Question: What was the total amount of the Commercial Banking in the sections where Investment Bank is greater than 1000? (in million)

def solution():
    # Define variables name and value
    commercial_banking_1 = 3025
    commercial_banking_2 = 2826
    commercial_banking_3 = 3374
    commercial_banking_4 = 3032

    # Do math calculation to get the answer
    answer = commercial_banking_1 + commercial_banking_2 + commercial_banking_3 + commercial_banking_4

    return answer

THE GOLDMAN SACHS GROUP, INC.  AND SUBSIDIARIES Management’s Discussion and Analysis The table below presents our average monthly assets under supervision by asset class.

||Average for theYear Ended December|
|$ in billions|2017|2016|2015|
|Alternative investments|$ 162|$ 149|$ 145|
|Equity|292|256|247|
|Fixed income|633|578|530|
|Total long-term AUS|1,087|983|922|
|Liquidity products|330|326|272|
|Total AUS|$1,417|$1,309|$1,194|

During 2017, Investment Management operated in an environment characterized by generally higher asset prices, resulting in appreciation in both equity and fixed income assets.

In addition, our longterm assets under supervision increased from net inflows primarily in fixed income and alternative investment assets.

These increases were partially offset by net outflows in liquidity products.

As a result, the mix of average assets under supervision during 2017 shifted slightly from liquidity products to long-term assets under supervision as compared to the mix at the end of 2016.

In the future, if asset prices decline, or investors favor assets that typically generate lower fees or investors withdraw their assets, net revenues in Investment Management would likely be negatively impacted.

Following a challenging first quarter of 2016, market conditions improved during the remainder of 2016 with higher asset prices resulting in full year appreciation in both equity and fixed income assets.

Also, our assets under supervision increased during 2016 from net inflows, primarily in fixed income assets, and liquidity products.

The mix of our average assets under supervision shifted slightly compared with 2015 from long-term assets under supervision to liquidity products.

Management fees were impacted by many factors, including inflows to advisory services and outflows from actively-managed mutual funds.2017 versus 2016.

Net revenues in Investment Management were $6.22 billion for 2017, 7% higher than 2016, due to higher management and other fees, reflecting higher average assets under supervision, and higher transaction revenues.

During the year, total assets under supervision increased $115 billion to $1.49 trillion.

Longterm assets under supervision increased $128 billion, including net market appreciation of $86 billion, primarily in equity and fixed income assets, and net inflows of $42 billion (which includes $20 billion of inflows in connection with the Verus acquisition and $5 billion of equity asset outflows in connection with the Australian divestiture), primarily in fixed income and alternative investment assets.

Liquidity products decreased $13 billion (which includes $3 billion of inflows in connection with the Verus acquisition).

Operating expenses were $4.80 billion for 2017, 3% higher than 2016, primarily due to increased compensation and benefits expenses, reflecting higher net revenues.

Pre-tax earnings were $1.42 billion in 2017, 25% higher than 2016.2016 versus 2015.

Net revenues in Investment Management were $5.79 billion for 2016, 7% lower than 2015.

This decrease primarily reflected significantly lower incentive fees compared with a strong 2015.

In addition, management and other fees were slightly lower, reflecting shifts in the mix of client assets and strategies, partially offset by the impact of higher average assets under supervision.

During 2016, total assets under supervision increased $127 billion to $1.38 trillion.

Long-term assets under supervision increased $75 billion, including net inflows of $42 billion, primarily in fixed income assets, and net market appreciation of $33 billion, primarily in equity and fixed income assets.

In addition, liquidity products increased $52 billion.

Operating expenses were $4.65 billion for 2016, 4% lower than 2015, due to decreased compensation and benefits expenses, reflecting lower net revenues.

Pre-tax earnings were $1.13 billion in 2016, 17% lower than 2015.

Geographic Data See Note 25 to the consolidated financial statements for a summary of our total net revenues, pre-tax earnings and net earnings by geographic region.

ferred capital debt securities, as issuances of FDIC-guaranteed debt and non-FDIC guaranteed debt in both the U. S.  and European markets were more than offset by redemptions.

Cash proceeds resulted from an increase in securities loaned or sold under repurchase agreements, partly attributable to favorable pricing and to financing the increased size of the Firm’s AFS securities portfolio; and the issuance of $5.8 billion of common stock.

There were no repurchases in the open market of common stock or the warrants during 2009.

In 2008, net cash provided by financing activities was $247.8 billion due to: growth in wholesale deposits, in particular, interest- and noninterest-bearing deposits in TSS (driven by both new and existing clients, and due to the deposit inflows related to the heightened volatility and credit concerns affecting the global markets that began in the third quarter of 2008), as well as increases in AM and CB (due to organic growth); proceeds of $25.0 billion from the issuance of preferred stock and the Warrant to the U. S.  Treasury under the Capital Purchase Program; additional issuances of common stock and preferred stock used for general corporate purposes; an increase in other borrowings due to nonrecourse secured advances under the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston AML Facility to fund the purchase of asset-backed commercial paper from money market mutual funds; increases in federal funds purchased and securities loaned or sold under repurchase agreements in connection with higher client demand for liquidity and to finance growth in the Firm’s AFS securities portfolio; and a net increase in long-term debt due to a combination of non-FDIC guaranteed debt and trust preferred capital debt securities issued prior to December 4, 2008, and the issuance of $20.8 billion of FDIC-guaranteed long-term debt issued during the fourth quarter of 2008.

