Washington, D.C. 20549

Commission file number: 1-3754

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

200 Renaissance Center

P.O. Box 200 Detroit, Michigan

48265-2000

(Address of principal executive offices)

(Zip Code)

(866) 710-4623

(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act (all listed on the New York Stock Exchange):

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  o

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  o  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 and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes  ☑  No o

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  o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulations 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. (Check one):

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes  o  No  ☑

Aggregate market value of voting and nonvoting common equity held by nonaffiliates: Ally Financial Inc. common equity is not registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission and there is no ascertainable market value for such common equity.

At February 28, 2012 , the number of shares outstanding of the Registrant's common stock was 1,330,970  shares.

Documents incorporated by reference.  None.

Ally Financial Inc. (formerly GMAC Inc.) is a leading, independent, globally diversified, financial services firm with $184 billion in assets and operations in 32  countries. Founded in 1919, we are a leading automotive financial services company with over 90 years of experience providing a broad array of financial products and services to automotive dealers and their customers. We are also one of the largest residential mortgage companies in the United States. We became a bank holding company on December 24, 2008, under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the BHC Act). Our banking subsidiary, Ally Bank, is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Ally Financial Inc. and a leading franchise in the growing direct (online and telephonic) banking market, with $39.6 billion of deposits at December 31, 2011 . The terms "Ally," "the Company," "we," "our," and "us" refer to Ally Financial Inc. and its subsidiaries as a consolidated entity, except where it is clear that the terms means only Ally Financial Inc.

Global Automotive Services and Mortgage are our primary lines of business. Our Global Automotive Services business is centered around our strong and longstanding relationships with automotive dealers and supports our automotive manufacturing partners and their marketing programs. Our Global Automotive Services business serves over 21,000  dealers globally with a wide range of financial services and insurance products. We believe our dealer-focused business model makes us the preferred automotive finance company for thousands of our automotive dealer customers. We have specialized incentive programs that are designed to encourage dealers to direct more of their business to us. In addition, we believe our longstanding relationship with General Motors Company (GM) and our recent relationship with Chrysler Group LLC (Chrysler) has resulted in particularly strong relationships between us and thousands of dealers and extensive operating experience relative to other automotive finance companies.

Our mortgage business is a leading originator and servicer of residential mortgage loans in the United States.

Ally Bank, our direct banking platform, provides our automotive finance and mortgage loan operations with a stable and low-cost funding source and facilitates prudent asset growth. Our focus is on building a stable deposit base driven by our compelling brand and strong value proposition. Ally Bank raises deposits directly from customers through a direct banking channel over the internet and by telephone. Ally Bank offers a full spectrum of deposit product offerings including certificates of deposit, savings accounts, money market accounts, IRA (individual retirement account) deposit products, as well as an online checking product. We continue to expand the product offerings in our banking platform in order to meet customer needs. Ally Bank's assets and operating results are divided between our North American Automotive Finance operations and Mortgage operations based on its underlying business activities.

The following table reflects the primary products and services offered by the continuing operations of each of our lines of business.

(a)    On November 2, 2011, we announced that in order to proactively address changes in the mortgage industry as a whole, we will be taking

immediate action to reduce the focus on the correspondent mortgage-lending channel.

Global Automotive Services

Global Automotive Services includes our North American Automotive Finance operations, International Automotive Finance operations, and Insurance operations. Our Global Automotive Services business had $120.5 billion of assets at  December 31, 2011 , and generated $6.4 billion of total net revenue in 2011 .

Our primary customers are automotive dealers, which are independently owned businesses. As part of the process of selling a vehicle, automotive dealers typically originate loans and leases to their retail customers. Dealers then select Ally or another automotive finance provider to which they sell loans and leases.

Our Global Automotive Services operations offer a wide range of financial services and insurance products to over 21,000 automotive dealerships and 5.8 million of their retail customers. We have deep dealer relationships that have been built over our 90-year history. Our dealer-focused business model encourages dealers to use our broad range of products through incentive programs like our Ally Dealer Rewards program, which rewards individual dealers based on the depth and breadth of our relationship. During 2011 and 2010 , 70% and 60%, respectively, of our U.S. automotive dealer customers received benefits under the Ally Dealer Rewards program, which was initiated in 2009. We expect even higher participation levels going forward as all of our automotive dealer customers are eligible to participate in the program. Our automotive finance services include providing retail installment sales contracts, loans, and leases, offering term loans to dealers, financing dealer floorplans and other lines of credit to dealers, fleet leasing, and vehicle remarketing services. We also offer vehicle service contracts and commercial insurance primarily covering dealers' wholesale vehicle inventories in the United States. We are a leading provider of vehicle service contracts, and maintenance coverage.

Global Automotive Services is supported by approximately 8,600 employees worldwide. A significant portion of our Global Automotive Services business is conducted with or through GM- and Chrysler-franchised dealers and their customers.

Automotive Finance

Our North American Automotive Finance operations consist of our automotive finance operations in the United States and Canada. At December 31, 2011 , our North American Automotive Finance operations had $97.0 billion of assets and generated $3.6 billion of total net revenue in 2011 . According to Experian Automotive, we were the largest independent provider of new retail automotive loans in the United States during 2011. We funded one out of every ten new car purchases that were financed in the United States during 2011. In the United States and Canada we have approximately 2,100 automotive finance and insurance employees in five regions focused on serving the needs of our dealer customers with finance and insurance products, expanding the number of overall dealer and automotive manufacturer relationships, and supporting our dealer lending and underwriting functions. In addition, we have over 2,100 employees that support our North American servicing operations. We manage commercial account servicing for over 5,000 dealers in the United States that utilize our floorplan inventory lending or other commercial loans. In the United States and Canada, we provide consumer asset servicing for a $76.0 billion portfolio at December 31, 2011 . The extensive infrastructure and experience of our servicing operation are important to our ability to minimize our loan losses and enable us to deliver favorable customer experience to both our dealers and their retail customers.

Our International Automotive Finance operations are in Europe, Latin America, and Asia. At December 31, 2011 , our International Automotive Finance operations had $15.5 billion of assets and generated $901 million of total net revenue in 2011 . Through our longstanding relationship with GM, we have extensive experience operating in international markets and broad global capabilities. We currently originate loans in 15 countries (other than the United States and Canada). Our international presence is focused on strategic operations in five core markets: Germany, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Mexico, and China through our joint venture, GMAC-SAIC Automotive Finance Company Limited (GMAC-SAIC). In China, GMAC-SAIC is a leading automotive finance company with broad geographic coverage and a full suite of products. We own 40% of GMAC-SAIC. The other joint venture partners include Shanghai Automotive Group Finance Company LTD and Shanghai General Motors Corporation Limited. Brazil and Mexico remain markets that we see as growth opportunities. In these markets we offer a full product line and have strong positions in the automotive dealer channel. Brazil and Mexico comprise $5.0 billion of our total finance receivables and loans at December 31, 2011 . Germany and the United Kingdom remain our core markets in Europe with $5.7 billion of total finance receivables and loans at December 31, 2011 .

Our success as an automotive finance provider is driven by the consistent and broad range of products and services we offer to dealers who originate loans and leases to their retail customers who are acquiring new and used automobiles. In the United States and Canada, Ally and other automotive finance providers purchase these loans and leases from automotive dealers. In other countries, we offer retail installment loans and leases directly to retail customers of the dealers. Automotive dealers are independently owned businesses and are our primary customer. Our growth strategy continues to focus on diversifying the franchise by expanding into different products as well as broadening our network of dealer relationships. During 2011, we continued to focus on the used vehicle market, which resulted in strong growth in used vehicle origination volume compared to 2010. Additionally, during 2011, we expanded the Ally Buyer's Choice product on new GM and Chrysler vehicles from Canada to select states in the United States. The Ally Buyer's Choice financing product allows customers to own their vehicle with a fixed rate and payment with the option to sell it to us at a pre-determined point during the contract term and at a pre-determined price.

Automotive dealers require a full range of financial products, including new and used vehicle inventory financing, inventory insurance, working capital and capital improvement loans, and vehicle remarketing services to conduct their respective businesses as well as service contracts and guaranteed asset protection (GAP) products to offer their customers. We have consistently provided this full suite of products to dealers.

For consumers, we offer retail automotive financing for new and used vehicles and leasing for new vehicles. In the United States, retail financing for the purchase of vehicles takes the form of installment sale financing. References to consumer automobile loans in this document include installment sales financing unless the context suggests otherwise. During 2011 , we originated a total of 2.3 million automotive loans and leases worldwide totaling approximately $53.3 billion. We provided financing for 38 % and 29 % of GM's and Chrysler's North American retail sales including leases, respectively, and 28% of GM's international retail sales including leases in countries where both GM and we operate and we had retail financing volume, excluding China. For additional information about our relationship and business transactions with GM, refer to Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.

Our consumer automotive financing operations generate revenue through finance charges or lease payments and fees paid by customers on the retail contracts and leases. We also recognize a gain or loss on the remarketing of the vehicles financed through lease contracts at the end of the lease. When the lease contract is originated, we estimate the residual value of the leased vehicle at lease termination. Periodically we revise the projected value of the leased vehicle at lease termination. Our actual sales proceeds from remarketing the vehicle may be higher or lower than the estimated residual value.

Automotive manufacturers may elect as a marketing incentive to sponsor special financing programs for retail sales of their respective vehicles. The manufacturer can lower the financing rate paid by the customer on either a retail contract or a lease by paying us the present value of the difference between the customer rate and our standard market rates at contract inception. These marketing incentives are referred to as rate support or subvention. GM may also from time to time offer lease pull-ahead programs, which encourage consumers to terminate existing leases early if they acquire a new GM vehicle. As part of these programs, we waive all or a portion of the customer's remaining payment obligation. In most cases, GM compensates us for a portion of the foregone revenue from those waived payments after consideration of the extent that our remarketing sale proceeds are higher than otherwise would be realized if the vehicle had been remarketed at lease contract maturity. Historically, the manufacturer elected to lower a customer's lease payments through a residual support incentive program; in these instances, the manufacturer and we agreed to increase the projected value of the vehicle at the time the lease contract was signed, and the manufacturer reimbursed us if the remarketing sales proceeds were less than the adjusted residual value. Over the past several years, automotive manufacturers have primarily supported leasing products through rate support programs.

Our commercial automotive financing operations primarily fund dealer inventory purchases of new and used vehicles, commonly referred to as wholesale or floorplan financing. This represents the largest portion of our commercial automotive financing business. We extend lines of credit to individual dealers. In general, each wholesale credit line is secured by all the vehicles financed and, in some instances, by other assets owned by the dealer or by a personal guarantee. The amount we advance to dealers is equal to 100% of the wholesale invoice price of new vehicles. Interest on wholesale automotive financing is generally payable monthly and is usually indexed to a floating rate benchmark. The rate for a particular dealer is based on the dealer's creditworthiness and eligibility for various incentive programs, among other factors. During 2011 , we financed an average of $34.3 billion of dealer vehicle inventory worldwide through wholesale or floorplan financings. We financed 79 % and 65 % of GM's and Chrysler's North American dealer inventory, respectively, during 2011 , and 78 % of GM's international dealer inventory in countries where GM operates and we provide dealer inventory financing, excluding China. Additional commercial offerings include automotive dealer term loans, revolving lines of credit, and dealer fleet financing. We provide comprehensive automotive remarketing services, including the use of SmartAuction, our online auction platform, which efficiently supports dealer-to-dealer and other commercial wholesale car transactions. In 2011 , we and others utilized SmartAuction to sell 344,000 vehicles to dealers and other commercial customers. SmartAuction served as the remarketing channel for 61% of Ally's off-lease vehicles.

Manufacturer Relationships

On November 30, 2006, we entered into an agreement with GM that, subject to certain conditions and limitations, whenever GM offers vehicle financing and leasing incentives to customers, it would do so exclusively through Ally. This agreement was subsequently modified on May 22, 2009. As a result of these modifications: (1) after December 31, 2010, GM became permitted to offer any incentive programs on a graduated basis through third parties on a nonexclusive, side-by-side basis with Ally provided that the pricing of the third parties meets certain requirements; (2) Ally has no obligation to provide operating lease financing products; and (3) Ally has no targets against which it could be assessed penalties. The modified agreement will expire on December 31, 2013. A primary objective of Ally under the agreement continues to be supporting distribution and marketing of GM products.

On August 6, 2010, we entered into an agreement with Chrysler (which replaced a term sheet that was originally effective on April 30, 2009) to make available automotive financing products and services to Chrysler dealers and customers. We are Chrysler's preferred provider of new wholesale financing for dealer inventory in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, along with other international markets upon the mutual agreement of the parties. We provide dealer financing and services and retail financing to qualified Chrysler dealers and customers as we deem appropriate according to our credit policies and in our sole discretion. Chrysler is obligated to provide us with certain exclusivity privileges including the use of Ally for designated minimum threshold percentages of certain Chrysler retail financing subvention programs. The agreement extends through April 30, 2013, with automatic one-year renewals unless either we or Chrysler provides sufficient notice of nonrenewal. During 2010, Chrysler also selected Ally to be the preferred financing provider for Fiat vehicles in the United States. Under this agreement, our North American Automotive Finance operations will offer retail financing, leasing, wholesale financing, working capital and facility loans, and remarketing services for Fiat vehicles in the United States.

Subvented loans, originated through our preferred financing relationships, represented 36% of our 2011 North American new retail loan and lease origination volume, respectively, compared to 41% in 2010 and 52% in 2009 . For non-subvented retail loan originations, we successfully compete at the dealer-level based on our strong dealer relationships, competitive pricing, full suite of products, and comprehensive service.

We have further diversified our customer base by establishing agreements to become preferred financing providers with other manufacturers including Thor Industries (recreational vehicles), Maserati (for the United States and Canada), MG Motor UK Ltd (in the United Kingdom), The Vehicle Production Group LLC (for the United States), and SsangYoung Motor UK Ltd (in the United Kingdom).

Insurance

Our Insurance operations offer both consumer finance and insurance products sold primarily through the automotive dealer channel and commercial insurance products sold to dealers. As part of our focus on offering dealers a broad range of consumer finance and insurance products, we provide vehicle service contracts and maintenance coverage. We also underwrite selected commercial insurance coverages, which primarily insure dealers' wholesale vehicle inventory in the United States. Additionally, the Insurance operations offer GAP products in the United States and personal automobile insurance coverage in certain countries outside the United States. Our Insurance operations had $8.0 billion of assets at December 31, 2011 , and generated $1.9 billion of total net revenue in 2011 .

Our vehicle service contracts for retail customers offer owners and lessees mechanical repair protection and roadside assistance for new and used vehicles beyond the manufacturer's new vehicle warranty. These vehicle service contracts are marketed to the public through automotive dealerships and on a direct response basis in the United States and Canada. The vehicle service contracts cover virtually all vehicle makes and models. We also offer GAP products, which allow the recovery of a specified economic loss beyond the covered vehicle's value in the event the vehicle is damaged and declared a total loss.

Wholesale vehicle inventory insurance for dealers provides physical damage protection for dealers' floorplan vehicles. Dealers are generally required to maintain this insurance by their floorplan finance provider. We offer vehicle inventory insurance in the United States to virtually all new car franchised dealerships. We sell insurance products to approximately 4,000 dealers in the United States. Among U.S. GM dealers to whom we provide wholesale financing, our wholesale insurance product penetration rate is approximately 78%. Dealers who receive wholesale financing from Ally are eligible for wholesale insurance incentives, such as automatic eligibility in our preferred insurance programs and increased financial benefits. Our ABA Seguros subsidiary provides personal automobile insurance and certain commercial insurance in Mexico. We also provide personal automobile insurance in Canada.

A significant aspect of our Insurance operations is the investment of proceeds from premiums and other revenue sources. We use these investments to satisfy our obligations related to future claims at the time these claims are settled. Our Insurance operations have an Investment Committee, which develops investment guidelines and strategies. The guidelines established by this committee reflect our risk tolerance, liquidity requirements, regulatory requirements, and rating agency considerations, among other factors.

Mortgage

Our Mortgage operations are now reported as two distinct segments: (1) Origination and Servicing operations and (2) Legacy Portfolio and Other operations. These operations are conducted through the mortgage operations of Ally Bank and subsidiaries of the Residential Capital, LLC (ResCap) legal entity in the United States. Our Mortgage operations had $33.9 billion of assets at December 31, 2011 , and generated $1.2 billion of total net revenue in 2011 .

Origination and Servicing

Our Origination and Servicing operations is one of the leading originators of conforming and government-insured residential mortgage loans in the United States. We are one of the largest residential mortgage loan servicers in the United States and we provide collateralized lines of credit to other mortgage originators, which we refer to as warehouse lending. We finance our mortgage loan originations primarily in Ally Bank. During 2011 , we originated or purchased approximately 247,000 mortgage loans totaling $56.3 billion in the United States: $45.3 billion through our network of correspondents and $10.9 billion through our retail and direct network, which includes our Ditech branded direct-to-consumer channel. On November 2, 2011, we announced that in order to proactively address changes in the mortgage industry as a whole, we will be taking immediate action to reduce the focus on the correspondent mortgage-lending channel; however, we will maintain correspondent relationships with key customers. This reduction will allow us to shift our focus and origination capacity to our retail and direct network channel. As a result, we believe our exposure to mortgage servicing rights (MSR) asset volatility will decrease over time, and we will be better positioned to comply with Basel III requirements. This change is also expected to result in a decrease in total origination levels in 2012 as compared to 2011. After consideration of our experience to-date and the shift in focus to the higher margin retail and direct channels, overall profitability is not expected to be significantly impacted if we are able to increase our retail and direct production volume due to government refinance programs. We will continue to evaluate this business in the future and further reductions in the correspondent channel could occur. We sell the conforming mortgages we originate or purchase in sales that take the form of securitizations guaranteed by the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) or the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), and sell government-insured mortgage loans we originate or purchase in securitizations guaranteed by the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae). Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and Ginnie Mae are collectively known as the Government-sponsored Enterprises or GSEs. We also selectively originate prime jumbo mortgage loans in the United States. In 2011 , we sold $57.9 billion of mortgage loans guaranteed by the GSEs, representing 99.8% of total loans sold by us. At December 31, 2011 , we were the primary servicer of 2.3 million mortgage loans with an unpaid principal balance of $356.4 billion. Our Origination and Servicing operations had $23.0 billion of assets at December 31, 2011 , and generated $933 million of total net revenue during the year ended December 31, 2011 .

