Nyse Cit 2014

CIT ANNUAL REPORT 2014
CIT
CITAnnual
AnnualReport 2014
Report 2014
BuildingLong-Term
Building Long-TermValue
Value
CIT Group Inc.
Founded in 1908, CIT (NYSE: CIT) is a financial holding company with more than $35 billion in financing and
leasing assets. It provides financing, leasing and advisory services to its clients and their customers across
more than 30 industries. CIT maintains leadership positions in middle market lending, factoring, retail and
equipment finance, as well as aerospace, equipment and rail leasing. CIT’s U.S. bank subsidiary CIT Bank
(Member FDIC), BankOnCIT.com, offers a variety of savings options designed to help customers achieve
their financial goals.
CIT Bank
Founded in 2000, CIT Bank (Member FDIC, Equal Housing Lender) is the U.S. commercial bank subsidiary
of CIT Group Inc. (NYSE: CIT). It provides lending and leasing to the small business, middle market and
transportation sectors. CIT Bank (BankOnCIT.com) offers a variety of savings options designed to help
customers achieve their financial goals. As of December 31, 2014, it had approximately $16 billion of deposits
and more than $21 billion of assets.
Transportation & International Finance North American Commercial Finance

CIT Aerospace Finance CIT Commercial Services
We provide customized leasing and secured financing We are a leading provider of factoring services in the
to operators of commercial and business aircraft. Our United States. We provide credit protection, accounts
financing services include operating leases, single investor receivable management services and asset-based lending
leases, leveraged financing and sale and leaseback to manufacturers and importers that sell into retail
arrangements, as well as loans secured by equipment. channels of distribution.
CIT International Finance CIT Corporate Finance

We offer equipment financing and leasing to small and We provide lending, leasing and other financial
middle market businesses in China. and advisory services to the middle market with a
focus on specific industries, including: Aerospace &
CIT Maritime Finance Defense, Business Services, Communications, Energy,
We offer senior secured loans, sale-leasebacks and Entertainment, Gaming, Healthcare, Industrials,
bareboat charters to owners and operators of oceangoing Information Services & Technology, Restaurants, Retail,
cargo vessels, including tankers, bulkers, container ships, Sports & Media and Transportation.
car carriers and offshore vessels and drilling rigs.
CIT Equipment Finance
CIT Rail We provide leasing and equipment loan solutions to small
We are an industry leader in offering customized leasing businesses and middle market companies in a wide range
and financing solutions and a highly efficient, diversified of industries. We provide creative financing solutions to
fleet of railcar assets to freight shippers and carriers our borrowers and lessees, and assist manufacturers and
throughout North America and Europe. distributors in growing sales, profitability and customer
loyalty by providing customized, value-added finance
solutions to their commercial clients. The LendEdge
platform, in our Direct Capital Corporation business,
allows small businesses to access financing through a
highly automated credit approval, documentation and
funding process. We offer both capital and operating
leases.
CIT Real Estate Finance

We provide senior secured commercial real estate
loans to developers and other commercial real estate
professionals. We focus on stable, cash flowing properties
and originate construction loans to highly experienced
and well-capitalized developers.
April 2, 2015
DEAR FELLOW SHAREHOLDERS,
Last year marked the fifth year since we began our efforts to reposition CIT for long-term
success, and I am happy to report that we made solid progress in 2014. In addition to growing
our financing and leasing assets organically, we made two key acquisitions that are designed to
strengthen our commercial franchises and improve returns.
Our collateralized lending model continues to differentiate CIT from its competitors in JOHN A. THAIN
the middle market. We lend in industries we know — our deep industry expertise creates CHAIRMAN OF THE
opportunities for us to make smart and profitable financing decisions. Our lending business is BOARD & CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER
directly benefiting from our strategy of building assets through CIT Bank, a deliberate course
that led last year to one of the most transformative deals in CIT’s recent history: our planned
acquisition of OneWest Bank.
Smart, Selective Growth
In 2014, CIT grew its earning assets, achieved its profit targets and continued returning capital to shareholders.
We reported net income of $1.1 billion, $5.96 per diluted share, while our combined commercial financing and
leasing assets in our North American Commercial Finance and Transportation & International Finance segments
grew by 12%. In addition, we saw a 27% increase in CIT Bank deposits in 2014.
The assets we are adding are contributing to CIT’s financial strength. We remain focused on taking capital out of
low-return businesses and re-investing it in higher-return businesses that we back with strong credit and asset risk
management. This combination of portfolio management and lending discipline has helped us continue to originate
assets with attractive risk-adjusted returns.
A few years ago, we made a deliberate decision to expand our business into adjacent markets while pruning
operations that did not meet our parameters for returns. One of the opportunities we identified was in commercial
real estate. We reentered the space after many commercial banks retreated from it in the wake of the credit crisis.
But we did so selectively, focusing solely on first-lien collateralized loans. We have built our commercial real estate
business into a nearly $2 billion lending platform in just three years. Maritime and capital equipment financing are
two other lending businesses where we have pursued and capitalized on similar opportunities.
We exited businesses that we concluded no longer supported our strategic goals, including our student lending
portfolio, a corporate finance portfolio in the United Kingdom (UK) and smaller equipment leasing portfolios in
Asia, Latin America and Europe. We also entered into definitive agreements to sell our equipment leasing platforms
in Mexico and Brazil and transferred our UK equipment finance portfolio to held-for-sale.
Together, these new initiatives and divestitures are helping us return capital to you, our shareholders. Since May
2013, our Board has authorized $1.3 billion of share repurchases, and in the third quarter of 2014, CIT increased its
quarterly dividend to $0.15 a share.
2014 Acquisitions
We are also employing our excess capital to acquire businesses we feel will offer us good risk-adjusted returns.
In January of 2014, we purchased Nacco SAS, a European rail lessor that extends our expertise in railcar leasing to
a new market that is undergoing deregulation. It was a unique chance to acquire an existing platform with a diverse
and attractive fleet, as well as a highly experienced management team. In August, we acquired Direct Capital
Corporation, a New Hampshire-based provider of financing to small- and medium-sized businesses. The company,
through its LendEdge platform, provides financing to small businesses through a highly automated credit approval,
documentation and funding process.
Of course, our agreement to buy OneWest Bank was the most significant development of the year. This transaction
will transform CIT into a leading provider of retail and commercial banking services and further establish the
Company as the commercial bank for the middle market.
The transaction will advance our bank strategy in a pivotal way, bringing in nearly $22 billion in assets and $14 billion
in deposits. With approximately 70 branches in Southern California, OneWest Bank will give us access to a retail
branch network to go with our national small business and middle market lending platform. The addition complements
and enhances our commercial finance franchise and will provide our customers the ability to leverage the OneWest
banking services platform, including its cash management and commercial deposit-taking capabilities. In addition, the
transaction is financially compelling as it will be accretive to our earnings per share as early as 2016.
In combination with our share repurchase program and dividend distributions, the acquisitions are helping us move
toward our target capital ratios. In addition, at the close of the year, Fitch Ratings reinitiated coverage of CIT and rated
our senior debt BB+ and gave us an overall “stable” rating.
A Differentiated Lending Model
CIT’s growth is driven by our differentiated lending model. We’re very good at lending against collateral and at
managing this collateral with our industry expertise.
Over the past few years, we have outlined our efforts to expand CIT Bank by growing assets and building the deposit
base to create a low-cost funding source for our businesses. Today, almost all of our North American commercial
finance assets, our new railcar equipment, our aircraft loans and some aircraft equipment in the U.S., and all of our
maritime lending are financed by CIT Bank.
These actions all led up to the OneWest Bank transaction, which will fundamentally change the foundation of our
lending businesses by making the majority of our assets funded with bank deposits instead of a combination of
secured and unsecured debt. The new funding mix will significantly lower the overall cost of our funding, improve
profitability and diversify our deposit base through the addition of branch and commercial deposits.
Creating Long-Term Value
In 2015, we look forward to further advancing our long-term value proposition and pursuing what we believe are
attractive growth opportunities. Our initial focus will be on completing our OneWest Bank acquisition and expanding
our commercial banking franchise. As part of that process, we will take extra care to maintain the strong risk
management practices and credit discipline we have worked so hard to instill over these past few years. We will
continue to grow franchises with appropriate risk-adjusted returns, improve our profitability by exiting non-strategic
portfolios, remain disciplined on expense management and return excess capital to our shareholders while maintaining
strong capital ratios.
I want to thank our more than 3,300 employees for their efforts over the past year. It’s their dedication and teamwork
that has spurred our growth and helped us to establish our role as a leading provider of small business and middle
market financing. I also join them in welcoming our newest employees to the CIT family and in thanking you, our
shareholders, for your continued support.
John A. Thain
Chairman of the Board & Chief Executive Officer
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
|X| Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the or | | Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 Securities Exchange Act of 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014
Commission File Number: 001-31369
CIT GROUP INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware 65-1051192
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (IRS Employer Identification No.)
11 West 42nd Street, New York, New York 10036

(Address of Registrant’s principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
(212) 461-5200
Registrant’s telephone number including area code:
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each class Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share New York Stock Exchange
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting
issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (check one)
Yes |X| No | | Large accelerated filer |X| Accelerated filer | |
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file Non-accelerated filer | | Smaller reporting company | |
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. At February 6, 2015, there were 175,995,263 shares of CIT’s
Yes | | No |X| common stock, par value $0.01 per share, outstanding.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months Yes | | No |X|
(or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file The aggregate market value of voting common stock held by
such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements non-affiliates of the registrant, based on the New York Stock
for the past 90 days. Yes |X| No | | Exchange Composite Transaction closing price of Common Stock
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted ($45.76 per share, 184,891,451 shares of common stock
electronically and posted on its Corporate Web site, if any, every outstanding), which occurred on June 30, 2014, was
interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to $8,460,632,798. For purposes of this computation, all officers and
Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (232.405 of this chapter) during the directors of the registrant are deemed to be affiliates. Such
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was determination shall not be deemed an admission that such
required to submit and post such files). Yes |X| No | | officers and directors are, in fact, affiliates of the registrant.
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed all
to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (229.405 of this Chapter) is not documents and reports required to be filed by Section 12, 13 or
contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the
registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court.
statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K Yes |X| No | |
or any amendment to this Form 10-K. | | DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement relating to
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a the 2015 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by
smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large reference into Part III hereof to the extent described herein.
CIT ANNUAL REPORT 2014 1
CONTENTS
Part One
Item 1. Business Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Where You Can Find More Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Item 1A. Risk Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Item 2. Properties .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Item 3. Legal Proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Part Two
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities . . . . 28
Item 6. Selected Financial Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure about Market Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Item 9B. Other Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149
Part Three
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
Item 11. Executive Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
Part Four
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
Signatures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
Table of Contents
2 CIT ANNUAL REPORT 2014
PART ONE
Item 1: Business Overview

BUSINESS DESCRIPTION York (“FRBNY”) under the U.S. Bank Holding Company Act of
1956 (“BHC Act”). CIT Bank (the “Bank”), a wholly-owned subsid-
CIT Group Inc., together with its subsidiaries (“we”, “our”, “CIT”
iary, is a Utah state-chartered bank located in Salt Lake City, UT
or the “Company”) has provided financial solutions to its clients
that offers commercial financing and leasing products, as well as
since its formation in 1908. We provide financing, leasing and
a suite of savings options, and is subject to regulation by the
advisory services principally to middle market companies in a
Federal Depository Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) and the Utah
wide variety of industries primarily in North America, and equip-
Department of Financial Institutions (“UDFI”). As of
ment financing and leasing solutions to the transportation
December 31, 2014, over 48% of CIT’s financing and leasing
industry worldwide. We had over $35 billion of financing and
assets were in the Bank and essentially all new U.S. business vol-
leasing assets at December 31, 2014. CIT became a bank holding
ume is being originated by the Bank.
company (“BHC”) in December 2008 and a financial holding com-
pany (“FHC”) in July 2013. Each business has industry alignment and focuses on specific sectors,
products and markets, with portfolios diversified by client and geog-
CIT is regulated by the Board of Governors of the Federal
raphy. Our principal product and service offerings include:
Reserve System (“FRB”) and the Federal Reserve Bank of New
Products and Services

• Account receivables collection • Enterprise value and cash flow loans
• Acquisition and expansion financing • Factoring services
• Asset management and servicing • Financial risk management
• Asset-based loans • Import and export financing
• Credit protection • Insurance services
• Debt restructuring • Equipment leases
• Debt underwriting and syndication • Letters of credit / trade acceptances
• Debtor-in-possession / turnaround financing • Mergers and acquisition advisory services (“M&A”)
• Deposits • Secured lines of credit
We source business through marketing efforts directly to borrow- Bank, National Association” name. IMB Holdco is regulated by
ers, lessees, manufacturers, vendors and distributors, and the FRB and OneWest Bank is regulated by the Office of the
through referral sources and other intermediaries. We also buy Comptroller of the Currency, U.S. Department of the Treasury
participations in syndications of loans and lines of credit and peri- (“OCC”). The OneWest Transaction is subject to certain custom-
odically purchase finance receivables on a whole-loan basis. ary closing conditions and regulatory approval by the FRB and
We generate revenue by earning interest on loans and invest- the OCC, but not a shareholder vote. On February 6, 2015, the
ments, collecting rentals on equipment we lease, and earning FRB and the OCC announced a joint public meeting on the One-
commissions, fees and other income for services we provide. We West Transaction, which will be held on February 26, 2015 at the
syndicate and sell certain finance receivables and equipment to Los Angeles branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of San
leverage our origination capabilities, reduce concentrations and Francisco.
manage our balance sheet. CIT Group Inc. will continue to be led by John A. Thain, Chairman
We set underwriting standards for each division and employ port- and Chief Executive Officer. Following the close of the transac-
folio risk management models to achieve desired portfolio tion, Steven T. Mnuchin, Chairman of IMB Holdco LLC, will join
demographics. Our collection and servicing operations are orga- CIT Group Inc. as Vice Chairman and will also become a member
nized by business and geography in order to provide efficient of its Board of Directors. Alan Frank, an independent director
client interfaces and uniform customer experiences. from OneWest Bank will also join the CIT Board, increasing its
size from 13 to 15 members. Joseph Otting, President and Chief
Executive Officer of OneWest Bank, will join CIT as Co-President
PENDING ACQUISITION
of CIT and CEO of CIT Bank, N.A.
On July 22, 2014, we announced that we had entered into a Following the closing, based on current definitions and require-
definitive agreement and plan of merger to acquire IMB Holdco ments for a systematically important financial institution (“SIFI”),
LLC, the parent company of OneWest Bank, N.A. (“OneWest CIT will become subject to the enhanced regulatory standards
Bank”) for approximately $3.4 billion (the “OneWest Transac- applicable to bank holding companies at the end of the quarter
tion”), subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the merger in which the OneWest Transaction closes, including but not lim-
agreement. The consideration paid will be based upon certain ited to submitting an annual capital plan, undergoing an annual
capital levels derived from OneWest Bank’s audited June 30, 2014 supervisory stress test and two company-run stress tests,
balance sheet, and is expected to approximate $2 billion in cash enhanced requirements for overall risk management, submitting
and 31.3 million shares of CIT Group Inc. common stock, which a resolution plan, implementation of an enhanced compliance
had a value of $1.4 billion at the time of the announcement, but program under the Volcker Rule, and payment of additional FRB
will vary depending upon the share price at the time of closing. assessments. The date on which CIT must comply with each SIFI
As part of the OneWest Transaction, CIT Bank, CIT’s banking sub- requirement will vary depending on the terms of the particular
sidiary, will merge with and into OneWest Bank under the “CIT regulation and timing of deal closing.
BUSINESS SEGMENTS
In December 2013, we announced organization changes that became effective January 1, 2014. In conjunction with
management’s plans to (i) realign and simplify its businesses and organizational structure, (ii) streamline and consoli-
date certain business processes to achieve greater operating efficiencies, and (iii) leverage CIT’s operational
capabilities for the benefit of its clients and customers, CIT will manage its business and report its financial results in
three operating segments: Transportation & International Finance (“TIF”), North American Commercial Finance
(“NACF”), and Non-Strategic Portfolios (“NSP”) and a fourth non-operating segment, Corporate and Other. See
Note 25 — Business Segment Information in Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data for additional
information relating to the reorganization.
SEGMENT DIVISIONS MARKETS AND SERVICES
Transportation & • Aerospace Large ticket equipment leasing and secured financing to select
International Finance • Rail transportation industries.
• Maritime Finance Equipment finance and secured lending in select international geographies.
• International Finance
North American • Commercial Services Factoring, receivables management products and secured financing to retail
Commercial Finance • Corporate Finance supply chain companies.
• Equipment Finance Lending, leasing and other financial and advisory services to small and
• Real Estate Finance middle-market companies across select industries.
Non-Strategic Portfolios Consists of portfolios that we do not consider strategic.
Corporate and Other Consists of certain items not allocated to operating segments.
Financial information about our segments and our geographic areas of operation are located in Item 7. Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data (Note 25 — Business
Segment Information).

TRANSPORTATION & INTERNATIONAL FINANCE International Finance offers equipment financing, secured lend-
TIF is a leading provider of leasing and financing solutions to ing and leasing to small and middle-market businesses in
operators and suppliers in the global aviation and railcar indus- China and the U.K., the latter of which was included in assets
tries, and has a growing maritime business. TIF consists of four held for sale at December 31, 2014.
divisions: aerospace (commercial air and business air), rail, mari- The primary asset type held by TIF is equipment (predominantly
time finance, and international finance, the latter of which commercial aircraft and railcars) purchased and leased to com-
includes equipment financing, secured lending and leasing in mercial end-users. The typical structure for leasing of large ticket
China and the U.K. The U.K. Equipment Financing portfolio was transportation assets is an operating lease. TIF also has a loan
included in assets held for sale at December 31, 2014. Revenues portfolio consisting primarily of senior, secured loans. The pri-
generated by TIF primarily include rents collected on leased mary source of revenue for TIF is rent collected on leased assets
assets, interest on loans, fees, and gains from assets sold. Aero- and to a lesser extent interest on loans, gains from assets sold
space and Rail account for the vast majority of the segment’s and fees for services provided.
assets, revenues and earnings. Maritime Finance was launched as
The primary risks for TIF are asset risk (resulting from ownership
a distinct business in the fourth quarter of 2012, although CIT had
of the equipment on operating lease) and credit risk. Asset risk
periodically financed assets within the sector on a small scale.
arises from fluctuations in supply and demand for the underlying
We achieved leadership positions in transportation finance by lever- equipment that is leased. TIF invests in long-lived equipment;
aging our deep industry experience and core strengths in technical commercial aircraft have economic useful lives of approximately
asset management, customer relationship management, and credit 20-25 years and railcars/locomotives have economic useful lives
analysis. We have extensive experience managing equipment over its of approximately 35-50 years. This equipment is then leased to
full life cycle, including purchasing, leasing, remarketing and selling commercial end-users with lease terms of approximately 3-12
new and used equipment. TIF is a global business, with aircraft years. CIT is exposed to the risk that, at the end of the lease
around the world, railcar leasing operations throughout North term, the value of the asset will be lower than expected, resulting
America and Europe and a growing loan portfolio. in reduced future lease income over the remaining life of the
Aerospace asset or a lower sale value.
Commercial Air provides aircraft leasing, lending, asset man- Asset risk is generally recognized through changes to lease
agement, and advisory services. The division’s primary clients income streams from fluctuations in lease rates and/or utilization.
include global and regional airlines around the world. Offices Changes to lease income occur when the existing lease contract
are located in the U.S., Europe and Asia. As of December 31, expires, the asset comes off lease, and the business seeks to
2014, our commercial aerospace financing and leasing portfo- enter a new lease agreement. Asset risk may also change depre-
lio consists of 350 aircraft, which are placed with about 100 ciation, resulting from changes in the residual value of the
clients in approximately 50 countries. operating lease asset or through impairment of the asset carrying
value, which can occur at any time during the life of the asset.
Business Air offers financing and leasing programs for corpo-
rate and private owners of business jets. Serving clients Credit risk in the leased equipment portfolio results from the
around the world, we provide financing that is tailored to our potential default of lessees, possibly driven by obligor specific or
clients unique business requirements. Products include term industry-wide conditions, and is economically less significant than
loans, leases, pre-delivery financing, fractional share financing asset risk for TIF, because in the operating lease business, there is
and vendor / manufacturer financing. no extension of credit to the obligor. Instead, the lessor deploys
a portion of the useful life of the asset. Credit losses manifest
Rail offers customized leasing and financing solutions and a through multiple parts of the income statement including loss of
highly efficient fleet of railcars and locomotives to railroads lease/rental income due to missed payments, time off lease, or
and shippers throughout North America and Europe. We lower rental payments than the existing contract either due to a
expanded our operations to Europe during 2014 through an restructuring or re-leasing of the asset to another obligor as well
acquisition. We serve over 650 customers, including all of the as higher expenses due to, for example, repossession costs to
U.S. and Canadian Class I railroads (railroads with annual rev- recover, refurbish, and re-lease assets. Credit risk associated with
enues of at least $250 million), other railroads and non-rail loans relates to the ability of the borrower to repay its loan and
companies, such as shippers and power and energy compa- the Company’s ability to realize the value of the collateral under-
nies. Our operating lease fleet consists of approximately lying the loan should the borrower default on its obligations.
120,000 railcars and 390 locomotives. Railcar types include
covered hopper cars used to ship grain and agricultural prod- See “Concentrations” section of Item 7. Management’s Discus-
ucts, plastic pellets, sand, and cement, tank cars for energy sion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
products and chemicals, gondolas for coal, steel coil and mill Operations and Note 21 — Commitments of Item 8. Financial
service products, open hopper cars for coal and aggregates, Statements and Supplementary Data for further discussion of our
boxcars for paper and auto parts and centerbeams and flat aerospace and rail portfolios.
cars for lumber.
NORTH AMERICAN COMMERCIAL FINANCE
Maritime Finance offers senior secured loans, sale-leasebacks
and bareboat charters to owners and operators of oceangoing The NACF segment consists of four divisions: Commercial Ser-
cargo vessels, including tankers, bulkers, container ships, car vices, Corporate Finance, Equipment Finance, and Real Estate
carriers and offshore vessels and drilling rigs. Finance. Revenue is generated from interest earned on loans,
rents on leases, fees and other revenue from lending activities tively affect CIT’s margins. NACF is also exposed to business risk
and capital markets transactions, and commissions earned on fac- related to its syndication activity. Under adverse market circum-
toring activities. stances, CIT would be exposed to risk arising from the inability to
sell loans to other lenders, resulting in lower fee income and
Commercial Services provides factoring, receivable management
higher than expected credit exposure to certain borrowers.
products, and secured financing to businesses (our clients, gener-
ally manufacturers or importers of goods) that operate in several Another risk to which NACF is exposed to in Equipment Finance is
industries, including apparel, textile, furniture, home furnishings asset risk, namely that at the end of the lease term, the value of the
and consumer electronics. Factoring entails the assumption of asset will be lower than expected, resulting in reduced future lease
credit risk with respect to trade accounts receivable arising from income over the remaining life of the asset or a lower sale value.
the sale of goods by our clients to their customers (generally
The products and services provided by Commercial Services consist
retailers) that have been factored (i.e. sold or assigned to the fac-
of two types of credit risk: customer and client. A client (typically a
tor). Although primarily U.S.-based, Commercial Services also
manufacturer or importer of goods) is the counterparty to any factor-
conducts business with clients and their customers internationally.
ing agreement, financing agreement, or receivables purchasing
Corporate Finance provides a range of financing options and agreement that has been entered into with Commercial Services. A
offers advisory services to small and medium size companies. Its customer (typically a wholesaler or retailer) is the account debtor and
core products include both loan and fee-based products. Loans obligor on trade accounts receivable that have been factored with
offered are primarily senior secured loans collateralized by and assigned to the factor.
accounts receivable, inventory, machinery & equipment and/or
The largest risk for Commercial Services is customer credit risk in
intangibles that are often used for working capital, plant expan-
factoring transactions. Customer risk relates to the financial
sion, acquisitions or recapitalizations. These loans include
inability of a customer to pay on undisputed trade accounts
revolving lines of credit and term loans and, depending on the nature
receivable due from such customer to the factor. While smaller
and quality of the collateral, may be referred to as asset-based loans
than customer credit exposure, there is also client credit risk in
or cash flow loans. We provide financing to customers in a wide
providing cash advances to factoring clients. Client risk relates to
range of industries, including Commercial & Industrial, Communica-
a decline in the credit worthiness of a borrowing client, their con-
tions, Media, & Entertainment, Energy, and Healthcare.
sequent inability to repay their loan and the possible insufficiency
Equipment Finance provides leasing and equipment loan solu- of the underlying collateral (including the aforementioned cus-
tions to small businesses and middle market companies in a wide tomer accounts receivable) to cover any loan repayment shortfall.
range of industries on both a private label and direct basis. We At December 31, 2014, client credit risk accounted for less than
provide financing solutions for our borrowers and lessees, and 10% of total Commercial Services credit exposure while customer
assist manufacturers and distributors in growing sales, profitabil- credit risk accounted for the remainder.
ity and customer loyalty by providing customized, value-added
Commercial Services is also subject to a variety of business risks
finance solutions to their commercial clients. Our LendEdge plat-
including operational, due to the high volume of transactions, as
form allows small businesses to access financing through a highly
well as business risks related to competitive pressures from other
automated credit approval, documentation and funding process.
banks, boutique factors, and credit insurers. These pressures cre-
We offer loans and both capital and operating leases.
ate risk of reduced pricing and factoring volume for CIT. In
Real Estate Finance provides senior secured commercial real addition, client de-factoring can occur if retail credit conditions
estate loans to developers and other commercial real estate pro- are benign for a long period and clients no longer demand fac-
fessionals. We focus on stable, cash flowing properties and toring services for credit protection.
originate construction loans to highly experienced and well capi-
talized developers. NON-STRATEGIC PORTFOLIOS
Key risks faced by NACF’s Corporate Finance, Equipment Finance NSP consisted of portfolios that we no longer consider strategic.
and Real Estate Finance divisions are credit risk, business risk and At December 31, 2014 these consisted primarily of equipment
asset risk. Credit risks associated with secured financings relate to the financing portfolios in Mexico and Brazil. We have separate
ability of the borrower to repay its loan and the value of the collateral definitive agreements to sell these businesses and anticipate
underlying the loan should the borrower default on its obligations. closing the Mexico transaction in the 2015 first quarter and Brazil
Business risks relate to the demand for NACF’s services that is in the second half of 2015.
broadly affected by the level of economic growth and is more
specifically affected by the level of economic activity in CIT’s tar- CORPORATE AND OTHER
get industries. If demand for CIT’s products and services declines, Certain items are not allocated to operating segments and are
then new business volume originated by NACF will decline. Like- included in Corporate and Other, including unallocated interest
wise, changes in supply and demand of CIT’s products and expense, primarily related to corporate liquidity costs (Interest
services also affect the pricing CIT can command from the mar- Expense), mark-to-market adjustments on non-qualifying deriva-
ket. Additionally, new business volume in Equipment Finance is tives (Other Income), restructuring charges for severance and
influenced by CIT’s ability to maintain and develop relationships facilities exit activities, certain legal costs and unallocated
with its vendor partners. With regard to pricing, NACF is subject expenses (Operating Expenses). Corporate and Other also
to potential threats from competitor activity or disintermediation retains net gains or losses on debt extinguishments.
by vendor partners and other referral sources, which could nega-

CIT BANK
CIT Bank (Member FDIC) is a wholly-owned subsidiary of CIT activities. Its existing suite of deposit products includes Certificates of
Group Inc. that is regulated by the FDIC and the UDFI. Since its Deposit, Savings Accounts, and Individual Retirement Accounts.
founding in 2000, the Bank has expanded its assets, deposits and
The Bank’s assets are primarily commercial loans and operating
product offerings. The Bank continued to grow in 2014, with
lease equipment, which are reported in the respective commer-
increased deposits and expanded business activities, which
cial segment (i.e. NACF and TIF). The Bank’s growing operating
included the acquisition of Direct Capital, a provider of financing
lease portfolio primarily consists of railcars, with some aircraft
to small and mid-sized businesses.
added in 2014.
The Bank raises deposits from retail and institutional investors
At year-end, CIT Bank remained well capitalized, maintaining Tier
primarily through its online bank (www.BankOnCIT.com) and
1 and Total capital ratios well above required levels.
through broker channels in order to fund its lending and leasing
DISCONTINUED OPERATION
On April 25, 2014, the Company completed the sale of its student the end of 2013. The Company had ceased offering private student
lending business resulting in it being reported as a discontinued loans in 2007 and government-guaranteed student loans in 2008.
operation. The business had previously been included in the
See Note 2 — Acquisition and Disposition Activities of Item 8.
Non-Strategic Portfolios segment and consisted of a portfolio of
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data for further
U.S. Government-guaranteed student loans. The portfolio was in
information.
run-off and had been transferred to assets held for sale (“AHFS”) at
EMPLOYEES
CIT employed approximately 3,360 people at December 31, 2014. mately 2,680 were employed in the U.S. entities and 680 in non-
Based upon the location of the Company’s legal entities, approxi- U.S. entities.
COMPETITION
The markets in which we operate in are competitive, based on product structure, pricing, or terms of our competitors that do
factors that vary by product, customer, and geographic region. not meet our credit standards or return requirements or
Our competitors include global and domestic commercial banks, (ii) receive lower returns or incur higher credit losses if we match
regional and community banks, captive finance companies, and our competitors’ product structure, pricing, or terms.
leasing companies. In most of our business segments, we have a
To take advantage of opportunities, we must continue to com-
few large competitors that have significant market share and
pete successfully with financial institutions that are larger and
many smaller niche competitors.
have better access to low cost funding. As a result, we tend not
Many of our competitors are large companies with substantial to compete on price, but rather on industry experience, asset and
financial, technological, and marketing resources. Our customer equipment knowledge, and customer service. The regulatory
value proposition is primarily based on financing terms, structure, environment in which we and/or our customers operate also
and client service. From time to time, due to highly competitive affects our competitive position.
markets, we may (i) lose market share if we are unwilling to match
REGULATION
We are regulated by federal and state banking laws, regulations nies (“BHCs”) and their subsidiaries, including the power to
and policies. Such laws and regulations are intended primarily for impose substantial fines, limit dividends, restrict operations and
the protection of depositors, customers and the federal deposit acquisitions, and require divestitures. BHCs and banks, as well as
insurance fund (“DIF”), as well as to minimize risk to the banking subsidiaries of both, are prohibited by law from engaging in prac-
system as a whole, and not for the protection of our shareholders tices that the relevant regulatory authority deems unsafe or
or non-depository creditors. Bank regulatory agencies have broad unsound. CIT is a BHC, and elected to become a FHC, subject to
examination and enforcement power over bank holding compa- regulation and examination by the FRB and the FRBNY under the
BHC Act. As an FHC, CIT is subject to certain limitations on our dated assets for the four most recent consecutive quarters of $50
activities, transactions with affiliates, and payment of dividends, billion or more (the “$50 Billion SIFI Threshold”). We continue to
and certain standards for capital and liquidity, safety and sound- devote significant resources in terms of both increased expenditures
ness, and incentive compensation, among other matters. Under and management time to assessing the regulatory changes we are
the system of “functional regulation” established under the BHC facing and implementing the new regulations.
Act, the FRB supervises CIT, including all of its non-bank subsid-
iaries, as an “umbrella regulator” of the consolidated Banking Supervision and Regulation
organization. CIT Bank is chartered as a state bank by the UDFI Permissible Activities
and is not a member bank of the Federal Reserve System. CIT’s
principal regulator is the FRB and CIT Bank’s principal regulators CIT is a BHC registered under the BHC Act and elected to
are the FDIC and the UDFI. Both CIT and CIT Bank are regulated become a FHC under the BHC Act, effective July 23, 2013. In
by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), which general, the BHC Act limits the business of BHCs that are not
regulates consumer financial products. Upon completion of the financial holding companies to banking, managing or controlling
merger of CIT Bank with and into OneWest Bank, the resulting banks, performing servicing activities for subsidiaries, and engag-
bank under the CIT Bank NA name, will be a national bank and its ing in activities that the FRB has determined, by order or
principal regulator will be the OCC. regulation, are so closely related to banking as to be a proper
incident thereto. An FHC, however, may engage in other activi-
Certain of our subsidiaries are subject to regulation by other
ties, or acquire and retain the shares of a company engaged in
domestic and foreign governmental agencies. CIT Capital Securi-
activities that are financial in nature or incidental or complemen-
ties L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company, is a broker-dealer
tary to activities that are financial in nature as long as the FHC
licensed by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”),
continues to meet the eligibility requirements for FHCs. These
and is subject to regulation by FINRA and the Securities and
requirements include that the FHC and each of its U.S. deposi-
Exchange Commission (“SEC”). CIT also holds a 16% interest in
tory institution subsidiaries maintain their status as “well-
CIT Group Securities (Canada) Inc., a Canadian broker dealer, which
capitalized” and “well-managed.”
is licensed and regulated by the Ontario Securities Commission.
A depository institution subsidiary is considered to be “well-
Our insurance operations are primarily conducted through The
capitalized” if it satisfies the requirements for this status
Equipment Insurance Company, a Vermont corporation; CIT Insur-
discussed below under “Prompt Corrective Action.” A depository
ance Company Limited, a Missouri corporation; CIT Insurance
institution subsidiary is considered “well-managed” if it received
Agency, Inc., a Delaware corporation; and Equipment Protection
a composite rating and management rating of at least “satisfac-
Services (Europe) Limited, an Irish company. Each company is
tory” in its most recent examination. An FHC’s status will also
licensed to enter into insurance contracts and is subject to regu-
depend upon its maintaining its status as “well-capitalized” and
lation and examination by insurance regulators.
“well-managed” under applicable FRB regulations. If an FHC
CIT Bank Limited, an English corporation, is licensed as a bank ceases to meet these capital and management requirements, the
and broker-dealer and is subject to regulation and examination FRB’s regulations provide that the FHC must enter into an agree-
by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation ment with the FRB to comply with all applicable capital and
Authority of the United Kingdom. Banco Commercial Investment management requirements. Until the FHC returns to compliance,
Trust do Brazil S.A., a Brazilian corporation, is licensed as a bank the FRB may impose limitations or conditions on the conduct of
and is subject to regulation and examination by Banco Central do its activities, and the company may not commence any non-
Brazil. In connection with the restructuring of our international banking financial activities permissible for FHCs or acquire a
Equipment Finance platform, we have surrendered other banking company engaged in such financial activities without prior
licenses in France, Germany, and Sweden. approval of the FRB. If the company does not return to compli-
ance within 180 days, the FRB may require divestiture of the
The regulation and oversight of the financial services industry has
FHC’s depository institutions. BHCs and banks must also be well-
undergone significant revision in the past several years. In par-
capitalized and well-managed in order to acquire banks located
ticular, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
outside their home state. An FHC will also be limited in its ability
Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), which was enacted in July
to commence non-banking financial activities or acquire a com-
2010, made extensive changes to the regulatory structure and
pany engaged in such financial activities if any of its insured
environment affecting banks, BHCs, non-bank financial compa-
depository institution subsidiaries fails to maintain a “satisfac-
nies, broker dealers, and investment advisory and management
tory” rating under the Community Reinvestment Act, as
firms. The Dodd-Frank Act has resulted in extensive rulemaking
described below under “Community Reinvestment Act.”
by various regulatory agencies, which is ongoing. Although the
Dodd-Frank Act has not significantly limited CIT from conducting Activities that are “financial in nature” include securities under-
the activities in which we were previously engaged, a number of writing, dealing and market making, advising mutual funds and
regulations have affected and will continue to affect the conduct investment companies, insurance underwriting and agency, mer-
of a number of our business activities, either directly, through chant banking, and activities that the FRB, in consultation with
regulation of specific activities or indirectly through regulation of the Secretary of the Treasury, determines to be financial in nature
concentration risks, capital, or liquidity or through the imposition or incidental to such financial activity. “Complementary activities”
of additional compliance requirements. Furthermore, if the One- are activities that the FRB determines upon application to be
West Transaction is approved and completed, we will become complementary to a financial activity and that do not pose a
subject to additional regulations that are applicable to SIFIs, which safety and soundness issue. CIT is primarily engaged in activities
generally include financial institutions that have average total consoli- that are permissible for a BHC that is not an FHC.

The Dodd-Frank Act places additional limits on the activities of and qualifying subordinated debt, none of which CIT currently
banks and their affiliates by prohibiting them from engaging in has outstanding. The sum of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital represented
proprietary trading and investing in and sponsoring certain our qualifying “total capital,” with Tier 1 capital representing at
unregistered investment companies (defined as hedge funds and least half of our qualifying “total capital”.
private equity funds). This statutory provision is commonly called
Under the Basel I capital guidelines of the FRB, assets and certain
the “Volcker Rule”. The statutory provision became effective in
off-balance sheet commitments and obligations were converted
July 2012 and required banking entities subject to the Volcker
into risk-weighted assets against which regulatory capital was
Rule to bring their activities and investments into compliance
measured. Risk weighted assets were determined by dividing
with applicable requirements by July 2014. In December 2013,
assets and certain off-balance sheet commitments and obligations
the federal banking agencies, the SEC, and the CFTC adopted
into risk categories, each of which was assigned a risk weighting,
final rules to implement the Volcker Rule, and the FRB, by order,
which ranged from 0% (e.g., for U.S. Treasury Bonds) to 100%.
extended the compliance period to July 2015. In December 2014,
the FRB, by order, extended the conformance period to July 2016 CIT, like other BHCs, was required to maintain Tier 1 capital and
for investments in and relationships with so-called legacy covered “total capital” equal to at least 4.0% and 8.0%, respectively, of its
funds and stated its intention to grant an additional extension total risk-weighted assets (including various off-balance sheet
through July 2017. The final rules are highly complex and require items, such as long-term unfunded loan commitments). CIT Bank,
an extensive compliance program, including an enhanced com- like other depository institutions, was required to maintain
pliance program applicable to banking entities with more than equivalent capital levels under capital adequacy guidelines. In
$50 billion in consolidated assets. CIT does not currently anticipate addition, for a BHC and a depository institution to be considered
that the Volcker Rule will have a material effect on its business and “well capitalized” its Tier 1 capital and “Total capital” ratios were
activities, as we have a limited amount of trading activities and fund required to be at least 6.0% and 10.0%, respectively.
investments. CIT has sold certain of its fund investments, will incur CIT and CIT Bank both continued to meet the “well capitalized”
additional costs to revise its policies and procedures, and will need to thresholds at December 31, 2014. CIT’s Tier 1 capital and Total
upgrade its operating and monitoring systems to ensure compliance capital ratios were 14.5% and 15.2%, while CIT Bank’s ratios were
with the Volcker Rule. We cannot yet determine the precise financial 13.0% and 14.2%, respectively.
impact of the rule on CIT and its customers.
Leverage Requirements. Under Basel I, BHCs and depository
Capital Requirements institutions were also required to comply with minimum Tier 1 Lever-
As a BHC, CIT is subject to consolidated regulatory capital age ratio requirements. The Tier 1 Leverage ratio was the ratio of a
requirements administered by the FRB. CIT Bank is subject to banking organization’s Tier 1 capital to its total adjusted quarterly
similar capital requirements administered by the FDIC. Upon average assets (as defined for regulatory purposes). Under these
completion of the merger with OneWest Bank, CIT Bank, N.A. requirements, BHCs and FDIC-supervised banks that either had the
would be subject to the capital requirements administered by the highest supervisory rating or had implemented the appropriate fed-
OCC. As of December 31, 2014 and prior, the risk-based capital eral regulatory authority’s risk-adjusted measure for market risk were
guidelines applicable to CIT were based upon the 1988 Capital required to maintain a minimum Tier 1 Leverage ratio of 3.0%. All
Accord (Basel I) of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision other BHCs and FDIC-supervised banks were required to main-
(the Basel Committee). Effective January 1, 2015, CIT became tain a minimum Tier 1 Leverage ratio of 4.0%, unless a different
subject to the risk-based capital guidelines that are based upon minimum was specified by an appropriate regulatory authority. In
the Basel Committee’s final framework for strengthening capital addition, for a depository institution to be considered “well capi-
and liquidity regulation, which was released in December 2010 talized” under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective
and revised in June 2011 (Basel III). action discussed under “Prompt Corrective Action” below, its
Tier 1 Leverage ratio was required to be at least 5.0%.
General Risk-Based Capital Requirements. As of December 31,
2014 and prior, CIT computed and reported its risk-based capital At December 31, 2014, CIT’s Tier 1 leverage ratio was 17.4% and
ratios in accordance with the general risk-based capital rules set CIT Bank’s was 12.2%.
by the U.S. banking agencies that were based upon Basel I. Basel III and the New Standardized Risk-based Approach. In
Under these rules, as applicable to CIT, Tier 1 capital generally December 2010, the Basel Committee released Basel III, its final
included common shareholders’ equity, retained earnings, and framework for strengthening capital and liquidity regulation,
minority interests in equity accounts of consolidated subsidiaries, which was revised in June 2011. In July 2013, the FRB and the
less the effect of certain items in accumulated other comprehen- FDIC issued a final rule (Basel III Final Rule) that adopted the final
sive income, goodwill and intangible assets, one-half of the Basel III capital framework implementing the revised risk-based
investment in unconsolidated subsidiaries and other adjustments. capital and leverage requirements for U.S. banking organizations
Tier 1 capital could also include qualifying non-cumulative per- proposed under Basel III. The Company, as well as the Bank, became
petual preferred stock and a limited amount of trust preferred subject to the Basel III Final Rule effective January 1, 2015.
securities and qualifying cumulative perpetual preferred stock,
none of which CIT currently has outstanding. Tier 2 capital con- Among other matters, the Basel III Final Rule: (i) introduces a new
sisted of the allowance for credit losses up to 1.25 percent of risk- capital measure called “Common Equity Tier 1” (“CET1”) and
weighted assets less one-half of the investment in related regulatory capital ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets;
unconsolidated subsidiaries and other adjustments. In addition, (ii) specifies that Tier 1 capital consists of CET1 and “Additional
Tier 2 capital included perpetual preferred stock not qualifying as Tier 1 capital” instruments meeting certain revised requirements;
Tier 1 capital, qualifying mandatory convertible debt securities, (iii) mandates that most deductions/adjustments to regulatory
capital measures be made to CET1 and not to the other compo- holding companies’ Tier 1 capital. The Company does not have
nents of capital; and (iv) expands the scope of the deductions any hybrid securities outstanding at December 31, 2014.
from and adjustments to capital as compared to existing regula- Implementation of some of these deductions to CET1 began on
tions. For most banking organizations, the most common form of January 1, 2015, and will be phased-in over a 4-year period
Additional Tier 1 capital is non-cumulative perpetual preferred (beginning at 40% on January 1, 2015 and adding 20% per year
stock and the most common form of Tier 2 capital is subordi- thereafter until January 1, 2018).
nated notes, which will be subject to the Basel III Final Rule
specific requirements. The Company does not currently have The Basel III Final Rule prescribed a new approach for risk
either of these forms of capital outstanding. weightings for BHCs and banks that follow the Standardized
approach, which applies to CIT. This approach expands the risk-
The Basel III Final Rule provides for a number of deductions from weighting categories from the current four Basel I-derived
and adjustments to CET1. These include, for example, goodwill, categories (0%, 20%, 50% and 100%) to a larger and more risk-
other intangible assets, and deferred tax assets (DTAs) that arise sensitive number of categories, depending on the nature of the
from net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards net of any exposure, ranging from 0% for U.S. government and agency secu-
related valuation allowance. Also, mortgage servicing rights, rities, to as high as 1,250% for such exposures as credit-
DTAs arising from temporary differences that could not be real- enhancing interest-only strips or unsettled security/commodity
ized through net operating loss carrybacks and significant transactions. Using the reported exposure balances as of
investments in non-consolidated financial institutions must be December 31, 2014, and the Basel III Final Rule’s standardized
deducted from CET1 to the extent that any one such category approach as fully phased in at January 1, 2019, the Company’s
exceeds 10% of CET1 or all such items, in the aggregate, exceed total risk-weighted assets would increase $1,598.5 million or 2.9%
15% of CET1. The non-DTA related deductions (goodwill, intan- while CIT Bank’s would increase $147.3 million or 0.8%. This mod-
gibles, etc.) may be reduced by netting with any associated est increase is due to the similarity in categorizing the assets and
deferred tax liabilities (DTLs). As for the DTA deductions, the net- off-balance sheet exposures of CIT and CIT Bank in accordance with
ting of any remaining DTL must be allocated in portion to the the Standardized Approach under the Basel III Final Rule compared
DTAs arising from net operating losses and tax credit carryfor- to Basel I.
wards and those arising from temporary differences.
Per the Basel III Final Rule, the minimum capital ratios for CET1,
In addition, under the Basel I general risk-based capital rules, the Tier 1 capital, and Total capital are 4.5%, 6.0% and 8.0%, respec-
effects of certain components of accumulated other comprehen- tively. In addition, the Basel III Final Rule introduces a new
sive income (“AOCI”) included in shareholders’ equity (for “capital conservation buffer”, composed entirely of CET1, on top
example, mark-to-market of securities held in the available-for- of these minimum risk-weighted asset ratios. The capital conser-
sale (“AFS”) portfolio) under U.S. GAAP are reversed for the vation buffer is designed to absorb losses during periods of
purpose of determining regulatory capital ratios. Pursuant to the economic stress. Banking institutions with a ratio of CET1 to risk-
Basel III Final Rule, the effects of these AOCI items are not weighted assets above the minimum but below the capital
excluded; however, non-advanced approaches banking organiza- conservation buffer will face constraints on dividends, equity
tions, including the Company and CIT Bank, may make a one- repurchases and compensation based on the amount of the
time permanent election to continue to exclude the AOCI items shortfall. This buffer will be implemented beginning January 1,
currently excluded under Basel I. Both the Company and CIT 2016 at the 0.625% level and increase by 0.625% on each subse-
Bank will elect to exclude AOCI items from regulatory capital quent January 1, until it reaches 2.5% on January 1, 2019.
ratios. The Basel III Final Rule also precludes certain hybrid secu-
CIT will be required to maintain risk-based capital ratios at
rities, such as trust preferred securities, from inclusion in bank
January 1, 2019 as follows:
Minimum Capital Requirements — January 1, 2019

Tier 1 Common Tier 1 Total
Equity Capital Capital
Stated minimum ratios 4.5% 6.0% 8.0%
Capital conservation buffer 2.5% 2.5% 2.5%
Effective minimum ratios 7.0% 8.5% 10.5%
With respect to CIT Bank, the Basel III Final Rule revises the adequately capitalized. The Basel III Final Rule does not change
“prompt corrective action” (“PCA”) regulations adopted pursu- the total risk-based capital requirement for any PCA category.
ant to Section 38 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, by: Both the Company and CIT Bank are subject to a minimum Tier 1
(i) introducing a CET1 ratio requirement at each PCA category Leverage ratio of 4%.
(other than critically undercapitalized), with the required CET1
As non-advanced approaches banking organizations, the Com-
ratio being 6.5% for well-capitalized status; (ii) increasing the
pany and CIT Bank will not be subject to the Basel III Final Rule’s
minimum Tier 1 capital ratio requirement for each category, with
countercyclical buffer or the supplementary leverage ratio.
the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio for well-capitalized status being
8% (as compared to the current 6%); and (iii) eliminating the cur- As of December 31, 2014, the Company and CIT Bank have met
rent provision that provides that a bank with a composite all capital requirements under the Basel III Final Rule, including
supervisory rating of 1 may have a 3% leverage ratio and still be the capital conservation buffer, on a fully phased-in basis as if
such requirements were currently effective.

The following table presents a comparison of CIT’s and CIT Bank’s capital ratios as of December 31, 2014 calculated under the Basel I
rules and the fully phased-in Basel III Final Rule — Standardized approach.
Comparison of Basel I and Basel III Capital Ratios (dollars in millions)
As of December 31, 2014
Basel I Basel III Final Rule(1)
Actual Requirement Actual Requirement
CIT
Capital
CET1 N/A(2) $ 8,242.6
Tier 1 $ 8,067.3 8,242.6
Total 8,412.4 8,624.4
Risk-weighted assets 55,480.9 57,079.4
Adjusted quarterly average assets 46,327.3 46,585.9
Capital ratios
CET1 N/A(2) N/A(2) 14.4% 7.0%(4)
(3)
Tier 1 14.5% 6.0% 14.4% 8.5%(4)
(3)
Total 15.2% 10.0% 15.1% 10.5%(4)
Leverage 17.4% 4.0% 17.7% 4.0%
CIT Bank
Capital
CET1 N/A(2) $ 2,536.4
Tier 1 $ 2,536.3 2,536.4
Total 2,781.5 2,783.4
Risk-weighted assets 19,552.3 19,699.6
Adjusted quarterly average assets 20,860.9 20,860.9
Capital ratios
CET1 N/A(2) N/A(2) 12.9% 7.0%(4)
(3)
Tier 1 13.0% 6.0% 12.9% 8.5%(4)
Total 14.2% 10.0%(3) 14.1% 10.5%(4)
(3)
Leverage 12.2% 5.0% 12.2% 4.0%
(1) Basel III Final Rule calculated under the Standardized Approach on a fully phased-in basis that will be required effective January 1, 2019. These ratios are
preliminary estimates based upon our present interpretation of the Basel III Final Rule.
(2) Not applicable as the CET1 ratio was introduced with the Basel III Final Rule.
(3) Basel I minimum requirements for “well capitalized” institution.
(4) Required ratios under the Basel III Final Rule include the post-transition minimum capital conversation buffer effective January 1, 2019.
Stress Test and Capital Plan Requirements publicly disclose the summary stress test results in a forum easily
accessible to the public, such as CIT’s website, between June 15
In October 2012, the FRB issued final regulations, commonly
and June 30 following the submission of the stress tests. The
referred to as Dodd Frank Act Stress Testing or DFA Stress Test-
results, at a minimum, must contain certain specific details of the
ing, detailing stress test requirements for BHCs, savings and loan
“severely adverse” scenario.
companies and state member banks with total consolidated
assets greater than $10 billion. Similarly, the FDIC published In late 2014, the Federal Reserve and FDIC modified the stress
regulations requiring annual stress tests for FDIC-insured state test timelines. As currently applicable to CIT, beginning with the
nonmember banks and FDIC-insured state-chartered savings 2016 stress test program, both CIT and the Bank will submit
organizations with total consolidated assets averaging $10 billion annual stress test results to their respective regulators by July 31
or more for four consecutive quarters. with public disclosure of summary stress test results between
October 15 and October 31.
Both CIT and the Bank are required to conduct annual stress tests
using scenarios provided by the FRB and FDIC respectively. The If CIT exceeds the $50 Billion SIFI Threshold, as is anticipated if
scenarios are typically the same since they have been jointly the OneWest Transaction is approved and completed, CIT would
issued by the agencies. CIT must submit its stress test results to become subject to the capital plan rule and become a covered
the FRB and the Bank to both the FDIC and the FRB by March 31 company. As such, CIT would be required to participate in the
of each year. In addition, both CIT and the Bank are required to annual Comprehensive Capital Assessment and Review (CCAR)
conducted by the FRB. For CCAR, CIT would submit a capital such as central bank reserves and government and corporate
plan along with the annual company-run stress tests to the FRB. debt that can be converted easily and quickly into cash. Each
The FRB would conduct a separate supervisory stress test using data institution would be required to hold high quality, liquid assets in
submitted by CIT in a format specified by the FRB. Both the FRB and an amount equal to or greater than its projected cash outflows
CIT must publish the results of the annual supervisory stress tests and minus its projected cash inflows capped at 75% of projected cash
company-run stress tests. From 2016 onward, annual capital plans and outflows for a 30-day stress period. The firms must calculate their
company-run stress tests will be submitted by April 5 with publication LCR each business day. The final rule applies a modified version
of results by June 30. of the LCR requirements to bank holding companies with total
consolidated assets of greater than $50 billion but less than $250
A BHC subject to the capital plan may not pay dividends or take other
billion. The modified version of the LCR requirement only requires the
capital actions, which includes share repurchases, except for those
LCR calculation to be performed on the last business day of each
specified in its capital plans and in any event only if the BHC has
month and sets the denominator (that is, the calculation of net cash
received a “non-objection” to its capital plan from the FRB.
outflows) for the modified version at 70% of the denominator as calcu-
While CIT is not currently subject to the capital plan rule, the FRB lated under the most comprehensive version of the rule applicable to
has the authority to require any BHC to submit annual capital larger institutions. Under the FRB final rule, a BHC with between $50
plans. Although CIT is currently not required to take part in the billion and $250 billion in total consolidated assets must comply with
CCAR, we produce a capital plan that we believe is aligned with the first phase of the minimum LCR requirement at the later of
the supervisory expectations for large BHCs, which includes and January 1, 2016 or the first quarter after the quarter in which it
considers stress test results for supervisory scenarios. Our annual exceeds the $50 Billion SIFI Threshold with the LCR requirement
capital plan is subject to review by the FRBNY. going into full-effect on January 1, 2017. CIT anticipates exceeding
If CIT exceeds the $50 Billion SIFI Threshold, CIT would also be the $50 Billion SIFI Threshold if the OneWest Transaction is approved
required to conduct mid-cycle company-run stress tests with and completed, after which CIT would be required to comply with
company-developed economic scenarios for submission to the the modified version of the LCR requirement described below under
FRB. Based on the aforementioned modification to the stress test Enhanced Standards for Large Bank Holding Companies.
timeline, the mid-cycle stress tests must be submitted by Octo- The U.S. bank regulatory agencies have not issued final rules
ber 5 each year. Public disclosure of the summary mid-cycle stress implementing the NSFR test called for by the Basel III final frame-
test results would be made between October 5 and October 20. work. The Basel Committee released its final standards on the
Liquidity Requirements NSFR on October 31, 2014.
Historically, regulation and monitoring of bank and BHC liquidity Prompt Corrective Action
has been addressed as a supervisory matter, without required for- The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of
mulaic measures. The Basel III final framework requires banks and 1991 (“FDICIA”), among other things, establishes five capital cat-
BHCs to measure their liquidity against specific liquidity tests egories for FDIC-insured banks: well capitalized, adequately
that, although similar in some respects to liquidity measures his- capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and
torically applied by banks and regulators for management and critically undercapitalized. Under regulations in effect through
supervisory purposes, going forward will be required by regula- December 31, 2014, a depository institution is deemed to be
tion. One test, referred to as the liquidity coverage ratio (“LCR”), “well capitalized,” the highest category, if it has a total capital
is designed to ensure that the banking entity maintains an ratio of 10% or greater, a Tier 1 capital ratio of 6% or greater and
adequate level of unencumbered high-quality liquid assets equal a Tier 1 leverage ratio of 5% or greater and is not subject to any
to the entity’s expected net cash outflow for a 30-day time hori- order or written directive by any such regulatory authority to
zon under an acute liquidity stress scenario, with a phased meet and maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure.
implementation process starting January 1, 2015 and complete As noted above, as of January 1, 2015, the standards for “well-
implementation by January 1, 2019. The other, referred to as the capitalized” status under the prompt corrective action
net stable funding ratio (“NSFR”), is designed to promote more regulations changed by, among other things, introducing a CET1
medium- and long-term funding of the assets and activities of bank- ratio requirement of 6.5% and increasing the Tier 1 capital ratio
ing entities over a one-year time horizon, with an observation period requirement from 6.0% to 8.0%. The total capital ratio and lever-
through mid-2016 and, subject to any revisions resulting from the age ratio requirements remain at 10.0% and 5.0%, respectively.
analyses conducted and data collected during the observation CIT Bank’s capital ratios were all in excess of minimum guidelines
period, implemented as a minimum standard by January 1, 2018. for well capitalized at December 31, 2014 and 2013. Neither CIT
On September 3, 2014, the banking regulators adopted a joint nor CIT Bank is subject to any order or written agreement regard-
final rule implementing the LCR for certain U.S. banking institu- ing any capital requirements.
tions. The rule applies a comprehensive version of the LCR to FDICIA requires the applicable federal regulatory authorities to
large and internationally active U.S. banking organizations, which implement systems for “prompt corrective action” for insured
include banks with total consolidated assets of $250 billion or depository institutions that do not meet minimum requirements.
more or total consolidated on-balance sheet foreign exposure of FDICIA imposes progressively more restrictive constraints on
$10 billion or more, or any depository institution with total con- operations, management and capital distributions as the capital
solidated assets of $10 billion or more that is a consolidated category of an institution declines. Undercapitalized, significantly
subsidiary of either of the foregoing. These institutions will be undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized depository insti-
required to hold minimum amounts of high-quality, liquid assets, tutions are required to submit a capital restoration plan to their

primary federal regulator. Although prompt corrective action (1) the acquisition by a BHC of direct or indirect ownership or
regulations apply only to depository institutions and not to BHCs, control of more than 5% of any class of voting shares of a bank,
the holding company must guarantee any such capital restoration savings association, or BHC, (2) the acquisition of all or substan-
plan in certain circumstances. The liability of the parent holding tially all of the assets of any bank or savings association by any
company under any such guarantee is limited to the lesser of five subsidiary of a BHC other than a bank, or (3) the merger or con-
percent of the bank’s assets at the time it became “undercapital- solidation of any BHC with another BHC. Prior regulatory
ized” or the amount needed to comply. The parent holding approval is also generally required for mergers, acquisitions and
company might also be liable for civil money damages for failure consolidations involving other insured depository institutions. In
to fulfill that guarantee. In the event of the bankruptcy of the par- reviewing acquisition and merger applications, the bank regula-
ent holding company, such guarantee would take priority over tory authorities will consider, among other things, the
the parent’s general unsecured creditors. competitive effect of the transaction, financial and managerial
issues, including the capital position of the combined organiza-
Regulators take into consideration both risk-based capital ratios
tion, convenience and needs factors, including the applicant’s
and other factors that can affect a bank’s financial condition,
record under the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (“CRA”),
including (a) concentrations of credit risk, (b) interest rate risk,
the effectiveness of the subject organizations in combating
and (c) risks from non-traditional activities, along with an institu-
tion’s ability to manage those risks, when determining capital money laundering activities, and the transaction’s effect on the
adequacy. This evaluation is made during the institution’s safety stability of the U.S. banking and financial systems. In addition, an
and soundness examination. An institution may be downgraded FHC must obtain prior approval of the FRB before acquiring certain
to, or deemed to be in, a capital category that is lower than is non-bank financial companies with assets exceeding $10 billion.
indicated by its capital ratios if it is determined to be in an unsafe Dividends
or unsound condition or if it receives an unsatisfactory examina-
tion rating with respect to certain matters. CIT is a legal entity separate and distinct from CIT Bank and CIT’s
other subsidiaries. CIT provides a significant amount of funding
Enhanced Standards for Large Bank Holding Companies to its subsidiaries, which is generally recorded as intercompany
In February 2014, the FRB approved a final rule to implement cer- loans or equity investments. Most of CIT’s cash inflow is com-
tain enhanced prudential standards mandated by Section 165 of prised of interest on intercompany loans to its subsidiaries and
the Dodd-Frank Act. The final rule applies to, among others, dividends from its subsidiaries.
BHCs with at least $50 billion in total consolidated assets, based The ability of CIT to pay dividends on common stock may be
on the average of total consolidated assets for the last four quar- affected by, among other things, various capital requirements,
ters. The final rule implements Section 165’s risk management particularly the capital and non-capital standards established for
requirements, including requirements, duties, and qualifications
depository institutions under FDICIA, which may limit the ability
for a risk management committee and chief risk officer and
of CIT Bank to pay dividends to CIT. The right of CIT, its stock-
liquidity stress testing and buffer requirements. The liquidity buf-
holders, and its creditors to participate in any distribution of the
fer under these rules is separate from the LCR described above
assets or earnings of its subsidiaries is further subject to prior
under “Liquidity Requirements”. The rule refers to the previously
claims of creditors of CIT Bank and CIT’s other subsidiaries.
adopted final capital rules, capital plan and stress test require-
ments, discussed in “Basel III and the New Standardized Risk- Utah state law imposes limitations on the payment of dividends
based Approach” and “Stress Test and Capital Plan by CIT Bank. A Utah state bank may declare a dividend out of the
Requirements” above, as meeting Section 165’s requirements for net profits of the bank after providing for all expenses, losses,
U.S. BHCs. The FRB has not yet issued a final rule establishing interest, and taxes accrued or due from the bank. Furthermore,
single counterparty credit limits. The FRB has discretionary before declaring any dividend, a Utah bank must provide for not
authority to establish additional prudential standards, on its own less than 10% of the net profits of the bank for the period cov-
or at the FSOC’s recommendation, regarding contingent capital, ered by the dividend to be carried to a surplus fund until the
enhanced public disclosures, short-term debt limits, and other- surplus is equal to the bank’s capital stock, defined as the par
wise as it deems appropriate. value of all shares of the bank that have been issued. Utah law
Two aspects of the final rules – requirements for annual stress may also impose additional restrictions on the payment of divi-
testing of capital under one baseline and two stress scenarios dends if CIT Bank sustains losses in excess of its reserves for loan
and certain corporate governance provisions requiring, among losses and undivided profits.
other things, that each BHC establish a risk committee of its If the merger of CIT Bank with OneWest Bank is completed, the
board of directors with a “risk management expert” as one of its OCC’s regulations would apply to the combined bank. These
members − apply to BHCs with total consolidated assets of $10
regulations limit dividends if the total amount of all dividends
billion or more, including CIT. If the OneWest Transaction is
(common and preferred) declared in any current year, including
approved and completed, CIT will exceed the $50 Billion SIFI
the proposed dividend, exceeds the total net income for the cur-
Threshold and will become subject to other requirements of the
rent year to date plus any retained net income for the prior two
final rule as well.
years, less the sum of any transfers required by the OCC and any
Acquisitions transfers required to fund the retirement of any preferred stock. If
the dividend in either of the prior two years exceeded that year’s
Federal and state laws impose notice and approval requirements
net income, the excess shall not reduce the net income for the
for mergers and acquisitions involving depository institutions or
three year period described above, provided the amount of excess
BHCs. The BHC Act requires the prior approval of the FRB for
dividends for either of the prior two years can be offset by retained net report periodically to regulators a resolution plan for their rapid
income in the current year minus three years or the current year minus and orderly resolution in the event of material financial distress or
four years. failure. Such a resolution plan must, among other things, ensure
that its depository institution subsidiaries are adequately pro-
It is the policy of the FRB that a BHC generally pay dividends on
tected from risks arising from its other subsidiaries. The final rule
common stock out of net income available to common sharehold-
sets specific standards for the resolution plans, including requir-
ers over the past year, only if the prospective rate of earnings
ing a detailed resolution strategy, a description of the range of
retention appears consistent with capital needs, asset quality, and
specific actions the company proposes to take in resolution, and
overall financial condition, and only if the BHC is not in danger of
an analysis of the company’s organizational structure, material
failing to meet its minimum regulatory capital adequacy ratios. In
entities, interconnections and interdependencies, and manage-
the current financial and economic environment, the FRB indi-
ment information systems, among other elements. If CIT’s total
cated that BHCs should not maintain high dividend pay-out ratios
consolidated assets exceed the $50 Billion SIFI Threshold, as is
unless both asset quality and capital are very strong. A BHC
anticipated if the OneWest Transaction is approved and com-
should not maintain a dividend level that places undue pressure
pleted, it would become subject to this requirement.
on the capital of bank subsidiaries, or that may undermine the BHC’s
ability to serve as a source of strength to its subsidiary bank. Orderly Liquidation Authority
We anticipate that our capital ratios reflected in the stress test The Dodd-Frank Act created the Orderly Liquidation Authority
calculations required of us and the capital plan that we prepare (“OLA”), a resolution regime for systemically important non-bank
as described under “Stress Test and Capital Requirements”, financial companies, including BHCs and their non-bank affiliates,
above, will be an important factor considered by the FRB in under which the FDIC may be appointed receiver to liquidate
evaluating whether our proposed return of capital may be an such a company upon a determination by the Secretary of the
unsafe or unsound practice. Additionally, should our total consoli- U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury), after consultation with
dated assets equal or exceed an average of $50 billion for the the President, with support by a supermajority recommendation
prior four consecutive quarters, as is anticipated if the OneWest from the FRB and, depending on the type of entity, the approval
Transaction is approved and completed, we would likely also be of the director of the Federal Insurance Office, a supermajority
limited to paying dividends and repurchasing stock only in accor-
vote of the SEC, or a supermajority vote of the FDIC, that the
dance with our annual capital plan submitted to the FRB under
company is in danger of default, that such default presents a sys-
the capital plan rule.
temic risk to U.S. financial stability, and that the company should
Source of Strength Doctrine and Support for Subsidiary Banks be subject to the OLA process. This resolution authority is similar
FRB policy and federal statute require BHCs such as CIT to serve to the FDIC resolution model for depository institutions, with cer-
as a source of strength and to commit capital and other financial tain modifications to reflect differences between depository
resources to subsidiary banks. This support may be required at institutions and non-bank financial companies and to reduce dis-
times when CIT may not be able to provide such support without parities between the treatment of creditors’ claims under the U.S.
adversely affecting its ability to meet other obligations. If CIT is Bankruptcy Code and in an orderly liquidation authority proceed-
unable to provide such support, the FRB could instead require ing compared to those that would exist under the resolution
the divestiture of CIT Bank and impose operating restrictions model for insured depository institutions.
pending the divestiture. Any capital loans by a BHC to any of its An Orderly Liquidation Fund will fund OLA liquidation proceed-
subsidiary banks are subordinate in right of payment to deposi- ings through borrowings from the Treasury and risk-based
tors and to certain other indebtedness of the subsidiary bank. If a assessments made, first, on entities that received more in the
BHC commits to a federal bank regulator that it will maintain the resolution than they would have received in liquidation to the
capital of its bank subsidiary, whether in response to the FRB’s extent of such excess, and second, if necessary, on BHCs with
invoking its source of strength authority or in response to other
total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more, any non-bank
regulatory measures, that commitment will be assumed by the
financial company supervised by the FRB, and certain other finan-
bankruptcy trustee and the bank will be entitled to priority pay-
cial companies with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or
ment in respect of that commitment.
more. If an orderly liquidation is triggered, CIT, if it exceeds the
Enforcement Powers of Federal Banking Agencies $50 Billion SIFI Threshold, as is anticipated if the OneWest Trans-
The FRB and other U.S. banking agencies have broad enforce- action is approved and completed, could face assessments for
ment powers with respect to an insured depository institution the Orderly Liquidation Fund. We do not yet have an indication
and its holding company, including the power to (i) impose cease of the level of such assessments. Furthermore, were CIT to
and desist orders, substantial fines and other civil penalties, become subject to the OLA, the regime may also require
(ii) terminate deposit insurance, and (iii) appoint a conservator or changes to CIT’s structure, organization and funding pursuant to
receiver. Failure to comply with applicable laws or regulations the guidelines described above.
could subject CIT or CIT Bank, as well as their officers and direc- FDIC Deposit Insurance
tors, to administrative sanctions and potentially substantial civil
and criminal penalties. Deposits of CIT Bank are insured by the FDIC Deposit Insurance
Fund (“DIF”) up to applicable limits and are subject to premium
Resolution Planning assessments.
As required by the Dodd-Frank Act, the FRB and FDIC have
The current assessment system applies different methods to
jointly issued a final rule that requires certain organizations,
small institutions with assets of less than $10 billion, which are
including BHCs with consolidated assets of $50 billion or more, to

classified as small institutions, and large institutions with assets of Reserve Act. These regulations limit the types and amounts of
greater than $10 billion for more than four consecutive quarters. transactions (including loans due and credit extensions from CIT
CIT Bank is an FDIC-insured state nonmember bank with total Bank or its subsidiaries to CIT and its other subsidiaries and affili-
assets of $21 billion as of December 31, 2014, and is considered a ates) as well as restrict certain other transactions (such as the
large institution. purchase of existing loans or other assets by CIT Bank or its sub-
sidiaries from CIT and its other subsidiaries and affiliates) that
For larger institutions, the FDIC uses a two scorecard system, one
may otherwise take place and generally require those transac-
for most large institutions that have had more than $10 billion in
tions to be on an arms-length basis and, in the case of extensions
assets as of December 31, 2006 (unless the institution subse-
of credit, be secured by specified amounts and types of collat-
quently reported assets of less than $10 billion for four
eral. These regulations generally do not apply to transactions
consecutive quarters) or have had more than $10 billion in total
between CIT Bank and its subsidiaries.
assets for at least four consecutive quarters since December 31,
2006 and another for (i) “highly complex” institutions that have All transactions subject to Sections 23A and 23B between CIT
had over $50 billion in assets for at least four consecutive quar- Bank and its affiliates are done on an arms-length basis. During
ters and are directly or indirectly controlled by a U.S. parent with 2014, CIT Bank purchased $45 million of loans from affiliates, sub-
over $500 billion in assets for four consecutive quarters and ject to Section 23A, and received $33 million of loans transferred
(ii) certain processing banks and trust companies with total fidu- in the form of capital infusions from CIT. In 2013, the Bank pur-
ciary assets of $500 billion or more for at least four consecutive chased $272 million of loans from BHC affiliates, subject to
quarters. Each scorecard has a performance score and a loss- Section 23A and received $67 million of loans transferred in the
severity score that is combined to produce a total score, which is form of capital infusions from the BHC. Furthermore, to ensure
translated into an initial assessment rate. In calculating these ongoing compliance with Sections 23A and 23B, CIT Bank main-
scores, the FDIC utilizes a bank’s capital level and CAMELS rat- tains sufficient collateral in the form of cash deposits and
ings and certain financial measures designed to assess an pledged loans to cover any extensions of credit to affiliates.
institution’s ability to withstand asset-related stress and funding-
The Dodd-Frank Act significantly expanded the coverage and
related stress. The FDIC also has the ability to make discretionary
scope of the limitations on affiliate transactions within a banking
adjustments to the total score, up or down, by a maximum of 15
organization and changes the procedure for seeking exemptions
basis points, based upon significant risk factors that are not
from these restrictions. For example, the Dodd-Frank Act
adequately captured in the scorecard. The total score translates
expanded the definition of a “covered transaction” to include
to an initial base assessment rate on a non-linear, sharply increas-
derivatives transactions and securities lending transactions with a
ing scale. For large institutions, the initial base assessment rate
non-bank affiliate under which a bank (or its subsidiary) has credit
ranges from 5 to 35 basis points on an annualized basis. After the
exposure (with the term “credit exposure” to be defined by the
effect of potential base rate adjustments described below (but
FRB under its existing rulemaking authority). Collateral require-
not including the depository institution debt adjustment), the
ments will apply to such transactions as well as to certain
total base assessment rate could range from 2.5 to 45 basis
repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements.
points on an annualized basis.
Safety and Soundness Standards
The potential adjustments to an institution’s initial base assess-
ment rate include (i) potential decrease of up to 5 basis points for FDICIA requires the federal bank regulatory agencies to pre-
certain long-term unsecured debt (unsecured debt adjustment) scribe standards, by regulations or guidelines, relating to internal
and, (ii) except for well capitalized institutions with a CAMELS rat- controls, information systems and internal audit systems, loan
ing of 1 or 2, a potential increase of up to 10 basis points for documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate risk exposure,
brokered deposits in excess of 10% of domestic deposits (bro- asset growth, asset quality, earnings, stock valuation, compensa-
kered deposit adjustment). As the DIF reserve ratio grows, the tion, fees and benefits, and such other operational and
rate schedule will be adjusted downward. Additionally, an institu- managerial standards as the agencies deem appropriate. Guide-
tion must pay an additional premium (the depository institution lines adopted by the federal bank regulatory agencies establish
debt adjustment) equal to 50 basis points on every dollar above general standards relating to internal controls and information
3% of an institution’s Tier 1 capital of long-term, unsecured debt systems, internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit
held that was issued by another insured depository institution underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth and compen-
(excluding debt guaranteed under the Temporary Liquidity Guar- sation, fees and benefits. In general, the guidelines require,
antee Program). among other things, appropriate systems and practices to iden-
tify and manage the risk and exposures specified in the
Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDIA”), the FDIC may
guidelines. The guidelines prohibit excessive compensation as an
terminate deposit insurance upon a finding that the institution
unsafe and unsound practice and describe compensation as
has engaged in unsafe and unsound practices, is in an unsafe or
excessive when the amounts paid are unreasonable or dispropor-
unsound condition to continue operations, or has violated any
tionate to the services performed by an executive officer,
applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by
employee, director or principal stockholder. In addition, the
the FDIC.
agencies adopted regulations that authorize, but do not require,
Transactions with Affiliates an agency to order an institution that has been given notice by an
agency that it is not satisfying any of such safety and soundness
Transactions between CIT Bank and its subsidiaries, and CIT and
standards to submit a compliance plan. If, after being so notified,
its other subsidiaries and affiliates, are regulated by the FRB and
an institution fails to submit an acceptable compliance plan or
the FDIC pursuant to Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal
fails in any material respect to implement an acceptable compli- Furthermore, banking regulators take into account CRA ratings
ance plan, the agency must issue an order directing action to when considering approval of applications to acquire, merge, or
correct the deficiency and may issue an order directing other consolidate with another banking institution or its holding com-
actions of the types to which an undercapitalized institution is pany, to establish a new branch office that will accept deposits or
subject under the “prompt corrective action” provisions of the to relocate an office, and such record may be the basis for deny-
FDIA. See “Prompt Corrective Action” above. If an institution ing the application. CIT Bank received a rating of “Satisfactory”
fails to comply with such an order, the agency may seek to on its most recent CRA examination by the FDIC.
enforce such order in judicial proceedings and to impose civil
Incentive Compensation
monetary penalties.
The Dodd-Frank Act requires the federal bank regulatory agen-
Insolvency of an Insured Depository Institution
cies and the SEC to establish joint regulations or guidelines
If the FDIC is appointed the conservator or receiver of an insured prohibiting incentive-based payment arrangements at specified
depository institution, upon its insolvency or in certain other regulated entities, such as CIT and CIT Bank, having at least
events, the FDIC has the power: $1 billion in total assets that encourage inappropriate risks by
providing an executive officer, employee, director or principal
- to transfer any of the depository institution’s assets and
shareholder with excessive compensation, fees, or benefits or
liabilities to a new obligor without the approval of the
that could lead to material financial loss to the entity. In addition,
depository institution’s creditors;
these regulators must establish regulations or guidelines requir-
- to enforce the terms of the depository institution’s contracts
ing enhanced disclosure to regulators of incentive-based
pursuant to their terms; or
compensation arrangements. The agencies proposed such regu-
- to repudiate or disaffirm any contract or lease to which the
lations in April 2011, but these regulations have not yet been
depository institution is a party, the performance of which is
finalized. If the regulations are adopted in the form initially pro-
determined by the FDIC to be burdensome and the
posed, they will impose limitations on the manner in which CIT
disaffirmance or repudiation of which is determined by the
may structure compensation for its executives.
FDIC to promote the orderly administration of the depository
institution. In June 2010, the FRB and the FDIC issued comprehensive final
guidance intended to ensure that the incentive compensation
In addition, under federal law, the claims of holders of deposit
policies of banking organizations do not undermine the safety
liabilities, including the claims of the FDIC as the guarantor of
and soundness of such organizations by encouraging excessive
insured depositors, and certain claims for administrative
risk-taking. The guidance, which covers all employees that have
expenses against an insured depository institution would be
the ability to materially affect the risk profile of an organization,
afforded priority over other general unsecured claims against
either individually or as part of a group, is based upon the key
such an institution, including claims of debt holders of the institu-
principles that a banking organization’s incentive compensation
tion, in the liquidation or other resolution of such an institution
arrangements should (i) provide incentives that do not encourage
by any receiver. As a result, whether or not the FDIC ever seeks to
risk-taking beyond the organization’s ability to effectively identify
repudiate any debt obligations of CIT Bank, the debt holders
and manage risks, (ii) be compatible with effective internal con-
would be treated differently from, and could receive, if anything,
trols and risk management, and (iii) be supported by strong
substantially less than CIT Bank’s depositors.
corporate governance, including active and effective oversight by
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Supervision (“CFPB”) the organization’s board of directors. These three principles are
The CFPB is authorized to interpret and administer federal con- incorporated into the proposed joint compensation regulations
sumer financial laws, as well as to directly examine and enforce under the Dodd-Frank Act discussed above.
compliance with those laws by depository institutions with assets Anti-Money Laundering (“AML”) and Economic Sanctions
over $10 billion, such as CIT Bank.
In the U.S., the Bank Secrecy Act, as amended by the USA
Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) PATRIOT Act of 2001, imposes significant obligations on financial
The CRA requires depository institutions like CIT Bank to assist in institutions, including banks, to detect and deter money launder-
meeting the credit needs of their market areas consistent with ing and terrorist financing, including requirements to implement
safe and sound banking practice by, among other things, provid- AML programs, verify the identity of customers that maintain
ing credit to low-and moderate-income individuals and accounts, file currency transaction reports, and monitor and
communities. The CRA does not establish specific lending report suspicious activity to appropriate law enforcement or regu-
requirements or programs for depository institutions nor does it latory authorities. Anti-money laundering laws outside the United
limit an institution’s discretion to develop the types of products States contain similar requirements to implement AML programs.
and services that it believes are best suited to its particular com- The Company has implemented policies, procedures, and inter-
munity, consistent with the CRA. Depository institutions are nal controls that are designed to comply with all applicable AML
periodically examined for compliance with the CRA and are laws and regulations. The Company has also implemented poli-
assigned ratings, which are made available to the public. Failure cies, procedures, and internal controls that are designed to
to receive at least a “Satisfactory” rating could inhibit a deposi- comply with the regulations and economic sanctions programs
tory institution or its holding company from undertaking certain administered by the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Con-
activities, including engaging in activities permitted as a financial trol (“OFAC”), which administers and enforces economic and
holding company under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (“GLBA”). trade sanctions against targeted foreign countries and regimes,
terrorists, international narcotics traffickers, those engaged in

