SLM Corp 10-K

slm-20201231 UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 Form 10-K (Mark One) ☑ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31 , 2020 or ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 or 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to Commission file number 001-13251 SLM Corp oration (Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter) Delaware 52-2013874 (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) 300 Continental Drive Newark, Delaware 19713 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) ( 302 ) 451-0200 (Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code) (Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report) Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Trading Symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered Common stock, par value $.20 per share SLM The NASDAQ Global Select Market Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series B, par value $.20 per share SLMBP The NASDAQ Global Select Market Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☑ No ☐ Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☑ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☑ No ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☑ No ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one): Large accelerated filer ☑ Accelerated filer ☐ Non-accelerated filer ☐ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) Smaller reporting company ☐ Emerging growth company ☐ If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report . ☑ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☑ The aggregate market value of voting common stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant as of June 30, 2020 was $ 2.6 billion (based on closing sale price of $7.03 per share as reported for the NASDAQ Global Select Market). As of January 31, 2021, there were 363,671,446 shares of common stock outstanding. DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE Portions of the proxy statement relating to the Registrant’s 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. SLM CORPORATION TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Number Forward-Looking and Cautionary Statements 1 Available Information 2 PART I Item 1. Business 3 Item 1A. Risk Factors 22 Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 36 Item 2. Properties 36 Item 3. Legal Proceedings 37 Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 38 PART II Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities 39 Item 6. Selected Financial Data 42 Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations 43 Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk 99 Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 103 Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure 103 Item 9A. Controls and Procedures 103 Item 9B. Other Information 103 PART III. Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 104 Item 11. Executive Compensation 104 Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters 104 Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence 104 Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services 104 PART IV Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules 105 FORWARD-LOOKING AND CAUTIONARY STATEMENTS References in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to “we,” “us,” “our,” “Sallie Mae,” “SLM” and the “Company” refer to SLM Corporation and its subsidiaries, except as otherwise indicated or unless the context otherwise requires. This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking” statements and information based on management’s current expectations as of the date of this report. Statements that are not historical facts, including statements about our beliefs, opinions, or expectations and statements that assume or are dependent upon future events, are forward-looking statements. This includes, but is not limited to: statements regarding future developments surrounding COVID-19 or any other pandemic, including, without limitation, statements regarding the potential impact of COVID-19 or any other pandemic on the Company’s business, results of operations, financial condition, and/or cash flows; our expectation and ability to pay a quarterly cash dividend on our common stock in the future, subject to the determination by our Board of Directors, and based on an evaluation of our earnings, financial condition and requirements, business conditions, capital allocation determinations, and other factors, risks, and uncertainties; the Company’s 2021 guidance; the Company’s three-year horizon outlook; the Company’s expectation and ability to execute loan sales and share repurchases; the Company’s projections regarding originations, net charge-offs, non-interest expenses, earnings, balance sheet position, and other metrics; and any estimates related to accounting standard changes. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties, assumptions, and other factors that may cause actual results to be materially different from those reflected in such forward-looking statements. These factors include, among others, the risks and uncertainties set forth in Item 1A. “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”); the societal, business, and legislative/regulatory impact of pandemics and other public heath crises; increases in financing costs; limits on liquidity; increases in costs associated with compliance with laws and regulations; failure to comply with consumer protection, banking, and other laws; changes in accounting standards and the impact of related changes in significant accounting estimates, including any regarding the measurement of our allowance for credit losses and the related provision expense; any adverse outcomes in any significant litigation to which we are a party; credit risk associated with our exposure to third-parties, including counterparties to our derivative transactions; and changes in the terms of education loans and the educational credit marketplace (including changes resulting from new laws and the implementation of existing laws). We could also be affected by, among other things: changes in our funding costs and availability; reductions to our credit ratings; cybersecurity incidents, cyberattacks, and other failures or breaches of our operating systems or infrastructure, including those of third-party vendors; damage to our reputation; risks associated with restructuring initiatives, including failures to successfully implement cost-cutting programs and the adverse effects of such initiatives on our business; changes in the demand for educational financing or in financing preferences of lenders, educational institutions, students, and their families; changes in law and regulations with respect to the student lending business and financial institutions generally; changes in banking rules and regulations, including increased capital requirements; increased competition from banks and other consumer lenders; the creditworthiness of our customers; changes in the general interest rate environment, including the rate relationships among relevant money-market instruments and those of our earning assets versus our funding arrangements; rates of prepayment on the loans that we own; changes in general economic conditions and our ability to successfully effectuate any acquisitions; and other strategic initiatives. The preparation of our consolidated financial statements also requires us to make certain estimates and assumptions, including estimates and assumptions about future events. These estimates or assumptions may prove to be incorrect. All forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are qualified by these cautionary statements and are made only as of the date of this report. We do not undertake any obligation to update or revise these forward-looking statements to conform such statements to actual results or changes in our expectations. 1 AVAILABLE INFORMATION Our website address is www.salliemae.com. Copies of our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K, as well as any amendments to those reports, and our Proxy Statements and any significant investor presentations, are available free of charge through our website as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. The SEC maintains a website at www.sec.gov that contains all such filed or furnished reports and other information. In addition, copies of our Board Governance Guidelines, Code of Business Conduct (which includes the code of ethics applicable to our Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer) and the governing charters for each committee of our Board of Directors are available free of charge on our website, as well as in print, to any stockholder upon request. We intend to disclose any amendments to or waivers of our Code of Business Conduct (to the extent applicable to our Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer or Principal Accounting Officer) by posting such information on our website. Information contained or referenced on our website is not incorporated by reference into and does not form a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. 2 PART I. Item 1. Business Our Company Mission SLM Corporation, more commonly known as Sallie Mae, is the premier financial brand in higher education. Our mission is to power confidence as students begin their unique journey. We simplify the college planning process by providing tools, resources, and information to help students and families make informed decisions and to improve access and support college completion through our scholarship programs and responsible financing options. We believe education, in all forms, is the foundation for success, an equalizer of opportunities, and a proven pathway to economic mobility. Higher education increases lifetime wages and enables economic mobility. For example, data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor and Statistics confirms those with bachelor’s degrees earn 66 percent more than those with a high school diploma. 1 Those with advanced degrees earn an even greater percentage than those with a high school diploma. 1 This effect is multigenerational, as children of parents who are college educated are more likely to earn a bachelor’s degree than students whose parents did not go to college. Most would agree our society prospers and becomes more economically inclusive when each of its members is provided access to post-secondary education. 2 Education represents a transformative investment in one’s future that yields our country’s next nurses, teachers, engineers, business leaders, and more. Our History While the Sallie Mae name has existed for more than 40 years, the company that operates as Sallie Mae today, SLM Corporation, was formed in late 2013 and includes its wholly-owned subsidiary, Sallie Mae Bank, an industrial bank established in 2005 (the “Bank”). On April 30, 2014, we legally separated (the “Spin-Off”) from another public company that is now named Navient Corporation (“Navient”), which is in the education loan management, servicing, asset recovery, and consolidation loan business. Navient retained all assets and liabilities generated prior to the Spin-Off other than those explicitly retained by us pursuant to the Separation and Distribution Agreement (as hereinafter defined) executed in connection with the Spin-Off. We are a consumer banking business and did not retain any assets or liabilities generated prior to the Spin-Off other than those explicitly retained by us pursuant to the Separation and Distribution Agreement. We sometimes refer to the company that existed prior to the Spin-Off as “pre-Spin-Off SLM.” The Bank was formed in 2005 to fund and originate Private Education Loans (as hereinafter defined) on behalf of pre-Spin-Off SLM. While the Bank first originated Private Education Loans in February 2006, pre-Spin-Off SLM continued to purchase a portion of its Private Education Loans from third-party lending partners through mid-2009. With some minor exceptions, the Bank became the sole originator of Private Education Loans for pre-Spin-Off SLM beginning with the 2009-2010 academic year, the first academic year following the launch of the Bank’s Smart Option Student Loan program in mid-2009. Our principal executive offices are located at 300 Continental Drive, Newark, Delaware 19713. Additionally, we have offices in New Castle, Delaware; Salt Lake City, Utah; Indianapolis, Indiana; Newton, Massachusetts; and Sterling, Virginia. Our telephone number is (302) 451-0200. ______________________ 1 https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2020/data-on-display/education-pays.htm 2 https://research.collegeboard.org/trends/education-pays 3 Our Business Our business is focused and aligned to strategic imperatives that set the foundation for our continued success. These imperatives include: increasing the profitability and growth of our core business, continuing to build and advance a strong brand among our customers, helping policymakers better understand the student lending marketplace and our role in it, allocating capital and returning it to shareholders when appropriate, and fostering a true mission- and performance-led culture. In 2020, we developed a new organizational structure to better align to these focused strategic imperatives, which resulted in reduced costs and improved operating efficiencies. For further information on these new imperatives, see Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — 2020 Strategic Imperatives and Corporate Restructuring,” in this annual report on Form 10-K. Private Education Loans Our primary business is to originate and service high-quality Private Education Loans. “Private Education Loans” are education loans for students or their families that are not made, insured or guaranteed by any state or federal government. We also offer a range of deposit products insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”). In 2020, more than 420,000 families chose us as their Private Education Loan provider, more than any other private student loan lender. We originated $5.3 billion of Private Education Loans, a decrease of 5 percent from the year ended December 31, 2019, with the decrease largely due to the COVID-19 pandemic. As of December 31, 2020, we had $18.4 billion of Private Education Loans held for investment, net, outstanding. The Private Education Loans we make to students and families serve primarily to bridge the gap between the cost of higher education and the amount funded through financial aid, federal loans and student and families’ resources. We also extend Private Education Loans as an alternative to similar federal education loan products where we believe our rates are competitive. Our primary Private Education Loan product is the Smart Option Student Loan, which emphasizes in-school payment features that can produce shorter terms and reduce customers’ total finance charges. Customers generally elect one of three Smart Option repayment types at the time of loan origination. The first two, Interest Only and Fixed Payment options, require monthly payments while the student is in school and during the grace period thereafter, and accounted for approximately half of the Private Education Loans the Bank originated during 2020. The third repayment option is the more traditional deferred Private Education Loan product where customers are not required to make payments while the student is in school and during the grace period after separation from school. (The grace period for a Smart Option Student Loan generally runs for six months after the borrower separates from school, but can run for up to 36 months for a small subset of graduate loans.) Lower interest rates on the Interest Only and Fixed Payment options encourage customers to elect those options, which help customers reduce their total loan cost compared with the traditional deferred option loan. Making payments while in school helps customers become accustomed to making on-time regular loan payments. We offer both variable-rate and fixed-rate loans. We also offer six loan products for specific graduate programs of study. These include the Sallie Mae Law School Loan, the Sallie Mae MBA Loan, the Sallie Mae Health Professions Graduate Loan, the Sallie Mae Medical School Loan, the Sallie Mae Dental School Loan, and the Sallie Mae Graduate School Loan. These products were designed to address the specific needs of graduate students, such as extended grace periods for medical students. We regularly review and update the terms of our Private Education Loan products. Our Private Education Loans include important protections for the family, including loan forgiveness in case of death or permanent disability of the student borrower, a free, quarterly FICO score benefit to students and cosigners and, for borrowers with a Smart Option Student Loan, on-line tutoring services to help students succeed in school. As a holder of Private Education Loans, we bear the full credit risk of the customers. We manage this risk by underwriting and pricing based on customized credit scoring criteria and the addition of qualified cosigners. For Private Education Loans originated during the year ended December 31, 2020, our average FICO scores (representing the higher credit scores of the cosigners or borrowers) at the time of original approval were 749, and approximately 86.0 percent of those loans were cosigned. In addition, we require school certification of both the need for, and the amount of, every Private Education Loan we originate (to prevent unnecessary borrowing beyond a school’s cost of attendance), and we disburse the loan proceeds directly to the higher education institutions to ensure loan proceeds are applied directly to the student’s education expenses. The core of our marketing strategy is to promote our products on campuses through financial aid offices as well as through online and direct marketing to students and families. Our on-campus efforts with approximately 2,400 higher education institutions are led by our sales force, the largest in the industry, which has become a trusted resource for financial aid offices. 4 Our loans are high credit quality and the overwhelming majority of our customers manage their payments with great success. Private Education Loans in repayment include loans on which customers are making interest only or fixed payments, as well as loans that have entered full principal and interest repayment status after any applicable grace period. At December 31, 2020, 2.8 percent of Private Education Loans (held for investment) in repayment were greater than 30 days delinquent, and Private Education Loans (held for investment) in forbearance were 4.3 percent of loans in repayment and forbearance. In 2020, net charge-offs as a percentage of average loans in repayment were 1.17 percent. Sallie Mae Bank The Bank, which is regulated by the Utah Department of Financial Institutions (the “UDFI”), the FDIC, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”), offers traditional savings products, such as high-yield savings accounts, money market accounts, and certificates of deposit (“CDs”), originates Private Education Loans, and manages a loan portfolio that also includes loans insured or guaranteed under the previously existing Federal Family Education Loan Program (“FFELP Loans”) and credit card loans (“Credit Cards”). At December 31, 2020, the Bank had total assets of $30.3 billion, including $18.4 billion of Private Education Loans (held for investment), net, $735 million of FFELP Loans (held for investment), net, $11 million of Credit Cards (held for investment), net, and total deposits of $23.2 billion. Our ability to obtain deposit funding and offer competitive interest rates on deposits will be necessary to sustain our Private Education Loan and other originations. Our ability to obtain such funding is dependent, in part, on the capital levels of the Bank and its compliance with other applicable regulatory requirements. At the time of this filing, there are no regulatory restrictions on our ability to obtain deposit funding or the interest rates we offer other than those restrictions generally applicable to all FDIC-insured banks of similar charter and size. We maintained our diversified funding base by raising $1.3 billion in term funding collateralized by pools of Private Education Loans in the long-term asset-backed securities (“ABS”) market in 2020. This brought our total ABS funding outstanding at December 31, 2020 to $4.5 billion, or 24 percent of our total Private Education Loans held for investment portfolio. We plan to continue to use ABS funding, market conditions permitting. This helps us better match-fund our assets and avoids excessive reliance on deposit funding. See the subsection titled “Regulation of Sallie Mae Bank” under “Supervision and Regulation” for additional details about the Bank. Credit Cards We offer three types of credit cards, each uniquely designed to promote and reward financial responsibility, including a card that offers a cash back bonus that cardholders can apply to pay down a student loan. At December 31, 2020, we had $11 million of Credit Cards, net, outstanding in our held for investment portfolio. SmartyPig Our SmartyPig™ product is a free, FDIC-insured, online, goal-based savings account that helps consumers save for long- and short-term goals. Its tiered interest rates reward consumers for growing their savings. Personal Loans and Upromise In the fourth quarter of 2019, we discontinued originations of our unsecured personal loans used for non-educational purposes (“Personal Loans”) and did not originate or purchase any Personal Loans in 2020. In the third quarter of 2020, we sold our entire Personal Loan portfolio to focus our capital and attention on the core education loan business. As part of our efforts to focus and align to our core business, on May 31, 2020, we also sold our Upromise Inc. subsidiary, which operated a free to join rewards program. 5 Our Lending Philosophy Sallie Mae is committed to lending responsibly and encourages responsible borrowing by advising students and families to follow this three-step approach to paying for college: Start with money you won’t have to pay back. Supplement your college savings and income by maximizing scholarships, grants, and work-study. Explore federal student loans. Explore federal student loan options by completing the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (“FAFSA”). Consider a responsible private student loan. Fill the gap between your available resources and the cost of college. The best interests of our customers are front-and-center and integral to our responsible lending philosophy. We reward financial responsibility, emphasize building good credit, and provide flexible repayment terms to help customers manage and eliminate debt. We also embed customer protections in our products. To ensure applicants borrow only what they need to cover their school’s cost of attendance, we actively engage with schools and require school certification before we disburse a Private Education Loan. To help applicants understand their loan and its terms, we provide multiple, customized disclosures explaining the applicant’s starting interest rate, the interest rate during the life of the loan, and the loan’s total cost under the available repayment options. Our Private Education Loans feature (i) no origination fees and no prepayment penalties, (ii) interest rate reductions for those who enroll in and make monthly payments through auto debit, (iii) free access to quarterly FICO credit scores to help customers monitor their credit health, (iv) a choice of repayment options, and (v) a choice of either variable or fixed interest rates. Beginning in 2017, all newly-originated Private Education Loans for undergraduate students included the benefit of free access to study services at an online third-party vendor to assist students in advancing their education. Our Approach to Assisting Students and Families Borrowing and Repaying Private Education Loans Half of our Private Education Loan customers elect an in-school repayment option. By making in-school payments, customers learn to establish good repayment patterns, reduce their total loan cost, and graduate with less debt. We send monthly communications to customers while they are in school, even if they have no monthly payments scheduled, to keep them informed and encourage them to reduce the amount they will owe when they leave school. Some customers transitioning from school to the work force may require more time before they are financially capable of making full payments of principal and interest. Sallie Mae created a Graduated Repayment Program (the “GRP”) to assist borrowers with additional payment flexibility, allowing customers to make interest-only payments instead of full principal and interest payments for a period of 12 months if they elect within a specified time frame to participate in the GRP. The time frame for electing to participate in the GRP begins six months before expiration of a borrower’s grace period and extends until 12 months after the expiration of the grace period. The 12-month interest only payments under the GRP begin upon expiration of a borrower’s grace period or election of the GRP, whichever is later. Our experience has taught us the successful transition from school to full principal and interest repayment status involves making and carrying out a financial plan. As customers approach the principal and interest repayment period on their loans, Sallie Mae engages with them and communicates what to expect during the transition. In addition, SallieMae.com provides educational content for customers on how to organize loans, set up a monthly budget, and understand repayment obligations. Examples are provided to help explain how payments are applied and allocated, and see how the accrued interest on alternative repayment programs could affect the cost of customers’ loans. The site also provides important information on benefits available to service men and women under the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act (the “SCRA”). After graduation, a customer may apply for the cosigner to be released from the loan. This option is available after 12 principal and interest payments are made and the student borrower adequately meets our credit requirements. In the event of a cosigner’s death, the student borrower automatically continues as the sole individual on the loan with the same terms. If a customer’s account becomes delinquent, our collections centers work with the customer and/or the cosigner to understand their ability to make ongoing payments. If the customer is in financial hardship, we work with the customer and/or cosigner and identify any available alternative arrangements designed to reduce monthly payment obligations. These can include extended repayment schedules, temporary interest rate reductions and, if appropriate, short-term hardship forbearance (which typically is retroactive and granted by our collections department), suited to their individual circumstances and ability to make payments. Currently, our servicing centers generally also grant prospective forbearance if a borrower who is current requests it for increments of up to three months at a time, for up to 12 months. When we grant forbearance, we counsel customers on the effect forbearance will have on their loan balance. See Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Financial Condition — Allowance for Credit Losses — Use of 6 Forbearance and Rate Modifications as a Private Education Loan Collection Tool” for additional information about planned changes to our credit administration practices. COVID-19 Response We are accommodating to customers who face special circumstances or have trouble making loan payments. Like many Americans, some of our customers faced unforeseen challenges due to the pandemic of respiratory disease caused by the coronavirus 2019 or COVID-19 (“COVID-19”). In response, we took significant steps to provide relief to assist those customers. On March 10, 2020, we proactively posted assistance information on our web site and communicated to all Sallie Mae customers, including cosigners, to inform them assistance was available. We enhanced the functionality of our chat, automated phone system, mobile app, and website features to help all our customers manage their accounts, make or postpone payments, and request hardship relief. Customers may contact us in whatever way is most convenient for them. Historically we have utilized disaster forbearance for material events, including hurricanes, wildfires, and floods. Disaster forbearance defers payments for as many as 90 days upon enrollment. In accordance with regulatory guidance that encourages lenders to work constructively with customers who have been impacted by COVID-19, we invoked this same disaster forbearance program to assist our customers through COVID-19 and offered this program across our operations, including through mobile and self-service channels such as chat and interactive voice response (“IVR”) to address initial high volumes at the onset of the pandemic. We have since returned to a policy of interacting with 100 percent of these customers through our customer care and collections personnel. Customers requesting a disaster forbearance or an extension of a disaster forbearance are required to speak with our customer care and collections personnel. The first wave of disaster forbearance was granted primarily in 90-day increments. As these forbearances ended in late second quarter and early third quarter, we reduced the disaster forbearance to one-month increments and implemented additional discussions between our servicing agents and borrowers to encourage borrowers/cosigners to enter repayment. Customers who receive a disaster forbearance do not progress in delinquency and are not assessed late fees or other fees. During a disaster forbearance, a customer’s credit file will continue to reflect the status of the loan as it was immediately prior to granting the disaster forbearance. During the period of the disaster forbearance, interest continues to accrue, but is not capitalized to the loan balance after the loan returns to repayment status. If the financial hardship extends beyond 90 days, additional assistance is available for eligible customers. For example, for borrowers exiting disaster forbearance and not eligible for GRP, we may allow them to make interest only payments for 12 months before reverting to full principal and interest payments. As of December 31, 2020, $44.2 million of Private Education Loans held for investment were in disaster forbearance status. For further information on the impact of COVID-19 on the Company, see Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Impact of COVID-19 on Sallie Mae,” in this annual report on Form 10-K. Customer Service We perform the origination, servicing and collections activities for all of our Private Education Loans in the United States with dedicated representatives assisting customers with various needs, including the military personnel customers who may be eligible for military benefits. We expect the Bank or affiliates of the Bank to retain servicing of all Private Education Loans the Bank originates, regardless of whether the loans are held, sold or securitized. Over the past few years, we have implemented several improvements in our ability to interact with our loan customers, including: • an integrated platform that allows customers and servicing agents to simultaneously access the same systems in real time interaction; • an on-line chat function for customer service; • a mobile application accessible through smart phones and the Apple watch; and • initiation of customer surveys to gain feedback on areas for improvement within our servicing function. These and other enhancements have contributed to streamlined originations and servicing processes, increased customer self-services rates, and improved customer satisfaction in all channels. The Company maintains an A+ rating with the Better Business Bureau. Customer Success We continue to adapt our business to best serve the needs of families who see us as a trusted advisor and partner. We are strongly invested in our customers’ success. Of total customers, 98 percent of loans in repayment are in good standing. Our College Planning Calculator helps families set college savings goals, projects the full costs of a college degree, and estimates future student loan payments and the annual starting salary level needed to keep payments manageable. 7 Scholarship Search, our free online scholarship database, is home to more than 6 million scholarships collectively worth over $30 billion. For academic year (“AY”) 2019-2020, more than 24,000 students reported receiving at least one scholarship via our database, covering more than $67 million in college costs. Our Scholarship Search for Graduate Students includes access to approximately 1 million graduate school scholarships with an aggregate value of more than $1 billion. In 2019, we unveiled a new, one-stop college-planning destination — Sallie Mae’s Paying for College Resource — created with, and for, high school educators and counselors. The Sallie Mae Paying for College Resource provides access to free, online college planning tools, short educational videos on financial aid, and other valuable information to help guide students and their families through the planning for college process. In 2020, to raise awareness about the importance of completing the FAFSA and to simplify the process, we partnered with Embark, the leading provider of admissions software for schools and universities, to provide a free online tool to help families file the FAFSA. The tool reduces the average time it takes to complete the FAFSA from 55 minutes to less than 20 minutes. 8 Key Drivers of Private Education Loan Market Growth The size of the Private Education Loan market is based primarily on three factors: college enrollment levels, the costs of attending college, and the availability of funds from the federal government to pay for a college education. The amounts students and their families can contribute toward college costs and the availability of scholarships and institutional grants are also important. If the cost of education increases at a pace exceeding the sum of family income, savings, federal lending, and scholarships, more students and families can be expected to rely on Private Education Loans. If enrollment levels or college costs decline, or the availability of federal education loans, grants or subsidies and scholarships significantly increases, Private Education Loan demand could decrease. We focus primarily on students attending public and private not-for-profit four-year degree granting institutions. We lend to some students attending two-year and for-profit schools. Due to the low cost of two-year programs, federal grant and loan programs are typically sufficient for the funding needs of these students. Approximately 11 percent or $583 million of our 2020 Private Education Loan originations were for students attending for-profit schools. The for-profit schools where we continue to do business are primarily focused on career training and health care fields. We expect students who attend and complete programs at for-profit schools to support the same repayment performance as students who attend and graduate from public and private not-for-profit four-year degree granting institutions. Our competitors 1 in the Private Education Loan market include large banks such as Discover Bank, Citizens Financial Group, Inc. and PNC Bank, as well as a number of smaller specialty finance companies and members of the Education Finance Council. We compete based on our products, originations capability, price, and customer service. Enrollment We expect modest enrollment growth over the next several years. Enrollment at Four-Year Degree Granting Institutions 2 (in millions) • According to the U.S. Department of Education’s projections released in December 2019, the high school graduate population is projected to remain relatively flat from 2020 to 2029. 2 ______________________ 1 Source: MeasureOne Q3 2020 Private Student Loan Report, November 2020. www.measureone.com. 2 Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Projections of Education Statistics to 2029 (NCES, December 2019), Enrollment in Postsecondary Institutions (NCES, December 2019). These are the most recent sources available to us for this information. 9 Tuition Rates • Average published tuition and fees (exclusive of room and board) at four-year public and private not-for-profit institutions increased at compound annual growth rates of 1.8 percent and 2.4 percent, respectively, from AYs 2016-2017 through 2020-2021. Average published tuition and fees at public and private four-year not-for-profit institutions grew 2.3 percent and 3.4 percent, respectively, between AYs 2018-2019 and 2019-2020 and 1.1 percent and 2.1 percent, respectively, between AYs 2019-2020 and 2020-2021. 3 Tuition and fees are likely to continue to grow at the more modest rates of recent years. Published Tuition and Fees 3 (Dollars in actuals) ______ 3 Source: The College Board-Trends in College Pricing 2020. © 2020 The College Board. www.collegeboard.org. The College Board restates its data annually, which may cause previously reported results to vary. 10 Sources of Funding Private Education Loan originations increased to an estimated $13 billion in AY 2019-2020, up 10 percent over the previous year. 4 _______ 4 Source: The College Board-Trends in Student Aid 2016. © 2016 The College Board. www.collegeboard.org and The College Board-Trends in Student Aid 2020. © 2020 The College Board. www.collegeboard.org . MeasureOne www.measureone.com. Funding sources in current dollars and include federal and private loan data. 2020 Private Education Loan market assumptions use The College Board-Trends in Student Aid 2016 © 2016 trends and College Board-Trends in Student Aid 2020 © 2020 data, and MeaureOne report. Other sources for the size of the Private Education Loan market exist and may cite the size of the market differently. The College Board restates its data annually, which may cause previously reported results to vary. We changed our source of participants in this 2020 annual report, removing our internal estimates for Private Education Loans made by smaller lenders, and relying solely on publicly available sources for market estimates, because we believe it provides a more appropriate basis for comparison of the performance of our business. 11 • We estimate total spending on higher education was $477 billion in AY 2019-2020, up from $424 billion in AY 2015-2016. Private Education Loan originations increased to an estimated $13 billion in AY 2019-2020, up 10 percent over the previous year and represent just 2.7 percent of total spending on higher education. Modest growth in total spending can lead to meaningful increases in Private Education Loans in the absence of growth in other sources of funding. . 5 • Over the AYs 2015-2019 period, increases in total spending have been absorbed primarily through increased family contributions. If household finances continue to improve, we would expect this trend to continue. _________________________ 5 Source: Total post-secondary education spending is estimated by Sallie Mae determining the full-time equivalents for both graduates and undergraduates and multiplying by the estimated total per person cost of attendance for each school type. In doing so, we utilize information from the U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Projections of Education Statistics to 2027 (NCES 2020, October 2020), The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), College Board -Trends in Student Aid 2016. © 2016 The College Board, www.collegeboard.org, College Board -Trends in Student Aid 2020. © 2020 The College Board, www.collegeboard.org, College Board -Trends in Student Pricing 2020. © 2020 The College Board, www.collegeboard.org, National Student Clearinghouse - Term Enrollment Estimates, and Company analysis. 2019 Private Education Loan market assumptions use The College Board-Trends in Student Aid 2016 © 2016 trends and College Board-Trends in Student Aid 2020 © 2020 data. Other sources for these data points also exist publicly and may vary from our computed estimates. NCES, IPEDS, and College Board restate their data annually, which may cause previous reports to vary. We have also recalculated figures in our Company analysis to standardize all costs of attendance to dollars not adjusted for inflation. This has a minimal impact on historically-stated numbers. 12 Supervision and Regulation Overview We are subject to extensive regulation, examination and supervision by various federal, state and local authorities. The more significant aspects of the laws and regulations that apply to us and our subsidiaries are described below. These descriptions are qualified in their entirety by reference to the full text of the applicable statutes, legislation, regulations and policies, as they may be amended, and as interpreted and applied, by federal, state and local agencies. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) was adopted to reform and strengthen regulation and supervision of the U.S. financial services industry. It contains comprehensive provisions to govern the practices and oversight of financial institutions and other participants in the financial markets. It mandates significant regulations, additional requirements and oversight on almost every aspect of the U.S. financial services industry, including increased capital and liquidity requirements, limits on leverage and enhanced supervisory authority. It requires the issuance of many regulations, which will take effect over several years. Additionally, states are taking an increased interest in directly regulating the conduct and practices of student loan servicers. Some states recently have enacted legislation creating specialized offices within state government to oversee the student loan servicing industry operating within those states, as well as to set minimum standards governing the practices of student loan servicers. This represents a significant change from the past in which states generally did not issue laws and regulations tailored specifically to the student loan servicing industry. Consumer Protection Laws and Regulations Our origination, servicing, first-party collection and deposit taking activities subject us to federal and state consumer protection, privacy and related laws and regulations. Some of the more significant laws and regulations that are applicable to our business include: • various state and federal laws governing unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices; • various state laws and regulations imposing specific, mandated standards and requirements on the conduct and practices of student loan servicers; • the federal Truth-In-Lending Act and Regulation Z, which govern disclosures of credit terms to consumer borrowers; • the Fair Credit Reporting Act and Regulation V, which govern the use and provision of information to consumer reporting agencies; • the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B, which prohibit creditor practices that discriminate on the basis of race, religion and other prohibited factors in extending credit; • the SCRA, which applies to all debts incurred prior to commencement of active military service (including education loans) and limits the amount of interest, including fees, that may be charged; • the Truth in Savings Act and Regulation DD, which mandate certain disclosures related to consumer deposit accounts; • the Expedited Funds Availability Act, Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act and Regulation CC issued by the Federal Reserve Bank (“FRB”), which relate to the availability of deposit funds to consumers; • the Right to Financial Privacy Act, which imposes a duty to maintain the confidentiality of consumer financial records and prescribes procedures for complying with federal government requests for and subpoenas of financial records; • the Electronic Funds Transfer Act and Regulation E, which govern automated transfers of funds and consumers’ rights related thereto; • the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, which governs communication methods that may be used to contact customers; • the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which governs the ability of financial institutions to disclose nonpublic information about consumers to non-affiliated third-parties; and • the California Consumer Privacy Act, which governs transparency and disclosure obligations regarding personal information of residents of the State of California. 13 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau The CFPB has broad authority to promulgate regulations under federal consumer financial protection laws and to directly or indirectly enforce those laws, including providing regulatory oversight of the Private Education Loan industry, and to examine financial institutions for compliance. It is authorized to collect fines and order consumer restitution in the event of violations, engage in consumer financial education, track consumer complaints, request data and promote the availability of financial services to underserved consumers and communities. It has authority to prevent unfair, deceptive or abusive acts and practices by issuing regulations or by using its enforcement authority without first issuing regulations. The CFPB has been active in its supervision, examination and enforcement of financial services companies, notably bringing enforcement actions, imposing fines and mandating large refunds to customers of several large banking institutions. The CFPB is the Bank’s primary consumer compliance supervisor with compliance examination authority and primary consumer protection enforcement authority. The UDFI and FDIC remain the prudential regulatory authorities with respect to the Bank’s financial strength. The Private Education Loan Ombudsman within the CFPB is authorized to receive and attempt to informally resolve inquiries about Private Education Loans. The Private Education Loan Ombudsman is required by law to report to Congress annually on the trends and issues identified through this process. The CFPB continues to take an active interest in the student loan industry, undertaking a number of initiatives related to the Private Education Loan market and student loan servicing. In early February 2020, the CFPB entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the U.S. Department of Education (the “CFPB/DOE MOU”) in order to better serve student loan borrowers. Under the agreement, the agencies will share complaint information from borrowers and meet quarterly to discuss, among other things, the nature of complaints received and available information about the resolution of complaints. Regulation of Sallie Mae Bank The Bank was chartered in 2005 and is a Utah industrial bank regulated by the FDIC, the UDFI and the CFPB. We are not a bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act and therefore are not subject to the federal regulations applicable to bank holding companies. However, we and our non-bank subsidiaries are subject to regulation and oversight as institution-affiliated parties. The following discussion sets forth some of the elements of the bank regulatory framework applicable to us, the Bank and our other non-bank subsidiaries. General The Bank is currently subject to prudential regulation and examination by the FDIC and the UDFI, and consumer compliance regulation and examination by the CFPB. Numerous other federal and state laws and regulations govern almost all aspects of the operations of the Bank and, to some degree, our operations and those of our non-bank subsidiaries as institution-affiliated parties. Actions by Federal and State Regulators Under federal and state laws and regulations pertaining to the safety and soundness of insured depository institutions, the UDFI and the FDIC have the authority to compel or restrict certain actions of the Bank if it is determined to lack sufficient capital or other resources, or is otherwise operating in a manner deemed to be inconsistent with safe and sound banking practices. Under this authority, the Bank’s regulators can require it to enter into informal or formal supervisory agreements, including board resolutions, memoranda of understanding, written agreements and consent or cease and desist orders, pursuant to which the Bank would be required to take identified corrective actions to address cited concerns and refrain from taking certain actions. 