Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2025
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Contingencies In 2006, we completed the spin-offs of our Realogy and Wyndham subsidiaries (now known as Anywhere Real Estate, Inc., and Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc. and Travel + Leisure Co., respectively). We do not believe that the impact of any resolution of pre-existing contingent liabilities in connection with the spin-offs should result in a material liability to us in relation to our consolidated financial position or liquidity, as Anywhere Real Estate, Inc., Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc. and Travel + Leisure Co. have agreed to assume responsibility for these liabilities. In March 2023, the California Office of Tax Appeals (“OTA”) issued an opinion in a case involving notices of proposed assessment of California corporation franchise tax for tax year 1999 issued to us. The case involves whether (i) the notices of proposed assessment were barred by the statute of limitations; and (ii) a transaction undertaken by us in tax year 1999 constituted a tax-free reorganization under the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”). The OTA concluded that the notices of proposed assessment were not barred by the statute of limitations and that the 1999 transaction was not a tax-free reorganization under the IRC. Anywhere Real Estate, Inc. has assumed 62.5%, and Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc. and Travel + Leisure Co. have assumed 37.5% of the potential tax liability in this matter, respectively. We filed a petition for rehearing, which was denied in April 2024, and the tax assessment was paid in May 2025. We expect that judicial relief will be sought. We are also named in litigation that is primarily related to the businesses of our former subsidiaries, including Realogy and Wyndham. We are entitled to indemnification from such entities for any liability resulting from such litigation. In September 2014, Dawn Valli et al. v. Avis Budget Group Inc., et al. was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The plaintiffs seek to represent a purported nationwide class of certain renters of vehicles from our Avis and Budget subsidiaries from September 30, 2008 through the present. The plaintiffs seek damages in connection with claims relating to alleged misrepresentations and omissions concerning charging customers for traffic infractions and related administrative fees. In October 2023, plaintiffs’ motion for class certification was denied as to their proposed nationwide class and granted as to a subclass, created at the Court’s discretion, of Avis Preferred and Budget Fastbreak members. We have been named as a defendant in other purported consumer class action lawsuits, including a class action filed against us in New Jersey seeking damages in connection with a breach of contract claim, which the Company intends to vigorously defend. In April 2025, a shareholder filed a proposed securities class action, Shane Merriam v. Avis Budget Group, Inc., Joseph A. Ferraro, and Izilda P. Martins, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The plaintiff alleges under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 that the Company and its management made misrepresentations or omissions about the Company’s fleet strategy in 2024, causing the stock to decline when the Company announced its fourth quarter results in February 2025. In June 2025, a shareholder filed a substantially similar proposed securities class action in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Barry O’Connor v. Avis Budget Group, Inc., Joseph A. Ferraro, Izilda P. Martins. The shareholders have proposed to consolidate the cases and serve as co-lead plaintiffs, and that application is pending before the Court. The Company intends to defend the claims vigorously. In June 2025, a shareholder filed a derivative suit in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Andrew Jones v. Jagdeep Pahwa, Anu Hariharan, Bernardo Hees, Joseph Ferraro, Lynn Krominga, Glenn Lurie, Izilda Martins, and Karthik Sarma. The suit asserts breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment claims in connection with the Company's fleet strategy in 2024. The Company is named as a nominal defendant. The director and officer defendants intend to vigorously defend the case. We are currently involved, and in the future may be involved, in claims and/or legal proceedings, including class actions, and governmental inquiries that are incidental to our vehicle rental and car sharing operations, including, among others, contract and licensee disputes, competition matters, employment and wage-and-hour claims, insurance and liability claims, intellectual property claims, business practice disputes and other regulatory, environmental, commercial and tax matters. In addition, we are a defendant in a number of legal proceedings for personal injury arising from the operation of our vehicles. Litigation is inherently unpredictable and, although we believe that our accruals are adequate and/or that we have valid defenses in these matters, unfavorable resolutions could occur. We estimate that the potential exposure resulting from adverse outcomes of current legal proceedings in which it is reasonably possible that a loss may be incurred could, in the aggregate, be up to approximately $40 million in excess of amounts accrued as of June 30, 2025. We do not believe that the impact should result in a material liability to us in relation to our consolidated financial condition or results of operations. Commitments to Purchase Vehicles We maintain agreements with vehicle manufacturers under which we have agreed to purchase approximately $2.3 billion of vehicles from manufacturers over the next 12 months, a $4.0 billion decrease compared to December 31, 2024, financed primarily through the issuance of vehicle-backed debt and cash received upon the disposition of vehicles. Certain of these commitments are subject to the vehicle manufacturers satisfying their obligations under their respective repurchase and guaranteed depreciation agreements. Concentrations Concentrations of credit risk as of June 30, 2025 include risks related to our repurchase and guaranteed depreciation agreements with domestic and foreign car manufacturers and primarily with respect to receivables for program cars that have been disposed of, but for which we have not yet received payment from the manufacturers.

