Back to GetFilings.com

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

FOR ANNUAL AND TRANSITION REPORTS

PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 13 OR 15(d) OF THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003

OR

For the transition period from                  to                 

Commission file number 1-6523

Bank of America Corporation

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

SECURITIES REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OF THE ACT:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.   Yes  x  No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2).  Yes  x  No  ¨

The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock (“Common Stock”) held by non-affiliates is approximately $116,840,744,050 (based on the June 30, 2003 closing price of Common Stock of $79.03 per share). As of February 27, 2004, there were 1,448,991,040 shares of Common Stock outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

PART I

Item 1. BUSINESS

General

Bank of America Corporation (the “Corporation”) is a Delaware corporation, a bank holding company and a financial holding company under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. The principal executive offices of the Corporation are located in the Bank of America Corporate Center, Charlotte, North Carolina 28255.

Primary Market Areas

Through its banking subsidiaries (the “Banks”) and various nonbanking subsidiaries, the Corporation provides a diversified range of banking and nonbanking financial services and products, primarily throughout the Mid-Atlantic (Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia), the Midwest (Illinois, Iowa, Kansas and Missouri), the Southeast (Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee), the Southwest (Arizona, Arkansas, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Texas), the Northwest (Oregon and Washington) and the West (California, Idaho and Nevada) regions of the United States and in selected international markets. Management believes that these are desirable regions in which to be located. Based on the most recent available data, personal income in the states in these regions as a whole rose 3.8 percent year-to-year through the third quarter of 2003, compared to growth of 3.3 percent in the rest of the United States. In addition, the population in these states as a whole rose an estimated 1.3 percent between 2002 and 2003, compared to growth of 0.5 percent in the rest of the United States. Through December 2003, the average rate of unemployment in these states was 5.6 percent, ranging from Virginia’s 3.6 percent to Oregon’s 7.2 percent, compared to a rate of unemployment of 5.8 percent in the rest of the United States. The number of housing permits authorized in 2003 was 9 percent higher than in 2002 in these states as a whole.

The Corporation has the leading bank deposit market share position in California, Florida, Maryland and Washington. In addition, the Corporation ranks second in terms of bank deposit market share in Arizona, Kansas, Missouri, New Mexico, North Carolina, South Carolina and Texas; third in Arkansas, Georgia, Nevada and the District of Columbia; fourth in Idaho, Oregon and Virginia; fifth in Oklahoma and Tennessee; sixth in Iowa; and thirteenth in Illinois.

Acquisition and Disposition Activity

As part of its operations, the Corporation regularly evaluates the potential acquisition of, and holds discussions with, various financial institutions and other businesses of a type eligible for financial holding company ownership or control. In addition, the Corporation regularly analyzes the values of, and submits bids for, the acquisition of customer-based funds and other liabilities and assets of such financial institutions and other businesses. The Corporation also regularly considers the potential disposition of certain of its assets, branches, subsidiaries or lines of businesses. As a general rule, the Corporation publicly announces any material acquisitions or dispositions when a definitive agreement has been reached.

On October 27, 2003, the Corporation and FleetBoston Financial Corporation (“FleetBoston”) announced they had signed an Agreement and Plan of Merger dated October 27, 2003. The merger agreement has been approved by the boards of directors of the Corporation and FleetBoston and is subject to customary closing conditions, including regulatory and stockholders’ approvals. Closing is expected in April of 2004. Additional information on the merger with FleetBoston is included under Note 2 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the 2003 Annual Report to Stockholders (the “2003 Annual Report”) which is incorporated herein by reference.

Government Supervision and Regulation

The following discussion describes elements of an extensive regulatory framework applicable to bank holding companies, financial holding companies and banks and specific information about the Corporation and its subsidiaries. Federal regulation of banks, bank holding companies and financial holding companies is intended primarily for the protection of depositors and the Bank Insurance Fund rather than for the protection of stockholders and creditors.

1

General

As a registered bank holding company and financial holding company, the Corporation is subject to the supervision of, and regular inspection by, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve Board”). The Banks are organized as national banking associations, which are subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the “Comptroller” or “OCC”), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”), the Federal Reserve Board and other federal and state regulatory agencies. In addition to banking laws, regulations and regulatory agencies, the Corporation and its subsidiaries and affiliates are subject to various other laws and regulations and supervision and examination by other regulatory agencies, all of which directly or indirectly affect the operations and management of the Corporation and its ability to make distributions to stockholders.

