Answer: 8198.0

Question: What is the sum of Target date/risk of FXimpact, Operating leases of Thereafter, and Principal of Total ?

Context:
Long-term product offerings include alpha-seeking active and index strategies. Our alpha-seeking active strategies seek to earn attractive returns in excess of a market benchmark or performance hurdle while maintaining an appropriate risk profile, and leverage fundamental research and quantitative models to drive portfolio construction. In contrast, index strategies seek to closely track the returns of a corresponding index, generally by investing in substantially the same underlying securities within the index or in a subset of those securities selected to approximate a similar risk and return profile of the index. Index strategies include both our non-ETF index products and iShares ETFs. Although many clients use both alpha-seeking active and index strategies, the application of these strategies may differ. For example, clients may use index products to gain exposure to a market or asset class, or may use a combination of index strategies to target active returns. In addition, institutional non-ETF index assignments tend to be very large (multi-billion dollars) and typically reflect low fee rates. Net flows in institutional index products generally have a small impact on BlackRock’s revenues and earnings. Equity Year-end 2017 equity AUM totaled $3.372 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $130.1 billion. Net inflows included $174.4 billion into iShares ETFs, driven by net inflows into Core funds and broad developed and emerging market equities, partially offset by non-ETF index and active net outflows of $25.7 billion and $18.5 billion, respectively. BlackRock’s effective fee rates fluctuate due to changes in AUM mix. Approximately half of BlackRock’s equity AUM is tied to international markets, including emerging markets, which tend to have higher fee rates than U. S.  equity strategies. Accordingly, fluctuations in international equity markets, which may not consistently move in tandem with U. S.  markets, have a greater impact on BlackRock’s equity revenues and effective fee rate. Fixed Income Fixed income AUM ended 2017 at $1.855 trillion, reflecting net inflows of $178.8 billion. In 2017, active net inflows of $21.5 billion were diversified across fixed income offerings, and included strong inflows into municipal, unconstrained and total return bond funds. iShares ETFs net inflows of $67.5 billion were led by flows into Core, corporate and treasury bond funds. Non-ETF index net inflows of $89.8 billion were driven by demand for liability-driven investment solutions. Multi-Asset BlackRock’s multi-asset team manages a variety of balanced funds and bespoke mandates for a diversified client base that leverages our broad investment expertise in global equities, bonds, currencies and commodities, and our extensive risk management capabilities. Investment solutions might include a combination of long-only portfolios and alternative investments as well as tactical asset allocation overlays. Component changes in multi-asset AUM for 2017 are presented below.

(in millions)	December 31,2016	Net inflows (outflows)	Marketchange	FXimpact	December 31,2017

Asset allocation and balanced	$176,675	$-2,502	$17,387	$4,985	$196,545

Target date/risk	149,432	23,925	24,532	1,577	199,466

Fiduciary	68,395	-1,047	7,522	8,819	83,689

FutureAdvisor-1	505	-46	119	—	578

Total	$395,007	$20,330	$49,560	$15,381	$480,278

 (1) FutureAdvisor amounts do not include AUM held in iShares ETFs. Multi-asset net inflows reflected ongoing institutional demand for our solutions-based advice with $18.9 billion of net inflows coming from institutional clients. Defined contribution plans of institutional clients remained a significant driver of flows, and contributed $20.8 billion to institutional multi-asset net inflows in 2017, primarily into target date and target risk product offerings. Retail net inflows of $1.1 billion reflected demand for our Multi-Asset Income fund family, which raised $5.8 billion in 2017. The Company’s multi-asset strategies include the following: ? Asset allocation and balanced products represented 41% of multi-asset AUM at year-end. These strategies combine equity, fixed income and alternative components for investors seeking a tailored solution relative to a specific benchmark and within a risk budget. In certain cases, these strategies seek to minimize downside risk through diversification, derivatives strategies and tactical asset allocation decisions. Flagship products in this category include our Global Allocation and Multi-Asset Income fund families.  ? Target date and target risk products grew 16% organically in 2017, with net inflows of $23.9 billion. Institutional investors represented 93% of target date and target risk AUM, with defined contribution plans accounting for 87% of AUM. Flows were driven by defined contribution investments in our LifePath offerings. LifePath products utilize a proprietary active asset allocation overlay model that seeks to balance risk and return over an investment horizon based on the investor’s expected retirement timing. Underlying investments are primarily index products.  ? Fiduciary management services are complex mandates in which pension plan sponsors or endowments and foundations retain BlackRock to assume responsibility for some or all aspects of investment management. These customized services require strong partnership with the clients’ investment staff and trustees in order to tailor investment strategies to meet client-specific risk budgets and return objectives. not to exceed a maximum leverage ratio (ratio of net debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, where net debt equals total debt less unrestricted cash) of 3 to 1, which was satisfied with a ratio of less than 1 to 1 at December 31, 2017. The 2017 credit facility provides back-up liquidity to fund ongoing working capital for general corporate purposes and various investment opportunities. At December 31, 2017, the Company had no amount outstanding under the 2017 credit facility Commercial Paper Program. The Company can issue unsecured commercial paper notes (the “CP Notes”) on a private-placement basis up to a maximum aggregate amount outstanding at any time of $4.0 billion. The commercial paper program is currently supported by the 2017 credit facility. At December 31, 2017, BlackRock had no CP Notes outstanding Long-Term Borrowings The carrying value of long-term borrowings at December 31, 2017 included the following:

(in millions)	Maturity Amount	Carrying Value	Maturity

5.00% Notes	$1,000	$999	December 2019

4.25% Notes	750	747	May 2021

3.375% Notes	750	746	June 2022

3.50% Notes	1,000	994	March 2024

1.25% Notes-1	841	835	May 2025

3.20% Notes	700	693	March 2027

Total Long-term Borrowings	$5,041	$5,014

 (1) The carrying value of the 1.25% Notes estimated using foreign exchange rate as of December 31, 2017. For more information on Company’s borrowings, see Note 12, Borrowings, in the notes to the consolidated financial statements contained in Part II, Item 8 of this filing. Contractual Obligations, Commitments and Contingencies The following table sets forth contractual obligations, commitments and contingencies by year of payment at December 31, 2017:

(in millions)	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	Thereafter-1	Total

Contractual obligations and commitments-1:

Long-term borrowings-2:

Principal	$—	$1,000	$—	$750	$750	$2,541	$5,041

Interest	175	175	125	109	81	185	850

Operating leases	141	132	126	118	109	1,580	2,206

Purchase obligations	128	101	29	22	19	28	327

Investment commitments	298	—	—	—	—	—	298

Total contractual obligations and commitments	742	1,408	280	999	959	4,334	8,722

Contingent obligations:

Contingent payments related to business acquisitions-3	33	179	39	34	—	—	285

Total contractual obligations, commitments andcontingent obligations-4	$775	$1,587	$319	$1,033	$959	$4,334	$9,007

 (1) Amounts do not include $350 million of cash payment consideration and contingent consideration related to the Company’s agreement to acquire the asset management business of Citibanamex. (2) The amount of principal and interest payments for the 2025 Notes (issued in Euros) represents the expected payment amounts using foreign exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. (3) The amount of contingent payments reflected for any year represents the expected payments using foreign currency exchange rates as of December 31, 2017. The fair value of the remaining aggregate contingent payments at December 31, 2017 totaled $236 million and is included in other liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. (4) At December 31, 2017, the Company had approximately $365 million of net unrecognized tax benefits. Due to the uncertainty of timing and amounts that will ultimately be paid, this amount has been excluded from the table above. Operating Leases. The Company leases its primary office locations under agreements that expire on varying dates through 2043. In connection with certain lease agreements, the Company is responsible for escalation payments. The contractual obligations table above includes only guaranteed minimum lease payments for such leases and does not project potential escalation or other lease-related payments. These leases are classified as operating leases and, as such, are not recorded as liabilities on the consolidated statements of financial condition. In May 2017, the Company entered into an agreement with 50 HYMC Owner LLC, for the lease of approximately 847,000 square feet of office space located at 50 Hudson Yards, New York, New York. The term of the lease is twenty years from the date that rental payments begin, expected to occur in McKESSON CORPORATION FINANCIAL REVIEW (Continued) 46 In July 2008, the Board authorized the retirement of shares of the Company’s common stock that may be repurchased from time-to-time pursuant to its stock repurchase program. During the second quarter of 2009, all of the 4 million repurchased shares, which we purchased for $204 million, were formally retired by the Company. The retired shares constitute authorized but unissued shares. We elected to allocate any excess of share repurchase price over par value between additional paid-in capital and retained earnings. As such, $165 million was recorded as a decrease to retained earnings. The Company anticipates that it will continue to pay quarterly cash dividends in the future. However, the payment and amount of future dividends remain within the discretion of the Board and will depend upon the Company’s future earnings, financial condition, capital requirements and other factors. Although we believe that our operating cash flow, financial assets, current access to capital and credit markets, including our existing credit and sales facilities, will give us the ability to meet our financing needs for the foreseeable future, there can be no assurance that continued or increased volatility and disruption in the global capital and credit markets will not impair our liquidity or increase our costs of borrowing. Selected Measures of Liquidity and Capital Resources:


Answer: 1828.0

Question: Without Management and financial advice fees and Distribution fees, how much of Revenues is there in total in 2009? (in million)

Context:
Certain property fund limited partnerships that the Company consolidates have floating rate revolving credit borrowings of $381 million as of December 31, 2009. Certain Threadneedle subsidiaries guarantee the repayment of outstanding borrowings up to the value of the assets of the partnerships. The debt is secured by the assets of the partnerships and there is no recourse to Ameriprise Financial.24. Earnings per Share Attributable to Ameriprise Financial Common Shareholders The computations of basic and diluted earnings (loss) per share attributable to Ameriprise Financial common shareholders are as follows:

 	 Years Ended December 31,

 	 2009	2008	 2007

 	 (in millions, except per share amounts)

 Numerator:

Net income (loss) attributable to Ameriprise Financial	$722	$-38	$814

 Denominator:

Basic: Weighted-average common shares outstanding	242.2	222.3	236.2

Effect of potentially dilutive nonqualified stock options and other share-based awards	2.2	2.6	3.7

Diluted: Weighted-average common shares outstanding	244.4	224.9	239.9

 Earnings (loss) per share attributable to Ameriprise Financial common shareholders:

Basic	$2.98	$-0.17	$3.45

Diluted	$2.95	$-0.17 (1)	$3.39

 (1) Diluted shares used in this calculation represent basic shares due to the net loss. Using actual diluted shares would result in anti-dilution. Basic weighted average common shares for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 included 3.4 million, 2.1 million and 1.6 million, respectively, of vested, nonforfeitable restricted stock units and 4.6 million, 3.1 million and 3.5 million, respectively, of non-vested restricted stock awards and restricted stock units that are forfeitable but receive nonforfeitable dividends. Potentially dilutive securities include nonqualified stock options and other share-based awards.25. Shareholders’ Equity The Company has a share repurchase program in place to return excess capital to shareholders. Since September 2008 through the date of this report, the Company has suspended its stock repurchase program; as a result there were no share repurchases during the year ended December 31, 2009. During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company repurchased a total of 12.7 million and 15.9 million shares, respectively, of its common stock at an average price of $48.26 and $59.59, respectively. As of December 31, 2009, the Company had approximately $1.3 billion remaining under a share repurchase authorization. The Company may also reacquire shares of its common stock under its 2005 ICP and 2008 Plan related to restricted stock awards. Restricted shares that are forfeited before the vesting period has lapsed are recorded as treasury shares. In addition, the holders of restricted shares may elect to surrender a portion of their shares on the vesting date to cover their income tax obligations. These vested restricted shares reacquired by the Company and the Company’s payment of the holders’ income tax obligations are recorded as a treasury share purchase. The restricted shares forfeited and recorded as treasury shares under the 2005 ICP and 2008 Plan were 0.3 million shares in each of the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007. For each of the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007, the Company reacquired 0.5 million of its common stock through the surrender of restricted shares upon vesting and paid in the aggregate $11 million, $24 million and $29 million, respectively, related to the holders’ income tax obligations on the vesting date. In 2009, the Company issued and sold 36 million shares of its common stock. The proceeds of $869 million will be used for general corporate purposes, including the Company’s pending acquisition of the long-term asset management business of Columbia, which is expected to close in the spring of 2010. See Note 5 for additional information on the Company’s pending acquisition of Columbia. In 2008, the Company reissued 1.8 million treasury shares for restricted stock award grants and the issuance of shares vested under the P2 Deferral Plan and the Transition and Opportunity Bonus (‘‘T&O Bonus’’) program. In 2005, the Company awarded bonuses to advisors General and administrative expense decreased $15 million, or 7%, to $192 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, primarily due to expense controls. Protection Our Protection segment offers a variety of protection products to address the protection and risk management needs of our retail clients including life, disability income and property-casualty insurance. Life and disability income products are primarily distributed through our branded advisors. Our property-casualty products are sold direct, primarily through affinity relationships. We issue insurance policies through our life insurance subsidiaries and the property casualty companies. The primary sources of revenues for this segment are premiums, fees, and charges that we receive to assume insurance-related risk. We earn net investment income on owned assets supporting insurance reserves and capital supporting the business. We also receive fees based on the level of assets supporting variable universal life separate account balances. This segment earns intersegment revenues from fees paid by the Asset Management segment for marketing support and other services provided in connection with the availability of RiverSource VST Funds under the variable universal life contracts. Intersegment expenses for this segment include distribution expenses for services provided by the Advice & Wealth Management segment, as well as expenses for investment management services provided by the Asset Management segment. The following table presents the results of operations of our Protection segment:

 	 Years Ended December 31,

 	 2009	 2008	Change

 	(in millions, except percentages)

 Revenues

Management and financial advice fees	$47	$56	$-9	-16%

Distribution fees	97	106	-9	-8

Net investment income	422	252	170	67

Premiums	1,020	994	26	3

Other revenues	386	547	-161	-29

Total revenues	1,972	1,955	17	1

Banking and deposit interest expense	1	1	—	—

Total net revenues	1,971	1,954	17	1

 Expenses

Distribution expenses	22	18	4	22

Interest credited to fixed accounts	144	144	—	—

Benefits, claims, losses and settlement expenses	924	856	68	8

Amortization of deferred acquisition costs	159	333	-174	-52

General and administrative expense	226	251	-25	-10

Total expenses	1,475	1,602	-127	-8

Pretax income	$496	$352	$144	41%

 Our Protection segment pretax income was $496 million for 2009, an increase of $144 million, or 41%, from $352 million in 2008. Net revenues Net revenues increased $17 million, or 1%, to $2.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, due to an increase in net investment income and premiums, partially offset by a decrease in other revenues related to updating valuation assumptions. Net investment income increased $170 million, or 67%, to $422 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, primarily due to net realized investment gains of $27 million in 2009 compared to net realized investment losses of $92 million in the prior year primarily related to impairments of Available-for-Sale securities. In addition, investment income earned on fixed maturity securities increased $46 million compared to the prior year driven by higher yields on the longer-term investments in our fixed income investment portfolio. In December, our board of directors ratified its authorization of a stock repurchase program in the amount of 1.5 million shares of our common stock. As of December 31, 2010 no shares had been repurchased. We have paid dividends for 71 consecutive years with payments increasing each of the last 19 years. We paid total dividends of $.54 per share in 2010 compared with $.51 per share in 2009. Aggregate Contractual Obligations A summary of our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2010, is as follows:

(dollars in millions)	Payments due by period

Contractual Obligations	Total	Less Than1 year	1 - 3Years	3 - 5Years	More than5 years

Long-term Debt	$261.0	$18.6	$181.2	$29.2	$32.0

Fixed Rate Interest	22.4	6.1	9.0	5.1	2.2

Operating Leases	30.2	7.2	7.9	5.4	9.7

Purchase Obligations	45.5	45.5	-	-	-

Total	$359.1	$77.4	$198.1	$39.7	$43.9

 As of December 31, 2010, the liability for uncertain income tax positions was $2.7 million. Due to the high degree of uncertainty regarding timing of potential future cash flows associated with these liabilities, we are unable to make a reasonably reliable estimate of the amount and period in which these liabilities might be paid. We utilize blanket purchase orders to communicate expected annual requirements to many of our suppliers. Requirements under blanket purchase orders generally do not become committed until several weeks prior to the company’s scheduled unit production. The purchase obligation amount presented above represents the value of commitments considered firm. RESULTS OF OPERATIONS Our sales from continuing operations in 2010 were $1,489.3 million surpassing 2009 sales of $1,375.0 million by 8.3 percent. The increase in sales was due mostly to significantly higher sales in our water heater operations in China resulting from geographic expansion, market share gains and new product introductions as well as additional sales from our water treatment business acquired in November, 2009. Our sales from continuing operations were $1,451.3 million in 2008. The $76.3 million decline in sales from 2008 to 2009 was due to lower residential and commercial volume in North America, reflecting softness in the domestic housing market and a slowdown in the commercial water heater business and was partially offset by strong growth in water heater sales in China and improved year over year pricing. On December 13, 2010 we entered into a definitive agreement to sell our Electrical Products Company to Regal Beloit Corporation for $700 million in cash and approximately 2.83 million shares of Regal Beloit common stock. The transaction, which has been approved by both companies' board of directors, is expected to close in the first half of 2011. Due to the pending sale, our Electrical Products segment has been accorded discontinued operations treatment in the accompanying financial statements. Sales in 2010, including sales of $701.8 million for our Electrical Products segment, were $2,191.1 million. Our gross profit margin for continuing operations in 2010 was 29.9 percent, compared with 28.7 percent in 2009 and 25.8 percent in 2008. The improvement in margin from 2009 to 2010 was due to increased volume, cost containment activities and lower warranty costs which more than offset certain inefficiencies resulting from the May flood in our Ashland City, TN water heater manufacturing facility. The increase in profit margin from 2008 to 2009 resulted from increased higher margin China water heater volume, aggressive cost reduction programs and lower material costs. Selling, general and administrative expense (SG&A) was $36.9 million higher in 2010 than in 2009. The increased SG&A, the majority of which was incurred in our China water heater operation, was associated with selling costs to support higher volume and new product lines. Additional SG&A associated with our 2009 water treatment acquisition also contributed to the increase. SG&A was $8.5 million higher in 2009 than 2008 resulting mostly from an $8.2 million increase in our China water heater operation in support of higher volumes.


