EDGAR 10-K Filing

Company CIK: 1003509
Filing Year: 2021
Filename: 1003509_10-K_2021_0001193125-21-094610.json

---

ITEM 1. BUSINESS
Item 1. Business.

---

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
Item 2. Properties.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

---

ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.
Not Applicable.

---

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

---

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

---

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURE
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.
Not Applicable.
Substitute Information provided in accordance with General Instruction J to Form 10-K:
Item 1112(b) of Regulation AB: Significant obligors of pool assets (Financial information).
The pool assets held by the American Express Credit Account Master Trust (the “Trust”) do not include any significant obligors.
Item 1114(b)(2) of Regulation AB: Credit enhancement and other support, except for certain derivatives instruments (Financial information).
Based on the standards set forth in Item 1114(b) of Regulation AB, no information is required in response to this Item.
Item 1115(b) of Regulation AB: Certain derivatives instruments (Financial information).
Based on the standards set forth in Item 1115(b) of Regulation AB, no information is required in response to this Item.
Item 1117 of Regulation AB: Legal proceedings.
In the ordinary course of business, American Express Company and its subsidiaries (“American Express”) are subject to various pending and potential legal actions, arbitration proceedings, claims, investigations, examinations, regulatory proceedings, information gathering requests, subpoenas, inquiries and matters relating to compliance with laws and regulations (collectively, legal proceedings).
Based on American Express’ current knowledge, and taking into consideration its litigation-related liabilities, American Express does not believe it is a party to, nor is any of its properties the subject of, any legal proceeding that would have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial condition or liquidity. However, in light of the uncertainties involved in such matters, including the fact that some pending legal proceedings are at preliminary stages or seek an indeterminate amount of damages, it is possible that the outcome of legal proceedings could have a material impact on American Express’ results of operations. Certain legal proceedings involving American Express are described below.
A putative merchant class action in the Eastern District of New York, consolidated in 2011 and collectively captioned In re: American Express Anti-Steering Rules Antitrust Litigation (II), alleged that provisions in American Express’ merchant agreements prohibiting merchants from differentially surcharging American Express cards or steering a customer to use another network’s card or another type of general-purpose card (“anti-steering” and “non-discrimination” contractual provisions) violate U.S. antitrust laws. On January 15, 2020, American Express’ motion to compel arbitration of claims brought by merchants who accept American Express and to dismiss claims of merchants who do not was granted. Plaintiffs have appealed part of this decision.
On February 25, 2020, American Express was named as a defendant in a case filed in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, captioned Laurelwood Cleaners LLC v. American Express Co., et al., in which the plaintiff seeks a public injunction prohibiting American Express from enforcing its anti-steering and non-discrimination provisions and from requiring merchants “to offer the service of Amex-card acceptance for free.” The case has been stayed pending the outcome of arbitration proceedings.
On January 29, 2019, American Express was named in a putative class action brought in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, captioned Anthony Oliver, et al. v. American Express Company and American Express Travel Related Services Company Inc., in which the plaintiffs are holders of MasterCard, Visa and/or Discover credit cards (but not American Express cards) and allege they paid higher prices as a result of American Express’ anti-steering and non-discrimination provisions in violation of federal antitrust law and the antitrust and consumer laws of various states. Plaintiffs seek unspecified damages and other forms of relief. The court dismissed plaintiffs’ federal antitrust claim, numerous state antitrust and consumer protection claims and their unjust enrichment claim. The remaining claims in plaintiffs’ complaint arise under the antitrust laws of 11 states and the consumer protection laws of six states.
In July 2004, American Express was named as a defendant in another putative class action filed in the Southern District of New York and subsequently transferred to the Eastern District of New York, captioned The Marcus Corporation v. American Express Co., et al., in which the plaintiffs allege an unlawful antitrust tying arrangement between certain of American Express charge cards and credit cards in violation of various state and federal laws. The plaintiffs in this action seek injunctive relief and an unspecified amount of damages.
On March 8, 2016, plaintiffs B&R Supermarket, Inc. d/b/a Milam’s Market and Grove Liquors LLC, on behalf of themselves and others, filed a suit, captioned B&R Supermarket, Inc. d/b/a Milam’s Market, et al. v. Visa Inc., et al., for violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, the Clayton Antitrust Act, California’s Cartwright Act and unjust enrichment in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, against American Express Company, other credit and charge card networks, other issuing banks and EMVCo, LLC. Plaintiffs allege that the defendants, through EMVCo, conspired to shift liability for fraudulent, faulty and otherwise rejected consumer credit card transactions from themselves to merchants after the implementation of EMV chip payment terminals. Plaintiffs seek damages and injunctive relief. An amended complaint was filed on July 15, 2016. On September 30, 2016, the court denied American Express’ motion to dismiss as to claims brought by merchants who do not accept American Express cards, and on May 4, 2017, the California court transferred the case to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. On August 28, 2020, the court granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification.
PART II
The following Items have been omitted in accordance with General Instruction J to Form 10-K:

---

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

---

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
Item 6. Selected Financial Data.

---

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

---

ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.

---

ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

---

ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.

---

ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.

---

ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 9B. Other Information.
Not Applicable.
PART III
The following Items have been omitted in accordance with General Instruction J to Form 10-K:

---

ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.

---

ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
Item 11. Executive Compensation.

---

ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.

---

ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.