A financial holding company, and the companies under its control, are permitted to engage in activities considered “financial in nature” as defined by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and Federal Reserve Board interpretations (including, without limitation, insurance and securities activities), and therefore may engage in a broader range of activities than permitted for bank holding companies and their subsidiaries. A financial holding company may engage directly or indirectly in activities considered financial in nature, either de novo or by acquisition, provided the financial holding company gives the Federal Reserve Board after-the-fact notice of the new activities. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act also permits national banks, such as the Banks, to engage in activities considered financial in nature through a financial subsidiary, subject to certain conditions and limitations and with the approval of the Comptroller.

Interstate Banking

Bank holding companies (including bank holding companies that also are financial holding companies) also are required to obtain the prior approval of the Federal Reserve Board before acquiring more than five percent of any class of voting stock of any non-affiliated bank. Pursuant to the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (the “Interstate Banking and Branching Act”), a bank holding company may acquire banks located in states other than its home state without regard to the permissibility of such acquisitions under state law, but subject to any state requirement that the bank has been organized and operating for a minimum period of time, not to exceed five years, and the requirement that the bank holding company, after the proposed acquisition, controls no more than 10 percent of the total amount of deposits of insured depository institutions in the United States and no more than 30 percent or such lesser or greater amount set by state law of such deposits in that state.

Subject to certain restrictions, the Interstate Banking and Branching Act also authorizes banks to merge across state lines to create interstate banks. The Interstate Banking and Branching Act also permits a bank to open new branches in a state in which it does not already have banking operations if such state enacts a law permitting de novo branching. The Corporation has consolidated its retail subsidiary banks into a single interstate bank (Bank of America, N.A.), headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina, with full service branch offices in 21 states and the District of Columbia. In addition, the Corporation operates a nationally chartered credit card bank (Bank of America, N.A. (USA)), headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona, and three nationally chartered bankers’ banks: Bank of America Oregon, N.A., headquartered in Portland, Oregon; Bank of America California, N.A., headquartered in San Francisco, California; and Bank of America Georgia, N.A., headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia.

Changes in Regulations

Proposals to change the laws and regulations governing the banking industry are frequently introduced in Congress, in the state legislatures and before the various bank regulatory agencies. The likelihood and timing of any proposals or legislation and the impact they might have on the Corporation and its subsidiaries cannot be determined at this time.

Capital and Operational Requirements

The Federal Reserve Board, the Comptroller and the FDIC have issued substantially similar risk-based and leverage capital guidelines applicable to United States banking organizations. In addition, these regulatory agencies may from time to time require that a banking organization maintain capital above the minimum levels, whether because of its financial condition or actual or anticipated growth. The Federal

2

Reserve Board risk-based guidelines define a three-tier capital framework. Tier 1 capital includes common shareholders’ equity and qualifying preferred stock, less goodwill and other adjustments. Tier 2 capital consists of preferred stock not qualifying as Tier 1 capital, mandatory convertible debt, limited amounts of subordinated debt, other qualifying term debt and the allowance for credit losses up to 1.25 percent of risk-weighted assets. Tier 3 capital includes subordinated debt that is unsecured, fully paid, has an original maturity of at least two years, is not redeemable before maturity without prior approval by the Federal Reserve Board and includes a lock-in clause precluding payment of either interest or principal if the payment would cause the issuing bank’s risk-based capital ratio to fall or remain below the required minimum. The sum of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital less investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries represents the Corporation’s qualifying total capital. Risk-based capital ratios are calculated by dividing Tier 1 and total capital by risk-weighted assets. Assets and off-balance sheet exposures are assigned to one of four categories of risk-weights, based primarily on relative credit risk. The minimum Tier 1 capital ratio is four percent and the minimum total capital ratio is eight percent. The Corporation’s Tier 1 and total risk-based capital ratios under these guidelines at December 31, 2003 were 7.85 percent and 11.87 percent, respectively. At December 31, 2003, the Corporation had no subordinated debt that qualified as Tier 3 capital.

The leverage ratio is determined by dividing Tier 1 capital by adjusted average total assets. Although the stated minimum ratio is 100 to 200 basis points above three percent, banking organizations are required to maintain a ratio of at least five percent to be classified as well capitalized. The Corporation’s leverage ratio at December 31, 2003 was 5.73 percent. The Corporation meets its leverage ratio requirement.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”), among other things, identifies five capital categories for insured depository institutions (well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized) and requires the respective federal regulatory agencies to implement systems for “prompt corrective action” for insured depository institutions that do not meet minimum capital requirements within such categories. FDICIA imposes progressively more restrictive constraints on operations, management and capital distributions, depending on the category in which an institution is classified. Failure to meet the capital guidelines could also subject a banking institution to capital raising requirements. An “undercapitalized” bank must develop a capital restoration plan and its parent holding company must guarantee that bank’s compliance with the plan. The liability of the parent holding company under any such guarantee is limited to the lesser of five percent of the bank’s assets at the time it became “undercapitalized” or the amount needed to comply with the plan. Furthermore, in the event of the bankruptcy of the parent holding company, such guarantee would take priority over the parent’s general unsecured creditors. In addition, FDICIA requires the various regulatory agencies to prescribe certain non-capital standards for safety and soundness relating generally to operations and management, asset quality and executive compensation and permits regulatory action against a financial institution that does not meet such standards.