The fourth-quarter FDIC-guaranteed debt issuance was offset partially by maturities of non-FDIC guaranteed long-term debt during the same period.

The increase in long-term debt (including trust preferred capital debt securities) was used primarily to fund certain illiquid assets held by the parent holding company and to build liquidity.

Cash was also used to pay dividends on common and preferred stock.

The Firm did not repurchase any shares of its common stock during 2008.

In 2007, net cash provided by financing activities was $184.1 billion due to a net increase in wholesale deposits from growth in business volumes, in particular, interest-bearing deposits at TSS, AM and CB; net issuances of long-term debt (including trust preferred capital debt securities) primarily to fund certain illiquid assets held by the parent holding company and build liquidity, and by IB from client-driven structured notes transactions; and growth in commercial paper issuances and other borrowed funds due to growth in the volume of liability balances in sweep accounts in TSS and CB, and to fund trading positions and to further build liquidity.

Cash was used to repurchase common stock and pay dividends on common stock.

Credit ratings The cost and availability of financing are influenced by credit ratings.

Reductions in these ratings could have an adverse effect on the Firm’s access to liquidity sources, increase the cost of funds, trigger additional collateral or funding requirements and decrease the number of investors and counterparties willing to lend to the Firm.

Additionally, the Firm’s funding requirements for VIEs and other third-party commitments may be adversely affected.

For additional information on the impact of a credit ratings downgrade on the funding requirements for VIEs, and on derivatives and collateral agreements, see Special-purpose entities on pages 86–87 and Ratings profile of derivative receivables marked to market (“MTM”), and Note 5 on page 111 and pages 175–183, respectively, of this Annual Report.

Critical factors in maintaining high credit ratings include a stable and diverse earnings stream, strong capital ratios, strong credit quality and risk management controls, diverse funding sources, and disciplined liquidity monitoring procedures.

The credit ratings of the parent holding company and each of the Firm’s significant banking subsidiaries as of January 15, 2010, were as follows.

||Short-term debt|Senior long-term debt|
||Moody’s|S&P|Fitch|Moody’s|S&P|Fitch|
|JPMorgan Chase & Co.|P-1|A-1|F1+|Aa3|A+|AA-|
|JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.|P-1|A-1+|F1+|Aa1|AA-|AA-|
|Chase Bank USA, N.A.|P-1|A-1+|F1+|Aa1|AA-|AA-|

Ratings actions affecting the Firm On March 4, 2009, Moody’s revised the outlook on the Firm to negative from stable.

This action was the result of Moody’s view that the Firm’s ability to generate capital would be adversely affected by higher credit costs due to the global recession.

The rating action by Moody’s in the first quarter of 2009 did not have a material impact on the cost or availability of the Firm’s funding.

At December 31, 2009, Moody’s outlook remained negative.

Ratings from S&P and Fitch on JPMorgan Chase and its principal bank subsidiaries remained unchanged at December 31, 2009, from December 31, 2008.

At December 31, 2009, S&P’s outlook remained negative, while Fitch’s outlook remained stable.

Following the Firm’s earnings release on January 15, 2010, S&P and Moody’s announced that their ratings on the Firm remained unchanged.

If the Firm’s senior long-term debt ratings were downgraded by one additional notch, the Firm believes the incremental cost of funds or loss of funding would be manageable, within the context of current market conditions and the Firm’s liquidity resources.

JPMorgan Chase’s unsecured debt does not contain requirements that would call for an acceleration of payments, maturities or changes in the structure of the existing debt, provide any limitations on future borrowings or require additional collateral, based on unfavorable

Management’s discussion and analysis JPMorgan Chase & Co. /2009 Annual Report 122 Residential real estate loan modification activities: During 2009, the Firm reviewed its residential real estate portfolio to identify homeowners most in need of assistance, opened new regional counseling centers, hired additional loan counselors, introduced new financing alternatives, proactively reached out to borrowers to offer pre-qualified modifications, and commenced a new process to independently review each loan before moving it into the foreclosure process.

In addition, during the first quarter of 2009, the U. S.  Treasury introduced the MHA programs, which are designed to assist eligible homeowners in a number of ways, one of which is by modifying the terms of their mortgages.

The Firm is participating in the MHA programs while continuing to expand its other loss-mitigation efforts for financially distressed borrowers who do not qualify for the MHA programs.

The MHA programs and the Firm’s other loss-mitigation programs for financially troubled borrowers generally represent various concessions such as term extensions, rate reductions and deferral of principal payments that would have otherwise been required under the terms of the original agreement.

When the Firm modifies home equity lines of credit in troubled debt restructurings, future lending commitments related to the modified loans are canceled as part of the terms of the modification.

