General Motors Financial Company, Inc. - FORM 10-K

Attached files

file	filename
EX-12.1 - STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF RATIOS - General Motors Financial Company, Inc.	dex121.htm
EX-23.1 - CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM - General Motors Financial Company, Inc.	dex231.htm
EX-32.1 - SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONS - General Motors Financial Company, Inc.	dex321.htm
EX-31.1 - SECTION 302 CERTIFICATIONS - General Motors Financial Company, Inc.	dex311.htm
EX-21.1 - SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT - General Motors Financial Company, Inc.	dex211.htm

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended June 30, 2010

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE

SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from to

Commission file number 1-10667

AmeriCredit Corp.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Texas

75-2291093

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization)

(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)

801 Cherry Street, Suite 3500, Fort Worth, Texas 76102

(Address of principal executive offices, including Zip Code)

(817) 302-7000

(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, $0.01 par value

New York Stock Exchange

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

None

(Title of each class)

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No x

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 (Section 229.405 of this chapter) 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. x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 105 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ¨ No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.


Large accelerated filer x		Accelerated filer ¨		Non-accelerated filer ¨		Smaller Reporting Company ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ¨ No x

The aggregate market value of the 50,803,574 shares of the Registrant’s Common Stock held by non-affiliates, based upon the closing price of the Registrant’s Common Stock on the New York Stock Exchange on December 31, 2009, was approximately $967,300,049.

There were 135,390,408 shares of Common Stock, $0.01 par value, outstanding as of August 26, 2010.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

NONE

AMERICREDIT CORP.

INDEX TO FORM 10-K


Item No.		Page
	FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND INDUSTRY DATA	3

	PART I

1.	BUSINESS	4

1A.	RISK FACTORS	12

1B.	UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS	20

2.	PROPERTIES	21

3.	LEGAL PROCEEDINGS	21

4.	REMOVED AND RESERVED	22

	PART II

5.	MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS	23

6.	SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA	25

7.	MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS	26

7A.	QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK	42

8.	FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA	47

9.	CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE	90

9A.	CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES	90

	PART III

10.	DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT	93

11.	EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION	100

12.	SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT	120

13.	CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS	122

14.	PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES	125

	PART IV

15.	EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES	126

	SIGNATURES	127

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Form 10-K contains several “forward-looking statements.” Forward-looking statements are those that use words such as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “may,” “likely,” “should,” “estimate,” “continue,” “future” or other comparable expressions. These words indicate future events and trends. Forward-looking statements are our current views with respect to future events and financial performance. These forward-looking statements are subject to many assumptions, risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ significantly from historical results or from those anticipated by us. The most significant risks are detailed from time to time in our filings and reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2010. It is advisable not to place undue reliance on our forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to, and do not, publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, except as required by federal securities laws, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

The following factors are among those that may cause actual results to differ materially from historical results or from the forward-looking statements:

•

changes in general economic and business conditions;

•

interest rate fluctuations;

•

our financial condition and liquidity, as well as future cash flows and earnings;

•

competition;

•

the effect, interpretation or application of new or existing laws, regulations, court decisions and accounting pronouncements;

•

the availability of sources of financing;

•

the level of net charge-offs, delinquencies and prepayments on the automobile contracts we originate;

•

items associated with our pending merger with General Motors; and

•

significant litigation.

If one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or if underlying assumptions prove incorrect, our actual results may vary materially from those expected, estimated or projected.

INDUSTRY DATA

In this Form 10-K, we rely on and refer to information regarding the automobile lending industry from market research reports, analyst reports and other publicly available information. Although we believe that this information is reliable, we have not independently verified any of it.

AVAILABLE INFORMATION

We make available free of charge through our website, www.americredit.com, our AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust, AmeriCredit Prime Automobile Receivables Trust, Bay View Automobile Receivables Trust and Long Beach Automobile Receivables Trust securitization portfolio performance measures and all materials that we file electronically with the SEC, including our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practical after filing or furnishing such material with or to the SEC.

The public may read and copy any materials we file with or furnish to the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549. Information on the operation of the Public Reference Room may be obtained by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an Internet website, www.sec.gov, which contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC.

PART I

ITEM 1.

BUSINESS

General Motors Merger Agreement

On July 21, 2010, we entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) with General Motors Holdings LLC (“GM Holdings”), a Delaware limited liability company and a wholly owned subsidiary of General Motors Company (“General Motors”), and Goalie Texas Holdco Inc. (“Merger Sub”), a Texas corporation and a direct wholly owned subsidiary of GM Holdings. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, Merger Sub will be merged with and into AmeriCredit, with AmeriCredit continuing as the surviving corporation and a direct wholly owned subsidiary of GM Holdings (the “Merger”). Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement and subject to the satisfaction or waiver of the closing conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, at the effective time of the Merger (the “Effective Time”), each share of our common stock issued and outstanding immediately prior to the Effective Time (other than (i) any shares held by us or any of our subsidiaries immediately prior to the Effective Time, which shares will be cancelled with no consideration in exchange for such cancellation, and (ii) any shares held by our shareholders who are entitled to and who properly exercise appraisal rights under Texas law) will be converted into the right to receive $24.50 in cash, without interest.

General

We are a leading independent auto finance company that has been operating in the automobile finance business since September 1992. We purchase auto finance contracts for new and used vehicles purchased by consumers from franchised and select independent automobile dealerships. As used herein, “loans” include auto finance contracts originated by dealers and purchased by us. We predominantly offer financing to consumers who are typically unable to obtain financing from banks, credit unions and manufacturer captive auto finance companies. We service our loan portfolio at regional centers using automated loan servicing and collection systems. Funding for our auto lending activities is obtained through the utilization of our credit facilities and securitization transactions.

We have historically maintained a significant share of the sub-prime market and have, in the past, participated in the prime and near prime sectors of the auto finance industry to a more limited extent. We source our business primarily through our relationships with auto dealers, which we maintain through our regional credit centers, marketing representatives (dealer relationship managers) and alliance relationships. We expanded our traditional sub-prime niche through the acquisition of Bay View Acceptance Corporation (“BVAC”) in May 2006, which offered specialized auto finance products, including extended term financing and higher loan-to-value advances, to consumers with prime credit bureau scores, and our acquisition of Long Beach Acceptance Corporation (“LBAC”) in January 2007, which offered auto finance products primarily to consumers with near prime credit bureau scores. The operations of BVAC and LBAC have been integrated into our originations, servicing and administrative activities and we provide auto finance products solely under the AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. name.

We were incorporated in Texas on May 18, 1988, and succeeded to the business, assets and liabilities of a predecessor corporation formed under the laws of Texas on August 1, 1986. Our predecessor began operations in March 1987, and the business has been operated continuously since that time. Our principal executive offices are located at 801 Cherry Street, Suite 3500, Fort Worth, Texas, 76102 and our telephone number is (817) 302-7000.

Marketing and Loan Originations

Target Market. Our automobile lending programs are designed to serve customers who have limited access to automobile financing through banks, credit unions and the manufacturer captives. The bulk of our typical borrowers have experienced prior credit difficulties or have limited credit histories and generally have

credit bureau scores ranging from 500 to 700. Because we generally serve customers who are unable to meet the credit standards imposed by most banks, credit unions and manufacturer captives, we generally charge higher interest rates than those charged by such sources. Since we provide financing in a relatively high-risk market, we also expect to sustain a higher level of credit losses than these other automobile financing sources.

Marketing. As an indirect lender, we focus our marketing activities on automobile dealerships. We are selective in choosing the dealers with whom we conduct business and primarily pursue manufacturer franchised dealerships with used car operations and a limited number of independent dealerships. We prefer to finance later model, low mileage used vehicles and moderately priced new vehicles. Of the contracts purchased by us during fiscal 2010, approximately 94% were originated by manufacturer franchised dealers and 6% by select independent dealers; further, approximately 77% were used vehicles and 23% were new vehicles. We purchased contracts from 10,756 dealers during fiscal 2010. No dealer location accounted for more than 1% of the total volume of contracts purchased by us for that same period.

Prior to entering into a relationship with a dealer, we consider the dealer’s operating history and reputation in the marketplace. We then maintain a non-exclusive relationship with the dealer. This relationship is actively monitored with the objective of maximizing the volume of applications received from the dealer that meet our underwriting standards and profitability objectives. Due to the non-exclusive nature of our relationships with dealerships, the dealerships retain discretion to determine whether to obtain financing from us or from another source for a loan made by the dealership to a customer seeking to make a vehicle purchase. Our representatives regularly contact and visit dealers to solicit new business and to answer any questions dealers may have regarding our financing programs and capabilities and to explain our underwriting philosophy. To increase the effectiveness of these contacts, marketing personnel have access to our management information systems which detail current information regarding the number of applications submitted by a dealership, our response and the reasons why a particular application was rejected.

We purchase finance contracts without recourse to the dealer. Accordingly, the dealer has no liability to us if the consumer defaults on the contract. Although finance contracts are purchased without recourse to the dealer, the dealer typically makes certain representations as to the validity of the contract and compliance with certain laws, and indemnifies us against any claims, defenses and set-offs that may be asserted against us because of assignment of the contract or the condition of the underlying collateral. Recourse based upon those representations and indemnities would be limited in circumstances in which the dealer has insufficient financial resources to perform upon such representations and indemnities. We do not view recourse against the dealer on these representations and indemnities to be of material significance in our decision to purchase finance contracts from a dealer. Depending upon the contract structure and consumer credit attributes, we may charge dealers a non-refundable acquisition fee or pay dealers a participation fee when purchasing finance contracts. These fees are assessed on a contract-by-contract basis.

Origination Network. Our origination platform provides specialized focus on marketing and underwriting loans. Responsibilities are segregated so that the sales group markets our programs and products to our dealer customers, while the underwriting group focuses on underwriting, negotiating and closing loans.

We use a combination of regional credit centers and dealer relationship managers to market our indirect financing programs to select dealers, develop relationships with these dealers and underwrite contracts submitted by the dealerships. We believe that the personal relationships our credit underwriters and dealer relationship managers establish with the dealership staff are an important factor in creating and maintaining productive relationships with our dealer customer base.

We select markets for credit center locations based upon numerous factors, most notably proximity to the geographic markets and dealers we seek to serve and availability of qualified personnel. Credit centers are typically situated in suburban office buildings that are accessible to dealers.

Regional credit managers, credit managers and credit underwriters staff credit center locations. The regional credit managers report to a senior vice president. Credit center personnel are compensated with base salaries and incentives based on corporate and overall credit center performance, including factors such as loan credit quality, loan pricing adequacy and loan volume objectives.

The senior vice presidents monitor credit center compliance with our underwriting guidelines. Our management information systems provide the senior vice presidents with access to credit center information enabling them to consult with the regional credit managers on credit decisions and review exceptions to our underwriting guidelines. The senior vice presidents also make periodic visits to the credit centers to conduct operational reviews.

Dealer relationship managers are either based in a credit center or work from a home office. Dealer relationship managers solicit dealers for applications and maintain our relationships with the dealers in their geographic vicinity, but do not have responsibility for credit approvals. We believe the local presence provided by our dealer relationship managers enables us to be more responsive to dealer concerns and local market conditions. Applications solicited by the dealer relationship managers are underwritten at our credit centers. The dealer relationship managers are compensated with base salaries and incentives based on loan volume objectives and profitability. The dealer relationship managers report to regional sales managers.

Alliance Relationships. We have programs with certain new vehicle manufacturers under which the new vehicle manufacturers provide us cash payments in order for us to offer lower interest rates on finance contracts we purchase from the new vehicle manufacturers’ dealership network. The programs serve our goal of increasing new loan originations and the new vehicle manufacturers’ goal of making credit more available to consumers purchasing vehicles sold by the new vehicle manufacturer.

Origination Data. The following table sets forth information with respect to the number of credit centers, number of dealer relationship managers, dollar volume of contracts purchased and number of producing dealerships for the periods set forth below.


	Years Ended June 30,
	2010		2009		2008
	(dollars in thousands)
Number of credit centers		14		13		24
Number of dealer relationship managers		99		55		104
Origination volume^(a)	$	2,137,620	$	1,285,091	$	6,293,494
Number of producing dealerships^(b)		10,756		9,401		17,872

(a)

Fiscal 2008 amount includes $218.1 million of contracts purchased through our leasing program.

(b)

A producing dealership refers to a dealership from which we purchased a contract in the respective period.

Credit Underwriting

We utilize a proprietary credit scoring system to support the credit approval process. The credit scoring system was developed through statistical analysis of our consumer demographic and portfolio databases. Credit scoring is used to differentiate credit applicants and to rank order credit risk in terms of expected default rates, which enables us to evaluate credit applications for approval and tailor loan pricing and structure according to this statistical assessment of credit risk. For example, a consumer with a lower score would indicate a higher probability of default and, therefore, we would either decline the application, or, if approved, compensate for this higher default risk through the structuring and pricing of the loan. While we employ a credit scoring system in the credit approval process, credit scoring does not eliminate credit risk. Adverse determinations in evaluating contracts for purchase or changes in certain macroeconomic factors could negatively affect the credit quality of our receivables portfolio.

The credit scoring system considers data contained in the customer’s credit application, credit bureau report, other third-party data sources as well as the structure of the proposed loan and produces a statistical assessment of these attributes. This assessment is used to segregate applicant risk profiles and determine whether the risk is acceptable and the price we should charge for that risk. Our credit scorecards are monitored through comparison of actual versus projected performance by score. Periodically, we endeavor to refine our proprietary scorecards based on new information including identified correlations between receivables performance and data obtained in the underwriting process.

We purchase individual contracts through our underwriting specialists in credit centers using a credit approval process tailored to local market conditions. Underwriting personnel have a specific credit authority based upon their experience and historical loan portfolio results as well as established credit scoring parameters. Although the credit approval process is decentralized, our application processing system includes controls designed to ensure that credit decisions comply with our credit scoring strategies and underwriting policies and procedures.

Finance contract application packages completed by prospective obligors are received electronically, through web-based platforms that automate and accelerate the financing process. Upon receipt or entry of application data into our application processing system, a credit bureau report and other third-party data sources are automatically accessed and a credit score is computed. For applications that are not automatically declined, our underwriting personnel review the application package and determine whether to approve the application, approve the application subject to conditions that must be met, or deny the application. The credit decision is based primarily on the applicant’s credit score determined by our proprietary credit scoring system. We estimate that approximately 25-35% of applicants will be approved for credit by us. Dealers are contacted regarding credit decisions electronically or by facsimile. Declined applicants are also provided with appropriate notification of the decision.

Our underwriting and collateral guidelines, including credit scoring parameters, form the basis for the credit decision. Exceptions to credit policies and authorities must be approved by designated individuals with appropriate credit authority. Additionally, our centralized credit review and credit risk management departments monitor exceptions and adherence to underwriting guidelines, procedures and appropriate approval levels.

Completed contract packages are sent to us by dealers. Loan documentation is scanned to create electronic images and electronically forwarded to our centralized loan processing department. A loan processing representative verifies certain applicant employment, income and residency information. Loan terms, insurance coverage and other information may be verified or confirmed with the customer. The original documents are subsequently sent to our centralized account services department and critical documents are stored in a fire resistant vault.

Once cleared for funding, the funds are electronically transferred to the dealer or a check is issued. Upon funding of the contract, we acquire a perfected security interest in the automobile that was financed. Daily loan reports are generated for review by senior operations management. All of our contracts are fully amortizing with substantially equal monthly installments. Key variables, such as loan applicant data, credit bureau and credit score information, loan structures and terms and payment histories are tracked. Our credit risk management department also regularly reviews the performance of our credit scoring system and is responsible for the development and enhancement of our credit scorecards.

Credit indicator packages track portfolio performance at various levels of detail including total company, credit center and dealer. Various daily reports and analytical data are also generated to monitor credit quality as well as to refine the structure and mix of new loan originations. We review profitability metrics on a consolidated basis, as well as at the credit center, origination channel, dealer and contract levels.

Loan Servicing

Our servicing activities consist of collecting and processing customer payments, responding to customer inquiries, initiating contact with customers who are delinquent in payment of an installment, maintaining the

security interest in the financed vehicle, monitoring physical damage insurance coverage of the financed vehicle, and arranging for the repossession of financed vehicles, liquidation of collateral and pursuit of deficiencies when appropriate.

We use monthly billing statements to serve as a reminder to customers as well as an early warning mechanism in the event a customer has failed to notify us of an address change. Approximately 15 days before a customer’s first payment due date and each month thereafter, we mail the customer a billing statement directing the customer to mail payments to a lockbox bank for deposit in a lockbox account. Payment receipt data is electronically transferred from our lockbox bank to us for posting to the loan accounting system. Payments may also be received from third party payment processors, such as Western Union, directly by us from customers or via electronic transmission of funds. Payment processing and customer account maintenance is performed centrally at our operations center in Arlington, Texas.

Our collections activities are performed at regional centers located in Arlington, Texas; Chandler, Arizona; Charlotte, North Carolina; and Peterborough, Ontario. A predictive dialing system is utilized to make phone calls to customers whose payments are past due. The predictive dialer is a computer-controlled telephone dialing system that simultaneously dials phone numbers of multiple customers from a file of records extracted from our database. Once a live voice responds to the automated dialer’s call, the system automatically transfers the call to a collector and the relevant account information to the collector’s computer screen. Accounts that the system has been unable to reach within a specified number of days are flagged, thereby promptly identifying for management all customers who cannot be reached by telephone. By eliminating the time spent on attempting to reach customers, the system gives a single collector the ability to speak with a larger number of customers daily.

Once an account reaches a certain level of delinquency, the account moves to one of our advanced collection units. The objective of these collectors is to resolve the delinquent account. We may repossess a financed vehicle if an account is deemed uncollectible, the financed vehicle is deemed by collection personnel to be in danger of being damaged, destroyed or hidden, the customer deals in bad faith or the customer voluntarily surrenders the financed vehicle.

Statistically-based behavioral assessment models are used in our servicing activities to project the relative probability that an individual account will default. The behavioral assessment models are used to help develop servicing strategies for the portfolio or for targeted account groups within the portfolio.

At times, we offer payment deferrals to customers who have encountered financial difficulty, hindering their ability to pay as contracted. A deferral allows the customer to move delinquent payments to the end of the loan, usually by paying a fee that is calculated in a manner specified by applicable law. The collector reviews the customer’s past payment history and behavioral score and assesses the customer’s desire and capacity to make future payments. Before agreeing to a deferral, the collector also considers whether the deferment transaction complies with our policies and guidelines. Exceptions to our policies and guidelines for deferrals must be approved in accordance with these policies and guidelines. While payment deferrals are initiated and approved in the collections department, a separate department processes authorized deferment transactions. Exceptions are also monitored by our centralized credit risk management function.

Repossessions are subject to prescribed legal procedures, which include peaceful repossession, one or more customer notifications, a prescribed waiting period prior to disposition of the repossessed automobile and return of personal items to the customer. Some jurisdictions provide the customer with reinstatement or redemption rights. Legal requirements, particularly in the event of bankruptcy, may restrict our ability to dispose of the repossessed vehicle. Independent repossession firms engaged by us handle repossessions. All repossessions, other than bankruptcy or previously charged off accounts, must be approved by a collections officer. Upon repossession and after any prescribed waiting period, the repossessed automobile is sold at auction. We do not sell any vehicles on a retail basis. The proceeds from the sale of the automobile at auction, and any other recoveries, are credited against the balance of the contract. Auction proceeds from sale of the repossessed vehicle

and other recoveries are usually not sufficient to cover the outstanding balance of the contract, and the resulting deficiency is charged off. For fiscal 2010, the net recovery rate upon the sale of repossessed assets was approximately 44%. We pursue collection of deficiencies when we deem such action to be appropriate.

Our policy is to charge off an account in the month in which the account becomes 120 days contractually delinquent if we have not repossessed the related vehicle. We charge off accounts in repossession when the automobile is repossessed and legally available for disposition. A charge-off represents the difference between the estimated net sales proceeds and the amount of the delinquent contract, including accrued interest. Accounts in repossession that have been charged off are removed from finance receivables and the related repossessed automobiles are included in other assets at net realizable value on the consolidated balance sheet pending disposal.

The value of the collateral underlying our receivables portfolio is updated periodically with a loan-by-loan link to national wholesale auction values. This data, along with our own experience relative to mileage and vehicle condition, are used for evaluating collateral disposition activities.

Financing

We finance our loan origination volume through the use of our credit facilities and execution of securitization transactions.

Credit Facilities. Loans are typically funded initially using credit facilities that are administered by agents on behalf of institutionally managed commercial paper or medium term note conduits. Under these funding agreements, we transfer finance receivables to special purpose finance subsidiaries. These subsidiaries, in turn, issue notes to the agents, collateralized by such finance receivables and cash. The agents provide funding under the notes to the subsidiaries pursuant to an advance formula, and the subsidiaries forward the funds to us in consideration for the transfer of finance receivables. While these subsidiaries are included in our consolidated financial statements, these subsidiaries are separate legal entities and the finance receivables and other assets held by these subsidiaries are legally owned by them and are not available to our creditors or creditors of our other subsidiaries. Advances under our funding agreements bear interest at commercial paper, London Interbank Offered Rates (“LIBOR”) or prime rates plus a credit spread and specified fees depending upon the source of funds provided by the agents.