The various regulatory agencies have adopted substantially similar regulations that define the five capital categories identified by FDICIA, using the total risk-based capital, Tier 1 risk-based capital and leverage capital ratios as the relevant capital measures. Such regulations establish various degrees of corrective action to be taken when an institution is considered undercapitalized. Under the regulations, a “well capitalized” institution must have a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of at least six percent, a total risk-based capital ratio of at least ten percent and a leverage ratio of at least five percent and not be subject to a capital directive order. Under these guidelines, each of the Banks was considered well capitalized as of December 31, 2003.

Regulators also must take into consideration (a) concentrations of credit risk; (b) interest rate risk (when the interest rate sensitivity of an institution’s assets does not match the sensitivity of its liabilities or its off-balance-sheet position); and (c) risks from non-traditional activities, as well as an institution’s ability to manage those risks, when determining the adequacy of an institution’s capital. This evaluation will be made as a part of the institution’s regular safety and soundness examination. In addition, the Corporation, and any Bank with significant trading activity, must incorporate a measure for market risk in their regulatory capital calculations.

3

Distributions

The Corporation’s funds for cash distributions to its stockholders are derived from a variety of sources, including cash and temporary investments. The primary source of such funds, and funds used to pay principal and interest on its indebtedness, is dividends received from the Banks. Each of the Banks is subject to various regulatory policies and requirements relating to the payment of dividends, including requirements to maintain capital above regulatory minimums. The appropriate federal regulatory authority is authorized to determine under certain circumstances relating to the financial condition of a bank or bank holding company that the payment of dividends would be an unsafe or unsound practice and to prohibit payment thereof.

In addition, the ability of the Corporation and the Banks to pay dividends may be affected by the various minimum capital requirements and the capital and non-capital standards established under FDICIA, as described above. The right of the Corporation, its stockholders and its creditors to participate in any distribution of the assets or earnings of its subsidiaries is further subject to the prior claims of creditors of the respective subsidiaries.

Source of Strength

According to Federal Reserve Board policy, bank holding companies are expected to act as a source of financial strength to each subsidiary bank and to commit resources to support each such subsidiary. This support may be required at times when a bank holding company may not be able to provide such support. Similarly, under the cross-guarantee provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, in the event of a loss suffered or anticipated by the FDIC – either as a result of default of a banking subsidiary or related to FDIC assistance provided to a subsidiary in danger of default – the other Banks may be assessed for the FDIC’s loss, subject to certain exceptions.

Competition

The activities in which the Corporation and its four business segments (Consumer and Commercial Banking, Asset Management, Global Corporate and Investment Banking, and Equity Investments) engage are highly competitive. Generally, the lines of activity and markets served involve competition with other banks, thrifts, credit unions and other nonbank financial institutions, such as investment banking firms, investment advisory firms, brokerage firms, investment companies and insurance companies. The Corporation also competes against banks and thrifts owned by nonregulated diversified corporations and other entities which offer financial services, located both domestically and internationally and through alternative delivery channels such as the Internet. The methods of competition center around various factors, such as customer services, interest rates on loans and deposits, lending limits and customer convenience, such as location of offices.

The commercial banking business in the various local markets served by the Corporation’s business segments is highly competitive. The four business segments compete with other banks, thrifts, finance companies and other businesses which provide similar services. The business segments actively compete in commercial lending activities with local, regional and international banks and nonbank financial organizations, some of which are larger than certain of the Corporation’s nonbanking subsidiaries and the Banks. In its consumer lending operations, the competitors of the business segments include other banks, thrifts, credit unions, finance companies and other nonbank organizations offering financial services. In the investment banking, investment advisory and brokerage business, the Corporation’s nonbanking subsidiaries compete with other banking and investment banking firms, investment advisory firms, brokerage firms, investment companies, other organizations offering similar services and other investment alternatives available to investors. The Corporation’s mortgage banking units compete with banks, thrifts, government agencies, mortgage brokers and other nonbank organizations offering mortgage banking services. In the trust business, the Banks compete with other banks, investment counselors and insurance companies in national markets for institutional funds and insurance agents, thrifts, financial counselors and other fiduciaries for personal trust business. The Corporation and its four business segments also actively compete for funds. A primary source of funds for the Banks is deposits, and competition for deposits includes other deposit-taking organizations, such as banks, thrifts, and credit unions, as well as money market mutual funds.