14 Enforcement Powers of Regulators As “institution-affiliated parties” of the Bank, we, our non-bank subsidiaries and our management, employees, agents, independent contractors and consultants are subject to potential civil and criminal penalties for violations of law, regulations or written orders of a government agency. Violations can include failure to timely file required reports, filing false or misleading information or submitting inaccurate reports. Civil penalties may be as high as $1,000,000 per day for such violations, and criminal penalties for some financial institution crimes may include imprisonment for 20 years. Regulators have flexibility to commence enforcement actions against institutions and institution-affiliated parties, and the FDIC has the authority to terminate deposit insurance. When issued by a banking agency, cease and desist and similar orders may, among other things, require affirmative action to correct any harm resulting from a violation or practice, including by compelling restitution, reimbursement, indemnifications or guarantees against loss. A financial institution may also be ordered to restrict its growth, dispose of certain assets, rescind agreements or contracts, or take other actions determined to be appropriate by the ordering agency. The federal banking regulators also may remove a director or officer from an insured depository institution (or bar them from the industry) if a violation is willful or reckless. In May 2014, the Bank received a Civil Investigative Demand (“CID”) from the CFPB as part of the CFPB’s separate investigation relating to customer complaints, fees and charges assessed in connection with the servicing of student loans and related collection practices of pre-Spin-Off SLM by entities now subsidiaries of Navient during a time period prior to the Spin-Off (the “CFPB Investigation”). Two state attorneys general also provided the Bank identical CIDs and other state attorneys general have become involved in the inquiry over time (collectively, the “Multi-State Investigation”). To the extent requested, the Bank has been cooperating fully with the CFPB and the attorneys general conducting the Multi-State Investigation. Given the timeframe covered by the CIDs, the CFPB Investigation and the Multi-State Investigation, and the focus on practices and procedures previously conducted by Navient and its servicing subsidiaries prior to the Spin-Off, Navient is leading the response to these investigations. Consequently, we have no basis from which to estimate either the duration or ultimate outcome of these investigations. With regard to the CFPB Investigation, we note that on January 18, 2017, the CFPB filed a complaint in federal court in Pennsylvania against Navient, along with its subsidiaries, Navient Solutions, Inc. and Pioneer Credit Recovery, Inc. The complaint alleges these Navient entities, among other things, engaged in deceptive practices with respect to their historic servicing and debt collection practices. Neither SLM, the Bank, nor any of their current subsidiaries are named in, or otherwise a party to, the lawsuit and are not alleged to have engaged in any wrongdoing. The CFPB’s complaint asserts Navient’s assumption of these liabilities pursuant to the Separation and Distribution Agreement entered into by the Company and Navient in connection with the Spin-Off (the “Separation and Distribution Agreement”). On January 18, 2017, the Illinois Attorney General filed a lawsuit in Illinois state court against Navient - its subsidiaries Navient Solutions, Inc., Pioneer Credit Recovery, Inc., and General Revenue Corporation - and the Bank arising out of the Multi-State Investigation. On March 20, 2017, the Bank moved to dismiss the Illinois Attorney General action as to the Bank, arguing, among other things, the complaint failed to allege with sufficient particularity or specificity how the Bank was responsible for any of the alleged conduct, most of which predated the Bank’s existence. On July 10, 2018, the Court granted the Bank’s motion to dismiss without prejudice. On August 7, 2018, the Illinois Attorney General filed a First Amended Complaint and, on October 9, 2018, the Bank again moved to dismiss the action based on grounds similar to those raised in its March 20, 2017 motion. The Illinois Attorney General filed its response on November 21, 2018, and the Bank filed its reply on December 10, 2018. Oral argument on the motion took place on January 9, 2019. The Court took the motion under advisement. To date, four other state attorneys general (California, Washington, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey) have filed suits against Navient and one or more of its current subsidiaries arising out of the Multi-State Investigation. Neither SLM, the Bank, nor any of their current subsidiaries are named in, or otherwise a party to, the California, Washington, Pennsylvania, or New Jersey lawsuits, and no claims are asserted against them. Each complaint asserts in its own fashion that Navient assumed responsibility under the Separation and Distribution Agreement for the alleged conduct in the complaints prior to the Spin-Off. On September 24, 2018, the Washington Attorney General served a third-party subpoena on the Bank calling for the production of certain records. The Bank has responded to the subpoena. Additional lawsuits may arise from the Multi-State Investigation which may or may not name the Company, the Bank or any of their current subsidiaries as parties to these suits. Pursuant to the terms of the Separation and Distribution Agreement, and as contemplated by the structure of the Spin-Off, Navient is legally obligated to indemnify the Bank against all claims, actions, damages, losses or expenses that may arise from the conduct of all activities of pre-Spin-Off SLM occurring prior to the Spin-Off, except for certain liabilities related to the conduct of the pre-Spin-Off consumer banking business that were specifically assumed by the Bank (and as to which the Bank is obligated to indemnify Navient). Navient has acknowledged its indemnification obligations under the Separation and Distribution Agreement, in connection with the Multi-State Investigation 15 and the related lawsuits in which the Bank has been named as a party. Navient has informed the Bank, however, that it believes that the Bank may be responsible to indemnify Navient against certain potential liabilities arising from the above-described lawsuits under the Separation and Distribution Agreement and/or a separate loan servicing agreement between the parties, and has suggested that the parties defer further discussion regarding indemnification obligations, and reimbursement of ongoing legal costs, in connection with the lawsuits until the lawsuits are resolved. The Bank disagrees with Navient’s position and the Bank has reiterated to Navient that Navient is responsible for promptly indemnifying the Bank against all liabilities arising out of the conduct of pre-Spin-Off SLM that are at issue in the Multi-State Investigation and in the above-described lawsuits. Standards for Safety and Soundness The Federal Deposit Insurance Act requires the federal banking regulatory agencies such as the FDIC to prescribe, by regulation or guidance, operational and managerial standards for all insured depository institutions, such as the Bank, relating to internal controls, information systems and audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate risk exposure, and asset quality. The agencies also must prescribe standards for earnings and stock valuation, as well as standards for compensation, fees and benefits. The federal banking regulators have implemented these required standards through regulations and interagency guidance designed to identify and address problems at insured depository institutions before capital becomes impaired. Under the regulations, if a regulator determines a bank fails to meet any prescribed standards, the regulator may require the bank to submit an acceptable plan to achieve compliance, consistent with deadlines for the submission and review of such safety and soundness compliance plans. Dividends and Share Repurchase Programs The Bank is chartered under the laws of the State of Utah and its deposits are insured by the FDIC. The Bank’s ability to pay dividends is subject to the laws of Utah and the regulations of the FDIC. Generally, under Utah’s industrial bank laws and regulations as well as FDIC regulations, the Bank may pay dividends to the Company from its net profits without regulatory approval if, following the payment of the dividend, the Bank’s capital and surplus would not be impaired. The Company pays quarterly cash dividends on its outstanding Floating-Rate Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series B (the “Series B Preferred Stock”) when, as, and if declared by its Board of Directors, in the Board’s discretion. In January 2019, the Company initiated a new policy to pay a regular, quarterly cash dividend on its common stock as well, beginning in the first quarter of 2019, and its Board of Directors approved a common stock share repurchase program. Common stock dividend declarations are subject to determination by, and the discretion of, the Company’s Board of Directors. The Company may change its common stock dividend policy at any time. The January 23, 2019 share repurchase program (the “2019 Share Repurchase Program”), which was effective upon announcement and expired on January 22, 2021, permitted the Company to repurchase from time to time shares of its common stock up to an aggregate repurchase price not to exceed $200 million. We have utilized all capacity under the 2019 Share Repurchase Program, having repurchased 17 million shares of common stock for $167 million for the year ended December 31, 2019 and 3 million shares of common stock for $33 million in the year ended December 31, 2020. The January 22, 2020 share repurchase program (the “2020 Share Repurchase Program”), which was effective upon announcement and expires on January 21, 2022, permits the Company to repurchase shares of its common stock from time to time up to an aggregate repurchase price not to exceed $600 million. Under the authority of the 2020 Share Repurchase Program, on March 10, 2020, we entered into an accelerated share repurchase agreement (“ASR”) with a third-party financial institution under which we paid $525 million for an upfront delivery of our common stock and a forward agreement. On March 11, 2020, the third-party financial institution delivered to us approximately 44.9 million shares. The final total actual number of shares of common stock delivered to us pursuant to the forward agreement was based upon the Rule 10b-18 volume-weighted average price at which the shares of our common stock traded during the regular trading sessions on the NASDAQ Global Select Market during the term of the ASR. The transactions are accounted for as equity transactions and are included in treasury stock when the shares are received, at which time there is an immediate reduction in the weighted average common shares calculation for basic and diluted earnings per share. On January 26, 2021, we completed the ASR and upon final settlement on January 28, 2021, we received an additional 13 million shares. In total, we repurchased 58 million shares under the ASR at an average price per share of $9.01. For additional information, see Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 25, “Subsequent Events.” 16 In October 2020, we initiated a cash tender offer to purchase up to 2,000,000 shares of our Series B Preferred Stock. On November 30, 2020, we accepted for purchase 1,489,304 shares of the Series B Preferred Stock at a purchase price of $45 per share plus an amount equal to accrued and unpaid dividends, for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $68 million. On January 27, 2021, the Company announced a new share repurchase program (the “2021 Share Repurchase Program”), which was effective upon announcement and expires on January 26, 2023, and permits the Company to repurchase shares of its common stock from time to time up to an aggregate repurchase price not to exceed $1.25 billion. On February 2, 2021, we announced the commencement of a tender offer (the “Tender Offer”) to purchase up to $1 billion in aggregate purchase price of our outstanding shares of common stock, par value $0.20 per share (the “Securities”) or such lesser aggregate purchase price of Securities as are properly tendered and not properly withdrawn, at a single per-Security price not greater than $15.00 nor less than $13.10 per share to the seller in cash, less any applicable withholding taxes and without interest. The Tender Offer may be amended from time to time, and will expire, upon the terms and conditions described in the relevant Tender Offer materials filed with the SEC. The results of the Tender Offer will be reflected in the Company’s financial results for the first fiscal quarter of 2021. Repurchases under the programs may occur from time to time and through a variety of methods, including tender offers, open market repurchases, repurchases effected through Rule 10b5-1 trading plans, negotiated block purchases, accelerated share repurchase programs, or other similar transactions. The timing and volume of any repurchases under the 2020 Share Repurchase Program and the 2021 Share Repurchase Program will be subject to market conditions, and there can be no guarantee that the Company will repurchase up to the limit of the programs or at all. We expect that the Bank will pay dividends to the Company as may be necessary to enable the Company to pay any declared dividends on its Series B Preferred Stock and common stock and to consummate any common share repurchases by the Company under the share repurchase programs. The Bank declared $579 million and $254 million in dividends for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively, with the proceeds primarily used to fund the 2019 and 2020 Share Repurchase Programs and stock dividends. The Bank paid no dividends on its common stock for the year ended December 31, 2018. Regulatory Capital Requirements The Bank is subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by the FDIC and the UDFI. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory and possibly additional discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial position. Under the FDIC’s regulations implementing the Basel III capital framework (“U.S. Basel III”) and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action, the Bank must meet specific capital standards that involve quantitative measures of its assets, liabilities and certain off-balance sheet items as calculated under regulatory accounting practices. The Bank’s capital amounts and its classification under the prompt corrective action framework are also subject to qualitative judgments by the regulators about components of capital, risk weightings and other factors. The Bank is subject to the following minimum capital ratios under U.S. Basel III: a Common Equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 4.5 percent, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6.0 percent, a Total risk-based capital ratio of 8.0 percent, and a Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4.0 percent. In addition, the Bank is subject to a Common Equity Tier 1 capital conservation buffer of greater than 2.5 percent. Failure to maintain the buffer will result in restrictions on the Bank’s ability to make capital distributions, including the payment of dividends, and to pay discretionary bonuses to executive officers. Including the buffer, the Bank is required to maintain the following capital ratios under U.S. Basel III in order to avoid such restrictions: a Common Equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of greater than 7.0 percent, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of greater than 8.5 percent and a Total risk-based capital ratio of greater than 10.5 percent. To qualify as “well capitalized” under the prompt corrective action framework for insured depository institutions, the Bank must maintain a Common Equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of at least 6.5 percent, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of at least 8.0 percent, a Total risk-based capital ratio of at least 10.0 percent, and a Tier 1 leverage ratio of at least 5.0 percent. On August 26, 2020, the FDIC and other federal banking agencies published a final rule that provides those banking organizations that adopt CECL (as hereinafter defined) during the 2020 calendar year with the option to delay for two years, and then phase in over the following three years, the effects on regulatory capital of CECL relative to the incurred loss methodology. We have elected to use this option. The final rule is substantially similar to an interim final rule issued on March 27, 2020. Under this final rule, because we have elected to use the deferral option, the regulatory capital impact of our transition adjustments recorded on January 1, 2020 from the adoption of CECL will be deferred for two years. In addition, from January 1, 2020 through the end of the two-year deferral period, 25 percent of the ongoing impact of CECL on our allowance for credit 17 losses, retained earnings, and average total consolidated assets, each as reported for regulatory capital purposes, will be added to the deferred transition amounts (“adjusted transition amounts”) and deferred for the two-year period. At the conclusion of the two-year period (i.e., beginning January 1, 2022), the adjusted transition amounts will be phased in for regulatory capital purposes at a rate of 25 percent per year, with the phased-in amounts included in regulatory capital at the beginning of each year. Our January 1, 2020 CECL transition amounts increased the allowance for credit losses by $1.1 billion, increased the liability representing our off-balance sheet exposure for unfunded commitments by $116 million, and increased our deferred tax asset by $306 million, resulting in a cumulative effect adjustment that reduced retained earnings by $953 million. This transition adjustment was inclusive of qualitative adjustments incorporated into our CECL allowance as necessary, to address any limitations in the models used. Stress Testing Requirements The Dodd-Frank Act as enacted imposed stress testing requirements on banking organizations with total consolidated assets, averaged over the four most recent consecutive quarters, of more than $10 billion. The Bank completed its third annual stress test (using the scenarios provided by the FDIC) with the January 1, 2018 stress testing cycle. As a result of the passage of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, signed into law on May 24, 2018, the Bank became exempt from formally filing and publishing the results. However, under regulatory guidance, the Bank still conducts annual capital stress tests, the results of which it presents to its prudential regulators - the FDIC and the UDFI - for their review. The Bank also conducts quarterly liquidity stress tests to evaluate the adequacy of its liquidity sources under various stress scenarios and provides the results to its Board of Directors. These scenarios are submitted to the Bank’s prudential regulators at their request. Deposit Insurance and Assessments Deposits at the Bank are insured up to the applicable legal limits by the FDIC - administered Deposit Insurance Fund (the “DIF”), which is funded primarily by quarterly assessments on insured banks. An insured bank’s assessment is calculated by multiplying its assessment rate by its assessment base. A bank’s assessment base and assessment rate are determined each quarter. The Bank’s insurance assessment base currently is its average consolidated total assets minus its average tangible equity during the assessment period. The Bank’s assessment rate is determined by the FDIC using a number of factors, including the results of supervisory evaluations, the Bank’s capital ratios and its financial condition, as well as the risk posed by the Bank to the DIF. Assessment rates for insured banks also are subject to adjustment depending on a number of factors, including significant holdings of brokered deposits in certain instances and the issuance or holding of certain types of debt. Deposits With respect to brokered deposits, an insured depository institution must be well capitalized under the prompt corrective action framework in order to accept, renew or roll over such deposits without FDIC clearance. An adequately capitalized insured depository institution must obtain a waiver from the FDIC to accept, renew or roll over brokered deposits. Undercapitalized insured depository institutions generally may not accept, renew or roll over brokered deposits. For more information on the Bank’s deposits, see Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Key Financial Measures — Funding Sources.” Regulatory Examinations The Bank currently undergoes regular on-site examinations by the Bank’s regulators, who examine for adherence to a range of legal and regulatory compliance responsibilities. A regulator conducting an examination has complete access to the books and records of the examined institution. The results of the examination are confidential. The cost of examinations may be assessed against the examined institution as the agency deems necessary or appropriate. Source of Strength Under the Dodd-Frank Act, we are required to serve as a source of financial strength to the Bank and to commit resources to support the Bank in circumstances when we might not do so absent the statutory requirement. Any loan by us to the Bank would be subordinate in right of payment to depositors and to certain other indebtedness of the Bank. 18 Community Reinvestment Act The Community Reinvestment Act (the “CRA”) requires the FDIC to evaluate the record of the Bank in meeting the credit needs of its local community, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. These evaluations are considered in evaluating mergers, acquisitions and applications to open a branch or facility. Failure to adequately meet these criteria could result in additional requirements and limitations on the Bank. The Bank has received a CRA rating of Outstanding. Privacy Laws The federal banking regulators, as required by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (“GLBA”), have adopted regulations that limit the ability of banks and other financial institutions to disclose nonpublic information about consumers to nonaffiliated third-parties. Financial institutions are required to disclose to consumers their policies for collecting and protecting confidential customer information. Customers generally may prevent financial institutions from sharing nonpublic personal financial information with nonaffiliated third-parties, with some exceptions, such as the processing of transactions requested by the consumer. Financial institutions generally may not disclose certain consumer or account information to any nonaffiliated third-party for use in telemarketing, direct mail marketing or other marketing. The privacy regulations also restrict information sharing among affiliates for marketing purposes and govern the use and provision of information to consumer reporting agencies. Federal and state banking agencies have prescribed standards for maintaining the security and confidentiality of consumer information, and the Bank is subject to such standards, as well as certain federal and state laws or standards for notifying consumers in the event of a security breach. In addition, we must comply with increasingly complex and rigorous data privacy and data security laws and regulatory standards enacted to protect business and personal data. These laws impose additional obligations on companies regarding the handling of personal data and provide certain individual privacy rights to persons whose data is stored. Any failure to comply with these laws and regulatory standards could subject us to legal and reputational risk. For example, California passed the California Consumer Privacy Act (the “CCPA”), which became effective on January 1, 2020, and applies to for-profit businesses that conduct business in California and meet certain revenue or data collection thresholds. The CCPA contains several exemptions, including an exemption applicable to information that is collected, processed, sold or disclosed pursuant to the GLBA. However, the definition of personal information is expanded under the CCPA to apply to certain data beyond the scope of the GLBA exemption. Misuse of or failure to secure certain personal information could result in violation of data privacy laws and regulations, proceedings against the Company by governmental entities or others, damage to our reputation and credibility and could negatively affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. If other states in the U.S. adopt similar laws or if a comprehensive federal data privacy law is enacted, we may expend considerable additional resources to meet these requirements and the overall risk to the Company could incrementally increase depending upon the reach and application of any such laws. State Regulation of Student Loan Servicers In certain states, laws regulating the conduct of student loan servicers may apply to and impact the servicing practices of the Bank. While these state laws vary in content, they generally include components relating to licensure and oversight by state authorities and the creation of specialized student loan ombudsman offices to oversee the student loan industry operating within these states. These laws may also include requirements pertaining to payment processing, customer communications, the handling of customer inquiries and complaints, information concerning loan repayment options and access to borrower account records, among other requirements. Notably, these laws often include provisions for enforcement of alleged violations by state regulators as well as private litigation by aggrieved consumers. Other Sources of Regulation Many other aspects of our businesses are subject to federal and state regulation and administrative oversight. Some of the most significant of these are described below. Oversight of Derivatives Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act requires all standardized derivatives, including most interest rate swaps, to be submitted for clearing to central intermediaries to reduce counterparty risk. Two of the central intermediaries we use are the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (the “CME”) and the London Clearing House (the “LCH”). All variation margin payments on derivatives cleared through the CME and LCH are required to be accounted for as legal settlement. As of December 31, 2020, $8.2 billion notional of our derivative contracts were cleared on the CME and $0.4 billion were cleared on the LCH. The derivative contracts cleared through the CME and the LCH represent 95.3 percent and 4.7 percent, respectively, of our total notional derivative contracts of $8.6 billion at December 31, 2020. Our exposure is limited to the value of the derivative contracts in a 19 gain position less any collateral held and plus any collateral posted. When there is a net negative exposure, we consider our exposure to the counterparty to be zero. Credit Risk Retention The Dodd-Frank risk retention rules generally require sponsors of ABS, such as Sallie Mae, to retain an economic interest in an ABS transaction that represents at least five percent of the credit risk of the assets being securitized. We early adopted the Dodd-Frank risk retention rules beginning with our 2016-A securitization transaction completed in May 2016. For our 2016-A transaction and subsequent securitizations to date, we comply with the Dodd-Frank risk retention rules by retaining (for a requisite period of time) an “eligible horizontal residual interest” comprised of residual certificates representing at least five percent of the fair value of all interests issued in the securitization transaction, determined as of the date of transfer. With any securitizations, including any loan sale transactions structured as securitizations, that are treated as off-balance sheet, we intend to comply with the Dodd-Frank risk retention rules by retaining (for a requisite period) an “eligible vertical interest” comprised of a five percent interest in each class of ABS interests issued in any such transaction or a single interest entitling the holder to five percent of any amounts payable by the trustee in respect of each interest issued by the trust. The risk retention provisions of the FDIC safe harbor rule were superseded by the Dodd-Frank risk retention rules. Anti-Money Laundering, the USA PATRIOT Act, and U.S. Economic Sanctions The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 (the “USA Patriot Act”), which amended the Bank Secrecy Act, substantially broadened the scope of United States anti-money laundering laws and regulations by imposing significant new compliance and due diligence obligations, creating new crimes and penalties and expanding the extra-territorial jurisdiction of the United States. The U.S. Treasury Department has issued and, in some cases proposed, a number of regulations that apply various requirements of the USA Patriot Act to financial institutions such as the Bank. These regulations impose obligations on financial institutions to maintain appropriate internal policies, procedures and controls to detect, prevent and report money laundering and terrorist financing and to verify the identity of their customers. In addition, U.S. law generally prohibits or substantially restricts U.S. persons from doing business with countries designated by the U.S. Department of State as state sponsors of terrorism. Under U.S. law, there are similar prohibitions or restrictions with countries subject to other U.S. economic sanctions administered by the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control or other agencies. We maintain policies and procedures designed to ensure compliance with relevant U.S. laws and regulations applicable to U.S. persons. Volcker Rule In December 2013, the U.S. banking agencies, the SEC and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission issued final rules to implement the “Volcker Rule” provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. The rules prohibit insured depository institutions and their affiliates from engaging in proprietary trading and from investing in, sponsoring or having certain financial relationships with certain private funds. These prohibitions are subject to a number of important exclusions and exemptions that, for example, permit insured depository institutions and their affiliates to trade for risk-mitigating hedging and liquidity management, subject to certain conditions and restrictions. The Volcker Rule does not have a meaningful effect on our current operations or those of our subsidiaries, as we do not materially engage in the businesses prohibited by the Volcker Rule. Human Capital Resources and Talent Development As of December 31, 2020, we had approximately 1,600 team members, all located in the United States, none of whom are covered by collective bargaining agreements. Our “MAPS” program (Manage, Apply, Practice, and Succeed), is designed to identify, and cultivate, our future leaders from existing employees of Sallie Mae. Now in its third year and seventh cohort, the MAPS program brings together mid and senior-level managers to enhance their leadership skills and build their project management capabilities through group projects and collaborative exercises. Our leadership development program, “Inspirational Leadership,” is designed to build on our leadership competencies and provide an opportunity to bring about new solutions through our business challenge. This program is offered to mid to senior-level leaders who have the potential to assume broader roles in the future. In addition to what we believe to be attractive compensation and benefits programs, our management incentive plan and long-term incentive plan provide cash and equity bonuses to employees to help incentivize employee productivity, which we believe contributes to our success. We believe that a diverse and inclusive workforce can lead to a more effective company. As of December 31, 2020, 54.1 percent of our team members were female and 40.6 percent of our team members self-identified as part of a minority 20 group. Our talent acquisition program has led to a steady increase in female and minority representation in leadership positions since 2015 across the Company. We believe an engaged workforce leads to a more innovative, productive, and profitable company. For this reason, we periodically measure employee engagement. The results from engagement surveys are used to implement programs and processes designed to keep our team members connected and growing at Sallie Mae. Ensuring the safety and well-being of our team members remains a priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. In March 2020, we enacted a robust business continuity plan, including a work-from-home policy for all team members. Our technology platform and the adaptability of our team allowed for a seamless transition to a remote working environment; and we continue to provide team members with the tools and resources necessary to continue our business. Our team members get involved in the communities where they live and work through the Sallie Mae Employee Volunteer Program and the Sallie Mae Employee Matching Gift Program. In 2020, our team members donated 861 hours through our community engagement programs and more than $60,000 in matching gifts, which efforts we believe provide a sense of inclusiveness and purpose and support our stakeholder communities. 21 Item 1A. Risk Factors PANDEMIC RISK The pandemic caused by a novel coronavirus, or COVID-19 (“COVID-19 pandemic”), and resulting adverse economic conditions have adversely impacted our business and results and, in the future, could have a more material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and/or cash flows. Any future pandemics could subject our business to the same or greater risks than the COVID-19 pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant disruption to the U.S. and world economies, including the closing of many schools and businesses for extended periods of time, significantly higher unemployment and underemployment, significantly lower interest rates, volatility in equity market valuations, and extreme volatility in the U.S. and world financial markets. Depending upon the success of the distribution, public acceptance, and administration of COVID-19 vaccines or other therapies, we expect the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the U.S. economy may be significant during a large part of 2021 and that it could materially adversely affect our operations, our regulatory capital and liquidity position, the credit performance of our Private Education Loans and other assets, the number of borrowers seeking payment relief, our results of operations and financial condition, and/or our cash flows. As described in Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Impact of COVID-19 on Sallie Mae — Customers and Credit Performance,” in this annual report on Form 10-K, during 2020 we experienced a significant increase in disaster forbearance grants, and our borrowers experienced higher levels of financial hardship, which could lead to increased levels of delinquencies and defaults in the future. Also, our loan application volumes decreased and we had lower Private Education Loan origination volumes in 2020 than we had anticipated. In addition, our employees may have to continue to work from home for a significant portion of 2021. Unanticipated issues arising from handling personal, confidential, and other information from a less efficient work-from-home environment could adversely impact our operations and lead to greater risk for us. The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic impacts our business, results of operations, financial condition, and/or cash flows will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and largely beyond our control, including the impact of the pandemic on colleges and universities, student enrollment, and the need for Private Education Loans. There can be no assurance that colleges and universities will return to normal pre-pandemic operations, which could adversely affect enrollments and, consequently, the need for Private Education Loans. In addition, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and/or cash flows will depend upon, among other factors: the scope and duration of the pandemic; the number of our employees, customers, and vendors adversely affected by the pandemic; the broader public health and economic dislocations resulting from the pandemic; the actions taken by governmental authorities to limit the public health, financial, and economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic; any legislative or regulatory changes that suspend or reduce payments or cancel or discharge obligations for education loan borrowers; any reputational damage related to the broader reception and perception of our response to the COVID-19 pandemic; and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on local, U.S., and world economies. Moreover, we expect that effects of the COVID-19 pandemic will heighten many of the other known risks to our business described below in this Item 1A, and the impact of COVID-19 on our business could be material and adverse. Any future pandemic could subject our business to the same or greater risks than the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCENTRATION RISK Our product offerings are primarily concentrated in loan products for higher education and deposit products for online depositors. Such concentrations and the competitive environment for those products subject us to risks that could adversely affect our financial position. At December 31, 2020, approximately 60 percent of our total assets, and 70 percent of our total assets excluding cash and cash equivalents, were comprised of Private Education Loans. This concentration poses the risk that any disruption, dislocation, or other negative event or trend in the Private Education Loan market or the overall economic environment could disproportionately and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. We compete in the Private Education Loan market with banks and other consumer lending institutions, many with strong consumer brand name 22 recognition and greater financial resources. Many of those lenders also have a greater level of diversification in their mix of assets, which can enable them to be more competitive in uncertain or challenging economic times. Moreover, our competition will increase as various lending institutions and other competitors, including Navient, through its Earnest subsidiary, enter or re-enter the Private Education Loan market. We also compete with FinTech companies (as defined below), many of whom have lower return hurdles than more traditional consumer lending institutions. We compete based on our brand products, origination capability, and customer service. To the extent our competitors compete more aggressively or effectively, we could lose market share to them or subject our existing loans to consolidation or refinancing risk. Competition plays a significant role in our online deposit gathering activities. The market for online deposits is highly competitive, based primarily on a combination of reputation and rate. Increased competition for deposits could cause our cost of funds to increase, which could negatively impact our loan pricing and net interest margin. In addition to competition with banks and other consumer lending institutions, the federal government, through the Federal Direct Student Loan Program (the “DSLP”), poses significant competition to our Private Education Loan products. The availability and terms of loans the government originates or guarantees affect the demand for Private Education Loans because students and their families often rely on Private Education Loans to bridge the gap between available funds, including family savings, scholarships, grants, and federal and state loans, and the costs of post-secondary education. The federal government currently places both annual and aggregate limits on the amount of federal loans any student can receive and determines the criteria for student eligibility. Parents and graduate students may obtain additional federal education loans through other programs. These federal education lending programs are generally adjusted in connection with funding authorizations from the U.S. Congress for programs under the Higher Education Act of 1965 (the “HEA”). The HEA’s reauthorization is currently pending in the U.S. Congress. Reauthorization, as well as measures to provide relief for COVID-19, could provide a legislative vehicle for changes to student loan programs. Possible components that could impact the Private Education Loan market are changes to federal education loan limits, private loan refinancing programs, or Private Education Loan forgiveness. Other components of any legislation also could have a negative impact on our business and financial condition. See “— POLITICAL/REPUTATIONAL RISK. ” Consumer access to alternative means of financing the costs of education and other factors may reduce demand for, or adversely affect our ability to retain, Private Education Loans, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or cash flows. The demand for Private Education Loans could weaken if families and student borrowers use other vehicles to bridge the gap between available funds and costs of post-secondary education. These vehicles include, among others: • Home equity loans or other borrowings available to families to finance their education costs; • Pre-paid tuition plans, which allow students to pay tuition at today’s rates to cover tuition costs in the future; • Section 529 plans, which include both pre-paid tuition plans and college savings plans that allow a family to save funds on a tax-advantaged basis; • Education IRAs, now known as Coverdell Education Savings Accounts, under which a holder can make annual contributions for education savings; • Government education loan programs such as the DSLP; and • Direct loans from colleges and universities, as well as income sharing agreements offered by schools and facilitated by private companies. In addition, our ability to grow Private Education Loan originations and retain assets at our planned levels could be negatively affected if: 23 • demographic trends in the United States result in a decrease in college-age individuals; • demand for higher education decreases; • the cost of attendance of higher education decreases; • consumers increase their targeted savings for higher education; • prepayment rates on our Private Education Loans increase or accelerate due to greater market liquidity, availability of alternative means of financing, improved household incomes, increasing consumer confidence, and/or various other factors; • there is broader public resistance to increasing higher education costs; or • proposals for new federal and state education spending described below in “Political/Reputational Risk” gain broader appeal or momentum. Consolidation or refinancing of existing Private Education Loans could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or cash flows. We believe the design of our Private Education Loan products, with emphasis on rigorous underwriting, credit-worthy cosigners and variable or fixed interest rates, creates sustainable, competitive loan products. However, increasing amounts of private education consolidation loans at interest rates below those of our existing portfolio - whether from private sources (including financial technology (“FinTech”) companies) or otherwise - can contribute to an increase in the prepayment rates of our existing Private Education Loans and, if prolonged and continuous, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or cash flows. Since 2010, there have been a number of bills introduced in the United States Congress to promote federal financing for consolidation or refinancing of existing student loans, as well as an increase in the number of lenders offering similar products. Also, on July 31, 2018, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the “OCC”) issued a policy statement announcing that it would consider applications from FinTech companies to become special purpose national banks. The special purpose national bank charter is available to qualifying companies engaged in a limited range of banking activities, including paying checks or lending money, but that do not take deposits. CREDIT RISK Defaults on our loans, particularly Private Education Loans, could adversely affect our business, financial position, results of operations, and/or cash flows. We bear the full credit exposure on our Private Education Loans and Credit Card loans, which are unsecured loans. If they were to default at rates much higher than anticipated or at speeds faster than anticipated, our business, financial position, results of operations, and/or cash flows could be adversely affected. Delinquencies are an important indicator of the potential future credit performance of those loan portfolios. Many factors can have an impact on borrower delinquencies. But rising unemployment rates and the failure of our in-school borrowers to graduate are two of the most significant macroeconomic factors that could increase loan delinquencies, defaults and loan modifications, or otherwise negatively affect performance of our existing education loan portfolios. Likewise, high unemployment may impede Private Education Loan originations growth, as loan applicants and cosigners may experience trouble repaying credit obligations or may not meet our credit standards. Additionally, if interest rates rise causing payments on variable-rate loans to increase, borrowers and cosigners could experience trouble repaying loans we have made to them. See Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Financial Condition — Allowance for Credit Losses — Use of Forbearance and Rate Modifications as a Private Education Loan Collection Tool” for a discussion of how items such as changes in credit administration practices can impact the timing and level of delinquencies and defaults on our loans. Higher credit-related losses and weaker credit quality negatively affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations and limit funding options, which could also adversely impact our liquidity position. Our Private Education Loan delinquencies (loans greater than 30 days past due), as a percentage of Private Education Loans in repayment, were 2.8 percent at December 31, 2020. Our allowance for credit 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/or results of operations. In June 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-13, “Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments,” which became effective for us on January 1, 2020. Under the new guidance, for all loans carried at amortized cost, upon loan 24 origination we are required to measure our allowance for credit losses based on our estimate of all current expected credit losses (“CECL”) over the remaining contractual term of the assets. The CECL standard resulted in a significant change in how we recognize credit losses and will have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations, and capital levels. The evaluation of our allowance for credit losses is inherently subjective, as it requires material estimates