Securitizations. We pursue a financing strategy of securitizing our receivables to diversify our funding sources and free up capacity on our credit facilities for the purchase of additional automobile finance contracts. The asset-backed securities market has traditionally allowed us to fund our finance receivables at fixed interest rates over the life of a securitization transaction, thereby locking in the excess spread on our loan portfolio.

Proceeds from securitizations are primarily used to fund initial cash credit enhancement requirements in the securitization and to pay down borrowings under our credit facilities, thereby increasing availability thereunder for further contract purchases. From 1994 to June 30, 2010, we had securitized approximately $61.2 billion of automobile receivables.

In our securitizations, we, through wholly-owned subsidiaries, transfer automobile receivables to newly-formed securitization trusts (“Trusts”), which issue one or more classes of asset-backed securities. The asset-backed securities are in turn sold to investors.

level of credit enhancement in future senior subordinated securitizations will depend, in part, on the net interest margin, collateral characteristics and credit performance trends of the receivables transferred, our portfolio and overall auto finance industry credit trends, as well as our financial condition, the economic environment and our ability to sell lower rated subordinated bonds at rates we consider acceptable.

The second type of securitization structure we have utilized involves the purchase of a financial guaranty insurance policy issued by an insurer. On August 19, 2010, we closed a $200 million securitization transaction, AMCAR 2010-B, which was insured by Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. (“Assured”) and has initial cash deposit and overcollateralization requirements of 17.0%. The asset-backed securities sold had an underlying rating of single-A, but achieved a triple-A credit rating with the benefit of the financial guaranty insurance policy.

The financial guaranty insurance policies insure the timely payment of interest and the ultimate payment of principal due on the asset-backed securities. We have limited reimbursement obligations to the insurers; however, credit enhancement requirements, including the insurers’ encumbrance of certain restricted cash accounts and subordinated interests in Trusts, provide a source of funds to cover shortfalls in collections and to reimburse the insurers for any claims which may be made under the policies issued with respect to our securitizations. Since our securitization program’s inception, there have been no claims under any insurance policies.

The credit enhancement requirements in our securitization transactions include restricted cash accounts that are generally established with an initial deposit and may subsequently be funded through excess cash flows from securitized receivables. An additional form of credit enhancement is provided in the form of overcollateralization whereby more receivables are transferred to the Trusts than the amount of asset-backed securities issued by the Trusts. In the event a shortfall exists in amounts payable on the asset-backed securities, first overcollateralization is reduced, and then funds may be withdrawn from the restricted cash account to cover the shortfall before amounts are drawn on the insurance policy, if applicable. With respect to insured securitization transactions, funds may also be withdrawn to reimburse the insurers for draws on financial guaranty insurance policies in an event of default. Additionally, agreements with the insurers provide that if portfolio performance ratios (delinquency, cumulative default or cumulative net loss triggers) in a Trust’s pool of receivables exceed certain targets, the restricted cash account would be increased. Cash would be retained in the restricted cash account and not released to us until the increased target levels have been reached and maintained. We are entitled to receive amounts from the restricted cash accounts to the extent the amounts deposited exceed the required target enhancement levels. The credit enhancement requirements related to senior subordinated transactions typically do not contain portfolio performance ratios which could increase the minimum required credit enhancement levels.

Trade Names

We have obtained federal trademark protection for the “AmeriCredit” name and the logo that incorporates the “AmeriCredit” name. Certain other names, logos and phrases used by us in our business operations have also been trademarked.

Regulation

Our operations are subject to regulation, supervision and licensing under various federal, state and local statutes, ordinances and regulations.

In most states in which we operate, a consumer credit regulatory agency regulates and enforces laws relating to consumer lenders and sales finance companies such as us. These rules and regulations generally provide for licensing as a sales finance company or consumer lender, limitations on the amount, duration and charges, including interest rates, for various categories of loans, requirements as to the form and content of finance

contracts and other documentation, and restrictions on collection practices and creditors’ rights. In certain states, we are subject to periodic examination by state regulatory authorities. Some states in which we operate do not require special licensing or provide extensive regulation of our business.

We are also subject to extensive federal regulation, including the Truth in Lending Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act. These laws require us to provide certain disclosures to prospective borrowers and protect against discriminatory lending practices and unfair credit practices. The principal disclosures required under the Truth in Lending Act include the terms of repayment, the total finance charge and the annual percentage rate charged on each contract or loan. The Equal Credit Opportunity Act prohibits creditors from discriminating against credit applicants on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, age or marital status. According to Regulation B promulgated under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, creditors are required to make certain disclosures regarding consumer rights and advise consumers whose credit applications are not approved of the reasons for the rejection. In addition, the credit scoring system used by us must comply with the requirements for such a system as set forth in the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and Regulation B. The Fair Credit Reporting Act requires us to provide certain information to consumers whose credit applications are not approved on the basis of a report obtained from a consumer reporting agency and to respond to consumers who inquire regarding any adverse reporting submitted by us to the consumer reporting agencies. Additionally, we are subject to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which requires us to maintain the privacy of certain consumer data in our possession and to periodically communicate with consumers on privacy matters. We are also subject to the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, which requires us, in most circumstances, to reduce the interest rate charged to customers who have subsequently joined, enlisted, been inducted or called to active military duty.

The dealers who originate automobile finance contracts purchased by us also must comply with both state and federal credit and trade practice statutes and regulations. Failure of the dealers to comply with these statutes and regulations could result in consumers having rights of rescission and other remedies that could have an adverse effect on us.

We believe that we maintain all material licenses and permits required for our current operations and are in substantial compliance with all applicable local, state and federal regulations. There can be no assurance, however, that we will be able to maintain all requisite licenses and permits, and the failure to satisfy those and other regulatory requirements could have a material adverse effect on our operations. Further, the adoption of additional, or the revision of existing, rules and regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Compliance with applicable law is costly and can affect operating results. Compliance also requires forms, processes, procedures, controls and the infrastructure to support these requirements, and may create operational constraints. Laws in the financial services industry are designed primarily for the protection of consumers. The failure to comply could result in significant statutory civil and criminal penalties, monetary damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, possible revocation of licenses and damage to reputation, brand and valued customer relationships.

In the near future, the financial services industry is likely to see increased disclosure obligations, restrictions on pricing and fees and enforcement proceedings. Effective June 30, 2010, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Reform Act”) created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”). The CFPB has been given broad authority to seek consumer financial protection by rulemaking, supervision and enforcement.

The Reform Act also repealed Rule 436(g) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), which relates to U.S. public offerings registered under the Securities Act. Rule 436(g) provided that credit ratings assigned by a Nationally Registered Statistical Rating Organization (“NRSRO”) are not considered a part of registration statements prepared or certified by an ‘expert’, as described within the meaning of sections 7 and 11 of the Securities Act and, accordingly, the NRSRO consent was not required to include credit ratings in Securities Act registration statements and any related prospectuses.

Subsequent to the Reform Act being signed into law, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance issued a ‘no-action’ letter allowing a six month transition period ending January 24, 2011, for issuers to omit credit ratings from registration statements filed under Regulation AB promulgated under the Securities Act so as to provide issuers, rating agencies and other market participants with a transition period in order to implement changes to comply with the new statutory requirement while still conducting registered asset-backed security offerings. If there is no resolution after the six month transition period, it may be difficult to bring new asset-backed securities issues to the public market. We also believe that, even with a longer-term resolution of the issue, it likely will become more expensive for us to bring new transactions to the public market, potentially shrinking the total amount of asset-backed issuance, lowering the availability of consumer and commercial credit, and raising costs for borrowers.

The SEC has proposed significant changes to the rules applicable to issuers and sponsors of asset-backed securities under the Securities Act and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). With the proposed changes we could potentially see an adverse impact in access to the asset-backed capital markets and lessened effectiveness of our financing programs.

Competition

The automobile finance market is highly fragmented and is served by a variety of financial entities including the captive finance affiliates of major automotive manufacturers, banks, thrifts, credit unions and independent finance companies. Many of these competitors have substantially greater financial resources and lower costs of funds than ours. In addition, our competitors often provide financing on terms more favorable to automobile purchasers or dealers than we offer. Many of these competitors also have long standing relationships with automobile dealerships and may offer dealerships or their customers other forms of financing, including dealer floor plan financing or revolving credit products, which are not provided by us. Providers of automobile financing have traditionally competed on the basis of interest rates charged, the quality of credit accepted, the flexibility of loan terms offered and the quality of service provided to dealers and customers. In seeking to establish ourselves as one of the principal financing sources at the dealers we serve, we compete predominantly on the basis of our high level of dealer service and strong dealer relationships and by offering flexible loan terms. There can be no assurance that we will be able to compete successfully in this market or against these competitors.

Employees

At June 30, 2010, we employed 2,940 persons in the United States and Canada. None of our employees are a part of a collective bargaining agreement, and our relationships with employees are satisfactory.

ITEM 1A.

RISK FACTORS

Pending Merger. On July 21, 2010, we entered into the Merger Agreement with GM Holdings. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, Merger Sub will be merged with and into AmeriCredit, with AmeriCredit continuing as the surviving corporation and a direct wholly owned subsidiary of GM Holdings. Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement and subject to the satisfaction or waiver of the closing conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, at the Effective Time each share of our common stock issued and outstanding immediately prior to the Effective Time (other than (i) any shares held by us or any of our subsidiaries immediately prior to the Effective Time, which shares will be cancelled with no consideration in exchange for such cancellation, and (ii) any shares held by our shareholders who are entitled to and who properly exercise appraisal rights under Texas law) will be converted into the right to receive $24.50 in cash, without interest.

of Directors has unanimously recommended that our shareholders adopt and approve the Merger Agreement, we cannot predict the outcome of the shareholder vote. The Merger will not close if the requisite approval is not received from our shareholders.

If the proposed Merger is not completed, the share price of our common stock may drop to the extent that the current market price of our common stock reflects an assumption that the Merger will be completed. In addition, under circumstances defined in the Merger Agreement, we may be required to pay a termination fee of $105 million. Further, a failed transaction may result in negative publicity and a negative impression of us in the investment community. Finally, any disruptions to our business resulting from the announcement and pendency of the Merger, or any adverse changes in our relationships with our customers, vendors and employees, could continue or accelerate as a result of the announcement of the proposed Merger or in the event of a failed transaction. There can be no assurance that our business, these relationships or our financial condition will not be adversely affected, as compared to the condition prior to the announcement of the Merger, if the Merger is not consummated.

The Merger Agreement contains customary representations and warranties of AmeriCredit, GM Holdings and Merger Sub. The Merger Agreement also contains customary covenants and agreements, including covenants relating to (a) the conduct of our business between the date of the signing of the Merger Agreement and the closing of the Merger, (b) non-solicitation of competing acquisition proposals and (c) the efforts of the parties to cause the Merger to be completed. Compliance with the covenants outlined in the Merger Agreement could restrict our ability to operate our business or result in our failure to pursue other opportunities which could be beneficial to our business in the future, should the Merger not be completed. Furthermore, management’s efforts may be focused on completing the Merger and diverted from the operation of our business.

Dependence on Credit Facilities. We depend on various credit facilities with financial institutions to finance our purchase of contracts pending securitization.

At June 30, 2010, we had one credit facility, which we refer to as our master/syndicated warehouse facility, which provides borrowing capacity of up to $1.3 billion. In February 2010, we amended our master/syndicated warehouse facility, which was approved by the eight lenders in the facility to expand the size of the facility to $1.3 billion from $1.0 billion, and to extend the revolving period to February 2011. In February 2011 when the revolving period ends and if the facility is not renewed, the outstanding balance will be repaid over time based on the amortization of the receivables pledged until February 2012 when the remaining balance will be due and payable. On August 20, 2010, the master/syndicated warehouse facility was amended to allow for the change of control following the consummation of the pending Merger.

Additionally, we have a medium term note facility that reached the end of its revolving period in October 2009 and has $598.9 million outstanding at June 30, 2010. The outstanding balance of this facility will be repaid over time based on the amortization of the receivables pledged until October 2016 when any remaining amount outstanding will be due and payable.

We cannot guarantee that the master/syndicated warehouse facility will continue to be available beyond the current maturity date on reasonable terms or at all. The availability of this financing source depends, in part, on factors outside of our control, including regulatory capital treatment for unfunded bank lines of credit and the availability of bank liquidity in general. If we are unable to extend or replace this facility or arrange new credit facilities or other types of interim financing, we will have to curtail or suspend loan origination activities, which would have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations.

Our credit facilities generally contain a borrowing base or advance formula which requires us to pledge finance receivables in excess of the amounts which we can borrow under the facilities. We are also required to hold certain funds in restricted cash accounts to provide additional collateral for borrowings under the credit facilities. In addition, the finance receivables pledged as collateral must be less than 31 days delinquent at

periodic measurement dates. Accordingly, increases in delinquencies or defaults on pledged collateral resulting from weakened economic conditions, or due to our inability to execute securitization transactions or any other factor, would require us to pledge additional finance receivables to support the same borrowing levels and to replace delinquent or defaulted collateral. The pledge of additional finance receivables to support our credit facilities would adversely impact our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations.

Disruptions in the capital markets in 2008 and early 2009 have caused banks and other credit providers to restrict availability of new credit facilities, including execution of hedging arrangements, and require more collateral and higher pricing upon renewal of existing credit facilities, if such facilities are renewed at all. Accordingly, as our existing master/syndicated warehouse facility comes up for renewal, we may be required to provide more collateral in the form of finance receivables or cash to support borrowing levels which will affect our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations. In addition, higher pricing would increase our cost of funds and adversely affect our profitability.

Additionally, the credit facilities contain various covenants requiring certain minimum financial ratios, asset quality, and portfolio performance ratios (portfolio net loss and delinquency ratios, and pool level cumulative net loss ratios) as well as limits on deferment levels. Failure to meet any of these covenants could result in an event of default under these agreements. If an event of default occurs under these agreements, the lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under these agreements to be immediately due and payable, enforce their interests against collateral pledged under these agreements or restrict our ability to obtain additional borrowings under these facilities. If the lenders elect to accelerate outstanding indebtedness under these agreements following the violation of any covenant, such actions may result in an event of default under our senior note and convertible senior note indentures.

Dependence on Securitization Program.

General. Since December 1994, we have relied upon our ability to transfer receivables to securitization Trusts and sell securities in the asset-backed securities market to generate cash proceeds for repayment of credit facilities and to purchase additional receivables. Accordingly, adverse changes in our asset-backed securities program or in the asset-backed securities market for automobile receivables in general have in the past, and could in the future, materially adversely affect our ability to purchase and securitize loans on a timely basis and upon terms acceptable to us. Any adverse change or delay would have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations.

We will continue to require the execution of securitization transactions in order to fund our future liquidity needs. There can be no assurance that funding will be available to us through these sources or, if available, that it will be on terms acceptable to us. If these sources of funding are not available to us on a regular basis for any reason, including the occurrence of events of default, deterioration in loss experience on the receivables, breach of financial covenants or portfolio and pool performance measures, disruption of the asset-backed market or otherwise, we will be required to revise the scale of our business, including the possible discontinuation of loan origination activities, which would have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations.

Recent Conditions and Events. Although, the asset-backed securities market, along with credit markets in general, have stabilized, they are operating at reduced levels compared to periods prior to mid-2007. Conditions in the asset-backed securities market began deteriorating in mid-2007, were further weakened by the credit rating downgrades of the financial guaranty insurance providers, and worsened significantly following the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in September 2008. Over this time period, conditions in the asset-backed securities market generally included increased risk premiums for issuers, limited investor demand for asset-backed securities, particularly those securities backed by sub-prime collateral, rating agency downgrades of asset-backed securities, and a general tightening of availability of credit. These conditions increased our cost of funding and restricted our access to the asset-backed securities market, and may occur again in the future.

There can be no assurance that we will continue to be successful in selling securities in the asset-backed securities market. Since we are highly dependent on the availability of the asset-backed securities market to finance our operations, disruptions in this market or adverse changes or delays in our ability to access this market would have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations. Although we experienced sufficient investor demand for the securities we issued in our recent securitizations, reduced investor demand for asset-backed securities could result in our having to hold auto loans until investor demand improves, but our capacity to hold auto loans is not unlimited. A reduced demand for our asset-backed securities could require us to reduce the amount of auto loans that we will purchase. A return to adverse market conditions, such as we experienced in 2008 and early 2009, could also result in increased costs and reduced margins in connection with our securitization transactions.

Securitization Structures. Since the beginning of fiscal 2009, we have primarily utilized senior subordinated securitization structures which involve the sale of subordinated asset-backed securities to provide credit enhancement for the senior, or higher rated, asset-backed securities. In a senior-subordinated securitization, we expect that the higher rated, or triple-A, securities to be sold by us will comprise approximately 70% of the total securities issued. The balance of securities we expect to issue, the subordinated notes, will comprise the remaining 30%. Sizes of the classes depend upon rating agency loss assumptions and loss coverage requirements in addition to the level of subordinate bonds. The market environment for subordinated securities is traditionally smaller than for senior securities and, therefore, can be more challenging than the market for triple-A securities. There can be no assurance that we will be able to sell the subordinated securities in a senior subordinated securitization, or that the pricing and terms demanded by investors for such securities will be acceptable to us. If we were unable for any reason to sell the subordinated securities in a senior subordinated securitization, we would be required to hold such securities which could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations and could force us to curtail or suspend loan origination activities.

The amount of the initial credit enhancement on future senior-subordinated securitizations will be dependent upon the amount of subordinated securities sold and the desired ratings on the securities being sold. In the AMCAR 2010-2 securitization, the initial cash deposit and overcollateralization requirement was 8.25% in order to provide credit enhancement for the asset-backed securities sold, including the double-B rated securities which were the lowest rated securities sold. The required initial and targeted credit enhancement levels depend, in part, on the net interest margin expected over the life of a securitization, the collateral characteristics of the pool of receivables securitized, credit performance trends of our finance receivables, the structure of the securitization transaction, our financial condition and the economic environment. In periods of economic weakness and associated deterioration of credit performance trends, required credit enhancement levels generally increase, particularly for securitizations of higher risk finance receivables such as our loan portfolio. Higher levels of credit enhancement require significantly greater use of liquidity to execute a securitization transaction. The level of credit enhancement requirements in the future could adversely impact our ability to execute securitization transactions and may affect the timing of such securitizations given the increased amount of liquidity necessary to fund credit enhancement requirements. This, in turn, may adversely impact our ability to opportunistically access the capital markets when conditions are favorable.

Prior to fiscal 2009, we primarily utilized financial guaranty insurance policies provided by various monoline insurance providers in order to achieve triple-A ratings on the securities issued in our securitization transactions. Most of the monoline insurers we have used in the past are still facing financial stress and have received rating agency downgrades due to risk exposures on insurance policies that guarantee mortgage debt and related structured products. As a result, there is limited demand for securities guaranteed by insurance policies. However, during calendar 2010, we were able to issue two securitizations utilizing financial guaranty insurance policies. The asset-backed securities sold had an underlying rating of single-A without considering the benefit of the financial guaranty insurance policy.

Liquidity and Capital Needs. Our ability to make payments on or to refinance our indebtedness and to fund our operations depends on our ability to generate cash and our access to the capital markets in the future.

This, to a certain extent, is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory, capital market conditions and other factors that are beyond our control.

We expect to continue to require substantial amounts of cash. Our primary cash requirements include the funding of: (i) contract purchases pending their securitization; (ii) credit enhancement requirements in connection with the securitization of the receivables and credit facilities; (iii) interest and principal payments under our credit facilities and other indebtedness; (iv) fees and expenses incurred in connection with the securitization and servicing of receivables and credit facilities; (v) ongoing operating expenses; (vi) income tax payments; and (vii) capital expenditures.

We require substantial amounts of cash to fund our contract purchase and securitization activities. Although we must fund certain credit enhancement requirements upon the closing of a securitization, we typically receive the cash representing excess cash flows and return of credit enhancement deposits over the actual life of the receivables securitized. We also incur transaction costs in connection with a securitization transaction. Accordingly, our strategy of securitizing our newly purchased receivables will require significant amounts of cash.

Our primary sources of future liquidity are expected to be: (i) interest and principal payments on loans not yet securitized; (ii) distributions received from securitization Trusts; (iii) servicing fees; (iv) borrowings under our credit facilities or proceeds from securitization transactions; and (v) further issuances of other debt or equity securities.

Because we expect to continue to require substantial amounts of cash for the foreseeable future, we anticipate that we will require the execution of additional securitization transactions and may choose to enter into other additional debt or equity financings. The type, timing and terms of financing selected by us will be dependent upon our cash needs, the availability of other financing sources and the prevailing conditions in the capital markets. There can be no assurance that funding will be available to us through these sources or, if available, that the funding will be on acceptable terms. If we are unable to execute securitization transactions on a regular basis, we would not have sufficient funds to finance new loan originations and, in such event, we would be required to revise the scale of our business, including possible discontinuation of loan origination activities, which would have a material adverse effect on our ability to achieve our business and financial objectives.