activities related to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruc- - govern secured transactions;
tion, and other threats to the national security, foreign policy, or - set collection, foreclosure, repossession and claims handling
economy of the United States, as well as sanctions based on procedures and other trade practices;
United Nations and other international mandates. - prohibit discrimination in the extension of credit and
administration of loans; and
Anti-corruption - regulate the use and reporting of information related to a
The Company is subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act borrower’s credit experience and other data collection.
(“FCPA”), which prohibits offering, promising, giving, or authoriz- Our Aerospace, Rail, Maritime, and other equipment financing
ing others to give anything of value, either directly or indirectly, operations are subject to various laws, rules, and regulations
to a non-U.S. government official in order to influence official administered by authorities in jurisdictions where we do business.
action or otherwise gain an unfair business advantage, such as to In the U.S., our equipment leasing operations, including for air-
obtain or retain business. The Company is also subject to appli- craft, railcars, ships, and other equipment, are subject to rules
cable anti-corruption laws in the jurisdictions in which it operates, and regulations relating to safety, operations, maintenance, and
such as the U.K. Bribery Act, which generally prohibits commer- mechanical standards promulgated by various federal and state
cial bribery, the receipt of a bribe, and the failure to prevent agencies and industry organizations, including the U.S. Depart-
bribery by an associated person, in addition to prohibiting ment of Transportation, the Federal Aviation Administration, the
improper payments to foreign government officials. The Com- Federal Railroad Administration, the Association of American
pany has implemented policies, procedures, and internal controls Railroads, the Maritime Administration, the U.S. Coast Guard,
that are designed to comply with such laws, rules, and and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, state
regulations. agencies regulate some aspects of rail and maritime operations
with respect to health and safety matters not otherwise pre-
Protection of Customer and Client Information
empted by federal law.
Certain aspects of the Company’s business are subject to legal Each of CIT’s insurance subsidiaries is licensed and regulated in
requirements concerning the use and protection of customer the states in which it conducts insurance business. The extent of
information, including those adopted pursuant to GLBA and the such regulation varies, but most jurisdictions have laws and regu-
Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 in the U.S., the lations governing the financial aspects and business conduct of
E.U. Data Protection Directive, and various laws in Asia and Latin insurers. State laws in the U.S. grant insurance regulatory authori-
America. In the U.S., the Company is required periodically to ties broad administrative powers with respect to, among other
notify its customers and clients of its policy on sharing nonpublic things: licensing companies and agents to transact business;
customer or client information with its affiliates or with third party establish statutory capital and reserve requirements and the sol-
non-affiliates, and, in some circumstances, allow its customers vency standards that must be met and maintained; regulating
and clients to prevent disclosure of certain personal information certain premium rates; reviewing and approving policy forms;
to affiliates and third party non-affiliates. In many foreign jurisdic- regulating unfair trade and claims practices, including through
tions, the Company is also restricted from sharing customer or the imposition of restrictions on marketing and sales practices,
client information with third party non-affiliates. distribution arrangements and payment of inducements; approv-
Other Regulation ing changes in control of insurance companies; restricting the
payment of dividends and other transactions between affiliates;
In addition to U.S. banking regulation, our operations are subject and regulating the types, amounts and valuation of investments.
to supervision and regulation by other federal, state, and various Each insurance subsidiary is required to file reports, generally
foreign governmental authorities. Additionally, our operations including detailed annual financial statements, with insurance
may be subject to various laws and judicial and administrative regulatory authorities in each of the jurisdictions in which it does
decisions. This oversight may serve to: business, and its operations and accounts are subject to periodic
- regulate credit granting activities, including establishing examination by such authorities.
licensing requirements, if any, in various jurisdictions; Changes to laws of states and countries in which we do business
- establish maximum interest rates, finance charges and other could affect the operating environment in substantial and unpre-
charges; dictable ways. We cannot accurately predict whether such
- regulate customers’ insurance coverages; changes will occur or, if they occur, the ultimate effect they would
- require disclosures to customers; have upon our financial condition or results of operations.
WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION
A copy of our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on In addition, the SEC maintains an Internet site at
Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to http://www.sec.gov, from which interested parties can electroni-
those reports, as well as our Proxy Statement, may be read and cally access the Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports
copied at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to
Washington D.C. 20549. Information on the Public Reference those reports, as well as our Proxy Statement.
Room may be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.
The Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form the Compensation Committee, the Nominating and Governance
10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those Committee, and the Risk Management Committee, and our Code
reports, as well as our Proxy Statement, are available free of of Business Conduct are available, free of charge, on our internet
charge on the Company’s Internet site at http://www.cit.com as site at www.cit.com/investor, and printed copies are available by
soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electroni- contacting Investor Relations, 1 CIT Drive, Livingston, NJ 07039
cally filed or furnished with the SEC. Copies of our Corporate or by telephone at (973) 740-5000.
Governance Guidelines, the Charters of the Audit Committee,
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Accretable / Non-accretable fresh start accounting adjustments Finance Receivables include loans, capital lease receivables and
reflect components of the fair value adjustments to assets and factoring receivables. In certain instances, we use the term
liabilities. Accretable adjustments flow through the related line “Loans” synonymously, as presented on the balance sheet.
items on the statement of operations (interest income, interest Financing and Leasing Assets (“FLA”) include finance receivables,
expense, non-interest income and depreciation expense) on a operating lease equipment, and AHFS.
regular basis over the remaining life of the asset or liability. These
Fresh Start Accounting (“FSA”) was adopted upon emergence
primarily relate to interest adjustments on loans and leases, as
from bankruptcy. FSA recognizes that CIT has a new enterprise
well as debt. Non-accretable adjustments, for instance credit
value following its emergence from bankruptcy and requires asset
related write-downs on loans, become adjustments to the basis
values to be remeasured using fair value in accordance with
of the asset and flow back through the statement of operations only
accounting requirements for business combinations. The excess
upon the occurrence of certain events, such as repayment or sale.
of reorganization value over the fair value of tangible and intan-
Available-for-sale (“AFS”) is a classification that pertains to debt gible assets was recorded as goodwill. In addition, FSA also
and equity securities. We classify these securities as AFS when requires that all liabilities, other than deferred taxes, be stated at
they are neither trading securities nor held-to-maturity securities. fair value. Deferred taxes were determined in conformity with
Loans and equipment that we classify in assets held for sale accounting requirements for Income Taxes.
(“AHFS”) generally pertain to assets we no longer have the intent
Interest income includes interest earned on finance receivables,
or ability to hold until maturity.
cash balances and dividends on investments.
Average Earning Assets (“AEA”) is computed using month end
Lease – capital is an agreement in which the party who owns the
balances and is the average of finance receivables (defined
property (lessor), which is CIT as part of our finance business, per-
below), operating lease equipment, and financing and leasing
mits another party (lessee), which is our customer, to use the
assets held for sale, less the credit balances of factoring clients.
property with substantially all of the economic benefits and risks
We use this average for certain key profitability ratios, including
of asset ownership passed to the lessee.
return on AEA, Net Finance Revenue as a percentage of AEA and
operating expenses as a percentage of AEA. Lease – operating is a lease in which CIT retains ownership of the
asset, collects rental payments, recognizes depreciation on the
Average Finance Receivables (“AFR”) is computed using month
asset, and retains the risks of ownership, including obsolescence.
end balances and is the average of finance receivables (defined
below). We use this average to measure the rate of net charge- Lower of Cost or Fair Value relates to the carrying value of an
offs for the period. asset. The cost refers to the current book balance of certain
assets, such as held for sale assets, and if that balance is higher
Average Operating Leases (“AOL”) is computed using month
than the fair value, an impairment charge is reflected in the cur-
end balances and is the average of operating lease equipment.
rent period statement of operations.
We use this average to measure the rate of return on our operat-
ing lease portfolio for the period. Net Finance Revenue (“NFR”) is a non-GAAP measurement
defined as Net Interest Revenue (defined below) plus rental
Delinquent loan categorization occurs when payment is not
income on operating lease equipment less depreciation on operat-
received when contractually due. Delinquent loan trends are used
ing lease equipment and maintenance and other operating lease
as a gauge of potential portfolio degradation or improvement.
expenses. When divided by AEA, the product is defined as Net
Derivative Contract is a contract whose value is derived from a Finance Margin (“NFM”). These are key measures used by manage-
specified asset or an index, such as an interest rate or a foreign ment in the evaluation of the financial performance of our business.
currency exchange rate. As the value of that asset or index
Net Interest Income Sensitivity (“NII Sensitivity”) measures the
changes, so does the value of the derivative contract. We use
impact of hypothetical changes in interest rates on NFR.
derivatives to manage interest rate, foreign currency or credit
risks. The derivative contracts we use may include interest-rate Net Interest Revenue reflects interest and fees on finance receiv-
swaps, interest rate caps, cross-currency swaps, foreign exchange ables and interest/dividends on investments less interest expense
forward contracts, and credit default swaps. on deposits and long term borrowings.
Economic Value of Equity (“EVE”) measures the net economic Net Operating Loss Carryforward / Carryback (“NOL”) is a tax
value of equity by assessing the market value of assets, liabilities concept, whereby tax losses in one year can be used to offset
and derivatives. taxable income in other years. For example, a U.S. Federal NOL

can first be carried-back and applied against taxable income Residual Values represent the estimated value of equipment at
recorded in the two preceding years with any remaining amount the end of the lease term. For operating leases, it is the value to
being carried-forward for the next twenty years to offset future which the asset is depreciated at the end of its estimated useful life.
taxable income. The rules pertaining to the number of years allowed Risk Weighted Assets (“RWA”) is the denominator to which Total
for the carryback or carryforward of an NOL varies by jurisdiction. Capital and Tier 1 Capital is compared to derive the respective
New business volume represents the initial cash outlay related to risk based regulatory ratios. RWA is comprised of both
new loan or lease equipment transactions entered into during the on-balance sheet assets and certain off-balance sheet items (for
period. The amount includes CIT’s portion of a syndicated trans- example loan commitments, purchase commitments or derivative
action, whether it acts as the agent or a participant, and in certain contracts), all of which are adjusted by certain risk-weightings as
instances, it includes asset purchases from third parties. defined by the regulators, which are based upon, among other
things, the relative credit risk of the counterparty.
Non-accrual Assets include finance receivables greater than
$500,000 that are individually evaluated and determined to be Syndication and Sale of Receivables result from originating
impaired, as well as finance receivables less than $500,000 that finance receivables with the intent to sell a portion, or the entire
are delinquent (generally for more than 90 days), unless it is both balance, of these assets to other institutions. We earn and recog-
well secured and in the process of collection. Non-accrual assets nize fees and/or gains on sales, which are reflected in other
also include finance receivables maintained on a cash basis income, for acting as arranger or agent in these transactions.
because of deterioration in the financial position of the borrower. Tangible Capital excludes goodwill and intangible assets. We use
Non-performing Assets include non-accrual assets (described above) tangible capital in measuring tangible book value and tangible
and assets received in satisfaction of loans (repossessed assets). book value per share.
Other Income includes (1) factoring commissions, (2) gains and Tier 1 Capital and Tier 2 Capital are regulatory capital as defined
losses on sales of equipment (3) fee revenues, including fees on in the capital adequacy guidelines issued by the Federal Reserve.
lines of credit, letters of credit, capital markets related fees, Tier 1 Capital is total stockholders’ equity reduced by goodwill
agent and advisory fees and servicing fees, (4) gains and losses and intangibles and adjusted by elements of other comprehen-
on loan and portfolio sales, (5) recoveries on loans charged-off sive income and other items. Tier 2 Capital consists of, among
pre-emergence and loans charged-off prior to transfer to AHFS, other things, other preferred stock that does not qualify as Tier 1,
(6) gains and losses on investments, (7) gains and losses on mandatory convertible debt, limited amounts of subordinated
derivatives and foreign currency exchange, (8) counterparty debt, other qualifying term debt, and allowance for loan losses
receivable accretion, (9) impairment on AHFS, and (10) other rev- up to 1.25% of risk weighted assets.
enues. Other income combined with rental income on operating Total Capital is the sum of Tier 1 and Tier 2 Capital, subject to
leases is defined as Non-interest income. certain adjustments, as applicable.
Regulatory Credit Classifications used by CIT are as follows: Total Net Revenue is a non-GAAP measurement and is the com-
- Pass – These assets do not meet the criteria for classification in bination of NFR and other income.
one of the other categories; Total Return Swap (“TRS”) is a swap where one party agrees to
- Special Mention – These assets exhibit potential weaknesses pay the other the “total return” of a defined underlying asset
that deserve management’s close attention and if left (e.g., a loan), usually in return for receiving a stream of LIBOR-
uncorrected, these potential weaknesses may, at some future based cash flows. The total returns of the asset, including interest
date, result in the deterioration of the repayment prospects; and any default shortfall, are passed through to the counterparty.
- Substandard – These assets are inadequately protected by the The counterparty is therefore assuming the risks and rewards of
current sound worth and paying capacity of the borrower, and the underlying asset.
are characterized by the distinct possibility that some loss will
Troubled Debt Restructuring (“TDR”) occurs when a lender, for
be sustained if the deficiencies are not corrected;
economic or legal reasons, grants a concession to the borrower
- Doubtful – These assets have weaknesses that make collection
related to the borrower’s financial difficulties that it would not
or liquidation in full unlikely on the basis of current facts,
otherwise consider.
conditions, and values and
- Loss – These assets are considered uncollectible and of little or Variable Interest Entity (“VIE”) is a corporation, partnership, lim-
no value and are generally charged off. ited liability company, or any other legal structure used to
conduct activities or hold assets. These entities: lack sufficient equity
Classified assets are rated as substandard, doubtful and loss and
investment at risk to permit the entity to finance its activities without
range from: (1) assets that exhibit a well-defined weakness and
additional subordinated financial support from other parties; have
are inadequately protected by the current sound worth and pay-
equity owners who either do not have voting rights or lack the ability
ing capacity of the borrower, and are characterized by the distinct
to make significant decisions affecting the entity’s operations; and/or
possibility that some loss will be sustained if the deficiencies are
have equity owners that do not have an obligation to absorb the
not corrected to (2) assets with weaknesses that make collection
entity’s losses or the right to receive the entity’s returns.
or liquidation in full unlikely on the basis of current facts, condi-
tions, and values. Assets in this classification can be accruing or Yield-related Fees are collected in connection with our assump-
on non-accrual depending on the evaluation of these factors. Classi- tion of underwriting risk in certain transactions in addition to
fied loans plus special mention loans are considered criticized loans. interest income. We recognize yield-related fees, which include
prepayment fees and certain origination fees, in interest income
over the life of the lending transaction.
Item 1A. Risk Factors

The operation of our business, and the economic and regulatory sales, the largest being our student lending portfolio. We also
climate in the U.S. and other regions of the world involve various entered into an agreement to acquire IMB Holdco LLC and its
elements of risk and uncertainty. You should carefully consider subsidiary, OneWest Bank, N.A., which is still pending.
the risks and uncertainties described below before making a If CIT engages in business acquisitions, it may be necessary to
decision whether to invest in the Company. This is a discussion of pay a premium over book and market values to complete the
the risks that we believe are material to our business and does transaction, which may result in some dilution of our tangible
not include all risks, material or immaterial, that may possibly book value and net income per common share. If CIT uses sub-
affect our business. Any of the following risks, as well as addi- stantial cash or other liquid assets or incurs substantial debt to
tional risks that are presently unknown to us or that we currently acquire a business or assets, we could become more susceptible
deem immaterial, could have a material adverse effect on our to economic downturns and competitive pressures. Inherent
business, financial condition, and results of operations. uncertainties exist when integrating the operations of an
acquired entity. CIT may not be able to fully achieve its strategic
Risks Related to Our Strategy and Business Plan
objectives and planned operating efficiencies in an acquisition.
If the assumptions and analyses underlying our strategy and busi- CIT may also be exposed to other risks inherent in an acquisition,
ness plan, including with respect to market conditions, capital and including potential exposure to unknown or contingent liabilities,
liquidity, business strategy, and operations are incorrect, we may be changes in our credit, liquidity, interest rate or other risk profiles,
unsuccessful in executing our strategy and business plan. exposure to potential asset quality issues, potential disruption of
our existing business and diversion of management’s time and
A number of strategic issues affect our business, including how
attention, possible loss of key employees or customers of the
we allocate our capital and liquidity, our business strategy, our
acquired business, potential risk that certain items were not
funding models, and the quality and efficiency of operations. We
accounted for properly by the seller in accordance with financial
developed our strategy and business plan based upon certain
accounting and reporting standards. In most instances, CIT and
assumptions, analyses, and financial forecasts, including with
any potential acquired company will be operating pursuant to
respect to our capital levels, funding model, credit ratings, rev-
different policies, procedures, and processes, and utilizing differ-
enue growth, earnings, interest margins, expense levels, cash
ent systems, which will require significant time, cost, and effort to
flow, credit losses, liquidity and financing sources, lines of busi-
integrate. If we fail to realize the expected revenue increases,
ness and scope of our international operations, acquisitions and
cost savings, increases in geographic or product presence,
divestitures, equipment residual values, capital expenditures,
and/or other projected benefits from an acquisition, or if we are
retention of key employees, and the overall strength and stability
unable to adequately integrate the acquired business, or experi-
of general economic conditions. Financial forecasts are inherently
ence unexpected costs, changes in our risk profile, or disruption
subject to many uncertainties and are necessarily speculative,
to our business, it could have a material adverse effect on our
and it is likely that one or more of the assumptions and estimates
business, financial condition, and results of operations.
that are the basis of these financial forecasts will not be accurate.
Accordingly, our actual financial condition and results of opera- CIT must generally receive regulatory approval before it can
tions may differ materially from what we have forecast. If we are acquire a bank or BHC or for any acquisition in which the assets
unable to implement our strategic initiatives effectively, we may acquired exceeds $10 billion. We cannot be certain when or if, or
need to refine, supplement, or modify our business plan and on what terms and conditions, any required regulatory approval
strategy in significant ways. If we are unable to fully implement may be granted. We may be required to sell assets or business
our business plan and strategy, it may have a material adverse effect units as a condition to receiving regulatory approval. Our pro-
on our business, results of operations and financial condition. posed acquisition of IMB Holdco LLC and OneWest Bank, N.A. is
still subject to regulatory approval. If CIT announces an acquisi-
We may not be able to achieve the expected benefits from tion, but fails to close the transaction, whether due to a failure to
acquiring a business or assets or from disposing of a business or obtain regulatory approvals, failure to obtain shareholder
assets, which may have an adverse effect on our business or approval, a change in circumstances, or for any other reason, CIT
results of operations. may be exposed to potential disruption of our business, diversion
As part of our strategy and business plan, we may consider of management’s time and attention, risk from a failure to diver-
engaging in business or asset acquisitions or sales to manage our sify our business and products, and increased expenses without a
business, the products and services we offer, and our asset levels, commensurate increase in revenues.
credit exposures, or liquidity position. There are a number of risks As a result of economic cycles and other factors, the value of cer-
inherent in acquisition and sale transactions, including the risk tain asset classes may fluctuate and decline below their historic
that we fail to identify or to complete any of these transactions, cost. If CIT is holding such businesses or asset classes, we may
that we enter into a transaction, but fail to complete the transac- not recover our carrying value if we sell such businesses or
tion, that we fail to sell a business or assets that are considered assets or we may end up with a higher risk exposure to specific
non-strategic or high risk, or that we complete the transaction, customers, industries, asset classes, or geographic regions than
but fail to properly integrate the acquired company or to realize we have targeted. In addition, potential purchasers may be
the anticipated benefits from the transaction. In 2014, CIT com- unwilling to pay an amount equal to the face value of a loan or
pleted two acquisitions, Nacco and Direct Capital, and various lease if the purchaser is concerned about the quality of our credit
Item 1A: Risk Factors

underwriting. We may not receive adequate consideration for our ing agencies, which consider a number of factors, including CIT’s
dispositions. These transactions, if completed, may reduce the own financial strength, performance, prospects, and operations,
size of our business and we may not be able to replace the lend- as well as factors not within our control, including conditions
ing and leasing activity associated with these businesses. As a affecting the financial services industry generally. There can be no
result, future disposition of assets could have a material adverse assurance that we will maintain or increase our current ratings,
effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. which currently are not investment grade. If we experience a sub-
stantial, unexpected, or prolonged change in the level or cost of
Risks Related to Capital and Liquidity liquidity, or fail to generate sufficient cash flow to satisfy our obli-
gations, it could adversely affect our business, financial condition,
If we fail to maintain sufficient capital or adequate liquidity to
or results of operations.
meet regulatory capital guidelines, there could be a material
adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and finan- Our business may be adversely affected if we fail to successfully
cial condition. expand our sources of deposits at CIT Bank.
New and evolving capital and liquidity standards will have a sig- CIT Bank currently does not have a branch network and relies on
nificant effect on banks and BHCs. In July 2013, the FRB and the its online bank, brokered deposits, and certain deposit sweep
FDIC approved the Basel III Final Rule, which requires BHCs to accounts to raise deposits. Our ability to obtain deposit funding
maintain more and higher quality capital than in the past. In and offer competitive interest rates on deposits is dependent on
October 2014, the FRB issued a proposed rule to create a stan- CIT Bank’s capital levels. Federal banking law generally prohibits
dardized minimum liquidity requirement for large and a bank from accepting, renewing or rolling over brokered depos-
internationally active banking organizations, referred to as the its, unless the bank is well-capitalized or it is adequately
“liquidity coverage ratio”, or “LCR”. The U.S. bank regulatory capitalized and obtains a waiver from the FDIC. There are also
agencies are also expected to issue a rule implementing the net restrictions on interest rates that may be paid by banks that are
stable funding ratio, or “NSFR”, called for by the Basel III Final less than well capitalized, under which such a bank generally may
Framework. If we incur future losses that reduce our capital levels not pay an interest rate on any deposit of more than 75 basis
or affect our liquidity, we may fail to maintain our regulatory capi- points over the national rate published by the FDIC unless the
tal or our liquidity above regulatory minimums and at FDIC determines that the bank is operating in a high-rate area.
economically satisfactory levels. Failure to maintain the appropri- Continued expansion of CIT Bank’s retail online banking platform
ate capital levels or adequate liquidity would have a material to diversify the types of deposits that it accepts may require sig-
adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of nificant time, effort, and expense to implement. We have agreed
operations, and subject the Company to a variety of formal or to acquire OneWest Bank, which has a retail branch network, but
informal enforcement actions, which may include restrictions on that transaction is subject to regulatory approval, which may not
our business activities, including limiting lending and leasing be obtained. We are likely to face significant competition for
activities, limiting the expansion of our business, either organi- deposits from larger BHCs who are similarly seeking larger and
cally or through acquisitions, requiring the raising of additional more stable pools of funding. If CIT Bank fails to expand and
capital, which may be dilutive to shareholders, or requiring prior diversify its deposit-taking capability, it could have an adverse effect
regulatory approval before taking certain actions, such as pay- on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.
ment of dividends or otherwise returning capital to shareholders.
The new liquidity standards could also require CIT to hold higher Risks Related to Regulatory Obligations
levels of short-term investments, thereby reducing our ability to
invest in longer-term or less liquid assets. If we are unable to We could be adversely affected by the additional banking regu-
meet any of these capital or liquidity standards, it may have a lations imposed on SIFIs when we complete the proposed
material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and acquisition of IMB Holdco LLC and OneWest Bank.
financial condition. We have agreed to acquire IMB Holdco LLC and its subsidiary,
OneWest Bank, a national bank regulated by the OCC, with CIT
If we fail to maintain adequate liquidity or to generate sufficient Bank merging into OneWest Bank, which will be renamed CIT
cash flow to satisfy our obligations as they come due, whether Bank, N.A. If the transaction receives regulatory approval and is
due to a downgrade in our credit ratings or for any other reasons, it completed, CIT will exceed the $50 billion threshold for designa-
could materially adversely affect our future business operations. tion as a systemically important financial institution (SIFI) in the
CIT’s liquidity is essential for the operation of our business. Our quarter in which the transaction closes and will become subject
liquidity, and our ability to issue debt in the capital markets or to the FRB regulations applicable to SIFIs, generally within four
fund our activities through bank deposits, could be affected by a quarters or less of the closing. There are a number of regulations
number of factors, including market conditions, our capital struc- that are applicable to SIFIs (the “SIFI Rules”) that are not appli-
ture and capital levels, our credit ratings, and the performance of cable to smaller banking organizations, including but not limited
our business. An adverse change in any of those factors, and par- to enhanced rules on capital plans and stress testing, enhanced
ticularly a downgrade in our credit ratings, could negatively affect governance standards, enhanced liquidity requirements,
CIT’s liquidity and competitive position, increase our funding enhanced reporting requirements, and a requirement to develop
costs, or limit our access to the capital markets or deposit mar- a resolution plan. Each of the SIFI Rules will require CIT to dedi-
kets. Further, an adverse change in the performance of our cate significant time, effort, and expense to comply with the
business could have a negative impact on our operating cash enhanced standards and requirements. If we fail to develop at a
flow. CIT’s credit ratings are subject to ongoing review by the rat- reasonable cost the systems and processes necessary to comply
with the enhanced standards and requirements imposed by the requirements, and could have an adverse effect on our business, finan-
SIFI Rules, it could have a material adverse effect on our busi- cial condition and results of operations.
ness, financial condition, or results of operations. Our Aerospace, Rail, Maritime, and other equipment financing
operations are subject to various laws, rules, and regulations
Our business is subject to significant government regulation
administered by authorities in jurisdictions where we do business.
and supervision and we could be adversely affected by banking
In the U.S., our equipment leasing operations, including for air-
or other regulations, including new regulations or changes in
craft, railcars, ships, and other equipment, are subject to rules
existing regulations or the application thereof.
and regulations relating to safety, operations, maintenance, and
The financial services industry, in general, is heavily regulated. mechanical standards promulgated by various federal and state
We are subject to the comprehensive, consolidated supervision agencies and industry organizations, including the U.S. Depart-
of the FRB, including risk-based and leverage capital requirement of Transportation, the Federal Aviation Administration, the
ments and information reporting requirements. In addition, CIT Federal Railroad Administration, the Association of American
Bank is subject to supervision by the FDIC and UDFI, including Railroads, the Maritime Administration, the U.S. Coast Guard,
risk-based capital requirements and information reporting and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In addition, state
requirements. This regulatory oversight is established to protect agencies regulate some aspects of rail and maritime operations
depositors, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking sys- with respect to health and safety matters not otherwise pre-
tem as a whole, and is not intended to protect debt and equity empted by federal law. Our business operations and our
security holders. If we fail to satisfy regulatory requirements equipment leasing portfolios may be adversely impacted by rules
applicable to bank holding companies that have elected to be and regulations promulgated by governmental and industry
treated as financial holding companies, our financial condition agencies, which could require substantial modification, mainte-
and results of operations could be adversely affected, and we nance, or refurbishment of our aircraft, railcars, ships, or other
may be restricted in our ability to undertake certain capital equipment, or potentially make such equipment inoperable or
actions (such as declaring dividends or repurchasing outstanding obsolete. Violations of these rules and regulations can result in
shares) or engage in certain activities or acquisitions. In addition, substantial fines and penalties, including potential limitations on
our banking regulators have significant discretion in the examina- operations or forfeitures of assets.
tion and enforcement of applicable banking statutes and
The financial services industry is also heavily regulated in many
regulations, and may restrict our ability to engage in certain
jurisdictions outside of the United States. We have subsidiaries in
activities or acquisitions, or may require us to maintain more capital.
various countries that are licensed as banks, banking corpora-
Proposals for legislation to further regulate, restrict, and tax certain tions and broker-dealers, all of which are subject to regulation
financial services activities are continually being introduced in the and examination by banking and securities regulators in their
United States Congress and in state legislatures. The Dodd-Frank Act, home jurisdiction. In certain jurisdictions, including the United
which was adopted in 2010, constitutes the most wide-ranging over- Kingdom, the local banking regulators expect the local regulated
haul of financial services regulation in decades, including provisions entity to maintain contingency plans to operate on a stand-alone
affecting, among other things, (i) corporate governance and executive basis in the event of a crisis. Given the evolving nature of regula-
compensation of companies whose securities are registered with the tions in many of these jurisdictions, it may be difficult for us to
SEC, (ii) FDIC insurance assessments based on asset levels rather than meet all of the regulatory requirements, establish operations and
deposits, (iii) minimum capital levels for BHCs, (iv) derivatives activities, receive approvals. Our inability to remain in compliance with
proprietary trading, and private investment funds offered by financial regulatory requirements in a particular jurisdiction could have a
institutions, and (v) the regulation of large financial institutions. In addi- material adverse effect on our operations in that market and on
tion, the Dodd-Frank Act established additional regulatory bodies, our reputation generally.
including the FSOC, which is charged with identifying systemic risks,
promoting stronger financial regulation, and identifying those non- We could be adversely affected by the actions and commercial
bank companies that are “systemically important”, and the CFPB, soundness of other financial institutions.
which has broad authority to examine and regulate a federal regulatory CIT’s ability to engage in routine funding transactions could be
framework for consumer financial protection. The agencies regulating adversely affected by the actions and commercial soundness of
the financial services industry periodically adopt changes to their regu- other financial institutions. Financial institutions are interrelated
lations and are still finalizing regulations to implement various as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty, or other relation-
provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. In recent years, regulators have ships. CIT has exposure to many different industries and
increased significantly the level and scope of their supervision and counterparties, and it routinely executes transactions with coun-
regulation of the financial services industry. We are unable to predict terparties in the financial services industry, including brokers and
the form or nature of any future changes to statutes or regulation, dealers, commercial banks, investment banks, mutual and hedge
including the interpretation or implementation thereof. Such increased funds, and other institutional clients. As a result, defaults by, or
supervision and regulation could significantly affect our ability to con- even rumors or questions about, one or more financial institu-
duct certain of our businesses in a cost-effective manner, restrict the tions, or the financial services industry generally, could affect
type of activities in which we are permitted to engage, or subject us to market liquidity and could lead to losses or defaults by us or by
stricter and more conservative capital, leverage, liquidity, and risk man- other institutions. Many of these transactions could expose CIT to
agement standards. Any such action could have a substantial impact credit risk in the event of default by its counterparty or client. In
on us, significantly increase our costs, limit our growth opportunities, addition, CIT’s credit risk may be impacted if the collateral held
affect our strategies and business operations and increase our capital by it cannot be realized upon or is liquidated at prices not suffi-
cient to recover the full amount of the financial instrument

exposure due to CIT. There is no assurance that any such losses reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external
would not adversely affect, possibly materially, CIT. purposes in accordance with GAAP. If we identify material weak-
nesses or other deficiencies in our internal controls, or if material
We may be restricted from paying dividends or repurchasing weaknesses or other deficiencies exist that we fail to identify, our
our common stock. risk will be increased that a material misstatement to our annual
CIT is a legal entity separate and distinct from its subsidiaries, or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected
including CIT Bank, and relies on dividends from its subsidiaries on a timely basis. Any such potential material misstatement, if not
for a significant portion of its cash flow. Federal banking laws and prevented or detected, could require us to restate previously
regulations limit the amount of dividends that CIT Bank can pay. released financial statements and could otherwise have a material
BHCs with assets in excess of $50 billion must develop and sub- adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and finan-
mit to the FRB for review an annual capital plan detailing their cial condition.
plans for the payment of dividends on their common or preferred
stock or the repurchase of common stock. Although our assets Our allowance for loan losses may prove inadequate.
currently are less than $50 billion, we will exceed the $50 Billion The quality of our financing and leasing assets depends on the
SIFI Threshold and become subject to the capital plan require- creditworthiness of our customers and their ability to fulfill their
ment if the OneWest Transaction is approved and completed. obligations to us. We maintain a consolidated allowance for loan
Once subject to this requirement, if our capital plan were not losses on our financing and leasing assets to provide for loan
approved or if we do not satisfy applicable capital requirements, defaults and non-performance. The amount of our allowance
our ability to undertake capital actions may be restricted. Further- reflects management’s judgment of losses inherent in the portfo-
more, we still consult with the FRBNY prior to declaring dividends lio. However, the economic environment is dynamic, and our
on our common stock or implementing a plan to repurchase our portfolio credit quality could decline in the future.
common stock. We cannot determine whether the FRBNY will Our allowance for loan losses may not keep pace with changes in
object to future capital returns. the credit-worthiness of our customers or in collateral values. Our
credit losses were significantly more severe from 2007 to 2009
Risks Related to the Operation of Our Businesses
than in prior economic downturns, due to a significant decline in
Revenue growth from new business initiatives and expense real estate values, an increase in the proportion of cash flow loans
reductions from efficiency improvements may not be achieved. versus asset based loans in our corporate finance segment, the
limited ability of borrowers to restructure their liabilities or their
As part of its ongoing business, CIT from time to time enters into new
business, and reduced values of the collateral underlying the loans. If
business initiatives. In addition, CIT from time to time has targeted cer-
the credit quality of our customer base declines, if the risk profile of a
tain expense reductions in its business. The new business initiatives
market, industry, or group of customers changes significantly, or if the
may not be successful in increasing revenue, whether due to significant
markets for accounts receivable, equipment, real estate, or other collat-
levels of competition, lack of demand for services, lack of name recog-
eral deteriorates significantly, our allowance for loan losses may prove
nition or a record of prior performance, or otherwise, or may require
inadequate, which could have a material adverse effect on our busi-
higher expenditures than anticipated to generate new business vol-
ness, results of operations, and financial condition.
ume. The expense initiatives may not reduce expenses as much as
anticipated, whether due to delays in implementation, higher than In addition to customer credit risk associated with loans and
expected or unanticipated costs of implementation, increased costs for leases, we are exposed to other forms of credit risk, including
new regulatory obligations, or for other reasons. If CIT is unable to counterparties to our derivative transactions, loan sales, syndica-
achieve the anticipated revenue growth from its new business initiatives tions and equipment purchases. These counterparties include
or the projected expense reductions from efficiency improvements, its other financial institutions, manufacturers, and our customers. If
results of operations and profitability may be adversely affected. our credit underwriting processes or credit risk judgments fail to
adequately identify or assess such risks, or if the credit quality of
Our Commercial Aerospace business is concentrated by indus- our derivative counterparties, customers, manufacturers, or other
try and any downturn in that industry may have a material parties with which we conduct business materially deteriorates,
adverse effect on our business. we may be exposed to credit risk related losses that may negatively
Most of our business is diversified by customer, industry, and impact our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
geography. However, although our Commercial Aerospace busi-
If the models that we use in our business are poorly designed,
ness is diversified by customer and geography, it is concentrated
our business or results of operations may be adversely affected.
in one industry and represents 29% of our financing and leasing
assets. If there is a significant downturn in commercial air travel, it We rely on quantitative models to measure risks and to estimate
could have a material adverse effect on our business and results certain financial values. Models may be used in such processes as
of operations. determining the pricing of various products, grading loans and
extending credit, measuring interest rate and other market risks,
If we fail to maintain adequate internal control over financial predicting losses, assessing capital adequacy, and calculating
reporting, it could result in a material misstatement of the Com- regulatory capital levels, as well as to estimate the value of finan-
pany’s annual or interim financial statements. cial instruments and balance sheet items. Poorly designed or
Management of CIT is responsible for establishing and maintain- implemented models present the risk that our business decisions
ing adequate internal control over financial reporting designed to based on information incorporating models will be adversely
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial affected due to the inadequacy of that information. Also, infor-
mation we provide to the public or to our regulators based on
poorly designed or implemented models could be inaccurate or significant portion of our leasing portfolios are comprised of
misleading. Some of the decisions that our regulators make, operating leases, which increase our residual realization risk.
including those related to capital distributions to our sharehold-
ers, could be affected adversely due to their perception that the We are currently involved in a number of legal proceedings, and
quality of the models used to generate the relevant information may from time to time be involved in government investigations
are insufficient. and inquiries, related to the conduct of our business, the results
of which could have a material adverse effect on our business,
It could adversely affect our business if we fail to retain and/or financial condition, or results of operation.
attract skilled employees. We are currently involved in a number of legal proceedings, and
Our business and results of operations will depend in part upon may from time to time be involved in government investigations
our ability to retain and attract highly skilled and qualified execu- and inquiries, relating to matters that arise in connection with the
tive officers and management, financial, compliance, technical, conduct of our business (collectively, “Litigation”). We are also at
marketing, sales, and support employees. Competition for quali- risk when we have agreed to indemnify others for losses related
fied executive officers and employees can be challenging, and to Litigation they face, such as in connection with the sale of a
CIT cannot ensure success in attracting or retaining such individu- business or assets by us. It is inherently difficult to predict the
als. This competition can lead to increased expenses in many outcome of Litigation matters, particularly when such matters are
areas. If we fail to attract and retain qualified executive officers in their early stages or where the claimants seek indeterminate
and employees, it could materially adversely affect our ability to damages. We cannot state with certainty what the eventual out-
compete and it could have a material adverse effect on our ability come of the pending Litigation will be, what the timing of the
to successfully operate our business or to meet our operations, ultimate resolution of these matters will be, or what the eventual
risk management, compliance, regulatory, funding and financial loss, fines, or penalties related to each pending matter will be, if
reporting requirements. any. The actual results of resolving Litigation matters may be sub-
stantially higher than the amounts reserved, or judgments may be
We may not be able to realize our entire investment in the rendered, or fines or penalties assessed in matters for which we
equipment we lease to our customers. have no reserves. Adverse judgments, fines or penalties in one or
Our financing and leasing assets include a significant portion of more Litigation matters could have a material adverse effect on
leased equipment, including but not limited to aircraft, railcars our business, financial condition, or results of operations.
and locomotives, technology and office equipment, and medical
equipment. The realization of equipment values (residual values) We and our subsidiaries are party to various financing arrange-
during the life and at the end of the term of a lease is an impor- ments, commercial contracts and other arrangements that
tant element in the profitability of our leasing business. At the under certain circumstances give, or in some cases may give,
inception of each lease, we record a residual value for the leased the counterparty the ability to exercise rights and remedies
equipment based on our estimate of the future value of the under such arrangements which, if exercised, may have material
equipment at the end of lease term or end of equipment esti- adverse consequences.
mated useful life. We and our subsidiaries are party to various financing arrange-
If the market value of leased equipment decreases at a rate ments, commercial contracts and other arrangements, such as
greater than we projected, whether due to rapid technological or securitization transactions, derivatives transactions, funding facili-
economic obsolescence, unusual wear and tear on the equip- ties, and agreements for the purchase or sale of assets, that give,
ment, excessive use of the equipment, recession or other adverse or in some cases may give, the counterparty the ability to exer-
economic conditions, or other factors, it would adversely affect cise rights and remedies upon the occurrence of certain events.
the current values or the residual values of such equipment. Such events may include a material adverse effect or material
adverse change (or similar event), a breach of representations or
Further, certain equipment residual values, including commercial
warranties, a failure to disclose material information, a breach of
aerospace residuals, are dependent on the manufacturers’ or
covenants, certain insolvency events, a default under certain
vendors’ warranties, reputation, and other factors, including mar-
specified other obligations, or a failure to comply with certain
ket liquidity. Residual values for certain equipment, including
financial covenants. The counterparty could have the ability,
aerospace, rail, and medical equipment, may also be affected by
depending on the arrangement, to, among other things, require
changes in laws or regulations that mandate design changes or
early repayment of amounts owed by us or our subsidiaries and in
additional safety features. In addition, we may not realize the full
some cases payment of penalty amounts, or require the repur-
market value of equipment if we are required to sell it to meet
chase of assets previously sold to the counterparty. Additionally, a
liquidity needs or for other reasons outside of the ordinary course
default under financing arrangements or derivatives transactions
of business. Consequently, there can be no assurance that we will
that exceed a certain size threshold in the aggregate may also
realize our estimated residual values for equipment.
cause a cross-default under instruments governing our other
The degree of residual realization risk varies by transaction type. financing arrangements or derivatives transactions. If the ability
Capital leases bear the least risk because contractual payments of any counterparty to exercise such rights and remedies is trig-
usually cover approximately 90% of the equipment’s cost at the gered and we are unsuccessful in avoiding or minimizing the
inception of the lease. Operating leases have a higher degree of adverse consequences discussed above, such consequences
risk because a smaller percentage of the equipment’s value is could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of
covered by contractual cash flows over the term of the lease. A operations, and financial condition.

Investment in and revenues from our foreign operations are We may be adversely affected by significant changes in interest rates.
subject to various risks and requirements associated with trans- In addition to our equity capital, we rely on borrowed money
acting business in foreign countries. from unsecured debt, secured debt, and deposits to fund our
An economic recession or downturn, increased competition, or business. We derive the bulk of our income from net finance rev-
business disruption associated with the political or regulatory enue, which is the difference between interest and rental income
environments in the international markets in which we operate on our financing and leasing assets and interest expense on
could adversely affect us. deposits and other borrowings, depreciation on our operating
In addition, our foreign operations generally conduct business in lease equipment and maintenance and other operating lease
foreign currencies, which subject us to foreign currency exchange expenses. Prevailing economic conditions, the trade, fiscal, and
rate fluctuations. These exposures, if not effectively hedged monetary policies of the federal government and the policies of
could have a material adverse effect on our investment in interna- various regulatory agencies all affect market rates of interest and
tional operations and the level of international revenues that we the availability and cost of credit, which in turn significantly
generate from international financing and leasing transactions. affects our net finance revenue. Volatility in interest rates can also
Reported results from our operations in foreign countries may result in disintermediation, which is the flow of funds away from
fluctuate from period to period due to exchange rate movements financial institutions into direct investments, such as federal gov-
in relation to the U.S. dollar, particularly exchange rate movements in ernment and corporate securities and other investment vehicles,
the Canadian dollar, which is our largest non-U.S. exposure. which, because of the absence of federal insurance premiums
and reserve requirements, generally pay higher rates of return
Foreign countries have various compliance requirements for
than financial institutions.
financial statement audits and tax filings, which are required in
order to obtain and maintain licenses to transact business and Although interest rates are currently lower than usual, any signifi-
may be different in some respects from GAAP in the U.S. or the cant decrease in market interest rates may result in a change in
tax laws and regulations of the U.S. If we are unable to properly net interest margin and net finance revenue. A substantial portion
complete and file our statutory audit reports or tax filings, regula- of our loans and other financing products, as well as our deposits
tors or tax authorities in the applicable jurisdiction may restrict and other borrowings, bear interest at floating interest rates. If
our ability to do business. interest rates increase, monthly interest obligations owed by our
customers to us will also increase, as will our own interest
Furthermore, our international operations could expose us to
expense. Demand for our loans or other financing products may
trade and economic sanctions or other restrictions imposed by
decrease as interest rates rise or if interest rates are expected to
the United States or other governments or organizations. The
rise in the future. In addition, if prevailing interest rates increase,
U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and other federal agencies
some of our customers may not be able to make the increased
and authorities have a broad range of civil and criminal penalties
interest payments or refinance their balloon and bullet payment
they may seek to impose against corporations and individuals for
transactions, resulting in payment defaults and loan impairments.
violations of trade sanction laws, the Foreign Corrupt Practices
Conversely, if interest rates remain low, our interest expense may
Act (“FCPA”) and other federal statutes. Under trade sanction
decrease, but our customers may refinance the loans they have
laws, the government may seek to impose modifications to busi-
with us at lower interest rates, or with others, leading to lower
ness practices, including cessation of business activities in
revenues. As interest rates rise and fall over time, any significant
sanctioned countries, and modifications to compliance programs,
change in market rates may result in a decrease in net finance
which may increase compliance costs, and may subject us to
revenue, particularly if the interest rates we pay on our deposits
fines, penalties and other sanctions. If any of the risks described
and other borrowings and the interest rates we charge our cus-
above materialize, it could adversely impact our operating results
tomers do not change in unison, which may have a material adverse
and financial condition.
effect on our business, operating results, and financial condition.
These laws also prohibit improper payments or offers of pay-
ments to foreign governments and their officials and political We may be adversely affected by deterioration in economic
parties for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. We conditions that is general in scope or affects specific industries,
have operations, deal with government entities and have con- products or geographic areas.
tracts in countries known to experience corruption. Our activities Given the high percentage of our financing and leasing assets
in these countries create the risk of unauthorized payments or represented directly or indirectly by loans and leases, and the
offers of payments by one of our employees, consultants, sales importance of lending and leasing to our overall business, weak
agents, or associates that could be in violation of various laws, economic conditions are likely to have a negative impact on our
including the FCPA, even though these parties are not always business and results of operations. Prolonged economic weak-
subject to our control. Our employees, consultants, sales agents, ness or other adverse economic or financial developments in the
or associates may engage in conduct for which we may be held U.S. or global economies in general, or affecting specific indus-
responsible. Violations of the FCPA may result in severe criminal tries, geographic locations and/or products, would likely
or civil sanctions, and we may be subject to other liabilities, which adversely impact credit quality as borrowers may fail to meet
could negatively affect our business, operating results, and finan- their debt payment obligations, particularly customers with highly
cial condition. leveraged loans. Adverse economic conditions have in the past
and could in the future result in declines in collateral values,
which also decreases our ability to fund against collateral. This
would result in higher levels of nonperforming loans, net charge-
offs, provision for credit losses, and valuation adjustments on
loans held for sale. The value to us of other assets such as invest- We could be adversely affected by changes in tax laws and
ment securities, most of which are debt securities or other regulations or the interpretations of such laws and regulations
financial instruments supported by loans, similarly would be We are subject to the income tax laws of the U.S., its states and
negatively impacted by widespread decreases in credit quality municipalities and those of the foreign jurisdictions in which we
resulting from a weakening of the economy. Accordingly, higher have business operations. These tax laws are complex and may
credit and collateral related losses and decreases in the value of be subject to different interpretations. We must make judgments
financial instruments could impact our financial position or oper- and interpretations about the application of these inherently
ating results. complex tax laws when determining our provision for income
In addition, a downturn in certain industries may result in reduced taxes, our deferred tax assets and liabilities, and our valuation
demand for products that we finance in that industry or nega- allowance. Changes to the tax laws, administrative rulings or
tively impact collection and asset recovery efforts. Decreased court decisions could increase our provision for income taxes and
demand for the products of various manufacturing customers due reduce our net income.
to recession may adversely affect their ability to repay their loans In all likelihood, changes to the U.S. tax laws and regulations will
and leases with us. Similarly, a decrease in the level of airline pas- occur within the next few years. While impossible to predict, gov-
senger traffic or a decline in railroad shipping volumes due to ernments’ need for additional revenue makes it likely that there
reduced demand for certain raw materials or bulk products may will be continued proposals to change tax rules in ways that could
adversely affect our aerospace or rail businesses, the value of our increase our effective tax rate. In addition, these changes could
aircraft and rail assets, and the ability of our lessees to make include a widening of the corporate tax base by including earn-
lease payments. ings from international operations. Such changes to the tax laws
We are also affected by the economic and other policies adopted could have a material impact on our income tax expense and
by various governmental authorities in the U.S. and other jurisdic- deferred tax balances.
tions in reaction to economic conditions. Changes in monetary Conversely, should these amendments to the tax laws reduce our
policies of the FRB and non-U.S. central banking authorities effective tax rate, the value of our deferred tax asset would
directly impact our cost of funds for lending, capital raising, and decline resulting in a charge to our net income during the period
investment activities, and may impact the value of financial instru- in which the amendment is enacted. In addition, the value
ments we hold. In addition, such changes may affect the credit assigned to our deferred tax assets is dependent upon our ability
quality of our customers. Changes in domestic and international to generate future taxable income. If we are not able to do so, we
monetary policies are beyond our control and difficult to predict. may need to increase our valuation allowance for deferred tax
assets with a corresponding charge recorded to net income.
Competition from both traditional competitors and new market These changes could affect our regulatory capital ratios as calcu-
entrants may adversely affect our market share, profitability, lated in accordance with the Basel III Final Rule that became
and returns. effective for us on January 1, 2015. The exact impact is depen-
Our markets are highly competitive and are characterized by dent upon the effects an amendment has on our net deferred tax
competitive factors that vary based upon product and geo- assets arising from net operating loss and tax credit carry-
graphic region. We have a wide variety of competitors that forwards, versus our net deferred tax assets related to temporary
include captive and independent finance companies, commercial timing differences, as the former is deduction from capital (the
banks and thrift institutions, industrial banks, community banks, numerator to the ratios), while the latter is included in risk-
leasing companies, hedge funds, insurance companies, mortgage weighted assets (the denominator). See “ Regulation — Banking
companies, manufacturers and vendors. Supervision and Regulation — Capital Requirements” section of
We compete on the basis of pricing (including the interest rates Item 1. Business Overview and for further discussion regarding
charged on loans or paid on deposits and the pricing for equip- the impact of deferred tax assets on regulatory capital.
ment leases), product terms and structure, the range of products We may be exposed to risk of environmental liability or claims
and services offered, and the quality of customer service (includ- for negligence, property damage, or personal injury when we
ing convenience and responsiveness to customer needs and take title to properties or lease certain equipment.
concerns). The ability to access and use technology is an increas-
In the course of our business, we may foreclose on and take title
ingly important competitive factor in the financial services
to real estate that contains or was used in the manufacture or
industry, and it is a critically important component to customer
processing of hazardous materials, or that is subject to other haz-
satisfaction as it affects our ability to deliver the right products
ardous risks. In addition, we may lease equipment to our
and services.
customers that is used to mine, develop, process, or transport
If we are unable to address the competitive pressures that we hazardous materials. As a result, we could be subject to environ-
face, we could lose market share. On the other hand, if we meet mental liabilities or claims for negligence, property damage, or
those competitive pressures, it is possible that we could incur sig- personal injury with respect to these properties or equipment.
nificant additional expense, experience lower returns due to We may be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties
compressed net finance revenue, and/or incur increased losses for property damage, personal injury, investigation, and clean-up
due to less rigorous risk standards. costs incurred by these parties in connection with environmental
contamination, accidents or other hazardous risks, or may be
required to investigate or clean up hazardous or toxic substances
or chemical releases at a property. The costs associated with
investigation or remediation activities could be substantial. In

addition, if we are the owner or former owner of a contaminated is a lack of preparedness on the part of national or regional emer-
site or equipment involved in a hazardous incident, we may be gency responders or on the part of other organizations and
subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages businesses that we deal with, particularly those that we depend
and costs resulting from environmental contamination, property upon but have no control over.
damage, personal injury or other hazardous risks emanating from
the property or related to the equipment. If we become subject We continually encounter technological change, and if we are
to significant environmental liabilities or claims for negligence, unable to implement new or upgraded technology when
property damage, or personal injury, our financial condition and required, it may have a material adverse effect on our business.
results of operations could be adversely affected. The financial services industry is continually undergoing rapid
technological change with frequent introduction of new
We rely on our systems, employees, and certain third party ven- technology-driven products and services. The effective use of
dors and service providers in conducting our operations, and technology increases efficiency and enables financial institutions
certain failures, including internal or external fraud, operational to better serve customers and to reduce costs. Our continued
errors, systems malfunctions, disasters, or terrorist activities, success depends, in part, upon our ability to address the needs
could materially adversely affect our operations. of our customers by using technology to provide products and
We are exposed to many types of operational risk, including the services that satisfy customer demands and create efficiencies in
risk of fraud by employees and outsiders, clerical and record- our operations. If we are unable to effectively implement new
keeping errors, and computer or telecommunications systems technology-driven products and services that allow us to remain
malfunctions. Our businesses depend on our ability to process a competitive or be successful in marketing these products and ser-
large number of increasingly complex transactions. If any of our vices to our customers, it may have a material adverse effect on
operational, accounting, or other data processing systems fail or our business.
have other significant shortcomings, we could be materially
adversely affected. We are similarly dependent on our employ- We could be adversely affected by information security
ees. We could be materially adversely affected if one of our breaches or cyber security attacks.
employees causes a significant operational break-down or failure, Information security risks for large financial institutions such as
either as a result of human error or intentional sabotage or CIT have generally increased in recent years, in part because of
fraudulent manipulation of our operations or systems. Third par- the proliferation of new technologies, the use of the Internet and
ties with which we do business, including vendors that provide telecommunications technologies to conduct financial transac-
internet access, portfolio servicing, deposit products, or security tions, and the increased sophistication and activities of organized
solutions for our operations, could also be sources of operational crime, hackers, terrorists, activists, and other external parties,
and information security risk to us, including from breakdowns, some of which may be linked to terrorist organizations or hostile
failures, or capacity constraints of their own systems or employ- foreign governments. Our operations rely on the secure process-
ees. Any of these occurrences could diminish our ability to ing, transmission and storage of confidential information in our
operate one or more of our businesses, or cause financial loss, computer systems and networks. Our businesses rely on our digi-
potential liability to clients, inability to secure insurance, reputa- tal technologies, computer and email systems, software, and
tional damage, or regulatory intervention, which could have a networks to conduct their operations. Our technologies, systems,
material adverse effect on our business. networks, and our customers’ devices may become the target of
We may also be subject to disruptions of our operating systems cyber attacks or information security breaches that could result in
arising from events that are wholly or partially beyond our con- the unauthorized release, gathering, monitoring, misuse, loss or
trol, which may include, for example, electrical or destruction of CIT’s or our customers’ confidential, proprietary
telecommunications outages, natural or man-made disasters, and other information, or otherwise disrupt CIT’s or its customers’
such as fires, earthquakes, hurricanes, floods, or tornados, dis- or other third parties’ business operations.
ease pandemics, or events arising from local or regional politics, Recently, there have been several well-publicized attacks on
including terrorist acts or international hostilities. Such disrup- retailers and financial services companies in which the perpetra-
tions may give rise to losses in service to clients and loss or tors gained unauthorized access to confidential information
liability to us. In addition, there is the risk that our controls and and customer data, often through the introduction of computer
procedures as well as business continuity and data security sys- viruses or malware, cyber attacks, phishing, or other means.
tems prove to be inadequate. The computer systems and There have also been a series of apparently related denial of
network systems we and others use could be vulnerable to service attacks on large financial services companies. In a denial
unforeseen problems. These problems may arise in both our of service attack, hackers flood commercial websites with
internally developed systems and the systems of third-party hard- extraordinarily high volumes of traffic, with the goal of
ware, software, and service providers. In addition, our computer disrupting the ability of commercial enterprises to process trans-
systems and network infrastructure present security risks, and actions and possibly making their websites unavailable to
could be susceptible to hacking, computer viruses, or identity customers for extended periods of time. We recently experi-
theft. Any such failure could affect our operations and could enced denial of service attacks that targeted a third party service
materially adversely affect our results of operations by requiring provider that provides software and customer services with
us to expend significant resources to correct the defect, as well respect to our online deposit taking activities, which resulted in
as by exposing us to litigation or losses not covered by insurance. temporary disruptions in customers’ ability to perform online
The adverse impact of disasters, terrorist activities, or interna- banking transactions, although no customer data was lost or
tional hostilities also could be increased to the extent that there compromised. Even if not directed at CIT specifically, attacks on
other entities with whom we do business or on whom we other- national presence, the outsourcing of some of our business
wise rely or attacks on financial or other institutions important to operations, and the continued uncertain global economic envi-
the overall functioning of the financial system could adversely ronment. As cyber threats continue to evolve, we may be
affect, directly or indirectly, aspects of our business. required to expend significant additional resources to continue to
Since January 1, 2012, we have not experienced any material modify or enhance our protective measures or to investigate and
information security breaches involving either proprietary or cus- remediate any information security vulnerabilities.
tomer information. However, if we experience cyber attacks or Disruptions or failures in the physical infrastructure or operating
other information security breaches in the future, either the Com- systems that support our businesses and customers, or cyber
pany or its customers may suffer material losses. Our risk and attacks or security breaches of the networks, systems or devices
exposure to these matters remains heightened because of, that our customers use to access our products and services could
among other things, the evolving nature of these threats, the result in customer attrition, regulatory fines, penalties or interven-
prominent size and scale of CIT and its role in the financial ser- tion, reputational damage, reimbursement or other
vices industry, our plans to continue to implement our online compensation costs, and/or additional compliance costs, any of
banking channel strategies and develop additional remote con- which could materially adversely affect our results of operations
nectivity solutions to serve our customers when and how they or financial condition.
want to be served, our expanded geographic footprint and inter-
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

There are no unresolved SEC staff comments.
Item 2. Properties
CIT primarily operates in North America, with additional locations in Europe, Latin America, and Asia. CIT occupies approximately 1.3 million
square feet of office space, the majority of which is leased.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings

CIT is currently involved, and from time to time in the future may it is both probable that a loss will occur and the amount of such
be involved, in a number of judicial, regulatory, and arbitration loss can be reasonably estimated. Based on currently available
proceedings relating to matters that arise in connection with the information, CIT believes that the results of Litigation that is cur-
conduct of its business (collectively, “Litigation”), certain of which rently pending, taken together, will not have a material adverse
Litigation matters are described in Note 22 — Contingencies of effect on the Company’s financial condition, but may be material
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data. In view of to the Company’s operating results or cash flows for any particu-
the inherent difficulty of predicting the outcome of Litigation lar period, depending in part on its operating results for that
matters, particularly when such matters are in their early stages or period. The actual results of resolving such matters may be sub-
where the claimants seek indeterminate damages, CIT cannot stantially higher than the amounts reserved.
state with confidence what the eventual outcome of the pending
For more information about pending legal proceedings, includ-
Litigation will be, what the timing of the ultimate resolution of
ing an estimate of certain reasonably possible losses in excess of
these matters will be, or what the eventual loss, fines, or penalties
reserved amounts, see Note 22 — Contingencies of Item 8.
related to each pending matter may be, if any. In accordance with
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
applicable accounting guidance, CIT establishes reserves for Liti-
gation when those matters present loss contingencies as to which
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

PART TWO
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Market Information — CIT’s common stock trades on the New The following tables set forth the high and low reported closing
York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) under the symbol “CIT.” prices for CIT’s common stock.
2014 2013
Common Stock High Low High Low
First Quarter $52.15 $45.46 $44.72 $39.04
Second Quarter $49.89 $41.52 $47.56 $40.88
Third Quarter $49.73 $43.50 $51.33 $46.84
Fourth Quarter $49.45 $44.15 $52.13 $47.21
Holders of Common Stock — As of February 6, 2014, there were Dividends — We declared the following dividends in 2014:
111,113 beneficial holders of common stock.
Declaration Date Per Share Dividend

January $0.10
April $0.10
July $0.15
October $0.15
On January 21, 2015, the Board of Directors declared a quarterly period from December 31, 2009 to December 31, 2014. The chart
cash dividend of $0.15 per share payable on February 27, 2015 to also shows the cumulative returns of the S&P 500 Index and S&P
shareholders of record on February 13, 2015. We declared a $0.10 Banks Index for the same period. The comparison assumes $100
cash dividend on our common stock during the 2013 fourth quar- was invested on December 31, 2009. Each of the indices shown
ter. There were no other dividends declared during 2013. assumes that all dividends paid were reinvested.
Shareholder Return — The following graph shows the annual
cumulative total shareholder return for common stock during the
CIT STOCK PERFORMANCE DATA
$250
$216.40
$200 $208.10
$205.05
$186.97
$150
$100
$50
$0
12/31/2009 12/31/2010 12/31/2011 12/31/2012 12/31/2013 12/31/2014

CIT $100.00 $170.59 $126.29 $139.95 $189.19 $216.40
S&P 500 $100.00 $115.06 $117.48 $136.26 $180.38 $205.05
S&P Banks $100.00 $119.84 $107.00 $132.74 $180.15 $208.10
S&P Financials $100.00 $112.13 $ 93.00 $119.73 $162.34 $186.97
Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation not require shareholder approval. Equity awards associated with
Plans — Our equity compensation plans in effect following the these plans are presented in the following table.
Effective Date were approved by the Bankruptcy Court and do
Number of Securities Number of Securities

to be Issued Weighted-Average Remaining Available for
Upon Exercise of Exercise Price of Future Issuance Under
Outstanding Options Outstanding Options Equity Compensation Plans
Equity compensation plan
approved by the Court 59,095 $31.23 5,185,306*
* Excludes the number of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options and 2,293,739 shares underlying outstanding awards granted to
employees and/or directors that are unvested and/or unsettled.
During 2014, we had no equity compensation plans that were not lion of common stock through June 30, 2015. Management
approved by the Court or by shareholders. For further informa- determined the timing and amount of shares repurchased under
tion on our equity compensation plans, including the weighted the share repurchase authorizations based on market conditions
average exercise price, see Item 8. Financial Statements and and other considerations. The repurchases were effected via
Supplementary Data, Note 20 — Retirement, Postretirement and open market purchases and through plans designed to comply
Other Benefit Plans. with Rule 10b5-1(c) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended. The repurchased common stock is held as treasury
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities — In January and April
shares and may be used for the issuance of shares under CIT’s
2014, the Board of Directors approved the repurchase of up to
employee stock plans.
$307 million and $300 million, respectively, of common stock
through December 31, 2014. On July 22, 2014, the Board of The following table provides information related to purchases by
Directors approved an additional repurchase of up to $500 mil- the Company of its common shares:
Total Number Approximate

of Shares Dollar Value
Purchased as Total Dollar of Shares that
Total Part of Amount May Yet be
Number Average the Publicly Purchased Purchased
of Shares Price Paid Announced Under the Under the
Purchased per Share Program Program Program
(dollars in millions) (dollars in millions)
2013(1) 4,006,941 $193.4 $ —
2014 – First Quarter Purchases(2) 2,905,348 $135.6
2014 – Second Quarter Purchases(2)(3) 9,409,798 $416.3
2014 – Third Quarter Purchases(3) 2,238,147 $105.9
(3)
2014 – Fourth Quarter Purchases
October 1–31, 2014 447,847 $45.76 447,847 $ 20.5
November 1–30, 2014 — $ — — —
December 1–31, 2014 2,066,508 $46.94 2,066,508 97.0
2,514,355 $46.73 2,514,355 $117.5
(3)
Year to date – December 31, 2014 17,067,648 $775.3 $326.6
(1)
Shares repurchased were subject to a $200 million total that expired on December 31, 2013.
(2) Shares repurchased were subject to a $607 million total that expired on December 31, 2014.
(3)
Remaining share repurchases are subject to a $500 million total that expires on June 30, 2015.
Through January 31, 2015, we repurchased an additional 4.7 mil- common stock under equity compensation plans and an
lion of our shares for an aggregate purchase price of $212 million. employee stock purchase plan, both of which are subject to regis-
After these purchases, $114 million remained of the authorized tration statements.
repurchase capacity that expires on June 30, 2015.
Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities — There were no sales of
common stock during 2014. However, there were issuances of
Item 5: Market for Registrant’s Common Equity

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

The following table sets forth selected consolidated financial Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about
information regarding our results of operations, balance sheets Market Risk and Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplemen-
and certain ratios. tary Data.
The data presented below is explained further in, and should be
read in conjunction with, Item 7. Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and
Select Data (dollars in millions)

At or for the Years Ended December 31,
2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
Select Statement of Operations Data
Net interest revenue $ 140.3 $ 194.3 $ (1,271.7) $ (532.3) $ 542.6
Provision for credit losses (100.1) (64.9) (51.4) (269.7) (802.1)
Total non-interest income 2,398.4 2,278.7 2,515.5 2,739.8 2,760.0
Total other expenses (1,757.8) (1,673.9) (1,607.8) (1,691.9) (1,756.4)
Income (loss) from continuing operations 1,077.5 644.4 (535.8) 83.9 502.9
Net income (loss) 1,130.0 675.7 (592.3) 14.8 521.3
Per Common Share Data
Diluted income (loss) per common share – continuing
operations $ 5.69 $ 3.19 $ (2.67) $ 0.42 $ 2.51
Diluted income (loss) per common share $ 5.96 $ 3.35 $ (2.95) $ 0.07 $ 2.60
Book value per common share $ 50.13 $ 44.78 $ 41.49 $ 44.27 $ 44.54
Tangible book value per common share $ 46.83 $ 42.98 $ 39.61 $ 42.23 $ 42.17
Dividends declared per common share $ 0.50 $ 0.10 – – –
Dividend payout ratio 8.4% 3.0% – – –
Performance Ratios
Return on average common stockholders’ equity 12.8% 7.8% (7.0)% 0.2% 6.0%
Net finance revenue as a percentage of average earning assets 4.25% 4.61% (0.09)% 2.09% 4.74%
Return on average continuing operations total assets 2.37% 1.56% (1.38)% 0.21% 1.08%
Total ending equity to total ending assets 18.9% 18.8% 18.9% 19.6% 17.4%
Balance Sheet Data
Loans including receivables pledged $19,495.0 $18,629.2 $17,153.1 $15,225.8 $16,612.9
Allowance for loan losses (346.4) (356.1) (379.3) (407.8) (416.2)
Operating lease equipment, net 14,930.4 13,035.4 12,411.7 12,006.4 11,155.0
Goodwill and intangible assets, net 571.3 334.6 345.9 345.9 355.6
Total cash and short-term investments 8,223.9 7,532.5 7,477.1 8,264.3 11,070.5
Assets of discontinued operation – 3,821.4 4,202.6 7,021.8 8,555.1
Total assets 47,880.0 47,139.0 44,012.0 45,263.4 51,453.4
Deposits 15,849.8 12,526.5 9,684.5 6,193.7 4,536.2
Long-term borrowings 18,455.8 18,484.5 18,330.9 21,743.9 29,303.9
Liabilities of discontinued operation – 3,277.6 3,648.8 4,595.4 4,798.4
Total common stockholders’ equity 9,068.9 8,838.8 8,334.8 8,883.6 8,929.0
Credit Quality
Non-accrual loans as a percentage of finance receivables 0.82% 1.29% 1.92% 4.61% 9.73%
Net charge-offs as a percentage of average finance receivables 0.52% 0.44% 0.46% 1.70% 2.07%
Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of finance receivables 1.78% 1.91% 2.21% 2.68% 2.51%
Financial Ratios
Tier 1 Capital Ratio 14.5% 16.7% 16.2% 18.8% 19.0%
Total Capital Ratio 15.2% 17.4% 17.0% 19.7% 19.9%
Average Balances(1) and Associated Income for the year ended: (dollars in millions)
December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013 December 31, 2012
Average Average Average Average Average Average
Balance Interest Rate (%) Balance Interest Rate (%) Balance Interest Rate (%)
Interest bearing deposits $ 5,343.0 $ 17.7 0.33% $ 5,531.6 $ 16.6 0.30% $ 6,420.1 $ 21.7 0.34%
Securities purchased under
agreements to resell 242.3 1.3 0.54% – – – – – –
Investment securities 1,667.8 16.5 0.99% 1,886.0 12.3 0.65% 1,316.7 10.5 0.80%
Loans (including held for sale)(2)(3)
U.S.(2) 16,759.1 905.1 5.88% 14,618.0 855.3 6.40% 12,403.4 953.5 8.51%
Non-U.S. 3,269.0 285.9 8.75% 4,123.6 371.0 9.00% 4,029.1 408.3 10.13%
Total loans(2) 20,028.1 1,191.0 6.38% 18,741.6 1,226.3 7.01% 16,432.5 1,361.8 8.94%
Total interest earning assets / interest
income(2)(3) 27,281.2 1,226.5 4.73% 26,159.2 1,255.2 5.04% 24,169.3 1,394.0 6.07%
Operating lease equipment, net
(including held for sale)(4)
U.S.(4) 7,755.0 689.6 8.89% 6,559.0 613.1 9.35% 6,139.0 596.9 9.72%
Non-U.S.(4) 7,022.3 590.9 8.41% 6,197.1 580.6 9.37% 6,299.0 651.3 10.34%
Total operating lease equipment,
net(4) 14,777.3 1,280.5 8.67% 12,756.1 1,193.7 9.36% 12,438.0 1,248.2 10.04%
Total earning assets(2) 42,058.5 $2,507.0 6.16% 38,915.3 $2,448.9 6.50% 36,607.3 $2,642.2 7.46%
Non interest earning assets
Cash due from banks 945.0 522.1 441.2
Allowance for loan losses (349.6) (367.8) (405.1)
All other non-interest earning
assets 2,720.5 2,215.3 2,228.2
Assets of discontinued operation 1,167.2 4,016.3 5,420.7
Total Average Assets $46,541.6 $45,301.2 $44,292.3
Average Liabilities
Borrowings
Deposits $ 13,955.8 $ 231.0 1.66% $ 11,212.1 $ 179.8 1.60% $ 7,707.9 $ 152.5 1.98%
Long-term borrowings(5) 18,582.0 855.2 4.60% 18,044.5 881.1 4.88% 19,964.5 2,513.2 12.59%
Total interest-bearing liabilities 32,537.8 $1,086.2 3.34% 29,256.6 $1,060.9 3.63% 27,672.4 $2,665.7 9.63%
Credit balances of factoring clients 1,368.5 1,258.6 1,194.4
Other non-interest bearing liabilities 2,791.7 2,638.2 2,642.7
Liabilities of discontinued operation 997.2 3,474.2 4,293.8
Noncontrolling interests 7.0 9.2 5.0
Stockholders’ equity 8,839.4 8,664.4 8,484.0
Total Average Liabilities and
Stockholders’ Equity $46,541.6 $45,301.2 $44,292.3
Net revenue spread 2.82% 2.87% (2.17)%
Impact of non-interest bearing
sources 0.67% 0.82% 2.10%
Net revenue/yield on earning
assets(2) $1,420.8 3.49% $1,388.0 3.69% $ (23.5) (0.07)%
(1)
The average balances presented are derived based on month end balances during the year. Tax exempt income was not significant in any of the years pre-
sented. Average rates are impacted by FSA accretion and amortization.
(2)
The rate presented is calculated net of average credit balances for factoring clients.
(3)
Non-accrual loans and related income are included in the respective categories.
(4)
Operating lease rental income is a significant source of revenue; therefore, we have presented the rental revenues net of depreciation and net of Mainte-
nance and other operating lease expenses.
(5)
Interest and average rates include FSA accretion, including amounts accelerated due to redemptions or extinguishments, and accelerated original issue
discount on debt extinguishment related to the GSI facility.
Interest income on interest bearing deposits, securities pur- marily U.S. Treasury securities, U.S. Government Agency
chased under agreements to resell and investment securities was securities, and supranational and foreign government securities
not significant in any of the years presented. Average interest that typically mature in 91 days or less. In addition, during 2014
bearing deposits was down reflecting the investment of cash in we initiated the investment in securities purchased under agree-
various types of investment securities to earn a higher yield. ments to resell.
Investments are typically a combination of high quality debt, pri-
Item 6: Selected Financial Data