4

The Corporation’s ability to expand into additional states remains subject to various federal and state laws. See “Government Supervision and Regulation – General” for a more detailed discussion of interstate banking and branching legislation and certain state legislation.

Employees

As of December 31, 2003, there were 133,549 full-time equivalent employees within the Corporation and its subsidiaries. Of the foregoing employees, 84,647 were employed within Consumer and Commercial Banking, 6,618 were employed within Asset Management, 6,439 were employed within Global Corporate and Investment Banking and 185 were employed within Equity Investments. The remainder were employed elsewhere within the Corporation and its subsidiaries.

None of the domestic employees within the Corporation is subject to a collective bargaining agreement. Management considers its employee relations to be good.

Additional Information

The following additional information set forth in the 2003 Annual Report is incorporated herein by reference: Business Segment Operations (under the caption “Business Segment Operations” in the Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Results of Operations and Financial Condition (the “MD&A”) and in Note 20 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements (the “Notes”)); Net Interest Income (under the captions “Financial Highlights” and “Supplemental Financial Data” in the MD&A and Tables II and III of the Statistical Financial Information); Securities (under the caption “Interest Rate Risk Management —Securities” in the MD&A and Notes 1 and 4 of the Notes); Outstanding Loans and Leases (under the caption “Credit Risk Management” in the MD&A, Tables IV, VIII, IX and X of the Statistical Financial Information, and Notes 1 and 7 of the Notes); Deposits (under the caption “Liquidity Risk Management—Deposits and Other Funding Sources” in the MD&A and Note 11 of the Notes); Short-Term Borrowings (in Table V of the Statistical Financial Information and Note 12 of the Notes); Trading Liabilities (in Note 5 of the Notes); Market Risk Management (under the caption “Market Risk Management” in the MD&A); Liquidity Risk Management (under the caption “Liquidity Risk Management” in the MD&A); Operational Risk Management (under the caption “Operational Risk Management” in the MD&A); and Performance by Geographic Area (under Note 22 of the Notes).

The Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 are available on the Corporation’s website (www.bankofamerica.com under the “About Bank of America—Investor Relations—10-Qs and 10-Ks” and “About Bank of America—Investor Relations—Complete SEC Filings” captions) as soon as reasonably practicable after the Corporation electronically files such material with, or furnishes it to the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Item 2. PROPERTIES

As of December 31, 2003, the principal offices of the Corporation and each of its business segments were located in the 60-story Bank of America Corporate Center in Charlotte, North Carolina, which is owned by a subsidiary of the Corporation. The Corporation occupies approximately 679,000 square feet and leases approximately 521,000 square feet to third parties at market rates, which represents substantially all of the space in this facility. In addition to this facility, the Corporation also leases or owns a significant amount of space worldwide. As of December 31, 2003, the Corporation and its subsidiaries owned or leased approximately 17,500 locations in 44 states, the District of Columbia and 30 foreign countries.

Item 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

In the ordinary course of business, the Corporation and its subsidiaries are routinely defendants in or parties to a number of pending and threatened legal actions and proceedings, including actions brought on behalf of various classes of claimants. In certain of these actions and proceedings, claims for substantial monetary damages are asserted against the Corporation and its subsidiaries and certain of these actions and proceedings are based on alleged violations of consumer protection, securities, environmental, banking and other laws.

5

In view of the inherent difficulty of predicting the outcome of such matters, the Corporation cannot state what the eventual outcome of pending matters will be; however, based on current knowledge, management does not believe that liabilities, if any, arising from pending litigation or regulatory matters, including the litigation and regulatory matters described below, will have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position or liquidity of the Corporation but may be material to the Corporation’s operating results for any particular quarter.

Mutual Fund Operations

On September 3, 2003, the Office of the Attorney General for the State of New York (NYAG) simultaneously filed and settled a complaint against Canary Capital Partners, LLC, et al. (collectively, Canary). The complaint alleged, among other things, that Canary engaged in improper trading with certain mutual funds in the Nations Funds family (Nations Funds). Specifically, the NYAG alleged that Canary engaged in activities that it characterized as “market timing” and “late trading.” The Corporation is cooperating fully with the NYAG, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and other regulators in connection with these inquiries.

On September 16, 2003, the NYAG announced a criminal action, and the SEC announced a civil action, against a former employee of Banc of America Securities LLC (BAS). The complaints allege that this former employee played a key role in enabling Canary to engage in “late trading” of shares of Nations Funds and other mutual funds in violation of state and federal law.