Leverage. We currently have a substantial amount of outstanding indebtedness. Our ability to make payments of principal or interest on, or to refinance, our indebtedness will depend on our future operating performance, including the performance of receivables transferred to securitization Trusts, and our ability to enter into additional securitization transactions as well as other debt or equity financings, which, to a certain extent, are subject to economic, financial, competitive, regulatory, capital markets and other factors beyond our control.

If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flows in the future to service our debt, we may be required to refinance all or a portion of our existing debt or to obtain additional financing. There can be no assurance that any refinancings will be possible or that any additional financing could be obtained on acceptable terms. The inability to service or refinance our existing debt or to obtain additional financing would have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations.

The degree to which we are leveraged creates risks including: (i) we may be unable to satisfy our obligations under our outstanding indebtedness; (ii) we may find it more difficult to fund future credit enhancement requirements, operating costs, income tax payments, capital expenditures, or general corporate expenditures; (iii) we may have to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash resources to payments on our outstanding indebtedness, thereby reducing the funds available for operations and future business opportunities; and (iv) we may be vulnerable to adverse general economic, capital markets and industry conditions.

Our credit facilities require us to comply with certain financial ratios and covenants, including minimum asset quality maintenance requirements. These restrictions may interfere with our ability to obtain financing or to engage in other necessary or desirable business activities. If we cannot comply with the requirements in our credit facilities, then the lenders may increase our borrowing costs, remove us as servicer or declare the outstanding debt immediately due and payable. If our debt payments were accelerated, the assets pledged on these facilities might not be sufficient to fully repay the debt. These lenders may foreclose upon their collateral, including the restricted cash in these credit facilities. These events may also result in a default under our senior note and convertible senior note indentures. We may not be able to obtain a waiver of these provisions or refinance our debt, if needed. In such case, our financial condition, liquidity, and results of operations would materially suffer.

Default and Prepayment Risks. Our financial condition, liquidity, and results of operations depend, to a material extent, on the performance of loans in our portfolio. Obligors under contracts acquired or originated by us may default during the term of their loan. Generally, we bear the full risk of losses resulting from defaults. In the event of a default, the collateral value of the financed vehicle usually does not cover the outstanding loan balance and costs of recovery.

We maintain an allowance for loan losses for our finance receivable portfolio which reflects management’s estimates of inherent losses for these loans. If the allowance is inadequate, we would recognize the losses in excess of that allowance as an expense and results of operations would be adversely affected. A material adjustment to our allowance for loan losses and the corresponding decrease in earnings could limit our ability to enter into future securitizations and other financings, thus impairing our ability to finance our business.

We are required to deposit substantial amounts of the cash flows generated by our interests in securitizations sponsored by us to satisfy targeted credit enhancement requirements. An increase in defaults would reduce the cash flows generated by our interests in securitization transactions lengthening the period required to build targeted credit enhancement levels in the securitization trusts. Distributions of cash from the securitizations to us would be delayed and the ultimate amount of cash distributable to us would be less, which would have an adverse effect on our liquidity. The targeted credit enhancement levels in future securitizations may also be increased, due to an increase in defaults and losses, further impacting our liquidity.

Consumer prepayments affect the amount of finance charge income we receive over the life of the loans. If prepayment levels increase for any reason and we are not able to replace the prepaid receivables with newly originated loans, we will receive less finance charge income and our results of operations may be adversely affected.

Portfolio Performance—Negative Impact on Cash Flows. Generally, the form of agreements we have entered into with our financial guaranty insurance providers in connection with securitization transactions insured by them contain specified limits on portfolio performance ratios (delinquency, cumulative default and cumulative net loss) on the receivables included in each securitization Trust. If, at any measurement date, a portfolio performance ratio with respect to any Trust were to exceed the specified limits, provisions of the credit enhancement agreement would automatically increase the level of credit enhancement requirements for that Trust if a waiver was not obtained. During the period in which the specified portfolio performance ratio was exceeded, excess cash flows, if any, from the Trust would be used to fund additional credit enhancement up to the increased levels instead of being distributed to us, which would have an adverse effect on our cash flows and liquidity.

Our securitization transactions insured by some of our financial guaranty insurance providers are cross-collateralized to a limited extent. In the event of a shortfall in the original targeted credit enhancement requirement for any of these securitization Trusts after a certain period of time, excess cash flows from other transactions insured by the same insurance provider would be used to satisfy the shortfall amount rather than be distributed to us.

Right to Terminate Servicing. The agreements that we have entered into with our financial guaranty insurance providers in connection with securitization transactions insured by them contain additional specified targeted portfolio performance ratios (delinquency, cumulative default and cumulative net loss) that are higher than the limits referred to in the preceding risk factor. If, at any measurement date, the targeted portfolio performance ratios with respect to any insured Trust were to exceed these additional levels, provisions of the agreements permit the financial guaranty insurance providers to declare the occurrence of an event of default and take steps to terminate our servicing rights to the receivables sold to that Trust. In addition, the servicing agreements on certain insured securitization Trusts are cross-defaulted so that a default declared under one servicing agreement would allow the financial guaranty insurance provider to terminate our servicing rights under all servicing agreements for securitization Trusts in which they issued a financial guaranty insurance policy. Additionally, if these higher targeted portfolio performance levels were exceeded and the financial guaranty insurance providers elected to declare an event of default, the insurance providers may retain all excess cash generated by other securitization transactions insured by them as additional credit enhancement. This, in turn, could result in defaults under our other securitizations and other material indebtedness, including under our senior note and convertible senior note indentures. Although we have never exceeded these additional targeted portfolio performance ratios, there can be no assurance that we will not exceed these additional targeted portfolio performance ratios in the future. If such targeted portfolio performance ratios are exceeded, or if we have breached our obligations under the servicing agreements, or if the financial guaranty insurance providers are required to make payments under a policy, or if certain bankruptcy or insolvency events were to occur then there can be no assurance that an event of default will not be declared and our servicing rights will not be terminated. The termination of any or all of our servicing rights would have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations.

Implementation of Business Strategy. Our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations depend on management’s ability to execute our business strategy. Key factors involved in the execution of the business strategy include achieving the desired loan origination volume, continued and successful use of proprietary scoring models for credit risk assessment and risk-based pricing, the use of effective credit risk management techniques and servicing strategies, implementation of effective loan servicing and collection practices, continued investment in technology to support operating efficiency, and continued access to funding and liquidity sources. Our failure or inability to execute any element of our business strategy could materially adversely affect our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations.

Target Consumer Base. The majority of our loan purchasing and servicing activities involve sub-prime automobile receivables. Sub-prime borrowers are associated with higher-than-average delinquency and default rates. While we believe that we effectively manage these risks with our proprietary credit scoring system, risk-based loan pricing and other underwriting policies, and our servicing and collection methods, no assurance can be given that these criteria or methods will be effective in the future. In the event that we underestimate the default risk or under-price contracts that we purchase, our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations would be adversely affected, possibly to a material degree.

Economic Conditions. We are subject to changes in general economic conditions that are beyond our control. During periods of economic slowdown or recession, delinquencies, defaults, repossessions and losses generally increase. These periods also may be accompanied by increased unemployment rates, decreased consumer demand for automobiles and declining values of automobiles securing outstanding loans, which weakens collateral coverage and increases the amount of a loss in the event of default. Additionally, higher gasoline prices, declining stock market values, unstable real estate values, increasing unemployment levels, general availability of consumer credit or other factors that impact consumer confidence or disposable income could increase loss frequency and decrease consumer demand for automobiles as well as weaken collateral values on certain types of automobiles. Because we focus predominantly on sub-prime borrowers, the actual rates of delinquencies, defaults, repossessions and losses on these loans are higher than those experienced in the general automobile finance industry and could be more dramatically affected by a general economic downturn. In addition, during an economic slowdown or recession, our servicing costs may increase without a corresponding

increase in our finance charge income. While we seek to manage the higher risk inherent in loans made to sub-prime borrowers through the underwriting criteria and collection methods we employ, no assurance can be given that these criteria or methods will afford adequate protection against these risks. Any sustained period of increased delinquencies, defaults, repossessions or losses or increased servicing costs could adversely affect our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and our ability to enter into future securitizations and future credit facilities.

Wholesale Auction Values. We sell repossessed automobiles at wholesale auction markets located throughout the United States and Canada. Auction proceeds from the sale of repossessed vehicles and other recoveries are usually not sufficient to cover the outstanding balance of the contract, and the resulting deficiency is charged off. Decreased auction proceeds resulting from the depressed prices at which used automobiles may be sold during periods of economic slowdown or slack consumer demand will result in higher credit losses for us. Furthermore, depressed wholesale prices for used automobiles may result from significant liquidations of rental or fleet inventories, financial difficulties of the new vehicle manufacturers, discontinuance of vehicle brands and models and from increased volume of trade-ins due to promotional programs offered by new vehicle manufacturers. Additionally, higher gasoline prices may decrease the wholesale auction values of certain types of vehicles as evidenced by declines in calendar 2008 in the wholesale values of large sport utility vehicles and trucks. Our net recoveries as a percentage of repossession charge-offs were 44% in fiscal 2010, 40% in fiscal 2009 and 45% in fiscal 2008. There can be no assurance that our recovery rates will remain at current levels.

Interest Rates. Our profitability may be directly affected by the level of and fluctuations in interest rates, which affects the gross interest rate spread we earn on our receivables. As the level of interest rates change, our gross interest rate spread on new originations either increases or decreases since the rates charged on the contracts purchased from dealers are fixed rate and are limited by market and competitive conditions, restricting our opportunity to pass on increased interest costs to the consumer. We believe that our financial position, liquidity, and results of operations could be adversely affected during any period of higher interest rates, possibly to a material degree. We monitor the interest rate environment and employ hedging strategies designed to mitigate the impact of increases in interest rates. We can provide no assurance however, that hedging strategies will mitigate the impact of increases in interest rates.

Significant Share Ownership. As of June 30, 2010, we have two shareholders that each held significant share ownership of our outstanding common stock.

Leucadia National Corp. (“Leucadia”) owns approximately 25% of our outstanding common stock and has two members on our Board of Directors. As a result, Leucadia could exert significant influence over matters requiring shareholder approval, including approval of significant corporate transactions such as the Merger. This concentration of ownership may delay or prevent a change in control and make the approval of certain transactions more difficult without their support. We entered into a standstill agreement with Leucadia which expired on March 3, 2010. Subsequent to the termination of the standstill agreement, Leucadia has no restrictions with respect to taking certain actions regarding business combinations or proxy solicitations concerning the composition of our Board of Directors. In connection with the proposed Merger, Leucadia and certain of its affiliates entered into a shareholder support and voting agreement, under which each of them agreed to vote as shareholders in favor of the Merger Agreement, pursuant to the terms and conditions of such voting agreement.

Fairholme Funds Inc. (“Fairholme”) owns approximately 18% of our outstanding common stock. As a result, Fairholme could exert significant influence over matters requiring shareholder approval, including approval of significant corporate transactions such as the Merger. This concentration of ownership may delay or prevent a change in control and make the approval of certain transactions more difficult without their support. We have entered into a standstill agreement with Fairholme which expires on December 31, 2010. Subsequent to the termination of the standstill agreement, Fairholme will not be restricted from taking certain actions regarding business combinations or proxy solicitations concerning the composition of our Board of Directors. In connection with the proposed Merger, Fairholme and certain of its affiliates entered into a shareholder support

and voting agreement, under which each of them agreed to vote as shareholders in favor of the Merger Agreement, pursuant to the terms and conditions of such voting agreement.

Labor Market Conditions. Competition to hire and retain personnel possessing the skills and experience required by us could contribute to an increase in our employee turnover rate. High turnover or an inability to attract and retain qualified personnel could have an adverse effect on our delinquency, default and net loss rates, our ability to grow and, ultimately, our financial condition, liquidity, and results of operations.

Data Integrity. If third parties or our employees are able to penetrate our network security or otherwise misappropriate our customers’ personal information or loan information, or if we give third parties or our employees improper access to our customers’ personal information or loan information, we could be subject to liability. This liability could include identity theft or other similar fraud-related claims. This liability could also include claims for other misuses or losses of personal information, including for unauthorized marketing purposes. Other liabilities could include claims alleging misrepresentation of our privacy and data security practices.

We rely on encryption and authentication technology licensed from third parties to provide the security and authentication necessary to effect secure online transmission of confidential consumer information. Advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries in the field of cryptography or other events or developments may result in a compromise or breach of the algorithms that we use to protect sensitive customer transaction data. A party who is able to circumvent our security measures could misappropriate proprietary information or cause interruptions in our operations. We may be required to expend capital and other resources to protect against such security breaches or to alleviate problems caused by such breaches. Our security measures are designed to protect against security breaches, but our failure to prevent such security breaches could subject us to liability, decrease our profitability, and damage our reputation.

Regulation. Reference should be made to Item 1. “Business – Regulation” for a discussion of regulatory risk factors.

Competition. Reference should be made to Item 1. “Business – Competition” for a discussion of competitive risk factors.

Litigation. As a consumer finance company, we are subject to various consumer claims and litigation seeking damages and statutory penalties, based upon, among other things, usury, disclosure inaccuracies, wrongful repossession, violations of bankruptcy stay provisions, certificate of title disputes, fraud, breach of contract and discriminatory treatment of credit applicants. Some litigation against us could take the form of class action complaints by consumers and/or shareholders. As the assignee of finance contracts originated by dealers, we may also be named as a co-defendant in lawsuits filed by consumers principally against dealers. The damages and penalties claimed by consumers in these types of matters can be substantial. The relief requested by the plaintiffs varies but can include requests for compensatory, statutory and punitive damages. We believe that we have taken prudent steps to address and mitigate the litigation risks associated with our business activities. However, any adverse resolution of litigation pending or threatened against us could have a material adverse affect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

On July 21, 2010, we entered into the Merger Agreement. A public announcement of the agreement was made on July 22, 2010. In accordance with the Merger Agreement, we filed a preliminary proxy statement with the SEC on August 20, 2010. Litigation has been commenced with respect to the proposed Merger. See Item 3 – “Legal Proceedings” for further discussion.

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED

STAFF COMMENTS

None

ITEM 2.

PROPERTIES

Our executive offices are located at 801 Cherry Street, Suite 3500, Fort Worth, Texas, in a 51,000 square foot office space under a ten-year lease that commenced in June 2009.

We also lease 46,000 square feet of office space in Charlotte, North Carolina under a lease expiring in June 2012, 85,000 square feet of office space in Peterborough, Ontario under a lease expiring in July 2019, 62,000 square feet of office space in Chandler, Arizona, under a lease expiring in September 2015 and 250,000 square feet of office space in Arlington, Texas, under a twelve-year agreement with renewal options that commenced in August 2005. We also own a 250,000 square foot servicing facility in Arlington, Texas. Our regional credit centers are generally leased under agreements with original terms of three to five years. Such facilities are typically located in a suburban office building and consist of between 2,000 and 6,000 square feet of space.

ITEM 3.

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

As a consumer finance company, we are subject to various consumer claims and litigation seeking damages and statutory penalties, based upon, among other things, usury, disclosure inaccuracies, wrongful repossession, violations of bankruptcy stay provisions, certificate of title disputes, fraud, breach of contract and discriminatory treatment of credit applicants. Some litigation against us could take the form of class action complaints by consumers and/or shareholders. As the assignee of finance contracts originated by dealers, we may also be named as a co-defendant in lawsuits filed by consumers principally against dealers. The damages and penalties claimed by consumers in these types of matters can be substantial. The relief requested by the plaintiffs varies but can include requests for compensatory, statutory and punitive damages. We believe that we have taken prudent steps to address and mitigate the litigation risks associated with our business activities. However, any adverse resolution of litigation pending or threatened against us could have a material adverse affect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

On July 21, 2010, we entered into the Merger Agreement. The following litigation has been commenced with respect to the proposed Merger:

On July 27, 2010, an action styled Robert Hatfield, Derivatively on behalf of AmeriCredit Corp. vs. Clifton H. Morris, Jr., Daniel E. Berce, John Clay, Ian M. Cumming, A.R. Dike, James H. Greer, Douglas K. Higgins, Kenneth H. Jones, Jr., Robert B. Sturges, Justin R. Wheeler, General Motors Holdings LLC and General Motors Company, Defendants, and AmeriCredit Corp., Nominal Defendant, was filed in the District Court of Tarrant County, Texas, Cause No. 017 246937 10 (the “Hatfield Case”). In the Hatfield Case, the plaintiff alleges, among other allegations, that the individual defendants, who are members of our Board of Directors, breached their fiduciary duties with regards to the pending transaction between us and GM Holdings. Among other relief, the complaint seeks to enjoin the closing of the transaction, to require us to rescind the transaction and the recovery of attorney fees and expenses.

On July 28, 2010, an action styled Labourers’ Pension Fund of Central and Eastern Canada, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated v. AmeriCredit Corp., Clifton H. Morris, Jr., Daniel E. Berce, Bruce R. Berkowitz, John R. Clay, Ian M. Cumming, A.R. Dike, James H. Greer, Douglas K. Higgins, Kenneth H. Jones, Jr., Justin R. Wheeler and General Motors Company, Defendants, was filed in the District Court of Tarrant County, Texas, Cause No. 236 246960 10 (the “Labourers’ Pension Fund Case”). In the Labourers’ Pension Fund Case, the plaintiff seeks class action status and alleges that members of our Board of Directors breached their fiduciary duties in negotiating and approving the proposed transaction between us and GM Holdings. Among other relief, the complaint seeks to enjoin both the transaction from closing as well as a shareholder vote on the pending transaction and seeks the recovery of damages on behalf of shareholders and the recovery of attorney fees and expenses. The court has not yet determined whether the case may be maintained as a class action.

On August 6, 2010, an action styled Carla Butler, Derivatively on behalf of AmeriCredit Corp., Plaintiff vs. Clifton H. Morris, Jr., Daniel E. Berce, John Clay, Ian M. Cumming, A.R. Dike, James H. Greer, Douglas K.

Higgins, Kenneth H. Jones, Jr., Robert B. Sturges, Justin R. Wheeler, General Motors Holdings LLC and General Motors Company, Defendants, and AmeriCredit Corp., Nominal Defendant, was filed in the District Court of Tarrant County, Texas, Cause No. 67 247227-10 (the “Butler Case”). In the Butler Case, like previously filed litigation related to the proposed transaction between us and GM Holdings, the complaint alleges that our individual officers and directors breached their fiduciary duties. Among other relief, the complaint seeks to rescind the transaction and enjoin its consummation and also to award plaintiff costs and disbursements including attorneys’ and expert fees.

On August 24, 2010, an action styled Asbestos Workers Local 42 Pension Fund, Plaintiff vs. Daniel E. Berce, Clifton H. Morris, Ian M. Cumming, Justin R. Wheeler, James H. Greer, A.R. Dike, Douglas K. Higgins, Kenneth H. Jones, Jr., John R. Clay, Robert B. Sturges, General Motors Holdings LLC and Goalie Texas Holdco Inc., Defendants, and AmeriCredit Corp., Nominal Defendant, was filed in the District Court of Tarrant County, Texas, Cause No. 017 247635-10 (the “Asbestos Workers Case”). In the Asbestos Workers Case, like previously filed litigation related to the proposed transaction between us and GM Holdings, the complaint alleges that our individual officers and directors breached their fiduciary duties. Among other relief, the complaint seeks to rescind the transaction and enjoin its consummation and also to award plaintiff costs and disbursements including attorneys’ and expert fees.

We believe that the claims alleged in the Hatfield Case, the Labourers’ Pension Fund Case, the Butler Case and the Asbestos Workers Case are without merit and we intend to assert vigorous defenses to the litigation. Neither the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome nor the amount of ultimate liability, if any, with respect to this litigation can be determined at this time.

ITEM 4.

REMOVED AND RESERVED

PART II

ITEM 5.

MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

Market Information

Our common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol ACF. As of August 26, 2010, there were 135,390,408 shares of common stock outstanding and 197 shareholders of record.

The following table sets forth the range of the high, low and closing sale prices for our common stock as reported on the Composite Tape of the New York Stock Exchange Listed Issues.


	High		Low		Close
Fiscal year ended June 30, 2010
First Quarter	$	18.00	$	11.51	$	15.79
Second Quarter		20.10		14.71		19.04
Third Quarter		24.55		18.69		23.76
Fourth Quarter		26.49		18.14		18.22

Fiscal year ended June 30, 2009
First Quarter	$	14.90	$	6.26	$	10.13
Second Quarter		10.58		2.85		7.64
Third Quarter		8.50		3.07		5.86
Fourth Quarter		14.40		5.67		13.55

Dividend Policy

We have never paid cash dividends on our common stock. The indentures pursuant to which our senior notes and convertible senior notes were issued contain certain restrictions on the payment of dividends. We presently intend to retain future earnings, if any, for use in the operation of the business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

Stock Repurchases

We have repurchased $1,374.8 million of our common stock since inception of our share repurchase program in April 2004, and we have remaining authorization to repurchase $172.0 million of our common stock. Covenants in our indentures entered into with respect to our senior notes and our convertible senior notes limit our ability to repurchase stock. We do not anticipate pursuing repurchase activity for the foreseeable future.

