---

---

---

---

---

•

Permitted Activities —The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (GLB Act) amended the BHC Act by providing a new regulatory framework applicable to “financial holding companies,” which are bank holding companies that meet certain qualifications and elect financial holding company status. The FRB supervises, examines, and regulates financial holding companies, as it does all bank holding companies. However, insurance and securities activities conducted by a financial holding company or its nonbank subsidiaries are regulated primarily by functional regulators. As a financial holding company, Ally is permitted to engage in a broader range of financial and related activities than those that are permissible for bank holding companies, in particular, securities,

---

•

Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act — On July 21, 2010, the President of the United States signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act). The Dodd-Frank Act represents a significant overhaul of many aspects of the regulation of the financial services industry, addressing, among other things, systemic risk, capital adequacy, deposit insurance assessments, consumer financial protection, derivatives, restrictions on an insured bank’s transactions with its affiliates, lending limits, and mortgage-lending practices. When fully implemented, the Dodd-Frank Act will have material implications for Ally and the entire financial services industry. Among other things, it would:

•	result in Ally being subject to enhanced prudential standards, oversight and scrutiny as a result of being a bank holding company with $50 billion or more in total consolidated assets (large bank holding company);

•	increase the levels of capital and liquidity with which Ally must operate and affect how it plans capital and liquidity levels;

•	subject Ally to new and/or higher fees paid to various regulatory entities, including but not limited to deposit insurance fees paid by Ally Bank to the FDIC;

•	potentially impact a number of Ally's business and risk management strategies;

•	potentially restrict the revenue that Ally generates from certain businesses;

•	require Ally to provide to the FRB and FDIC an annual plan for its rapid and orderly resolution in the event of material financial distress;

•	subject Ally to regulation by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), which has very broad rule-making, examination, and enforcement authorities;

•	subject Ally to the Volcker Rule, which prohibits “proprietary trading” activities as well as investing in, sponsoring, or maintaining certain other relationships with “covered funds,” each as defined in the final implementing regulations and subject to important exemptions contained therein; and

•	subject derivatives that Ally enters into for hedging, risk management and other purposes to a comprehensive new regulatory regime which, over time, will require central clearing and execution on designated markets or execution facilities for certain standardized derivatives and impose margin, documentation, trade reporting and other new requirements.

---

•	Capital Adequacy Requirements — Ally and Ally Bank are subject to various guidelines as established under FRB and FDIC regulations. Refer to Note 20 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information. See also “Basel Capital Accord” below.

•

Capital Planning and Stress Tests — In December 2011, the FRB adopted a capital plan rule for large bank holding companies. The capital planning regime requires Ally to submit a proposed capital plan to the FRB every January, which the FRB must take action on by the following March. The proposed capital plan must include a description of all planned capital actions over a nine-quarter planning horizon, including any issuance of a debt or equity capital instrument, any capital distribution, and any similar action that the FRB determines could have an impact on Ally's consolidated capital. The proposed action plan must also include a discussion of how Ally will maintain capital above the U.S. Basel III minimum regulatory capital ratios that are phased in over the nine-quarter planning horizon, and above a Tier 1 common equity-to-total risk-weighted assets ratio of 5 percent, and serve as a source of strength to Ally Bank. The FRB's capital plan rule requires that Ally receive no objection from the FRB before making a capital distribution. If the FRB objects to the capital plan, or if certain material events occur after approval of a plan, Ally must submit a revised capital plan within 30 days. In addition, even with an approved capital plan, Ally must seek the approval of the FRB before making a capital distribution if, among other factors, Ally would not meet its regulatory capital requirements after making the proposed capital distribution.

•

Limitations on Bank and Bank Holding Company Dividends and Capital Distributions — Utah law (and, in certain instances, federal law) places restrictions and limitations on dividends or other distributions payable by our banking subsidiary, Ally Bank, to Ally. Under the FRB’s capital plan rule, an objection to a large bank holding company’s capital plan generally prohibits it from paying dividends or making certain other capital distributions without specific FRB non-objection to such action. Even if a large bank holding company receives a non-objection to its capital plan, it may not pay a dividend or make certain other capital distributions without FRB approval under certain circumstances (e.g., after giving effect to the dividend or distribution, the bank holding company would not meet a minimum regulatory capital ratio or a Tier 1 common ratio of at least 5%). In addition, FRB supervisory guidance requires bank holding companies such as Ally to consult with the FRB prior to increasing dividends, implementing common stock repurchase programs or redeeming or repurchasing capital instruments. Such guidance provides for a supervisory capital assessment program that outlines FRB expectations concerning the processes that bank holding companies have in place to ensure they hold adequate capital under adverse conditions to maintain ready access to funding. The U.S. banking regulators are also authorized to prohibit a banking subsidiary or bank holding company from engaging in unsafe or unsound banking practices and, depending upon the circumstances, could find that paying a dividend or making a capital distribution would constitute an unsafe or unsound banking practice.

---

•

Transactions with Affiliates — Certain transactions between Ally Bank and any of its nonbank “affiliates,” including but not limited to Ally, are subject to federal statutory and regulatory restrictions. Pursuant to these restrictions, unless otherwise exempted, “covered transactions” including Ally Bank's extensions of credit to and asset purchases from its nonbank affiliates, generally (1) are limited to 10% of Ally Bank's capital stock and surplus with respect to transactions with any individual affiliate, with an aggregate limit of 20% of Ally Bank's capital stock and surplus for all affiliates and all such transactions; (2) in the case of certain credit transactions, are subject to stringent collateralization requirements; (3) in the case of asset purchases by Ally Bank, may not involve the purchase of any asset deemed to be a “low quality asset” under federal banking guidelines; and (4) must be conducted in accordance with safe-and-sound banking practices (collectively, the Affiliate Transaction Restrictions). In addition, transactions between Ally Bank and a nonbank affiliate generally must be on market terms and conditions.

•

Source of Strength — Pursuant to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act, FRB policy and regulations and the Parent Company Agreement and the Capital and Liquidity Maintenance Agreement described in Note 20 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Ally is required to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to Ally Bank and is required to commit necessary capital and liquidity to support Ally Bank. This support may be required at inopportune times for Ally.

•

Enforcement Authority — The FDIC and FRB have broad authority to issue orders to banks and bank holding companies to cease and desist from unsafe or unsound banking practices and from violations of laws, rules, regulations, or conditions imposed in writing by the banking agencies. The FDIC and FRB also are empowered to require affirmative actions to correct any violation or practice; issue administrative orders that can be judicially enforced; direct increases in capital; limit dividends and distributions; restrict growth; assess civil money penalties against institutions or individuals who violate any laws, regulations, orders, or written agreements with the banking agencies; order termination of certain activities of bank holding companies or their subsidiaries; remove officers and directors; order divestiture of ownership or control of a nonbanking subsidiary by a bank holding company (in the case of the FRB); terminate deposit insurance (in the case of the FDIC); and/or place a bank into receivership (in the case of the FDIC).

---

---

•

Privacy — The GLB Act imposes additional obligations on us to safeguard the information we maintain on our customers, requires us to provide notice of our privacy practices, and permits customers to “opt-out” of information sharing with unaffiliated parties. The U.S. banking regulators and the Federal Trade Commission have issued regulations that establish obligations to safeguard information. In addition, several states have enacted even more stringent privacy and safeguarding legislation. If a variety of inconsistent state privacy rules or requirements are enacted, our compliance costs could increase substantially.

•	Fair Credit Reporting Act — The Fair Credit Reporting Act regulates the use of credit reports and the reporting of information to credit reporting agencies, and also provides a national legal standard for lenders to share information with affiliates and certain third parties and to provide firm offers of credit to consumers. In late 2003, the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act was enacted,

---

•

Truth in Lending Act — The Truth in Lending Act (TILA), as amended, and Regulation Z, which implements TILA, requires lenders to provide borrowers with uniform, understandable information concerning terms and conditions in certain credit transactions. These rules apply to Ally and its subsidiaries in transactions in which they extend credit to consumers and require, in the case of certain mortgage and automotive financing transactions, conspicuous disclosure of the finance charge and annual percentage rate, if any. In addition, if an advertisement for credit states specific credit terms, Regulation Z requires that such advertisement state only those terms that actually are or will be arranged or offered by the creditor. The CFPB has recently issued substantial amendments to the mortgage requirements under TILA, and additional changes are likely in the future. Failure to comply with TILA can result in liability for damages as well as criminal and civil penalties.

•

Sarbanes-Oxley Act — The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 implemented a broad range of corporate governance and accounting measures designed to promote honesty and transparency in corporate America. The principal provisions of the act include, among other things, (1) the creation of an independent accounting oversight board; (2) auditor independence provisions that restrict non-audit services that accountants may provide to their audit clients; (3) additional corporate governance and responsibility measures including the requirement that the principal executive and financial officers certify financial statements; (4) the potential forfeiture of bonuses or other incentive-based compensation and profits from the sale of an issuer's securities by directors and senior officers in the twelve-month period following initial publication of any financial statements that later require restatement; (5) an increase in the oversight of and enhancement of certain requirements relating to audit committees and how they interact with the independent auditors; (6) requirements that audit committee members must be independent and are barred from accepting consulting, advisory, or other compensatory fees from the issuer; (7) requirements that companies disclose whether at least one member of the audit committee is a “financial expert” (as defined by the SEC) and, if not, why the audit committee does not have a financial expert; (8) a prohibition on personal loans to directors and officers, except certain loans made by insured financial institutions, on nonpreferential terms and in compliance with other bank regulatory requirements; (9) disclosure of a code of ethics; (10) requirements that management assess the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and that the Independent Registered Public Accounting firm attest to the assessment; and (11) a range of enhanced penalties for fraud and other violations.

•

USA PATRIOT Act/Anti-Money-Laundering Requirements — In 2001, the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act (USA PATRIOT Act) was signed into law. Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act amends the Bank Secrecy Act and contains provisions designed to detect and prevent the use of the U.S. financial system for money laundering and terrorist financing activities. The Bank Secrecy Act, as amended by the USA PATRIOT Act, requires bank holding companies, banks, and certain other financial companies to undertake activities including maintaining an anti-money-laundering program, verifying the identity of clients, monitoring for and reporting on suspicious transactions, reporting on cash transactions exceeding specified thresholds, and responding to requests for information by regulatory authorities and law enforcement agencies. We have implemented internal practices, procedures, and controls designed to comply with these anti-money-laundering requirements.

•

Community Reinvestment Act — Under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), a bank has a continuing and affirmative obligation, consistent with the safe-and-sound operation of the institution, to help meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low- and moderate-income persons and neighborhoods. The CRA does not establish specific lending requirements or programs for financial institutions. However, institutions are rated on their performance in meeting the needs of their communities. Failure by Ally Bank to maintain a "satisfactory" or better rating under the CRA may adversely affect Ally's ability to make acquisitions and engage in new activities, and in the event of such a rating, the Federal Reserve must prohibit the financial holding company and its subsidiaries from engaging in any additional activities other than those permissible for bank holding companies that are not financial holding companies.

---

---

•	result in Ally being subject to enhanced oversight and scrutiny as a result of being a bank holding company with $50 billion or more in total consolidated assets (large bank holding company);

•	increase the levels of capital and liquidity with which Ally must operate and affect how it plans capital and liquidity levels;

•	subject Ally to new and/or higher fees paid to various regulatory entities, including but not limited to deposit insurance fees and any other similar assessments paid by Ally Bank to the FDIC;

•	potentially impact a number of Ally's business and risk management strategies;

•	potentially restrict the revenue that Ally generates from certain businesses;

---

•	require Ally to provide to the FRB and FDIC an annual plan for its rapid and orderly resolution in the event of material financial distress;

•	subject Ally to regulation by the CFPB, which has very broad rule-making, examination, and enforcement authorities; and

•	subject derivatives that Ally enters into for hedging, risk management and other purposes to a comprehensive new regulatory regime which, over time, will require central clearing and execution on designated markets or execution facilities for certain standardized derivatives and impose margin, documentation, trade reporting and other new requirements.

---

---

---

---

---

•	the selection, tenure and compensation of our management;

•	our business strategy and product offerings;

•	our relationship with our employees and other constituencies; and

•	our financing activities, including the issuance of debt and equity securities.

---

•	will increase our cost of funds;

•	may reduce our consumer automotive financing volume by influencing customers to pay cash for, as opposed to financing, vehicle purchases or not to buy new vehicles;

•	may negatively impact our ability to remarket off-lease vehicles; and

•	will generally reduce the value of automotive financing loans and contracts and retained interests and fixed income securities held in our investment portfolio.

---

---

---

---

(a)	Effective June 30, 2009, we converted from a limited liability company into a corporation and, as a result, became subject to corporate U.S. federal, state, and local taxes. Our conversion to a corporation resulted in a change in tax status and a net deferred tax liability of $1.2 billion was established through income tax expense.

(b)

Core pretax income (loss) is not a financial measure defined by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). We define core pretax income as earnings from continuing operations before income taxes and original issue discount amortization expense primarily associated with our 2008 bond exchange. We believe that the presentation of core pretax income (loss) is useful information for the users of our financial statements in understanding the earnings from our core businesses. In addition, core pretax income (loss) is an important measure that management uses to assess the performance of our operations. We believe that core pretax income (loss) is a useful alternative measure of our ongoing profitability and performance, when viewed in conjunction with GAAP measures. The presentation of this additional information is not a substitute for net income (loss) determined in accordance with GAAP.

(c)	Primarily represents original issue discount amortization expense associated with the significant private debt exchange completed during 2008.

---

(a)	The ratios were computed based on average assets and average equity using a combination of monthly and daily average methodologies.

(b)	Net interest spread represents the difference between the rate on total interest-earning assets and the rate on total interest-bearing liabilities, excluding discontinued operations for the periods shown.

(c)	Net yield on interest-earning assets represents net financing revenue as a percentage of total interest-earning assets.

(d)	Tier 1 capital generally consists of common equity, minority interests, qualifying noncumulative preferred stock, and the fixed rate cumulative preferred stock sold to the U.S. Department of Treasury (Treasury) under TARP, less goodwill and other adjustments.

(e)	Total risk-based capital is the sum of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital. Tier 2 capital generally consists of preferred stock not qualifying as Tier 1 capital, limited amounts of subordinated debt and the allowance for loan losses, and other adjustments. The amount of Tier 2 capital may not exceed the amount of Tier 1 capital.

(f)	Tier 1 leverage equals Tier 1 capital divided by adjusted quarterly average total assets (which reflects adjustments for disallowed goodwill and certain intangible assets). The minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio is 3% or 4% depending on factors specified in the regulations.

(g)

We define Tier 1 common as Tier 1 capital less noncommon elements, including qualifying perpetual preferred stock, minority interest in subsidiaries, trust preferred securities, and mandatorily convertible preferred securities. Ally considers various measures when evaluating capital utilization and adequacy, including the Tier 1 common equity ratio, in addition to capital ratios defined by banking regulators. This calculation is intended to complement the capital ratios defined by banking regulators for both absolute and comparative purposes. Because GAAP does not include capital ratio measures, Ally believes there are no comparable GAAP financial measures to these ratios. Tier 1 common equity is not formally defined by GAAP or codified in the federal banking regulations and, therefore, is considered to be a non-GAAP financial measure. Ally believes the Tier 1 common equity ratio is important because we believe analysts and banking regulators may assess our capital adequacy using this ratio. Additionally, presentation of this measure allows readers to compare certain aspects of our capital adequacy on the same basis to other companies in the industry.

(h)	Risk-weighted assets are defined by regulation and are determined by allocating assets and specified off-balance sheet financial instruments into several broad risk categories.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

(a)	The decline in total assets from 2012 to 2013 was primarily due to the sale of substantially all of our international automotive finance businesses. Refer to Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further details.

---

---

---

---

---

•	Sale to dealer — After the lessee declines an option to purchase the off-lease vehicle, the dealer who accepts the returned off-lease vehicle has the opportunity to purchase the vehicle directly from us at a price we define.

•

Internet auctions — Once the lessee and dealer decline their options to purchase, we offer off-lease vehicles to dealers and certain other third parties in the United States through our proprietary internet site (SmartAuction). This internet sales program maximizes the net sales proceeds from off-lease vehicles by reducing the time between vehicle return and ultimate disposition, reducing holding costs, and broadening the number of prospective buyers. We maintain the internet auction site, set the pricing floors on vehicles, and administer the auction process. We earn a service fee for every vehicle sold through SmartAuction, which, in 2013, was approximately 261,000 vehicles.

•

Physical auctions — We dispose of our off-lease vehicles not purchased at termination by the lease consumer or dealer or sold on an internet auction through traditional official manufacturer-sponsored auctions. We are responsible for handling decisions at the auction including arranging for inspections, authorizing repairs and reconditioning, and determining whether bids received at auction should be accepted.

---

(a)	Share of manufacturer franchise dealer inventory based on a 13 month average of dealer inventory (excludes in-transit units).

---

---

(a)	Management uses a combined ratio as a primary measure of underwriting profitability. Underwriting profitability is indicated by a combined ratio under 100% and is calculated as the sum of all incurred losses and expenses (excluding interest and income tax expense) divided by the total of premiums and service revenues earned and other fee income.

---