The Corporation has announced that it will establish a restitution fund for shareholders of the Nations Funds who were harmed by Canary’s late trading and market timing practices. In addition, the Corporation announced that it will provide restitution for shareholders of third party mutual funds who were harmed by any late trading activities by Canary that are found to have occurred through the Corporation in the event restitution is not otherwise available from Canary, its affiliates, its investors or from any other third parties. The Corporation has also committed to return to the Nations Funds all funds management and advisory fees related to the Canary market timing agreement.

The Corporation has named several key leaders and advisors external to the Corporation to review mutual fund practices. These individuals are currently leading an independent review of the Corporation’s mutual fund policies and practices, including a complete legal and regulatory compliance review of the Corporation’s mutual fund business, and coordinating a detailed review of all technology, control, and compliance systems related to the mutual fund business, including all systems relating to sales, clearing, and derivative and brokerage operations.

The Corporation is developing new policies to eliminate all lending, derivatives, brokerage services or any other services relating to mutual fund trading activity by clients known to the Corporation to engage in active mutual fund market timing not permitted by the targeted funds. The Corporation has committed that the market timing policies being established will no longer permit special exceptions.

The independent trustees of the Board of Trustees of the Nations Funds have retained an independent firm to evaluate the extent of any adverse monetary impact to any Nations Fund in which the Nations Funds’ adviser permitted a discretionary market timing agreement. They also announced that they would evaluate whether any additional steps are appropriate to assure Nations Funds shareholders that the Nations Funds are being managed in their best interests. In addition, the independent trustees announced that the Board of Trustees, with the assistance of the independent firm, will conduct a review of the issues relating to late trading in Nations Funds, consider the results of the review of these issues being conducted by the Corporation, and take action as appropriate.

As of the date hereof, a number of lawsuits and regulatory proceedings have been filed against the Corporation, its affiliates and associates in connection with these circumstances, alleging, among other things, breaches of fiduciary duties, federal securities laws, the ERISA Act, the Investment Company Act of 1940, and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 as well as contractual and other common law claims. The Corporation has also received shareholder derivative actions purportedly brought on behalf of the

6

Corporation alleging various claims, including breach of fiduciary duty, against the Board of Directors in connection with these matters. Additional lawsuits or regulatory proceedings presenting similar or additional allegations and requests for relief arising out of these circumstances could be filed in the future against the Corporation and related parties.

During the quarter ended September 30, 2003, the Corporation recognized a $100 million charge to income in connection with these matters. The Corporation, however, cannot determine at this time the eventual outcome, timing or impact of these matters. Accordingly, it is possible that additional charges in the future may be required.

Enron Corporation (Enron) Securities Litigation

The Corporation was named as a defendant, along with a number of commercial and investment banks and their holding companies, certain former Enron officers and directors, law firms and accountants, in a putative consolidated class action pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas filed on April 8, 2002 entitled Newby v. Enron. The amended complaint, which was filed in May 2003 and is now the operative complaint, alleges claims against the Corporation and BAS under Sections 11, 12 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 related to the role of BAS as an underwriter of two public offerings of Enron debt and as an initial purchaser in a private placement of debt issued by an Enron-affiliated company. The Corporation and BAS have moved to dismiss all of the claims asserted against them in the operative complaint. That motion is fully briefed and remains pending. Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification is fully briefed and remains pending.

In addition, the Corporation and certain of its affiliates have been named as defendants or third-party defendants, along with other commercial and investment banks and many other parties, in various other individual and putative class actions relating to Enron. The complaints assert claims under federal securities laws, state securities laws and/or state common law or statutes. The majority of these actions were either filed in or have been transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas and consolidated or coordinated with Newby v. Enron.

The corporation cannot determine at this time the eventual outcome, timing or impact of these matters.

WorldCom, Inc. (WorldCom) Securities Litigation

BAS, Banc of America Securities Limited (BASL), and other underwriters of WorldCom bonds issued in 2000 and 2001, as well as former officers and directors of WorldCom and other parties, have been named as defendants in a class action lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York entitled WorldCom Securities Litigation. The operative complaint alleges claims against BAS and BASL under Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 in connection with 2000 and 2001 public bond offerings and is brought on behalf of purchasers and acquirers of bonds issued in or traceable to these offerings. On October 24, 2003, United States District Court Judge Denise Cote certified a class consisting of “all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired publicly-traded securities of WorldCom during the period beginning April 29, 1999 through and including June 25, 2002 and who were injured thereby.” Fact discovery is presently proceeding in this class action and a trial date has been set for January 10, 2005.