Performance Graph

The following performance graph presents cumulative shareholder returns on our Common Stock for the five years ended June 30, 2010. In the performance graph, we are compared to (i) the S&P 500 and (ii) the S&P Consumer Finance Index. Each Index assumes $100 invested at the beginning of the measurement period and is calculated assuming quarterly reinvestment of dividends and quarterly weighting by market capitalization.

The data source for the graphs is Hemscott Inc., an authorized licensee of S&P.

Comparison of Cumulative Shareholder Return 2005-2010

COMPARISON OF CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN

LOGO


	June 2005		June 2006		June 2007		June 2008		June 2009		June 2010
AmeriCredit Corp.	$	100.00	$	109.49	$	104.12	$	33.80	$	53.14	$	71.45
S&P 500	$	100.00	$	108.63	$	131.00	$	113.81	$	83.97	$	96.09
S&P Consumer Finance	$	100.00	$	110.09	$	120.07	$	63.71	$	40.00	$	65.89

ITEM 6.

SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The table below summarizes selected financial information. For additional information, refer to the audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto in Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.


Years Ended June 30,	2010		2009			2008			2007		2006
	(dollars in thousands, except per share data)
Operating Data
Finance charge income	$	1,431,319	$	1,902,684		$	2,382,484		$	2,142,470	$	1,641,125
Other revenue		91,498		164,640			160,598			197,453		170,213
Total revenue		1,522,817		2,067,324			2,543,082			2,339,923		1,811,338
Impairment of goodwill							212,595
Net income (loss)		220,546		(10,889	)		(82,369	)		349,963		306,183
Basic earnings (loss) per Share		1.65		(0.09	)		(0.72	)		2.94		2.29
Diluted earnings (loss) per Share		1.60		(0.09	)		(0.72	)		2.65		2.08
Diluted weighted average Shares		138,179,945		125,239,241			114,962,241			133,224,945		148,824,916
Other Data
Origination volume^(a)	$	2,137,620	$	1,285,091		$	6,293,494		$	8,454,600	$	6,208,004

June 30,	2010		2009			2008 ^(a)			2007 ^(a)		2006
	(in thousands)
Balance Sheet Data
Cash and cash equivalents	$	282,273	$	193,287		$	433,493		$	910,304	$	513,240
Finance receivables, net		8,160,208		10,037,329			14,030,299			15,102,370		11,097,008
Total assets		9,881,033		11,958,327			16,508,201			17,762,999		13,067,865
Credit facilities		598,946		1,630,133			2,928,161			2,541,702		2,106,282
Securitization notes payable		6,108,976		7,426,687			10,420,327			11,939,447		8,518,849
Senior notes		70,620		91,620			200,000			200,000
Convertible senior notes		414,068		392,514			642,599			620,537		200,000
Total liabilities		7,480,609		9,851,019			14,542,939			15,606,407		11,058,979
Shareholders’ equity		2,400,424		2,107,308			1,965,262			2,156,592		2,008,886
Other Data
Finance receivables		8,733,518		10,927,969			14,981,412			15,922,458		11,775,665
Gain on sale receivables										24,091		421,037

Managed receivables		8,733,518		10,927,969			14,981,412			15,946,549		12,196,702

(a)

Fiscal 2008 and 2007 amounts include $218.1 million and $34.9 million of contracts purchased through our leasing program, respectively.

ITEM 7.

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Recent Events

On July 21, 2010, we entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”) with General Motors Holdings LLC (“GM Holdings”), a Delaware limited liability company and a wholly owned subsidiary of General Motors Company (“General Motors”), and Goalie Texas Holdco Inc. (“Merger Sub”), a Texas corporation and a direct wholly owned subsidiary of GM Holdings. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, Merger Sub will be merged with and into AmeriCredit, with AmeriCredit continuing as the surviving corporation and a direct wholly owned subsidiary of GM Holdings. Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement and subject to the satisfaction or waiver of the closing conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, at the Effective Time each share of our common stock issued and outstanding immediately prior to the Effective Time (other than (i) any shares held by us or any of our subsidiaries immediately prior to the Effective Time, which shares will be cancelled with no consideration in exchange for such cancellation, and (ii) any shares held by our shareholders who are entitled to and who properly exercise appraisal rights under Texas law) will be converted into the right to receive $24.50 in cash, without interest.

There is no assurance that the Merger with GM Holdings will occur. The closing of the Merger is subject to the satisfaction of certain closing conditions, including the approval of the Merger by our shareholders. The timing of such approval and the closing of the Merger are subject to factors beyond our control. While our Board of Directors has unanimously recommended that our shareholders adopt and approve the Merger Agreement, we cannot predict the outcome of the shareholder vote. The Merger will not close if the requisite approval is not received from our shareholders.

GENERAL

We are a leading independent auto finance company specializing in purchasing retail automobile installment sales contracts originated by franchised and select independent dealers in connection with the sale of used and new automobiles. We generate revenue and cash flows primarily through the purchase, retention, subsequent securitization and servicing of finance receivables. As used herein, “loans” include auto finance receivables originated by dealers and purchased by us. To fund the acquisition of receivables prior to securitization, we use available cash and borrowings under our credit facilities. We earn finance charge income on the finance receivables and pay interest expense on borrowings under our credit facilities.

Through wholly-owned subsidiaries, we periodically transfer receivables to securitization trusts (“Trusts”) that issue asset-backed securities to investors. We retain an interest in these securitization transactions in the form of restricted cash accounts and overcollateralization, whereby more receivables are transferred to the Trusts than the amount of asset-backed securities issued by the Trusts, as well as the estimated future excess cash flows expected to be received by us over the life of the securitization. Excess cash flows result from the difference between the finance charges received from the obligors on the receivables and the interest paid to investors in the asset-backed securities, net of credit losses and expenses.

Excess cash flows from the Trusts are initially utilized to fund credit enhancement requirements in order to attain specific credit ratings for the asset-backed securities issued by the Trusts. Once targeted credit enhancement requirements are reached and maintained, excess cash flows are distributed to us or, in a securitization utilizing a senior subordinated structure, may be used to accelerate the repayment of certain

subordinated securities. In addition to excess cash flows, we receive monthly base servicing fees and we collect other fees, such as late charges, as servicer for securitization Trusts. For securitization transactions that involve the purchase of a financial guaranty insurance policy, credit enhancement requirements will increase if specified portfolio performance ratios are exceeded. Excess cash flows otherwise distributable to us from Trusts in which the portfolio performance ratios were exceeded and from other Trusts which may be subject to limited cross-collateralization provisions are accumulated in the Trusts until such higher levels of credit enhancement are reached and maintained. Senior subordinated securitizations typically do not utilize portfolio performance ratios.

We structure our securitization transactions as secured financings. Accordingly, following a securitization, the finance receivables and the related securitization notes payable remain on the consolidated balance sheets. We recognize finance charge and fee income on the receivables and interest expense on the securities issued in the securitization transaction and record a provision for loan losses to cover probable loan losses on the receivables.

Prior to October 1, 2002, our securitization transactions were structured as sales of finance receivables. In connection with the acquisitions described below, we also acquired two securitization Trusts which were accounted for as sales of finance receivables. Receivables sold under this structure are referred to herein as “gain on sale receivables.” At June 30, 2010, we had no outstanding gain on sale securitizations.

On May 1, 2006, we acquired the stock of Bay View Acceptance Corporation (“BVAC”). BVAC served auto dealers in 32 states offering specialized auto finance products, including extended term financing and higher loan-to-value advances to consumers with prime credit bureau scores.

On January 1, 2007, we acquired the stock of Long Beach Acceptance Corporation (“LBAC”). LBAC served auto dealers in 34 states offering auto finance products primarily to consumers with near prime credit bureau scores.

The operations of BVAC and LBAC have been integrated into our origination, servicing and administrative activities and we provide auto finance products solely under the AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. name.

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions which affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the financial statements and the amount of revenue and costs and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results could differ from those estimates and those differences may be material. The accounting estimates that we believe are the most critical to understanding and evaluating our reported financial results include the following:

Allowance for loan losses

The allowance for loan losses is established systematically based on the determination of the amount of probable credit losses inherent in the finance receivables as of the reporting date. We review charge-off experience factors, delinquency reports, historical collection rates, estimates of the value of the underlying collateral, economic trends, such as unemployment rates, and other information in order to make the necessary judgments as to the probable credit losses. We also use historical charge-off experience to determine a loss confirmation period, which is defined as the time between when an event, such as delinquency status, giving rise to a probable credit loss occurs with respect to a specific account and when such account is charged off. This loss confirmation period is applied to the forecasted probable credit losses to determine the amount of losses inherent in finance receivables at the reporting date. Assumptions regarding credit losses and loss confirmation periods are reviewed periodically and may be impacted by actual performance of finance receivables and changes in any of the factors discussed above. Should the credit loss assumption or loss confirmation period increase, there would be an increase in the amount of allowance for loan losses required, which would decrease the net carrying value of finance receivables and increase the amount of provision for loan losses recorded on the consolidated

statements of operations and comprehensive operations. A 10% and 20% increase in cumulative net credit losses over the loss confirmation period would increase the allowance for loan losses as of June 30, 2010, as follows (in thousands):


	10% adverse change		20% adverse change
Impact on allowance for loan losses	$	57,331	$	114,662

We believe that the allowance for loan losses is adequate to cover probable losses inherent in our receivables; however, because the allowance for loan losses is based on estimates, there can be no assurance that the ultimate charge-off amount will not exceed such estimates or that our credit loss assumptions will not increase.

Income Taxes

We are subject to income tax in the United States and Canada. In the ordinary course of our business, there may be transactions, calculations, structures and filing positions where the ultimate tax outcome is uncertain. At any point in time, multiple tax years are subject to audit by various taxing jurisdictions and we record liabilities for estimated tax results based on the requirements of the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes. Management believes that the estimates it uses are reasonable. However, due to expiring statutes of limitations, audits, settlements, changes in tax law or new authoritative rulings, no assurance can be given that the final outcome of these matters will be comparable to what was reflected in the historical income tax provisions and accruals. We may need to adjust our accrued tax assets or liabilities if actual results differ from estimated results or if we adjust these assumptions in the future, which could materially impact the effective tax rate, earnings, accrued tax balances and cash.

As a part of our financial reporting process, we must assess the likelihood that our deferred tax assets can be recovered. Unless recovery is more likely than not, the provision for income taxes must be increased by recording a reserve in the form of a valuation allowance for all or a portion of the deferred tax assets. In this process, certain criteria are evaluated including the existence of deferred tax liabilities that can be used to absorb deferred tax assets, taxable income in prior carryback years that can be used to absorb net operating losses, credit carrybacks, estimated taxable income in future years and the duration of the carryforward periods. We incurred a significant taxable loss for fiscal 2009. On November 6, 2009, the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009 was signed into law which provides an election to carryback a loss to the third, fourth or fifth year that precedes the year of loss. Because of this change in tax law, we elected to extend our U.S. federal fiscal 2009 net operating loss (“NOL”) carryback period. We have fully utilized our federal NOL. In contrast to U.S. federal tax rules, there is generally no carryback potential for the majority of U.S. state tax jurisdictions and the various state carryforward periods range from 5 to 20 years. We have established a valuation allowance against a portion of our state tax net operating loss. Our judgment regarding future taxable income may change due to evolving corporate and operational strategies, market conditions, changes in U.S., state or international tax laws and other factors which may later alter our judgment of the utilization of these assets.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Year Ended June 30, 2010 as compared to Year Ended June 30, 2009

Changes in Finance Receivables

A summary of changes in our finance receivables is as follows (in thousands):


Years Ended June 30,	2010			2009
Balance at beginning of period	$	10,927,969		$	14,981,412
Loans purchased		2,137,620			1,285,091
Liquidations and other		(4,332,071	)		(5,338,534	)

Balance at end of period	$	8,733,518		$	10,927,969

Average finance receivables	$	9,495,125		$	13,001,773

The increase in loans purchased during fiscal 2010 as compared to fiscal 2009 was primarily due to our establishing higher loan origination goals as a result of improved access to the securitization markets. Loan production targets were constrained during fiscal 2009 in order to preserve capital and liquidity. The decrease in liquidations and other resulted primarily from reduced average finance receivables.

The average new loan size increased to $18,209 for fiscal 2010 from $17,507 for fiscal 2009. The average annual percentage rate for finance receivables purchased during fiscal 2010 was 17.0% for both fiscal 2010 and fiscal 2009.

Net Margin

Net margin is the difference between finance charge and other income earned on our receivables and the cost to fund the receivables as well as the cost of debt incurred for general corporate purposes.

Our net margin as derived from the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive operations is as follows (in thousands):


Years Ended June 30,	2010			2009
Finance charge income	$	1,431,319		$	1,902,684
Other income		91,215			116,488
Interest expense		(457,222	)		(726,560	)

Net margin	$	1,065,312		$	1,292,612

Net margin as a percentage of average finance receivables is as follows:


Years Ended June 30,	2010		2009
Finance charge income	15.1	%	14.6	%
Other income	0.9		0.9
Interest expense	(4.8	)	(5.6	)

Net margin as a percentage of average finance receivables	11.2	%	9.9	%

The increase in net margin as a percentage of average finance receivables for fiscal 2010, as compared to fiscal 2009, was mainly due to higher annual percentage rates for finance receivables purchased since mid calendar year 2008, reduced interest costs as a result of declining leverage and lower interest rates on securitizations completed in fiscal 2010. Interest expense in fiscal 2009 was also adversely impacted by warrant costs and commitment fees associated with a forward purchase agreement that terminated in fiscal 2009.

Revenue

Finance charge income decreased by 24.8% to $1,431.3 million for fiscal 2010 from $1,902.7 million for fiscal 2009, primarily due to the decrease in average finance receivables. The effective yield on our finance receivables increased to 15.1% for fiscal 2010 from 14.6% for fiscal 2009. The effective yield represents finance charges and fees taken into earnings during the period as a percentage of average finance receivables and is lower than the contractual rates of our auto finance contracts due to finance receivables in nonaccrual status.

Other income consists of the following (in thousands):


	Years Ended June 30,
	2010		2009
Leasing income	$	44,316	$	47,073
Investment income		2,989		16,295
Late fees and other income		43,910		53,120

	$	91,215	$	116,488

Investment income decreased as a result of lower invested cash balances combined with lower market interest rates. Late fees and other income decreased as a result of the reduction in average finance receivables.

During fiscal 2010, we repurchased on the open market $21.0 million of senior notes due in 2015 at an average price of 97.3% of the principal amount of the notes repurchased, which resulted in a gain on retirement of debt of $0.3 million. Gain on retirement of debt for fiscal 2009 was $48.2 million. In fiscal 2009, we repurchased on the open market $60.0 million par value of our convertible senior notes due in 2013 at an average price of 44.1% of the principal amount, $200.0 million par value of our convertible senior notes due in 2023 at an average price of 99.5% of the principal amount, and $28.0 million par value of our convertible senior notes due in 2011 at an average price of 44.2% of the principal amount. In connection with these repurchases, we recorded a gain on retirement of debt of $33.5 million. We also issued 15,122,670 shares of our common stock to Fairholme Funds Inc. (“Fairholme”), in a non-cash transaction, in exchange for $108.4 million of our senior notes due 2015, held by Fairholme, at a price of $840 per $1,000 principal amount of the notes. We recognized a gain of $14.7 million, net of transaction costs, on retirement of debt in the exchange. Fairholme and its affiliates held approximately 19.8% of our outstanding common stock prior to the issuance of the shares described above.

Costs and Expenses

Operating Expenses

Operating expenses decreased to $288.8 million for fiscal 2010 from $308.8 million for fiscal 2009. Our operating expenses are predominately related to personnel costs that include base salary and wages, performance incentives and benefits as well as related employment taxes. Personnel costs represented 74.2% and 72.8% of total operating expenses for fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively.

Operating expenses as a percentage of average finance receivables increased to 3.0% for fiscal 2010, as compared to 2.4% for fiscal 2009. The increase in operating expenses as a percentage of average finance receivables primarily resulted from the impact of a decreasing portfolio on our fixed cost base and higher loan origination staffing to support increased origination levels.

Provision for Loan Losses

Provisions for loan losses are charged to income to bring our allowance for loan losses to a level which management considers adequate to absorb probable credit losses inherent in the portfolio of finance receivables. The provision for loan losses recorded for fiscal 2010 and 2009 reflects inherent losses on receivables originated during those periods and changes in the amount of inherent losses on receivables originated in prior periods. The provision for loan losses decreased to $388.1 million for fiscal 2010 from $972.4 million for fiscal 2009 as a result of favorable credit performance of loans originated since early calendar year 2008, stabilization of economic conditions and improved recovery values on repossessed collateral. As a percentage of average finance receivables, the provision for loan losses was 4.1% and 7.5% for fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively.

Interest Expense

Interest expense decreased to $457.2 million for fiscal 2010 from $726.6 million for fiscal 2009. Average debt outstanding was $8.0 billion and $11.8 billion for fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively. Our effective rate of interest paid on our debt decreased to 5.7% for fiscal 2010 compared to 6.2% for fiscal 2009, due to lower interest on securitizations completed in fiscal 2010. Interest expense in fiscal 2009 was also adversely impacted by warrant costs and commitment fees associated with a forward purchase agreement that terminated in fiscal 2009.

Taxes

Our effective income tax rate was 37.6% for fiscal 2010. The fiscal 2009 effective tax rate was not meaningful due to the low absolute level of the loss before income taxes.

Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)

Other comprehensive income (loss) consisted of the following (in thousands):


Years Ended June 30,	2010			2009
Unrealized gains (losses) on cash flow hedges	$	43,306		$	(26,871	)
Foreign currency translation adjustment		8,230			750
Income tax (provision) benefit		(18,567	)		11,426

	$	32,969		$	(14,695	)

Cash Flow Hedges

Unrealized gains (losses) on cash flow hedges consisted of the following (in thousands):


Years Ended June 30,	2010			2009
Unrealized losses related to changes in fair value	$	(36,761	)	$	(109,115	)
Reclassification of unrealized losses into earnings		80,067			82,244

	$	43,306		$	(26,871	)

Unrealized losses related to changes in fair value for fiscal 2010 and 2009, were due to changes in the fair value of interest rate swap agreements that were designated as cash flow hedges for accounting purposes. The fair value of the interest rate swap agreements changed in fiscal 2010 and 2009 because of significant declines in forward interest rates.

Unrealized gains (losses) on cash flow hedges of our floating rate debt are reclassified into earnings when interest rate fluctuations on securitization notes payable or other hedged items affect earnings.

Canadian Currency Translation Adjustment

Canadian currency translation adjustment gains of $8.2 million and $0.7 million for fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively, were included in other comprehensive loss. The translation adjustment gains are due to the increase in the value of our Canadian dollar denominated assets related to the decline in the U.S. dollar to Canadian dollar conversion rates.

Year Ended June 30, 2009 as compared to Year Ended June 30, 2008

Changes in Finance Receivables

A summary of changes in our finance receivables is as follows (in thousands):


Years Ended June 30,	2009			2008
Balance at beginning of period	$	14,981,412		$	15,922,458
Loans purchased		1,285,091			6,075,412
Loans repurchased from gain on sale Trusts					18,401
Liquidations and other		(5,338,534	)		(7,034,859	)

Balance at end of period	$	10,927,969		$	14,981,412

Average finance receivables	$	13,001,773		$	16,059,129

The decrease in loans purchased during fiscal 2009 as compared to fiscal 2008 was primarily due to significantly reduced loan origination targets in order to preserve capital and liquidity in fiscal 2009. The decrease in liquidations and other resulted primarily from reduced average finance receivables.

The average new loan size decreased to $17,507 for fiscal 2009 from $19,093 for fiscal 2008 primarily as a result of limiting loan-to-value ratios on new loan originations. The average annual percentage rate for finance receivables purchased during fiscal 2009 increased to 17.0 % from 15.4% during fiscal 2008 due to increased pricing on new loan originations necessitated by higher funding costs.

Net Margin

Our net margin as derived from the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive operations is as follows (in thousands):


Years Ended June 30,	2009			2008
Finance charge income	$	1,902,684		$	2,382,484
Other income		116,488			160,598
Interest expense		(726,560	)		(858,874	)

Net margin	$	1,292,612		$	1,684,208

Net margin as a percentage of average finance receivables is as follows:


Years Ended June 30,	2009		2008
Finance charge income	14.6	%	14.8	%
Other income	0.9		1.0
Interest expense	(5.6	)	(5.3	)

Net margin as a percentage of average finance receivables	9.9	%	10.5	%

The decrease in net margin for fiscal 2009, as compared to fiscal 2008, was the result of a lower effective yield on the portfolio due to higher delinquency levels in fiscal 2009 and an increase in funding costs primarily from the warrant costs and commitment fees related to a forward purchase agreement terminated in fiscal 2009.

