Our unfunded lending commitments primarily consist of credit card lines, loan commitments to customers of our Credit Card, Commercial Banking and Consumer Banking businesses, as well as standby and commercial letters of credit. These commitments, other than credit card lines and certain other unconditionally cancellable lines of credit, are legally binding conditional agreements that have fixed expirations or termination dates and specified interest rates and purposes. The contractual amount of these commitments represents the maximum possible credit risk to us should the counterparty draw upon the commitment. We generally manage the potential risk of unfunded lending commitments by limiting the total amount of arrangements, monitoring the size and maturity structure of these portfolios and applying the same credit standards for all of our credit activities.

For unused credit card lines, we have not experienced and do not anticipate that all of our customers will access their entire available line at any given point in time. Commitments to extend credit other than credit card lines generally require customers to maintain certain credit standards. Collateral requirements and loan-to-value (“LTV”) ratios are the same as those for funded transactions and are established based on management’s credit assessment of the customer. These commitments may expire without being drawn upon; therefore, the total commitment amount does not necessarily represent future funding requirements.

We also issue letters of credit, such as financial standby, performance standby and commercial letters of credit, to meet the financing needs of our customers. Standby letters of credit are conditional commitments issued by us to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party in a borrowing arrangement. Commercial letters of credit are short-term commitments issued primarily to facilitate trade finance activities for customers and are generally collateralized by the goods being shipped to the customer. These collateral requirements are similar to those for funded transactions and are established based on management’s credit assessment of the customer. Management conducts regular reviews of all outstanding letters of credit and the results of these reviews are considered in assessing the adequacy of reserves for unfunded lending commitments.


	Contractual Amount				Carrying Value
(Dollars in millions)	September 30, 2025		December 31, 2024		September 30, 2025		December 31, 2024
Credit card lines	$	675,646	$	411,603	N/A		N/A
Other loan commitments(1)	46,774		45,145		$	71	$	73
Standby letters of credit and commercial letters of credit(2)	1,380		1,306		29		30
Total unfunded lending commitments	$	723,800	$	458,054	$	100	$	103

__________

Within our Commercial Banking business, we originate multifamily commercial real estate loans with the intent to sell them to the GSEs. We enter into loss sharing agreements with the GSEs upon the sale of these originated loans. Beginning January 1, 2020, we elected the fair value option on new loss sharing agreements entered into. Unrealized gains and losses are recorded in other non-interest income in our consolidated statements of income. For those loss sharing agreements entered into as of and prior to December 31, 2019, we amortize the liability recorded at inception into non-interest income as we are released from risk of having to make a payment and record our estimate of expected credit losses each period through the provision for credit losses in our consolidated statements of income. The liability recognized on our consolidated balance sheets for these loss sharing agreements was $170 million and $143 million as of September 30, 2025 and December 31, 2024, respectively. See “Note 5—Allowance for Credit Losses and Reserve for Unfunded Lending Commitments” for information related to our credit card partnership loss sharing arrangements.

Diners Club and/or DFS Services LLC (on behalf of the PULSE Network) have entered into contractual relationships with certain international merchants, international ATM acquirers and international payment networks to retain counterparty exposure arising from failures of third parties to perform their financial payment or settlement obligations.

The maximum potential amount of future payments related to such contingent obligations is dependent upon the transaction volume processed between the time a potential counterparty defaults on its settlement and the time at which the Company disables the settlement of any further transactions for the defaulting party. The Company has certain contractual remedies to offset these counterparty settlement exposures, however, there is no limitation on the maximum amount the Company may be liable to pay. The actual amount of the potential exposure cannot be quantified as the Company cannot determine whether particular counterparties will fail to meet their settlement obligations. Counterparty settlement guarantees were not material for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2025. The Company did not record a contingent liability in the consolidated financial statements as of September 30, 2025.

The Company operates the Discover Network, issues payment cards and permits third parties to issue payment cards. The Company is contingently liable for certain transactions processed on the Discover Network in the event of a dispute between the payment card customer and a merchant. The contingent liability arises if the disputed transaction involves a merchant or merchant acquirer with whom the Discover Network has a direct relationship. If a dispute is resolved in the customer's favor, the Discover Network will credit or refund the disputed amount to the Discover Network card issuer, who in turn credits its customer's account. The Discover Network will then charge back the disputed amount of the payment card transaction to the merchant or merchant acquirer, where permitted by the applicable agreement, to seek recovery of amounts already paid to the merchant for payment card transactions. If the Discover Network is unable to collect the amount subject to dispute from the merchant or merchant acquirer, the Discover Network will bear the loss for the amount credited or refunded to the customer.

The maximum potential amount of obligations of the Discover Network arising from such contingent obligations is estimated to be the portion of the total Discover Network transaction volume processed to date for which timely and valid disputes may be raised under applicable law and relevant issuer and customer agreements. There is no limitation on the maximum amount the Company may be liable to pay to issuers. However, the Company believes that such amount is not representative of the Company's actual potential loss exposure based on the Company’s historical experience. The actual amount of the potential exposure cannot be quantified as the Company cannot determine whether the current or cumulative transaction volumes may include or result in disputed transactions.