In addition, the Corporation, BAS and BASL, along with other underwriters, certain holding companies affiliated with the underwriters, a former Salomon Smith Barney telecommunications analyst, certain former officers and directors of WorldCom and WorldCom’s former auditors have been named as defendants in numerous individual actions that were filed in either federal or state courts arising out of alleged accounting irregularities of the books and records of WorldCom. Plaintiffs in these actions are typically institutional investors, including state pension funds, who allegedly purchased debt securities issued by WorldCom pursuant to public offerings in 1997, 1998, 2000 or 2001. The majority of the complaints assert only claims under Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933, but some complaints also include claims under the Exchange Act of 1934, state securities laws, other state statutes and under common law theories. Most of these cases were filed in state court and subsequently removed (as related to WorldCom’s bankruptcy) by defendants to federal courts and then transferred by the Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York to be consolidated with WorldCom

7

Securities Litigation for pre-trial purposes. Seven of these actions, which had been removed, were remanded to state courts in Alabama (2), Tennessee, Pennsylvania (3) and Illinois.

Certain plaintiffs in actions transferred to the Southern District of New York have filed an appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals arguing that their actions were not properly removed to federal court because a provision in the Securities Act prevented such removals. Defendants, including the underwriters, have argued that removal was proper.

Additional complaints were filed on behalf of purchasers of WorldCom stock in state courts in Mississippi against the Corporation and BAS, as well as certain former officers and directors of WorldCom, other commercial and investment banks and other parties. These cases have also been transferred to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and consolidated with WorldCom Securities Litigation for pre-trial purposes.

The corporation cannot determine at this time the eventual outcome, timing or impact of these matters.

Adelphia Communications Corporation (Adelphia) Securities Litigation

Bank of America, N.A. (BANA) and BAS are defendants in several private civil actions relating to Adelphia which have been consolidated for pre-trial purposes and are currently pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The actions include a class action and various individual actions. BAS was a member of seven underwriting syndicates of securities issued by Adelphia, and BANA was an agent and/or lender in connection with five credit facilities in which Adelphia subsidiaries were borrowers. Additional defendants include other members of those syndicates, underwriters for additional Adelphia securities offerings, lenders and agents for that and other credit facilities, former Adelphia insiders and members of its board of directors, and Adelphia’s outside auditors and counsel. The complaints allege claims under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

BANA and BAS are also defendants in an adversary proceeding pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. The proceeding is brought by the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in the Adelphia Bankruptcy Proceedings (the “Creditors Committee”) on behalf of Adelphia; however, the Bankruptcy Court has not yet given the Creditors Committee authority to bring this lawsuit. The adversary proceeding complaint names over 400 defendants and asserts over 50 claims under federal statute (including Bank Holding Company Act), state common law and various provisions of the Bankruptcy Code. The Creditors Committee seeks avoidance and recovery of payments, equitable subordination, disallowance and recharacterization of claims and recovery of damages in an unspecified amount. BANA, BAS and other investment bank defendants have filed motions to dismiss. The Official Committee of Equity Security Holders in the Adelphia Bankruptcy Proceedings has filed a motion seeking to intervene in the adversary proceeding and to file its own complaint. The proposed complaint is similar to the Creditor’s Committee complaint, except that it also asserts claims under RICO and various state law theories.

The Corporation cannot determine at this time the eventual outcome, timing or impact of these matters.

Paul J. Miller v. Bank of America, N.A.

On August 13, 1998, BANA’s predecessor was named as a defendant in this class action challenging its practice, consistent with the banking industry, of debiting accounts that receive, by direct deposit, governmental benefits to repay fees incurred in those accounts. The action alleges fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and violations of certain California laws. On October 16, 2001, a class was certified consisting of more than one million California residents who have, had or will have, at any time after August 13, 1994, a deposit account with BANA into which payments of public benefits are or have been directly deposited by the government. The case proceeded to trial on January 20, 2004.

On February 25, 2004, at the conclusion of the jury phase of the trial, the jury found in BANA’s favor on three of the four claims presented to the jury. As to the fourth claim, alleging that BANA violated certain California laws, the jury imposed damages of approximately $75 million and awarded the class representative $275,000 in emotional distress damages. The jury also assessed a $1,000 penalty as to those members of the class suffering substantial economic or emotional harm as a result of the practice but did not

8

determine which or how many class members are entitled to the penalty. This and other legal issues remain outstanding in the trial court.

The Corporation believes that this case is without merit and plans to appeal any adverse judgment. The Corporation cannot determine at this time the eventual outcome, timing or impact of this matter.