Revenue

Finance charge income decreased by 20.1% to $1,902.7 million for fiscal 2009 from $2,382.5 million for fiscal 2008, primarily due to the decrease in average finance receivables. The effective yield on our finance receivables decreased to 14.6% for fiscal 2009 from 14.8% for fiscal 2008. The effective yield represents finance charges and fees taken into earnings during the period as a percentage of average finance receivables and is lower than the contractual rates of our auto finance contracts due to finance receivables in nonaccrual status.

Other income consists of the following (in thousands):


	Years Ended June 30,
	2009		2008
Investment income	$	16,295	$	56,769
Leasing income		47,073		40,679
Late fees and other income		53,120		63,150

	$	116,488	$	160,598

Gain on retirement of debt for fiscal 2009 was $48.2 million. We repurchased on the open market, $60.0 million par value of our convertible senior notes due in 2013 at an average price of 44.1% of the principal amount, $200.0 million par value of our convertible senior notes due in 2023 at an average price of 99.5% of the principal amount, and $28.0 million par value of our convertible senior notes due in 2011 at an average price of 44.2% of the principal amount. In connection with these repurchases, we recorded a gain on retirement of debt of $33.5 million. We also issued 15,122,670 shares of our common stock to Fairholme in a non-cash transaction, in exchange for $108.4 million of our senior notes due 2015, held by Fairholme, at a price of $840 per $1,000 principal amount of the notes. We recognized a gain of $14.7 million, net of transaction costs, on retirement of debt in the exchange. Fairholme and its affiliates held approximately 19.8% of our outstanding common stock prior to the issuance of the shares described above.

Costs and Expenses

Operating Expenses

Operating expenses decreased to $308.8 million for fiscal 2009 from $397.8 million for fiscal 2008, as a result of cost savings from implementation of plans to reduce loan origination levels and related staffing and administrative support. Our operating expenses are predominately related to personnel costs that include base salary and wages, performance incentives and benefits as well as related employment taxes. Personnel costs represented 72.8% and 79.4% of total operating expenses for fiscal 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Operating expenses as a percentage of average finance receivables were 2.4% for fiscal 2009, as compared to 2.5% for fiscal 2008.

Provision for Loan Losses

Provisions for loan losses are charged to income to bring our allowance for loan losses to a level which management considers adequate to absorb probable credit losses inherent in the portfolio of finance receivables. The provision for loan losses recorded for fiscal 2009 and 2008 reflects inherent losses on receivables originated during those periods and changes in the amount of inherent losses on receivables originated in prior periods. The provision for loan losses decreased to $972.4 million for fiscal 2009 from $1,131.0 million for fiscal 2008 as a result of a lower level of receivables originated during fiscal 2009 and the improved credit profile of loans originated since early calendar year 2008, partially offset by higher expected future losses due to weaker economic conditions. As a percentage of average finance receivables, the provision for loan losses was 7.5% and 7.0% for fiscal 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Interest Expense

Interest expense decreased to $726.6 million for fiscal 2009 from $858.9 million for fiscal 2008. Average debt outstanding was $11.8 billion and $15.1 billion for fiscal 2009 and 2008, respectively. Our effective rate of interest paid on our debt increased to 6.2% for fiscal 2009 compared to 5.7% for fiscal 2008, due to warrant costs and commitment fees associated with a forward purchase agreement that was terminated in fiscal 2009.

Taxes

The fiscal 2009 effective tax rate was not meaningful due to the low absolute level of the loss before income taxes. The fiscal 2008 effective tax rate was impacted by the effect of no longer being permanently reinvested with respect to our Canadian subsidiaries, an impairment of non-deductible goodwill, adjustment of uncertain tax positions, and revision of deferred tax assets and liabilities.

Other Comprehensive Loss

Other comprehensive loss consisted of the following (in thousands):


Years Ended June 30,	2009			2008
Unrealized losses on cash flow hedges	$	(26,871	)	$	(84,404	)
Foreign currency translation adjustment		750			5,855
Unrealized losses on credit enhancement assets					(232	)
Income tax benefit		11,426			26,683

	$	(14,695	)	$	(52,098	)

Cash Flow Hedges

Unrealized losses on cash flow hedges consisted of the following (in thousands):


Years Ended June 30,	2009			2008
Unrealized losses related to changes in fair value	$	(109,115	)	$	(109,039	)
Reclassification of unrealized losses into earnings		82,244			24,635

	$	(26,871	)	$	(84,404	)

Unrealized losses related to changes in fair value for fiscal 2009 and 2008, were due to changes in the fair value of interest rate swap agreements that were designated as cash flow hedges for accounting purposes. The fair value of the interest rate swap agreements changed in fiscal 2009 and 2008 because of significant declines in forward interest rates.

Unrealized losses on cash flow hedges of our floating rate debt are reclassified into earnings when interest rate fluctuations on securitization notes payable or other hedged items affect earnings.

Canadian Currency Translation Adjustment

Canadian currency translation adjustment gains of $0.7 million and $5.9 million for fiscal 2009 and 2008, respectively, were included in other comprehensive loss. The translation adjustment gains are due to the increase in the value of our Canadian dollar denominated assets related to the decline in the U.S. dollar to Canadian dollar conversion rates.

CREDIT QUALITY

We provide financing in relatively high-risk markets, and, therefore, anticipate a corresponding high level of delinquencies and charge-offs.

The following table presents certain data related to the receivables portfolio (dollars in thousands):


	June 30, 2010			June 30, 2009
Principal amount of receivables, net of fees	$	8,733,518		$	10,927,969
Allowance for loan losses		(573,310	)		(890,640	)

Receivables, net	$	8,160,208		$	10,037,329

Number of outstanding contracts		776,377			895,708

Average carrying amount of outstanding contract (in dollars)	$	11,249		$	12,200

Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of receivables		6.6%			8.2%

The allowance for loan losses as a percentage of receivables decreased to 6.6% as of June 30, 2010, from 8.2% as of June 30, 2009, as a result of the favorable credit performance of loans originated since early calendar year 2008, stabilization of economic conditions and improved recovery rates on repossessed collateral.

Delinquency

The following is a summary of finance receivables that are (i) more than 30 days delinquent, but not yet in repossession, and (ii) in repossession, but not yet charged off (dollars in thousands):


	June 30, 2010				June 30, 2009
	Amount		Percent		Amount		Percent
Delinquent contracts:
31 to 60 days	$	542,655	6.2	%	$	753,086	6.9	%
Greater-than-60 days		230,780	2.7			383,245	3.5

		773,435	8.9			1,136,331	10.4
In repossession		31,457	0.4			49,280	0.5

	$	804,892	9.3	%	$	1,185,611	10.9	%

An account is considered delinquent if a substantial portion of a scheduled payment has not been received by the date such payment was contractually due. Delinquencies in our managed receivables portfolio may vary from period to period based upon the average age or seasoning of the portfolio, seasonality within the calendar year and economic factors. Due to our target customer base, a relatively high percentage of accounts become delinquent at some point in the life of a loan and there is a high rate of account movement between current and delinquent status in the portfolio.

Delinquencies in finance receivables were lower at June 30, 2010, as compared to June 30, 2009, as a result of the favorable credit performance of loans originated since early calendar year 2008 and stabilization of economic conditions.

Deferrals

In accordance with our policies and guidelines, we, at times, offer payment deferrals to consumers, whereby the consumer is allowed to move up to two delinquent payments to the end of the loan generally by paying a fee (approximately the interest portion of the payment deferred, except where state law provides for a lesser amount). Our policies and guidelines limit the number and frequency of deferments that may be granted. Additionally, we generally limit the granting of deferments on new accounts until a requisite number of payments have been received. Due to the nature of our customer base and policies and guidelines of the deferral program, which policies and guidelines have not changed materially in several years, approximately 50% to 60% of accounts historically comprising the portfolio receive a deferral at some point in the life of the account.

An account for which all delinquent payments are cleared through a deferment transaction, which may include installment payments, is classified as current at the time the deferment is granted and therefore is not included as a delinquent account. Thereafter, such account is aged based on the timely payment of future installments in the same manner as any other account.

Contracts receiving a payment deferral as an average quarterly percentage of average receivables outstanding were 7.3%, 7.8% and 6.3% for fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Deferment levels were lower in fiscal 2010 than in fiscal 2009 as a result of the stabilization of economic conditions.

The following is a summary of total deferrals as a percentage of receivables outstanding:


	June 30, 2010		June 30, 2009
Never deferred	67.8	%	66.9	%
Deferred:
1-2 times	22.4		26.0
3-4 times	9.7		7.0
Greater than 4 times	0.1		0.1

Total deferred	32.2		33.1

Total	100.0	%	100.0	%

We evaluate the results of our deferment strategies based upon the amount of cash installments that are collected on accounts after they have been deferred versus the extent to which the collateral underlying the deferred accounts has depreciated over the same period of time. Based on this evaluation, we believe that payment deferrals granted according to our policies and guidelines are an effective portfolio management technique and result in higher ultimate cash collections from the portfolio.

Changes in deferment levels do not have a direct impact on the ultimate amount of finance receivables charged off by us. However, the timing of a charge-off may be affected if the previously deferred account ultimately results in a charge-off. To the extent that deferrals impact the ultimate timing of when an account is charged off, historical charge-off ratios and loss confirmation periods used in the determination of the adequacy of our allowance for loan losses are also impacted. Increased use of deferrals may result in a lengthening of the loss confirmation period, which would increase expectations of credit losses inherent in the loan portfolio and therefore increase the allowance for loan losses and related provision for loan losses. Changes in these ratios and periods are considered in determining the appropriate level of allowance for loan losses and related provision for loan losses.

Charge-offs

The following table presents charge-off data with respect to our finance receivables portfolio (dollars in thousands):


Years Ended June 30,	2010			2009			2008
Finance receivables:
Repossession charge-offs	$	1,232,318		$	1,573,006		$	1,496,713
Less: Recoveries		(543,910	)		(626,245	)		(670,307	)
Mandatory charge-offs^(a)		16,980			86,093			173,640

Net charge-offs	$	705,388		$	1,032,854		$	1,000,046

Net charge-offs as a percentage of average receivables:		7.4	%		7.9	%		6.2	%

Recoveries as a percentage of gross repossession charge-offs:		44.1	%		39.8	%		44.8	%

(a)

Mandatory charge-offs represent accounts 120 days delinquent that are charged off in full with no recovery amounts realized at time of charge-off net of any subsequent recoveries and the net write-down of finance receivables in repossession to the net realizable value of the repossessed vehicle when the repossessed vehicle is legally available for sale.

Net charge-offs as a percentage of average receivables outstanding may vary from period to period based upon the average age or seasoning of the portfolio and economic factors. The decrease in net charge-offs as a percentage of average receivables for fiscal 2010, compared to fiscal 2009, was a result of the favorable credit performance of loans originated since early calendar year 2008, stabilization of economic conditions and improved recovery rates on repossessed collateral.

LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES

General

Our primary sources of cash have been finance charge income, servicing fees, distributions from securitization Trusts, borrowings under credit facilities, transfers of finance receivables to Trusts in securitization transactions and collections, recoveries on finance receivables and net proceeds from senior notes and convertible senior notes transactions. Our primary uses of cash have been purchases of finance receivables, repayment of credit facilities, securitization notes payable and other indebtedness, funding credit enhancement requirements for securitization transactions and credit facilities, repurchases of unsecured debt, operating expenses, and income tax payments.

We used cash of $2,090.6 million, $1,280.3 million and $6,260.2 million for the purchase of finance receivables during fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Generally, these purchases were funded initially utilizing cash and borrowings under credit facilities and subsequently funded in securitization transactions.

Liquidity

Our available liquidity consisted of the following (in thousands):


June 30,	2010		2009
Cash and cash equivalents	$	282,273	$	193,287
Borrowing capacity on unpledged eligible receivables		489,552		289,424

Total	$	771,825	$	482,711

Credit Facilities

In the normal course of business, in addition to using our available cash, we pledge receivables to and borrow under our credit facilities to fund our operations and repay these borrowings as appropriate under our cash management strategy.

As of June 30, 2010, credit facilities consisted of the following (in millions):


Facility Type	Facility Amount		Advances Outstanding
Master/Syndicated warehouse facility^(a)	$	1,300.0
Medium term note facility^(b)			$	598.9

	$	1,300.0	$	598.9

(a)

In February 2011 when the revolving period ends and if the facility is not renewed, the outstanding balance will be repaid over time based on the amortization of the receivables pledged until February 2012 when the remaining balance will be due and payable.

(b)

The revolving period under this facility ended in October 2009, and the outstanding debt balance will be repaid over time based on the amortization of the receivables pledged until October 2016 when any remaining amount outstanding will be due and payable.

In February 2010, we amended our master/syndicated warehouse facility, which was approved by the eight lenders in the facility, to expand the size of the facility to $1.3 billion from $1.0 billion and to extend the revolving period to February 2011. On August 20, 2010, the master/syndicated warehouse facility was amended to allow for the change of control following the consummation of the pending Merger.

We are required to hold certain funds in restricted cash accounts to provide additional collateral for borrowings under our facilities. Additionally, our funding agreements contain various covenants requiring minimum financial ratios, asset quality and portfolio performance ratios (portfolio net loss and delinquency

ratios, and pool level cumulative net loss ratios) as well as limits on deferment levels. Failure to meet any of these covenants could result in an event of default under these agreements. If an event of default occurs under these agreements, the lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under these agreements to be immediately due and payable, enforce their interests against collateral pledged under these agreements or, with respect to the master/syndicated warehouse facility, restrict our ability to obtain additional borrowings.

Senior Notes

In June 2007, we issued $200.0 million of senior notes, which are uncollateralized, due in June 2015. Interest on the senior notes is payable semiannually at a rate of 8.5%. The notes will be redeemable, at our option, in whole or in part, at any time on or after July 1, 2011, at specific redemption prices.

In November 2008, we entered into a purchase agreement with Fairholme under which Fairholme purchased $123.2 million of asset-backed securities, consisting of $50.6 million of Class B Notes and $72.6 million of Class C Notes in the AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust (“AMCAR”) 2008-2 transaction. We also issued 15,122,670 shares of our common stock to Fairholme, in a non-cash transaction, in exchange for $108.4 million of our senior notes due 2015, held by Fairholme, at a price of $840 per $1,000 principal amount of the notes. We recognized a gain of $14.7 million, net of transaction costs, on retirement of debt in the exchange. Fairholme and its affiliates held approximately 19.8% of our outstanding common stock prior to the issuance of the shares described above.

In March 2010, we repurchased on the open market $21.0 million of senior notes due in 2015 at an average price of 97.3% of the principal amount of the notes repurchased, which resulted in a gain on retirement of debt of $0.3 million.

Convertible Senior Notes

In September 2006, we issued $550.0 million of convertible senior notes of which $275.0 million are due in 2011, bearing interest at a rate of 0.75% per annum, and $275.0 million are due in 2013, bearing interest at a rate of 2.125% per annum. Interest on the notes is payable semiannually. Subject to certain conditions, the notes, which are uncollateralized, may be converted prior to maturity into shares of our common stock at an initial conversion price of $28.07 per share and $30.51 per share for the notes due in 2011 and 2013, respectively. Upon conversion, the conversion value will be paid in: 1) cash equal to the principal amount of the notes and 2) to the extent the conversion value exceeds the principal amount of the notes, shares of our common stock. The notes are convertible only in the following circumstances: 1) if the closing sale price of our common stock exceeds 130% of the conversion price during specified periods set forth in the indentures under which the notes were issued, 2) if the average trading price per $1,000 principal amount of the notes is less than or equal to 98% of the average conversion value of the notes during specified periods set forth in the indentures under which the notes were issued or 3) upon the occurrence of specific corporate transactions set forth in the indentures under which the notes were issued.

In conjunction with the issuance of the convertible senior notes, we purchased call options that entitle us to purchase shares of our common stock in an amount equal to the number of shares issued upon conversion of the notes at $28.07 per share and $30.51 per share for the notes due in 2011 and 2013, respectively. These call options are expected to allow us to offset the dilution of our shares if the conversion feature of the convertible senior notes is exercised.

We also sold warrants to purchase 9,796,408 shares of our common stock at $35 per share and 9,012,713 shares of our common stock at $40 per share for the notes due in 2011 and 2013, respectively. In no event are we required to deliver a number of shares in connection with the exercise of these warrants in excess of twice the aggregate number of shares initially issuable upon the exercise of the warrants.

We have analyzed the conversion feature, call option and warrant transactions regarding accounting for derivative financial instruments indexed to and potentially settled in a company’s own stock and determined they meet the criteria for classification as equity transactions. As a result, both the cost of the call options and the proceeds of the warrants are reflected in additional paid-in capital on our consolidated balance sheets, and we will not recognize subsequent changes in their fair value.

As a result of adopting the accounting for convertible debt instruments that may be settled in cash upon conversion (including partial cash settlement), we have separately accounted for the liability and equity components of the convertible senior notes due in September 2011 and 2013, retrospectively, based on our determination that our borrowing rate at the time of issuance for unsecured senior debt without an equity conversion feature was approximately 7%. At issuance, the liability and equity components were $404.3 million and $145.7 million ($91.7 million net of deferred taxes), respectively. The debt discount is being amortized to interest expense based on the effective interest method. The carrying value as of June 30, 2010 was $414.1 million (net of debt discount of $47.9 million).

During fiscal 2009, we repurchased on the open market $28.0 million par value of our convertible senior notes due in 2011 at an average price of 44.2% of the principal amount of the notes repurchased. We also repurchased $60.0 million par value of our convertible senior notes due in 2013 at an average price of 44.1% of the principal amount of the notes repurchased. In connection with these repurchases, we recorded a gain on retirement of debt of $32.7 million.

During fiscal 2009, we repurchased and retired all $200.0 million of our convertible notes due in November 2023 at an average price equal to 99.5% of the principal amount of the notes redeemed. We recorded a gain on retirement of debt of $0.8 million.

Contractual Obligations

The following table summarizes the expected scheduled principal and interest payments, where applicable, under our contractual obligations (in thousands):


Years Ending June 30,	2011		2012		2013		2014		2015		Thereafter		Total
Operating leases	$	11,174	$	11,097	$	10,522	$	10,248	$	9,878	$	24,560	$	77,479
Other notes payable		118												118
Medium term note facility		212,542		165,604		124,646		74,570		21,201		383		598,946
Securitization notes payable		3,075,510		1,961,636		625,210		280,471		131,842		37,722		6,112,391
Senior notes												70,620		70,620
Convertible senior notes				247,000				215,017						462,017
Total expected interest payments^(a)		218,277		116,339		62,347		33,611		13,720		1,048		445,342

Total	$	3,517,621	$	2,501,676	$	822,725	$	613,917	$	176,641	$	134,333	$	7,766,913

(a)

Interest expense is calculated based on London Interbank Offered Rates (“LIBOR”) plus the respective credit spreads and specified fees associated with the medium term note facility, the coupon rate for the senior notes and convertible senior notes and a fixed rate of interest for our securitization notes payable. Interest expense on the floating rate tranches of the securitization notes payable is converted to a fixed rate based on the floating rate plus any expected hedge payments.

We adopted the provisions of accounting for uncertain tax positions on July 1, 2007. As of June 30, 2010, we had liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions of $63.1 million. The table above does not include these liabilities due to the high degree of uncertainty regarding the future cash flows associated with these amounts.

Securitizations

We have completed 70 securitization transactions through June 30, 2010, excluding securitization Trusts entered into by BVAC and LBAC prior to their acquisition by us. The proceeds from the transactions were primarily used to repay borrowings outstanding under our credit facilities.

A summary of the active transactions is as follows (in millions):


Transaction	Date	Original Amount		Balance at June 30, 2010
2005-C-F	August 2005	$	1,100.0	$	70.0
2005-D-A	November 2005		1,400.0		118.6
2006-1	March 2006		945.0		83.7
2006-R-M	May 2006		1,200.0		253.5
2006-A-F	July 2006		1,350.0		209.6
2006-B-G	September 2006		1,200.0		227.5
2007-A-X	January 2007		1,200.0		276.6
2007-B-F	April 2007		1,500.0		410.2
2007-1	May 2007		1,000.0		263.5
2007-C-M	July 2007		1,500.0		481.2
2007-D-F	September 2007		1,000.0		347.9
2007-2-M	October 2007		1,000.0		347.7
2008-A-F	May 2008		750.0		343.7
2008-1	October 2008		500.0		221.9
2008-2	November 2008		500.0		230.8
2009-1	July 2009		725.0		451.0
2009-1 (APART)	October 2009		227.5		163.3
2010-1	February 2010		600.0		511.6
2010-A	March 2010		200.0		187.2
2010-2	May 2010		600.0		583.2
BV2005-LJ-1	February 2005		232.1		11.3
BV2005-LJ-2^(a)	July 2005		185.6		11.5
BV2005-3	December 2005		220.1		22.4
LB2005-A	June 2005		350.0		15.7
LB2005-B	October 2005		350.0		22.3
LB2006-A	May 2006		450.0		49.6
LB2006-B	September 2006		500.0		83.2
LB2007-A	March 2007		486.0		110.3

Total active securitizations		$	21,271.3	$	6,109.0

(a)

Note balance does not include $1.4 million of asset-backed securities repurchased and retained by us as of June 30, 2010.