Average rates on loans and operating lease equipment decreased from As a result of our debt redemption activities and the increased
2013 and 2012, due to new business yields that are generally lower than proportion of deposits to total funding, we reduced weighted
maturing loans, sales of higher-yielding portfolios, lower suspended average coupon rates of outstanding deposits and long-term
depreciation, lower yield-related fees and lower FSA accretion. While borrowings to 3.11% at December 31, 2014 from 3.33% at
interest income on loans benefited in 2014 from higher balances, inter- December 31, 2013 and 3.52% at December 31, 2012.
est income was down from 2013 and 2012 reflecting lower FSA
The weighted average coupon rate of long-term borrowings at
accretion, which totaled $31 million in 2014, $61 million in 2013 and
December 31, 2014 was 4.32%, compared to 4.47% at
$212 million in 2012, change in product mix in NACF and sales of
December 31, 2013 and 4.45% at December 31, 2012. Long-term
higher-yielding portfolios in NSP.
borrowings consist of unsecured and secured debt. The weighted
Net operating lease revenue was primarily generated from the average coupon rate of unsecured long-term borrowings at
commercial air and rail portfolios. Net operating lease revenue December 31, 2014 was 5.00%, compared to 5.11% at
increased in 2014 compared to 2013, as the benefit of increased December 31, 2013 and 5.12% at December 31, 2012. The
assets from the growing aerospace and rail portfolios offset lower weighted average coupon rate of secured long-term borrowings
rental rates on aircraft, higher depreciation expense reflecting at December 31, 2014 was 3.10%, compared to 3.12% at
asset growth, and increased maintenance and other operating December 31, 2013 and 3.23% at December 31, 2012.
lease expenses. Net operating lease revenue decreased in 2013
Deposits have increased, both in dollars and proportion of total
from 2012. Higher revenues, from the growth in the aerospace
CIT funding to 46% at December 31, 2014, compared to 40% at
and rail portfolios, were more than offset by the increased depre-
December 31, 2013 and 35% at December 31, 2012. The
ciation and higher maintenance and operating lease expenses.
weighted average coupon rate of total CIT deposits at
Rental income in 2014 increased from 2013 and 2012, reflecting December 31, 2014 was 1.69%, compared to 1.65% at
the growing portfolio. On average, lease renewal rates in the rail December 31, 2013 and 1.75% at December 31, 2012.
portfolio were re-pricing slightly higher, while the commercial air-
The table below disaggregates CIT’s year-over-year changes
craft portfolio had been re-pricing slightly lower.
(2014 versus 2013 and 2013 versus 2012) in net interest revenue
Accretion of FSA discounts on long-term borrowings increased and operating lease margins as presented in the preceding
interest expense by $53 million, $69 million and $1.5 billion for tables between volume (level of lending or borrowing) and rate
the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. (rates charged customers or incurred on borrowings). See “Net
Included in these balances are accelerated amounts related to Finance Revenue” section for further discussion.
the repayment of certain debt securities. The 2012 accelerated
debt FSA accretion resulted from repayments of $15 billion of
Series A and C Notes that was repaid in the first three quarters
and $1.0 billion of secured debt repaid in the last quarter of 2012.
Changes in Net Finance Revenue (dollars in millions)

2014 Compared to 2013 2013 Compared to 2012
Increase (decrease) Increase (decrease)
due to change in: due to change in:
Volume Rate Net Volume Rate Net
Interest Income
Loans (including held for sale)
U.S. $125.9 $ (76.1) $ 49.8 $141.7 $ (239.9) $ (98.2)
Non-U.S. (74.8) (10.3) (85.1) 8.5 (45.8) (37.3)
Total loans 51.1 (86.4) (35.3) 150.2 (285.7) (135.5)
Interest bearing deposits (0.6) 1.7 1.1 (2.7) (2.4) (5.1)
Securities purchased under agreements to resell 1.3 – 1.3 – – –
Investments (2.2) 6.4 4.2 3.7 (1.9) 1.8
Interest income 49.6 (78.3) (28.7) 151.2 (290.0) (138.8)
Operating lease equipment, net (including held
for sale)(1) 175.7 (88.9) 86.8 29.7 (84.2) (54.5)
Interest Expense
Interest on deposits 45.5 5.7 51.2 56.1 (28.8) 27.3
Interest on long-term borrowings(2) 24.7 (50.6) (25.9) (93.7) (1,538.4) (1,632.1)
Interest expense 70.2 (44.9) 25.3 (37.6) (1,567.2) (1,604.8)
Net finance revenue $155.1 $(122.3) $ 32.8 $218.5 $ 1,193.0 $ 1,411.5
(1)
Operating lease rental income is a significant source of revenue; therefore, we have presented the net revenues.
(2)
Includes acceleration of FSA accretion resulting from redemptions or extinguishments and accelerated original issue discount on debt extinguishment
related to the TRS facility.
Average Daily Long-term Borrowings Balances and Rates (dollars in millions)

Years Ended
Average Average Average Average Average Average
Unsecured Balance Interest Rate (%) Balance Interest Rate (%) Balance Interest Rate (%)
Revolving Credit Facility(1) $ – $ 14.1 – $ – $ 15.6 – $ 284.1 $ 18.6 6.56%
Senior Unsecured Notes 12,382.9 635.0 5.13% 12,107.0 660.0 5.45% 12,957.2 1,613.8 12.45%
Secured borrowings 6,184.0 206.1 3.33% 5,938.8 205.5 3.46% 6,121.9 197.0 3.22%
Series A Notes – – – – – – 856.2 683.8 79.86%
Total Long-term Borrowings $18,566.9 $855.2 4.61% $18,045.8 $881.1 4.88% $20,219.4 $2,513.2 12.43%
(1)
Interest expense and average rate includes Facility commitment fees and amortization of Facility deal costs.
Item 6: Selected Financial Data

Item 7: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results

of Operations and
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

BACKGROUND SEGMENT REORGANIZATION
CIT Group Inc., together with its subsidiaries (“we”, “our”, “CIT” or the In December 2013, we announced organization changes that became
“Company”) has provided financial solutions to its clients since its for- effective January 1, 2014. In conjunction with management’s plans to
mation in 1908. We provide financing, leasing and advisory services (i) realign and simplify its businesses and organizational structure,
principally to middle market companies in a wide variety of industries (ii) streamline and consolidate certain business processes to achieve
primarily in North America, and equipment financing and leasing solu- greater operating efficiencies, and (iii) leverage CIT’s operational capa-
tions to the transportation industry worldwide. We had over $35 billion bilities for the benefit of its clients and customers, CIT manages its
of financing and leasing assets at December 31, 2014. CIT became a business and reports its financial results in three operating segments
bank holding company (“BHC”) in December 2008 and a financial (the “New Segments”): (1) Transportation & International Finance
holding company (“FHC”) in July 2013. (“TIF”); (2) North American Commercial Finance (“NACF”);
CIT is regulated by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Sys- and (3) Non-Strategic Portfolios (“NSP”). See Note 25 — Business
tem (“FRB”) and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (“FRBNY”) Segment Information in Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplemen-
under the U.S. Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. CIT Bank (the tary Data for additional information relating to the reorganization.
“Bank”), a wholly-owned subsidiary, is a Utah state chartered bank DISCONTINUED OPERATION
located in Salt Lake City that offers commercial financing and leasing
products as well as a suite of savings options and is subject to regula- On April 25, 2014, the Company completed the sale of the student
tion by the Federal Depository Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) and the lending business, which consisted of a portfolio of U.S. Government-
Utah Department of Financial Institutions (“UDFI”). guaranteed student loans that was in run-off, along with certain
secured debt and servicing rights. As a result, the student lending busi-
On July 22, 2014, we announced that we had entered into a definitive ness is reported as a discontinued operation and all data included has
agreement and plan of merger to acquire IMB Holdco LLC, the parent been adjusted to reflect this presentation. Income from the discontin-
company of OneWest Bank, N.A. (“OneWest Bank”) for approximately ued operation of $52 million for 2014 reflected the benefit of proceeds
$3.4 billion (the “OneWest Transaction”), consisting of approximately received in excess of the net carrying value of assets and liabilities sold.
$2 billion in cash and 31.3 million shares of CIT Group Inc. common stock,
which had a value of $1.4 billion at the time of the announcement, but will The business was previously included in the NSP segment. During the
vary depending upon the share price at the time of closing. IMB Holdco is 2013 fourth quarter, management determined that it no longer had the
regulated by the FRB and OneWest Bank is regulated by the Office of the intent to hold these assets until maturity and transferred the portfolio
Comptroller of the Currency, U.S. Department of the Treasury (“OCC”). to assets held for sale (“AHFS”). See Note 2 — Acquisition and Dispo-
The OneWest Transaction is subject to certain customary closing condi- sition Activities in Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
tions and regulatory approval by the FRB and the OCC, but not for additional information relating to the discontinued operation.
shareholder vote. See Pending Acquisition included in Part I Item 1. The following sections reflect the New Segments and discontinued
Business Overview for further discussion of the transaction. operation. Unless specifically noted, the discussions and data pre-
sented throughout the following sections reflect CIT balances on a
The consolidated financial statements include the effects of adopting
continuing operations basis.
Fresh Start Accounting (“FSA”) upon the Company’s emergence from
bankruptcy on December 10, 2009, based on a convenience date of 2014 FINANCIAL OVERVIEW
December 31, 2009, as required by U.S. GAAP. Accretion and amortiza-
As discussed below, our 2014 operating results reflected increased
tion of certain FSA adjustments are included in the consolidated
business activity that resulted in asset growth, continued credit quality
Statements of Operations, primarily impacting discussions on Net
metrics at cyclical lows and strategic business decisions that elevated
Finance Revenue, and were more prominent in prior years. See Fresh
operating expenses.
Start Accounting and Note 1 — Business and Summary of Significant
Accounting Policies in Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Net income for 2014 totaled $1,130 million, $5.96 per diluted share,
Data for further discussion. compared to $676 million, $3.35 per diluted share for 2013 and a net
loss of $592 million for 2012, $2.95 per diluted share. Income from con-
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and tinuing operations (after taxes) for 2014 totaled $1,078 million, $5.69 per
Results of Operations” and “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures diluted share, compared to $644 million, $3.19 per diluted share for
about Market Risk” contain financial terms that are relevant to our busi- 2013 and a loss of $536 million, $2.67 per diluted share, in 2012.
ness and a glossary of key terms used is included in Part I Item 1.
Business Overview. Net income for 2014 included $419 million, $2.21 per diluted share, of
income tax benefits associated with partial reversals of valuation allow-
Management uses certain non-GAAP financial measures in its analysis ances on certain domestic and international deferred tax assets. In
of the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. addition, the tax provision benefited by approximately $30 million
See “Non-GAAP Financial Measurements” for a reconciliation of these related to the acquisition of Direct Capital. Net income also reflected
to comparable financial measures based on accounting principles gen- continued high level of impairment charges related to the progress
erally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”).
made exiting certain portfolios. The net loss in 2012 included $1.3 bil- sale of higher-yielding asset portfolios, and declines in net FSA
lion (pre-tax) of debt redemption charges and OID acceleration, accretion, partially offset by improved funding costs. While other
resulting from significant extinguishments of high cost debt. institutions may use net interest margin (“NIM”), defined as inter-
Income from continuing operations, before provision for income est income less interest expense, we discuss NFM, which includes
taxes totaled $681 million for 2014, down from $734 million for operating lease rental revenue and depreciation expense, due to
2013 and improved from a pre-tax loss in 2012. As detailed in the their significant impact on revenue and expense. Net operating
following table, adjusted pre-tax income, excluding debt lease revenue was up modestly from 2013 and 2012, as increased
redemption charges and loss on debt extinguishments(1), was revenue earned on higher average assets and consistently high
down from both 2013 and 2012. The 2014 pre-tax results were aircraft and railcar utilization rates offset higher depreciation
dampened by impairment charges on AHFS, mostly related to expense and maintenance and other operating lease expenses
international assets in the NSP segment, and an increase in the and lower aerospace remarketing lease rates.
provision for credit losses. The 2013 decline from 2012 reflected a Provision for credit losses for 2014 was $100 million, up from $65 mil-
lower benefit from FSA accretion and a decline in other income, lion last year and $51 million in 2012, reflecting lower recoveries and
partially offset by improved funding costs. higher non-specific reserves, primarily due to asset growth. The allow-
The following table presents pre-tax results adjusted for debt ance for loan losses as a percent of finance receivables was 1.78%,
redemption charges, a non-GAAP measurement. 1.91% and 2.21% as of December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
Pre-tax Income (Loss) from Continuing Operations Excluding Other income of $305 million decreased from $381 million in 2013 and
Debt Redemption Charges (dollars in millions) $615 million in 2012, largely due to reduced gains on assets sold and
Years Ended December 31, higher losses on derivative and foreign currency exchange.
2014 2013 2012
Operating expenses were $942 million, down from $970 million in 2013
Pre-tax income/(loss) from
and up from $894 million in 2012. Operating expenses excluding
continuing operations $680.8 $734.2 $ (415.4)
restructuring costs(5) were $910 million, $933 million and $871 million for
Accelerated FSA net discount/
(premium) on debt 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The decline from 2013 was due to
extinguishments and repurchases 34.7 34.6 1,294.9 the $50 million tax agreement settlement charge in that year. Absent
Debt related – loss on debt that charge, operating expenses excluding restructuring costs
extinguishments 3.5 – 61.2 increased by 3% from 2013, as a result of integration-related costs and
Accelerated OID on debt additional employee costs associated with the Direct Capital and
extinguishments related to the Nacco acquisitions, which were partially offset by expense reduction
GSI facility (42.0) (5.2) (6.9) initiatives. Headcount at December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 was
Debt redemption charges and approximately 3,360, 3,240, and 3,560, respectively, with the current
OID acceleration (3.8) 29.4 1,349.2 year increase reflecting the headcount associated with the noted
Pre-tax income from continuing acquisitions.
operations – excluding debt
redemption charges and OID Provision for income taxes was a benefit of $398 million in 2014 reflecting
acceleration(1) $677.0 $763.6 $ 933.8 $375 million relating to a partial reversal of the U.S. Federal deferred tax
Net finance revenue(2) (“NFR”) was $1.4 billion in 2014, slightly up from asset valuation allowance, approximately $44 million related to the reversal
2013 and up from ($23) million in 2012. Growth in Average earning of valuation allowance for certain international net deferred tax assets,
assets(3) (“AEA”) and improved funding costs increased NFR in 2014 approximately $30 million benefit related to the acquisition of Direct Capi-
and 2013. The negative NFR for 2012 was driven by the acceleration of tal, and net income tax expense on state and international earnings.
FSA discount accretion resulting from extinguishments of over $15 bil- Beginning in 2015, the Company expects to report deferred income tax
lion high cost debt. AEA was $33.4 billion in 2014, up from $30.1 billion expense on its domestic earnings after the above mentioned partial
in 2013 and from $27.6 billion in 2012. release of its domestic valuation allowances on net deferred tax assets.
Management expects that this will result in a global effective tax rate in the
Net Finance Margin (“NFM”) for 2014 was at the high-end of our
range of 30-35%. The provision for income taxes was $84 million for 2013
near-term outlook benefiting from lower funding costs and con-
and $117 million for 2012, as described in “Income Taxes” section.
tinued prepayment benefits, which was offset by portfolio
re-pricing. NFM excluding debt redemption charges(4) was 4.23% Total assets of continuing operations(6) at December 31, 2014 were
for 2014, down from 4.71% for 2013 and 4.58% in 2012. The $47.9 billion, up from $43.3 billion at December 31, 2013 and $39.8 bil-
reduction from 2013 primarily reflects portfolio re-pricing, the lion at December 31, 2012. Financing and leasing assets (“FLA”)
(1)
Pre-tax income from continuing operations excluding debt redemption charges and loss on debt extinguishments is a non-GAAP measure. See “Non-
GAAP Financial Measurements” for reconciliation of non-GAAP to GAAP financial information.
(2)
Net finance revenue is a non-GAAP measure; see “Non-GAAP Financial Measurements” for a reconciliation of non-GAAP to GAAP financial information.
(3)
Average earning assets is a non-GAAP measure; see “Non-GAAP Financial Measurements” for a reconciliation of non-GAAP to GAAP financial information.
(4)
Net finance margin excluding debt redemption charges is a non-GAAP measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measurements” for reconciliation of non-GAAP
to GAAP financial information. Debt redemption charges include accelerated fresh start accounting debt discount amortization, accelerated original issue
discount (“OID”) on debt extinguishment related to the GSI facility, and prepayment costs.
(5)
Operating expenses excluding restructuring charges is a non-GAAP measure; see “Non-GAAP Financial Measurements” for reconciliation of non-GAAP to
GAAP financial information.
(6)
Total assets from continuing operations is a non-GAAP measure. See “Non-GAAP Measurements” for reconciliation of non-GAAP to GAAP
financial information.
Item 7: Management’s Discussion and Analysis

increased to $35.6 billion, up from $32.7 billion at December 31, - We made significant progress exiting low-return portfolios in
2013, and $30.2 billion at December 31, 2012, as new origination 2014. We exited all the sub-scale portfolios in Asia, Europe and
volume and business acquisitions more than offset collections several in Latin America, as well as our Small Business Lending
and sales. Cash totaled $7.1 billion, compared to $6.0 billion at (“SBL”) and Student Loan (“SLX”) portfolios. In addition, we
December 31, 2013 and $6.7 billion at December 31, 2012. Invest- sold a TIF international loan portfolio in the U.K., and
ment securities and securities purchased under resale transferred another to AHFS.
agreements totaled $2.2 billion at December 31, 2014, compared
3. Expand Bank Assets and Funding
to $2.6 billion and $1.1 billion at December 31, 2013 and 2012,
respectively. During February 2015, $1.2 billion of cash was used CIT Bank funds most of our U.S. lending and leasing volume and
to repay maturing unsecured notes. continues to expand on-line deposit offerings.
Credit metrics remained at or near cycle lows. Non-accrual bal- - Total assets were $21.1 billion at December 31, 2014, up from
ances declined to $161 million (0.82% of finance receivables) at $16.1 billion at December 31, 2013, reflecting new business
December 31, 2014 from $241 million (1.29%) a year ago and volume and the acquisition of Direct Capital. CIT Bank funded
$330 million (1.92%) at December 31, 2012. Net charge-offs in $7.8 billion of new business volume in 2014, up over 9% from
2014 increased due to lower recoveries and loans transferred to 2013.
AHFS. Net charge-offs were $99 million (0.52% of average finance - Deposits at year end were $15.9 billion, up from $12.5 billion at
receivables (AFR)) and included $43 million related to loans trans- December 31, 2013. The weighted average rate on outstanding
ferred to AHFS, compared to $81 million (0.44%), which included deposits was 1.63% at December 31, 2014, up from 1.55% at
$39 million related to loans transferred to AHFS, in 2013 and December 31, 2013, primarily due to an increase in term
$74 million (0.46%) in 2012. deposits with longer maturities. Online deposits grew to 56% of
total deposits from 49% in 2013.
2014 PRIORITIES
- On July 22, 2014, CIT announced that it entered into a
Our priorities in 2014 focused on achieving our profitability targets by definitive agreement and plan of merger with IMB Holdco LLC,
growing earning assets and managing expenses, growing CIT Bank the parent company of OneWest Bank, N.A. (“OneWest Bank”),
assets and deposits, and returning capital to our shareholders. for $3.4 billion in cash and stock. At December 31, 2014,
1. Grow Earning Assets OneWest Bank had approximately 70 branches in Southern
California, with nearly $22 billion of assets and over $14 billion
We grew earning assets, organically and through acquisitions, of deposits.
by focusing on existing products and markets as well as
newer initiatives. 4. Continue to Return Capital
- Financing and leasing assets (“FLA”) totaled $35.6 billion, up We continue to prudently deploy our capital, as well as return
from $32.7 billion at December 31, 2013. TIF and NACF capital to our shareholders through share repurchases and divi-
comprise the vast majority of the assets and totaled $35.3 dends, which totaled approximately $870 million in 2014, while
billion, up $3.9 billion from December 31, 2013, driven by solid maintaining strong capital ratios.
origination volumes, supplemented by $1.2 billion of financing - During 2014, we repurchased over 17 million of our shares for
and leasing assets from acquisitions (at the time of the an aggregate purchase price of $775 million, at an average
acquisitions). NSP makes up the remaining balance of FLA, price of $45.42. Through January 31, 2015, we repurchased an
which declined $0.9 billion during 2014, and is expected to additional 4.7 million shares for an aggregate purchase price of
continue to decline as portfolios are sold or liquidated. $212 million.
2. Achieve Profit Targets - In 2014, the Board of Directors approved share repurchases in
The 2014 pre-tax return on AEA was 2.04%, slightly above our aggregate of $1.1 billion. After the 2015 purchases, $114 million
near-term outlook of approximately 2.00%. remained of the authorized repurchase capacity that expires on
June 30, 2015.
- NFM of 4.25% was at the high end of our near-term outlook
range of 3.75%-4.25%, benefiting from lower funding costs, - We paid dividends of approximately $95 million in 2014. During
suspended depreciation, interest recoveries and prepayments, 2014 we increased our quarterly dividend by 50% to $0.15 per
but pressured by portfolio re-pricing. share and on January 21, 2015, the Board approved CIT’s
quarterly cash dividend of $0.15 per share, payable in
- Other Income remained within our near-term outlook range of February 2015.
0.75%-1.00% but was impacted by impairment charges on AHFS.
- Operating expenses were $942 million, including restructuring 2015 PRIORITIES
charges of $31 million. Excluding restructuring charges,
During 2015, we will focus on continuing to create long term
operating expenses were 2.73% of AEA, above the near-term
value for shareholders.
outlook range of 2.00%-2.50%, but improved from 2013. 2014
included costs associated with our Non-Strategic Portfolios as Specific business objectives established for 2015 include:
well as elevated costs from our strategic repositioning, - Expand Our Commercial Banking Franchise — We will work to
including the Direct Capital and Nacco acquisitions, the complete and integrate the OneWest Bank acquisition and
OneWest integration planning and international exits. enhance our commercial banking operations.
- Maintain Strong Risk Management Practices — We will - Realize embedded value — We will focus on enhancing our
continue to maintain credit discipline focused on maintaining economic returns, which would improve the utilization of our U.S.
appropriate risk-adjusted returns through the business cycle NOL, thereby reducing the net deferred tax asset, and increase
and continue enhancements in select areas for SIFI Readiness. regulatory capital.
- Grow Business Franchises — We will concentrate our growth on - Return Excess Capital — We plan to prudently return capital to
building franchises that meet or exceed our risk adjusted return our shareholders through share repurchases and dividends,
hurdles and improve profitability by exiting non-strategic while maintaining strong capital ratios.
portfolios (mainly Mexico and Brazil, and the equipment
finance business in the U.K.).
PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS
The following chart reflects key performance indicators evaluated by management and used throughout this management discussion and analysis:
KEY PERFORMANCE METRICS MEASUREMENTS
Asset Generation — to originate new business and grow - New business volumes; and
earning assets. - Financing and leasing assets balances.
Revenue Generation — lend money at rates in excess of cost of - Net finance revenue and other income;
borrowing and consistent with risk profile of obligor, earn rentals - Net finance margin;
on the equipment we lease commensurate with the risk, and - Asset yields and funding costs; and
generate other revenue streams. - Operating lease revenue as a percentage of average operating
lease equipment.
Credit Risk Management — accurately evaluate credit - Net charge-offs, balances and as a percentage of AFR;
worthiness of customers, maintain high-quality assets and - Non-accrual loans, balances and as a percentage of loans;
balance income potential with loss expectations. - Classified assets and delinquencies balances; and
- Loan loss reserve, balance and as a percentage of loans.
Equipment and Residual Risk Management — appropriately - Equipment utilization;

evaluate collateral risk in leasing transactions and remarket or - Market value of equipment relative to book value; and
sell equipment at lease termination. - Gains and losses on equipment sales.
Expense Management — maintain efficient operating platforms - Operating expenses and trends;
and related infrastructure. - Operating expenses as a percentage of AEA; and
- Gross revenue as a percentage of AEA.
Profitability — generate income and appropriate returns to - Net income per common share (EPS);
shareholders. - Net income and pre-tax income, each as a percentage of
average earning assets (ROA); and
- Pre-tax income as a percentage of average tangible common
equity (ROTCE).
Capital Management — maintain a strong capital position. - Tier 1 and Total capital ratios; and
- Tier 1 capital as a percentage of adjusted average assets;
(“Tier 1 Leverage Ratio”).
Liquidity Management — maintain access to ample funding at - Levels of cash, securities purchased under resale agreements
competitive rates to meet obligations as they come due. and certain short term investment securities;
- Committed and available funding facilities;
- Debt maturity profile; and
- Debt ratings.
Manage Market Risk — measure and manage risk to income - Net Interest Income Sensitivity; and
statement and economic value of enterprise due to movements - Economic Value of Equity (EVE).
in interest and foreign currency exchange rates.

NET FINANCE REVENUE
The following tables present management’s view of consolidated NFR and NFM and includes revenues from loans and leased equipment,
net of interest expense and depreciation, in dollars and as a percent of AEA.
Net Finance Revenue(1) and Net Finance Margin (dollars in millions)
Years Ended December 31,
2014 2013 2012
Interest income $ 1,226.5 $ 1,255.2 $ 1,394.0
Rental income on operating leases 2,093.0 1,897.4 1,900.8
Finance revenue 3,319.5 3,152.6 3,294.8
Interest expense (1,086.2) (1,060.9) (2,665.7)
Depreciation on operating lease equipment (615.7) (540.6) (513.2)
Maintenance and other operating lease expenses (196.8) (163.1) (139.4)
Net finance revenue $ 1,420.8 $ 1,388.0 $ (23.5)
Average Earning Assets(1)(2) (“AEA”) $33,394.7 $30,122.5 $27,608.6
As a % of AEA:
Interest income 3.67% 4.16% 5.05%
Rental income on operating leases 6.27% 6.30% 6.88%
Finance revenue 9.94% 10.46% 11.93%
Interest expense (3.25)% (3.52)% (9.66)%
Depreciation on operating lease equipment (1.85)% (1.79)% (1.86)%
Maintenance and other operating lease expenses (0.59)% (0.54)% (0.50)%
Net finance margin 4.25% 4.61% (0.09)%
(1)
NFR and AEA are non-GAAP measures; see “Non-GAAP Financial Measurements” sections for a reconciliation of non-GAAP to GAAP financial information.
(2)
AEA are less than comparable balances displayed later in this document in ‘Select Data’ (Average Balances) due to the exclusion of deposits with banks and
other investments and the inclusion of credit balances of factoring clients.
NFR and NFM are key metrics used by management to measure the NFR increased modestly from 2013, reflecting higher earning
profitability of our lending and leasing assets. NFR includes interest assets, which offset compression on portfolio yields as new busi-
and yield-related fee income on our loans and capital leases, rental ness yields are generally lower than yields on maturing loans. The
income and depreciation, maintenance and other operating lease improvements from 2012 to 2013 was largely due to the negative
expenses from our operating lease equipment, interest and dividend impact of significantly higher debt FSA discount accretion in 2012
income on cash and investments, as well as funding costs. Since our that resulted from repayments of high cost debt. The adjust-
asset composition includes a high level of operating lease equipment ments, accelerated debt FSA accretion and accelerated OID on
(43% of AEA for the year ended December 31, 2014), NFM is a more debt extinguishment related to the GSI facility (“accelerated OID
appropriate metric for CIT than net interest margin (“NIM”) (a common accretion”), are referred to as “accelerated debt FSA and OID
metric used by other BHCs), as NIM does not fully reflect the earnings accretion”. As detailed in the following table, absent accelerated
of our portfolio because it includes the impact of debt costs on all our debt FSA and OID accretion and prepayment costs, adjusted
assets but excludes the net revenue (rental income less depreciation) NFR in 2014 was flat compared to 2013 and up from 2012, ben-
from operating leases. efiting from lower funding costs and higher commercial assets.
The following table reflects NFR and NFM, before and after accelerated debt FSA and OID accretion and prepayment costs.
Adjusted NFR(1) ($) and NFM(1) (%) (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
NFR / NFM $1,420.8 4.25% $1,388.0 4.61% $ (23.5) (0.09)%
Accelerated FSA net discount/(premium) on debt
extinguishments and repurchases 34.7 0.10% 34.6 0.12% 1,294.9 4.69%
Accelerated OID on debt extinguishments related to
the GSI facility (42.0) (0.12)% (5.2) (0.02)% (6.9) (0.02)%
Adjusted NFR and NFM $1,413.5 4.23% $1,417.4 4.71% $1,264.5 4.58%
(1)
Adjusted NFR and NFM are non-GAAP measures; see “Non-GAAP Financial Measurements” for a reconciliation of non-GAAP to GAAP financial
information.
NFM and adjusted NFM declined from 2013 as margin compres- - Lower funding costs at December 31, 2013 resulted from our
sion and sales of higher yielding assets offset lower debt costs. liability management actions, which included paying off high
cost debt in 2012 and increasing the proportion of deposits in
- Finance revenue rose in 2014 on increased earning assets.
our funding mix, as discussed further below.
However, the margin trends reflect repricing at lower yields, a
decline in benefit from FSA accretion and the sale in 2013 of a - Net FSA accretion (excluding accelerated FSA on debt
higher-yielding Dell Europe portfolio (within NSP), which extinguishments and repurchases noted in the above table)
benefited 2013 primarily from suspended depreciation on increased NFR by $212 million in 2013 and $238 million in 2012.
operating leases. AEA increased 11% from 2013. FSA accretion
Accretion of FSA discounts on long-term borrowings increased
totaled $31 million in 2014 and $61 million in 2013. The
interest expense by $53 million, $69 million and $1.5 billion for
remaining accretable discount was not significant at
the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
December 31, 2014. See Fresh Start Accounting section later in
Included in these balances are accelerated amounts. The 2014
this document.
accelerated debt FSA accretion mostly resulted from the repay-
- Funding costs declined. Weighted average coupon rate of ment of secured debt under the GSI facility, while the 2013
outstanding deposits and long-term borrowings was 3.11% at accelerated debt FSA accretion resulted from the repayment of
December 31, 2014, down from 3.33% at December 31, 2013, as senior unsecured notes issued under our InterNotes retail note
the portion of our funding derived from deposits increased to program. The 2012 accelerated debt FSA accretion resulted from
46% from 40% at December 31, 2013. repayments of $15 billion of Series A and C Notes in the first
three quarters and $1.0 billion of secured debt in the last quarter
- NFM reflects the mentioned impacts to finance revenue and lower
of 2012. At December 31, 2014, the remaining FSA discount on
debt costs. During 2014, high levels of interest recoveries and
long-term borrowings was not significant.
prepayments continued to benefit NFM. NFM also benefited,
though at a lower level, from suspended depreciation on operating As a result of our debt redemption activities and the increased
lease equipment held for sale, as depreciation is not recorded while proportion of deposits to total funding, we reduced weighted
this equipment is held for sale (detailed further below). As we average coupon rates of outstanding deposits and long-term
complete the NSP portfolio sales and aerospace asset sales to borrowings to 3.11% at December 31, 2014 from 3.33% at
TC-CIT Aviation joint venture, the benefit to NFM from suspended December 31, 2013 and 3.52% at December 31, 2012.
depreciation will diminish.
The weighted average coupon rate of long-term borrowings at
The 2013 NFM was up from 2012, primarily reflecting lower accel- December 31, 2014 was 4.32%, compared to 4.47% at
erated debt FSA accretion while adjusted NFM improved over December 31, 2013 and 4.45% at December 31, 2012. Long-term
the 2012 margin on benefits from lower funding costs, continued borrowings consist of unsecured and secured debt. The weighted
high levels of interest recoveries and suspended depreciation, average coupon rate of unsecured long-term borrowings at
partially offset by lower FSA loan accretion and yield compression December 31, 2014 was 5.00%, compared to 5.11% at
on certain assets. December 31, 2013 and 5.12% at December 31, 2012. The
weighted average coupon rate of secured long-term borrowings
- Lower finance revenue in 2013 reflected pressure on certain
at December 31, 2014 was 3.10%, compared to 3.12% at
renewal lease rates in the commercial air portfolio and the sale
December 31, 2013 and 3.23% at December 31, 2012.
of the Dell Europe portfolio, which contained higher-yielding
assets. AEA increased 9% from 2012. Interest income was down Deposits have increased, both in dollars and proportion of total CIT
from 2012 reflecting lower FSA accretion, which totaled $61 funding to 46% at December 31, 2014 compared to 40% at
million in 2013 and $212 million in 2012. December 31, 2013 and 35% at December 31, 2012. The weighted
average coupon rate of total CIT deposits at December 31, 2014 was
- Interest recoveries, which result from events such as
1.69%, up from 1.65% at December 31, 2013, primarily due to an
prepayments on or sales of non-accrual assets and assets
increase in term deposits with longer maturities, and down from 1.75%
returning to accrual status, and certain other yield-related fees,
at December 31, 2012. Deposits and long-term borrowings are also
were elevated in 2012, and moderated in 2013.
discussed in Funding and Liquidity.
- NFM benefited from suspended depreciation on operating
See Select Financial Data (Average Balances) section for more
lease equipment held for sale in 2013, since depreciation is not
information on Long-term borrowing rates.
recorded while this equipment is held for sale. This benefit
was down from 2012, primarily due to the sale of the Dell
Europe portfolio in the third and fourth quarters. (Amounts
detailed below).

The following table depicts select yields and margin related data for our segments, plus select divisions within TIF and NACF.
Select Segment and Division Margin Metrics (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
Transportation & International Finance
AEA $18,243.0 $15,434.6 $14,269.2
Gross yield 12.33% 12.55% 13.21%
NFM 4.84% 4.89% 0.02%
Adjusted NFM 4.80% 4.99% 4.45%
AEA
Aerospace $10,467.4 $ 9,317.9 $ 9,358.3
Rail $ 5,581.9 $ 4,332.4 $ 3,905.3
Maritime Finance $ 670.0 $ 300.1 $ –
International Finance $ 1,523.7 $ 1,484.2 $ 1,005.6
Gross yield
Aerospace 12.00% 12.23% 12.53%
Rail 14.75% 14.69% 14.87%
Maritime Finance 5.18% 7.83% –
International Finance 8.92% 9.30% 13.01%
North American Commercial Finance
AEA $14,319.5 $12,916.2 $11,362.7
Gross yield 6.49% 7.22% 9.47%
NFM 3.93% 4.44% 2.23%
Adjusted NFM 3.93% 4.50% 6.06%
AEA
Real Estate Finance $ 1,687.6 $ 1,119.0 $ 257.5
Corporate Finance $ 7,138.2 $ 6,710.2 $ 6,229.5
Equipment Finance $ 4,526.4 $ 4,083.3 $ 3,787.8
Commercial Services $ 967.3 $ 1,003.7 $ 1,087.9
Gross yield
Real Estate Finance 4.15% 4.19% 4.01%
Corporate Finance 5.30% 5.80% 8.15%
Equipment Finance 9.53% 10.82% 13.20%
Commercial Services 5.18% 5.47% 5.30%
Non-Strategic Portfolios
AEA $ 832.2 $ 1,771.7 $ 1,976.7
Gross yield 15.16% 15.14% 15.96%
NFM 3.57% 5.97% 1.14%
Adjusted NFM 3.57% 6.27% 3.14%
Gross yields (interest income plus rental income on operating costs. NACF gross yields and NFM reflect continued pressures
leases as a % of AEA) and NFM in TIF were modestly down from within Corporate Finance and Equipment Finance. NSP contains
2013, reflecting lower rental rates on certain aircraft, while the run-off portfolios, which can cause volatility in the gross yield due
increase in adjusted NFM from 2012 reflect improved funding to the low AEA.
The following table sets forth the details on net operating lease revenues(7).
Net Operating Lease Revenue as a % of Average Operating Leases (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
Rental income on operating leases $ 2,093.0 14.41% $ 1,897.4 15.22% $ 1,900.8 15.74%
Depreciation on operating lease equipment (615.7) (4.24)% (540.6) (4.33)% (513.2) (4.25)%
Maintenance and other operating lease expenses (196.8) (1.35)% (163.1) (1.31)% (139.4) (1.15)%
Net operating lease revenue and % of AOL $ 1,280.5 8.82% $ 1,193.7 9.58% $ 1,248.2 10.34%
Average Operating Lease Equipment (“AOL”) $14,524.4 $12,463.8 $12,072.9
Net operating lease revenue was primarily generated from the fied as assets held for sale, depreciation expense is no longer
commercial air and rail portfolios. Net operating lease revenue recognized, but the asset is evaluated for impairment with any
increased in 2014 compared to 2013, as the benefit of increased such charge recorded in other income. (See “Non-interest
assets from the growing aerospace and rail portfolios offset lower Income — Impairment on assets held for sale” for discussion on
rental rates, higher depreciation expense, and increased mainte- impairment charges). Consequently, net operating lease revenue
nance and other operating lease expenses. Net operating lease includes rental income on operating lease equipment classified
revenue decreased in 2013 from 2012, reflecting increased depre- as assets held for sale, but there is no related depreciation
ciation, which included residual adjustments, and higher expense. NFM continued to benefit from suspended deprecia-
maintenance and operating lease expenses from the rail portfolio tion due to the portfolio sales activity in NSP and aerospace
growth, along with lower renewal rates. assets held for sale related to the TC-CIT Aviation joint venture.
The amount of suspended depreciation on operating lease
Rental income in 2014 increased from 2013 and 2012, reflecting
equipment in assets held for sale totaled $23 million for 2014,
the growing portfolio. On average, lease renewal rates in the rail
$73 million for 2013 and $96 million for 2012. The decrease from
portfolio were re-pricing slightly higher, while the commercial air-
2012 primarily reflects the sale of the Dell Europe portfolio in the
craft portfolio has been re-pricing slightly lower.
third and fourth quarters of 2013.
Commercial aircraft utilization remained strong throughout 2014
The increasing maintenance and other operating lease expenses
with 99% of our portfolio leased or under a commitment to lease,
primarily relate to the growing rail portfolio, and to a lesser
consistent with 2013 and 2012. During 2014, our rail fleet utiliza-
extent, aircraft re-leasing.
tion remained strong. Including commitments, rail fleet utilization
was 99% at December 31, 2014, up from December 31, 2013 and The factors described in rental income, depreciation, and mainte-
2012. nance and other operating lease expenses are driving the
decrease in the net operating lease revenue as a percent of AOL,
We have 16 new aircraft deliveries scheduled for 2015, substan-
as the higher revenue from the growth in assets is offset by the
tially all of which have lease commitments with customers. We
lower rental rates. The 2014 first quarter European rail acquisition
expect delivery of approximately 7,000 railcars from our order
also impacted net yields, as the acquired portfolio’s net yields
book during 2015, about 90% of which are placed.
were lower than the overall portfolio.
Depreciation on operating lease equipment increased from 2013
Operating lease equipment in assets held for sale totaled $440
and 2012, mostly reflecting higher transportation equipment bal-
million at December 31, 2014, primarily reflecting aerospace
ances. Depreciation expense also includes amounts related to
assets. Operating lease equipment in assets held for sale totaled
equipment impairments. Depreciation expense is adjusted when
$205 million at December 31, 2013 and $344 million at
projected fair value at the end of the lease term or estimated
December 31, 2012, which included the Dell Europe platform
useful life is below the projected book value at the end of the
assets that were sold in 2013.
lease term or estimated useful life. The prior years, 2013 and
2012, benefited from lower depreciation expense, primarily in See “Expenses — Depreciation on operating lease equipment”
NSP business, as a result of certain operating lease equipment and “Concentrations — Operating Leases” for additional
being recorded as held for sale. Once a long-lived asset is classi- information.
(7)
Net operating lease revenue is a non-GAAP measure. See “Non-GAAP Financial Measurements” for a reconciliation of non-GAAP to GAAP financial
information.

CREDIT METRICS
Credit metrics remain at or near cyclical lows, and given current Net charge-offs were $99 million (0.52% as a percentage of aver-
levels, sequential quarterly movements in non-accrual loans and age finance receivables) in 2014, versus $81 million (0.44%) in
charge-offs are subject to volatility as individual larger accounts 2013 and $74 million (0.46%) in 2012. Net charge-offs include
migrate in and out of non-accrual status or get resolved. $43 million in 2014 and $39 million in 2013 related to the transfer
of receivables to assets held for sale. Absent AHFS transfer
Non-accrual loans declined to $161 million (0.82% of finance
related charge-offs, net charge-offs were 0.29% and 0.23% for the
receivables) from $241 million (1.29%) at December 31, 2013 and
years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Recover-
$330 million (1.92%) at December 31, 2012. The decrease reflects
ies have continued to decline, totaling $28 million in 2014, down
the sale of the Small Business Lending unit, repayments, charge-
from $58 million in 2013 and $68 million in 2012, driven by the
offs, and returns to accrual status where appropriate.
lower levels of gross charge-offs in recent periods. Gross Charge-
The provision for credit losses was $100 million for the current year, up offs were $128 million (0.67%) in 2014 versus $139 million in 2013
from $65 million in 2013 and $51 million in 2012. The 2014 provision (0.76%) and $142 million (0.88%) in 2012.
reflects lower recoveries and higher non-specific reserves, primarily due
to asset growth. The increase in 2013 from 2012 reflected asset growth
and charge-offs due to loans transferred to AHFS.
The following table presents detail on our allowance for loan losses, including charge-offs and recoveries and provides summarized com-
ponents of the provision and allowance:
Allowance for Loan Losses and Provision for Credit Losses (dollars in millions)
Years ended December 31,
2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
Allowance – beginning of period $ 356.1 $ 379.3 $ 407.8 $ 416.2 $ –
(1)
Provision for credit losses 100.1 64.9 51.4 269.7 802.1
Change related to new accounting guidance (2) – – – – 68.6
Other(1) (10.7) (7.4) (5.8) (12.9) (8.2)
Net additions 89.4 57.5 45.6 256.8 862.5
Gross charge-offs(3) (127.5) (138.6) (141.7) (368.8) (492.0)
Recoveries(4) 28.4 57.9 67.6 103.6 45.7
Net Charge-offs (99.1) (80.7) (74.1) (265.2) (446.3)
Allowance – end of period $ 346.4 $ 356.1 $ 379.3 $ 407.8 $ 416.2
Provision for credit losses

Specific reserves on impaired loans $ (18.0) $ (14.8) $ (9.4) $ (66.7) $ 121.3
Non-specific reserves 19.0 (1.0) (13.3) 71.2 234.5
Net charge-offs 99.1 80.7 74.1 265.2 446.3
Total $ 100.1 $ 64.9 $ 51.4 $ 269.7 $ 802.1
Allowance for loan losses

Specific reserves on impaired loans $ 12.4 $ 30.4 $ 45.2 $ 54.6 $ 121.3
Non-specific reserves 334.0 325.7 334.1 353.2 294.9
Total $ 346.4 $ 356.1 $ 379.3 $ 407.8 $ 416.2
Ratio
Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans 1.78% 1.91% 2.21% 2.68% 2.51%
(1)
The provision for credit losses includes amounts related to reserves on unfunded loan commitments, unused letters of credit, and for deferred purchase
agreements, all of which are reflected in other liabilities, as well as foreign currency translation adjustments. The items included in other liabilities totaled $35
million, $28 million, $23 million, $22 million and $12 million at December 31, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
(2)
Reflects reserves associated with loans consolidated in accordance with 2010 adoption of accounting guidance on consolidation of variable interest entities.
(3)
Gross charge-offs included $43 million and $39 million of charge-offs related to the transfer of receivables to assets held for sale for the year ended
December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Prior year amounts were not significant.
(4)
Recoveries for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013, 2012, 2011 and 2010 do not include $20 million, $22 million, $54 million, $124 million and $279 mil-
lion, respectively, of recoveries of loans charged off pre-emergence and loans charged off prior to the transfer to assets held for sale, which are included in
Other Income.
The allowance rate reflects the relatively benign credit environ- See Note 1 — Business and Summary of Significant Accounting
ment. NSP currently carries no reserves, as the portfolio consists Policies for discussion on policies relating to the allowance for
almost entirely of AHFS. The decline in specific allowance is con- loan losses, and Note 4 — Allowance for Loan Losses for addi-
sistent with reduced non-accrual inflows and the reversal of tional segment related data in Item 8 Financial Statements and
reserves related to the resolution of a small number of larger Supplementary Data and Critical Accounting Estimates for further
accounts in NACF. analysis of the allowance for credit losses.
Segment Finance Receivables and Allowance for Loan Losses (dollars in millions)
Finance Allowance for Net Carrying
Receivables Loan Losses Value
December 31, 2014
Transportation & International Finance $ 3,558.9 $ (46.8) $ 3,512.1
North American Commercial Finance 15,936.0 (299.6) 15,636.4
Non-Strategic Portfolio 0.1 – 0.1
Total $19,495.0 $(346.4) $19,148.6
December 31, 2013
Non-Strategic Portfolio 441.7 (5.6) 436.1
Total $18,629.2 $(356.1) $18,273.1
December 31, 2012
Non-Strategic Portfolio 1,512.2 (41.3) 1,470.9
Total $17,153.1 $(379.3) $16,773.8
December 31, 2011
Total $15,225.8 $(407.8) $14,818.0
December 31, 2010
Total $16,612.9 $(416.2) $16,196.7

The following table presents charge-offs, by class. See Results by Business Segment for additional information.
Charge-offs as a Percentage of Average Finance Receivables by Class (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
Gross Charge-offs
Transportation Finance $ 0.7 0.03% $ – – $ 0.9 0.08% $ 1.1 0.11% $ 4.8 0.36%
International Finance 44.1 3.34% 26.0 1.76% 14.8 1.50% 16.9 2.48% 33.0 9.08%
Transportation & International
Finance(1) 44.8 1.25% 26.0 0.84% 15.7 0.71% 18.0 1.06% 37.8 2.21%
Corporate Finance 29.7 0.42% 21.9 0.33% 37.8 0.61% 147.9 2.58% 130.4 1.62%
Equipment Finance 35.8 0.84% 32.0 0.82% 52.5 1.44% 125.8 3.03% 126.1 1.66%
Real Estate Finance – – – – – – 6.7 35.14% 24.7 15.16%
Commercial Services 9.7 0.41% 4.4 0.19% 8.6 0.36% 21.1 0.85% 29.8 1.12%
North American Commercial
Finance(2) 75.2 0.49% 58.3 0.42% 98.9 0.80% 301.5 2.44% 311.0 1.68%
Non-Strategic Portfolio(3) 7.5 4.91% 54.3 4.82% 27.1 1.81% 49.3 3.23% 143.2 10.21%
Total $127.5 0.67% $138.6 0.76% $141.7 0.88% $368.8 2.36% $492.0 2.28%
Recoveries
Transportation Finance $ 0.2 0.01% $ 1.1 0.07% $ – – $ 0.1 0.01% $ – –
Finance 7.1 0.19% 9.1 0.29% 8.7 0.39% 5.9 0.35% 4.2 0.24%
Commercial Services 2.1 0.09% 7.8 0.33% 7.8 0.33% 10.9 0.44% 1.2 0.04%
Finance 19.0 0.13% 39.8 0.29% 46.4 0.38% 80.2 0.65% 25.9 0.14%
Non-Strategic Portfolio 2.3 1.44% 9.0 0.81% 12.5 0.83% 17.5 1.15% 15.6 1.11%
Total $ 28.4 0.15% $ 57.9 0.32% $ 67.6 0.42% $103.6 0.66% $ 45.7 0.21%
Net Charge-offs
Transportation Finance $ 0.5 0.02% $ (1.1) (0.07)% $ 0.9 0.08% $ 1.0 0.10% $ 4.8 0.36%
Finance(1) 37.7 1.06% 16.9 0.55% 7.0 0.32% 12.1 0.71% 33.6 1.97%
Commercial Services 7.6 0.32% (3.4) (0.14)% 0.8 0.03% 10.2 0.41% 28.6 1.08%
Finance(2) 56.2 0.36% 18.5 0.13% 52.5 0.42% 221.3 1.79% 285.1 1.54%
(3)
Non-Strategic Portfolio 5.2 3.47% 45.3 4.01% 14.6 0.98% 31.8 2.08% 127.6 9.10%
Total $ 99.1 0.52% $ 80.7 0.44% $ 74.1 0.46% $265.2 1.70% $446.3 2.07%
(1)
TIF charge-offs for 2014 and 2013 included approximately $18 million and $2 million, respectively, related to the transfer of receivables to assets held for sale.
(2)
NACF charge-offs for 2014 and 2013 included approximately $18 million and $5 million, respectively, related to the transfer of receivables to assets held
for sale.
(3)
NSP charge-offs for 2014 and 2013 included approximately $7 million and $32 million, respectively, related to the transfer of receivables to assets held
for sale.
Charge-offs remained at relatively low levels absent the amount opportunities for recoveries. Additionally, charge-offs associated
related to assets transferred to AHFS. Recoveries are down in with AHFS do not generate future recoveries as the loans are
amount from prior periods and are expected to continue to generally sold before recoveries can be realized.
decline as the low level of more recent charge-offs afford fewer
The tables below present information on non-performing loans, which includes non-performing loans related to assets held for sale for
each period:
Non-accrual and Accruing Past Due Loans at December 31 (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
Non-accrual loans
U.S. $ 71.9 $176.3 $273.1 $623.6 $1,336.5
Foreign 88.6 64.4 57.0 77.8 280.7
Non-accrual loans 160.5 240.7 330.1 701.4 1,617.2
Troubled Debt Restructurings
U.S. $ 13.8 $218.0 $263.2 $427.5 $ 412.4
Foreign 3.4 2.9 25.9 17.7 49.3
Restructured loans $ 17.2 $220.9 $289.1 $445.2 $ 461.7
Accruing loans past due 90 days or more $ 10.3 $ 9.9 $ 3.4 $ 2.2 $ 1.7
Segment Non-accrual Loans as a Percentage of Finance Receivables at December 31 (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012
Transportation Finance $ 0.1 – $ 14.3 0.81% $ 31.5 2.36%
International Finance 37.1 5.93% 21.0 1.21% 7.5 0.61%
Transportation & International Finance 37.2 1.05% 35.3 1.01% 39.0 1.52%
Corporate Finance 30.9 0.45% 83.8 1.23% 156.5 2.41%
Equipment Finance 70.0 1.48% 59.4 1.47% 55.3 1.51%
Commercial Services – – 4.2 0.19% 6.0 0.26%
North American Commercial Finance 100.9 0.63% 147.4 1.00% 217.8 1.66%
Non-Strategic Portfolio 22.4 NM 58.0 13.14% 73.3 4.85%
Total $160.5 0.82% $240.7 1.29% $330.1 1.92%
NM — not meaningful; Non-accrual loans include loans held for sale. The December 31, 2014 Non-Strategic Portfolios amount reflected non-accrual loans held
for sale; since portfolio loans were insignificant, no % is displayed.
Non-accrual loans remained at low levels during 2014. The Approximately 54% of our non-accrual accounts were paying cur-
improvements in 2014 reflect the relatively low levels of new rently at December 31, 2014, and our impaired loan carrying
non-accruals, the resolution of a small number of larger accounts value (including FSA discount, specific reserves and charge-offs)
in Corporate Finance and the sale of the Small Business to estimated outstanding contractual balances approximated
Lending unit in NSP. The entire NSP portfolio at December 2014 68%. For this purpose, impaired loans are comprised principally
was classified as held for sale making the percentage of of non-accrual loans over $500,000 and TDRs.
finance receivables not meaningful while the 2013 NSP non-
Total delinquency (30 days or more) improved to 1.7% of finance
accruals include $40 million related to accounts in held for sale
receivables compared to 2.0% at December 31, 2013, primarily
resulting in an increase of non-accruals as a percentage of
due to an improvement in non-credit (administrative) delinquen-
finance receivables.
cies in the Equipment Finance portfolio.
Foregone Interest on Non-accrual Loans and Troubled Debt Restructurings (dollars in millions)
Years Ended December 31
2014 2013 2012
U.S. Foreign Total U.S. Foreign Total U.S. Foreign Total
Interest revenue that would have been earned at
original terms $22.8 $12.4 $35.2 $52.9 $12.4 $65.3 $66.5 $12.1 $78.6
Less: Interest recorded 6.7 4.2 10.9 18.4 4.2 22.6 23.7 3.7 27.4
Foregone interest revenue $16.1 $ 8.2 $24.3 $34.5 $ 8.2 $42.7 $42.8 $ 8.4 $51.2

The Company periodically modifies the terms of loans/finance were modified but were not considered to be TDRs, it was deter-
receivables in response to borrowers’ difficulties. Modifications mined that no concessions had been granted by CIT to the
that include a financial concession to the borrower, which other- borrower. Borrower compliance with the modified terms is the
wise would not have been considered, are accounted for as primary measurement that we use to determine the success of
troubled debt restructurings (“TDRs”). For those accounts that these programs.
The tables that follow reflect loan carrying values as of December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 of accounts that have been modified.
Troubled Debt Restructurings and Modifications at December 31 (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
% Compliant % Compliant % Compliant
Deferral of principal and/or interest $ 6.0 96% $194.6 99% $248.5 98%
Debt forgiveness – – 2.4 77% 2.5 95%
Interest rate reductions – – – – 14.8 100%
Covenant relief and other 11.2 83% 23.9 74% 23.3 80%
Total TDRs $ 17.2 88% $220.9 96% $289.1 97%
Percent non accrual 75% 33% 29%
(1)
Modifications
Extended maturity $ 0.1 100% $ 14.9 37% $111.5 97%
Covenant relief 70.9 100% 50.6 100% 113.6 100%
Interest rate increase 25.1 100% 21.8 100% 79.6 100%
Other 58.3 100% 62.6 87% 62.4 100%
Total Modifications $154.4 100% $149.9 89% $367.1 99%
Percent non-accrual 10% 23% 25%
(1)
Table depicts the predominant element of each modification, which may contain several of the characteristics listed.
The decrease in TDRs from prior years is driven principally by the See Note 3 — Loans in Item 8 Financial Statements and Supple-
payoff of a small number of accounts and the disposition of the mentary Data for additional information regarding TDRs and
SBL portfolio. other credit quality information.
NON-INTEREST INCOME
Non-interest Income (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
Rental income on operating leases $2,093.0 $1,897.4 $1,900.8
Other Income:
Factoring commissions 120.2 122.3 126.5
Gains on sales of leasing equipment 98.4 130.5 117.6
Fee revenues 93.1 101.5 86.1
Gain on investments 39.0 8.2 40.2
Gains on loan and portfolio sales 34.3 48.8 162.3
Recoveries of loans charged off pre-emergence and loans charged off prior
to transfer to held for sale 19.8 21.9 54.3
Counterparty receivable accretion 10.7 8.6 88.7
Gains (losses) on derivatives and foreign currency exchange (37.8) 1.0 (5.7)
Impairment on assets held for sale (100.7) (124.0) (115.1)
Other revenues 28.4 62.5 59.8
Other income 305.4 381.3 614.7
Non-interest income $2,398.4 $2,278.7 $2,515.5
Non-interest Income includes Rental Income on Operating enues from this portfolio, fee revenues were relatively consistent
Leases and Other Income. with 2013. Fee revenues are mainly driven by our NACF segment,
though small business lending fees are in NSP.
Rental income on operating leases from equipment we lease is
recognized on a straight line basis over the lease term. Rental Gains on investments primarily reflected sales of equity invest-
income is discussed in “Net Finance Revenues” and “Results by ments that were received as part of a lending transaction or, in
Business Segment”. See also Note 5 — Operating Lease Equip- some cases, a workout situation. The gains were primarily in
ment in Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data for NACF. Gains in 2014 included $16 million from investment securi-
additional information on operating leases. ties sold to comply with the Volcker Rule. Gains declined in 2013
from 2012 on fewer transactions.
Other income declined in 2014 and 2013 reflecting the following:
Gains on loan and portfolio sales reflected 2014 sales volume of
Factoring commissions declined slightly, reflecting the change in
$1.4 billion, which included $0.5 billion in each of TIF and NACF
the underlying portfolio mix that offset a modest increase in fac-
and over $0.4 billion in NSP. TIF activity was primarily due to the
toring volume. Factoring volume was $26.7 billion in 2014, up
sale of the U.K. corporate lending portfolio (gain of $11 million)
from $25.7 billion in 2013 and $25.1 billion for 2012.
and NSP sales were primarily due to the SBL sale (gains on which
Gains on sales of leasing equipment resulted from the sale of were minimal). The 2013 sales volume totaled $0.9 billion, which
approximately $1.2 billion of leasing equipment in 2014 and 2013 included $0.6 billion in NSP, and over $0.1 billion in both NACF
and $1.3 billion in 2012. Gains as a percentage of equipment sold and TIF. Over 80% of 2013 gains related to NSP and included
decreased from the prior year and approximated the 2012 per- gains from the sale of the Dell Europe portfolio. Sales volume
centage and will vary based on the type and age of equipment was $0.5 billion in 2012, which was substantially all in NACF
sold. Equipment sales for 2014 included $0.8 billion in TIF and with high gains as a percentage of sales from sales of low
over $0.3 billion in NACF. In 2014, TIF sold approximately $330 carrying value loans that were on nonaccrual and included
million of aircraft to TC-CIT Aviation, a joint venture with Century FSA adjustments.
Tokyo Leasing, which resulted in a $30 million gain. Equipment
Recoveries of loans charged off pre-emergence and loans
sales for 2013 included $0.9 billion in TIF assets and $0.3 billion in
charged off prior to transfer to held for sale reflected repayments
NACF assets. Equipment sales for 2012 included $0.8 billion in
or other workout resolutions on loans charged off prior to our
TIF assets and $0.5 billion in NACF assets.
emergence from bankruptcy and loans charged off prior to classi-
Fee revenues include fees on lines of credit and letters of credit, fication as held for sale. These recoveries are recorded as other
capital markets-related fees, agent and advisory fees, and servic- income, unlike recoveries on loans charged-off after our restruc-
ing fees for the loans we sell but retain servicing, including turing, which are recorded as a reduction to the provision for loan
servicing fees in the small business lending portfolio that was losses. The decrease from the prior years reflected a general
sold in June 2014. Fee revenues generated for servicing the small decline in recoveries of loans charged off pre-emergence as the
business lending portfolio totaled approximately $5 million for Company moves further away from its emergence date.
2014 and $11 million for each of 2013 and 2012. Absent the rev-

Counterparty receivable accretion related to the FSA accretion of derivatives on the income statement, refer to Note 11 — Deriva-
a fair value discount on the receivable from Goldman Sachs Inter- tive Financial Instruments in Item 8 Financial Statements and
national (“GSI”) related to the GSI Facilities, which are total Supplementary Data.
return swaps (as discussed in Funding and Liquidity and Note 10
Impairment on assets held for sale in 2014 included $70 million
— Long-term Borrowings and Note 11 — Derivative Financial
for NSP identified as subscale platforms and $31 million from TIF.
Instruments in Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary
TIF charges include over $19 million related to commercial air-
Data). The discount was accreted into income over the expected
craft operating lease equipment held for sale and the remainder
term of the payout of the associated receivables, and accreted to
related to the transfer of U.K. portfolios to AHFS. The 2013
zero during 2014.
amount included $105 million of charges related to NSP and $19
Gains (losses) on derivatives and foreign currency exchange million for TIF operating lease equipment (mostly aerospace
Transactional foreign currency movements resulted in losses of related). NSP activity included $59 million of charges related to
$(133) million in 2014, driven by the strengthening of the U.S. cur- Dell Europe portfolio operating lease equipment and the remain-
rency against the Canadian dollar, Euro, Mexican Peso, and U.K. ing 2013 NSP impairment related mostly to the international
Pound Sterling, losses of $(14) million in 2013, and gains of $37 platform rationalization. When a long-lived asset is classified as
million in 2012. These were partially offset by gains of $124 mil- held for sale, depreciation expense is suspended and the asset is
lion in 2014, similarly impacted by the foreign currency evaluated for impairment with any such charge recorded in other
movements noted, gains of $20 million in 2013, and losses of income. (See Expenses for related discussion on depreciation on
$(33) million in 2012 on derivatives that economically hedge for- operating lease equipment.) The 2012 amount included $81 mil-
eign currency movements and other exposures. Losses related to lion for NSP, essentially all of which related to NSP Dell Europe
the valuation of the derivatives within the GSI facility were $(15) operating lease equipment, and $34 million related to TIF equip-
million for 2014, $(4) million for 2013 and $(6) million for 2012. The ment, mostly aerospace related.
increase reflected the higher unused portion of the facility due to
Other revenues included items that are more episodic in nature, such
the sale of the student lending business in 2014. In addition,
as gains on work-out related claims, proceeds received in excess of
there were losses of $(14) million, $(1) million and $(4) million in
carrying value on non-accrual accounts held for sale, which were repaid
2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively, on the realization of cumulative
or had another workout resolution, insurance proceeds in excess of
translation adjustment (“CTA”) amounts from AOCI upon the sale
carrying value on damaged leased equipment, and also includes
or substantial liquidation of a subsidiary. As of December 31,
income from joint ventures. The 2013 amount included gains on work-
2014, there was approximately $(60) million of CTA losses
out related claims of $19 million in NACF and $13 million in TIF. The
included in accumulated other comprehensive loss in the Con-
2012 amount included $14 million gain on a sale of a platform in NSP,
solidated Balance Sheet related to the Brazil, Mexico, and U.K.
related to the Dell Europe transaction.
portfolios in AHFS. For additional information on the impact of
EXPENSES
Other Expenses (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012
Depreciation on operating lease equipment $ 615.7 $ 540.6 $ 513.2
Maintenance and other operating lease expenses 196.8 163.1 139.4
Operating expenses:
Compensation and benefits 533.8 535.4 537.1
Technology 85.2 83.3 81.6
Professional fees 80.6 69.1 63.8
Net occupancy expense 35.0 35.3 36.1
Advertising and marketing 33.7 25.2 36.5
Provision for severance and facilities exiting activities 31.4 36.9 22.7
Other expenses(1) 142.1 185.0 116.2
Operating expenses 941.8 970.2 894.0
Loss on debt extinguishments 3.5 – 61.2
Total other expenses $1,757.8 $1,673.9 $1,607.8
Headcount 3,360 3,240 3,560
(1)
The year ended December 31, 2013 included $50 million related to the Tyco tax agreement settlement charge.
Depreciation on operating lease equipment is recognized on Capital and Nacco acquisitions. Operating expenses rose over
owned equipment over the lease term or estimated useful life of 8% from 2012 to 2013, driven by the tax agreement settlement
the asset. Depreciation expense is primarily driven by the TIF charge, and costs associated with restructuring initiatives. Oper-
operating lease equipment portfolio, which includes long-lived ating expenses also include Bank deposit-raising costs, which
assets such as aircraft and railcars. To a lesser extent, deprecia- totaled $59 million in 2014 and $35 million in each of 2013 and
tion expense includes amounts on smaller ticket equipment, such 2012. These are reflected across various expense categories, but
as office equipment. Impairments recorded on equipment held in mostly within advertising and marketing and in other, reflecting
portfolio are reported as depreciation expense. AHFS also deposit insurance costs. Operating expenses reflect the following
impacts the balance, as depreciation expense is suspended on changes:
operating lease equipment once it is transferred to AHFS. Depre- - Compensation and benefits decreased in 2014 as progress on
ciation expense is discussed further in “Net Finance Revenues,”
various expense initiatives was partly offset by increased costs
as it is a component of our asset margin. See “Non-interest
related to the acquisitions. Expenses were down slightly in 2013
Income” for impairment charges on operating lease equipment
from 2012 as lower salaries and benefit costs from the
classified as held for sale.
reduction in employees was partially offset by higher incentive
Maintenance and other operating lease expenses relate to the compensation, which includes the amortization of deferred
TIF operating lease portfolio. The majority of the maintenance compensation. Headcount at December 31, 2014 was up from a
expenses are railcar fleet related. CIT Rail provides railcars pri- year ago, driven by the Direct Capital and Nacco acquisitions,
marily pursuant to full-service lease contracts under which CIT while down from 2012, resulting from efficiency initiatives. See
Rail as lessor is responsible for railcar maintenance and repair. Note 20 — Retirement, Postretirement and Other Benefit Plans
Under our aircraft leases, the lessee is generally responsible for in Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
normal maintenance and repairs, airframe and engine overhauls, - Professional fees include legal and other professional fees such
compliance with airworthiness directives, and compliance with
as tax, audit, and consulting services and increased from 2013
return conditions of aircraft on lease. As a result, aircraft operat-
reflecting costs associated with acquisitions, the pending
ing lease expenses primarily relate to transition costs incurred in
OneWest Transaction, and exits of our non-strategic portfolios.
connection with re-leasing an aircraft. The increase in mainte-
The increase from 2012 to 2013 primarily reflected costs
nance and other operating lease expenses from 2013 reflects the
associated with our international rationalization efforts, and
growing rail portfolio.
2012 also benefited from higher amounts received on favorable
Operating expenses decreased from 2013, due to the 2013 Tyco legal and tax resolutions.
International Ltd. (“Tyco”) tax agreement settlement charge of - Advertising and marketing expenses include costs associated
$50 million, discussed below in other expenses. Absent that
with raising deposits. Bank advertising and marketing costs
charge, operating expenses increased by 2%, which includes inte-
increased in 2014 from 2013, reflecting increased deposits and
gration costs and additional employee costs related to the Direct

the termination of a branch under construction. Advertising Tyco. CIT agreed to pay Tyco $60 million, including $10 million
and marketing costs totaled $25 million in 2014, $15 million in that had been previously accrued. In 2014, other expenses also
2013, and $24 million in 2012. include increased Bank deposit insurance costs.
- Provision for severance and facilities exiting activities reflects We made significant progress exiting low-returning portfolios in 2014.
costs associated with various organization efficiency initiatives. We exited all the sub-scale portfolios in Asia, Europe and several in
Severance costs were $30 million of the 2014 charges and Latin America, as well as our Small Business Lending (“SBL”) and Stu-
related to the termination of approximately 150 employees and dent Loan (“SLX”) portfolios. Our primary focus is now on exiting
the associated benefits costs. The facility exiting activities Mexico and Brazil and closing several legal entities in Europe and Asia.
totaled $1 million. See Note 27 — Severance and Facility We have separate agreements to sell the businesses in Mexico and
Exiting Liabilities for additional information. Brazil and anticipate finalizing the Mexico transaction in the 2015 first
quarter and Brazil in the second half of 2015. Upon completion of all of
- Other expenses include items such as travel and entertainment,
our planned exits, we expect to eliminate approximately $15 million
insurance, FDIC costs, office equipment and supplies costs and
from our quarterly expenses.
taxes other than income taxes. Other expenses declined in
2014 primarily due to the 2013 $50 million Tyco tax agreement Loss on debt extinguishments for 2014 primarily related to early
settlement charge expense. On December 20, 2013, we extinguishments of unsecured debt maturing in February 2015,
reached an agreement with Tyco to settle contract claims while the 2012 amount reflected the write-off of accelerated fees
asserted by Tyco related to a tax agreement that CIT and Tyco and underwriting costs related to the repayment of the remaining
entered into in 2002 in connection with CIT’s separation from Series A Notes and all of the 7% Series C Notes.
FRESH START ACCOUNTING
Upon emergence from bankruptcy in 2009, CIT applied Fresh ment was, in effect, an impairment of the operating lease
Start Accounting (FSA) in accordance with GAAP. FSA had a sig- equipment upon emergence from bankruptcy, as the assets were
nificant impact on our operating results in prior years but the recorded at their fair value, which was less than their carrying
impact has significantly lessened. NFR includes the accretion of value. The recording of the FSA adjustment reduced the asset
the FSA adjustments to the loans, leases and debt, as well as to balances subject to depreciation and thus decreases depreciation
depreciation and, to a lesser extent rental income related to expense over the remaining useful life of the operating lease
operating lease equipment. equipment or until it is sold.
The most significant remaining discount at December 31, 2014, During 2014, the fair value discount on the receivable from GSI
related to operating lease equipment ($1.3 billion related to rail accreted to zero and the remaining FSA balances on loans and
operating lease equipment and $0.7 billion to aircraft operating borrowings and deposits at December 31, 2014 were not signifi-
lease equipment). The discount on the operating lease equip- cant at less than $1 million and $7 million, respectively.
INCOME TAXES
Income Tax Data (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012
Provision for income taxes, before discrete items $ 47.4 $54.4 $ 76.2
Discrete items (445.3) 29.5 40.5
(Benefit) provision for income taxes $(397.9) $83.9 $116.7
Effective tax rate (58.4)% 11.4% (28.1)%
The Company’s 2014 income tax benefit is $397.9 million. This - $375 million reduction to the valuation allowance on the U.S.
compares to income tax provisions of $83.9 million in 2013 and net federal deferred tax assets,
$116.7 million in 2012. The change from the prior year tax provi- - $44 million reduction to the valuation allowances on certain
sions primarily reflects discrete tax benefits relating to the release
international net deferred tax assets,
of certain domestic and international valuation allowances, a
reduction in international income tax expense driven by lower - $30 million reduction to the U.S. federal and state valuation
international earnings, and changes in certain other discrete tax allowances consequent to the acquisition of Direct Capital, and
expense (benefit). Included in the discrete tax benefit of - Miscellaneous other $4 million of net tax expense items
$445.3 million for the current year is: partially offset the above mentioned tax benefits.
Excluding discrete items, the income tax provisions primarily benefit associated with a tax position taken on a prior-year
reflects income tax expense on the earnings of certain interna- restructuring transaction. Both of these benefits were fully offset
tional operations and state income tax expense in the U.S. by corresponding increases to the domestic valuation allowance.
The 2013 income tax provision of $83.9 million reflected income The change in the effective tax rate each period is impacted by a
tax expense on the earnings of certain international operations number of factors, including the relative mix of domestic and
and state income tax expense in the U.S. Included in the 2013 tax international earnings, adjustments to the valuation allowances,
provision is approximately $30 million of net discrete tax expense and discrete items. The actual year-end 2014 effective tax rate
that primarily related to the establishment of valuation allow- may vary from the near term future periods due to the changes in
ances against certain international net deferred tax assets due to these factors.
certain international platform rationalizations, and deferred tax
Beginning in 2015, the Company expects to report deferred
expense due to the sale of a leverage lease. The discrete tax
income tax expense on its domestic earnings after the 2014 par-
expense items were partially offset by incremental tax benefits
tial release of its domestic valuation allowances on net deferred
associated with favorable settlements of prior year international
tax assets. Management expects that this will result in a global
tax audits.
effective tax rate in the range of 30-35%. However, there will be a
The 2012 income tax provision of $116.7 million reflected income minimal impact on cash taxes paid until the related NOL carry-
tax expense on the earnings of certain international operations forward is fully utilized. In addition, while GAAP equity increased
and state income tax expense in the U.S. Included in the 2012 tax as a result of the partial recognition of net deferred tax assets
provision is $40.5 million of net discrete tax expense that primar- corresponding to the partial release of the aforementioned valua-
ily consisted of incremental taxes associated with international tion allowances, there was minimal benefit on regulatory capital.
audit settlements and an increase in a U.S. deferred tax liability
See Note 19 — Income Taxes in Item 8 Financial Statements and
on certain indefinite life assets that cannot be used as a source of
Supplementary Data for detailed discussion on the Company’s
future taxable income in the assessment of the domestic valua-
domestic and foreign reporting entities’ net deferred tax assets,
tion allowance. Also, included in 2012 was a discrete tax benefit
inclusive of the deferred tax assets related to the net operating
of $146.5 million caused by a release of tax reserves established
losses (“NOLs“) in these entities and their respective valuation
on an uncertain tax position taken on certain tax losses following
allowance analysis.
a favorable ruling from the tax authorities and a $98.4 million tax
RESULTS BY BUSINESS SEGMENT
Effective January 1, 2014, Management changed our operating consistent with this presentation. See Note — 2 Acquisition and
segments, which are now reported in three operating segments: Disposition Activities in Item 8 Financial Statements and Supple-
(1) TIF; (2) NACF; and (3) NSP. mentary Data for additional information.
See Note 25 — Business Segment Information in Item 8 Financial The following table summarizes the reported pre-tax earnings of
Statements and Supplementary Data for additional information each segment, and the impacts of certain debt redemption
relating to the reorganization. actions. The pre-tax amounts excluding these actions are used by
management to analyze segment results and are Non-GAAP
On April 25, 2014, we completed the sale of our student lending
measurements. See Non-GAAP Financial Measurements for dis-
business, which had been included in NSP prior to the sale. As a
cussion on the use of non-GAAP measurements.
result, the student lending business is reported as a discontinued
operation, and all prior periods have been conformed and are