Answer: 808.0

Question: What was the total amount of September 30, 2009 in the range of 0 and 1000 in 2009 ? (in thousand)

Context:
Guarantees We adopted FASB Interpretation No.45 (“FIN 45”), “Guarantor’s Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others” at the beginning of our fiscal 2003. See “Recent Accounting Pronouncements” for further information regarding FIN 45. The lease agreements for our three office buildings in San Jose, California provide for residual value guarantees. These lease agreements were in place prior to December 31, 2002 and are disclosed in Note 14. In the normal course of business, we provide indemnifications of varying scope to customers against claims of intellectual property infringement made by third parties arising from the use of our products. Historically, costs related to these indemnification provisions have not been significant and we are unable to estimate the maximum potential impact of these indemnification provisions on our future results of operations. We have commitments to make certain milestone and/or retention payments typically entered into in conjunction with various acquisitions, for which we have made accruals in our consolidated financial statements. In connection with our purchases of technology assets during fiscal 2003, we entered into employee retention agreements totaling $2.2 million. We are required to make payments upon satisfaction of certain conditions in the agreements. As permitted under Delaware law, we have agreements whereby we indemnify our officers and directors for certain events or occurrences while the officer or director is, or was serving, at our request in such capacity. The indemnification period covers all pertinent events and occurrences during the officer’s or director’s lifetime. The maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited; however, we have director and officer insurance coverage that limits our exposure and enables us to recover a portion of any future amounts paid. We believe the estimated fair value of these indemnification agreements in excess of applicable insurance coverage is minimal. As part of our limited partnership interests in Adobe Ventures, we have provided a general indemnification to Granite Ventures, an independent venture capital firm and sole general partner of Adobe Ventures, for certain events or occurrences while Granite Ventures is, or was serving, at our request in such capacity provided that Granite Ventures acts in good faith on behalf of the partnerships. We are unable to develop an estimate of the maximum potential amount of future payments that could potentially result from any hypothetical future claim, but believe the risk of having to make any payments under this general indemnification to be remote. We accrue for costs associated with future obligations which include costs for undetected bugs that are discovered only after the product is installed and used by customers. The accrual remaining at the end of fiscal 2003 primarily relates to new releases of our Creative Suites products during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2003. The table below summarizes the activity related to the accrual during fiscal 2003:

Balance at November 29, 2002	Accruals	Payments	Balance at November 28, 2003

$—	$5,554	$-2,369	$3,185

 Advertising Expenses We expense all advertising costs as incurred and classify these costs under sales and marketing expense. Advertising expenses for fiscal years 2003, 2002, and 2001 were $24.0 million, $26.7 million and $30.5 million, respectively. Foreign Currency and Other Hedging Instruments Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.133 (“SFAS No.133”), “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities,” establishes accounting and reporting standards for derivative instruments and hedging activities and requires us to recognize these as either assets or liabilities on the balance sheet and measure them at fair value. As described in Note 15, gains and losses resulting from

	Year Ended

	September 30, 2009	% Incr. (Decr.)	September 30, 2008	% Incr. (Decr.)	September 30, 2007

	($ in 000's)

Revenues

Securities Commissions and

Investment Banking Fees	$ 7,162	-78%	$ 32,292	-23%	$ 41,879

Investment Advisory Fees	1,355	-59%	3,326	30%	2,568

Interest Income	1,456	-63%	3,987	-4%	4,163

Trading Profits	4,531	341%	1,027	-80%	5,254

Other	387	-60%	975	-82%	5,340

Total Revenues	14,891	-64%	41,607	-30%	59,204

Interest Expense	421	-66%	1,235	3%	1,197

Net Revenues	14,470	-64%	40,372	-30%	58,007

Non-Interest Expense

Compensation Expense	14,381	-44%	25,860	-8%	28,010

Other Expense	7,296	-60%	18,064	-23%	23,383

Total Non-Interest Expense	21,677	-51%	43,924	-15%	51,393

Income (Loss) Before Taxes

and Minority Interest	-7,207	103%	-3,552	-154%	6,614

Minority Interest in

Pre-tax (Losses) Income Held by Others	-2,321	1,742%	-126	-104%	2,995

Pre-tax (Loss) Earnings	$ -4,886	-43%	$ -3,426	-195%	$ 3,619

 Year ended September 30, 2009 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2008 - Emerging Markets Emerging markets in fiscal 2009 consists of the results of our joint ventures in Latin America, including Argentina, Uruguay and Brazil. The global economic slowdown and credit crisis continued to significantly impact emerging markets in all business lines. The results in the emerging market segment declined to a $4.9 million loss from a $3.4 million loss in the prior year. This decline was a result of a $24 million, or 80%, decline in commission revenues which was almost entirely offset by a $3.5 million increase in trading profits and a $22 million decline in non-interest expenses. Our minority interest partners shared in $2.3 million of the fiscal 2009 loss before taxes. In December, our joint venture in Turkey ceased operations and subsequently filed for protection under Turkish bankruptcy laws. We have fully reserved for our equity interest in this joint venture. Year ended September 30, 2008 Compared with the Year ended September 30, 2007 - Emerging Markets Emerging markets consists of the results of our joint ventures in Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil and Turkey. The results in the emerging market segment declined from a $3.6 million profit in fiscal 2007 to a $3.4 million loss in fiscal 2008. This decline was a result of a greater decline in revenues than an increase in expenses. Expenses were impacted by our investment in Brazil. The global economic slowdown and credit crisis significantly impacted emerging markets in all business lines. Commission revenue declined 23% in fiscal 2008 as compared to the prior year as the economic slowdown and a series of political crises in Turkey and Argentina during 2008 severely undermined investors’ confidence in these countries. Trading profits declined due to losses taken in proprietary positions in Turkey. The commission expense portion of compensation expense declined in proportion to the decline in commission revenue. Other expenses in fiscal 2007 were unusually high due to the accrual of tax liabilities and the related legal expenses. As of September 30, 2008, we were still awaiting the final outcome of the litigation in Turkey, and in light of the suspension of the entity’s license, our ability to continue as a going concern in Turkey was uncertain. We had fully reserved for our investment in the Turkish joint venture as of September 30, 2008 and, accordingly, fiscal 2008 pre-tax earnings did not include any net impact of our Turkish joint venture. Index 64 Certain statistical disclosures by bank holding companies As a financial holding company, we are required to provide certain statistical disclosures by bank holding companies pursuant to the SEC’s Industry Guide 3. Certain of those disclosures are as follows for the fiscal year indicated:

	Year ended September 30,

	2016	2015	2014

RJF return on average assets-1	1.8%	2.0%	2.1%

RJF return on average equity-2	11.3%	11.5%	12.3%

Average equity to average assets-3	17.1%	18.5%	18.1%

Dividend payout ratio-4	21.9%	21.0%	19.3%

 (1) Computed as net income attributable to RJF for the year indicated, divided by average assets (the sum of total assets at the beginning and end of the year, divided by two). (2) Computed by utilizing the net income attributable to RJF for the year indicated, divided by the average equity attributable to RJF for each respective fiscal year. Average equity is computed by adding the total equity attributable to RJF as of each quarter-end date during the indicated fiscal year, plus the beginning of the year total, divided by five. (3) Computed as average equity (the sum of total equity at the beginning and end of the fiscal year, divided by two), divided by average assets (the sum of total assets at the beginning and end of the fiscal year, divided by two). (4) Computed as dividends declared per common share during the fiscal year as a percentage of diluted earnings per common share. Refer to the RJ Bank section of this MD&A, various sections within Item 7A in this report and the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Form 10-K for the other required disclosures. Liquidity and Capital Resources Liquidity is essential to our business. The primary goal of our liquidity management activities is to ensure adequate funding to conduct our business over a range of market environments. Senior management establishes our liquidity and capital policies. These policies include senior management’s review of shortand long-term cash flow forecasts, review of monthly capital expenditures, the monitoring of the availability of alternative sources of financing, and the daily monitoring of liquidity in our significant subsidiaries. Our decisions on the allocation of capital to our business units consider, among other factors, projected profitability and cash flow, risk and impact on future liquidity needs. Our treasury department assists in evaluating, monitoring and controlling the impact that our business activities have on our financial condition, liquidity and capital structure as well as maintains our relationships with various lenders. The objectives of these policies are to support the successful execution of our business strategies while ensuring ongoing and sufficient liquidity. Liquidity is provided primarily through our business operations and financing activities. Financing activities could include bank borrowings, repurchase agreement transactions or additional capital raising activities under our “universal” shelf registration statement. Cash used in operating activities during the year ended September 30, 2016 was $518 million. Successful operating results generated a $650 million increase in cash. Increases in cash from operations include: ? An increase in brokerage client payables had a $1.82 billion favorable impact on cash. The increase largely results from two factors. First, many clients reacted to uncertainties in the equity markets by increasing the cash balances in their brokerage accounts. Second, our brokerage client account balances increased as a result of our fiscal year 2016 acquisitions of Alex. Brown and 3Macs. Cumulatively, these two factors result in the increase in brokerage client payables and a corresponding increase in assets segregated pursuant to regulations which is discussed below.  ? Stock loaned, net of stock borrowed, increased $153 million.  ? Accrued compensation, commissions and benefits increased $46 million as a result of the increased financial results we achieved in fiscal year 2016. Offsetting these, decreases in cash used in operations resulted from: ? A $1.95 billion increase in assets segregated pursuant to regulations and other segregated assets, primarily resulting from the increase in client cash balances described above. RALPH LAUREN CORPORATION NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued) The weighted-average number of common shares outstanding used to calculate basic net income (loss) per common share is reconciled to shares used to calculate diluted net income (loss) per common share as follows:


Answer: 10353.5

Question: What is the average value of Total assets and Corporate and other bonds for Fixed maturity securities for Total in 2016? (in million)