We structure our securitization transactions as secured financings. Finance receivables are transferred to a securitization Trust, which is one of our special purpose finance subsidiaries, and the Trusts issue one or more series of asset-backed securities (securitization notes payable). While these Trusts are included in our consolidated financial statements, these Trusts are separate legal entities; thus the finance receivables and other assets held by these Trusts are legally owned by these Trusts, are available to satisfy the related securitization notes payable and are not available to our creditors or our other subsidiaries.

At the time of securitization of finance receivables, we are required to pledge assets equal to a specified percentage of the securitization pool to provide credit enhancement required for specific credit ratings for the asset-backed securities issued by the Trusts.

Since the beginning of fiscal 2009, we have primarily utilized senior subordinated securitization structures which involve the sale of subordinated asset-backed securities to provide credit enhancement for the senior, or highest rated, asset-backed securities. On May 20, 2010, we closed a $600 million senior subordinated securitization transaction, AMCAR 2010-2, that has initial cash deposit and overcollateralization requirements of 8.25% in order to provide credit enhancement for the asset-backed securities sold, including the double-B rated securities which were the lowest rated securities sold. The level of credit enhancement in future senior subordinated securitizations will depend, in part, on the net interest margin, collateral characteristics, and credit performance trends of the receivables transferred, as well as our financial condition, the economic environment and our ability to sell subordinated bonds at rates we consider acceptable.

The second type of securitization structure we have utilized involves the purchase of a financial guaranty insurance policy issued by an insurer. On August 19, 2010, we closed a $200 million securitization transaction, AMCAR 2010-B, which was insured by Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. (“Assured”), and has initial cash deposit and overcollateralization requirements of 17.0%. The asset-backed securities sold had an underlying rating of single-A without considering the benefit of the financial guaranty insurance policy.

Cash flows related to securitization transactions were as follows (in millions):


Years Ended June 30,	2010		2009		2008
Initial credit enhancement deposits:
Restricted cash	$	53.9	$	25.8	$	82.4
Overcollateralization		490.8		289.1		384.1
Distributions from Trusts:
Secured Financing Trusts		424.2		429.5		668.5
Gain on sale Trusts						7.5

The agreements with the insurers of our securitization transactions covered by a financial guaranty insurance policy provide that if portfolio performance ratios (delinquency, cumulative default or cumulative net loss) in a Trust’s pool of receivables exceed certain targets, the specified credit enhancement levels would be increased.

The agreements that we have entered into with our financial guaranty insurance providers in connection with securitization transactions insured by them contain additional specified targeted portfolio performance ratios (delinquency, cumulative default and cumulative net loss) that are higher than the limits referred to above. If, at any measurement date, the targeted portfolio performance ratios with respect to any insured Trust were to exceed these additional levels, provisions of the agreements permit the financial guaranty insurance providers to declare the occurrence of an event of default and take steps to terminate our servicing rights to the receivables sold to that Trust. In addition, the servicing agreements on certain insured securitization Trusts are cross-defaulted so that a default declared under one servicing agreement would allow the financial guaranty insurance provider to terminate our servicing rights under all servicing agreements for securitization Trusts in which they issued a financial guaranty insurance policy. Additionally, if these higher targeted portfolio performance levels were exceeded and the financial guaranty insurance providers elect to declare an event of default, the insurance providers may retain all excess cash generated by other securitization transactions insured by them as additional credit enhancement. This, in turn, could result in defaults under our other securitizations and other material indebtedness, including under our senior note and convertible note indentures. Although we have never exceeded these additional targeted portfolio performance ratios, and we currently believe it is unlikely that an event of default would be declared and our servicing rights terminated if we were to exceed these higher targeted ratios, there can be no assurance that an event of default will not be declared and our servicing rights will not be terminated if (i) such targeted portfolio performance ratios are breached, (ii) we breach our obligations under the servicing agreements, (iii) the financial guaranty insurance providers are required to make payments under a policy, or (iv) certain bankruptcy or insolvency events were to occur. As of June 30, 2010, no such servicing right termination events have occurred with respect to any of the Trusts formed by us.

During fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, we exceeded certain portfolio performance ratios in several AMCAR and LBAC securitizations. Excess cash flows from Trusts associated with these securitizations have been or are being used to build higher credit enhancement in each respective Trust instead of being distributed to us. We do not expect the trapping of excess cash flows from these Trusts to have a material adverse impact to our liquidity.

On January 22, 2010, we entered into an agreement with Assured to increase the levels of additional specified targeted portfolio performance ratios in the AMCAR 2007-D-F, AMCAR 2008-A-F, LB2006-B and LB2007-A securitizations. As part of this agreement, we deposited $38.0 million in the AMCAR 2007-D-F securitization restricted cash account and $57.0 million in the AMCAR 2008-A-F securitization restricted cash account. This cash is expected to be redistributed to us over time as the securitization notes pay down.

Stock Repurchases

We have repurchased $1,374.8 million of our common stock since inception of our share repurchase program in April 2004, and we have remaining authorization to repurchase $172.0 million of our common stock. Covenants in our indentures entered into with respect to our senior notes and convertible senior notes limit our ability to repurchase stock. Currently, we do not anticipate pursuing repurchase activity for the foreseeable future.

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE

AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

Fluctuations in market interest rates impact our credit facilities and securitization transactions. Our gross interest rate spread, which is the difference between interest earned on our finance receivables and interest paid, is affected by changes in interest rates as a result of our dependence upon the issuance of variable rate securities and the incurrence of variable rate debt to fund our purchases of finance receivables.

Credit Facilities

Finance receivables purchased by us and pledged to secure borrowings under our credit facilities bear fixed interest rates. Amounts borrowed under our credit facilities bear interest at variable rates that are subject to frequent adjustments to reflect prevailing market interest rates. To protect the interest rate spread within each credit facility, our special purpose finance subsidiaries are contractually required to purchase interest rate cap agreements in connection with borrowings under our credit facilities. The purchaser of the interest rate cap agreement pays a premium in return for the right to receive the difference in the interest cost at any time a specified index of market interest rates rises above the stipulated “cap” rate. The purchaser of the interest rate cap agreement bears no obligation or liability if interest rates fall below the “cap” rate. As part of our interest rate risk management strategy and when economically feasible, we may simultaneously sell a corresponding interest rate cap agreement in order to offset the premium paid by our special purpose finance subsidiary to purchase the interest rate cap agreement and thus retain the interest rate risk. The fair value of the interest rate cap agreement purchased by the special purpose finance subsidiary is included in other assets and the fair value of the interest rate cap agreement sold by us is included in other liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets.

Securitizations

The interest rate demanded by investors in our securitization transactions depends on prevailing market interest rates for comparable transactions and the general interest rate environment. We utilize several strategies to minimize the impact of interest rate fluctuations on our gross interest rate margin, including the use of derivative financial instruments and the regular sale or pledging of auto receivables to securitization Trusts.

In our securitization transactions, we transfer fixed rate finance receivables to Trusts that, in turn, sell either fixed rate or floating rate securities to investors. The fixed rates on securities issued by the Trusts are indexed to market interest rate swap spreads for transactions of similar duration or various LIBOR and do not fluctuate

during the term of the securitization. The floating rates on securities issued by the Trusts are indexed to LIBOR and fluctuate periodically based on movements in LIBOR. Derivative financial instruments, such as interest rate swap and cap agreements, are used to manage the gross interest rate spread on these transactions. We use interest rate swap agreements to convert the variable rate exposures on securities issued by our securitization Trusts to a fixed rate, thereby locking in the gross interest rate spread to be earned by us over the life of a securitization. Interest rate swap agreements purchased by us do not impact the amount of cash flows to be received by holders of the asset-backed securities issued by the Trusts. The interest rate swap agreements serve to offset the impact of increased or decreased interest paid by the Trusts on floating rate asset-backed securities on the cash flows to be received by us from the Trusts. We utilize such arrangements to modify our net interest sensitivity to levels deemed appropriate based on our risk tolerance. In circumstances where the interest rate risk is deemed to be tolerable, usually if the risk is less than one year in term at inception, we may choose not to hedge potential fluctuations in cash flows due to changes in interest rates. Our special purpose finance subsidiaries are contractually required to purchase a derivative financial instrument to protect the net spread in connection with the issuance of floating rate securities even if we choose not to hedge our future cash flows. Although the interest rate cap agreements are purchased by the Trusts, cash outflows from the Trusts ultimately impact our retained interests in the securitization transactions as cash expended by the securitization Trusts will decrease the ultimate amount of cash to be received by us. Therefore, when economically feasible, we may simultaneously sell a corresponding interest rate cap agreement to offset the premium paid by the Trust to purchase the interest rate cap agreement. The fair value of the interest rate cap agreements purchased by the special purpose finance subsidiaries in connection with securitization transactions are included in other assets and the fair value of the interest rate cap agreements sold by us are included in other liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets. Changes in the fair value of the interest rate cap agreements are reflected in interest expense on our consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive operations.

We have entered into interest rate swap agreements to hedge the variability in interest payments on eight of our active securitization transactions. Portions of these interest rate swap agreements are designated and qualify as cash flow hedges. The fair value of interest rate swap agreements designated as hedges is included in liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets. Interest rate swap agreements that are not designated as hedges are included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheets.

The following table provides information about our interest rate-sensitive financial instruments by expected maturity date as of June 30, 2010 (dollars in thousands):


Years Ending June 30,	2011			2012			2013			2014			2015			Thereafter			Fair Value
Assets:
Finance receivables
Principal amounts	$	3,820,633		$	2,553,069		$	1,385,146		$	612,810		$	262,155		$	99,705		$	8,110,223
Weighted average annual percentage rate		15.89	%		15.90	%		15.94	%		16.02	%		15.90	%		15.77	%
Interest rate swaps
Notional amounts	$	943,818		$	669,225		$	69,139											$	26,194
Average pay rate		5.34	%		4.54	%		2.81	%
Average receive rate		1.31	%		1.46	%		2.05	%
Interest rate caps purchased
Notional amounts	$	138,028		$	84,780		$	100,025		$	118,011		$	139,230		$	194,382		$	3,188
Average strike rate		5.75	%		5.66	%		5.52	%		5.40	%		5.29	%		5.15	%

Liabilities:
Credit facilities
Principal amounts	$	212,542		$	165,604		$	124,646		$	74,570		$	21,201		$	383		$	598,946
Weighted average effective interest rate		2.10	%		2.61	%		3.48	%		4.32	%		4.97	%		5.43	%
Securitization notes payable
Principal amounts	$	3,075,510		$	1,961,636		$	625,210		$	280,471		$	131,842		$	37,722		$	6,230,902
Weighted average effective interest rate		4.07	%		4.75	%		6.28	%		6.47	%		6.59	%		8.17	%
Senior notes
Principal amounts													$	70,620					$	70,620
Weighted average effective interest rate														8.50	%
Convertible senior notes
Principal amounts				$	247,000					$	215,017								$	414,007
Weighted average effective coupon interest rate					0.75	%					2.125	%
Interest rate swaps
Notional amounts	$	943,818		$	669,225		$	69,139											$	70,421
Average pay rate		5.34	%		4.54	%		2.81	%
Average receive rate		1.31	%		1.46	%		2.05	%
Interest rate caps sold
Notional amounts	$	71,859		$	84,780		$	100,025		$	118,011		$	139,230		$	194,382		$	3,320
Average strike rate		5.76	%		5.66	%		5.52	%		5.40	%		5.29	%		5.15	%

The following table provides information about our interest rate-sensitive financial instruments by expected maturity date as of June 30, 2009 (dollars in thousands):


Years Ending June 30,	2010			2011			2012			2013			2014			Thereafter			Fair Value
Assets:
Finance receivables
Principal amounts	$	4,377,885		$	3,049,845		$	1,973,972		$	1,083,894		$	384,822		$	57,551		$	9,717,655
Weighted average annual percentage rate		15.56	%		15.61	%		15.65	%		15.65	%		15.63	%		15.42	%
Interest rate swaps
Notional amounts	$	864,354		$	911,639		$	744,329		$	72,226								$	24,267
Average pay rate		4.24	%		4.20	%		3.16	%		1.72	%
Average receive rate		0.67	%		1.75	%		2.07	%		1.47	%
Interest rate caps purchased
Notional amounts	$	415,190		$	427,643		$	308,301		$	294,311		$	191,645		$	277,796		$	15,858
Average strike rate		4.33	%		4.49	%		4.60	%		4.60	%		4.68	%		3.80	%
Liabilities:
Credit facilities
Principal amounts	$	955,012		$	286,281		$	168,629		$	121,533		$	79,995		$	18,683		$	1,630,133
Weighted average effective interest rate		3.95	%		3.30	%		4.83	%		5.63	%		6.05	%		6.31	%
Securitization notes payable
Principal amounts	$	3,221,439		$	2,280,382		$	1,698,314		$	233,825								$	6,879,245
Weighted average effective interest rate		4.15	%		4.75	%		5.48	%		7.04	%
Senior notes
Principal amounts																$	91,620		$	85,207
Weighted average effective interest rate																	8.50	%
Convertible senior notes
Principal amounts							$	247,000					$	215,017					$	328,396
Weighted average effective coupon interest rate								0.75	%					2.125	%
Interest rate swaps
Notional amounts	$	864,354		$	911,639		$	744,329		$	72,226								$	131,885
Average pay rate		4.24	%		4.20	%		3.16	%		1.72	%
Average receive rate		0.67	%		1.75	%		2.07	%		1.47	%
Interest rate caps
sold Notional amounts	$	298,675		$	353,224		$	306,219		$	293,491		$	191,639		$	277,796		$	16,644
Average strike rate		4.64	%		4.60	%		4.60	%		4.60	%		4.68	%		3.80	%

Finance receivables are estimated to be realized by us in future periods using discount rate, prepayment and credit loss assumptions similar to our historical experience. Notional amounts on interest rate swap and cap agreements are based on contractual terms. Credit facilities and securitization notes payable amounts have been classified based on expected payoff. Senior notes and convertible senior notes principal amounts have been classified based on maturity.

The notional amounts of interest rate swap and cap agreements, which are used to calculate the contractual payments to be exchanged under the contracts, represent average amounts that will be outstanding for each of the years included in the table. Notional amounts do not represent amounts exchanged by parties and, thus, are not a measure of our exposure to loss through our use of these agreements.

Management monitors our hedging activities to ensure that the value of derivative financial instruments, their correlation to the contracts being hedged and the amounts being hedged continue to provide effective protection against interest rate risk. However, there can be no assurance that our strategies will be effective in minimizing interest rate risk or that increases in interest rates will not have an adverse effect on our profitability. All transactions are entered into for purposes other than trading.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

In June 2009, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued updated guidance on the accounting for transfers of financial assets, as well as the consolidation of variable interest entities. The adoption of the changes in accounting are effective for us beginning with the first quarter in fiscal 2011. We do not anticipate the impact of the adoption to have a material impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

On July 21, 2010, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2010-20, Disclosures about the Credit Quality of Financing Receivables and the Allowance for Credit Losses. The new disclosure guidance will significantly expand the existing disclosure requirements surrounding finance receivables and the allowance for loan losses. The objectives of the enhanced disclosures are to provide information that will enable readers of financial statements to understand the nature of credit risk in financing receivables, how that risk is analyzed in determining the related allowance for loan losses, and changes to the allowance during the reporting period. The new disclosures are required starting in the first interim or annual reporting period on or after December 31, 2010. We do not anticipate the adoption of this ASU to have an impact on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL

STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

AMERICREDIT CORP.

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(dollars in thousands)


	June 30,
	2010			2009
Assets
Cash and cash equivalents	$	282,273		$	193,287
Finance receivables, net		8,160,208			10,037,329
Restricted cash—securitization notes payable		930,155			851,606
Restricted cash—credit facilities		142,725			195,079
Property and equipment, net		37,734			44,195
Leased vehicles, net		94,677			156,387
Deferred income taxes		81,836			75,782
Income tax receivable					197,579
Other assets		151,425			207,083

Total assets	$	9,881,033		$	11,958,327

Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity
Liabilities:
Credit facilities	$	598,946		$	1,630,133
Securitization notes payable		6,108,976			7,426,687
Senior notes		70,620			91,620
Convertible senior notes		414,068			392,514
Accrued taxes and expenses		210,013			157,640
Interest rate swap agreements		70,421			131,885
Other liabilities		7,565			20,540

Total liabilities		7,480,609			9,851,019

Commitments and contingencies (Note 10)

Shareholders’ equity:
Preferred stock, $.01 par value per share, 20,000,000 shares authorized; none issued
Common stock, $.01 par value per share, 350,000,000 shares authorized; 136,856,360 and 134,977,812 shares issued		1,369			1,350
Additional paid-in capital		327,095			284,961
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)		11,870			(21,099	)
Retained earnings		2,099,005			1,878,459

		2,439,339			2,143,671
Treasury stock, at cost (1,916,510 and 1,806,446 shares)		(38,915	)		(36,363	)

Total shareholders’ equity		2,400,424			2,107,308

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity	$	9,881,033		$	11,958,327

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

AMERICREDIT CORP.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE OPERATIONS

(dollars in thousands, except per share data)


	Years Ended June 30,
	2010			2009			2008
Revenue
Finance charge income	$	1,431,319		$	1,902,684		$	2,382,484
Other income		91,215			116,488			160,598
Gain on retirement of debt		283			48,152

		1,522,817			2,067,324			2,543,082

Costs and expenses
Operating expenses		288,791			308,803			397,814
Leased vehicles expenses		34,639			47,880			36,362
Provision for loan losses		388,058			972,381			1,130,962
Interest expense		457,222			726,560			858,874
Restructuring charges, net		668			11,847			20,116
Impairment of goodwill								212,595

		1,169,378			2,067,471			2,656,723

Income (loss) before income taxes		353,439			(147	)		(113,641	)
Income tax provision (benefit)		132,893			10,742			(31,272	)

Net income (loss)		220,546			(10,889	)		(82,369	)

Other comprehensive income (loss)
Unrealized gains (losses) on cash flow hedges		43,306			(26,871	)		(84,404	)
Foreign currency translation adjustment		8,230			750			5,855
Unrealized losses on credit enhancement assets								(232	)
Income tax (provision) benefit		(18,567	)		11,426			26,683

Other comprehensive income (loss)		32,969			(14,695	)		(52,098	)

Comprehensive income (loss)	$	253,515		$	(25,584	)	$	(134,467	)

Earnings (loss) per share
Basic	$	1.65		$	(0.09	)	$	(0.72	)

Diluted	$	1.60		$	(0.09	)	$	(0.72	)

Weighted average shares
Basic		133,845,238			125,239,241			114,962,241

Diluted		138,179,945			125,239,241			114,962,241

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

AMERICREDIT CORP.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY

(dollars in thousands)


	Common Stock					Additional Paid-in Capital			Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)			Retained Earnings			Treasury Stock
	Shares		Amount			Additional Paid-in Capital						Retained Earnings			Shares		Amount
Balance at July 1, 2007	120,590,473		$	1,206		$	163,051		$	45,694		$	1,989,780		1,934,061		$	(43,139	)
Common stock issued on exercise of options	1,138,691			11			12,561
Common stock issued on exercise of warrants	1,065,047			11			8,581
Uncertain tax position liability adjustment													(463	)
Income tax benefit from exercise of options and amortization of convertible note hedges							13,443
Common stock cancelled—restricted stock	(15,050	)
Common stock issued for employee benefit plans	987,089			10			2,140								(214,377	)		6,606
Stock based compensation expense							17,945
Repurchase of common stock															5,734,850			(127,901	)
Amortization of warrant costs							10,193
Retirement of treasury stock	(5,000,000	)		(50	)		(93,850	)					(17,600	)	(5,000,000	)		111,500
Other comprehensive loss, net of income tax benefit of $26,683										(52,098	)
Net loss													(82,369	)

Balance at June 30, 2008	118,766,250			1,188			134,064			(6,404	)		1,889,348		2,454,534			(52,934	)
Common stock issued on exercise of options	131,654			1			1,053
Common stock issued relating to retirement of debt	15,122,670			151			90,830
Income tax benefit from exercise of options and amortization of convertible note hedges							10,678
Common stock cancelled—restricted stock	(47,000	)
Common stock issued for employee benefit plans	1,004,238			10			(11,029	)							(648,088	)		16,571
Stock based compensation expense							14,264
Amortization of warrant costs							45,101
Other comprehensive loss, net of income tax benefit of $11,426										(14,695	)
Net loss													(10,889	)

Balance at June 30, 2009	134,977,812			1,350			284,961			(21,099	)		1,878,459		1,806,446			(36,363	)
Common stock issued on exercise of options	837,411			8			11,597
Income tax benefit from exercise of options and amortization of convertible note hedges							9,434
Common stock issued for employee benefit plans	1,041,137			11			4,020								110,064			(2,552	)
Stock based compensation expense							15,115
Amortization of warrant costs							1,968
Other comprehensive income, net of income tax provision of $18,567										32,969
Net income													220,546

Balance at June 30, 2010	136,856,360		$	1,369		$	327,095		$	11,870		$	2,099,005		1,916,510		$	(38,915	)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

AMERICREDIT CORP.