Impacts of Debt Redemption Charges on Pre-tax Income (Loss) by Segment (dollars in millions)
Year Ended December 31, 2014
North
Transportation American
& International Commercial Non-Strategic Corporate
Finance Finance Portfolios & Other Total
Income (loss) from continuing operations, before (provision)
benefit for income taxes $ 612.2 $319.0 $(102.1) $(148.3) $ 680.8
Accelerated FSA net discount on debt extinguishments and
repurchases 34.7 – – – 34.7
Debt related – loss on debt extinguishments – – – 3.5 3.5
Accelerated OID on debt extinguishments related to the GSI
facility (42.0) – – – (42.0)
Pre-tax income (loss) from continuing operations – excluding debt
redemptions and OID acceleration $ 604.9 $319.0 $(102.1) $(144.8) $ 677.0

benefit for income taxes $ 563.7 $364.7 $ (62.8) $(131.4) $ 734.2
repurchases 14.5 8.5 10.6 1.0 34.6
facility – – (5.2) – (5.2)
redemptions and OID acceleration $ 578.2 $373.2 $ (57.4) $(130.4) $ 763.6

benefit for income taxes $(166.2) $267.3 $(125.0) $(391.5) $ (415.4)
repurchases 638.5 435.9 39.5 181.0 1,294.9
Debt related – loss on debt extinguishments – – – 61.2 61.2
facility (6.9) – – – (6.9)
redemptions and OID acceleration $ 465.4 $703.2 $ (85.5) $(149.3) $ 933.8
Transportation & International Finance (TIF) Rail leases railcars and locomotives to railroads and shippers
throughout North America, and Europe. Our operating lease
TIF includes several divisions: aerospace (commercial air and
fleet consists of approximately 120,000 railcars and 390 locomo-
business air), rail, maritime finance, and international finance.
tives and we serve over 650 customers.
Revenues generated by TIF include rents collected on leased
assets, interest on loans, fees, and gains from assets sold. Maritime Finance offers secured loans to owners and operators of
oceangoing and inland cargo vessels, as well as offshore vessels
Aerospace — Commercial Air provides aircraft leasing, lending,
and drilling rigs.
asset management, and advisory services for commercial and
regional airlines around the world. We own and finance a fleet of International Finance offers equipment financing, secured lend-
350 aircraft and have about 100 clients in approximately 50 ing and leasing to small and middle-market businesses in China
countries. and the U.K., the latter of which was included in assets held for
sale at December 31, 2014.
Aerospace — Business Air offers financing and leasing programs
for corporate and private owners of business jets.
Transportation & International Finance – Financial Data and Metrics (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012
Earnings Summary
Interest income $ 289.4 $ 254.9 $ 218.2
Interest expense (650.4) (585.5) (1,331.5)
Provision for credit losses (38.3) (18.7) (14.5)
Other income 69.9 82.2 65.8
Operating expenses (301.9) (255.3) (220.3)
Income (loss) before (provision) benefit for income taxes $ 612.2 $ 563.7 $ (166.2)
Pre-tax income – excluding debt redemption charges and accelerated OID on
debt extinguishment related to the GSI facility(1) $ 604.9 $ 578.2 $ 465.4
Select Average Balances
Average finance receivables (AFR) $ 3,571.2 $ 3,078.9 $ 2,204.9
Average operating leases (AOL) 14,255.7 12,195.8 11,853.5
Average earning assets (AEA) 18,243.0 15,434.6 14,269.2
Statistical Data
Net finance revenue (interest and rental income, net of interest and
depreciation expense and maintenance and other operating lease
expenses) (NFR) $ 882.5 $ 755.5 $ 2.8
Net finance margin (NFR as a % of AEA) 4.84% 4.89% 0.02%
Operating lease margin as a % of AOL 8.72% 8.91% 9.42%
Pretax return on AEA 3.36% 3.65% (1.16)%
New business volume $ 5,015.0 $ 3,578.0 $ 2,825.7
(1)
Non-GAAP measurement, see table at the beginning of this section for a reconciliation of non-GAAP to GAAP financial information.
Results reflect strong asset growth, lower funding costs, contin- through 2020. During 2014 we placed an order with Boeing for the pur-
ued high utilization rates of our aircraft and railcars, and higher chase of 10 787-9 Dreamliner aircraft, with deliveries beginning in 2018
charge-offs in the international division. Pre-tax earnings also and orders with Airbus for the purchase of 15 A330-900neo (new
continued to be modestly impacted by accelerated debt FSA and engine option) aircraft and five A321-200ceo (current engine option)
OID accretion from debt prepayment activities, which increased aircraft. Deliveries of the A330-900neo are scheduled to begin in 2018
2014 results by $7 million, compared to decreases of $15 million and deliveries of the A321-200ceo are scheduled to begin in 2015. See
in 2013 and $632 million in 2012. Note 21 — Commitments in Item 8 Financial Statements and Supple-
mental Data and Concentrations for further aircraft data.
We grew financing and leasing assets during 2014, further
expanding our aircraft and railcar fleets, and building our mari- During 2014, the Company formed TC-CIT Aviation Ireland and
time finance portfolio. Financing and leasing assets grew to $19.0 TC-CIT Aviation U.S. (together TC-CIT Aviation), joint ventures
billion at December 31, 2014, up from $16.4 billion at between CIT Aerospace and Century Tokyo Leasing Corporation
December 31, 2013 and $14.9 billion at December 31, 2012. The (”CTL“), a comprehensive financial services company in Japan.
2014 increase from 2013 reflected growth in all transportation Under the terms of the agreements, TC-CIT Aviation will acquire
divisions, $1.5 billion increase in Aerospace, $1.2 billion in Rail, commercial aircraft that will be leased to airlines around the
including the Nacco acquisition in the 2014 first quarter, and $0.6 globe. CIT Aerospace agreed to sell 14 commercial aircraft to
billion in Maritime, as discussed in the following paragraphs. TC-CIT Aviation in transactions with an aggregate value of
approximately $0.6 billion (nine of which were sold in the fourth
Aerospace financing and leasing assets grew to $11.1 billion from $9.7
quarter of 2014 at a gain of approximately $30 million, with the
billion at December 31, 2013 and $9.5 billion at December 31, 2012.
remaining five aircraft, with a carrying value of approximately
Our owned commercial portfolio included 279 aircraft at December 31,
$225 million in AHFS at December 31, 2014 to be sold in the first
2014, up slightly from December 31, 2013 and 2012. Commercial Air
quarter of 2015). Under the terms of the joint ventures, CIT will
assets are primarily originated through orders with manufacturers, but
facilitate arranging aircraft acquisitions, negotiating leases, ser-
are also supplemented by spot purchases of new and used equipment.
vicing the aircraft and administering the entities. CIT has a 30%
At December 31, 2014, we had 152 aircraft on order from manufactur-
equity investment in TC-CIT Aviation. CTL will maintain a majority
ers up from 147 at December 31, 2013, with deliveries scheduled

equity interest in the joint venture and will be a lender to the maintenance and other operating lease expenses), which is a
newly-established companies. component of NFR, increased as higher rental income from
growth in the Aerospace and Rail portfolios and strong
Rail financing and leasing assets grew to $5.8 billion from $4.6
utilization offset increased depreciation and maintenance and
billion at December 31, 2013 and $4.2 billion at December 31,
operating lease expense. The decline from 2013 compared to
2012. We expanded our owned portfolio to approximately
2012 reflected pressure on renewal rates on certain aircraft,
120,000 railcars at December 31, 2014, from 106,000 and 103,000
higher depreciation and higher maintenance and operating
at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The current year
lease expense. The decline in the operating lease margin (as a
increase in assets and railcars included the impact of the Nacco
% of average operating lease equipment) primarily reflects
acquisition described below. Rail assets are primarily originated
pressure on renewal rates on certain aircraft.
through firm orders with manufacturers and are also supple-
- New business volume for 2014 primarily included the delivery
mented by spot purchases. At December 31, 2014, we had
of 37 aircraft, approximately 6,000 railcars, with the vast
approximately 11,000 railcars on order from manufacturers, with
majority of the rail operating lease volume originated by the
deliveries scheduled through 2016. During 2014 we placed orders
Bank, and $2.2 billion of finance receivables. New business
with manufacturers for approximately 9,000 railcars.
volume for 2013 primarily reflected the delivery of 24 aircraft
We entered the European rail leasing market with the January 31, and approximately 5,400 railcars, while new business volume
2014 acquisition of Nacco, an independent full service railcar les- for 2012 reflected the addition of 21 aircraft and approximately
sor in Europe. The purchase included approximately $650 million 7,000 railcars.
of assets (operating lease equipment), comprised of more than - Equipment utilization remained strong throughout 2014 and
9,500 railcars, consisting of tank cars, flat cars, gondolas and hop- ended the year with 99% of commercial air and rail equipment
per cars. See Note 21 — Commitments in Item 8 Financial on lease or under a commitment. Rail utilization rates were up
Statements and Supplemental Data and Concentrations for fur- from 2013 and 2012, while air utilization remained consistently
ther railcar data. strong over the 3-year period. We have 16 new aircraft
Maritime Finance financing and leasing assets more than deliveries scheduled for 2015, substantially all of which have
doubled to $1.0 billion from $0.4 billion at December 31, 2013, as lease commitments with customers. Over 80% of all railcars on
we continued to expand this business. order have commitments, including about 90% of the
approximately 7,000 scheduled railcar deliveries for 2015.
International Finance financing and leasing assets decreased to - Other income primarily reflected the following:
$1.0 billion from $1.7 billion at December 31, 2013 and $1.2 bil- - Gains on asset sales totaled $78 million on $1.3 billion of
lion at December 31, 2012, primarily reflecting the sale of a equipment and receivable sales, including a gain of $30
portfolio of corporate loans in the 2014 fourth quarter and collec- million on the sale of aircraft to the TC-CIT Aviation joint
tions. Included in the balance at December 31, 2014 were ventures, compared to $82 million of gains on $978 million of
approximately $400 million of assets held for sale related to a asset sales in 2012 and $70 million of gains on $750 million of
U.K. portfolio of equipment finance assets. asset sales in 2012.
- Impairment charges on AHFS totaled $31 million in 2014,
Highlights included:
and predominantly related to international portfolios and
- NFR was up from 2013 and 2012. Excluding accelerated debt commercial aircraft, compared to $19 million in 2013 and $34
FSA and OID accretion, which had a significant impact in 2012, million in 2012, mostly related to commercial aircraft.
NFR was $875 million, up from $770 million in 2013 and $634 - FSA accretion on counterparty receivable totaled $2 million,
million in 2012. The increases reflect growth in the portfolios $1 million and $15 million for the years ended December 31,
and lower funding costs. Total net FSA accretion increased NFR 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. There is no longer any
by $152 million in 2014 and $176 million in 2013 and decreased balance to accrete.
NFR by $550 million in 2012. The remaining net FSA accretion - Other income also includes a small amount of fee and
benefits will primarily be reflected in depreciation expense, and periodic items, such as a $13 million benefit related to a
will continue to decline over time. Adjusted Net Finance work-out related claim in 2013.
Margin decreased from 2013 reflecting the lower portfolio yield - Non-accrual loans were $37 million (1.05% of finance
and increased from 2012 reflecting improved funding costs. receivables) at December 31, 2014, compared to $35 million
See Select Segment and Division Margin Metrics table in Net (1.01%) at December 31, 2013 and $39 million (1.52%) at
Finance Revenue section. December 31, 2012. The 2014 and 2013 provision for credit
- Financing and leasing assets grew 16% in 2014, primarily losses mostly reflected the credit metric trends and loan
reflecting new business volume of $5.0 billion and the Nacco portfolio growth. Net charge-offs were $38 million (1.06% of
rail acquisition, partially offset by asset sales, including a UK average finance receivables) in 2014, up from $17 million
portfolio and aircraft sold to the TC-CIT Aviation joint venture, (0.55%) and $7 million (0.32%) in 2013 and 2012, respectively.
equipment depreciation and loan amortization. Essentially all of the charge-offs for 2014, 2013 and 2012 were
- Gross yields (interest income plus rental income on operating concentrated in the International portfolio. TIF charge-offs in
leases as a % of AEA) decreased from 2013 and 2012, reflecting 2014 included approximately $18 million related to the transfer
lower rental rates on certain aircraft and growth in the loan of receivables to assets held for sale (amounts for the prior
portfolio. years were not significant).
- Net operating lease revenue (rental income on operating
leases less depreciation on operating lease equipment and
- Operating expenses increased in 2014 and 2013 reflecting offered are primarily senior secured loans collateralized by
investments in new initiatives and growth in existing accounts receivable, inventory, machinery & equipment and/or
businesses, including the Nacco rail acquisition in the 2014 first intangibles that are often used for working capital, plant expan-
quarter. sion, acquisitions or recapitalizations. These loans include
revolving lines of credit and term loans and, depending on the
North American Commercial Finance (NACF)
nature and quality of the collateral, may be referred to as asset-
The NACF segment consists of four divisions: Commercial Ser- based loans or cash flow loans. We provide financing to
vices, Corporate Finance, Equipment Finance, and Real Estate customers in a wide range of industries, including Commercial &
Finance. Revenue is generated from interest earned on loans, Industrial, Communications, Media & Entertainment, Energy, and
rents on equipment leased, fees and other revenue from lending Healthcare.
and leasing activities and capital markets transactions, and com-
Equipment Finance provides leasing and equipment financing
missions earned on factoring and related activities.
solutions to small businesses and middle market companies in a
Commercial Services provides factoring, receivable management wide range of industries on both a private label and direct basis.
products, and secured financing to businesses (our clients, gener- We provide financing solutions for our borrowers and lessees,
ally manufacturers or importers of goods) that operate in several and assist manufacturers and distributors in growing sales, profit-
industries, including apparel, textile, furniture, home furnishings ability and customer loyalty by providing customized, value-
and consumer electronics. Factoring entails the assumption of added finance solutions to their commercial clients. Our
credit risk with respect to trade accounts receivable arising from LendEdge platform allows small businesses to access financing
the sale of goods by our clients to their customers (generally through a highly automated credit approval, documentation and
retailers) that have been factored (i.e. sold or assigned to the fac- funding process. We offer both capital and operating leases.
tor). Although primarily U.S.-based, Commercial Services also
Real Estate Finance provides senior secured commercial real
conducts business with clients and their customers internationally.
estate loans to developers and other commercial real estate pro-
Corporate Finance provides a range of financing options and fessionals. We focus on stable, cash flowing properties and
offers advisory services to small and medium size companies. Its originate construction loans to highly experienced and well capi-
core products include both loan and fee-based products. Loans talized developers.
North American Commercial Finance – Financial Data and Metrics (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012
Earnings Summary
Interest income $ 832.4 $ 828.6 $ 976.5
Interest expense (285.4) (284.3) (750.9)
Rental income on operating leases 97.4 104.0 99.4
Other income 318.0 306.5 555.2
Income before provision for income taxes $ 319.0 $ 364.7 $ 267.3
(1)
Pre-tax income – excluding debt redemption charges $ 319.0 $ 373.2 $ 703.2
Average finance receivables (AFR) $15,397.7 $14,040.4 $12,420.8
Average earning assets (AEA)(2) 14,319.5 12,916.2 11,362.7
Statistical Data
depreciation expense) (NFR) $ 562.7 $ 573.2 $ 253.1
Pretax return on AEA 2.23% 2.82% 2.35%
New business volume $ 6,201.6 $ 6,244.9 $ 5,862.9
Factoring volume $26,702.5 $25,712.2 $25,123.9
(1)
(2)
AEA is lower than AFR as it is reduced by the average credit balances for factoring clients.

Pre-tax income for 2014 reflects strong asset growth, offset by NFR by $20 million in 2014, $44 million in 2013 and $254 million
higher credit costs, lower yields in certain portfolios and addi- in 2012.
tional costs related to the August 1, 2014 acquisition of Direct - NACF gross yields and NFM reflect continued pressures on
Capital. Pre-tax income includes accelerated debt FSA accretion, yields in certain units of the business. See Select Segment and
which reduced profitability in 2013 and 2012 by $9 million and Division Margin Metrics table in Net Finance Revenue section.
$436 million, respectively. Excluding accelerated debt FSA accre- - Financing and leasing assets totaled $16.2 billion, up from
tion, pre-tax income declined from 2012 to 2013 as the benefit $15.0 billion at December 31, 2013 and $13.3 billion at
from higher assets and lower funding costs were offset by signifi- December 31, 2012, driven primarily by new business volume
cantly lower other income, primarily lower gains on asset sales and the Direct Capital acquisition.
and lower net FSA accretion. - Other income was up slightly from 2013 and down from 2012,
reflecting the following:
The growth in Financing and Leasing Assets was driven by solid
- Factoring commissions of $120 million were down slightly
new loan and lease volumes, supplemented by the acquisition of
from both prior years as pressure on factoring commission
approximately $540 million of financing and leasing assets in
rates due to competition and changes in the portfolio mix
Direct Capital that are reflected in the Equipment Finance divi-
offset increased factoring volume.
sion. New business volume was down slightly from 2013, as the
- Gains on asset sales (including receivables, equipment and
decline in Corporate Finance activity offset increases in Equip-
investments) totaled $89 million in 2014, up from $47 million
ment Finance and Real Estate Finance.
in 2013 but down from $227 million in 2012. Financing and
Financing and leasing assets in Corporate Finance totaled $6.9 Leasing assets sold totaled $803 million in 2014, compared
billion at December 31, 2014, up slightly from December 31, 2013 to $439 million in 2013 and $948 million in 2012.
and from $6.6 billion at December 31, 2012. Equipment Finance - FSA-related counterparty receivable accretion totaled $8
assets grew to $5.0 billion from $4.3 billion at December 31, 2013, million, compared to $7 million in 2013 and $68 million in
reflecting the Direct Capital acquisition, and from $3.8 billion at 2012. There is no longer any balance to accrete.
December 31, 2012. Real Estate Finance loans totaled $1.8 billion - Recoveries of loans charged off pre-emergence and loans
at December 31, 2014, up from $1.6 billion and $0.6 billion at charged off prior to transfer to assets held for sale totaled
December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Commercial Services $13 million in 2014, unchanged from 2013 and down from
factoring receivables and loans of $2.6 billion were up from $2.3 $45 million in 2012.
billion at each of December 31, 2013 and 2012. - Fee revenue was $81 million in 2014, compared to $82
CIT Bank originated the vast majority of the U.S. funded loan and million in 2013 and $67 million in 2012. Fee revenue is mainly
lease volume in each of the periods presented. At December 31, driven by syndication fees, arranger fees, agent fees and
2014, over 75% of this segment’s financing and leasing assets fees from issuing letters of credit and on unused lines of
were in the Bank. credit.
- 2013 also included gains on workout-related claims of $19
New business pricing in each of our units remains competitive, million.
and was relatively consistent throughout 2014. - Credit metrics remained at or near cycle lows. Non-accrual
Highlights included: loans declined to $101 million (0.63% of finance receivables),
from $147 million (1.00%) at December 31, 2013 and $218
- NFR was down slightly from 2013 and up from 2012. Because of million (1.66%) at December 31, 2012. Net charge-offs were $56
the significant impact accelerated debt repayments had on million (0.36% of average finance receivables) in 2014,
prior periods, it is more meaningful to exclude the accelerated compared to $19 million (0.13%) in 2013 and $52 million (0.42%)
accretion. Excluding accelerated debt FSA, NFR of $563 million in 2012. Net charge-offs for 2014 included $18 million related to
was down from $582 million in 2013 and $689 million in 2012. the transfer of receivables to AHFS compared to $5 million in
NFR, excluding accelerated debt FSA accretion, benefited from 2013.
a higher level of earning assets and lower funding costs in 2014 - Operating expenses largely reflected the benefits of operating
and 2013, which were offset by a declining benefit from net FSA efficiencies gained compared to 2013 and 2012, offset by the
accretion and lower yields on certain loan products. Net FSA additional costs related to the acquisition of Direct Capital.
accretion, excluding the accelerated debt accretion, increased
Non-Strategic Portfolios (NSP) under definitive sale agreements. On June 27, 2014, we com-
pleted the sale of the Small Business Lending (”SBL“) division,
NSP consisted of portfolios that we no longer consider strategic.
with results included in the 2014 financials.
At December 31, 2014, these consisted primarily of equipment
financing portfolios in Mexico and Brazil, both of which were
Non-Strategic Portfolios – Financial Data and Metrics (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
Earnings Summary
Interest income $ 90.5 $ 157.2 $ 180.3
Provision for credit losses 0.4 (10.8) 7.3
Other income (57.6) (14.6) (9.1)
Maintenance and other operating lease expenses – (0.1) (0.1)
Loss before provision for income taxes $(102.1) $ (62.8) $ (125.0)
Pre-tax loss – excluding debt redemption charges and accelerated OID on
debt extinguishment related to the GSI facility(1) $(102.1) $ (57.4) $ (85.5)
Average finance receivables (AFR) $ 151.2 $1,128.6 $1,490.7
Average earning assets (AEA) 832.2 1,771.7 1,976.7
Statistical Data
depreciation expense and maintenance and other operating lease
expenses) (NFR) $ 29.7 $ 105.7 $ 22.5
New business volume $ 216.5 $ 713.0 $ 911.6
(1)
Pre-tax losses continued in 2014, driven by lower asset levels - Other income declined from the prior years, reflecting:
from reduced business activity and lower other income. 2013 and - A gain of $1 million on $483 million of receivable and equipment
2012 pre-tax results were also impacted by accelerated debt FSA
sales in 2014, which included approximately $340 million of assets
and OID accretion of $5 million and $40 million, respectively,
related to the SBL portfolio. Gains totaled $57 million on $656
reflecting debt prepayment activities.
million of receivable and equipment sales in 2013, which included
Financing and leasing assets totaled $380 million at approximately $470 million of assets related to the Dell Europe
December 31, 2014, down from $1.3 billion at December 31, 2013 portfolio sale. Gains totaled $22 million on $43 million of
and $2.0 billion at December 31, 2012. The current year decline equipment and receivable sales in 2012. The 2013 gain included
reflected the exit from all the sub-scale countries in Asia and $50 million on the sale of the Dell Europe portfolio, whereas the
Europe, and several in Latin America, as well as our SBL portfolio. 2012 gain included $14 million related to the sale of our Dell
Essentially the entire remaining balance consists of the portfolios Europe operating platform.
in Mexico and Brazil. We have entered into definitive agreements - Impairment charges recorded on international equipment
to sell these businesses and both transactions are subject to cus- finance portfolios and operating lease equipment held for
tomary regulatory approvals. We anticipate closing the Mexico sale. Total impairment charges were $70 million for 2014,
transaction in the 2015 first quarter and Brazil in the second half compared to $105 million and $81 million for the 2013 and
of 2015. During 2013, we completed the sale of the Dell Europe 2012, respectively. The 2014 impairment charges related
portfolio, approximately $470 million of financing and leasing mostly to fair value adjustments to portfolios in AHFS as part
assets, as well as certain other foreign portfolios. of our international rationalization. The majority of the 2013
and 2012 impairments related to charges on operating
Highlights included:
leases recorded in assets held for sale ($62 million in 2013
- Net finance revenue (”NFR“) was down from 2013, driven by and $80 million in 2012), which had a nearly offsetting benefit
lower earning assets. There was minimal net FSA accretion in in net finance revenue related to suspended depreciation,
2014, while NFR included total net FSA accretion costs of $20 and for portfolios transferred to AHFS as part of our
million in 2013 and $122 million in 2012. international rationalization. See ”Non-interest Income“ and

”Expenses“ for discussions on impairment charges and the exits in Mexico and Brazil and the closing of several legal
suspended depreciation on operating lease equipment held entities in Europe and Asia we expect to eliminate
for sale. approximately $15 million from our quarterly expenses.
- The remaining balance mostly includes fee revenue,
Corporate and Other
recoveries of loans charged off pre-emergence and loans
charged off prior to transfer to held for sale and other Certain items are not allocated to operating segments and are
revenues. Fee revenue included servicing fees related to the included in Corporate and Other, including unallocated interest
small business lending portfolio, which totaled $5 million in expense, primarily related to corporate liquidity costs (Interest
2014 and $11 million for each of 2013 and 2012, which were Expense), mark-to-market adjustments on non-qualifying deriva-
no longer earned subsequent to the sale of that portfolio tives (Other Income), restructuring charges for severance and
in 2014. facilities exit activities and certain legal costs and unallocated
expenses (Operating Expenses). Corporate and Other also
- Operating expenses were down, primarily reflecting lower cost
reflects net gains or losses on debt extinguishments.
due to the sales in 2014 and 2013, including SBL, Dell Europe
operations and other international operations. As we complete
Corporate and Other – Financial Data (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
Earnings Summary
Interest income $ 14.2 $ 14.5 $ 19.0
Provision for credit losses (0.2) 0.1 (0.2)
Other income (24.9) 7.2 2.8
Loss on debt extinguishments (3.5) – (61.2)
Loss before provision for income taxes $(148.3) $(131.4) $(391.5)
Pre-tax loss – excluding debt redemption charges and accelerated OID on
debt extinguishment related to the GSI facility(1) $(144.8) $(130.4) $(149.3)
(1)
- Interest income consists of interest and dividend income - Operating expenses reflects salary and general and
primarily from deposits held at other depository institutions administrative expenses in excess of amounts allocated to the
and other investment securities. business segments and litigation-related costs, including $50
- Interest expense is allocated to the segments. Amounts in million in 2013 related to the Tyco tax agreement settlement.
excess of these allocations and amounts related to excess Operating expenses also included $31 million, $37 million and
liquidity are held in Corporate. Interest expense also reflects $23 million related to provision for severance and facilities
certain FSA amounts, $17 million in 2014, while 2013 and 2012 exiting activities during 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
included $8 million and $196 million, respectively. - The 2012 loss on debt extinguishments resulted primarily from
- Other income primarily reflects gains and (losses) on repayments of Series C Notes.
derivatives, including the GSI facilities, which drove the
balances in 2014, and foreign currency exchange. The GSI
derivative had a negative mark-to-market of $15 million in 2014.
FINANCING AND LEASING ASSETS
The following table presents our financing and leasing assets by segment.
Financing and Leasing Asset Composition (dollars in millions)
December 31,
$ Change $ Change
2014 2013 2012 2014 vs 2013 2013 vs 2012
Transportation & International Finance
Loans $ 3,558.9 $ 3,494.4 $ 2,556.5 $ 64.5 $ 937.9
Operating lease equipment, net 14,665.2 12,778.5 12,178.0 1,886.7 600.5
Assets held for sale 815.2 158.5 173.6 656.7 (15.1)
Financing and leasing assets 19,039.3 16,431.4 14,908.1 2,607.9 1,523.3
Aerospace
Loans 1,796.5 1,247.7 1,217.6 548.8 30.1
Operating lease equipment, net 8,949.5 8,267.9 8,105.2 681.6 162.7
Assets held for sale 391.6 148.8 171.8 242.8 (23.0)
Financing and leasing assets 11,137.6 9,664.4 9,494.6 1,473.2 169.8
Rail
Loans 130.0 107.2 117.0 22.8 (9.8)
Operating lease equipment, net 5,715.2 4,503.9 4,060.7 1,211.3 443.2
Assets held for sale 1.2 3.3 1.8 (2.1) 1.5
Financing and leasing assets 5,846.4 4,614.4 4,179.5 1,232.0 434.9
Maritime Finance
Loans 1,006.7 412.6 – 594.1 412.6
Assets held for sale 19.7 – – 19.7 –
Financing and leasing assets 1,026.4 412.6 – 613.8 412.6
International Finance
Loans 625.7 1,726.9 1,221.9 (1,101.2) 505.0
Operating lease equipment, net 0.5 6.7 12.1 (6.2) (5.4)
Assets held for sale 402.7 6.4 – 396.3 6.4
Financing and leasing assets 1,028.9 1,740.0 1,234.0 (711.1) 506.0
North American Commercial Finance
Loans 15,936.0 14,693.1 13,084.4 1,242.9 1,608.7
Operating lease equipment, net 265.2 240.5 150.9 24.7 89.6
Assets held for sale 22.8 38.2 42.1 (15.4) (3.9)
Financing and leasing assets 16,224.0 14,971.8 13,277.4 1,252.2 1,694.4
Corporate Finance
Loans 6,889.9 6,831.8 6,501.0 58.1 330.8
Operating lease equipment, net – 6.2 16.2 (6.2) (10.0)
Financing and leasing assets 6,912.7 6,876.2 6,551.3 36.5 324.9
Equipment Finance
Loans 4,717.3 4,044.1 3,662.0 673.2 382.1
Operating lease equipment, net 265.2 234.3 134.7 30.9 99.6
Assets held for sale – – 8.0 – (8.0)
Financing and leasing assets 4,982.5 4,278.4 3,804.7 704.1 473.7
Real Estate Finance
Loans 1,768.6 1,554.8 616.1 213.8 938.7
Commercial Services
Loans and factoring receivables 2,560.2 2,262.4 2,305.3 297.8 (42.9)
Non-Strategic Portfolios
Loans 0.1 441.7 1,512.2 (441.6) (1,070.5)
Operating lease equipment, net – 16.4 82.8 (16.4) (66.4)
Financing and leasing assets 380.2 1,264.8 2,024.1 (884.6) (759.3)
Total financing and leasing assets $35,643.5 $32,668.0 $30,209.6 $ 2,975.5 $ 2,458.4

Financing and leasing assets continued to grow in 2014, reflect- The 2014 decline in NSP primarily reflected sales, which included the
ing strong new business volumes and acquisitions, partially offset remaining SBL portfolio, limited new business volumes and portfolio
by portfolio collections and prepayments and asset sales. runoff. The remaining AHFS primarily reflected the Mexico and Brazil
portfolios, each subject to separate sales agreements.
Growth in TIF during 2014 was driven by the transportation divi-
sions, reflecting solid new business volume, and was Financing and leasing assets increased in 2013 from 2012, reflect-
supplemented by the acquisition of Nacco that added approxi- ing strong new business volumes and portfolio purchases,
mately $650 million of operating lease equipment. As we partially offset by portfolio collections and prepayments and
reevaluated certain International Finance portfolios during 2014, asset sales. Operating lease equipment increased, primarily
higher asset sales resulted in lower asset balances in that divi- reflecting scheduled equipment deliveries in Aerospace and Rail.
sion. TIF financing and leasing assets AHFS were mainly Assets held for sale totaled $1.0 billion at December 31, 2013,
comprised of a $400 million U.K. portfolio and aircraft, including and included assets associated with our subscale and interna-
$225 million to be sold to the TC-CIT Aviation joint venture. See tional platform rationalization efforts, primarily portfolios in
”Results by Business Segment“ for detail. Europe and South America, and a small business lending portfo-
lio in NSP and mostly aerospace equipment in TIF.
Growth in NACF in 2014 was led by Equipment Finance, which
included the acquisition of Direct Capital that increased loans by Financing and leasing asset trends are discussed in the respective
approximately $540 million at the time of acquisition in the third quar- segment descriptions in ”Results by Business Segment“.
ter. Commercial Services grew by approximately 13% in 2014 and Real
The following table reflects the contractual maturities of our
Estate Finance also grew, but at a slower pace than in 2013.
finance receivables:
Contractual Maturities of Loans at December 31, 2014 (dollars in millions)

U.S. Foreign Total
Fixed-rate
1 year or less $ 3,662.2 $ 674.7 $ 4,336.9
Year 2 1,119.7 380.0 1,499.7
Year 3 793.3 251.0 1,044.3
Year 4 458.0 151.8 609.8
Year 5 229.8 100.9 330.7
2-5 years 2,600.8 883.7 3,484.5
After 5 years 440.7 205.7 646.4
Total fixed-rate 6,703.7 1,764.1 8,467.8
Adjustable-rate
1 year or less 536.6 270.0 806.6
Year 2 1,332.9 272.1 1,605.0
Year 3 1,497.8 313.7 1,811.5
Year 4 1,892.4 394.9 2,287.3
Year 5 1,327.6 539.1 1,866.7
2-5 years 6,050.7 1,519.8 7,570.5
After 5 years 2,179.7 470.4 2,650.1
Total adjustable-rate 8,767.0 2,260.2 11,027.2
Total $15,470.7 $4,024.3 $19,495.0
The following table presents the changes to our financing and leasing assets:
Financing and Leasing Assets Rollforward (dollars in millions)
Transportation North American
& International Commercial Non-Strategic
Finance Finance Portfolios Total
Balance at December 31, 2011 $13,702.8 $12,250.7 $1,959.4 $27,912.9
New business volume 2,825.7 5,862.9 911.6 9,600.2
Portfolio / business purchases 198.0 – – 198.0
Loan and portfolio sales – (448.7) (10.0) (458.7)
Equipment sales (750.0) (499.1) (33.0) (1,282.1)
Depreciation (410.9) (71.9) (30.4) (513.2)
Gross charge-offs (15.7) (98.9) (27.1) (141.7)
Collections and other (641.8) (3,717.6) (746.4) (5,105.8)
Balance at December 31, 2012 14,908.1 13,277.4 2,024.1 30,209.6
Portfolio / business purchases 154.3 720.4 – 874.7
Loan and portfolio sales (103.2) (129.4) (621.0) (853.6)
Equipment sales (874.8) (309.5) (34.8) (1,219.1)
Depreciation (433.3) (75.1) (32.2) (540.6)
Collections and other (771.7) (4,698.6) (730.0) (6,200.3)
Balance at December 31, 2013 16,431.4 14,971.8 1,264.8 32,668.0
Portfolio / business purchases 649.2 536.6 – 1,185.8
Loan and portfolio sales (474.1) (460.6) (454.2) (1,388.9)
Equipment sales (780.5) (342.1) (28.3) (1,150.9)
Depreciation (519.6) (81.7) (14.4) (615.7)
Collections and other (1,237.3) (4,526.4) (596.7) (6,360.4)
Balance at December 31, 2014 $19,039.3 $16,224.0 $ 380.2 $35,643.5
New business volume in 2014 increased 9% from 2013 following a year and NSP primarily consisted of the small business loan port-
10% increase from 2012, reflecting solid demand for TIF and folio, along with some international portfolios. NSP 2013 activity
NACF products and services. TIF new business volume primarily reflected sales of sub-scale platforms associated with our interna-
reflects scheduled aircraft and railcar deliveries, and increased tional platform rationalization efforts and approximately $470
maritime finance lending. NACF maintained its strong perfor- million of Dell Europe receivables. The 2012 sales in NACF pri-
mance from 2013. New business volume was down slightly in marily reflected corporate loans.
NACF, as the decline in Corporate Finance activity, mostly in the
Equipment sales in TIF consisted of aerospace and rail assets in
commercial and industrial industries, offset the increase in Equip-
conjunction with its portfolio management activities and strategic
ment Finance, which also included solid activity from Direct
initiatives, including sales to the TC-CIT Aviation joint venture.
Capital. NSP was down from 2013 and 2012 resulting from our
NACF sales reflect assets within Equipment Finance and Corpo-
international platform rationalization.
rate Finance, while NSP sales included Dell Europe assets in 2013
Portfolio/business purchases included Nacco in TIF and Direct and 2012.
Capital in NACF during 2014 and a commercial loan portfolio in
Portfolio activities are discussed in the respective segment
NACF and a portfolio in TIF during 2013.
descriptions in ”Results by Business Segment“.
Loan and portfolio sales in TIF during 2014 reflect international
portfolios, while NACF had various loan sales throughout the

CONCENTRATIONS
Ten Largest Accounts Geographic Concentrations

Our ten largest financing and leasing asset accounts, the vast The following table represents the financing and leasing assets
majority of which are lessors of air and rail assets, in the aggre- by obligor geography:
gate represented 11.1% of our total financing and leasing assets
at December 31, 2014 (the largest account was less than 2.2%).
The ten largest financing and leasing asset accounts were 9.8% at
both December 31, 2013 and 2012.
Financing and Leasing Assets by Obligor – Geographic Region (dollars in millions)

Northeast $ 6,552.0 18.4% $ 5,933.1 18.2% $ 4,495.4 14.9%
Southwest 3,852.8 10.8% 3,606.9 11.1% 3,090.8 10.2%
Midwest 3,821.6 10.7% 3,762.5 11.5% 3,970.9 13.2%
Southeast 3,732.9 10.5% 2,690.2 8.2% 2,612.9 8.7%
West 3,183.1 8.9% 3,238.6 9.9% 3,092.9 10.2%
Total U.S. 21,142.4 59.3% 19,231.3 58.9% 17,262.9 57.2%
Asia / Pacific 4,712.8 13.2% 4,017.9 12.3% 3,790.0 12.5%
Europe 3,192.4 9.0% 3,692.4 11.3% 3,386.7 11.2%
Canada 2,520.6 7.1% 2,287.0 7.0% 2,255.1 7.5%
Latin America 1,651.7 4.6% 1,743.1 5.3% 1,934.3 6.4%
All other countries 2,423.6 6.8% 1,696.3 5.2% 1,580.6 5.2%
Total $35,643.5 100.0% $32,668.0 100.0% $30,209.6 100.0%
The following table summarizes both state concentrations greater than 5.0% and international country concentrations in excess of 1.0% of
our financing and leasing assets:
Financing and Leasing Assets by Obligor – State and Country (dollars in millions)
State
Texas $ 3,261.4 9.1% $ 3,022.4 9.3% $ 2,466.2 8.2%
New York 2,492.3 7.0% 2,323.3 7.1% 1,836.1 6.1%
All other states 15,388.7 43.2% 13,885.6 42.5% 12,960.6 42.9%
Total U.S. $21,142.4 59.3% $19,231.3 58.9% $17,262.9 57.2%
Country
Canada $ 2,520.6 7.1% $ 2,287.0 7.0% $ 2,255.1 7.5%
China 1,043.7 2.9% 969.1 2.9% 1,113.5 3.7%
Australia 1,029.1 2.9% 974.4 3.0% 1,041.8 3.4%
England 855.3 2.4% 1,166.5 3.6% 941.9 3.1%
Mexico 670.7 1.9% 819.9 2.5% 940.5 3.1%
Brazil 579.5 1.6% 710.3 2.2% 685.6 2.3%
Philippines 511.3 1.4% 255.9 0.8% 172.8 0.6%
Indonesia 424.4 1.2% 285.9 0.8% 319.9 1.0%
Russia(1) 400.0 1.1% 355.9 1.1% 322.9 1.1%
France 340.6 1.0% 294.7 0.9% 248.2 0.8%
Spain 339.4 1.0% 450.7 1.4% 459.1 1.5%
All other countries 5,786.5 16.2% 4,866.4 14.9% 4,445.4 14.7%
Total International $14,501.1 40.7% $13,436.7 41.1% $12,946.7 42.8%
(1)
Most of the balance represents operating lease equipment.
Cross-Border Transactions
Cross-border transactions reflect monetary claims on borrowers domiciled in foreign countries and primarily include cash deposited with
foreign banks and receivables from residents of a foreign country, reduced by amounts funded in the same currency and recorded in the
same jurisdiction. The following table includes all countries that we have cross-border claims of 0.75% or greater of total consolidated
assets at December 31, 2014:
Cross-border Outstandings as of December 31 (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012

Exposure Exposure Exposure
as a as a as a
Net Local Percentage Percentage Percentage
Country Total of Total Total of Total Total of Total
Country Banks(**) Government Other Claims Exposure Assets Exposure Assets Exposure Assets
Canada $ 76 $ – $173 $1,148 $1,397 2.92% $1,784.0 3.78% $1,285.0 2.92%
United Kingdom 562 2 269 296 1,129 2.36% 1,317.0 2.79% 449.0 1.02%
China – – 126 727 853 1.78% 881.0 1.87% 335.0 0.76%
Marshall Islands – – 687 – 687 1.43% – – – –
France 3 – 412 11 426 0.89% 586.0 1.24% 566.0 1.29%
Germany – – – – (*) – 442.0 0.94% (*) –
Mexico – – – – – – 406.0 0.86% (*) –
Netherlands – – – – (*) – (*) – 364.0 0.83%
(*) Cross-border outstandings were less than 0.75% of total consolidated assets
(**) Claims from Bank counterparts include claims outstanding from derivative products.
Industry Concentrations
The following table represents financing and leasing assets by industry of obligor:
Financing and Leasing Assets by Obligor – Industry (dollars in millions)

Commercial airlines (including regional
airlines)(1) $10,313.7 28.9% $ 8,972.4 27.5% $ 9,039.2 29.9%
Manufacturing(2) 4,702.6 13.2% 4,311.9 13.2% 4,181.1 13.8%
Retail(3) 3,187.8 8.9% 3,063.1 9.4% 3,010.7 10.0%
Transportation(4) 2,872.5 8.1% 2,515.9 7.7% 2,379.6 7.9%
Service industries 2,553.6 7.2% 3,123.4 9.6% 3,039.8 10.1%
Wholesale 1,710.3 4.8% 1,394.1 4.3% 884.4 2.9%
Real Estate 1,590.5 4.5% 1,351.4 4.1% 694.5 2.3%
Energy and utilities 1,513.2 4.2% 1,384.6 4.2% 1,078.8 3.6%
Oil and gas extraction / services 1,483.4 4.2% 1,157.1 3.5% 990.3 3.3%
Finance and insurance 1,272.1 3.6% 787.0 2.4% 729.9 2.4%
Healthcare 1,159.7 3.3% 1,393.1 4.3% 1,466.7 4.8%
Other (no industry greater than 2%) 3,284.1 9.1% 3,214.0 9.8% 2,714.6 9.0%
Total $35,643.5 100.0% $32,668.0 100.0% $30,209.6 100.0%
Certain prior period balances in the table have been conformed to the current period presentation.
(1)
Includes the Commercial Aerospace Portfolio and additional financing and leasing assets that are not commercial aircraft.
(2)
At December 31, 2014, includes petroleum and coal, including refining (1.5%),manufacturers of chemicals, including pharmaceuticals (3.4%), Electrical and
Electronic Equipment (1.0%) and Stone, Clay, Glass & Concrete (1.0%).
(3)
At December 31, 2014, includes retailers of apparel (4.2%) and general merchandise (1.7%).
(4)
At December 31, 2014, includes rail (3.9%), maritime (1.8%) and trucking and shipping (1.6%).
Direct exposure to customers in the energy industry includes $1.5 services includes railcars, primarily tank and sand railcars, leased
billion in energy and utilities and $1.5 billion in the oil and gas to companies in these industries. There is also approximately $0.5
extraction/services industries. Energy and utilities primarily con- billion of loans that are exposed to oil (primarily in oil and gas
sists of project finance transactions supporting unregulated extraction/services), of which approximately 80% is secured and
power generation plants, mostly fueled by natural gas. Approxi- approximately two-thirds is with oilfield services companies.
mately $1 billion of the exposure to oil and gas extraction/

Operating Lease Equipment — Rail 2014, the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Adminis-
tration (”PHMSA“) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
As detailed in the following table, at December 31, 2014, TIF had
(”NPRM“) on Enhanced Tank Car Standards and Operational
approximately 120,000 railcars and 390 locomotives on operating
Controls for High Hazard Flammable Trains seeking public com-
lease. We also have commitments to purchase railcars, as dis-
ment on tank cars standards, braking systems, speed restrictions,
closed in Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,
rail routing and notifications to state emergency responders. The
Note 21 — Commitments.
NPRM also requested comment on retrofit standards and sched-
Railcar Type Owned Fleet Purchase Orders ule for existing tank cars in high-hazard flammable trains. The
Covered Hoppers 45,026 5,826 NPRM is complex and will require extensive review. In addition,
the PHMSA proposed three different options for new tank car
Tank Cars 30,765 5,212
standards in the NPRM and raised questions to which public
Coal 12,483 – comment and discussion is requested.
Mill/Coil Gondolas 14,128 –
Until PHMSA and TC release their proposed rules, we will be
Boxcars 8,539 – unable to assess how any final regulations may impact CIT and
Flatcars 5,524 – what changes may be required with respect to our tank cars in
Locomotives 390 – Flammable Liquids service, including the scope and cost to CIT
of any retrofit program and the timing of required implementa-
Other 3,197 –
tion of any retrofitting requirements. Since the average age of
Total 120,052 11,038 our affected fleet is relatively young, we expect to retrofit most, if
not all, of our cars pursuant to the regulations and to amortize
TIF’s global Rail business has a fleet of approximately 120,000 and recover the cost over the remaining asset life. We do not
railcars, including approximately 31,000 tank cars. The North expect these operational and regulatory changes will have a
American fleet has approximately 19,000 tank cars used in the material impact on our business or financial results.
transport of crude oil, ethanol and other flammable liquids (col-
lectively, ”Flammable Liquids“). Of the 19,000 tank cars, Operating Lease Equipment — Aerospace
approximately 12,000 tank cars are leased directly to customers As detailed in the following table, at December 31, 2014, TIF had
for the transportation of crude by rail. In addition, the owned 279 commercial aircraft on operating lease. We also have com-
fleet contains 9,000 covered hoppers that carry sand to support mitments to purchase aircraft, as disclosed in Item 8. Financial
crude oil and natural gas drilling. Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 21 — Commitments.
Following several highly-publicized derailments of tank cars since Aircraft Type Owned Fleet Order Book
mid-2013, U.S. and Canadian government agencies and industry
Airbus A319/320/321 122 55
groups agreed to implement a number of operational changes,
including requiring multiple crew members on all trains carrying Airbus A330 38 20
hazardous materials, prohibiting unattended trains on main lines, Airbus A350 – 14
increasing track inspections, reducing speeds in populated areas, Boeing 737 82 44
redirecting trains around high-risk areas, and mandating the test-
Boeing 757 8 –
ing and classification of crude oil prior to shipment. In addition,
in April, 2014, Transport Canada (”TC“) issued an order prohibit- Boeing 767 6 –
ing the use of certain older tank cars in dangerous goods service Boeing 787 2 18
in Canada effective immediately, however CIT had no railcars Embraer 145 1 –
impacted by the order.
Embraer 175 4 –
On June 27, 2014, TC announced proposed amendments under Embraer 190/195 15 1
the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Act, the Railway Safety
Management System Regulations, and the Transportation Infor- Other 1 –
mation Regulations that will, among other safety requirements for Total 279 152
railways, formalize new DOT-111 tank car standards. On July 23,
Commercial Aerospace The information presented below by region, manufacturer, and body
The following tables present detail on our commercial and type, is based on our operating lease aircraft portfolio which comprises
regional aerospace portfolio (”Commercial Aerospace“). The net 91% of our total commercial aerospace portfolio and substantially all of
investment in regional aerospace financing and leasing assets our owned fleet of leased aircraft at December 31, 2014.
was $48 million, $52 million and $80 million at December 31, 2014
and 2013 and 2012, respectively, and was substantially comprised
of loans and capital leases.
Commercial Aerospace Portfolio (dollars in millions)

Net Net Net
Investment Number Investment Number Investment Number
By Product:
Operating lease(1) $ 9,309.3 279 $8,379.3 270 $8,238.8 268
Loan(2) 635.0 50 505.3 39 666.7 64
Capital lease 335.6 21 31.7 8 40.4 10
Total $10,279.9 350 $8,916.3 317 $8,945.9 342
Commercial Aerospace Operating Lease Portfolio(1)

Net Net Net
Investment Number Investment Number Investment Number
By Region:
Asia / Pacific $3,610.0 88 $3,065.1 81 $3,071.3 83
Europe 2,135.4 82 2,408.8 91 2,343.2 86
U.S. and Canada 1,802.6 57 1,276.5 43 1,049.9 38
Latin America 994.9 37 940.3 38 1,020.2 42
Africa / Middle East 766.4 15 688.6 17 754.2 19
Total $9,309.3 279 $8,379.3 270 $8,238.8 268
By Manufacturer:
Airbus $5,985.5 160 $5,899.1 167 $5,602.6 162
Boeing 2,711.6 98 2,038.7 87 2,301.0 94
Embraer 547.2 20 441.5 16 324.8 12
Other 65.0 1 – – 10.4 –
Total $9,309.3 279 $8,379.3 270 $8,238.8 268
(3)
By Body Type :
Narrow body $6,287.8 230 $6,080.6 230 $5,966.6 227
Intermediate 2,955.3 47 2,297.3 39 2,222.6 39
Wide body – – – – 37.5 1
Regional and other 66.2 2 1.4 1 12.1 1
Total $9,309.3 279 $8,379.3 270 $8,238.8 268
Number of customers 98 98 97
Weighted average age of fleet (years) 5 5 5
(1)
Includes operating lease equipment held for sale.
(2)
Plane count excludes aircraft in which our net investment consists of syndicated financings against multiple aircraft. The net investment associated with such
financings was $39 million at December 31, 2014, $45 million at December 31, 2013, and $50 million at December 31, 2012.
(3)
Narrow body are single aisle design and consist primarily of Boeing 737 and 757 series, Airbus A320 series, and Embraer E170 and E190 aircraft. Intermedi-
ate body are smaller twin aisle design and consist primarily of Boeing 767 series and Airbus A330 series aircraft. Wide body are large twin aisle design, such
as Boeing 747 and 777 series aircraft. Regional and Other includes aircraft and related equipment, such as engines.
Our top five commercial aerospace outstanding exposures Commitments in Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary
totaled $2,595.1 million at December 31, 2014. The largest indi- Data for additional information regarding commitments to pur-
vidual outstanding exposure totaled $759.6 million at chase additional aircraft.
December 31, 2014, which was to a U.S. carrier. See Note 21 —

RISK MANAGEMENT
CIT is subject to a variety of risks that may arise through the GOVERNANCE AND SUPERVISION
Company’s business activities, including the following principal
CIT’s Risk Management Group (”RMG“) has established a Risk
forms of risk:
Governance Framework that is intended to promote appropriate
- Strategic risk is the impact on earnings or capital arising from risk identification, measurement, monitoring, management and
adverse strategic business decisions, improper implementation control. The Risk Governance Framework is focused on:
of strategic decisions, or lack of responsiveness to changes in - the major risks inherent to CIT’s business activities, as defined
the industry, including changes in the financial services industry
above;
as well as fundamental changes in the businesses in which our - the Enterprise Risk Framework, which includes the policies,
customers and our Company engages.
procedures, practices and resources used to manage and
- Credit risk is the risk of loss (including the incurrence of
assess these risks, and the decision-making governance
additional expenses) when a borrower does not meet its
structure that supports it;
financial obligations to the Company. Credit risk may arise from - the Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance Framework, which defines
lending, leasing, and/or counterparty activities.
the level and type of risk CIT is willing to assume in its
- Asset risk is the equipment valuation and residual risk of lease
exposures and business activities, given its business objectives,
equipment owned by the Company that arises from fluctuations
and sets limits, credit authorities, target performance metrics,
in the supply and demand for the underlying leased
underwriting standards and risk acceptance criteria used to
equipment. The Company is exposed to the risk that, at the
define and guide the decision-making processes; and
end of the lease term, the value of the asset will be lower than - management information systems, including data, models,
expected, resulting in either reduced future lease income over
analytics and risk reporting, to enable adequate identification,
the remaining life of the asset or a lower sale value.
monitoring and reporting of risks for proactive management.
- Market risk includes interest rate risk and foreign currency risk.
Interest rate risk is the impact that fluctuations in interest rates The Risk Management Committee (”RMC“) of the Board oversees
will have on the Company’s net finance revenue and on the the major risks inherent to CIT’s business activities and the con-
market value of the Company’s assets, liabilities and trol processes with respect to such risks. The Chief Risk Officer
derivatives. Foreign exchange risk is the economic impact that (”CRO“) supervises CIT’s risk management functions through the
fluctuations in exchange rates between currencies can have on RMG and reports regularly to the RMC of the Board on the status
the Company’s non-dollar denominated assets and liabilities. of CIT’s risk management program. Within the RMG, officers with
- Liquidity risk is the risk that the Company has an inability to reporting lines to the CRO supervise and manage groups and
maintain adequate cash resources and funding capacity to departments with specific risk management responsibilities.
meet its obligations, including under stress scenarios. The Credit Risk Management (”CRM“) group manages and
- Capital risk is the risk that the Company does not have approves all credit risk throughout CIT. This group is led by the
adequate capital to cover its risks and to support its growth Chief Credit Officer (”CCO“), and includes the heads of credit for
and strategic objectives. each business, the head of Problem Loan Management, Credit
- Operational risk is the risk of financial loss, damage to the Control and Credit Administration. The CCO chairs several key
Company’s reputation, or other adverse impacts resulting from governance committees, including the Corporate Credit
inadequate or failed internal processes and systems, people or Committee (”CCC“).
external events.
- Information Technology Risk is the risk of financial loss, damage The Enterprise Risk Management (”ERM“) group is responsible
to the company’s reputation or other adverse impacts resulting for oversight of asset risk, market risk, liquidity risk, capital risk,
from unauthorized (malicious or accidental) disclosure, operational risk, model development, analytics, risk data
modification, or destruction of information, including cyber- and reporting.
crime, unintentional errors and omissions, IT disruptions due to The Chief Model Risk Officer reports directly to the CRO, and is
natural or man-made disasters, or failure to exercise due care responsible for model governance, validation and monitoring
and diligence in the implementation and operation of an IT
system. The Chief Information Risk Officer reports to the CRO and is
- Legal and Regulatory Risk is the risk that the Company is not in responsible for IT Risk, Business Continuity Planning and
compliance with applicable laws and regulations, which may Disaster Recovery.
result in fines, regulatory criticism or business restrictions, or The Risk Framework, Risk Policy & Governance are also managed
damage to the Company’s reputation. through a direct report to the CRO.
- Reputational Risk is the potential that negative publicity,
whether true or not, will cause a decline in the value of the Credit Review is an independent oversight function that is responsible
Company due to changes in the customer base, costly for performing internal credit-related reviews for the organization as
litigation, or other revenue reductions. well as the ongoing monitoring, testing, and measurement of credit
quality and credit process risk in enterprise-wide lending and leasing
activities. Credit Review reports to the RMC of the Board and adminis-
tratively into the CRO.
The Compliance function reports to the Audit Committee of the impairment based upon collateral value and projected cash flows
Board and administratively into the CRO. and relevant market data with any impairment in value charged
to earnings.
Regulatory Relations reports to Internal Audit Services (”IAS“)
and the Chief Audit Executive. The Audit Committee and the Using our underwriting policies, procedures and practices, com-
Regulatory Compliance Committee of the Board oversee bined with credit judgment and quantitative tools, we evaluate
financial, legal, compliance, regulatory and audit risk financing and leasing assets for credit and collateral risk during
management practices. the credit decision-making process and after the advancement of
funds. We set forth our underwriting parameters based on: (1)
STRATEGIC RISK Target Market Definitions, which delineate risk by market, indus-
try, geography and product, (2) Risk Acceptance Criteria, which
Strategic risk management starts with analyzing the short and detail acceptable structures, credit profiles and risk-adjusted
medium term business and strategic plans established by the returns, and (3) through our Corporate Credit Policies. We cap-
Company. This includes the evaluation of the industry, opportuni- ture and analyze credit risk based on probability of obligor
ties and risks, market factors and the competitive environment, as default (”PD“) and loss given default (”LGD“). PD is determined
well as internal constraints, such as CIT’s risk appetite and control by evaluating borrower creditworthiness, including analyzing
environment. The business plan and strategic plan are linked to credit history, financial condition, cash flow adequacy, financial
the Risk Appetite and Risk Tolerance Frameworks, including the performance and management quality. LGD ratings, which esti-
limit structure. RMG is responsible for the New Product and Stra- mate loss if an account goes into default, are predicated on
tegic Initiative process. This process is intended to enable new transaction structure, collateral valuation and related guarantees
activities that are consistent with CIT’s expertise and risk appe- (including recourse to manufacturers, dealers or governments).
tite, and ensure that appropriate due diligence is completed on
We execute derivative transactions with our customers in order to
new strategies before approval and implementation. Changes in
help them mitigate their interest rate and currency risks. We typi-
the business environment and in the industry are evaluated peri-
cally enter into offsetting derivative transactions with third parties
odically through scenario development and analytics, and
in order to neutralize CIT’s interest rate exposure to these cus-
discussed with the business leaders, CEO and RMC.
tomer related derivative transactions. The counterparty credit
Strategic risk management includes the effective implementation exposure related to these transactions is monitored and evalu-
of new products and strategic initiatives. The New Product and ated as part of our credit risk management process.
Strategic Initiative process requires tracking and review of all Commercial Lending and Leasing. Commercial credit manage-
approved new initiatives. In the case of acquisitions, such as ment begins with the initial evaluation of credit risk and
Nacco and Direct Capital, integration planning and management underlying collateral at the time of origination and continues over
covers the implementation process across affected businesses the life of the finance receivable or operating lease, including
and functions. In the case of the OneWest Transaction, CIT will normal collection, recovery of past due balances and liquidating
also become a SIFI. SIFI planning and implementation is a cross underlying collateral.
functional effort, led by RMG and coordinated with the integra-
tion planning processes. Credit personnel review potential borrowers’ financial condition,
results of operations, management, industry, business model,
customer base, operations, collateral and other data, such as
CREDIT RISK
third party credit reports and appraisals, to evaluate the potential
Lending and Leasing Risk customer’s borrowing and repayment ability. Transactions are
The extension of credit through our lending and leasing activities graded by PD and LGD, as described above. Credit facilities are
is core to our businesses. As such, CIT’s credit risk management subject to our overall credit approval process and underwriting
process is centralized in the RMG, reporting into the CRO guidelines and are issued commensurate with the credit evalua-
through the CCO. This group establishes the Company’s under- tion performed on each prospective borrower, as well as portfolio
writing standards, approves extensions of credit, and is concentrations. Credit personnel continue to review the PD and
responsible for portfolio management, including credit grading LGD periodically. Decisions on continued creditworthiness or
and problem loan management. RMG reviews and monitors impairment of borrowers are determined through these
credit exposures with the goal of identifying, as early as possible, periodic reviews.
customers that are experiencing declining creditworthiness or Small-Ticket Lending and Leasing. For small-ticket lending and
financial difficulty. The CCO evaluates reserves through our leasing transactions, largely in Equipment Finance and NSP, we
Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses (”ALLL“) process for per- employ automated credit scoring models for origination (score-
forming loans and non-accrual loans, as well as establishing cards) and re-grading (auto re-grade algorithms). These are
nonspecific reserves to cover losses inherent in the portfolio. supplemented by business rules and expert judgment. The mod-
CIT’s portfolio is managed by setting limits and target perfor- els evaluate, among other things, financial performance metrics,
mance metrics, and monitoring risk concentrations by borrower, length of time in business, industry category and geography, and
industry, geography and equipment type. We set or modify Risk are used to assess a potential borrower’s credit standing and
Acceptance Criteria (underwriting standards) as conditions war- repayment ability, including the value of collateral. We utilize
rant, based on borrower risk, collateral, industry risk, portfolio external credit bureau scoring, when available, and behavioral
size and concentrations, credit concentrations and risk of sub- models, as well as judgment in the credit adjudication, evaluation
stantial credit loss. We evaluate our collateral and test for asset and collection processes.

We evaluate the small-ticket leasing portfolio using delinquency MARKET RISK

vintage curves and other tools to analyze trends and credit per-
CIT is exposed to interest rate and currency risk as a result of its
formance by transaction type, including analysis of specific credit
business activities. Generally, CIT does not pro-actively assume
characteristics and selected subsets of the portfolios. Adjust-
these risks as a way to make a return, as it does with credit and
ments to credit scorecards, auto re-grading algorithms, business
asset risk. RMG measures, monitors and sets limits on these
rules and lending programs are made periodically based on
exposures, by analyzing the impact of potential interest rate and
these evaluations. Individual underwriters are assigned credit
foreign exchange rate changes on financial performance. We
authority based upon experience, performance and understand-
consider factors such as customer prepayment trends and repric-
ing of underwriting policies of small-ticket leasing operations. A
ing characteristics of assets and liabilities. Our asset-liability
credit approval hierarchy is enforced to ensure that an under-
management system provides analytical capabilities to assess
writer with the appropriate level of authority reviews applications.
and measure the effects of various market rate scenarios upon
Counterparty Risk the Company’s financial performance.
We enter into interest rate and currency swaps and foreign Interest Rate Risk
exchange forward contracts as part of our overall risk manage-
Interest rate risk arises from lending, leasing, investments,
ment practices. We establish limits and evaluate and manage the
deposit taking and funding, as assets and liabilities reprice at dif-
counterparty risk associated with these derivative instruments
ferent times and by different amounts as interest rates change.
through our RMG.
We evaluate and monitor interest rate risk primarily through two
The primary risk of derivative instruments is counterparty credit metrics.
exposure, which is defined as the ability of a counterparty to per-
form financial obligations under the derivative contract. We seek
- Net Interest Income Sensitivity (”NII Sensitivity“), which
to control credit risk of derivative agreements through counter- measures the net impact of hypothetical changes in interest
party credit approvals, pre-established exposure limits and rates on net finance revenue; and
monitoring procedures.
- Economic Value of Equity (”EVE“), which measures the net
impact of these hypothetical changes on the value of equity by
The CCC, in conjunction with ERM, approves each counterparty assessing the market value of assets, liabilities and derivatives.
and establishes exposure limits based on credit analysis of each
counterparty. Derivative agreements entered into for our own risk Interest rate risk and sensitivity is influenced primarily by the
management purposes are generally entered into with major composition of the balance sheet, driven by the type of products
financial institutions rated investment grade by nationally recog- offered (fixed/floating rate loans and deposits), investments,
nized rating agencies. funding and hedging activities. Our assets are primarily com-
prised of commercial loans, operating leases, cash and
We also monitor and manage counterparty credit risk, for
investments. We use a variety of funding sources, including retail
example, through the use of exposure limits, related to our cash
and brokered CDs, savings accounts, and secured and unsecured
and short-term investment portfolio, including securities pur-
debt. Our leasing products are level/fixed payment transactions,
chased under agreements to resell.
whereas the interest rate on the majority of our commercial loan
ASSET RISK portfolio is based off of a floating rate index such as short-term
Libor or Prime. Our debt securities within the investment portfo-
Asset risk in our leasing business is evaluated and managed in the busi-
lio, securities purchased under agreements to resell and interest
ness units and overseen by RMG. Our business process consists of: (1)
bearing deposits (cash) have short durations and reprice fre-
setting residual values at transaction inception, (2) systematic residual
quently. With respect to liabilities, CDs and unsecured debt are
value reviews, and (3) monitoring levels of residual realizations. Residual
fixed rate, secured debt is a mix of fixed and floating rate, and
realizations, by business and product, are reviewed as part of our quar-
the rates on savings accounts are established based on the mar-
terly financial and asset quality review. Reviews for impairment are
ket environment and competition. The composition of our assets
performed at least annually.
and liabilities generally results in a relatively small net asset-
The RMG teams review the air and rail markets; monitoring traffic sensitive position at the shorter end of the yield curve, mostly to
flows, measuring supply and demand trends, and evaluating the moves in LIBOR, whereby our assets will reprice faster than
impact of new technology or regulatory requirements on supply our liabilities.
and demand for different types of equipment. Commercial air is
Deposits continued to grow as a percent of total funding. CIT
more global, while the rail market is regional, mainly North
Bank sources deposits primarily through direct-to-consumer (via
America and Europe. Demand for both passenger and freight
the internet) and brokered channels. At December 31, 2014, the
equipment is correlated with GDP growth trends for the markets
Bank had approximately $16 billion in deposits, more than half of
the equipment serves as well as the more immediate conditions
which were obtained through our direct channel while approxi-
of those markets. Cyclicality in the economy and shifts in travel
mately 38% were sourced through brokers with the remainder
and trade flows due to specific events (e.g., natural disasters,
from institutional and other sources. Fixed rate, term deposits
conflicts, political upheaval, disease, and terrorism) represent
represented over 62% of our deposit portfolio. The deposit rates
risks to the earnings that can be realized by these businesses. CIT
we offer can be influenced by market conditions and competitive
seeks to mitigate these risks by maintaining relatively young
factors. Changes in interest rates can affect our pricing and
fleets of assets with wide operator bases, which can facilitate
potentially impact our ability to gather and retain deposits. Rates
attractive lease and utilization rates.
offered by competitors also can influence our rates and our
ability to attract and hold deposits. In a rising rate environment, regularly stress test the effect of deposit rate changes on our
the Bank may need to increase rates to renew maturing deposits margins and seek to achieve optimal alignment between assets
and attract new deposits. Rates on our savings account deposits and liabilities from an interest rate risk management perspective.
may fluctuate due to pricing competition and may also move with
The table below summarizes the results of simulation modeling
short-term interest rates, on a lagging basis. In general, retail
produced by our asset/liability management system. The results
deposits represent a low-cost source of funds and are less sensi-
reflect the percentage change in the EVE and NII Sensitivity over
tive to interest rate changes than many non-deposit funding
the next twelve months assuming an immediate 100 basis point
sources. Our ability to gather brokered deposits may be more
parallel increase or decrease in interest rates. NII sensitivity is
sensitive to rate changes than other types of deposits. We man-
based on a static balance sheet projection.
age this risk by limiting maturity concentration and emphasizing
new issuance in long-dated maturities of up to ten years. We
December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013

+100 bps –100 bps +100 bps –100 bps
NII Sensitivity 6.4% (0.8)% 6.1% (0.9)%
EVE 1.9% (1.6)% 1.8% (2.0)%
A primary driver of the change in NII Sensitivity was the sale in flow analysis. Rates are shocked up and down via a set of sce-
April 2014 of the student lending business, which had, as of narios that include both parallel and non-parallel interest rate
December 31, 2013, a portfolio of $3.4 billion of government- movements. Scenarios are also run to capture our sensitivity to
guaranteed student loans and associated $3.3 billion of floating changes in the shape of the yield curve. Furthermore, we evalu-
rate debt that was extinguished upon sale. The December 31, ate the sensitivity of these results to a number of key
2013 amounts reflect the simulation results on our portfolio at assumptions, such as credit quality, spreads, and prepayments.
that time, which included the student lending business. Various holding periods of the operating lease assets are also
considered. These range from the current existing lease term to
As detailed in the above table, NII sensitivity is positive to an
longer terms which assume lease renewals consistent with man-
increase in interest rates. This is primarily driven by our cash and
agement’s expected holding period of a particular asset. NII
investment securities position, and floating rate commercial loan
Sensitivity and EVE limits have been set and are monitored for
portfolio, which reprice frequently. On a net basis, we generally
certain of the key scenarios. We manage the exposure to changes
have more floating/repricing assets than liabilities in the near
in NII Sensitivity and EVE in accordance with our risk appetite and
term. As a result, our current portfolio is more sensitive to moves
within Board approved policy limits.
in short-term interest rates in the near term. Therefore, our NFR
may increase if short-term interest rates rise, or decrease if short- We use results of our various interest rate risk analyses to formu-
term interest rates decline. Market implied forward rates over the late asset and liability management (”ALM“) strategies in order
subsequent future twelve months are used to determine a base to achieve the desired risk profile, while managing our objectives
interest rate scenario for the net interest income projection for for capital adequacy and liquidity risk exposures. Specifically, we
the base case. This base projection is compared with those calcu- manage our interest rate risk position through certain pricing
lated under varying interest rate scenarios such as 100 basis point strategies for loans and deposits, our investment strategy, issuing
parallel rate shift to arrive at NII Sensitivity. term debt with floating or fixed interest rates, and using deriva-
tives such as interest rate swaps, which modify the interest rate
EVE complements net interest income simulation and sensitivity
characteristics of certain assets or liabilities.
analysis as it estimates risk exposures beyond a twelve month
horizon. EVE modeling measures the extent to which the eco- These measurements provide an estimate of our interest rate sen-
nomic value of assets, liabilities and off-balance sheet sitivity, however, they do not account for potential changes in
instruments may change in response to fluctuations in interest credit quality, size, and prepayment characteristics of our balance
rates. EVE is calculated by subjecting the balance sheet to differ- sheet. They also do not account for other business developments
ent rate shocks, measuring the net value of assets, liabilities and that could affect net income, or for management actions that
off-balance sheet instruments, and comparing those amounts could affect net income or that could be taken to change our risk
with the base case of an unchanged interest rate environment. profile. Accordingly, we can give no assurance that actual results
The duration of our liabilities is greater than that of our assets, in would not differ materially from the estimated outcomes of our
that we have more fixed rate liabilities than assets in the longer simulations. Further, the range of such simulations does not rep-
term, causing EVE to increase under increasing rates and resent our current view of the expected range of future interest
decrease under decreasing rates. The methodology with which rate movements.
the operating lease assets are assessed in the results table above
Foreign Currency Risk
reflects the existing contractual rental cash flows and the
expected residual value at the end of the existing contract term. We seek to hedge transactional exposure of our non-dollar
The simulation modeling for both NII Sensitivity and EVE assumes denominated activities, which were comprised of foreign currency
we take no action in response to the changes in interest rates. loans and leases to foreign entities, through local currency bor-
rowings. To the extent such borrowings were unavailable, we
A wide variety of potential interest rate scenarios are simulated have utilized derivative instruments (foreign currency exchange
within our asset/liability management system. All interest sensi- forward contracts and cross currency swaps) to hedge our
tive assets and liabilities are evaluated using discounted cash

non-dollar denominated activities. Additionally, we have utilized takes into account our current condition, risks, exposures, strategies
derivative instruments to hedge the translation exposure of our and activities. The capital risk framework requires contingency plans for
net investments in foreign operations. stress results that would breach the established capital thresholds.
Currently, our non-dollar denominated loans and leases are
largely funded with U.S. dollar denominated debt and equity OPERATIONAL RISK
which, if unhedged, would cause foreign currency transactional Operational risk is the risk of financial loss or other adverse
and translational exposures. For the most part, we hedge these impacts resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes
exposures through derivative instruments. RMG sets limits and and systems, people or external events. Operational Risk may
monitors usage to ensure that currency positions are appropri- result from fraud by employees or persons outside the Company,
ately hedged, as unhedged exposures may cause changes in transaction processing errors, employment practices and work-
earnings or the equity account. place safety issues, unintentional or negligent failure to meet
professional obligations to clients, business interruption due to
LIQUIDITY RISK system failures, or other external events.
Our liquidity risk management and monitoring process is Operational risk is managed within individual business units. The
designed to ensure the availability of adequate cash resources head of each business and functional area is responsible for
and funding capacity to meet our obligations. Our overall liquid- maintaining an effective system of internal controls to mitigate
ity management strategy is intended to ensure ample liquidity to operational risks. The business segment Chief Operating Officers
meet expected and contingent funding needs under both normal (”COO“) designate Operational Risk Managers responsible for
and stress environments. Consistent with this strategy, we main- implementation of the Operational Risk framework programs.
tain large pools of cash and highly liquid investments. Additional The Enterprise Operational Risk function provides oversight in
sources of liquidity include the Amended and Restated Revolving managing operational risk, designs and supports the enterprise-
Credit and Guaranty Agreement (the ”Revolving Credit Facility“), wide Operational Risk framework programs, and promotes
other committed financing facilities and cash collections gener- awareness by providing training to employees and Operational
ated by portfolio assets originated in the normal course Risk Managers within business units and functional areas. Addi-
of business. tionally, Enterprise Operational Risk maintains the Loss Data
We utilize a series of measurement tools to assess and monitor Collection and Risk Assessment programs. Oversight of the
the level and adequacy of our liquidity position, liquidity condi- operational risk management function is provided by RMG, the
tions and trends. The primary tool is a cash forecast designed to RMC, the Enterprise Risk Committee and the Operational and
identify material movements in cash flows. Stress scenarios are Information Technology Risk Working Group.
applied to measure the resiliency of the liquidity position and to
identify stress points requiring remedial action. Also included INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY RISK
among our liquidity measurement tools is an early warning sys- Information Technology risks are risks around information secu-
tem (summarized on an Early Warning Indicator Report (EWI)) that rity, cyber-security, and business disruption from systems
monitors key macro-environmental and company specific metrics implementation or downtime, that could adversely impact the
that serve as early warning signals of potential impending liquid- organization’s business or business processes, including loss or
ity stress events. Event triggers are categorized by severity into a legal liability due to unauthorized (malicious or accidental) disclo-
three-level stress monitoring system; Moderately Enhanced Cri- sure, modification, or destruction of information, unintentional
sis, Heightened Crisis, and Maximum Crisis. Assessments outside errors and omissions, IT disruptions due to natural or man-made
defined thresholds trigger contingency funding actions, which are disasters, or failure to exercise due care and diligence in the
detailed in the Company’s Contingency Funding Plan (”CFP“). implementation and operation of an IT system.
Integral to our liquidity management practices is our CFP, which The Information Risk function provides oversight of the Informa-
outlines actions and protocols under liquidity stress conditions, tion Security and Business Continuity Management (BCM)
whether they are idiosyncratic or systemic in nature and defines programs. Information Security provides guidance across the
the thresholds that trigger contingency funding actions. The organization intended to preserve and protect the confidentiality,
objective of the CFP is to ensure an adequately sustained level of integrity, and availability of CIT information and information sys-
liquidity under certain stress conditions. tems. BCM provides oversight of CIT’s global Business Continuity
Planning through planning and implementation of proactive, pre-
CAPITAL RISK ventive, and corrective actions intended to enable continuous
Capital Risk is the risk that the Company does not have adequate capi- business operations in the event of a disaster, including technol-
tal to cover its risks and to support its growth and strategic objectives. ogy recovery. Information Risk is responsible for the ongoing IT
CIT establishes internal capital risk limits and warning thresholds, using risk assessments of CIT’s applications, infrastructure and third
both Economic and Risk-Based Capital calculations as well as stress party vendors, as well as information security and BCM training
testing, including DFAST, to evaluate the Company’s capital adequacy and awareness for employees, contingent workers and
for multiple types of risk in both normal and stressed environments. consultants.
Economic capital includes credit risk, asset risk, market risk, operational Oversight of the Information Risk function is provided by the
risk and model risk. Stress testing assesses the potential impact of RMG, the Board Risk Management Committee, the Enterprise
adverse scenarios – both regulatory and internally generated – on our Risk Committee and the Operational and Information Technology
consolidated earnings, losses, and capital over a planning horizon and Risk Working Group.
LEGAL and REGULATORY RISK adverse outcomes. They advise business leadership and staff with
respect to the implementation of procedures to operationalize
CIT is subject to a number of laws and regulations, both in the
compliance policies and other requirements.
U.S. and in other countries in which it does business, some of
which are applicable primarily to financial services and others of
which have general applicability to all businesses. Any failure to REPUTATIONAL RISK
comply with applicable laws and regulations may result in govern- Reputational Risk is the potential that negative publicity, whether
mental investigations and inquiries, legal proceedings, including true or not, will cause a decline in the value of the Company due
both private and governmental plaintiffs, significant monetary to changes in the customer base, costly litigation, or other rev-
damages, fines, or penalties, restrictions on the way in which we enue reductions. Protecting CIT, its shareholders, employees and
conduct our business, or reputational harm. To reduce these risks, brand against reputational risk is of paramount importance to the
the Company consults regularly with legal counsel, both internal Company. To address this mandate CIT has established corporate
and external, on significant legal and regulatory issues and has governance standards relating to its Code of Business Conduct
established a compliance function to facilitate maintaining com- and ethics. During 2014, the Company expanded the Chief Com-
pliance with applicable laws and regulations. pliance Officer’s responsibilities by appointing him to the role of
Corporate Compliance is an independent function responsible Chief Ethics Officer. In this combined role, his responsibili-
for maintaining an enterprise-wide compliance risk management ties were extended to encompass compliance not only with
program commensurate with the size, scope and complexity of laws and regulations, but also with CIT’s values and its Code of
our businesses, operations, and the countries in which we oper- Business Conduct.
ate. The Compliance function (1) oversees programs and The Company has adopted, and the Board of Directors has
processes to evaluate and monitor compliance with laws and approved, a Code of Business Conduct, applicable to all direc-
regulations pertaining to our business, (2) tests the adequacy of tors, officers and employees, which details acceptable behaviors
the compliance control environment in each business, and (3) in conducting the Company’s business and acting on the Compa-
monitors and promotes compliance with the Company’s ethical ny’s behalf. The Code of Business Conduct covers conflicts of
standards as set forth in our Code of Business Conduct and com- interest, corporate opportunities, confidentiality, fair dealing (with
pliance policies. Corporate Compliance, led by the Chief Ethics respect to customers, suppliers, competitors and employees),
and Compliance Officer, is responsible for setting the overall protection and proper use of Company assets, compliance with
global compliance framework and standards, using a risk based laws, and encourages reporting of unethical or illegal behavior,
approach to identify and manage key compliance obligations and including through a Company hotline. Annually, each employee is
risks. The head of each business and staff function is responsible trained on the Code of Business Conduct’s requirements, and
for ensuring compliance within their respective areas of authority. provides an attestation as to their understanding of the require-
Corporate Compliance, through the Chief Ethics and Compliance ments and their responsibility to comply.
Officer, reports administratively to the CRO and to the Chairper-
CIT’s Executive Management Committee (”EMC“) has estab-
son of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.
lished, and approved, the charter of a Global Ethics Committee.
The global compliance risk management program includes train- The Ethics Committee is chaired by CIT’s General Counsel and
ing (in collaboration with a centralized Learning and Corporate Secretary. Its members include the Chief Ethics and
Development team within Human Resources), testing, monitor- Compliance Officer, Chief Auditor, Head of Human Resources
ing, risk assessment, and other disciplines necessary to effectively and the Head of Communications, Marketing & Government
manage compliance and regulatory risks. The Company consults Relations. The Committee is charged with (a) oversight of the
with subject matter experts in the areas of privacy, sanctions, anti- Code of Business Conduct and Company Values, (b) seeing that
money laundering, anti-corruption compliance and other areas. CIT’s ethical standards are communicated, upheld and enforced
Corporate Compliance has implemented comprehensive compli- in a consistent manner, and (c) periodic reporting to the EMC and
ance policies and procedures and employs Business Unit Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of employee miscon-
Compliance Officers and Regional Compliance Officers who work duct and related disciplinary action.
with each business to advise business staff and leadership in the CIT’s IAS monitors and tests the overall effectiveness of internal
prudent conduct of business within a regulated environment and control and operational systems on an ongoing basis and reports
within the requirements of law, rule, regulation and the control results to senior management and to the Audit Committee of
environment we maintain to reduce the risk of violations or other the Board.
FUNDING AND LIQUIDITY
CIT actively manages and monitors its funding and liquidity to capital markets or other funding sources. Primary liquidity
sources against relevant limits and targets. These sources satisfy sources include:
funding and other operating obligations, while also providing - Cash totaled $7.1 billion at December 31, 2014, compared to
protection against unforeseen stress events like unanticipated
$6.0 billion at December 31, 2013 and $6.7 billion at
funding obligations, such as customer line draws, or disruptions
December 31, 2012. Cash at December 31, 2014 consisted of
$1.6 billion related to the bank holding company, and