Legacy Portfolio and Other

Our Legacy Portfolio and Other operations primarily consists of loans originated prior to January 1, 2009, and includes noncore business activities including discontinued operations, portfolios in runoff, and cash held in the ResCap legal entity. These activities, all of which we

have discontinued, include, among other things: lending to real estate developers and homebuilders in the United States and the United Kingdom; purchasing, selling and securitizing nonconforming residential mortgage loans (with the exception of U.S. prime jumbo mortgage loans) in both the United States and internationally; certain conforming origination channels closed in 2008 and our mortgage reinsurance business. We continue to strategically review our mortgage business. As a result of our review, we exited the European mortgage market through the sale of our United Kingdom and continental Europe operations in 2010 and entered into an agreement to sell the assets of our Canadian operations in 2011. We have substantially reduced the risk in our Mortgage operations since the onset of the housing crisis through a significant reduction in total assets, primarily through the runoff and divestiture of noncore businesses and assets. In 2011 , we sold $250 million in domestic legacy mortgage loans to investors through whole-loan securitizations. At December 31, 2011 , our Legacy Portfolio and Other operations had total assets of $10.9 billion that included mortgage loans held-for-investment with a net carrying value of $8.0 billion and mortgage loans held-for-sale with a net carrying value of $1.6 billion, which have been marked at 47% of their unpaid principal balance on average. In addition, in 2010 we reached agreements with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, significantly limiting our repurchase obligations with each counterparty. Our Mortgage operations hold reserves of $825 million at December 31, 2011 , for potential repurchase obligations related to potential breaches of representations and warranties. Refer to Note 31 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the reserve for representation and warranty obligations.

Corporate and Other

Corporate and Other primarily consists of our centralized corporate treasury and deposit gathering activities, such as management of the cash and corporate investment securities portfolios, short- and long-term debt, retail and brokered deposit liabilities, derivative instruments, the amortization of the discount associated with new debt issuances and bond exchanges, most notably from the December 2008 bond exchange, and the residual impacts of our corporate funds-transfer pricing (FTP) and treasury asset liability management (ALM) activities. Corporate and Other also includes our Commercial Finance Group, certain equity investments, and reclassifications and eliminations between the reportable operating segments. Our Commercial Finance Group provides senior secured commercial-lending products to small and medium sized businesses primarily in the United States.

Ally Bank

Ally Bank raises deposits directly from customers through the direct banking channel via the internet and over the telephone. We have quickly become a leader in direct banking with our recognizable brand, accessible 24/7 customer service, and competitively priced deposit products. We have distinguished our direct bank with our "Talk Straight, Do Right, Be Obviously Better." branding and products that are "Easy to Use" with "No Fine Print, Hidden Fees, Rules or Penalties."

Ally Bank provides our automotive finance and mortgage loan operations with a stable and low-cost funding source and facilitates prudent asset growth. At December 31, 2011 , we had $39.6 billion of deposits including $27.7 billion of retail deposits sourced by Ally Bank. The focus on retail deposits and growth in our deposit base from $19.2 billion at the end of 2008 to $39.6 billion at the end 2011 , combined with improving capital markets and a lower interest rate environment have contributed to a reduction in our cost of funds of approximately 178 basis points since the first quarter of 2009. Looking forward, our cost of funds will be influenced by changes in the level of deposits as well as the interest rate environment and the state of capital markets.

Consumer preferences for the online banking model have grown consistently over the past several years. We believe internet banking is now the preferred banking channel by consumers. According to a 2011 American Bankers Association survey, the number of bank customers who prefer to do their banking online increased to 62% in 2011 from just 36% in 2010. The survey also showed those who prefer branch banking declined from 25% to 20% over the same period. We have received a positive response to innovative product offerings launched in 2011, including IRA deposit products, 48-month raise your rate certificates of deposit, pop money, eCheck deposit, and the "Ally Perks" debit rewards program. We believe that Ally Bank is well-positioned to take advantage of the consumer-driven shift from branch to direct banking.

The markets for automotive and mortgage financing, banking, and insurance are highly competitive. The market for automotive financing has grown more competitive as more consumers are financing their vehicle purchases and as more competitors continue to enter this market as a result of how well automotive finance assets generally performed relative to other asset classes through the economic cycle during the past three years.  More recently, competition for automotive financing has further intensified as a growing number of banks have become increasingly interested in automotive-finance assets. In addition, our mortgage business and Ally Bank face significant competition from commercial banks, savings institutions, mortgage companies, and other financial institutions. Our insurance business also faces significant competition from automotive manufacturers, insurance carriers, third-party administrators, brokers, and other insurance-related companies. Many of our competitors have substantial positions nationally or in the markets in which they operate. Some of our competitors have lower cost structures, substantially lower costs of capital, and are much less reliant on securitization activities, unsecured debt, and other public markets. We face significant competition in most areas, including product offerings, rates, pricing and fees, and customer service.  Further, there has been significant consolidation among companies in the financial services industry, which is expected to continue.  This is likely to result in larger and better capitalized competitors.

The markets for automotive and mortgage securitizations and whole-loan sales are also competitive, and other issuers and originators could increase the amount of their issuances and sales. In addition, lenders and other investors within those markets often establish limits on their credit exposure to particular issuers, originators, and asset classes, or they may require higher returns to increase the amount of their exposure. Increased issuance by other participants in the market or decisions by investors to limit their credit exposure to (or to require a higher yield for) us or to automotive or mortgage securitizations or whole-loans could negatively affect our ability and that of our subsidiaries

to price our securitizations and whole-loan sales at attractive rates. The result would be lower proceeds from these activities and lower profits for our subsidiaries and us.

We are subject to various regulatory, financial, and other requirements of the jurisdictions in which our businesses operate. In light of recent conditions in the global financial markets, regulators have increased their focus on the regulation of the financial services industry. As a result, proposals for legislation that could increase the scope and nature of regulation of the financial services industry are possible. The following is a description of some of the primary laws and regulations that currently affect our business.

Bank Holding Company Status

Ally Financial Inc. (Ally) and IB Finance Holding Company, LLC (IB Finance) are both bank holding companies under the BHC Act. IB Finance is the direct holding company for Ally's FDIC-insured depository institution, Ally Bank. As a bank holding company, Ally is subject to supervision, examination and regulation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FRB). Ally must also comply with regulatory risk-based capital and leverage requirements, as well as various safety and soundness standards imposed by the FRB, and is subject to certain statutory restrictions concerning the types of assets or securities it may own and the activities in which it may engage. Ally Bank, our direct banking subsidiary, is not a member of the Federal Reserve System and is subject to supervision, examination and regulation by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Utah Department of Financial Institutions (UDFI). This regulatory oversight is established to protect depositors, the FDIC's Deposit Insurance Fund, and the banking system as a whole, not security holders, and in some instances may be contrary to their interests.

Many provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act will only become effective at a later date or after a rulemaking process is completed. The orderly liquidation authority became effective in July 2010, with implementing regulations adopted thereafter in stages, with some rulemakings still to come. If Ally were subject to the orderly liquidation authority, the FDIC would be appointed as receiver, giving the FDIC the ability to wind-up Ally, including the ability to assign assets and liabilities without the need for creditor consent or prior court review and the ability of the FDIC to differentiate and determine priority among creditors.

In December 2011, the FRB proposed rules to implement some provisions of the systemic risk regime. If adopted as proposed, among other provisions, the rules would require Ally to maintain a sufficient quantity of highly liquid assets to survive a projected 30-day liquidity stress event and implement various liquidity-related corporate governance measures; limit Ally's aggregate exposure to any unaffiliated counterparty to 25% of Ally's capital and surplus; and potentially subject Ally to an early remediation regime that could limit the ability of Ally to pay dividends or expand its business if the FRB identified Ally as suffering from financial or management weaknesses.

In January 2012, President Obama appointed Richard Cordray as director of the CFPB. Since then, the CFPB has proposed various rules to implement consumer financial protection provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and related requirements. Many of these proposed rules, when finalized, will impose new requirements on Ally and its business operations. In addition, as an insured depository institution with total assets of more than $10 billion, Ally Bank may be required in the future to submit periodic reports to the CFPB, and will become subject to examination by the CFPB.

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). Also, transactions between Ally Bank and a nonbank affiliate generally must be on market terms and conditions. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, among other changes to the Affiliate Transaction Restrictions, credit exposures resulting from derivatives transactions and securities lending and borrowing transactions are now treated as "covered transactions." Furthermore, there is an "attribution rule" under the Affiliate Transaction Restrictions that provides that a transaction between Ally Bank and a third party must be treated as a transaction between Ally Bank and a nonbank affiliate to the extent that the proceeds of the transaction are used for the benefit of or transferred to a nonbank affiliate of Ally Bank.

Because Ally controls Ally Bank, Ally is an affiliate of Ally Bank for purposes of the Affiliate Transaction Restrictions. Thus, retail financing transactions by Ally Bank involving vehicles for which Ally provided floorplan financing are subject to the Affiliate Transaction Restrictions because the proceeds of the retail financings are deemed to benefit, and are ultimately transferred to, Ally Financial.

Historically, the FRB was authorized to exempt, in its discretion, transactions or relationships from the requirements of these rules if it found such exemptions to be in the public interest and consistent with the purposes of the rules. As a result of the Dodd-Frank Act, exemptions now may be granted by the FDIC if the FDIC and FRB jointly find that the exemption is in the public interest and consistent with the purposes of the rules, and the FDIC finds that the exemption does not present an unacceptable risk to the Deposit Insurance Fund. The FRB granted several such exemptions to Ally Bank in the past. However, the existing exemptions are subject to various conditions and, particularly in light of the statutory changes made by the Dodd-Frank Act, any requests for future exemptions may not be granted. Moreover, these limited exemptions generally do not encompass consumer leasing or used vehicle financing. Since there is no assurance that Ally Bank will be able to obtain future exemptions or waivers with respect to these restrictions, the ability to grow Ally Bank's business will be affected by the Affiliate Transaction Restrictions and the conditions set forth in the existing exemption letters.

Basel Capital Accord

The minimum risk-based capital requirements adopted by the federal banking agencies follow the Capital Accord (Capital Accord or Basel I) of the Bank for International Settlements' Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (Basel Committee). The Capital Accord was published in 1988 and generally applies to depository institutions and their holding companies in the United States. In 2004, the Basel Committee published a revision to the Capital Accord (Basel II). The goal of the Basel II capital rules is to provide more risk-sensitive regulatory capital calculations and promote enhanced risk management practices among large, internationally active banking organizations. U.S. banking regulators published final Basel II rules in December 2007. Ally is required to comply with the Basel II rules as implemented by the U.S. banking regulators. Prior to full implementation of the Basel II rules, Ally is required to complete a qualification period of four consecutive quarters during which it needs to demonstrate that it meets the requirements of the rules to the satisfaction of its primary U.S. banking regulator. Pursuant to an extension that was granted to Ally, this qualification period, or parallel run, is required to begin no later than October 1, 2013. During this period, capital is calculated using both Basel I and Basel II methodologies. Upon completion of this parallel run and with the approval of the primary U.S. banking regulator, Ally will begin to use Basel II to calculate regulatory capital. Basel II contemplated a three-year transition period during which a bank holding company or bank could gradually lower its capital level below the levels required by Basel I. However, under a final capital rule that implements a provision of the Dodd-Frank Act, Ally and Ally Bank must continue to calculate their risk-based capital requirements under Basel I, and the capital requirements that each computes under Basel I will serve as a floor for its risk-based capital requirement computed under Basel II.

In addition to Basel II, the Basel Committee recently adopted new capital, leverage, and liquidity guidelines under the Capital Accord (Basel III) that when implemented in the United States may have the effect of raising capital requirements beyond those required by current law and the Dodd-Frank Act. Basel III will increase the minimum Tier 1 common equity ratio to 4.5% , net of regulatory deductions, and introduces a capital conservation buffer of an additional 2.5% of common equity to risk-weighted assets raising the target minimum common

equity ratio to 7.0% . Basel III increases the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio to 8.5% inclusive of the capital conservation buffer, increases the minimum total capital ratio to 10.5% inclusive of the capital buffer, and introduces a countercyclical capital buffer of up to 2.5% of common equity or other fully loss absorbing capital for periods of excess credit growth. Basel III also introduces a nonrisk adjusted Tier 1 leverage ratio of 3% , based on a measure of the total exposure rather than total assets, and new liquidity standards. The Basel III capital, leverage, and liquidity standards will be phased in over a multiyear period. The Basel III rules, when implemented, will also impose a 15% cap on the amount of Tier 1 capital that can be met, in the aggregate, through significant investments in the common shares of unconsolidated financial subsidiaries, MSRs, and deferred tax assets through timing differences. In addition, under Basel III rules, after a ten-year phase-out period beginning in January 2013, trust preferred and other "hybrid" securities will no longer qualify as Tier 1 capital. However, under the Dodd-Frank Act, subject to certain exceptions (e.g., for debt or equity issued to the U.S. government under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act), trust preferred and other "hybrid" securities are phased out from Tier 1 capital over a three-year period starting January 2013. We continue to monitor developments with respect to Basel III and, pending the adoption of final capital rules and subsequent regulatory interpretation by the U.S. regulators, there remains a degree of uncertainty on the full impact of Basel III.

It is also anticipated that during 2012 the U.S. banking agencies will issue final rules based on the 2010 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the Risk-Based Capital Guidelines for Market Risk, as amended in December 2011 (Market Risk rules). We continue to monitor developments with respect to the Market Risk rules.

Troubled Asset Relief Program

As part of the Automotive Industry Financing Program created under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) established by the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (the EESA), Ally has entered into agreements pursuant to which Treasury has purchased preferred stock and trust preferred securities of Ally. As a result of these investments, subject to certain exceptions, Ally and its subsidiaries are generally prohibited from paying certain dividends or distributions on, or redeeming, repurchasing, or acquiring any common stock without consent of Treasury. Ally has further agreed that until Treasury ceases to hold Ally preferred stock, Ally will comply with certain restrictions on executive privileges and compensation. Ally must also take all necessary action to ensure that its corporate governance and benefit plans with respect to its senior executive officers comply with Section 111(b) of the EESA as implemented by any guidance or regulation under the EESA, as amended by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which was signed into law on February 17, 2009, as implemented by the Interim Final Rule issued by Treasury on June 15, 2009. For further details regarding these restrictions on compensation as a result of TARP investments, refer to the Compensation Discussion and Analysis in Item 11.

Depository Institutions

On December 24, 2008, Ally Bank received approval from the UDFI to convert from an industrial bank to a commercial nonmember state-chartered bank. Ally Bank's deposits are insured by the FDIC, and Ally Bank is required to file periodic reports with the FDIC concerning its financial condition. Total assets of Ally Bank were $ 85.3 billion and $ 70.3 billion at December 31, 2011 and 2010 , respectively.

As a commercial nonmember bank chartered by the State of Utah, Ally Bank is subject to various regulatory capital adequacy requirements administered by state and federal banking agencies. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory and discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a direct material effect on Ally Bank's results of operations and financial condition. At December 31, 2011 , we were in compliance with our regulatory capital requirements. For an additional discussion of capital adequacy requirements, refer to Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

International Banks, Finance Companies, and Other Non-U.S. Operations

Certain of our foreign subsidiaries operate in local markets as either banks or regulated finance companies and are subject to regulatory restrictions. These regulatory restrictions, among other things, require that our subsidiaries meet certain minimum capital requirements and may restrict dividend distributions and ownership of certain assets. Total assets of our regulated international banks and finance companies were approximately $ 13.6 billion and $ 14.5 billion at December 31, 2011 and 2010 , respectively. In addition, the BHC Act imposes restrictions on Ally's ability to invest equity abroad without FRB approval. Many of our other operations are also heavily regulated in many jurisdictions outside the United States.

U.S. Mortgage Business

Our U.S. mortgage business is subject to extensive federal, state, and local laws, rules, and regulations in addition to judicial and administrative decisions that impose requirements and restrictions on this business. As a Federal Housing Administration-approved lender, certain of our U.S. mortgage subsidiaries are required to submit audited financial statements to the Department of Housing and Urban Development on an annual basis. The U.S. mortgage business is also subject to examination by the Federal Housing Commissioner to assure compliance with Federal Housing Administration regulations, policies, and procedures. The federal, state, and local laws, rules, and regulations to which our U.S. mortgage business is subject, among other things, impose licensing obligations and financial requirements; limit the interest rates, finance charges, and other fees that can be charged; regulate the use of credit reports and the reporting of credit information; impose underwriting requirements; regulate marketing techniques and practices; require the safeguarding of nonpublic information about customers; and regulate servicing practices, including the assessment, collection, foreclosure, claims handling, and investment and interest payments on escrow accounts. In addition, proposals have been enacted in the U.S. Congress and are under consideration by various regulatory authorities that would affect the manner in which the GSEs conduct their business and there is some possibility that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will be subject to winding down.

Insurance Companies

Our Insurance operations are subject to certain minimum aggregate capital requirements, net asset and dividend restrictions under applicable state and foreign insurance law, and the rules and regulations promulgated by various U.S. and foreign regulatory agencies. Under various state and foreign insurance regulations, dividend distributions may be made only from statutory unassigned surplus with approvals required from the regulatory authorities for dividends in excess of certain statutory limitations. In addition, the BHC Act imposes restrictions on our ability to invest equity abroad without FRB approval.

Investments in Ally

Because Ally Bank is an FDIC-insured bank and Ally and IB Finance are bank holding companies, acquisitions of our voting stock above certain thresholds may be subject to regulatory approval or notice under federal or state law. Investors are responsible for ensuring that they do not, directly or indirectly, acquire shares of our stock in excess of the amount that may be acquired without regulatory approval under the Change in Bank Control Act, the BHC Act, and Utah state law.

Other Regulations

Some of the other more significant regulations that we are subject to include:

We had approximately 14,800 and 14,400 employees worldwide at December 31, 2011 and 2010 , respectively.

The results of operations for each of our reportable operating segments and the products and services offered are contained in the individual business operations sections of Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. Financial information related to reportable operating segments and geographic areas is provided in Note 28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and Current Reports on Form 8-K (and amendments to these reports) are available on our internet website, free of charge, as soon as reasonably practicable after the reports are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. These reports are available at www.ally.com. Choose Investor Relations, Financial Information, and then SEC Filings (under About Ally). These reports can also be found on the SEC website at www.sec.gov.

Our businesses face many risks and uncertainties, any of which could result in a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition. We believe that the most significant of the risks and uncertainties that we face are described below. This Form 10-K is qualified in its entirety by these risk factors.

Our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be adversely affected by regulations to which we are subject as a result of our bank holding company status.