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(in thousands)


	Years Ended June 30,
	2010			2009			2008
Cash flows from operating activities
Net income (loss)	$	220,546		$	(10,889	)	$	(82,369	)
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities:
Depreciation and amortization		79,044			109,008			86,879
Provision for loan losses		388,058			972,381			1,130,962
Deferred income taxes		(24,567	)		226,783			(146,361	)
Stock based compensation expense		15,115			14,264			17,945
Amortization of warrant costs		1,968			45,101			10,193
Non-cash interest charges on convertible debt		21,554			22,506			22,062
Accretion and amortization of loan fees		4,791			19,094			29,435
Gain on retirement of debt		(283	)		(48,907	)
Impairment of goodwill								212,595
Other		(15,954	)		2,773			6,126
Changes in assets and liabilities, net of assets and liabilities acquired:
Income tax receivable		197,402			(174,682	)		(22,897	)
Other assets		5,256			(6,704	)		(15,627	)
Accrued taxes and expenses		35,779			(52,113	)		11,018

Net cash provided by operating activities		928,709			1,118,615			1,259,961

Cash flows from investing activities
Purchases of receivables		(2,090,602	)		(1,280,291	)		(6,260,198	)
Principal collections and recoveries on receivables		3,606,680			4,257,637			6,108,690
Purchases of property and equipment		(1,581	)		(1,003	)		(8,463	)
Change in restricted cash—securitization notes payable		(78,549	)		131,064			31,683
Change in restricted cash—credit facilities		52,354			63,180			(92,754	)
Change in other assets		43,875			12,960			(41,731	)
Proceeds from money market fund		10,047			104,319
Investment in money market fund					(115,821	)
Net purchases of leased vehicles								(198,826	)
Distributions from gain on sale Trusts								7,466

Net cash provided (used) by investing activities		1,542,224			3,172,045			(454,133	)

Cash flows from financing activities
Net change in credit facilities		(1,031,187	)		(1,278,117	)		385,611
Issuance of securitization notes payable		2,352,493			1,000,000			4,250,000
Payments on securitization notes payable		(3,674,062	)		(3,987,424	)		(5,774,035	)
Debt issuance costs		(24,754	)		(32,609	)		(39,347	)
Net proceeds from issuance of common stock		15,635			3,741			25,174
Retirement of debt		(20,425	)		(238,617	)
Repurchase of common stock								(127,901	)
Other net changes		645			(603	)		323

Net cash used by financing activities		(2,381,655	)		(4,533,629	)		(1,280,175	)

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents		89,278			(242,969	)		(474,347	)
Effect of Canadian exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents		(292	)		2,763			(2,464	)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year		193,287			433,493			910,304

Cash and cash equivalents at end of year	$	282,273		$	193,287		$	433,493

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

AMERICREDIT CORP.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

1.	Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

History and Operations

We were formed on August 1, 1986, and, since September 1992, have been in the business of purchasing and servicing automobile sales finance contracts. From January 2007 through May 2008, we also originated leases on automobiles.

Recent Events

Basis of Presentation

The consolidated financial statements include our accounts and the accounts of our wholly-owned subsidiaries, including certain special purpose financing trusts utilized in securitization transactions (“Trusts”) which are considered variable interest entities. All intercompany transactions and accounts have been eliminated in consolidation. Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions which affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the financial statements and the amount of revenue and costs and expenses during the reporting periods. Actual results could differ from those estimates and those differences may be material. These estimates include, among other things, the determination of the allowance for loan losses on finance receivables, and income taxes.

Cash Equivalents

Investments in highly liquid securities with original maturities of 90 days or less are included in cash and cash equivalents.

Finance Receivables

Finance receivables are carried at amortized cost, net of allowance for loan losses.

Allowance for Loan Losses

Provisions for loan losses are charged to operations in amounts sufficient to maintain the allowance for loan losses at a level considered adequate to cover probable credit losses inherent in our finance receivables.

The allowance for loan losses is established systematically based on the determination of the amount of probable credit losses inherent in the finance receivables as of the reporting date. We review charge-off experience factors, delinquency reports, historical collection rates, estimates of the value of the underlying collateral, economic trends, such as unemployment rates, and other information in order to make the necessary judgments as to probable credit losses. We also use historical charge-off experience to determine a loss confirmation period, which is defined as the time between when an event, such as delinquency status, giving rise to a probable credit loss occurs with respect to a specific account and when such account is charged off. This loss confirmation period is applied to the forecasted probable credit losses to determine the amount of losses inherent in finance receivables at the reporting date. Assumptions regarding probable credit losses and loss confirmation periods are reviewed periodically and may be impacted by actual performance of finance receivables and changes in any of the factors discussed above.

Charge-off Policy

Our policy is to charge off an account in the month in which the account becomes 120 days contractually delinquent if we have not repossessed the related vehicle. We charge off accounts in repossession when the automobile is repossessed and legally available for disposition. A charge-off generally represents the difference between the estimated net sales proceeds and the amount of the delinquent contract, including accrued interest. Accounts in repossession that have been charged off have been removed from finance receivables and the related repossessed automobiles, aggregating $12.4 million and $20.4 million at June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, are included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheets pending sale.

Securitization

The structure of our securitization transactions does not qualify under the accounting criteria for sales of finance receivables and, accordingly, such securitization transactions have been accounted for as secured financings. Therefore, following a securitization, the finance receivables and the related securitization notes payable remain on the consolidated balance sheets. We recognize finance charge and fee income on the receivables and interest expense on the securities issued in the securitization transaction, and record a provision for loan losses to recognize probable loan losses inherent in the finance receivables. Cash pledged to support the securitization transaction is deposited to a restricted account and recorded on our consolidated balance sheets as restricted cash – securitization notes payable, which is invested in highly liquid securities with original maturities of 90 days or less or in highly rated guaranteed investment contracts.

Prior to October 1, 2002, we structured our securitization transactions to meet the accounting criteria for sales of finance receivables. We also acquired two securitization Trusts which were accounted for as sales of receivables. Such securitization transactions are referred to herein as gain on sale Trusts. We had no gain on sale Trusts outstanding as of June 30, 2010.

Property and Equipment

Property and equipment are carried at cost less accumulated depreciation. Depreciation is generally provided on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the assets, which ranges from three to 25 years. The cost of assets sold or retired and the related accumulated depreciation are removed from the accounts at the time of disposition and any resulting gain or loss is included in operations. Maintenance, repairs and minor replacements are charged to operations as incurred; major replacements and betterments are capitalized.

Leased Vehicles

Leased vehicles consist of automobiles leased to consumers. These assets are reported at cost, less accumulated depreciation. Depreciation expense is recorded on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. Leased vehicles are depreciated to the estimated residual value at the end of the lease term. Under the accounting for impairment or disposal of long-lived assets, residual values of operating leases are evaluated individually for

impairment. When aggregate future cash flows from the operating lease, including the expected realizable fair value of the leased asset at the end of the lease, are less than the book value of the lease, an immediate impairment write-down is recognized if the difference is deemed not recoverable. Otherwise, reductions in the expected residual value result in additional depreciation of the leased asset over the remaining term of the lease. Upon disposition, a gain or loss is recorded for any difference between the net book value of the lease and the proceeds from the disposition of the asset, including any insurance proceeds.

Goodwill

Under the purchase method of accounting, the net assets of entities acquired by us are recorded at their estimated fair value at the date of acquisition. The excess cost of the acquisition over the fair value is recorded as goodwill. Goodwill is subject to impairment testing using a two-step process. The first step of the goodwill impairment test is to identify potential impairment by comparing the fair value of the reporting unit with its carrying amount, including goodwill. We have determined that we have only one reporting unit. If the fair value of a reporting unit exceeds its carrying amount, goodwill of the reporting unit is considered not impaired and the second step of the impairment test is not required. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second step of the goodwill impairment test is performed to measure the amount of the impairment loss, if any. The second step of the goodwill impairment test compares the implied fair value (i.e., the fair value of reporting unit less the fair value of the unit’s assets and liabilities, including identifiable intangible assets) of the reporting unit’s goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. If the carrying value of goodwill exceeds its implied fair value, the excess is required to be recorded as an impairment charge in earnings.

On January 1, 2007, we acquired the stock of Long Beach Acceptance Corporation (“LBAC”). The total consideration in the all-cash transaction, including transaction costs, was approximately $287.7 million. We initially recorded goodwill of approximately $196.8 million, all of which is deductible for federal income tax purposes. On May 1, 2006, we acquired the stock of Bay View Acceptance Corporation (“BVAC”). The total consideration in the all-cash transaction, including transaction costs, was approximately $64.6 million. We initially recorded goodwill of approximately $14.4 million, which is not deductible for federal income tax purposes. The operations of LBAC and BVAC have been integrated into our activities and we provide auto finance products solely under the AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. name.

Our annual goodwill impairment analysis performed during the fourth quarter of the year ended June 30, 2008 resulted in the determination that the goodwill was fully impaired.

A summary of changes to goodwill is as follows (in thousands):


Years ended June 30,	2008
Balance at beginning of year	$	208,435
Adjustments to goodwill		4,160
Impairment		(212,595	)

Balance at end of year	$

Derivative Financial Instruments

We recognize all of our derivative financial instruments as either assets or liabilities on our consolidated balance sheets at fair value. The accounting for changes in the fair value of each derivative financial instrument depends on whether it has been designated and qualifies as an accounting hedge, as well as the type of hedging relationship identified.

Our special purpose finance subsidiaries are contractually required to purchase derivative instruments as credit enhancement in connection with securitization transactions and credit facilities.

Interest Rate Swap Agreements

We utilize interest rate swap agreements to convert floating rate exposures on securities issued in securitization transactions to fixed rates, thereby hedging the variability in interest expense paid. Our interest rate swap agreements are designated as cash flow hedges on the floating rate debt of our securitization notes payable and may qualify for hedge accounting treatment, while others do not qualify and are marked to market through interest expense in our consolidated statements of operations. Cash flows from derivatives used to manage interest rate risk are classified as operating activities.

For interest rate swap agreements designated as hedges, we formally document all relationships between the interest rate swap agreement and the underlying asset, liability or cash flows being hedged, as well as our risk management objective and strategy for undertaking the hedge transactions. At hedge inception and at least quarterly, we also formally assess whether the interest rate swap agreements that are used in hedging transactions have been highly effective in offsetting changes in the cash flows or fair value of the hedged items and whether those interest rate swap agreements may be expected to remain highly effective in future periods. In addition, we also assess the continued probability that the hedged cash flows will be realized.

We use regression analysis to assess hedge effectiveness of our cash flow hedges on a prospective and retrospective basis. A derivative financial instrument is deemed to be effective if the X-coefficient from the regression analysis is between a range of 0.80 and 1.25. At June 30, 2010, all of our interest rate swap agreements designated as cash flow hedges fall within this range and are deemed to be effective hedges for accounting purposes. We use the hypothetical derivative method to measure the amount of ineffectiveness and a net earnings impact occurs when the change in the value of a derivative instrument does not offset the change in the value of the underlying hedged item. Ineffectiveness of our hedges is not material.

The effective portion of the changes in the fair value of the interest rate swaps qualifying as cash flow hedges are included as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) as an unrealized gain or loss on cash flow hedges. These unrealized gains or losses are recognized as adjustments to income over the same period in which cash flows from the related hedged item affect earnings. However, if we expect the continued reporting of a loss in accumulated other comprehensive income would lead to recognizing a net loss on the combination of the interest rate swap agreements and the hedged item, the loss is reclassified to earnings for the amount that is not expected to be recovered. Additionally, to the extent that any of these contracts are not considered to be perfectly effective in offsetting the change in the value of the cash flows being hedged, any changes in fair value relating to the ineffective portion of these contracts are recognized in interest expense on our consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive operations. We discontinue hedge accounting prospectively when it is determined that an interest rate swap agreement has ceased to be effective as an accounting hedge or if the underlying hedged cash flow is no longer probable of occurring.

Interest Rate Cap Agreements

Generally, we purchase interest rate cap agreements to limit floating rate exposures on securities issued in our credit facilities. As part of our interest rate risk management strategy and when economically feasible, we may simultaneously sell a corresponding interest rate cap agreement in order to offset the premium paid to purchase the interest rate cap agreement and thus retain the interest rate risk. Because the interest rate cap agreements entered into by us or our special purpose finance subsidiaries do not qualify for hedge accounting, changes in the fair value of interest rate cap agreements purchased by the special purpose finance subsidiaries and interest rate cap agreements sold by us are recorded in interest expense on our consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive operations.

We do not use derivative instruments for trading or speculative purposes.

Interest rate risk management contracts are generally expressed in notional principal or contract amounts that are much larger than the amounts potentially at risk for nonpayment by counterparties. Therefore, in the event of nonperformance by the counterparties, our credit exposure is limited to the uncollected interest and the market value related to the contracts that have become favorable to us. We manage the credit risk of such contracts by using highly rated counterparties, establishing risk limits and monitoring the credit ratings of the counterparties.

We maintain a policy of requiring that all derivative contracts be governed by an International Swaps and Derivatives Association Master Agreement. We enter into arrangements with individual counterparties that we believe are creditworthy and generally settle on a net basis. In addition, we perform a quarterly assessment of our counterparty credit risk, including a review of credit ratings, credit default swap rates and potential nonperformance of the counterparty. Based on our most recent quarterly assessment of our counterparty credit risk, we consider this risk to be low.

Income Taxes

Deferred income taxes are provided in accordance with the asset and liability method of accounting for income taxes to recognize the tax effects of tax credits and temporary differences between financial statement and income tax accounting. A valuation allowance is recognized if it is more likely than not that some portion or the entire deferred tax asset will not be realized.

We account for uncertainty in income taxes in the financial statements. See Note 14 - “Income Taxes” for a discussion of the accounting for uncertain tax positions.

Revenue Recognition

Finance Charge Income

Finance charge income related to finance receivables is recognized using the interest method. Accrual of finance charge income is suspended on accounts that are more than 60 days delinquent, accounts in bankruptcy, and accounts in repossession. Fees and commissions received and direct costs of originating loans are deferred and amortized over the term of the related finance receivables using the interest method and are removed from the consolidated balance sheets when the related finance receivables are sold, charged off or paid in full.

Operating Leases – deferred origination fees or costs

Net deferred origination fees or costs are amortized on a straight-line basis over the life of the lease to other income.

Stock Based Compensation

Share-based payment transactions are measured at fair value and recognized in the financial statements. For fiscal 2010, 2009, and 2008, we have recorded total stock based compensation expense of $15.1 million ($9.4 million net of tax), $14.3 million ($9.2 million net of tax), and $17.9 million ($13.5 million net of tax), respectively.

The excess tax benefit of the stock based compensation expense related to the exercise of stock options of $1.1 million and $1.3 million for fiscal 2010 and 2008, respectively, has been included in other net changes as a cash inflow from financing activities on the consolidated statements of cash flows.

The fair value of each option granted or modified was estimated using an option-pricing model with the following weighted average assumptions:


Years Ended June 30,	2010		2009		2008
Expected dividends	0		0		0
Expected volatility	65.7	%	92.1	%	60.8	%
Risk-free interest rate	1.2	%	1.7	%	3.3	%
Expected life	1.4 years		2.0 years		1.2 years

We have not paid out dividends historically, thus the dividend yields are estimated at zero percent.

Expected volatility reflects an average of the implied and historical volatility rates. Management believes that a combination of market-based measures is currently the best available indicator of expected volatility.

The risk-free interest rate is the implied yield available for zero-coupon U.S. government issues with a remaining term equal to the expected life of the options.

The expected lives of options are determined based on our historical option exercise experience and the term of the option.

Assumptions are reviewed each time there is a new grant or modification of a previous grant and may be impacted by actual fluctuation in our stock price, movements in market interest rates and option terms. The use of different assumptions produces a different fair value for the options granted or modified and impacts the amount of compensation expense recognized on the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive operations.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

2.	Finance Receivables

Finance receivables consist of the following (in thousands):


June 30,	2010			2009
Finance receivables unsecuritized, net of fees	$	1,533,673		$	2,534,158
Finance receivables securitized, net of fees		7,199,845			8,393,811
Less allowance for loan losses		(573,310	)		(890,640	)

	$	8,160,208		$	10,037,329

Finance receivables securitized represent receivables transferred to our special purpose finance subsidiaries in securitization transactions accounted for as secured financings. Finance receivables unsecuritized include $651.3 million and $2,037.6 million pledged under our credit facilities as of June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

Finance receivables are collateralized by vehicle titles and we have the right to repossess the vehicle in the event the consumer defaults on the payment terms of the contract.

The accrual of finance charge income has been suspended on $491.2 million and $667.3 million of delinquent finance receivables as of June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

Finance contracts are purchased by us from auto dealers without recourse, and accordingly, the dealer has no liability to us if the consumer defaults on the contract. Depending upon the contract structure and consumer credit attributes, we may pay dealers a participation fee or we may charge dealers a non-refundable acquisition fee when purchasing individual finance contracts. We record the amortization of participation fees and accretion of acquisition fees to finance charge income using the effective interest method.

A summary of the allowance for loan losses is as follows (in thousands):


Years ended June 30,	2010			2009			2008
Balance at beginning of year	$	890,640		$	951,113		$	820,088
Repurchase of receivables								109
Provision for loan losses		388,058			972,381			1,130,962
Net charge-offs		(705,388	)		(1,032,854	)		(1,000,046	)

Balance at end of year	$	573,310		$	890,640		$	951,113

3.	Securitizations

A summary of our securitization activity and cash flows from special purpose entities used for securitizations is as follows (in thousands):


Years ended June 30,	2010		2009		2008
Receivables securitized	$	2,843,308	$	1,289,082	$	4,634,083
Net proceeds from securitization		2,352,493		1,000,000		4,250,000
Servicing fees:
Sold				28		168
Secured financing^(a)		196,304		237,471		306,949
Distributions from Trusts:
Sold						7,466
Secured financing		424,161		429,457		668,510

(a)

Cash flows received for servicing securitizations accounted for as secured financings are included in finance charge income on the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive operations.

We retain servicing responsibilities for receivables transferred to the Trusts. Included in finance charge income is a monthly base servicing fee earned on the outstanding principal balance of our securitized receivables and supplemental fees (such as late charges) for servicing the receivables.

As of June 30, 2010 and 2009, we were servicing $7.2 billion and $8.4 billion, respectively, of finance receivables that have been transferred to securitization Trusts.

In April 2008, we entered into a one year, $2 billion forward purchase commitment agreement with Deutsche Bank (“Deutsche”). Under this agreement and subject to certain terms, Deutsche committed to purchase triple-A rated asset-backed securities issued by our sub-prime AmeriCredit Automobile Receivables Trust (“AMCAR”) securitization platform in registered public offerings. We paid $20.0 million of upfront commitment fees and issued a warrant to purchase up to 7.5 million shares of our common stock valued at $48.9 million in connection with the agreement. We utilized $752.8 million of the commitment in conjunction with the execution of our AMCAR 2008-1 and 2008-2 transactions. Effective December 19, 2008, we entered into a letter agreement with Deutsche whereby the parties mutually agreed to terminate the forward purchase commitment agreement. The remaining unamortized warrant costs of $14.3 million and unamortized commitment fees of $5.8 million at the termination date were charged to interest expense during fiscal 2009. See Note 11 - “Common Stock and Warrants” for a discussion of warrants issued by us in connection with this transaction.

In September 2008, we entered into agreements with Wachovia Capital Markets, LLC and Wachovia Bank, National Association (together, “Wachovia”), to establish two funding facilities under which Wachovia would provide total funding of $117.7 million, during the one year term of the facilities, secured by asset-backed securities as collateral. In conjunction with our AMCAR 2008-1 transaction, we obtained funding under these facilities of $48.9 million by pledging double-A rated asset-backed securities (the “Class B Notes”) as collateral and $68.8 million by pledging single-A rated asset-backed securities (the “Class C Notes”) as collateral. Under these funding facilities, we retained the Class B Notes and the Class C Notes issued in the transaction and then sold the retained notes to a special purpose subsidiary, which in turn pledged such retained notes as collateral to secure the funding under the two facilities. The facilities were renewed for another one year term in September 2009. At the end of the one year term, the facilities, if not renewed, will amortize in accordance with the securitization transaction until paid off. We paid $1.9 million of upfront commitment fees and issued a warrant to purchase up to 1.0 million shares of our common stock valued at $8.3 million in connection with these facilities, which were amortized to interest expense over the original one year term of the facilities. Unamortized warrant costs of $2.0 million and unamortized commitment fees of $0.5 million, as of June 30, 2009, are included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheets. See Note 11 - “Common Stock and Warrants” for a discussion of warrants issued by us in connection with this transaction.