In 2006, we completed the spin-offs of our Realogy and Wyndham subsidiaries (now known as Anywhere Real Estate, Inc., and Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc. and Travel + Leisure Co., respectively). We do not believe that the impact of any resolution of pre-existing contingent liabilities in connection with the spin-offs should result in a material liability to us in relation to our consolidated financial position or liquidity, as Anywhere Real Estate, Inc., Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc. and Travel + Leisure Co. have agreed to assume responsibility for these liabilities.

In March 2023, the California Office of Tax Appeals (“OTA”) issued an opinion in a case involving notices of proposed assessment of California corporation franchise tax for tax year 1999 issued to us. The case involves whether (i) the notices of proposed assessment were barred by the statute of limitations; and (ii) a transaction undertaken by us in tax year 1999 constituted a tax-free reorganization under the Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”). The OTA concluded that the notices of proposed assessment were not barred by the statute of limitations and that the 1999 transaction was not a tax-free reorganization under the IRC. Anywhere Real Estate, Inc. has assumed 62.5%, and Wyndham Hotels and Resorts, Inc. and Travel + Leisure Co. have assumed 37.5% of the potential tax liability in this matter, respectively. We filed a petition for rehearing, which was denied in April 2024, and the tax assessment was paid in May 2025. We expect that judicial relief will be sought.

In September 2014, Dawn Valli et al. v. Avis Budget Group Inc., et al. was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. The plaintiffs seek to represent a purported nationwide class of certain renters of vehicles from our Avis and Budget subsidiaries from September 30, 2008 through the present. The plaintiffs seek damages in connection with claims relating to alleged misrepresentations and omissions concerning charging customers for traffic infractions and related administrative fees. In October 2023, plaintiffs’ motion for class certification was denied as to their proposed nationwide class and granted as to a subclass, created at the Court’s discretion, of Avis Preferred and Budget Fastbreak members. We have been named as a defendant in other purported consumer class action lawsuits, including a class action filed against us in New Jersey seeking damages in connection with a breach of contract claim, which the Company intends to vigorously defend.

In April 2025, a shareholder filed a proposed securities class action, Shane Merriam v. Avis Budget Group, Inc., Joseph A. Ferraro, and Izilda P. Martins, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. The plaintiff alleges under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 that the Company and its management made misrepresentations or omissions about the Company’s fleet strategy in 2024, causing the stock to decline when the Company announced its fourth quarter results in February 2025. In June 2025, a shareholder filed a substantially similar proposed securities class action in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Barry O’Connor v. Avis Budget Group, Inc., Joseph A. Ferraro, Izilda P. Martins. The shareholders have proposed to consolidate the cases and serve as co-lead plaintiffs, and that application is pending before the Court. The Company intends to defend the claims vigorously. In June 2025, a shareholder filed a derivative suit in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, Andrew Jones v. Jagdeep Pahwa, Anu Hariharan, Bernardo Hees, Joseph Ferraro, Lynn Krominga, Glenn Lurie, Izilda Martins, and Karthik Sarma. The suit asserts breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment claims in connection with the Company's fleet strategy in 2024. The Company is named as a nominal defendant. The director and officer defendants intend to vigorously defend the case.

We are currently involved, and in the future may be involved, in claims and/or legal proceedings, including class actions, and governmental inquiries that are incidental to our vehicle rental and car sharing operations, including, among others, contract and licensee disputes, competition matters, employment and wage-and-hour claims, insurance and liability claims, intellectual property claims, business practice disputes and other regulatory, environmental, commercial and tax matters. In addition, we are a defendant in a number of legal proceedings for personal injury arising from the operation of our vehicles.

Litigation is inherently unpredictable and, although we believe that our accruals are adequate and/or that we have valid defenses in these matters, unfavorable resolutions could occur. We estimate that the potential exposure resulting from adverse outcomes of current legal proceedings in which it is reasonably possible that a loss may be incurred could, in the aggregate, be up to approximately $40 million in excess of amounts accrued as of June 30, 2025. We do not believe that the impact should result in a material liability to us in relation to our consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

We maintain agreements with vehicle manufacturers under which we have agreed to purchase approximately $2.3 billion of vehicles from manufacturers over the next 12 months, a $4.0 billion decrease compared to December 31, 2024, financed primarily through the issuance of vehicle-backed debt and cash received upon the disposition of vehicles. Certain of these commitments are subject to the vehicle manufacturers satisfying their obligations under their respective repurchase and guaranteed depreciation agreements.

Concentrations of credit risk as of June 30, 2025 include risks related to our repurchase and guaranteed depreciation agreements with domestic and foreign car manufacturers and primarily with respect to receivables for program cars that have been disposed of, but for which we have not yet received payment from the manufacturers.