D.E. Shaw Litigation

Following the merger of NationsBank Corporation and BankAmerica Corporation in September 1998, the Corporation and certain of its officers and directors were named as defendants in class actions brought on behalf of persons who purchased NationsBank or BankAmerica shares between August 4, 1998 and September 30, 1998; persons who purchased shares of the Corporation between October 1 and October 13, 1998, and persons who held NationsBank or BankAmerica shares as of the merger. The claims on behalf of the purchasers and the persons who held NationsBank shares as of the merger principally rested on the allegation that the Corporation or its predecessors failed to disclose material facts concerning a $1.4 billion financial relationship between BankAmerica Corporation and D.E. Shaw & Co. that resulted in a $372 million charge to the Corporation’s earnings in the quarter ending September 30, 1998. The claims of the persons who held BankAmerica shares as of the merger principally rested on the allegation that the defendants misrepresented a “takeover” of BankAmerica Corporation as a “merger of equals.”

On November 2, 2002, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri (the Federal Court), the Court to which all federal actions had been transferred, entered a final judgment dismissing the actions with prejudice. The Federal Court entered the judgment after approving a settlement providing for payment of $333 million to the classes of purchasers and holders of NationsBank shares and $157 million to the classes of purchasers of BankAmerica and Corporation shares and holders of BankAmerica shares (all amounts to bear interest at the 90-day Treasury Bill Rate from March 6, 2002 to the date of payment). The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment on appeal by certain objecting plaintiffs and class members on December 2, 2003, and denied a petition for rehearing on January 9, 2004. It is expected that, in accordance with its terms, the settlement will become final in April 2004 unless further review is sought in the Supreme Court of the United States. There remain pending several actions in California that have been stayed since April 2000, when the Federal Court enjoined the plaintiffs in those actions from purporting to prosecute their claims on behalf of a class.

Regulatory

In the course of its business, the Corporation is subject to regulatory examinations, information gathering requests, inquiries and investigations. Two of the Corporation’s subsidiaries, BAS and Banc of America Investment Services, Inc. (“BAI”), are registered broker/dealers under the federal securities laws and are subject to regulation by the SEC, the National Association of Securities Dealers, the New York Stock Exchange and state securities regulators. In connection with several, formal and informal, investigations by those agencies, BAS and BAI have received numerous requests, subpoenas and orders for documents, testimony and information in connection with various aspects of its regulated activities.

The SEC is currently conducting a formal investigation with respect to certain trading and research- related activities of BAS during the period 1999 through 2001. To date, the SEC staff has not indicated whether it intends to recommend any enforcement action in connection with these trading and research-related activities. On December 30, 2003, however, BAS was advised by the SEC staff that it does intend to recommend action against BAS with respect to alleged books and records violations related to the preservation and production of materials requested during the investigation of the trading and research-related activities. BAS is cooperating with the SEC staff with respect to the ongoing investigation and is also working with the staff to reach a resolution of the books and records matter.

9

Item 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

There were no matters submitted to a vote of stockholders during the quarter ended December 31, 2003.

Item 4A. EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT

Pursuant to the Instructions to Form 10-K and Item 401(b) of Regulation S-K, the name, age and position of each current executive officer of the Corporation are listed below along with such officer’s business experience during the past five years. Officers are appointed annually by the Board of Directors at the meeting of directors immediately following the annual meeting of stockholders.

Amy Woods Brinkley, age 48, Chief Risk Officer. Ms. Brinkley was named to her present position in April 2002. From July 2001 to April 2002, she served as Chairman, Credit Policy and Deputy Corporate Risk Management Executive; from August 1999 to July 2001, she served as President, Consumer Products; and from 1993 to August 1999, she served as Marketing Group Executive. She first became an officer in 1979. She also serves as Chief Risk Officer and a director of Bank of America, N.A.

Edward J. Brown III, age 55, President, Global Corporate and Investment Banking. Mr. Brown was named to his present position in August 2000. From September 1998 to August 2000, he served as President, Global Capital Raising and Global Capital Markets; and from June 1997 to September 1998, he served as President, Global Finance. He first became an officer in 1974. He also serves as President, Global Corporate and Investment Banking and a director of Bank of America, N.A.

Richard M. DeMartini, age 51, President, Asset Management. Mr. DeMartini was named to his present position in February 2001. From January 1999 to February 2001, he served as Chairman, International Private Client Group, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter; and from March 1997 to January 1999, he served as President Individual Asset Management Group, Morgan Stanley Dean Witter. He first became an officer in February 2001. He also serves as President, Asset Management of Bank of America, N.A.

Barbara J. Desoer, age 51, President, Consumer Products. Ms. Desoer was named to her present position in July 2001. From September 1999 to July 2001, she served as Director of Marketing; from May 1999 to September 1999, she served as Banking Group President, California Retail Bank; and from December 1996 to May 1999, she served as Regional Executive, California Retail Bank. She first became an officer in 1977. She also serves as President, Consumer Products and a director of Bank of America, N.A.