---

ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services.
Substitute Information provided in accordance with General Instruction J to Form 10-K:
Item 1119 of Regulation AB: Affiliations and Certain Relationships and Related Transactions.
Information required by Item 1119 of Regulation AB has been omitted from this report on Form 10-K in reliance on the Instruction to Item 1119.
Item 1122 of Regulation AB: Compliance with Applicable Servicing Criteria.
Each of American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. (“TRS”) (for itself and on behalf of its wholly owned subsidiary, American Express National Bank (“AENB”)), Exela Technologies, Inc. (“Exela”) (for itself and its wholly owned subsidiaries), and The Bank of New York Mellon (each, a “Servicing Participant”) has been identified by the registrant as a party participating in the servicing function with respect to the pool assets held by the American Express Credit Account Master Trust for all or a portion of the period covered by this Form 10-K.
Each of the Servicing Participants has completed a report on an assessment of compliance with the servicing criteria applicable to such Servicing Participant (each, a “Report on Assessment”) as of and for the year ended December 31, 2020, which Reports on Assessment are attached as exhibits to this Form 10-K. In addition, each of the Servicing Participants has provided an attestation report (each, an “Attestation Report”) by a registered independent public accounting firm regarding its related Report on Assessment. Each Attestation Report is attached as an exhibit to this Form 10-K.
Vendors
A Servicing Participant may engage one or more vendors, who are not considered servicers for purposes of Regulation AB, to perform specific and limited, or scripted activities that address all or a portion of one or more servicing criteria applicable to such Servicing Participant. In general in these cases, the Servicing Participant has instituted policies and procedures to monitor whether such vendors’ activities comply in all material respects with such servicing criteria, and may elect to take responsibility for assessing compliance with the servicing criteria applicable to such vendors’ activities in such Servicing Participant’s Report on Assessment.
Where the Servicing Participant has not instituted such policies and procedures, or where the Servicing Participant does not otherwise elect to take responsibility for assessing its vendors’ activities, the vendor is itself treated as a Servicing Participant and is required to provide its own Report on Assessment and related Attestation Report.
Exceptions
Except as disclosed below, no Report on Assessment or related Attestation Report has identified any material instance of noncompliance with the servicing criteria identified in such Report on Assessment as applicable to the related Servicing Participant. In addition, no Report on Assessment or related Attestation Report has identified any material deficiency in such Servicing Participant’s policies and procedures to monitor vendor compliance.
The Bank of New York Mellon: The Bank of New York Mellon’s Report on Assessment and related Attestation Report have identified material noncompliance with one servicing criterion applicable to The Bank of New York Mellon. With regard to servicing criterion 1122(d)(2)(vii), The Bank of New York Mellon’s report states that, during the reporting period, certain reconciliations were not prepared on a monthly basis for all asset-backed securities related bank accounts, including custodial accounts. The Bank of New York Mellon identifies in its report certain remediation efforts with respect to the instances of noncompliance with servicing criterion 1122(d)(2)(vii), which include enhancing the procedures and controls around bank reconciliations in order to ensure that such reconciliations are prepared and reviewed timely, as further described in the report. The Bank of New York Mellon has confirmed to the Depositor and TRS that no instance of noncompliance with servicing criterion 1122(d)(2)(vii) involved the Trust or investors in the Trust. We have not independently verified the accuracy of The Bank of New York Mellon’s assertions, the adequacy of its remediation efforts or the accuracy of its confirmations.
Platform Level Reports
Regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) require that each Servicing Participant complete a Report on Assessment at a “platform” level, meaning that the transactions covered by the Report on Assessment should include all asset-backed securities transactions involving such Servicing Participant that are backed by the same asset type. During 2020, TRS’ proprietary facilities conducted paper payment remittance processing services and performed billing dispute services. Exela (through its wholly owned subsidiary, Regulus West, LLC) also performed paper payment remittance processing services at three locations in the United States. As a remittance processor, Exela is responsible for, among other services, transmitting payment information to TRS, which TRS in turn uses to update its account obligor records. In its Report on Assessment attached as Exhibit 33.2 to this Form 10-K, Exela defines its platform to include (i) remittance processing services it provides to customers who are issuers or servicers of asset-backed securities transactions and (ii) who have requested confirmation of Exela’s compliance in connection with loan and/or receivables portfolios that include pool assets for asset backed securities transactions. The Bank of New York Mellon is Trustee of the Trust. In its Report on Assessment attached as Exhibit 33.3 to this Form 10-K, The Bank of New York Mellon defines its platform to include publicly issued (i.e., transaction-level reporting initially required under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) asset-backed securities issued on or after January 1, 2006 (and like-kind transactions issued prior to January 1, 2006), that are subject to Regulation AB for which The Bank of New York Mellon provides trustee, securities administration, paying agent or custodial services, as defined and to the extent applicable in the transaction agreements, other than residential mortgage-backed securities and other mortgage-related asset-backed securities.
None of TRS or the Trust is an affiliate of Exela or The Bank of New York Mellon.
Item 1123 of Regulation AB: Servicer Compliance Statement.
Each of TRS, AENB, and Exela has been identified by the registrant as a servicer or subservicer with respect to the pool assets held by the Trust for all or a portion of the period covered by this Form 10-K. Each of them has provided a Statement of Compliance for the period covered by this Form 10-K (a “Compliance Statement”), in each case signed by an authorized officer thereof. Each Compliance Statement is attached as an exhibit to this Form 10-K.
PART IV

---

ITEM 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules.
(a) (1) Not applicable.
(2) Not applicable.
(3) The exhibits filed in response to Item 601 of Regulation S-K are listed in the Exhibit Index.
(b) The exhibits filed in response to Item 601 of Regulation S-K are listed in the Exhibit Index.
(c) Not applicable.