In December 2020, Discover entered into a consent order with the CFPB related to certain private student loan servicing practices (the “CFPB Order”). As part of the CFPB Order, Discover implemented a redress and compliance plan and paid a civil monetary penalty. Although Discover sold its student loan portfolio and ceased servicing student loans prior to the closing of the Transaction, the CFPB Order by its terms remains in effect until December 2030 for issues that occurred prior to the sale and transfer of servicing for the student loan portfolio.

On July 19, 2023, Discover disclosed that it had incorrectly classified certain credit cards into its highest merchant and merchant acquirer pricing tier (the “Card Product Misclassification”). On April 18, 2025, Discover and DFS Services LLC entered into a consent order with the Federal Reserve (the “Federal Reserve Order”) in connection with the Card Product Misclassification relating to, among other things, board governance, risk management and internal controls and requiring a civil money penalty, which was paid prior to the closing of the Transaction. Capital One and CONA have committed to satisfy the obligations of the Federal Reserve Order.

In addition, as a condition of the OCC’s approval of CONA’s application to acquire Discover Bank, CONA was required to provide a plan for supervisory non-objection, which detailed effective and sustainable corrective action and timelines to address the underlying root causes of any outstanding enforcement actions against Discover Bank and plans for remediation of harm, including the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) April 2025 orders relating to Card Product Misclassification, in which Discover Bank agreed to pay restitution of at least $1.2 billion to adversely affected merchants, merchant acquirers and other intermediaries and a civil money penalty. On September 15, 2025, CONA submitted the required plan to the OCC and the condition was terminated.

In accordance with the current accounting standards for loss contingencies, we establish reserves for legal and regulatory related matters that arise from the ordinary course of our business activities when it is probable that a loss associated with a claim or proceeding has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. None of the amounts we currently have recorded individually or in the aggregate are considered to be material to our financial condition. Litigation claims and proceedings of all types are subject to many uncertain factors that generally cannot be predicted with assurance.

We are defendants or respondents in a number of evolving legal and regulatory matters. For certain matters, we are able to estimate reasonably possible losses above existing reserves, and for other matters, such an estimate is not possible at this time. Management’s current estimate of the reasonably possible future losses above our reserves for legal and regulatory matters as of September 30, 2025 is up to approximately $300 million. Our reserve and reasonably possible loss estimates involve considerable judgment and reflect that there is significant uncertainty regarding numerous factors that may impact the ultimate loss levels. Notwithstanding our attempt to estimate a reasonably possible range of loss beyond our current accrual levels for some legal and regulatory matters based on current information, it is possible that actual future losses will exceed both the current accrual level and reasonably possible losses disclosed here. Given the inherent uncertainties involved in these matters and the very large or indeterminate damages sought in some of these, there is significant uncertainty as to the ultimate liability we may incur from these legal and regulatory matters and an adverse outcome in one or more of these matters could be material to our results of operations or cash flows for any particular reporting period.

Discover and certain of its subsidiaries entered into a settlement agreement to resolve putative class actions filed on behalf of merchants allegedly affected by the Card Product Misclassification. The court granted preliminary approval of the settlement on July 30, 2025. The class action settlement and court-approved distribution of restitution will be the primary means through which restitution for the Card Product Misclassification is provided to affected parties, including to satisfy the restitution obligations under the FDIC and Federal Reserve consent orders, which are discussed in more detail above.

Discover was also named as a defendant in a putative class action on behalf of shareholders alleging securities and other claims based on the Card Product Misclassification, among other subjects. On March 31, 2025, the court dismissed the putative shareholder class action without prejudice, and on May 14, 2025 plaintiffs moved for leave to file an amended complaint. Discover was also subject to an SEC investigation into the Card Product Misclassification matter. We are cooperating with the investigation.

In 2005, a putative class of retail merchants filed antitrust lawsuits against Mastercard and Visa and several issuing banks, including Capital One, seeking both injunctive relief and monetary damages for an alleged conspiracy by defendants to fix the level of interchange fees. The Visa and Mastercard payment networks and issuing banks entered into settlement and judgment sharing agreements allocating the liabilities of any judgment or settlement arising from all interchange-related cases.

The lawsuits were consolidated before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York for certain purposes and were settled in 2012. The class settlement, however, was invalidated by the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in June 2016, and the suit was bifurcated into separate class actions seeking injunctive and monetary relief, respectively. In addition, numerous merchant groups opted out of the 2012 settlement.

The monetary relief class action settled for $5.5 billion and was approved by the District Court in December 2019. The Second Circuit affirmed the settlement in March 2023, and it is final. Some of the merchants that opted out of the monetary relief class have brought cases, and some of those cases have settled and some remain pending. Visa created a litigation escrow account following its initial public offering of stock in 2008 that funds the portion of these settlements attributable to Visa-allocated transactions. Any settlement amounts based on Mastercard-allocated transactions that have not already been paid are reflected in our reserves. Visa and Mastercard reached a settlement with the injunctive relief class and filed a motion for preliminary approval, which was denied by the District Court in June 2024. The parties will continue to litigate unless a settlement is reached and approved.