$3.7 billion at CIT Bank (including $0.1 billion of restricted debt related to the student lending business, which was reported
cash), with the remainder comprised of cash at operating in discontinued operation and extinguished in April 2014.
subsidiaries and other restricted balances of approximately
Deposits
$0.9 billion each. During February 2015, $1.2 billion of cash
was used to repay maturing unsecured notes. We continued to grow deposits during 2014 to fund our bank
- Securities purchased under agreements to resell (”reverse lending and leasing activities. Deposits totaled $15.8 billion at
repurchase agreements“) totaled $650 million at December 31, 2014. December 31, 2014, up from $12.5 billion at December 31, 2013
Beginning in the third quarter, CIT entered into reverse repurchase and $9.7 billion at December 31, 2012, essentially all of which are
agreements in an effort to improve returns on excess liquidity. These in CIT Bank. The weighted average coupon rate of total deposits
agreements are short-term securities that had maturity dates of 90 at December 31, 2014 was 1.69%, up from 1.65% at December 31,
days or less, had a weighted average yield of approximately 50 bps 2013, primarily due to an increase in term deposits with longer
and are secured by the underlying collateral, which is maintained at a maturities, and down from 1.75% at December 31, 2012.
third-party custodian. Interest earned on these securities is included
The following table details our deposits by type:
in ’Other interest and dividends’ in the statement of operations. See
Note 6 — Securities Purchased Under Resale Agreements in Item 8 Deposits at December 31 (dollars in millions)
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data for further details.
2014 2013 2012
- Short-term investment securities totaled $1.1 billion at
December 31, 2014, which consisted of U.S. Government Online deposits $ 8,858.5 $ 6,117.5 $4,643.4
Agency discount notes and U.S. Treasury bills that were Brokered CDs / sweeps 5,986.0 5,365.4 4,251.6
classified as AFS and had remaining maturity dates of 90 days Other(1) 1,005.3 1,043.6 789.5
or less, compared to $1.5 billion at December 31, 2013 and $0.8 Total $15,849.8 $12,526.5 $9,684.5
billion at December 31, 2012. The 2013 balance did not include
(1)
$0.7 billion of certain securities that were classified as HTM. Other primarily includes a deposit sweep arrangement related to Health-
- A $1.5 billion multi-year committed revolving credit facility, of care Savings Accounts and deposits at our Brazil bank.
which $1.4 billion was unused at December 31, 2014; and Long-term Borrowings
- Committed securitization facilities and secured bank lines that
totaled $4.8 billion, of which $2.8 billion was unused at Long-term borrowings consist of unsecured and secured debt
December 31, 2014, provided that eligible assets are available and totaled $18.5 billion at December 31, 2014, unchanged from
that can be funded through these facilities. December 31, 2013 and up slightly from $18.3 billion at
December 31, 2012. The weighted average coupon rate of long-
Asset liquidity is further enhanced by our ability to sell or syndi- term borrowings at December 31, 2014 was 4.32%, down from
cate portfolio assets in secondary markets (as discussed in 4.47% at December 31, 2013 and 4.45% at December 31, 2012.
Results by Business Segments), which also enables us to manage
credit exposure, and to pledge assets to access secured borrow- Unsecured
ing facilities through the Federal Home Loan Banks (”FHLB“) Revolving Credit Facility
and FRB.
There were no borrowings outstanding under the Revolving
In addition to the funding requirements to organically grow our Credit Facility at December 31, 2014. The amount available to
assets, the OneWest Transaction will require additional funding. draw upon at December 31, 2014 was approximately $1.4 billion,
The acquisition price of $3.4 billion includes a cash portion of with the remaining amount of approximately $0.1 billion utilized
$2.0 billion, which may require us to issue debt for all or some for issuance of letters of credit.
portion thereof.
The Revolving Credit Facility was amended in January 2014
As a result of our continued funding and liability management to reduce the total commitment amount from $2.0 billion to
initiatives, we further reduced the weighted average coupon $1.5 billion and extend the maturity date of the commitment to
rates on outstanding deposits and long-term borrowings to January 27, 2017. The total commitment amount consists of a
3.11% at December 31, 2014, down from 3.33% and 3.52% at $1.15 billion revolving loan tranche and a $350 million revolving
December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. The fol- loan tranche that can also be utilized for issuance of letters of
lowing table reflects our funding mix: credit. The applicable margin charged under the facility is 2.50%
for LIBOR-based loans and 1.50% for Base Rate loans. Improve-
Funding Mix at December 31
ment in CIT’s long-term senior unsecured debt ratings to either
2014 2013 2012 BB by S&P or Ba2 by Moody’s would result in a reduction in the
Deposits 46% 40% 35% applicable margin to 2.25% for LIBOR-based loans and to 1.25%
for Base Rate loans. A downgrade in CIT’s long-term senior unse-
Secured 19% 19% 23%
cured debt ratings to B+ by S&P and B1 by Moody’s would result
Unsecured 35% 41% 42%
in an increase in the applicable margin to 2.75% for LIBOR-based
The higher deposit base is reflective of the growth in CIT Bank loans and to 1.75% for Base Rate loans. In the event of a one
assets. While the unsecured notes outstanding in dollar amount notch downgrade by only one of the agencies, no change to the
remained relatively flat compared to December 31, 2013, the margin charged under the facility would occur.
change in percentage of the total funding is more pronounced.
The percentage of secured funding for each period excludes the
The Revolving Credit Facility is unsecured and is guaranteed by - In the third quarter, CIT closed a $640 million aerospace
eight of the Company’s domestic operating subsidiaries. The securitization, and funded it within the GSI TRS.
facility was amended to modify the covenant requiring a mini- - During the fourth quarter, CIT Bank closed a $750 million
mum guarantor asset coverage ratio and the criteria for equipment lease securitization that had a weighted average
calculating the ratio. The amended covenant requires a minimum coupon of 1.37% and was secured by U.S. equipment finance
guarantor asset coverage ratio ranging from 1.25:1.0 to the cur- receivables.
rent requirement of 1.5:1.0 depending on the Company’s long-
CIT Bank secured borrowings totaled $1.9 billion and $0.9 billion
term senior unsecured debt rating. As of December 31, 2014, the
at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, which were secured
last reported asset coverage ratio was 2.70x.
by $2.4 billion and $1.0 billion of pledged assets at December 31,
Senior Unsecured Notes 2014 and 2013. Non-bank secured borrowings were $4.7 billion
At December 31, 2014, unsecured notes outstanding totaled and $5.1 billion at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and
$11.9 billion, compared to $12.5 billion and $11.8 billion at were secured by assets of $8.3 billion and $8.6 billion,
December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The weighted average respectively.
coupon rate of unsecured long-term borrowings at December 31, As part of our liquidity management strategy, we may pledge
2014 was 5.00%, down from 5.11% at December 31, 2013 and assets to secure financing transactions (which include securitiza-
5.12% at December 31, 2012. tions), to secure borrowings from the FHLB or for other purposes
The following highlight our significant unsecured notes transac- as required or permitted by law. Our secured financing transac-
tions during 2014: tions do not meet accounting requirements for sale treatment
and are recorded as secured borrowings, with the assets remain-
- On November 12, 2014, CIT repurchased $300 million of 4.75% ing on-balance sheet pursuant to GAAP. The debt associated
unsecured notes that had a maturity date in February 2015, and with these transactions is collateralized by receivables, leases
recorded a $3 million loss on extinguishment. The remaining and/or equipment. Certain related cash balances are restricted.
$1.2 billion of this tranche was outstanding at December 31,
2014 and repaid in February 2015. CIT Bank is a member of the FHLB of Seattle and may borrow
- On April 1, 2014, we repaid $1.3 billion of maturing 5.25% under a line of credit that is secured by collateral pledged to
unsecured notes. FHLB Seattle. CIT Bank had $125 million outstanding under the
- On February 19, 2014, CIT issued, at par value, $1 billion line and $168 million of commercial real estate assets were
aggregate principal amount of senior unsecured notes due pledged as collateral at December 31, 2014. A subsidiary of CIT
2019 that bear interest at a rate of 3.875%. Bank is a member of FHLB Des Moines and may borrow under
lines of credit that are secured by a blanket lien on the subsid-
See Note 10 — Long-term Borrowings in Item 8 Financial State- iary’s assets and collateral pledged to FHLB Des Moines. At
ments and Supplementary Data for further detail. December 31, 2014, $130 million of advances were outstand-
Secured ing and $142 million of collateral was pledged with FHLB
Des Moines.
Secured borrowings totaled $6.5 billion at December 31, 2014,
compared to $6.0 billion and $6.5 billion at December 31, 2013 See Note 10 — Long-Term Borrowings in Item 8 Financial State-
and 2012, respectively. The weighted average coupon rate of ments and Supplementary Data for a table displaying our
secured long-term borrowings at December 31, 2014 was 3.10%, consolidated secured financings and pledged assets.
down from 3.12% at December 31, 2013 and 3.23% at
GSI Facilities
December 31, 2012.
Two financing facilities between two wholly-owned subsidiaries of
The secured borrowings increase from 2013 reflects debt
CIT and Goldman Sachs International (”GSI“) are structured as
acquired with the Nacco and Direct Capital acquisitions, partially
total return swaps (”TRS“), under which amounts available for
offset by net repayments. Secured debt associated with the
advances are accounted for as derivatives. Pursuant to applicable
Nacco acquisition totaled approximately $375 million. Secured
accounting guidance, only the unutilized portion of the TRS is
debt associated with the Direct Capital acquisition included
accounted for as a derivative and recorded at its estimated fair
six separate facilities representing $581 million in total commit-
value. The size of the CIT Financial Ltd. (”CFL“) facility is $1.5 bil-
ments at the acquisition date. The outstanding balance for these
lion and the CIT TRS Funding B.V. (”BV“) facility is $625 million.
acquired facilities totaled $486 million at the acquisition date,
consisting of four revolving facilities ($293 million) and two term At December 31, 2014, a total of $1,809.3 million of assets and
asset-backed securitization facilities ($193 million). secured debt totaling $1,221.4 million issued to investors was
outstanding under the GSI Facilities. After adjustment to the
Other notable 2014 facility transactions included:
amount of actual qualifying borrowing base under terms of the
- In the first quarter, CIT renewed a CAD 250 million committed GSI Facilities, this secured debt provided for usage of $1,033.1
multi-year conduit facility that allows the Canadian Equipment million of the maximum notional amount of the GSI Facilities. The
Finance business to fund both existing assets and new remaining $1,091.9 million of the maximum notional amount rep-
originations at attractive terms. resents the unused portion of the GSI Facilities and constitutes
- In the second quarter, CIT Bank renewed and extended to 2016 the notional amount of derivative financial instruments. Unse-
an existing $1 billion committed multi-year Equipment Finance cured counterparty receivable of $559.2 million is owed to CIT
conduit facility. from GSI for debt discount, return of collateral posted to GSI and
settlements resulting from market value changes to asset-backed

securities underlying the structures at December 31, 2014. The Based on the Company’s valuation, we recorded a liability of
counterparty receivable was up from $301.6 million at $25 million, $10 million and $6 million at December 31, 2014,
December 31, 2013 as a proportionate amount of the balance 2013 and 2012, respectively. During 2014, 2013 and 2012, we rec-
had been allocated to discontinued operation, i.e. the former stu- ognized $15 million, $4 million and $6 million, respectively, as a
dent lending business. Upon sale of the secured assets and reduction to other income associated with the change in liability.
repayment of the secured debt, the full capacity of the facility
Interest expense related to the GSI Facilities is affected by
from a presentation perspective reverted back to the continuing
the following:
operations.
The CFL Facility was structured as a TRS to satisfy the specific
- A fixed facility fee of 2.85% per annum times the maximum
requirements to obtain this funding commitment from GSI. Under facility commitment amount,
the terms of the GSI Facilities, CIT raises cash from the issuance
- A variable amount based on one-month or three-month USD
of ABS to investors designated by GSI under the total return LIBOR times the ”utilized amount“ (effectively the ”adjusted
swap, equivalent to the face amount of the ABS less an adjust- qualifying borrowing base“) of the total return swap, and
ment for any OID which equals the market price of the ABS. CIT
- A reduction in interest expense due to the recognition of
is also required to deposit a portion of the face amount of the the payment of any OID from GSI on the various asset-
ABS with GSI as additional collateral prior to funding ABS backed securities.
through the GSI Facilities. See Note 11 — Derivative Financial Instruments in Item 8 Finan-
Amounts deposited with GSI can increase or decrease over time cial Statements and Supplementary Data for further information.
depending on the market value of the ABS and / or changes in the rat- Debt Ratings
ings of the ABS. CIT and GSI engage in periodic settlements based on
the timing and amount of coupon, principal and any other payments Debt ratings can influence the cost and availability of short-and
actually made by CIT on the ABS. Pursuant to the terms of the TRS, GSI long-term funding, the terms and conditions on which such fund-
is obligated to return those same amounts to CIT plus a proportionate ing may be available, the collateral requirements, if any, for
amount of the initial deposit. Simultaneously, CIT is obligated to pay borrowings and certain derivative instruments, the acceptability
GSI (1) principal in an amount equal to the contractual market price of our letters of credit, and the number of investors and counter-
times the amount of principal reduction on the ABS and (2) interest parties willing to lend to the Company. A decrease, or potential
equal to LIBOR times the adjusted qualifying borrowing base of the decrease, in credit ratings could impact access to the capital mar-
ABS. On a quarterly basis, CIT pays the fixed facility fee of 2.85% per kets and/or increase the cost of debt, and thereby adversely
annum times the maximum facility commitment amount. affect the Company’s liquidity and financial condition.
Valuation of the derivatives related to the GSI Facilities is Our debt ratings at December 31, 2014 as rated by Standard &
based on several factors using a discounted cash flow (DCF) Poor’s Ratings Services (”S&P“), Fitch Ratings, Inc. (”Fitch“),
methodology, including: Moody’s Investors Service (”Moody’s“) and Dominion Bond Rat-
ing Service (”DBRS“) are presented in the following table and,
- CIT’s funding costs for similar financings based on the current
other than the resumption of rating by Fitch, were unchanged
market environment;
from December 31, 2013.
- Forecasted usage of the long-dated GSI Facilities through the
final maturity date in 2028; and
- Forecasted amortization, due to principal payments on
the underlying ABS, which impacts the amount of the
unutilized portion.
Debt Ratings as of December 31, 2014

S&P Fitch Moody’s DBRS
Issuer / Counterparty Credit Rating BB- BB+ Ba3 BB
Revolving Credit Facility Rating BB- BB+ Ba3 BBB (Low)
Series C Notes / Senior Unsecured Debt Rating BB- BB+ Ba3 BB
Outlook Positive Stable Stable Positive
Rating Agency changes during 2014 include the re-initiation of liquidity, asset quality, business mix, level and quality of earnings,
coverage by Fitch Ratings, Inc. in December, 2014. In addition, and the current legislative and regulatory environment, including
after the July 22, 2014 announcement of our definitive agreement implied government support. In addition, rating agencies them-
to acquire OneWest Bank, Moody’s affirmed its Ba3 corporate selves have been subject to scrutiny arising from the financial
family rating and placed our Ba3 senior unsecured rating on crisis and could make or be required to make substantial changes
review for possible downgrade; S&P affirmed its BB- rating and to their ratings policies and practices, particularly in response to
retained its positive outlook; and DBRS placed its BB rating legislative and regulatory changes, including as a result of provi-
under review with positive implications. sions in Dodd-Frank. Potential changes in the legislative and
regulatory environment and the timing of those changes could
Rating agencies indicate that they base their ratings on many
impact our ratings, which as noted above could impact our
quantitative and qualitative factors, including capital adequacy,
liquidity and financial condition.
A debt rating is not a recommendation to buy, sell or hold securi- Contractual Payments and Commitments
ties, and the ratings are subject to revision or withdrawal at any
The following tables summarize significant contractual payments and
time by the assigning rating agency. Each rating should be evalu-
contractual commitment expirations at December 31, 2014. Certain
ated independently of any other rating.
amounts in the payments table are not the same as the respective bal-
Tax Implications of Cash in Foreign Subsidiaries ance sheet totals, because this table is based on contractual amounts
and excludes items such as issue discounts and FSA discounts. Actual
Cash held by foreign subsidiaries totaled $1.8 billion, including
cash flows could vary materially from those depicted in the payments
cash available to the BHC and restricted cash, at December 31,
table as further explained in the table footnotes.
2014, compared to $1.8 billion and $1.6 billion at December 31,
2013 and 2012, respectively.
Other than in a limited number of jurisdictions, Management
does not intend to indefinitely reinvest foreign earnings.
Payments for the Twelve Months Ended December 31(1) (dollars in millions)
Total 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019+
Secured borrowings(2) $ 6,514.0 $ 1,853.3 $1,125.8 $ 893.2 $ 626.1 $ 2,015.6
Senior unsecured 11,951.4 1,200.0 – 3,000.0 2,200.0 5,551.4
Long-term borrowings 18,465.4 3,053.3 1,125.8 3,893.2 2,826.1 7,567.0
Deposits 15,851.2 6,988.4 1,670.6 2,398.2 928.2 3,865.8
Credit balances of factoring clients 1,622.1 1,622.1 – – – –
Lease rental expense 170.2 31.3 29.5 25.7 24.5 59.2
Total contractual payments $36,108.9 $11,695.1 $2,825.9 $6,317.1 $3,778.8 $11,492.0
(1)
Projected payments of debt interest expense and obligations relating to postretirement programs are excluded.
(2)
Includes non-recourse secured borrowings, which are generally repaid in conjunction with the pledged receivable maturities, and excludes debt associated
with discontinued operation.
Commitment Expiration by Twelve Month Periods Ended December 31 (dollars in millions)

Total 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019+
Financing commitments $ 4,747.9 $ 729.4 $ 838.8 $ 947.8 $ 957.4 $1,274.5
Aerospace manufacturer purchase commitments(1) 10,820.4 945.7 534.2 847.0 2,211.0 6,282.5
Rail and other manufacturer purchase commitments 1,323.2 943.0 380.2 – – –
Letters of credit 388.4 51.7 35.8 60.1 84.1 156.7
Deferred purchase agreements 1,854.4 1,854.4 – – – –
Guarantees, acceptances and other recourse obligations 2.8 2.8 – – – –
Liabilities for unrecognized tax obligations(2) 53.7 10.0 43.7 – – –
Total contractual commitments $19,190.8 $4,537.0 $1,832.7 $1,854.9 $3,252.5 $7,713.7
(1)
Aerospace commitments are net of amounts on deposit with manufacturers.
(2)
The balance cannot be estimated past 2016; therefore the remaining balance is reflected in 2016.
Financing commitments increased from $4.3 billion at prised of cash flow or enterprise value facilities. Most of our
December 31, 2013 to $4.7 billion at December 31, 2014. This undrawn and available financing commitments are in the Corpo-
includes commitments that have been extended to and accepted rate Finance division of NACF. The top ten undrawn
by customers or agents, but on which the criteria for funding commitments totaled $392 million at December 31, 2014.
have not been completed of $355 million at December 31, 2014
The table above includes approximately $1.3 billion of undrawn
and $548 million at December 31, 2013. Also included are Com-
financing commitments at December 31, 2014 and $0.9 billion at
mercial Services credit line agreements, with an amount available
December 31, 2013 that were not in compliance with contractual
of $112 million at December 31, 2014, net of amount of receiv-
obligations, and therefore CIT does not have the contractual obli-
ables assigned to us. These are cancellable by CIT only after a
gation to lend.
notice period.
See Note 21 — Commitments in Item 8 Financial Statements and
At December 31, 2014, substantially all our undrawn financing
Supplementary Data for further detail.
commitments were senior facilities, with approximately 80%
secured by equipment or other assets and the remainder com-

CAPITAL
Capital Management Once we exceed $50 Billion SIFI Threshold, as is anticipated if the
OneWest Transaction is approved and completed, CIT would also
CIT manages its capital position to ensure that it is sufficient to:
be subject to stress test requirements for covered companies
(i) support the risks of its businesses, (ii) maintain a ”well-
(subpart G of the FRB’s Regulation YY). Annually, CIT would be
capitalized“ status under regulatory requirements, and
required to submit a capital plan along with Company-run stress
(iii) provide flexibility to take advantage of future investment
test results using the Federal Reserve’s supervisory economic sce-
opportunities. Capital in excess of these requirements is available
narios. Furthermore, CIT would also be required to conduct
to distribute to shareholders.
annual and mid-cycle Company-run stress tests with company-
CIT uses a complement of capital metrics and related thresholds developed economic scenarios for submission to the FRB.
to measure capital adequacy. The Company takes into account
the existing regulatory capital framework and the evolution under Return of Capital
the Basel III rules. CIT further evaluates capital adequacy through Capital returned in 2014 totaled $870 million, including $95 mil-
the enterprise stress testing and economic capital (”ECAP“) lion in dividends and repurchases of approximately $775 million
approaches, which constitute our internal capital adequacy of our common stock.
assessment process (”ICAAP“).
In January and April 2014, the Board of Directors approved the
CIT monitors regulatory capital ratios, ECAP measures and liquid- repurchase of up to $307 million and $300 million, respectively, of
ity metrics under baseline and stress scenario forecasts to common stock through December 31, 2014. On July 22, 2014, the
support the capital adequacy assessment process. Regulatory Board of Directors approved an additional repurchase of up to
capital ratios indicate CIT’s capital adequacy using regulatory $500 million of common stock through June 30, 2015. After the
definitions of available capital, such as Common Equity Tier 1, 2015 purchases, $114 million remained of the authorized repur-
Tier 1, and Total Capital, and regulatory measures of portfolio risk chase capacity that expires on June 30, 2015.
such as risk weighted assets. As of December 31, 2014 and prior,
During 2014, we repurchased over 17 million of our shares for an
CIT reported regulatory capital under the general risk-based
aggregate purchase price of $775 million, at an average price of
capital rules based on the Basel I framework. Beginning
$45.42. Through January 31, 2015, we repurchased an additional
January 1, 2015, CIT reports regulatory capital ratios in accor-
4.7 million shares for an aggregate purchase price of $212 million.
dance with the Basel III Final Rule and determines risk weighted
The repurchases were effected via open market purchases and
assets under the Standardized Approach. See the ”Regulation“
through plans designed to comply with Rule 10b5-1(c) under the
section of Item 1 Business Overview for further detail regarding
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
regulatory matters, including ”Basel III“, ”Capital Requirements“
and ”Leverage Requirements“. During the year, the common stock quarterly dividend was increased
50% to $0.15 per share. Our 2014 common stock dividends were
ECAP ratios provide a view of capital adequacy that take into
as follows:
account CIT’s specific risks by comparing CIT’s unexpected losses
to its capital available to absorb losses. ECAP is calculated using 2014 Dividends
statistically defined stress events over a one year time horizon,
which is consistent with CIT’s risk appetite. Declaration Date Payment Date Per Share Dividend
January February 28, 2014 $0.10
As part of the capital and strategic planning processes, CIT fore-
casts capital adequacy under baseline and stress scenarios, April May 30, 2014 $0.10
including the supervisory scenarios provided by the Federal July August 29, 2014 $0.15
Reserve for consideration in Dodd-Frank Act stress testing. Per October November 26, 2014 $0.15
the Dodd-Frank Act, both CIT Group and CIT Bank are required
to perform annual stress tests as prescribed for institutions with Capital Composition and Ratios
total assets greater than $10 billion but less than $50 billion. The Company is subject to various regulatory capital require-
Stress tests are run under the three supervisory scenarios pro- ments. The regulatory capital guidelines currently applicable to
vided annually by the Federal Reserve: Baseline, Adverse, and the Company are based on the Capital Accord of the Basel Com-
Severely Adverse. Scenarios include 9 quarter projections of mac- mittee on Banking Supervision (Basel I). We compute capital
roeconomic factors that are used to measure and/or indicate the ratios in accordance with Federal Reserve capital guidelines for
outlook of specific aspects of the economy. These macroeco- assessing adequacy of capital. To be well capitalized, a BHC gen-
nomic projections form the basis for CIT’s capital adequacy erally must maintain Tier 1 and Total Capital Ratios of at least 6%
results presented for each scenario. and 10%, respectively. The Federal Reserve Board also has estab-
lished minimum guidelines. The minimum ratios are: Tier 1
Capital Ratio of 4.0%, Total Capital Ratio of 8.0% and Tier 1
Leverage Ratio of 4.0%. In order to be considered a ”well capital-
ized“ depository institution under FDIC guidelines, the Bank
must maintain a Tier 1 Capital Ratio of at least 6%, a Total Capital
Ratio of at least 10%, and a Tier 1 Leverage Ratio of at least 5%.
Tier 1 Capital and Total Capital Components (dollars in millions)

December 31,
Tier 1 Capital 2014 2013 2012
Total stockholders’ equity $ 9,068.9 $ 8,838.8 $ 8,334.8
Effect of certain items in accumulated other comprehensive loss excluded from
Tier 1 Capital and qualifying noncontrolling interests 53.0 24.2 41.1
Adjusted total equity 9,121.9 8,863.0 8,375.9
Less: Goodwill(1) (571.3) (338.3) (345.9)
Disallowed deferred tax assets (416.8) (26.6) (61.4)
Disallowed intangible assets(1) (25.7) (20.3) (32.7)
Investment in certain subsidiaries (36.7) (32.3) (34.4)
(2)
Other Tier 1 components (4.1) (6.0) (6.6)
Tier 1 Capital 8,067.3 8,439.5 7,894.9
Tier 2 Capital
Qualifying reserve for credit losses and other reserves(3) 381.8 383.9 402.6
Less: Investment in certain subsidiaries (36.7) (32.3) (34.4)
Other Tier 2 components(4) – 0.1 0.5
Total qualifying capital $ 8,412.4 $ 8,791.2 $ 8,263.6
Risk-weighted assets $55,480.9 $50,571.2 $48,616.9
BHC Ratios
Tier 1 Capital Ratio 14.5% 16.7% 16.2%
Total Capital Ratio 15.2% 17.4% 17.0%
Tier 1 Leverage Ratio 17.4% 18.1% 18.3%
CIT Bank Ratios
Tier 1 Leverage Ratio 12.2% 16.9% 20.2%
(1)
Goodwill and disallowed intangible assets adjustments also reflect the portion included within assets held for sale.
(2)
Includes the Tier 1 capital charge for nonfinancial equity investments and the Tier 1 capital deduction for net unrealized losses on available-for-sale market-
able securities (net of tax).
(3)
”Other reserves“ represents additional credit loss reserves for unfunded lending commitments, letters of credit, and deferred purchase agreements, all of
which are recorded in Other Liabilities.
(4)
Banking organizations are permitted to include in Tier 2 Capital up to 45% of net unrealized pretax gains on available-for-sale equity securities with readily
determinable fair values.
The change in common stockholders’ equity from December 31, - The increase in goodwill and intangible assets due to the
2013 was primarily driven by Net Income of $1,130 million, includ- acquisitions of Direct Capital in the third quarter and Nacco
ing the benefit of the reversal of the valuation allowance on the in the first quarter, is also disallowed for regulatory
deferred tax asset of $419 million, less the impact of share repur- capital purposes.
chases, $775 million, and dividends of $95 million.
For a BHC, capital adequacy is based upon risk-weighted asset
In addition to the changes in common stockholders’ equity, ratios calculated in accordance with quantitative measures estab-
Regulatory Capital is also negatively affected by certain lished by the Federal Reserve. Under the Basel I guidelines,
adjustments. During 2014, the primary changes to these certain commitments and off-balance sheet transactions are
balances included: assigned asset equivalent balances, and together with
on-balance sheet assets, are divided into risk categories, each of
- In the third quarter, we recorded a partial reversal of our U.S.
which is assigned a risk weighting ranging from 0% (for example
Federal deferred tax asset valuation allowance of $375 million.
U.S. Treasury Bonds) to 100% (for example commercial loans).
In the fourth quarter, an additional $44 million was recorded for
the reversal of the valuation allowance related to our
international deferred tax assets. These reversals benefited net
income and stockholders’ equity but had minimal impact on
our regulatory capital ratios as the majority of the deferred tax
asset balance is disallowed for regulatory capital purposes.

The reconciliation of balance sheet assets to risk-weighted assets is presented below:

Risk-Weighted Assets (dollars in millions)
December 31,
2014 2013 2012
Balance sheet assets $47,880.0 $ 47,139.0 $44,012.0
Risk weighting adjustments to balance sheet assets (8,647.8) (10,328.1) (9,960.4)
Off balance sheet items 16,248.7 13,760.3 14,565.3
Risk-weighted assets $55,480.9 $ 50,571.2 $48,616.9
The change in the 2014 balance sheet assets from 2013 reflect aircraft and $1.3 billion related to railcars), unused lines of credit
additions from DCC and Nacco acquisitions, along with new busi- ($1.9 billion credit equivalent, largely related to Corporate
ness volume, mostly offset by the sale of the student loan Finance division) and deferred purchase agreements ($1.9 billion
portfolio, European assets, and SBL. Risk weighting adjustments related to Commercial Services division). The increase from 2013
declined primarily due to the sale of the student loan assets as is primarily due to higher aerospace purchase commitments. See
the U.S. government guaranteed portion was risk-weighted at Note 21 — Commitments in Item 8 Financial Statements and
0%. The 2014 off balance sheet items primarily reflect commit- Supplementary Data for further detail on commitments.
ments to purchase aircraft and railcars ($10.7 billion related to
Tangible Book Value and Tangible Book Value per Share(1)

Tangible book value represents common equity less goodwill and other intangible assets. A reconciliation of CIT’s total common stock-
holders’ equity to tangible book value, a non-GAAP measure, follows:
Tangible Book Value and per Share Amounts (dollars in millions, except per share amounts)
December 31,
2014 2013 2012
Total common stockholders’ equity $9,068.9 $8,838.8 $8,334.8
Less: Goodwill (571.3) (334.6) (345.9)
Intangible assets (25.7) (20.3) (31.9)
Tangible book value $8,471.9 $8,483.9 $7,957.0
Book value per share $ 50.13 $ 44.78 $ 41.49
Tangible book value per share $ 46.83 $ 42.98 $ 39.61
(1)
Tangible book value and tangible book value per share are non-GAAP measures.
Book value was up as the 2014 earnings exceeds the impact of Direct Capital and Nacco acquisitions. Book value per share
share repurchases, the value of which reduces book value while increased reflecting the decline in outstanding shares and higher
held in treasury. Tangible book value (”TBV“) was down slightly common equity. TBV per share increased, as the decline in out-
and reflected the reduction for the goodwill recorded with the standing shares offset the slight decrease in TBV.
CIT BANK
The Bank is a state-chartered commercial bank headquartered in solid new business activity, and supplemented by the addition of
Salt Lake City, Utah, that is subject to regulation and examination approximately $540 million of loans (at the acquisition date) from
by the FDIC and the UDFI and is our principal bank subsidiary. the third quarter acquisition of Direct Capital. The Bank funded
The Bank originates and funds lending and leasing activity in the $7.8 billion of new business volume during 2014, up 10% from
U.S. Asset growth during 2014, 2013 and 2012 reflected higher 2013. Funded volumes represented nearly all of the new U.S. vol-
commercial lending and leasing volume, as well as the August 1, umes for NACF and TIF. The Bank expanded its portfolio of
2014 acquisition of Direct Capital. Deposits grew in support of operating lease equipment, which totaled $2.0 billion at
the increased business and we expanded our product offerings. December 31, 2014 and was comprised primarily of railcars and
The Bank’s capital and leverage ratios are included in the tables some aircraft.
that follow and, while remaining well above required levels, are
CIT Bank deposits were $15.9 billion at December 31, 2014, up from
down from 2013 reflecting growth activities, including the impact
$12.5 billion at December 31, 2013 and $9.6 billion at December 31,
of approximately $180 million of goodwill and intangible assets
2012. The weighted average interest rate was 1.63% at December 31,
associated with the Direct Capital acquisition.
2014, up from December 31, 2013, primarily due to an increase in term
As detailed in the following Condensed Balance Sheet table, total deposits with longer maturities and down from December 31, 2012.
assets increased to $21.1 billion, up nearly $5 billion from last year and
Long-term borrowings at December 31, 2014 mainly consisted of
$9 billion from December 31, 2012, primarily related to growth in com-
debt related to secured borrowing transactions, the acquisition of
mercial financing and leasing assets. Cash and deposits with banks was
Direct Capital and amounts borrowed from FHLBs.
$3.7 billion at December 31, 2014, up from $2.5 billion at December 31,
2013, and $3.4 billion at December 31, 2012. The following presents condensed financial information for CIT
Bank. The 2012 statements of operations include activity related
Commercial loans totaled $15.0 billion at December 31, 2014, up
to a portfolio of student loans. The BHC has reflected the student
from $12.0 billion at December 31, 2013 and $8.1 billion at
lending business as a discontinued operation.
December 31, 2012. Commercial loans grew in 2014, reflecting
Condensed Balance Sheets (dollars in millions)

At December 31,
2014 2013 2012
ASSETS:
Cash and deposits with banks $ 3,684.9 $ 2,528.6 $ 3,351.3
Investment securities 285.2 234.6 123.3
Assets held for sale 22.8 104.5 37.7
Commercial loans 14,982.8 12,032.6 8,060.5
Allowance for loan losses (269.5) (212.9) (134.6)
Operating lease equipment, net 2,026.3 1,248.9 621.6
Goodwill 167.8 – –
Other assets 215.7 195.0 164.6
Total Assets $21,116.0 $16,131.3 $12,224.4
LIABILITIES AND EQUITY:
Deposits $15,877.9 $12,496.2 $ 9,614.7
Long-term borrowings 1,862.5 854.6 49.6
Other borrowings 303.1 – –
Other liabilities 356.1 183.9 122.7
Total Liabilities 18,399.6 13,534.7 9,787.0
Total Equity 2,716.4 2,596.6 2,437.4
Total Liabilities and Equity $21,116.0 $16,131.3 $12,224.4
Capital Ratios:
Tier 1 Leverage ratio 12.2% 16.9% 20.2%
Financing and Leasing Assets by Segment:
North American Commercial Finance $12,518.8 $10,701.1 $ 7,280.7
Transportation & International Finance 4,513.1 2,606.8 1,370.6
Non-Strategic Portfolios – 78.1 68.5
Total $17,031.9 $13,386.0 $ 8,719.8

Condensed Statements of Operations (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
Interest income $ 712.1 $ 550.5 $ 381.0
Net interest revenue 467.0 378.4 189.3
Net interest revenue, after credit provision 367.9 285.3 95.4
Other income 114.2 123.7 144.7
Total net revenue, net of interest expense and credit provision 709.3 519.2 266.9
Income before provision for income taxes 204.7 177.9 80.5
Provision for income taxes (81.6) (69.4) (39.4)
Net income $ 123.1 $ 108.5 $ 41.1
New business volume $7,845.7 $7,148.2 $6,024.7
The Bank’s results benefited from growth in AEA. The provision Other income in 2014 was down from 2013, reflecting lower fee
for credit losses for 2014 reflects higher reserve build, including revenue. Operating expenses increased from prior years, reflect-
higher non-specific reserves, primarily due to asset growth ing the continued growth of both asset and deposits in the Bank,
including new business through Direct Capital, while credit met- and the addition of 250 employees in the current year associated
rics remain at or near cyclical lows. The Bank’s 2013 provision for with the Direct Capital acquisition. As a % of AEA, operating
credit losses reflected portfolio growth, and 2012 included $34 expenses were 2.69% in 2014, unchanged from 2013 and up from
million as a change in estimate. For 2014, 2013 and 2012, net 2.46% in 2012.
charge-offs as a percentage of average finance receivables were
0.31%, 0.15% and 0.14%, respectively.
Net Finance Revenue (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
Interest income $ 712.1 $ 550.5 $ 381.0
Finance revenue 939.3 660.7 407.8
Maintenance and other operating lease expenses* (8.2) (2.9) (1.3)
Net finance revenue $ 593.7 $ 441.3 $ 205.0
Average Earning Assets (”AEA“) $15,344.0 $11,048.2 $7,181.6
As a % of AEA:
Interest income 4.64% 4.98% 5.31%
Rental income on operating leases 1.48% 1.00% 0.37%
Finance revenue 6.12% 5.98% 5.68%
Interest expense (1.60)% (1.56)% (2.67)%
Depreciation on operating lease equipment (0.60)% (0.40)% (0.14)%
Maintenance and other operating lease expenses* (0.05)% (0.03)% (0.02)%
Net finance revenue 3.87% 3.99% 2.85%
* Amounts included in CIT Bank operating expenses.
NFR and NFM are key metrics used by management to measure 2014), NFM is a more appropriate metric for the Bank than net
the profitability of our lending and leasing assets. NFR includes interest margin (”NIM“) (a common metric used by other banks),
interest and fee income on our loans and capital leases, interest as NIM does not fully reflect the earnings of our portfolio
and dividend income on cash and investments, rental revenue because it includes the impact of debt costs on all our assets
from our leased equipment, depreciation and maintenance and but excludes the net revenue (rental income less depreciation
other operating lease expenses, as well as funding costs. Since and maintenance and other operating lease expenses) from
our asset composition includes an increasing level of operating operating leases.
lease equipment (11% of AEA for the year ended December 31,
NFR increased reflecting the growth in financing and leasing grew its operating lease portfolio by adding railcars and some
assets. NFM is down from 2013, reflecting some pressure on loan aircraft, which contributed $127 million to NFR in 2014, compared
yields and slightly higher funding costs. During 2014, the Bank to $63 million and $16 million 2013 and 2012, respectively.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP These sensitivity analyses do not represent management’s expec-
requires management to use judgment in making estimates and tations of the deterioration in risk ratings, or the increases in
assumptions that affect reported amounts of assets and liabilities, allowance and loss rates, but are provided as hypothetical sce-
reported amounts of income and expense and the disclosure of narios to assess the sensitivity of the allowance for loan losses to
contingent assets and liabilities. The following estimates, which changes in key inputs. We believe the risk ratings utilized in the
are based on relevant information available at the end of each allowance calculations are appropriate and that the probability
period, include inherent risks and uncertainties related to judg- of the sensitivity scenarios above occurring within a short
ments and assumptions made. We consider the estimates to be period of time is remote. The process of determining the level
critical in applying our accounting policies, due to the existence of the allowance for loan losses requires a high degree of judg-
of uncertainty at the time the estimate is made, the likelihood of ment. Others given the same information could reach different
changes in estimates from period to period and the potential reasonable conclusions.
impact on the financial statements.
See Note 1 — Business and Summary of Significant Accounting
Management believes that the judgments and estimates utilized Policies for discussion on policies relating to the allowance for
in the following critical accounting estimates are reasonable. We loan losses, and Note 4 — Allowance for Loan Losses for seg-
do not believe that different assumptions are more likely than ment related data in Item 8 Financial Statements and
those utilized, although actual events may differ from such Supplementary Data and Credit Metrics for further information on
assumptions. Consequently, our estimates could prove inaccu- the allowance for credit losses.
rate, and we may be exposed to charges to earnings that could
Loan Impairment — Loan impairment is measured based upon
be material.
the difference between the recorded investment in each loan and
Allowance for Loan Losses — The allowance for loan losses is either the present value of the expected future cash flows dis-
reviewed for adequacy based on portfolio collateral values and counted at each loan’s effective interest rate (the loan’s
credit quality indicators, including charge-off experience, levels contractual interest rate adjusted for any deferred fees / costs or
of past due loans and non-performing assets, evaluation of port- discount / premium at the date of origination/acquisition) or if a
folio diversification and concentration as well as economic loan is collateral dependent, the collateral’s fair value. When fore-
conditions to determine the need for a qualitative adjustment. closure or impairment is determined to be probable, the
We review finance receivables periodically to determine the measurement will be based on the fair value of the collateral. The
probability of loss, and record charge-offs after considering such determination of impairment involves management’s judgment
factors as delinquencies, the financial condition of obligors, the and the use of market and third party estimates regarding collat-
value of underlying collateral, as well as third party credit eral values. Valuations of impaired loans and corresponding
enhancements such as guarantees and recourse to manufactur- impairment affect the level of the reserve for credit losses. See
ers. This information is reviewed on a quarterly basis with senior Note 1 — Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Poli-
management, including the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Risk cies for discussion on policies relating to the allowance for loan
Officer, Chief Credit Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Control- losses, and Note 3 — Loans for further discussion in Item 8 Finan-
ler, among others, as well as the Audit and Risk Management cial Statements and Supplementary Data.
Committees, in order to set the reserve for credit losses.
Fair Value Determination — At December 31, 2014, only selected
As of December 31, 2014, the allowance was comprised of non- assets (certain debt and equity securities, trading derivatives and
specific reserves of $334 million and specific reserves of derivative counterparty assets) and liabilities (trading derivatives
$12 million. The allowance is sensitive to the risk ratings assigned and derivative counterparty liabilities) were measured at fair
to loans and leases in our portfolio. Assuming a one level PD value. The fair value of assets related to net employee projected
downgrade across the 14 grade internal scale for all non-impaired benefit obligations was determined largely via level 2.
loans and leases, the allowance would have increased by
See Note 1 — Business and Summary of Significant Accounting
$229 million to $575 million at December 31, 2014. Assuming a
Policies, Note 13 — Fair Value and Note 20 — Retirement, Postre-
one level LGD downgrade across the 11 grade internal scale for
tirement and Other Benefit Plans in Item 8 Financial Statements
all non-impaired loans and leases, the allowance would have
and Supplementary Data for further discussion.
increased by $118 million to $464 million at December 31, 2014.
As a percentage of finance receivables, the allowance would be Lease Residual Values — Operating lease equipment is carried at
2.95% under the PD hypothetical stress scenario and 2.38% under cost less accumulated depreciation and is depreciated to esti-
the hypothetical LGD stress scenario, compared to the mated residual value using the straight-line method over the
reported 1.78%. lease term or estimated useful life of the asset. Direct financing
leases are recorded at the aggregated future minimum lease pay-
ments plus estimated residual values less unearned finance

income. We generally bear greater residual risk in operating CIT tested for impairment as of September 30, 2014, at which
lease transactions (versus finance lease transactions) as the dura- time CIT’s share price was $45.96 and tangible book value
tion of an operating lease is shorter relative to the equipment (”TBV“) per share was $45.87. This is as compared to
useful life than a finance lease. Management performs periodic December 31, 2009, CIT’s emergence date, when the Company
reviews of residual values, with other than temporary impairment was valued at a discount of 30% to TBV per share of $39.06. At
recognized in the current period as an increase to depreciation September 30, 2014, CIT’s share price was trading at 66% above
expense for operating lease residual impairment, or as an adjust- the December 31, 2009 share price of $27.61, while the TBV per
ment to yield for value adjustments on finance leases. Data share of $45.87 was approximately 17% higher than the TBV at
regarding current equipment values, including appraisals, and December 31, 2009.
historical residual realization experience are among the factors
In accordance with ASC 350, Intangibles — Goodwill and other,
considered in evaluating estimated residual values. As of
goodwill is assessed for impairment at least annually, or more fre-
December 31, 2014, our direct financing lease residual balance
quently if events occur that would indicate a potential reduction
was $0.7 billion and our total operating lease equipment balance
in the fair value of the reporting unit below its carrying value.
totaled $14.9 billion.
Impairment exists when the carrying amount of goodwill exceeds
Liabilities for Uncertain Tax Positions — The Company has open its implied fair value. The ASC requires a two-step impairment
tax years in the U.S., Canada, and other international jurisdictions test to be used to identify potential goodwill impairment and to
that are currently under examination, or may be subject to exami- measure the amount of goodwill impairment. Companies can
nation in the future, by the applicable taxing authorities. We also choose to perform qualitative assessments to conclude on
evaluate the adequacy of our income tax reserves in accordance whether it is more likely or not that a company’s carrying amount
with accounting standards on uncertain tax positions, taking into including goodwill is greater than its fair value, commonly
account open tax return positions, tax assessments received, and referred to as Step 0, before applying the two-step approach.
tax law changes. The process of evaluating liabilities and tax
For 2014, we performed the Step 1 analysis utilizing estimated
reserves involves the use of estimates and a high degree of man-
fair value based on peer price to earnings (”PE“) and TBV mul-
agement judgment. The final determination of tax audits could
tiples for the Transportation Finance, Commercial Services and
affect our income tax expense.
Equipment Finance goodwill assessments. The Company per-
Realizability of Deferred Tax Assets — The recognition of certain formed the analysis using both a current PE and forward PE
net deferred tax assets of the Company’s reporting entities is method. The current PE method was based on annualized pre-
dependent upon, but not limited to, the future profitability of the FSA income after taxes and actual peers’ multiples as of
reporting entity, when the underlying temporary differences will September 30, 2014. The forward PE method was based on fore-
reverse, and tax planning strategies. Further, Management’s judg- casted pre-FSA income after taxes and forward peers’ multiples
ment regarding the use of estimates and projections is required as of September 30, 2014. Pre-FSA income after taxes is utilized
in assessing our ability to realize the deferred tax assets relating for valuations as this was considered more appropriate for deter-
to net operating loss carry forwards (”NOL’s“) as most of these mining the company’s profitability without the impact of FSA
assets are subject to limited carry-forward periods some of which adjustment from the Company’s emergence from bankruptcy
begin to expire in 2015. In addition, the domestic NOLs are sub- in 2009.
ject to annual use limitations under the Internal Revenue Code
The TBV method is based on the reporting unit’s estimated
and certain state laws. Management utilizes historical and pro-
equity carrying amount and peer ratios using TBV as of
jected data in evaluating positive and negative evidence
September 30, 2014. For all analyses, CIT estimates each report-
regarding recognition of deferred tax assets. See Note 1 — Busi-
ing unit’s equity carrying amounts by applying the Company’s
ness and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Note 19
economic capital ratios to the unit’s risk weighted assets.
— Income Taxes in Item 8 Financial Statements and Supplemen-
tary Data for additional information regarding income taxes. In addition, the Company applied a 42.2% control premium. The
control premium is management’s estimate of how much a mar-
Goodwill — The consolidated goodwill balance totaled $571 mil-
ket participant would be willing to pay over the market fair
lion at December 31, 2014, or approximately 1% of total assets.
value for control of the business. Management concluded,
During 2014, CIT acquired 100% of the outstanding shares of
based on performing the Step 1 analysis, that the fair values of
Paris-based Nacco, and Direct Capital, resulting in the addition
the reporting units exceed their respective carrying values,
of $77 million and $168 million of goodwill, respectively. The
including goodwill.
remaining amount of goodwill represented the excess reorgani-
zation value over the fair value of tangible and identified Estimating the fair value of reporting units involves the use of
intangible assets, net of liabilities, recorded in conjunction with estimates and significant judgments that are based on a number
FSA in 2009, and was allocated to TIF Transportation Finance, of factors including actual operating results. If current conditions
NSP and to the NACF Equipment Finance and Commercial Ser- change from those expected, it is reasonably possible that the
vices reporting units. judgments and estimates described above could change in
future periods.
Though the goodwill balance is not significant compared to total
assets, management believes the judgmental nature in determin- See Note 26 — Goodwill and Intangible Assets in Item 8
ing the values of the reporting units when measuring for potential Financial Statements and Supplementary Data for more
impairment is significant enough to warrant additional discussion. detailed information.
INTERNAL CONTROLS WORKING GROUP
The Internal Controls Working Group (”ICWG“), which reports to in Finance, Risk, Operations, Human Resources, Information Tech-
the Disclosure Committee, is responsible for monitoring and nology and Internal Audit. See Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
improving internal controls over external financial reporting. The for more information.
ICWG is chaired by the Controller and is comprised of executives
NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASUREMENTS
The SEC adopted regulations that apply to any public disclosure GAAP financial measures to evaluate our performance. We intend
or release of material information that includes a non-GAAP our non-GAAP financial measures to provide additional informa-
financial measure. The accompanying Management’s Discussion tion and insight regarding operating results and financial position
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations of the business and in certain cases to provide financial informa-
and Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure about Market Risk tion that is presented to rating agencies and other users of
contain certain non-GAAP financial measures. Due to the nature financial information. These measures are not in accordance with,
of our financing and leasing assets, which include a higher pro- or a substitute for, GAAP and may be different from or inconsis-
portion of operating lease equipment than most BHCs, and the tent with non-GAAP financial measures used by other companies.
impact of FSA following our 2009 restructuring, certain financial See footnotes below the tables for additional explanation of non-
measures commonly used by other BHCs are not as meaningful GAAP measurements.
for our Company. Therefore, management uses certain non-
Total Net Revenue(1) and Net Operating Lease Revenue(2) (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012
Total Net Revenue
Interest income $ 1,226.5 $ 1,255.2 $ 1,394.0
Finance revenue 3,319.5 3,152.6 3,294.8
Net finance revenue 1,420.8 1,388.0 (23.5)
Other income 305.4 381.3 614.7
Total net revenue $ 1,726.2 $ 1,769.3 $ 591.2
Net Operating Lease Revenue
Rental income on operating leases $ 2,093.0 $ 1,897.4 $ 1,900.8
Net operating lease revenue $ 1,280.5 $ 1,193.7 $ 1,248.2
Adjusted NFR ($) and NFM (%) (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
NFR / NFM $1,420.8 4.25% $1,388.0 4.61% $ (23.5) (0.09)%
Accelerated FSA net discount on
debt extinguishments and
repurchases 34.7 0.10% 34.6 0.12% 1,294.9 4.69%
Accelerated OID on debt
extinguishments related to the GSI
facility (42.0) (0.12)% (5.2) (0.02)% (6.9) (0.02)%
Adjusted NFR and NFM $1,413.5 4.23% $1,417.4 4.71% $1,264.5 4.58%

Operating Expenses Excluding Restructuring Costs(3) (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
Operating expenses $(941.8) $(970.2) $(894.0)
Operating expenses excluding restructuring costs $(910.4) $(933.3) $(871.3)
Earning Assets(4) (dollars in millions)

December 31,
2014 2013 2012
Loans $19,495.0 $18,629.2 $17,153.1
Operating lease equipment, net 14,930.4 13,035.4 12,411.7
Assets held for sale 1,218.1 1,003.4 644.8
Credit balances of factoring clients (1,622.1) (1,336.1) (1,256.5)
Total earning assets $34,021.4 $31,331.9 $28,953.1
Tangible Book Value(6) (dollars in millions)

December 31,
2014 2013 2012
Total common stockholders’ equity $9,068.9 $8,838.8 $8,334.8
Less: Goodwill (571.3) (334.6) (345.9)
Intangible assets (25.7) (20.3) (31.9)
Tangible book value $8,471.9 $8,483.9 $7,957.0
Continuing Operations Total Assets(5) (dollars in millions)

December 31,
2014 2013 2012
Total assets $47,880.0 $47,139.0 $44,012.0
Assets of discontinued operation – (3,821.4) (4,202.6)
Continuing operations total assets $47,880.0 $43,317.6 $39,809.4
(1)
Total net revenues is a non-GAAP measure that represents the combination of net finance revenue and other income and is an aggregation of all sources of
revenue for the Company. Total net revenues is used by management to monitor business performance. Given our asset composition includes a high level
of operating lease equipment, NFM is a more appropriate metric than net interest margin (”NIM“) (a common metric used by other bank holding compa-
nies), as NIM does not fully reflect the earnings of our portfolio because it includes the impact of debt costs of all our assets but excludes the net revenue
(rental revenue less depreciation and maintenance and other operating lease expenses) from operating leases.
(2)
Net operating lease revenue is a non-GAAP measure that represents the combination of rental income on operating leases less depreciation on operating
lease equipment and maintenance and other operating lease expenses. Net operating lease revenues is used by management to monitor portfolio
performance.
(3)
Operating expenses excluding restructuring costs is a non-GAAP measure used by management to compare period over period expenses.
(4)
Earning assets is a non-GAAP measure and are utilized in certain revenue and earnings ratios. Earning assets are net of credit balances of factoring clients.
This net amount represents the amounts we fund.
(5)
Continuing operations total assets is a non-GAAP measure, which management uses for analytical purposes to compare balance sheet assets on a consis-
tent basis.
(6)
Tangible book value is a non-GAAP measure, which represents an adjusted common shareholders’ equity balance that has been reduced by goodwill and
intangible assets. Tangible book value is used to compute a per common share amount, which is used to evaluate our use of equity.
FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
Certain statements contained in this document are ”forward- Therefore, actual results may differ materially from those
looking statements“ within the meaning of the U.S. Private expressed or implied in those statements. Factors, in addition to
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. All statements contained those disclosed in ”Risk Factors“, that could cause such differ-
herein that are not clearly historical in nature are forward-looking ences include, but are not limited to:
and the words ”anticipate,“ ”believe,“ ”could,“ ”expect,“ ”esti- - capital markets liquidity,
mate,“ ”forecast,“ ”intend,“ ”plan,“ ”potential,“ ”project,“ - risks of and/or actual economic slowdown, downturn
”target“ and similar expressions are generally intended to iden-
or recession,
tify forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statements - industry cycles and trends,
contained herein, in press releases, written statements or other - uncertainties associated with risk management, including
documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission or
credit, prepayment, asset/liability, interest rate and
in communications and discussions with investors and analysts in
currency risks,
the normal course of business through meetings, webcasts, - adequacy of reserves for credit losses,
phone calls and conference calls, concerning our operations, - risks inherent in changes in market interest rates and
economic performance and financial condition are subject to
quality spreads,
known and unknown risks, uncertainties and contingencies. - funding opportunities, deposit taking capabilities and
Forward-looking statements are included, for example, in the dis-
borrowing costs,
cussions about: - conditions and/or changes in funding markets and our access
- our liquidity risk and capital management, including our capital to such markets, including secured and unsecured term debt
plan, leverage, capital ratios, and credit ratings, our liquidity and the asset-backed securitization markets,
plan, and our plans and the potential transactions designed to - risks of implementing new processes, procedures, and systems,
enhance our liquidity and capital, and for a return of capital, - risks associated with the value and recoverability of leased
- our plans to change our funding mix and to access new sources equipment and lease residual values,
of funding to broaden our use of deposit taking capabilities, - risks of failing to achieve the projected revenue growth from
- our credit risk management and credit quality, new business initiatives or the projected expense reductions
- our asset/liability risk management, from efficiency improvements,
- our funding, borrowing costs and net finance revenue, - application of fair value accounting in volatile markets,
- our operational risks, including success of systems - application of goodwill accounting in a recessionary economy,
enhancements and expansion of risk management and - changes in laws or regulations governing our business and
control functions, operations, or affecting our assets, including our operating
- our mix of portfolio asset classes, including growth initiatives, lease equipment,
new business initiatives, new products, acquisitions and - changes in competitive factors,
divestitures, new business and customer retention, - demographic trends,
- legal risks, including related to the enforceability of our - customer retention rates,
agreements and to changes in laws and regulations, - future acquisitions and dispositions of businesses or asset
- our growth rates, portfolios, and
- our commitments to extend credit or purchase equipment, and - regulatory changes and/or developments.
- how we may be affected by legal proceedings.
Any or all of our forward-looking statements here or in other pub-
All forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties, lications may turn out to be wrong, and there are no guarantees
many of which are beyond our control, which may cause actual regarding our performance. We do not assume any obligation to
results, performance or achievements to differ materially from update any forward-looking statement for any reason.
anticipated results, performance or achievements. Also, forward-
looking statements are based upon management’s estimates
of fair values and of future costs, using currently
available information.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of CIT Group Inc.: assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and
evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal
In our opinion, the accompanying consolidated balance sheets
control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included per-
and the related consolidated statements of operations, of com-
forming such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
prehensive income (loss), of stockholders’ equity and of cash
circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable
flows present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position
basis for our opinions.
of CIT Group Inc. and its subsidiaries (”the Company“) at
December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, and the results of A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process
their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliabil-
the period ended December 31, 2014 in conformity with account- ity of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
ing principles generally accepted in the United States of America. statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control
respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures
December 31, 2014, based on criteria established in Internal that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable
Control—Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and disposi-
of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission tions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable
(COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit
financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally
over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effective- accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expendi-
ness of internal control over financial reporting, included in tures of the company are being made only in accordance with
Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Report- authorizations of management and directors of the company; and
ing appearing under Item 9A. Our responsibility is to express (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely
opinions on these financial statements and on the Company’s detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated company’s assets that could have a material effect on the finan-
audits (which were integrated audits in 2014 and 2013). We con- cial statements.
ducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial
Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projec-
standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain
tions of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because
free of material misstatement and whether effective internal con-
of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with
trol over financial reporting was maintained in all material
the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examin-
ing, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting
principles used and significant estimates made by management,
and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our New York, New York
audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtain- February 20, 2015
ing an understanding of internal control over financial reporting,
CIT GROUP INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (dollars in millions – except per share data)
December 31, December 31,
2014 2013
Assets
Cash and due from banks, including restricted balances of $374.0 and $178.1 at
December 31, 2014 and 2013(1), respectively $ 878.5 $ 680.1
Interest bearing deposits, including restricted balances of $590.2 and $785.5 at
December 31, 2014 and 2013(1), respectively 6,241.2 5,364.6
Securities purchased under agreements to resell 650.0 –
Investment securities 1,550.3 2,630.7
Assets held for sale(1) 1,218.1 1,003.4
Loans (see Note 10 for amounts pledged) 19,495.0 18,629.2
Allowance for loan losses (346.4) (356.1)
Total loans, net of allowance for loan losses(1) 19,148.6 18,273.1
Operating lease equipment, net (see Note 10 for amounts pledged)(1) 14,930.4 13,035.4
Unsecured counterparty receivable 559.2 301.6
Goodwill 571.3 334.6
Other assets, including $168.0 and $50.3 at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, at fair value 2,132.4 1,694.1
Assets of discontinued operation (1) – 3,821.4
Total Assets $47,880.0 $47,139.0
Liabilities
Deposits $15,849.8 $12,526.5
Credit balances of factoring clients 1,622.1 1,336.1
Other liabilities, including $62.3 and $111.0 at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, at fair value 2,888.8 2,664.3
Long-term borrowings, including $3,053.3 and $2,510.5 contractually due within twelve months at
December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively 18,455.8 18,484.5
Liabilities of discontinued operation (1) – 3,277.6
Total Liabilities 38,816.5 38,289.0
Stockholders’ Equity
Common stock: $0.01 par value, 600,000,000 authorized
Issued: 203,127,291 and 202,182,395 at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively 2.0 2.0
Outstanding: 180,920,575 and 197,403,751 at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively
Paid-in capital 8,603.6 8,555.4
Retained earnings 1,615.7 581.0
Accumulated other comprehensive loss (133.9) (73.6)
Treasury stock: 22,206,716 and 4,778,644 shares at December 31, 2014 and 2013 at cost, respectively (1,018.5) (226.0)
Total Common Stockholders’ Equity 9,068.9 8,838.8
Noncontrolling minority interests (5.4) 11.2
Total Equity 9,063.5 8,850.0
Total Liabilities and Equity $47,880.0 $47,139.0
(1) The following table presents information on assets and liabilities related to Variable Interest Entities (VIEs) that are consolidated by
the Company. The difference between VIE total assets and total liabilities represents the Company’s interest in those entities, which
were eliminated in consolidation. The assets of the consolidated VIEs will be used to settle the liabilities of those entities and, except
for the Company’s interest in the VIEs, are not available to the creditors of CIT or any affiliates of CIT.
Assets
Cash and interest bearing deposits, restricted $ 537.3 $ 516.4
Assets held for sale – 96.7
Total loans, net of allowance for loan losses 3,619.2 3,109.7
Operating lease equipment, net 4,219.7 4,569.9
Other 10.0 11.9
Assets of discontinued operation – 3,438.2
Total Assets $8,386.2 $11,742.8
Liabilities
Beneficial interests issued by consolidated VIEs (classified as long-term borrowings) $5,331.5 $ 5,156.4
Liabilities of discontinued operation – 3,265.6
Total Liabilities $5,331.5 $ 8,422.0
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
Item 8: Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS (dollars in millions – except per share data)

2014 2013 2012
Interest income
Interest and fees on loans $ 1,191.0 $ 1,226.3 $ 1,361.8
Interest and dividends on interest bearing deposits and investments 35.5 28.9 32.2
Interest income 1,226.5 1,255.2 1,394.0
Interest expense
Interest on long-term borrowings (855.2) (881.1) (2,513.2)
Interest on deposits (231.0) (179.8) (152.5)
Net interest revenue 140.3 194.3 (1,271.7)
Net interest revenue, after credit provision 40.2 129.4 (1,323.1)
Non-interest income
Other income 305.4 381.3 614.7
Total non-interest income 2,398.4 2,278.7 2,515.5
Total revenue, net of interest expense and credit provision 2,438.6 2,408.1 1,192.4
Other expenses
Loss on debt extinguishments (3.5) – (61.2)
Total other expenses (1,757.8) (1,673.9) (1,607.8)
Income (loss) from continuing operations before benefit (provision)
for income taxes 680.8 734.2 (415.4)
Benefit (provision) for income taxes 397.9 (83.9) (116.7)
Income (loss) from continuing operations before attribution of noncontrolling
interests 1,078.7 650.3 (532.1)
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests, after tax (1.2) (5.9) (3.7)
Income (loss) from continuing operations 1,077.5 644.4 (535.8)
Discontinued operation
Income (loss) from discontinued operation, net of taxes (230.3) 31.3 (56.5)
Gain on sale of discontinued operation, net of taxes 282.8 – –
Income (loss) from discontinued operation, net of taxes 52.5 31.3 (56.5)
Net income (loss) $ 1,130.0 $ 675.7 $ (592.3)
Basic income (loss) per common share
Income (loss) from continuing operations $ 5.71 $ 3.21 $ (2.67)
Basic income (loss) per common share $ 5.99 $ 3.37 $ (2.95)
Diluted income (loss) per common share
Diluted income (loss) per common share $ 5.96 $ 3.35 $ (2.95)
Average number of common shares – basic (thousands) 188,491 200,503 200,887
Average number of common shares – diluted (thousands) 189,463 201,695 200,887
Dividends declared per common share $ 0.50 $ 0.10 $ –

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS) (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012
Income (loss) from continuing operations, before attribution of noncontrolling
interests $1,078.7 $650.3 $(532.1)
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax:
Foreign currency translation adjustments (26.0) (12.8) (8.4)
Changes in fair values of derivatives qualifying as cash flow hedges 0.2 (0.1) 0.6
Net unrealized gains (losses) on available for sale securities (0.1) (2.0) 1.0
Changes in benefit plans net gain (loss) and prior service (cost)/credit (34.4) 19.0 11.7
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax (60.3) 4.1 4.9
Comprehensive income (loss) before noncontrolling interests and
discontinued operation 1,018.4 654.4 (527.2)
Comprehensive loss attributable to noncontrolling interests (1.2) (5.9) (3.7)
Comprehensive income (loss) $1,069.7 $679.8 $(587.4)


CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY (dollars in millions)
Retained Accumulated
Earnings Other Noncontrolling
Common Paid-in (Accumulated Comprehensive Treasury Minority Total
Stock Capital Deficit) Income (Loss) Stock Interests Equity
December 31, 2011 $2.0 $8,459.3 $ 517.7 $ (82.6) $ (12.8) $ 2.5 $8,886.1
Net income (loss) (592.3) 3.7 (588.6)
Other comprehensive income,
net of tax 4.9 4.9
Amortization of restricted
stock, stock option, and
performance share expenses 41.6 (3.9) 37.7
Employee stock purchase plan 1.1 1.1
Distribution of earnings and
capital (0.2) (1.5) (1.7)
December 31, 2012 $2.0 $8,501.8 $ (74.6) $ (77.7) $ (16.7) $ 4.7 $8,339.5
Net income 675.7 5.9 681.6
Other comprehensive income,
net of tax 4.1 4.1
Dividends paid (20.1) (20.1)
stock, stock option and
performance shares expenses 52.5 (15.9) 36.6
Repurchase of common stock (193.4) (193.4)
capital 0.6 0.6
December 31, 2013 $2.0 $8,555.4 $ 581.0 $ (73.6) $ (226.0) $ 11.2 $8,850.0
Net income 1,130.0 1.2 1,131.2
Other comprehensive loss,
net of tax (60.3) (60.3)
Dividends paid (95.3) (95.3)
stock, stock option and
performance shares expenses 47.1 (17.0) 30.1
Repurchase of common stock (775.5) (775.5)
capital (17.8) (17.8)
December 31, 2014 $2.0 $8,603.6 $1,615.7 $(133.9) $(1,018.5) $ (5.4) $9,063.5

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (dollars in millions)
Years Ended December 31
2014 2013 2012
Cash Flows From Operations
Net income (loss) $ 1,130.0 $ 675.7 $ (592.3)
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash flows from operations:
Provision for credit losses 100.1 64.9 51.6
Net depreciation, amortization and accretion 882.0 705.5 1,985.9
Net gains on equipment, receivable and investment sales (348.6) (187.2) (342.8)
Loss on debt extinguishments – – 21.1
Provision for deferred income taxes (426.7) 59.1 32.7
(Increase) decrease in finance receivables held for sale (165.1) 404.8 (54.9)
Increase in other assets (34.9) (251.1) (106.2)
Increase (decrease) in accrued liabilities and payables 141.5 (18.1) (86.6)
Net cash flows provided by operations 1,278.3 1,453.6 908.5
Cash Flows From Investing Activities
Loans originated and purchased (15,534.3) (18,243.1) (18,983.6)
Principal collections of loans 13,681.8 15,310.4 16,673.7
Purchases of investment securities (9,824.4) (16,538.8) (16,322.0)
Proceeds from maturities of investment securities 10,297.8 15,084.5 16,580.0
Proceeds from asset and receivable sales 3,817.2 1,875.4 4,499.3
Purchases of assets to be leased and other equipment (3,101.1) (2,071.8) (1,776.6)
Net (increase) decrease in short-term factoring receivables (8.0) 105.2 134.1
Acquisition, net of cash received (448.6) – –
Net change in restricted cash 93.8 127.0 (314.0)
Net cash flows (used in) provided by investing activities (1,025.8) (4,351.2) 490.9
Cash Flows From Financing Activities
Proceeds from the issuance of term debt 4,180.1 2,107.6 13,523.9
Repayments of term debt (5,874.7) (2,445.8) (19,542.2)
Net increase in deposits 3,323.9 2,846.1 3,499.8
Collection of security deposits and maintenance funds 551.8 543.9 563.4
Use of security deposits and maintenance funds (488.4) (495.8) (373.8)
Repurchase of common stock (775.5) (193.4) –
Dividends paid (95.3) (20.1) –
Net cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities 821.9 2,342.5 (2,328.9)
Increase (decrease) in unrestricted cash and cash equivalents 1,074.4 (555.1) (929.5)
Unrestricted cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period 5,081.1 5,636.2 6,565.7
Unrestricted cash and cash equivalents, end of period $ 6,155.5 $ 5,081.1 $ 5,636.2
Supplementary Cash Flow Disclosure
Interest paid $ (1,049.5) $ (997.8) $ (1,240.0)
Federal, foreign, state and local income taxes (paid) collected, net $ (21.6) $ (68.0) $ 18.4
Supplementary Non Cash Flow Disclosure
Transfer of assets from held for investment to held for sale $ 2,551.3 $ 5,141.9 $ 1,421.2
Transfer of assets from held for sale to held for investment $ 64.9 $ 18.0 $ 11.0

CIT GROUP AND SUBSIDIARIES — NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE 1 — BUSINESS AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

ACCOUNTING POLICIES Financing and Leasing Assets
CIT Group Inc., together with its subsidiaries (collectively ”CIT“ CIT extends credit to customers through a variety of financing
or the ”Company“), has provided financial solutions to its clients arrangements including term loans, revolving credit facilities,
since its formation in 1908. The Company provides financing, capital leases (direct finance leases) and operating leases. The
leasing and advisory services principally to middle market compa- amounts outstanding on term loans, revolving credit facilities and
nies in a wide variety of industries primarily in North America, and capital leases are referred to as finance receivables. In certain
equipment financing and leasing solutions to the transportation instances, we use the term ”Loans“ synonymously, as presented
industry worldwide. CIT became a bank holding company on the balance sheet. These finance receivables, when combined
(”BHC“) in December 2008 and a financial holding company with Assets held for sale and Operating lease equipment, net are
(”FHC“) in July 2013. CIT is regulated by the Board of Governors referred to as financing and leasing assets.
of the Federal Reserve System (”FRB“) and the Federal Reserve
Bank of New York (”FRBNY“) under the U.S. Bank Holding Com- It is CIT’s expectation that the majority of the loans and leases
pany Act of 1956. CIT Bank (the ”Bank“), a wholly-owned originated will be held for the foreseeable future or until maturity.
subsidiary, is a Utah state chartered bank located in Salt Lake In certain situations, for example to manage concentrations
City, and is regulated by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corpora- and/or credit risk or where returns no longer meet specified tar-
tion (”FDIC“) and the Utah Department of Financial Institutions gets, some or all of certain exposures are sold. Loans for which
(”UDFI“). The Company operates primarily in North America, with the Company has the intent and ability to hold for the foresee-
locations in Europe and Asia. able future or until maturity are classified as held for investment
(”HFI“). If the Company no longer has the intent or ability to hold
BASIS OF PRESENTATION loans for the foreseeable future, then the loans are transferred
to AHFS. Loans originated with the intent to resell are classified
Basis of Financial Information
as AHFS.
The accounting and financial reporting policies of CIT Group Inc.
Loans originated and classified as HFI are recorded at amortized
conform to generally accepted accounting principles (”GAAP“) in
cost. Loan origination fees and certain direct origination costs are
the United States and the preparation of the consolidated finan-
deferred and recognized as adjustments to interest income over
cial statements is in conformity with GAAP which requires
the lives of the related loans. Unearned income on leases and
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect
discounts and premiums on loans purchased are amortized to
reported amounts and disclosures. Actual results could differ
interest income using the effective interest method. Direct financ-
from those estimates and assumptions. Some of the more signifi-
ing leases originated and classified as HFI are recorded at the
cant estimates include: allowance for loan losses, loan
aggregate future minimum lease payments plus estimated
impairment, fair value determination, lease residual values, liabili-
residual values less unearned finance income. Management per-
ties for uncertain tax positions, realizability of deferred tax assets,
forms periodic reviews of estimated residual values, with other
and goodwill assets. Additionally where applicable, the policies
than temporary impairment (”OTTI“) recognized in current
conform to accounting and reporting guidelines prescribed by
period earnings.
bank regulatory authorities.
If it is determined that a loan should be transferred from HFI to
Principles of Consolidation AHFS, then the balance is transferred at the lower of cost or fair
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include value. At the time of transfer, a write-down of the loan is recorded
financial information related to CIT Group Inc. and its majority- as a charge-off when the carrying amount exceeds fair value and
owned subsidiaries and those variable interest entities (”VIEs“) the difference relates to credit quality, otherwise the write-down
where the Company is the primary beneficiary. is recorded as a reduction to Other Income, and any allowance
for loan loss is reversed. Once classified as AHFS, the amount by
In preparing the consolidated financial statements, all significant
which the carrying value exceeds fair value is recorded as a valua-
inter-company accounts and transactions have been eliminated.
tion allowance and is reflected as a reduction to Other Income.
Assets held in an agency or fiduciary capacity are not included in
the consolidated financial statements. If it is determined that a loan should be transferred from AHFS to
HFI, the loan is transferred at the lower of cost or fair value on
Discontinued Operation the transfer date, which coincides with the date of change in
On April 25, 2014, the Company completed the sale of its student management’s intent. The difference between the carrying value
lending business. As a result, the student lending business is of the loan and the fair value, if lower, is reflected as a loan dis-
reported as a discontinued operation for all periods. The busi- count at the transfer date, which reduces its carrying value.
ness had been included in the Non-Strategic Portfolios segment Subsequent to the transfer, the discount is accreted into earnings
and consisted of a portfolio of U.S. Government-guaranteed stu- as an increase to interest income over the life of the loan using
dent loans. The portfolio was in run-off and had been transferred the effective interest method.
to assets held for sale (”AHFS“) at the end of 2013. See Note 2 — Operating lease equipment is carried at cost less accumulated
Acquisition and Disposition Activities. depreciation. Operating lease equipment is depreciated to its
estimated residual value using the straight-line method over the
lease term or estimated useful life of the asset. Where manage-
ment’s intention is to sell the equipment received at the end of a
lease, these are marked to the lower of cost or fair value and clas- the opinion of management, collection of remaining principal
sified as AHFS. Depreciation is stopped on these assets and any and interest is reasonably assured, and upon collection of six
further marks to lower of cost or fair value are recorded in Other consecutive scheduled payments.
Income. Equipment received at the end of the lease is marked to The Company periodically modifies the terms of finance receiv-
the lower of cost or fair value with the adjustment recorded in ables in response to borrowers’ financial difficulties. These
Other Income. modifications may include interest rate changes, principal for-
In the operating lease portfolio, maintenance costs incurred that giveness or payment deferments. Finance receivables that are
exceed maintenance funds collected for commercial aircraft are modified, where a concession has been made to the borrower,
expensed if they do not provide a future economic benefit and are accounted for as Troubled Debt Restructurings (”TDRs“).
do not extend the useful life of the aircraft. Such costs may TDRs are generally placed on non-accrual upon their restructur-
include costs of routine aircraft operation and costs of mainte- ing and remain on non-accrual until, in the opinion of
nance and spare parts incurred in connection with re-leasing an management, collection of remaining principal and interest is
aircraft and during the transition between leases. For such main- reasonably assured, and upon collection of six consecutive
tenance costs that are not capitalized, a charge is recorded in scheduled payments.
expense at the time the costs are incurred. Income recognition Allowance for Loan Losses on Finance Receivables
related to maintenance funds collected and not used during the
life of the lease is deferred to the extent management estimates The allowance for loan losses is intended to provide for credit
costs will be incurred by subsequent lessees performing sched- losses inherent in the loan and lease receivables portfolio and is
uled maintenance. Upon the disposition of an aircraft, any excess periodically reviewed for adequacy considering credit quality
maintenance funds that exist are recognized in Other Income. indicators, including expected and historical losses and levels of
and trends in past due loans, non-performing assets and
Revenue Recognition impaired loans, collateral values and economic conditions.
Interest income on loans (both HFI and AHFS) is recognized using The allowance for loan losses is determined based on three key
the effective interest method or on a basis approximating a level components: (1) specific allowances for loans that are impaired,
rate of return over the life of the asset. Interest income includes a based upon the value of underlying collateral or projected cash
component of accretion of the fair value discount on loans and flows, (2) non-specific allowances for estimated losses inherent in
lease receivables recorded in connection with Fresh Start the portfolio based upon the expected loss over the loss emer-
Accounting (”FSA“), which is accreted using the effective interest gence period projected loss levels and (3) allowances for
method as a yield adjustment over the remaining term of the loan estimated losses inherent in the portfolio based upon economic
and recorded in interest income. See Fresh Start Accounting fur- risks, industry and geographic concentrations, and other factors.
ther in this section. Changes to the Allowance for Loan Losses are recorded in the
Rental revenue on operating leases is recognized on a straight Provision for Credit Losses.
line basis over the lease term and is included in Non-interest With respect to assets transferred from HFI to AHFS, a charge off
Income. Intangible assets were recorded during FSA and in is recognized to the extent carrying value exceeds the expected
acquisitions completed by the Company to adjust the carrying cash flows and the difference relates to credit quality.
value of above or below market operating lease contracts to their An approach similar to the allowance for loan losses is utilized to
fair value. The FSA related adjustments (net) are amortized into calculate a reserve for losses related to unfunded loan commit-
rental income on a straight line basis over the remaining term of ments and deferred purchase commitments associated with the
the respective lease. Company’s factoring business. A reserve for unfunded loan com-
The recognition of interest income (including accretion) on Loans is mitments is maintained to absorb estimated probable losses
suspended and an account is placed on non-accrual status when, in the related to these facilities. The adequacy of the reserve is deter-
opinion of management, full collection of all principal and interest due mined based on periodic evaluations of the unfunded credit
is doubtful. To the extent the estimated cash flows, including fair value facilities, including an assessment of the probability of commit-
of collateral, does not satisfy both the principal and accrued interest ment usage, credit risk factors for loans outstanding to these
outstanding, accrued but uncollected interest at the date an account is same customers, and the terms and expiration dates of the
placed on non-accrual status is reversed and charged against interest unfunded credit facilities. The reserve for unfunded loan commit-
income. Subsequent interest received is applied to the outstanding ments is recorded as a liability on the Consolidated Balance
principal balance until such time as the account is collected, charged- Sheet. Net adjustments to the reserve for unfunded loan commit-
off or returned to accrual status. Loans that are on cash basis non- ments are included in the provision for credit losses.
accrual do not accrue interest income; however, payments designated Finance receivables are divided into the following portfolio seg-
by the borrower as interest payments may be recorded as interest ments, which correspond to the Company’s business segments;
income. To qualify for this treatment, the remaining recorded invest- Transportation & International Finance (”TIF“), North American
ment in the loan must be deemed fully collectable. Commercial Finance (”NACF“) and Non-Strategic Portfolios
The recognition of interest income (including accretion) on cer- (”NSP“). Within each portfolio segment, credit risk is assessed
tain small ticket commercial loans and lease receivables is and monitored in the following classes of loans; within TIF, Trans-
suspended and all previously accrued but uncollected revenue is portation Finance and International Finance, and within NACF,
reversed, when payment of principal and/or interest is contractu- Corporate Finance, Equipment Finance, Real Estate Finance, and
ally delinquent for 90 days or more. Accounts, including accounts Commercial Services. The allowance is estimated based upon the
that have been modified, are returned to accrual status when, in finance receivables in the respective class.