that may be subject to significant changes. The measurement of expected credit losses is based on historical information, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts to estimate the expected loss over the life of the loan. This differs significantly from the “incurred loss” model, which was in effect during 2019 and delays recognition until it is probable a loss has been incurred. Our models take into account historical loss experience in various economic conditions to estimate expected future losses based upon future economic forecasts over a period of time, at which point we revert expected losses to our historical rates. Future defaults can be higher than anticipated due to a variety of factors outside of our control, and our models may not accurately estimate future loan loss performance. The models used in calculating our CECL estimates include forecasts of future economic conditions, loss rates, prepayment rates, and recovery rates. If these forecasts prove to be inaccurate, or our models were not designed properly, our allowance for credit losses may not be sufficient to cover future losses, which could negatively impact our financial condition, results of operations, and capital levels. In addition, the amount of losses recorded under CECL is very sensitive to the inputs described above. As such, changes to these inputs could significantly change the amount of allowance necessary, which could have a negative impact on our financial results and capital levels. See Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates — Allowance for Credit Losses 2020 ” for further details. LIQUIDITY RISK Our ability to achieve our business goals will be heavily reliant on our ability to obtain deposits, obtain financing through asset-backed securitizations, and, for at least the next few years, sell loans at attractive prices to help fund any share repurchase programs that may be authorized from time to time. An inability to effectively manage our liquidity could negatively impact our ability to fund our business obligations and opportunities, which could lead to regulatory scrutiny and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and/or cash flows. We must effectively manage the liquidity risk inherent in our business. We require liquidity to meet cash requirements for such things as day-to-day operating expenses, funding of our Private Education Loan and Credit Card originations, deposit withdrawals and maturities, payment of any declared dividends on our preferred stock and common stock, and payment for any shares of common stock acquired under any common stock repurchase program or otherwise. Our primary sources of liquidity and funding are customer deposits, payments received on Private Education Loans and FFELP Loans that we hold, and proceeds from loan sales and securitization transactions. We may maintain too much liquidity, which can be costly, or we may be too illiquid, which could result in financial distress during times of economic stress or capital market disruptions. We fund Private Education Loan originations through asset-backed securitizations and deposits raised by the Bank, including term and liquid brokered and retail deposits, as well as Educational 529 and Health Savings Account deposits. Assets funded through deposits result in refinancing risk because the average term of the deposits is shorter than the expected term of the Private Education Loan assets we originate. The significant competition for deposits from other banking organizations that are also seeking stable deposits to support their funding needs may affect deposit renewal rates, costs, or availability. In addition, our ability to maintain existing balances or obtain additional deposits may be affected by factors, including those beyond our control, such as a rising stock market, perceptions about our financial strength, quality of deposit servicing or online banking generally, and general economic conditions, including high unemployment and decreased savings rates. Also, our ability to maintain our current level of deposits or grow our deposit base could be affected by regulatory restrictions, including the possible imposition by our regulators of prior approval requirements or restrictions. Our short-term success also depends on our ability to structure Private Education Loan securitizations or execute other secured funding transactions. Several factors may have a material adverse effect on both our ability to obtain such funding and the time it takes us to structure and execute these transactions, including the following: • Persistent and prolonged disruption or volatility in the capital markets or in the education loan ABS sector specifically; • Degradation of the credit quality or performance of the Private Education Loans we sell or finance through securitization trusts, or adverse rating agency assumptions, rating actions, or conclusions with respect to those trusts or the education loan-backed securitization trusts sponsored by other issuers; • A material breach of our obligations to purchasers of our Private Education Loans, including securitization trusts; 25 • The timing, pricing, and size of education loan asset-backed securitizations other parties issue, or the adverse performance of, or other problems with, such securitizations; • Challenges to the enforceability of Private Education Loans based on violations of, or changes to, federal or state consumer protection or licensing laws and related regulations, or imposition of penalties or liabilities on assignees of Private Education Loans for violation of such laws and regulations; and • Our inability to structure and gain market acceptance for new product features or services to meet new demands of ABS investors, rating agencies, or credit facility providers. If we require funding beyond that which we may be able to obtain through deposits and proceeds from ABS transactions at attractive prices, we may need to raise additional liquidity through other forms of secured and unsecured debt financing, which, in turn, could increase our funding costs and reduce our net interest margin. Our ability to sell loans at attractive prices, as well as the timing and volume of any sales, will be subject to market conditions, and there can be no guarantee that we will be able to effectuate planned loan sales at the prices, times, or volumes we desire, or at all. If we are unable to effectuate loan sales at the prices, times, and volumes we desire, we may not be able to fund share repurchase programs that are authorized from time to time or achieve other business goals. We currently maintain sufficient risk-based capital through adequate retention and reinvestment of earnings from operations. If our business objectives require capital above and beyond what we generate through retained earnings, we may need to raise capital for our business by issuing additional equity to investors. Several factors, some of which may be beyond our control, may have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise funding at any given time through any of the channels described above in this Risk Factor in the amounts, at the rates, or within the timeframes we desire or need. If this occurs, our business, results of operations, financial position, and/or cash flow could be materially and adversely affected. In structuring and facilitating securitizations or sales of Private Education Loans, administering securitization trusts, or servicing loans we have securitized or sold, we may incur liabilities to transaction parties. Under applicable state and federal securities laws, if investors incur losses as a result of purchasing ABS issued in connection with our securitization transactions, we could be deemed responsible and could be liable to investors for damages. We could also be liable to investors or other parties for certain updated performance information that we may provide subsequent to the original issuances. If we fail to cause the securitization trusts or other transaction parties to disclose adequately all material information regarding an investment in any securities, if we or the trusts make statements that are misleading in any material respect in information delivered to investors in any securities, if we breach any representations or warranties made in connection with securitization of the loans, or if we breach any other duties as the administrator or servicer of the securitization trusts, it is possible we could be sued and ultimately held liable to an investor or other transaction party. In transactions involving the sale of loans in non-securitized form where we remain the servicer of the loans, it is possible we could be sued and ultimately held liable to the purchaser of the loans or another transaction party for breaches or representations of warranties or breaches of servicing covenants. INTEREST RATE RISK The interest rate and maturity characteristics of our earning assets do not fully match the interest rate and maturity characteristics of our funding arrangements, which may negatively impact the level of our net interest income. We are also subject to repayment and prepayment risks, which can increase uncertainty as we manage our interest rate risk and can adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and/or cash flows. Net interest income is the primary source of cash flow generated by our loan portfolios. Interest earned on our Private Education Loans and FFELP Loans is either fixed-rate or indexed to a short-term variable rate, and these loans are originated with relatively long repayment periods. ABS funding closely mirrors the expected maturities of our education loans and provides a combination of fixed and variable-rate funding. Deposits are issued with both fixed and variable rates, and the average term is typically shorter than the expected term of our combined loan portfolios. The different interest rate and maturity characteristics of our loan portfolio and the liabilities funding that portfolio result in fluctuations in our net interest income. In certain interest rate environments, this mismatch may reduce our net interest margin (the interest yield earned on our portfolio less the rate paid on our interest-bearing liabilities) and net interest income. While we actively monitor and manage mismatches in the interest rate and maturity characteristics of our assets and liabilities, 26 using derivative transactions where necessary to avoid excessive levels of repricing and refunding risk, it is not possible to hedge all of our exposure to such risks. While the assets, liabilities, and related hedging derivative contract re-pricing indices are typically highly correlated, there can be no assurance that the historically high correlation will not be disrupted by capital market dislocations or other factors outside our control. In these circumstances, our earnings could be materially adversely affected. We are also subject to risks associated with changes in repayment and prepayment rates on Private Education Loans, which can increase uncertainty as we manage our interest rate risk. Consolidations and refinancings contribute to increased prepayment rates. In addition, increases in employment levels, wages, family income, alternative sources of financing, and government support for student loan borrowers during times of crisis, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic, may also contribute to higher than expected prepayment rates, which can adversely affect our interest rate and repricing risk and our financial condition and results of operations. Our use of derivatives to manage interest rate sensitivity exposes us to credit and market risk that could have a material adverse effect on our earnings. We maintain an overall interest rate strategy that uses derivatives to reduce the economic effect of interest rate changes. Developing an effective hedging strategy for dealing with movements in interest rates is complex, and no strategy can completely avoid the risks associated with these fluctuations. For example, our education loan portfolios remain subject to prepayment risk that could cause them to be under- or over-hedged, which could result in material losses. In addition, some of our interest rate risk management activities expose us to mark-to-market losses if interest rates move in a materially different way than was expected when we entered into the related derivative contracts. Our use of derivatives also exposes us to market risk and credit risk. Market risk is the chance of financial loss resulting from changes in interest rates and market liquidity. Some of the interest rate swaps we use to economically hedge interest rate risk between our assets and liabilities do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment. Therefore, the change in fair value, called the “mark-to-market,” of the swaps that do not qualify as accounting hedges is included in our statement of income. A decline in the fair value of those derivatives could have a material adverse effect on our reported earnings. We are also subject to the creditworthiness of third-parties, including various lending, investment, and derivative counterparties. Our overall counterparty exposure is more fully discussed in Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Counterparty Exposure.” If our counterparties are unable to perform their obligations, such inability could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and/or cash flows. The transition from LIBOR to an alternative reference “benchmark” interest rate is uncertain and could adversely affect the value of or the interest rates on our assets and obligations indexed to LIBOR, as well as the revenue and expenses associated with those assets and obligations. The interest rates on our variable-rate Private Education Loans and certain other assets are indexed to LIBOR, the London interbank offered rate. Certain of our interest rate swaps, notes issued under our term ABS and our education loan-backed multi-lender secured borrowing facility (the “Secured Borrowing Facility”), brokered and non-brokered deposits and other obligations also are indexed to LIBOR. In each case, the terms of the relevant agreements define LIBOR and provide differing methods for how it may be replaced or computed if LIBOR is no longer available as defined. LIBOR is used worldwide as a reference for setting interest rates on loans, derivatives, and other assets and obligations. On July 27, 2017, the United Kingdom's Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates LIBOR, publicly announced that it intends to stop persuading or compelling banks on the London interbank market to submit LIBOR rates after 2021. On December 4, 2020, the administrator of LIBOR, the ICE Benchmark Administration, published a consultation on its intention to extend the date on which the rates on most tenors of U.S. dollar LIBOR would cease being published from December 31, 2021 to June 30, 2023. Any publication beyond December 31, 2021 will need to comply with applicable regulations, including as to representativeness. U.S. banking regulators have encouraged banks to stop entering into new LIBOR-based contracts as soon as practicable and in any event by the end of 2021. It is unclear at this time, and we are not able to predict, whether or when LIBOR will cease to exist, whether or when new methods of calculating LIBOR will be established such that it continues to exist after 2021, or whether or when alternative benchmark or reference rates will be available, either through regulatory action or financial market developments, as viable alternatives to LIBOR. If one or more replacement benchmark or reference rates is available, it is unknown at this time, and we are unable to predict, whether any such alternatives will be acceptable to investors, 27 financial markets or regulators, or applied consistently and concurrently to various assets, obligations, or financial instruments. Certain of our existing assets and obligations do not include provisions clearly specifying a method for transitioning from LIBOR to an alternative benchmark rate. Given this situation, it is unclear what consents or approvals, if any, will be required to replace LIBOR under our various agreements. As a result of these potential changes and related uncertainties, the interest rates on and value of our assets and obligations indexed to LIBOR, and the revenue and expenses associated with those assets and obligations, could be affected in disparate ways at disparate times, creating basis risk and potential adverse effects on our business and results of operations. Changes to the reference rate used could result in dissatisfied customers, lenders, investors, or counterparties, which could result in reputational damage, litigation or regulatory scrutiny. The Company has actively monitored market developments with respect to LIBOR replacement since 2017 and during 2020 launched a formal cross-functional replacement project with the goal of ensuring a smooth transition to a replacement index with minimal negative impact on our customers, investors, and the Company’s business, financial condition, and results of operations. The project team monitors developments, assesses impacts, proposes plans and, with the approval of an executive committee, implements changes. The project team reports status regularly to our Board of Directors. In 2020 we began issuing certain deposits based on the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (“SOFR”). We expect to begin to issue variable-rate Private Education Loans that do not use LIBOR as a reference rate in 2021. We plan to significantly reduce the number of contracts that reference LIBOR, either through modification or replacement, by June 2023. There can be no guarantee our reference rate replacement plan will occur as expected, however, and failure to implement the plan effectively or changes in how LIBOR transition occurs could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial position, and/or cash flows. CAPITAL RISK The Bank is subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by the FDIC and the UDFI. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory and possibly additional discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and/or financial condition. Under U.S. Basel III and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action, the Bank must meet specific capital standards that involve quantitative measures of its assets, liabilities, and certain off-balance sheet items as calculated under regulatory accounting practices. The Bank’s capital amounts and its classification under the prompt corrective action framework are also subject to qualitative judgments by the regulators about components of capital, risk weightings, and other factors. If the Bank fails to satisfy regulatory risk-based or leverage capital requirements, it may be subject to serious regulatory sanctions that could prevent us from successfully executing our business plan and may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial position, and/or cash flows. See Item 1. “Business — Supervision and Regulation — Regulation of Sallie Mae Bank — Regulatory Capital Requirements.” Unfavorable results from the periodic stress scenarios we model under regulatory guidance may adversely affect our business and result in regulatory action that could adversely affect our cost of capital and liquidity position. Pursuant to regulatory guidance, the Bank conducts annual capital stress tests, modeling systemic and company-specific stress scenarios. In 2020, as the Bank responded to the macroeconomic and humanitarian challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Bank selected as its primary stress scenario its current forecast, reflecting the severe stresses anticipated due to the impact of the pandemic on our customers and the U.S. economy (including the impacts of disaster forbearance practices designed to alleviate the severity of the pandemic on our borrowers). The results of this analysis were presented to and reviewed by the Bank’s senior management, the Bank’s Board of Directors and the Board’s Risk Committee. In addition, the Bank made the results of the stress tests (its current business forecast) available to its prudential regulators - the FDIC and the UDFI. The process we utilized in 2020 was a pragmatic departure from our standard testing practices, dictated by the severity of the pandemic. Generally, the stress test results include certain measures that evaluate the Bank’s ability to absorb losses in severely adverse economic and financial conditions; the 2020 scenario analysis tested the Bank’s resources and resiliency in real time. Typically, on the basis of a stress analysis, senior management may elect to adjust its business plans or capital targets to reduce risks identified by the analysis. Our regulators may also require the Bank to raise additional capital or take other actions, or may impose restrictions on our business, based on the results of the stress tests. We may not be able to raise additional capital if required to do so, or may not be able to do so on terms that are advantageous to us. Any such capital raises, if required, may also be dilutive to our existing stockholders. 28 We also conduct quarterly liquidity stress tests to evaluate the adequacy of our liquidity sources under several stress scenarios, including a severely adverse macroeconomic scenario. In 2020, the forecast of business operations through the pandemic served as the severely adverse scenario. The results of these scenarios may lead management to determine, or regulators to demand, that higher levels of liquidity be maintained at significant incremental expense to the Bank. Changes in accounting standards, or incorrect estimates and assumptions by management in connection with the preparation of our consolidated financial statements, could adversely affect our capital levels, results of operation, and/or financial condition. We are subject to the requirements of entities that set and interpret the accounting standards governing the preparation of our financial statements and other financial reports. These entities, which include the FASB, the SEC and banking regulators, may add new requirements or change their interpretations of how those standards should be applied. Changes in our accounting policies or in accounting standards could materially affect how we report our financial condition and/or results of operations. As a result of changes to financial accounting or reporting standards, whether promulgated or required by the FASB or other regulators, we could be required to change certain of the assumptions or estimates we have previously used in preparing our financial statements, which could negatively impact how we record and report our financial condition, results of operations, and capital levels. The preparation of our consolidated financial statements requires us to make critical accounting estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, income, and expenses during the reporting periods. Incorrect estimates and assumptions by us in connection with the preparation of our consolidated financial statements could adversely affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, income, and expenses. If we make incorrect assumptions or estimates, we may under- or overstate reported financial results, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and/or results of operations. For additional information on the key areas for which assumptions and estimates are used in preparing our financial statements, see Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates” and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 2, “Significant Accounting Policies.” REGULATORY RISK Failure to comply with consumer protection, privacy, or cybersecurity laws and requirements could subject us to civil and criminal penalties or litigation, including class actions, and have a material adverse effect on our business. We are subject to a broad range of federal and state consumer protection laws applicable to our lending and retail banking activities, including laws governing fair lending, unfair, deceptive and abusive acts and practices, service member protections, interest rates and loan fees, disclosures of loan terms, marketing, servicing and collections. We are also subject to a dynamically changing landscape of privacy and cybersecurity laws, regulations, and requirements. For example, the CCPA took effect on January 1, 2020, and is broad, sweeping legislation that gives California consumers certain rights similar to those provided by the European General Data Protection Regulation. Among other things, the CCPA provides for enhanced regulatory penalties and potential statutory damages in relation to certain types of data breaches. See Item 1. “Business — Supervision and Regulation — Regulation of Sallie Mae Bank — Privacy Laws” for additional information. Violations of, or changes in, federal or state consumer protection, privacy or cybersecurity laws or related regulations, or in the prevailing interpretations thereof, may expose us to litigation, administrative fines, penalties and restitution, result in greater compliance costs, constrain the marketing and origination of Private Education Loans or other products, adversely affect the collection of balances due on the loan assets held by us or by securitization trusts or otherwise adversely affect our business. Compliance with laws and regulations can be difficult and costly, and changes to laws and regulations, as well as increased intensity in compliance and supervision activities, often impose additional compliance costs. Accordingly, we could incur substantial additional expense complying with these requirements and may be required to create new processes and information systems. Moreover, changes in federal or state consumer protection laws and related regulations, or in the prevailing interpretations thereof, could invalidate or call into question the legality of certain of our services and business practices. The CFPB is the Bank’s primary consumer compliance supervisor, with exclusive authority to conduct examinations for the purposes of assessing compliance with the requirements of Federal consumer financial laws and with primary consumer compliance enforcement authority. CFPB jurisdiction could result in additional regulation and supervision, which could 29 increase our costs and limit our ability to pursue business opportunities. The CFPB/DOE MOU could lead to additional complaints received by the CFPB regarding us, which could lead to additional scrutiny of us and increase our costs. Consent orders, decrees or settlements entered into with governmental agencies may also increase our compliance costs or restrict certain of our activities. The CFPB and the FDIC have issued guidance to supervised banks with respect to increased responsibilities to supervise the activities of service providers to ensure compliance with federal consumer protection laws. The issuance of regulatory guidance and the enforcement of the enhanced vendor management standards via examination and investigation of us or any third-party with whom we do business may increase our costs, require increased management attention and adversely impact our operations. In the event we should fail to meet the heightened standards for management of service providers, we could be subject to supervisory orders to cease and desist, civil monetary penalties, or other actions due to claimed noncompliance, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, operating results, and/or cash flows. We operate in a highly regulated environment and the laws and regulations that govern our operations, or changes in these laws and regulations, or our failure to comply with them, may adversely affect us. In addition to consumer protection laws, we are also subject to extensive regulation and supervision that govern almost all aspects of our operations. Intended to protect clients, depositors, the DIF, and the overall financial system, these laws and regulations may, among other matters: • prescribe minimum capital requirements; • limit the rates of growth of our business; • impose limitations on the business activities in which we can engage; • limit the dividends or distributions the Bank can pay to us; • limit share repurchases; • restrict the payment of discretionary bonuses to executive officers; • restrict the ability of institutions to guarantee our debt; • limit proprietary trading and investments in certain private funds; • impose certain specific accounting requirements on us that may be more restrictive; • result in changes from time to time in our practices, policies, and procedures in various areas of our business; and • result in greater or earlier charges to earnings or reductions in our capital. The FDIC has the authority to limit the Bank’s annual total balance sheet growth, but no such limitations were imposed in recent years. There can be no assurance that limitations will not be imposed in the future, however. Compliance with laws and regulations can be difficult and costly, and changes to laws and regulations, as well as increased intensity in supervision, often impose additional compliance costs. We, like the rest of the banking sector, are facing increased regulation and supervision of our industry by bank regulatory agencies and expect there may be additional and changing requirements and conditions imposed on us, any of which could increase our costs, require increased management attention and adversely impact our results of operations. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations, even if the failure is inadvertent or reflects a difference in interpretation, could subject us to fines, other penalties and restrictions on our business activities, any of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, cash flows, results of operations, capital base and/or the price of our securities. POLITICAL/REPUTATIONAL RISK Proposals of federal and state governments, or of various political candidates, affecting the student loan industry in particular, such as proposals for new federal education spending designed to make higher education “free” or substantially so regardless of financial need, or to create new federally funded programs to refinance private student loans, subject us to political risk and could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and/or cash flows. We operate in an environment of heightened political and regulatory scrutiny of education loan lending, servicing, and originations. The rising cost of higher education, questions regarding the quality of education provided, particularly among for- 30 profit institutions, and the increasing amount of student loan debt outstanding in the United States have prompted this heightened and ongoing scrutiny. This environment could lead to further proposals by political candidates and state and federal legislators and regulators, and to the enactment of laws and regulations, applicable to, or limiting, our business. For instance, over the last several years, numerous proposals for new federal spending have been discussed by political candidates and/or introduced by legislators to make higher education “free” or substantially so. Some proposals have included the potential forgiveness of substantial amounts of existing outstanding student loan indebtedness. Also, various states have proposed and/or enacted legislation providing for “free” or “substantially free” higher education to residents of the state having incomes below a certain level and who attend publicly-funded universities in the state. Moreover, since 2010, a number of bills have been introduced in the United States Congress to promote federal financing for consolidation or refinancing of existing student loans. The regulatory environment at the state level has shifted such that many states recently have enacted new legislation specifically restricting the conduct and practices of student loan servicers. The enactment of any of the proposed legislation or policies described above, even if they do not apply specifically to private education loans, could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and/or cash flows. In addition, the continued ongoing publicity regarding these various proposals, even if they are not enacted, could negatively impact the market price of our common stock. We are subject to reputational risk, which could damage our brand and have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and/or cash flows. Our reputation as an originator and servicer of high-quality Private Education Loans is very dependent upon how our customers, our regulators, legislators, the education community, and the broader market perceive our business practices, financial heath, and integrity, and the business practices, financial health, and integrity of the overall student loan market or other loan markets, as applicable. Negative publicity, including as a result of our actual or alleged conduct or public opinion of the student loan industry or other relevant industries generally, or as a result of achieving lower environmental, social, and governance, or “sustainability,” scores or ratings than those desired by certain investors, could damage our reputation and business and adversely impact the price of our common stock. Additionally, as described above, proposals of political candidates or legislators that may affect the financial industry, or the student loan industry in particular, could damage our reputation and business and adversely impact the price of our common stock. Any internal, market, or other developments, including those relating to our competitors or our business, that result in a negative impact on our reputation or the reputation of the student loan industry or other relevant industries could have an adverse effect on our ability to originate, service, and retain Private Education Loans or other loans, as applicable, result in greater regulatory, legislative, and media scrutiny, increase our risk of litigation and regulatory sanctions or other actions, and have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and/or results of operations. OPERATIONAL RISKS Failure of our operating systems or infrastructure or the inability to adapt to changes could disrupt our business, cause significant losses, result in regulatory action, or damage our reputation. Our business is dependent on our ability to process and monitor large numbers of transactions in compliance with legal and regulatory standards and our product specifications. As processing demands change and our loan portfolios grow in both volume and differing terms and conditions, developing and maintaining our operating systems and infrastructure become increasingly challenging. There is no assurance we can adequately or efficiently develop, maintain or acquire access to such systems and infrastructure. Our loan originations and the servicing, financial, accounting, data processing or other operating systems and facilities that support them may fail to operate properly, become disabled as a result of events beyond our control or be unable to be rapidly configured to timely address regulatory changes, in each case potentially adversely affecting our ability to process these transactions. Any such failure could adversely affect our ability to service our customers, result in financial loss or liability to our customers and investors, disrupt our business, result in regulatory action or cause reputational damage. Despite the plans we have in place, our ability to operate may be adversely affected by a disruption in the infrastructure that supports our businesses. Notwithstanding our efforts to maintain business continuity, a disruptive event impacting our processing locations could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or cash flows. 31 Our business processes are becoming increasingly dependent upon technological advancement, and we could lose market share if we are not able to keep pace with rapid changes in technology. Our future success depends, in part, on our ability to underwrite and approve loans, process loan applications and payments and provide other customer services, in a safe, automated manner with high-quality service standards. The volume of loan originations we are able to process is reliant on the systems and processes we have implemented and developed. These systems and processes are becoming increasingly dependent upon technological advancement, such as the ability to process loans and payments over the internet or mobile applications, accept electronic signatures and provide initial decisions instantly. Our future success also depends, in part, on our ability to develop and implement technology solutions that keep pace with continuing changes in technology, industry standards and client preferences, including FinTech developments. We may not be successful in anticipating or responding to these developments in a timely manner. We have made, and need to continue to make, investments in our technology platform to provide competitive products and services. We may be required to expend significant funds to develop or acquire new technologies. If competitors introduce products, services, and systems that are better than ours or that are more cost-effective or that gain greater market acceptance, we could lose market share. Any one of these circumstances could have a material adverse effect on our business reputation and ability to obtain and retain clients and, therefore, could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or results of operations. We depend on secure information technology and a breach of those systems or those of third-party vendors could result in significant losses, unauthorized disclosure of confidential customer information and reputational damage, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or results of operations and could lead to significant financial and legal exposure. Our operations rely on the secure collection, processing, storage and transmission of personal, confidential and other information in a significant number of customer transactions on a continuous basis through our computer systems and networks and those of our third-party service providers. Information security risks for financial institutions and third-party service providers have increased in recent years and continue to evolve in part because of the proliferation of new technologies, the use of the internet and telecommunications technologies to conduct financial transactions, and the increased sophistication and activities of organized crime, hackers, terrorists, activists and other external parties, including foreign state-sponsored actors. These parties also may fraudulently induce employees, customers and others who use our or our service providers’ systems or have access to our or our customers’ data, to gain access to our and our customers’ data or our assets. While we have not been materially impacted by cyber incidents, we continue to evolve our security controls to effectively prevent, detect and respond to the continually changing threats, and we may be required to expend significant additional resources in the future to enhance our security controls in response to new or more sophisticated threats, as well as new regulations related to cybersecurity. Additionally, while we, and our third-party service providers, commit resources to the design, implementation, maintenance, security and monitoring of our networks and systems, there is no guarantee that our security controls, or those of our third-party service providers, will protect against all threats. Despite the measures we and our third-party service providers implement to protect our systems and our or our customers’ data, we may not be able to anticipate, prevent or detect cyber-attacks, particularly because the techniques used by attackers change frequently or are not recognized until launched, and because cyber-attacks can originate from a wide variety of sources, including third parties who are or may be involved in organized crime or linked to terrorist organizations or hostile foreign governments. Such third parties may seek to gain unauthorized access to our systems either directly or using equipment or security passwords belonging to employees, customers, third-party service providers or other users of our systems or those of our third-party service providers. Or, they may seek to disrupt or disable our or our service providers’ services through attacks such as denial-of-service and ransomware attacks. In addition, we or our service providers may be unable to identify, or may be significantly delayed in identifying, cyber-attacks and incidents due to the increasing use of techniques and tools that are designed to circumvent controls, to avoid detection, and to remove or obfuscate forensic artifacts. As a result, our computer systems, software and networks, as well as those of third-party vendors we utilize, may be vulnerable to unauthorized access, computer viruses, malicious attacks and other events that could have a security impact beyond our control. We also routinely transmit and receive personal, confidential and proprietary information, some through third parties, which may be vulnerable to interception, misuse or mishandling. If one or more of such events occur, personal, confidential and other information processed by, stored in, or transmitted through our computer systems and networks, or those of third-party vendors, could be compromised or could cause interruptions or malfunctions in our or our customers’ or service providers’ operations that could result in significant losses, 32 loss of business by us and loss of confidence in us, customer dissatisfaction, significant litigation, regulatory exposures, and harm to our reputation and brand. In addition, we may be required to expend significant resources to modify our protective measures, to investigate the circumstances surrounding the event and implement mitigation and remediation measures. We also may be subject to fines, penalties, litigation (including securities fraud class action lawsuits) and regulatory investigation costs and settlements and financial losses that are either not insured against or not fully covered through any insurance maintained by us. If one or more of such events occur, our business, financial condition and/or results of operations could be significantly and adversely affected. While we seek to mitigate cyber and related risks associated with outsourcing to third-party service providers, including through our vendor management processes, both operational and technological cyber risks remain and certain risks are beyond our security and control systems. Cyber-attacks targeted at our service providers may result in unauthorized interception, misuse, mishandling, access, acquisition, loss or destruction of our or our customers’ data, or other cyber incidents, that may affect the availability of our services, and impose costs and other liabilities that significantly and adversely affect us in the ways discussed above. We depend significantly on third-parties for a wide array of our operations and customer services and key components of our information technology infrastructure, and a breach of security or service levels, or violation of law by one of these third-parties, could disrupt our business or provide our competitors with an opportunity to enhance their position at our expense. We depend significantly on third-parties for a wide array of our operations and customer services and key components of our information technology and security infrastructures. Third-party vendors are significantly involved in aspects of our servicing for Private Education Loans, FFELP Loans, Bank deposit-taking activities, payroll software and systems development, data center and operations, including the timely and secure transmission of information across our data communication network, and for other telecommunications, email, processing, storage, remittance and technology-related services in connection with our business. If a service provider fails to provide the services we require or expect, or fails to meet applicable regulatory or contractual requirements, such as service levels, protection of our customers’ personal and confidential information, or compliance with applicable laws, that failure could negatively impact our business by adversely affecting our ability to process customers’ transactions in a timely and accurate manner, otherwise hampering our ability to serve our customers and investors, or subjecting us to litigation and regulatory risk for matters as diverse as poor vendor oversight, improper release or protection of personal information, or release of incorrect information. Such a failure could adversely affect the perception of the reliability of our networks and services, and the quality of our brand, and could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and/or results of operations. We primarily rely upon Amazon Web Services to deliver our offerings to users on our platform, and any disruption of or interference with our use of Amazon Web Services could adversely impact our business and operations. Amazon Web Services (“AWS”) provides a distributed computing infrastructure platform for business operations, which is commonly referred to as “cloud” computing services. In 2019, we completed the migration of our computing infrastructure over to AWS. We currently run the majority of computing to power our websites, mobile applications, and other technology products and services on AWS, and we store a significant amount of our users’ information and our confidential business information on AWS. We have limited control over the AWS operations and facilities that we use to store our data. While we’ve implemented contingencies for disaster recovery and business continuity, those operations and facilities are susceptible to damage and/or service interruptions. AWS’ continuing and uninterrupted performance is critical to our continuing and uninterrupted operations. Given the nature of the outsourcing of these services, along with the fact that we cannot easily switch our AWS operations to another cloud provider, any disruption of or interference with our use of AWS could adversely impact our operations and business. Any negative publicity arising from these disruptions could also harm our reputation and brand and may affect the usage of our offerings. We may face risks from our operations related to litigation or regulatory actions that could result in significant legal expenses and settlement or damage awards. Defending against litigation may require significant attention and resources of management and, regardless of the outcome, such actions could result in significant expenses. If we are a party to material litigation and if the defenses we assert are ultimately unsuccessful, or if we are unable to achieve a favorable settlement, we could be liable for large damages and that could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and/or financial condition. 