Context:
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies – (Continued) CNA applies the same impairment model as described above for the majority of its non-redeemable preferred stock securities on the basis that these securities possess characteristics similar to debt securities and that the issuers maintain their ability to pay dividends. For all other equity securities, in determining whether the security is otherthan-temporarily impaired, the Impairment Committee considers a number of factors including, but not limited to: (i) the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than amortized cost, (ii) the financial condition and near term prospects of the issuer, (iii) the intent and ability of CNA to retain its investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for an anticipated recovery in value and (iv) general market conditions and industry or sector specific outlook. Joint venture investments – The Company has 20% to 50% interests in operating joint ventures related to hotel properties and had joint venture interests in the former Bluegrass Project, as discussed in Note 2, that are accounted for under the equity method. The Company’s investment in these entities was $217 million and $234 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 and reported in Other assets on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity income (loss) for these investments was $41 million, $43 million and $(62) million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 and reported in Other operating expenses on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Income. Some of these investments are variable interest entities (“VIE”) as defined in the accounting guidance because the entities will require additional funding from each equity owner throughout the development and construction phase and are accounted for under the equity method since the Company is not the primary beneficiary. The maximum exposure to loss for the VIE investments is $337 million, consisting of the amount of the investment and debt guarantees. The following tables present summarized financial information for these joint ventures:

 Year Ended December 31		 2016	2015

 (In millions)

Total assets		$1,749	$1,577

Total liabilities		1,444	1,231

 Year Ended December 31	 2016	2015	2014

Revenues	$693	$606	$491

Net income	80	71	32

 Hedging – The Company formally documents all relationships between hedging instruments and hedged items, as well as its risk-management objective and strategy for undertaking various hedging transactions. The Company also formally assesses (both at the hedge’s inception and on an ongoing basis) whether the derivatives that are used in hedging transactions have been highly effective in offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows of hedged items and whether those derivatives may be expected to remain highly effective in future periods. When it is determined that a derivative for which hedge accounting has been designated is not (or ceases to be) highly effective, the Company discontinues hedge accounting prospectively. See Note 3 for additional information on the Company’s use of derivatives. Securities lending activities – The Company lends securities for the purpose of enhancing income or to finance positions to unrelated parties who have been designated as primary dealers by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Borrowers of these securities must deposit and maintain collateral with the Company of no less than 100% of the fair value of the securities loaned. U. S.  Government securities and cash are accepted as collateral. The Company maintains effective control over loaned securities and, therefore, continues to report such securities as investments on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Securities lending is typically done on a matched-book basis where the collateral is invested to substantially match the term of the loan. This matching of terms tends to limit risk. In accordance with the Company’s lending agreements, securities on loan are returned immediately to the Company upon notice. Collateral is not reflected as an asset of the Company. There was no collateral held at December 31, 2016 and 2015. Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 4. Fair Value – (Continued) x Level 2 – Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs are observable in active markets. x Level 3 – Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more significant inputs are not observable. Prices may fall within Level 1, 2 or 3 depending upon the methodology and inputs used to estimate fair value for each specific security. In general, the Company seeks to price securities using third party pricing services. Securities not priced by pricing services are submitted to independent brokers for valuation and, if those are not available, internally developed pricing models are used to value assets using a methodology and inputs the Company believes market participants would use to value the assets. Prices obtained from third-party pricing services or brokers are not adjusted by the Company. The Company performs control procedures over information obtained from pricing services and brokers to ensure prices received represent a reasonable estimate of fair value and to confirm representations regarding whether inputs are observable or unobservable. Procedures may include: (i) the review of pricing service methodologies or broker pricing qualifications, (ii) back-testing, where past fair value estimates are compared to actual transactions executed in the market on similar dates, (iii) exception reporting, where period-over-period changes in price are reviewed and challenged with the pricing service or broker based on exception criteria, (iv) detailed analysis, where the Company performs an independent analysis of the inputs and assumptions used to price individual securities and (v) pricing validation, where prices received are compared to prices independently estimated by the Company. The fair values of CNA’s life settlement contracts are included in Other assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Equity options purchased are included in Equity securities, and all other derivative assets are included in Receivables. Derivative liabilities are included in Payable to brokers. Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis are summarized in the tables below:

 December 31, 2016	Level 1	 Level 2	 Level 3	 Total

 (In millions)

 Fixed maturity securities:

 Corporate and other bonds		$18,828	$130	$18,958

 States, municipalities and political subdivisions		13,239	1	13,240

 Asset-backed:

 Residential mortgage-backed		4,944	129	5,073

 Commercial mortgage-backed		2,027	13	2,040

 Other asset-backed		968	57	1,025

 Total asset-backed		7,939	199	8,138

 U.S. Treasury and obligations of government-sponsored enterprises	$93			93

 Foreign government		445		445

 Redeemable preferred stock	19			19

 Fixed maturitiesavailable-for-sale	112	40,451	330	40,893

 Fixed maturities trading		595	6	601

 Total fixed maturities	$112	$41,046	$336	$41,494

 Equity securitiesavailable-for-sale	$91		$19	$110

 Equity securities trading	438		1	439

 Total equity securities	$529	$-	$20	$549

 Short term investments	$3,833	$853		$4,686

 Other invested assets	55	5		60

 Receivables	1			1

 Life settlement contracts			$58	58

 Payable to brokers	-44			-44

 Item 5. Market for the Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities The following graph compares annual total return of our Common Stock, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Composite Stock Index (“S&P 500 Index”) and our Peer Group (“Loews Peer Group”) for the five years ended December 31, 2016. The graph assumes that the value of the investment in our Common Stock, the S&P 500 Index and the Loews Peer Group was $100 on December 31, 2011 and that all dividends were reinvested.

	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016

Loews Common Stock	100.0	108.91	129.64	113.59	104.47	128.19

S&P 500 Index	100.0	116.00	153.57	174.60	177.01	198.18

Loews Peer Group (a)	100.0	113.39	142.85	150.44	142.44	165.34

 (a) The Loews Peer Group consists of the following companies that are industry competitors of our principal operating subsidiaries: Chubb Limited (name change from ACE Limited after it acquired The Chubb Corporation on January 15, 2016), W. R.  Berkley Corporation, The Chubb Corporation (included through January 15, 2016 when it was acquired by ACE Limited), Energy Transfer Partners L. P. , Ensco plc, The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. , Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L. P.  (included through November 26, 2014 when it was acquired by Kinder Morgan Inc. ), Noble Corporation, Spectra Energy Corp, Transocean Ltd.  and The Travelers Companies, Inc.  Dividend Information We have paid quarterly cash dividends in each year since 1967. Regular dividends of $0.0625 per share of Loews common stock were paid in each calendar quarter of 2016 and 2015.


Answer: 2011.0

Question: In terms of Assets,which year is Fair Values of Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments on December 31 higher?

Context:
R.  ONEOK PARTNERS General Partner Interest - See Note B for discussion of the April 2006 acquisition of the additional general partner interest in ONEOK Partners. The limited partner units we received from ONEOK Partners were newly created Class B limited partner units. As of April 7, 2007, the Class B limited partner units are no longer subordinated to distributions on ONEOK Partners’ common units and generally have the same voting rights as the common units and are entitled to receive increased quarterly distributions and distributions on liquidation equal to 110 percent of the distributions paid with respect to the common units. On June 21, 2007, we, as the sole holder of ONEOK Partners Class B limited partner units, waived our right to receive the increased quarterly distributions on the Class B units for the period April 7, 2007, through December 31, 2007, and continuing thereafter until we give ONEOK Partners no less than 90 days advance notice that we have withdrawn our waiver. Any such withdrawal of the waiver will be effective with respect to any distribution on the Class B units declared or paid on or after 90 days following delivery of the notice. Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement and in conjunction with the issuance of additional common units by ONEOK Partners, we, as the general partner, are required to make equity contributions in order to maintain our representative general partner interest. Our investment in ONEOK Partners is shown in the table below for the periods presented.

	December 31, 2007	December 31, 2006	December 31, 2005

General partner interest	2.00%	2.00%	1.65%

Limited partner interest	43.70% (a)	43.70% (a)	1.05% (b)

Total ownership interest	45.70%	45.70%	2.70%

 (a) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units and 36.5 million Class B units. (b) - Represents approximately 0.5 million common units. Cash Distributions - Under the ONEOK Partners’ partnership agreement, distributions are made to the partners with respect to each calendar quarter in an amount equal to 100 percent of available cash. Available cash generally consists of all cash receipts adjusted for cash disbursements and net changes to cash reserves. Available cash will generally be distributed 98 percent to limited partners and 2 percent to the general partner. As an incentive, the general partner’s percentage interest in quarterly distributions is increased after certain specified target levels are met. Under the incentive distribution provisions, the general partner receives: ?15 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.605 per unit, ?25 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.715 per unit, and ?50 percent of amounts distributed in excess of $0.935 per unit. ONEOK Partners’ income is allocated to the general and limited partners in accordance with their respective partnership ownership percentages. The effect of any incremental income allocations for incentive distributions that are allocated to the general partner is calculated after the income allocation for the general partner’s partnership interest and before the income allocation to the limited partners. The following table shows ONEOK Partners’ general partner and incentive distributions related to the periods indicated.