The allowance policies described above related to specific and Delinquent Finance Receivables
non-specific allowances, and the impaired finance receivables A loan is considered past due for financial reporting purposes if
and charge-off policies that follow, are applied across the portfo- default of contractual principal or interest exists for a period of 30
lio segments and loan classes. Given the nature of the Company’s days or more. Past due loans consist of both loans that are still
business, the specific allowance is largely related to the NACF accruing interest as well as loans on non-accrual status.
and TIF portfolio segments. The non-specific allowance, which
considers the Company’s internal system of probability of default Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
and loss severity ratings, among other factors, is applicable to all A review for impairment of long-lived assets, such as operating
the portfolio segments. lease equipment, is performed at least annually or when events
or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of
Impairment of Finance Receivables
long-lived assets may not be recoverable. Impairment of assets is
Impaired finance receivables of $500 thousand or greater that are determined by comparing the carrying amount to future undis-
placed on non-accrual status, largely in the Corporate Finance, counted net cash flows expected to be generated. If an asset is
Real Estate Finance, Commercial Services, Transportation Finance impaired, the impairment is the amount by which the carrying
and International Finance loan classes, are subject to periodic amount exceeds the fair value of the asset. Fair value is based
individual review by the Company’s problem loan management upon discounted cash flow analysis and available market data.
(”PLM“) function. The Company excludes small-ticket loan and Current lease rentals, as well as relevant and available market
lease receivables, largely in Equipment Finance and NSP, that information (including third party sales for similar equipment, and
have not been modified in a troubled debt restructuring, as well published appraisal data), are considered both in determining
as short-term factoring receivables in Commercial Services, from undiscounted future cash flows when testing for the existence of
its impaired finance receivables disclosures as charge-offs are impairment and in determining estimated fair value in measuring
typically determined and recorded for such loans beginning at impairment. Depreciation expense is adjusted when projected
90-150 days of contractual delinquency. fair value at the end of the lease term is below the projected
Impairment occurs when, based on current information and book value at the end of the lease term. Assets to be disposed of
events, it is probable that CIT will be unable to collect all are included in assets held for sale in the Consolidated Balance
amounts due according to contractual terms of the agreement. Sheet and reported at the lower of the carrying amount or fair
Impairment is measured as the shortfall between estimated value value less disposal costs.
and recorded investment in the finance receivable, with the esti-
Securities Purchased Under Resale Agreements
mated value determined using fair value of collateral and other
cash flows if the finance receivable is collateralized, or the pres- Securities purchased under agreements to resell (reverse repos)
ent value of expected future cash flows discounted at the generally do not constitute a sale or purchase of the underlying
contract’s effective interest rate. securities for accounting purposes and, therefore are treated as
collateralized financing transactions. These agreements are
Charge-off of Finance Receivables recorded at the amounts at which the securities were acquired.
Charge-offs on loans are recorded after considering such factors See Note 13 — Fair Value for discussion of fair value. The Com-
as the borrower’s financial condition, the value of underlying col- pany’s reverse repos are short-term securities secured by the
lateral and guarantees (including recourse to dealers and underlying collateral, which, along with the cash investment, are
manufacturers), and the status of collection activities. Such maintained by a third-party.
charge-offs are deducted from the carrying value of the related CIT’s policy is to obtain collateral with a market value in excess of
finance receivables. This policy is largely applicable in the Corpo- the principal amount under resale agreements. To ensure that the
rate Finance, Equipment Finance, Real Estate Finance, market value of the underlying collateral remains sufficient, the
Commercial Services and Transportation Finance loan classes. collateral is valued on a daily basis. Collateral typically consists of
Charge-offs on certain small ticket finance receivables are government-agency securities, corporate bonds and mortgage-
recorded beginning at 90 to 150 days of contractual delinquency. backed securities.
Charge-offs on loans originated are reflected in the provision for
These securities financing agreements give rise to minimal credit
credit losses. Charge-offs on loans with a purchase price discount
risk as a result of the collateral provisions, therefore no allowance
or FSA discount are first allocated to the respective loan’s dis-
is considered necessary. In the event of counterparty default, the
count, then to the extent a charge-off amount exceeds such
financing agreement provides the Company with the right to liq-
discount, to provision for credit losses. Collections on accounts
uidate the collateral held. Interest earned on these financing
previously charged off in the post-emergence period are
agreements is included in Interest and dividends on interest bear-
recorded as recoveries in the provision for credit losses. Collec-
ing deposits and investments in the statement of operations.
tions on accounts previously charged off in the pre-emergence
period are recorded as recoveries in other income. Collections on Investments
accounts previously charged off prior to transfer to AHFS are Debt and equity securities classified as ”available-for-sale“
recorded as recoveries in other income. (”AFS“) are carried at fair value with changes in fair value
reported in accumulated other comprehensive income (”AOCI“),
a component of stockholders’ equity, net of applicable income
taxes. Credit-related declines in fair value that are determined to
be OTTI are immediately recorded in earnings. Realized gains
and losses on sales are included in Other income on a specific
identification basis, and interest and dividend income on AFS - activity in the market of the issuer that may indicate adverse
securities is included in Interest and dividends on interest bear- credit conditions; and
ing deposits and investments. - the Company’s ability and intent to hold the investment for a
Debt securities classified as ”held-to-maturity“ (”HTM“) repre- period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery.
sent securities that the Company has both the ability and the The Company’s review for impairment generally includes identifi-
intent to hold until maturity, and are carried at amortized cost. cation and evaluation of investments that have indications of
Interest on such securities is included in Interest and dividends possible impairment, in addition to:
on interest bearing deposits and investments.
- analysis of individual investments that have fair values less than
Debt and marketable equity security purchases and sales are amortized cost, including consideration of the length of time
recorded as of the trade date. the investment has been in an unrealized loss position and the
Equity securities without readily determinable fair values are gen- expected recovery period;
erally carried at cost or the equity method of accounting and
- discussion of evidential matter, including an evaluation of factors or
periodically assessed for OTTI, with the net asset values reduced
triggers that could cause individual investments to qualify as having
when impairment is deemed to be other-than-temporary. Equity
OTTI and those that would not support OTTI; and
method investments are recorded at cost, adjusted to reflect the
Company’s portion of income, loss or dividend of the investee. - documentation of the results of these analyses, as required
All other non-marketable equity investments are carried at cost under business policies.
and periodically assessed for OTTI.
For equity securities, management considers the various factors
Evaluating Investments for OTTI described above. If it is determined that the security’s decline in
An unrealized loss exists when the current fair value of an indi- fair value (for equity securities classified as AFS) or cost (for
vidual security is less than its amortized cost basis. Unrealized equity securities carried at cost) is other than temporary, the
losses that are determined to be temporary in nature are security’s fair value or cost is written down, and the charge recog-
recorded, net of tax, in AOCI for AFS securities, while such losses nized in Other income.
related to HTM securities are not recorded, as these investments Goodwill and Other Identified Intangibles
are carried at their amortized cost.
Goodwill balance as of December 31, 2013 represented the
The Company conducts and documents periodic reviews of all excess of reorganization equity value over the fair value of tan-
securities with unrealized losses to evaluate whether the impair- gible and identifiable intangible assets, net of liabilities. Effective
ment is other than temporary. The Company accounts for January 1, 2014, this goodwill was reallocated to the Company’s
investment impairments in accordance with ASC 320-10-35-34, new TIF and NACF reporting units based on the respective
Investments — Debt and Equity Securities: Recognition of an reporting unit’s estimated fair value of equity. The Company
Other-Than-Temporary Impairment. Under the guidance for debt evaluated goodwill for impairment immediately before and after
securities, OTTI is recognized in earnings for debt securities that the reallocation of goodwill to the reporting units and identified
the Company has an intent to sell or that the Company believes it no impairment.
is more-likely-than-not that it will be required to sell prior to the
The Company’s goodwill also represents the excess of the pur-
recovery of the amortized cost basis. For debt securities classified
chase prices paid for acquired businesses over the respective net
as HTM that are considered to have OTTI that the Company does
asset values acquired. The goodwill was assigned to reporting
not intend to sell and it is more likely than not that the Company
units at the date the goodwill was initially recorded. Once the
will not be required to sell before recovery, the OTTI is separated
goodwill was assigned to the segment (or ”reporting unit“) level,
into an amount representing the credit loss, which is recognized
it no longer retained its association with a particular transaction,
in other income in the Consolidated Statement of Operations,
and all of the activities within the reporting unit, whether
and the amount related to all other factors, which is recognized in
acquired or internally generated, are available to evaluate the
OCI. OTTI on debt securities and equity securities classified as
value of goodwill.
AFS and non-marketable equity investments are recognized in
the Consolidated Statement of Operations in the period Goodwill is not amortized but it is subject to impairment testing
determined. at the reporting unit on an annual basis, or more often if events
or circumstances indicate there may be impairment. The Com-
Amortized cost is defined as the original purchase cost, plus or
pany follows guidance in ASU 2011-08, Intangibles — Goodwill
minus any accretion or amortization of a purchase discount or
and Other (Topic 350), Testing Goodwill for Impairment that
premium. Regardless of the classification of the securities as AFS
includes the option to first assess qualitative factors to determine
or HTM, the Company assesses each investment with an unreal-
whether the existence of events or circumstances leads to a
ized loss for impairment.
determination that it is more likely than not that the fair value of
Factors considered in determining whether a loss is temporary a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount before perform-
include: ing the two-step impairment test as required in ASC 350,
- the length of time that fair value has been below cost; Intangibles — Goodwill and Other. Examples of qualitative fac-
- the severity of the impairment or the extent to which fair value tors to assess include macroeconomic conditions, industry and
has been below cost; market considerations, market changes affecting the Company’s
- the cause of the impairment and the financial condition and the products and services, overall financial performance, and com-
near-term prospects of the issuer; pany specific events affecting operations.

If the Company does not perform the qualitative assessment or The Company documents at inception all relationships between
upon performing the qualitative assessment concludes that it is hedging instruments and hedged items, as well as the risk man-
more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less agement objectives and strategies for undertaking various
than its carrying amount, CIT would be required to perform the hedges. Upon executing a derivative contract, the Company des-
first step of the two-step goodwill impairment test for that report- ignates the derivative as either a qualifying hedge or non-
ing unit. The first step involves comparing the fair value of the qualifying hedge. The designation may change based upon
reporting unit with its carrying value, including goodwill as mea- management’s reassessment of circumstances.
sured by allocated equity. If the fair value of the reporting unit The Company utilizes cross-currency swaps and foreign currency
exceeds its carrying value, goodwill in that unit is not considered forward contracts to hedge net investments in foreign operations.
impaired. However, if the carrying value exceeds its fair value, These transactions are classified as foreign currency net invest-
step two must be performed to assess potential impairment. In ment hedges with resulting gains and losses reflected in AOCI.
step two, the implied fair value of the reporting unit’s goodwill For hedges of foreign currency net investment positions, the ”for-
(the reporting unit’s fair value less its carrying amount, excluding ward“ method is applied whereby effectiveness is assessed and
goodwill) is compared with the carrying amount of the goodwill. measured based on the amounts and currencies of the individual
An impairment loss would be recorded in the amount that the hedged net investments versus the notional amounts and under-
carrying amount of goodwill exceeds its implied fair value. lying currencies of the derivative contract. For those hedging
Reporting unit fair values are primarily estimated using dis- relationships where the critical terms of the underlying net invest-
counted cash flow models. See Note 26 — Goodwill and ment and the derivative are identical, and the credit-worthiness
Intangible Assets for further details. of the counterparty to the hedging instrument remains sound,
Intangible assets were recorded relating to the valuation of exist- there is an expectation of no hedge ineffectiveness so long as
ing customer relationships and trade names related to the 2014 those conditions continue to be met.
acquisitions and for net above and below market operating lease The Company also enters into foreign currency forward contracts
contracts recorded in FSA or in acquisitions. These intangible to manage the foreign currency risk associated with its non US
assets are amortized on a straight line basis. Amortization subsidiary’s funding activities and designates these as foreign
expense for the intangible assets, except for the net above and currency cash flow hedges for which certain components are
below market operating lease contracts, is recorded in Operating reflected in AOCI and others recognized in noninterest income
expenses. The intangible assets related to net above and below when the underlying transaction impacts earnings.
market operating lease contracts amortization results in lower In addition, the company uses foreign currency forward contracts,
rental income (a component of Non-interest Income) over the interest rate swaps, cross currency interest rate swaps, and options to
remaining term of the lease agreements. Management evaluates hedge interest rate and foreign currency risks arising from its asset and
definite lived intangible assets for impairment when events and liability mix. These are treated as economic hedges.
circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts of those assets
may not be recoverable. Derivative instruments that qualify for hedge accounting are pre-
sented in the balance sheet at their fair values in other assets or
Other Assets other liabilities. Derivatives that do not qualify for hedge
Assets received in satisfaction of loans are initially recorded at fair accounting are presented in the balance sheet in other assets or
value and then assessed at the lower of carrying value or esti- other liabilities, with their resulting gains or losses recognized in
mated fair value less selling costs, with write-downs of the pre- Other Income. Fair value is based on dealer quotes, pricing mod-
existing receivable reflected in the provision for credit losses. els, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques
Additional impairment charges, if any, would be recorded in for which the determination of fair value may require significant
Other Income. management judgment or estimation. The fair value of the
derivative is reported on a gross-by-counterparty basis. Valua-
Derivative Financial Instruments tions of derivative assets and liabilities reflect the value of the
The Company manages economic risk and exposure to interest instrument including the Company’s and counterparty’s credit risk.
rate and foreign currency risk through derivative transactions in CIT is exposed to credit risk to the extent that the counterparty fails to
over-the-counter markets with other financial institutions. The perform under the terms of a derivative. The Company manages this
Company does not enter into derivative financial instruments for credit risk by requiring that all derivative transactions be conducted
speculative purposes. with counterparties rated investment grade at the initial transaction by
Derivatives utilized by the Company may include swaps, forward settle- nationally recognized rating agencies, and by setting limits on the
ment contracts, and options contracts. A swap agreement is a contract exposure with any individual counterparty. In addition, pursuant to the
between two parties to exchange cash flows based on specified under- terms of the Credit Support Annexes between the Company and its
lying notional amounts, assets and/or indices. Forward settlement counterparties, CIT may be required to post collateral or may be
contracts are agreements to buy or sell a quantity of a financial instru- entitled to receive collateral in the form of cash or highly liquid securi-
ment, index, currency or commodity at a predetermined future date, ties depending on the valuation of the derivative instruments as
and rate or price. An option contract is an agreement that gives the measured on a daily basis.
buyer the right, but not the obligation, to buy or sell an underlying Fair Value
asset from or to another party at a predetermined price or rate over a
specific period of time. CIT measures the fair value of its financial assets and liabilities in
accordance with ASC 820 Fair Value Measurements, which defines
fair value, establishes a consistent framework for measuring fair value
and requires disclosures about fair value measurements. The Com- facts is sometimes open to interpretation. Given these inherent
pany categorizes its financial instruments, based on the priority of complexities, the Company must make judgments in assessing
inputs to the valuation techniques, according to the following three- the likelihood that a beneficial income tax position will be sus-
tier fair value hierarchy: tained upon examination by the taxing authorities based on the
technical merits of the tax position. An income tax benefit is rec-
- Level 1 – Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for
ognized only when, based on management’s judgment regarding
identical assets or liabilities that are accessible at the
the application of income tax laws, it is more likely than not that
measurement date. Level 1 assets and liabilities include debt
the tax position will be sustained upon examination. A position
and equity securities and derivative contracts that are traded in
that meets this standard is measured at the largest amount of tax
an active exchange market, as well as certain other securities
benefit that will more likely than not be realized on settlement.
that are highly liquid and are actively traded in over-the-
The amount of benefit recognized for financial reporting pur-
counter markets;
poses is based on management’s best judgment of the most
- Level 2 – Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as
likely outcome resulting from examination given the facts, circum-
quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, quoted prices in
stances and information available at the reporting date. The
markets that are not active, or other inputs that are observable
Company adjusts the level of unrecognized tax benefits when
or can be corroborated by observable market data for
there is new information available to assess the likelihood of the
substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. Level 2
outcome. Liabilities for uncertain income tax positions are
assets and liabilities include debt securities with quoted prices
included in current taxes payable, which is reflected in accrued
that are traded less frequently than exchange-traded
liabilities and payables. Accrued interest and penalties for unrec-
instruments and derivative contracts whose value is determined
ognized tax positions are recorded in income tax expense.
using a pricing model with inputs that are observable in the
market or can be derived principally from or corroborated by Other Comprehensive Income/Loss
observable market data. This category generally includes Other Comprehensive Income/Loss includes unrealized gains and
derivative contracts and certain loans held-for-sale; losses, unless other than temporarily impaired, on AFS invest-
- Level 3 – Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no ments, foreign currency translation adjustments for both net
market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the investment in foreign operations and related derivatives desig-
assets or liabilities. Level 3 assets and liabilities include nated as hedges of such investments, changes in fair values of
financial instruments whose value is determined using valuation derivative instruments designated as hedges of future cash flows
models, discounted cash flow methodologies or similar and certain pension and postretirement benefit obligations, all
techniques, as well as instruments for which the determination net of tax.
of fair value requires significant management judgment or
estimation. This category generally includes highly structured Foreign Currency Translation
or long-term derivative contracts and structured finance In addition to U.S. operations, the Company has operations in
securities where independent pricing information cannot Canada, Europe and other jurisdictions. The functional currency
be obtained for a significant portion of the underlying assets for foreign operations is generally the local currency, other than
or liabilities. in the Aerospace business in which the U.S. dollar is typically the
Income Taxes functional currency. The value of assets and liabilities of the for-
eign operations is translated into U.S. dollars at the rate of
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the exchange in effect at the balance sheet date. Revenue and
expected future taxation of events that have been reflected in the expense items are translated at the average exchange rates dur-
Consolidated Financial Statements. Deferred tax assets and ing the year. The resulting foreign currency translation gains and
liabilities are determined based on the differences between the losses, as well as offsetting gains and losses on hedges of net
book values and the tax basis of assets and liabilities, using tax investments in foreign operations, are reflected in AOCI. Transac-
rates in effect for the years in which the differences are expected tion gains and losses resulting from exchange rate changes on
to reverse. A valuation allowance is provided to reduce the transactions denominated in currencies other than the functional
reported amount of any net deferred tax assets of a reporting currency are included in Other income.
entity if, based upon the relevant facts and circumstances, it is
more likely than not that some or all of the deferred tax assets Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits
will not be realized. Additionally, in certain situations, it may be CIT has both funded and unfunded noncontributory defined ben-
appropriate to write-off the deferred tax asset against the valua- efit pension and postretirement plans covering certain U.S. and
tion allowance. This reduces the valuation allowance and the non-U.S. employees, each of which is designed in accordance
amount of the respective gross deferred tax asset that is dis- with the practices and regulations in the related countries.
closed. A write-off might be appropriate if there is only a remote
Recognition of the funded status of a benefit plan, which is mea-
likelihood that the reporting entity will ever utilize its respective
sured as the difference between plan assets at fair value and the
deferred tax assets, thereby eliminating the need to disclose the
benefit obligation, is included in the balance sheet. The Com-
gross amounts.
pany recognizes as a component of Other Comprehensive
The Company is subject to the income tax laws of the United Income, net of tax, the net actuarial gains or losses and prior ser-
States, its states and municipalities and those of the foreign juris- vice cost or credit that arise during the period but are not
dictions in which the Company operates. These tax laws are recognized as components of net periodic benefit cost in the
complex, and the manner in which they apply to the taxpayer’s Statement of Operations.

Variable Interest Entities the Company’s involvement with a VIE cause the Company’s con-
A VIE is a corporation, partnership, limited liability company, or solidation conclusion regarding the VIE to change.
any other legal structure used to conduct activities or hold assets. When in the evaluation of its interest in each VIE it is determined
These entities: lack sufficient equity investment at risk to permit that the Company is considered the primary beneficiary, the VIE’s
the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated assets, liabilities and non-controlling interests are consolidated
financial support from other parties; have equity owners who and included in the Consolidated Financial Statements. See Note
either do not have voting rights or lack the ability to make signifi- 10 — Long Term Borrowings for further details.
cant decisions affecting the entity’s operations; and/or have
Non-interest Income
equity owners that do not have an obligation to absorb the enti-
ty’s losses or the right to receive the entity’s returns. Non-interest income is recognized in accordance with relevant
authoritative pronouncements and includes rental income on
The Company accounts for its VIEs in accordance with Account-
operating leases and other income. Other income includes
ing Standards Update (”ASU“) No. 2009-16, Transfers and
(1) factoring commissions, (2) gains and losses on sales of equip-
Servicing (Topic 860) — Accounting for Transfers of Financial
ment (3) fee revenues, including fees on lines of credit, letters of
Assets and ASU No. 2009-17, Consolidations (Topic 810) —
credit, capital markets related fees, agent and advisory fees and
Improvements to Financial Reporting by Enterprises Involved with
servicing fees (4) gains and losses on loan and portfolio sales,
Variable Interest Entities. ASU 2009-17 amended the VIEs Subsec-
(5) recoveries on loans charged-off pre-emergence and loans
tions of ASC Subtopic 810-10 to require former qualified special
charged-off prior to transfer to AHFS, (6) gains and losses on
purpose entities to be evaluated for consolidation and also
investments, (7) gains and losses on derivatives and foreign
changed the approach to determining a VIE’s primary beneficiary
currency exchange, (8) counterparty receivable accretion,
(”PB“) and required companies to more frequently reassess
(9) impairment on assets held for sale, and (10) other revenues.
whether they must consolidate VIEs. Under the new guidance,
the PB is the party that has both (1) the power to direct the activi- Other Expenses
ties of an entity that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic Other expenses include (1) depreciation on operating lease
performance; and (2) through its interests in the VIE, the obliga- equipment, (2) maintenance and other operating lease expenses,
tion to absorb losses or the right to receive benefits from the VIE (3) operating expenses, which include compensation and ben-
that could potentially be significant to the VIE. efits, technology costs, professional fees, net occupancy
To assess whether the Company has the power to direct the expenses, provision for severance and facilities exiting activities,
activities of a VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s eco- advertising and marketing, and other expenses and (4) losses on
nomic performance, the Company considers all facts and debt extinguishments.
circumstances, including its role in establishing the VIE and its
ongoing rights and responsibilities. This assessment includes, Stock-Based Compensation
first, identifying the activities that most significantly impact the Compensation expense associated with equity-based awards is
VIE’s economic performance; and second, identifying which party, recognized over the vesting period (requisite service period),
if any, has power over those activities. In general, the parties that generally three years, under the ”graded vesting“ attribution
make the most significant decisions affecting the VIE (such as method, whereby each vesting tranche of the award is amortized
asset managers, collateral managers, servicers, or owners of call separately as if each were a separate award. The cost of awards
options or liquidation rights over the VIE’s assets) or have the granted to directors in lieu of cash is recognized using the single-
right to unilaterally remove those decision-makers are deemed to grant approach with immediate vesting and expense recognition.
have the power to direct the activities of a VIE. Expenses related to stock-based compensation are included in
To assess whether the Company has the obligation to absorb Operating Expenses.
losses of the VIE or the right to receive benefits from the VIE that Earnings per Share (”EPS“)
could potentially be significant to the VIE, the Company consid-
Basic EPS is computed by dividing net income by the weighted-
ers all of its economic interests, including debt and equity
average number of common shares outstanding for the period.
investments, servicing fees, and derivative or other arrangements
Diluted EPS is computed by dividing net income by the
deemed to be variable interests in the VIE. This assessment
weighted-average number of common shares outstanding
requires that the Company apply judgment in determining
increased by the weighted-average potential impact of dilutive
whether these interests, in the aggregate, are considered poten-
securities. The Company’s potential dilutive instruments primarily
tially significant to the VIE. Factors considered in assessing
include restricted unvested stock grants and performance stock
significance include: the design of the VIE, including its capital-
grants. The dilutive effect is computed using the treasury stock
ization structure; subordination of interests; payment priority;
method, which assumes the conversion of these instruments.
relative share of interests held across various classes within the
However, in periods when there is a net loss, these shares would
VIE’s capital structure; and the reasons why the interests are held
not be included in the EPS computation as the result would have
by the Company.
an anti-dilutive effect.
The Company performs on-going reassessments of: (1) whether
any entities previously evaluated under the majority voting- Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal Activities
interest framework have become VIEs, based on certain events, A liability for costs associated with exit or disposal activities, other
and are therefore subject to the VIE consolidation framework; than in a business combination, is recognized when the liability is
and (2) whether changes in the facts and circumstances regarding incurred. The liability is measured at fair value, with adjustments for
changes in estimated cash flows recognized in earnings.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows NEW ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

Unrestricted cash and cash equivalents includes cash and interest- Reporting Discontinued Operations and Disclosures of Disposals
bearing deposits, which are primarily overnight money market of Components of an Entity
investments and short term investments in mutual funds. The Com-
The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued
pany maintains cash balances principally at financial institutions
Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2014-08, Reporting Dis-
located in the U.S. and Canada. The balances are not insured in all
continued Operations and Disclosures of Disposals of
cases. Cash and cash equivalents also include amounts at CIT Bank,
Components of an Entity, in April 2014, which changes the criteria
which are only available for the bank’s funding and investment
for determining which disposals can be presented as discontin-
requirements. Cash inflows and outflows from customer deposits are
ued operations and modifies related disclosure requirements.
presented on a net basis. Most factoring receivables are presented
The final guidance raises the threshold for a disposal to qualify as
on a net basis in the Statements of Cash Flows, as factoring receiv-
a discontinued operation and requires new disclosures of both
ables are generally less than 90 days.
discontinued operations and certain other disposals that do not
Cash receipts and cash payments resulting from purchases and meet the definition of a discontinued operation. The ASU is
sales of loans, securities, and other financing and leasing assets aimed at reducing the frequency of disposals reported as discon-
are classified as operating cash flows in accordance with ASC tinued operations by focusing on strategic shifts that have or will
230-10-45-21 when these assets are originated/acquired and des- have a major effect on an entity’s operations and financial results.
ignated specifically for resale. In another change from current GAAP, the guidance permits com-
Activity for loans originated or acquired for investment purposes, panies to have continuing cash flows and significant continuing
including those subsequently transferred to AHFS, is classified in involvement with the disposed component.
the investing section of the statement of cash flows in accordance The ASU eliminates most of the scope exceptions in current
with ASC 230-10-45-12 and 230-10-45-13. The vast majority of the GAAP. Under the revised standard, a discontinued operation is
Company’s loan originations are for investment purposes. Cash (1) a component of an entity or group of components that has
receipts resulting from sales of loans, beneficial interests and been disposed of by sale, disposed of other than by sale or is
other financing and leasing assets that were not specifically origi- classified as held for sale that represents a strategic shift that has
nated and/or acquired and designated for resale are classified as or will have a major effect on an entity’s operations and financial
investing cash inflows regardless of subsequent classification. results or (2) an acquired business or nonprofit activity that is clas-
Activity of the discontinued operation is included in various line sified as held for sale on the date of the acquisition. The
items of the Statements of Cash Flows. guidance does not change the presentation requirements for dis-
continued operations in the statement where net income is
Fresh Start Accounting
presented. Although it permits significant continuing involve-
The consolidated financial statements include the effects of ment, the standard does not address how companies should
adopting Fresh Start Accounting (”FSA“) upon the Company’s present continuing involvement with a discontinued operation
emergence from bankruptcy on December 10, 2009, based on a prior to the disposal. Also, the ASU requires the reclassification of
convenience date of December 31, 2009 (the ”Convenience assets and liabilities of a discontinued operation in the statement
Date“), as required by U.S. GAAP. Accretion and amortization of of financial position for all prior periods presented.
certain FSA adjustments are included in the consolidated State-
The standard expands the disclosures for discontinued opera-
ments of Operations and Cash Flows.
tions and requires new disclosures related to individually material
Interest income includes a component of accretion of the fair disposals that do not meet the definition of a discontinued
value discount on loans recorded in connection with FSA. The operation, an entity’s continuing involvement with a discontinued
remaining balance at December 31, 2014 was not significant. operation following the disposal date, and retained equity
For finance receivables that were considered impaired at the FSA method investments in a discontinued operation.
date and for which the cash flows were evaluated based on For public entities, the guidance is effective for annual periods
expected cash flows that were less than contractual cash flows, beginning on or after December 15, 2014 and interim periods
there is an accretable and a non-accretable discount. The accre- within that year. The ASU is applied prospectively. CIT adopted
table discount was accreted using the effective interest method this ASU on January 1, 2015, which did not impact CIT’s consoli-
as a yield adjustment over the remaining term of the loan and dated financial statements or disclosures, but will result in
recorded in Interest Income. The non-accretable discount additional disclosures for future dispositions.
reflected the present value of the difference between the excess
of cash flows contractually required to be paid and expected cash Revenue Recognition
flows (i.e. credit component) and the remaining balance at The FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with
December 31, 2014 was not significant. Operating lease equip- Customers, in June 2014, which will supersede virtually all of the
ment purchased prior to emergence from bankruptcy in 2009 was revenue recognition guidance in GAAP.
recorded at estimated fair value at emergence and is carried at The core principle of the five-step model is that a company will
that new basis less accumulated depreciation. recognize revenue when it transfers control of goods or services
to customers at an amount that reflects the consideration to
which it expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or
services. In doing so, many companies will have to make more

estimates and use more judgment than they do under current The ASU is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15,
GAAP. The five-step analysis of transactions, to determine when 2015 and interim periods within those years. Early adoption is permit-
and how revenue is recognized, includes: ted. CIT is currently evaluating the impact of adopting this ASU and
1. Identify the contract with the customer. is reviewing existing awards for applicability.
2. Identify the performance obligations in the contract. Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue
3. Determine the transaction price. as a Going Concern
4. Allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations. The FASB issued ASU 2014-15, Disclosure of Uncertainties about
5. Recognize revenue when or as each performance obligation is an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern, in August
satisfied. 2014. This ASU describes how entities should assess their ability
Companies can choose to apply the standard using either the full to meet their obligations and sets disclosure requirements about
retrospective approach or a modified retrospective approach. how this information should be communicated. The standard will
Under the modified approach, financial statements will be pre- be used along with existing auditing standards, and provides the
pared for the year of adoption using the new standard, but prior following key guidance:
periods will not be adjusted. Instead, companies will recognize a 1. Entities must perform a going concern assessment by evaluat-
cumulative catch-up adjustment to the opening balance of ing their ability to meet their obligations for a look-forward
retained earnings at the effective date for contracts that still period of one year from the financial statement issuance date
require performance by the company and disclose all line items (or date the financial statements are available to be issued).
in the year of adoption as if they were prepared under today’s 2. Disclosures are required if it is probable an entity will be
revenue guidance. unable to meet its obligations within the look-forward period.
The FASB has set an effective date of fiscal years beginning after Incremental substantial doubt disclosure is required if the
December 15, 2016 for public entities. However, public compa- probability is not mitigated by management’s plans.
nies that choose full retrospective application will need to apply 3. Pursuant to the ASU, substantial doubt about an entity’s ability
the standard to amounts they report for 2015 and 2016 on the to continue as a going concern exists if it is probable that the
face of their 2017 financial statements. CIT is required to adopt entity will be unable to meet its obligations as they become
the ASU and is currently evaluating the impact of adoption. CIT due within one year after the date the annual or interim finan-
has not yet selected a transition method nor has it determined cial statements are issued or available to be issued
the effect of the standard on its ongoing financial reporting. (assessment date).
Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an The new standard applies to all entities for the first annual period
Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved ending after December 15, 2016. Company management is
after the Requisite Service Period responsible for assessing going concern uncertainties at each
The FASB issued ASU No. 2014-12, Accounting for Share-Based annual and interim reporting period thereafter. The adoption of
Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Perfor- this guidance is not expected to have a significant impact on
mance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service CIT’s financial statements or disclosures.
Period, in June 2014. Pushdown Accounting
The ASU directs that a performance target that affects vesting The FASB issued ASU No. 2014-17, Business Combinations (Topic
and can be achieved after the requisite service period is a perfor- 805): Pushdown Accounting (a Consensus of the FASB Emerging
mance condition. That is, compensation cost would be Issues Task Force), in November 2014, to provide guidance for
recognized over the required service period if it is probable that newly acquired businesses and organizations that prepare finan-
the performance condition would be achieved. The total amount cial statements separately from their parents.
of compensation cost recognized during and after the requisite
An acquired entity may elect the option to apply pushdown
service period would reflect the number of awards that are
accounting in the reporting period in which the change-in-control
expected to vest and would be adjusted to reflect those awards
event occurs. An acquired entity should determine whether to
that ultimately vest.
elect to apply pushdown accounting for each individual change-
The ASU does not require additional disclosures. Entities may in-control event in which an acquirer obtains control of the
apply the amendments in this Update either (a) prospectively to acquired entity. If pushdown accounting is not applied in the
all awards granted or modified after the effective date or (b) ret- reporting period in which the change-in-control event occurs, an
rospectively to all awards with performance targets that are acquired entity will have the option to elect to apply pushdown
outstanding as of the beginning of the earliest annual period pre- accounting in a subsequent reporting period to the acquired
sented in the financial statements and to all new or modified entity’s most recent change-in-control event. An election to apply
awards thereafter. If retrospective transition is adopted, the pushdown accounting in a reporting period after the reporting
cumulative effect of applying this ASU as of the beginning of the period in which the change-in-control event occurred should be
earliest annual period presented in the financial statements considered a change in accounting principle in accordance with
should be recognized as an adjustment to the opening retained Topic 250, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections. If push-
earnings balance at that date. Additionally, if retrospective transi- down accounting is applied to an individual change-in-control
tion is adopted, an entity may use hindsight in measuring and event, that election is irrevocable.
recognizing the compensation cost.
The amendments in this Update are effective on November 18, Student Lending Business Disposition
2014. After the effective date, an acquired entity can make an On April 25, 2014, the Company completed the sale of its student
election to apply the guidance to future change-in-control events lending business, along with certain secured debt and servicing
or to its most recent change-in-control event. However, if the rights. As a result, the student lending business is reported as a
financial statements for the period in which the most recent discontinued operation for all periods presented. The business
change-in-control event occurred already have been issued or was in run-off and $3.4 billion in portfolio assets were classified as
made available to be issued, the application of this guidance assets held for sale as of December 31, 2013.
would be a change in accounting principle. The adoption of this
The operating results and the assets and liabilities of the discon-
guidance did not impact CIT’s consolidated financial statements
tinued operation, which was formerly included in the Non-
or disclosures.
Strategic Portfolios segment, are presented separately in the
Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements. The individual
NOTE 2 — ACQUISITION AND DISPOSITION ACTIVITIES
assets and liabilities of the discontinued Student Lending opera-
During 2014, the Company completed the following significant tion are combined in the captions ”Assets of discontinued
business acquisitions and disposition. There were no significant operation“ and ”Liabilities of discontinued operation“ in the con-
business acquisitions or dispositions during 2013 or 2012. solidated Balance Sheet.
Nacco Acquisition In connection with the classification of the student lending busi-
ness as a discontinued operation, certain indirect operating
On January 31, 2014, CIT acquired 100% of the outstanding
expenses that previously had been allocated to the business,
shares of Paris-based Nacco SAS (”Nacco“), an independent full
have instead been allocated to Corporate and Other as part of
service railcar lessor in Europe. The purchase price was approxi-
continuing operations and are not included in the summary of
mately $250 million and the acquired assets and liabilities were
discontinued operation presented in the table below. The total
recorded at their estimated fair values as of the acquisition date,
incremental pretax amounts of indirect overhead expense that
resulting in $77 million of goodwill. The purchase included
were previously allocated to the student lending business and
approximately $650 million of assets (operating lease equipment),
remain in continuing operations were approximately $1.7 million,
comprised of more than 9,500 railcars, including: tank cars, flat
$8.8 million and $15.3 million for the years ended December 31,
cars, gondolas and hopper cars, and liabilities, including secured
2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
debt of $375 million.
Interest expense allocated to the discontinued operation corre-
Direct Capital Acquisition sponds to debt of approximately $3.2 billion, net of $224 million
On August 1, 2014, CIT Bank acquired 100% of the outstanding of FSA. The debt included $0.8 billion that was repaid using a
shares of Capital Direct Group and its subsidiaries (”Direct Capi- portion of the cash proceeds. Salaries and general operating
tal“), a U.S. based lender providing equipment leasing and expenses included in discontinued operation consists of direct
financing to small and mid-sized businesses operating across a expenses of the student lending business that are separate from
range of industries. The purchase price was approximately $230 ongoing CIT operations and will not continue subsequent to
million and the acquired assets and liabilities were recorded at disposal.
their estimated fair values as of the acquisition date resulting in Income from the discontinued operation for 2014 reflected the
approximately $170 million of goodwill. The assets acquired benefit of proceeds received in excess of the net carrying value
included finance receivables of approximately $540 million, along of assets and liabilities sold. The interest expense primarily
with existing secured debt of $487 million. In addition, intangible reflected the acceleration of FSA accretion of $224 million on the
assets of approximately $12 million were recorded relating mainly extinguishment of the debt, while the gain on sale mostly
to the valuation of existing customer relationships and trade names. reflected the excess of purchase price over net assets, and
amounts received for the sale of servicing rights.
Summarized financial information for the discontinued business is
shown below.
Assets and Liabilities of Discontinued Operation (dollars in millions)

2014 2013
Assets:
Assets held for sale $ – $3,374.5
Cash – 94.5
Other assets – 352.4
Total assets $ – $3,821.4
Liabilities:
Long-term borrowings (secured) $ – $3,265.6
Other liabilities – 12.0
Total Liabilities $ – $3,277.6

Operating Results of Discontinued Operation (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
Interest income $ 27.0 $130.7 $ 178.3
Other income (2.1) 0.9 38.3)
Income (loss) from discontinued operation before provision for income taxes (226.9) 39.9 (39.4)
Provision for income taxes (3.4) (8.6) (17.1)
Income (loss) from discontinued operation, net of taxes (230.3) 31.3 (56.5)
Gain on sale of discontinued operation 282.8 – –
Income (loss) from discontinued operation, net of taxes $ 52.5 $ 31.3 $ (56.5)
NOTE 3 — LOANS
Finance receivables consist of the following:
Finance Receivables by Product (dollars in millions)
2014 2013
Loans $14,398.2 $13,814.3
Direct financing leases and leveraged leases 5,096.8 4,814.9
Finance receivables 19,495.0 18,629.2
Finance receivables held for sale 779.9 794.3
Finance receivables and held for sale receivables(1) $20,274.9 $19,423.5
(1)
Assets held for sale on the Balance Sheet includes finance receivables and operating lease equipment. As discussed in subsequent tables, since the Com-
pany manages the credit risk and collections of finance receivables held for sale consistently with its finance receivables held for investment, the aggregate
amount is presented in this table.
The following table presents finance receivables by segment, based on obligor location:
Finance Receivables (dollars in millions)

Domestic Foreign Total Domestic Foreign Total
Transportation & International Finance $ 812.6 $2,746.3 $ 3,558.9 $ 666.6 $2,827.8 $ 3,494.4
North American Commercial Finance 14,645.1 1,290.9 15,936.0 13,196.7 1,496.4 14,693.1
Non-Strategic Portfolios – 0.1 0.1 117.9 323.8 441.7
Total $15,457.7 $4,037.3 $19,495.0 $13,981.2 $4,648.0 $18,629.2
The following table presents selected components of the net investment in finance receivables.
Components of Net Investment in Finance Receivables (dollars in millions)
2014 2013
Unearned income $(869.6) $(942.0)
Equipment residual values 684.2 669.2
Unamortized (discounts) (22.0) (47.9)
Net unamortized deferred costs and (fees) 48.5 49.7
Leveraged lease third party non-recourse debt payable (180.5) (203.8)
Certain of the following tables present credit-related information at the ”class“ level in accordance with ASC 310-10-50, Disclosures
about the Credit Quality of Finance Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses. A class is generally a disaggregation of a portfolio
segment. In determining the classes, CIT considered the finance receivable characteristics and methods it applies in monitoring and
assessing credit risk and performance.
Credit Quality Information uncorrected, these potential weaknesses may, at some future
date, result in the deterioration of the repayment prospects.
The following table summarizes finance receivables by the risk
- Classified – a classified asset ranges from: (1) assets that exhibit
ratings that bank regulatory agencies utilize to classify credit
a well-defined weakness and are inadequately protected by the
exposure and which are consistent with indicators the Company
current sound worth and paying capacity of the borrower, and
monitors. Customer risk ratings are reviewed on a regular basis
are characterized by the distinct possibility that some loss will
by Credit Risk Management and are adjusted as necessary for
be sustained if the deficiencies are not corrected to (2) assets
updated information affecting the borrowers’ ability to fulfill their
with weaknesses that make collection or liquidation in full
obligations.
unlikely on the basis of current facts, conditions, and values.
The definitions of these ratings are as follows: Assets in this classification can be accruing or on non-accrual
- Pass – finance receivables in this category do not meet the depending on the evaluation of these factors.
criteria for classification in one of the categories below.
- Special mention – a special mention asset exhibits potential
weaknesses that deserve management’s close attention. If left
Finance and Held for Sale Receivables — By Risk Rating (dollars in millions)
Transportation &
International Finance North American Commercial Finance
Non-
Transportation International Corporate Equipment Real Estate Commercial Strategic
Grade: Finance Finance Finance Finance Finance Services Subtotal Portfolios Total
December 31, 2014
Pass $2,895.9 $ 820.2 $6,199.0 $4,129.1 $1,692.0 $2,084.1 $17,820.3 $ 288.7 $18,109.0
Special mention 12.8 107.9 561.0 337.8 76.6 278.8 1,374.9 18.4 1,393.3
Classified – accruing 44.1 58.0 121.8 180.4 – 197.3 601.6 10.5 612.1
Classified – non-accrual 0.1 37.1 30.9 70.0 – – 138.1 22.4 160.5
Total $2,952.9 $1,023.2 $6,912.7 $4,717.3 $1,768.6 $2,560.2 $19,934.9 $ 340.0 $20,274.9
December 31, 2013
Pass $1,627.4 $1,530.3 $5,783.1 $3,355.2 $1,554.8 $1,804.6 $15,655.4 $ 685.5 $16,340.9
Special mention 28.6 145.8 769.5 363.5 – 314.7 1,622.1 350.1 1,972.2
Classified – accruing 97.2 36.2 233.6 266.0 – 138.9 771.9 97.8 869.7
Classified – non-accrual 14.3 21.0 83.8 59.4 – 4.2 182.7 58.0 240.7
Total $1,767.5 $1,733.3 $6,870.0 $4,044.1 $1,554.8 $2,262.4 $18,232.1 $1,191.4 $19,423.5
Past Due and Non-accrual Loans

The table that follows presents portfolio delinquency status, regardless of accrual/non-accrual classification:
Finance and Held for Sale Receivables — Delinquency Status (dollars in millions)
30–59 Days 60–89 Days 90 Days or Total Past Total Finance
Past Due Past Due Greater Due Current Receivables
December 31, 2014
Transportation Finance $ 5.2 $ 1.9 $ 4.3 $ 11.4 $ 2,941.5 $ 2,952.9
International Finance 43.9 7.0 21.6 72.5 950.7 1,023.2
Corporate Finance 4.4 – 0.5 4.9 6,907.8 6,912.7
Equipment Finance 93.7 32.9 14.9 141.5 4,575.8 4,717.3
Real Estate Finance – – – – 1,768.6 1,768.6
Commercial Services 62.2 3.3 0.9 66.4 2,493.8 2,560.2
Sub-total 209.4 45.1 42.2 296.7 19,638.2 19,934.9
Non-Strategic Portfolios 16.4 6.9 9.6 32.9 307.1 340.0
Total $225.8 $52.0 $51.8 $329.6 $19,945.3 $20,274.9
December 31, 2013
Transportation Finance $ 18.3 $ 0.9 $ 0.5 $ 19.7 $ 1,747.8 $ 1,767.5
International Finance 30.6 11.6 12.6 54.8 1,678.5 1,733.3
Corporate Finance – – 17.8 17.8 6,852.2 6,870.0
Equipment Finance 116.6 30.0 18.6 165.2 3,878.9 4,044.1
Real Estate Finance – – – – 1,554.8 1,554.8
Commercial Services 47.9 2.4 1.0 51.3 2,211.1 2,262.4
Sub-total 213.4 44.9 50.5 308.8 17,923.3 18,232.1
Non-Strategic Portfolios 29.7 7.9 16.2 53.8 1,137.6 1,191.4
Total $243.1 $52.8 $66.7 $362.6 $19,060.9 $19,423.5

The following table sets forth non-accrual loans and assets mined to be impaired (generally loans with balances greater than
received in satisfaction of loans (repossessed assets). Non-accrual $500,000), as well as other, smaller balance loans placed on non-
loans include loans that are individually evaluated and deter- accrual due to delinquency (generally 90 days or more).
Finance Receivables on Non-accrual Status (dollars in millions)

Held for Held for Held for Held for
Investment Sale Total Investment Sale Total
Transportation Finance $ 0.1 $ – $ 0.1 $ 14.3 $ – $ 14.3
International Finance 22.4 14.7 37.1 21.0 – 21.0
Corporate Finance 30.9 – 30.9 83.5 0.3 83.8
Equipment Finance 70.0 – 70.0 59.4 – 59.4
Commercial Services – – – 4.2 – 4.2
Sub-total 123.4 14.7 138.1 182.4 0.3 182.7
Non-Strategic Portfolios – 22.4 22.4 17.6 40.4 58.0
Total $123.4 $37.1 $160.5 $200.0 $40.7 $240.7
Repossessed assets 0.8 7.0
Total non-performing assets $161.3 $247.7
Total Accruing loans past due 90 days or more $ 10.3 $ 9.9
Payments received on non-accrual financing receivables are generally applied first against outstanding principal, though in certain
instances where the remaining recorded investment is deemed fully collectible, interest income is recognized on a cash basis.
Impaired Loans The following table contains information about impaired finance
receivables and the related allowance for loan losses, exclusive of
The Company’s policy is to review for impairment finance receiv-
finance receivables that were identified as impaired at the Conve-
ables greater than $500,000 that are on non-accrual status. Small-
nience Date for which the Company is applying the income
ticket loan and lease receivables that have not been modified in a
recognition and disclosure guidance in ASC 310-30 (Loans and
troubled debt restructuring, as well as short-term factoring
Debt Securities Acquired with Deteriorated Credit Quality), which
receivables, are included (if appropriate) in the reported non-
are disclosed further below in this note.
accrual balances above, but are excluded from the impaired
finance receivables disclosure below as charge-offs are typically
determined and recorded for such loans when they are more than
90 – 150 days past due.
Impaired Loans (dollars in millions)

Unpaid Average
Recorded Principal Related Recorded
December 31, 2014 Investment Balance Allowance Investment
With no related allowance recorded:
International Finance $10.2 $17.0 $ – $ 10.1
Corporate Finance 1.2 1.2 – 104.9
Equipment Finance 5.6 6.8 – 5.8
Commercial Services 4.2 4.2 – 6.9
Non-Strategic Portfolios – – – 3.4
With an allowance recorded:
Transportation Finance – – – 9.0
International Finance 6.0 6.0 1.0 3.4
Corporate Finance 29.6 34.3 11.4 43.5
Equipment Finance – – – 0.8
Commercial Services – – – 2.8
Total Impaired Loans(1) 56.8 69.5 12.4 190.6
Total Loans Impaired at Convenience Date(2) 1.2 15.8 0.5 26.4
Total $58.0 $85.3 $12.9 $217.0
December 31, 2013
With no related allowance recorded:
Transportation Finance $ – $ – $ – $ 2.2
International Finance 6.9 24.5 – 6.9
Corporate Finance 136.1 150.1 – 152.8
Equipment Finance 5.8 7.9 – 7.0
Commercial Services 9.1 9.1 – 10.0
Non-Strategic Portfolios 10.2 12.5 – 24.0
With an allowance recorded:
Transportation Finance 14.3 14.3 0.6 12.4
Commercial Services 4.2 4.2 1.0 4.6
Non-Strategic Portfolios – – – 1.0
(3)
Total Impaired Loans 237.2 274.3 30.4 300.6
Total Loans Impaired at Convenience Date(4) 54.1 95.8 1.0 77.9
Total $291.3 $370.1 $31.4 $378.5
(1)
Interest income recorded for the year ended December 31, 2014 while the loans were impaired was $10.1 million of which $0.7 million was interest recog-
nized using cash-basis method of accounting.
(2)
Details of finance receivables that were identified as impaired at the Convenience Date are presented under Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Dete-
riorated Credit Quality.
(3)
Interest income recorded for the year ended December 31, 2013 while the loans were impaired was $17.7 million of which $3.5 million was interest recog-
nized using the cash-basis method of accounting.
(4)
Details of finance receivables that were identified as impaired at the Convenience Date are presented under Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Dete-
riorated Credit Quality.

Impairment occurs when, based on current information and Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Deteriorated Credit
events, it is probable that CIT will be unable to collect all Quality
amounts due according to contractual terms of the agreement.
For purposes of this presentation, the Company is applying the
The Company has established review and monitoring procedures
income recognition and disclosure guidance in ASC 310-30
designed to identify, as early as possible, customers that are
(Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Deteriorated Credit
experiencing financial difficulty. Credit risk is captured and ana-
Quality) to finance receivables that were identified as impaired
lyzed based on the Company’s internal probability of obligor
under FSA at the Convenience Date. At December 31, 2014 and
default (PD) and loss given default (LGD) ratings. A PD rating is
2013, the carrying amounts approximated $1 million and $54 mil-
determined by evaluating borrower credit-worthiness, including
lion, respectively, and the outstanding balance approximated $16
analyzing credit history, financial condition, cash flow adequacy,
million and $96 million, respectively. The outstanding balance
financial performance and management quality. An LGD rating is
represents the sum of contractual principal, interest and fees
predicated on transaction structure, collateral valuation and
earned at the reporting date, calculated as pre-FSA net invest-
related guarantees or recourse. Further, related considerations in
ment plus inception to date charge-offs. The allowance for loan
determining probability of collection include the following:
losses on these loans was $0.5 million at December 31, 2014 and
- Instances where the primary source of payment is no longer $1.0 million at December 31, 2013. See Note 4 — Allowance for
sufficient to repay the loan in accordance with terms of the loan Loan Losses.
document;
- Lack of current financial data related to the borrower or
guarantor; The Company periodically modifies the terms of finance receiv-
- Delinquency status of the loan; ables in response to borrowers’ difficulties. Modifications that
- Borrowers experiencing problems, such as operating losses, include a financial concession to the borrower are accounted for
marginal working capital, inadequate cash flow, excessive as troubled debt restructurings (TDRs).
financial leverage or business interruptions;
CIT uses a consistent methodology across all loans to determine
- Loans secured by collateral that is not readily marketable or
if a modification is with a borrower that has been determined to
that has experienced or is susceptible to deterioration in
be in financial difficulty and was granted a concession. Specifi-
realizable value; and
cally, the Company’s policies on TDR identification include the
- Loans to borrowers in industries or countries experiencing
following examples of indicators used to determine whether the
severe economic instability.
borrower is in financial difficulty:
Impairment is measured as the shortfall between estimated value - Borrower is in default with CIT or other material creditor
and recorded investment in the finance receivable. A specific - Borrower has declared bankruptcy
allowance or charge-off is recorded for the shortfall. In instances - Growing doubt about the borrower’s ability to continue as a
where the estimated value exceeds the recorded investment, no
going concern
specific allowance is recorded. The estimated value is deter- - Borrower has (or is expected to have) insufficient cash flow to
mined using fair value of collateral and other cash flows if the
service debt
finance receivable is collateralized, the present value of expected - Borrower is de-listing securities
future cash flows discounted at the contract’s effective interest - Borrower’s inability to obtain funds from other sources
rate, or market price. A shortfall between the estimated value - Breach of financial covenants by the borrower.
and recorded investment in the finance receivable is reported in
the provision for credit losses. In instances when the Company If the borrower is determined to be in financial difficulty, then CIT
measures impairment based on the present value of expected utilizes the following criteria to determine whether a concession
future cash flows, the change in present value is reported in the has been granted to the borrower:
provision for credit losses. - Assets used to satisfy debt are less than CIT’s recorded
The following summarizes key elements of the Company’s policy investment in the receivable
regarding the determination of collateral fair value in the mea- - Modification of terms – interest rate changed to below market
surement of impairment: rate
- Maturity date extension at an interest rate less than market rate
- “Orderly liquidation value” is the basis for collateral valuation; - The borrower does not otherwise have access to funding for
- Appraisals are updated annually or more often as market
debt with similar risk characteristics in the market at the
conditions warrant; and
restructured rate and terms
- Appraisal values are discounted in the determination of - Capitalization of interest
impairment if the: - Increase in interest reserves
- appraisal does not reflect current market conditions; or
- Conversion of credit to Payment-In-Kind (PIK)
- collateral consists of inventory, accounts receivable, or other
- Delaying principal and/or interest for a period of three months
forms of collateral that may become difficult to locate, collect
or more
or subject to pilferage in a liquidation. - Partial forgiveness of the balance.
Modified loans that meet the definition of a TDR are subject to - Payment deferrals result in lower net present value of cash
the Company’s standard impaired loan policy, namely that non- flows, if not accompanied by additional interest or fees, and
accrual loans in excess of $500,000 are individually reviewed for increased provision for credit losses to the extent applicable.
impairment, while non-accrual loans less than $500,000 are con- The financial impact of these modifications is not significant
sidered as part of homogenous pools and are included in the given the moderate length of deferral periods;
determination of the non-specific allowance. - Interest rate reductions result in lower amounts of interest
The recorded investment of TDRs at December 31, 2014 and 2013 being charged to the customer, but are a relatively small part of
was $17.2 million and $220.9 million, of which 75% and 33%, the Company’s restructuring programs. Additionally, in some
respectively were on non-accrual. NACF receivables accounted instances, modifications improve the Company’s economic
for 91% of the total TDRs at December 31, 2014 and 80% at return through increased interest rates and fees, but are
December 31, 2013, and there were $0.8 million and $7.1 million, reported as TDRs due to assessments regarding the borrowers’
respectively, of commitments to lend additional funds to borrow- ability to independently obtain similar funding in the market
ers whose loan terms have been modified in TDRs. and assessments of the relationship between modified rates
and terms and comparable market rates and terms. The
Recorded investment related to modifications qualifying as TDRs
weighted average change in interest rates for all TDRs occur-
that occurred during the years ended December 31, 2014 and
ring during the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 was
2013 were $10.3 million and $24.6 million, respectively. The
not significant;
recorded investment of TDRs that experienced a payment default
(payment default is one missed payment), during the years ended - Debt forgiveness, or the reduction in amount owed by bor-
December 31, 2014 and 2013, and for which the payment default rower, results in incremental provision for credit losses, in the
occurred within one year of the modification totaled $1.0 million form of higher charge-offs. While these types of modifications
and $5.7 million at the time of default, respectively. The 2014 and have the greatest individual impact on the allowance, the
2013 defaults related to NACF and NSP. amounts of principal forgiveness for TDRs occurring during
2014 and 2013 totaled $0 million and $12.2 million, respectively,
The financial impact of the various modification strategies that
as debt forgiveness is a relatively small component of the Com-
the Company employs in response to borrower difficulties is
pany’s modification programs; and
described below. While the discussion focuses on the 2014
amounts, the overall nature and impact of modification programs - The other elements of the Company’s modification programs
were comparable in the prior year. that are not TDRs, do not have a significant impact on financial
results given their relative size, or do not have a direct financial
- The nature of modifications qualifying as TDR’s based upon
impact, as in the case of covenant changes.
recorded investment at December 31, 2014 and 2013 was com-
prised of payment deferrals for 35% and 88%, covenant relief
for 65% and 11%, and interest rate reductions and debt forgive-
ness for 0% and 1%;

NOTE 4 — ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN LOSSES
Allowance for Loan Losses and Recorded Investment in Finance Receivables
As of and for the Years Ended December 31 (dollars in millions)

2014
Transportation & North American
International Commercial Non-Strategic Corporate
Finance Finance Portfolios and Other Total
Beginning balance $ 46.7 $ 303.8 $ 5.6 $ – $ 356.1
Provision for credit losses 38.3 62.0 (0.4) 0.2 100.1
Other(1) (0.5) (10.0) – (0.2) (10.7)
Gross charge-offs(2) (44.8) (75.2) (7.5) – (127.5)
Recoveries 7.1 19.0 2.3 – 28.4
Allowance balance – end of period $ 46.8 $ 299.6 $ – $ – $ 346.4
Allowance balance:
Loans individually evaluated for impairment $ 1.0 $ 11.4 $ – $ – 12.4
Loans collectively evaluated for impairment 45.8 287.7 – – 333.5
Loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality(3) – 0.5 – – 0.5
Allowance balance – end of period $ 46.8 $ 299.6 $ – $ – $ 346.4
(1)
Other reserves $ 0.3 $ 35.1 $ – $ – $ 35.4
Finance receivables:
Loans individually evaluated for impairment $ 17.6 $ 40.6 $ – $ – 58.2
Loans collectively evaluated for impairment 3,541.3 15,894.2 0.1 – 19,435.6
Ending balance $3,558.9 $15,936.0 $ 0.1 $ – $19,495.0
Percent of loans to total loans 18.3% 81.7% – – 100.0%
2013
Beginning balance $ 44.3 $ 293.7 $ 41.3 $ – $ 379.3
Provision for credit losses 18.7 35.5 10.8 (0.1) 64.9
Other(1) 0.6 (6.9) (1.2) 0.1 (7.4)
Gross charge-offs(2) (26.0) (58.3) (54.3) – (138.6)
Recoveries 9.1 39.8 9.0 – 57.9
Allowance balance – end of period $ 46.7 $ 303.8 $ 5.6 $ – $ 356.1
Allowance balance:
Loans individually evaluated for impairment $ 0.6 $ 29.8 $ – $ – $ 30.4
Loans collectively evaluated for impairment 46.1 273.0 5.6 – 324.7
Allowance balance – end of period $ 46.7 $ 303.8 $ 5.6 $ – $ 356.1
Other reserves(1) $ 0.2 $ 27.6 $ – $ – $ 27.8
Finance receivables:
Loans individually evaluated for impairment $ 21.2 $ 205.8 $ 10.2 $ – $ 237.2
Loans collectively evaluated for impairment 3,473.1 14,435.1 429.7 – 18,337.9
Loans acquired with deteriorated credit quality(3) 0.1 52.2 1.8 – 54.1
Ending balance $3,494.4 $14,693.1 $441.7 $ – $18,629.2
Percent of loans to total loans 18.7% 78.9% 2.4% – 100.0%
(1)
”Other reserves“ represents additional credit loss reserves for unfunded lending commitments, letters of credit and for deferred purchase agreements, all of
which is recorded in Other Liabilities. ”Other“ also includes changes relating to sales and foreign currency translations.
(2)
Gross charge-offs included $13 million and $18 million charged directly to the Allowance for loan losses for the years ended December 31, 2014 and
December 31, 2013, respectively. In 2014, $13 million related to NACF. In 2013, $16 million related to NACF and $2 million to NSP.
(3)
Represents loans considered impaired in FSA and are accounted for under the guidance in ASC 310-30 (Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Deterio-
rated Credit Quality).
NOTE 5 — OPERATING LEASE EQUIPMENT

The following table provides the net book value (net of accumulated depreciation of $1.8 billion at December 31, 2014 and $1.5 billion at
December 31, 2013) of operating lease equipment, by equipment type.
Operating Lease Equipment (dollars in millions)

Commercial aircraft (including regional aircraft) $ 8,890.1 $ 8,229.1
Railcars and locomotives 5,714.0 4,500.1
Other equipment 326.3 306.2
(1)
Total $14,930.4 $13,035.4
(1)
Includes equipment off-lease of $183.2 million and $144.7 million at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, primarily consisting of rail and aerospace
assets.
The following table presents future minimum lease rentals due on NOTE 6 — SECURITIES PURCHASED UNDER RESALE
non-cancelable operating leases at December 31, 2014. Excluded AGREEMENTS
from this table are variable rentals calculated on asset usage lev-
At December 31, 2014, the Company had $650 million of
els, re-leasing rentals, and expected sales proceeds from
securities purchased under resale agreements. Securities
remarketing equipment at lease expiration, all of which are com-
purchased under agreements to resell (reverse repos) generally
ponents of operating lease profitability.
do not constitute a sale or purchase of the underlying securities
for accounting purposes and, therefore are treated as collateral-
Minimum Lease Rentals Due (dollars in millions) ized financing transactions. These agreements are recorded at
the amounts at which the securities were acquired. See Note 13 –
Years Ended December 31, Fair Value for discussion of fair value. These agreements are
short-term securities that had maturity dates of 90 days or less
2015 $1,923.0
and are secured by the underlying collateral, which, along with
2016 1,672.8 the cash investment, are maintained by a tri-party custodian.
2017 1,381.2
2018 1,093.3 NOTE 7 — INVESTMENT SECURITIES
2019 822.0 Investments include debt and equity securities. The Company’s
Thereafter 2,431.9 debt securities primarily include U.S. Treasury securities, U.S.
Government Agency securities, and foreign government securities
Total $9,324.2
that typically mature in 91 days or less, and the carrying value
approximates fair value. Equity securities include common stock
and warrants.
Investment Securities (dollars in millions)

Debt securities available-for-sale $1,116.5 $1,487.8
Equity securities available-for-sale 14.0 13.7
Debt securities held-to-maturity(1) 352.3 1,042.3
Non-marketable equity investments(2) 67.5 86.9
Total investment securities $1,550.3 $2,630.7
(1)
Recorded at amortized cost less impairment on securities that have credit-related impairment.
(2)
Non-marketable equity investments include ownership interests greater than 3% in limited partnership investments that are accounted for under the equity
method. Non-marketable equity investments include $19.7 million and $23.6 million in limited partnerships at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively,
accounted for under the equity method. The remaining investments are carried at cost and include qualified Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) invest-
ments, equity fund holdings and shares issued by customers during loan work out situations or as part of an original loan investment.

Realized investment gains totaled $39.7 million, $8.9 million and In addition, the Company maintained $6.2 billion and $5.4 billion
$40.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and of interest bearing deposits at December 31, 2014 and 2013,
2012, respectively, and exclude losses from OTTI. OTTI credit- respectively, which are cash equivalents and are classified sepa-
related impairments on equity securities recognized in earnings rately on the balance sheet.
were $0.7 million, $0.7 million and $0.2 million for the years
The following table presents interest and dividends on interest
ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Impair-
bearing deposits and investments:
ment amounts in accumulated other comprehensive income
(”AOCI“) were not material at December 31, 2014 or
December 31, 2013.
Interest and Dividend Income (dollars in millions)
Year Ended December 31,

2014 2013 2012
Interest income – interest bearing deposits $17.7 $16.6 $21.7
Interest income – investments/reverse repos 14.1 8.9 7.8
Dividends – investments 3.7 3.4 2.7
Total interest and dividends $35.5 $28.9 $32.2
Securities Available-for-Sale
The following table presents amortized cost and fair value of securities AFS.
Securities AFS — Amortized Cost and Fair Value (dollars in millions)

Gross Gross
Amortized Unrealized Unrealized Fair
Cost Gains Losses Value
December 31, 2014
Debt securities AFS
U.S. Treasury Securities $ 200.0 $ – $ – $ 200.0
U.S. government agency obligations 904.2 – – 904.2
Supranational and foreign government securities 12.3 – – 12.3
Total debt securities AFS 1,116.5 – – 1,116.5
Equity securities AFS 14.0 0.6 (0.6) 14.0
Total securities AFS $1,130.5 $0.6 $(0.6) $1,130.5
December 31, 2013
Debt securities AFS
U.S. Treasury Securities $ 649.1 $ – $ – $ 649.1
U.S. government agency obligations 711.9 – – 711.9
Supranational and foreign government securities 126.8 – – 126.8
Total debt securities AFS 1,487.8 – – 1,487.8
Equity securities AFS 13.5 0.4 (0.2) 13.7
Total securities AFS $1,501.3 $0.4 $(0.2) $1,501.5
Debt Securities Held-to-Maturity

The carrying value and fair value of securities HTM at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013 were as follows:
Debt Securities HTM — Carrying Value and Fair Value (dollars in millions)
Gross Gross
Carrying Unrecognized Unrecognized Fair
Value Gains Losses Value
December 31, 2014
Mortgage-backed securities
U.S. government owned and sponsored agencies $ 156.3 $ 2.5 $ (1.9) $ 156.9
State and municipal 48.1 0.1 (1.8) 46.4
Foreign government 37.9 0.1 – 38.0
Corporate – Foreign 110.0 9.0 – 119.0
Total debt securities held-to-maturity $ 352.3 $11.7 $ (3.7) $ 360.3
December 31, 2013
U.S. government agency obligations $ 735.5 $ 0.1 $ – $ 735.6
U.S. government owned and sponsored agencies 96.3 1.7 (5.8) 92.2
State and municipal 57.4 – (6.5) 50.9
Foreign government 38.3 – – 38.3
Corporate – Foreign 114.8 9.0 – 123.8
Total debt securities held-to-maturity $1,042.3 $10.8 $(12.3) $1,040.8
The following table presents the amortized cost and fair value of debt securities HTM by contractual maturity dates:
Securities HTM — Amortized Cost and Fair Value Maturities (dollars in millions)
Carrying Fair Carrying Fair
Cost Value Cost Value
U.S. government agency obligations
Total — Due within 1 year $ – $ – $ 735.5 $ 735.6
U.S. government owned and sponsored agencies
Due after 5 but within 10 years 1.3 1.3 – –
Due after 10 years(1) 155.0 155.6 96.3 92.2
Total 156.3 156.9 96.3 92.2
State and municipal
Due within 1 year 1.2 1.2 0.7 0.7
Due after 1 but within 5 years 2.9 2.9 4.4 4.4
Due after 5 but within 10 years – – 0.7 0.7
Due after 10 years(1) 44.0 42.3 51.6 45.1
Total 48.1 46.4 57.4 50.9
Foreign government
Due within 1 year 10.8 10.8 29.8 29.8
Total 37.9 38.0 38.3 38.3
Corporate – Foreign
Due within 1 year 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8
Total 110.0 119.0 114.8 123.8
Total debt securities held-to-maturity $352.3 $360.3 $1,042.3 $1,040.8
(1)
Investments with no stated maturities are included as contractual maturities of greater than 10 years. Actual maturities may differ due to call or prepayment
rights.

NOTE 8 — OTHER ASSETS

The following table presents the components of other assets.
Other Assets (dollars in millions)

Deposits on commercial aerospace equipment $ 736.3 $ 831.3
Deferred federal and state tax assets 422.5 40.0
Fair value of derivative financial instruments 168.0 50.3
Deferred debt costs and other deferred charges 148.1 158.5
Furniture and fixtures 126.4 85.3
Tax receivables, other than income taxes 102.0 132.2
Executive retirement plan and deferred compensation 96.7 101.3
Other(1) 332.4 295.2
Total other assets $2,132.4 $1,694.1
(1)
Other includes items such as: accrued interest/dividends, fixed assets, prepaid expenses, investments in and receivables from non-
consolidated entities, and other miscellaneous assets.
NOTE 9 — DEPOSITS
The following table presents deposits detail, maturities and weighted average interest rates.
Deposits (dollars in millions)

Deposits Outstanding $ 15,849.8 $ 12,526.5
Weighted average contractual interest rate 1.69% 1.65%
Weighted average remaining number of days to maturity(1) 1,247 days 1,014 days
Contractual Maturities and Rates
Due in 2015—(1.16%)(2) $ 6,988.4
Due in 2016—(1.66%) 1,670.6
Due in 2017- (1.41%) 2,398.2
Due in 2018—(1.85%) 928.2
Due in 2019—(2.45%) 1,670.7
Due after 2019—(3.06%) 2,195.1
Deposits outstanding, excluding fresh start adjustments $ 15,851.2
(1)
Excludes deposit balances with no stated maturity.
(2)
Includes rates on deposit accounts with no stated maturity.

2014 2013
Daily average deposits $13,925.4 $11,254.3
Maximum amount outstanding $15,851.2 $12,605.3
Weighted average contractual interest rate for the year 1.59% 1.56%
The following table presents the maturity profile of deposits with a denomination of $100,000 or more.
Certificates of Deposits $100,000 or More (dollars in millions)
At December 31,
2014 2013
U.S. certificates of deposits
Three months or less $ 340.9 $ 317.7
After three months through six months 330.8 258.1
After six months through twelve months 757.8 601.7
After twelve months 2,590.3 1,501.9
Total U.S. certificates of deposits $4,019.8 $2,679.4
Non-U.S. certificates of deposits $ 57.0 $ 88.3
NOTE 10 — LONG-TERM BORROWINGS

The following table presents the carrying value of outstanding long-term borrowings:
(dollars in millions) December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013
CIT Group Inc. Subsidiaries Total Total
Senior unsecured(1) $11,932.4 $ – $11,932.4 $12,531.6
Secured borrowings – 6,523.4 6,523.4 5,952.9
Total Long-term Borrowings $11,932.4 $6,523.4 $18,455.8 $18,484.5
(1)
Senior Unsecured Notes at December 31, 2014 were comprised of $8,243.5 million of Unsecured Notes, $3,650.0 million of Series C Notes and $38.9 million
of other unsecured debt.
The following table summarizes contractual maturities, which excludes original issue discounts and FSA discounts, of total long-term bor-
rowings outstanding:
Contractual Maturities – Long-term Borrowings (dollars in millions)

Contractual
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Thereafter Maturities
Senior unsecured $1,200.0 $ – $3,000.0 $2,200.0 $2,750.0 $2,801.4 $11,951.4
Secured borrowings 1,853.3 1,125.8 893.2 626.1 466.8 1,548.8 6,514.0
$3,053.3 $1,125.8 $3,893.2 $2,826.1 $3,216.8 $4,350.2 $18,465.4
On February 15, 2015, the Company repaid the maturing senior The Revolving Credit Facility may be drawn and prepaid at the
unsecured notes. option of CIT. The unutilized portion of any commitment under
the Revolving Credit Facility may be reduced permanently or ter-
Unsecured
minated by CIT at any time without penalty.
Revolving Credit Facility The Revolving Credit Facility is unsecured and is guaranteed by
eight of the Company’s domestic operating subsidiaries. The
There were no outstanding borrowings under the Revolving facility was amended in January 2014 to modify the covenant
Credit Facility at December 31, 2014 and 2013. The amount avail- requiring a minimum guarantor asset coverage ratio and the cri-
able to draw upon at December 31, 2014 was approximately $1.4 teria for calculating the ratio. The amended covenant requires a
billion, with the remaining amount of approximately $0.1 billion minimum guarantor asset coverage ratio ranging from 1.25:1.0 to
being utilized for issuance of letters of credit. the current requirement of 1.5:1.0 depending on the Company’s
The Revolving Credit Facility has a total commitment amount of long-term senior unsecured debt rating.
$1.5 billion and the maturity date of the commitment is The Revolving Credit Facility is subject to a $6 billion minimum
January 27, 2017. The total commitment amount consists of a consolidated net worth covenant of the Company, tested quar-
$1.15 billion revolving loan tranche and a $350 million revolving terly, and also limits the Company’s ability to create liens, merge
loan tranche that can also be utilized for issuance of letters of or consolidate, sell, transfer, lease or dispose of all or substan-
credit. The applicable margin charged under the facility is 2.50% tially all of its assets, grant a negative pledge or make certain
for LIBOR-based loans and 1.50% for Base Rate loans. restricted payments during the occurrence and continuance of an
event of default.