33 Our framework for managing risks, including model risk and data governance risk, may not be effective in mitigating our risk of loss. Our risk management framework seeks to mitigate risk and appropriately balance risk and return. We have established processes and procedures intended to identify, measure, monitor, control and report the types of risk to which we are subject. We seek to monitor and control our risk exposure through a framework of policies, procedures, limits and reporting requirements. We also rely on quantitative models to measure and manage risks and estimate certain financial values. Models may be used in such processes as product pricing, extending credit, measuring interest rate and other market risk, estimating losses, calculating and assessing capital levels, estimating the value of financial instruments and balance sheet items, and various other processes. If the models that we use to measure and/or mitigate these risks and values are poorly designed, based upon incorrect or incomplete information, poorly implemented, or are otherwise inadequate, or our governance surrounding the management of data we use in our models and other aspects of our business is poorly designed or implemented, or otherwise is inadequate, our business decisions may be adversely affected, we may provide inaccurate information to the public or regulators, and/or we may incur increased losses. In addition, there may be existing or developing risks that we have not appropriately anticipated, identified or mitigated. If our risk management framework does not effectively identify or mitigate our risks, we could suffer unexpected losses and our business, financial condition and/or results of operations could be materially adversely affected. Our internal controls over financial reporting and disclosure controls may be ineffective. Our management is responsible for maintaining, regularly assessing and, as necessary, making changes to our internal controls over financial reporting and our disclosure controls. Nevertheless, our internal controls over financial reporting and our disclosure controls can provide only reasonable assurances regarding the reliability of our financial reporting and the preparation of our financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“GAAP”) and may not prevent or detect misstatements. Any failure or circumvention of our internal controls over financial reporting or our disclosure controls, failure to comply with rules and regulations related to such controls, or failure to make sound and appropriate application of the criteria established in the framework set forth in Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and/or results of operations. RISKS RELATED TO SPIN-OFF Because of Navient’s indemnification obligations, we have significant exposures to risks related to its creditworthiness. If we are unable to obtain indemnification payments from Navient, we could experience higher than expected costs and operating expenses and our results of operations, cash flows and/or financial condition could be materially and adversely affected. Pursuant to the terms of the Separation and Distribution Agreement, and as contemplated by the structure of the Spin-Off, Navient is legally obligated to indemnify the Bank against all claims, actions, damages, losses or expenses that may arise from the conduct of all activities of pre-Spin-Off SLM occurring prior to the Spin-Off, except for certain liabilities specifically assumed by the Bank in the agreement as to which the Bank would be obligated to indemnify Navient. The Separation and Distribution Agreement provides specific processes and procedures pursuant to which we may submit claims for indemnification to Navient. If for any reason Navient is unable or unwilling to pay claims made against it, our costs, operating expenses, cash flows and/or financial condition could be materially and adversely affected over time. GENERAL RISKS The holders of our preferred stock have rights that are senior to those of our common shareholders. At December 31, 2020, we had issued and outstanding 2.5 million shares of our Series B Preferred Stock. Our Series B Preferred Stock is senior to our shares of common stock in right of payment of dividends and other distributions. Generally, we must be current on dividends payable to holders of our Series B Preferred Stock before any dividends can be paid on our common stock. We also must comply with certain provisions that are protective of the Series B Preferred Stock in order to effectuate any repurchases under our common stock share repurchase program. In the event of our 34 bankruptcy, dissolution or liquidation, the holders of our Series B Preferred Stock must be satisfied before any distributions can be made to our common shareholders. We may be limited in our ability to pay dividends on, and repurchase, our common stock. The declaration and payment of future common stock dividends, as well as the amount thereof, are subject to determination by, and the discretion of, our Board of Directors. In addition, we may change our policy regarding the payment of dividends and reduce or eliminate our common stock dividend in the future, which could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. Our share repurchase programs permit us to repurchase from time to time shares of our common stock up to an aggregate repurchase price not to exceed the authorized limits described in this Form 10-K. We may not be able to sell loans at prices, in volumes, or on a schedule, that will provide us with sufficient funds to effect share repurchases under our share repurchase programs. The timing and volume of any repurchases will be subject to market conditions, and there can be no guarantee that we will repurchase up to the limit of any program or at all, which could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. We are dependent on funds obtained from the Bank to fund dividend payments and any share repurchases. Regulatory and other legal restrictions may limit our ability to transfer funds freely, either to or from our subsidiaries. In particular, the Bank is subject to laws and regulations that authorize regulatory bodies to block or reduce the flow of funds to us, or that prohibit such transfers altogether in certain circumstances. These laws, regulations and rules may hinder our ability to access funds that we may need to make payments in respect of our stock or to satisfy our other responsibilities. The FDIC has the authority to prohibit or limit the payment of dividends by the Bank and SLM Corporation. 35 Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments None. Item 2. Properties The following table lists the principal facility owned by us as of December 31, 2020: Location Function Approximate Square Feet Newark, DE Headquarters 160,000 The following table lists the principal facilities leased by us as of December 31, 2020: Location Function Approximate Square Feet Indianapolis, IN Administrative Offices 115,000 New Castle, DE Loan Servicing Center 125,000 Sterling, VA Administrative Offices 27,000 Newton, MA Administrative Offices 24,000 Salt Lake City, UT Sallie Mae Bank 17,000 The facility that we own is not encumbered by a mortgage. We believe that our headquarters, loan servicing centers, data center, back-up facility and data management and collection centers are generally adequate to meet our long-term lending and business goals. Our headquarters are currently located in owned space at 300 Continental Drive, Newark, Delaware, 19713. 36 Item 3. Legal Proceedings We and our subsidiaries and affiliates are subject to various claims, lawsuits and other actions that arise in the normal course of business. It is common for the Company, our subsidiaries and affiliates to receive information and document requests and investigative demands from state attorneys general, legislative committees and administrative agencies. These requests may be for informational or regulatory purposes and may relate to our business practices, the industries in which we operate, or other companies with whom we conduct business. Our practice has been and continues to be to cooperate with these bodies and be responsive to any such requests. Pursuant to the terms of the Spin-Off and applicable law, Navient is responsible for all liabilities (whether accrued, contingent or otherwise and whether known or unknown) arising out of or resulting from the conduct of pre-Spin-Off SLM and its subsidiaries’ businesses prior to the Spin-Off, other than certain specifically identified liabilities relating to the conduct of our consumer banking business for which the Bank is responsible. Nonetheless, given the prior usage of the Sallie Mae and SLM names by entities now owned by Navient, we and our subsidiaries may from time to time be improperly named as defendants in legal proceedings where the allegations at issue are the legal responsibility of Navient. Most of these legal proceedings involve matters that arose in whole or in part in the ordinary course of business of pre-Spin-Off SLM. Likewise, as the period of time since the Spin-Off increases, so does the likelihood any allegations that may be made may be in part for our own actions in a post-Spin-Off time period and in part for Navient’s conduct in a pre-Spin-Off time period. We will not be providing information on these proceedings unless there are material issues of fact or disagreement with Navient as to the bases of the proceedings or responsibility therefor that we believe could have a material, adverse impact on our business, assets, financial condition, liquidity or outlook if not resolved in our favor. On January 18, 2017, the Illinois Attorney General filed a lawsuit in Illinois state court against Navient - its subsidiaries Navient Solutions, Inc., Pioneer Credit Recovery, Inc., and General Revenue Corporation - and the Bank arising out of the Multi-State Investigation. On March 20, 2017, the Bank moved to dismiss the Illinois Attorney General action as to the Bank, arguing, among other things, the complaint failed to allege with sufficient particularity or specificity how the Bank was responsible for any of the alleged conduct, most of which predated the Bank’s existence. On July 10, 2018, the Court granted the Bank’s motion to dismiss without prejudice. On August 7, 2018, the Illinois Attorney General filed a First Amended Complaint and, on October 9, 2018, the Bank again moved to dismiss the action based on grounds similar to those raised in its March 20, 2017 motion. The Illinois Attorney General filed its response on November 21, 2018, and the Bank filed its reply on December 10, 2018. Oral argument on the motion took place on January 9, 2019. The Court took the motion under advisement. To date, four other state attorneys general (California, Washington, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey) have filed suits against Navient and one or more of its current subsidiaries arising out of the Multi-State Investigation. Neither SLM, the Bank, nor any of their current subsidiaries are named in, or otherwise a party to, the California, Washington, Pennsylvania, or New Jersey lawsuits, and no claims are asserted against them. Each complaint asserts in its own fashion that Navient assumed responsibility under the Separation and Distribution Agreement for the alleged conduct in the complaints prior to the Spin-Off. On September 24, 2018, the Washington Attorney General served a third-party subpoena on the Bank calling for the production of certain records. The Bank has responded to the subpoena. Additional lawsuits may arise from the Multi-State Investigation which may or may not name the Company, the Bank or any of their current subsidiaries as parties to these suits. Pursuant to the terms of the Separation and Distribution Agreement, and as contemplated by the structure of the Spin-Off, Navient is legally obligated to indemnify the Bank against all claims, actions, damages, losses or expenses that may arise from the conduct of all activities of pre-Spin-Off SLM occurring prior to the Spin-Off, except for certain liabilities related to the conduct of the pre-Spin-Off consumer banking business that were specifically assumed by the Bank (and as to which the Bank is obligated to indemnify Navient). Navient has acknowledged its indemnification obligations under the Separation and Distribution Agreement, in connection with the Multi-State Investigation and the related lawsuits in which the Bank has been named as a party. Navient has informed the Bank, however, that it believes that the Bank may be responsible to indemnify Navient against certain potential liabilities arising from the above-described lawsuits under the Separation and Distribution Agreement and/or a separate loan servicing agreement between the parties, and has suggested that the parties defer further discussion regarding indemnification obligations, and reimbursement of ongoing legal costs, in connection with the lawsuits until the lawsuits are resolved. The Bank disagrees with Navient’s position and the Bank has reiterated to Navient that Navient is responsible for promptly indemnifying the Bank against all liabilities arising out of the conduct of pre-Spin-Off SLM that are at issue in the Multi-State Investigation and in the above-described lawsuits. 37 Regulatory Update In May 2014, the Bank received a CID from the CFPB as part of the CFPB Investigation. Two state attorneys general also provided the Bank identical CIDs and other state attorneys general have become involved in the Multi-State Investigation. To the extent requested, the Bank has been cooperating fully with the CFPB and the attorneys general conducting the Multi-State Investigation. Given the timeframe covered by the CIDs, the CFPB Investigation and the Multi-State Investigation, and the focus on practices and procedures previously conducted by Navient and its servicing subsidiaries prior to the Spin-Off, Navient is leading the response to these investigations. Consequently, we have no basis from which to estimate either the duration or ultimate outcome of these investigations. With regard to the CFPB Investigation, we note that on January 18, 2017, the CFPB filed a complaint in federal court in Pennsylvania against Navient, along with its subsidiaries, Navient Solutions, Inc. and Pioneer Credit Recovery, Inc. The complaint alleges these Navient entities, among other things, engaged in deceptive practices with respect to their historic servicing and debt collection practices. Neither SLM, the Bank, nor any of their current subsidiaries are named in, or otherwise a party to, the lawsuit and are not alleged to have engaged in any wrongdoing. The CFPB’s complaint asserts Navient’s assumption of these liabilities pursuant to the Separation and Distribution Agreement. Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures N/A 38 PART II. Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities Our common stock is listed and has traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market (“Nasdaq”) under the symbol SLM since December 12, 2011. Previously, our common stock was listed and traded on the New York Stock Exchange. As of January 31, 2021, there were 363,671,446 shares of our common stock outstanding and 264 holders of record. We paid quarterly cash dividends on our common stock of $0.03 per share for each quarter of 2020 and 2019. For the year ended December 31, 2018, we did not pay dividends on our common stock. Common stock dividend declarations are subject to determination by, and the discretion of, our Board of Directors. We may change our common stock dividend policy at any time. Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities The following table provides information relating to our purchase of shares of our common stock in the three months ended December 31, 2020. (In thousands, except per share data) Total Number of Shares Purchased (1) Average Price Paid per Share Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs (2) Approximate Dollar Value of Shares That May Yet Be Purchased Under Publicly Announced Plans or Programs (2) Period: October 1 - October 31, 2020 28 $ 9.23 — $ 75,000 November 1 - November 30, 2020 44 $ 10.60 — $ 75,000 December 1 - December 31, 2020 17 $ 11.93 — $ 75,000 Total fourth-quarter 2020 89 $ 10.43 — _________ (1) The total number of shares purchased includes: (i) shares purchased under the stock repurchase programs discussed herein, and (ii) shares of our common stock tendered to us to satisfy the exercise price in connection with cashless exercises of stock options, and tax withholding obligations in connection with exercises of stock options and vesting of restricted stock, restricted stock units and performance stock units. (2) On January 23, 2019, our Board of Directors authorized us to repurchase shares of our common stock up to an aggregate repurchase price not to exceed $200 million under the 2019 Share Repurchase Program. As of February 2020, we had utilized all capacity under the 2019 Share Repurchase Program. On January 22, 2020, our Board of Directors authorized us to repurchase shares of our common stock up to an aggregate repurchase price not to exceed $600 million under the 2020 Share Repurchase Program. The 2020 Share Repurchase Program expires on January 21, 2022. In the first quarter of 2020, we paid $525 million under an ASR agreement and received an initial delivery of 44.9 million shares. See Note 13, “Stockholders’ Equity” to our consolidated financial statements for further discussion. The closing price of our common stock on Nasdaq on December 31, 2020 was $12.39. The 2019 Share Repurchase Program expired on January 22, 2021 and permitted us to repurchase from time to time shares of our common stock up to an aggregate repurchase price not to exceed $200 million. We utilized all capacity under the 2019 Share Repurchase Program, having repurchased 17 million and 3 million shares of common stock for $167 million and $33 million in the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2020, respectively. The 2020 Share Repurchase Program expires on January 21, 2022 and permits us to repurchase shares of common stock from time to time up to an aggregate repurchase price not to exceed $600 million. 39 Under the authority of the 2020 Share Repurchase Program, on March 10, 2020, we entered into an ASR with a third-party financial institution under which we paid $525 million for an upfront delivery of our common stock and a forward agreement. On March 11, 2020, the third-party financial institution delivered to us approximately 44.9 million shares. The final total actual number of shares of common stock delivered to us pursuant to the forward agreement was based upon the Rule 10b-18 volume-weighted average price at which the shares of our common stock traded during the regular trading sessions on the NASDAQ Global Select Market during the term of the ASR. The transactions are accounted for as equity transactions and are included in treasury stock when the shares are received, at which time there is an immediate reduction in the weighted average common shares calculation for basic and diluted earnings per share. On January 26, 2021, we completed the ASR and upon final settlement on January 28, 2021, we received an additional 13 million shares. In total, we repurchased 58 million shares under the ASR at an average price per share of $9.01. For additional information, see Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 25, “Subsequent Events.” On January 27, 2021, we announced the 2021 Share Repurchase Program, which was effective upon announcement and expires on January 26, 2023, and permits us to repurchase shares of our common stock from time to time up to an aggregate repurchase price not to exceed $1.25 billion. On February 2, 2021, we announced the Tender Offer to purchase up to $1 billion in aggregate purchase price of our outstanding shares of common stock, par value $0.20 per share (the “Securities”) or such lesser aggregate purchase price of Securities as are properly tendered and not properly withdrawn, at a single per-Security price not greater than $15.00 nor less than $13.10 per share to the seller in cash, less any applicable withholding taxes and without interest. The Tender Offer may be amended from time to time, and will expire, upon the terms and conditions described in the relevant Tender Offer materials filed with the SEC. The results of the Tender Offer will be reflected in the Company’s financial results for the first fiscal quarter of 2021. Repurchases under our share repurchase programs may occur from time to time and through a variety of methods, including tender offers, open market repurchases, repurchases effected through Rule 10b5-1 trading plans, negotiated block purchases, accelerated share repurchase programs, or other similar transactions. The timing and volume of any repurchases will be subject to market conditions, and there can be no guarantee that we will repurchase up to the limit of the program or at all. In addition to any repurchases that we may make under the share repurchase programs, we expect to repurchase common stock acquired as a result of taxes withheld in connection with award exercises and vesting under our employee stock-based compensation plans. 40 Stock Performance The following graph compares the five-year cumulative total returns of SLM Corporation, the S&P Supercomposite Consumer Finance Sub-Industry Index, and the S&P 400 Regional Bank Sub-Industry Index. This graph assumes $100 was invested in the stock or the relevant index on December 31, 2015, and also assumes the reinvestment of dividends through December 31, 2020. Five-Year Cumulative Total Stockholder Return Company/Index 12/31/15 12/31/16 12/31/17 12/31/18 12/31/19 12/31/20 SLM Corporation $100.0 $169.0 $173.3 $127.5 $138.4 $195.0 S&P Supercomposite Consumer Finance Sub-Industry Index 100.0 121.4 145.8 122.2 165.0 166.4 S&P 400 Regional Bank Sub-Industry Index 100.0 133.0 139.9 110.0 137.0 125.2 _________ Source: Bloomberg Total Return Analysis 41 Item 6. Selected Financial Data. Selected Financial Data 2016-2020 (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) The following table sets forth our selected financial and other operating information. The selected financial data in the table is derived from our consolidated financial statements. The data should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements, related notes, and Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 Operating Data: Net interest income $ 1,480 $ 1,623 $ 1,413 $ 1,129 $ 891 Non-interest income (loss) 331 49 (52) (3) 69 Total revenue 1,811 1,672 1,361 1,126 960 Net income $ 881 $ 578 $ 487 $ 289 $ 250 Basic earnings per common share attributable to SLM Corporation $ 2.27 $ 1.31 $ 1.08 $ 0.63 $ 0.54 Diluted earnings per common share attributable to SLM Corporation $ 2.25 $ 1.30 $ 1.07 $ 0.62 $ 0.53 Dividends per common share attributable to SLM Corporation common shareholders (1) $ 0.12 $ 0.12 $ — $ — $ — Return on common stockholders’ equity 45 % 21 % 20 % 14 % 14 % Net interest margin 4.81 5.76 6.10 5.93 5.68 Return on assets 2.84 1.96 2.01 1.43 1.52 Dividend payout ratio 5 9 — — — Average equity/average assets 7.23 10.56 11.22 11.92 13.40 Balance Sheet Data: Total education loans held for investment portfolio, net $ 19,172 $ 23,680 $ 21,143 $ 18,174 $ 15,125 Total Personal Loans held for investment, net — 984 1,128 394 13 Total Credit Cards held for investment, net 11 4 — — — Total assets 30,770 32,686 26,638 21,780 18,533 Total deposits 22,666 24,284 18,943 15,505 13,436 Total borrowings 5,189 4,643 4,284 3,275 2,168 Total SLM Corporation stockholders’ equity 2,563 3,312 2,973 2,474 2,347 Book value per common share 6.16 6.91 5.90 4.80 4.15 _________ (1) Common stock dividend declarations are subject to determination by, and the discretion of, our Board of Directors. We may change our common stock dividend policy at any time. We did not pay common stock dividends in fiscal years 2018, 2017 and 2016. 42 Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This discussion and analysis also contains forward-looking statements and should be read in conjunction with the disclosures and information contained in “Forward-Looking and Cautionary Statements” and Item 1A. “Risk Factors” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Through this discussion and analysis, we intend to provide the reader with some narrative context for how our management views our consolidated financial statements, additional context within which to assess our operating results, and information on the quality and variability of our earnings, liquidity and cash flows. Impact of COVID-19 on Sallie Mae During the first quarter of 2020, the outbreak of coronavirus 2019 or COVID-19 (“COVID-19”) began to spread worldwide and has caused significant disruptions to the U.S. and world economies. On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak to be a pandemic. On March 13, 2020, then President Trump declared a national emergency, which made federal funds available to respond to the crisis. Beginning on March 15, 2020, many businesses closed or reduced hours throughout the U.S. to combat the spread of COVID-19. All 50 states have reported cases of COVID-19 and each has implemented various containment efforts, including lockdowns on non-essential businesses. Early in the second quarter of 2020, severe restrictions were placed on businesses to slow the growth of COVID-19 infections. Many shut down, causing the unemployment rate to increase dramatically, while others instituted a work from home regime. In response, we offered disaster forbearance to those customers who contacted us and were negatively affected by COVID-19. As the second quarter of 2020 concluded, the country experienced a significant spike in COVID-19 infections as more people left homes for work and other activities. During the third quarter of 2020, economic and consumer trends appeared to be slightly improving and progress was made on vaccine trials and possible treatments to mitigate the spread of the virus. The fourth quarter of 2020 saw a rapid economic recovery from the initial onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Concurrently, a significant spike in COVID-19 infections during the fourth quarter, and the continued threat of a surge in virus cases nationally, posed a renewed threat to the economic recovery. However, at the end of the fourth quarter, the rollout of new vaccines and the ratification of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (the “CAA”), which provides for additional COVID-19 focused relief and extends certain provisions of the CARES Act (which was signed into law on March 27, 2020 by then President Trump), contributed to a more positive long-term outlook. In addition, the new Biden administration, which has control of both houses of the U.S. Congress, has proposed additional economic stimulus in early 2021. The impact of COVID-19 is felt by our colleagues, our customers, and our communities. In response to COVID-19, we implemented efforts to safeguard our team members and enabled a remote work environment. In addition, we have taken steps to help our customers in this time of crisis. Further, The Sallie Mae Fund, our charitable arm, has made contributions to assist in our hometown communities. The following discussion highlights how we are responding and the expected impacts of COVID-19 on our business. The COVID-19 crisis is unprecedented and has had a significant impact on the economic environment globally and in the U.S. While we have highlighted below how we have responded to the pandemic and described its financial impact, there is a significant amount of uncertainty as to the length and breadth of the impact to the U.S. economy and, consequently, on us. Economists expect the impact of COVID-19 on the U.S. economy to continue to be significant well into 2021. Accordingly, the information below should be read in conjunction with our COVID-19 pandemic risk factor, see Part I, Item 1A. “Risk Factors - Pandemic Risk ” in this annual report on Form 10-K. In addition, see the forward-looking and cautionary statements discussion in this annual report on Form 10-K. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties, assumptions, and other factors that may cause actual results to be materially different from those reflected in such forward-looking statements. These factors include, among others, the risks and uncertainties set forth in Part I, Item 1A. “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this annual report on Form 10-K. Customers and Credit Performance COVID-19 is having far reaching, negative impacts on individuals, businesses, and, consequently, the overall economy. Specifically, COVID-19 has materially disrupted business operations throughout the country, resulting in significantly higher levels of unemployment or underemployment. As a result, we expect many of our individual customers will experience financial hardship, creating a challenge to meet credit standards for new loan originations and making it difficult, if not 43 impossible, to fulfill their payment obligations to us without temporary assistance. We are monitoring key metrics as early warning indicators of financial hardship, including changes in weekly unemployment claims, enrollment in auto-debit payments, requests for new forbearances, enrollment in hardship payment plans, and early delinquency metrics. As a result of the negative impact on employment from COVID-19, our customers are experiencing higher levels of financial hardship, which has led to elevated levels of forbearance, especially during the initial months of the pandemic. We expect such higher levels of financial hardship to lead to higher levels of delinquencies and defaults in the future, as borrowers who had received disaster forbearance from us re-enter repayment status. We expect that, left unabated, this deterioration in forbearance, delinquency, and default rates will persist until such time as the economy and employment return to relatively normal levels. We maintain an allowance for credit losses that incorporates multiple economic scenarios. For the year ended December 31, 2020, we considered the current economic forecasts as well as how the significant uncertainty may affect future unemployment rates and the economy in estimating our allowance for credit losses. We could experience significant changes in our allowance for credit losses as the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic becomes clearer. The process for determining our allowance contemplates material external factors that may require management adjustments. We used Moody’s Analytics economic forecasts in estimating the losses on our loan portfolio. Historically we have utilized disaster forbearance for material events, including hurricanes, wildfires, and floods. Disaster forbearance defers payments for as many as 90 days upon enrollment. In accordance with regulatory guidance that encourages lenders to work constructively with customers who have been impacted by COVID-19, we have invoked this same disaster forbearance program to assist our customers through COVID-19 and offered this program across our operations, including through mobile and self-service channels such as chat and IVR to address initial high volumes at the onset of the pandemic. We have since returned to a policy of interacting with 100 percent of these customers through our customer care and collections personnel. Customers requesting a disaster forbearance or an extension of a disaster forbearance are required to speak with our customer care and collections personnel. The first wave of disaster forbearance was granted primarily in 90-day increments. As these forbearances ended in the late second quarter and early third quarter of 2020, we have reduced the disaster forbearance to one-month increments and implemented additional discussions between our servicing agents and borrowers to encourage borrowers/cosigners to enter repayment. Customers who receive a disaster forbearance do not progress in delinquency and are not assessed late fees or other fees. During a disaster forbearance, a customer’s credit file will continue to reflect the status of the loan as it was immediately prior to granting the disaster forbearance. During the period of the disaster forbearance, interest will continue to accrue, but is not capitalized to the loan balance after the loan returns to repayment status. If the financial hardship extends beyond 90 days, additional assistance will be available for eligible customers. For example, for borrowers exiting disaster forbearance and not eligible for GRP, we may allow them to make interest only payments for 12 months before reverting to full principal and interest payments. We observed a significant increase in the use of disaster forbearance at the onset of the pandemic as businesses closed in accordance with broadly adopted ‘shelter at home’ policies and unemployment rose. While the pandemic persists, we have seen a corresponding reduction in the usage of other payment programs and defaults, given the availability of the disaster forbearance. Additionally, we have seen lower usage of automatic direct debit payments as customers manage the uncertainty associated with the pandemic. For customers experiencing financial hardship unrelated to COVID-19, our normal collection efforts and programs are in place. In the second quarter of 2020, we had planned to revise our credit administration practices to phase in (i) a required six-month period between successive grants of forbearance and between forbearance grants and certain other repayment alternatives (with exceptions for forbearances granted during the first six months following a customer’s grace period and exceptions for contractual interest rate reductions), and (ii) a limitation on the participation of delinquent customers in certain short-term extended or interest-only repayment alternatives to once in 12 months and twice in five years. Prior to full implementation of the planned credit administration practices changes, which we originally expected to have been completed by year-end 2020, we planned to conduct a controlled testing program on randomly selected customers to measure the impact of the changes on our customers, our credit operations, and key credit metrics. The testing commenced in October 2019 for some of the planned changes on a very small percentage of our total portfolio and we originally expected to expand the number of borrowers in repayment who would be subject to the new credit administration practices. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we postponed our efforts so that we can be more flexible in dealing with our customers’ financial hardship. In October 2020, we began to roll out in a methodical approach the implementation of the credit administration practices changes and related testing. Management now expects to have completed implementation of the planned credit 44 administration practices changes by year-end 2022. However, we may modify the contemplated practice changes, the proposed timeline, or the method of implementation as we learn more about the impacts of the program on our customers. To make it as easy as possible to access the assistance they need, we have communicated to our customers multiple times and in multiple ways. At the start of the pandemic, we sent all our customers an email explaining their self-serve options and how to contact us if they need assistance. We continue to send e-mails to those customers who have enrolled for COVID-19 disaster forbearance and we regularly update our website at www.SallieMae.com/coronavirus with the latest information on how our customers can access their account and get assistance or payment relief, if needed. We expect that, as the economic impact of COVID-19 evolves, we will continue to evaluate the measures we have put in place to assist our customers during this unprecedented time. We continue to adapt and evolve our customer care and collections practices to meet the needs of our customers, while operating in a safe and sound manner. Our Team Members Our team members have been affected by COVID-19 in many ways, including disruptions due to unexpected school and day-care closings, family underemployment or unemployment, and learning how to work remotely with, in some cases, new tools and technology to learn and support that work. Our goal has been to support our team members during the present uncertainty while meeting the needs of our customers and providing business continuity. Early in the crisis, we provided our team members with information about best practices to prevent the spread of COVID-19 and other viruses or illnesses. We enabled substantially all of our workforce to work remotely. In addition, we have limited in-person meetings, non-employee visits to our locations, and non-essential business travel. Based on the national and local guidelines, we developed a principles-based, phased-in approach for returning to the office, which will differ for each of our office locations. We have gathered team members’ feedback and are considering social distancing measures, workplace layout, employee schedules, and sanitation policies for each phase. The phases are a flexible framework that may shift over time as we monitor guidelines from our national and local governments and prepare for workplace readiness. To further protect the health and welfare of our people and respond to their individual circumstances, we have provided additional wellness assistance. We have also encouraged team members who potentially have been exposed to COVID-19 to self-quarantine for 14 days while we continue to pay them. To ease access to medical assistance, we are waiving co-payments for COVID-19 testing and telemedicine for those team members enrolled in our health insurance plans . Operations We have robust pandemic and business continuity plans that include our business units and technology environments. When COVID-19 advanced to a pandemic, we activated our business continuity plan. As an element of the plan, we activated our Executive Crisis Management Team (“ECMT”), a group of the most senior managers across the enterprise. The ECMT directed a series of activities to address the health and safety of our workforce, to assist customers, to sustain business operations, and to address our management of other ongoing pandemic activities. In response to a growing infected population across the United States, we executed plans for social-distancing in our facilities and implemented work-from-home contingencies. As the virus spread, we created remote-working capabilities for our call center agents and consulted with regulators about our plans. We also completed a series of additional steps to appropriately ensure compliance with our telecommuting policy. The policy is designed to create a secure at-home work environment that protects our customers’ information and transactions while also providing the necessary technology capabilities to enable effective remote-working for our team members. In addition, we enhanced the functionality of our chatbot, IVR, mobile app, and website features to help our customers manage their accounts. Initially there was a modest decline in productivity as our team members adjusted to the significant change in their work experience. However, we largely have seen productivity return to pre-COVID-19 rates and customer satisfaction survey results also have returned to pre-crisis levels. We currently believe our technology infrastructure is sufficient to maintain a remote-working environment for the vast majority of our workforce for the foreseeable future. The level and ability of our team members to continue working from home could change, however, as conditions surrounding COVID-19 evolve and infections increase, or if there are interruptions in the internet infrastructure where our team members live or if our internet service providers are otherwise adversely affected. 45 Liquidity and Capital Over the course of 2019, we significantly increased our overall liquidity position for risk management purposes and enhanced our liquidity stress testing regime. As a result of these efforts and the activities that occurred in the first quarter of 2020, described below, we currently believe our liquidity position is stable and we expect to be able to fund our business operations through 2021. However, because of the disruptions in the capital markets that occurred at the onset of the pandemic, we implemented our Contingency Funding Plan, which entailed monitoring and reporting to management our liquidity position and the health of deposit and asset-backed securities markets. In times of financial distress, we often see a flight to quality, where investors seek safer places to invest their money, such as insured bank deposits and in securities such as U.S. Treasuries and government- sponsored debt and mortgage-backed securities. We saw similar trends in the marketplace during this crisis and expect that as a well-capitalized insured depository institution, we will have ample access to deposit markets. As pandemic-related capital market disruptions abated, we de-activated the Contingency Funding Plan in October 2020, but remain watchful for signs of renewed market stress as the pandemic evolves. Maintaining our focus on earnings quality as well as prudent liquidity management, we have actively managed the cost of our retail deposits downward in response to the rapid downturn in short-term interest rates in the first nine months of 2020. Despite the lower deposit rates, we have experienced only moderate retail deposit outflows, primarily in term CDs, that are within the outflow targets our Asset and Liability Committee approved. In addition, we were able to access the brokered deposit, asset-backed security and unsecured debt markets throughout 2020. We manage our capital position through a rigorous capital stress testing regime. As a result, we believe that, given the high quality of our Private Education Loan portfolio, we have sufficient capital to withstand our current estimate of the expected downturn. If circumstances surrounding COVID-19 change in a significantly more adverse way, however, it is possible our liquidity and regulatory capital position could be materially and adversely affected, which could materially and adversely impact our business operations and our overall financial condition. See “Liquidity and Capital Resources” and “Borrowings” for additional discussion on our capital and funding activities. Regulatory agencies have also provided regulatory capital relief to financial institutions as a result of the crisis. See “ — Financial Results” for additional discussion regarding the regulatory relief. Regulatory We are regulated by the FDIC, the UDFI, and the CFPB. These agencies have encouraged regulated entities to work constructively with customers affected by COVID-19 and have provided guidance regarding loan modifications. The federal banking regulators have stated that working with customers who are current on existing loans, either individually or as part of a program for creditworthy customers who are experiencing short-term financial or operational problems as a result COVID-19, generally would not be considered TDRs. For modification programs, such as forbearance, designed to provide temporary relief for current customers affected by COVID-19, we may presume that customers who are current on payments are not experiencing financial difficulties at the time of the modification for purposes of determining TDR status, and thus no further TDR analysis is required for each loan modification in the program. In addition, the regulators have indicated their examiners will exercise judgment in reviewing loan modifications, including TDRs, and will not automatically adversely risk-rate credits that are affected by COVID-19, including those considered TDRs. Regardless of whether modifications result in loans being considered TDRs or adversely classified, bank examiners have indicated they will not criticize prudent efforts to modify the terms of existing loans to affected customers. We have briefed our regulators on the actions taken to date, including the vast majority of our employees working from home and the exceptions we have granted to our existing policies, and on privacy and security issues and how these risks have been mitigated in a work-from-home environment. Community We understand that the communities in which our employees live, work, and serve are also suffering financial distress as a result of COVID-19. Due to the growing needs of our neighbors, many of the organizations in place to provide assistance are overburdened. In March 2020, The Sallie Mae Fund donated a total of $1 million to local food banks in states home to Sallie Mae facilities. Each of the five organizations received a $200,000 grant from The Sallie Mae Fund to support emergency response efforts to combat food insecurity for those in the community impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Those efforts resulted in the donation of more than 900,000 meals and 2 million pounds of food and provided personal protective equipment for staff and food bank volunteers. 