James H. Hance, Jr., age 59, Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Hance was named Chief Financial Officer in August 1988, and was named Vice Chairman in October 1993. He first became an officer in 1987. He also serves as a director of the Corporation and as Vice Chairman, Chief Financial Officer and a director of Bank of America, N.A.

Kenneth D. Lewis, age 56, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Lewis was named Chairman and Chief Executive Officer in April 2001 and President in January 1999. From October 1998 to January 1999, he served as President, Consumer and Commercial Banking; from 1993 to October 1998, he served as President; and from October 1999 to April 2001, he served as Chief Operating Officer. He first became an officer in 1971. Mr. Lewis also serves as a director of the Corporation and as Chairman, President, Chief Executive Officer and a director of Bank of America, N.A.

R. Eugene Taylor, age 56, President, Consumer and Commercial Banking. Mr. Taylor was named to his present position in June 2000. From February 2000 to June 2000, he served as President, Central Region; from October 1998 to June 2000, he served as President, West Region; and from December 1997 to October 1998, he served as President, Florida. He first became an officer in 1970. He also serves as President, Consumer and Commercial Banking and a director of Bank of America, N.A.

10

PART II

Item 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCK HOLDER MATTERS

The principal market on which the Common Stock is traded is the New York Stock Exchange. The Common Stock is also listed on the London Stock Exchange and the Pacific Stock Exchange, and certain shares are listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange. The following table sets forth the high and low closing sales prices of the Common Stock on the New York Stock Exchange for the periods indicated:

As of February 27, 2004, there were 226,796 record holders of Common Stock. During 2002 and 2003, the Corporation paid dividends on the Common Stock on a quarterly basis. The following table sets forth dividends paid per share of Common Stock for the periods indicated:

For additional information regarding the Corporation’s ability to pay dividends, see “Government Supervision and Regulation – Distributions”. In addition, Note 15 of the Notes in the 2003 Annual Report is incorporated herein by reference.

Information on the Corporation’s equity compensation plans included under Note 17 of the Notes in the 2003 Annual Report is incorporated herein by reference.

Item 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The information set forth in Table 1 of the MD&A and Table XIX of the Statistical Financial Information of the 2003 Annual Report is incorporated herein by reference.

Item 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The information set forth in the 2003 Annual Report in the MD&A is incorporated by reference herein in its entirety, and the Report of Management in the 2003 Annual Report is also incorporated herein by reference.

Item 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

The information set forth in the 2003 Annual Report under the caption “Market Risk Management” in the MD&A is incorporated herein by reference.

Item 8. CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

The following information set forth in the 2003 Annual Report is incorporated herein by reference: the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements of Bank of America Corporation and Subsidiaries,

11

together with the report thereon of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP  dated January 15, 2004 and the Selected Quarterly Financial Data in Table XIX of the Statistical Financial Information.

Item 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

There were no changes in or disagreements with accountants on accounting and financial disclosure.

Item 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures

As of the end of the period covered by this report and pursuant to Rule 13a-15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”), the Corporation’s management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness and design of the Corporation’s disclosure controls and procedures (as that term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Exchange Act). Based upon that evaluation, the Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded, as of the end of the period covered by this report, that the Corporation’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective in recording, processing, summarizing and reporting information required to be disclosed by the Corporation, within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms.

Changes in internal controls

In addition and as of the end of the period covered by this report, there have been no changes in internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) of the Exchange Act) during the Corporation’s fourth fiscal quarter that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the internal control over financial reporting.

PART III

Item 10. DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT

Information included under the following captions in the Corporation’s proxy statement relating to its 2004 annual meeting of stockholders (the “2004 Proxy Statement”) is incorporated herein by reference:

Additional information required by Item 10 with respect to executive officers is set forth in Part I, Item 4A hereof.

Item 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Information included under the following captions in the 2004 Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference:

Item 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

Information included under the following caption in the 2004 Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference:

12

Information included under Note 17 of the Notes in the 2003 Annual Report, including the table presenting equity compensation plan information, is incorporated herein by reference.

Item 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS

Information included under the following captions in the 2004 Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference:

Item 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

Information included under the following captions in the 2004 Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference:

PART IV

Item 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES AND REPORTS ON FORM 8-K

With the exception of the information expressly incorporated herein by reference, the 2003 Annual Report and the 2004 Proxy Statement are not to be deemed filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

13

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 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.

Date: March 1, 2004

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.

14

15

INDEX TO EXHIBITS

E-1

E-2

E-3

E-4

E-5