	 Years Ended December 31,

	 2007	 2006	 2005

	(Thousands of dollars)

General partner distributions	$7,842	$6,228	$2,632

Incentive distributions	50,627	31,102	6,568

Total distributions from ONEOK Partners	$58,469	$37,330	$9,200

 The quarterly distributions paid by ONEOK Partners to limited partners in the first, second, third and fourth quarters of 2007 were $0.98 per unit, $0.99 per unit, $1.00 per unit, and $1.01 per unit, respectively. gas. The use of these derivative instruments and the associated recovery of these costs have been approved by the OCC, KCC and regulatory authorities in certain of our Texas jurisdictions. ONEOK entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued. ONEOK had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $500 million at December 31, 2011. In January 2012, ONEOK entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $200 million. Upon issuance in January 2012 of our $700 million, 4.25-percent senior notes due 2022, ONEOK settled all $700 million of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $44.1 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt. ONEOK Partners entered into forward-starting interest-rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges of the variability of interest payments on a portion of forecasted debt issuances that may result from changes in the benchmark interest rate before the debt is issued. At December 31, 2011, ONEOK Partners had interest-rate swaps with notional values totaling $750 million. During the year ended December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners entered into additional interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $650 million. Upon ONEOK Partners’ debt issuance in September 2012, ONEOK Partners settled $1 billion of its interest-rate swaps and realized a loss of $124.9 million in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) that will be amortized to interest expense over the term of the related debt. At December 31, 2012, ONEOK Partners’ remaining interest-rate swaps with notional amounts totaling $400 million have settlement dates greater than 12 months. Fair Values of Derivative Instruments - The following table sets forth the fair values of our derivative instruments for our continuing and discontinued operations for the periods indicated:

	December 31, 2012 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)	December 31, 2011 Fair Values of Derivatives (a)

	Assets	(Liabilities)	Assets	(Liabilities)

	(Thousands of dollars)

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments

Commodity contracts

Financial contracts	$47,516(b)	$-4,885	$184,184(c)	$-73,346

Physical contracts	56	-126	62	-344

Interest-rate contracts	10,923	—	—	-128,666

Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments	58,495	-5,011	184,246	-202,356

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

Commodity contracts

Nontrading instruments

Financial contracts	24,970	-25,009	295,948	-323,170

Physical contracts	4,059	-153	38,733	-1,665

Trading instruments

Financial contracts	15,358	-14,192	111,920	-110,050

Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments	44,387	-39,354	446,601	-434,885

Total derivatives	$102,882	$-44,365	$630,847	$-637,241

 (a) - Included on a net basis in energy marketing and risk-management assets and liabilities, other assets and other deferred credits on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. (b) - Includes $16.9 million of derivative net assets and ineffectiveness associated with cash flow hedges of inventory related to certain financial contracts that were used to hedge forecasted purchases and sales of natural gas. The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). (c) - Includes $88.9 million of derivative assets associated with cash flow hedges of inventory that were adjusted to reflect the lower of cost or market value. The deferred gains associated with these assets have been reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). guidance to amend or clarify portions of the final rule in 2013. We anticipate that if the EPA issues additional responses, amendments and/or policy guidance on the final rule, it will reduce the anticipated capital, operations and maintenance costs resulting from the regulation. Generally, the NSPS final rule will require expenditures for updated emissions controls, monitoring and record-keeping requirements at affected facilities in the crude-oil and natural gas industry. We do not expect these expenditures will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. CERCLA - The federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, also commonly known as Superfund (CERCLA), imposes strict, joint and several liability, without regard to fault or the legality of the original act, on certain classes of “persons” (defined under CERCLA) that caused and/or contributed to the release of a hazardous substance into the environment. These persons include but are not limited to the owner or operator of a facility where the release occurred and/or companies that disposed or arranged for the disposal of the hazardous substances found at the facility. Under CERCLA, these persons may be liable for the costs of cleaning up the hazardous substances released into the environment, damages to natural resources and the costs of certain health studies. Neither we nor ONEOK Partners expect our respective responsibilities under CERCLA, for this facility and any other, will have a material impact on our respective results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Chemical Site Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security released an interim rule in April 2007 that requires companies to provide reports on sites where certain chemicals, including many hydrocarbon products, are stored. We completed the Homeland Security assessments, and our facilities subsequently were assigned one of four risk-based tiers ranging from high (Tier 1) to low (Tier 4) risk, or not tiered at all due to low risk. To date, four of our facilities have been given a Tier 4 rating. Facilities receiving a Tier 4 rating are required to complete Site Security Plans and possible physical security enhancements. We do not expect the Site Security Plans and possible security enhancements cost will have a material impact on our results of operations, financial position or cash flows. Pipeline Security - The United States Department of Homeland Security’s Transportation Security Administration and the DOT have completed a review and inspection of our “critical facilities” and identified no material security issues. Also, the Transportation Security Administration has released new pipeline security guidelines that include broader definitions for the determination of pipeline “critical facilities. ” We have reviewed our pipeline facilities according to the new guideline requirements, and there have been no material changes required to date. Environmental Footprint - Our environmental and climate change strategy focuses on taking steps to minimize the impact of our operations on the environment. These strategies include: (i) developing and maintaining an accurate greenhouse gas emissions inventory according to current rules issued by the EPA; (ii) improving the efficiency of our various pipelines, natural gas processing facilities and natural gas liquids fractionation facilities; (iii) following developing technologies for emission control and the capture of carbon dioxide to keep it from reaching the atmosphere; and (iv) utilizing practices to reduce the loss of methane from our facilities. We participate in the EPA’s Natural Gas STAR Program to voluntarily reduce methane emissions. We continue to focus on maintaining low rates of lost-and-unaccounted-for natural gas through expanded implementation of best practices to limit the release of natural gas during pipeline and facility maintenance and operations. EMPLOYEESWe employed 4,859 people at January 31, 2013, including 705 people at Kansas Gas Service who are subject to collective bargaining agreements. The following table sets forth our contracts with collective bargaining units at January 31, 2013:


Answer: 0.54902

Question: in 2008 what was the approximate tax rate on the company recorded an aggregate net unrealized loss

Context:
AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) of certain of its assets and liabilities under its interest rate swap agreements held as of December 31, 2006 and entered into during the first half of 2007. In addition, the Company paid $8.0 million related to a treasury rate lock agreement entered into and settled during the year ended December 31, 2008. The cost of the treasury rate lock is being recognized as additional interest expense over the 10-year term of the 7.00% Notes. During the year ended December 31, 2007, the Company also received $3.1 million in cash upon settlement of the assets and liabilities under ten forward starting interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $1.4 billion, which were designated as cash flow hedges to manage exposure to variability in cash flows relating to forecasted interest payments in connection with the Certificates issued in the Securitization in May 2007. The settlement is being recognized as a reduction in interest expense over the five-year period for which the interest rate swaps were designated as hedges. The Company also received $17.0 million in cash upon settlement of the assets and liabilities under thirteen additional interest rate swap agreements with an aggregate notional amount of $850.0 million that managed exposure to variability of interest rates under the credit facilities but were not considered cash flow hedges for accounting purposes. This gain is included in other income in the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2007. As of December 31, 2008 and 2007, other comprehensive (loss) income included the following items related to derivative financial instruments (in thousands):

	2008	2007

Deferred loss on the settlement of the treasury rate lock, net of tax	$-4,332	$-4,901

Deferred gain on the settlement of interest rate swap agreements entered into in connection with the Securitization, net oftax	1,238	1,636

Unrealized losses related to interest rate swap agreements, net of tax	-16,349	-486

 During the years ended December 31, 2008 and 2007, the Company recorded an aggregate net unrealized loss of approximately $15.8 million and $3.2 million, respectively (net of a tax provision of approximately $10.2 million and $2.0 million, respectively) in other comprehensive loss for the change in fair value of interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges and reclassified an aggregate of $0.1 million and $6.2 million, respectively (net of an income tax provision of $2.0 million and an income tax benefit of $3.3 million, respectively) into results of operations.9. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS The Company determines the fair market values of its financial instruments based on the fair value hierarchy established in SFAS No.157, which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. The standard describes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair value. Level 1 Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access at the measurement date. The Company’s Level 1 assets consist of available-for-sale securities traded on active markets as well as certain Brazilian Treasury securities that are highly liquid and are actively traded in over-the-counter markets. Level 2 Observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) The Company issued 82,865, 93,367 and 105,239 of non-vested restricted stock units in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, the majority of which provide for vesting as to all underlying shares on the third anniversary of the grant date. The weighted average grant-date fair value for non-vested restricted stock units granted during 2017, 2016 and 2015 was $187.85, $142.71 and $118.00, respectively. The Company recorded $11.2 million of expense related to restricted stock units during 2017, which is included in cost of goods sold or selling, general and administrative expenses. The unamortized share-based compensation cost related to non-vested restricted stock units, net of expected forfeitures, was $13.2 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.8 years. The Company uses treasury stock to provide shares of common stock in connection with vesting of the restricted stock units. TELEFLEX INCORPORATED NOTES?TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS — (Continued) F-37 Note 13?— Income taxes The following table summarizes the components of the provision for income taxes from continuing operations:

	2017	2016	2015

	(Dollars in thousands)

Current:

Federal	$133,621	$2,344	$-4,700

State	5,213	5,230	2,377

Foreign	35,444	28,842	53,151

Deferred:

Federal	-258,247	-25,141	-35,750

State	1,459	-1,837	-5,012

Foreign	212,158	-1,364	-2,228

	$129,648	$8,074	$7,838

 The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “TCJA”) was enacted on December 22, 2017. The legislation significantly changes U. S.  tax law by, among other things, permanently reducing corporate income tax rates from a maximum of 35% to 21%, effective January 1, 2018; implementing a territorial tax system, by generally providing for, among other things, a dividends received deduction on the foreign source portion of dividends received from a foreign corporation if specified conditions are met; and imposing a one-time repatriation tax on undistributed post-1986 foreign subsidiary earnings and profits, which are deemed repatriated for purposes of the tax. As a result of the TCJA, the Company reassessed and revalued its ending net deferred tax liabilities at December 31, 2017 and recognized a?$46.1 million?provisional tax benefit in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2017. As a result of the deemed repatriation tax under the TCJA, the Company recognized a $154.0 million provisional tax expense in the Company’s consolidated statement of income for the year ended December 31, 2017, and the Company expects to pay this tax over an eight-year period. While the TCJA provides for a territorial tax system, beginning in 2018, it includes?two?new U. S.  tax base erosion provisions, the global intangible low-taxed income (“GILTI”) provisions and the base-erosion and anti-abuse tax (“BEAT”) provisions. The GILTI provisions require the Company to include in its U. S.  income tax return foreign subsidiary earnings in excess of an allowable return on the foreign subsidiary’s tangible assets. The Company expects that it will be subject to incremental U. S.  tax on GILTI income beginning in 2018. Because of the complexity of the new GILTI tax rules, the Company is continuing to evaluate this provision of the TCJA and the application of Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic 740, "Income Taxes. " Under U. S.  GAAP, the Company may make an accounting policy election to either (1) treat future taxes with respect to the inclusion in U. S.  taxable income of amounts related to GILTI as current period expense when incurred (the “period cost method”) or (2) take such amounts into a company’s measurement of its deferred taxes (the “deferred method”). The Company’s selection of an accounting policy with respect to the new GILTI tax rules will depend, in part, on an analysis of the Company’s global income to determine whether the Company expects to have future U. S.  inclusions in taxable income related to GILTI and, if so, what the impact is expected to be. The determination of whether the Company expects to have future U. S.  inclusions ? Miller Insurance Services LLP, which is a Pounds sterling functional entity, earns significant non-functional currency revenues, in which case the Company limits its exposure to exchange rate changes by the use of forward contracts matched to a percentage of forecast cash inflows in specific currencies and periods. However, where the foreign exchange risk relates to any Pounds sterling pension benefits assets or liability for pension benefits, we do not hedge the risk. Consequently, if our London market operations have a significant pension asset or liability, we may be exposed to accounting gains and losses, recognized in other comprehensive income or loss, if the U. S.  dollar and Pounds sterling exchange rates change. We do, however, hedge the Pounds sterling contributions into the pension plan. Translation risk Outside our U. S.  and London market operations, we predominantly earn revenues and incur expenses in the local currency. When we translate the results and net assets of these operations into U. S.  dollars for reporting purposes, movements in exchange rates will affect reported results and net assets. For example, if the U. S.  dollar strengthens against the Euro, the reported results of our Eurozone operations in U. S.  dollar terms will be lower. With the exception of foreign currency hedges for certain intercompany loans that are not designated as hedging instruments, we do not hedge translation risk. The table below provides information about our foreign currency forward exchange contracts, which are sensitive to exchange rate risk. The table summarizes the U. S.  dollar equivalent amounts of each currency bought and sold forward and the weighted average contractual exchange rates. All forward exchange contracts mature within three years.

	Settlement date before December 31,

	2017	2018	2019

December 31, 2016	Contract amount	Average contractual exchange rate	Contract amount	Average contractual exchange rate	Contract amount	Average contractual exchange rate

	(millions)		(millions)		(millions)

Foreign currency sold

U.S. dollars sold for Pounds sterling	$390	$1.51 = £1	$268	$1.46 = £1	$77	$1.39 = £1

Euro sold for U.S. dollars	74	€1 = $1.20	48	€1 = $1.19	14	€1 = $1.17

Japanese yen sold for U.S. dollars	21	¥110.85 = $1	13	¥110.90 - $1	5	¥98.63 = $1

Euro sold for Pounds sterling	22	€1 = £1.21	9	1 = £1.33	4	€1 = £1.24

Total	$507		$338		$100

Fair value(i)	$-65		$-40		$-5

 (i) Represents the difference between the contract amount and the cash flow in U. S.  dollars which would have been receivable had the foreign currency forward exchange contracts been entered into on December 31, 2016 at the forward exchange rates prevailing at that date.


Answer: 2.0

Question: How many kinds of Sales volume are greater than 200 in 2017?

Context:
Table of Contents Rent expense under all operating leases, including both cancelable and noncancelable leases, was $645 million, $488 million and $338 million in 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Future minimum lease payments under noncancelable operating leases having remaining terms in excess of one year as of September 28, 2013, are as follows (in millions):

2014	$610

2015	613

2016	587

2017	551

2018	505

Thereafter	1,855

Total minimum lease payments	$4,721

 Other Commitments As of September 28, 2013, the Company had outstanding off-balance sheet third-party manufacturing commitments and component purchase commitments of $18.6 billion. In addition to the off-balance sheet commitments mentioned above, the Company had outstanding obligations of $1.3 billion as of September 28, 2013, which consisted mainly of commitments to acquire capital assets, including product tooling and manufacturing process equipment, and commitments related to advertising, research and development, Internet and telecommunications services and other obligations. Contingencies The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims that have arisen in the ordinary course of business and that have not been fully adjudicated. In the opinion of management, there was not at least a reasonable possibility the Company may have incurred a material loss, or a material loss in excess of a recorded accrual, with respect to loss contingencies. However, the outcome of litigation is inherently uncertain. Therefore, although management considers the likelihood of such an outcome to be remote, if one or more of these legal matters were resolved against the Company in a reporting period for amounts in excess of management’s expectations, the Company’s consolidated financial statements for that reporting period could be materially adversely affected. Apple Inc.  v.  Samsung Electronics Co. , Ltd, et al. On August 24, 2012, a jury returned a verdict awarding the Company $1.05 billion in its lawsuit against Samsung Electronics Co. , Ltd and affiliated parties in the United States District Court, Northern District of California, San Jose Division. On March 1, 2013, the District Court upheld $599 million of the jury’s award and ordered a new trial as to the remainder. Because the award is subject to entry of final judgment, partial re-trial and appeal, the Company has not recognized the award in its results of operations. VirnetX, Inc.  v.  Apple Inc.  et al. On August 11, 2010, VirnetX, Inc.  filed an action against the Company alleging that certain of its products infringed on four patents relating to network communications technology. On November 6, 2012, a jury returned a verdict against the Company, and awarded damages of $368 million. The Company is challenging the verdict, believes it has valid defenses and has not recorded a loss accrual at this time. CF INDUSTRIES HOLDINGS, INC.  5 The following table summarizes our nitrogen fertilizer production volume for the last three years

	December 31,

	2017	2016	2015

	(tons in thousands)

Ammonia-1	10,295	8,307	7,673

Granular urea	4,451	3,368	2,520

UAN -32%	6,914	6,698	5,888

AN	2,127	1,845	1,283

 (1) Gross ammonia production, including amounts subsequently upgraded on-site into granular urea, UAN or AN. Donaldsonville, Louisiana The Donaldsonville nitrogen fertilizer complex is the world's largest nitrogen fertilizer production facility. It has six ammonia plants, five urea plants, four nitric acid plants, three UAN plants, and one DEF plant. The complex, which is located on the Mississippi River, includes deep-water docking facilities, access to an ammonia pipeline, and truck and railroad loading capabilities. The complex has on-site storage for 160,000 tons of ammonia, 201,000 tons of UAN (measured on a 32% nitrogen content basis) and 173,000 tons of granular urea. As part of our capacity expansion projects, the new Donaldsonville urea plant became operational during the fourth quarter of 2015. The new UAN plant was placed in service in the first quarter of 2016, and the new ammonia plant was placed in service in October 2016. For additional details regarding the capacity expansion projects, see Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources. Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada Medicine Hat is the largest nitrogen fertilizer complex in Canada. It has two ammonia plants and one urea plant. The complex has on-site storage for 60,000 tons of ammonia and 60,000 tons of granular urea. Port Neal, Iowa The Port Neal facility is located approximately 12 miles south of Sioux City, Iowa on the Missouri River. The facility consists of two ammonia plants, three urea plants, two nitric acid plants and a UAN plant. The location has on-site storage for 90,000 tons of ammonia, 154,000 tons of granular urea, and 81,000 tons of 32% UAN. As part of our capacity expansion projects, both the ammonia and urea plants were placed in service in December 2016. For additional details regarding the capacity expansion projects, see Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources. Verdigris, Oklahoma The Verdigris facility is located northeast of Tulsa, Oklahoma, near the Verdigris River and is owned by TNLP. It is the second largest UAN production facility in North America. The facility comprises two ammonia plants, two nitric acid plants, two UAN plants and a port terminal. Through our approximately 75.3% interest in TNCLP and its subsidiary, TNLP, we operate the plants and lease the port terminal from the Tulsa-Rogers County Port Authority. The complex has on-site storage for 60,000 tons of ammonia and 100,000 tons of 32% UAN. Woodward, Oklahoma The Woodward facility is located in rural northwest Oklahoma and consists of an ammonia plant, two nitric acid plants, two urea plants and two UAN plants. The facility has on-site storage for 36,000 tons of ammonia and 84,000 tons of 32% UAN. Yazoo City, Mississippi The Yazoo City facility is located in central Mississippi and includes one ammonia plant, four nitric acid plants, an AN plant, two urea plants, a UAN plant and a dinitrogen tetroxide production and storage facility. The site has on-site storage for 50,000 tons of ammonia, 48,000 tons of 32% UAN and 11,000 tons of AN and related products. Cost of Sales. Cost of sales per ton in our ammonia segment averaged $248 per ton in 2016, including the impact of the CF Fertilisers UK acquisition, which averaged $220 per ton. The remaining cost of sales per ton was $250 in 2016, a 16% decrease from the $296 per ton in 2015. The decrease was due primarily to the impact of unrealized net mark-to-market gains on natural gas derivatives in 2016 compared to losses in 2015 and to the impact of lower realized natural gas costs in 2016. This was partly offset by capacity expansion project start-up costs of $50 million and an increase in expansion project depreciation as a result of the new ammonia plants at our Donaldsonville and Port Neal facilities. Granular Urea Segment Our granular urea segment produces granular urea, which contains 46% nitrogen. Produced from ammonia and carbon dioxide, it has the highest nitrogen content of any of our solid nitrogen fertilizers. Granular urea is produced at our Courtright, Ontario; Donaldsonville, Louisiana; Medicine Hat, Alberta; and Port Neal, Iowa nitrogen complexes. The following table presents summary operating data for our granular urea segment:

	Year ended December 31,

	2017	2016	2015	2017 v. 2016	2016 v. 2015

	(in millions, except as noted)

Net sales	$971	$831	$788	$140	17%	$43	5%

Cost of sales	856	584	469	272	47%	115	25%

Gross margin	$115	$247	$319	$-132	-53%	$-72	-23%

Gross margin percentage	11.8%	29.7%	40.4%	-17.9%		-10.7%

Sales volume by product tons (000s)	4,357	3,597	2,460	760	21%	1,137	46%

Sales volume by nutrient tons (000s)(1)	2,004	1,654	1,132	350	21%	522	46%

Average selling price per product ton	$223	$231	$320	$-8	-3%	$-89	-28%

Average selling price per nutrient ton-1	$485	$502	$696	$-17	-3%	$-194	-28%

Gross margin per product ton	$26	$69	$129	$-43	-62%	$-60	-47%

Gross margin per nutrient ton-1	$57	$149	$281	$-92	-62%	$-132	-47%

Depreciation and amortization	$246	$112	$51	$134	120%	$61	120%

Unrealized net mark-to-market loss (gain) on natural gas derivatives	$16	$-67	$47	$83	N/M	$-114	N/M

 N/M—Not Meaningful (1) Granular urea represents 46% nitrogen content. Nutrient tons represent the tons of nitrogen within the product tons. Year Ended December 31, 2017 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2016 Net Sales. Net sales in the granular urea segment increased by $140 million, or 17%, to $971 million in 2017 compared to $831 million in 2016 due primarily to a 21% increase in sales volume partially offset by a 3% decrease in average selling prices. Sales volume was higher due primarily to increased production at our new Port Neal facility, which came on line in the fourth quarter of 2016. Average selling prices decreased to $223 per ton in 2017 compared to $231 per ton in 2016 due primarily to greater global nitrogen supply availability due to global capacity additions. Selling prices strengthened in the fourth quarter of 2017 rising approximately 14% compared to the prior year period. Cost of Sales. Cost of sales per ton in our granular urea segment averaged $197 in 2017, a 22% increase from the $162 per ton in 2016. The increase was due primarily to higher depreciation as a result of the new granular urea plant at our Port Neal facility, an unrealized net mark-to-market loss on natural gas derivatives in 2017 compared to a gain in the comparable period of 2016 and higher realized natural gas costs, including the impact of realized derivatives. These increases in cost of sales were partially offset by the impact of production efficiencies due to increased volume. Depreciation and amortization in our granular urea segment in 2017 was $56 per ton compared to $31 per ton in 2016.


Answer: 8895.5

Question: What's the sum of Cost of sales of Year Ended December 31, 2016, Decreases in current period tax positions, and Total Year Ended December 31, 2005 of Balance at End of Period ?

Context:
The following table summarizes the changes in the Company’s valuation allowance:

Balance at January 1, 2010	$25,621

Increases in current period tax positions	907

Decreases in current period tax positions	-2,740

Balance at December 31, 2010	$23,788

Increases in current period tax positions	1,525

Decreases in current period tax positions	-3,734

Balance at December 31, 2011	$21,579

Increases in current period tax positions	0

Decreases in current period tax positions	-2,059

Balance at December 31, 2012	$19,520

 Note 14: Employee Benefits Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits The Company maintains noncontributory defined benefit pension plans covering eligible employees of its regulated utility and shared services operations. Benefits under the plans are based on the employee’s years of service and compensation. The pension plans have been closed for most employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 had their accrued benefit frozen and will be able to receive this benefit as a lump sum upon termination or retirement. Union employees hired on or after January 1, 2001 and non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006 are provided with a 5.25% of base pay defined contribution plan. The Company does not participate in a multiemployer plan. The Company’s funding policy is to contribute at least the greater of the minimum amount required by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 or the normal cost, and an additional contribution if needed to avoid “at risk” status and benefit restrictions under the Pension Protection Act of 2006. The Company may also increase its contributions, if appropriate, to its tax and cash position and the plan’s funded position. Pension plan assets are invested in a number of actively managed and indexed investments including equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities and guaranteed interest contracts with insurance companies. Pension expense in excess of the amount contributed to the pension plans is deferred by certain regulated subsidiaries pending future recovery in rates charged for utility services as contributions are made to the plans. (See Note 6) The Company also has several unfunded noncontributory supplemental non-qualified pension plans that provide additional retirement benefits to certain employees. The Company maintains other postretirement benefit plans providing varying levels of medical and life insurance to eligible retirees. The retiree welfare plans are closed for union employees hired on or after January 1, 2006. The plans had previously closed for non-union employees hired on or after January 1, 2002. The Company’s policy is to fund other postretirement benefit costs for rate-making purposes. Plan assets are invested in equity and bond mutual funds, fixed income securities, real estate investment trusts (“REITs”) and emerging market funds. The obligations of the plans are dominated by obligations for active employees. Because the timing of expected benefit payments is so far in the future and the size of the plan assets are small relative to the Company’s assets, the investment strategy is to allocate a significant percentage of assets to equities, which the Company believes will provide the highest return over the long-term period. The fixed income assets are invested in long duration debt securities and may be invested in fixed income instruments, such as futures and options in order to better match the duration of the plan liability. The allocation of goodwill in accordance with SFAS No.142 for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 was as follows:

 	 Balance at Beginning of Period	 Goodwill Acquired	 Foreign Currency Translation and Other	 Balance at End of Period

Year Ended December 31, 2006

Food Packaging	$540.4	$31.9	$14.9	$587.2

Protective Packaging	1,368.4	0.4	1.1	1,369.9

Total	$1,908.8	$32.3	$16.0	$1,957.1

Year Ended December 31, 2005

Food Packaging	$549.8	$0.7	$-10.1	$540.4

Protective Packaging	1,368.2	0.8	-0.6	1,368.4

Total	$1,918.0	$1.5	$-10.7	$1,908.8

 See Note 20, “Acquisitions,” for additional information on the goodwill acquired during 2006. Note 4 Short Term Investments—Available-for-Sale Securities At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company’s available-for-sale securities consisted of auction rate securities for which interest or dividend rates are generally re-set for periods of up to 90 days. At December 31, 2006, the Company held $33.9 million of auction rate securities which were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates. At December 31, 2005, the Company held $44.1 million of auction rate securities, of which $34.7 million were investments in preferred stock with no maturity dates and $9.4 million were investments in other auction rate securities with contractual maturities in 2031. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the fair value of the available-for-sale securities held by the Company was equal to their cost. There were no gross realized gains or losses from the sale of availablefor-sale securities in 2006 and 2005. Note 5 Accounts Receivable Securitization Program In December 2001, the Company and a group of its U. S.  subsidiaries entered into an accounts receivable securitization program with a bank and an issuer of commercial paper administered by the bank. On December 7, 2004, which was the scheduled expiration date of this program, the parties extended this program for an additional term of three years ending December 7, 2007. Under this receivables program, the Company’s two primary operating subsidiaries, Cryovac, Inc.  and Sealed Air Corporation (US), sell all of their eligible U. S.  accounts receivable to Sealed Air Funding Corporation, an indirectly wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company that was formed for the sole purpose of entering into the receivables program. Sealed Air Funding in turn may sell undivided ownership interests in these receivables to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, subject to specified conditions, up to a maximum of $125.0 million of receivables interests outstanding from time to time. Sealed Air Funding retains the receivables it purchases from the operating subsidiaries, except those as to which it sells receivables interests to the bank or the issuer of commercial paper. The Company has structured the sales of accounts receivable by the operating subsidiaries to Sealed Air Funding, and the sales of receivables interests from Sealed Air Funding to the bank and the issuer of commercial paper, as “true sales” under applicable laws. The assets of Sealed Air Funding are not available to pay any creditors of the Company or of the Company’s other subsidiaries or affiliates. The Company accounts for these transactions as sales of receivables under the provisions of SFAS No.140, “Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishment of Liabilities. ” Product Care 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, net sales decreased $30 million, or 2%, in 2016 compared with 2015, of which $22 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $8 million, or 1%, in 2016 compared with 2015 primarily due to the following: ? unfavorable price/mix of $29 million primarily in North America driven by targeted pricing incentives and an unfavorable product mix related to accelerated growth in e-Commerce and a shift in demand due to more innovative, resource-efficient solutions. This was partially offset by: ? higher unit volumes of $21 million, primarily in North America and EMEA due to ongoing strength in the e-Commerce and third party logistics markets, partially offset by rationalization and weakness in the industrial sector, as well as declines in Latin America due to the political and economic environment.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, net sales decreased $109 million, or 7%, in 2015 compared with 2014, of which $99 million was due to negative currency impact. On a constant dollar basis, net sales decreased $10 million, or 1%, in 2015 compared with 2014 primarily due to the following: ? lower unit volumes due to rationalization efforts in North America, Latin America and to a lesser extent, EMEA and weaknesses across the industrial sector. This was partially offset by: ? favorable price/mix in all regions, primarily in North America and Latin America reflecting results from our focus on maintaining pricing disciplines and an increase of sales from high-performance packaging solutions, including cushioning and packaging systems as compared to sales from general packaging solutions, and the progression of our pricing and value initiatives implemented to offset non-material inflationary costs as well as currency devaluation. Cost of Sales Cost of sales for the years ended December 31, were as follows:

	Year Ended December 31,	2016 vs. 2015 % Change	2015 vs. 2014 % Change

(In millions)	2016	2015	2014

Net sales	$6,778.3	$7,031.5	$7,750.5	-3.6%	-9.3%

Cost of sales	4,246.7	4,444.9	5,062.9	-4.5%	-12.2%

As a % of net sales	62.7%	63.2%	65.3%

Gross Profit	$2,531.6	$2,586.6	$2,687.6	-2.1%	-3.8%

 2016 compared with 2015 As reported, costs of sales decreased $198 million in 2016 as compared to 2015. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $163 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $35 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $79 million, offset by an increase of $51 million in expenses representing higher non-material manufacturing and direct costs, including salary and wage inflation, partially offset by restructuring savings and lower incentive based compensation.2015 compared with 2014 As reported, costs of sales decreased $618 million in 2015 as compared to 2014. Cost of sales was impacted by favorable foreign currency translation of $492 million. On a constant dollar basis, cost of sales decreased $126 million primarily due to the divestiture of the North American foam trays and absorbent pads business and European food trays business of $140 million and favorable impact of $31 million related to cost savings, freight, and other supply chain costs. These were partially offset by $47 million in expenses related to higher non-material manufacturing costs, including salary and wage inflation.