We are a bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (BHC Act). Many of the regulatory requirements to which we are subject as a bank holding company were not previously applicable to us and have and will continue to require significant expense and devotion of resources to fully implement necessary policies and procedures to ensure compliance. Compliance with such laws and regulations involves substantial costs and may adversely affect our ability to operate profitably. Recent events, particularly in the financial and real estate markets, have resulted in bank regulatory agencies placing increased focus and scrutiny on participants in the financial services industry, including us. For a description of our regulatory requirements, see Certain Regulatory Matters in Item 1. Business.

Ally is subject to ongoing supervision, examination and regulation by the FRB, and Ally Bank by the FDIC and the Utah DFI, in each case, through regular examinations and other means that allow the regulators to gauge management's ability to identify, assess, and control risk in all areas of operations in a safe-and-sound manner and to ensure compliance with laws and regulations.

Ally is currently required by its banking supervisors to make improvements in areas such as board and senior management oversight, risk management, regulatory reporting, internal audit planning, capital adequacy process, stress testing, and Bank Secrecy Act / anti-money-laundering compliance, and to continue to reduce problem assets. Separately, Ally Bank is currently required by its banking supervisors to make improvements in areas such as compliance management and training, consumer protection monitoring, consumer complaint resolution, internal audit program and residential mortgage loan pricing, and fee monitoring. These requirements are judicially enforceable, and if we are unable to implement and maintain these required actions, plans, policies and procedures in a timely and effective manner and otherwise comply with the requirements outlined above, we could become subject to formal supervisory actions which could subject us to significant restrictions on our existing business or on our ability to develop any new business. Such forms of supervisory action could include, without limitation, written agreements, cease and desist orders, and consent orders and may, among other things, result in restrictions on our ability to pay dividends, requirements to increase capital, restrictions on our activities, the imposition of civil monetary penalties, and enforcement of such action through injunctions or restraining orders. We could also be required to dispose of certain assets and liabilities within a prescribed period. The terms of any such supervisory action could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating flexibility, financial condition, and results of operations.

Our ability to engage in certain activities may be adversely affected by our status as a bank holding company.

As a bank holding company, Ally's activities are generally limited to banking or to managing or controlling banks or to other activities deemed closely related to banking or otherwise permissible under the BHC Act and related regulations. Likewise, subject to certain exceptions, Ally is not permitted to acquire more than 5% of any class of voting shares of any nonaffiliated bank or bank holding company, directly or indirectly, or to acquire control of any other company, directly or indirectly (including by acquisition of 25% or more of a class of voting shares). Upon our bank holding company approval, we were permitted an initial two-year grace period to bring our activities and investments into conformity with these restrictions. This grace period expired in December 2010. The FRB initially granted a one-year extension that expired in December 2011, and recently granted a second one-year extension that expires in December 2012. We will be

permitted to apply to the FRB for one additional one-year extension. Certain of Ally's existing activities and investments, including most of our insurance activities and our SmartAuction vehicle remarketing services for third parties, are deemed impermissible under the BHC Act and must be terminated or disposed of by the expiration of this extension and any additional extensions. While some of these activities may be continued if Ally is able to convert to a financial holding company under the BHC Act, Ally may be unable to satisfy the requirements to enable it to convert to a financial holding company prior to that time, and activities, businesses, or investments that would be permissible for a financial holding company will need to be terminated or disposed of. The FRB may also decline to grant any additional requested extensions, and Ally may be obligated to terminate or dispose of any impermissible activities, businesses, or investments more quickly than anticipated or under terms that are unfavorable to us. Either situation could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial position.

As a bank holding company, our ability to expand into new business activities would require us to obtain the prior approval of the relevant banking supervisors. There can be no assurance that any required approval will be obtained or that we will be able to execute on any such plans in a timely manner or at all. If we are unable to obtain approval to expand into new business activities, our business, results of operations, and financial position may be materially adversely affected.

Our business and financial condition could be further adversely affected as a result of issues relating to mortgage foreclosures, home sales, and evictions in certain states and our entry into a related consent order.

Representatives of federal and state governments, including the United States Department of Justice, the FRB, the FDIC, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and law enforcement authorities in all 50 states, have been investigating the procedures followed by mortgage servicing companies and banks, including subsidiaries of Ally, in connection with mortgage foreclosure home sales and evictions. In connection with this, on February 9, 2012, we reached an agreement in principle with the federal government and 49 state attorneys general with respect to these matters, which resulted in a charge of approximately $230 million in the fourth quarter of 2011. This agreement in principle is subject to ongoing discussions among the parties and the completion of definitive documentation, as well as required regulatory and court approvals. It is possible that Ally or its subsidiaries could become subject to further penalties, sanctions, or other adverse actions related to these matters, which could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows.

On December 1, 2011, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts filed an enforcement action in the Suffolk County Superior Court against GMAC Mortgage and several other lender/servicers. The Commonwealth claims that certain aspects of defendants' foreclosure processes are unlawful, that defendants do not always process loan modification accurately, and that defendants' use of the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) has damaged the integrity of the Commonwealth's Torrens recording system. The Commonwealth seeks civil penalties, injunctive relief, costs and attorneys' fees. In connection with the settlement with the federal government and state attorneys general announced on February 9, 2012, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts agreed to settle all servicing-related claims asserted in this action and to certain limits on monetary damages, if any. However, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts continues to pursue claims related to MERS and certain foreclosure-related matters.

As a result of an examination conducted by the FRB and FDIC, on April 13, 2011, each of Ally, Ally Bank, Residential Capital, LLC and GMAC Mortgage, LLC (collectively, the Ally Entities) entered into a Consent Order (the Consent Order) with the FRB and the FDIC. The Consent Order requires the Ally Entities to make improvements to various aspects of our residential mortgage loan-servicing business, including compliance programs, internal audit, communications with borrowers, vendor management, management information systems, employee training, and oversight by the boards of the Ally Entities. We estimate that incremental costs to the applicable mortgage companies for implementation and ongoing compliance related to these matters to be approximately $40 million annually during 2012 and 2013, and then reducing over time. The majority of these incremental annual costs are for additional servicing personnel, enhancements to information systems, vendor management, costs to comply with MERS requirements, and increased audit and compliance costs.

The Consent Order further requires GMAC Mortgage, LLC to retain independent consultants to conduct a risk assessment related to mortgage servicing activities and, separately, to conduct a review of certain past residential mortgage foreclosure actions (Foreclosure Review). Based on current expectations, we estimate total costs to the applicable mortgage companies related to the Foreclosure Review to be up to $200 million, but it is possible that costs could be higher, particularly if the scope of the Foreclosure Review is expanded. We expect the majority of these costs to be incurred in 2012, although it is possible that such costs could be incurred over a longer period of time.

We cannot estimate the ultimate impact of any deficiencies that have been or may be identified in the historical foreclosure procedures of certain of our mortgage subsidiaries (Mortgage Companies). There are potential risks related to these matters that extend beyond potential liability on individual foreclosure actions. Specific risks could include, for example, claims and litigation related to foreclosure remediation and resubmission; claims from investors that hold securities that become adversely impacted by continued delays in the foreclosure process, the reduction in foreclosure proceeds due to delay, or by challenges to completed foreclosure sales to the extent, if any, not covered by title insurance obtained in connection with such sales; actions by courts, state attorneys general, or regulators to delay further the foreclosure process after submission of corrected affidavits, or to facilitate claims by borrowers alleging that they were harmed by our foreclosure practices (by, for example, foreclosing without offering an appropriate range of alternative home preservation options); additional regulatory fines, sanctions, and other additional costs; and reputational risks. To date we have borne all out-of-pocket costs associated with the remediation rather than passing any such costs through to investors for whom we service the related mortgages, and we expect that we will continue to do so.

Our ability to execute our business strategy may be affected by regulatory considerations.

Our business strategy for Ally Bank, which is primarily focused on automotive lending and growth of our direct-channel deposit business, is subject to regulatory oversight from a safety and soundness perspective. If our banking supervisors raise concerns regarding any aspect of our business strategy for Ally Bank, we may be obliged to alter our strategy, which could include moving certain activities, such as certain types of lending, outside of Ally Bank to one of our nonbanking affiliates. Alternative funding sources outside of Ally Bank, such as asset securitization or financings in the capital markets, could be more expensive than funding through Ally Bank and could adversely effect our business prospects, results of operations and financial condition.

We are subject to new capital planning and systemic risk regimes, which impose significant restrictions and requirements.

Effective December 2011, the FRB requires bank holding companies with $50 billion or more in total consolidated assets, such as Ally, to submit annual capital plans for FRB non-objection. In the absence of a non-objection regarding the capital plan, the new regulation prohibits such bank holding companies from paying dividends or making certain other capital distributions without a specific FRB non-objection to such action. Even if a 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%) and subject to certain exceptions. Ally submitted its first capital plan in January 2012, and it is unknown whether the FRB will accept Ally's plan as submitted or require revisions.

In addition, in December 2011, the FRB proposed rules to implement certain provisions of the systemic risk regime under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act). If adopted as proposed, among other provisions, the rules would require Ally to maintain a sufficient quantity of highly liquid assets to survive a projected 30-day liquidity stress event and implement various liquidity-related corporate governance measures; limit Ally's aggregate exposure to any unaffiliated counterparty to 25% of Ally's capital and surplus; and potentially subject Ally to an early remediation regime that could limit the ability of Ally to pay dividends or expand its business if the FRB identified Ally as suffering from financial or management weaknesses. The systemic risk provisions, when implemented, could adversely affect our business prospects, results of operations, and financial condition.

Our ability to rely on deposits as a part of our funding strategy may be limited.

Ally Bank continues to be a key part of our funding strategy, and we have increased our reliance on deposits as an alternative source of funding through Ally Bank. Ally Bank does not have a retail branch network, and it obtains its deposits through direct banking and brokered deposits which, at December 31, 2011 , included $9.9 billion of brokered certificates of deposit that may be more price sensitive than other types of deposits and may become less available if alternative investments offer higher interest rates. Our ability to maintain our current level of deposits or grow our deposit base could be affected by regulatory restrictions including the possible imposition of prior approval requirements, restrictions on deposit growth, or restrictions on our rates offered. In addition, perceptions of our financial strength, rates offered by third parties, and other competitive factors beyond our control, including returns on alternative investments, will also impact our ability to grow our deposit base. As we have established the Ally Bank brand and increased our retail deposit base over the past few years, we have reduced offered rates on new retail deposits. However, a strategy of continuing to offer reduced rates in the future could limit our ability to further grow or maintain deposits. Even if we are able to grow the deposit base of Ally Bank, our regulators may impose restrictions on our ability to use Ally Bank deposits as a source of funding for certain business activities potentially raising the cost of funding those activities without the use of Ally Bank deposits.

The FDIC has indicated that it expects Ally to diversify Ally Bank's overall funding and to focus on reducing Ally Bank's overall funding costs including the interest rates paid on Ally Bank deposits. See Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Liquidity Management, Funding, and Regulatory Capital-Funding Strategy in Item 7. for additional information about these diversification activities. As stated above, over the past few years, we have reduced rates on retail deposits, as well as introduced new products, resulting in lower cost of funds for deposits. However, it is possible that further reductions of rates on retail deposits could limit Ally Bank's ability to grow or maintain deposits, which could have a material adverse impact on the funding and capital position of Ally.

The regulatory environment in which we operate could have a material adverse effect on our business and earnings.

Our domestic operations are subject to various laws and judicial and administrative decisions imposing various requirements and restrictions relating to supervision and regulation by state and federal authorities. Such regulation and supervision are primarily for the benefit and protection of our customers, not for the benefit of investors in our securities, and could limit our discretion in operating our business. Noncompliance with applicable statutes, regulations, rules, or policies could result in the suspension or revocation of any license or registration at issue as well as the imposition of civil fines and criminal penalties.

Ally, Ally Bank, and many of our nonbank subsidiaries are heavily regulated by bank and other regulatory agencies at the federal and state levels. This regulatory oversight is established to protect depositors, the FDIC's Deposit Insurance Fund, and the banking system as a whole, not security holders. Changes to statutes, regulations, rules, or policies including the interpretation or implementation of statutes, regulations, rules, or policies could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways including limiting the types of financial services and products we may offer, limiting our ability to pursue acquisitions and increasing the ability of third parties to offer competing financial services and products.

Our operations are also heavily regulated in many jurisdictions outside the United States. For example, certain of our foreign subsidiaries operate either as a bank or a regulated finance company, and our insurance operations are subject to various requirements in the foreign markets in which we operate. The varying requirements of these jurisdictions may be inconsistent with U.S. rules and may materially adversely affect our business or limit necessary regulatory approvals, or if approvals are obtained, we may not be able to continue to comply with the terms of the approvals or applicable regulations. In addition, in many countries, the regulations applicable to the financial services industry are uncertain and evolving.

Our inability to remain in compliance with regulatory requirements in a particular jurisdiction could have a material adverse effect on our operations in that market with regard to the affected product and on our reputation generally. No assurance can be given that applicable laws or regulations will not be amended or construed differently, that new laws and regulations will not be adopted, or that we will not be prohibited by local laws or regulators from raising interest rates above certain desired levels, any of which could materially adversely affect our business, operating flexibility, financial condition, or results of operations.

Financial services legislative and regulatory reforms may have a significant impact on our business and results of operations.

The Dodd-Frank Act became law in July 2010. Portions of the Dodd-Frank Act were effective immediately, but many provisions will only be effective after the adoption of implementing regulations, which have been delayed in numerous cases. The Dodd-Frank Act, when fully implemented, will have material implications for Ally and the entire financial services industry. Among other things, it will or potentially could:

As the Dodd-Frank Act requires that many studies be conducted and that hundreds of regulations be written in order to fully implement it, the full impact of this legislation on Ally, its business strategies, and financial performance cannot be known at this time and may not be known for a number of years. In addition, regulations may impact us differently in comparison to other more established financial institutions. However, these impacts are expected to be substantial and some of them are likely to adversely affect Ally and its financial performance. The extent to which Ally can adjust its strategies to offset such adverse impacts also is not knowable at this time.

Our business may be adversely affected upon our implementation of the revised capital requirements under the Basel III capital rules.

The Bank for International Settlements' Basel Committee on Banking Supervision recently adopted new capital, leverage, and liquidity guidelines under the Basel Accord (Basel III), which when implemented in the United States, may have the effect of raising capital requirements beyond those required by current law and the Dodd-Frank Act. Basel III increases (i) the minimum Tier 1 common equity ratio from 2.0% to 4.5% , net of regulatory deductions, and introduces a capital conservation buffer of an additional 2.5% of common equity to risk-weighted assets, raising the target minimum common equity ratio to 7.0% and (ii) the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio to 8.5% inclusive of the capital conservation buffer, increases the minimum total capital ratio to 10.5% inclusive of the capital buffer, and introduces a countercyclical capital buffer of up to 2.5% of common equity or other fully loss absorbing capital for periods of excess credit growth. Basel III also introduces a nonrisk adjusted Tier 1 leverage ratio of 3% based on a measure of the total exposure rather than total assets and new liquidity standards. The Basel III capital, leverage, and liquidity standards will be phased in over a multiyear period. The Basel III rules, when implemented, will also impose a 15% cap on the amount of Tier 1 capital that can be met, in the aggregate, through significant investments in the common shares of unconsolidated financial subsidiaries, mortgage servicing rights (MSRs), and deferred tax assets through timing differences, as well as a 10% cap on the amount of each of the three individual items that may be included in Tier 1 capital. In addition, under Basel III rules, after a 10-year phase-out period beginning in January 2013, trust preferred and other "hybrid" securities will no longer qualify as Tier 1 capital. However, under the Dodd-Frank Act, subject to certain exceptions, trust preferred and other "hybrid" securities are phased out from Tier 1 capital in a three-year period starting January 2013. At December 31, 2011 , Ally had $2.3 billion of MSRs and $2.5 billion of trust preferred securities, which were included as Tier 1 capital. Ally currently has no other "hybrid" securities outstanding. The Basel III

rules, when implemented, will impose limits on Ally's ability to meet its regulatory capital requirements through the use of MSRs, trust preferred securities, or other "hybrid" securities, if applicable. Pending final rules for Basel III and subsequent regulatory interpretation, there remains a degree of uncertainty on the full impact of Basel III. It is currently anticipated that U.S. banking regulators will propose regulations to implement Basel III in 2012.

If we or Ally Bank fail to satisfy regulatory capital requirements, we or Ally Bank may be subject to serious regulatory sanctions ranging in severity from being precluded from making acquisitions or engaging in new activities to becoming subject to informal or formal supervisory actions by the FRB and/or FDIC and, potentially, FDIC receivership of Ally Bank. If any of these were to occur, such actions could prevent us from successfully executing our business plan and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial position.

The actions of the FRB and international central banking authorities directly impact our cost of funds for lending, capital raising, and investment activities and may impact the value of financial instruments we hold. In addition, such changes in monetary policy may affect the credit quality of our customers. Changes in domestic and international monetary policy are beyond our control and difficult to predict.

Future consumer or mortgage legislation could harm our competitive position.

In addition to the recent enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act, various legislative bodies have also recently been considering altering the existing framework governing creditors' rights and mortgage products including legislation that would result in or allow loan modifications of various sorts. Such legislation may change banking statutes and the operating environment in substantial and unpredictable ways. If enacted, such legislation could increase or decrease the cost of doing business; limit or expand permissible activities; or affect the competitive balance among banks, savings associations, credit unions, and other financial institutions. We cannot predict whether new legislation will be enacted, and if enacted, the effect that it or any regulations would have on our activities, financial condition, or results of operations.

Ally and its subsidiaries are or may become involved from time to time in information-gathering requests, investigations, and proceedings by government and self-regulatory agencies which may lead to adverse consequences.

Ally and its subsidiaries, including Ally Bank, are or may become involved from time to time in information-gathering requests, reviews, investigations, and proceedings (both formal and informal) by government and self-regulatory agencies, including the FRB, FDIC, Utah DFI, CFPB, SEC, and the Federal Trade Commission regarding their respective operations. Such requests include subpoenas from each of the SEC and the U.S. Department of Justice, served on Ally Financial Inc. and GMAC Mortgage LLC, respectively. Beginning in December 2010 and continuing through 2011, a series of subpoenas were received from the SEC, seeking information about various aspects of the process surrounding securitizations of residential mortgages with which certain of our mortgage subsidiaries were involved as sponsor or servicer. The subpoena received from the U.S. Department of Justice includes a broad request for documentation and other information in connection with its investigation of potential fraud related to the origination and/or underwriting of mortgage loans. These subpoenas, or any other investigation or information-gathering request, may result in material adverse consequences including without limitation, adverse judgments, settlements, fines, penalties, injunctions, or other actions.

Our business, financial position, and results of operations could be adversely affected by the impact of affiliate transaction restrictions imposed in connection with certain financing transactions.

