Datasets:

aveni-ai

/

aveni-bench-multihiertt

like 0

Follow

Aveni 9

Which year is Total Revenues of Group retirement products the most?

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued Domestic Retirement Services Results Domestic Retirement Services results, presented on a sub-product basis for 2007, 2006 and 2005 were as follows: <table><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>Premiums and Other Considerations</td><td>Net Investment Income</td><td>Net Realized Capital Gains (Losses)</td><td>Total Revenues</td><td>Operating Income</td></tr><tr><td> 2007</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>$446</td><td>$2,280</td><td>$-451</td><td>2,275</td><td>$696</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>96</td><td>3,664</td><td>-829</td><td>2,931</td><td>530</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>627</td><td>166</td><td>-45</td><td>748</td><td>122</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff*</td><td>21</td><td>387</td><td>-83</td><td>325</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,190</td><td>$6,497</td><td>$-1,408</td><td>$6,279</td><td>$1,347</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>$386</td><td>$2,279</td><td>$-144</td><td>$2,521</td><td>$1,017</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>122</td><td>3,581</td><td>-257</td><td>3,446</td><td>1,036</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>531</td><td>202</td><td>5</td><td>738</td><td>193</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff*</td><td>18</td><td>426</td><td>-8</td><td>436</td><td>77</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,057</td><td>$6,488</td><td>$-404</td><td>$7,141</td><td>$2,323</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>$351</td><td>$2,233</td><td>$-67</td><td>$2,517</td><td>$1,055</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>97</td><td>3,346</td><td>-214</td><td>3,229</td><td>858</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>467</td><td>217</td><td>4</td><td>688</td><td>189</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff*</td><td>22</td><td>430</td><td>—</td><td>452</td><td>62</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$937</td><td>$6,226</td><td>$-277</td><td>$6,886</td><td>$2,164</td></tr><tr><td> Percentage Increase/(Decrease) 2007 vs. 2006:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>16%</td><td>—%</td><td>—%</td><td>-10%</td><td>-32%</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>-21</td><td>2</td><td>—</td><td>-15</td><td>-49</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>18</td><td>-18</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>-37</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff</td><td>17</td><td>-9</td><td>—</td><td>-25</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>13%</td><td>—%</td><td>—%</td><td>-12%</td><td>-42%</td></tr><tr><td>Percentage Increase/(Decrease) 2006 vs. 2005:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>10%</td><td>2%</td><td>—%</td><td>—%</td><td>-4%</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>26</td><td>7</td><td>—</td><td>7</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>14</td><td>-7</td><td>25</td><td>7</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff</td><td>-18</td><td>-1</td><td>—</td><td>-4</td><td>24</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>13%</td><td>4%</td><td>—%</td><td>4%</td><td>7%</td></tr></table> * Primarily represents runoff annuity business sold through discontinued distribution relationships.2007 and 2006 Comparison Total revenues and operating income for Domestic Retirement Services declined in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to increased net realized capital losses. Net realized capital losses for Domestic Retirement Services increased due to higher other- than-temporary impairmentcharges of$1.2 billion in 2007 compared to $368 million in 2006 and sales to reposition assets in certain investment portfolios for both group retirement products and individual ?xed annuities, as well as from changes in the value of certain individual variable annuity product guarantees and related hedges associated with living bene?t features. Changes in actuarial estimates, including DAC unlockingsand re?nements to estimates resulting from actuarial valuation system enhance- ments, resulted in a net decrease to operating income of $112 million in 2007. Group retirement products operating income in 2007 de- creased compared to 2006 primarily as a result of increased net realized capital losses due to higher other-than-temporary impair- mentcharges and an increase in DAC amortization related to both an increase in surrenders and to policy changes adding guaran- teed minimum withdrawal bene?t riders to existing contracts. Operating income was also negatively affected in 2007 by an $18 million adjustment,primarily re?ecting changes in actuarial estimates from the conversion to a new valuation system. These were partially offset by higher variable annuity fees which resulted from an increase in separate account assets compared to 2006. Individual ?xed annuities operating income in 2007 decreased compared to 2006 as a result of net realized capital losses due to higher other-than-temporary impairmentcharges partially offset by increases in partnership income. The decline in operating income also re?ected higher DAC amortization and sales induce-ment costs related to increased surrenders and a $33 million charge re?ecting changes in actuarial estimates from the conver- American International Group, Inc. , and Subsidiaries Expected Loss Models — Under this mechanism, the amount of collateral to be posted is determined based on the amount of expected credit losses, generally determined using a rating-agency model. Negotiated Amount — Under this mechanism, the amount of collateral to be posted is determined based on terms negotiated between AIGFP and the counterparty, which could be a fixed percentage of the notional amount or present value of premiums to be earned by AIGFP. The following table presents the amount of collateral postings by underlying mechanism as described above with respect to the regulatory capital relief portfolio (prior to consideration of transactions other than the Capital Markets super senior credit default swaps subject to the same Master Agreements) as of the periods ended: <table><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>December 31, 2009</td><td>December 31, 2010</td><td>February 16, 2011</td></tr><tr><td>Reference to market indices</td><td>$60</td><td>$19</td><td>$10</td></tr><tr><td>Expected loss models</td><td>20</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Negotiated amount</td><td>230</td><td>217</td><td>216</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$310</td><td>$236</td><td>$226</td></tr></table> Arbitrage Portfolio — Multi-Sector CDOs In the CDS transactions with physical settlement provisions, in respect of multi-sector CDOs, the standard CSA provisions for the calculation of exposure have been modified, with the exposure amount determined pursuant to an agreed formula that is based on the difference between the net notional amount of such transaction and the market value of the relevant underlying CDO security, rather than the replacement value of the transaction. As of any date, the ‘‘market value’’ of the relevant CDO security is the price at which a marketplace participant would be willing to purchase such CDO security in a market transaction on such date, while the ‘‘replacement value of the transaction’’ is the cost on such date of entering into a credit default swap transaction with substantially the same terms on the same referenced obligation (e. g. , the CDO security). In cases where a formula is utilized, a transaction-specific threshold is generally factored into the calculation of exposure, which reduces the amount of collateral required to be posted. These thresholds typically vary based on the credit ratings of AIG and/or the reference obligations, with greater posting obligations arising in the context of lower ratings. For the large majority of counterparties to these transactions, the Master Agreement and CSA cover non-CDS transactions (e. g. , interest rate and cross currency swap transactions) as well as CDS transactions. As a result, the amount of collateral to be posted by AIGFP in relation to the CDS transactions will be added to or offset by the amount, if any, of the exposure AIG has to the counterparty on the non-CDS transactions. Arbitrage Portfolio — Corporate Debt/CLOs All of the Capital Markets corporate arbitrage-CLO transactions are subject to CSAs. These transactions are treated the same as other transactions subject to the same Master Agreement and CSA, with the calculation of collateral in accordance with the standard CSA procedures outlined above. The vast majority of corporate debt transactions are no longer subject to future collateral postings. In exchange for an upfront payment to an intermediary counterparty, AIGFP has eliminated all future obligations to post collateral on corporate debt transactions that mature after 2011. Collateral Calls AIGFP has received collateral calls from counterparties in respect of certain super senior credit default swaps, of which a large majority relate to multi-sector CDOs. To a lesser extent, AIGFP has also received collateral calls in respect of certain super senior credit default swaps entered into by counterparties for regulatory capital relief purposes and in respect of corporate arbitrage. From time to time, valuation methodologies used and estimates made by counterparties with respect to certain super senior credit default swaps or the underlying reference CDO securities, for purposes of determining the ITEM 7 / LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES The following table presents a summary of AIG’s Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows: <table><tr><td> Years Ended December 31, <i>(in millions)</i> </td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Summary:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities</td><td>$3,676</td><td>$-81</td><td>$16,597</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities</td><td>16,612</td><td>36,448</td><td>-9,912</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash used in financing activities</td><td>-20,564</td><td>-36,926</td><td>-9,261</td></tr><tr><td>Effect of exchange rate changes on cash</td><td>16</td><td>29</td><td>39</td></tr><tr><td>Decrease in cash</td><td>-260</td><td>-530</td><td>-2,537</td></tr><tr><td>Cash at beginning of year</td><td>1,474</td><td>1,558</td><td>4,400</td></tr><tr><td>Change in cash of businesses held for sale</td><td>-63</td><td>446</td><td>-305</td></tr><tr><td>Cash at end of year</td><td>$1,151</td><td>$1,474</td><td>$1,558</td></tr></table> Operating Cash Flow Activities Interest payments totaled $4.0 billion in 2012 compared to $9.0 billion in 2011. Cash paid for interest in 2011 includes the payment of FRBNY Credit Facility accrued compounded interest totaling $6.4 billion. Excluding interest payments, AIG generated positive operating cash flow of $7.7 billion and $8.9 billion in 2012 and 2011, respectively. Insurance companies generally receive most premiums in advance of the payment of claims or policy benefits. The ability of insurance companies to generate positive cash flow is affected by the frequency and severity of losses under their insurance policies, policy retention rates and operating expenses. Cash provided by AIG Property Casualty operating activities was $1.1 billion in 2012 compared to $1.9 billion in 2011, primarily reflecting the decrease in net premiums written as a result of the continued execution of strategic initiatives to improve business mix and the timing of the cash flows used to pay claims and claims adjustment expenses and the related reinsurance recoveries. Cash provided by operating activities by AIG Life and Retirement was $2.9 billion in 2012 compared to $2.4 billion in 2011, primarily reflecting efforts to actively manage spread income. Cash provided by operating activities of discontinued operations of $2.9 billion in 2012 compared to $6.2 billion in 2011, includes ILFC, and in 2011 and 2010, foreign life insurance subsidiaries that were divested in 2011, including Nan Shan, AIG Star and AIG Edison. Net cash provided by operating activities declined in 2011 compared to 2010, principally due to the following: ? the cash payment by AIG Parent of $6.4 billion in accrued compounded interest and fees under the FRBNY Credit Facility. In prior periods, these payments were paid in-kind and did not affect operating cash flows; ? cash provided by operating activities of foreign life subsidiaries declined by $10.4 billion due to the sale of those subsidiaries (AIA, ALICO, AIG Star, AIG Edison and Nan Shan). The subsidiaries generated operational cash inflows of $3.4 billion and $13.8 billion in 2011 and 2010, respectively; and ? the effect of catastrophes and the cession of a large portion of AIG Property Casualty’s net asbestos liabilities in the U. S. to NICO. Excluding the impact of the NICO cession and catastrophes, cash provided by AIG’s reportable segments in 2011 is consistent with 2010, as increases in claims paid were offset by increases in premiums collected at the insurance subsidiaries. Investing Cash Flow Activities Net cash provided by investing activities for 2012 includes the following items: ? payments received relating to the sale of the underlying assets held by ML II of approximately $1.6 billion; ? payments of approximately $8.5 billion received in connection with the dispositions of ML III assets by the FRBNY; ITEM 7 / RESULTS OF OPERATIONS / COMMERCIAL INSURANCE low interest rate environment, partially offset by growth in average assets. See MD&A – Investments – Life Insurance Companies for additional information on the investment strategy, asset-liability management process and invested assets of our Life Insurance Companies, which include the invested assets of the Institutional Markets business. General operating expenses in 2014 increased slightly compared to 2013, primarily due to investments in technology.2013 and 2012 Comparison Pre-tax operating income for 2013 increased compared to 2012, due in part to higher net investment income from alternative investments, partially offset by lower base net investment income. Interest credited to policyholder account balances in 2012 included $110 million of expense resulting from a comprehensive review of reserves for the GIC portfolio. Results for 2013 included a full year of the growing stable value wrap business, which contributed $31 million to the increase in pre-tax operating income compared to 2012. Stable value wrap notional assets under management grew to $24.6 billion at December 31, 2013 from $10.4 billion at December 31, 2012, including the notional amount of contracts transferred from an AIG affiliate. Net investment income for 2013 increased slightly compared to 2012, primarily due to higher net investment income from alternative investments, largely offset by lower income from the base portfolio. The increase in alternative investment income in 2013 compared to 2012 reflected higher hedge fund income due to favorable equity market conditions. The decrease in base net income was primarily due to investment of available cash, including proceeds from sales of securities made during 2013 to utilize capital loss carryforwards, at rates below the weighted average yield of the overall portfolio. General operating expenses in 2013 increased compared to 2012, primarily to support increased volume in the stable value wrap business. Institutional Markets Premiums, Deposits and Net Flows For Institutional Markets, premiums represent amounts received on traditional life insurance policies and life-contingent payout annuities or structured settlements. Premiums and deposits is a non-GAAP financial measure that includes direct and assumed premiums as well as deposits received on universal life insurance and investment-type annuity contracts, including GICs and stable value wrap funding agreements. The following table presents a reconciliation of Institutional Markets premiums and deposits to GAAP premiums: <table><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums and deposits</td><td>$3,797</td><td>$991</td><td>$774</td></tr><tr><td>Deposits</td><td>-3,344</td><td>-354</td><td>-289</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-21</td><td>-27</td><td>-27</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums</td><td>$432</td><td>$610</td><td>$458</td></tr></table> The decrease in premiums in 2014 compared to 2013 was primarily due to a high volume of single-premium products sold in 2013, including life-contingent payout annuities. Sales of these products decreased in 2014 compared to 2013 due to a more competitive environment as well as continued low interest rates. The increase in deposits in 2014 compared to 2013 included a $2.5 billion deposit to the separate accounts of one of the Life Insurance Companies for a stable value wrap funding agreement. The majority of stable value wrap sales are measured based on the notional amount included in assets under management, but do not include the receipt of funds that would be included in premiums and deposits. The increase in deposits in 2014 compared to 2013 also reflected a $450 million GIC issued in 2014. The increase in premiums in 2013 compared to 2012 reflected a high volume of single-premium product sales in 2013, including structured settlements with life contingencies and terminal funding annuities. The increase in deposits in 2013 compared to 2012 reflected strong sales of high net worth products, primarily private placement variable annuities.

What will Distribution fees reach in 2010 if it continues to grow at its current rate? (in millions)

The Company is required to establish a valuation allowance for any portion of the deferred tax assets that management believes will not be realized. Included in deferred tax assets is a significant deferred tax asset relating to capital losses that have been recognized for financial statement purposes but not yet for tax return purposes. Under current U. S. federal income tax law, capital losses generally must be used against capital gain income within five years of the year in which the capital losses are recognized for tax purposes. Significant judgment is required in determining if a valuation allowance should be established, and the amount of such allowance if required. Factors used in making this determination include estimates relating to the performance of the business including the ability to generate capital gains. Consideration is given to, among other things in making this determination, i) future taxable income exclusive of reversing temporary differences and carryforwards, ii) future reversals of existing taxable temporary differences, iii) taxable income in prior carryback years, and iv) tax planning strategies. Based on analysis of the Company’s tax position, management believes it is more likely than not that the results of future operations and implementation of tax planning strategies will generate sufficient taxable income to enable the Company to utilize all of its deferred tax assets. Accordingly, no valuation allowance for deferred tax assets has been established as of December 31, 2009 and 2008. Included in the Company’s deferred income tax assets are tax benefits related to net operating loss carryforwards of $59 million which will expire beginning December 31, 2025 as well as tax credit carryforwards of $166 million which will expire beginning December 31, 2025. A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of gross unrecognized tax benefits for 2009 is as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">(in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at January 1</td><td>$-56</td><td>$164</td><td>$113</td></tr><tr><td>Additions (reductions) based on tax positions related to the current year</td><td>1</td><td>-164</td><td>42</td></tr><tr><td>Additions for tax positions of prior years</td><td>45</td><td>64</td><td>56</td></tr><tr><td>Reductions for tax positions of prior years</td><td>-23</td><td>-120</td><td>-45</td></tr><tr><td>Settlements</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-2</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31</td><td>$-33</td><td>$-56</td><td>$164</td></tr></table> If recognized, approximately $81 million, $62 million and $84 million, net of federal tax benefits, of the unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively, would affect the effective tax rate. The Company recognizes interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits as a component of the income tax provision. The Company recognized $1 million in interest and penalties for the year ended December 31, 2009 and a net reduction of $25 million and $4 million in interest and penalties for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the Company had a receivable of $12 million and $13 million, respectively, related to accrued interest and penalties. It is reasonably possible that the total amounts of unrecognized tax benefits will change in the next 12 months. However, there are a number of open audits and quantification of a range cannot be made at this time. The Company or one or more of its subsidiaries files income tax returns in the U. S. federal jurisdiction, and various states and foreign jurisdictions. With few exceptions, the Company is no longer subject to U. S. federal, state and local, or non-U. S. income tax examinations by tax authorities for years before 1997. The Internal Revenue Service (‘‘IRS’’), as part of the overall examination of the American Express Company consolidated return, completed its field examination of the Company’s U. S. income tax returns for 1997 through 2002 during 2008 and completed its field examination of 2003 through 2004 in the third quarter of 2009. However, for federal income tax purposes these years continue to remain open as a consequence of certain issues under appeal. In the fourth quarter of 2008, the IRS commenced an examination of the Company’s U. S. income tax returns for 2005 through 2007, which is expected to be completed in 2010. The Company’s or certain of its subsidiaries’ state income tax returns are currently under examination by various jurisdictions for years ranging from 1998 through 2006. On September 25, 2007, the IRS issued Revenue Ruling 2007-61 in which it announced that it intends to issue regulations with respect to certain computational aspects of the Dividends Received Deduction (‘‘DRD’’) related to separate account assets held in connection with variable contracts of life insurance companies. Revenue Ruling 2007-61 suspended a revenue ruling issued in August 2007 that purported to change accepted industry and IRS interpretations of the statutes governing these computational questions. Any regulations that the The following table presents the changes in wrap account assets: <table><tr><td> </td><td> 2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2">(in billions)</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at January 1</td><td>$72.8</td><td>$93.9</td></tr><tr><td>Net flows</td><td>9.3</td><td>3.7</td></tr><tr><td>Market appreciation/(depreciation)</td><td>12.8</td><td>-26.8</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>—</td><td>2.0</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31</td><td>$94.9</td><td>$72.8</td></tr></table> Our wrap accounts had net inflows of $9.3 billion in 2009 compared to net inflows of $3.7 billion in 2008 and market appreciation of $12.8 billion in 2009 compared to market depreciation of $26.8 billion in 2008. In 2008, we acquired $2.0 billion in wrap account assets attributable to our acquisition of H&R Block Financial Advisors, Inc. We provide securities execution and clearing services for our retail and institutional clients through our registered broker-dealer subsidiaries. As of December 31, 2009, we administered $95.1 billion in assets for clients, an increase of $19.6 billion compared to the prior year primarily due to market appreciation. The following table presents the results of operations of our Advice & Wealth Management segment: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2">Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td colspan="2">Change</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="4">(in millions, except percentages)</td></tr><tr><td> Revenues</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Management and financial advice fees</td><td>$1,234</td><td>$1,339</td><td>$-105</td><td>-8%</td></tr><tr><td>Distribution fees</td><td>1,733</td><td>1,912</td><td>-179</td><td>-9</td></tr><tr><td>Net investment income</td><td>297</td><td>-43</td><td>340</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Other revenues</td><td>85</td><td>80</td><td>5</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>3,349</td><td>3,288</td><td>61</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Banking and deposit interest expense</td><td>133</td><td>178</td><td>-45</td><td>-25</td></tr><tr><td>Total net revenues</td><td>3,216</td><td>3,110</td><td>106</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td> Expenses</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Distribution expenses</td><td>1,968</td><td>2,121</td><td>-153</td><td>-7</td></tr><tr><td>General and administrative expense</td><td>1,282</td><td>1,138</td><td>144</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Total expenses</td><td>3,250</td><td>3,259</td><td>-9</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Pretax loss</td><td>$-34</td><td>$-149</td><td>$115</td><td>77%</td></tr></table> Our Advice & Wealth Management segment pretax loss was $34 million in 2009 compared to pretax loss of $149 million in 2008. Net revenues Net revenues were $3.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to $3.1 billion in the prior year, an increase of $106 million, or 3%, driven by an increase in net investment income as well as revenues resulting from our 2008 acquisitions and a decrease in banking and deposit interest expense, partially offset by decreases in management and financial advice fees and distribution fees. Management and financial advice fees decreased $105 million, or 8%, to $1.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, driven by a 22% decline in the daily average S&P 500 Index on a period-over-period basis, partially offset by net inflows. Wrap account assets increased $22.1 billion, or 30%, compared to the prior year due to net inflows and market appreciation. Financial planning fees were lower for the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to the prior year resulting from accelerated financial plan delivery standards in 2008. Distribution fees decreased $179 million, or 9%, to $1.7 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, primarily due to lower client activity levels and lower asset-based fees driven by lower equity markets, partially offset by revenues resulting from our 2008 acquisitions. Liquidity and Capital Resources Overview We maintained substantial liquidity during 2009. At December 31, 2009, we had $3.1 billion in cash and cash equivalents compared to $6.2 billion at December 31, 2008. Excluding collateral received from derivative counterparties, cash and cash equivalents were $3.0 billion and $4.4 billion at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. We have additional liquidity available through an unsecured revolving credit facility for $750 million that expires in September 2010, which we anticipate re-establishing before expiration. Under the terms of the underlying credit agreement, we can increase this facility to $1.0 billion. Available borrowings under this facility are reduced by any outstanding letters of credit. We have had no borrowings under this credit facility and had $2 million of outstanding letters of credit at December 31, 2009. In June 2009, we issued $200 million of 7.75% senior notes due 2039 and $300 million of 7.30% senior notes due 2019 (collectively, ‘‘senior notes’’). In July 2009, we used a portion of the proceeds from the issuance of our senior notes to repurchase $450 million aggregate principal amount of our 5.35% senior notes due 2010 pursuant to a cash tender offer. In addition, in June 2009, we received cash of $869 million from the issuance and sale of 36 million shares of our common stock. In September 2009, we announced the all-cash acquisition of the long-term asset management business of Columbia Management, which is expected to close in the spring of 2010. The total consideration to be paid will be between $900 million and $1.2 billion, which is expected to be funded through the use of cash on hand. In 2009, our subsidiaries, Ameriprise Bank, FSB and RiverSource Life, became members of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moines (‘‘FHLB of Des Moines’’), which provides these subsidiaries with access to collateralized borrowings. As of December 31, 2009, we had no borrowings from the FHLB of Des Moines. We believe cash flows from operating activities, available cash balances and our availability of revolver borrowings will be sufficient to fund our operating liquidity needs. Various ratings organizations publish financial strength ratings, which measure an insurance company’s ability to meet contractholder and policyholder obligations, and credit ratings. The following table summarizes the ratings for Ameriprise Financial, Inc. and certain of its insurance subsidiaries as of the date of this filing: <table><tr><td> </td><td> A.M. Best Company, Inc.</td><td> Standard & Poor's Ratings Services</td><td> Moody's Investors Service</td><td> Fitch Ratings Ltd.</td></tr><tr><td> Financial Strength Ratings</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>RiverSource Life</td><td>A+</td><td>AA-</td><td>Aa3</td><td>AA-</td></tr><tr><td>IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company</td><td>A</td><td>N/R</td><td>N/R</td><td>N/R</td></tr><tr><td> Credit Ratings</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Ameriprise Financial, Inc.</td><td>a-</td><td>A</td><td>A3</td><td>A-</td></tr></table> As of December 31, 2009, A. M. Best Company, Inc. , Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services, Moody’s Investors Service and Fitch Ratings Ltd. retained negative outlooks on Ameriprise Financial, Inc. and RiverSource Life and the life insurance industry as a whole. For information on how changes in our financial strength or credit ratings could affect our financial condition and results of operations, see the ‘‘Risk Factors’’ discussion included in Part 1, Item 1A in our Annual Report on Form 10-K. Dividends from Subsidiaries Ameriprise Financial is primarily a parent holding company for the operations carried out by our wholly owned subsidiaries. Because of our holding company structure, our ability to meet our cash requirements, including the payment of dividends on our common stock, substantially depends upon the receipt of dividends or return of capital from our subsidiaries, particularly our life insurance subsidiary, RiverSource Life, our face-amount certificate subsidiary, Ameriprise Certificate Company (‘‘ACC’’), AMPF Holding Corporation, which is the parent company of our retail introducing broker-dealer subsidiary, Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc. (‘‘AFSI’’) and our clearing broker-dealer subsidiary, American Enterprise Investment Services, Inc. (‘‘AEIS’’), our auto and home insurance subsidiary, IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company (‘‘IDS Property Casualty’’), doing business as Ameriprise Auto & Home Insurance, Threadneedle, RiverSource Service Corporation and our investment advisory company, RiverSource Investments, LLC. The payment of dividends by many of our subsidiaries is restricted and certain of our subsidiaries are subject to regulatory capital requirements. Kendal Vroman, 39 Mr. Vroman has served as our Managing Director, Commodity Products, OTC Services & Information Products since February 2010. Mr. Vroman previously served as Managing Director and Chief Corporate Development Officer from 2008 to 2010. Mr. Vroman joined us in 2001 and since then has held positions of increasing responsibility, including most recently as Managing Director, Corporate Development and Managing Director, Information and Technology Services. Scot E. Warren, 47 Mr. Warren has served as our Managing Director, Equity Index Products and Index Services since February 2010. Mr. Warren previously served as our Managing Director, Equity Products since joining us in 2007. Prior to that, Mr. Warren worked for Goldman Sachs as its President, Manager Trading and Business Analysis Team. Prior to Goldman Sachs, Mr. Warren managed equity and option execution and clearing businesses for ABN Amro in Chicago and was a Senior Consultant for Arthur Andersen & Co. for financial services firms. FINANCIAL INFORMATION ABOUT GEOGRAPHIC AREAS Due to the nature of its business, CME Group does not track revenues based upon geographic location. We do, however, track trading volume generated outside of traditional U. S. trading hours and through our international telecommunication hubs. Our customers can directly access our exchanges throughout the world. The following table shows the percentage of our total trading volume on our Globex electronic trading platform generated during non-U. S. hours and through our international hubs.

What was the total amount of Amount in 2007 for Financial Services Businesses ? (in million)

strategy to provide omni-channel solutions that combine gateway services, payment service provisioning and merchant acquiring across Europe. This transaction was accounted for as a business combination. We recorded the assets acquired, liabilities assumed and noncontrolling interest at their estimated fair values as of the acquisition date. In connection with the acquisition of Realex, we paid a transaction-related tax of $1.2 million. Other acquisition costs were not material. The revenue and earnings of Realex for the year ended May 31, 2015 were not material nor were the historical revenue and earnings of Realex material for the purpose of presenting pro forma information for the current or prior-year periods. The estimated acquisition date fair values of the assets acquired, liabilities assumed and the noncontrolling interest, including a reconciliation to the total purchase consideration, are as follows (in thousands): <table><tr><td>Cash</td><td>$4,082</td></tr><tr><td>Customer-related intangible assets</td><td>16,079</td></tr><tr><td>Acquired technology</td><td>39,820</td></tr><tr><td>Trade name</td><td>3,453</td></tr><tr><td>Other intangible assets</td><td>399</td></tr><tr><td>Other assets</td><td>6,213</td></tr><tr><td>Liabilities</td><td>-3,479</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred income tax liabilities</td><td>-7,216</td></tr><tr><td>Total identifiable net assets</td><td>59,351</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill</td><td>66,809</td></tr><tr><td>Noncontrolling interest</td><td>-7,280</td></tr><tr><td>Total purchase consideration</td><td>$118,880</td></tr></table> Goodwill of $66.8 million arising from the acquisition, included in the Europe segment, was attributable to expected growth opportunities in Europe, potential synergies from combining our existing business with gateway services and payment service provisioning in certain markets and an assembled workforce to support the newly acquired technology. Goodwill associated with this acquisition is not deductible for income tax purposes. The customer-related intangible assets have an estimated amortization period of 16 years. The acquired technology has an estimated amortization period of 10 years. The trade name has an estimated amortization period of 7 years. strategy to provide omni-channel solutions that combine gateway services, payment service provisioning and merchant acquiring across Europe. This transaction was accounted for as a business combination. We recorded the assets acquired, liabilities assumed and noncontrolling interest at their estimated fair values as of the acquisition date. In connection with the acquisition of Realex, we paid a transaction-related tax of $1.2 million. Other acquisition costs were not material. The revenue and earnings of Realex for the year ended May 31, 2015 were not material nor were the historical revenue and earnings of Realex material for the purpose of presenting pro forma information for the current or prior-year periods. The estimated acquisition date fair values of the assets acquired, liabilities assumed and the noncontrolling interest, including a reconciliation to the total purchase consideration, are as follows (in thousands): Goodwill of $66.8 million arising from the acquisition, included in the Europe segment, was attributable to expected growth opportunities in Europe, potential synergies from combining our existing business with gateway services and payment service provisioning in certain markets and an assembled workforce to support the newly acquired technology. Goodwill associated with this acquisition is not deductible for income tax purposes. The customer-related intangible assets have an estimated amortization period of 16 years. The acquired technology has an estimated amortization period of 10 years. The trade name has an estimated amortization period of 7 years. On October 5, 2015, we paid €6.7 million ($7.5 million equivalent as of October 5, 2015) to acquire the remaining shares of Realex after which we own 100% of the outstanding shares. Ezidebit On October 10, 2014, we completed the acquisition of 100% of the outstanding stock of Ezi Holdings Pty Ltd (¡°Ezidebit¡±) for AUD302.6 million in cash ($266.0 million equivalent as of the acquisition date). This acquisition was funded by a combination of cash on hand and borrowings on our revolving credit facility. Ezidebit is a leading integrated payments company focused on recurring payments verticals in Australia and New Zealand. Ezidebit markets its services through a network of integrated software vendors and direct channels to numerous vertical markets. We acquired Ezidebit to establish a direct distribution channel in Australia and New Zealand and to further enhance our existing integrated solutions offerings. This transaction was accounted for as a business combination. We recorded the assets acquired and liabilities assumed at their estimated fair values as of the acquisition date. Certain adjustments to estimated fair value were recorded during the year ended May 31, 2016 based on new information obtained that existed as of the acquisition date. During the measurement period, management determined that deferred income taxes should be reflected for certain nondeductible intangible assets. Measurement-period adjustments, which are reflected in the table below, had no material effect on earnings or other comprehensive income for the current or prior periods. The revenue and earnings of Ezidebit for which $92 million of the fees are offset in incentive compensation expense in accordance with the terms of the contractual agreements. Certain of these incentive fees are subject to positive or negative future adjustment based on cumulative fund performance in relation to specified benchmarks. The increase also reflects $68 million greater revenues from proprietary investing mainly due to appreciation and gains on sale of real estate related investments, including income of $12 million relating to a single investment in the current period and $58 million relating to two sale transactions in the prior year. Asset management fees increased $88 million mainly from institutional and retail customer assets as a result of increased asset values due to market appreciation and net asset flows. Expenses 2007 to 2006 Annual Comparison. Expenses, as shown in the table above under “—Operating Results,” increased $170 million, from $1.457 billion in 2006 to $1.627 billion in 2007. The increase is primarily driven by higher expenses associated with certain real estate funds, as discussed above.2006 to 2005 Annual Comparison. Expenses increased $225 million, from $1.232 billion in 2005 to $1.457 billion in 2006. The increase in expenses was primarily due to higher performance-based compensation costs resulting from favorable performance in 2006, higher expenses related to proprietary investing activities and incentive compensation related to performance based incentive fees, as discussed above. Financial Advisory Operating Results The following table sets forth the Financial Advisory segment’s operating results for the periods indicated. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td><td>2005</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">(in millions)</td></tr><tr><td> Operating results:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Revenues</td><td>$373</td><td>$314</td><td>$199</td></tr><tr><td>Expenses</td><td>76</td><td>287</td><td>454</td></tr><tr><td>Adjusted operating income</td><td>297</td><td>27</td><td>-255</td></tr><tr><td>Equity in earnings of operating joint ventures-1</td><td>-370</td><td>-294</td><td>-192</td></tr><tr><td>Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes and equity in earnings of operating joint ventures</td><td>$-73</td><td>$-267</td><td>$-447</td></tr></table> (1) Equity in earnings of operating joint ventures are included in adjusted operating income but excluded from income from continuing operations before income taxes and equity in earnings of operating joint ventures, as they are reflected on a U. S. GAAP basis on an after-tax basis as a separate line on our Consolidated Statements of Operations. On July 1, 2003, we combined our retail securities brokerage and clearing operations with those of Wachovia Corporation, or Wachovia, and formed Wachovia Securities Financial Holdings, LLC, or Wachovia Securities, a joint venture now headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri. As of December 31, 2007, we had a 38% ownership interest in the joint venture, with Wachovia owning the remaining 62%. As part of the transaction, we retained certain assets and liabilities related to the contributed businesses, including liabilities for certain litigation and regulatory matters. We account for our ownership of the joint venture under the equity method of accounting. On October 1, 2007, Wachovia completed the acquisition of A. G. Edwards, Inc. , or A. G. Edwards, for $6.8 billion and on January 1, 2008 combined the retail securities brokerage business of A. G. Edwards with Wachovia Securities. As discussed in Note 6 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, we have elected the “lookback” option under the terms of the agreements relating to the joint venture in connection with the combination of the A. G. Edwards business with Wachovia Securities. The “lookback” option permits us to delay for approximately two years following the combination of the A. G. Edwards business with Wachovia Securities our decision to make or not to make payments to avoid or limit dilution of our ownership interest in the joint venture. During this “lookback” period, our share in the earnings of the joint venture, as well as our share of the one-time costs associated with the combination, will be based on our diluted ownership level, which is in the process of being determined. Any payment at the end of the “lookback” period to restore all or part of our ownership interest in the joint venture would be based on the appraised or agreed value of the existing joint venture and the A. G. Edwards business. In such event, we would also need to make a true-up payment of one-time costs associated with the combination to reflect the incremental increase in our ownership interest in the joint venture. Alternatively, we may at the end of the “lookback” period “put” our joint venture interests to Wachovia based on the appraised value of the joint venture, excluding the A. G. Edwards business, as of the date of the combination of the A. G. Edwards business with Wachovia Securities. We also retain our separate right to “put” our joint venture interests to Wachovia at any time after July 1, 2008 based on the appraised value of the joint venture, including the A. G. Edwards business, determined as if it were a public company and including a control premium such as would apply in the case of a sale of 100% of its common equity. However, if in connection with the “lookback” option we elect at the end of the “lookback” period to make payments to avoid or limit dilution, we may not exercise this “put” option prior to the first anniversary of the end of the “lookback” period. Investment Results The following tables set forth the income yield and investment income, excluding realized investment gains (losses), for each major investment category of our general account for the periods indicated. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">Year Ended December 31, 2007</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Financial Services Businesses</td><td colspan="2">Closed Block Business</td><td colspan="2">Combined</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Yield-1</td><td>Amount</td><td>Yield-1</td><td>Amount</td><td>Yield-1</td><td>Amount</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">($ in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed maturities</td><td>5.10%</td><td>$5,700</td><td>6.59%</td><td>$3,047</td><td>5.53%</td><td>$8,747</td></tr><tr><td>Trading account assets supporting insurance liabilities</td><td>5.12</td><td>716</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5.12</td><td>716</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities</td><td>4.95</td><td>198</td><td>2.91</td><td>93</td><td>4.04</td><td>291</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial loans</td><td>6.17</td><td>1,081</td><td>7.00</td><td>504</td><td>6.41</td><td>1,585</td></tr><tr><td>Policy loans</td><td>5.23</td><td>188</td><td>6.35</td><td>333</td><td>5.90</td><td>521</td></tr><tr><td>Short-term investments and cash equivalents</td><td>4.58</td><td>378</td><td>9.83</td><td>183</td><td>5.05</td><td>561</td></tr><tr><td>Other investments</td><td>4.80</td><td>136</td><td>17.83</td><td>176</td><td>8.19</td><td>312</td></tr><tr><td>Gross investment income before investment expenses</td><td>5.20</td><td>8,397</td><td>6.64</td><td>4,336</td><td>5.60</td><td>12,733</td></tr><tr><td>Investment expenses</td><td>-0.14</td><td>-521</td><td>-0.23</td><td>-547</td><td>-0.17</td><td>-1,068</td></tr><tr><td>Investment income after investment expenses</td><td>5.06%</td><td>7,876</td><td>6.41%</td><td>3,789</td><td>5.43%</td><td>11,665</td></tr><tr><td>Investment results of other entities and operations-2</td><td></td><td>352</td><td></td><td>—</td><td></td><td>352</td></tr><tr><td>Total investment income</td><td></td><td>$8,228</td><td></td><td>$3,789</td><td></td><td>$12,017</td></tr></table> Year Ended December 31, 2006 <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">Year Ended December 31, 2006</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Financial Services Businesses</td><td colspan="2">Closed Block Business</td><td colspan="2">Combined</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Yield-1</td><td>Amount</td><td>Yield-1</td><td>Amount</td><td>Yield-1</td><td>Amount</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">($ in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed maturities</td><td>4.95%</td><td>$5,315</td><td>6.59%</td><td>$3,001</td><td>5.42%</td><td>$8,316</td></tr><tr><td>Trading account assets supporting insurance liabilities</td><td>4.73</td><td>652</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4.73</td><td>652</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities</td><td>5.15</td><td>182</td><td>2.81</td><td>81</td><td>4.10</td><td>263</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial loans</td><td>6.15</td><td>982</td><td>7.58</td><td>529</td><td>6.58</td><td>1,511</td></tr><tr><td>Policy loans</td><td>5.04</td><td>158</td><td>6.35</td><td>333</td><td>5.86</td><td>491</td></tr><tr><td>Short-term investments and cash equivalents</td><td>5.38</td><td>342</td><td>10.91</td><td>191</td><td>6.06</td><td>533</td></tr><tr><td>Other investments</td><td>8.03</td><td>217</td><td>10.76</td><td>94</td><td>8.72</td><td>311</td></tr><tr><td>Gross investment income before investment expenses</td><td>5.14</td><td>7,848</td><td>6.61</td><td>4,229</td><td>5.56</td><td>12,077</td></tr><tr><td>Investment expenses</td><td>-0.15</td><td>-515</td><td>-0.24</td><td>-549</td><td>-0.18</td><td>-1,064</td></tr><tr><td>Investment income after investment expenses</td><td>4.99%</td><td>7,333</td><td>6.37%</td><td>3,680</td><td>5.38%</td><td>11,013</td></tr><tr><td>Investment results of other entities and operations-2</td><td></td><td>307</td><td></td><td>—</td><td></td><td>307</td></tr><tr><td>Total investment income</td><td></td><td>$7,640</td><td></td><td>$3,680</td><td></td><td>$11,320</td></tr></table> (1) Yields are based on quarterly average carrying values except for fixed maturities, equity securities and securities lending activity. Yields for fixed maturities are based on amortized cost. Yields for equity securities are based on cost. Yields for securities lending activity are calculated net of corresponding liabilities and rebate expenses. Yields exclude investment income on assets other than those included in invested assets of the Financial Services Businesses. Prior periods yields are presented on a basis consistent with the current period presentation. (2) Includes investment income of securities brokerage, securities trading, banking operations, real estate and relocation services, and asset management operations. The net investment income yield on our general account investments after investment expenses, excluding realized investment gains (losses), was 5.43% and 5.38% for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The net investment income yield attributable to the Financial Services Businesses was 5.06% for the year ended December 31, 2007, compared to 4.99% for the year ended December 31, 2006. See below for a discussion of the change in the Financial Services Businesses’ yields. The net investment income yield attributable to the Closed Block Business was 6.41% for the year ended December 31, 2007, compared to 6.37% for the year ended December 31, 2006. The increase was primarily due to higher income from investments in joint ventures and limited partnerships, driven by net appreciation of underlying assets and gains from the sale of underlying assets partially offset by lower mortgage loan prepayment income.

Does the average value of Power purchase agreements in Entergy Arkansas greater than that in Entergy Louisiana?

Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Notes to Financial Statements 145 The fair value of debt securities, summarized by contractual maturities, as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">(In Millions)</td></tr><tr><td>less than 1 year</td><td>$31</td><td>$21</td></tr><tr><td>1 year - 5 years</td><td>676</td><td>526</td></tr><tr><td>5 years - 10 years</td><td>388</td><td>490</td></tr><tr><td>10 years - 15 years</td><td>131</td><td>146</td></tr><tr><td>15 years - 20 years</td><td>34</td><td>52</td></tr><tr><td>20 years+</td><td>163</td><td>161</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,423</td><td>$1,396</td></tr></table> During the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, proceeds from the dispositions of securities amounted to $2,571 million, $1,652 million, and $1,583 million, respectively. During the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, gross gains of $80 million, $26 million, and $5 million, respectively, and gross losses of $30 million, $20 million, and $4 million, respectively, were reclassified out of other comprehensive income into earnings. Other-than-temporary impairments and unrealized gains and losses Entergy evaluates unrealized losses at the end of each period to determine whether an other-than-temporary impairment has occurred. Effective January 1, 2009, Entergy adopted an accounting pronouncement providing guidance regarding recognition and presentation of other-than-temporary impairments related to investments in debt securities. The assessment of whether an investment in a debt security has suffered an other-than-temporary impairment is based on whether Entergy has the intent to sell or more likely than not will be required to sell the debt security before recovery of its amortized costs. Further, if Entergy does not expect to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the debt security, an other-than-temporary impairment is considered to have occurred and it is measured by the present value of cash flows expected to be collected less the amortized cost basis (credit loss). For debt securities held as of January 1, 2009 for which an other-than-temporary impairment had previously been recognized but for which assessment under the new guidance indicates this impairment is temporary, Entergy recorded an adjustment to its opening balance of retained earnings of $11.3 million ($6.4 million net-of-tax). Entergy did not have any material other-than-temporary impairments relating to credit losses on debt securities in 2009. The assessment of whether an investment in an equity security has suffered an other-than-temporary impairment continues to be based on a number of factors including, first, whether Entergy has the ability and intent to hold the investment to recover its value, the duration and severity of any losses, and, then, whether it is expected that the investment will recover its value within a reasonable period of time. Entergy's trusts are managed by third parties who operate in accordance with agreements that define investment guidelines and place restrictions on the purchases and sales of investments. Non-Utility Nuclear recorded charges to other income of $86 million in 2009, $50 million in 2008, and $5 million in 2007, resulting from the recognition of the other-than-temporary impairment of certain equity securities held in its decommissioning trust funds. NOTE 18. ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDING As a result of the effects of Hurricane Katrina and the effect of extensive flooding that resulted from levee breaks in and around the New Orleans area, on September 23, 2005, Entergy New Orleans filed a voluntary petition in bankruptcy court seeking reorganization relief under Chapter 11 of the U. S. Bankruptcy Code. On May 7, 2007, the bankruptcy judge entered an order confirming Entergy New Orleans' plan of reorganization. With the receipt of CDBG funds, and the agreement on insurance recovery with one of its excess insurers, Entergy New Orleans waived the conditions precedent in its plan of reorganization and the plan became effective on May 8, 2007. Following are significant terms in Entergy New Orleans' plan of reorganization: As a result of the accounting for uncertain tax positions, the amount of the deferred tax assets reflected in the financial statements is less than the amount of the tax effect of the federal and state net operating loss carryovers, tax credit carryovers, and other tax attributes reflected on income tax returns. Because it is more likely than not that the benefit from certain state net operating and capital loss carryovers will not be utilized, a valuation allowance of $66 million and $13 million has been provided on the deferred tax assets relating to these state net operating and capital loss carryovers, respectively. Significant components of accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued for the Registrant Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 are as follows: <table><tr><td>2011</td><td>Entergy Arkansas</td><td>Entergy Gulf States Louisiana</td><td>Entergy Louisiana</td><td>Entergy Mississippi</td><td>Entergy New Orleans</td><td>Entergy Texas</td><td>System Energy</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="7">(In Thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred tax liabilities:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Plant basis differences - net</td><td>-$1,375,502</td><td>-$1,224,422</td><td>-$1,085,047</td><td>-$608,596</td><td>-$169,538</td><td>-$892,707</td><td>-$505,369</td></tr><tr><td>Regulatory asset for income taxes - net</td><td>-64,204</td><td>-140,644</td><td>-121,388</td><td>-28,183</td><td>70,973</td><td>-59,812</td><td>-87,550</td></tr><tr><td>Power purchase agreements</td><td>94</td><td>3,938</td><td>-1</td><td>2,383</td><td>22</td><td>2,547</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Nuclear decommissioning trusts</td><td>-53,789</td><td>-21,096</td><td>-22,441</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-19,138</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred fuel</td><td>-82,452</td><td>-1,225</td><td>-4,285</td><td>718</td><td>-331</td><td>3,932</td><td>-8</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-107,558</td><td>-1,532</td><td>-26,373</td><td>-10,193</td><td>-18,319</td><td>-14,097</td><td>-9,333</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>-$1,683,411</td><td>-$1,384,981</td><td>-$1,259,535</td><td>-$643,871</td><td>-$117,193</td><td>-$960,137</td><td>-$621,398</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred tax assets:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Accumulated deferred investment</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>tax credits</td><td>16,843</td><td>31,367</td><td>28,197</td><td>2,437</td><td>592</td><td>6,769</td><td>22,133</td></tr><tr><td>Pension and OPEB</td><td>-75,399</td><td>92,602</td><td>19,866</td><td>-30,390</td><td>-11,713</td><td>-41,964</td><td>-19,593</td></tr><tr><td>Nuclear decommissioning liabilities</td><td>-104,862</td><td>-38,683</td><td>56,399</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-47,360</td></tr><tr><td>Sale and leaseback</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>66,801</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>150,629</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for regulatory adjustments</td><td>-</td><td>97,608</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for contingencies</td><td>4,167</td><td>90</td><td>3,940</td><td>2,465</td><td>10,121</td><td>2,299</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Unbilled/deferred revenues</td><td>15,222</td><td>-21,918</td><td>-7,108</td><td>8,990</td><td>2,707</td><td>14,324</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Customer deposits</td><td>7,019</td><td>618</td><td>5,699</td><td>1,379</td><td>109</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Rate refund</td><td>11,627</td><td>-</td><td>134</td><td>-</td><td>2</td><td>-3,924</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Net operating loss carryforwards</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>39,153</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>58,546</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>3,485</td><td>27,392</td><td>18,824</td><td>4,826</td><td>5,248</td><td>37,734</td><td>25,724</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>-121,898</td><td>189,076</td><td>231,905</td><td>-10,293</td><td>7,066</td><td>73,784</td><td>131,533</td></tr><tr><td>Noncurrent accrued taxes (including</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>unrecognized tax benefits)</td><td>-27,718</td><td>-206,752</td><td>-75,750</td><td>-6,271</td><td>-27,859</td><td>39,799</td><td>-165,981</td></tr><tr><td>Accumulated deferred income</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>taxes and taxes accrued</td><td>-$1,833,027</td><td>-$1,402,657</td><td>-$1,103,380</td><td>-$660,435</td><td>-$137,986</td><td>-$846,554</td><td>-$655,846</td></tr></table> Entergy Mississippi, Inc. Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis 327 2010 Compared to 2009 Net revenue consists of operating revenues net of: 1) fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale, 2) purchased power expenses, and 3) other regulatory charges (credits). Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2010 to 2009. <table><tr><td></td><td>Amount (In Millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2009 net revenue</td><td>$536.7</td></tr><tr><td>Volume/weather</td><td>18.9</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-0.3</td></tr><tr><td>2010 net revenue</td><td>$555.3</td></tr></table> The volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 1,046 GWh, or 8%, in billed electricity usage in all sectors, primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather on the residential sector. Gross operating revenues, fuel and purchased power expenses, and other regulatory charges (credits) Gross operating revenues increased primarily due to an increase of $22 million in power management rider revenue as the result of higher rates, the volume/weather variance discussed above, and an increase in Grand Gulf rider revenue as a result of higher rates and increased usage, offset by a decrease of $23.5 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to lower fuel rates. Fuel and purchased power expenses decreased primarily due to a decrease in deferred fuel expense as a result of prior over-collections, offset by an increase in the average market price of purchased power coupled with increased net area demand. Other regulatory charges increased primarily due to increased recovery of costs associated with the power management recovery rider. Other Income Statement Variances 2011 Compared to 2010 Other operation and maintenance expenses decreased primarily due to: x a $5.4 million decrease in compensation and benefits costs primarily resulting from an increase in the accrual for incentive-based compensation in 2010 and a decrease in stock option expense; and x the sale of $4.9 million of surplus oil inventory. The decrease was partially offset by an increase of $3.9 million in legal expenses due to the deferral in 2010 of certain litigation expenses in accordance with regulatory treatment. Taxes other than income taxes increased primarily due to an increase in ad valorem taxes due to a higher 2011 assessment as compared to 2010, partially offset by higher capitalized property taxes as compared with prior year. Depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily due to an increase in plant in service. Interest expense decreased primarily due to a revision caused by FERC’s acceptance of a change in the treatment of funds received from independent power producers for transmission interconnection projects. Entergy New Orleans, Inc. Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis 350 Also in addition to the contractual obligations, Entergy New Orleans has $53.7 million of unrecognized tax benefits and interest net of unused tax attributes and payments for which the timing of payments beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of effective settlement of tax positions. See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information regarding unrecognized tax benefits. The planned capital investment estimate for Entergy New Orleans reflects capital required to support existing business. The estimated capital expenditures are subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based on the ongoing effects of regulatory constraints, environmental compliance, market volatility, economic trends, changes in project plans, and the ability to access capital. Management provides more information on long-term debt and preferred stock maturities in Notes 5 and 6 and to the financial statements. As an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Corporation, Entergy New Orleans pays dividends from its earnings at a percentage determined monthly. Entergy New Orleans’s long-term debt indentures contain restrictions on the payment of cash dividends or other distributions on its common and preferred stock. Sources of Capital Entergy New Orleans’s sources to meet its capital requirements include: x internally generated funds; x cash on hand; and x debt and preferred stock issuances. Entergy New Orleans may refinance, redeem, or otherwise retire debt and preferred stock prior to maturity, to the extent market conditions and interest and dividend rates are favorable. Entergy New Orleans’s receivables from the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years: <table><tr><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>(In Thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>$9,074</td><td>$21,820</td><td>$66,149</td><td>$60,093</td></tr></table> See Note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool. Entergy New Orleans has obtained short-term borrowing authorization from the FERC under which it may borrow through October 2013, up to the aggregate amount, at any one time outstanding, of $100 million. See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of Entergy New Orleans’s short-term borrowing limits. The long-term securities issuances of Entergy New Orleans are limited to amounts authorized by the City Council, and the current authorization extends through July 2012. Entergy Louisiana’s Ninemile Point Unit 6 Self-Build Project In June 2011, Entergy Louisiana filed with the LPSC an application seeking certification that the public necessity and convenience would be served by Entergy Louisiana’s construction of a combined-cycle gas turbine generating facility (Ninemile 6) at its existing Ninemile Point electric generating station. Ninemile 6 will be a nominally-sized 550 MW unit that is estimated to cost approximately $721 million to construct, excluding interconnection and transmission upgrades. Entergy Gulf States Louisiana joined in the application, seeking certification of its purchase under a life-of-unit power purchase agreement of up to 35% of the capacity and energy generated by Ninemile 6. The Ninemile 6 capacity and energy is proposed to be allocated 55% to Entergy Louisiana, 25% to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, and 20% to Entergy New Orleans. In February 2012 the City Council passed a resolution authorizing Entergy New Orleans to purchase 20% of the Ninemile 6 energy and capacity. If approvals are obtained from the LPSC and other permitting agencies, Ninemile 6 construction is Equity Compensation Plan Information The following table summarizes the equity compensation plan information as of December 31, 2011. Information is included for equity compensation plans approved by the stockholders and equity compensation plans not approved by the stockholders.

What is the ratio of Securities to the total for Net realized losses reclassified into earnings in 2008?

The calculation of earnings per common share and diluted earnings per common share for 2004, 2003 and 2002 is presented below. See Note 1 of the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion on the calculation of earnings per common share. <table><tr><td> (Dollars in millions, except per share information; shares in thousands)</td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td><td>2002</td></tr><tr><td> Earnings per common share</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>$14,143</td><td>$10,810</td><td>$9,249</td></tr><tr><td>Preferred stock dividends</td><td>-16</td><td>-4</td><td>-5</td></tr><tr><td>Net income available to common shareholders</td><td>$14,127</td><td>$10,806</td><td>$9,244</td></tr><tr><td>Average common shares issued and outstanding</td><td>3,758,507</td><td>2,973,407</td><td>3,040,085</td></tr><tr><td> Earnings per common share</td><td>$3.76</td><td>$3.63</td><td>$3.04</td></tr><tr><td> Diluted earnings per common share</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net income available to common shareholders</td><td>$14,127</td><td>$10,806</td><td>$9,244</td></tr><tr><td>Convertible preferred stock dividends</td><td>2</td><td>4</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Net income available to common shareholders and assumed conversions</td><td>$14,129</td><td>$10,810</td><td>$9,249</td></tr><tr><td>Average common shares issued and outstanding</td><td>3,758,507</td><td>2,973,407</td><td>3,040,085</td></tr><tr><td>Dilutive potential common shares^{-1, 2}</td><td>65,436</td><td>56,949</td><td>90,850</td></tr><tr><td>Total diluted average common shares issued and outstanding</td><td>3,823,943</td><td>3,030,356</td><td>3,130,935</td></tr><tr><td> Diluted earnings per common share</td><td>$3.69</td><td>$3.57</td><td>$2.95</td></tr></table> (1) For 2004, 2003 and 2002, average options to purchase 10 million, 19 million and 45 million shares, respectively, were outstanding but not included in the computation of earnings per common share because they were antidilutive. (2) Includes incremental shares from assumed conversions of convertible preferred stock, restricted stock units, restricted stock shares and stock options. Note 14 Regulatory Requirements and Restrictions The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FRB) requires the Corporation’s banking subsidiaries to maintain reserve balances based on a percentage of certain deposits. Average daily reserve balances required by the FRB were $6.9 billion and $4.1 billion for 2004 and 2003, respectively. Currency and coin residing in branches and cash vaults (vault cash) are used to partially satisfy the reserve requirement. The average daily reserve balances, in excess of vault cash, held with the Federal Reserve Bank amounted to $70 million and $317 million for 2004 and 2003, respectively. The primary source of funds for cash distributions by the Corporation to its shareholders is dividends received from its banking subsidiaries. Bank of America, N. A. and Fleet National Bank declared and paid dividends of $5.9 billion and $1.3 billion, respectively, for 2004 to the parent. In 2005, Bank of America, N. A. and Fleet National Bank can declare and pay dividends to the parent of $4.7 billion and $790 million plus an additional amount equal to their net profits for 2005, as defined by statute, up to the date of any such dividend declaration. The other subsidiary national banks can initiate aggregate dividend payments in 2005 of $2.6 billion plus an additional amount equal to their net profits for 2005, as defined by statute, up to the date of any such dividend declaration. The amount of dividends that each subsidiary bank may declare in a calendar year without approval by the OCC is the subsidiary bank’s net profits for that year combined with its net retained profits, as defined, for the preceding two years. The FRB, the OCC and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (collectively, the Agencies) have issued regulatory capital guidelines for U. S. banking organizations. Failure to meet the capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory and discretionary actions by regulators that could have a material effect on the Corporation’s financial statements. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, the Corporation and Bank of America, N. A. were classified as well-capitalized under this regulatory framework. At December 31, 2004, Fleet National Bank was classified as well-capitalized under this regulatory framework. There have been no conditions or events since December 31, 2004 that management believes have changed the Corporation’s, Bank of America, N. A. ’s or Fleet National Bank’s capital classifications. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> December 31</td><td colspan="2"> Average Balance</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td> 2007</td><td>2006</td><td> 2007</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans and leases</td><td>$359,946</td><td>$307,661</td><td>$327,810</td><td>$288,131</td></tr><tr><td>Total earning assets^-1</td><td>383,384</td><td>343,338</td><td>353,591</td><td>344,013</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets^-1</td><td>442,987</td><td>399,373</td><td>408,034</td><td>396,559</td></tr><tr><td>Total deposits</td><td>344,850</td><td>329,195</td><td>328,918</td><td>332,242</td></tr></table> The strategy for GCSBB is to attract, retain and deepen customer relationships. We achieve this strategy through our ability to offer a wide range of products and services through a franchise that stretches coast to coast through 32 states and the District of Columbia. We also provide credit card products to customers in Canada, Ireland, Spain and the United Kingdom. In the U. S. , we serve approximately 59 million consumer and small business relationships utilizing our network of 6,149 banking centers, 18,753 domestic branded ATMs, and telephone and Internet channels. Within GCSBB, there are three primary businesses: Deposits, Card Services, and Consumer Real Estate. In addition, ALM/Other includes the results of ALM activities and other consumer-related businesses (e. g. , insurance). GCSBB, specifically Card Services, is presented on a managed basis. For a reconciliation of managed GCSBB to held GCSBB, see Note 22 – Business Segment Information to the Consolidated Financial Statements. During 2007, Visa Inc. filed a registration statement with the SEC with respect to a proposed IPO. Subject to market conditions and other factors, Visa Inc. expects the IPO to occur in the first half of 2008. We expect to record a gain associated with the IPO. In addition, we expect that a portion of the proceeds from the IPO will be used by Visa Inc. to fund liabilities arising from litigation which would allow us to record an offset to the litigation liabilities that we recorded in the fourth quarter of 2007 as discussed below. Net income decreased $1.9 billion, or 17 percent, to $9.4 billion compared to 2006 as increases in noninterest income and net interest income were more than offset by increases in provision for credit losses and noninterest expense. Net interest income increased $612 million, or two percent, to $28.8 billion due to the impacts of organic growth and the LaSalle acquisition on average loans and leases, and deposits compared to 2006. Noninterest income increased $2.1 billion, or 13 percent, to $18.9 billion compared to the same period in 2006, mainly due to increases in card income, service charges and mortgage banking income. Provision for credit losses increased $4.4 billion, or 51 percent, to $12.9 billion compared to 2006. This increase primarily resulted from a $3.2 billion increase in Card Services and a $978 million increase in Consumer Real Estate. For further discussion of the increase in provision for credit losses related to Card Services and Consumer Real Estate, see their respective discussions. Noninterest expense increased $1.7 billion, or nine percent, to $20.1 billion largely due to increases in personnel-related expenses, Visarelated litigation costs, equally allocated to Card Services and Treasury Services on a management accounting basis, and technology related costs. For additional information on Visa-related litigation, see Note 13 – Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Deposits Deposits provides a comprehensive range of products to consumers and small businesses. Our products include traditional savings accounts, money market savings accounts, CDs and IRAs, and noninterest and interest-bearing checking accounts. Debit card results are also included in Deposits. Deposit products provide a relatively stable source of funding and liquidity. We earn net interest spread revenues from investing this liquidity in earning assets through client-facing lending activity and our ALM activities. The revenue is allocated to the deposit products using our funds transfer pricing process which takes into account the interest rates and maturity characteristics of the deposits. Deposits also generate fees such as account service fees, non-sufficient fund fees, overdraft charges and ATM fees, while debit cards generate merchant interchange fees based on purchase volume. Excluding accounts obtained through acquisitions, we added approximately 2.3 million net new retail checking accounts in 2007. These additions resulted from continued improvement in sales and service results in the Banking Center Channel and Online, and the success of such products as Keep the ChangeTM, Risk Free CDs, Balance Rewards and Affinity. We continue to migrate qualifying affluent customers and their related deposit balances from GCSBB to GWIM. In 2007, a total of $11.4 billion of deposits were migrated from GCSBB to GWIM compared to $10.7 billion in 2006. After migration, the associated net interest income, service charges and noninterest expense are recorded in GWIM. Net income increased $364 million, or seven percent, to $5.2 billion compared to 2006 as an increase in noninterest income was partially offset by an increase in noninterest expense. Net interest income remained relatively flat at $9.4 billion compared to 2006 as the addition of LaSalle and higher deposit spreads resulting from disciplined pricing were offset by the impact of lower balances. Average deposits decreased $3.2 billion, or one percent, largely due to the migration of customer relationships and related balances to GWIM, partially offset by the acquisition of LaSalle. The increase in noninterest income was driven by higher service charges of $665 million, or 12 percent, primarily as a result of new demand deposit account growth and the addition of LaSalle. Additionally, debit card revenue growth of $248 million, or 13 percent, was due to a higher number of checking accounts, increased usage, the addition of LaSalle and market penetration (i. e. , increase in the number of existing account holders with debit cards). Noninterest expense increased $323 million, or four percent, to $9.1 billion compared to 2006, primarily due to the addition of LaSalle, and to higher account and transaction volumes. Card Services Card Services, which excludes the results of debit cards (included in Deposits), provides a broad offering of products, including U. S. Consumer and Business Card, Unsecured Lending, and International Card. We offer a variety of co-branded and affinity credit card products and have become the leading issuer of credit cards through endorsed marketing in the U. S. and Europe. During 2007, Merchant Services was transferred to Treasury Services within GCIB. Previously their results were reported in Card Services. Prior period amounts have been reclassified. The shares of the series of preferred stock previously discussed are not subject to the operation of a sinking fund and have no participation rights. With the exception of the Series L Preferred Stock, the shares of the series of preferred stock in the previous table are not convertible. The holders of these series have no general voting rights. If any dividend payable on these series is in arrears for three or more semi-annual or six or more quarterly dividend periods, as applicable (whether consecutive or not), the holders of these series and any other class or series of preferred stock ranking equally as to payment of dividends and upon which equivalent voting rights have been conferred and are exercisable (voting as a single class) will be entitled to vote for the election of two additional directors. These voting rights terminate when the Corporation has paid in full dividends on these series for at least two semi-annual or four quarterly dividend periods, as applicable, following the dividend arrearage (or, in the case of the Series N Preferred Stock, upon payment of all accrued and unpaid dividends). In October 2008, in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, established as part of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the Corporation issued to the U. S. Treasury 600 thousand shares of Series N Preferred Stock as presented in the previous table. The Series N Preferred Stock has a call feature after three years. In connection with this investment, the Corporation also issued to the U. S. Treasury 10-year warrants to purchase approximately 73.1 million shares of Bank of America Corporation common stock at an exercise price of $30.79 per share. Upon the request of the U. S. Treasury, at any time, the Corporation has agreed to enter into a deposit arrangement pursuant to which the Series N Preferred Stock may be deposited and depositary shares, representing 1/25th of a share of Series N Preferred Stock, may be issued. The Corporation has agreed to register the Series N Preferred Stock, the warrants, the shares of common stock underlying the warrants and the depositary shares, if any, for resale under the Securities Act of 1933. As required under the TARP Capital Purchase Program in connection with the sale of the Series N Preferred Stock to the U. S. Treasury, dividend payments on, and repurchases of, the Corporation’s outstanding preferred and common stock are subject to certain restrictions. For as long as any Series N Preferred Stock is outstanding, no dividends may be declared or paid on the Corporation’s outstanding preferred and common stock until all accrued and unpaid dividends on Series N Preferred Stock are fully paid. In addition, the U. S. Treasury’s consent is required for any increase in dividends declared on shares of common stock before the third anniversary of the issuance of the Series N Preferred Stock unless the Series N Preferred Stock is redeemed by the Corporation or transferred in whole by the U. S. Treasury. Further, the U. S. Treasury’s consent is required for any repurchase of any equity securities or trust preferred securities except for repurchases of Series N Preferred Stock or repurchases of common shares in connection with benefit plans consistent with past practice before the third anniversary of the issuance of the Series N Preferred Stock unless redeemed by the Corporation or transferred in whole by the U. S. Treasury. On July 14, 2006, the Corporation redeemed its 6.75% Perpetual Preferred Stock with a stated value of $250 per share. The 382.5 thousand shares, or $96 million, outstanding of preferred stock were redeemed at the stated value of $250 per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends. On July 3, 2006, the Corporation redeemed its Fixed/Adjustable Rate Cumulative Preferred Stock with a stated value of $250 per share. The 700 thousand shares, or $175 million, outstanding of preferred stock were redeemed at the stated value of $250 per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends. All preferred stock outstanding has preference over the Corporation’s common stock with respect to the payment of dividends and distribution of the Corporation’s assets in the event of a liquidation or dissolution. Except in certain circumstances, the holders of preferred stock have no voting rights. During 2008, 2007 and 2006 the aggregate dividends declared on preferred stock were $1.3 billion, $182 million and $22 million respectively. In addition, in January 2009, the Corporation declared aggregate dividends on preferred stock of $909 million, including $145 million related to preferred stock exchanged in connection with the Merrill Lynch acquisition. Accumulated OCI The following table presents the changes in accumulated OCI for 2008, 2007 and 2006, net-of-tax. <table><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>Securities -1</td><td>Derivatives -2</td><td>Employee Benefit Plans -3</td><td>Foreign Currency -4</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2007</td><td>$6,536</td><td>$-4,402</td><td>$-1,301</td><td>$296</td><td>$1,129</td></tr><tr><td>Net change in fair value recorded in accumulated OCI^-5</td><td>-10,354</td><td>104</td><td>-3,387</td><td>-1,000</td><td>-14,637</td></tr><tr><td>Net realized losses reclassified into earnings^-6</td><td>1,797</td><td>840</td><td>46</td><td>–</td><td>2,683</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2008</td><td>$-2,021</td><td>$-3,458</td><td>$-4,642</td><td>$-704</td><td>$-10,825</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2006</td><td>$-2,733</td><td>$-3,697</td><td>$-1,428</td><td>$147</td><td>$-7,711</td></tr><tr><td>Net change in fair value recorded in accumulated OCI^-5</td><td>9,416</td><td>-1,252</td><td>4</td><td>142</td><td>8,310</td></tr><tr><td>Net realized (gains) losses reclassified into earnings⁽⁶⁾</td><td>-147</td><td>547</td><td>123</td><td>7</td><td>530</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2007</td><td>$6,536</td><td>$-4,402</td><td>$-1,301</td><td>$296</td><td>$1,129</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2005</td><td>$-2,978</td><td>$-4,338</td><td>$-118</td><td>$-122</td><td>$-7,556</td></tr><tr><td>Net change in fair value recorded in accumulated OCI</td><td>465</td><td>534</td><td>-1,310</td><td>219</td><td>-92</td></tr><tr><td>Net realized (gains) losses reclassified into earnings⁽⁶⁾</td><td>-220</td><td>107</td><td>–</td><td>50</td><td>-63</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2006</td><td>$-2,733</td><td>$-3,697</td><td>$-1,428</td><td>$147</td><td>$-7,711</td></tr></table> (1) In 2008, 2007 and 2006, the Corporation reclassified net realized losses into earnings on the sales and other-than-temporary impairments of AFS debt securities of $1.4 billion, $137 million and $279 million, net-of-tax, respectively, and net realized (gains) losses on the sales and other-than-temporary impairments of AFS marketable equity securities of $377 million, $(284) million, and $(499) million, net-of-tax, respectively. (2) The amounts included in accumulated OCI for terminated interest rate derivative contracts were losses of $3.4 billion, $3.8 billion and $3.2 billion, net-of-tax, at December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. (3) For more information, see Note 16 – Employee Benefit Plans to the Consolidated Financial Statements. (4) For 2008, the net change in fair value recorded in accumulated OCI represented $3.8 billion in losses associated with the Corporation’s foreign currency translation adjustments on its net investment in consolidated foreign operations partially offset by gains of $2.8 billion on the related foreign currency exchange hedging results. (5) Securities include the fair value adjustment of $4.8 billion and $8.4 billion, net-of-tax, related to the Corporation’s investment in CCB at December 31, 2008 and 2007. (6) Included in this line item are amounts related to derivatives used in cash flow hedge relationships. These amounts are reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged forecasted transactions affect earnings. This line item also includes (gains) losses on AFS debt and marketable equity securities and impairment charges. These amounts are reclassified into earnings upon sale of the related security or when the other-than-temporary impairment charge is recognized. Entering 2006, earnings in the first quarter are expected to improve compared with the 2005 fourth quarter due principally to higher average price realizations, reflecting announced price increases. Product demand for the first quarter should be seasonally slow, but is expected to strengthen as the year progresses, supported by continued economic growth in North America, Asia and Eastern Europe. Average prices should also improve in 2006 as price increases announced in late 2005 and early 2006 for uncoated freesheet paper and pulp continue to be realized. Operating rates are expected to improve as a result of industry-wide capacity reductions in 2005. Although energy and raw material costs remain high, there has been some decline in both natural gas and delivered wood costs, with further moderation expected later in 2006. We will continue to focus on further improvements in our global manufacturing operations, implementation of supply chain enhancements and reductions in overhead costs during 2006. Industrial Packaging Demand for Industrial Packaging products is closely correlated with non-durable industrial goods production in the United States, as well as with demand for processed foods, poultry, meat and agricultural products. In addition to prices and volumes, major factors affecting the profitability of Industrial Packaging are raw material and energy costs, manufacturing efficiency and product mix. Industrial Packaging’s net sales for 2005 increased 2% compared with 2004, and were 18% higher than in 2003, reflecting the inclusion of International Paper Distribution Limited (formerly International Paper Pacific Millennium Limited) beginning in August 2005. Operating profits in 2005 were 39% lower than in 2004 and 13% lower than in 2003. Sales volume increases ($24 million), improved price realizations ($66 million), and strong mill operating performance ($27 million) were not enough to offset the effects of increased raw material costs ($103 million), higher market related downtime costs ($50 million), higher converting operating costs ($22 million), and unfavorable mix and other costs ($67 million). Additionally, the May 2005 sale of our Industrial Papers business resulted in a $25 million lower earnings contribution from this business in 2005. The segment took 370,000 tons of downtime in 2005, including 230,000 tons of lack-of-order downtime to balance internal supply with customer demand, compared to a total of 170,000 tons in 2004, which included 5,000 tons of lack-of-order downtime. <table><tr><td><i></i> <i>In millions</i><i></i></td><td>2005</td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td></tr><tr><td>Sales</td><td>$4,935</td><td>$4,830</td><td>$4,170</td></tr><tr><td>Operating Profit</td><td>$230</td><td>$380</td><td>$264</td></tr></table> Containerboard’s net sales totaled $895 million in 2005, $951 million in 2004 and $815 million in 2003. Soft market conditions and declining customer demand at the end of the first quarter led to lower average sales prices during the second and third quarters. Beginning in the fourth quarter, prices recovered as a result of increased customer demand and a rationalization of supply. Full year sales volumes trailed 2004 levels early in the year, reflecting the weak market conditions in the first half of 2005. However, volumes rebounded in the second half of the year, and finished the year ahead of 2004 levels. Operating profits decreased 38% from 2004, but were flat with 2003. The favorable impacts of increased sales volumes, higher average sales prices and improved mill operating performance were not enough to offset the impact of higher wood, energy and other raw material costs and increased lack-of-order downtime. Implementation of the new supply chain operating model in our containerboard mills during 2005 resulted in increased operating efficiency and cost savings. Specialty Papers in 2005 included the Kraft Paper business for the full year and the Industrial Papers business for five months prior to its sale in May 2005. Net sales totaled $468 million in 2005, $723 million in 2004 and $690 million in 2003. Operating profits in 2005 were down 23% compared with 2004 and 54% compared with 2003, reflecting the lower contribution from Industrial Papers. U. S. Converting Operations net sales for 2005 were $2.6 billion compared with $2.3 billion in 2004 and $1.9 billion in 2003. Sales volumes were up 10% in 2005 compared with 2004, mainly due to the acquisition of Box USA in July 2004. Average sales prices in 2005 began the year above 2004 levels, but softened in the second half of the year. Operating profits in 2005 decreased 46% and 4% from 2004 and 2003 levels, respectively, primarily due to increased linerboard, freight and energy costs. European Container sales for 2005 were $883 million compared with $865 million in 2004 and $801 million in 2003. Operating profits declined 19% and 13% compared with 2004 and 2003, respectively. The increase in sales in 2005 reflected a slight increase in demand over 2004, but this was not sufficient to offset the negative earnings effect of increased operating costs, unfavorable foreign exchange rates and a reduction in average sales prices. The Moroccan box plant acquisition, which was completed in October 2005, favorably impacted fourth-quarter results. Industrial Packaging’s sales in 2005 included $104 million from International Paper Distribution Limited, our Asian box and containerboard business, subsequent to the acquisition of an additional 50% interest in August 2005.

How many Below Investment Grade exceed the average of Below Investment Grade in 2004?

MetLife, Inc. Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued) Issuance Costs In connection with the offering of common equity units, the Holding Company incurred $55.3 million of issuance costs of which $5.8 million related to the issuance of the junior subordinated debentures underlying common equity units which funded the Series A and Series B trust preferred securities and $49.5 million related to the expected issuance of the common stock under the stock purchase contracts. The $5.8 million in debt issuance costs were capitalized, included in other assets, and amortized using the effective interest method over the period from issuance date of the common equity units to the initial and subsequent stock purchase date. The remaining $49.5 million of costs related to the common stock issuance under the stock purchase contracts and were recorded as a reduction of additional paid-in capital. Earnings Per Common Share The stock purchase contracts are reflected in diluted earnings per common share using the treasury stock method. The stock purchase contracts were included in diluted earnings per common share for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006 as shown in Note 20. Remarketing of Junior Subordinated Debentures and Settlement of Stock Purchase Contracts On August 15, 2008, the Holding Company closed the successful remarketing of the Series A portion of the junior subordinated debentures underlying the common equity units. The Series A junior subordinated debentures were modified as permitted by their terms to be 6.817% senior debt securities Series A, due August 15, 2018. The Holding Company did not receive any proceeds from the remarketing. Most common equity unit holders chose to have their junior subordinated debentures remarketed and used the remarketing proceeds to settle their payment obligations under the applicable stock purchase contract. For those common equity unit holders that elected not to participate in the remarketing and elected to use their own cash to satisfy the payment obligations under the stock purchase contract, the terms of the debt are the same as the remarketed debt. The initial settlement of the stock purchase contracts occurred on August 15, 2008, providing proceeds to the Holding Company of $1,035 million in exchange for shares of the Holding Company’s common stock. The Holding Company delivered 20,244,549 shares of its common stock held in treasury at a value of $1,064 million to settle the stock purchase contracts. On February 17, 2009, the Holding Company closed the successful remarketing of the Series B portion of the junior subordinated debentures underlying the common equity units. The Series B junior subordinated debentures were modified as permitted by their terms to be 7.717% senior debt securities Series B, due February 15, 2019. The Holding Company did not receive any proceeds from the remarketing. Most common equity unit holders chose to have their junior subordinated debentures remarketed and used the remarketing proceeds to settle their payment obligations under the applicable stock purchase contract. For those common equity unit holders that elected not to participate in the remarketing and elected to use their own cash to satisfy the payment obligations under the stock purchase contract, the terms of the debt are the same as the remarketed debt. The subsequent settlement of the stock purchase contracts occurred on February 17, 2009, providing proceeds to the Holding Company of $1,035 million in exchange for shares of the Holding Company’s common stock. The Holding Company delivered 24,343,154 shares of its newly issued common stock at a value of $1,035 million to settle the stock purchase contracts. See also Notes 10, 12, 18 and 25.14. Shares Subject to Mandatory Redemption and Company-Obligated Mandatorily Redeemable Securities of Subsidiary Trusts GenAmerica Capital I. In June 1997, GenAmerica Corporation (“GenAmerica”) issued $125 million of 8.525% capital securities through a wholly-owned subsidiary trust, GenAmerica Capital I. In October 2007, GenAmerica redeemed these securities which were due to mature on June 30, 2027. As a result of this redemption, the Company recognized additional interest expense of $10 million. Interest expense on these instruments is included in other expenses and was $20 million and $11 million for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively.15. Income Tax The provision for income tax from continuing operations is as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td> 2006</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Current:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Federal</td><td>$216</td><td>$424</td><td>$615</td></tr><tr><td>State and local</td><td>10</td><td>15</td><td>39</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign</td><td>372</td><td>200</td><td>144</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td>598</td><td>639</td><td>798</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Federal</td><td>1,078</td><td>1,015</td><td>164</td></tr><tr><td>State and local</td><td>-6</td><td>31</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign</td><td>-90</td><td>-25</td><td>52</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td>982</td><td>1,021</td><td>218</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for income tax</td><td>$1,580</td><td>$1,660</td><td>$1,016</td></tr></table> the same default methodology to all Alt-A bonds, regardless of the underlying collateral. The Company’s Alt-A portfolio has superior structure to the overall Alt-A market. The Company’s Alt-A portfolio is 88% fixed rate collateral, has zero exposure to option ARM mortgages and has only 12% hybrid ARMs. Fixed rate mortgages have performed better than both option ARMs and hybrid ARMs. Additionally, 83% of the Company’s Alt-A portfolio has super senior credit enhancement, which typically provides double the credit enhancement of a standard AAA rated bond. Based upon the analysis of the Company’s exposure to Alt-A mortgage loans through its investment in asset-backed securities, the Company continues to expect to receive payments in accordance with the contractual terms of the securities. Asset-Backed Securities. The Company’s asset-backed securities are diversified both by sector and by issuer. At December 31, 2008, the largest exposures in the Company’s asset-backed securities portfolio were credit card receivables, automobile receivables, student loan receivables and residential mortgage-backed securities backed by sub-prime mortgage loans of 49%, 10%, 10% and 10% of the total holdings, respectively. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company’s holdings in asset-backed securities was $10.5 billion and $10.6 billion at estimated fair value. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, $7.9 billion and $5.7 billion, respectively, or 75% and 54%, respectively, of total asset-backed securities were rated Aaa/AAA by Moody’s, S&P or Fitch. The Company’s asset-backed securities included in the structured securities table above include exposure to residential mortgagebacked securities backed by sub-prime mortgage loans. Sub-prime mortgage lending is the origination of residential mortgage loans to customers with weak credit profiles. The Company’s exposure exists through investment in asset-backed securities which are supported by sub-prime mortgage loans. The slowing U. S. housing market, greater use of affordable mortgage products, and relaxed underwriting standards for some originators of below-prime loans have recently led to higher delinquency and loss rates, especially within the 2006 and 2007 vintage year. Vintage year refers to the year of origination and not to the year of purchase. These factors have caused a pull-back in market liquidity and repricing of risk, which has led to an increase in unrealized losses from December 31, 2007 to December 31, 2008. Based upon the analysis of the Company’s exposure to sub-prime mortgage loans through its investment in asset-backed securities, the Company expects to receive payments in accordance with the contractual terms of the securities. The following table shows the Company’s exposure to asset-backed securities supported by sub-prime mortgage loans by credit quality and by vintage year: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="12"> December 31, 2008</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> Aaa</td><td colspan="2"> Aa</td><td colspan="2"> A</td><td colspan="2"> Baa</td><td colspan="2"> Below Investment Grade</td><td colspan="2"> Total</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="12"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2003 & Prior</td><td>$96</td><td>$77</td><td>$92</td><td>$72</td><td>$26</td><td>$16</td><td>$83</td><td>$53</td><td>$8</td><td>$4</td><td>$305</td><td>$222</td></tr><tr><td>2004</td><td>129</td><td>70</td><td>372</td><td>204</td><td>5</td><td>3</td><td>37</td><td>28</td><td>2</td><td>1</td><td>545</td><td>306</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td>357</td><td>227</td><td>186</td><td>114</td><td>20</td><td>11</td><td>79</td><td>46</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>646</td><td>402</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td>146</td><td>106</td><td>69</td><td>30</td><td>15</td><td>10</td><td>26</td><td>7</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>258</td><td>155</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>78</td><td>33</td><td>35</td><td>21</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>3</td><td>1</td><td>118</td><td>57</td></tr><tr><td>2008</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$728</td><td>$480</td><td>$797</td><td>$453</td><td>$101</td><td>$61</td><td>$227</td><td>$136</td><td>$19</td><td>$12</td><td>$1,872</td><td>$1,142</td></tr></table> December 31, 2007 <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="12"> December 31, 2007</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> Aaa</td><td colspan="2"> Aa</td><td colspan="2"> A</td><td colspan="2"> Baa</td><td colspan="2"> Below Investment Grade</td><td colspan="2"> Total</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td></td><td> Cost or </td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td><td> Amortized </td><td> Fair </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td><td> Cost</td><td> Value</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="12"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2003 & Prior</td><td>$217</td><td>$206</td><td>$130</td><td>$123</td><td>$15</td><td>$14</td><td>$13</td><td>$12</td><td>$4</td><td>$2</td><td>$379</td><td>$357</td></tr><tr><td>2004</td><td>186</td><td>169</td><td>412</td><td>383</td><td>11</td><td>9</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>610</td><td>561</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td>509</td><td>462</td><td>218</td><td>197</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>727</td><td>659</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td>244</td><td>223</td><td>64</td><td>43</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>308</td><td>266</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>132</td><td>123</td><td>17</td><td>9</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>149</td><td>132</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,288</td><td>$1,183</td><td>$841</td><td>$755</td><td>$26</td><td>$23</td><td>$13</td><td>$12</td><td>$5</td><td>$2</td><td>$2,173</td><td>$1,975</td></tr></table> At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company had asset-backed securities supported by sub-prime mortgage loans with estimated fair values of $1.1 billion and $2.0 billion, respectively, and unrealized losses of $730 million and $198 million, respectively, as outlined in the tables above. At December 31, 2008, approximately 82% of the portfolio is rated Aa or better of which 82% was in vintage year 2005 and prior. At December 31, 2007, approximately 98% of the portfolio was rated Aa or better of which 79% was in vintage year 2005 and prior. These older vintages benefit from better underwriting, improved enhancement levels and higher residential property price appreciation. At December 31, 2008, 37% of the asset-backed securities backed by sub-prime mortgage loans have been guaranteed by financial guarantee insurers, of which 19% and 37% were guaranteed by financial guarantee insurers who were Aa and Baa rated, respectively. At December 31, 2008, all of the $1.1 billion of asset-backed securities supported by sub-prime mortgage loans were classified as Level 3 securities. have access to liquidity by issuing bonds to public or private investors based on our assessment of the current condition of the credit markets. At December 31, 2009, we had a working capital surplus of approximately $1.0 billion, which reflects our decision to maintain additional cash reserves to enhance liquidity in response to difficult economic conditions. At December 31, 2008, we had a working capital deficit of approximately $100 million. Historically, we have had a working capital deficit, which is common in our industry and does not indicate a lack of liquidity. We maintain adequate resources and, when necessary, have access to capital to meet any daily and short-term cash requirements, and we have sufficient financial capacity to satisfy our current liabilities. <table><tr><td><i>Millions of Dollars</i></td><td><i>2009</i></td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Cash provided by operating activities</td><td>$3,234</td><td>$4,070</td><td>$3,277</td></tr><tr><td>Cash used in investing activities</td><td>-2,175</td><td>-2,764</td><td>-2,426</td></tr><tr><td>Cash used in financing activities</td><td>-458</td><td>-935</td><td>-800</td></tr><tr><td>Net change in cash and cash equivalents</td><td>$601</td><td>$371</td><td>$51</td></tr></table> Operating Activities Lower net income in 2009, a reduction of $184 million in the outstanding balance of our accounts receivable securitization program, higher pension contributions of $72 million, and changes to working capital combined to decrease cash provided by operating activities compared to 2008. Higher net income and changes in working capital combined to increase cash provided by operating activities in 2008 compared to 2007. In addition, accelerated tax deductions enacted in 2008 on certain new operating assets resulted in lower income tax payments in 2008 versus 2007. Voluntary pension contributions in 2008 totaling $200 million and other pension contributions of $8 million partially offset the year-over-year increase versus 2007. Investing Activities Lower capital investments and higher proceeds from asset sales drove the decrease in cash used in investing activities in 2009 versus 2008. Increased capital investments and lower proceeds from asset sales drove the increase in cash used in investing activities in 2008 compared to 2007.

containerboards net sales represented what percentage of industrial packaging sales in 2005?

The calculation of earnings per common share and diluted earnings per common share for 2004, 2003 and 2002 is presented below. See Note 1 of the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion on the calculation of earnings per common share. <table><tr><td> (Dollars in millions, except per share information; shares in thousands)</td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td><td>2002</td></tr><tr><td> Earnings per common share</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>$14,143</td><td>$10,810</td><td>$9,249</td></tr><tr><td>Preferred stock dividends</td><td>-16</td><td>-4</td><td>-5</td></tr><tr><td>Net income available to common shareholders</td><td>$14,127</td><td>$10,806</td><td>$9,244</td></tr><tr><td>Average common shares issued and outstanding</td><td>3,758,507</td><td>2,973,407</td><td>3,040,085</td></tr><tr><td> Earnings per common share</td><td>$3.76</td><td>$3.63</td><td>$3.04</td></tr><tr><td> Diluted earnings per common share</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net income available to common shareholders</td><td>$14,127</td><td>$10,806</td><td>$9,244</td></tr><tr><td>Convertible preferred stock dividends</td><td>2</td><td>4</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Net income available to common shareholders and assumed conversions</td><td>$14,129</td><td>$10,810</td><td>$9,249</td></tr><tr><td>Average common shares issued and outstanding</td><td>3,758,507</td><td>2,973,407</td><td>3,040,085</td></tr><tr><td>Dilutive potential common shares^{-1, 2}</td><td>65,436</td><td>56,949</td><td>90,850</td></tr><tr><td>Total diluted average common shares issued and outstanding</td><td>3,823,943</td><td>3,030,356</td><td>3,130,935</td></tr><tr><td> Diluted earnings per common share</td><td>$3.69</td><td>$3.57</td><td>$2.95</td></tr></table> (1) For 2004, 2003 and 2002, average options to purchase 10 million, 19 million and 45 million shares, respectively, were outstanding but not included in the computation of earnings per common share because they were antidilutive. (2) Includes incremental shares from assumed conversions of convertible preferred stock, restricted stock units, restricted stock shares and stock options. Note 14 Regulatory Requirements and Restrictions The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FRB) requires the Corporation’s banking subsidiaries to maintain reserve balances based on a percentage of certain deposits. Average daily reserve balances required by the FRB were $6.9 billion and $4.1 billion for 2004 and 2003, respectively. Currency and coin residing in branches and cash vaults (vault cash) are used to partially satisfy the reserve requirement. The average daily reserve balances, in excess of vault cash, held with the Federal Reserve Bank amounted to $70 million and $317 million for 2004 and 2003, respectively. The primary source of funds for cash distributions by the Corporation to its shareholders is dividends received from its banking subsidiaries. Bank of America, N. A. and Fleet National Bank declared and paid dividends of $5.9 billion and $1.3 billion, respectively, for 2004 to the parent. In 2005, Bank of America, N. A. and Fleet National Bank can declare and pay dividends to the parent of $4.7 billion and $790 million plus an additional amount equal to their net profits for 2005, as defined by statute, up to the date of any such dividend declaration. The other subsidiary national banks can initiate aggregate dividend payments in 2005 of $2.6 billion plus an additional amount equal to their net profits for 2005, as defined by statute, up to the date of any such dividend declaration. The amount of dividends that each subsidiary bank may declare in a calendar year without approval by the OCC is the subsidiary bank’s net profits for that year combined with its net retained profits, as defined, for the preceding two years. The FRB, the OCC and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (collectively, the Agencies) have issued regulatory capital guidelines for U. S. banking organizations. Failure to meet the capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory and discretionary actions by regulators that could have a material effect on the Corporation’s financial statements. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, the Corporation and Bank of America, N. A. were classified as well-capitalized under this regulatory framework. At December 31, 2004, Fleet National Bank was classified as well-capitalized under this regulatory framework. There have been no conditions or events since December 31, 2004 that management believes have changed the Corporation’s, Bank of America, N. A. ’s or Fleet National Bank’s capital classifications. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> December 31</td><td colspan="2"> Average Balance</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td> 2007</td><td>2006</td><td> 2007</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans and leases</td><td>$359,946</td><td>$307,661</td><td>$327,810</td><td>$288,131</td></tr><tr><td>Total earning assets^-1</td><td>383,384</td><td>343,338</td><td>353,591</td><td>344,013</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets^-1</td><td>442,987</td><td>399,373</td><td>408,034</td><td>396,559</td></tr><tr><td>Total deposits</td><td>344,850</td><td>329,195</td><td>328,918</td><td>332,242</td></tr></table> The strategy for GCSBB is to attract, retain and deepen customer relationships. We achieve this strategy through our ability to offer a wide range of products and services through a franchise that stretches coast to coast through 32 states and the District of Columbia. We also provide credit card products to customers in Canada, Ireland, Spain and the United Kingdom. In the U. S. , we serve approximately 59 million consumer and small business relationships utilizing our network of 6,149 banking centers, 18,753 domestic branded ATMs, and telephone and Internet channels. Within GCSBB, there are three primary businesses: Deposits, Card Services, and Consumer Real Estate. In addition, ALM/Other includes the results of ALM activities and other consumer-related businesses (e. g. , insurance). GCSBB, specifically Card Services, is presented on a managed basis. For a reconciliation of managed GCSBB to held GCSBB, see Note 22 – Business Segment Information to the Consolidated Financial Statements. During 2007, Visa Inc. filed a registration statement with the SEC with respect to a proposed IPO. Subject to market conditions and other factors, Visa Inc. expects the IPO to occur in the first half of 2008. We expect to record a gain associated with the IPO. In addition, we expect that a portion of the proceeds from the IPO will be used by Visa Inc. to fund liabilities arising from litigation which would allow us to record an offset to the litigation liabilities that we recorded in the fourth quarter of 2007 as discussed below. Net income decreased $1.9 billion, or 17 percent, to $9.4 billion compared to 2006 as increases in noninterest income and net interest income were more than offset by increases in provision for credit losses and noninterest expense. Net interest income increased $612 million, or two percent, to $28.8 billion due to the impacts of organic growth and the LaSalle acquisition on average loans and leases, and deposits compared to 2006. Noninterest income increased $2.1 billion, or 13 percent, to $18.9 billion compared to the same period in 2006, mainly due to increases in card income, service charges and mortgage banking income. Provision for credit losses increased $4.4 billion, or 51 percent, to $12.9 billion compared to 2006. This increase primarily resulted from a $3.2 billion increase in Card Services and a $978 million increase in Consumer Real Estate. For further discussion of the increase in provision for credit losses related to Card Services and Consumer Real Estate, see their respective discussions. Noninterest expense increased $1.7 billion, or nine percent, to $20.1 billion largely due to increases in personnel-related expenses, Visarelated litigation costs, equally allocated to Card Services and Treasury Services on a management accounting basis, and technology related costs. For additional information on Visa-related litigation, see Note 13 – Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Deposits Deposits provides a comprehensive range of products to consumers and small businesses. Our products include traditional savings accounts, money market savings accounts, CDs and IRAs, and noninterest and interest-bearing checking accounts. Debit card results are also included in Deposits. Deposit products provide a relatively stable source of funding and liquidity. We earn net interest spread revenues from investing this liquidity in earning assets through client-facing lending activity and our ALM activities. The revenue is allocated to the deposit products using our funds transfer pricing process which takes into account the interest rates and maturity characteristics of the deposits. Deposits also generate fees such as account service fees, non-sufficient fund fees, overdraft charges and ATM fees, while debit cards generate merchant interchange fees based on purchase volume. Excluding accounts obtained through acquisitions, we added approximately 2.3 million net new retail checking accounts in 2007. These additions resulted from continued improvement in sales and service results in the Banking Center Channel and Online, and the success of such products as Keep the ChangeTM, Risk Free CDs, Balance Rewards and Affinity. We continue to migrate qualifying affluent customers and their related deposit balances from GCSBB to GWIM. In 2007, a total of $11.4 billion of deposits were migrated from GCSBB to GWIM compared to $10.7 billion in 2006. After migration, the associated net interest income, service charges and noninterest expense are recorded in GWIM. Net income increased $364 million, or seven percent, to $5.2 billion compared to 2006 as an increase in noninterest income was partially offset by an increase in noninterest expense. Net interest income remained relatively flat at $9.4 billion compared to 2006 as the addition of LaSalle and higher deposit spreads resulting from disciplined pricing were offset by the impact of lower balances. Average deposits decreased $3.2 billion, or one percent, largely due to the migration of customer relationships and related balances to GWIM, partially offset by the acquisition of LaSalle. The increase in noninterest income was driven by higher service charges of $665 million, or 12 percent, primarily as a result of new demand deposit account growth and the addition of LaSalle. Additionally, debit card revenue growth of $248 million, or 13 percent, was due to a higher number of checking accounts, increased usage, the addition of LaSalle and market penetration (i. e. , increase in the number of existing account holders with debit cards). Noninterest expense increased $323 million, or four percent, to $9.1 billion compared to 2006, primarily due to the addition of LaSalle, and to higher account and transaction volumes. Card Services Card Services, which excludes the results of debit cards (included in Deposits), provides a broad offering of products, including U. S. Consumer and Business Card, Unsecured Lending, and International Card. We offer a variety of co-branded and affinity credit card products and have become the leading issuer of credit cards through endorsed marketing in the U. S. and Europe. During 2007, Merchant Services was transferred to Treasury Services within GCIB. Previously their results were reported in Card Services. Prior period amounts have been reclassified. The shares of the series of preferred stock previously discussed are not subject to the operation of a sinking fund and have no participation rights. With the exception of the Series L Preferred Stock, the shares of the series of preferred stock in the previous table are not convertible. The holders of these series have no general voting rights. If any dividend payable on these series is in arrears for three or more semi-annual or six or more quarterly dividend periods, as applicable (whether consecutive or not), the holders of these series and any other class or series of preferred stock ranking equally as to payment of dividends and upon which equivalent voting rights have been conferred and are exercisable (voting as a single class) will be entitled to vote for the election of two additional directors. These voting rights terminate when the Corporation has paid in full dividends on these series for at least two semi-annual or four quarterly dividend periods, as applicable, following the dividend arrearage (or, in the case of the Series N Preferred Stock, upon payment of all accrued and unpaid dividends). In October 2008, in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, established as part of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the Corporation issued to the U. S. Treasury 600 thousand shares of Series N Preferred Stock as presented in the previous table. The Series N Preferred Stock has a call feature after three years. In connection with this investment, the Corporation also issued to the U. S. Treasury 10-year warrants to purchase approximately 73.1 million shares of Bank of America Corporation common stock at an exercise price of $30.79 per share. Upon the request of the U. S. Treasury, at any time, the Corporation has agreed to enter into a deposit arrangement pursuant to which the Series N Preferred Stock may be deposited and depositary shares, representing 1/25th of a share of Series N Preferred Stock, may be issued. The Corporation has agreed to register the Series N Preferred Stock, the warrants, the shares of common stock underlying the warrants and the depositary shares, if any, for resale under the Securities Act of 1933. As required under the TARP Capital Purchase Program in connection with the sale of the Series N Preferred Stock to the U. S. Treasury, dividend payments on, and repurchases of, the Corporation’s outstanding preferred and common stock are subject to certain restrictions. For as long as any Series N Preferred Stock is outstanding, no dividends may be declared or paid on the Corporation’s outstanding preferred and common stock until all accrued and unpaid dividends on Series N Preferred Stock are fully paid. In addition, the U. S. Treasury’s consent is required for any increase in dividends declared on shares of common stock before the third anniversary of the issuance of the Series N Preferred Stock unless the Series N Preferred Stock is redeemed by the Corporation or transferred in whole by the U. S. Treasury. Further, the U. S. Treasury’s consent is required for any repurchase of any equity securities or trust preferred securities except for repurchases of Series N Preferred Stock or repurchases of common shares in connection with benefit plans consistent with past practice before the third anniversary of the issuance of the Series N Preferred Stock unless redeemed by the Corporation or transferred in whole by the U. S. Treasury. On July 14, 2006, the Corporation redeemed its 6.75% Perpetual Preferred Stock with a stated value of $250 per share. The 382.5 thousand shares, or $96 million, outstanding of preferred stock were redeemed at the stated value of $250 per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends. On July 3, 2006, the Corporation redeemed its Fixed/Adjustable Rate Cumulative Preferred Stock with a stated value of $250 per share. The 700 thousand shares, or $175 million, outstanding of preferred stock were redeemed at the stated value of $250 per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends. All preferred stock outstanding has preference over the Corporation’s common stock with respect to the payment of dividends and distribution of the Corporation’s assets in the event of a liquidation or dissolution. Except in certain circumstances, the holders of preferred stock have no voting rights. During 2008, 2007 and 2006 the aggregate dividends declared on preferred stock were $1.3 billion, $182 million and $22 million respectively. In addition, in January 2009, the Corporation declared aggregate dividends on preferred stock of $909 million, including $145 million related to preferred stock exchanged in connection with the Merrill Lynch acquisition. Accumulated OCI The following table presents the changes in accumulated OCI for 2008, 2007 and 2006, net-of-tax. <table><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>Securities -1</td><td>Derivatives -2</td><td>Employee Benefit Plans -3</td><td>Foreign Currency -4</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2007</td><td>$6,536</td><td>$-4,402</td><td>$-1,301</td><td>$296</td><td>$1,129</td></tr><tr><td>Net change in fair value recorded in accumulated OCI^-5</td><td>-10,354</td><td>104</td><td>-3,387</td><td>-1,000</td><td>-14,637</td></tr><tr><td>Net realized losses reclassified into earnings^-6</td><td>1,797</td><td>840</td><td>46</td><td>–</td><td>2,683</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2008</td><td>$-2,021</td><td>$-3,458</td><td>$-4,642</td><td>$-704</td><td>$-10,825</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2006</td><td>$-2,733</td><td>$-3,697</td><td>$-1,428</td><td>$147</td><td>$-7,711</td></tr><tr><td>Net change in fair value recorded in accumulated OCI^-5</td><td>9,416</td><td>-1,252</td><td>4</td><td>142</td><td>8,310</td></tr><tr><td>Net realized (gains) losses reclassified into earnings⁽⁶⁾</td><td>-147</td><td>547</td><td>123</td><td>7</td><td>530</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2007</td><td>$6,536</td><td>$-4,402</td><td>$-1,301</td><td>$296</td><td>$1,129</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2005</td><td>$-2,978</td><td>$-4,338</td><td>$-118</td><td>$-122</td><td>$-7,556</td></tr><tr><td>Net change in fair value recorded in accumulated OCI</td><td>465</td><td>534</td><td>-1,310</td><td>219</td><td>-92</td></tr><tr><td>Net realized (gains) losses reclassified into earnings⁽⁶⁾</td><td>-220</td><td>107</td><td>–</td><td>50</td><td>-63</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2006</td><td>$-2,733</td><td>$-3,697</td><td>$-1,428</td><td>$147</td><td>$-7,711</td></tr></table> (1) In 2008, 2007 and 2006, the Corporation reclassified net realized losses into earnings on the sales and other-than-temporary impairments of AFS debt securities of $1.4 billion, $137 million and $279 million, net-of-tax, respectively, and net realized (gains) losses on the sales and other-than-temporary impairments of AFS marketable equity securities of $377 million, $(284) million, and $(499) million, net-of-tax, respectively. (2) The amounts included in accumulated OCI for terminated interest rate derivative contracts were losses of $3.4 billion, $3.8 billion and $3.2 billion, net-of-tax, at December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. (3) For more information, see Note 16 – Employee Benefit Plans to the Consolidated Financial Statements. (4) For 2008, the net change in fair value recorded in accumulated OCI represented $3.8 billion in losses associated with the Corporation’s foreign currency translation adjustments on its net investment in consolidated foreign operations partially offset by gains of $2.8 billion on the related foreign currency exchange hedging results. (5) Securities include the fair value adjustment of $4.8 billion and $8.4 billion, net-of-tax, related to the Corporation’s investment in CCB at December 31, 2008 and 2007. (6) Included in this line item are amounts related to derivatives used in cash flow hedge relationships. These amounts are reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged forecasted transactions affect earnings. This line item also includes (gains) losses on AFS debt and marketable equity securities and impairment charges. These amounts are reclassified into earnings upon sale of the related security or when the other-than-temporary impairment charge is recognized. Entering 2006, earnings in the first quarter are expected to improve compared with the 2005 fourth quarter due principally to higher average price realizations, reflecting announced price increases. Product demand for the first quarter should be seasonally slow, but is expected to strengthen as the year progresses, supported by continued economic growth in North America, Asia and Eastern Europe. Average prices should also improve in 2006 as price increases announced in late 2005 and early 2006 for uncoated freesheet paper and pulp continue to be realized. Operating rates are expected to improve as a result of industry-wide capacity reductions in 2005. Although energy and raw material costs remain high, there has been some decline in both natural gas and delivered wood costs, with further moderation expected later in 2006. We will continue to focus on further improvements in our global manufacturing operations, implementation of supply chain enhancements and reductions in overhead costs during 2006. Industrial Packaging Demand for Industrial Packaging products is closely correlated with non-durable industrial goods production in the United States, as well as with demand for processed foods, poultry, meat and agricultural products. In addition to prices and volumes, major factors affecting the profitability of Industrial Packaging are raw material and energy costs, manufacturing efficiency and product mix. Industrial Packaging’s net sales for 2005 increased 2% compared with 2004, and were 18% higher than in 2003, reflecting the inclusion of International Paper Distribution Limited (formerly International Paper Pacific Millennium Limited) beginning in August 2005. Operating profits in 2005 were 39% lower than in 2004 and 13% lower than in 2003. Sales volume increases ($24 million), improved price realizations ($66 million), and strong mill operating performance ($27 million) were not enough to offset the effects of increased raw material costs ($103 million), higher market related downtime costs ($50 million), higher converting operating costs ($22 million), and unfavorable mix and other costs ($67 million). Additionally, the May 2005 sale of our Industrial Papers business resulted in a $25 million lower earnings contribution from this business in 2005. The segment took 370,000 tons of downtime in 2005, including 230,000 tons of lack-of-order downtime to balance internal supply with customer demand, compared to a total of 170,000 tons in 2004, which included 5,000 tons of lack-of-order downtime. <table><tr><td><i></i> <i>In millions</i><i></i></td><td>2005</td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td></tr><tr><td>Sales</td><td>$4,935</td><td>$4,830</td><td>$4,170</td></tr><tr><td>Operating Profit</td><td>$230</td><td>$380</td><td>$264</td></tr></table> Containerboard’s net sales totaled $895 million in 2005, $951 million in 2004 and $815 million in 2003. Soft market conditions and declining customer demand at the end of the first quarter led to lower average sales prices during the second and third quarters. Beginning in the fourth quarter, prices recovered as a result of increased customer demand and a rationalization of supply. Full year sales volumes trailed 2004 levels early in the year, reflecting the weak market conditions in the first half of 2005. However, volumes rebounded in the second half of the year, and finished the year ahead of 2004 levels. Operating profits decreased 38% from 2004, but were flat with 2003. The favorable impacts of increased sales volumes, higher average sales prices and improved mill operating performance were not enough to offset the impact of higher wood, energy and other raw material costs and increased lack-of-order downtime. Implementation of the new supply chain operating model in our containerboard mills during 2005 resulted in increased operating efficiency and cost savings. Specialty Papers in 2005 included the Kraft Paper business for the full year and the Industrial Papers business for five months prior to its sale in May 2005. Net sales totaled $468 million in 2005, $723 million in 2004 and $690 million in 2003. Operating profits in 2005 were down 23% compared with 2004 and 54% compared with 2003, reflecting the lower contribution from Industrial Papers. U. S. Converting Operations net sales for 2005 were $2.6 billion compared with $2.3 billion in 2004 and $1.9 billion in 2003. Sales volumes were up 10% in 2005 compared with 2004, mainly due to the acquisition of Box USA in July 2004. Average sales prices in 2005 began the year above 2004 levels, but softened in the second half of the year. Operating profits in 2005 decreased 46% and 4% from 2004 and 2003 levels, respectively, primarily due to increased linerboard, freight and energy costs. European Container sales for 2005 were $883 million compared with $865 million in 2004 and $801 million in 2003. Operating profits declined 19% and 13% compared with 2004 and 2003, respectively. The increase in sales in 2005 reflected a slight increase in demand over 2004, but this was not sufficient to offset the negative earnings effect of increased operating costs, unfavorable foreign exchange rates and a reduction in average sales prices. The Moroccan box plant acquisition, which was completed in October 2005, favorably impacted fourth-quarter results. Industrial Packaging’s sales in 2005 included $104 million from International Paper Distribution Limited, our Asian box and containerboard business, subsequent to the acquisition of an additional 50% interest in August 2005.

What's the difference of Securities America, Inc.-3(4) between 2010 and 2009 forActual Capital? (in million)

nonperformance credit spread moves to a zero spread over the LIBOR swap curve, the reduction to net income would be approximately $71 million, net of DAC and DSIC amortization and income taxes, based on December 31, 2010 credit spreads. Liquidity and Capital Resources Overview We maintained substantial liquidity during the year ended December 31, 2010. At December 31, 2010, we had $2.9 billion in cash and cash equivalents compared to $3.1 billion at December 31, 2009. We have additional liquidity available through an unsecured revolving credit facility for up to $500 million that we entered into on September 30, 2010 and which expires in September 2011. Under the terms of the underlying credit agreement, we can increase this facility to $750 million upon satisfaction of certain approval requirements. Available borrowings under this facility are reduced by any outstanding letters of credit. We have had no borrowings under this credit facility and had $1 million of outstanding letters of credit at December 31, 2010. In March 2010, we issued $750 million of 5.30% senior notes due 2020. A portion of the proceeds was used to retire $340 million of debt that matured in November 2010. On April 30, 2010, we closed on the Columbia Management Acquisition and paid $866 million in the second quarter with cash on hand and assumed liabilities of $30 million. Our subsidiaries, Ameriprise Bank, FSB and RiverSource Life, are members of the Federal Home Loan Bank (‘‘FHLB’’) of Des Moines, which provides these subsidiaries with access to collateralized borrowings. As of December 31, 2010, we had no borrowings from the FHLB. In 2010, we entered into repurchase agreements to reduce reinvestment risk from higher levels of expected annuity net cash flows. Repurchase agreements allow us to receive cash to reinvest in longer-duration assets, while paying back the short-term debt with cash flows generated by the fixed income portfolio. The balance of repurchase agreements at December 31, 2010 was $397 million, which is collateralized with agency residential mortgage backed securities and corporate debt securities from our investment portfolio. We believe cash flows from operating activities, available cash balances and our availability of revolver borrowings will be sufficient to fund our operating liquidity needs. Dividends from Subsidiaries Ameriprise Financial is primarily a parent holding company for the operations carried out by our wholly owned subsidiaries. Because of our holding company structure, our ability to meet our cash requirements, including the payment of dividends on our common stock, substantially depends upon the receipt of dividends or return of capital from our subsidiaries, particularly our life insurance subsidiary, RiverSource Life, our face-amount certificate subsidiary, Ameriprise Certificate Company (‘‘ACC’’), AMPF Holding Corporation, which is the parent company of our retail introducing broker-dealer subsidiary, Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc. (‘‘AFSI’’) and our clearing broker-dealer subsidiary, American Enterprise Investment Services, Inc. (‘‘AEIS’’), our Auto and Home insurance subsidiary, IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company (‘‘IDS Property Casualty’’), doing business as Ameriprise Auto & Home Insurance, our transfer agent subsidiary, Columbia Management Investment Services Corp. , our investment advisory company, Columbia Management Investment Advisers, LLC, and Threadneedle. The payment of dividends by many of our subsidiaries is restricted and certain of our subsidiaries are subject to regulatory capital requirements. Actual capital and regulatory capital requirements as of December 31 for our wholly owned subsidiaries subject to regulatory capital requirements were as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Actual Capital</td><td colspan="2">Regulatory Capital Requirements</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">(in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>RiverSource Life-1(2)</td><td>$3,813</td><td>$3,450</td><td>$652</td><td>$803</td></tr><tr><td>RiverSource Life of NY-1(2)</td><td>291</td><td>286</td><td>38</td><td>44</td></tr><tr><td>IDS Property Casualty-1(3)</td><td>411</td><td>405</td><td>141</td><td>133</td></tr><tr><td>Ameriprise Insurance Company-1(3)</td><td>44</td><td>46</td><td>2</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>ACC-4(5)</td><td>184</td><td>293</td><td>173</td><td>231</td></tr><tr><td>Threadneedle-6</td><td>182</td><td>201</td><td>104</td><td>155</td></tr><tr><td>Ameriprise Bank, FSB-7</td><td>302</td><td>255</td><td>294</td><td>231</td></tr><tr><td>AFSI-3(4)</td><td>119</td><td>79</td><td>1</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Ameriprise Captive Insurance Company-3</td><td>38</td><td>28</td><td>12</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>Ameriprise Trust Company-3</td><td>41</td><td>36</td><td>40</td><td>32</td></tr><tr><td>AEIS-3(4)</td><td>115</td><td>133</td><td>35</td><td>29</td></tr><tr><td>Securities America, Inc.-3(4)</td><td>2</td><td>15</td><td>#</td><td>#</td></tr><tr><td>RiverSource Distributors, Inc.-3(4)</td><td>24</td><td>41</td><td>#</td><td>#</td></tr><tr><td>Columbia Management Investment Distributors, Inc.-3(4)</td><td>27</td><td>13</td><td>#</td><td>#</td></tr></table> # Amounts are less than $1 million. (1) Actual capital is determined on a statutory basis. (2) Regulatory capital requirement is based on the statutory risk-based filing The Company believes that its unrecognized tax benefits could decrease by $10,273 within the next twelve months. The Company has effectively settled all Federal income tax matters related to years prior to 2010. Various other state and foreign income tax returns are open to examination for various years. Belgian Tax Matter The Company believes that its unrecognized tax benefits could decrease by $10,273 within the next twelve months. The Company has effectively settled all Federal income tax matters related to years prior to 2010. Various other state and foreign income tax returns are open to examination for various years. Belgian Tax Matter In January 2012, the Company received a €23,789 assessment from the Belgian tax authority related to its year ended December 31, 2008, asserting that the Company had understated its Belgian taxable income for that year. The Company filed a formal protest in the first quarter of 2012 refuting the Belgian tax authority¡¯s position. The Belgian tax authority set aside the assessment in the third quarter of 2012 and refunded all related deposits, including interest income of €1,583 earned on such deposits. However, on October 23, 2012, the Belgian tax authority notified the Company of its intent to increase the Company¡¯s taxable income for the year ended December 31, 2008 under a revised theory. On December 28, 2012, the Belgian tax authority issued assessments for the years ended December 31, 2005 and December 31, 2009, in the amounts of €46,135 and €35,567, respectively, including penalties, but excluding interest. The Company filed a formal protest during the first quarter of 2013 relating to the new assessments. In September 2013, the Belgian tax authority denied the Company¡¯s protests, and the Company has brought these two years before the Court of First Appeal in Bruges. In December 2013, the Belgian tax authority issued additional assessments related to the years ended December 31, 2006, 2007, and 2010, in the amounts of €38,817, €39,635, and €43,117, respectively, including penalties, but excluding interest. The Company filed formal protests during the first quarter of 2014, refuting the Belgian tax authority¡¯s position for each of the years assessed. In the quarter ended June 28, 2014, the Company received a formal assessment for the year ended December 31, 2008, totaling €30,131, against which the Company also submitted its formal protest. All 4 additional years have been brought before the Court of First Appeal in November 2014. In January of 2015, the Company met with the Court of First Appeal in Bruges, Belgium and agreed with the Belgium tax authorities to consolidate and argue the issues regarding the years 2005 and 2009, and apply the ruling to all of the open years (to the extent there are no additional facts/procedural arguments in the other years). On January 27, 2016, the Court of First Appeal in Bruges, Belgium ruled in favor of the Company with respect to the calendar years ending December 31, 2005 and December 31, 2009. The Company anticipates that the Belgian tax authority will appeal this ruling. The Company disagrees with the views of the Belgian tax authority on this matter and will persist in its vigorous defense if there is an appeal. Although there can be no assurances, the Company believes the ultimate outcome of these actions will not have a material adverse effect on its financial condition but could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, liquidity or cash flows in a given quarter or year. NOTE 14 COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES The Company is obligated under various operating leases for office and manufacturing space, machinery, and equipment. Future minimum lease payments under non-cancelable capital and operating leases (with initial or remaining lease terms in excess of one year) as of December 31: <table><tr><td></td><td>Capital</td><td>Operating</td><td>Total FuturePayments</td></tr><tr><td>2016</td><td>$1,385</td><td>95,407</td><td>96,792</td></tr><tr><td>2017</td><td>1,257</td><td>76,748</td><td>78,005</td></tr><tr><td>2018</td><td>1,139</td><td>54,306</td><td>55,445</td></tr><tr><td>2019</td><td>972</td><td>34,907</td><td>35,879</td></tr><tr><td>2020</td><td>555</td><td>20,263</td><td>20,818</td></tr><tr><td>Thereafter</td><td>4,537</td><td>15,454</td><td>19,991</td></tr><tr><td>Total payments</td><td>9,845</td><td>297,085</td><td>306,930</td></tr><tr><td>Less amount representing interest</td><td>1,913</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Present value of capitalized lease payments</td><td>$7,932</td><td></td><td></td></tr></table> Rental expense under operating leases was $110,771, $114,529 and $116,541 in 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The Company had approximately $1,381 and $47,713 in standby letters of credit for various insurance contracts and commitments to foreign vendors as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively that expire within two years. The Company is involved in litigation from time to time in the regular course of its business. Except as noted below and in Note 13¡ªIncome Taxes Belgian Tax Matter, there are no material legal proceedings pending or known by the Company to be contemplated to which the Company is a party or to which any of its property is subject. Each of these facilities has a renewal provision for two one-year extensions, subject to lender approval. The following table shows our capitalization structure as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, as well as an adjusted capitalization structure that we believe is consistent with the manner in which the rating agencies currently view the Junior Notes: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2011</td><td colspan="2">2010</td></tr><tr><td>Capitalization Structure</td><td>Actual</td><td>Adjusted</td><td>Actual</td><td>Adjusted</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">(Millions of Dollars)</td></tr><tr><td>Common Equity</td><td>$3,963.3</td><td>$4,213.3</td><td>$3,802.1</td><td>$4,052.1</td></tr><tr><td>Preferred Stock of Subsidiary</td><td>30.4</td><td>30.4</td><td>30.4</td><td>30.4</td></tr><tr><td>Long-Term Debt (including current maturities)</td><td>4,646.9</td><td>4,396.9</td><td>4,405.4</td><td>4,155.4</td></tr><tr><td>Short-Term Debt</td><td>669.9</td><td>669.9</td><td>657.9</td><td>657.9</td></tr><tr><td>Total Capitalization</td><td>$9,310.5</td><td>$9,310.5</td><td>$8,895.8</td><td>$8,895.8</td></tr><tr><td>Total Debt</td><td>$5,316.8</td><td>$5,066.8</td><td>$5,063.3</td><td>$4,813.3</td></tr><tr><td>Ratio of Debt to Total Capitalization</td><td>57.1%</td><td>54.4%</td><td>56.9%</td><td>54.1%</td></tr></table> For a summary of the interest rate, maturity and amount outstanding of each series of our long-term debt on a consolidated basis, see the Consolidated Statements of Capitalization. Included in Long-Term Debt on our Consolidated Balance Sheet as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 is $500 million aggregate principal amount of the Junior Notes. The adjusted presentation attributes $250 million of the Junior Notes to Common Equity and $250 million to Long-Term Debt. We believe this presentation is consistent with the 50% or greater equity credit the majority of rating agencies currently attribute to the Junior Notes. The adjusted presentation of our consolidated capitalization structure is presented as a complement to our capitalization structure presented in accordance with GAAP. Management evaluates and manages Wisconsin Energy's capitalization structure, including its total debt to total capitalization ratio, using the GAAP calculation as adjusted by the rating agency treatment of the Junior Notes. Therefore, we believe the non-GAAP adjusted presentation reflecting this treatment is useful and relevant to investors in understanding how management and the rating agencies evaluate our capitalization structure. As described in Note I -- Common Equity, in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, certain restrictions exist on the ability of our subsidiaries to transfer funds to us. We do not expect these restrictions to have any material effect on our operations or ability to meet our cash obligations. Wisconsin Electric is the obligor under two series of tax exempt pollution control refunding bonds in outstanding principal amounts of $147 million. In August 2009, Wisconsin Electric terminated letters of credit that provided credit and liquidity support for the bonds, which resulted in a mandatory tender of the bonds. Wisconsin Electric issued commercial paper to fund the purchase of the bonds. As of December 31, 2011, the repurchased bonds were still outstanding, but were reported as a reduction in our consolidated long-term debt because they are held by Wisconsin Electric. Depending on market conditions and other factors, Wisconsin Electric may change the method used to determine the interest rate on the bonds and have them remarketed to third parties. Bonus Depreciation Provisions In December 2010, the President of the United States signed tax legislation extending the bonus depreciation rules to certain projects placed in service in 2010, 2011 and 2012. As a result of this extension, we recognized increased federal tax depreciation in 2010 and 2011 relating to assets placed in service during those years, including the Glacier Hills Wind Park, OC 1 and OC 2. In addition, we also anticipate an increase in tax depreciation in 2012 for assets placed in service during 2012, including the Oak Creek AQCS project. As a result of the increased tax depreciation in 2011 and 2012, we will not make federal income tax payments for 2011 and do not anticipate making federal income tax payments for 2012.

What is the ratio of Total cards-in-force in Table 1 to the Other in Table 0 in 2016?

Overall, billed business increased in 2017 compared to 2016. U. S. billed business increased 1 percent and non-U. S. billed business increased 12 percent. See Tables 5 and 6 for more details on billed business performance. The average discount rate was 2.43 percent, 2.45 percent and 2.46 percent for 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The decrease in the average discount rate in 2017 compared to 2016 primarily reflected rate pressure from merchant negotiations, including those resulting from the recent regulatory changes affecting competitor pricing in certain international markets, the continued growth of the OptBlue program, and changes in industry and geographic mix. We expect the average discount rate will continue to decline over time due to a greater shift of existing merchants into OptBlue, merchant negotiations and competition, volume related pricing discounts, certain pricing initiatives mainly driven by pricing regulation (including regulation of competitors’ interchange rates) and other factors. Net card fees increased in both periods. The increase in 2017 was primarily driven by growth in the Platinum and Delta portfolios and growth in key international markets. The increase in 2016 was primarily driven by growth in the Platinum, Gold and Delta portfolios. Other fees and commissions increased in 2017 compared to 2016, and decreased in 2016 compared to 2015. The increase in 2017 was primarily driven by an increase in delinquency fees due to a change in the late fee assessment date for certain U. S. charge cards and an increase in foreign exchange conversion revenue. The decrease in 2016 was primarily due to lower Costco-related fees, partially offset by an increase in delinquency and loyalty coalition-related fees. Other revenues decreased in 2017 compared to 2016, and were relatively flat in 2016 compared to 2015. The decrease in 2017 was primarily driven by prior-year revenues related to the Loyalty Edge business, which was sold in the fourth quarter of 2016, and a contractual payment from a GNS partner also in the prior year.2016 included the previously-mentioned contractual payment from a GNS partner and higher revenues from our Prepaid Services business compared to 2015, offset by lower revenues related to Costco, Loyalty Edge and the GBT JV transition services agreement. Interest income increased in 2017 compared to 2016 and decreased in 2016 compared to 2015. The increase in 2017 primarily reflected higher average Card Member loans and higher yields. The growth in average Card Member loans was primarily driven by a mix shift over time towards non-cobrand lending products, where Card Members tend to revolve more of their loan balances. The increase in yields was primarily driven by a greater percentage of loans at higher rate buckets, specific pricing actions, and increases in benchmark interest rates. The decrease in 2016 was primarily driven by lower Costco cobrand loans and the associated interest income, partially offset by modestly higher yields and an increase in average Card Member loans across other lending products. Interest expense increased in both periods. The increase in 2017 was primarily driven by higher interest rates and higher average long-term debt. The increase in 2016 was primarily driven by higher average customer deposit balances, partially offset by lower average long-term debt. TABLE 3: PROVISIONS FOR LOSSES SUMMARY <table><tr><td>Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2" rowspan="2"Change 2017 vs. 2016></td><td colspan="2" rowspan="2"Change 2016 vs. 2015></td></tr><tr><td>(Millions, except percentages)</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>Charge card</td><td>$795</td><td>$696</td><td>$737</td><td>$99</td><td>14%</td><td>$-41</td><td>-6%</td></tr><tr><td>Card Member loans</td><td>1,868</td><td>1,235</td><td>1,190</td><td>633</td><td>51</td><td>45</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>96</td><td>95</td><td>61</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>34</td><td>56</td></tr><tr><td>Total provisions for losses^(a)</td><td>$2,759</td><td>$2,026</td><td>$1,988</td><td>$733</td><td>36%</td><td>$38</td><td>2%</td></tr></table> (a) Beginning December 1, 2015 through to the sale completion dates, did not reflect the HFS portfolios. EXPENSES Marketing, promotion, rewards, Card Member services and other expenses increased in 2017 compared to 2016, reflecting higher Card Member rewards and Card Member services and other expenses, partially offset by lower marketing and promotion expenses. Card Member rewards expense increased $218 million, primarily driven by enhancements to Platinum rewards and increased spending volumes, partially offset by Costco-related expenses in the prior year. Card Member services and other expense increased $173 million driven by higher usage of travel-related benefits and enhanced Platinum card benefits. Marketing and promotion expenses decreased $112 million due to lower spending on growth initiatives. Salaries and employee benefits and other operating expense increased in 2017 compared to 2016, primarily reflecting the gains on the sales of the HFS portfolios in the prior year, which were recognized as an expense reduction in other expenses, partially offset by lower technology and other servicing-related costs in the current year and restructuring charges in the prior year. Total expenses decreased in 2016 compared to 2015, primarily driven by lower salaries and employee benefits and other operating expenses, largely reflecting the gains on the sales of the HFS portfolios as previously mentioned. Income tax provision decreased in 2017 compared to 2016, primarily reflecting the impact of recurring permanent tax benefits on the lower level of pretax income. <table><tr><td>As of or for the Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td rowspan="2">Change 2017 vs. 2016</td><td rowspan="2">Change 2016 vs. 2015</td></tr><tr><td>(Millions, except percentages and where indicated)</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>Card billed business(billions)</td><td>$337.0</td><td>$345.3</td><td>$370.1</td><td>-2%</td><td>-7%</td></tr><tr><td>Charge card billed business as a % of total</td><td>36.4%</td><td>34.7%</td><td>32.4%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total cards-in-force</td><td>34.9</td><td>32.7</td><td>40.7</td><td>7</td><td>-20</td></tr><tr><td>Basic cards-in-force</td><td>25.0</td><td>23.3</td><td>28.6</td><td>7</td><td>-19</td></tr><tr><td>Average basic Card Member spending(dollars)</td><td>$13,950</td><td>$13,447</td><td>$13,441</td><td>4</td><td>―</td></tr><tr><td>Total segment assets(billions)</td><td>$94.2</td><td>$87.4</td><td>$92.7</td><td>8</td><td>-6</td></tr><tr><td>Card Member loans:^(a)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total loans(billions)</td><td>$53.7</td><td>$48.8</td><td>$43.5</td><td>10</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>Average loans(billions)</td><td>$48.9</td><td>$44.4</td><td>$51.1</td><td>10%</td><td>-13%</td></tr><tr><td>Net write-off rate — principal only^(b)</td><td>1.8%</td><td>1.5%</td><td>1.4%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net write-off rate — principal, interest and fees^(b)</td><td>2.1%</td><td>1.8%</td><td>1.6%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>30+ days past due loans as a % of total</td><td>1.3%</td><td>1.1%</td><td>1.0%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Calculation of Net Interest Yield on Average Card Member loans:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net interest income</td><td>$5,013</td><td>$4,546</td><td>$4,710</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Exclude:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Interest expense not attributable to our Card Member loan portfolio^(c)</td><td>120</td><td>80</td><td>72</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Interest income not attributable to our Card Member loan portfolio^(d)</td><td>-101</td><td>-24</td><td>-15</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Adjusted net interest income^(e)</td><td>$5,032</td><td>$4,602</td><td>$4,767</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Average Card Member loans including HFS loan portfolios(billions)^(f)</td><td>$48.9</td><td>$49.4</td><td>$52.1</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net interest income divided by average Card Member loans</td><td>10.3%</td><td>9.2%</td><td>9.0%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net interest yield on average Card Member loans^(e)</td><td>10.3%</td><td>9.3%</td><td>9.2%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Card Member receivables:^(a)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total receivables(billions)</td><td>$13.1</td><td>$12.3</td><td>$11.8</td><td>7%</td><td>4%</td></tr><tr><td>Net write-off rate — principal only^(b)</td><td>1.3%</td><td>1.4%</td><td>1.6%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net write-off rate — principal and fees^(b)</td><td>1.4%</td><td>1.6%</td><td>1.8%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>30+ days past due as a % of total</td><td>1.1%</td><td>1.2%</td><td>1.4%</td><td></td><td></td></tr></table> (a) Refer to Table 7 footnote (a). (b) Refer to Table 7 footnote (e). (c) Refer to Table 8 footnote (a). (d) Refer to Table 8 footnote (b). (e) Refer to Table 8 footnote (c). (f) Refer to Table 8 footnote (d). UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) The following table summarizes the activity related to our unrecognized tax benefits (in millions): <table><tr><td>Balance at January 1, 2007</td><td>$373</td></tr><tr><td>Additions for tax positions of the current year</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Additions for tax positions of prior years</td><td>34</td></tr><tr><td>Reductions for tax positions of prior years for:</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Changes in judgment or facts</td><td>-12</td></tr><tr><td>Settlements during the period</td><td>-49</td></tr><tr><td>Lapses of applicable statute of limitations</td><td>-4</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2007</td><td>$355</td></tr></table> As of December 31, 2007, the total amount of gross unrecognized tax benefits that, if recognized, would affect the effective tax rate was $134 million. We also had gross recognized tax benefits of $567 million recorded as of December 31, 2007 associated with outstanding refund claims for prior tax years. Therefore, we had a net receivable recorded with respect to prior year income tax matters in the accompanying balance sheets. Our continuing practice is to recognize interest and penalties associated with income tax matters as a component of income tax expense. Related to the uncertain tax benefits noted above, we accrued penalties of $5 million and interest of $36 million during 2007. As of December 31, 2007, we have recognized a liability for penalties of $6 million and interest of $75 million. Additionally, we have recognized a receivable for interest of $116 million for the recognized tax benefits associated with outstanding refund claims. We file income tax returns in the U. S. federal jurisdiction, most U. S. state and local jurisdictions, and many non-U. S. jurisdictions. As of December 31, 2007, we had substantially resolved all U. S. federal income tax matters for tax years prior to 1999. In the third quarter of 2007, we entered into a Joint Stipulation to Dismiss the case with the Department of Justice, effectively withdrawing our refund claim related to the 1994 disposition of a subsidiary in France. The write-off of previously recognized tax receivable balances associated with the 1994 French matter resulted in a $37 million increase in income tax expense for the quarter. However, this increase was offset by the impact of favorable developments with various other U. S. federal, U. S. state, and non-U. S. contingency matters. In February 2008, the IRS completed its audit of the tax years 1999 through 2002 with only a limited number of issues that will be considered by the IRS Appeals Office by 2009. The IRS is in the final stages of completing its audit of the tax years 2003 through 2004. We anticipate that the IRS will conclude its audit of the 2003 and 2004 tax years by 2009. With few exceptions, we are no longer subject to U. S. state and local and non-U. S. income tax examinations by tax authorities for tax years prior to 1999, but certain U. S. state and local matters are subject to ongoing litigation. A number of years may elapse before an uncertain tax position is audited and ultimately settled. It is difficult to predict the ultimate outcome or the timing of resolution for uncertain tax positions. It is reasonably possible that the amount of unrecognized tax benefits could significantly increase or decrease within the next twelve months. Items that may cause changes to unrecognized tax benefits include the timing of interest deductions, the deductibility of acquisition costs, the consideration of filing requirements in various states, the allocation of income and expense between tax jurisdictions and the effects of terminating an election to have a foreign subsidiary join in filing a consolidated return. These changes could result from the settlement of ongoing litigation, the completion of ongoing examinations, the expiration of the statute of limitations, or other unforeseen circumstances. At this time, an estimate of the range of the reasonably possible change cannot be made.

In the year / section with largest amount of Average contract revenue per MWh, what's the sum of Planned net MW in operation?

Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 31 The Vermont Yankee acquisition included a 10-year PPA under which the former owners will buy the power produced by the plant, which is through the expiration in 2012 of the current operating license for the plant. The PPA includes an adjustment clause under which the prices specified in the PPA will be adjusted downward monthly, beginning in November 2005, if power market prices drop below PPA prices. Accordingly, because the price is not fixed, the table above does not report power from that plant as sold forward after November 2005. A sale of power on a unit contingent basis coupled with an availability guarantee provides for the payment to the power purchaser of contract damages, if incurred, in the event the seller fails to deliver power as a result of the failure of the specified generation unit to generate power at or above a specified availability threshold. To date, Entergy has not incurred any payment obligation to any power purchaser pursuant to an availability guarantee. All of Entergy's outstanding availability guarantees provide for dollar limits on Entergy's maximum liability under such guarantees. Some of the agreements to sell the power produced by Entergy's Non-Utility Nuclear power plants contain provisions that require an Entergy subsidiary to provide collateral to secure its obligations under the agreements. The Entergy subsidiary may be required to provide collateral based upon the difference between the current market and contracted power prices in the regions where the Non-Utility Nuclear business sells its power. The primary form of the collateral to satisfy these requirements would be an Entergy Corporation guaranty. Cash and letters of credit are also acceptable forms of collateral. At December 31, 2004, based on power prices at that time, Entergy had in place as collateral $545.5 million of Entergy Corporation guarantees and $47.5 million of letters of credit. In the event of a decrease in Entergy Corporation's credit rating to specified levels below investment grade, Entergy may be required to replace Entergy Corporation guarantees with cash or letters of credit under some of the agreements. In addition to selling the power produced by its plants, the Non-Utility Nuclear business sells installed capacity to load-serving distribution companies in order for those companies to meet requirements placed on them by the ISO in their area. Following is a summary of the amount of the Non-Utility Nuclear business' installed capacity that is currently sold forward, and the blended amount of the Non-Utility Nuclear business' planned generation output and installed capacity that is currently sold forwar <table><tr><td></td><td> 2005</td><td> 2006</td><td> 2007</td><td> 2008</td><td> 2009</td></tr><tr><td> Non-Utility Nuclear:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Percent of capacity sold forward:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Bundled capacity and energy contracts</td><td>13%</td><td>13%</td><td>13%</td><td>13%</td><td>13%</td></tr><tr><td>Capacity contracts</td><td>58%</td><td>67%</td><td>36%</td><td>22%</td><td>10%</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>71%</td><td>80%</td><td>49%</td><td>35%</td><td>23%</td></tr><tr><td>Planned net MW in operation</td><td>4,155</td><td>4,200</td><td>4,200</td><td>4,200</td><td>4,200</td></tr><tr><td>Average capacity contract price per kW per month</td><td>$1.2</td><td>$1.1</td><td>$1.1</td><td>$1.0</td><td>$0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Blended Capacity and Energy (based on revenues)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>% of planned generation and capacity sold forward</td><td>93%</td><td>87%</td><td>65%</td><td>36%</td><td>12%</td></tr><tr><td>Average contract revenue per MWh</td><td>$40</td><td>$42</td><td>$43</td><td>$44</td><td>$43</td></tr></table> As of December 31, 2004, approximately 99% of Entergy's counterparties to Non-Utility Nuclear's energy and capacity contracts have investment grade credit rating Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Notes to Financial Statements Fuel and purchased power cost recovery Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, and Entergy Texas are allowed to recover fuel and purchased power costs through fuel mechanisms included in electric and gas rates that are recorded as fuel cost recovery revenues. The difference between revenues collected and the current fuel and purchased power costs is generally recorded as “Deferred fuel costs” on the Utility operating companies’ financial statements. The table below shows the amount of deferred fuel costs as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 that Entergy expects to recover (or return to customers) through fuel mechanisms, subject to subsequent regulatory review. <table><tr><td></td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">(In Millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Arkansas</td><td>$68.7</td><td>$97.3</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Gulf States Louisiana (a)</td><td>$109.7</td><td>$99.2</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Louisiana (a)</td><td>$37.6</td><td>$94.6</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Mississippi</td><td>$38.1</td><td>$26.5</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy New Orleans (a)</td><td>-$19.1</td><td>$1.9</td></tr><tr><td>Entergy Texas</td><td>-$4.1</td><td>-$93.3</td></tr></table> (a) 2013 and 2012 include $100.1 million for Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, $68 million for Entergy Louisiana, and $4.1 million for Entergy New Orleans of fuel, purchased power, and capacity costs, which do not currently earn a return on investment and whose recovery periods are indeterminate but are expected to be over a period greater than twelve months. Entergy Arkansas Production Cost Allocation Rider The APSC approved a production cost allocation rider for recovery from customers of the retail portion of the costs allocated to Entergy Arkansas as a result of the System Agreement proceedings, which are discussed in the “System Agreement Cost Equalization Proceedings” section below. These costs cause an increase in Entergy Arkansas’s deferred fuel cost balance because Entergy Arkansas pays the costs over seven months but collects them from customers over twelve months. Energy Cost Recovery Rider Entergy Arkansas’s retail rates include an energy cost recovery rider to recover fuel and purchased energy costs in monthly customer bills. The rider utilizes the prior calendar-year energy costs and projected energy sales for the twelve-month period commencing on April 1 of each year to develop an energy cost rate, which is redetermined annually and includes a true-up adjustment reflecting the over- or under-recovery, including carrying charges, of the energy costs for the prior calendar year. The energy cost recovery rider tariff also allows an interim rate request depending upon the level of over- or under-recovery of fuel and purchased energy costs. In October 2005 the APSC initiated an investigation into Entergy Arkansas's interim energy cost recovery rate. The investigation focused on Entergy Arkansas's 1) gas contracting, portfolio, and hedging practices; 2) wholesale purchases during the period; 3) management of the coal inventory at its coal generation plants; and 4) response to the contractual failure of the railroads to provide coal deliveries. In March 2006 the APSC extended its investigation to cover the costs included in Entergy Arkansas’s March 2006 annual energy cost rate filing, and a hearing was held in the APSC investigation in October 2006. Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Notes to Financial Statements As of December?31, 2017, System Energy, in connection with the Grand Gulf sale and leaseback transactions, had future minimum lease payments (reflecting an implicit rate of 5.13%) that are recorded as long-term debt, as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td>Amount (In Thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>2018</td><td>$17,188</td></tr><tr><td>2019</td><td>17,188</td></tr><tr><td>2020</td><td>17,188</td></tr><tr><td>2021</td><td>17,188</td></tr><tr><td>2022</td><td>17,188</td></tr><tr><td>Years thereafter</td><td>240,625</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>326,565</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Amount representing interest</td><td>292,209</td></tr><tr><td>Present value of net minimum lease payments</td><td>$34,356</td></tr></table> NOTE 11. ? RETIREMENT, OTHER POSTRETIREMENT BENEFITS, AND DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLANS?? (Entergy Corporation, Entergy Arkansas, Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Mississippi, Entergy New Orleans, Entergy Texas, and System Energy) Qualified Pension Plans Entergy has eight qualified pension plans covering substantially all employees. The Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan for Non-Bargaining Employees (Non-Bargaining Plan I), the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan for Bargaining Employees (Bargaining Plan I), the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan II for Non-Bargaining Employees (Non-Bargaining Plan II), the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan II for Bargaining Employees, the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan III, and the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan IV for Bargaining Employees?are non-contributory final average pay plans and provide pension benefits that are based on employees’ credited service and compensation during employment. ?Effective as of the close of business on December 31, 2016, the Entergy Corporation Retirement Plan IV for Non-Bargaining Employees (Non-Bargaining Plan IV) was merged with and into Non-Bargaining Plan II. At the close of business on December 31, 2016, the liabilities for the accrued benefits and the assets attributable to such liabilities of all participants in Non-Bargaining Plan IV were assumed by and transferred to Non-Bargaining Plan II. There was no loss of vesting or benefit options or reduction of accrued benefits to affected participants as a result of this plan merger. Non-bargaining employees whose most recent date of hire is after June 30, 2014 participate in the Entergy Corporation Cash Balance Plan for Non-Bargaining Employees (Non-Bargaining Cash Balance Plan). Certain bargaining employees hired or rehired after June 30, 2014, or such later date provided for in their applicable collective bargaining agreements, participate in the Entergy Corporation Cash Balance Plan for Bargaining Employees (Bargaining Cash Balance Plan). The Registrant Subsidiaries participate in these four plans: Non-Bargaining Plan I, Bargaining Plan I, Non-Bargaining Cash Balance Plan, and Bargaining Cash Balance Plan. The assets of the six final average pay qualified pension plans are held in a master trust established by Entergy, and the assets of the two cash balance pension plans are held in a second master trust established by Entergy. ? ?Each pension plan has an undivided beneficial interest in each of the investment accounts in its respective master trust that is maintained by a trustee. ? ?Use of the master trusts permits the commingling of the trust assets of the pension plans of Entergy Corporation and its Registrant Subsidiaries for investment and administrative purposes. ? ?Although assets in the master trusts are commingled, the trustee maintains supporting records for the purpose of allocating the trust level equity in net earnings (loss) and the administrative expenses of the investment accounts in each trust to the various participating pension plans in that particular trust. ? ?The fair value of the trusts’ assets is determined by the trustee and certain investment managers. ? ?For each trust, the trustee calculates a daily earnings factor, including realized and MetLife, Inc. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (Continued) The following is a summary of Stock Option exercise activity for the: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2007</td><td> 2006</td><td> 2005</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Total intrinsic value of stock options exercised</td><td>$122</td><td>$65</td><td>$39</td></tr><tr><td>Cash received from exercise of stock options</td><td>$110</td><td>$83</td><td>$72</td></tr><tr><td>Tax benefit realized from stock options exercised</td><td>$43</td><td>$23</td><td>$13</td></tr></table> Performance Shares Beginning in 2005, certain members of management were awarded Performance Shares under (and as defined in) the 2005 Stock Plan. Participants are awarded an initial target number of Performance Shares with the final number of Performance Shares payable being determined by the product of the initial target multiplied by a factor of 0.0 to 2.0. The factor applied is based on measurements of the Company’s performance with respect to: (i) the change in annual net operating earnings per share, as defined; and (ii) the proportionate total shareholder return, as defined, with reference to the three-year performance period relative to other companies in the S&P Insurance Index with reference to the same three-year period. Performance Share awards will normally vest in their entirety at the end of the threeyear performance period (subject to certain contingencies) and will be payable entirely in shares of the Company’s common stock. The following is a summary of Performance Share activity for the year ended December 31, 2007: <table><tr><td></td><td> Performance Shares</td><td> Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td>Outstanding at January 1, 2007</td><td>1,849,575</td><td>$42.24</td></tr><tr><td>Granted</td><td>916,075</td><td>$60.86</td></tr><tr><td>Forfeited</td><td>-75,525</td><td>$49.20</td></tr><tr><td>Outstanding at December 31, 2007</td><td>2,690,125</td><td>$48.39</td></tr><tr><td>Performance Shares expected to vest at December 31, 2007</td><td>2,641,669</td><td>$48.20</td></tr></table> Performance Share amounts above represent aggregate initial target awards and do not reflect potential increases or decreases resulting from the final performance factor to be determined at the end of the respective performance period. As of December 31, 2007, the three year performance period for the 2005 Performance Share grants was completed. Included in the immediately preceding table are 965,525 outstanding Performance Shares to which the final performance factor will be applied. The calculation of the performance factor is expected to be finalized during the second quarter of 2008 after all data necessary to perform the calculation is publicly available. Performance Share awards are accounted for as equity awards but are not credited with dividend-equivalents for actual dividends paid on the Holding Company’s common stock during the performance period. Accordingly, the fair value of Performance Shares is based upon the closing price of the Holding Company’s common stock on the date of grant, reduced by the present value of estimated dividends to be paid on that stock during the performance period. Compensation expense related to initial Performance Shares granted prior to January 1, 2006 and expected to vest is recognized ratably during the performance period. Compensation expense related to initial Performance Shares granted on or after January 1, 2006 and expected to vest is recognized ratably over the performance period or the period to retirement eligibility, if shorter. Performance Shares expected to vest and the related compensation expenses may be further adjusted by the performance factor most likely to be achieved, as estimated by management, at the end of the performance period. Compensation expense of $90 million, $74 million and $24 million, related to Performance Shares was recognized for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. As of December 31, 2007, there were $57 million of total unrecognized compensation costs related to Performance Share awards. It is expected that these costs will be recognized over a weighted average period of 1.72 years. Long-Term Performance Compensation Plan Prior to January 1, 2005, the Company granted stock-based compensation to certain members of management under the LTPCP. Each participant was assigned a target compensation amount (an “Opportunity Award”) at the inception of the performance period with the final compensation amount determined based on the total shareholder return on the Company’s common stock over the three-year performance period, subject to limited further adjustment approved by the Company’s Board of Directors. Payments on the Opportunity Awards were normally payable in their entirety (subject to certain contingencies) at the end of the three-year performance period, and were paid in whole or in part with shares of the Company’s common stock, as approved by the Company’s Board of Directors. There were no new grants under the LTPCP during the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005. A portion of each Opportunity Award under the LTPCP was settled in shares of the Holding Company’s common stock while the remainder was settled in cash. The portion of the Opportunity Award settled in shares of the Holding Company’s common stock was accounted for as an equity award with the fair value of the award determined based upon the closing price of the Holding Company’s common stock on the date of grant. The compensation expense associated with the equity award, based upon the grant date fair value, was recognized into expense ratably over the respective three-year performance period. The portion of the Opportunity Award settled in cash was accounted for as a liability and was remeasured using the closing price of the Holding Company’s common stock on the final day of each subsequent reporting period during the three-year performance period. The final LTPCP performance period concluded during the six months ended June 30, 2007. Final Opportunity Awards in the amount of 618,375 shares of the Company’s common stock and $16 million in cash were paid on April 18, 2007. No significant compensation expected policy assessments based on the level of guaranteed minimum benefits generated using multiple scenarios of separate account returns. The scenarios use best estimate assumptions consistent with those used to amortize DAC. Because separate account balances have had positive returns relative to the prior year, current estimates of future benefits are lower than that previously projected which resulted in a decrease in this liability in the current period. Partially offsetting these increases, higher DAC amortization of $49 million resulted from business growth and favorable investment results. Latin America Region. The decrease in operating earnings was primarily driven by lower net investment income. Net investment income decreased by $297 million due to a decrease of $383 million from lower yields, partially offset by an increase of $86 million due to an increase in average invested assets. The decrease in yields was due, in part, to the impact of changes in assumptions for measuring the effects of inflation on certain inflation-indexed fixed maturity securities. This decrease was partially offset by a reduction of $221 million in the related insurance liability primarily due to lower inflation. The increase in net investment income attributable to an increase in average invested assets was primarily due to business growth and, as such, was largely offset by increases in policyholder benefits and interest credited expense. Higher claim experience in Mexico resulted in a $45 million decline in operating earnings. The nationalization and reform of the pension business in Argentina impacted both the current year and prior year earnings, resulting in a net $36 million decline in operating earnings. In addition, operating earnings decreased due to a net income tax increase of $8 million in Mexico, resulting from a change in assumption regarding the repatriation of earnings, partially offset by the favorable impact of a lower effective tax rate in 2009. Partially offsetting these decreases in operating earnings was the combination of growth in Mexico’s individual and institutional businesses and higher premium rates in its institutional business, which increased operating earnings by $51 million. Pesification in Argentina impacted both the current year and prior year earnings, resulting in a net $73 million increase in operating earnings. This benefit was largely due to a reassessment of our approach in managing existing and potential future claims related to certain social security pension annuity contract holders in Argentina resulting in a liability release. Lower expenses of $8 million resulted primarily from the impact of operational efficiencies achieved through our Operational Excellence initiative. EMEI Region. The impact of foreign currency transaction gains and a tax benefit, both of which occurred in the prior year, contributed $12 million to the decline in operating earnings. Our investment of $9 million in our distribution capability and growth initiatives in 2009 also reduced operating earnings. There was an increase in net investment income of $76 million, which was due to an increase of $65 million from an improvement in yields and $11 million from an increase in average invested assets. The increase in yields was primarily due to favorable results on the trading securities portfolio, stemming from the equity markets experiencing some recovery in 2009. As our trading portfolio backs unit-linked policyholder liabilities, the trading portfolio results were entirely offset by a corresponding increase in interest credited expense. The increase in net investment income attributable to an increase in average invested assets was primarily due to business growth and was largely offset by increases in policyholder benefits and interest credited expense, also due to business growth. Banking, Corporate & Other <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>Change</td><td>% Change</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">(In millions)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td> Operating Revenues</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Premiums</td><td>$19</td><td>$27</td><td>$-8</td><td>-29.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Net investment income</td><td>477</td><td>808</td><td>-331</td><td>-41.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Other revenues</td><td>1,092</td><td>184</td><td>908</td><td>493.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating revenues</td><td>1,588</td><td>1,019</td><td>569</td><td>55.8%</td></tr><tr><td> Operating Expenses</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Policyholder benefits and claims and policyholder dividends</td><td>4</td><td>46</td><td>-42</td><td>-91.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Interest credited to policyholder account balances</td><td>—</td><td>7</td><td>-7</td><td>-100.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Interest credited to bank deposits</td><td>163</td><td>166</td><td>-3</td><td>-1.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Capitalization of DAC</td><td>—</td><td>-3</td><td>3</td><td>-100.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of DAC and VOBA</td><td>3</td><td>5</td><td>-2</td><td>-40.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Interest expense</td><td>1,027</td><td>1,033</td><td>-6</td><td>-0.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Other expenses</td><td>1,336</td><td>699</td><td>637</td><td>91.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating expenses</td><td>2,533</td><td>1,953</td><td>580</td><td>29.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for income tax expense (benefit)</td><td>-617</td><td>-495</td><td>-122</td><td>-24.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Operating earnings</td><td>-328</td><td>-439</td><td>111</td><td>25.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Preferred stock dividends</td><td>122</td><td>125</td><td>-3</td><td>-2.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Operating earnings available to common shareholders</td><td>$-450</td><td>$-564</td><td>$114</td><td>20.2%</td></tr></table> Banking, Corporate & Other recognized the full year impact of our forward and reverse residential mortgage platform acquisitions, a strong residential mortgage refinance market, healthy growth in the reverse mortgage arena, and a favorable interest spread environment. Our forward and reverse residential mortgage production of $37.4 billion in 2009 is up 484% compared to 2008 production. The increase in mortgage production drove higher investments in residential mortgage loans held-for-sale and mortgage servicing rights. At December 31, 2009, our residential mortgage loans servicing portfolio was $64.1 billion comprised of agency (Federal National Mortgage Association (“FNMA”), Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“FHLMC”) or Government National Mortgage Association (“GNMA”) securities) portfolios. Transaction and time deposits, which provide a relatively stable source of funding and liquidity and are used to fund loans and fixed income securities purchases, grew 48% in 2009 to $10.2 billion. Borrowings decreased 10% in 2009 to $2.4 billion. During 2009, we participated in the Federal Reserve Bank of New York Term Auction Facility, which provided short term liquidity with low funding costs. Factory Stores We extend our reach to additional consumer groups through our 259 factory stores worldwide, which are principally located in major outlet centers. During Fiscal 2015, we added 30 new factory stores and closed six factory stores.

What is the average value of Total revenues in Table 2 and Restricted stock awards in Table 1 in 2007? (in million)

rates and accrued interest thereon. On certificates allowing for the deduction of a surrender charge, the cash surrender values may be less than accumulated investment certificate reserves prior to maturity dates. Cash surrender values on certificates allowing for no surrender charge are equal to certificate reserves. The Company generally invests the proceeds from investment certificates in fixed and variable rate securities. The Company may hedge the interest rate risks under these obligations with derivative instruments. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, there were no outstanding derivatives to hedge these interest rate risks. Certain investment certificate products have returns tied to the performance of equity markets. The Company guarantees the principal for purchasers who hold the certificate for the full 52-week term and purchasers may participate in increases in the stock market based on the S&P 500 Index, up to a maximum return. Purchasers can choose 100% participation in the market index up to the cap or 25% participation plus fixed interest with a combined total up to the cap. Current first term certificates have maximum returns of 4% or 5%. The equity component of these certificates is considered an embedded derivative and is accounted for separately. The change in fair values of the embedded derivative reserve is reflected in banking and deposit interest expense. See Note 20 for additional information about derivative instruments used to economically hedge the equity price risk related to the Company’s stock market certificates.14. Debt Debt and the stated interest rates were as follows: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"> Outstanding Balance December 31,</td><td colspan="2"> Stated Interest Rate December 31,</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> 2009</td><td> 2008</td><td>2009</td><td> 2008</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="4"> (in millions) </td></tr><tr><td>Senior notes due 2010</td><td>$340</td><td>$800</td><td>5.4%</td><td>5.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Senior notes due 2015</td><td>700</td><td>700</td><td>5.7</td><td>5.7</td></tr><tr><td>Senior notes due 2019</td><td>300</td><td>—</td><td>7.3</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Senior notes due 2039</td><td>200</td><td>—</td><td>7.8</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Junior subordinated notes due 2066</td><td>322</td><td>457</td><td>7.5</td><td>7.5</td></tr><tr><td>Floating rate revolving credit borrowings due 2013</td><td>142</td><td>64</td><td>4.1</td><td>3.6</td></tr><tr><td>Floating rate revolving credit borrowings due 2014</td><td>198</td><td>—</td><td>5.9</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Floating rate revolving credit borrowings due 2014</td><td>41</td><td>—</td><td>2.5</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Municipal bond inverse floater certificates due 2021</td><td>6</td><td>6</td><td>0.3</td><td>2.2</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$2,249</td><td>$2,027</td><td></td><td></td></tr></table> On November 23, 2005, the Company issued $1.5 billion of unsecured senior notes including $800 million of five-year senior notes which mature November 15, 2010 and $700 million of 10-year senior notes which mature November 15, 2015, and incurred debt issuance costs of $7 million. Interest payments are due semi-annually on May 15 and November 15. In July 2009, the Company purchased $450 million aggregate principal amount of its senior notes due 2010, pursuant to a cash tender offer. The tender offer consideration per $1,000 principal amount of these notes accepted for purchase was $1,000, with an early tender payment of $30. Payments for these notes purchased pursuant to the tender offer included accrued and unpaid interest from the last interest payment date to, but not including, the settlement date. The Company also repurchased $10 million of these notes in the second quarter of 2009 in open market transactions. On June 8, 2009, the Company issued $300 million of unsecured senior notes which mature June 28, 2019, and incurred debt issuance costs of $3 million. Interest payments are due semi-annually in arrears on June 28 and December 28. On June 3, 2009, the Company issued $200 million of unsecured senior notes which mature June 15, 2039, and incurred debt issuance costs of $6 million. Interest payments are due quarterly in arrears on March 15, June 15, September 15 and December 15. In June 2005, the Company entered into interest rate swap agreements totaling $1.5 billion, which qualified as cash flow hedges related to planned debt offerings. The Company terminated the swap agreements in November 2005 when the senior notes due 2010 and 2015 were issued. The related gain on the swap agreements of $71 million was recorded to accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) and is being amortized as a reduction to interest expense over the period in which the hedged cash flows are expected to occur. Considering the The components of the Company’s share-based compensation expense, net of forfeitures, were as follows: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="3"> Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> 2009</td><td> 2008</td><td> 2007</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="3"> (in millions) </td></tr><tr><td>Stock options</td><td>$53</td><td>$40</td><td>$37</td></tr><tr><td>Restricted stock awards</td><td>59</td><td>57</td><td>52</td></tr><tr><td>Restricted stock units</td><td>70</td><td>51</td><td>54</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$182</td><td>$148</td><td>$143</td></tr></table> For the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, the total income tax benefit recognized by the Company related to the sharebased compensation expense was $64 million, $52 million and $50 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, there was $158 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested awards under the Company’s share-based compensation plans. That cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.5 years. Amended and Restated Ameriprise Financial 2005 Incentive Compensation Plan The 2005 ICP, which was amended and approved by shareholders on April 25, 2007, provides for the grant of cash and equity incentive awards to directors, employees and independent contractors, including stock options, restricted stock awards, restricted stock units, stock appreciation rights, performance shares and similar awards designed to comply with the applicable federal regulations and laws of jurisdiction. Under the 2005 ICP, a maximum of 37.9 million shares may be issued. Of this total, no more than 4.4 million shares may be issued after April 25, 2007 for full value awards, which are awards other than stock options and stock appreciation rights. Shares issued under the 2005 ICP may be authorized and unissued shares or treasury shares. Deferred Compensation Plan The Deferred Compensation Plan (‘‘DCP’’) gives certain employees the choice to defer a portion of their bonus, which can be invested in investment options as provided by the DCP, including the Ameriprise Financial Stock Fund. The Company provides a match if the participant deferrals are invested in the Ameriprise Financial Stock Fund. Participant deferrals vest immediately and the Company match vests after three years. Distributions are made in shares of the Company’s common stock for the portion of the deferral invested in the Ameriprise Financial Stock Fund and the related Company match, for which the Company has recorded in equity. The DCP does allow for accelerated vesting of the share-based awards in cases of death, disability and qualified retirement. Compensation expense related to the Company match is recognized on a straight-line basis over the vesting period. Ameriprise Financial 2008 Employment Incentive Equity Award Plan The 2008 Plan is designed to align new employees’ interests with those of the shareholders of the Company and attract and retain new employees. The 2008 Plan provides for the grant of equity incentive awards to new employees who became employees in connection with a merger or acquisition, including stock options, restricted stock awards, restricted stock units, and other equity-based awards designed to comply with the applicable federal and foreign regulations and laws of jurisdiction. Under the 2008 Plan, a maximum of 6.0 million shares may be issued. Awards granted under the 2008 Plan may be settled in cash and/or shares of the Company’s common stock according to the award’s terms. Stock Options Stock options granted have an exercise price not less than 100% of the current fair market value of a share of the Company’s common stock on the grant date and a maximum term of 10 years. Stock options granted generally vest ratably over three to four years. Vesting of option awards may be accelerated based on age and length of service. Stock options granted are expensed on a straight-line basis over the option vesting period based on the estimated fair value of the awards on the date of grant using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model. Net revenues increased $3 million compared to the prior year. Net investment loss for the year ended December 31, 2009 reflects the transfer priced interest income allocated to the Annuities and Protection segments for maintaining excess liquidity and the period-over-period decline in short-term interest rates. The increase in other revenues compared to the prior year was due to a $58 million gain on the repurchase of $135 million of our junior notes in 2009 compared to a gain of $19 million on the repurchase of $43 million of our junior notes in 2008. Total expenses decreased $96 million, or 26%, to $267 million for the year ended December 31, 2009. Interest and debt expense for the year ended December 31, 2009 included a $13 million expense related to the early retirement of $450 million of our 5.35% senior notes due 2010. General and administrative expense decreased $116 million, or 46%, compared to the prior year due to money market support costs incurred in 2008, including $77 million related to the mark-to-market of Lehman Brothers securities that we purchased from various 2a-7 money market mutual funds managed by our subsidiary, RiverSource Investments, LLC and $36 million for the cost of guaranteeing specific client holdings in an unaffiliated money market mutual fund, and $60 million in restructuring charges in 2008, partially offset by higher performance compensation accruals and legal expenses in 2009. Consolidated Results of Operations Year Ended December 31, 2008 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2007 The following table presents our consolidated results of operations: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2">Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td colspan="2">Change</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="4">(in millions, except percentages)</td></tr><tr><td> Revenues</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Management and financial advice fees</td><td>$2,899</td><td>$3,238</td><td>$-339</td><td>-10%</td></tr><tr><td>Distribution fees</td><td>1,565</td><td>1,762</td><td>-197</td><td>-11</td></tr><tr><td>Net investment income</td><td>817</td><td>2,014</td><td>-1,197</td><td>-59</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums</td><td>1,048</td><td>1,017</td><td>31</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Other revenues</td><td>766</td><td>724</td><td>42</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>7,095</td><td>8,755</td><td>-1,660</td><td>-19</td></tr><tr><td>Banking and deposit interest expense</td><td>179</td><td>249</td><td>-70</td><td>-28</td></tr><tr><td>Total net revenues</td><td>6,916</td><td>8,506</td><td>-1,590</td><td>-19</td></tr><tr><td> Expenses</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Distribution expenses</td><td>1,912</td><td>2,011</td><td>-99</td><td>-5</td></tr><tr><td>Interest credited to fixed accounts</td><td>790</td><td>847</td><td>-57</td><td>-7</td></tr><tr><td>Benefits, claims, losses and settlement expenses</td><td>1,125</td><td>1,179</td><td>-54</td><td>-5</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of deferred acquisition costs</td><td>933</td><td>551</td><td>382</td><td>69</td></tr><tr><td>Interest and debt expense</td><td>109</td><td>112</td><td>-3</td><td>-3</td></tr><tr><td>Separation costs</td><td>—</td><td>236</td><td>-236</td><td>-100</td></tr><tr><td>General and administrative expense</td><td>2,472</td><td>2,562</td><td>-90</td><td>-4</td></tr><tr><td>Total expenses</td><td>7,341</td><td>7,498</td><td>-157</td><td>-2</td></tr><tr><td>Pretax income (loss)</td><td>-425</td><td>1,008</td><td>-1,433</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Income tax provision (benefit)</td><td>-333</td><td>202</td><td>-535</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss)</td><td>-92</td><td>806</td><td>-898</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Net loss attributable to noncontrolling interests</td><td>-54</td><td>-8</td><td>-46</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss) attributable to Ameriprise Financial</td><td>$-38</td><td>$814</td><td>$-852</td><td>NM</td></tr></table> MASCO CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CONTINUED) 62 M. EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT PLANS (Continued) Plan Assets. Our qualified defined-benefit pension plan weighted average asset allocation, which is based upon fair value, was as follows:

What was the total amount of Allowance greater than 270 in 2018? (in million)

Item 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS None. Item 2. PROPERTIES The table below provides a summary of our containerboard mills, the principal products produced and each mill’s year-end 2011 annual practical maximum capacity based upon all of our paper machines’ production capabilities, as reported to the AF&PA: <table><tr><td>Location</td><td>Function Kraft linerboard mill Kraft linerboard mill Semi-chemical medium mill Semi-chemical medium mill</td><td>Capacity (tons) 1,043,000 556,000 538,000 438,000</td></tr><tr><td>Counce, TN</td><td>Valdosta, GA</td><td>Tomahawk, WI</td></tr><tr><td>Filer City, MI</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td></td><td>2,575,000</td></tr></table> We currently own our four containerboard mills and 44 of our corrugated manufacturing operations (37 corrugated plants and seven sheet plants). We also own one warehouse and miscellaneous other property, which includes sales offices and woodlands management offices. These sales offices and woodlands management offices generally have one to four employees and serve as administrative offices. PCA leases the space for four corrugated plants, 23 sheet plants, six regional design centers, and numerous other distribution centers, warehouses and facilities. The equipment in these leased facilities is, in virtually all cases, owned by PCA, except for forklifts and other rolling stock which are generally leased. We lease the cutting rights to approximately 88,000 acres of timberland located near our Valdosta mill (77,000 acres) and our Counce mill (11,000 acres). On average, these cutting rights agreements have terms with approximately 12 years remaining. Our corporate headquarters is located in Lake Forest, Illinois. The headquarters facility is leased for the next ten years with provisions for two additional five year lease extensions. Item 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS During September and October 2010, PCA and eight other U. S. and Canadian containerboard producers were named as defendants in five purported class action lawsuits filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, alleging violations of the Sherman Act. The lawsuits have been consolidated in a single complaint under the caption Kleen Products LLC v Packaging Corp. of America et al. The consolidated complaint alleges that the defendants conspired to limit the supply of containerboard, and that the purpose and effect of the alleged conspiracy was to artificially increase prices of containerboard products during the period from August 2005 to the time of filing of the complaints. The complaint was filed as a purported class action suit on behalf of all purchasers of containerboard products during such period. The complaint seeks treble damages and costs, including attorney’s fees. The defendants’ motions to dismiss the complaint were denied by the court in April 2011. PCA believes the allegations are without merit and will defend this lawsuit vigorously. However, as the lawsuit is in the early stages of discovery, PCA is unable to predict the ultimate outcome or estimate a range of reasonably possible losses. PCA is a party to various other legal actions arising in the ordinary course of our business. These legal actions cover a broad variety of claims spanning our entire business. As of the date of this filing, we believe it is not reasonably possible that the resolution of these legal actions will, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. NOTE 18 EQUITY COMMON STOCK On February 8, 2010, we raised $3.0 billion in new common equity through the issuance of 55.6 million shares of common stock in an underwritten offering at $54 per share. The underwriters exercised their option to purchase an additional 8.3 million shares of common stock at the offering price of $54 per share, totaling approximately $450 million, to cover over-allotments. We completed this issuance on March 11, 2010. PREFERRED STOCK Information related to preferred stock is as follows: Preferred Stock – Issued and Outstanding <table><tr><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2"> Preferred Shares</td></tr><tr><td>December 31Shares in thousands</td><td>Liquidation value per share</td><td> 2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Authorized</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>$1 par value</td><td></td><td> 16,588</td><td>16,588</td></tr><tr><td>Issued and outstanding</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Series B</td><td>$40</td><td> 1</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Series K</td><td>10,000</td><td> 50</td><td>50</td></tr><tr><td>Series L</td><td>100,000</td><td> 2</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Series O</td><td>100,000</td><td> 10</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total issued and outstanding</td><td></td><td> 63</td><td>53</td></tr></table> Our Series B preferred stock is cumulative and is not redeemable at our option. Annual dividends on Series B preferred stock total $1.80 per share. Holders of Series B preferred stock are entitled to 8 votes per share, which is equal to the number of full shares of common stock into which the Series B Preferred Stock is convertible. Our Series K preferred stock was issued in May 2008 in connection with our issuance of $500 million of Depositary Shares, each representing a fractional interest in a share of the Fixed-to-Floating Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series K. Dividends are payable if and when declared each May 21 and November 21 until May 21, 2013. After that date, dividends will be payable each 21st of August, November, February and May. Dividends will be paid at a rate of 8.25% prior to May 21, 2013 and at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 422 basis points beginning May 21, 2013. The Series K preferred stock is redeemable at our option on or after May 21, 2013. Our 9.875% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series L was issued in connection with the National City transaction in exchange for National City’s Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series F. Dividends on the Series L preferred stock are payable if and when declared each 1st of February, May, August and November. Dividends will be paid at a rate of 9.875% prior to February 1, 2013 and at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 633 basis points beginning February 1, 2013. The Series L is redeemable at PNC’s option, subject to Federal Reserve approval, if then applicable, on or after February 1, 2013 at a redemption price per share equal to the liquidation preference plus any declared but unpaid dividends. Our Series O preferred stock was issued on July 27, 2011, when we issued one million depositary shares, each representing a 1/100th interest in a share of our Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series O for gross proceeds before commissions and expenses of $1 billion. Dividends are payable when, as, and if declared by our board of directors or an authorized committee of our board, semi-annually on February 1 and August 1 of each year until August 1, 2021 at a rate of 6.75%. After that date, dividends will be payable on February 1, May 1, August 1 and November 1 of each year beginning on November 1, 2021 at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 3.678% per annum. The Series O preferred stock is redeemable at our option on or after August 1, 2021 and at our option within 90 days of a regulatory capital treatment event as defined in the designations. We have authorized but unissued Series H, I, J and M preferred stock. As described in Note 13 Capital Securities of Subsidiary Trusts and Perpetual Trust Securities, under the terms of two of the hybrid capital vehicles we issued that currently qualify as capital for regulatory purposes (the Trust II Securities and the Trust III Securities), these Trust Securities are automatically exchangeable into shares of PNC preferred stock (Series I and Series J, respectively) in each case under certain conditions relating to the capitalization or the financial condition of PNC Bank, N. A. and upon the direction of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. The Series preferred stock of PNC REIT Corp. is also automatically exchangeable under similar conditions into shares of PNC Series H preferred stock. As a part of the National City transaction, we established the PNC Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series M, which mirrors in all material respects the former National City Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series E. PNC has designated 5,751 preferred shares, liquidation value $100,000 per share, for this series. No shares have yet been issued; however, National City issued stock purchase contracts for 5,001 shares of its Series E Preferred Stock (now replaced by the PNC Series M as part of the National City transaction) to the National City Preferred Capital Trust I in connection with the issuance by that Trust of $500 million of 12.000% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Normal Automatic Preferred Enhanced Capital Securities (the Normal APEX Securities) in January 2008 by the Trust. It is expected that the Trust will purchase 5,001 of the Series M preferred shares pursuant to these stock purchase contracts on December 10, 2012 or on an earlier date and possibly as late as December 10, 2013. The Trust has The weighted-average assumptions used (as of the end of each year) to determine year end obligations for pension and postretirement benefits were as follows. Table 74: Other Pension Assumptions <table><tr><td>Year ended December 31</td><td>2018</td><td>2017</td></tr><tr><td>Discount rate</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Qualified pension</td><td>4.30%</td><td>3.60%</td></tr><tr><td>Nonqualified pension</td><td>4.15%</td><td>3.45%</td></tr><tr><td>Postretirement benefits</td><td>4.20%</td><td>3.55%</td></tr><tr><td>Rate of compensation increase (average)</td><td>3.50%</td><td>3.50%</td></tr><tr><td>Assumed health care cost trend rate</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Initial trend</td><td>6.50%</td><td>6.75%</td></tr><tr><td>Ultimate trend</td><td>5.00%</td><td>5.00%</td></tr><tr><td>Year ultimate trend reached</td><td>2025</td><td>2025</td></tr></table> The discount rates are determined independently for each plan by comparing the expected future benefits that will be paid under each plan with yields available on high quality corporate bonds of similar duration. For this analysis, 10% of bonds with the highest yields and 40% with the lowest yields were removed from the bond universe. The expected return on plan assets is a long-term assumption established by considering historical and anticipated returns of the asset classes invested in by the pension plan and the allocation strategy currently in place among those classes. For purposes of setting and reviewing this assumption, “long- term” refers to the period over which the plan’s projected benefit obligations will be disbursed. We review this assumption at each measurement date and adjust it if warranted. Our selection process references certain historical data and the current environment, but primarily utilizes qualitative judgment regarding future return expectations. We also examine the assumption used by other companies with similar pension investment strategies. Taking into account all of these factors, the expected long-term return on plan assets for determining net periodic pension cost for 2018 was 6.00%. We are reducing our expected long-term return on assets to 5.75% for determining pension cost for 2019. This decision was made after considering the views of both internal and external capital market advisors, particularly with regard to the effects of the recent economic environment on long-term prospective equity and fixed income returns. PNC’s net periodic benefit cost recognized for the plans is sensitive to the discount rate and expected long-term return on plan assets. With all other assumptions held constant, a .5% decline in the discount rate would have resulted in an immaterial increase in net periodic benefit cost for the qualified pension plan in 2018, and to be recognized in 2019. For the nonqualified pension plan and postretirement benefits, a .5% decline in the discount rate would also have resulted in an immaterial increase in net periodic benefit cost. The health care cost trend rate assumptions shown in Tables 73 and 74 relate only to the postretirement benefit plans. The effect of a one-percentage-point increase or decrease in assumed health care cost trend rates would be insignificant. Defined Contribution Plans The PNC Incentive Savings Plan (ISP) is a qualified defined contribution plan that covers all of our eligible employees. Effective January 1, 2015, newly-hired full time employees and part-time employees who became eligible to participate in the ISP after that date are automatically enrolled in the ISP with a deferral rate equal to 4% of eligible compensation in the absence of an affirmative election otherwise. Employee benefits expense related to the ISP was $139 million in 2018, $125 million in 2017 and $122 million in 2016, representing cash contributed to the ISP by PNC. The ISP is a 401(k) Plan and includes an employee stock ownership (ESOP) feature. Employee contributions are invested in a number of investment options, including pre mixed portfolios and individual core funds, available under the ISP at the direction of the employee. NOTE 12 STOCK BASED COMPENSATION PLANS We have long-term incentive award plans (Incentive Plans) that provide for the granting of incentive stock options, nonqualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, incentive shares/performance units, restricted shares, restricted share units, other share-based awards and dollar-denominated awards to executives and, other than incentive stock options, to non-employee directors. Certain Incentive Plan awards may be paid in stock, cash or a combination of stock and cash. We typically grant a substantial portion of our stock-based compensation awards during the first quarter of each year. SUMMARY OF LOAN LOSS EXPERIENCE <table><tr><td>Year ended December 31 – dollars in millions</td><td>2018</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan and lease losses – January 1</td><td>$2,611</td><td>$2,589</td><td>$2,727</td><td>$3,331</td><td>$3,609</td></tr><tr><td>Gross charge-offs</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>-108</td><td>-186</td><td>-332</td><td>-206</td><td>-276</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>-8</td><td>-24</td><td>-26</td><td>-44</td><td>-70</td></tr><tr><td>Equipment lease financing</td><td>-8</td><td>-11</td><td>-5</td><td>-5</td><td>-14</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>-110</td><td>-123</td><td>-143</td><td>-181</td><td>-275</td></tr><tr><td>Residential real estate</td><td>-6</td><td>-9</td><td>-14</td><td>-24</td><td>-40</td></tr><tr><td>Credit card</td><td>-217</td><td>-182</td><td>-161</td><td>-160</td><td>-163</td></tr><tr><td>Other consumer (a)</td><td>-307</td><td>-251</td><td>-205</td><td>-185</td><td>-183</td></tr><tr><td>Total gross charge-offs</td><td>-764</td><td>-786</td><td>-886</td><td>-805</td><td>-1,021</td></tr><tr><td>Recoveries</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>67</td><td>81</td><td>117</td><td>170</td><td>207</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>24</td><td>28</td><td>51</td><td>66</td><td>84</td></tr><tr><td>Equipment lease financing</td><td>8</td><td>7</td><td>10</td><td>4</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>98</td><td>91</td><td>84</td><td>93</td><td>78</td></tr><tr><td>Residential real estate</td><td>21</td><td>18</td><td>9</td><td>13</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>Credit card</td><td>24</td><td>21</td><td>19</td><td>21</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Other consumer (a)</td><td>102</td><td>83</td><td>53</td><td>52</td><td>60</td></tr><tr><td>Total recoveries</td><td>344</td><td>329</td><td>343</td><td>419</td><td>490</td></tr><tr><td>Net (charge-offs)</td><td>-420</td><td>-457</td><td>-543</td><td>-386</td><td>-531</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for credit losses</td><td>408</td><td>441</td><td>433</td><td>255</td><td>273</td></tr><tr><td>Net decrease / (increase) in allowance for unfunded loan commitments andletters of credit</td><td>12</td><td>4</td><td>-40</td><td>-2</td><td>-17</td></tr><tr><td>Other (b)</td><td>18</td><td>34</td><td>12</td><td>-471</td><td>-3</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan and lease losses – December 31</td><td>$2,629</td><td>$2,611</td><td>$2,589</td><td>$2,727</td><td>$3,331</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance as a percentage of December 31:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Loans (b)</td><td>1.16%</td><td>1.18%</td><td>1.23%</td><td>1.32%</td><td>1.63%</td></tr><tr><td>Nonperforming loans</td><td>155%</td><td>140%</td><td>121%</td><td>128%</td><td>133%</td></tr><tr><td>As a percentage of average loans:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net charge-offs</td><td>.19%</td><td>.21%</td><td>.26%</td><td>.19%</td><td>.27%</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for credit losses</td><td>.18%</td><td>.20%</td><td>.21%</td><td>.12%</td><td>.14%</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan and lease losses (b)</td><td>1.18%</td><td>1.20%</td><td>1.24%</td><td>1.33%</td><td>1.67%</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance as a multiple of net charge-offs</td><td>6.26x</td><td>5.71x</td><td>4.77x</td><td>7.06x</td><td>6.27x</td></tr></table> (a) Includes automobile, education and other consumer. (b) Includes $468 million in write-offs of purchased impaired loans in 2015 due to the change in derecognition policy effective December 31, 2016 for certain consumer purchased impaired loans. See Note 1 Accounting Policies in our 2015 Form 10-K for additional information. The following table presents the assignment of the allowance for loan and lease losses and the categories of loans as a percentage of total loans. Changes in the allocation over time reflect the changes in loan portfolio composition, risk profile and refinements to reserve methodologies. ALLOCATION OF ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN AND LEASE LOSSES <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2018</td><td colspan="2">2017</td><td colspan="2">2016</td><td colspan="2">2015</td><td colspan="2">2014</td></tr><tr><td>December 31 dollars in millions</td><td>Allowance</td><td>Loans to Total Loans</td><td>Allowance</td><td>Loans to Total Loans</td><td>Allowance</td><td>Loans to Total Loans</td><td>Allowance</td><td>Loans to Total Loans</td><td>Allowance</td><td>Loans to Total Loans</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>$1,350</td><td>51.6%</td><td>$1,302</td><td>50.1%</td><td>$1,179</td><td>48.1%</td><td>$1,286</td><td>47.7%</td><td>$1,209</td><td>47.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>271</td><td>12.4</td><td>244</td><td>13.1</td><td>320</td><td>13.8</td><td>281</td><td>13.3</td><td>318</td><td>11.4</td></tr><tr><td>Equipment lease financing</td><td>42</td><td>3.2</td><td>36</td><td>3.6</td><td>35</td><td>3.6</td><td>38</td><td>3.6</td><td>44</td><td>3.7</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>204</td><td>11.6</td><td>284</td><td>12.9</td><td>357</td><td>14.2</td><td>484</td><td>15.5</td><td>872</td><td>16.9</td></tr><tr><td>Residential real estate</td><td>297</td><td>8.3</td><td>300</td><td>7.8</td><td>332</td><td>7.4</td><td>307</td><td>7.0</td><td>561</td><td>7.0</td></tr><tr><td>Credit card</td><td>239</td><td>2.8</td><td>220</td><td>2.6</td><td>181</td><td>2.5</td><td>167</td><td>2.4</td><td>173</td><td>2.3</td></tr><tr><td>Other consumer (a)</td><td>226</td><td>10.1</td><td>225</td><td>9.9</td><td>185</td><td>10.4</td><td>164</td><td>10.5</td><td>154</td><td>11.1</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$2,629</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$2,611</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$2,589</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$2,727</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$3,331</td><td>100.0%</td></tr></table> (a) Includes automobile, education and other consumer.