46 Financial Result s For the year ended December 31, 2020, we considered the current economic forecasts as well as the how the significant uncertainty surrounding COVID-19 may affect future unemployment rates and the economy in estimating our allowance for credit losses. While we remain cautious about the near-term economic forecasts, we changed the economic scenarios used in determining the allowance for credit losses in the fourth quarter of 2020 to a more balanced formula from the scenarios used in the second and third quarters of 2020, which gave a 50 percent weighting to the downside scenario. Provisions for credit losses for the year ended December 31, 2020, decreased by $261 million compared with the year-ago period. The allowance in 2019 was determined using an incurred loss model which, for the most part, based its allowance on expected losses over the next 12 months. On January 1, 2020, we adopted CECL, which required a life-of-loan loss allowance, and recorded an increase to the allowance for on-balance sheet loans and off-balance sheet loan commitments of $1.3 billion with an offsetting entry of $953 million in retained earnings and a $306 million deferred tax asset. After January 1, 2020, all future changes in the allowance were recorded through the provisions for credit losses. For the year ended December 31, 2020, we had provisions for credit losses of $93 million. This was the result of $290 million in additional provisions for credit losses related to new commitments made in 2020, an additional $129 million due to deteriorating economic conditions during the year as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and $99 million caused by lower recovery rates and various overlays and other adjustments applied during the year. Offsetting these was a $206 million reduction in the provisions for credit losses as a result of $2.9 billion of loans transferred to held-for-sale from held for investment in the fourth quarter of 2020, the sale of $3.1 billion of Private Education Loans in the first quarter of 2020, which resulted in a reduction to our provision for credit losses of $162 million, a benefit of $121 million from faster prepayment speeds, and the sale of our entire Personal Loan portfolio, which resulted in a reduction to our provision for credit losses of $43 million. The benefit from faster prepayment speeds reflected actual loan prepayment speeds being higher than what our models were predicting due to the significant amount of COVID-19 related government stimulus. As COVID-19 continues to impact the economy, the company could continue to experience significant changes in its allowance for credit losses in 2021. Private Education Loans (held for investment) in forbearance as a percentage of held for investment Private Education Loans in repayment and forbearance was 4.3 percent at December 31, 2020, compared to 4.1 percent at December 31, 2019. The majority of our disaster forbearances were entered into during March and April of 2020 because of COVID-19 and the resulting shelter-at-home guidance that caused many businesses to shut down during the early part of the pandemic. When these disaster forbearances expired in June and July of 2020, they were no longer considered in forbearance until the borrower requested, and was granted, an additional forbearance. Many of these borrowers went back into repayment status at the end of their original three-month disaster forbearance. Other borrowers asked for additional forbearance and we began granting those in one-month increments. In the third and fourth quarters of 2020, we saw our forbearance rate decline from the high levels we experienced in the second quarter of 2020. Higher forbearance rates in the year ended December 31, 2020 compared with the year-ago period are primarily a result of our working with customers affected by COVID-19. The majority of colleges, universities, and trade schools across the country shifted their fall 2020 semester to a hybrid model, which includes a mix of online, in-person classes and scaled back residential options. The remaining schools are executing a fully remote or on campus experience. Colleges and universities have reported their enrollment figures for fall 2020 and have indicated lower results due to an increase in freshmen deferring enrollment. With second semester courses underway, most campuses are continuing the learning model used in the fall semester. Our application volumes also decreased and our 2020 Private Education Loan origination volume was $5.3 billion, a decline of 5 percent compared to 2019. For some students, going back to school in the fall was not an option because of the pandemic, or for other reasons. Therefore, some students are taking a “gap year” before returning to school. In 2020, for those students that had unexpectedly separated from school, we provided an extension of time through fall 2021 to re-enroll, before beginning their grace period that occurs prior to entering full principal and interest repayment status. At December 31, 2020, $1.0 billion of Private Education Loans were granted this extended period of time. See “ — Financial Condition — Summary of Our Loans Held for Investment Portfolio — Ending Loans Held for Investment Balance, net” for an additional breakout of those loans. On March 27, 2020, then President Trump signed into law the CARES Act, which, among other things, allows us to (i) elect to suspend the requirements under GAAP for loan modifications related to COVID-19 that would otherwise be categorized as troubled debt restructurings (“TDRs”), and (ii) suspend any determination of a loan modified as a result of the effects of COVID-19 as being a TDR, including impairment for accounting purposes. Furthermore, on December 27, 2020, the CAA was signed into law. The CAA provides for additional COVID-19 focused relief and extends certain provisions of the CARES Act. 47 We have elected to suspend TDR accounting for modifications of loans that occur as a result of COVID-19 for the applicable period of the CARES Act and CAA relief. The relief from TDR guidance applies to modifications of loans that were not more than 30 days past due as of December 31, 2019, and that occur during the period beginning on March 1, 2020, and ending on the earlier of (i) sixty days after the date on which the national emergency related to the COVID-19 outbreak is terminated, or (ii) January 1, 2022. We are continuing to apply TDR accounting to those loans that were more than 30 days past due as of December 31, 2019 and were subsequently modified. On August 26, 2020, the federal banking agencies published a final rule that provides those banking organizations that adopt CECL during the 2020 calendar year with the option to delay for two years, and then phase in over the following three years, the effects on regulatory capital of CECL relative to the incurred loss methodology. We have elected to use this option. The final rule is substantially similar to an interim final rule issued on March 27, 2020. Under this final rule, because we have elected to use the deferral option, the regulatory capital impact of our transition adjustments recorded on January 1, 2020 from the adoption of CECL will be deferred for two years. In addition, from January 1, 2020 through the end of the two-year deferral period, 25 percent of the ongoing impact of CECL on our allowance for credit losses, retained earnings, and average total consolidated assets, each as reported for regulatory capital purposes, will be added to the deferred transition amounts (“adjusted transition amounts”) and deferred for the two-year period. At the conclusion of the two-year period (i.e., beginning January 1, 2022), the adjusted transition amounts will be phased in for regulatory capital purposes at a rate of 25 percent per year, with the phased-in amounts included in regulatory capital at the beginning of each year. Our January 1, 2020 CECL transition amounts increased the allowance for credit losses by $1.1 billion, increased the liability representing our off-balance sheet exposure for unfunded commitments by $116 million, and increased our deferred tax asset by $306 million, resulting in a cumulative effect adjustment that reduced retained earnings by $953 million. This transition adjustment was inclusive of qualitative adjustments incorporated into our CECL allowance as necessary, to address any limitations in the models used. At December 31, 2020, the adjusted transition amounts, subject to changes over the two-year phase-in period, that will be deferred for regulatory capital purposes are as follows: Transition Amounts Adjustments for the Year Ended Adjusted Transition Amounts (Dollars in thousands) January 1, 2020 December 31, 2020 December 31, 2020 Retained earnings $ 952,639 $ (57,859) $ 894,780 Allowance for credit losses 1,143,053 (55,811) 1,087,242 Liability for unfunded commitments 115,758 (2,048) 113,710 Deferred tax asset 306,171 — 306,171 48 Overview The following discussion and analysis presents a review of our business and operations as of and for the year ended December 31, 2020. Key Financial Measures Set forth below are brief summaries of our key financial measures. Our operating results are primarily driven by net interest income from our Private Education Loan portfolio, gains and losses on loan sales, provision expense for credit losses, and operating expenses. The growth of our business and the strength of our financial condition are primarily driven by our ability to achieve our annual Private Education Loan origination goals while sustaining credit quality and maintaining cost-efficient funding sources to support our originations. Net Interest Income Most of our earnings are generated from the interest income earned on assets in our education loan portfolios and on Credit Cards, net of the interest expense we pay on the funding for those loans. We report these earnings as net interest income. We also often refer to the net interest margin, which is the net interest yield earned on our interest-earning assets less the rate paid on our related interest-bearing liabilities. The majority of our interest income comes from our Private Education Loan portfolio. FFELP Loans have a lower net interest yield and carry lower risk than Private Education Loans, as a result of the federal government guarantee supporting FFELP Loans. Loan Sales and Secured Financings We may sell loans to third-parties through whole loan sales, securitizations or other similar transactions. We typically retain servicing of loans subsequent to their sale and earn revenue for this servicing at prevailing market rates for such services. Selling loans removes the loan assets from our balance sheet and helps us manage our asset growth, capital and liquidity needs. Alternatively, we may use loans as collateral in connection with the creation of asset-backed securitizations or secured funding facilities structured as financings. These types of transactions may provide us long-term financing, but they do not remove loan assets from our balance sheet, nor do they generate gains on sales of loans, net. Consequently, our operating results may be significantly affected by whether we choose to sell loans and recognize current gains on sale or continue to hold or finance loans, thereby retaining some or all the net interest income from those loans. In the first quarter of 2020, we sold $3.1 billion of our Private Education Loans, including $2.9 billion of principal, $199 million in capitalized interest, and $12 million in accrued interest, to unaffiliated third parties. In the third quarter of 2020, we sold our entire Personal Loan portfolio, including $697 million of principal and $7 million in accrued interest. For additional information, see Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 5, “Loans Held for Investment.” In the first quarter of 2021, we sold $3.0 billion of our Private Education Loans, including $2.8 billion of principal, $185 million in capitalized interest, and $15 million in accrued interest, to unaffiliated third parties. For additional information, see Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 6, “Loans Held for Sale.” Allowance for Credit Losses Management estimates and maintains an allowance for credit losses for the lifetime expected credit losses on loans in our portfolios, as well as for future loan commitments, at the reporting date. See Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates — Allowance for Credit Losses 2020.” Allowances for credit losses are an important indicator of management’s perspective on the future performance of a loan portfolio. Each quarter, management makes an adjustment to the allowance for credit losses to reflect its most up-to-date estimate of future losses by recording a charge against quarterly revenues known as provision expense. As they occur, actual loan charge-offs and recoveries are then charged or credited, respectively, against the allowance for credit losses rather than against earnings. The allowance for credit losses and provision expense rise when future charge-offs are expected to increase and fall when future charge-offs are expected to decline. We bear the full credit exposure on our Private Education Loans and Credit Cards. Losses on our Private Education Loans are affected by risk characteristics such as loan status (in-school, grace, forbearance, repayment and delinquency), loan seasoning (number of months in active repayment), underwriting criteria (e.g., credit scores), presence of a cosigner and the current economic environment. See “CREDIT RISK - Defaults on our loans, particularly Private Education Loans, could adversely affect our business, financial position, results of operations, and/or cash flows . ” in Item 1A. 49 “Risk Factors” for additional information. Losses typically emerge once a borrower separates from school and enters full principal and interest repayment after the borrower’s grace period (six months, typically) ends. As a larger proportion of our Private Education Loan portfolio enters full principal and interest repayment in the coming years, we would expect the amount of TDRs, and charge-offs, to increase. Our allowance for credit losses for FFELP Loans and related periodic provision expense are small because we generally bear a maximum of three percent loss exposure due to the federal guarantee on such loans. We maintain an allowance for credit losses for our FFELP Loans at a level sufficient to cover lifetime expected credit losses. We maintain an allowance for Credit Card losses at an amount sufficient to absorb losses estimated to cover lifetime expected credit losses. Because our Credit Card portfolio is new and we do not have historical loss experience, we use estimated loss rates reported by other financial institutions to estimate our allowance for credit losses for Credit Cards, net of expected recoveries. In addition, we use a model that utilizes purchased credit card information with risk characteristics similar to those of our own portfolio as a challenger model. We then consider any qualitative factors that may change our future expectations of losses. As all of our Credit Card loans are unconditionally cancelable by us, the issuer, we do not record any estimate of credit losses for unused portions of our Credit Card commitments. Charge-Offs and Delinquencies Delinquencies are another important indicator of potential future credit performance. When a Private Education Loan reaches 120 days delinquent, it is charged against the allowance for credit losses. We charge off Credit Cards when they are 180 days delinquent. Charge-off data provides relevant information with respect to the actual performance of a loan portfolio over time. Management focuses on delinquencies as well as the progression of loans from early to late stage delinquency as a key metric in estimating the allowance for credit losses and tailoring its future collections strategies. We manage our charged-off loans through a mix of in-house collectors, third-party collectors and sales to third-parties. Operating Expenses The cost of operating our business directly affects our profitability. We strive to manage growth in our business in a prudent fashion by focusing on investments to improve efficiency throughout the Company. We monitor and report internally various metrics, including cost to acquire and cost to service our loans (which include both owned and serviced loans), among others. The cost to acquire is affected by such variables as technology, personnel and marketing costs. Servicing expenses primarily include compensation and benefit expenses related to our collections, customer support and payment processing employees, and technology costs and other expenses associated with facilitating and servicing borrowers. Costs to service can vary period to period based upon seasonality and borrower payment status. The cost to service a delinquent borrower is significantly higher than the cost to service a current or in-school borrower. “Core Earnings” We prepare financial statements in accordance with GAAP. However, we also produce and report our after-tax earnings on a separate basis that we refer to as “Core Earnings.” The difference between our non-GAAP “Core Earnings” and GAAP results for periods presented generally is driven by the unrealized, mark-to-fair value gains (losses) on derivatives contracts recognized in GAAP, but not in “Core Earnings.” “Core Earnings” recognizes the difference in accounting treatment based upon whether a derivative qualifies for hedge accounting treatment. We enter into derivative instruments to economically hedge interest rate and cash flow risk associated with our portfolio. We believe that our derivatives are effective economic hedges and, as such, are a critical element of our interest rate risk management strategy. Those derivative instruments that qualify for hedge accounting treatment have their related cash flows recorded in interest income or interest expense along with the hedged item. Some of our derivatives do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment and the stand-alone derivative must be marked-to-fair value in the income statement with no consideration for the corresponding change in fair value of the hedged item. These gains and losses, recorded in “Gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities, net,” are primarily caused by interest rate volatility and changing credit spreads during the period as well as the volume and term of derivatives not receiving hedge accounting treatment. Cash flows on derivative instruments that do not qualify for hedge accounting are not recorded in interest income and interest expense; they are recorded in non-interest income: “Gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities, net.” For periods prior to July 1, 2018, the amount recorded in “Gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities, net” includes (a) the accrual of the current payment on those interest rate swaps that do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment, 50 (b) the change in fair values related to future expected cash flows for derivatives that do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment, and (c) ineffectiveness on derivatives that receive hedge accounting treatment. For purposes of “Core Earnings” in those periods prior to July 1, 2018, we include in GAAP earnings the current period accrual amounts (interest reclassification) on the swaps and exclude the remaining ineffectiveness (and change in fair values for those derivatives not qualifying for hedge accounting treatment). “Core Earnings” in those periods is meant to represent what earnings would have been had these derivatives qualified for hedge accounting and there was no ineffectiveness. In the third quarter of 2018, we changed our definition of “Core Earnings” to no longer exclude ineffectiveness related to derivative instruments that are receiving hedge accounting treatment. Accordingly, the only adjustments required to reconcile from our “Core Earnings” results to our GAAP results of operations, net of tax, relate to differing treatments for our derivative instruments used to hedge our economic risks that do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment. For periods beginning July 1, 2018, the amount recorded in “Gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities, net” includes (a) the accrual of the current payment on the interest rate swaps that do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment and (b) the change in fair values related to future expected cash flows for derivatives that do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment. For purposes of “Core Earnings,” we include in GAAP earnings the current period accrual amounts (interest reclassification) on the swaps and exclude the change in fair values for those derivatives not qualifying for hedge accounting treatment. “Core Earnings” is meant to represent what earnings would have been had these derivatives qualified for hedge accounting and there was no ineffectiveness. “Core Earnings” are not a substitute for reported results under GAAP. We provide a “Core Earnings” basis of presentation because (i) earnings per share computed on a “Core Earnings” basis is one of several measures we utilize in establishing management incentive compensation, and (ii) we believe it better reflects the financial results for derivatives that are economic hedges of interest rate risk, but which do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment. GAAP provides a uniform, comprehensive basis of accounting. Our “Core Earnings” basis of presentation differs from GAAP in the way it treats derivatives as described above. The following table shows the amount in “Gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities, net” that relates to the interest reclassification on the derivative contracts. Years Ended December 31, (Dollars in thousands) 2020 2019 2018 Hedge ineffectiveness gains prior to adoption of ASU No. 2017-12 (1) $ — $ — $ 2,684 Unrealized gains (losses) on instruments not in a hedging relationship 10,164 19,469 (1,400) Interest reclassification 39,380 (1,644) (1,371) Gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities, net $ 49,544 $ 17,825 $ (87) ______ (1) The hedge ineffectiveness gains of $3 million for the year ended December 31, 2018 related to hedging relationships that were discontinued in 2018 prior to the adoption of ASU No. 2017-12. 51 The following table reflects adjustments associated with our derivative activities. Years Ended December 31, (Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts) 2020 2019 2018 “ Core Earnings ” adjustments to GAAP: GAAP net income $ 880,690 $ 578,276 $ 487,476 Preferred stock dividends 9,734 16,837 15,640 GAAP net income attributable to SLM Corporation common stock $ 870,956 $ 561,439 $ 471,836 Adjustments: Net impact of derivative accounting (1) (10,164) (19,469) (1,284) Net tax expense (benefit) (2) (2,481) (4,758) (312) Total “Core Earnings” adjustments to GAAP (7,683) (14,711) (972) “Core Earnings” attributable to SLM Corporation common stock $ 863,273 $ 546,728 $ 470,864 GAAP diluted earnings per common share $ 2.25 $ 1.30 $ 1.07 Derivative adjustments, net of tax (0.02) (0.03) — “Core Earnings” diluted earnings per common share $ 2.23 $ 1.27 $ 1.07 ______ (1) Derivative Accounting: “Core Earnings” exclude periodic unrealized gains and losses caused by the mark-to-fair value valuations on derivatives that do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment under GAAP, but include current period accruals on the derivative instruments. For periods prior to July 1, 2018, “Core Earnings” also exclude the periodic unrealized gains and losses that are a result of ineffectiveness recognized related to effective hedges under GAAP, net of tax. Under GAAP, for our derivatives held to maturity, the cumulative net unrealized gain or loss over the life of the contract will equal $0. (2) “Core Earnings” tax rate is based on the effective tax rate at the Bank, where the derivative instruments are held. The following table reflects our provisions for credit losses and total portfolio net charge-offs: Years Ended December 31, (Dollars in thousands) 2020 2019 2018 Provisions for credit losses $ 93,133 $ 354,249 $ 244,864 Total portfolio net charge-offs (216,036) (253,143) (153,722) Beginning in 2020, we began to evaluate management’s performance internally using a measure that starts with “Core Earnings” net income as disclosed above for a period, and further adjusting it by increasing it by the impact of GAAP provisions for credit losses, and decreasing it by the total portfolio net charge-offs recorded in that period, net of the tax impact of these adjustments. 52 Private Education Loan Originations Private Education Loans are the principal asset on our balance sheet, and the amount of new Private Education Loan originations we generate each year is a key indicator of the trajectory of our business, including our future earnings and asset growth. Funding Sources Deposits We utilize brokered, retail and other core deposits to meet funding needs and enhance our liquidity position. These deposits can be term or liquid deposits. Our term brokered deposits have terms as long as seven years. Interest rates on a portion of our long-term deposits are swapped into one-month LIBOR. This structure has the effect of transforming the interest rate characteristics of these deposits to match the index on which the majority of our assets reset, thereby minimizing our exposure to interest rate risk. Retail deposits are sourced through a direct banking platform and serve as an important source of diversified funding. Brokered deposits are sourced through a network of brokers and provide a stable source of funding. In addition, we accept certain deposits considered non-brokered that are held in large accounts structured to allow FDIC insurance to flow through to underlying individual depositors. We diversify our funding sources with deposits from Educational 529 savings plan and Health Savings plans. These and other large omnibus accounts, aggregating the deposits of many individual depositors, represented $7.1 billion of our deposit totals as of December 31, 2020. Loan Securitizations We have diversified our funding sources by issuing term ABS and by entering into the Secured Borrowing Facility (which was previously called the asset-backed commercial paper facility, or ABCP Facility). Term ABS financing provides long-term funding for our Private Education Loan portfolio at attractive interest rates and at terms that effectively match the average life of the assets. Loans associated with these transactions will remain on our balance sheet if we retain the residual interest in these trusts. The Secured Borrowing Facility provides an extremely flexible source of funds that can be drawn upon on short notice to meet funding needs within the Bank. Borrowings under our Secured Borrowing Facility are accounted for as secured financings. 53 2020 Strategic Imperatives and Corporate Restructuring At the beginning of 2020, we were focused on executing our legacy strategy comprised of three main pillars: growing our primary student loan business, maintaining and enhancing our best-in-class customer experience platform, and continuing our efforts to diversify into other financial products. Based on these pillars, we set six goals: (1) prudently grow our Private Education Loan assets and revenues; (2) maintain our strong capital position; (3) continue our credit card initiative to increase the level of engagement with our existing customers and attract new customers; (4) manage operating expenses to improve the efficiency of our operations; (5) maintain our strong governance, risk oversight and compliance infrastructure; and (6) leverage our culture to engage employees, recognize and reward contributions to business results, and develop talent to support our business strategy and growth. With the arrival of a new CEO, and based on changing market dynamics, we undertook a comprehensive strategic review. The strategic review validated much of our previous strategy, but also highlighted several areas for greater focus. As a result, we introduced the following five strategic imperatives in the third quarter of 2020, which we believe will increase shareholder value: • Maximize the profitability and growth of our core business . Our goal is to build upon our position as the leading lender in the private student loan market to maximize profitability and growth. We will seek to expand our share of the market through initiatives to increase the volume of applications, approval rate on the applications we receive, and ultimate funding rate for customers. We will endeavor to accomplish this without diminishing our risk/return appetite and, in some cases, by enhancing it. We will also seek to improve the efficiency of our marketing and customer acquisition strategies through the implementation of robust direct to consumer marketing technologies. Finally, we will endeavor to drive greater efficiency and operating leverage through continued efficiency efforts and leveraging past investments in systems and platforms. • Optimize the value of our brand and our attractive client base. Our well-known brand, which is synonymous with student lending, is a strong asset. Our goal, however, is to improve upon it and make it a beloved brand that will strengthen our position in the private student loan industry. We will endeavor to do this by improving our current products and our servicing experience. We will focus on improving our already high customer satisfaction scores by simplifying our customer touch points. In addition, we plan to improve the presentation of our free products that help students and families plan and pay for college, such as our cost of college calculators and our scholarship search engine. A very large number of people who currently visit our website are not our borrowers. We would like to deepen our relationship with those customers to enhance our brand, improve our core business, and potentially develop new growth opportunities in the future. • Better inform the external narrative about student lending. The marketplace presents both real and perceived risk to private student lending. We will engage with bipartisan policymakers to help them better understand the role of private lenders and how Sallie Mae provides tools, resources, and responsible financing to help students and families access and complete college. • Maintain a rigorous and predictable capital allocation and return program to create shareholder value. Our goal is to remain very disciplined by generating high returns on equity in our core business and by returning capital to shareholders when it cannot be deployed in a way that generates high returns and supports our core private student lending business. We expect to continue to sell loans at premiums attractive to us and use the capital released and gains generated to repurchase shares of our common stock, if we believe the stock is undervalued by reasonable measures. Our focus on loan sales to generate capital to return to shareholders is likely to continue throughout the phase-in of the regulatory capital implications of CECL, after which period of time we intend to generate significant excess capital organically for shareholders. • Drive a mission-led culture. We believe, and research affirms, mission-led companies generate superior outcomes for customers, employees, shareholders, and other key stakeholders. To drive performance, we will continue to align and advance a culture tied directly to our mission: to power confidence as students begin their unique journey. To help align us to accomplish these initiatives, during the third quarter of 2020 we restructured our senior management team and assigned a senior management team member to be responsible for the progress of each of the imperatives described above. In addition to the senior management changes, during the third quarter of 2020, we initiated a restructuring program to reduce costs and improve operating efficiencies by better aligning our organizational structure with our new corporate strategic imperatives. In conjunction with the restructuring plan, involuntary termination benefit arrangements and certain other costs that are incremental and incurred as a direct result of our restructuring plan are classified as restructuring expenses in the 54 accompanying consolidated statements of income. Restructuring expenses of $26 million were recorded in the year ended December 31, 2020. The majority of these restructuring expenses incurred through December 31, 2020 were severance costs related to the elimination of approximately 165 positions, or approximately 9 percent of the workforce that existed as of December 31, 2019. During the third and fourth quarters of 2020, we began making progress on the corporate strategic imperatives. In the third quarter of 2020, we sold our entire Personal Loan portfolio, including $697 million of principal and $7 million in accrued interest. In the fourth quarter of 2020, we issued an unsecured debt offering of $500 million of 4.20 percent Senior Notes due October 29, 2025 at par. In October 2020, we initiated a cash tender offer to purchase up to 2,000,000 shares of our Series B preferred stock. On November 30, 2020, we accepted for purchase 1,489,304 shares of the Series B preferred stock at a purchase price of $45 per share plus an amount equal to accrued and unpaid dividends, for an aggregate purchase price of approximately $68 million. 55 Results of Operations We present the results of operations below on a consolidated basis in accordance with GAAP. GAAP Consolidated Statements of Income Increase (Decrease) Years Ended December 31, 2020 vs. 2019 2019 vs. 2018 (Dollars in millions, except per share data) 2020 2019 2018 $ % $ % Interest income: Loans $ 1,989 $ 2,249 $ 1,895 $ (260) (12) % $ 354 19 % Investments 12 8 6 4 50 2 33 Cash and cash equivalents 21 74 34 (53) (72) 40 118 Total interest income 2,022 2,331 1,935 (309) (13) 396 20 Total interest expense 542 708 522 (166) (23) 186 36 Net interest income 1,480 1,623 1,413 (143) (9) 210 15 Less: provisions for credit losses 93 354 245 (261) (74) 109 44 Net interest income after provisions for credit losses 1,387 1,269 1,168 118 9 101 9 Non-interest income (loss): Gains on sales of loans, net 238 — 2 238 100 (2) — Losses on sales of securities, net — — (2) — — 2 — Gains on derivatives and hedging activities, net 50 18 — 32 178 18 100 Other income (loss) 43 31 (52) 12 (39) 83 160 Total non-interest income (loss) 331 49 (52) 282 576 101 194 Non-interest expenses: Total operating expenses 538 574 557 (36) (6) 17 3 Restructuring expenses 26 — — 26 100 — — Total non-interest expenses 564 574 557 (10) (2) 17 3 Income before income tax expense 1,154 744 559 410 55 185 33 Income tax expense 273 165 72 108 65 94 131 Net income 881 578 487 302 52 91 19 Preferred stock dividends 10 17 16 (7) (41) 1 6 Net income attributable to SLM Corporation common stock $ 871 $ 561 $ 472 $ 310 55 % $ 89 19 % Basic earnings per common share attributable to SLM Corporation $ 2.27 $ 1.31 $ 1.08 $ 0.96 73 % $ 0.23 21 % Diluted earnings per common share attributable to SLM Corporation $ 2.25 $ 1.30 $ 1.07 $ 0.95 73 % $ 0.23 21 % Declared dividends per common share attributable to SLM Corporation $ 0.12 $ 0.12 $ — $ — — % $ 0.12 100 % 56 GAAP Consolidated Earnings Summary Year Ended December 31, 2020 Compared with Year Ended December 31, 2019 For the year ended December 31, 2020, net income was $881 million, or $2.25 diluted earnings per common share, compared with net income of $578 million, or $1.30 diluted earnings per common share, for the year ended December 31, 2019. The year-over-year increase was primarily attributable to increases in gains on sales of loans, net, lower provisions for credit losses, and lower operating expenses, which were offset by a decline in total net interest income. The primary contributors to each of the identified drivers of change in net income for the current year period compared with the year-ago period are as follows: • Net interest income in 2020 decreased by $143 million compared with the year-ago period primarily due to a 95 basis point decrease in net interest margin. Net interest margin decreased primarily due to (i) rates on our cash and short-term investments portfolio decreasing faster than our deposits repriced as interest rates fell as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as (ii) the sale of our higher yielding Personal Loan portfolio. • Provisions for credit losses for the year ended December 31, 2020, decreased by $261 million compared with the year-ago period. The allowance in 2019 was determined using an incurred loss model which, for the most part, based its allowance on expected losses over the next 12 months. On January 1, 2020, we adopted CECL, which required a life-of-loan loss allowance, and recorded an increase to the allowance for on balance sheet loans and off-balance sheet loan commitments of $1.3 billion with an offsetting entry of a $953 million reduction in retained earnings and a $306 million increase in our deferred tax asset. After January 1, 2020, all future changes in the allowance were recorded through the provisions for credit losses. For the year ended December 31, 2020, our provisions for credit losses were $93 million. This was primarily the result of $290 million in additional provision for credit losses related to new commitments made in 2020, an additional $129 million due to deteriorating economic conditions during the year as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and $99 million caused by lower recovery rates and various overlays and other adjustments applied during the year. Offsetting these was a $206 million reduction in the provisions for credit losses as a result of $2.9 billion of loans transferred to held-for-sale from held for investment in the fourth quarter of 2020, the sale of $3.1 billion of Private Education Loans in the first quarter of 2020, which resulted in a reduction to our provision for credit losses of $162 million, a benefit of $121 million from faster prepayment speeds, and the sale of our entire Personal Loan portfolio, which resulted in a reduction to our provisions for credit losses of $43 million. The benefit from faster prepayment speeds was to reflect actual loan prepayment speeds being higher than what our models were predicting due to the significant amount of COVID-19 related government stimulus. • Gains on sales of loans, net, were $238 million in 2020, primarily as a result of the sale of $3.1 billion of Private Education Loans to unaffiliated third parties in the first quarter of 2020. There were no loan sales in 2019. • Gains on derivatives and hedging activities, net, increased $32 million in 2020 compared with the year-ago period. The increase was driven by a significant decrease in interest rates during 2020 as a result of the economic impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, which caused our receive-fixed/pay-variable interest rate swaps that are not designated as accounting hedges, but are economic hedges, to increase in value. • Other income increased $12 million in 2020 from the year-ago period primarily due to an $11 million gain from the sale of our Upromise subsidiary in the second quarter of 2020, and an increase of $17 million in third-party servicing fees, offset by $13 million in lower revenue from our divested Upromise business, and an $8 million gain we recorded in the year-ago period related to changes in the valuation of certain non-marketable securities. Third-party servicing fees increased primarily as a result of the sale of $3.1 billion of Private Education loans in the first quarter of 2020 (where we continued to service the loans after they were sold). • For the year ended December 31, 2020, total operating expenses were $538 million, compared with $574 million in the year-ago period. The decrease in operating expenses was primarily driven by reduced personnel and marketing costs as a result of the suspension of Personal Loan originations and the subsequent sale of our Personal Loan portfolio, the sale of our Upromise subsidiary, lower FDIC fees, and lower employee compensation costs as a result of the restructuring, which were offset by increased costs from growth in the serviced and owned loan portfolio, CEO transition costs, and costs related to other initiatives. • Restructuring expenses for the year ended December 31, 2020 were $26 million, related to the restructuring plan we implemented in the third quarter of 2020. These expenses were primarily related to involuntary termination benefit 57 arrangements, as well as certain other costs, such as legal and consulting fees that were incremental and incurred as a direct result of our restructuring plan. There were no restructuring expenses recorded in the year-ago period. • Income tax expense for the year ended December 31, 2020 was $273 million, compared with $165 million in the year-ago period. The effective tax rate increased in 2020 to 23.7 percent from 22.2 percent in the year-ago period. The increase in the effective tax rate was primarily driven by $14 million in tax credits recorded in 2019. Year Ended December 31, 2019 Compared with Year Ended December 31, 2018 For the year ended December 31, 2019, net income was $578 million, or $1.30 diluted earnings per common share, compared with net income of $487 million, or $1.07 diluted earnings per common share, for the year ended December 31, 2018. The year-over-year increase was primarily attributable to increases in net interest income and total non-interest income, which were offset by increases in provisions for credit losses, total non-interest expenses and an increase in income tax expense. The primary contributors to each of the identified drivers of change in net income for 2019 compared with 2018 are as follows: • Net interest income in 2019 increased by $210 million compared with 2018 primarily due to a $3.1 billion increase in average loans outstanding. Net interest margin decreased by 34 basis points primarily as a result of an additional $1.8 billion in average cash and other short-term investments held in 2019 compared with 2018. In 2019, we began increasing the amount of cash and cash equivalents held to increase overall liquidity levels for risk management purposes. Yields on deposits placed with the Federal Reserve and government and agency securities are below our cost of funds, which reduces the weighted average yield on our interest-earning assets and our net interest margin. The increase in yield on our education loan portfolios in 2019 compared with 2018 was primarily due to the carryover benefit in early 2019 from the increase in LIBOR rates during 2018, which increased the yield on our variable-rate Private Education Loan and FFELP portfolios. The increase in our cost of funds in 2019 compared to 2018 was also due to the increasing rates that occurred in the latter half of 2018. The increased liquidity levels in 2019 reduced the net interest margin by approximately $11 million compared with 2018. • Provisions for credit losses in 2019 increased $109 million compared with 2018 primarily due to a higher provision for our TDR portfolio as a result of the impact of declining interest rates, higher delinquencies, and a 14 percent growth in Private Education Loans in repayment. The allowance for a TDR loan equals the difference between the carrying amount of the loan and the present value of the expected future cash flows discounted at the effective interest rate of the loan just prior to the loan’s classification as a TDR. For our variable-rate TDR loans, we locked in the discount rate at the time of TDR classification and did not adjust that rate as interest rates changed. Therefore, when interest rates increased, which they did in 2018, we recorded a lower allowance on our variable-rate TDR portfolio because of the higher future expected cash flows. Conversely, when interest rates declined, as they did during 2019, the present value of future expected cash flows of the variable-rate TDR portfolio declined and the related allowance increased. • There were no gains on sales of loans, net, in 2019. Gains on sales of loans, net, resulted in a net gain of $2 million in 2018, as we sold the $43 million Split Loan (as hereinafter defined) portfolio in second-quarter 2018. See Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Risk Management — Arrangements with Navient Corporation — Amended Loan Participation and Purchase Agreement.” • There were no sales of securities in 2019, compared with losses on sales of securities, net, of $2 million in 2018, due to the sale of $41 million of mortgage-backed securities in second-quarter 2018. • Gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities, net, resulted in a net gain of $18 million in 2019 compared with a net loss of less than $1 million in 2018. The increase was driven by several factors, including an additional $2.6 billion of notional derivative contracts entered into during 2019 that were economic hedges but did not receive hedge accounting treatment. These derivatives, as well as other derivative contracts that did not receive hedge accounting treatment, were favorably affected by interest rates and future interest rate expectations during 2019. • Other income in the year ended December 31, 2019 increased $83 million from 2018. In 2019 and 2018, we reduced other income by $12 million and $94 million, respectively, to reflect the reduction in our tax indemnification receivable because of the expiration of certain statutes of limitations related to a portion of indemnified uncertain tax positions. Absent these tax-related items, other income in 2019 increased $1 million compared to 2018. In 2019, we 58 recorded an $8 million gain related to changes in the valuation of certain non-marketable securities, which was offset by lower revenue in our Upromise business. • For the year ended December 31, 2019, non-interest expenses were $574 million, compared with $557 million in 2018. Full-year non-interest expenses grew 3 percent year-over-year. The increase in non-interest expenses was driven by the growth in our Private Education Loan portfolio and increased investments in marketing, slightly offset by a reduction in initial costs related to our migration to the cloud. • Income tax expense increased to $165 million in 2019 from $72 million in 2018. Our effective income tax rate increased to 22.2 percent in 2019 from 12.8 percent in 2018. The increase in the effective tax rate was primarily the result of a $94 million decrease in income tax expense in 2018 due to the previously mentioned expiration of certain statutes of limitations regarding a portion of indemnified uncertain tax positions. Absent that item, our effective tax rate for 2018 would have been 25.4 percent. The further decrease in the effective tax rate in 2019 was primarily driven by $14 million of tax credits recorded in 2019, the majority of which related to prior year tax filings. 59 Financial Condition Average Balance Sheets - GAAP The following table reflects the rates earned on interest-earning assets and paid on interest-bearing liabilities and reflects our net interest margin on a consolidated basis. Years Ended December 31, 2020 2019 2018 (Dollars in thousands) Balance Rate Balance Rate Balance Rate Average Assets Private Education Loans $ 22,426,216 8.42 % $ 22,225,473 9.32 % $ 19,282,500 9.10 % FFELP Loans 757,953 3.76 814,198 4.79 888,301 4.57 Personal Loans 582,552 12.43 1,141,503 12.09 900,152 11.08 Taxable securities 1,547,837 0.73 324,849 2.35 235,700 2.61 Cash and other short-term investments 5,457,234 0.40 3,693,245 2.01 1,844,404 1.88 Total interest-earning assets 30,771,792 6.57 % 28,199,268 8.27 % 23,151,057 8.36 % Non-interest-earning assets 236,536 1,318,290 1,157,628 Total assets $ 31,008,328 $ 29,517,558 $ 24,308,685 Average Liabilities and Equity Brokered deposits $ 12,777,874 1.84 % $ 11,760,646 2.66 % $ 9,028,589 2.43 % Retail and other deposits 10,772,161 1.47 9,588,747 2.44 8,142,449 2.08 Other interest-bearing liabilities (1) 4,982,771 2.98 4,658,075 3.43 3,948,001 3.37 Total interest-bearing liabilities 28,532,806 1.90 % 26,007,468 2.72 % 21,119,039 2.47 % Non-interest-bearing liabilities 234,798 392,173 461,327 Equity 2,240,724 3,117,917 2,728,319 Total liabilities and equity $ 31,008,328 $ 29,517,558 $ 24,308,685 Net interest margin 4.81 % 5.76 % 6.10 % _________________ (1) Includes the average balance of our unsecured borrowings, as well as secured borrowings and amortization expense of transaction costs related to our term asset-backed securitizations and our Secured Borrowing Facility. 60 Rate/Volume Analysis - GAAP The following rate/volume analysis shows the relative contribution of changes in interest rates and asset volumes. (Dollars in thousands) Increase (Decrease) Change Due To (1) Rate Volume 2020 vs. 2019 Interest income $ (309,372) $ (508,217) $ 198,845 Interest expense (166,050) (229,719) 63,669 Net interest income $ (143,322) $ (282,344) $ 139,022 2019 vs. 2018 Interest income $ 395,680 $ (21,847) $ 417,527 Interest expense 185,429 56,072 129,357 Net interest income $ 210,251 $ (83,975) $ 294,226 _____________ (1) Changes in income and expense due to both rate and volume have been allocated in proportion to the relationship of the absolute dollar amounts of the change in each. The changes in income and expense are calculated independently for each line in the table. The totals for the rate and volume columns are not the sum of the individual lines. Summary of Our Loans Held for Investment Portfolio Ending Loans Held for Investment Balances, net December 31, 2020 (Dollars in thousands) Private Education Loans FFELP Loans Credit Cards Total Loans Held for Investment Total loan portfolio: In-school (1) $ 3,582,394 $ 81 $ — $ 3,582,475 Grace, repayment and other (2)(3) 16,146,943 737,512 12,238 16,896,693 Total, gross 19,729,337 737,593 12,238 20,479,168 Deferred origination costs and unamortized premium/(discount) 63,475 1,993 230 65,698 Allowance for credit losses (1,355,844) (4,378) (1,501) (1,361,723) Total loans held for investment portfolio, net $ 18,436,968 $ 735,208 $ 10,967 $ 19,183,143 % of total 96 % 4 % — % 100 % _________ (1) Loans for customers still attending school and who are not yet required to make payments on the loans. At December 31, 2020, the loans in the “in-school” category include $254 million of Private Education Loans whose borrowers did not return to school in the fall of 2020 because of the pandemic, or other reasons, and who received an extension of time from us to re-enroll before beginning their grace period and, therefore, currently are not required to make any payments. For further discussion, see “— Impact of COVID-19 on Sallie Mae — Financial Results.” (2) At December 31, 2020, the loans in the “grace, repayment and other” category include (a) $147 million of Private Education Loans whose borrowers are in a grace or deferred status and who did not return to school in the fall of 2020, who received an extension of time from us to re-enroll before beginning their grace period and, therefore, currently are not required to make any payments, and (b) $639 million of Private Education Loans whose borrowers are in a forbearance or repayment status and who did not return to school in the fall of 2020 and who received an extension of time from us to re-enroll before beginning their grace period. For further discussion, see “— Impact of COVID-19 on Sallie Mae — Financial Results.” (3) Includes loans in deferment or forbearance. Loans in repayment include loans on which borrowers are making interest only or fixed payments, as well as loans that have entered full principal and interest repayment status after any applicable grace period. 61 December 31, 2019 (Dollars in thousands) Private Education Loans FFELP Loans Personal Loans Credit Cards Total Loans Held for Investment Total loan portfolio: In-school (1) $ 4,288,239 $ 81 $ — $ — $ 4,288,320 Grace, repayment and other (2) 18,901,352 783,225 1,049,007 3,884 20,737,468 Total, gross 23,189,591 783,306 1,049,007 3,884 25,025,788 Deferred origination costs and unamortized premium/(discount) 81,224 2,143 513 36 83,916 Allowance for credit losses (374,300) (1,633) (65,877) (102) (441,912) Total loans held for investment portfolio, net $ 22,896,515 $ 783,816 $ 983,643 $ 3,818 $ 24,667,792 % of total 93 % 3 % 4 % — % 100 % December 31, 2018 (Dollars in thousands) Private Education Loans FFELP Loans Personal Loans Total Loans Held for Investment Total loan portfolio: In-school (1) $ 4,037,125 $ 163 $ — $ 4,037,288 Grace, repayment and other (2) 16,467,340 846,324 1,190,091 18,503,755 Total, gross 20,504,465 846,487 1,190,091 22,541,043 Deferred origination costs and unamortized premium/(discount) 68,321 2,379 297 70,997 Allowance for credit losses (277,943) (977) (62,201) (341,121) Total loans held for investment portfolio, net $ 20,294,843 $ 847,889 $ 1,128,187 $ 22,270,919 % of total 91 % 4 % 5 % 100 % _________ (1) Loans for customers still attending school and who are not yet required to make payments on the loans. (2) Includes loans in deferment or forbearance. Loans in repayment include loans on which borrowers are making interest only or fixed payments, as well as loans that have entered full principal and interest repayment status after any applicable grace period. 62 December 31, 2017 (Dollars in thousands) Private Education Loans FFELP Loans Personal Loans Total Loans Held for Investment Total loan portfolio: In-school (1) $ 3,740,237 $ 257 $ — $ 3,740,494 Grace, repayment and other (2) 13,691,930 927,403 400,280 15,019,613 Total, gross 17,432,167 927,660 400,280 18,760,107 Deferred origination costs and unamortized premium/(discount) 56,378 2,631 — 59,009 Allowance for credit losses (243,715) (1,132) (6,628) (251,475) Total loans held for investment portfolio, net $ 17,244,830 $ 929,159 $ 393,652 $ 18,567,641 % of total 93 % 5 % 2 % 100 % December 31, 2016 (Dollars in thousands) Private Education Loans FFELP Loans Personal Loans Total Loans Held for Investment Total loan portfolio: In-school (1) $ 3,371,870 $ 377 $ — $ 3,372,247 Grace, repayment and other (2) 10,879,805 1,010,531 12,893 11,903,229 Total, gross 14,251,675 1,010,908 12,893 15,275,476 Deferred origination costs and unamortized premium/(discount) 44,206 2,941 — 47,147 Allowance for credit losses (182,472) (2,171) (58) (184,701) Total loans held for investment portfolio, net $ 14,113,409 $ 1,011,678 $ 12,835 $ 15,137,922 % of total 93 % 7 % — % 100 % _________ (1) Loans for customers still attending school and who are not yet required to make payments on the loans. (2) Includes loans in deferment or forbearance. Loans in repayment include loans on which borrowers are making interest only or fixed payments, as well as loans that have entered full principal and interest repayment status after any applicable grace period. Average Loans Held for Investment Balances (net of unamortized premium/discount) Years Ended December 31, (Dollars in thousands) 2020 2019 2018 Private Education Loans $ 22,426,216 94 % $ 22,225,473 92 % $ 19,282,500 92 % FFELP Loans 757,953 3 814,198 3 888,301 4 Personal Loans 582,552 3 1,141,503 5 900,152 4 Total portfolio $ 23,766,721 100 % $ 24,181,174 100 % $ 21,070,953 100 % 63 Loans Held for Investment, Net Activity Year Ended December 31, 2020 (Dollars in thousands) Private Education Loans (1) FFELP Loans Personal Loans Credit Cards Total Loans Held for Investment, net (1) Beginning balance $ 22,896,515 $ 783,816 $ 983,643 $ 3,818 $ 24,667,792 Day 1 CECL adjustment to allowance (1,060,830) (2,852) (79,183) (188) (1,143,053) Balance at January 1, 2020 21,835,685 780,964 904,460 3,630 23,524,739 Acquisitions and originations: Fixed-rate 2,903,258 — 41 — 2,903,299 Variable-rate 2,439,029 — — 35,955 2,474,984 Total acquisitions and originations 5,342,287 — 41 35,955 5,378,283 Capitalized interest and deferred origination cost premium amortization 616,115 27,558 (253) (819) 642,601 Sales (2,925,478) — (588,285) — (3,513,763) Loan consolidations to third-parties (1) (1,332,802) (21,243) — — (1,354,045) Allowance 79,285 107 36,526 (1,211) 114,707 Transfer to loans held-for-sale (2,885,640) — — — (2,885,640) Repayments and other (1) (2,292,484) (52,178) (352,489) (26,588) (2,723,739) Ending balance $ 18,436,968 $ 735,208 $ — $ 10,967 $ 19,183,143 _________ (1) In our Form 10-Qs for the first three fiscal quarters of 2020: (i) the “loan consolidations to third-parties” line item incorrectly included consolidation activity for loans we serviced but did not own, and (ii) the “repayments and other” line item did not correctly reflect the total of all scheduled repayments and voluntary prepayments made on loans in repayment that we owned and held for investment. The “ending balance” line item, which includes the effects of those two line items, was reflected correctly in the Form 10-Qs. The “loan consolidations to third-parties” line item was overstated in the Form 10-Qs for the first, second, and third fiscal quarters by $13 million, $45 million, and $39 million, respectively. The “repayments and other” line item was understated in the Form 10-Qs for the first, second, and third fiscal quarters by $13 million, $45 million, and $39 million, respectively. In order to correctly reflect the activity that occurred throughout 2020 regarding those line items for loans we owned and held for investment, in this Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2020, the “loan consolidations to third-parties” line item reflects a reduction of $97 million to the line item amount to reflect the aggregate overstatement for the first three fiscal quarters, and the “repayments and other” line item reflects an increase of $97 million to the line item amount to reflect the aggregate understatement for the first three fiscal quarters. The “loan consolidations to third-parties” for Private Education Loans for the fourth quarter of 2020 were $345 million, and totaled $1.3 billion for the year ended December 31, 2020. The “repayments and other” for Private Education Loans for the fourth quarter of 2020 were $576 million and totaled $2.3 billion for the year ended December 31, 2020. 64 Year Ended December 31, 2019 (Dollars in thousands) Private Education Loans FFELP Loans Personal Loans Credit Cards Total Loans Held for Investment, net Beginning balance $ 20,294,843 $ 847,889 $ 1,128,187 $ — $ 22,270,919 Acquisitions and originations: Fixed-rate 3,784,860 — 480,398 — 4,265,258 Variable-rate 1,866,914 — — 5,933 1,872,847 Total acquisitions and originations 5,651,774 — 480,398 5,933 6,138,105 Capitalized interest and deferred origination cost premium amortization 722,153 28,258 (323) — 750,088 Sales — — — — — Loan consolidations to third-parties (1,512,279) (27,461) — — (1,539,740) Allowance (96,357) (656) (3,676) (102) (100,791) Repayments and other (2,163,619) (64,214) (620,943) (2,013) (2,850,789) Ending balance $ 22,896,515 $ 783,816 $ 983,643 $ 3,818 $ 24,667,792 Year Ended December 31, 2018 (Dollars in thousands) Private Education Loans FFELP Loans Personal Loans Total Loans Held for Investment, net Beginning balance $ 17,244,830 $ 929,159 $ 393,652 $ 18,567,641 Acquisitions and originations: Fixed-rate 3,082,544 — 1,157,875 4,240,419 Variable-rate 2,252,948 — — 2,252,948 Total acquisitions and originations 5,335,492 — 1,157,875 6,493,367 Capitalized interest and deferred origination cost premium amortization 597,997 31,093 (71) 629,019 Sales (43,988) — — (43,988) Loan consolidations to third-parties (991,044) (30,076) — (1,021,120) Allowance (34,228) 155 (55,573) (89,646) Repayments and other (1,814,216) (82,442) (367,696) (2,264,354) Ending balance $ 20,294,843 $ 847,889 $ 1,128,187 $ 22,270,919 “Loan consolidations to third-parties” and “Repayments and other” are both significantly affected by the volume of loans in our held for investment portfolio in full principal and interest repayment status. Loans in full principal and interest repayment status in our Private Education Loans held for investment portfolio at December 31, 2020 decreased by 15 percent compared with December 31, 2019, and now total 49 percent of our Private Education Loans held for investment portfolio at December 31, 2020. The balance of loans held for investment in full principal and interest repayment status was affected in 2020 by loan sales and the transfer of loans from held for investment to held-for-sale. “Loan consolidations to third-parties” for the year ended December 31, 2020 total 14.7 percent of our Private Education Loans held for investment portfolio in full principal and interest repayment status at December 31, 2020, or 7.2 percent of our total Private Education Loans held for investment portfolio at December 31, 2020, compared with the year-ago period of 14.2 percent of our Private Education Loan held for investment portfolio in full principal and interest repayment status, or 6.6 percent of our total Private Education Loans held for investment portfolio, respectively. One driver of the increase in the rate of consolidations in 2020 was the result of our transferring $2.9 billion in loans to held-for-sale. Absent this transfer, the rate of consolidation activity (as a percent of our total Private Education Loan held for investment portfolio in full principal and interest repayment status) would have been 12.9 percent for the year ended December 31, 2020. The other contributor to the increase in consolidations is attributable to consolidators having ready access to funding for much of 2020 in spite of the 65 COVID-19 pandemic impact on the economy. Historical experience has shown that loan consolidation activity is heightened in the period when the loan initially enters full principal and interest repayment status and then subsides over time. The “Repayments and other” category includes all scheduled repayments, as well as voluntary prepayments, made on loans in repayment (including loans in full principal and interest repayment status) and also includes charge-offs. Consequently, this category can be significantly affected by the volume of loans in repayment. Historically, voluntary prepayments and loan consolidations decrease when unemployment increases as borrowers and lenders look to conserve liquidity. While we saw a decrease in voluntary prepayments in the second quarter of 2020 (as compared to the first quarter of 2020) as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the decrease was not as significant as we expected based upon historical experience during higher unemployment periods and has increased to closer to pre-pandemic levels in 2020 (as compared to the year-ago period). Private Education Loan Originations The following table summarizes our Private Education Loan originations. Originations represent loans that were funded or acquired during the period presented. Years Ended December 31, (Dollars in thousands) 2020 % 2019 % 2018 % Smart Option - interest only (1) $ 1,222,148 23 % $ 1,234,246 22 % $ 1,164,229 22 % Smart Option - fixed pay (1) 1,498,578 28 1,560,496 28 1,410,124 27 Smart Option - deferred (1) 1,912,978 36 2,082,147 37 2,017,927 38 Smart Option - principal and interest 9,559 — 9,806 — 8,450 — Graduate Loan 579,451 11 622,181 11 609,742 11 Parent Loan 98,023 2 115,910 2 104,771 2 Total Private Education Loan originations $ 5,320,737 100 % $ 5,624,786 100 % $ 5,315,243 100 % Percentage of loans with a cosigner 86.0 % 86.6 % 87.2 % Average FICO at approval (2) 749 746 746 ________ (1) Interest only, fixed pay and deferred describe the payment option while in school or in grace period. See Item 1. “Business - Our Business - Private Education Loans” for further discussion. (2) Represents the higher credit score of the cosigner or the borrower. 66 Allowance for Credit Losses Allowance for Credit Losses Activity Years Ended December 31, 2020 2019 (Dollars in thousands) Private Education Loans FFELP Loans Personal Loans Credit Cards Total Portfolio Private Education Loans FFELP Loans Personal Loans Credit Cards Total Portfolio Beginning balance $ 374,300 $ 1,633 $ 65,877 $ 102 $ 441,912 $ 277,943 $ 977 $ 62,201 $ — $ 341,121 Day 1 adjustment for adoption of CECL 1,060,830 2,852 79,183 188 1,143,053 — — — — — Balance at January 1, 2020 1,435,130 4,485 145,060 290 1,584,965 277,943 977 62,201 — 341,121 Transfer from unfunded commitment liability (1) 320,808 — — — 320,808 — — — — — Less: Charge-offs (205,326) (519) (39,079) (119) (245,043) (208,978) (822) (74,313) (1) (284,114) Loan sales — — (108,534) — (108,534) — — — — — Plus: Recoveries 24,021 — 4,984 2 29,007 25,765 — 5,206 — 30,971 Provisions for credit losses: Provision, current period 148,673 412 40,485 1,328 190,898 279,570 1,478 72,783 103 353,934 Loan sale reduction to provision (161,793) — (42,916) — (204,709) — — — — — Loans transferred to held-for-sale (205,669) — — — (205,669) — — — — — Total provisions for credit losses (2) (218,789) 412 (2,431) 1,328 (219,480) 279,570 1,478 72,783 103 353,934 Ending balance $ 1,355,844 $ 4,378 $ — $ 1,501 $ 1,361,723 $ 374,300 $ 1,633 $ 65,877 $ 102 $ 441,912 Troubled debt restructurings (3) $ 1,274,590 $ — $ — $ — $ 1,274,590 $ 1,581,966 $ — $ — $ — $ 1,581,966 __________ (1) See Note 8, “Unfunded Loan Commitments,” in this Form 10-K for a summary of the activity in the allowance for and balance of unfunded loan commitments, respectively. (2) For the year ended December 31, 2020, below is a reconciliation of the provision for credit losses reported in the consolidated statements of income. When a new loan commitment is made, we record the CECL allowance as a liability for unfunded commitments by recording a provision for credit losses. When the loan is funded, we transfer that liability to the allowance for credit losses. Consolidated Statements of Income Provisions for Credit Losses Reconciliation (Dollars in thousands) Year Ended December 31, 2020 Private Education Loan provisions for credit losses: Provisions for loan losses $ (218,789) Provisions for unfunded loan commitments 312,613 Total Private Education Loan provisions for credit losses 93,824 Other impacts to the provisions for credit losses: Personal Loans (2,431) FFELP Loans 412 Credit Cards 1,328 Total (691) Provisions for credit losses reported in consolidated statements of income $ 93,133 (3) Represents the unpaid principal balance of loans classified as troubled debt restructurings. 67 Years Ended December 31, 2018 2017 2016 (Dollars in thousands) Private Education Loans FFELP Loans Personal Loans Total Portfolio Private Education Loans FFELP Loans Personal Loans Total Portfolio Private Education Loans FFELP Loans Personal Loans Total Portfolio Beginning balance $ 243,715 $ 1,132 $ 6,628 $ 251,475 $ 182,472 $ 2,171 $ 58 $ 184,701 $ 108,816 $ 3,691 $ — $ 112,507 Less: Charge-offs (154,701) (1,135) (19,690) (175,526) (130,063) (954) (579) (131,596) (90,203) (1,348) — (91,551) Loan sales (1) (1,216) — — (1,216) (4,871) — — (4,871) (6,034) — — (6,034) Plus: Recoveries 20,858 — 946 21,804 17,635 — 11 17,646 10,382 — — 10,382 Provisions for loan losses 169,287 980 74,317 244,584 178,542 (85) 7,138 185,595 159,511 (172) 58 159,397 Ending balance $ 277,943 $ 977 $ 62,201 $ 341,121 $ 243,715 $ 1,132 $ 6,628 $ 251,475 $ 182,472 $ 2,171 $ 58 $ 184,701 Troubled debt restructurings (2) $ 1,257,856 $ — $ — $ 1,257,856 $ 990,351 $ — $ — $ 990,351 $ 612,606 $ — $ — $ 612,606 _________ (1) Represents fair value adjustments on loans sold. (2) Represents the unpaid principal balance of loans classified as troubled debt restructurings. Private Education Loan Allowance for Credit Losses In establishing the allowance for Private Education Loan losses as of December 31, 2020, we considered several factors with respect to our Private Education Loan held for investment portfolio, in particular, credit quality and delinquency, forbearance and charge-off trends. Private Education Loans held for investment in full principal and interest repayment status were 49 percent of our total Private Education Loans held for investment portfolio at December 31, 2020, compared with 46 percent at December 31, 2019. For a more detailed discussion of our policy for determining the collectability of Private Education Loans and maintaining our allowance for Private Education Loans, see “—Allowance for Credit Losses” and Note 5, “Loans Held for Investment — Certain Collection Tools - Private Education Loans” in this Form 10-K. 68 The table below presents our Private Education Loans held for investment portfolio delinquency trends. Loans in repayment include loans on which borrowers are making interest only or fixed payments, as well as loans that have entered full principal and interest repayment status after any applicable grace period. Private Education Loans Held for Investment December 31, 2020 2019 2018 (Dollars in thousands) Balance % Balance % Balance % Loans in-school/grace/deferment (1)(2) $ 4,779,040 $ 5,687,405 $ 5,260,445 Loans in forbearance (1)(3) 645,476 714,516 577,164 Loans in repayment and percentage of each status (1) : Loans current 13,898,948 97.2 % 16,315,651 97.2 % 14,289,705 97.4 % Loans delinquent 31-60 days (4) 205,528 1.4 288,051 1.7 231,216 1.6 Loans delinquent 61-90 days (4) 119,643 0.8 121,302 0.7 95,105 0.7 Loans delinquent greater than 90 days (4) 80,702 0.6 62,666 0.4 50,830 0.3 Total Private Education Loans in repayment 14,304,821 100.0 % 16,787,670 100.0 % 14,666,856 100.0 % Total Private Education Loans, gross 19,729,337 23,189,591 20,504,465 Private Education Loans deferred origination costs and unamortized premium/(discount) 63,475 81,224 68,321 Total Private Education Loans 19,792,812 23,270,815 20,572,786 Private Education Loans allowance for losses (1,355,844) (374,300) (277,943) Private Education Loans, net $ 18,436,968 $ 22,896,515 $ 20,294,843 Percentage of Private Education Loans in repayment 72.5 % 72.4 % 71.5 % Delinquencies as a percentage of Private Education Loans in repayment 2.8 % 2.8 % 2.6 % Loans in forbearance as a percentage of Private Education Loans in repayment and forbearance 4.3 % 4.1 % 3.8 % _________ (1) At December 31, 2020, the loans in the “in-school/grace/deferment” category above include $401 million of Private Education Loans whose borrowers did not return to school in the fall of 2020 because of the pandemic, or for other reasons, and who received an extension of time from us to re-enroll before beginning their grace period. At December 31, 2020, the loans in the “in forbearance” category above include $30 million of Private Education Loans whose borrowers did not return to school in the fall of 2020 and who received an extension of time from us to re-enroll before beginning their grace period. At December 31, 2020, the loans in the “in repayment” category above include $609 million of Private Education Loans whose borrowers did not return to school in the fall of 2020 and who received an extension of time from us to re-enroll before beginning their grace period. For further discussion, see “— Impact of COVID-19 on Sallie Mae — Financial Results.” (2) Deferment includes customers who have returned to school or are engaged in other permitted educational activities and are not yet required to make payments on the loans (e.g., residency periods for medical students or a grace period for bar exam preparation). (3) Loans for customers who have requested extension of grace period generally during employment transition or who have temporarily ceased making full payments due to hardship or other factors, consistent with established loan program servicing policies and procedures. (4) The period of delinquency is based on the number of days scheduled payments are contractually past due. Delinquencies as a percentage of Private Education Loans (held for investment) in repayment remained unchanged at 2.8 percent at December 31, 2020 compared with December 31, 2019, and the forbearance rate increased to 4.3 percent at December 31, 2020 from 4.1 percent at December 31, 2019. While delinquency rates remained static, there were significantly higher unemployment rates in 2020, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, when compared with 2019. Typically, higher unemployment rates, as we saw in 2020, would cause delinquency rates to increase significantly; however, several factors contributed to lower than expected delinquencies, including the suspension of payments on federal loans which reduced the payment burden by our borrowers, as well as the disaster forbearance program we invoked to assist our customers. The first 69 wave of disaster forbearance was granted primarily in 90-day increments. When these disaster forbearances expired in June and July 2020, the loans were no longer considered in forbearance until the borrowers requested, and were granted, an additional forbearance. Many of these borrowers went back into repayment status at the end of their original three-month disaster forbearance. Other borrowers asked for additional forbearance and we began granting those in one-month increments. In the third and fourth quarters of 2020, we saw our forbearance rate decline from the high levels we experienced in the second of quarter 2020, as borrowers exited their original three-month disaster forbearance. As our borrowers exit forbearance and enter repayment status, we expect to see an increase in delinquency rates in future periods due to higher unemployment rates. Higher forbearance rates in 2020 compared with the year-ago period are primarily a result of our working with customers affected by COVID-19. Customers who receive a disaster forbearance do not progress in delinquency and are not assessed late fees or other fees. During a disaster forbearance, a customer’s credit file will continue to reflect the status of the loan as it was immediately prior to granting the disaster forbearance. See additional discussion related to collections activity and the COVID-19 pandemic in “ — Impact of COVID-19 on Sallie Mae — Customers and Credit Performance.” The following table summarizes changes in the allowance for Private Education Loan (held for investment) losses. Years Ended December 31, (Dollars in thousands) 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 Beginning balance $ 374,300 $ 277,943 $ 243,715 $ 182,472 $ 108,816 Day 1 adjustment for adoption of CECL 1,060,830 — — — — Balance at January 1, 2020 1,435,130 277,943 243,715 182,472 108,816 Transfer from unfunded commitment liability (1) 320,808 — — — — Provision for credit losses: Provision, current period 148,673 279,570 169,287 178,542 159,511 Loan sale reduction to provision (161,793) — — — — Loans transferred to held for sale (205,669) — — — — Total provision (218,789) 279,570 169,287 178,542 159,511 Net charge-offs: Charge-offs (205,326) (208,978) (154,701) (130,063) (90,203) Recoveries 24,021 25,765 20,858 17,635 10,382 Net charge-offs (181,305) (183,213) (133,843) (112,428) (79,821) Loan sales (2) — — (1,216) (4,871) (6,034) Ending Balance $ 1,355,844 $ 374,300 $ 277,943 $ 243,715 $ 182,472 Allowance as a percentage of the ending total loan balance 6.87 % 1.61 % 1.36 % 1.40 % 1.28 % Allowance as a percentage of the ending loans in repayment (3) 9.48 % 2.23 % 1.90 % 2.00 % 1.88 % Allowance coverage of net charge-offs 7.48 2.04 2.08 2.17 2.29 Net charge-offs as a percentage of average loans in repayment (3) 1.17 % 1.17 % 1.01 % 1.03 % 0.96 % Delinquencies as a percentage of ending loans in repayment (3) 2.84 % 2.81 % 2.57 % 2.42 % 2.06 % Loans in forbearance as a percentage of ending loans in repayment and forbearance (3) 4.32 % 4.08 % 3.79 % 3.70 % 3.50 % Ending total loans, gross $ 19,729,337 $ 23,189,591 $ 20,504,465 $ 17,432,167 $ 14,251,675 Average loans in repayment (3) $ 15,518,851 $ 15,605,927 $ 13,303,801 $ 10,881,058 $ 8,283,036 Ending loans in repayment (3) $ 14,304,821 $ 16,787,670 $ 14,666,856 $ 12,206,033 $ 9,709,758 _______ (1) See Note 8, “Unfunded Loan Commitments,” in this Form 10-K for a summary of the activity in the allowance for and balance of unfunded loan commitments, respectively. (2) Represents fair value adjustments on loans sold. (3) Loans in repayment include loans on which borrowers are making interest only or fixed payments, as well as loans that have entered full principal and interest repayment status after any applicable grace period. 70 As part of concluding on the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses, we review key allowance and loan metrics. The most significant of these metrics considered are the allowance coverage of net charge-offs ratio; the allowance as a percentage of ending total loans and of ending loans in repayment; and delinquency and forbearance percentages. Use of Forbearance and Rate Modifications as a Private Education Loan Collection Tool We adjust the terms of loans for certain borrowers when we believe such changes will help our customers manage their student loan obligations, achieve better student outcomes, and increase the collectability of the loan. These changes generally take the form of a temporary forbearance of payments, a temporary interest rate reduction, a temporary interest rate reduction with a permanent extension of the loan term, and/or a short-term extended repayment alternative. Forbearance is granted prospectively for borrowers who are current in their payments and may be granted retroactively for certain delinquent borrowers. Forbearance allows a borrower to temporarily not make scheduled payments or to make smaller than scheduled payments, in each case for a specified period of time. Using forbearance extends the original term of the loan by the term of forbearance taken. Forbearance does not grant any reduction in the total principal or interest repayment obligation. While a loan is in forbearance status, interest continues to accrue and is capitalized to principal when the loan re-enters repayment status (except as described below in the case of disaster forbearance). We grant forbearance through our servicing centers to borrowers who are current in their payments and through our collections centers to certain borrowers who are delinquent. Our forbearance policies and practices vary depending upon whether a borrower is current or delinquent at the time forbearance is requested, generally with stricter payment requirements for delinquent borrowers. We view the population of borrowers that use forbearance positively because the borrowers are either proactively reaching out to us to obtain assistance in managing their obligations or are working with our collections center to bring their loans current. Forbearance may be granted through our servicing centers to customers who are exiting their grace period and to other customers who are current in their payments, to provide temporary payment relief. In these circumstances, a customer’s loan is placed into a forbearance status in limited monthly increments and is reflected in the forbearance status at month-end during this time. At the end of the forbearance period, the customer will enter repayment status as current and is expected to begin making scheduled monthly payments. Currently, we generally grant forbearance in our servicing centers if a borrower who is current requests it for increments of up to three months at a time, for up to 12 months. Forbearance may also be granted through our collections centers to customers who are delinquent in their payments. If specific payment requirements are met, the forbearance can cure the delinquency and the customer is returned to a current repayment status. Forbearance as a collection tool is used most effectively when applying historical experience and our judgment to a customer’s unique situation. We leverage updated customer information and other decision support tools to best determine who will be granted forbearance based on our expectations as to a customer’s ability and willingness to repay their obligation. This strategy is aimed at assisting customers while mitigating the risks of delinquency and default as well as encouraging resolution of delinquent loans. In all instances, we require one or more payments before granting forbearance to delinquent borrowers. The COVID-19 pandemic is having far reaching, negative impacts on individuals, businesses, and, consequently, the overall economy. Specifically, COVID-19 has materially disrupted business operations throughout the country, resulting in significantly higher levels of unemployment or underemployment. As a result, we expect many of our individual customers will experience financial hardship, making it difficult, if not impossible, to meet their payment obligations to us without temporary assistance. We are monitoring key metrics as early warning indicators of financial hardship, including changes in weekly unemployment claims, enrollment in auto-debit payments, requests for new forbearances, enrollment in hardship payment plans, and early delinquency metrics. As a result of the negative impact on employment from COVID-19, our customers are experiencing higher levels of financial hardship, which led initially to higher levels of forbearance. We expect such higher levels of financial hardship to lead to higher levels of delinquencies and defaults in the future, as borrowers who had received disaster forbearance from us re-enter repayment status. We expect that, left unabated, this deterioration in forbearance, delinquency, and default rates will persist until such time as the economy and employment return to relatively normal levels. For some students, going back to school in the fall was not an option because of the pandemic, or for other reasons. Therefore, some students are taking a “gap 71 year” before returning to school. In 2020, for those students that had unexpectedly separated from school, we provided an extension of time through fall 2021 to re-enroll, before beginning their grace period that occurs prior to entering full principal and interest repayment status. At December 31, 2020, $1.0 billion of Private Education Loans were granted this extended period of time. We assist customers with an array of payment programs during periods of financial hardship as standard operating convention, including: forbearance, which defers payments during a short-term hardship; our GRP, which is an interest-only payment for 12 months; or a loan modification that, in the event of long-term hardship, reduces the interest rate on a loan to 4 percent for 24 months and/or permanently extends the maturity date of the loan. Historically, we have utilized disaster forbearance for material events, including hurricanes, wildfires, and floods. Disaster forbearance defers payments for as much as 90 days upon enrollment. We have invoked this same disaster forbearance program to assist our customers through COVID-19 and offer this program across our operations, including through mobile app and self-service channels such as chat and IVR. Customers who receive a disaster forbearance will not progress in delinquency and will not be assessed late fees or other fees. During a disaster forbearance, a customer’s credit file will continue to reflect the status of the loan as it was immediately prior to granting the disaster forbearance. During the period of the disaster forbearance, interest will continue to accrue, but is not capitalized to the loan balance after the loan returns to repayment status. The first wave of disaster forbearance was granted primarily in 90-day increments. As these forbearances ended, we reduced the disaster forbearance to one-month increments and implemented additional discussions between our servicing agents and borrowers to encourage borrowers/cosigners to enter repayment. If the financial hardship extends beyond 90 days, additional assistance will be available for eligible customers. For example, for borrowers exiting disaster forbearance and not eligible for GRP, we may allow them to make interest only payments for 12 months before reverting to full principal and interest payments. Management continually monitors our credit administration practices and may periodically modify these practices based upon performance, industry conventions, and/or regulatory feedback. In light of these considerations, we previously announced that we plan to implement certain changes to our credit administration practices in the future. As discussed below, however, we postponed until the fourth quarter of 2020 the implementation of the announced credit administration practices changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, we previously announced that we plan to revise our credit administration practices limiting the number of forbearance months granted consecutively and the number of times certain extended or reduced repayment alternatives may be granted. For example, we currently grant forbearance to borrowers without requiring any period of prior principal and interest payments, meaning that, if a borrower satisfies all eligibility requirements, forbearance increments may be granted consecutively. We previously announced that, beginning in the second quarter of 2020, we would phase in a required six-month period between successive grants of forbearance and between forbearance grants and certain other repayment alternatives. We announced this required period will not apply, however, to forbearances granted during the first six months following a borrower’s grace period and will not be required for a borrower to receive a contractual interest rate reduction. In addition, we announced we would limit the participation of delinquent borrowers in certain short-term extended or interest-only repayment alternatives to once in 12 months and twice in five years. As previously announced, prior to full implementation of the credit administration practices changes described above, management will conduct a controlled testing program on randomly selected borrowers to measure the impact of the changes on our customers, our credit operations, and key credit metrics. The testing commenced in October 2019 for some of the planned changes on a very small percentage of our total portfolio and we originally expected to expand the number of borrowers in repayment who would be subject to the new credit administration practices. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, we postponed our efforts so that we can be more flexible in dealing with our customers’ financial hardship. In October 2020, we began to roll out in a methodical approach the implementation of the credit administration practices changes and related testing. Management now expects to have completed implementation of the planned credit administration practices changes by year-end 2022. However, we may modify or delay the contemplated practice changes, the proposed timeline, or the method of implementation as we learn more about the impacts of the program on our customers. We also offer rate and term modifications to customers experiencing more severe hardship. Currently, we temporarily reduce the contractual interest rate on a loan to 4.0 percent for a two-year period and, in the vast majority of cases, permanently extend the final maturity date of the loan. As part of demonstrating the ability and willingness to pay, the customer must make three consecutive monthly payments at the reduced payment to qualify for the program. The combination of the rate reduction and maturity extension helps reduce the monthly payment due from the borrower and increases the likelihood the borrower will 72 remain current during the interest rate modification period as well as when the loan returns to its original contractual interest rate. At December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, 7.8 percent and 7.2 percent, respectively, of our Private Education Loans held for investment then currently in full principal and interest repayment status were subject to interest rate reductions made under our rate modification program. We currently have no plans to change the basic elements of the rate and term modifications we offer to our customers experiencing more severe hardship. While there are limitations to our estimate of the future impact of the credit administration practices changes described above, absent the effect of any mitigating measures, and based on an analysis of borrower behavior under our current credit administration practices, which may not be indicative of how borrowers will behave under revised credit administration practices, we expect that the credit administration practices changes described above will accelerate defaults and could increase life of loan defaults in our Private Education Loan held for investment portfolio by approximately 4 percent to 14 percent. Among the measures that we are planning to implement and expect may partly offset or moderate any acceleration of or increase in defaults will be greater focus on the risk assessment process to ensure borrowers are mapped to the appropriate program, better utilization of existing programs (e.g., GRP and rate modifications), and the introduction of a new program offering short-term payment reductions (permitting interest-only payments for up to six months) for certain early stage delinquencies. The full impact of these changes to our collections practices described above may only be realized over the longer term, however. In particular, when we calculate the allowance for credit losses under CECL, which became effective on January 1, 2020, our loan loss reserves increased materially because we expect the life of loan defaults on our overall Private Education Loan portfolio to increase, in part as a result of the planned changes to our credit administration practices. As we progress with the controlled testing program of the planned changes to our credit administration practices, we expect to learn more about how our borrowers are reacting to these changes and, as we analyze such reactions, we will continue to refine our estimates of the impact of those changes on our allowance for credit losses. The tables below show the composition and status of the Private Education Loan portfolio held for investment aged by number of months in active repayment status (months for which a scheduled monthly payment was due). Active repayment status includes loans on which borrowers are making interest only or fixed payments, as well as loans that have entered full principal and interest repayment status after any applicable grace period. Our experience shows that the percentage of loans in forbearance status generally decreases the longer the loans have been in active repayment status. At December 31, 2020, loans in forbearance status as a percentage of total Private Education Loans in repayment and forbearance were 3.0 percent for Private Education Loans (held for investment) that have been in active repayment status for fewer than 25 months. Approximately 69 percent of our Private Education Loans (held for investment) in forbearance status have been in active repayment status less than 25 months. 73 (Dollars in millions) December 31, 2020 Private Education Loans Held for Investment Monthly Scheduled Payments Due Not Yet in Repayment Total 0 to 12 13 to 24 25 to 36 37 to 48 More than 48 Loans in-school/grace/deferment $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 4,779 $ 4,779 Loans in forbearance 353 91 71 54 76 — 645 Loans in repayment - current 3,987 3,181 2,215 1,624 2,892 — 13,899 Loans in repayment - delinquent 31-60 days 76 39 30 22 38 — 205 Loans in repayment - delinquent 61-90 days 49 21 17 12 21 — 120 Loans in repayment - delinquent greater than 90 days 33 15 12 8 13 — 81 Total $ 4,498 $ 3,347 $ 2,345 $ 1,720 $ 3,040 $ 4,779 19,729 Deferred origination costs and unamortized premium/(discount) 64 Allowance for credit losses (1,356) Total Private Education Loans, net $ 18,437 Loans in forbearance as a percentage of total Private Education Loans in repayment and forbearance 2.36 % 0.61 % 0.48 % 0.36 % 0.51 % — % 4.32 % (Dollars in millions) December 31, 2019 Private Education Loans Held for Investment Monthly Scheduled Payments Due Not Yet in Repayment Total 0 to 12 13 to 24 25 to 36 37 to 48 More than 48 Loans in-school/grace/deferment $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 5,687 $ 5,687 Loans in forbearance 402 97 79 65 72 — 715 Loans in repayment - current 4,769 3,817 2,752 2,093 2,885 — 16,316 Loans in repayment - delinquent 31-60 days 108 53 45 35 47 — 288 Loans in repayment - delinquent 61-90 days 48 24 18 14 17 — 121 Loans in repayment - delinquent greater than 90 days 25 13 9 7 9 — 63 Total $ 5,352 $ 4,004 $ 2,903 $ 2,214 $ 3,030 $ 5,687 23,190 Deferred origination costs and unamortized premium/(discount) 81 Allowance for credit losses (374) Total Private Education Loans, net $ 22,897 Loans in forbearance as a percentage of total Private Education Loans in repayment and forbearance 2.30 % 0.55 % 0.45 % 0.37 % 0.41 % — % 4.08 % 74 (Dollars in millions) December 31, 2018 Private Education Loans Held for Investment Monthly Scheduled Payments Due Not Yet in Repayment Total 0 to 12 13 to 24 25 to 36 37 to 48 More than 48 Loans in-school/grace/deferment $ — $ — $ — $ — $ — $ 5,260 $ 5,260 Loans in forbearance 338 75 66 52 46 — 577 Loans in repayment - current 4,477 3,333 2,615 1,897 1,968 — 14,290 Loans in repayment - delinquent 31-60 days 94 43 38 27 29 — 231 Loans in repayment - delinquent 61-90 days 39 19 15 10 12 — 95 Loans in repayment - delinquent greater than 90 days 21 11 8 5 6 — 51 Total $ 4,969 $ 3,481 $ 2,742 $ 1,991 $ 2,061 $ 5,260 20,504 Deferred origination costs and unamortized premium/(discount) 69 Allowance for credit losses (278) Total Private Education Loans, net $ 20,295 Loans in forbearance as a percentage of total Private Education Loans in repayment and forbearance 2.22 % 0.49 % 0.44 % 0.34 % 0.30 % — % 3.79 % Private Education Loans Held for Investment Types The following table provides information regarding the loans in repayment balance and total loan balance by Private Education Loan held for investment product type for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019. December 31, 2020 (Dollars in thousands Signature and Other Parent Loan Smart Option Career Training Graduate Loan Total $ in repayment (1) $ 215,439 $ 285,323 $ 13,130,229 $ 12,250 $ 661,580 $ 14,304,821 $ in total $ 330,979 $ 289,572 $ 18,067,491 $ 12,797 $ 1,028,498 $ 19,729,337 December 31, 2019 (Dollars in thousands Signature and Other Parent Loan Smart Option Career Training Graduate Loan Total $ in repayment (1) $ 205,203 $ 248,662 $ 15,928,942 $ 12,394 $ 392,469 $ 16,787,670 $ in total $ 341,919 $ 251,104 $ 21,951,654 $ 12,895 $ 632,019 $ 23,189,591 _______ (1) Loans in repayment include loans on which borrowers are making interest only or fixed payments, as well as loans that have entered full principal and interest repayment status after any applicable grace period. 75 Accrued Interest Receivable The following table provides information regarding accrued interest receivable on our Private Education Loans held for investment. The table also discloses the amount of accrued interest on loans greater than 90 days past due as compared to our allowance for uncollectible interest. The majority of the total accrued interest receivable represents accrued interest on deferred loans where no payments are due while the borrower is in school and fixed-pay loans where the borrower makes a $25 monthly payment that is smaller than the interest accruing on that loan in that month. The accrued interest on these loans will be capitalized against the balance of the loans when the borrower exits the grace period upon separation from school. The allowance for uncollectible interest exceeds the amount of accrued interest on our 90 days past due portfolio for all periods presented. Private Education Loans Accrued Interest Receivable (Dollars in thousands) Total Interest Receivable Greater Than 90 Days Past Due Allowance for Uncollectible Interest December 31, 2020 $ 1,168,895 $ 4,354 $ 4,467 December 31, 2019 $ 1,366,158 $ 2,390 $ 5,309 December 31, 2018 $ 1,168,823 $ 1,920 $ 6,322 December 31, 2017 $ 951,138 $ 1,372 $ 4,664 December 31, 2016 $ 739,847 $ 845 $ 2,898 76 Liquidity and Capital Resources Funding and Liquidity Risk Management Our primary liquidity needs include our ongoing ability to fund our businesses throughout market cycles, including during periods of financial stress, our ongoing ability to fund originations of Private Education Loans and other loans and our ability to meet any outflows of our Bank deposits. To achieve these objectives, we analyze and monitor our liquidity needs, maintain excess liquidity and access to diverse funding sources, such as deposits at the Bank, issuance of secured debt primarily through asset-backed securitizations, and other financing facilities, and loan sales. It is our policy to manage operations so liquidity needs are fully satisfied through normal operations to avoid unplanned loan sales under all but the most dire emergency conditions. Our liquidity management is governed by policies approved by our Board of Directors. Oversight of these policies is performed in the Asset and Liability Committee, a management-level committee. These policies take into account the volatility of cash flow forecasts, expected asset and liability maturities, anticipated loan demand and a variety of other factors to establish minimum liquidity guidelines. Key risks associated with our liquidity relate to our ability to access the capital markets and the markets for bank deposits at reasonable rates. This ability may be affected by our performance, competitive pressures, the macroeconomic environment, and the impact they have on the availability of funding sources in the marketplace. We target maintaining sufficient on-balance sheet and contingent sources of liquidity to enable us to meet all contractual and contingent obligations under various stress scenarios, including severe macroeconomic stresses as well as specific stresses that test the resiliency of our balance sheet. As the Bank has grown, we have improved our liquidity stress testing practices to align more closely with the industry, which resulted in our adopting increased liquidity requirements. Beginning in the second quarter of 2019, we began to increase our liquidity levels by increasing cash and marketable investments held as part of our ongoing efforts to enhance our ability to maintain a strong risk management position. By early 2020 we held a significant liquidity buffer of cash and securities, which we expect to maintain through 2021. Due to the seasonal nature of our business, our liquidity levels will likely vary from quarter to quarter. Sources of Liquidity and Available Capacity Ending Balances December 31, (Dollars in thousands) 2020 2019 2018 Sources of primary liquidity: Unrestricted cash and liquid investments: Holding Company and other non-bank subsidiaries $ 1,117 $ 29,620 $ 25,990 Sallie Mae Bank (1) 4,454,175 5,534,257 2,533,116 Available-for-sale investments 1,927,726 487,669 176,245 Total unrestricted cash and liquid investments $ 6,383,018 $ 6,051,546 $ 2,735,351 ____ (1) This amount will be used primarily to originate Private Education Loans at the Bank. 77 Average Balances Years Ended December 31, (Dollars in thousands) 2020 2019 2018 Sources of primary liquidity: Unrestricted cash and liquid investments: Holding Company and other non-bank subsidiaries $ 20,307 $ 38,705 $ 22,570 Sallie Mae Bank (1) 5,202,302 3,455,216 1,677,922 Available-for-sale investments 1,495,155 323,930 201,937 Total unrestricted cash and liquid investments $ 6,717,764 $ 3,817,851 $ 1,902,429 ____ (1) This amount will be used primarily to originate Private Education Loans at the Bank. Deposits The following table summarizes total deposits. December 31, (Dollars in thousands) 2020 2019 Deposits - interest bearing $ 22,664,899 $ 24,282,906 Deposits - non-interest bearing 1,140 1,077 Total deposits $ 22,666,039 $ 24,283,983 Our total deposits of $22.7 billion were comprised of $11.9 billion in brokered deposits and $10.8 billion in retail and other deposits at December 31, 2020, compared with total deposits of $24.3 billion, which were comprised of $13.8 billion in brokered deposits and $10.5 billion in retail and other deposits, at December 31, 2019. Interest bearing deposits as of December 31, 2020 and 2019 consisted of retail and brokered non-maturity savings deposits, retail and brokered non-maturity money market deposit accounts (“MMDAs”) and retail and brokered CDs. Interest bearing deposits include deposits from Educational 529 and Health Savings plans that diversify our funding sources and add deposits we consider to be core. These and other large omnibus accounts, aggregating the deposits of many individual depositors, represented $7.1 billion of our deposit total as of December 31, 2020, compared with $6.8 billion at December 31, 2019. Some of our deposit products are serviced by third-party providers. Placement fees associated with the brokered CDs are amortized into interest expense using the effective interest rate method. We recognized placement fee expense of $19 million, $18 million, and $13 million in the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Fees paid to third-party brokers related to brokered CDs were $5 million, $28 million, and $26 million during the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively. 