On July 29, 2019, we announced that on March 22 and 23, 2019 an outside individual gained unauthorized access to our systems. This individual obtained certain types of personal information relating to people who had applied for our credit card products and to our credit card customers (the “2019 Cybersecurity Incident”). As a result of the 2019 Cybersecurity Incident, we have been subject to numerous legal proceedings and other inquiries and could be the subject of additional proceedings and inquiries in the future.

We are named as a defendant in 4 putative consumer class action cases in Canadian courts alleging harm from the 2019 Cybersecurity Incident and seeking various remedies, including monetary and injunctive relief. The lawsuits allege breach of contract, negligence, violations of various privacy laws and a variety of other legal causes of action. In the second quarter of 2022, a trial court in British Columbia preliminarily certified a class of all impacted Canadian consumers except those in Quebec. The preliminary certification decision in British Columbia was appealed, with both parties contesting portions of the ruling. On July 4, 2024, the British Columbia Court of Appeal denied both parties’ appeals. In the third quarter of 2023, a trial court in Quebec preliminarily authorized a class of all impacted consumers in Quebec. This decision was also appealed and, on February 25, 2025, the Quebec Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s ruling. The final two putative class actions, both of which are pending in Alberta, are continuing in parallel, but currently remain at a preliminary stage.

On July 10, 2023, we were sued in a putative class action in the Eastern District of Virginia by savings account holders alleging breach of contract and a variety of other causes of action relating to our introduction of a new savings account product with a higher interest rate than existing savings account products (“Savings Account Litigation”). Since the original suit, we have also been sued in six similar putative class actions in federal courts in California, Illinois, Ohio, Virginia, New Jersey and New York. On March 20, 2024, we filed with the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation a motion to consolidate and transfer related actions to the Eastern District of Virginia. In June 2024, the Judicial Panel granted the motion and transferred the related actions to the Eastern District of Virginia. Plaintiffs filed a consolidated complaint on July 1, 2024, and the court set a trial date in July 2025. In November 2024, the court denied our motion to dismiss. In April 2025, the parties reached an agreement to settle the case and, in June 2025, the court granted preliminary approval of the settlement. The settlement fund is reflected in our reserves. On September 14, 2025, the New York Attorney General, on behalf of itself and 17 other state attorneys general, filed an amicus brief opposing the class action settlement. The court has scheduled a final approval hearing on the settlement on November 6, 2025.

On May 14, 2025, the New York Attorney General sued Capital One in the Southern District of New York alleging a variety of causes of action under New York and federal law based on factual allegations similar to those raised in the Multidistrict Litigation pending in the Eastern District of Virginia. On August 7, 2025, the case was transferred to the Eastern District of Virginia. Capital One filed a motion to dismiss on August 29, 2025, and the motion is now fully briefed and awaiting a ruling from the court.

In addition, we are commonly subject to various pending and threatened legal actions relating to the conduct of our normal business activities. In the opinion of management, the ultimate aggregate liability, if any, arising out of all such other pending or threatened legal actions is not expected to be material to our consolidated financial position or our results of operations.

On November 16, 2023, the FDIC finalized a rule to implement a special assessment to recover the loss to the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) arising from the protection of uninsured depositors in connection with the systemic risk determination announced on March 12, 2023, following the closures of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank. In December 2023, the FDIC provided notification that it would be collecting the special assessment at an annual rate of approximately 13.4 bps over eight quarterly collection periods, beginning with the first quarter of 2024 with the first payment due on June 28, 2024. In September 2025, the FDIC provided notification that the collection period will be extended an additional one quarter beyond the initial eight quarterly collection periods, at a lower rate. The special assessment base is equal to an insured depository institution’s estimated uninsured deposits reported on its Consolidated Reports of Condition and Income as of December 31, 2022 (“2022 Call Report”), adjusted to exclude the first $5 billion of uninsured deposits. We recognized $289 million in operating expense in the fourth quarter of 2023 associated with the special assessment based on our 2022 Call Report, which was revised and refiled during 2023. As a result of updates from the FDIC related to our portion of the FDIC’s estimate of relevant DIF losses, we have recognized $317 million of operating expenses related to the special assessment as of September 30, 2025.

On July 8, 2025, the FDIC invoiced CONA for additional special assessment fees and interest and asserted that CONA underreported its estimated uninsured deposits on the 2022 Call Report. CONA disagrees with the FDIC’s special assessment calculation. On September 10, 2025, CONA filed suit against the FDIC in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia seeking a declaratory judgment that CONA does not owe the disputed portion of the FDIC’s special assessment. While we cannot predict the outcome of this dispute with the FDIC, we estimate that the amount of reasonably possible additional special assessment fees above our existing accrual is approximately $200 million. CONA has deposited collateral satisfactory to the FDIC related to the disputed additional assessment amounts that have been invoiced to date. The deposited collateral will remain in custody with a third party bank pending resolution of the dispute.