Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2013
Commitments And Contingencies [Abstract]
Commitments And Contingencies	17. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Legal and Regulatory Proceedings The Company was named in litigation commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on June 29, 2012, under the caption U.S. Bank National Association v. Institutional Financial Markets, Inc. The plaintiff, U.S. Bank, alleges breach of contract respecting certain fees allegedly owing to U.S. Bank, as Trustee, in connection with the issuance of trust preferred securities, seeking damages and a declaration that the Company must make certain future fee payments. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint in lieu of an answer on October 26, 2012. U.S. Bank filed its response to the motion on November 26, 2012. On July 19, 2013, the court entered a Memorandum and Order denying the Company’s motion to dismiss. The Company filed its answer to the Complaint on August 19, 2013. The Company intends to defend the action vigorously. The ultimate amount of any loss incurred by the Company in this matter is uncertain. The Company cannot currently estimate the likelihood it will suffer a loss greater than the amounts accrued for as of September 30, 2013. On October 3, 2013, a summons with notice was served on the Company in connection with litigation commenced in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, captioned Northern Rock (Asset Management) PLC v. Société Générale Corporate and Investment Banking, Cohen & Company Securities, et al. The plaintiff has not yet filed a complaint. If a complaint is filed, the Company intends to vigorously defend the claims. In addition to the matters set forth above, the Company is a party to various routine legal proceedings and regulatory inquiries arising out of the ordinary course of the Company’s business. Management believes that the results of these routine legal proceedings and regulatory matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, or on the Company’s operations and cash flows. However, the Company cannot estimate the legal fees and expenses to be incurred in connection with these routine matters and, therefore, is unable to determine whether these future legal fees and expenses will have a material impact on the Company’s operations and cash flows. It is the Company’s policy to expense legal and other fees as incurred. Alesco XIV Guarantee AFN invested in a CDO (Alesco XIV) in which Assured Guaranty (“Assured”) was providing credit support to the senior interests in securitizations. Alesco XIV made a loan (the “Guaranteed Loan”) to a particular borrower and AFN entered into an arrangement with Assured whereby AFN agreed to make payments to Assured upon the occurrence of both (i) a loss on the Guaranteed Loan and (ii) a loss suffered by Assured on its overall credit support arrangement to Alesco XIV security holders. This arrangement was accounted for as a guarantee by the Company. As of December 31, 2012, the Company had a liability of $1,084 related to this arrangement that was included in accounts payable and other liabilities in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. In May 2013, the underlying loan was paid off in full by the borrower. As a result, the Company’s guarantee with Assured was extinguished. For the nine months ended September 30, 2013, the Company recognized other income of $1,084, which was included as a component of principal transactions and other income in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations, and wrote off the liability. Pennsylvania Income Tax Assessment In October, 2013, the Company received an assessment from the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue in the amount of $4,683 (including penalties) related to a subsidiary of AFN for the 2009 tax year. The assessment denied this subsidiary’s Keystone Opportunity Zone (“KOZ”) credit for that year. The Company is currently preparing an administrative appeal of this assessment with the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue. If the assessment were to be upheld in administrative appeal, the Company can then file an appeal with the Pennsylvania Board of Finance and Revenue. Finally, if the Pennsylvania Board of Finance and Revenue were to uphold the assessment, the Company would then seek relief in Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. The Company has evaluated the assessment in accordance with the provisions of ASC 740 and determined not to record any reserve for this assessment. Accumulated Dividends and Dividend Equivalents on Restricted Stock and Restricted Units From time to time, the Company has granted restricted stock and restricted units that are entitled to receive dividends or dividend equivalents as and when such dividends or dividend equivalents are declared and paid by the Company; provided, however, that the cash dividends or dividend equivalents on such restricted stock or restricted units are held by the Company until the period of forfeiture lapses and forfeited if the underlying restricted shares or restricted units are forfeited. The Company’s potential liability, assuming the restricted stock or restricted units were to vest as of September 30, 2013, is approximately $112.

17. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Legal and Regulatory Proceedings

The Company was named in litigation commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on June 29, 2012, under the caption U.S. Bank National Association v. Institutional Financial Markets, Inc. The plaintiff, U.S. Bank, alleges breach of contract respecting certain fees allegedly owing to U.S. Bank, as Trustee, in connection with the issuance of trust preferred securities, seeking damages and a declaration that the Company must make certain future fee payments. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint in lieu of an answer on October 26, 2012. U.S. Bank filed its response to the motion on November 26, 2012. On July 19, 2013, the court entered a Memorandum and Order denying the Company’s motion to dismiss. The Company filed its answer to the Complaint on August 19, 2013. The Company intends to defend the action vigorously. The ultimate amount of any loss incurred by the Company in this matter is uncertain. The Company cannot currently estimate the likelihood it will suffer a loss greater than the amounts accrued for as of September 30, 2013.

On October 3, 2013, a summons with notice was served on the Company in connection with litigation commenced in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, captioned Northern Rock (Asset Management) PLC v. Société Générale Corporate and Investment Banking, Cohen & Company Securities, et al. The plaintiff has not yet filed a complaint. If a complaint is filed, the Company intends to vigorously defend the claims.

In addition to the matters set forth above, the Company is a party to various routine legal proceedings and regulatory inquiries arising out of the ordinary course of the Company’s business. Management believes that the results of these routine legal proceedings and regulatory matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, or on the Company’s operations and cash flows. However, the Company cannot estimate the legal fees and expenses to be incurred in connection with these routine matters and, therefore, is unable to determine whether these future legal fees and expenses will have a material impact on the Company’s operations and cash flows. It is the Company’s policy to expense legal and other fees as incurred.

Alesco XIV Guarantee

AFN invested in a CDO (Alesco XIV) in which Assured Guaranty (“Assured”) was providing credit support to the senior interests in securitizations. Alesco XIV made a loan (the “Guaranteed Loan”) to a particular borrower and AFN entered into an arrangement with Assured whereby AFN agreed to make payments to Assured upon the occurrence of both (i) a loss on the Guaranteed Loan and (ii) a loss suffered by Assured on its overall credit support arrangement to Alesco XIV security holders. This arrangement was accounted for as a guarantee by the Company. As of December 31, 2012, the Company had a liability of $1,084 related to this arrangement that was included in accounts payable and other liabilities in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. In May 2013, the underlying loan was paid off in full by the borrower. As a result, the Company’s guarantee with Assured was extinguished. For the nine months ended September 30, 2013, the Company recognized other income of $1,084, which was included as a component of principal transactions and other income in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations, and wrote off the liability.

Pennsylvania Income Tax Assessment

In October, 2013, the Company received an assessment from the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue in the amount of $4,683 (including penalties) related to a subsidiary of AFN for the 2009 tax year. The assessment denied this subsidiary’s Keystone Opportunity Zone (“KOZ”) credit for that year. The Company is currently preparing an administrative appeal of this assessment with the Pennsylvania Department of Revenue. If the assessment were to be upheld in administrative appeal, the Company can then file an appeal with the Pennsylvania Board of Finance and Revenue. Finally, if the Pennsylvania Board of Finance and Revenue were to uphold the assessment, the Company would then seek relief in Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court. The Company has evaluated the assessment in accordance with the provisions of ASC 740 and determined not to record any reserve for this assessment.

Accumulated Dividends and Dividend Equivalents on Restricted Stock and Restricted Units

From time to time, the Company has granted restricted stock and restricted units that are entitled to receive dividends or dividend equivalents as and when such dividends or dividend equivalents are declared and paid by the Company; provided, however, that the cash dividends or dividend equivalents on such restricted stock or restricted units are held by the Company until the period of forfeiture lapses and forfeited if the underlying restricted shares or restricted units are forfeited. The Company’s potential liability, assuming the restricted stock or restricted units were to vest as of September 30, 2013, is approximately $112.