78 Interest bearing deposits at December 31, 2020 and 2019 are summarized as follows: December 31, 2020 December 31, 2019 (Dollars in thousands) Amount Year-End Weighted Average Stated Rate (1) Amount Year-End Weighted Average Stated Rate (1) Money market $ 10,159,657 0.83 % $ 9,616,547 2.04 % Savings 907,976 0.55 718,616 1.71 Certificates of deposit 11,597,266 1.34 13,947,743 2.44 Deposits - interest bearing $ 22,664,899 $ 24,282,906 __ (1) Includes the effect of interest rate swaps in effective hedge relationships. As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, there were $571 million and $963 million, respectively, of deposits exceeding FDIC insurance limits. Accrued interest on deposits was $50 million and $68 million at December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. Counterparty Exposure Counterparty exposure related to financial instruments arises from the risk that a lending, investment or derivative counterparty will not be able to meet its obligations to us. Excess cash is generally invested with the FRB on an overnight basis or in the FRB’s Term Deposit Facility, minimizing counterparty exposure on cash balances. Our investment portfolio is primarily comprised of a small portfolio of mortgage-backed securities issued by government agencies and government-sponsored enterprises that are purchased to meet CRA targets. Additionally, our investing activity is governed by Board-approved limits on the amount that is allowed to be invested with any one issuer based on the credit rating of the issuer, further minimizing our counterparty exposure. Counterparty credit risk is considered when valuing investments and considering impairment. Related to derivative transactions, protection against counterparty risk is generally provided by International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. Credit Support Annexes (“CSAs”), or clearinghouses for over-the-counter derivatives. CSAs require a counterparty to post collateral if a potential default would expose the other party to a loss. All derivative contracts entered into by the Bank are covered under CSAs or clearinghouse agreements and require collateral to be exchanged based on the net fair value of derivatives with each counterparty. Our exposure is limited to the value of the derivative contracts in a gain position, less any collateral held by us and plus collateral posted with the counterparty. Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act requires all standardized derivatives, including most interest rate swaps, to be submitted for clearing to central counterparties to reduce counterparty risk. Two of the central counterparties we use are the CME and the LCH. All variation margin payments on derivatives cleared through the CME and LCH are accounted for as legal settlement. As of December 31, 2020, $8.2 billion notional of our derivative contracts were cleared on the CME and $0.4 billion were cleared on the LCH. The derivative contracts cleared through the CME and LCH represent 95.3 percent and 4.7 percent, respectively, of our total notional derivative contracts of $8.6 billion at December 31, 2020. For derivatives cleared through the CME and LCH, the net gain (loss) position includes the variation margin amounts as settlement of the derivative and not collateral against the fair value of the derivative. The amount of variation margin included as settlement as of December 31, 2020 was $(179) million and $19 million for the CME and LCH, respectively. Changes in fair value for derivatives not designated as hedging instruments are presented as realized gains (losses). Our exposure is limited to the value of the derivative contracts in a gain position less any collateral held and plus any collateral posted. When there is a net negative exposure, we consider our exposure to the counterparty to be zero. At December 31, 2020 and 2019, we had a net positive exposure (derivative gain positions to us, less collateral held by us and plus collateral posted with counterparties) related to derivatives of $43 million and $52 million, respectively. 79 We have liquidity exposure related to collateral movements between us and our derivative counterparties. Movements in the value of the derivatives, which are primarily affected by changes in interest rates, may require us to return cash collateral held or may require us to access primary liquidity to post collateral to counterparties. The table below highlights exposure related to our derivative counterparties as of December 31, 2020. (Dollars in thousands) SLM Corporation and Sallie Mae Bank Contracts Total exposure, net of collateral $ 43,317 Exposure to counterparties with credit ratings, net of collateral $ 43,317 Percent of exposure to counterparties with credit ratings below S&P AA- or Moody’s Aa3 — % Percent of exposure to counterparties with credit ratings below S&P A- or Moody’s A3 — % Regulatory Capital The Bank is subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by federal and state banking authorities. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory and possibly additional discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a direct material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Under U.S. Basel III and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action, the Bank must meet specific capital standards that involve quantitative measures of its assets, liabilities and certain off-balance sheet items as calculated under regulatory accounting practices. The Bank’s capital amounts and its classification under the prompt corrective action framework are also subject to qualitative judgments by the regulators about components of capital, risk weightings and other factors. The following capital amounts and ratios are based upon the Bank’s average assets and risk-weighted assets, as indicated. Actual U.S. Basel III Minimum Requirements Plus Buffer (1)(2) (Dollars in thousands) Amount Ratio Amount Ratio As of December 31, 2020: Common Equity Tier 1 Capital (to Risk-Weighted Assets) $ 3,579,005 14.0 % $ 1,794,780 > 7.0 % Tier 1 Capital (to Risk-Weighted Assets) $ 3,579,005 14.0 % $ 2,179,375 > 8.5 % Total Capital (to Risk-Weighted Assets) $ 3,849,820 15.0 % $ 2,692,169 > 10.5 % Tier 1 Capital (to Average Assets) $ 3,579,005 11.3 % $ 1,264,424 > 4.0 % As of December 31, 2019: Common Equity Tier 1 Capital (to Risk-Weighted Assets) $ 3,264,309 12.2 % $ 1,876,050 > 7.0 % Tier 1 Capital (to Risk-Weighted Assets) $ 3,264,309 12.2 % $ 2,278,060 > 8.5 % Total Capital (to Risk-Weighted Assets) $ 3,600,668 13.4 % $ 2,814,074 > 10.5 % Tier 1 Capital (to Average Assets) $ 3,264,309 10.2 % $ 1,282,642 > 4.0 % ________________ (1) Reflects the U.S. Basel III minimum required ratio plus the applicable capital conservation buffer. (2) The Bank’s regulatory capital ratios also exceeded all applicable standards for the Bank to qualify as “well capitalized” under the prompt corrective action framework. 80 Capital Management The Bank intends to maintain at all times regulatory capital levels that meet both the minimum levels required under U.S. Basel III (including applicable buffers) and the levels necessary to be considered “well capitalized” under the FDIC’s prompt corrective action framework, in order to support asset growth and operating needs, address unexpected credit risks and protect the interests of depositors and the DIF administered by the FDIC. The Bank’s Capital Policy requires management to monitor these capital standards and the Bank’s compliance with them. The Board of Directors and management periodically evaluate the quality of assets, the stability of earnings, and the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses for the Bank. The Company is a source of strength for the Bank and will provide additional capital if necessary. We believe that current and projected capital levels are appropriate for 2021. As of December 31, 2020, the Bank’s risk-based and leverage capital ratios exceed the required minimum ratios and the applicable buffers under the fully phased-in U.S. Basel III standards as well as the “well capitalized” standards under the prompt corrective action framework. Under U.S. Basel III, the Bank is required to maintain the following minimum regulatory capital ratios: a Common Equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 4.5 percent, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6.0 percent, a Total risk-based capital ratio of 8.0 percent, and a Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4.0 percent. In addition, the Bank is subject to Common Equity Tier 1 capital conservation buffer of greater than 2.5 percent. Failure to maintain the buffer will result in restrictions on the Bank’s ability to make capital distributions, including the payment of dividends, and to pay discretionary bonuses to executive officers. As of December 31, 2020, the Bank had a Common Equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio and a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 14.0 percent, a Total risk-based capital ratio of 15.0 percent and a Tier 1 leverage ratio of 11.3 percent, which exceed the capital levels required under U.S. Basel III and the “well capitalized” standard. Dividends The Bank is chartered under the laws of the State of Utah and its deposits are insured by the FDIC. The Bank’s ability to pay dividends is subject to the laws of Utah and the regulations of the FDIC. Generally, under Utah’s industrial bank laws and regulations as well as FDIC regulations, the Bank may pay dividends to the Company from its net profits without regulatory approval if, following the payment of the dividend, the Bank’s capital and surplus would not be impaired. The Bank declared $579 million and $254 million in dividends for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively, with the proceeds primarily used to fund the 2020 and 2019 Share Repurchase Programs, respectively, and stock dividends. The Bank paid no dividends on its common stock for the year ended December 31, 2018. See Part I, Item 1. “Business — Supervision and Regulation — Regulation of Sallie Mae Bank — Dividends and Share Repurchase Programs,” regarding the expectation that the Bank will pay dividends to the Company as may be necessary to enable the Company to pay any declared dividends on its Series B Preferred Stock and common stock and to consummate any common share repurchases by the Company under the share repurchase programs. See also Part I, Item 1A. “Risk Factors — General Risks” for possible limitations on the payments of our dividends. 81 Borrowings Outstanding borrowings consist of unsecured debt and secured borrowings issued through our term ABS program and our Secured Borrowing Facility (which was previously called the asset-backed commercial paper facility or ABCP Facility). The issuing entities for those secured borrowings are variable interest entities and are consolidated for accounting purposes. The following table summarizes our secured borrowings at December 31, 2020 and 2019. For additional information, see Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 11, “Borrowings.” December 31, 2020 December 31, 2019 (Dollars in thousands) Short-Term Long-Term Total Short-Term Long-Term Total Unsecured borrowings: Unsecured debt (fixed-rate) $ — $ 692,879 $ 692,879 $ — $ 198,159 $ 198,159 Total unsecured borrowings — 692,879 692,879 — 198,159 198,159 Secured borrowings: Private Education Loan term securitizations: Fixed-rate — 3,261,233 3,261,233 — 2,629,902 2,629,902 Variable-rate — 1,235,105 1,235,105 — 1,525,976 1,525,976 Total Private Education Loan term securitizations — 4,496,338 4,496,338 — 4,155,878 4,155,878 Secured Borrowing Facility — — — 289,230 — 289,230 Total secured borrowings — 4,496,338 4,496,338 289,230 4,155,878 4,445,108 Total $ — $ 5,189,217 $ 5,189,217 $ 289,230 $ 4,354,037 $ 4,643,267 Short-term borrowings On February 19, 2020, we amended our Secured Borrowing Facility to, among other things, increase the amount that can be borrowed under the facility to $2 billion (from $750 million) and extend the maturity of the facility. We hold 100 percent of the residual interest in the Secured Borrowing Facility trust. Under the amended Secured Borrowing Facility, we incur financing costs on unused borrowing capacity and on outstanding advances. The amended Secured Borrowing Facility extended the revolving period, during which we may borrow, repay and reborrow funds, until February 17, 2021. On February 17, 2021, we further amended and extended the maturity of our Secured Borrowing Facility such that the revolving period now extends until February 16, 2022. The scheduled amortization period, during which amounts outstanding under the Secured Borrowing Facility must be repaid, now ends on February 16, 2023 (or earlier, if certain material adverse events occur). At December 31, 2020, there were no secured borrowings outstanding under the Secured Borrowing Facility and at December 31, 2019, $289 million secured borrowings were outstanding under the Secured Borrowing Facility. For additional information, see Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 11, “Borrowings” and Note 25, “Subsequent Events.” Short-term borrowings have a remaining term to maturity of one year or less. The Secured Borrowing Facility’s contractual maturity is two years from the date of inception or renewal (one-year revolving period plus a one-year amortization period); however, we classify advances under our Secured Borrowing Facility as short-term borrowings because it is our intention to repay those advances within one year. 82 Long-term borrowings Unsecured Debt On April 5, 2017, we issued at par an unsecured debt offering of $200 million of 5.125 percent Senior Notes due April 5, 2022. At December 31, 2020, the outstanding balance was $199 million. On October 29, 2020, we issued at par an unsecured debt offering of $500 million of 4.20 percent Senior Notes due October 29, 2025. At December 31, 2020, the outstanding balance was $494 million. Secured Financings 2020 Transactions On February 12, 2020, we executed our $636 million SMB Private Education Loan Trust 2020-A term ABS transaction, which was accounted for as a secured financing. We sold $636 million of notes to third parties and retained a 100 percent interest in the residual certificates issued in the securitization, raising approximately $634 million of gross proceeds. The Class A and Class B notes had a weighted average life of 4.18 years and priced at a weighted average LIBOR equivalent cost of 1-month LIBOR plus 0.88 percent. At December 31, 2020, $605 million of our Private Education Loans, including $567 million of principal and $38 million in capitalized interest, were encumbered because of this transaction. On August 12, 2020, we executed our $707 million SMB Private Education Loan Trust 2020-B term ABS transaction, which was accounted for as a secured financing. We sold $707 million of notes to third parties and retained a 100 percent interest in the residual certificates issued in the securitization, raising approximately $705 million of gross proceeds. The Class A and Class B notes had a weighted average life of 4.14 years and priced at a weighted average LIBOR equivalent cost of 1-month LIBOR plus 1.30 percent. At December 31, 2020, $748 million of our Private Education Loans, including $701 million of principal and $47 million in capitalized interest, were encumbered because of this transaction. 2019 Transactions On March 13, 2019, we executed our $453 million SMB Private Education Loan Trust 2019-A term ABS transaction, which was accounted for as a secured financing. We sold $453 million of notes to third parties and retained a 100 percent interest in the residual certificates issued in the securitization, raising approximately $451 million of gross proceeds. The Class A and Class B notes had a weighted average life of 4.26 years and priced at a weighted average LIBOR equivalent cost of 1-month LIBOR plus 0.92 percent. At December 31, 2020, $377 million of our Private Education Loans, including $355 million of principal and $22 million in capitalized interest, were encumbered because of this transaction. On June 12, 2019, we executed our $657 million SMB Private Education Loan Trust 2019-B term ABS transaction, which was accounted for as a secured financing. We sold $657 million of notes to third parties and retained a 100 percent interest in the residual certificates issued in the securitization, raising approximately $655 million of gross proceeds. The Class A and Class B notes had a weighted average life of 4.41 years and priced at a weighted average LIBOR equivalent cost of 1-month LIBOR plus 1.01 percent. At December 31, 2020, $578 million of our Private Education Loans, including $542 million of principal and $36 million in capitalized interest, were encumbered because of this transaction. Pre-2019 Transactions Prior to 2019, we executed a total of $5.8 billion in ABS transactions that were accounted for as secured financings. At December 31, 2020, $3.7 billion of our Private Education Loans, including $3.5 billion of principal and $159 million in capitalized interest, were encumbered as a result of these transactions. 83 Other Borrowing Sources We maintain discretionary uncommitted Federal Funds lines of credit with various correspondent banks, which totaled $125 million at December 31, 2020. The interest rate we are charged on these lines of credit is priced at Fed Funds plus a spread at the time of borrowing, and is payable daily. We did not utilize these lines of credit in the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019. We established an account at the FRB to meet eligibility requirements for access to the Primary Credit borrowing facility at the FRB’s Discount Window (the “Window”). The Primary Credit borrowing facility is a lending program available to depository institutions that are in generally sound financial condition. All borrowings at the Window must be fully collateralized. We can pledge asset-backed and mortgage-backed securities, as well as FFELP Loans and Private Education Loans, to the FRB as collateral for borrowings at the Window. Generally, collateral value is assigned based on the estimated fair value of the pledged assets. At December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, the value of our pledged collateral at the FRB was $3.8 billion and $3.2 billion, respectively. The interest rate charged to us is the discount rate set by the FRB. We did not utilize this facility in the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019. Contractual Loan Commitments When we approve a Private Education Loan at the beginning of an academic year, that approval may cover the borrowing for the entire academic year. As such, we do not always disburse the full amount of the loan at the time of such approval, but instead have a commitment to fund a portion of the loan at a later date (usually at the start of the second semester or subsequent trimesters). At December 31, 2020, we had $1.7 billion of outstanding contractual loan commitments which we expect to fund during the remainder of the 2020/2021 academic year. At December 31, 2020, we had a $110 million reserve recorded in “Other Liabilities” to cover expected losses that may occur during the one-year loss emergence period on these unfunded commitments. Contractual Cash Obligations The following table provides a summary of our contractual principal obligations associated with long-term Bank deposits, secured borrowings, unsecured debt, loan commitments and lease obligations at December 31, 2020. 1 Year or Less 1 to 3 Years 3 to 5 Years Over 5 Years Total (Dollars in thousands) Long-term bank deposits (1) $ 8,456,768 $ 6,311,200 $ 1,446,149 $ 51,797 $ 16,265,914 Secured borrowings (2) 612,195 1,770,041 1,659,191 634,186 4,675,613 Unsecured debt — 200,000 500,000 — 700,000 Loan commitments (1) 1,673,007 11 — — 1,673,018 Lease obligations 6,101 13,158 13,308 24,720 57,287 Total contractual cash obligations $ 10,748,071 $ 8,294,410 $ 3,618,648 $ 710,703 $ 23,371,832 ____ (1) Interest obligations are either variable or fixed in nature. (2) Amounts reflect the contractual requirements of the Private Education Loan term securitizations, based on the expected paydown of the underlying collateral. 84 Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations addresses our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with GAAP. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 2, “Significant Accounting Policies” includes a summary of the significant accounting policies and methods used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements. The preparation of these financial statements requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results may differ from these estimates under varying assumptions or conditions. On a quarterly basis, management evaluates its estimates, particularly those that include the most difficult, subjective or complex judgments and are often about matters that are inherently uncertain. The most significant judgments, estimates and assumptions relate to the following critical accounting policies that are discussed in more detail below. On January 1, 2020, we adopted FASB’s ASU No. 2016-13, “Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments” (“CECL”), which resulted in a significant change to our allowance for credit losses policy, and is outlined below. Recently Issued and Adopted Accounting Pronouncements ASU No. 2016-13, “Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments” In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, which became effective for us on January 1, 2020. This ASU eliminated the previous accounting guidance for the recognition of credit impairment. Under the new guidance, for all loans carried at amortized cost, upon loan origination we are required to measure our allowance for credit losses based on our estimate of all current expected credit losses over the remaining contractual term of the assets. Updates to that estimate each period will be recorded through provision expense. The estimate of credit losses must be based on historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts. The ASU does not mandate the use of any specific method for estimating credit loss, permitting companies to use judgment in selecting the approach that is most appropriate in their circumstances. In addition, Topic 326 made changes to the accounting for available-for-sale debt securities. One such change is to require an assessment of unrealized losses on available-for-sale debt securities that we have the ability and intent to hold for a period of time sufficient to recover the amortized cost of the security, for the purpose of determining credit impairment. If any credit impairment exists, an allowance for losses must be established for the amount of the unrealized loss that is determined to be credit-related. On January 1, 2020, we adopted CECL using the modified retrospective method and it had a material impact on how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations and on regulatory capital. The following table illustrates the impact of the cumulative effect adjustment made upon adoption of CECL: 85 January 1, 2020 (Dollars in thousands) As reported under CECL Pre-CECL Adoption Impact of CECL Adoption Assets: Allowance for credit losses: Private Education Loans $ 1,435,130 $ 374,300 $ 1,060,830 FFELP Loans 4,485 1,633 2,852 Personal Loans 145,060 65,877 79,183 Credit Cards 290 102 188 Total $ 1,584,965 $ 441,912 $ 1,143,053 Deferred tax asset $ 415,540 $ 109,369 $ 306,171 Liabilities: Allowance for credit losses: Off-balance sheet exposures $ 118,239 $ 2,481 $ 115,758 Equity: Retained Earnings $ 897,873 $ 1,850,512 $ (952,639) This transition adjustment is inclusive of qualitative adjustments incorporated into our CECL allowance as necessary, to address any limitations in the models used. Allowance for Credit Losses 2020 We maintain an allowance for credit losses for the lifetime expected credit losses on loans in our portfolios, as well as for future loan commitments, at the reporting date. In determining the lifetime expected credit losses on our Private Education Loan portfolio loan segments, we use a discounted cash flow model. This method requires us to project future principal and interest cash flows on our loans in those portfolios. To estimate the future expected cash flows, we use a vintage-based model that considers life of loan loss expectations, prepayments (both voluntary and involuntary), defaults, recoveries, and any other adjustments deemed necessary, to determine the adequacy of the allowance at each balance sheet date. These cash flows are discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate to calculate the present value of those cash flows. Management adjusts the effective interest rate used to discount expected cash flows to incorporate expected prepayments. The difference between the present value of those cash flows and the amortized cost basis of the underlying loans is the allowance for credit losses. Entities that measure credit losses based on the present value of expected future cash flows are permitted to report the entire change in present value as credit loss expense, but may alternatively report the change in present value due to the passage of time as interest income. We have elected to report the entire change in present value as credit loss expense. In determining the loss rates used for the vintage-based approach, we start with our historical loss rates, stratify the loans within each vintage, and then adjust the loss rates based upon economic factors forecasted over a reasonable and supportable forecast period. The reasonable and supportable forecast period is meant to represent the period in which we believe we can estimate the impact of forecasted economic factors in our expected losses. At the end of the reasonable and supportable forecast period, we immediately revert our forecast of expected losses to our historical averages. We use a two-year reasonable and supportable forecast period, although this period is subject to change as our view evolves on our ability to reasonably forecast economic conditions to estimate future losses. In estimating our current expected credit losses, we use a combination of expected economic scenarios coupled with our historical experience to derive a base case adjusted for any qualitative factors (as described below). We also develop an adverse and favorable economic scenario. At each reporting date, we determine the appropriate weighting of these alternate scenarios 86 based upon the current economic conditions and our view of the risks of alternate outcomes. This weighting of expectations is used in calculating our current expected credit losses recorded each period. In estimating recoveries, we use both estimates of what we would receive from the sale of defaulted loans as well as historical borrower payment behavior to estimate the timing and amount of future recoveries on charged-off loans. We use historical experience and economic forecasts to estimate future prepayment speeds. As with our loss forecasts, at the end of the two-year reasonable and supportable forecast for prepayments, we immediately revert to our historical long-term prepayment rates. In addition to the above modeling approach, we also take certain other qualitative factors into consideration when calculating the allowance for credit losses. These qualitative factors include, but are not limited to, changes in lending policies and procedures, including changes in underwriting standards and collection, charge-off and recovery practices not already included in the analysis, and the effect of other external factors such as legal and regulatory requirements on the level of estimated current expected credit losses. The evaluation of the allowance for credit losses is inherently subjective, as it requires material estimates that may be susceptible to significant changes. If actual future performance in delinquency, charge-offs, and recoveries is significantly different than estimated, or management assumptions or practices were to change, this could materially affect the estimate of the allowance for credit losses, the timing of when losses are recognized, and the related provision for credit losses on our consolidated statements of income. When calculating our allowance for credit losses and liability for unfunded commitments, we incorporate several inputs that are subject to change period to period. These include, but are not limited to, CECL model inputs and any overlays deemed necessary by management. The most impactful CECL model inputs include: • Economic forecasts; • Weighting of economic forecasts; • Prepayment speeds; • New loan volume, including commitments made but not yet disbursed; and • Loan sales. Management overlays can encompass a broad array of factors not captured by model inputs, such as changes in servicing policies. Below we describe in further detail our policies and procedures for the allowance for credit losses as they relate to our Private Education Loan, Credit Card, and FFELP Loan portfolios. During the third quarter of 2020, we sold our entire Personal Loan portfolio. Allowance for Private Education Loan Losses In addition to the key assumptions/estimates described above, some estimates are unique to our Private Education Loan portfolio. Estimates are made on our Private Education Loans regarding when each borrower will separate from school. The cash flow timing of when a borrower will begin making full principal and interest payments is dependent upon when the student either graduates or leaves school. These dates can change based upon many factors. We receive information regarding projected graduation dates from a third-party clearinghouse. The separation from school date will be updated quarterly based on updated information received from the clearinghouse. Additionally, when we have a contractual obligation to fund a loan or a portion of a loan at a later date, we make an estimate regarding the percentage of this obligation that will be funded. This estimate is based on historical experience. For unfunded commitments, we recognize the related life of loan allowance as a liability. Once the loan is funded, that liability transfers to the allowance for Private Education Loan losses. 87 Key Credit Quality Indicators - Private Education Loans We determine the collectability of our Private Education Loan portfolio by evaluating certain risk characteristics. We consider credit score at original approval and periodically refreshed/updated credit scores through the loan’s term, existence of a cosigner, loan status, and loan seasoning as the key credit quality indicators because they have the most significant effect on the determination of the adequacy of our allowance for credit losses. Credit scores are an indicator of the creditworthiness of borrowers and the higher the credit scores the more likely it is the borrowers will be able to make all of their contractual payments. Loan status affects the credit risk because a past due loan is more likely to result in a credit loss than a current loan. Additionally, loans in the deferred payment status have different credit risk profiles compared with those in current pay status. Loan seasoning affects credit risk because a loan with a history of making payments generally has a lower incidence of default than a loan with a history of making infrequent or no payments. The existence of a cosigner lowers the likelihood of default as well. We monitor and update these credit quality indicators in the analysis of the adequacy of our allowance for credit losses on a quarterly basis. We collect on defaulted loans through a mix of in-house collectors, third-party collectors and sales to third-parties. For December 31, 2020 and 2019, we used both an estimate of recovery rates from in-house collections as well as expectations of future sales of defaulted loans to estimate the timing and amount of future recoveries on charged-off loans. Private Education Loans generally do not require borrowers to begin principal and interest repayment until at least six months after the borrowers have graduated or otherwise separated from school. Consequently, the loss estimates for these loans are generally low while the borrower is in school and then increase upon the end of the grace period after separation from school. At December 31, 2020 and 2019, 24 percent and 25 percent, respectively, of the principal balance of the Private Education Loan portfolio was related to borrowers who are in an in-school (fully deferred), grace, or other deferment status and not required to make payments. Our collection policies for Private Education Loans allow for periods of nonpayment for certain borrowers requesting an extended grace period upon leaving school or experiencing temporary difficulty meeting payment obligations. This is referred to as forbearance and is considered in estimating the allowance for credit losses. As part of concluding on the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses for Private Education Loans, we review key allowance and loan metrics. The most relevant of these metrics considered are the allowance as a percentage of ending total loans, delinquency percentages, and forbearance percentages. We consider a Private Education Loan to be delinquent if the borrower has not made a required payment prior to the 31st day after such payment was contractually due. Troubled Debt Restructurings In estimating the expected defaults for our Private Education Loans that are considered TDRs, we follow the same discounted cash flow process described above but use the historical loss rates related to past TDR loans. The appropriate gross loss rates are determined for each individual loan by evaluating loan maturity, risk characteristics, and macroeconomic conditions. The allowance for our TDR portfolio is included in our overall allowance for Private Education Loans. Our TDR portfolio is comprised mostly of loans with interest rate reductions and loans with forbearance usage greater than three months, as further described below. We adjust the terms of loans for certain borrowers when we believe such changes will help our customers manage their student loan obligations, achieve better student outcomes, and increase the collectability of the loans. These changes generally take the form of a temporary forbearance of payments, a temporary interest rate reduction, a temporary interest rate reduction with a permanent extension of the loan term, and/or a short-term extended repayment alternative. When we give a borrower facing financial difficulty an interest rate reduction, we temporarily reduce the rate (currently to 4.0 percent) for a two-year period and, in the vast majority of cases, permanently extend the final maturity of the loan. The combination of these two loan term changes helps reduce the monthly payment due from the borrower and increases the likelihood the borrower will remain current during the interest rate modification period as well as when the loan returns to its original contractual interest rate. We classify a loan as a TDR due to forbearance using a two-step process. The first step is to identify a loan that was in full principal and interest repayment status and received more than three months of forbearance in a 24-month period; however, during the first nine months after a loan had entered full principal and interest repayment status, we do not count up to the first 88 six months of forbearance received during that period against the three-month policy limit. The second step is to evaluate the creditworthiness of the loan by examining its most recent refreshed FICO score. Loans that have met the criteria in the first test and have a FICO score above a certain threshold (based on the most recent quarterly FICO score refresh) will not be classified as TDRs. Loans that have met the criteria in the first test and have a FICO score under the threshold (based on the most recent quarterly FICO score refresh) will be classified as TDRs. A loan also becomes a TDR when it is modified to reduce the interest rate on the loan (regardless of when such modification occurs and/or whether such interest rate reduction is temporary). Once a loan qualifies for TDR status, it remains a TDR for allowance purposes for the remainder of its life. About half of our loans that are considered TDRs involve a temporary forbearance of payments and do not change the contractual interest rate of the loan. As of December 31, 2020 and 2019, approximately 47 percent and 50 percent, respectively, of TDRs were classified as such due to their forbearance status. For additional information, see Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 7, “Allowance for Credit Losses.” During the first quarter of 2020, COVID-19 began to spread worldwide and has caused significant disruptions to the U.S. and world economies. On March 27, 2020, then President Trump signed into law the CARES Act, which, among other things, allows us to (i) elect to suspend the requirements under GAAP for loan modifications related to COVID-19 that would otherwise be categorized as TDRs, and (ii) suspend any determination of a loan modified as a result of the effects of COVID-19 as being a TDR, including impairment for accounting purposes. We have elected to suspend TDR accounting for modifications of loans that occur as a result of COVID-19 for the applicable period of the CARES Act and CAA relief. The relief from TDR guidance applies to modifications of loans that were not more than 30 days past due as of December 31, 2019, and that occur during the period beginning on March 1, 2020, and ending on the earlier of (i) sixty days after the date on which the national emergency related to the COVID-19 outbreak is terminated, or (ii) January 1, 2022. We are continuing to apply TDR accounting to those loans that were more than 30 days past due as of December 31, 2019 and were subsequently modified. Off-Balance Sheet Exposure for Contractual Loan Commitments When we approve a Private Education Loan at the beginning of an academic year, that approval may cover the borrowing for the entire academic year. As such, we do not always disburse the full amount of the loan at the time of such approval, but instead have a commitment to fund a portion of the loan at a later date (usually the start of the second semester or subsequent trimesters). We estimate expected credit losses over the contractual period in which we are exposed to credit risk via a contractual obligation to extend credit, unless that obligation is unconditionally cancellable by us. The discounted cash flow approach described above includes expected future contractual disbursements. The portion of the allowance for credit losses related to future disbursements is shown as a liability on the face of the balance sheet, and related provision for credit losses is reflected on the income statement. Uncollectible Interest The majority of the total accrued interest receivable on our Private Education Loan portfolio represents accrued interest on deferred loans where no payments are due while the borrower is in school and on fixed-pay loans where the borrower makes a $25 monthly payment that is smaller than the interest accrued on the loan in that month. The accrued interest on these loans will be capitalized and increase the unpaid principal balance of the loans when the borrower exits the grace period after separation from school. The discounted cash flow approach described above considers both the collectability of principal as well as this portion of accrued interest that is expected to capitalize to the balance of the loan. Therefore, the allowance for this portion of accrued interest balance is included in our allowance for credit losses. The discounted cash flow approach does not consider interest accrued on loans that are in a full principal and interest repayment status or in interest-only repayment status. We separately capture the amount of expected uncollectible interest associated with these loans using historical experience to estimate the uncollectible interest for the next four months at each period-end date. This amount is recorded as a reduction of interest income. Accrued interest receivable is separately disclosed on the face of the balance sheet. Allowance for Credit Card Loans We use the gross loss approach when estimating the allowance for credit losses for our Credit Card portfolio. Because our Credit Card portfolio is new and we do not have historical loss experience, we use estimated loss rates reported by other financial institutions to estimate our allowance for credit losses for Credit Cards, net of expected recoveries. In addition, we use 89 a model that utilizes purchased credit card information with risk characteristics similar to those of our own portfolio as a challenger model. We then consider any qualitative factors that may change our future expectations of losses. As all of our Credit Card loans are unconditionally cancelable by us, the issuer, we do not record any estimate of credit losses for unused portions of our Credit Card commitments. Allowance for FFELP Loan Losses FFELP Loans are insured as to their principal and accrued interest in the event of default, subject to a risk-sharing level based on the date of loan disbursement. These insurance obligations are supported by contractual rights against the United States. For loans disbursed on or after July 1, 2006, we receive 97 percent reimbursement on all qualifying default claims. For loans disbursed after October 1, 1993, and before July 1, 2006, we receive 98 percent reimbursement on all qualifying claims. For loans disbursed prior to October 1, 1993, we receive 100 percent reimbursement. Because we bear a maximum of three percent loss exposure due to this federal guarantee, our allowance for credit losses for FFELP Loans and related periodic provision expense are relatively small. We use the gross loss approach when estimating the allowance for credit losses for the unguaranteed portion of our FFELP Loans. We maintain an allowance for credit losses for our FFELP Loans at a level sufficient to cover lifetime expected credit losses. The allowance for FFELP Loan losses uses historical experience of customer default behavior. We apply the default rate projections, net of applicable risk sharing, to our FFELP Loans for the current period to perform our quantitative calculation. Once the quantitative calculation is performed, we review the adequacy of the allowance for credit losses and determine if qualitative adjustments need to be considered. Loan Interest Income For all loans, including impaired loans, classified as held for investment, we recognize interest income as earned, adjusted for the amortization of deferred direct origination and acquisition costs. Deferred fees or costs are required to be recognized as yield adjustments over the life of the related loans and are recognized by the interest method. The objective of the interest method is to arrive at periodic interest income (including recognition of fees and costs) at a constant effective yield on the net investment in the receivable (i.e., the principal amount of the receivable adjusted by unamortized fees or costs, purchase premium or discount and any hedging activity—these unamortized costs will collectively be referred to as “basis adjustments”). The difference between the periodic interest income so determined and the interest income determined by applying the stated interest rate to the outstanding principal amount of the receivable is the amount of periodic amortization of deferred direct origination and acquisition costs. For the amortization of the basis adjustments, we determine the constant effective yield necessary to apply the interest method based upon the contractual terms of the loan contract, with no consideration given to expected prepayments. For fixed-rate loans, when a prepayment occurs the unamortized balance of the basis adjustments is adjusted so that future amortization (based upon the contractual terms of the loan) will result in a constant effective yield equal to the original effective interest rate. Prepayments do not result in a change in the effective interest rate of the loan. We determine the contractual payments on a pool basis; as such, when a prepayment occurs, future contractual payments will be determined assuming the pool will make smaller payments through the original term of the contract. The adjustment to the unamortized basis adjustment balance is recorded in interest income. For variable-rate loans, the effective interest rate at the time of origination is the loan’s effective interest rate assuming all future contractual payments. The effective interest rate remains the same for that loan until the loan rate changes. If there is no prepayment and no change in the stated interest rate, the periodic amortization of the basis adjustments is equal to the difference between the effective interest rate multiplied by the book basis and the contractual interest due. We determine the contractual payments on a pool basis; as such, when a prepayment occurs, future contractual payments will be determined assuming the pool will make smaller payments through the original term of the contract. The adjustment to the unamortized basis adjustment balance is recorded in interest income. When the interest rate on a variable-rate loan changes, the effective interest rate is recalculated using the same methodology described in the previous paragraph; however, the future contractual payments are changed to reflect the new interest rate. There is no forecasting of future expected changes in interest rates. The accounting basis used to determine the effective interest rate of the cash flows is equal to the balances of the unpaid principal balance and unamortized basis adjustments at the time of the rate change. 