We have analyzed the warrant transactions regarding accounting for derivative financial instruments indexed to and potentially settled in a company’s own stock and determined they meet the criteria for classification as equity transactions. As a result, amortization of the warrant costs is reflected in additional paid-in capital on our consolidated balance sheets, and we did not recognize subsequent changes in their fair value.

In November 2008, we entered into a purchase agreement with Fairholme Funds Inc. (“Fairholme”) under which Fairholme purchased $123.2 million of asset-backed securities, consisting of $50.6 million of Class B Notes and $72.6 million of Class C Notes in the AMCAR 2008-2 transaction. See Note 7 - “Senior Notes and Convertible Senior Notes” for discussion of other transactions with Fairholme.

4.	Investment in Money Market Fund

We had an investment in the Reserve Primary Money Market Fund (the “Reserve Fund”), a money market fund which has subsequently liquidated its portfolio of investments. As of June 30, 2009, the investment was valued at the estimated net asset value of $0.97 per share as published by the Reserve Fund. Through June 30, 2010, we have received distributions from the Reserve Fund representing approximately $0.99 per share in total distributions.

5.	Credit Facilities

Amounts outstanding under our credit facilities are as follows (in thousands):


June 30,	2010		2009
Medium term note facility	$	598,946	$	750,000
Master/Syndicated warehouse facility				569,756
Prime/Near prime facility				250,377
Lease warehouse facility				60,000

	$	598,946	$	1,630,133

Further detail regarding terms and availability of the credit facilities as of June 30, 2010, follows (in thousands):


Facility	Facility Amount		Advances Outstanding		Finance Receivables Pledged		Restricted Cash Pledged^(c)
Master/Syndicated warehouse facility^(a):	$	1,300,000					$	300
Medium term note facility^(b):			$	598,946	$	651,255		115,837

	$	1,300,000	$	598,946	$	651,255	$	116,137

(a)

(b)

(c)

These amounts do not include cash collected on finance receivables pledged of $26.6 million which is also included in restricted cash – credit facilities on the consolidated balance sheets.

Generally, our credit facilities are administered by agents on behalf of institutionally managed commercial paper or medium term note conduits. Under these funding agreements, we transfer finance receivables to our special purpose finance subsidiaries. These subsidiaries, in turn, issue notes to the agents, collateralized by such finance receivables and cash. The agents provide funding under the notes to the subsidiaries pursuant to an advance formula, and the subsidiaries forward the funds to us in consideration for the transfer of finance receivables. While these subsidiaries are included in our consolidated financial statements, these subsidiaries are separate legal entities and the finance receivables and other assets held by these subsidiaries are legally owned by these subsidiaries and are not available to our creditors or our other subsidiaries. Advances under the funding agreements bear interest at commercial paper, London Interbank Offered Rates (“LIBOR”) or prime rates plus a credit spread and specified fees depending upon the source of funds provided by the agents.

We are required to hold certain funds in restricted cash accounts to provide additional collateral for borrowings under the credit facilities. Additionally, the credit facilities contain various covenants requiring minimum financial ratios, asset quality and portfolio performance ratios (portfolio net loss and delinquency ratios, and pool level cumulative net loss ratios) as well as limits on deferment levels. Failure to meet any of these covenants could result in an event of default under these agreements. If an event of default occurs under these agreements, the lenders could elect to declare all amounts outstanding under these agreements to be immediately due and payable, enforce their interests against collateral pledged under these agreements or restrict our ability to obtain additional borrowings under these agreements. As of June 30, 2010, we were in compliance with all covenants in our credit facilities.

On February 26, 2010, we increased and extended our master/syndicated warehouse facility. The borrowing capacity available under the facility increased to $1.3 billion from $1.0 billion and includes commitments from eight lenders. On August 20, 2010, the master/syndicated warehouse facility was amended to allow for the change of control following the consummation of the pending Merger.

Debt issuance costs are being amortized to interest expense over the expected term of the credit facilities. Unamortized costs of $8.3 million and $16.1 million, as of June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, are included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheets.

6.	Securitization Notes Payable

Securitization notes payable represents debt issued by us in securitization transactions. Debt issuance costs are being amortized over the expected term of the securitizations on an effective yield basis. Unamortized costs of $19.7 million and $13.9 million as of June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, are included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheets.

Securitization notes payable consists of the following (dollars in thousands):


Transaction	Maturity Date^(b)	Original Note Amount		Original Weighted Average Interest Rate		Receivables Pledged at June 30, 2010		Note Balance at June 30, 2010		Note Balance at June 30, 2009
2004-D-F	July 2011	$	750,000	3.1	%					$	48,301
2005-A-X	October 2011		900,000	3.7	%						72,264
2005-1	May 2011		750,000	4.5	%						57,059
2005-B-M	May 2012		1,350,000	4.1	%						159,428
2005-C-F	June 2012		1,100,000	4.5	%	$	77,101	$	69,967		160,112
2005-D-A	November 2012		1,400,000	4.9	%		130,552		118,645		245,084
2006-1	May 2013		945,000	5.3	%		107,872		83,724		162,775
2006-R-M	January 2014		1,200,000	5.4	%		282,564		253,467		452,604
2006-A-F	September 2013		1,350,000	5.6	%		231,544		209,606		371,300
2006-B-G	September 2013		1,200,000	5.2	%		250,414		227,503		386,480
2007-A-X	October 2013		1,200,000	5.2	%		302,553		276,588		447,945
2007-B-F	December 2013		1,500,000	5.2	%		449,540		410,193		650,889
2007-1	March 2016		1,000,000	5.4	%		260,396		263,468		430,801
2007-C-M	April 2014		1,500,000	5.5	%		526,484		481,155		742,002
2007-D-F	June 2014		1,000,000	5.5	%		381,097		347,913		539,020
2007-2-M	March 2016		1,000,000	5.3	%		363,564		347,739		535,200
2008-A-F	October 2014		750,000	6.0	%		431,228		343,753		518,835
2008-1	January 2015		500,000	8.7	%		356,580		221,952		388,355
2008-2	April 2015		500,000	10.5	%		378,821		230,803		400,108
2009-1	January 2016		725,000	7.5	%		675,981		450,998
2009-1 (APART)	July 2017		227,493	2.7	%		228,458		163,350
2010-1	July 2017		600,000	3.7	%		600,341		511,583
2010-A	July 2017		200,000	3.1	%		224,084		187,162
2010-2	June 2016		600,000	3.8	%		609,800		583,210
BV2005-LJ-1^(a)	May 2012		232,100	5.1	%		10,635		11,271		26,800
BV2005-LJ-2^(a)(c)	February 2014		185,596	4.6	%		12,215		11,467		26,668
BV2005-3^(a)	June 2014		220,107	5.1	%		21,211		22,359		43,065
LB2004-C^(a)	July 2011		350,000	3.5	%						23,543
LB2005-A^(a)	April 2012		350,000	4.1	%		14,852		15,708		41,040
LB2005-B^(a)	June 2012		350,000	4.4	%		24,567		22,293		53,157
LB2006-A^(a)	May 2013		450,000	5.4	%		54,482		49,638		97,058
LB2006-B^(a)	September 2013		500,000	5.2	%		80,735		83,194		148,167
LB2007-A	January 2014		486,000	5.0	%		112,174		110,267		198,627

		$	25,371,296			$	7,199,845	$	6,108,976	$	7,426,687

(a)

Transactions relate to securitization Trusts acquired by us.

(b)

Maturity date represents final legal maturity of securitization notes payable. Securitization notes payable are expected to be paid based on amortization of the finance receivables pledged to the Trusts. Expected principal payments are $3,075.5 million in fiscal 2011, $1,961.6 million in fiscal 2012, $625.2 million in fiscal 2013, $280.5 million in fiscal 2014, $131.8 million in fiscal 2015 and $37.7 million thereafter.

(c)

Note balance does not include $1.4 million of asset-backed securities repurchased and retained by us as of June 30, 2010.

At the time of securitization of finance receivables, we are required to pledge assets equal to a specified percentage of the securitization pool to support the securitization transaction. Typically, the assets pledged consist of cash deposited to a restricted account and additional receivables delivered to the Trust, which create overcollateralization. The securitization transactions require the percentage of assets pledged to support the transaction to increase until a specified level is attained. Excess cash flows generated by the Trusts are added to the restricted cash account or used to pay down outstanding debt in the Trusts, creating overcollateralization until the targeted percentage level of assets has been reached. Once the targeted percentage level of assets is reached and maintained, excess cash flows generated by the Trusts are released to us as distributions from Trusts. Additionally, as the balance of the securitization pool declines, the amount of pledged assets needed to maintain the required percentage level is reduced. Assets in excess of the required percentage are also released to us as distributions from Trusts.

With respect to our securitization transactions covered by a financial guaranty insurance policy, agreements with the insurers provide that if portfolio performance ratios (delinquency, cumulative default or cumulative net loss) in a Trust’s pool of receivables exceed certain targets, the specified credit enhancement levels would be increased.

Agreements with our financial guaranty insurance providers contain additional specified targeted portfolio performance ratios that are higher than those described in the preceding paragraph. If, at any measurement date, the targeted portfolio performance ratios with respect to any insured Trust were to exceed these higher levels, provisions of the agreements permit our financial guaranty insurance providers to declare the occurrence of an event of default and terminate our servicing rights to the receivables transferred to that Trust. As of June 30, 2010, no such servicing right termination events have occurred with respect to any of the Trusts formed by us.

During fiscal 2010, 2009 and 2008, we exceeded certain portfolio performance ratios in several AMCAR and LBAC securitizations. Excess cash flows from these Trusts have been or are being used to build higher credit enhancement in each respective Trust instead of being distributed to us. We do not expect the trapping of excess cash flows from these Trusts to have a material adverse impact to our liquidity.

On January 22, 2010, we entered into an agreement with Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp. (“Assured”), to increase the levels of additional specified targeted portfolio performance ratios in the AMCAR 2007-D-F, AMCAR 2008-A-F, LB2006-B and LB2007-A securitizations. As part of this agreement, we deposited $38.0 million in the AMCAR 2007-D-F securitization restricted cash account and $57.0 million in the AMCAR 2008-A-F securitization restricted cash account. This cash is expected to be redistributed to us over time as the securitization notes pay down.

7.	Senior Notes and Convertible Senior Notes

Senior notes and convertible senior notes consist of the following (in thousands):


	June 30, 2010			June 30, 2009
8.5% Senior Notes (due July 2015)	$	70,620		$	91,620

0.75% Convertible Senior Notes (due in September 2011)		247,000			247,000
Debt discount		(17,645	)		(31,088	)
2.125% Convertible Senior Notes (due in September 2013)		215,017			215,017
Debt discount		(30,304	)		(38,415	)

	$	414,068		$	392,514

As a result of adopting new guidance regarding the accounting for convertible debt instruments that may be settled in cash upon conversion (including partial cash settlement), we have separately accounted for the liability and equity components of the convertible senior notes due in September 2011 and 2013, retrospectively, based on our nonconvertible debt borrowing rate on the issuance date of approximately 7%. At issuance, the liability and equity components were $404.3 million and $145.7 million ($91.7 million net of deferred taxes), respectively. The debt discount is being amortized to interest expense over the expected term of the notes based on the effective interest method.

Interest expense related to the convertible senior notes consists of the following (in thousands):


Years Ended June 30,	2010		2009		2008
Discount amortization	$	21,554	$	22,506	$	22,062
Contractual interest		6,421		7,379		7,906

Total interest expense related to convertible senior notes	$	27,975	$	29,885	$	29,968

Debt issuance costs related to the senior notes and the convertible senior notes are being amortized to interest expense over the expected term of the notes; unamortized costs of $0.9 million and $1.4 million related to the senior notes and $2.8 million and $4.2 million related to the convertible senior notes are included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheets as of June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Debt issuance costs of approximately $3.5 million directly related to the issuance of the convertible senior notes have been allocated to the equity component in proportion to the allocation of proceeds.

Senior Notes

Interest on the senior notes is payable semiannually. The notes will be redeemable, at our option, in whole or in part, at any time on or after July 1, 2011, at specific redemption prices. The indenture pursuant to which the senior notes were issued contains certain restrictions including limitations on our ability to incur additional indebtedness, other than certain collateralized indebtedness, pay cash dividends and repurchase common stock.

In November 2008, we issued 15,122,670 shares of our common stock to Fairholme Funds Inc (“Fairholme”), in a non-cash transaction, in exchange for $108.4 million of our senior notes due 2015, held by Fairholme, at a price of $840 per $1,000 principal amount of the notes. We recognized a gain of $14.7 million, net of transaction costs, on retirement of debt in the exchange. Fairholme and its affiliates held approximately 19.8% of our outstanding common stock prior to the issuance of these shares.

During fiscal 2010, we repurchased on the open market $21.0 million of senior notes due in 2015 at an average price of 97.3% of the principal amount of the notes repurchased which resulted in a gain on retirement of debt of $0.3 million.

In the event of a change of control, each holder of senior notes shall have the right, at the holder’s option, to require us to repurchase all or any part of such holder’s senior notes pursuant to a notice from us describing the transaction that constitutes a change of control at an offer price equal to 101% of the principal amount of the notes.

Convertible Senior Notes

Interest on the convertible senior notes is payable semiannually. Subject to certain conditions, the notes, which are uncollateralized, may be converted prior to maturity into shares of our common stock at an initial conversion price of $28.07 per share and $30.51 per share for the notes due in 2011 and 2013, respectively. Upon conversion, the conversion value will be paid in: 1) cash equal to the principal amount of the notes and 2) to the extent the conversion value exceeds the principal amount of the notes, shares of our common stock. The notes are convertible only in the following circumstances: 1) if the closing sale price of our common stock exceeds 130% of the conversion price during specified periods set forth in the indentures under which the notes were issued, 2) if the average trading price per $1,000 principal amount of the notes is less than or equal to 98% of the average conversion value of the notes during specified periods set forth in the indentures under which the notes were issued or 3) upon the occurrence of specific corporate transactions set forth in the indentures under which the notes were issued. At June 30, 2010 and 2009, the if-converted value did not exceed the principal amount of the convertible senior notes.

In connection with the issuance of the convertible senior notes due in 2011 and 2013, we purchased call options that entitle us to purchase shares of our common stock in an amount equal to the number of shares issued upon conversion of the notes at $28.07 per share and $30.51 per share for the notes due in 2011 and 2013, respectively. These call options are expected to allow us to offset the dilution of our shares if the conversion feature of the convertible senior notes is exercised.

We also sold warrants to purchase 9,796,408 shares of our common stock at $35.00 per share and 9,012,713 shares of our common stock at $40 per share for the notes due in 2011 and 2013, respectively. In no event are we required to deliver a number of shares in connection with the exercise of these warrants in excess of twice the aggregate number of shares initially issuable upon the exercise of the warrants.

During fiscal 2009, we repurchased on the open market $28.0 par value million of our convertible senior notes due in 2011 at an average price of 44.2% of the principal amount of the notes repurchased. We also repurchased $60.0 par value million of our convertible senior notes due in 2013 at an average price of 44.1% of the principal amount of the notes repurchased. In connection with these repurchases, we recorded a gain on retirement of debt of $32.7 million.

During fiscal 2009, we repurchased and retired all $200.0 million of our convertible notes due in November 2023 at an average price equal to 99.5% of the principal amount of notes redeemed. We recorded a gain on retirement of debt of $0.8 million.

In the event of a change of control, each holder of convertible senior notes shall have the right, at the holder’s option, to require us to repurchase all or any part of such holder’s convertible senior notes pursuant to a notice from us describing the transaction that constitutes a change of control at an offer price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the notes.

8.	Derivative Financial Instruments and Hedging Activities

We are exposed to market risks arising from adverse changes in interest rates due to floating interest rate exposure on our credit facilities and on certain securitization notes payable. See Note 1 - “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies—Derivative Financial Instruments” for more information regarding our derivative financial instruments and hedging activities.

Interest rate caps, swaps and foreign currency contracts consist of the following (in thousands):


	June 30, 2010				June 30, 2009
	Notional		Fair Value		Notional		Fair Value
Assets
Interest rate swaps^(a)	$	1,682,182	$	26,194	$	2,592,548	$	24,267
Interest rate caps^(a)		774,456		3,188		1,914,886		15,858

Total assets	$	2,456,638	$	29,382	$	4,507,434	$	40,125

Liabilities
Interest rate swaps	$	1,682,182	$	70,421	$	2,592,548	$	131,885
Interest rate caps^(b)		708,287		3,320		1,721,044		16,644
Foreign currency contracts^(b)(c)		58,470		1,206

Total liabilities	$	2,448,939	$	74,947	$	4,313,592	$	148,529

(a)

Included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheets.

(b)

Included in other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets.

(c)

Notional has been translated from Canadian dollars to U.S. dollars at the quarter end rate.

Interest rate swap agreements designated as hedges had unrealized losses of approximately $53.8 million and $97.1 million included in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) as of June 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively. The ineffectiveness related to the interest rate swap agreements was $0.4 million and $0.8 million for fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively, and immaterial for fiscal 2008. We estimate approximately $43.7 million of unrealized losses included in accumulated other comprehensive loss will be reclassified into earnings within the next twelve months.

Interest rate swap agreements not designated as hedges had a change in fair value which resulted in gains of $12.6 million and $22.7 million included in interest expense on the consolidated statements of operations for fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively.

Under the terms of our derivative financial instruments, we are required to pledge certain funds to be held in restricted cash accounts as collateral for the outstanding derivative transactions. As of June 30, 2010 and 2009, these restricted cash accounts totaled $26.7 million and $45.7 million, respectively, and are included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheets.

On September 15, 2008, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (“LBHI”) and 16 additional affiliates of LBHI (together with LBHI, “Lehman”), filed petitions in bankruptcy court. Lehman was the hedge counterparty on interest rate swaps with notional amounts of $1.1 billion. In November 2008, we replaced Lehman as the counterparty on these interest rate swaps. Upon replacement we designated these new swaps as hedges. From July 1, 2008 until the hedge designation date of the replacement swaps, the change in fair value on these swap agreements resulted in a $34.1 million loss for fiscal 2009, and is included in interest expense in the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive operations.

The following tables present information on the effect of derivative instruments on the consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive operations for fiscal 2010 and 2009, respectively (in thousands):


	Income (Losses) Recognized In Income
	2010			2009			2008
Non-Designated hedges:
Interest rate contracts^(a)	$	13,248		$	(12,463	)	$	6,891
Foreign currency contracts^(b)		(1,206	)

Total	$	12,042		$	(12,463	)	$	6,891

Designated hedges:
Interest rate contracts^(a)	$	394		$	(781	)	$

Total	$	394		$	(781	)	$


	(Losses) Recognized in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
	2010			2009			2008
Designated hedges:
Interest rate contracts^(a)	$	(36,761	)	$	(109,115	)	$	(109,039	)

Total	$	(36,761	)	$	(109,115	)	$	(109,039	)


	(Losses) Reclassified From Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) into Income^(c)
	2010			2009			2008
Designated hedges:
Interest rate contracts^(a)	$	(80,067	)	$	(82,244	)	$	(24,635	)

Total	$	(80,067	)	$	(82,244	)	$	(24,635	)

(a)

Income (losses) recognized in income are included in interest expense.

(b)

Income (losses) recognized in income are included in operating expenses.

(c)

Losses reclassified from AOCI into income for effective and ineffective portions are included in interest expense.

9.	Fair Values of Assets and Liabilities

Effective July 1, 2008, we adopted fair value measurement guidance which provides a framework for measuring fair value under GAAP. Fair value is defined as the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. Fair value measurement requires that valuation techniques maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs and also establishes a fair value hierarchy which prioritizes the valuation inputs into three broad levels.

There are three general valuation techniques that may be used to measure fair value, as described below:

(A)

Market approach – Uses prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities. Prices may be indicated by pricing guides, sale transactions, market trades, or other sources;

(B)

Cost approach – Based on the amount that currently would be required to replace the service capacity of an asset (replacement cost); and

(C)

Income approach – Uses valuation techniques to convert future amounts to a single present amount based on current market expectations about the future amounts (includes present value techniques and option-pricing models). Net present value is an income approach where a stream of expected cash flows is discounted at an appropriate market interest rate.

Assets and liabilities itemized below were measured at fair value on a recurring basis at June 30, 2010:

June 30, 2010 (in thousands)

Fair Value Measurements Using

Assets/
Liabilities
At Fair
Value

Level 1
Quoted
Prices
In Active
Markets
Identical
Assets

Level 2
Significant
Other
Observable
Inputs

Level 3
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs

Assets

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments:

Interest rate caps (A)

3,188

Interest rate swaps (C)

General Motors Financial Company, Inc. - FORM 10-K - August 27, 2010

Attached files