Senior Unsecured Notes notes filed under the shelf registration rank equal in right of payment
Senior unsecured notes include notes issued under the ”shelf“ regis- with the Series C Unsecured Notes and the Revolving Credit Facility.
tration filed in March 2012 that was scheduled to mature in the first The following tables present the principal amounts of Senior
quarter of 2015, and Series C Unsecured Notes. In January 2015, we Unsecured Notes issued under the Company’s shelf registration
filed a new shelf that expires in January 2018. The and Series C Unsecured Notes by maturity date.
Senior Unsecured Notes (dollars in millions)
Maturity Date Rate (%) Date of Issuance Par Value

February 2015* 4.750% February 2012 1,200.0
May 2017 5.000% May 2012 1,250.0
August 2017 4.250% August 2012 1,750.0
March 2018 5.250% March 2012 1,500.0
April 2018* 6.625% March 2011 700.0
February 2019* 5.500% February 2012 1,750.0
February 2019 3.875% February 2014 1,000.0
May 2020 5.375% May 2012 750.0
August 2022 5.000% August 2012 1,250.0
August 2023 5.000% August 2013 750.0
Weighted average and total 4.99% $11,900.0
* Series C Unsecured Notes
The Indentures for the Senior Unsecured Notes and Series C Secured Borrowings
Unsecured Notes limit the Company’s ability to create liens,
At December 31, 2014, the secured borrowings had a weighted
merge or consolidate, or sell, transfer, lease or dispose of all or
average interest rate of 3.10%, which ranged from 0.24% to 6.15%
substantially all of its assets. Upon a Change of Control Trigger-
with maturities ranging from 2015 through 2028. Set forth below
ing Event as defined in the Indentures for the Senior Unsecured
are borrowings and pledged assets, which are primarily owned by
Notes and Series C Unsecured Notes, holders of the Senior Unse-
consolidated variable interest entities. Creditors of these entities
cured Notes and Series C Unsecured Notes will have the right to
received ownership and/or security interests in the assets. These
require the Company, as applicable, to repurchase all or a portion
entities are intended to be bankruptcy remote so that such assets
of the Senior Unsecured Notes and Series C Unsecured Notes at
are not available to creditors of CIT or any affiliates of CIT until
a purchase price equal to 101% of the principal amount, plus
and unless the related secured borrowings have been fully dis-
accrued and unpaid interest to the date of such repurchase.
charged. These transactions do not meet accounting requirements
for sales treatment and are recorded as secured borrowings.
Secured Borrowings and Pledged Assets Summary(1)(2) (dollars in millions)

Secured Borrowing Pledged Assets Secured Borrowing Pledged Assets
(3)
Rail $1,179.7 $ 1,575.7 $ 931.0 $1,163.1
Aerospace(3) 2,411.7 3,914.4 2,366.1 4,126.7
International Finance 545.0 730.6 583.5 748.1
Subtotal – Transportation & International Finance 4,136.4 6,220.7 3,880.6 6,037.9
Commercial Services 334.7 1,644.6 334.7 1,453.2
Equipment Finance 1,797.6 2,352.8 1,227.3 1,499.7
Real Estate Finance 125.0 168.0 – –
Subtotal – North American Commercial Finance 2,387.0 4,307.0 1,882.2 3,400.3
Small Business Loan – Non-Strategic Portfolios – – 190.1 220.1
(2)
Total $6,523.4 $10,527.7 $5,952.9 $9,658.3
(1)
As part of our liquidity management strategy, the Company pledges assets to secure financing transactions (which include securitizations), and for other pur-
poses as required or permitted by law while CIT Bank also pledges assets to secure borrowings from the FHLB and FRB.
(2)
At December 31, 2014, we had pledged assets (including collateral for the FRB discount window not in the table above) of $12.3 billion, which included $6.3
billion of loans, $4.8 billion of operating lease equipment (including amounts held for sale), $1.0 billion of cash and $0.2 billion of investment securities.
(3)
At December 31, 2014, the GSI TRS related borrowings and pledged assets, respectively, of $1.2 billion and $1.8 billion were included in Transportation &
International Finance. The GSI TRS is described in Note 11 — Derivative Financial Instruments.
Variable Interest Entities (”VIEs“) associated with the underlying leases and loans. The VIE has an
obligation to pay the debt in accordance with the terms of the
The Company utilizes VIEs in the ordinary course of business to
underlying agreements.
support its own and its customers’ financing needs. Each VIE is a
separate legal entity and maintains its own books and records. Generally, third-party investors in the obligations of the consoli-
dated VIEs have legal recourse only to the assets of the VIEs and
The most significant types of VIEs that CIT utilizes are ’on balance
do not have recourse to the Company beyond certain specific
sheet’ secured financings of pools of leases and loans originated
provisions that are customary for secured financing transactions,
by the Company where the Company is the primary beneficiary.
such as asset repurchase obligations for breaches of representa-
The Company originates pools of assets and sells these to special
tions and warranties. In addition, the assets are generally
purpose entities, which, in turn, issue debt instruments backed by
restricted to pay only such liabilities.
the asset pools or sells individual interests in the assets to inves-
tors. CIT retains the servicing rights and participates in certain
cash flows. These VIEs are typically organized as trusts or limited NOTE 11 — DERIVATIVE FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
liability companies, and are intended to be bankruptcy remote, As part of managing economic risk and exposure to interest rate
from a legal standpoint. and foreign currency risk, the Company primarily enters into
The main risks inherent in these secured borrowing structures are derivative transactions in over-the-counter markets with other
deterioration in the credit performance of the vehicle’s underly- financial institutions. The Company does not enter into derivative
ing asset portfolio and risk associated with the servicing of the financial instruments for speculative purposes.
underlying assets. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Lenders typically have recourse to the assets in the VIEs and may Act (the ”Act“) includes measures to broaden the scope of
benefit from other credit enhancements, such as: (1) a reserve or derivative instruments subject to regulation by requiring clearing
cash collateral account that requires the Company to deposit and exchange trading of certain derivatives, and imposing mar-
cash in an account, which will first be used to cover any defaulted gin, reporting and registration requirements for certain market
obligor payments, (2) over-collateralization in the form of excess participants. Since the Company does not meet the definition of
assets in the VIE, or (3) subordination, whereby the Company a Swap Dealer or Major Swap Participant under the Act, the new
retains a subordinate position in the secured borrowing which reporting and clearing obligations, which became effective
would absorb losses due to defaulted obligor payments before April 10, 2013, apply to a limited number of derivative transac-
the senior certificate holders. The VIE may also enter into deriva- tions executed with its lending customers in order to manage
tive contracts in order to convert the debt issued by the VIEs to their interest rate risk.
match the underlying assets or to limit or change the risk of See Note 1 — Business and Summary of Significant Accounting
the VIE. Policies for further description of its derivative transaction
With respect to events or circumstances that could expose CIT to policies.
a loss, as these are accounted for as on balance sheet, the Com- The following table presents fair values and notional values of
pany records an allowance for loan losses for the credit risks derivative financial instruments:
Fair and Notional Values of Derivative Financial Instruments(1) (dollars in millions)

Notional Asset Fair Liability Notional Asset Fair Liability
Amount Value Fair Value Amount(2) Value Fair Value
Qualifying Hedges
Cross currency swaps – net investment hedges $ – $ – $ – $ 47.1 $ 1.1 $ –
Foreign currency forward contracts – cash flow hedges – – – 3.8 – (0.3)
Foreign currency forward contracts – net investment hedges 1,193.1 74.7 – 1,436.8 11.8 (23.8)
Total Qualifying Hedges 1,193.1 74.7 – 1,487.7 12.9 (24.1)
Non-Qualifying Hedges
Cross currency swaps – – – 131.8 6.3 –
Interest rate swaps 1,902.0 15.2 (23.1) 1,386.0 5.7 (25.4)
Written options 2,711.5 – (2.7) 566.0 – (1.0)
Purchased options 948.4 0.8 – 816.8 1.2 –
Foreign currency forward contracts 2,028.8 77.2 (12.0) 1,979.9 23.4 (50.8)
Total Return Swap (TRS) 1,091.9 – (24.5) 485.2 – (9.7)
Equity Warrants 1.0 0.1 – 1.0 0.8 –
Total Non-qualifying Hedges 8,683.6 93.3 (62.3) 5,366.7 37.4 (86.9)
Total Hedges $9,876.7 $168.0 $(62.3) $6,854.4 $50.3 $(111.0)
(1)
Presented on a gross basis.

Total Return Swaps (”TRS“) Valuation of the derivatives related to the GSI facilities is based
on several factors using a discounted cash flow (DCF) methodol-
Two financing facilities between two wholly-owned subsidiaries of
ogy, including:
CIT and Goldman Sachs International (”GSI“) are structured as
total return swaps (”TRS“), under which amounts available for - CIT’s funding costs for similar financings based on current mar-
advances are accounted for as derivatives. Pursuant to applicable ket conditions;
accounting guidance, only the unutilized portion of the TRS is - Forecasted usage of the long-dated facilities through the final
accounted for as a derivative and recorded at its estimated fair
maturity date in 2028; and
value. The size of the CIT Financial Ltd. (”CFL“) facility is $1.5 bil-
lion and the CIT TRS Funding B.V. (”BV“) facility is $625 million. - Forecasted amortization, due to principal payments on the
underlying ABS, which impacts the amount of the unutilized
The aggregate ”notional amounts“ of the total return swaps of
portion.
$1,091.9 million at December 31, 2014 and $485.2 million at
December 31, 2013 represent the aggregate unused portions Based on the Company’s valuation, a liability of $25 million and
under the CFL and BV facilities and constitute derivative financial $10 million was recorded at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respec-
instruments. These notional amounts are calculated as the maxi- tively. The change in value is recorded in Other Income in the
mum aggregate facility commitment amounts, currently $2,125.0 Consolidated Statements of Operations.
million, less the aggregate actual adjusted qualifying borrowing
Impact of Collateral and Netting Arrangements on the Total
base outstanding of $1,033.1 million at December 31, 2014 and
Derivative Portfolio
$1,639.8 million at December 31, 2013 under the facilities. The
notional amounts of the derivatives will increase as the adjusted The following tables present a summary of our derivative portfo-
qualifying borrowing base decreases due to repayment of the lio, which includes the gross amounts of recognized financial
underlying asset-backed securities (ABS) to investors. If CIT funds assets and liabilities; the amounts offset in the consolidated bal-
additional ABS under the facilities, the aggregate adjusted quali- ance sheet; the net amounts presented in the consolidated
fying borrowing base of the total return swaps will increase and balance sheet; the amounts subject to an enforceable master net-
the notional amount of the derivatives will decrease accordingly. ting arrangement or similar agreement that were not included in
the offset amount above, and the amount of cash collateral
In April 2014, the Company sold its student loan assets and extin-
received or pledged. Substantially all of the derivative transac-
guished the debt of $787 million, which was secured by these
tions are under an International Swaps and Derivatives
loans. This debt secured reference obligations under the TRS.
Association (”ISDA“) agreement.
The extinguishment of the debt was the primary cause of the
increase of the notional amount related to the TRS.
Offsetting of Derivative Assets and Liabilities (dollars in millions)

Gross Amounts not
offset in the
Consolidated Balance Sheet
Gross Amount Net Amount
Gross Amount Offset in the Presented in the Derivative Cash Collateral
of Recognized Consolidated Consolidated Financial Pledged/ Net
Assets (Liabilities) Balance Sheet Balance Sheet Instruments(1) (Received)(1)(2) Amount
December 31, 2014
Derivative assets $ 168.0 $ – $ 168.0 $(13.6) $(137.3) $ 17.1
Derivative liabilities (62.3) – (62.3) 13.6 8.7 (40.0)
December 31, 2013
Derivative assets $ 50.3 $ – $ 50.3 $(33.4) $ (5.0) $ 11.9
Derivative liabilities (111.0) – (111.0) 33.4 41.0 (36.6)
(1)
The Company’s derivative transactions are governed by ISDA agreements that allow for net settlements of certain payments as well as offsetting of all con-
tracts (”Derivative Financial Instruments“) with a given counterparty in the event of bankruptcy or default of one of the two parties to the transaction. We
believe our ISDA agreements meet the definition of a master netting arrangement or similar agreement for purposes of the above disclosure. In conjunction
with the ISDA agreements, the Company has entered into collateral arrangements with its counterparties which provide for the exchange of cash depending
on the change in the market valuation of the derivative contracts outstanding. Such collateral is available to be applied in settlement of the net balances
upon an event of default by one of the counterparties.
(2)
Collateral pledged or received is included in Other assets or Other liabilities, respectively.
The following table presents the impact of derivatives on the statements of operations:
Derivative Instrument Gains and Losses (dollars in millions)
Contract Type Gain / (Loss) Recognized 2014 2013 2012
Qualifying Hedges
Foreign currency forward contracts – cash flow hedges Other income $ – $ 0.7 $ 1.1
Total Qualifying Hedges – 0.7 1.1
Non Qualifying Hedges
Cross currency swaps Other income 4.1 11.5 (10.5)
Interest rate swaps Other income 7.2 19.1 1.2
Interest rate options Other income (2.4) – (0.7)
Foreign currency forward contracts Other income 118.1 (12.1) (23.7)
Equity warrants Other income (0.7) 0.8 (0.3)
Total Return Swap (TRS) Other income (14.8) (3.9) (5.8)
Total Non-qualifying Hedges 111.5 15.4 (39.8)
Total derivatives – income statement impact $111.5 $ 16.1 $(38.7)
The following table presents the changes in AOCI relating to derivatives:
Changes in AOCI Relating to Derivatives (dollars in millions)

Derivatives- Hedge Derivatives-
effective portion ineffectiveness Total effective
reclassified recorded income portion
from AOCI directly to statement recorded Total change in
Contract Type to income income impact in OCI OCI for period
Foreign currency forward contracts – cash flow
hedges $ – $ – $ – $ 0.2 $ 0.2
Foreign currency forward contracts – net
investment hedges (18.1) – (18.1) 111.1 129.2
Cross currency swaps – net investment hedges – – – 1.1 1.1
Total $(18.1) $ – $(18.1) $112.4 $130.5
hedges $ 0.7 $ – $ 0.7 $ 0.6 $ (0.1)
investment hedges (7.7) – (7.7) 5.8 13.5
Cross currency swaps – net investment hedges (0.1) – (0.1) 10.0 10.1
Total $ (7.1) $ – $ (7.1) $ 16.4 $ 23.5
hedges $ 1.1 $ – $ 1.1 $ 1.7 $ 0.6
investment hedges (4.1) – (4.1) (59.4) (55.3)
Cross currency swaps ¡ net investment hedges – – – (12.9) (12.9)
Total $ (3.0) $ – $ (3.0) $ (70.6) $ (67.6)

NOTE 12 — OTHER LIABILITIES

The following table presents components of other liabilities:
Other Liabilities (dollars in millions)

Equipment maintenance reserves $ 960.4 $ 904.2
Accrued expenses and accounts payable 478.3 478.1
Security and other deposits 368.0 227.4
Current taxes payable and deferred taxes 319.1 179.8
Accrued interest payable 243.7 247.1
Valuation adjustment relating to aerospace commitments 121.2 137.5
(1)
Other 398.1 490.2
Total other liabilities $2,888.8 $2,664.3
(1)
Other consists of other taxes, property tax liabilities and other miscellaneous liabilities.
NOTE 13 — FAIR VALUE The Company characterizes inputs in the determination of fair
value according to the fair value hierarchy. The fair value of the
Fair Value Hierarchy Company’s assets and liabilities where the measurement objec-
The Company is required to report fair value measurements for tive specifically requires the use of fair value are set forth in the
specified classes of assets and liabilities. See Note 1 — ”Business tables below:
and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies“ for fair value
measurement policy.
Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis (dollars in millions)
Total Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
December 31, 2014
Assets
Debt Securities AFS $1,116.5 $212.3 $ 904.2 $ –
Equity Securities AFS 14.0 14.0 – –
Trading assets at fair value – derivatives 93.3 – 93.3 –
Derivative counterparty assets at fair value 74.7 – 74.7 –
Total $1,298.5 $226.3 $1,072.2 $ –
Liabilities
Trading liabilities at fair value – derivatives $ (62.3) $ – $ (35.7) $(26.6)
Derivative counterparty liabilities at fair value – – – –
Total $ (62.3) $ – $ (35.7) $(26.6)
December 31, 2013
Assets
Debt Securities AFS $1,487.8 $675.9 $ 811.9 $ –
Equity Securities AFS 13.7 13.7 – –
Trading assets at fair value – derivatives 37.4 – 37.4 –
Derivative counterparty assets at fair value 12.9 – 12.9 –
Total $1,551.8 $689.6 $ 862.2 $ –
Liabilities
Trading liabilities at fair value – derivatives $ (86.9) $ – $ (77.2) $ (9.7)
Derivative counterparty liabilities at fair value (24.1) – (24.1) –
Total $ (111.0) $ – $ (101.3) $ (9.7)
The following table presents financial instruments for which a non-recurring change in fair value has been recorded:
Assets Measured at Fair Value on a Non-recurring Basis (dollars in millions)
Fair Value Measurements
at Reporting Date Using:
Total Gains
Total Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 and (Losses)
Assets
December 31, 2014
Assets Held for Sale $949.6 $ – $ – $949.6 $(73.6)
Impaired loans 13.2 – – 13.2 (4.9)
Total $962.8 $ – $ – $962.8 $(78.5)
December 31, 2013
Assets Held for Sale $731.1 $ – $ – $731.1 $(59.4)
Impaired loans 18.5 – – 18.5 (1.6)
Total $749.6 $ – $ – $749.6 $(61.0)
Loans are transferred from held for investment (”HFI“) to Assets Level 3 Gains and Losses
held for sale (”HFS“) at the lower of cost or fair value. At the time
The tables below set forth a summary of changes in the esti-
of transfer, a write-down of the loan is recorded as a charge-off, if
mated fair value of the Company’s Level 3 financial assets and
applicable. Once classified as HFS, the amount by which the car-
liabilities measured on a recurring basis:
rying value exceeds fair value is recorded as a valuation
allowance. Changes in Fair Value of Level 3 Financial Assets and Liabilities
Measured on a Recurring Basis (dollars in millions)
Impaired finance receivables of $500,000 or greater that are
placed on non-accrual status are subject to periodic individual Total
review in conjunction with the Company’s ongoing problem loan (all derivatives)
management (PLM) function. Impairment occurs when, based on December 31, 2012 $ (5.8)
current information and events, it is probable that CIT will be
unable to collect all amounts due according to contractual terms Gains or losses realized/unrealized included
of the agreement. Impairment is measured as the shortfall in Other Income(1) (3.9)
between estimated value and recorded investment in the finance December 31, 2013 (9.7)
receivable, with the estimated value determined using fair value Gains or losses realized/unrealized included
of collateral and other cash flows if the finance receivable is col- in Other Income(1) (16.9)
lateralized, or the present value of expected future cash flows December 31, 2014 $(26.6)
discounted at the contract’s effective interest rate. (1)
Valuation of the derivatives related to the GSI facilities and written
options on certain CIT Bank CDs.

FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS

The carrying and estimated fair values of financial instruments presented below exclude leases and certain other assets and liabilities,
which are not required for disclosure.
Financial Instruments (dollars in millions) December 31, 2014 December 31, 2013
Carrying Estimated Carrying Estimated
Value Fair Value Value Fair Value
Derivative assets at fair value – non-qualifying hedges $ 93.3 $ 93.3 $ 37.4 $ 37.4
Derivative counterparty assets at fair value 74.7 74.7 12.9 12.9
Assets held for sale (excluding leases) 67.0 67.2 415.2 416.4
Loans (excluding leases)(1) 14,379.5 14,076.2 13,955.5 14,017.7
Securities purchased under agreements to resell 650.0 650.0 – –
Investment securities 1,550.3 1,558.3 2,630.7 2,629.2
Other assets subject to fair value disclosure and unsecured
counterparty receivables(2) 886.2 886.2 586.5 586.5
Liabilities
Deposits(3) (15,891.4) (16,105.7) (12,565.0) (12,751.9)
Derivative liabilities at fair value – non-qualifying hedges (62.3) (62.3) (86.9) (86.9)
Derivative counterparty liabilities at fair value – – (24.1) (24.1)
Long-term borrowings(3) (18,657.9) (19,244.4) (18,693.1) (19,340.8)
Credit balances of factoring clients(1) (1,622.1) (1,622.1) (1,336.1) (1,336.1)
Other liabilities subject to fair value disclosure(4) (2,066.8) (2,066.8) (1,919.1) (1,919.1)
(1)
At December 31, 2014, the credit balances of factoring clients, which was previously reflected as an offset to “Loans”, is separately disclosed in the Liabilities
section of the table above and utilize Level 3 inputs. A corresponding reclassification was made to 2013 classification to conform to the current year presen-
tation.
(2)
Other assets subject to fair value disclosure primarily include accrued interest receivable and miscellaneous receivables. These assets have carrying values
that approximate fair value generally due to the short-term nature and are classified as level 3. The unsecured counterparty receivables primarily consist of
amounts owed to CIT from GSI for debt discount, return of collateral posted to GSI and settlements resulting from market value changes to asset-backed
securities underlying the GSI Facilities.
(3)
Deposits and long-term borrowings include accrued interest, which is included in ”Other liabilities“ in the Balance Sheet.
(4)
Other liabilities subject to fair value disclosure include accounts payable, accrued liabilities, customer security and maintenance deposits and miscellaneous
liabilities. The fair value of these approximate carrying value and are classified as level 3.
Assumptions used to value financial instruments are set forth below: third party vendors. As these Level 3 unobservable inputs are specific
to individual loans / collateral types, management does not believe
Derivatives – The estimated fair values of derivatives were calculated
that sensitivity analysis of individual inputs is meaningful, but rather that
internally using observable market data and represent the net amount
sensitivity is more meaningfully assessed through the evaluation of
receivable or payable to terminate, taking into account current market
aggregate carrying values of the loans. The fair value of loans at
rates, which represent Level 2 inputs, except for the TRS derivative and
December 31, 2014 was $14.1 billion, which is 97.9% of carrying value.
written options on certain CIT Bank CDs that utilized Level 3 inputs.
The fair value of loans at December 31, 2013 was $14.0 billion, which
See Note 11 — Derivative Financial Instruments for notional principal
was 100.4% of carrying value.
amounts and fair values.
Impaired Loans – The value of impaired loans is estimated using
Assets held for sale – Assets held for sale are recorded at the
the fair value of collateral (on an orderly liquidation basis) if the
lower of cost or fair value on the balance sheet. Most of the
loan is collateralized, or the present value of expected cash flows
assets are subject to a binding contract, current letter of intent or
utilizing the current market rate for such loan. As these Level 3
other third-party valuation, which are Level 3 inputs. For the
unobservable inputs are specific to individual loans / collateral
remaining assets, the fair value is generally determined using
types, management does not believe that sensitivity analysis of
internally generated valuations or discounted cash flow analysis,
individual inputs is meaningful, but rather that sensitivity is more
which are considered Level 3 inputs. Commercial loans are gener-
meaningfully assessed through the evaluation of aggregate carry-
ally valued individually, while small-ticket commercial loans are
ing values of impaired loans relative to contractual amounts owed
valued on an aggregate portfolio basis.
(unpaid principal balance or ”UPB“) from customers. As of
Loans – Of the loan balance above, approximately $1.6 billion and $1.3 December 31, 2014, the UPB related to impaired loans, including
billion at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, was valued using loans for which the Company is applying the income recognition
Level 2 inputs. As there is no liquid secondary market for the other and disclosure guidance in ASC 310-30 (Loans and Debt Securi-
loans in the Company’s portfolio, the fair value is estimated based on ties Acquired with Deteriorated Credit Quality), totaled $85.3
discounted cash flow analyses which use Level 3 inputs at both Decem- million. Including related allowances, these loans are carried at
ber 31, 2014 and 2013. In addition to the characteristics of the $45.1 million, or 53% of UPB. Of these amounts, $29.2 million and
underlying contracts, key inputs to the analysis include interest rates, $21.2 million of UPB and carrying value relate to loans with no
prepayment rates, and credit spreads. For the commercial loan portfo- specific allowance. The difference between UPB and carrying
lio, the market based credit spread inputs are derived from instruments value reflects cumulative charge-offs on accounts remaining in
with comparable credit risk characteristics obtained from independent process of collection, FSA discounts and allowances. See Note 3
— Loans for more information.
Securities purchased under agreements to resell – The estimated in the present value calculation are based on the Company’s aver-
fair values of securities purchased under agreements to resell age current deposit rates for similar terms, which are Level 3 inputs.
were calculated internally based on discounted cash flows that
Long-term borrowings – Unsecured debt of approximately $12.0 billion
utilize observable market rates for the applicable maturity and
par value and secured borrowings of approximately $3.3 billion par
which represent Level 2 inputs.
value at December 31, 2014 and unsecured debt of approximately
Investment Securities – Debt and equity securities classified as AFS are $12.6 billion par value and secured borrowings of approximately
carried at fair value, as determined either by Level 1 or Level 2 inputs. $2.4 billion par value at December 31, 2013, were valued using market
Debt securities classified as AFS included investments in U.S. Treasury inputs, which are Level 2 inputs. Where market estimates were not
and federal government agency securities and were valued using Level available for approximately $3.2 billion and $3.6 billion par value at
2 inputs, primarily quoted prices for similar securities. Certain equity December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, values were estimated using
securities classified as AFS were valued using Level 1 inputs, primarily a discounted cash flow analysis with a discount rate approximating
quoted prices in active markets, while other equity securities used Level current market rates for issuances by CIT of similar term debt, which are
2 inputs, due to being less frequently traded or having limited quoted Level 3 inputs.
market prices. Debt securities classified as HTM are securities that the
At December 31, 2013, the Company had considered approximately
Company has both the ability and the intent to hold until maturity and
$12.6 billion par value of unsecured borrowings to be valued using
are carried at amortized cost and periodically assessed for OTTI, with
Level 1 inputs. At year-end 2014, the Company determined the market
the cost basis reduced when impairment is deemed to be other-than-
liquidity for our unsecured debt does not constitute an active market in
temporary. Non-marketable equity investments are generally recorded
the context of measuring fair value, and that the market inputs used to
under the cost or equity method of accounting and are periodically
estimate fair value should result in our unsecured debt being classified
assessed for OTTI, with the net asset values reduced when impairment
as Level 2. The Company has revised the previous presentation of the
is deemed to be other-than-temporary. For investments in limited
fair value measurement of unsecured borrowings in the information
equity partnership interests, we use the net asset value provided by the
presented above for this immaterial error.
fund manager as an appropriate measure of fair value.
See Note 1 − Business and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Deposits – The fair value of deposits was estimated based upon a
for further description of the Company’s Fair Value policies.
present value discounted cash flow analysis. Discount rates used
NOTE 14 — STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

A roll forward of common stock activity is presented in the following table.
Number of Shares of Common Stock Issued Less Treasury Outstanding
Common Stock – December 31, 2012 201,283,063 (414,261) 200,868,802
Restricted stock issued 873,842 – 873,842
Repurchase of common stock – (4,006,941) (4,006,941)
Shares held to cover taxes on vesting restricted shares and other – (357,442) (357,442)
Employee stock purchase plan participation 25,490 – 25,490
Common Stock – December 31, 2013 202,182,395 (4,778,644) 197,403,751
Restricted stock issued 913,399 – 913,399
Repurchase of common stock – (17,067,648) (17,067,648)
Shares held to cover taxes on vesting restricted shares and other – (360,424) (360,424)
Employee stock purchase plan participation 31,497 – 31,497
Common Stock – December 31, 2014 203,127,291 (22,206,716) 180,920,575
We declared and paid dividends totaling $0.50 per common Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income/(Loss)
share during 2014. We declared and paid a $0.10 cash dividend Total comprehensive income was $1,069.7 million for the year
on our common stock during the 2013 fourth quarter. No other ended December 31, 2014, versus $679.8 million for the year
dividends were declared or paid in 2013. ended December 31, 2013 and a comprehensive loss of
$587.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2012, including
accumulated other comprehensive loss of $133.9 million and
$73.6 million at December 2014 and 2013, respectively.
The following table details the components of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss, net of tax:
Components of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) (dollars in millions)
Gross Income Net Gross Income Net
Unrealized Taxes Unrealized Unrealized Taxes Unrealized
Changes in benefit plan net gain/(loss) and prior service
(cost)/credit $ (58.7) $0.2 $ (58.5) $(24.3) $ 0.2 $(24.1)
Foreign currency translation adjustments (75.4) – (75.4) (49.4) – (49.4)
Changes in fair values of derivatives qualifying as cash flow
hedges – – – (0.2) – (0.2)
Unrealized net gains (losses) on available for sale securities – – – 0.2 (0.1) 0.1
Total accumulated other comprehensive loss $(134.1) $0.2 $(133.9) $(73.7) $ 0.1 $(73.6)

The following table details the changes in the components of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss).
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) (dollars in millions)
Changes in Total
Changes in Unrealized fair values of accumulated
benefit plan net Foreign net gains derivatives other
gain (loss) and currency (losses) on qualifying comprehensive
prior service translation available for as cash income (loss)
(cost) credit adjustments sale securities flow hedges (“AOCI”)
Balance as of December 31, 2012 $(43.1) $(36.6) $ 2.1 $(0.1) $ (77.7)
AOCI activity before reclassifications 19.2 (21.2) (2.8) 0.6 (4.2)
Amounts reclassed from AOCI (0.2) 8.4 0.8 (0.7) 8.3
Net current period AOCI 19.0 (12.8) (2.0) (0.1) 4.1
Balance as of December 31, 2013 $(24.1) $(49.4) $ 0.1 $(0.2) $ (73.6)
AOCI activity before reclassifications (42.5) (41.8) (0.6) 0.2 (84.7)
Amounts reclassed from AOCI 8.1 15.8 0.5 – 24.4
Net current period AOCI (34.4) (26.0) (0.1) 0.2 (60.3)
Balance as of December 31, 2014 $(58.5) $(75.4) $ – $ – $(133.9)
Other Comprehensive Income/(Loss) Reclassification adjustments impacting net income related to

changes in fair value of derivatives qualifying as cash flow hedges
The amounts included in the Statement of Comprehensive
were not significant for 2014, 2013 and 2012. There were no
Income (Loss) are net of income taxes.
income taxes associated with changes in fair values of derivatives
The changes in benefit plans net gain/(loss) and prior service qualifying as cash flow hedges for 2014, 2013 and 2012.
(cost)/credit reclassification adjustments impacting net income
The Company has operations in Canada and other countries. The
was $(8.1) million in 2014, $0.2 million for 2013 and $1.4 million for
functional currency for foreign operations is generally the local
2012. The change in income taxes associated with changes in
currency. The value of assets and liabilities of these operations is
benefit plans net gain/(loss) and prior service (cost)/credit was
translated into U.S. dollars at the rate of exchange in effect at the
insignificant for 2014 and 2013, and was $0.2 million for 2012.
balance sheet date. Revenue and expense items are translated at
Foreign currency translation reclassification adjustments impact- the average exchange rates during the year. The resulting foreign
ing net income were $15.8 million for 2014, $8.4 million for 2013 currency translation gains and losses, as well as offsetting gains
and none for 2012. There were no income taxes associated with and losses on hedges of net investments in foreign operations,
foreign currency translation adjustments for 2014, 2013 and 2012. are reflected in AOCI. Transaction gains and losses resulting
Reclassification adjustments impacting net income for unrealized from exchange rate changes on transactions denominated in
gains (losses) on available for sale securities were $0.5 million in currencies other than the functional currency are recorded in
2014, $0.8 million in 2013 and not significant for 2012. The Other Income.
change in income taxes associated with net unrealized gains on
available for sale securities was $0.2 million for 2014, $1.3 million
for 2013, and $(1.0) million for 2012.
2014 2013
Gross Amount Tax Net Amount Gross Amount Tax Net Amount
Changes in benefit plan net gain/(loss) and prior service
(cost)/credit
Gains (Losses) $ 8.1 $ – $ 8.1 $(0.2) $ – $(0.2)
Foreign currency translation adjustments
Gains (Losses) 15.8 – 15.8 8.4 – 8.4
Net unrealized gains (losses) on available for sale securities
Gains (Losses) 0.8 (0.3) 0.5 1.3 (0.5) 0.8
Changes in fair value of derivatives qualifying as cash flow
hedges
Gains (Losses) – – – (0.7) – (0.7)
Total Reclassifications out of AOCI $24.7 $(0.3) $24.4 $ 8.8 $(0.5) $ 8.3
NOTE 15 — REGULATORY CAPITAL minimum amounts and ratios of Total and Tier 1 capital to risk-
weighted assets, and of Tier 1 capital to average assets, subject
The Company and the Bank are each subject to various regula-
to any agreement with regulators to maintain higher capital
tory capital requirements administered by the Federal Reserve
levels.
Bank (”FRB“) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
(”FDIC“). The calculation of the Company’s regulatory capital ratios are
subject to review and consultation with the FRB, which may result
Quantitative measures established by regulation to ensure capital
in refinements to amounts reported at December 31, 2014.
adequacy require that the Company and the Bank each maintain
Tier 1 Capital and Total Capital Components (dollars in millions)

CIT CIT Bank
December 31, December 31, December 31, December 31,
Tier 1 Capital 2014 2013 2014 2013
Total stockholders’ equity(1) $ 9,068.9 $ 8,838.8 $ 2,716.4 $ 2,596.6
Effect of certain items in accumulated other comprehensive loss
excluded from Tier 1 Capital and qualifying noncontrolling
interest 53.0 24.2 (0.2) –
Adjusted total equity 9,121.9 8,863.0 2,716.2 2,596.6
Less: Goodwill(2) (571.3) (338.3) (167.8) –
Disallowed deferred tax assets (416.8) (26.6) – –
Disallowed intangible assets(2) (25.7) (20.3) (12.1) –
Investment in certain subsidiaries (36.7) (32.3) – –
Other Tier 1 components(3) (4.1) (6.0) – –
Tier 1 Capital 8,067.3 8,439.5 2,536.3 2,596.6
Tier 2 Capital
Qualifying allowance for credit losses and other reserves(4) 381.8 383.9 245.1 193.6
Less: Investment in certain subsidiaries (36.7) (32.3) – –
Other Tier 2 components(5) – 0.1 0.1 –
Total qualifying capital $ 8,412.4 $ 8,791.2 $ 2,781.5 $ 2,790.2
Risk-weighted assets $55,480.9 $50,571.2 $19,552.3 $15,451.9
Total Capital (to risk-weighted assets):
Actual 15.2% 17.4% 14.2% 18.1%
Required Ratio for Capital Adequacy Purposes to be well
capitalized 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0%
Tier 1 Capital (to risk-weighted assets):
Actual 14.5% 16.7% 13.0% 16.8%
Required Ratio for Capital Adequacy Purposes to be well
capitalized 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0%
Tier 1 Leverage Ratio:
Actual 17.4% 18.1% 12.2% 16.9%
Required Ratio for Capital Adequacy Purposes 4.0% 4.0% 5.0% 5.0%
(1)
See Consolidated Balance Sheets for the components of Total stockholders’ equity.
(2)
Goodwill and disallowed intangible assets adjustments also reflect the portion included within assets held for sale.
(3)
Includes the Tier 1 capital charge for nonfinancial equity investments and the Tier 1 capital deduction for net unrealized losses on available-for-sale market-
able securities (net of tax).
(4)
”Other reserves“ represents additional credit loss reserves for unfunded lending commitments, letters of credit, and deferred purchase agreements, all of
which are recorded in Other Liabilities.
(5)
Banking organizations are permitted to include in Tier 2 Capital up to 45% of net unrealized pretax gains on available-for-sale equity securities with readily
determinable fair values.
The change in common stockholders’ equity from December 31, addition to the changes in common stockholders’ equity, regula-
2013 was primarily driven by net income, including the benefit of tory capital was negatively affected by certain adjustments.
the partial reversal of the valuation allowance on the deferred tax During 2014, the primary changes to these balances included the
asset, less the impact of share repurchases and dividends. In noted partial reversal of the valuation allowance on the deferred

tax asset and increase to goodwill and intangible assets. The expands the risk-weighting categories from the current four
reversals benefited net income and stockholders’ equity but had Basel I-derived categories (0%, 20%, 50% and 100%) to a larger
minimal impact on our regulatory capital ratios as the majority of and more risk-sensitive number of categories, depending on the
the deferred tax asset balance is disallowed for regulatory capital nature of the exposure, (ranging from 0% for U.S. government
purposes. The increase in goodwill and intangible assets was due and agency securities, to as high as 1,250% for such exposures as
to the acquisitions of Direct Capital and Nacco and is also disal- credit-enhancing interest-only strips or unsettled security/
lowed for regulatory capital purposes. commodity transactions.). Finally, the Basel III Final Rule
established new minimum capital ratios for CET1, Tier 1 capital,
Effective January 1, 2015, CIT became subject to the risk-based
and Total capital of 4.5%, 6.0% and 8.0%, respectively. The Basel
capital guidelines that are based upon the Basel Committee’s
III Final Rule also introduces a new ”capital conservation buffer“,
final framework for strengthening capital and liquidity regulation,
composed entirely of CET1, on top of these minimum risk-
which was released in December 2010 and revised in June 2011
weighted asset ratios, The capital conservation buffer is designed
(Basel III). As it currently applies to CIT, the Basel III Final Rule:
to absorb losses during periods of economic stress. Banking insti-
(i) introduces a new capital measure called ”Common Equity Tier
tutions with a ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets above the
1“ (”CET1“) and related regulatory capital ratio of CET1 to risk-
minimum but below the capital conservation buffer will face con-
weighted assets; (ii) specifies that Tier 1 capital consists of CET1
straints on dividends, equity repurchases and compensation
and ”Additional Tier 1 capital“ instruments meeting certain
based on the amount of the shortfall. This buffer will be imple-
revised requirements; (iii) mandates that most deductions/
mented beginning January 1, 2016 at the 0.625% level and
adjustments to regulatory capital measures be made to CET1 and
increase by 0.625% on each subsequent January 1, until it reaches
not to the other components of capital; and (iv) expands the
2.5% on January 1, 2019. Based on our current capital structure,
scope of the deductions from and adjustments to capital as com-
the overall impact on the capital ratios for CIT and the Bank are
pared to existing regulations. The Basel III Final Rule also
expected to minimal.
prescribed a new approach for risk weightings that follow the
Standardized approach, which applies to CIT. This approach
NOTE 16 — EARNINGS PER SHARE

The reconciliation of the numerator and denominator of basic EPS with that of diluted EPS is presented below:
Earnings Per Share (dollars in millions, except per share amounts; shares in thousands)
2014 2013 2012
Earnings / (Loss)
Net income (loss) from continuing operations $ 1,077.5 $ 644.4 $ (535.8)
Net Income (loss) from discontinued operation 52.5 31.3 (56.5)
Net income (loss) $ 1,130.0 $ 675.7 $ (592.3)
Weighted Average Common Shares Outstanding
Basic shares outstanding 188,491 200,503 200,887
Stock-based awards(1) 972 1,192 –
Diluted shares outstanding 189,463 201,695 200,887
Basic Earnings Per common share data
Income (loss) from discontinued operation 0.28 0.16 (0.28)
Basic income (loss) per common share $ 5.99 $ 3.37 $ (2.95)
Diluted Earnings Per common share data
Income (loss) from discontinued operation 0.27 0.16 (0.28)
Diluted income (loss) per common share $ 5.96 $ 3.35 $ (2.95)
(1)
Represents the incremental shares from in-the-money non-qualified restricted stock awards, performance shares, and stock options. Weighted average
restricted shares, performance shares and options that were out-of-the money and excluded from diluted earnings per share totaled 1.3 million, 1.1 million,
and 1.5 million, for the December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 periods, respectively.
NOTE 17 — NON-INTEREST INCOME

The following table sets forth the components of non-interest income:
Non-interest Income (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
Rental income on operating leases $2,093.0 $1,897.4 $1,900.8
Other Income:
Factoring commissions 120.2 122.3 126.5
Gains on sales of leasing equipment 98.4 130.5 117.6
Fee revenues 93.1 101.5 86.1
Gain on investments 39.0 8.2 40.2
Gains on loan and portfolio sales 34.3 48.8 162.3
Recoveries of loans charged off pre-emergence and loans charged off prior to
transfer to held for sale 19.8 21.9 54.3
Counterparty receivable accretion 10.7 8.6 88.7
Gains (losses) on derivatives and foreign currency exchange (37.8) 1.0 (5.7)
Impairment on assets held for sale (100.7) (124.0) (115.1)
Other revenues 28.4 62.5 59.8
Total other income 305.4 381.3 614.7
Total non-interest income $2,398.4 $2,278.7 $2,515.5
NOTE 18 — OTHER EXPENSES

The following table sets forth the components of other expenses:
Other Expenses (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
Depreciation on operating lease equipment $ 615.7 $ 540.6 $ 513.2
Maintenance and other operating lease expenses 196.8 163.1 139.4
Operating expenses:
Compensation and benefits 533.8 535.4 537.1
Technology 85.2 83.3 81.6
Professional fees 80.6 69.1 63.8
Net occupancy expense 35.0 35.3 36.1
Advertising and marketing 33.7 25.2 36.5
Other expenses(1) 142.1 185.0 116.2
Total operating expenses 941.8 970.2 894.0
Loss on debt extinguishments 3.5 – 61.2
Total other expenses $1,757.8 $1,673.9 $1,607.8
(1)
2013 includes $50 million related to a tax settlement agreement with Tyco International Ltd.

NOTE 19 — INCOME TAXES

The following table presents the U.S. and non-U.S. components of income (loss) before provision for income taxes:
Income (Loss) From Continuing Operations Before Provision for Income Taxes (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012
U.S. $342.4 $374.2 $(1,004.3)
Non-U.S. 338.4 360.0 588.9
Income (loss) from continuing operations before provision for income taxes $680.8 $734.2 $ (415.4)
The provision for income taxes is comprised of the following:
Provision for Income Taxes (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012
Current federal income tax provision $ 0.9 $ 0.1 $ 1.5
Deferred federal income tax provision (benefit) (405.6) 18.9 9.5
Total federal income tax provision (benefit) (404.7) 19.0 11.0
Current state and local income tax provision 6.9 6.0 16.1
Deferred state and local income tax provision (benefit) 2.1 1.0 (2.1)
Total state and local income tax provision 9.0 7.0 14.0
Total international income tax provision 1.2 66.5 108.8
Total provision (benefit) for income taxes $(394.5) $92.5 $133.8
Continuing operations $(397.9) $83.9 $116.7
Discontinued operation 3.4 8.6 17.1
Total provision (benefit) for income taxes $(394.5) $92.5 $133.8
A reconciliation from the U.S. Federal statutory rate to the Company’s actual effective income tax rate is as follows:
Percentage of Pretax Income Years Ended December 31 (dollars in millions)
Effective Tax Rate
2014 2013 2012
Income Percent Income Percent Income Percent
tax of tax of Pretax tax of
Pretax expense pretax Pretax expense pretax income expense pretax
Income (benefit) income (loss) (benefit) (loss) (loss) (benefit) income
Continuing Operations
Federal income tax rate $680.8 $ 238.3 35.0% $734.2 $ 256.9 35.0% $(415.4) $(145.3) 35.0%
Increase (decrease) due to:
State and local income taxes, net of
federal income tax benefit 9.0 1.3 6.2 0.8 13.5 (3.2)
Lower tax rates applicable to non-
U.S. earnings (99.7) (14.6) (97.1) (13.2) (152.9) 36.8
International income subject to U.S.
tax 46.0 6.8 55.7 7.6 322.5 (77.7)
Unrecognized tax benefits (269.2) (39.5) 0.3 – (227.8) 54.9
Deferred income taxes on
international unremitted earnings (7.8) (1.2) (24.7) (3.4) 112.0 (27.0)
Valuation allowances (313.3) (46.0) (100.6) (13.7) 211.4 (50.9)
International tax settlements (1.1) (0.2) (11.2) (1.5) – –
Other (0.1) – (1.6) (0.2) (16.7) 4.0
Effective Tax Rate – Continuing
Operations $(397.9) (58.4)% $ 83.9 11.4% $ 116.7 (28.1)%
Discontinued Operation:
Federal income tax rate $ 55.9 $ 19.6 35.0% $ 39.9 $ 14.0 35.0% $ (39.4) $ (13.7) 35.0%
Increase (decrease) due to:
State and local income taxes, net of
federal income tax benefit (0.1) (0.1) 0.7 1.7 0.5 (1.4)
Lower tax rates applicable to non-
U.S. earnings 1.5 2.7 15.3 38.5 11.9 (30.3)
International income subject to U.S.
tax (2.7) (4.7) (17.9) (44.9) (17.4) 44.1
Valuation Allowances (14.9) (26.7) (3.5) (8.8) 35.8 (91.1)
Effective Tax Rate – Discontinued
Operation 3.4 6.2% 8.6 21.5% 17.1 (43.7)%
Total Effective Tax Rate $(394.5) (53.5)% $ 92.5 11.9% $ 133.8 (29.4)%

The tax effects of temporary differences that give rise to deferred income tax assets and liabilities are presented below:
Components of Deferred Income Tax Assets and Liabilities (dollars in millions)
December 31,
2014 2013
Deferred Tax Assets:
Net operating loss (NOL) carry forwards $ 2,837.0 $ 2,694.7
Loans and direct financing leases 48.5 166.4
Provision for credit losses 163.7 147.9
Accrued liabilities and reserves 91.7 97.2
FSA adjustments – aircraft and rail contracts 46.1 52.8
Other 145.3 114.0
Total gross deferred tax assets 3,332.3 3,273.0
Deferred Tax Liabilities:
Operating leases (1,797.6) (1,549.3)
International unremitted earnings (162.0) (168.5)
Debt (3.6) (97.7)
Goodwill and intangibles (62.4) (47.3)
Other (29.0) (71.4)
Total deferred tax liabilities (2,054.6) (1,934.2)
Total net deferred tax asset before valuation allowances 1,277.7 1,338.8
Less: Valuation allowances (1,122.4) (1,495.3)
Net deferred tax asset (liability) after valuation allowances $ 155.3 $ (156.5)
2009 Bankruptcy examination. NOLs arising in post-emergence years are not sub-
ject to this limitation absent another ownership change as
CIT filed prepackaged voluntary petitions for relief under the U.S.
defined by the IRS for U.S. tax purposes.
bankruptcy Code on November 1, 2009 and emerged from bank-
ruptcy on December 10, 2009. As a consequence of the Net Operating Loss Carry-forwards
bankruptcy, CIT realized cancellation of indebtedness income
As of December 31, 2014, CIT has deferred tax assets totaling
(”CODI“). The Internal Revenue Service Code generally requires
$2.8 billion on its global NOLs. This includes a deferred tax asset
CODI to be recognized and included in taxable income. How-
of: (1) $2.0 billion relating to its cumulative U.S. federal NOLs of
ever, if CODI is realized pursuant to a confirmed plan of
$5.7 billion, after the CODI reduction described in the paragraph
reorganization, then CODI is not recognized in taxable income
above; (2) $416 million relating to cumulative state NOLs of $8.6
but instead reduces certain favorable tax attributes. CIT tax attri-
billion, and (3) $412 million relating to cumulative international
bute reductions included a reduction to the Company’s federal
NOLs of $3.0 billion.
net operating loss carry-forwards (”NOLs“) of approximately $4.3
billion and the tax bases in its assets of $2.8 billion. Of the $5.7 billion U.S. federal NOLs, approximately $3.0 billion
relates to the pre-emergence period subject to the Sec. 382 limi-
CIT’s reorganization in 2009 constituted an ownership change
tation discussed above, of which approximately $1.0 billion is no
under Section 382 of the Code, which placed an annual dollar
longer subject to the limitation. Domestic taxable income was
limit on the use of the remaining pre-bankruptcy NOLs. Under
modest for the current year, primarily due to accelerated tax
the relief provision elected by the Company, Sec. 382(l)(6), the
depreciation on the operating lease portfolios. The net increase
NOLs that the Company may use annually is limited to the prod-
in the U.S. federal NOLs from the prior year balance of $5.2 bil-
uct of a prescribed rate of return applied against the value of
lion is primarily attributable to favorable audit adjustments
equity immediately after any ownership change. Based on a vol-
coming out of the most recent IRS audit examination including
ume weighted average price (VWAP) determined by the
the resolution of an uncertain tax position relating to the amount
Company’s market trading prices between December 10, 2009
of CODI and corresponding NOL carry-forward adjustment con-
and March 31, 2010, the Company’s usage of pre-bankruptcy
sequent to the 2009 Bankruptcy. The U.S. federal NOL’s will
NOLs will be limited to $264.7 million per annum. The change
expire beginning in 2027 through 2033. $162 million of state
from the previous reported annual limit of $230 million, which was
NOLs will expire in 2015, and while most of the international
based on an equity value determined by the Company’s opening
NOLs have no expiration date, a small portion will expire over
stock price on December 10, 2009, reflects adjustments to arrive
various periods, with an insignificant amount expiring in 2015.
at the VWAP method reported on the tax return and agreed to by
the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) during the most recent audit
Prior to December 31, 2013, the Company had not previously rec- The forecast of future taxable income for the Company reflects a
ognized any tax benefit on its prior year U.S. federal and U.S. long-term view of growth and returns that management believes
state NOLs and certain prior year international NOLs due to is more likely than not of being realized.
uncertainties related to its ability to realize its net deferred tax
For the U.S. state valuation allowance, the Company analyzed the
assets in the future. Due to these uncertainties, combined with
state net operating loss carry-forwards for each reporting entity
the three years of cumulative losses by certain domestic and
to determine the amounts that are expected to expire unused.
international reporting entities, the Company had concluded that
Based on this analysis, it was determined that the existing valua-
it did not meet the criteria to recognize its net deferred tax
tion allowance was still required on the U.S. state deferred tax
assets, inclusive of the deferred tax assets related to the NOLs in
assets on net operating loss carry-forwards. Accordingly, no dis-
these entities. Accordingly, the Company maintained a valuation
crete adjustment was made to the U.S. State valuation allowance
allowance of $1.5 billion against its net deferred tax assets at
this quarter. The negative evidence supporting this conclusion is
December 31, 2013. Of the $1.5 billion valuation allowance,
as follows:
approximately $1.3 billion related to domestic reporting entities
($0.9 billion U.S. federal and $0.4 billion U.S. state) and $211 mil- - Separate State filing entities remained in a three year
lion related to international reporting entities. cumulative loss.
- State NOLs expiration periods vary in time and availability.
The determination of whether or not to maintain the valuation
allowances on certain reporting entities’ net deferred tax assets Additionally, during the current year, the Company reduced the
requires significant judgment and an analysis of all positive and U.S. federal and state valuation allowances in the normal course
negative evidence to determine whether it is more likely than not as the Company recognized U.S. taxable income. This taxable
that these future benefits will be realized. ASC 740-10-30-18 income reduced the deferred tax asset on NOLs, and, when com-
states that ”future realization of the tax benefit of an existing bined with the increase in net deferred tax liabilities, which are
deductible temporary difference or NOL carry-forward ultimately mainly related to accelerated tax depreciation on the operating
depends on the existence of sufficient taxable income within the lease portfolios, resulted in a reduction of the valuation allow-
carryback and carry-forward periods available under the tax law.“ ances. However, the Company retained a valuation allowance of
As such, the Company has considered the following potential $1.0 billion against its U.S. net deferred tax assets at
sources of taxable income in its assessment of a reporting entity’s December 31, 2014. Of the $1.0 billion domestic valuation allow-
ability to recognize its net deferred tax asset: ance, approximately $0.7 billion is against the deferred tax asset
on the U.S. federal NOLs and $0.3 billion is against the deferred
- Taxable income in carryback years,
tax asset on the U.S. state NOLs. The reduction in the valuation
- Future reversals of existing taxable temporary differences
allowance from the prior year relates primarily to the realization
(deferred tax liabilities),
of the above mentioned net deferred tax assets. However, the
- Prudent and feasible tax planning strategies, and
reduction was partially offset by an increase in the NOLs due to
- Future taxable income forecasts.
the aforementioned favorable IRS audit adjustments and the
During the third quarter of 2014, management concluded that it resolution of an uncertain tax position related to the computation
was more likely than not that the Company will generate suffi- of ”CODI“ which resulted in adjustments to the reported NOLs.
cient future taxable income within the applicable carry-forward
The ability to recognize the remaining deferred tax assets relat-
periods to realize $375 million of its U.S. net federal deferred tax
ing to the U.S. federal and state NOLs, and capital loss carry-
assets. This conclusion was reached after weighing all of the evi-
forwards that continue to be subject to a valuation allowance will
dence and determining that the positive evidence outweighed
be evaluated on a quarterly basis to determine if there are any
the negative evidence. No discrete reduction to the valuation
significant events that would affect our ability to utilize these
allowance related to the U.S. net state deferred tax assets or the
deferred tax assets. If events are identified that affect our ability
capital loss carry-forwards was recorded in the fourth or any other
to utilize our deferred tax assets, the analysis will be updated to
quarter. In the U.S., the Company files a U.S. consolidated federal
determine if any adjustments to the valuation allowances are
tax return, combined unitary state tax returns, and separate state
required. Such events may include acquisitions that support the
tax returns in various jurisdictions. Thus, the tax reporting entity
Company’s long-term business strategies while also enabling it to
for U.S. federal tax purposes and U.S. state combined filing pur-
accelerate the utilization of its net operating losses, as evidenced
poses is the ”U.S. Affiliated Group“, while the reporting entities
by the acquisition of Direct Capital Corporation and the
for the separate state income tax returns are select individual
announced definitive agreement and plan of merger to acquire
affiliated group members. The positive evidence supporting this
IMB Holdco LLC, the parent company of OneWest Bank N.A.
conclusion is as follows:
(”OneWest Bank“).
- The U.S. Affiliated Group transitioned into a 3-year (12 quarter)
The impact of the OneWest Bank transaction on the utilization of
cumulative normalized income position in the third quarter,
the Company’s NOLs cannot be considered in the Company’s
resulting in the Company’s ability to significantly increase the
forecast of future taxable income until the acquisition is consum-
reliance on future taxable income forecasts.
mated. The acquisition is expected to accelerate the utilization of
- Management’s long-term forecast of future U.S. taxable income
the Company’s NOLs and therefore management anticipates it
supports partial utilization of the U.S. federal NOLs prior to
will reverse the remaining U.S. federal valuation allowance after
their expiration.
- The federal NOLs will not expire until 2027 through 2033.

consummation of the acquisition. The Company is currently Indefinite Reinvestment Assertion

evaluating the impact of the acquisition on the U.S. state NOLs
In 2011, management decided to no longer assert its intent to
and expects the acquisition to utilize some portion of these
indefinitely reinvest its international earnings, except for interna-
amounts which would cause a partial reduction to the U.S. state
tional subsidiaries in select jurisdictions. This decision was driven
valuation allowance.
by events during the course of the year that culminated in Man-
The Company maintained a valuation allowance of $141 million agement’s conclusion that it may need to repatriate international
against the international reporting entities’ net deferred tax earnings to address certain long-term investment and funding
assets at December 31, 2014. The reduction from the prior year is strategies. If the undistributed earnings of the select international
primarily related to a $44 million valuation allowance reversal for subsidiaries were distributed, additional domestic and interna-
one international reporting entity. During the fourth quarter of tional income tax liabilities would result. However, it is not
2014, the Company concluded that it is more likely than not that practicable to determine the amount of such taxes.
this reporting entity will generate sufficient future taxable income
As of December 31, 2014, Management continues to maintain the
within the indefinite NOL carry-forward period to utilize its net
position with regards to its assertion. During 2014, the Company
deferred tax asset. The future taxable income was driven by the
increased its deferred tax liabilities for international withholding
receipt of favorable tax ruling, which confirmed that it could uti-
taxes by $0.5 million and reduced the domestic deferred income
lize its NOLs by generating taxable income through aircraft
tax liabilities by $7.1 million. As of December 31, 2014, the Com-
leasing.
pany has recorded $1.9 million for international withholding taxes
In the evaluation process related to the net deferred tax assets of and $160.1 million for domestic deferred income tax liabilities
the Company’s other international reporting entities, uncertain- which represents the Company’s best estimate of the tax cost
ties surrounding the international business plans, the recent associated with the potential future repatriation of undistributed
international platform rationalizations, and the ”cumulative losses earnings of its international subsidiaries. The $160.1 million of
in recent years“ have made it challenging to reliably project cumulative deferred income taxes were offset by a corresponding
future taxable income. The primary inputs for the forecast of adjustment to the domestic valuation allowance resulting in no
future taxable income will continue to be identified as the busi- impact to the income tax provision.
ness plans for the international operations evolve, and potential
Liabilities for Unrecognized Tax Benefits
tax planning strategies are identified. Thus, as of this reporting
period, the negative evidence continues to outweigh the positive A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecog-
evidence, and the Company continues to maintain a full valuation nized tax benefits is as follows:
allowance on these entities’ net deferred tax assets.
Unrecognized Tax Benefits (dollars in millions)

Liabilities for
Unrecognized
Tax Benefits Interest /Penalties Grand Total
Balance at December 31, 2013 $ 320.1 $13.3 $ 333.4
Additions for tax positions related to current year 8.5 0.8 9.3
Additions for tax positions related to prior years 1.0 0.8 1.8
Income Tax Audit Settlements (271.2) (0.8) (272.0)
Foreign currency revaluation (4.7) (0.8) (5.5)
Balance at December 31, 2014 $ 53.7 $13.3 $ 67.0
During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company During the year ended December 31, 2014, the Company recog-
recorded a net $266.4 million reduction on uncertain tax posi- nized zero net income tax expense relating to interest and
tions, including interest, penalties, and net of a $5.5 million penalties on its uncertain tax positions, net of a $0.8 million
decrease attributable to foreign currency revaluation. The major- decrease attributable to foreign currency translation. As of
ity of the net reduction related to prior years’ uncertain federal December 31, 2014, the accrued liability for interest and penalties
and state tax positions and primarily comprised of two items: is $13.3 million. The Company recognizes accrued interest and
1) $270.4 million tax benefit associated with an uncertain tax posi- penalties on unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense.
tion taken on a prior-year federal and state tax returns, on which
The entire $53.7 million of unrecognized tax benefits at
the uncertainty no longer exists. 2) $8.8 million increase associ-
December 31, 2014 would lower the Company’s effective tax rate,
ated with an uncertain tax position taken on a pre-acquisition tax
if realized. The Company believes that the total unrecognized tax
status filing position by Direct Capital. The $270.4 million tax
benefits may decrease, in the range of $10 to $15 million, due to
benefit was fully offset by a corresponding increase to the
the settlements of audits and the expiration of various statutes of
domestic valuation allowance, while the $8.8 million increase was
limitations prior to December 31, 2015.
fully offset by corresponding decrease to goodwill included in the
purchase price accounting adjustments related to the Direct
Capital acquisition.
Income Tax Audits On October 16, 2012, the Board of Directors of the Company
approved amendments to freeze the benefits earned under
During the fourth quarter of 2014, the Company substantially
both the Plan and the Supplemental Plan. These actions became
settled with the Internal Revenue Service on examinations for tax-
effective on December 31, 2012. These changes resulted in a
able years ending December 31, 2008 through December 31,
reduction in the pension liability, a gain to AOCI and eliminated
2010 and received the final Revenue Agent Report dated
future service cost accruals. The freeze discontinued credit for
January 15, 2015. The tentative audit settlement resulted in no
services after December 31, 2012; however, accumulated bal-
additional regular or alternative minimum tax liability due. A new
ances under the cash balance formula continue to receive
IRS examination will commence this year for the taxable years
periodic interest, subject to certain government limits. The inter-
ending December 31, 2011 through December 31, 2013.
est credit was 3.63%, 2.47%, and 2.67% for the years ended
On April 3, 2012, the Company and Internal Revenue Service (IRS) December 31, 2014, 2013, and 2012, respectively. Participants
concluded the audit examination of the Company’s U.S. federal under the traditional formula accrued a benefit through
income tax returns for the taxable years ended December 31, December 31, 2012, after which the benefit amount was frozen,
2005 through December 31, 2007. The audit settlement resulted and no further credits will be earned.
in the imposition of a $1.4 million alternative minimum tax that
Employees generally become vested in both plans after complet-
can be used in the future as a credit to offset the Company’s
ing three years of service, or upon attaining normal retirement
regular tax liability.
age, as defined. Upon termination or retirement, vested partici-
The Company and its subsidiaries are under examination in vari- pants under the ”cash balance“ formula have the option of
ous states, provinces and countries for years ranging from 2005 receiving their benefit in a lump sum, deferring their payment to
through 2013. Management does not anticipate that these exami- age 65 or converting their vested benefit to an annuity. Tradi-
nation results will have any material financial impact. tional formula participants can only receive an annuity upon a
qualifying retirement.
NOTE 20 — RETIREMENT, POSTRETIREMENT AND OTHER
Postretirement Benefits
BENEFIT PLANS
CIT provides healthcare and life insurance benefits to eligible
CIT provides various benefit programs, including defined benefit
retired employees. U.S. retiree healthcare and life insurance ben-
retirement and postretirement plans, and defined contribution
efits account for 45.4% and 50.3% of the total postretirement
savings incentive plans. A summary of major plans is provided
benefit obligation, respectively. For most eligible retirees, health-
below.
care is contributory and life insurance is non-contributory. The
Retirement and Postretirement Benefit Plans U.S. retiree healthcare plan pays a stated percentage of most
medical expenses, reduced by a deductible and any payments
Retirement Benefits made by the government and other programs. The U.S. retiree
CIT has both funded and unfunded noncontributory defined ben- healthcare benefit includes a maximum limit on CIT’s share of
efit pension plans covering certain U.S. and non-U.S. employees, costs for employees who retired after January 31, 2002. All post-
each of which is designed in accordance with practices and regu- retirement benefit plans are funded on a pay-as-you-go basis.
lations in the related countries. Retirement benefits under On October 16, 2012, the Board of Directors of the Company
defined benefit pension plans are based on an employee’s age, approved amendments that discontinue benefits under CIT’s
years of service and qualifying compensation. postretirement benefit plans. These changes resulted in a gain
The Company’s largest plan is the CIT Group Inc. Retirement Plan to AOCI and a reduction of future service cost accruals for these
(the ”Plan“), which accounts for 79.4% of the Company’s total plans. CIT no longer offers retiree medical, dental and life insur-
pension projected benefit obligation at December 31, 2014. ance benefits to those who did not meet the eligibility criteria for
these benefits by December 31, 2013. Employees who met the
The Company also maintains a U.S. noncontributory supplemen- eligibility requirements for retiree health insurance by
tal retirement plan, the CIT Group Inc. Supplemental Retirement December 31, 2013 will be offered retiree medical and dental
Plan (the ”Supplemental Plan“), for participants whose benefit in coverage upon retirement. To receive retiree life insurance,
the Plan is subject to Internal Revenue Code limitations, and employees must have met the eligibility criteria for retiree life
an executive retirement plan, which has been closed to new insurance by December 31, 2013 and must have retired from CIT
members since 2006. In aggregate, these two plans account for on or before December 31, 2013.
18.9% of the total pension projected benefit obligation at
December 31, 2014.

Obligations and Funded Status

The following tables set forth changes in benefit obligation, plan assets, funded status and net periodic benefit cost of the retirement
plans and postretirement plans:
Obligations and Funded Status (dollars in millions)

Retirement Benefits Post-Retirement Benefits
2014 2013 2014 2013
Change in benefit obligation
Benefit obligation at beginning of year $ 452.4 $ 480.8 $ 38.8 $ 42.3
Service cost 0.2 0.5 − 0.1
Interest cost 20.2 17.8 1.6 1.6
Plan amendments, curtailments, and settlements (29.5) (1.7) − 0.6
Actuarial loss/(gain) 50.4 (20.1) 0.8 (2.8)
Benefits paid (25.8) (25.3) (4.3) (4.7)
Other(1) (4.3) 0.4 1.7 1.7
Benefit obligation at end of year 463.6 452.4 38.6 38.8
Change in plan assets
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of period 356.9 346.3 − −
Actual return on plan assets 28.5 16.0 − −
Employer contributions 33.7 21.1 2.5 3.0
Plan settlements (29.3) (1.7) − (0.1)
Benefits paid (25.8) (25.3) (4.3) (4.7)
Other(1) (4.1) 0.5 1.8 1.8
Fair value of plan assets at end of period 359.9 356.9 − −
Funded status at end of year(2)(3) $(103.7) $ (95.5) $(38.6) $(38.8)
(1)
Consists of the following: plan participants’ contributions and currency translation adjustments.
(2)
These amounts were recognized as liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2014 and 2013.
(3)
Company assets of $91.0 million and $95.7 million as of December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, related to the non-qualified U.S. executive
retirement plan obligation are not included in plan assets but related liabilities are in the benefit obligation.
During 2013, the Company entered into a buy-in/buy-out transac- in the Statement of Operations during 2014 when the transaction
tion in the United Kingdom with an insurance company that met settlement accounting requirements.
resulted in a full buy-out of the related pension plan in 2014. This
The accumulated benefit obligation for all defined benefit pen-
contract did not meet the settlement requirements in ASC 715,
sion plans was $463.1 million and $449.8 million, at December 31,
Compensation – Retirement Benefits as of the year ended
2014 and 2013, respectively. Information for those defined benefit
December 31, 2013 and resulted in an $8.0 million actuarial loss
plans with an accumulated benefit obligation in excess of plan
that is included in the net actuarial gain of $20.1 million as of
assets is as follows:
December 31, 2013, as the plan’s pension liabilities were valued
at their buy-in value basis. The loss of $8.0 million was recognized
Defined Benefit Plans with an Accumulated Benefit Obligation in Excess of Plan Assets (dollars in millions)
December 31,
2014 2013
Projected benefit obligation $ 463.6 $ 421.4
Accumulated benefit obligation 463.1 418.8
Fair value of plan assets 359.9 325.9
The net periodic benefit cost and other amounts recognized in AOCI consisted of the following:
Net Periodic Benefit Costs and Other Amounts (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012 2014 2013 2012
Service cost $ 0.2 $ 0.5 $ 14.5 $ − $ 0.1 $ 0.8
Interest cost 20.2 17.8 19.9 1.6 1.6 1.9
Expected return on plan assets (20.8) (18.9) (18.4) − − −
Amortization of prior service cost − − − (0.5) (0.6) (0.3)
Amortization of net loss/(gain) 7.5 1.0 2.1 (0.7) (0.2) (0.4)
Settlement and curtailment (gain)/loss 2.9 0.2 (0.6) − (0.3) −
Termination benefits − − 0.3 − − −
Net periodic benefit cost 10.0 0.6 17.8 0.4 0.6 2.0
Other Changes in Plan Assets and Benefit
Obligations Recognized in Other Comprehensive
Income
Net (gain)/loss 42.6 (17.1) (2.6) 1.0 (2.5) 0.6
Prior service cost (credit) − − − − − (7.7)
Amortization, settlement or curtailment recognition
of net gain/(loss) (10.4) (1.1) (2.2) 0.7 0.1 0.4
Amortization, settlement or curtailment recognition
of prior service (cost)/credit − − − 0.5 1.4 0.2
Total recognized in OCI 32.2 (18.2) (4.8) 2.2 (1.0) (6.5)
Total recognized in net periodic benefit cost
and OCI $ 42.2 $(17.6) $ 13.0 $ 2.6 $(0.4) $(4.5)
The amounts recognized in AOCI during the year ended by a 75 basis point increase in the discount rate from 3.75% at
December 31, 2014 were net losses (before taxes) of $32.2 million December 31, 2012 to 4.50% at December 31, 2013.
for retirement benefits. Changes in assumptions, primarily the
The plan changes approved on October 16, 2012 resulted in plan
discount rate and mortality tables, accounted for $46.8 million of
curtailments and amendments which reduced the liability for the
the overall net retirement benefits AOCI losses. The discount rate
affected plans as indicated in the table above. Each of the
for the Plan and the Supplemental Plan decreased 100 basis
amended plans was re-measured at October 1, 2012 using a
points to 3.75% at December 31, 2014, and the rate for the
discount rate of 3.75%.
executive retirement plan decreased 75 basis points to 3.75% at
December 31, 2014. This decline in the discount rate accounted The amounts recognized in AOCI during the year ended
for $33.5 million of the net AOCI loss for retirement benefits. December 31, 2012 were net gains (before taxes) of $4.8 million
Additionally, the adoption of the new Society of Actuaries’ mor- for retirement benefits. The net retirement benefits AOCI gains
tality table and improvement scale RP-2014/SP-2014 resulted in were primarily driven by a reduction in benefit obligations of
an increase in retirement benefit obligations of $10.2 million. $20.4 million resulting from the decision to freeze benefits under
Partially offsetting these losses were the settlement of the UK certain plans, an increase in asset values of $23.8 million due to
pension scheme, which resulted in $8.0 million of loss amortiza- favorable asset performance, and the settlement of obligations of
tion and settlement charges recorded during 2014, and U.S. approximately $8.7 million as a result of the lump sum cash out
asset gains of $7.7 million. The postretirement AOCI net losses offering. These gains were largely offset by changes in assump-
(before taxes) of $2.2 million during the year ended tions, which resulted in an increase in plan obligations of
December 31, 2014 were primarily driven by a 75 basis point approximately $48.1 million.
decrease in the U.S. postretirement plan discount rate from The postretirement AOCI net gains (before taxes) of $6.5 million
4.50% at December 31, 2013 to 3.75% at December 31, 2014. during the year ended December 31, 2012 were primarily driven
The amounts recognized in AOCI during the year ended by the reduction in benefit obligations of $8.3 million primarily
December 31, 2013 were net gains (before taxes) of $18.2 million due to the discontinuation of benefits under certain plans, par-
for retirement benefits. The net retirement benefits AOCI gains tially offset by the impacts of assumption changes of
were primarily driven by a reduction in benefit obligations of approximately $1.8 million.
$17.1 million resulting from changes in assumptions. The discount The discount rate for the majority of the U.S. pension and postre-
rate for the U.S. pension and postretirement plans increased by tirement plans decreased by 75 basis points from 4.50% at
100 basis points from 3.75% at December 31, 2012 to 4.75% at December 31, 2011 to 3.75% at December 31, 2012. The decrease
December 31, 2013 and accounted for the majority of the AOCI in the discount rate assumption represents the majority of the
gains arising from assumption changes. offset to the reduction of the pension and postretirement benefit
The postretirement AOCI net gains (before taxes) of $1.0 million obligations driven by plan changes.
during the year ended December 31, 2013 were primarily driven

Assumptions Expected long-term rate of return assumptions on assets are

based on projected asset allocation and historical and expected
Discount rate assumptions used for pension and post-retirement
future returns for each asset class. Independent analysis of his-
benefit plan accounting reflect prevailing rates available on
torical and projected asset returns, inflation, and interest rates
high-quality, fixed-income debt instruments with maturities that
are provided by the Company’s investment consultants and actu-
match the benefit obligation. The rate of compensation used in
aries as part of the Company’s assumptions process.
the actuarial model is based upon the Company’s long-term
plans for any increases, taking into account both market data and The weighted average assumptions used in the measurement of
historical increases. benefit obligations are as follows:
Weighted Average Assumptions

2014 2013 2014 2013
Discount rate 3.74% 4.59% 3.74% 4.50%
(1) (1)
Rate of compensation increases 0.09% 3.03%
Health care cost trend rate
(1) (1)
Pre-65 7.20% 7.40%
(1) (1)
Post-65 7.30% 7.60%
(1) (1)
Ultimate health care cost trend rate 4.50% 4.50%
(1) (1)
Year ultimate reached 2029 2029
The weighted average assumptions used to determine net periodic benefit costs are as follows:
Weighted Average Assumptions

2014 2013 2014 2013
Discount rate 4.58% 3.81% 4.50% 3.86%
(1) (1)
Expected long-term return on plan assets 5.74% 5.57%
(1)
Rate of compensation increases 3.03% 3.03% 3.00%
(1)
Not applicable.
Healthcare rate trends have a significant effect on healthcare plan There were no direct investments in equity securities of CIT or its
costs. The Company uses both external and historical data to subsidiaries included in pension plan assets in any of the years
determine healthcare rate trends. An increase (decrease) of one- presented.
percentage point in assumed healthcare rate trends would
Plan investments are stated at fair value. Common stock traded
increase (decrease) the postretirement benefit obligation by
on security exchanges as well as mutual funds and exchange
$1.3 million and ($1.1 million), respectively. The service and
traded funds are valued at closing market prices; when no trades
interest cost are not material.
are reported, they are valued at the most recent bid quotation
Plan Assets (Level 1). Investments in Common Collective Trusts and Short
Term Investment Funds are carried at fair value based upon net
CIT maintains a ”Statement of Investment Policies and Objec-
asset value (”NAV“) (Level 2). Funds that invest in alternative
tives“ which specifies guidelines for the investment, supervision
assets that do not have quoted market prices are valued at esti-
and monitoring of pension assets in order to manage the Compa-
mated fair value based on capital and financial statements
ny’s objective of ensuring sufficient funds to finance future
received from fund managers (Level 3). Given the valuation of
retirement benefits. The asset allocation policy allows assets to
Level 3 assets is dependent upon assumptions and expectations,
be invested between 15% to 35% in Equities, 35% to 65% in
management, with the assistance of third party experts, periodi-
Fixed-Income, 15% to 25% in Global Asset Allocations, and 5% to
cally assesses the controls and governance employed by the
10% in Hedge Funds. The asset allocation follows a Liability
investment firms that manage Level 3 assets.
Driven Investing (”LDI“) strategy. The objective of LDI is to allo-
cate assets in a manner that their movement will more closely
track the movement in the benefit liability. The policy provides
specific guidance on asset class objectives, fund manager guide-
lines and identification of prohibited and restricted transactions.
It is reviewed periodically by the Company’s Investment Commit-
tee and external investment consultants.
Members of the Investment Committee are appointed by the
Chief Executive Officer and include the Chief Financial Officer as
the committee Chairman, and other senior executives.
The tables below set forth asset fair value measurements.