Certain transactions between Ally Bank and any of its nonbank "affiliates," including but not limited to Ally Financial Inc. and ResCap 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). Under the Dodd-Frank Act, among other changes to Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act, credit exposures resulting from derivatives transactions and securities lending and borrowing transactions will be treated as "covered transactions." Furthermore, there is an "attribution rule" that provides that a transaction between Ally Bank and a third party must be treated as a transaction between Ally Bank and a nonbank affiliate to the extent that the proceeds of the transaction are used for the benefit of, or transferred to, a nonbank affiliate of Ally Bank. Retail financing transactions by Ally Bank involving vehicles which are floorplan financed by Ally Financial Inc. are subject to the Affiliate Transaction Restrictions because the proceeds of the retail financings are deemed to benefit, and are ultimately transferred to, Ally.

Historically, the FRB was authorized to exempt, in its discretion, transactions or relationships from the requirements of these rules if it found such exemptions to be in the public interest and consistent with the purposes of the rules. As a result of the Dodd-Frank Act, exemptions now may be granted by the FDIC if the FDIC and FRB jointly find that the exemption is in the public interest and consistent with the purposes of the rules, and the FDIC finds that the exemption does not present an unacceptable risk to the Deposit Insurance Fund. The FRB granted several such exemptions to Ally Bank in the past. However, the existing exemptions are subject to various conditions and, particularly in light of the statutory changes made by the Dodd-Frank Act, any requests for future exemptions may not be granted. Moreover, these limited exemptions generally do not encompass consumer leasing or used vehicle financing. Since there is no assurance that Ally Bank will be able to obtain future exemptions or waivers with respect to these restrictions, the ability to grow Ally Bank's business will be affected by the Affiliate Transaction Restrictions and the conditions set forth in the existing exemption letters.

Ally Financial Inc. may in the future require distributions from its subsidiaries.

We currently fund Ally Financial Inc.'s obligations, including dividend payments to our preferred shareholders, and payments of interest and principal on our indebtedness, from cash generated by Ally Financial Inc. In the future, Ally Financial Inc. may not generate sufficient funds at the parent company level to fund its obligations. As such, it may require dividends, distributions, or other payments from its subsidiaries to fund its obligations. However, regulatory and other legal restrictions may limit the ability of Ally Financial Inc.'s subsidiaries to transfer funds freely to Ally Financial Inc. In particular, many of Ally Financial Inc.'s subsidiaries are subject to laws, regulations, and rules that authorize regulatory bodies to block or reduce the flow of funds to it or that prohibit such transfers entirely in certain circumstances. These laws, regulations, and rules may hinder Ally Financial Inc.'s ability to access funds that it may need to make payments on its obligations in the future. Furthermore, as a bank holding company, Ally Financial Inc. may become subject to a prohibition or to limitations on its ability to pay dividends. The bank regulators have the authority and, under certain circumstances, the duty to prohibit or to limit payment of dividends by the banking organizations they supervise, including Ally Financial Inc. and its subsidiaries.

Current and future increases in FDIC insurance premiums, including the FDIC special assessment imposed on all FDIC-insured institutions, could decrease our earnings.

Beginning in 2008 and continuing through 2011, higher levels of bank failures have dramatically increased resolution costs of the FDIC and depleted the Deposit Insurance Fund (the DIF). In May 2009, the FDIC announced that it had voted to levy a special assessment on insured institutions in order to facilitate the rebuilding of the DIF. In September 2009, the FDIC voted to adopt an increase in the risk-based assessment rate effective beginning January 1, 2011, by three basis points. Further, the Dodd-Frank Act alters the calculation of an insured institution's deposit base for purposes of deposit insurance assessments and removes the upper limit for the reserve ratio designated by the FDIC each year. On February 7, 2011, the FDIC approved a final rule implementing these changes, which took effect on April 1, 2011. The FDIC will continue to assess the changes to the assessment rates at least annually. Future deposit premiums paid by Ally Bank depend on the level of the DIF and the magnitude and cost of future bank failures. Any increases in deposit insurance assessments could decrease our earnings.

The profitability and financial condition of our operations are heavily dependent upon the performance, operations, and prospects of GM and Chrysler.

GM, GM dealers, and GM-related employees compose a significant portion of our customer base, and our domestic and, in particular, our International Automotive Finance operations are highly dependent on GM production and sales volume. In 2011 , 62% of our North American new vehicle dealer inventory financing and 66% of our North American new vehicle consumer automotive financing volume were for GM dealers and customers. In addition, 97% of our international new vehicle dealer inventory financing and 82% of our international new vehicle consumer automotive financing volume were for GM dealers and customers. Furthermore, we have an agreement with Chrysler related to automotive financing products and services for Chrysler dealers and customers pursuant to which we are the preferred provider of new wholesale financing for Chrysler dealer inventory and consumer financing for Chrysler customers. In 2011 , 30% of our North American new vehicle dealer inventory financing and 28% of our North American new vehicle consumer automotive financing volume were for Chrysler dealers and customers.

Ally's agreements with GM and Chrysler regarding automotive financing products for their dealers and customers extend through December and April 2013, respectively, unless terminated earlier in accordance with their terms. The agreement with Chrysler provides for automatic one-year renewals unless either we or Chrysler provides sufficient notice of nonrenewal. As a result, our agreement with Chrysler will be automatically extended through April 30, 2014, unless Chrysler notifies us of nonrenewal on or before April 30, 2012, in which case, the agreement would expire on April 30, 2013. These agreements provide Ally with certain preferred provider benefits including limiting the use of other financing providers by GM and Chrysler in their incentive programs. The terms of the Ally agreement with GM changed after January 1, 2011, such that GM is now able to offer incrementally more incentive programs through third parties on a nonexclusive, side-by-side basis with Ally, provided that the pricing of the third parties meets certain requirements. Due to the highly competitive nature of the market for financial services, Ally may be unable to extend one or both of these agreements or may face less favorable terms upon extension. If Ally is unable to extend one or both of these agreements or if GM or Chrysler enters a similar agreement with a third party, Ally's retail financing volumes could be materially and adversely impacted.

On October 1, 2010, GM acquired AmeriCredit Corp. (which GM subsequently renamed General Motors Financial Company, Inc.), an independent automotive finance company that focuses on providing leasing and subprime financing options. If GM were to direct substantially more business, including wholesale financing business, to its captive on noncommercial terms thus reducing its reliance on our services over time, it could have a material adverse effect on our profitability and financial condition. In addition, it is possible that GM or other automotive manufacturers could utilize other existing companies to support their financing needs including offering products or terms that we would not or could not offer, which could have a material adverse impact on our business and operations. Furthermore, other automotive manufacturers could expand or establish or acquire captive finance companies to support their financing needs thus reducing their need for our services.

A significant adverse change in GM's or Chrysler's business, including significant adverse changes in their respective liquidity position and access to the capital markets; the production or sale of GM or Chrysler vehicles; the quality or resale value of GM or Chrysler vehicles; the use of GM or Chrysler marketing incentives; GM's or Chrysler's relationships with its key suppliers; or GM's or Chrysler's relationship

with the United Auto Workers and other labor unions and other factors impacting GM or Chrysler or their respective employees, could have a material adverse effect on our profitability and financial condition. In addition, growth in our International Automotive Finance operations are highly dependent on GM, and therefore any significant change to GM's international business or our relationship with GM may hinder our ability to expand internationally.

There is no assurance that the global automotive market or GM's and Chrysler's respective share of that market will not suffer downturns in the future, and any negative impact could in turn have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial position.

Our business requires substantial capital and liquidity, and disruption in our funding sources and access to the capital markets would have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, capital positions, and financial condition.

Our liquidity and the long-term viability of Ally depend on many factors, including our ability to successfully raise capital and secure appropriate bank financing. We are currently required to maintain a Tier 1 leverage ratio of 15% at Ally Bank, which will require that Ally maintain substantial equity funds in Ally Bank and inject substantial additional equity funds into Ally Bank as Ally Bank's assets increase over time.

We have significant maturities of unsecured debt each year. While we have reduced our reliance on unsecured funding, it continues to remain a critical component of our capital structure and financing plans. At December 31, 2011 , approximately $12.0 billion in principal amount of total outstanding consolidated unsecured debt is scheduled to mature in 2012 , which includes $7.4 billion in principal amount of debt issued under the FDIC's Temporary Liquidity Guaranty Program, and approximately $2.3 billion and $5.8 billion in principal amount of consolidated unsecured debt is scheduled to mature in 2013 and 2014 , respectively. We also obtain short-term funding from the sale of floating rate demand notes, all of which the holders may elect to have redeemed at any time without restriction. At December 31, 2011 , a total of $2.8 billion in principal amount of Demand Notes were outstanding. We also rely on secured funding. At December 31, 2011 , approximately $14.4 billion of outstanding consolidated secured debt is scheduled to mature in 2012 , approximately $15.1 billion is scheduled to mature in 2013 , and approximately $11.1 billion is scheduled to mature in 2014 . Furthermore, at December 31, 2011 , approximately $15.0 billion in certificates of deposit at Ally Bank are scheduled to mature in 2012, which is not included in the 2012 unsecured maturities provided above. Additional financing will be required to fund a material portion of the debt maturities over these periods. The capital markets continue to be volatile, and Ally's access to the debt markets may be significantly reduced during periods of market stress. In addition, we will continue to have significant original issue discount amortization expenses (OID expense) in the near future, which will adversely affect our net income and resulting capital position. OID expense was $925 million for the year ended 2011 , and the remaining scheduled amortization of OID is $350 million , $263 million , and $190 million in 2012 , 2013 , and 2014 , respectively.

As a result of the volatility in the markets and our current unsecured debt ratings, we have increased our reliance on various secured debt markets. Although market conditions have improved, there can be no assurances that this will continue. In addition, we continue to rely on our ability to borrow from other financial institutions, and many of our primary bank facilities are up for renewal on a yearly basis. Any weakness in market conditions and a tightening of credit availability could have a negative effect on our ability to refinance these facilities and increase the costs of bank funding. Ally and Ally Bank also continue to access the securitization markets. While markets have continued to stabilize following the 2008 liquidity crisis, there can be no assurances these sources of liquidity will remain available to us.

Our indebtedness and other obligations are significant and could materially and adversely affect our business.

We have a significant amount of indebtedness. At December 31, 2011, we had approximately $101.6 billion in principal amount of indebtedness outstanding (including $53.0 billion in secured indebtedness). Interest expense on our indebtedness constituted approximately 57% of our total financing revenue and other interest income for the year ended December 31, 2011. In addition, during the twelve months ending December 31, 2011, we declared and paid preferred stock dividends of $794 million in the aggregate.

We have the ability to create additional unsecured indebtedness. If our debt service obligations increase, whether due to the increased cost of existing indebtedness or the incurrence of additional indebtedness, we may be required to dedicate a significant portion of our cash flow from operations to the payment of principal of, and interest on, our indebtedness, which would reduce the funds available for other purposes. Our indebtedness also could limit our ability to withstand competitive pressures and reduce our flexibility in responding to changing business and economic conditions.

The worldwide financial services industry is highly competitive. If we are unable to compete successfully or if there is increased competition in the automotive financing, mortgage, and/or insurance markets or generally in the markets for securitizations or asset sales, our business could be negatively affected.

The markets for automotive and mortgage financing, banking, and insurance are highly competitive. The market for automotive financing has grown more competitive as more consumers are financing their vehicle purchases and as more competitors continue to enter this market as a result of how well automotive finance assets generally performed relative to other asset classes during the 2008 economic downturn.  More recently, competition for automotive financing has further intensified as a growing number of banks have become increasingly interested in automotive-finance assets, which has resulted in pressure on our net interest margins. For example, on April 1, 2011, TD Bank Group announced the closing of its acquisition of Chrysler Financial, which could enhance Chrysler Financial's ability to expand its product offerings and may result in increased competition. Our mortgage business and Ally Bank face significant competition from commercial banks, savings institutions, mortgage companies, and other financial institutions. Our insurance business faces significant

competition from insurance carriers, reinsurers, third-party administrators, brokers, and other insurance-related companies. Many of our competitors have substantial positions nationally or in the markets in which they operate. Some of our competitors have lower cost structures, substantially lower costs of capital, and are much less reliant on securitization activities, unsecured debt, and other public markets. We face significant competition in most areas including product offerings, rates, pricing and fees, and customer service. If we are unable to compete effectively in the markets in which we operate, our profitability and financial condition could be negatively affected.

The markets for asset and mortgage securitizations and whole-loan sales are competitive, and other issuers and originators could increase the amount of their issuances and sales. In addition, lenders and other investors within those markets often establish limits on their credit exposure to particular issuers, originators, and asset classes, or they may require higher returns to increase the amount of their exposure. Increased issuance by other participants in the market or decisions by investors to limit their credit exposure to (or to require a higher yield for) us or to automotive or mortgage securitizations or whole-loans could negatively affect our ability and that of our subsidiaries to price our securitizations and whole-loan sales at attractive rates. The result would be lower proceeds from these activities and lower profits for our subsidiaries and us.

Our allowance for loan losses may not be adequate to cover actual losses, and we may be required to materially increase our allowance, which may adversely affect our capital, financial condition, and results of operations.

We maintain an allowance for loan losses, which is a reserve established through a provision for loan losses charged to expenses, which represents management's best estimate of probable credit losses that have been incurred within the existing portfolio of loans, all as described in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. The allowance, in the judgment of management, is established to reserve for estimated loan losses and risks inherent in the loan portfolio. The determination of the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses inherently involves a high degree of subjectivity and requires us to make significant estimates of current credit risks using existing qualitative and quantitative information, all of which may undergo material changes. Changes in economic conditions affecting borrowers, new information regarding existing loans, identification of additional problem loans, and other factors, both within and outside of our control, may require an increase in the allowance for loan losses.

Bank regulatory agencies periodically review our allowance for loan losses, as well as our methodology for calculating our allowance for loan losses and may require an increase in the provision for loan losses or the recognition of additional loan charge-offs, based on judgments different than those of management. An increase in the allowance for loan losses results in a decrease in net income and capital and may have a material adverse effect on our capital, financial condition and results of operations.

The protracted period of adverse developments in the mortgage finance and credit markets has adversely affected ResCap's business, liquidity, and its capital position and has raised substantial doubt about ResCap's ability to continue as a going concern.

ResCap has been adversely affected by the events and conditions in the broader mortgage banking industry, most severely but not limited to the domestic nonprime and nonconforming and international mortgage loan markets. Fair market valuations of held-for-sale mortgage loans, MSRs, and securitized interests that continue to be held by ResCap and other assets and liabilities ResCap records at fair value may continue to deteriorate if there continues to be weakness in housing prices or increased severity of delinquencies and defaults of mortgage loans, or should mortgage rates increase. These deteriorating factors previously resulted in higher provision for loan losses on ResCap's held-for-investment mortgage loans and real estate-lending portfolios. As a direct result of these events and conditions, ResCap discontinued new originations in all of its international operations and sold its U.K. and European operations and currently generally only purchases or originates mortgage loans that can be sold in the form of securitizations guaranteed by the GSEs. If the GSEs became unable or unwilling to purchase mortgage loans from ResCap, it would have a materially adverse impact on ResCap's funding and liquidity and on its ability to originate or purchase new mortgage loans.

ResCap is highly leveraged relative to its cash flow and has recognized substantial losses resulting in a significant deterioration in capital. There continues to be a risk that ResCap will not be able to meet its debt service obligations, and/or that it will be in a negative liquidity position in 2012 or beyond. Further, ResCap was in default on certain of its financial covenants as of December 31, 2011 due to insufficient equity levels, and it is possible that further defaults could occur in the future due to insufficient equity, capital, or liquidity. ResCap remains heavily dependent on Ally and its affiliates for funding and capital support, and there can be no assurance that Ally or its affiliates will continue any such support or that Ally will choose to execute any further strategic transactions with respect to ResCap or that any transactions undertaken will be successful.

In light of ResCap's liquidity and capital needs combined with volatile conditions in the marketplace, there is substantial doubt about ResCap's ability to continue as a going concern. If Ally determines to no longer support ResCap's capital or liquidity needs or if ResCap or Ally are unable to successfully execute effective initiatives, it would have a material adverse effect on ResCap's business, results of operations, and financial position.

We have extensive financing and hedging exposures to ResCap, which could be at risk of nonpayment if ResCap were to file for bankruptcy.

We have extensive financing and hedging arrangements in place with ResCap. At December 31, 2011 , we had $2.6 billion in funding arrangements with ResCap. This amount included a $1.0 billion of senior secured credit facilities, which were fully drawn at December 31, 2011. This amount further included a $1.6 billion line of credit consisting of $1.1 billion in secured capacity, of which $235 million was drawn, and $500 million of unsecured capacity. The unsecured portion is only available after the secured portion has been fully drawn. At

December 31, 2011 , all hedging arrangements were fully collateralized. Amounts outstanding under the financing and hedging arrangements fluctuate. If ResCap were to file for bankruptcy, ResCap's repayments of its financing facilities, including those with us, will be subject to bankruptcy proceedings and regulations, or ResCap may be unable to repay its financing facilities. In addition, we would be an unsecured creditor of ResCap to the extent that the proceeds from the sale of our collateral are insufficient to repay ResCap's secured obligations to us. In addition, it is possible that other ResCap creditors would seek to recharacterize our loans to ResCap as equity contributions or to seek equitable subordination of our claims so that the claims of other creditors would have priority over our claims. We may also find it advantageous to provide debtor-in-possession financing to ResCap in a bankruptcy proceeding in order to preserve the value of the collateral ResCap has pledged to us. In addition, should ResCap file for bankruptcy, our investment related to ResCap's equity position would likely be reduced to zero, and creditors of ResCap may attempt to assert claims directly against us for payment of their obligations, which could result in litigation with such creditors.

There is a significant risk that ResCap will not be able to meet its debt service obligations and other funding obligations in the near term.

ResCap expects its liquidity pressures to continue in 2012. ResCap is highly leveraged relative to its cash flow. At December 31, 2011 , ResCap's unrestricted liquidity (cash readily available to cover operating demands from across its business operations) totaled $390 million with cash and cash equivalents totaling $619 million.

ResCap expects that additional and continuing liquidity pressure, which is difficult to forecast with precision, will result from the obligation of its subsidiaries to advance delinquent principal, interest, property taxes, casualty insurance premiums, home equity line advances, and certain other amounts with respect to mortgage loans its subsidiaries service that become delinquent. In addition, ResCap continues to be subject to financial covenants requiring it to maintain minimum consolidated tangible net worth and consolidated liquidity balances. ResCap will attempt to meet these and other liquidity and capital demands through a combination of cash flow from operations and financings, potential asset sales, and other various alternatives. To the extent these sources prove insufficient, ResCap will be dependent on continued support from Ally to the extent Ally agrees to provide such support. Ally currently provides funding and capital support to ResCap through various secured and unsecured facilities, which includes a $500 million unsecured line of credit. The sufficiency of these sources of additional liquidity cannot be assured, and any asset sales, even if they raise sufficient cash to meet ResCap's liquidity needs, may adversely affect its overall profitability and financial condition.

Moreover, even if ResCap is successful in implementing all of the actions described above, its ability to satisfy its liquidity needs and comply with any covenants included in its debt agreements requiring maintenance of minimum cash balances may be affected by additional factors and events (such as interest rate fluctuations and margin calls) that increase ResCap's cash needs making ResCap unable to independently satisfy its near-term liquidity requirements.

Our mortgage subsidiary, ResCap, requires substantial liquidity and capital.

ResCap remains heavily reliant on support from us to meet its liquidity and capital requirements, which includes approximately $2.4 billion in principal amount of indebtedness scheduled to mature in 2012, 2013, and 2014. For example, we made a capital contribution of approximately $197 million to ResCap in January 2012 through forgiveness of intercompany debt to cure a covenant breach by ResCap. In addition, ResCap has commitments to lend up to $1.8 billion under existing home equity lines of credit it has extended to customers. Developments in the market for many types of mortgage products have resulted in reduced liquidity for these assets. As a result, a significant portion of ResCap's assets are relatively illiquid.

Pursuant to an existing contractual arrangement, ResCap is precluded from paying any dividends to us, including additional capital that we may provide in the future.

ResCap employs various economic hedging strategies to mitigate the interest rate and prepayment risk inherent in many of its assets including its mortgage loans held-for-sale portfolio, MSRs, its portfolio of held-for-investment mortgage loans, and interests from securitizations. A significant portion of ResCap's operating cash at any given time may consist of funds delivered to it as credit support by counterparties pursuant to these arrangements. As interest rates change and dependent upon the hedge position, ResCap may need to continue to repay or deliver cash as credit support for these arrangements. If the amount ResCap must repay or deliver is substantial, depending on its liquidity position at that time, ResCap may not be able to pay such amounts as required.

Certain of our mortgage subsidiaries have been, and will likely continue to be, required to repurchase mortgage loans for losses, indemnify the investor for incurred losses, or make the investor whole related to breaches of representations and warranties made in connection with the sale of loans, and face potential legal liability resulting from claims related to the sale of mortgage backed securities.

When our Mortgage Companies sell mortgage loans through whole-loan sales or securitizations, these entities are required to make customary representations and warranties about the loans to the purchaser and/or securitization trust. These representations and warranties relate to, among other things, the ownership of the loan, the validity of the lien securing the loan, the loan's compliance with the criteria for inclusion in the transaction, including compliance with underwriting standards or loan criteria established by the buyer, ability to deliver required documentation, and compliance with applicable laws. In general, the representations and warranties described above may be enforced against the applicable Mortgage Companies at any time unless a sunset provision is in place. Breaches of these representations and warranties have resulted in a requirement that the applicable Mortgage Companies repurchase mortgage loans, indemnify the investor for incurred losses, or make the investor whole. As the mortgage industry continues to experience higher repurchase demands and additional

parties begin to attempt to put back loans, a significant increase in activity beyond that experienced today could occur, resulting in additional future losses at our Mortgage Companies. At December 31, 2011 , our reserve for representation and warranty obligations was $825 million . It is difficult to determine the accuracy of our estimates and assumptions used to determine this reserve. For example, if the law were to develop that disagrees with our interpretation that a claimant must prove that the alleged breach of representations and warranties was caused by the alleged adverse effect on the interest of the claimant, it could significantly impact our determination of the reserve. In addition, if recent court rulings related to monoline litigation that have allowed sampling of loan files instead of a loan-by-loan review to determine if a representations and warranties breach has occurred are followed generally by the courts, private-label securitization investors may view litigation as a more attractive alternative to a loan-by-loan review. As a result of these and other developments, the actual experience at our Mortgage Companies may differ materially from these estimates and assumptions. Refer to Note 31 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further details.

Further, claims related to private-label mortgage-backed securities (MBS) have been brought against Ally and certain of its subsidiaries under federal and state securities laws and contract laws (among other theories), and additional similar claims are likely to be brought in the future. Several securities law cases have been brought by various third-party investors relating to MBS, where investors have alleged misstatements and omissions in registration statements, prospectuses, prospectus supplements, and other documents related to MBS offerings. In addition, there are two cases pending where MBIA Insurance Corporation (MBIA), a monoline bond insurance company, has alleged, among other things, that two of our Mortgage Companies breached their contractual representations and warranties relating to the characteristics of the mortgage loans contained in certain insured MBS offerings. MBIA further alleges that such entities failed to follow certain remedy procedures set forth in the contracts and improperly serviced the mortgage loans. Along with claims of breach of contract, MBIA also alleges fraud. In addition, there are four cases where Financial Guaranty Insurance Company (FGIC) has alleged, among other things, that certain of our mortgage subsidiaries breached their contractual representations and warranties relating to the characteristics of the mortgage loans contained in certain insured MBS offerings. FGIC further alleges that our subsidiaries breached contractual obligations to permit access to loan files and certain books and records. Along with claims of breach of contract, FGIC also alleges fraud in one of the three cases. We expect our Mortgage Companies to receive additional repurchase demands from MBIA and FGIC, the amount of which could be substantial. In addition, litigation from other monoline bond insurance companies is likely. Third-party investors may also bring contractual representation and warranties claims against us. Refer to Note 31 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further details with respect to existing litigation.

Certain of our mortgage subsidiaries received subpoenas in July 2010 from the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), which is the conservator of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The subpoenas relating to Fannie Mae investments have been withdrawn with prejudice. The FHFA indicated that documents provided in response to the remaining subpoenas will enable the FHFA to determine whether they believe issuers of private-label MBS are potentially liable to Freddie Mac for losses they might have incurred. Although Freddie Mac has not brought any representation and warranty claims against us with respect to private label securities subsequent to the settlement, they may well do so in the future. The FHFA has commenced securities and related common law fraud litigation against certain of our mortgage subsidiaries with respect to certain of Freddie Mac's private label securities investments. Refer to Note 31 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

We believe it is reasonably possible that losses at our Mortgage Companies beyond amounts currently reserved for the matters described above could occur, and such losses could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations, financial position, or cash flows. However, based on currently available information, we are unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses above reserves that have been established.

Changes in existing U.S. government-sponsored mortgage programs, restrictions on our access to such programs, or disruptions in the secondary markets in the United States or in other countries in which we operate could adversely affect our profitability and financial condition.

Our ability to generate revenue through mortgage loan sales to institutional investors in the United States depends to a significant degree on programs administered by the GSEs and others that facilitate the issuance of MBS in the secondary market. These GSEs play a powerful role in the residential mortgage industry and we have significant business relationships with them. Proposals have been enacted in the U.S. Congress and are under consideration by various regulatory authorities that would affect the manner in which these GSEs conduct their business to require them to register their stock with the SEC to reduce or limit certain business benefits that they receive from the U.S. government and to limit the size of the mortgage loan portfolios that they may hold. Furthermore, the Obama administration released a report in 2011 that recommended winding down Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We do not know what impact, if any, the report would have on the future of the GSEs. Moreover, the results of the upcoming U.S. presidential election may also have a significant impact on the future of the GSEs. In addition, the GSEs themselves have been negatively affected by recent mortgage market conditions, including conditions that have threatened their access to debt financing. Any discontinuation of, or significant reduction in, the operation of these GSEs could adversely affect our revenues and profitability. Also, any significant adverse change in the level of activity in the secondary market including declines in institutional investors' desire to invest in our mortgage products could materially adversely affect our business.

We are exposed to consumer credit risk, which could adversely affect our profitability and financial condition.

We are subject to credit risk resulting from defaults in payment or performance by customers for our contracts and loans, as well as contracts and loans that are securitized and in which we retain a residual interest. For example, the continued decline in the domestic housing market and the increase in unemployment rates resulted in an increase in delinquency rates related to mortgage loans that ResCap and Ally

Bank either hold or retain an interest in. Furthermore, a weak economic environment, high unemployment rates, and the continued deterioration of the housing market could exert pressure on our consumer automotive finance customers resulting in higher delinquencies, repossessions, and losses. There can be no assurances that our monitoring of our credit risk as it affects the value of these assets and our efforts to mitigate credit risk through our risk-based pricing, appropriate underwriting policies, and loss-mitigation strategies are, or will be, sufficient to prevent a further adverse effect on our profitability and financial condition. In addition, we have begun to increase our used automobile and nonprime automobile financing (nonprime automobile financing). We define nonprime consumer automobile loans as those loans with a FICO score (or an equivalent score) at origination of less than 620. At December 31, 2011 , the carrying value of our North American Automotive Finance Operations (NAO) nonprime consumer automobile loans before allowance for loan losses was $3.8 billion, or approximately 7.1% of our total NAO consumer automobile loans. Of these loans, $51 million were considered nonperforming as they had been placed on nonaccrual status in accordance with internal loan policies. Refer to the Nonaccrual Loans section of Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information. Our International Automotive Finance Operations (IO) also has exposure to loans of higher credit risk with similar characteristics to those of the nonprime loans held by NAO. However, the lack of a consistent external third-party provider of consumer credit score information (like FICO in the United States and Canada) across the international geographies where we operate requires us to use our own internally-developed credit scoring approach to create a similar international comparative. Based on this internal analysis we believe nonprime loans represent less than 10% of our total IO consumer automobile loans and of these loans, less than 5% were considered nonperforming. As we grow our automotive asset portfolio in nonprime automobile financing loans over time, our credit risk may increase. As part of the underwriting process, we rely heavily upon information supplied by third parties. If any of this information is intentionally or negligently misrepresented and the misrepresentation is not detected before completing the transaction, the credit risk associated with the transaction may be increased.

General business and economic conditions may significantly and adversely affect our revenues, profitability, and financial condition.

Our business and earnings are sensitive to general business and economic conditions in the United States and in the markets in which we operate outside the United States. A downturn in economic conditions resulting in increased short and long term interest rates, inflation, fluctuations in the debt capital markets, unemployment rates, consumer and commercial bankruptcy filings, or a decline in the strength of national and local economies and other factors that negatively affect household incomes could decrease demand for our financing and mortgage products and increase mortgage and financing delinquency and losses on our customer and dealer financing operations. We have been negatively affected due to the significant stress in the residential real estate and related capital markets and, in particular, the lack of home price appreciation in many markets in which we lend. Further, a significant and sustained increase in fuel prices could lead to diminished new and used vehicle purchases and negatively affect our automotive finance business.

If the rate of inflation were to increase, or if the debt capital markets or the economies of the United States or our markets outside the United States were to weaken, or if home prices or new and used vehicle purchases experience declines, we could be significantly and adversely affected, and it could become more expensive for us to conduct our business. For example, business and economic conditions that negatively affect household incomes, housing prices, and consumer behavior related to our businesses could decrease (1) the demand for our mortgage loans and new and used vehicle financing and (2) the value of the collateral underlying our portfolio of held-for-investment mortgages and new and used vehicle loans and interests that continue to be held by us, thus further increasing the number of consumers who become delinquent or default on their loans. In addition, the rate of delinquencies, foreclosures, and losses on our loans (especially our nonprime mortgage loans) could be higher during more severe economic slowdowns.

Any sustained period of increased delinquencies, foreclosures, or losses could further harm our ability to sell our mortgage and new and used vehicle loans, the prices we receive for our mortgage and new and used vehicle loans, or the value of our portfolio of mortgage and new and used vehicle loans held-for-investment or interests from our securitizations, which could harm our revenues, profitability, and financial condition. Continued adverse business and economic conditions could affect demand for housing, new and used vehicles, the cost of construction, and other related factors that could harm the revenues and profitability of our business.

In addition, our business and earnings are significantly affected by the fiscal and monetary policies of the U.S. government and its agencies and similar governmental authorities in the markets in which we operate outside the United States. We are particularly affected by the policies of the FRB, which regulates the supply of money and credit in the United States. The FRB's policies influence the new and used vehicle financing market and the size of the mortgage origination market, which significantly affects the earnings of our businesses and the earnings of our business capital activities. The FRB's policies also influence the yield on our interest earning assets and the cost of our interest-bearing liabilities. Changes in those policies are beyond our control and difficult to predict and could adversely affect our revenues, profitability, and financial condition.

The current debt crisis in Europe, the risk that certain countries may default on their sovereign debt, and recent rating agency actions with respect to European countries and the United States and the resulting impact on the financial markets, could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations and financial position.

The current crisis in Europe has created uncertainty with respect to the ability of certain European Union countries to continue to service their sovereign debt obligations. Recently, rating agencies have lowered their ratings on several euro-zone countries. The continuation of the European debt crisis has adversely impacted financial markets and has created substantial volatility and uncertainty, and will likely continue to do so. Risks related to this have had, and are likely to continue to have, a negative impact on global economic activity and the financial markets. In addition, on August 5, 2011, Standard & Poor's Ratings Services lowered its long-term sovereign credit rating on the United States of America to 'AA+' from 'AAA', and the outlook on its long-term rating is negative. The U.S. downgrade, any future

downgrades, as well as the perceived creditworthiness of U.S. government-related obligations, could impact our ability to obtain, and the pricing with respect to, funding that is collateralized by affected instruments and obtained through the secured and unsecured markets. As these conditions persist, our business, results of operation, and financial position could be materially adversely affected.

Acts or threats of terrorism and political or military actions taken by the United States or other governments could adversely affect general economic or industry conditions.

Geopolitical conditions may affect our earnings. Acts or threats of terrorism and political or military actions taken by the United States or other governments in response to terrorism, or similar activity, could adversely affect general economic or industry conditions.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) holds a majority of the outstanding our common stock.

At February 28, 2012 , Treasury held 981,971 shares of common stock, which represents approximately 74% of the voting power of the holders of common stock outstanding for matters requiring a vote of the holders of common stock. In addition, as of the date hereof, Treasury holds 118,750,000 shares of Series F-2 Preferred Stock (which are convertible into shares of common stock in accordance with Ally's certificate of incorporation), with an aggregate liquidation preference of approximately $5.9 billion.

Pursuant to the Amended and Restated Governance Agreement dated May 21, 2009, as of the date hereof, Treasury also has the right to appoint six of the eleven members to our board of directors. As a result of this stock ownership interest and Treasury's right to appoint six directors to our board of directors, Treasury has the ability to exert control, through its power to vote for the election of our directors, over various matters. To the extent Treasury elects to exert such control over us, its interests (as a government entity) may differ from those of our other stockholders and it may influence, through its ability to vote for the election of our directors, matters including:

In particular, Treasury may have a greater interest in promoting U.S. economic growth and jobs than our other stockholders. In the future we may also become subject to new and additional laws and government regulations regarding various aspects of our business as a result of participation in the TARP program and the U.S. government's ownership in our business. These regulations could make it more difficult for us to compete with other companies that are not subject to similar regulations.

The limitations on compensation imposed on us due to our participation in TARP, including the restrictions placed on our compensation by the Special Master for TARP Executive Compensation, may adversely affect our ability to retain and motivate our executives and employees.

Our performance is dependent on the talent and efforts of our management team and employees. As a result of our participation in TARP, the compensation of certain members of our management team and employees is subject to extensive restrictions under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, as amended by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (the ARRA), which was signed into law on February 17, 2009, as implemented by the Interim Final Rule issued by Treasury on June 15, 2009 (the IFR). In addition, due to our level of participation in TARP, pursuant to ARRA and the IFR, the Office of the Special Master for TARP Executive Compensation has the authority to further regulate our compensation arrangements with certain of our executives and employees. In addition, we may become subject to further restrictions under any other future legislation or regulation limiting executive compensation. Many of the restrictions are not limited to our senior executives and affect other employees whose contributions to revenue and performance may be significant. These limitations may leave us unable to create a compensation structure that permits us to retain and motivate certain of our executives and employees or to attract new executives or employees, especially if we are competing against institutions that are not subject to the same restrictions. Any such inability could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Our borrowing costs and access to the unsecured debt capital markets depend significantly on our credit ratings.

The cost and availability of unsecured financing are materially affected by our short- and long-term credit ratings. Each of Standard & Poor's Rating Services; Moody's Investors Service, Inc.; Fitch, Inc.; and Dominion Bond Rating Service rates our debt. Our current ratings as assigned by each of the respective rating agencies are below investment grade, which negatively impacts our access to liquidity and increases our borrowing costs in the unsecured market. Ratings reflect the rating agencies' opinions of our financial strength, operating performance, strategic position, and ability to meet our obligations. On February 2, 2012, Fitch downgraded our senior debt to BB- from BB and changed the outlook to negative. Future downgrades of our credit ratings would increase borrowing costs and further constrain our access to the unsecured debt markets and, as a result, would negatively affect our business. In addition, downgrades of our credit ratings could increase the possibility of additional terms and conditions being added to any new or replacement financing arrangements as well as impact elements of certain existing secured borrowing arrangements.

Agency ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security and may be revised or withdrawn at any time by the issuing organization. Each agency's rating should be evaluated independently of any other agency's rating.

Our profitability and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected if the residual value of off-lease vehicles decrease in the future.

Our expectation of the residual value of a vehicle subject to an automotive lease contract is a critical element used to determine the amount of the lease payments under the contract at the time the customer enters into it. As a result, to the extent the actual residual value of the vehicle, as reflected in the sales proceeds received upon remarketing at lease termination, is less than the expected residual value for the vehicle at lease inception, we incur additional depreciation expense and/or a loss on the lease transaction. General economic conditions, the supply of off-lease and other vehicles to be sold, new vehicle market prices, perceived vehicle quality, overall price and volatility of gasoline or diesel fuel, among other factors, heavily influence used vehicle prices and thus the actual residual value of off-lease vehicles. Consumer confidence levels and the strength of automotive manufacturers and dealers can also influence the used vehicle market. For example, during 2008, sharp declines in demand and used vehicle sale prices adversely affected our remarketing proceeds and financial results.

Vehicle brand images, consumer preference, and vehicle manufacturer marketing programs that influence new and used vehicle markets also influence lease residual values. In addition, our ability to efficiently process and effectively market off-lease vehicles affects the disposal costs and proceeds realized from the vehicle sales. While manufacturers, at times, may provide support for lease residual values including through residual support programs, this support does not in all cases entitle us to full reimbursement for the difference between the remarketing sales proceeds for off-lease vehicles and the residual value specified in the lease contract. Differences between the actual residual values realized on leased vehicles and our expectations of such values at contract inception could have a negative impact on our profitability and financial condition.