90 We also pay to the DOE an annual 105 basis point Consolidation Loan Rebate Fee on FFELP consolidation loans, which is netted against loan interest income. Additionally, interest earned on education loans reflects potential non-payment adjustments in accordance with our uncollectible interest recognition policy. We do not amortize any adjustments to the basis of loans when they are classified as held-for-sale. With the adoption of CECL on January 1, 2020, we continue to analyze the collectability of accrued interest associated with loans not currently in full principal and interest repayment status or in interest only repayment status as discussed above; however, we have changed the recognition of the allowance for this portion of uncollectible interest (amounts to be capitalized after separation from school and the expiration of the grace period) to the provision for loan losses from our historical practice of recording it as a reduction of interest income, as well as classifying this allowance as part of our allowance for credit losses as opposed to our historical practice of recording it as a reduction of accrued interest income receivable. The allowance for the portion of uncollectible interest on loans making full interest payments will continue to be recorded as a reduction of interest income. We recognize certain fee income (primarily late fees) on all loans when earned according to the contractual provisions of the promissory notes, as well as our expectation of collectability. Fee income is recorded when earned in “other non-interest income” in the accompanying consolidated statements of income. Allowance for Credit Losses 2019 Prior to the adoption of CECL on January 1, 2020, we maintained an allowance for credit losses at an amount sufficient to absorb probable losses incurred in our portfolios as well as regarding future loan commitments, at the reporting date based on a projection of estimated probable credit losses incurred in the portfolio. For a detailed description of this approach, see Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 2, “Significant Accounting Policies—Allowance for Credit Losses 2019” for significant judgments related to the determination of the allowance for credit losses in 2019. Derivative Accounting The most significant judgments related to derivative accounting are: (1) concluding the derivative is an effective hedge and qualifies for hedge accounting, and (2) determining the fair value of certain derivatives and hedged items. To qualify for hedge accounting, a derivative must be a highly effective hedge upon designation and on an ongoing basis. There are no “bright line” tests on what is considered a highly effective hedge. We use a historical regression analysis to prove ongoing and prospective hedge effectiveness. See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 2, “Significant Accounting Policies — Fair Value Measurement” for significant judgments related to the valuation of derivatives. Although some of our valuations require more judgment than others, we compare the fair values of our derivatives that we calculate to those fair values provided by our counterparties on a monthly basis. We view this as a critical control which helps validate these judgments. Any significant differences with our counterparties are identified and resolved appropriately. On July 1, 2018, we adopted FASB’s ASU No. 2017-12, “Derivatives and Hedging: Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities,” which (1) improved the financial reporting of hedging relationships to better portray the economic results of an entity’s risk management activities in its financial statements, and (2) made certain targeted improvements to simplify the application of the hedge accounting guidance. One of the key changes was that the standard eliminated the separate measurement and reporting of hedge ineffectiveness. In accordance with the standard, certain provisions were required to be applied on a modified retrospective basis, which requires a cumulative effect adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive income with a corresponding adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption, or January 1, 2018 in our case. The accounting for derivative instruments requires that every derivative instrument, including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts, be recorded on the balance sheet as either an asset or liability measured at fair value. Our derivative instruments are classified and accounted for by us as fair value hedges, cash flow hedges, or trading hedges. Fair Value Hedges We generally use fair value hedges to offset the exposure to changes in fair value of a recognized fixed-rate liability. We enter into interest rate swaps to economically convert fixed-rate liabilities into variable-rate liabilities. For fair value hedges, we generally consider all components of the derivative’s gain and/or loss when assessing hedge effectiveness and generally hedge changes in fair values due to interest rates. For fair value hedges, the entire change in the fair value of the hedging instrument included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness is recorded in the same line item in the consolidated statements of income 91 that is used to present the earnings effect of the hedged component of the hedged item. The timing of recognition of the change in fair value of a hedging instrument included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness is the same as prior to the adoption of ASU No. 2017-12. Cash Flow Hedges We use cash flow hedges to hedge the exposure to variability in cash flows of floating-rate liabilities. This strategy is used primarily to minimize the exposure to volatility in cash flows from future changes in interest rates. In assessing hedge effectiveness, generally all components of each derivative’s gains or losses are included in the assessment. We hedge exposure to changes in cash flows due to changes in interest rates or total changes in cash flow. For cash flow hedges, the entire change in the fair value of the hedging instrument included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness is recorded in other comprehensive income (loss). Those amounts are subsequently reclassified to earnings, in the same line item in the consolidated statements of income as impacted by the hedged item, when the hedged item affects earnings. Amounts reported in accumulated other comprehensive income related to derivatives will be reclassified to interest expense as interest payments are made on our variable-rate deposits. During the next twelve months, we estimate that $19 million will be reclassified as an increase to interest expense. Trading Activities When derivative instruments do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment, they are accounted for at fair value with all changes in fair value recorded through earnings. All of our derivative instruments entered into with maturities of less than three years are economically hedging risk, but do not receive hedge accounting treatment. Trading derivatives also include any hedges that originally received hedge accounting treatment, but lost hedge accounting treatment due to failed effectiveness testing, as well as the activity of certain derivatives prior to those derivatives receiving hedge accounting treatment. Cumulative effect of applying ASU No. 2017-12 As a result of the cumulative effect of applying the hedging standard to our fair value hedges on July 1, 2018, we recorded a $2 million basis increase to our hedged deposit balances with a corresponding increase to retained earnings of approximately $0.8 million, net of taxes and a $3 million loss to “gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities, net” in our consolidated statements of income to adjust the life-to-date ineffectiveness. To reflect the adoption of the hedging standard on our cash flow hedging relationships at July 1, 2018, we recorded a $0.2 million, net of taxes decrease to retained earnings and a corresponding $0.3 million increase to accumulated other comprehensive income. ASU No. 2020-04 On March 12, 2020, FASB issued Accounting Standards Update ASU No. 2020-04, “Reference Rate Reform (“Topic 848”): Facilitation of the Effects of Reference Rate Reform on Financial Reporting.” On January 7, 2021, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update ASU No. 2021-01, “Reference Rate Reform (“Topic 848”): Scope” that clarified the scope of Topic 848. Topic 848 contains temporary optional expedients and exceptions for applying GAAP to contract modifications, hedging relationships, and other transactions affected by reference rate reform. Our derivative portfolio is made up of interest rate swaps that are centrally cleared through either the CME or the LCH. On October 16, 2020, both the CME and the LCH changed the price alignment interest and discount rate applied when valuing these transactions to SOFR. The ISDA 2020 IBOR Fallbacks Protocol (the “ISDA Fallback Protocol”) was made available for adherence on October 23, 2020, with an effective date of January 25, 2021. Once adhered to by both counterparties in a bilateral relationship and the effective date is reached, the ISDA Fallback Protocol represents a change to the contractual terms of derivatives governed by each respective ISDA agreement between the Company and a derivative counterparty. We have elected the option provided in Topic 848 to not reassess previous accounting determinations as well as the option to not dedesignate a hedging relationship due to a current or future change in a critical or contractual term related to reference rate reform, including changes in the discount rate. As our liabilities may begin to use alternatives to LIBOR before LIBOR is no longer published, for cash flow hedges of forecasted LIBOR based payments, we have elected the expedient offered in Topic 848 to disregard the potential change in the designated hedged interest rate risk that may occur because of reference rate reform when we assesses whether the hedged forecasted transactions are probable, in accordance with the requirements of “Derivatives and Hedging” Topic 815. We have 92 also elected the expedient provided by Topic 848 to assume the reference rate will not be replaced for the remainder of the hedging relationship when assessing hedge effectiveness. Topic 848 allows for different elections to be made at different points in time. We intend to reassess our elections of optional expedients and exceptions included within Topic 848 when changes or additions are necessary. Risk Management Our Approach Risk is inherent in our business activities and the specialized lending industry we serve. The ability of management to anticipate, identify and remediate risk in a timely manner is critical to our continued success. Our enterprise risk management (“ERM”) framework is designed to identify, remediate, control and report these risks and escalate as appropriate to the Board of Directors or its designee. Risk Oversight Our Board of Directors oversees our overall strategic direction, including our risk management capability and effectiveness. The Board of Directors has oversight of key policies as well as the risk management framework developed and administered by the management team. We have a robust process to escalate to the Board meaningful departures from our risk appetite statements. The Board of Directors oversees the continued development of the ERM program. The Governance Framework Our overall objective is to ensure all significant risks inherent in our business can be identified, remediated where appropriate, controlled and reported. To this end, we have adopted the “three lines of defense” approach to governance. Specifically, the business units form the “first line of defense” and are the “owners” of risks inherent in their business activities. As the risk owner, the first line of defense is accountable for the day-to-day execution of risk and control policy and procedures (including activities performed by third-party contractors). Our Independent Risk Function constitutes the “second line of defense” and conducts oversight and effective challenge of the risk and control activities within the first line of defense. Rather than focusing on execution, the second line of defense is accountable for the related policy and standards executed upon by the first line of defense. Finally, the Internal Audit function comprises the “third line of defense.” The Internal Audit function provides opinions to the Board of Directors on the effectiveness of the first and second lines of defense, as reflected in audit reports. Enterprise Risk Management Policy and Framework The ERM policy and risk appetite framework are designed to establish a stable risk and control environment across the enterprise. The policy, which is approved by the Board of Directors, outlines the framework used to ensure that risk and control issues across the enterprise are identified, remediated, controlled and reported. The ERM policy, the risk appetite framework and the related policies and procedures constitute the core of the Independent Risk governance program. The risk appetite statements are at the core of the governance framework. The risk appetite statements establish the level of risk we are willing to accept within each risk category, described below, in pursuit of our business objectives. Compliance with our risk appetite is monitored using a set of key risk indicators, with thresholds and limits, for each risk type. The Enterprise Risk Committee (the “ERC”) provides oversight of the risk appetite framework with escalation to the Board of Directors, as appropriate. Our Board of Directors approves the risk appetite framework annually and requires that management provide ongoing updates on adherence to the risk appetites. 93 Board of Directors Committee Structure We have a robust Board of Directors committee structure that facilitates oversight, effective challenge and escalation of risk and control issues. Risk Committee. The Risk Committee was established to assist the Board of Directors in fulfilling its risk management oversight responsibilities. Annually, the Risk Committee recommends the ERM policy and the risk appetite framework to the Board of Directors for approval. The Risk Committee receives periodic updates on compliance with the framework from the Chief Risk Officer (the “CRO”). Audit Committee. The Audit Committee is responsible for oversight of the Internal Audit function. Additionally, the Audit Committee oversees the quality and integrity of our financial reporting process and financial statements; the qualifications, hiring, performance and independence of our independent registered accounting firm; and our system of internal financial controls. Nominations, Governance and Compensation Committee. The Nominations, Governance and Compensation Committee, among other things: (1) periodically reviews management’s succession planning; (2) confirms our compensation practices properly balance risk and reward and do not promote excessive risk-taking; (3) implements good governance policies for us and our Board of Directors; (4) approves all compensation and benefits for our Chief Executive Officer, Executive Vice Presidents, and independent members of our Board of Directors; (5) approves our equity-based compensation plans and management’s administration of employee benefit plans; (6) reviews related party transactions; (7) conducts assessments of the performance of our Board of Directors and its committees; and (8) recommends nominees for election to our Board of Directors. Preferred Stock Committee. The Preferred Stock Committee monitors and evaluates proposed actions that may impact the rights of holders of our preferred stock. Compliance Committee. The purpose of the Compliance Committee of the Board of Directors of the Bank is to assist the Board of Directors in: (1) overseeing the continuing maintenance and enhancement of a strong and sustainable compliance culture; (2) providing oversight of the compliance management system; (3) approving sound policies and objectives and effectively supervising all compliance - related activities; (4) ensuring that the Bank has a qualified Chief Compliance Officer with sufficient authority, independence and resources to administer an effective compliance management system; (5) ensuring our compliance with the Code of Business Conduct; and (6) exercising and performing all other duties and responsibilities delegated to the Committee. Management-Level Committee Structure Executive Committee (“EC”) . The EC is authorized by the Board of Directors to assist the Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) in the general supervision of the business of the Bank. Specifically, the EC will (1) provide to the CEO advice and counsel, subject matter expertise, and recommendations as requested, and (2) through its subcommittees, facilitate the evaluation and decision-making on routine cross-functional matters, and assist management in the fulfillment of management’s duties related to specific risks. The EC has established the following sub-committees to assist in fulfilling its duties. Enterprise Risk Committee . The ERC provides independent oversight and effective challenge to risk and control activities across the enterprise. Additionally, the ERC informs the Risk and Compliance Committees of the Board of Directors, including escalation of instances of non-compliance with the framework. Credit Committee . The Credit Committee is responsible for credit and counterparty risk, product pricing, and credit and collections operations. Operational Risk Committee (“ORC”) . The ORC is the oversight body for risk related to inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems or from external events. It also reviews information technology risk and regulatory and legal risks. Asset and Liability Committee (“ALCO”). ALCO is responsible for the strategy, processes and authorities with which the Bank’s interest rate risk, liquidity and capital adequacy are managed. Each of these sub-committees is comprised of subject matter experts from the senior management team and is accountable to the EC. Moreover, these sub-committees may be supported by steering or working groups, as appropriate. Disclosure Committee. Our Disclosure Committee assists our CEO and Chief Financial Officer in their review of periodic SEC reporting documents, earnings releases, investor materials and related disclosure policies and procedures. 94 Internal Audit Risk Assessment Internal Audit regularly monitors our various risk management and compliance efforts, identifies areas that may require increased focus and resources, and reports significant control issues and recommendations to executive management and the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors. Annually, Internal Audit performs an independent risk assessment to evaluate the risk of all significant components of the Company and uses the results to develop their annual Internal Audit plan. Additionally, Internal Audit performs selected reviews of both risk management and compliance functions, including key controls, processes and systems, to assess the effectiveness of the overall risk management framework. Risk Categories Our ERM framework is designed to address the following risk categories: Credit Risk . Credit risk is the risk to earnings or capital resulting from an obligor’s failure to meet the terms of any contract with us or other failure to perform as agreed. Credit risk is found in all activities where success depends on counterparty, issuer or borrower performance. The credit risk related to Private Education Loans is managed within a credit risk infrastructure that includes: (i) a well-defined underwriting, asset quality and collection policy framework; (ii) an ongoing monitoring and review process of portfolio composition and trends; (iii) assignment and management of credit authorities and responsibilities; and (iv) establishment of an allowance for credit losses that covers estimated future losses based upon an analysis of portfolio metrics and economic factors. Credit risk related to derivative contracts is managed by reviewing counterparties for credit strength on an ongoing basis and through our credit policies, which place limits on the amount of exposure we may take with any one counterparty and require collateral to secure the position. The credit and counterparty risk associated with derivatives is measured based on the replacement cost should the counterparty with contracts in a gain position to us fail to perform under the terms of the contract. Operational Risk . Operational risk is the risk to earnings resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems and third-party vendors, or from external events. Operational risk is pervasive in that it exists in all business lines, functional units, legal entities and geographic locations, and it includes information technology risk, physical security risk on tangible assets, as well as regulatory and legal risk. Operational risk exposures are managed through a combination of first line of defense risk, and control activities and second line of defense oversight. The ORC is the management committee responsible for operational risk, and it supports the EC in its oversight duties. The ORC is responsible for escalation to the EC, as appropriate. Additionally, our key risk indicators include operational risk metrics, thresholds and limits and are included in the periodic reporting to the Risk Committee of the Board of Directors. Legal Risk. Legal risk is the risk to earnings, capital or reputation manifested by claims made through the legal system and may arise from a product, a transaction, a business relationship, property (real, personal or intellectual), conduct of an employee or a change in law or regulation. Primary ownership and responsibility for legal risk is placed with the first lines of defense, working with their legal colleagues, to identify and manage. Compliance supports these activities by providing extensive training, monitoring and testing of the processes, policies and procedures utilized by the first lines of defense, maintaining relevant legal and regulatory requirements, and working in close coordination with our Legal group. The General Counsel provides periodic reports, as appropriate, to the Risk Committee of the Board of Directors. Our Code of Business Conduct and the on-going training our employees receive in many compliance areas provide a framework for our employees to conduct themselves with the highest integrity. We instill a risk-conscious culture through communications, training, policies and procedures. Market Risk. Market risk is the risk to earnings or capital resulting from changes in market conditions, such as interest rates, credit spreads or other volatilities. We are exposed to various types of market risk, in particular the risk of loss resulting 95 from interest rate risk, basis risk and other risks that arise through the management of our investment, debt and loan portfolios. Market risk exposures are managed primarily through ALCO. These activities are closely tied to those related to the management of our funding and liquidity risks. The Risk Committee of our Board of Directors periodically reviews and approves the investment and asset and liability management policies and contingency funding plan developed and administered by ALCO. The Chief Financial Officer provides reports to the Risk Committee of the Board of Directors on market risk management. Funding and Liquidity Risk . Funding and liquidity risk is the risk to earnings, capital or the conduct of our business arising from the inability to meet our obligations when they become due without incurring unacceptable losses, such as the inability to fund liability maturities and deposit withdrawals, or invest in future asset growth and business operations at reasonable market rates, as well as the inability to fund Private Education Loan and other loan originations. Our primary liquidity needs include our ongoing ability to: meet our funding needs through market cycles, including periods of financial stress; manage the relative maturities of assets and liabilities on our balance sheet; fund disbursements of Private Education Loans and other loans; and service our indebtedness and bank deposits. Ultimately, our funding and liquidity risk relates to our ability to access the capital markets at reasonable rates and to maintain retail deposits and other funding sources through the Bank, as well as our maintenance of a reserve of cash and unencumbered highly-liquid investment securities that may be readily converted to cash if needed. Our funding and liquidity risk activities are centralized within our Corporate Finance department, which is responsible for developing and executing our funding strategy. We analyze and monitor our liquidity risk, maintain excess liquidity and access diverse funding sources depending on current market conditions. Funding and liquidity risks are overseen and recommendations approved primarily through ALCO. The Risk Committee of our Board of Directors is responsible for periodically reviewing the funding and liquidity positions and contingency funding plan developed and administered by ALCO. Reputational Risk . Reputational risk is the risk to shareholder value and growth trajectory from a negative perception, whether true or not, of an organization by its key stakeholders, the changing expectations of its stakeholders and/or inadequate internal coordination of business decisions. This could expose us to litigation, financial loss or other damage to our business or brand. Management proactively assesses and manages reputational risk. We have established our government relations function to manage our review of and response to all formal inquiries from members of Congress, state legislators, and their staff, as well as providing targeted messaging that reinforces our public policy goals. We review and consider reputational risk on matters as diverse as the launch of new products and services, our credit underwriting activities, and how we fund operations. Our public relations, marketing and media teams continuously monitor print, electronic and social media to understand how we are perceived; proactively address customer complaints; and endeavor to enhance the value of our corporate brand. Metrics related to reputational risk are reported to and monitored by the EC. Our Legal, Government Relations and Compliance groups regularly meet and collaborate with our Media and Investor Relations teams to provide more coordinated monitoring and management of our reputational risks. Strategic Risk . Strategic risk is the risk to shareholder value and growth trajectory from adverse business decisions and/or improper implementation of business strategies. Management must be able to develop and implement business strategies that leverage the organization’s core competencies and are appropriately structured, resourced and executed. The overall development of the strategic plan includes extensive engagement with the Board of Directors. Similarly, the Board of Directors provides oversight and effective challenge on performance, relative to the strategic plan. Common Stock Our shareholders have authorized the issuance of 1.125 billion shares of common stock (par value of $0.20). At December 31, 2020, 375 million shares were issued and outstanding and 35 million shares were unissued but encumbered for outstanding stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock units, performance stock units and dividend equivalent units for employee compensation and remaining authority for stock-based compensation plans. See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 13, “Stockholders’ Equity” for additional details. 96 Arrangements with Navient Corporation In connection with the Spin-Off, we entered into a Separation and Distribution Agreement. We also entered into various other ancillary agreements with Navient to effect the Spin-Off and provide a framework for our relationship with Navient thereafter, such as a transition services agreement, a tax sharing agreement, an employee matters agreement, a loan servicing and administration agreement, a joint marketing agreement, a key services agreement, a data sharing agreement and a master sublease agreement. The majority of these agreements were transitional in nature with most having terms that have expired or will expire within the next year. We continue to have exposure to risks related to Navient’s creditworthiness. If we are unable to obtain indemnification payments from Navient, our results of operations and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected. Pursuant to the terms of the Spin-Off and applicable law, Navient is responsible for all liabilities (whether accrued, contingent or otherwise and whether known or unknown) arising out of or resulting from the conduct of pre-Spin-Off SLM and its subsidiaries’ businesses prior to the Spin-Off, other than certain specifically identified liabilities relating to the conduct of our consumer banking business for which the Bank is responsible. Nonetheless, given the prior usage of the Sallie Mae and SLM names by entities now owned by Navient, we and our subsidiaries may from time to time be improperly named as defendants in legal proceedings where the allegations at issue are the legal responsibility of Navient. Most of these legal proceedings involve matters that arose in whole or in part in the ordinary course of business of pre-Spin-Off SLM. Likewise, as the period of time since the Spin-Off increases, so does the likelihood any allegations that may be made may be in part for our own actions in a post-Spin-Off time period and in part for Navient’s conduct in a pre-Spin-Off time period. We will not be providing information on these proceedings unless there are material issues of fact or disagreement with Navient as to the bases of the proceedings or responsibility therefor that we believe could have a material, adverse impact on our business, assets, financial condition, liquidity or outlook if not resolved in our favor. We briefly summarize below some of the most significant agreements and relationships we continue to have with Navient. For additional information regarding the Separation and Distribution Agreement and the other ancillary agreements, see our Current Report on Form 8-K filed on May 2, 2014. Separation and Distribution Agreement The Separation and Distribution Agreement addresses, among other things, the following activities: • the obligation of each party to indemnify the other against liabilities retained or assumed by that party pursuant to the Separation and Distribution Agreement and in connection with claims of third-parties; • the allocation among the parties of rights and obligations under insurance policies; and • the creation of a governance structure by which matters related to the separation and other transactions contemplated by the Separation and Distribution Agreement are to be managed. The Separation and Distribution Agreement provides specific processes and procedures pursuant to which we may submit claims for indemnification to Navient. If for any reason Navient is unable or unwilling to pay claims made against it, our costs, operating expenses, cash flows and financial condition could be materially and adversely affected over time. Indemnification Obligations Pursuant to the terms of the Separation and Distribution Agreement, and as contemplated by the structure of the Spin-Off, Navient is legally obligated to indemnify the Bank against all claims, actions, damages, losses or expenses that may arise from the conduct of all activities of pre-Spin-Off SLM occurring prior to the Spin-Off, except for certain liabilities related to the conduct of the pre-Spin-Off consumer banking business that were specifically assumed by the Bank (and as to which the Bank 97 is obligated to indemnify Navient). Some significant examples of the types of indemnification obligations Navient has under the Separation and Distribution Agreement and related ancillary agreements include: • Navient is required to indemnify the Company and the Bank for any liabilities, costs or expenses they may incur arising from any action or threatened action related to the servicing, operations and collections activities of pre-Spin-Off SLM and its subsidiaries with respect to Private Education Loans and FFELP Loans that were assets of the Bank or Navient at the time of the Spin-Off; provided that written notice was provided to Navient on or prior to April 30, 2017, the third anniversary date of the Spin-Off. Navient is not required to indemnify for changes in law or changes in prior existing interpretations of law that occur on or after April 30, 2014. • In connection with the Spin-Off, we recorded a liability related to uncertain tax positions of $27 million for which we are indemnified by Navient. As of December 31, 2020, the remaining balance of the indemnification receivable related to those uncertain tax positions was $7 million. Long-Term Arrangements The loan servicing and administration agreement governs the terms by which Navient provides servicing, administration and collection services for the Bank’s portfolio of FFELP Loans, as well as servicing history information with respect to Private Education Loans previously serviced by Navient and access to certain promissory notes in Navient’s possession. The term of the loan servicing and administration agreement has been extended to April 30, 2022. The data sharing agreement provided us the right to obtain from Navient certain post-Spin-Off performance data relating to Private Education Loans owned or serviced by Navient to support and facilitate ongoing underwriting, originations, forecasting, performance and reserve analyses. The term of the data sharing agreement expired on April 29, 2019, however. The tax sharing agreement governs the respective rights, responsibilities and obligations of us and Navient after the Spin-Off relating to taxes, including with respect to the payment of taxes, the preparation and filing of tax returns and the conduct of tax contests. Under this agreement, each party is generally liable for taxes attributable to its business. The agreement also addresses the allocation of tax liabilities that are incurred as a result of the Spin-Off and related transactions. Amended Loan Participation and Purchase Agreement Prior to the Spin-Off, the Bank sold substantially all of its Private Education Loans to several former affiliates, now subsidiaries of Navient (collectively, the “Purchasers”), pursuant to an amended loan participation and purchase agreement. The agreement predates the Spin-Off but was significantly amended and reduced in scope in connection with the Spin-Off. Post-Spin-Off, the Bank retained only the right to require the Purchasers to purchase loans whose borrowers had a lending relationship with both the Bank and Navient (“Split Loans”) (such purchases to be made at fair value) when the Split Loans either (1) are more than 90 days past due; (2) have been restructured; (3) have been granted a hardship forbearance or more than six months of administrative forbearance; or (4) have a borrower or cosigner who has filed for bankruptcy. In the second quarter of 2018, we sold our remaining $43 million portfolio of Split Loans (both current and non-current loans) to Navient and recognized a net gain of $2 million. 98 Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk Interest Rate Sensitivity Analysis Our interest rate risk management program seeks to manage and control interest rate risk, thereby reducing our exposure to fluctuations in interest rates and achieving consistent and acceptable levels of profit in any rate environment, and sustainable growth in net interest income over the long term. We evaluate and monitor interest rate risk through two primary methods: • Earnings at Risk (“EAR”), which measures the impact of hypothetical changes in interest rates on net interest income; and • Economic Value of Equity (“EVE”), which measures the sensitivity or change in the economic value of equity to changes in interest rates. A number of potential interest rate scenarios are simulated using our asset liability management system. The Bank is the primary source of interest rate risk within the Company. At present, a significant portion of the Bank’s earning assets and a large balance of deposits are indexed to 1-month LIBOR. Therefore, 1-month LIBOR is considered a core rate in our interest rate risk analysis. Other interest rate changes are correlated to changes in 1-month LIBOR for analytic purposes, with higher or lower correlations based on historical relationships. In addition, key rates are modeled with a floor, which indicates how low each specific rate is likely to move in practice. Rates are adjusted up or down via a set of scenarios that includes both rate shocks and ramps. Rate shocks represent an immediate and sustained change in 1-month LIBOR, with the resulting changes in other indices correlated accordingly. Interest rate ramps represent a linear increase in 1-month LIBOR over the course of 12 months, with the resulting changes in other indices correlated accordingly. The following tables summarize the potential effect on earnings over the next 24 months and the potential effect on market values of balance sheet assets and liabilities at December 31, 2020 and 2019, based upon a sensitivity analysis performed by management assuming hypothetical increases in market interest rates of 100 and 300 basis points while credit and funding spreads remain constant. The EVE sensitivity is applied only to financial assets and liabilities, including hedging instruments, that existed at the balance sheet date, and does not reflect any impact of new assets, liabilities, commitments, or hedging instruments that may arise in the future. With current interest rates so low, a 100 or 300-basis point downward rate shock does not provide a meaningful indication of interest rate sensitivity, so results for those scenarios have not been presented. At December 31, 2020, the full impact of a 100-basis point downward rate shock cannot be modeled for some instruments on our balance sheet, due to the precipitous fall in many short-term rates since February 2020. The EAR results for December 31, 2020 indicate a market risk profile that is less sensitive than at December 31, 2019 to rate changes and is now at a nearly rate-neutral position for net interest income, based on static balance sheet assumptions over the next two years. For the year ended December 31, 2020, the increased sensitivity in the EVE risk metric is the result of an increase in fixed-rate assets on the balance sheet relative to fixed-rate liabilities and a change in the model used to perform the calculation. A portion of the increased sensitivity is due to portfolio structural changes as we now have a higher percentage of assets invested in fixed-rate loans and highly liquid fixed-rate securities, with underlying funding of fixed-rate liabilities of relatively shorter duration. In addition, several changes to the EVE calculation methodology have been made in 2020 that have caused the ratios presented below to increase. Significant changes in methodology have occurred with the recent implementation of a new asset and liability model, which offers capabilities to model the expected cashflows of our Private Education Loan portfolio more precisely. These changes have lengthened the projected remaining weighted average lives of our education loan assets. 99 December 31, 2020 2019 +300 Basis Points +100 Basis Points -100 Basis Points +300 Basis Points +100 Basis Points -100 Basis Points EAR - Shock -0.6 % -0.0 % N/A +4.4 % +1.4 % -1.4 % EAR - Ramp -0.1 % +0.1 % N/A +3.8 % +1.1 % -0.9 % EVE -15.8 % -5.3 % N/A -5.0 % -1.9 % +2.0 % In the preceding tables, the interest rate sensitivity analysis reflects the balance sheet mix of fully variable LIBOR-based loans, and fully variable funding, including brokered CDs that have been converted to LIBOR through derivative transactions. The analysis assumes that retail MMDAs and retail savings balances, while relatively sensitive to interest rate changes, will not correlate 100 percent to the full interest rate shocks or ramps. Also considered is the impact of FFELP Loans, which receive floor income in low interest rate environments, and will therefore not reprice fully with interest rate shocks. Although we believe that these measurements provide an estimate of our interest rate sensitivity, they do not account for potential changes in credit quality, balance sheet mix, and size of our balance sheet. They also do not account for other business developments that could affect net income, or for management actions that could affect net income or could be taken to change our risk profile. Accordingly, we can give no assurance that actual results would not differ materially from the estimated outcomes of our simulations. Further, such simulations do not represent our current view of expected future interest rate movements. 100 Asset and Liability Funding Gap The table below presents our assets and liabilities (funding) arranged by underlying indices as of December 31, 2020. In the following GAAP presentation, the funding gap only includes derivatives that qualify as effective hedges (those derivatives which are reflected in net interest income, as opposed to those reflected in the “gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities, net” line on the consolidated statements of income). The difference between the asset and the funding is the funding gap for the specified index. This represents at a high level our exposure to interest rate risk in the form of basis risk and repricing risk, which is the risk that the different indices may reset at different frequencies or may not move in the same direction or at the same magnitude. (Note that all fixed-rate assets and liabilities are aggregated into one line item, which does not capture the differences in time due to maturity.) (Dollars in millions) Index Frequency of Variable Resets Assets Funding (1) Funding Gap Fed Funds Effective Rate daily/weekly/monthly $ — $ 675.1 $ (675.1) SOFR Rate monthly 50.6 (50.6) 3-month Treasury bill weekly 109.4 — 109.4 Prime monthly 13.5 — 13.5 3-month LIBOR quarterly — 251.1 (251.1) 1-month LIBOR monthly 12,245.9 9,984.9 2,261.0 1-month LIBOR daily 628.2 — 628.2 Non-Discrete reset (2) daily/weekly 4,626.6 4,044.0 582.6 Fixed-Rate (3) 13,146.8 15,764.7 (2,617.9) Total $ 30,770.4 $ 30,770.4 $ — ______________________ (1) Funding (by index) includes all derivatives that qualify as effective hedges. (2) Assets include restricted and unrestricted cash equivalents and other overnight type instruments. Funding includes liquid retail deposits and the obligation to return cash collateral held related to derivatives exposures. (3) Assets include receivables and other assets (including premiums and reserves). Funding includes unswapped time deposits, liquid MMDAs swapped to fixed rates and stockholders’ equity. The “Funding Gap” in the above table shows primarily mismatches in the 1-month LIBOR (monthly), fixed-rate and Non-Discrete reset categories. Changes in the Fed Funds Effective Rate, 3-month LIBOR, SOFR and 1-month LIBOR daily categories are generally quite highly correlated, and should offset each other effectively. The funding in the fixed-rate bucket includes $2.3 billion of equity and $0.5 billion of non-interest bearing liabilities. We consider our overall risk to be low and our strategies are designed to maintain low to moderate levels of market exposure. We use interest rate swaps and other derivatives to achieve our risk management objectives. Our asset liability management strategy is to match assets with debt (in combination with derivatives) that have the same underlying index and reset frequency or have interest rate characteristics that we believe are highly correlated. The use of funding with index types and reset frequencies that are different from our assets exposes us to interest rate risk in the form of basis and repricing risk. This could result in our cost of funds not moving in the same direction or with the same magnitude as the yield on our assets. While we believe this risk is low, as all of these indices are short-term with rate movements that are highly correlated over a long period of time, market disruptions (which have occurred in recent years) can lead to a temporary divergence between indices, resulting in a negative impact to our earnings. 101 Weighted Average Life The following table reflects the weighted average lives of our earning assets and liabilities at December 31, 2020. Weighted Average (Averages in Years) Life Earning assets Education loans (1) 5.39 Cash and investments 0.49 Total earning assets 4.30 Deposits Short-term deposits 0.41 Long-term deposits 2.14 Total deposits 0.81 Borrowings Long-term borrowings 3.98 Total borrowings 3.98 ____ (1) Includes the loans held for sale portfolio, as well as the loans held for investment portfolio. 102 Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data Reference is made to the financial statements listed under the heading “(a) 1.A. Financial Statements” of Item 15 hereof, which financial statements are incorporated by reference in response to this Item 8. Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure Nothing to report. Item 9A. Controls and Procedures Disclosure Controls and Procedures Our management, with the participation of our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)) as of December 31, 2020. Based on this evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that, as of December 31, 2020, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is (a) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and (b) accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act). Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, we assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020. In making this assessment, our management used the criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on our assessment and those criteria, management concluded that, as of December 31, 2020, our internal control over financial reporting is effective. KPMG LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, audited the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020, as stated in their report listed under the heading “(a) 1.A. Financial Statements” of Item 15 hereof. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate. Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting There have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2020 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting. Item 9B. Other Information Nothing to report. 103 PART III. Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance The information contained in the 2021 Proxy Statement, including information appearing in the sections titled “Proposal 1 — Election of Directors,” “Executive Officers,” “Compensation Discussion and Analysis — Other Arrangements, Policies and Practices Related to Executive Compensation Programs — Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance,” and “Corporate Governance” in the 2021 Proxy Statement, is incorporated herein by reference. Item 11. Executive Compensation The information contained in the 2021 Proxy Statement, including information appearing in the sections titled “Executive Compensation” and “Director Compensation” in the 2021 Proxy Statement, is incorporated herein by reference. Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters The information contained in the 2021 Proxy Statement, including information appearing in the sections titled “Equity Compensation Plan Information,” “Ownership of Common Stock by 5 Percent or More Holders” and “Ownership of Common Stock by Directors and Executive Officers” in the 2021 Proxy Statement, is incorporated herein by reference. Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence The information contained in the 2021 Proxy Statement, including information appearing under “Corporate Governance — Related Party Transactions” and “Corporate Governance — Director Independence” in the 2021 Proxy Statement, is incorporated herein by reference. Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services The information contained in the 2021 Proxy Statement, including information appearing under “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in the 2021 Proxy Statement, is incorporated herein by reference. 104 PART IV. Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules (a) 1. Financial Statements A. The following consolidated financial statements of SLM Corporation and the Report of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm thereon are included in Item 8 above: Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm F- 2 Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm F- 6 Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 20 20 and 201 9 F- 8 Consolidated Statements of Income for the years ended December 31, 20 20 , 201 9 and 201 8 F- 9 Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the years ended December 31, 20 20 , 201 9 and 201 8 F- 10 Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity for the years ended December 31, 20 20 , 201 9 and 201 8 F- 11 Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 20 20 , 201 9 and 201 8 F- 14 Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements F- 16 2. Financial Statement Schedules All schedules are omitted because they are not applicable or the required information is shown in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto. 3. Exhibits The exhibits listed in the accompanying index to exhibits are filed or incorporated by reference as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We will furnish at cost a copy of any exhibit filed with or incorporated by r