Answer: -0.04348

Question: In the year with lowest amount of Service cost, what's the increasing rate of Interest cost for Pension Benefits? (in %)

Context:
The funded status of the Company's plans as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, was as follows

	Pension Benefits December 31	Other Benefits December 31

($ in millions)	2015	2014	2015	2014

Change in Benefit Obligation

Benefit obligation at beginning of year	$5,671	$4,730	$650	$616

Service cost	150	136	13	13

Interest cost	242	253	27	30

Plan participants' contributions	11	26	6	7

Actuarial loss (gain)	-254	714	-91	24

Benefits paid	-185	-168	-39	-40

Curtailments	—	-20	—	—

Benefit obligation at end of year	5,635	5,671	566	650

Change in Plan Assets

Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year	4,731	4,310	—	—

Actual return on plan assets	-47	437	—	—

Employer contributions	103	126	33	33

Plan participants' contributions	11	26	6	7

Benefits paid	-185	-168	-39	-40

Fair value of plan assets at end of year	4,613	4,731	—	—

Funded status	$-1,022	$-940	$-566	$-650

Amounts Recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position:

Pension plan assets	$—	$17	$—	$—

Current liability-1	-21	-18	-143	-143

Non-current liability-2	-1,001	-939	-423	-507

Accumulated other comprehensive loss (income) (pre-tax) related to:

Prior service costs (credits)	86	105	-105	-125

Net actuarial loss (gain)	1,433	1,374	-21	73

 (1) Included in other current liabilities and current portion of postretirement plan liabilities, respectively. (2) Included in pension plan liabilities and other postretirement plan liabilities, respectively. The Projected Benefit Obligation ("PBO"), Accumulated Benefit Obligation ("ABO"), and asset values for the Company's qualified pension plans were $5,490 million, $5,146 million, and $4,613 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2015, and $5,529 million, $5,124 million, and $4,731 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. The PBO represents the present value of pension benefits earned through the end of the year, with allowance for future salary increases. The ABO is similar to the PBO, but does not provide for future salary increases. The PBO and fair value of plan assets for all qualified and non-qualified pension plans with PBOs in excess of plan assets were $5,635 million and $4,613 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2015, and $4,394 million and $3,438 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. The ABO and fair value of plan assets for all qualified and non-qualified pension plans with ABOs in excess of plan assets were $4,051 million and $3,391 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2015, and $3,981 million and $3,438 million, respectively, as of December 31, 2014. The ABO for all pension plans was $5,273 million and $5,244 million as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The changes in amounts recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) were as follows: FAS/CAS Adjustment The FAS/CAS Adjustment represents the difference between our pension and postretirement plan expense under FAS and under CAS.

	Year Ended December 31	2015 over 2014	2014 over 2013

($ in millions)	2015	2014	2013	Dollars	Percent	Dollars	Percent

FAS expense	$-168	$-155	$-257	$-13	-8%	$102	40%

CAS cost	272	227	196	45	20%	31	16%

FAS/CAS Adjustment	$104	$72	$-61	$32	44%	$133	218%

 2015 - The FAS/CAS Adjustment in 2015 was a net benefit of $104 million, compared to a net benefit of $72 million in 2014. The favorable change was driven by the phase-in of Harmonization and better than expected 2014 asset returns, partially offset by higher FAS expense primarily due to lower discount rates at the end of 2014.2014 - The FAS/CAS Adjustment in 2014 was a net benefit of $72 million, compared to a net expense of $61 million in 2013. The favorable change was driven by lower FAS expense, due primarily to higher discount rates and plan assets at the end of 2013, the full year effect of the 2013 postretirement benefits amendment, and the phase-in of Harmonization. We expect the FAS/CAS Adjustment in 2016 to be a net benefit of approximately $137 million ($161 million FAS and $298 million CAS), primarily driven by the continued phase-in of Harmonization and higher FAS discount rates, partially offset by lower than expected 2015 asset returns. The expected FAS/CAS Adjustment is subject to change during 2016, when we remeasure our actuarial estimate of the unfunded benefit obligation for CAS with updated census data and other items. Deferred State Income Taxes Deferred state income taxes reflect the change in deferred state tax assets and liabilities in the relevant period. These amounts are recorded within operating income, while the current period state income tax expense is charged to contract costs and included in cost of sales and service revenues in segment operating income.2015 - The deferred state income tax expense remained constant at $2 million in 2015 and 2014. Deferred state tax expense in 2015 was primarily attributable to changes in the timing of contract taxable income and pension related adjustments, partially offset by a reduction in the valuation allowance for state tax credit carryforwards.2014 - The deferred state income tax expense in 2014 was $2 million, compared to a benefit of $6 million in 2013. This change was primarily attributable to non-recurring adjustments related to establishing a valuation allowance for a state tax loss carryforward and the true-up of 2013 deferred taxes. These increases were partially offset by changes in the timing of contract taxable income and reserves that are not currently deductible for tax purposes. Interest Expense 2015 - Interest expense in 2015 was $137 million, compared to $149 million in 2014. The decrease was primarily a result of refinancing 6.875% senior notes with 5.000% senior notes and repayment in full of the term loans, partially offset by loss on early extinguishment of debt. See Note 14: Debt in Item 8.2014 - Interest expense in 2014 was $149 million, compared to $118 million in 2013. The increase was primarily a result of a loss on the early extinguishment of debt in the fourth quarter of 2014. See Note 14: Debt in Item 8. Federal Income Taxes 2015 - Our effective tax rate on earnings from continuing operations was 36.1% in 2015, compared to 33.3% in 2014. The increase in our effective tax rate for 2015 was primarily attributable to adjustments to the domestic manufacturing deduction and an increase in the goodwill impairment that is not amortizable for tax purposes. Advance Payments and Billings in Excess of Revenues - Payments received in excess of inventoried costs and revenues are recorded as advance payment liabilities. Property, Plant, and Equipment - Depreciable properties owned by the Company are recorded at cost and depreciated over the estimated useful lives of individual assets. Major improvements are capitalized while expenditures for maintenance, repairs, and minor improvements are expensed. Costs incurred for computer software developed or obtained for internal use are capitalized and amortized over the expected useful life of the software, not to exceed nine years. Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of their useful lives or the term of the lease. The remaining assets are depreciated using the straight-line method, with the following lives:

	Years

Land improvements	3	-	40

Buildings and improvements	3	-	60

Capitalized software costs	3	-	9

Machinery and other equipment	2	-	45

 The Company evaluates the recoverability of its property, plant, and equipment when there are changes in economic circumstances or business objectives that indicate the carrying value may not be recoverable. The Company's evaluations include estimated future cash flows, profitability, and other factors affecting fair value. As these assumptions and estimates may change over time, it may or may not be necessary to record impairment charges. Leases - The Company uses its incremental borrowing rate in the assessment of lease classification as capital or operating and defines the initial lease term to include renewal options determined to be reasonably assured. The Company conducts operations primarily under operating leases. Many of the Company's real property lease agreements contain incentives for tenant improvements, rent holidays, or rent escalation clauses. For incentives for tenant improvements, the Company records a deferred rent liability and amortizes the deferred rent over the term of the lease as a reduction to rent expense. For rent holidays and rent escalation clauses during the lease term, the Company records minimum rental expenses on a straight-line basis over the term of the lease. For purposes of recognizing lease incentives, the Company uses the date of initial possession as the commencement date, which is generally the date on which the Company is given the right of access to the space and begins to make improvements in preparation for the intended use. Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets - The Company performs impairment tests for goodwill as of November 30 of each year and between annual impairment tests if evidence of potential impairment exists, by first comparing the carrying value of net assets to the fair value of the related operations. If the fair value is determined to be less than the carrying value, a second step is performed to determine if goodwill is impaired, by comparing the estimated fair value of goodwill to its carrying value. Purchased intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis or a method based on the pattern of benefits over their estimated useful lives, and the carrying value of these assets is reviewed for impairment when events indicate that a potential impairment may have occurred. Equity Method Investments - Investments in which the Company has the ability to exercise significant influence over the investee but does not own a majority interest or otherwise control are accounted for under the equity method of accounting and included in other assets in its consolidated statements of financial position. The Company's equity investments align strategically and are integrated with the Company's operations, and therefore the Company's share of the net earnings or losses of the investee is included in operating income (loss). The Company evaluates its equity investments for other than temporary impairment whenever events or changes in business circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts of such investments may not be fully recoverable. If a decline in the value of an equity method investment is determined to be other than temporary, a loss is recorded in earnings in the current period. Self-Insured Group Medical Insurance - The Company maintains a self-insured group medical insurance plan. The plan is designed to provide a specified level of coverage for employees and their dependents. Estimated liabilities