What is the sum of Aircraft on Firm Order in 2009?

Table of Contents Index to Financial Statements Cargo Delta Cargo is the largest cargo carrier among the U. S. passenger airlines, based on revenue. Through the strength of our global network, we are able to connect all of the world’s major freight gateways. We generate cargo revenues in domestic and international markets primarily through the use of cargo space on regularly scheduled passenger aircraft. Additionally, we have a limited, focused network of freighters that tie together the key freight markets in Asia and connect to three gateways in the U. S. Delta Cargo is a member of SkyTeam Cargo, the world’s largest global airline cargo alliance. The alliance, whose other members are Aeromexico Cargo, Air France Cargo, Alitalia Cargo, CSA Czech Airlines Cargo, KLM Cargo and Korean Air Cargo, offers a global network with over 16,000 daily flights spanning 6 continents. This alliance offers cargo customers a consistent international product line, and the partners work to jointly improve their efficiency and effectiveness in the marketplace. MRO Our maintenance, repair and overhaul (“MRO”) operations known as Delta TechOps is the largest airline MRO in North America with state-of-the-art facilities worldwide. In addition to providing maintenance and engineering support for the combined Delta and NWA fleets of nearly 800 aircraft, Delta TechOps serves more than 125 aviation and airline customers from around the world. Delta TechOps employs approximately 8,500 maintenance professionals and is one of the most experienced MRO providers in the world. Among the key services we offer are: ? Airframe Maintenance—aircraft overhaul for both widebody and narrowbody craft; ? Component Maintenance—repair, overhaul, and test facilities for electromechanical components and avionics; ? Engine Maintenance—full overhaul, repair, and support capabilities for engine parts and components; ? Line Maintenance—a full range of ground services including deicing and aircraft parking; ? Support Services—logistics, fleet engineering, engine leasing, and more; and ? Technical Operations Training—technical training for a wide variety of aircraft types. Fuel Our results of operations are significantly impacted by changes in the price and availability of aircraft fuel. The following table shows our aircraft fuel consumption and costs for 2006 through 2008. <table><tr><td> Year</td><td> Gallons Consumed^-2(Millions)</td><td> Cost^{-2 (3)}(Millions)</td><td> Average Price Per Gallon^{-2 (3)}</td><td> Percentage of Total Operating Expense^-2</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2008^-1</td><td>2,740</td><td>$8,686</td><td>$3.16</td><td>38</td><td>%^-4</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>2,534</td><td>5,676</td><td>2.24</td><td>31%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td>2,480</td><td>5,250</td><td>2.12</td><td>30%</td><td></td></tr></table> (1) Includes Northwest operations for the period from October 30 to December 31, 2008. (2) Includes the operations under contract carrier agreements with regional air carriers. (3) Net of fuel hedge (losses) gains under our fuel hedging program of ($65) million, $51 million and ($108) million for 2008, 2007 and 2006, (4) Total operating expense for 2008 reflects a $7.3 billion non-cash charge from an impairment of goodwill and other intangible assets and $1.1 billion in primarily non-cash merger-related charges. Including these charges, fuel costs accounted for 28% of total operating expense. Our aircraft fuel purchase contracts do not provide material protection against price increases or assure the availability of our fuel supplies. We purchase most of our aircraft fuel under contracts that establish the price based on various market indices. We also purchase aircraft fuel on the spot market, from off-shore sources and under contracts that permit the refiners to set the price. We use derivative instruments, which are comprised of crude oil, heating oil and jet fuel swap, collar and call option contracts, in an effort to manage our exposure to changes in aircraft fuel prices. Table of Contents Index to Financial Statements Our purchase commitments (firm orders) for aircraft, as well as options to purchase additional aircraft, as of December 31, 2008 are shown in the following tables: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6"> Delivery in Calendar Years Ending</td><td></td></tr><tr><td> Aircraft on Firm Order^-3</td><td> 2009</td><td> 2010</td><td> 2011</td><td> 2012</td><td> After 2012</td><td> Total</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>B-737-700</td><td>5</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>B-737-800</td><td>11</td><td>21</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>33</td><td>^-1</td></tr><tr><td>B-777-200LR</td><td>6</td><td>2</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>8</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>A319-100</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>A320-200</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>2</td><td>—</td><td>2</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>CRJ-900</td><td>10</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>10</td><td>^-2</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>32</td><td>23</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>5</td><td>63</td><td></td></tr></table> (1) Includes 31 aircraft, which we have entered into definitive agreements to sell to third parties immediately following delivery of these aircraft to us by the manufacturer. (2) Includes 2 aircraft orders we assigned to a regional air carrier. (3) We have excluded from the table above our order of 18 B-787-8 aircraft. The Boeing Company (“Boeing”) has informed us that Boeing will be unable to meet the contractual delivery schedule for these aircraft. We are in discussions with Boeing regarding this situation. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="7"> Delivery in Calendar Years Ending</td></tr><tr><td> Aircraft on Option^-1</td><td> 2010</td><td> 2011</td><td> 2012</td><td> 2013</td><td> After 2013</td><td> Total</td><td> Rolling Options</td></tr><tr><td>B-737-800</td><td>10</td><td>24</td><td>22</td><td>4</td><td>—</td><td>60</td><td>116</td></tr><tr><td>B-767-300ER</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>4</td><td>6</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>B-767-400</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>7</td><td>12</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>B-777-200LR</td><td>2</td><td>6</td><td>6</td><td>4</td><td>9</td><td>27</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>B-787-8</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6</td><td>12</td><td>18</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td>CRJ-200</td><td>4</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>CRJ-700</td><td>5</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>CRJ-900</td><td>25</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>26</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>EMB 175</td><td>4</td><td>18</td><td>14</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>36</td><td>64</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>52</td><td>50</td><td>43</td><td>17</td><td>32</td><td>194</td><td>208</td></tr></table> (1) Aircraft options have scheduled delivery slots, while rolling options replace options and are assigned delivery slots as options expire or are exercised. Ground Facilities We lease most of the land and buildings that we occupy. Delta’s largest aircraft maintenance base, various computer, cargo, flight kitchen and training facilities and most of its principal offices are located at or near the Atlanta Airport, on land leased from the City of Atlanta generally under long-term leases. Delta owns a portion of its principal offices, its Atlanta reservations center and other real property in Atlanta. NWA owns its primary offices, which are located near the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport, including its corporate offices located on a 160-acre site east of the airport. Other NWA owned facilities include reservations centers in Baltimore, Maryland, Tampa, Florida, Minot, North Dakota and Chisholm, Minnesota, and a data processing center in Eagan, Minnesota. NWA also owns property in Tokyo, including a 1.3-acre site in downtown Tokyo and a 33-acre land parcel, 512-room hotel and flight kitchen located near Tokyo’s Narita International Airport. We lease ticket counter and other terminal space, operating areas and air cargo facilities in most of the airports that we serve. At most airports, we have entered into use agreements which provide for the non-exclusive use of runways, taxiways, and other improvements and facilities; landing fees under these agreements normally are based on the number of landings and weight of aircraft. These leases and use agreements generally run for The Company entered into agreements with various governmental entities in the states of Kentucky, Georgia and Tennessee to implement tax abatement plans related to its distribution center in Franklin, Kentucky (Simpson County), its distribution center in Macon, Georgia (Bibb County), and its Store Support Center in Brentwood, Tennessee (Williamson County). The tax abatement plans provide for reduction of real property taxes for specified time frames by legally transferring title to its real property in exchange for industrial revenue bonds. This property was then leased back to the Company. No cash was exchanged. The lease payments are equal to the amount of the payments on the bonds. The tax abatement period extends through the term of the lease, which coincides with the maturity date of the bonds. At any time, the Company has the option to purchase the real property by paying off the bonds, plus $1. The terms and amounts authorized and drawn under each industrial revenue bond agreement are outlined as follows, as of December 30, 2017: <table><tr><td></td><td>Bond Term</td><td>Bond Authorized Amount(in millions)</td><td>Amount Drawn(in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Franklin, Kentucky Distribution Center</td><td>30 years</td><td>$54.0</td><td>$51.8</td></tr><tr><td>Macon, Georgia Distribution Center</td><td>15 years</td><td>$58.0</td><td>$49.9</td></tr><tr><td>Brentwood, Tennessee Store Support Center</td><td>10 years</td><td>$78.0</td><td>$75.3</td></tr></table> Due to the form of these transactions, the Company has not recorded the bonds or the lease obligation associated with the sale lease-back transaction. The original cost of the Company’s property and equipment is recorded on the balance sheet and is being depreciated over its estimated useful life. Capitalized Software Costs The Company capitalizes certain costs related to the acquisition and development of software and amortizes these costs using the straight-line method over the estimated useful life of the software, which is three to five years. Computer software consists of software developed for internal use and third-party software purchased for internal use. A subsequent addition, modification or upgrade to internal-use software is capitalized to the extent that it enhances the software’s functionality or extends its useful life. These costs are included in computer software and hardware in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets. Certain software costs not meeting the criteria for capitalization are expensed as incurred. Store Closing Costs The Company regularly evaluates the performance of its stores and periodically closes those that are under-performing. The Company records a liability for costs associated with an exit or disposal activity when the liability is incurred, usually in the period the store closes. Store closing costs were not significant to the results of operations for any of the fiscal years presented. Leases Assets under capital leases are amortized in accordance with the Company’s normal depreciation policy for owned assets or over the lease term, if shorter, and the related charge to operations is included in depreciation expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income. Certain operating leases include rent increases during the lease term. For these leases, the Company recognizes the related rental expense on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease (which includes the pre-opening period of construction, renovation, fixturing and merchandise placement) and records the difference between the expense charged to operations and amounts paid as a deferred rent liability. The Company occasionally receives reimbursements from landlords to be used towards improving the related store to be leased. Leasehold improvements are recorded at their gross costs, including items reimbursed by landlords. Related reimbursements are deferred and amortized on a straight-line basis as a reduction of rent expense over the applicable lease term. Note 2 - Share-Based Compensation: Share-based compensation includes stock option and restricted stock unit awards and certain transactions under the Company’s ESPP. Share-based compensation expense is recognized based on the grant date fair value of all stock option and restricted stock unit awards plus a discount on shares purchased by employees as a part of the ESPP. The discount under the ESPPrepresents the difference between the purchase date market value and the employee’s purchase price.

What is the sum of the Cost of sales in the years where Net sales is greater than 1000? (in million)

Table of Contents ITEM 2. PROPERTIES Flight Equipment and Fleet Renewal As of December 31, 2016, American operated a mainline fleet of 930 aircraft. In 2016, we continued our extensive fleet renewal program, which has provided us with the youngest fleet of the major U. S. network carriers. During 2016, American took delivery of 55 new mainline aircraft and retired 71 aircraft. We are supported by our wholly-owned and third-party regional carriers that fly under capacity purchase agreements operating as American Eagle. As of December 31, 2016, American Eagle operated 606 regional aircraft. During 2016, we increased our regional fleet by 61 regional aircraft, we removed and placed in temporary storage one Embraer ERJ 140 aircraft and retired 41 other regional aircraft. Mainline As of December 31, 2016, American’s mainline fleet consisted of the following aircraft: <table><tr><td></td><td>Average Seating Capacity</td><td>Average Age (Years)</td><td>Owned</td><td>Leased</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>Airbus A319</td><td>128</td><td>12.8</td><td>19</td><td>106</td><td>125</td></tr><tr><td>Airbus A320</td><td>150</td><td>15.5</td><td>10</td><td>41</td><td>51</td></tr><tr><td>Airbus A321</td><td>178</td><td>4.9</td><td>153</td><td>46</td><td>199</td></tr><tr><td>AirbusA330-200</td><td>258</td><td>5.0</td><td>15</td><td>—</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>AirbusA330-300</td><td>291</td><td>16.4</td><td>4</td><td>5</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Boeing737-800</td><td>160</td><td>7.7</td><td>123</td><td>161</td><td>284</td></tr><tr><td>Boeing757-200</td><td>179</td><td>17.9</td><td>39</td><td>12</td><td>51</td></tr><tr><td>Boeing767-300ER</td><td>211</td><td>19.5</td><td>28</td><td>3</td><td>31</td></tr><tr><td>Boeing777-200ER</td><td>263</td><td>16.0</td><td>44</td><td>3</td><td>47</td></tr><tr><td>Boeing777-300ER</td><td>310</td><td>2.8</td><td>18</td><td>2</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Boeing787-8</td><td>226</td><td>1.3</td><td>17</td><td>—</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>Boeing787-9</td><td>285</td><td>0.2</td><td>4</td><td>—</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Embraer 190</td><td>99</td><td>9.2</td><td>20</td><td>—</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>McDonnell DouglasMD-80</td><td>140</td><td>22.0</td><td>25</td><td>32</td><td>57</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td></td><td>10.3</td><td>519</td><td>411</td><td>930</td></tr></table> CF INDUSTRIES HOLDINGS, INC. 123 Changes in common shares outstanding are as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Beginning balance</td><td>233,081,556</td><td>241,673,050</td><td>279,240,970</td></tr><tr><td>Exercise of stock options</td><td>17,600</td><td>274,705</td><td>942,560</td></tr><tr><td>Issuance of restricted stock^-1</td><td>44,941</td><td>40,673</td><td>20,875</td></tr><tr><td>Forfeitures of restricted stock</td><td>-10,000</td><td>—</td><td>-65,680</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase of treasury shares^-2</td><td>-19,928</td><td>-8,906,872</td><td>-38,465,675</td></tr><tr><td>Ending balance</td><td>233,114,169</td><td>233,081,556</td><td>241,673,050</td></tr></table> (1) Includes shares issued from treasury. (2) Includes shares withheld to pay employee tax obligations upon the vesting of restricted stock. Preferred Stock CF Holdings is authorized to issue 50 million shares of $0.01 par value preferred stock. Our Second Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, authorizes the Board, without any further stockholder action or approval, to issue these shares in one or more classes or series, and (except in the case of our Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock, 500,000 shares of which are authorized and the terms of which were specified in the original certificate of incorporation of CF Holdings) to fix the rights, preferences and privileges of the shares of each wholly unissued class or series and any of its qualifications, limitations or restrictions. In connection with the Plan (as defined below), 500,000 shares of preferred stock have been designated as Series B Junior Participating Preferred Stock. The Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock had been established in CF Holdings’ original certificate of incorporation in connection with our former stockholder rights plan that expired in 2015. No shares of preferred stock have been issued. Tax Benefits Preservation Plan On September 6, 2016, CF Holdings entered into a Tax Benefits Preservation Plan (the Plan) with Computershare Trust Company, N. A. , as rights agent. The Plan is intended to help protect our tax net operating losses and certain other tax assets (the Tax Benefits) by deterring any person from becoming a "5-percent shareholder" (as defined in Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended) (a 5% Shareholder). Under the Plan, each share of common stock has attached to it one right. Each right entitles the holder to purchase one one-thousandth of a share of our preferred stock designated as Series B Junior Participating Preferred Stock at a purchase price of $100, subject to adjustment. Rights will only be exercisable under the limited circumstances specified in the Plan when there has been a distribution of the rights and such rights are no longer redeemable by CF Holdings. A distribution of the rights would occur upon the earlier of (i) 10 business days following a public announcement that a person or group of affiliated or associated persons has become a 5% Shareholder (subject to certain exceptions described in the Plan) and (ii) 10 business days (or such later date as the Board shall determine) following the commencement of a tender offer or exchange offer that would result in a person or group of affiliated or associated persons becoming a 5% Shareholder (subject to certain exceptions described in the Plan). The rights will expire at the earliest of (i) 5:00 P. M. (New York City time) on September 5, 2017, or such later date and time (but not later than 5:00 P. M. (New York City time) on September 5, 2019) as may be determined by the Board and approved by the stockholders of CF Holdings by a vote of the majority of the votes cast by the holders of shares entitled to vote thereon at a meeting of the stockholders of CF Holdings prior to 5:00 P. M. (New York City time) on September 5, 2017, (ii) the time at which the rights are redeemed or exchanged as provided in the Plan, (iii) the time at which the Board determines that the Plan is no longer necessary or desirable for the preservation of Tax Benefits, and (iv) the close of business on the first day of a taxable year of CF Holdings to which the Board determines that no Tax Benefits may be carried forward. In the event that a person or group of affiliated or associated persons becomes a 5% Shareholder (subject to certain exceptions described in the Plan), each holder of a right, other than such person, any member of such group or related person, all of whose rights will be null and void, will thereafter have the right to receive, upon exercise, common stock having a value equal to two times the exercise price of the right. CF INDUSTRIES HOLDINGS, INC. 126 19. Stock-Based Compensation 2014 Equity and Incentive Plan On May 14, 2014, our shareholders approved the CF Industries Holdings, Inc. 2014 Equity and Incentive Plan (the 2014 Equity and Incentive Plan) which replaced the CF Industries Holdings, Inc. 2009 Equity and Incentive Plan. Under the 2014 Equity and Incentive Plan, we may grant incentive stock options, nonqualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, restricted stock units, performance awards (payable in cash or stock) and other stock-based awards to our officers, employees, consultants and independent contractors (including non-employee directors). The purpose of the 2014 Equity and Incentive Plan is to provide an incentive for our employees, officers, consultants and non-employee directors that is aligned with the interests of our stockholders. Share Reserve and Individual Award Limits The maximum number of shares reserved for the grant of awards under the 2014 Equity and Incentive Plan is the sum of (i) 13.9 million and (ii) the number of shares subject to outstanding awards under our predecessor plans to the extent such awards terminate or expire without delivery of shares. For purposes of determining the number of shares of stock available for grant under the 2014 Equity and Incentive Plan, each option or stock appreciation right is counted against the reserve as one share. Each share of stock granted, other than an option or a stock appreciation right, is counted against the reserve as 1.61 shares. If any outstanding award expires or is settled in cash, any unissued shares subject to the award are again available for grant under the 2014 Equity and Incentive Plan. Shares tendered in payment of the exercise price of an option and shares withheld by the Company or otherwise received by the Company to satisfy tax withholding obligations are not available for future grant under the 2014 Equity and Incentive Plan. As of December 31, 2016, we had 11.7 million shares available for future awards under the 2014 Equity and Incentive Plan. The 2014 Equity and Incentive Plan provides that no more than 5.0 million underlying shares may be granted to a participant in any one calendar year. Stock Options Under the 2014 Equity and Incentive Plan and our predecessor plans, we granted to plan participants nonqualified stock options to purchase shares of our common stock. The exercise price of these options is equal to the market price of our common stock on the date of grant. The contractual life of each option is ten years and generally one-third of the options vest on each of the first three anniversaries of the date of grant. The fair value of each stock option award is estimated using the Black-Scholes option valuation model. Key assumptions used and resulting grant date fair values are shown in the following table. <table><tr><td></td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted-average assumptions:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Expected volatility</td><td>39%</td><td>31%</td><td>33%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected term of stock options</td><td>4.3 Years</td><td>4.3 Years</td><td>4.3 Years</td></tr><tr><td>Risk-free interest rate</td><td>1.2%</td><td>1.5%</td><td>1.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected dividend yield</td><td>3.3%</td><td>1.9%</td><td>1.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted-average grant date fair value</td><td>$8.97</td><td>$13.99</td><td>$12.77</td></tr></table> The expected volatility of our stock options is based on the combination of the historical volatility of our common stock and implied volatilities of exchange traded options on our common stock. The expected term of options is estimated based on our historical exercise experience, post-vesting employment termination behavior and the contractual term. The risk-free interest rate is based on the U. S. Treasury Strip yield curve in effect at the time of grant for the expected term of the options. Ammonia Segment Our ammonia segment produces anhydrous ammonia (ammonia), which is our most concentrated nitrogen fertilizer as it contains 82% nitrogen. The results of our ammonia segment consist of sales of ammonia to external customers. In addition, ammonia is the "basic" nitrogen product that we upgrade into other nitrogen products such as granular urea, UAN and AN. We produce ammonia at all of our nitrogen manufacturing complexes. The following table presents summary operating data for our ammonia segment, including the impact of our acquisition of the remaining 50% equity interest in CF Fertilisers UK: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="7">Twelve months ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td colspan="2">2016 v. 2015</td><td colspan="2">2015 v. 2014</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="7">(in millions, except as noted)</td></tr><tr><td>Net sales</td><td>$981</td><td>$1,523</td><td>$1,576</td><td>$-542</td><td>-36%</td><td>$-53</td><td>-3%</td></tr><tr><td>Cost of sales</td><td>715</td><td>884</td><td>983</td><td>-169</td><td>-19%</td><td>-99</td><td>-10%</td></tr><tr><td>Gross margin</td><td>$266</td><td>$639</td><td>$593</td><td>$-373</td><td>-58%</td><td>$46</td><td>8%</td></tr><tr><td>Gross margin percentage</td><td>27.1%</td><td>42.0%</td><td>37.6%</td><td>-14.9%</td><td></td><td>4.4%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Sales volume by product tons (000s)</td><td>2,874</td><td>2,995</td><td>2,969</td><td>-121</td><td>-4%</td><td>26</td><td>1%</td></tr><tr><td>Sales volume by nutrient tons (000s)⁽¹⁾</td><td>2,358</td><td>2,456</td><td>2,434</td><td>-98</td><td>-4%</td><td>22</td><td>1%</td></tr><tr><td>Average selling price per product ton</td><td>$341</td><td>$509</td><td>$531</td><td>$-168</td><td>-33%</td><td>$-22</td><td>-4%</td></tr><tr><td>Average selling price per nutrient ton^-1</td><td>$416</td><td>$620</td><td>$648</td><td>$-204</td><td>-33%</td><td>$-28</td><td>-4%</td></tr><tr><td>Gross margin per product ton</td><td>$93</td><td>$213</td><td>$200</td><td>$-120</td><td>-56%</td><td>$13</td><td>7%</td></tr><tr><td>Gross margin per nutrient ton^-1</td><td>$113</td><td>$260</td><td>$244</td><td>$-147</td><td>-57%</td><td>$16</td><td>7%</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation and amortization</td><td>$96</td><td>$95</td><td>$69</td><td>$1</td><td>1%</td><td>$26</td><td>38%</td></tr><tr><td>Unrealized net mark-to-market loss (gain) on natural gas derivatives</td><td>$-85</td><td>$40</td><td>$25</td><td>$-125</td><td>N/M</td><td>$15</td><td>60%</td></tr></table> (1) Ammonia represents 82% nitrogen content. Nutrient tons represent the tons of nitrogen within the product tons. Year Ended December 31, 2016 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2015 Net Sales. Total net sales in the ammonia segment decreased by $542 million, or 36%, to $981 million in 2016 from $1.52 billion in 2015 due primarily to a 33% decrease in average selling prices and a 4% decrease in sales volume. These results include the impact of the CF Fertilisers UK acquisition, which increased net sales by $26 million, or 2%. The remaining decrease in our ammonia net sales of $568 million, or 37%, was due primarily to lower average selling prices and sales volume. Selling prices declined due to excess global nitrogen supply. In addition, our selling prices reflect the impact of a higher proportion of export sales, the volumes of which increased as a result of the weak fall application season attributable to the combined impact of weather conditions and low crop prices on our customers' decisions related to applying fertilizer in the fall. Sales volume in 2016 declined due to combination of the weak fall application season and the impact of upgrading additional ammonia production at our Donaldsonville facility into granular urea and UAN as a result of our capacity expansion projects coming on line at our Donaldsonville, Louisiana complex. Cost of Sales. Cost of sales per ton in our ammonia segment averaged $248 per ton in 2016, including the impact of the CF Fertilisers UK acquisition, which averaged $220 per ton. The remaining cost of sales per ton was $250 in 2016, a 16% decrease from the $296 per ton in 2015. The decrease was due primarily to the impact of unrealized net mark-to-market gains on natural gas derivatives in 2016 compared to losses in 2015 and to the impact of lower realized natural gas costs in 2016. This was partly offset by capacity expansion project start-up costs of $50 million and an increase in expansion project depreciation as a result of the new ammonia plants at our Donaldsonville and Port Neal facilities.

what was the change in advertising costs from 2001 to 2002?

A summary of these various obligations at December 31, 2012, follows (in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td>Total</td><td>2013</td><td>2014 to2015</td><td>2016 to2017</td><td>Thereafter</td></tr><tr><td>Reclamation and environmental obligations^a</td><td>$5,243</td><td>$246</td><td>$471</td><td>$329</td><td>$4,197</td></tr><tr><td>Debt maturities</td><td>3,527</td><td>2</td><td>500</td><td>500</td><td>2,525</td></tr><tr><td>Take-or-pay contracts^b</td><td>2,200</td><td>976</td><td>731</td><td>286</td><td>207</td></tr><tr><td>Scheduled interest payment obligations^c</td><td>1,289</td><td>121</td><td>241</td><td>226</td><td>701</td></tr><tr><td>Operating lease obligations</td><td>205</td><td>32</td><td>38</td><td>31</td><td>104</td></tr><tr><td>Total^d</td><td>$12,464</td><td>$1,377</td><td>$1,981</td><td>$1,372</td><td>$7,734</td></tr></table> a. Represents estimated cash payments, on an undiscounted and unescalated basis, associated with reclamation and environmental activities. The timing and the amount of these payments could change as a result of changes in regulatory requirements, changes in scope and timing of reclamation activities, the settlement of environmental matters and as actual spending occurs. Refer to Note 13 for additional discussion of environmental and reclamation matters. b. Represents contractual obligations for purchases of goods or services that are defined by us as agreements that are enforceable and legally binding and that specify all significant terms. Take-orpay contracts primarily comprise the procurement of copper concentrates ($799 million), electricity ($524 million) and transportation services ($448 million). Some of our take-or-pay contracts are settled based on the prevailing market rate for the service or commodity purchased, and in some cases, the amount of the actual obligation may change over time because of market conditions. Obligations for copper concentrates provide for deliveries of specified volumes to Atlantic Copper at market-based prices. Electricity obligations are primarily for contractual minimum demand at the South America and Tenke mines. Transportation obligations are primarily for South America contracted ocean freight and for North America rail freight. c. Scheduled interest payment obligations were calculated using stated coupon rates for fixed-rate debt and interest rates applicable at December 31, 2012, for variable-rate debt. d. This table excludes certain other obligations in our consolidated balance sheets, including estimated funding for pension obligations as the funding may vary from year to year based on changes in the fair value of plan assets and actuarial assumptions, accrued liabilities totaling $107 million that relate to unrecognized tax benefits where the timing of settlement is not determinable; Atlantic Copper's obligations for retired employees totaling $38 million (refer to Note 10); and PT Freeport Indonesia's reclamation and closure cash fund obligation totaling $17 million (refer to Note 13). This table also excludes purchase orders for the purchase of inventory and other goods and services, as purchase orders typically represent authorizations to purchase rather than binding agreements. In addition to our debt maturities and other contractual obligations discussed above, we have other commitments, which we expect to fund with available cash, projected operating cash flows, available credit facility or future financing transactions, if necessary. These include (i) PT Freeport Indonesia’s commitment to provide one percent of its annual revenue for the development of the local people in its area of operations through the Freeport Partnership Fund for Community Development, (ii) TFM’s commitment to provide 0.3 percent of its annual revenue for the development of the local people in its area of operations and (iii) other commercial commitments, including standby letters of credit, surety bonds and guarantees. Refer to Notes 13 and 14 for further discussion. CONTINGENCIES Environmental The cost of complying with environmental laws is a fundamental and substantial cost of our business. At December 31, 2012, we had $1.2 billion recorded in our consolidated balance sheets for environmental obligations attributed to CERCLA or analogous state programs and for estimated future costs associated with environmental obligations that are considered probable based on specific facts and circumstances. During 2012, we incurred environmental capital expenditures and other environmental costs (including our joint venture partners’ shares) of $612 million for programs to comply with applicable environmental laws and regulations that affect our operations, compared to $387 million in 2011 and $372 million in 2010. The increase in environmental costs in 2012, compared with 2011 and 2010, primarily relates to higher expenditures for land and settlements of environmental matters (see Note 13 for further discussion). For 2013, we expect to incur approximately $600 million of aggregate environmental capital expenditures and other environmental costs, which are part of our overall 2013 operating budget. The timing and amount of estimated payments could change as a result of changes in regulatory requirements, changes in scope and timing of reclamation activities, the settlement of environmental matters and as actual spending occurs. Refer to Note 13 for further information about environmental regulation, including significant environmental matters. Asset Retirement Obligations We recognize AROs as liabilities when incurred, with the initial measurement at fair value. These obligations, which are initially estimated based on discounted cash flow estimates, are accreted to full value over time through charges to income. Reclamation costs for disturbances are recorded as an ARO in the period of disturbance. Our cost estimates are reflected on a third-party cost basis and comply with our legal obligation to retire tangible, long-lived assets. At December 31, 2012, we had $1.1 billion recorded in our consolidated balance sheets for AROs. Spending ILLUMINA, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) Advertising Costs The Company expenses advertising costs as incurred. Advertising costs were approximately $440,000 for 2003, $267,000 for 2002 and $57,000 for 2001. Income Taxes A deferred income tax asset or liability is computed for the expected future impact of differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities, as well as the expected future tax benefit to be derived from tax loss and credit carryforwards. Deferred income tax expense is generally the net change during the year in the deferred income tax asset or liability. Valuation allowances are established when realizability of deferred tax assets is uncertain. The effect of tax rate changes is reflected in tax expense during the period in which such changes are enacted. Foreign Currency Translation The functional currencies of the Company’s wholly owned subsidiaries are their respective local currencies. Accordingly, all balance sheet accounts of these operations are translated to U. S. dollars using the exchange rates in effect at the balance sheet date, and revenues and expenses are translated using the average exchange rates in effect during the period. The gains and losses from foreign currency translation of these subsidiaries’ financial statements are recorded directly as a separate component of stockholders’ equity under the caption ‘‘Accumulated other comprehensive income. ’’ Stock-Based Compensation At December 28, 2003, the Company has three stock-based employee and non-employee director compensation plans, which are described more fully in Note 5. As permitted by SFAS No.123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, the Company accounts for common stock options granted, and restricted stock sold, to employees, founders and directors using the intrinsic value method and, thus, recognizes no compensation expense for options granted, or restricted stock sold, with exercise prices equal to or greater than the fair value of the Company’s common stock on the date of the grant. The Company has recorded deferred stock compensation related to certain stock options, and restricted stock, which were granted prior to the Company’s initial public offering with exercise prices below estimated fair value (see Note 5), which is being amortized on an accelerated amortization methodology in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation Number (‘‘FIN’’) 28. Pro forma information regarding net loss is required by SFAS No.123 and has been determined as if the Company had accounted for its employee stock options and employee stock purchases under the fair value method of that statement. The fair value for these options was estimated at the dates of grant using the fair value option pricing model (Black Scholes) with the following weighted-average assumptions for 2003, 2002 and 2001: <table><tr><td></td><td>Year Ended December 28, 2003</td><td>Year Ended December 29, 2002</td><td>Year Ended December 30, 2001</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average risk-free interest rate</td><td>3.03%</td><td>3.73%</td><td>4.65%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected dividend yield</td><td>0%</td><td>0%</td><td>0%</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average volatility</td><td>103%</td><td>104%</td><td>119%</td></tr><tr><td>Estimated life (in years)</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average fair value of options granted</td><td>$3.31</td><td>$4.39</td><td>$7.51</td></tr></table> The Company renewed an unsecured bank credit line on April 29, 2010 which provides for funding of up to $5,000 and bears interest at the prime rate less 1% (2.25% at June 30, 2010). The credit line was renewed through April 29, 2012. At June 30, 2010, $762 was outstanding. The Company renewed a bank credit line on March 7, 2010 which provides for funding of up to $8,000 and bears interest at the Federal Reserve Board’s prime rate (3.25% at June 30, 2010). The credit line expires March 7, 2011 and is secured by $1,000 of investments. At June 30, 2010, no amount was outstanding. The Company has entered into a bank credit facility agreement that includes a revolving loan, a term loan and a bullet term loan. The revolving loan allows short-term borrowings of up to $150,000, which may be increased by the Company at any time until maturity to $250,000. The revolving loan terminates June 4, 2015. At June 30, 2010, the outstanding revolving loan balance was $120,000. The term loan has an original principal balance of $150,000, with quarterly principal payments of $5,625 beginning on September 30, 2011, and the remaining balance due June 4, 2015. The bullet term loan had an original principal balance of $100,000. The full balance, which would have been due on December 4, 2010, was paid in full on July 8, 2010 as set forth in Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements (see Item 8). Each of the loans bear interest at a variable rate equal to (a) a rate based on LIBOR or (b) an alternate base rate (the greater of (a) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.5%, (b) the Prime Rate or (c) LIBOR plus 1.0%), plus an applicable percentage in each case determined by the Company’s leverage ratio. The outstanding balances bear interest at a weighted average rate of 2.99%. The loans are secured by pledges of capital stock of certain subsidiaries of the Company. The loans are also guaranteed by certain subsidiaries of the Company. The credit facility is subject to various financial covenants that require the Company to maintain certain financial ratios as defined in the agreement. As of June 30, 2010, the Company was in compliance with all such covenants. The Company has entered into various capital lease obligations for the use of certain computer equipment. Included in property and equipment are related assets of $8,872. At June 30, 2010, $5,689 was outstanding, of which $4,380 will be maturing in the next twelve months. Contractual Obligations and Other Commitments At June 30, 2010 the Company’s total off balance sheet contractual obligations were $36,935. This balance consists of $27,228 of long-term operating leases for various facilities and equipment which expire from 2011 to 2017 and the remaining $9,707 is for purchase commitments related to property and equipment, particularly for contractual obligations related to the on-going construction of new facilities. The table excludes $7,548 of liabilities for uncertain tax positions as we are unable to reasonably estimate the ultimate amount or timing of settlement. Contractual obligations by Less than More than <table><tr><td>Contractual obligations by</td><td rowspan="2">Less than 1 year</td><td></td><td></td><td rowspan="2">More than 5 years</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>period as of June 30, 2010</td><td>1-3 years</td><td>3-5 years</td><td>TOTAL</td></tr><tr><td>Operating lease obligations</td><td>$ 8,765</td><td>$ 9,422</td><td>$ 5,851</td><td>$ 3,190</td><td>$ 27,228</td></tr><tr><td>Capital lease obligations</td><td>4,380</td><td>1,309</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5,689</td></tr><tr><td>Notes payable, including accrued interest</td><td>102,493</td><td>46,210</td><td>225,213</td><td>-</td><td>373,916</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase obligations</td><td>9,707</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>9,707</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$125,345</td><td>$56,941</td><td>$231,064</td><td>$3,190</td><td>$416,540</td></tr></table> Recent Accounting Pronouncements In December 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Statement on Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No.141(R), “Business Combinations,” (“SFAS 141(R)”) which replaces SFAS No.141 and has since been incorporated into the Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) as ASC 805-10. ASC 805-10 establishes principles and requirements for how an acquirer recognizes and measures in its financial statements the identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, any non-controlling interest in the acquired entity and the goodwill acquired. The Statement also establishes disclosure requirements which will enable users of the financial statements to evaluate the nature and financial effects of the business combination. Relative to SFAS 141(R), the FASB issued FSP 141(R)-1 on April 1, 2009, which is now incorporated in ASC 805-20. ASC 805-20 eliminates the requirement under FAS 141(R) to record assets and liabilities at the acquisition date for noncontractual contingencies at fair value where it is deemed “more-likely-than-not” that an asset or liability would result. Under ASC 805-20, such assets and liabilities would only need to be recorded where the fair value can be determined during the measurement period or where it is probable that an asset or liability exists at the acquisition date and the amount of fair value can be reasonably determined. ASC 805-10 was effective for the Company on July 1, 2009. The adoption Insurance. The following table presents the underwriting results and ratios for the Insurance segment for the periods indicated. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Years Ended December 31,</td><td colspan="2">2012/2011</td><td colspan="2">2011/2010</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>Variance</td><td>% Change</td><td>Variance</td><td>% Change</td></tr><tr><td>Gross written premiums</td><td>$1,073.1</td><td>$975.6</td><td>$865.4</td><td>$97.5</td><td>10.0%</td><td>$110.3</td><td>12.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Net written premiums</td><td>852.1</td><td>820.5</td><td>620.3</td><td>31.6</td><td>3.9%</td><td>200.2</td><td>32.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums earned</td><td>$852.4</td><td>$821.2</td><td>$641.1</td><td>$31.3</td><td>3.8%</td><td>$180.1</td><td>28.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Incurred losses and LAE</td><td>700.3</td><td>705.9</td><td>536.8</td><td>-5.6</td><td>-0.8%</td><td>169.2</td><td>31.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Commission and brokerage</td><td>117.6</td><td>137.7</td><td>120.8</td><td>-20.1</td><td>-14.6%</td><td>16.9</td><td>14.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Other underwriting expenses</td><td>103.0</td><td>89.5</td><td>69.7</td><td>13.5</td><td>15.1%</td><td>19.8</td><td>28.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Underwriting gain (loss)</td><td>$-68.5</td><td>$-111.9</td><td>$-86.1</td><td>$43.5</td><td>-38.8%</td><td>$-25.8</td><td>30.0%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Point Chg</td><td></td><td>Point Chg</td></tr><tr><td>Loss ratio</td><td>82.2%</td><td>86.0%</td><td>83.7%</td><td></td><td>-3.8</td><td></td><td>2.3</td></tr><tr><td>Commission and brokerage ratio</td><td>13.8%</td><td>16.8%</td><td>18.8%</td><td></td><td>-3.0</td><td></td><td>-2.0</td></tr><tr><td>Other underwriting expense ratio</td><td>12.0%</td><td>10.8%</td><td>10.9%</td><td></td><td>1.2</td><td></td><td>-0.1</td></tr><tr><td>Combined ratio</td><td>108.0%</td><td>113.6%</td><td>113.4%</td><td></td><td>-5.6</td><td></td><td>0.2</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">(Some amounts may not reconcile due to rounding.)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table> Premiums. Gross written premiums increased by 10.0% to $1,073.1 million in 2012 compared to $975.6 million in 2011. This increase was primarily driven by crop and primary A&H medical stop loss business, partially offset by the termination and runoff of several large casualty programs. Net written premiums increased 3.9% to $852.1 million in 2012 compared to $820.5 million in 2011. The lower increase in net written premiums in comparison to gross written premiums is primarily attributable to a higher level of reinsurance employed for the crop business. Premiums earned increased 3.8% to $852.4 million in 2012 compared to $821.2 million in 2011. The change in premiums earned is relatively consistent with the increase in net written premiums. Gross written premiums increased by 12.7% to $975.6 million in 2011 compared to $865.4 million in 2010. This was due to strategic portfolio changes with growth in short-tail business, primarily driven by the acquisition of Heartland, which provided $169.6 million of new crop insurance premium in 2011 and $54.0 million growth in A&H primary business, partially offset by the reduction of a large casualty program. Net written premiums increased 32.3% to $820.5 million in 2011 compared to $620.3 million for the same period in 2010 due to higher gross premiums and reduced levels of ceded reinsurance, primarily due to the reduction of the large casualty program. Premiums earned increased 28.1% to $821.2 million in 2011 compared to $641.1 million in 2010. The change in premiums earned is relatively consistent with the increase in net written premiums.

What is the sum amount of Capital lease obligations in the years with the lowest amount of Operating lease obligations? (in dollars in millions)

Revenues N&SS revenues decreased 1% in 2008 and 2% in 2007. The decrease of $137 million in 2008 is primarily due to decreased revenues in FCS, Proprietary and satellite programs partially offset by increased revenues in the SBInet program. The decrease of $292 million in 2007 was primarily due to the exclusion of government Delta volume, now a component of our equity investment in ULA and lower FCS volume, partially offset by increased volume on SBInet and several satellite programs. Delta launch and new-build satellite deliveries were as follows: <table><tr><td>Years ended December 31,</td><td> 2008</td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td>Delta II Commercial</td><td> 2</td><td>3</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Delta II Government</td><td></td><td></td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Delta IV Government</td><td></td><td></td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Satellites</td><td> 1</td><td>4</td><td>4</td></tr></table> Delta government launches are excluded from our deliveries after December 1, 2006 due to the formation of ULA. Operating Earnings N&SS operating earnings increased by $171 million in 2008 was primarily due to increased earnings from our investment in ULA. The decrease in 2007 was due to lower earnings on FCS and several satellite programs. These decreases were partially offset by higher award fees on GMD and a $44 million gain on sale of a property in Anaheim. N&SS operating earnings include equity earnings of $73 million, $85 million and $71 million from the United Space Alliance joint venture in 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively and equity earnings of $105 million, a loss of $11 million and equity earnings of $5 million from the ULA joint venture in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The ULA equity earnings and loss amounts are net of the basis difference amortization. Research and Development The N&SS research and development funding remains focused on the development of communications, command and control, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance systems (C4ISR); communications and command and control (C3) capabilities that support a network-enabled architecture approach for our various government customers. We are investing in communications capabilities to enable connectivity between existing air/ground platforms, increase communications availability and bandwidth through more robust space systems, and leverage innovative communications concepts. Key programs in this area include JTRS, FCS, Global Positioning System, Tracking and Data Relay Satellite, Ares 1 Crew Launch Vehicle and GMD. Investments were also made to support concepts that may lead to the development of next-generation space intelligence systems. Along with increased funding to support these areas of architecture and network-enabled capabilities development, we also maintained our investment levels in global missile defense and advanced missile defense concepts and technologies. Backlog N&SS total backlog decreased by 12% in 2008 compared with 2007 primarily due to revenues recognized on multi-year orders received in prior years on FCS, GMD and C3 programs, partially offset by an increase in the International Space Station program. Total backlog decreased by 7% in 2007 compared with 2006 due to revenues recognized on FCS and Proprietary programs, partially offset by an increase in Space Exploration programs. Additional Considerations Items which could have a future impact on N&SS operations include the following: United Launch Alliance On December 1, 2006, we completed the transaction with Lockheed Martin Corporation (Lockheed) to create a 50/50 joint venture named United Launch Alliance L. L. C. (ULA). ULA combines the production, engineering, test and launch operations associated with U. S. government launches of Boeing Delta and Lockheed Atlas rockets. In connection with the transaction, billion of unused borrowing on revolving credit line agreements. We anticipate that these credit lines will primarily serve as backup liquidity to support our general corporate borrowing needs. Financing commitments totaled $18.1 billion and $15.9 billion as of December 31, 2012 and 2011. We anticipate that we will not be required to fund a significant portion of our financing commitments as we continue to work with third party financiers to provide alternative financing to customers. Historically, we have not been required to fund significant amounts of outstanding commitments. However, there can be no assurances that we will not be required to fund greater amounts than historically required. In the event we require additional funding to support strategic business opportunities, our commercial aircraft financing commitments, unfavorable resolution of litigation or other loss contingencies, or other business requirements, we expect to meet increased funding requirements by issuing commercial paper or term debt. We believe our ability to access external capital resources should be sufficient to satisfy existing short-term and long-term commitments and plans, and also to provide adequate financial flexibility to take advantage of potential strategic business opportunities should they arise within the next year. However, there can be no assurance of the cost or availability of future borrowings, if any, under our commercial paper program, in the debt markets or our credit facilities. At December 31, 2012 and 2011, our pension plans were $19.7 billion and $16.6 billion underfunded as measured under GAAP. On an ERISA basis our plans are more than 100% funded at December 31, 2012 with minimal required contributions in 2013. We expect to make discretionary contributions to our plans of approximately $1.5 billion in 2013. We may be required to make higher contributions to our pension plans in future years. As of December 31, 2012, we were in compliance with the covenants for our debt and credit facilities. The most restrictive covenants include a limitation on mortgage debt and sale and leaseback transactions as a percentage of consolidated net tangible assets (as defined in the credit agreements), and a limitation on consolidated debt as a percentage of total capital (as defined). When considering debt covenants, we continue to have substantial borrowing capacity. Contractual Obligations The following table summarizes our known obligations to make future payments pursuant to certain contracts as of December 31, 2012, and the estimated timing thereof. <table><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>Total</td><td>Lessthan 1year</td><td>1-3years</td><td>3-5years</td><td>After 5years</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt (including current portion)</td><td>$10,251</td><td>$1,340</td><td>$2,147</td><td>$1,095</td><td>$5,669</td></tr><tr><td>Interest on debt^-1</td><td>6,177</td><td>510</td><td>864</td><td>749</td><td>4,054</td></tr><tr><td>Pension and other postretirement cash requirements</td><td>25,558</td><td>579</td><td>1,244</td><td>7,025</td><td>16,710</td></tr><tr><td>Capital lease obligations</td><td>184</td><td>102</td><td>78</td><td>4</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Operating lease obligations</td><td>1,405</td><td>218</td><td>334</td><td>209</td><td>644</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase obligations not recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position</td><td>118,002</td><td>44,472</td><td>41,838</td><td>18,956</td><td>12,736</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase obligations recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position</td><td>15,981</td><td>14,664</td><td>1,307</td><td>1</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Total contractual obligations</td><td>$177,558</td><td>$61,885</td><td>$47,812</td><td>$28,039</td><td>$39,822</td></tr></table> (1) Includes interest on variable rate debt calculated based on interest rates at December 31, 2012. Variable rate debt was less than 1% of our total debt at December 31, 2012. Industry Competitiveness The commercial jet airplane market and the airline industry remain extremely competitive. Market liberalization in Europe, the Middle East and Asia is enabling low-cost airlines to continue gaining market share. These airlines are increasing the pressure on airfares. This results in continued cost pressures for all airlines and price pressure on our products. Major productivity gains are essential to ensure a favorable market position at acceptable profit margins. Continued access to global markets remains vital to our ability to fully realize our sales potential and longterm investment returns. Approximately 91% of Commercial Airplanes’ total backlog, in dollar terms, is with non-U. S. airlines. We face aggressive international competitors who are intent on increasing their market share. They offer competitive products and have access to most of the same customers and suppliers. With government support,Airbus has historically invested heavily to create a family of products to compete with ours. Regional jet makers Embraer and Bombardier continue to develop and market larger and increasingly more capable airplanes, including Embraer’s E-195 in the regional jet market and Bombardier’s C Series in the 100-150 seat transcontinental market. Additionally, other competitors from Russia, China and Japan are developing commercial jet aircraft. Some of these competitors have historically enjoyed access to governmentprovided financial support, including “launch aid,” which greatly reduces the cost and commercial risks associated with airplane development activities. This has enabled the development of airplanes without commercial viability; others to be brought to market more quickly than otherwise possible; and many offered for sale below market-based prices. Many competitors have continued to make improvements in efficiency, which may result in funding product development, gaining market share and improving earnings. This market environment has resulted in intense pressures on pricing and other competitive factors, and we expect these pressures to continue or intensify in the coming years. We are focused on improving our products and services and continuing our cost-reduction efforts, which enhances our ability to compete. We are also focused on taking actions to ensure that Boeing is not harmed by unfair subsidization of competitors. Results of Operations <table><tr><td>Years ended December 31,</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>Revenues</td><td>$56,729</td><td>$58,012</td><td>$59,399</td></tr><tr><td>% of total company revenues</td><td>61%</td><td>61%</td><td>62%</td></tr><tr><td>Earnings from operations</td><td>$5,432</td><td>$1,995</td><td>$4,284</td></tr><tr><td>Operating margins</td><td>9.6%</td><td>3.4%</td><td>7.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Research and development</td><td>$2,247</td><td>$3,706</td><td>$2,311</td></tr></table> Revenues Commercial Airplanes revenues decreased by $1,283 million or 2% in 2017 compared with 2016 due to delivery mix, with fewer twin aisle deliveries more than offsetting the impact of higher single aisle deliveries. Commercial Airplanes revenues decreased by $1,387 million or 2% in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to fewer deliveries. Through February 25, 2016, we repurchased approximately $415.0 million of shares of our common stock, which includes the $250.0 million of shares that we repurchased from certain selling stockholders on February 10, 2016. In order to achieve operational synergies, we expect cash outlays related to our integration plans to be approximately $290.0 million in 2016. These cash outlays are necessary to achieve our integration goals of net annual pre-tax operating profit synergies of $350.0 million by the end of the third year post-Closing Date. Also as discussed in Note 20 to our consolidated financial statements, as of December 31, 2015, a short-term liability of $50.0 million and long-term liability of $264.6 million related to Durom Cup product liability claims was recorded on our consolidated balance sheet. We expect to continue paying these claims over the next few years. We expect to be reimbursed a portion of these payments for product liability claims from insurance carriers. As of December 31, 2015, we have received a portion of the insurance proceeds we estimate we will recover. We have a long-term receivable of $95.3 million remaining for future expected reimbursements from our insurance carriers. We also had a short-term liability of $33.4 million related to Biomet metal-on-metal hip implant claims. At December 31, 2015, we had ten tranches of senior notes outstanding as follows (dollars in millions):

What is the growth rate of Balance between December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2009?

ABIOMED, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued) Note 8. Goodwill and In-Process Research and Development (Continued) The Company has no accumulated impairment losses on goodwill. The Company performed a Step 0 qualitative assessment during the annual impairment review for fiscal 2015 as of October 31, 2014 and concluded that it is not more likely than not that the fair value of the Company’s single reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. Therefore, the two-step goodwill impairment test for the reporting unit was not necessary in fiscal 2015. As described in Note 3. “Acquisitions,” in July 2014, the Company acquired ECP and AIS and recorded $18.5 million of IPR&D. The estimated fair value of the IPR&D was determined using a probability-weighted income approach, which discounts expected future cash flows to present value. The projected cash flows from the expandable catheter pump technology were based on certain key assumptions, including estimates of future revenue and expenses, taking into account the stage of development of the technology at the acquisition date and the time and resources needed to complete development. The Company used a discount rate of 22.5% and cash flows that have been probability adjusted to reflect the risks of product commercialization, which the Company believes are appropriate and representative of market participant assumptions. The carrying value of the Company’s IPR&D assets and the change in the balance for the year ended March 31, 2015 is as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td>March 31, 2015 (in $000’s)</td></tr><tr><td>Beginning balance</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Additions</td><td>18,500</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign currency translation impact</td><td>-3,789</td></tr><tr><td>Ending balance</td><td>$14,711</td></tr></table> Note 9. Stockholders’ Equity Class B Preferred Stock The Company has authorized 1,000,000 shares of Class B Preferred Stock, $.01 par value, of which the Board of Directors can set the designation, rights and privileges. No shares of Class B Preferred Stock have been issued or are outstanding. Stock Repurchase Program In November 2012, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized a stock repurchase program for up to $15.0 million of its common stock. The Company financed the stock repurchase program with its available cash. During the year ended March 31, 2013, the Company repurchased 1,123,587 shares for $15.0 million in open market purchases at an average cost of $13.39 per share, including commission expense. The Company completed the purchase of common stock under this stock repurchase program in January 2013. Note 10. Stock Award Plans and Stock-Based Compensation Stock Award Plans The Company grants stock options and restricted stock awards to employees and others. All outstanding stock options of the Company as of March 31, 2015 were granted with an exercise price equal to the fair market value on the date of grant. Outstanding stock options, if not exercised, expire 10 years from the date of grant. The Company’s 2008 Stock Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) authorizes the grant of a variety of equity awards to the Company’s officers, directors, employees, consultants and advisers, including awards of unrestricted and restricted stock, restricted stock units, incentive and nonqualified stock options to purchase shares of common stock, performance share awards and stock appreciation rights. The Plan provides that options may only be granted at the current market value on the date of grant. Each share of stock issued pursuant to a stock option or stock appreciation right counts as one share against the maximum number of shares issuable under the Plan, while each share of stock issued Simultaneously, the FASB issued SFAS No.167, Amendments to FASB Interpretation No.46(R) (SFAS 167), which details three key changes to the consolidation model. First, former QSPEs will now be included in the scope of SFAS 167. In addition, the FASB has changed the method of analyzing which party to a variable interest entity (VIE) should consolidate the VIE (known as the primary beneficiary) to a qualitative determination of which party to the VIE has “power” combined with potentially significant benefits or losses, instead of the current quantitative risks and rewards model. The entity that has power has the ability to direct the activities of the VIE that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance. Finally, the new standard requires that the primary beneficiary analysis be re-evaluated whenever circumstances change. The current rules require reconsideration of the primary beneficiary only when specified reconsideration events occur. As a result of implementing these new accounting standards, Citigroup will consolidate certain of the VIEs and former QSPEs with which it currently has involvement. An ongoing evaluation of the application of these new requirements could, with the resolution of certain uncertainties, result in the identification of additional VIEs and former QSPEs, other than those presented below, needing to be consolidated. It is not currently anticipated, however, that any such newly identified VIEs and former QSPEs would have a significant impact on Citigroup’s Consolidated Financial Statements or capital position. In accordance with SFAS 167, Citigroup employed three approaches for consolidating all of the VIEs and former QSPEs that it consolidated as of January 1, 2010. The first approach requires initially measuring the assets, liabilities, and noncontrolling interests of the VIEs and former QSPEs at their carrying values (the amounts at which the assets, liabilities, and noncontrolling interests would have been carried in the Consolidated Financial Statements, if Citigroup had always consolidated these VIEs and former QSPEs). The second approach is to use the unpaid principal amounts, where using carrying values is not practicable. The third approach is to elect the fair value option, in which all of the financial assets and liabilities of certain designated VIEs and former QSPEs would be recorded at fair value upon adoption of SFAS 167 and continue to be marked to market thereafter, with changes in fair value reported in earnings. Citigroup consolidated all required VIEs and former QSPEs as of January 1, 2010 at carrying values or unpaid principal amounts, except for certain private label residential mortgage and mutual fund deferred sales commissions VIEs, for which the fair value option was elected. The following tables present the pro forma impact of adopting these new accounting standards applying these approaches. The pro forma impact of these changes on incremental GAAP assets and resulting risk-weighted assets for those VIEs and former QSPEs that were consolidated or deconsolidated for accounting purposes as of January 1, 2010 (based on financial information as of December 31, 2009), reflecting Citigroup’s present understanding of the new accounting requirements and immediate implementation of the recently issued final risk-based capital rules regarding SFAS 166 and SFAS 167, was as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Incremental</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>In billions of dollars</td><td>GAAP assets</td><td>Risk- weighted assets</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Impact of consolidation</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Credit cards</td><td>$86.3</td><td>$0.8</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial paper conduits</td><td>28.3</td><td>13.0</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Student loans</td><td>13.6</td><td>3.7</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Private label consumer mortgages</td><td>4.4</td><td>1.3</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Municipal tender option bonds</td><td>0.6</td><td>0.1</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Collateralized loan obligations</td><td>0.5</td><td>0.5</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Mutual fund deferred sales commissions</td><td>0.5</td><td>0.5</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td>$134.2</td><td>$19.9</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Impact of deconsolidation</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Collateralized debt obligations-2</td><td>$1.9</td><td>$3.6</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Equity-linked notes-3</td><td>1.2</td><td>0.5</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$137.3</td><td>$24.0</td><td></td></tr></table> (1) Citigroup undertook certain actions during the first and second quarters of 2009 in support of its off-balance-sheet credit card securitization vehicles. As a result of these actions, Citigroup included approximately $82 billion of incremental risk-weighted assets in its risk-based capital ratios as of March 31, 2009 and an additional approximate $900 million as of June 30, 2009. See Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. (2) The implementation of SFAS 167 will result in the deconsolidation of certain synthetic and cash collateralized debt obligation (CDO) VIEs that were previously consolidated under the requirements of ASC 810 (FIN 46(R)). Upon deconsolidation of these synthetic CDOs, Citigroup’s Consolidated Balance Sheet will reflect the recognition of current receivables and payables related to purchased and written credit default swaps entered into with these VIEs, which had previously been eliminated in consolidation. The deconsolidation of certain cash CDOs will have a minimal impact on GAAP assets, but will cause a sizable increase in risk-weighted assets. The impact on risk-weighted assets results from replacing, in Citigroup’s trading account, largely investment grade securities owned by these VIEs when consolidated, with Citigroup’s holdings of non-investment grade or unrated securities issued by these VIEs when deconsolidated. (3) Certain equity-linked note client intermediation transactions that had previously been consolidated under the requirements of ASC 810 (FIN 46 (R)) will be deconsolidated with the implementation of SFAS 167. Upon deconsolidation, Citigroup’s Consolidated Balance Sheet will reflect both the equitylinked notes issued by the VIEs and held by Citigroup as trading assets, as well as related trading liabilities in the form of prepaid equity derivatives. These trading assets and trading liabilities were formerly eliminated in consolidation. 19. GOODWILL AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS Goodwill The changes in Goodwill during 2008 and 2009 were as follows: <table><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2007</td><td>$41,053</td></tr><tr><td>Sale of German retail bank</td><td>$-1,047</td></tr><tr><td>Sale of CitiCapital</td><td>-221</td></tr><tr><td>Sale of Citigroup Global Services Limited</td><td>-85</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase accounting adjustments—BISYS</td><td>-184</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase of the remaining shares of Nikko Cordial—net of purchase accounting adjustments</td><td>287</td></tr><tr><td>Acquisition of Legg Mason Private Portfolio Group</td><td>98</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign exchange translation</td><td>-3,116</td></tr><tr><td>Impairment of goodwill</td><td>-9,568</td></tr><tr><td>Smaller acquisitions, purchase accounting adjustments and other</td><td>-85</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2008</td><td>$27,132</td></tr><tr><td>Sale of Smith Barney</td><td>$-1,146</td></tr><tr><td>Sale of Nikko Cordial Securities</td><td>-558</td></tr><tr><td>Sale of Nikko Asset Management</td><td>-433</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign exchange translation</td><td>547</td></tr><tr><td>Smaller acquisitions/divestitures, purchase accounting adjustments and other</td><td>-150</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2009</td><td>$25,392</td></tr></table> The changes in Goodwill by segment during 2008 and 2009 were as follows: <table><tr><td>In millions of dollars</td><td>Regional Consumer Banking</td><td>Institutional Clients Group</td><td>Citi Holdings</td><td>Corporate/ Other</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2007-1</td><td>$19,751</td><td>$9,288</td><td>$12,014</td><td>$—</td><td>$41,053</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill acquired during 2008</td><td>$88</td><td>$108</td><td>$1,492</td><td>$—</td><td>$1,688</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill disposed of during 2008</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-1,378</td><td>—</td><td>-1,378</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill impaired during 2008</td><td>-6,547</td><td>—</td><td>-3,021</td><td>—</td><td>-9,568</td></tr><tr><td>Other-1</td><td>-4,006</td><td>775</td><td>-1,432</td><td>—</td><td>-4,663</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2008-1</td><td>$9,286</td><td>$10,171</td><td>$7,675</td><td>$—</td><td>$27,132</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill acquired during 2009</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill disposed of during 2009</td><td>—</td><td>-39</td><td>-2,248</td><td>—</td><td>-2,287</td></tr><tr><td>Other-1</td><td>307</td><td>225</td><td>15</td><td>—</td><td>547</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2009</td><td>$9,593</td><td>$10,357</td><td>$5,442</td><td>$—</td><td>$25,392</td></tr></table> (1) Other changes in Goodwill primarily reflect foreign exchange effects on non-dollar-denominated goodwill, as well as purchase accounting adjustments. Goodwill impairment testing is performed at a level below the business segments (referred to as a reporting unit). The changes in the organizational structure in 2009 resulted in the creation of new reporting segments. As a result, commencing with the second quarter of 2009, the Company has identified new reporting units as required under ASC 350, Intangibles— Goodwill and Other. Goodwill affected by the reorganization has been reassigned from 10 reporting units to nine, using a fair value approach. During 2009, goodwill was allocated to disposals and tested for impairment under the new reporting units. The Company performed goodwill impairment testing for all reporting units as of April 1, 2009 and July 1, 2009. Additionally, the Company performed an interim goodwill impairment test for the Local Consumer Lending—Cards reporting unit as of November 30, 2009. No goodwill was written off due to impairment in 2009. During 2008, the share prices of financial stocks continued to be very volatile and were under considerable pressure in sustained turbulent markets. In this environment, Citigroup’s market capitalization remained below book value for most of the period and the Company performed goodwill impairment testing for all reporting units as of February 28, 2008, July 1, 2008 and December 31, 2008. The results of the first step of the impairment test showed no indication of impairment in any of the reporting units at any of the periods except December 31, 2008 and, accordingly, the Company did not perform the second step of the impairment test, except for the test performed as of December 31, 2008. As of December 31, 2008, there was an indication of impairment in the North America Consumer Banking, Latin America Consumer Banking, and Local Consumer Lending—Other reporting units and, accordingly, the second step of testing was performed on these reporting units.

what is the pre-tax aggregate net unrealized loss in 2008?

AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) of certain of its assets and liabilities under its interest rate swap agreements held as of December 31, 2006 and entered into during the first half of 2007. In addition, the Company paid $8.0 million related to a treasury rate lock agreement entered into and settled during the year ended December 31, 2008. The cost of the treasury rate lock is being recognized as additional interest expense over the 10-year term of the 7.00% Notes. During the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company also received $3.1 million in cash upon settlement of the assets and liabilities under ten forward starting interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $1.4 billion, which were designated as cash flow hedges to manage exposure to variability in cash flows relating to forecasted interest payments in connection with the Certificates issued in the Securitization in May 2007. The settlement is being recognized as a reduction in interest expense over the five-year period for which the interest rate swaps were designated as hedges. The Company also received $17.0 million in cash upon settlement of the assets and liabilities under thirteen additional interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $850.0 million that managed exposure to variability of interest rates under the credit facilities but were not considered cash flow hedges for accounting purposes. This gain is included in other income in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2007. As of December 31, 2008 and 2007, other comprehensive (loss) income included the following items related to derivative financial instruments (in thousands): <table><tr><td></td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred loss on the settlement of the treasury rate lock, net of tax</td><td>$-4,332</td><td>$-4,901</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred gain on the settlement of interest rate swap agreements entered into in connection with the Securitization, net oftax</td><td>1,238</td><td>1,636</td></tr><tr><td>Unrealized losses related to interest rate swap agreements, net of tax</td><td>-16,349</td><td>-486</td></tr></table> During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company recorded an aggregate net unrealized loss of approximately $15.8 million and $3.2 million, respectively (net of a tax provision of approximately $10.2 million and $2.0 million, respectively) in other comprehensive loss for the change in fair value of interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges and reclassified an aggregate of $0.1 million and $6.2 million, respectively (net of an income tax provision of $2.0 million and an income tax benefit of $3.3 million, respectively) into results of operations.9. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS The Company determines the fair market values of its financial instruments based on the fair value hierarchy established in SFAS No.157, which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. The standard describes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value. Level 1 Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access at the measurement date. The Company’s Level 1 assets consist of available-for-sale securities traded on active markets as well as certain Brazilian Treasury securities that are highly liquid and are actively traded in over-the-counter markets. Level 2 Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) The Company issued 82,865, 93,367 and 105,239 of non-vested restricted stock units in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, the majority of which provide for vesting as to all underlying shares on the third anniversary of the grant date. The weighted average grant-date fair value for non-vested restricted stock units granted during 2017, 2016 and 2015 was $187.85, $142.71 and $118.00, respectively. The Company recorded $11.2 million of expense related to restricted stock units during 2017, which is included in cost of goods sold or selling, general and administrative expenses. The unamortized share-based compensation cost related to non-vested restricted stock units, net of expected forfeitures, was $13.2 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.8 years. The Company uses treasury stock to provide shares of common stock in connection with vesting of the restricted stock units. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) F-37 Note 13?— Income taxes The following table summarizes the components of the provision for income taxes from continuing operations: <table><tr><td></td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">(Dollars in thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Current:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Federal</td><td>$133,621</td><td>$2,344</td><td>$-4,700</td></tr><tr><td>State</td><td>5,213</td><td>5,230</td><td>2,377</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign</td><td>35,444</td><td>28,842</td><td>53,151</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Federal</td><td>-258,247</td><td>-25,141</td><td>-35,750</td></tr><tr><td>State</td><td>1,459</td><td>-1,837</td><td>-5,012</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign</td><td>212,158</td><td>-1,364</td><td>-2,228</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$129,648</td><td>$8,074</td><td>$7,838</td></tr></table> The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “TCJA”) was enacted on December 22, 2017. The legislation significantly changes U. S. tax law by, among other things, permanently reducing corporate income tax rates from a maximum of 35% to 21%, effective January 1, 2018; implementing a territorial tax system, by generally providing for, among other things, a dividends received deduction on the foreign source portion of dividends received from a foreign corporation if specified conditions are met; and imposing a one-time repatriation tax on undistributed post-1986 foreign subsidiary earnings and profits, which are deemed repatriated for purposes of the tax. As a result of the TCJA, the Company reassessed and revalued its ending net deferred tax liabilities at December 31, 2017 and recognized a?$46.1 million?provisional tax benefit in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2017. As a result of the deemed repatriation tax under the TCJA, the Company recognized a $154.0 million provisional tax expense in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2017, and the Company expects to pay this tax over an eight-year period. While the TCJA provides for a territorial tax system, beginning in 2018, it includes?two?new U. S. tax base erosion provisions, the global intangible low-taxed income (“GILTI”) provisions and the base-erosion and anti-abuse tax (“BEAT”) provisions. The GILTI provisions require the Company to include in its U. S. income tax return foreign subsidiary earnings in excess of an allowable return on the foreign subsidiary’s tangible assets. The Company expects that it will be subject to incremental U. S. tax on GILTI income beginning in 2018. Because of the complexity of the new GILTI tax rules, the Company is continuing to evaluate this provision of the TCJA and the application of Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 740, "Income Taxes. " Under U. S. GAAP, the Company may make an accounting policy election to either (1) treat future taxes with respect to the inclusion in U. S. taxable income of amounts related to GILTI as current period expense when incurred (the “period cost method”) or (2) take such amounts into a company’s measurement of its deferred taxes (the “deferred method”). The Company’s selection of an accounting policy with respect to the new GILTI tax rules will depend, in part, on an analysis of the Company’s global income to determine whether the Company expects to have future U. S. inclusions in taxable income related to GILTI and, if so, what the impact is expected to be. The determination of whether the Company expects to have future U. S. inclusions ? Miller Insurance Services LLP, which is a Pounds sterling functional entity, earns significant non-functional currency revenues, in which case the Company limits its exposure to exchange rate changes by the use of forward contracts matched to a percentage of forecast cash inflows in specific currencies and periods. However, where the foreign exchange risk relates to any Pounds sterling pension benefits assets or liability for pension benefits, we do not hedge the risk. Consequently, if our London market operations have a significant pension asset or liability, we may be exposed to accounting gains and losses, recognized in other comprehensive income or loss, if the U. S. dollar and Pounds sterling exchange rates change. We do, however, hedge the Pounds sterling contributions into the pension plan. Translation risk Outside our U. S. and London market operations, we predominantly earn revenues and incur expenses in the local currency. When we translate the results and net assets of these operations into U. S. dollars for reporting purposes, movements in exchange rates will affect reported results and net assets. For example, if the U. S. dollar strengthens against the Euro, the reported results of our Eurozone operations in U. S. dollar terms will be lower. With the exception of foreign currency hedges for certain intercompany loans that are not designated as hedging instruments, we do not hedge translation risk. The table below provides information about our foreign currency forward exchange contracts, which are sensitive to exchange rate risk. The table summarizes the U. S. dollar equivalent amounts of each currency bought and sold forward and the weighted average contractual exchange rates. All forward exchange contracts mature within three years. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">Settlement date before December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2017</td><td colspan="2">2018</td><td colspan="2">2019</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2016</td><td>Contract amount</td><td>Average contractual exchange rate</td><td>Contract amount</td><td>Average contractual exchange rate</td><td>Contract amount</td><td>Average contractual exchange rate</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>(millions)</td><td></td><td>(millions)</td><td></td><td>(millions)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Foreign currency sold</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S. dollars sold for Pounds sterling</td><td>$390</td><td>$1.51 = £1</td><td>$268</td><td>$1.46 = £1</td><td>$77</td><td>$1.39 = £1</td></tr><tr><td>Euro sold for U.S. dollars</td><td>74</td><td>€1 = $1.20</td><td>48</td><td>€1 = $1.19</td><td>14</td><td>€1 = $1.17</td></tr><tr><td>Japanese yen sold for U.S. dollars</td><td>21</td><td>¥110.85 = $1</td><td>13</td><td>¥110.90 - $1</td><td>5</td><td>¥98.63 = $1</td></tr><tr><td>Euro sold for Pounds sterling</td><td>22</td><td>€1 = £1.21</td><td>9</td><td>1 = £1.33</td><td>4</td><td>€1 = £1.24</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$507</td><td></td><td>$338</td><td></td><td>$100</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Fair value⁽ⁱ⁾</td><td>$-65</td><td></td><td>$-40</td><td></td><td>$-5</td><td></td></tr></table> (i) Represents the difference between the contract amount and the cash flow in U. S. dollars which would have been receivable had the foreign currency forward exchange contracts been entered into on December 31, 2016 at the forward exchange rates prevailing at that date.

In the year with largest amount of government, what's the increasing rate of education?

(e) Other adjustments primarily include certain historical retention costs, unusual, non-recurring litigation matters, secondary-offering-related expenses and expenses related to the consolidation of office locations north of Chicago. During the year ended December 31, 2013, we recorded IPO- and secondary-offering related expenses of $75.0 million. For additional information on the IPO- and secondary-offering related expenses, see Note 10 (Stockholder’s Equity) to the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements. (f) Includes the impact of consolidating five months for the year ended December 31, 2015 of Kelway’s financial results. (4) Non-GAAPnet income excludes, among other things, charges related to the amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets, non-cash equity-based compensation, acquisition and integration expenses, and gains and losses from the extinguishment of long-term debt. Non-GAAP net income is considered a non-GAAP financial measure. Generally, a non-GAAPfinancial measure is a numerical measure of a company’s performance, financial position or cash flows that either excludes or includes amounts that are not normally included or excluded in the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP. Non-GAAP measures used by us may differ from similar measures used by other companies, even when similar terms are used to identify such measures. We believe that non-GAAP net income provides meaningful information regarding our operating performance and cash flows including our ability to meet our future debt service, capital expenditures and working capital requirements. The following unaudited table sets forth a reconciliation of net income to non-GAAPnet income for the periods presented: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>$403.1</td><td>$244.9</td><td>$132.8</td><td>$119.0</td><td>$17.1</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of intangibles^(a)</td><td>173.9</td><td>161.2</td><td>161.2</td><td>163.7</td><td>165.7</td></tr><tr><td>Non-cash equity-based compensation</td><td>31.2</td><td>16.4</td><td>8.6</td><td>22.1</td><td>19.5</td></tr><tr><td>Non-cash equity-based compensation related to equity investment^(b)</td><td>20.0</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Net loss on extinguishments of long-term debt</td><td>24.3</td><td>90.7</td><td>64.0</td><td>17.2</td><td>118.9</td></tr><tr><td>Acquisition and integration expenses^(c)</td><td>10.2</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Gain on remeasurement of equity investment^(d)</td><td>-98.1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Other adjustments^(e)</td><td>3.7</td><td>-0.3</td><td>61.2</td><td>-3.3</td><td>-15.6</td></tr><tr><td>Aggregate adjustment for income taxes^(f)</td><td>-64.8</td><td>-103.0</td><td>-113.5</td><td>-71.6</td><td>-106.8</td></tr><tr><td>Non-GAAP net income^(g)</td><td>$503.5</td><td>$409.9</td><td>$314.3</td><td>$247.1</td><td>$198.8</td></tr></table> (a) Includes amortization expense for acquisition-related intangible assets, primarily customer relationships, customer contracts and trade names. (b) Represents our 35% share of an expense related to certain equity awards granted by one of the sellers to Kelway coworkers in July 2015 prior to our acquisition of Kelway. (c) Primarily includes expenses related to the acquisition of Kelway. (d) Represents the gain resulting from the remeasurement of our previously held 35% equity investment to fair value upon the completion of the acquisition of Kelway. (e) Primarily includes expenses related to the consolidation of office locations north of Chicago and secondaryoffering-related expenses. Amount in 2013 primarily relates to IPO- and secondary-offering related expenses. (f) Based on a normalized effective tax rate of 38.0% (39.0% prior to the Kelway acquisition), except for the noncash equity-based compensation from our equity investment and the gain resulting from the remeasurement of our previously held 35% equity investment to fair value upon the completion of the acquisition of Kelway, which were tax effected at a rate of 35.4%. The aggregate adjustment for income taxes also includes a $4.0 million deferred tax benefit recorded during the three months and year ended December 31, 2015 as a result of a tax rate reduction in the United Kingdom and additional tax expense during the year ended December 31, 2015 of $3.3 million as a result of recording withholding tax on the unremitted earnings of our Canadian subsidiary. Additionally, note that certain acquisition costs are non-deductible. Net sales Net sales by segment, in dollars and as a percentage of total Net sales, and the year-over-year dollar and percentage change in Net sales for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 are as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2015</td><td colspan="2">2014</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>(dollars in millions)</td><td>Net Sales</td><td>Percentageof Total Net Sales</td><td>Net Sales</td><td>Percentageof Total Net Sales</td><td>DollarChange</td><td>PercentChange^-1</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Medium/Large</td><td>$5,758.2</td><td>44.3%</td><td>$5,485.4</td><td>45.4%</td><td>$272.8</td><td>5.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Small Business</td><td>1,058.2</td><td>8.2</td><td>990.1</td><td>8.2</td><td>68.1</td><td>6.9</td></tr><tr><td>Total Corporate</td><td>6,816.4</td><td>52.5</td><td>6,475.5</td><td>53.6</td><td>340.9</td><td>5.3</td></tr><tr><td>Public:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Government</td><td>1,675.9</td><td>12.9</td><td>1,449.4</td><td>12.0</td><td>226.5</td><td>15.6</td></tr><tr><td>Education</td><td>1,807.0</td><td>13.9</td><td>1,824.0</td><td>15.1</td><td>-17.0</td><td>-0.9</td></tr><tr><td>Healthcare</td><td>1,642.6</td><td>12.6</td><td>1,606.0</td><td>13.3</td><td>36.6</td><td>2.3</td></tr><tr><td>Total Public</td><td>5,125.5</td><td>39.4</td><td>4,879.4</td><td>40.4</td><td>246.1</td><td>5.0</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>1,046.8</td><td>8.1</td><td>719.6</td><td>6.0</td><td>327.2</td><td>45.5</td></tr><tr><td>Total Net sales</td><td>$12,988.7</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$12,074.5</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$914.2</td><td>7.6%</td></tr></table> (1) There were 254 selling days for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014. Total Net sales in 2015 increased $914.2 million, or 7.6%, to $12,988.7 million, compared to $12,074.5 million in 2014, reflecting both organic net sales growth and the impact of consolidating five months of Kelway net sales. Customer priorities continued to shift more towards integrated solutions, which drove higher growth in solutions sales compared to transactional product sales. Strong sales performance in solutions-focused products was driven by netcomm and server and server-related products. The growth in transactional products was led by notebooks/mobile devices, partially offset by a decline in desktop computers. Organic net sales, which excludes the impact of the acquisition of Kelway, increased $563.5 million, or 4.7%, to $12,638.0 million in 2015, compared to $12,074.5 million in 2014. Organic net sales on a constant currency basis, which excludes the impact of foreign currency translation, in 2015 increased $635.0 million, or 5.3%, to $12,638.0 million, compared to $12,003.0 million in 2014. For additional information, see “Non-GAAP Financial Measure Reconciliations” below. Corporate segment net sales in 2015 increased $340.9 million, or 5.3%, compared to 2014, driven by sales growth in both our medium/large and small business customer channels and reflecting stronger performance in solutions sales compared to transactional product sales. Within our Corporate segment, net sales to medium/large customers increased $272.8 million, or 5.0%, year over year, primarily due to strong sales performance in solutions-focused products driven by netcomm products and server and server-related products. Growth in transactional products was driven by notebook/mobile devices, partially offset by a decline in desktop computers. Net sales to small business customers increased by $68.1 million, or 6.9%, between periods, driven by growth in notebooks/mobile devices and netcomm products, partially offset by a decline in desktop computers. Public segment net sales in 2015 increased $246.1 million, or 5.0%, between years, due to strong sales performance in government and growth in healthcare, partially offset by education remaining relatively flat. Net sales to government customers increased $226.5 million, or 15.6%, between periods, as sales to both federal and state/local government customers experienced mid-teens growth. The increase in net sales to the federal government was driven by growth in sales of netcomm products, software and enterprise storage, as we continued to benefit from strategic changes made to better align with new federal government purchasing programs implemented last year. A continued focus on public safety drove the increase in net sales to state/local government customers, which was led by netcomm products, notebooks/mobile devices and software, partially offset by a decline in desktop computers. Net sales to education customers decreased $17.0 million, or 0.9%, year over year, primarily due to declines in notebooks/mobile devices, partially offset by growth in netcomm products. Net sales to healthcare customers increased $36.6 million, or 2.3%, year over year, driven by growth in netcomm and server-related products, partially offset by declines in desktop DISH NETWORK CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued F-43 15. Stock-Based Compensation Stock Incentive Plans We maintain stock incentive plans to attract and retain officers, directors and key employees. Stock awards under these plans include both performance and non-performance based stock incentives. As of December 31, 2013, we had outstanding under these plans stock options to acquire 14.1 million shares of our Class A common stock and 1.9 million restricted stock units. Stock options granted on or prior to December 31, 2013 were granted with exercise prices equal to or greater than the market value of our Class A common stock at the date of grant and with a maximum term of approximately ten years. While historically we have issued stock awards subject to vesting, typically at the rate of 20% per year, some stock awards have been granted with immediate vesting and other stock awards vest only upon the achievement of certain company-specific subscriber, operational and/or financial goals. As of December 31, 2013, we had 69.7 million shares of our Class A common stock available for future grant under our stock incentive plans. During December 2011, we paid a dividend in cash of $2.00 per share on our outstanding Class A and Class B common stock to shareholders of record on November 17, 2011. In light of such dividend, during January 2012, the exercise price of 21.2 million stock options, affecting approximately 600 employees, was reduced by $2.00 per share (the “2011 Stock Option Adjustment”). Except as noted below, all information discussed below reflects the 2011 Stock Option Adjustment. On December 28, 2012, we paid a dividend in cash of $1.00 per share on our outstanding Class A and Class B common stock to shareholders of record on December 14, 2012. In light of such dividend, during January 2013, the exercise price of 16.3 million stock options, affecting approximately 550 employees, was reduced by $0.77 per share (the “2012 Stock Option Adjustment”). Except as noted below, all information discussed below reflects the 2012 Stock Option Adjustment. On January 1, 2008, we completed the distribution of our technology and set-top box business and certain infrastructure assets (the “Spin-off”) into a separate publicly-traded company, EchoStar. In connection with the Spin-off, each DISH Network stock award was converted into an adjusted DISH Network stock award and a new EchoStar stock award consistent with the Spin-off exchange ratio. We are responsible for fulfilling all stock awards related to DISH Network common stock and EchoStar is responsible for fulfilling all stock awards related to EchoStar common stock, regardless of whether such stock awards are held by our or EchoStar’s employees. Notwithstanding the foregoing, our stock-based compensation expense, resulting from stock awards outstanding at the Spin-off date, is based on the stock awards held by our employees regardless of whether such stock awards were issued by DISH Network or EchoStar. Accordingly, stock-based compensation that we expense with respect to EchoStar stock awards is included in “Additional paid-in capital” on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of March 31, 2013, we have recognized all of our stock-based compensation expense resulting from EchoStar stock awards outstanding at the Spin-off date held by our employees except for the 2005 LTIP performance awards, which were determined not to be probable as of December 31, 2013. See discussion of the 2005 LTIP below. The following stock awards were outstanding: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="4"> As of December 31, 2013</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"> DISH Network Awards</td><td colspan="2"> EchoStar Awards</td></tr><tr><td> Stock Awards Outstanding</td><td> Stock Options</td><td> Restricted Stock Units</td><td> Stock Options</td><td> Restricted Stock Units</td></tr><tr><td>Held by DISH Network employees</td><td>12,821,290</td><td>1,876,498</td><td>602,048</td><td>44,288</td></tr><tr><td>Held by EchoStar employees</td><td>1,237,284</td><td>66,999</td><td>N/A</td><td>N/A</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>14,058,574</td><td>1,943,497</td><td>602,048</td><td>44,288</td></tr></table> Average Balances and Interest Rates鈥擫iabilities and Equity, and Net Interest Revenue(1)(2)(3)(4) <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Average volume</td><td colspan="3">Interest expense</td><td colspan="3">% Average rate</td></tr><tr><td>In millions of dollars, except rates</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td></tr><tr><td>Liabilities</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Deposits</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>In U.S. offices^-5</td><td>$273,122</td><td>$289,669</td><td>$262,544</td><td>$1,291</td><td>$1,432</td><td>$1,754</td><td>0.47%</td><td>0.49%</td><td>0.67%</td></tr><tr><td>In offices outside the U.S.^-6</td><td>425,053</td><td>465,144</td><td>481,134</td><td>3,761</td><td>4,260</td><td>4,482</td><td>0.88</td><td>0.92</td><td>0.93</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$698,175</td><td>$754,813</td><td>$743,678</td><td>$5,052</td><td>$5,692</td><td>$6,236</td><td>0.72%</td><td>0.75%</td><td>0.84%</td></tr><tr><td>Federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under agreements to repurchase^-7</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>In U.S. offices</td><td>$108,286</td><td>$102,246</td><td>$126,742</td><td>$721</td><td>$656</td><td>$677</td><td>0.67%</td><td>0.64%</td><td>0.53%</td></tr><tr><td>In offices outside the U.S.^-6</td><td>66,200</td><td>87,777</td><td>102,623</td><td>893</td><td>1,239</td><td>1,662</td><td>1.35</td><td>1.41</td><td>1.62</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$174,486</td><td>$190,023</td><td>$229,365</td><td>$1,614</td><td>$1,895</td><td>$2,339</td><td>0.93%</td><td>1.00%</td><td>1.02%</td></tr><tr><td>Trading account liabilities^-8(9)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>In U.S. offices</td><td>$25,837</td><td>$30,451</td><td>$24,834</td><td>$111</td><td>$75</td><td>$93</td><td>0.43%</td><td>0.25%</td><td>0.37%</td></tr><tr><td>In offices outside the U.S.^-6</td><td>44,126</td><td>45,205</td><td>47,908</td><td>105</td><td>93</td><td>76</td><td>0.24</td><td>0.21</td><td>0.16</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$69,963</td><td>$75,656</td><td>$72,742</td><td>$216</td><td>$168</td><td>$169</td><td>0.31%</td><td>0.22%</td><td>0.23%</td></tr><tr><td>Short-term borrowings^-10</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>In U.S. offices</td><td>$66,086</td><td>$79,028</td><td>$77,439</td><td>$234</td><td>$161</td><td>$176</td><td>0.35%</td><td>0.20%</td><td>0.23%</td></tr><tr><td>In offices outside the U.S.^-6</td><td>50,043</td><td>39,220</td><td>35,551</td><td>288</td><td>419</td><td>421</td><td>0.58</td><td>1.07</td><td>1.18</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$116,129</td><td>$118,248</td><td>$112,990</td><td>$522</td><td>$580</td><td>$597</td><td>0.45%</td><td>0.49%</td><td>0.53%</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt^-11</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>In U.S. offices</td><td>$182,371</td><td>$194,295</td><td>$194,140</td><td>$4,309</td><td>$5,093</td><td>$6,602</td><td>2.36%</td><td>2.62%</td><td>3.40%</td></tr><tr><td>In offices outside the U.S.^-6</td><td>7,643</td><td>7,761</td><td>10,194</td><td>208</td><td>262</td><td>234</td><td>2.72</td><td>3.38</td><td>2.30</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$190,014</td><td>$202,056</td><td>$204,334</td><td>$4,517</td><td>$5,355</td><td>$6,836</td><td>2.38%</td><td>2.65%</td><td>3.35%</td></tr><tr><td>Total interest-bearing liabilities</td><td>$1,248,767</td><td>$1,340,796</td><td>$1,363,109</td><td>$11,921</td><td>$13,690</td><td>$16,177</td><td>0.95%</td><td>1.02%</td><td>1.19%</td></tr><tr><td>Demand deposits in U.S. offices</td><td>$26,124</td><td>$26,216</td><td>$21,948</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Other non-interest-bearing liabilities^-8</td><td>329,756</td><td>317,351</td><td>299,052</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total liabilities from discontinued operations</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>362</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total liabilities</td><td>$1,604,647</td><td>$1,684,363</td><td>$1,684,471</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Citigroup stockholders’ equity^-12</td><td>$217,875</td><td>$210,863</td><td>$196,884</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Noncontrolling interest</td><td>1,315</td><td>1,689</td><td>1,941</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total equity^-12</td><td>$219,190</td><td>$212,552</td><td>$198,825</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity</td><td>$1,823,837</td><td>$1,896,915</td><td>$1,883,296</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net interest revenue as a percentage of average interest-earning assets^-13</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>In U.S. offices</td><td>$923,334</td><td>$953,394</td><td>$926,291</td><td>$28,495</td><td>$27,497</td><td>$25,591</td><td>3.09%</td><td>2.88%</td><td>2.76%</td></tr><tr><td>In offices outside the U.S.^-6</td><td>682,503</td><td>718,800</td><td>731,570</td><td>18,624</td><td>20,993</td><td>21,723</td><td>2.73</td><td>2.92</td><td>2.97</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,605,837</td><td>$1,672,194</td><td>$1,657,861</td><td>$47,119</td><td>$48,490</td><td>$47,314</td><td>2.93%</td><td>2.90%</td><td>2.85%</td></tr></table> Net interest revenue includes the taxable equivalent adjustments related to the tax-exempt bond portfolio (based on the U. S. federal statutory tax rate of 35%) of $487 million, $498 million and $521 million for 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Interest rates and amounts include the effects of risk management activities associated with the respective liability categories. Monthly or quarterly averages have been used by certain subsidiaries where daily averages are unavailable. Detailed average volume, Interest revenue and Interest expense exclude Discontinued operations. See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Consists of other time deposits and savings deposits. Savings deposits are made up of insured money market accounts, NOW accounts, and other savings deposits. The interest expense on savings deposits includes FDIC deposit insurance assessments. Average rates reflect prevailing local interest rates, including inflationary effects and monetary corrections in certain countries. Average volumes of securities sold under agreements to repurchase are reported net pursuant to ASC 210-20-45. However, Interest expense excludes the impact of ASC 210-20-45. The fair value carrying amounts of derivative contracts are reported net, pursuant to ASC 815-10-45, in Non-interest-earning assets and Other non-interest bearing liabilities.

What's the sum of Debt maturities of Thereafter, and Capital lease obligations of Less than 1 year ?

A summary of these various obligations at December 31, 2012, follows (in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td>Total</td><td>2013</td><td>2014 to2015</td><td>2016 to2017</td><td>Thereafter</td></tr><tr><td>Reclamation and environmental obligations^a</td><td>$5,243</td><td>$246</td><td>$471</td><td>$329</td><td>$4,197</td></tr><tr><td>Debt maturities</td><td>3,527</td><td>2</td><td>500</td><td>500</td><td>2,525</td></tr><tr><td>Take-or-pay contracts^b</td><td>2,200</td><td>976</td><td>731</td><td>286</td><td>207</td></tr><tr><td>Scheduled interest payment obligations^c</td><td>1,289</td><td>121</td><td>241</td><td>226</td><td>701</td></tr><tr><td>Operating lease obligations</td><td>205</td><td>32</td><td>38</td><td>31</td><td>104</td></tr><tr><td>Total^d</td><td>$12,464</td><td>$1,377</td><td>$1,981</td><td>$1,372</td><td>$7,734</td></tr></table> a. Represents estimated cash payments, on an undiscounted and unescalated basis, associated with reclamation and environmental activities. The timing and the amount of these payments could change as a result of changes in regulatory requirements, changes in scope and timing of reclamation activities, the settlement of environmental matters and as actual spending occurs. Refer to Note 13 for additional discussion of environmental and reclamation matters. b. Represents contractual obligations for purchases of goods or services that are defined by us as agreements that are enforceable and legally binding and that specify all significant terms. Take-orpay contracts primarily comprise the procurement of copper concentrates ($799 million), electricity ($524 million) and transportation services ($448 million). Some of our take-or-pay contracts are settled based on the prevailing market rate for the service or commodity purchased, and in some cases, the amount of the actual obligation may change over time because of market conditions. Obligations for copper concentrates provide for deliveries of specified volumes to Atlantic Copper at market-based prices. Electricity obligations are primarily for contractual minimum demand at the South America and Tenke mines. Transportation obligations are primarily for South America contracted ocean freight and for North America rail freight. c. Scheduled interest payment obligations were calculated using stated coupon rates for fixed-rate debt and interest rates applicable at December 31, 2012, for variable-rate debt. d. This table excludes certain other obligations in our consolidated balance sheets, including estimated funding for pension obligations as the funding may vary from year to year based on changes in the fair value of plan assets and actuarial assumptions, accrued liabilities totaling $107 million that relate to unrecognized tax benefits where the timing of settlement is not determinable; Atlantic Copper's obligations for retired employees totaling $38 million (refer to Note 10); and PT Freeport Indonesia's reclamation and closure cash fund obligation totaling $17 million (refer to Note 13). This table also excludes purchase orders for the purchase of inventory and other goods and services, as purchase orders typically represent authorizations to purchase rather than binding agreements. In addition to our debt maturities and other contractual obligations discussed above, we have other commitments, which we expect to fund with available cash, projected operating cash flows, available credit facility or future financing transactions, if necessary. These include (i) PT Freeport Indonesia’s commitment to provide one percent of its annual revenue for the development of the local people in its area of operations through the Freeport Partnership Fund for Community Development, (ii) TFM’s commitment to provide 0.3 percent of its annual revenue for the development of the local people in its area of operations and (iii) other commercial commitments, including standby letters of credit, surety bonds and guarantees. Refer to Notes 13 and 14 for further discussion. CONTINGENCIES Environmental The cost of complying with environmental laws is a fundamental and substantial cost of our business. At December 31, 2012, we had $1.2 billion recorded in our consolidated balance sheets for environmental obligations attributed to CERCLA or analogous state programs and for estimated future costs associated with environmental obligations that are considered probable based on specific facts and circumstances. During 2012, we incurred environmental capital expenditures and other environmental costs (including our joint venture partners’ shares) of $612 million for programs to comply with applicable environmental laws and regulations that affect our operations, compared to $387 million in 2011 and $372 million in 2010. The increase in environmental costs in 2012, compared with 2011 and 2010, primarily relates to higher expenditures for land and settlements of environmental matters (see Note 13 for further discussion). For 2013, we expect to incur approximately $600 million of aggregate environmental capital expenditures and other environmental costs, which are part of our overall 2013 operating budget. The timing and amount of estimated payments could change as a result of changes in regulatory requirements, changes in scope and timing of reclamation activities, the settlement of environmental matters and as actual spending occurs. Refer to Note 13 for further information about environmental regulation, including significant environmental matters. Asset Retirement Obligations We recognize AROs as liabilities when incurred, with the initial measurement at fair value. These obligations, which are initially estimated based on discounted cash flow estimates, are accreted to full value over time through charges to income. Reclamation costs for disturbances are recorded as an ARO in the period of disturbance. Our cost estimates are reflected on a third-party cost basis and comply with our legal obligation to retire tangible, long-lived assets. At December 31, 2012, we had $1.1 billion recorded in our consolidated balance sheets for AROs. Spending ILLUMINA, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) Advertising Costs The Company expenses advertising costs as incurred. Advertising costs were approximately $440,000 for 2003, $267,000 for 2002 and $57,000 for 2001. Income Taxes A deferred income tax asset or liability is computed for the expected future impact of differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities, as well as the expected future tax benefit to be derived from tax loss and credit carryforwards. Deferred income tax expense is generally the net change during the year in the deferred income tax asset or liability. Valuation allowances are established when realizability of deferred tax assets is uncertain. The effect of tax rate changes is reflected in tax expense during the period in which such changes are enacted. Foreign Currency Translation The functional currencies of the Company’s wholly owned subsidiaries are their respective local currencies. Accordingly, all balance sheet accounts of these operations are translated to U. S. dollars using the exchange rates in effect at the balance sheet date, and revenues and expenses are translated using the average exchange rates in effect during the period. The gains and losses from foreign currency translation of these subsidiaries’ financial statements are recorded directly as a separate component of stockholders’ equity under the caption ‘‘Accumulated other comprehensive income. ’’ Stock-Based Compensation At December 28, 2003, the Company has three stock-based employee and non-employee director compensation plans, which are described more fully in Note 5. As permitted by SFAS No.123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, the Company accounts for common stock options granted, and restricted stock sold, to employees, founders and directors using the intrinsic value method and, thus, recognizes no compensation expense for options granted, or restricted stock sold, with exercise prices equal to or greater than the fair value of the Company’s common stock on the date of the grant. The Company has recorded deferred stock compensation related to certain stock options, and restricted stock, which were granted prior to the Company’s initial public offering with exercise prices below estimated fair value (see Note 5), which is being amortized on an accelerated amortization methodology in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation Number (‘‘FIN’’) 28. Pro forma information regarding net loss is required by SFAS No.123 and has been determined as if the Company had accounted for its employee stock options and employee stock purchases under the fair value method of that statement. The fair value for these options was estimated at the dates of grant using the fair value option pricing model (Black Scholes) with the following weighted-average assumptions for 2003, 2002 and 2001: <table><tr><td></td><td>Year Ended December 28, 2003</td><td>Year Ended December 29, 2002</td><td>Year Ended December 30, 2001</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average risk-free interest rate</td><td>3.03%</td><td>3.73%</td><td>4.65%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected dividend yield</td><td>0%</td><td>0%</td><td>0%</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average volatility</td><td>103%</td><td>104%</td><td>119%</td></tr><tr><td>Estimated life (in years)</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average fair value of options granted</td><td>$3.31</td><td>$4.39</td><td>$7.51</td></tr></table> The Company renewed an unsecured bank credit line on April 29, 2010 which provides for funding of up to $5,000 and bears interest at the prime rate less 1% (2.25% at June 30, 2010). The credit line was renewed through April 29, 2012. At June 30, 2010, $762 was outstanding. The Company renewed a bank credit line on March 7, 2010 which provides for funding of up to $8,000 and bears interest at the Federal Reserve Board’s prime rate (3.25% at June 30, 2010). The credit line expires March 7, 2011 and is secured by $1,000 of investments. At June 30, 2010, no amount was outstanding. The Company has entered into a bank credit facility agreement that includes a revolving loan, a term loan and a bullet term loan. The revolving loan allows short-term borrowings of up to $150,000, which may be increased by the Company at any time until maturity to $250,000. The revolving loan terminates June 4, 2015. At June 30, 2010, the outstanding revolving loan balance was $120,000. The term loan has an original principal balance of $150,000, with quarterly principal payments of $5,625 beginning on September 30, 2011, and the remaining balance due June 4, 2015. The bullet term loan had an original principal balance of $100,000. The full balance, which would have been due on December 4, 2010, was paid in full on July 8, 2010 as set forth in Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements (see Item 8). Each of the loans bear interest at a variable rate equal to (a) a rate based on LIBOR or (b) an alternate base rate (the greater of (a) the Federal Funds Rate plus 0.5%, (b) the Prime Rate or (c) LIBOR plus 1.0%), plus an applicable percentage in each case determined by the Company’s leverage ratio. The outstanding balances bear interest at a weighted average rate of 2.99%. The loans are secured by pledges of capital stock of certain subsidiaries of the Company. The loans are also guaranteed by certain subsidiaries of the Company. The credit facility is subject to various financial covenants that require the Company to maintain certain financial ratios as defined in the agreement. As of June 30, 2010, the Company was in compliance with all such covenants. The Company has entered into various capital lease obligations for the use of certain computer equipment. Included in property and equipment are related assets of $8,872. At June 30, 2010, $5,689 was outstanding, of which $4,380 will be maturing in the next twelve months. Contractual Obligations and Other Commitments At June 30, 2010 the Company’s total off balance sheet contractual obligations were $36,935. This balance consists of $27,228 of long-term operating leases for various facilities and equipment which expire from 2011 to 2017 and the remaining $9,707 is for purchase commitments related to property and equipment, particularly for contractual obligations related to the on-going construction of new facilities. The table excludes $7,548 of liabilities for uncertain tax positions as we are unable to reasonably estimate the ultimate amount or timing of settlement. Contractual obligations by Less than More than <table><tr><td>Contractual obligations by</td><td rowspan="2">Less than 1 year</td><td></td><td></td><td rowspan="2">More than 5 years</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>period as of June 30, 2010</td><td>1-3 years</td><td>3-5 years</td><td>TOTAL</td></tr><tr><td>Operating lease obligations</td><td>$ 8,765</td><td>$ 9,422</td><td>$ 5,851</td><td>$ 3,190</td><td>$ 27,228</td></tr><tr><td>Capital lease obligations</td><td>4,380</td><td>1,309</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>5,689</td></tr><tr><td>Notes payable, including accrued interest</td><td>102,493</td><td>46,210</td><td>225,213</td><td>-</td><td>373,916</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase obligations</td><td>9,707</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>9,707</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$125,345</td><td>$56,941</td><td>$231,064</td><td>$3,190</td><td>$416,540</td></tr></table> Recent Accounting Pronouncements In December 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Statement on Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No.141(R), “Business Combinations,” (“SFAS 141(R)”) which replaces SFAS No.141 and has since been incorporated into the Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) as ASC 805-10. ASC 805-10 establishes principles and requirements for how an acquirer recognizes and measures in its financial statements the identifiable assets acquired, the liabilities assumed, any non-controlling interest in the acquired entity and the goodwill acquired. The Statement also establishes disclosure requirements which will enable users of the financial statements to evaluate the nature and financial effects of the business combination. Relative to SFAS 141(R), the FASB issued FSP 141(R)-1 on April 1, 2009, which is now incorporated in ASC 805-20. ASC 805-20 eliminates the requirement under FAS 141(R) to record assets and liabilities at the acquisition date for noncontractual contingencies at fair value where it is deemed “more-likely-than-not” that an asset or liability would result. Under ASC 805-20, such assets and liabilities would only need to be recorded where the fair value can be determined during the measurement period or where it is probable that an asset or liability exists at the acquisition date and the amount of fair value can be reasonably determined. ASC 805-10 was effective for the Company on July 1, 2009. The adoption Insurance. The following table presents the underwriting results and ratios for the Insurance segment for the periods indicated. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Years Ended December 31,</td><td colspan="2">2012/2011</td><td colspan="2">2011/2010</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>Variance</td><td>% Change</td><td>Variance</td><td>% Change</td></tr><tr><td>Gross written premiums</td><td>$1,073.1</td><td>$975.6</td><td>$865.4</td><td>$97.5</td><td>10.0%</td><td>$110.3</td><td>12.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Net written premiums</td><td>852.1</td><td>820.5</td><td>620.3</td><td>31.6</td><td>3.9%</td><td>200.2</td><td>32.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums earned</td><td>$852.4</td><td>$821.2</td><td>$641.1</td><td>$31.3</td><td>3.8%</td><td>$180.1</td><td>28.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Incurred losses and LAE</td><td>700.3</td><td>705.9</td><td>536.8</td><td>-5.6</td><td>-0.8%</td><td>169.2</td><td>31.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Commission and brokerage</td><td>117.6</td><td>137.7</td><td>120.8</td><td>-20.1</td><td>-14.6%</td><td>16.9</td><td>14.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Other underwriting expenses</td><td>103.0</td><td>89.5</td><td>69.7</td><td>13.5</td><td>15.1%</td><td>19.8</td><td>28.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Underwriting gain (loss)</td><td>$-68.5</td><td>$-111.9</td><td>$-86.1</td><td>$43.5</td><td>-38.8%</td><td>$-25.8</td><td>30.0%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Point Chg</td><td></td><td>Point Chg</td></tr><tr><td>Loss ratio</td><td>82.2%</td><td>86.0%</td><td>83.7%</td><td></td><td>-3.8</td><td></td><td>2.3</td></tr><tr><td>Commission and brokerage ratio</td><td>13.8%</td><td>16.8%</td><td>18.8%</td><td></td><td>-3.0</td><td></td><td>-2.0</td></tr><tr><td>Other underwriting expense ratio</td><td>12.0%</td><td>10.8%</td><td>10.9%</td><td></td><td>1.2</td><td></td><td>-0.1</td></tr><tr><td>Combined ratio</td><td>108.0%</td><td>113.6%</td><td>113.4%</td><td></td><td>-5.6</td><td></td><td>0.2</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">(Some amounts may not reconcile due to rounding.)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table> Premiums. Gross written premiums increased by 10.0% to $1,073.1 million in 2012 compared to $975.6 million in 2011. This increase was primarily driven by crop and primary A&H medical stop loss business, partially offset by the termination and runoff of several large casualty programs. Net written premiums increased 3.9% to $852.1 million in 2012 compared to $820.5 million in 2011. The lower increase in net written premiums in comparison to gross written premiums is primarily attributable to a higher level of reinsurance employed for the crop business. Premiums earned increased 3.8% to $852.4 million in 2012 compared to $821.2 million in 2011. The change in premiums earned is relatively consistent with the increase in net written premiums. Gross written premiums increased by 12.7% to $975.6 million in 2011 compared to $865.4 million in 2010. This was due to strategic portfolio changes with growth in short-tail business, primarily driven by the acquisition of Heartland, which provided $169.6 million of new crop insurance premium in 2011 and $54.0 million growth in A&H primary business, partially offset by the reduction of a large casualty program. Net written premiums increased 32.3% to $820.5 million in 2011 compared to $620.3 million for the same period in 2010 due to higher gross premiums and reduced levels of ceded reinsurance, primarily due to the reduction of the large casualty program. Premiums earned increased 28.1% to $821.2 million in 2011 compared to $641.1 million in 2010. The change in premiums earned is relatively consistent with the increase in net written premiums.

What is the proportion of Asset Management to the total Mortgage and other loans receivable, net of allowance in 2006?

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries Financial Services Operations AlG's Financial Services subsidiaries engage in diversified activi- ties including aircraft and equipment leasing, capital markets, consumer finance and insurance premium finance. Financial Services Results Financial Services results for 2006,2005 and 2004 were as follows: <table><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>2006</td><td>2005</td><td>2004</td></tr><tr><td>Revenues<i>^(a)</i>:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Aircraft Leasing<i>^(b)</i></td><td>$4,143</td><td>$3,578</td><td>$3,136</td></tr><tr><td>Capital Markets<i>^(c)(d)</i></td><td>-186</td><td>3,260</td><td>1,278</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer Finance<i>^(e)</i></td><td>3,819</td><td>3,613</td><td>2,978</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>234</td><td>74</td><td>103</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$8,010</td><td>$10,525</td><td>$7,495</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">Operating income (loss)<i>^(a)</i>:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Aircraft Leasing</td><td>$639</td><td>$679</td><td>$642</td></tr><tr><td>Capital Markets<i>^(d)</i></td><td>-873</td><td>2,661</td><td>662</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer Finance<i>^(f)</i></td><td>761</td><td>876</td><td>786</td></tr><tr><td>Other, includingintercompany adjustments<i>^(g)</i></td><td>-3</td><td>60</td><td>90</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$524</td><td>$4,276</td><td>$2,180</td></tr></table> (a) Includes the effect of hedging activities that did not qualify for hedge accounting treatment under FAS 133, including the related foreign exchange gains and osses. For 2006,2005 and 2004, respectively, the effect was $(1.8) billion,$2.0 billion and $(122) million in both revenues and operating income for Capital Markets. These amounts result primarily from interest rate and foreign currency derivatives that are economicaly hedging available for sale securities and borrowings. For 2004, the effect was $(27) million in operating income for Aircrat Leasing. During 2006 and 2005, Aircraft Leasing derivative gains and losses were reported as part of AlG's Other category, and were not reported in Aircraft Leasing operating income. (b) Revenues are primarily aircraft lease rentals from ILFC. (cC) Revenues, shown net of interest expense of $3.2 bilion,$3.0 bilion and $2.3 bilion, in 2006,2005 and 2004, respectively, were primarily from hedged financial positions entered into in connection with counterparty transactions and the effect of hedging activities that did not quality for hedge accounting treatment under FAS 133 described n (a) above. (d) Certain transactions entered into by AIGFP generate tax credits and benefits which are included in income taxes in the consolidated statement of income. The amounts of such tax credits and benefits fod the years ended December 31,2006,2005 and 2004, respectively. are $50 million,$67 milion and $107 million. (e) Revenues are primarily fimance charges. () includes catastrophe-related losses of $62 milion recorded in the third quarter of 2005 resulting from hurricane Katrina, which were reduced by $35 milion in 2006 due to the reevaluation of the remaining estimated los ses. (g) Includes specific reserves recorded during 2006 in the amount of $42 millon related to two commercial lending trans actions. Financial Services operating income decreased in 2006 com- pared to 2005 and increased in 2005 compared to 2004, due primarily to the effect of hedging activities that did not qualify for hedge accounting under FAS 133. AIG is reinstituting hedge accounting in the first quarter of 2007 for AlGFP and later in 2007 for the balance of the Financial Services operations. Aircraft Leasing AlG's Aircraft Leasing operations represent the operations of ILFC, which generates its revenues primarily from leasing new and used commercial jet aircraft to foreign and domestic airlines. Revenues also result from the remarketing of commercial jets for ILFC's own account, and remarketing and fleet management services for airlines and financial institutions. ILFC finances its purchases of aircraft primarily through the issuance of a variety of debt instruments. The composite borrowing rates at December 31, 2006 and 2005 were 5.17 percent and 4.61 percent, respec- tively. The composite borrowing rates did not reflect the benefit of economically hedging ILFC's floating rate and foreign currency denominated debt using interest rate and foreign currency deriva tives. These derivatives are effective economic hedges; however, since hedge accounting under FAS 133 was not applied, the benefits of using derivatives to hedge these exposures were not reflected in ILFC's borrowing rates. ILFC's sources of revenue are principally from scheduled and charter airlines and companies associated with the airline indus- try. The airline industry is sensitive to changes in economic conditions and is cyclical and highly competitive. Airlines and related companies may be affected by political or economic instability, terrorist activities, changes in national policy, competi- tive pressures on certain air carriers, fuel prices and shortages, labor stoppages, insurance costs, recessions, world health issues and other political or economic events adversely affecting world or regonal trading markets. ILFC is exposed to operating loss and liquidity strain through nonperformance of aircraft lessees, through owning aircraft which it would be unable to sell or re-lease at acceptable rates at lease expiration and, in part, through committing to purchase aircraft which it would be unable to lease. ILFC’s revenues and operating income may be adversely affected by the volatile competitive environment in which its customers operate. ILFC manages the risk of nonperformance by its lessees with security deposit requirements, repossession rights, overhaul requirements and close monitoring of industry conditions through its marketing force. However, there can be no assurance that ILFC would be able to successfully manage the risks relating to the effect of possible future deterioration in the airline industry. Approximately 90 percent of ILFC’s ?eet is leased to non-U. S. carriers, and the ?eet, comprised of the most ef?cient aircraft in the airline industry, continues to be in high demand from such carriers. ILFC typically contracts to re-lease aircraft before the end of the existing lease term. For aircraft returned before the end of the lease term, ILFC has generally been able to re-lease such aircraft within two to six months of its return. As a lessor, ILFC considers an aircraft ‘‘idle’’ or ‘‘off lease’’ when the aircraft is not subject to a signed lease agreement or signed letter of intent. ILFC had one aircraft off lease at December 31, 2006, and all new aircraft scheduled for delivery through 2007 have been leased. Management formally reviews regularly, and no less frequently than quarterly, issues affecting ILFC’s ?eet, including events and circumstances that may cause impairment of aircraft values. Management evaluates aircraft in the ?eet as necessary based on American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued <table><tr><td colspan="2"></td><td>Life Insurance &</td><td colspan="4"></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>General</td><td>Retirement</td><td>Financial</td><td>Asset</td><td colspan="2"></td></tr><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>Insurance</td><td>Services</td><td>Services</td><td>Management</td><td>Other</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Fixed maturities:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Bonds available for sale, at fair value</td><td>$67,994</td><td>$288,018</td><td>$1,357</td><td>$29,500</td><td>$—</td><td>$386,869</td></tr><tr><td>Bonds held to maturity, at amortized cost</td><td>21,437</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>21,437</td></tr><tr><td>Bond trading securities, at fair value</td><td>1</td><td>10,835</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>10,836</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Common stocks available for sale, at fair value</td><td>4,245</td><td>8,705</td><td>—</td><td>226</td><td>80</td><td>13,256</td></tr><tr><td>Common stocks trading, at fair value</td><td>350</td><td>14,505</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>14,855</td></tr><tr><td>Preferred stocks available for sale, at fair value</td><td>1,884</td><td>650</td><td>5</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>2,539</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage and other loans receivable, net of allowance</td><td>17</td><td>21,043</td><td>2,398</td><td>4,884</td><td>76</td><td>28,418</td></tr><tr><td>Financial services assets:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Flight equipment primarily under operating leases, net of accumulated depreciation</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>39,875</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>39,875</td></tr><tr><td>Securities available for sale, at fair value</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>47,205</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>47,205</td></tr><tr><td>Trading securities, at fair value</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5,031</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5,031</td></tr><tr><td>Spot commodities</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>220</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>220</td></tr><tr><td>Unrealized gain on swaps, options and forward transactions</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>19,607</td><td>—</td><td>-355</td><td>19,252</td></tr><tr><td>Trade receivables</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4,317</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4,317</td></tr><tr><td>Securities purchased under agreements to resell, at contract value</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>30,291</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>30,291</td></tr><tr><td>Finance receivables, net of allowance</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>29,573</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>29,573</td></tr><tr><td>Securities lending invested collateral, at fair value</td><td>5,376</td><td>50,099</td><td>76</td><td>13,755</td><td>—</td><td>69,306</td></tr><tr><td>Other invested assets</td><td>9,207</td><td>13,962</td><td>2,212</td><td>13,198</td><td>3,532</td><td>42,111</td></tr><tr><td>Short-term investments, at cost</td><td>3,281</td><td>15,192</td><td>2,807</td><td>6,198</td><td>5</td><td>27,483</td></tr><tr><td>Total investments and financial services assets as shown on the balance sheet</td><td>113,792</td><td>423,009</td><td>184,974</td><td>67,761</td><td>3,338</td><td>792,874</td></tr><tr><td>Cash</td><td>334</td><td>740</td><td>390</td><td>118</td><td>8</td><td>1,590</td></tr><tr><td>Investment income due and accrued</td><td>1,363</td><td>4,378</td><td>23</td><td>326</td><td>1</td><td>6,091</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate, net of accumulated depreciation</td><td>570</td><td>698</td><td>17</td><td>75</td><td>26</td><td>1,386</td></tr><tr><td>Total invested assets<i>^(a)(b)</i></td><td>$116,059</td><td>$428,825</td><td>$185,404</td><td>$68,280</td><td>$3,373</td><td>$801,941</td></tr></table> (a) Certain reclassifications and format changes have been made to prior period amounts to conform to the current period presentation. (b) At December 31, 2006, approximately 68 percent and 32 percent of invested assets were held in domestic and foreign investments, respectively. Investment Strategy AIG’s investment strategies are tailored to the speci?c business needs of each operating unit. The investment objectives are driven by the business model for each of the businesses: General Insurance, Life Insurance, Retirement Services and Asset Manage-ment’s Spread-Based Investment business. The primary objectives are in terms of preservation of capital, growth of surplus and generation of investment income to support the insurance products. At the local operating unit level, the strategies are based on considerations that include the local market, liability duration and cash ?ow characteristics, rating agency and regula- tory capital considerations, legal investment limitations, tax optimization and diversi?cation. In addition to local risk manage-ment considerations, AIG’s corporate risk management guidelines impose limitations on concentrations to promote diversi?cation by industry, asset class and geographic sector. American International Group, Inc. , and Subsidiaries resulted in a benefit to the surplus of the domestic and foreign General Insurance companies of $114 million and $859 million, respectively, and did not affect compliance with minimum regulatory capital requirements. As discussed under Item 3. Legal Proceedings, various regulators have commenced investigations into certain insurance business practices. In addition, the OTS and other regulators routinely conduct examinations of AIG and its subsidiaries, including AIG’s consumer finance operations. AIG cannot predict the ultimate effect that these investigations and examinations, or any additional regulation arising therefrom, might have on its business. Federal, state or local legislation may affect AIG’s ability to operate and expand its various financial services businesses, and changes in the current laws, regulations or interpretations thereof may have a material adverse effect on these businesses. AIG’s U. S. operations are negatively affected under guarantee fund assessment laws which exist in most states. As a result of operating in a state which has guarantee fund assessment laws, a solvent insurance company may be assessed for certain obligations arising from the insolvencies of other insurance companies which operated in that state. AIG generally records these assessments upon notice. Additionally, certain states permit at least a portion of the assessed amount to be used as a credit against a company’s future premium tax liabilities. Therefore, the ultimate net assessment cannot reasonably be estimated. The guarantee fund assessments net of credits recognized in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively, were $8 million, $87 million and $97 million. AIG is also required to participate in various involuntary pools (principally workers’ compensation business) which provide insurance coverage for those not able to obtain such coverage in the voluntary markets. This participation is also recorded upon notification, as these amounts cannot reasonably be estimated. A substantial portion of AIG’s General Insurance business and a majority of its Life Insurance & Retirement Services business are conducted in foreign countries. The degree of regulation and supervision in foreign jurisdictions varies. Generally, AIG, as well as the underwriting companies operating in such jurisdictions, must satisfy local regulatory requirements. Licenses issued by foreign authorities to AIG subsidiaries are subject to modification and revocation. Thus, AIG’s insurance subsidiaries could be prevented from conducting future business in certain of the jurisdictions where they currently operate. AIG’s international operations include operations in various developing nations. Both current and future foreign operations could be adversely affected by unfavorable political developments up to and including nationalization of AIG’s operations without compensation. Adverse effects resulting from any one country may affect AIG’s results of operations, liquidity and financial condition depending on the magnitude of the event and AIG’s net financial exposure at that time in that country. Foreign insurance operations are individually subject to local solvency margin requirements that require maintenance of adequate capitalization, which AIG complies with by country. In addition, certain foreign locations, notably Japan, have established regulations that can result in guarantee fund assessments. These have not had a material effect on AIG’s financial condition or results of operations. Investments Investments by Segment The following tables summarize the composition of AIG’s investments by segment: <table><tr><td></td><td> General Insurance</td><td> Life Insurance & Retirement Services</td><td> Financial Services</td><td> Asset Management</td><td> Other</td><td> Total</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="6"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td> At December 31, 2008</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Fixed maturity securities:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Bonds available for sale, at fair value</td><td>$85,791</td><td>$262,824</td><td>$1,971</td><td>$12,284</td><td>$172</td><td>$363,042</td></tr><tr><td>Bond trading securities, at fair value</td><td>—</td><td>6,296</td><td>26,848</td><td>5</td><td>4,099</td><td>37,248</td></tr><tr><td>Securities lending invested collateral, at fair value</td><td>790</td><td>3,054</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>3,844</td></tr></table> Business Separation Costs On 16 September 2015, the Company announced that it intends to separate its Materials Technologies business via a spin-off. During the fourth quarter, we incurred legal and other advisory fees of $7.5 ($.03 per share). Gain on Previously Held Equity Interest On 30 December 2014, we acquired our partner’s equity ownership interest in a liquefied atmospheric industrial gases production joint venture in North America for $22.6 which increased our ownership from 50% to 100%. The transaction was accounted for as a business combination, and subsequent to the acquisition, the results are consolidated within our Industrial Gases – Americas segment. The assets acquired, primarily plant and equipment, were recorded at their fair value as of the acquisition date. The acquisition date fair value of the previously held equity interest was determined using a discounted cash flow analysis under the income approach. During the first quarter of 2015, we recorded a gain of $17.9 ($11.2 after-tax, or $.05 per share) as a result of revaluing our previously held equity interest to fair value as of the acquisition date. Advisory Costs During the fourth quarter of 2013, we incurred legal and other advisory fees of $10.1 ($6.4 after-tax, or $.03 per share) in connection with our response to the rapid acquisition of a large position in shares of our common stock by Pershing Square Capital Management LLC and its affiliates. Other Income (Expense), Net Items recorded to other income (expense), net arise from transactions and events not directly related to our principal income earning activities. The detail of other income (expense), net is presented in Note 24, Supplemental Information, to the consolidated financial statements.2015 vs. 2014 Other income (expense), net of $47.3 decreased $5.5. The current year includes a gain of $33.6 ($28.3 after-tax, or $.13 per share) resulting from the sale of two parcels of land. The gain was partially offset by unfavorable foreign exchange impacts and lower gains on other sales of assets and emissions credits. No other individual items were significant in comparison to the prior year.2014 vs. 2013 Other income (expense), net of $52.8 decreased $17.4, primarily due to higher gains from the sale of a number of small assets and investments, higher government grants, and a favorable commercial contract settlement in 2013. Otherwise, no individual items were significant in comparison to 2013.

What was the total amount of Amount greater than 5000 in 2013?

THE HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) 9. Goodwill (continued) The annual goodwill assessment for the Mutual Funds and Consumer Markets reporting units and the Group Benefits reporting unit within Corporate was completed as of October 31, 2012, which resulted in no write-downs of goodwill for the year ended December 31, 2012. The reporting units passed the first step of their annual impairment test with a significant margin with the exception of the Group Benefits reporting unit. Group Benefits passed the first step of its annual impairment test with less than a 10% margin. The fair value of the Group Benefits reporting unit is based on discounted cash flows using earnings projections on in force business and future business growth. There could be a positive or negative impact on the result of step one in future periods if assumptions change about the level of economic capital, future business growth, earnings projections or the weighted average cost of capital. Year ended December 31, 2011 During the second quarter of 2011, the Company wrote off the remaining $15 of goodwill associated with the Federal Trust Corporation (“FTC”) reporting unit within Corporate due to the announced divestiture of FTC. The write-off of the FTC reporting unit goodwill was recorded as a loss on disposal within discontinued operations. The Consumer Markets reporting unit completed its annual goodwill assessment on October 1, 2011 and again on October 31, 2011, which resulted in no impairment of goodwill. In both tests, the Consumer Markets reporting unit passed the first step of the annual impairment tests with a significant margin. The annual goodwill assessment for the Property & Casualty Commercial reporting unit that was performed on October 1, 2011 resulted in a write-down of goodwill of $30, pre-tax leaving no remaining goodwill. The results of the discounted cash flow calculations indicated that the fair value of the reporting unit was less than the carrying value; this was due primarily to a decrease in future expected underwriting cash flows. The decrease in future expected underwriting cash flows is driven by an expected reduction in written premium in the short term as the Company maintains pricing discipline in a downward market cycle, while retaining long term capabilities for future opportunities. The Company completed its annual goodwill assessment for Mutual Funds, Individual Life, Retirement Plans and Group Benefits, including the goodwill within Corporate, on January 1, 2011 and October 31, 2011, which resulted in no impairment of goodwill. In both tests, the reporting units passed the first step of their annual impairment tests with a significant margin with the exception of the Individual Life reporting unit at the January 1, 2011 test. The Individual Life reporting unit had a margin of less than 10% between fair value and book value on January 1, 2011. As of the October 31, 2011 impairment test, the Individual Life reporting unit had a fair value in excess of book value of approximately 15%, a modest improvement from January 1, 2011 results due to improving cost of capital.10. Sales Inducements The Company offered enhanced crediting rates or bonus payments to contract holders on certain of its individual and group annuity products. The expense associated with offering a bonus is deferred and amortized over the life of the related contract in a pattern consistent with the amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs. Amortization expense associated with expenses previously deferred is recorded over the remaining life of the contract. Consistent with the Unlock, the Company unlocks the amortization of the sales inducement asset. For further information concerning the Unlock, see Note 8 - Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs and Present Value of Future Profits of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Changes in sales inducement activity are as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">For the years ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, beginning of period</td><td>$325</td><td>$434</td><td>$459</td></tr><tr><td>Sales inducements deferred</td><td>—</td><td>7</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization — Unlock charge [1]</td><td>-72</td><td>-82</td><td>-28</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization charged to income</td><td>-33</td><td>-34</td><td>-17</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization charged to business dispositions [2]</td><td>-71</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, end of period</td><td>$149</td><td>$325</td><td>$434</td></tr></table> [1] Includes Unlock charge of $52 in the first quarter of 2013 related to elimination of future estimated gross profits on the Japan variable annuity block due to the increased costs associated with expanding Japan variable annuity hedging program. [2] Represents accelerated amortization of $22 and $49 in the first quarter of 2013 recognized upon the sale of the Retirement Plans and Individual Life businesses, respectively. For further information, see Note 2 - Business Dispositions of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Table of Contents THE HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) 13. Debt (continued)The Debentures are unsecured, subordinated and junior in right of payment and upon liquidation to all of the Company’s existing and future senior indebtedness. In addition, the Debentures are effectively subordinated to all of the Company’s subsidiaries’ existing and future indebtedness and other liabilities, including obligations to policyholders. The Debentures do not limit the Company’s or the Company’s subsidiaries’ ability to incur additional debt, including debt that ranks senior in right of payment and upon liquidation to the Debentures. The Debentures rank equally in right of payment and upon liquidation with (i) any indebtedness the terms of which provide that such indebtedness ranks equally with the Debentures, including guarantees of such indebtedness, (ii) the Company’s existing 8.125% fixedto-floating rate junior subordinated debentures due 2068 (the “8.125% Debentures”), (iii) the Company’s Income Capital Obligation Notes due 2067, issuable pursuant to the Junior Subordinated Indenture, dated as of February 12, 2007, between the Company and Wilmington Trust Company (the “ICON securities”), (iv) our trade accounts payable, and (v) any of our indebtedness owed to a person who is our subsidiary or employee. Long-Term Debt Maturities Long-term debt maturities (at par values), as of December 31, 2013 are summarized as follows: <table><tr><td>2014</td><td>$200</td></tr><tr><td>2015</td><td>456</td></tr><tr><td>2016</td><td>275</td></tr><tr><td>2017</td><td>711</td></tr><tr><td>2018</td><td>320</td></tr><tr><td>Thereafter</td><td>4,438</td></tr></table> Shelf Registrations On August 9, 2013, the Company filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) an automatic shelf registration statement (Registration No.333-190506) for the potential offering and sale of debt and equity securities. The registration statement allows for the following types of securities to be offered: debt securities, junior subordinated debt securities, preferred stock, common stock, depositary shares, warrants, stock purchase contracts, and stock purchase units. In that The Hartford is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 under the Securities Act of 1933, the registration statement went effective immediately upon filing and The Hartford may offer and sell an unlimited amount of securities under the registration statement during the three-year life of the registration statement. Contingent Capital Facility The Company is party to a put option agreement that provides The Hartford with the right to require the Glen Meadow ABC Trust, a Delaware statutory trust, at any time and from time to time, to purchase The Hartford’s junior subordinated notes in a maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed $500. Under the Put Option Agreement, The Hartford will pay the Glen Meadow ABC Trust premiums on a periodic basis, calculated with respect to the aggregate principal amount of notes that The Hartford had the right to put to the Glen Meadow ABC Trust for such period. The Hartford has agreed to reimburse the Glen Meadow ABC Trust for certain fees and ordinary expenses. The Company holds a variable interest in the Glen Meadow ABC Trust where the Company is not the primary beneficiary. As a result, the Company did not consolidate the Glen Meadow ABC Trust. As of December 31, 2013, The Hartford has not exercised its right to require Glen Meadow ABC Trust to purchase the notes. As a result, the notes remain a source of capital for the HFSG Holding Company. Revolving Credit Facilities The Company has a senior unsecured revolving credit facility (the "Credit Facility") that provides for borrowing capacity up to $1.75 billion (which is available in U. S. dollars, and in Euro, Sterling, Canadian dollars and Japanese Yen) through January 6, 2016. As of December 31, 2013, there were no borrowings outstanding under the Credit Facility. Of the total availability under the Credit Facility, up to $250 is available to support letters of credit issued on behalf of the Company or subsidiaries of the Company. Under the Credit Facility, the Company must maintain a minimum level of consolidated net worth of $14.9 billion. The definition of consolidated net worth under the terms of the Credit Facility, excludes AOCI and includes the Company's outstanding junior subordinated debentures and, if any, perpetual preferred securities, net of discount. In addition, the Company’s maximum ratio of consolidated total debt to consolidated total capitalization is limited to 35%, and the ratio of consolidated total debt of subsidiaries to consolidated total capitalization is limited to 10%. As of December 31, 2013, the Company was in compliance with all financial covenants under the Credit Facility Table of Contents THE HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) 19. Stock Compensation Plans (continued) Restricted Unit awards In 2010 and 2009, The Hartford issued restricted units as part of The Hartford’s 2005 Stock Plan. Restricted stock unit awards under the plan have historically been settled in shares, but under this award will be settled in cash and are thus referred to as “Restricted Units”. The economic value recipients will ultimately realize will be identical to the value that would have been realized if the awards had been settled in shares, i. e. , upon settlement, recipients will receive cash equal to The Hartford’s share price multiplied by the number of restricted units awarded. Because Restricted Units will be settled in cash, the awards are remeasured at the end of each reporting period until settlement. Awards granted in 2009 vested after a three year period. Awards granted in 2010 include both graded and cliff vesting restricted units which vest over a three year period. The graded vesting attribution method is used to recognize the expense of the award over the requisite service period. For example, the graded vesting attribution method views one three-year grant with annual graded vesting as three separate sub-grants, each representing one third of the total number of awards granted. The first sub-grant vests over one year, the second sub-grant vests over two years and the third sub-grant vests over three years. There were no restricted units awarded for 2013 or 2012. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, 27 thousand and 832 thousand restricted units were outstanding, respectively. Deferred Stock Unit Plan Effective July 31, 2009, the Compensation and Management Development Committee of the Board authorized The Hartford Deferred Stock Unit Plan (“Deferred Stock Unit Plan”), and, on October 22, 2009, it was amended. The Deferred Stock Unit Plan provides for contractual rights to receive cash payments based on the value of a specified number of shares of stock. The Deferred Stock Unit Plan provides for two award types, Deferred Units and Restricted Units. Deferred Units are earned ratably over a year, based on the number of regular pay periods occurring during such year. Deferred Units are credited to the participant's account on a quarterly basis based on the market price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant and are fully vested at all times. Deferred Units credited to employees prior to January 1, 2010 (other than senior executive officers hired on or after October 1, 2009) are not paid until after two years from their grant date. Deferred Units credited on or after January 1, 2010 (and any credited to senior executive officers hired on or after October 1, 2009) are paid in three equal installments after the first, second and third anniversaries of their grant date. Restricted Units are intended to be incentive compensation and, unlike Deferred Units, vest over time, generally three years, and are subject to forfeiture. The Deferred Stock Unit Plan is structured consistent with the limitations and restrictions on employee compensation arrangements imposed by the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 and the TARP Standards for Compensation and Corporate Governance Interim Final Rule issued by the U. S. Department of Treasury on June 10, 2009. There were no deferred stock units awarded in 2013 or 2012. A summary of the status of the Company’s non-vested awards under the Deferred Stock Unit Plan as of December 31, 2013, is presented below: <table><tr><td>Non-vested Units</td><td>Restricted Units (in thousands)</td><td>Weighted-Average Grant-Date Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td>Non-vested at beginning of year</td><td>309</td><td>25.08</td></tr><tr><td>Granted</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Vested</td><td>-306</td><td>25.04</td></tr><tr><td>Forfeited</td><td>-3</td><td>28.99</td></tr><tr><td>Non-vested at end of year</td><td>—</td><td>$—</td></tr></table> Subsidiary Stock Plan In 2013 The Hartford established a subsidiary stock-based compensation plan similar to The Hartford 2010 Incentive Stock Plan except that it awards non-public subsidiary stock as compensation. The Company recognized stock-based compensation plans expense of $1 in the year ended December 31, 2013 for the subsidiary stock plan. Upon employee vesting of subsidiary stock, the Company will recognize a noncontrolling equity interest. Employees will be restricted from selling vested subsidiary stock to other than the Company and the Company will have discretion on the amount of stock to repurchase. Therefore the subsidiary stock will be classified as equity because it is not mandatorily redeemable. Investment Results Composition of Invested Assets <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">December 31, 2013</td><td colspan="2">December 31, 2012</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Amount</td><td>Percent</td><td>Amount</td><td>Percent</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed maturities, available-for-sale ("AFS"), at fair value</td><td>$62,357</td><td>79.2%</td><td>$85,922</td><td>81.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed maturities, at fair value using the fair value option ("FVO")</td><td>844</td><td>1.1%</td><td>1,087</td><td>1.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities, AFS, at fair value</td><td>868</td><td>1.1%</td><td>890</td><td>0.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage loans</td><td>5,598</td><td>7.1%</td><td>6,711</td><td>6.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Policy loans, at outstanding balance</td><td>1,420</td><td>1.8%</td><td>1,997</td><td>1.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Limited partnerships and other alternative investments</td><td>3,040</td><td>3.9%</td><td>3,015</td><td>2.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Other investments [1]</td><td>521</td><td>0.7%</td><td>1,114</td><td>1.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Short-term investments</td><td>4,008</td><td>5.1%</td><td>4,581</td><td>4.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Total investments excluding equity securities, trading</td><td>78,656</td><td>100%</td><td>105,317</td><td>100%</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities, trading, at fair value [2]</td><td>19,745</td><td></td><td>28,933</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total investments</td><td>$98,401</td><td></td><td>$134,250</td><td></td></tr></table> [1] Primarily relates to derivative instruments. [2] As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, approximately $19.7 billion and $27.1 billion, respectively, of equity securities, trading, support Japan variable annuities. Those equity securities, trading, were invested in mutual funds, which, in turn, invested in the following asset classes as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively: Japan equity 22% and 20%, Japan fixed income (primarily government securities) 15% and 15%, global equity 22% and 21%, global government bonds 40% and 43%, and cash and other 1% and 1%. Total investments decreased since December 31, 2012, principally due to the sale of the Retirement Plans and Individual Life businesses resulting in the transfer of fixed maturities, AFS, fixed maturities, FVO, equity securities, AFS, mortgage loans, and policy loans with a total carrying value of $17.3 billion in January 2013. In addition, the sale of the U. K. variable annuity business, HLIL, in the fourth quarter of 2013 resulted in a decline in the carrying value of fixed maturities, AFS and equity securities, trading of $469 and $1.7 billion, respectively. Refer to Note 2 - Business Dispositions of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of these transactions. The remaining decrease in total invested assets is primarily due to a decrease in equity securities, trading, fixed maturities, AFS, other investments, and short-term investments. The decline in equity securities, trading was primarily due to variable annuity policy surrenders, the depreciation of the Japanese Yen as compared to the U. S. dollar, partially offset by equity market gains. The decrease in fixed maturities, AFS was due to a decline in valuations due to an increase in interest rates, a reduction in assets levels in Talcott Resolution associated with dollar rolls and repurchase agreements, and capital management actions, including debt repayments and share repurchases. The decline in other investments was largely due to a decline in derivative market value primarily resulting from an increase in interest rates and the depreciation of the Japanese yen in comparison to the euro and U. S dollar. The decrease in shortterm investments is primarily attributable to a decline in derivative collateral held due to decreases in derivative market values.

what was the percentage change in the allowance for loan losses from 2008 to 2009?

ABIOMED, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued) Note 11. Strategic Investment (Continued) The Company estimated the fair value of the embedded derivative and warrant associated with the WorldHeart transaction using the BlackScholes option valuation model at the initial dates of investment. The fair value of the embedded derivative and warrant were calculated using the following weighted-average assumptions: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Conversion Feature</td><td colspan="2"> Warrant</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>December 11, 2007</td><td>January 3, 2008</td><td>December 11, 2007</td><td> January 3, 2008</td></tr><tr><td>Stock price</td><td>$2.59</td><td>$2.39</td><td>$2.59</td><td>$2.39</td></tr><tr><td>Exercise Price</td><td>$1.75</td><td>$1.75</td><td>$0.01</td><td>$0.01</td></tr><tr><td>Risk-free interest rate</td><td>2.94%</td><td>2.83%</td><td>3.32%</td><td>3.26%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected option life (years)</td><td>2.00</td><td>1.94</td><td>5.00</td><td>4.94</td></tr><tr><td>Expected volatility</td><td>91.7%</td><td>97.1%</td><td>131.9%</td><td>131.3%</td></tr></table> Note 12. Stock Award Plans and Stock Based Compensation Stock Option Plans Virtually all outstanding stock options of the Company as of March 31, 2008 were granted with an exercise price equal to the fair market value on the date of grant. For options and restricted stock granted below fair market value, compensation expense is recognized ratably over the vesting period. Outstanding stock options, if not exercised, expire 10 years from the date of grant. The 1992 Combination Stock Option Plan (the “Combination Plan”), as amended, was adopted in September 1992 as a combination and amendment of the Company’s then outstanding Incentive Stock Option Plan and Nonqualified Plan. A total of 2,670,859 options were awarded from the Combination Plan during its ten year restatement term that ended on May 1, 2002. As of March 31, 2008, 141,300 of these options remain outstanding, fully vested and eligible for future exercise. The 1998 Equity Incentive Plan, (the “Equity Incentive Plan”), was adopted by the Company in August 1998. The Equity Incentive Plan provides for grants of options to key employees, directors, advisors and consultants as either incentive stock options or nonqualified stock options as determined by the Company’s Board of Directors. A maximum of 1,000,000 shares of common stock may be awarded under this plan. Options granted under the Equity Incentive Plan are exercisable at such times and subject to such terms as the Board of Directors may specify at the time of each stock option grant. Options outstanding under the Equity Incentive Plan have vesting periods of three to five years from the date of grant and options awarded expire ten years from the date of grant. The 2000 Stock Incentive Plan, (the “2000 Plan”), as amended, was adopted by the Company in August 2000. The 2000 Plan provides for grants of options to key employees, directors, advisors and consultants to the Company or its subsidiaries as either incentive or nonqualified stock options as determined by the Company’s Board of Directors. Up to 4,900,000 shares of common stock may be awarded under the 2000 Plan and are exercisable at such times and subject to such terms as the Board of Directors may specify at the time of each stock option grant. Options outstanding under the 2000 Plan generally vest four years from the date of grant and options awarded expire ten years from the date of grant. The Company has a nonqualified stock option plan for non-employee directors (the “Directors’ Plan”). The Directors’ Plan, as amended, was adopted in July 1989 and provides for grants of options to purchase shares of the Company’s common stock to non-employee Directors of the Company. Up to 400,000 shares of common stock may be awarded under the Directors’ Plan. Options outstanding under the Director’s Plan have vesting periods of one to five years from the date of grant and options expire ten years from the date of grant. 18. ALLOWANCE FOR CREDIT LOSSES <table><tr><td>In millions of dollars</td><td>2009</td><td>2008-1</td><td>2007-1</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan losses at beginning of year</td><td>$29,616</td><td>$16,117</td><td>$8,940</td></tr><tr><td>Gross credit losses</td><td>-32,784</td><td>-20,760</td><td>-11,864</td></tr><tr><td>Gross recoveries</td><td>2,043</td><td>1,749</td><td>1,938</td></tr><tr><td>Net credit (losses) recoveries (NCLs)</td><td>$-30,741</td><td>$-19,011</td><td>$-9,926</td></tr><tr><td>NCLs</td><td>$30,741</td><td>$19,011</td><td>$9,926</td></tr><tr><td>Net reserve builds (releases)</td><td>5,741</td><td>11,297</td><td>6,550</td></tr><tr><td>Net specific reserve builds (releases)</td><td>2,278</td><td>3,366</td><td>356</td></tr><tr><td>Total provision for credit losses</td><td>$38,760</td><td>$33,674</td><td>$16,832</td></tr><tr><td>Other, net-2</td><td>-1,602</td><td>-1,164</td><td>271</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan losses at end of year</td><td>$36,033</td><td>$29,616</td><td>$16,117</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for credit losses on unfunded lending commitments at beginning of year-3</td><td>$887</td><td>$1,250</td><td>$1,100</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for unfunded lending commitments</td><td>244</td><td>-363</td><td>150</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for credit losses on unfunded lending commitments at end of year-3</td><td>$1,157</td><td>$887</td><td>$1,250</td></tr><tr><td>Total allowance for loans, leases, and unfunded lending commitments</td><td>$37,190</td><td>$30,503</td><td>$17,367</td></tr></table> (1) Reclassified to conform to the current period’s presentation. (2) 2009 primarily includes reductions to the loan loss reserve of approximately $543 million related to securitizations, approximately $402 million related to the sale or transfers to held-for-sale of U. S. Real Estate Lending Loans, and $562 million related to the transfer of the U. K. Cards portfolio to held-for-sale.2008 primarily includes reductions to the loan loss reserve of approximately $800 million related to FX translation, $102 million related to securitizations, $244 million for the sale of the German retail banking operation, $156 million for the sale of CitiCapital, partially offset by additions of $106 million related to the Cuscatlán and Bank of Overseas Chinese acquisitions.2007 primarily includes reductions to the loan loss reserve of $475 million related to securitizations and transfers to loans held-for-sale, and reductions of $83 million related to the transfer of the U. K. CitiFinancial portfolio to held-for-sale, offset by additions of $610 million related to the acquisitions of Egg, Nikko Cordial, Grupo Cuscatlán and Grupo Financiero Uno. (3) Represents additional credit loss reserves for unfunded corporate lending commitments and letters of credit recorded in Other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheet. INSTITUTIONAL CLIENTS GROUP Institutional Clients Group (ICG) includes Securities and Banking and Transaction Services. ICG provides corporate, institutional and high-net-worth clients with a full range of products and services, including cash management, trading, underwriting, lending and advisory services, around the world. ICG’s international presence is supported by trading floors in approximately 75 countries and a proprietary network within Transaction Services in over 90 countries. At December 31, 2009, ICG had approximately $866 billion of assets and $442 billion of deposits. <table><tr><td>In millions of dollars</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>% Change 2009 vs. 2008</td><td>% Change 2008 vs. 2007</td></tr><tr><td>Commissions and fees</td><td>$2,075</td><td>$2,876</td><td>$3,156</td><td>-28%</td><td>-9%</td></tr><tr><td>Administration and other fiduciary fees</td><td>4,964</td><td>5,413</td><td>5,014</td><td>-8</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Investment banking</td><td>4,685</td><td>3,329</td><td>5,399</td><td>41</td><td>-38</td></tr><tr><td>Principal transactions</td><td>6,001</td><td>6,544</td><td>7,012</td><td>-8</td><td>-7</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>1,971</td><td>-1,021</td><td>1,169</td><td>NM</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Total non-interest revenue</td><td>$19,696</td><td>$17,141</td><td>$21,750</td><td>15%</td><td>-21%</td></tr><tr><td>Net interest revenue (including dividends)</td><td>17,739</td><td>17,740</td><td>11,704</td><td>—</td><td>52</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues, net of interest expense</td><td>$37,435</td><td>$34,881</td><td>$33,454</td><td>7%</td><td>4%</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating expenses</td><td>17,568</td><td>20,955</td><td>20,812</td><td>-16</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Net credit losses</td><td>723</td><td>917</td><td>310</td><td>-21</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for unfunded lending commitments</td><td>138</td><td>-191</td><td>79</td><td>NM</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Credit reservebuild</td><td>857</td><td>1,149</td><td>167</td><td>-25</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for benefits and claims</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>-100</td></tr><tr><td>Provisions for loan losses and benefits and claims</td><td>$1,718</td><td>$1,875</td><td>$557</td><td>-8%</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations before taxes</td><td>$18,149</td><td>$12,051</td><td>$12,085</td><td>51%</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Income taxes</td><td>5,261</td><td>2,746</td><td>3,116</td><td>92</td><td>-12%</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations</td><td>$12,888</td><td>$9,305</td><td>$8,969</td><td>39%</td><td>4%</td></tr><tr><td>Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests</td><td>68</td><td>18</td><td>45</td><td>NM</td><td>-60</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>$12,820</td><td>$9,287</td><td>$8,924</td><td>38%</td><td>4%</td></tr><tr><td>Average assets(in billions of dollars)</td><td>$839</td><td>$1,037</td><td>$1,154</td><td>-19%</td><td>-10%</td></tr><tr><td>Return on assets</td><td>1.53%</td><td>0.90%</td><td>0.77%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Revenues by region</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>North America</td><td>$11,926</td><td>$13,148</td><td>$10,644</td><td>-9%</td><td>24%</td></tr><tr><td>EMEA</td><td>13,424</td><td>9,683</td><td>10,755</td><td>39</td><td>-10</td></tr><tr><td>Latin America</td><td>4,784</td><td>3,808</td><td>4,360</td><td>26</td><td>-13</td></tr><tr><td>Asia</td><td>7,301</td><td>8,242</td><td>7,695</td><td>-11</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$37,435</td><td>$34,881</td><td>$33,454</td><td>7%</td><td>4%</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations by region</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>North America</td><td>$3,032</td><td>$2,598</td><td>$1,896</td><td>17%</td><td>37%</td></tr><tr><td>EMEA</td><td>4,680</td><td>1,902</td><td>2,411</td><td>NM</td><td>-21</td></tr><tr><td>Latin America</td><td>2,116</td><td>1,636</td><td>1,899</td><td>29</td><td>-14</td></tr><tr><td>Asia</td><td>3,060</td><td>3,169</td><td>2,763</td><td>-3</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$12,888</td><td>$9,305</td><td>$8,969</td><td>39%</td><td>4%</td></tr><tr><td>Average loans by region(in billions of dollars)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>North America</td><td>$45</td><td>$50</td><td>$51</td><td>-10%</td><td>-2%</td></tr><tr><td>EMEA</td><td>44</td><td>54</td><td>56</td><td>-19</td><td>-4</td></tr><tr><td>Latin America</td><td>21</td><td>24</td><td>26</td><td>-13</td><td>-8</td></tr><tr><td>Asia</td><td>28</td><td>37</td><td>38</td><td>-24</td><td>-3</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$138</td><td>$165</td><td>$171</td><td>-16%</td><td>-4%</td></tr></table>

What is the growing rate of Net credit losses in the year with the most Provision for benefits and claims?

Sources of Liquidity Primary sources of liquidity for Citigroup and its principal subsidiaries include: ? deposits; ? collateralized financing transactions; ? senior and subordinated debt; ? commercial paper; ? trust preferred and preferred securities; and ? purchased/wholesale funds. Citigroup’s funding sources are diversified across funding types and geography, a benefit of its global franchise. Funding for Citigroup and its major operating subsidiaries includes a geographically diverse retail and corporate deposit base of $774.2 billion. These deposits are diversified across products and regions, with approximately two-thirds of them outside of the U. S. This diversification provides the Company with an important, stable and low-cost source of funding. A significant portion of these deposits has been, and is expected to be, long-term and stable, and are considered to be core. There are qualitative as well as quantitative assessments that determine the Company’s calculation of core deposits. The first step in this process is a qualitative assessment of the deposits. For example, as a result of the Company’s qualitative analysis certain deposits with wholesale funding characteristics are excluded from consideration as core. Deposits that qualify under the Company’s qualitative assessments are then subjected to quantitative analysis. Excluding the impact of changes in foreign exchange rates and the sale of our retail banking operations in Germany during the year ending December 31, 2008, the Company’s deposit base remained stable. On a volume basis, deposit increases were noted in Transaction Services, U. S. Retail Banking and Smith Barney. This was partially offset by the Company’s decision to reduce deposits considered wholesale funding, consistent with the Company’s de-leveraging efforts, and declines in International Consumer Banking and the Private Bank. Citigroup and its subsidiaries have historically had a significant presence in the global capital markets. The Company’s capital markets funding activities have been primarily undertaken by two legal entities: (i) Citigroup Inc. , which issues long-term debt, medium-term notes, trust preferred securities, and preferred and common stock; and (ii) Citigroup Funding Inc. (CFI), a first-tier subsidiary of Citigroup, which issues commercial paper, medium-term notes and structured equity-linked and credit-linked notes, all of which are guaranteed by Citigroup. Other significant elements of longterm debt on the Consolidated Balance Sheet include collateralized advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank system, long-term debt related to the consolidation of ICG’s Structured Investment Vehicles, asset-backed outstandings, and certain borrowings of foreign subsidiaries. Each of Citigroup’s major operating subsidiaries finances its operations on a basis consistent with its capitalization, regulatory structure and the environment in which it operates. Particular attention is paid to those businesses that for tax, sovereign risk, or regulatory reasons cannot be freely and readily funded in the international markets. Citigroup’s borrowings have historically been diversified by geography, investor, instrument and currency. Decisions regarding the ultimate currency and interest rate profile of liquidity generated through these borrowings can be separated from the actual issuance through the use of derivative instruments. Citigroup is a provider of liquidity facilities to the commercial paper programs of the two primary Credit Card securitization trusts with which it transacts. Citigroup may also provide other types of support to the trusts. As a result of the recent economic downturn, its impact on the cashflows of the trusts, and in response to credit rating agency reviews of the trusts, the Company increased the credit enhancement in the Omni Trust, and plans to provide additional enhancement to the Master Trust (see Note 23 to Consolidated Financial Statements on page 175 for a further discussion). This support preserves investor sponsorship of our card securitization franchise, an important source of liquidity. Banking Subsidiaries There are various legal limitations on the ability of Citigroup’s subsidiary depository institutions to extend credit, pay dividends or otherwise supply funds to Citigroup and its non-bank subsidiaries. The approval of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, in the case of national banks, or the Office of Thrift Supervision, in the case of federal savings banks, is required if total dividends declared in any calendar year exceed amounts specified by the applicable agency’s regulations. State-chartered depository institutions are subject to dividend limitations imposed by applicable state law. In determining the declaration of dividends, each depository institution must also consider its effect on applicable risk-based capital and leverage ratio requirements, as well as policy statements of the federal regulatory agencies that indicate that banking organizations should generally pay dividends out of current operating earnings. Non-Banking Subsidiaries Citigroup also receives dividends from its non-bank subsidiaries. These non-bank subsidiaries are generally not subject to regulatory restrictions on dividends. However, as discussed in “Capital Resources and Liquidity” on page 94, the ability of CGMHI to declare dividends can be restricted by capital considerations of its broker-dealer subsidiaries. CGMHI’s consolidated balance sheet is liquid, with the vast majority of its assets consisting of marketable securities and collateralized short-term financing agreements arising from securities transactions. CGMHI monitors and evaluates the adequacy of its capital and borrowing base on a daily basis to maintain liquidity and to ensure that its capital base supports the regulatory capital requirements of its subsidiaries. Some of Citigroup’s non-bank subsidiaries, including CGMHI, have credit facilities with Citigroup’s subsidiary depository institutions, including Citibank, N. A. Borrowings under these facilities must be secured in accordance with Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act. There are various legal restrictions on the extent to which a bank holding company and certain of its non-bank subsidiaries can borrow or obtain credit from Citigroup’s subsidiary depository institutions or engage in certain other transactions with them. In general, these restrictions require that transactions be on arm’s length terms and be secured by designated amounts of specified collateral. See Note 20 to the Consolidated Financial Statements on page 169. At December 31, 2008, long-term debt and commercial paper outstanding for Citigroup, CGMHI, CFI and Citigroup’s subsidiaries were as follows: <table><tr><td><i>In billions of dollars</i></td><td>Citigroup parent company</td><td>CGMHI^-2</td><td>Citigroup Funding Inc.^-2</td><td>Other Citigroup subsidiaries</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt</td><td>$192.3</td><td>$20.6</td><td>$37.4</td><td>$109.3</td><td>^-1</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial paper</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$28.6</td><td>$0.5</td><td></td></tr></table> (1) At December 31, 2008, approximately $67.4 billion relates to collateralized advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank. (2) Citigroup Inc. guarantees all of CFI’s debt and CGMHI’s publicly issued securities. Citi Holdings contains businesses and portfolios of assets that Citigroup has determined are not central to its core Citicorp businesses. Consistent with its strategy, Citi intends to exit these businesses as quickly as practicable in an economically rational manner through business divestitures, portfolio run-offs and asset sales. During 2009 and 2010, Citi made substantial progress divesting and exiting businesses from Citi Holdings, having completed more than 30 divestiture transactions, including Smith Barney, Nikko Cordial Securities, Nikko Asset Management, Primerica Financial Services, various credit card businesses (including Diners Club North America) and The Student Loan Corporation (which is reported as discontinued operations within the Corporate/Other segment for the second half of 2010 only). Citi Holdings’ GAAP assets of $359 billion have been reduced by $128 billion from December 31, 2009, and $468 billion from the peak in the first quarter of 2008. Citi Holdings’ GAAP assets of $359 billion represent approximately 19% of Citi’s assets as of December 31, 2010. Citi Holdings’ risk-weighted assets of approximately $330 billion represent approximately 34% of Citi’s risk-weighted assets as of December 31, 2010. Citi Holdings consists of the following: Brokerage and Asset Management, Local Consumer Lending, and Special Asset Pool. <table><tr><td>In millions of dollars</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>% Change 2010 vs. 2009</td><td>% Change 2009 vs. 2008</td></tr><tr><td>Net interest revenue</td><td>$14,773</td><td>$16,139</td><td>$21,092</td><td>-8%</td><td>-23%</td></tr><tr><td>Non-interest revenue</td><td>4,514</td><td>12,989</td><td>-29,330</td><td>-65</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues, net of interest expense</td><td>$19,287</td><td>$29,128</td><td>$-8,238</td><td>-34%</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net credit losses</td><td>$19,070</td><td>$24,585</td><td>$14,026</td><td>-22%</td><td>75%</td></tr><tr><td>Credit reserve build (release)</td><td>-3,500</td><td>5,305</td><td>11,258</td><td>NM</td><td>-53</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for loan losses</td><td>$15,570</td><td>$29,890</td><td>$25,284</td><td>-48%</td><td>18%</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for benefits and claims</td><td>813</td><td>1,094</td><td>1,228</td><td>-26</td><td>-11</td></tr><tr><td>Provision (release) for unfunded lending commitments</td><td>-82</td><td>106</td><td>-172</td><td>NM</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Total provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims</td><td>$16,301</td><td>$31,090</td><td>$26,340</td><td>-48%</td><td>18%</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating expenses</td><td>$9,563</td><td>$13,764</td><td>$24,104</td><td>-31</td><td>-43%</td></tr><tr><td>Loss from continuing operations before taxes</td><td>$-6,577</td><td>$-15,726</td><td>$-58,682</td><td>58%</td><td>73%</td></tr><tr><td>Benefits for income taxes</td><td>-2,554</td><td>-6,878</td><td>-22,185</td><td>63</td><td>69</td></tr><tr><td>(Loss) from continuing operations</td><td>$-4,023</td><td>$-8,848</td><td>$-36,497</td><td>55%</td><td>76%</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests</td><td>207</td><td>29</td><td>-372</td><td>NM</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Citi Holdings net loss</td><td>$-4,230</td><td>$-8,877</td><td>$-36,125</td><td>52%</td><td>75%</td></tr><tr><td>Balance sheet data(in billions of dollars)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total EOP assets</td><td>$359</td><td>$487</td><td>$650</td><td>-26%</td><td>-25%</td></tr><tr><td>Total EOP deposits</td><td>$79</td><td>$89</td><td>$81</td><td>-11%</td><td>10%</td></tr></table> receipt in 2005, of a $10 million termination fee associated with one property that left our system. The favorable items noted above were also partially offset by $146 million of increased general and administrative expenses and $46 million of lower synthetic fuel revenue net of synthetic fuel expenses. Increased general, administrative and other expenses were associated with our Lodging segments as unallocated general, administrative and other expenses were down slightly compared to the prior year. The increase in general, administrative and other expenses reflects a $94 million charge impacting our North American Full-Service and International Lodging segments, primarily due to the non-cash write-off of deferred contract acquisition costs associated with the termination of management agreements associated with our acquisition of the CTF properties, and $30 million of expenses associated with our bedding incentive program, impacting our North American Full-Service, North American Limited-Service and International Lodging segments. General, administrative and other expenses in 2005 also reflect pre-tax performance termination cure payments of $15 million associated with two properties, a $9 million pre-tax charge associated with three guarantees, increased other net overhead costs of $13 million including costs related to the Company’s unit growth, development and systems, and $2 million of increased foreign exchange losses partially offset by $5 million of lower litigation expenses. Additionally, in 2004, general, administrative and other expenses included a $13 million charge associated with the write-off of deferred contract acquisition costs. Operating income for 2005 included a synthetic fuel operating loss of $144 million versus a $98 million operating loss in the prior year, reflecting increased costs and the consolidation of our synthetic fuel operations from the start of the 2004 second quarter, which resulted in the recognition of revenue and expenses for all of 2005 versus only three quarters in 2004, as we accounted for the synthetic fuel operations using the equity method of accounting in the 2004 first quarter. For additional information, see our “Synthetic Fuel” segment discussion later in this report. Gains and Other Income The following table shows our gains and other income for 2006, 2005 and 2004. <table><tr><td> <i>($ in millions)</i></td><td>2006</td><td> 2005</td><td> 2004</td></tr><tr><td>Timeshare segment note sale gains</td><td>$—</td><td>$69</td><td>$64</td></tr><tr><td>Synthetic fuel earn-out payments (made) received, net</td><td>-15</td><td>32</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>Loss on expected land sale</td><td>-37</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Gains on sales of real estate and other</td><td>26</td><td>34</td><td>48</td></tr><tr><td>Other note sale/repayment gains</td><td>2</td><td>25</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Gains on sale/income on redemption of joint venture investments</td><td>68</td><td>7</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>Income from cost method joint ventures</td><td>15</td><td>14</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$59</td><td>$181</td><td>$164</td></tr></table> Gains on sale/income on redemption of joint venture investments of $68 million in 2006 represents $43 million of net gains associated with the sale of joint venture investments and $25 million of income associated with the redemption of preferred stock we held in one investee. As further explained in the earlier “Revenues” discussion for 2006, Timeshare segment note sale gains of $77 million in 2006 are presented in the “Timeshare sales and services” revenue caption. Interest Expense 2006 COMPARED TO 2005 Interest expense increased $18 million (17 percent) to $124 million in 2006 from $106 million in 2005. Included within interest expense for 2006 are charges totaling $46 million relating to interest on accumulated cash inflows, in advance of our cash outflows for various programs that we operate on the owners’ behalf, including the Marriott Rewards, Gift Certificates and SelfInsurance programs. The increase in interest on these programs over 2005 is related to higher liability balances and higher interest rates. Interest expense also increased in 2006, due to our June 2005 Series F Notes issuance, our June 2006 Series H Notes issuance, and higher commercial paper balances coupled with higher rates. Partially offsetting these increases were interest expense declines associated with the payoff, at maturity, of both our Series D Notes in April 2005 and Series B Notes in November 2005, and the exchange of our Series C and Series E Notes for lower interest rate Series G Notes in 2005.2005 COMPARED TO 2004 Interest expense increased $7 million (7 percent) to $106 million in 2005 from $99 million in the prior year, reflecting increased debt levels, which helped to facilitate significantly higher capital expenditures and share repurchases in 2005. Interest expense in 2005 reflected our June 2005 Series F Notes issuance and, versus the prior year, higher commercial paper balances coupled with higher rates. Included within interest expense for 2005 are charges totaling $29 million relating to interest on accumulated cash inflows, in advance of our cash outflows for various programs that we operate on the owners’ behalf, including the Marriott Rewards, Gift Certificates and Self-Insurance programs. The increase over 2004 is related to higher liability balances and higher interest rates. Partially offsetting these increases were interest expense declines associated with the payoff, at maturity, of both our Series D Notes in April 2005 and Series B Notes in November 2005, and the capitalization of more interest associated with the development of timeshare properties. Interest Income, Provision for Loan Losses, and Income Tax 2006 COMPARED TO 2005 Interest income, before the provision for loan losses, decreased $34 million (43 percent) to $45 million in 2006 from $79 million in 2005, primarily reflecting the impact of loans repaid to us in 2005. Also reflected in the decrease versus the prior year are $4 million of mark-to-market expenses in 2006 associated with hedges for our synthetic fuel operations. Loan loss provisions decreased $31 million versus the prior year reflecting the reversal of loan loss provisions totaling $3 million in 2006 compared to a charge of $17 million in 2005 due to the impairment of our Delta Air Lines, Inc. aircraft leveraged lease, see the “Investment in Leveraged Lease” caption later in this report for additional information, and an $11 million loan loss provision in 2005 associated with one property. Our tax provision totaled $286 million in 2006 compared to a tax provision of $94 million in 2005. The difference of $192 million is primarily attributable to $96 million of higher taxes in 2006 associated with higher pre-tax income from our lodging operations and $96 million of lower tax credits and tax benefit in 2006 associated with our synthetic fuel operations that generated a net tax benefit of $94 million in 2006 compared to a net tax benefit of $190 million in 2005. As discussed in more detail in the “Synthetic Fuel” segment caption later in this report, 2006 includes a provision for an estimated 39 percent

What do all collateralized financings sum up in 2018 , excluding Repurchase agreements and Securities loaned? (in million)

Management’s Discussion and Analysis The table below presents a reconciliation of our common shareholders’ equity to the estimated Basel III Advanced CET1 on a fully phased-in basis. <table><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td>As of December 2013</td></tr><tr><td>Common shareholders’ equity</td><td>$ 71,267</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill</td><td>-3,705</td></tr><tr><td>Identifiable intangible assets</td><td>-671</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred tax liabilities</td><td>908</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, net of deferred tax liabilities</td><td>-3,468</td></tr><tr><td>Deductions for investments in nonconsolidated financial institutions¹</td><td>-9,091</td></tr><tr><td>Otheradjustments²</td><td>-489</td></tr><tr><td>Basel III CET1</td><td>$ 58,219</td></tr><tr><td>Basel III Advanced RWAs</td><td>$594,662</td></tr><tr><td>Basel III Advanced CET1 Ratio</td><td>9.8%</td></tr></table> 1. This deduction, which represents the fully phased-in requirement, is the amount by which our investments in the capital of nonconsolidated financial institutions exceed certain prescribed thresholds. During both the transitional period and thereafter, no deduction will be required if the applicable proportion of our investments in the capital of nonconsolidated financial institutions falls below the prescribed thresholds.2. Principally includes credit valuation adjustments on derivative liabilities and debt valuation adjustments, as well as other required credit riskbased deductions. In addition, beginning with the first quarter of 2015, subject to transitional provisions, we will also be required to disclose ratios calculated under the Standardized approach. Our estimated CET1 ratio under the Standardized approach (Standardized CET1 ratio) on a fully phased-in basis was approximately 60 basis points lower than our estimated Basel III Advanced CET1 ratio in the table above. Both the Basel III Advanced CET1 ratio and the Standardized CET1 ratio are subject to transitional provisions. Reflecting the transitional provisions that became effective January 1, 2014, our estimated Basel III Advanced CET1 ratio and our estimated Standardized CET1 ratio are approximately 150 basis points higher than the respective CET1 ratios on a fully phased-in basis as of December 2013. Effective January 1, 2014, Group Inc. ’s capital and leverage ratios are calculated under, and subject to the minimums as defined in, the Revised Capital Framework. The changes to the definition of capital and minimum ratios, subject to transitional provisions, were effective beginning January 1, 2014. RWAs are based on Basel I Adjusted, as defined in Note 20 to the consolidated financial statements. The firm will transition to Basel III beginning on April 1, 2014. Including the impact of the changes to the definition of regulatory capital and reflecting the transitional provisions effective in 2014, our estimated CET1 ratio (CET1 to RWAs on a Basel I Adjusted basis) as of December 2013 would have been essentially unchanged as compared to our Tier 1 common ratio under Basel I. Regulatory Leverage Ratios. The Revised Capital Framework increased the minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio applicable to us from 3% to 4% effective January 1, 2014. In addition, the Revised Capital Framework will introduce a new Tier 1 supplementary leverage ratio (supplementary leverage ratio) for Advanced approach banking organizations. The supplementary leverage ratio compares Tier 1 capital (as defined under the Revised Capital Framework) to a measure of leverage exposure, defined as the sum of the firm’s assets less certain CET1 deductions plus certain off-balance-sheet exposures, including a measure of derivatives exposures and commitments. The Revised Capital Framework requires a minimum supplementary leverage ratio of 3%, effective January 1, 2018, but with disclosure required beginning in the first quarter of 2015. In addition, subsequent to the approval of the Revised Capital Framework, the Agencies issued a proposal to increase the minimum supplementary leverage ratio requirement for the largest U. S. banks (those deemed to be global systemically important banking institutions (G-SIBs) under the Basel G-SIB framework). These proposals would require the firm and other G-SIBs to meet a 5% supplementary leverage ratio (comprised of the minimum requirement of 3% plus a 2% buffer). As of December 2013, our estimated supplementary leverage ratio based on the Revised Capital Framework approximates this proposed minimum. In addition, the Basel Committee recently finalized revisions that would increase the size of the leverage exposure for purposes of the supplementary leverage ratio, but would retain a minimum supplementary leverage ratio requirement of 3%. It is not known with certainty at this point whether the U. S. regulators will adopt this revised definition of leverage into their rules and proposals for the supplementary leverage ratio. THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Gains and Losses on Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities Accounted for at Fair Value Under the Fair Value Option The table below presents the gains and losses recognized in earnings as a result of the firm electing to apply the fair value option to certain financial assets and financial liabilities. These gains and losses are included in “Market making” and “Other principal transactions. ” The table below also includes gains and losses on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments included in unsecured short-term borrowings, unsecured long-term borrowings and deposits. These gains and losses would have been recognized under other U. S. GAAP even if the firm had not elected to account for the entire hybrid financial instrument at fair value. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured short-term borrowings</td><td>$-1,028</td><td>$ 346</td><td>$-1,180</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured long-term borrowings</td><td>584</td><td>771</td><td>-592</td></tr><tr><td>Other liabilities and accrued expenses</td><td>-55</td><td>-684</td><td>-441</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-630</td><td>-217</td><td>-366</td></tr><tr><td> Total</td><td>$-1,129</td><td>$ 216</td><td>$-2,579</td></tr></table> In the table above: ‰ Gains/(losses) exclude contractual interest, which is included in “Interest income” and “Interest expense,” for all instruments other than hybrid financial instruments. See Note 23 for further information about interest income and interest expense. ‰ Unsecured short-term borrowings includes gains/(losses) on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments of $(1.05) billion for 2016, $339 million for 2015 and $(1.22) billion for 2014, respectively. ‰ Unsecured long-term borrowings includes gains/(losses) on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments of $737 million for 2016, $653 million for 2015 and $(697) million for 2014, respectively. ‰ Other liabilities and accrued expenses includes gains/ (losses) on certain subordinated liabilities of consolidated VIEs. ‰ Other primarily consists of gains/(losses) on receivables from customers and counterparties, deposits and other secured financings. Excluding the gains and losses on the instruments accounted for under the fair value option described above, “Market making” and “Other principal transactions” primarily represent gains and losses on “Financial instruments owned, at fair value” and “Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value. ” Loans and Lending Commitments The table below presents the difference between the aggregate fair value and the aggregate contractual principal amount for loans and long-term receivables for which the fair value option was elected. In the table below, the aggregate contractual principal amount of loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than 90 days past due (which excludes loans carried at zero fair value and considered uncollectible) exceeds the related fair value primarily because the firm regularly purchases loans, such as distressed loans, at values significantly below the contractual principal amounts. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">As of December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td> 2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td> Performing loans and long-term receivables</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Aggregate contractual principal in excess of fair value</td><td> $ 478</td><td>$1,330</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3"> Loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than 90 days past due</td></tr><tr><td>Aggregate contractual principal in excess of fair value</td><td> 8,101</td><td>9,600</td></tr><tr><td>Aggregate fair value of loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than90 days past due</td><td> 2,138</td><td>2,391</td></tr></table> As of December 2016 and December 2015, the fair value of unfunded lending commitments for which the fair value option was elected was a liability of $80 million and $211 million, respectively, and the related total contractual amount of these lending commitments was $7.19 billion and $14.01 billion, respectively. See Note 18 for further information about lending commitments. THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis Funding Sources Our primary sources of funding are deposits, collateralized financings, unsecured short-term and long-term borrowings, and shareholders’ equity. We seek to maintain broad and diversified funding sources globally across products, programs, markets, currencies and creditors to avoid funding concentrations. The table below presents information about our funding sources. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">As of December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td colspan="2"> 2018</td><td colspan="2">2017</td></tr><tr><td>Deposits</td><td> $158,257</td><td> 25%</td><td>$138,604</td><td>23%</td></tr><tr><td>Collateralized financings:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Repurchase agreements</td><td> 78,723</td><td> 13%</td><td>84,718</td><td>14%</td></tr><tr><td>Securities loaned</td><td> 11,808</td><td> 2%</td><td>14,793</td><td>2%</td></tr><tr><td>Other secured financings</td><td> 21,433</td><td> 3%</td><td>24,788</td><td>4%</td></tr><tr><td>Total collateralized financings</td><td> 111,964</td><td> 18%</td><td>124,299</td><td>20%</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured short-term borrowings</td><td> 40,502</td><td> 7%</td><td>46,922</td><td>8%</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured long-term borrowings</td><td> 224,149</td><td> 36%</td><td>217,687</td><td>36%</td></tr><tr><td>Total shareholders’ equity</td><td> 90,185</td><td> 14%</td><td>82,243</td><td>13%</td></tr><tr><td> Total funding sources</td><td> $625,057</td><td> 100%</td><td>$609,755</td><td>100%</td></tr></table> Our funding is primarily raised in U. S. dollar, Euro, British pound and Japanese yen. We generally distribute our funding products through our own sales force and thirdparty distributors to a large, diverse creditor base in a variety of markets in the Americas, Europe and Asia. We believe that our relationships with our creditors are critical to our liquidity. Our creditors include banks, governments, securities lenders, corporations, pension funds, insurance companies, mutual funds and individuals. We have imposed various internal guidelines to monitor creditor concentration across our funding programs. Deposits. Our deposits provide us with a diversified source of funding and reduce our reliance on wholesale funding. A growing portion of our deposit base consists of consumer deposits. Deposits are primarily used to finance lending activity, other inventory and a portion of our GCLA. We raise deposits, including savings, demand and time deposits, through internal and third-party broker-dealers, and from consumers and institutional clients, and primarily through Goldman Sachs Bank USA (GS Bank USA) and Goldman Sachs International Bank (GSIB). In September 2018, we launched Marcus: by Goldman Sachs in the U. K. to accept deposits. See Note 14 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about our deposits. Secured Funding. We fund a significant amount of inventory on a secured basis. Secured funding includes collateralized financings in the consolidated statements of financial condition. We may also pledge our inventory as collateral for securities borrowed under a securities lending agreement. We also use our own inventory to cover transactions in which we or our clients have sold securities that have not yet been purchased. Secured funding is less sensitive to changes in our credit quality than unsecured funding, due to our posting of collateral to our lenders. Nonetheless, we continually analyze the refinancing risk of our secured funding activities, taking into account trade tenors, maturity profiles, counterparty concentrations, collateral eligibility and counterparty roll over probabilities. We seek to mitigate our refinancing risk by executing term trades with staggered maturities, diversifying counterparties, raising excess secured funding, and pre-funding residual risk through our GCLA. We seek to raise secured funding with a term appropriate for the liquidity of the assets that are being financed, and we seek longer maturities for secured funding collateralized by asset classes that may be harder to fund on a secured basis, especially during times of market stress. Our secured funding, excluding funding collateralized by liquid government and agency obligations, is primarily executed for tenors of one month or greater and is primarily executed through term repurchase agreements and securities loaned contracts. The weighted average maturity of our secured funding included in collateralized financings in the consolidated statements of financial condition, excluding funding that can only be collateralized by liquid government and agency obligations, exceeded 120 days as of December 2018. Assets that may be harder to fund on a secured basis during times of market stress include certain financial instruments in the following categories: mortgage and other assetbacked loans and securities, non-investment-grade corporate debt securities, equity securities and emerging market securities. Assets that are classified in level 3 of the fair value hierarchy are generally funded on an unsecured basis. See Notes 5 and 6 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about the classification of financial instruments in the fair value hierarchy and “Unsecured Long-Term Borrowings” below for further information about the use of unsecured long-term borrowings as a source of funding. We also raise financing through other types of collateralized financings, such as secured loans and notes. GS Bank USA has access to funding from the Federal Home Loan Bank. Our outstanding borrowings against the Federal Home Loan Bank were $528 million as of December 2018 and $3.40 billion as of December 2017.