Current conditions in the residential mortgage market and housing markets may continue to adversely affect Ally's mortgage business.

The residential mortgage market in the United States and other international markets in which our Mortgage operations conduct, or previously conducted, business have experienced a variety of difficulties and changed economic conditions that adversely affected our mortgage business' results of operations and financial condition. Delinquencies and losses with respect to our Legacy Portfolio and Other segment's nonprime mortgage loans increased significantly. Housing prices in many parts of the United States, the United Kingdom, and other international markets also declined or stopped appreciating after extended periods of significant appreciation. In addition, the liquidity provided to the mortgage sector had been significantly reduced. This liquidity reduction combined with our decision to reduce our mortgage business' exposure to the nonprime mortgage market caused its nonprime mortgage production to decline. Similar trends have emerged beyond the nonprime sector, especially at the lower end of the prime credit quality scale, and have had a similar effect on our mortgage business' related liquidity needs and businesses. These trends have resulted in significant write-downs to our Legacy Portfolio and Other's held-for-sale mortgage loans and trading securities portfolios and additions to its allowance for loan losses for its held-for-investment mortgage loans and warehouse-lending receivables portfolios. A continuation of these conditions may continue to adversely affect our mortgage business' financial condition and results of operations.

Moreover, the continued deterioration of the U.S. housing market and decline in home prices since 2008 in many U.S. markets, which may continue, could result in increased delinquencies or defaults on the mortgage assets ResCap owns and services as well as those mortgage assets owned by Ally Bank. Further, loans that our Mortgage operations historically made based on limited credit or income documentation also increase the likelihood of future increases in delinquencies or defaults on mortgage loans. An increase in delinquencies or defaults will result in a higher level of credit losses and credit-related expenses and increased liquidity requirements to fund servicing advances, all of which in turn will reduce revenues and profits of our mortgage business. Higher credit losses and credit-related expenses also could adversely affect our financial condition.

Significant indemnification payments or contract, lease, or loan repurchase activity of retail contracts or leases or mortgage loans could harm our profitability and financial condition.

We have repurchase obligations in our capacity as servicer in securitizations and whole-loan sales. If a servicer breaches a representation, warranty, or servicing covenant with respect to an automotive receivable or mortgage loan, the servicer may be required by the servicing provisions to repurchase that asset from the purchaser or otherwise compensate one or more classes of investors for losses caused by the breach. If the frequency at which repurchases of assets or other payments occurs increases substantially from its present rate, the result could be a material adverse effect on our financial condition, liquidity, and results of operations.

In connection with its servicing of securitized mortgage loans, ResCap is subject to contractual caps on the percentage of mortgage loans it is permitted to modify in any securitized pool. The financial crisis has resulted in dramatic increases in the volume of delinquent mortgage loans over the past three years. In an effort to achieve the best net present value recovery for the securitization trust, ResCap increased the volume of modifications of distressed mortgage loans to assist homeowners and avoid liquidating properties in a collapsing and opaque housing market. In certain securitization transactions, ResCap has exceeded the applicable contractual modification cap. The securitization documents provide that the contractual caps can be raised or eliminated with the concurrence of each rating agency rating the transaction. For certain transactions with respect to which loan modifications have exceeded the contractual caps, the rating agencies have concurred in raising or eliminating the caps, but they have not consented in connection with other such transactions. ResCap will continue to seek their concurrence in connection with other transactions as it deems appropriate and will suspend modifications in excess of applicable caps pending receipt of such consent or investor approval to amend the servicing contracts. An investor in a specific mortgage security class might claim that modifications in excess of the applicable cap amounted to a material failure of ResCap to perform its servicing obligations and that the investor was damaged as a result. Such claims, if successful, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition,

liquidity, and results of operations.

Our earnings may decrease because of decreases or increases in interest rates.

We are subject to risks from decreasing interest rates, particularly given the Federal Reserve's recent steps to keep interest rates low in an attempt to improve economic growth. For example, a significant decrease in interest rates could increase the rate at which mortgages are prepaid, which could require us to write down the value of our retained interests and MSRs. Moreover, if prepayments are greater than expected, the cash we receive over the life of our held-for-investment mortgage loans and our retained interests would be reduced. Higher-than-expected prepayments could also reduce the value of our MSRs and, to the extent the borrower does not refinance with us, the size of our servicing portfolio. Therefore, any such changes in interest rates could harm our revenues, profitability, and financial condition.

Rising interest rates could also have an adverse impact on our business. For example, rising interest rates:

Throughout 2009 and 2010 the credit risk embedded in the balance sheet was reduced as a result of asset sales, asset markdowns, and a change in the mix of our loan assets as the legacy portfolios were replaced with assets underwritten to tighter credit standards. This reduction in risk has resulted in a mix of assets outstanding on the balance sheet as of December 31, 2011 , with a lower yielding profile than the prior-year period. During this same period of time we experienced a significant decline in our consumer automotive operating lease portfolio that was realizing higher yields from remarketing gains due to historically high used vehicle prices. The combination of the above factors resulted in a decline in asset yields more than the decline in liability rates, and therefore the decline in the net interest spread on the balance sheet throughout 2010 and into 2011.

Our hedging strategies may not be successful in mitigating our risks associated with changes in interest rates and could affect our profitability and financial condition as could our failure to comply with hedge accounting principles and interpretations.

We employ various economic hedging strategies to mitigate the interest rate and prepayment risk inherent in many of our assets and liabilities. Our hedging strategies rely on assumptions and projections regarding our assets, liabilities, and general market factors. If these assumptions and projections prove to be incorrect or our hedges do not adequately mitigate the impact of changes in interest rates or prepayment speeds, we may experience volatility in our earnings that could adversely affect our profitability and financial condition. In addition, we may not be able to find market participants that are willing to act as our hedging counterparties, which could have an adverse effect on the success of our hedging strategies.

In addition, hedge accounting in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP) requires the application of significant subjective judgments to a body of accounting concepts that is complex and for which the interpretations have continued to evolve within the accounting profession and among the standard-setting bodies.

A failure of or interruption in, as well as, security risks of the communications and information systems on which we rely to conduct our business could adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

We rely heavily upon communications and information systems to conduct our business. Any failure or interruption of our information systems or the third-party information systems on which we rely as a result of inadequate or failed processes or systems, human errors, or external events could cause underwriting or other delays and could result in fewer applications being received, slower processing of applications, and reduced efficiency in servicing. In addition, our communication and information systems may present security risks, and could be susceptible to hacking or identity theft. The occurrence of any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We use estimates and assumptions in determining the fair value of certain of our assets in determining lease residual values and in determining our reserves for insurance losses and loss adjustment expenses. If our estimates or assumptions prove to be incorrect, our cash flow, profitability, financial condition, and business prospects could be materially and adversely affected.

We use estimates and various assumptions in determining the fair value of many of our assets, including certain held-for-investment and held-for-sale loans for which we elected fair value accounting, retained interests from securitizations of loans and contracts, MSRs, and other investments, which do not have an established market value or are not publicly traded. We also use estimates and assumptions in determining the residual values of leased vehicles. In addition, we use estimates and assumptions in determining our reserves for insurance losses and loss adjustment expenses which represent the accumulation of estimates for both reported losses and those incurred, but not

reported, including claims adjustment expenses relating to direct insurance and assumed reinsurance agreements. For further discussion related to estimates and assumptions, see Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Critical Accounting Estimates. It is difficult to determine the accuracy of our estimates and assumptions, and our actual experience may differ materially from these estimates and assumptions. A material difference between our estimates and assumptions and our actual experience may adversely affect our cash flow, profitability, financial condition, and business prospects.

Our business outside the United States exposes us to additional risks that may cause our revenues and profitability to decline.

We conduct a significant portion of our business outside the United States exposing us to risks such as the following:

The effects of these risks may, individually or in the aggregate, adversely affect our revenues and profitability.

Our business could be adversely affected by changes in foreign-currency exchange rates.

We are exposed to risks related to the effects of changes in foreign-currency exchange rates. Changes in currency exchange rates can have a significant impact on our earnings from international operations as a result of foreign-currency-translation adjustments. While we carefully monitor and attempt to manage our exposure to fluctuation in currency exchange rates through foreign-currency hedging activities, these types of changes could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Fluctuations in valuation of investment securities or significant fluctuations in investment market prices could negatively affect revenues.

Investment market prices in general are subject to fluctuation. Consequently, the amount realized in the subsequent sale of an investment may significantly differ from the reported market value and could negatively affect our revenues. Additionally, negative fluctuations in the value of available-for-sale investment securities could result in unrealized losses recorded in equity. Fluctuation in the market price of a security may result from perceived changes in the underlying economic characteristics of the investee, the relative price of alternative investments, national and international events, and general market conditions.

A loss of contractual servicing rights could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, liquidity, and results of operations.

We are the servicer for all of the receivables we have acquired or originated and transferred to other parties in securitizations and whole-loan sales of automotive receivables. Our mortgage subsidiaries service the mortgage loans we have securitized, and we service the majority of the mortgage loans we have sold in whole-loan sales. In each case, we are paid a fee for our services, which fees in the aggregate constitute a substantial revenue stream for us. In each case, we are subject to the risk of termination under the circumstances specified in the applicable servicing provisions.

In most securitizations and whole-loan sales, the owner of the receivables or mortgage loans will be entitled to declare a servicer default and terminate the servicer upon the occurrence of specified events. These events typically include a bankruptcy of the servicer, a material failure by the servicer to perform its obligations, and a failure by the servicer to turn over funds on the required basis. The termination of these servicing rights, were it to occur, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, liquidity, and results of operations and those of our mortgage subsidiaries.

Changes in accounting standards issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) could adversely affect our reported revenues, profitability, and financial condition.

Our financial statements are subject to the application of GAAP, which are periodically revised and/or expanded. The application of accounting principles is also subject to varying interpretations over time. Accordingly, we are required to adopt new or revised accounting standards or comply with revised interpretations that are issued from time to time by various parties, including accounting standard setters and those who interpret the standards, such as the FASB and the SEC, banking regulators, and our independent registered public accounting firm. Those changes could adversely affect our reported revenues, profitability, or financial condition.

Recently, the FASB has proposed new financial accounting standards, and has many active projects underway, that could materially affect our reported revenues, profitability, or financial condition. These proposed standards or projects include the potential for significant changes in the accounting for financial instruments (including loans, deposits, and debt) and the accounting for leases, among others. It is possible that any changes, if enacted, could adversely affect our reported revenues, profitability, or financial condition.

The soundness of other financial institutions could adversely affect us.

Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty, or other relationships. We have exposure to different counterparties, and we routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, investment banks, and other institutions. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of default of our counterparty.

Our inability to maintain relationships with dealers could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

Our business depends on the continuation of our relationships with our customers, particularly the automotive dealers with whom we do business. If we are not able to maintain existing relationships with key automotive dealers or if we are not able to develop new relationships for any reason, including if we are not able to provide services on a timely basis or offer products that meet the needs of the dealers, our business, results of operations, and financial condition could be adversely affected.

Adverse economic conditions or changes in laws in states in which we have customer concentrations may negatively affect our operating results and financial condition.

We are exposed to consumer loan portfolio concentration in California and Texas and consumer mortgage loan concentration in California, Florida, and Michigan. Factors adversely affecting the economies and applicable laws in these states could have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial position.

None.

Our principal corporate offices are located in Detroit, Michigan; New York, New York; and Charlotte, North Carolina. In Detroit, we lease approximately 247,000 square feet from GM pursuant to a lease agreement expiring in November 2016. In New York, we lease approximately 35,000 square feet of office space under a lease that expires in July 2015. In Charlotte, we lease approximately 133,000 square feet of office space under a lease expiring in December 2015.

The primary offices for our Global Automotive Services operations are located in Detroit, Michigan, and Southfield, Michigan. The primary office for our North American Automotive Finance operations is located in Detroit, Michigan, and is included in the totals referenced above. Our International Automotive Finance operations leased space in 22 countries totaling approximately 375,000 square feet. The largest location is in the United Kingdom with office space under lease of approximately 76,000 square feet. The primary office for our U.S. Insurance operations is located in Southfield, Michigan, where we lease approximately 71,000 square feet of office space under leases expiring in April 2016. Our Insurance operations also have significant leased offices in Mexico.

The primary offices for our Mortgage operations are located in Fort Washington, Pennsylvania, and Minneapolis, Minnesota. In Fort Washington, we lease approximately 450,000 square feet of office space pursuant to a lease that expires in November 2019. In Minneapolis, we lease approximately 60,000 square feet of office space expiring in March 2014. Our Mortgage operations also have significant leased offices in Texas and California.

In addition to the properties described above, we lease additional space throughout the United States and in other countries in which we have significant operations, including Canada, Germany, and Brazil. We believe our facilities are adequate for us to conduct our present business activities.

Refer to Note 31 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion related to our legal proceedings.

Not applicable.

We currently have a total of 2,021,384 shares of common stock authorized for issuance, and at February 28, 2012 , a total of 1,330,970  shares of common stock were issued and outstanding. Further, we have reserved 690,272 of the remaining authorized but unissued shares of common stock for issuance in connection with any future conversion of Ally's Fixed Rate Cumulative Mandatorily Convertible Preferred Stock, Series F-2 (Series F-2 Preferred Stock). Our common stock is not registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and there is no established trading market for the shares. At February 28, 2012 , there were 159 holders of common stock reflected on our stock register.

Subject to certain exceptions, for so long as any shares of the Series F-2 Preferred Stock are outstanding and owned by the U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury), Ally and its subsidiaries are generally prohibited from paying certain dividends or distributions on, or redeeming, repurchasing or acquiring, any common stock without consent of Treasury. Ally is also generally prohibited from making any dividends or distributions on, or redeeming, repurchasing, or acquiring, its common stock unless all accrued and unpaid dividends for all past dividend periods on the Series F-2 Preferred Stock are fully paid. In addition, pursuant to the terms of Ally's Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series G, Ally is not permitted to make any Restricted Payments on or prior to January 1, 2014, and may only make Restricted Payments after January 1, 2014, if certain conditions are satisfied. For this purpose, Restricted Payments includes dividends or distribution of assets on any share of common stock and any redemption, purchase, or other acquisition of any shares of common stock, subject to certain exceptions.

For a discussion of preferred stock currently outstanding, refer to Note 20 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

Ally did not have any unregistered sales of its equity securities in fiscal year 2011 , except as previously disclosed on Form 8-K.

The selected historical financial information set forth below should be read in conjunction with Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, our Consolidated Financial Statements, and the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. The historical financial information presented may not be indicative of our future performance.

The following table presents selected statement of income data.

The following table presents selected balance sheet and ratio data.

The following Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation (MD&A), as well as other portions of this Form 10-K, may contain certain statements that constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the federal securities laws. The words "expect," "anticipate," "estimate," "forecast," "initiative," "objective," "plan," "goal," "project," "outlook," "priorities," "target," "intend," "evaluate," "pursue," "seek," "may," "would," "could," "should," "believe," "potential," "continue," or the negatives of any of these words or similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. All statements herein, other than statements of historical fact, including without limitation statements about future events and financial performance, are forward-looking statements that involve certain risks and uncertainties. You should not place undue reliance on any forward-looking statement and should consider all uncertainties and risks discussed in this report, including those under Item 1A, Risk Factors, as well as those provided in any subsequent SEC filings. Forward-looking statements apply only as of the date they are made, and Ally undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances that arise after the date the forward-looking statement are made.

Ally Financial Inc. (formerly GMAC Inc.) is a leading, independent, globally diversified, financial services firm with $184 billion in assets. Founded in 1919, we are a leading automotive financial services company with over 90 years experience providing a broad array of financial products and services to automotive dealers and their customers. We are also one of the largest residential mortgage companies in the United States. We became a bank holding company on December 24, 2008, under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended. Our banking subsidiary, Ally Bank, is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Ally Financial Inc. and a leading franchise in the growing direct (online and telephonic) banking market, with $39.6 billion of deposits at December 31, 2011 . Ally Bank's assets and operating results are divided between our Global Automotive Services and Mortgage operations based on its underlying business activities.

Global Automotive Services

Our Global Automotive Services operations offer a wide range of financial services and insurance products to over 21,000 automotive dealers and their retail customers. We have deep dealer relationships that have been built over our 90-year history and our dealer-focused business model makes us a preferred automotive finance company for many automotive dealers. Our broad set of product offerings and customer-focused marketing programs differentiate Ally in the marketplace and help drive higher product penetration in our dealer relationships. Our ability to generate attractive automotive assets is driven by our global platform and scale, strong relationships with automotive dealers, a full suite of dealer financial products, automotive loan-servicing capabilities, dealer-based incentive programs, and superior customer service.

Our automotive financial services include providing retail installment sales contracts, loans, and leases, offering term loans to dealers, financing dealer floorplans and other lines of credit to dealers, fleet leasing, and vehicle remarketing services. We also offer vehicle service contracts and commercial insurance primarily covering dealers' wholesale vehicle inventories in the United States and internationally. We are a leading provider of vehicle service contracts, and maintenance coverages.

We have a longstanding relationship with General Motors Company (GM) and have developed strong relationships directly with GM-franchised dealers as well as gained extensive operating experience with GM-franchised dealers relative to other automotive finance companies. Since GM sold a majority interest in us in 2006, we have transformed ourselves to a market-driven independent automotive finance company. We are the preferred financing provider to GM and Chrysler Group LLC (Chrysler) on incentivized retail loans. We have further diversified our customer base by establishing agreements to become preferred financing providers with other manufacturers including Fiat (for North America), Thor Industries (recreational vehicles), Maserati (for the United States and Canada), MG Motor UK Ltd (in the United Kingdom), The Vehicle Production Group LLC (for the United States), and SsangYoung Motor UK Ltd (in the United Kingdom). Currently, a significant portion of our business is originated through GM- and Chrysler-franchised dealers and their customers.

During 2009 and much of 2010 our primary emphasis was on originating loans of higher credit tier borrowers. For this reason, our current operating results continue to reflect higher credit quality, lower yielding loans with lower credit loss experience. Ally however seeks to be a meaningful lender to a wide spectrum of borrowers. In 2010 we enhanced our risk management practices and efforts on risk-based pricing. We have gradually increased volumes in lower credit tiers in 2011. We have also selectively re-entered the leasing market with a more targeted product approach since late 2009.

We plan to continue to increase the proportion of our non-GM and Chrysler business, as we focus on maintaining and growing our dealer-customer base through our full suite of products, our dealer relationships, the scale of our platform, and our dealer-based incentive programs. We also expect growth in consumer applications to moderate to some degree given the significant growth of consumer applications experienced in 2011 following the addition of a new credit aggregation network in DealerTrack, which provides access to a more expansive universe of dealers.

Our international automotive-lending operations currently originate loans in 15 countries with a focus on operations in five core markets: Germany, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Mexico, and China through our joint venture, GMAC-SAIC Automotive Finance Company Limited (GMAC-SAIC).

Our Insurance operations offer both consumer finance and insurance products sold primarily through the automotive dealer channel and

commercial insurance products sold to dealers. As part of our focus on offering dealers a broad range of consumer finance and insurance products, we provide vehicle service contracts, and maintenance coverage. We also underwrite selected commercial insurance coverage, which primarily insures dealers' wholesale vehicle inventory in the United States. Additionally, our Insurance operations offer Guaranteed Automobile Protection (GAP) products in the United States and personal automobile insurance coverage in certain countries outside of the United States.

Mortgage

We report our Mortgage operations as two distinct segments: (1) Origination and Servicing operations and (2) Legacy Portfolio and Other operations.

Our Origination and Servicing operations is one of the leading originators of conforming and government-insured residential mortgage loans in the United States. We are one of the largest residential mortgage loan servicers in the United States and we provide collateralized lines of credit to other mortgage originators, which we refer to as warehouse lending. We finance our mortgage loan originations primarily in Ally Bank. We sell the conforming mortgages we originate or purchase in sales that take the form of securitizations guaranteed by the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) or the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac), and we sell government-insured mortgage loans we originate or purchase in securitizations guaranteed by the Government National Mortgage Association (Ginnie Mae) or through whole-loan sales. We also selectively originate prime jumbo mortgage loans in the United States.

Our Legacy Portfolio and Other operations primarily consist of loans originated prior to January 1, 2009, and includes noncore business activities including discontinued operations, portfolios in runoff, and cash held in the Residential Capital, LLC (ResCap) legal entity. These activities, all of which we have discontinued, include, among other things: lending to real estate developers and homebuilders in the United States and the United Kingdom; purchasing, selling and securitizing nonconforming residential mortgage loans (with the exception of U.S. prime jumbo mortgage loans) in both the United States and internationally; and certain conforming origination channels closed in 2008 and our mortgage reinsurance business.

We re-aligned our business model to focus on our Origination and Servicing operations in response to market developments and based on our ongoing strategic review of the mortgage business. We have substantially eliminated nonconforming U.S. and international loan production (with the exception of U.S. prime jumbo mortgage loans) and currently have correspondent, direct, and warehouse lending as our primary channels of production as opposed to high cost retail branch offices. On November 2, 2011, we announced that in order to proactively address changes in the mortgage industry as a whole, we will be taking immediate action to reduce the focus on the correspondent mortgage lending channel; however, we will maintain correspondent relationships with key customers. This reduction will allow us to shift our focus and origination capacity to our retail and direct network channel. As a result, we believe our exposure to mortgage servicing rights (MSR) asset volatility will decrease over time, and we will be better positioned to comply with Basel III requirements. This change is also expected to result in a decrease in total origination levels in 2012 as compared to 2011. After consideration of our experience to-date and the shift in focus to the higher margin retail and direct channels, overall profitability is not expected to be significantly impacted if we are able to increase our retail and direct production volume due to government refinance programs. We will continue to evaluate this business in the future and further reductions in the correspondent channel could occur. Our origination platforms deliver products that have liquid market distribution and sales outlets and are structured to respond quickly as market conditions change. We have also consolidated our servicing operations to streamline our costs and align ourselves to capture future opportunities as mortgage servicing markets reform.

Additionally, we have implemented several strategic initiatives to reduce the risk related to our Legacy Portfolio and Other operations. These actions have included, but are not limited to, restructuring of ResCap debt in 2008, moving mortgage loans held-for-investment to held-for sale in 2009 while recording appropriate market value adjustments, the sale of legacy business platforms including our international operations in the United Kingdom and continental Europe, and other targeted asset dispositions including domestic and international mortgage loans and commercial finance receivables and loans. The consolidated assets of our Legacy Portfolio and Other operations have decreased to $10.9 billion at December 31, 2011 , from $32.9 billion at December 31, 2008, due to these actions.

Mortgage loan origination volume is driven by the volume of home sales, prevailing interest rates, and our underwriting standards. Our mortgage origination volume in 2011 was primarily driven by refinancings that were influenced by historically low interest rates. Our focus in 2012 and future periods will be on sustaining our position as a leading servicer of conforming and government-insured residential mortgage loans. Additionally, we plan to continue to manage and reduce mortgage business risk.

On February 9, 2012, we reached an agreement in principle with the federal government and 49 state attorneys general with respect to certain foreclosure-related matters, which resulted in our Mortgage operations recording a $230 million charge in the fourth quarter of 2011. This charge reflects a $40 million reduction in the foreclosure related expense accrual that was previously announced on February 2, 2012, as part of our 2011 year-end earnings release. The charge increased our accrued expenses and other liabilities by $223 million and increased our allowance for servicer advances within other assets by $7 million on our Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2011. ResCap recorded $212 million of the $230 million penalty.

ResCap is required to maintain consolidated tangible net worth, as defined, of $250 million at the end of each month, under the terms of certain of its credit facilities. For this purpose, consolidated tangible net worth is defined as ResCap's consolidated equity excluding intangible assets. As a result of the fourth quarter charge, ResCap's consolidated tangible net worth was $92 million at December 31, 2011, and was therefore temporarily reduced to below $250 million. This was, however, immediately remediated by Ally through a capital contribution of $197 million, which was provided through forgiveness of intercompany debt during January 2012. Notwithstanding the immediate cure, the

temporary reduction in tangible net worth resulted in a covenant breach in certain of ResCap's credit facilities as of December 31, 2011. ResCap has obtained waivers from all applic able lenders with respect to this covenant breach and an acknowledgment letter from a GSE indicating they would take no immediate action as a result of the breach. In the fut ure Ally may choose not to remediate any further breaches of covenants. There can be no assurances for further capital support.

Corporate and Other

Corporate and Other primarily consists of our centralized corporate treasury and deposit gathering activities, such as management of the cash and corporate investment securities portfolios, short- and long-term debt, retail and brokered deposit liabilities, derivative instruments, the amortization of the discount associated with new debt issuances and bond exchanges, most notably from the December 2008 bond exchange, and the residual impacts of our corporate funds-transfer pricing (FTP) and treasury asset liability management (ALM) activities. Corporate and Other also includes our Commercial Finance Group, certain equity investments, and reclassifications and eliminations between the reportable operating segments.

Loss from continuing operations before income tax expense for Corporate and Other was $1.9 billion and $2.6 billion for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 , respectively. These losses were primarily driven by net financing losses of $1.7 billion and $2.1 billion for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 , respectively. The net financing losses at Corporate and Other are largely driven by the amortization of original issue discount, primarily related to our 2008 bond exchange, and the net financing loss that results from our FTP methodology.

The net financing revenue of our Global Automotive Services and Mortgage operations includes the results of an FTP process that insulates these operations from interest rate volatility by matching assets and liabilities with similar interest rate sensitivity and maturity characteristics. The FTP process assigns charge rates to the assets and credit rates to the liabilities within our Global Automotive Services and Mortgage operations, respectively, based on anticipated maturity and a benchmark index plus an assumed credit spread. The assumed credit spread represents the cost of funds for each asset class based on a blend of funding channels available to the enterprise, including unsecured and secured capital markets, private funding facilities, and deposits. In addition, a risk-based methodology, which incorporates each operations credit, market, and operational risk components is used to allocate equity to these operations.

The negative residual impact of our FTP methodology that is realized in Corporate and Other primarily represents the cost of certain funding and liquidity management activities not allocated through our FTP methodology. Most notably, the net interest expense of maintaining our liquidity and investment portfolios, the value of which was approximately $22.8 billion at December 31, 2011 , is maintained in Corporate and Other and not allocated to the businesses through our FTP methodology. In addition, other unassigned funding costs, including the results of our ALM activities, are also not allocated to the businesses.

Ally Bank

Ally Bank, our direct banking platform, provides our Automotive Finance and Mortgage operations with a stable and low-cost funding source and facilitates prudent asset growth. Our focus is on building a stable deposit base driven by our compelling brand and strong value proposition. Ally Bank raises deposits directly from customers through a direct banking channel via the internet and by telephone. We have become a leader in direct banking with our recognizable brand, accessible 24/7 customer service, and competitively priced products.

Ally Bank offers a full spectrum of deposit product offerings including certificates of deposits, savings accounts, money market accounts, IRA deposit products, and an online checking product. In addition, brokered deposits are obtained through third-party intermediaries. At December 31, 2011, Ally Bank had $39.6 billion of deposits, including $27.7 billion of retail deposits. The growth of our retail base from $7.2 billion at the end of 2008 to $27.7 billion at December 31, 2011, has enabled us to reduce our cost of funds during that period. The growth in deposits is primarily attributable to our retail deposits while our brokered deposits have remained at historical levels. Strong retention rates, reflecting the strength of the franchise, have materially contributed to our growth in retail deposits.

Funding and Liquidity

Our funding strategy largely focuses on the development of diversified funding sources across a global investor base to meet all of our liquidity needs throughout different market cycles, including periods of financial distress. Prior to becoming a bank holding company, our funding largely came from the following sources.

The diversity of our funding sources enhances funding flexibility, limits dependence on any one source and results in a more cost-effective funding strategy over the long term. Throughout 2008 and 2009, the global credit markets experienced extraordinary levels of volatility and stress. As a result, access by market participants, including Ally, to the capital markets was significantly constrained and borrowing costs increased. In response, numerous government programs were established aimed at improving the liquidity position of U.S. financial services firms. After converting to a bank holding company in late 2008, we participated in several of the programs, including

Temporary Liquidity Guaranty Program (TLGP), Term Auction Facility, and Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility. Our diversification strategy and participation in these programs helped us to maintain sufficient liquidity during this period of financial distress to meet all maturing unsecured debt obligations and to continue our lending and operating activities.

During 2009, as part of our overall transformation from an independent financial services company to a bank holding company, we took actions to further diversify and develop more stable funding sources and, in particular, embarked upon initiatives to grow our consumer deposit-taking capabilities within Ally Bank. In addition, we began distinguishing our liquidity management strategies between bank funding and nonbank funding.

Maximizing bank funding continues to be the cornerstone of our long-term liquidity strategy. We have made significant progress in migrating assets to Ally Bank and growing our retail deposit base since becoming a bank holding company. Retail deposits provide a low-cost source of funds that are less sensitive to interest rate changes, market volatility or changes in our credit ratings than other funding sources. At December 31, 2011 , deposit liabilities totaled $45.1 billion , which constituted 31 % of our total funding. This compares to just 14% at December 31, 2008.

In addition to building a larger deposit base, we continue to remain active in the securitization markets to finance our Ally Bank automotive loan portfolios. During 2011 , we issued $9.3 billion in secured funding backed by retail automotive loans and leases as well as dealer floorplan automotive loans of Ally Bank. Continued structural efficiencies in securitizations combined with improving capital market conditions have resulted in a reduction in the cost of funds achieved through secured funding transactions, making them a very attractive source of funding. Additionally, for retail loans and leases, the term structure of the transaction locks in funding for a specified pool of loans and leases for the life of the underlying asset. Once a pool of retail automobile loans are selected and placed into a securitization, the underlying assets and corresponding debt amortize simultaneously resulting in committed and matched funding for the life of the asset. We manage the execution risk arising from secured funding by maintaining a diverse investor base and maintaining committed secured facilities.

As we have shifted our focus to migrating assets to Ally Bank and growing our bank funding capabilities, our reliance on parent company liquidity has consequently been reduced. Funding sources at the parent company generally consist of longer-term unsecured debt, private credit facilities, and asset-backed securitizations. Historically, the unsecured term debt markets were a key source of long-term financing for us. However, given our ratings profile and market environment, during the second half of 2007 and throughout 2008 and 2009 we chose not to target transactions in the unsecured term debt markets due to the expected high market rates and alternative funding sources. In 2010, we re-entered the unsecured term debt market with several issuances that year. In the first half of 2011, we issued over $3.7 billion of unsecured debt globally through several issuances. However, in the second half of 2011, we chose not to issue unsecured term debt given the extreme market volatility and expected high cost of issuance. At December 31, 2011 , we had $12.0 billion and $2.3 billion of outstanding unsecured long-term debt with maturities in 2012 and 2013 , respectively. To fund these maturities, we expect to use existing pre-issued liquidity combined with maintaining an opportunistic approach to new issuance.

The strategies outlined above have allowed us to build and maintain a conservative liquidity position. Total available liquidity at the parent company was $26.9 billion , and Ally Bank had $10.0 billion of available liquidity at December 31, 2011 . For discussion purposes within the funding and liquidity section, parent company includes our consolidated operations less our Insurance operations, ResCap, and Ally Bank. At the same time, these strategies have also resulted in a cost of funds improvement of approximately 178 basis points since the first quarter of 2009. Looking forward, given our enhanced liquidity and capital position and generally improved credit ratings, we expect that our cost of funds will continue to improve over time.

Credit Strategy

We are a full spectrum automotive finance lender with most of our automotive loan originations underwritten within the prime-lending markets as we continue to prudently expand in nonprime markets. Our Mortgage Origination and Servicing operations primarily focus on selling conforming mortgages we originate or purchase in sales that take the form of securitizations guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac and sell government-insured mortgage loans we originate or purchase in securitizations guaranteed by Ginnie Mae (collectively, the Government-sponsored Enterprises or GSEs).

During 2011, we continued to recognize improvement in our credit risk profile as a result of proactive credit risk initiatives that were taken in 2009 and 2010 and modest improvement in the overall economic environment. We discontinued and sold multiple nonstrategic operations, mainly in our international businesses, including our commercial construction portfolio. Within our Automotive Finance operations, we exited certain underperforming dealer relationships. Within our Mortgage operations, we have taken action to reduce the focus on the correspondent mortgage-lending channel; however, we will maintain correspondent relationships with key customers.

During the year ended December 31, 2011 , the credit performance of our portfolios improved overall as we benefited from lower frequency and severity of losses within our automotive portfolios and stabilization of asset quality trends within our mortgage portfolios. Nonperforming loans and charge-offs declined, and our provision for loan losses decreased to $219 million in 2011 from $442 million in 2010 .

We continue to see signs of economic stabilization in the housing and vehicle markets, although our total credit portfolio will continue to be affected by sustained levels of high unemployment and continued uncertainty in the housing market.

Representation and Warranty Obligations

We continue to make progress in mitigating repurchase reserve exposure through ongoing settlement discussions with key counterparties and ongoing maintenance of an appropriate reserve for representation and warranty obligations associated with certain mortgage companies (Mortgage Companies) within our Mortgage operations. We seek to manage the risk of repurchase or indemnification and the associated credit exposure through our underwriting and quality assurance practices and by servicing mortgage loans to meet investor standards. We believe that, in general, the longer a loan performs prior to default the less likely it is that an alleged breach of representation and warranty will be found to have a material and adverse impact on the loan's performance. Our representation and warranty expense decreased to $324 million in 2011 from $670 million in 2010 . The repurchase reserve of $825 million at December 31, 2011 , primarily represents exposure unrelated to the GSEs, as we have reached agreements with both Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, subject to certain exclusions, limiting the remaining exposure of the applicable Mortgage Companies to these counterparties.

Outstanding claims during 2011 have remained relatively constant with GSE claim activity declining compared to 2010 while monoline and other claims activity have increased. Increased claims from monolines reflect activity still under review. Typically, the obligations under representation and warranties provided to monolines and other whole-loan investors are not as comprehensive as those to the GSEs. As such, we believe a significant portion of these claims are ineligible for repurchase or indemnification. As a result of market developments over the past several years, repurchase demand behavior has changed significantly. GSEs are more likely to submit claims for loans at any point in their life cycle. Investors are more likely to submit claims for loans that become delinquent at any time while a loan is outstanding or when a loan incurs a loss.

Bank Holding Company and Treasury's Investments

During 2008, and continuing into 2009, the credit, capital, and mortgage markets became increasingly disrupted. This disruption led to severe reductions in liquidity and adversely affected our capital position. As a result, Ally sought approval to become a bank holding company to obtain access to capital at a lower cost to remain competitive in our markets. On December 24, 2008, Ally and IB Finance Holding Company, LLC, the holding company of Ally Bank, were each approved as bank holding companies under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. At the same time, Ally Bank converted from a Utah-chartered industrial bank into a Utah-chartered commercial nonmember bank. Ally Bank as an FDIC-insured depository institution, is subject to the supervision and examination of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Utah Department of Financial Institutions (UDFI). Ally Financial Inc. is subject to the supervision and examination of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FRB). We are required to comply with regulatory risk-based and leverage capital requirements, as well as various safety and soundness standards established by the FRB, and are subject to certain statutory restrictions concerning the types of assets or securities that we may own and the activities in which we may engage.

As one of the conditions to becoming a bank holding company, the FRB required several actions of Ally, including meeting a minimum amount of regulatory capital. In order to meet this requirement, Ally took several actions, the most significant of which were the execution of private debt exchanges and cash tender offers to purchase and/or exchange certain of our and our subsidiaries outstanding notes held by eligible holders for a combination of cash, newly issued notes of Ally, and in the case of certain of the offers, preferred stock. The transactions resulted in an extinguishment of all notes tendered or exchanged into the offers and the new notes and stock were recorded at fair value on the issue date. This resulted in a pretax gain on extinguishment of debt of $11.5 billion and a corresponding increase to our capital levels. The gain included a $5.4 billion original issue discount representing the difference between the face value and the fair value of the new notes and is being amortized as interest expense over the term of the new notes. In addition, the U.S. Department of Treasury (Treasury) made an initial investment in Ally on December 29, 2008, pursuant to the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) with a $5.0 billion purchase of Ally perpetual preferred stock with a total liquidation preference of $5.25 billion (Perpetual Preferred Stock).

On May 21, 2009, Treasury made a second investment of $7.5 billion in exchange for Ally's mandatorily convertible preferred stock with a total liquidation preference of approximately $7.9 billion (Old MCP), which included a $4 billion investment to support our agreement with Chrysler to provide automotive financing to Chrysler dealers and customers and a $3.5 billion investment related to the FRB's Supervisory Capital Assessment Program requirements. Shortly after this second investment, on May 29, 2009, Treasury acquired 35.36% of Ally common stock when it exercised its right to acquire 190,921 shares of Ally common stock from GM as repayment for an $884 million loan that Treasury had previously provided to GM.

On December 30, 2009, we entered into another series of transactions with Treasury under TARP, pursuant to which Treasury (i) converted 60 million shares of Old MCP (with a total liquidation preference of $3.0 billion) into 259,200 shares of additional Ally common stock; (ii) invested $1.25 billion in new Ally mandatorily convertible preferred stock with a total liquidation preference of approximately $1.3 billion (the New MCP); and (iii) invested $2.54 billion in new trust preferred securities with a total liquidation preference of approximately $2.7 billion (Trust Preferred Securities). At this time, Treasury also exchanged all of its Perpetual Preferred Stock and remaining Old MCP (following the conversion of Old MCP described above) into additional New MCP.

On December 30, 2010, Treasury converted 110 million shares of New MCP (with a total liquidation preference of approximately $5.5 billion) into 531,850 shares of additional Ally common stock. The conversion reduces dividends by approximately $500 million per year, assists with capital preservation, and is expected to improve profitability with a lower cost of funds.

On March 1, 2011, the Declaration of Trust and certain other documents related to the Trust Preferred Securities were amended, and all of the outstanding Trust Preferred Securities held by Treasury were designated 8.125% Fixed Rate/Floating Rate Trust Preferred Securities, Series 2. On March 7, 2011, Treasury sold 100% of the Series 2 Trust Preferred Securities in an offering registered with the SEC. Ally did not receive any proceeds from the sale.

Following the transactions described above, Treasury currently holds 73.8% of Ally common stock and approximately $5.9 billion in New MCP. As a result of its current common stock investment, Treasury is entitled to appoint six of the eleven total members of the Ally Board of Directors.

The following table summarizes the investments in Ally made by Treasury in 2008 and 2009.

The following table summarizes Treasury's investment in Ally at December 31, 2011 .

During 2009, 2010, and 2011, we committed to sell certain operations of our International Automotive Finance operations, Insurance operations, Mortgage Legacy Portfolio and Other operations, and Commercial Finance Group, and have classified certain of these operations as discontinued. For all periods presented, all of the operating results for these operations have been removed from continuing operations. Refer to Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for more details.

Our primary lines of business are Global Automotive Services and Mortgage. The following table summarizes the operating results excluding discontinued operations of each line of business. Operating results for each of the lines of business are more fully described in the MD&A sections that follow.

n/m = not meaningful

The following table summarizes our consolidated operating results excluding discontinued operations for the periods shown. Refer to the operating segment sections of the MD&A that follows for a more complete discussion of operating results by line of business.

n/m = not meaningful

2011 Compared to 2010

We incurred a net loss from continuing operations of $112 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to net income from continuing operations of $986 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 . Continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2011 , was unfavorably impacted by a decrease in net servicing income due to a drop in interest rates and increased market volatility, lower gains on the sale of loans, and a $230 million expense related to penalties imposed by certain regulators and other governmental agencies in connection with mortgage foreclosure-related matters. Partially offsetting the decrease was lower representation and warranty expense and a lower provision for loan losses.

Total financing revenue and other interest income decreased by 13% for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to 2010 . Operating lease revenue and the related depreciation expense at our Automotive Finance operations declined due to a lower average operating lease portfolio balance as a result of our decision in late 2008 to significantly curtail leasing. Depreciation expense was also impacted by lower lease remarketing gains resulting from lower lease termination volumes. The decrease in our Mortgage Legacy Portfolio and Other operations resulted from a decline in average asset levels due to loan sales, the deconsolidation of previously on-balance sheet securitizations, and portfolio runoff. Partially offsetting the decrease was an increase in consumer financing revenue at our North American Automotive operations driven primarily by an increase in consumer asset levels related to strong loan origination volume during 2010 and 2011 resulting primarily from higher automotive industry sales, increased used vehicle financing volume, and higher on-balance sheet retention.

Interest expense decreased 7% for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to 2010 , primarily as a result of a change in our funding mix with an increased amount of funding coming from deposit liabilities as well as favorable trends in the securitization markets.

Net servicing income was $569 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to $1.1 billion in 2010 . The decrease was

primarily due to a drop in interest rates and increased market volatility compared to favorable valuation adjustments in 2010. Additionally, 2011 includes a valuation adjustment that estimates the impact of higher servicing costs related to enhanced foreclosure procedures, establishment of single point of contact, and other processes to comply with the Consent Order.

Insurance premiums and service revenue earned decreased 10% for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to 2010 . The decrease was primarily driven by the sale of certain international insurance operations during the fourth quarter of 2010 and lower earnings from our U.S. vehicle service contracts written between 2007 and 2009 due to lower domestic vehicle sales volume.

Gain on mortgage and automotive loans decreased 63% for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to 2010 . The decrease was primarily due to lower margins on mortgage loan sales, a decrease in mortgage loan production, lower whole-loan mortgage sales and mortgage loan resolutions in 2011, the absence of the 2010 gain on the deconsolidation of an on-balance sheet securitization, and the expiration of our automotive forward flow agreements during the fourth quarter of 2010.

We incurred a loss on extinguishment of debt of $64 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to a loss of $123 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 . The activity in all periods related to the extinguishment of certain Ally debt, which included $50 million of accelerated amortization of original issue discount for the 2011, compared to $101 million in 2010.

Other gain on investments was $294 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to $504 million in 2010 . The decrease was primarily due to lower realized investment gains on our Insurance operations investment portfolio.

Other income, net of losses, increased 40% for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to 2010 . The increase during 2011 was primarily due to the positive impact of a $121 million gain on the early settlement of a loss holdback provision related to certain historical automotive whole-loan forward flow agreements and a favorable change in the fair value option election adjustment.

The provision for loan losses was $219 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to $442 million in 2010 . The decrease during 2011 reflected improved credit quality of the overall portfolio and the continued runoff and improved loss performance of our Nuvell nonprime automotive financing portfolio.

Insurance losses and loss adjustment expenses decreased 13% for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to  2010 . The decrease was primarily due to lower frequency and severity experienced within our international Insurance business and the sale of certain international operations during the fourth quarter of 2010. The decrease was partially offset by higher weather-related losses in the United States on our dealer inventory insurance products.

Other operating expenses decreased 5% for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to 2010 . The decrease was primarily related to lower mortgage representation and warranty reserve expense of $346 million, lower insurance commissions expense, and lower vehicle remarketing and repossession expense. The decrease was partially offset by a $230 million expense related to penalties imposed by certain regulators and other governmental agencies in connection with mortgage foreclosure-related matters.

We recognized consolidated income tax expense of $179 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to $153 million in 2010 . We have a full valuation allowance against our domestic net deferred tax assets and certain international net deferred tax assets. Accordingly, tax expense is driven by foreign income taxes on pretax profits within our foreign operations and U.S. state income taxes in states where profitable subsidiaries are required to file separately from other loss companies in the group or where the use of prior losses is restricted. The increase in income tax expense for 2011, compared to 2010, was driven by increased pretax income in our foreign operations, partially offset by a $101 million reversal of valuation allowance in Canada related to modifications to the legal structure of our Canadian operations.

2010 Compared to 2009

We earned net income from continuing operations of $986 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to a net loss from continuing operations of $7.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009 . Continuing operations for the year ended December 31, 2010 , were favorably impacted by our strategic mortgage actions taken during 2009 to stabilize our consumer and commercial portfolios that resulted in a significant decrease in our provision for loan losses and our continued focus on cost reduction resulted in lower operating expenses. The year ended December 31, 2010, was also favorably impacted by an increase in net servicing income; higher gains on the sale of loans; and lower impairments on equity investments, lot option projects, model homes, and foreclosed real estate.

Total financing revenue and other interest income decreased by 12% for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to 2009 . Our International Automotive Finance operations experienced lower consumer and commercial asset levels due to adverse business conditions in Europe and the runoff of wind-down portfolios in certain international countries as we shifted our focus to five core international markets: Germany, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Mexico, and China through our joint venture. A decline in asset levels in our Mortgage Legacy Portfolio and Other operations resulted from asset sales and portfolio runoff. Operating lease revenue (along with the related depreciation expense) at our North American Automotive Finance operations decreased as a result of a net decline in the size of our operating lease portfolio due to our decision in late 2008 to significantly curtail leasing. The decrease was partially offset by lease portfolio remarketing gains due to strong used vehicle prices and higher remarketing volume as well as an increase in consumer and commercial financing revenue related to the addition of non-GM automotive financing business.

Interest expense decreased 6% for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to 2009 . Interest expense decreased as a result of a

change in our funding mix with an increased amount of funding coming from deposit liabilities as well as favorable trends in the securitization markets.

Net servicing income was $1.1 billion for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to $363 million in 2009 . The increase was primarily due to projected cash flow improvements related to slower prepayment speeds as well as higher Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) loss mitigation incentive fees compared to prior year unfavorable hedge performance with respect to mortgage servicing rights.

Insurance premiums and service revenue earned decreased 6% for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to 2009 . The decrease was primarily driven by lower earnings from our U.S. vehicle service contracts due to a decrease in domestic written premiums related to lower vehicle sales volume during the period 2007 to 2009. The decrease was partially offset by increased volume in our international operations.

Gain on mortgage and automotive loans increased 58% for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to 2009 . The increase was primarily related to unfavorable valuation adjustments taken during 2009 on our held-for-sale automobile loan portfolios, higher gains on mortgage whole-loan sales and securitizations in 2010 compared to 2009, higher gains on mortgage loan resolutions in 2010, and the recognition of a gain on the deconsolidation of an on-balance sheet securitization. The increase was partially offset by gains on the sale of wholesale automotive financing receivables during 2009 as there were no off-balance sheet wholesale funding transactions during 2010.

We incurred a loss on extinguishment of debt of $123 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to a gain of $665 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 . The activity in all periods related to the extinguishment of certain Ally debt that for the year ended December 31, 2010, included $101 million of accelerated amortization of original issue discount.

Other gain on investments was $504 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to $162 million in 2009 . The increase was primarily due to higher realized investment gains driven by market repositioning and the sale of our tax-exempt securities portfolio. During the year ended December 31, 2009, we recognized other-than-temporary impairments of $55 million.

Other income, net of losses, increased 183% for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to 2009 . The improvement in 2010 was primarily related to the absence of loan origination income deferral due to the fair value option election for our held-for-sale loans during the third quarter of 2009 and the impact of significant impairments recognized in 2009. In 2009, we recorded impairments on equity investments, lot option projects, model homes, and an $87 million fair value impairment upon the transfer of our resort finance portfolio from held-for-sale to held-for-investment. Also in 2010, we recognized gains on the sale of foreclosed real estate compared to losses and impairments in 2009.

The provision for loan losses was $442 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to $5.6 billion in 2009 . The Mortgage Legacy Portfolio and Other provision decreased $4.1 billion from the prior year due to an improved asset mix as a result of the strategic actions taken during the fourth quarter of 2009 to write-down and reclassify certain legacy mortgage loans from held-for-investment to held-for-sale. The decrease in provision was also driven by the continued runoff and improved loss performance of our Nuvell nonprime automotive financing portfolio.

Insurance losses and loss adjustment expenses decreased 17 % for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to  2009 . The decrease was primarily driven by lower loss experience in our Mortgage Legacy Portfolio and Other operations' captive reinsurance portfolio.

Other operating expenses decreased 27% for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to 2009 , reflecting our continued expense reduction efforts. The improvements were primarily due to lower mortgage representation and warranty expenses, reduced professional service expenses, lower technology and communications expense, lower full-service leasing vehicle maintenance costs, lower insurance commissions, and lower advertising and marketing expenses for the year ended December 31, 2010.

Management focuses on efficiency ratio as an important measure to assess the performance of our operations. Throughout 2010, expense reduction was a strategic objective of management as we continued to focus on increasing operational efficiency by decreasing expenses as well as streamlining our operations through the disposition or wind-down of non-core businesses and related legacy infrastructure. We remain focused on efforts to control costs to support overall profitability while still investing in key customer-facing areas critical to our core franchises. Additionally, advertising and marketing expenses decreased in 2010 as compared to 2009. These reductions largely reflect higher expenses incurred in 2009 to establish the new Ally brand. Going-forward our advertising and marketing dollars will primarily be directed to customers and initiatives that we believe support our growth strategy.

We recognized consolidated income tax expense of $153 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to $74 million in 2009 . The increase was driven primarily by foreign taxes on higher pretax profits not subject to valuation allowance and U.S. state income taxes in states where profitable subsidiaries are required to file separately from other loss companies in the group or where the use of prior year losses is restricted.

Results for Global Automotive Services are presented by reportable segment, which includes our North American Automotive Finance operations, our International Automotive Finance operations, and our Insurance operations.

North American Automotive Finance Operations

Results of Operations

The following table summarizes the operating results of our North American Automotive Finance operations for the periods shown. North American Automotive Finance operations consist of automotive financing in the United States and Canada and include the automotive activities of Ally Bank and ResMor Trust. The amounts presented are before the elimination of balances and transactions with our other reportable segments.

n/m = not meaningful

2011 Compared to 2010

Our North American Automotive Finance operations earned income before income tax expense of $2.1 billion  for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to $2.3 billion  for the year ended December 31, 2010 . Results for the year ended December 31, 2011 , were primarily driven by less favorable remarketing results in our operating lease portfolio, due primarily to lower lease terminations and the absence of gains on the sale of automotive loans due to the expiration of our forward flow agreements during the fourth quarter of 2010. These declines were partially offset by increased consumer financing revenue driven by strong loan origination volume related primarily to improvement in automotive industry sales, the growth in used automobile financings, and a lower loan loss provision due to an improved credit mix and improved consumer credit performance.

Consumer financing revenue increased 21 % for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to 2010 , due to an increase in consumer asset levels primarily related to strong loan origination volume during 2010 and 2011 resulting primarily from higher automotive industry

sales, increased used vehicle financing volume, and higher on-balance sheet retention. Additionally, we continue to prudently expand our nonprime origination volume and introduce innovative finance products to the marketplace. The increase in consumer revenue was partially offset by lower yields as a result of an increasingly competitive market environment and a change in the consumer asset mix, including the runoff of the higher-yielding Nuvell nonprime automotive financing portfolio.

Loans held-for-sale financing revenue decreased $107 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to 2010 , due to the expiration of forward flow agreements during the fourth quarter of 2010. Subsequent to the expiration of these agreements, consumer loan originations have largely been retained on-balance sheet utilizing deposit funding from Ally Bank and on-balance sheet securitization transactions.

Operating lease revenue decreased 36% for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to 2010 . Operating lease revenue and depreciation expense declined due to a lower average operating lease portfolio balance. Depreciation expense was also impacted by lower remarketing gains due primarily to a decline in lease termination volume. In 2008 and 2009, we significantly curtailed our lease product offerings in the United States and Canada. During the latter half of 2009, we re-entered the U.S. leasing market with targeted lease product offerings and have continued to expand lease volume since that time.

Servicing fee income decreased $65 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to 2010 , due to lower levels of off-balance sheet retail serviced assets driven by a reduction of new whole-loan sales subsequent to the expiration of our forward flow agreements in the fourth quarter of 2010.

Net gain on automotive loans decreased $201 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to 2010 , primarily due to the expiration of our forward flow agreements during the fourth quarter of 2010. In prior years, we have opportunistically utilized whole-loan sales as part of our funding strategy; however, during 2011, we have primarily utilized deposit funding and on-balance sheet funding transactions.

The provision for loan losses was $ 93 million  for the year ended December 31, 2011 , compared to $286 million in 2010 . The decrease was primarily due to improved credit quality that drove improved loss performance in the consumer loan portfolio, continued runoff of our Nuvell nonprime consumer portfolio, and continued strength in the used vehicle market, partially offset by continued growth in the consumer loan portfolio.

2010 Compared to 2009

Our North American Automotive Finance operations earned income before income tax expense of $2.3 billion  for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to $1.6 billion  for the year ended December 31, 2009 . Results for the year ended December 31, 2010 , were favorably impacted by increased loan origination volume related to improved economic conditions, the growth of our non-GM consumer and commercial automotive financing business, and favorable remarketing results, which reflected continued strength in the used vehicle market.

Consumer financing revenue (combined with interest income on consumer loans held-for-sale) increased 15% during the year ended December 31, 2010 , primarily due to an increase in consumer loan origination volume as a result of improved economic conditions and increased volume from non-GM channels. Additionally, consumer asset levels increased due to the consolidation of consumer loans included in securitization transactions that were previously classified as off-balance sheet. Refer to Note 11 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding the consolidation of these assets. The increase was partially offset by a change in the consumer asset mix including the runoff of the higher-yielding Nuvell nonprime automotive financing portfolio.

Commercial revenue increased 25% , compared to the year ended December 31, 2009 , primarily due to an increase in dealer wholesale funding driven by improved economic conditions, the growth of non-GM wholesale floorplan business, and the recognition of all wholesale funding transactions on-balance sheet in 2010 compared to certain transactions that were off-balance sheet in 2009 .

Operating lease revenue (along with the related depreciation expense) decreased 12% for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to 2009 , primarily due to a decline in the size of our operating lease portfolio resulting from our decision in late 2008 to significantly curtail leasing. This decision was based on the significant decline in used vehicle prices that resulted in increasing residual losses during 2008 and an impairment of our lease portfolio. During the latter half of 2009, we selectively re-entered the U.S. leasing market with more targeted lease product offerings. As a result, runoff of the legacy portfolio exceeded new origination volume. The decrease in operating lease revenue was largely offset by an associated decline in depreciation expense, which was also favorably impacted by remarketing gains as a result of continued strength in the used vehicle market and higher remarketing volume.

Other interest income decreased 45% for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to 2009 , primarily due to a change in funding mix including lower levels of off-balance sheet securitizations.

Net gain on automotive loans increased 13% for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to 2009 . The increase was primarily related to higher levels of retail whole-loan sales in 2010 , higher gains on the sale of loans during 2010 , and unfavorable valuation adjustments taken during 2009 on the held-for-sale portfolio. The increase was partially offset by higher gains on the sale of wholesale receivables during 2009 as there were no off-balance sheet wholesale funding transactions during 2010 .

Other income decreased 28% for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to 2009 . The decrease was primarily due to unfavorable swap mark-to-market activity related to the held-for-sale loan portfolio in 2010 .

The provision for loan losses was $286 million  for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to $611 million  in 2009 . The decrease was primarily driven by the continued runoff of our Nuvell portfolio and improved loss performance in the consumer loan portfolio reflecting improved pricing in the used vehicle market and higher credit quality of more recent originations.

Noninterest expense decreased 13% for the year ended December 31, 2010 , compared to 2009 . The decrease was primarily due to lower compensation and benefits expense primarily related to lower employee headcount resulting from rightsizing the cost structure with business volumes along with further productivity improvements, unfavorable foreign-currency movements during the year ended December 31, 2009 , and lower IT and professional services costs due to continued focus on cost reduction.

International Automotive Finance Operations

Results of Operations