief Executive Officer Operating Partner Senior Research Scholar Chairman and Chief
Citigroup Inc. General Atlantic LLC Columbia University Executive Officer, Retired
Duncan P. Hennes Judith Rodin School of International Ernst & Young
Co-Founder and Partner President and Public Affairs Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de
Atrevida Partners, LLC Rockefeller Foundation Diana L. Taylor Leon
Vice Chair Director, Center for the
Franz B. Humer Robert L. Ryan
Solera Capital, LLC Study of Globalization;
Chairman and CEO, Retired Chief Financial Officer, Retired
Professor in the Field
Roche Holding Ltd. Medtronic Inc. William S. Thompson, Jr.
of International
Michael E. O’Neill Anthony M. Santomero Chief Executive Officer, Retired
Economics and Politics
Chairman Former President Pacific Investment
Yale University
Citigroup Inc. Federal Reserve Bank of Management Company
Philadelphia (PIMCO)

305
Signatures The Directors of Citigroup listed below executed a power of attorney
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities appointing John C. Gerspach their attorney-in-fact, empowering him to sign
Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed this report on their behalf.
on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, on the 25th day
of February, 2015. Duncan P. Hennes Anthony M. Santomero
Franz B. Humer Joan E. Spero
Citigroup Inc. Michael E. O’Neill Diana L. Taylor
(Registrant) Gary M. Reiner William S. Thompson, Jr.
Judith Rodin James S. Turley
Robert Ryan Ernesto Zedillo Ponce de Leon

John C. Gerspach
Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this John C. Gerspach
report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the
registrant and in the capacities indicated on the 25th day of February, 2015.

Citigroup’s Principal Executive Officer and a Director:

Michael L. Corbat

Citigroup’s Principal Financial Officer:

John C. Gerspach

Citigroup’s Principal Accounting Officer:

Jeffrey R. Walsh

306
This page intentionally left blank.

307
This page intentionally left blank.

308