In the year with the most other revenues , what is the growth rate of General and administrative expense? (in million)

spread over the LIBOR swap curve, the reduction to net income would be approximately $235 million, net of DAC and DSIC amortization and income taxes, based on December 31, 2008 credit spreads. The nonperformance risk for our derivatives is managed and mitigated primarily through the use of master netting arrangements and collateral arrangements. As of December 31, 2008, any deterioration in our derivative counterparties’ credit would not materially impact our financial statements. Liquidity and Capital Resources Overview We maintained substantial liquidity during 2008. At December 31, 2008, we had $6.2 billion in cash and cash equivalents compared to $3.8 billion at December 31, 2007. Approximately $1.6 billion of the increase in cash and cash equivalents was from increases in collateral received from derivative counterparties as our living benefits hedge portfolio gained in value. Excluding the collateral balances, cash and cash equivalents were $4.4 billion and $3.6 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. We have additional liquidity available through an unsecured revolving credit facility for $750 million that expires in September 2010. Under the terms of the underlying credit agreement, we can increase this facility to $1.0 billion. Available borrowings under this facility are reduced by any outstanding letters of credit. We have had no borrowings under this credit facility and had $2 million of outstanding letters of credit at December 31, 2008. We believe cash flows from operating activities, available cash balances and our availability of revolver borrowings will be sufficient to fund our operating liquidity needs. The following table summarizes the ratings for Ameriprise Financial, Inc. (‘‘Ameriprise Financial’’) and certain of its subsidiaries as of the date of this filing: <table><tr><td> </td><td> A.M. Best Company</td><td> Standard & Poor's Rating Services</td><td> Moody's Investors Service</td><td> Fitch Ratings Ltd.</td></tr><tr><td> Claims Paying Ratings</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>RiverSource Life</td><td>A+</td><td>AA-</td><td>Aa3</td><td>AA-</td></tr><tr><td>IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company</td><td>A</td><td>N/R</td><td>N/R</td><td>N/R</td></tr><tr><td> Credit Ratings</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Ameriprise Financial, Inc.</td><td>a-</td><td>A</td><td>A3</td><td>A-</td></tr></table> On January 29, 2009, Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services (‘‘S&P’’) and Moody’s Investors Service (‘‘Moody’s’’) affirmed the ratings of Ameriprise Financial, Inc. and RiverSource Life citing excellent capitalization and solid financial flexibility. At the same time, both S&P and Moody’s revised their outlook on Ameriprise Financial, Inc. and RiverSource Life from stable to negative citing diminished earnings power resulting from the challenging equity and credit markets. On July 10, 2008, S&P raised its counterparty credit rating on Ameriprise Financial, Inc. to ‘A’ from ‘A-’ and indicated its ratings outlook on our company as stable, citing our strong balance sheet and strong cash coverage of our stable life insurance and asset management operations, supported by an innovative financial advisory distribution channel. These positive factors are somewhat offset by sensitivity to equity-market and debt-market volatility and competitive pressure in our key segments. At the same time, S&P affirmed its ‘AA-’ counterparty credit and financial strength ratings on our life insurance subsidiaries, RiverSource Life and RiverSource Life of NY. Our capital transactions in 2008 and 2007 primarily related to the repurchase of our common stock, dividends paid to our shareholders and the repurchase of debt. Dividends from Subsidiaries Ameriprise Financial is primarily a parent holding company for the operations carried out by our wholly owned subsidiaries. Because of our holding company structure, our ability to meet our cash requirements, including the payment of dividends on our common stock, substantially depends upon the receipt of dividends or return of capital from our subsidiaries, particularly our life insurance subsidiary, RiverSource Life, our face-amount certificate subsidiary, Ameriprise Certificate Company (‘‘ACC’’), our retail introducing broker-dealer subsidiary, Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc. (‘‘AFSI’’), our clearing brokerdealer subsidiary, American Enterprise Investment Services, Inc. (‘‘AEIS’’), our auto and home insurance subsidiary, IDS Property Casualty Insurance Company (‘‘IDS Property Casualty’’), doing business as Ameriprise Auto & Home Insurance, Threadneedle, RiverSource Service Corporation and our investment advisory company, RiverSource Investments. The home business reflecting the impact of growth in exposures from an 11% increase in policies in force, an increase in catastrophe losses reflecting the growth in exposures and the extremely severe winter and spring weather during 2014, and adverse development in the 2013 and prior accident years auto liability coverage observed during the first quarter of 2014 resulting in a $30 million increase to prior accident year loss reserves. Later in 2014, further adverse loss development was observed primarily in the 2014 auto book of business which resulted in a $60 million increase to loss reserves for estimated losses including IBNR. Catastrophe losses were $66 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $42 million for the prior year. Corporate & Other The following table presents the results of operations of our Corporate & Other segment on an operating basis: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td colspan="2">Change</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">(in millions)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Revenues</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Distribution fees</td><td>$1</td><td>$1</td><td>$—</td><td>—%</td></tr><tr><td>Net investment income (loss)</td><td>-6</td><td>8</td><td>-14</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Other revenues</td><td>9</td><td>6</td><td>3</td><td>50</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>4</td><td>15</td><td>-11</td><td>-73</td></tr><tr><td>Banking and deposit interest expense</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total net revenues</td><td>4</td><td>15</td><td>-11</td><td>-73</td></tr><tr><td>Expenses</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Distribution expenses</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Interest and debt expense</td><td>21</td><td>33</td><td>-12</td><td>-36</td></tr><tr><td>General and administrative expense</td><td>212</td><td>210</td><td>2</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Total expenses</td><td>234</td><td>244</td><td>-10</td><td>-4</td></tr><tr><td>Operating loss</td><td>$-230</td><td>$-229</td><td>$-1</td><td>—%</td></tr></table> NM Not Meaningful. Our Corporate & Other segment pretax operating loss excludes net realized investment gains or losses and the impact of consolidating CIEs. Our Corporate & Other segment pretax operating loss was $230 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $229 million for the prior year. Net investment income (loss) was a loss of $6 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to income of $8 million for the prior year due to a $13 million increase in losses associated with affordable housing partnerships. Interest and debt expense decreased $12 million, or 36%, to $21 million for the year ended December 31, 2014 compared to $33 million for the prior year primarily due to $19 million in costs in 2013 related to the early redemption of our senior notes due 2015, partially offset by expenses in 2014 related to the early redemption of our senior notes due 2039. General and administrative expense for the year ended December 31, 2014 included a provision for potential resolution of a regulatory matter regarding certain historical events and processes at one of our ongoing lines of business, which was partially offset by lower investment spending compared to the prior year. Fair Value Measurements We report certain assets and liabilities at fair value; specifically, separate account assets, derivatives, embedded derivatives, properties held by our consolidated property funds, and most investments and cash equivalents. Fair value assumes the exchange of assets or liabilities occurs in orderly transactions and is not the result of a forced liquidation or distressed sale. We include actual market prices, or observable inputs, in our fair value measurements to the extent available. Broker quotes are obtained when quotes from pricing services are not available. We validate prices obtained from third parties through a variety of means such as: price variance analysis, subsequent sales testing, stale price review, price comparison across pricing vendors and due diligence reviews of vendors. See Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on our fair value measurements. Fair Value of Liabilities and Nonperformance Risk Companies are required to measure the fair value of liabilities at the price that would be received to transfer the liability to a market participant (an exit price). Since there is not a market for our obligations of our variable annuity riders and indexed universal life insurance, we consider the assumptions participants in a hypothetical market would make to reflect an exit price. As a result, we adjust the valuation of variable annuity riders and indexed universal life insurance by updating certain contractholder assumptions, adding explicit margins to provide for profit, risk and expenses, and adjusting the rates used to discount expected cash flows to reflect a current market estimate of our nonperformance risk. The 20. Regulatory Requirements Restrictions on the transfer of funds exist under regulatory requirements applicable to certain of the Company’s subsidiaries. At December 31, 2016, the aggregate amount of unrestricted net assets was approximately $1.4 billion. The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (‘‘NAIC’’) defines Risk-Based Capital (‘‘RBC’’) requirements for insurance companies. The RBC requirements are used by the NAIC and state insurance regulators to identify companies that merit regulatory actions designed to protect policyholders. These requirements apply to both the Company’s life and property casualty insurance companies. In addition, IDS Property Casualty is subject to the statutory surplus requirements of the State of Wisconsin. The Company’s life and property casualty companies each met their respective minimum RBC requirements. The Company’s life and property casualty insurance companies are required to prepare statutory financial statements in accordance with the accounting practices prescribed or permitted by the insurance departments of their respective states of domicile, which vary materially from GAAP. Prescribed statutory accounting practices include publications of the NAIC, as well as state laws, regulations and general administrative rules. The more significant differences from GAAP include charging policy acquisition costs to expense as incurred, establishing annuity and insurance reserves using different actuarial methods and assumptions, valuing investments on a different basis and excluding certain assets from the balance sheet by charging them directly to surplus, such as a portion of the net deferred income tax assets. State insurance statutes contain limitations as to the amount of dividends or distributions that insurers may make without providing prior notification to state regulators. For RiverSource Life, dividends or distributions in excess of unassigned surplus, as determined in accordance with accounting practices prescribed by the State of Minnesota, require advance notice to the Minnesota Department of Commerce, RiverSource Life’s primary regulator, and are subject to potential disapproval. RiverSource Life’s statutory unassigned surplus aggregated $275 million and $954 million as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. In addition, dividends or distributions, whose fair market value, together with that of other dividends or distributions made within the preceding 12 months, exceeds the greater of the previous year’s statutory net gain from operations or 10% of the previous year-end statutory capital and surplus are referred to as ‘‘extraordinary dividends. ’’ Extraordinary dividends also require advance notice to the Minnesota Department of Commerce, and are subject to potential disapproval. Statutory capital and surplus for RiverSource Life was $3.0 billion and $3.7 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Statutory capital and surplus for IDS Property Casualty was $800 million and $684 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Statutory net gain from operations and net income (loss) are summarized as follows: <table><tr><td rowspan="3"></td><td colspan="3">Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3">(in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>RiverSource Life</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Statutory net gain from operations^-1</td><td>$834</td><td>$1,033</td><td>$1,412</td></tr><tr><td>Statutory net income^-1</td><td>322</td><td>633</td><td>1,154</td></tr><tr><td>IDS Property Casualty</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Statutory net income (loss)</td><td>-8</td><td>-44</td><td>-25</td></tr></table> (1) Statutory net gain (loss) from operations and statutory net income (loss) are significantly impacted by changes in reserves for variable annuity guaranteed benefits, however, these impacts are substantially offset by unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives which are not included in statutory income but are recorded directly to surplus. Government debt securities of $4 million and $5 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, held by the Company’s life insurance subsidiaries were on deposit with various states as required by law. Ameriprise Certificate Company (‘‘ACC’’) is registered as an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ‘‘1940 Act’’). ACC markets and sells investment certificates to clients. ACC is subject to various capital requirements under the 1940 Act, laws of the State of Minnesota and understandings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’) and the Minnesota Department of Commerce. The terms of the investment certificates issued by ACC and the provisions of the 1940 Act also require the maintenance by ACC of qualified assets. Under the provisions of its certificates and the 1940 Act, ACC was required to have qualified assets (as that term is defined in Section 28(b) of the 1940 Act) in the amount of $5.9 billion and $4.8 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. ACC had qualified assets of $6.3 billion and $5.1 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Ameriprise Financial and ACC entered into a Capital Support Agreement on March 2, 2009, pursuant to which Ameriprise Financial agrees to commit such capital to ACC as is necessary to satisfy applicable minimum capital requirements. Effective April 30, 2014, this agreement was amended to revise the maximum commitment to $50 million. For the years Management anticipates that the effective tax rate in 2017 will be between 32% and 35%. However, business portfolio actions, changes in the current economic environment, tax legislation or rate changes, currency fluctuations, ability to realize deferred tax assets, movements in stock price impacting tax benefits or deficiencies on stock-based payment awards, and the results of operations in certain taxing jurisdictions may cause this estimated rate to fluctuate. Segment Information Arconic’s operations consist of three worldwide reportable segments: Global Rolled Products, Engineered Products and Solutions, and Transportation and Construction Solutions (see below). Segment performance under Arconic’s management reporting system is evaluated based on a number of factors; however, the primary measure of performance is the after-tax operating income (ATOI) of each segment. Certain items such as the impact of LIFO inventory accounting; metal price lag (the timing difference created when the average price of metal sold differs from the average cost of the metal when purchased by the respective segment—generally when the price of metal increases, metal lag is favorable and when the price of metal decreases, metal lag is unfavorable); interest expense; noncontrolling interests; corporate expense (general administrative and selling expenses of operating the corporate headquarters and other global administrative facilities, along with depreciation and amortization on corporate-owned assets); restructuring and other charges; and other items, including intersegment profit eliminations, differences between tax rates applicable to the segments and the consolidated effective tax rate, and other nonoperating items such as foreign currency transaction gains/losses and interest income are excluded from segment ATOI. ATOI for all reportable segments totaled $1,087 in 2016, $986 in 2015, and $983 in 2014. The following information provides shipment, sales and ATOI data for each reportable segment, as well as certain realized price data, for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016. See Note O to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Part II Item 8 of this Form 10-K for additional information. Beginning in the first quarter of 2017, Arconic’s segment reporting metric will change from ATOI to Adjusted EBITDA. Global Rolled Products(1) <table><tr><td></td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Third-party aluminum shipments (kmt)</td><td>1,339</td><td>1,375</td><td>1,598</td></tr><tr><td>Average realized price per metric ton of aluminum^-2</td><td>$3,633</td><td>$3,820</td><td>$3,970</td></tr><tr><td>Third-party sales</td><td>$4,864</td><td>$5,253</td><td>$6,344</td></tr><tr><td>Intersegment sales</td><td>118</td><td>125</td><td>185</td></tr><tr><td>Total sales</td><td>$4,982</td><td>$5,378</td><td>$6,529</td></tr><tr><td>ATOI</td><td>$269</td><td>$225</td><td>$224</td></tr></table> Excludes the Warrick, IN rolling operations and the equity interest in the rolling mill at the joint venture in Saudi Arabia, both of which were previously part of the Global Rolled Products segment but became part of Alcoa Corporation effective November 1, 2016. (2) Generally, average realized price per metric ton of aluminum includes two elements: a) the price of metal (the underlying base metal component based on quoted prices from the LME, plus a regional premium which represents the incremental price over the base LME component that is associated with physical delivery of metal to a particular region), and b) the conversion price, which represents the incremental price over the metal price component that is associated with converting primary aluminum into sheet and plate. In this circumstance, the metal price component is a pass-through to this segment’s customers with limited exception (e. g. , fixed-priced contracts, certain regional premiums). The Global Rolled Products segment produces aluminum sheet and plate for a variety of end markets. Sheet and plate is sold directly to customers and through distributors related to the aerospace, automotive, commercial transportation, packaging, building and construction, and industrial products (mainly used in the production of machinery and equipment and consumer durables) end markets. A small portion of this segment also produces aseptic foil for the packaging end market. While the customer base for flat-rolled products is large, a significant amount of sales of sheet

as of february 19 , 2016 what was the market capitalization

PART II ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES The following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the NYSE for the years 2015 and 2014. <table><tr><td>2015</td><td>High</td><td>Low</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended March 31</td><td>$101.88</td><td>$93.21</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended June 30</td><td>98.64</td><td>91.99</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended September 30</td><td>101.54</td><td>86.83</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended December 31</td><td>104.12</td><td>87.23</td></tr><tr><td>2014</td><td>High</td><td>Low</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended March 31</td><td>$84.90</td><td>$78.38</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended June 30</td><td>90.73</td><td>80.10</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended September 30</td><td>99.90</td><td>89.05</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended December 31</td><td>106.31</td><td>90.20</td></tr></table> On February 19, 2016, the closing price of our common stock was $87.32 per share as reported on the NYSE. As of February 19, 2016, we had 423,897,556 outstanding shares of common stock and 159 registered holders. Dividends As a REIT, we must annually distribute to our stockholders an amount equal to at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (determined before the deduction for distributed earnings and excluding any net capital gain). Generally, we have distributed and expect to continue to distribute all or substantially all of our REIT taxable income after taking into consideration our utilization of net operating losses (“NOLs”). We have two series of preferred stock outstanding, 5.25% Mandatory Convertible Preferred Stock, Series A, issued in May 2014 (the “Series A Preferred Stock”), with a dividend rate of 5.25%, and the 5.50% Mandatory Convertible Preferred Stock, Series B (the “Series B Preferred Stock”), issued in March 2015, with a dividend rate of 5.50%. Dividends are payable quarterly in arrears, subject to declaration by our Board of Directors. The amount, timing and frequency of future distributions will be at the sole discretion of our Board of Directors and will be dependent upon various factors, a number of which may be beyond our control, including our financial condition and operating cash flows, the amount required to maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT and reduce any income and excise taxes that we otherwise would be required to pay, limitations on distributions in our existing and future debt and preferred equity instruments, our ability to utilize NOLs to offset our distribution requirements, limitations on our ability to fund distributions using cash generated through our TRSs and other factors that our Board of Directors may deem relevant. We have distributed an aggregate of approximately $2.3 billion to our common stockholders, including the dividend paid in January 2016, primarily subject to taxation as ordinary income. During the year ended December 31, 2015, we declared the following cash distributions: Our total non-U. S. exposure was $232.6 billion at December 31, 2011, a decrease of $29.4 billion from December 31, 2010. Our non-U. S. exposure remained concentrated in Europe which accounted for $115.9 billion, or 50 percent, of total non-U. S. exposure. The European exposure was mostly in Western Europe and was distributed across a variety of industries. The decrease of $32.2 billion in Europe was primarily driven by our efforts to reduce risk in countries affected by the ongoing debt crisis in the Eurozone. Select European countries are further detailed in Table 54. Asia Pacific was our second largest non-U. S. exposure at $74.6 billion, or 32 percent. The $1.3 billion increase in Asia Pacific was driven by increases in securities and local exposure in Japan and increases in the emerging markets, predominately in local exposure, loans and securities offset by the sale of CCB shares. For more information on our CCB investment, see Note 5 – Securities to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Latin America accounted for $17.4 billion, or seven percent, of total non-U. S. exposure. The $2.6 billion increase in Latin America was primarily driven by an increase in Brazil in securities and local country exposure. Middle East and Africa increased $926 million to $4.6 billion, representing two percent of total non-U. S. exposure. Other non-U. S. exposure was $20.1 billion at December 31, 2011, a decrease of $2.1 billion in 2011 resulting primarily from a decrease in local exposure as a result of the sale of our Canadian consumer card business. For more information on our Asia Pacific and Latin America exposure, see non-U. S. exposure to selected countries defined as emerging markets on page 100. Table 52 presents countries where total cross-border exposure exceeded one percent of our total assets. At December 31, 2011, the United Kingdom and Japan were the only countries where total cross-border exposure exceeded one percent of our total assets. At December 31, 2011, Canada and France had total cross-border exposure of $16.9 billion and $16.1 billion representing 0.79 percent and 0.75 percent of total assets. Canada and France were the only other countries that had total cross-border exposure that exceeded 0.75 percent of our total assets at December 31, 2011. Exposure includes cross-border claims by our non-U. S. offices including loans, acceptances, time deposits placed, trading account assets, securities, derivative assets, other interestearning investments and other monetary assets. Amounts also include unused commitments, SBLCs, commercial letters of credit and formal guarantees. Sector definitions are consistent with FFIEC reporting requirements for preparing the Country Exposure Report. <table><tr><td>Table 52</td><td colspan="6">Total Cross-border Exposure Exceeding One Percent of Total Assets^-1</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>December 31</td><td>Public Sector</td><td>Banks</td><td>Private Sector</td><td>Cross-borderExposure</td><td>Exposure as aPercentage ofTotal Assets</td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td>2011</td><td>$6,401</td><td>$4,424</td><td>$18,056</td><td>$28,881</td><td>1.36%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2010</td><td>101</td><td>5,544</td><td>32,354</td><td>37,999</td><td>1.68</td></tr><tr><td>Japan^-2</td><td>2011</td><td>4,603</td><td>10,383</td><td>8,060</td><td>23,046</td><td>1.08</td></tr></table> (1) Total cross-border exposure for the United Kingdom and Japan included derivatives exposure of $5.9 billion and $3.5 billion at December 31, 2011 and $2.3 billion and $2.8 billion at December 31, 2010 which has been reduced by the amount of cash collateral applied of $9.3 billion and $1.2 billion at December 31, 2011 and $13.0 billion and $1.6 billion at December 31, 2010. Derivative assets were collateralized by other marketable securities of $242 million and $1.7 billion at December 31, 2011 and $96 million and $743 million at December 31, 2010. (2) At December 31, 2010, total cross-border exposure for Japan was $17.0 billion, representing 0.75 percent of total assets. Tables 43 and 44 present commercial real estate credit quality data by non-homebuilder and homebuilder property types. The homebuilder portfolio presented in Tables 42, 43 and 44 includes condominiums and other residential real estate. Other property types in Tables 42, 43 and 44 primarily include special purpose, nursing/retirement homes, medical facilities and restaurants, as well as unsecured loans to borrowers whose primary business is commercial real estate. Table 43 Commercial Real Estate Credit Quality Data <table><tr><td>Table 43</td><td colspan="4">Commercial Real Estate Credit Quality Data December 31</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Nonperforming Loans andForeclosed Properties^-1</td><td colspan="2">Utilized ReservableCriticized Exposure^-2</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Non-homebuilder</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Office</td><td>$807</td><td>$1,061</td><td>$2,375</td><td>$3,956</td></tr><tr><td>Multi-family rental</td><td>339</td><td>500</td><td>1,604</td><td>2,940</td></tr><tr><td>Shopping centers/retail</td><td>561</td><td>1,000</td><td>1,378</td><td>2,837</td></tr><tr><td>Industrial/warehouse</td><td>521</td><td>420</td><td>1,317</td><td>1,878</td></tr><tr><td>Multi-use</td><td>345</td><td>483</td><td>971</td><td>1,316</td></tr><tr><td>Hotels/motels</td><td>173</td><td>139</td><td>716</td><td>1,191</td></tr><tr><td>Land and land development</td><td>530</td><td>820</td><td>749</td><td>1,420</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>223</td><td>168</td><td>997</td><td>1,604</td></tr><tr><td>Total non-homebuilder</td><td>3,499</td><td>4,591</td><td>10,107</td><td>17,142</td></tr><tr><td>Homebuilder</td><td>993</td><td>1,963</td><td>1,418</td><td>3,376</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial real estate</td><td>$4,492</td><td>$6,554</td><td>$11,525</td><td>$20,518</td></tr></table> Table 44 Commercial Real Estate Net Charge-offs and Related Ratios <table><tr><td>Table 44</td><td colspan="4">Commercial Real Estate Net Charge-offs and Related Ratios</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Net Charge-offs</td><td colspan="2">Net Charge-off Ratios^-1</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Non-homebuilder</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Office</td><td>$126</td><td>$273</td><td>1.51%</td><td>2.49%</td></tr><tr><td>Multi-family rental</td><td>36</td><td>116</td><td>0.52</td><td>1.21</td></tr><tr><td>Shopping centers/retail</td><td>184</td><td>318</td><td>2.69</td><td>3.56</td></tr><tr><td>Industrial/warehouse</td><td>88</td><td>59</td><td>1.94</td><td>1.07</td></tr><tr><td>Multi-use</td><td>61</td><td>143</td><td>1.63</td><td>2.92</td></tr><tr><td>Hotels/motels</td><td>23</td><td>45</td><td>0.86</td><td>1.02</td></tr><tr><td>Land and land development</td><td>152</td><td>377</td><td>7.58</td><td>13.04</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>19</td><td>220</td><td>0.33</td><td>3.14</td></tr><tr><td>Total non-homebuilder</td><td>689</td><td>1,551</td><td>1.67</td><td>2.86</td></tr><tr><td>Homebuilder</td><td>258</td><td>466</td><td>8.00</td><td>8.26</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial real estate</td><td>$947</td><td>$2,017</td><td>2.13</td><td>3.37</td></tr></table> (1) Net charge-off ratios are calculated as net charge-offs divided by average outstanding loans excluding loans accounted for under the fair value option. At December 31, 2011, total committed non-homebuilder exposure was $53.1 billion compared to $64.2 billion at December 31, 2010, with the decrease due to exposure reductions in all non-homebuilder property types. Non-homebuilder nonperforming loans and foreclosed properties were $3.5 billion and $4.6 billion at December 31, 2011 and 2010, which represented 9.29 percent and 10.08 percent of total nonhomebuilder loans and foreclosed properties. Non-homebuilder utilized reservable criticized exposure decreased to $10.1 billion, or 25.34 percent of non-homebuilder utilized reservable exposure, at December 31, 2011 compared to $17.1 billion, or 35.55 percent, at December 31, 2010. The decrease in reservable criticized exposure was driven primarily by office, shopping centers/retail and multi-family rental property types. For the nonhomebuilder portfolio, net charge-offs decreased $862 million in 2011 due in part to resolution of criticized assets through payoffs and sales. At December 31, 2011, we had committed homebuilder exposure of $3.9 billion compared to $6.0 billion at December 31, 2010, of which $2.4 billion and $4.3 billion were funded secured loans. The decline in homebuilder committed exposure was due to repayments, net charge-offs, reductions in new home construction and continued risk mitigation initiatives with market conditions providing fewer origination opportunities to offset the reductions. Homebuilder nonperforming loans and foreclosed properties decreased $970 million due to repayments, a decline in the volume of loans being downgraded to nonaccrual status and net charge-offs. Homebuilder utilized reservable criticized exposure decreased $2.0 billion to $1.4 billion due to repayments and net charge-offs. The nonperforming loans, leases and foreclosed properties and the utilized reservable criticized ratios for the homebuilder portfolio were 38.89 percent and 54.65 percent at December 31, 2011 compared to 42.80 percent and 74.27 percent at December 31, 2010. Net charge-offs for the homebuilder portfolio decreased $208 million in 2011. Capital Management During 2015, we repurchased approximately $2.4 billion of common stock, with an average price of $16.92 per share, in connection with our 2015 Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) capital plan, which included a request to repurchase $4.0 billion of common stock over five quarters beginning in the second quarter of 2015, and to maintain the quarterly common stock dividend at the current rate of $0.05 per share. Based on the conditional non-objection we received from the Federal Reserve on our 2015 CCAR submission, we were required to resubmit our CCAR capital plan by September 30, 2015 and address certain weaknesses the Federal Reserve identified in our capital planning process. We have established plans and taken actions which addressed the identified weaknesses, and we resubmitted our CCAR capital plan on September 30, 2015. The Federal Reserve announced that it did not object to our resubmitted CCAR capital plan on December 10, 2015. As an Advanced approaches institution, under Basel 3, we were required to complete a qualification period (parallel run) to demonstrate compliance with the Basel 3 Advanced approaches capital framework to the satisfaction of U. S. banking regulators. We received approval to begin using the Advanced approaches capital framework to determine risk-based capital requirements beginning in the fourth quarter of 2015. As previously disclosed, with the approval to exit parallel run, U. S. banking regulators requested modifications to certain internal analytical models including the wholesale (e. g. , commercial) credit models. All requested modifications were incorporated, which increased our risk-weighted assets, and are reflected in the risk-based ratios in the fourth quarter of 2015. Having exited parallel run on October 1, 2015, we are required to report regulatory risk-based capital ratios and risk-weighted assets under both the Standardized and Advanced approaches. The approach that yields the lower ratio is used to assess capital adequacy including under the Prompt Corrective Action (PCA) framework and was the Advanced approaches in the fourth quarter of 2015. For additional information, see Capital Management on page 51. Trust Preferred Securities On December 29, 2015, the Corporation provided notice of the redemption on January 29, 2016 of all trust preferred securities of Merrill Lynch Preferred Capital Trust III, Merrill Lynch Preferred Capital Trust IV and Merrill Lynch Preferred Capital Trust V (the Trust Preferred Securities). In connection with the Corporation’s acquisition of Merrill Lynch & Co. , Inc. in 2009, the Corporation recorded a discount to par value as purchase accounting adjustments associated with the Trust Preferred Securities. The Corporation recorded a $612 million charge to net interest income related to the discount on these securities. New Accounting Guidance on Recognition and Measurement of Financial Instruments In January 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued new accounting guidance on recognition and measurement of financial instruments. The Corporation has early adopted, retrospective to January 1, 2015, the provision that requires the Corporation to present unrealized gains and losses resulting from changes in the Corporation’s own credit spreads on liabilities accounted for under the fair value option (referred to as debit valuation adjustments, or DVA) in accumulated other comprehensive income (OCI). The impact of the adoption was to reclassify, as of January 1, 2015, unrealized DVA losses of $2.0 billion pretax ($1.2 billion after tax) from retained earnings to accumulated OCI. Further, pretax unrealized DVA gains of $301 million, $301 million and $420 million were reclassified from other income to accumulated OCI for the third, second and first quarters of 2015, respectively. This had the effect of reducing net income as previously reported for the aforementioned quarters by $187 million, $186 million and $260 million, or approximately $0.02 per share in each quarter. This change is reflected in consolidated results and the Global Markets segment results. Results for 2014 were not subject to restatement under the provisions of the new accounting guidance. Selected Financial Data Table 1 provides selected consolidated financial data for 2015 and 2014.

What was the total amount of Net interest revenue and Non-interest revenue in 2009 ? (in million)

Citigroup’s repurchases are primarily from Government Sponsored Entities. The specific representations and warranties made by the Company depend on the nature of the transaction and the requirements of the buyer. Market conditions and credit-ratings agency requirements may also affect representations and warranties and the other provisions the Company may agree to in loan sales. In the event of a breach of the representations and warranties, the Company may be required to either repurchase the mortgage loans (generally at unpaid principal balance plus accrued interest) with the identified defects or indemnify (“make-whole”) the investor or insurer. The Company has recorded a repurchase reserve that is included in Other liabilities in the Consolidated Balance Sheet. In the case of a repurchase, the Company will bear any subsequent credit loss on the mortgage loans. The Company’s representations and warranties are generally not subject to stated limits in amount or time of coverage. However, contractual liability arises only when the representations and warranties are breached and generally only when a loss results from the breach. In the case of a repurchase, the loan is typically considered a creditimpaired loan and accounted for under SOP 03-3, “Accounting for Certain Loans and Debt Securities, Acquired in a Transfer” (now incorporated into ASC 310-30, Receivables—Loans and Debt Securities Acquired with Deteriorated Credit Quality). These repurchases have not had a material impact on nonperforming loan statistics, because credit-impaired purchased SOP 03-3 loans are not included in nonaccrual loans. The Company estimates its exposure to losses from its obligation to repurchase previously sold loans based on the probability of repurchase or make-whole and an estimated loss given repurchase or make-whole. This estimate is calculated separately by sales vintage (i. e. , the year the loans were sold) based on a combination of historical trends and forecasted repurchases and losses considering the: (1) trends in requests by investors for loan documentation packages to be reviewed; (2) trends in recent repurchases and make-wholes; (3) historical percentage of claims made as a percentage of loan documentation package requests; (4) success rate in appealing claims; (5) inventory of unresolved claims; and (6) estimated loss given repurchase or make-whole, including the loss of principal, accrued interest, and foreclosure costs. The Company does not change its estimation methodology by counterparty, but the historical experience and trends are considered when evaluating the overall reserve. The request for loan documentation packages is an early indicator of a potential claim. During 2009, loan documentation package requests and the level of outstanding claims increased. In addition, our loss severity estimates increased during 2009 due to the impact of macroeconomic factors and recent experience. These factors contributed to a $493 million change in estimate for this reserve in 2009. As indicated above, the repurchase reserve is calculated by sales vintage. The majority of the repurchases in 2009 were from the 2006 and 2007 sales vintages, which also represent the vintages with the largest lossgiven-repurchase. An insignificant percentage of 2009 repurchases were from vintages prior to 2006, and this is expected to decrease, because those vintages are later in the credit cycle. Although early in the credit cycle, the Company has experienced improved repurchase and loss-given-repurchase statistics from the 2008 and 2009 vintages. In the case of a repurchase of a credit-impaired SOP 03-3 loan (now incorporated into ASC 310-30), the difference between the loan’s fair value and unpaid principal balance at the time of the repurchase is recorded as a utilization of the repurchase reserve. Payments to make the investor whole are also treated as utilizations and charged directly against the reserve. The provision for estimated probable losses arising from loan sales is recorded as an adjustment to the gain on sale, which is included in Other revenue in the Consolidated Statement of Income. A liability for representations and warranties is estimated when the Company sells loans and is updated quarterly. Any subsequent adjustment to the provision is recorded in Other revenue in the Consolidated Statement of Income. The activity in the repurchase reserve for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 is as follows: <table><tr><td>In millions of dollars</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, beginning of the year</td><td>$75</td><td>$2</td></tr><tr><td>Additions for new sales</td><td>33</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>Change in estimate</td><td>493</td><td>59</td></tr><tr><td>Utilizations</td><td>-119</td><td>-9</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, end of the year</td><td>$482</td><td>$75</td></tr></table> Goodwill Goodwill represents an acquired company’s acquisition cost over the fair value of net tangible and intangible assets acquired. Goodwill is subject to annual impairment tests, whereby Goodwill is allocated to the Company’s reporting units and an impairment is deemed to exist if the carrying value of a reporting unit exceeds its estimated fair value. Furthermore, on any business dispositions, Goodwill is allocated to the business disposed of based on the ratio of the fair value of the business disposed of to the fair value of the reporting unit. Intangible Assets Intangible assets—including core deposit intangibles, present value of future profits, purchased credit card relationships, other customer relationships, and other intangible assets, but excluding MSRs—are amortized over their estimated useful lives. Intangible assets deemed to have indefinite useful lives, primarily certain asset management contracts and trade names, are not amortized and are subject to annual impairment tests. An impairment exists if the carrying value of the indefinite-lived intangible asset exceeds its fair value. For other Intangible assets subject to amortization, an impairment is recognized if the carrying amount is not recoverable and exceeds the fair value of the Intangible asset. Other Assets and Other Liabilities Other assets include, among other items, loans held-for-sale, deferred tax assets, equity-method investments, interest and fees receivable, premises and equipment, end-user derivatives in a net receivable position, repossessed assets, and other receivables. This table does not include: ? certain venture capital investments made by some of the Company’s private equity subsidiaries, as the Company accounts for these investments in accordance with the Investment Company Audit Guide; ? certain limited partnerships where the Company is the general partner and the limited partners have the right to replace the general partner or liquidate the funds; ? certain investment funds for which the Company provides investment management services and personal estate trusts for which the Company provides administrative, trustee and/or investment management services; ? VIEs structured by third parties where the Company holds securities in inventory. These investments are made on arm’s-length terms; and ? transferred assets to a VIE where the transfer did not qualify as a sale and where the Company did not have any other involvement that is deemed to be a variable interest with the VIE. These transfers are accounted for as secured borrowings by the Company. The asset balances for consolidated VIEs represent the carrying amounts of the assets consolidated by the Company. The carrying amount may represent the amortized cost or the current fair value of the assets depending on the legal form of the asset (e. g. , security or loan) and the Company’s standard accounting policies for the asset type and line of business. he asset balances for unconsolidated VIEs where the Company has significant involvement represent the most current information available to the Company. In most cases, the asset balances represent an amortized cost basis without regard to impairments in fair value, unless fair value information is readily available to the Company. For VIEs that obtain asset exposures synthetically through derivative instruments (for example, synthetic CDOs), the table includes the full original notional amount of the derivative as an asset. The maximum funded exposure represents the balance sheet carrying amount of the Company’s investment in the VIE. It reflects the initial amount of cash invested in the VIE plus any accrued interest and is adjusted for any impairments in value recognized in earnings and any cash principal payments received. The maximum exposure of unfunded positions represents the remaining undrawn committed amount, including liquidity and credit facilities provided by the Company, or the notional amount of a derivative instrument considered to be a variable interest, adjusted for any declines in fair value recognized in earnings. In certain transactions, the Company has entered into derivative instruments or other arrangements that are not considered variable interests in the VIE (e. g. , interest rate swaps, crosscurrency swaps, or where the Company is the purchaser of credit protection under a credit default swap or total return swap where the Company pays the total return on certain assets to the SPE). Receivables under such arrangements are not included in the maximum exposure amounts. Funding Commitments for Significant Unconsolidated VIEs— Liquidity Facilities and Loan Commitments The following table presents the notional amount of liquidity facilities and loan commitments that are classified as funding commitments in the SPE table as of December 31, 2009: <table><tr><td>In millions of dollars</td><td>Liquidity Facilities</td><td>LoanCommitments</td></tr><tr><td>Citicorp</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Citi-administered asset-backed commercial paper conduits (ABCP)</td><td>$20,486</td><td>$1,718</td></tr><tr><td>Third-party commercial paper conduits</td><td>353</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Asset-based financing</td><td>—</td><td>549</td></tr><tr><td>Municipal securities tender option bond trusts (TOBs)</td><td>6,304</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Municipal investments</td><td>—</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>10</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>Total Citicorp</td><td>$27,153</td><td>$2,308</td></tr><tr><td>Citi Holdings</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Citi-administered asset-backed commercial paper conduits (ABCP)</td><td>$11,978</td><td>$1,682</td></tr><tr><td>Third-party commercial paper conduits</td><td>252</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Collateralized loan obligations (CLOs)</td><td>—</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>Asset-based financing</td><td>—</td><td>1,311</td></tr><tr><td>Municipal investments</td><td>—</td><td>386</td></tr><tr><td>Investment Funds</td><td>—</td><td>93</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>—</td><td>257</td></tr><tr><td>Total CitiHoldings</td><td>$12,230</td><td>$3,748</td></tr><tr><td>Total Citigroup funding commitments</td><td>$39,383</td><td>$6,056</td></tr></table> TRANSACTION SERVICES Transaction Services is composed of Treasury and Trade Solutions (TTS) and Securities and Fund Services (SFS). TTS provides comprehensive cash management and trade finance for corporations, financial institutions and public sector entities worldwide. SFS provides custody and funds services to investors such as insurance companies and mutual funds, clearing services to intermediaries such as broker-dealers, and depository and agency/trust services to multinational corporations and governments globally. Revenue is generated from net interest revenue on deposits in TTS and SFS, as well as trade loans and from fees for transaction processing and fees on assets under custody in SFS. <table><tr><td>In millions of dollars</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>% Change 2009 vs. 2008</td><td>% Change 2008 vs. 2007</td></tr><tr><td>Net interest revenue</td><td>$5,651</td><td>$5,485</td><td>$4,254</td><td>3%</td><td>29%</td></tr><tr><td>Non-interest revenue</td><td>4,138</td><td>4,461</td><td>3,844</td><td>-7</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues, net of interest expense</td><td>$9,789</td><td>$9,946</td><td>$8,098</td><td>-2%</td><td>23%</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating expenses</td><td>4,515</td><td>5,156</td><td>4,634</td><td>-12</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>Provisions for credit losses and for benefits and claims</td><td>7</td><td>35</td><td>-30</td><td>-80</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Income before taxes and noncontrolling interests</td><td>$5,267</td><td>$4,755</td><td>$3,494</td><td>11%</td><td>36%</td></tr><tr><td>Income taxes</td><td>1,531</td><td>1,402</td><td>1,038</td><td>9</td><td>35</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations</td><td>3,736</td><td>3,353</td><td>2,456</td><td>11</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests</td><td>13</td><td>31</td><td>20</td><td>-58</td><td>55</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>$3,723</td><td>$3,322</td><td>$2,436</td><td>12%</td><td>36%</td></tr><tr><td>Average assets(in billions of dollars)</td><td>$60</td><td>$71</td><td>$69</td><td>-15%</td><td>3%</td></tr><tr><td>Return on assets</td><td>6.21%</td><td>4.68%</td><td>3.53%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Revenues by region</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>North America</td><td>$2,526</td><td>$2,161</td><td>$1,646</td><td>17%</td><td>31%</td></tr><tr><td>EMEA</td><td>3,389</td><td>3,677</td><td>2,999</td><td>-8</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>Latin America</td><td>1,373</td><td>1,439</td><td>1,199</td><td>-5</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Asia</td><td>2,501</td><td>2,669</td><td>2,254</td><td>-6</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>$9,789</td><td>$9,946</td><td>$8,098</td><td>-2%</td><td>23%</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations by region</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>North America</td><td>$615</td><td>$323</td><td>$209</td><td>90%</td><td>55%</td></tr><tr><td>EMEA</td><td>1,287</td><td>1,246</td><td>816</td><td>3</td><td>53</td></tr><tr><td>Latin America</td><td>604</td><td>588</td><td>463</td><td>3</td><td>27</td></tr><tr><td>Asia</td><td>1,230</td><td>1,196</td><td>968</td><td>3</td><td>24</td></tr><tr><td>Total net income from continuing operations</td><td>$3,736</td><td>$3,353</td><td>$2,456</td><td>11%</td><td>37%</td></tr><tr><td>Key indicators(in billions of dollars)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Average deposits and other customer liability balances</td><td>$303</td><td>$280</td><td>$246</td><td>8%</td><td>14%</td></tr><tr><td>EOP assets under custody(in trillions of dollars)</td><td>12.1</td><td>11.0</td><td>13.1</td><td>10</td><td>-16</td></tr></table> 2009 vs. 2008 Revenues, net of interest expense declined 2% compared to 2008 as strong growth in balances was more than offset by lower spreads driven by low interest rates globally. Average deposits and other customer liability balances grew 8%, driven by strong growth in all regions. Treasury and Trade Solutions revenues grew 7% as a result of strong growth in balances and higher trade revenues. Securities and Funds Services revenues declined 18%, attributable to reductions in asset valuations and volumes. Operating expenses declined 12%, mainly as a result of headcount reductions and successful execution of reengineering initiatives. Cost of credit declined 80%, which was primarily attributable to overall portfolio management. Net income increased 12%, leading to a record net income, with growth across all regions reflecting benefits of continued re-engineering and expense management efforts.2008 vs. 2007 Revenues, net of interest expense grew 23% driven by new business and implementations, growth in customer liability balances, increased transaction volumes and the impact of acquisitions. Average deposits and other customer liability balances grew 14% driven by success of new business growth and implementations. Treasury and Trade Solutions revenues grew 26% as a result of strong liability and fee growth as well as increased client penetration. Securities and Funds Services revenues grew 17% as a result of increased assets under custody, volumes and liability balances.2010 Outlook Transaction Services business performance will continue to be impacted in 2010 by levels of interest rates, economic activity, volatility in global capital markets, foreign exchange and market valuations globally. Levels of client activity and client cash and security flows are key factors dependent on macroeconomic conditions. Transaction Services intends to continue to invest in technology to support its global network, as well as investments to build out its investor services suite of products aimed at large, underpenetrated markets for middle and back office outsourcing among a range of investors. These and similar investments could lead to increasing operating expenses. BROKERAGE AND ASSET MANAGEMENT Brokerage and Asset Management (BAM), which constituted approximately 6% of Citi Holdings by assets as of December 31, 2009, consists of Citi’s global retail brokerage and asset management businesses. This segment was substantially affected and reduced in size in 2009 due to the divestitures of Smith Barney (to the Morgan Stanley Smith Barney joint venture (MSSB JV)) and Nikko Cordial Securities. At December 31, 2009, BAM had approximately $35 billion of assets, which included $26 billion of assets from the 49% interest in the MSSB JV ($13 billion investment and $13 billion in loans associated with the clients of the MSSB JV) and $9 billion of assets from a diverse set of asset management and insurance businesses of which approximately half will be transferred into the LATAM RCB during the first quarter of 2010, as discussed under “Citi Holdings” above. Morgan Stanley has options to purchase Citi’s remaining stake in the MSSB JV over three years starting in 2012. The 2009 results include an $11.1 billion gain ($6.7 billion after-tax) on the sale of Smith Barney.

What is the sum of the amount of Equity securities in the range of 50 million and 100 million? (in million)

Table of Contents NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC. the asset. Projected cash flows are discounted at a required market rate of return that reflects the relative risk of achieving the cash flows and the time value of money. The cost approach, which estimates value by determining the current cost of replacing an asset with another of equivalent economic utility, was used, as appropriate, for certain assets for which the market and income approaches could not be applied due to the nature of the asset. The cost to replace a given asset reflects the estimated reproduction or replacement cost for the asset, less an allowance for loss in value due to depreciation. The fair value of US Airways’ Dividend Miles loyalty program liability was determined based on the weighted average equivalent ticket value of outstanding miles which were expected to be redeemed for future travel at December 9, 2013. The weighted average equivalent ticket value contemplates differing classes of service, domestic and international itineraries and the carrier providing the award travel. Pro-forma Impact of the Merger American’s unaudited pro-forma results presented below include the effects of the Merger as if it had been consummated as of January 1, 2012. The pro- forma results include the depreciation and amortization associated with the acquired tangible and intangible assets, lease and debt fair value adjustments, the elimination of any deferred gains or losses, adjustments relating to reflecting the fair value of the loyalty program liability and the impact of income changes on profit sharing expense, among others. In addition, the pro-forma results below reflect the impact of higher wage rates related to memorandums of understanding with US Airways’ pilots that became effective upon closing of the Merger, as well as the elimination of American’s reorganization items, net and Merger transition costs. However, the pro-forma results do not include any anticipated synergies or other expected benefits of the Merger. Accordingly, the unaudited pro-forma financial information below is not necessarily indicative of either future results of operations or results that might have been achieved had the acquisition been consummated as of January 1, 2012. <table><tr><td></td><td>December 31, 2013 (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Revenue</td><td>$40,782</td></tr><tr><td>Net Income</td><td>2,707</td></tr></table> 5. Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (a) Basis of Presentation On December 30, 2015, US Airways merged with and into American, which is reflected in American’s consolidated financial statements as though the transaction had occurred on December 9, 2013, when a subsidiary of AMR merged with and into US Airways Group. Thus, the full years of 2015 and 2014 and the period from December 9, 2013 to December 31, 2013 are comprised of the consolidated financial data of American and US Airways. For the periods prior to December 9, 2013, the financial data reflects the results of American only. For financial reporting purposes, the transaction constituted a transfer of assets between entities under common control and was accounted for in a manner similar to the pooling of interests method of accounting. Under this method, the carrying amount of net assets recognized in the balance sheets of each combining entity are carried forward to the balance sheet of the combined entity and no other assets or liabilities are recognized. The preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP) requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, revenues and expenses, and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The most significant areas of judgment relate to passenger revenue recognition, impairment of goodwill, impairment of long-lived and The following tables set forth the income yield and investment income, excluding realized investment gains (losses) and non-hedge accounting derivative results, for each major investment category of our Japanese operations’ general account for the periods indicated. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Year Ended December 31, 2009</td><td colspan="2">Year Ended December 31, 2008</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Yield-1</td><td>Amount</td><td>Yield-1</td><td>Amount</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">($ in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed maturities</td><td>2.88%</td><td>$1,519</td><td>2.95%</td><td>$1,314</td></tr><tr><td>Trading account assets supporting insurance liabilities</td><td>1.97</td><td>22</td><td>2.10</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities</td><td>3.13</td><td>58</td><td>2.91</td><td>73</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial mortgage and other loans</td><td>4.86</td><td>167</td><td>4.76</td><td>144</td></tr><tr><td>Policy loans</td><td>3.91</td><td>63</td><td>3.92</td><td>50</td></tr><tr><td>Short-term investments and cash equivalents</td><td>0.62</td><td>11</td><td>2.26</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Other investments</td><td>6.27</td><td>129</td><td>8.77</td><td>139</td></tr><tr><td>Gross investment income before investment expenses</td><td>3.05</td><td>1,969</td><td>3.21</td><td>1,764</td></tr><tr><td>Investment expenses</td><td>-0.16</td><td>-108</td><td>-0.19</td><td>-107</td></tr><tr><td>Total investment income</td><td>2.89%</td><td>$1,861</td><td>3.02%</td><td>$1,657</td></tr></table> (1) Yields are based on quarterly average carrying values except for fixed maturities, equity securities and securities lending activity. Yields for fixed maturities are based on amortized cost. Yields for equity securities are based on cost. Yields for fixed maturities and short-term investments and cash equivalents are calculated net of liabilities and rebate expenses corresponding to securities lending activity. Yields exclude investment income on assets other than those included in invested assets. Prior periods yields are presented on a basis consistent with the current period presentation. The decrease in yield on the Japanese insurance portfolio for 2009 compared to 2008 is primarily attributable to lower fixed maturity reinvestment rates, including the reinvestment of proceeds realized from certain capital actions and a lower short-term interest rate environment both in the U. S. and Japan. The U. S. dollar denominated fixed maturities that are not hedged to yen through third party derivative contracts provide a yield that is substantially higher than the yield on comparable Japanese fixed maturities. The average value of U. S. dollar denominated fixed maturities that are not hedged to yen through third party derivative contracts for 2009 and 2008 was approximately $10.1 billion and $9.9 billion, respectively, based on amortized cost. For additional information regarding U. S. dollar investments held in our Japanese insurance operations see, “—Results of Operations for Financial Services Businesses by Segment— International Insurance and Investments Division. ” Fixed Maturity Securities Investment Mix Our fixed maturity securities portfolio consists of publicly-traded and privately-placed debt securities across an array of industry categories. The fixed maturity securities relating to our international insurance operations are primarily comprised of foreign government securities. We manage our public portfolio to a risk profile directed or overseen by the Asset Liability Management and Risk Management groups and, in the case of our international insurance portfolios, to a profile that also reflects the local market environment. The investment objectives for fixed maturity securities are consistent with those described above. The total return that we earn on the portfolio will be reflected both as investment income and also as realized gains or losses on investments. We use our private placement and asset-backed portfolios to enhance the diversification and yield of our overall fixed maturity portfolio. Within our domestic portfolios, we maintain a private fixed income portfolio that is larger than the industry average as a percentage of total fixed income holdings. Over the last several years, our investment staff has directly originated more than half of our annual private placement originations. Our origination capability offers the opportunity to lead transactions and gives us the opportunity for better terms, including covenants and call protection, and to take advantage of innovative deal structures. (1) Represents net shares issued from treasury pursuant to the Company’s stock-based compensation programs. In the event of a liquidation, dissolution or winding-up of the Company, holders of Common Stock would be entitled to receive a proportionate share of the net assets of the Company that remain after paying all liabilities and the liquidation preferences of any preferred stock. Common Stock Held in Treasury Common Stock held in treasury is accounted for at average cost. Gains resulting from the reissuance of “Common Stock held in treasury” are credited to “Additional paid-in capital. ” Losses resulting from the reissuance of “Common Stock held in treasury” are charged first to “Additional paid-in capital” to the extent the Company has previously recorded gains on treasury share transactions, then to “Retained earnings. ” <table><tr><td></td><td>Other PostretirementBenefits (in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>One percentage point increase</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Increase in total service and interest costs</td><td>$7</td></tr><tr><td>Increase in postretirement benefit obligation</td><td>153</td></tr><tr><td>One percentage point decrease</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Decrease in total service and interest costs</td><td>$5</td></tr><tr><td>Decrease in postretirement benefit obligation</td><td>120</td></tr></table> Plan Assets The investment goal of the domestic pension plan assets is to generate an above benchmark return on a diversified portfolio of stocks, bonds and other investments. The cash requirements of the pension obligation, which include a traditional formula principally representing payments to annuitants and a cash balance formula that allows lump sum payments and annuity payments, are designed to be met by the bonds and short-term investments in the portfolio. The pension plan risk management practices include guidelines for asset concentration, credit rating and liquidity. The pension plan does not invest in leveraged derivatives. Derivatives such as futures contracts are used to reduce transaction costs and change asset concentration, while interest rate swaps and futures are used to adjust duration. The investment goal of the domestic postretirement plan assets is to generate an above benchmark return on a diversified portfolio of stocks, bonds, and other investments, while meeting the cash requirements for the postretirement obligation that includes a medical benefit including prescription drugs, a dental benefit and a life benefit. The postretirement plan risk management practices include guidelines for asset concentration, credit rating, liquidity and tax efficiency. The postretirement plan does not invest in leveraged derivatives. Derivatives such as futures contracts are used to reduce transaction costs and change asset concentration, while interest rate swaps and futures are used to adjust duration. The plan fiduciaries for the Company’s pension and postretirement plans have developed guidelines for asset allocations reflecting a percentage of total assets by asset class, which are reviewed on an annual basis. Asset allocation targets as of December 31, 2015 are as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Pension</td><td colspan="2">Postretirement</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Minimum</td><td>Maximum</td><td>Minimum</td><td>Maximum</td></tr><tr><td>Asset Category</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S. Equities</td><td>2%</td><td>15%</td><td>25%</td><td>58%</td></tr><tr><td>International Equities</td><td>2%</td><td>16%</td><td>2%</td><td>22%</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed Maturities</td><td>50%</td><td>69%</td><td>3%</td><td>52%</td></tr><tr><td>Short-term Investments</td><td>0%</td><td>15%</td><td>0%</td><td>44%</td></tr><tr><td>Real Estate</td><td>2%</td><td>15%</td><td>0%</td><td>0%</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>0%</td><td>16%</td><td>0%</td><td>0%</td></tr></table> To implement the investment strategy, plan assets are invested in funds that primarily invest in securities that correspond to one of the asset categories under the investment guidelines. However, at any point in time, some of the assets in a fund may be of a different nature than the specified asset category PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL, INC. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 14. SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM DEBT Short-term Debt The table below presents the Company’s short-term debt at December 31, for the years indicated as follows:

what was the percentage change in cash from operations between 2008 and 2009?

During 2010, we granted 3.8 million RSUs and 1.1 million Employee SARs. See Footnote No.4, “Share-Based Compensation,” of the Notes to our Financial Statements for additional information. NEW ACCOUNTING STANDARDS See Footnote No.1, “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies,” of the Notes to our Financial Statements for information related to our adoption of new accounting standards in 2010 and for information on our anticipated adoption of recently issued accounting standards. LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES Cash Requirements and Our Credit Facilities Our Credit Facility, which expires on May 14, 2012, and associated letters of credit, provide for $2.4 billion of aggregate effective borrowings. Borrowings under the Credit Facility bear interest at the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) plus a fixed spread based on the credit ratings for our public debt. We also pay quarterly fees on the Credit Facility at a rate based on our public debt rating. For additional information on our Credit Facility, including participating financial institutions, see Exhibit 10, “Amended and Restated Credit Agreement,” to our Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 16, 2007. Although our Credit Facility does not expire until 2012, we expect that we may extend or replace it during 2011. The Credit Facility contains certain covenants, including a single financial covenant that limits our maximum leverage (consisting of Adjusted Total Debt to Consolidated EBITDA, each as defined in the Credit Facility) to not more than 4 to 1. Our outstanding public debt does not contain a corresponding financial covenant or a requirement that we maintain certain financial ratios. We currently satisfy the covenants in our Credit Facility and public debt instruments, including the leverage covenant under the Credit Facility, and do not expect the covenants to restrict our ability to meet our anticipated borrowing and guarantee levels or increase those levels should we need to do so in the future. We believe the Credit Facility, together with cash we expect to generate from operations and our ability to raise capital, remains adequate to meet our short-term and long-term liquidity requirements, finance our long-term growth plans, meet debt service, and fulfill other cash requirements. At year-end 2010, our available borrowing capacity amounted to $2.831 billion and reflected borrowing capacity of $2.326 billion under our Credit Facility and our cash balance of $505 million. We calculate that borrowing capacity by taking $2.404 billion of effective aggregate bank commitments under our Credit Facility and subtracting $78 million of outstanding letters of credit under our Credit Facility. During 2010, we repaid our outstanding Credit Facility borrowings and had no outstanding balance at year-end. As noted in the previous paragraphs, we anticipate that this available capacity will be adequate to fund our liquidity needs. Since we continue to have ample flexibility under the Credit Facility’s covenants, we also expect that undrawn bank commitments under the Credit Facility will remain available to us even if business conditions were to deteriorate markedly. Cash from Operations Cash from operations, depreciation expense, and amortization expense for the last three fiscal years are as follows: <table><tr><td><i>($ in millions)</i></td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Cash from operations</td><td>$1,151</td><td>$868</td><td>$641</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation expense</td><td>138</td><td>151</td><td>155</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization expense</td><td>40</td><td>34</td><td>35</td></tr></table> Our ratio of current assets to current liabilities was roughly 1.4 to 1.0 at year-end 2010 and 1.2 to 1.0 at year-end 2009. We minimize working capital through cash management, strict credit-granting policies, and aggressive collection efforts. We also have significant borrowing capacity under our Credit Facility should we need additional working capital. Principal Financial Group, Inc. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued) 4. Variable Interest Entities — (continued) the credit-linked note if cumulative losses exceeded the subordination of a synthetic reference portfolio. As of December 31, 2008, the credit default swap entered into by the trust had an outstanding notional amount of $130.0 million. The credit default swap counterparties of the grantor trusts had no recourse to our assets. In October 2009, the grantor trust was terminated and we received $122.2 million in cash. We determined that this grantor trust was a VIE and that we were the primary beneficiary of the trust as we were the sole investor in the trust and the manager of the synthetic reference portfolios. Upon consolidation of the trust, as of December 31, 2008, our consolidated statements of financial position included $93.5 million of available-for-sale fixed maturity securities, which represented the collateral held by the trust. The assets of the trust were held by a trustee and could only be liquidated to settle obligations of the trust. These obligations included losses on the synthetic reference portfolio and the return of investments due to maturity or termination of the trust. As of December 31, 2008, our consolidated statements of financial position included $53.4 million of other liabilities representing derivative market values of the trust. During the year December 31, 2008 and 2007, the credit default swaps had a change in fair value that resulted in a $54.5 million pre-tax loss and $3.2 million pre-tax loss, respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2009, we recognized a pre-tax gain of $49.8 million related to the change in fair value and termination of the credit default swaps. Grantor Trusts. We contributed undated subordinated floating rate notes to three grantor trusts. The trusts separated the cash flows of the underlying $425.9 million par value notes by issuing an interest-only certificate and a residual certificate related to each note contributed. Each interest-only certificate entitles the holder to interest on the stated note for a specified term while the residual certificate entitles the holder to interest payments subsequent to the term of the interest-only certificate and to all principal payments. We retained the interest-only certificate and the residual certificates were subsequently sold to a third party. We have determined that these grantor trusts are VIEs as our interest-only certificates are exposed to the majority of the risk of loss due to interest rate risk. The restricted interest periods end between 2016 and 2020 and, at that time, the residual certificate holders’ certificates are redeemed by the trust in return for the notes. We have determined that it will be necessary for us to consolidate these entities until the expiration of the interest-only period. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, our consolidated statements of financial position include $226.6 million and $212.2 million, respectively, of undated subordinated floating rate notes of the grantor trusts, which are classified as available-for-sale fixed maturity securities and represent the collateral held by the trust. The obligation to deliver the underlying securities to the residual certificate holders of $89.1 million and $103.8 million as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, is classified as an other liability and contains an embedded derivative of the forecasted transaction to deliver the underlying securities. The creditors of the grantor trusts have no recourse to our assets. Other. In addition to the entities above, we have a number of relationships with a disparate group of entities, which meet the criteria for VIEs. Due to the nature of our direct investment in the equity and/or debt of these VIEs, we are the primary beneficiary of such entities, which requires us to consolidate them. These entities include five private investment vehicles and several hedge funds. The consolidation of these VIEs did not have a material effect on either our consolidated statements of financial position as of December 31, 2009 or 2008, or results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007. For these entities, the creditors have no recourse to our assets. The carrying amount and classification of other consolidated VIE assets that are pledged as collateral that the VIEs have designated for their other obligations and the debt of the VIEs are as follows: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"> December 31,</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> 2009</td><td> 2008</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"><i>(in millions)</i> </td></tr><tr><td>Fixed maturity securities, available-for-sale</td><td>$59.2</td><td>$103.8</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed maturity securities, trading</td><td>19.8</td><td>17.2</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities, trading</td><td>90.9</td><td>30.7</td></tr><tr><td>Cash and other assets</td><td>119.8</td><td>140.8</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets pledged as collateral</td><td>$289.7</td><td>$292.5</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt and other obligations</td><td>$178.9</td><td>$248.6</td></tr></table> The assets of the trusts are held by a trustee and can only be liquidated to settle obligations of the trusts. These obligations primarily include unrealized losses on derivatives, the synthetic reference portfolios or financial guarantees and the return of investments due to maturity or termination of the trusts. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, these Principal Financial Group, Inc. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued) 5. Investments — (continued) Each reporting period, all securities are reviewed to determine whether an other-than-temporary decline in value exists and whether losses should be recognized. We consider relevant facts and circumstances in evaluating whether a credit or interest rate-related impairment of a security is other than temporary. Relevant facts and circumstances considered include: (1) the extent and length of time the fair value has been below cost; (2) the reasons for the decline in value; (3) the financial position and access to capital of the issuer, including the current and future impact of any specific events and (4) for fixed maturity securities, our intent to sell a security or whether it is more likely than not we will be required to sell the security before the recovery of its amortized cost which, in some cases, may extend to maturity and for equity securities, our ability and intent to hold the security for a period of time that allows for the recovery in value. Prior to 2009, our ability and intent to hold fixed maturity securities for a period of time that allowed for a recovery in value was considered rather than our intent to sell these securities. To the extent we determine that a security is deemed to be other than temporarily impaired, an impairment loss is recognized. Impairment losses on equity securities are recognized in net income and are measured as the difference between amortized cost and fair value. The way in which impairment losses on fixed maturity securities are now recognized in the financial statements is dependent on the facts and circumstances related to the specific security. If we intend to sell a security or it is more likely than not that we would be required to sell a security before the recovery of its amortized cost, less any current period credit loss, we recognize an other-than-temporary impairment in net income for the difference between amortized cost and fair value. If we do not expect to recover the amortized cost basis, we do not plan to sell the security and if it is not more likely than not that we would be required to sell a security before the recovery of its amortized cost, less any current period credit loss, the recognition of the other-than-temporary impairment is bifurcated. We recognize the credit loss portion in net income and the noncredit loss portion in OCI. Prior to 2009, other-than-temporary impairments on fixed maturity securities were recorded in net income in their entirety and the amount recognized was the difference between amortized cost and fair value. We estimate the amount of the credit loss component of a fixed maturity security impairment as the difference between amortized cost and the present value of the expected cash flows of the security. The present value is determined using the best estimate cash flows discounted at the effective interest rate implicit to the security at the date of purchase or the current yield to accrete an asset-backed or floating rate security. The methodology and assumptions for establishing the best estimate cash flows vary depending on the type of security. The asset-backed securities cash flow estimates are based on bond specific facts and circumstances that may include collateral characteristics, expectations of delinquency and default rates, loss severity and prepayment speeds and structural support, including subordination and guarantees. The corporate bond cash flow estimates are derived from scenario-based outcomes of expected corporate restructurings or liquidations using bond specific facts and circumstances including timing, security interests and loss severity. Total other-than-temporary impairment losses, net of recoveries from the sale of previously impaired securities, were as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">For the year ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">(in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed maturities, available-for-sale</td><td>$-693.6</td><td>$-432.0</td><td>$-262.8</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities, available-for-sale</td><td>-20.5</td><td>-47.3</td><td>-51.3</td></tr><tr><td>Total other-than-temporary impairment losses, net of recoveries from the sale of previously impaired securities</td><td>$-714.1</td><td>$-479.3</td><td>$-314.1</td></tr></table> Principal Financial Group, Inc. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued) 10. Debt — (continued) Long-Term Debt The components of long-term debt as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, were as follows: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"> December 31,</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> 2009</td><td> 2008</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"><i>(in millions)</i> </td></tr><tr><td>8.2% notes payable, due 2009</td><td>$—</td><td>$454.9</td></tr><tr><td>3.31% notes payable, due 2011</td><td>61.2</td><td>49.9</td></tr><tr><td>3.63% notes payable, due 2011</td><td>31.4</td><td>25.6</td></tr><tr><td>7.875% notes payable, due 2014</td><td>400.0</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>8.875% notes payable, due 2019</td><td>350.0</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>6.05% notes payable, due 2036</td><td>601.8</td><td>601.8</td></tr><tr><td>8% surplus notes payable, due 2044</td><td>99.2</td><td>99.2</td></tr><tr><td>Non-recourse mortgages and notes payable</td><td>40.6</td><td>58.7</td></tr><tr><td>Other mortgages and notes payable</td><td>0.4</td><td>0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Total long-term debt</td><td>$1,584.6</td><td>$1,290.5</td></tr></table> The amounts included above are net of the discount and premium associated with issuing these notes, which are being amortized to expense over their respective terms using the interest method. On May 18, 2009, we issued $750.0 million of senior notes. We issued a $400.0 million series of notes that bear interest at 7.875% and will mature on May 15, 2014, and a $350.0 million series of notes that bear interest at 8.875% and will mature on May 15, 2019. Interest on the notes is payable semi-annually on May 15 and November 15 each year, beginning on November 15, 2009. The proceeds were primarily used to refinance $440.9 million of notes that matured on August 15, 2009, with the remaining proceeds being used for general corporate purposes. On October 16 and December 5, 2006, we issued $500.0 million and $100.0 million, respectively, of senior notes. The notes bear interest at a rate of 6.05% per year. Interest on the notes is payable semi-annually on April 15 and October 15 each year and began on April 15, 2007. The notes will mature on October 15, 2036. A portion of the proceeds were used to fund the 2006 acquisition of WM Advisors, Inc. , with the remaining proceeds being used for general corporate purposes. On November 3, 2005, Principal International de Chile S. A. , a wholly owned indirect subsidiary, entered into long-term borrowing agreements with two Chilean banks in the amount of US $93.9 million. This debt is denominated in Unidades de Formento (‘‘UF’’), a Chilean inflation-indexed, peso-denominated monetary unit. Of this amount, US $49.0 million of UF +3.31% notes, which was refinanced from +4.59% during 2007, and US $44.9 million of UF +3.63% notes, which was refinanced from +4.93% in 2007, mature on November 3, 2011. Interest on the notes is payable semi-annually on May 3 and November 3 each year. The debt outstanding and interest expense will vary due to fluctuations in the Chilean peso to US dollar exchange rates and Chilean inflation. On August 25, 1999, Principal Financial Group (Australia) Holdings Pty. Limited, a wholly owned indirect subsidiary, issued $665.0 million of unsecured redeemable long-term debt. Principal Financial Group (Australia) Holdings Pty. Limited used the net proceeds from the notes to partially fund the purchase of the outstanding stock of several companies affiliated with Bankers Trust Australia Group. On December 28, 2001, all of the long-term debt obligations of Principal Financial Group (Australia) Holdings Pty. Limited were assumed by its parent, Principal Financial Services, Inc. Of the original amount issued, $200.0 million of 7.95% notes matured on August 15, 2004, with the remaining $465.0 million in 8.2% notes maturing on August 15, 2009. The note was paid in full during 2009. On March 10, 1994, Principal Life issued $100.0 million of surplus notes due March 1, 2044, at an 8% annual interest rate. None of our affiliates hold any portion of the notes. Each payment of interest and principal on the notes, however, may be made only with the prior approval of the Commissioner of Insurance of the State of Iowa (the ‘‘Commissioner’’) and only to the extent that Principal Life has sufficient surplus earnings to make such payments. Interest of $8.0 million for each of the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 was approved by the Commissioner, and charged to expense. Subject to Commissioner approval, the notes due March 1, 2044, may be redeemed at Principal Life’s election on or after March 1, 2014, in whole or in part at a redemption price of approximately 102.3% of par. The approximate 2.3% premium is scheduled to gradually diminish over the following ten years. These notes may be redeemed on or after March 1, 2024, at a redemption price of 100% of the principal amount plus interest accrued to the date of redemption. The non-recourse mortgages, other mortgages and notes payable are primarily financings for real estate developments. Outstanding principal balances as of December 31, 2009, ranged from $5.9 million to $9.1 million per <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="6"> December 31, 2008</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"> Public</td><td colspan="2"> Private</td><td colspan="2"> Total</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> Carrying amount</td><td> Gross unrealized losses</td><td> Carrying amount</td><td> Gross unrealized losses</td><td> Carrying amount</td><td> Gross unrealized losses</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="6"><i>(in millions)</i> </td></tr><tr><td>Three months or less</td><td>$3,086.0</td><td>$194.4</td><td>$1,188.1</td><td>$99.5</td><td>$4,274.1</td><td>$293.9</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than three to six months</td><td>4,213.7</td><td>467.9</td><td>1,673.6</td><td>236.4</td><td>5,887.3</td><td>704.3</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than six to nine months</td><td>3,014.0</td><td>620.7</td><td>1,566.6</td><td>290.6</td><td>4,580.6</td><td>911.3</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than nine to twelve months</td><td>2,321.0</td><td>743.0</td><td>1,259.7</td><td>460.1</td><td>3,580.7</td><td>1,203.1</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than twelve to twenty-four months</td><td>3,042.0</td><td>1,507.5</td><td>2,217.1</td><td>1,519.7</td><td>5,259.1</td><td>3,027.2</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than twenty-four to thirty-six months</td><td>1,045.2</td><td>296.1</td><td>312.5</td><td>217.1</td><td>1,357.7</td><td>513.2</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than thirty-six months</td><td>1,363.8</td><td>423.5</td><td>698.2</td><td>265.8</td><td>2,062.0</td><td>689.3</td></tr><tr><td>Total fixed maturity securities, available-for-sale</td><td>$18,085.7</td><td>$4,253.1</td><td>$8,915.8</td><td>$3,089.2</td><td>$27,001.5</td><td>$7,342.3</td></tr></table> The following tables present the carrying amount and the gross unrealized losses, including other-than-temporary impairment losses reported in OCI, on below investment grade fixed maturity securities available-for-sale by aging category for the time periods indicated. <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="6"> December 31, 2009</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"> Public</td><td colspan="2"> Private</td><td colspan="2"> Total</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> Carrying amount</td><td> Gross unrealized losses</td><td> Carrying amount</td><td> Gross unrealized losses</td><td> Carrying amount</td><td> Gross unrealized losses</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="6"><i>(in millions)</i> </td></tr><tr><td>Three months or less</td><td>$55.7</td><td>$3.3</td><td>$52.8</td><td>$1.2</td><td>$108.5</td><td>$4.5</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than three to six months</td><td>3.4</td><td>—</td><td>14.8</td><td>—</td><td>18.2</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than six to nine months</td><td>12.7</td><td>0.2</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.1</td><td>12.8</td><td>0.3</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than nine to twelve months</td><td>32.8</td><td>11.2</td><td>1.0</td><td>1.8</td><td>33.8</td><td>13.0</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than twelve to twenty-four months</td><td>441.3</td><td>112.2</td><td>365.6</td><td>186.7</td><td>806.9</td><td>298.9</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than twenty-four to thirty-six months</td><td>609.0</td><td>314.8</td><td>403.5</td><td>435.8</td><td>1,012.5</td><td>750.6</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than thirty-six months</td><td>113.8</td><td>26.8</td><td>84.6</td><td>76.6</td><td>198.4</td><td>103.4</td></tr><tr><td>Total fixed maturity securities, available-for-sale</td><td>$1,268.7</td><td>$468.5</td><td>$922.4</td><td>$702.2</td><td>$2,191.1</td><td>$1,170.7</td></tr></table> December 31, 2008 <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="6"> December 31, 2008</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"> Public</td><td colspan="2"> Private</td><td colspan="2"> Total</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> Carrying amount</td><td> Gross unrealized losses</td><td> Carrying amount</td><td> Gross unrealized losses</td><td> Carrying amount</td><td> Gross unrealized losses</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="6"><i>(in millions)</i> </td></tr><tr><td>Three months or less</td><td>$133.1</td><td>$56.5</td><td>$114.6</td><td>$32.1</td><td>$247.7</td><td>$88.6</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than three to six months</td><td>88.8</td><td>12.7</td><td>297.1</td><td>74.3</td><td>385.9</td><td>87.0</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than six to nine months</td><td>102.5</td><td>42.9</td><td>129.1</td><td>46.5</td><td>231.6</td><td>89.4</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than nine to twelve months</td><td>163.0</td><td>65.9</td><td>44.5</td><td>43.7</td><td>207.5</td><td>109.6</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than twelve to twenty-four months</td><td>242.0</td><td>151.7</td><td>351.8</td><td>239.5</td><td>593.8</td><td>391.2</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than twenty-four to thirty-six months</td><td>41.2</td><td>26.1</td><td>13.3</td><td>21.4</td><td>54.5</td><td>47.5</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than thirty-six months</td><td>100.3</td><td>29.7</td><td>100.9</td><td>30.3</td><td>201.2</td><td>60.0</td></tr><tr><td>Total fixed maturity securities, available-for-sale</td><td>$870.9</td><td>$385.5</td><td>$1,051.3</td><td>$487.8</td><td>$1,922.2</td><td>$873.3</td></tr></table> The following tables present the carrying amount and the gross unrealized losses, including other-than-temporary impairment losses reported in OCI, on fixed maturity securities available-for-sale where the estimated fair value has declined and remained below amortized cost by 20% or more as the time periods indicate.

What was the average of the Total operating revenues in the year where Other investment income/(losses) is positive? (in million)

Other Liquidity Items Cash payments required for long-term debt maturities, rental payments under noncancellable operating leases, purchase obligations and other commitments in effect at December 31, 2010, are summarized in the following table: <table><tr><td></td><td>Payments Due By Period(a)</td></tr><tr><td>($ in millions)</td><td>Total</td><td>Less than1 Year</td><td>1-3 Years</td><td>3-5 Years</td><td>More than5 Years</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt, including capital leases</td><td>$2,750.1</td><td>$34.5</td><td>$188.3</td><td>$367.1</td><td>$2,160.2</td></tr><tr><td>Interest payments on long-term debt(b)</td><td>1,267.5</td><td>160.5</td><td>316.4</td><td>304.2</td><td>486.4</td></tr><tr><td>Operating leases</td><td>93.2</td><td>31.1</td><td>37.1</td><td>16.6</td><td>8.4</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase obligations(c)</td><td>6,586.9</td><td>2,709.5</td><td>3,779.4</td><td>98.0</td><td>−</td></tr><tr><td>Total payments on contractual obligations</td><td>$10,697.7</td><td>$2,935.6</td><td>$4,321.2</td><td>$785.9</td><td>$2,655.0</td></tr></table> (a) Amounts reported in local currencies have been translated at the year-end 2010 exchange rates. (b) For variable rate facilities, amounts are based on interest rates in effect at year end and do not contemplate the effects of hedging instruments. (c) The company’s purchase obligations include contracted amounts for aluminum, steel and other direct materials. Also included are commitments for purchases of natural gas and electricity, aerospace and technologies contracts and other less significant items. In cases where variable prices and/or usage are involved, management’s best estimates have been used. Depending on the circumstances, early termination of the contracts may or may not result in penalties and, therefore, actual payments could vary significantly. The table above does not include $60.1 million of uncertain tax positions, the timing of which is uncertain. Contributions to the company’s defined benefit pension plans, not including the unfunded German plans, are expected to be in the range of $30 million in 2011. This estimate may change based on changes in the Pension Protection Act and actual plan asset performance, among other factors. Benefit payments related to these plans are expected to be $71.4 million, $74.0 million, $77.1 million, $80.3 million and $84.9 million for the years ending December 31, 2011 through 2015, respectively, and a total of $483.1 million for the years 2016 through 2020. Payments to participants in the unfunded Other Liquidity Items Cash payments required for long-term debt maturities, rental payments under noncancellable operating leases, purchase obligations and other commitments in effect at December 31, 2010, are summarized in the following table: (a) Amounts reported in local currencies have been translated at the year-end 2010 exchange rates. (b) For variable rate facilities, amounts are based on interest rates in effect at year end and do not contemplate the effects of hedging instruments. (c) The company¡¯s purchase obligations include contracted amounts for aluminum, steel and other direct materials. Also included are commitments for purchases of natural gas and electricity, aerospace and technologies contracts and other less significant items. In cases where variable prices and/or usage are involved, management¡¯s best estimates have been used. Depending on the circumstances, early termination of the contracts may or may not result in penalties and, therefore, actual payments could vary significantly. The table above does not include $60.1 million of uncertain tax positions, the timing of which is uncertain. Contributions to the company¡¯s defined benefit pension plans, not including the unfunded German plans, are expected to be in the range of $30 million in 2011. This estimate may change based on changes in the Pension Protection Act and actual plan asset performance, among other factors. Benefit payments related to these plans are expected to be $71.4 million, $74.0 million, $77.1 million, $80.3 million and $84.9 million for the years ending December 31, 2011 through 2015, respectively, and a total of $483.1 million for the years 2016 through 2020. Payments to participants in the unfunded German plans are expected to be between $21.8 million (€16.5 million) to $23.2 million (€17.5 million) in each of the years 2011 through 2015 and a total of $102.7 million (€77.5 million) for the years 2016 through 2020. For the U. S. pension plans in 2011, we changed our return on asset assumption to 8.00 percent (from 8.25 percent in 2010) and our discount rate assumption to an average of 5.55 percent (from 6.00 percent in 2010). Based on the changes in assumptions, pension expense in 2011 is anticipated to be relatively flat compared to 2010. A reduction of the expected return on pension assets assumption by a quarter of a percentage point would result in an estimated $2.9 million increase in the 2011 global pension expense, while a quarter of a percentage point reduction in the discount rate applied to the pension liability would result in an estimated $3.5 million of additional pension expense in 2011. Additional information regarding the company¡¯s pension plans is provided in Note 14 accompanying the consolidated financial statements within Item 8 of this report. Annual cash dividends paid on common stock were 20 cents per share in 2010, 2009 and 2008. Total dividends paid were $35.8 million in 2010, $37.4 million in 2009 and $37.5 million in 2008. On January 26, 2011, the company¡¯s board of directors approved an increase in the quarterly dividends to 7 cents per share. Share Repurchases Our share repurchases, net of issuances, totaled $506.7 million in 2010, $5.1 million in 2009 and $299.6 million in 2008. On November 2, 2010, we acquired 2,775,408 shares of our publicly held common stock in a private transaction for $88.8 million. On February 17, 2010, we entered into an accelerated share repurchase agreement to buy $125.0 million of our common shares using cash on hand and available borrowings. We advanced the $125.0 million on February 22, 2010, and received 4,323,598 shares, which represented 90 percent of the total shares as calculated using the previous day¡¯s closing price. The agreement was settled on May 20, 2010, and the company received an additional 398,206 shares. Net repurchases in 2008 included a $31 million settlement on January 7, 2008, of a forward contract entered into in December 2007 for the repurchase of 1,350,000 shares. From January 1 through February 24, 2011, Ball repurchased an additional $143.3 million of its common stock. Table of Contents into U. S. Dollars using the spot foreign exchange rate in effect on the exercise date. Upon the exercise of share options, the company either issues new shares or can utilize shares held in treasury (see Note 10, “Share Capital”) to satisfy the exercise. The share option plans provided for a grant price equal to the quoted market price of the company's shares on the date of grant. If the options remain unexercised after a period of 10 years from the date of grant, the options expire. Furthermore, options are forfeited if the employee leaves the company before the options vest. All options outstanding at December 31, 2011were exercisable and had a range of exercise prices from ￡6.39 to ￡19.19, and weighted average remaining contractual life of 2.62 years. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010, and 2009, was $9.2 million, $18.5 million, and $20.7 million, respectively. At December 31, 2011, the aggregate intrinsic value of options outstanding and options exercisable was $36.3 million. The market price of the company's common stock at December 31, 2011 was $20.09 (December 31, 2010: $24.06). Changes in outstanding share option awards are as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2011</td><td colspan="2">2010</td><td colspan="2">2009</td></tr><tr><td>Millions of shares, except prices</td><td>Options</td><td>Weighted Average Exercise Price(£ Sterling)</td><td>Options</td><td>Weighted Average Exercise Price(£ Sterling)</td><td>Options</td><td>Weighted Average Exercise Price(£ Sterling)</td></tr><tr><td>Outstanding at the beginning of year</td><td>10.7</td><td>13.85</td><td>16.4</td><td>14.99</td><td>23.1</td><td>14.06</td></tr><tr><td>Forfeited during the year</td><td>-5.3</td><td>19.70</td><td>-3.9</td><td>21.90</td><td>-2.1</td><td>15.15</td></tr><tr><td>Exercised during the year</td><td>-0.9</td><td>8.33</td><td>-1.8</td><td>6.70</td><td>-4.6</td><td>10.20</td></tr><tr><td>Outstanding at the end of the year</td><td>4.5</td><td>7.85</td><td>10.7</td><td>13.85</td><td>16.4</td><td>14.99</td></tr><tr><td>Exercisable at the end of the year</td><td>4.5</td><td>7.85</td><td>10.7</td><td>13.85</td><td>16.4</td><td>14.99</td></tr></table> 13. RETIREMENT BENEFIT PLANS Defined Contribution Plans The company operates defined contribution retirement benefit plans for all qualifying employees. The assets of the plans are held separately from those of the company in funds under the control of trustees. When employees leave the plans prior to vesting fully in the contributions, the contributions payable by the company are reduced by the amount of forfeited contributions. The total amounts charged to the Consolidated Statements of Income for the year ended December 31, 2011, of $53.2 million (December 31, 2010: $47.0 million, 2009: $43.6 million) represent contributions paid or payable to these plans by the company at rates specified in the rules of the plans. As of December 31, 2011, accrued contributions of $20.0 million (December 31, 2010: $18.9 million) for the current year will be paid to the plans. Defined Benefit Plans The company maintains legacy defined benefit pension plans for qualifying employees of its subsidiaries in the U. K. , Ireland, Germany and Taiwan. All defined benefit plans are closed to new participants. The company also maintains a postretirement medical plan in the U. S. , which was closed to new participants in 2005. In 2006, the plan was amended to eliminate benefits for all participants who will not meet retirement eligibility by 2008. The assets of all defined benefit schemes are held in separate trustee-administered funds. Under the plans, the employees are generally entitled to retirement benefits based on final salary at retirement. The most recent actuarial valuations of plan assets and the present value of the defined benefit obligation were valued as of December 31, 2011. The benefit obligation, related current service cost and prior service cost were measured using the projected unit credit method. <table><tr><td>$ in millions</td><td>Before Consolidation^-1</td><td>Consolidated Investment Products</td><td>Adjustments^-1(2)</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>Year ended December 31, 2010</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total operating revenues</td><td>3,532.7</td><td>0.3</td><td>-45.3</td><td>3,487.7</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating expenses</td><td>2,887.8</td><td>55.3</td><td>-45.3</td><td>2,897.8</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income</td><td>644.9</td><td>-55.0</td><td>—</td><td>589.9</td></tr><tr><td>Equity in earnings of unconsolidated affiliates</td><td>40.8</td><td>—</td><td>-0.6</td><td>40.2</td></tr><tr><td>Interest and dividend income</td><td>10.4</td><td>246.0</td><td>-5.1</td><td>251.3</td></tr><tr><td>Other investment income/(losses)</td><td>15.6</td><td>107.6</td><td>6.4</td><td>129.6</td></tr><tr><td>Interest expense</td><td>-58.6</td><td>-123.7</td><td>5.1</td><td>-177.2</td></tr><tr><td>Income before income taxes</td><td>653.1</td><td>174.9</td><td>5.8</td><td>833.8</td></tr><tr><td>Income tax provision</td><td>-197.0</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-197.0</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>456.1</td><td>174.9</td><td>5.8</td><td>636.8</td></tr><tr><td>(Gains)/losses attributable to noncontrolling interests in consolidated entities, net</td><td>-0.2</td><td>-170.8</td><td>-0.1</td><td>-171.1</td></tr><tr><td>Net income attributable to common shareholders</td><td>455.9</td><td>4.1</td><td>5.7</td><td>465.7</td></tr></table> (1) The Before Consolidation column includes Invesco's equity interests in the investment products accounted for as equity method (private equity and real estate partnership funds) and available-for-sale investments (CLOs). Upon consolidation of the CLOs, the company's and the CLOs' accounting policies are effectively aligned, resulting in the reclassification of the company's gain for the year ended December 31, 2011 of $20.3 million (representing the increase in the market value of the company's holding in the consolidated CLOs) from other comprehensive income into other gains/losses (year ended December 31, 2010: $6.4 million). The company's gain on its investment in the CLOs (before consolidation) eliminates with the company's share of the offsetting loss on the CLOs' debt. The net income arising from consolidation of CLOs is therefore completely attributed to other investors in these CLOs, as the company's share has been eliminated through consolidation. The Before Consolidation column does not include any other adjustments related to non-GAAPfinancial measure presentation. (2) Adjustments include the elimination of intercompany transactions between the company and its consolidated investment products, primarily the elimination of management fees expensed by the funds and recorded as operating revenues (before consolidation) by the company. Operating Revenues and Net Revenues The main categories of revenues, and the dollar and percentage change between the periods, are as follows: <table><tr><td>$ in millions</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>$ Change</td><td>% Change</td></tr><tr><td>Investment management fees</td><td>3,138.5</td><td>2,720.9</td><td>417.6</td><td>15.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Service and distribution fees</td><td>780.3</td><td>645.5</td><td>134.8</td><td>20.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Performance fees</td><td>37.9</td><td>26.1</td><td>11.8</td><td>45.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>135.5</td><td>95.2</td><td>40.3</td><td>42.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating revenues</td><td>4,092.2</td><td>3,487.7</td><td>604.5</td><td>17.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Third-party distribution, service and advisory expenses</td><td>-1,282.5</td><td>-1,053.8</td><td>-228.7</td><td>21.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Proportional share of revenues, net of third-party distribution expenses, from joint venture investments</td><td>41.4</td><td>42.2</td><td>-0.8</td><td>-1.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Management fees earned from consolidated investment products</td><td>46.8</td><td>45.3</td><td>1.5</td><td>3.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Performance fees earned from consolidated investment products</td><td>0.5</td><td>—</td><td>0.5</td><td>N/A</td></tr><tr><td>Other revenues recorded by consolidated investment products</td><td>—</td><td>-0.3</td><td>0.3</td><td>-100.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Net revenues</td><td>2,898.4</td><td>2,521.1</td><td>377.3</td><td>15.0%</td></tr></table> Operating revenues increased by 17.3% in the year ended December 31, 2011 to $4,092.2 million (year ended December 31, 2010: $3,487.7 million). Net revenues increased by 15.0% in in the year ended December 31, 2011 to $2,898.4 million (year ended December 31, 2010: $2,521.1 million). Net revenues are operating revenues less third-party distribution, service and advisory expenses, plus our proportional share of net revenues from joint venture arrangements, plus management and performance fees Table of Contents both probable and reasonably estimable. We must from time to time make material estimates with respect to legal and other contingencies. The nature of our business requires compliance with various state and federal statutes, as well as various contractual obligations, and exposes us to a variety of legal proceedings and matters in the ordinary course of business. While the outcomes of matters such as these are inherently uncertain and difficult to predict, we maintain reserves reflected in other current and other non-current liabilities, as appropriate, for identified losses that are, in our judgment, probable and reasonably estimable. Management's judgment is based on the advice of legal counsel, ruling on various motions by the applicable court, review of the outcome of similar matters, if applicable, and review of guidance from state or federal agencies, if applicable. Contingent consideration payable in relation to a business acquisition is recorded as of the acquisition date as part of the fair value transferred in exchange for the acquired business. Recent Accounting Standards See Item 8, Financial Statements and Supplementary Data - Note 1, “Accounting Policies - Accounting Pronouncements Recently Adopted and Pending Accounting Pronouncements. ” Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk In the normal course of its business, the company is primarily exposed to market risk in the form of securities market risk, interest rate risk, and foreign exchange rate risk. AUM Market Price Risk The company's investment management revenues are comprised of fees based on a percentage of the value of AUM. Declines in equity or fixed income security market prices could cause revenues to decline because of lower investment management fees by: ? Causing the value of AUM to decrease. ? Causing the returns realized on AUM to decrease (impacting performance fees). ? Causing clients to withdraw funds in favor of investments in markets that they perceive to offer greater opportunity and that the company does not serve. ? Causing clients to rebalance assets away from investments that the company manages into investments that the company does not manage. ? Causing clients to reallocate assets away from products that earn higher revenues into products that earn lower revenues. Underperformance of client accounts relative to competing products could exacerbate these factors. Securities Market Risk The company has investments in sponsored investment products that invest in a variety of asset classes. Investments are generally made to establish a track record or to hedge economically exposure to certain deferred compensation plans. The company's exposure to market risk arises from its investments. The following table summarizes the fair values of the investments exposed to market risk and provides a sensitivity analysis of the estimated fair values of those investments, assuming a 20% increase or decrease in fair values:

What's the sum of Collections reinvested in revolving period securitizations in terms of Home Equity in 2009? (in dollars in millions)

The following table sets forth information concerning increases in the total number of our AAP stores during the past five years: <table><tr><td></td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Beginning Stores</td><td>3,369</td><td>3,264</td><td>3,243</td><td>3,153</td><td>2,995</td></tr><tr><td>New Stores^-1</td><td>95</td><td>110</td><td>75</td><td>109</td><td>175</td></tr><tr><td>Stores Closed</td><td>-4</td><td>-5</td><td>-54</td><td>-19</td><td>-17</td></tr><tr><td>Ending Stores</td><td>3,460</td><td>3,369</td><td>3,264</td><td>3,243</td><td>3,153</td></tr></table> (1) Does not include stores that opened as relocations of previously existing stores within the same general market area or substantial renovations of stores.6WRUH7HFKQRORJ\ Our store-based information systems, which are designed to improve the efficiency of our operations and enhance customer service, are comprised of a proprietary POS system and electronic parts catalog, or EPC, system. Information maintained by our POS system is used to formulate pricing, marketing and merchandising strategies and to replenish inventory accurately and rapidly. Our POS system is fully integrated with our EPC system and enables our store Team Members to assist our customers in their parts selection and ordering based on the year, make, model and engine type of their vehicles. Our centrally-based EPC data management system enables us to reduce the time needed to (i) exchange data with our vendors and (ii) catalog and deliver updated, accurate parts information. Our EPC system also contains enhanced search engines and user-friendly navigation tools that enhance our Team Members' ability to look up any needed parts as well as additional products the customer needs to complete an automotive repair project. If a hard-to-find part or accessory is not available at one of our stores, the EPC system can determine whether the part is carried and in-stock through our HUB or PDQ? networks or can be ordered directly from one of our vendors. Available parts and accessories are then ordered electronically from another store, HUB, PDQ? or directly from the vendor with immediate confirmation of price, availability and estimated delivery time. We also support our store operations with additional proprietary systems and customer driven labor scheduling capabilities. Our store-level inventory management system provides real-time inventory tracking at the store level. With the store-level system, store Team Members can check the quantity of on-hand inventory for any SKU, adjust stock levels for select items for store specific events, automatically process returns and defective merchandise, designate SKUs for cycle counts and track merchandise transfers. Our stores use radio frequency hand-held devices to help ensure the accuracy of our inventory. Our standard operating procedure, or SOP, system is a web-based, electronic data management system that provides our Team Members with instant access to any of our standard operating procedures through a comprehensive on-line search function. All of these systems are tightly integrated and provide real-time, comprehensive information to store personnel, resulting in improved customer service levels, Team Member productivity and in-stock availability.6WRUH6XSSRUW&HQWHU 0HUFKDQGLVLQJ Purchasing for virtually all of the merchandise for our stores is handled by our merchandise teams located in three primary locations: ? Store support center in Roanoke, Virginia; ? Regional office in Minneapolis, Minnesota; and ? Global sourcing office in Taipei, Taiwan. Our Roanoke team is primarily responsible for the parts categories and our Minnesota team is primarily responsible for accessories, oil and chemicals. Our global sourcing team works closely with both teams. In Fiscal 2011, we purchased merchandise from approximately 500 vendors, with no single vendor accounting for more than 9% of purchases. Our purchasing strategy involves negotiating agreements with most of our vendors to purchase merchandise over a specified period of time along with other terms, including pricing, payment terms and volume. The merchandising team has developed strong vendor relationships in the industry and, in a collaborative effort with our vendor partners, utilizes a category management process where we manage the mix of our product offerings to meet customer demand. We believe this process, which develops a customer-focused business plan for each merchandise category, and our global sourcing operation are critical to improving comparable store sales, gross margin and inventory productivity. There were no new securitizations of home equity loans during 2009 and 2008. The following table summarizes selected information related to home equity and automobile loan securitizations at and for the year ended December 31, 2009 and 2008. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> Home Equity</td><td colspan="3">Automobile</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td colspan="2"> 2009</td><td>2008</td><td colspan="2"> 2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td> For the Year Ended December 31</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cash proceeds from new securitizations</td><td> $</td><td> –</td><td>$–</td><td> $</td><td> –</td><td>$741</td></tr><tr><td>Losses on securitizations^-1</td><td> </td><td> –</td><td>–</td><td> </td><td> –</td><td>-31</td></tr><tr><td>Collections reinvested in revolving period securitizations</td><td> </td><td> 177</td><td>235</td><td> </td><td> –</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td>Repurchases of loans from trust^-2</td><td> </td><td> 268</td><td>128</td><td> </td><td> 298</td><td>184</td></tr><tr><td>Cash flows received on residual interests</td><td> </td><td> 35</td><td>27</td><td> </td><td> 52</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td> At December 31</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Principal balance outstanding</td><td> </td><td> 46,282</td><td>34,169</td><td> </td><td> 2,656</td><td>5,385</td></tr><tr><td>Senior securities held^{-3, 4}</td><td> </td><td> 15</td><td>–</td><td> </td><td> 2,119</td><td>4,102</td></tr><tr><td>Subordinated securities held^-5</td><td> </td><td> 48</td><td>3</td><td> </td><td> 195</td><td>383</td></tr><tr><td>Residual interests held^-6</td><td> </td><td> 100</td><td>93</td><td> </td><td> 83</td><td>84</td></tr></table> (1) Net of hedges (2) Repurchases of loans from the trust for home equity loans are typically a result of the Corporation’s representations and warranties, modifications or the exercise of an optional clean-up call. In addition, during 2009 and 2008, the Corporation paid $141 million and $34 million to indemnify the investor or insurer under the representations and warranties, and corporate guarantees. For further information regarding representations and warranties, and corporate guarantees, see the First Lien Mortgage-related Securitizations discussion. Repurchases of automobile loans during 2009 and 2008 were due to the exercise of an optional clean-up call. (3) As a holder of these securities, the Corporation receives scheduled interest and principal payments. During 2009, there were no other-than-temporary impairment losses recorded on those securities classified as AFS debt securities. (4) At December 31, 2009, all of the held senior securities issued by the home equity securitization trusts were valued using quoted market prices and classified as trading account assets. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, substantially all of the held senior securities issued by the automobile securitization trusts were valued using quoted market prices and classified as AFS debt securities. (5) At December 31, 2009 and 2008, substantially all of the held subordinated securities issued by the home equity securitization trusts were valued using model valuations and classified as AFS debt securities. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, substantially all of the held subordinated securities issued by the automobile securitization trusts were valued using quoted market prices and classified as AFS debt securities. (6) Residual interests include the residual asset, overcollateralization and cash reserve accounts, which are carried at fair value or amounts that approximate fair value. The residual interests were derived using model valuations and substantially all are classified in other assets. Under the terms of the Corporation’s home equity securitizations, advances are made to borrowers when they draw on their lines of credit and the Corporation is reimbursed for those advances from the cash flows in the securitization. During the revolving period of the securitization, this reimbursement normally occurs within a short period after the advance. However, when the securitization transaction has begun a rapid amortization period, reimbursement of the Corporation’s advance occurs only after other parties in the securitization have received all of the cash flows to which they are entitled. This has the effect of extending the time period for which the Corporation’s advances are outstanding. In particular, if loan losses requiring draws on monoline insurers’ policies, which protect the bondholders in the securitization, exceed a specified threshold or duration, the Corporation may not receive reimbursement for all of the funds advanced to borrowers, as the senior bondholders and the monoline insurers have priority for repayment. The Corporation evaluates all of its home equity securitizations for their potential to experience a rapid amortization event by estimating the amount and timing of future losses on the underlying loans, the excess spread available to cover such losses and by evaluating any estimated shortfalls in relation to contractually defined triggers. A maximum funding obligation attributable to rapid amortization cannot be calculated as a home equity borrower has the ability to pay down and redraw balances. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, home equity securitization transactions in rapid amortization had $14.1 billion and $13.1 billion of trust certificates outstanding. This amount is significantly greater than the amount the Corporation expects to fund. At December 31, 2009, an additional $1.1 billion of trust certificates outstanding pertain to home equity securitization transactions that are expected to enter rapid amortization during the next 24 months. The charges that will ultimately be recorded as a result of the rapid amortization events are dependent on the performance of the loans, the amount of subsequent draws, and the timing of related cash flows. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, the reserve for losses on expected future draw obligations on the home equity securitizations in or expected to be in rapid amortization was $178 million and $345 million. The Corporation has consumer MSRs from the sale or securitization of home equity loans. The Corporation recorded $128 million and $78 million of servicing fee income related to home equity securitizations during 2009 and 2008. For more information on MSRs, see Note 22 – Mortgage Servicing Rights. At December 31, 2009 and 2008, there were no recognized servicing assets or liabilities associated with any of the automobile securitization transactions. The Corporation recorded $43 million and $30 million in servicing fees related to automobile securitizations during 2009 and 2008. The Corporation provides financing to certain entities under assetbacked financing arrangements. These entities are controlled and consolidated by third parties. At December 31, 2009, the principal balance outstanding for these asset-backed financing arrangements was $10.4 billion, the maximum loss exposure was $6.8 billion, and on-balance sheet assets were $6.7 billion which are primarily recorded in loans and leases. The total cash flows for 2009 were $491 million and are primarily related to principal and interest payments received. NOTE 9 – Variable Interest Entities The Corporation utilizes SPEs in the ordinary course of business to support its own and its customers’ financing and investing needs. These SPEs are typically structured as VIEs and are thus subject to consolidation by the reporting enterprise that absorbs the majority of the economic risks and rewards of the VIE. To determine whether it must consolidate a VIE, the Corporation qualitatively analyzes the design of the VIE to identify the creators of variability within the VIE, including an assessment as to the nature of the risks that are created by the assets and other contractual arrangements of the VIE, and identifies whether it will absorb a majority of that variability. In addition, the Corporation uses VIEs such as trust preferred securities trusts in connection with its funding activities, as described in more detail in Note 13 – Long-term Debt. The Corporation also uses VIEs in the form of synthetic securitization vehicles to mitigate a portion of the credit risk on its residential mortgage loan portfolio as described in Item 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - Continued 54 LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES Cash, cash equivalents and marketable investment securities. We consider all liquid investments purchased within 90 days of their maturity to be cash equivalents. See “Item 7A. – Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” for further discussion regarding our marketable investment securities. As of December 31, 2008, our cash, cash equivalents and current marketable investment securities totaled $559 million compared to $2.788 billion as of December 31, 2007, a decrease of $2.229 billion. Our principal source of liquidity during 2008 was cash generated by operating activities of $2.188 billion, approximately $750 million raised in issuing our 7 ?% Senior Notes due 2015 and the net sales of marketable and strategic investments of $166 million. Our primary uses of cash during 2008 were for the redemption of $1.5 billion of debt, the purchases of property and equipment of $1.130 billion, the acquisition of 700 MHz wireless spectrum for $712 million, the distribution of $1.532 billion to EchoStar related to the Spin-off, and the repurchase of 3.1 million shares of our common stock for $83 million. In addition, we reclassified $240 million of marketable investment securities on hand at December 31, 2007 to noncurrent assets during 2008 as recent events in the credit markets have reduced or eliminated current liquidity for these investments. The following discussion highlights our free cash flow and cash flow activities during the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006. Free cash flow. We define free cash flow as “Net cash flows from operating activities” less “Purchases of property and equipment,” as shown on our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. We believe free cash flow is an important liquidity metric because it measures, during a given period, the amount of cash generated that is available to repay debt obligations, make investments, fund acquisitions and for certain other activities. Free cash flow is not a measure determined in accordance with GAAP and should not be considered a substitute for “Operating income,” “Net income,” “Net cash flows from operating activities” or any other measure determined in accordance with GAAP. Since free cash flow includes investments in operating assets, we believe this non-GAAP liquidity measure is useful in addition to the most directly comparable GAAP measure - “Net cash flows from operating activities. ” During the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, free cash flow was significantly impacted by changes in operating assets and liabilities as shown in the “Net cash flows from operating activities” section of our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows included herein. Operating asset and liability balances can fluctuate significantly from period to period and there can be no assurance that free cash flow will not be negatively impacted by material changes in operating assets and liabilities in future periods, since these changes depend upon, among other things, management’s timing of payments and control of inventory levels, and cash receipts. In addition to fluctuations resulting from changes in operating assets and liabilities, free cash flow can vary significantly from period to period depending upon, among other things, subscriber growth, subscriber revenue, subscriber churn, subscriber acquisition costs including amounts capitalized under our equipment lease programs, operating efficiencies, increases or decreases in purchases of property and equipment and other factors. The following table reconciles free cash flow to “Net cash flows from operating activities. ” <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> For the Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2008</td><td> 2007 (In thousands)</td><td> 2006</td></tr><tr><td>Free cash flow</td><td>$1,058,454</td><td>$1,172,198</td><td>$882,924</td></tr><tr><td>Add back:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Purchases of property and equipment</td><td>1,129,890</td><td>1,444,522</td><td>1,396,318</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash flows from operating activities</td><td>$2,188,344</td><td>$2,616,720</td><td>$2,279,242</td></tr></table> The decline in free cash flow from 2007 to 2008 of $114 million resulted from a decrease in “Net cash flows from operating activities” of $429 million, or 16.4%, partially offset by a decrease in “Purchases of property and equipment” of $315 million, or 21.8%. The decrease in “Net cash flows from operating activities” was primarily attributable to a $351 million decrease in cash resulting from changes in operating assets and liabilities and a $59 million decrease in net income, adjusted to exclude non-cash changes in “Depreciation and amortization” expense and “Realized and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 16. Statutory Accounting Practices (Unaudited) CNA’s domestic insurance subsidiaries maintain their accounts in conformity with accounting practices prescribed or permitted by insurance regulatory authorities, which vary in certain respects from GAAP. In converting from statutory accounting principles to GAAP, typical adjustments include deferral of policy acquisition costs and the inclusion of net unrealized holding gains or losses in shareholders’ equity relating to certain fixed maturity securities. CNA’s insurance subsidiaries are domiciled in various jurisdictions. These subsidiaries prepare statutory financial statements in accordance with accounting practices prescribed or permitted by the respective jurisdictions’ insurance regulators. Prescribed statutory accounting practices are set forth in a variety of publications of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”) as well as state laws, regulations and general administrative rules. CCC follows a permitted practice related to the statutory provision for reinsurance, or the uncollectible reinsurance reserve. This permitted practice allows CCC to record an additional uncollectible reinsurance reserve amount through a different financial statement line item than the prescribed statutory convention. This permitted practice had no effect on CCC’s statutory surplus at December 31, 2007 or 2006. CNA’s ability to pay dividends and other credit obligations is significantly dependent on receipt of dividends from its subsidiaries. The payment of dividends to CNA by its insurance subsidiaries without prior approval of the insurance department of each subsidiary’s domiciliary jurisdiction is limited by formula. Dividends in excess of these amounts are subject to prior approval by the respective state insurance departments. Dividends from CCC are subject to the insurance holding company laws of the State of Illinois, the domiciliary state of CCC. Under these laws, ordinary dividends, or dividends that do not require prior approval of the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation – Division of Insurance (the “Department”), may be paid only from earned surplus, which is calculated by removing unrealized gains from unassigned surplus. As of December 31, 2007, CCC is in a positive earned surplus position, enabling CCC to pay approximately $630 million of dividend payments during 2008 that would not be subject to the Department’s prior approval. The actual level of dividends paid in any year is determined after an assessment of available dividend capacity, holding company liquidity and cash needs as well as the impact the dividends will have on the statutory surplus of the applicable insurance company. CNA’s domestic insurance subsidiaries are subject to risk-based capital requirements. Risk-based capital is a method developed by the NAIC to determine the minimum amount of statutory capital appropriate for an insurance company to support its overall business operations in consideration of its size and risk profile. The formula for determining the amount of risk-based capital specifies various factors, weighted based on the perceived degree of risk, which are applied to certain financial balances and financial activity. The adequacy of a company’s actual capital is evaluated by a comparison to the risk-based capital results, as determined by the formula. Companies below minimum risk-based capital requirements are classified within certain levels, each of which requires specified corrective action. As of December 31, 2007 and 2006, all of CNA’s domestic insurance subsidiaries exceeded the minimum risk-based capital requirements. Combined statutory capital and surplus and net income, determined in accordance with accounting practices prescribed or permitted by insurance regulatory authorities for the property and casualty and the life insurance subsidiaries, were as follows:

What will principal transaction be like in 2013 if it develops with the same increasing rate as current?

The Company does not believe that any individual unrealized loss in the available-for-sale or unrecognized loss in the held-to-maturity portfolio as of December 31, 2011 represents a credit loss. The credit loss component is the difference between the security’s amortized cost basis and the present value of its expected future cash flows, and is recognized in earnings. The noncredit loss component is the difference between the present value of its expected future cash flows and the fair value and is recognized through other comprehensive income (loss). The Company assessed whether it intends to sell, or whether it is more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell a security before recovery of its amortized cost basis. For debt securities that are considered other-than-temporarily impaired and that the Company does not intend to sell and will not be required to sell prior to recovery of its amortized cost basis, the Company determines the amount of the impairment that is related to credit and the amount due to all other factors. The majority of the unrealized or unrecognized losses on mortgage-backed securities are attributable to changes in interest rates and a re-pricing of risk in the market. The majority of agency mortgage-backed securities and CMOs, other agency debt securities and agency debentures are AAA-rated. Municipal bonds and corporate bonds are evaluated by reviewing the credit-worthiness of the issuer and general market conditions. The Company does not intend to sell the securities in an unrealized loss position and it is not more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the debt securities before the anticipated recovery of its remaining amortized cost of the securities in an unrealized loss position at December 31, 2011. The majority of the Company’s available-for-sale and held-to-maturity portfolio consists of residential mortgage-backed securities. For residential mortgage-backed securities, the Company calculates the credit portion of OTTI by comparing the present value of the expected future cash flows with the amortized cost basis of the security. The expected future cash flows are determined using the remaining contractual cash flows adjusted for future credit losses. The estimate of expected future credit losses includes the following assumptions: 1) expected default rates based on current delinquency trends, foreclosure statistics of the underlying mortgages and loan documentation type; 2) expected loss severity based on the underlying loan characteristics, including loan-to-value, origination vintage and geography; and 3) expected loan prepayments and principal reduction based on current experience and existing market conditions that may impact the future rate of prepayments. The expected cash flows of the security are then discounted at the interest rate used to recognize interest income on the security to arrive at the present value amount. The following table presents a summary of the significant inputs considered for securities that were other-than-temporarily impaired as of December 31, 2011: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> December 31, 2011</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Weighted Average</td><td colspan="2"> Range</td></tr><tr><td>Default rate^-1</td><td>6%</td><td>2%</td><td>- 21%</td></tr><tr><td>Loss severity</td><td>51%</td><td>40%</td><td>- 65%</td></tr><tr><td>Prepayment rate</td><td>6%</td><td>2%</td><td>- 15%</td></tr></table> The following table presents a roll-forward of the credit loss component of the amortized cost of debt securities that have noncredit loss recognized in other comprehensive income (loss) and credit loss recognized in earnings for the periods presented (dollars in thousands): <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2011</td><td> 2010</td><td> 2009^-1</td></tr><tr><td>Credit loss balance, beginning of period</td><td>$188,038</td><td>$150,372</td><td>$80,060</td></tr><tr><td>Additions:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Initial credit impairment</td><td>61</td><td>1,642</td><td>11,780</td></tr><tr><td>Subsequent credit impairment</td><td>14,846</td><td>36,024</td><td>58,532</td></tr><tr><td>Credit loss balance, end of period</td><td>$202,945</td><td>$188,038</td><td>$150,372</td></tr></table> (1) The Company adopted the amended guidance for the recognition and presentation of OTTI for debt securities on April 1, 2009 EARNINGS OVERVIEW 2012 Compared to 2011 We incurred a net loss of $112.6 million, or $(0.39) per diluted share, on total net revenue of $1.9 billion for the year ended December 31, 2012. The net loss for the year ended December 31, 2012 was primarily the result of losses of $256.9 million from the early extinguishment of all the 12 1 ?2 % Springing lien notes and 7 7 ?8 % Notes during 2012. Net operating interest income decreased 11% to $1.1 billion for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to 2011, which was driven primarily by a decrease in enterprise net interest spread during 2012. Commissions, fees and service charges, principal transactions and other revenue decreased 11% to $630.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2012, compared to 2011, which was driven primarily by a decrease in trading activity during 2012. In addition, gains on loans and securities, net increased 67% to $200.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to 2011. We recognized additional gains from securities sold as a result of our continued deleveraging efforts, primarily related to a reduction in wholesale funding obligations, which resulted in losses on early extinguishment of debt of $78.3 million during the year ended December 31, 2012. Provision for loan losses declined 20% to $354.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to 2011. The decline was driven primarily by improving credit trends and loan portfolio run-off, offset by an increase of $50 million related to charge-offs associated with newly identified bankruptcy filings during the third quarter of 2012. Total operating expenses decreased 6% to $1.2 billion for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to 2011. This decrease was driven primarily by decreases in clearing and servicing and other operating expenses, partially offset by an increase in compensation and benefits expense for the year ended December 31, 2012. The following sections describe in detail the changes in key operating factors and other changes and events that affected net revenue, provision for loan losses, operating expense, other income (expense) and income tax expense (benefit). Revenue The components of revenue and the resulting variances are as follows (dollars in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Year Ended December 31,</td><td colspan="2">Variance 2012 vs. 2011</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>Amount</td><td>%</td></tr><tr><td>Net operating interest income</td><td>$1,085.1</td><td>$1,220.0</td><td>$-134.9</td><td>-11%</td></tr><tr><td>Commissions</td><td>377.8</td><td>436.2</td><td>-58.4</td><td>-13%</td></tr><tr><td>Fees and service charges</td><td>122.2</td><td>130.4</td><td>-8.2</td><td>-6%</td></tr><tr><td>Principal transactions</td><td>93.1</td><td>105.4</td><td>-12.3</td><td>-12%</td></tr><tr><td>Gains on loans and securities, net</td><td>200.4</td><td>120.2</td><td>80.2</td><td>67%</td></tr><tr><td>Net impairment</td><td>-16.9</td><td>-14.9</td><td>-2.0</td><td>*</td></tr><tr><td>Other revenues</td><td>37.8</td><td>39.3</td><td>-1.5</td><td>-4%</td></tr><tr><td>Total non-interest income</td><td>814.4</td><td>816.6</td><td>-2.2</td><td>-0%</td></tr><tr><td>Total net revenue</td><td>$1,899.5</td><td>$2,036.6</td><td>$-137.1</td><td>-7%</td></tr></table> * Percentage not meaningful. Net Operating Interest Income Net operating interest income decreased 11% to $1.1 billion for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to 2011. Net operating interest income is earned primarily through investing customer cash and deposits in enterprise interest-earning assets, which include: real estate loans, margin receivables, available-for- sale securities and held-to-maturity securitie Net Impairment We recognized $16.9 million and $14.9 million of net impairment during the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, on certain securities in our non-agency CMO portfolio due to continued deterioration in the expected credit performance of the underlying loans in those specific securities. The gross other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) and the noncredit portion of OTTI, which was or had been previously recorded through other comprehensive income (loss), are shown in the table below (dollars in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td>Year Ended December 31, 2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”)</td><td>$-19.8</td><td>$-9.2</td></tr><tr><td>Less: noncredit portion of OTTI recognized into (out of) other comprehensive income (loss) (before tax)</td><td>2.9</td><td>-5.7</td></tr><tr><td>Net impairment</td><td>$-16.9</td><td>$-14.9</td></tr></table> Provision for Loan Losses Provision for loan losses decreased 20% to $354.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared to 2011. The decrease in provision for loan losses was driven primarily by improving credit trends, as evidenced by the lower levels of delinquent loans in the one- to four-family and home equity loan portfolios, and loan portfolio run-off. The decrease was partially offset by $50 million in charge-offs associated with newly identified bankruptcy filings during the third quarter of 2012, with approximately 80% related to prior years. We utilize third party loan servicers to obtain bankruptcy data on our borrowers and during the third quarter of 2012, we identified an increase in bankruptcies reported by one specific servicer. In researching this increase, we discovered that the servicer had not been reporting historical bankruptcy data on a timely basis. As a result, we implemented an enhanced procedure around all servicer reporting to corroborate bankruptcy reporting with independent third party data. Through this additional process, approximately $90 million of loans were identified in which servicers failed to report the bankruptcy filing to us, approximately 90% of which were current at the end of the third quarter of 2012. As a result, these loans were written down to the estimated current value of the underlying property less estimated selling costs, or approximately $40 million, during the third quarter of 2012. These charge-offs resulted in an increase to provision for loan losses of $50 million for the year ended December 31, 2012. The provision for loan losses has declined four consecutive years, down 78% from its peak of $1.6 billion for the year ended December 31, 2008. We expect provision for loan losses to continue to decline over the long term, although it is subject to variability in any given quarter. capital strength. The Tier 1 common ratio is defined as Tier 1 capital less elements of Tier 1 capital that are not in the form of common equity, such as trust preferred securities, divided by total risk-weighted assets. The following table shows the calculation of the Tier 1 common ratio (dollars in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Shareholders’ equity</td><td>$4,855.9</td><td>$4,904.5</td><td>$4,928.0</td></tr><tr><td>Deduct:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Losses in other comprehensive income on available-for-sale debt securities and cash flow hedges, net of tax</td><td>-459.0</td><td>-315.4</td><td>-389.6</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill and other intangible assets, net of deferred tax liabilities</td><td>1,654.2</td><td>1,899.4</td><td>1,947.5</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td>3,660.7</td><td>3,320.5</td><td>3,370.1</td></tr><tr><td>Deduct:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Disallowed servicing assets and deferred tax assets</td><td>1,185.4</td><td>1,278.9</td><td>1,331.0</td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1 common</td><td>$2,475.3</td><td>$2,041.6</td><td>$2,039.1</td></tr><tr><td>Total risk-weighted assets</td><td>$17,991.9</td><td>$19,849.9</td><td>$21,668.1</td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1 common ratio (Tier 1 common / Total risk-weighted assets)</td><td>13.8%</td><td>10.3%</td><td>9.4%</td></tr></table> In July 2013, the U. S. Federal banking agencies finalized a rule to implement Basel III in the U. S. , a framework for the calculation and components of a banking organization’s regulatory capital and for calculating a banking organization’s risk-weighted assets. Among other things, the Basel III rule raises the minimum thresholds for required capital and revises certain aspects of the definitions and elements of the capital that can be used to satisfy these required minimum thresholds. While the rules became effective on January 1, 2014 for certain large banking organizations, most U. S. banking organizations, including the Company and E*TRADE Bank, have until January 1, 2015 to begin complying with this new framework, with the fully phased-in Basel III capital standards becoming effective in 2019. We expect to be compliant with the Basel III framework, as it is phased-in. We believe the most relevant elements of the final rule to us relate to the risk-weighting of mortgage loans, which will remain unchanged from current rules, and margin receivables, which will qualify for 0% riskweighting. In addition, the final rule gives the option for a one-time permanent election for the inclusion or exclusion in the calculation of Common Tier 1 capital of unrealized gains (losses) on all available-for-sale debt securities; we currently intend to elect to exclude unrealized gains (losses). We believe the incorporation of these elements will have a favorable impact on our current capital ratios. On October 9, 2012, regulators issued final rules implementing provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that require banking organizations with total consolidated assets of more than $10 billion but less than $50 billion to conduct annual company-run stress tests, report the results to their primary federal regulator and the Federal Reserve and publish a summary of the results. Under the rules, stress tests must be conducted using certain scenarios (baseline, adverse and severely adverse), which the Federal Reserve will publish by November 15 of each year. Under the OCC and the Federal Reserve stress test regulations, E*TRADE Bank and the Company, respectively, will be required to conduct stress-testing using the prescribed stress-testing methodologies. The final regulations require E*TRADE Bank to conduct its first stress test using financial statement data as of September 30, 2013, and it will be required to report results to the OCC on or before March 31, 2014. The Company will be required to conduct its first stress test using financial statement data as of September 30, 2016, and it will be required to disclose a summary of its stress test results to the Federal Reserve on or before March 31, 2017. We conducted a company-run stress test for E*TRADE Bank and the Company, which we believe is consistent with the OCC’s and Federal Reserve’s methodologies, respectively, and provided the results to the OCC and the Federal Reserve with the submission of the long-term capital plan in February 2013. We believe that E*TRADE Bank is on schedule to provide the data from its first stress test to the OCC on or before March 31, 2014, as required.

what was the average operating leases 2014rental expense for operating leases from 2009 to 2011

The Company has also encountered various quality issues on its aircraft carrier construction and overhaul programs and its Virginia-class submarine construction program at its Newport News location. These primarily involve matters related to filler metal used in pipe welds identified in 2007, and issues associated with non-nuclear weld inspection and the installation of weapons handling equipment on certain submarines, and certain purchased material quality issues identified in 2009. The Company does not believe that resolution of these issues will have a material effect upon its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Environmental Matters—The estimated cost to complete environmental remediation has been accrued where it is probable that the Company will incur such costs in the future to address environmental conditions at currently or formerly owned or leased operating facilities, or at sites where it has been named a Potentially Responsible Party (“PRP”) by the Environmental Protection Agency, or similarly designated by another environmental agency, and these costs can be estimated by management. These accruals do not include any litigation costs related to environmental matters, nor do they include amounts recorded as asset retirement obligations. To assess the potential impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements, management estimates the range of reasonably possible remediation costs that could be incurred by the Company, taking into account currently available facts on each site as well as the current state of technology and prior experience in remediating contaminated sites. These estimates are reviewed periodically and adjusted to reflect changes in facts and technical and legal circumstances. Management estimates that as of December 31, 2011, the probable future costs for environmental remediation is $3 million, which is accrued in other current liabilities. Factors that could result in changes to the Company’s estimates include: modification of planned remedial actions, increases or decreases in the estimated time required to remediate, changes to the determination of legally responsible parties, discovery of more extensive contamination than anticipated, changes in laws and regulations affecting remediation requirements, and improvements in remediation technology. Should other PRPs not pay their allocable share of remediation costs, the Company may have to incur costs exceeding those already estimated and accrued. In addition, there are certain potential remediation sites where the costs of remediation cannot be reasonably estimated. Although management cannot predict whether new information gained as projects progress will materially affect the estimated liability accrued, management does not believe that future remediation expenditures will have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Financial Arrangements—In the ordinary course of business, HII uses standby letters of credit issued by commercial banks and surety bonds issued by insurance companies principally to support the Company’s self-insured workers’ compensation plans. At December 31, 2011, there were $121 million of standby letters of credit issued but undrawn and $297 million of surety bonds outstanding related to HII. U. S. Government Claims—From time to time, the U. S. Government advises the Company of claims and penalties concerning certain potential disallowed costs. When such findings are presented, the Company and U. S. Government representatives engage in discussions to enable HII to evaluate the merits of these claims as well as to assess the amounts being claimed. The Company does not believe that the outcome of any such matters will have a material effect on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Collective Bargaining Agreements—The Company believes that it maintains good relations with its approximately 38,000 employees of which approximately 50% are covered by a total of 10 collective bargaining agreements. The Company expects to renegotiate renewals of each of its collective bargaining agreements between 2013 and 2015 as they approach expiration. Collective bargaining agreements generally expire after three to five years and are subject to renegotiation at that time. It is not expected that the results of these negotiations, either individually or in the aggregate, will have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated results of operations. Operating Leases—Rental expense for operating leases was $44 million in 2011, $44 million in 2010, and $48 million in 2009. These amounts are net of immaterial amounts of sublease rental income. Minimum rental commitments under longterm non-cancellable operating leases for the next five years and thereafter are: <table><tr><td>2012</td><td>$21</td></tr><tr><td>2013</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>2014</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>2015</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>2016</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>Thereafter</td><td>48</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$124</td></tr></table> 10. GOODWILL AND OTHER PURCHASED INTANGIBLE ASSETS Goodwill HII performs impairment tests for goodwill as of November 30 of each year, or when evidence of potential impairment exists. Goodwill is tested for impairment between annual impairment tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of the Company’s reporting units below their carrying value. In light of the adverse equity market conditions that began in the second quarter of 2011 and the resultant decline in industry market multiples and its market capitalization, the Company performed an interim goodwill impairment analysis as of September 30, 2011. The analysis resulted in a $290 million non-cash goodwill impairment charge recorded in the Company’s Ingalls segment in 2011. Due to the complexities involved in determining the implied fair value of the goodwill of each reporting unit, the Company initially recorded a preliminary goodwill impairment charge of $300 million in the third quarter of 2011, which represented its best estimate of the impairment amount at the time of the filing of the Company’s third quarter report. The goodwill impairment charge was later adjusted to $290 million in the fourth quarter of 2011, based on the final impairment analysis. The goodwill at these businesses has no tax basis, and, accordingly, there was no tax benefit associated with recording the impairment charge. No goodwill impairment was recognized at the Newport News segment, as the Company’s analysis indicated its fair value was in excess of its carrying value as of September 30, 2011. The Company performed its annual goodwill impairment testing as of November 30, 2011, and determined that no further impairment was necessary, as the testing indicated the fair value of each reporting unit exceeded its corresponding carrying value. Accumulated goodwill impairment losses at December 31, 2011 and 2010, were $2,780 million and $2,490 million, respectively. The accumulated goodwill impairment losses at December 31, 2011 and 2010, for Ingalls were $1,568 million and $1,278 million, respectively. The accumulated goodwill impairment losses at both December 31, 2011 and 2010, for Newport News were $1,212 million. Prior to completing the second step related to the goodwill impairment charge in 2011, HII tested its purchased intangible assets and other long-lived assets for impairment, and the carrying values of these assets were determined not to be impaired. The changes in the carrying amounts of goodwill during 2011 and 2010 were as follows: <table><tr><td> ($ in millions)</td><td>Ingalls</td><td> Newport News</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>Balance as of December 31, 2009</td><td>$488</td><td>$646</td><td>$1,134</td></tr><tr><td>Balance as of December 31, 2010</td><td>488</td><td>646</td><td>1,134</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill impairment</td><td>-290</td><td>0</td><td>-290</td></tr><tr><td> Balance as of December 31, 2011</td><td>$198</td><td>$646</td><td>$844</td></tr></table> Purchased Intangible Assets The following table summarizes the Company’s aggregate purchased intangible assets, all of which are contract or program related intangible assets: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">December 31</td></tr><tr><td> ($ in millions)</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Gross carrying amount</td><td>$939</td><td>$939</td></tr><tr><td>Accumulated amortization</td><td>-372</td><td>-352</td></tr><tr><td>Net carrying amount</td><td>$567</td><td>$587</td></tr></table> The Company’s purchased intangible assets other than goodwill are subject to amortization on a straight-line basis over an aggregate weighted-average period of 40 years. Remaining unamortized intangible assets consist principally of amounts pertaining to nuclear-powered aircraft carrier and submarine intangibles whose useful lives have been estimated based on the long life cycle of the related programs. Amortization expense for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, was $20 million, $23 million and $30 million, respectively. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">December 31, 2017</td></tr><tr><td>($ in millions)</td><td>Total</td><td>Level 1</td><td>Level 2</td><td>Level 3</td></tr><tr><td>Plan assets subject to leveling</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S. and international equities</td><td>$1,270</td><td>$1,270</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Government and agency debt securities</td><td>409</td><td>—</td><td>409</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate and other debt securities</td><td>1,287</td><td>—</td><td>1,287</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Group annuity contract</td><td>3</td><td>—</td><td>3</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Cash and cash equivalents, net</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Net plan assets subject to leveling</td><td>$2,969</td><td>$1,270</td><td>$1,699</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Plan assets not subject to leveling</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S. and international equities (a)</td><td>2,012</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Corporate and other debt securities</td><td>165</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Real estate investments</td><td>279</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Private partnerships</td><td>16</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Hedge funds</td><td>281</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cash and cash equivalents, net (b)</td><td>115</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total plan assets not subject to leveling</td><td>2,868</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net plan assets</td><td>$5,837</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table> (a) U. S. and international equity securities include investments in small, medium, and large capitalization stocks of public companies held in commingled trust funds. (b) Cash and cash equivalents are liquid short-term investment funds and include net receivables and payables of the trust. These funds are available for immediate use to fund daily operations, execute investment policies, and serve as a temporary investment vehicle. The master trust limits the use of derivatives through direct or separate account investments, such that the derivatives used are liquid and able to be readily valued in the market. Derivative usage in separate account structures is primarily for gaining market exposure in an unlevered manner or hedging investment risks. The fair market value of the pension master trust's derivatives through direct or separate account investments resulted in a net asset of approximately $4 million and a net liability of $1 million as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, respectively. There was no activity attributable to Level 3 retirement plan assets during the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017.18. STOCK COMPENSATION PLANS As of December 31, 2018, HII had stock-based compensation awards outstanding under the following plans: the Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. 2011 Long-Term Incentive Stock Plan (the "2011 Plan") and the Huntington Ingalls Industries, Inc. 2012 Long-Term Incentive Stock Plan (the "2012 Plan"). Stock Compensation Plans On March 23, 2012, the Company's board of directors adopted the 2012 Plan, subject to stockholder approval, and the Company's stockholders approved the 2012 Plan on May 2, 2012. Award grants made on or after May 2, 2012, were made under the 2012 Plan. Award grants made prior to May 2, 2012, were made under the 2011 Plan. No future grants will be made under the 2011 Plan.

what is the highest total amount of North Sea?

Investments Prior to our acquisition of Keystone on October 12, 2007, we held common shares of Keystone, which were classified as an available-for-sale investment security. Accordingly, the investment was included in other assets at its fair value, with the unrealized gain excluded from earnings and included in accumulated other comprehensive income, net of applicable taxes. Upon our acquisition of Keystone on October 12, 2007, the unrealized gain was removed from accumulated other comprehensive income, net of applicable taxes, and the original cost of the common shares was considered a component of the purchase price. Fair Value of Financial Instruments Our debt is reflected on the balance sheet at cost. Based on current market conditions, our interest rate margins are below the rate available in the market, which causes the fair value of our debt to fall below the carrying value. The fair value of our term loans (see Note 6, “Long-Term Obligations”) is approximately $570 million at December 31, 2009, as compared to the carrying value of $596 million. We estimated the fair value of our term loans by calculating the upfront cash payment a market participant would require to assume our obligations. The upfront cash payment, excluding any issuance costs, is the amount that a market participant would be able to lend at December 31, 2009 to an entity with a credit rating similar to ours and achieve sufficient cash inflows to cover the scheduled cash outflows under our term loans. The carrying amounts of our cash and equivalents, net trade receivables and accounts payable approximate fair value. We apply the market approach to value our financial assets and liabilities, which include the cash surrender value of life insurance, deferred compensation liabilities and interest rate swaps. The market approach utilizes available market information to estimate fair value. Required fair value disclosures are included in Note 8, “Fair Value Measurements. ” Accrued Expenses We self-insure a portion of employee medical benefits under the terms of our employee health insurance program. We purchase certain stop-loss insurance to limit our liability exposure. We also self-insure a portion of our property and casualty risk, which includes automobile liability, general liability, workers’ compensation and property under deductible insurance programs. The insurance premium costs are expensed over the contract periods. A reserve for liabilities associated with these losses is established for claims filed and claims incurred but not yet reported based upon our estimate of ultimate cost, which is calculated using analyses of historical data. We monitor new claims and claim development as well as trends related to the claims incurred but not reported in order to assess the adequacy of our insurance reserves. Self-insurance reserves on the Consolidated Balance Sheets are net of claims deposits of $0.7 million and $0.8 million, at December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. While we do not expect the amounts ultimately paid to differ significantly from our estimates, our insurance reserves and corresponding expenses could be affected if future claim experience differs significantly from historical trends and assumptions. Product Warranties Some of our mechanical products are sold with a standard six-month warranty against defects. We record the estimated warranty costs at the time of sale using historical warranty claim information to project future warranty claims activity and related expenses. The changes in the warranty reserve are as follows (in thousands): <table><tr><td>Balance as of January 1, 2008</td><td>$580</td></tr><tr><td>Warranty expense</td><td>3,681</td></tr><tr><td>Warranty claims</td><td>-3,721</td></tr><tr><td>Balance as of December 31, 2008</td><td>540</td></tr><tr><td>Warranty expense</td><td>5,033</td></tr><tr><td>Warranty claims</td><td>-4,969</td></tr><tr><td>Balance as of December 31, 2009</td><td>$604</td></tr></table> requirements. See additional information included in Critical Accounting Policies – Commodity Derivative Instruments and Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk. Certain of our commodity contracts were executed in connection with the Patina Merger, prior to the global crude oil and natural gas price escalations which began in early 2005. The settlements of these contracts have reduced our cash flows. However, these contracts expired in December 2008. Our remaining commodity contracts were executed in more favorable price environments. Although we cannot predict market prices, our remaining commodity contract positions should result in more favorable cash flows as compared to our commodity contract positions in prior periods. See Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data – Note 6 – Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities for our current hedge positions. Cash Flows Summary cash flow information is as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">(in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Total cash provided by (used in):</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Operating activities</td><td>$2,285</td><td>$2,017</td><td>$1,730</td></tr><tr><td>Investing activities</td><td>-2,132</td><td>-1,403</td><td>-1,098</td></tr><tr><td>Financing activities</td><td>327</td><td>-107</td><td>-589</td></tr><tr><td>Increase in cash and cash equivalents</td><td>$480</td><td>$507</td><td>$43</td></tr></table> Operating Activities—Net cash provided by operating activities totaled $2.3 billion in 2008, an increase of $268 million, or 13%, as compared with 2007. The increase was primarily due to a significant increase in oil, gas and NGL sales resulting from higher average realized crude oil and natural gas prices during the first nine months of 2008. The revenue increase was slightly offset by higher production costs and G&A expense. Net cash provided by operating activities includes dividends received from equity method investees. Net cash provided by operating activities was $2.0 billion in 2007, an increase of $287 million, or 17% as compared with 2006. The increase was due primarily to increased sales resulting from higher average realized crude oil prices and higher average realized US natural gas prices. These increases were partially offset by higher exploration expense and G&A expense. In addition, cash flows from operating activities in 2007 included dividends from equity method investees. Cash distributions from equity method investees received in 2006 were repayments of loans and were included in investing activities. See Results of Operations—Income from Equity Method Investees. Investing Activities—The primary use of cash in investing activities is for capital spending, which may be offset by proceeds from property sales or distributions from equity method investees. Net cash used in investing activities totaled $2.1 billion in 2008, as compared with $1.4 billion in 2007. In 2008 we had an expanded capital budget, with increased acquisition, development and exploratory activity in onshore US and deepwater Gulf of Mexico areas as well as increased exploratory activity in international locations including Equatorial Guinea and Israel. Our total additions to property, plant and equipment plus acquisitions ($2.3 billion) were minimally offset by proceeds from property sales ($131 million). In comparison, in 2007, we had additions to property, plant and equipment ($1.4 billion) primarily due to development activity in the US and North Sea and acquisition and exploratory activities in the US and West Africa. Expenditures were minimally offset by proceeds from property sales of $9 million. In comparison, in 2006 cash flows from investing activities totaled $1.1 billion. We had acquisitions and additions to property, plant and equipment ($1.8 billion) due to the acquisition of U. S. Exploration plus additional development and exploratory activity in the US and development activity in the North Sea. These expenditures were offset by proceeds from the sale of our significant Gulf of Mexico shelf properties ($520 million) and net distributions received from equity method investees ($151 million). The distributions from equity method investees were the result of repayment of loans and therefore were included in cash flows from investing activities. See Results of Operations—Income from Equity Method Investees. (4) Includes production through November 24, 2010. Our Block 3 PSC was terminated by the Ecuadorian government on November 25, 2010. Intercompany natural gas sales were eliminated for accounting purposes. Electricity sales are included in other revenues. See Termination of Ecuador PSC above. (5) Volumes represent sales of condensate and LPG from the LPG plant in Equatorial Guinea. Revenues from sales of crude oil and natural gas have accounted for 90% or more of consolidated revenues for each of the last three fiscal years. At December 31, 2010, our operated properties accounted for approximately 64% of our total production. Being the operator of a property improves our ability to directly influence production levels and the timing of projects, while also enhancing our control over operating expenses and capital expenditures. Productive Wells The number of productive crude oil and natural gas wells in which we held an interest at December 31, 2010 was as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Crude Oil Wells</td><td colspan="2">Natural Gas Wells</td><td colspan="2">Total</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Gross</td><td>Net</td><td>Gross</td><td>Net</td><td>Gross</td><td>Net</td></tr><tr><td>United States</td><td>6,543</td><td>5,759.5</td><td>6,804</td><td>4,968.1</td><td>13,347</td><td>10,727.6</td></tr><tr><td>Equatorial Guinea</td><td>4</td><td>1.6</td><td>13</td><td>4.4</td><td>17</td><td>6.0</td></tr><tr><td>Israel</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>6</td><td>2.8</td><td>6</td><td>2.8</td></tr><tr><td>North Sea</td><td>18</td><td>3.8</td><td>8</td><td>1.0</td><td>26</td><td>4.8</td></tr><tr><td>China</td><td>19</td><td>10.8</td><td>1</td><td>0.6</td><td>20</td><td>11.4</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>6,584</td><td>5,775.7</td><td>6,832</td><td>4,976.9</td><td>13,416</td><td>10,752.6</td></tr></table> Productive wells are producing wells and wells mechanically capable of production. A gross well is a well in which a working interest is owned. The number of gross wells is the total number of wells in which a working interest is owned. The number of net wells is the sum of the fractional working interests owned in gross wells expressed as whole numbers and fractions thereof. Wells with multiple completions are counted as one well in the table above. Developed and Undeveloped Acreage Developed and undeveloped acreage (including both leases and concessions) held at December 31, 2010 was as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Developed Acreage</td><td colspan="2">Undeveloped Acreage</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Gross</td><td>Net</td><td>Gross</td><td>Net</td></tr><tr><td>(thousands)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>United States</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Onshore</td><td>1,535</td><td>1,012</td><td>1,815</td><td>1,318</td></tr><tr><td>Offshore</td><td>65</td><td>35</td><td>562</td><td>397</td></tr><tr><td>Total United States</td><td>1,600</td><td>1,047</td><td>2,377</td><td>1,715</td></tr><tr><td>International</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Equatorial Guinea</td><td>56</td><td>19</td><td>573</td><td>233</td></tr><tr><td>Cameroon</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1,125</td><td>563</td></tr><tr><td>Israel</td><td>62</td><td>29</td><td>1,592</td><td>660</td></tr><tr><td>North Sea-1</td><td>52</td><td>7</td><td>213</td><td>41</td></tr><tr><td>China</td><td>7</td><td>4</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Suriname</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>3,087</td><td>1,389</td></tr><tr><td>France-2</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>2,808</td><td>2,036</td></tr><tr><td>Nicaragua</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1,977</td><td>1,977</td></tr><tr><td>Cyprus-3</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>1,136</td><td>795</td></tr><tr><td>India</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>694</td><td>347</td></tr><tr><td>Total International</td><td>177</td><td>59</td><td>13,205</td><td>8,041</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>1,777</td><td>1,106</td><td>15,582</td><td>9,756</td></tr></table> (1) The North Sea includes acreage in the UK and the Netherlands. (2) We are currently funding a 2-D seismic survey over the acreage in return for a working interest in the concession. (3) A portion of the acreage has been assigned to a partner and the agreement is awaiting government approval. Developed acreage is comprised of leased acres that are within an area spaced by or assignable to a productive well. Undeveloped acreage is comprised of leased acres with defined remaining terms and not within an area spaced by or assignable to a productive well. A gross acre is any leased acre in which a working interest is owned. A net acre is comprised of the total of the owned working interest(s) in a gross acre expressed in a fractional format. Noble Energy, Inc. Index to Financial Statements Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 135 crude oil and natural gas production, commodity prices based on sales contract terms or commodity price curves as of the date of the estimate, estimated operating and development costs, and a risk-adjusted discount rate of 10%. The fair values of assets held for sale were based on anticipated sales proceeds less costs to sell. See Note 5. Asset Impairments. Additional Fair Value Disclosures Debt The fair value of fixed-rate, public debt is estimated based on the published market prices for the same or similar issues. As such, we consider the fair value of our public fixed rate debt to be a Level 1 measurement on the fair value hierarchy. See Note 10. Long-Term Debt. Fair value information regarding our debt is as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">December 31,2015</td><td colspan="2">December 31,2014</td></tr><tr><td>(millions)</td><td>Carrying Amount</td><td>Fair Value</td><td>Carrying Amount</td><td>Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td>Long-Term Debt, Net^-1</td><td>$7,626</td><td>$7,105</td><td>$5,758</td><td>$6,179</td></tr></table> (1) Net of unamortized discount, premium and debt issuance costs and excludes capital lease and other obligations. No floating rate debt was outstanding at December 31, 2015 or December 31, 2014. Note 14. Earnings (Loss) Per Share Basic earnings (loss) per share of common stock is computed using the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding during each period. The diluted earnings (loss) per share of common stock include the effect of outstanding stock options, shares of restricted stock, or shares of our common stock held in a rabbi trust (when dilutive). The following table summarizes the calculation of basic and diluted earnings (loss) per share:

What is the sum of Securities loaned in 2017 and Aggregate contractual principal in excess of fair value in 2015? (in million)

Management’s Discussion and Analysis The table below presents a reconciliation of our common shareholders’ equity to the estimated Basel III Advanced CET1 on a fully phased-in basis. <table><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td>As of December 2013</td></tr><tr><td>Common shareholders’ equity</td><td>$ 71,267</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill</td><td>-3,705</td></tr><tr><td>Identifiable intangible assets</td><td>-671</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred tax liabilities</td><td>908</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, net of deferred tax liabilities</td><td>-3,468</td></tr><tr><td>Deductions for investments in nonconsolidated financial institutions¹</td><td>-9,091</td></tr><tr><td>Otheradjustments²</td><td>-489</td></tr><tr><td>Basel III CET1</td><td>$ 58,219</td></tr><tr><td>Basel III Advanced RWAs</td><td>$594,662</td></tr><tr><td>Basel III Advanced CET1 Ratio</td><td>9.8%</td></tr></table> 1. This deduction, which represents the fully phased-in requirement, is the amount by which our investments in the capital of nonconsolidated financial institutions exceed certain prescribed thresholds. During both the transitional period and thereafter, no deduction will be required if the applicable proportion of our investments in the capital of nonconsolidated financial institutions falls below the prescribed thresholds.2. Principally includes credit valuation adjustments on derivative liabilities and debt valuation adjustments, as well as other required credit riskbased deductions. In addition, beginning with the first quarter of 2015, subject to transitional provisions, we will also be required to disclose ratios calculated under the Standardized approach. Our estimated CET1 ratio under the Standardized approach (Standardized CET1 ratio) on a fully phased-in basis was approximately 60 basis points lower than our estimated Basel III Advanced CET1 ratio in the table above. Both the Basel III Advanced CET1 ratio and the Standardized CET1 ratio are subject to transitional provisions. Reflecting the transitional provisions that became effective January 1, 2014, our estimated Basel III Advanced CET1 ratio and our estimated Standardized CET1 ratio are approximately 150 basis points higher than the respective CET1 ratios on a fully phased-in basis as of December 2013. Effective January 1, 2014, Group Inc. ’s capital and leverage ratios are calculated under, and subject to the minimums as defined in, the Revised Capital Framework. The changes to the definition of capital and minimum ratios, subject to transitional provisions, were effective beginning January 1, 2014. RWAs are based on Basel I Adjusted, as defined in Note 20 to the consolidated financial statements. The firm will transition to Basel III beginning on April 1, 2014. Including the impact of the changes to the definition of regulatory capital and reflecting the transitional provisions effective in 2014, our estimated CET1 ratio (CET1 to RWAs on a Basel I Adjusted basis) as of December 2013 would have been essentially unchanged as compared to our Tier 1 common ratio under Basel I. Regulatory Leverage Ratios. The Revised Capital Framework increased the minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio applicable to us from 3% to 4% effective January 1, 2014. In addition, the Revised Capital Framework will introduce a new Tier 1 supplementary leverage ratio (supplementary leverage ratio) for Advanced approach banking organizations. The supplementary leverage ratio compares Tier 1 capital (as defined under the Revised Capital Framework) to a measure of leverage exposure, defined as the sum of the firm’s assets less certain CET1 deductions plus certain off-balance-sheet exposures, including a measure of derivatives exposures and commitments. The Revised Capital Framework requires a minimum supplementary leverage ratio of 3%, effective January 1, 2018, but with disclosure required beginning in the first quarter of 2015. In addition, subsequent to the approval of the Revised Capital Framework, the Agencies issued a proposal to increase the minimum supplementary leverage ratio requirement for the largest U. S. banks (those deemed to be global systemically important banking institutions (G-SIBs) under the Basel G-SIB framework). These proposals would require the firm and other G-SIBs to meet a 5% supplementary leverage ratio (comprised of the minimum requirement of 3% plus a 2% buffer). As of December 2013, our estimated supplementary leverage ratio based on the Revised Capital Framework approximates this proposed minimum. In addition, the Basel Committee recently finalized revisions that would increase the size of the leverage exposure for purposes of the supplementary leverage ratio, but would retain a minimum supplementary leverage ratio requirement of 3%. It is not known with certainty at this point whether the U. S. regulators will adopt this revised definition of leverage into their rules and proposals for the supplementary leverage ratio. THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Gains and Losses on Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities Accounted for at Fair Value Under the Fair Value Option The table below presents the gains and losses recognized in earnings as a result of the firm electing to apply the fair value option to certain financial assets and financial liabilities. These gains and losses are included in “Market making” and “Other principal transactions. ” The table below also includes gains and losses on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments included in unsecured short-term borrowings, unsecured long-term borrowings and deposits. These gains and losses would have been recognized under other U. S. GAAP even if the firm had not elected to account for the entire hybrid financial instrument at fair value. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured short-term borrowings</td><td>$-1,028</td><td>$ 346</td><td>$-1,180</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured long-term borrowings</td><td>584</td><td>771</td><td>-592</td></tr><tr><td>Other liabilities and accrued expenses</td><td>-55</td><td>-684</td><td>-441</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-630</td><td>-217</td><td>-366</td></tr><tr><td> Total</td><td>$-1,129</td><td>$ 216</td><td>$-2,579</td></tr></table> In the table above: ‰ Gains/(losses) exclude contractual interest, which is included in “Interest income” and “Interest expense,” for all instruments other than hybrid financial instruments. See Note 23 for further information about interest income and interest expense. ‰ Unsecured short-term borrowings includes gains/(losses) on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments of $(1.05) billion for 2016, $339 million for 2015 and $(1.22) billion for 2014, respectively. ‰ Unsecured long-term borrowings includes gains/(losses) on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments of $737 million for 2016, $653 million for 2015 and $(697) million for 2014, respectively. ‰ Other liabilities and accrued expenses includes gains/ (losses) on certain subordinated liabilities of consolidated VIEs. ‰ Other primarily consists of gains/(losses) on receivables from customers and counterparties, deposits and other secured financings. Excluding the gains and losses on the instruments accounted for under the fair value option described above, “Market making” and “Other principal transactions” primarily represent gains and losses on “Financial instruments owned, at fair value” and “Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value. ” Loans and Lending Commitments The table below presents the difference between the aggregate fair value and the aggregate contractual principal amount for loans and long-term receivables for which the fair value option was elected. In the table below, the aggregate contractual principal amount of loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than 90 days past due (which excludes loans carried at zero fair value and considered uncollectible) exceeds the related fair value primarily because the firm regularly purchases loans, such as distressed loans, at values significantly below the contractual principal amounts. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">As of December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td> 2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td> Performing loans and long-term receivables</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Aggregate contractual principal in excess of fair value</td><td> $ 478</td><td>$1,330</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3"> Loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than 90 days past due</td></tr><tr><td>Aggregate contractual principal in excess of fair value</td><td> 8,101</td><td>9,600</td></tr><tr><td>Aggregate fair value of loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than90 days past due</td><td> 2,138</td><td>2,391</td></tr></table> As of December 2016 and December 2015, the fair value of unfunded lending commitments for which the fair value option was elected was a liability of $80 million and $211 million, respectively, and the related total contractual amount of these lending commitments was $7.19 billion and $14.01 billion, respectively. See Note 18 for further information about lending commitments. THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis Funding Sources Our primary sources of funding are deposits, collateralized financings, unsecured short-term and long-term borrowings, and shareholders’ equity. We seek to maintain broad and diversified funding sources globally across products, programs, markets, currencies and creditors to avoid funding concentrations. The table below presents information about our funding sources. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">As of December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td colspan="2"> 2018</td><td colspan="2">2017</td></tr><tr><td>Deposits</td><td> $158,257</td><td> 25%</td><td>$138,604</td><td>23%</td></tr><tr><td>Collateralized financings:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Repurchase agreements</td><td> 78,723</td><td> 13%</td><td>84,718</td><td>14%</td></tr><tr><td>Securities loaned</td><td> 11,808</td><td> 2%</td><td>14,793</td><td>2%</td></tr><tr><td>Other secured financings</td><td> 21,433</td><td> 3%</td><td>24,788</td><td>4%</td></tr><tr><td>Total collateralized financings</td><td> 111,964</td><td> 18%</td><td>124,299</td><td>20%</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured short-term borrowings</td><td> 40,502</td><td> 7%</td><td>46,922</td><td>8%</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured long-term borrowings</td><td> 224,149</td><td> 36%</td><td>217,687</td><td>36%</td></tr><tr><td>Total shareholders’ equity</td><td> 90,185</td><td> 14%</td><td>82,243</td><td>13%</td></tr><tr><td> Total funding sources</td><td> $625,057</td><td> 100%</td><td>$609,755</td><td>100%</td></tr></table> Our funding is primarily raised in U. S. dollar, Euro, British pound and Japanese yen. We generally distribute our funding products through our own sales force and thirdparty distributors to a large, diverse creditor base in a variety of markets in the Americas, Europe and Asia. We believe that our relationships with our creditors are critical to our liquidity. Our creditors include banks, governments, securities lenders, corporations, pension funds, insurance companies, mutual funds and individuals. We have imposed various internal guidelines to monitor creditor concentration across our funding programs. Deposits. Our deposits provide us with a diversified source of funding and reduce our reliance on wholesale funding. A growing portion of our deposit base consists of consumer deposits. Deposits are primarily used to finance lending activity, other inventory and a portion of our GCLA. We raise deposits, including savings, demand and time deposits, through internal and third-party broker-dealers, and from consumers and institutional clients, and primarily through Goldman Sachs Bank USA (GS Bank USA) and Goldman Sachs International Bank (GSIB). In September 2018, we launched Marcus: by Goldman Sachs in the U. K. to accept deposits. See Note 14 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about our deposits. Secured Funding. We fund a significant amount of inventory on a secured basis. Secured funding includes collateralized financings in the consolidated statements of financial condition. We may also pledge our inventory as collateral for securities borrowed under a securities lending agreement. We also use our own inventory to cover transactions in which we or our clients have sold securities that have not yet been purchased. Secured funding is less sensitive to changes in our credit quality than unsecured funding, due to our posting of collateral to our lenders. Nonetheless, we continually analyze the refinancing risk of our secured funding activities, taking into account trade tenors, maturity profiles, counterparty concentrations, collateral eligibility and counterparty roll over probabilities. We seek to mitigate our refinancing risk by executing term trades with staggered maturities, diversifying counterparties, raising excess secured funding, and pre-funding residual risk through our GCLA. We seek to raise secured funding with a term appropriate for the liquidity of the assets that are being financed, and we seek longer maturities for secured funding collateralized by asset classes that may be harder to fund on a secured basis, especially during times of market stress. Our secured funding, excluding funding collateralized by liquid government and agency obligations, is primarily executed for tenors of one month or greater and is primarily executed through term repurchase agreements and securities loaned contracts. The weighted average maturity of our secured funding included in collateralized financings in the consolidated statements of financial condition, excluding funding that can only be collateralized by liquid government and agency obligations, exceeded 120 days as of December 2018. Assets that may be harder to fund on a secured basis during times of market stress include certain financial instruments in the following categories: mortgage and other assetbacked loans and securities, non-investment-grade corporate debt securities, equity securities and emerging market securities. Assets that are classified in level 3 of the fair value hierarchy are generally funded on an unsecured basis. See Notes 5 and 6 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about the classification of financial instruments in the fair value hierarchy and “Unsecured Long-Term Borrowings” below for further information about the use of unsecured long-term borrowings as a source of funding. We also raise financing through other types of collateralized financings, such as secured loans and notes. GS Bank USA has access to funding from the Federal Home Loan Bank. Our outstanding borrowings against the Federal Home Loan Bank were $528 million as of December 2018 and $3.40 billion as of December 2017.

What is the average increasing rate of Purchased power between 2017 and 2018? (in million)

Rupture" in Note H to the financial statements in Item 8) ($14 million), offset in part by surcharges for assessments and fees that are collected in revenues from customers ($4 million) and lower municipal infrastructure support costs ($2 million). Depreciation and amortization increased $2 million in 2018 compared with 2017 due primarily to higher steam utility plant balances. Taxes, other than income taxes increased $14 million in 2018 compared with 2017 due primarily to higher property taxes ($13 million) and state and local taxes ($2 million), offset in part by a sales and use tax refund ($1 million). Taxes, Other Than Income Taxes At $2,156 million, taxes other than income taxes remain one of CECONY’s largest operating expenses. The principal components of, and variations in, taxes other than income taxes were: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">For the Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>(Millions of Dollars)</td><td>2018</td><td>2017</td><td>Variation</td></tr><tr><td>Property taxes</td><td>$1,845</td><td>$1,692</td><td>$153</td></tr><tr><td>State and local taxes related to revenue receipts</td><td>330</td><td>319</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>Payroll taxes</td><td>69</td><td>67</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Other taxes</td><td>-88</td><td>-21</td><td>-67</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$2,156(a)</td><td>$2,057(a)</td><td>$99</td></tr></table> (a) Including sales tax on customers’ bills, total taxes other than income taxes in 2018 and 2017 were $2,628 and $2,495 million, respectively. Other Income (Deductions) Other income (deductions) decreased $6 million in 2018 compared with 2017 due primarily to an increase in non- service costs related to pension and other postretirement benefits. Net Interest Expense Net interest expense increased $66 million in 2018 compared with 2017 due primarily to higher debt balances in 2018. Income Tax Expense Income taxes decreased $359 million in 2018 compared with 2017 due primarily to lower income before income tax expense ($56 million), a decrease in the corporate federal income tax rate due to the TCJA ($250 million), a decrease in tax benefits for plant-related flow items ($9 million) and an increase in the amortization of excess deferred federal income taxes due to the TCJA ($52 million), offset in part by non-deductible business expenses ($3 million) and a decrease in bad debt write-offs ($4 million). CECONY deferred as a regulatory liability its estimated net benefits for the 2018 period under the TCJA. See “Other Regulatory Matters” in Note B to the financial statements in Item 8. O&R <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">For the Year Ended December 31, 2018</td><td></td><td colspan="2">For the Year Ended December 31, 2017</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>(Millions of Dollars)</td><td>Electric</td><td>Gas</td><td>2018 Total</td><td>Electric</td><td>Gas</td><td>2017 Total</td><td>2018-2017Variation</td></tr><tr><td>Operating revenues</td><td>$642</td><td>$249</td><td>$891</td><td>$642</td><td>$232</td><td>$874</td><td>$17</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased power</td><td>208</td><td>—</td><td>208</td><td>191</td><td>—</td><td>191</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>Gas purchased for resale</td><td>—</td><td>86</td><td>86</td><td>—</td><td>73</td><td>73</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Other operations and maintenance</td><td>233</td><td>72</td><td>305</td><td>232</td><td>64</td><td>296</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation and amortization</td><td>56</td><td>21</td><td>77</td><td>51</td><td>20</td><td>71</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Taxes, other than income taxes</td><td>52</td><td>31</td><td>83</td><td>53</td><td>29</td><td>82</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income</td><td>$93</td><td>$39</td><td>$132</td><td>$115</td><td>$46</td><td>$161</td><td>$-29</td></tr></table> fund’s third-party administrator based upon the valuation of the underlying securities and instruments and primarily by applying a market or income valuation methodology as appropriate depending on the specific type of security or instrument held. Funds-of-funds are valued based upon the net asset values of the underlying investments in hedge funds. Private equity consists of interests in partnerships that invest in U. S. and non-U. S. debt and equity securities. Partnership interests are valued using the most recent general partner statement of fair value, updated for any subsequent partnership interest cash flows. Real estate includes commercial properties, land and timberland, and generally includes, but is not limited to, retail, office, industrial, multifamily and hotel properties. Real estate fund values are primarily reported by the fund manager and are based on valuation of the underlying investments which include inputs such as cost, discounted cash flows, independent appraisals and market based comparable data. Risk Parity Funds are defined as engineered beta exposure to a wide range of asset classes and risk premia, including equity, interest rates, credit, and commodities. Risk parity funds seek to provide high risk-adjusted returns while providing a high level of diversification relative to a traditional equity/fixed income portfolio. These funds seek to achieve this objective with the use of modest leverage applied to lower-risk, more diverse asset classes. Investments in Risk parity funds are valued using monthly reported net asset values. Also included in these funds are related derivative instruments which are generally employed as asset class substitutes for managing asset/liability mismatches, or bona fide hedging or other appropriate risk management purposes. Derivative instruments are generally valued by the investment managers or in certain instances by third-party pricing sources. The fair value measurements using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) at December 31, 2015 were as follows: Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) <table><tr><td>In millions</td><td>Otherfixedincome</td><td>Hedgefunds</td><td>Privateequity</td><td>Realestate</td><td>Risk parity funds</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>Beginning balance at December 31, 2014</td><td>$10</td><td>$867</td><td>$519</td><td>$1,101</td><td>$376</td><td>$2,873</td></tr><tr><td>Actual return on plan assets:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Relating to assets still held at the reporting date</td><td>—</td><td>27</td><td>27</td><td>41</td><td>-39</td><td>56</td></tr><tr><td>Relating to assets sold during the period</td><td>—</td><td>3</td><td>-9</td><td>27</td><td>-7</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Purchases, sales and settlements</td><td>—</td><td>-3</td><td>-45</td><td>-75</td><td>10</td><td>-113</td></tr><tr><td>Transfers in and/or out of Level 3</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Ending balance at December 31, 2015</td><td>$10</td><td>$894</td><td>$492</td><td>$1,094</td><td>$340</td><td>$2,830</td></tr></table> FUNDING AND CASH FLOWS The Company’s funding policy for the Pension Plan is to contribute amounts sufficient to meet legal funding requirements, plus any additional amounts that the Company may determine to be appropriate considering the funded status of the plans, tax deductibility, cash flow generated by the Company, and other factors. The Company continually reassesses the amount and timing of any discretionary contributions. Contributions to the qualified plan totaling $750 million, $353 million and $31 million were made by the Company in 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Generally, International Paper’s non-U. S. pension plans are funded using the projected benefit as a target, except in certain countries where funding of benefit plans is not required. At December 31, 2015, projected future pension benefit payments, excluding any termination benefits, were as follows: <table><tr><td>2016</td><td>$782</td></tr><tr><td>2017</td><td>792</td></tr><tr><td>2018</td><td>803</td></tr><tr><td>2019</td><td>818</td></tr><tr><td>2020</td><td>832</td></tr><tr><td>2021 – 2025</td><td>4,365</td></tr></table> OTHER U. S. PLANS International Paper sponsors the International Paper Company Salaried Savings Plan and the International Paper Company Hourly Savings Plan, both of which are tax-qualified defined contribution 401(k) savings plans. The following table presents information related to the major classes of assets and liabilities that were classified as held for sale in our consolidated balance sheet (in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td>December 31, 2017</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments</td><td>$13</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Trade accounts receivable, less allowances</td><td>10</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Inventories</td><td>11</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Prepaid expenses and other assets</td><td>12</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Other assets</td><td>7</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Property, plant and equipment — net</td><td>85</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Bottlers' franchise rights with indefinite lives</td><td>5</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill</td><td>103</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Other intangible assets</td><td>1</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for reduction of assets held for sale</td><td>-28</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Assets held for sale</td><td>$219</td><td>¹</td></tr><tr><td>Accounts payable and accrued expenses</td><td>$22</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Other liabilities</td><td>12</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Deferred income taxes</td><td>3</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Liabilities held for sale</td><td>$37</td><td>²</td></tr></table> 1 Consists of total assets relating to North America refranchising of $9 million and Latin America bottling operations of $210 million, which are included in the Bottling Investments operating segment.2 Consists of total liabilities relating to North America refranchising of $5 million and Latin America bottling operations of $32 million, which are included in the Bottling Investments operating segment. We determined that the operations included in the table above did not meet the criteria to be classified as discontinued operations under the applicable guidance. Discontinued Operations In October 2017, the Company and ABI completed the transition of ABI’s controlling interest in CCBA to the Company for $3,150 million. We plan to hold a controlling interest in CCBA temporarily. We anticipate that we will divest a portion of our ownership interest in 2019, which will result in the Company no longer having a controlling interest in CCBA. Accordingly, we have presented the financial position and results of operations of CCBA as discontinued operations in the accompanying consolidated financial statements. As CCBA met the criteria to be classified as held for sale, we were required to record their assets and liabilities at the lower of carrying value or fair value less any costs to sell and present the related assets and liabilities as separate line items in our consolidated balance sheet. During the year ended December 31, 2018, we recorded an impairment charge of $554 million, reflecting management’s view of the proceeds that are expected to be received based on revised projections of future operating results and foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations. Refer to Note 17. Upon consolidation of CCBA, we remeasured our previously held equity interests in CCBA and its South African subsidiary to fair value and recorded a gain on the remeasurement of $150 million. The fair values in our previously held equity investments in CCBA and its South African subsidiary were determined using income approaches, including discounted cash flow models (a Level 3 measurement), and the Company believes the inputs and assumptions used are consistent with those hypothetical marketplace participants would use. We recorded $1,805 million for the noncontrolling interests of CCBA. The fair value of the noncontrolling interests was determined in a manner similar to our previously held equity investments. The preliminary goodwill recorded at the time of the transaction was $4,262 million, none of which is tax deductible. This goodwill is in part due to the significant synergies that are expected from the consolidation of the bottling system in Southern and East Africa, especially within the country of South Africa. As a result, upon finalization of purchase accounting $411 million of the final goodwill balance of $4,186 million was allocated to other reporting units expected to benefit from this transaction. During 2018, the Company acquired additional bottling operations in Zambia and Botswana, which have also been included in assets held for sale — discontinued operations and liabilities held for sale — discontinued operations. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies – (Continued) accounted for under the previous accounting guidance, FTB No.85-4, where the carrying value of life settlement contracts was the cash surrender value, and revenue was recognized and included in Other revenues on the Consolidated Statements of Income when the life insurance policy underlying the life settlement contract matured. Under the previous accounting guidance, maintenance expenses were expensed as incurred and included in Other operating expenses on the Consolidated Statements of Income. CNA’s investments in life settlement contracts were $129 million and $115 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007 and are included in Other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The cash receipts and payments related to life settlement contracts are included in Cash flows from operating activities on the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for all periods presented. The fair value of each life insurance policy is determined as the present value of the anticipated death benefits less anticipated premium payments for that policy. These anticipated values are determined using mortality rates and policy terms that are distinct for each insured. The discount rate used reflects current risk-free rates at applicable durations and the risks associated with assessing the current medical condition of the insured, the potential volatility of mortality experience for the portfolio and longevity risk. CNA used its own experience to determine the fair value of its portfolio of life settlement contracts. The mortality experience of this portfolio of life insurance policies may vary by quarter due to its relatively small size. The following table details the values for life settlement contracts as of December 31, 2008.

What will Total trading account assets be like in 2011 if it continues to grow at the same rate as it did in 2010? (in million)

NOTE 3 Trading Account Assets and Liabilities The table below presents the components of trading account assets and liabilities at December 31, 2010 and 2009. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> December 31</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td> 2010</td><td>2009</td></tr><tr><td> Trading account assets</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S. government and agency securities^-1</td><td>$60,811</td><td>$44,585</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate securities, trading loans and other</td><td>49,352</td><td>57,009</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities</td><td>32,129</td><td>33,562</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S.sovereign debt</td><td>33,523</td><td>28,143</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage trading loans and asset-backed securities</td><td>18,856</td><td>18,907</td></tr><tr><td> Total trading account assets</td><td>$194,671</td><td>$182,206</td></tr><tr><td> Trading account liabilities</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S. government and agency securities</td><td>$29,340</td><td>$26,519</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities</td><td>15,482</td><td>18,407</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S.sovereign debt</td><td>15,813</td><td>12,897</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate securities and other</td><td>11,350</td><td>7,609</td></tr><tr><td> Total trading account liabilities</td><td>$71,985</td><td>$65,432</td></tr></table> (1) Includes $29.7 billion and $23.5 billion at December 31, 2010 and 2009 of GSE obligations. NOTE 4 Derivatives Derivative Balances Derivatives are entered into on behalf of customers, for trading, as economic hedges or as qualifying accounting hedges. The Corporation enters into derivatives to facilitate client transactions, for principal trading purposes and to manage risk exposures. For additional information on the Corporation’s derivatives and hedging activities, see Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Principles. The table below identifies derivative instruments included on the Corporation’s Consolidated Balance Sheet in derivative assets and liabilities at December 31, 2010 and 2009. Balances are presented on a gross basis, prior to the application of counterparty and collateral netting. Total derivative assets and liabilities are adjusted on an aggregate basis to take into consideration the effects of legally enforceable master netting agreements and have been reduced by the cash collateral applied. <table><tr><td></td><td></td><td colspan="6">December 31, 2010</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td colspan="3">Gross Derivative Assets</td><td colspan="3">Gross Derivative Liabilities</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td> Trading </td><td></td><td></td><td> Trading </td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td> Derivatives </td><td></td><td></td><td> Derivatives </td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td> and </td><td> Qualifying </td><td></td><td> and </td><td> Qualifying </td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Contract/ </td><td> Economic </td><td> Accounting </td><td></td><td> Economic </td><td> Accounting </td><td></td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in billions)</td><td> Notional^-1</td><td> Hedges</td><td> Hedges^-2</td><td>Total</td><td> Hedges</td><td> Hedges^-2</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td> Interest rate contracts</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Swaps</td><td>$42,719.2</td><td>$1,193.9</td><td>$14.9</td><td>$1,208.8</td><td>$1,187.9</td><td>$2.2</td><td>$1,190.1</td></tr><tr><td>Futures and forwards</td><td>9.939.2</td><td>6.0</td><td>–</td><td>6.0</td><td>4.7</td><td>–</td><td>4.7</td></tr><tr><td>Written options</td><td>2,887.7</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>82.8</td><td>–</td><td>82.8</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased options</td><td>3,026.2</td><td>88.0</td><td>–</td><td>88.0</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td> Foreign exchange contracts</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Swaps</td><td>630.1</td><td>26.5</td><td>3.7</td><td>30.2</td><td>28.5</td><td>2.1</td><td>30.6</td></tr><tr><td>Spot, futures and forwards</td><td>2,652.9</td><td>41.3</td><td>–</td><td>41.3</td><td>44.2</td><td>–</td><td>44.2</td></tr><tr><td>Written options</td><td>439.6</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>13.2</td><td>–</td><td>13.2</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased options</td><td>417.1</td><td>13.0</td><td>–</td><td>13.0</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td> Equity contracts</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Swaps</td><td>42.4</td><td>1.7</td><td>–</td><td>1.7</td><td>2.0</td><td>–</td><td>2.0</td></tr><tr><td>Futures and forwards</td><td>78.8</td><td>2.9</td><td>–</td><td>2.9</td><td>2.1</td><td>–</td><td>2.1</td></tr><tr><td>Written options</td><td>242.7</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>19.4</td><td>–</td><td>19.4</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased options</td><td>193.5</td><td>21.5</td><td>–</td><td>21.5</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td> Commodity contracts</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Swaps</td><td>90.2</td><td>8.8</td><td>0.2</td><td>9.0</td><td>9.3</td><td>–</td><td>9.3</td></tr><tr><td>Futures and forwards</td><td>413.7</td><td>4.1</td><td>–</td><td>4.1</td><td>2.8</td><td>–</td><td>2.8</td></tr><tr><td>Written options</td><td>86.3</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>6.7</td><td>–</td><td>6.7</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased options</td><td>84.6</td><td>6.6</td><td>–</td><td>6.6</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td> Credit derivatives</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Purchased credit derivatives:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Credit default swaps</td><td>2,184.7</td><td>69.8</td><td>–</td><td>69.8</td><td>34.0</td><td>–</td><td>34.0</td></tr><tr><td>Total return swaps/other</td><td>26.0</td><td>0.9</td><td>–</td><td>0.9</td><td>0.2</td><td>–</td><td>0.2</td></tr><tr><td>Written credit derivatives:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Credit default swaps</td><td>2,133.5</td><td>33.3</td><td>–</td><td>33.3</td><td>63.2</td><td>–</td><td>63.2</td></tr><tr><td>Total return swaps/other</td><td>22.5</td><td>0.5</td><td>–</td><td>0.5</td><td>0.5</td><td>–</td><td>0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Gross derivative assets/liabilities</td><td></td><td>$1,518.8</td><td>$18.8</td><td>$1,537.6</td><td>$1,501.5</td><td>$4.3</td><td>$1,505.8</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Legally enforceable master netting agreements</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>-1,406.3</td><td></td><td></td><td>-1,406.3</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Cash collateral applied</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>-58.3</td><td></td><td></td><td>-43.6</td></tr><tr><td> Total derivative assets/liabilities</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>$73.0</td><td></td><td></td><td>$55.9</td></tr></table> (1) Represents the total contract/notional amount of derivative assets and liabilities outstanding. (2) Excludes $4.1 billion of long-term debt designated as a hedge of foreign currency risk. Core Net Interest Income We manage core net interest income which is reported net interest income on a FTE basis adjusted for the impact of market-based activities. As discussed in the GBAM business segment section beginning on page 49, we evaluate our market-based results and strategies on a total market-based revenue approach by combining net interest income and noninterest income for GBAM. In addition, 2009 is presented on a managed basis which is adjusted for loans that we originated and subsequently sold into credit card securitizations. Noninterest income, rather than net interest income and provision for credit losses, was recorded for securitized assets as we are compensated for servicing the securitized assets and we recorded servicing income and gains or losses on securitizations, where appropriate.2010 is presented in accordance with new consolidation guidance. An analysis of core net interest income, core average earning assets and core net interest yield on earning assets, all of which adjust for the impact of these two non-core items from reported net interest income on a FTE basis, is shown below. We believe the use of this non-GAAP presentation provides additional clarity in assessing our results. <table><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td></tr><tr><td> Net interest income^-1</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>As reported^-2</td><td>$52,693</td><td>$48,410</td></tr><tr><td>Impact of market-based net interest income^-3</td><td>-4,430</td><td>-6,117</td></tr><tr><td>Core net interest income</td><td>48,263</td><td>42,293</td></tr><tr><td>Impact of securitizations^-4</td><td>n/a</td><td>10,524</td></tr><tr><td> Core net interest income</td><td>48,263</td><td>52,817</td></tr><tr><td> Average earning assets</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>As reported</td><td>1,897,573</td><td>1,830,193</td></tr><tr><td>Impact of market-based earning assets^-3</td><td>-504,360</td><td>-481,376</td></tr><tr><td>Core average earning assets</td><td>1,393,213</td><td>1,348,817</td></tr><tr><td>Impact of securitizations^-5</td><td>n/a</td><td>83,640</td></tr><tr><td> Core average earning assets</td><td>1,393,213</td><td>1,432,457</td></tr><tr><td> Net interest yield contribution^-1</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>As reported^-2</td><td>2.78%</td><td>2.65%</td></tr><tr><td>Impact of market-based activities^-3</td><td>0.68</td><td>0.49</td></tr><tr><td>Core net interest yield on earning assets</td><td>3.46</td><td>3.14</td></tr><tr><td>Impact of securitizations</td><td>n/a</td><td>0.55</td></tr><tr><td> Core net interest yield on earning assets</td><td>3.46%</td><td>3.69%</td></tr></table> (1) FTE basis (2) Balance and calculation include fees earned on overnight deposits placed with the Federal Reserve of $368 million and $379 million for 2010 and 2009. (3) Represents the impact of market-based amounts included in GBAM. (4) Represents the impact of securitizations utilizing actual bond costs which is different from the business segment view which utilizes funds transfer pricing methodologies. (5) Represents average securitized loans less accrued interest receivable and certain securitized bonds retained. n/a = not applicable Core net interest income decreased $4.6 billion to $48.3 billion for 2010 compared to 2009. The decrease was driven by lower loan levels compared to managed loan levels in 2009, and lower yields for the discretionary and credit card portfolios. These impacts were partially offset by lower rates on deposits. Core average earning assets decreased $39.2 billion to $1.4 trillion for 2010 compared to 2009. The decrease was primarily due to lower commercial loan levels and lower consumer loan levels compared to managed consumer loan levels in 2009. The impact was partially offset by increased securities levels in 2010. Core net interest yield decreased 23 bps to 3.46 percent for 2010 compared to 2009 due to the factors noted above. The fair value of variable rate debt approximates the carrying value since interest rates are variable and, thus, approximate current market rates. Free Cash Flow We define free cash flow, which is not a measure determined in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States, as cash provided by operating activities less purchases of property and equipment plus proceeds from sales of property and equipment as presented in our Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. Our free cash flow for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003 is calculated as follows (in millions):

What is the growing rate of BENEFIT OBLIGATION AT END OF YEAR for Con Edison in the year with the least Benefit obligation at beginning of year for Con Edison?

<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td></tr><tr><td>Risk-free interest rate</td><td>1.2%</td><td>1.4%</td><td>1.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected life (in years)</td><td>3.8</td><td>3.4</td><td>3.8</td></tr><tr><td>Dividend yield</td><td>—%</td><td>—%</td><td>—%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected volatility</td><td>38%</td><td>37%</td><td>47%</td></tr></table> Our computation of expected volatility for 2011 , 2010 and 2009 was based on a combination of historical and market-based implied volatility from traded options on our stock. Our computation of expected life was determined based on historical experience of similar awards, giving consideration to the contractual terms of the stock-based awards, vesting schedules and expectations of future employee behavior. The interest rate for periods within the contractual life of the award was based on the U. S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant. The estimation of awards that will ultimately vest requires judgment, and to the extent actual results or updated estimates differ from our current estimates, such amounts will be recorded as a cumulative adjustment in the period estimates are revised. We consider many factors when estimating forfeitures, including employee class and historical experience. Recent Accounting Pronouncements See “Note 1 - The Company and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report, regarding the impact of certain recent accounting pronouncements on our consolidated financial statements. Item 7A: Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk Foreign Currency Exposure We have significant operations internationally that are denominated in foreign currencies, primarily the Euro, British pound, Korean won, Australian dollar and Canadian dollar, subjecting us to foreign currency risk which may adversely impact our financial results. We transact business in various foreign currencies and have significant international revenues as well as costs. In addition, we charge our international subsidiaries for their use of intellectual property and technology and for certain corporate services provided by eBay and by PayPal. Our cash flow, results of operations and certain of our intercompany balances that are exposed to foreign exchange rate fluctuations may differ materially from expectations and we may record significant gains or losses due to foreign currency fluctuations and related hedging activities. We have a foreign exchange exposure management program that aims to identify material foreign currency exposures, to manage these exposures, and to minimize the potential effects of currency fluctuations on our reported consolidated cash flows and results of operations through the purchase of foreign currency exchange contracts. These foreign currency exchange contracts are accounted for as derivative instruments. For additional details related to our derivative instruments, please see “Note 9 - Derivative Instruments” to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. Interest Rate Risk The primary objective of our investment activities is to preserve principal while at the same time maximizing yields without significantly increasing risk. To achieve this objective, we maintain our portfolio of cash equivalents and short-term and long-term investments in a variety of available for sale securities, including money market funds and government and corporate securities. As of December 31, 2011 , approximately 56% of our total cash and investment portfolio was held in bank deposits and money market funds. As such, changes in interest rates will impact our interest income. In addition, we regularly issue new commercial paper notes to repay outstanding commercial paper notes as they mature, and those new commercial paper notes bear interest at rates prevailing at the time of issuance. Accordingly, changes in interest rates will impact interest expense or cost of net revenues. As of December 31, 2011 , we held no direct investments in auction rate securities, collateralized debt obligations, structured investment vehicles or mortgage-backed securities. For additional details related to our investment activities, please see "Note 7 - Investments" to the consolidated financial statements included in this report. Investments in both fixed-rate and floating-rate interest-earning instruments carry varying degrees of interest rate risk. The fair market value of our fixed-rate securities may be adversely impacted due to a rise in interest rates. In general, securities with longer maturities are subject to greater interest-rate risk than those with shorter maturities. While floating rate securities generally are subject to less interest-rate risk than fixedrate securities, floating-rate securities may produce less income than expected if interest rates decrease. Due in part to these factors, our investment income may fall short of expectations or we may suffer losses in principal if securities are sold that have declined in market value due to changes in interest rates. As of <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Con Edison</td><td colspan="3">CECONY</td></tr><tr><td>(Millions of Dollars)</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td></tr><tr><td>CHANGE IN BENEFIT OBLIGATION</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Benefit obligation at beginning of year</td><td>$1,411</td><td>$1,395</td><td>$1,454</td><td>$1,203</td><td>$1,198</td><td>$1,238</td></tr><tr><td>Service cost</td><td>20</td><td>19</td><td>23</td><td>15</td><td>15</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td>Interest cost on accumulated postretirement benefit obligation</td><td>51</td><td>60</td><td>54</td><td>43</td><td>52</td><td>46</td></tr><tr><td>Amendments</td><td>—</td><td>-12</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Net actuarial loss/(gain)</td><td>-103</td><td>47</td><td>-42</td><td>-85</td><td>28</td><td>-20</td></tr><tr><td>Benefits paid and administrative expenses</td><td>-127</td><td>-134</td><td>-136</td><td>-117</td><td>-125</td><td>-126</td></tr><tr><td>Participant contributions</td><td>35</td><td>36</td><td>38</td><td>34</td><td>35</td><td>38</td></tr><tr><td>Medicare prescription subsidy</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>BENEFIT OBLIGATION AT END OF YEAR</td><td>$1,287</td><td>$1,411</td><td>$1,395</td><td>$1,093</td><td>$1,203</td><td>$1,198</td></tr><tr><td>CHANGE IN PLAN ASSETS</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year</td><td>$1,084</td><td>$1,113</td><td>$1,047</td><td>$950</td><td>$977</td><td>$922</td></tr><tr><td>Actual return on plan assets</td><td>-6</td><td>59</td><td>153</td><td>-4</td><td>54</td><td>134</td></tr><tr><td>Employer contributions</td><td>6</td><td>7</td><td>9</td><td>6</td><td>7</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>EGWP payments</td><td>28</td><td>12</td><td>8</td><td>26</td><td>11</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Participant contributions</td><td>35</td><td>36</td><td>38</td><td>34</td><td>35</td><td>38</td></tr><tr><td>Benefits paid</td><td>-153</td><td>-143</td><td>-142</td><td>-142</td><td>-134</td><td>-133</td></tr><tr><td>FAIR VALUE OF PLAN ASSETS AT END OF YEAR</td><td>$994</td><td>$1,084</td><td>$1,113</td><td>$870</td><td>$950</td><td>$977</td></tr><tr><td>FUNDED STATUS</td><td>$-293</td><td>$-327</td><td>$-282</td><td>$-223</td><td>$-253</td><td>$-221</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized net loss</td><td>$28</td><td>$78</td><td>$70</td><td>$4</td><td>$45</td><td>$54</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized prior service costs</td><td>-51</td><td>-71</td><td>-78</td><td>-32</td><td>-46</td><td>-61</td></tr></table> The decrease in the other postretirement benefit plan obligation (due primarily to increased discount rates) was the primary cause of the decreased liability for other postretirement benefits at Con Edison and CECONY of $34 million and $30 million, respectively, compared with December 31, 2014. For Con Edison, this decreased liability corresponds with an increase to regulatory liabilities of $30 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the Utilities consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized net losses and a credit to OCI of $1 million (net of taxes) for the unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses and O&R’s New Jersey subsidiary. For CECONY, the decrease in liability corresponds with an increase to regulatory liabilities of $27 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the company consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses. A portion of the unrecognized net losses and prior service costs for the other postretirement benefits, equal to $12 million and $(20) million, respectively, will be recognized from accumulated OCI and the regulatory asset into net periodic benefit cost over the next year for Con Edison. Included in these amounts are $10 million and $(14) million, respectively, for CECONY. Assumptions The actuarial assumptions were as follows: FIDELITY NATIONAL INFORMATION SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) Future minimum operating lease payments for leases with remaining terms greater than one year for each of the years in the five years ending December 31, 2015, and thereafter in the aggregate, are as follows (in millions): <table><tr><td>2011</td><td>$65.1</td></tr><tr><td>2012</td><td>47.6</td></tr><tr><td>2013</td><td>35.7</td></tr><tr><td>2014</td><td>27.8</td></tr><tr><td>2015</td><td>24.3</td></tr><tr><td>Thereafter</td><td>78.1</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$278.6</td></tr></table> In addition, the Company has operating lease commitments relating to office equipment and computer hardware with annual lease payments of approximately $16.3 million per year which renew on a short-term basis. Rent expense incurred under all operating leases during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was $116.1 million, $100.2 million and $117.0 million, respectively. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was rent expense of $2.0 million, $1.8 million and $17.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Data Processing and Maintenance Services Agreements. The Company has agreements with various vendors, which expire between 2011 and 2017, for portions of its computer data processing operations and related functions. The Company’s estimated aggregate contractual obligation remaining under these agreements was approximately $554.3 million as of December 31, 2010. However, this amount could be more or less depending on various factors such as the inflation rate, foreign exchange rates, the introduction of significant new technologies, or changes in the Company’s data processing needs. (16) Employee Benefit Plans Stock Purchase Plan FIS employees participate in an Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP). Eligible employees may voluntarily purchase, at current market prices, shares of FIS’ common stock through payroll deductions. Pursuant to the ESPP, employees may contribute an amount between 3% and 15% of their base salary and certain commissions. Shares purchased are allocated to employees based upon their contributions. The Company contributes varying matching amounts as specified in the ESPP. The Company recorded an expense of $14.3 million, $12.4 million and $14.3 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, relating to the participation of FIS employees in the ESPP. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was expense of $0.1 million and $3.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.401(k) Profit Sharing Plan The Company’s employees are covered by a qualified 401(k) plan. Eligible employees may contribute up to 40% of their pretax annual compensation, up to the amount allowed pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code. The Company generally matches 50% of each dollar of employee contribution up to 6% of the employee’s total eligible compensation. The Company recorded expense of $23.1 million, $16.6 million and $18.5 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, relating to the participation of FIS employees in the 401(k) plan. Included in discontinued operations in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings was expense of $0.1 million and $3.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively The following table presents a reconciliation of net cash provided by operating activities to free cash flow available to News Corporation:

Does TRICARE subtotal keeps increasing each year between 2003 and 2004 ?

Liquidity Our primary sources of cash include receipts of premiums, administrative services fees, investment income, and proceeds from the sale or maturity of our investment securities and from borrowings. Our primary uses of cash include disbursements for claims payments, administrative expenses, interest expense, and taxes, purchases of investment securities and capital expenditures and payments on borrowings. Cash and cash equivalents decreased to $580.1 million at December 31, 2004 from $931.4 million at December 31, 2003. The change in cash and cash equivalents for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 is summarized as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td><td>2002</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">(in thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by operating activities</td><td>$347,809</td><td>$413,140</td><td>$321,408</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash used in investing activities</td><td>-624,081</td><td>-382,837</td><td>-204,974</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities</td><td>-75,053</td><td>179,744</td><td>-46,497</td></tr><tr><td>(Decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents</td><td>$-351,325</td><td>$210,047</td><td>$69,937</td></tr></table> Cash Flow from Operating Activities Our operating cash flows in 2004 were significantly impacted by the timing of the Medicare Advantage premium remittance which is payable to us on the first day of each month. When the first day of a month falls on a weekend or holiday, we have historically received this payment at the end of the previous month. As such, the Medicare Advantage receipts for January 2004 of $211.9 million and January 2003 of $205.8 million were received in December 2003 and December 2002, respectively, because January 1 is a holiday. This timing accounts for a significant portion of the unearned revenues balance on our consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2003. Beginning in 2005, the monthly premium payment schedule includes a change in timing from previous practice. As a result of this change, the January 2005 payment of $290.3 million originally scheduled to be received on Friday, December 31, 2004, was changed to Monday, January 3, 2005, or one business day later. Therefore, we received only 11 monthly Medicare Advantage premium remittances during 2004 versus 12 monthly premium remittances during 2003. Other than the impact from the timing of the Medicare Advantage premium receipts, the increase in net income and cash generated from changes in working capital increased our operating cash flow in 2004 compared to 2003. The most significant drivers of changes in our working capital are typically the timing of receipts for premiums and administrative services fees and payments of medical expenses. We illustrate these changes with the following summary of receivables and medical and other expenses payable. The detail of total net receivables was as follows at December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002: <table><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2">Change</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td><td>2002</td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">(in thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>TRICARE:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Base receivable</td><td>$396,355</td><td>$266,656</td><td>$197,544</td><td>$129,699</td><td>$69,112</td></tr><tr><td>Bid price adjustments (BPAs)</td><td>25,601</td><td>92,875</td><td>104,044</td><td>-67,274</td><td>-11,169</td></tr><tr><td>Change orders</td><td>6,021</td><td>7,073</td><td>57,630</td><td>-1,052</td><td>-50,557</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>427,977</td><td>366,604</td><td>359,218</td><td>61,373</td><td>7,386</td></tr><tr><td>Less: long-term portion of BPAs</td><td>—</td><td>-38,794</td><td>-86,471</td><td>38,794</td><td>47,677</td></tr><tr><td>TRICARE subtotal</td><td>427,977</td><td>327,810</td><td>272,747</td><td>100,167</td><td>55,063</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial and other</td><td>186,144</td><td>178,577</td><td>146,882</td><td>7,567</td><td>31,695</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for doubtful accounts</td><td>-34,506</td><td>-40,400</td><td>-30,178</td><td>5,894</td><td>-10,222</td></tr><tr><td>Total net receivables</td><td>$579,615</td><td>$465,987</td><td>$389,451</td><td>113,628</td><td>76,536</td></tr><tr><td>Reconciliation to cash flow statement:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Change in long-term receivables</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>-52,583</td><td>-61,316</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for doubtful accounts</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>6,433</td><td>7,416</td></tr><tr><td>Receivables from acquisition</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>-16,420</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Change in receivables in cash flow statement</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>$51,058</td><td>$22,636</td></tr></table> consistently reliable result. Conversely, for the most recent three months of incurred claims, the volume of claims processed historically is not at a level sufficient to produce a reliable result, which therefore requires us to examine historical trend patterns as the primary method of evaluation. Changes in claim processes, including receipt cycle times, claim inventory levels, recoveries of overpayments, outsourcing, system conversions, and processing disruptions due to weather or other events affect views regarding the reasonable choice of completion factors. The receipt cycle time measures the average length of time between when a medical claim was initially incurred and when the claim form was received. Increased electronic claim submissions from providers have decreased the receipt cycle time over the last few years. For example, the average receipt cycle time has decreased from 16.5 days in 2005 to 15.6 days in 2007 which represents a 5.5% reduction in cycle time over the three year period. Medical cost trends potentially are more volatile than other segments of the economy. The drivers of medical cost trends include increases in the utilization of hospital facilities, physician services, prescription drugs, and new medical technologies, as well as the inflationary effect on the cost per unit of each of these expense components. Other external factors such as government-mandated benefits or other regulatory changes, increases in medical services capacity, direct to consumer advertising for prescription drugs and medical services, an aging population, catastrophes, and epidemics also may impact medical cost trends. Internal factors such as system conversions, claims processing cycle times, changes in medical management practices and changes in provider contracts also may impact our ability to accurately predict estimates of historical completion factors or medical cost trends. All of these factors are considered in estimating IBNR and in estimating the per member per month claims trend for purposes of determining the reserve for the most recent three months. Additionally, we continually prepare and review follow-up studies to assess the reasonableness of the estimates generated by our process and methods over time. The results of these studies are also considered in determining the reserve for the most recent three months. Each of these factors requires significant judgment by management. The completion and claims per member per month trend factors are the most significant factors impacting the IBNR estimate. The portion of IBNR estimated using completion factors for claims incurred prior to the most recent three months is less variable than the portion of IBNR estimated using trend factors. The following table illustrates the sensitivity of these factors assuming moderate adverse experience and the estimated potential impact on our operating results caused by reasonably likely changes in these factors based on December 31, 2007 data: <table><tr><td colspan="2">Completion Factor(a):</td><td colspan="2">Claims Trend Factor(b):</td></tr><tr><td> Factor Change</td><td>Increase (Decrease) in Benefits Payable</td><td> Factor Change</td><td>(Decrease) Increase in Benefits Payable</td></tr><tr><td colspan="4">(dollars in thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>1.50%</td><td>$-172,100</td><td>-10%</td><td>$-399,700</td></tr><tr><td>1.00%</td><td>$-114,700</td><td>-8%</td><td>$-319,700</td></tr><tr><td>0.50%</td><td>$-57,400</td><td>-6%</td><td>$-239,800</td></tr><tr><td>0.25%</td><td>$-28,700</td><td>-4%</td><td>$-159,900</td></tr><tr><td>-0.50%</td><td>$57,400</td><td>-2%</td><td>$-79,900</td></tr><tr><td>-1.00%</td><td>$114,700</td><td>2%</td><td>$79,900</td></tr></table> (a) Reflects estimated potential changes in benefits payable caused by changes in completion factors for incurred months prior to the most recent three months. (b) Reflects estimated potential changes in benefits payable caused by changes in annualized claims trend used for the estimation of per member per month incurred claims for the most recent three months. Humana Inc. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) 3. ACQUISITIONS On December 21, 2010, we acquired Concentra Inc. , or Concentra, a health care company based in Addison, Texas, for cash consideration of $804.7 million. Through its affiliated clinicians, Concentra delivers occupational medicine, urgent care, physical therapy, and wellness services to workers and the general public through its operation of medical centers and worksite medical facilities. The Concentra acquisition provides entry into the primary care space on a national scale, offering additional means for achieving health and wellness solutions and providing an expandable platform for growth with a management team experienced in physician asset management and alternate site care. The preliminary fair values of Concentra’s assets acquired and liabilities assumed at the date of the acquisition are summarized as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td>Concentra (in thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Cash and cash equivalents</td><td>$21,317</td></tr><tr><td>Receivables</td><td>108,571</td></tr><tr><td>Other current assets</td><td>20,589</td></tr><tr><td>Property and equipment</td><td>131,837</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill</td><td>531,372</td></tr><tr><td>Other intangible assets</td><td>188,000</td></tr><tr><td>Other long-term assets</td><td>12,935</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets acquired</td><td>1,014,621</td></tr><tr><td>Current liabilities</td><td>-100,091</td></tr><tr><td>Other long-term liabilities</td><td>-109,811</td></tr><tr><td>Total liabilities assumed</td><td>-209,902</td></tr><tr><td>Net assets acquired</td><td>$804,719</td></tr></table> The other intangible assets, which primarily consist of customer relationships and trade name, have a weighted average useful life of 13.7 years. Approximately $57.9 million of the acquired goodwill is deductible for tax purposes. The purchase price allocation is preliminary, subject to completion of valuation analyses, including, for example, refining assumptions used to calculate the fair value of other intangible assets. The purchase agreement contains provisions under which there may be future consideration paid or received related to the subsequent determination of working capital that existed at the acquisition date. Any payments or receipts for provisional amounts for working capital will be recorded as an adjustment to goodwill when paid or received. The results of operations and financial condition of Concentra have been included in our consolidated statements of income and consolidated balance sheets from the acquisition date. In connection with the acquisition, we recognized approximately $14.9 million of acquisition-related costs, primarily banker and other professional fees, in selling, general and administrative expense. The proforma financial information assuming the acquisition had occurred as of January 1, 2009 was not material to our results of operations. On October 31, 2008, we acquired PHP Companies, Inc. (d/b/a Cariten Healthcare), or Cariten, for cash consideration of approximately $291.0 million, including the payment of $34.9 million during 2010 to settle a purchase price contingency. The Cariten acquisition increased our commercial fully-insured and ASO presence as well as our Medicare HMO presence in eastern Tennessee. During 2009, we continued our review of the fair value estimate of certain other intangible and net tangible assets acquired. This review resulted in a decrease of $27.1 million in the fair value of other intangible assets, primarily related to the fair value assigned to the customer contracts acquired. There was a corresponding adjustment to goodwill and deferred income taxes. The

What's the total amount of the Net income for Amount in the years where Operating activities for Total cash provided by (used in) is greater than 1760? (in million)

The table below sets forth information on our share repurchases and dividends paid in 2015, 2014 and 2013. <table><tr><td></td><td>Payment Due by Period</td></tr><tr><td>As of December 31, 2015 (in millions)</td><td>Total</td><td>Year 1</td><td>Years 2-3</td><td>Years 4-5</td><td>More than 5</td></tr><tr><td>Debtobligations^(a)</td><td>$52,727</td><td>$3,597</td><td>$6,842</td><td>$8,482</td><td>$33,806</td></tr><tr><td>Capital lease obligations</td><td>156</td><td>30</td><td>47</td><td>39</td><td>40</td></tr><tr><td>Operating lease obligations</td><td>3,459</td><td>452</td><td>782</td><td>608</td><td>1,617</td></tr><tr><td>Purchaseobligations^(b)</td><td>53,644</td><td>10,848</td><td>10,080</td><td>8,537</td><td>24,179</td></tr><tr><td>Other long-term liabilities reflected on the balance sheet^(c)</td><td>6,280</td><td>590</td><td>1,245</td><td>2,390</td><td>2,055</td></tr><tr><td>Total^(d)(e)</td><td>$116,266</td><td>$15,517</td><td>$18,996</td><td>$20,056</td><td>$61,697</td></tr></table> Refer to Note 10 and Note 17 to Comcast’s consolidated financial statements. (a) Excludes interest payments. (b) Purchase obligations consist of agreements to purchase goods and services that are legally binding on us and specify all significant terms, including fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased and price provisions. Our purchase obligations related to our Cable Communications segment include programming contracts with cable networks and local broadcast television stations; contracts with customer premise equipment manufacturers, communications vendors and multichannel video providers for which we provide advertising sales representation; and other contracts entered into in the normal course of business. Cable Communications programming contracts in the table above include amounts payable under fixed or minimum guaranteed commitments and do not represent the total fees that are expected to be paid under programming contracts, which we expect to be significantly higher because these contracts are generally based on the number of subscribers receiving the programming. Our purchase obligations related to our NBCUniversal segments consist primarily of commitments to acquire film and television programming, including U. S. television rights to future Olympic Games through 2032, Sunday Night Football on the NBC network through the 2022-23 season, including the Super Bowl in 2018 and 2021, NHL games through the 2020-21 season, Spanish-language U. S. television rights to FIFA World Cup games through 2022, U. S television rights to English Premier League soccer games through the 2021-22 season, certain PGA TOUR and other golf events through 2030 and certain NASCAR events through 2024, as well as obligations under various creative talent and employment agreements, including obligations to actors, producers, television personalities and executives, and various other television commitments. Purchase obligations do not include contracts with immaterial future commitments. (c) Other long-term liabilities reflected on the balance sheet consist primarily of subsidiary preferred shares; deferred compensation obligations; and pension, postretirement and postemployment benefit obligations. A contractual obligation with a carrying value of $1.1 billion is not included in the table above because it is uncertain if the arrangement will be settled. The contractual obligation involves an interest held by a third party in the revenue of certain theme parks. The arrangement provides the counterparty with the right to periodic payments associated with current period revenue and, beginning in 2017, the option to require NBCUniversal to purchase the interest for cash in an amount based on a contractually specified formula, which amount could be significantly higher than our current carrying value. See Note 11 to Comcast’s consolidated financial statements for additional information related to this arrangement. Reserves for uncertain tax positions of $1.1 billion are not included in the table above because it is uncertain if and when these reserves will become payable. Payments of $2.1 billion of participations and residuals are also not included in the table above because we cannot make a reliable estimate of the period in which these obligations will be settled. (d) Our contractual obligations do not include the commitment to invest up to $4 billion at any one time as an investor in Atairos due to our inability to estimate the timing of this funding. In addition, we do not include any future expenditures related to the construction and development of the proposed Universal Studios theme park in Beijing, China as we are not currently obligated to make such funding. PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL, INC. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements 21. COMMITMENTS AND GUARANTEES, CONTINGENT LIABILITIES AND LITIGATION AND REGULATORY MATTERS (continued) Summary The Company’s litigation and regulatory matters are subject to many uncertainties, and given their complexity and scope, their outcome cannot be predicted. It is possible that the results of operations or the cash flow of the Company in a particular quarterly or annual period could be materially affected by an ultimate unfavorable resolution of pending litigation and regulatory matters depending, in part, upon the results of operations or cash flow for such period. Management believes, however, that the ultimate outcome of all pending litigation and regulatory matters, after consideration of applicable reserves and rights to indemnification, should not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position.22. QUARTERLY RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED) The unaudited quarterly results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004 are summarized in the table below: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">Three months ended</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> March 31 </td><td> June 30 </td><td> September 30 </td><td>December 31</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">(in millions, except per share amounts)</td></tr><tr><td> 2005</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>$7,721</td><td>$8,318</td><td>$7,787</td><td>$7,882</td></tr><tr><td>Total benefits and expenses</td><td>6,403</td><td>7,002</td><td>6,670</td><td>7,162</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations before income taxes, extraordinary gain on acquisition and cumulative effect of accountingchange</td><td>1,318</td><td>1,316</td><td>1,117</td><td>720</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>929</td><td>883</td><td>1,364</td><td>364</td></tr><tr><td>Basic income from continuing operations before extraordinary gain on acquisition and cumulative effect of accounting change pershare—Common Stock-1</td><td>1.51</td><td>1.59</td><td>2.66</td><td>0.80</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted income from continuing operations before extraordinary gain on acquisition and cumulative effect of accounting change pershare—Common Stock-1</td><td>1.49</td><td>1.56</td><td>2.61</td><td>0.78</td></tr><tr><td>Basic net income per share—Common Stock-1</td><td>1.51</td><td>1.50</td><td>2.63</td><td>0.79</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted net income per share—Common Stock-1</td><td>1.49</td><td>1.48</td><td>2.59</td><td>0.78</td></tr><tr><td>Basic and diluted net income (loss) per share—Class B Stock</td><td>70.50</td><td>53.50</td><td>11.50</td><td>-16.00</td></tr><tr><td> 2004</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>$6,692</td><td>$6,844</td><td>$7,299</td><td>$7,288</td></tr><tr><td>Total benefits and expenses</td><td>5,985</td><td>6,155</td><td>6,228</td><td>6,387</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations before income taxes, extraordinary gain on acquisition and cumulative effect of accountingchange</td><td>707</td><td>689</td><td>1,071</td><td>901</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>401</td><td>549</td><td>728</td><td>578</td></tr><tr><td>Basic income from continuing operations before extraordinary gain on acquisition and cumulative effect of accounting change pershare—Common Stock-1</td><td>0.75</td><td>1.02</td><td>1.14</td><td>0.78</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted income from continuing operations before extraordinary gain on acquisition and cumulative effect of accounting change pershare—Common Stock-1</td><td>0.73</td><td>1.00</td><td>1.11</td><td>0.76</td></tr><tr><td>Basic net income per share—Common Stock-1</td><td>0.58</td><td>1.04</td><td>1.11</td><td>0.65</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted net income per share—Common Stock-1</td><td>0.57</td><td>1.02</td><td>1.08</td><td>0.64</td></tr><tr><td>Basic and diluted net income per share—Class B Stock</td><td>46.00</td><td>3.50</td><td>79.00</td><td>120.50</td></tr></table> (1) Quarterly earnings per share amounts may not add to the full year amounts due to the averaging of shares. Results for the second and fourth quarters of 2005 include pre-tax expenses of $136 million and $267 million, respectively, related to obligations and costs we retained in connection with businesses contributed to the retail securities brokerage joint venture with Wachovia, including accruals for estimated settlement costs related to market timing issues under active negotiation with state and federal authorities. Results for the third quarter of 2005 include an income tax benefit of $720 million, as discussed further in Note 17. As discussed in Note 2, the Company adopted SOP 03-1 effective January 1, 2004. Results for the first quarter of 2004 include a loss from the cumulative effect of accounting changes, net of taxes, of $79 million related to the adoption of SOP 03-1. In the fourth quarter of 2004 the Company committed to the sale or exit of its Dryden Wealth Management Business and results for the fourth quarter include a charge of $53 million for the impairment of goodwill associated with this business. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) The effective income tax rate for 2016 was impacted by a tax benefit associated with U. S. federal tax return filings, a benefit resulting from the reduction of our German reserves as a result of the conclusion of an audit, a benefit resulting from the expiration of various statutes of limitation, and a benefit associated with the IP R&D asset impairment referenced in Note 4. The Company and its subsidiaries are routinely subject to examinations by various taxing authorities. In conjunction with these examinations and as a regular practice, the Company establishes and adjusts reserves with respect to its uncertain tax positions to address developments related to those positions. The Company realized a net benefit of approximately $5.2 million in 2017 as a result of reducing its reserves with respect to uncertain tax positions, principally due to the expiration of a number of applicable statutes of limitations. The Company realized a net benefit of approximately $8.8 million in 2016, as a result of reducing its reserves with respect to uncertain tax positions, principally due to the conclusion of a tax audit in Germany and the expiration of various statutes of limitations. The Company realized a net benefit of approximately $4.6 million in 2015, which resulted from a reduction in the Company's U. S. reserves due to the conclusion of a tax audit, offset by an increase in the Company's foreign reserves with respect to developments in the tax audit in Germany discussed above. The following table summarizes significant components of the Company’s deferred tax assets and liabilities at December?31, 2017 and?2016: <table><tr><td></td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">(Dollars in thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred tax assets:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Tax loss and credit carryforwards</td><td>$210,055</td><td>$136,046</td></tr><tr><td>Pension</td><td>28,147</td><td>46,563</td></tr><tr><td>Reserves and accruals</td><td>62,378</td><td>52,343</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>3,619</td><td>17,704</td></tr><tr><td>Less: valuation allowances</td><td>-104,799</td><td>-104,520</td></tr><tr><td>Total deferred tax assets</td><td>199,400</td><td>148,136</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred tax liabilities:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Property, plant and equipment</td><td>22,299</td><td>32,209</td></tr><tr><td>Intangibles — stock acquisitions</td><td>553,245</td><td>321,707</td></tr><tr><td>Unremitted foreign earnings</td><td>223,494</td><td>63,419</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>228</td><td>466</td></tr><tr><td>Total deferred tax liabilities</td><td>799,266</td><td>417,801</td></tr><tr><td>Net deferred tax liability</td><td>$-599,866</td><td>$-269,665</td></tr></table> As a result of the TCJA, the Company reassessed and revalued its deferred tax positions at December 31, 2017. As a result, the Company recognized a $46.1 million decrease in the net deferred tax liability in 2017. Under the tax laws of various jurisdictions in which the Company operates, deductions or credits that cannot be fully utilized for tax purposes during the current year may be carried forward, subject to statutory limitations, to reduce taxable income or taxes payable in a future tax year. At December?31, 2017, the tax effect of such carryforwards approximated $210.1 million. Of this amount, $11.5 million has no expiration date, $2.0 million expires after 2017 but before the end of 2022 and $196.6 million expires after 2022. A portion of these carryforwards consists of tax losses and credits obtained by the Company as a result of acquisitions; the utilization of these carryforwards are subject to an annual limitation imposed by Section?382 of the Internal Revenue Code, which limits a company’s ability to deduct prior net operating losses following a more than 50 percent change in ownership. It is not expected that the Section?382 limitation will prevent the Company ultimately from utilizing the applicable loss carryforwards. The determination of state net operating loss carryforwards is dependent upon the United States?subsidiaries’ taxable income or loss, the state’s proportion of each subsidiary's taxable net income and the application of state laws, which can change from year to year and impact the amount of such carryforward. The valuation allowance for deferred tax assets of $104.8 million and $104.5 million at December?31, 2017 and?2016, respectively, relates principally to the uncertainty of the Company’s ability to utilize certain deferred tax $3.8 bllin at the end of fiscal 2007. Working capital, the excess of current assets over current liabilities, was $0.6 bllion at the end of fiscal 2008, down from $2.8 bllin at the end of fiscal 2007. The decreases in cosh and cash equivolents, short-term investments and working capital were due primarily to the liquidation of a substantial portion of our investment portfolio to repay debt and to fund our ASR program. In addition, at March 1, 2008, we ecassified $4 17 miion (par value) of our short-term investments in auction-rate securities to non-current assets within equity and other investments in our consolidoted balance sheet given the uncertainty of when these investments can be successfully liquidated at par as a result of the current market failures for auction-rate securities as described below. In accordance with our investment policy, we invest with issuers who have high-quality credit and limit the amount of investment exposure to any one ssuer. The primary objective of our investment activities is to preserve principal and maintain a desired level of liquidity to meet working capital needs. We seek to preserve principal and minimize exposure to interest- rate fluctuations by limiting default risk, market risk and reinvestment risk. All investment debt securities we own are investment grade. We do not have any investments in securities that are collateralized by assets that include mortgages or subprime debt. The vast majority of our investments in auction-rate securities are AAA/Aaa-rated and collateralized by student loans, which are guaranteed 95% to 100% by the U. S. government. Until February 2008, the market for auction-rate securities was highly liquid. Begining February 11, 2008, a substantial number of auctions began to fail as the amount of securities submitted for sale in those auctions exceeded the aggregate amount of the bids. Substantially all of our auction-rate securities portfolio at March 1, 2008, has been subject to failed audions. For each unsuccessful audion, the interest rate moves to a maximum rate defined for each security. To date, we have collected all interest due on our audion-rate securities and expect to continue to do so in the future. Since March 1, 2008 and through April 25, 2008, we have liquidated $20 million of auction-rate securities at par value. At April 25, 2008, our auction-rate securities portfolio was $397 million (par value). The principal associated with failed auctions will not be accessible until successful auctions occur, a buyer is found outside of the auction process, the issuers establish a different form of financing to replace these securities, or final payments come due according to the contractual maturities of the debt issues, which range from 8 to 40 years. We believe that the credit quality of our auction-rote securities is high and that we will ultimately recover all amounts invested in these securities. We do not believe the current iliquidity of these investments will have a material impact on our ability to execute our business plans as described below in the Outlook for Fiscal 2009 section of this MD&A. Our liquidity is also ffected by restricted cash and investments in debt securities that are pledged as collateral or restricted to use for vendor payables, general liability insurance, workers' compensation insurance and warranty programs. Restrided cash and investments in debt securities totaled $ 408 million and $382 million at March 1, 2008, and March 3, 2007, respectively, and were included in other current assets or equity and other invest ments. Cash Flows The following table summarizes our cash flows from operating, investing and financing activities for each of the past three fiscal years ($ in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td>Total cash provided by (used in):</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Operating activities</td><td>$2,025</td><td>$1,762</td><td>$1,740</td></tr><tr><td>Investing activities</td><td>1,464</td><td>-780</td><td>-754</td></tr><tr><td>Financing activities</td><td>-3,378</td><td>-513</td><td>-619</td></tr><tr><td>Effect of exchange rate changes on cash</td><td>122</td><td>-12</td><td>27</td></tr><tr><td>Increase in cash and cash equivalents</td><td>$233</td><td>$457</td><td>$394</td></tr></table> ITEM 2. PROPERTIES Our worldwide headquarters is located on a 35-acre office complex in Atlanta, Georgia. The complex includes our 621,000 square foot headquarters building and an 870,000 square foot building in which our North America group’s main offices are located. The complex also includes several other buildings, including our 264,000 square foot Coca-Cola Plaza building, technical and engineering facilities and a reception center. We also own an office and retail building at 711 Fifth Avenue in New York, New York. These properties, except for the North America group’s main offices, are included in Corporate. The North America group’s main offices are included in the North America operating segment. We own or lease additional facilities, real estate and office space throughout the world which we use for administrative, manufacturing, processing, packaging, storage, warehousing, distribution and retail operations. These properties are generally included in the geographic operating segment in which they are located. The following table summarizes our principal production, distribution and storage facilities by operating segment and Corporate as of December 31, 2018: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Principal Concentrate and/or Syrup Plants</td><td colspan="2">Principal Beverage Manufacturing/Bottling Plants</td><td colspan="2">Distribution and Storage Warehouses</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Owned</td><td>Leased</td><td>Owned</td><td>Leased</td><td>Owned</td><td>Leased</td></tr><tr><td>Europe, Middle East & Africa</td><td>6</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Latin America</td><td>5</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>2</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>North America</td><td>11</td><td>—</td><td>9</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>41</td></tr><tr><td>Asia Pacific</td><td>6</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>2</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Bottling Investments</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>45</td><td>5</td><td>64</td><td>69</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate</td><td>3</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Total¹</td><td>31</td><td>—</td><td>54</td><td>6</td><td>68</td><td>133</td></tr></table> 1 Does not include 36 owned and 2 leased principal beverage manufacturing/bottling plants and 23 owned and 30 leased distribution and storage warehouses related to our discontinued operations. Management believes that our Company’s facilities for the production of our products are suitable and adequate, that they are being appropriately utilized in line with past experience, and that they have sufficient production capacity for their present intended purposes. The extent of utilization of such facilities varies based upon seasonal demand for our products. However, management believes that additional production can be achieved at the existing facilities by adding personnel and capital equipment and, at some facilities, by adding shifts of personnel or expanding the facilities. We continuously review our anticipated requirements for facilities and, on the basis of that review, may from time to time acquire or lease additional facilities and/or dispose of existing facilities. ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS The Company is involved in various legal proceedings, including the proceedings specifically discussed below. Management believes that, except as disclosed in U. S. Federal Income Tax Dispute below, the total liabilities of the Company that may arise as a result of currently pending legal proceedings will not have a material adverse effect on the Company taken as a whole. Aqua-Chem Litigation On December 20, 2002, the Company filed a lawsuit (The Coca-Cola Company v. Aqua-Chem, Inc. , Civil Action No.2002CV631-50) in the Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia (“Georgia Case”), seeking a declaratory judgment that the Company has no obligation to its former subsidiary, Aqua-Chem, Inc. , now known as Cleaver-Brooks, Inc. (“Aqua-Chem”), for any past, present or future liabilities or expenses in connection with any claims or lawsuits against Aqua-Chem. Subsequent to the Company’s filing but on the same day, Aqua-Chem filed a lawsuit (Aqua-Chem, Inc. v. The Coca-Cola Company, Civil Action No.02CV012179) in the Circuit Court, Civil Division of Milwaukee County, Wisconsin (“Wisconsin Case”). In the Wisconsin Case, Aqua-Chem sought a declaratory judgment that the Company is responsible for all liabilities and expenses not covered by insurance in connection with certain of Aqua-Chem’s general and product liability claims arising from occurrences prior to the Company’s sale of Aqua-Chem in 1981, and a judgment for breach of contract in an amount exceeding $9 million for costs incurred by Aqua-Chem to date in connection with such claims. The Wisconsin Case initially was stayed, pending final resolution of the Georgia Case, and later was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice by Aqua-Chem. The Company owned Aqua-Chem from 1970 to 1981. During that time, the Company purchased over $400 million of insurance coverage, which also insures Aqua-Chem for some of its prior and future costs for certain product liability and other claims. The Company sold Aqua-Chem to Lyonnaise American Holding, Inc. , in 1981 under the terms of a stock sale agreement. The 1981 agreement, and a subsequent 1983 settlement agreement, outlined the parties’ rights and obligations concerning past and future In addition to the consolidated operating results shown on the previous page, consolidated results for 2007 and adjusted growth rates for 2008 and 2007 are presented in the following table excluding the impact of the Latam transaction. These results include the effect of foreign currency translation further discussed in the section titled Impact of foreign currency translation on reported results. While the Company has converted certain other markets to a developmental license arrangement, management believes the Latam transaction and the associated charge are not indicative of ongoing operations due to the size and scope of the transaction. Management believes that the adjusted operating results better reflect the underlying business trends relevant to the periods presented. <table><tr><td><i>Dollars in millions, except per share data</i></td><td> <i>2008</i></td><td><i>2007^-1</i></td><td>Latam Transaction -1</td><td><i>2007</i><i>Excluding</i><i>Latam</i><i>Transaction</i></td><td><i>2006</i></td><td> <i>2008 Adjusted</i> <i>% Inc</i></td><td><i>2007 Adjusted</i><i>% Inc</i></td></tr><tr><td>Operating income</td><td>$6,443</td><td>$3,879</td><td>$-1,641</td><td>$5,520</td><td>$4,433</td><td> 17</td><td>25</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations</td><td>4,313</td><td>2,335</td><td>-1,579</td><td>3,914</td><td>2,866</td><td> 10</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>Income from discontinued operations</td><td></td><td>60</td><td></td><td>60</td><td>678</td><td> nm</td><td>nm</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>4,313</td><td>2,395</td><td>-1,579</td><td>3,974</td><td>3,544</td><td> 9</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td><i>Income per common share – diluted</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Continuing operations<i>^-2,3</i></td><td>3.76</td><td>1.93</td><td>-1.30</td><td>3.23</td><td>2.29</td><td> 16</td><td>41</td></tr><tr><td>Discontinued operations</td><td></td><td>0.05</td><td></td><td>0.05</td><td>0.54</td><td> nm</td><td>nm</td></tr><tr><td>Net income<i>^-2,3</i></td><td>3.76</td><td>1.98</td><td>-1.30</td><td>3.28</td><td>2.83</td><td> 15</td><td>16</td></tr></table> nm Not meaningful. (1) The results for the full year 2007 included impairment and other charges of $1,665 million, partly offset by a benefit of $24 million due to eliminating depreciation on the assets in Latam in mid-April 2007, and a tax benefit of $62 million. (2) The following items impact the comparison of adjusted growth in diluted income per share from continuing operations and diluted net income per share for the year ended December 31, 2008 compared with 2007. On a net basis, these items negatively impact the comparison by 7 and 6 percentage points, respectively: 2008 ? $0.09 per share gain on the sale of the Company’s minority interest in Pret A Manger.2007 ? $0.26 per share of income tax benefit resulting from the completion of an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) examination of the Company’s 2003-2004 U. S. federal income tax returns; partly offset by ? $0.02 per share of income tax expense related to the impact of a tax law change in Canada. (3) The following items impact the comparison of adjusted growth in diluted income per share from continuing operations and diluted net income per share for the year ended December 31, 2007 compared with 2006. On a net basis, these items positively impact the comparison by 15 and 12 percentage points, respectively: 2007 ? $0.26 per share of income tax benefit resulting from the completion of an IRS examination of the Company’s 2003-2004 U. S. federal income tax returns; partly offset by ? $0.02 per share of income tax expense related to the impact of a tax law change in Canada.2006 ? $0.08 per share of operating expenses primarily related to strategic actions taken to enhance overall profitability and improve returns; and ? $0.01 per share of incremental income tax expense primarily related to the impact of a tax law change in Canada. Net income and diluted net income per common share In 2008, net income and diluted net income per common share were $4.3 billion and $3.76. Results benefited by a $109 million, or $0.09 per share, gain on the sale of the Company’s minority interest in Pret A Manger. In 2007, net income and diluted net income per common share were $2.4 billion and $1.98. Income from continuing operations was $2.3 billion or $1.93 per share, which included $1.6 billion or $1.30 per share of net expense related to the Latam transaction. This reflects an impairment charge of $1.32 per share, partly offset by a $0.02 per share benefit due to eliminating depreciation on the assets in Latam in mid-April 2007 in accordance with accounting rules. In addition, 2007 results included a net tax benefit of $288 million or $0.24 per share resulting from the completion of an IRS examination of the Company’s 2003-2004 U. S. federal income tax returns, partly offset by the impact of a tax law change in Canada. Income from discontinued operations was $60 million or $0.05 per share. In 2006, net income and diluted net income per common share were $3.5 billion and $2.83. Income from continuing operations was $2.9 billion or $2.29 per share, which included $134 million ($98 million after tax or $0.08 per share) of impairment and other charges primarily related to strategic actions taken to enhance overall profitability and improve returns, as well as $0.01 per share of net incremental income tax expense primarily related to the impact of a tax law change in Canada. Income from discontinued operations was $678 million or $0.54 per share. Refer to the Impairment and other charges, net and Discontinued operations sections for further discussion. The Company repurchased 69.7 million shares of its stock for $4.0 billion in 2008 and 77.1 million shares for $3.9 billion in 2007, driving reductions of over 4% and 3% of total shares outstanding, respectively, net of stock option exercises. maintenance and contract expenses incurred by our subsidiaries for external transportation services); materials used to maintain the Railroad’s lines, structures, and equipment; costs of operating facilities jointly used by UPRR and other railroads; transportation and lodging for train crew employees; trucking and contracting costs for intermodal containers; leased automobile maintenance expenses; and tools and supplies. Expenses for contract services increased $103 million in 2012 versus 2011, primarily due to increased demand for transportation services purchased by our logistics subsidiaries for their customers and additional costs for repair and maintenance of locomotives and freight cars. Expenses for contract services increased $106 million in 2011 versus 2010, driven by volume-related external transportation services incurred by our subsidiaries, and various other types of contractual services, including flood-related repairs, mitigation and improvements. Volume-related crew transportation and lodging costs, as well as expenses associated with jointly owned operating facilities, also increased costs compared to 2010. In addition, an increase in locomotive maintenance materials used to prepare a portion of our locomotive fleet for return to active service due to increased volume and additional capacity for weather related issues and warranty expirations increased expenses in 2011. Depreciation – The majority of depreciation relates to road property, including rail, ties, ballast, and other track material. A higher depreciable asset base, reflecting ongoing capital spending, increased depreciation expense in 2012 compared to 2011. A higher depreciable asset base, reflecting ongoing capital spending, increased depreciation expense in 2011 compared to 2010. Higher depreciation rates for rail and other track material also contributed to the increase. The higher rates, which became effective January 1, 2011, resulted primarily from increased track usage (based on higher gross ton-miles in 2010). Equipment and Other Rents – Equipment and other rents expense primarily includes rental expense that the Railroad pays for freight cars owned by other railroads or private companies; freight car, intermodal, and locomotive leases; and office and other rent expenses. Increased automotive and intermodal shipments, partially offset by improved car-cycle times, drove an increase in our short-term freight car rental expense in 2012. Conversely, lower locomotive lease expense partially offset the higher freight car rental expense. Costs increased in 2011 versus 2010 as higher short-term freight car rental expense and container lease expense offset lower freight car and locomotive lease expense. Other – Other expenses include personal injury, freight and property damage, destruction of equipment, insurance, environmental, bad debt, state and local taxes, utilities, telephone and cellular, employee travel, computer software, and other general expenses. Other costs in 2012 were slightly higher than 2011 primarily due to higher property taxes. Despite continual improvement in our safety experience and lower estimated annual costs, personal injury expense increased in 2012 compared to 2011, as the liability reduction resulting from historical claim experience was less than the reduction in 2011. Higher property taxes, casualty costs associated with destroyed equipment, damaged freight and property and environmental costs increased other costs in 2011 compared to 2010. A one-time payment of $45 million in the first quarter of 2010 related to a transaction with CSXI and continued improvement in our safety performance and lower estimated liability for personal injury, which reduced our personal injury expense year-over-year, partially offset increases in other costs.

as of december 31 , 2017 , what was the percent of the 2016 program remaining available for purchase

In recent years, the Michigan legislature has conducted hearings on the subject of energy competition. If the ROA limit were increased or if electric generation service in Michigan were deregulated, Consumers’ financial results and operations could be materially adversely affected. Electric Transmission: In 2012, ReliabilityFirst Corporation informed Consumers that Consumers may not be properly registered to meet certain NERC electric reliability standards. Consumers assessed its registration status, taking into consideration FERC’s December 2012 order on the definition of a bulk electric system, and in 2013 notified ReliabilityFirst Corporation that it was preparing to register as a transmission owner, transmission planner, and transmission operator. In light of this order, Consumers reviewed the classification of certain electric distribution assets and, in April 2014, filed an application for reclassification with the MPSC. In October 2014, the MPSC approved a settlement agreement that will allow Consumers to reclassify $34 million of net plant assets from distribution to transmission, subject to FERC approval. In January 2015, Consumers filed an application for reclassification with FERC. Electric Rate Matters: Rate matters are critical to Consumers’ electric utility business. For additional details on rate matters, see Note 3, Regulatory Matters. Electric Rate Design: In June 2014, Michigan’s governor signed legislation requiring the MPSC to explore alternative cost allocation and rate design methods that would promote affordable and competitive rates for all electric customers. In conjunction with this legislation, Consumers submitted to the MPSC a proposal for a new electric rate design in October 2014. This proposed new design will better ensure that rates are equal to the cost of service and will have the effect of making rates for energyintensive industrial customers more competitive, while keeping residential bills affordable. Consumers incorporated its proposed new rate design into the rate case it filed in December 2014. Electric Rate Case: In December 2014, Consumers filed an application with the MPSC seeking an annual rate increase of $163 million, based on a 10.7 percent authorized return on equity. The filing requested authority to recover new investment in system reliability, environmental compliance, and technology enhancements. Presented in the following table are the components of the requested increase in revenue: <table><tr><td></td><td>In Millions</td></tr><tr><td>Components of the rate increase</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Investment in rate base</td><td>$ 185</td></tr><tr><td>Addition of new gas plant</td><td>35</td></tr><tr><td>Operating and maintenance costs</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>Cost of capital</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Working capital</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Cost-reduction initiatives</td><td>-80</td></tr><tr><td>Gross margin</td><td>-30</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$ 163</td></tr></table> The filing also seeks approval of an investment recovery mechanism that would allow recovery of an additional $163 million in total for incremental investments that Consumers plans to make in 2016 and 2017 and $78 million for incremental investments planned in 2018, subject to reconciliation. Depreciation Rate Case: In June 2014, Consumers filed a depreciation case related to its electric and common utility property. In this case, Consumers requested an increase in depreciation expense, and its recovery of that expense, of $28 million annually. PSCR Plan: Consumers submitted its 2015 PSCR plan to the MPSC in September 2014 and, in accordance with its proposed plan, self-implemented the 2015 PSCR charge beginning in January 2015. In 2013, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed the district court decision. The appellate court found that FERC preemption does not apply under the facts of these cases. The appellate court affirmed the district court’s denial of leave to amend to add federal antitrust claims. The matter was appealed to the U. S. Supreme Court, which in 2015 upheld the Ninth Circuit’s decision. The cases were remanded back to the federal district court. In May 2016, the federal district court granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment in the individual lawsuit based on a release in a prior settlement involving similar allegations and reinstated CMS Energy as a defendant in one of the class action lawsuits. The order of summary judgment has been appealed. In December 2016, CMS Energy entities reached a tentative settlement with the plaintiffs in the three Kansas and Missouri cases for an amount that was not material to CMS Energy. Notice of the tentative settlement has been filed in the federal district court. The settlement will be subject to court approval. Other CMS Energy entities remain as defendants in the two Wisconsin class action lawsuits. These cases involve complex facts, a large number of similarly situated defendants with different factual positions, and multiple jurisdictions. Presently, any estimate of liability would be highly speculative; the amount of CMS Energy’s reasonably possible loss would be based on widely varying models previously untested in this context. If the outcome after appeals is unfavorable, these cases could negatively affect CMS Energy’s liquidity, financial condition, and results of operations. Bay Harbor: CMS Land retained environmental remediation obligations for the collection and treatment of leachate, a liquid consisting of water and other substances, at Bay Harbor after selling its interests in the development in 2002. Leachate is produced when water enters into cement kiln dust piles left over from former cement plant operations at the site. In 2012, CMS Land and the MDEQ finalized an agreement that established the final remedies and the future water quality criteria at the site. CMS Land completed all construction necessary to implement the remedies required by the agreement and will continue to maintain and operate a system to discharge treated leachate into Little Traverse Bay under an NPDES permit issued in 2010 and renewed in October 2016. The renewed NPDES permit is valid through September 2020. Various claims have been brought against CMS Land or its affiliates, including CMS Energy, alleging environmental damage to property, loss of property value, insufficient disclosure of environmental matters, breach of agreement relating to access, or other matters. CMS Land and other parties have received a demand for payment from the EPA in the amount of $8 million, plus interest. The EPA is seeking recovery under CERCLA of response costs allegedly incurred at Bay Harbor. These costs exceed what was agreed to in a 2005 order between CMS Land and the EPA, and CMS Land has communicated to the EPA that it does not believe that this is a valid claim. The EPA has filed a lawsuit to collect these costs. At December 31, 2016, CMS Energy had a recorded liability of $51 million for its remaining obligations for environmental remediation. CMS Energy calculated this liability based on discounted projected costs, using a discount rate of 4.34 percent and an inflation rate of one percent on annual operating and maintenance costs. The undiscounted amount of the remaining obligation is $65 million. CMS Energy expects to pay the following amounts for long-term liquid disposal and operating and maintenance in each of the next five years: <table><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2"><i>In Millions</i></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2017</td><td>2018</td><td>2019</td><td>2020</td><td>2021</td></tr><tr><td> CMS Energy</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Long-term liquid disposal and operating and maintenance costs</td><td>$5</td><td>$4</td><td>$4</td><td>$4</td><td>$4</td></tr></table> CMS Energy’s estimate of response activity costs and the timing of expenditures could change if there are changes in circumstances or assumptions used in calculating the liability. Although a liability for its present estimate of remaining response activity costs has been recorded, CMS Energy cannot predict the ultimate financial impact or outcome of this matter. CMS Energy and Consumers also have recognized non-current liabilities for which the timing of payments cannot be reasonably estimated. These items, which are excluded from the table above, include regulatory liabilities, deferred income taxes, workers compensation liabilities, accrued liabilities under renewable energy programs, and other liabilities. Retirement benefits are also excluded from the table above. For details related to benefit payments, see Note 12, Retirement Benefits. Off-Balance-Sheet Arrangements: CMS Energy, Consumers, and certain of their subsidiaries enter into various arrangements in the normal course of business to facilitate commercial transactions with third parties. These arrangements include indemnities, surety bonds, letters of credit, and financial and performance guarantees. Indemnities are usually agreements to reimburse a counterparty that may incur losses due to outside claims or breach of contract terms. The maximum payment that could be required under a number of these indemnity obligations is not estimable; the maximum obligation under indemnities for which such amounts were estimable was $153 million at December 31, 2016. While CMS Energy and Consumers believe it is unlikely that they will incur any material losses related to indemnities they have not recorded as liabilities, they cannot predict the impact of these contingent obligations on their liquidity and financial condition. For additional details on these and other guarantee arrangements, see Note 4, Contingencies and Commitments—Guarantees. For additional details on operating leases, see Note 10, Leases and Palisades Financing. Capital Expenditures: Over the next five years, CMS Energy and Consumers expect to make substantial capital investments. CMS Energy and Consumers may revise their forecasts of capital expenditures periodically due to a number of factors, including environmental regulations, business opportunities, market volatility, economic trends, and the ability to access capital. Presented in the following table are CMS Energy’s and Consumers’ estimated capital expenditures, including lease commitments, for 2017 through 2021: <table><tr><td></td><td>2017</td><td>2018</td><td>2019</td><td>2020</td><td>2021</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"> CMS Energy, including Consumers</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Consumers</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$9.0</td></tr><tr><td>Enterprises</td><td>-</td><td>0.1</td><td>0.1</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>0.2</td></tr><tr><td>Total CMS Energy</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$1.9</td><td>$1.9</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$9.2</td></tr><tr><td> Consumers</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Electric utility operations</td><td>$1.0</td><td>$0.8</td><td>$1.1</td><td>$1.1</td><td>$1.0</td><td>$5.0</td></tr><tr><td>Gas utility operations</td><td>0.8</td><td>1.0</td><td>0.7</td><td>0.7</td><td>0.8</td><td>4.0</td></tr><tr><td>Total Consumers</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$1.8</td><td>$9.0</td></tr></table> OUTLOOK Several business trends and uncertainties may affect CMS Energy’s and Consumers’ financial condition and results of operations. These trends and uncertainties could have a material impact on CMS Energy’s and Consumers’ consolidated income, cash flows, or financial position. For additional details regarding these and other uncertainties, see Forward-Looking Statements and Information; Item 1A. Risk Factors; Note 3, Regulatory Matters; and Note 4, Contingencies and Commitments. Table of Contents The following table discloses purchases of shares of our common stock made by us or on our behalf during the fourth quarter of 2017. <table><tr><td>Period</td><td>Total Numberof SharesPurchased</td><td>AveragePrice Paidper Share</td><td>Total Number ofShares NotPurchased as Part ofPublicly AnnouncedPlans or Programs (a)</td><td>Total Number ofShares Purchased asPart of PubliclyAnnounced Plans orPrograms</td><td>Approximate DollarValue of Shares thatMay Yet Be PurchasedUnder the Plans orPrograms (b)</td></tr><tr><td>October 2017</td><td>515,762</td><td>$77.15</td><td>292,145</td><td>223,617</td><td>$1.6 billion</td></tr><tr><td>November 2017</td><td>2,186,889</td><td>$81.21</td><td>216,415</td><td>1,970,474</td><td>$1.4 billion</td></tr><tr><td>December 2017</td><td>2,330,263</td><td>$87.76</td><td>798</td><td>2,329,465</td><td>$1.2 billion</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>5,032,914</td><td>$83.83</td><td>509,358</td><td>4,523,556</td><td>$1.2 billion</td></tr></table> (a) The shares reported in this column represent purchases settled in the fourth quarter of 2017 relating to (i) our purchases of shares in open-market transactions to meet our obligations under stock-based compensation plans, and (ii) our purchases of shares from our employees and non-employee directors in connection with the exercise of stock options, the vesting of restricted stock, and other stock compensation transactions in accordance with the terms of our stock-based compensation plans. (b) On September 21, 2016, we announced that our board of directors authorized our purchase of up to $2.5 billion of our outstanding common stock (the 2016 program) with no expiration date. As of December 31, 2017, we had $1.2 billion remaining available for purchase under the 2016 program. On January 23, 2018, we announced that our board of directors authorized our purchase of up to an additional $2.5 billion of our outstanding common stock with no expiration date.

In the year with the most Total fixed rate debt, what is the amount of Variable rate debt and total?

Part II, Item 7 The following table summarizes the activity under these share repurchase programs during 2008, 2007 and 2006: <table><tr><td></td><td> Total cost of shares purchased </td><td> Total number of shares purchased </td><td> Average price paid per share </td></tr><tr><td>2008</td><td>$1,818,841</td><td>21,064.7</td><td>$86.35</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>$1,355,000</td><td>16,336.1</td><td>$82.95</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td>$1,067,842</td><td>17,992.7</td><td>$59.35</td></tr></table> Given the current credit and economic environment, Schlumberger anticipates that the total dollar amount of stock repurchases in 2009 may be significantly less than the $1.8 billion spent during 2008. This anticipated reduction will serve to increase Schlumberger’s financial flexibility during these uncertain times. Stock buy-back activity during 2009 will continue to be targeted to offset any dilution caused by the Schlumberger stock-based compensation programs. ? Cash flow provided by operations was $6.9 billion in 2008, $6.3 billion in 2007 and $4.7 billion in 2006. These improvements were driven by the revenue and net income increases experienced in 2008 and 2007 offset by required investments in working capital. ? During 2008, 2007 and 2006, Schlumberger announced that its Board of Directors had approved increases in the quarterly dividend of 20%, 40% and 19%, respectively. Total dividends paid during 2008, 2007 and 2006 were $964 million, $771 million and $568 million, respectively. ? Capital expenditures were $3.7 billion in 2008, $2.9 billion in 2007 and $2.5 billion in 2006. These increases were a result of the increased activity levels experienced in recent years. Capital expenditures are expected to approach $3.0 billion in 2009, including $385 million relating to the construction of seismic vessels. ? During 2008, 2007 and 2006 Schlumberger made $290 million, $250 million and $251 million, respectively, of contributions to its defined benefit pension plans. The US qualified pension plan was 71% funded at December 31, 2008 based on the projected benefit obligation. This compares to 109% funded at December 31, 2007. Outside of the US, Schlumberger’s International Staff Pension Plan, which was converted to a defined benefit pension plan during the fourth quarter of 2008 (and therefore accounts for approximately half of the increase in the Postretirement Benefits liability on the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2008), and UK pension plan are a combined 69% funded at December 31, 2008 based on the projected benefit obligation. The UK pension plan was 92% funded at December 31, 2007. Schlumberger currently anticipates contributing approximately $400 million to $500 million to its defined benefit pension plans in 2009, subject to market and business conditions. ? During 2008 and 2007, certain holders of Schlumberger Limited 1.5% Series A Convertible Debentures due June 1, 2023 and 2.125% Series B Convertible Debentures due June 1, 2023 converted their debentures into Schlumberger common stock. The following table summarizes these conversions: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> 2008 </td><td colspan="2"> 2007 </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Conversions </td><td> Shares issued </td><td> Conversions </td><td> Shares issued </td></tr><tr><td>1.5% Series A debentures</td><td>$353</td><td> 9.76</td><td>$622</td><td>17.19</td></tr><tr><td>2.125% Series B debentures</td><td>95</td><td> 2.36</td><td>34</td><td>0.85</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$448</td><td> 12.12</td><td>$656</td><td>18.04</td></tr></table> Part II, Item 7A The following table represents principal amounts of Schlumberger’s debt at December 31, 2008 by year of maturity: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6"> Expected Maturity Dates </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2009</td><td> 2010</td><td> 2011</td><td> 2012</td><td> 2013</td><td> Total</td></tr><tr><td> Fixed rate debt</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>5.25% Guaranteed Bonds (Euro denominated)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>$714</td><td>$714</td></tr><tr><td>2.125% Series B Convertible Debentures</td><td></td><td>$321</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>321</td></tr><tr><td>5.14% Guaranteed Notes (Canadian dollar denominated)</td><td></td><td>203</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>203</td></tr><tr><td>5.875% Guaranteed Bonds (Euro denominated)</td><td></td><td></td><td>$355</td><td></td><td></td><td>355</td></tr><tr><td>6.5% Notes</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>$647</td><td></td><td>647</td></tr><tr><td> Total fixed rate debt</td><td>$–</td><td>$524</td><td>$355</td><td>$647</td><td>$714</td><td>$2,240</td></tr><tr><td> Variable rate debt</td><td>$1,597</td><td>$245</td><td>$422</td><td>$771</td><td>$16</td><td>$3,051</td></tr><tr><td> Total</td><td>$1,597</td><td>$769</td><td>$777</td><td>$1,418</td><td>$730</td><td>$5,291</td></tr></table> The fair market value of the outstanding fixed rate debt was approximately $2.4 billion as of December 31, 2008. The weighted average interest rate on the variable rate debt as of December 31, 2008 was approximately 4.5%. Schlumberger does not enter into foreign currency or interest rate derivatives for speculative purposes. Forward-looking Statements This Report and other statements we make contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the federal securities laws, which include any statements that are not historical facts, such as our forecasts or expectations regarding business outlook; growth for Schlumberger as a whole and for each of Oilfield Services and WesternGeco (and for specified products or geographic areas within each segment); oil and natural gas demand and production growth; operating margins; operating and capital expenditures as well as research & development spending, by Schlumberger and the oil and gas industry; the business strategies of Schlumberger’s customers; the Schlumberger effective tax rate; Schlumberger’s stock repurchase program; expected pension and post-retirement funding; expected stock compensation costs; exploitation and integration of technology; and future results of operations. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, the current global economic downturn; changes in exploration and production spending by Schlumberger’s customers and changes in the level of oil and natural gas exploration and development; general economic and business conditions in key regions of the world; the financial condition of our suppliers and customers in light of current global economic conditions; operational and project modifications, delays or cancellations; political and economic uncertainty and socio-political unrest; and other risks and uncertainties described elsewhere in this Report, including under “Item 1A. Risk Factors”. If one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize (or the consequences of such a development changes), or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual outcomes may vary materially from those forecasted or expected. Schlumberger disclaims any intention or obligation to update publicly or revise such statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Part II, Item 8 Allowance for doubtful accounts is as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at beginning of year</td><td>$160</td><td>$133</td><td>$86</td></tr><tr><td>Provision</td><td>38</td><td>54</td><td>65</td></tr><tr><td>Amounts written off</td><td>-13</td><td>-27</td><td>-18</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at end of year</td><td>$185</td><td>$160</td><td>$133</td></tr></table> Discontinued Operations During the fourth quarter of 2009, Schlumberger recorded a net $22 million charge related to the resolution of a customs assessment pertaining to its former offshore contract drilling business, as well as the resolution of certain contingencies associated with other previously disposed of businesses. This amount is included in Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operations in the Consolidated Statement of Income. During the first quarter of 2008, Schlumberger recorded a gain of $38 million related to the resolution of a contingency associated with a previously disposed of business. This gain is included in Income (Loss) from Discontinued Operations in the Consolidated Statement of Income.

what's the total amount of Loss expenses Casualty of 2008 Gross, and Case reserves of 2009 Gross ?

The following table illustrates the effect that a 10% unfavorable or favorable movement in foreign currency exchange rates, relative to the U. S. dollar, would have on the fair value of our forward exchange contracts as of October 30, 2010 and October 31, 2009: <table><tr><td></td><td>October 30, 2010</td><td>October 31, 2009</td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of forward exchange contracts asset</td><td>$7,256</td><td>$8,367</td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of forward exchange contracts after a 10% unfavorable movement in foreign currency exchange rates asset</td><td>$22,062</td><td>$20,132</td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of forward exchange contracts after a 10% favorable movement in foreign currency exchange rates liability</td><td>$-7,396</td><td>$-6,781</td></tr></table> The calculation assumes that each exchange rate would change in the same direction relative to the U. S. dollar. In addition to the direct effects of changes in exchange rates, such changes typically affect the volume of sales or the foreign currency sales price as competitors’ products become more or less attractive. Our sensitivity analysis of the effects of changes in foreign currency exchange rates does not factor in a potential change in sales levels or local currency selling prices. NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) ACE Limited and Subsidiaries Under Swiss corporate law, the Company may not generally issue Common Shares below their par value. In the event there is a need to raise common equity at a time when the trading price of the Company’s Common Shares is below par value, the Company will need to obtain shareholder approval to decrease the par value of the Common Shares. b) Shares issued, outstanding, authorized, and conditional Following is a table of changes in Common Shares issued and outstanding for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007: <table><tr><td></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Shares issued, beginning of year</td><td>335,413,501</td><td>329,704,531</td><td>326,455,468</td></tr><tr><td>Shares issued, net</td><td>2,000,000</td><td>3,140,194</td><td>1,213,663</td></tr><tr><td>Exercise of stock options</td><td>168,720</td><td>2,365,401</td><td>1,830,004</td></tr><tr><td>Shares issued under Employee Stock Purchase Plan</td><td>259,395</td><td>203,375</td><td>205,396</td></tr><tr><td>Shares issued, end of year</td><td>337,841,616</td><td>335,413,501</td><td>329,704,531</td></tr><tr><td>Common Shares in treasury, end of year</td><td>-1,316,959</td><td>-1,768,030</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td>Shares issued and outstanding, end of year</td><td>336,524,657</td><td>333,645,471</td><td>329,704,531</td></tr><tr><td> <i>Common Shares issued to employee trust</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Balance, beginning of year</td><td>-108,981</td><td>-117,231</td><td>-166,425</td></tr><tr><td>Shares redeemed</td><td>7,500</td><td>8,250</td><td>49,194</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, end of year</td><td>-101,481</td><td>-108,981</td><td>-117,231</td></tr></table> In July 2008, prior to the Continuation, the Company issued and placed 2,000,000 Common Shares in treasury principally for issuance upon the exercise of employee stock options. At December 31, 2009, 1,316,959 Common Shares remain in treasury after net shares redeemed under employee share-based compensation plans. Common Shares issued to employee trust are the shares issued by the Company to a rabbi trust for deferred compensation obligations as discussed in Note 12 f) below. Shares authorized The Board is currently authorized to increase the share capital from time to time through the issuance of up to 99,750,000 fully paid up Common Shares with a par value of CHF 31.88 each. Conditional share capital for bonds and similar debt instruments The share capital of the Company may be increased through the issuance of a maximum of 33,000,000 Common Shares with a par value of CHF 31.88 each, payable in full, through the exercise of conversion and/or option or warrant rights granted in connection with bonds, notes, or similar instruments, issued or to be issued by the Company, including convertible debt instruments. Conditional share capital for employee benefit plans The share capital of the Company may be increased through the issuance of a maximum of 30,401,725 Common Shares with a par value of CHF 31.88 each, payable in full, in connection with the exercise of option rights granted to any employee of the Company, and any consultant, director, or other person providing services to the Company. c) ACE Limited securities repurchase authorization In November 2001, the Board authorized the repurchase of any ACE issued debt or capital securities, which includes ACE’s Common Shares, up to an aggregate total of $250 million. These purchases may take place from time to time in the open market or in private purchase transactions. At December 31, 2009, this authorization had not been utilized. d) General restrictions The holders of the Common Shares are entitled to receive dividends as proposed by the Board and approved by the shareholders. Holders of Common Shares are allowed one vote per share provided that, if the controlled shares of any shareholder constitute ten percent or more of the outstanding Common Shares of the Company, only a fraction of the vote will be allowed The process of establishing loss reserves for property and casualty claims can be complex and is subject to considerable uncertainty as it requires the use of informed estimates and judgments based on circumstances known at the date of accrual. The following table shows our total reserves segregated between case reserves (including loss expense reserves) and IBNR reserves at December 31, 2009 and 2008. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> 2009</td><td colspan="3">2008</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions of U.S. dollars)</td><td> Gross</td><td> Ceded</td><td> Net</td><td>Gross</td><td>Ceded</td><td>Net</td></tr><tr><td>Case reserves</td><td>$17,307</td><td>$6,664</td><td>$10,643</td><td>$16,583</td><td>$6,539</td><td>$10,044</td></tr><tr><td>IBNR reserves</td><td>20,476</td><td>6,081</td><td>14,395</td><td>20,593</td><td>6,396</td><td>14,197</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$37,783</td><td>$12,745</td><td>$25,038</td><td>$37,176</td><td>$12,935</td><td>$24,241</td></tr></table> The following table segregates loss reserves by line of business including property and all other, casualty, and personal accident (A&H) at December 31, 2009 and 2008. In the table, loss expenses are defined to include unallocated and allocated loss adjustment expenses. For certain lines, in particular ACE International and ACE Bermuda products, loss adjustment expenses are partially included in IBNR and partially included in loss expenses. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> 2009</td><td colspan="3">2008</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions of U.S. dollars)</td><td> Gross</td><td> Ceded</td><td> Net</td><td>Gross</td><td>Ceded</td><td>Net</td></tr><tr><td><i>Property and all other</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Case reserves</td><td>$3,149</td><td>$1,600</td><td>$1,549</td><td>$3,180</td><td>$1,367</td><td>$1,813</td></tr><tr><td>Loss expenses</td><td>260</td><td>81</td><td>179</td><td>264</td><td>92</td><td>172</td></tr><tr><td>IBNR reserves</td><td>2,028</td><td>815</td><td>1,213</td><td>2,456</td><td>1,084</td><td>1,372</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td>5,437</td><td>2,496</td><td>2,941</td><td>5,900</td><td>2,543</td><td>3,357</td></tr><tr><td><i>Casualty</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Case reserves</td><td>9,506</td><td>3,177</td><td>6,329</td><td>8,700</td><td>3,178</td><td>5,522</td></tr><tr><td>Loss expenses</td><td>3,773</td><td>1,661</td><td>2,112</td><td>3,871</td><td>1,779</td><td>2,092</td></tr><tr><td>IBNR reserves</td><td>17,777</td><td>5,110</td><td>12,667</td><td>17,455</td><td>5,144</td><td>12,311</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td>31,056</td><td>9,948</td><td>21,108</td><td>30,026</td><td>10,101</td><td>19,925</td></tr><tr><td><i>A&H</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Case reserves</td><td>588</td><td>144</td><td>444</td><td>536</td><td>121</td><td>415</td></tr><tr><td>Loss expenses</td><td>31</td><td>1</td><td>30</td><td>32</td><td>2</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>IBNR reserves</td><td>671</td><td>156</td><td>515</td><td>682</td><td>168</td><td>514</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td>1,290</td><td>301</td><td>989</td><td>1,250</td><td>291</td><td>959</td></tr><tr><td><i>Total</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Case reserves</td><td>13,243</td><td>4,921</td><td>8,322</td><td>12,416</td><td>4,666</td><td>7,750</td></tr><tr><td>Loss expenses</td><td>4,064</td><td>1,743</td><td>2,321</td><td>4,167</td><td>1,873</td><td>2,294</td></tr><tr><td>IBNR reserves</td><td>20,476</td><td>6,081</td><td>14,395</td><td>20,593</td><td>6,396</td><td>14,197</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$37,783</td><td>$12,745</td><td>$25,038</td><td>$37,176</td><td>$12,935</td><td>$24,241</td></tr></table> The judgments used to estimate unpaid loss and loss expense reserves require different considerations depending upon the individual circumstances underlying the insured loss. For example, the reserves established for high excess casualty claims, A&E claims, claims from major catastrophic events, or the IBNR for our various product lines each require different assumptions and judgments to be made. Necessary judgments are based on numerous factors and may be revised as additional experience and other data become available and are reviewed, as new or improved methods are developed, or as laws change. Hence, ultimate loss payments may differ from the estimate of the ultimate liabilities made at the balance sheet date. Changes to our previous estimates of prior period loss reserves impact the reported calendar year underwriting results by worsening our reported results if the prior year reserves prove to be deficient or improving our reported results if the prior year reserves prove to be redundant. The potential for variation in loss reserves is impacted by numerous factors, which we discuss below. We establish loss and loss expense reserves for our liabilities from claims for all of the insurance and reinsurance business that we write. For those claims reported by insureds or ceding companies to us prior to the balance sheet date, and

What is the proportion of Pensions' Service cost of of net periodic benefit cost in U.S. Plans to the total in 2006?

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries Survival Ratios-Asbestos and Environmental The following table presents AlG's survival ratios for asbestos and environmental claims for year-end 2006,2005 and 2004. The survival ratio is derived by dividing the year end carried loss reserve by the average payments for the three most recent calendar years for these claims. Therefore, the survival ratio is a simplistic measure estimating the number of years it would be before the current ending loss reser ves for these claims would be paid off using recent year average payments. The December 31, 2006 survival ratio is lower than the ratio at December 31,2005because the more recent periods included in the rolling average reflect higher claims payments. Many factors, such as aggressive settlement procedures, mix of business and level of coverage provided, have a significant effect on the amount of asbestos and environmental reserves and payments and the resultant survivalratio. Thus, caution should be exercised in attempting to deter- mine reserve adequacy for these claims based simply on this survival ratio. AlG's survival ratios for asbestos and environmental claims, separately and combined were based upon a three-year average payment. These ratios for the years ended December 31,2006,2005 and 2004 were as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td>Gross</td><td>Net</td></tr><tr><td> 2006</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Survival ratios:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Asbestos</td><td> 11.7</td><td> 12.9</td></tr><tr><td>Environmental</td><td> 5.3</td><td> 4.5</td></tr><tr><td>Combined</td><td> 10.3</td><td> 10.3</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Survival ratios:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Asbestos</td><td>15.9</td><td>19.8</td></tr><tr><td>Environmental</td><td>6.9</td><td>6.2</td></tr><tr><td>Combined</td><td>13.0</td><td>14.2</td></tr><tr><td>2004</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Survival ratios:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Asbestos</td><td>10.7</td><td>13.5</td></tr><tr><td>Environmental</td><td>6.5</td><td>6.8</td></tr><tr><td>Combined</td><td>9.1</td><td>10.5</td></tr></table> Life Insurance & Retirement Services Operations AIG's Life Insurance & Retirement Services subsidiaries offer a wide range of insurance and retirement savings products both domestically and abroad. Domestically, AlG's Life Insurance & Retirement Services operations offer a broad range of protection products, such as life insurance and group life and health products, including disability income products and payout annuities, which include single premium immediate annuities, structured settlements and termi- nal funding annuities. Home service operations include an array of life insurance, accident and health and annuity products soldprimarily through career agents. In addition, home service in- cludes a small block of runoff property and casualty coverage. Retirement services include group retirement products, individual fixed and variable annuities sold through banks, broker-dealers and exclusive sales representatives, and annuity runoff opera- tions, which include previously acquired"closed blocks"and other fixed and variable annuities largely sold through distribution relationships that have been discontinued. Overseas, AlG's Life Insurance & Retirement Services opera- tions include insurance and investment-oriented products such as whole and term life, investment linked, universal life and endo- ments, personal accident and health products, group products including pension, life and health, and fixed and variable annuities. AlG's Life Insurance & Retirement Ser vices subsidiaries reporttheir operations through the following major internal reporting units and business units: Foreign Life Insurance & Retirement Services Japan and Other* ·ALICO ·AlG Star Life ·AIG Edison Life Asia·AIA ·Nan Shan ·AlRCO ·Philamlife Domestic Life Insurance ·AlG American General ·USLIFE ·AGLA Domestic Retirement Services ·VALIC ·AlG Annuity ·AlG SunAmerica *Japan and Other consists of all operations in Japan and the operations of ALICO and its subsidi aries worldwide. American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries 15. Employee Benefits Continued (i) Components of net periodic benefit cost and other amounts recognized in other comprehensive income: The following table presents the components of net periodic benefit cost recognized in income and other amounts recognized in other comprehensive income with respect to the defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefit plans for the year ended December 31, 2006 (no amounts were recognized in other comprehensive income for the years ended 2005 and 2004): <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Pensions</td><td colspan="3">Postretirement</td></tr><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>Non-U.S. Plans</td><td>U.S. Plans</td><td>Total</td><td>Non-U.S. Plans</td><td>U.S. Plans</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td> 2006</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Components of net periodic benefit cost:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Service cost</td><td>$78</td><td>$130</td><td>$208</td><td>$4</td><td>$6</td><td>$10</td></tr><tr><td>Interest cost</td><td>36</td><td>169</td><td>205</td><td>2</td><td>11</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Expected return on assets</td><td>-28</td><td>-201</td><td>-229</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of prior service cost</td><td>-9</td><td>-3</td><td>-12</td><td>—</td><td>-6</td><td>-6</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of transitional obligation</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Recognition of net actuarial (gains)/losses</td><td>16</td><td>75</td><td>91</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>1</td><td>6</td><td>7</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Net periodic benefit cost</td><td>$95</td><td>$176</td><td>$271</td><td>$6</td><td>$11</td><td>$17</td></tr><tr><td>Total recognized in other comprehensive income</td><td>$38</td><td>$24</td><td>$62</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Total recognized in net periodic benefit cost and other comprehensive income</td><td>$133</td><td>$200</td><td>$333</td><td>$6</td><td>$11</td><td>$17</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Components of net periodic benefit cost:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Service cost</td><td>$71</td><td>$111</td><td>$182</td><td>$4</td><td>$5</td><td>$9</td></tr><tr><td>Interest cost</td><td>32</td><td>153</td><td>185</td><td>2</td><td>11</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Expected return on assets</td><td>-21</td><td>-180</td><td>-201</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of prior service cost</td><td>-10</td><td>-3</td><td>-13</td><td>—</td><td>-6</td><td>-6</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of transitional obligation</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Recognition of net actuarial (gains)/losses</td><td>21</td><td>55</td><td>76</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>7</td><td>1</td><td>8</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Net periodic benefit cost</td><td>$101</td><td>$137</td><td>$238</td><td>$6</td><td>$10</td><td>$16</td></tr><tr><td>2004</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Components of net periodic benefit cost:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Service cost</td><td>$59</td><td>$101</td><td>$160</td><td>$3</td><td>$6</td><td>$9</td></tr><tr><td>Interest cost</td><td>33</td><td>147</td><td>180</td><td>2</td><td>14</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>Expected return on assets</td><td>-22</td><td>-170</td><td>-192</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of prior service cost</td><td>-8</td><td>—</td><td>-8</td><td>—</td><td>-7</td><td>-7</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of transitional obligation</td><td>2</td><td>—</td><td>2</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Recognition of net actuarial (gains)/losses</td><td>15</td><td>53</td><td>68</td><td>11</td><td>2</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Other*</td><td>-24</td><td>—</td><td>-24</td><td>3</td><td>—</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Net periodic benefit cost</td><td>$55</td><td>$131</td><td>$186</td><td>$19</td><td>$15</td><td>$34</td></tr></table> * The reduction resulted from transferring to the Japanese government certain Japanese plan obligations approximating $50 million reduced by approximately $26 million loss incurred with respect to the settlement of those obligations. For the U. S. plans, the estimated net loss, prior service credit and transition obligation for the defined benefit pension plans that will be amortized from Accumulated other comprehensive income into net periodic benefit cost over the next fiscal year are $37 million, $3 million and $0 million, respectively. For the non-U. S. plans, the estimated net loss, prior service credit and transition obligation for the defined benefit pension plans that will be amortized from Accumulated other comprehensive income into net periodic benefit cost over the next fiscal year are $11 million, $10 million and $1 million, respectively. The estimated net loss, prior service credit and transition obligation for the other defined benefit postretirement plans that will be amortized from Accumulated other comprehensive income into net periodic benefit cost over the next fiscal year will be less than $5 million in the aggregate. PART?III 59 ITEM?10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE For the information required by this Item?10 with respect to our Executive Officers, see Part?I, Item 1. of this report. For the other information required by this Item?10, see “Election Of Directors,” “Nominees for Election to the Board of Directors,” “Corporate Governance” and “Section?16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance,” in the Proxy Statement for our 2019 Annual Meeting, which information is incorporated herein by reference. The Proxy Statement for our 2019 Annual Meeting will be filed within 120?days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K. ITEM?11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION For the information required by this Item?11, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” “Compensation Committee Report,” and “Executive Compensation” in the Proxy Statement for our 2019 Annual Meeting, which information is incorporated herein by reference. ITEM?12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS For the information required by this Item?12 with respect to beneficial ownership of our common stock, see “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” in the Proxy Statement for our 2019 Annual Meeting, which information is incorporated herein by reference. The following table sets forth certain information as of December?31, 2018 regarding our equity plans : <table><tr><td>Plan Category</td><td>Number of Securitiesto be Issued UponExercise ofOutstanding Options, Warrants and Rights_-1 (A)(B)</td><td>Weighted-AverageExercise Price ofOutstanding Options, Warrants and Rights</td><td>Number of SecuritiesRemaining Available forFuture Issuance UnderEquity CompensationPlans (ExcludingSecurities Reflected in Column (A)) (C)</td></tr><tr><td>Equity compensation plans approved by security holders</td><td>1,471,449</td><td>$136.62</td><td>3,578,241</td></tr></table> (1) The number of securities in column (A) include 22,290 shares of common stock underlying performance stock units if maximum performance levels are achieved; the actual number of shares, if any, to be issued with respect to the performance stock units will be based on performance with respect to specified financial and relative stock price measures. ITEM?13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE For the information required by this Item?13, see “Certain Transactions” and “Corporate Governance” in the Proxy Statement for our 2019 Annual Meeting, which information is incorporated herein by reference. ITEM?14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES For the information required by this Item?14, see “Audit and Non-Audit Fees” and “Audit Committee Pre-Approval Procedures” in the Proxy Statement for our 2019 Annual Meeting, which information is incorporated herein by reference.

What is the total amount of Net cash used in financing activities of 2010, Individual fixed annuities of Net Investment Income, and Group retirement products of Total Revenues ?

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued Domestic Retirement Services Results Domestic Retirement Services results, presented on a sub-product basis for 2007, 2006 and 2005 were as follows: <table><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>Premiums and Other Considerations</td><td>Net Investment Income</td><td>Net Realized Capital Gains (Losses)</td><td>Total Revenues</td><td>Operating Income</td></tr><tr><td> 2007</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>$446</td><td>$2,280</td><td>$-451</td><td>2,275</td><td>$696</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>96</td><td>3,664</td><td>-829</td><td>2,931</td><td>530</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>627</td><td>166</td><td>-45</td><td>748</td><td>122</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff*</td><td>21</td><td>387</td><td>-83</td><td>325</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,190</td><td>$6,497</td><td>$-1,408</td><td>$6,279</td><td>$1,347</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>$386</td><td>$2,279</td><td>$-144</td><td>$2,521</td><td>$1,017</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>122</td><td>3,581</td><td>-257</td><td>3,446</td><td>1,036</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>531</td><td>202</td><td>5</td><td>738</td><td>193</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff*</td><td>18</td><td>426</td><td>-8</td><td>436</td><td>77</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,057</td><td>$6,488</td><td>$-404</td><td>$7,141</td><td>$2,323</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>$351</td><td>$2,233</td><td>$-67</td><td>$2,517</td><td>$1,055</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>97</td><td>3,346</td><td>-214</td><td>3,229</td><td>858</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>467</td><td>217</td><td>4</td><td>688</td><td>189</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff*</td><td>22</td><td>430</td><td>—</td><td>452</td><td>62</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$937</td><td>$6,226</td><td>$-277</td><td>$6,886</td><td>$2,164</td></tr><tr><td> Percentage Increase/(Decrease) 2007 vs. 2006:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>16%</td><td>—%</td><td>—%</td><td>-10%</td><td>-32%</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>-21</td><td>2</td><td>—</td><td>-15</td><td>-49</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>18</td><td>-18</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>-37</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff</td><td>17</td><td>-9</td><td>—</td><td>-25</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>13%</td><td>—%</td><td>—%</td><td>-12%</td><td>-42%</td></tr><tr><td>Percentage Increase/(Decrease) 2006 vs. 2005:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>10%</td><td>2%</td><td>—%</td><td>—%</td><td>-4%</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>26</td><td>7</td><td>—</td><td>7</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>14</td><td>-7</td><td>25</td><td>7</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff</td><td>-18</td><td>-1</td><td>—</td><td>-4</td><td>24</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>13%</td><td>4%</td><td>—%</td><td>4%</td><td>7%</td></tr></table> * Primarily represents runoff annuity business sold through discontinued distribution relationships.2007 and 2006 Comparison Total revenues and operating income for Domestic Retirement Services declined in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to increased net realized capital losses. Net realized capital losses for Domestic Retirement Services increased due to higher other- than-temporary impairmentcharges of$1.2 billion in 2007 compared to $368 million in 2006 and sales to reposition assets in certain investment portfolios for both group retirement products and individual ?xed annuities, as well as from changes in the value of certain individual variable annuity product guarantees and related hedges associated with living bene?t features. Changes in actuarial estimates, including DAC unlockingsand re?nements to estimates resulting from actuarial valuation system enhance- ments, resulted in a net decrease to operating income of $112 million in 2007. Group retirement products operating income in 2007 de- creased compared to 2006 primarily as a result of increased net realized capital losses due to higher other-than-temporary impair- mentcharges and an increase in DAC amortization related to both an increase in surrenders and to policy changes adding guaran- teed minimum withdrawal bene?t riders to existing contracts. Operating income was also negatively affected in 2007 by an $18 million adjustment,primarily re?ecting changes in actuarial estimates from the conversion to a new valuation system. These were partially offset by higher variable annuity fees which resulted from an increase in separate account assets compared to 2006. Individual ?xed annuities operating income in 2007 decreased compared to 2006 as a result of net realized capital losses due to higher other-than-temporary impairmentcharges partially offset by increases in partnership income. The decline in operating income also re?ected higher DAC amortization and sales induce-ment costs related to increased surrenders and a $33 million charge re?ecting changes in actuarial estimates from the conver- American International Group, Inc. , and Subsidiaries Expected Loss Models — Under this mechanism, the amount of collateral to be posted is determined based on the amount of expected credit losses, generally determined using a rating-agency model. Negotiated Amount — Under this mechanism, the amount of collateral to be posted is determined based on terms negotiated between AIGFP and the counterparty, which could be a fixed percentage of the notional amount or present value of premiums to be earned by AIGFP. The following table presents the amount of collateral postings by underlying mechanism as described above with respect to the regulatory capital relief portfolio (prior to consideration of transactions other than the Capital Markets super senior credit default swaps subject to the same Master Agreements) as of the periods ended: <table><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>December 31, 2009</td><td>December 31, 2010</td><td>February 16, 2011</td></tr><tr><td>Reference to market indices</td><td>$60</td><td>$19</td><td>$10</td></tr><tr><td>Expected loss models</td><td>20</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Negotiated amount</td><td>230</td><td>217</td><td>216</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$310</td><td>$236</td><td>$226</td></tr></table> Arbitrage Portfolio — Multi-Sector CDOs In the CDS transactions with physical settlement provisions, in respect of multi-sector CDOs, the standard CSA provisions for the calculation of exposure have been modified, with the exposure amount determined pursuant to an agreed formula that is based on the difference between the net notional amount of such transaction and the market value of the relevant underlying CDO security, rather than the replacement value of the transaction. As of any date, the ‘‘market value’’ of the relevant CDO security is the price at which a marketplace participant would be willing to purchase such CDO security in a market transaction on such date, while the ‘‘replacement value of the transaction’’ is the cost on such date of entering into a credit default swap transaction with substantially the same terms on the same referenced obligation (e. g. , the CDO security). In cases where a formula is utilized, a transaction-specific threshold is generally factored into the calculation of exposure, which reduces the amount of collateral required to be posted. These thresholds typically vary based on the credit ratings of AIG and/or the reference obligations, with greater posting obligations arising in the context of lower ratings. For the large majority of counterparties to these transactions, the Master Agreement and CSA cover non-CDS transactions (e. g. , interest rate and cross currency swap transactions) as well as CDS transactions. As a result, the amount of collateral to be posted by AIGFP in relation to the CDS transactions will be added to or offset by the amount, if any, of the exposure AIG has to the counterparty on the non-CDS transactions. Arbitrage Portfolio — Corporate Debt/CLOs All of the Capital Markets corporate arbitrage-CLO transactions are subject to CSAs. These transactions are treated the same as other transactions subject to the same Master Agreement and CSA, with the calculation of collateral in accordance with the standard CSA procedures outlined above. The vast majority of corporate debt transactions are no longer subject to future collateral postings. In exchange for an upfront payment to an intermediary counterparty, AIGFP has eliminated all future obligations to post collateral on corporate debt transactions that mature after 2011. Collateral Calls AIGFP has received collateral calls from counterparties in respect of certain super senior credit default swaps, of which a large majority relate to multi-sector CDOs. To a lesser extent, AIGFP has also received collateral calls in respect of certain super senior credit default swaps entered into by counterparties for regulatory capital relief purposes and in respect of corporate arbitrage. From time to time, valuation methodologies used and estimates made by counterparties with respect to certain super senior credit default swaps or the underlying reference CDO securities, for purposes of determining the ITEM 7 / LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES The following table presents a summary of AIG’s Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows: <table><tr><td> Years Ended December 31, <i>(in millions)</i> </td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Summary:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities</td><td>$3,676</td><td>$-81</td><td>$16,597</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities</td><td>16,612</td><td>36,448</td><td>-9,912</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash used in financing activities</td><td>-20,564</td><td>-36,926</td><td>-9,261</td></tr><tr><td>Effect of exchange rate changes on cash</td><td>16</td><td>29</td><td>39</td></tr><tr><td>Decrease in cash</td><td>-260</td><td>-530</td><td>-2,537</td></tr><tr><td>Cash at beginning of year</td><td>1,474</td><td>1,558</td><td>4,400</td></tr><tr><td>Change in cash of businesses held for sale</td><td>-63</td><td>446</td><td>-305</td></tr><tr><td>Cash at end of year</td><td>$1,151</td><td>$1,474</td><td>$1,558</td></tr></table> Operating Cash Flow Activities Interest payments totaled $4.0 billion in 2012 compared to $9.0 billion in 2011. Cash paid for interest in 2011 includes the payment of FRBNY Credit Facility accrued compounded interest totaling $6.4 billion. Excluding interest payments, AIG generated positive operating cash flow of $7.7 billion and $8.9 billion in 2012 and 2011, respectively. Insurance companies generally receive most premiums in advance of the payment of claims or policy benefits. The ability of insurance companies to generate positive cash flow is affected by the frequency and severity of losses under their insurance policies, policy retention rates and operating expenses. Cash provided by AIG Property Casualty operating activities was $1.1 billion in 2012 compared to $1.9 billion in 2011, primarily reflecting the decrease in net premiums written as a result of the continued execution of strategic initiatives to improve business mix and the timing of the cash flows used to pay claims and claims adjustment expenses and the related reinsurance recoveries. Cash provided by operating activities by AIG Life and Retirement was $2.9 billion in 2012 compared to $2.4 billion in 2011, primarily reflecting efforts to actively manage spread income. Cash provided by operating activities of discontinued operations of $2.9 billion in 2012 compared to $6.2 billion in 2011, includes ILFC, and in 2011 and 2010, foreign life insurance subsidiaries that were divested in 2011, including Nan Shan, AIG Star and AIG Edison. Net cash provided by operating activities declined in 2011 compared to 2010, principally due to the following: ? the cash payment by AIG Parent of $6.4 billion in accrued compounded interest and fees under the FRBNY Credit Facility. In prior periods, these payments were paid in-kind and did not affect operating cash flows; ? cash provided by operating activities of foreign life subsidiaries declined by $10.4 billion due to the sale of those subsidiaries (AIA, ALICO, AIG Star, AIG Edison and Nan Shan). The subsidiaries generated operational cash inflows of $3.4 billion and $13.8 billion in 2011 and 2010, respectively; and ? the effect of catastrophes and the cession of a large portion of AIG Property Casualty’s net asbestos liabilities in the U. S. to NICO. Excluding the impact of the NICO cession and catastrophes, cash provided by AIG’s reportable segments in 2011 is consistent with 2010, as increases in claims paid were offset by increases in premiums collected at the insurance subsidiaries. Investing Cash Flow Activities Net cash provided by investing activities for 2012 includes the following items: ? payments received relating to the sale of the underlying assets held by ML II of approximately $1.6 billion; ? payments of approximately $8.5 billion received in connection with the dispositions of ML III assets by the FRBNY; ITEM 7 / RESULTS OF OPERATIONS / COMMERCIAL INSURANCE low interest rate environment, partially offset by growth in average assets. See MD&A – Investments – Life Insurance Companies for additional information on the investment strategy, asset-liability management process and invested assets of our Life Insurance Companies, which include the invested assets of the Institutional Markets business. General operating expenses in 2014 increased slightly compared to 2013, primarily due to investments in technology.2013 and 2012 Comparison Pre-tax operating income for 2013 increased compared to 2012, due in part to higher net investment income from alternative investments, partially offset by lower base net investment income. Interest credited to policyholder account balances in 2012 included $110 million of expense resulting from a comprehensive review of reserves for the GIC portfolio. Results for 2013 included a full year of the growing stable value wrap business, which contributed $31 million to the increase in pre-tax operating income compared to 2012. Stable value wrap notional assets under management grew to $24.6 billion at December 31, 2013 from $10.4 billion at December 31, 2012, including the notional amount of contracts transferred from an AIG affiliate. Net investment income for 2013 increased slightly compared to 2012, primarily due to higher net investment income from alternative investments, largely offset by lower income from the base portfolio. The increase in alternative investment income in 2013 compared to 2012 reflected higher hedge fund income due to favorable equity market conditions. The decrease in base net income was primarily due to investment of available cash, including proceeds from sales of securities made during 2013 to utilize capital loss carryforwards, at rates below the weighted average yield of the overall portfolio. General operating expenses in 2013 increased compared to 2012, primarily to support increased volume in the stable value wrap business. Institutional Markets Premiums, Deposits and Net Flows For Institutional Markets, premiums represent amounts received on traditional life insurance policies and life-contingent payout annuities or structured settlements. Premiums and deposits is a non-GAAP financial measure that includes direct and assumed premiums as well as deposits received on universal life insurance and investment-type annuity contracts, including GICs and stable value wrap funding agreements. The following table presents a reconciliation of Institutional Markets premiums and deposits to GAAP premiums: <table><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums and deposits</td><td>$3,797</td><td>$991</td><td>$774</td></tr><tr><td>Deposits</td><td>-3,344</td><td>-354</td><td>-289</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-21</td><td>-27</td><td>-27</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums</td><td>$432</td><td>$610</td><td>$458</td></tr></table> The decrease in premiums in 2014 compared to 2013 was primarily due to a high volume of single-premium products sold in 2013, including life-contingent payout annuities. Sales of these products decreased in 2014 compared to 2013 due to a more competitive environment as well as continued low interest rates. The increase in deposits in 2014 compared to 2013 included a $2.5 billion deposit to the separate accounts of one of the Life Insurance Companies for a stable value wrap funding agreement. The majority of stable value wrap sales are measured based on the notional amount included in assets under management, but do not include the receipt of funds that would be included in premiums and deposits. The increase in deposits in 2014 compared to 2013 also reflected a $450 million GIC issued in 2014. The increase in premiums in 2013 compared to 2012 reflected a high volume of single-premium product sales in 2013, including structured settlements with life contingencies and terminal funding annuities. The increase in deposits in 2013 compared to 2012 reflected strong sales of high net worth products, primarily private placement variable annuities.

What is the proportion of Land and land development for Nonperforming Loans andForeclosed Properties-1 to the total in 2011?

PART II ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES The following table presents reported quarterly high and low per share sale prices of our common stock on the NYSE for the years 2015 and 2014. <table><tr><td>2015</td><td>High</td><td>Low</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended March 31</td><td>$101.88</td><td>$93.21</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended June 30</td><td>98.64</td><td>91.99</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended September 30</td><td>101.54</td><td>86.83</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended December 31</td><td>104.12</td><td>87.23</td></tr><tr><td>2014</td><td>High</td><td>Low</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended March 31</td><td>$84.90</td><td>$78.38</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended June 30</td><td>90.73</td><td>80.10</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended September 30</td><td>99.90</td><td>89.05</td></tr><tr><td>Quarter ended December 31</td><td>106.31</td><td>90.20</td></tr></table> On February 19, 2016, the closing price of our common stock was $87.32 per share as reported on the NYSE. As of February 19, 2016, we had 423,897,556 outstanding shares of common stock and 159 registered holders. Dividends As a REIT, we must annually distribute to our stockholders an amount equal to at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (determined before the deduction for distributed earnings and excluding any net capital gain). Generally, we have distributed and expect to continue to distribute all or substantially all of our REIT taxable income after taking into consideration our utilization of net operating losses (“NOLs”). We have two series of preferred stock outstanding, 5.25% Mandatory Convertible Preferred Stock, Series A, issued in May 2014 (the “Series A Preferred Stock”), with a dividend rate of 5.25%, and the 5.50% Mandatory Convertible Preferred Stock, Series B (the “Series B Preferred Stock”), issued in March 2015, with a dividend rate of 5.50%. Dividends are payable quarterly in arrears, subject to declaration by our Board of Directors. The amount, timing and frequency of future distributions will be at the sole discretion of our Board of Directors and will be dependent upon various factors, a number of which may be beyond our control, including our financial condition and operating cash flows, the amount required to maintain our qualification for taxation as a REIT and reduce any income and excise taxes that we otherwise would be required to pay, limitations on distributions in our existing and future debt and preferred equity instruments, our ability to utilize NOLs to offset our distribution requirements, limitations on our ability to fund distributions using cash generated through our TRSs and other factors that our Board of Directors may deem relevant. We have distributed an aggregate of approximately $2.3 billion to our common stockholders, including the dividend paid in January 2016, primarily subject to taxation as ordinary income. During the year ended December 31, 2015, we declared the following cash distributions: Our total non-U. S. exposure was $232.6 billion at December 31, 2011, a decrease of $29.4 billion from December 31, 2010. Our non-U. S. exposure remained concentrated in Europe which accounted for $115.9 billion, or 50 percent, of total non-U. S. exposure. The European exposure was mostly in Western Europe and was distributed across a variety of industries. The decrease of $32.2 billion in Europe was primarily driven by our efforts to reduce risk in countries affected by the ongoing debt crisis in the Eurozone. Select European countries are further detailed in Table 54. Asia Pacific was our second largest non-U. S. exposure at $74.6 billion, or 32 percent. The $1.3 billion increase in Asia Pacific was driven by increases in securities and local exposure in Japan and increases in the emerging markets, predominately in local exposure, loans and securities offset by the sale of CCB shares. For more information on our CCB investment, see Note 5 – Securities to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Latin America accounted for $17.4 billion, or seven percent, of total non-U. S. exposure. The $2.6 billion increase in Latin America was primarily driven by an increase in Brazil in securities and local country exposure. Middle East and Africa increased $926 million to $4.6 billion, representing two percent of total non-U. S. exposure. Other non-U. S. exposure was $20.1 billion at December 31, 2011, a decrease of $2.1 billion in 2011 resulting primarily from a decrease in local exposure as a result of the sale of our Canadian consumer card business. For more information on our Asia Pacific and Latin America exposure, see non-U. S. exposure to selected countries defined as emerging markets on page 100. Table 52 presents countries where total cross-border exposure exceeded one percent of our total assets. At December 31, 2011, the United Kingdom and Japan were the only countries where total cross-border exposure exceeded one percent of our total assets. At December 31, 2011, Canada and France had total cross-border exposure of $16.9 billion and $16.1 billion representing 0.79 percent and 0.75 percent of total assets. Canada and France were the only other countries that had total cross-border exposure that exceeded 0.75 percent of our total assets at December 31, 2011. Exposure includes cross-border claims by our non-U. S. offices including loans, acceptances, time deposits placed, trading account assets, securities, derivative assets, other interestearning investments and other monetary assets. Amounts also include unused commitments, SBLCs, commercial letters of credit and formal guarantees. Sector definitions are consistent with FFIEC reporting requirements for preparing the Country Exposure Report. <table><tr><td>Table 52</td><td colspan="6">Total Cross-border Exposure Exceeding One Percent of Total Assets^-1</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>December 31</td><td>Public Sector</td><td>Banks</td><td>Private Sector</td><td>Cross-borderExposure</td><td>Exposure as aPercentage ofTotal Assets</td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td>2011</td><td>$6,401</td><td>$4,424</td><td>$18,056</td><td>$28,881</td><td>1.36%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2010</td><td>101</td><td>5,544</td><td>32,354</td><td>37,999</td><td>1.68</td></tr><tr><td>Japan^-2</td><td>2011</td><td>4,603</td><td>10,383</td><td>8,060</td><td>23,046</td><td>1.08</td></tr></table> (1) Total cross-border exposure for the United Kingdom and Japan included derivatives exposure of $5.9 billion and $3.5 billion at December 31, 2011 and $2.3 billion and $2.8 billion at December 31, 2010 which has been reduced by the amount of cash collateral applied of $9.3 billion and $1.2 billion at December 31, 2011 and $13.0 billion and $1.6 billion at December 31, 2010. Derivative assets were collateralized by other marketable securities of $242 million and $1.7 billion at December 31, 2011 and $96 million and $743 million at December 31, 2010. (2) At December 31, 2010, total cross-border exposure for Japan was $17.0 billion, representing 0.75 percent of total assets. Tables 43 and 44 present commercial real estate credit quality data by non-homebuilder and homebuilder property types. The homebuilder portfolio presented in Tables 42, 43 and 44 includes condominiums and other residential real estate. Other property types in Tables 42, 43 and 44 primarily include special purpose, nursing/retirement homes, medical facilities and restaurants, as well as unsecured loans to borrowers whose primary business is commercial real estate. Table 43 Commercial Real Estate Credit Quality Data <table><tr><td>Table 43</td><td colspan="4">Commercial Real Estate Credit Quality Data December 31</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Nonperforming Loans andForeclosed Properties^-1</td><td colspan="2">Utilized ReservableCriticized Exposure^-2</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Non-homebuilder</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Office</td><td>$807</td><td>$1,061</td><td>$2,375</td><td>$3,956</td></tr><tr><td>Multi-family rental</td><td>339</td><td>500</td><td>1,604</td><td>2,940</td></tr><tr><td>Shopping centers/retail</td><td>561</td><td>1,000</td><td>1,378</td><td>2,837</td></tr><tr><td>Industrial/warehouse</td><td>521</td><td>420</td><td>1,317</td><td>1,878</td></tr><tr><td>Multi-use</td><td>345</td><td>483</td><td>971</td><td>1,316</td></tr><tr><td>Hotels/motels</td><td>173</td><td>139</td><td>716</td><td>1,191</td></tr><tr><td>Land and land development</td><td>530</td><td>820</td><td>749</td><td>1,420</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>223</td><td>168</td><td>997</td><td>1,604</td></tr><tr><td>Total non-homebuilder</td><td>3,499</td><td>4,591</td><td>10,107</td><td>17,142</td></tr><tr><td>Homebuilder</td><td>993</td><td>1,963</td><td>1,418</td><td>3,376</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial real estate</td><td>$4,492</td><td>$6,554</td><td>$11,525</td><td>$20,518</td></tr></table> Table 44 Commercial Real Estate Net Charge-offs and Related Ratios <table><tr><td>Table 44</td><td colspan="4">Commercial Real Estate Net Charge-offs and Related Ratios</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Net Charge-offs</td><td colspan="2">Net Charge-off Ratios^-1</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Non-homebuilder</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Office</td><td>$126</td><td>$273</td><td>1.51%</td><td>2.49%</td></tr><tr><td>Multi-family rental</td><td>36</td><td>116</td><td>0.52</td><td>1.21</td></tr><tr><td>Shopping centers/retail</td><td>184</td><td>318</td><td>2.69</td><td>3.56</td></tr><tr><td>Industrial/warehouse</td><td>88</td><td>59</td><td>1.94</td><td>1.07</td></tr><tr><td>Multi-use</td><td>61</td><td>143</td><td>1.63</td><td>2.92</td></tr><tr><td>Hotels/motels</td><td>23</td><td>45</td><td>0.86</td><td>1.02</td></tr><tr><td>Land and land development</td><td>152</td><td>377</td><td>7.58</td><td>13.04</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>19</td><td>220</td><td>0.33</td><td>3.14</td></tr><tr><td>Total non-homebuilder</td><td>689</td><td>1,551</td><td>1.67</td><td>2.86</td></tr><tr><td>Homebuilder</td><td>258</td><td>466</td><td>8.00</td><td>8.26</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial real estate</td><td>$947</td><td>$2,017</td><td>2.13</td><td>3.37</td></tr></table> (1) Net charge-off ratios are calculated as net charge-offs divided by average outstanding loans excluding loans accounted for under the fair value option. At December 31, 2011, total committed non-homebuilder exposure was $53.1 billion compared to $64.2 billion at December 31, 2010, with the decrease due to exposure reductions in all non-homebuilder property types. Non-homebuilder nonperforming loans and foreclosed properties were $3.5 billion and $4.6 billion at December 31, 2011 and 2010, which represented 9.29 percent and 10.08 percent of total nonhomebuilder loans and foreclosed properties. Non-homebuilder utilized reservable criticized exposure decreased to $10.1 billion, or 25.34 percent of non-homebuilder utilized reservable exposure, at December 31, 2011 compared to $17.1 billion, or 35.55 percent, at December 31, 2010. The decrease in reservable criticized exposure was driven primarily by office, shopping centers/retail and multi-family rental property types. For the nonhomebuilder portfolio, net charge-offs decreased $862 million in 2011 due in part to resolution of criticized assets through payoffs and sales. At December 31, 2011, we had committed homebuilder exposure of $3.9 billion compared to $6.0 billion at December 31, 2010, of which $2.4 billion and $4.3 billion were funded secured loans. The decline in homebuilder committed exposure was due to repayments, net charge-offs, reductions in new home construction and continued risk mitigation initiatives with market conditions providing fewer origination opportunities to offset the reductions. Homebuilder nonperforming loans and foreclosed properties decreased $970 million due to repayments, a decline in the volume of loans being downgraded to nonaccrual status and net charge-offs. Homebuilder utilized reservable criticized exposure decreased $2.0 billion to $1.4 billion due to repayments and net charge-offs. The nonperforming loans, leases and foreclosed properties and the utilized reservable criticized ratios for the homebuilder portfolio were 38.89 percent and 54.65 percent at December 31, 2011 compared to 42.80 percent and 74.27 percent at December 31, 2010. Net charge-offs for the homebuilder portfolio decreased $208 million in 2011. Capital Management During 2015, we repurchased approximately $2.4 billion of common stock, with an average price of $16.92 per share, in connection with our 2015 Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) capital plan, which included a request to repurchase $4.0 billion of common stock over five quarters beginning in the second quarter of 2015, and to maintain the quarterly common stock dividend at the current rate of $0.05 per share. Based on the conditional non-objection we received from the Federal Reserve on our 2015 CCAR submission, we were required to resubmit our CCAR capital plan by September 30, 2015 and address certain weaknesses the Federal Reserve identified in our capital planning process. We have established plans and taken actions which addressed the identified weaknesses, and we resubmitted our CCAR capital plan on September 30, 2015. The Federal Reserve announced that it did not object to our resubmitted CCAR capital plan on December 10, 2015. As an Advanced approaches institution, under Basel 3, we were required to complete a qualification period (parallel run) to demonstrate compliance with the Basel 3 Advanced approaches capital framework to the satisfaction of U. S. banking regulators. We received approval to begin using the Advanced approaches capital framework to determine risk-based capital requirements beginning in the fourth quarter of 2015. As previously disclosed, with the approval to exit parallel run, U. S. banking regulators requested modifications to certain internal analytical models including the wholesale (e. g. , commercial) credit models. All requested modifications were incorporated, which increased our risk-weighted assets, and are reflected in the risk-based ratios in the fourth quarter of 2015. Having exited parallel run on October 1, 2015, we are required to report regulatory risk-based capital ratios and risk-weighted assets under both the Standardized and Advanced approaches. The approach that yields the lower ratio is used to assess capital adequacy including under the Prompt Corrective Action (PCA) framework and was the Advanced approaches in the fourth quarter of 2015. For additional information, see Capital Management on page 51. Trust Preferred Securities On December 29, 2015, the Corporation provided notice of the redemption on January 29, 2016 of all trust preferred securities of Merrill Lynch Preferred Capital Trust III, Merrill Lynch Preferred Capital Trust IV and Merrill Lynch Preferred Capital Trust V (the Trust Preferred Securities). In connection with the Corporation’s acquisition of Merrill Lynch & Co. , Inc. in 2009, the Corporation recorded a discount to par value as purchase accounting adjustments associated with the Trust Preferred Securities. The Corporation recorded a $612 million charge to net interest income related to the discount on these securities. New Accounting Guidance on Recognition and Measurement of Financial Instruments In January 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued new accounting guidance on recognition and measurement of financial instruments. The Corporation has early adopted, retrospective to January 1, 2015, the provision that requires the Corporation to present unrealized gains and losses resulting from changes in the Corporation’s own credit spreads on liabilities accounted for under the fair value option (referred to as debit valuation adjustments, or DVA) in accumulated other comprehensive income (OCI). The impact of the adoption was to reclassify, as of January 1, 2015, unrealized DVA losses of $2.0 billion pretax ($1.2 billion after tax) from retained earnings to accumulated OCI. Further, pretax unrealized DVA gains of $301 million, $301 million and $420 million were reclassified from other income to accumulated OCI for the third, second and first quarters of 2015, respectively. This had the effect of reducing net income as previously reported for the aforementioned quarters by $187 million, $186 million and $260 million, or approximately $0.02 per share in each quarter. This change is reflected in consolidated results and the Global Markets segment results. Results for 2014 were not subject to restatement under the provisions of the new accounting guidance. Selected Financial Data Table 1 provides selected consolidated financial data for 2015 and 2014.

What's the sum of the Net investment income in the years where Other income is positive? (in million)

CONSUMER INSURANCE Consumer Insurance Results The following table presents Consumer Insurance results: <table><tr><td> Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2">Percentage Change</td></tr><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2015 vs. 2014</td><td>2014 vs. 2013</td></tr><tr><td>Revenues:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Premiums</td><td>$14,085</td><td>$14,936</td><td>$15,302</td><td>-6%</td><td>-2%</td></tr><tr><td>Policy fees</td><td>2,557</td><td>2,453</td><td>2,252</td><td>4</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Net investment income</td><td>8,322</td><td>9,082</td><td>9,352</td><td>-8</td><td>-3</td></tr><tr><td>Other income</td><td>2,105</td><td>1,998</td><td>1,754</td><td>5</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Benefits and expenses:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Policyholder benefits and losses incurred</td><td>10,475</td><td>10,796</td><td>10,957</td><td>-3</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Interest credited to policyholder account balances</td><td>3,316</td><td>3,353</td><td>3,477</td><td>-1</td><td>-4</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs</td><td>2,887</td><td>2,759</td><td>2,836</td><td>5</td><td>-3</td></tr><tr><td>General operating and other expenses^*</td><td>7,013</td><td>7,087</td><td>6,826</td><td>-1</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-tax operating income</td><td>$3,378</td><td>$4,474</td><td>$4,564</td><td>-24%</td><td>-2%</td></tr></table> * Includes general operating expenses, non deferrable commissions, other acquisition expenses, advisory fee expenses and other expenses. Consumer Insurance Results by Operating Segment Consumer Insurance presents its operating results in three operating segments – Retirement, Life and Personal Insurance. The following section provides a comparative discussion of Consumer Insurance Results of Operations for 2015, 2014 and 2013 by operating segment. Retirement Results The following table presents Retirement results: <table><tr><td> Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2">Percentage Change</td></tr><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2015 vs. 2014</td><td>2014 vs. 2013</td></tr><tr><td>Revenues:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Premiums</td><td>$168</td><td>$287</td><td>$188</td><td>-41%</td><td>53%</td></tr><tr><td>Policy fees</td><td>1,072</td><td>1,010</td><td>861</td><td>6</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>Net investment income</td><td>6,002</td><td>6,489</td><td>6,628</td><td>-8</td><td>-2</td></tr><tr><td>Advisory fee and other income</td><td>2,056</td><td>1,998</td><td>1,754</td><td>3</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Benefits and expenses:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Policyholder benefits and losses incurred</td><td>511</td><td>537</td><td>364</td><td>-5</td><td>48</td></tr><tr><td>Interest credited to policyholder account balances</td><td>2,823</td><td>2,846</td><td>2,935</td><td>-1</td><td>-3</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs</td><td>480</td><td>346</td><td>273</td><td>39</td><td>27</td></tr><tr><td>Non deferrable insurance commissions</td><td>282</td><td>265</td><td>249</td><td>6</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Advisory fee expenses</td><td>1,349</td><td>1,315</td><td>1,175</td><td>3</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>General operating expenses</td><td>1,014</td><td>980</td><td>945</td><td>3</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-tax operating income</td><td>$2,839</td><td>$3,495</td><td>$3,490</td><td>-19%</td><td>-%</td></tr></table> ITEM 7 / RESULTS OF OPERATIONS / CONSUMER INSURANCE * Severe losses are defined as non-catastrophe individual first party losses and surety losses greater than $10 million, net of related reinsurance and salvage and subrogation.2015 and 2014 Comparison The combined ratio increased by 1.4 points in 2015 compared to 2014, reflecting an increase in the loss ratio and acquisition ratio, partially offset by a decrease in the general operating expense ratio. The accident year combined ratio, as adjusted, increased by 0.7 points in 2015 compared to 2014. The accident year loss ratio, as adjusted, increased by 0.2 points in 2015, compared to 2014, due to higher large but not severe losses in automobile and personal property businesses, partially offset by a decrease in losses in warranty service programs and lower severe losses. The loss ratio improvement in warranty service programs was offset by an increase in the acquisition ratio due to a related profit sharing arrangement. The acquisition ratio increased by 1.1 points in 2015 compared to 2014, primarily due to increases in acquisition costs in warranty service programs and in the automobile business, partially offset by lower direct marketing expenses in the Accident and Health business. The general operating expense ratio decreased by 0.6 points in 2015 compared to 2014, reflecting an ongoing focus on cost efficiency.2014 and 2013 Comparison The combined ratio decreased by 1.6 points in 2014 compared to 2013, primarily due to a lower loss ratio, partially offset by a higher acquisition ratio as discussed below. The accident year combined ratio, as adjusted, decreased by 2.6 points in 2014 compared to 2013, primarily due to an improved accident year loss ratio, as adjusted. The accident year loss ratio, as adjusted, decreased by 3.6 points in 2014 compared to 2013, as a result of improvements across all lines of business. The lower losses associated with a warranty retail program were largely offset by an increase in the related profit sharing arrangement, which increased the acquisition ratio in 2014 compared to 2013. The severe losses of $54 million, resulting largely from four fire claims, accounted for 0.5 points of the accident year loss ratio, as adjusted, in 2014. The general operating expense ratio remained unchanged in 2014 compared to 2013, reflecting the impact of efficiencies from organizational realignment initiatives, offset by increased technology-related expenses. CORPORATE AND OTHER Corporate and Other Results The following table presents AIG’s Corporate and Other results: <table><tr><td> Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2">Percentage Change</td></tr><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2015 vs. 2014</td><td>2014 vs. 2013</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate and Other pre-tax operating loss:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Equity in pre-tax operating earnings of AerCap^(a)</td><td>$255</td><td>$434</td><td>$-</td><td>-41%</td><td>NM%</td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of PICC investments^(b)</td><td>33</td><td>37</td><td>-</td><td>-11</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Income from other assets, net^(c)</td><td>1,382</td><td>373</td><td>47</td><td>271</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate general operating expenses</td><td>-985</td><td>-1,146</td><td>-1,115</td><td>14</td><td>-3</td></tr><tr><td>Severance expense^(d)</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-265</td><td>NM</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Interest expense</td><td>-1,101</td><td>-1,233</td><td>-1,412</td><td>11</td><td>13</td></tr></table> ITEM 8 / NOTE 6. LENDING ACTIVITIES the troubled debtor, the modification is a troubled debt restructuring (TDR). We assess whether a borrower is experiencing financial difficulty based on a variety of factors, including the borrower’s current default on any of its outstanding debt, the probability of a default on any of its debt in the foreseeable future without the modification, the insufficiency of the borrower’s forecasted cash flows to service any of its outstanding debt (including both principal and interest), and the borrower’s inability to access alternative third-party financing at an interest rate that would be reflective of current market conditions for a nontroubled debtor. Concessions granted may include extended maturity dates, interest rate changes, principal or interest forgiveness, payment deferrals and easing of loan covenants. During 2015 and 2014, loans with a carrying value of $36 million and $218 million were modified in TDRs, respectively.7. REINSURANCE In the ordinary course of business, our insurance companies may use both treaty and facultative reinsurance to minimize their net loss exposure to any single catastrophic loss event or to an accumulation of losses from a number of smaller events or to provide greater diversification of our businesses. In addition, our general insurance subsidiaries assume reinsurance from other insurance companies. We determine the portion of the incurred but not reported (IBNR) loss that will be recoverable under our reinsurance contracts by reference to the terms of the reinsurance protection purchased. This determination is necessarily based on the estimate of IBNR and accordingly, is subject to the same uncertainties as the estimate of IBNR. Reinsurance assets include the balances due from reinsurance and insurance companies under the terms of our reinsurance agreements for paid and unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses incurred, ceded unearned premiums and ceded future policy benefits for life and accident and health insurance contracts and benefits paid and unpaid. Amounts related to paid and unpaid losses and benefits and loss expenses with respect to these reinsurance agreements are substantially collateralized. We remain liable to the extent that our reinsurers do not meet their obligation under the reinsurance contracts, and as such, we regularly evaluate the financial condition of our reinsurers and monitor concentration of our credit risk. The estimation of the allowance for doubtful accounts requires judgment for which key inputs typically include historical trends regarding uncollectible balances, disputes and credit events as well as specific reviews of balances in dispute or subject to credit impairment. The allowance for doubtful accounts on reinsurance assets was $272 million and $258 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Changes in the allowance for doubtful accounts on reinsurance assets are reflected in Policyholder benefits and losses incurred within the Consolidated Statements of Income. The following table provides supplemental information for loss and benefit reserves, gross and net of ceded reinsurance: <table><tr><td> At December 31,</td><td rowspan="2">2015 As Reported</td><td></td><td rowspan="2">2014 As Reported</td><td></td></tr><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>Net of Reinsurance</td><td>Net of Reinsurance</td></tr><tr><td>Liability for unpaid losses and loss adjustment expenses^(a)</td><td>$-74,942</td><td>$-60,603</td><td>$-77,260</td><td>$-61,612</td></tr><tr><td>Future policy benefits for life and accident and health insurance contracts</td><td>-43,585</td><td>-42,506</td><td>-42,749</td><td>-41,767</td></tr><tr><td>Reserve for unearned premiums</td><td>-21,318</td><td>-18,380</td><td>-21,324</td><td>-18,278</td></tr><tr><td>Reinsurance assets^(b)</td><td>18,356</td><td></td><td>19,676</td><td></td></tr></table> (a) In 2015 and 2014, the Net of Reinsurance amount reflects the cession under the June 17, 2011 transaction with National Indemnity Company (NICO) of $1.8 billion and $1.5 billion, respectively. (b) Represents gross reinsurance assets, excluding allowances and reinsurance recoverable on paid losses. Short-Duration Reinsurance Short-duration reinsurance is effected under reinsurance treaties and by negotiation on individual risks. Certain of these reinsurance arrangements consist of excess of loss contracts that protect us against losses above stipulated amounts. Ceded premiums are considered prepaid reinsurance premiums and are recognized as a reduction of premiums earned over the contract period in proportion to the protection received. Amounts recoverable from reinsurers on short-duration contracts are estimated in a manner consistent with the claims liabilities associated with the reinsurance and presented as a component of Reinsurance assets. Assumed reinsurance premiums are earned primarily on a pro-rata basis over the terms of the ITEM 8 / NOTE 19. SHARE-BASED AND OTHER COMPENSATION PLANS Our non-employee directors, who serve on our Board of Directors, receive share-based compensation in the form of fully vested deferred stock units (DSUs) with delivery deferred until retirement from the Board. DSUs granted in 2015, 2014 and 2013 accrue DEUs equal to the amount of any regular quarterly dividend that would have been paid by AIG if the shares of AIG Common Stock underlying the DSUs had been outstanding. In 2015, 2014 and 2013, we granted to non-employee directors 32,342, 28,477 and 25,735 DSUs, respectively, under the 2013 Plan, and recognized expense of $1.9 million, $1.5 million and $1.2 million, respectively. Stock Options Options granted under the AIG 2007 Stock Incentive Plan and the 1999 Stock Option Plan generally vested over four years (25 percent vesting per year) and expire 10 years from the date of grant. All outstanding options are vested and out of the money at December 31, 2015. There were no stock options granted since 2008. The aggregate intrinsic value for all unexercised options is zero. The following table provides a roll forward of stock option activity: <table><tr><td> As of or for the Year Ended December 31, 2015</td><td>Shares</td><td>Weighted Average Exercise Price</td><td>Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life</td></tr><tr><td> Options:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Exercisable at beginning of year</td><td>202,275</td><td>$1,037.74</td><td>2.17</td></tr><tr><td>Expired</td><td>-108,763</td><td>$1,261.25</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Exercisable at end of year</td><td>93,512</td><td>$777.78</td><td>2.16</td></tr></table> Cash-settled Awards Share-based cash-settled awards are recorded as liabilities until the final payout is made or the award is replaced with a stocksettled award. Compensation expense is recognized over the vesting periods, unless the award is fully vested on the grant date in which case the entire award value is immediately recognized as expense. Unlike stock-settled awards, which generally have a fixed grant-date fair value (unless the award is subsequently modified), the fair value of unsettled or unvested cash-settled awards is remeasured at the end of each reporting period based on the change in fair value of one share of AIG Common Stock. The liability and corresponding expense are adjusted accordingly until the award is settled. During the period we were subject to Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) restrictions, we issued various cash-settled sharebased grants, including Stock Salary, TARP RSU awards, and other cash-settled RSU awards, to certain of our most highly compensated employees and executive officers in the form of restricted stock units that were either fully vested with payment deferred, or subject to specified service and performance conditions. After the repayment of our TARP obligations in December 2012, all performance conditions were satisfied; as a result, we no longer issue awards that are subject to TARP restrictions. Restricted Stock Units Stock Salary was earned and accrued at the same time or times as the salary would otherwise be paid in cash and is generally settled in installments on the first, second or third anniversary of grant in accordance with the terms of an employee’s award. Stock Salary grants were generally issued in the form of fully vested RSUs and are settled in cash based on the value of AIG The performance units granted to certain executives in fiscal 2014 were based on a one-year performance period. After the Compensation Committee certified the performance results, 25% of the performance units converted to unrestricted shares. The remaining 75% converted to restricted shares that vest in equal installments on each of the first three anniversaries of the conversion date. The performance units granted to certain executives during fiscal 2015 were based on a three-year performance period. After the Compensation Committee certifies the performance results for the three-year period, performance units earned will convert into unrestricted common stock. The Compensation Committee may set a range of possible performance-based outcomes for performance units. Depending on the achievement of the performance measures, the grantee may earn up to 200% of the target number of shares. For awards with only performance conditions, we recognize compensation expense over the performance period using the grant date fair value of the award, which is based on the number of shares expected to be earned according to the level of achievement of performance goals. If the number of shares expected to be earned were to change at any time during the performance period, we would make a cumulative adjustment to share-based compensation expense based on the revised number of shares expected to be earned. During fiscal 2015, certain executives were granted performance units that we refer to as leveraged performance units, or LPUs. LPUs contain a market condition based on our relative stock price growth over a three-year performance period. The LPUs contain a minimum threshold performance which, if not met, would result in no payout. The LPUs also contain a maximum award opportunity set as a fixed dollar and fixed number of shares. After the three-year performance period, one-third of any earned units converts to unrestricted common stock. The remaining two-thirds convert to restricted stock that will vest in equal installments on each of the first two anniversaries of the conversion date. We recognize share-based compensation expense based on the grant date fair value of the LPUs, as determined by use of a Monte Carlo model, on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for each separately vesting portion of the LPU award. Total Shareholder Return Units Before fiscal 2015, certain of our executives were granted total shareholder return (“TSR”) units, which are performance-based restricted stock units that are earned based on our total shareholder return over a three-year performance period compared to companies in the S&P 500. Once the performance results are certified, TSR units convert into unrestricted common stock. Depending on our performance, the grantee may earn up to 200% of the target number of shares. The target number of TSR units for each executive is set by the Compensation Committee. We recognize share-based compensation expense based on the grant date fair value of the TSR units, as determined by use of a Monte Carlo model, on a straight-line basis over the vesting period. The following table summarizes the changes in unvested share-based awards for the years ended May 31, 2015 and 2014 (shares in thousands):

What is the sum of CET1 capital, Tier 1 capital and Total capital in 2017? (in million)

THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis 2018 versus 2017. Provision for credit losses in the consolidated statements of earnings was $674 million for 2018, compared with $657 million for 2017, as the higher provision for credit losses primarily related to consumer loan growth in 2018 was partially offset by an impairment of approximately $130 million on a secured loan in 2017.2017 versus 2016. Provision for credit losses in the consolidated statements of earnings was $657 million for 2017, compared with $182 million for 2016, reflecting an increase in impairments, which included an impairment of approximately $130 million on a secured loan in 2017, and higher provision for credit losses primarily related to consumer loan growth. Operating Expenses Our operating expenses are primarily influenced by compensation, headcount and levels of business activity. Compensation and benefits includes salaries, discretionary compensation, amortization of equity awards and other items such as benefits. Discretionary compensation is significantly impacted by, among other factors, the level of net revenues, overall financial performance, prevailing labor markets, business mix, the structure of our share-based compensation programs and the external environment. In addition, see “Use of Estimates” for further information about expenses that may arise from litigation and regulatory proceedings. The table below presents operating expenses by line item and headcount. <table><tr><td></td><td>Year Ended December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td>2018</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td></tr><tr><td>Compensation and benefits</td><td>$12,328</td><td>$11,653</td><td>$11,448</td></tr><tr><td>Brokerage, clearing, exchange and distribution fees</td><td>3,200</td><td>2,876</td><td>2,823</td></tr><tr><td>Market development</td><td>740</td><td>588</td><td>457</td></tr><tr><td>Communications and technology</td><td>1,023</td><td>897</td><td>809</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation and amortization</td><td>1,328</td><td>1,152</td><td>998</td></tr><tr><td>Occupancy</td><td>809</td><td>733</td><td>788</td></tr><tr><td>Professional fees</td><td>1,214</td><td>1,165</td><td>1,081</td></tr><tr><td>Other expenses</td><td>2,819</td><td>1,877</td><td>1,900</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating expenses</td><td>$23,461</td><td>$20,941</td><td>$20,304</td></tr><tr><td>Headcount atperiod-end</td><td>36,600</td><td>33,600</td><td>32,400</td></tr></table> In the table above, the following reclassifications have been made to previously reported amounts to conform to the current presentation: ‰ Regulatory-related fees that are paid to exchanges are now reported in brokerage, clearing, exchange and distribution fees. Previously such amounts were reported in other expenses. ‰ Headcount consists of our employees, and excludes consultants and temporary staff previously reported as part of total staff. As a result, expenses related to these consultants and temporary staff are now reported in professional fees. Previously such amounts were reported in compensation and benefits expenses.2018 versus 2017. Operating expenses in the consolidated statements of earnings were $23.46 billion for 2018, 12% higher than 2017. Our efficiency ratio (total operating expenses divided by total net revenues) for 2018 was 64.1%, compared with 64.0% for 2017. The increase in operating expenses compared with 2017 was primarily due to higher compensation and benefits expenses, reflecting improved operating performance, and significantly higher net provisions for litigation and regulatory proceedings. Brokerage, clearing, exchange and distribution fees were also higher, reflecting an increase in activity levels, and technology expenses increased, reflecting higher expenses related to computing services. In addition, expenses related to consolidated investments and our digital lending and deposit platform increased, with the increases primarily in depreciation and amortization expenses, market development expenses and other expenses. The increase compared with 2017 also included $297 million related to the recently adopted revenue recognition standard. See Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about ASU No.2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606). ” Net provisions for litigation and regulatory proceedings for 2018 were $844 million compared with $188 million for 2017.2018 included a $132 million charitable contribution to Goldman Sachs Gives, our donor-advised fund. Compensation was reduced to fund this charitable contribution to Goldman Sachs Gives. We ask our participating managing directors to make recommendations regarding potential charitable recipients for this contribution. As of December 2018, headcount increased 9% compared with December 2017, reflecting an increase in technology professionals and investments in new business initiatives.2017 versus 2016. Operating expenses in the consolidated statements of earnings were $20.94 billion for 2017, 3% higher than 2016. Our efficiency ratio for 2017 was 64.0% compared with 65.9% for 2016. The increase in operating expenses compared with 2016 was primarily driven by slightly higher compensation and benefits expenses and our investments to fund growth. Higher expenses related to consolidated investments and our digital lending and deposit platform were primarily included in depreciation and amortization expenses, market development expenses and other expenses. In addition, technology expenses increased, reflecting higher expenses related to cloud-based services and software depreciation, and professional fees increased, primarily related to consulting costs. These increases were partially offset by lower net provisions for litigation and regulatory proceedings, and lower occupancy expenses (primarily related to exit costs in 2016). Note 26 – Regulatory capital The Federal Reserve establishes capital requirements, including well-capitalized standards, for the consolidated financial holding company. The OCC establishes similar minimum capital requirements and standards for the Firm’s IDI, including JPMorgan Chase Bank, N. A. and Chase Bank USA, N. A. Capital rules under Basel III establish minimum capital ratios and overall capital adequacy standards for large and internationally active U. S. bank holding companies and banks, including the Firm and its IDI subsidiaries. Basel III set forth two comprehensive approaches for calculating RWA: a standardized approach (“Basel III Standardized”) and an advanced approach (“Basel III Advanced”). Certain of the requirements of Basel III are subject to phase-in periods that began on January 1, 2014 and continue through the end of 2018 (“transitional period”). The three categories of risk-based capital and their predominant components under the Basel III Transitional rules are illustrated below: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">JPMorgan Chase & Co.</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Basel III Standardized Transitional</td><td></td><td colspan="2">Basel III Advanced Transitional</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions,except ratios)</td><td>Dec 31, 2017</td><td>Dec 31, 2016</td><td></td><td>Dec 31, 2017</td><td>Dec 31,2016</td></tr><tr><td>Regulatory capital</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>CET1 capital</td><td>$183,300</td><td>$182,967</td><td></td><td>$183,300</td><td>$182,967</td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1 capital^(a)</td><td>208,644</td><td>208,112</td><td></td><td>208,644</td><td>208,112</td></tr><tr><td>Total capital</td><td>238,395</td><td>239,553</td><td></td><td>227,933</td><td>228,592</td></tr><tr><td>Assets</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Risk-weighted</td><td>1,499,506</td><td>1,483,132</td><td>^(e)</td><td>1,435,825</td><td>1,476,915</td></tr><tr><td>Adjusted average^(b)</td><td>2,514,270</td><td>2,484,631</td><td></td><td>2,514,270</td><td>2,484,631</td></tr><tr><td>Capital ratios^(c)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>CET1</td><td>12.2%</td><td>12.3%</td><td>^(e)</td><td>12.8%</td><td>12.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1^(a)</td><td>13.9</td><td>14.0</td><td>^(e)</td><td>14.5</td><td>14.1</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>15.9</td><td>16.2</td><td>^(e)</td><td>15.9</td><td>15.5</td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1 leverage^(d)</td><td>8.3</td><td>8.4</td><td></td><td>8.3</td><td>8.4</td></tr></table> The following tables present the regulatory capital, assets and risk-based capital ratios for JPMorgan Chase and its significant IDI subsidiaries under both Basel III Standardized Transitional and Basel III Advanced Transitional at December 31, 2017 and 2016. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Basel III Standardized Transitional</td><td></td><td colspan="2">Basel III Advanced Transitional</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions,except ratios)</td><td>Dec 31, 2017</td><td>Dec 31, 2016</td><td></td><td>Dec 31, 2017</td><td>Dec 31,2016</td></tr><tr><td>Regulatory capital</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>CET1 capital</td><td>$184,375</td><td>$179,319</td><td></td><td>$184,375</td><td>$179,319</td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1 capital^(a)</td><td>184,375</td><td>179,341</td><td></td><td>184,375</td><td>179,341</td></tr><tr><td>Total capital</td><td>195,839</td><td>191,662</td><td></td><td>189,419</td><td>184,637</td></tr><tr><td>Assets</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Risk-weighted</td><td>1,335,809</td><td>1,311,240</td><td>^(e)</td><td>1,226,534</td><td>1,262,613</td></tr><tr><td>Adjusted average^(b)</td><td>2,116,031</td><td>2,088,851</td><td></td><td>2,116,031</td><td>2,088,851</td></tr><tr><td>Capital ratios^(c)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>CET1</td><td>13.8%</td><td>13.7%</td><td>^(e)</td><td>15.0%</td><td>14.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1^(a)</td><td>13.8</td><td>13.7</td><td>^(e)</td><td>15.0</td><td>14.2</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>14.7</td><td>14.6</td><td>^(e)</td><td>15.4</td><td>14.6</td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1 leverage^(d)</td><td>8.7</td><td>8.6</td><td></td><td>8.7</td><td>8.6</td></tr></table> Notes to consolidated financial statements Securities lending indemnifications Through the Firm’s securities lending program, counterparties’ securities, via custodial and non-custodial arrangements, may be lent to third parties. As part of this program, the Firm provides an indemnification in the lending agreements which protects the lender against the failure of the borrower to return the lent securities. To minimize its liability under these indemnification agreements, the Firm obtains cash or other highly liquid collateral with a market value exceeding 100% of the value of the securities on loan from the borrower. Collateral is marked to market daily to help assure that collateralization is adequate. Additional collateral is called from the borrower if a shortfall exists, or collateral may be released to the borrower in the event of overcollateralization. If a borrower defaults, the Firm would use the collateral held to purchase replacement securities in the market or to credit the lending client or counterparty with the cash equivalent thereof. Derivatives qualifying as guarantees The Firm transacts certain derivative contracts that have the characteristics of a guarantee under U. S. GAAP. These contracts include written put options that require the Firm to purchase assets upon exercise by the option holder at a specified price by a specified date in the future. The Firm may enter into written put option contracts in order to meet client needs, or for other trading purposes. The terms of written put options are typically five years or less. Derivatives deemed to be guarantees also includes stable value contracts, commonly referred to as “stable value products”, that require the Firm to make a payment of the difference between the market value and the book value of a counterparty’s reference portfolio of assets in the event that market value is less than book value and certain other conditions have been met. Stable value products are transacted in order to allow investors to realize investment returns with less volatility than an unprotected portfolio. These contracts are typically longer-term or may have no stated maturity, but allow the Firm to elect to terminate the contract under certain conditions. The notional value of derivatives guarantees generally represents the Firm’s maximum exposure. However, exposure to certain stable value products is contractually limited to a substantially lower percentage of the notional amount. The fair value of derivative guarantees reflects the probability, in the Firm’s view, of whether the Firm will be required to perform under the contract. The Firm reduces exposures to these contracts by entering into offsetting transactions, or by entering into contracts that hedge the market risk related to the derivative guarantees. The following table summarizes the derivatives qualifying as guarantees as of December 31, 2017, and 2016.

What's the sum of the Unit redemptions in the years where Mortgages Payable for Carrying Amounts is positive?

Table of Contents Mac The following table presents Mac net sales and unit sales information for 2014, 2013 and 2012 (dollars in millions and units in thousands): <table><tr><td></td><td> 2014</td><td> Change</td><td> 2013</td><td>Change</td><td> 2012</td></tr><tr><td>Net sales</td><td>$24,079</td><td>12%</td><td>$21,483</td><td>-7%</td><td>$23,221</td></tr><tr><td>Percentage of total net sales</td><td>13%</td><td></td><td>13%</td><td></td><td>15%</td></tr><tr><td>Unit sales</td><td>18,906</td><td>16%</td><td>16,341</td><td>-10%</td><td>18,158</td></tr></table> The year-over-year growth in Mac net sales and unit sales for 2014 was primarily driven by increased sales of MacBook Air, MacBook Pro and Mac Pro. Mac net sales and unit sales increased in all of the Company’s operating segments. Mac ASPs decreased during 2014 compared to 2013 primarily due to price reductions on certain Mac models and a shift in mix towards Mac portable systems. Mac net sales and unit sales for 2013 were down or relatively flat in all of the Company’s operating segments. Mac ASPs increased slightly partially offsetting the impact of lower unit sales on net sales. The decline in Mac unit sales and net sales reflected the overall weakness in the market for personal computers. iTunes, Software and Services The following table presents net sales information of iTunes, Software and Services for 2014, 2013 and 2012 (dollars in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td> 2014</td><td> Change</td><td> 2013</td><td> Change</td><td> 2012</td></tr><tr><td>iTunes, Software and Services</td><td>$18,063</td><td>13%</td><td>$16,051</td><td>25%</td><td>$12,890</td></tr><tr><td>Percentage of total net sales</td><td>10%</td><td></td><td>9%</td><td></td><td>8%</td></tr></table> The increase in net sales of iTunes, Software and Services in 2014 compared to 2013 was primarily due to growth in net sales from the iTunes Store, AppleCare and licensing. The iTunes Store generated a total of $10.2 billion in net sales during 2014 compared to $9.3 billion during 2013. Growth in net sales from the iTunes Store was driven by increases in revenue from app sales reflecting continued growth in the installed base of iOS devices and the expanded offerings of iOS Apps and related in-App purchases. This was partially offset by a decline in sales of digital music. The increase in net sales of iTunes, Software and Services in 2013 compared to 2012 was primarily due to growth in net sales from the iTunes Store, AppleCare and licensing. The iTunes Store generated a total of $9.3 billion in net sales during 2013, a 24% increase from 2012. Growth in the iTunes Store, which includes the App Store, the Mac App Store and the iBooks Store, reflected continued growth in the installed base of iOS devices, expanded offerings of iOS Apps and related in-App purchases, and expanded offerings of iTunes digital content. Segment Operating Performance The Company manages its business primarily on a geographic basis. Accordingly, the Company determined its reportable operating segments, which are generally based on the nature and location of its customers, to be the Americas, Europe, Greater China, Japan, Rest of Asia Pacific and Retail. The Americas segment includes both North and South America. The Europe segment includes European countries, as well as India, the Middle East and Africa. The Greater China segment includes China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. The Rest of Asia Pacific segment includes Australia and Asian countries, other than those countries included in the Company’s other operating segments. The results of the Company’s geographic segments do not include results of the Retail segment. Each operating segment provides similar hardware and software products and similar services. Further information regarding the Company’s operating segments may be found in Part II, Item 8 of this Form 10-K in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Note 11, “Segment Information and Geographic Data. ” KIMCO REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, CONTINUED Noncontrolling interests also includes 138,015 convertible units issued during 2006, by the Company, which are valued at approximately $5.3 million, including a fair market value adjustment of $0.3 million, related to an interest acquired in an office building located in Albany, NY. These units are redeemable at the option of the holder after one year for cash or at the option of the Company for the Company’s common stock at a ratio of 1:1. The holder is entitled to a distribution equal to the dividend rate of the Company’s common stock. The Company is restricted from disposing of these assets, other than through a tax free transaction, until January 2017. The following table presents the change in the redemption value of the Redeemable noncontrolling interests for the year ended December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 (amounts in thousands): <table><tr><td></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at January 1,</td><td>$115,853</td><td>$173,592</td></tr><tr><td>Unit redemptions</td><td>-14,889</td><td>-55,110</td></tr><tr><td>Fair market value amortization</td><td>-571</td><td>-2,524</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-89</td><td>-105</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31,</td><td>$100,304</td><td>$115,853</td></tr></table> 16. Fair Value Disclosure of Financial Instruments: All financial instruments of the Company are reflected in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets at amounts which, in management’s estimation based upon an interpretation of available market information and valuation methodologies, reasonably approximate their fair values except those listed below, for which fair values are reflected. The valuation method used to estimate fair value for fixed-rate and variable-rate debt and noncontrolling interests relating to mandatorily redeemable noncontrolling interests associated with finite-lived subsidiaries of the Company is based on discounted cash flow analyses, with assumptions that include credit spreads, loan amounts and debt maturities. The fair values for marketable securities are based on published or securities dealers’ estimated market values. Such fair value estimates are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that would be realized upon disposition. The following are financial instruments for which the Company’s estimate of fair value differs from the carrying amounts (in thousands): <table><tr><td></td><td>December 31, 2009 Carrying Amounts</td><td>Estimated Fair Value</td><td>2008 Carrying Amounts</td><td>Estimated Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td>Marketable Securities</td><td>$209,593</td><td>$204,006</td><td>$258,174</td><td>$218,786</td></tr><tr><td>Notes Payable</td><td>$3,000,303</td><td>$3,099,139</td><td>$3,440,819</td><td>$2,766,187</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgages Payable</td><td>$1,388,259</td><td>$1,377,224</td><td>$847,491</td><td>$838,503</td></tr><tr><td>Construction Payable</td><td>$45,821</td><td>$44,725</td><td>$268,337</td><td>$262,485</td></tr><tr><td>Mandatorily Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests(termination dates ranging from 2019 – 2027)</td><td>$2,768</td><td>$5,256</td><td>$2,895</td><td>$5,444</td></tr></table> The Company has certain financial instruments that must be measured under the FASB’s Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures guidance, including: available for sale securities, convertible notes and derivatives. The Company currently does not have non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities that are required to be measured at fair value on a recurring basis. As a basis for considering market participant assumptions in fair value measurements, the FASB’s Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures guidance establishes a fair value hierarchy that distinguishes between market participant assumptions based on market data obtained from sources independent of the reporting entity (observable inputs that are classified within Levels 1 and 2 of the hierarchy) and the reporting entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions (unobservable inputs classified within Level 3 of the hierarchy). Net interest on the stock loan/borrow business decreased 38% due to decreased rates and balances despite a focus on hard-to-locate securities. Other interest revenue and expense include earnings on corporate cash and inventory balances, and interest expense on overnight borrowings, our senior notes issued in August, 2009 and the mortgage on our headquarters facility. Results of Operations - Private Client Group The following table presents consolidated financial information for our PCG segment for the years indicated: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">Year Ended</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>September 30, 2009</td><td>% Incr. (Decr.)</td><td>September 30, 2008</td><td>% Incr. (Decr.)</td><td>September 30, 2007</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">($ in 000's)</td></tr><tr><td>Revenues:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Securities Commissions and Fees</td><td>$ 1,262,810</td><td>-18%</td><td>$ 1,532,290</td><td>5%</td><td>$ 1,462,323</td></tr><tr><td>Interest</td><td>65,589</td><td>-72%</td><td>233,801</td><td>-28%</td><td>326,601</td></tr><tr><td>Financial Service Fees</td><td>125,038</td><td>-2%</td><td>127,304</td><td>16%</td><td>110,056</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>104,025</td><td>-2%</td><td>106,380</td><td>20%</td><td>88,502</td></tr><tr><td>Total Revenues</td><td>1,557,462</td><td>-22%</td><td>1,999,775</td><td>1%</td><td>1,987,482</td></tr><tr><td>Interest Expense</td><td>14,891</td><td>-89%</td><td>141,474</td><td>-32%</td><td>208,537</td></tr><tr><td>Net Revenues</td><td>1,542,570</td><td>-17%</td><td>1,858,301</td><td>4%</td><td>1,778,945</td></tr><tr><td>Non-Interest Expenses:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Sales Commissions</td><td>929,202</td><td>-19%</td><td>1,144,727</td><td>6%</td><td>1,082,457</td></tr><tr><td>Admin & Incentive Comp and Benefit Costs</td><td>279,666</td><td>-4%</td><td>289,937</td><td>15%</td><td>251,684</td></tr><tr><td>Communications and Information Processing</td><td>58,607</td><td>-2%</td><td>59,753</td><td>7%</td><td>55,822</td></tr><tr><td>Occupancy and Equipment</td><td>79,072</td><td>8%</td><td>73,253</td><td>18%</td><td>61,961</td></tr><tr><td>Business Development</td><td>55,488</td><td>-15%</td><td>64,992</td><td>12%</td><td>57,816</td></tr><tr><td>Clearance and Other</td><td>55,951</td><td>18%</td><td>47,369</td><td>1%</td><td>46,983</td></tr><tr><td>Total Non-Interest Expenses</td><td>1,457,986</td><td>-13%</td><td>1,680,031</td><td>8%</td><td>1,556,723</td></tr><tr><td>Income Before Taxes and Minority Interest</td><td>84,584</td><td>-53%</td><td>178,270</td><td>-20%</td><td>222,222</td></tr><tr><td>Minority Interest</td><td>-289</td><td></td><td>124</td><td></td><td>-148</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-tax Income</td><td>$ 84,873</td><td>-52%</td><td>$ 178,146</td><td>-20%</td><td>$ 222,370</td></tr><tr><td>Margin on Net Revenues</td><td>5.5%</td><td></td><td>9.6%</td><td></td><td>12.5%</td></tr></table> Year ended September 30, 2009 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2008 - Private Client Group PCG revenues were 22% below the prior year, reflecting the impact of the extremely challenging economic and market conditions. Commission revenue decreased $269 million, or 18%, from the prior year, with the majority of that decrease experienced by our domestic independent contractor operation. Commissions in RJ&A PCG declined only $45 million, or 9%, due to the recruitment of 219 employee financial advisors in fiscal 2009 (for a net increase of 94) and 184 in fiscal 2008 (for a net increase of 114). It generally takes newly recruited financial advisors up to two years to reach their previous production levels. Average production per employee financial advisor decreased to $417,000 in fiscal 2009, down 19% from the $515,000 attained in fiscal 2008. The recruitment of above-average producers did not overcome the negative impact that the steep market decline had on our private clients’ investing activities. RJFS and RJFSA recruited 559 independent contractor financial advisors in fiscal 2009 (for a net increase of 129). Independent contractor financial advisor average production decreased from $330,000 in fiscal 2008 to $273,000 in fiscal 2009, impacted, like RJ&A, by the challenging economic and market conditions.

In the section with the most Liquid hydrocarbons(mmbbl), what is the growth rate of Natural gas(bcf)?

Marathon maintains an equity compensation program for its non-employee directors under the Plan. Pursuant to the program, non-employee directors must defer 50% of their annual retainers in the form of common stock units. In addition, the program provides each non-employee director with a matching grant of up to 1,000 shares of common stock upon his or her initial election to the board if he or she purchases an equivalent number of shares within 60 days of joining the board. Common stock units are book entry units equal in value to a share of stock. During 2003, 15,799 shares of stock were issued; during 2002, 14,472 shares of stock were issued and during 2001, 12,358 shares of stock were issued.26. Stockholder Rights Plan In 2002, the Marathon’s stockholder rights plan (the Rights Plan), was amended due to the Separation. In January 2003, the expiration date of the Rights Plan was accelerated to January 31, 2003.27. Leases Marathon leases a wide variety of facilities and equipment under operating leases, including land and building space, office equipment, production facilities and transportation equipment. Most long-term leases include renewal options and, in certain leases, purchase options. Future minimum commitments for capital lease obligations (including sale-leasebacks accounted for as financings) and for operating lease obligations having remaining noncancelable lease terms in excess of one year are as follows: <table><tr><td> <i>(In millions)</i> </td><td> Capital Lease Obligations </td><td>Operating Lease Obligations</td></tr><tr><td>2004</td><td>$29</td><td>$108</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td>20</td><td>80</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td>26</td><td>67</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>34</td><td>38</td></tr><tr><td>2008</td><td>26</td><td>31</td></tr><tr><td>Later years</td><td>127</td><td>131</td></tr><tr><td>Sublease rentals</td><td>–</td><td>-77</td></tr><tr><td>Total minimum lease payments</td><td>262</td><td>$378</td></tr><tr><td>Less imputed interest costs</td><td>81</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Present value of net minimum lease payments included in long-term debt</td><td>$181</td><td></td></tr></table> In connection with past sales of various plants and operations, Marathon assigned and the purchasers assumed certain leases of major equipment used in the divested plants and operations of United States Steel. In the event of a default by any of the purchasers, United States Steel has assumed these obligations; however, Marathon remains primarily obligated for payments under these leases. Minimum lease payments under these operating lease obligations of $54 million have been included above and an equal amount has been reported as sublease rentals. Of the $181 million present value of net minimum capital lease payments, $135 million was related to obligations assumed by United States Steel under the Financial Matters Agreement. Of the $378 million total minimum operating lease payments, $18 million was assumed by United States Steel under the Financial Matters Agreement. During 2003, Marathon purchased two LNG tankers to transport LNG primarily from Kenai, Alaska to Tokyo, Japan which were previously leased. A $17 million charge was recorded on the termination of the two tanker operating leases. Operating lease rental expense was: <table><tr><td> <i>(In millions)</i> </td><td rowspan="2">2003 $182(a)</td><td rowspan="2">2002 $196(a)</td><td rowspan="2">2001 $159</td></tr><tr><td>Minimum rental</td></tr><tr><td>Contingent rental</td><td>15</td><td>13</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Sublease rentals</td><td>-9</td><td>-11</td><td>-11</td></tr><tr><td>Net rental expense</td><td>$188</td><td>$198</td><td>$161</td></tr></table> (a) Excludes $23 million and $24 million paid by United States Steel in 2003 and 2002 on assumed leases. The above discussion contains forward-looking statements with regard to the Jackpine mine expansion and Quest CCS. Some factors that could affect the Jackpine mine expansion include the inability to obtain or delay in obtaining third-party approvals and permits. The Quest CCS is subject to the inability to obtain or delay in obtaining government funds, the availability of materials and labor, unforeseen hazards such as weather conditions and other risks customarily associated with these types of projects. Actual results may differ materially from these expectations, estimates and projections and are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and other factors, some of which are beyond our control and difficult to predict. The foregoing factors (among others) could cause actual results to differ materially from those set forth in the forward-looking statements. Reserves Estimated Reserve Quantities The following table sets forth estimated quantities of our proved liquid hydrocarbon, natural gas and synthetic crude oil reserves based upon an unweighted average of closing prices for the first day of each month in the 12-month periods ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011. Included in our liquid hydrocarbon reserves are NGLs which represent approximately 7 percent, 6 percent and 5 percent of our total proved reserves on an oil equivalent barrel basis as of December 2013, 2012 and 2011. Approximately 72 percent, 63 percent and 40 percent of those NGL reserves are associated with our U. S. unconventional resource plays as of December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011. Reserves are disclosed by continent and by country if the proved reserves related to any geographic area, on an oil equivalent barrel basis, represent 15 percent or more of our total proved reserves. A geographic area can be an individual country, group of countries within a continent, or a continent. Due to the agreements entered in 2013 to sell our Angola assets, estimated proved reserves for Angola are reported as discontinued operations ("Disc Ops") for all presented periods. Approximately 73 percent of our December 31, 2013 proved reserves are located in OECD countries. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">North America</td><td colspan="3">Africa</td><td rowspan="2">Europe Total</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2013</td><td>U.S.</td><td>Canada</td><td>Total</td><td>E.G.</td><td>Other</td><td>Total</td><td>Disc Ops</td><td>GrandTotal</td></tr><tr><td>Proved Developed Reserves</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Liquid hydrocarbons(mmbbl)</td><td>292</td><td>—</td><td>292</td><td>55</td><td>176</td><td>231</td><td>78</td><td>19</td><td>620</td></tr><tr><td>Natural gas(bcf)</td><td>540</td><td>—</td><td>540</td><td>823</td><td>95</td><td>918</td><td>41</td><td>—</td><td>1,499</td></tr><tr><td>Synthetic crude oil(mmbbl)</td><td>—</td><td>674</td><td>674</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>674</td></tr><tr><td>Total proved developed reserves(mmboe)</td><td>382</td><td>674</td><td>1,056</td><td>193</td><td>192</td><td>385</td><td>84</td><td>19</td><td>1,544</td></tr><tr><td>Proved Undeveloped Reserves</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Liquid hydrocarbons(mmbbl)</td><td>324</td><td>—</td><td>324</td><td>43</td><td>39</td><td>82</td><td>11</td><td>9</td><td>426</td></tr><tr><td>Natural gas(bcf)</td><td>485</td><td>—</td><td>485</td><td>497</td><td>110</td><td>607</td><td>80</td><td>—</td><td>1,172</td></tr><tr><td>Synthetic crude oil(mmbbl)</td><td>—</td><td>6</td><td>6</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Total proved undeveloped reserves(mmboe)</td><td>405</td><td>6</td><td>411</td><td>125</td><td>57</td><td>182</td><td>25</td><td>9</td><td>627</td></tr><tr><td>Total Proved Reserves</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Liquid hydrocarbons(mmbbl)</td><td>616</td><td>—</td><td>616</td><td>98</td><td>215</td><td>313</td><td>89</td><td>28</td><td>1,046</td></tr><tr><td>Natural gas(bcf)</td><td>1,025</td><td>—</td><td>1,025</td><td>1,320</td><td>205</td><td>1,525</td><td>121</td><td>—</td><td>2,671</td></tr><tr><td>Synthetic crude oil(mmbbl)</td><td>—</td><td>680</td><td>680</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>680</td></tr><tr><td>Total proved reserves(mmboe)</td><td>787</td><td>680</td><td>1,467</td><td>318</td><td>249</td><td>567</td><td>109</td><td>28</td><td>2,171</td></tr></table> discount to Brent was narrower in 2013 than in 2012 and 2011. As a result of the significant increase in U. S. production of light sweet crude oil, the historical relationship between WTI, Brent and LLS pricing may not be indicative of future periods. Composition – The proportion of our liquid hydrocarbon sales volumes that are NGLs continues to increase due to our development of United States unconventional liquids-rich plays. NGLs were 15 percent of our North America E&P liquid hydrocarbon sales volumes in 2013 compared to 10 percent in 2012 and 7 percent in 2011. Natural gas – A significant portion of our natural gas production in the U. S. is sold at bid-week prices, or first-of-month indices relative to our specific producing areas. Average Henry Hub settlement prices for natural gas were 31 percent higher for 2013 than for 2012. International E&P Liquid hydrocarbons – Our International E&P crude oil production is relatively sweet and has historically sold in relation to the Brent crude benchmark, which on average was 3 percent lower for 2013 than 2012. Natural gas – Our major International E&P natural gas-producing regions are Europe and E. G. Natural gas prices in Europe have been considerably higher than the U. S. in recent years. In the case of E. G. , our natural gas sales are subject to term contracts, making realized prices in these areas less volatile. The natural gas sales from E. G. are at fixed prices; therefore, our reported average International E&P natural gas realized prices may not fully track market price movements. Oil Sands Mining The Oil Sands Mining segment produces and sells various qualities of synthetic crude oil. Output mix can be impacted by operational problems or planned unit outages at the mines or upgrader. Sales prices for roughly two-thirds of the normal output mix has historically tracked movements in WTI and one-third has historically tracked movements in the Canadian heavy crude oil marker, primarily WCS. The WCS discount to WTI has been increasing on average in each year presented below. Despite a wider WCS discount in 2013, our average Oil Sands Mining price realizations increased due to a greater proportion of higher value synthetic crude oil sales volumes compared to 2012. The operating cost structure of the Oil Sands Mining operations is predominantly fixed and therefore many of the costs incurred in times of full operation continue during production downtime. Per-unit costs are sensitive to production rates. Key variable costs are natural gas and diesel fuel, which track commodity markets such as the AECO natural gas sales index and crude oil prices, respectively. The table below shows average benchmark prices that impact both our revenues and variable costs: <table><tr><td>Benchmark</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>WTI crude oil(Dollars per bbl)</td><td>$98.05</td><td>$94.15</td><td>$95.11</td></tr><tr><td>WCS(Dollars per bbl)^(a)</td><td>$72.77</td><td>$73.18</td><td>$77.97</td></tr><tr><td>AECO natural gas sales index(Dollars per mmbtu)^(b)</td><td>$3.08</td><td>$2.39</td><td>$3.68</td></tr></table> Provision for income taxes increased $1,791 million in 2012 from 2011 primarily due to the increase in pretax income from continuing operations, including the impact of the resumption of sales in Libya in the first quarter of 2012. The following is an analysis of the effective income tax rates for 2012 and 2011: <table><tr><td></td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Statutory rate applied to income from continuing operations before income taxes</td><td>35%</td><td>35%</td></tr><tr><td>Effects of foreign operations, including foreign tax credits</td><td>18</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Change in permanent reinvestment assertion</td><td>—</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Adjustments to valuation allowances</td><td>21</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Tax law changes</td><td>—</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Effective income tax rate on continuing operations</td><td>74%</td><td>61%</td></tr></table> The effective income tax rate is influenced by a variety of factors including the geographic sources of income and the relative magnitude of these sources of income. The provision for income taxes is allocated on a discrete, stand-alone basis to pretax segment income and to individual items not allocated to segments. The difference between the total provision and the sum of the amounts allocated to segments appears in the "Corporate and other unallocated items" shown in the reconciliation of segment income to net income below. Effects of foreign operations – The effects of foreign operations on our effective tax rate increased in 2012 as compared to 2011, primarily due to the resumption of sales in Libya in the first quarter of 2012, where the statutory rate is in excess of 90 percent. Change in permanent reinvestment assertion – In the second quarter of 2011, we recorded $716 million of deferred U. S. tax on undistributed earnings of $2,046 million that we previously intended to permanently reinvest in foreign operations. Offsetting this tax expense were associated foreign tax credits of $488 million. In addition, we reduced our valuation allowance related to foreign tax credits by $228 million due to recognizing deferred U. S. tax on previously undistributed earnings. Adjustments to valuation allowances – In 2012 and 2011, we increased the valuation allowance against foreign tax credits because it is more likely than not that we will be unable to realize all U. S. benefits on foreign taxes accrued in those years. See Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data - Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about income taxes. Discontinued operations is presented net of tax, and reflects our downstream business that was spun off June 30, 2011 and our Angola business which we agreed to sell in 2013. See Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data – Notes 3 and 6 to the consolidated financial statements for additional information.

by what percentage did the aeco natural gas sales index decline from 2011 to 2013?

Marathon maintains an equity compensation program for its non-employee directors under the Plan. Pursuant to the program, non-employee directors must defer 50% of their annual retainers in the form of common stock units. In addition, the program provides each non-employee director with a matching grant of up to 1,000 shares of common stock upon his or her initial election to the board if he or she purchases an equivalent number of shares within 60 days of joining the board. Common stock units are book entry units equal in value to a share of stock. During 2003, 15,799 shares of stock were issued; during 2002, 14,472 shares of stock were issued and during 2001, 12,358 shares of stock were issued.26. Stockholder Rights Plan In 2002, the Marathon’s stockholder rights plan (the Rights Plan), was amended due to the Separation. In January 2003, the expiration date of the Rights Plan was accelerated to January 31, 2003.27. Leases Marathon leases a wide variety of facilities and equipment under operating leases, including land and building space, office equipment, production facilities and transportation equipment. Most long-term leases include renewal options and, in certain leases, purchase options. Future minimum commitments for capital lease obligations (including sale-leasebacks accounted for as financings) and for operating lease obligations having remaining noncancelable lease terms in excess of one year are as follows: <table><tr><td> <i>(In millions)</i> </td><td> Capital Lease Obligations </td><td>Operating Lease Obligations</td></tr><tr><td>2004</td><td>$29</td><td>$108</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td>20</td><td>80</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td>26</td><td>67</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>34</td><td>38</td></tr><tr><td>2008</td><td>26</td><td>31</td></tr><tr><td>Later years</td><td>127</td><td>131</td></tr><tr><td>Sublease rentals</td><td>–</td><td>-77</td></tr><tr><td>Total minimum lease payments</td><td>262</td><td>$378</td></tr><tr><td>Less imputed interest costs</td><td>81</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Present value of net minimum lease payments included in long-term debt</td><td>$181</td><td></td></tr></table> In connection with past sales of various plants and operations, Marathon assigned and the purchasers assumed certain leases of major equipment used in the divested plants and operations of United States Steel. In the event of a default by any of the purchasers, United States Steel has assumed these obligations; however, Marathon remains primarily obligated for payments under these leases. Minimum lease payments under these operating lease obligations of $54 million have been included above and an equal amount has been reported as sublease rentals. Of the $181 million present value of net minimum capital lease payments, $135 million was related to obligations assumed by United States Steel under the Financial Matters Agreement. Of the $378 million total minimum operating lease payments, $18 million was assumed by United States Steel under the Financial Matters Agreement. During 2003, Marathon purchased two LNG tankers to transport LNG primarily from Kenai, Alaska to Tokyo, Japan which were previously leased. A $17 million charge was recorded on the termination of the two tanker operating leases. Operating lease rental expense was: <table><tr><td> <i>(In millions)</i> </td><td rowspan="2">2003 $182(a)</td><td rowspan="2">2002 $196(a)</td><td rowspan="2">2001 $159</td></tr><tr><td>Minimum rental</td></tr><tr><td>Contingent rental</td><td>15</td><td>13</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Sublease rentals</td><td>-9</td><td>-11</td><td>-11</td></tr><tr><td>Net rental expense</td><td>$188</td><td>$198</td><td>$161</td></tr></table> (a) Excludes $23 million and $24 million paid by United States Steel in 2003 and 2002 on assumed leases. The above discussion contains forward-looking statements with regard to the Jackpine mine expansion and Quest CCS. Some factors that could affect the Jackpine mine expansion include the inability to obtain or delay in obtaining third-party approvals and permits. The Quest CCS is subject to the inability to obtain or delay in obtaining government funds, the availability of materials and labor, unforeseen hazards such as weather conditions and other risks customarily associated with these types of projects. Actual results may differ materially from these expectations, estimates and projections and are subject to certain risks, uncertainties and other factors, some of which are beyond our control and difficult to predict. The foregoing factors (among others) could cause actual results to differ materially from those set forth in the forward-looking statements. Reserves Estimated Reserve Quantities The following table sets forth estimated quantities of our proved liquid hydrocarbon, natural gas and synthetic crude oil reserves based upon an unweighted average of closing prices for the first day of each month in the 12-month periods ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011. Included in our liquid hydrocarbon reserves are NGLs which represent approximately 7 percent, 6 percent and 5 percent of our total proved reserves on an oil equivalent barrel basis as of December 2013, 2012 and 2011. Approximately 72 percent, 63 percent and 40 percent of those NGL reserves are associated with our U. S. unconventional resource plays as of December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011. Reserves are disclosed by continent and by country if the proved reserves related to any geographic area, on an oil equivalent barrel basis, represent 15 percent or more of our total proved reserves. A geographic area can be an individual country, group of countries within a continent, or a continent. Due to the agreements entered in 2013 to sell our Angola assets, estimated proved reserves for Angola are reported as discontinued operations ("Disc Ops") for all presented periods. Approximately 73 percent of our December 31, 2013 proved reserves are located in OECD countries. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">North America</td><td colspan="3">Africa</td><td rowspan="2">Europe Total</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2013</td><td>U.S.</td><td>Canada</td><td>Total</td><td>E.G.</td><td>Other</td><td>Total</td><td>Disc Ops</td><td>GrandTotal</td></tr><tr><td>Proved Developed Reserves</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Liquid hydrocarbons(mmbbl)</td><td>292</td><td>—</td><td>292</td><td>55</td><td>176</td><td>231</td><td>78</td><td>19</td><td>620</td></tr><tr><td>Natural gas(bcf)</td><td>540</td><td>—</td><td>540</td><td>823</td><td>95</td><td>918</td><td>41</td><td>—</td><td>1,499</td></tr><tr><td>Synthetic crude oil(mmbbl)</td><td>—</td><td>674</td><td>674</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>674</td></tr><tr><td>Total proved developed reserves(mmboe)</td><td>382</td><td>674</td><td>1,056</td><td>193</td><td>192</td><td>385</td><td>84</td><td>19</td><td>1,544</td></tr><tr><td>Proved Undeveloped Reserves</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Liquid hydrocarbons(mmbbl)</td><td>324</td><td>—</td><td>324</td><td>43</td><td>39</td><td>82</td><td>11</td><td>9</td><td>426</td></tr><tr><td>Natural gas(bcf)</td><td>485</td><td>—</td><td>485</td><td>497</td><td>110</td><td>607</td><td>80</td><td>—</td><td>1,172</td></tr><tr><td>Synthetic crude oil(mmbbl)</td><td>—</td><td>6</td><td>6</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Total proved undeveloped reserves(mmboe)</td><td>405</td><td>6</td><td>411</td><td>125</td><td>57</td><td>182</td><td>25</td><td>9</td><td>627</td></tr><tr><td>Total Proved Reserves</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Liquid hydrocarbons(mmbbl)</td><td>616</td><td>—</td><td>616</td><td>98</td><td>215</td><td>313</td><td>89</td><td>28</td><td>1,046</td></tr><tr><td>Natural gas(bcf)</td><td>1,025</td><td>—</td><td>1,025</td><td>1,320</td><td>205</td><td>1,525</td><td>121</td><td>—</td><td>2,671</td></tr><tr><td>Synthetic crude oil(mmbbl)</td><td>—</td><td>680</td><td>680</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>680</td></tr><tr><td>Total proved reserves(mmboe)</td><td>787</td><td>680</td><td>1,467</td><td>318</td><td>249</td><td>567</td><td>109</td><td>28</td><td>2,171</td></tr></table> discount to Brent was narrower in 2013 than in 2012 and 2011. As a result of the significant increase in U. S. production of light sweet crude oil, the historical relationship between WTI, Brent and LLS pricing may not be indicative of future periods. Composition – The proportion of our liquid hydrocarbon sales volumes that are NGLs continues to increase due to our development of United States unconventional liquids-rich plays. NGLs were 15 percent of our North America E&P liquid hydrocarbon sales volumes in 2013 compared to 10 percent in 2012 and 7 percent in 2011. Natural gas – A significant portion of our natural gas production in the U. S. is sold at bid-week prices, or first-of-month indices relative to our specific producing areas. Average Henry Hub settlement prices for natural gas were 31 percent higher for 2013 than for 2012. International E&P Liquid hydrocarbons – Our International E&P crude oil production is relatively sweet and has historically sold in relation to the Brent crude benchmark, which on average was 3 percent lower for 2013 than 2012. Natural gas – Our major International E&P natural gas-producing regions are Europe and E. G. Natural gas prices in Europe have been considerably higher than the U. S. in recent years. In the case of E. G. , our natural gas sales are subject to term contracts, making realized prices in these areas less volatile. The natural gas sales from E. G. are at fixed prices; therefore, our reported average International E&P natural gas realized prices may not fully track market price movements. Oil Sands Mining The Oil Sands Mining segment produces and sells various qualities of synthetic crude oil. Output mix can be impacted by operational problems or planned unit outages at the mines or upgrader. Sales prices for roughly two-thirds of the normal output mix has historically tracked movements in WTI and one-third has historically tracked movements in the Canadian heavy crude oil marker, primarily WCS. The WCS discount to WTI has been increasing on average in each year presented below. Despite a wider WCS discount in 2013, our average Oil Sands Mining price realizations increased due to a greater proportion of higher value synthetic crude oil sales volumes compared to 2012. The operating cost structure of the Oil Sands Mining operations is predominantly fixed and therefore many of the costs incurred in times of full operation continue during production downtime. Per-unit costs are sensitive to production rates. Key variable costs are natural gas and diesel fuel, which track commodity markets such as the AECO natural gas sales index and crude oil prices, respectively. The table below shows average benchmark prices that impact both our revenues and variable costs: <table><tr><td>Benchmark</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>WTI crude oil(Dollars per bbl)</td><td>$98.05</td><td>$94.15</td><td>$95.11</td></tr><tr><td>WCS(Dollars per bbl)^(a)</td><td>$72.77</td><td>$73.18</td><td>$77.97</td></tr><tr><td>AECO natural gas sales index(Dollars per mmbtu)^(b)</td><td>$3.08</td><td>$2.39</td><td>$3.68</td></tr></table> Provision for income taxes increased $1,791 million in 2012 from 2011 primarily due to the increase in pretax income from continuing operations, including the impact of the resumption of sales in Libya in the first quarter of 2012. The following is an analysis of the effective income tax rates for 2012 and 2011: <table><tr><td></td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Statutory rate applied to income from continuing operations before income taxes</td><td>35%</td><td>35%</td></tr><tr><td>Effects of foreign operations, including foreign tax credits</td><td>18</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Change in permanent reinvestment assertion</td><td>—</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Adjustments to valuation allowances</td><td>21</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Tax law changes</td><td>—</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Effective income tax rate on continuing operations</td><td>74%</td><td>61%</td></tr></table> The effective income tax rate is influenced by a variety of factors including the geographic sources of income and the relative magnitude of these sources of income. The provision for income taxes is allocated on a discrete, stand-alone basis to pretax segment income and to individual items not allocated to segments. The difference between the total provision and the sum of the amounts allocated to segments appears in the "Corporate and other unallocated items" shown in the reconciliation of segment income to net income below. Effects of foreign operations – The effects of foreign operations on our effective tax rate increased in 2012 as compared to 2011, primarily due to the resumption of sales in Libya in the first quarter of 2012, where the statutory rate is in excess of 90 percent. Change in permanent reinvestment assertion – In the second quarter of 2011, we recorded $716 million of deferred U. S. tax on undistributed earnings of $2,046 million that we previously intended to permanently reinvest in foreign operations. Offsetting this tax expense were associated foreign tax credits of $488 million. In addition, we reduced our valuation allowance related to foreign tax credits by $228 million due to recognizing deferred U. S. tax on previously undistributed earnings. Adjustments to valuation allowances – In 2012 and 2011, we increased the valuation allowance against foreign tax credits because it is more likely than not that we will be unable to realize all U. S. benefits on foreign taxes accrued in those years. See Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data - Note 10 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about income taxes. Discontinued operations is presented net of tax, and reflects our downstream business that was spun off June 30, 2011 and our Angola business which we agreed to sell in 2013. See Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data – Notes 3 and 6 to the consolidated financial statements for additional information.

What is the ratio of all amount that are smaller than 100 to the sum of amount, in 2008? (in %)

NOTE 19 SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY Preferred Stock Information related to preferred stock is as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2">Preferred Shares</td></tr><tr><td>December 31Shares in thousands</td><td>Liquidationvalue per share</td><td> 2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Authorized</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>$1 par value</td><td></td><td> 16,960</td><td>16,985</td></tr><tr><td>Issued and outstanding</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Series A</td><td>$40</td><td> 6</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Series B</td><td>40</td><td> 1</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Series C</td><td>20</td><td> 119</td><td>128</td></tr><tr><td>Series D</td><td>20</td><td> 171</td><td>186</td></tr><tr><td>Series K</td><td>10,000</td><td> 50</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Series L</td><td>100,000</td><td> 2</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Series N</td><td>100,000</td><td> 76</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total issued and outstanding</td><td></td><td> 425</td><td>322</td></tr></table> On December 31, 2008, we issued $7.6 billion of Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series N, to the US Treasury under the US Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”) Capital Purchase Program, together with a warrant to purchase shares of common stock of PNC described below. Series N dividends are payable on the 15th of February, May, August and November beginning February 15, 2009. Dividends will be paid at a rate of 5.00% through February 15, 2014 and 9.00% thereafter. This preferred stock is redeemable at par plus accrued and unpaid dividends subject to the approval of our primary banking regulators. Under the TARP Capital Purchase Program, there are restrictions on common and preferred dividends and common share repurchases associated with the preferred stock issued to the US Treasury. As is typical with cumulative preferred stock, dividend payments for this preferred stock must be current before dividends can be paid on junior shares, including our common stock, or junior shares can be repurchased or redeemed. Also, the US Treasury’s consent is required for any increase in common dividends per share above the most recent level prior to October 14, 2008 until the third anniversary of the preferred stock issuance as long as the US Treasury continues to hold any of the preferred stock. Further, during that same period, the US Treasury’s consent is required, unless the preferred stock is no longer held by the US Treasury, for any share repurchases with limited exceptions, most significantly purchases of common shares in connection with any benefit plan in the ordinary course of business consistent with past practice. As part of the National City transaction, we issued 9.875% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series L in exchange for National City’s Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series F. Dividends are payable if and when declared each 1st of February, May, August and November. Dividends will be paid at a rate of 9.875% prior to February 1, 2013 and at a rate of three-month LIBOR plus 633 basis points beginning February 1, 2013. The Series L is redeemable at PNC’s option, subject to a replacement capital covenant for the first ten years after issuance and subject to Federal Reserve approval, if then applicable, on or after February 1, 2013 at a redemption price per share equal to the liquidation preference plus any declared but unpaid dividends. Also as part of the National City transaction, we established the PNC Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series M, which mirrors in all material respects the former National City Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series E. PNC has designated 5,751preferred shares, liquidation value $100,000 per share, for this series. No shares have yet been issued; however, National City issued stock purchase contracts for 5,001 shares of its Series E Preferred Stock (now replaced by the PNC Series M as part of the National City transaction) to the National City Preferred Capital Trust I in connection with the issuance by that Trust of $500 million of 12.000% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Normal Automatic Preferred Enhanced Capital Securities (the “Normal APEX Securities”) in January 2008 by the Trust. It is expected that the Trust will purchase 5,001 of the Series M preferred shares pursuant to these stock purchase contracts on December 10, 2012 or on an earlier date and possibly as late as December 10, 2013. The Trust has pledged the $500,100,000 principal amount of National City 8.729% Junior Subordinated Notes due 2043 held by the Trust and their proceeds to secure this purchase obligation. If Series M shares are issued prior to December 10, 2012, any dividends on such shares will be calculated at a rate per annum equal to 12.000% until December 10, 2012, and thereafter, at a rate per annum that will be reset quarterly and will equal three-month LIBOR for the related dividend period plus 8.610%. Dividends will be payable if and when declared by the Board at the dividend rate so indicated applied to the liquidation preference per share of the Series M Preferred Stock. The Series M is redeemable at PNC’s option, subject to a replacement capital covenant for the first ten years after issuance and subject to Federal Reserve approval, if then applicable, on or after December 10, 2012 at a redemption price per share equal to the liquidation preference plus any declared but unpaid dividends. As a result of the National City transaction, we assumed National City’s obligations under replacement capital covenants with respect to (i) the Normal APEX Securities and our Series M shares and (ii) National City’s 6,000,000 of Depositary Shares (each representing 1/4000th of an interest in a share of our 9.875% Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series L), whereby we agreed not to cause the redemption or repurchase of the Normal APEX or Depositary Shares, as applicable, or the underlying Preferred Stock and/or junior subordinated notes, as applicable, unless such repurchases or redemptions are made from the proceeds of the issuance of certain qualified securities and pursuant to the other terms and conditions set amount of unrecognized tax benefit related to permanent differences because a portion of those unrecognized benefits relate to state tax matters. It is reasonably possible that the liability for uncertain tax positions could increase or decrease in the next twelve months due to completion of tax authorities’ exams or the expiration of statutes of limitations. Management estimates that the liability for uncertain tax positions could decrease by $5 million within the next twelve months. The consolidated federal income tax returns of The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. and subsidiaries through 2003 have been audited by the Internal Revenue Service and we have resolved all disputed matters through the IRS appeals division. The Internal Revenue Service is currently examining the 2004 through 2006 consolidated federal income tax returns of The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. and subsidiaries. The consolidated federal income tax returns of National City Corporation and subsidiaries through 2004 have been audited by the Internal Revenue Service and we have reached agreement in principle on resolution of all disputed matters through the IRS appeals division. However, because the agreement is still subject to execution of a closing agreement we have not treated it as effectively settled. The Internal Revenue Service is currently examining the 2005 through 2007 consolidated federal income tax returns of National City Corporation and subsidiaries, and we expect the 2008 federal income tax return to begin being audited as soon as it is filed. New York, New Jersey, Maryland and New York City are principally where we were subject to state and local income tax prior to our acquisition of National City. The state of New York is currently in the process of closing the 2002 to 2004 audit and will begin auditing the years 2005 and 2006. New York City is currently auditing 2004 and 2005. However, years 2002 and 2003 remain subject to examination by New York City pending completion of the New York state audit. Through 2006, BlackRock is included in our New York and New York City combined tax filings and constituted most of the tax liability. Years subsequent to 2004 remain subject to examination by New Jersey and years subsequent to 2005 remain subject to examination by Maryland. National City was principally subject to state and local income tax in California, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, and Missouri. Audits currently in process for these states include: California (2003-2004), Illinois (2004-2006) and Missouri (2003-2005). We will now also be principally subject to tax in those states. In the ordinary course of business we are routinely subject to audit by the taxing authorities of these states and at any given time a number of audits will be in process. Our policy is to classify interest and penalties associated with income taxes as income taxes. At January 1, 2008, we had accrued $91 million of interest related to tax positions, most of which related to our cross-border leasing transactions. The total accrued interest and penalties at December 31, 2008 was $164 million. While the leasing related interest decreased with a payment to the IRS, the $73 million net increase primarily resulted from our acquisition of National City. NOTE 22 SUMMARIZED FINANCIAL INFORMATION OF BLACKROCK As required by SEC Regulation S-X, summarized consolidated financial information of BlackRock follows (in millions). <table><tr><td>December 31</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets</td><td>$19,924</td><td>$22,561</td></tr><tr><td>Total liabilities</td><td>$7,367</td><td>$10,387</td></tr><tr><td>Non-controlling interest</td><td>491</td><td>578</td></tr><tr><td>Stockholders’ equity</td><td>12,066</td><td>11,596</td></tr><tr><td>Total liabilities, non-controlling interest and stockholders’ equity</td><td>$19,924</td><td>$22,561</td></tr><tr><td>Year ended December 31</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenue</td><td>$5,064</td><td>$4,845</td></tr><tr><td>Total expenses</td><td>3,471</td><td>3,551</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income</td><td>1,593</td><td>1,294</td></tr><tr><td>Non-operating income (expense)</td><td>-574</td><td>529</td></tr><tr><td>Income before income taxes and non-controlling interest</td><td>1,019</td><td>1,823</td></tr><tr><td>Income taxes</td><td>388</td><td>464</td></tr><tr><td>Non-controlling interest</td><td>-155</td><td>364</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>$786</td><td>$995</td></tr></table> NOTE 23 REGULATORY MATTERS We are subject to the regulations of certain federal and state agencies and undergo periodic examinations by such regulatory authorities. The access to and cost of funding new business initiatives including acquisitions, the ability to pay dividends, the level of deposit insurance costs, and the level and nature of regulatory oversight depend, in large part, on a financial institution’s capital strength. The minimum US regulatory capital ratios are 4% for tier 1 risk-based, 8% for total riskbased and 4% for leverage. However, regulators may require higher capital levels when particular circumstances warrant. To qualify as “well capitalized,” regulators require banks to maintain capital ratios of at least 6% for tier 1 risk-based, 10% for total risk-based and 5% for leverage. At December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007, each of our domestic bank subsidiaries met the “well capitalized” capital ratio requirements. We recorded such loans at estimated fair value and considered them to be performing, even if contractually past due (or if we do not expect to receive payment in full based on the original contractual terms), since certain purchase accounting adjustments will be accreted to interest income over time. The accretion will represent the discount associated with the difference between the expected cash flows and estimated fair value of the loans. This accounting treatment resulted in the return to performing status of $3.2 billion of loans previously classified as nonperforming by National City. The purchase accounting adjustments were estimated as of December 31, 2008 and such estimates may be refined during the first quarter of 2009. At December 31, 2008, our largest nonperforming asset was approximately $36 million and our average nonperforming loan associated with commercial lending was less than $1 million. The amount of nonperforming loans that was current as to principal and interest was $555 million at December 31, 2008 and $178 million at December 31, 2007. Accruing Loans Past Due 90 Days Or More- Summary <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> Amount</td><td colspan="2"> Percent of Total Outstandings</td></tr><tr><td>Dollars in millions</td><td> Dec. 31 2008 (a)</td><td>Dec. 312007</td><td>Dec. 31 2008 (a)</td><td>Dec. 312007</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>$97</td><td>$14</td><td>.14%</td><td>.05%</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>723</td><td>18</td><td>2.81</td><td>.20</td></tr><tr><td>Equipment lease financing</td><td>2</td><td></td><td>.03</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Consumer</td><td>419</td><td>49</td><td>.80</td><td>.27</td></tr><tr><td>Residential real estate</td><td>2,011</td><td>43</td><td>9.32</td><td>.45</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>7</td><td>12</td><td>.37</td><td>2.91</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$3,259</td><td>$136</td><td>1.86%</td><td>.20%</td></tr></table> (a) Amounts include the impact of National City. Loans that are not included in nonperforming or past due categories but cause us to be uncertain about the borrower’s ability to comply with existing repayment terms over the next six months totaled $745 million at December 31, 2008, compared with $134 million at December 31, 2007. Allowances For Loan And Lease Losses And Unfunded Loan Commitments And Letters Of Credit We maintain an allowance for loan and lease losses to absorb losses from the loan portfolio. We determine the allowance based on quarterly assessments of the probable estimated losses inherent in the loan portfolio. While we make allocations to specific loans and pools of loans, the total reserve is available for all loan and lease losses. In addition to the allowance for loan and lease losses, we maintain an allowance for unfunded loan commitments and letters of credit. We report this allowance as a liability on our Consolidated Balance Sheet. We determine this amount using estimates of the probability of the ultimate funding and losses related to those credit exposures. This methodology is similar to the one we use for determining the adequacy of our allowance for loan and lease losses. We refer you to Note 5 Asset Quality in the Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Report regarding changes in the allowance for loan and lease losses and in the allowance for unfunded loan commitments and letters of credit. Also see the Allocation Of Allowance For Loan And Lease Losses table in the Statistical Information (Unaudited) section of Item 8 of this Report for additional information included herein by reference. We establish specific allowances for loans considered impaired using a method prescribed by SFAS 114, “Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan. ” All impaired loans except leases and large groups of smallerbalance homogeneous loans which may include but are not limited to credit card, residential mortgage, and consumer installment loans are subject to SFAS 114 analysis. Specific allowances for individual loans over a set dollar threshold are determined by our Special Asset Committee based on an analysis of the present value of expected future cash flows from the loans discounted at their effective interest rate, observable market price, or the fair value of the underlying collateral. We establish specific allowance on all other impaired loans based on the loss given default credit risk rating. Allocations to non-impaired commercial and commercial real estate loans (pool reserve allocations) are assigned to pools of loans as defined by our business structure and are based on internal probability of default and loss given default credit risk ratings. Key elements of the pool reserve methodology include: ? Probability of default (“PD”), which is primarily based on historical default analyses and is derived from the borrower’s internal PD credit risk rating; ? Exposure at default (“EAD”), which is derived from historical default data; and ? Loss given default (“LGD”), which is based on historical loss data, collateral value and other structural factors that may affect our ultimate ability to collect on the loan and is derived from the loan’s internal LGD credit risk rating. Our pool reserve methodology is sensitive to changes in key risk parameters such as PDs, LGDs and EADs. In general, a given change in any of the major risk parameters will have a corresponding change in the pool reserve allocations for non-impaired commercial loans. Our commercial loans are the largest category of credits and are most sensitive to changes in the key risk parameters and pool reserve loss rates. To illustrate, if we increase the pool reserve loss rates by 5% for all categories of non-impaired commercial loans, then the

What will active in equity be like in 2018 if it develops with the same increasing rate as current? (in million)

used to refinance certain indebtedness which matured in the fourth quarter of 2014. Interest is payable semi-annually in arrears on March 18 and September 18 of each year, or approximately $35 million per year. The 2024 Notes may be redeemed prior to maturity at any time in whole or in part at the option of the Company at a “make-whole” redemption price. The unamortized discount and debt issuance costs are being amortized over the remaining term of the 2024 Notes.2022 Notes. In May 2012, the Company issued $1.5 billion in aggregate principal amount of unsecured unsubordinated obligations. These notes were issued as two separate series of senior debt securities, including $750 million of 1.375% notes, which were repaid in June 2015 at maturity, and $750 million of 3.375% notes maturing in June 2022 (the “2022 Notes”). Net proceeds were used to fund the repurchase of BlackRock’s common stock and Series B Preferred from Barclays and affiliates and for general corporate purposes. Interest on the 2022 Notes of approximately $25 million per year is payable semi-annually on June 1 and December 1 of each year. The 2022 Notes may be redeemed prior to maturity at any time in whole or in part at the option of the Company at a “make-whole” redemption price. The “make-whole” redemption price represents a price, subject to the specific terms of the 2022 Notes and related indenture, that is the greater of (a) par value and (b) the present value of future payments that will not be paid because of an early redemption, which is discounted at a fixed spread over a comparable Treasury security. The unamortized discount and debt issuance costs are being amortized over the remaining term of the 2022 Notes.2021 Notes. In May 2011, the Company issued $1.5 billion in aggregate principal amount of unsecured unsubordinated obligations. These notes were issued as two separate series of senior debt securities, including $750 million of 4.25% notes maturing in May 2021 and $750 million of floating rate notes, which were repaid in May 2013 at maturity. Net proceeds of this offering were used to fund the repurchase of BlackRock’s Series B Preferred from affiliates of Merrill Lynch & Co. , Inc. Interest on the 4.25% notes due in 2021 (“2021 Notes”) is payable semi-annually on May 24 and November 24 of each year, and is approximately $32 million per year. The 2021 Notes may be redeemed prior to maturity at any time in whole or in part at the option of the Company at a “make-whole” redemption price. The unamortized discount and debt issuance costs are being amortized over the remaining term of the 2021 Notes.2019 Notes. In December 2009, the Company issued $2.5 billion in aggregate principal amount of unsecured and unsubordinated obligations. These notes were issued as three separate series of senior debt securities including $0.5 billion of 2.25% notes, which were repaid in December 2012, $1.0 billion of 3.50% notes, which were repaid in December 2014 at maturity, and $1.0 billion of 5.0% notes maturing in December 2019 (the “2019 Notes”). Net proceeds of this offering were used to repay borrowings under the CP Program, which was used to finance a portion of the acquisition of Barclays Global Investors from Barclays on December 1, 2009, and for general corporate purposes. Interest on the 2019 Notes of approximately $50 million per year is payable semi-annually in arrears on June 10 and December 10 of each year. These notes may be redeemed prior to maturity at any time in whole or in part at the option of the Company at a “make-whole” redemption price. The unamortized discount and debt issuance costs are being amortized over the remaining term of the 2019 Notes.13. Commitments and Contingencies Operating Lease Commitments The Company leases its primary office spaces under agreements that expire through 2043. Future minimum commitments under these operating leases are as follows: <table><tr><td>Year</td><td>Amount</td></tr><tr><td>2018</td><td>141</td></tr><tr><td>2019</td><td>132</td></tr><tr><td>2020</td><td>126</td></tr><tr><td>2021</td><td>118</td></tr><tr><td>2022</td><td>109</td></tr><tr><td>Thereafter</td><td>1,580</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$2,206</td></tr></table> In May 2017, the Company entered into an agreement with 50 HYMC Owner LLC, for the lease of approximately 847,000 square feet of office space located at 50 Hudson Yards, New York, New York. The term of the lease is twenty years from the date that rental payments begin, expected to occur in May 2023, with the option to renew for a specified term. The lease requires annual base rental payments of approximately $51 million per year during the first five years of the lease term, increasing every five years to $58 million, $66 million and $74 million per year (or approximately $1.2 billion in base rent over its twenty-year term). This lease is classified as an operating lease and, as such, is not recorded as a liability on the consolidated statements of financial condition. Rent expense and certain office equipment expense under lease agreements amounted to $132 million, $134 million and $136 million in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Investment Commitments. At December 31, 2017, the Company had $298 million of various capital commitments to fund sponsored investment funds, including consolidated VIEs. These funds include private equity funds, real assets funds, and opportunistic funds. This amount excludes additional commitments made by consolidated funds of funds to underlying third-party funds as third-party noncontrolling interest holders have the legal obligation to fund the respective commitments of such funds of funds. Generally, the timing of the funding of these commitments is unknown and the commitments are callable on demand at any time prior to the expiration of the commitment. These unfunded commitments are not recorded on the consolidated statements of financial condition. These commitments do not include potential future commitments approved by the Company that are not yet legally binding. The Company intends to make additional capital commitments from time to time to fund additional investment products for, and with, its clients. Contingencies Contingent Payments Related to Business Acquisitions. In connection with certain acquisitions, BlackRock is required to make contingent payments, subject to achieving specified performance targets, which may include revenue related to acquired contracts or new capital commitments for certain products. The fair value of the remaining aggregate contingent payments at December 31, 2017 totaled $236 million, including $128 million related to the First Reserve Transaction, and is included in other liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. Institutional active AUM ended 2017 at $1.1 trillion, reflecting $5.9 billion of net inflows. Institutional active represented 19% of long-term AUM and 18% of long-term base fees. Growth in AUM reflected continued strength in multi-asset products with net inflows of $19.6 billion reflecting ongoing demand for solutions offerings and the LifePath? target-date suite. Alternatives net inflows of $0.6 billion were led by inflows into infrastructure, hedge fund solutions and alternatives solutions offerings. Excluding return of capital and investment of $6.0 billion, alternatives net inflows were $6.6 billion. In addition, 2017 was another strong fundraising year for illiquid alternatives, and we raised approximately $11 billion in new commitments, which will be a source of future net inflows. Equity and fixed income net outflows were $13.6 billion and $0.7 billion, respectively. Institutional index AUM totaled $2.3 trillion at December 31, 2017, reflecting net inflows of $49.1 billion. Fixed income net inflows of $87.5 billion were driven by demand for liabilitydriven investment solutions, particularly in Europe. Equity net outflows of $34.8 billion were primarily due to low-fee regional index equity outflows as clients looked to re-allocate, re-balance or meet their cash needs. Alternatives net outflows of $2.9 billion reflected outflows from passive currency overlays. Institutional index represented 40% of long-term AUM at December 31, 2017 and accounted for 10% of long-term base fees for 2017. The Company’s institutional clients consist of the following: ? Pensions, Foundations and Endowments. BlackRock is among the world’s largest managers of pension plan assets with $2.403 trillion, or 69%, of long-term institutional AUM managed for defined benefit, defined contribution and other pension plans for corporations, governments and unions at December 31, 2017. The market landscape continues to shift from defined benefit to defined contribution, driving strong flows in our defined contribution channel, which had $46.5 billion of long-term net inflows for the year, driven by continued demand for our LifePath target-date suite. Defined contribution represented $887.1 billion of total pension AUM, and we remain well positioned to capitalize on the on-going evolution of the defined contribution market and demand for outcome-oriented investments. An additional $76.4 billion, or 2%, of longterm institutional AUM was managed for other tax-exempt investors, including charities, foundations and endowments. ? Official Institutions. BlackRock managed $195.3 billion, or 6%, of long-term institutional AUM for official institutions, including central banks, sovereign wealth funds, supranationals, multilateral entities and government ministries and agencies at year-end 2017. These clients often require specialized investment advice, the use of customized benchmarks and training support. ? Financial and Other Institutions. BlackRock is a top independent manager of assets for insurance companies, which accounted for $274.3 billion, or 8%, of institutional long-term AUM at year-end 2017. Assets managed for other taxable institutions, including corporations, banks and third-party fund sponsors for which we provide sub-advisory services, totaled $506.9 billion, or 15%, of long-term institutional AUM at year-end. PRODUCT TYPE AND INVESTMENT STYLE Component changes in AUM by product type and investment style for 2017 are presented below. <table><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>December 31,2016</td><td>Net inflows (outflows)</td><td>Acquisition^-1</td><td>Market change</td><td>FXimpact</td><td>December 31,2017</td></tr><tr><td>Equity:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Active</td><td>$275,033</td><td>$-18,506</td><td>$—</td><td>$46,134</td><td>$8,548</td><td>$311,209</td></tr><tr><td>iSharesETFs</td><td>951,252</td><td>174,377</td><td>—</td><td>189,472</td><td>14,509</td><td>1,329,610</td></tr><tr><td>Non-ETF index</td><td>1,430,891</td><td>-25,725</td><td>—</td><td>289,829</td><td>35,827</td><td>1,730,822</td></tr><tr><td>Equity subtotal</td><td>2,657,176</td><td>130,146</td><td>—</td><td>525,435</td><td>58,884</td><td>3,371,641</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed income:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Active</td><td>749,996</td><td>21,541</td><td>—</td><td>28,800</td><td>14,798</td><td>815,135</td></tr><tr><td>iSharesETFs</td><td>314,707</td><td>67,451</td><td>—</td><td>4,497</td><td>8,597</td><td>395,252</td></tr><tr><td>Non-ETF index</td><td>507,662</td><td>89,795</td><td>—</td><td>14,324</td><td>33,297</td><td>645,078</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed income subtotal</td><td>1,572,365</td><td>178,787</td><td>—</td><td>47,621</td><td>56,692</td><td>1,855,465</td></tr><tr><td>Multi-asset</td><td>395,007</td><td>20,330</td><td>—</td><td>49,560</td><td>15,381</td><td>480,278</td></tr><tr><td>Alternatives:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Core</td><td>88,630</td><td>780</td><td>3,264</td><td>3,438</td><td>2,421</td><td>98,533</td></tr><tr><td>Currency and commodities</td><td>28,308</td><td>197</td><td>—</td><td>1,813</td><td>496</td><td>30,814</td></tr><tr><td>Alternatives subtotal</td><td>116,938</td><td>977</td><td>3,264</td><td>5,251</td><td>2,917</td><td>129,347</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term</td><td>4,741,486</td><td>330,240</td><td>3,264</td><td>627,867</td><td>133,874</td><td>5,836,731</td></tr><tr><td>Cash management</td><td>403,584</td><td>38,259</td><td>—</td><td>1,239</td><td>6,867</td><td>449,949</td></tr><tr><td>Advisory</td><td>2,782</td><td>-1,245</td><td>—</td><td>-205</td><td>183</td><td>1,515</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$5,147,852</td><td>$367,254</td><td>$3,264</td><td>$628,901</td><td>$140,924</td><td>$6,288,195</td></tr></table> (1) Amount represents AUM acquired in the First Reserve Transaction. occurs, at which time they are recorded as adjustments to interest expense over the term of the related notes. At December 31, 2005, AOCI included a deferred loss of $4.1 million, net of tax, related to an interest rate swap. This amount is being reclassified into earnings as adjustments to interest expense over the term of the Company’s 51?4% senior notes due 2014. At December 31, 2004, the amount of deferred loss included in AOCI was $4.6 million, net of tax. The amounts amortized to interest expense were $0.8 million and $0.5 million for the years ending December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Note 13 – Equity Method Investments Noble Energy owns a 45% interest in Atlantic Methanol Production Company, LLC (‘‘AMPCO’’), which owns and operates a methanol production facility and related facilities in Equatorial Guinea and a 28% interest in Alba Plant, LLC (‘‘Alba Plant’’), which owns and operates a liquefied petroleum gas (‘‘LPG’’) processing plant. Construction of the Alba Plant was funded primarily through advances by the Company and other owners in exchange for notes payable by the Alba Plant. The notes mature on December 31, 2011 and bear interest at the 90-day LIBOR rate plus 3%. Noble Energy owns 50% interests in AMPCO Marketing, LLC and AMPCO Services, LLC, which provide technical and consulting services. These investments, which are accounted for using the equity method, are included in equity method investments on the Company’s balance sheets, and the Company’s share of earnings is reported as income from equity method investments on the Company’s statements of operations. Summarized, 100% combined financial information for equity method investees was as follows: Balance Sheet Information <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"> December 31, </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> 2005 </td><td> 2004 </td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"> (in thousands) </td></tr><tr><td>Current assets</td><td>$274,484</td><td>$174,864</td></tr><tr><td>Noncurrent assets</td><td>877,402</td><td>826,499</td></tr><tr><td>Current liabilities</td><td>119,912</td><td>118,784</td></tr><tr><td>Noncurrent liabilities</td><td>450,156</td><td>381,509</td></tr></table> Statements of Operations Information

As As the chart 2 shows, what is the Weighted average exercise price for Balance at December 31, 2005 ?

Japanese Yen (approximately $63 million and $188 million, respectively, based on applicable exchange rates at that time). The cash paid of approximately $63 million during the quarter ended March 31, 2010 as a result of the purchase of Sumitomo 3M shares from SEI is classified as “Other financing activities” in the consolidated statement of cash flows. The remainder of the purchase financed by the note payable to SEI is considered non-cash financing activity in the first quarter of 2010. As discussed in Note 2, during the second quarter of 2010, 3M recorded a financed liability of 1.7 billion Japanese yen (approximately $18 million based on applicable exchange rates at that time) related to the A-One acquisition, which is also considered a non-cash financing activity. Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements and Contractual Obligations: As of December 31, 2012, the Company has not utilized special purpose entities to facilitate off-balance sheet financing arrangements. Refer to the section entitled “Warranties/Guarantees” in Note 13 for discussion of accrued product warranty liabilities and guarantees. In addition to guarantees, 3M, in the normal course of business, periodically enters into agreements that require the Company to indemnify either major customers or suppliers for specific risks, such as claims for injury or property damage arising out of the use of 3M products or the negligence of 3M personnel, or claims alleging that 3M products infringe thirdparty patents or other intellectual property. While 3M’s maximum exposure under these indemnification provisions cannot be estimated, these indemnifications are not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations or financial condition. A summary of the Company’s significant contractual obligations as of December 31, 2012, follows: Contractual Obligations <table><tr><td></td><td></td><td>Payments due by year</td></tr><tr><td>(Millions)</td><td>Total</td><td>2013</td><td>2014</td><td>2015</td><td>2016</td><td>2017</td><td>After 2017</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt, including current portion (Note 9)</td><td>$5,902</td><td>$986</td><td>$1,481</td><td>$107</td><td>$994</td><td>$648</td><td>$1,686</td></tr><tr><td>Interest on long-term debt</td><td>1,721</td><td>189</td><td>152</td><td>97</td><td>96</td><td>79</td><td>1,108</td></tr><tr><td>Operating leases (Note 13)</td><td>735</td><td>194</td><td>158</td><td>119</td><td>77</td><td>68</td><td>119</td></tr><tr><td>Capital leases (Note 13)</td><td>96</td><td>22</td><td>21</td><td>8</td><td>7</td><td>4</td><td>34</td></tr><tr><td>Unconditional purchase obligations and other</td><td>1,489</td><td>1,060</td><td>209</td><td>111</td><td>48</td><td>33</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>Total contractual cash obligations</td><td>$9,943</td><td>$2,451</td><td>$2,021</td><td>$442</td><td>$1,222</td><td>$832</td><td>$2,975</td></tr></table> Long-term debt payments due in 2013 and 2014 include floating rate notes totaling $132 million (classified as current portion of long-term debt) and $97 million, respectively, as a result of put provisions associated with these debt instruments. Unconditional purchase obligations are defined as an agreement to purchase goods or services that is enforceable and legally binding on the Company. Included in the unconditional purchase obligations category above are certain obligations related to take or pay contracts, capital commitments, service agreements and utilities. These estimates include both unconditional purchase obligations with terms in excess of one year and normal ongoing purchase obligations with terms of less than one year. Many of these commitments relate to take or pay contracts, in which 3M guarantees payment to ensure availability of products or services that are sold to customers. The Company expects to receive consideration (products or services) for these unconditional purchase obligations. Contractual capital commitments are included in the preceding table, but these commitments represent a small part of the Company’s expected capital spending in 2013 and beyond. The purchase obligation amounts do not represent the entire anticipated purchases in the future, but represent only those items for which the Company is contractually obligated. The majority of 3M’s products and services are purchased as needed, with no unconditional commitment. For this reason, these amounts will not provide a reliable indicator of the Company’s expected future cash outflows on a stand-alone basis. Other obligations, included in the preceding table within the caption entitled “Unconditional purchase obligations and other,” include the current portion of the liability for uncertain tax positions under ASC 740, which is expected to be paid out in cash in the next 12 months. The Company is not able to reasonably estimate the timing of the long-term payments or the amount by which the liability will increase or decrease over time; therefore, the long-term portion of the net tax liability of $170 million is excluded from the preceding table. Refer to Note 7 for further details. Compensation expense was determined from the estimates of fair values of stock options granted using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. The following summarizes the weighted average of fair value and the significant assumptions used in applying the Black-Scholes model for options granted: <table><tr><td></td><td> 2006 </td><td> 2005 </td><td> 2004 </td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average of fair value for options granted</td><td>$15.02</td><td>15.33</td><td>11.85</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average assumptions used:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Expected dividend yield</td><td>2.0%</td><td>2.0%</td><td>2.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected volatility</td><td>18.0%</td><td>25.0%</td><td>26.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Risk-free interest rate</td><td>4.95%</td><td>3.95%</td><td>3.11%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected life (in years)</td><td>4.1</td><td>4.1</td><td>3.8</td></tr></table> The methodology used to estimate the fair values of stock options is consistent with the estimates used for the pro forma presentation in years prior to the adoption of SFAS 123R. The assumptions for expected dividend yield, expected volatility and expected life reflect management’s judgment and include consideration of historical experience. Expected volatility is based on historical volatility. The risk-free interest rate is based on the U. S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant for periods corresponding with the expected life of the option. The following summarizes our stock option activity for the three years ended December 31, 2006: <table><tr><td></td><td> Number of shares </td><td> Weighted average exercise price </td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2003</td><td>7,570,645</td><td>$49.51</td></tr><tr><td>Granted</td><td>2,279,621</td><td>57.28</td></tr><tr><td>Exercised</td><td>-1,812,594</td><td>48.32</td></tr><tr><td>Expired</td><td>-170,662</td><td>52.54</td></tr><tr><td>Forfeited</td><td>-233,235</td><td>51.59</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2004</td><td>7,633,775</td><td>51.98</td></tr><tr><td>Granted</td><td>912,905</td><td>71.37</td></tr><tr><td>Assumed in acquisition</td><td>1,559,693</td><td>47.44</td></tr><tr><td>Exercised</td><td>-1,872,753</td><td>50.00</td></tr><tr><td>Expired</td><td>-519,521</td><td>66.53</td></tr><tr><td>Forfeited</td><td>-216,533</td><td>55.46</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2005</td><td>7,497,566</td><td>52.79</td></tr><tr><td>Granted</td><td>979,274</td><td>81.14</td></tr><tr><td>Exercised</td><td>-1,631,012</td><td>49.43</td></tr><tr><td>Expired</td><td>-52,398</td><td>50.00</td></tr><tr><td>Forfeited</td><td>-106,641</td><td>62.89</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2006</td><td>6,686,789</td><td>57.62</td></tr><tr><td>Outstanding options exercisable as of:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2006</td><td>4,409,971</td><td>$50.73</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2005</td><td>4,663,707</td><td>49.04</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2004</td><td>3,711,405</td><td>51.02</td></tr></table> We issue new authorized shares for the exercise of stock options. During 2006, the total intrinsic value of options exercised was approximately $50.8 million. Additional selected information on stock options at December 31, 2006 follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> Outstanding options </td><td colspan="2"> Exercisable options </td></tr><tr><td> Exercise price range</td><td> Number of shares </td><td> Weighted average exercise price </td><td> Weighted average remaining contractual life (years) </td><td> Number of shares </td><td> Weighted average exercise price </td></tr><tr><td>$ 0.32 to $ 19.99</td><td>76,164</td><td>$11.63</td><td>0.9-1</td><td>76,164</td><td>$11.63</td></tr><tr><td>$ 20.00 to $ 39.99</td><td>190,986</td><td>27.44</td><td>2.2</td><td>190,986</td><td>27.44</td></tr><tr><td>$ 40.00 to $ 44.99</td><td>1,290,243</td><td>42.23</td><td>2.6</td><td>1,290,243</td><td>42.23</td></tr><tr><td>$ 45.00 to $ 49.99</td><td>356,590</td><td>48.30</td><td>4.6</td><td>356,590</td><td>48.30</td></tr><tr><td>$ 50.00 to $ 54.99</td><td>1,011,382</td><td>53.72</td><td>2.4</td><td>1,006,735</td><td>53.71</td></tr><tr><td>$ 55.00 to $ 59.99</td><td>1,550,516</td><td>56.92</td><td>4.5</td><td>917,585</td><td>57.03</td></tr><tr><td>$ 60.00 to $ 64.99</td><td>172,390</td><td>61.51</td><td>2.7</td><td>102,522</td><td>61.72</td></tr><tr><td>$ 65.00 to $ 69.99</td><td>198,253</td><td>67.30</td><td>6.4</td><td>146,699</td><td>67.42</td></tr><tr><td>$ 70.00 to $ 74.99</td><td>759,814</td><td>70.86</td><td>5.5</td><td>255,919</td><td>70.91</td></tr><tr><td>$ 75.00 to $ 79.99</td><td>116,126</td><td>75.92</td><td>6.0</td><td>57,528</td><td>75.84</td></tr><tr><td>$ 80.00 to $ 82.92</td><td>964,325</td><td>81.14</td><td>6.4</td><td>9,000</td><td>80.65</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>6,686,789</td><td>57.62</td><td>4.2-1</td><td>4,409,971</td><td>50.73</td></tr></table> 1 The weighted average remaining contractual life excludes 35,023 stock options that do not have a fixed expiration date. They expire between the date of termination and one year from the date of termination, depending upon certain circumstances. For outstanding options at December 31, 2006, the aggregate intrinsic value was $166.0 million. For exercisable options at December 31, 2006, the aggregate intrinsic value was $139.9 million and the weighted average remaining contractual life was 3.4 years, excluding the stock options previously noted without a fixed expiration date. The previous tables do not include options for employees to purchase common stock of our subsidiaries, TCBO and NetDeposit. At December 31, 2006 for TCBO, there were options to purchase 87,000 shares at an exercise price of $20.00. At December 31, 2006, there were 1,038,000 issued and outstanding shares of TCBO common stock. For NetDeposit, there were options to purchase 11,739,920 shares at exercise prices from $0.42 to $1.00. At December 31, 2006, there were 100,536,568 issued and outstanding shares of NetDeposit common stock. TCBO and NetDeposit options are included in the previous pro forma disclosure. Net income increased 6.0% to $172.6 million in 2006 compared with $162.9 million for 2005, and $145.8 million for 2004. Loan growth, interest rate risk management, credit management, customer profitability management and expense control were the primary contributors to the positive results of operations for 2006 while the loss of deposits and higher cost of funding negatively impacted earnings. Net interest income for 2006 increased $18.0 million or 4.0% to $469.4 million compared to $451.4 million for 2005 and $410.2 million for 2004. CB&T’s net interest margin was 4.81%, 4.91% and 4.78% for 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The bank strives to maintain a slightly asset-sensitive position with regard to interest rate risk management, meaning that when market interest rates rise, the net interest margin increases. Net interest income in 2006 increased although the margin narrowed due to the flattening yield curve and the competitive pressures of increases in interest rates on deposits and increased reliance on higher cost nondeposit funding. The efficiency ratio has improved in each of the past three years: 44.4% for 2006, 46.3% for 2005, and 47.9% for 2004. CB&T continues to focus on managing operating efficiencies and costs in relation to revenue. Total revenue was $550.1 million, an increase of 4.5% over $526.4 million in 2005. Noninterest expense grew to $244.6 million, an increase of 0.3% over $243.9 million in 2005. This modest expense growth was primarily due to strong controls over staffing levels and other variable expenses. Full-time equivalent employees declined to 1,659 in December 2006 from 1,673 in December 2005. Schedule 15 CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST <table><tr><td></td><td> 2006 </td><td> 2005 </td><td> 2004 </td></tr><tr><td> PERFORMANCE RATIOS</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Return on average assets</td><td>1.59%</td><td>1.59%</td><td>1.51%</td></tr><tr><td>Return on average common equity</td><td>15.40%</td><td>15.53%</td><td>14.52%</td></tr><tr><td>Efficiency ratio</td><td>44.42%</td><td>46.29%</td><td>47.93%</td></tr><tr><td>Net interest margin</td><td>4.81%</td><td>4.91%</td><td>4.78%</td></tr><tr><td> OTHER INFORMATION</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Full-time equivalent employees</td><td>1,659</td><td>1,673</td><td>1,722</td></tr><tr><td>Domestic offices:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Traditional branches</td><td>91</td><td>91</td><td>91</td></tr><tr><td>ATMs</td><td>103</td><td>105</td><td>107</td></tr></table> Net loans and leases grew $421 million or 5.5% in 2006 compared to 2005. Commercial, small business, real estate construction, and commercial real estate loans grew modestly in 2006 compared to 2005, while consumer loans declined and residential real estate loans remained flat. CB&T does not expect overall loan growth in 2007 to be much different than 2006 given the tenuous business climate particularly in its primary Southern California commercial and residential real estate construction and development markets. Total deposits declined $486 million or 5.5% in 2006 compared to 2005. The ratio of noninterest-bearing deposits to total deposits was 33.6% and 33.2% for 2006 and 2005, respectively. Reflecting general banking conditions in California, CB&T was challenged in its deposit growth in 2006 and expects to continue to be challenged in 2007. Nonperforming assets were $27.1 million at December 31, 2006 compared to $20.0 million one year ago. Nonperforming assets to net loans and other real estate owned at December 31, 2006 was 0.34% compared to 0.26% at December 31, 2005. Net loan and lease charge-offs were $10.9 million for 2006 compared with $4.9 million for 2005. CB&T’s loan loss provision was $15.0 million for 2006 compared to $9.9 million for 2005. The ratio of the allowance for loan losses to nonperforming loans was 360.3% at year-end 2006 compared to 512.1% at year-end 2005. The ratio of the allowance for loan losses to net loans and leases was 1.17% and 1.18% at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Amegy Corporation Amegy is headquartered in Houston, Texas and operates Amegy Bank, the tenth largest full-service commercial bank in Texas measured by deposits in the state. Amegy operates 64 full-service traditional branches and 8 banking centers in grocery stores in the Houston metropolitan area, and five traditional branches and one loan production office in the Dallas metropolitan area. During the first quarter of 2007, Amegy continued its expansion into the attractive markets in Texas by opening its first location in San Antonio, a loan production office to serve the Central Texas market. Amegy also operates a broker-dealer (Amegy Investments, Inc), a trust and private bank group, and a mortgage bank (Amegy Mortgage Company). The Texas economy is the eleventh largest in the world with two-thirds of all state economic activity occurring in We monitor this risk through the use of two complementary measurement methods: duration of equity and income simulation. In the duration of equity method, we measure the expected changes in the market values of equity in response to changes in interest rates. In the income simulation method, we analyze the expected changes in income in response to changes in interest rates. Duration of equity is derived by first calculating the dollar duration of all assets, liabilities and derivative instruments. Dollar duration is determined by calculating the market value of each instrument assuming interest rates sustain immediate and parallel movements up 1% and down 1%. The average of these two changes in market value is the dollar duration. Subtracting the dollar duration of liabilities from the dollar duration of assets and adding the net dollar duration of derivative instruments results in the dollar duration of equity. Duration of equity is computed by dividing the dollar duration of equity by the market value of equity. Income simulation is an estimate of the net interest income that would be recognized under different rate environments. Net interest income is measured under several parallel and nonparallel interest rate environments and deposit repricing assumptions, taking into account an estimate of the possible exercise of options within the portfolio. Both of these measurement methods require that we assess a number of variables and make various assumptions in managing the Company’s exposure to changes in interest rates. The assessments address loan and security prepayments, early deposit withdrawals, and other embedded options and noncontrollable events. As a result of uncertainty about the maturity and repricing characteristics of both deposits and loans, the Company estimates ranges of duration and income simulation under a variety of assumptions and scenarios. The Company’s interest rate risk position changes as the interest rate environment changes and is managed actively to try to maintain a consistent slightly asset-sensitive position. However, positions at the end of any period may not be reflective of the Company’s position in any subsequent period. We should note that duration of equity is highly sensitive to the assumptions used for deposits that do not have specific maturities, such as checking, savings, and money market accounts and also to prepayment assumptions used for loans with prepayment options. Given the uncertainty of these durations, we view the duration of equity as falling within a range of possibilities. For income simulation, Company policy requires that interest sensitive income from a static balance sheet is expected to decline by no more than 10% during one year if rates were to immediately rise or fall in parallel by 200 basis points. As of the dates indicated, Schedule 41 shows the Company’s estimated range of duration of equity, duration of equity simulation, and percentage change in interest sensitive income in the first year after the rate change if interest rates were to sustain an immediate parallel change of 200 basis points; the “low” and “high” results differ based on the assumed speed of repricing of administered-rate deposits (money market, interest-on-checking, and savings): Schedule 41 DURATION OF EQUITY AND INTEREST SENSITIVE INCOME

What will Projected benefit obligation at beginning of year of Con Edison reach in 2016 if it continues to grow at its current rate? (in million)

(a) Relates to an increase in CECONY’s pension obligation of $45 million from a 1999 special retirement program. Funded Status The funded status at December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Con Edison</td><td colspan="3">CECONY</td></tr><tr><td>(Millions of Dollars)</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td></tr><tr><td>CHANGE IN PROJECTED BENEFIT OBLIGATION</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Projected benefit obligation at beginning of year</td><td>$15,081</td><td>$12,197</td><td>$13,406</td><td>$14,137</td><td>$11,429</td><td>$12,572</td></tr><tr><td>Service cost – excluding administrative expenses</td><td>293</td><td>221</td><td>259</td><td>274</td><td>206</td><td>241</td></tr><tr><td>Interest cost on projected benefit obligation</td><td>575</td><td>572</td><td>537</td><td>538</td><td>536</td><td>503</td></tr><tr><td>Net actuarial (gain)/loss</td><td>-996</td><td>2,641</td><td>-1,469</td><td>-931</td><td>2,484</td><td>-1,388</td></tr><tr><td>Plan amendments</td><td>—</td><td>6</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Benefits paid</td><td>-576</td><td>-556</td><td>-536</td><td>-536</td><td>-518</td><td>-499</td></tr><tr><td>PROJECTED BENEFIT OBLIGATION AT END OF YEAR</td><td>$14,377</td><td>$15,081</td><td>$12,197</td><td>$13,482</td><td>$14,137</td><td>$11,429</td></tr><tr><td>CHANGE IN PLAN ASSETS</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year</td><td>$11,495</td><td>$10,755</td><td>$9,135</td><td>$10,897</td><td>$10,197</td><td>$8,668</td></tr><tr><td>Actual return on plan assets</td><td>126</td><td>752</td><td>1,310</td><td>118</td><td>715</td><td>1,241</td></tr><tr><td>Employer contributions</td><td>750</td><td>578</td><td>879</td><td>697</td><td>535</td><td>819</td></tr><tr><td>Benefits paid</td><td>-576</td><td>-556</td><td>-536</td><td>-536</td><td>-518</td><td>-499</td></tr><tr><td>Administrative expenses</td><td>-36</td><td>-34</td><td>-33</td><td>-35</td><td>-32</td><td>-32</td></tr><tr><td>FAIR VALUE OF PLAN ASSETS AT END OF YEAR</td><td>$11,759</td><td>$11,495</td><td>$10,755</td><td>$11,141</td><td>$10,897</td><td>$10,197</td></tr><tr><td>FUNDED STATUS</td><td>$-2,618</td><td>$-3,586</td><td>$-1,442</td><td>$-2,341</td><td>$-3,240</td><td>$-1,232</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized net loss</td><td>$3,909</td><td>$4,888</td><td>$2,759</td><td>$3,704</td><td>$4,616</td><td>$2,617</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized prior service costs</td><td>16</td><td>20</td><td>17</td><td>3</td><td>4</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Accumulated benefit obligation</td><td>12,909</td><td>13,454</td><td>11,004</td><td>12,055</td><td>12,553</td><td>10,268</td></tr></table> The decrease in the pension plan’s projected benefit obligation (due primarily to increased discount rates) was the primary cause of the decreased pension liability at Con Edison and CECONY of $968 million and $899 million, respectively, compared with December 31, 2014. For Con Edison, this decrease in pension liability corresponds with a decrease to regulatory assets of $967 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the Utilities consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, a credit to OCI of $10 million (net of taxes) for the unrecognized net losses, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses and O&R’s New Jersey and Pennsylvania utility subsidiaries. For CECONY, the decrease in pension liability corresponds with a decrease to regulatory assets of $911 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, a credit to OCI of $1 million (net of taxes) for unrecognized net losses, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses. A portion of the unrecognized net loss and prior service cost for the pension plan, equal to $603 million and $4 million, respectively, will be recognized from accumulated OCI and the regulatory asset into net periodic benefit cost over the next year for Con Edison. Included in these amounts are $570 million and $2 million, respectively, for CECONY. At December 31, 2015 and 2014, Con Edison’s investments include $243 million and $225 million, respectively, held in external trust accounts for benefit payments pursuant to the supplemental retirement plans. Included in these amounts for CECONY were $221 million and $208 million, respectively. See Note P. The accumulated benefit obligations for the supplemental retirement plans for Con Edison and CECONY were $285 million and $249 million as of December 31, 2015 and $289 million and $250 million as of December 31, 2014, respectively Contract options in our defense businesses represent agreements to perform additional work beyond the products and services associated with firm contracts, if the customer exercises the option. These options are negotiated in conjunction with a firm contract and provide the terms under which the customer may elect to procure additional units or services at a future date. Contract options in the Aerospace group represent options to purchase new aircraft and long-term agreements with fleet customers. We recognize options in backlog when the customer exercises the option and establishes a firm order. On December 31, 2009, the estimated potential value associated with these IDIQ contracts and contract options was approximately $17.6 billion, up from $16.8 billion at the end of 2008. This represents our estimate of the potential value we will receive. The actual amount of funding received in the future may be higher or lower. We expect to realize this value over the next 10 to 15 years. REVIEW OF OPERATING SEGMENTS AEROSPACE Review of 2009 vs. 2008 <table><tr><td> Year Ended December 31</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td colspan="2">Variance</td></tr><tr><td>Revenues</td><td>$5,171</td><td>$5,512</td><td>$-341</td><td>-6.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Operating earnings</td><td>707</td><td>1,021</td><td>-314</td><td>-30.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Operating margin</td><td>13.7%</td><td>18.5%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gulfstream aircraft deliveries (in units):</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Green</td><td>94</td><td>156</td><td>-62</td><td>-39.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Completion</td><td>110</td><td>152</td><td>-42</td><td>-27.6%</td></tr></table> The Aerospace group’s revenues decreased in 2009, the net result of a 24 percent decline in Gulfstream revenues that was offset in part by revenues from Jet Aviation, which we acquired in the fourth quarter of 2008. The combination of the global economic deterioration and credit crisis along with negative business-jet rhetoric had a significant impact on the business-jet market in 2009. To adjust to the economic conditions and weakened demand, we reduced Gulfstream’s 2009 aircraft production and delivery schedule, primarily in the group’s midsize models, to bridge the market downturn. This included a five-week furlough at the group’s production center in Savannah, Georgia, in July and August. As a result, aircraft-manufacturing revenues decreased 28 percent in 2009 compared with 2008. The economic environment also impacted the group’s aircraft services business. Organic aircraftservices revenues were down 15 percent in 2009 resulting from reduced flying hours and customer deferral of aircraft maintenance. The decline in aircraft manufacturing and services revenues was slightly offset by higher pre-owned aircraft revenues in 2009. The group sold six pre-owned aircraft for $124 in 2009 compared with two sales for $18 in 2008. The group’s operating earnings declined in 2009 compared with 2008 due primarily to the factors noted above. The components of the reduction in earnings were as follows: <table><tr><td>Aircraft manufacturing and completions</td><td>$-220</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-owned aircraft</td><td>-18</td></tr><tr><td>Aircraft services</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-77</td></tr><tr><td>Total decrease in operating earnings</td><td>$-314</td></tr></table> The net decrease in the group’s aircraft manufacturing and completions earnings in 2009 resulted from the reduction in Gulfstream aircraft deliveries offset in part by the addition of Jet Aviation’s aircraft completions and refurbishing business. The earnings decline associated with the decreased Gulfstream volume was mitigated by cost-reduction initiatives, a shift in the mix of aircraft deliveries toward large-cabin aircraft, and liquidated damages collected on defaulted aircraft contracts. As a result, aircraft manufacturing margins increased in 2009 over 2008 despite the decline in volume during the year. The group continues to focus on reducing costs through production improvements and operational efficiencies to maintain aircraft-manufacturing margins. In late 2008 and early 2009, the supply in the global pre-owned aircraft market increased significantly, putting considerable pressure on pricing. As a result, the group wrote down the carrying value of its preowned aircraft inventory in 2009. Pricing in the pre-owned market appears to have stabilized in the second half of 2009, particularly for large-cabin aircraft. The group continues to work to minimize its preowned aircraft exposure, with four pre-owned aircraft valued at $60 remaining in inventory at the end of 2009. Aircraft services earnings were steady in 2009 compared with 2008 as the addition of Jet Aviation’s maintenance and repair activities, fixedbase operations and aircraft management services offset a decrease in organic aircraft services earnings. A significant reduction in flight hours in the business-jet market put competitive pressure on aircraft maintenance and repair earnings in 2009. The group’s operating earnings also were impacted negatively in 2009 by severance costs associated with workforce reduction activities and intangible asset amortization related to the Jet Aviation acquisition. The factors discussed above and the addition of lower-margin Jet Aviation business caused the group’s overall operating margins to decrease 480 basis points in 2009 compared with 2008. Overview Vornado Realty Trust (“Vornado”) is a fully-integrated real estate investment trust (“REIT”) and conducts its business through, and substantially all of its interests in properties are held by, Vornado Realty L. P. , a Delaware limited partnership (the “Operating Partnership”). Accordingly, Vornado’s cash flow and ability to pay dividends to its shareholders is dependent upon the cash flow of the Operating Partnership and the ability of its direct and indirect subsidiaries to first satisfy their obligations to creditors. Vornado is the sole general partner of, and owned approximately 93.5% of the common limited partnership interest in the Operating Partnership at December 31, 2011. All references to “we,” “us,” “our,” the “Company” and “Vornado” refer to Vornado Realty Trust and its consolidated subsidiaries, including the Operating Partnership. We own and operate office, retail and showroom properties (our “core” operations) with large concentrations of office and retail properties in the New York City metropolitan area and in the Washington, DC / Northern Virginia area. In addition, we have a 32.7% interest in Toys “R” Us, Inc. (“Toys”) which has a significant real estate component, a 32.4% interest in Alexander’s, Inc. (NYSE: ALX) (“Alexander’s”), which has seven properties in the greater New York metropolitan area, as well as interests in other real estate and related investments. Our business objective is to maximize shareholder value, which we measure by the total return provided to our shareholders. Below is a table comparing our performance to the Morgan Stanley REIT Index (“RMS”) and the SNL REIT Index (“SNL”) for the following periods ended December 31, 2011: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="3"> Total Return^-1</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> Vornado</td><td> RMS</td><td> SNL</td></tr><tr><td>One-year</td><td>-4.6%</td><td>8.7%</td><td>8.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Three-year</td><td>40.2%</td><td>79.6%</td><td>79.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Five-year</td><td>-25.2%</td><td>-7.3%</td><td>-3.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Ten-year</td><td>187.0%</td><td>163.2%</td><td>175.4%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table> We intend to achieve our business objective by continuing to pursue our investment philosophy and executing our operating strategies through: ? Maintaining a superior team of operating and investment professionals and an entrepreneurial spirit; ? Investing in properties in select markets, such as New York City and Washington, DC, where we believe there is a high likelihood of capital appreciation; ? Acquiring quality properties at a discount to replacement cost and where there is a significant potential for higher rents; ? Investing in retail properties in select under-stored locations such as the New York City metropolitan area; ? Developing and redeveloping existing properties to increase returns and maximize value; and ? Investing in operating companies that have a significant real estate component. We expect to finance our growth, acquisitions and investments using internally generated funds, proceeds from possible asset sales and by accessing the public and private capital markets. We may also offer Vornado common or preferred shares or Operating Partnership units in exchange for property and may repurchase or otherwise reacquire these securities in the future. We compete with a large number of real estate property owners and developers, some of which may be willing to accept lower returns on their investments than we are. Principal factors of competition include rents charged, attractiveness of location, the quality of the property and the breadth and the quality of services provided. Our success depends upon, among other factors, trends of the national, regional and local economies, the financial condition and operating results of current and prospective tenants and customers, availability and cost of capital, construction and renovation costs, taxes, governmental regulations, legislation and population trends. See “Risk Factors” in Item 1A for additional information regarding these factors. Costs under the Transformational Cost Management Program, which were primarily recorded in selling, general and administrative expenses and included in the fiscal year ended August 31, 2019 were as follows (in millions):

What is the average amount of Case reserves of 2008 Net, and Exercise of stock options of 2008 ?

The following table illustrates the effect that a 10% unfavorable or favorable movement in foreign currency exchange rates, relative to the U. S. dollar, would have on the fair value of our forward exchange contracts as of October 30, 2010 and October 31, 2009: <table><tr><td></td><td>October 30, 2010</td><td>October 31, 2009</td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of forward exchange contracts asset</td><td>$7,256</td><td>$8,367</td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of forward exchange contracts after a 10% unfavorable movement in foreign currency exchange rates asset</td><td>$22,062</td><td>$20,132</td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of forward exchange contracts after a 10% favorable movement in foreign currency exchange rates liability</td><td>$-7,396</td><td>$-6,781</td></tr></table> The calculation assumes that each exchange rate would change in the same direction relative to the U. S. dollar. In addition to the direct effects of changes in exchange rates, such changes typically affect the volume of sales or the foreign currency sales price as competitors’ products become more or less attractive. Our sensitivity analysis of the effects of changes in foreign currency exchange rates does not factor in a potential change in sales levels or local currency selling prices. NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) ACE Limited and Subsidiaries Under Swiss corporate law, the Company may not generally issue Common Shares below their par value. In the event there is a need to raise common equity at a time when the trading price of the Company’s Common Shares is below par value, the Company will need to obtain shareholder approval to decrease the par value of the Common Shares. b) Shares issued, outstanding, authorized, and conditional Following is a table of changes in Common Shares issued and outstanding for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007: <table><tr><td></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Shares issued, beginning of year</td><td>335,413,501</td><td>329,704,531</td><td>326,455,468</td></tr><tr><td>Shares issued, net</td><td>2,000,000</td><td>3,140,194</td><td>1,213,663</td></tr><tr><td>Exercise of stock options</td><td>168,720</td><td>2,365,401</td><td>1,830,004</td></tr><tr><td>Shares issued under Employee Stock Purchase Plan</td><td>259,395</td><td>203,375</td><td>205,396</td></tr><tr><td>Shares issued, end of year</td><td>337,841,616</td><td>335,413,501</td><td>329,704,531</td></tr><tr><td>Common Shares in treasury, end of year</td><td>-1,316,959</td><td>-1,768,030</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td>Shares issued and outstanding, end of year</td><td>336,524,657</td><td>333,645,471</td><td>329,704,531</td></tr><tr><td> <i>Common Shares issued to employee trust</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Balance, beginning of year</td><td>-108,981</td><td>-117,231</td><td>-166,425</td></tr><tr><td>Shares redeemed</td><td>7,500</td><td>8,250</td><td>49,194</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, end of year</td><td>-101,481</td><td>-108,981</td><td>-117,231</td></tr></table> In July 2008, prior to the Continuation, the Company issued and placed 2,000,000 Common Shares in treasury principally for issuance upon the exercise of employee stock options. At December 31, 2009, 1,316,959 Common Shares remain in treasury after net shares redeemed under employee share-based compensation plans. Common Shares issued to employee trust are the shares issued by the Company to a rabbi trust for deferred compensation obligations as discussed in Note 12 f) below. Shares authorized The Board is currently authorized to increase the share capital from time to time through the issuance of up to 99,750,000 fully paid up Common Shares with a par value of CHF 31.88 each. Conditional share capital for bonds and similar debt instruments The share capital of the Company may be increased through the issuance of a maximum of 33,000,000 Common Shares with a par value of CHF 31.88 each, payable in full, through the exercise of conversion and/or option or warrant rights granted in connection with bonds, notes, or similar instruments, issued or to be issued by the Company, including convertible debt instruments. Conditional share capital for employee benefit plans The share capital of the Company may be increased through the issuance of a maximum of 30,401,725 Common Shares with a par value of CHF 31.88 each, payable in full, in connection with the exercise of option rights granted to any employee of the Company, and any consultant, director, or other person providing services to the Company. c) ACE Limited securities repurchase authorization In November 2001, the Board authorized the repurchase of any ACE issued debt or capital securities, which includes ACE’s Common Shares, up to an aggregate total of $250 million. These purchases may take place from time to time in the open market or in private purchase transactions. At December 31, 2009, this authorization had not been utilized. d) General restrictions The holders of the Common Shares are entitled to receive dividends as proposed by the Board and approved by the shareholders. Holders of Common Shares are allowed one vote per share provided that, if the controlled shares of any shareholder constitute ten percent or more of the outstanding Common Shares of the Company, only a fraction of the vote will be allowed The process of establishing loss reserves for property and casualty claims can be complex and is subject to considerable uncertainty as it requires the use of informed estimates and judgments based on circumstances known at the date of accrual. The following table shows our total reserves segregated between case reserves (including loss expense reserves) and IBNR reserves at December 31, 2009 and 2008. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> 2009</td><td colspan="3">2008</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions of U.S. dollars)</td><td> Gross</td><td> Ceded</td><td> Net</td><td>Gross</td><td>Ceded</td><td>Net</td></tr><tr><td>Case reserves</td><td>$17,307</td><td>$6,664</td><td>$10,643</td><td>$16,583</td><td>$6,539</td><td>$10,044</td></tr><tr><td>IBNR reserves</td><td>20,476</td><td>6,081</td><td>14,395</td><td>20,593</td><td>6,396</td><td>14,197</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$37,783</td><td>$12,745</td><td>$25,038</td><td>$37,176</td><td>$12,935</td><td>$24,241</td></tr></table> The following table segregates loss reserves by line of business including property and all other, casualty, and personal accident (A&H) at December 31, 2009 and 2008. In the table, loss expenses are defined to include unallocated and allocated loss adjustment expenses. For certain lines, in particular ACE International and ACE Bermuda products, loss adjustment expenses are partially included in IBNR and partially included in loss expenses. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> 2009</td><td colspan="3">2008</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions of U.S. dollars)</td><td> Gross</td><td> Ceded</td><td> Net</td><td>Gross</td><td>Ceded</td><td>Net</td></tr><tr><td><i>Property and all other</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Case reserves</td><td>$3,149</td><td>$1,600</td><td>$1,549</td><td>$3,180</td><td>$1,367</td><td>$1,813</td></tr><tr><td>Loss expenses</td><td>260</td><td>81</td><td>179</td><td>264</td><td>92</td><td>172</td></tr><tr><td>IBNR reserves</td><td>2,028</td><td>815</td><td>1,213</td><td>2,456</td><td>1,084</td><td>1,372</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td>5,437</td><td>2,496</td><td>2,941</td><td>5,900</td><td>2,543</td><td>3,357</td></tr><tr><td><i>Casualty</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Case reserves</td><td>9,506</td><td>3,177</td><td>6,329</td><td>8,700</td><td>3,178</td><td>5,522</td></tr><tr><td>Loss expenses</td><td>3,773</td><td>1,661</td><td>2,112</td><td>3,871</td><td>1,779</td><td>2,092</td></tr><tr><td>IBNR reserves</td><td>17,777</td><td>5,110</td><td>12,667</td><td>17,455</td><td>5,144</td><td>12,311</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td>31,056</td><td>9,948</td><td>21,108</td><td>30,026</td><td>10,101</td><td>19,925</td></tr><tr><td><i>A&H</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Case reserves</td><td>588</td><td>144</td><td>444</td><td>536</td><td>121</td><td>415</td></tr><tr><td>Loss expenses</td><td>31</td><td>1</td><td>30</td><td>32</td><td>2</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>IBNR reserves</td><td>671</td><td>156</td><td>515</td><td>682</td><td>168</td><td>514</td></tr><tr><td>Subtotal</td><td>1,290</td><td>301</td><td>989</td><td>1,250</td><td>291</td><td>959</td></tr><tr><td><i>Total</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Case reserves</td><td>13,243</td><td>4,921</td><td>8,322</td><td>12,416</td><td>4,666</td><td>7,750</td></tr><tr><td>Loss expenses</td><td>4,064</td><td>1,743</td><td>2,321</td><td>4,167</td><td>1,873</td><td>2,294</td></tr><tr><td>IBNR reserves</td><td>20,476</td><td>6,081</td><td>14,395</td><td>20,593</td><td>6,396</td><td>14,197</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$37,783</td><td>$12,745</td><td>$25,038</td><td>$37,176</td><td>$12,935</td><td>$24,241</td></tr></table> The judgments used to estimate unpaid loss and loss expense reserves require different considerations depending upon the individual circumstances underlying the insured loss. For example, the reserves established for high excess casualty claims, A&E claims, claims from major catastrophic events, or the IBNR for our various product lines each require different assumptions and judgments to be made. Necessary judgments are based on numerous factors and may be revised as additional experience and other data become available and are reviewed, as new or improved methods are developed, or as laws change. Hence, ultimate loss payments may differ from the estimate of the ultimate liabilities made at the balance sheet date. Changes to our previous estimates of prior period loss reserves impact the reported calendar year underwriting results by worsening our reported results if the prior year reserves prove to be deficient or improving our reported results if the prior year reserves prove to be redundant. The potential for variation in loss reserves is impacted by numerous factors, which we discuss below. We establish loss and loss expense reserves for our liabilities from claims for all of the insurance and reinsurance business that we write. For those claims reported by insureds or ceding companies to us prior to the balance sheet date, and

What will Professional services be like in 2012 if it develops with the same increasing rate as current?

Net Impairment We recognized $14.9 million of net impairment during the year ended December 31, 2011, on certain securities in our non-agency CMO portfolio due to continued deterioration in the expected credit performance of the underlying loans in those specific securities. The gross other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) and the noncredit portion of OTTI, which was or had been previously recorded through other comprehensive income, are shown in the table below (dollars in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td>Year Ended December31, 2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”)</td><td>$-9.2</td><td>$-41.5</td></tr><tr><td>Less: noncredit portion of OTTI recognized into (out of)other comprehensive income (loss) (before tax)</td><td>-5.7</td><td>3.8</td></tr><tr><td>Net impairment</td><td>$-14.9</td><td>$-37.7</td></tr></table> Other Revenues Other revenues decreased 15% to $39.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to 2010. The decrease was due primarily to the gain on sale of approximately $1 billion in savings accounts to Discover Financial Services in the first quarter of 2010, which increased other revenues during the year ended December 31, 2010. Provision for Loan Losses Provision for loan losses decreased 43% to $440.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to 2010. The decrease in provision for loan losses was driven by improving credit trends and loan portfolio run-off, as evidenced by the lower levels of delinquent loans in the one- to four-family and home equity loan portfolios. The provision for loan losses has declined for three consecutive years, down 72% from its peak of $1.6 billion for the year ended December 31, 2008. We expect provision for loan losses to continue to decline in 2012 compared to 2011, although it is subject to variability from quarter to quarter. As we transition from the OTS to the OCC, we are evaluating programs and practices that were designed in accordance with guidance from the OTS. We are working to align certain policies and procedures to the guidance from the OCC and have suspended certain loan modification programs that will require changes. We increased the qualitative reserve in 2011 to reflect additional estimated losses during the period of reduced activity in our modification programs, as well as uncertainty around certain loans modified under our previous programs. Once the evaluation of the existing programs and practices is complete and any necessary changes have been implemented, we will re-assess the overall qualitative reserve. Corporate/Other The following table summarizes corporate/other financial information for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 (dollars in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December 31,</td><td colspan="2">Variance 2011 vs. 2010</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>Amount</td><td>%</td></tr><tr><td>Total net revenue</td><td>$-0.1</td><td>$-0.0</td><td>$—</td><td>$-0.1</td><td>*</td></tr><tr><td>Compensation and benefits</td><td>70.3</td><td>80.2</td><td>93.7</td><td>-9.9</td><td>-12%</td></tr><tr><td>Professional services</td><td>35.4</td><td>28.9</td><td>42.7</td><td>6.5</td><td>23%</td></tr><tr><td>Occupancy and equipment</td><td>2.7</td><td>2.6</td><td>3.4</td><td>0.1</td><td>4%</td></tr><tr><td>Communications</td><td>1.5</td><td>1.7</td><td>1.9</td><td>-0.2</td><td>-11%</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation and amortization</td><td>18.4</td><td>21.0</td><td>19.1</td><td>-2.6</td><td>-12%</td></tr><tr><td>Facility restructuring and</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>other exit activities</td><td>7.7</td><td>14.3</td><td>20.7</td><td>-6.6</td><td>*</td></tr><tr><td>Other operating expenses</td><td>34.5</td><td>25.8</td><td>21.2</td><td>8.7</td><td>34%</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating expense</td><td>170.5</td><td>174.5</td><td>202.7</td><td>-4.0</td><td>-2%</td></tr><tr><td>Operating loss</td><td>-170.6</td><td>-174.5</td><td>-202.7</td><td>3.9</td><td>-2%</td></tr><tr><td>Total other income (expense)</td><td>-175.8</td><td>-159.0</td><td>-1,260.4</td><td>-16.8</td><td>11%</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate/other loss</td><td>$-346.4</td><td>$-333.5</td><td>$-1,463.1</td><td>$-12.9</td><td>4%</td></tr></table> * Percentage not meaningful. The corporate/other category includes costs that are centrally-managed, technology related costs incurred to support centrally-managed functions, restructuring and other exit activities, corporate debt and corporate investments.2011 Compared to 2010 The corporate/other loss before income taxes was $346.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2011, compared to $333.5 million in 2010. Compensation and benefits decreased 12% to $70.3 million due primarily to a decrease in incentive compensation during the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to 2010. The increase in professional services was due primarily to a $6.0 million credit in connection with a legal settlement in the third quarter of 2010, which decreased professional services for the year ended December 31, 2010. Other operating expenses increased 34% to $34.5 million primarily due to the recording of a net reserve of $10.8 million related a memorandum of understanding that was entered into to settle the Freudenberg Action during the year ended December 31, 2011. Total other income (expense) consisted primarily of $177.8 million in corporate interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2011 on interest-bearing corporate debt. In addition to the stated interest on corporate debt, the corporate interest expense line item included the benefit of discontinued fair value hedges on corporate debt, which decreased $7.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to 2010. Offsetting interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2011 was a $3.1 million gain on early extinguishment of debt related to the call of the 2013 Notes in the second quarter of 2011.2010 Compared to 2009 The corporate/other loss was $333.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to $1.5 billion for the same period in 2009. The loss for the year ended December 31, 2010 was due to total operating expenses of $174.5 million and other expense of $159.0 million. Total other income (expense) primarily M & T BANK CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES Notes to Financial Statements — (Continued) 4. Loans and leases Total gross loans and leases outstanding were comprised of the following: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> December 31</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2006</td><td> 2005</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> (In thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Loans</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial, financial, agricultural, etc</td><td>$10,472,919</td><td>$9,818,897</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Residential</td><td>5,248,119</td><td>3,802,645</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>12,691,964</td><td>12,833,912</td></tr><tr><td>Construction</td><td>3,453,981</td><td>2,335,498</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer</td><td>9,885,883</td><td>10,385,740</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans</td><td>41,752,866</td><td>39,176,692</td></tr><tr><td>Leases</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>1,423,637</td><td>1,286,930</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer</td><td>30,451</td><td>90,069</td></tr><tr><td>Total leases</td><td>1,454,088</td><td>1,376,999</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans and leases</td><td>$43,206,954</td><td>$40,553,691</td></tr></table> One-to-four family residential mortgage loans held for sale were $1.9 billion at December 31, 2006 and $1.2 billion at December 31, 2005. One-to-four family residential mortgage loans and smaller balance commercial mortgage loans with many repayment characteristics similar to residential mortgage loans that are serviced for others totaled approximately $16.7 billion and $15.6 billion at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. As of December 31, 2006, approximately $7 million of one-to-four family residential mortgage loans serviced for others had been sold with credit recourse. Commercial mortgage loans held for sale were $49 million at December 31, 2006 and $199 million at December 31, 2005. Commercial mortgage loans serviced for others totaled approximately $4.9 billion and $4.3 billion at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. As of December 31, 2006, approximately $939 million of commercial mortgage loan balances serviced for others had been sold with recourse in conjunction with the Company’s participation in the FNMA Delegated Underwriting and Servicing (“DUS”) program. At December 31, 2006, the Company estimated that the recourse obligations described above were not material to the Company’s consolidated financial position. There have been no material losses incurred as a result of those recourse arrangements. Included in consumer loans were home equity loans held for sale of $65 million at December 31, 2006 and $38 million at December 31, 2005. Nonperforming loans (loans on which interest was not being accrued or had been renegotiated at below-market interest rates) totaled $224,228,000 at December 31, 2006 and $156,451,000 at December 31, 2005. If nonaccrual and renegotiated loans had been accruing interest at their originally contracted terms, interest income on such loans would have amounted to $17,173,000 in 2006 and $12,144,000 in 2005. The actual amounts included in interest income during 2006 and 2005 on such loans were $6,770,000 and $3,279,000, respectively. The recorded investment in loans considered impaired for purposes of applying SFAS No.114 was $152,676,000 and $92,528,000 at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The recorded investment in loans considered impaired for which there was a related valuation allowance for impairment included in the allowance for credit losses and the amount of such impairment allowance were $139,021,000 and $23,388,000, respectively, at December 31, 2006 and $65,244,000 and $15,343,000, respectively, at December 31, 2005. The recorded investment in loans considered impaired for which there was no related valuation allowance for impairment was $13,655,000 and $27,284,000 at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The average recorded investment in impaired loans during 2006, 2005 and 2004 was $97,263,000, $106,603,000 and $135,431,000, respectively. Interest income recognized on impaired loans DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION· DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC· PROGRESS ENERGYINC. · DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LC· DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, LLC· DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. · DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, LC· PIEDMONT NATURAL GAS COMPANY INC. Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued) On August 4, 2016, pursuant to N. C. Gen. Stat.105-130.3C, the North Carolina Department of Revenue announced the North Carolina corporate income tax rate would be reduced from a statutory rate of 4.0 percent to 3.0 percent beginning January 1, 2017. Duke Energy and Piedmont recorded net reductions of approximately $80 million and $16 million to their North Carolina deferred tax liabilities in the third quarter of 2016. The significant majority of this deferred tax liability reduction was offset by recording a regulatory liability pending NCUC determination of the disposition of amounts related to Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Progress and Piedmont. The impact did not have a significant impact on the financial position, results of operation, or cash flows of Duke Energy, Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy or Duke Energy Progress. On June 28, 2017, the North Carolina General Assembly amended N. C. Gen. Stat.105-130.3, reducing the North Carolina corporate income tax rate from a statutory rate of 3.0 percent to 2.5 percent beginning January 1, 2019. Duke Energy recorded a net reduction of approximately $55 million to their North Carolina deferred tax liabilities in the second quarter of 2017. The significant majority of this deferred tax liability reduction was offset by recording a regulatory liability pending NCUC determination of the disposition of amounts related to Duke Energy Carolinas, Duke Energy Progress and Piedmont. The impact did not have a significant impact on the financial position, results of operation or cash flows of Duke Energy, Duke Energy Carolinas, Progress Energy or Duke Energy Progress. UNRECOGNIZED TAX BENEFITS The following tables present changes to unrecognized tax benefits <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="8">Year Ended December 31, 2017</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>Duke Energy</td><td>Duke Energy Carolinas</td><td>Progress Energy</td><td>Duke Energy Progress</td><td>Duke Energy Florida</td><td>Duke Energy Ohio</td><td>Duke Energy Indiana</td><td>Piedmont</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized tax benefits – January 1</td><td>$17</td><td>$1</td><td>$2</td><td>$2</td><td>$4</td><td>$4</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized tax benefits increases (decreases)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gross increases – tax positions in prior periods</td><td>12</td><td>4</td><td>3</td><td>3</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Gross decreases – tax positions in prior periods</td><td>-4</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-4</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total changes</td><td>8</td><td>4</td><td>3</td><td>3</td><td>1</td><td>-3</td><td>1</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized tax benefits – December 31</td><td>$25</td><td>$5</td><td>$5</td><td>$5</td><td>$5</td><td>$1</td><td>$1</td><td>$3</td></tr></table> Year Ended December 31, 2016 <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="7">Year Ended December 31, 2016</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>Duke Energy</td><td>Duke Energy Carolinas</td><td>Progress Energy</td><td>Duke Energy Progress</td><td>Duke Energy Florida</td><td>Duke Energy Ohio</td><td>Duke Energy Indiana</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized tax benefits – January 1</td><td>$88</td><td>$72</td><td>$1</td><td>$3</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$1</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized tax benefits increases (decreases)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gross increases – tax positions in prior periods</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Gross decreases – tax positions in prior periods</td><td>-4</td><td>-4</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Decreases due to settlements</td><td>-68</td><td>-67</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Reduction due to lapse of statute of limitations</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>2</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total changes</td><td>-71</td><td>-71</td><td>1</td><td>-1</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized tax benefits – December 31</td><td>$17</td><td>$1</td><td>$2</td><td>$2</td><td>$4</td><td>$4</td><td>$—</td></tr></table> Year Ended December 31, 2015 <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">Year Ended December 31, 2015</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>Duke Energy</td><td>Duke Energy Carolinas</td><td>Progress Energy</td><td>Duke Energy Progress</td><td>Duke Energy Florida</td><td>Duke Energy Indiana</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized tax benefits – January 1</td><td>$213</td><td>$160</td><td>$32</td><td>$23</td><td>$8</td><td>$1</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized tax benefits increases (decreases)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gross increases – tax positions in prior periods</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Gross decreases – tax positions in prior periods</td><td>-48</td><td>-45</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Decreases due to settlements</td><td>-45</td><td>-43</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Reduction due to lapse of statute of limitations</td><td>-32</td><td>—</td><td>-32</td><td>-21</td><td>-8</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total changes</td><td>-125</td><td>-88</td><td>-31</td><td>-20</td><td>-8</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized tax benefits – December 31</td><td>$88</td><td>$72</td><td>$1</td><td>$3</td><td>$—</td><td>$1</td></tr></table> Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 7 Net Revenue 2004 Compared to 2003 Net revenue, which is Entergy's measure of gross margin, consists of operating revenues net of: 1) fuel, fuel-related, and purchased power expenses and 2) other regulatory credits. Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2004 to 2003. <table><tr><td></td><td>(In Millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2003 net revenue</td><td>$4,214.5</td></tr><tr><td>Volume/weather</td><td>68.3</td></tr><tr><td>Summer capacity charges</td><td>17.4</td></tr><tr><td>Base rates</td><td>10.6</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred fuel cost revisions</td><td>-46.3</td></tr><tr><td>Price applied to unbilled sales</td><td>-19.3</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-1.2</td></tr><tr><td>2004 net revenue</td><td>$4,244.0</td></tr></table> The volume/weather variance resulted primarily from increased usage, partially offset by the effect of milder weather on sales during 2004 compared to 2003. Billed usage increased a total of 2,261 GWh in the industrial and commercial sectors. The summer capacity charges variance was due to the amortization in 2003 at Entergy Gulf States and Entergy Louisiana of deferred capacity charges for the summer of 2001. Entergy Gulf States' amortization began in June 2002 and ended in May 2003. Entergy Louisiana's amortization began in August 2002 and ended in July 2003. Base rates increased net revenue due to a base rate increase at Entergy New Orleans that became effective in June 2003. The deferred fuel cost revisions variance resulted primarily from a revision in 2003 to an unbilled sales pricing estimate to more closely align the fuel component of that pricing with expected recoverable fuel costs at Entergy Louisiana. Deferred fuel cost revisions also decreased net revenue due to a revision in 2004 to the estimate of fuel costs filed for recovery at Entergy Arkansas in the March 2004 energy cost recovery rider. The price applied to unbilled sales variance resulted from a decrease in fuel price in 2004 caused primarily by the effect of nuclear plant outages in 2003 on average fuel costs. Gross operating revenues and regulatory credits Gross operating revenues include an increase in fuel cost recovery revenues of $475 million and $18 million in electric and gas sales, respectively, primarily due to higher fuel rates in 2004 resulting from increases in the market prices of purchased power and natural gas. As such, this revenue increase is offset by increased fuel and purchased power expenses. Other regulatory credits increased primarily due to the following: ? cessation of the Grand Gulf Accelerated Recovery Tariff that was suspended in July 2003; ? the amortization in 2003 of deferred capacity charges for summer 2001 power purchases at Entergy Gulf States and Entergy Louisiana; ? the deferral in 2004 of $14.3 million of capacity charges related to generation resource planning as allowed by the LPSC; ? the deferral in 2004 by Entergy Louisiana of $11.4 million related to the voluntary severance program, in accordance with a proposed stipulation entered into with the LPSC staff; and

In the year with lowest amount of Distribution fees, what's the increasing rate of Net investment income? (in %)

Certain property fund limited partnerships that the Company consolidates have floating rate revolving credit borrowings of $381 million as of December 31, 2009. Certain Threadneedle subsidiaries guarantee the repayment of outstanding borrowings up to the value of the assets of the partnerships. The debt is secured by the assets of the partnerships and there is no recourse to Ameriprise Financial.24. Earnings per Share Attributable to Ameriprise Financial Common Shareholders The computations of basic and diluted earnings (loss) per share attributable to Ameriprise Financial common shareholders are as follows: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="3"> Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> 2009</td><td>2008</td><td> 2007</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="3"> (in millions, except per share amounts) </td></tr><tr><td> Numerator:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss) attributable to Ameriprise Financial</td><td>$722</td><td>$-38</td><td>$814</td></tr><tr><td> Denominator:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Basic: Weighted-average common shares outstanding</td><td>242.2</td><td>222.3</td><td>236.2</td></tr><tr><td>Effect of potentially dilutive nonqualified stock options and other share-based awards</td><td>2.2</td><td>2.6</td><td>3.7</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted: Weighted-average common shares outstanding</td><td>244.4</td><td>224.9</td><td>239.9</td></tr><tr><td> Earnings (loss) per share attributable to Ameriprise Financial common shareholders:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Basic</td><td>$2.98</td><td>$-0.17</td><td>$3.45</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted</td><td>$2.95</td><td>$-0.17 (1)</td><td>$3.39</td></tr></table> (1) Diluted shares used in this calculation represent basic shares due to the net loss. Using actual diluted shares would result in anti-dilution. Basic weighted average common shares for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 included 3.4 million, 2.1 million and 1.6 million, respectively, of vested, nonforfeitable restricted stock units and 4.6 million, 3.1 million and 3.5 million, respectively, of non-vested restricted stock awards and restricted stock units that are forfeitable but receive nonforfeitable dividends. Potentially dilutive securities include nonqualified stock options and other share-based awards.25. Shareholders’ Equity The Company has a share repurchase program in place to return excess capital to shareholders. Since September 2008 through the date of this report, the Company has suspended its stock repurchase program; as a result there were no share repurchases during the year ended December 31, 2009. During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company repurchased a total of 12.7 million and 15.9 million shares, respectively, of its common stock at an average price of $48.26 and $59.59, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, the Company had approximately $1.3 billion remaining under a share repurchase authorization. The Company may also reacquire shares of its common stock under its 2005 ICP and 2008 Plan related to restricted stock awards. Restricted shares that are forfeited before the vesting period has lapsed are recorded as treasury shares. In addition, the holders of restricted shares may elect to surrender a portion of their shares on the vesting date to cover their income tax obligations. These vested restricted shares reacquired by the Company and the Company’s payment of the holders’ income tax obligations are recorded as a treasury share purchase. The restricted shares forfeited and recorded as treasury shares under the 2005 ICP and 2008 Plan were 0.3 million shares in each of the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007. For each of the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, the Company reacquired 0.5 million of its common stock through the surrender of restricted shares upon vesting and paid in the aggregate $11 million, $24 million and $29 million, respectively, related to the holders’ income tax obligations on the vesting date. In 2009, the Company issued and sold 36 million shares of its common stock. The proceeds of $869 million will be used for general corporate purposes, including the Company’s pending acquisition of the long-term asset management business of Columbia, which is expected to close in the spring of 2010. See Note 5 for additional information on the Company’s pending acquisition of Columbia. In 2008, the Company reissued 1.8 million treasury shares for restricted stock award grants and the issuance of shares vested under the P2 Deferral Plan and the Transition and Opportunity Bonus (‘‘T&O Bonus’’) program. In 2005, the Company awarded bonuses to advisors General and administrative expense decreased $15 million, or 7%, to $192 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, primarily due to expense controls. Protection Our Protection segment offers a variety of protection products to address the protection and risk management needs of our retail clients including life, disability income and property-casualty insurance. Life and disability income products are primarily distributed through our branded advisors. Our property-casualty products are sold direct, primarily through affinity relationships. We issue insurance policies through our life insurance subsidiaries and the property casualty companies. The primary sources of revenues for this segment are premiums, fees, and charges that we receive to assume insurance-related risk. We earn net investment income on owned assets supporting insurance reserves and capital supporting the business. We also receive fees based on the level of assets supporting variable universal life separate account balances. This segment earns intersegment revenues from fees paid by the Asset Management segment for marketing support and other services provided in connection with the availability of RiverSource VST Funds under the variable universal life contracts. Intersegment expenses for this segment include distribution expenses for services provided by the Advice & Wealth Management segment, as well as expenses for investment management services provided by the Asset Management segment. The following table presents the results of operations of our Protection segment: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"> Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> 2009</td><td> 2008</td><td colspan="2">Change</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="4">(in millions, except percentages)</td></tr><tr><td> Revenues</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Management and financial advice fees</td><td>$47</td><td>$56</td><td>$-9</td><td>-16%</td></tr><tr><td>Distribution fees</td><td>97</td><td>106</td><td>-9</td><td>-8</td></tr><tr><td>Net investment income</td><td>422</td><td>252</td><td>170</td><td>67</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums</td><td>1,020</td><td>994</td><td>26</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Other revenues</td><td>386</td><td>547</td><td>-161</td><td>-29</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>1,972</td><td>1,955</td><td>17</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Banking and deposit interest expense</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total net revenues</td><td>1,971</td><td>1,954</td><td>17</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td> Expenses</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Distribution expenses</td><td>22</td><td>18</td><td>4</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>Interest credited to fixed accounts</td><td>144</td><td>144</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Benefits, claims, losses and settlement expenses</td><td>924</td><td>856</td><td>68</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of deferred acquisition costs</td><td>159</td><td>333</td><td>-174</td><td>-52</td></tr><tr><td>General and administrative expense</td><td>226</td><td>251</td><td>-25</td><td>-10</td></tr><tr><td>Total expenses</td><td>1,475</td><td>1,602</td><td>-127</td><td>-8</td></tr><tr><td>Pretax income</td><td>$496</td><td>$352</td><td>$144</td><td>41%</td></tr></table> Our Protection segment pretax income was $496 million for 2009, an increase of $144 million, or 41%, from $352 million in 2008. Net revenues Net revenues increased $17 million, or 1%, to $2.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, due to an increase in net investment income and premiums, partially offset by a decrease in other revenues related to updating valuation assumptions. Net investment income increased $170 million, or 67%, to $422 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, primarily due to net realized investment gains of $27 million in 2009 compared to net realized investment losses of $92 million in the prior year primarily related to impairments of Available-for-Sale securities. In addition, investment income earned on fixed maturity securities increased $46 million compared to the prior year driven by higher yields on the longer-term investments in our fixed income investment portfolio. In December, our board of directors ratified its authorization of a stock repurchase program in the amount of 1.5 million shares of our common stock. As of December 31, 2010 no shares had been repurchased. We have paid dividends for 71 consecutive years with payments increasing each of the last 19 years. We paid total dividends of $.54 per share in 2010 compared with $.51 per share in 2009. Aggregate Contractual Obligations A summary of our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2010, is as follows: <table><tr><td>(dollars in millions)</td><td>Payments due by period</td></tr><tr><td>Contractual Obligations</td><td>Total</td><td>Less Than1 year</td><td>1 - 3Years</td><td>3 - 5Years</td><td>More than5 years</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term Debt</td><td>$261.0</td><td>$18.6</td><td>$181.2</td><td>$29.2</td><td>$32.0</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed Rate Interest</td><td>22.4</td><td>6.1</td><td>9.0</td><td>5.1</td><td>2.2</td></tr><tr><td>Operating Leases</td><td>30.2</td><td>7.2</td><td>7.9</td><td>5.4</td><td>9.7</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase Obligations</td><td>45.5</td><td>45.5</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$359.1</td><td>$77.4</td><td>$198.1</td><td>$39.7</td><td>$43.9</td></tr></table> As of December 31, 2010, the liability for uncertain income tax positions was $2.7 million. Due to the high degree of uncertainty regarding timing of potential future cash flows associated with these liabilities, we are unable to make a reasonably reliable estimate of the amount and period in which these liabilities might be paid. We utilize blanket purchase orders to communicate expected annual requirements to many of our suppliers. Requirements under blanket purchase orders generally do not become committed until several weeks prior to the company’s scheduled unit production. The purchase obligation amount presented above represents the value of commitments considered firm. RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Our sales from continuing operations in 2010 were $1,489.3 million surpassing 2009 sales of $1,375.0 million by 8.3 percent. The increase in sales was due mostly to significantly higher sales in our water heater operations in China resulting from geographic expansion, market share gains and new product introductions as well as additional sales from our water treatment business acquired in November, 2009. Our sales from continuing operations were $1,451.3 million in 2008. The $76.3 million decline in sales from 2008 to 2009 was due to lower residential and commercial volume in North America, reflecting softness in the domestic housing market and a slowdown in the commercial water heater business and was partially offset by strong growth in water heater sales in China and improved year over year pricing. On December 13, 2010 we entered into a definitive agreement to sell our Electrical Products Company to Regal Beloit Corporation for $700 million in cash and approximately 2.83 million shares of Regal Beloit common stock. The transaction, which has been approved by both companies' board of directors, is expected to close in the first half of 2011. Due to the pending sale, our Electrical Products segment has been accorded discontinued operations treatment in the accompanying financial statements. Sales in 2010, including sales of $701.8 million for our Electrical Products segment, were $2,191.1 million. Our gross profit margin for continuing operations in 2010 was 29.9 percent, compared with 28.7 percent in 2009 and 25.8 percent in 2008. The improvement in margin from 2009 to 2010 was due to increased volume, cost containment activities and lower warranty costs which more than offset certain inefficiencies resulting from the May flood in our Ashland City, TN water heater manufacturing facility. The increase in profit margin from 2008 to 2009 resulted from increased higher margin China water heater volume, aggressive cost reduction programs and lower material costs. Selling, general and administrative expense (SG&A) was $36.9 million higher in 2010 than in 2009. The increased SG&A, the majority of which was incurred in our China water heater operation, was associated with selling costs to support higher volume and new product lines. Additional SG&A associated with our 2009 water treatment acquisition also contributed to the increase. SG&A was $8.5 million higher in 2009 than 2008 resulting mostly from an $8.2 million increase in our China water heater operation in support of higher volumes.

what's the total amount of No surrender charge of 2010 Individual Fixed Annuities, Change in cash of 2008, and Total reserves of 2010 Individual Variable Annuities ?

2010 and 2009 Comparison Surrender rates have improved compared to the prior year for group retirement products, individual fixed annuities and individual variable annuities as surrenders have returned to more normal levels. Surrender rates for individual fixed annuities have decreased significantly in 2010 due to the low interest rate environment and the relative competitiveness of interest credited rates on the existing block of fixed annuities versus interest rates on alternative investment options available in the marketplace. Surrender rates for group retirement products are expected to increase in 2011 as certain large group surrenders are anticipated.2009 and 2008 Comparison Surrenders and other withdrawals increased in 2009 for group retirement products primarily due to higher large group surrenders. However, surrender rates and withdrawals have improved for individual fixed annuities and individual variable annuities. The following table presents reserves by surrender charge category and surrender rates: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="3">2010</td><td colspan="3"> 2009</td></tr><tr><td> At December 31, <i>(in millions)</i> </td><td>Group Retirement Products*</td><td>Individual Fixed Annuities</td><td>Individual Variable Annuities</td><td>Group Retirement Products*</td><td>Individual Fixed Annuities</td><td>Individual Variable Annuities </td></tr><tr><td>No surrender charge</td><td>$52,742</td><td>$14,006</td><td>$11,859</td><td>$47,854</td><td>$11,444</td><td>$11,161</td></tr><tr><td>0% - 2%</td><td>1,292</td><td>3,510</td><td>4,083</td><td>1,509</td><td>3,054</td><td>4,094</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than 2% - 4%</td><td>1,754</td><td>5,060</td><td>2,040</td><td>1,918</td><td>5,635</td><td>2,066</td></tr><tr><td>Greater than 4%</td><td>2,753</td><td>22,777</td><td>7,361</td><td>3,213</td><td>23,885</td><td>6,758</td></tr><tr><td>Non-Surrenderable</td><td>792</td><td>3,136</td><td>238</td><td>850</td><td>3,184</td><td>558</td></tr><tr><td>Total reserves</td><td>$59,333</td><td>$48,489</td><td>$25,581</td><td>$55,344</td><td>$47,202</td><td>$24,637</td></tr><tr><td>Surrender rates</td><td>10.3%</td><td>7.4%</td><td>11.4%</td><td>12.3%</td><td>14.4%</td><td>12.1%</td></tr></table> * Excludes mutual funds of $9.0 billion and $8.1 billion in 2010 and 2009, respectively. Financial Services Operations AIG’s Financial Services subsidiaries engage in diversified activities including commercial aircraft leasing and the remaining Capital Markets portfolios, which are conducted through ILFC and AIGFP, respectively. Following the classification of AGF as discontinued operations in the third quarter of 2010 (see Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements), AIG’s remaining consumer finance businesses are now reported in AIG’s Other operations category as part of Divested businesses. As discussed in Note 3 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, in order to align financial reporting with changes made during the third quarter of 2010 to the manner in which AIG’s chief operating decision makers review the businesses to make decisions about resources to be allocated and to assess performance, changes were made to AIG’s segment information. During the third quarter of 2010, AIG’s Asset Management Group undertook the management responsibilities for non-derivative assets and liabilities of the Capital Markets’ businesses of the Financial Services segment. These assets and liabilities are being managed on a spread basis, in concert with the MIP. Accordingly, gains and losses related to these assets and liabilities, primarily consisting of credit valuation adjustment gains and losses are reported in AIG’s Other operations category as part of Asset Management — Direct Investment business. Also, intercompany interest related to loans from AIG Funding Inc. (AIG Funding) to AIGFP is no longer being allocated to Capital Markets from Other operations. The remaining Capital Markets derivatives business continues to be reported in the Financial Services segment as part of Capital Markets results. American International Group, Inc. , and Subsidiaries solely for illustrative purposes. The selection of these specific events should not be construed as a prediction, but only as a demonstration of the potential effects of such events. These scenarios should not be construed as the only risks AIG faces; these events are shown as an indication of several possible losses AIG could experience. In addition, losses from these and other risks could be materially higher than illustrated. The sensitivity factors utilized for 2010 and presented above were selected based on historical data from 1990 to 2010, as follows (see the table below): ? a 100 basis point parallel shift in the yield curve is broadly consistent with a one standard deviation movement of the benchmark ten-year treasury yield; ? a 20 percent drop for equity and alternative investments is broadly consistent with a one standard deviation movement in the S&P 500; and ? a 10 percent depreciation of foreign currency exchange rates is consistent with a one standard deviation movement in the U. S. dollar (USD)/Japanese Yen (JPY) exchange rate. <table><tr><td></td><td>Period</td><td>StandardDeviation</td><td>Suggested2010Scenario</td><td>2010 Scenarioas aMultiple ofStandardDeviation</td><td>2010 Change/ Return</td><td>2010 as aMultiple ofStandardDeviation</td><td>Original2009 Scenario(based onStandardDeviation for1989-2009Period)</td></tr><tr><td>10-Year Treasury</td><td>1990-2010</td><td>0.01</td><td>0.01</td><td>1.01</td><td>-0.01</td><td>0.56</td><td>0.01</td></tr><tr><td>S&P 500</td><td>1990-2010</td><td>0.19</td><td>0.20</td><td>1.05</td><td>0.13</td><td>0.67</td><td>0.20</td></tr><tr><td>USD/JPY</td><td>1990-2010</td><td>0.11</td><td>0.10</td><td>0.92</td><td>0.15</td><td>1.34</td><td>0.10</td></tr></table> Operational Risk Management AIG’s Operational Risk Management department (ORM) oversees AIG’s operational risk management practices. The Director of ORM reports to the CRO. ORM is responsible for establishing and maintaining the framework, principles and guidelines of AIG’s operational risk management program. Each business unit is responsible for its operational risks and implementing the components of the operational risk management program to effectively identify, assess, monitor and mitigate such risks. This responsibility includes developing and implementing policies, procedures, management oversight processes, and other governance-related activities consistent with AIG’s overall operational risk management process. Senior operational risk executives in the businesses report to the Director of ORM and to business management. This reporting structure facilitates development of business-specific knowledge of operational risk matters, while at the same time maintaining company-wide consistency in AIG’s overall approach to operational risk management. A strong operational risk management program facilitates escalation and resolution of operational risk issues. In order to accomplish this, AIG’s operational risk management program is designed to: ? pro-actively address potential operational risk issues; ? create transparency at all levels of the organization; and ? assign clear ownership and accountability for addressing identified issues. As part of the operational risk management framework, AIG has implemented a risk and control self assessment (RCSA) process. The RCSA process is used to identify key operational risks and evaluate the effectiveness of existing controls to mitigate those risks. Corrective action plans are developed to address any identified issues. In 2010, business units continued to enhance their RCSA processes to perform more robust risk assessments. American International Group, Inc. , and Subsidiaries AIG’s consolidated risk target is to maintain a minimum liquidity buffer such that AIG Parent’s liquidity needs under the ERM stress scenarios do not exceed 80 percent of AIG Parent’s overall liquidity sources over the specified two-year horizon. If the 80 percent minimum threshold is projected to be breached over this defined time horizon, AIG will take appropriate actions to further increase liquidity sources or reduce liquidity needs to maintain the target threshold, although no assurance can be given that this would be possible under then-prevailing market conditions. AIG expects to enter into additional capital maintenance agreements with its U. S. insurance companies to manage the flow of capital and funds between AIG Parent and the insurance companies. As a result of these ERM stress tests, AIG believes that it has sufficient liquidity at the AIG Parent level to satisfy future liquidity requirements and meet its obligations, including reasonably foreseeable contingencies or events. See further discussion regarding AIG Parent and subsidiary liquidity considerations in Liquidity of Parent and Subsidiaries below. Analysis of sources and uses of cash The following table presents selected data from AIG’s Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows: <table><tr><td> Years Ended December 31, <i>(in millions)</i> </td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Summary:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities</td><td>$16,910</td><td>$18,584</td><td>$-122</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities</td><td>-10,225</td><td>5,778</td><td>47,176</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash used in financing activities</td><td>-9,261</td><td>-28,997</td><td>-40,734</td></tr><tr><td>Effect of exchange rate changes on cash</td><td>39</td><td>533</td><td>38</td></tr><tr><td>Change in cash</td><td>-2,537</td><td>-4,102</td><td>6,358</td></tr><tr><td>Cash at beginning of year</td><td>4,400</td><td>8,642</td><td>2,284</td></tr><tr><td>Reclassification of assets held for sale</td><td>-305</td><td>-140</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Cash at end of year</td><td>$1,558</td><td>$4,400</td><td>$8,642</td></tr></table> Net cash provided by operating activities was positive for both 2010 and 2009 compared to negative in 2008, principally due to positive cash flows from AIG’s life insurance subsidiaries. Insurance companies generally receive most premiums in advance of the payment of claims or policy benefits, but the ability of Chartis to generate positive cash flow is affected by operating expenses, the frequency and severity of losses under its insurance policies and policy retention rates. Cash provided by Chartis operations was $1.9 billion for 2010 compared to $2.8 billion in 2009 as a reduction in claims paid was more than offset by declines in premiums collected, arising primarily from a decrease in domestic production. Catastrophic events and significant casualty losses, the timing and effect of which are inherently unpredictable, reduce operating cash flow for Chartis operations. Cash provided by AIG’s life insurance subsidiaries, including entities presented as discontinued operations, was $15.5 billion for 2010 compared to $9.1 billion in 2009 as growth in international markets was partially offset by a decrease in cash flows from domestic operations. Cash flows provided from Financial Services including entities presented as discontinued operations were $1.4 billion and $5.4 billion for 2010 and 2009, respectively. The decrease can be attributed in part to the continued wind-down of AIGFP’s businesses and portfolio. Cash provided by Chartis was $2.8 billion for 2009 compared to $4.8 billion in 2008 as a reduction in claims paid was more than offset by reduced premiums collected. Cash provided by life insurance operations, including entities presented as discontinued operations, was $9.1 billion for 2009 compared to $22 billion in 2008. Reduced cash flows were primarily driven by the continuing impact of the negative events during the second half of 2008. Cash provided from Financial Services, including entities presented as discontinued operations, was $5.4 billion for 2009 compared to $28.9 billion operating cash outflows in 2008, primarily related to collateral posting requirements. Although many clients use both active and passive strategies, the application of these strategies differs greatly. For example, clients may use index products to gain exposure to a market or asset class pending reallocation to an active manager. This has the effect of increasing turnover of index AUM. In addition, institutional non-ETP index assignments tend to be very large (multibillion dollars) and typically reflect low fee rates. This has the potential to exaggerate the significance of net flows in institutional index products on BlackRock’s revenues and earnings. Equity Year-end 2012 equity AUM of $1.845 trillion increased by $285.4 billion, or 18%, from the end of 2011, largely due to flows into regional, country-specific and global mandates and the effect of higher market valuations. Equity AUM growth included $54.0 billion in net new business and $3.6 billion in new assets related to the acquisition of Claymore. Net new business of $54.0 billion was driven by net inflows of $53.0 billion and $19.1 billion into iShares and non-ETP index accounts, respectively. Passive inflows were offset by active net outflows of $18.1 billion, with net outflows of $10.0 billion and $8.1 billion from fundamental and scientific active equity products, respectively. Passive strategies represented 84% of equity AUM with the remaining 16% in active mandates. Institutional investors represented 62% of equity AUM, while iShares, and retail and HNW represented 29% and 9%, respectively. At year-end 2012, 63% of equity AUM was managed for clients in the Americas (defined as the United States, Caribbean, Canada, Latin America and Iberia) compared with 28% and 9% managed for clients in EMEA and Asia-Pacific, respectively. BlackRock’s effective fee rates fluctuate due to changes in AUM mix. Approximately half of BlackRock’s equity AUM is tied to international markets, including emerging markets, which tend to have higher fee rates than similar U. S. equity strategies. Accordingly, fluctuations in international equity markets, which do not consistently move in tandem with U. S. markets, may have a greater impact on BlackRock’s effective equity fee rates and revenues. Fixed Income Fixed income AUM ended 2012 at $1.259 trillion, rising $11.6 billion, or 1%, relative to December 31, 2011. Growth in AUM reflected $43.3 billion in net new business, excluding the two large previously mentioned low-fee outflows, $75.4 billion in market and foreign exchange gains and $3.0 billion in new assets related to Claymore. Net new business was led by flows into domestic specialty and global bond mandates, with net inflows of $28.8 billion, $13.6 billion and $3.1 billion into iShares, non-ETP index and model-based products, respectively, partially offset by net outflows of $2.2 billion from fundamental strategies. Fixed Income AUM was split between passive and active strategies with 48% and 52%, respectively. Institutional investors represented 74% of fixed income AUM while iShares and retail and HNW represented 15% and 11%, respectively. At year-end 2012, 59% of fixed income AUM was managed for clients in the Americas compared with 33% and 8% managed for clients in EMEA and AsiaPacific, respectively. Multi-Asset Class Component Changes in Multi-Asset Class AUM

what was the percent of the decline in the gross unrecognized tax benefits from 2009 to 2010

REPUBLIC SERVICES, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, CONTINUED approximately $32 million of federal tax payments were deferred and paid in 2009 as a result of the Allied acquisition. The following table summarizes the activity in our gross unrecognized tax benefits for the years ended December 31: <table><tr><td></td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at beginning of year</td><td>$242.2</td><td>$611.9</td><td>$23.2</td></tr><tr><td>Additions due to the Allied acquisition</td><td>-</td><td>13.3</td><td>582.9</td></tr><tr><td>Additions based on tax positions related to current year</td><td>2.8</td><td>3.9</td><td>10.6</td></tr><tr><td>Reductions for tax positions related to the current year</td><td>-</td><td>-</td><td>-5.1</td></tr><tr><td>Additions for tax positions of prior years</td><td>7.5</td><td>5.6</td><td>2.0</td></tr><tr><td>Reductions for tax positions of prior years</td><td>-7.4</td><td>-24.1</td><td>-1.3</td></tr><tr><td>Reductions for tax positions resulting from lapse of statute of limitations</td><td>-10.4</td><td>-0.5</td><td>-0.4</td></tr><tr><td>Settlements</td><td>-11.9</td><td>-367.9</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at end of year</td><td>$222.8</td><td>$242.2</td><td>$611.9</td></tr></table> New accounting guidance for business combinations became effective for our 2009 financial statements. This new guidance changed the treatment of acquired uncertain tax liabilities. Under previous guidance, changes in acquired uncertain tax liabilities were recognized through goodwill. Under the new guidance, subsequent changes in acquired unrecognized tax liabilities are recognized through the income tax provision. As of December 31, 2010, $206.5 million of the $222.8 million of unrecognized tax benefits related to tax positions taken by Allied prior to the 2008 acquisition. Included in the balance at December 31, 2010 and 2009 are approximately $209.1 million and $217.6 million of unrecognized tax benefits (net of the federal benefit on state issues) that, if recognized, would affect the effective income tax rate in future periods. During 2010, the IRS concluded its examination of our 2005 and 2007 tax years. The conclusion of this examination reduced our gross unrecognized tax benefits by approximately $1.9 million. We also resolved various state matters during 2010 that, in the aggregate, reduced our gross unrecognized tax benefits by approximately $10.0 million. During 2009, we settled our outstanding tax dispute related to Allied’s risk management companies (see – Risk Management Companies) with both the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). This settlement reduced our gross unrecognized tax benefits by approximately $299.6 million. During 2009, we also settled with the IRS, through an accounting method change, our outstanding tax dispute related to intercompany insurance premiums paid to Allied’s captive insurance company. This settlement reduced our gross unrecognized tax benefits by approximately $62.6 million. In addition to these federal matters, we also resolved various state matters that, in the aggregate, reduced our gross unrecognized tax benefits during 2009 by approximately $5.8 million. We recognize interest and penalties as incurred within the provision for income taxes in our consolidated statements of income. Related to the unrecognized tax benefits previously noted, we accrued interest of $19.2 million during 2010 and, in total as of December 31, 2010, have recognized a liability for penalties of $1.2 million and interest of $99.9 million. During 2009, we accrued interest of $24.5 million and, in total at December 31, 2009, had recognized a liability for penalties of $1.5 million and interest of $92.3 million. During 2008, we accrued penalties of $0.2 million and interest of $5.2 million and, in total at December 31, 2008, had recognized a liability for penalties of $88.1 million and interest of $180.0 million. NONREGULATED OPERATING MARGINS The following table details the changes in nonregulated revenue and margin included in continuing operations: <table><tr><td> (Millions of Dollars)</td><td>2005</td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td></tr><tr><td>Nonregulated and other revenue</td><td>$74</td><td>$75</td><td>$134</td></tr><tr><td>Nonregulated cost of goods sold</td><td>-25</td><td>-29</td><td>-81</td></tr><tr><td>Nonregulated margin</td><td>$49</td><td>$46</td><td>$53</td></tr></table> 2004 Comparison to 2003 Nonregulated revenue decreased in 2004, due primarily to the discontinued consolidation of an investment in an independent power-producing entity that was no longer majority owned. NON-FUEL OPERATING EXPENSES AND OTHER ITEMS Other Utility Operating and Maintenance Expenses Other operating and maintenance expenses for 2005 increased by approximately $87 million, or 5.5 percent, compared with 2004. An outage at the Monticello nuclear plant and higher outage costs at Prairie Island in 2005 increased costs by approximately $26 million. Employee benefit costs were higher in 2005, primarily due to increased pension benefits and long-term disability costs. Also contributing to the increase were higher uncollectible receivable costs, attributable in part to modifications to the bankruptcy laws, higher fuel prices and certain changes in the credit and collections process. Other operating and maintenance expenses for 2004 increased by approximately $21 million, or 1.4 percent, compared with 2003. Of the increase, $12 million was incurred to assist with the storm damage repair in Florida and was offset by increased revenue. The remaining increase of $9 million is primarily due to higher electric service reliability costs, higher information technology costs, higher plant-related costs, higher costs related to a customer billing system conversion and increased costs primarily related to compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The higher costs were partially offset by lower employee benefit and compensation costs and lower nuclear plant outage costs <table><tr><td> (Millions of Dollars)</td><td>2005 vs. 2004</td><td>2004 vs. 2003</td></tr><tr><td>Higher (lower) employee benefit costs</td><td>$31</td><td>$-12</td></tr><tr><td>Higher (lower) nuclear plant outage costs</td><td>26</td><td>-13</td></tr><tr><td>Higher uncollectible receivable costs</td><td>19</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Higher donations to energy assistance programs</td><td>4</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Higher mutual aid assistance costs</td><td>1</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>Higher electric service reliability costs</td><td>9</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Higher (lower) information technology costs</td><td>-6</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Higher (lower) plant-related costs</td><td>-7</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Higher costs related to customer billing system conversion</td><td>4</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Higher costs to comply with Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002</td><td>—</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>6</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating and maintenance expense increase</td><td>$87</td><td>$21</td></tr></table> Other Nonregulated Operating and Maintenance Expenses Other nonregulated operating and maintenance expenses decreased $16 million, or 35.4 percent, in 2005 compared with 2004, primarily due to the accrual of $18 million in 2004 for a settlement agreement related to shareholder lawsuits. Other nonregulated operating and maintenance expenses decreased $9 million, or 17.5 percent, in 2004 compared with 2003. This decrease resulted from the dissolution of Planergy International and the discontinued consolidation of an investment in an independent powerproducing entity that was no longer majority owned after the divestiture of NRG. Depreciation and Amortization Depreciation and amortization expense for 2005 increased by approximately $61 million, or 8.7 percent, compared with 2004. The changes were primarily due to the installation of new steam generators at Unit 1 of the Prairie Island nuclear plant and software system additions, both of which have relatively short depreciable lives compared with other capital additions. The Prairie Island steam generators are being depreciated over the remaining life of the plant operating license, which expires in 2013. In addition, the Minnesota Renewable Development Fund and renewable cost-recovery amortization, which is recovered in revenue as a non-fuel rider and does not have an impact on net income, increased over 2004. The increase was partially offset by the changes in useful lives and net salvage rates approved by Minnesota regulators in August 2005. Depreciation and amortization expense for 2004 decreased by $21 million, or 2.9 percent, compared with 2003. The reduction is largely due to several regulatory decisions. In 2004, as a result of a Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) order, NSP-Minnesota modified its decommissioning expense recognition, which served to reduce decommissioning accruals by approximately $18 million in 2004 compared with 2003. In addition, effective July 1, 2003, the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) lengthened the depreciable lives of certain electric utility plant at PSCo as a part of the general Colorado rate case, reducing annual depreciation expense by $20 million. PSCo experienced the full impact of the annual reduction in 2004, resulting in a decrease in depreciation expense of $10 million for 2004 compared with 2003. These decreases were partially offset by plant additions. Contractual Obligations and Other Commitments — Xcel Energy has contractual obligations and other commitments that will need to be funded in the future, in addition to its capital expenditure programs. The following is a summarized table of contractual obligations and other commercial commitments at Dec. 31, 2007. See additional discussion in the consolidated statements of capitalization and Notes 4, 5, and 15 to the consolidated financial statements. <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="5"> Payments Due by Period</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> Total</td><td> Less than 1 Year</td><td> 1 to 3 Years</td><td> 4 to 5 Years</td><td> After 5 Years</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="5"> (Thousands of Dollars) </td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt, principal and interest payments</td><td>$12,599,312</td><td>$1,065,530</td><td>$1,849,818</td><td>$1,760,489</td><td>$7,923,475</td></tr><tr><td>Capital lease obligations</td><td>85,951</td><td>6,139</td><td>11,794</td><td>11,139</td><td>56,879</td></tr><tr><td>Operating leases^(a),^(b)</td><td>1,439,346</td><td>104,557</td><td>200,000</td><td>161,743</td><td>973,046</td></tr><tr><td>Unconditional purchase obligations</td><td>12,047,364</td><td>2,448,155</td><td>3,321,234</td><td>2,247,977</td><td>4,029,998</td></tr><tr><td>Other long-term obligations — WYCO investment</td><td>121,000</td><td>108,000</td><td>13,000</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Other long-term obligations^(c)</td><td>165,847</td><td>31,589</td><td>42,775</td><td>38,964</td><td>52,519</td></tr><tr><td>Payments to vendors in process</td><td>145,059</td><td>145,059</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Short-term debt</td><td>1,088,560</td><td>1,088,560</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total contractual cash obligations^(d)</td><td>$27,692,439</td><td>$4,997,589</td><td>$5,438,621</td><td>$4,220,312</td><td>$13,035,917</td></tr></table> (a) Under some leases, Xcel Energy would have to sell or purchase the property that it leases if it chose to terminate before the scheduled lease expiration date. Most of Xcel Energy’s railcar, vehicle and equipment and aircraft leases have these terms. At Dec. 31, 2006, the amount that Xcel Energy would have to pay if it chose to terminate these leases was approximately $176.8 million. In addition, at the end of the equipment leases’ terms, each lease must be extended, equipment purchased for the greater of the fair value or unamortized value or equipment sold to a third party with Xcel Energy making up any deficiency between the sales price and the unamortized value. (b) Included in operating lease payments are $76.6 million, $151.7 million, $124.5 million and $916.6 million, for the less than 1 year, 1-3 years, 4-5 years and after 5 years categories, respectively, pertaining to five purchase power agreements that were accounted for as operating leases. (c) Included in other long-term obligations are tax, penalties and interest related to unrecognized tax benefits recorded according to FIN 48. (d) Xcel Energy and its subsidiaries have contracts providing for the purchase and delivery of a significant portion of its current coal, nuclear fuel and natural gas requirements. Additionally, the utility subsidiaries of Xcel Energy have entered into agreements with utilities and other energy suppliers for purchased power to meet system load and energy requirements, replace generation from company-owned units under maintenance and during outages, and meet operating reserve obligations. Certain contractual purchase obligations are adjusted based on indices. The effects of price changes are mitigated through cost-of-energy adjustment mechanisms. (e) Xcel Energy also has outstanding authority under contracts and blanket purchase orders to purchase up to approximately $1.6 billion of goods and services through the year 2050, in addition to the amounts disclosed in this table and in the forecasted capital expenditures. Xcel Energy has also executed five additional purchase power agreements that are conditional upon achievement of certain conditions, including becoming operational. Estimated payments under these conditional obligations are $52.8 million, $165.7 million, $177.9 million and $1.7 billion, respectively, for the less than 1 year, 1-3 years, 4-5 years and after 5 years categories. Common Stock Dividends — Future dividend levels will be dependent on Xcel Energy’s results of operations, financial position, cash flows and other factors, and will be evaluated by the Xcel Energy board of directors. Xcel Energy’s objective is to increase the annual dividend in the range of 2 percent to 4 percent per year. Xcel Energy’s dividend policy balances: ? Projected cash generation from utility operations; ? Projected capital investment in the utility businesses; ? A reasonable rate of return on shareholder investment; and ? The impact on Xcel Energy’s capital structure and credit ratings. In addition, there are certain statutory limitations that could affect dividend levels. Federal law places certain limits on the ability of public utilities within a holding company system to declare dividends. Specifically, under the Federal Power Act, a public utility may not pay dividends from any funds properly included in a capital account. The cash to pay dividends to Xcel Energy shareholders is primarily derived from dividends received from its utility subsidiaries. The utility subsidiaries are generally limited in the amount of dividends allowed by state regulatory commissions to be paid to the holding company. The limitation is imposed through equity ratio limitations that range from 30 percent to 60 percent. Some utility subsidiaries must comply with bond indenture covenants or restrictions under credit agreements for debt to total capitalization ratios. Results of Operations The following table summarizes the diluted EPS for Xcel Energy and subsidiaries:

What is the sum of Net interest revenue, Non-interest revenue and Revenues, net of interest expense in 2009? (in million)

American International Group, Inc. , and Subsidiaries The Capital Markets wind-down and other segment developments affecting pre-tax income (loss) described above are discussed further in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity of Parent and Subsidiaries — Financial Services — Capital Markets Wind-down. Accrued compounding interest and fees (reflected as non-cash expenses) were paid in kind in 2010 and 2009 under the provisions of the FRBNY Credit Facility and, accordingly, did not reduce operating cash flow in any period. Debt under the FRBNY Credit Facility includes total accrued compounding interest and fees of $6.4 billion at December 31, 2010. This amount was fully repaid in cash on January 14, 2011 as part of the Recapitalization. Net cash used in investing activities in 2010 primarily resulted from net purchases of fixed maturity securities, resulting from AIG’s investment of cash generated from operating activities, and the redeployment of liquidity that had been accumulated by the insurance companies in 2008 and 2009. In these years, Net cash provided by investing activities resulted from the net proceeds from the sale and maturity of investments. Net cash used in financing activities was significantly lower in 2010 than in 2009, primarily as a result of declines in policyholder contract withdrawals, reflecting improved conditions for the life insurance and retirement services businesses was partially offset by the issuance of long-term debt by ILFC, which is discussed in Liquidity of Parent and Subsidiaries — Financial Services — ILFC. Net cash used in financing activities was significantly lower in 2009 than in 2008, also primarily as a result of declines in policyholder contract withdrawals, reduction of payments and the FRBNY Credit Facility and a reduction in repayments of other borrowings. See Contractual Obligations herein for additional information. Liquidity of Parent and Subsidiaries AIG Parent Sources of Liquidity As a result of the Closing of the Recapitalization, AIG has established and maintains substantial sources of actual and contingent liquidity. The following table presents AIG Parent’s sources of liquidity in addition to liquidity that is expected to result from cash flows from operations: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="2"> As of</td><td></td></tr><tr><td><i>(In millions)</i> </td><td> December 31, 2010 </td><td> February 16, 2011 </td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cash<i>^(a)</i></td><td>$49</td><td>$-</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Short-term investments<i>^(a)</i></td><td>5,602</td><td>8,953</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Available capacity under Syndicated Credit Facility<i>^(b)</i></td><td>-</td><td>3,000</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Available capacity under Contingent Liquidity Facility</td><td>500</td><td>500</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Available capacity under the Department of the Treasury Commitment (Series G)<i>^(b)</i></td><td>-</td><td>2,000</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Available borrowing under the FRBNY Credit Facility<i>^(c)</i></td><td>9,890</td><td>-</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Available capacity under the Department of the Treasury Commitment (Series F)<i>^(c)</i></td><td>22,292</td><td>-</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total AIG Parent liquidity sources<i>^(d)</i></td><td>$38,333</td><td>$14,453</td><td><i>^(e)</i></td></tr></table> (a) Includes total Cash and Short-term investments for AIG Parent. See Note 25 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. (b) The Syndicated Credit Facility and the Series G Drawdown Right became effective January 14, 2011, the closing date of the Recapitalization. (c) The FRBNY Credit Facility was fully repaid and terminated, and the Department of Treasury Commitment (Series F) was drawn down on the closing of the Recapitalization. (d) Excludes Cash and Short-term Investments held by AIGFP (excluding Banque AIG S. A. ) which are considered to be unrestricted and available for use by AIG Parent; these balances totaled $421 million at December 31, 2010 and $494 million at February 16, 2011. (e) Does not give effect to reduction for a $3.7 billion capital contribution made by AIG Parent to Chartis after February 16, 2011. FRBNY Credit Facility: At December 31, 2010, a total of $21.0 billion was outstanding under the FRBNY Credit Facility, a net decrease of $2.5 billion from December 31, 2009. The amount outstanding at December 31, 2010 included $6.4 billion of accrued compounding interest and fees. On January 14, 2011, AIG used cash proceeds from the AIA initial public offering and the sale of ALICO to fully repay and terminate the FRBNY Comparison of Five-Year Cumulative Total Return The following graph compares the cumulative total return on Citigroup’s common stock with the S&P 500 Index and the S&P Financial Index over the five-year period extending through December31, 2009. The graph assumes that $100 was invested on December31, 2004 in Citigroup’s common stock, the S&P 500 Index and the S&P Financial Index and that all dividends were reinvested. <table><tr><td>DECEMBER 31</td><td>CITIGROUP</td><td>S&P 500 INDEX</td><td>S&P FINANCIAL INDEX</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td>104.38</td><td>104.83</td><td>106.30</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td>124.02</td><td>121.20</td><td>126.41</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>70.36</td><td>127.85</td><td>103.47</td></tr><tr><td>2008</td><td>18.71</td><td>81.12</td><td>47.36</td></tr><tr><td>2009</td><td>9.26</td><td>102.15</td><td>55.27</td></tr></table> SECURITIES AND BANKING Securities and Banking (S&B) offers a wide array of investment and commercial banking services and products for corporations, governments, institutional and retail investors, and ultra-high-net worth individuals. S&B includes investment banking and advisory services, lending, debt and equity sales and trading, institutional brokerage, foreign exchange, structured products, cash instruments and related derivatives, and private banking. S&B revenue is generated primarily from fees for investment banking and advisory services, fees and interest on loans, fees and spread on foreign exchange, structured products, cash instruments and related derivatives, income earned on principal transactions, and fees and spreads on private banking services. <table><tr><td>In millions of dollars</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>% Change 2009 vs. 2008</td><td>% Change 2008 vs. 2007</td></tr><tr><td>Net interest revenue</td><td>$12,088</td><td>$12,255</td><td>$7,450</td><td>-1%</td><td>64%</td></tr><tr><td>Non-interest revenue</td><td>15,558</td><td>12,680</td><td>17,906</td><td>23</td><td>-29</td></tr><tr><td>Revenues, net of interest expense</td><td>$27,646</td><td>$24,935</td><td>$25,356</td><td>11%</td><td>-2%</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating expenses</td><td>13,053</td><td>15,799</td><td>16,178</td><td>-17</td><td>-2</td></tr><tr><td>Net credit losses</td><td>720</td><td>899</td><td>306</td><td>-20</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Provisions for unfunded lending commitments</td><td>138</td><td>-185</td><td>79</td><td>NM</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Credit reserve build</td><td>853</td><td>1,126</td><td>201</td><td>-24</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Provisions for benefits and claims</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>-100</td></tr><tr><td>Provisions for loan losses and benefits and claims</td><td>$1,711</td><td>$1,840</td><td>$587</td><td>-7%</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Income before taxes and noncontrolling interests</td><td>$12,882</td><td>$7,296</td><td>$8,591</td><td>77%</td><td>-15%</td></tr><tr><td>Income taxes</td><td>3,730</td><td>1,344</td><td>2,078</td><td>NM</td><td>-35</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations</td><td>9,152</td><td>5,952</td><td>6,513</td><td>54</td><td>-9</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests</td><td>55</td><td>-13</td><td>25</td><td>NM</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>$9,097</td><td>$5,965</td><td>$6,488</td><td>53%</td><td>-8%</td></tr><tr><td>Average assets(in billions of dollars)</td><td>$779</td><td>$966</td><td>$1,085</td><td>-19%</td><td>-11%</td></tr><tr><td>Return on assets</td><td>1.17%</td><td>0.62%</td><td>0.60%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Revenues by region</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>North America</td><td>$9,400</td><td>$10,987</td><td>$8,998</td><td>-14%</td><td>22%</td></tr><tr><td>EMEA</td><td>10,035</td><td>6,006</td><td>7,756</td><td>67</td><td>-23</td></tr><tr><td>Latin America</td><td>3,411</td><td>2,369</td><td>3,161</td><td>44</td><td>-25</td></tr><tr><td>Asia</td><td>4,800</td><td>5,573</td><td>5,441</td><td>-14</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>$27,646</td><td>$24,935</td><td>$25,356</td><td>11%</td><td>-2%</td></tr><tr><td>Net income from continuing operations by region</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>North America</td><td>$2,417</td><td>$2,275</td><td>$1,687</td><td>6%</td><td>35%</td></tr><tr><td>EMEA</td><td>3,393</td><td>656</td><td>1,595</td><td>NM</td><td>-59</td></tr><tr><td>Latin America</td><td>1,512</td><td>1,048</td><td>1,436</td><td>44</td><td>-27</td></tr><tr><td>Asia</td><td>1,830</td><td>1,973</td><td>1,795</td><td>-7</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>Total net income from continuing operations</td><td>$9,152</td><td>$5,952</td><td>$6,513</td><td>54%</td><td>-9%</td></tr><tr><td>Securities and Banking revenue details</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total investment banking</td><td>$4,763</td><td>$3,245</td><td>$5,570</td><td>47%</td><td>-42%</td></tr><tr><td>Lending</td><td>-2,153</td><td>4,220</td><td>1,814</td><td>NM</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Equity markets</td><td>3,182</td><td>2,878</td><td>5,202</td><td>11</td><td>-45</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed income markets</td><td>21,540</td><td>14,395</td><td>11,507</td><td>50</td><td>25</td></tr><tr><td>Private bank</td><td>2,054</td><td>2,309</td><td>2,473</td><td>-11</td><td>-7</td></tr><tr><td>Other Securities and Banking</td><td>-1,740</td><td>-2,112</td><td>-1,210</td><td>18</td><td>-75</td></tr><tr><td>Total Securities and Banking revenues</td><td>$27,646</td><td>$24,935</td><td>$25,356</td><td>11%</td><td>-2%</td></tr></table> PART II DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION ? DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC ? PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. ? DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC ? DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, LLC ? DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. ? DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, LLC ? PIEDMONT NATURAL GAS COMPANY, INC. Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued) a provisional basis, see Note 22, “Income Taxes,” for additional information. If Duke Energy’s estimate of the tax effect of reversing temporary differences is not reflective of actual outcomes, is modified to reflect new developments or interpretations of the tax law, revised to incorporate new accounting principles, or changes in the expected timing or manner of the reversal then Duke Energy’s results of operations could be impacted. Tax-related interest and penalties are recorded in Interest Expense and Other Income and Expenses, net in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. See Note 22 for further information. Accounting for Renewable Energy Tax Credits When Duke Energy receives ITCs on wind or solar facilities, it reduces the basis of the property recorded on the Consolidated Balance Sheets by the amount of the ITC and, therefore, the ITC benefit is ultimately recognized in the statement of operations through reduced depreciation expense. Additionally, certain tax credits and government grants result in an initial tax depreciable base in excess of the book carrying value by an amount equal to one half of the ITC. Deferred tax benefits are recorded as a reduction to income tax expense in the period that the basis difference is created. Excise Taxes Certain excise taxes levied by state or local governments are required to be paid even if not collected from the customer. These taxes are recognized on a gross basis. Otherwise, the taxes are accounted for net. Excise taxes accounted for on a gross basis within both Operating Revenues and Property and other taxes in the Consolidated Statements of Operations were as follows. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>Duke Energy</td><td>$376</td><td>$362</td><td>$396</td></tr><tr><td>Duke Energy Carolinas</td><td>36</td><td>31</td><td>31</td></tr><tr><td>Progress Energy</td><td>220</td><td>213</td><td>229</td></tr><tr><td>Duke Energy Progress</td><td>19</td><td>18</td><td>16</td></tr><tr><td>Duke Energy Florida</td><td>201</td><td>195</td><td>213</td></tr><tr><td>Duke Energy Ohio</td><td>98</td><td>100</td><td>102</td></tr><tr><td>Duke Energy Indiana</td><td>20</td><td>17</td><td>34</td></tr><tr><td>Piedmont^(a)</td><td>2</td><td></td><td></td></tr></table> NEW ACCOUNTING STANDARDS The new accounting standards adopted for 2017 and 2016 had no material impact on the presentation or results of operations, cash flows or financial position of the Duke Energy Registrants. The following accounting standards were adopted by the Duke Energy Registrants during 2017. Stock-Based Compensation and Income Taxes. In first quarter 2017, Duke Energy adopted Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) guidance, which revised the accounting for stock-based compensation and the associated income taxes. The adopted guidance changed certain aspects of accounting for stock-based payment awards to employees including the accounting for income taxes and classification on the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. The primary impact to Duke Energy as a result of implementing this guidance was a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings for tax benefits not previously recognized and additional income tax expense for the 12 months ended December 31, 2017. See the Duke Energy Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity for further information. Goodwill Impairment. In January 2017, the FASB issued revised guidance for the subsequent measurement of goodwill. Under the guidance, a company will recognize an impairment to goodwill for the amount by which a reporting unit’s carrying value exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value, not to exceed the amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. Duke Energy early adopted this guidance for the 2017 annual goodwill impairment test. The following new accounting standards have been issued, but have not yet been adopted by the Duke Energy Registrants, as of December 31, 2017. Revenue from Contracts with Customers. In May 2014, the FASB issued revised accounting guidance for revenue recognition from contracts with customers. The core principle of this guidance is that an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The amendments in this update also require disclosure of sufficient information to allow users to understand the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers. Duke Energy has identified material revenue streams, which served as the basis for accounting analysis and documentation of the impact of this guidance on revenue recognition. The accounting analysis included reviewing representative contracts and tariffs for each material revenue stream. Most of Duke Energy’s revenue will be in scope of the new guidance. The majority of our sales, including energy provided to residential customers, are from tariff offerings that provide natural gas or electricity without a defined contractual term (“at-will”). For such arrangements, revenue from contracts with customers will be equivalent to the electricity or natural gas supplied and billed in that period (including estimated billings). As such, there will not be a significant shift in the timing or pattern of revenue recognition for such sales. Also included in the accounting analysis was the evaluation of certain long-term revenue streams including electric wholesale contracts and renewables power purchase agreements (PPAs). For such arrangements, Duke Energy does not expect material changes to the pattern of revenue recognition on the registrants. In addition, Duke Energy has monitored the activities of the power and utilities industry revenue recognition task force including draft accounting positions released in October 2017 and the impact, if any, on Duke Energy’s specific contracts and conclusions. Potential revisions to processes, policies and controls, primarily related to evaluating supplemental disclosures required as a result of adopting this guidance, will be evaluated and implemented as necessary. Some revenue arrangements, such as alternative revenue programs and certain PPAs accounted for as leases, are excluded PART II DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION ? DUKE ENERGY CAROLINAS, LLC ? PROGRESS ENERGY, INC. ? DUKE ENERGY PROGRESS, LLC ? DUKE ENERGY FLORIDA, LLC ? DUKE ENERGY OHIO, INC. ? DUKE ENERGY INDIANA, LLC ? PIEDMONT NATURAL GAS COMPANY, INC. Combined Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements – (Continued) Piedmont’s Earnings Piedmont’s revenues and net income included in Duke Energy’s Consolidated Statements of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2016, were $367 million and $20 million, respectively. Piedmont’s revenues and net income for the year ended December 31, 2016, include the impact of nonrecurring transaction costs of $10 million and $46 million, respectively. Acquisition Related Financings and Other Matters Duke Energy financed the Piedmont acquisition with a combination of debt and equity issuances and other cash sources, including: ? $3.75 billion of long-term debt issued in August 2016. ? $750 million borrowed under the $1.5 billion short-term loan facility in September 2016, which was repaid in December 2016. ?10.6 million shares of common stock issued in October 2016 for net cash proceeds of approximately $723 million. The $4.9 billion senior unsecured bridge financing facility (Bridge Facility) with Barclays Capital, Inc. (Barclays) was terminated following the issuance of the long-term debt. For additional information related to the debt and equity issuances, see Notes 6 and 18, respectively. For additional information regarding Duke Energy’s and Piedmont’s joint investment in Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC (ACP), see Note 4. DISPOSITIONS For the year ended December 31, 2017, the Loss from Discontinued Operations, net of tax, was immaterial. The following table summarizes the (Loss) Income from Discontinued Operations, net of tax recorded on Duke Energy’s Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2016, and 2015: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>International Energy Disposal Group</td><td>$-534</td><td>$157</td></tr><tr><td>Midwest Generation Disposal Group</td><td>36</td><td>33</td></tr><tr><td>Other^(a)</td><td>90</td><td>-13</td></tr><tr><td>(Loss) Income from Discontinued Operations, net of tax</td><td>$-408</td><td>$177</td></tr></table> (a) Relates to previously sold businesses not related to the Disposal Groups. The amount for 2016 represents an income tax benefit resulting from immaterial out of period deferred tax liability adjustments. The amount for 2015 includes indemnifications provided for certain legal, tax and environmental matters and foreign currency translation adjustments.2016 Sale of International Energy In February 2016, Duke Energy announced it had initiated a process to divest its International Energy businesses, excluding the equity method investment in NMC (the International Disposal Group), and in October 2016, announced it had entered into two separate purchase and sale agreements to execute the divestiture. Both sales closed in December of 2016, resulting in available cash proceeds of $1.9 billion, excluding transaction costs. Proceeds were primarily used to reduce Duke Energy holding company (the parent) debt. Existing favorable tax attributes result in no immediate U. S. federal-level cash tax impacts. Details of each transaction are as follows ? On December 20, 2016, Duke Energy closed on the sale of its ownership interests in businesses in Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala and Peru to I Squared Capital. The assets sold included approximately 2,230 MW of hydroelectric and natural gas generation capacity, transmission infrastructure and natural gas processing facilities. I Squared Capital purchased the businesses for an enterprise value of $1.2 billion. ? On December 29, 2016, Duke Energy closed on the sale of its Brazilian business, which included approximately 2,090 MW of hydroelectric generation capacity, to CTG for an enterprise value of $1.2 billion. With the closing of the CTG deal, Duke Energy finalized its exit from the Latin American market. Assets Held For Sale and Discontinued Operations As a result of the transactions, the International Disposal Group was classified as held for sale and as discontinued operations in the fourth quarter of 2016. Interest expense directly associated with the International Disposal Group was allocated to discontinued operations. No interest from corporate level debt was allocated to discontinued operations. The following table presents the results of the International Disposal Group for the years ended December 31, 2016, and 2015, which are included in (Loss) Income from Discontinued Operations, net of tax in Duke Energy’s Consolidated Statements of Operations. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>Operating Revenues</td><td>$988</td><td>$1,088</td></tr><tr><td>Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power</td><td>227</td><td>306</td></tr><tr><td>Cost of natural gas</td><td>43</td><td>53</td></tr><tr><td>Operation, maintenance and other</td><td>341</td><td>334</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation and amortization^(a)</td><td>62</td><td>92</td></tr><tr><td>Property and other taxes</td><td>15</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Impairment charges^(b)</td><td>194</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>(Loss) Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net</td><td>-3</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Other Income and Expenses, net</td><td>58</td><td>23</td></tr><tr><td>Interest Expense</td><td>82</td><td>85</td></tr><tr><td>Pretax loss on disposal^(c)</td><td>-514</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>(Loss) Income before income taxes^(d)</td><td>-435</td><td>227</td></tr><tr><td>Income tax expense^(e)(f)</td><td>99</td><td>70</td></tr><tr><td>(Loss) Income from discontinued operations of the International Disposal Group</td><td>$-534</td><td>$157</td></tr></table> (a) Upon meeting the criteria for assets held for sale, beginning in the fourth quarter of 2016 depreciation expense was ceased. (b) In conjunction with the advancements of marketing efforts during 2016, Duke Energy performed recoverability tests of the long-lived asset groups of International Energy. As a result, Duke Energy determined the carrying value of certain assets in Central America was not fully recoverable and recorded a pretax impairment charge of $194 million. The charge represents the excess of carrying value over the estimated fair value of the assets, which was based on a Level 3 Fair Value measurement that was primarily determined from the income approach using discounted cash flows but also considered market information obtained in 2016. (c) The pretax loss on disposal includes the recognition of cumulative foreign currency translation losses of $620 million as of the disposal date. See the Consolidated Statements of Changes in Equity for additional information. (d) Pretax (Loss) Income attributable to Duke Energy Corporation was $(445) million and $221 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. (e) 2016 amount includes $126 million of income tax expense on the disposal, which primarily reflects incountry taxes incurred as a result of the sale. The after-tax loss on disposal was $640 million. (f) 2016 amount includes an income tax benefit of $95 million. See Note 22, “Income Taxes,” for additional information. PART II Interest Expense. The variance was primarily due to higher debt outstanding and lower debt returns driven by the Crystal River Unit 3 regulatory asset debt return ending in June 2016 upon securitization. Income Tax Expense. The variance was primarily due to the impact of the Tax Act and lower pretax earnings. See the Subsidiary Registrants section above for additional information on the Tax Act and the impact on the effective tax rate. Matters Impacting Future Results On August 29, 2017, Duke Energy Florida filed the 2017 Settlement with the FPSC. On November 20, 2017, the FPSC issued an order to approve the 2017 Settlement. See Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, “Regulatory Matters,” for additional information about the 2017 Settlement. In accordance with the 2017 Settlement, Duke Energy Florida will not seek recovery of any costs associated with the ongoing Westinghouse contract litigation, which is currently being appealed. See Note 5 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, “Commitments and Contingencies” for additional information about the litigation. An unfavorable appeals ruling on that matter could have an adverse impact on Electric Utilities and Infrastructure’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows. Within this Item 7, see the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act above as well as Liquidity and Capital Resources below for risks associated with the Tax Act DUKE ENERGY OHIO <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>Variance</td></tr><tr><td>Operating Revenues</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Regulated electric</td><td>$1,373</td><td>$1,410</td><td>$-37</td></tr><tr><td>Nonregulated electric and other</td><td>42</td><td>31</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>Regulated natural gas</td><td>508</td><td>503</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating revenues</td><td>1,923</td><td>1,944</td><td>-21</td></tr><tr><td>Operating Expenses</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power – regulated</td><td>369</td><td>442</td><td>-73</td></tr><tr><td>Fuel used in electric generation and purchased power – nonregulated</td><td>58</td><td>51</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Cost of natural gas</td><td>107</td><td>103</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Operation, maintenance and other</td><td>524</td><td>512</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation and amortization</td><td>261</td><td>233</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>Property and other taxes</td><td>278</td><td>258</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Impairment charges</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating expenses</td><td>1,598</td><td>1,599</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Gains on Sales of Other Assets and Other, net</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Operating Income</td><td>326</td><td>347</td><td>-21</td></tr><tr><td>Other Income and Expenses, net</td><td>17</td><td>9</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Interest Expense</td><td>91</td><td>86</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Income from Continuing Operations Before Income Taxes</td><td>252</td><td>270</td><td>-18</td></tr><tr><td>Income Tax Expense from Continuing Operations</td><td>59</td><td>78</td><td>-19</td></tr><tr><td>Income from Continuing Operations</td><td>193</td><td>192</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>(Loss) Income from Discontinued Operations, net of tax</td><td>-1</td><td>36</td><td>-37</td></tr><tr><td>Net Income</td><td>$192</td><td>$228</td><td>$-36</td></tr></table> The following table shows the percent changes in GWh sales of electricity, dekatherms of natural gas delivered and average number of electric and natural gas customers for Duke Energy Ohio. The below percentages for retail customer classes represent billed sales only. Total sales includes billed and unbilled retail sales and wholesale sales to incorporated municipalities and to public and private utilities and power marketers.

Does the average value of total revenues in United State greater than that in Europe (a)?

<table><tr><td> For the Years Ended December 31</td><td> Total</td><td> United States</td><td> Europe (a)</td><td> Africa</td><td> Asia and Other (b)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="5"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2010</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Sales and other operating revenues</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Unaffiliated customers</td><td>$8,601</td><td>$2,310</td><td>$2,251</td><td>$2,750</td><td>$1,290</td></tr><tr><td>Inter-company</td><td>143</td><td>143</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>8,744</td><td>2,453</td><td>2,251</td><td>2,750</td><td>1,290</td></tr><tr><td>Costs and expenses</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Production expenses, including related taxes</td><td>1,924</td><td>489</td><td>727</td><td>455</td><td>253</td></tr><tr><td>Exploration expenses, including dry holes and lease impairment</td><td>865</td><td>364</td><td>49</td><td>143</td><td>309</td></tr><tr><td>General, administrative and other expenses</td><td>281</td><td>161</td><td>48</td><td>20</td><td>52</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation, depletion and amortization</td><td>2,222</td><td>649</td><td>463</td><td>772</td><td>338</td></tr><tr><td>Asset impairments</td><td>532</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>532</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total costs and expenses</td><td>5,824</td><td>1,663</td><td>1,287</td><td>1,922</td><td>952</td></tr><tr><td>Results of operations before income taxes</td><td>2,920</td><td>790</td><td>964</td><td>828</td><td>338</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for income taxes</td><td>1,425</td><td>305</td><td>477</td><td>580</td><td>63</td></tr><tr><td>Results of operations</td><td>$1,495</td><td>$485</td><td>$487</td><td>$248</td><td>$275</td></tr></table> (a) Results of operations for oil and gas producing activities in Norway were as follows for the years ended December 31: <table><tr><td></td><td>2012</td><td> <i>2011</i></td><td> <i>2010</i></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> <i>(In millions)</i></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><i>Sales and other operating revenues—Unaffiliated customers</i></td><td>$518</td><td>$996</td><td>$524</td><td><i></i></td></tr><tr><td><i>Costs and expenses</i></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td><i>Production expenses, including related taxes</i></td><td>302</td><td>290</td><td>149</td><td><i></i></td></tr><tr><td><i>Exploration expenses, including dry holes and lease impairment</i></td><td>—</td><td>10</td><td>12</td><td><i></i></td></tr><tr><td><i>General, administrative and other expenses</i></td><td>10</td><td>9</td><td>9</td><td><i></i></td></tr><tr><td><i>Depreciation, depletion and amortization</i></td><td>139</td><td>232</td><td>133</td><td><i></i></td></tr><tr><td><i>Total costs and expenses</i></td><td>451</td><td>541</td><td>303</td><td><i></i></td></tr><tr><td><i>Results of operations before income taxes</i></td><td>67</td><td>455</td><td>221</td><td><i></i></td></tr><tr><td><i>Provision for income taxes</i></td><td>-82</td><td>295</td><td>154</td><td><i></i></td></tr><tr><td><i>Results of operations</i></td><td>$149</td><td>$160</td><td>$67</td><td><i></i></td></tr></table> (b) Excludes a 2012 income tax charge of $86 million for a disputed application of an international tax treaty. Oil and Gas Reserves The Corporation’s proved oil and gas reserves are calculated in accordance with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regulations and the requirements of the Financial Accounting Standards Board. Proved oil and gas reserves are quantities, which by analysis of geoscience and engineering data, can be estimated with reasonable certainty to be economically producible from known reservoirs under existing economic conditions, operating methods and government regulations. The Corporation’s estimation of net recoverable quantities of liquid hydrocarbons and natural gas is a highly technical process performed by internal teams of geoscience professionals and reservoir engineers. Estimates of reserves were prepared by the use of appropriate geologic, petroleum engineering, and evaluation principals and techniques that are in accordance with practices generally recognized by the petroleum industry as presented in the publication of the Society of Petroleum Engineers entitled “Standards Pertaining to the Estimating and Auditing of Oil and Gas Reserves Information (Revision as of February 19, 2007). ” The method or combination of methods used in the analysis of each reservoir is based on the maturity of the reservoir, the completeness of the subsurface data available at the time of the estimate, the stage of reservoir development and the production history. Where applicable, reliable technologies may be used in reserve estimation, as defined in the SEC regulations. These technologies, including computational methods, must have been field tested and demonstrated to provide reasonably certain results with consistency and repeatability in the formation being evaluated or in an analogous formation. In order for reserves to be classified as proved, any required government approvals must be obtained and depending on the cost of the project, either senior management or the board of directors must commit to fund the development. The Corporation’s proved reserves are subject to certain risks and uncertainties, which are discussed in Item 1A, Risk Factors Related to Our Business and Operations of this Form 10-K. by net repayments of other debt of $53 million. During 2011, net proceeds from borrowings on available credit facilities were $422 million. During 2010, net proceeds from borrowings were $1,098 million, including the August 2010 issuance of $1,250 million of 30-year fixed-rate public notes with a coupon of 5.6% scheduled to mature in 2041. In January 2010, the Corporation completed the repurchase of the remaining $116 million of fixed-rate public notes that were scheduled to mature in 2011. Total common stock dividends paid were $171 million in 2012, $136 million in 2011 and $131 million in 2010. In 2012, the Corporation made five quarterly common stock dividend payments as a result of accelerating payment of the fourth quarter 2012 dividend, which historically would have been paid in the first quarter of 2013. The Corporation received net proceeds from the exercise of stock options, including related income tax benefits of $11 million, $88 million and $54 million in 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Future Capital Requirements and Resources The Corporation anticipates investing a total of approximately $6.8 billion in capital and exploratory expenditures during 2013, substantially all of which is targeted for E&P operations. This reflects an 18 percent reduction from the 2012 total of $8.3 billion. The decrease is substantially attributable to a reduced level of spend in the Bakken driven by lower drilling and completion costs and decreased investments in infrastructure projects. During 2012, the Corporation funded its capital spending through cash flows from operations, incremental borrowings and proceeds from asset sales. The Corporation had a cash flow deficit of approximately $2.5 billion in 2012 and the projected deficit for 2013 is expected to moderate versus 2012 based on current commodity prices. During 2012, the Corporation announced asset sales totaling $2.4 billion, of which cash proceeds of $843 million were received in 2012 and approximately $440 million were received in January 2013. The Corporation is also pursuing the sale of its Russian operations, Eagle Ford assets and its terminal network. The Corporation expects to fund its 2013 capital expenditures and ongoing operations, including dividends, pension contributions and debt repayments with existing cash on-hand, cash flows from operations and proceeds from asset sales. Crude oil and natural gas prices are volatile and difficult to predict. In addition, unplanned increases in the Corporation’s capital expenditure program could occur. If conditions were to change, such as a significant decrease in commodity prices or an unexpected increase in capital expenditures, the Corporation would take steps to protect its financial flexibility and may pursue other sources of liquidity, including the issuance of debt securities, the issuance of equity securities, and/or further asset sales. See Overview on page 20 for a discussion of Elliott Management Corporation. The table below summarizes the capacity, usage, and available capacity of the Corporation’s borrowing and letter of credit facilities at December 31, 2012: <table><tr><td></td><td> Expiration Date</td><td> Capacity</td><td> Borrowings</td><td> Letters of Credit Issued</td><td> Total Used</td><td> Available Capacity</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td colspan="5"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Revolving credit facility</td><td>April 2016</td><td>$4,000</td><td>$758</td><td>$—</td><td>$758</td><td>$3,242</td></tr><tr><td>Asset-backed credit facility</td><td>July 2013 (a)</td><td>642</td><td>600</td><td>—</td><td>600</td><td>42</td></tr><tr><td>Committed lines</td><td>Various (b)</td><td>2,730</td><td>500</td><td>463</td><td>963</td><td>1,767</td></tr><tr><td>Uncommitted lines</td><td>Various (b)</td><td>773</td><td>490</td><td>283</td><td>773</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td></td><td>$8,145</td><td>$2,348</td><td>$746</td><td>$3,094</td><td>$5,051</td></tr></table> (a) Total capacity of $1 billion subject to the amount of eligible receivables posted as collateral. (b) Committed and uncommitted lines have expiration dates through 2014. The Corporation has a $4 billion syndicated revolving credit facility that matures in April 2016. This facility can be used for borrowings and letters of credit. Borrowings on the facility bear interest at 1.25% above the London Interbank Offered Rate. A fee of 0.25% per annum is also payable on the amount of the facility. The interest rate and facility fee are subject to adjustment if the Corporation’s credit rating changes. The Corporation has a 364-day asset-backed credit facility secured by certain accounts receivable from its M&R operations. Under the terms of this financing arrangement, the Corporation has the ability to borrow or issue letters of credit of up to $1 billion subject to the availability of sufficient levels of eligible receivables. At December 31, 2012, outstanding borrowings under this facility of $600 million were collateralized by a total of HESS CORPORATION AND CONSOLIDATED SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (Continued) 2010: In December, the Corporation acquired approximately 167,000 net acres in the Bakken oil shale play (Bakken) in North Dakota from TRZ Energy, LLC for $1,075 million in cash. In December, the Corporation also completed the acquisition of American Oil & Gas Inc. (American Oil & Gas) for approximately $675 million through the issuance of approximately 8.6 million shares of the Corporation’s common stock, which increased the Corporation’s acreage position in the Bakken by approximately 85,000 net acres. The properties acquired were located near the Corporation’s existing acreage. These acquisitions strengthened the Corporation’s acreage position in the Bakken, leveraged existing capabilities and infrastructure and are expected to contribute to future reserve and production growth. Both of these transactions were accounted for as business combinations and the majority of the fair value of the assets acquired was assigned to unproved properties. The total goodwill recorded on these transactions was $332 million after final post-closing adjustments. In September, the Corporation completed the exchange of its interests in Gabon and the Clair Field in the United Kingdom for additional interests of 28% and 25%, respectively, in the Valhall and Hod fields offshore Norway. This non-monetary exchange was accounted for as a business combination. The transaction resulted in a pre-tax gain of $1,150 million ($1,072 million after income taxes). The total combined carrying amount of the disposed assets prior to the exchange was $702 million, including goodwill of $65 million. The Corporation also acquired, from a different third party, additional interests of 8% and 13% in the Valhall and Hod fields, respectively, for $507 million in cash. This acquisition was accounted for as a business combination. As a result of both of these transactions, the Corporation’s total interests in the Valhall and Hod fields are 64% and 63%, respectively. The primary reason for these transactions was to acquire long-lived crude oil reserves and future production growth. For all the 2010 acquisitions and the exchange described above, the assets acquired and liabilities assumed were recorded at fair value. The estimated fair value for property, plant and equipment acquired in these transactions was based primarily on an income approach (Level 3 fair value measurement).4. Inventories Inventories at December 31 were as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">(In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Crude oil and other charge stocks</td><td>$493</td><td>$451</td></tr><tr><td>Refined petroleum products and natural gas</td><td>1,362</td><td>1,762</td></tr><tr><td>Less: LIFO adjustment</td><td>-1,123</td><td>-1,276</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>732</td><td>937</td></tr><tr><td>Merchandise, materials and supplies</td><td>527</td><td>486</td></tr><tr><td>Total inventories</td><td>$1,259</td><td>$1,423</td></tr></table> The percentage of LIFO inventory to total crude oil, refined petroleum products and natural gas inventories was 71% and 72% at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. During 2012 the Corporation reduced LIFO inventories, which are carried at lower costs than current inventory costs. The effect of the LIFO inventory liquidations was to decrease Cost of products sold by approximately $165 million in 2012 ($104 million after income taxes).5. HOVENSA L. L. C. Joint Venture The Corporation has a 50% interest in HOVENSA, a joint venture with a subsidiary of Petroleos de Venezuela, S. A. (PDVSA), which owns a refinery in St. Croix, U. S. Virgin Islands. In January 2012, HOVENSA shut down its refinery as a result of continued substantial operating losses due to global economic conditions and competitive disadvantages versus other refiners, despite efforts to improve operating performance by reducing refining capacity to 350,000 from 500,000 barrels per day in the first half of 2011. During 2012 and continuing into 2013, HOVENSA and the Government of the Virgin Islands engaged in discussions pertaining to HOVENSA’s plan to run the facility as an oil storage terminal while the Corporation and its joint venture partner pursue a sale of HOVENSA. Table of Contents VALERO ENERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) Cash Flow Hedges Cash flow hedges are used to hedge price volatility in certain forecasted feedstock and refined product purchases, refined product sales, and natural gas purchases. The objective of our cash flow hedges is to lock in the price of forecasted feedstock, product or natural gas purchases or refined product sales at existing market prices that we deem favorable. As of December 31, 2011, we had the following outstanding commodity derivative instruments that were entered into to hedge forecasted purchases or sales of crude oil and refined products. The information presents the notional volume of outstanding contracts by type of instrument and year of maturity (volumes in thousands of barrels).

How many elements for Issued of Common Stock show negative value in 2004?

Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Notes to Financial Statements <table><tr><td></td><td>Amount (In Millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Plant (including nuclear fuel)</td><td>$727</td></tr><tr><td>Decommissioning trust funds</td><td>252</td></tr><tr><td>Other assets</td><td>41</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets acquired</td><td>1,020</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased power agreement (below market)</td><td>420</td></tr><tr><td>Decommissioning liability</td><td>220</td></tr><tr><td>Other liabilities</td><td>44</td></tr><tr><td>Total liabilities assumed</td><td>684</td></tr><tr><td>Net assets acquired</td><td>$336</td></tr></table> Subsequent to the closing, Entergy received approximately $6 million from Consumers Energy Company as part of the Post-Closing Adjustment defined in the Asset Sale Agreement. The Post-Closing Adjustment amount resulted in an approximately $6 million reduction in plant and a corresponding reduction in other liabilities. For the PPA, which was at below-market prices at the time of the acquisition, Non-Utility Nuclear will amortize a liability to revenue over the life of the agreement. The amount that will be amortized each period is based upon the difference between the present value calculated at the date of acquisition of each year's difference between revenue under the agreement and revenue based on estimated market prices. Amounts amortized to revenue were $53 million in 2009, $76 million in 2008, and $50 million in 2007. The amounts to be amortized to revenue for the next five years will be $46 million for 2010, $43 million for 2011, $17 million in 2012, $18 million for 2013, and $16 million for 2014. NYPA Value Sharing Agreements Non-Utility Nuclear's purchase of the FitzPatrick and Indian Point 3 plants from NYPA included value sharing agreements with NYPA. In October 2007, Non-Utility Nuclear and NYPA amended and restated the value sharing agreements to clarify and amend certain provisions of the original terms. Under the amended value sharing agreements, Non-Utility Nuclear will make annual payments to NYPA based on the generation output of the Indian Point 3 and FitzPatrick plants from January 2007 through December 2014. Non-Utility Nuclear will pay NYPA $6.59 per MWh for power sold from Indian Point 3, up to an annual cap of $48 million, and $3.91 per MWh for power sold from FitzPatrick, up to an annual cap of $24 million. The annual payment for each year's output is due by January 15 of the following year. Non-Utility Nuclear will record its liability for payments to NYPA as power is generated and sold by Indian Point 3 and FitzPatrick. An amount equal to the liability will be recorded to the plant asset account as contingent purchase price consideration for the plants. In 2009, 2008, and 2007, Non-Utility Nuclear recorded $72 million as plant for generation during each of those years. This amount will be depreciated over the expected remaining useful life of the plants. In August 2008, Non-Utility Nuclear entered into a resolution of a dispute with NYPA over the applicability of the value sharing agreements to its FitzPatrick and Indian Point 3 nuclear power plants after the planned spin-off of the Non-Utility Nuclear business. Under the resolution, Non-Utility Nuclear agreed not to treat the separation as a "Cessation Event" that would terminate its obligation to make the payments under the value sharing agreements. As a result, after the spin-off transaction, Enexus will continue to be obligated to make payments to NYPA under the amended and restated value sharing agreements. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) (Dollar amounts in thousands except per share data) Note 11—Shareholders’ Equity Share Data: A summary of preferred and common share activity is as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> Preferred Stock </td><td colspan="2">Common Stock</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Issued </td><td> Treasury Stock </td><td>Issued</td><td>Treasury Stock</td></tr><tr><td>2004:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Balance at January 1, 2004</td><td>-0-</td><td>-0-</td><td>113,783,658</td><td>-1,069,053</td></tr><tr><td>Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>763,592</td></tr><tr><td>Treasury stock acquired</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>-5,534,276</td></tr><tr><td>Retirement of treasury stock</td><td></td><td></td><td>-5,000,000</td><td>5,000,000</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2004</td><td>-0-</td><td>-0-</td><td>108,783,658</td><td>-839,737</td></tr><tr><td>2005:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options</td><td></td><td></td><td>91,090</td><td>5,835,740</td></tr><tr><td>Treasury stock acquired</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>-10,301,852</td></tr><tr><td>Retirement of treasury stock</td><td></td><td></td><td>-4,000,000</td><td>4,000,000</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2005</td><td>-0-</td><td>-0-</td><td>104,874,748</td><td>-1,305,849</td></tr><tr><td>2006:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Grants of restricted stock</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>28,000</td></tr><tr><td>Issuance of common stock due to exercise of stock options</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>507,259</td></tr><tr><td>Treasury stock acquired</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>-5,989,531</td></tr><tr><td>Retirement of treasury stock</td><td></td><td></td><td>-5,000,000</td><td>5,000,000</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2006</td><td>-0-</td><td>-0-</td><td>99,874,748</td><td>-1,760,121</td></tr></table> Acquisition of Common Shares: Torchmark shares are acquired from time to time through open market purchases under the Torchmark stock repurchase program when it is believed to be the best use of Torchmark’s excess cash flows. Share repurchases under this program were 5.6 million shares at a cost of $320 million in 2006, 5.6 million shares at a cost of $300 million in 2005, and 5.2 million shares at a cost of $268 million in 2004. When stock options are exercised, proceeds from the exercises are generally used to repurchase approximately the number of shares available with those funds, in order to reduce dilution. Shares repurchased for dilution purposes were 415 thousand shares at a cost of $24 million in 2006, 4.7 million shares costing $255 million in 2005, and 313 thousand shares at a cost of $17 million in 2004. Retirement of Treasury Stock: Torchmark retired 5 million shares of treasury stock in December, 2006, 4 million in 2005, and 5 million in 2004. Restrictions: Restrictions exist on the flow of funds to Torchmark from its insurance subsidiaries. Statutory regulations require life insurance subsidiaries to maintain certain minimum amounts of capital and surplus. Dividends from insurance subsidiaries of Torchmark are limited to the greater of statutory net gain from operations, excluding capital gains and losses, on an annual noncumulative basis, or 10% of surplus, in the absence of special regulatory approval. Additionally, insurance company distributions are generally not permitted in excess of statutory surplus. Subsidiaries are also subject to certain minimum capital requirements. In 2006, subsidiaries of Torchmark paid $428 million in dividends to the parent company. During 2007, a maximum amount of $434 million is expected to be available to Torchmark from subsidiaries without regulatory approval. PART I ITEM 1. BUSINESS General SL Green Realty Corp. is a self-managed real estate investment trust, or REIT, with in-house capabilities in property management, acquisitions, financing, development, construction and leasing. We were formed in June 1997 for the purpose of continuing the commercial real estate business of S. L. Green Properties, Inc. , our predecessor entity. S. L. Green Properties, Inc. , which was founded in 1980 by Stephen L. Green, the Company's Chairman, had been engaged in the business of owning, managing, leasing, acquiring and repositioning office properties in Manhattan, a borough of New York City. Reckson Associates Realty Corp. , or Reckson, and Reckson Operating Partnership, L. P. , or ROP, are wholly-owned subsidiaries of SL Green Operating Partnership, L. P. , the Operating Partnership. As of December 31, 2013, we owned the following interests in commercial office properties in the New York Metropolitan area, primarily in midtown Manhattan. Our investments in the New York Metropolitan area also include investments in Brooklyn, Long Island, Westchester County, Connecticut and Northern New Jersey, which are collectively known as the Suburban properties: <table><tr><td>Location</td><td>Ownership</td><td>Number ofBuildings</td><td>Square Feet</td><td>Weighted AverageOccupancy-1</td></tr><tr><td>Manhattan</td><td>Consolidated properties</td><td>23</td><td>17,306,045</td><td>94.5%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Unconsolidated properties</td><td>9</td><td>5,934,434</td><td>96.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Suburban</td><td>Consolidated properties</td><td>26</td><td>4,087,400</td><td>79.8%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Unconsolidated properties</td><td>4</td><td>1,222,100</td><td>87.2%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>62</td><td>28,549,979</td><td>92.5%</td></tr></table> (1) The weighted average occupancy represents the total occupied square feet divided by total available rentable square feet. As of December 31, 2013, our Manhattan office properties were comprised of 17 fee owned buildings, including ownership in commercial condominium units, and six leasehold owned buildings. As of December 31, 2013, our Suburban office properties were comprised of 25 fee owned buildings and one leasehold building. As of December 31, 2013, we also held fee owned interests in nine unconsolidated Manhattan office properties and four unconsolidated Suburban office properties. We refer to our consolidated and unconsolidated Manhattan and Suburban office properties collectively as our Portfolio. As of December 31, 2013, we also owned investments in 16 retail properties encompassing approximately 875,800 square feet, 20 development buildings encompassing approximately 3,230,800 square feet, four residential buildings encompassing 801 units (approximately 719,900 square feet) and two land interests encompassing approximately 961,400 square feet. The Company also has ownership interests in 28 west coast office properties encompassing 52 buildings totaling approximately 3,654,300 square feet. In addition, we manage two office buildings owned by third parties and affiliated companies encompassing approximately 626,400 square feet. As of December 31, 2013, we also held debt and preferred equity investments with a book value of $1.3 billion. Our corporate offices are located in midtown Manhattan at 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170. As of December 31, 2013, our corporate staff consisted of approximately 278 persons, including 182 professionals experienced in all aspects of commercial real estate. We can be contacted at (212) 594-2700. We maintain a website at www. slgreen. com. On our website, you can obtain, free of charge, a copy of our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after we file such material electronically with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. We have also made available on our website our audit committee charter, compensation committee charter, nominating and corporate governance committee charter, code of business conduct and ethics and corporate governance principles. We do not intend for information contained on our website to be part of this annual report on Form 10-K. You can also read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at its Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549 (1-800-SEC-0330). The SEC maintains an Internet site (http://www. sec. gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. Operating Profit We consider operating profit to be an important measure for evaluating our operating performance and we evaluate operating profit for each of the reportable business segments in which we operate. We internally manage our operations by reference to operating profit with economic resources allocated primarily based on each segment’s contribution to operating profit. Segment operating profit is defined as operating profit before Corporate Unallocated. Segment operating profit is not, however, a measure of financial performance under U. S. GAAP, and may not be defined and calculated by other companies in the same manner. The table below reconciles segment operating profit to total operating profit:

What is the sum of Investment real estate in 2012 and Gain (loss) recognized in OCI on derivatives in 2011? (in million)

ITEM 8 / NOTE 7. INVESTMENTS Maiden Lane III The FRBNY completed the liquidation of ML III assets during the third quarter of 2012 and substantially all of the sales proceeds have been distributed in accordance with the priority of payments of the transaction. In 2012, we received total payments of approximately $8.5 billion, which included contractual and additional distributions and our original $5.0 billion equity interest in ML III. In 2012, we purchased $7.1 billion of securities through the FRBNY’s auction of ML III assets. Other Invested Assets The following table summarizes the carrying values of other invested assets: <table><tr><td> December 31, <i>(in millions)</i> </td><td> 2012 </td><td>2011 </td></tr><tr><td>Alternative investments^(a)</td><td>$18,990</td><td>$18,793</td></tr><tr><td>Mutual funds</td><td>128</td><td>258</td></tr><tr><td>Investment real estate^(b)</td><td>3,195</td><td>2,778</td></tr><tr><td>Aircraft asset investments^(c)</td><td>984</td><td>1,100</td></tr><tr><td>Life settlement contracts</td><td>4,357</td><td>4,006</td></tr><tr><td>Retained interest in AIA</td><td>–</td><td>12,367</td></tr><tr><td>All other investments</td><td>1,463</td><td>1,442</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$29,117</td><td>$40,744</td></tr></table> (a) Includes hedge funds, private equity funds, affordable housing partnerships and other investment partnerships. (b) Net of accumulated depreciation of $469 million and $428 million in 2012 and 2011, respectively. (c) Consist primarily of AIG Life and Retirement investments in aircraft equipment held in trusts. Other Invested Assets Carried at Fair Value Certain hedge funds, private equity funds, affordable housing partnerships and other investment partnerships for which we have elected the fair value option are reported at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in Net investment income with the exception of DIB investments, for which such changes are reported in Other income. Other investments in hedge funds, private equity funds, affordable housing partnerships and other investment partnerships in which our insurance operations do not hold aggregate interests sufficient to exercise more than minor influence over the respective partnerships are reported at fair value with changes in fair value recognized as a component of Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). These investments are subject to other-than-temporary impairment evaluation (see below for discussion on evaluating equity investments for other-than-temporary impairment). The gross unrealized loss recorded in Accumulated other comprehensive income on such investments was $68 million and $269 million at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, the majority of which pertains to investments in private equity funds and hedge funds that have been in continuous unrealized loss position for less than 12 months. Other Invested Assets – Equity Method Investments We account for hedge funds, private equity funds, affordable housing partnerships and other investment partnerships using the equity method of accounting unless our interest is so minor that we may have virtually no influence over partnership operating and financial policies. Under the equity method of accounting, our carrying value generally is our share of the net asset value of the funds or the partnerships, and changes in our share of the net asset values are recorded in Net investment income with the exception of DIB investments, for which such changes are reported in Other income. In applying the equity method of accounting, we consistently use the most recently available financial information provided by the general partner or manager of each of these investments, which is one to three months prior to the end of our reporting period. The financial statements of these investees are generally audited annually. ITEM 8 / NOTE 12. DERIVATIVES AND HEDGE ACCOUNTING designated as hedges of the change in fair value of foreign currency denominated available-for-sale securities attributable to changes in foreign exchange rates. We previously designated certain interest rate swaps entered into by GCM with third parties as cash flow hedges of certain floating rate debt issued by ILFC, specifically to hedge the changes in cash flows on floating rate debt attributable to changes in the benchmark interest rate. We de-designated such cash flow hedges in December 2012 subsequent to the announcement of the ILFC Transaction. We use foreign currency denominated debt and cross-currency swaps as hedging instruments in net investment hedge relationships to mitigate the foreign exchange risk associated with our non-U. S. dollar functional currency foreign subsidiaries. We assess the hedge effectiveness and measure the amount of ineffectiveness for these hedge relationships based on changes in spot exchange rates. For the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010 we recognized gains (losses) of $(74) million, $(13) million and $28 million, respectively, included in Foreign currency translation adjustment in Accumulated other comprehensive income related to the net investment hedge relationships. A qualitative methodology is utilized to assess hedge effectiveness for net investment hedges, while regression analysis is employed for all other hedges. The following table presents the effect of our derivative instruments in fair value hedging relationships in the Consolidated Statement of Operations: <table><tr><td> Years Ended December 31, <i>(in millions)</i> </td><td colspan="2">2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Interest rate contracts:^(a)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Loss recognized in earnings on derivatives</td><td> $</td><td>–</td><td>$-3</td></tr><tr><td>Gain recognized in earnings on hedged items^(b)</td><td></td><td>124</td><td>152</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign exchange contracts:^(a)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Loss recognized in earnings on derivatives</td><td></td><td>-2</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Gain recognized in earnings on hedged items</td><td></td><td>2</td><td>1</td></tr></table> (a) Gains and losses recognized in earnings for the ineffective portion and amounts excluded from effectiveness testing, if any, are recorded in Net realized capital gains (losses). (b) Includes $124 million and $149 million, for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, representing the amortization of debt basis adjustment recorded in Other income and Net realized capital gains (losses) following the discontinuation of hedge accounting. The following table presents the effect of our derivative instruments in cash flow hedging relationships in the Consolidated Statement of Operations: <table><tr><td> Years Ended December 31, <i>(in millions)</i> </td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Interest rate contracts^(a):</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gain (loss) recognized in OCI on derivatives</td><td>$-2</td><td>$-5</td></tr><tr><td>Gain (loss) reclassified from Accumulated OCI into earnings^(b)</td><td>-35</td><td>-55</td></tr></table> (a) Hedge accounting was discontinued in December 2012 subsequent to the announcement of the ILFC Transaction. Gains and losses recognized in earnings are recorded in Income (loss) from discontinued operations. Previously the effective portion of the change in fair value of a derivative qualifying as a cash flow hedge was recorded in Accumulated other comprehensive income until earnings were affected by the variability of cash flows in the hedged item. Gains and losses reclassified from Accumulated other comprehensive income were previously recorded in Other income. Gains or losses recognized in earnings on derivatives for the ineffective portion were previously recorded in Net realized capital gains (losses). (b) Includes $19 million for the year ended December 2012, representing the reclassification from Accumulated other comprehensive income into earnings following the discontinuation of cash flow hedges of ILFC debt. ITEM 6 / SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA The Selected Consolidated Financial Data should be read in conjunction with Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations and the Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying notes included elsewhere herein. <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="5">Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td><i>(in millions, except per share data)</i> </td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>2010 (a)</td><td>2009 (a)</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td> Revenues:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Premiums</td><td>$38,011</td><td>$38,990</td><td>$45,319</td><td>$48,583</td><td>$60,147</td></tr><tr><td>Policy fees</td><td>2,791</td><td>2,705</td><td>2,710</td><td>2,656</td><td>2,990</td></tr><tr><td>Net investment income</td><td>20,343</td><td>14,755</td><td>20,934</td><td>18,992</td><td>10,453</td></tr><tr><td>Net realized capital gains (losses)</td><td>929</td><td>701</td><td>-716</td><td>-3,787</td><td>-50,426</td></tr><tr><td>Other income</td><td>3,582</td><td>2,661</td><td>4,582</td><td>3,729</td><td>-34,941</td></tr><tr><td> Total revenues</td><td>65,656</td><td>59,812</td><td>72,829</td><td>70,173</td><td>-11,777</td></tr><tr><td> Benefits, claims and expenses:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Policyholder benefits and claims incurred</td><td>31,977</td><td>33,450</td><td>41,392</td><td>45,314</td><td>45,447</td></tr><tr><td>Interest credited to policyholder account balances</td><td>4,362</td><td>4,467</td><td>4,487</td><td>4,611</td><td>5,582</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of deferred acquisition costs</td><td>5,709</td><td>5,486</td><td>5,821</td><td>6,670</td><td>6,425</td></tr><tr><td>Other acquisition and insurance expenses</td><td>9,235</td><td>8,458</td><td>10,163</td><td>9,815</td><td>14,783</td></tr><tr><td>Interest expense</td><td>2,319</td><td>2,444</td><td>6,742</td><td>13,237</td><td>14,440</td></tr><tr><td>Net loss on extinguishment of debt</td><td>9</td><td>2,847</td><td>104</td><td>–</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td>Net (gain) loss on sale of properties and divested businesses</td><td>2</td><td>74</td><td>-19,566</td><td>1,271</td><td>–</td></tr><tr><td>Other expenses</td><td>2,721</td><td>2,470</td><td>3,439</td><td>5,282</td><td>5,842</td></tr><tr><td> Total benefits, claims and expenses</td><td>56,334</td><td>59,696</td><td>52,582</td><td>86,200</td><td>92,519</td></tr><tr><td>Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes^(b)</td><td>9,322</td><td>116</td><td>20,247</td><td>-16,027</td><td>-104,296</td></tr><tr><td>Income taxes expense (benefit)</td><td>1,570</td><td>-19,424</td><td>6,993</td><td>-2,551</td><td>-8,097</td></tr><tr><td>Income (loss) from continuing operations</td><td>7,752</td><td>19,540</td><td>13,254</td><td>-13,476</td><td>-96,199</td></tr><tr><td>Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of taxes</td><td>-4,052</td><td>1,790</td><td>-969</td><td>3,750</td><td>-6,683</td></tr><tr><td> Net income (loss)</td><td>3,700</td><td>21,330</td><td>12,285</td><td>-9,726</td><td>-102,882</td></tr><tr><td> Net income (loss) attributable to AIG</td><td>3,438</td><td>20,622</td><td>10,058</td><td>-8,362</td><td>-101,784</td></tr><tr><td> Income (loss) per common share attributable to AIG common shareholders</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Basic and diluted</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Income (loss) from continuing operations</td><td>4.44</td><td>10.03</td><td>16.50</td><td>-98.52</td><td>-725.89</td></tr><tr><td>Income (loss) from discontinued operations</td><td>-2.40</td><td>0.98</td><td>-1.52</td><td>27.15</td><td>-49.91</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss) attributable to AIG</td><td>2.04</td><td>11.01</td><td>14.98</td><td>-71.37</td><td>-775.80</td></tr><tr><td>Dividends declared per common share</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>8.40</td></tr><tr><td> Year-end balance sheet data:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total investments</td><td>375,824</td><td>410,438</td><td>410,412</td><td>601,165</td><td>636,912</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets</td><td>548,633</td><td>553,054</td><td>675,573</td><td>838,346</td><td>848,552</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt</td><td>48,500</td><td>75,253</td><td>106,461</td><td>136,733</td><td>177,485</td></tr><tr><td>Total liabilities</td><td>449,630</td><td>442,138</td><td>568,363</td><td>748,550</td><td>797,692</td></tr><tr><td>Total AIG shareholders' equity</td><td>98,002</td><td>101,538</td><td>78,856</td><td>60,585</td><td>40,844</td></tr><tr><td>Total equity</td><td>98,669</td><td>102,393</td><td>106,776</td><td>88,837</td><td>48,939</td></tr><tr><td>Book value per share^(a)</td><td>66.38</td><td>53.53</td><td>561.40</td><td>448.54</td><td>303.71</td></tr><tr><td>Book value per share, excluding Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)^(a)^(c)</td><td>57.87</td><td>50.11</td><td>498.25</td><td>400.90</td><td>353.97</td></tr><tr><td>AIG Property Casualty combined ratio^(d)</td><td>108.6</td><td>108.8</td><td>116.8</td><td>108.4</td><td>102.1</td></tr><tr><td> Other data (from continuing operations):</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Other-than-temporary impairments</td><td>1,167</td><td>1,280</td><td>3,039</td><td>6,696</td><td>41,867</td></tr><tr><td>Adjustment to federal and foreign deferred tax valuation allowance</td><td>-1,907</td><td>-18,307</td><td>1,361</td><td>2,986</td><td>22,172</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of prepaid commitment fee</td><td>–</td><td>49</td><td>3,471</td><td>8,359</td><td>9,279</td></tr><tr><td>Catastrophe-related losses</td><td>$2,652</td><td>$3,307</td><td>$1,076</td><td>$53</td><td>$1,840</td></tr></table> (a) Comparability between 2010 and 2009 data is affected by the deconsolidation of AIA in the fourth quarter of 2010. Book value per share, excluding Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) is a non-GAAP measure. See Item 7. MD&A – Use of Non-GAAP Measures for additional information. Comparability of 2010, 2009 and 2008 is affected by a one for twenty reverse stock split. (b) Reduced by fourth quarter reserve strengthening charges of $4.2 billion and $2.2 billion in 2010 and 2009, respectively, related to the annual review of AIG Property Casualty loss and loss adjustment reserves. (c) Amounts for periods after December 31, 2008 have been revised to reflect reclassification of income taxes from AOCI to additional paid in capital to correct the presentation of components of AIG Shareholders’ Equity. See Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the reclass. (d) See Item 7. MD&A – Results of Operations – AIG Property Casualty Operations for a reconciliation of the adjusted combined ratio. Management’s Discussion and Analysis Business-Specific Limits. The Firmwide Finance Committee sets asset and liability limits for each business and aged inventory limits for certain financial instruments as a disincentive to hold inventory over longer periods of time. These limits are set at levels which are close to actual operating levels in order to ensure prompt escalation and discussion among business managers and managers in our independent control and support functions on a routine basis. The Firmwide Finance Committee reviews and approves balance sheet limits on a quarterly basis and may also approve changes in limits on an ad hoc basis in response to changing business needs or market conditions. Monitoring of Key Metrics. We monitor key balance sheet metrics daily both by business and on a consolidated basis, including asset and liability size and composition, aged inventory, limit utilization, risk measures and capital usage. We allocate assets to businesses and review and analyze movements resulting from new business activity as well as market fluctuations. Scenario Analyses. We conduct scenario analyses to determine how we would manage the size and composition of our balance sheet and maintain appropriate funding, liquidity and capital positions in a variety of situations: ‰ These scenarios cover short-term and long-term time horizons using various macro-economic and firm-specific assumptions. We use these analyses to assist us in developing longer-term funding plans, including the level of unsecured debt issuances, the size of our secured funding program and the amount and composition of our equity capital. We also consider any potential future constraints, such as limits on our ability to grow our asset base in the absence of appropriate funding. ‰ Through our Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process (ICAAP), CCAR, the stress tests we are required to conduct under the Dodd-Frank Act, and our resolution and recovery planning, we further analyze how we would manage our balance sheet and risks through the duration of a severe crisis and we develop plans to access funding, generate liquidity, and/or redeploy or issue equity capital, as appropriate. Balance Sheet Allocation In addition to preparing our consolidated statements of financial condition in accordance with U. S. GAAP, we prepare a balance sheet that generally allocates assets to our businesses, which is a non-GAAP presentation and may not be comparable to similar non-GAAP presentations used by other companies. We believe that presenting our assets on this basis is meaningful because it is consistent with the way management views and manages risks associated with the firm’s assets and better enables investors to assess the liquidity of the firm’s assets. The table below presents a summary of this balance sheet allocation.

In which year is Securities loaned greater than 14000?

Management’s Discussion and Analysis The table below presents a reconciliation of our common shareholders’ equity to the estimated Basel III Advanced CET1 on a fully phased-in basis. <table><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td>As of December 2013</td></tr><tr><td>Common shareholders’ equity</td><td>$ 71,267</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill</td><td>-3,705</td></tr><tr><td>Identifiable intangible assets</td><td>-671</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred tax liabilities</td><td>908</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill and identifiable intangible assets, net of deferred tax liabilities</td><td>-3,468</td></tr><tr><td>Deductions for investments in nonconsolidated financial institutions¹</td><td>-9,091</td></tr><tr><td>Otheradjustments²</td><td>-489</td></tr><tr><td>Basel III CET1</td><td>$ 58,219</td></tr><tr><td>Basel III Advanced RWAs</td><td>$594,662</td></tr><tr><td>Basel III Advanced CET1 Ratio</td><td>9.8%</td></tr></table> 1. This deduction, which represents the fully phased-in requirement, is the amount by which our investments in the capital of nonconsolidated financial institutions exceed certain prescribed thresholds. During both the transitional period and thereafter, no deduction will be required if the applicable proportion of our investments in the capital of nonconsolidated financial institutions falls below the prescribed thresholds.2. Principally includes credit valuation adjustments on derivative liabilities and debt valuation adjustments, as well as other required credit riskbased deductions. In addition, beginning with the first quarter of 2015, subject to transitional provisions, we will also be required to disclose ratios calculated under the Standardized approach. Our estimated CET1 ratio under the Standardized approach (Standardized CET1 ratio) on a fully phased-in basis was approximately 60 basis points lower than our estimated Basel III Advanced CET1 ratio in the table above. Both the Basel III Advanced CET1 ratio and the Standardized CET1 ratio are subject to transitional provisions. Reflecting the transitional provisions that became effective January 1, 2014, our estimated Basel III Advanced CET1 ratio and our estimated Standardized CET1 ratio are approximately 150 basis points higher than the respective CET1 ratios on a fully phased-in basis as of December 2013. Effective January 1, 2014, Group Inc. ’s capital and leverage ratios are calculated under, and subject to the minimums as defined in, the Revised Capital Framework. The changes to the definition of capital and minimum ratios, subject to transitional provisions, were effective beginning January 1, 2014. RWAs are based on Basel I Adjusted, as defined in Note 20 to the consolidated financial statements. The firm will transition to Basel III beginning on April 1, 2014. Including the impact of the changes to the definition of regulatory capital and reflecting the transitional provisions effective in 2014, our estimated CET1 ratio (CET1 to RWAs on a Basel I Adjusted basis) as of December 2013 would have been essentially unchanged as compared to our Tier 1 common ratio under Basel I. Regulatory Leverage Ratios. The Revised Capital Framework increased the minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio applicable to us from 3% to 4% effective January 1, 2014. In addition, the Revised Capital Framework will introduce a new Tier 1 supplementary leverage ratio (supplementary leverage ratio) for Advanced approach banking organizations. The supplementary leverage ratio compares Tier 1 capital (as defined under the Revised Capital Framework) to a measure of leverage exposure, defined as the sum of the firm’s assets less certain CET1 deductions plus certain off-balance-sheet exposures, including a measure of derivatives exposures and commitments. The Revised Capital Framework requires a minimum supplementary leverage ratio of 3%, effective January 1, 2018, but with disclosure required beginning in the first quarter of 2015. In addition, subsequent to the approval of the Revised Capital Framework, the Agencies issued a proposal to increase the minimum supplementary leverage ratio requirement for the largest U. S. banks (those deemed to be global systemically important banking institutions (G-SIBs) under the Basel G-SIB framework). These proposals would require the firm and other G-SIBs to meet a 5% supplementary leverage ratio (comprised of the minimum requirement of 3% plus a 2% buffer). As of December 2013, our estimated supplementary leverage ratio based on the Revised Capital Framework approximates this proposed minimum. In addition, the Basel Committee recently finalized revisions that would increase the size of the leverage exposure for purposes of the supplementary leverage ratio, but would retain a minimum supplementary leverage ratio requirement of 3%. It is not known with certainty at this point whether the U. S. regulators will adopt this revised definition of leverage into their rules and proposals for the supplementary leverage ratio. THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Gains and Losses on Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities Accounted for at Fair Value Under the Fair Value Option The table below presents the gains and losses recognized in earnings as a result of the firm electing to apply the fair value option to certain financial assets and financial liabilities. These gains and losses are included in “Market making” and “Other principal transactions. ” The table below also includes gains and losses on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments included in unsecured short-term borrowings, unsecured long-term borrowings and deposits. These gains and losses would have been recognized under other U. S. GAAP even if the firm had not elected to account for the entire hybrid financial instrument at fair value. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured short-term borrowings</td><td>$-1,028</td><td>$ 346</td><td>$-1,180</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured long-term borrowings</td><td>584</td><td>771</td><td>-592</td></tr><tr><td>Other liabilities and accrued expenses</td><td>-55</td><td>-684</td><td>-441</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-630</td><td>-217</td><td>-366</td></tr><tr><td> Total</td><td>$-1,129</td><td>$ 216</td><td>$-2,579</td></tr></table> In the table above: ‰ Gains/(losses) exclude contractual interest, which is included in “Interest income” and “Interest expense,” for all instruments other than hybrid financial instruments. See Note 23 for further information about interest income and interest expense. ‰ Unsecured short-term borrowings includes gains/(losses) on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments of $(1.05) billion for 2016, $339 million for 2015 and $(1.22) billion for 2014, respectively. ‰ Unsecured long-term borrowings includes gains/(losses) on the embedded derivative component of hybrid financial instruments of $737 million for 2016, $653 million for 2015 and $(697) million for 2014, respectively. ‰ Other liabilities and accrued expenses includes gains/ (losses) on certain subordinated liabilities of consolidated VIEs. ‰ Other primarily consists of gains/(losses) on receivables from customers and counterparties, deposits and other secured financings. Excluding the gains and losses on the instruments accounted for under the fair value option described above, “Market making” and “Other principal transactions” primarily represent gains and losses on “Financial instruments owned, at fair value” and “Financial instruments sold, but not yet purchased, at fair value. ” Loans and Lending Commitments The table below presents the difference between the aggregate fair value and the aggregate contractual principal amount for loans and long-term receivables for which the fair value option was elected. In the table below, the aggregate contractual principal amount of loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than 90 days past due (which excludes loans carried at zero fair value and considered uncollectible) exceeds the related fair value primarily because the firm regularly purchases loans, such as distressed loans, at values significantly below the contractual principal amounts. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">As of December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td> 2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td> Performing loans and long-term receivables</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Aggregate contractual principal in excess of fair value</td><td> $ 478</td><td>$1,330</td></tr><tr><td colspan="3"> Loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than 90 days past due</td></tr><tr><td>Aggregate contractual principal in excess of fair value</td><td> 8,101</td><td>9,600</td></tr><tr><td>Aggregate fair value of loans on nonaccrual status and/or more than90 days past due</td><td> 2,138</td><td>2,391</td></tr></table> As of December 2016 and December 2015, the fair value of unfunded lending commitments for which the fair value option was elected was a liability of $80 million and $211 million, respectively, and the related total contractual amount of these lending commitments was $7.19 billion and $14.01 billion, respectively. See Note 18 for further information about lending commitments. THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis Funding Sources Our primary sources of funding are deposits, collateralized financings, unsecured short-term and long-term borrowings, and shareholders’ equity. We seek to maintain broad and diversified funding sources globally across products, programs, markets, currencies and creditors to avoid funding concentrations. The table below presents information about our funding sources. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">As of December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td colspan="2"> 2018</td><td colspan="2">2017</td></tr><tr><td>Deposits</td><td> $158,257</td><td> 25%</td><td>$138,604</td><td>23%</td></tr><tr><td>Collateralized financings:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Repurchase agreements</td><td> 78,723</td><td> 13%</td><td>84,718</td><td>14%</td></tr><tr><td>Securities loaned</td><td> 11,808</td><td> 2%</td><td>14,793</td><td>2%</td></tr><tr><td>Other secured financings</td><td> 21,433</td><td> 3%</td><td>24,788</td><td>4%</td></tr><tr><td>Total collateralized financings</td><td> 111,964</td><td> 18%</td><td>124,299</td><td>20%</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured short-term borrowings</td><td> 40,502</td><td> 7%</td><td>46,922</td><td>8%</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured long-term borrowings</td><td> 224,149</td><td> 36%</td><td>217,687</td><td>36%</td></tr><tr><td>Total shareholders’ equity</td><td> 90,185</td><td> 14%</td><td>82,243</td><td>13%</td></tr><tr><td> Total funding sources</td><td> $625,057</td><td> 100%</td><td>$609,755</td><td>100%</td></tr></table> Our funding is primarily raised in U. S. dollar, Euro, British pound and Japanese yen. We generally distribute our funding products through our own sales force and thirdparty distributors to a large, diverse creditor base in a variety of markets in the Americas, Europe and Asia. We believe that our relationships with our creditors are critical to our liquidity. Our creditors include banks, governments, securities lenders, corporations, pension funds, insurance companies, mutual funds and individuals. We have imposed various internal guidelines to monitor creditor concentration across our funding programs. Deposits. Our deposits provide us with a diversified source of funding and reduce our reliance on wholesale funding. A growing portion of our deposit base consists of consumer deposits. Deposits are primarily used to finance lending activity, other inventory and a portion of our GCLA. We raise deposits, including savings, demand and time deposits, through internal and third-party broker-dealers, and from consumers and institutional clients, and primarily through Goldman Sachs Bank USA (GS Bank USA) and Goldman Sachs International Bank (GSIB). In September 2018, we launched Marcus: by Goldman Sachs in the U. K. to accept deposits. See Note 14 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about our deposits. Secured Funding. We fund a significant amount of inventory on a secured basis. Secured funding includes collateralized financings in the consolidated statements of financial condition. We may also pledge our inventory as collateral for securities borrowed under a securities lending agreement. We also use our own inventory to cover transactions in which we or our clients have sold securities that have not yet been purchased. Secured funding is less sensitive to changes in our credit quality than unsecured funding, due to our posting of collateral to our lenders. Nonetheless, we continually analyze the refinancing risk of our secured funding activities, taking into account trade tenors, maturity profiles, counterparty concentrations, collateral eligibility and counterparty roll over probabilities. We seek to mitigate our refinancing risk by executing term trades with staggered maturities, diversifying counterparties, raising excess secured funding, and pre-funding residual risk through our GCLA. We seek to raise secured funding with a term appropriate for the liquidity of the assets that are being financed, and we seek longer maturities for secured funding collateralized by asset classes that may be harder to fund on a secured basis, especially during times of market stress. Our secured funding, excluding funding collateralized by liquid government and agency obligations, is primarily executed for tenors of one month or greater and is primarily executed through term repurchase agreements and securities loaned contracts. The weighted average maturity of our secured funding included in collateralized financings in the consolidated statements of financial condition, excluding funding that can only be collateralized by liquid government and agency obligations, exceeded 120 days as of December 2018. Assets that may be harder to fund on a secured basis during times of market stress include certain financial instruments in the following categories: mortgage and other assetbacked loans and securities, non-investment-grade corporate debt securities, equity securities and emerging market securities. Assets that are classified in level 3 of the fair value hierarchy are generally funded on an unsecured basis. See Notes 5 and 6 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about the classification of financial instruments in the fair value hierarchy and “Unsecured Long-Term Borrowings” below for further information about the use of unsecured long-term borrowings as a source of funding. We also raise financing through other types of collateralized financings, such as secured loans and notes. GS Bank USA has access to funding from the Federal Home Loan Bank. Our outstanding borrowings against the Federal Home Loan Bank were $528 million as of December 2018 and $3.40 billion as of December 2017.

What is the average value of Fixed maturities, available-for-sale ("AFS"), at fair value for Amount and Balance, beginning of period in 2013 ?

THE HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) 9. Goodwill (continued) The annual goodwill assessment for the Mutual Funds and Consumer Markets reporting units and the Group Benefits reporting unit within Corporate was completed as of October 31, 2012, which resulted in no write-downs of goodwill for the year ended December 31, 2012. The reporting units passed the first step of their annual impairment test with a significant margin with the exception of the Group Benefits reporting unit. Group Benefits passed the first step of its annual impairment test with less than a 10% margin. The fair value of the Group Benefits reporting unit is based on discounted cash flows using earnings projections on in force business and future business growth. There could be a positive or negative impact on the result of step one in future periods if assumptions change about the level of economic capital, future business growth, earnings projections or the weighted average cost of capital. Year ended December 31, 2011 During the second quarter of 2011, the Company wrote off the remaining $15 of goodwill associated with the Federal Trust Corporation (“FTC”) reporting unit within Corporate due to the announced divestiture of FTC. The write-off of the FTC reporting unit goodwill was recorded as a loss on disposal within discontinued operations. The Consumer Markets reporting unit completed its annual goodwill assessment on October 1, 2011 and again on October 31, 2011, which resulted in no impairment of goodwill. In both tests, the Consumer Markets reporting unit passed the first step of the annual impairment tests with a significant margin. The annual goodwill assessment for the Property & Casualty Commercial reporting unit that was performed on October 1, 2011 resulted in a write-down of goodwill of $30, pre-tax leaving no remaining goodwill. The results of the discounted cash flow calculations indicated that the fair value of the reporting unit was less than the carrying value; this was due primarily to a decrease in future expected underwriting cash flows. The decrease in future expected underwriting cash flows is driven by an expected reduction in written premium in the short term as the Company maintains pricing discipline in a downward market cycle, while retaining long term capabilities for future opportunities. The Company completed its annual goodwill assessment for Mutual Funds, Individual Life, Retirement Plans and Group Benefits, including the goodwill within Corporate, on January 1, 2011 and October 31, 2011, which resulted in no impairment of goodwill. In both tests, the reporting units passed the first step of their annual impairment tests with a significant margin with the exception of the Individual Life reporting unit at the January 1, 2011 test. The Individual Life reporting unit had a margin of less than 10% between fair value and book value on January 1, 2011. As of the October 31, 2011 impairment test, the Individual Life reporting unit had a fair value in excess of book value of approximately 15%, a modest improvement from January 1, 2011 results due to improving cost of capital.10. Sales Inducements The Company offered enhanced crediting rates or bonus payments to contract holders on certain of its individual and group annuity products. The expense associated with offering a bonus is deferred and amortized over the life of the related contract in a pattern consistent with the amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs. Amortization expense associated with expenses previously deferred is recorded over the remaining life of the contract. Consistent with the Unlock, the Company unlocks the amortization of the sales inducement asset. For further information concerning the Unlock, see Note 8 - Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs and Present Value of Future Profits of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Changes in sales inducement activity are as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">For the years ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, beginning of period</td><td>$325</td><td>$434</td><td>$459</td></tr><tr><td>Sales inducements deferred</td><td>—</td><td>7</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization — Unlock charge [1]</td><td>-72</td><td>-82</td><td>-28</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization charged to income</td><td>-33</td><td>-34</td><td>-17</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization charged to business dispositions [2]</td><td>-71</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, end of period</td><td>$149</td><td>$325</td><td>$434</td></tr></table> [1] Includes Unlock charge of $52 in the first quarter of 2013 related to elimination of future estimated gross profits on the Japan variable annuity block due to the increased costs associated with expanding Japan variable annuity hedging program. [2] Represents accelerated amortization of $22 and $49 in the first quarter of 2013 recognized upon the sale of the Retirement Plans and Individual Life businesses, respectively. For further information, see Note 2 - Business Dispositions of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Table of Contents THE HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) 13. Debt (continued)The Debentures are unsecured, subordinated and junior in right of payment and upon liquidation to all of the Company’s existing and future senior indebtedness. In addition, the Debentures are effectively subordinated to all of the Company’s subsidiaries’ existing and future indebtedness and other liabilities, including obligations to policyholders. The Debentures do not limit the Company’s or the Company’s subsidiaries’ ability to incur additional debt, including debt that ranks senior in right of payment and upon liquidation to the Debentures. The Debentures rank equally in right of payment and upon liquidation with (i) any indebtedness the terms of which provide that such indebtedness ranks equally with the Debentures, including guarantees of such indebtedness, (ii) the Company’s existing 8.125% fixedto-floating rate junior subordinated debentures due 2068 (the “8.125% Debentures”), (iii) the Company’s Income Capital Obligation Notes due 2067, issuable pursuant to the Junior Subordinated Indenture, dated as of February 12, 2007, between the Company and Wilmington Trust Company (the “ICON securities”), (iv) our trade accounts payable, and (v) any of our indebtedness owed to a person who is our subsidiary or employee. Long-Term Debt Maturities Long-term debt maturities (at par values), as of December 31, 2013 are summarized as follows: <table><tr><td>2014</td><td>$200</td></tr><tr><td>2015</td><td>456</td></tr><tr><td>2016</td><td>275</td></tr><tr><td>2017</td><td>711</td></tr><tr><td>2018</td><td>320</td></tr><tr><td>Thereafter</td><td>4,438</td></tr></table> Shelf Registrations On August 9, 2013, the Company filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) an automatic shelf registration statement (Registration No.333-190506) for the potential offering and sale of debt and equity securities. The registration statement allows for the following types of securities to be offered: debt securities, junior subordinated debt securities, preferred stock, common stock, depositary shares, warrants, stock purchase contracts, and stock purchase units. In that The Hartford is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 under the Securities Act of 1933, the registration statement went effective immediately upon filing and The Hartford may offer and sell an unlimited amount of securities under the registration statement during the three-year life of the registration statement. Contingent Capital Facility The Company is party to a put option agreement that provides The Hartford with the right to require the Glen Meadow ABC Trust, a Delaware statutory trust, at any time and from time to time, to purchase The Hartford’s junior subordinated notes in a maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed $500. Under the Put Option Agreement, The Hartford will pay the Glen Meadow ABC Trust premiums on a periodic basis, calculated with respect to the aggregate principal amount of notes that The Hartford had the right to put to the Glen Meadow ABC Trust for such period. The Hartford has agreed to reimburse the Glen Meadow ABC Trust for certain fees and ordinary expenses. The Company holds a variable interest in the Glen Meadow ABC Trust where the Company is not the primary beneficiary. As a result, the Company did not consolidate the Glen Meadow ABC Trust. As of December 31, 2013, The Hartford has not exercised its right to require Glen Meadow ABC Trust to purchase the notes. As a result, the notes remain a source of capital for the HFSG Holding Company. Revolving Credit Facilities The Company has a senior unsecured revolving credit facility (the "Credit Facility") that provides for borrowing capacity up to $1.75 billion (which is available in U. S. dollars, and in Euro, Sterling, Canadian dollars and Japanese Yen) through January 6, 2016. As of December 31, 2013, there were no borrowings outstanding under the Credit Facility. Of the total availability under the Credit Facility, up to $250 is available to support letters of credit issued on behalf of the Company or subsidiaries of the Company. Under the Credit Facility, the Company must maintain a minimum level of consolidated net worth of $14.9 billion. The definition of consolidated net worth under the terms of the Credit Facility, excludes AOCI and includes the Company's outstanding junior subordinated debentures and, if any, perpetual preferred securities, net of discount. In addition, the Company’s maximum ratio of consolidated total debt to consolidated total capitalization is limited to 35%, and the ratio of consolidated total debt of subsidiaries to consolidated total capitalization is limited to 10%. As of December 31, 2013, the Company was in compliance with all financial covenants under the Credit Facility Table of Contents THE HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued) 19. Stock Compensation Plans (continued) Restricted Unit awards In 2010 and 2009, The Hartford issued restricted units as part of The Hartford’s 2005 Stock Plan. Restricted stock unit awards under the plan have historically been settled in shares, but under this award will be settled in cash and are thus referred to as “Restricted Units”. The economic value recipients will ultimately realize will be identical to the value that would have been realized if the awards had been settled in shares, i. e. , upon settlement, recipients will receive cash equal to The Hartford’s share price multiplied by the number of restricted units awarded. Because Restricted Units will be settled in cash, the awards are remeasured at the end of each reporting period until settlement. Awards granted in 2009 vested after a three year period. Awards granted in 2010 include both graded and cliff vesting restricted units which vest over a three year period. The graded vesting attribution method is used to recognize the expense of the award over the requisite service period. For example, the graded vesting attribution method views one three-year grant with annual graded vesting as three separate sub-grants, each representing one third of the total number of awards granted. The first sub-grant vests over one year, the second sub-grant vests over two years and the third sub-grant vests over three years. There were no restricted units awarded for 2013 or 2012. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, 27 thousand and 832 thousand restricted units were outstanding, respectively. Deferred Stock Unit Plan Effective July 31, 2009, the Compensation and Management Development Committee of the Board authorized The Hartford Deferred Stock Unit Plan (“Deferred Stock Unit Plan”), and, on October 22, 2009, it was amended. The Deferred Stock Unit Plan provides for contractual rights to receive cash payments based on the value of a specified number of shares of stock. The Deferred Stock Unit Plan provides for two award types, Deferred Units and Restricted Units. Deferred Units are earned ratably over a year, based on the number of regular pay periods occurring during such year. Deferred Units are credited to the participant's account on a quarterly basis based on the market price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant and are fully vested at all times. Deferred Units credited to employees prior to January 1, 2010 (other than senior executive officers hired on or after October 1, 2009) are not paid until after two years from their grant date. Deferred Units credited on or after January 1, 2010 (and any credited to senior executive officers hired on or after October 1, 2009) are paid in three equal installments after the first, second and third anniversaries of their grant date. Restricted Units are intended to be incentive compensation and, unlike Deferred Units, vest over time, generally three years, and are subject to forfeiture. The Deferred Stock Unit Plan is structured consistent with the limitations and restrictions on employee compensation arrangements imposed by the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 and the TARP Standards for Compensation and Corporate Governance Interim Final Rule issued by the U. S. Department of Treasury on June 10, 2009. There were no deferred stock units awarded in 2013 or 2012. A summary of the status of the Company’s non-vested awards under the Deferred Stock Unit Plan as of December 31, 2013, is presented below: <table><tr><td>Non-vested Units</td><td>Restricted Units (in thousands)</td><td>Weighted-Average Grant-Date Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td>Non-vested at beginning of year</td><td>309</td><td>25.08</td></tr><tr><td>Granted</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Vested</td><td>-306</td><td>25.04</td></tr><tr><td>Forfeited</td><td>-3</td><td>28.99</td></tr><tr><td>Non-vested at end of year</td><td>—</td><td>$—</td></tr></table> Subsidiary Stock Plan In 2013 The Hartford established a subsidiary stock-based compensation plan similar to The Hartford 2010 Incentive Stock Plan except that it awards non-public subsidiary stock as compensation. The Company recognized stock-based compensation plans expense of $1 in the year ended December 31, 2013 for the subsidiary stock plan. Upon employee vesting of subsidiary stock, the Company will recognize a noncontrolling equity interest. Employees will be restricted from selling vested subsidiary stock to other than the Company and the Company will have discretion on the amount of stock to repurchase. Therefore the subsidiary stock will be classified as equity because it is not mandatorily redeemable. Investment Results Composition of Invested Assets <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">December 31, 2013</td><td colspan="2">December 31, 2012</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Amount</td><td>Percent</td><td>Amount</td><td>Percent</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed maturities, available-for-sale ("AFS"), at fair value</td><td>$62,357</td><td>79.2%</td><td>$85,922</td><td>81.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed maturities, at fair value using the fair value option ("FVO")</td><td>844</td><td>1.1%</td><td>1,087</td><td>1.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities, AFS, at fair value</td><td>868</td><td>1.1%</td><td>890</td><td>0.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage loans</td><td>5,598</td><td>7.1%</td><td>6,711</td><td>6.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Policy loans, at outstanding balance</td><td>1,420</td><td>1.8%</td><td>1,997</td><td>1.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Limited partnerships and other alternative investments</td><td>3,040</td><td>3.9%</td><td>3,015</td><td>2.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Other investments [1]</td><td>521</td><td>0.7%</td><td>1,114</td><td>1.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Short-term investments</td><td>4,008</td><td>5.1%</td><td>4,581</td><td>4.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Total investments excluding equity securities, trading</td><td>78,656</td><td>100%</td><td>105,317</td><td>100%</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities, trading, at fair value [2]</td><td>19,745</td><td></td><td>28,933</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total investments</td><td>$98,401</td><td></td><td>$134,250</td><td></td></tr></table> [1] Primarily relates to derivative instruments. [2] As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, approximately $19.7 billion and $27.1 billion, respectively, of equity securities, trading, support Japan variable annuities. Those equity securities, trading, were invested in mutual funds, which, in turn, invested in the following asset classes as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively: Japan equity 22% and 20%, Japan fixed income (primarily government securities) 15% and 15%, global equity 22% and 21%, global government bonds 40% and 43%, and cash and other 1% and 1%. Total investments decreased since December 31, 2012, principally due to the sale of the Retirement Plans and Individual Life businesses resulting in the transfer of fixed maturities, AFS, fixed maturities, FVO, equity securities, AFS, mortgage loans, and policy loans with a total carrying value of $17.3 billion in January 2013. In addition, the sale of the U. K. variable annuity business, HLIL, in the fourth quarter of 2013 resulted in a decline in the carrying value of fixed maturities, AFS and equity securities, trading of $469 and $1.7 billion, respectively. Refer to Note 2 - Business Dispositions of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of these transactions. The remaining decrease in total invested assets is primarily due to a decrease in equity securities, trading, fixed maturities, AFS, other investments, and short-term investments. The decline in equity securities, trading was primarily due to variable annuity policy surrenders, the depreciation of the Japanese Yen as compared to the U. S. dollar, partially offset by equity market gains. The decrease in fixed maturities, AFS was due to a decline in valuations due to an increase in interest rates, a reduction in assets levels in Talcott Resolution associated with dollar rolls and repurchase agreements, and capital management actions, including debt repayments and share repurchases. The decline in other investments was largely due to a decline in derivative market value primarily resulting from an increase in interest rates and the depreciation of the Japanese yen in comparison to the euro and U. S dollar. The decrease in shortterm investments is primarily attributable to a decline in derivative collateral held due to decreases in derivative market values.

what is the growth rate in operating income of hr solutions from 2009 to 2010?

HR Solutions <table><tr><td>Years ended December 31,</td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Revenue</td><td>$2,111</td><td>$1,267</td><td>$1,356</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income</td><td>234</td><td>203</td><td>208</td></tr><tr><td>Operating margin</td><td>11.1%</td><td>16.0%</td><td>15.3%</td></tr></table> In October 2010, we completed the acquisition of Hewitt, one of the world’s leading human resource consulting and outsourcing companies. Hewitt operates globally together with Aon’s existing consulting and outsourcing operations under the newly created Aon Hewitt brand. Hewitt’s operating results are included in Aon’s results of operations beginning October 1, 2010. Our HR Solutions segment generated approximately 25% of our consolidated total revenues in 2010 and provides a broad range of human capital services, as follows: Consulting Services: ? Health and Benefits advises clients about how to structure, fund, and administer employee benefit programs that attract, retain, and motivate employees. Benefits consulting includes health and welfare, executive benefits, workforce strategies and productivity, absence management, benefits administration, data-driven health, compliance, employee commitment, investment advisory and elective benefits services. ? Retirement specializes in global actuarial services, defined contribution consulting, investment consulting, tax and ERISA consulting, and pension administration. ? Compensation focuses on compensatory advisory/counsel including: compensation planning design, executive reward strategies, salary survey and benchmarking, market share studies and sales force effectiveness, with special expertise in the financial services and technology industries. ? Strategic Human Capital delivers advice to complex global organizations on talent, change and organizational effectiveness issues, including talent strategy and acquisition, executive on-boarding, performance management, leadership assessment and development, communication strategy, workforce training and change management. Outsourcing Services: ? Benefits Outsourcing applies our HR expertise primarily through defined benefit (pension), defined contribution (401(k)), and health and welfare administrative services. Our model replaces the resource-intensive processes once required to administer benefit plans with more efficient, effective, and less costly solutions. ? Human Resource Business Processing Outsourcing (‘‘HR BPO’’) provides market-leading solutions to manage employee data; administer benefits, payroll and other human resources processes; and record and manage talent, workforce and other core HR process transactions as well as other complementary services such as absence management, flexible spending, dependent audit and participant advocacy. Beginning in late 2008, the disruption in the global credit markets and the deterioration of the financial markets created significant uncertainty in the marketplace. Weak economic conditions globally continued throughout 2010. The prolonged economic downturn is adversely impacting our clients’ financial condition and therefore the levels of business activities in the industries and geographies where we operate. While we believe that the majority of our practices are well positioned to manage through this time, these challenges are reducing demand for some of our services and putting has liability. For a further discussion of claims and possible claims against O&R under Superfund, see Note G to the financial statements in Item 8. Manufactured Gas Sites O&R and its predecessors formerly owned and operated manufactured gas plants at seven sites (O&R MGP Sites) in Orange County and Rockland County, New York. Three of these sites are now owned by parties other than O&R, and have been redeveloped by them for residential, commercial or industrial uses. The NYSDEC is requiring O&R to develop and implement remediation programs for the O&R MGP Sites including any neighboring areas to which contamination may have migrated. O&R has completed remedial investigations at all seven of its MGP sites and has received the NYSDEC’s decision regarding the remedial work to be performed at six of the sites. Of the six sites, O&R has completed remediation at four sites. Remedial construction was initiated on a portion of one of the remaining sites in 2018 and remedial design is ongoing for the other remaining sites. The company estimates that its undiscounted potential liability for the completion of the site investigation and cleanup of the known contamination on MGP sites could range from $86 million to $142 million. Superfund Sites O&R is a PRP at Superfund sites involving other PRPs, and participates in PRP groups at those sites. The company is not managing the site investigation and remediation at these multiparty Superfund sites. Work at these sites is in various stages, and investigation, remediation and monitoring activities at some of these sites is expected to continue over extended periods of time. The company believes that it is unlikely that monetary sanctions, such as penalties, will be imposed by any governmental authority with respect to these sites. The following table lists each of the Superfund sites for which the company anticipates it may have liability. The table also shows for each such site its location, the year in which the company was designated or alleged to be a PRP or to otherwise have responsibilities for the site (shown in the table under “Start”), the name of the court or agency in which proceedings for the site are pending and O&R’s estimated percentage of the total liability for each site. The company currently estimates that its potential liability for investigation, remediation, monitoring and environmental damages in aggregate for the sites below is less than $1 million. Superfund liability is joint and several. The company’s estimate of its liability for each site was determined pursuant to consent decrees, settlement agreements or otherwise and in light of the financial condition of other PRPs. The company’s actual liability could differ substantially from amounts estimated. <table><tr><td>Site</td><td>Location</td><td>Start</td><td>Court orAgency</td><td>% of TotalLiability</td></tr><tr><td>Metal Bank of America</td><td>Philadelphia, PA</td><td>1993</td><td>EPA</td><td>4.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Borne Chemical</td><td>Elizabeth, NJ</td><td>1997</td><td>NJDEP</td><td>2.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Ellis Road</td><td>Jacksonville, FL</td><td>2011</td><td>EPA</td><td>0.2%</td></tr></table> Other Federal, State and Local Environmental Provisions Toxic Substances Control Act Virtually all electric utilities, including CECONY, own equipment containing PCBs. PCBs are regulated under the Federal Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976. The Utilities have procedures in place to manage and dispose of oil and equipment containing PCBs properly when they are removed from service. Water Quality Under NYSDEC regulations, the operation of CECONY’s generating facilities requires permits for water discharges and water withdrawals. Conditions to the renewal of such permits may include limitations on the operations of the permitted facility or requirements to install certain equipment, the cost of which could be substantial. For information about the company’s generating facilities, see “CECONY – Electric Operations – Electric Facilities” and “Steam Operations – Steam Facilities” above in this Item 1. Certain governmental authorities are investigating contamination in the Hudson River and the New York Harbor. These waters run through portions of CECONY’s service area. Governmental authorities could require entities that released hazardous substances that contaminated these waters to bear the cost of investigation and remediation, which could be substantial. Fuel expenses increased $23 million in 2017 compared with 2016 due to higher unit costs. Other operations and maintenance expenses decreased $119 million in 2017 compared with 2016 due primarily to lower costs for pension and other postretirement benefits ($89 million) and other employee benefits related to a rabbi trust ($22 million). Depreciation and amortization increased $60 million in 2017 compared with 2016 due primarily to higher electric utility plant balances. Taxes, other than income taxes increased $78 million in 2017 compared with 2016 due primarily to higher property taxes ($97 million) and the absence in 2017 of a favorable state audit settlement in 2016 ($5 million), offset in part by deferral of under-collected property taxes due to new property tax rates for fiscal year 2017 – 2018 ($21 million) and lower state and local taxes ($4 million). Gas CECONY’s results of gas operations for the year ended December 31, 2017 compared with the year ended December 31, 2016 is as follows <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">For the Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(Millions of Dollars)</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>Variation</td></tr><tr><td>Operating revenues</td><td>$1,901</td><td>$1,508</td><td>$393</td></tr><tr><td>Gas purchased for resale</td><td>510</td><td>319</td><td>191</td></tr><tr><td>Other operations and maintenance</td><td>413</td><td>378</td><td>35</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation and amortization</td><td>185</td><td>159</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>Taxes, other than income taxes</td><td>298</td><td>265</td><td>33</td></tr><tr><td>Gas operating income</td><td>$495</td><td>$387</td><td>$108</td></tr></table> CECONY’s gas sales and deliveries, excluding off-system sales, in 2017 compared with 2016 were <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">Thousands of Dt Delivered</td><td colspan="4">Revenues in Millions (a)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">For the Years Ended</td><td colspan="2"></td><td colspan="2">For the Years Ended</td><td colspan="2"></td></tr><tr><td>Description</td><td>December 31, 2017</td><td>December 31, 2016</td><td>Variation</td><td>Percent Variation</td><td>December 31, 2017</td><td>December 31, 2016</td><td>Variation</td><td>Percent Variation</td></tr><tr><td>Residential</td><td>52,244</td><td>47,794</td><td>4,450</td><td>9.3%</td><td>$802</td><td>$667</td><td>$135</td><td>20.2%</td></tr><tr><td>General</td><td>30,761</td><td>28,098</td><td>2,663</td><td>9.5</td><td>334</td><td>266</td><td>68</td><td>25.6</td></tr><tr><td>Firm transportation</td><td>71,353</td><td>68,442</td><td>2,911</td><td>4.3</td><td>524</td><td>426</td><td>98</td><td>23.0</td></tr><tr><td>Total firm sales and transportation</td><td>154,358</td><td>144,334</td><td>10,024</td><td>6.9(b)</td><td>1,660</td><td>1,359</td><td>301</td><td>22.1</td></tr><tr><td>Interruptible sales (c)</td><td>7,553</td><td>8,957</td><td>-1,404</td><td>-15.7</td><td>35</td><td>34</td><td>1</td><td>2.9</td></tr><tr><td>NYPA</td><td>37,033</td><td>43,101</td><td>-6,068</td><td>-14.1</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Generation plants</td><td>61,800</td><td>87,835</td><td>-26,035</td><td>-29.6</td><td>25</td><td>25</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>21,317</td><td>21,165</td><td>152</td><td>0.7</td><td>31</td><td>32</td><td>-1</td><td>-3.1</td></tr><tr><td>Other operating revenues (d)</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>148</td><td>56</td><td>92</td><td>Large</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>282,061</td><td>305,392</td><td>-23,331</td><td>-7.6%</td><td>$1,901</td><td>$1,508</td><td>$393</td><td>26.1%</td></tr></table> (a) Revenues from gas sales are subject to a weather normalization clause and a revenue decoupling mechanism, as a result of which, delivery revenues are generally not affected by changes in delivery volumes from levels assumed when rates were approved. (b) After adjusting for variations, primarily billing days, firm gas sales and transportation volumes in the company’s service area increased 5.9 percent in 2017 compared with 2016, reflecting primarily increased volumes attributable to the growth in the number of gas customers. (c) Includes 3,816 thousands and 4,708 thousands of Dt for 2017 and 2016, respectively, which are also reflected in firm transportation and other. (d) Other gas operating revenues generally reflect changes in regulatory assets and liabilities in accordance with the company’s rate plans. See Note B to the financial statements in Item 8. Operating revenues increased $393 million in 2017 compared with 2016 due primarily to increased gas purchased for resale expense ($191 million) and higher revenues from the gas rate plan and growth in the number of customers ($182 million). Gas purchased for resale increased $191 million in 2017 compared with 2016 due to higher unit costs ($176 million) and purchased volumes ($15 million).

What's the increasing rate of Investment Bank for Total in 2009?

THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis The table below presents our average monthly assets under supervision by asset class. <table><tr><td></td><td>Average for theYear Ended December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in billions</i></td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>Alternative investments</td><td>$ 162</td><td>$ 149</td><td>$ 145</td></tr><tr><td>Equity</td><td>292</td><td>256</td><td>247</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed income</td><td>633</td><td>578</td><td>530</td></tr><tr><td>Total long-term AUS</td><td>1,087</td><td>983</td><td>922</td></tr><tr><td>Liquidity products</td><td>330</td><td>326</td><td>272</td></tr><tr><td>Total AUS</td><td>$1,417</td><td>$1,309</td><td>$1,194</td></tr></table> Operating Environment. During 2017, Investment Management operated in an environment characterized by generally higher asset prices, resulting in appreciation in both equity and fixed income assets. In addition, our longterm assets under supervision increased from net inflows primarily in fixed income and alternative investment assets. These increases were partially offset by net outflows in liquidity products. As a result, the mix of average assets under supervision during 2017 shifted slightly from liquidity products to long-term assets under supervision as compared to the mix at the end of 2016. In the future, if asset prices decline, or investors favor assets that typically generate lower fees or investors withdraw their assets, net revenues in Investment Management would likely be negatively impacted. Following a challenging first quarter of 2016, market conditions improved during the remainder of 2016 with higher asset prices resulting in full year appreciation in both equity and fixed income assets. Also, our assets under supervision increased during 2016 from net inflows, primarily in fixed income assets, and liquidity products. The mix of our average assets under supervision shifted slightly compared with 2015 from long-term assets under supervision to liquidity products. Management fees were impacted by many factors, including inflows to advisory services and outflows from actively-managed mutual funds.2017 versus 2016. Net revenues in Investment Management were $6.22 billion for 2017, 7% higher than 2016, due to higher management and other fees, reflecting higher average assets under supervision, and higher transaction revenues. During the year, total assets under supervision increased $115 billion to $1.49 trillion. Longterm assets under supervision increased $128 billion, including net market appreciation of $86 billion, primarily in equity and fixed income assets, and net inflows of $42 billion (which includes $20 billion of inflows in connection with the Verus acquisition and $5 billion of equity asset outflows in connection with the Australian divestiture), primarily in fixed income and alternative investment assets. Liquidity products decreased $13 billion (which includes $3 billion of inflows in connection with the Verus acquisition). Operating expenses were $4.80 billion for 2017, 3% higher than 2016, primarily due to increased compensation and benefits expenses, reflecting higher net revenues. Pre-tax earnings were $1.42 billion in 2017, 25% higher than 2016.2016 versus 2015. Net revenues in Investment Management were $5.79 billion for 2016, 7% lower than 2015. This decrease primarily reflected significantly lower incentive fees compared with a strong 2015. In addition, management and other fees were slightly lower, reflecting shifts in the mix of client assets and strategies, partially offset by the impact of higher average assets under supervision. During 2016, total assets under supervision increased $127 billion to $1.38 trillion. Long-term assets under supervision increased $75 billion, including net inflows of $42 billion, primarily in fixed income assets, and net market appreciation of $33 billion, primarily in equity and fixed income assets. In addition, liquidity products increased $52 billion. Operating expenses were $4.65 billion for 2016, 4% lower than 2015, due to decreased compensation and benefits expenses, reflecting lower net revenues. Pre-tax earnings were $1.13 billion in 2016, 17% lower than 2015. Geographic Data See Note 25 to the consolidated financial statements for a summary of our total net revenues, pre-tax earnings and net earnings by geographic region. ferred capital debt securities, as issuances of FDIC-guaranteed debt and non-FDIC guaranteed debt in both the U. S. and European markets were more than offset by redemptions. Cash proceeds resulted from an increase in securities loaned or sold under repurchase agreements, partly attributable to favorable pricing and to financing the increased size of the Firm’s AFS securities portfolio; and the issuance of $5.8 billion of common stock. There were no repurchases in the open market of common stock or the warrants during 2009. In 2008, net cash provided by financing activities was $247.8 billion due to: growth in wholesale deposits, in particular, interest- and noninterest-bearing deposits in TSS (driven by both new and existing clients, and due to the deposit inflows related to the heightened volatility and credit concerns affecting the global markets that began in the third quarter of 2008), as well as increases in AM and CB (due to organic growth); proceeds of $25.0 billion from the issuance of preferred stock and the Warrant to the U. S. Treasury under the Capital Purchase Program; additional issuances of common stock and preferred stock used for general corporate purposes; an increase in other borrowings due to nonrecourse secured advances under the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston AML Facility to fund the purchase of asset-backed commercial paper from money market mutual funds; increases in federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under repurchase agreements in connection with higher client demand for liquidity and to finance growth in the Firm’s AFS securities portfolio; and a net increase in long-term debt due to a combination of non-FDIC guaranteed debt and trust preferred capital debt securities issued prior to December 4, 2008, and the issuance of $20.8 billion of FDIC-guaranteed long-term debt issued during the fourth quarter of 2008. The fourth-quarter FDIC-guaranteed debt issuance was offset partially by maturities of non-FDIC guaranteed long-term debt during the same period. The increase in long-term debt (including trust preferred capital debt securities) was used primarily to fund certain illiquid assets held by the parent holding company and to build liquidity. Cash was also used to pay dividends on common and preferred stock. The Firm did not repurchase any shares of its common stock during 2008. In 2007, net cash provided by financing activities was $184.1 billion due to a net increase in wholesale deposits from growth in business volumes, in particular, interest-bearing deposits at TSS, AM and CB; net issuances of long-term debt (including trust preferred capital debt securities) primarily to fund certain illiquid assets held by the parent holding company and build liquidity, and by IB from client-driven structured notes transactions; and growth in commercial paper issuances and other borrowed funds due to growth in the volume of liability balances in sweep accounts in TSS and CB, and to fund trading positions and to further build liquidity. Cash was used to repurchase common stock and pay dividends on common stock. Credit ratings The cost and availability of financing are influenced by credit ratings. Reductions in these ratings could have an adverse effect on the Firm’s access to liquidity sources, increase the cost of funds, trigger additional collateral or funding requirements and decrease the number of investors and counterparties willing to lend to the Firm. Additionally, the Firm’s funding requirements for VIEs and other third-party commitments may be adversely affected. For additional information on the impact of a credit ratings downgrade on the funding requirements for VIEs, and on derivatives and collateral agreements, see Special-purpose entities on pages 86–87 and Ratings profile of derivative receivables marked to market (“MTM”), and Note 5 on page 111 and pages 175–183, respectively, of this Annual Report. Critical factors in maintaining high credit ratings include a stable and diverse earnings stream, strong capital ratios, strong credit quality and risk management controls, diverse funding sources, and disciplined liquidity monitoring procedures. The credit ratings of the parent holding company and each of the Firm’s significant banking subsidiaries as of January 15, 2010, were as follows. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Short-term debt</td><td colspan="3">Senior long-term debt</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Moody’s</td><td>S&P</td><td>Fitch</td><td>Moody’s</td><td>S&P</td><td>Fitch</td></tr><tr><td>JPMorgan Chase & Co.</td><td>P-1</td><td>A-1</td><td>F1+</td><td>Aa3</td><td>A+</td><td>AA-</td></tr><tr><td>JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.</td><td>P-1</td><td>A-1+</td><td>F1+</td><td>Aa1</td><td>AA-</td><td>AA-</td></tr><tr><td>Chase Bank USA, N.A.</td><td>P-1</td><td>A-1+</td><td>F1+</td><td>Aa1</td><td>AA-</td><td>AA-</td></tr></table> Ratings actions affecting the Firm On March 4, 2009, Moody’s revised the outlook on the Firm to negative from stable. This action was the result of Moody’s view that the Firm’s ability to generate capital would be adversely affected by higher credit costs due to the global recession. The rating action by Moody’s in the first quarter of 2009 did not have a material impact on the cost or availability of the Firm’s funding. At December 31, 2009, Moody’s outlook remained negative. Ratings from S&P and Fitch on JPMorgan Chase and its principal bank subsidiaries remained unchanged at December 31, 2009, from December 31, 2008. At December 31, 2009, S&P’s outlook remained negative, while Fitch’s outlook remained stable. Following the Firm’s earnings release on January 15, 2010, S&P and Moody’s announced that their ratings on the Firm remained unchanged. If the Firm’s senior long-term debt ratings were downgraded by one additional notch, the Firm believes the incremental cost of funds or loss of funding would be manageable, within the context of current market conditions and the Firm’s liquidity resources. JPMorgan Chase’s unsecured debt does not contain requirements that would call for an acceleration of payments, maturities or changes in the structure of the existing debt, provide any limitations on future borrowings or require additional collateral, based on unfavorable Management’s discussion and analysis JPMorgan Chase & Co. /2009 Annual Report 122 Residential real estate loan modification activities: During 2009, the Firm reviewed its residential real estate portfolio to identify homeowners most in need of assistance, opened new regional counseling centers, hired additional loan counselors, introduced new financing alternatives, proactively reached out to borrowers to offer pre-qualified modifications, and commenced a new process to independently review each loan before moving it into the foreclosure process. In addition, during the first quarter of 2009, the U. S. Treasury introduced the MHA programs, which are designed to assist eligible homeowners in a number of ways, one of which is by modifying the terms of their mortgages. The Firm is participating in the MHA programs while continuing to expand its other loss-mitigation efforts for financially distressed borrowers who do not qualify for the MHA programs. The MHA programs and the Firm’s other loss-mitigation programs for financially troubled borrowers generally represent various concessions such as term extensions, rate reductions and deferral of principal payments that would have otherwise been required under the terms of the original agreement. When the Firm modifies home equity lines of credit in troubled debt restructurings, future lending commitments related to the modified loans are canceled as part of the terms of the modification. Under all of these programs, borrowers must make at least three payments under the revised contractual terms during a trial modification period and be successfully re-underwritten with income verification before their loans can be permanently modified. The Firm’s loss-mitigation programs are intended to minimize economic loss to the Firm, while providing alternatives to foreclosure. The success of these programs is highly dependent on borrowers’ ongoing ability and willingness to repay in accordance with the modified terms and could be adversely affected by additional deterioration in the economic environment or shifts in borrower behavior. For both the Firm’s on-balance sheet loans and loans serviced for others, approximately 600,000 mortgage modifications had been offered to borrowers in 2009. Of these, 89,000 have achieved permanent modification. Substantially all of the loans contractually modified to date were modified under the Firm’s other loss mitigation programs. The following table presents information relating to restructured on-balance sheet residential real estate loans for which concessions have been granted to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty as of December 31, 2009. Modifications of purchased credit-impaired loans continue to be accounted for and reported as purchased credit-impaired loans, and the impact of the modification is incorporated into the Firm’s quarterly assessment of whether a probable and/or significant change in estimated future principal cash flows has occurred. Modifications of loans other than purchased credit-impaired are generally accounted for and reported as troubled debt restructurings. Restructured residential real estate loans(a) <table><tr><td> December 31, 2009</td><td rowspan="2">On-balance sheet loans</td><td rowspan="2">Nonperforming on-balance sheet loans^(d)</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td></tr><tr><td> Restructured residential real estate loans – excludingpurchased credit-impaired loans^(b)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Home equity – senior lien</td><td>$168</td><td>$30</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity – junior lien</td><td>222</td><td>43</td></tr><tr><td>Prime mortgage</td><td>634</td><td>243</td></tr><tr><td>Subprime mortgage</td><td>1,998</td><td>598</td></tr><tr><td>Option ARMs</td><td>8</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td> Total restructured residential real estate loans – excluding purchased credit-impaired loans</td><td>$3,030</td><td>$920</td></tr><tr><td> Restructured purchased credit-impaired loans^(c)</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>$453</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Prime mortgage</td><td>1,526</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Subprime mortgage</td><td>1,954</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td>Option ARMs</td><td>2,972</td><td>NA</td></tr><tr><td> Total restructured purchased credit-impaired loans</td><td>$6,905</td><td>NA</td></tr></table> (a) Restructured residential real estate loans were immaterial at December 31, 2008. (b) Amounts represent the carrying value of restructured residential real estate loans. (c) Amounts represent the unpaid principal balance of restructured purchased credit-impaired loans. (d) Nonperforming loans modified in a troubled debt restructuring may be returned to accrual status when repayment is reasonably assured and the borrower has made a minimum of six payments under the new terms. Real estate owned (“REO”): As part of the residential real estate foreclosure process, loans are written down to the fair value of the underlying real estate asset, less costs to sell. In those instances where the Firm gains title, ownership and possession of individual properties at the completion of the foreclosure process, these REO assets are managed for prompt sale and disposition at the best possible economic value. Any further gains or losses on REO assets are recorded as part of other income. Operating expense, such as real estate taxes and maintenance, are charged to other expense. REO assets declined from year-end 2008 as a result of the foreclosure moratorium in early 2009 and the subsequent increase in loss mitigation activities. It is anticipated that REO assets will increase over the next several quarters, as loans moving through the foreclosure process are expected to increase. The calculation of the allowance for loan losses to total retained loans, excluding both home lending purchased credit-impaired loans and loans held by the Washington Mutual Master Trust, is presented below. <table><tr><td>December 31, (in millions, except ratios)</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan losses</td><td>$31,602</td><td>$23,164</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Allowance for purchased credit-impaired loans</td><td>1,581</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Adjusted allowance for loan losses</td><td>$30,021</td><td>$23,164</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans retained</td><td>$627,218</td><td>$728,915</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Firmwide purchased credit-impaired loans</td><td>81,380</td><td>89,088</td></tr><tr><td>Loans held by the Washington Mutual Master Trust</td><td>1,002</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Adjusted loans</td><td>$544,836</td><td>$639,827</td></tr><tr><td> Allowance for loan losses to ending loans excluding purchased credit-impaired loans and loans held by the Washington Mutual Master Trust</td><td>5.51%</td><td>3.62%</td></tr></table> The following table presents the allowance for credit losses by business segment at December 31, 2009 and 2008. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">Allowance for credit losses</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> 2009</td><td colspan="3">2008</td></tr><tr><td>December 31,</td><td></td><td>Lending-related</td><td></td><td></td><td>Lending-related</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>Loan losses</td><td>commitments</td><td>Total</td><td>Loan losses</td><td>commitments</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>Investment Bank</td><td>$3,756</td><td>$485</td><td>$4,241</td><td>$3,444</td><td>$360</td><td>$3,804</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial Banking</td><td>3,025</td><td>349</td><td>3,374</td><td>2,826</td><td>206</td><td>3,032</td></tr><tr><td>Treasury & Securities Services</td><td>88</td><td>84</td><td>172</td><td>74</td><td>63</td><td>137</td></tr><tr><td>Asset Management</td><td>269</td><td>9</td><td>278</td><td>191</td><td>5</td><td>196</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate/Private Equity</td><td>7</td><td>—</td><td>7</td><td>10</td><td>—</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td> Total Wholesale</td><td>7,145</td><td>927</td><td>8,072</td><td>6,545</td><td>634</td><td>7,179</td></tr><tr><td>Retail Financial Services</td><td>14,776</td><td>12</td><td>14,788</td><td>8,918</td><td>25</td><td>8,943</td></tr><tr><td>Card Services</td><td>9,672</td><td>—</td><td>9,672</td><td>7,692</td><td>—</td><td>7,692</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate/Private Equity</td><td>9</td><td>—</td><td>9</td><td>9</td><td>—</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td> Total Consumer</td><td>24,457</td><td>12</td><td>24,469</td><td>16,619</td><td>25</td><td>16,644</td></tr><tr><td> Total</td><td>$31,602</td><td>$939</td><td>$32,541</td><td>$23,164</td><td>$659</td><td>$23,823</td></tr></table> Provision for credit losses The managed provision for credit losses was $38.5 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, up by $13.9 billion from the prior year. The prior-year included a $1.5 billion charge to conform Washington Mutual’s allowance for loan losses, which affected both the consumer and wholesale portfolios. For the purpose of the following analysis, this charge is excluded. The consumer-managed provision for credit losses was $34.5 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, compared with $20.4 billion in the prior year, reflecting an increase in the allowance for credit losses in the home lending and credit card loan portfolios. Included in the 2009 addition to the allowance for loan losses was a $1.6 billion increase related to estimated deterioration in the Washington Mutual purchased credit-impaired portfolio. The wholesale provision for credit losses was $4.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, compared with $2.7 billion in the prior year, reflecting continued weakness in the credit environment. <table><tr><td>Year ended December 31,</td><td colspan="9">Provision for credit losses</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td colspan="3">Loan losses</td><td colspan="3">Lending-related commitments</td><td colspan="3">Total</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Investment Bank</td><td>$2,154</td><td>$2,216</td><td>$376</td><td>$125</td><td>$-201</td><td>$278</td><td>$2,279</td><td>$2,015</td><td>$654</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial Banking</td><td>1,314</td><td>505</td><td>230</td><td>140</td><td>-41</td><td>49</td><td>1,454</td><td>464</td><td>279</td></tr><tr><td>Treasury & Securities Services</td><td>34</td><td>52</td><td>11</td><td>21</td><td>30</td><td>8</td><td>55</td><td>82</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>Asset Management</td><td>183</td><td>87</td><td>-19</td><td>5</td><td>-2</td><td>1</td><td>188</td><td>85</td><td>-18</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate/Private Equity^(a)(b)</td><td>-1</td><td>676</td><td>—</td><td>-1</td><td>5</td><td>—</td><td>-2</td><td>681</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td> Total Wholesale</td><td>3,684</td><td>3,536</td><td>598</td><td>290</td><td>-209</td><td>336</td><td>3,974</td><td>3,327</td><td>934</td></tr><tr><td>Retail Financial Services</td><td>15,950</td><td>9,906</td><td>2,620</td><td>-10</td><td>-1</td><td>-10</td><td>15,940</td><td>9,905</td><td>2,610</td></tr><tr><td>CardServices – reported</td><td>12,019</td><td>6,456</td><td>3,331</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>12,019</td><td>6,456</td><td>3,331</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate/Private Equity^(a)(c)(d)</td><td>82</td><td>1,339</td><td>-11</td><td>—</td><td>-48</td><td>—</td><td>82</td><td>1,291</td><td>-11</td></tr><tr><td> Total Consumer</td><td>28,051</td><td>17,701</td><td>5,940</td><td>-10</td><td>-49</td><td>-10</td><td>28,041</td><td>17,652</td><td>5,930</td></tr><tr><td> Total provision for creditlosses – reported</td><td>31,735</td><td>21,237</td><td>6,538</td><td>280</td><td>-258</td><td>326</td><td>32,015</td><td>20,979</td><td>6,864</td></tr><tr><td>Credit card– securitized</td><td>6,443</td><td>3,612</td><td>2,380</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6,443</td><td>3,612</td><td>2,380</td></tr><tr><td> Total provision for creditlosses – managed</td><td>$38,178</td><td>$24,849</td><td>$8,918</td><td>$280</td><td>$-258</td><td>$326</td><td>$38,458</td><td>$24,591</td><td>$9,244</td></tr></table> (a) Includes accounting conformity provisions related to the Washington Mutual transaction in 2008. (b) Includes provision expense related to loans acquired in the Bear Stearns merger in the second quarter of 2008. (c) Includes amounts related to held-for-investment prime mortgages transferred from AM to the Corporate/Private Equity segment. (d) In November 2008, the Firm transferred $5.8 billion of higher quality credit card loans from the legacy Chase portfolio to a securitization trust previously established by Washington Mutual (‘‘the Trust’’). As a result of converting higher credit quality Chase-originated on-book receivables to the Trust’s seller’s interest which has a higher overall loss rate reflective of the total assets within the Trust, approximately $400 million of incremental provision expense was recorded during the fourth quarter. This incremental provision expense was recorded in the Corporate segment as the action related to the acquisition of Washington Mutual’s banking operations. For further discussion of credit card securitizations, see Note 15 on pages 206---213 of this Annual Report.

What was the total amount of elements for RevPAR excluding those elements greater than 150 in 2016 ?

Select-Service Lodging Select-Service Lodging includes our Courtyard, Fairfield Inn and SpringHill Suites brands. <table><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2"> Annual Change </td></tr><tr><td> <i></i> <i>($ in millions)</i><i></i> </td><td> 2005 </td><td> 2004 </td><td> 2003 </td><td> 2005/2004 </td><td> 2004/2003 </td></tr><tr><td>Revenues</td><td>$1,265</td><td>$1,118</td><td>$1,000</td><td>13%</td><td>12%</td></tr><tr><td>Segment results</td><td>$209</td><td>$140</td><td>$99</td><td>49%</td><td>41%</td></tr></table> 2005 COMPARED TO 2004 Across our Select-Service Lodging segment, we added 66 hotels (8,363 rooms) and deflagged 18 hotels (2,309 rooms) in 2005. The deflagged properties were primarily associated with our Fairfield Inn brand. The increase in revenues for 2005 over the prior year reflects stronger RevPAR, driven by occupancy and rate increases and the growth in the number of rooms across our selectservice brands. The $69 million increase in segment results versus the prior year reflects a $35 million increase in base management, incentive management and franchise fees, $4 million of higher owned, leased and other revenue net of direct expenses, $12 million of higher gains and other income, a $12 million increase in equity results, and $6 million of lower general, administrative and other expenses. General, administrative and other expenses in 2005 included $8 million of higher pre-tax expenses associated with our bedding incentive program. In 2004, as discussed below, we wrote off deferred contract acquisition costs, impacting general and administrative expenses, totaling $13 million. The 2005 increase in gains and other income is primarily a result of the 2005 sale of a portfolio of land underlying 75 Courtyard hotels, which generated pre-tax gains of $17 million, a $10 million gain in 2005 associated with the repayment, before maturity, to us of the loan we made to the Courtyard joint venture and increased income of $3 million in 2005 associated with cost method joint ventures, partially offset by $20 million of gains in 2004 primarily associated with land sales. Stronger performance at our reinvented Courtyard properties, versus non-reinvented properties, is also contributing to the increase in revenue and segment results from the prior year. For additional information related to the Courtyard joint venture, see the “Courtyard Joint Venture” caption in “Liquidity and Capital Resources” later in this report.2004 COMPARED TO 2003 Across our Select-Service Lodging segment, we added 89 hotels (10,556 rooms) and deflagged 35 hotels (4,395 rooms) in 2004. The increase in the Select-Service Lodging segment revenues for 2004 over the prior year reflects stronger RevPAR, driven by occupancy and rate increases, and the growth in the number of rooms across our select-service brands. Base management, incentive management and franchise fees increased $31 million, and gains were $19 million higher than the prior year, reflecting land sales during the year as well as recognition of deferred gains associated with properties we previously owned. Joint venture results increased by $5 million as a result of the strong business environment. These increases were partially offset by an increase in administrative costs of $13 million. Most of the increase in administrative costs is associated with a transaction related to our Courtyard joint venture (discussed more fully later in this report in “Liquidity and Capital Resources” under the heading “Courtyard Joint Venture”). As the termination of the existing management agreements associated with the Courtyard joint venture was probable in 2004, we wrote off our deferred contract acquisition costs related to the existing contracts, resulting in a charge of $13 million. Extended-Stay Lodging Extended-Stay Lodging includes our Residence Inn, TownePlace Suites, Marriott Executive Apartments and Marriott ExecuStay brands. <table><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2"> Annual Change </td></tr><tr><td> <i>($ in millions)</i> </td><td> 2005 </td><td> 2004 </td><td> 2003 </td><td> 2005/2004 </td><td> 2004/2003 </td></tr><tr><td>Revenues</td><td>$608</td><td>$547</td><td>$557</td><td>11%</td><td>-2%</td></tr><tr><td>Segment results</td><td>$65</td><td>$66</td><td>$47</td><td>-2%</td><td>40%</td></tr></table> 2005 COMPARED TO 2004 Across the Extended-Stay Lodging segment, we added 37 hotels (4,293 rooms) in 2005. Our base and incentive management fees in 2005 were $12 million higher than the prior year and our franchise fees, principally associated with our Residence Inn brand, also increased $12 million. The increase in management and franchise fees is largely due to higher RevPAR driven by increased demand and to the growth in the number of rooms. Owned, leased, corporate housing and other revenue, net of direct expenses declined $12 million compared to a year ago primarily as a result of our ExecuStay brand’s shift toward franchising. Gains and other income was $11 million lower than last year, primarily reflecting gains on sales of real estate in 2004 versus no gains in 2005. General and administrative costs were slightly higher, primarily reflecting 2005 pre-tax expenses of $4 million associated with our bedding incentive program and a $6 million charge in 2005 associated with the settlement of litigation, almost entirely offset by lower general, administrative and other expenses, including lower costs associated with ExecuStay’s shift toward franchising. RevPAR for Select-Service and Extended-Stay Lodging comparable companyoperated North American hotels increased 9.4 percent to $76.49. Occupancy for these hotels increased slightly to 73.8 percent from 72.6 percent in 2004, while average daily rates increased 8.7 percent to $103.70.2004 COMPARED TO 2003 In 2004, we added 20 hotels (2,303 rooms) and deflagged one hotel (80 rooms) across our Extended-Stay Lodging segment. The decline in our Extended-Stay Lodging segment revenue in 2004 is primarily attributable to the shift in the ExecuStay business from management to franchising. We entered into more than 20 new franchise markets in 2004, and only five managed markets remain at the end of 2004. Our base management fees increased $4 million, and our incentive management fees were essentially flat with last year, while our franchise fees, principally associated with our Residence Inn brand, increased $9 million. The increase in franchise fees is largely due to the growth in the number of rooms and an increase in RevPAR. In addition, gains of $10 million in 2004 were favorable to the prior year by $4 million. ExecuStay experienced improved results compared to the prior year, resulting from increased occupancy, primarily in the New York market, coupled with lower operating costs associated with the shift in business toward franchising. The $2 million increase in general and administrative costs associated with supporting the segment’s hotel brands was more than offset by the $6 million decline in ExecuStay’s general and administrative costs associated with ExecuStay’s shift toward franchising. RevPAR for Select-Service and Extended-Stay Lodging comparable companyoperated North American hotels increased 9.1 percent to $68.66. Occupancy for these hotels increased to 72.6 percent from 70.0 percent in 2003, while average daily rates increased 4.4 percent to $94.52. We compute the effect of dilutive securities using the treasury stock method and average market prices during the period. We determine dilution based on earnings from continuing operations. In accordance with FAS No.128, “Earnings per Share,” we did not include the following stock options in our calculation of diluted earnings per share because the option exercise prices were greater than the average market price for our Class A Common Stock for the applicable period: (a) for 2005, no stock options; (b) for 2004, no stock options; and (c) for 2003, 5.7 million stock options. PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT <table><tr><td><i>($ in millions)</i></td><td>2005</td><td>2004</td></tr><tr><td>Land</td><td>$259</td><td>$371</td></tr><tr><td>Buildings and leasehold improvements</td><td>659</td><td>642</td></tr><tr><td>Furniture and equipment</td><td>827</td><td>771</td></tr><tr><td>Timeshare properties</td><td>1,249</td><td>1,186</td></tr><tr><td>Construction in progress</td><td>132</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>3,126</td><td>3,070</td></tr><tr><td>Accumulated depreciation</td><td>-785</td><td>-681</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$2,341</td><td>$2,389</td></tr></table> We record property and equipment at cost, including interest, rent and real estate taxes incurred during development and construction. Interest capitalized as a cost of property and equipment totaled $30 million in 2005, $16 million in 2004, and $25 million in 2003. We capitalize the cost of improvements that extend the useful life of property and equipment when incurred. These capitalized costs may include structural costs, equipment, fixtures, floor and wall coverings and paint. All repair and maintenance costs are expensed as incurred. We compute depreciation using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets (three to 40 years). Depreciation expense totaled $156 million in 2005, $133 million in 2004, and $132 million in 2003. We amortize leasehold improvements over the shorter of the asset life or lease term. ACQUISITIONS AND DISPOSITIONS 2005 Acquisitions During the third quarter, we purchased from CTF Holdings Ltd. and certain of its affiliates (collectively “CTF”) 13 properties (in each case through a purchase of real estate, a purchase of the entity that owned the hotel, or an assignment of CTF’s leasehold rights) and certain joint venture interests from CTF for an aggregate price of $381 million. Prior to the sale, all of the properties were operated by us or our subsidiaries. We plan to sell eight of the properties we have purchased to date to third-party owners, and the balances related to these full-service properties are classified within the “Assets held for sale” and “Liabilities of assets held for sale” captions in our Consolidated Balance Sheet. One operating lease has terminated. We operate the four remaining properties under leases, three of which expire by 2012. Under the purchase and sale agreement we signed with CTF in the second quarter of 2005, we remain obligated to purchase two additional properties for $17 million, the acquisition of which was postponed pending receipt of certain third-party consents. On the closing date we and CTF also modified management agreements on 29 other CTF-leased hotels, 28 located in Europe and one located in the United States. We became secondarily liable for annual rent payments for certain of these hotels when we acquired the Renaissance Hotel Group N. V. in 1997. We continue to manage 16 of these hotels under new long-term management agreements; however, due to certain provisions in the management agreements, we account for these contracts as operating leases. CTF placed approximately $89 million in trust accounts to cover possible shortfalls in cash flow necessary to meet rent payments under these leases. In turn, we released CTF from its guarantees in connection with these leases. Approximately $79 million remained in these trust accounts at the end of 2005. Our financial statements reflect us as lessee on these hotels. Minimum lease payments relating to these leases are as follows: $32 million in 2006; $33 million in 2007; $33 million in 2008; $33 million in 2009; $33 million in 2010; and $231 million thereafter, for a total of $395 million. For the remaining 13 European leased hotels, CTF may terminate management agreements with us if and when CTF obtains releases from landlords of our back-up guarantees. Pending completion of the CTF-landlord agreements, we continue to manage these hotels under modified management agreements and remain secondarily liable We compute the effect of dilutive securities using the treasury stock method and average market prices during the period. We determine dilution based on earnings from continuing operations. In accordance with FAS No.128, ¡°Earnings per Share,¡± we did not include the following stock options in our calculation of diluted earnings per share because the option exercise prices were greater than the average market price for our Class A Common Stock for the applicable period: (a) for 2005, no stock options; (b) for 2004, no stock options; and (c) for 2003, 5.7 million stock options. PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT We record property and equipment at cost, including interest, rent and real estate taxes incurred during development and construction. Interest capitalized as a cost of property and equipment totaled $30 million in 2005, $16 million in 2004, and $25 million in 2003. We capitalize the cost of improvements that extend the useful life of property and equipment when incurred. These capitalized costs may include structural costs, equipment, fixtures, floor and wall coverings and paint. All repair and maintenance costs are expensed as incurred. We compute depreciation using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets (three to 40 years). Depreciation expense totaled $156 million in 2005, $133 million in 2004, and $132 million in 2003. We amortize leasehold improvements over the shorter of the asset life or lease term. ACQUISITIONS AND DISPOSITIONS 2005 Acquisitions During the third quarter, we purchased from CTF Holdings Ltd. and certain of its affiliates (collectively ¡°CTF¡±) 13 properties (in each case through a purchase of real estate, a purchase of the entity that owned the hotel, or an assignment of CTF¡¯s leasehold rights) and certain joint venture interests from CTF for an aggregate price of $381 million. Prior to the sale, all of the properties were operated by us or our subsidiaries. We plan to sell eight of the properties we have purchased to date to third-party owners, and the balances related to these full-service properties are classified within the ¡°Assets held for sale¡± and ¡°Liabilities of assets held for sale¡± captions in our Consolidated Balance Sheet. One operating lease has terminated. We operate the four remaining properties under leases, three of which expire by 2012. Under the purchase and sale agreement we signed with CTF in the second quarter of 2005, we remain obligated to purchase two additional properties for $17 million, the acquisition of which was postponed pending receipt of certain third-party consents. On the closing date we and CTF also modified management agreements on 29 other CTF-leased hotels, 28 located in Europe and one located in the United States. We became secondarily liable for annual rent payments for certain of these hotels when we acquired the Renaissance Hotel Group N. V. in 1997. We continue to manage 16 of these hotels under new long-term management agreements; however, due to certain provisions in the management agreements, we account for these contracts as operating leases. CTF placed approximately $89 million in trust accounts to cover possible shortfalls in cash flow necessary to meet rent payments under these leases. In turn, we released CTF from its guarantees in connection with these leases. Approximately $79 million remained in these trust accounts at the end of 2005. Our financial statements reflect us as lessee on these hotels. Minimum lease payments relating to these leases are as follows: $32 million in 2006; $33 million in 2007; $33 million in 2008; $33 million in 2009; $33 million in 2010; and $231 million thereafter, for a total of $395 million. For the remaining 13 European leased hotels, CTF may terminate management agreements with us if and when CTF obtains releases from landlords of our back-up guarantees. Pending completion of the CTF-landlord agreements, we continue to manage these hotels under modified management agreements and remain secondarily liable under certain of these leases. CTF has made available €35 million in cash collateral in the event that we are required to fund under such guarantees. As CTF obtains releases from the landlords and these hotels exit the system, our contingent liability exposure of approximately $217 million will decline. We also continue to manage three hotels in the United Kingdom under amended management agreements with CTF and continue to manage 14 properties in Asia on behalf of New World Development Company Limited and its affiliates. CTF¡¯s principals are officers, directors and stockholders of New World Development Company Limited. At the closing date, the owners of the United Kingdom and Asian hotels agreed to invest $17 million to renovate those properties. We and CTF also exchanged legal releases effective as of the closing date, and litigation and arbitration that was outstanding between the two companies and their affiliates was dismissed. Simultaneously with the closing on the foregoing transactions, CTF also sold five properties and one minority joint venture interest to Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc. (¡°Sunstone¡±) for $419 million, eight properties to Walton Street Capital, L. L. C. (¡°Walton Street¡±) for $578 million, and two properties to Tarsadia Hotels (¡°Tarsadia¡±) <table><tr><td> <i>($ in millions)</i></td><td>2006</td><td>2005</td></tr><tr><td>Land</td><td>$316</td><td>$301</td></tr><tr><td>Buildings and leasehold improvements</td><td>724</td><td>659</td></tr><tr><td>Furniture and equipment</td><td>888</td><td>827</td></tr><tr><td>Construction in progress</td><td>215</td><td>132</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2,143</td><td>1,919</td></tr><tr><td>Accumulated depreciation</td><td>-905</td><td>-785</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$1,238</td><td>$1,134</td></tr></table> We record property and equipment at cost, including interest, rent and real estate taxes incurred during development and construction. Interest capitalized as a cost of property and equipment totaled $32 million in 2006, $30 million in 2005, and $16 million in 2004. We capitalize the cost of improvements that extend the useful life of property and equipment when incurred. These capitalized costs may include structural costs, equipment, fixtures, floor and wall coverings. All repair and maintenance costs are expensed as incurred. We compute depreciation using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets (three to 40 years), and we amortize leasehold improvements over the shorter of the asset life or lease term. Depreciation expense totaled $155 million in 2006, $156 million in 2005, and $133 million in 2004.8 | ACQUISITIONS AND DISPOSITIONS 2006 Acquisitions During 2006, we acquired one full-service property for $130 million including aggregate cash consideration of $46 million plus the assumption of debt. In addition we acquired three other fullservice properties for aggregate cash consideration of $134 million. We plan to sell all four properties to third-party owners, and we classified the balances related to these properties as “Assets held for sale” and “Liabilities of assets held for sale” on our Consolidated Balance Sheet.2006 Dispositions In 2006 we sold our interest in the 50/50 joint venture with Whitbread PLC (“Whitbread”), which held 46 hotels consisting of more than 8,000 rooms, and we received approximately $164 million in cash, net of transaction costs, which was approximately equal to the investment’s book value. We continue to manage the hotels under the Marriott Hotels & Resorts and Renaissance Hotels & Resorts brands. For additional information regarding this joint venture, see Footnote No.10,“Marriott and Whitbread Joint Venture. ”We also sold our minority interest in five other joint ventures during 2006 for cash proceeds of $64 million and recognized gains of $43 million. Additionally, one cost method investee redeemed the preferred stock we held for $81 million in cash consideration, and we recognized income of $25 million on the redemption. During 2006 we also sold 10 full-service properties for cash proceeds of $487 million and recognized gains totaling $14 million. We accounted for each of the sales under the full accrual method in accordance with FAS No.66,“Accounting for Sales of Real Estate,” and will continue to operate eight of the properties under long-term management agreements. The sold properties included eight properties purchased in 2005 from CTF Holdings Ltd. and certain of its affiliates (collectively “CTF”). For additional information regarding the CTF transaction, see the “2005 Acquisitions” caption later in this footnote. Prior to the sale of one property, balances associated with that property were reclassified in conformity with other “held and used” properties, in the first half of 2006 as the property was not expected to be sold, within one year of its classification as “held for sale. ” In conjunction with that reclassification, we recorded depreciation expense of $2 million in the first half of 2006 that would have been recognized had the asset been continuously classified as “held and used. ” Cash proceeds of $26 million for one hotel sold in 2006 are not reflected in the disposition proceeds of $487 million as the proceeds were initially recorded as a deposit because of a contingency and impacted the “Other investing activities” section of our Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows rather than dispositions. The contingency was subsequently resolved and sale of accounting was achieved in 2006. Other asset sales generated cash proceeds of $2 million. Late in 2006, we sold a 75 percent interest in a joint venture to a third party for its book value of $14 million. At the time of the sale, the joint venture’s only asset was a parcel of land. In conjunction with the sale, we made a $25 million bridge loan to the joint venture, which matures on February 28, 2007. Following the guidance found in EITF 98-8,“Accounting for Transfers of Investments That Are in Substance Real Estate,” and FAS No.66, “Accounting for Sales of Real Estate,” due to our continuing involvement with the joint venture, we are consolidating the joint venture for the period of time that the bridge loan remains outstanding. Subsequent to the bridge loan’s repayment, we will account for our remaining interest in the joint venture under the equity method as required by APB 18,“The Equity Method of Accounting for Investments in Common Stock. ” In 1988, the Company as landlord, entered into a 59-year ground lease with a lessee for land that was improved with a hotel that is owned by the lessee. The hotel was previously branded a Marriott property; however, currently it is not. The lease contains contractual rental increases over the term of the lease, and annual ground rent on the land currently totals approximately $5 million. The lease also contains a provision that permits the lessee, under certain circumstances, to purchase the land for a fixed price. The Company and the lessee have had various discussions concerning the land as well as the hotel. During the 2006 second quarter, it became probable that none of the proposed transactions were acceptable to both parties, and the lessee indicated its intent to exercise its option to purchase the land. Accordingly, in the 2006 second quarter, we reclassified the land from the “Property and equipment” caption in our Consolidated Balance Sheet to the “Assets held for sale” caption and recorded a $37 million non-cash charge to adjust the carrying amount to net realizable value. Additional amounts may be due us depending on the lessee’s use of the land subsequent to purchase; however, such amounts will only be recorded if and when paid.2005 Acquisitions During the third quarter of 2005, we purchased from CTF Holdings Ltd. and certain of its affiliates (collectively “CTF”) 13 properties (in each case through a purchase of real estate, a purchase of the entity that owned the hotel, or an assignment of CTF’s leasehold 2016 Compared to 2015 Comparable?Company-Operated North American Properties <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">RevPAR</td><td colspan="3">Occupancy</td><td colspan="2">Average Daily Rate</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2016</td><td>Change vs. 2015</td><td>2016</td><td colspan="2">Change vs. 2015</td><td>2016</td><td>Change vs. 2015</td></tr><tr><td>JW Marriott</td><td>$187.02</td><td>4.0%</td><td>76.8%</td><td>2.2%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$243.57</td><td>1.1%</td></tr><tr><td>The Ritz-Carlton</td><td>$252.40</td><td>3.6%</td><td>71.9%</td><td>1.0%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$350.99</td><td>2.2%</td></tr><tr><td>W Hotels</td><td>$239.94</td><td>-2.2%</td><td>81.7%</td><td>0.2%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$293.82</td><td>-2.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Composite North American Luxury^-1</td><td>$242.10</td><td>2.8%</td><td>76.3%</td><td>1.4%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$317.13</td><td>0.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Marriott Hotels</td><td>$144.94</td><td>2.4%</td><td>75.4%</td><td>0.7%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$192.23</td><td>1.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Sheraton</td><td>$149.49</td><td>2.1%</td><td>76.5%</td><td>-0.5%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$195.40</td><td>2.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Westin</td><td>$167.21</td><td>0.9%</td><td>77.4%</td><td>-0.6%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$216.07</td><td>1.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Composite North American Upper Upscale^-2</td><td>$149.92</td><td>2.3%</td><td>76.1%</td><td>0.3%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$196.98</td><td>1.8%</td></tr><tr><td>North American Full-Service^-3</td><td>$166.97</td><td>2.4%</td><td>76.2%</td><td>0.5%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$219.25</td><td>1.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Courtyard</td><td>$103.65</td><td>2.2%</td><td>73.1%</td><td>0.3%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$141.83</td><td>1.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Residence Inn</td><td>$118.14</td><td>3.8%</td><td>79.0%</td><td>0.6%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$149.56</td><td>3.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Composite North American Limited-Service^-4</td><td>$106.20</td><td>2.8%</td><td>75.0%</td><td>0.5%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$141.68</td><td>2.1%</td></tr><tr><td>North American - All^-5</td><td>$147.48</td><td>2.5%</td><td>75.8%</td><td>0.5%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$194.64</td><td>1.8%</td></tr></table> Comparable?Systemwide North American Properties <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">RevPAR</td><td colspan="3">Occupancy</td><td colspan="2">Average Daily Rate</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2016</td><td>Change vs. 2015</td><td>2016</td><td colspan="2">Change vs. 2015</td><td>2016</td><td>Change vs. 2015</td></tr><tr><td>JW Marriott</td><td>$178.91</td><td>3.5%</td><td>76.0%</td><td>1.3%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$235.47</td><td>1.8%</td></tr><tr><td>The Ritz-Carlton</td><td>$252.40</td><td>3.6%</td><td>71.9%</td><td>1.0%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$350.99</td><td>2.2%</td></tr><tr><td>W Hotels</td><td>$239.94</td><td>-2.2%</td><td>81.7%</td><td>0.2%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$293.82</td><td>-2.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Composite North American Luxury^-1</td><td>$231.99</td><td>2.8%</td><td>76.0%</td><td>1.2%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$305.36</td><td>1.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Marriott Hotels</td><td>$124.39</td><td>2.0%</td><td>72.4%</td><td>0.3%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$171.92</td><td>1.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Sheraton</td><td>$115.58</td><td>2.4%</td><td>73.3%</td><td>0.3%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$157.73</td><td>2.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Westin</td><td>$152.94</td><td>2.4%</td><td>76.9%</td><td>0.1%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$198.98</td><td>2.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Composite North American Upper Upscale^-2</td><td>$130.44</td><td>2.5%</td><td>73.9%</td><td>0.4%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$176.52</td><td>1.9%</td></tr><tr><td>North American Full-Service^-3</td><td>$141.11</td><td>2.6%</td><td>74.1%</td><td>0.5%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$190.41</td><td>1.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Courtyard</td><td>$101.49</td><td>1.9%</td><td>72.9%</td><td>—%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$139.24</td><td>1.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Residence Inn</td><td>$112.78</td><td>2.4%</td><td>79.0%</td><td>-0.1%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$142.78</td><td>2.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Fairfield Inn & Suites</td><td>$77.96</td><td>1.2%</td><td>70.1%</td><td>-0.5%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$111.20</td><td>1.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Composite North American Limited-Service^-4</td><td>$96.62</td><td>2.0%</td><td>74.2%</td><td>—%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$130.15</td><td>2.0%</td></tr><tr><td>North American - All^-5</td><td>$116.47</td><td>2.3%</td><td>74.2%</td><td>0.2%</td><td>pts.</td><td>$157.00</td><td>2.0%</td></tr></table> (1) Includes JW Marriott, The Ritz-Carlton, W Hotels, The Luxury Collection, St. Regis, and EDITION. (2) Includes Marriott Hotels, Sheraton, Westin, Renaissance, Autograph Collection, Gaylord Hotels, Le Méridien, and Tribute Portfolio. (3) Includes Composite North American Luxury and Composite North American Upper Upscale. (4) Includes Courtyard, Residence Inn, Fairfield Inn & Suites, SpringHill Suites, and TownePlace Suites. Systemwide also includes Four Points, Aloft, and Element. (5) Includes North American Full-Service and Composite North American Limited-Service. Table of Contents Global Brand Concepts American Living Launched exclusively at JCPenney in February 2008, American Living offers classic American style with a fresh, modern spirit and authentic sensibility. From everyday essentials to special occasion looks for the entire family to finely crafted bedding and home furnishings, American Living promises stylish clothing and home products that are exceptionally made and offered at an incredible value. American Living is available exclusively at JCPenney and JCP. com. Chaps Chaps translates the classic heritage and timeless aesthetic of Ralph Lauren into an accessible line for men, women, children and the home. From casual basics designed for versatility and ease of wear to smart, finely tailored silhouettes perfect for business and more formal occasions, Chaps creates interchangeable classics that are both enduring and affordable. The Chaps men’s collection is available at select department and specialty stores. The Chaps collections for women, children and the home are available exclusively at Kohl’s and Kohls. com. Our Wholesale Segment Our Wholesale segment sells our products to leading upscale and certain mid-tier department stores, specialty stores and golf and pro shops, both domestically and internationally. We have continued to focus on elevating our brand by improving in-store product assortment and presentation, and improving full-price sell-throughs to consumers. As of the end of Fiscal 2011, our Ralph Laurenbranded products were sold through approximately 10,000 doors worldwide and during Fiscal 2011, we invested approximately $35 million in related shop-within-shops primarily in domestic and international department and specialty stores. Department stores are our major wholesale customers in North America. In Europe, our wholesale sales are a varying mix of sales to both department stores and specialty shops, depending on the country. Our collection brands — Women’s Ralph Lauren Collection and Black Label and Men’s Purple Label and Black Label — are distributed through a limited number of premier fashion retailers. In addition, we sell excess and out-of-season products through secondary distribution channels, including our retail factory stores. In Japan, our wholesale products are distributed primarily through shop-within-shops at premiere and top-tier department stores, and the mix of business is weighted to Women’s Blue Label. In Asia (excluding Japan and South Korea), our wholesale products are sold at mid and toptier department stores, and the mix of business is primarily weighted to Men’s and Women’s Blue Label. In Asia and on a worldwide basis, products distributed through concessions-based sales arrangements are reported within our Retail segment (see “Our Retail Segment” for further discussion). Worldwide Distribution Channels The following table presents the number of doors by geographic location, in which Ralph Lauren-branded products distributed by our Wholesale segment were sold to consumers in our primary channels of distribution as of April 2, 2011:

Is the total amount of all elements in 2014 greater than that in 2013 for CHANGE IN PROJECTED BENEFIT OBLIGATION for Con Edison?

As of December 31, 2017, we had $1.238 billion of gross unrecognized tax benefits, of which a net $1.150 billion, if recognized, would affect our effective tax rate. As of December 31, 2016, we had $1.095 billion of gross unrecognized tax benefits, of which a net $1.006 billion, if recognized, would affect our effective tax rate. As of December 31, 2015, we had $1.056 billion of gross unrecognized tax benefits, of which a net $900 million, if recognized, would affect our effective tax rate. A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>Beginning Balance</td><td>$1,095</td><td>$1,056</td><td>$1,047</td></tr><tr><td>Additions based on positions related to the current year</td><td>134</td><td>47</td><td>32</td></tr><tr><td>Additions based on positions related to prior years</td><td>16</td><td>14</td><td>38</td></tr><tr><td>Reductions for tax positions of prior years</td><td>-3</td><td>-17</td><td>-36</td></tr><tr><td>Settlements with taxing authorities</td><td>-2</td><td>-3</td><td>-18</td></tr><tr><td>Statute of limitation expirations</td><td>-2</td><td>-2</td><td>-7</td></tr><tr><td>Ending Balance</td><td>$1,238</td><td>$1,095</td><td>$1,056</td></tr></table> We are subject to U. S. Federal income tax as well as income tax of multiple state and foreign jurisdictions. We have concluded all U. S. federal income tax matters through 2000, all foreign income tax matters through 2002 and substantially all material state and local income tax matters through 2005. We have received Notices of Deficiency from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) reflecting proposed audit adjustments for Guidant Corporation for its 2001 through 2006 tax years and Boston Scientific Corporation for its 2006 and 2007 tax years. The total incremental tax liability asserted by the IRS for the applicable periods is $1.162 billion plus interest. The primary issue in dispute for all years is the transfer pricing associated with the technology license agreements between domestic and foreign subsidiaries of Guidant. In addition, the IRS has proposed adjustments in connection with the financial terms of our Transaction Agreement with Abbott Laboratories pertaining to the sale of Guidant's vascular intervention business to Abbott Laboratories in April 2006. During 2014, we received a Revenue Agent Report from the IRS reflecting significant proposed audit adjustments to our 2008, 2009 and 2010 tax years based upon the same transfer pricing methodologies that the IRS applied to our 2001 through 2007 tax years. We do not agree with the transfer pricing methodologies applied by the IRS or its resulting assessment. We have filed petitions with the U. S. Tax Court contesting the Notices of Deficiency for the 2001 through 2007 tax years in challenge and submitted a letter to the IRS Office of Appeals protesting the Revenue Agent Report for the 2008 through 2010 tax years and requesting an administrative appeal hearing. The issues in dispute were scheduled to be heard in U. S. Tax Court in July 2016. On July 19, 2016, we entered into a Stipulation of Settled Issues with the IRS intended to resolve all of the aforementioned transfer pricing issues, as well as the issues related to our transaction with Abbott Laboratories, for the 2001 through 2007 tax years. The Stipulation of Settled Issues is contingent upon the IRS Office of Appeals applying the same basis of settlement to all transfer pricing issues for the Company’s 2008, 2009 and 2010 tax years as well as review by the United States Congress Joint Committee on Taxation. In October 2016, we reached an agreement in principle with IRS Office of Appeals as to the resolution of transfer pricing issues in 2008, 2009 and 2010 tax years, subject to additional calculations of tax as well as documentation to memorialize our agreement. In the event that the conditions in the Stipulation of Settled Items are satisfied, we expect to make net tax payments of approximately $275 million, plus interest through the date of payment with respect to the settled issues. If finalized, payments related to the resolution are expected in the next six months. We believe that our income tax reserves associated with these matters are adequate as of December 31, 2017 and we do not expect to recognize any additional charges related to resolution of this controversy. However, the final resolution of these issues is contingent and if the Stipulation of Settled Issues is not finalized, it could have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. We recognize interest and penalties related to income taxes as a component of income tax expense. We had $655 million accrued for gross interest and penalties as of December 31, 2017 and $572 million as of December 31, 2016. The increase in gross interest and penalties of $83 million was recognized in our consolidated statements of operations. We recognized net tax expense related to interest and penalties of $154 million in 2017, $46 million in 2016 and $37 million in 2015. The increase in our net tax expense related to interest and penalties as of December 31, 2017, as compared to December 31, 2016, is primarily attributable to remeasuring the future tax benefit of our accrued interest as a result of the TCJA. segment includes AWE and our share of earnings for our investment in ULA, which provides expendable launch services to the U. S. Government. Space Systems’ operating results included the following (in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Net sales</td><td>$9,409</td><td>$9,105</td><td>$9,202</td></tr><tr><td>Operating profit</td><td>1,289</td><td>1,171</td><td>1,187</td></tr><tr><td>Operating margin</td><td>13.7%</td><td>12.9%</td><td>12.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Backlog atyear-end</td><td>$18,900</td><td>$17,400</td><td>$20,300</td></tr></table> 2016 compared to 2015 Space Systems’ net sales in 2016 increased $304 million, or 3%, compared to 2015. The increase was attributable to net sales of approximately $410 million from AWE following the consolidation of this business in the third quarter of 2016; and approximately $150 million for commercial space transportation programs due to increased launch-related activities; and approximately $70 million of higher net sales for various programs (primarily Fleet Ballistic Missiles) due to increased volume. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in net sales of approximately $340 million for government satellite programs due to decreased volume (primarily SBIRS and MUOS) and the wind-down or completion of mission solutions programs. Space Systems’ operating profit in 2016 increased $118 million, or 10%, compared to 2015. The increase was primarily attributable to a non-cash, pre-tax gain of approximately $127 million related to the consolidation of AWE; and approximately $80 million of increased equity earnings from joint ventures (primarily ULA). These increases were partially offset by a decrease of approximately $105 million for government satellite programs due to lower risk retirements (primarily SBIRS, MUOS and mission solutions programs) and decreased volume. Adjustments not related to volume, including net profit booking rate adjustments, were approximately $185 million lower in 2016 compared to 2015.2015 compared to 2014 Space Systems’ net sales in 2015 decreased $97 million, or 1%, compared to 2014. The decrease was attributable to approximately $335 million lower net sales for government satellite programs due to decreased volume (primarily AEHF) and the wind-down or completion of mission solutions programs; and approximately $55 million for strategic missile and defense systems due to lower volume. These decreases were partially offset by higher net sales of approximately $235 million for businesses acquired in 2014; and approximately $75 million for the Orion program due to increased volume. Space Systems’ operating profit in 2015 decreased $16 million, or 1%, compared to 2014. Operating profit increased approximately $85 million for government satellite programs due primarily to increased risk retirements. This increase was offset by lower operating profit of approximately $65 million for commercial satellite programs due to performance matters on certain programs; and approximately $35 million due to decreased equity earnings in joint ventures. Adjustments not related to volume, including net profit booking rate adjustments and other matters, were approximately $105 million higher in 2015 compared to 2014. Equity earnings Total equity earnings recognized by Space Systems (primarily ULA) represented approximately $325 million, $245 million and $280 million, or 25%, 21% and 24% of this business segment’s operating profit during 2016, 2015 and 2014. Backlog Backlog increased in 2016 compared to 2015 primarily due to the addition of AWE’s backlog. Backlog decreased in 2015 compared to 2014 primarily due to lower orders for government satellite programs and the Orion program and higher sales on the Orion program. Trends We expect Space Systems’ 2017 net sales to decrease in the mid-single digit percentage range as compared to 2016, driven by program lifecycles on government satellite programs, partially offset by the recognition of AWE net sales for a full year in 2017 versus a partial year in 2016 following the consolidation of AWE in the third quarter of 2016. Operating profit (2) The following table shows the amounts of other venture capital investments held by the following consolidated funds and amounts attributable to SVBFG for each fund at December 31, 2014 , 2013 and 2012 : <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2014</td><td colspan="2">2013</td><td colspan="2">2012</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in thousands)</td><td>Carrying value(as reported)</td><td>Amount attributableto SVBFG</td><td>Carrying value(as reported)</td><td>Amount attributableto SVBFG</td><td>Carrying value(as reported)</td><td>Amount attributableto SVBFG</td></tr><tr><td>Silicon Valley BancVentures, LP</td><td>$3,291</td><td>$352</td><td>$6,564</td><td>$702</td><td>$43,493</td><td>$4,652</td></tr><tr><td>SVB Capital Partners II, LP</td><td>20,481</td><td>1,040</td><td>22,684</td><td>1,152</td><td>79,761</td><td>4,051</td></tr><tr><td>Capital Partners III, LP</td><td>41,055</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>SVB Capital Shanghai Yangpu Venture Capital Fund</td><td>6,377</td><td>431</td><td>3,591</td><td>243</td><td>3,837</td><td>259</td></tr><tr><td>Total other venture capital investments</td><td>$71,204</td><td>$1,823</td><td>$32,839</td><td>$2,097</td><td>$127,091</td><td>$8,962</td></tr></table> (3) Investments classified as other securities (fair value accounting) represent direct equity investments in public companies held by our consolidated funds. At December 31, 2014 , the amount primarily includes total unrealized gains of $75 million in one public company, FireEye. The extent to which any unrealized gains (or losses) will become realized is subject to a variety of factors, including, among other things, changes in prevailing market prices and the timing of any sales or distribution of securities and may also be constrained by lock-up agreements. None of the FireEye related investments currently are subject to a lock-up agreement. Loans The following table details the composition of the loan portfolio, net of unearned income, as of the five most recent year-ends: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in thousands)</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial loans:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Software and internet -1</td><td>$4,954,676</td><td>$4,102,636</td><td>$3,261,489</td><td>$2,492,849</td><td>$1,820,680</td></tr><tr><td>Hardware -1</td><td>1,131,006</td><td>1,213,032</td><td>1,118,370</td><td>952,303</td><td>641,052</td></tr><tr><td>Private equity/venture capital</td><td>4,582,906</td><td>2,386,054</td><td>1,732,699</td><td>1,117,419</td><td>1,036,201</td></tr><tr><td>Life science & healthcare -1</td><td>1,289,904</td><td>1,170,220</td><td>1,066,199</td><td>863,737</td><td>575,944</td></tr><tr><td>Premium wine</td><td>187,568</td><td>149,841</td><td>143,511</td><td>130,245</td><td>144,972</td></tr><tr><td>Other -1</td><td>234,551</td><td>288,904</td><td>315,453</td><td>342,147</td><td>375,928</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial loans</td><td>12,380,611</td><td>9,310,687</td><td>7,637,721</td><td>5,898,700</td><td>4,594,777</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate secured loans:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Premium wine -2</td><td>606,753</td><td>514,993</td><td>413,513</td><td>345,988</td><td>312,255</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer loans -3</td><td>1,118,115</td><td>873,255</td><td>685,300</td><td>534,001</td><td>361,704</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>39,651</td><td>30,743</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total real estate secured loans</td><td>1,764,519</td><td>1,418,991</td><td>1,098,813</td><td>879,989</td><td>673,959</td></tr><tr><td>Construction loans -4</td><td>78,626</td><td>76,997</td><td>65,742</td><td>30,256</td><td>60,178</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer loans</td><td>160,520</td><td>99,711</td><td>144,657</td><td>161,137</td><td>192,823</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans, net of unearned income -5(6)</td><td>$14,384,276</td><td>$10,906,386</td><td>$8,946,933</td><td>$6,970,082</td><td>$5,521,737</td></tr></table> (1) Because of the diverse nature of energy and resource innovation products and services, for our loan-related reporting purposes, ERI-related loans are reported under our hardware, software and internet, life science & healthcare and other commercial loan categories, as applicable. (2) Included in our premium wine portfolio are gross construction loans of $112 million , $112 million , $148 million , $111 million and $119 million at December 31, 2014 , 2013 , 2012 , 2011 and 2010 , respectively. (3) Consumer loans secured by real estate at December 31, 2014 , 2013 , 2012 , 2011 and 2010 were comprised of the following:

When does Premiums earned in As previously reported reach the largest value?

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS): <table><tr><td>CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS</td><td colspan="3">Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2015</td><td colspan="3">Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2014</td></tr><tr><td>AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS):</td><td></td><td rowspan="2">Effect of adoption of new accounting policy</td><td></td><td></td><td rowspan="2">Effect of adoption of new accounting policy</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>As previously reported</td><td>As adopted</td><td>As previously reported</td><td>As adopted</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in thousands)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>REVENUES:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Premiums earned</td><td>$5,481,459</td><td>$-188,617</td><td>$5,292,842</td><td>$5,169,135</td><td>$-125,428</td><td>$5,043,707</td></tr><tr><td>Net investment income</td><td>473,825</td><td>-352</td><td>473,473</td><td>530,570</td><td>-85</td><td>530,485</td></tr><tr><td>Other income (expense)</td><td>60,435</td><td>27,845</td><td>88,280</td><td>18,437</td><td>13,871</td><td>32,308</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenues</td><td>5,837,889</td><td>-161,124</td><td>5,676,765</td><td>5,790,589</td><td>-111,642</td><td>5,678,947</td></tr><tr><td>CLAIMS AND EXPENSES:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Incurred losses and loss adjustment expenses</td><td>3,101,915</td><td>-37,200</td><td>3,064,715</td><td>2,906,534</td><td>-30,598</td><td>2,875,936</td></tr><tr><td>Commission, brokerage, taxes and fees</td><td>1,202,036</td><td>-18,390</td><td>1,183,646</td><td>1,135,586</td><td>-14,441</td><td>1,121,145</td></tr><tr><td>Other underwriting expenses</td><td>265,984</td><td>-8,915</td><td>257,069</td><td>240,400</td><td>-7,296</td><td>233,104</td></tr><tr><td>Total claims and expenses</td><td>4,629,380</td><td>-64,505</td><td>4,564,875</td><td>4,344,474</td><td>-52,335</td><td>4,292,139</td></tr><tr><td>INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE TAXES</td><td>1,208,509</td><td>-96,619</td><td>1,111,890</td><td>1,446,115</td><td>-59,307</td><td>1,386,808</td></tr><tr><td>NET INCOME (LOSS)</td><td>1,074,488</td><td>-96,619</td><td>977,869</td><td>1,258,463</td><td>-59,307</td><td>1,199,156</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests</td><td>-96,619</td><td>96,619</td><td>-</td><td>-59,307</td><td>59,307</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>NET INCOME (LOSS) ATTRIBUTABLE TO EVEREST RE GROUP</td><td>977,869</td><td>-977,869</td><td>-</td><td>1,199,156</td><td>-1,199,156</td><td>-</td></tr></table> <table><tr><td>CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS:</td><td colspan="3">Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2015</td><td colspan="3">Twelve Months Ended December 31, 2014</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in thousands)</td><td>As previously reported</td><td>Effect of adoption of new accounting policy</td><td>As adopted</td><td>As previously reported</td><td>Effect of adoption of new accounting policy</td><td>As adopted</td></tr><tr><td>CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss)</td><td>$1,074,488</td><td>$-96,619</td><td>$977,869</td><td>$1,258,463</td><td>$-59,307</td><td>$1,199,156</td></tr><tr><td>Decrease (increase) in premiums receivable</td><td>-93,837</td><td>-4,374</td><td>-98,211</td><td>45,282</td><td>3,089</td><td>48,371</td></tr><tr><td>Decrease (increase) in funds held by reinsureds, net</td><td>31,225</td><td>-75,000</td><td>-43,775</td><td>-1,835</td><td>-</td><td>-1,835</td></tr><tr><td>Decrease (increase) in reinsurance receivables</td><td>-240,414</td><td>-24,689</td><td>-265,103</td><td>-186,014</td><td>-24,634</td><td>-210,648</td></tr><tr><td>Decrease (increase) in prepaid reinsurance premiums</td><td>-14,486</td><td>-7,333</td><td>-21,819</td><td>-79,086</td><td>956</td><td>-78,130</td></tr><tr><td>Increase (decrease) in other net payable to reinsurers</td><td>38,262</td><td>5,465</td><td>43,727</td><td>29,410</td><td>-1,102</td><td>28,308</td></tr><tr><td>Change in other assets and liabilities, net</td><td>264</td><td>-9,198</td><td>-8,934</td><td>35,419</td><td>-178,054</td><td>-142,635</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities</td><td>1,308,382</td><td>-211,748</td><td>1,096,634</td><td>1,313,821</td><td>-259,059</td><td>1,054,762</td></tr><tr><td>CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net change in short-term investments</td><td>-98,903</td><td>440,636</td><td>341,733</td><td>-497,983</td><td>421,500</td><td>-76,483</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities</td><td>-1,121,737</td><td>440,636</td><td>-681,101</td><td>-1,180,072</td><td>421,500</td><td>-758,572</td></tr><tr><td>CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Third party investment in redeemable noncontrolling interest</td><td>266,848</td><td>-266,848</td><td>-</td><td>136,200</td><td>-136,200</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Subscription advances for third party redeemable noncontrolling interest</td><td>30,000</td><td>-30,000</td><td>-</td><td>40,000</td><td>-40,000</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Dividends paid on third party investment in redeemable noncontrolling interest</td><td>-68,158</td><td>68,158</td><td>-</td><td>-10,334</td><td>10,334</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities</td><td>-332,879</td><td>-228,690</td><td>-561,569</td><td>-312,232</td><td>-165,866</td><td>-478,098</td></tr><tr><td>EFFECT OF EXCHANGE RATE CHANGES ON CASH</td><td>-7,582</td><td>-198</td><td>-7,780</td><td>4,575</td><td>3,425</td><td>8,000</td></tr></table> CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS: The following table presents a reconciliation of beginning and ending reserve balances for the periods indicated on a GAAP basis: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Gross reserves at beginning of period</td><td>$9,951.8</td><td>$9,720.8</td><td>$9,673.2</td></tr><tr><td>Incurred related to:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Current year</td><td>3,434.9</td><td>3,129.7</td><td>2,915.6</td></tr><tr><td>Prior years</td><td>-295.3</td><td>-65.0</td><td>-39.7</td></tr><tr><td>Total incurred losses</td><td>3,139.6</td><td>3,064.7</td><td>2,875.9</td></tr><tr><td>Paid related to:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Current year</td><td>745.6</td><td>690.0</td><td>755.9</td></tr><tr><td>Prior years</td><td>2,043.0</td><td>2,180.1</td><td>2,088.8</td></tr><tr><td>Total paid losses</td><td>2,788.6</td><td>2,870.1</td><td>2,844.7</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign exchange/translation adjustment</td><td>-99.9</td><td>-190.0</td><td>-160.7</td></tr><tr><td>Change in reinsurance receivables on unpaid losses and LAE</td><td>109.4</td><td>226.4</td><td>176.9</td></tr><tr><td>Gross reserves at end of period</td><td>$10,312.3</td><td>$9,951.8</td><td>$9,720.8</td></tr><tr><td>(Some amounts may not reconcile due to rounding.)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table> Incurred prior years’ reserves decreased by $295.3 million, $65.0 million and $39.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The decrease for 2016 was attributable to favorable development in the reinsurance segments of $468.7 million related primarily to property and short-tail business in the U. S. , property business in Canada, Latin America, Middle East and Africa, as well as favorable development on prior year catastrophe losses, partially offset by $53.9 million of adverse development on A&E reserves. Part of the favorable development in the reinsurance segments related to the 2015 loss from the explosion at the Chinese port of Tianjin. In 2015, this loss was originally estimated to be $60.0 million. At December 31, 2016, this loss was projected to be $16.7 million resulting in $43.3 million of favorable development in 2016. The net favorable development in the reinsurance segments was partially offset by $173.4 million of unfavorable development in the insurance segment primarily related to run-off construction liability and umbrella program business. The decrease for 2015 was attributable to favorable development in the reinsurance segments of $217.2 million related to treaty casualty and treaty property reserves, partially offset by $152.1 million of unfavorable development in the insurance segment primarily related to umbrella program and construction liability business. The decrease for 2014 was attributable to favorable development in the reinsurance segments of $202.4 million related to treaty casualty, treaty property and catastrophe reserves, partially offset by $137.8 million development on A&E reserves and $25.0 million of unfavorable development in the insurance segment primarily related to umbrella program and construction liability business. Since the Company has operations in many countries, part of the Company’s loss and LAE reserves are in foreign currencies and translated to U. S. dollars for each reporting period. Fluctuations in the exchange rates for the currencies, period over period, affect the U. S. dollar amount of outstanding reserves. The translation adjustment line at the bottom of the table eliminates the impact of the exchange fluctuations from the reserve re-estimates. The Company’s loss reserving methodologies continuously monitor the emergence of loss and loss development trends, seeking, on a timely basis, to both adjust reserves for the impact of trend shifts and to factor the impact of such shifts into the Company’s underwriting and pricing on a prospective basis. Reserves for Asbestos and Environmental Losses and LAE. At December 31, 2016, the Company’s gross reserves for A&E claims represented 4.3% of its total reserves. The Company’s A&E liabilities stem from Mt. McKinley’s direct insurance business and Everest Re’s assumed reinsurance business. Liabilities related to Mt. McKinley’s direct business, which had been ceded to Bermuda Re previously, were retroceded to an affiliate of Clearwater Insurance Company in July 2015, concurrent with the sale of Mt. McKinley to Clearwater Insurance Company. There are significant uncertainties in estimating the amount of the Company’s potential losses from A&E claims and ultimate values cannot be estimated using traditional reserving techniques. See ITEM 7, “Management’s Discussion Other expense, net increased $0.8 million to $7.2 million in 2015 from $6.4 million in 2014. This increase was due to higher net losses on the combined foreign currency exchange rate changes on transactions denominated in foreign currencies and our foreign currency derivative financial instruments in 2015. Provision for income taxes increased $19.9 million to $154.1 million in 2015 from $134.2 million in 2014. Our effective tax rate was 39.9% in 2015 compared to 39.2% in 2014. Our effective tax rate for 2015 was higher than the effective tax rate for 2014 primarily due to increased non-deductible costs incurred in connection with our Connected Fitness acquisitions in 2015. Year Ended December 31, 2014 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2013 Net revenues increased $752.3 million, or 32.3%, to $3,084.4 million in 2014 from $2,332.1 million in 2013. Net revenues by product category are summarized below:

What was the total amount of Expenses in 2008 for Amount? (in thousand)

MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) (in thousands, except share and per share amounts) Had compensation expense for employee stock-based awards been determined based on the fair value at grant date consistent with SFAS No.123(R), the Company’s Net income (loss) for the year would have been increased or decreased to the pro forma amounts indicated below: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2005</td><td> 2004</td><td>2003</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>As reported</td><td>$8,142</td><td>$57,587</td><td>$4,212</td></tr><tr><td>Compensation expense</td><td>1,366</td><td>1,965</td><td>1,646</td></tr><tr><td>Pro forma</td><td>$6,776</td><td>$55,622</td><td>$2,566</td></tr><tr><td>Basic net income (loss) per common share</td><td>$0.29</td><td>$6.76</td><td>$-2.20</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted net income (loss) per common share</td><td>$0.23</td><td>$1.88</td><td>$-2.20</td></tr><tr><td>Basic net income (loss) per common share — pro forma</td><td>$0.24</td><td>$6.48</td><td>$-2.70</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted net income (loss) per common share — pro forma</td><td>$0.19</td><td>$1.82</td><td>$-2.70</td></tr></table> Basic and diluted earnings per share (“EPS”) in 2003 includes the effect of dividends accrued on our redeemable convertible preferred stock. In 2003, securities that could potentially dilute basic EPS in the future were not included in the computation of diluted EPS, because to do so would have been anti-dilutive. See Note 12, “Earnings Per Share”. Revenue Recognition The majority of the Company’s revenues are derived from commissions for trades executed on the electronic trading platform that are billed to its broker-dealer clients on a monthly basis. The Company also derives revenues from information and user access fees, license fees, interest and other income. Commissions are generally calculated as a percentage of the notional dollar volume of bonds traded on the electronic trading platform and vary based on the type and maturity of the bond traded. Under the transaction fee plans, bonds that are more actively traded or that have shorter maturities are generally charged lower commissions, while bonds that are less actively traded or that have longer maturities generally command higher commissions. Commissions are recorded on a trade date basis. The Company’s standard fee schedule for U. S. high-grade corporate bonds was revised in August 2003 to provide lower average transaction commissions for dealers who transacted higher U. S. high-grade volumes through the platform, while at the same time providing an element of fixed commissions over the two-year term of the plans. One of the revised plans that was suited for the Company’s most active broker-dealer clients included a fee cap that limited the potential growth in U. S. high-grade revenue. The fee caps were set to take effect at volume levels significantly above those being transacted at the time the revised transaction fee plans were introduced. Most broker-dealer clients entered into fee arrangements with respect to the trading of U. S. high-grade corporate bonds that included both a fixed component and a variable component. These agreements had been scheduled to expire during the third quarter of 2005. On June 1, 2005, the Company introduced a new fee plan primarily for secondary market transactions in U. S. high-grade corporate bonds executed on its electronic trading platform. As of December 31, 2005, 17 of the Company’s U. S. high-grade broker-dealer clients have signed new two-year agreements that supersede the fee arrangements that were entered into with many of its broker-dealer clients during the third quarter of 2003. The new plan incorporates higher fixed monthly fees and lower variable fees for brokerdealer clients than the previous U. S. high-grade corporate transaction fee plans described above, and incorporates volume incentives to broker-dealer clients that are designed to increase the volume of transactions effected on the Company’s The U. S. high-grade average variable transaction fee per million increased from $84 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $121 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008 due to the longer maturity of trades executed on the platform, for which we charge higher commissions. The Eurobond average variable transaction fee per million decreased from $138 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $112 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008, principally from the introduction of the new European high-grade fee plan. Other average variable transaction fee per million increased from $121 per million for the year ended December 31, 2007 to $158 per million for the year ended December 31, 2008 primarily due to a higher percentage of volume in products that carry higher fees per million, principally high-yield. Technology Products and Services. Technology products and services revenues increased by $7.8 million to $8.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $0.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. The increase was primarily a result of the Greenline acquisition. Information and User Access Fees. Information and user access fees increased by $0.1 million or 2.5% to $6.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $5.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. Investment Income. Investment income decreased by $1.8 million or 33.7% to $3.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $5.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. This decrease was primarily due to lower interest rates. Other. Other revenues decreased by $0.1 million or 4.4% to $1.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $1.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. Expenses Our expenses for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the resulting dollar and percentage changes, were as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2008</td><td colspan="2">2007</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>% of</td><td></td><td>% of</td><td>$</td><td>%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> $</td><td>Revenues</td><td> $</td><td>Revenues</td><td>Change</td><td>Change</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">($ in thousands)</td></tr><tr><td> Expenses</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Employee compensation and benefits</td><td>$43,810</td><td>47.1%</td><td>$43,051</td><td>46.0%</td><td>$759</td><td>1.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation and amortization</td><td>7,879</td><td>8.5</td><td>7,170</td><td>7.7</td><td>709</td><td>9.9</td></tr><tr><td>Technology and communications</td><td>8,311</td><td>8.9</td><td>7,463</td><td>8.0</td><td>848</td><td>11.4</td></tr><tr><td>Professional and consulting fees</td><td>8,171</td><td>8.8</td><td>7,639</td><td>8.2</td><td>532</td><td>7.0</td></tr><tr><td>Occupancy</td><td>2,891</td><td>3.1</td><td>3,275</td><td>3.5</td><td>-384</td><td>-11.7</td></tr><tr><td>Marketing and advertising</td><td>3,032</td><td>3.3</td><td>1,905</td><td>2.0</td><td>1,127</td><td>59.2</td></tr><tr><td>General and administrative</td><td>6,157</td><td>6.6</td><td>5,889</td><td>6.3</td><td>268</td><td>4.6</td></tr><tr><td>Total expenses</td><td>$80,251</td><td>86.2%</td><td>$76,392</td><td>81.6%</td><td>$3,859</td><td>5.1%</td></tr></table> $43.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $43.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. This increase was primarily attributable to higher wages of $2.4 million, severance costs of $1.0 million and stockbased compensation expense of $1.4 million, offset by reduced incentive compensation of $3.6 million. The higher wages were primarily a result of the Greenline acquisition. The total number of employees increased to 185 as of December 31, 2008 from 182 as of December 31, 2007. As a percentage of total revenues, employee compensation and benefits expense increased to 47.1% for the year ended December 31, 2008 from 46.0% for the year ended December 31, 2007. Depreciation and Amortization. Depreciation and amortization expense increased by $0.7 million or 9.9% to $7.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 from $7.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2007. An increase in amortization of intangible assets of $1.3 million and the TWS impairment charge of $0.7 million were offset by a decline in depreciation and amortization of hardware and software development costs of $1.3 million. MARKETAXESS HOLDINGS INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) of this standard had no material effect on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition and Consolidated Statements of Operations. Reclassifications Certain reclassifications have been made to the prior years’ financial statements in order to conform to the current year presentation. Such reclassifications had no effect on previously reported net income. On March 5, 2008, the Company acquired all of the outstanding capital stock of Greenline Financial Technologies, Inc. (“Greenline”), an Illinois-based provider of integration, testing and management solutions for FIX-related products and services designed to optimize electronic trading of fixed-income, equity and other exchange-based products, and approximately ten percent of the outstanding capital stock of TradeHelm, Inc. , a Delaware corporation that was spun-out from Greenline immediately prior to the acquisition. The acquisition of Greenline broadens the range of technology services that the Company offers to institutional financial markets, provides an expansion of the Company’s client base, including global exchanges and hedge funds, and further diversifies the Company’s revenues beyond the core electronic credit trading products. The results of operations of Greenline are included in the Consolidated Financial Statements from the date of the acquisition. The aggregate consideration for the Greenline acquisition was $41.1 million, comprised of $34.7 million in cash, 725,923 shares of common stock valued at $5.8 million and $0.6 million of acquisition-related costs. In addition, the sellers were eligible to receive up to an aggregate of $3.0 million in cash, subject to Greenline attaining certain earnout targets in 2008 and 2009. A total of $1.4 million was paid to the sellers in 2009 based on the 2008 earn-out target, bringing the aggregate consideration to $42.4 million. The 2009 earn-out target was not met. A total of $2.0 million of the purchase price, which had been deposited into escrow accounts to satisfy potential indemnity claims, was distributed to the sellers in March 2009. The shares of common stock issued to each selling shareholder of Greenline were released in two equal installments on December 20, 2008 and December 20, 2009, respectively. The value ascribed to the shares was discounted from the market value to reflect the non-marketability of such shares during the restriction period. The purchase price allocation is as follows (in thousands): <table><tr><td>Cash</td><td>$6,406</td></tr><tr><td>Accounts receivable</td><td>2,139</td></tr><tr><td>Amortizable intangibles</td><td>8,330</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill</td><td>29,405</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred tax assets, net</td><td>3,410</td></tr><tr><td>Other assets, including investment in TradeHelm</td><td>1,429</td></tr><tr><td>Accounts payable, accrued expenses and deferred revenue</td><td>-8,701</td></tr><tr><td>Total purchase price</td><td>$42,418</td></tr></table> The amortizable intangibles include $3.2 million of acquired technology, $3.3 million of customer relationships, $1.3 million of non-competition agreements and $0.5 million of tradenames. Useful lives of ten years and five years have been assigned to the customer relationships intangible and all other amortizable intangibles, respectively. The identifiable intangible assets and goodwill are not deductible for tax purposes. The following unaudited pro forma consolidated financial information reflects the results of operations of the Company for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, as if the acquisition of Greenline had occurred as of the beginning of the period presented, after giving effect to certain purchase accounting adjustments. These pro forma results are not necessarily indicative of what the Company’s operating results would have been had the acquisition actually taken place as of the beginning of the earliest period presented. The pro forma financial information

What was the total amount of Volume – Units excluding those Volume – Units greater than 1000 inEMEA Latin America

Table of Contents ADOBE INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) Goodwill, Purchased Intangibles and Other Long-Lived Assets Goodwill is assigned to one or more reporting segments on the date of acquisition. We review our goodwill for impairment annually during our second quarter of each fiscal year and between annual tests if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of any one of our reporting units below its respective carrying amount. In performing our goodwill impairment test, we first perform a qualitative assessment, which requires that we consider events or circumstances including macroeconomic conditions, industry and market considerations, cost factors, overall financial performance, changes in management or key personnel, changes in strategy, changes in customers, changes in the composition or carrying amount of a reporting segment’s net assets and changes in our stock price. If, after assessing the totality of events or circumstances, we determine that it is more likely than not that the fair values of our reporting segments are greater than the carrying amounts, then the quantitative goodwill impairment test is not performed. If the qualitative assessment indicates that the quantitative analysis should be performed, we then evaluate goodwill for impairment by comparing the fair value of each of our reporting segments to its carrying value, including the associated goodwill. To determine the fair values, we use the equal weighting of the market approach based on comparable publicly traded companies in similar lines of businesses and the income approach based on estimated discounted future cash flows. Our cash flow assumptions consider historical and forecasted revenue, operating costs and other relevant factors. We completed our annual goodwill impairment test in the second quarter of fiscal 2018. We determined, after performing a qualitative review of each reporting segment, that it is more likely than not that the fair value of each of our reporting segments substantially exceeds the respective carrying amounts. Accordingly, there was no indication of impairment and the quantitative goodwill impairment test was not performed. We did not identify any events or changes in circumstances since the performance of our annual goodwill impairment test that would require us to perform another goodwill impairment test during the fiscal year. We amortize intangible assets with finite lives over their estimated useful lives and review them for impairment whenever an impairment indicator exists. We continually monitor events and changes in circumstances that could indicate carrying amounts of our long-lived assets, including our intangible assets may not be recoverable. When such events or changes in circumstances occur, we assess recoverability by determining whether the carrying value of such assets will be recovered through the undiscounted expected future cash flows. If the future undiscounted cash flows are less than the carrying amount of these assets, we recognize an impairment loss based on any excess of the carrying amount over the fair value of the assets. We did not recognize any intangible asset impairment charges in fiscal 2018, 2017 or 2016. During fiscal 2018, our intangible assets were amortized over their estimated useful lives ranging from 1 to 14 years. Amortization is based on the pattern in which the economic benefits of the intangible asset will be consumed or on a straight-line basis when the consumption pattern is not apparent. The weighted average useful lives of our intangible assets were as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td>Weighted AverageUseful Life (years)</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased technology</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Customer contracts and relationships</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Trademarks</td><td>9</td></tr><tr><td>Acquired rights to use technology</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>Backlog</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Other intangibles</td><td>4</td></tr></table> Income Taxes We use the asset and liability method of accounting for income taxes. Under this method, income tax expense is recognized for the amount of taxes payable or refundable for the current year. In addition, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for expected future tax consequences of temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities, and for operating losses and tax credit carryforwards. We record a valuation allowance to reduce deferred tax assets to an amount for which realization is more likely than not. 2007 compared with 2006 The decrease in interest expense in 2007 compared with 2006 was primarily due to the following: ? a $7.2 million decrease due to the retirement of the Company’s 5.625% euro notes in July 2006; ? a decrease of $4.3 million related to higher capitalized interest during the construction of capital investment projects in 2007 compared with 2006; partially offset by; ? an increase of $1.8 million as a result of additional expense related to the compounding of interest on the amount payable pursuant to the asbestos settlement agreement; and ? an increase of $1.2 million due to the impact of higher interest rates on the Company’s $300.0 million of outstanding interest rate swaps entered into to effectively convert its 5.375% senior notes due April 2008 into floating rate debt.2006 compared with 2005 The decrease in interest expense in 2006 compared with 2005 was primarily due to the following: ? a $7.5 million decrease due to the retirement of the Company’s 5.625% euro notes in July 2006, and ? a decrease of $1.8 million related to higher capitalized interest during the construction of capital investment projects in 2006 compared with 2005; partially offset by; ? an increase of $5.0 million due to the impact of higher interest rates on the Company’s $300.0 million of outstanding interest rate swaps entered into to effectively convert its 5.375% senior notes due April 2008 into floating rate debt; and ? an increase of $1.7 million caused by additional expense related to the compounding of interest on the amount payable pursuant to the asbestos settlement agreement. Gain on Sale of Equity Method Investment On February 9, 2007, the Company sold its 50% investment in PolyMask Corporation to its joint venture partner, 3M Company (the ‘‘PolyMask transaction’’). The joint venture was formed in 1991 between the Company and 3M to produce and sell non-packaging surface protection films. Prior to the sale, the Company accounted for this joint venture under the equity method of accounting. The Company received an aggregate cash amount of $36.0 million for the transaction and other related assets and recorded a pre-tax gain of $35.3 million ($22.4 million after-tax) in the first quarter of 2007. This gain was reflected as a gain on sale of equity method investment on the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. The Company’s proportionate share of PolyMask Corporation’s net income was $0.4 million in 2007, $3.9 million in 2006 and $2.6 million in 2005 and was included in other income, net, on the consolidated statements of operations. The Company’s investment in this joint venture was not material to the Company’s consolidated financial position or results of operations. Other Income, Net The following table provides details of the Company’s other income, net: <table><tr><td></td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td><td>2005</td></tr><tr><td>Interest and dividend income</td><td>$19.9</td><td>$16.8</td><td>$11.1</td></tr><tr><td>Net foreign exchange transaction loss</td><td>-6.4</td><td>-4.1</td><td>-4.7</td></tr><tr><td>Asbestos settlement and related costs</td><td>-0.7</td><td>-1.6</td><td>-2.2</td></tr><tr><td>Advisory expenses incurred prior to ceasing work on an acquisition</td><td>-7.5</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Loss on sale of small product line</td><td>-6.8</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Gain on termination of forward starting interest rate swaps</td><td>3.7</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Other, net</td><td>9.8</td><td>10.9</td><td>11.7</td></tr><tr><td>Other income, net</td><td>$12.0</td><td>$22.0</td><td>$15.9</td></tr></table> Interest and dividend income increased in 2007 compared with 2006 and 2005 primarily due to higher interest rates on the Company’s investments and to a lesser extent higher cash balances. See Note 12, Global Operations We operate through our subsidiaries and have a presence in the U. S. and the 57 other countries/regions listed below, enabling us to distribute our products to our customers in 122 countries/regions. <table><tr><td>Argentina</td><td>Egypt</td><td>Italy</td><td>Peru</td><td>Sweden</td></tr><tr><td>Australia</td><td>Finland</td><td>Jamaica</td><td>Philippines</td><td>Switzerland</td></tr><tr><td>Austria</td><td>France</td><td>Japan</td><td>Poland</td><td>Taiwan</td></tr><tr><td>Belgium</td><td>Germany</td><td>Kenya</td><td>Portugal</td><td>Thailand</td></tr><tr><td>Brazil</td><td>Greece</td><td>Luxembourg</td><td>Romania</td><td>Turkey</td></tr><tr><td>Canada</td><td>Guatemala</td><td>Malaysia</td><td>Russia</td><td>Ukraine</td></tr><tr><td>Chile</td><td>Hong Kong</td><td>Mexico</td><td>Saudi Arabia</td><td>United Arab Emirates</td></tr><tr><td>China</td><td>Hungary</td><td>Morocco</td><td>Singapore</td><td>United Kingdom</td></tr><tr><td>Colombia</td><td>India</td><td>Netherlands</td><td>Slovakia</td><td>Uruguay</td></tr><tr><td>Costa Rica</td><td>Indonesia</td><td>New Zealand</td><td>South Africa</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Czech Republic</td><td>Ireland</td><td>Nigeria</td><td>South Korea</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Denmark</td><td>Israel</td><td>Norway</td><td>Spain</td><td></td></tr></table> In maintaining our foreign operations, we face risks inherent in these operations, such as currency fluctuations, inflation and political instability. Information on currency exchange risk appears in Part II, Item 7A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, which information is incorporated herein by reference. Other risks attendant to our foreign operations are set forth in Part I, Item 1A “Risk Factors,” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, which information is incorporated herein by reference. Information on the impact of currency exchange on our Consolidated Financial Statements appears in Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. ” Financial information showing net sales and total long-lived assets by geographic region for each of the two years ended December 31, 2017 appears in Note 4, “Segments,” which information is incorporated herein by reference. We maintain programs to comply with the various laws, rules and regulations related to the protection of the environment that we may be subject to in the many countries/regions in which we operate. See Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” under the caption “Environmental Matters. ” Employees As of December 31, 2017, we had approximately 15,000 employees worldwide. Approximately 5,800 of these employees were in the U. S. , with approximately 112 of these employees covered by collective bargaining agreements. Of the approximately 9,200 employees who were outside the U. S. , approximately 5,400 were covered by collective bargaining agreements. Collective bargaining agreements related to 15% of our employees, primarily outside the U. S. , will expire within the next year and we will be engaged in negotiations to attain new agreements. Many of the covered employees are represented by works councils or industrial boards, as is customary in the jurisdictions in which they are employed. We believe that our employee relations are satisfactory. Marketing, Distribution and Customers At December 31, 2017, we employed approximately 2,300 sales, marketing and customer service personnel throughout the world who sell and market our products to and through a large number of distributors, fabricators, converters, e-commerce and mail order fulfillment firms, and contract packaging firms as well as directly to end-users such as food processors, foodservice businesses, supermarket retailers, lodging, retail, pharmaceutical companies, healthcare facilities, medical device manufacturers, and other manufacturers. To support our Food Care and New Ventures customers, we operate three Packforum? innovation and learning centers that are located in the U. S. , France, and China. At Packforum? Centers, we assist customers in identifying the appropriate packaging materials and systems to meet their needs. We also offer ideation services, educational seminars, employee training and customized graphic design services to our customers. To assist our marketing efforts for our Product Care products and to provide specialized customer services, we operate 35 industrial Package Design Centers (PDCs) worldwide within our facilities. These PDCs are staffed with professional net sales excluding the impact of foreign currency translation, a non-U. S. GAAP measure, which we define as “constant dollar” and the change in net sales excluding acquisitions and divestitures and the impact of foreign currency translation, a non-U. S. GAAP measure, which we define as "organic. " We believe using constant and organic dollar measures aids in the comparability between periods as it eliminates the volatility of changes in foreign currency exchange rates and eliminates large fluctuations due to acquisitions or divestitures. <table><tr><td>(In millions)</td><td colspan="2">North America</td><td colspan="2">EMEA</td><td colspan="2">Latin America</td><td colspan="2">APAC</td><td colspan="2">Total</td></tr><tr><td>2017 Net Sales</td><td>$2,415.0</td><td>54.1%</td><td>$984.7</td><td>22.1%</td><td>$409.3</td><td>9.2%</td><td>$652.6</td><td>14.6%</td><td>$4,461.6</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Volume – Units</td><td>14.2</td><td>0.6%</td><td>15.1</td><td>1.5%</td><td>23.4</td><td>5.7%</td><td>15.0</td><td>2.3%</td><td>67.7</td><td>1.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Price/mix^-1</td><td>76.0</td><td>3.1%</td><td>13.7</td><td>1.4%</td><td>45.6</td><td>11.1%</td><td>-2.3</td><td>-0.4%</td><td>133.0</td><td>3.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Total organic change (non-U.S. GAAP)</td><td>90.2</td><td>3.7%</td><td>28.8</td><td>2.9%</td><td>69.0</td><td>16.8%</td><td>12.7</td><td>1.9%</td><td>200.7</td><td>4.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Acquisition</td><td>43.8</td><td>1.8%</td><td>—</td><td>—%</td><td>1.4</td><td>0.3%</td><td>68.6</td><td>10.5%</td><td>113.8</td><td>2.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Total constant dollar change (non-U.S. GAAP)</td><td>134.0</td><td>5.5%</td><td>28.8</td><td>2.9%</td><td>70.4</td><td>17.1%</td><td>81.3</td><td>12.4%</td><td>314.5</td><td>7.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign currency translation</td><td>-0.1</td><td>—%</td><td>24.5</td><td>2.5%</td><td>-62.6</td><td>-15.3%</td><td>-5.2</td><td>-0.8%</td><td>-43.4</td><td>-1.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Total change (U.S. GAAP)</td><td>133.9</td><td>5.5%</td><td>53.3</td><td>5.4%</td><td>7.8</td><td>1.8%</td><td>76.1</td><td>11.6%</td><td>271.1</td><td>6.1%</td></tr><tr><td>2018 Net Sales</td><td>$2,548.9</td><td>53.9%</td><td>$1,038.0</td><td>21.9%</td><td>$417.1</td><td>8.8%</td><td>$728.7</td><td>15.4%</td><td>$4,732.7</td><td></td></tr></table> (In millions) <table><tr><td>(In millions)</td><td colspan="2">North America</td><td colspan="2">EMEA</td><td colspan="2">Latin America</td><td colspan="2">APAC</td><td colspan="2">Total</td></tr><tr><td>2016 Net Sales</td><td>$2,237.8</td><td>53.1%</td><td>$962.7</td><td>22.9%</td><td>$396.8</td><td>9.4%</td><td>$614.0</td><td>14.6%</td><td>$4,211.3</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Volume – Units</td><td>161.4</td><td>7.2%</td><td>12.9</td><td>1.3%</td><td>5.9</td><td>1.5%</td><td>8.6</td><td>1.4%</td><td>188.8</td><td>4.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Price/mix^-1</td><td>12.9</td><td>0.6%</td><td>-7.9</td><td>-0.8%</td><td>4.0</td><td>1.0%</td><td>-1.0</td><td>-0.2%</td><td>8.0</td><td>0.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Total organic change (non-U.S. GAAP)</td><td>174.3</td><td>7.8%</td><td>5.0</td><td>0.5%</td><td>9.9</td><td>2.5%</td><td>7.6</td><td>1.2%</td><td>196.8</td><td>4.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Acquisition</td><td>—</td><td>—%</td><td>—</td><td>—%</td><td>—</td><td>—%</td><td>23.6</td><td>3.8%</td><td>23.6</td><td>0.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Total constant dollar change (non-U.S. GAAP)</td><td>174.3</td><td>7.8%</td><td>5.0</td><td>0.5%</td><td>9.9</td><td>2.5%</td><td>31.2</td><td>5.0%</td><td>220.4</td><td>5.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign currency translation</td><td>2.9</td><td>0.1%</td><td>17.0</td><td>1.8%</td><td>2.6</td><td>0.7%</td><td>7.4</td><td>1.2%</td><td>29.9</td><td>0.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Total change (U.S. GAAP)</td><td>177.2</td><td>7.9%</td><td>22.0</td><td>2.3%</td><td>12.5</td><td>3.2%</td><td>38.6</td><td>6.2%</td><td>250.3</td><td>6.0%</td></tr><tr><td>2017 Net Sales</td><td>$2,415.0</td><td>54.1%</td><td>$984.7</td><td>22.1%</td><td>$409.3</td><td>9.2%</td><td>$652.6</td><td>14.6%</td><td>$4,461.6</td><td></td></tr></table> (1) Our price/mix reported above includes the net impact of our pricing actions and rebates as well as the period-to-period change in the mix of products sold. Also included in our reported price/mix is the net effect of some of our customers purchasing our products in non-U. S. dollar or euro-denominated countries at selling prices denominated in U. S. dollars or euros. This primarily arises when we export products from the U. S. and euro-zone countries. The impact to our reported price/mix of these purchases in other countries at selling prices denominated in U. S. dollars or euros was not material in the periods included in the table above. Net Sales by Segment The following tables present the components of change in net sales by our segment reporting structure for the year ended December 31, 2018 compared with 2017 and for the year ended December 31, 2017 compared with 2016. We also present the change in net sales excluding the impact of foreign currency translation, a non-U. S. GAAP measure, which we define as “constant dollar” and the change in net sales excluding acquisitions and divestitures and the impact of foreign currency

what was the percentage change in the the fair value of our foreign currency forward contracts from 2008 to 2009

Company determined that its usage pattern for certain assets had changed significantly and revised the useful lives of certain equipment starting in 2009. This adjustment was considered to be a change in an accounting estimate. The impact to the Company in 2010 and 2009 were as follows (unaudited): <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5"> 2010</td></tr><tr><td>(millions of dollars)</td><td> Q1</td><td> Q2</td><td> Q3</td><td> Q4</td><td> Full Year</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income increase</td><td>$4.8</td><td>$4.7</td><td>$4.6</td><td>$4.7</td><td>$18.8</td></tr><tr><td>Net earnings increase attributable to BorgWarner Inc.</td><td>3.7</td><td>3.6</td><td>3.6</td><td>3.6</td><td>14.5</td></tr><tr><td>Earnings per share increase — Basic</td><td>$0.03</td><td>$0.03</td><td>$0.03</td><td>$0.03</td><td>$0.13</td></tr><tr><td>Earnings per share increase — Diluted</td><td>$0.03</td><td>$0.03</td><td>$0.03</td><td>$0.03</td><td>$0.11</td></tr></table> Revenue Recognition The Company recognizes revenue when title and risk of loss pass to the customer, which is usually upon shipment of product. Although the Company may enter into long-term supply agreements with its major customers, each shipment of goods is treated as a separate sale and the prices are not fixed over the life of the agreements. Impairment of Long-Lived Assets In accordance with ASC Topic 360, the Company periodically reviews the carrying value of its long-lived assets, whether held for use or disposal, including other intangible assets, when events and circumstances warrant such a review. Such events and circumstances include, but are not limited to, a significant decrease in market volumes, or project life, or a loss of a major customer application (i. e. , a “triggering event”). The Company’s impairment review is performed at each manufacturing, assembly, and technical site using data that is the basis for the Company’s annual budget (or forecast on an interim basis) and long-range plan (“LRP”). The annual budget and LRP include a five year projection of future cash flows based on actual new products and customer commitments. If a triggering event has occurred, the assets are identified by the operating location and management as potentially impaired and a recoverability review is performed by management. The review will determine if a current or future alternative use exists for additional customer applications or if redeployment of the assets to any of the Company’s other operating sites around the world is justified. The recoverability test compares projected undiscounted future cash flows to the carrying value of a product line or a specific customer application or asset grouping, as applicable. If the undiscounted cash flow test for recoverability identifies a possible impairment, management will perform a fair value analysis. Management determines fair value under ASC Topic 820 using the appropriate valuation technique of market, income or cost approach. Management believes that the estimates and assumptions are reasonable however, changes in assumptions with respect to future volumes, program project life or future asset use, in addition to future cash flows underlying these estimates could affect the Company’s fair value evaluations. Due to the sudden decline in the global automotive markets in 2008 and 2009, the Company reviewed the carrying value of its long-lived assets. As a result of these reviews, the Company recognized $36.3 million and $72.9 million in impairment of long-lived assets (i. e. , plant and equipment) as part of restructuring NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) NOTE 4 INCOME TAXES Earnings before income taxes and the provision for income taxes are presented in the following table. <table><tr><td>(millions of dollars)</td><td colspan="3">2010</td><td colspan="3">2009</td><td colspan="3">2008</td></tr><tr><td>Year Ended December 31,</td><td>U.S.</td><td>Non-U.S.</td><td>Total</td><td>U.S.</td><td>Non-U.S.</td><td>Total</td><td>U.S.</td><td>Non-U.S.</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>Earnings (loss) before taxes</td><td>$-26.7</td><td>$504.6</td><td>$477.9</td><td>$-138.5</td><td>$156.4</td><td>$17.9</td><td>$-123.8</td><td>$137.8</td><td>$14.0</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for income taxes:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Current:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Federal/foreign</td><td>14.0</td><td>117.7</td><td>131.7</td><td>-2.7</td><td>42.7</td><td>40.0</td><td>7.7</td><td>99.5</td><td>107.2</td></tr><tr><td>State</td><td>2.2</td><td>—</td><td>2.2</td><td>1.5</td><td>—</td><td>1.5</td><td>1.0</td><td>—</td><td>1.0</td></tr><tr><td>Total current</td><td>16.2</td><td>117.7</td><td>133.9</td><td>-1.2</td><td>42.7</td><td>41.5</td><td>8.7</td><td>99.5</td><td>108.2</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred</td><td>-48.9</td><td>-3.3</td><td>-52.2</td><td>-51.6</td><td>-8.4</td><td>-60.0</td><td>-44.7</td><td>-30.2</td><td>-74.9</td></tr><tr><td>Total provision for income taxes</td><td>$-32.7</td><td>$114.4</td><td>$81.7</td><td>$-52.8</td><td>$34.3</td><td>$-18.5</td><td>$-36.0</td><td>$69.3</td><td>$33.3</td></tr><tr><td>Effective tax rate</td><td>-122.5%</td><td>22.7%</td><td>17.1%</td><td>-38.1%</td><td>21.9%</td><td>-103.4%</td><td>-29.1%</td><td>50.3%</td><td>237.9%</td></tr></table> The provision for income taxes resulted in an effective tax rate for 2010 of 17.1% compared with rates of (103.4)% in 2009 and 237.9% in 2008. In the first quarter of 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) was signed into law. In addition, the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (“the Reconciliation Act”) was also passed, amending certain portions of the PPACA. The PPACA contains a provision eliminating tax deductibility of retiree health care costs to the extent of federal subsidies received by plan sponsors who provide retiree prescription drug benefits equivalent to Medicare Part D coverage. However, based upon the changes made in the Reconciliation Act, the tax benefit related to the Medicare Part D subsidies will be extended until December 31, 2012. For all tax years ending after December 31, 2012 there will no longer be a tax benefit for the Medicare Part D subsidies. Therefore, the impact to the Company for the loss of this future tax benefit (after December 31, 2012) was an additional tax expense of approximately $2.9 million in 2010. The provision for income taxes for the year ended December 31, 2010 included a favorable impact of $21.2 million from the reversal of the Company’s valuation allowance on U. S. based foreign tax credit carryforwards. The improving financial performance of the Company’s U. S. operations has resulted in greater certainty that the Company will be able to fully utilize existing foreign tax credit carryforwards. The Company’s annual effective tax rate for 2010 is 17.1% which includes the impact of the reversal of the Company’s valuation allowance on U. S. based foreign tax credit carryforwards, the change in tax legislation related to Medicare Part D subsidies, the additional tax expense associated with the BERU-Eichenauer equity investment gain and the tax benefit associated with the Company’s environmental litigation settlement. This rate differs from the U. S. statutory rate primarily due to foreign rates, which differ from those in the U. S. , the realization of certain business tax credits including foreign tax credits and favorable permanent differences between book and tax treatment for items, including equity in affiliates’ earnings. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) the Company’s December 31, 2010 Consolidated Balance Sheet. See Note 1 in the Consolidated Financial Statements for more information regarding the Company’s first quarter 2010 adoption of ASC Topic 860. (b) In 2006, the Company entered into several interest rate swaps that had the effect of converting $325.0 million of fixed rate notes to variable rates. In the first quarter of 2009, $100 million in interest rate swaps related to the Company’s 2009 fixed rate debt matured, and the Company terminated $150 million in interest rate swap agreements related to the Company’s 2016 fixed rate debt and $75 million of interest rate swap agreements related to the Company’s 2019 fixed rate debt. As a result of the first quarter 2009 swap terminations, a $34.5 million gain remained in debt and is being amortized over the remaining lives of the respective 2016 and 2019 debt. As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, the unamortized portion was $27.8 million and $31.4 million, respectively. Annual principal payments required as of December 31, 2010 are as follows (in millions of dollars) <table><tr><td>2011</td><td>$128.5</td></tr><tr><td>2012</td><td>384.1</td></tr><tr><td>2013</td><td>5.0</td></tr><tr><td>2014</td><td>0.2</td></tr><tr><td>2015</td><td>10.0</td></tr><tr><td>After 2015</td><td>682.4</td></tr><tr><td>Total Payments</td><td>$1,210.2</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Convertible Note Accretion</td><td>-25.3</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Unamortized Discounts</td><td>-4.5</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,180.4</td></tr></table> The Company’s long-term debt includes various financial covenants, none of which are expected to restrict future operations. On March 31, 2010, the Company replaced its $250 million multi-currency revolving credit facility with a new $550 million multi-currency revolving credit facility, which includes a feature that allows the Company to increase its borrowings to $600 million. The new facility provides for borrowings through March 31, 2013, and is guaranteed by the Company’s domestic subsidiaries. The Company has three key financial covenants as part of the credit agreement. These covenants are a net worth test, a debt compared to EBITDA (“Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization”) test, and an interest coverage test. The Company was in compliance with all covenants at December 31, 2010 and expects to remain compliant in future periods. At December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009 there were no outstanding borrowings under these facilities. On September 16, 2010, the Company issued $250 million in 4.625% senior notes due 2020. Interest is payable semi-annually on March 15 and September 15 of each year, beginning on March 15, 2011. The senior notes were issued under the Company’s $750 million universal shelf registration filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, leaving approximately $126 million available as of December 31, 2010. On April 9, 2009, the Company issued $373.8 million in convertible senior notes due April 15, 2012. Under ASC Topic 470, “Accounting for Convertible Debt Instruments That May be Settled in Cash Upon Conversion (Including Partial Cash Settlement)”, the Company must account for the convertible senior notes by bifurcating the instruments between their liability and equity components. The value of the debt component is based on the fair value of issuing a similar nonconvertible debt security. The equity component of the convertible debt security is calculated by deducting the value of the liability from the proceeds received at issuance. The Company’s December 31, 2010 Consolidated Balance Sheet includes debt of $348.5 million and capital in excess of par of $36.5 million. Additionally, ASC Topic 470 requires the Company to accrete the addition, we are exposed to gains and losses resulting from fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates on transactions generated by our international subsidiaries in currencies other than their local currencies. These gains and losses are primarily driven by inter-company transactions. These exposures are included in other income (expense), net on the consolidated statements of income. Since 2007, we have used foreign currency forward contracts to reduce the risk from exchange rate fluctuations on inter-company transactions and projected inventory purchases for our Canadian subsidiary. Beginning in December 2008, we began using foreign currency forward contracts in order to reduce the risk associated with foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations on inter-company transactions for our European subsidiary. We do not enter into derivative financial instruments for speculative or trading purposes. Based on the foreign currency forward contracts outstanding as of December 31, 2009, we receive US Dollars in exchange for Canadian Dollars at a weighted average contractual forward foreign currency exchange rate of 1.04 CAD per $1.00 and US Dollars in exchange for Euros at a weighted average contractual foreign currency exchange rate of 0.70 EUR per $1.00. As of December 31, 2009, the notional value of our outstanding foreign currency forward contracts for our Canadian subsidiary was $15.4 million with contract maturities of 1 month, and the notional value of our outstanding foreign currency forward contracts for our European subsidiary was $56.0 million with contract maturities of 1 month. The foreign currency forward contracts are not designated as cash flow hedges, and accordingly, changes in their fair value are recorded in other income (expense), net on the consolidated statements of income. The fair value of our foreign currency forward contracts was $0.3 million and $1.2 million as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. These amounts are included in prepaid expenses and other current assets on the consolidated balance sheet. Refer to Note 9 for a discussion of the fair value measurements. Other income (expense), net included the following amounts related to changes in foreign currency exchange rates and derivative foreign currency forward contracts:

Which year is Residential mortgage for Recoveries of loans and leases previously charged off the most?

As of 30 September 2016 and 2015, there were no assets or liabilities classified as discontinued operations relating to the Homecare business.5. BUSINESS RESTRUCTURING AND COST REDUCTION ACTIONS The charges we record for business restructuring and cost reduction actions have been excluded from segment operating income. Cost Reduction Actions In fiscal year 2016, we recognized an expense of $33.9 ($24.0 after-tax, or $.11 per share) for severance and other benefits related to cost reduction actions which resulted in the elimination of approximately 700 positions. The expenses related primarily to the Industrial Gases – Americas and the Industrial Gases – EMEA segments. The following table summarizes the carrying amount of the accrual for cost reduction actions at 30 September 2016: <table><tr><td></td><td>Severance and Other Benefits</td></tr><tr><td>2016 Charge</td><td>$33.9</td></tr><tr><td>Amount reflected in pension liability</td><td>-.9</td></tr><tr><td>Cash expenditures</td><td>-20.4</td></tr><tr><td>Currency translation adjustment</td><td>.3</td></tr><tr><td>30 September 2016</td><td>$12.9</td></tr></table> Business Realignment and Reorganization On 18 September 2014, we announced plans to reorganize the Company, including realignment of our businesses in new reporting segments and other organizational changes, effective as of 1 October 2014. As a result of this reorganization, we incurred severance and other charges. In fiscal year 2015, we recognized an expense of $207.7 ($153.2 after-tax, or $.71 per share). Severance and other benefits totaled $151.9 and related to the elimination of approximately 2,000 positions. Asset and associated contract actions totaled $55.8 and related primarily to a plant shutdown in the Corporate and other segment and the exit of product lines within the Industrial Gases – Global and Materials Technologies segments. The 2015 charges related to the segments as follows: $31.7 in Industrial Gases – Americas, $52.2 in Industrial Gases – EMEA, $10.3 in Industrial Gases – Asia, $37.0 in Industrial Gases – Global, $27.6 in Materials Technologies, and $48.9 in Corporate and other. During the fourth quarter of 2014, an expense of $12.7 ($8.2 after-tax, or $.04 per share) was incurred relating to the elimination of approximately 50 positions. The 2014 charge related to the segments as follows: $2.9 in Industrial Gases – Americas, $3.1 in Industrial Gases – EMEA, $1.5 in Industrial Gases – Asia, $1.5 in Industrial Gases – Global, $1.6 in Materials Technologies, and $2.1 in Corporate and other. Table V Allowance for Credit Losses <table><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan and lease losses, January 1</td><td>$14,419</td><td>$17,428</td><td>$24,179</td><td>$33,783</td><td>$41,885</td></tr><tr><td>Loans and leases charged off</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Residential mortgage</td><td>-866</td><td>-855</td><td>-1,508</td><td>-3,276</td><td>-4,294</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>-975</td><td>-1,364</td><td>-2,258</td><td>-4,573</td><td>-4,997</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. credit card</td><td>-2,738</td><td>-3,068</td><td>-4,004</td><td>-5,360</td><td>-8,114</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S. credit card</td><td>-275</td><td>-357</td><td>-508</td><td>-835</td><td>-1,691</td></tr><tr><td>Direct/Indirect consumer</td><td>-383</td><td>-456</td><td>-710</td><td>-1,258</td><td>-2,190</td></tr><tr><td>Other consumer</td><td>-224</td><td>-268</td><td>-273</td><td>-274</td><td>-252</td></tr><tr><td>Total consumer charge-offs</td><td>-5,461</td><td>-6,368</td><td>-9,261</td><td>-15,576</td><td>-21,538</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. commercial^-1</td><td>-536</td><td>-584</td><td>-774</td><td>-1,309</td><td>-1,690</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>-30</td><td>-29</td><td>-251</td><td>-719</td><td>-1,298</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial lease financing</td><td>-19</td><td>-10</td><td>-4</td><td>-32</td><td>-61</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S. commercial</td><td>-59</td><td>-35</td><td>-79</td><td>-36</td><td>-155</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial charge-offs</td><td>-644</td><td>-658</td><td>-1,108</td><td>-2,096</td><td>-3,204</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans and leases charged off</td><td>-6,105</td><td>-7,026</td><td>-10,369</td><td>-17,672</td><td>-24,742</td></tr><tr><td>Recoveries of loans and leases previously charged off</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Residential mortgage</td><td>393</td><td>969</td><td>424</td><td>165</td><td>377</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>339</td><td>457</td><td>455</td><td>331</td><td>517</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. credit card</td><td>424</td><td>430</td><td>628</td><td>728</td><td>838</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S. credit card</td><td>87</td><td>115</td><td>109</td><td>254</td><td>522</td></tr><tr><td>Direct/Indirect consumer</td><td>271</td><td>287</td><td>365</td><td>495</td><td>714</td></tr><tr><td>Other consumer</td><td>31</td><td>39</td><td>39</td><td>42</td><td>50</td></tr><tr><td>Total consumer recoveries</td><td>1,545</td><td>2,297</td><td>2,020</td><td>2,015</td><td>3,018</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. commercial^-2</td><td>172</td><td>214</td><td>287</td><td>368</td><td>500</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>35</td><td>112</td><td>102</td><td>335</td><td>351</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial lease financing</td><td>10</td><td>19</td><td>29</td><td>38</td><td>37</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S. commercial</td><td>5</td><td>1</td><td>34</td><td>8</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial recoveries</td><td>222</td><td>346</td><td>452</td><td>749</td><td>891</td></tr><tr><td>Total recoveries of loans and leases previously charged off</td><td>1,767</td><td>2,643</td><td>2,472</td><td>2,764</td><td>3,909</td></tr><tr><td>Net charge-offs</td><td>-4,338</td><td>-4,383</td><td>-7,897</td><td>-14,908</td><td>-20,833</td></tr><tr><td>Write-offs of PCI loans</td><td>-808</td><td>-810</td><td>-2,336</td><td>-2,820</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for loan and lease losses</td><td>3,043</td><td>2,231</td><td>3,574</td><td>8,310</td><td>13,629</td></tr><tr><td>Other^-3</td><td>-82</td><td>-47</td><td>-92</td><td>-186</td><td>-898</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan and lease losses, December 31</td><td>12,234</td><td>14,419</td><td>17,428</td><td>24,179</td><td>33,783</td></tr><tr><td>Reserve for unfunded lending commitments, January 1</td><td>528</td><td>484</td><td>513</td><td>714</td><td>1,188</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for unfunded lending commitments</td><td>118</td><td>44</td><td>-18</td><td>-141</td><td>-219</td></tr><tr><td>Other^-4</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-11</td><td>-60</td><td>-255</td></tr><tr><td>Reserve for unfunded lending commitments, December 31</td><td>646</td><td>528</td><td>484</td><td>513</td><td>714</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for credit losses, December 31</td><td>$12,880</td><td>$14,947</td><td>$17,912</td><td>$24,692</td><td>$34,497</td></tr></table> (1) Includes U. S. small business commercial charge-offs of $282 million, $345 million, $457 million, $799 million and $1.1 billion in 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. (2) Includes U. S. small business commercial recoveries of $57 million, $63 million, $98 million, $100 million and $106 million in 2015, 2014, 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. (3) Primarily represents the net impact of portfolio sales, consolidations and deconsolidations, and foreign currency translation adjustments. In addition, the 2011 amount includes a $449 million reduction in the allowance for loan and lease losses related to Canadian consumer card loans that were transferred to LHFS. (4) Primarily represents accretion of the Merrill Lynch purchase accounting adjustment and the impact of funding previously unfunded positions. NOTE 6 ACQUISITIONS AND JOINT VENTURES OLMUKSAN 2014: In May 2014, the Company conducted a voluntary tender offer for the remaining outstanding 12.6% public shares of Olmuksan. The Company also purchased outstanding shares of Olmuksan outside of the tender offer. As of December 31, 2014 and 2015, the Company owned 91.7% of Olmuksan's outstanding and issued shares.2013: On January 3, 2013, International Paper completed the acquisition (effective date of acquisition on January 1, 2013) of the shares of its joint venture partner, Sabanci Holding, in the Turkish corrugated packaging company, Olmuksa International Paper Sabanci Ambalaj Sanayi ve Ticaret A. S. , now called Olmuksan International Paper Ambalaj Sanayi ve Ticaret A. S. (Olmuksan), for a purchase price of $56 million. The acquired shares represented 43.7% of Olmuksan's shares. Prior to this acquisition, International Paper held a 43.7% equity interest in Olmuksan. Because the transaction resulted in International Paper becoming the majority shareholder, owning 87.4% of Olmuksan's outstanding and issued shares, its completion triggered a mandatory call for tender of the remaining public shares which began in March 2013 and ended in April 2013, with no shares tendered. As a result, the 12.6% owned by other parties were considered non-controlling interests. Olmuksan's financial results have been consolidated with the Company's Industrial Packaging segment beginning January 1, 2013, the effective date which International Paper obtained majority control of the entity. Following the transaction, the Company's previously held 43.7% equity interest in Olmuksan was remeasured to a fair value of $75 million, resulting in a gain of $9 million. In addition, the cumulative translation adjustment balance of $17 million relating to the previously held equity interest was reclassified, as expense, from accumulated other comprehensive income. The final purchase price allocation indicated that the sum of the cash consideration paid, the fair value of the noncontrolling interest and the fair value of the previously held interest was less than the fair value of the underlying assets by $21 million, resulting in a bargain purchase price gain being recorded on this transaction. The aforementioned remeasurement of equity interest gain, the cumulative translation adjustment to expense, and the bargain purchase gain are included in the Net bargain purchase gain on acquisition of business in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations. The following table summarizes the final allocation of the purchase price to the fair value of assets and liabilities acquired as of January 1, 2013, which was completed in the fourth quarter of 2013. <table><tr><td>Cash and temporary investments</td><td>$5</td></tr><tr><td>Accounts and notes receivable</td><td>72</td></tr><tr><td>Inventory</td><td>31</td></tr><tr><td>Other current assets</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Plants, properties and equipment</td><td>106</td></tr><tr><td>Investments</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets acquired</td><td>227</td></tr><tr><td>Notes payable and current maturities of long-term debt</td><td>17</td></tr><tr><td>Accounts payable and accrued liabilities</td><td>27</td></tr><tr><td>Deferred income tax liability</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Postretirement and postemployment benefit obligation</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Total liabilities assumed</td><td>54</td></tr><tr><td>Noncontrolling interest</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td>Net assets acquired</td><td>$155</td></tr></table> Pro forma information related to the acquisition of Olmuksan has not been included as it does not have a material effect on the Company's consolidated results of operations. ORSA 2014: On April 8, 2014, the Company acquired the remaining 25% of shares of Orsa International Paper Embalangens S. A. (Orsa IP) from its joint venture partner, Jari Celulose, Papel e Embalagens S. A. (Jari), a Grupo Orsa company, for approximately $127 million, of which $105 million was paid in cash with the remaining $22 million held back pending satisfaction of certain indemnification obligations by Jari. International Paper will release the amount held back, or any amount for which we have not notified Jari of a claim, by March 30, 2016. An additional $11 million, which was not included in the purchase price, was placed in an escrow account pending resolution of certain open matters. During 2014, these open matters were successfully resolved, which resulted in $9 million paid out of escrow to Jari and correspondingly added to the final purchase consideration. The remaining $2 million was released back to the Company. As a result of this transaction, the Company reversed the $168 million of Redeemable noncontrolling interest included on the March 31, 2014 consolidated balance sheet. The net difference between the Redeemable noncontrolling interest balance plus $14 million of currency translation adjustment reclassified out of Other comprehensive income less the 25% purchase price was reflected as an increase to Retained earnings on the consolidated balance sheet.

What's the increasing rate of Secured debt in 2006 Ended December 31?

Undistributed earnings of $696.9 million from certain foreign subsidiaries are considered to be permanently reinvested abroad and will not be repatriated to the United States in the foreseeable future. Because those earnings are considered to be indefinitely reinvested, no domestic federal or state deferred income taxes have been provided thereon. If we were to make a distribution of any portion of those earnings in the form of dividends or otherwise, we would be subject to both U. S. income taxes (subject to an adjustment for foreign tax credits) and withholding taxes payable to the various foreign jurisdictions. Because of the availability of U. S. foreign tax credit carryforwards, it is not practicable to determine the domestic federal income tax liability that would be payable if such earnings were no longer considered to be reinvested indefinitely. A valuation allowance is provided against deferred tax assets when it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Changes to our valuation allowance during the years ended May 31, 2015 and 2014 are summarized below (in thousands): <table><tr><td>Balance at May 31, 2013</td><td>$-28,464</td></tr><tr><td>Utilization of foreign net operating loss carryforwards</td><td>2,822</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for foreign tax credit carryforward</td><td>18,061</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>382</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at May 31, 2014</td><td>-7,199</td></tr><tr><td>Utilization of foreign net operating loss carryforwards</td><td>3,387</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-11</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at May 31, 2015</td><td>$-3,823</td></tr></table> Net operating loss carryforwards of foreign subsidiaries totaling $12.4 million and U. S. net operating loss carryforwards previously acquired totaling $19.8 million at May 31, 2015 will expire between May 31, 2017 and May 31, 2033 if not utilized. Capital loss carryforwards of U. S. subsidiaries totaling $4.7 million will expire if not utilized by May 31, 2017. Tax credit carryforwards totaling $8.4 million at May 31, 2015 will expire between May 31, 2017 and May 31, 2023 if not utilized. We conduct business globally and file income tax returns in the U. S. federal jurisdiction and various state and foreign jurisdictions. In the normal course of business, we are subject to examination by taxing authorities around the world. As a result of events that occurred in the fourth quarter of the year ended May 31, 2015, management concluded that it was more likely than not that the tax positions in a foreign jurisdiction, for which we had recorded estimated liabilities of $65.6 million in other noncurrent liabilities on our consolidated balance sheet, would be sustained on their technical merits based on information available as of May 31, 2015. Therefore, the liability and corresponding deferred tax assets were eliminated as of May 31, 2015. The uncertain tax positions have been subject to an ongoing examination in that foreign jurisdiction by the tax authority. Discussions and correspondence between the tax authority and us during the fourth quarter indicated that the likelihood of the positions being sustained had increased. Subsequent to May 31, 2015, we received a final closure notice regarding the examination resulting in no adjustments to taxable income related to this matter for the tax returns filed for the periods ended May 31, 2010 through May 31, 2013. The unrecognized tax benefits were effectively settled with this final closure notice. We are no longer subjected to state income tax examinations for years ended on or before May 31, 2008, U. S. federal income tax examinations for fiscal years prior to 2012 and United Kingdom federal income tax examinations for years ended on or before May 31, 2013. Item 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA The following table sets forth selected consolidated financial and other information as of and for each of the years in the five-year period ended December 31, 2007. The table should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto, and Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, included elsewhere in this Report. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">Years Ended December 31, (In thousands, except per share data and apartment homes owned)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td><td>2005</td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td></tr><tr><td> Operating Data(a)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Rental income</td><td>$497,474</td><td>$463,719</td><td>$407,038</td><td>$306,691</td><td>$244,758</td></tr><tr><td>Loss before minority interests and discontinued operations</td><td>-100,596</td><td>-91,870</td><td>-63,499</td><td>-58,003</td><td>-59,187</td></tr><tr><td>Income from discontinued operations, net of minority interests</td><td>208,130</td><td>214,102</td><td>214,126</td><td>150,073</td><td>123,453</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>221,349</td><td>128,605</td><td>155,166</td><td>97,152</td><td>70,404</td></tr><tr><td>Distributions to preferred stockholders</td><td>13,911</td><td>15,370</td><td>15,370</td><td>19,531</td><td>26,326</td></tr><tr><td>Net income available to common stockholders</td><td>205,177</td><td>113,235</td><td>139,796</td><td>71,892</td><td>24,807</td></tr><tr><td>Common distributions declared</td><td>177,540</td><td>168,408</td><td>163,690</td><td>152,203</td><td>134,876</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average number of common shares outstanding — basic</td><td>134,016</td><td>133,732</td><td>136,143</td><td>128,097</td><td>114,672</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average number of common shares outstanding — diluted</td><td>134,016</td><td>133,732</td><td>136,143</td><td>128,097</td><td>114,672</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average number of common shares, OP Units, and common stock equivalents outstanding — diluted</td><td>146,936</td><td>147,981</td><td>150,141</td><td>145,842</td><td>136,975</td></tr><tr><td>Per share — basic and diluted:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Loss from continuing operations available to common stockholders, net of minority interests</td><td>$-0.02</td><td>$-0.75</td><td>$-0.54</td><td>$-0.61</td><td>$-0.86</td></tr><tr><td>Income from discontinued operations, net of minority interests</td><td>1.55</td><td>1.60</td><td>1.57</td><td>1.17</td><td>1.08</td></tr><tr><td>Net income available to common stockholders</td><td>1.53</td><td>0.85</td><td>1.03</td><td>0.56</td><td>0.22</td></tr><tr><td>Common distributions declared</td><td>1.32</td><td>1.25</td><td>1.20</td><td>1.17</td><td>1.14</td></tr><tr><td> Balance Sheet Data</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Real estate owned, at cost</td><td>$5,952,541</td><td>$5,820,122</td><td>$5,512,424</td><td>$5,243,296</td><td>$4,351,551</td></tr><tr><td>Accumulated depreciation</td><td>1,371,759</td><td>1,253,727</td><td>1,123,829</td><td>1,007,887</td><td>896,630</td></tr><tr><td>Total real estate owned, net of accumulated depreciation</td><td>4,580,782</td><td>4,566,395</td><td>4,388,595</td><td>4,235,409</td><td>3,454,921</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets</td><td>4,801,121</td><td>4,675,875</td><td>4,541,593</td><td>4,332,001</td><td>3,543,643</td></tr><tr><td>Secured debt</td><td>1,137,936</td><td>1,182,919</td><td>1,116,259</td><td>1,197,924</td><td>1,018,028</td></tr><tr><td>Unsecured debt</td><td>2,364,740</td><td>2,155,866</td><td>2,043,518</td><td>1,682,058</td><td>1,114,009</td></tr><tr><td>Total debt</td><td>3,502,676</td><td>3,338,785</td><td>3,159,777</td><td>2,879,982</td><td>2,132,037</td></tr><tr><td>Stockholders’ equity</td><td>1,019,393</td><td>1,055,255</td><td>1,107,724</td><td>1,195,451</td><td>1,163,436</td></tr><tr><td>Number of common shares outstanding</td><td>133,318</td><td>135,029</td><td>134,012</td><td>136,430</td><td>127,295</td></tr><tr><td> Other Data</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td> Cash Flow Data</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cash provided by operating activities</td><td>$250,578</td><td>$229,613</td><td>$248,186</td><td>$251,747</td><td>$234,945</td></tr><tr><td>Cash used in investing activities</td><td>-71,397</td><td>-149,973</td><td>-219,017</td><td>-595,966</td><td>-304,217</td></tr><tr><td>Cash (used in)/provided by financing activities</td><td>-178,105</td><td>-93,040</td><td>-21,530</td><td>347,299</td><td>70,944</td></tr><tr><td> Funds from Operations(b)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Funds from operations — basic</td><td>$247,210</td><td>$244,471</td><td>$238,254</td><td>$211,670</td><td>$193,750</td></tr><tr><td>Funds from operations — diluted</td><td>250,936</td><td>248,197</td><td>241,980</td><td>219,557</td><td>208,431</td></tr><tr><td> Apartment Homes Owned</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total apartment homes owned at December 31</td><td>65,867</td><td>70,339</td><td>74,875</td><td>78,855</td><td>76,244</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average number of apartment homes owned during the year</td><td>69,662</td><td>73,731</td><td>76,069</td><td>76,873</td><td>74,550</td></tr></table> (a) Reclassified to conform to current year presentation in accordance with FASB Statement No.144, “Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” as described in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements. (b) Funds from operations, or FFO, is defined as net income (computed in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles), excluding gains (or losses) from sales of depreciable property, premiums or original issuance costs associated with preferred stock redemptions, plus depreciation and amortization, and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. This definition conforms with the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trust’s definition issued in April 2002. We consider FFO in evaluating property acquisitions and our operating performance and believe that FFO should be considered along with, but not as an alternative to, net income and cash flows as a measure of our activities in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. FFO does not represent cash generated from operating activities in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and is not necessarily indicative of cash available to fund cash needs. RE3 is our subsidiary that focuses on development, land entitlement and short-term hold investments. RE3 tax benefits and gain on sales, net of taxes, is defined as net sales proceeds less a tax provision and the gross investment basis of the asset before accumulated depreciation. We consider FFO with RE3 tax benefits and gain on sales, net of taxes, to be a meaningful supplemental measure of performance because the short-term use of funds produce a profit that differs from the traditional long-term investment in real estate for REITs. For 2005, FFO includes $2.5 million of hurricane related insurance recoveries. For 2004, FFO includes a charge of $5.5 million to cover hurricane related expenses. For the years ended December 31, 2007, 2004 and 2003, distributions to preferred stockholders exclude $2.6 million, $5.7 million and $19.3 million, respectively, related to premiums on preferred stock repurchases. $1,138 per home, and major renovations totaled $71.8 million or $1,045 per home for the year ended December 31, 2007. The following table outlines capital expenditures and repair and maintenance costs for all of our communities, excluding real estate under development, condominium conversions and commercial properties, for the periods presented: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December 31, (dollars in thousands)</td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December 31, (per home)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2007</td><td> 2006</td><td>% Change</td><td> 2007</td><td> 2006</td><td>% Change</td></tr><tr><td>Turnover capital expenditures</td><td>$13,362</td><td>$14,214</td><td>-6.0%</td><td>$194</td><td>$197</td><td>-1.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Asset preservation expenditures</td><td>31,071</td><td>20,409</td><td>52.2%</td><td>452</td><td>283</td><td>59.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Total recurring capital expenditures</td><td>44,433</td><td>34,623</td><td>28.3%</td><td>646</td><td>480</td><td>34.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Revenue enhancing improvements</td><td>78,209</td><td>144,102</td><td>-45.7%</td><td>1,138</td><td>2,002</td><td>-43.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Major renovations</td><td>71,785</td><td>36,996</td><td>94.0%</td><td>1,045</td><td>514</td><td>103.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Total capital expenditures</td><td>$194,427</td><td>$215,721</td><td>-9.9%</td><td>$2,829</td><td>$2,996</td><td>-5.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Repair and maintenance expense</td><td>$42,518</td><td>$43,498</td><td>-2.3%</td><td>$619</td><td>$604</td><td>2.5%</td></tr></table> Total capital expenditures for our communities decreased $21.3 million or $167 per home for the year ended December 31, 2007 compared to the same period in 2006. This decrease was attributable to a $65.9 million decrease in revenue enhancing improvements at certain of our properties that was offset by an additional $9.8 million being invested in recurring capital expenditures and an additional $34.8 million being invested in major renovations as compared to the same period in 2006. We will continue to selectively add revenue enhancing improvements which we believe will provide a return on investment substantially in excess of our cost of capital. Recurring capital expenditures during 2008 are currently expected to be approximately $650 per home. Impairment of Long-Lived Assets We record impairment losses on long-lived assets used in operations when events and circumstances indicate that the assets might be impaired and the undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by the future operation and disposition of those assets are less than the net book value of those assets. Our cash flow estimates are based upon historical results adjusted to reflect our best estimate of future market and operating conditions and our estimated holding periods. The net book value of impaired assets is reduced to fair market value. Our estimates of fair market value represent our best estimate based upon industry trends and reference to market rates and transactions. Real Estate Investment Properties We purchase real estate investment properties from time to time and allocate the purchase price to various components, such as land, buildings, and intangibles related to in-place leases in accordance with FASB Statement No.141, “Business Combinations. ” The purchase price is allocated based on the relative fair value of each component. The fair value of buildings is determined as if the buildings were vacant upon acquisition and subsequently leased at market rental rates. As such, the determination of fair value considers the present value of all cash flows expected to be generated from the property including an initial lease-up period. We determine the fair value of in-place leases by assessing the net effective rent and remaining term of the lease relative to market terms for similar leases at acquisition. In addition, we consider the cost of acquiring similar leases, the foregone rents associated with the lease-up period, and the carrying costs associated with the lease-up period. The fair value of in-place leases is recorded and amortized as amortization expense over the remaining contractual lease period.

when pnc redeemed all shares of the series m preferred stock from the trust on december 10 , 2012 , what was the total cash cost of the redemption?

ADDITIONAL FINANCIAL INFORMATION OFF-BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS On December 31, 2016, other than operating leases, we had no material off-balance sheet arrangements. CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS AND COMMERCIAL COMMITMENTS The following tables present information about our contractual obligations and commercial commitments on December 31, 2016: <table><tr><td></td><td></td><td colspan="4">Payments Due by Period</td></tr><tr><td>Contractual Obligations</td><td>Total Amount Committed</td><td>Less Than 1 Year</td><td>1-3 Years</td><td>4-5 Years</td><td>More Than 5 Years</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt (a)</td><td>$4,791</td><td>$991</td><td>$162</td><td>$661</td><td>$2,977</td></tr><tr><td>Capital lease obligations</td><td>30</td><td>2</td><td>5</td><td>4</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>Operating leases</td><td>1,187</td><td>241</td><td>339</td><td>164</td><td>443</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase obligations (b)</td><td>26,155</td><td>11,783</td><td>9,938</td><td>3,443</td><td>991</td></tr><tr><td>Other long-term liabilities (c)</td><td>18,169</td><td>3,004</td><td>2,287</td><td>1,783</td><td>11,095</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$50,332</td><td>$16,021</td><td>$12,731</td><td>$6,055</td><td>$15,525</td></tr></table> (a) Includes scheduled interest payments. See Note J to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 for a discussion of long-term debt. (b) Includes amounts committed under legally enforceable agreements for goods and services with defined terms as to quantity, price and timing of delivery. This amount includes $16.3 billion of purchase obligations for products and services to be delivered under firm government contracts under which we would expect full recourse under normal contract termination clauses. (c) Represents other long-term liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheet, including the current portion of these liabilities. The projected timing of cash flows associated with these obligations is based on management’s estimates, which are based largely on historical experience. This amount also includes all liabilities under our defined-benefit retirement plans. See Note P to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 for information regarding these liabilities and the plan assets available to satisfy them. <table><tr><td></td><td></td><td colspan="4">Amount of Commitment Expiration by Period</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial Commitments</td><td>Total Amount Committed</td><td>Less Than 1 Year</td><td>1-3 Years</td><td>4-5 Years</td><td>More Than 5 Years</td></tr><tr><td>Letters of credit and guarantees*</td><td>$1,044</td><td>$560</td><td>$257</td><td>$68</td><td>$159</td></tr></table> * See Note N to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 for a discussion of letters of credit. APPLICATION OF CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations is based on our Consolidated Financial Statements, which have been prepared in accordance with GAAP. The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires that we make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, as well as the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the period. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates, including most pervasively those related to various assumptions and projections for our long-term contracts and programs. Other significant estimates include those related to goodwill and other intangible assets, income taxes, pension and other post-retirement benefits, workers’ compensation, warranty obligations and litigation and other contingencies. We employ judgment in making our estimates but they are based on historical experience, currently available information and various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. The results of these estimates form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are not readily available from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates. We believe that our judgment is applied consistently and produces financial information that fairly depicts the results of operations for all periods presented. In our opinion, the following policies are critical and require the use of significant judgment in their application: Revenue Recognition We account for revenue and earnings using the percentage-ofcompletion method. Under this method, we recognize contract costs and revenue as the work progresses, either as the products are produced or as services are rendered. We determine progress using either input measures (e. g. , costs incurred) or output measures (e. g. , contract milestones or units delivered), as appropriate to the circumstances. An input measure is used in most cases unless an output measure is identified that is reliably determinable and representative of progress toward completion. We estimate the profit on a contract as the difference between the total estimated revenue and expected costs to complete a contract and recognize that profit Table 66: Commercial Lending Asset Quality Indicators (a) <table><tr><td></td><td></td><td colspan="3">Criticized Commercial Loans</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>In millions</td><td>PassRated (b)</td><td>Special Mention (c)</td><td>Substandard (d)</td><td>Doubtful (e)</td><td>TotalLoans</td></tr><tr><td> December 31, 2012</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>$78,048</td><td>$1,939</td><td>$2,600</td><td>$145</td><td>$82,732</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>14,898</td><td>804</td><td>1,802</td><td>210</td><td>17,714</td></tr><tr><td>Equipment lease financing</td><td>7,062</td><td>68</td><td>112</td><td>5</td><td>7,247</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased impaired loans</td><td>49</td><td>60</td><td>852</td><td>288</td><td>1,249</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial lending (f)</td><td>$100,057</td><td>$2,871</td><td>$5,366</td><td>$648</td><td>$108,942</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2011</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>$60,649</td><td>$1,831</td><td>$2,817</td><td>$257</td><td>$65,554</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>11,478</td><td>791</td><td>2,823</td><td>400</td><td>15,492</td></tr><tr><td>Equipment lease financing</td><td>6,210</td><td>48</td><td>153</td><td>5</td><td>6,416</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased impaired loans</td><td>107</td><td>35</td><td>542</td><td>168</td><td>852</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial lending (f)</td><td>$78,444</td><td>$2,705</td><td>$6,335</td><td>$830</td><td>$88,314</td></tr></table> (a) Based upon PDs and LGDs. (b) Pass Rated loans include loans not classified as “Special Mention”, “Substandard”, or “Doubtful”. (c) Special Mention rated loans have a potential weakness that deserves management’s close attention. If left uncorrected, these potential weaknesses may result in deterioration of repayment prospects at some future date. These loans do not expose us to sufficient risk to warrant a more adverse classification at this time. (d) Substandard rated loans have a well-defined weakness or weaknesses that jeopardize the collection or liquidation of debt. They are characterized by the distinct possibility that we will sustain some loss if the deficiencies are not corrected. (e) Doubtful rated loans possess all the inherent weaknesses of a Substandard rated loan with the additional characteristics that the weakness makes collection or liquidation in full improbable due to existing facts, conditions, and values. (f) Loans are included above based on their contractual terms as “Pass”, “Special Mention”, “Substandard” or “Doubtful”. CONSUMER LENDING ASSET CLASSES Home Equity and Residential Real Estate Loan Classes We use several credit quality indicators, including delinquency information, nonperforming loan information, updated credit scores, originated and updated LTV ratios, and geography, to monitor and manage credit risk within the home equity and residential real estate loan classes. We evaluate mortgage loan performance by source originators and loan servicers. A summary of asset quality indicators follows: Delinquency/Delinquency Rates: We monitor trending of delinquency/delinquency rates for home equity and residential real estate loans. See the Asset Quality section of this Note 5 for additional information. Nonperforming Loans: We monitor trending of nonperforming loans for home equity and residential real estate loans. See the Asset Quality section of this Note 5 for additional information. Credit Scores: We use a national third-party provider to update FICO credit scores for home equity loans and lines of credit and residential real estate loans on at least a quarterly basis. The updated scores are incorporated into a series of credit management reports, which are utilized to monitor the risk in the loan classes. LTV (inclusive of combined loan-to-value (CLTV) ratios for second lien positions): At least semi-annually, we update the property values of real estate collateral and calculate an updated LTV ratio. For open-end credit lines secured by real estate in regions experiencing significant declines in property values, more frequent valuations may occur. We examine LTV migration and stratify LTV into categories to monitor the risk in the loan classes. Historically, we used, and we continue to use, a combination of original LTV and updated LTV for internal risk management reporting and risk management purposes (e. g. , line management, loss mitigation strategies). In addition to the fact that estimated property values by their nature are estimates, given certain data limitations it is important to note that updated LTVs may be based upon management’s assumptions (e. g. , if an updated LTV is not provided by the third-party service provider, home price index (HPI) changes will be incorporated in arriving at management’s estimate of updated LTV). Geography: Geographic concentrations are monitored to evaluate and manage exposures. Loan purchase programs are sensitive to, and focused within, certain regions to manage geographic exposures and associated risks. ITEM 5 – MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES (a) (1) Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange and is traded under the symbol “PNC. ” At the close of business on February 15, 2013, there were 75,100 common shareholders of record. Holders of PNC common stock are entitled to receive dividends when declared by the Board of Directors out of funds legally available for this purpose. Our Board of Directors may not pay or set apart dividends on the common stock until dividends for all past dividend periods on any series of outstanding preferred stock have been paid or declared and set apart for payment. The Board presently intends to continue the policy of paying quarterly cash dividends. The amount of any future dividends will depend on economic and market conditions, our financial condition and operating results, and other factors, including contractual restrictions and applicable government regulations and policies (such as those relating to the ability of bank and nonbank subsidiaries to pay dividends to the parent company and regulatory capital limitations). The amount of our dividend is also currently subject to the results of the Federal Reserve’s 2013 Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) as part of its supervisory assessment of capital adequacy described under “Supervision and Regulation” in Item 1 of this Report. The Federal Reserve has the power to prohibit us from paying dividends without its approval. For further information concerning dividend restrictions and restrictions on loans, dividends or advances from bank subsidiaries to the parent company, see “Supervision and Regulation” in Item 1 of this Report, “Funding and Capital Sources” in the Consolidated Balance Sheet Review section, “Liquidity Risk Management” in the Risk Management section, and “Trust Preferred Securities” in the Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements And Variable Interest Entities section of Item 7 of this Report, and Note 14 Capital Securities of Subsidiary Trusts and Perpetual Trust Securities and Note 22 Regulatory Matters in the Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Report, which we include here by reference. We include here by reference additional information relating to PNC common stock under the caption “Common Stock Prices/Dividends Declared” in the Statistical Information (Unaudited) section of Item 8 of this Report. We include here by reference the information regarding our compensation plans under which PNC equity securities are authorized for issuance as of December 31, 2012 in the table (with introductory paragraph and notes) that appears in Item 12 of this Report. Our registrar, stock transfer agent, and dividend disbursing agent is: Computershare Trust Company, N. A.250 Royall Street Canton, MA 02021 800-982-7652 We include here by reference the information that appears under the caption “Common Stock Performance Graph” at the end of this Item 5. (a)(2) None. (b) Not applicable. (c) Details of our repurchases of PNC common stock during the fourth quarter of 2012 are included in the following table: In thousands, except per share data <table><tr><td>2012 period (a)</td><td>Total sharespurchased (b)</td><td>Averagepricepaid pershare</td><td>Total sharespurchased aspartofpubliclyannouncedprograms (c)</td><td>Maximumnumber ofshares thatmay yet bepurchasedundertheprograms (c)</td></tr><tr><td>October 1 – 31</td><td>13</td><td>$60.05</td><td></td><td>22,552</td></tr><tr><td>November 1 – 30</td><td>750</td><td>$55.08</td><td>750</td><td>21,802</td></tr><tr><td>December 1 – 31</td><td>292</td><td>$55.74</td><td>251</td><td>21,551</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>1,055</td><td>$55.32</td><td>1,001</td><td></td></tr></table> (a) In addition to the repurchases of PNC common stock during the fourth quarter of 2012 included in the table above, PNC redeemed all 5,001 shares of its Series M Preferred Stock on December 10, 2012 as further described below. As part of the National City transaction, we established the PNC Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series M (the “Series M Preferred Stock”), which mirrored in all material respects the former National City Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series E. On December 10, 2012, PNC issued $500.1 million aggregate liquidation amount (5,001 shares) of the Series M Preferred Stock to the National City Preferred Capital Trust I (the “Trust”) as required pursuant to the settlement of a Stock Purchase Contract Agreement between the Trust and PNC dated as of January 30, 2008. Immediately upon such issuance, PNC redeemed all 5,001 shares of the Series M Preferred Stock from the Trust on December 10, 2012 at a redemption price equal to $100,000 per share. (b) Includes PNC common stock purchased under the program referred to in note (c) to this table and PNC common stock purchased in connection with our various employee benefit plans. Note 15 Employee Benefit Plans and Note 16 Stock Based Compensation Plans in the Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Report include additional information regarding our employee benefit plans that use PNC common stock. (c) Our current stock repurchase program allows us to purchase up to 25 million shares on the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. This program was authorized on October 4, 2007 and will remain in effect until fully utilized or until modified, superseded or terminated. The extent and timing of share repurchases under this program will depend on a number of factors including, among others, market and general economic conditions, economic capital and regulatory capital considerations, alternative uses of capital, the potential impact on our credit ratings, and contractual and regulatory limitations, including the impact of the Federal Reserve’s supervisory assessment of capital adequacy program.

How many Balance at Beginning of Period exceed the average of Balance at Beginning of Period in 2006?

The following table summarizes the changes in the Company’s valuation allowance: <table><tr><td>Balance at January 1, 2010</td><td>$25,621</td></tr><tr><td>Increases in current period tax positions</td><td>907</td></tr><tr><td>Decreases in current period tax positions</td><td>-2,740</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2010</td><td>$23,788</td></tr><tr><td>Increases in current period tax positions</td><td>1,525</td></tr><tr><td>Decreases in current period tax positions</td><td>-3,734</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2011</td><td>$21,579</td></tr><tr><td>Increases in current period tax positions</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td>Decreases in current period tax positions</td><td>-2,059</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2012</td><td>$19,520</td></tr></table> Note 14: Employee Benefits Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits The Company maintains noncontributory defined benefit pension plans covering eligible employees of its regulated utility and shared services operations. Benefits under the plans are based on the employee’s years of service and compensation. The pension plans have been closed for most employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 had their accrued benefit frozen and will be able to receive this benefit as a lump sum upon termination or retirement. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 and non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006 are provided with a 5.25% of base pay defined contribution plan. The Company does not participate in a multiemployer plan. The Company’s funding policy is to contribute at least the greater of the minimum amount required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 or the normal cost, and an additional contribution if needed to avoid “at risk” status and benefit restrictions under the Pension Protection Act of 2006. The Company may also increase its contributions, if appropriate, to its tax and cash position and the plan’s funded position. Pension plan assets are invested in a number of actively managed and indexed investments including equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities and guaranteed interest contracts with insurance companies. Pension expense in excess of the amount contributed to the pension plans is deferred by certain regulated subsidiaries pending future recovery in rates charged for utility services as contributions are made to the plans. (See Note 6) The Company also has several unfunded noncontributory supplemental non-qualified pension plans that provide additional retirement benefits to certain employees. The Company maintains other postretirement benefit plans providing varying levels of medical and life insurance to eligible retirees. The retiree welfare plans are closed for union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. The plans had previously closed for non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2002. The Company’s policy is to fund other postretirement benefit costs for rate-making purposes. Plan assets are invested in equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities, real estate investment trusts (“REITs”) and emerging market funds. The obligations of the plans are dominated by obligations for active employees. Because the timing of expected benefit payments is so far in the future and the size of the plan assets are small relative to the Company’s assets, the investment strategy is to allocate a significant percentage of assets to equities, which the Company believes will provide the highest return over the long-term period. The fixed income assets are invested in long duration debt securities and may be invested in fixed income instruments, such as futures and options in order to better match the duration of the plan liability. The allocation of goodwill in accordance with SFAS No.142 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 was as follows: <table><tr><td> </td><td> Balance at Beginning of Period</td><td> Goodwill Acquired</td><td> Foreign Currency Translation and Other</td><td> Balance at End of Period</td></tr><tr><td>Year Ended December 31, 2006</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Food Packaging</td><td>$540.4</td><td>$31.9</td><td>$14.9</td><td>$587.2</td></tr><tr><td>Protective Packaging</td><td>1,368.4</td><td>0.4</td><td>1.1</td><td>1,369.9</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,908.8</td><td>$32.3</td><td>$16.0</td><td>$1,957.1</td></tr><tr><td>Year Ended December 31, 2005</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Food Packaging</td><td>$549.8</td><td>$0.7</td><td>$-10.1</td><td>$540.4</td></tr><tr><td>Protective Packaging</td><td>1,368.2</td><td>0.8</td><td>-0.6</td><td>1,368.4</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,918.0</td><td>$1.5</td><td>$-10.7</td><td>$1,908.8</td></tr></table> See Note 20, “Acquisitions,” for additional information on the goodwill acquired during 2006. Note 4 Short Term Investments—Available-for-Sale Securities At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company’s available-for-sale securities consisted of auction rate securities for which interest or dividend rates are generally re-set for periods of up to 90 days. At December 31, 2006, the Company held $33.9 million of auction rate securities which were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates. At December 31, 2005, the Company held $44.1 million of auction rate securities, of which $34.7 million were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates and $9.4 million were investments in other auction rate securities with contractual maturities in 2031. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the fair value of the available-for-sale securities held by the Company was equal to their cost. There were no gross realized gains or losses from the sale of availablefor-sale securities in 2006 and 2005. Note 5 Accounts Receivable Securitization Program In December 2001, the Company and a group of its U. S. subsidiaries entered into an accounts receivable securitization program with a bank and an issuer of commercial paper administered by the bank. On December 7, 2004, which was the scheduled expiration date of this program, the parties extended this program for an additional term of three years ending December 7, 2007. Under this receivables program, the Company’s two primary operating subsidiaries, Cryovac, Inc. and Sealed Air Corporation (US), sell all of their eligible U. S. accounts receivable to Sealed Air Funding Corporation, an indirectly wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company that was formed for the sole purpose of entering into the receivables program. Sealed Air Funding in turn may sell undivided ownership interests in these receivables to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, subject to specified conditions, up to a maximum of $125.0 million of receivables interests outstanding from time to time. Sealed Air Funding retains the receivables it purchases from the operating subsidiaries, except those as to which it sells receivables interests to the bank or the issuer of commercial paper. The Company has structured the sales of accounts receivable by the operating subsidiaries to Sealed Air Funding, and the sales of receivables interests from Sealed Air Funding to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, as “true sales” under applicable laws. The assets of Sealed Air Funding are not available to pay any creditors of the Company or of the Company’s other subsidiaries or affiliates. The Company accounts for these transactions as sales of receivables under the provisions of SFAS No.140, “Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishment of Liabilities. ” Product Care 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, net sales decreased $30 million, or 2%, in 2016 compared with 2015, of which $22 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $8 million, or 1%, in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to the following: ? unfavorable price/mix of $29 million primarily in North America driven by targeted pricing incentives and an unfavorable product mix related to accelerated growth in e-Commerce and a shift in demand due to more innovative, resource-efficient solutions. This was partially offset by: ? higher unit volumes of $21 million, primarily in North America and EMEA due to ongoing strength in the e-Commerce and third party logistics markets, partially offset by rationalization and weakness in the industrial sector, as well as declines in Latin America due to the political and economic environment.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, net sales decreased $109 million, or 7%, in 2015 compared with 2014, of which $99 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $10 million, or 1%, in 2015 compared with 2014 primarily due to the following: ? lower unit volumes due to rationalization efforts in North America, Latin America and to a lesser extent, EMEA and weaknesses across the industrial sector. This was partially offset by: ? favorable price/mix in all regions, primarily in North America and Latin America reflecting results from our focus on maintaining pricing disciplines and an increase of sales from high-performance packaging solutions, including cushioning and packaging systems as compared to sales from general packaging solutions, and the progression of our pricing and value initiatives implemented to offset non-material inflationary costs as well as currency devaluation. Cost of Sales Cost of sales for the years ended December 31, were as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December 31,</td><td rowspan="2">2016 vs. 2015 % Change</td><td rowspan="2">2015 vs. 2014 % Change</td></tr><tr><td>(In millions)</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Net sales</td><td>$6,778.3</td><td>$7,031.5</td><td>$7,750.5</td><td>-3.6%</td><td>-9.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Cost of sales</td><td>4,246.7</td><td>4,444.9</td><td>5,062.9</td><td>-4.5%</td><td>-12.2%</td></tr><tr><td>As a % of net sales</td><td>62.7%</td><td>63.2%</td><td>65.3%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gross Profit</td><td>$2,531.6</td><td>$2,586.6</td><td>$2,687.6</td><td>-2.1%</td><td>-3.8%</td></tr></table> 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, costs of sales decreased $198 million in 2016 as compared to 2015. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $163 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $35 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $79 million, offset by an increase of $51 million in expenses representing higher non-material manufacturing and direct costs, including salary and wage inflation, partially offset by restructuring savings and lower incentive based compensation.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, costs of sales decreased $618 million in 2015 as compared to 2014. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $492 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $126 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $140 million and favorable impact of $31 million related to cost savings, freight, and other supply chain costs. These were partially offset by $47 million in expenses related to higher non-material manufacturing costs, including salary and wage inflation.

In which year is Commercial Utilized Loans and leases positive?

GWIM provides a wide offering of customized banking, investment and brokerage services tailored to meet the changing wealth management needs of our individual and institutional customer base. Our clients have access to a range of services offered through three primary businesses: MLGWM; U. S. Trust, Bank of America Private Wealth Management (U. S. Trust); and Columbia. The results of the Retirement & Philanthropic Services business, the Corporation’s approximate 34 percent economic ownership interest in BlackRock and other miscellaneous items are included in Other within GWIM. As part of the Merrill Lynch acquisition, we added its financial advisors and an economic ownership interest of approximately 50 percent in BlackRock, a publicly traded investment management company. During 2009, BlackRock completed its purchase of Barclays Global Investors, an asset management business, from Barclays PLC which had the effect of diluting our ownership interest in BlackRock and, for accounting purposes, was treated as a sale of a portion of our ownership interest. As a result, upon the closing of this transaction, the Corporation’s economic ownership interest in BlackRock was reduced to approximately 34 percent and we recorded a pre-tax gain of $1.1 billion. Net income increased $1.1 billion, or 78 percent, to $2.5 billion as higher total revenue was partially offset by increases in noninterest expense and provision for credit losses. Net interest income increased $767 million, or 16 percent, to $5.6 billion primarily due to the acquisition of Merrill Lynch partially offset by a lower net interest income allocation from ALM activities and the impact of the migration of client balances during 2009 to Deposits and Home Loans & Insurance. GWIM’s average loan and deposit growth benefited from the acquisition of Merrill Lynch and the shift of client assets from off-balance sheet (e. g. , money market funds) to on-balance sheet products (e. g. , deposits) partially offset by the net migration of customer relationships. A more detailed discussion regarding migrated customer relationships and related balances is provided in the following MLGWM discussion. Noninterest income increased $9.5 billion to $12.6 billion primarily due to higher investment and brokerage services income driven by the Merrill Lynch acquisition, the $1.1 billion gain on our investment in BlackRock and the lower level of support provided to certain cash funds partially offset by the impact of lower average equity market levels and net outflows primarily in the cash complex. Provision for credit losses increased $397 million, or 60 percent, to $1.1 billion, reflecting the weak economy during 2009 which drove higher net charge-offs in the consumer real estate and commercial portfolios including a single large commercial charge-off. Noninterest expense increased $8.2 billion to $13.1 billion driven by the addition of Merrill Lynch and higher FDIC insurance and special assessment costs partially offset by lower revenue-related expenses. Client Assets The following table presents client assets which consist of AUM, client brokerage assets, assets in custody and client deposits. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">December 31</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Assets under management</td><td>$749,852</td><td>$523,159</td></tr><tr><td>Client brokerage assets^-1</td><td>1,270,461</td><td>172,106</td></tr><tr><td>Assets in custody</td><td>274,472</td><td>133,726</td></tr><tr><td>Client deposits</td><td>224,840</td><td>176,186</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Client brokerage assets and assets incustody included in assets under management</td><td>-346,682</td><td>-87,519</td></tr><tr><td> Total net client assets</td><td>$2,172,943</td><td>$917,658</td></tr></table> (1) Client brokerage assets include non-discretionary brokerage and fee-based assets. The increase in net client assets was driven by the acquisition of Merrill Lynch and higher equity market values at December 31, 2009 compared to 2008 partially offset by outflows that primarily occurred in cash and money market assets due to increasing interest rate pressure. Merrill Lynch Global Wealth Management Effective January 1, 2009, as a result of the Merrill Lynch acquisition, we combined the Merrill Lynch wealth management business and our former Premier Banking & Investments business to form MLGWM. MLGWM provides a high-touch client experience through a network of approximately 15,000 client-facing financial advisors to our affluent customers with a personal wealth profile of at least $250,000 of investable assets. The addition of Merrill Lynch created one of the largest financial advisor networks in the world. Merrill Lynch added $10.3 billion in revenue and $1.6 billion in net income during 2009. Total client balances in MLGWM, which include deposits, AUM, client brokerage assets and other assets in custody, were $1.4 trillion at December 31, 2009. MLGWM includes the impact of migrating customers and their related deposit and loan balances to or from Deposits and Home Loans & Insurance. As of the date of migration, the associated net interest income, noninterest income and noninterest expense are recorded in the segment to which the customers migrated. During 2009, total deposits of $43.4 billion were migrated to Deposits from MLGWM. Conversely, during 2008, total deposits of $20.5 billion were migrated from Deposits to MLGWM. During 2009 and 2008, total loans of $16.6 billion and $1.7 billion were migrated from MLGWM, of which $11.5 billion and $1.6 billion were migrated to Home Loans & Insurance. These changes in 2009 were mainly due to client segmentation threshold changes resulting from the Merrill Lynch acquisition. Table 9 presents total long-term debt and other obligations at December 31, 2009. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5"> December 31, 2009</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td> Due in 1 Year or Less</td><td> Due after 1 Year through 3 Years</td><td> Due after 3 Years through 5 Years</td><td> Due after 5 Years</td><td> Total</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt and capital leases</td><td>$99,144</td><td>$124,054</td><td>$72,103</td><td>$143,220</td><td>$438,521</td></tr><tr><td>Operating lease obligations</td><td>3,143</td><td>5,072</td><td>3,355</td><td>8,143</td><td>19,713</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase obligations</td><td>11,957</td><td>3,667</td><td>1,627</td><td>2,119</td><td>19,370</td></tr><tr><td>Other long-term liabilities</td><td>610</td><td>1,097</td><td>848</td><td>1,464</td><td>4,019</td></tr><tr><td> Total long-term debt and other obligations</td><td>$114,854</td><td>$133,890</td><td>$77,933</td><td>$154,946</td><td>$481,623</td></tr></table> Debt, lease, equity and other obligations are more fully discussed in Note 13 – Long-term Debt and Note 14 – Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements. The Plans are more fully discussed in Note 17 – Employee Benefit Plans to the Consolidated Financial Statements. We enter into commitments to extend credit such as loan commitments, standby letters of credit (SBLCs) and commercial letters of credit to meet the financing needs of our customers. For a summary of the total unfunded, or off-balance sheet, credit extension commitment amounts by expiration date, see the table in Note 14 – Commitments and Contingencies to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Regulatory Initiatives On November 12, 2009, the Federal Reserve issued the final rule related to changes to Regulation E and on May 22, 2009, the CARD Act was signed into law. For more information on the impact of these new regulations, see Regulatory Overview on page 29. In December 2009, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision released consultative documents on both capital and liquidity. In addition, we will begin Basel II parallel implementation during the second quarter of 2010. For more information, see Basel Regulatory Capital Requirements on page 64. On January 21, 2010, the Federal Reserve, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, FDIC and Office of Thrift Supervision (collectively, joint agencies) issued a final rule regarding risk-based capital and the impact of adoption of new consolidation rules issued by the FASB. The final rule eliminates the exclusion of certain asset-backed commercial paper (ABCP) program assets from risk-weighted assets and provides a reservation of authority to permit the joint agencies to require banks to treat structures that are not consolidated under the accounting standards as if they were consolidated for risk-based capital purposes commensurate with the risk relationship of the bank to the structure. In addition, the final rule allows for an optional delay and phase-in for a maximum of one year for the effect on risk-weighted assets and the regulatory limit on the inclusion of the allowance for loan and lease losses in Tier 2 capital related to the assets that must be consolidated as a result of the accounting change. The transitional relief does not apply to the leverage ratio or to assets in VIEs to which a bank provides implicit support. We have elected to forgo the phase-in period, and accordingly, we consolidated the amounts for regulatory capital purposes as of January 1, 2010. For more information on the impact of this guidance, see Impact of Adopting New Accounting Guidance on Consolidation on page 64. On December 14, 2009, we announced our intention to increase lending to small- and medium-sized businesses to approximately $21 billion in 2010 compared to approximately $16 billion in 2009. This announcement is consistent with the U. S. Treasury’s initiative, announced as part of the Financial Stability Plan on February 2, 2009, to help increase small business owners’ access to credit. As part of the initiative, the U. S. Treasury began making direct purchases of up to $15 billion of certain securities backed by Small Business Administration (SBA) loans to improve liquidity in the credit markets and purchasing new securities to ensure that financial institutions feel confident in extending new loans to small businesses. The program also temporarily raises guarantees to up to 90 percent in the SBA’s loan program and temporarily eliminates certain SBA loan fees. We continue to lend to creditworthy small business customers through small business credit cards, loans and lines of credit products. In response to the economic downturn, the FDIC implemented the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP) to strengthen confidence and encourage liquidity in the banking system by allowing the FDIC to guarantee senior unsecured debt (e. g. , promissory notes, unsubordinated unsecured notes and commercial paper) up to prescribed limits, issued by participating entities beginning on October 14, 2008, and continuing through October 31, 2009. We participated in this program; however, as announced in September 2009, due to improved market liquidity and our ability to issue debt without the FDIC guarantee, we, with the FDIC’s agreement, exited the program and have stopped issuing FDICguaranteed debt. At December 31, 2009, we still had FDIC-guaranteed debt outstanding issued under the TLGP of $44.3 billion. The TLGP also offered the Transaction Account Guarantee Program (TAGP) that guaranteed noninterest-bearing deposit accounts held at participating FDICinsured institutions on balances in excess of $250,000. We elected to opt out of the six-month extension of the TAGP which extends the program to June 30, 2010. We exited the TAGP effective December 31, 2009. On September 21, 2009, the Corporation reached an agreement to terminate its term sheet with the U. S. government under which the U. S. government agreed in principle to provide protection against the possibility of unusually large losses on a pool of the Corporation’s financial instruments that were acquired from Merrill Lynch. In connection with the termination of the term sheet, the Corporation paid a total of $425 million to the U. S. government to be allocated among the U. S. Treasury, the Federal Reserve and the FDIC. In addition to exiting the TARP as discussed on page 30, terminating the U. S. Government’s asset guarantee term sheet and exiting the TLGP, including the TAGP, we have exited or ceased participation in market disruption liquidity programs created by the U. S. government in response to the economic downturn of 2008. We have exited or repaid borrowings under the Term Auction Facility, U. S. Treasury Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program for Money Market Funds, ABCP Money Market Fund Liquidity Facility, Commercial Paper Federal Funding Facility, Money Market Investor Funding Facility, Term Securities Lending Facility and Primary Dealer Credit Facility. On November 17, 2009, the FDIC issued a final rule that required insured institutions to prepay on December 30, 2009 their estimated Table 29 presents commercial credit exposure by type for utilized, unfunded and total binding committed credit exposure. Commercial utilized credit exposure includes funded loans, standby letters of credit, financial guarantees, bankers’ acceptances and commercial letters of credit for which the bank is legally bound to advance funds under prescribed conditions, during a specified period. Although funds have not been advanced, these exposure types are considered utilized for credit risk management purposes. Total commercial committed credit exposure decreased by $10.1 billion, or one percent, at December 31, 2009 compared to December 31, 2008. The decrease was largely driven by reductions in loans and leases partially offset by an increase in derivatives due to the acquisition of Merrill Lynch. Total commercial utilized credit exposure decreased to $494.4 billion at December 31, 2009 compared to $498.7 billion at December 31, 2008. Funded loans and leases declined due to limited demand for acquisition financing and capital expenditures in the large corporate and middle-market portfolios and as clients utilized the improved capital markets more extensively for their funding needs. With the economic outlook remaining uncertain, businesses are aggressively managing working capital and production capacity, maintaining low inventories and deferring capital spending. The increase in derivative assets was driven by the acquisition of Merrill Lynch substantially offset during 2009 by maturing transactions, mark-to-market adjustments from changing interest and foreign exchange rates, as well as narrower credit spreads. The loans and leases funded utilization rate was 57 percent at December 31, 2009 compared to 58 percent at December 31, 2008. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6"> December 31</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> Commercial Utilized^{-1, 2}</td><td colspan="2"> Commercial Unfunded^{-1, 3, 4}</td><td colspan="2"> Total Commercial Committed^-1</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td> 2009</td><td>2008</td><td> 2009</td><td>2008</td><td> 2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Loans and leases</td><td>$322,564</td><td>$342,767</td><td>$293,519</td><td>$300,856</td><td>$616,083</td><td>$643,623</td></tr><tr><td>Derivative assets^-5</td><td>80,689</td><td>62,252</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>80,689</td><td>62,252</td></tr><tr><td>Standby letters of credit and financial guarantees</td><td>70,238</td><td>72,840</td><td>6,008</td><td>4,740</td><td>76,246</td><td>77,580</td></tr><tr><td>Assets held-for-sale^-6</td><td>13,473</td><td>14,206</td><td>781</td><td>183</td><td>14,254</td><td>14,389</td></tr><tr><td>Bankers’ acceptances</td><td>3,658</td><td>3,382</td><td>16</td><td>13</td><td>3,674</td><td>3,395</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial letters of credit</td><td>2,958</td><td>2,974</td><td>569</td><td>791</td><td>3,527</td><td>3,765</td></tr><tr><td>Foreclosed properties and other</td><td>797</td><td>328</td><td>–</td><td>–</td><td>797</td><td>328</td></tr><tr><td> Total commercial credit exposure</td><td>$494,377</td><td>$498,749</td><td>$300,893</td><td>$306,583</td><td>$795,270</td><td>$805,332</td></tr></table> (1) At December 31, 2009, total commercial utilized, total commercial unfunded and total commercial committed exposure include $88.5 billion, $25.7 billion and $114.2 billion, respectively, related to Merrill Lynch. (2) Total commercial utilized exposure at December 31, 2009 and 2008 includes loans and issued letters of credit accounted for under the fair value option and is comprised of loans outstanding of $4.9 billion and $5.4 billion, and letters of credit with a notional amount of $1.7 billion and $1.4 billion. (3) Total commercial unfunded exposure at December 31, 2009 and 2008 includes loan commitments accounted for under the fair value option with a notional amount of $25.3 billion and $15.5 billion. (4) Excludes unused business card lines which are not legally binding. (5) Derivative assets are carried at fair value, reflect the effects of legally enforceable master netting agreements, and have been reduced by cash collateral of $58.4 billion and $34.8 billion at December 31, 2009 and 2008. Not reflected in utilized and committed exposure is additional derivative collateral held of $16.2 billion and $13.4 billion which consists primarily of other marketable securities at December 31, 2009 and 2008. (6) Total commercial committed assets held-for-sale exposure consists of $9.0 billion and $12.1 billion of commercial LHFS exposure (e. g. , commercial mortgage and leveraged finance) and $5.3 billion and $2.3 billion of assets held-for-sale exposure at December 31, 2009 and 2008. Table 30 presents commercial utilized reservable criticized exposure by product type. Criticized exposure corresponds to the Special Mention, Substandard and Doubtful asset categories defined by regulatory authorities. In addition to reservable loans and leases, excluding those accounted for under the fair value option, exposure includes SBLCs, financial guarantees, bankers’ acceptances and commercial letters of credit for which we are legally bound to advance funds under prescribed conditions, during a specified period. Although funds have not been advanced, these exposure types are considered utilized for credit risk management purposes. Total commercial utilized reservable criticized exposure rose by $21.7 billion primarily due to increases in commercial real estate and commercial – domestic. Commercial real estate increased $10.0 billion primarily due to the non-homebuilder portfolio which has been impacted by the weak economy partially offset by a decrease in the homebuilder portfolio. The $9.3 billion increase in commercial – domestic reflects deterioration across various lines of business and industries, primarily in Global Banking. At December 31, 2009, approximately 85 percent of the loans within criticized reservable utilized exposure are secured. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> December 31</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2009</td><td colspan="2">2008</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td> Amount</td><td>Percent -1</td><td>Amount</td><td>Percent^-1</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial – domestic^-2</td><td>$28,259</td><td>11.66%</td><td>$18,963</td><td>7.20%</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>23,804</td><td>32.13</td><td>13,830</td><td>19.73</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial lease financing</td><td>2,229</td><td>10.04</td><td>1,352</td><td>6.03</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial – foreign</td><td>2,605</td><td>7.12</td><td>1,459</td><td>3.65</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>56,897</td><td>15.17</td><td>35,604</td><td>8.99</td></tr><tr><td>Small business commercial – domestic</td><td>1,789</td><td>10.18</td><td>1,333</td><td>6.94</td></tr><tr><td> Total commercial utilized reservable criticized exposure</td><td>$58,686</td><td>14.94</td><td>$36,937</td><td>8.90</td></tr></table> (1) Percentages are calculated as commercial utilized reservable criticized exposure divided by total commercial utilized reservable exposure for each exposure category. (2) Excludes small business commercial – domestic exposure. The following table provides a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances of our foreign pension plan assets measured at fair value that used significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) (in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td>December 31, 2017</td></tr><tr><td>Beginning Balance</td><td>$78.7</td></tr><tr><td>Gains on assets sold</td><td>0.3</td></tr><tr><td>Change in fair value of assets</td><td>3.8</td></tr><tr><td>Net purchases and sales</td><td>5.2</td></tr><tr><td>Translation gain</td><td>3.0</td></tr><tr><td>Ending Balance</td><td>$91.0</td></tr></table> We expect that we will have no legally required minimum funding requirements in 2018 for the qualified U. S. and Puerto Rico defined benefit retirement plans, nor do we expect to voluntarily contribute to these plans during 2018. Contributions to foreign defined benefit plans are estimated to be $17.0 million in 2018 . We do not expect the assets in any of our plans to be returned to us in the next year. Defined Contribution Plans We also sponsor defined contribution plans for substantially all of the U. S. and Puerto Rico employees and certain employees in other countries. The benefits offered under these plans are reflective of local customs and practices in the countries concerned. We expensed $47.9 million, $42.5 million and $40.2 million related to these plans for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.15. Income Taxes 2017 Tax Act: The President signed U. S. tax reform legislation (“2017 Tax Act”) on December 22, 2017, which is considered the enactment date. The 2017 Tax Act includes a broad range of provisions, many of which significantly differ from those contained in previous U. S. tax law. Changes in tax law are accounted for in the period of enactment. As such, our 2017 consolidated financial statements reflect the immediate tax effect of the 2017 Tax Act. The 2017 Tax Act contains several key provisions including, among other things: ? a one-time tax on the mandatory deemed repatriation of post-1986 untaxed foreign earnings and profits (E&P), referred to as the toll charge; ? a reduction in the corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017; ? the introduction of a new U. S. tax on certain off-shore earnings referred to as global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) at an effective tax rate of 10.5 percent for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017 (increasing to 13.125 percent for tax years beginning after December 31, 2025), with a partial offset by foreign tax credits; and ? the introduction of a territorial tax system beginning in 2018 by providing a 100 percent dividend received deduction on certain qualified dividends from foreign subsidiaries. During the fourth quarter of 2017, we recorded an income tax benefit of $1,272.4 million, which was comprised of the following: ? income tax benefit of $715.0 million for the one-time deemed repatriation of foreign earnings. This is composed of a $1,181.0 million benefit from the removal of a deferred tax liability we had recorded for the repatriation of foreign earnings prior to the 2017 Tax Act offset by $466.0 million for the toll charge recognized under the 2017 Tax Act. In accordance with the 2017 Tax Act, we expect to elect to pay the toll charge in installments over eight years. As of December 31, 2017, we have recorded current and non-current income tax liabilities related to the toll charge of $82.0 million and $384.0 million, respectively. ? an income tax benefit of $557.4 million, primarily related to the remeasurement of our deferred tax assets and liabilities at the enacted corporate income tax rate of 21 percent. The net benefit recorded was based on currently available information and interpretations made in applying the provisions of the 2017 Tax Act as of the time of filing this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We further refined our estimates related to the impact of the 2017 Tax Act subsequent to the issuance of our earnings release for the fourth quarter of 2017. In accordance with authoritative guidance issued by the SEC, the income tax effect for certain aspects of the 2017 Tax Act represent provisional amounts for which our accounting is incomplete, but with respect to which a reasonable estimate could be determined and recorded during the fourth quarter of 2017. The actual effects of the 2017 Tax Act and final amounts recorded may differ materially from our current estimate of provisional amounts due to, among other things, further interpretive guidance that may be issued by U. S. tax authorities or regulatory bodies, including the SEC and the FASB. We will continue to analyze the 2017 Tax Act and any additional guidance that may be issued so we can finalize the full effects of applying the new legislation on our financial statements in the measurement period, which ends in the fourth quarter of 2018. We continue to evaluate the impacts of the 2017 Tax Act and consider the amounts recorded to be provisional. In addition, we are still evaluating the GILTI provisions of the 2017 Tax Act and their impact, if any, on our consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2017. The FASB allows companies to adopt an accounting policy to either recognize deferred taxes for GILTI or treat such as a tax cost in the year incurred. We have not yet determined which accounting policy to adopt because determining the impact of the GILTI provisions requires analysis of our existing legal entity structure, the reversal of our U. S. GAAP and U. S. tax basis differences in the assets and liabilities of our foreign subsidiaries, and our ability to offset any tax with foreign tax credits. As such, we did not record a deferred income tax

Does the average value of Loans and leases in 2014 greater than that in 2013

countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2009 amounted to $1.26 billion (Italy). Aggregate cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2008 amounted to $3.45 billion (Canada and Germany). There were no cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2007. Capital The management of regulatory and economic capital both involve key metrics evaluated by management to assess whether our actual level of capital is commensurate with our risk profile, is in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and is sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. Regulatory Capital Our objective with respect to regulatory capital management is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting customers’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an optimal level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and satisfying regulatory capital adequacy requirements. Our capital management process focuses on our risk exposures, our regulatory capital requirements, the evaluations of the major independent credit rating agencies that assign ratings to our public debt and our capital position relative to our peers. Our Capital Committee, working in conjunction with our Asset and Liability Committee, referred to as ALCO, oversees the management of regulatory capital, and is responsible for ensuring capital adequacy with respect to regulatory requirements, internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. The primary regulator of both State Street and State Street Bank for regulatory capital purposes is the Federal Reserve. Both State Street and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991. State Street Bank must meet the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for the parent company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Regulatory capital ratios and related regulatory guidelines for State Street and State Street Bank were as follows as of December 31: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">REGULATORY GUIDELINES</td><td colspan="2">STATE STREET</td><td colspan="2"> STATE STREET BANK</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Minimum</td><td>Well Capitalized</td><td>2009</td><td>2008 -2</td><td>2009</td><td> 2008^-2</td></tr><tr><td>Regulatory capital ratios:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1 risk-based capital</td><td>4%</td><td>6%</td><td>17.7%</td><td>20.3%</td><td>17.3%</td><td>19.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Total risk-based capital</td><td>8</td><td>10</td><td>19.1</td><td>21.6</td><td>19.0</td><td>21.3</td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1 leverage ratio^-1</td><td>4</td><td>5</td><td>8.5</td><td>7.8</td><td>8.2</td><td>7.6</td></tr></table> (1) Regulatory guideline for well capitalized applies only to State Street Bank. (2) Tier 1 and total risk-based capital and tier 1 leverage ratios exclude the impact, where applicable, of the asset-backed commercial paper purchased under the Federal Reserve’s AMLF, as permitted by the AMLF’s terms and conditions. At December 31, 2009, State Street’s and State Street Bank’s tier 1 and total risk-based capital ratios decreased compared to year-end 2008. With respect to State Street, the loss associated with the May 2009 conduit consolidation and the June 2009 redemption of the equity received from the U. S. Treasury in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, partly offset by the aggregate impact of the May 2009 public offering MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the level of housing prices and the timing of defaults. To the extent that such factors differ significantly from management's current expectations, resulting loss estimates may differ materially from those stated. Excluding other-than-temporary impairment recorded in 2014, management considers the aggregate decline in fair value of the remaining investment securities and the resulting gross unrealized losses as of December 31, 2014 to be temporary and not the result of any material changes in the credit characteristics of the securities. Additional information about these gross unrealized losses is provided in note 3 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. Loans and Leases TABLE 26: U. S. AND NON- U. S. LOANS AND LEASES <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">As of December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(In millions)</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Institutional:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S.</td><td>$14,908</td><td>$10,623</td><td>$9,645</td><td>$7,115</td><td>$7,001</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S.</td><td>3,263</td><td>2,654</td><td>2,251</td><td>2,478</td><td>4,192</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S.</td><td>28</td><td>209</td><td>411</td><td>460</td><td>764</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans and leases</td><td>$18,199</td><td>$13,486</td><td>$12,307</td><td>$10,053</td><td>$11,957</td></tr><tr><td>Average loans and leases</td><td>$15,912</td><td>$13,781</td><td>$11,610</td><td>$12,180</td><td>$12,094</td></tr></table> The increase in loans in the institutional segment as of December 31, 2014 as compared to December 31, 2013 was primarily driven by higher levels of short-duration advances and increased investment in the non-investment-grade lending market through participations in loan syndications, specifically senior secured bank loans. Short-duration advances to our clients included in the institutional segment were $3.54 billion and $2.45 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. These short-duration advances provide liquidity to fund clients in support of their transaction flows associated with securities settlement activities. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, our investment in senior secured bank loans totaled approximately $2.07 billion and $724 million, respectively. In addition, we had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2014 totaling $337 million to participate in such syndications. These senior secured bank loans, which we have rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 95% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2014, compared to 94% as of December 31, 2013. Our investment strategy involves limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment, and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans. As of December 31, 2014, our allowance for loan losses included approximately $26 million related to these senior secured bank loans. As this portfolio grows and becomes more seasoned, our allowance for loan losses related to these loans may increase through additional provisions for credit losses. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, unearned income deducted from our investment in leveraged lease financing was $109 million and $121 million, respectively, for U. S. leases and $261 million and $298 million, respectively, for non-U. S. leases. The commercial real estate, or CRE, loans are composed of the loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. Additional information about all of our loan-and-lease segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The decrease in the CRE loans as of December 31, 2014 compared to December 31, 2013 resulted from one of the loans, acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreement with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy being repaid. As of December 31, 2014 no CRE loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings. As of December 31, 2013, we held a CRE loan for approximately $130 million which had previously been modified in a troubled debt restructuring. No loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings in 2014 or 2013. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) Funding Deposits: We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, foreign exchange services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with State Street entities in various currencies. We invest these client deposits in a combination of investment securities and shortduration financial instruments whose mix is determined by the characteristics of the deposits. For the past several years, we have experienced higher client deposit inflows toward the end of the quarter or the end of the year. As a result, we believe average client deposit balances are more reflective of ongoing funding than period-end balances. TABLE 33: CLIENT DEPOSITS <table><tr><td></td><td>December 31,</td><td>Average Balance Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(In millions)</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td></tr><tr><td>Client deposits^-1</td><td>$195,276</td><td>$182,268</td><td>$167,470</td><td>$143,043</td></tr></table> (1) Balance as of December 31, 2014 excluded term wholesale certificates of deposit, or CDs, of $13.76 billion; average balances for the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 excluded average CDs of $6.87 billion and $2.50 billion, respectively. Short-Term Funding: Our corporate commercial paper program, under which we can issue up to $3.0 billion of commercial paper with original maturities of up to 270 days from the date of issuance, had $2.48 billion and $1.82 billion of commercial paper outstanding as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding at reasonable rates of interest from wholesale investors. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank's membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral. Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight, and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $8.93 billion and $7.95 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $800 million, or approximately $690 million as of December 31, 2014, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancelable by either party with prior notice. As of December 31, 2014, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit. Long-Term Funding: As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank had Board authority to issue unsecured senior debt securities from time to time, provided that the aggregate principal amount of such unsecured senior debt outstanding at any one time does not exceed $5 billion. As of December 31, 2014, $4.1 billion was available for issuance pursuant to this authority. As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank also had Board authority to issue an additional $500 million of subordinated debt. We maintain an effective universal shelf registration that allows for the public offering and sale of debt securities, capital securities, common stock, depositary shares and preferred stock, and warrants to purchase such securities, including any shares into which the preferred stock and depositary shares may be convertible, or any combination thereof. We have issued in the past, and we may issue in the future, securities pursuant to our shelf registration. The issuance of debt or equity securities will depend on future market conditions, funding needs and other factors. Agency Credit Ratings Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; relative market position; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits; strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and preparedness for current or future regulatory developments. High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by providing assurance for unsecured funding and depositors, increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products, serve markets, and engage in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings. A downgrade or reduction of our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital

What's the sum of Fixed income in 2015? (in millions)

Contractual Obligations and Commercial Commitments The following table (in thousands) summarizes our contractual obligations at March 31, 2007 and the effects such obligations are expected to have on our liquidity and cash flows in future periods. <table><tr><td></td><td>Payments Due By Fiscal Year</td></tr><tr><td>Contractual Obligations</td><td>Total</td><td>Less than 1 Year</td><td>1-3 Years</td><td>3-5 Years</td><td>More than 5 Years</td></tr><tr><td>Operating Lease Obligations</td><td>$7,669</td><td>$1,960</td><td>$3,441</td><td>$1,652</td><td>$616</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase Obligations</td><td>6,421</td><td>6,421</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total Obligations</td><td>$14,090</td><td>$8,381</td><td>$3,441</td><td>$1,652</td><td>$616</td></tr></table> We have no long-term debt, capital leases or material commitments at March 31, 2007 other than those shown in the table above. In May 2005, we acquired all the shares of outstanding capital stock of Impella CardioSystems AG, a company headquartered in Aachen, Germany. The aggregate purchase price excluding a contingent payment in the amount of $5.6 million made on January 30, 2007 in the form of common stock, was approximately $45.1 million, which consisted of $42.2 million of our common stock, $1.6 million of cash paid to certain former shareholders of Impella, and $1.3 million of transaction costs, consisting primarily of fees paid for financial advisory and legal services. We may make additional contingent payments to Impella’s former shareholders based on additional milestone payments related to FDA approvals in the amount of up to $11.2 million. These contingent payments may be made in a combination of cash or stock under circumstances described in the purchase agreement. If any contingent payments are made, they will result in an increase to the carrying value of goodwill. We apply the disclosure provisions of FIN No.45, Guarantor’s Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others, and Interpretation of FASB Statements No.5, 57 and 107 and Rescission of FASB Interpretation No.34 (FIN No.45) to our agreements that contain guarantee or indemnification clauses. These disclosure provisions expand those required by SFAS No.5 by requiring that guarantors disclose certain types of guarantees, even if the likelihood of requiring the guarantor’s performance is remote. The following is a description of arrangements in which we are a guarantor. We enter into agreements with other companies in the ordinary course of business, typically with underwriters, contractors, clinical sites and customers that include indemnification provisions. Under these provisions we generally indemnify and hold harmless the indemnified party for losses suffered or incurred by the indemnified party as a result of our activities. These indemnification provisions generally survive termination of the underlying agreement. The maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these indemnification provisions is unlimited. We have never incurred any material costs to defend lawsuits or settle claims related to these indemnification agreements. As a result, the estimated fair value of these agreements is minimal. Accordingly, we have no liabilities recorded for these agreements as of March 31, 2007. Clinical study agreements – In our clinical study agreements, we have agreed to indemnify the participating institutions against losses incurred by them for claims related to any personal injury of subjects taking part in the study to the extent they relate to use of our devices in accordance with the clinical study agreement, the protocol for the device and our instructions. The indemnification provisions contained within our clinical study agreements do not generally include limits on the claims. We have never incurred any material costs related to the indemnification provisions contained in our clinical study agreements. Product warranties—We routinely accrue for estimated future warranty costs on our product sales at the time of shipment. All of our products are subject to rigorous regulation and quality standards. While we engage in extensive product quality programs and processes, including monitoring and evaluating the quality of our component suppliers, our warranty obligations are affected by product failure rates. Our operating results could be adversely affected if the actual cost of product failures exceeds the estimated warranty provision. Patent indemnifications—In many sales transactions, we indemnify customers against possible claims of patent infringement caused by our products. The indemnifications contained within sales contracts usually do not include limits on the claims. We have never incurred any material costs to defend lawsuits or settle patent infringement claims related to sales transactions. Under the provisions of FIN No.45, intellectual property indemnifications require disclosure only. iShares iShares is the leading ETF provider in the world, with $1.3 trillion of AUM at December 31, 2016 and was the top asset gatherer globally in 20161 with record net inflows of $140.5 billion resulting in an organic growth rate of 13%. Equity net inflows of $74.9 billion were driven by flows into the Core range and into funds with U. S. and broad developed market equity exposures. Record fixed income net inflows of $59.9 billion were diversified across exposures and product lines, led by flows into the Core range, corporate and high yield bond funds. iShares multi-asset and alternatives funds contributed a combined $5.7 billion of net inflows, primarily into commodities funds. iShares represented 27% of long-term AUM at December 31, 2016 and 36% of long-term base fees for 2016. Component changes in iShares AUM for 2016 are presented below. <table><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>December 31,2015</td><td>Netinflows</td><td>Marketchange</td><td>FX impact</td><td>December 31,2016</td></tr><tr><td>Equity</td><td>$823,156</td><td>$74,914</td><td>$56,469</td><td>$-3,287</td><td>$951,252</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed income</td><td>254,190</td><td>59,913</td><td>3,782</td><td>-3,178</td><td>314,707</td></tr><tr><td>Multi-asset</td><td>2,730</td><td>354</td><td>61</td><td>4</td><td>3,149</td></tr><tr><td>Alternatives^-1</td><td>12,485</td><td>5,298</td><td>1,055</td><td>-67</td><td>18,771</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,092,561</td><td>$140,479</td><td>$61,367</td><td>$-6,528</td><td>$1,287,879</td></tr></table> (1) Amounts include commodity iShares. Our broad iShares product range offers investors a precise, transparent and efficient way to tap market returns and gain access to a full range of asset classes and global markets that have been difficult for many investors to access, as well as the liquidity required to make adjustments to their exposures quickly and cost-efficiently. ? U. S. iShares AUM ended 2016 at $967.3 billion with $106.9 billion of net inflows driven by strong demand for the Core range and U. S. and broad developed market equities as well as a diverse range of fixed income products.2 In 2016, we saw increased investor focus on risk-aware, “smart beta” products, which saw $20.2 billion of net inflows. ? International iShares AUM ended 2016 at $320.5 billion with net inflows of $33.6 billion led by fixed income net inflows of $21.9 billion, diversified across high yield, emerging market and investment grade corporate bond funds.2 Our international Core ranges in Canada and Europe demonstrated solid results in their third year, raising a combined $11.6 billion in net inflows as we continue to expand our international presence among buy-and-hold investors. Institutional BlackRock’s institutional AUM is well diversified by both product and region, and we serve institutional investors on six continents in sub-categories including: pensions, endowments and foundations, official institutions, and financial institutions. Component changes in Institutional long-term AUM for 2016 are presented below. <table><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>December 31,2015</td><td>Net inflows (outflows)</td><td>Marketchange</td><td>FX impact</td><td>December 31,2016</td></tr><tr><td>Active:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Equity</td><td>$121,442</td><td>$-7,449</td><td>$11,112</td><td>$-4,406</td><td>$120,699</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed income</td><td>514,428</td><td>10,234</td><td>20,242</td><td>-8,177</td><td>536,727</td></tr><tr><td>Multi-asset</td><td>252,041</td><td>13,322</td><td>18,516</td><td>-6,946</td><td>276,933</td></tr><tr><td>Alternatives</td><td>74,941</td><td>1,811</td><td>619</td><td>-1,756</td><td>75,615</td></tr><tr><td>Active subtotal</td><td>962,852</td><td>17,918</td><td>50,489</td><td>-21,285</td><td>1,009,974</td></tr><tr><td>Index:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Equity</td><td>1,285,419</td><td>-8,612</td><td>135,997</td><td>-23,800</td><td>1,389,004</td></tr><tr><td>Fixed income</td><td>441,097</td><td>41,401</td><td>55,665</td><td>-39,488</td><td>498,675</td></tr><tr><td>Multi-asset</td><td>6,258</td><td>-82</td><td>843</td><td>-91</td><td>6,928</td></tr><tr><td>Alternatives</td><td>6,003</td><td>784</td><td>790</td><td>-503</td><td>7,074</td></tr><tr><td>Index subtotal</td><td>1,738,777</td><td>33,491</td><td>193,295</td><td>-63,882</td><td>1,901,681</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$2,701,629</td><td>$51,409</td><td>$243,784</td><td>$-85,167</td><td>$2,911,655</td></tr></table> From an enterprise risk management perspective, management sets limits on the levels of catastrophe loss exposure the Company may underwrite. The limits are revised periodically based on a variety of factors, including but not limited to the Company’s financial resources and expected earnings and risk/reward analyses of the business being underwritten. The Company may purchase reinsurance to cover specific business written or the potential accumulation or aggregation of exposures across some or all of its operations. Reinsurance purchasing decisions consider both the potential coverage and market conditions including the pricing, terms, conditions, availability and collectability of coverage, with the aim of securing cost effective protection from financially secure counterparties. The amount of reinsurance purchased has varied over time, reflecting the Company’s view of its exposures and the cost of reinsurance. Management estimates that the projected net economic loss from its largest 100-year event in a given zone represents approximately 10% of its December 31, 2018 shareholders’ equity. Economic loss is the PML exposure, net of third party reinsurance, reduced by estimated reinstatement premiums to renew coverage and estimated income taxes. The impact of income taxes on the PML depends on the distribution of the losses by corporate entity, which is also affected by inter-affiliate reinsurance. Management also monitors and controls its largest PMLs at multiple points along the loss distribution curve, such as loss amounts at the 20, 50, 100, 250, 500 and 1,000 year return periods. This process enables management to identify and control exposure accumulations and to integrate such exposures into enterprise risk, underwriting and capital management decisions. The Company’s catastrophe loss projections, segmented by risk zones, are updated quarterly and reviewed as part of a formal risk management review process. The table below reflects the Company’s PML exposure, net of third party reinsurance at various return periods for its top three zones/perils (as ranked by the largest 1 in 100 year economic loss) based on loss projection data as of January 1, 2019, adjusted to reflect Industry Loss Warranty (ILW) purchases at the same level the Company had available during 2018. <table><tr><td>Return Periods (in years)</td><td>1 in 20</td><td>1 in 50</td><td>1 in 100</td><td></td><td>1 in 250</td><td>1 in 500</td><td>1 in 1,000</td></tr><tr><td>Exceeding Probability</td><td colspan="2">5.0%</td><td>2.0%</td><td>1.0%</td><td>0.4%</td><td>0.2%</td><td>0.1%</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Zone/ Peril</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Southeast U.S., Wind</td><td>$639</td><td>$888</td><td>$1,036</td><td></td><td>$1,315</td><td>$1,583</td><td>$2,444</td></tr><tr><td>California, Earthquake</td><td>136</td><td>470</td><td>781</td><td></td><td>1,132</td><td>1,302</td><td>1,571</td></tr><tr><td>Texas, Wind</td><td>158</td><td>467</td><td>769</td><td></td><td>1,077</td><td>1,152</td><td>1,236</td></tr></table> The projected net economic losses, defined as PML exposures, net of third party reinsurance, reinstatement premiums and estimated income taxes, for the top three zones/perils scheduled above are as follows:

Which year is full service for Gas Delivered($ in millions) the highest?

THE AES CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) DECEMBER 31, 2017, 2016, AND 2015 145 On December 8, 2017, the Board of Directors declared a quarterly common stock dividend of $0.13 per share payable on February 15, 2018 to shareholders of record at the close of business on February 1, 2018. Stock Repurchase Program — No shares were repurchased in 2017. The cumulative repurchases from the commencement of the Program in July 2010 through December 31, 2017 totaled 154.3 million shares for a total cost of $1.9 billion, at an average price per share of $12.12 (including a nominal amount of commissions). As of December 31, 2017, $246 million remained available for repurchase under the Program. The common stock repurchased has been classified as treasury stock and accounted for using the cost method. A total of 155,924,785 and 156,878,891 shares were held as treasury stock at December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Restricted stock units under the Company's employee benefit plans are issued from treasury stock. The Company has not retired any common stock repurchased since it began the Program in July 2010.15. SEGMENTS AND GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION The segment reporting structure uses the Company's organizational structure as its foundation to reflect how the Company manages the businesses internally and is organized by geographic regions which provides a sociopolitical-economic understanding of our business. During the third quarter of 2017, the Europe and Asia SBUs were merged in order to leverage scale and are now reported as part of the Eurasia SBU. The management reporting structure is organized by five SBUs led by our President and Chief Executive Officer: US, Andes, Brazil, MCAC and Eurasia SBUs. The Company determined that it has five operating and five reportable segments corresponding to its SBUs. All prior period results have been retrospectively revised to reflect the new segment reporting structure. In February 2018, we announced a reorganization as a part of our ongoing strategy to simplify our portfolio, optimize our cost structure, and reduce our carbon intensity. The Company is currently evaluating the impact this reorganization will have on our segment reporting structure. Corporate and Other — Corporate overhead costs which are not directly associated with the operations of our five reportable segments are included in "Corporate and Other. " Also included are certain intercompany charges such as self-insurance premiums which are fully eliminated in consolidation. The Company uses Adjusted PTC as its primary segment performance measure. Adjusted PTC, a non-GAAP measure, is defined by the Company as pre-tax income from continuing operations attributable to The AES Corporation excluding gains or losses of the consolidated entity due to (a) unrealized gains or losses related to derivative transactions; (b) unrealized foreign currency gains or losses; (c) gains, losses and associated benefits and costs due to dispositions and acquisitions of business interests, including early plant closures; (d) losses due to impairments; (e) gains, losses and costs due to the early retirement of debt; and (f) costs directly associated with a major restructuring program, including, but not limited to, workforce reduction efforts, relocations, and office consolidation. Adjusted PTC also includes net equity in earnings of affiliates on an after-tax basis adjusted for the same gains or losses excluded from consolidated entities. The Company has concluded Adjusted PTC better reflects the underlying business performance of the Company and is the most relevant measure considered in the Company's internal evaluation of the financial performance of its segments. Additionally, given its large number of businesses and complexity, the Company concluded that Adjusted PTC is a more transparent measure that better assists investors in determining which businesses have the greatest impact on the Company's results. Revenue and Adjusted PTC are presented before inter-segment eliminations, which includes the effect of intercompany transactions with other segments except for interest, charges for certain management fees, and the write-off of intercompany balances, as applicable. All intra-segment activity has been eliminated within the segment. Inter-segment activity has been eliminated within the total consolidated results. The following tables present financial information by segment for the periods indicated (in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td>Total Revenue</td></tr><tr><td>Year Ended December 31,</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>US SBU</td><td>$3,229</td><td>$3,429</td><td>$3,593</td></tr><tr><td>Andes SBU</td><td>2,710</td><td>2,506</td><td>2,489</td></tr><tr><td>Brazil SBU</td><td>542</td><td>450</td><td>962</td></tr><tr><td>MCAC SBU</td><td>2,448</td><td>2,172</td><td>2,353</td></tr><tr><td>Eurasia SBU</td><td>1,590</td><td>1,670</td><td>1,875</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate and Other</td><td>35</td><td>77</td><td>31</td></tr><tr><td>Eliminations</td><td>-24</td><td>-23</td><td>-43</td></tr><tr><td>Total Revenue</td><td>$10,530</td><td>$10,281</td><td>$11,260</td></tr></table> Gas Operations Gas Facilities CECONY’s capitalized costs for utility plant, net of accumulated depreciation, for gas facilities, which are primarily distribution facilities, were $5,749 million and $5,196 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Natural gas is delivered by pipeline to CECONY at various points in or near its service territory and is distributed to customers by the company through an estimated 4,375 miles of mains and 370,924 service lines. The company owns a natural gas liquefaction facility and storage tank at its Astoria property in Queens, New York. The plant can store 1,062 MDt of which a maximum of about 240 MDt can be withdrawn per day. The company has about 1,226 MDt of additional natural gas storage capacity at a field in upstate New York, owned and operated by Honeoye Storage Corporation, a corporation 28.8 percent owned by CECONY and 71.2 percent owned by Con Edison Development. Gas Sales and Deliveries The company generally recovers the cost of the gas that it buys and then sells to its full-service customers. It does not make any margin or profit on the gas it sells. CECONY’s gas revenues are subject to a weather normalization clause and a revenue decoupling mechanism. As a result, its gas delivery revenues are generally not affected by changes in delivery volumes from levels assumed when rates were approved. CECONY’s gas sales and deliveries for the last five years were: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2012</td><td>2013</td><td>2014</td><td>2015</td><td>2016</td></tr><tr><td>Gas Delivered(MDt)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Firm Sales</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Full service</td><td>57,595</td><td>67,007</td><td>75,630</td><td>77,197</td><td>75,892</td></tr><tr><td>Firm transportation of customer-owned gas</td><td>52,860</td><td>61,139</td><td>68,731</td><td>72,864</td><td>68,442</td></tr><tr><td>Total Firm Sales</td><td>110,455</td><td>128,146</td><td>144,361</td><td>150,061</td><td>144,334</td></tr><tr><td>Interruptible Sales (a)</td><td>5,961</td><td>10,900</td><td>10,498</td><td>6,332</td><td>8,957</td></tr><tr><td>Total Gas Delivered to CECONY Customers</td><td>116,416</td><td>139,046</td><td>154,859</td><td>156,393</td><td>153,291</td></tr><tr><td>Transportation of customer-owned gas</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>NYPA</td><td>48,107</td><td>48,682</td><td>47,548</td><td>44,038</td><td>43,101</td></tr><tr><td>Other (mainly generating plants and interruptible transportation)</td><td>108,086</td><td>87,379</td><td>105,012</td><td>104,857</td><td>109,000</td></tr><tr><td>Off-System Sales</td><td>730</td><td>4,638</td><td>15</td><td>389</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total Sales</td><td>273,339</td><td>279,745</td><td>307,434</td><td>305,677</td><td>305,392</td></tr><tr><td>Gas Delivered($ in millions)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Firm Sales</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Full service</td><td>$889</td><td>$1,059</td><td>$1,141</td><td>$956</td><td>$933</td></tr><tr><td>Firm transportation of customer-owned gas</td><td>380</td><td>414</td><td>453</td><td>458</td><td>426</td></tr><tr><td>Total Firm Sales</td><td>1,269</td><td>1,473</td><td>1,594</td><td>1,414</td><td>1,359</td></tr><tr><td>Interruptible Sales</td><td>39</td><td>69</td><td>91</td><td>46</td><td>34</td></tr><tr><td>Total Gas Delivered to CECONY Customers</td><td>1,308</td><td>1,542</td><td>1,685</td><td>1,460</td><td>1,393</td></tr><tr><td>Transportation of customer-owned gas</td><td></td><td colspan="3"></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>NYPA</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Other (mainly generating plants and interruptible transportation)</td><td>68</td><td>71</td><td>70</td><td>54</td><td>57</td></tr><tr><td>Off-System Sales</td><td>5</td><td>18</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Other operating revenues (mainly regulatory amortizations)</td><td>32</td><td>-17</td><td>-36</td><td>11</td><td>56</td></tr><tr><td>Total Sales</td><td>$1,415</td><td>$1,616</td><td>$1,721</td><td>$1,528</td><td>$1,508</td></tr><tr><td>Average Revenue per Dt Sold</td><td></td><td colspan="3"></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Residential</td><td>$18.14</td><td>$18.52</td><td>$16.76</td><td>$13.91</td><td>$13.96</td></tr><tr><td>General</td><td>$11.68</td><td>$12.05</td><td>$12.38</td><td>$9.73</td><td>$9.47</td></tr></table> (a) Includes 563, 5,362, 6,057, 1,229 and 4,708 MDt for 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively, which are also reflected in firm transportation and other. For further discussion of the company’s gas operating revenues and its gas results, see “Results of Operations” in Item 7. For additional segment information, see Note N to the financial statements in Item 8 floating-rate notes to fixed-rates. This includes notional amounts of offsetting swaps that neutralize our exposure to interest rates on other interest rate swaps. FOREIGN EXCHANGE RISK Foreign currency fluctuations affect our net investments in foreign subsidiaries and foreign currency cash flows related to third party purchases, intercompany loans, and product shipments. We are also exposed to the translation of foreign currency earnings to the U. S. dollar. Our principal exposures are to the Australian dollar, British pound sterling, Canadian dollar, Chinese renminbi, euro, Japanese yen, and Mexican peso. We mainly use foreign currency forward contracts to selectively hedge our foreign currency cash flow exposures. We generally do not hedge more than 12 months forward and generally do not hedge intercompany transactions. We also have many net investments in foreign subsidiaries that are denominated in euros. We hedge a portion of these net investments by issuing euro-denominated commercial paper. As of May 25, 2008, we had issued $472.9 million of eurodenominated commercial paper and foreign exchange forward contracts that we have designated as a net investment hedge and thus deferred net foreign currency transaction losses of $69.6 million to accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). COMMODITY PRICE RISK Many commodities we use in the production and distribution of our products are exposed to market price risks. We utilize derivatives to hedge price risk for our principal ingredient and energy costs, including grains (oats, wheat, and corn), oils (principally soybean), non-fat dry milk, natural gas, and diesel fuel. We manage our exposures through a combination of purchase orders, long-term contracts with suppliers, exchangetraded futures and options, and over-the-counter options and swaps. We offset our exposures based on current and projected market conditions, and generally seek to acquire the inputs at as close to our planned cost as possible. As of May 25, 2008, the net notional value of commodity derivatives was $784.8 million, of which $524.8 million relates to agricultural positions and $260.0 million relates to energy positions. These hedges relate to inputs that generally will be utilized within the next 12 months. EQUITY INSTRUMENTS Equity price movements affect our compensation expense as certain investments owned by our employees related to our deferred compensation plan are revalued. We use equity swaps to manage this market risk. VALUE AT RISK The estimates in the table below are intended to measure the maximum potential fair value we could lose in one day from adverse changes in market interest rates, foreign exchange rates, commodity prices, and equity prices under normal market conditions. A Monte Carlo value-at-risk (VAR) methodology was used to quantify the market risk for our exposures. The models assumed normal market conditions and used a 95 percent confidence level. The VAR calculation used historical interest rates, foreign exchange rates, and commodity and equity prices from the past year to estimate the potential volatility and correlation of these rates in the future. The market data were drawn from the RiskMetricsTM data set. The calculations are not intended to represent actual losses in fair value that we expect to incur. Further, since the hedging instrument (the derivative) inversely correlates with the underlying exposure, we would expect that any loss or gain in the fair value of our derivatives would be generally offset by an increase or decrease in the fair value of the underlying exposures. The positions included in the calculations were: debt; investments; interest rate swaps; foreign exchange forwards; commodity swaps, futures and options; and equity instruments. The calculations do not include the underlying foreign exchange and commodities-related positions that are hedged by these market-risk-sensitive instruments. The table below presents the estimated maximum potential VAR arising from a one-day loss in fair value for our interest rate, foreign currency, commodity, and equity market-risk-sensitive instruments outstanding as of May 25, 2008, and May 27, 2007, and the average fair value impact during the year ended May 25, 2008. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Fair Value Impact</td></tr><tr><td>In Millions</td><td>May 25, 2008</td><td>Average During Fiscal 2008</td><td>May 27, 2007</td></tr><tr><td>Interest rate instruments</td><td>$18.9</td><td>$14.0</td><td>$10.1</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign currency instruments</td><td>5.0</td><td>4.1</td><td>3.5</td></tr><tr><td>Commodity instruments</td><td>6.3</td><td>4.7</td><td>4.0</td></tr><tr><td>Equity instruments</td><td>1.2</td><td>1.0</td><td>0.9</td></tr></table>

What is the sum of Unrecognized net loss CHANGE IN PLAN ASSETS of CECONY 2015, Operating earnings of 2008, and FUNDED STATUS CHANGE IN PLAN ASSETS of Con Edison 2014 ?

(a) Relates to an increase in CECONY’s pension obligation of $45 million from a 1999 special retirement program. Funded Status The funded status at December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Con Edison</td><td colspan="3">CECONY</td></tr><tr><td>(Millions of Dollars)</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td></tr><tr><td>CHANGE IN PROJECTED BENEFIT OBLIGATION</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Projected benefit obligation at beginning of year</td><td>$15,081</td><td>$12,197</td><td>$13,406</td><td>$14,137</td><td>$11,429</td><td>$12,572</td></tr><tr><td>Service cost – excluding administrative expenses</td><td>293</td><td>221</td><td>259</td><td>274</td><td>206</td><td>241</td></tr><tr><td>Interest cost on projected benefit obligation</td><td>575</td><td>572</td><td>537</td><td>538</td><td>536</td><td>503</td></tr><tr><td>Net actuarial (gain)/loss</td><td>-996</td><td>2,641</td><td>-1,469</td><td>-931</td><td>2,484</td><td>-1,388</td></tr><tr><td>Plan amendments</td><td>—</td><td>6</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Benefits paid</td><td>-576</td><td>-556</td><td>-536</td><td>-536</td><td>-518</td><td>-499</td></tr><tr><td>PROJECTED BENEFIT OBLIGATION AT END OF YEAR</td><td>$14,377</td><td>$15,081</td><td>$12,197</td><td>$13,482</td><td>$14,137</td><td>$11,429</td></tr><tr><td>CHANGE IN PLAN ASSETS</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year</td><td>$11,495</td><td>$10,755</td><td>$9,135</td><td>$10,897</td><td>$10,197</td><td>$8,668</td></tr><tr><td>Actual return on plan assets</td><td>126</td><td>752</td><td>1,310</td><td>118</td><td>715</td><td>1,241</td></tr><tr><td>Employer contributions</td><td>750</td><td>578</td><td>879</td><td>697</td><td>535</td><td>819</td></tr><tr><td>Benefits paid</td><td>-576</td><td>-556</td><td>-536</td><td>-536</td><td>-518</td><td>-499</td></tr><tr><td>Administrative expenses</td><td>-36</td><td>-34</td><td>-33</td><td>-35</td><td>-32</td><td>-32</td></tr><tr><td>FAIR VALUE OF PLAN ASSETS AT END OF YEAR</td><td>$11,759</td><td>$11,495</td><td>$10,755</td><td>$11,141</td><td>$10,897</td><td>$10,197</td></tr><tr><td>FUNDED STATUS</td><td>$-2,618</td><td>$-3,586</td><td>$-1,442</td><td>$-2,341</td><td>$-3,240</td><td>$-1,232</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized net loss</td><td>$3,909</td><td>$4,888</td><td>$2,759</td><td>$3,704</td><td>$4,616</td><td>$2,617</td></tr><tr><td>Unrecognized prior service costs</td><td>16</td><td>20</td><td>17</td><td>3</td><td>4</td><td>6</td></tr><tr><td>Accumulated benefit obligation</td><td>12,909</td><td>13,454</td><td>11,004</td><td>12,055</td><td>12,553</td><td>10,268</td></tr></table> The decrease in the pension plan’s projected benefit obligation (due primarily to increased discount rates) was the primary cause of the decreased pension liability at Con Edison and CECONY of $968 million and $899 million, respectively, compared with December 31, 2014. For Con Edison, this decrease in pension liability corresponds with a decrease to regulatory assets of $967 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs associated with the Utilities consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, a credit to OCI of $10 million (net of taxes) for the unrecognized net losses, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses and O&R’s New Jersey and Pennsylvania utility subsidiaries. For CECONY, the decrease in pension liability corresponds with a decrease to regulatory assets of $911 million for unrecognized net losses and unrecognized prior service costs consistent with the accounting rules for regulated operations, a credit to OCI of $1 million (net of taxes) for unrecognized net losses, and an immaterial change to OCI (net of taxes) for the unrecognized prior service costs associated with the competitive energy businesses. A portion of the unrecognized net loss and prior service cost for the pension plan, equal to $603 million and $4 million, respectively, will be recognized from accumulated OCI and the regulatory asset into net periodic benefit cost over the next year for Con Edison. Included in these amounts are $570 million and $2 million, respectively, for CECONY. At December 31, 2015 and 2014, Con Edison’s investments include $243 million and $225 million, respectively, held in external trust accounts for benefit payments pursuant to the supplemental retirement plans. Included in these amounts for CECONY were $221 million and $208 million, respectively. See Note P. The accumulated benefit obligations for the supplemental retirement plans for Con Edison and CECONY were $285 million and $249 million as of December 31, 2015 and $289 million and $250 million as of December 31, 2014, respectively Contract options in our defense businesses represent agreements to perform additional work beyond the products and services associated with firm contracts, if the customer exercises the option. These options are negotiated in conjunction with a firm contract and provide the terms under which the customer may elect to procure additional units or services at a future date. Contract options in the Aerospace group represent options to purchase new aircraft and long-term agreements with fleet customers. We recognize options in backlog when the customer exercises the option and establishes a firm order. On December 31, 2009, the estimated potential value associated with these IDIQ contracts and contract options was approximately $17.6 billion, up from $16.8 billion at the end of 2008. This represents our estimate of the potential value we will receive. The actual amount of funding received in the future may be higher or lower. We expect to realize this value over the next 10 to 15 years. REVIEW OF OPERATING SEGMENTS AEROSPACE Review of 2009 vs. 2008 <table><tr><td> Year Ended December 31</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td colspan="2">Variance</td></tr><tr><td>Revenues</td><td>$5,171</td><td>$5,512</td><td>$-341</td><td>-6.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Operating earnings</td><td>707</td><td>1,021</td><td>-314</td><td>-30.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Operating margin</td><td>13.7%</td><td>18.5%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Gulfstream aircraft deliveries (in units):</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Green</td><td>94</td><td>156</td><td>-62</td><td>-39.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Completion</td><td>110</td><td>152</td><td>-42</td><td>-27.6%</td></tr></table> The Aerospace group’s revenues decreased in 2009, the net result of a 24 percent decline in Gulfstream revenues that was offset in part by revenues from Jet Aviation, which we acquired in the fourth quarter of 2008. The combination of the global economic deterioration and credit crisis along with negative business-jet rhetoric had a significant impact on the business-jet market in 2009. To adjust to the economic conditions and weakened demand, we reduced Gulfstream’s 2009 aircraft production and delivery schedule, primarily in the group’s midsize models, to bridge the market downturn. This included a five-week furlough at the group’s production center in Savannah, Georgia, in July and August. As a result, aircraft-manufacturing revenues decreased 28 percent in 2009 compared with 2008. The economic environment also impacted the group’s aircraft services business. Organic aircraftservices revenues were down 15 percent in 2009 resulting from reduced flying hours and customer deferral of aircraft maintenance. The decline in aircraft manufacturing and services revenues was slightly offset by higher pre-owned aircraft revenues in 2009. The group sold six pre-owned aircraft for $124 in 2009 compared with two sales for $18 in 2008. The group’s operating earnings declined in 2009 compared with 2008 due primarily to the factors noted above. The components of the reduction in earnings were as follows: <table><tr><td>Aircraft manufacturing and completions</td><td>$-220</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-owned aircraft</td><td>-18</td></tr><tr><td>Aircraft services</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-77</td></tr><tr><td>Total decrease in operating earnings</td><td>$-314</td></tr></table> The net decrease in the group’s aircraft manufacturing and completions earnings in 2009 resulted from the reduction in Gulfstream aircraft deliveries offset in part by the addition of Jet Aviation’s aircraft completions and refurbishing business. The earnings decline associated with the decreased Gulfstream volume was mitigated by cost-reduction initiatives, a shift in the mix of aircraft deliveries toward large-cabin aircraft, and liquidated damages collected on defaulted aircraft contracts. As a result, aircraft manufacturing margins increased in 2009 over 2008 despite the decline in volume during the year. The group continues to focus on reducing costs through production improvements and operational efficiencies to maintain aircraft-manufacturing margins. In late 2008 and early 2009, the supply in the global pre-owned aircraft market increased significantly, putting considerable pressure on pricing. As a result, the group wrote down the carrying value of its preowned aircraft inventory in 2009. Pricing in the pre-owned market appears to have stabilized in the second half of 2009, particularly for large-cabin aircraft. The group continues to work to minimize its preowned aircraft exposure, with four pre-owned aircraft valued at $60 remaining in inventory at the end of 2009. Aircraft services earnings were steady in 2009 compared with 2008 as the addition of Jet Aviation’s maintenance and repair activities, fixedbase operations and aircraft management services offset a decrease in organic aircraft services earnings. A significant reduction in flight hours in the business-jet market put competitive pressure on aircraft maintenance and repair earnings in 2009. The group’s operating earnings also were impacted negatively in 2009 by severance costs associated with workforce reduction activities and intangible asset amortization related to the Jet Aviation acquisition. The factors discussed above and the addition of lower-margin Jet Aviation business caused the group’s overall operating margins to decrease 480 basis points in 2009 compared with 2008. Overview Vornado Realty Trust (“Vornado”) is a fully-integrated real estate investment trust (“REIT”) and conducts its business through, and substantially all of its interests in properties are held by, Vornado Realty L. P. , a Delaware limited partnership (the “Operating Partnership”). Accordingly, Vornado’s cash flow and ability to pay dividends to its shareholders is dependent upon the cash flow of the Operating Partnership and the ability of its direct and indirect subsidiaries to first satisfy their obligations to creditors. Vornado is the sole general partner of, and owned approximately 93.5% of the common limited partnership interest in the Operating Partnership at December 31, 2011. All references to “we,” “us,” “our,” the “Company” and “Vornado” refer to Vornado Realty Trust and its consolidated subsidiaries, including the Operating Partnership. We own and operate office, retail and showroom properties (our “core” operations) with large concentrations of office and retail properties in the New York City metropolitan area and in the Washington, DC / Northern Virginia area. In addition, we have a 32.7% interest in Toys “R” Us, Inc. (“Toys”) which has a significant real estate component, a 32.4% interest in Alexander’s, Inc. (NYSE: ALX) (“Alexander’s”), which has seven properties in the greater New York metropolitan area, as well as interests in other real estate and related investments. Our business objective is to maximize shareholder value, which we measure by the total return provided to our shareholders. Below is a table comparing our performance to the Morgan Stanley REIT Index (“RMS”) and the SNL REIT Index (“SNL”) for the following periods ended December 31, 2011: <table><tr><td> </td><td colspan="3"> Total Return^-1</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td> Vornado</td><td> RMS</td><td> SNL</td></tr><tr><td>One-year</td><td>-4.6%</td><td>8.7%</td><td>8.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Three-year</td><td>40.2%</td><td>79.6%</td><td>79.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Five-year</td><td>-25.2%</td><td>-7.3%</td><td>-3.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Ten-year</td><td>187.0%</td><td>163.2%</td><td>175.4%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table> We intend to achieve our business objective by continuing to pursue our investment philosophy and executing our operating strategies through: ? Maintaining a superior team of operating and investment professionals and an entrepreneurial spirit; ? Investing in properties in select markets, such as New York City and Washington, DC, where we believe there is a high likelihood of capital appreciation; ? Acquiring quality properties at a discount to replacement cost and where there is a significant potential for higher rents; ? Investing in retail properties in select under-stored locations such as the New York City metropolitan area; ? Developing and redeveloping existing properties to increase returns and maximize value; and ? Investing in operating companies that have a significant real estate component. We expect to finance our growth, acquisitions and investments using internally generated funds, proceeds from possible asset sales and by accessing the public and private capital markets. We may also offer Vornado common or preferred shares or Operating Partnership units in exchange for property and may repurchase or otherwise reacquire these securities in the future. We compete with a large number of real estate property owners and developers, some of which may be willing to accept lower returns on their investments than we are. Principal factors of competition include rents charged, attractiveness of location, the quality of the property and the breadth and the quality of services provided. Our success depends upon, among other factors, trends of the national, regional and local economies, the financial condition and operating results of current and prospective tenants and customers, availability and cost of capital, construction and renovation costs, taxes, governmental regulations, legislation and population trends. See “Risk Factors” in Item 1A for additional information regarding these factors. Costs under the Transformational Cost Management Program, which were primarily recorded in selling, general and administrative expenses and included in the fiscal year ended August 31, 2019 were as follows (in millions):

Does the average value of As of January 1 in Number of Awards greater than that in Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value?

damages to natural resources allegedly caused by the discharge of hazardous substances from two former waste disposal sites in New Jersey. During the fourth quarter, the Company negotiated a settlement of New Jersey’s claims. Under the terms of the settlement, the company will transfer to the State of New Jersey 150 acres of undeveloped land with groundwater recharge potential, which the Company acquired for purposes of the settlement, and will pay the state’s attorneys’ fees. Notice of the settlement was published for public comment in December 2007, and no objections were received. As a result, the Company and the State of New Jersey have signed the formal settlement agreement pursuant to which the Company will transfer title to the property and will be dismissed from the lawsuit, which will continue against the codefendants. Accrued Liabilities and Insurance Receivables Related to Legal Proceedings The Company complies with the requirements of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.5, “Accounting for Contingencies,” and related guidance, and records liabilities for legal proceedings in those instances where it can reasonably estimate the amount of the loss and where liability is probable. Where the reasonable estimate of the probable loss is a range, the Company records the most likely estimate of the loss, or the low end of the range if there is no one best estimate. The Company either discloses the amount of a possible loss or range of loss in excess of established reserves if estimable, or states that such an estimate cannot be made. For those insured matters where the Company has taken a reserve, the Company also records receivables for the amount of insurance that it expects to recover under the Company’s insurance program. For those insured matters where the Company has not taken a reserve because the liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, but where the Company has incurred an expense in defending itself, the Company records receivables for the amount of insurance that it expects to recover for the expense incurred. The Company discloses significant legal proceedings even where liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, if the Company believes there is at least a reasonable possibility that a loss may be incurred. Because litigation is subject to inherent uncertainties, and unfavorable rulings or developments could occur, there can be no certainty that the Company may not ultimately incur charges in excess of presently recorded liabilities. A future adverse ruling, settlement, or unfavorable development could result in future charges that could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations or cash flows in the period in which they are recorded. The Company currently believes that such future charges, if any, would not have a material adverse effect on the consolidated financial position of the Company, taking into account its significant available insurance coverage. Based on experience and developments, the Company periodically reexamines its estimates of probable liabilities and associated expenses and receivables, and whether it is able to estimate a liability previously determined to be not estimable and/or not probable. Where appropriate, the Company makes additions to or adjustments of its estimated liabilities. As a result, the current estimates of the potential impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the legal proceedings and claims pending against the Company could change in the future. The Company estimates insurance receivables based on an analysis of its numerous policies, including their exclusions, pertinent case law interpreting comparable policies, its experience with similar claims, and assessment of the nature of the claim, and records an amount it has concluded is likely to be recovered. The following table shows the major categories of on-going litigation, environmental remediation and other environmental liabilities for which the Company has been able to estimate its probable liability and for which the Company has taken reserves and the related insurance receivables: <table><tr><td>At December 31 (Millions)</td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td><td>2005</td></tr><tr><td>Breast implant liabilities</td><td>$1</td><td>$4</td><td>$7</td></tr><tr><td>Breast implant receivables</td><td>64</td><td>93</td><td>130</td></tr><tr><td>Respirator mask/asbestos liabilities</td><td>121</td><td>181</td><td>210</td></tr><tr><td>Respirator mask/asbestos receivables</td><td>332</td><td>380</td><td>447</td></tr><tr><td>Environmental remediation liabilities</td><td>37</td><td>44</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>Environmental remediation receivables</td><td>15</td><td>15</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td>Other environmental liabilities</td><td>147</td><td>14</td><td>8</td></tr></table> For those significant pending legal proceedings that do not appear in the table and that are not the subject of pending settlement agreements, the Company has determined that liability is not probable or the amount of the liability is not estimable, or both, and the Company is unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss at this time. The amounts in the preceding table with respect to breast implant and environmental remediation represent the Company’s best estimate of the respective liabilities. The Company does not believe that there is any single best estimate of the respirator/mask/asbestos liability or the other environmental liabilities shown above, nor that it can reliably estimate the amount or range of amounts by which those liabilities may exceed the reserves the Company has established. one year volatility, the median of the term of the expected life rolling volatility, the median of the most recent term of the expected life volatility of 3M stock, and the implied volatility on the grant date. The expected term assumption is based on the weighted average of historical grants. Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units The following table summarizes restricted stock and restricted stock unit activity for the years ended December 31: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2015</td><td colspan="2">2014</td><td colspan="2">2013</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Number of Awards</td><td>Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value</td><td>Number of Awards</td><td>Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value</td><td>Number of Awards</td><td>Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td>Nonvested balance —</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>As of January 1</td><td>2,817,786</td><td>$104.41</td><td>3,105,361</td><td>$92.31</td><td>3,261,562</td><td>$85.17</td></tr><tr><td>Granted</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Annual</td><td>671,204</td><td>165.86</td><td>798,615</td><td>126.79</td><td>946,774</td><td>101.57</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>26,886</td><td>156.94</td><td>78,252</td><td>152.74</td><td>44,401</td><td>111.19</td></tr><tr><td>Vested</td><td>-1,010,612</td><td>89.99</td><td>-1,100,675</td><td>90.37</td><td>-1,100,095</td><td>79.93</td></tr><tr><td>Forfeited</td><td>-64,176</td><td>118.99</td><td>-63,767</td><td>97.23</td><td>-47,281</td><td>90.82</td></tr><tr><td>As of December 31</td><td>2,441,088</td><td>$127.47</td><td>2,817,786</td><td>$104.41</td><td>3,105,361</td><td>$92.31</td></tr></table> As of December 31, 2015, there was $84 million of compensation expense that has yet to be recognized related to nonvested restricted stock and restricted stock units. This expense is expected to be recognized over the remaining weightedaverage vesting period of 24 months. The total fair value of restricted stock and restricted stock units that vested during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $166 million, $145 million and $114 million, respectively. The Company’s actual tax benefits realized for the tax deductions related to the vesting of restricted stock and restricted stock units for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $62 million, $54 million and $43 million, respectively. Restricted stock units granted under the 3M 2008 Long-Term Incentive Plan generally vest three years following the grant date assuming continued employment. Dividend equivalents equal to the dividends payable on the same number of shares of 3M common stock accrue on these restricted stock units during the vesting period, although no dividend equivalents are paid on any of these restricted stock units that are forfeited prior to the vesting date. Dividends are paid out in cash at the vest date on restricted stock units, except for performance shares which do not earn dividends. Since the rights to dividends are forfeitable, there is no impact on basic earnings per share calculations. Weighted average restricted stock unit shares outstanding are included in the computation of diluted earnings per share. Performance Shares Instead of restricted stock units, the Company makes annual grants of performance shares to members of its executive management. The 2015 performance criteria for these performance shares (organic volume growth, return on invested capital, free cash flow conversion, and earnings per share growth) were selected because the Company believes that they are important drivers of long-term stockholder value. The number of shares of 3M common stock that could actually be delivered at the end of the three-year performance period may be anywhere from 0% to 200% of each performance share granted, depending on the performance of the Company during such performance period. Non-substantive vesting requires that expense for the performance shares be recognized over one or three years depending on when each individual became a 3M executive. Performance shares do not accrue dividends during the performance period. Therefore, the grant date fair value is determined by reducing the closing stock price on the date of grant by the net present value of dividends during the performance period. Pension and Postretirement Obligations: 3M has various company-sponsored retirement plans covering substantially all U. S. employees and many employees outside the United States. The primary U. S. defined-benefit pension plan was closed to new participants effective January 1, 2009. The Company accounts for its defined benefit pension and postretirement health care and life insurance benefit plans in accordance with Accounting Standard Codification (ASC) 715, Compensation — Retirement Benefits, in measuring plan assets and benefit obligations and in determining the amount of net periodic benefit cost. ASC 715 requires employers to recognize the underfunded or overfunded status of a defined benefit pension or postretirement plan as an asset or liability in its statement of financial position and recognize changes in the funded status in the year in which the changes occur through accumulated other comprehensive income, which is a component of stockholders’ equity. While the company believes the valuation methods used to determine the fair value of plan assets are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the use of different methodologies or assumptions to determine the fair value of certain financial instruments could result in a different estimate of fair value at the reporting date. See Note 11 for additional discussion of actuarial assumptions used in determining pension and postretirement health care liabilities and expenses. Pension benefits associated with these plans are generally based primarily on each participant’s years of service, compensation, and age at retirement or termination. The benefit obligation represents the present value of the benefits that employees are entitled to in the future for services already rendered as of the measurement date. The Company measures the present value of these future benefits by projecting benefit payment cash flows for each future period and discounting these cash flows back to the December 31 measurement date, using the yields of a portfolio of high quality, fixed-income debt instruments that would produce cash flows sufficient in timing and amount to settle projected future benefits. Historically, the single aggregated discount rate used for each plan’s benefit obligation was also used for the calculation of all net periodic benefit costs, including the measurement of the service and interest costs. Beginning in 2016, 3M changed the method used to estimate the service and interest cost components of the net periodic pension and other postretirement benefit costs. The new method measures service cost and interest cost separately using the spot yield curve approach applied to each corresponding obligation. Service costs are determined based on duration-specific spot rates applied to the service cost cash flows. The interest cost calculation is determined by applying duration-specific spot rates to the year-by-year projected benefit payments. The spot yield curve approach does not affect the measurement of the total benefit obligations as the change in service and interest costs offset in the actuarial gains and losses recorded in other comprehensive income. The Company changed to the new method to provide a more precise measure of service and interest costs by improving the correlation between the projected benefit cash flows and the discrete spot yield curve rates. The Company accounted for this change as a change in estimate prospectively beginning in the first quarter of 2016. As a result of the change to the spot yield curve approach, 2016 defined benefit pension and postretirement net periodic benefit cost is expected to decrease by $180 million. Including this $180 million, 3M expects global defined benefit pension and postretirement expense in 2016 (before settlements, curtailments, special termination benefits and other) to decrease by approximately $320 million pre-tax when compared to 2015. Using this methodology, the Company determined discount rates for its plans as follow: <table><tr><td></td><td>U.S. Qualified Pension</td><td>International Pension (weighted average)</td><td>U.S. Postretirement Medical</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2014 Liability and 2015 Net Periodic Benefit Cost:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Single discount rate</td><td>4.10%</td><td>3.11%</td><td>4.07%</td></tr><tr><td>December 31, 2015 Liability:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Benefit obligation</td><td>4.47%</td><td>3.12%</td><td>4.32%</td></tr><tr><td>2016 Net Periodic Benefit Cost Components:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Service cost</td><td>4.72%</td><td>2.84%</td><td>4.60%</td></tr><tr><td>Interest cost</td><td>3.77%</td><td>2.72%</td><td>3.44%</td></tr></table> Another significant element in determining the Company’s pension expense in accordance with ASC 715 is the expected return on plan assets, which is based on historical results for similar allocations among asset classes. For the primary U. S. qualified pension plan, the expected long-term rate of return on an annualized basis for 2016 is 7.50%, 0.25% lower than 2015. Refer to Note 11 for information on how the 2015 rate was determined. Return on assets assumptions for

In the year with the most Estimated Fair Value in terms of Other, what is the growth rate of Estimated Fair Value of Communications?

Subscription Cost of subscription revenue consists of third-party royalties and expenses related to operating our network infrastructure, including depreciation expenses and operating lease payments associated with computer equipment, data center costs, salaries and related expenses of network operations, implementation, account management and technical support personnel, amortization of intangible assets and allocated overhead. We enter into contracts with third-parties for the use of their data center facilities and our data center costs largely consist of the amounts we pay to these third parties for rack space, power and similar items. Cost of subscription revenue increased due to the following: <table><tr><td></td><td>% Change2014-2013</td><td>% Change2013-2012</td></tr><tr><td>Data center cost</td><td>10%</td><td>11%</td></tr><tr><td>Compensation cost and related benefits associated with headcount</td><td>4</td><td>5</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation expense</td><td>3</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Royalty cost</td><td>3</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of purchased intangibles</td><td>—</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Various individually insignificant items</td><td>1</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total change</td><td>21%</td><td>27%</td></tr></table> Cost of subscription revenue increased during fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 primarily due to data center costs, compensation cost and related benefits, deprecation expense, and royalty cost. Data center costs increased as compared with the year-ago period primarily due to higher transaction volumes in our Adobe Marketing Cloud and Creative Cloud services. Compensation cost and related benefits increased as compared to the year-ago period primarily due to additional headcount in fiscal 2014, including from our acquisition of Neolane in the third quarter of fiscal 2013. Depreciation expense increased as compared to the year-ago period primarily due to higher capital expenditures in recent periods as we continue to invest in our network and data center infrastructure to support the growth of our business. Royalty cost increased primarily due to increases in subscriptions and downloads of our SaaS offerings. Cost of subscription revenue increased during fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012 primarily due to increased hosted server costs and amortization of purchased intangibles. Hosted server costs increased primarily due to increases in data center costs related to higher transaction volumes in our Adobe Marketing Cloud and Creative Cloud services, depreciation expense from higher capital expenditures in prior years and compensation and related benefits driven by additional headcount. Amortization of purchased intangibles increased primarily due to increased amortization of intangible assets purchased associated with our acquisitions of Behance and Neolane in fiscal 2013. Services and Support Cost of services and support revenue is primarily comprised of employee-related costs and associated costs incurred to provide consulting services, training and product support. Cost of services and support revenue increased during fiscal 2014 as compared to fiscal 2013 primarily due to increases in compensation and related benefits driven by additional headcount and third-party fees related to training and consulting services provided to our customers. Cost of services and support revenue increased during fiscal 2013 as compared to fiscal 2012 primarily due to increases in third-party fees related to training and consulting services provided to our customers and compensation and related benefits driven by additional headcount, including headcount from our acquisition of Neolane in fiscal 2013. with the disposition of real estate property and other investment transactions. The Company’s recorded liabilities were $6 million at both December 31, 2008 and 2007 for indemnities, guarantees and commitments. In connection with synthetically created investment transactions, the Company writes credit default swap obligations that generally require payment of principal outstanding due in exchange for the referenced credit obligation. If a credit event, as defined by the contract, occurs the Company’s maximum amount at risk, assuming the value of all referenced credit obligations is zero, was $1.9 billion at December 31, 2008. However, the Company believes that any actual future losses will be significantly lower than this amount. Additionally, the Company can terminate these contracts at any time through cash settlement with the counterparty at an amount equal to the then current estimated fair value of the credit default swaps. As of December 31, 2008, the Company would have paid $37 million to terminate all of these contracts. Other Commitments MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston (the “FHLB of Boston”) and holds $70 million of common stock of the FHLB of Boston at both December 31, 2008 and 2007, which is included in equity securities. MICC has also entered into funding agreements with the FHLB of Boston whereby MICC has issued such funding agreements in exchange for cash and for which the FHLB of Boston has been granted a blanket lien on certain MICC assets, including residential mortgage-backed securities, to collateralize MICC’s obligations under the funding agreements. MICC maintains control over these pledged assets, and may use, commingle, encumber or dispose of any portion of the collateral as long as there is no event of default and the remaining qualified collateral is sufficient to satisfy the collateral maintenance level. Upon any event of default by MICC, the FHLB of Boston’s recovery on the collateral is limited to the amount of MICC’s liability to the FHLB of Boston. The amount of the Company’s liability for funding agreements with the FHLB of Boston was $526 million and $726 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively, which is included in policyholder account balances. In addition, at December 31, 2008, MICC had advances of $300 million from the FHLB of Boston with original maturities of less than one year and therefore, such advances are included in short-term debt. These advances and the advances on these funding agreements are collateralized by mortgage-backed securities with estimated fair values of $1.3 billion and $901 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is a member of the FHLB of NY and holds $830 million and $339 million of common stock of the FHLB of NY at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively, which is included in equity securities. MLIC has also entered into funding agreements with the FHLB of NY whereby MLIC has issued such funding agreements in exchange for cash and for which the FHLB of NY has been granted a lien on certain MLIC assets, including residential mortgage-backed securities to collateralize MLIC’s obligations under the funding agreements. MLIC maintains control over these pledged assets, and may use, commingle, encumber or dispose of any portion of the collateral as long as there is no event of default and the remaining qualified collateral is sufficient to satisfy the collateral maintenance level. Upon any event of default by MLIC, the FHLB of NY’s recovery on the collateral is limited to the amount of MLIC’s liability to the FHLB of NY. The amount of the Company’s liability for funding agreements with the FHLB of NY was $15.2 billion and $4.6 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively, which is included in policyholder account balances. The advances on these agreements are collateralized by mortgage-backed securities with estimated fair values of $17.8 billion and $4.8 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. MetLife Bank is a member of the FHLB of NY and holds $89 million and $64 million of common stock of the FHLB of NY at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively, which is included in equity securities. MetLife Bank has also entered into repurchase agreements with the FHLB of NY whereby MetLife Bank has issued repurchase agreements in exchange for cash and for which the FHLB of NY has been granted a blanket lien on MetLife Bank’s residential mortgages and mortgage-backed securities to collateralize MetLife Bank’s obligations under the repurchase agreements. MetLife Bank maintains control over these pledged assets, and may use, commingle, encumber or dispose of any portion of the collateral as long as there is no event of default and the remaining qualified collateral is sufficient to satisfy the collateral maintenance level. The repurchase agreements and the related security agreement represented by this blanket lien provide that upon any event of default by MetLife Bank, the FHLB of NY’s recovery is limited to the amount of MetLife Bank’s liability under the outstanding repurchase agreements. The amount of the Company’s liability for repurchase agreements with the FHLB of NY was $1.8 billion and $1.2 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively, which is included in long-term debt and short-term debt depending on the original tenor of the advance. The advances on these repurchase agreements are collateralized by residential mortgagebacked securities and residential mortgage loans with estimated fair values of $3.1 billion and $1.3 billion at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Collateral for Securities Lending The Company has non-cash collateral for securities lending on deposit from customers, which cannot be sold or repledged, and which has not been recorded on its consolidated balance sheets. The amount of this collateral was $279 million and $40 million at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Goodwill Goodwill is the excess of cost over the estimated fair value of net assets acquired. Goodwill is not amortized but is tested for impairment at least annually or more frequently if events or circumstances, such as adverse changes in the business climate, indicate that there may be justification for conducting an interim test. Impairment testing is performed using the fair value approach, which requires the use of estimates and judgment, at the “reporting unit” level. A reporting unit is the operating segment or a business one level below the operating segment, if discrete financial information is prepared and regularly reviewed by management at that level. Information regarding changes in goodwill is as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2008</td><td> 2007</td><td> 2006</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at beginning of the period,</td><td>$4,814</td><td>$4,801</td><td>$4,701</td></tr><tr><td>Acquisitions -1</td><td>256</td><td>2</td><td>93</td></tr><tr><td>Other, net -2</td><td>-62</td><td>11</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at the end of the period</td><td>$5,008</td><td>$4,814</td><td>$4,801</td></tr></table> The Subsidiaries recognized no other postretirement benefit expense in 2008 as compared to $8 million in 2007 and $58 million in 2006. The major components of net periodic other postretirement benefit plan cost described above were as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">(In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Service cost</td><td>$21</td><td>$27</td><td>$35</td></tr><tr><td>Interest cost</td><td>103</td><td>103</td><td>116</td></tr><tr><td>Expected return on plan assets</td><td>-86</td><td>-86</td><td>-79</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of net actuarial (gains) losses</td><td>-1</td><td>—</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of prior service cost (credit)</td><td>-37</td><td>-36</td><td>-36</td></tr><tr><td>Net periodic benefit cost</td><td>$—</td><td>$8</td><td>$58</td></tr></table> The decrease in benefit cost from 2006 to 2007 primarily resulted from a change in the Medicare integration methodology for certain retirees. The decrease in benefit cost from 2007 to 2008 was due to primarily to increases in the discount rate and better than expected medical trend experience. For 2009 postretirement benefit expense, we anticipate an increase of approximately $25 million due to poor plan asset performance as a result of the economic downturn of the financial markets. The expected increase in expense can be attributed to lower expected return on assets and increased amortization of net actuarial losses. The estimated net actuarial losses and prior service credit for the other postretirement benefit plans that will be amortized from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) into net periodic benefit cost over the next year are less than $10 million and ($36) million, respectively. The weighted average discount rate used to calculate the net periodic postretirement cost was 6.65%, 6.00% and 5.82% for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets used to calculate the net other postretirement benefit plan cost for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006 was 7.33%, 7.47% and 7.42%, respectively. The expected rate of return on plan assets is based on anticipated performance of the various asset sectors in which the plan invests, weighted by target allocation percentages. Anticipated future performance is based on long-term historical returns of the plan assets by sector, adjusted for the Subsidiaries’ longterm expectations on the performance of the markets. While the precise expected return derived using this approach will fluctuate from year to year, the Subsidiaries’ policy is to hold this long-term assumption constant as long as it remains within reasonable tolerance from the derived rate. Based on the December 31, 2008 asset balances, a 25 basis point increase (decrease) in the expected rate of return on plan assets would result in a decrease (increase) in net periodic benefit cost of $3 million for the other postretirement benefit plans. Funding and Cash Flows of Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plan Obligations Pension Plan Obligations It is the Subsidiaries’ practice to make contributions to the qualified pension plans to comply with minimum funding requirements of ERISA, as amended. In accordance with such practice, no contributions were required for the years ended December 31, 2008 or 2007. No contributions will be required for 2009. The Subsidiaries made a discretionary contribution of $300 million to the qualified pension plans during the year ended December 31, 2008. During the year ended December 31, 2007, the Subsidiaries did not make any discretionary contributions to the qualified pension plans. The Subsidiaries expect to make additional discretionary contributions of $150 million in 2009. Benefit payments due under the non-qualified pension plans are funded from the Subsidiaries’ general assets as they become due under the provision of the plans. These payments totaled $43 million and $48 million for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. These benefit payments are expected to be at approximately the same level in 2009. Gross pension benefit payments for the next ten years, which reflect expected future service as appropriate, are expected to be as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td> Pension Benefits (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2009</td><td>$384</td></tr><tr><td>2010</td><td>$398</td></tr><tr><td>2011</td><td>$408</td></tr><tr><td>2012</td><td>$424</td></tr><tr><td>2013</td><td>$437</td></tr><tr><td>2014-2018</td><td>$2,416</td></tr></table> Other Postretirement Benefit Plan Obligations Other postretirement benefits represent a non-vested, non-guaranteed obligation of the Subsidiaries and current regulations do not require specific funding levels for these benefits. While the Subsidiaries have partially funded such plans in advance, it has been the Subsidiaries’ practice to primarily use their general assets, net of participants’ contributions, to pay postretirement medical claims as they come due in lieu of utilizing plan assets. Total payments equaled $149 million and $173 million for the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. The Subsidiaries’ expect to make contributions of $120 million, net of participants’ contributions, towards the other postretirement plan obligations in 2009. As noted previously, the Subsidiaries expect to receive subsidies under the Prescription Drug Act to partially offset such payments. Corporate Fixed Maturity Securities. The table below shows the major industry types that comprise the corporate fixed maturity holdings at: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2008</td><td colspan="2"> 2007</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Estimated </td><td>% of</td><td> Estimated </td><td> % of </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Fair Value</td><td>Total</td><td> Fair Value</td><td> Total</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> (In millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign -1</td><td>$29,679</td><td>32.0%</td><td>$37,166</td><td>33.4%</td></tr><tr><td>Finance</td><td>14,996</td><td>16.1</td><td>20,639</td><td>18.6</td></tr><tr><td>Industrial</td><td>13,324</td><td>14.3</td><td>15,838</td><td>14.3</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer</td><td>13,122</td><td>14.1</td><td>15,793</td><td>14.2</td></tr><tr><td>Utility</td><td>12,434</td><td>13.4</td><td>13,206</td><td>11.9</td></tr><tr><td>Communications</td><td>5,714</td><td>6.1</td><td>7,679</td><td>6.9</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>3,713</td><td>4.0</td><td>764</td><td>0.7</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$92,982</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$111,085</td><td>100.0%</td></tr></table> (1) Includes U. S. dollar-denominated debt obligations of foreign obligors, and other fixed maturity foreign investments. The Company maintains a diversified corporate fixed maturity portfolio across industries and issuers. The portfolio does not have exposure to any single issuer in excess of 1% of the total invested assets of the portfolio. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company’s combined holdings in the ten issuers to which it had the greatest exposure totaled $8.4 billion and $7.8 billion, respectively, the total of these ten issuers being less than 3% of the Company’s total invested assets at such dates. The exposure to the largest single issuer of corporate fixed maturity securities held at December 31, 2008 and 2007 was $1.5 billion and $1.2 billion, respectively. The Company has hedged all of its material exposure to foreign currency risk in its corporate fixed maturity portfolio. In the Company’s international insurance operations, both its assets and liabilities are generally denominated in local currencies. Structured Securities. The following table shows the types of structured securities the Company held at: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2008</td><td colspan="2"> 2007</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Estimated </td><td>% of</td><td> Estimated </td><td> % of </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Fair Value</td><td>Total</td><td> Fair Value</td><td> Total</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2"> (In millions)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Residential mortgage-backed securities:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Collateralized mortgage obligations</td><td>$26,025</td><td>44.0%</td><td>$36,303</td><td>44.0%</td></tr><tr><td>Pass-through securities</td><td>10,003</td><td>16.8</td><td>18,692</td><td>22.6</td></tr><tr><td>Total residential mortgage-backed securities</td><td>36,028</td><td>60.8</td><td>54,995</td><td>66.6</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial mortgage-backed securities</td><td>12,644</td><td>21.4</td><td>16,993</td><td>20.6</td></tr><tr><td>Asset-backed securities</td><td>10,523</td><td>17.8</td><td>10,572</td><td>12.8</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$59,195</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$82,560</td><td>100.0%</td></tr></table> Collateralized mortgage obligations are a type of mortgage-backed security that creates separate pools or tranches of pass-through cash flows for different classes of bondholders with varying maturities. Pass-through mortgage-backed securities are a type of assetbacked security that is secured by a mortgage or collection of mortgages. The monthly mortgage payments from homeowners pass from the originating bank through an intermediary, such as a government agency or investment bank, which collects the payments, and for fee, remits or passes these payments through to the holders of the pass-through securities. Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities. At December 31, 2008, the exposures in the Company’s residential mortgage-backed securities portfolio consist of agency, prime, and alternative residential mortgage loans (“Alt-A”) securities of 68%, 23%, and 9% of the total holdings, respectively. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, $33.3 billion and $54.7 billion, respectively, or 92% and 99% respectively, of the residential mortgage-backed securities were rated Aaa/AAA by Moody’s, S&P or Fitch. The majority of the agency residential mortgagebacked securities are guaranteed or otherwise supported by the Federal National Mortgage Association, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation or the Government National Mortgage Association. Prime residential mortgage lending includes the origination of residential mortgage loans to the most credit-worthy customers with high quality credit profiles. Alt-A residential mortgage loans are a classification of mortgage loans where the risk profile of the borrower falls between prime and sub-prime. At December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company’s Alt-A residential mortgage-backed securities exposure was $3.4 billion and $6.3 billion, respectively, with an unrealized loss of $1,963 million and $139 million, respectively. At December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007, $2.1 billion and $6.3 billion, respectively, or 63% and 99%, respectively, of the Company’s Alt-A residential mortgage-backed securities were rated Aa/AA or better by Moody’s, S&P or Fitch; At December 31, 2008 the Company’s Alt-A holdings are distributed as follows: 23% 2007 vintage year, 25% 2006 vintage year; and 52% in the 2005 and prior vintage years. Vintage year refers to the year of origination and not to the year of purchase. In December 2008, certain Alt-A residential mortgage-backed securities experienced ratings downgrades from investment grade to below investment grade, contributing to the decrease year over year cited above in those securities rated Aa/AA or better. In January 2009 Moody’s revised its loss projections for Alt-A residential mortgage-backed securities, and the Company anticipates that Moody’s will be downgrading virtually all 2006 and 2007 vintage year Alt-A securities to below investment grade, which will increase the percentage of our Alt-A residential mortgage-backed securities portfolio that will be rated below investment grade. Our analysis suggests that Moody’s is applying essentially

What's the total amount of Rental and management in 2010? (in thousand)

AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) 3.00% Convertible Notes—During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company issued an aggregate of approximately 8.9 million and 973 shares of Common Stock, respectively, upon conversion of $182.8 million and $0.02 million principal amount, respectively, of 3.00% Notes. Pursuant to the terms of the indenture, holders of the 3.00% Notes are entitled to receive 48.7805 shares of Common Stock for every $1,000 principal amount of notes converted. In connection with the conversions in 2008, the Company paid such holders an aggregate of approximately $4.7 million, calculated based on the discounted value of the future interest payments on the notes, which is reflected in loss on retirement of long-term obligations in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2008.14. IMPAIRMENTS, NET LOSS ON SALE OF LONG-LIVED ASSETS, RESTRUCTURING AND MERGER RELATED EXPENSE The significant components reflected in impairments, net loss on sale of long-lived assets, restructuring and merger related expense in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations include the following: Impairments and Net Loss on Sale of Long-Lived Assets—During the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, the Company recorded impairments and net loss on sale of long-lived assets (primarily related to its rental and management segment) of $11.2 million, $9.2 million and $2.6 million, respectively. During the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006 respectively, the Company recorded net losses associated with the sales of certain non-core towers and other assets, as well as impairment charges to write-down certain assets to net realizable value after an indicator of impairment had been identified. As a result, the Company recorded net losses and impairments of approximately $10.5 million, $7.1 million and $2.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The net loss for the year ended December 31, 2008 is comprised of net losses from asset sales and other impairments of $10.7 million, offset by gains from asset sales of $0.2 million. The net loss for the year ended December 31, 2007 is comprised of net losses from asset sales and other impairments of $7.8 million, offset by gains from asset sales of $0.7 million. Merger Related Expense—During the year ended December 31, 2005, the Company assumed certain obligations, as a result of the merger with SpectraSite, Inc. , primarily related to employee separation costs of former SpectraSite employees. Severance payments made to former SpectraSite, Inc. employees were subject to plans and agreements established by SpectraSite, Inc. and assumed by the Company in connection with the merger. These costs were recognized as an assumed liability in the purchase price allocation. In addition, the Company also incurred certain merger related costs for additional employee retention and separation costs incurred during the year ended December 31, 2006. The following table displays the activity with respect to this accrued liability for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006 (in thousands): <table><tr><td></td><td>Liability as of December 31, 2005</td><td>2006 Expense</td><td>2006 Cash Payments</td><td>Other</td><td>Liability as of December 31, 2006</td><td>2007 Expense</td><td>2007 Cash Payments</td><td>Other</td><td>Liability as of December 31, 2007</td><td>2008 Expense</td><td>2008 Cash Payments</td><td>Other</td><td>Liability as of December 31, 2008</td></tr><tr><td>Employee separations</td><td>$20,963</td><td>$496</td><td>$-12,389</td><td>$-1,743</td><td>$7,327</td><td>$633</td><td>$-6,110</td><td>$-304</td><td>$1,546</td><td>$284</td><td>$-1,901</td><td>$71</td><td>—</td></tr></table> As of December 31, 2008, the Company had paid all of these merger related liabilities. The loss from discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2007 is primarily due to the settlement of the Verestar bankruptcy proceedings and related litigation and the related tax effects. In November 2007, following approval by the bankruptcy court, the Verestar settlement agreement became effective, we paid the $32.0 million settlement amount and the litigation was dismissed. In connection with the approval of the settlement agreement by the bankruptcy court and the dismissal of the bankruptcy proceedings and related litigation, we determined that the benefits from certain of Verestar’s net operating losses would more likely than not be recoverable by us. We had not previously recorded these tax benefits related to net operating losses generated from the operations of Verestar and used by us because our ability to realize such benefits was potentially impacted by the bankruptcy proceedings and related litigation that had yet to be resolved. Accordingly, in November 2007, we recorded $5.6 million of additional tax benefits related to Verestar. We also recorded a tax provision of $10.7 million in loss from discontinued operations, net during the three months ended December 31, 2007 to write off deferred tax assets associated with Verestar that should have been written off in 2002 and removed from the consolidated balance sheet when Verestar was deconsolidated upon its bankruptcy filing in December 2003. Liquidity and Capital Resources Overview As a holding company, our cash flows are derived primarily from the operations of and distributions from our operating subsidiaries or funds raised through borrowings under our credit facilities and debt and equity offerings. As of December 31, 2008, we had approximately $638.2 million of total liquidity, comprised of approximately $143.1 million in cash and cash equivalents and the ability to borrow approximately $495.1 million under our Revolving Credit Facility. As of December 31, 2008, our cash and cash equivalents increased by $110.0 million as compared to December 31, 2007. Summary cash flow information for the years ended December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006 is set forth below. <table><tr><td rowspan="2"></td><td colspan="3">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used for):</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Operating activities</td><td>$773,258</td><td>$692,679</td><td>$620,738</td></tr><tr><td>Investing activities</td><td>-274,940</td><td>-186,180</td><td>-129,112</td></tr><tr><td>Financing activities</td><td>-388,172</td><td>-754,640</td><td>-323,063</td></tr><tr><td>Net effect of changes in exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents</td><td>-192</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents</td><td>$109,954</td><td>$-248,141</td><td>$168,563</td></tr></table> We use our cash flows to fund our operations and investments in our business, including tower maintenance and improvements, tower construction and DAS network installations, and tower and land acquisitions. During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, we also used a significant amount of our cash flows to fund refinancing and repurchases of our outstanding indebtedness, as well as our stock repurchase programs. By refinancing and repurchasing a portion of our outstanding indebtedness, we improved our financial position, which increased our financial flexibility and our ability to return value to our stockholders. Our significant transactions in 2008 included the following: ? We entered into a new $325.0 million Term Loan pursuant to our Revolving Credit Facility and used the net proceeds, together with available cash, to repay $325.0 million of existing indebtedness under the Revolving Credit Facility. ? We reduced the amount of indebtedness outstanding under our convertible notes through conversions of approximately $201.1 million face amount of convertible notes into shares of our Common Stock. ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA You should read the selected financial data in conjunction with our “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and our audited consolidated financial statements and the related notes to those consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report. In accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”), the consolidated statements of operations for all periods presented in this “Selected Financial Data” have been adjusted to reflect certain businesses as discontinued operations (see note 1 to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report). Year-over-year comparisons are significantly affected by our acquisitions, dispositions and, to a lesser extent, construction of towers. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>2010</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">(In thousands, except per share data)</td></tr><tr><td> Statements of Operations Data:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Revenues:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Rental and management</td><td>$1,936,373</td><td>$1,668,420</td><td>$1,547,035</td><td>$1,425,975</td><td>$1,294,068</td></tr><tr><td>Network development services</td><td>48,962</td><td>55,694</td><td>46,469</td><td>30,619</td><td>23,317</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating revenues</td><td>1,985,335</td><td>1,724,114</td><td>1,593,504</td><td>1,456,594</td><td>1,317,385</td></tr><tr><td>Operating expenses:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Cost of operations (exclusive of items shown separately below)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Rental and management</td><td>447,629</td><td>383,990</td><td>363,024</td><td>343,450</td><td>332,246</td></tr><tr><td>Network development services</td><td>26,957</td><td>32,385</td><td>26,831</td><td>16,172</td><td>11,291</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation, amortization and accretion-1</td><td>460,726</td><td>414,619</td><td>405,332</td><td>522,928</td><td>528,051</td></tr><tr><td>Selling, general, administrative and development expense</td><td>229,769</td><td>201,694</td><td>180,374</td><td>186,483</td><td>159,324</td></tr><tr><td>Other operating expenses</td><td>35,876</td><td>19,168</td><td>11,189</td><td>9,198</td><td>2,572</td></tr><tr><td>Total operating expenses</td><td>1,200,957</td><td>1,051,856</td><td>986,750</td><td>1,078,231</td><td>1,033,484</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income</td><td>784,378</td><td>672,258</td><td>606,754</td><td>378,363</td><td>283,901</td></tr><tr><td>Interest income, TV Azteca, net</td><td>14,212</td><td>14,210</td><td>14,253</td><td>14,207</td><td>14,208</td></tr><tr><td>Interest income</td><td>5,024</td><td>1,722</td><td>3,413</td><td>10,848</td><td>9,002</td></tr><tr><td>Interest expense</td><td>-246,018</td><td>-249,803</td><td>-253,584</td><td>-235,824</td><td>-215,643</td></tr><tr><td>Loss on retirement of long-term obligations</td><td>-1,886</td><td>-18,194</td><td>-4,904</td><td>-35,429</td><td>-27,223</td></tr><tr><td>Other income</td><td>315</td><td>1,294</td><td>5,988</td><td>20,675</td><td>6,619</td></tr><tr><td>Income before income taxes and income on equity method investments</td><td>556,025</td><td>421,487</td><td>371,920</td><td>152,840</td><td>70,864</td></tr><tr><td>Income tax provision</td><td>-182,489</td><td>-182,565</td><td>-135,509</td><td>-59,809</td><td>-41,768</td></tr><tr><td>Income on equity method investments</td><td>40</td><td>26</td><td>22</td><td>19</td><td>26</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations</td><td>373,576</td><td>238,948</td><td>236,433</td><td>93,050</td><td>29,122</td></tr><tr><td>Income (loss) from discontinued operations</td><td>30</td><td>8,179</td><td>110,982</td><td>-36,396</td><td>-854</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>373,606</td><td>247,127</td><td>347,415</td><td>56,654</td><td>28,268</td></tr><tr><td>Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest</td><td>-670</td><td>-532</td><td>-169</td><td>-338</td><td>-784</td></tr><tr><td>Net income attributable to American Tower Corporation</td><td>$372,936</td><td>$246,595</td><td>$347,246</td><td>$56,316</td><td>$27,484</td></tr><tr><td>Basic income per common share from continuing operations attributable to American Tower Corporation-2</td><td>$0.93</td><td>$0.60</td><td>$0.60</td><td>$0.22</td><td>$0.06</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted income per common share from continuing operations attributable to American Tower Corporation-2</td><td>$0.92</td><td>$0.59</td><td>$0.58</td><td>$0.22</td><td>$0.06</td></tr><tr><td>Weight average common shares outstanding-2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Basic</td><td>401,152</td><td>398,375</td><td>395,947</td><td>413,167</td><td>424,525</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted</td><td>404,072</td><td>406,948</td><td>418,357</td><td>426,079</td><td>436,217</td></tr><tr><td> Other Operating Data:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Ratio of earnings to fixed charges-3</td><td>2.65x</td><td>2.27x</td><td>2.12x</td><td>1.50x</td><td>1.25x</td></tr></table>

Which year is the value of Income from continuing operations for As Reported higher?

because the put option was voided, we began accounting for the synthetic fuel joint ventures using the equity method of accounting. Beginning March 26, 2004, as a result of adopting FIN 46(R), we have again consolidated the synthetic fuel joint ventures, and we reflect our partner’s share of the operating losses as minority interest. Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) Placed-in-Service Challenge In July 2004, IRS field auditors issued a notice of proposed adjustment and later a Summary Report to PacifiCorp, the previous owner of the Facilities, that included a challenge to the placed-in-service dates of three of the four synthetic fuel facilities owned by one of our synthetic fuel joint ventures. One of the conditions to qualify for tax credits under Section 29 of the Internal Revenue Code is that the production facility must have been placed in service before July 1, 1998. We strongly believe that all the facilities meet the placed-in-service requirement. Although we are engaged in discussions with the IRS and are confident this issue will be resolved in our favor and not result in a material charge to us, we cannot assure you as to the ultimate outcome of this matter. If ultimately resolved against us we could be prevented from realizing projected future tax credits and cause us to reverse previously utilized tax credits, requiring payment of substantial additional taxes. Since acquiring the plants, we have recognized approximately $435 million of tax credits from all four plants through December 31, 2004. The tax credits recognized through December 31, 2004, associated with the three facilities in question totaled approximately $330 million. On October 6, 2004, we entered into amendment agreements with our synthetic fuel partner that result in a shift in the allocation of tax credits between us. On the synthetic fuel facility that is not being reviewed by the IRS, our partner increased its allocation of tax credits from approximately 50 percent to 90 percent through March 31, 2005, and pays a higher price per tax credit to us for that additional share of tax credits. With respect to the three synthetic fuel facilities under IRS review, our partner reduced its allocation of tax credits from approximately 50 percent to an average of roughly 5 percent through March 31, 2005. If the IRS’ placed-in-service challenge regarding the three facilities is not successfully resolved by March 31, 2005, our partner will have the right to return its ownership interest in those three facilities to us at that time. We will have the flexibility to continue to operate at current levels, reduce production and/or sell an interest to another party. If there is a successful resolution by March 31, 2005, our partner’s share of the tax credits from all four facilities will return to approximately 50 percent. In any event, on March 31, 2005, our share of the tax credits from the one facility not under review will return to approximately 50 percent.8 DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS Senior Living Services During 2002, we completed the sale of 41 properties for $210 million and recorded an after-tax loss of $2 million. On December 30, 2002, we entered into a definitive agreement to sell our senior living management business to Sunrise Senior Living, Inc. (“Sunrise”) and to sell nine senior living communities to CNL Retirement Properties, Inc. (“CNL”) and recorded an after-tax charge of $131 million. We completed the sales to Sunrise and CNL, in addition to the related sale of a parcel of land to Sunrise in March 2003, for $266 million. We recorded after-tax gains of $19 million in 2003. Also, on December 30, 2002, we purchased 14 senior living communities for approximately $15 million in cash, plus the assumption of $227 million in debt, from an unrelated owner. We had previously agreed to provide a form of credit enhancement on the outstanding debt related to these communities. Management approved and committed to a plan to sell these communities within 12 months. As part of that plan, on March 31, 2003, we acquired all of the subordinated credit-enhanced mortgage securities relating to the 14 communities in a transaction in which we issued $46 million of unsecured Marriott International, Inc. notes, due April 2004. In the 2003 third quarter, we sold the 14 communities to CNL for approximately $184 million. We provided a $92 million acquisition loan to CNL in connection with the sale. Sunrise currently operates, and will continue to operate, the 14 communities under long-term management agreements. We recorded a gain, net of taxes, of $1 million. The operating results of our senior living segment are reported in discontinued operations during the years ended January 2, 2004, and January 3, 2003, and the remaining assets and liabilities were classified as assets held for sale and liabilities of businesses held for sale, respectively, on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet at January 3, 2003. The following table provides additional income statement and balance sheet information relating to the Senior Living Services business: <table><tr><td> <i>($ in millions)</i> </td><td> 2004 </td><td>2003</td><td>2002</td></tr><tr><td>Income Statement Summary</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Sales</td><td>$—</td><td>$184</td><td>$802</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-tax income on operations</td><td>$—</td><td>$11</td><td>$37</td></tr><tr><td>Tax provision</td><td>—</td><td>-4</td><td>-14</td></tr><tr><td>Income on operations, net of tax</td><td>$—</td><td>$7</td><td>$23</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-tax gain (loss) on disposal</td><td>$—</td><td>$31</td><td>$-141</td></tr><tr><td>Tax (provision) benefit</td><td>—</td><td>-12</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>Gain (loss) on disposal, net of tax</td><td>$—</td><td>$19</td><td>$-131</td></tr><tr><td>Balance Sheet Summary</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Property, plant and equipment</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$434</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>115</td></tr><tr><td>Other assets</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>54</td></tr><tr><td>Liabilities</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>317</td></tr></table> The tax benefit in 2002 of $10 million associated with the loss on disposal includes $45 million of additional taxes related to goodwill with no tax basis. Distribution Services In the third quarter of 2002, we completed a previously announced strategic review of our Distribution Services business and decided to exit that business. We completed that exit during the fourth quarter of 2002 through a combination of transferring certain facilities, closing other facilities and other suitable arrangements. In the year ended 16 FA I R VA LU E O F F I NA N C I A L I N S T RU M E N T S We believe that the fair values of current assets and current liabilities approximate their reported carrying amounts. The fair values of noncurrent financial assets, liabilities and derivatives are shown below. <table><tr><td></td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td></tr><tr><td><i>($ in millions)</i></td><td>Carrying Amount</td><td>Fair Value</td><td>Carrying Amount</td><td>Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td>Notes and other long-term assets</td><td>$1,702</td><td>$1,770</td><td>$1,740</td><td>$1,778</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt and other long-term liabilities</td><td>$848</td><td>$875</td><td>$1,373</td><td>$1,487</td></tr><tr><td>Derivative instruments</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$-1</td><td>$-1</td></tr></table> We value notes and other receivables based on the expected future cash flows discounted at risk-adjusted rates. We determine valuations for long-term debt and other long-term liabilities based on quoted market prices or expected future payments discounted at risk-adjusted rates.17 D E R I VAT I V E I N S T RU M E N T S During the year ended January 2, 2004, we entered into an interest rate swap agreement under which we receive a floating rate of interest and pay a fixed rate of interest. The swap modifies our interest rate exposure by effectively converting a note receivable with a fixed rate to a floating rate. The aggregate notional amount of the swap is $92 million, and it matures in 2010. The swap is classified as a fair value hedge, and the change in the fair value of the swap, as well as the change in the fair value of the underlying note receivable, is recognized in interest income. The fair value of the swap was a liability of approximately $3 million at December 31, 2004, and January 2, 2004. The hedge is highly effective, and therefore, no net gain or loss was reported in earnings during the years ended December 31, 2004, and January 2, 2004. At December 31, 2004, we had six outstanding interest rate swap agreements to manage interest rate risk associated with the residual interests we retain in conjunction with our timeshare note sales. We are required by purchasers and/or rating agencies to utilize interest rate swaps to protect the excess spread within our sold note pools. The aggregate notional amount of the swaps is $535 million, and they expire through 2022. These swaps are not accounted for as hedges under FAS No.133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities. ” The fair value of the swaps is a net asset of approximately $3 million at December 31, 2004, a net asset of approximately $1 million at January 2, 2004, and a net liability of $2 million at January 3, 2003. We recorded a $2 million net gain, $3 million net gain and $21 million net loss during the years ended December 31, 2004, January 2, 2004 and January 3, 2003, respectively. These expenses were largely offset by income resulting from the change in fair value of the retained interests and note sale gains in response to changes in interest rates. During the years ended December 31, 2004, and January 2, 2004, we entered into interest rate swaps to manage interest rate risk associated with forecasted timeshare note sales. These swaps were not accounted for as hedges under FAS No.133. The swaps were terminated upon the sale of the notes and resulted in a gain of $2 million during the year ended December 31, 2004, and a loss of $4 million during the year ended January 2, 2004. These amounts were largely offset by changes in the note sale gains and losses. During the years ended December 31, 2004, and January 2, 2004, we entered into forward foreign exchange contracts to manage the foreign currency exposure related to certain monetary assets denominated in pounds sterling. The aggregate dollar equivalent of the notional amount of the contracts is $36 million at December 31, 2004. The forward exchange contracts are not accounted for as hedges in accordance with FAS No.133. The fair value of the forward contracts is approximately zero at December 31, 2004, and January 2, 2004. We recorded a $3 million and $2 million net loss relating to these forward foreign exchange contracts for the years ended December 31, 2004 and January 2, 2004, respectively. The net losses for both years were offset by income recorded from translating the related monetary assets denominated in pounds sterling into U. S. dollars. During fiscal years 2004 and 2003, we entered into foreign exchange option and forward contracts to hedge the potential volatility of earnings and cash flows associated with variations in foreign exchange rates. The aggregate dollar equivalent of the notional amounts of the contracts is $36 million at December 31, 2004. These contracts have terms of less than a year and are classified as cash flow hedges. Changes in their fair values are recorded as a component of other comprehensive income. The fair value of the forward contracts is approximately zero and $1 million at December 31, 2004, and January 2, 2004, respectively. During 2004, it was determined that certain derivatives were no longer effective in offsetting the hedged item. Thus, cash flow hedge accounting treatment was discontinued and the ineffective contracts resulted in a loss of $1 million, which was reported in earnings for fiscal year 2004. The remaining hedges were highly effective and there was no net gain or loss reported in earnings for the fiscal years 2004 and 2003. As of December 31, 2004, there were no deferred gains or losses accumulated in other comprehensive income that we expect to reclassify into earnings over the next 12 months.18 CONTINGENCIES Guarantees We issue guarantees to certain lenders and hotel owners primarily to obtain long-term management contracts. The guarantees generally have a stated maximum amount of funding and a term of five years or less. The terms of guarantees to lenders generally require us to fund if cash flows from hotel operations are inadequate to cover annual debt service or to repay the loan at the end of the term. The terms of the guarantees to hotel owners generally require us to fund if the hotels do not attain specified levels of operating profit. Synthetic Fuel See Footnote No.2,“Synthetic Fuel,” and Footnote No.18, “Contingencies,” in this report for additional information regarding the Synthetic Fuel segment. The tables that follow detail the impact of our Synthetic Fuel segment on our income from continuing operations for 2006, 2005 and 2004. Our management evaluates the figures presented in the “Before Syn. Fuel Impact” columns because management expects the Synthetic Fuel segment will no longer have a material impact on our business after the Internal Revenue Code synthetic fuel tax credit program expires at the end of 2007 and because the presentation reflects the results of our core Lodging operations. Management also believes that these presentations facilitate the comparison of our results with the results of other lodging companies. However, the figures presented in the “Before Syn. Fuel Impact” columns are non-GAAP financial measures, may be calculated and/or presented differently than presentations of other companies, and are not alternatives to operating income, total tax (provision) benefit, income from continuing operations, or any other operating measure prescribed by U. S. generally accepted accounting principles.2006 COMPARED TO 2005 For 2006, the synthetic fuel operation generated revenue of $165 million versus revenue of $421 million for the prior year, primarily reflecting significantly lower production in 2006 as a result of production suspensions instituted in response to high oil prices. The $76 million operating loss for 2006 includes a $5 million charge reflecting the write-down of assets at the Alabama production facility as the adjacent mine was closed at year-end, and we did not anticipate operating the facility again at this location. Gains and other income (expense) reflects either net earnout payments received or net earn-out payments made. In 2006, net earn-out payments made totaled $15 million, while in 2005 net earn-out payments received totaled $32 million. Lower minority interest income primarily reflects the redemption, early in 2006, of our partner’s interest in SAFE II. Additionally, lower minority interest income in 2006 also reflects our buy-out in the 2006 fourth quarter of our partner’s interest in SAFE I. Interest costs in 2006 of $4 million reflect the cost of hedges entered into during 2006 in response to high oil prices and the uncertainty surrounding the potential phase-out of tax credits. Income from continuing operations for the Synthetic Fuel segment declined from $125 million in 2005 to $5 million in 2006, primarily as a result of both lower production in 2006 and the estimated 39 percent phase-out of tax credits due to high oil prices in 2006. The table below details the impact of our Synthetic Fuel segment on our continuing operations for 2006 and 2005 <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">2006</td><td colspan="3">2005</td></tr><tr><td> <i>($ in millions)</i></td><td>As Reported</td><td>Syn. Fuel Impact</td><td>Before Syn. Fuel Impact</td><td>As Reported</td><td>Syn. Fuel Impact</td><td>Before Syn. Fuel Impact</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income (loss)</td><td>$1,011</td><td>$-76</td><td>$1,087</td><td>$555</td><td>$-144</td><td>$699</td></tr><tr><td>Gains and other income (expense)</td><td>59</td><td>-15</td><td>74</td><td>181</td><td>32</td><td>149</td></tr><tr><td>Interest income, provision for loan losses and interest expense</td><td>-76</td><td>-4</td><td>-72</td><td>-55</td><td>—</td><td>-55</td></tr><tr><td>Equity in earnings (losses)</td><td>3</td><td>—</td><td>3</td><td>36</td><td>—</td><td>36</td></tr><tr><td>Income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest</td><td>997</td><td>-95</td><td>1,092</td><td>717</td><td>-112</td><td>829</td></tr><tr><td>Tax (provision) benefit</td><td>-348</td><td>32</td><td>-380</td><td>-261</td><td>23</td><td>-284</td></tr><tr><td>Tax credits</td><td>62</td><td>62</td><td>—</td><td>167</td><td>167</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total tax (provision) benefit</td><td>-286</td><td>94</td><td>-380</td><td>-94</td><td>190</td><td>-284</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations before minority interest</td><td>711</td><td>-1</td><td>712</td><td>623</td><td>78</td><td>545</td></tr><tr><td>Minority interest</td><td>6</td><td>6</td><td>—</td><td>45</td><td>47</td><td>-2</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations</td><td>$717</td><td>$5</td><td>$712</td><td>$668</td><td>$125</td><td>$543</td></tr></table> 2005 COMPARED TO 2004 For 2005, the synthetic fuel operation generated revenue of $421 million versus revenue of $321 million for the prior year, primarily due to the consolidation of our synthetic fuel operations from the start of the 2004 second quarter, which resulted in the recognition of revenue for the entire 2005 year compared with only three quarters in 2004, as we accounted for the synthetic fuel operations using the equity method of accounting in the 2004 first quarter. The $18 million increase in synthetic fuel income from continuing operations to $125 million from $107 million in 2004 is primarily due to our increased proportion of tax credits through May 31, 2005, associated with the SAFE II facilities that were then under IRS review and higher gains and other income, partially offset by our decreased proportion of tax credits through March 31, 2005, associated with the SAFE I facility that was not under IRS review. In addition, in 2005 production was slightly lower and raw materials prices were higher than in 2004. Gains and other income represents net earn-out payments received. Minority interest increased from a benefit of $40 million in 2004 to a benefit of $47 million in 2005, primarily as a result of the change in the method of accounting for our synthetic fuel operations. For 2004, minority interest reflects our partner’s share of the synthetic fuel losses from March 26, 2004 (when we began consolidating the ventures due to the adoption of FIN 46(R)) through year-end. For 2005, minority interest represents our partner’s share of the synthetic fuel losses for the entire year.