Fair Value Measurements (dollars in millions)
Total Fair
December 31, 2014 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Value
Cash $ 5.8 $ − $ − $ 5.8
Mutual Fund 72.0 − − 72.0
Common Collective Trust − 200.1 − 200.1
Common Stock 19.6 − − 19.6
Exchange Traded Funds 25.7 − − 25.7
Short Term Investment Fund − 1.5 − 1.5
Partnership − − 9.7 9.7
Hedge Fund − − 25.5 25.5
Insurance Contracts − − − −
$123.1 $201.6 $35.2 $359.9
December 31, 2013
Cash $ 0.2 $ − $ − $ 0.2
Mutual Fund 70.4 − − 70.4
Common Collective Trust − 179.3 − 179.3
Common Stock 18.1 − − 18.1
Exchange Traded Funds 21.2 − − 21.2
Short Term Investment Fund − 4.1 − 4.1
Partnership − − 9.7 9.7
Hedge Fund − − 22.9 22.9
Insurance Contracts − − 31.0 31.0
$109.9 $183.4 $63.6 $356.9
The table below sets forth changes in the fair value of the Plan’s Level 3 assets for the year ended December 31, 2014:
Fair Value of Level 3 Assets (dollars in millions)

Total Partnership Hedge Funds Insurance Contracts
December 31, 2013 $ 63.6 $9.7 $22.9 $ 31.0
Realized and Unrealized Gains (Losses) 0.1 − 0.1 −
Purchases, sales, and settlements, net (28.5) − 2.5 (31.0)
Net Transfers into and/or out of Level 3 − − − −
December 31, 2014 $ 35.2 $9.7 $25.5 $ −
Change in Unrealized Gains (Losses) for Investments still held at
December 31, 2014 $ 0.1 $ − $ 0.1 $ −
Contributions to finance future retirement benefits and are tax deductible. CIT
currently does not expect to have a required minimum contribu-
The Company’s policy is to make contributions so that they
tion to the U.S. Retirement Plan during 2015. For all other plans,
exceed the minimum required by laws and regulations, are con-
CIT currently expects to contribute $9.2 million during 2015.
sistent with the Company’s objective of ensuring sufficient funds

Estimated Future Benefit Payments using current actuarial assumptions. Actual benefit payments may
differ from projected benefit payments.
The following table depicts benefits projected to be paid from
plan assets or from the Company’s general assets calculated
Projected Benefits (dollars in millions)

Gross
Retirement Postretirement Medicare
For the years ended December 31, Benefits Benefits Subsidy
2015 $ 26.6 $ 3.0 $0.3
2016 26.3 3.0 0.3
2017 25.7 3.0 0.4
2018 26.4 2.9 0.4
2019 26.9 2.8 0.4
2020-2024 135.0 12.8 1.0
Savings Incentive Plan and retention stock and unit awards and the remaining related to
stock purchases. Compensation expense related to equity-based
CIT has a number of defined contribution retirement plans cover-
awards included $52.5 million in 2013 and $41.9 million in 2012.
ing certain of its U.S. and non-U.S. employees designed in
accordance with conditions and practices in the respective coun- Employee Stock Purchase Plan
tries. The U.S. plan, which qualifies under section 401(k) of the
In December 2010, the Company adopted the CIT Group Inc.
Internal Revenue Code, is the largest and accounts for 85% of the
2011 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the ”ESPP“), which was
Company’s total defined contribution retirement expense for the
approved by shareholders in May 2011. Eligibility for participation
year ended December 31, 2014. Generally, employees may con-
in the ESPP includes employees of CIT and its participating sub-
tribute a portion of their eligible compensation, as defined,
sidiaries who are customarily employed for at least 20 hours per
subject to regulatory limits and plan provisions, and the Com-
week, except that any employees designated as highly compen-
pany matches these contributions up to a threshold. On
sated are not eligible to participate in the ESPP. The ESPP is
October 16, 2012, the Board of Directors of the Company
available to employees in the United States and to certain inter-
approved plan enhancements which provide participants with
national employees. Under the ESPP, CIT is authorized to issue
additional company contributions in the plan effective January 1,
up to 2,000,000 shares of common stock to eligible employees.
2013. The cost of these plans totaled $21.6 million, $24.9 million
Eligible employees can choose to have between 1% and 10% of
and $16.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013,
their base salary withheld to purchase shares quarterly, at a pur-
and 2012, respectively.
chase price equal to 85% of the fair market value of CIT common
Stock-Based Compensation stock on the last business day of the quarterly offering period.
The amount of common stock that may be purchased by a par-
In December 2009, the Company adopted the Amended and
ticipant through the ESPP is generally limited to $25,000 per year.
Restated CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan (the ”LTIP“),
A total of 31,497 and 25,490 shares were purchased under the
which provides for grants of stock-based awards to employees,
plan in 2014 and 2013, respectively.
executive officers and directors, and replaced the Predecessor
CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan (the ”Prior Plan“). The Restricted Stock / Performance Units
number of shares of common stock that may be issued for all pur-
Under the LTIP, Restricted Stock Units (”RSUs“) are awarded at no
poses under the LTIP is 10,526,316.
cost to the recipient upon grant. RSUs are generally granted
Compensation expense related to equity-based awards are mea- annually at the discretion of the Company, but may also be
sured and recorded in accordance with ASC 718, Stock granted during the year to new hires or for retention or other pur-
Compensation. The fair value of equity-based and stock purchase poses. RSUs granted to employees and members of the Board
equity awards is measured at the date of grant using a Black- during 2014 and 2013 generally were scheduled to vest either
Scholes option pricing model, and the fair value of restricted one third per year for three years or 100% after three years. RSUs
stock and unit awards is based on the fair market value of CIT’s granted to employees during 2014 were also subject to
common stock on the date of grant. Compensation expense is performance-hurdle. Certain vested stock awards were scheduled
recognized over the vesting period (requisite service period), to remain subject to transfer restrictions through the first anniver-
which is generally three years for restricted stock/units, under the sary of the grant date for members of the Board who elected to
graded vesting method, whereby each vesting tranche of the receive stock in lieu of cash compensation for their retainer.
award is amortized separately as if each were a separate award. Vested stock salary awards granted to a limited number of execu-
Valuation assumptions for new equity awards are established at tives were scheduled to remain subject to transfer restrictions
the start of each fiscal year. through the first and/or third anniversaries of the grant date. Cer-
Operating expenses includes $48.8 million of compensation tain RSUs granted to directors, and in limited instances to
expense related to equity-based awards granted to employees or employees, are designed to settle in cash and are accounted for
members of the Board of Directors for the year ended as ”liability“ awards as prescribed by ASC 718. The values of
December 31, 2014, including $48.5 million related to restricted
these cash-settled RSUs are re-measured at the end of each threshold level of performance is not achieved for either perfor-
reporting period until the award is settled. mance measure, then no portion of the PSU target will be
payable. Achievement against either performance measures is
During 2014, 2013 and 2012, Performance Stock Units (”PSUs“)
calculated independently of the other performance measure and
were awarded to certain senior executives. The awards become
each measure is weighted equally.
payable only if CIT achieves certain volume and margin targets
over a three-year performance period. PSU share payouts may The fair value of restricted stock and RSUs that vested and settled
increase or decrease from the target grant based on performance in stock during 2014, 2013 and 2012 was $42.8 million, $38.6 mil-
against these pre-established performance measures, with the lion and $10.8 million, respectively. The fair value of RSUs that
actual number of shares ranging from 0% to a maximum of 150% vested and settled in cash during 2014, 2013 and 2012 was $0.2
of the target grant for PSUs granted in 2014 and 2013, and a million, $0.4 million and $0.4 million, respectively.
maximum of 200% of the target grant for PSUs granted in 2012.
The following tables summarize restricted stock and RSU activity
Both performance measures have a minimum threshold level of
for 2014 and 2013:
performance that must be achieved to trigger any payout; if the
Stock and Cash — Settled Awards Outstanding

Stock-Settled Awards Cash-Settled Awards
Weighted Weighted
Average Average
Number of Grant Date Number of Grant Date
Shares Value Shares Value
December 31, 2014
Unvested at beginning of period 2,219,463 $41.51 5,508 $41.93
Vested / unsettled Stock Salary at beginning of period 15,066 41.46 2,165 39.05
PSUs – granted to employees 138,685 47.77 − −
RSUs – granted to employees 905,674 47.71 − −
RSUs – granted to directors 35,683 43.07 4,046 42.01
Forfeited / cancelled (107,445) 43.87 − −
Vested / settled awards (913,387) 41.70 (4,284) 41.20
Vested / unsettled awards (25,255) 40.38 (1,082) 39.05
Unvested at end of period 2,268,484 $44.22 6,353 $41.99
December 31, 2013
Unvested at beginning of period 1,883,292 $40.15 9,677 $39.56
Vested / unsettled Stock Salary at beginning of period 114,119 38.20 3,247 39.05
PSUs – granted to employees 111,046 42.55 − −
RSUs – granted to employees 1,015,861 42.76 − −
RSUs – granted to directors 23,551 44.27 2,549 44.14
Forfeited / cancelled (40,697) 41.62 − −
Vested / settled awards (872,643) 39.81 (7,800) 39.31
Vested / unsettled Stock Salary Awards (15,066) 41.46 (2,165) 39.05
Unvested at end of period 2,219,463 $41.51 5,508 $41.93

NOTE 21 — COMMITMENTS
The accompanying table summarizes credit-related commitments, as well as purchase and funding commitments:
Commitments (dollars in millions)

December 31, 2014
December 31,
Due to Expire 2013
Within After Total Total
One Year One Year Outstanding Outstanding
Financing Commitments
Financing and leasing assets $ 729.4 $ 4,018.5 $ 4,747.9 $ 4,325.8
Letters of credit
Standby letters of credit 23.4 336.7 360.1 302.3
Other letters of credit 28.3 − 28.3 35.9
Guarantees
Deferred purchase agreements 1,854.4 − 1,854.4 1,771.6
Guarantees, acceptances and other recourse obligations 2.8 − 2.8 3.9
Purchase and Funding Commitments
Aerospace manufacturer purchase commitments 945.7 9,874.7 10,820.4 8,744.5
Rail and other manufacturer purchase commitments 943.0 380.2 1,323.2 1,054.0
Financing commitments, referred to as loan commitments or lines Letters of Credit

of credit, reflect CIT’s agreements to lend to its customers, sub-
In the normal course of meeting the needs of clients, CIT some-
ject to the customers’ compliance with contractual obligations.
times enters into agreements to provide financing and letters of
Included in the table above are commitments that have been
credit. Standby letters of credit obligate the issuer of the letter of
extended to and accepted by customers, clients or agents, but
credit to pay the beneficiary if a client on whose behalf the letter
on which the criteria for funding have not been completed of
of credit was issued does not meet its obligation. These financial
$355 million at December 31, 2014 and $548 million at
instruments generate fees and involve, to varying degrees, ele-
December 31, 2013. Financing commitments also include credit
ments of credit risk in excess of amounts recognized in the
line agreements to Commercial Services clients that are cancel-
Consolidated Balance Sheets. To minimize potential credit risk,
lable by us only after a notice period. The notice period is
CIT generally requires collateral and in some cases additional
typically 90 days or less. The amount available under these credit
forms of credit support from the client.
lines, net of amount of receivables assigned to us, is $112 million
at December 31, 2014. As financing commitments may not be Deferred Purchase Agreements
fully drawn, may expire unused, may be reduced or cancelled at
A Deferred Purchase Agreement (”DPA“) is provided in conjunc-
the customer’s request, and may require the customer to be in
tion with factoring, whereby CIT provides a client with credit
compliance with certain conditions, total commitment amounts
protection for trade receivables without purchasing the receiv-
do not necessarily reflect actual future cash flow requirements.
ables. The trade receivable terms are generally sixty days or less.
The table above includes approximately $1.3 billion of undrawn If the client’s customer is unable to pay an undisputed receivable
financing commitments at December 31, 2014 and $0.9 billion at solely as the result of credit risk, then CIT purchases the receiv-
December 31, 2013 for instances where the customer is not in able from the client. The outstanding amount in the table above
compliance with contractual obligations, and therefore CIT does is the maximum potential exposure that CIT would be required to
not have the contractual obligation to lend. pay under all DPAs. This maximum amount would only occur if all
receivables subject to DPAs default in the manner described
At December 31, 2014, substantially all undrawn financing com-
above, thereby requiring CIT to purchase all such receivables
mitments were senior facilities. Most of the Company’s undrawn
from the DPA clients.
and available financing commitments are in the Corporate
Finance division of NACF. The table above includes $1,775 million of DPA credit protection
at December 31, 2014, related to receivables which have been
The table above excludes uncommitted revolving credit facilities
presented to us for credit protection after shipment of goods has
extended by Commercial Services to its clients for working capi-
occurred and the customer has been invoiced. The table also
tal purposes. In connection with these facilities, Commercial
includes $79 million available under DPA credit line agreements,
Services has the sole discretion throughout the duration of these
net of amount of DPA credit protection provided at
facilities to determine the amount of credit that may be made
December 31, 2014. The DPA credit line agreements specify a
available to its clients at any time and whether to honor any spe-
contractually committed amount of DPA credit protection and are
cific advance requests made by its clients under these credit
cancellable by us only after a notice period. The notice period is
facilities.
typically 90 days or less.
The methodology used to determine the DPA liability is similar to pending, taken together, will not have a material adverse effect
the methodology used to determine the allowance for loan losses on the Company’s financial condition, but may be material to the
associated with the finance receivables, which reflects embedded Company’s operating results or cash flows for any particular
losses based on various factors, including expected losses period, depending in part on its operating results for that period.
reflecting the Company’s internal customer and facility credit rat- The actual results of resolving such matters may be substantially
ings. The liability recorded in Other Liabilities related to the DPAs higher than the amounts reserved.
totaled $5.2 million and $6.0 million at December 31, 2014 and
For certain Litigation matters in which the Company is involved,
December 31, 2013, respectively.
the Company is able to estimate a range of reasonably possible
Purchase and Funding Commitments losses in excess of established reserves and insurance. For other
matters for which a loss is probable or reasonably possible, such
CIT’s purchase commitments relate primarily to purchases of
an estimate cannot be determined. For Litigation where losses
commercial aircraft and rail equipment. Commitments to pur-
are reasonably possible, management currently estimates the
chase new commercial aircraft are predominantly with Airbus
aggregate range of reasonably possible losses as up to $85 mil-
Industries (”Airbus“), The Boeing Company (”Boeing“), and
lion in excess of established reserves and insurance related to
Embraer S.A. (”Embraer“). CIT may also commit to purchase an
those matters, if any. This estimate represents reasonably pos-
aircraft directly from an airline. Aerospace equipment purchases
sible losses (in excess of established reserves and insurance) over
are contracted for specific models, using baseline aircraft specifi-
the life of such Litigation, which may span a currently indetermin-
cations at fixed prices, which reflect discounts from fair market
able number of years, and is based on information currently
purchase prices prevailing at the time of commitment. The deliv-
available as of December 31, 2014. The matters underlying the
ery price of an aircraft may change depending on final
estimated range will change from time to time, and actual results
specifications. Equipment purchases are recorded at the delivery
may vary significantly from this estimate.
date. The estimated commitment amounts in the preceding table
are based on contracted purchase prices reduced for pre-delivery Those Litigation matters for which an estimate is not reasonably
payments to date and exclude buyer furnished equipment possible or as to which a loss does not appear to be reasonably
selected by the lessee. Pursuant to existing contractual commit- possible, based on current information, are not included within
ments, 152 aircraft remain to be purchased from Airbus, Boeing this estimated range and, therefore, this estimated range does
and Embraer at December 31, 2014. Aircraft deliveries are sched- not represent the Company’s maximum loss exposure.
uled periodically through 2020. Commitments exclude unexercised The foregoing statements about CIT’s Litigation are based on the
options to order additional aircraft. Aerospace purchase commit- Company’s judgments, assumptions, and estimates and are nec-
ments also include $0.2 billion of equipment to be purchased in 2015 essarily subjective and uncertain. Several of the Company’s
pursuant to sale and lease-back agreements with airlines. Litigation matters are described below.
The Company’s rail business entered into commitments to pur-
chase railcars from multiple manufacturers. At December 31, LAC-MÉGANTIC, QUEBEC DERAILMENT
2014, approximately 11,000 railcars remain to be purchased from
On July 6, 2013, a freight train including five locomotives and
manufacturers with deliveries through 2016. Rail equipment pur-
seventy-two tank cars carrying crude oil derailed in the town of
chase commitments are at fixed prices subject to price increases
Lac-Mégantic, Quebec. Nine of the tank cars were owned by The
for certain materials.
CIT Group/Equipment Financing, Inc. (”CIT/EF“) (a wholly-owned
Other vendor purchase commitments primarily relate to Equip- subsidiary of the Company) and leased to Western Petroleum
ment Finance. Company (”WPC“), a subsidiary of World Fuel Services Corp.
(”WFS“). Two of the locomotives are owned by CIT/EF and were
NOTE 22 — CONTINGENCIES leased to Montreal, Maine & Atlantic Railway, Ltd. (”MMA“), the
railroad operating the freight train at the time of the derailment,
Litigation a subsidiary of Rail World, Inc.
CIT is currently involved, and from time to time in the future may The derailment was followed by explosions and fire, which
be involved, in a number of judicial, regulatory, and arbitration resulted in the deaths of over forty people and an unknown num-
proceedings relating to matters that arise in connection with the ber of injuries, the destruction of more than thirty buildings in
conduct of its business (collectively, ”Litigation“). In view of the Lac-Mégantic, and the release of crude oil on land and into the
inherent difficulty of predicting the outcome of Litigation matters, Chaudiègere River. The extent of the property and environmental
particularly when such matters are in their early stages or where damage has not yet been determined. Twenty lawsuits have been
the claimants seek indeterminate damages, CIT cannot state with filed in Illinois by representatives of the deceased in connection
confidence what the eventual outcome of the pending Litigation with the derailment. The Company is named as a defendant in
will be, what the timing of the ultimate resolution of these mat- seven of the Illinois lawsuits, together with 13 other defendants,
ters will be, or what the eventual loss, fines, or penalties related including WPC, MMA (who has since been dismissed without
to each pending matter will be, if any. In accordance with appli- prejudice as a result of its chapter 11 bankruptcy filing on
cable accounting guidance, CIT establishes reserves for Litigation August 7, 2013), and the lessors of the other locomotives and
when those matters present loss contingencies as to which it is tank cars. Liability could be joint and several among some or all
both probable that a loss will occur and the amount of such loss of the defendants. All but two of these cases have been consoli-
can be reasonably estimated. Based on currently available infor- dated in the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of Illinois
mation, CIT believes that the results of Litigation that is currently and transferred to the U.S. District Court in Maine. The Company

has been named as an additional defendant in a pending class leasing services for tax years 2006 – 2011. Instead, Banco CIT
action in the Superior Court of Quebec, Canada. Other cases paid the ISS tax to Barueri, the municipality in which it is domi-
may be filed in U.S. and Canadian courts. The plaintiffs in the ciled in São Paulo, Brazil. The disputed issue is whether the ISS
pending U.S. and Canadian actions assert claims of negligence tax should be paid to the municipality in which the leasing com-
and strict liability based upon alleged design defect against the pany is located or the municipality in which the services were
Company in connection with the CIT/EF tank cars. The Company rendered or the customer is located. One of the pending ISS tax
has rights of indemnification and defense against its lessees, matters was resolved in favor of Banco CIT in April 2014. The
WPC and MMA (a debtor in bankruptcy), and also has rights as an amounts claimed by the taxing authorities of Itu and Cascavel
additional insured under liability coverage maintained by the les- collectively for open tax assessments and penalties are approxi-
sees. On July 28, 2014, the Company commenced a lawsuit mately 454,000 Reais (approximately $171,000). Favorable legal
against WPC in the U.S. District Court in the District of Minnesota precedent in a similar tax appeal has been issued by Brazil’s high-
to enforce its rights of indemnification and defense. In addition est court resolving the conflict between municipalities.
to its indemnification and insurance rights against its lessees, the
ICMS Tax Appeals
Company and its subsidiaries maintain contingent and general
liability insurance for claims of this nature, and the Company and Notices of infraction were received relating to the payment of
its insurers are working cooperatively with respect to these Imposto sobre Circulaco de Mercadorias e Servicos (”ICMS“)
claims. taxes charged by states in connection with the importation of
equipment. The state of São Paulo claims that Banco CIT should
The Lac-Mégantic derailment triggered a number of regulatory
have paid it ICMS tax for tax years 2006 – 2009 because Banco
investigations and actions. The Transportation Safety Board of
CIT, the purchaser, is located in São Paulo. Instead, Banco CIT
Canada issued its final report on the cause(s) of the derailment in
paid ICMS tax to the states of Espirito Santo, Espirito Santa Cate-
September 2014. In addition, Quebec’s Environment Ministry has
rina, and Alagoas, where the imported equipment arrived. A
issued an order to WFS, WPC, MMA, and Canadian Pacific Rail-
recent regulation issued by São Paulo in December 2013 reaffirms
way (which allegedly subcontracted with MMA) to pay for the full
a 2009 agreement by São Paulo to conditionally recognize ICMS
cost of environmental clean-up and damage assessment related
tax payments made to Espirito Santo. One of the pending notices
to the derailment.
of infraction against Banco CIT related to taxes paid to Espirito
As the Company is unable to predict the outcome of the forego- Santo was extinguished in May 2014. Another assessment related
ing legal proceedings or whether and the extent to which to taxes paid to Espirito Santo in the amount of 63.6 million Reais
additional lawsuits or claims will be brought against the Company ($23.9 million) was upheld in a ruling issued by the administrative
or its subsidiaries, the total damages have not been quantified, court in May 2014. That ruling has been appealed. Petitions seek-
there are a large number of parties named as defendants, and ing recognition of the taxes paid to Espirito Santo have been
the extent to which resulting liability will be assessed against filed with respect to the pending notices of infraction. Petitions
other parties and their financial ability to bear such responsibili- were filed in a general amnesty program regarding all but one of
ties is unknown, the Company cannot reasonably estimate the the assessments related to taxes paid to Santa Caterina and
amount or range of loss that may be incurred in connection with Alagoas. Those petitions have resulted in the extinguishment of
the derailment. The Company is vigorously defending the claims all but one of the Santa Caterina and Alagoas assessments. The
that have been asserted, including pursuing its rights under amounts claimed by São Paulo collectively for open tax assess-
indemnification agreements and insurance policies. MMA’s U.S. ments and penalties are approximately 68.5 million Reais
bankruptcy trustee, together with its Canadian bankruptcy moni- (approximately $25.8 million) for goods imported into the state of
tor, is engaged in negotiations in pursuit of a global or close to Espirito Santo from 2006 – 2009 and the state of Alagoas in 2008.
global settlement with the various parties in the various pending
A notice of infraction was received relating to São Paulo’s chal-
lawsuits. CIT has reached the terms of a settlement with the MMA
lenge of the ICMS tax rate paid by Banco CIT for tax years
US bankruptcy trustee, which settlement remains subject to docu-
2004 – 2007. São Paulo alleges that Banco CIT paid a lower rate
mentation and court approval. The settlement will not have a
of ICMS tax on imported equipment than was required (8.8%
material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition or
instead of 18%). Banco CIT challenged the notice of infraction
results of operations.
and was partially successful based upon the type of equipment
imported. Banco CIT has commenced a judicial proceeding chal-
BRAZILIAN TAX MATTERS
lenging the unfavorable portion of the administrative ruling. The
Banco Commercial Investment Trust do Brasil S.A. (”Banco CIT“), amount claimed by São Paulo for tax assessments and penalties
CIT’s Brazilian bank subsidiary, is pursuing a number of tax is approximately 4 million Reais (approximately $1.5 million).
appeals relating to disputed local tax assessments on leasing ser-
The current potential aggregate exposure in taxes, fines and
vices and importation of equipment. The disputes primarily
interest for the ISS and the ICMS tax matters is approximately 73
involve questions of whether the correct taxing authorities were
million Reais (approximately $27.5 million).
paid and whether the proper tax rate was applied.
ISS Tax Appeals
Notices of infraction were received relating to the payment of
Imposto sobre Serviços (”ISS“), charged by municipalities in con-
nection with services. The Brazilian municipalities of Itu and
Cascavel claim that Banco CIT should have paid them ISS tax on
NOTE 23 —LEASE COMMITMENTS tions with an aggregate value of approximately $0.6 billion and is
responsible for arranging future aircraft acquisitions, negotiating
Lease Commitments leases, servicing the aircraft and administering the entities. CIT
The following table presents future minimum rental payments also made and maintains a minority equity investment in TC-CIT
under non-cancellable long-term lease agreements for premises Aviation. CTL made and maintains a majority equity interest in
and equipment at December 31, 2014: the joint venture and will be a lender to the companies.
Future Minimum Rentals (dollars in millions) The combination of investments in and loans to non-consolidated
Years Ended December 31, entities represents the Company’s maximum exposure to loss, as
the Company does not provide guarantees or other forms of
2015 $ 31.3
indemnification to non-consolidated entities.
2016 29.5
Certain shareholders of CIT provide investment management,
2017 25.7
banking and investment banking services in the normal course of
2018 24.5
business.
2019 21.8
Thereafter 37.4 NOTE 25 — BUSINESS SEGMENT INFORMATION
Total $170.2
Management’s Policy in Identifying Reportable Segments
In addition to fixed lease rentals, leases generally require pay-
ment of maintenance expenses and real estate taxes, both of CIT’s reportable segments are comprised of divisions that are
which are subject to escalation provisions. Minimum payments aggregated into segments primarily based upon industry catego-
include $72.4 million ($12.2 million for 2015) which will be ries, geography, target markets and customers served, and, to a
recorded against the facility exiting liability when paid and there- lesser extent, the core competencies relating to product origina-
fore will not be recorded as rental expense in future periods. tion, distribution methods, operations and servicing and the
Minimum payments have not been reduced by minimum sub- nature of their regulatory environment. This segment reporting is
lease rentals of $57.5 million due in the future under non- consistent with the presentation of financial information to
cancellable subleases which will be recorded against the facility management.
exiting liability when received. See Note 27 — ”Severance and
Types of Products and Services
Facility Exiting Liabilities“ for the liability related to closing
facilities. Effective January 1, 2014, Management changed its operating
segments to (i) realign and simplify its businesses and organiza-
Rental expense for premises, net of sublease income (including
tional structure, (ii) streamline and consolidate certain business
restructuring charges from exiting office space), and equipment,
processes to achieve greater operating efficiencies, and (iii) lever-
was as follows.
age CIT’s operational capabilities for the benefit of its clients and
Years Ended December 31, customers. Effective January 1, 2014, CIT manages its business
(dollars in millions) 2014 2013 2012 and reports financial results in three operating segments:
Premises $20.1 $19.0 $19.8 (1) Transportation & International Finance; (2) North American
Equipment 3.4 3.0 2.9 Commercial Finance; and (3) Non-Strategic Portfolios.
Total $23.5 $22.0 $22.7 The change in segment reporting did not affect CIT’s historical
consolidated results of operations. The discussions below reflect
NOTE 24 — CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED the new reporting segments; all prior period comparisons have
TRANSACTIONS been conformed and are consistent with the presentation of
financial information to management.
CIT invests in various trusts, partnerships, and limited liability cor-
porations established in conjunction with structured financing TIF offers secured lending and leasing products to midsize and
transactions of equipment, power and infrastructure projects. larger companies across the aerospace, rail and maritime indus-
CIT’s interests in these entities were entered into in the ordinary tries, as well as international finance, which includes corporate
course of business. Other assets included approximately $73 mil- lending and equipment financing businesses in China and the
lion and $65 million at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively, U.K. Revenues generated by TIF include rents collected on leased
of investments in non-consolidated entities relating to such trans- assets, interest on loans, fees, and gains from assets sold.
actions that are accounted for under the equity or cost methods. NACF offers secured lending as well as other financial products
The increase reflects the investment in new joint ventures. and services predominately to small and midsize companies in
During 2014, the Company formed two joint ventures (collectively the U.S. and Canada. These include secured revolving lines of
”TC-CIT Aviation“) between CIT Aerospace and Century Tokyo credit and term loans, leases, accounts receivable credit protec-
Leasing Corporation (”CTL“). CIT records its net investment tion, accounts receivable collection, import and export financing,
under the equity method of accounting. Under the terms of the factoring, debtor-in-possession and turnaround financing and
agreements, TC-CIT Aviation will acquire commercial aircraft that receivable advisory services. Revenues generated by NACF
will be leased to airlines around the globe. Initially, CIT Aero- include interest earned on loans, rents collected on leased
space expects to sell 14 commercial aircraft (of which 9 were assets, fees and other revenue from leasing activities and capital
completed at December 31, 2014) to TC-CIT Aviation in transac-

markets transactions, and commissions earned on factoring and items include loss on debt extinguishments, costs associated with
related activities. excess cash liquidity (Interest Expense), mark-to-market adjust-
ments on non-qualifying derivatives (Other Income) and
NSP consists of portfolios that we no longer consider strategic.
restructuring charges for severance and facilities exit activities
At December 31, 2014 these consisted primarily of equipment
(Operating Expenses).
financing portfolios in Mexico and Brazil, both of which were
under separate contracts of sale.
Segment Profit and Assets
Certain activities are not attributed to operating segments and
are included in Corporate & Other. Some of the more significant
Segment Pre-tax Income (Loss) (dollars in millions)

International Commercial Non-Strategic
Finance Finance Portfolios Corporate & Other Total CIT
For the year ended December 31, 2014
Interest income $ 289.4 $ 832.4 $ 90.5 $ 14.2 $ 1,226.5
Interest expense (650.4) (285.4) (82.1) (68.3) (1,086.2)
Provision for credit losses (38.3) (62.0) 0.4 (0.2) (100.1)
Rental income on operating leases 1,959.9 97.4 35.7 − 2,093.0
Other income 69.9 318.0 (57.6) (24.9) 305.4
Depreciation on operating lease equipment (519.6) (81.7) (14.4) − (615.7)
Maintenance and other operating lease
expenses (196.8) − − − (196.8)
Operating expenses (301.9) (499.7) (74.6) (65.6) (941.8)
Loss on debt extinguishment − − − (3.5) (3.5)
Income (loss) from continuing operations before
(provision) benefit for income taxes $ 612.2 $ 319.0 $(102.1) $(148.3) $ 680.8
Select Period End Balances
Loans $ 3,558.9 $15,936.0 $ 0.1 $ − $19,495.0
Credit balances of factoring clients − (1,622.1) − − (1,622.1)
Assets held for sale 815.2 22.8 380.1 − 1,218.1
Operating lease equipment, net 14,665.2 265.2 − − 14,930.4
Interest income $ 254.9 $ 828.6 $ 157.2 $ 14.5 $ 1,255.2
Interest expense (585.5) (284.3) (130.2) (60.9) (1,060.9)
Provision for credit losses (18.7) (35.5) (10.8) 0.1 (64.9)
Other income 82.2 306.5 (14.6) 7.2 381.3
expenses (163.0) − (0.1) − (163.1)
(provision) benefit for income taxes $ 563.7 $ 364.7 $ (62.8) $(131.4) $ 734.2
Loans $ 3,494.4 $14,693.1 $ 441.7 $ − $18,629.2
Assets held for sale 158.5 38.2 806.7 − 1,003.4
Operating lease equipment, net 12,778.5 240.5 16.4 − 13,035.4
Segment Pre-tax Income (Loss) (dollars in millions) (continued)

Finance Finance Portfolios Corporate & Other Total CIT
Interest income $ 218.2 $ 976.5 $ 180.3 $ 19.0 $ 1,394.0
Interest expense (1,331.5) (750.9) (262.4) (320.9) (2,665.7)
Provision for credit losses (14.5) (44.0) 7.3 (0.2) (51.4)
Other income 65.8 555.2 (9.1) 2.8 614.7
expenses (139.3) − (0.1) − (139.4)
Loss on debt extinguishments − − − (61.2) (61.2)
(provision) benefit for income taxes $ (166.2) $ 267.3 $ (125.0) $(391.5) $ (415.4)
Loans $ 2,556.5 $13,084.4 $1,512.2 $ − $17,153.1
Assets held for sale 173.6 42.1 429.1 − 644.8
Operating lease equipment, net 12,178.0 150.9 82.8 − 12,411.7
Geographic Information
The following table presents information by major geographic region based upon the location of the Company’s legal entities.
Geographic Regions (dollars in millions)

Income (loss)
Income (loss) from continuing
from continuing operations before
Total Revenue operations before attribution of
from continuing benefit (provision) noncontrolling
Total Assets (3) operations for income taxes interests
U.S. (3) 2014 $34,985.8 $2,174.3 $ 342.4 $ 740.9
2013 $34,121.0 $2,201.7 $ 374.2 $ 354.6
2012 $30,829.1 $2,464.2 $(1,004.3) $(1,046.1)
Europe 2014 $ 7,950.5 $ 857.7 $ 161.2 $ 175.4
2013 $ 7,679.6 $ 807.4 $ 167.3 $ 121.5
2012 $ 7,274.9 $ 822.7 $ 224.7 $ 195.4
(1) (2)
Other foreign 2014 $ 4,943.7 $ 592.9 $ 177.2 $ 162.4
2013 $ 5,338.4 $ 524.8 $ 192.7 $ 174.2
2012 $ 5,908.0 $ 622.6 $ 364.2 $ 318.6
Total consolidated 2014 $47,880.0 $3,624.9 $ 680.8 $ 1,078.7
2013 $47,139.0 $3,533.9 $ 734.2 $ 650.3
2012 $44,012.0 $3,909.5 $ (415.4) $ (532.1)
(1)
Includes Canada region results which had income before income taxes of $72.6 million in 2014, $79.5 million in 2013 and $164.3 million in 2012 and income
before noncontrolling interests of $57.4 million in 2014, $69.2 million in 2013 and $112.0 million in 2012.
(2)
Includes Caribbean region results which had income before income taxes of $161.0 million in 2014, $103.3 million in 2013 and $203.5 million in 2012 and
income before noncontrolling interests of $161.7 million in 2014, $103.4 million in 2013 and $199.7 million in 2012.
(3)
Includes Assets of discontinued operation of $3,821.4 million at December 31, 2013, and $4,202.6 million at December 31, 2012. The Assets of discontinued
operation are in the U.S. There were no Assets of discontinued operation at December 31, 2014.

NOTE 26 — GOODWILL AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS

The following tables summarize goodwill and intangible assets, net balances by segment:
Goodwill (dollars in millions)

Finance Finance Portfolios Total
December 31, 2012 $183.1 $151.5 $ 11.3 $345.9
Activity − − (11.3) (11.3)
December 31, 2013 183.1 151.5 − 334.6
Additions, Activity(1) 68.9 167.8 − 236.7
December 31, 2014 $252.0 $319.3 $ − $571.3
(1)
Includes adjustments related to purchase accounting and foreign exchange translation.
approximately $170 million of goodwill. The assets acquired

Goodwill balances as of December 31, 2013 represented the
included finance receivables of approximately $540 million,
excess of reorganization equity value over the fair value of tan-
along with existing secured debt of $487 million. In addition,
gible and identifiable intangible assets, net of liabilities recorded
intangible assets of approximately $12 million were recorded
in conjunction with FSA. Following the change to the business
relating mainly to the valuation of existing customer relationships
segments as discussed in Note 25 — Business Segment Informa-
and trade names.
tion, effective January 1, 2014, this goodwill was reallocated to
the Company’s TIF, NACF and NSP segments. The balance was Once goodwill has been assigned, it no longer retains its associa-
further allocated to reporting units within the segments, Trans- tion with a particular event or acquisition, and all of the activities
portation Finance (TIF), Commercial Services (NACF), Equipment within a reporting unit, whether acquired or internally generated,
Finance (NACF) and NSP, based on the respective reporting unit’s are available to support the value of the goodwill.
estimated fair value of equity. The Company evaluated goodwill The Company periodically reviews and evaluates its goodwill and
for impairment immediately before and after the reallocation of intangible assets for potential impairment. In 2014, in addition to
goodwill to the reporting units and identified no impairment. the analysis performed in conjunction with the reallocation of
On January 31, 2014, CIT acquired 100% of the outstanding goodwill as of January 1, 2014, CIT also performed Step 1 good-
shares of Paris-based Nacco, an independent full service railcar will impairment testing for Transportation Finance, Commercial
lessor in Europe. The purchase price was approximately $250 mil- Services and Equipment Finance by comparing the reporting
lion and the acquired assets and liabilities were recorded at their units’ estimated fair value with their carrying values, including
estimated fair values as of the acquisition date, resulting in $77 goodwill. The Company estimated the fair values of the reporting
million of goodwill. The assets acquired included approximately units based on peer price to earnings (PE) and tangible book
$650 million of leasing assets along with existing secured debt. value (TBV) multiples for publicly traded companies comparable
to the reporting units. Management concluded, based on per-
On August 1, 2014, CIT Bank acquired 100% of the outstanding
forming the Step 1 analysis, that the fair values of each of the
shares of Capital Direct Group and its subsidiaries (”Direct Capi-
reporting units exceeded their respective carrying values, includ-
tal“), a U.S. based lender providing equipment leasing and
ing goodwill. As the results of the first step test showed no
financing to small and mid-sized businesses operating across a
indication of impairment in any of the reporting units, the Com-
range of industries. The purchase price was approximately $230
pany did not perform the second step of the impairment test for
million and the acquired assets and liabilities were recorded at
any of the reporting units.
their estimated fair values as of the acquisition date resulting in
Intangible Assets (dollars in millions)

International Commercial
Finance Finance Total
December 31, 2012 $ 31.9 $ − $ 31.9
Amortization (11.6) − (11.6)
December 31, 2013 20.3 − 20.3
Additions (0.4) 12.3 11.9
Amortization, other(1) (6.3) (0.2) (6.5)
December 31, 2014 $ 13.6 $12.1 $ 25.7
(1)
Includes foreign exchange translation.
Accumulated amortization totaled $204.6 million at December 31,

The TIF intangible assets recorded in conjunction with FSA are
2014. Projected amortization for the years ended December 31,
comprised of amounts related to favorable (above current market
2015 through December 31, 2019 is approximately $6.9 million,
rates) operating leases. The net intangible asset will be amortized
$5.1 million, $3.2 million, $3.1 million, and $3.2 million,
as an offset to rental income over the remaining life of the leases,
respectively.
generally 5 years or less. The NACF intangible assets of approxi-
mately $12 million recorded in 2014 related mainly to the
valuation of existing customer relationships and trade names
recorded in conjunction with the acquisition of Direct Capital.
NOTE 27 — SEVERANCE AND FACILITY EXITING LIABILITIES

The following table summarizes liabilities (pre-tax) related to closing facilities and employee severance:
Severance and Facility Exiting Liabilities (dollars in millions)

Severance Facilities
Number of Number of Total
Employees Liability Facilities Liability Liabilities
December 31. 2012 63 $ 7.3 16 $38.8 $ 46.1
Additions and adjustments 274 33.4 3 3.7 37.1
Utilization (212) (23.0) (3) (9.2) (32.2)
December 31. 2013 125 17.7 16 33.3 51.0
Additions and adjustments 150 28.8 2 (2.2) 26.6
Utilization (228) (37.8) (5) (7.4) (45.2)
December 31, 2014 47 $ 8.7 13 $23.7 $ 32.4
CIT continued to implement various organization efficiency and consolidations in connection with these initiatives. These addi-
cost reduction initiatives, such as our international rationalization tions, along with charges related to accelerated vesting of equity
activities. The severance additions primarily relate to employee and other benefits, were recorded as part of the $31.4 million and
termination benefits incurred in conjunction with these initiatives. $36.9 million provisions for the years ended December 31, 2014
The facility additions primarily relate to location closings and and 2013, respectively.

NOTE 28 — PARENT COMPANY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The following tables present the Parent Company only financial statements:
Condensed Parent Company Only Balance Sheet (dollars in millions)

2014 2013
Assets:
Cash and deposits $ 1,432.6 $ 1,533.5
Cash held at bank subsidiary 20.3 62.0
Securities purchased under agreements to resell 650.0 −
Investment securities 1,104.2 2,096.6
Receivables from nonbank subsidiaries 10,735.2 12,871.1
Receivables from bank subsidiaries 321.5 5.6
Investment in nonbank subsidiaries 6,600.1 6,533.4
Investment in bank subsidiaries 2,716.4 2,599.6
Goodwill 334.6 334.6
Other assets 1,625.2 853.2
Total Assets $25,540.1 $26,889.6
Liabilities and Equity:
Long-term borrowings $11,932.4 $12,531.6
Liabilities to nonbank subsidiaries 3,924.1 4,840.9
Other liabilities 614.7 678.3
Total Liabilities 16,471.2 18,050.8
Total Stockholders’ Equity 9,068.9 8,838.8
Total Liabilities and Equity $25,540.1 $26,889.6
Condensed Parent Company Only Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012
Income
Interest income from nonbank subsidiaries $ 560.3 $ 636.6 $ 737.6
Interest and dividends on interest bearing deposits and investments 1.4 2.0 2.6
Dividends from nonbank subsidiaries 526.8 551.1 834.0
Other income from subsidiaries (23.0) 50.8 181.0
Other income 103.8 (4.6) (37.7)
Total income 1,169.3 1,235.9 1,717.5
Expenses
Interest expense (649.6) (686.9) (2,345.9)
Interest expense on liabilities to subsidiaries (166.4) (199.6) (293.6)
Other expenses (199.4) (220.4) (242.3)
Total expenses (1,015.4) (1,106.9) (2,881.8)
Income (loss) before income taxes and equity in undistributed net income of subsidiaries 153.9 129.0 (1,164.3)
Benefit for income taxes 769.6 367.9 482.2
Income (loss) before equity in undistributed net income of subsidiaries 923.5 496.9 (682.1)
Equity in undistributed net income of bank subsidiaries 83.8 95.9 41.3
Equity in undistributed net income of nonbank subsidiaries 122.7 82.9 48.5
Net income (loss) 1,130.0 675.7 (592.3)
Other Comprehensive income (loss), net of tax (60.3) 4.1 4.9
Comprehensive income (loss) $ 1,069.7 $ 679.8 $ (587.4)
Condensed Parent Company Only Statements of Cash Flows (dollars in millions)

2014 2013 2012
Cash Flows From Operating Activities:
Net income (loss) $ 1,130.0 $ 675.7 $ (592.3)
Equity in undistributed earnings of subsidiaries (206.5) (178.8) (89.8)
Other operating activities, net (735.4) (88.2) 1,524.3
Net cash flows provided by operations 188.1 408.7 842.2
Cash Flows From Investing Activities:
(Increase) decrease in investments and advances to subsidiaries (92.6) 21.0 4,053.1
Decrease (increase) in Investment securities 342.3 (1,346.2) 89.1
Net cash flows provided by (used in) investing activities 249.7 (1,325.2) 4,142.2
Cash Flows From Financing Activities:
Proceeds from the issuance of term debt 991.3 735.2 9,750.0
Repayments of term debt (1,603.0) (60.5) (15,239.8)
Repurchase of common stock (775.5) (193.4) −
Dividends paid (95.3) (20.1) −
Net change in liabilities to subsidiaries 902.1 728.2 (1,139.5)
Net cash flows (used in) provided by financing activities (580.4) 1,189.4 (6,629.3)
Net (decrease) increase in unrestricted cash and cash equivalents (142.6) 272.9 (1,644.9)
Unrestricted cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period 1,595.5 1,322.6 2,967.5
Unrestricted cash and cash equivalents, end of period $ 1,452.9 $ 1,595.5 $ 1,322.6

NOTE 29 — SELECTED QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA

The following data has been adjusted for discontinued operation presentation and the classification of railcar maintenance expenses.
Selected Quarterly Financial Data (dollars in millions)

Unaudited
Fourth Third Second First
Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter
Interest income $ 306.2 $ 308.3 $ 309.8 $ 302.2
Interest expense (276.9) (275.2) (262.2) (271.9)
Provision for credit losses (15.0) (38.2) (10.2) (36.7)
Rental income on operating leases 546.5 535.0 519.6 491.9
Other income 116.4 24.2 93.7 71.1
Depreciation on operating lease equipment (153.2) (156.4) (157.3) (148.8)
Maintenance and other operating lease expenses (49.7) (46.5) (49.0) (51.6)
Operating expenses (248.8) (234.5) (225.0) (233.5)
Loss on debt extinguishment (3.1) − (0.4) −
Benefit (provision) for income taxes 28.3 401.2 (18.1) (13.5)
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests, after tax 1.3 (2.5) (5.7) 5.7
Income (loss) from discontinued operation, net of taxes (1.0) (0.5) 51.7 2.3
Net income $ 251.0 $ 514.9 $ 246.9 $ 117.2
Net income per diluted share $ 1.37 $ 2.76 $ 1.29 $ 0.59

Interest income $ 307.2 $ 306.4 $ 319.1 $ 322.5
Interest expense (267.5) (256.7) (262.6) (274.1)
Provision for credit losses (14.4) (16.4) (14.6) (19.5)
Rental income on operating leases 463.8 472.9 484.3 476.4
Other income 127.6 104.5 79.2 70.0
Depreciation on operating lease equipment (139.5) (134.2) (133.6) (133.3)
Maintenance and other operating lease expenses (39.0) (41.4) (40.3) (42.4)
Operating expenses (284.4) (228.8) (226.1) (230.9)
Provision for income taxes (28.6) (13.2) (29.3) (12.8)
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests, after tax (2.2) (0.2) (0.5) (3.0)
Income from discontinued operation, net of taxes 6.9 6.7 8.0 9.7
Net income $ 129.9 $ 199.6 $ 183.6 $ 162.6
Net income per diluted share $ 0.65 $ 0.99 $ 0.91 $ 0.81

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and

Financial Disclosure
None
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures

EVALUATION OF DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over external
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Under the supervision of and with the participation of management,
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future peri-
including our principal executive officer and principal financial officer,
ods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate
we evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and
because of changes in conditions or that the degree of compli-
procedures, as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)
ance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
promulgated under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended (the ”Exchange Act“) as of December 31, 2014. Based on Management of CIT, including our principal executive officer and
such evaluation, the principal executive officer and the principal principal financial officer, conducted an evaluation of the effec-
financial officer have concluded that the Company’s disclosure tiveness of the Company’s internal control over external financial
controls and procedures were effective. reporting as of December 31, 2014 using the criteria set forth by
the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER Commission (”COSO“) in Internal Control — Integrated Frame-
EXTERNAL FINANCIAL REPORTING work (2013). Management concluded that the Company’s internal
control over external financial reporting was effective as of
Management of CIT is responsible for establishing and maintain-
December 31, 2014, based on the criteria established in Internal
ing adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such
Control — Integrated Framework (2013).
term is defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f).
Internal control over external financial reporting is a process The effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over external
designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliabil- financial reporting as of December 31, 2014 has been audited by
ity of financial reporting and the preparation of financial PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.
accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control
over external financial reporting includes those policies and pro- CHANGES IN INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING:
cedures that: (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in There were no changes in our internal control over financial
reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions reporting during the quarter ended December 31, 2014 that have
and dispositions of the assets of the Company; (ii) provide rea- materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect,
sonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and
expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance
with authorizations of management and directors of the Com-
pany; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention
or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposi-
tion of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on
the financial statements.
Item 9B. Other Information

None
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
PART THREE
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

The information called for by Item 10 is incorporated by reference from the information under the captions ”Directors“, ”Corporate Gov-
ernance“ and ”Executive Officers“ in our Proxy Statement for our 2015 annual meeting of stockholders.
Item 11. Executive Compensation

The information called for by Item 11 is incorporated by reference from the information under the captions ”Director Compensation“,
”Executive Compensation“, including ”Compensation Discussion and Analysis“ and ”2014 Compensation Committee Report“ in our
Proxy Statement for our 2015 annual meeting of stockholders.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
The information called for by Item 12 is incorporated by reference from the information under the caption ”Security Ownership of Certain
Beneficial Owners and Management“ in our Proxy Statement for our 2015 annual meeting of stockholders.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
The information called for by Item 13 is incorporated by reference from the information under the captions ”Corporate Governance-
Director Independence“ and ”Related Person Transactions Policy“ in our Proxy Statement for our 2015 annual meeting of stockholders.
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services

The information called for by Item 14 is incorporated by reference from the information under the caption ”Proposal 2 — Ratification of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm“ in our Proxy Statement for our 2015 annual meeting of stockholders.
PART FOUR
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

(a) The following documents are filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as part of this report (see Item 8):
1. The following financial statements of CIT and Subsidiaries:
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2014 and December 31, 2013.
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012.
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
2. All schedules are omitted because they are not applicable or because the required information appears in the Consolidated Finan-
cial Statements or the notes thereto.
(b) Exhibits
2.1 Agreement and Plan of Merger, by and among CIT Group Inc., IMB Holdco LLC, Carbon Merger Sub LLC and JCF III
HoldCo I L.P., dated as of July 21, 2014 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to Form 8-K filed July 25, 2014).
3.1 Third Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of the Company, dated December 8, 2009 (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Form 8-K filed December 9, 2009).
3.2 Amended and Restated By-laws of the Company, as amended through July 15, 2014 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
99.1 to Form 8-K filed July 16, 2014).
4.1 Indenture dated as of January 20, 2006 between CIT Group Inc. and The Bank of New York Mellon (as successor to
JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A.) for the issuance of senior debt securities (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to Form
S-3 filed January 20, 2006).
4.2 Framework Agreement, dated July 11, 2008, among ABN AMRO Bank N.V., as arranger, Madeleine Leasing Limited, as
initial borrower, CIT Aerospace International, as initial head lessee, and CIT Group Inc., as guarantor, as amended by the
Deed of Amendment, dated July 19, 2010, among The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V. (f/k/a ABN AMRO Bank N.V.), as
arranger, Madeleine Leasing Limited, as initial borrower, CIT Aerospace International, as initial head lessee, and CIT
Group Inc., as guarantor, as supplemented by Letter Agreement No. 1 of 2010, dated July 19, 2010, among The Royal
Bank of Scotland N.V., as arranger, CIT Aerospace International, as head lessee, and CIT Group Inc., as guarantor, as
amended and supplemented by the Accession Deed, dated July 21, 2010, among The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V., as
arranger, Madeleine Leasing Limited, as original borrower, and Jessica Leasing Limited, as acceding party, as
supplemented by Letter Agreement No. 2 of 2010, dated July 29, 2010, among The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V., as
arranger, CIT Aerospace International, as head lessee, and CIT Group Inc., as guarantor, relating to certain Export Credit
Agency sponsored secured financings of aircraft and related assets (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.11 to Form
10-K filed March 10, 2011).
4.3 Form of All Parties Agreement among CIT Aerospace International, as head lessee, Madeleine Leasing Limited, as
borrower and lessor, CIT Group Inc., as guarantor, various financial institutions, as original ECA lenders, ABN AMRO Bank
N.V., Paris Branch, as French national agent, ABN AMRO Bank N.V., Niederlassung Deutschland, as German national
agent, ABN AMRO Bank N.V., London Branch, as British national agent, ABN AMRO Bank N.V., London Branch, as ECA
facility agent, ABN AMRO Bank N.V., London Branch, as security trustee, and CIT Aerospace International, as servicing
agent, relating to certain Export Credit Agency sponsored secured financings of aircraft and related assets during the
2008 and 2009 fiscal years (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.12 to Form 10-K filed March 10, 2011).
4.4 Form of ECA Loan Agreement among Madeleine Leasing Limited, as borrower, various financial institutions, as original
ECA lenders, ABN AMRO Bank N.V., Paris Branch, as French national agent, ABN AMRO Bank N.V., Niederlassung
Deutschland, as German national agent, ABN AMRO Bank N.V., London Branch, as British national agent, ABN AMRO
Bank N.V., London Branch, as ECA facility agent, ABN AMRO Bank N.V., London Branch, as security trustee, and CIT
Aerospace International, as servicing agent, relating to certain Export Credit Agency sponsored secured financings of
aircraft and related assets during the 2008 and 2009 fiscal years (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.13 to Form 10-K
filed March 10, 2011).
4.5 Form of Aircraft Head Lease between Madeleine Leasing Limited, as lessor, and CIT Aerospace International, as head
lessee, relating to certain Export Credit Agency sponsored secured financings of aircraft and related assets during the
2008 and 2009 fiscal years (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.14 to Form 10-K filed March 10, 2011).
Item 15: Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules

4.6 Form of Proceeds and Intercreditor Deed among Madeleine Leasing Limited, as borrower and lessor, various financial
institutions, ABN AMRO Bank N.V., Paris Branch, as French national agent, ABN AMRO Bank N.V., Niederlassung
Deutschland, as German national agent, ABN AMRO Bank N.V., London Branch, as British national agent, ABN AMRO
Bank N.V., London Branch, as ECA facility agent, ABN AMRO Bank N.V., London Branch, as security trustee, relating to
certain Export Credit Agency sponsored secured financings of aircraft and related assets during the 2008 and 2009 fiscal
years (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.15 to Form 10-K filed March 10, 2011).
4.7 Form of All Parties Agreement among CIT Aerospace International, as head lessee, Jessica Leasing Limited, as borrower
and lessor, CIT Group Inc., as guarantor, various financial institutions, as original ECA lenders, Citibank International plc,
as French national agent, Citibank International plc, as German national agent, Citibank International plc, as British
national agent, The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V., London Branch, as ECA facility agent, The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V.,
London Branch, as security trustee, CIT Aerospace International, as servicing agent, and Citibank, N.A., as administrative
agent, relating to certain Export Credit Agency sponsored secured financings of aircraft and related assets during the
2010 fiscal year (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.16 to Form 10-K filed March 10, 2011).
4.8 Form of ECA Loan Agreement among Jessica Leasing Limited, as borrower, various financial institutions, as original ECA
lenders, Citibank International plc, as French national agent, Citibank International plc, as German national agent,
Citibank International plc, as British national agent, The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V., London Branch, as ECA facility
agent, The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V., London Branch, as security trustee, and Citibank, N.A., as administrative agent,
relating to certain Export Credit Agency sponsored secured financings of aircraft and related assets during the 2010 fiscal
year (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.17 to Form 10-K filed March 10, 2011).
4.9 Form of Aircraft Head Lease between Jessica Leasing Limited, as lessor, and CIT Aerospace International, as head lessee,
relating to certain Export Credit Agency sponsored secured financings of aircraft and related assets during the 2010 fiscal
year (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.18 to Form 10-K filed March 10, 2011).
4.10 Form of Proceeds and Intercreditor Deed among Jessica Leasing Limited, as borrower and lessor, various financial
institutions, as original ECA lenders, Citibank International plc, as French national agent, Citibank International plc, as
German national agent, Citibank International plc, as British national agent, The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V., London
Branch, as ECA facility agent, The Royal Bank of Scotland N.V., London Branch, as security trustee, and Citibank, N.A., as
administrative agent, relating to certain Export Credit Agency sponsored secured financings of aircraft and related assets
during the 2010 fiscal year (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.19 to Form 10-K filed March 10, 2011).
4.11 Indenture, dated as of March 30, 2011, between CIT Group Inc. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Form 8-K filed June 30, 2011).
4.12 First Supplemental Indenture, dated as of March 30, 2011, between CIT Group Inc., the Guarantors named therein, and
Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee (including the Form of 5.250% Note due 2014 and the Form of 6.625%
Note due 2018) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to Form 8-K filed June 30, 2011).
4.13 Third Supplemental Indenture, dated as of February 7, 2012, between CIT Group Inc., the Guarantors named therein, and
Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as trustee (including the Form of Notes) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
4.4 of Form 8-K dated February 13, 2012).
4.14 Registration Rights Agreement, dated as of February 7, 2012, among CIT Group Inc., the Guarantors named therein, and
JP Morgan Securities LLC, as representative for the initial purchasers named therein (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.1 of Form 8-K dated February 13, 2012).
4.15 Amended and Restated Revolving Credit and Guaranty Agreement, dated as of January 27, 2014 among CIT Group Inc.,
certain subsidiaries of CIT Group Inc., as Guarantors, the Lenders party thereto from time to time and Bank of America,
N.A., as Administrative Agent and L/C Issuer (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Form 8-K filed January 28,
2014).
4.16 Indenture, dated as of March 15, 2012, among CIT Group Inc., Wilmington Trust, National Association, as trustee, and
Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as paying agent, security registrar and authenticating agent (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 of Form 8-K filed March 16, 2012).
4.17 First Supplemental Indenture, dated as of March 15, 2012, among CIT Group Inc., Wilmington Trust, National Association,
as trustee, and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as paying agent, security registrar and authenticating agent
(including the Form of 5.25% Senior Unsecured Note due 2018) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 of Form 8-K filed
March 16, 2012).
4.18 Second Supplemental Indenture, dated as of May 4, 2012, among CIT Group Inc., Wilmington Trust, National Association,
(including the Form of 5.000% Senior Unsecured Note due 2017 and the Form of 5.375% Senior Unsecured Note due 2020)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 of Form 8-K filed May 4, 2012).
4.19 Third Supplemental Indenture, dated as of August 3, 2012, among CIT Group Inc., Wilmington Trust, National Association,
(including the Form of 4.25% Senior Unsecured Note due 2017 and the Form of 5.00% Senior Unsecured Note due 2022)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to Form 8-K filed August 3, 2012).
4.20 Fourth Supplemental Indenture, dated as of August 1, 2013, among CIT Group Inc., Wilmington Trust, National
Association, as trustee, and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as paying agent, security registrar and
authenticating agent (including the Form of 5.00% Senior Unsecured Note due 2023) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit
4.2 to Form 8-K filed August 1, 2013).
4.21 Fifth Supplemental Indenture, dated as of February 19, 2014, among CIT Group Inc., Wilmington Trust, National
Association, as trustee, and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, as paying agent, security registrar and
authenticating agent (including the Form of 3.875% Senior Unsecured Note due 2019) (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.2 to Form 8-K filed February 19, 2014).
10.1* Amended and Restated CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan (as amended and restated effective December 10, 2009)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Form S-8 filed January 11, 2010).
10.2* CIT Group Inc. Supplemental Retirement Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective as of January 1, 2008) (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.27 to Form 10-Q filed May 12, 2008).
10.3* CIT Group Inc. Supplemental Savings Plan (As Amended and Restated Effective as of January 1, 2008) (incorporated by
10.4* New Executive Retirement Plan of CIT Group Inc. (As Amended and Restated as of January 1, 2008) (incorporated by
10.5* Form of CIT Group Inc. Three Year Stock Salary Award Agreement, dated February 8, 2010 (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.2 to Form 8-K filed February 8, 2010).
10.6* Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-term Incentive Plan Stock Option Award Agreement (One Year Vesting) (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.35 to Form 10-Q filed August 9, 2010).
10.7* Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-term Incentive Plan Stock Option Award Agreement (Three Year Vesting) (incorporated by
10.8* Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-term Incentive Plan Restricted Stock Award Agreement (Three Year Vesting) (incorporated by
10.9* Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-term Incentive Plan Restricted Stock Unit Director Award Agreement (Initial Grant)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.39 to Form 10-Q filed August 9, 2010).
10.10* Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-term Incentive Plan Restricted Stock Unit Director Award Agreement (Annual Grant)
10.11* Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, dated as of May 7, 2008, between CIT Group Inc. and C. Jeffrey Knittel
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.35 to Form 10-K filed March 2, 2009).
10.12* Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated December 22, 2008, between CIT Group Inc. and C. Jeffrey Knittel
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.37 to Form 10-K filed March 2, 2009).
10.13* Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement (with Good Reason)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.33 of Form 10-Q filed August 9, 2011).
10.14* Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement (without Good Reason)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.34 of Form 10-Q filed August 9, 2011).
10.15** Airbus A320 NEO Family Aircraft Purchase Agreement, dated as of July 28, 2011, between Airbus S.A.S. and C.I.T. Leasing
Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.35 of Form 10-Q/A filed February 1, 2012).
10.16** Amended and Restated Confirmation, dated June 28, 2012, between CIT TRS Funding B.V. and Goldman Sachs
International, and Credit Support Annex and ISDA Master Agreement and Schedule, each dated October 26, 2011,
between CIT TRS Funding B.V. and Goldman Sachs International, evidencing a $625 billion securities based financing
facility (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.32 to Form 10-Q filed August 9, 2012).

10.17** Third Amended and Restated Confirmation, dated June 28, 2012, between CIT Financial Ltd. and Goldman Sachs
International, and Amended and Restated ISDA Master Agreement Schedule, dated October 26, 2011 between CIT
Financial Ltd. and Goldman Sachs International, evidencing a $1.5 billion securities based financing facility (incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.33 to Form 10-Q filed August 9, 2012).
10.18** ISDA Master Agreement and Credit Support Annex, each dated June 6, 2008, between CIT Financial Ltd. and Goldman
Sachs International related to a $1.5 billion securities based financing facility (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.34 to
Form 10-Q filed August 11, 2008).
10.19 Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan Performance Stock Unit Award Agreement (with Good Reason)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.36 to Form 10-Q filed May 10, 2012).
10.20 Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan Performance Stock Unit Award Agreement (without Good Reason)
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.37 to Form 10-Q filed May 10, 2012).
10.21* Assignment and Extension of Employment Agreement, dated February 6, 2013, by and among CIT Group Inc., C. Jeffrey
Knittel and C.I.T. Leasing Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.34 to Form 10-Q filed November 6, 2013).
10.22* Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement (incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.36 to Form 10-K filed March 1, 2013).
10.23* Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement (Executives with Employment
Agreements) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.37 to Form 10-K filed March 1, 2013).
10.24* CIT Employee Severance Plan (Effective as of November 6, 2013) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.37 in Form 10-Q
filed November 6, 2013).
10.25 Stockholders Agreement, by and among CIT Group Inc. and the parties listed on the signature pages thereto, dated as of
July 21, 2014 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Form 8-K filed July 25, 2014).
10.26* Retention Letter Agreement, dated July 21, 2014, between CIT Group Inc. and Nelson Chai and Attached Restricted Stock
Unit Award Agreement (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to Form 8-K filed July 25, 2014).
10.27* Extension to Term of Employment Agreement, dated January 2, 2014, between CIT Group Inc. and C. Jeffrey Knittel
10.28* Amendment to Employment Agreement, dated July 14, 2014, between CIT Group Inc. and C. Jeffrey Knittel (incorporated
by reference to Form 8-K filed July 16, 2014).
10.29* Extension to Employment Agreement, dated January 16, 2015, between C.I.T. Leasing Corporation and C. Jeffrey Knittel
(filed herein).
10.30* Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement (with Performance Based
Vesting) (2013) (filed herein).
10.31* Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement (with Performance-Based
Vesting) (2013) (Executives with Employment Agreements) (filed herein).
10.32 Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement (with Performance Based
Vesting) (2014) (filed herein).
10.33 Form of CIT Group Inc. Long-Term Incentive Plan Restricted Stock Unit Award Agreement (with Performance Based
Vesting) (2014) (Executives with Employment Agreements) (filed herein).
12.1 CIT Group Inc. and Subsidiaries Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
21.1 Subsidiaries of CIT Group Inc.
23.1 Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP.
24.1 Powers of Attorney.
31.1 Certification of John A. Thain pursuant to Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Commission, as
promulgated pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act and Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
31.2 Certification of Scott T. Parker pursuant to Rules 13a-14(a) and 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Commission, as
promulgated pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act and Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.1*** Certification of John A. Thain pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002.
32.2*** Certification of Scott T. Parker pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002.
101.INS XBRL Instance Document (Includes the following financial information included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, formatted in XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language): (i) the
Consolidated Statements of Operations, (ii) the Consolidated Balance Sheets, (iii) the Consolidated Statements of
Changes in Stockholders’ Equity and Comprehensive Income, (iv) the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, and (v)
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.)
101.SCH XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document.
101.CAL XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document.
101.LAB XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document.
101.PRE XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document.
101.DEF XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document.
* Indicates a management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.

** Portions of this exhibit have been omitted and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission as part of an application for granting confi-
dential treatment pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
*** This information is furnished and not filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and is not incorporated by reference into any
filing under the Securities Act of 1933.

SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to
be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
CIT GROUP INC.
February 20, 2015 By: /s/ John A. Thain

John A. Thain
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and Director
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on
February 20, 2015 in the capacities indicated below.
NAME NAME
/s/ John A. Thain Gerald Rosenfeld*

John A. Thain Gerald Rosenfeld
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and Director Director
Ellen R. Alemany* Sheila A. Stamps*
Ellen R. Alemany Sheila A. Stamps
Director Director
Michael J. Embler* Seymour Sternberg*
Michael J. Embler Seymour Sternberg
Director Director
William M. Freeman* Peter J. Tobin*
William M. Freeman Peter J. Tobin
Director Director
David M. Moffett* Laura S. Unger*
David M. Moffett Laura S. Unger
Director Director
R. Brad Oates* /s/ Scott T. Parker
R. Brad Oates Scott T. Parker
Director Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Marianne Miller Parrs* /s/ E. Carol Hayles
Marianne Miller Parrs E. Carol Hayles
Director Executive Vice President and Controller
John A. Ryan* /s/ James P. Shanahan
John R. Ryan James P. Shanahan
Director Senior Vice President,
Chief Regulatory Counsel, Attorney-in-Fact
* Original powers of attorney authorizing Robert J. Ingato, Christopher H. Paul, and James P. Shanahan and each of them to sign on behalf of the above-
mentioned directors are held by the Corporation and available for examination by the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Item 302(b) of
Regulation S-T.
EXHIBIT 12.1
CIT Group Inc. and Subsidiaries Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges (dollars in millions)
2014 2013 2012 2011 2010
Earnings:
Net income (loss) $1,130.0 $ 675.7 $ (592.3) $ 14.8 $ 521.3
(Benefit) provision for income taxes—continuing operations (397.9) 83.9 116.7 157.0 236.7
(Income) loss from discontinued operation, net of taxes (52.5) (31.3) 56.5 69.1 (18.4)
Earnings (loss) from continuing operations, before
provision for income taxes 679.6 728.3 (419.1) 240.9 739.6
Fixed Charges:
Interest and debt expenses on indebtedness 1,086.2 1,060.9 2,665.7 2,504.2 2,837.1
Interest factor: one-third of rentals on real and personal
properties 7.3 7.8 8.2 9.3 23.2
Total fixed charges for computation of ratio 1,093.5 1,068.7 2,673.9 2,513.5 2,860.3
Total earnings before provision for income taxes and fixed
charges $1,773.1 $1,797.0 $2,254.8 $2,754.4 $3,599.9
(1)
Ratios of earnings to fixed charges 1.62x 1.68x 1.10x 1.26x
(1) Earnings were insufficient to cover fixed charges by $419.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2012.
EXHIBIT 31.1
CERTIFICATIONS
I, John A. Thain, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of CIT Group Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all mate-
rial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be
designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
(c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; and
(d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and
(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: February 20, 2015

/s/ John A. Thain
John A. Thain
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
CIT Group Inc.
EXHIBIT 31.2
CERTIFICATIONS
I, Scott T. Parker, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of CIT Group Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with
respect to the period covered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in
this report;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b) designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be
designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;
(c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; and
(d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):
(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and
(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: February 20, 2015

/s/ Scott T. Parker
Scott T. Parker
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
CIT Group Inc.
EXHIBIT 32.1
Certification Pursuant to Section 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
In connection with the Annual Report of CIT Group Inc. (”CIT“) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ”Report“), I, John A. Thain, the Chief Executive Officer of CIT, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that;
(i) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934; and
(ii) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of CIT.
/s/ John A. Thain
Dated: February 20, 2015 John A. Thain
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
CIT Group Inc.
EXHIBIT 32.2
Certification Pursuant to Section 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
In connection with the Annual Report of CIT Group Inc. (”CIT“) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2014, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ”Report“), I, Scott T. Parker, the Chief Financial Officer of CIT, certify, pursu-
ant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that;
(i) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934; and
(ii) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of CIT.
/s/ Scott T. Parker
Dated: February 20, 2015 Scott T. Parker
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
CIT Group Inc.
This page is intentionally left blank.
Corporate Information
GLOBAL HEADQUARTERS Ellen R. Alemany 1M, 5M INVESTOR INFORMATION

Retired Chairman and Chief Executive
11 West 42nd Street Officer of Citizens Financial Group, Inc. Stock Exchange Information
New York, NY 10036 and Head of RBS Americas In the United States, CIT common stock
Telephone: (212) 461-5200 is listed on the New York Stock Exchange
Michael J. Embler 1M, 3M under the ticker symbol “CIT.”
CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS Former Chief Investment Officer of
Franklin Mutual Advisors LLC Shareowner Services
One CIT Drive
Livingston, NJ 07039 For shareowner services, including
William M. Freeman 2M, 3M
Telephone: (973) 740-5000 address changes, security transfers and

Executive Chairman of General
general shareowner inquiries, please
Waters Inc.
Number of employees: contact Computershare.
3,360 as of December 31, 2014 David M. Moffett 2M
By writing:
Consultant to Bridgewater Associates, LP,
Number of beneficial shareholders: Computershare Shareowner Services LLC
Former Chief Executive Officer of the
111,113 as of February 6, 2015 P.O. Box 43006
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation
Providence, RI 02940-3006
EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT R. Brad Oates 4M

By visiting:
Chairman and Managing Partner
COMMITTEE https://www-us.computershare.com/
of Stone Advisors, LP
investor/Contact
John A. Thain
Marianne Miller Parrs 1C, 5M
Chairman of the Board and By calling:
Retired Executive Vice President
Chief Executive Officer (800) 851-9677 U.S. & Canada
and Chief Financial Officer of
(201) 680-6578 Other countries
Nelson J. Chai International Paper Company
(800) 231-5469 Telecommunication
President of CIT Group Inc. and North device for the hearing impaired
Gerald Rosenfeld 4C
American Commercial Finance, and
Vice Chairman of Lazard Ltd.
Chairman and CEO of CIT Bank For general shareowner information
John R. Ryan 2M, 3M, 6 and online access to your shareowner
Andrew T. Brandman account, visit Computershare’s website:
President and Chief Executive Officer
Executive Vice President and computershare.com
of the Center for Creative Leadership,
Chief Administrative Officer
Retired Vice Admiral of the U.S. Navy
Form 10-K and Other Reports
Robert J. Ingato A copy of Form 10-K and all quarterly
Sheila A. Stamps 4M, 5M
Executive Vice President, filings on Form 10-Q, Board Committee
Former Executive Vice President of
General Counsel and Secretary Charters, Corporate Governance
Corporate Strategy and Investor Relations
at Dreambuilder Investments LLC Guidelines and the Code of Business
C. Jeffrey Knittel
Conduct are available without charge at
President, Transportation & International
Seymour Sternberg 2C cit.com, or upon written request to:
Finance
Retired Chairman of the Board
and Chief Executive Officer of CIT Investor Relations
Scott T. Parker
New York Life Insurance Company One CIT Drive
Livingston, NJ 07039
Chief Financial Officer
Peter J. Tobin 4M, 5C
Retired Special Assistant to the President For additional information,
Lisa K. Polsky
of St. John’s University and Retired Chief please call (866) 54CITIR or
Financial Officer of The Chase Manhattan email [email protected].
Chief Risk Officer
Corporation
Margaret D. Tutwiler INVESTOR INQUIRIES
Executive Vice President, Laura S. Unger 1M, 3C
Communications & Former Commissioner of the U.S. Barbara Callahan
Government Relations Securities and Exchange Commission Senior Vice President
(973) 740-5058
BOARD OF DIRECTORS Audit Committee
1
[email protected]
2
Compensation Committee
cit.com/investor
3
Nominating and Governance Committee
John A. Thain 4
Risk Management Committee
Chairman of the Board and 5
Regulatory Compliance Committee
Chief Executive Officer 6
Lead Director
MEDIA INQUIRIES
of CIT Group Inc. C
Committee Chairperson
M
Committee Member C. Curtis Ritter
Senior Vice President
(973) 740-5390
[email protected]
cit.com/media
The NYSE requires that the Chief Executive Officer of a listed company certify
annually that he or she was not aware of any violation by the company of the NYSE’s
corporate governance listing standards. Such certification was made by John A. Thain
on June 10, 2014.
Certifications by the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of CIT
pursuant to section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 have been filed as
exhibits to CIT’s Annual Report on Form 10-K. Printed on recycled paper
cit.com
cit.com

Nyse Cit 2014

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Nyse Cit 2014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CIT ANNUAL REPORT 2014

CIT ANNUAL REPORT 2014

Transportation & International Finance North American Commercial Finance

CIT International Finance CIT Corporate Finance

CIT Real Estate Finance

DEAR FELLOW SHAREHOLDERS,

Smart, Selective Growth

A Differentiated Lending Model

Creating Long-Term Value

Commission File Number: 001-31369

CIT GROUP INC.

11 West 42nd Street, New York, New York 10036

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Where You Can Find More Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Item 1A. Risk Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Item 3. Legal Proceedings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Item 6. Selected Financial Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure about Market Risk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Item 9B. Other Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

Item 11. Executive Compensation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150

Item 1: Business Overview

Products and Services

SEGMENT DIVISIONS MARKETS AND SERVICES

Non-Strategic Portfolios Consists of portfolios that we do not consider strategic.

Item 1: Business Overview

Item 1: Business Overview

Item 1: Business Overview

Minimum Capital Requirements — January 1, 2019

Item 1: Business Overview

Item 1: Business Overview

Item 1: Business Overview

Item 1: Business Overview

WHERE YOU CAN FIND MORE INFORMATION

Item 1: Business Overview

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Item 1A: Risk Factors

Item 1A: Risk Factors

Item 1A: Risk Factors

Item 1A: Risk Factors

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Item 1A: Risk Factors

Declaration Date Per Share Dividend

CIT STOCK PERFORMANCE DATA

12/31/2009 12/31/2010 12/31/2011 12/31/2012 12/31/2013 12/31/2014

Number of Securities Number of Securities

Total Number Approximate

Item 5: Market for Registrant’s Common Equity

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

Select Data (dollars in millions)

Item 6: Selected Financial Data

Changes in Net Finance Revenue (dollars in millions)

Average Daily Long-term Borrowings Balances and Rates (dollars in millions)

Item 6: Selected Financial Data

Item 7: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk