AveniBench datasets
Collection
Datasets used in the AveniBench
•
8 items
•
Updated
answer
float64 -119,359
37B
| question
stringlengths 34
275
| context
stringlengths 8.14k
34k
|
|---|---|---|
2,006 | 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. |
1,570.75785 | 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. |
8,228 | 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. |
1 | 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. |
0.66977 | 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<sup>-1, 2</sup></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<sup>-1</sup></td><td>383,384</td><td>343,338</td><td>353,591</td><td>344,013</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets<sup>-1</sup></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>$1,129</td></tr><tr><td>Net change in fair value recorded in accumulated OCI<sup>-5</sup></td><td>-10,354</td><td>104</td><td>-3,387</td><td>-1,000</td><td>-14,637</td></tr><tr><td>Net realized losses reclassified into earnings<sup>-6</sup></td><td>1,797</td><td>840</td><td>46</td><td>–</td><td>2,683</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2008</td><td>$-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<sup>-5</sup></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<sup>(6)</sup></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<sup>(6)</sup></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. |
1 | 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. |
0.18136 | 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<sup>-1, 2</sup></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<sup>-1</sup></td><td>383,384</td><td>343,338</td><td>353,591</td><td>344,013</td></tr><tr><td>Total assets<sup>-1</sup></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>$1,129</td></tr><tr><td>Net change in fair value recorded in accumulated OCI<sup>-5</sup></td><td>-10,354</td><td>104</td><td>-3,387</td><td>-1,000</td><td>-14,637</td></tr><tr><td>Net realized losses reclassified into earnings<sup>-6</sup></td><td>1,797</td><td>840</td><td>46</td><td>–</td><td>2,683</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2008</td><td>$-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<sup>-5</sup></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<sup>(6)</sup></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<sup>(6)</sup></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. |
-13 | 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. |
0.34421 | 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<sup>(a)</sup></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:<sup>(a)</sup></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<sup>(b)</sup></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<sup>(b)</sup></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<sup>(c)</sup></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<sup>(d)</sup></td><td>-101</td><td>-24</td><td>-15</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Adjusted net interest income<sup>(e)</sup></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)<sup>(f)</sup></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<sup>(e)</sup></td><td>10.3%</td><td>9.3%</td><td>9.2%</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Card Member receivables:<sup>(a)</sup></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<sup>(b)</sup></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<sup>(b)</sup></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. |
4,200 | 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. |
End of preview. Expand
in Dataset Viewer.
AveniBench: MultiHiertt
MultiHiertt split used in the AveniBench.
License
This dataset is made available under the MIT license.
Citation
AveniBench
TDB
MultiHiertt
@inproceedings{zhao-etal-2022-multihiertt,
title = "{M}ulti{H}iertt: Numerical Reasoning over Multi Hierarchical Tabular and Textual Data",
author = "Zhao, Yilun and
Li, Yunxiang and
Li, Chenying and
Zhang, Rui",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 60th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers)",
month = may,
year = "2022",
address = "Dublin, Ireland",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2022.acl-long.454/",
doi = "10.18653/v1/2022.acl-long.454",
pages = "6588--6600",
}
- Downloads last month
- 17
Size of downloaded dataset files:
18.5 MB
Size of the auto-converted Parquet files:
3.85 MB
Number of rows:
1,159