What's the sum of Client deposits of Average Balance Year Ended December 31, 2013, and U.S. of As of December 31, 2012 ?

countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2009 amounted to $1.26 billion (Italy). Aggregate cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets at December 31, 2008 amounted to $3.45 billion (Canada and Germany). There were no cross-border outstandings to countries which totaled between .75% and 1% of our consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2007. Capital The management of regulatory and economic capital both involve key metrics evaluated by management to assess whether our actual level of capital is commensurate with our risk profile, is in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and is sufficient to provide us with the financial flexibility to undertake future strategic business initiatives. Regulatory Capital Our objective with respect to regulatory capital management is to maintain a strong capital base in order to provide financial flexibility for our business needs, including funding corporate growth and supporting customers’ cash management needs, and to provide protection against loss to depositors and creditors. We strive to maintain an optimal level of capital, commensurate with our risk profile, on which an attractive return to shareholders is expected to be realized over both the short and long term, while protecting our obligations to depositors and creditors and satisfying regulatory capital adequacy requirements. Our capital management process focuses on our risk exposures, our regulatory capital requirements, the evaluations of the major independent credit rating agencies that assign ratings to our public debt and our capital position relative to our peers. Our Capital Committee, working in conjunction with our Asset and Liability Committee, referred to as ALCO, oversees the management of regulatory capital, and is responsible for ensuring capital adequacy with respect to regulatory requirements, internal targets and the expectations of the major independent credit rating agencies. The primary regulator of both State Street and State Street Bank for regulatory capital purposes is the Federal Reserve. Both State Street and State Street Bank are subject to the minimum capital requirements established by the Federal Reserve and defined in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991. State Street Bank must meet the regulatory capital thresholds for “well capitalized” in order for the parent company to maintain its status as a financial holding company. Regulatory capital ratios and related regulatory guidelines for State Street and State Street Bank were as follows as of December 31: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">REGULATORY GUIDELINES</td><td colspan="2">STATE STREET</td><td colspan="2"> STATE STREET BANK</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Minimum</td><td>Well Capitalized</td><td>2009</td><td>2008 -2</td><td>2009</td><td> 2008^-2</td></tr><tr><td>Regulatory capital ratios:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1 risk-based capital</td><td>4%</td><td>6%</td><td>17.7%</td><td>20.3%</td><td>17.3%</td><td>19.8%</td></tr><tr><td>Total risk-based capital</td><td>8</td><td>10</td><td>19.1</td><td>21.6</td><td>19.0</td><td>21.3</td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1 leverage ratio^-1</td><td>4</td><td>5</td><td>8.5</td><td>7.8</td><td>8.2</td><td>7.6</td></tr></table> (1) Regulatory guideline for well capitalized applies only to State Street Bank. (2) Tier 1 and total risk-based capital and tier 1 leverage ratios exclude the impact, where applicable, of the asset-backed commercial paper purchased under the Federal Reserve’s AMLF, as permitted by the AMLF’s terms and conditions. At December 31, 2009, State Street’s and State Street Bank’s tier 1 and total risk-based capital ratios decreased compared to year-end 2008. With respect to State Street, the loss associated with the May 2009 conduit consolidation and the June 2009 redemption of the equity received from the U. S. Treasury in connection with the TARP Capital Purchase Program, partly offset by the aggregate impact of the May 2009 public offering MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the level of housing prices and the timing of defaults. To the extent that such factors differ significantly from management's current expectations, resulting loss estimates may differ materially from those stated. Excluding other-than-temporary impairment recorded in 2014, management considers the aggregate decline in fair value of the remaining investment securities and the resulting gross unrealized losses as of December 31, 2014 to be temporary and not the result of any material changes in the credit characteristics of the securities. Additional information about these gross unrealized losses is provided in note 3 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. Loans and Leases TABLE 26: U. S. AND NON- U. S. LOANS AND LEASES <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">As of December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(In millions)</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Institutional:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S.</td><td>$14,908</td><td>$10,623</td><td>$9,645</td><td>$7,115</td><td>$7,001</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S.</td><td>3,263</td><td>2,654</td><td>2,251</td><td>2,478</td><td>4,192</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>U.S.</td><td>28</td><td>209</td><td>411</td><td>460</td><td>764</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans and leases</td><td>$18,199</td><td>$13,486</td><td>$12,307</td><td>$10,053</td><td>$11,957</td></tr><tr><td>Average loans and leases</td><td>$15,912</td><td>$13,781</td><td>$11,610</td><td>$12,180</td><td>$12,094</td></tr></table> The increase in loans in the institutional segment as of December 31, 2014 as compared to December 31, 2013 was primarily driven by higher levels of short-duration advances and increased investment in the non-investment-grade lending market through participations in loan syndications, specifically senior secured bank loans. Short-duration advances to our clients included in the institutional segment were $3.54 billion and $2.45 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. These short-duration advances provide liquidity to fund clients in support of their transaction flows associated with securities settlement activities. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, our investment in senior secured bank loans totaled approximately $2.07 billion and $724 million, respectively. In addition, we had binding unfunded commitments as of December 31, 2014 totaling $337 million to participate in such syndications. These senior secured bank loans, which we have rated “speculative” under our internal risk-rating framework (refer to note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K), are externally rated “BBB,” “BB” or “B,” with approximately 95% of the loans rated “BB” or “B” as of December 31, 2014, compared to 94% as of December 31, 2013. Our investment strategy involves limiting our investment to larger, more liquid credits underwritten by major global financial institutions, applying our internal credit analysis process to each potential investment, and diversifying our exposure by counterparty and industry segment. However, these loans have significant exposure to credit losses relative to higher-rated loans. As of December 31, 2014, our allowance for loan losses included approximately $26 million related to these senior secured bank loans. As this portfolio grows and becomes more seasoned, our allowance for loan losses related to these loans may increase through additional provisions for credit losses. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, unearned income deducted from our investment in leveraged lease financing was $109 million and $121 million, respectively, for U. S. leases and $261 million and $298 million, respectively, for non-U. S. leases. The commercial real estate, or CRE, loans are composed of the loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. Additional information about all of our loan-and-lease segments, as well as underlying classes, is provided in note 4 to the consolidated financial statements included under Item 8 of this Form 10-K. The decrease in the CRE loans as of December 31, 2014 compared to December 31, 2013 resulted from one of the loans, acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreement with an affiliate of Lehman as a result of the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy being repaid. As of December 31, 2014 no CRE loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings. As of December 31, 2013, we held a CRE loan for approximately $130 million which had previously been modified in a troubled debt restructuring. No loans were modified in troubled debt restructurings in 2014 or 2013. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (Continued) Funding Deposits: We provide products and services including custody, accounting, administration, daily pricing, foreign exchange services, cash management, financial asset management, securities finance and investment advisory services. As a provider of these products and services, we generate client deposits, which have generally provided a stable, low-cost source of funds. As a global custodian, clients place deposits with State Street entities in various currencies. We invest these client deposits in a combination of investment securities and shortduration financial instruments whose mix is determined by the characteristics of the deposits. For the past several years, we have experienced higher client deposit inflows toward the end of the quarter or the end of the year. As a result, we believe average client deposit balances are more reflective of ongoing funding than period-end balances. TABLE 33: CLIENT DEPOSITS <table><tr><td></td><td>December 31,</td><td>Average Balance Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(In millions)</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td></tr><tr><td>Client deposits^-1</td><td>$195,276</td><td>$182,268</td><td>$167,470</td><td>$143,043</td></tr></table> (1) Balance as of December 31, 2014 excluded term wholesale certificates of deposit, or CDs, of $13.76 billion; average balances for the year ended December 31, 2014 and 2013 excluded average CDs of $6.87 billion and $2.50 billion, respectively. Short-Term Funding: Our corporate commercial paper program, under which we can issue up to $3.0 billion of commercial paper with original maturities of up to 270 days from the date of issuance, had $2.48 billion and $1.82 billion of commercial paper outstanding as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Our on-balance sheet liquid assets are also an integral component of our liquidity management strategy. These assets provide liquidity through maturities of the assets, but more importantly, they provide us with the ability to raise funds by pledging the securities as collateral for borrowings or through outright sales. In addition, our access to the global capital markets gives us the ability to source incremental funding at reasonable rates of interest from wholesale investors. As discussed earlier under “Asset Liquidity,” State Street Bank's membership in the FHLB allows for advances of liquidity with varying terms against high-quality collateral. Short-term secured funding also comes in the form of securities lent or sold under agreements to repurchase. These transactions are short-term in nature, generally overnight, and are collateralized by high-quality investment securities. These balances were $8.93 billion and $7.95 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. State Street Bank currently maintains a line of credit with a financial institution of CAD $800 million, or approximately $690 million as of December 31, 2014, to support its Canadian securities processing operations. The line of credit has no stated termination date and is cancelable by either party with prior notice. As of December 31, 2014, there was no balance outstanding on this line of credit. Long-Term Funding: As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank had Board authority to issue unsecured senior debt securities from time to time, provided that the aggregate principal amount of such unsecured senior debt outstanding at any one time does not exceed $5 billion. As of December 31, 2014, $4.1 billion was available for issuance pursuant to this authority. As of December 31, 2014, State Street Bank also had Board authority to issue an additional $500 million of subordinated debt. We maintain an effective universal shelf registration that allows for the public offering and sale of debt securities, capital securities, common stock, depositary shares and preferred stock, and warrants to purchase such securities, including any shares into which the preferred stock and depositary shares may be convertible, or any combination thereof. We have issued in the past, and we may issue in the future, securities pursuant to our shelf registration. The issuance of debt or equity securities will depend on future market conditions, funding needs and other factors. Agency Credit Ratings Our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to maintaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; relative market position; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and client deposits; strong liquidity monitoring procedures; and preparedness for current or future regulatory developments. High ratings limit borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by providing assurance for unsecured funding and depositors, increasing the potential market for our debt and improving our ability to offer products, serve markets, and engage in transactions in which clients value high credit ratings. A downgrade or reduction of our credit ratings could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity by restricting our ability to access the capital

what is the percentage change in rent expense for operating leases from 2001 to 2002?

ECHOSTAR COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued F-34 closing price of the class A common stock on the last business day of each calendar quarter in which such shares of class A common stock are deemed sold to an employee under the ESPP. The ESPP shall terminate upon the first to occur of (i) October 1, 2007 or (ii) the date on which the ESPP is terminated by the Board of Directors. During 2000, 2001 and 2002 employees purchased approximately 58,000; 80,000 and 108,000 shares of class A common stock through the ESPP, respectively.401(k) Employee Savings Plan EchoStar sponsors a 401(k) Employee Savings Plan (the “401(k) Plan”) for eligible employees. Voluntary employee contributions to the 401(k) Plan may be matched 50% by EchoStar, subject to a maximum annual contribution by EchoStar of $1,000 per employee. Matching 401(k) contributions totaled approximately $1.6 million, $2.1 million and $2.4 million during the years ended December 31, 2000, 2001 and 2002, respectively. EchoStar also may make an annual discretionary contribution to the plan with approval by EchoStar’s Board of Directors, subject to the maximum deductible limit provided by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. These contributions may be made in cash or in EchoStar stock. Forfeitures of unvested participant balances which are retained by the 401(k) Plan may be used to fund matching and discretionary contributions. Expense recognized relating to discretionary contributions was approximately $7 million, $225 thousand and $17 million during the years ended December 31, 2000, 2001 and 2002, respectively.9. Commitments and Contingencies Leases Future minimum lease payments under noncancelable operating leases as of December 31, 2002, are as follows (in thousands): <table><tr><td>2003</td><td>$17,274</td></tr><tr><td>2004</td><td>14,424</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td>11,285</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td>7,698</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>3,668</td></tr><tr><td>Thereafter</td><td>1,650</td></tr><tr><td>Total minimum lease payments</td><td>55,999</td></tr></table> Total rent expense for operating leases approximated $9 million, $14 million and $16 million in 2000, 2001 and 2002, respectively. Purchase Commitments As of December 31, 2002, EchoStar’s purchase commitments totaled approximately $359 million. The majority of these commitments relate to EchoStar receiver systems and related components. All of the purchases related to these commitments are expected to be made during 2003. EchoStar expects to finance these purchases from existing unrestricted cash balances and future cash flows generated from operations. Patents and Intellectual Property Many entities, including some of EchoStar’s competitors, now have and may in the future obtain patents and other intellectual property rights that cover or affect products or services directly or indirectly related to those that EchoStar offers. EchoStar may not be aware of all patents and other intellectual property rights that its products may potentially infringe. Damages in patent infringement cases can include a tripling of actual damages in certain cases. Further, EchoStar cannot estimate the extent to which it may be required in the future to obtain licenses with respect to Item 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS - Continued 52 Tivo litigation expense. We recorded $361 million of “Tivo litigation expense” during the year ended December 31, 2009 for supplemental damages, contempt sanctions and interest. See Note 14 in the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 15 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further discussion. Depreciation and amortization. “Depreciation and amortization” expense totaled $940 million during the year ended December 31, 2009, a $60 million or 6.0% decrease compared to the same period in 2008. The decrease in “Depreciation and amortization” expense was primarily due to the declines in depreciation expense related to set-top boxes used in our lease programs and the abandonment of a software development project during 2008 that was designed to support our IT systems. The decrease related to set-top-boxes was primarily attributable to capitalization of a higher mix of new advanced equipment in 2009 compared to the same period in 2008, which has a longer estimated useful life. In addition, the satellite depreciation expense declined due to the retirements of certain satellites from commercial service, almost entirely offset by depreciation expense associated with satellites placed in service in 2008. Interest income. “Interest income” totaled $30 million during the year ended December 31, 2009, a decrease of $21 million or 41.4% compared to the same period in 2008. This decrease principally resulted from lower percentage returns earned on our cash and marketable investment securities, partially offset by higher average cash and marketable investment securities balances during the year ended December 31, 2009. Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized. “Interest expense, net of amounts capitalized” totaled $388 million during the year ended December 31, 2009, an increase of $19 million or 5.0% compared to the same period in 2008. This change primarily resulted from an increase in interest expense related to the issuance of debt during 2009 and 2008 and the Ciel II capital lease, partially offset by a decrease in interest expense associated with 2008 debt redemptions. Other, net. “Other, net” expense totaled $16 million during the year ended December 31, 2009 compared to $169 million in 2008, a decrease of $153 million. This decrease primarily resulted from $178 million less in impairment charges on marketable and other investment securities, partially offset by $33 million less in net gains on the sale and exchanges of investments in 2009 compared to 2008. Earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization. EBITDA was $2.311 billion during the year ended December 31, 2009, a decrease of $576 million or 20.0% compared to the same period in 2008. EBITDA for the year ended December 31, 2009 was negatively impacted by the $361 million “Tivo litigation expense. ” The following table reconciles EBITDA to the accompanying financial statements. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> For the Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2009</td><td> 2008</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">(In thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>EBITDA</td><td>$2,311,398</td><td>$2,887,697</td></tr><tr><td>Less:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Interest expense, net</td><td>358,391</td><td>318,661</td></tr><tr><td>Income tax provision (benefit), net</td><td>377,429</td><td>665,859</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation and amortization</td><td>940,033</td><td>1,000,230</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss) attributable to DISH Network common shareholders</td><td>$635,545</td><td>$902,947</td></tr></table> EBITDA is not a measure determined in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, or GAAP, and should not be considered a substitute for operating income, net income or any other measure determined in accordance with GAAP. EBITDA is used as a measurement of operating efficiency and overall financial performance and we believe it to be a helpful measure for those evaluating companies in the pay-TV industry. Conceptually, EBITDA measures the amount of income generated each period that could be used to service debt, pay taxes and fund capital expenditures. EBITDA should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for measures of performance prepared in accordance with GAAP. Income tax (provision) benefit, net. Our income tax provision was $377 million during the year ended December 31, 2009, a decrease of $288 million compared to the same period in 2008. The decrease in the provision was primarily related to the decrease in “Income (loss) before income taxes” and a decrease in our effective tax rate. DISH NETWORK CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued F-28 9. Acquisitions DBSD North America and TerreStar Transactions On March 2, 2012, the FCC approved the transfer of 40 MHz of AWS-4 wireless spectrum licenses held by DBSD North America and TerreStar to us. On March 9, 2012, we completed the DBSD Transaction and the TerreStar Transaction, pursuant to which we acquired, among other things, certain satellite assets and wireless spectrum licenses held by DBSD North America and TerreStar. In addition, during the fourth quarter 2011, we and Sprint entered into a mutual release and settlement agreement (the “Sprint Settlement Agreement”) pursuant to which all issues then being disputed relating to the DBSD Transaction and the TerreStar Transaction were resolved between us and Sprint, including, but not limited to, issues relating to costs allegedly incurred by Sprint to relocate users from the spectrum then licensed to DBSD North America and TerreStar. The total consideration to acquire the DBSD North America and TerreStar assets was approximately $2.860 billion. This amount includes $1.364 billion for the DBSD Transaction, $1.382 billion for the TerreStar Transaction, and the net payment of $114 million to Sprint pursuant to the Sprint Settlement Agreement. See Note 16 for further information. As a result of these acquisitions, we recognized the acquired assets and assumed liabilities based on our estimates of fair value at their acquisition date, including $102 million in an uncertain tax position in “Long-term deferred revenue, distribution and carriage payments and other long-term liabilities” on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Subsequently, in the third quarter 2013, this uncertain tax position was resolved and $102 million was reversed and recorded as a decrease in “Income tax (provision) benefit, net” on our Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss) for the year ended December 31, 2013.10. Discontinued Operations As of December 31, 2013, Blockbuster had ceased all material operations. Accordingly, our Consolidated Balance Sheets, Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss) and Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows have been recast to present Blockbuster as discontinued operations for all periods presented and the amounts presented in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements relate only to our continuing operations, unless otherwise noted. During the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011, the revenue from our discontinued operations was $503 million, $1.085 billion and $974 million, respectively. “Income (loss) from discontinued operations, before income taxes” for the same periods was a loss of $54 million, $62 million and $3 million, respectively. In addition, “Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax” for the same periods was a loss of $47 million, $37 million and $7 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2013, the net assets from our discontinued operations consisted of the following: <table><tr><td></td><td>As of December 31, 2013 (In thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Current assets from discontinued operations</td><td>$68,239</td></tr><tr><td>Noncurrent assets from discontinued operations</td><td>9,965</td></tr><tr><td>Current liabilities from discontinued operations</td><td>-49,471</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term liabilities from discontinued operations</td><td>-19,804</td></tr><tr><td>Net assets from discontinued operations</td><td>$8,929</td></tr></table> PART II Item 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES Market Price of and Dividends on the Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters Market Information. Our Class A common stock is quoted on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “DISH. ” The high and low closing sale prices of our Class A common stock during 2014 and 2013 on the Nasdaq Global Select Market (as reported by Nasdaq) are set forth below. <table><tr><td>2014</td><td>High</td><td>Low</td></tr><tr><td>First Quarter</td><td>$62.42</td><td>$54.10</td></tr><tr><td>Second Quarter</td><td>65.64</td><td>56.23</td></tr><tr><td>Third Quarter</td><td>66.71</td><td>61.87</td></tr><tr><td>Fourth Quarter</td><td>79.41</td><td>57.96</td></tr><tr><td>2013</td><td>High</td><td>Low</td></tr><tr><td>First Quarter</td><td>$38.02</td><td>$34.19</td></tr><tr><td>Second Quarter</td><td>42.52</td><td>36.24</td></tr><tr><td>Third Quarter</td><td>48.09</td><td>41.66</td></tr><tr><td>Fourth Quarter</td><td>57.92</td><td>45.68</td></tr></table> As of February 13, 2015, there were approximately 8,208 holders of record of our Class A common stock, not including stockholders who beneficially own Class A common stock held in nominee or street name. As of February 10, 2015, 213,247,004 of the 238,435,208 outstanding shares of our Class B common stock were beneficially held by Charles W. Ergen, our Chairman, and the remaining 25,188,204 were held in trusts established by Mr. Ergen for the benefit of his family. There is currently no trading market for our Class B common stock. Dividends. On December 28, 2012, we paid a cash dividend of $1.00 per share, or approximately $453 million, on our outstanding Class A and Class B common stock to stockholders of record at the close of business on December 14, 2012. While we currently do not intend to declare additional dividends on our common stock, we may elect to do so from time to time. Payment of any future dividends will depend upon our earnings and capital requirements, restrictions in our debt facilities, and other factors the Board of Directors considers appropriate. We currently intend to retain our earnings, if any, to support future growth and expansion, although we may repurchase shares of our common stock from time to time. See further discussion under “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Liquidity and Capital Resources” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans. See “Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Item 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA The selected consolidated financial data as of and for each of the five years ended December 31, 2018 have been derived from our consolidated financial statements. On February 28, 2017, we and EchoStar and certain of our respective subsidiaries completed the Share Exchange. As the Share Exchange was a transaction between entities that are under common control accounting rules require that our Consolidated Financial Statements include the results of the Transferred Businesses for all periods presented, including periods prior to the completion of the Share Exchange. We initially recorded the Transferred Businesses at EchoStar’s historical cost basis. The difference between the historical cost basis of the Transferred Businesses and the net carrying value of the Tracking Stock was recorded in “Additional paid-in capital” on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. The results of the Transferred Businesses were prepared from separate records maintained by EchoStar for the periods prior to March 1, 2017, and may not necessarily be indicative of the conditions that would have existed, or the results of operations, if the Transferred Businesses had been operated on a combined basis with our subsidiaries. The selected consolidated financial data includes the results of the Transferred Businesses as described above for all periods presented, including periods prior to the completion of the Share Exchange. See Note 2 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for further information. Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation. See further information under “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Explanation of Key Metrics and Other Items” in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto for the three years ended December 31, 2018, and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">As of December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>Balance Sheet Data</td><td>2018</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">(In thousands)</td></tr><tr><td>Cash, cash equivalents and current marketable investment securities</td><td>$2,068,817</td><td>$1,980,673</td><td>$5,360,119</td><td>$1,611,894</td><td>$9,236,888</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets</td><td>30,587,012</td><td>29,773,766</td><td>27,914,292</td><td>22,665,292</td><td>21,756,516</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt and capital lease obligations (including current portion)</td><td>15,152,777</td><td>16,202,965</td><td>16,483,639</td><td>13,763,018</td><td>14,430,009</td></tr><tr><td>Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)</td><td>8,594,189</td><td>6,937,906</td><td>4,611,323</td><td>2,694,161</td><td>1,925,243</td></tr></table> For the Years Ended December 31, <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">For the Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>Statements of Operations Data</td><td>2018</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">(In thousands, except per share amounts)</td></tr><tr><td>Total revenue</td><td>$13,621,302</td><td>$14,391,375</td><td>$15,212,302</td><td>$15,225,493</td><td>$14,819,289</td></tr><tr><td>Total costs and expenses</td><td>11,473,681</td><td>12,823,610</td><td>12,893,041</td><td>13,797,121</td><td>12,915,803</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income (loss)</td><td>$2,147,621</td><td>$1,567,765</td><td>$2,319,261</td><td>$1,428,372</td><td>$1,903,486</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (loss) attributable to DISH Network</td><td>$1,575,091</td><td>$2,098,689</td><td>$1,497,939</td><td>$802,374</td><td>$996,648</td></tr><tr><td>Basic net income (loss) per share attributable to DISH Network</td><td>$3.37</td><td>$4.50</td><td>$3.22</td><td>$1.73</td><td>$2.17</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted net income (loss) per share attributable to DISH Network</td><td>$3.00</td><td>$4.07</td><td>$3.15</td><td>$1.73</td><td>$2.15</td></tr></table>

In the year with the most Granted for shares(in thousands), what is the growth rate of Outstanding ? (in %)

THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis Investing & Lending Investing & Lending includes our investing activities and the origination of loans, including our relationship lending activities, to provide financing to clients. These investments and loans are typically longer-term in nature. We make investments, some of which are consolidated, including through our merchant banking business and our special situations group, in debt securities and loans, public and private equity securities, infrastructure and real estate entities. Some of these investments are made indirectly through funds that we manage. We also make unsecured and secured loans to retail clients through our digital platforms, Marcus and Goldman Sachs Private Bank Select (GS Select), respectively. The table below presents the operating results of our Investing & Lending segment. <table><tr><td></td><td>Year Ended December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities</td><td>$4,578</td><td>$2,573</td><td>$3,781</td></tr><tr><td>Debt securities and loans</td><td>2,003</td><td>1,507</td><td>1,655</td></tr><tr><td>Total net revenues</td><td>6,581</td><td>4,080</td><td>5,436</td></tr><tr><td>Operating expenses</td><td>2,796</td><td>2,386</td><td>2,402</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-taxearnings</td><td>$3,785</td><td>$1,694</td><td>$3,034</td></tr></table> Operating Environment. During 2017, generally higher global equity prices and tighter credit spreads contributed to a favorable environment for our equity and debt investments. Results also reflected net gains from companyspecific events, including sales, and corporate performance. This environment contrasts with 2016, where, in the first quarter of 2016, market conditions were difficult and corporate performance, particularly in the energy sector, was impacted by a challenging macroeconomic environment. However, market conditions improved during the rest of 2016 as macroeconomic concerns moderated. If macroeconomic concerns negatively affect company-specific events or corporate performance, or if global equity markets decline or credit spreads widen, net revenues in Investing & Lending would likely be negatively impacted.2017 versus 2016. Net revenues in Investing & Lending were $6.58 billion for 2017, 61% higher than 2016. Net revenues in equity securities were $4.58 billion, including $3.82 billion of net gains from private equities and $762 million in net gains from public equities. Net revenues in equity securities were 78% higher than 2016, primarily reflecting a significant increase in net gains from private equities, which were positively impacted by companyspecific events and corporate performance. In addition, net gains from public equities were significantly higher, as global equity prices increased during the year. Of the $4.58 billion of net revenues in equity securities, approximately 60% was driven by net gains from company-specific events, such as sales, and public equities. Net revenues in debt securities and loans were $2.00 billion, 33% higher than 2016, reflecting significantly higher net interest income (2017 included approximately $1.80 billion of net interest income). Net revenues in debt securities and loans for 2017 also included an impairment of approximately $130 million on a secured loan. Operating expenses were $2.80 billion for 2017, 17% higher than 2016, due to increased compensation and benefits expenses, reflecting higher net revenues, increased expenses related to consolidated investments, and increased expenses related to Marcus. Pre-tax earnings were $3.79 billion in 2017 compared with $1.69 billion in 2016.2016 versus 2015. Net revenues in Investing & Lending were $4.08 billion for 2016, 25% lower than 2015. Net revenues in equity securities were $2.57 billion, including $2.17 billion of net gains from private equities and $402 million in net gains from public equities. Net revenues in equity securities were 32% lower than 2015, primarily reflecting a significant decrease in net gains from private equities, driven by company-specific events and corporate performance. Net revenues in debt securities and loans were $1.51 billion, 9% lower than 2015, reflecting significantly lower net revenues related to relationship lending activities, due to the impact of changes in credit spreads on economic hedges. Losses related to these hedges were $596 million in 2016, compared with gains of $329 million in 2015. This decrease was partially offset by higher net gains from investments in debt instruments and higher net interest income. See Note 9 to the consolidated financial statements for further information about economic hedges related to our relationship lending activities. Operating expenses were $2.39 billion for 2016, essentially unchanged compared with 2015. Pre-tax earnings were $1.69 billion in 2016, 44% lower than 2015. the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan generally vest over four years and expire no later than ten years from the date of grant. For restricted stock awards issued under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan, stock certificates are issued at the time of grant and recipients have dividend and voting rights. In general, these grants vest over three years. For deferred stock awards issued under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan, no stock is issued at the time of grant. Generally, these grants vest over two-, three- or four-year periods. Performance awards granted under the 2006 Plan and the 1997 Plan are earned over a performance period based on achievement of goals, generally over twoto three-year periods. Payment for performance awards is made in cash or in shares of our common stock equal to its fair market value per share, based on certain financial ratios, after the conclusion of each performance period. We record compensation expense, equal to the estimated fair value of the options on the grant date, on a straight-line basis over the options’ vesting periods. We use a Black-Scholes option-pricing model to estimate the fair value of the options granted. The weighted-average assumptions used in connection with the option-pricing model were as follows for the years indicated: <table><tr><td></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td> 2007</td></tr><tr><td>Dividend yield</td><td>4.82%</td><td>1.32%</td><td>1.34%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected volatility</td><td>26.70</td><td>21.00</td><td>23.30</td></tr><tr><td>Risk-free interest rate</td><td>2.49</td><td>3.17</td><td>4.69</td></tr><tr><td>Expected option lives (in years)</td><td>7.8</td><td>7.8</td><td>7.8</td></tr></table> Compensation expense related to stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock awards, deferred stock awards and performance awards, which we record as a component of salaries and employee benefits expense in our consolidated statement of income, was $126 million, $321 million and $272 million for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. The 2009 and 2008 expense excluded $13 million and $47 million, respectively, associated with accelerated vesting in connection with the restructuring plan described in note 6. The aggregate income tax benefit recorded in our consolidated statement of income related to the above-described compensation expense was $50 million, $127 million and $109 million for 2009, 2008 and 2007, respectively. Information about the 2006 Plan and 1997 Plan as of December 31, 2009, and activity during the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2009, is presented below: <table><tr><td></td><td>Shares (in thousands)</td><td> Weighted Average Exercise Price</td><td> Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Term (in years)</td><td> Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Stock Options and Stock Appreciation Rights:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Outstanding at December 31, 2007</td><td>16,368</td><td>$48.94</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Granted</td><td>921</td><td>81.71</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Exercised</td><td>-2,926</td><td>44.99</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Forfeited or expired</td><td>-47</td><td>47.40</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Outstanding at December 31, 2008</td><td>14,316</td><td>51.86</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Granted</td><td>516</td><td>19.31</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Exercised</td><td>-832</td><td>40.57</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Forfeited or expired</td><td>-833</td><td>46.32</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Outstanding at December 31, 2009</td><td>13,167</td><td>$51.64</td><td> 4.10</td><td>$24.8</td></tr><tr><td>Exercisable at December 31, 2009</td><td>11,172</td><td>$50.12</td><td> 3.42</td><td>$12.0</td></tr></table> The weighted-average grant date fair value of options granted in 2009, 2008 and 2007 was $2.96, $21.06 and $22.44, respectively. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, was $5 million, $102 million and $129 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, total unrecognized compensation cost, net of estimated forfeitures, related to stock options and stock appreciation rights was $7 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 21 months. value of our liquid assets, as defined, totaled $75.98 billion, compared to $85.81 billion as of December 31, 2008. The decrease was mainly attributable to unusually high 2008 deposit balances, as we experienced a significant increase in customer deposits during the second half of 2008 as the credit markets worsened. As customers accumulated liquidity, they placed cash with us, and these incremental customer deposits remained with State Street Bank at December 31, 2008. During 2009, as markets normalized, deposit levels moderated as customers returned to investing their cash, and our liquid asset levels declined accordingly. Due to the unusual size and volatile nature of these customer deposits, we maintained approximately $22.45 billion at central banks as of December 31, 2009, in excess of regulatory required minimums. Securities carried at $40.96 billion as of December 31, 2009, compared to $42.74 billion as of December 31, 2008, were designated as pledged for public and trust deposits, borrowed funds and for other purposes as provided by law, and are excluded from the liquid assets calculation, unless pledged to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. Liquid assets included securities pledged to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston to secure State Street Bank’s ability to borrow from their discount window should the need arise. This access to primary credit is an important source of back-up liquidity for State Street Bank. As of December 31, 2009, we had no outstanding primary credit borrowings from the discount window. Based upon our level of liquid assets and our ability to access the capital markets for additional funding when necessary, including our ability to issue debt and equity securities under our current universal shelf registration, management considers overall liquidity at December 31, 2009 to be sufficient to meet State Street’s current commitments and business needs, including supporting the liquidity of the commercial paper conduits and accommodating the transaction and cash management needs of our customers. As referenced above, our ability to maintain consistent access to liquidity is fostered by the maintenance of high investment-grade ratings on our debt, as measured by the major independent credit rating agencies. Factors essential to retaining high credit ratings include diverse and stable core earnings; strong risk management; strong capital ratios; diverse liquidity sources, including the global capital markets and customer deposits; and strong liquidity monitoring procedures. High ratings on debt minimize borrowing costs and enhance our liquidity by ensuring the largest possible market for our debt. A downgrade or reduction of these credit ratings could have an adverse impact to our ability to access funding at favorable interest rates. The following table presents information about State Street’s and State Street Bank’s credit ratings as of February 22, 2010.

what is the growth rate in earnings for non-utility nuclear in 2004 compare to 2003?

Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Management's Financial Discussion and Analysis 10 Other income (deductions) changed from $47.6 million in 2002 to ($36.0 million) in 2003 primarily due to a decrease in "miscellaneous - net" as a result of a $107.7 million accrual in the second quarter of 2003 for the loss that would be associated with a final, non-appealable decision disallowing abeyed River Bend plant costs. See Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements for more details regarding the River Bend abeyed plant costs. The decrease was partially offset by an increase in interest and dividend income as a result of the implementation of SFAS 143. Interest on long-term debt decreased from $462.0 million in 2002 to $433.5 million in 2003 primarily due to the redemption and refinancing of long-term debt. NON-UTILITY NUCLEAR Following are key performance measures for Non-Utility Nuclear: <table><tr><td></td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td><td>2002</td></tr><tr><td>Net MW in operation at December 31</td><td>4,058</td><td>4,001</td><td>3,955</td></tr><tr><td>Average realized price per MWh</td><td>$41.26</td><td>$39.38</td><td>$40.07</td></tr><tr><td>Generation in GWh for the year</td><td>32,524</td><td>32,379</td><td>29,953</td></tr><tr><td>Capacity factor for the year</td><td>92%</td><td>92%</td><td>93%</td></tr></table> 2004 Compared to 2003 The decrease in earnings for Non-Utility Nuclear from $300.8 million to $245.0 million was primarily due to the $154.5 million net-of-tax cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle that increased earnings in the first quarter of 2003 upon implementation of SFAS 143. See "Critical Accounting Estimates - SFAS 143" below for discussion of the implementation of SFAS 143. Earnings before the cumulative effect of accounting change increased by $98.7 million primarily due to the following: ? lower operation and maintenance expenses, which decreased from $681.8 million in 2003 to $595.7 million in 2004, primarily resulting from charges recorded in 2003 in connection with the voluntary severance program; ? higher revenues, which increased from $1.275 billion in 2003 to $1.342 billion in 2004, primarily resulting from higher contract pricing. The addition of a support services contract for the Cooper Nuclear Station and increased generation in 2004 due to power uprates completed in 2003 and fewer planned and unplanned outages in 2004 also contributed to the higher revenues; and ? miscellaneous income resulting from a reduction in the decommissioning liability for a plant, as discussed in Note 8 to the consolidated financial statements. Partially offsetting this increase were the following: ? higher income taxes, which increased from $88.6 million in 2003 to $142.6 million in 2004; and ? higher depreciation expense, which increased from $34.3 million in 2003 to $48.9 million in 2004, due to additions to plant in service.2003 Compared to 2002 The increase in earnings for Non-Utility Nuclear from $200.5 million to $300.8 million was primarily due to the $154.5 million net-of-tax cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle recognized in the first quarter of 2003 upon implementation of SFAS 143. See "Critical Accounting Estimates - SFAS 143" below for discussion of the implementation of SFAS 143. Income before the cumulative effect of accounting change decreased by $54.2 million. The decrease was primarily due to $83.0 million ($50.6 million net-of-tax) of charges recorded in connection with the voluntary severance program. Except for the effect of the voluntary severance program, operation and maintenance expenses in 2003 per MWh of generation were in line with 2002 operation and maintenance expenses. Gains and Other Income The following table shows our gains and other income for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2004, January 2, 2004, and January 3, 2003. <table><tr><td> <i>($ in millions)</i></td><td> 2004 </td><td> 2003 </td><td> 2002 </td></tr><tr><td>Timeshare note sale gains</td><td>$64</td><td>$64</td><td>$60</td></tr><tr><td>Synthetic fuel earn-out payments received, net</td><td>28</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Gains on sales of real estate</td><td>44</td><td>21</td><td>28</td></tr><tr><td>Gains on sales of joint venture investments</td><td>19</td><td>21</td><td>44</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>9</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$164</td><td>$106</td><td>$132</td></tr></table> Interest Expense 2004 COMPARED TO 2003 Interest expense decreased $11 million to $99 million, reflecting the repayment of $234 million of senior debt in the fourth quarter of 2003 and other subsequent debt reductions, partially offset by lower capitalized interest resulting from fewer projects under construction, primarily related to our Timeshare segment.2003 COMPARED TO 2002 Interest expense increased $24 million to $110 million, reflecting interest on the mortgage debt assumed in the fourth quarter of 2002 associated with the acquisition of 14 senior living communities, and lower capitalized interest resulting from fewer projects under construction, primarily related to our Timeshare segment. In the fourth quarter of 2003, $234 million of senior debt was repaid. The weighted average interest rate on the repaid debt was 7 percent. Interest Income, Provision for Loan Losses, and Income Tax 2004 COMPARED TO 2003 Interest income, before the provision for loan losses, increased $17 million (13 percent) to $146 million, reflecting higher loan balances, including the $200 million note collected in the third quarter of 2004 related to the acquisition by Cendant Corporation of our interest in the Two Flags joint venture and higher interest rates. We recognized $9 million of interest income associated with the $200 million note, which was issued early in the 2004 second quarter. Our provision for loan losses for 2004 was a benefit of $8 million and includes $3 million of reserves for loans deemed uncollectible at three hotels, offset by the reversal of $11 million of reserves no longer deemed necessary. Income from continuing operations before income taxes generated a tax provision of $100 million in 2004, compared to a tax benefit of $43 million in 2003. The difference is primarily attributable to the impact of the synthetic fuel joint ventures, which generated a tax benefit and tax credits of $165 million in 2004, compared to $245 million in 2003 and to higher pre-tax income. In the third quarter of 2003, we sold a 50 percent interest in our synthetic fuel joint ventures, and we currently consolidate the joint ventures.2003 COMPARED TO 2002 Interest income increased $7 million (6 percent) to $129 million. Our provision for loan losses for 2003 was $7 million and includes $15 million of reserves for loans deemed uncollectible at six hotels, offset by the reversal of $8 million of reserves no longer deemed necessary. Income from continuing operations before income taxes and minority interest generated a tax benefit of $43 million in 2003, compared to a tax provision of $32 million in 2002. The difference is primarily attributable to the impact of our synthetic fuel operation, which generated a tax benefit and tax credits of $245 million in 2003, compared to $208 million in 2002. Excluding the impact of the synthetic fuel operation, our pre-tax income was lower in 2003, which also contributed to the favorable tax impact. Our effective tax rate for discontinued operations increased from 15.7 percent to 39 percent due to the impact of the taxes in 2002 associated with the sale of stock in connection with the disposal of our Senior Living Services business. Minority Interest Minority interest increased from an expense of $55 million in 2003 to a benefit of $40 million in 2004, primarily as a result of the change in the ownership structure of the synthetic fuel joint ventures following our sale of 50 percent of our interest in the joint ventures. Due to the purchaser’s put option, which expired on November 6, 2003, minority interest for 2003 reflected our partner’s share of the synthetic fuel operating losses and its share of the associated tax benefit, along with its share of the tax credits from the June 21, 2003, sale date through the put option’s expiration date, when we began accounting for the ventures under the equity method of accounting. For 2004, minority interest reflects our partner’s share of the synthetic fuel losses from March 26, 2004 (when we began consolidating the ventures due to the adoption of FIN 46(R)), through year-end. For additional information, see the discussion relating to our “Synthetic Fuel” segment on page 19. Income from Continuing Operations 2004 COMPARED TO 2003 Income from continuing operations increased 25 percent to $594 million, and diluted earnings per share from continuing operations increased 27 percent to $2.47. The favorable results were primarily driven by strong hotel demand, new unit growth, strong timeshare results, higher interest income reflecting higher balances and rates, lower interest expense due to debt reductions, lower loan loss provisions, stronger synthetic fuel results and increased gains of $58 million, partially offset by higher income taxes excluding the synthetic fuel impact, and higher general and administrative expenses.2003 COMPARED TO 2002 Income from continuing operations increased 8 percent to $476 million, and diluted earnings per share from continuing operations advanced 11 percent to $1.94. Synthetic fuel operations contributed $96 million in 2003 compared to $74 million in 2002. Our lodging financial results declined $5 million to $702 million in 2003. The comparisons Product Specific Risks and Risk Mitigants For certain living benefits guarantees, claims will primarily represent the funding of contractholder lifetime withdrawals after the cumulative withdrawals have first exhausted the contractholder account value. Due to the age of the in force block, limited claim payments have occurred to date, and they are not expected to increase significantly within the next five years, based upon current assumptions. The timing and amount of future claims will depend on actual returns on contractholder account value and actual contractholder behavior relative to our assumptions. The majority of our current living benefits guarantees provide for guaranteed lifetime contractholder withdrawal payments inclusive of a “highest daily” contract value guarantee. Our PDI variable annuity complements our variable annuity products with the highest daily benefit and provides for guaranteed lifetime contractholder withdrawal payments, but restricts contractholder asset allocation to a single bond fund sub-account within the separate accounts. The majority of our variable annuity contracts with living benefits guarantees, and all new contracts sold with our highest daily living benefits feature, include risk mitigants in the form of an automatic rebalancing feature and/or inclusion in our ALM strategy. We may also utilize external reinsurance as a form of additional risk mitigation. The risks associated with the guaranteed benefits of certain legacy products that were sold prior to our development of the automatic rebalancing feature are also managed through our ALM strategy. Certain legacy GMAB products include the automatic rebalancing feature, but are not included in the ALM strategy. The PDI product and contracts with the GMIB feature have neither risk mitigant. Certain risks associated with PDI are managed through the limitation of contractholder asset allocations to a single bond fund sub-account. For our GMDBs, we provide a benefit payable in the event of death. Our base GMDB is generally equal to a return of cumulative deposits adjusted for any partial withdrawals. Certain products include an optional enhanced GMDB based on the greater of a minimum return on the contract value or an enhanced value. We have retained the risk that the total amount of death benefit payable may be greater than the contractholder account value. However, a substantial portion of the account values associated with GMDBs are subject to an automatic rebalancing feature because the contractholder also selected a living benefit guarantee which includes an automatic rebalancing feature. All of the variable annuity account values with living benefit guarantees also contain GMDBs. The living and death benefit features for these contracts cover the same insured life and, consequently, we have insured both the longevity and mortality risk on these contracts. The following table sets forth the risk management profile of our living benefit guarantees and GMDB features as of the periods indicated. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2016</td><td colspan="2">2015</td><td colspan="2">2014</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Account Value</td><td>% of Total</td><td>Account Value</td><td>% of Total</td><td>Account Value</td><td>% of Total</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">(in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Living benefit/GMDB features-1:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Both ALM strategy and automatic rebalancing-2</td><td>$106,585</td><td>69%</td><td>$106,018</td><td>71%</td><td>$110,953</td><td>72%</td></tr><tr><td>ALM strategy only</td><td>9,409</td><td>6%</td><td>9,994</td><td>7%</td><td>11,395</td><td>7%</td></tr><tr><td>Automatic rebalancing only</td><td>1,168</td><td>1%</td><td>1,393</td><td>1%</td><td>1,771</td><td>1%</td></tr><tr><td>External reinsurance-3</td><td>2,932</td><td>2%</td><td>1,513</td><td>1%</td><td>0</td><td>0%</td></tr><tr><td>PDI</td><td>7,926</td><td>5%</td><td>4,664</td><td>3%</td><td>2,777</td><td>2%</td></tr><tr><td>Other Products</td><td>2,730</td><td>2%</td><td>2,870</td><td>2%</td><td>3,324</td><td>2%</td></tr><tr><td>Total living benefit/GMDB features</td><td>$130,750</td><td></td><td>$126,452</td><td></td><td>$130,220</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>GMDB features and other-4</td><td>22,545</td><td>15%</td><td>22,989</td><td>15%</td><td>24,863</td><td>16%</td></tr><tr><td>Total variable annuity account value</td><td>$153,295</td><td></td><td>$149,441</td><td></td><td>$155,083</td><td></td></tr></table> (1) All contracts with living benefit guarantees also contain GMDB features, covering the same insured contract. (2) Contracts with living benefits that are included in our ALM strategy, and have an automatic rebalancing feature. (3) Represents contracts subject to reinsurance transaction with external counterparty covering new business for the period April 1, 2015 through December 31, 2016. These contracts with living benefits also have an automatic rebalancing feature. (4) Includes contracts that have a GMDB feature and do not have an automatic rebalancing feature. The risk profile of our variable annuity account values as of the periods above reflect our product risk diversification strategy and the runoff of legacy products over time.

What's the sum of Construction Payable of Estimated Fair Value, and Net sales of 2013 ?

Table of Contents Mac The following table presents Mac net sales and unit sales information for 2014, 2013 and 2012 (dollars in millions and units in thousands): <table><tr><td></td><td> 2014</td><td> Change</td><td> 2013</td><td>Change</td><td> 2012</td></tr><tr><td>Net sales</td><td>$24,079</td><td>12%</td><td>$21,483</td><td>-7%</td><td>$23,221</td></tr><tr><td>Percentage of total net sales</td><td>13%</td><td></td><td>13%</td><td></td><td>15%</td></tr><tr><td>Unit sales</td><td>18,906</td><td>16%</td><td>16,341</td><td>-10%</td><td>18,158</td></tr></table> The year-over-year growth in Mac net sales and unit sales for 2014 was primarily driven by increased sales of MacBook Air, MacBook Pro and Mac Pro. Mac net sales and unit sales increased in all of the Company’s operating segments. Mac ASPs decreased during 2014 compared to 2013 primarily due to price reductions on certain Mac models and a shift in mix towards Mac portable systems. Mac net sales and unit sales for 2013 were down or relatively flat in all of the Company’s operating segments. Mac ASPs increased slightly partially offsetting the impact of lower unit sales on net sales. The decline in Mac unit sales and net sales reflected the overall weakness in the market for personal computers. iTunes, Software and Services The following table presents net sales information of iTunes, Software and Services for 2014, 2013 and 2012 (dollars in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td> 2014</td><td> Change</td><td> 2013</td><td> Change</td><td> 2012</td></tr><tr><td>iTunes, Software and Services</td><td>$18,063</td><td>13%</td><td>$16,051</td><td>25%</td><td>$12,890</td></tr><tr><td>Percentage of total net sales</td><td>10%</td><td></td><td>9%</td><td></td><td>8%</td></tr></table> The increase in net sales of iTunes, Software and Services in 2014 compared to 2013 was primarily due to growth in net sales from the iTunes Store, AppleCare and licensing. The iTunes Store generated a total of $10.2 billion in net sales during 2014 compared to $9.3 billion during 2013. Growth in net sales from the iTunes Store was driven by increases in revenue from app sales reflecting continued growth in the installed base of iOS devices and the expanded offerings of iOS Apps and related in-App purchases. This was partially offset by a decline in sales of digital music. The increase in net sales of iTunes, Software and Services in 2013 compared to 2012 was primarily due to growth in net sales from the iTunes Store, AppleCare and licensing. The iTunes Store generated a total of $9.3 billion in net sales during 2013, a 24% increase from 2012. Growth in the iTunes Store, which includes the App Store, the Mac App Store and the iBooks Store, reflected continued growth in the installed base of iOS devices, expanded offerings of iOS Apps and related in-App purchases, and expanded offerings of iTunes digital content. Segment Operating Performance The Company manages its business primarily on a geographic basis. Accordingly, the Company determined its reportable operating segments, which are generally based on the nature and location of its customers, to be the Americas, Europe, Greater China, Japan, Rest of Asia Pacific and Retail. The Americas segment includes both North and South America. The Europe segment includes European countries, as well as India, the Middle East and Africa. The Greater China segment includes China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. The Rest of Asia Pacific segment includes Australia and Asian countries, other than those countries included in the Company’s other operating segments. The results of the Company’s geographic segments do not include results of the Retail segment. Each operating segment provides similar hardware and software products and similar services. Further information regarding the Company’s operating segments may be found in Part II, Item 8 of this Form 10-K in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Note 11, “Segment Information and Geographic Data. ” KIMCO REALTY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, CONTINUED Noncontrolling interests also includes 138,015 convertible units issued during 2006, by the Company, which are valued at approximately $5.3 million, including a fair market value adjustment of $0.3 million, related to an interest acquired in an office building located in Albany, NY. These units are redeemable at the option of the holder after one year for cash or at the option of the Company for the Company’s common stock at a ratio of 1:1. The holder is entitled to a distribution equal to the dividend rate of the Company’s common stock. The Company is restricted from disposing of these assets, other than through a tax free transaction, until January 2017. The following table presents the change in the redemption value of the Redeemable noncontrolling interests for the year ended December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008 (amounts in thousands): <table><tr><td></td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at January 1,</td><td>$115,853</td><td>$173,592</td></tr><tr><td>Unit redemptions</td><td>-14,889</td><td>-55,110</td></tr><tr><td>Fair market value amortization</td><td>-571</td><td>-2,524</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-89</td><td>-105</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31,</td><td>$100,304</td><td>$115,853</td></tr></table> 16. Fair Value Disclosure of Financial Instruments: All financial instruments of the Company are reflected in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets at amounts which, in management’s estimation based upon an interpretation of available market information and valuation methodologies, reasonably approximate their fair values except those listed below, for which fair values are reflected. The valuation method used to estimate fair value for fixed-rate and variable-rate debt and noncontrolling interests relating to mandatorily redeemable noncontrolling interests associated with finite-lived subsidiaries of the Company is based on discounted cash flow analyses, with assumptions that include credit spreads, loan amounts and debt maturities. The fair values for marketable securities are based on published or securities dealers’ estimated market values. Such fair value estimates are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that would be realized upon disposition. The following are financial instruments for which the Company’s estimate of fair value differs from the carrying amounts (in thousands): <table><tr><td></td><td>December 31, 2009 Carrying Amounts</td><td>Estimated Fair Value</td><td>2008 Carrying Amounts</td><td>Estimated Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td>Marketable Securities</td><td>$209,593</td><td>$204,006</td><td>$258,174</td><td>$218,786</td></tr><tr><td>Notes Payable</td><td>$3,000,303</td><td>$3,099,139</td><td>$3,440,819</td><td>$2,766,187</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgages Payable</td><td>$1,388,259</td><td>$1,377,224</td><td>$847,491</td><td>$838,503</td></tr><tr><td>Construction Payable</td><td>$45,821</td><td>$44,725</td><td>$268,337</td><td>$262,485</td></tr><tr><td>Mandatorily Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests(termination dates ranging from 2019 – 2027)</td><td>$2,768</td><td>$5,256</td><td>$2,895</td><td>$5,444</td></tr></table> The Company has certain financial instruments that must be measured under the FASB’s Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures guidance, including: available for sale securities, convertible notes and derivatives. The Company currently does not have non-financial assets and non-financial liabilities that are required to be measured at fair value on a recurring basis. As a basis for considering market participant assumptions in fair value measurements, the FASB’s Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures guidance establishes a fair value hierarchy that distinguishes between market participant assumptions based on market data obtained from sources independent of the reporting entity (observable inputs that are classified within Levels 1 and 2 of the hierarchy) and the reporting entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions (unobservable inputs classified within Level 3 of the hierarchy). Net interest on the stock loan/borrow business decreased 38% due to decreased rates and balances despite a focus on hard-to-locate securities. Other interest revenue and expense include earnings on corporate cash and inventory balances, and interest expense on overnight borrowings, our senior notes issued in August, 2009 and the mortgage on our headquarters facility. Results of Operations - Private Client Group The following table presents consolidated financial information for our PCG segment for the years indicated: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">Year Ended</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>September 30, 2009</td><td>% Incr. (Decr.)</td><td>September 30, 2008</td><td>% Incr. (Decr.)</td><td>September 30, 2007</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">($ in 000's)</td></tr><tr><td>Revenues:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Securities Commissions and Fees</td><td>$ 1,262,810</td><td>-18%</td><td>$ 1,532,290</td><td>5%</td><td>$ 1,462,323</td></tr><tr><td>Interest</td><td>65,589</td><td>-72%</td><td>233,801</td><td>-28%</td><td>326,601</td></tr><tr><td>Financial Service Fees</td><td>125,038</td><td>-2%</td><td>127,304</td><td>16%</td><td>110,056</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>104,025</td><td>-2%</td><td>106,380</td><td>20%</td><td>88,502</td></tr><tr><td>Total Revenues</td><td>1,557,462</td><td>-22%</td><td>1,999,775</td><td>1%</td><td>1,987,482</td></tr><tr><td>Interest Expense</td><td>14,891</td><td>-89%</td><td>141,474</td><td>-32%</td><td>208,537</td></tr><tr><td>Net Revenues</td><td>1,542,570</td><td>-17%</td><td>1,858,301</td><td>4%</td><td>1,778,945</td></tr><tr><td>Non-Interest Expenses:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Sales Commissions</td><td>929,202</td><td>-19%</td><td>1,144,727</td><td>6%</td><td>1,082,457</td></tr><tr><td>Admin & Incentive Comp and Benefit Costs</td><td>279,666</td><td>-4%</td><td>289,937</td><td>15%</td><td>251,684</td></tr><tr><td>Communications and Information Processing</td><td>58,607</td><td>-2%</td><td>59,753</td><td>7%</td><td>55,822</td></tr><tr><td>Occupancy and Equipment</td><td>79,072</td><td>8%</td><td>73,253</td><td>18%</td><td>61,961</td></tr><tr><td>Business Development</td><td>55,488</td><td>-15%</td><td>64,992</td><td>12%</td><td>57,816</td></tr><tr><td>Clearance and Other</td><td>55,951</td><td>18%</td><td>47,369</td><td>1%</td><td>46,983</td></tr><tr><td>Total Non-Interest Expenses</td><td>1,457,986</td><td>-13%</td><td>1,680,031</td><td>8%</td><td>1,556,723</td></tr><tr><td>Income Before Taxes and Minority Interest</td><td>84,584</td><td>-53%</td><td>178,270</td><td>-20%</td><td>222,222</td></tr><tr><td>Minority Interest</td><td>-289</td><td></td><td>124</td><td></td><td>-148</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-tax Income</td><td>$ 84,873</td><td>-52%</td><td>$ 178,146</td><td>-20%</td><td>$ 222,370</td></tr><tr><td>Margin on Net Revenues</td><td>5.5%</td><td></td><td>9.6%</td><td></td><td>12.5%</td></tr></table> Year ended September 30, 2009 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2008 - Private Client Group PCG revenues were 22% below the prior year, reflecting the impact of the extremely challenging economic and market conditions. Commission revenue decreased $269 million, or 18%, from the prior year, with the majority of that decrease experienced by our domestic independent contractor operation. Commissions in RJ&A PCG declined only $45 million, or 9%, due to the recruitment of 219 employee financial advisors in fiscal 2009 (for a net increase of 94) and 184 in fiscal 2008 (for a net increase of 114). It generally takes newly recruited financial advisors up to two years to reach their previous production levels. Average production per employee financial advisor decreased to $417,000 in fiscal 2009, down 19% from the $515,000 attained in fiscal 2008. The recruitment of above-average producers did not overcome the negative impact that the steep market decline had on our private clients’ investing activities. RJFS and RJFSA recruited 559 independent contractor financial advisors in fiscal 2009 (for a net increase of 129). Independent contractor financial advisor average production decreased from $330,000 in fiscal 2008 to $273,000 in fiscal 2009, impacted, like RJ&A, by the challenging economic and market conditions.

What's the sum of Seattle Metro of As of December 31, 2010 Apartment Units, and Huntington Breakers of RentableSquareFootage ?

The following tables describe the Company’s Portfolio as of December 31, 2011. The first table describes the Company’s communities and the second table describes the Company’s other real estate assets. (See Note 7 of the Company’s consolidated financial statements for more information about the Company’s secured mortgage debt and Schedule III for a list of secured mortgage loans related to the Company’s Portfolio. ) <table><tr><td>Communities-1</td><td>Location</td><td>Units</td><td>RentableSquareFootage</td><td>YearBuilt</td><td>YearAcquired</td><td>Occupancy-2</td></tr><tr><td>Southern California</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Alpine Country</td><td>Alpine, CA</td><td>108</td><td>81,900</td><td>1986</td><td>2002</td><td>95%</td></tr><tr><td>Alpine Village</td><td>Alpine, CA</td><td>301</td><td>254,400</td><td>1971</td><td>2002</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Anavia</td><td>Anaheim, CA</td><td>250</td><td>312,343</td><td>2009</td><td>2010</td><td>92%</td></tr><tr><td>Barkley, The-3(4)</td><td>Anaheim, CA</td><td>161</td><td>139,800</td><td>1984</td><td>2000</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Bonita Cedars</td><td>Bonita, CA</td><td>120</td><td>120,800</td><td>1983</td><td>2002</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Camarillo Oaks</td><td>Camarillo, CA</td><td>564</td><td>459,000</td><td>1985</td><td>1996</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Camino Ruiz Square</td><td>Camarillo, CA</td><td>160</td><td>105,448</td><td>1990</td><td>2006</td><td>98%</td></tr><tr><td>Cielo -5</td><td>Chatsworth, CA</td><td>119</td><td>125,400</td><td>2009</td><td>2009</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Cambridge</td><td>Chula Vista, CA</td><td>40</td><td>22,100</td><td>1965</td><td>2002</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Mesa Village</td><td>Clairemont, CA</td><td>133</td><td>43,600</td><td>1963</td><td>2002</td><td>98%</td></tr><tr><td>Parcwood-5</td><td>Corona, CA</td><td>312</td><td>270,000</td><td>1989</td><td>2004</td><td>95%</td></tr><tr><td>Tierra del Sol/Norte</td><td>El Cajon, CA</td><td>156</td><td>117,000</td><td>1969</td><td>2002</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Regency at Encino</td><td>Encino, CA</td><td>75</td><td>78,487</td><td>1989</td><td>2009</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Valley Park-6</td><td>Fountain Valley, CA</td><td>160</td><td>169,700</td><td>1969</td><td>2001</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Capri at Sunny Hills-6</td><td>Fullerton, CA</td><td>100</td><td>128,100</td><td>1961</td><td>2001</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Wilshire Promenade</td><td>Fullerton, CA</td><td>149</td><td>128,000</td><td>1992</td><td>1997</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Montejo-6</td><td>Garden Grove, CA</td><td>124</td><td>103,200</td><td>1974</td><td>2001</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>CBC Apartments</td><td>Goleta, CA</td><td>148</td><td>91,538</td><td>1962</td><td>2006</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Chimney Sweep Apartments</td><td>Goleta, CA</td><td>91</td><td>88,370</td><td>1967</td><td>2006</td><td>83%</td></tr><tr><td>416 on Broadway</td><td>Glendale, CA</td><td>115</td><td>126,782</td><td>2009</td><td>2010</td><td>93%</td></tr><tr><td>Hampton Court</td><td>Glendale, CA</td><td>83</td><td>71,500</td><td>1974</td><td>1999</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Hampton Place</td><td>Glendale, CA</td><td>132</td><td>141,500</td><td>1970</td><td>1999</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Devonshire</td><td>Hemet, CA</td><td>276</td><td>207,200</td><td>1988</td><td>2002</td><td>94%</td></tr><tr><td>Huntington Breakers</td><td>Huntington Beach, CA</td><td>342</td><td>241,700</td><td>1984</td><td>1997</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Axis 2300</td><td>Irvine, CA</td><td>115</td><td>170,714</td><td>2010-7</td><td>2010</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Hillsborough Park</td><td>La Habra, CA</td><td>235</td><td>215,500</td><td>1999</td><td>1999</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Trabuco Villas</td><td>Lake Forest, CA</td><td>132</td><td>131,000</td><td>1985</td><td>1997</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Marbrisa</td><td>Long Beach, CA</td><td>202</td><td>122,800</td><td>1987</td><td>2002</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Pathways</td><td>Long Beach, CA</td><td>296</td><td>197,700</td><td>1975-8</td><td>1991</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Belmont Station</td><td>Los Angeles, CA</td><td>275</td><td>225,000</td><td>2008</td><td>2008</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Bellerive</td><td>Los Angeles, CA</td><td>63</td><td>79,296</td><td>2011</td><td>2011</td><td>99%</td></tr><tr><td>Bunker Hill</td><td>Los Angeles, CA</td><td>456</td><td>346,600</td><td>1968</td><td>1998</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Cochran Apartments</td><td>Los Angeles, CA</td><td>58</td><td>51,400</td><td>1989</td><td>1998</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Kings Road</td><td>Los Angeles, CA</td><td>196</td><td>132,100</td><td>1979-9</td><td>1997</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Marbella, The</td><td>Los Angeles, CA</td><td>60</td><td>50,108</td><td>1991</td><td>2005</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Park Place</td><td>Los Angeles, CA</td><td>60</td><td>48,000</td><td>1988</td><td>1997</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Renaissance, The-5</td><td>Los Angeles, CA</td><td>169</td><td>154,268</td><td>1990-10</td><td>2006</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Santee Court</td><td>Los Angeles, CA</td><td>165</td><td>132,040</td><td>2004</td><td>2010</td><td>93%</td></tr><tr><td>Santee Village</td><td>Los Angeles, CA</td><td>73</td><td>69,817</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td><td>99%</td></tr><tr><td>Windsor Court</td><td>Los Angeles, CA</td><td>58</td><td>46,600</td><td>1988</td><td>1997</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Marina City Club-11</td><td>Marina Del Rey, CA</td><td>101</td><td>127,200</td><td>1971</td><td>2004</td><td>98%</td></tr><tr><td>Mirabella</td><td>Marina Del Rey, CA</td><td>188</td><td>176,800</td><td>2000</td><td>2000</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Mira Monte</td><td>Mira Mesa, CA</td><td>355</td><td>262,600</td><td>1982-12</td><td>2002</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Hillcrest Park</td><td>Newbury Park, CA</td><td>608</td><td>521,900</td><td>1973</td><td>1998</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Fairways-13</td><td>Newport Beach, CA</td><td>74</td><td>107,100</td><td>1972</td><td>1999</td><td>98%</td></tr><tr><td>Muse</td><td>North Hollywood, CA</td><td>152</td><td>135,292</td><td>2011</td><td>2011</td><td>99%</td></tr><tr><td>Country Villas</td><td>Oceanside, CA</td><td>180</td><td>179,700</td><td>1976</td><td>2002</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Mission Hills</td><td>Oceanside, CA</td><td>282</td><td>244,000</td><td>1984</td><td>2005</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Mariners Place</td><td>Oxnard, CA</td><td>105</td><td>77,200</td><td>1987</td><td>2000</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Monterey Villas</td><td>Oxnard, CA</td><td>122</td><td>122,100</td><td>1974</td><td>1997</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Tierra Vista</td><td>Oxnard, CA</td><td>404</td><td>387,100</td><td>2001</td><td>2001</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Arbors Parc Rose-14</td><td>Oxnard, CA</td><td>373</td><td>503,196</td><td>2001</td><td>2011</td><td>94%</td></tr><tr><td>Monterra del Mar</td><td>Pasadena, CA</td><td>123</td><td>74,400</td><td>1972</td><td>1997</td><td>96%</td></tr><tr><td>Monterra del Rey</td><td>Pasadena, CA</td><td>84</td><td>73,100</td><td>1972</td><td>1999</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Monterra del Sol</td><td>Pasadena, CA</td><td>85</td><td>69,200</td><td>1972</td><td>1999</td><td>97%</td></tr><tr><td>Villa Angelina-6</td><td>Placentia, CA</td><td>256</td><td>217,600</td><td>1970</td><td>2001</td><td>97%</td></tr></table> As of December 31, 2011, the Company had ownership interests in 159 communities, comprising 32,753 apartment units, and the apartment communities are located in the following major West Coast regions: Southern California (Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, Santa Barbara, San Diego, and Ventura counties) Northern California (the San Francisco Bay Area) Seattle Metro (Seattle metropolitan area) As of December 31, 2011, the Company also had ownership interests in five commercial buildings (with approximately 315,900 square feet). As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s development pipeline was comprised of five unconsolidated joint venture projects under development, one unconsolidated joint venture predevelopment project and three consolidated land parcels held for future development or sale aggregating 2,014 units, with total incurred costs of $227.1 million, and estimated remaining project costs of approximately $282.6 million for total estimated project costs of $422.6 million. By region, the Company's operating results for 2010 and 2011 and projections for 2012 new housing supply, job growth, and rental income as follows: Southern California Region: As of December 31, 2011, this region represented 48% of the Company’s consolidated apartment units. During the year ended December 31, 2011, revenues for “2011/2010 SameProperties” (as defined below), or “Same-Property revenues,” increased 2.7% in 2011 as compared to 2010. In 2012, the Company expects new residential supply (excluding Santa Barbara and Riverside counties) of 5,400 multifamily and 5,100 single family homes, which represents a total new supply of 0.2% and 0.1% of existing stock, respectively. The Company assumes an increase of 78,800 jobs or 1.2%, and an increase in rental income of 3.0% to 5.0% in 2012. Northern California Region: As of December 31, 2011, this region represented 30% of the Company’s consolidated apartment units. Same-Property revenues increased 5.7% in 2011 as compared to 2010. In 2012, the Company expects new residential supply of 3,000 multifamily and 2,200 single family homes, which represents a total new supply of 0.3% and 0.2%, respectively, of existing stock. The Company assumes an increase of 48,000 jobs or 1.7%, and an increase in rental income of 7.0% to 9.0% in 2012. Seattle Metro Region: As of December 31, 2011, this region represented 22% of the Company’s consolidated apartment units. Same-Property revenues increased 4.6% in 2011 as compared to 2010. In 2012, the Company expects new residential supply of 1,800 multifamily and 3,400 single family homes, which represents a total new supply of 0.5% of existing stock. The Company assumes an increase of 25,000 jobs or 1.8%, and an increase in rental income of 7.0% to 9.0% in 2012. The Company expects 2012 same-property revenues to increase between 5% and 7% compared to 2011 results, as renewal leases and new leases are signed at higher rents than 2011 during 2012. The Company expects sameproperty financial occupancy to be consistent with 2011 at 96.4%, thus 2012 revenues will increase 5% to 7% due to a similar increase in scheduled rent. Same-property operating expenses are expected to increase from 1.1% in 2011, to a range of 2% and 3% in 2012. Finally, same-property net operating income (“NOI”) which is defined as sameproperty revenues less same-property operating expenses is expected to increase from 5.5% for 2011 to a range of 7% to 9% in 2012. The Company’s consolidated communities are as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">As of December 31, 2011</td><td colspan="2">As of December 31, 2010</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Apartment Units</td><td>%</td><td>Apartment Units</td><td>%</td></tr><tr><td>Southern California</td><td>13,205</td><td>48%</td><td>13,076</td><td>49%</td></tr><tr><td>Northern California</td><td>8,106</td><td>30%</td><td>7,696</td><td>29%</td></tr><tr><td>Seattle Metro</td><td>6,108</td><td>22%</td><td>5,980</td><td>22%</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>27,419</td><td>100%</td><td>26,752</td><td>100%</td></tr></table> Co-investments including Fund II and Wesco I communities, Essex Skyline at MacArthur Place, and preferred equity co-investment communities are not included in the table presented above for both years. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (continued) Liquidity and Capital Resources Snap-on’s growth has historically been funded by a combination of cash provided by operating activities and debt financing. Snap-on believes that its cash from operations and collections of finance receivables, coupled with its sources of borrowings and available cash on hand, are sufficient to fund its currently anticipated requirements for scheduled debt payments (including the March 2014 repayment of $100.0 million of 5.85% unsecured notes upon maturity), payments of interest and dividends, new receivables originated by our financial services businesses, capital expenditures, working capital, restructuring activities, the funding of pension plans, and funding for additional share repurchases and acquisitions, if any. Due to Snap-on’s credit rating over the years, external funds have been available at an acceptable cost. As of the close of business on February 7, 2014, Snap-on’s long-term debt and commercial paper were rated, respectively, A3 and P-2 by Moody’s Investors Service; A- and A-2 by Standard & Poor’s; and A- and F2 by Fitch Ratings. Snap-on believes that its current credit arrangements are sound and that the strength of its balance sheet affords the company the financial flexibility to respond to both internal growth opportunities and those available through acquisitions. However, Snap-on cannot provide any assurances of the availability of future financing or the terms on which it might be available, or that its debt ratings may not decrease. The following discussion focuses on information included in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of 2013 year end, working capital (current assets less current liabilities) of $1,080.8 million increased $1.0 million from $1,079.8 million as of 2012 year end. The following represents the company’s working capital position as of 2013 and 2012 year end: <table><tr><td><i>(Amounts in millions)</i></td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td></tr><tr><td>Cash and cash equivalents</td><td>$217.6</td><td>$214.5</td></tr><tr><td>Trade and other accounts receivable – net</td><td>531.6</td><td>497.9</td></tr><tr><td>Finance receivables – net</td><td>374.6</td><td>323.1</td></tr><tr><td>Contract receivables – net</td><td>68.4</td><td>62.7</td></tr><tr><td>Inventories – net</td><td>434.4</td><td>404.2</td></tr><tr><td>Other current assets</td><td>169.6</td><td>166.6</td></tr><tr><td>Total current assets</td><td>1,796.2</td><td>1,669.0</td></tr><tr><td>Notes payable and current maturities of long-term debt</td><td>-113.1</td><td>-5.2</td></tr><tr><td>Accounts payable</td><td>-155.6</td><td>-142.5</td></tr><tr><td>Other current liabilities</td><td>-446.7</td><td>-441.5</td></tr><tr><td>Total current liabilities</td><td>-715.4</td><td>-589.2</td></tr><tr><td>Working capital</td><td>$1,080.8</td><td>$1,079.8</td></tr></table> Cash and cash equivalents of $217.6 million as of 2013 year end compared to cash and cash equivalents of $214.5 million at 2012 year end. The $3.1 million net increase in cash and cash equivalents includes the impacts of (i) $508.8 million of cash from collections of finance receivables; (ii) $392.6 million of cash generated from operations, net of $24.3 million of discretionary cash contributions to the company’s pension plans; (iii) $29.2 million of cash proceeds from stock purchase and option plan exercises; and (iv) $8.4 million of cash proceeds from the sale of property and equipment. These increases in cash and cash equivalents were largely offset by (i) the funding of $651.3 million of new finance receivables; (ii) dividend payments to shareholders of $92.0 million; (iii) the repurchase of 926,000 shares of the company’s common stock for $82.6 million; (iv) the funding of $70.6 million of capital expenditures; and (v) the May 2013 acquisition of Challenger for a cash purchase price of $38.2 million. Of the $217.6 million of cash and cash equivalents as of 2013 year end, $124.3 million was held outside of the United States. Snap-on considers these non-U. S. funds as permanently invested in its foreign operations to (i) provide adequate working capital; (ii) satisfy various regulatory requirements; and/or (iii) take advantage of business expansion opportunities as they arise; as such, the company does not presently expect to repatriate these funds to fund its U. S. operations or obligations. The repatriation of cash from certain foreign subsidiaries could have adverse net tax consequences on the company should Snap-on be required to pay and record U. S. income taxes and foreign withholding taxes on funds that were previously considered permanently invested. Alternatively, the repatriation of such cash from certain other foreign subsidiaries could result in favorable net tax consequences for the company. Snap-on periodically evaluates opportunities to repatriate certain foreign cash amounts to the extent that it does not incur additional unfavorable net tax consequences.

what is the highest total amount of Aircraft on Firm Order?

Table of Contents Index to Financial Statements Cargo Delta Cargo is the largest cargo carrier among the U. S. passenger airlines, based on revenue. Through the strength of our global network, we are able to connect all of the world’s major freight gateways. We generate cargo revenues in domestic and international markets primarily through the use of cargo space on regularly scheduled passenger aircraft. Additionally, we have a limited, focused network of freighters that tie together the key freight markets in Asia and connect to three gateways in the U. S. Delta Cargo is a member of SkyTeam Cargo, the world’s largest global airline cargo alliance. The alliance, whose other members are Aeromexico Cargo, Air France Cargo, Alitalia Cargo, CSA Czech Airlines Cargo, KLM Cargo and Korean Air Cargo, offers a global network with over 16,000 daily flights spanning 6 continents. This alliance offers cargo customers a consistent international product line, and the partners work to jointly improve their efficiency and effectiveness in the marketplace. MRO Our maintenance, repair and overhaul (“MRO”) operations known as Delta TechOps is the largest airline MRO in North America with state-of-the-art facilities worldwide. In addition to providing maintenance and engineering support for the combined Delta and NWA fleets of nearly 800 aircraft, Delta TechOps serves more than 125 aviation and airline customers from around the world. Delta TechOps employs approximately 8,500 maintenance professionals and is one of the most experienced MRO providers in the world. Among the key services we offer are: ? Airframe Maintenance—aircraft overhaul for both widebody and narrowbody craft; ? Component Maintenance—repair, overhaul, and test facilities for electromechanical components and avionics; ? Engine Maintenance—full overhaul, repair, and support capabilities for engine parts and components; ? Line Maintenance—a full range of ground services including deicing and aircraft parking; ? Support Services—logistics, fleet engineering, engine leasing, and more; and ? Technical Operations Training—technical training for a wide variety of aircraft types. Fuel Our results of operations are significantly impacted by changes in the price and availability of aircraft fuel. The following table shows our aircraft fuel consumption and costs for 2006 through 2008. <table><tr><td> Year</td><td> Gallons Consumed^-2(Millions)</td><td> Cost^{-2 (3)}(Millions)</td><td> Average Price Per Gallon^{-2 (3)}</td><td> Percentage of Total Operating Expense^-2</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2008^-1</td><td>2,740</td><td>$8,686</td><td>$3.16</td><td>38</td><td>%^-4</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>2,534</td><td>5,676</td><td>2.24</td><td>31%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td>2,480</td><td>5,250</td><td>2.12</td><td>30%</td><td></td></tr></table> (1) Includes Northwest operations for the period from October 30 to December 31, 2008. (2) Includes the operations under contract carrier agreements with regional air carriers. (3) Net of fuel hedge (losses) gains under our fuel hedging program of ($65) million, $51 million and ($108) million for 2008, 2007 and 2006, (4) Total operating expense for 2008 reflects a $7.3 billion non-cash charge from an impairment of goodwill and other intangible assets and $1.1 billion in primarily non-cash merger-related charges. Including these charges, fuel costs accounted for 28% of total operating expense. Our aircraft fuel purchase contracts do not provide material protection against price increases or assure the availability of our fuel supplies. We purchase most of our aircraft fuel under contracts that establish the price based on various market indices. We also purchase aircraft fuel on the spot market, from off-shore sources and under contracts that permit the refiners to set the price. We use derivative instruments, which are comprised of crude oil, heating oil and jet fuel swap, collar and call option contracts, in an effort to manage our exposure to changes in aircraft fuel prices. Table of Contents Index to Financial Statements Our purchase commitments (firm orders) for aircraft, as well as options to purchase additional aircraft, as of December 31, 2008 are shown in the following tables: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6"> Delivery in Calendar Years Ending</td><td></td></tr><tr><td> Aircraft on Firm Order^-3</td><td> 2009</td><td> 2010</td><td> 2011</td><td> 2012</td><td> After 2012</td><td> Total</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>B-737-700</td><td>5</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>B-737-800</td><td>11</td><td>21</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>33</td><td>^-1</td></tr><tr><td>B-777-200LR</td><td>6</td><td>2</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>8</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>A319-100</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>A320-200</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>2</td><td>—</td><td>2</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>CRJ-900</td><td>10</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>10</td><td>^-2</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>32</td><td>23</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>5</td><td>63</td><td></td></tr></table> (1) Includes 31 aircraft, which we have entered into definitive agreements to sell to third parties immediately following delivery of these aircraft to us by the manufacturer. (2) Includes 2 aircraft orders we assigned to a regional air carrier. (3) We have excluded from the table above our order of 18 B-787-8 aircraft. The Boeing Company (“Boeing”) has informed us that Boeing will be unable to meet the contractual delivery schedule for these aircraft. We are in discussions with Boeing regarding this situation. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="7"> Delivery in Calendar Years Ending</td></tr><tr><td> Aircraft on Option^-1</td><td> 2010</td><td> 2011</td><td> 2012</td><td> 2013</td><td> After 2013</td><td> Total</td><td> Rolling Options</td></tr><tr><td>B-737-800</td><td>10</td><td>24</td><td>22</td><td>4</td><td>—</td><td>60</td><td>116</td></tr><tr><td>B-767-300ER</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>4</td><td>6</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>B-767-400</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>1</td><td>2</td><td>7</td><td>12</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>B-777-200LR</td><td>2</td><td>6</td><td>6</td><td>4</td><td>9</td><td>27</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>B-787-8</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6</td><td>12</td><td>18</td><td>18</td></tr><tr><td>CRJ-200</td><td>4</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>4</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>CRJ-700</td><td>5</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>5</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>CRJ-900</td><td>25</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>26</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>EMB 175</td><td>4</td><td>18</td><td>14</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>36</td><td>64</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>52</td><td>50</td><td>43</td><td>17</td><td>32</td><td>194</td><td>208</td></tr></table> (1) Aircraft options have scheduled delivery slots, while rolling options replace options and are assigned delivery slots as options expire or are exercised. Ground Facilities We lease most of the land and buildings that we occupy. Delta’s largest aircraft maintenance base, various computer, cargo, flight kitchen and training facilities and most of its principal offices are located at or near the Atlanta Airport, on land leased from the City of Atlanta generally under long-term leases. Delta owns a portion of its principal offices, its Atlanta reservations center and other real property in Atlanta. NWA owns its primary offices, which are located near the Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport, including its corporate offices located on a 160-acre site east of the airport. Other NWA owned facilities include reservations centers in Baltimore, Maryland, Tampa, Florida, Minot, North Dakota and Chisholm, Minnesota, and a data processing center in Eagan, Minnesota. NWA also owns property in Tokyo, including a 1.3-acre site in downtown Tokyo and a 33-acre land parcel, 512-room hotel and flight kitchen located near Tokyo’s Narita International Airport. We lease ticket counter and other terminal space, operating areas and air cargo facilities in most of the airports that we serve. At most airports, we have entered into use agreements which provide for the non-exclusive use of runways, taxiways, and other improvements and facilities; landing fees under these agreements normally are based on the number of landings and weight of aircraft. These leases and use agreements generally run for The Company entered into agreements with various governmental entities in the states of Kentucky, Georgia and Tennessee to implement tax abatement plans related to its distribution center in Franklin, Kentucky (Simpson County), its distribution center in Macon, Georgia (Bibb County), and its Store Support Center in Brentwood, Tennessee (Williamson County). The tax abatement plans provide for reduction of real property taxes for specified time frames by legally transferring title to its real property in exchange for industrial revenue bonds. This property was then leased back to the Company. No cash was exchanged. The lease payments are equal to the amount of the payments on the bonds. The tax abatement period extends through the term of the lease, which coincides with the maturity date of the bonds. At any time, the Company has the option to purchase the real property by paying off the bonds, plus $1. The terms and amounts authorized and drawn under each industrial revenue bond agreement are outlined as follows, as of December 30, 2017: <table><tr><td></td><td>Bond Term</td><td>Bond Authorized Amount(in millions)</td><td>Amount Drawn(in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>Franklin, Kentucky Distribution Center</td><td>30 years</td><td>$54.0</td><td>$51.8</td></tr><tr><td>Macon, Georgia Distribution Center</td><td>15 years</td><td>$58.0</td><td>$49.9</td></tr><tr><td>Brentwood, Tennessee Store Support Center</td><td>10 years</td><td>$78.0</td><td>$75.3</td></tr></table> Due to the form of these transactions, the Company has not recorded the bonds or the lease obligation associated with the sale lease-back transaction. The original cost of the Company’s property and equipment is recorded on the balance sheet and is being depreciated over its estimated useful life. Capitalized Software Costs The Company capitalizes certain costs related to the acquisition and development of software and amortizes these costs using the straight-line method over the estimated useful life of the software, which is three to five years. Computer software consists of software developed for internal use and third-party software purchased for internal use. A subsequent addition, modification or upgrade to internal-use software is capitalized to the extent that it enhances the software’s functionality or extends its useful life. These costs are included in computer software and hardware in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets. Certain software costs not meeting the criteria for capitalization are expensed as incurred. Store Closing Costs The Company regularly evaluates the performance of its stores and periodically closes those that are under-performing. The Company records a liability for costs associated with an exit or disposal activity when the liability is incurred, usually in the period the store closes. Store closing costs were not significant to the results of operations for any of the fiscal years presented. Leases Assets under capital leases are amortized in accordance with the Company’s normal depreciation policy for owned assets or over the lease term, if shorter, and the related charge to operations is included in depreciation expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income. Certain operating leases include rent increases during the lease term. For these leases, the Company recognizes the related rental expense on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease (which includes the pre-opening period of construction, renovation, fixturing and merchandise placement) and records the difference between the expense charged to operations and amounts paid as a deferred rent liability. The Company occasionally receives reimbursements from landlords to be used towards improving the related store to be leased. Leasehold improvements are recorded at their gross costs, including items reimbursed by landlords. Related reimbursements are deferred and amortized on a straight-line basis as a reduction of rent expense over the applicable lease term. Note 2 - Share-Based Compensation: Share-based compensation includes stock option and restricted stock unit awards and certain transactions under the Company’s ESPP. Share-based compensation expense is recognized based on the grant date fair value of all stock option and restricted stock unit awards plus a discount on shares purchased by employees as a part of the ESPP. The discount under the ESPPrepresents the difference between the purchase date market value and the employee’s purchase price.

What is the average amount of Repurchases from securitization trusts of Residential Mortgage Agency 2016, and Allowance for loan and lease losses, January 1 of 2015 ?

Table VII Allowance for Credit Losses <table><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan and lease losses, January 1</td><td>$12,234</td><td>$14,419</td><td>$17,428</td><td>$24,179</td><td>$33,783</td></tr><tr><td>Loans and leases charged off</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Residential mortgage</td><td>-403</td><td>-866</td><td>-855</td><td>-1,508</td><td>-3,276</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>-752</td><td>-975</td><td>-1,364</td><td>-2,258</td><td>-4,573</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. credit card</td><td>-2,691</td><td>-2,738</td><td>-3,068</td><td>-4,004</td><td>-5,360</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S. credit card</td><td>-238</td><td>-275</td><td>-357</td><td>-508</td><td>-835</td></tr><tr><td>Direct/Indirect consumer</td><td>-392</td><td>-383</td><td>-456</td><td>-710</td><td>-1,258</td></tr><tr><td>Other consumer</td><td>-232</td><td>-224</td><td>-268</td><td>-273</td><td>-274</td></tr><tr><td>Total consumer charge-offs</td><td>-4,708</td><td>-5,461</td><td>-6,368</td><td>-9,261</td><td>-15,576</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. commercial^-1</td><td>-567</td><td>-536</td><td>-584</td><td>-774</td><td>-1,309</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>-10</td><td>-30</td><td>-29</td><td>-251</td><td>-719</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial lease financing</td><td>-30</td><td>-19</td><td>-10</td><td>-4</td><td>-32</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S. commercial</td><td>-133</td><td>-59</td><td>-35</td><td>-79</td><td>-36</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial charge-offs</td><td>-740</td><td>-644</td><td>-658</td><td>-1,108</td><td>-2,096</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans and leases charged off</td><td>-5,448</td><td>-6,105</td><td>-7,026</td><td>-10,369</td><td>-17,672</td></tr><tr><td>Recoveries of loans and leases previously charged off</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Residential mortgage</td><td>272</td><td>393</td><td>969</td><td>424</td><td>165</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>347</td><td>339</td><td>457</td><td>455</td><td>331</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. credit card</td><td>422</td><td>424</td><td>430</td><td>628</td><td>728</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S. credit card</td><td>63</td><td>87</td><td>115</td><td>109</td><td>254</td></tr><tr><td>Direct/Indirect consumer</td><td>258</td><td>271</td><td>287</td><td>365</td><td>495</td></tr><tr><td>Other consumer</td><td>27</td><td>31</td><td>39</td><td>39</td><td>42</td></tr><tr><td>Total consumer recoveries</td><td>1,389</td><td>1,545</td><td>2,297</td><td>2,020</td><td>2,015</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. commercial^-2</td><td>175</td><td>172</td><td>214</td><td>287</td><td>368</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>41</td><td>35</td><td>112</td><td>102</td><td>335</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial lease financing</td><td>9</td><td>10</td><td>19</td><td>29</td><td>38</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S. commercial</td><td>13</td><td>5</td><td>1</td><td>34</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial recoveries</td><td>238</td><td>222</td><td>346</td><td>452</td><td>749</td></tr><tr><td>Total recoveries of loans and leases previously charged off</td><td>1,627</td><td>1,767</td><td>2,643</td><td>2,472</td><td>2,764</td></tr><tr><td>Net charge-offs</td><td>-3,821</td><td>-4,338</td><td>-4,383</td><td>-7,897</td><td>-14,908</td></tr><tr><td>Write-offs of PCI loans</td><td>-340</td><td>-808</td><td>-810</td><td>-2,336</td><td>-2,820</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for loan and lease losses</td><td>3,581</td><td>3,043</td><td>2,231</td><td>3,574</td><td>8,310</td></tr><tr><td>Other^-3</td><td>-174</td><td>-82</td><td>-47</td><td>-92</td><td>-186</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan and lease losses, December 31</td><td>11,480</td><td>12,234</td><td>14,419</td><td>17,428</td><td>24,179</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Allowance included in assets of business held for sale^-4</td><td>-243</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total allowance for loan and lease losses, December 31</td><td>11,237</td><td>12,234</td><td>14,419</td><td>17,428</td><td>24,179</td></tr><tr><td>Reserve for unfunded lending commitments, January 1</td><td>646</td><td>528</td><td>484</td><td>513</td><td>714</td></tr><tr><td>Provision for unfunded lending commitments</td><td>16</td><td>118</td><td>44</td><td>-18</td><td>-141</td></tr><tr><td>Other^-3</td><td>100</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-11</td><td>-60</td></tr><tr><td>Reserve for unfunded lending commitments, December 31</td><td>762</td><td>646</td><td>528</td><td>484</td><td>513</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for credit losses, December 31</td><td>$11,999</td><td>$12,880</td><td>$14,947</td><td>$17,912</td><td>$24,692</td></tr></table> (1) Includes U. S. small business commercial charge-offs of $253 million, $282 million, $345 million, $457 million and $799 million in 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. (2) Includes U. S. small business commercial recoveries of $45 million, $57 million, $63 million, $98 million and $100 million in 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. (3) Primarily represents the net impact of portfolio sales, consolidations and deconsolidations, foreign currency translation adjustments and certain other reclassifications. (4) Represents allowance for loan and lease losses related to the non-U. S. credit card loan portfolio, which is included in assets of business held for sale on the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2016. Valuation Adjustments on Derivatives The Corporation records credit risk valuation adjustments on derivatives in order to properly reflect the credit quality of the counterparties and its own credit quality. The Corporation calculates valuation adjustments on derivatives based on a modeled expected exposure that incorporates current market risk factors. The exposure also takes into consideration credit mitigants such as enforceable master netting agreements and collateral. CDS spread data is used to estimate the default probabilities and severities that are applied to the exposures. Where no observable credit default data is available for counterparties, the Corporation uses proxies and other market data to estimate default probabilities and severity. Valuation adjustments on derivatives are affected by changes in market spreads, non-credit related market factors such as interest rate and currency changes that affect the expected exposure, and other factors like changes in collateral arrangements and partial payments. Credit spreads and non-credit factors can move independently. For example, for an interest rate swap, changes in interest rates may increase the expected exposure, which would increase the counterparty credit valuation adjustment (CVA). Independently, counterparty credit spreads may tighten, which would result in an offsetting decrease to CVA. The Corporation early adopted, retrospective to January 1, 2015, the provision of new accounting guidance issued in January 2016 that requires the Corporation to record unrealized DVA resulting from changes in the Corporation’s own credit spreads on liabilities accounted for under the fair value option in accumulated OCI. This new accounting guidance had no impact on the accounting for DVA on derivatives. For additional information, see New Accounting Pronouncements in Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Principles. The Corporation enters into risk management activities to offset market driven exposures. The Corporation often hedges the counterparty spread risk in CVA with CDS. The Corporation hedges other market risks in both CVA and DVA primarily with currency and interest rate swaps. In certain instances, the net-of-hedge amounts in the table below move in the same direction as the gross amount or may move in the opposite direction. This movement is a consequence of the complex interaction of the risks being hedged resulting in limitations in the ability to perfectly hedge all of the market exposures at all times. The table below presents CVA, DVA and FVA gains (losses) on derivatives, which are recorded in trading account profits, on a gross and net of hedge basis for 2016, 2015 and 2014. CVA gains reduce the cumulative CVA thereby increasing the derivative assets balance. DVA gains increase the cumulative DVA thereby decreasing the derivative liabilities balance. CVA and DVA losses have the opposite impact. FVA gains related to derivative assets reduce the cumulative FVA thereby increasing the derivative assets balance. FVA gains related to derivative liabilities increase the cumulative FVA thereby decreasing the derivative liabilities balance. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">2016</td><td colspan="2">2015</td><td colspan="2">2014</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>Gross</td><td>Net</td><td>Gross</td><td>Net</td><td>Gross</td><td>Net</td></tr><tr><td>Derivative assets (CVA)⁽¹⁾</td><td>$374</td><td>$214</td><td>$255</td><td>$227</td><td>$-22</td><td>$191</td></tr><tr><td>Derivative assets/liabilities (FVA)⁽¹⁾</td><td>186</td><td>102</td><td>16</td><td>16</td><td>-497</td><td>-497</td></tr><tr><td>Derivative liabilities (DVA)⁽¹⁾</td><td>24</td><td>-141</td><td>-18</td><td>-153</td><td>-28</td><td>-150</td></tr></table> (1) At December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, cumulative CVA reduced the derivative assets balance by $1.0 billion, $1.4 billion and $1.6 billion, cumulative FVA reduced the net derivatives balance by $296 million, $481 million and $497 million, and cumulative DVA reduced the derivative liabilities balance by $774 million, $750 million and $769 million, respectively NOTE 6 Securitizations and Other Variable Interest Entities The Corporation utilizes VIEs in the ordinary course of business to support its own and its customers’ financing and investing needs. The Corporation routinely securitizes loans and debt securities using VIEs as a source of funding for the Corporation and as a means of transferring the economic risk of the loans or debt securities to third parties. The assets are transferred into a trust or other securitization vehicle such that the assets are legally isolated from the creditors of the Corporation and are not available to satisfy its obligations. These assets can only be used to settle obligations of the trust or other securitization vehicle. The Corporation also administers, structures or invests in other VIEs including CDOs, investment vehicles and other entities. For more information on the Corporation’s utilization of VIEs, see Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Principles. The tables in this Note present the assets and liabilities of consolidated and unconsolidated VIEs at December 31, 2016 and 2015, in situations where the Corporation has continuing involvement with transferred assets or if the Corporation otherwise has a variable interest in the VIE. The tables also present the Corporation’s maximum loss exposure at December 31, 2016 and 2015, resulting from its involvement with consolidated VIEs and unconsolidated VIEs in which the Corporation holds a variable interest. The Corporation’s maximum loss exposure is based on the unlikely event that all of the assets in the VIEs become worthless and incorporates not only potential losses associated with assets recorded on the Consolidated Balance Sheet but also potential losses associated with off-balance sheet commitments, such as unfunded liquidity commitments and other contractual arrangements. The Corporation’s maximum loss exposure does not include losses previously recognized through write-downs of assets. As a result of new accounting guidance, which was effective on January 1, 2016, the Corporation identified certain limited partnerships and similar entities that are now considered to be VIEs and are included in the unconsolidated VIE tables in this Note at December 31, 2016. The Corporation had a maximum loss exposure of $6.1 billion related to these VIEs, which had total assets of $16.7 billion. The Corporation invests in ABS issued by third-party VIEs with which it has no other form of involvement and enters into certain commercial lending arrangements that may also incorporate the use of VIEs to hold collateral. These securities and loans are included in Note 3 – Securities or Note 4 – Outstanding Loans and Leases. In addition, the Corporation uses VIEs such as trust preferred securities trusts in connection with its funding activities. For additional information, see Note 11 – Long-term Debt. The Corporation uses VIEs, such as common trust funds managed within Global Wealth & Investment Management (GWIM), to provide investment opportunities for clients. These VIEs, which are generally not consolidated by the Corporation, as applicable, are not included in the tables in this Note. Except as described below, the Corporation did not provide financial support to consolidated or unconsolidated VIEs during 2016 or 2015 that it was not previously contractually required to provide, nor does it intend to do so. First-lien Mortgage Securitizations First-lien Mortgages As part of its mortgage banking activities, the Corporation securitizes a portion of the first-lien residential mortgage loans it originates or purchases from third parties, generally in the form of RMBS guaranteed by government-sponsored enterprises, FNMA and FHLMC (collectively the GSEs), or Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA) primarily in the case of FHA-insured and U. S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)-guaranteed mortgage loans. Securitization usually occurs in conjunction with or shortly after origination or purchase, and the Corporation may also securitize loans held in its residential mortgage portfolio. In addition, the Corporation may, from time to time, securitize commercial mortgages it originates or purchases from other entities. The Corporation typically services the loans it securitizes. Further, the Corporation may retain beneficial interests in the securitization trusts including senior and subordinate securities and equity tranches issued by the trusts. Except as described below and in Note 7 – Representations and Warranties Obligations and Corporate Guarantees, the Corporation does not provide guarantees or recourse to the securitization trusts other than standard representations and warranties. The table below summarizes select information related to firstlien mortgage securitizations for 2016, 2015 and 2014. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">Residential Mortgage</td><td colspan="2"></td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Agency</td><td colspan="3">Non-agency - Subprime</td><td colspan="3">Commercial Mortgage</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Cash proceeds from new securitizations^-1</td><td>$24,201</td><td>$27,164</td><td>$36,905</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$809</td><td>$3,887</td><td>$7,945</td><td>$5,710</td></tr><tr><td>Gain on securitizations^-2</td><td>370</td><td>894</td><td>371</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>49</td><td>38</td><td>49</td><td>68</td></tr><tr><td>Repurchases from securitization trusts^-3</td><td>3,611</td><td>3,716</td><td>5,155</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr></table> (1) The Corporation transfers residential mortgage loans to securitizations sponsored by the GSEs or GNMA in the normal course of business and receives RMBS in exchange which may then be sold into the market to third-party investors for cash proceeds. (2) A majority of the first-lien residential and commercial mortgage loans securitized are initially classified as LHFS and accounted for under the fair value option. Gains recognized on these LHFS prior to securitization, which totaled $487 million, $750 million and $715 million net of hedges, during 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively are not included in the table above. (3) The Corporation may have the option to repurchase delinquent loans out of securitization trusts, which reduces the amount of servicing advances it is required to make. The Corporation may also repurchase loans from securitization trusts to perform modifications. The majority of repurchased loans are FHA-insured mortgages collateralizing GNMA securities. In addition to cash proceeds as reported in the table above, the Corporation received securities with an initial fair value of $4.2 billion, $22.3 billion and $5.4 billion in connection with first-lien mortgage securitizations in 2016, 2015 and 2014. The receipt of these securities represents non-cash operating and investing activities and, accordingly, is not reflected on the Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows. All of these securities were initially classified as Level 2 assets within the fair value hierarchy. During 2016, 2015 and 2014 there were no changes to the initial classification. The Corporation recognizes consumer MSRs from the sale or securitization of first-lien mortgage loans. Servicing fee and ancillary fee income on consumer mortgage loans serviced, including securitizations where the Corporation has continuing The following table shows the major categories of ongoing claims for which the Company has been able to estimate its probable liability and for which the Company has taken reserves and the related insurance receivables:

what percentage of employees are subject to collective bargaining agreements?

R. ONEOK PARTNERS General Partner Interest - See Note B for discussion of the April 2006 acquisition of the additional general partner interest in ONEOK Partners. The limited partner units we received from ONEOK Partners were newly created Class B limited partner units. As of April 7, 2007, the Class B limited partner units are no longer subordinated to distributions on ONEOK Partners’ common units and generally have the same voting rights as the common units and are entitled to receive increased quarterly distributions and distributions on liquidation equal to 110 percent of the distributions paid with respect to the common units. On June 21, 2007, we, as the sole holder of ONEOK Partners Class B limited partner units, waived our right to receive the increased quarterly distributions on the Class B units for the period April 7, 2007, through December 31, 2007, and continuing thereafter until we give ONEOK Partners no less than 90 days advance notice that we have withdrawn our waiver. Any such withdrawal of the waiver will be effective with respect to any distribution on the Class B units declared or paid on or after 90 days following delivery of the notice. Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement and in conjunction with the issuance of additional common units by ONEOK Partners, we, as the general partner, are required to make equity contributions in order to maintain our representative general partner interest. Our investment in ONEOK Partners is shown in the table below for the periods presented. <table><tr><td></td><td>December 31, 2007</td><td>December 31, 2006</td><td>December 31, 2005</td></tr><tr><td>General partner interest</td><td>2.00%</td><td>2.00%</td><td>1.65%</td></tr><tr><td>Limited partner interest</td><td>43.70% (a)</td><td>43.70% (a)</td><td>1.05% (b)</td></tr><tr><td>Total ownership interest</td><td>45.70%</td><td>45.70%</td><td>2.70%</td></tr></table> (a) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units and 36.5 million Class B units. (b) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units. Cash Distributions - Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement, distributions are made to the partners with respect to each calendar quarter in an amount equal to 100 percent of available cash. Available cash generally consists of all cash receipts adjusted for cash disbursements and net changes to cash reserves. Available cash will generally be distributed 98 percent to limited partners and 2 percent to the general partner. As an incentive, the general partner’s percentage interest in quarterly distributions is increased after certain specified target levels are met. Under the incentive distribution provisions, the general partner receives: ?15 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.605 per unit, ?25 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.715 per unit, and ?50 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.935 per unit. ONEOK Partners’ income is allocated to the general and limited partners in accordance with their respective partnership ownership percentages. The effect of any incremental income allocations for incentive distributions that are allocated to the general partner is calculated after the income allocation for the general partner’s partnership interest and before the income allocation to the limited partners. The following table shows ONEOK Partners’ general partner and incentive distributions related to the periods indicated. <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> Years Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2007</td><td> 2006</td><td> 2005</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"><i>(Thousands of dollars)</i></td></tr><tr><td>General partner distributions</td><td>$7,842</td><td>$6,228</td><td>$2,632</td></tr><tr><td>Incentive distributions</td><td>50,627</td><td>31,102</td><td>6,568</td></tr><tr><td>Total distributions from ONEOK Partners</td><td>$58,469</td><td>$37,330</td><td>$9,200</td></tr></table> The quarterly distributions paid by ONEOK Partners to limited partners in the first, second, third and fourth quarters of 2007 were $0.98 per unit, $0.99 per unit, $1.00 per unit, and $1.01 per unit, respectively. gas. The use of these derivative instruments and the associated recovery of these costs have been approved by the OCC, KCC and regulatory authorities in certain of our Texas jurisdictions. ONEOK entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued. ONEOK had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $500 million at December 31, 2011. In January 2012, ONEOK entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $200 million. Upon issuance in January 2012 of our $700 million, 4.25-percent senior notes due 2022, ONEOK settled all $700 million of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $44.1 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt. ONEOK Partners entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued. At December 31, 2011, ONEOK Partners had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $750 million. During the year ended December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $650 million. Upon ONEOK Partners’ debt issuance in September 2012, ONEOK Partners settled $1 billion of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $124.9 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt. At December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners’ remaining interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $400 million have settlement dates greater than 12 months. Fair Values of Derivative Instruments - The following table sets forth the fair values of our derivative instruments for our continuing and discontinued operations for the periods indicated: <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">December 31, 2012 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)</td><td colspan="2">December 31, 2011 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Assets</td><td>(Liabilities)</td><td>Assets</td><td>(Liabilities)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="4">(Thousands of dollars)</td></tr><tr><td>Derivatives designated as hedging instruments</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commodity contracts</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Financial contracts</td><td>$47,516(b)</td><td>$-4,885</td><td>$184,184(c)</td><td>$-73,346</td></tr><tr><td>Physical contracts</td><td>56</td><td>-126</td><td>62</td><td>-344</td></tr><tr><td>Interest-rate contracts</td><td>10,923</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-128,666</td></tr><tr><td>Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments</td><td>58,495</td><td>-5,011</td><td>184,246</td><td>-202,356</td></tr><tr><td>Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commodity contracts</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Nontrading instruments</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Financial contracts</td><td>24,970</td><td>-25,009</td><td>295,948</td><td>-323,170</td></tr><tr><td>Physical contracts</td><td>4,059</td><td>-153</td><td>38,733</td><td>-1,665</td></tr><tr><td>Trading instruments</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Financial contracts</td><td>15,358</td><td>-14,192</td><td>111,920</td><td>-110,050</td></tr><tr><td>Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments</td><td>44,387</td><td>-39,354</td><td>446,601</td><td>-434,885</td></tr><tr><td>Total derivatives</td><td>$102,882</td><td>$-44,365</td><td>$630,847</td><td>$-637,241</td></tr></table> (a) - Included on a net basis in energy marketing and risk-management assets and liabilities, other assets and other deferred credits on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. (b) - Includes $16.9 million of derivative net assets and ineffectiveness associated with cash flow hedges of inventory related to certain financial contracts that were used to hedge forecasted purchases and sales of natural gas. The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). (c) - Includes $88.9 million of derivative assets associated with cash flow hedges of inventory that were adjusted to reflect the lower of cost or market value. The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). guidance to amend or clarify portions of the final rule in 2013. We anticipate that if the EPA issues additional responses, amendments and/or policy guidance on the final rule, it will reduce the anticipated capital, operations and maintenance costs resulting from the regulation. Generally, the NSPS final rule will require expenditures for updated emissions controls, monitoring and record-keeping requirements at affected facilities in the crude-oil and natural gas industry. We do not expect these expenditures will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. CERCLA - The federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, also commonly known as Superfund (CERCLA), imposes strict, joint and several liability, without regard to fault or the legality of the original act, on certain classes of “persons” (defined under CERCLA) that caused and/or contributed to the release of a hazardous substance into the environment. These persons include but are not limited to the owner or operator of a facility where the release occurred and/or companies that disposed or arranged for the disposal of the hazardous substances found at the facility. Under CERCLA, these persons may be liable for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances released into the environment, damages to natural resources and the costs of certain health studies. Neither we nor ONEOK Partners expect our respective responsibilities under CERCLA, for this facility and any other, will have a material impact on our respective results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Chemical Site Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security released an interim rule in April 2007 that requires companies to provide reports on sites where certain chemicals, including many hydrocarbon products, are stored. We completed the Homeland Security assessments, and our facilities subsequently were assigned one of four risk-based tiers ranging from high (Tier 1) to low (Tier 4) risk, or not tiered at all due to low risk. To date, four of our facilities have been given a Tier 4 rating. Facilities receiving a Tier 4 rating are required to complete Site Security Plans and possible physical security enhancements. We do not expect the Site Security Plans and possible security enhancements cost will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Pipeline Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration and the DOT have completed a review and inspection of our “critical facilities” and identified no material security issues. Also, the Transportation Security Administration has released new pipeline security guidelines that include broader definitions for the determination of pipeline “critical facilities. ” We have reviewed our pipeline facilities according to the new guideline requirements, and there have been no material changes required to date. Environmental Footprint - Our environmental and climate change strategy focuses on taking steps to minimize the impact of our operations on the environment. These strategies include: (i) developing and maintaining an accurate greenhouse gas emissions inventory according to current rules issued by the EPA; (ii) improving the efficiency of our various pipelines, natural gas processing facilities and natural gas liquids fractionation facilities; (iii) following developing technologies for emission control and the capture of carbon dioxide to keep it from reaching the atmosphere; and (iv) utilizing practices to reduce the loss of methane from our facilities. We participate in the EPA’s Natural Gas STAR Program to voluntarily reduce methane emissions. We continue to focus on maintaining low rates of lost-and-unaccounted-for natural gas through expanded implementation of best practices to limit the release of natural gas during pipeline and facility maintenance and operations. EMPLOYEESWe employed 4,859 people at January 31, 2013, including 705 people at Kansas Gas Service who are subject to collective bargaining agreements. The following table sets forth our contracts with collective bargaining units at January 31, 2013:

In the year with lowest amount of Total marketing, promotion, rewards and Card Member services and other, what's the increasing rate of Card Member rewards in 2014?

PROVISIONS FOR LOSSES Charge card provision for losses decreased $41 million or 6 percent in 2016 compared to 2015, and $55 million or 7 percent in 2015 compared to 2014. The decrease in 2016 was driven by lower net write-offs and improved delinquencies. The decrease in 2015 reflects a reserve release versus a reserve build in 2014, partially offset by higher write-offs. Card Member loans provision for losses increased $45 million or 4 percent in 2016 compared to 2015, and $52 million or 5 percent in 2015 compared to 2014. The increase in 2016 was primarily driven by strong momentum in our lending growth initiatives, resulting in higher loan balances, increased net write-offs in the current year and a slight increase in delinquencies, partially offset by the impact of the HFS portfolios, as the current year does not reflect the associated credit costs, as previously mentioned. The increase in 2015 primarily reflects a reserve build versus a reserve release in 2014. The reserve build in 2015 was due to a small increase in delinquency rates combined with an increase in loan balances, partially offset by lower write-offs and the impact related to transferring the HFS portfolios to Card Member loans and receivables HFS in December 2015. Other provision for losses increased $34 million or 56 percent in 2016 compared to 2015, and decreased $53 million or 46 percent in 2015 compared to 2014. The increase in 2016 was primarily driven by growth in the commercial financing portfolio resulting in higher net write-offs. The decrease in 2015 was primarily due to a merchant-related charge in the fourth quarter of 2014. TABLE 4: EXPENSES SUMMARY <table><tr><td>Years Ended December 31,</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2" rowspan="2"Change 2016 vs. 2015></td><td colspan="2" rowspan="2"Change 2015 vs. 2014></td></tr><tr><td><i>(Millions, except percentages)</i></td><td> 2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Marketing and promotion</td><td>$3,650</td><td>$3,109</td><td>$3,216</td><td>$541</td><td>17 %</td><td>$-107</td><td>-3%</td></tr><tr><td>Card Member rewards</td><td>6,793</td><td>6,996</td><td>6,931</td><td>-203</td><td>-3</td><td>65</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Card Member services and other</td><td>1,133</td><td>1,018</td><td>822</td><td>115</td><td>11</td><td>196</td><td>24</td></tr><tr><td>Total marketing, promotion, rewards and Card Member services and other</td><td>11,576</td><td>11,123</td><td>10,969</td><td>453</td><td>4</td><td>154</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Salaries and employee benefits</td><td>5,259</td><td>4,976</td><td>6,095</td><td>283</td><td>6</td><td>-1,119</td><td>-18</td></tr><tr><td>Other, net^(a)</td><td>5,162</td><td>6,793</td><td>6,089</td><td>-1,631</td><td>-24</td><td>704</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td> Total expenses</td><td>$21,997</td><td>$22,892</td><td>$23,153</td><td>$-895</td><td>-4%</td><td>$-261</td><td>-1%</td></tr></table> (a) Beginning December 1, 2015 through to the sale completion dates, includes the valuation allowance adjustment associated with the HFS portfolios. EXPENSES Marketing and promotion expenses increased $541 million or 17 percent in 2016 compared to 2015, and decreased $107 million or 3 percent in 2015 compared to 2014 (increasing 1 percent on an FX-adjusted basis), with higher levels of spending on growth initiatives in both periods.2 Card Member rewards expenses decreased $203 million or 3 percent in 2016 compared to 2015 and increased $65 million or 1 percent in 2015 compared to 2014. The decrease in 2016 was primarily driven by lower cobrand rewards expense of $518 million, primarily reflecting lower Costco-related expenses and a shift in volumes to cash rebate cards for which the rewards costs are classified as contra-discount revenue, partially offset by increased spending volumes across other cobrand card products. The lower cobrand rewards expense was partially offset by higher Membership Rewards expense of $315 million, primarily driven by an increase in new points earned as a result of higher spending volumes, recent enhancements to U. S. Consumer and Small Business Platinum rewards and less of a decline in the weighted average cost (WAC) per point. The increase in 2015 was primarily driven by higher cobrand rewards expense of $199 million, driven by rate impacts as a result of cobrand partnership renewal costs, partially offset by a decrease in Membership Rewards expense of $134 million. The latter was primarily driven by slower growth in the Ultimate Redemption Rate (URR) and a decline in the WAC per point assumption, including the impact of the $109 million charge in the fourth quarter of 2014 related to the Delta partnership renewal, partially offset by increased expenses related to new points earned, driven by higher spending volumes. The Membership Rewards URR for current program participants was 95 percent (rounded down) at December 31, 2016, compared to 95 percent (rounded down) at December 31, 2015, and 95 percent (rounded up) at December 31, 2014.2 Refer to footnote 1 on page 41 for details regarding foreign currency adjusted information TABLE 22: UNSECURED DEBT RATINGS <table><tr><td> Credit Agency</td><td> American Express Entity</td><td> Short-Term Ratings</td><td> Long-Term Ratings</td><td> Outlook</td></tr><tr><td>DBRS</td><td>All rated entities</td><td>R-1 (middle)</td><td>A (high)</td><td>Stable</td></tr><tr><td>Fitch</td><td>All rated entities</td><td>F1</td><td>A</td><td>Negative</td></tr><tr><td>Moody’s</td><td>TRS and rated operating subsidiaries^(a)</td><td>Prime-1</td><td>A2</td><td>Stable</td></tr><tr><td>Moody’s</td><td>American Express Company</td><td>Prime-2</td><td>A3</td><td>Stable</td></tr><tr><td>S&P</td><td>TRS^(a)</td><td>N/A</td><td>A-</td><td>Stable</td></tr><tr><td>S&P</td><td>Other rated operating subsidiaries</td><td>A-2</td><td>A-</td><td>Stable</td></tr><tr><td>S&P</td><td>American Express Company</td><td>A-2</td><td>BBB+</td><td>Stable</td></tr></table> (a) American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. Downgrades in the ratings of our unsecured debt or asset securitization program securities could result in higher funding costs, as well as higher fees related to borrowings under our unused lines of credit. Declines in credit ratings could also reduce our borrowing capacity in the unsecured debt and asset securitization capital markets. We believe our funding mix, including the proportion of U. S. retail deposits insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), should reduce the impact that credit rating downgrades would have on our funding capacity and costs. SHORT-TERM FUNDING PROGRAMS Short-term borrowings, such as commercial paper, are defined as any debt with an original maturity of twelve months or less, as well as interest-bearing overdrafts with banks. Our short-term funding programs are used primarily to meet working capital needs, such as managing seasonal variations in receivables balances. The amount of short-term borrowings issued in the future will depend on our funding strategy, our needs and market conditions. As of December 31, 2016, we had $3.0 billion in commercial paper outstanding and we had an average of $0.5 billion in commercial paper outstanding during 2016. Refer to Note 9 to the “Consolidated Financial Statements” for a further description of these borrowings. DEPOSIT PROGRAMS We offer deposits within our Centurion Bank and American Express Bank subsidiaries. These funds are currently insured up to $250,000 per account holder through the FDIC. Our ability to obtain deposit funding and offer competitive interest rates is dependent on the capital levels of Centurion Bank and American Express Bank. We, through American Express Bank, have a direct retail deposit program, Personal Savings from American Express, to supplement our distribution of deposit products sourced through third-party distribution channels. The direct retail program makes FDIC-insured certificates of deposit (CDs) and high-yield savings account products available directly to consumers. As of December 31, 2016 we had $53.0 billion in customer deposits. Refer to Note 8 to the “Consolidated Financial Statements” for a further description of these deposits. LONG-TERM DEBT PROGRAMS As of December 31, 2016 we had $47.0 billion in long-term debt outstanding. During 2016, we and our subsidiaries issued $3.8 billion of unsecured debt with maturities ranging from 3 to 5 years. Referto Note 9 to the “Consolidated Financial Statements” for a further description of these borrowings. Our 2016 debt issuances were as follows: TABLE 23: DEBT ISSUANCES <table><tr><td><i>(Billions)</i></td><td> 2016</td></tr><tr><td>American Express Credit Corporation:</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Fixed Rate Senior Notes (weighted-average coupon of 1.65%)</td><td>$3.5</td></tr><tr><td>Floating Rate Senior Notes(3-monthLIBOR plus 57 basis points onaverage)</td><td>0.3</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$3.8</td></tr></table> ASSET SECURITIZATION PROGRAMS We periodically securitize Card Member loans and receivables arising from our card business, as the securitization market provides us with cost-effective funding. Securitization of Card Member loans and receivables is accomplished through the transfer of those assets to a trust, which in turn issues securities collateralized by the transferred assets to third-party investors. The proceeds from issuance are distributed to us, through our wholly owned subsidiaries, as consideration for the transferred assets. NOTE 3 LOANS AND ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE The Company’s lending and charge payment card products result in the generation of Card Member loans and Card Member receivables, respectively. CARD MEMBER AND OTHER LOANS Card Member loans are recorded at the time a Card Member enters into a point-of-sale transaction with a merchant and represent revolving amounts due on lending card products, as well as amounts due from charge Card Members who utilize the Pay Over Time features on their account and elect to revolve a portion of the outstanding balance by entering into a revolving payment arrangement with the Company. These loans have a range of terms such as credit limits, interest rates, fees and payment structures, which can be revised over time based on new information about Card Members, and in accordance with applicable regulations and the respective product’s terms and conditions. Card Members holding revolving loans are typically required to make monthly payments based on pre-established amounts and the amounts that Card Members choose to revolve are subject to finance charges. Card Member loans are presented on the Consolidated Balance Sheets net of reserves for losses (refer to Note 4), and include principal and any related accrued interest and fees. The Company’s policy generally is to cease accruing interest on a Card Member loan at the time the account is written off, and establish reserves for interest that the Company believes will not be collected. Card Member loans by segment and Other loans as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 consisted of: <table><tr><td>(Millions)</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. Consumer Services^(a)</td><td>$53,668</td><td>$48,758</td></tr><tr><td>International Consumer and Network Services</td><td>8,651</td><td>6,971</td></tr><tr><td>Global Commercial Services</td><td>11,080</td><td>9,536</td></tr><tr><td>Card Member loans</td><td>73,399</td><td>65,265</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Reserve for losses</td><td>1,706</td><td>1,223</td></tr><tr><td>Card Member loans, net</td><td>$71,693</td><td>$64,042</td></tr><tr><td>Other loans, net^(b)</td><td>$2,607</td><td>$1,419</td></tr></table> (a) Includes approximately $25.7 billion and $26.1 billion of gross Card Member loans available to settle obligations of a consolidated VIE as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. (b) Other loans primarily represent personal and commercial financing products. Other loans are presented net of reserves for losses of $80 million and $42 million as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. CARD MEMBER AND OTHER RECEIVABLES Card Member receivables are also recorded at the time a Card Member enters into a point-of-sale transaction with a merchant and represent amounts due on charge card products. Each charge card transaction is authorized based on its likely economics, a Card Member’s most recent credit information and spend patterns. Additionally, global spend limits are established to limit the maximum exposure for the Company. Charge Card Members generally must pay the full amount billed each month. Card Member receivable balances are presented on the Consolidated Balance Sheets net of reserves for losses (refer to Note 4), and include principal and any related accrued fees. Card Member accounts receivable by segment and Other receivables as of December 31, 2017 and 2016 consisted of: <table><tr><td>(Millions)</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. Consumer Services^(a)</td><td>$13,143</td><td>$12,302</td></tr><tr><td>International Consumer and Network Services</td><td>7,803</td><td>5,966</td></tr><tr><td>Global Commercial Services</td><td>33,101</td><td>29,040</td></tr><tr><td>Card Member receivables</td><td>54,047</td><td>47,308</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Reserve for losses</td><td>521</td><td>467</td></tr><tr><td>Card Member receivables, net</td><td>$53,526</td><td>$46,841</td></tr><tr><td>Other receivables, net^(b)</td><td>$3,163</td><td>$3,232</td></tr></table> (a) Includes $8.9 billion of gross Card Member receivables available to settle obligations of a consolidated VIE as of both December 31, 2017 and 2016. (b) Other receivables primarily represent amounts related to (i) GNS partner banks for items such as royalty and franchise fees, (ii) certain merchants for billed discount revenue, (iii) tax-related receivables, and (iv) loyalty coalition partners for points issued, as well as program participation and servicing fees. Other receivables are presented net of reserves for losses of $31 million and $45 million as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Stock Performance Graph The following graph sets forth the cumulative total shareholder return on our Series A common stock, Series B common stock and Series C common stock as compared with the cumulative total return of the companies listed in the Standard and Poor’s 500 Stock Index (“S&P 500 Index”) and a peer group of companies comprised of CBS Corporation Class B common stock, Scripps Network Interactive, Inc. (acquired by the Company in March 2018), Time Warner, Inc. (acquired by AT&T Inc. in June 2018), Twenty-First Century Fox, Inc. Class A common stock (News Corporation Class A Common Stock prior to June 2013), Viacom, Inc. Class B common stock and The Walt Disney Company. The graph assumes $100 originally invested on December 31, 2013 in each of our Series A common stock, Series B common stock and Series C common stock, the S&P 500 Index, and the stock of our peer group companies, including reinvestment of dividends, for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018. Two peer companies, Scripps Networks Interactive, Inc. and Time Warner, Inc. , were acquired in 2018. The stock performance chart shows the peer group including Scripps Networks Interactive, Inc. and Time Warner, Inc. and excluding both acquired companies for the entire five year period. <table><tr><td></td><td>December 31,2013</td><td>December 31,2014</td><td>December 31,2015</td><td>December 31,2016</td><td>December 31,2017</td><td>December 31,2018</td></tr><tr><td>DISCA</td><td>$100.00</td><td>$74.58</td><td>$57.76</td><td>$59.34</td><td>$48.45</td><td>$53.56</td></tr><tr><td>DISCB</td><td>$100.00</td><td>$80.56</td><td>$58.82</td><td>$63.44</td><td>$53.97</td><td>$72.90</td></tr><tr><td>DISCK</td><td>$100.00</td><td>$80.42</td><td>$60.15</td><td>$63.87</td><td>$50.49</td><td>$55.04</td></tr><tr><td>S&P 500</td><td>$100.00</td><td>$111.39</td><td>$110.58</td><td>$121.13</td><td>$144.65</td><td>$135.63</td></tr><tr><td>Peer Group incl. Acquired Companies</td><td>$100.00</td><td>$116.64</td><td>$114.02</td><td>$127.96</td><td>$132.23</td><td>$105.80</td></tr><tr><td>Peer Group ex. Acquired Companies</td><td>$100.00</td><td>$113.23</td><td>$117.27</td><td>$120.58</td><td>$127.90</td><td>$141.58</td></tr></table> Equity Compensation Plan Information Information regarding securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans will be set forth in our definitive Proxy Statement for our 2019 Annual Meeting of Stockholders under the caption “Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans,” which is incorporated herein by reference.

What is the sum of Premiums in 2012 and Negotiated amount in 2011? (in million)

American International Group, Inc. and Subsidiaries Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued Domestic Retirement Services Results Domestic Retirement Services results, presented on a sub-product basis for 2007, 2006 and 2005 were as follows: <table><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>Premiums and Other Considerations</td><td>Net Investment Income</td><td>Net Realized Capital Gains (Losses)</td><td>Total Revenues</td><td>Operating Income</td></tr><tr><td> 2007</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>$446</td><td>$2,280</td><td>$-451</td><td>2,275</td><td>$696</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>96</td><td>3,664</td><td>-829</td><td>2,931</td><td>530</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>627</td><td>166</td><td>-45</td><td>748</td><td>122</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff*</td><td>21</td><td>387</td><td>-83</td><td>325</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,190</td><td>$6,497</td><td>$-1,408</td><td>$6,279</td><td>$1,347</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>$386</td><td>$2,279</td><td>$-144</td><td>$2,521</td><td>$1,017</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>122</td><td>3,581</td><td>-257</td><td>3,446</td><td>1,036</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>531</td><td>202</td><td>5</td><td>738</td><td>193</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff*</td><td>18</td><td>426</td><td>-8</td><td>436</td><td>77</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,057</td><td>$6,488</td><td>$-404</td><td>$7,141</td><td>$2,323</td></tr><tr><td>2005</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>$351</td><td>$2,233</td><td>$-67</td><td>$2,517</td><td>$1,055</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>97</td><td>3,346</td><td>-214</td><td>3,229</td><td>858</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>467</td><td>217</td><td>4</td><td>688</td><td>189</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff*</td><td>22</td><td>430</td><td>—</td><td>452</td><td>62</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$937</td><td>$6,226</td><td>$-277</td><td>$6,886</td><td>$2,164</td></tr><tr><td> Percentage Increase/(Decrease) 2007 vs. 2006:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>16%</td><td>—%</td><td>—%</td><td>-10%</td><td>-32%</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>-21</td><td>2</td><td>—</td><td>-15</td><td>-49</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>18</td><td>-18</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>-37</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff</td><td>17</td><td>-9</td><td>—</td><td>-25</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>13%</td><td>—%</td><td>—%</td><td>-12%</td><td>-42%</td></tr><tr><td>Percentage Increase/(Decrease) 2006 vs. 2005:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Group retirement products</td><td>10%</td><td>2%</td><td>—%</td><td>—%</td><td>-4%</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>26</td><td>7</td><td>—</td><td>7</td><td>21</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>14</td><td>-7</td><td>25</td><td>7</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>Individual annuities — runoff</td><td>-18</td><td>-1</td><td>—</td><td>-4</td><td>24</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>13%</td><td>4%</td><td>—%</td><td>4%</td><td>7%</td></tr></table> * Primarily represents runoff annuity business sold through discontinued distribution relationships.2007 and 2006 Comparison Total revenues and operating income for Domestic Retirement Services declined in 2007 compared to 2006 primarily due to increased net realized capital losses. Net realized capital losses for Domestic Retirement Services increased due to higher other- than-temporary impairmentcharges of$1.2 billion in 2007 compared to $368 million in 2006 and sales to reposition assets in certain investment portfolios for both group retirement products and individual ?xed annuities, as well as from changes in the value of certain individual variable annuity product guarantees and related hedges associated with living bene?t features. Changes in actuarial estimates, including DAC unlockingsand re?nements to estimates resulting from actuarial valuation system enhance- ments, resulted in a net decrease to operating income of $112 million in 2007. Group retirement products operating income in 2007 de- creased compared to 2006 primarily as a result of increased net realized capital losses due to higher other-than-temporary impair- mentcharges and an increase in DAC amortization related to both an increase in surrenders and to policy changes adding guaran- teed minimum withdrawal bene?t riders to existing contracts. Operating income was also negatively affected in 2007 by an $18 million adjustment,primarily re?ecting changes in actuarial estimates from the conversion to a new valuation system. These were partially offset by higher variable annuity fees which resulted from an increase in separate account assets compared to 2006. Individual ?xed annuities operating income in 2007 decreased compared to 2006 as a result of net realized capital losses due to higher other-than-temporary impairmentcharges partially offset by increases in partnership income. The decline in operating income also re?ected higher DAC amortization and sales induce-ment costs related to increased surrenders and a $33 million charge re?ecting changes in actuarial estimates from the conver- American International Group, Inc. , and Subsidiaries Expected Loss Models — Under this mechanism, the amount of collateral to be posted is determined based on the amount of expected credit losses, generally determined using a rating-agency model. Negotiated Amount — Under this mechanism, the amount of collateral to be posted is determined based on terms negotiated between AIGFP and the counterparty, which could be a fixed percentage of the notional amount or present value of premiums to be earned by AIGFP. The following table presents the amount of collateral postings by underlying mechanism as described above with respect to the regulatory capital relief portfolio (prior to consideration of transactions other than the Capital Markets super senior credit default swaps subject to the same Master Agreements) as of the periods ended: <table><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>December 31, 2009</td><td>December 31, 2010</td><td>February 16, 2011</td></tr><tr><td>Reference to market indices</td><td>$60</td><td>$19</td><td>$10</td></tr><tr><td>Expected loss models</td><td>20</td><td>-</td><td>-</td></tr><tr><td>Negotiated amount</td><td>230</td><td>217</td><td>216</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$310</td><td>$236</td><td>$226</td></tr></table> Arbitrage Portfolio — Multi-Sector CDOs In the CDS transactions with physical settlement provisions, in respect of multi-sector CDOs, the standard CSA provisions for the calculation of exposure have been modified, with the exposure amount determined pursuant to an agreed formula that is based on the difference between the net notional amount of such transaction and the market value of the relevant underlying CDO security, rather than the replacement value of the transaction. As of any date, the ‘‘market value’’ of the relevant CDO security is the price at which a marketplace participant would be willing to purchase such CDO security in a market transaction on such date, while the ‘‘replacement value of the transaction’’ is the cost on such date of entering into a credit default swap transaction with substantially the same terms on the same referenced obligation (e. g. , the CDO security). In cases where a formula is utilized, a transaction-specific threshold is generally factored into the calculation of exposure, which reduces the amount of collateral required to be posted. These thresholds typically vary based on the credit ratings of AIG and/or the reference obligations, with greater posting obligations arising in the context of lower ratings. For the large majority of counterparties to these transactions, the Master Agreement and CSA cover non-CDS transactions (e. g. , interest rate and cross currency swap transactions) as well as CDS transactions. As a result, the amount of collateral to be posted by AIGFP in relation to the CDS transactions will be added to or offset by the amount, if any, of the exposure AIG has to the counterparty on the non-CDS transactions. Arbitrage Portfolio — Corporate Debt/CLOs All of the Capital Markets corporate arbitrage-CLO transactions are subject to CSAs. These transactions are treated the same as other transactions subject to the same Master Agreement and CSA, with the calculation of collateral in accordance with the standard CSA procedures outlined above. The vast majority of corporate debt transactions are no longer subject to future collateral postings. In exchange for an upfront payment to an intermediary counterparty, AIGFP has eliminated all future obligations to post collateral on corporate debt transactions that mature after 2011. Collateral Calls AIGFP has received collateral calls from counterparties in respect of certain super senior credit default swaps, of which a large majority relate to multi-sector CDOs. To a lesser extent, AIGFP has also received collateral calls in respect of certain super senior credit default swaps entered into by counterparties for regulatory capital relief purposes and in respect of corporate arbitrage. From time to time, valuation methodologies used and estimates made by counterparties with respect to certain super senior credit default swaps or the underlying reference CDO securities, for purposes of determining the ITEM 7 / LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES The following table presents a summary of AIG’s Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows: <table><tr><td> Years Ended December 31, <i>(in millions)</i> </td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Summary:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities</td><td>$3,676</td><td>$-81</td><td>$16,597</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities</td><td>16,612</td><td>36,448</td><td>-9,912</td></tr><tr><td>Net cash used in financing activities</td><td>-20,564</td><td>-36,926</td><td>-9,261</td></tr><tr><td>Effect of exchange rate changes on cash</td><td>16</td><td>29</td><td>39</td></tr><tr><td>Decrease in cash</td><td>-260</td><td>-530</td><td>-2,537</td></tr><tr><td>Cash at beginning of year</td><td>1,474</td><td>1,558</td><td>4,400</td></tr><tr><td>Change in cash of businesses held for sale</td><td>-63</td><td>446</td><td>-305</td></tr><tr><td>Cash at end of year</td><td>$1,151</td><td>$1,474</td><td>$1,558</td></tr></table> Operating Cash Flow Activities Interest payments totaled $4.0 billion in 2012 compared to $9.0 billion in 2011. Cash paid for interest in 2011 includes the payment of FRBNY Credit Facility accrued compounded interest totaling $6.4 billion. Excluding interest payments, AIG generated positive operating cash flow of $7.7 billion and $8.9 billion in 2012 and 2011, respectively. Insurance companies generally receive most premiums in advance of the payment of claims or policy benefits. The ability of insurance companies to generate positive cash flow is affected by the frequency and severity of losses under their insurance policies, policy retention rates and operating expenses. Cash provided by AIG Property Casualty operating activities was $1.1 billion in 2012 compared to $1.9 billion in 2011, primarily reflecting the decrease in net premiums written as a result of the continued execution of strategic initiatives to improve business mix and the timing of the cash flows used to pay claims and claims adjustment expenses and the related reinsurance recoveries. Cash provided by operating activities by AIG Life and Retirement was $2.9 billion in 2012 compared to $2.4 billion in 2011, primarily reflecting efforts to actively manage spread income. Cash provided by operating activities of discontinued operations of $2.9 billion in 2012 compared to $6.2 billion in 2011, includes ILFC, and in 2011 and 2010, foreign life insurance subsidiaries that were divested in 2011, including Nan Shan, AIG Star and AIG Edison. Net cash provided by operating activities declined in 2011 compared to 2010, principally due to the following: ? the cash payment by AIG Parent of $6.4 billion in accrued compounded interest and fees under the FRBNY Credit Facility. In prior periods, these payments were paid in-kind and did not affect operating cash flows; ? cash provided by operating activities of foreign life subsidiaries declined by $10.4 billion due to the sale of those subsidiaries (AIA, ALICO, AIG Star, AIG Edison and Nan Shan). The subsidiaries generated operational cash inflows of $3.4 billion and $13.8 billion in 2011 and 2010, respectively; and ? the effect of catastrophes and the cession of a large portion of AIG Property Casualty’s net asbestos liabilities in the U. S. to NICO. Excluding the impact of the NICO cession and catastrophes, cash provided by AIG’s reportable segments in 2011 is consistent with 2010, as increases in claims paid were offset by increases in premiums collected at the insurance subsidiaries. Investing Cash Flow Activities Net cash provided by investing activities for 2012 includes the following items: ? payments received relating to the sale of the underlying assets held by ML II of approximately $1.6 billion; ? payments of approximately $8.5 billion received in connection with the dispositions of ML III assets by the FRBNY; ITEM 7 / RESULTS OF OPERATIONS / COMMERCIAL INSURANCE low interest rate environment, partially offset by growth in average assets. See MD&A – Investments – Life Insurance Companies for additional information on the investment strategy, asset-liability management process and invested assets of our Life Insurance Companies, which include the invested assets of the Institutional Markets business. General operating expenses in 2014 increased slightly compared to 2013, primarily due to investments in technology.2013 and 2012 Comparison Pre-tax operating income for 2013 increased compared to 2012, due in part to higher net investment income from alternative investments, partially offset by lower base net investment income. Interest credited to policyholder account balances in 2012 included $110 million of expense resulting from a comprehensive review of reserves for the GIC portfolio. Results for 2013 included a full year of the growing stable value wrap business, which contributed $31 million to the increase in pre-tax operating income compared to 2012. Stable value wrap notional assets under management grew to $24.6 billion at December 31, 2013 from $10.4 billion at December 31, 2012, including the notional amount of contracts transferred from an AIG affiliate. Net investment income for 2013 increased slightly compared to 2012, primarily due to higher net investment income from alternative investments, largely offset by lower income from the base portfolio. The increase in alternative investment income in 2013 compared to 2012 reflected higher hedge fund income due to favorable equity market conditions. The decrease in base net income was primarily due to investment of available cash, including proceeds from sales of securities made during 2013 to utilize capital loss carryforwards, at rates below the weighted average yield of the overall portfolio. General operating expenses in 2013 increased compared to 2012, primarily to support increased volume in the stable value wrap business. Institutional Markets Premiums, Deposits and Net Flows For Institutional Markets, premiums represent amounts received on traditional life insurance policies and life-contingent payout annuities or structured settlements. Premiums and deposits is a non-GAAP financial measure that includes direct and assumed premiums as well as deposits received on universal life insurance and investment-type annuity contracts, including GICs and stable value wrap funding agreements. The following table presents a reconciliation of Institutional Markets premiums and deposits to GAAP premiums: <table><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums and deposits</td><td>$3,797</td><td>$991</td><td>$774</td></tr><tr><td>Deposits</td><td>-3,344</td><td>-354</td><td>-289</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>-21</td><td>-27</td><td>-27</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums</td><td>$432</td><td>$610</td><td>$458</td></tr></table> The decrease in premiums in 2014 compared to 2013 was primarily due to a high volume of single-premium products sold in 2013, including life-contingent payout annuities. Sales of these products decreased in 2014 compared to 2013 due to a more competitive environment as well as continued low interest rates. The increase in deposits in 2014 compared to 2013 included a $2.5 billion deposit to the separate accounts of one of the Life Insurance Companies for a stable value wrap funding agreement. The majority of stable value wrap sales are measured based on the notional amount included in assets under management, but do not include the receipt of funds that would be included in premiums and deposits. The increase in deposits in 2014 compared to 2013 also reflected a $450 million GIC issued in 2014. The increase in premiums in 2013 compared to 2012 reflected a high volume of single-premium product sales in 2013, including structured settlements with life contingencies and terminal funding annuities. The increase in deposits in 2013 compared to 2012 reflected strong sales of high net worth products, primarily private placement variable annuities.

What was the total amount of UPS Contributions and Accruals in the range of 100 and 1000 in 2013? (in million)

an increase of $0.10 in the delivery area surcharge on both residential and commercial services to certain ZIP codes. These rate changes are customary, and are consistent with previous years’ rate increases. Additionally, we modified the fuel surcharge on domestic and U. S. -origin international air services by reducing by 2% the index used to determine the fuel surcharge. The UPS Ground fuel surcharge continues to fluctuate based on the U. S. Energy Department’s On-Highway Diesel Fuel Price. Rate changes for shipments originating outside the U. S. were made throughout the past year and varied by geographic market. In January 2008, UPS Freight announced a general rate increase averaging 5.4 percent covering non-contractual shipments in the United States and Canada. The increase goes into effect on February 4, 2008, and applies to minimum charge, LTL and TL rates. Investing Activities Net cash used in investing activities was $2.199 billion, $2.340 billion, and $975 million in 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively. The decrease in cash used in 2007 compared with 2006 was primarily due to lower capital expenditures and increased net sales of marketable securities and short-term investments. Net sales of marketable securities and short-term investments were $621 million, $482 million, and $2.752 billion in 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively, and were primarily used to fund our pension and postretirement medical benefit plans, as well as complete business acquisitions. In 2005, we spent $1.488 billion on business acquisitions, primarily Overnite Corp. , Lynx Express Ltd. in the United Kingdom, Messenger Service Stolica S. A. in Poland, and the express operations of Sinotrans Air Transportation Development Co. Ltd. in China (See Note 7 to the consolidated financial statements). We had a net cash use of $39 million in 2007, compared with cash generation of $68 and $95 million in 2006 and 2005, respectively, due to originations, sales, and customer paydowns of finance receivables, primarily in our commercial lending, asset-based lending, and leasing portfolios. In the second quarter of 2006, we terminated several energy derivatives and received $229 million in cash, which is reported in other investing activities in the statement of cash flows. These derivatives were designated as hedges of forecasted cash outflows for purchases of fuel products. As these derivatives maintained their effectiveness and qualified for hedge accounting, we recognized the gains associated with these hedges as a reduction of fuel expense over the original term of the hedges through 2007. Capital expenditures represent a primary use of cash in investing activities, as follows (in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td> 2007</td><td> 2006</td><td> 2005</td></tr><tr><td>Buildings and facilities</td><td>$853</td><td>$720</td><td>$495</td></tr><tr><td>Aircraft and parts</td><td>1,137</td><td>1,150</td><td>874</td></tr><tr><td>Vehicles</td><td>492</td><td>831</td><td>456</td></tr><tr><td>Information technology</td><td>338</td><td>384</td><td>362</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$2,820</td><td>$3,085</td><td>$2,187</td></tr></table> As described in the “Commitments” section below, we have commitments for the purchase of aircraft, vehicles, equipment and other fixed assets to provide for the replacement of existing capacity and anticipated future growth. We fund our capital expenditures with our cash from operations. Financing Activities Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities was $2.297, ($3.851), and ($4.175) billion in 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively. As of December 31, 2007, we increased our commercial paper borrowings to $7.366 billion, an increase of $6.575 billion over December 31, 2006. This issuance of commercial paper was used to fund the withdrawal payment to the Central States Pension Fund upon ratification of our labor contract with the Teamsters, as previously discussed. The commercial paper balance was reduced subsequent to December 31, 2007 as a result of an issuance of long-term debt (discussed further in the “Sources of Credit” section) and the receipt of an income tax refund. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) UPS class B common stock on the first or the last day of each quarterly period. Employees purchased 1.8, 1.9, and 2.0 million shares at average prices of $64.20, $66.64, and $64.54 per share during 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively. Compensation cost is measured for the fair value of employees’ purchase rights under our discounted employee stock purchase plan using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The weighted average assumptions used and the calculated weighted average fair value of employees’ purchase rights granted, are as follows: <table><tr><td></td><td>2007</td><td>2006</td><td>2005</td></tr><tr><td>Expected dividend yield</td><td>2.13%</td><td>1.79%</td><td>1.62%</td></tr><tr><td>Risk-free interest rate</td><td>4.60%</td><td>4.59%</td><td>2.84%</td></tr><tr><td>Expected life in years</td><td>0.25</td><td>0.25</td><td>0.25</td></tr><tr><td>Expected volatility</td><td>16.26%</td><td>15.92%</td><td>15.46%</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average fair value of purchase rights*</td><td>$9.80</td><td>$10.30</td><td>$9.46</td></tr></table> * Includes the 10% discount from the market price. Expected volatilities are based on the historical price volatility on our publicly-traded class B shares. The expected dividend yield is based on the recent historical dividend yields for our stock, taking into account changes in dividend policy. The risk-free interest rate is based on the term structure of interest rates on U. S. Treasury securities at the time of the option grant. The expected life represents the three month option period applicable to the purchase rights. NOTE 12. SEGMENT AND GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION We report our operations in three segments: U. S. Domestic Package operations, International Package operations, and Supply Chain & Freight operations. Package operations represent our most significant business and are broken down into regional operations around the world. Regional operations managers are responsible for both domestic and export operations within their geographic area. U. S. Domestic Package Domestic Package operations include the time-definite delivery of letters, documents, and packages throughout the United States. International Package International Package operations include delivery to more than 200 countries and territories worldwide, including shipments wholly outside the United States, as well as shipments with either origin or distribution outside the United States. Our International Package reporting segment includes the operations of our Europe, Asia, and Americas operating segments. Supply Chain & Freight Supply Chain & Freight includes our forwarding and logistics operations, UPS Freight, and other aggregated business units. Our forwarding and logistics business provides services in more than 175 countries and territories worldwide, and includes supply chain design and management, freight distribution, customs brokerage, mail and consulting services. UPS Freight offers a variety of LTL and TL services to customers in North America. Other aggregated business units within this segment include Mail Boxes, Etc. (the franchisor of Mail Boxes, Etc. and The UPS Store) and UPS Capital. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 83 Certain plans have been aggregated in the “All Other Multiemployer Pension Plans” line in the following table, as the contributions to each of these individual plans are not material. <table><tr><td></td><td>EIN / PensionPlan</td><td colspan="2">PensionProtection ActZone Status</td><td>FIP/RP StatusPending/</td><td colspan="3">(in millions)UPS Contributions and Accruals</td><td>Surcharge</td></tr><tr><td>Pension Fund</td><td>Number</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>Implemented</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td><td>Imposed</td></tr><tr><td>Alaska Teamster-Employer Pension Plan</td><td>92-6003463-024</td><td>Red</td><td>Red</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>$5</td><td>$4</td><td>$4</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Automotive Industries Pension Plan</td><td>94-1133245-001</td><td>Red</td><td>Red</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Central Pennsylvania Teamsters Defined Benefit Plan</td><td>23-6262789-001</td><td>Green</td><td>Yellow</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>30</td><td>29</td><td>27</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Employer-Teamsters Local Nos. 175 & 505 Pension Trust Fund</td><td>55-6021850-001</td><td>Green</td><td>Green</td><td>No</td><td>9</td><td>9</td><td>8</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Hagerstown Motor Carriers and Teamsters Pension Fund</td><td>52-6045424-001</td><td>Red</td><td>Red</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td>5</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>I.A.M. National Pension Fund / National Pension Plan</td><td>51-6031295-002</td><td>Green</td><td>Green</td><td>No</td><td>27</td><td>24</td><td>25</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>International Brotherhood of Teamsters Union Local No. 710 Pension Fund</td><td>36-2377656-001</td><td>Green</td><td>Green</td><td>No</td><td>88</td><td>75</td><td>74</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Local 705, International Brotherhood of Teamsters Pension Plan</td><td>36-6492502-001</td><td>Red</td><td>Red</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>68</td><td>46</td><td>58</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Local 804 I.B.T. & Local 447 I.A.M.—UPS Multiemployer Retirement Plan</td><td>51-6117726-001</td><td>Red</td><td>Red</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>88</td><td>87</td><td>84</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Milwaukee Drivers Pension Trust Fund</td><td>39-6045229-001</td><td>Green</td><td>Green</td><td>No</td><td>29</td><td>26</td><td>26</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>New England Teamsters & Trucking Industry Pension Fund</td><td>04-6372430-001</td><td>Red</td><td>Red</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>102</td><td>124</td><td>124</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>New York State Teamsters Conference Pension and Retirement Fund</td><td>16-6063585-074</td><td>Red</td><td>Red</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>72</td><td>65</td><td>57</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Teamster Pension Fund of Philadelphia and Vicinity</td><td>23-1511735-001</td><td>Yellow</td><td>Yellow</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>46</td><td>44</td><td>41</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Teamsters Joint Council No. 83 of Virginia Pension Fund</td><td>54-6097996-001</td><td>Yellow</td><td>Yellow</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>49</td><td>44</td><td>41</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Teamsters Local 639—Employers Pension Trust</td><td>53-0237142-001</td><td>Green</td><td>Green</td><td>No</td><td>41</td><td>36</td><td>33</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Teamsters Negotiated Pension Plan</td><td>43-6196083-001</td><td>Yellow</td><td>Red</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>26</td><td>24</td><td>22</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Truck Drivers and Helpers Local Union No. 355 Retirement Pension Plan</td><td>52-6043608-001</td><td>Yellow</td><td>Yellow</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>14</td><td>14</td><td>12</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>United Parcel Service, Inc.—Local 177, I.B.T. Multiemployer Retirement Plan</td><td>13-1426500-419</td><td>Red</td><td>Red</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>68</td><td>62</td><td>57</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Western Conference of Teamsters Pension Plan</td><td>91-6145047-001</td><td>Green</td><td>Green</td><td>No</td><td>553</td><td>520</td><td>476</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>Western Pennsylvania Teamsters and Employers Pension Fund</td><td>25-6029946-001</td><td>Red</td><td>Red</td><td>Yes/Implemented</td><td>23</td><td>24</td><td>21</td><td>No</td></tr><tr><td>All Other Multiemployer Pension Plans</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>49</td><td>59</td><td>44</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Total Contributions</td><td>$1,396</td><td>$1,325</td><td>$1,243</td><td></td></tr></table> In 2012, we reached an agreement with the New England Teamsters and Trucking Industry Pension Fund ("NETTI Fund"), a multiemployer pension plan in which UPS is a participant, to restructure the pension liabilities for approximately 10,200 UPS employees represented by the Teamsters. The agreement reflected a decision by the NETTI Fund's trustees to restructure the NETTI Fund through plan amendments to utilize a "two pool approach", which effectively subdivided the plan assets and liabilities between two groups of beneficiaries. As part of this agreement, UPS agreed to withdraw from the original pool of the NETTI Fund, of which it had historically been a participant, and reenter the NETTI Fund's newly-established pool as a new employer. Upon ratification of the agreement by the Teamsters in September 2012, we withdrew from the original pool of the NETTI Fund and incurred an undiscounted withdrawal liability of $2.162 billion to be paid in equal monthly installments over 50 years. The undiscounted withdrawal liability was calculated by independent actuaries employed by the NETTI Fund, in accordance with the governing plan documents and the applicable requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. In 2012, we recorded a charge to expense to establish an $896 million withdrawal liability on our consolidated balance sheet, which represents the present value of the $2.162 billion future payment obligation discounted at a 4.25% interest rate. This discount rate represents the estimated credit-adjusted market rate of interest at which we could obtain financing of a similar maturity and seniority. As this agreement is not a contribution to the plan, the amounts reflected in the previous table do not include this $896 million non-cash transaction. The $896 million charge to expense recorded in 2012 is included in "compensation and benefits" expense in the statements of consolidated income, while the corresponding withdrawal liability is included in "other non-current liabilities" on the consolidated balance sheet. We impute interest on the withdrawal liability using the 4.25% discount rate, while the monthly payments made to the NETTI Fund reduce the remaining balance of the withdrawal liability. AMGEN INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) sales (excluding amortization of intangible assets),” “Research and development” and “Selling, general and administrative” expenses for the year ended December 31, 2007 are the reversal of previously accrued expenses for bonuses and stock-based compensation awards totaling $31 million, which were forfeited as a result of the employees’ termination. We also recorded asset impairment charges of $59 million and $408 million during the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. The charges for both periods represent the write-off of the total cost of the related assets as they were abandoned with no alternative future uses or residual value. The charges for 2008 included impairments primarily for certain manufacturing-related assets. The charges in 2007 were primarily incurred in connection with our decisions to make changes to certain manufacturing and, to a lesser degree, certain R&D capital projects and to close certain production operations. In particular, these decisions in 2007 included certain revisions to and the subsequent indefinite postponement of our planned Ireland manufacturing operations, certain revisions to our planned manufacturing expansion in Puerto Rico and the closure of a clinical manufacturing facility in Thousand Oaks, California. In addition, in connection with the rationalization of our worldwide network of manufacturing facilities in 2007, we decided to accelerate the closure of one of our ENBREL commercial bulk manufacturing operations. The decision to accelerate the closure of this manufacturing operation was principally based on a thorough review of the supply plans for bulk ENBREL inventory across its worldwide manufacturing network, including consideration of expected increases in manufacturing yields, and the determination that the related assets no longer had any alternative future uses in our operations. Because the related estimated future cash flows for this manufacturing operation were sufficient to recover the respective book values, we were required to accelerate depreciation of the related assets rather than immediately impairing their carrying values. The amount included in “Cost of sales (excluding amortization of intangible assets)” in the table above, $147 million, represents the excess of the accelerated depreciation expense recognized during the year ended December 31, 2007 over the depreciation that would otherwise have been recorded, $6 million, if there were no plans to accelerate the closure of this manufacturing operation. During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, we also recorded cost recoveries of $1 million and $114 million, respectively, for certain restructuring charges, principally with respect to accelerated depreciation, in connection with our co-promotion agreement with Wyeth. Such amounts are recorded as a reduction of the Wyeth profit share expense included in “Selling, general and administrative” expenses. Also included in “Selling, general and administrative” expenses in 2008 are $12 million of loss accruals for leases principally related to certain facilities that will not be used in our operations and $9 million for implementation costs associated with certain restructuring initiatives. In addition during the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, we accrued $49 million and $119 million, respectively, included in “Other charges,” primarily related to loss accruals for leases for certain facilities that will not be used in our operations. For 2007, these charges primarily related to loss accruals for leases for certain R&D facilities. In addition, in 2008, we recorded a $10 million loss on the disposal of certain less significant marketed products that is included in “Interest and other income, net. ” The following table summarizes the charges and spending relating to the restructuring plan (in millions): <table><tr><td></td><td>Separation costs</td><td>Other</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>Restructuring reserves as of January 1, 2007</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Expense</td><td>209</td><td>119</td><td>328</td></tr><tr><td>Payments</td><td>-112</td><td>-17</td><td>-129</td></tr><tr><td>Restructuring reserves as of December 31, 2007</td><td>97</td><td>102</td><td>199</td></tr><tr><td>Expense</td><td>10</td><td>76</td><td>86</td></tr><tr><td>Payments</td><td>-103</td><td>-16</td><td>-119</td></tr><tr><td>Restructuring reserves as of December 31, 2008</td><td>$4</td><td>$162</td><td>$166</td></tr></table> Introduction This introduction contains certain information about Con Edison and its subsidiaries, including CECONY. This introduction is not a summary and should be read together with, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to, the more detailed information appearing elsewhere or incorporated by reference in this report. Con Edison’s mission is to provide energy services to our customers safely, reliably, efficiently and in an environmentally sound manner; to provide a workplace that allows employees to realize their full potential; to provide a fair return to our investors; and to improve the quality of life in the communities we serve. The company has ongoing programs designed to support its mission, including initiatives focused on safety, operational excellence, the customer experience and cost optimization. Con Edison is a holding company that owns: ? Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (CECONY), which delivers electricity, natural gas and steam to customers in New York City and Westchester County; ? Orange & Rockland Utilities, Inc. (O&R), which together with its subsidiary, Rockland Electric Company, delivers electricity and natural gas to customers primarily located in southeastern New York State and northern New Jersey (O&R, together with CECONY referred to as the Utilities); ? Con Edison Clean Energy Businesses, Inc. , which through its subsidiaries develops, owns and operates renewable and energy infrastructure projects and provides energy-related products and services to wholesale and retail customers (Con Edison Clean Energy Businesses, Inc. , together with its subsidiaries referred to as the Clean Energy Businesses); and ? Con Edison Transmission, Inc. , which through its subsidiaries invests in electric and gas transmission projects (Con Edison Transmission, Inc. , together with its subsidiaries referred to as Con Edison Transmission). Con Edison anticipates that the Utilities, which are subject to extensive regulation, will continue to provide substantially all of its earnings over the next few years. The Utilities have approved rate plans that are generally designed to cover each company’s cost of service, including capital and other costs of each company’s energy delivery systems. The Utilities recover from their full-service customers (who purchase energy from them), generally on a current basis, the cost the Utilities pay for energy and charge all of their customers the cost of delivery service. See "Utility Regulation" in Item 1, "Risk Factors" in Item 1A and "Rate Plans" in Note B to the financial statements in Item 8. Selected Financial Data Con Edison <table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">For the Year Ended December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(Millions of Dollars, except per share amounts)</td><td>2014</td><td>2015</td><td>2016</td><td>2017</td><td>2018</td></tr><tr><td>Operating revenues</td><td>$12,919</td><td>$12,554</td><td>$12,075</td><td>$12,033</td><td>12,337</td></tr><tr><td>Energy costs</td><td>4,513</td><td>3,716</td><td>3,088</td><td>2,625</td><td>2,948</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income (h)</td><td>2,591</td><td>2,879</td><td>2,780</td><td>2,774</td><td>2,664</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>1,092</td><td>1,193</td><td>1,245</td><td>1,525(g)</td><td>1,382(g)</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets (e)(f)</td><td>44,071</td><td>45,642(a)</td><td>48,255(b)</td><td>48,111(c)</td><td>53,920(d)</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt (e)</td><td>11,546</td><td>12,006</td><td>14,735</td><td>14,731</td><td>17,495</td></tr><tr><td>Total equity</td><td>12,585</td><td>13,061</td><td>14,306</td><td>15,425</td><td>16,839</td></tr><tr><td>Net Income per common share – basic</td><td>$3.73</td><td>$4.07</td><td>$4.15</td><td>$4.97</td><td>$4.43</td></tr><tr><td>Net Income per common share – diluted</td><td>$3.71</td><td>$4.05</td><td>$4.12</td><td>$4.94</td><td>$4.42</td></tr><tr><td>Dividends declared per common share</td><td>$2.52</td><td>$2.60</td><td>$2.68</td><td>$2.76</td><td>$2.86</td></tr><tr><td>Book value per share</td><td>$42.97</td><td>$44.50</td><td>$46.91</td><td>$49.72</td><td>$52.46</td></tr><tr><td>Average common shares outstanding(millions)</td><td>293</td><td>293</td><td>300</td><td>307</td><td>312</td></tr></table> (a) Reflects a $2,382 million increase in net plant offset by a $970 million decrease in regulatory assets for unrecognized pension and other postretirement costs. See Notes B, E and F to the financial statements in Item 8. (b) Reflects a $3,007 million increase in net plant offset by a $1,002 million decrease in regulatory assets for unrecognized pension and other postretirement costs. See Notes B, E and F to the financial statements in Item 8. (c) Reflects a $2.384 million increase in net plant, offset by decreases in regulatory assets resulting from the enactment of the federal Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, as enacted on December 22, 2017 (TCJA) of $2,418 million (including the netting of $1,168 million against the a material effect on its consolidated financial statements. See Note 12 for details regarding a tax matter. NOTE 14 VARIABLE INTEREST ENTITIES In connection with the 2006 sale of approximately 5.6 million acres of forestlands, International Paper received installment notes (the Timber Notes) totaling approximately $4.8 billion. The Timber Notes were used as collateral for borrowings from third party lenders, which effectively monetized the Timber Notes through the creation of newly formed special purposes entities (the Entities). The monetization structure preserved the tax deferral that resulted from the 2006 forestlands sales. As of December 31, 2018, this deferred tax liability was $884 million. During 2015, International Paper initiated a series of actions in order to extend the 2006 monetization structure and maintain the long-term nature of the deferred tax liability. The Entities, with assets and liabilities primarily consisting of the Timber Notes and third-party bank loans (the Extension Loans), were restructured which resulted in the formation of whollyowned, bankruptcy-remote special purpose entities (the 2015 Financing Entities). The Timber Notes are shown in Financial assets of special purpose entities on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet and mature in August 2021 unless extended for an additional five years. These notes, which do not require principal payments prior to their maturity, are supported by approximately $4.8 billion of irrevocable letters of credit. The Extension Loans are shown in Nonrecourse financial liabilities of special purpose entities on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet and mature in the fourth quarter of 2020. These bank loans, totaling approximately $4.2 billion, are nonrecourse to the Company, and are secured by approximately $4.8 billion of Timber Notes, the irrevocable letters of credit supporting the Timber Notes and approximately $150 million of International Paper debt obligations. The $150 million of International Paper debt obligations are eliminated in the consolidation of the 2015 Financing Entities and are not reflected in the Company’s consolidated balance sheet. Provisions of loan agreements related to approximately $1.1 billion of the Extension Loans require the bank issuing letters of credit supporting the Timber Notes pledged as collateral to maintain a credit rating at or above a specified threshold. In the event the credit rating of the letter of credit bank is downgraded below the specified threshold, the letters of credit must be replaced within 60 days with letters of credit from a qualifying financial institution. As of December 31, 2018 and 2017, the fair value of the Timber Notes was $4.7 billion and $4.8 billion, respectively, and the fair value of the Extension Loans was $4.2 billion and $4.3 billion for the years ended 2018 and 2017. The Timber Notes and Extension Loans are classified as Level 2 within the fair value hierarchy, which is further defined in Note 16. Activity between the Company and the 2015 Financing Entities was as follows: <table><tr><td>In millions</td><td>2018</td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td></tr><tr><td>Revenue (a)</td><td>$95</td><td>$95</td><td>$95</td></tr><tr><td>Expense (a)</td><td>128</td><td>128</td><td>128</td></tr><tr><td>Cash receipts (b)</td><td>95</td><td>95</td><td>77</td></tr><tr><td>Cash payments (c)</td><td>128</td><td>128</td><td>98</td></tr></table> (a) The revenue and expense are included in Interest expense, net in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations. (b) The cash receipts are interest received on the Financial assets of special purpose entities. (c) The cash payments represent interest paid on Nonrecourse financial liabilities of special purpose entities. In connection with the acquisition of Temple-Inland in February 2012, two special purpose entities became wholly-owned subsidiaries of International Paper. The use of the two wholly-owned special purpose entities discussed below preserved the tax deferral that resulted from the 2007 Temple-Inland timberlands sales. As of December 31, 2018, this deferred tax liability was $538 million, which will be settled with the maturity of the notes in 2027. In October 2007, Temple-Inland sold 1.55 million acres of timberland for $2.4 billion. The total consideration consisted almost entirely of notes due in 2027 issued by the buyer of the timberland, which Temple-Inland contributed to two wholly-owned, bankruptcy-remote special purpose entities. The notes are shown in Financial assets of special purpose entities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet and are supported by $2.4 billion of irrevocable letters of credit issued by three banks, which are required to maintain minimum credit ratings on their long-term debt. As of December 31, 2018 and 2017, the fair value of the notes was $2.2 billion and $2.3 billion, respectively. These notes are classified as Level 2 within the fair value hierarchy, which is further defined in Note 16. In December 2007, Temple-Inland's two wholly-owned special purpose entities borrowed $2.1 billion which is shown in Nonrecourse financial liabilities of special purpose entities. The loans are repayable in 2027 and are secured by the $2.4 billion of notes and the irrevocable letters of credit securing the notes, and are nonrecourse to us. The loan agreements provide that if a credit rating of any of the banks issuing the letters of credit is downgraded below the specified threshold, the