Under all of these programs, borrowers must make at least three payments under the revised contractual terms during a trial modification period and be successfully re-underwritten with income verification before their loans can be permanently modified.

The Firm’s loss-mitigation programs are intended to minimize economic loss to the Firm, while providing alternatives to foreclosure.

The success of these programs is highly dependent on borrowers’ ongoing ability and willingness to repay in accordance with the modified terms and could be adversely affected by additional deterioration in the economic environment or shifts in borrower behavior.

For both the Firm’s on-balance sheet loans and loans serviced for others, approximately 600,000 mortgage modifications had been offered to borrowers in 2009.

Of these, 89,000 have achieved permanent modification.

Substantially all of the loans contractually modified to date were modified under the Firm’s other loss mitigation programs.

The following table presents information relating to restructured on-balance sheet residential real estate loans for which concessions have been granted to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty as of December 31, 2009.

Modifications of purchased credit-impaired loans continue to be accounted for and reported as purchased credit-impaired loans, and the impact of the modification is incorporated into the Firm’s quarterly assessment of whether a probable and/or significant change in estimated future principal cash flows has occurred.

Modifications of loans other than purchased credit-impaired are generally accounted for and reported as troubled debt restructurings.

Restructured residential real estate loans(a)

| December 31, 2009|On-balance sheet loans|Nonperforming on-balance sheet loans(d)|
|(in millions)|
| Restructured residential real estate loans – excludingpurchased credit-impaired loans(b)|||
|Home equity – senior lien|$168|$30|
|Home equity – junior lien|222|43|
|Prime mortgage|634|243|
|Subprime mortgage|1,998|598|
|Option ARMs|8|6|
| Total restructured residential real estate loans – excluding purchased credit-impaired loans|$3,030|$920|
| Restructured purchased credit-impaired loans(c)|||
|Home equity|$453|NA|
|Prime mortgage|1,526|NA|
|Subprime mortgage|1,954|NA|
|Option ARMs|2,972|NA|
| Total restructured purchased credit-impaired loans|$6,905|NA|

(a) Restructured residential real estate loans were immaterial at December 31, 2008.

(b) Amounts represent the carrying value of restructured residential real estate loans.

(c) Amounts represent the unpaid principal balance of restructured purchased credit-impaired loans.

(d) Nonperforming loans modified in a troubled debt restructuring may be returned to accrual status when repayment is reasonably assured and the borrower has made a minimum of six payments under the new terms.

Real estate owned (“REO”): As part of the residential real estate foreclosure process, loans are written down to the fair value of the underlying real estate asset, less costs to sell.

In those instances where the Firm gains title, ownership and possession of individual properties at the completion of the foreclosure process, these REO assets are managed for prompt sale and disposition at the best possible economic value.

Any further gains or losses on REO assets are recorded as part of other income.

Operating expense, such as real estate taxes and maintenance, are charged to other expense.

REO assets declined from year-end 2008 as a result of the foreclosure moratorium in early 2009 and the subsequent increase in loss mitigation activities.

It is anticipated that REO assets will increase over the next several quarters, as loans moving through the foreclosure process are expected to increase.

The calculation of the allowance for loan losses to total retained loans, excluding both home lending purchased credit-impaired loans and loans held by the Washington Mutual Master Trust, is presented below.

|December 31, (in millions, except ratios)|2009|2008|
|Allowance for loan losses|$31,602|$23,164|
|Less: Allowance for purchased credit-impaired loans|1,581|—|
|Adjusted allowance for loan losses|$30,021|$23,164|
|Total loans retained|$627,218|$728,915|
|Less: Firmwide purchased credit-impaired loans|81,380|89,088|
|Loans held by the Washington Mutual Master Trust|1,002|—|
|Adjusted loans|$544,836|$639,827|
| Allowance for loan losses to ending loans excluding purchased credit-impaired loans and loans held by the Washington Mutual Master Trust|5.51%|3.62%|

The following table presents the allowance for credit losses by business segment at December 31, 2009 and 2008.

Provision for credit losses The managed provision for credit losses was $38.5 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, up by $13.9 billion from the prior year.

The prior-year included a $1.5 billion charge to conform Washington Mutual’s allowance for loan losses, which affected both the consumer and wholesale portfolios.

For the purpose of the following analysis, this charge is excluded.

The consumer-managed provision for credit losses was $34.5 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, compared with $20.4 billion in the prior year, reflecting an increase in the allowance for credit losses in the home lending and credit card loan portfolios.

Included in the 2009 addition to the allowance for loan losses was a $1.6 billion increase related to estimated deterioration in the Washington Mutual purchased credit-impaired portfolio.

The wholesale provision for credit losses was $4.0 billion for the year ended December 31, 2009, compared with $2.7 billion in the prior year, reflecting continued weakness in the credit environment.

(a) Includes accounting conformity provisions related to the Washington Mutual transaction in 2008.

(b) Includes provision expense related to loans acquired in the Bear Stearns merger in the second quarter of 2008.

(c) Includes amounts related to held-for-investment prime mortgages transferred from AM to the Corporate/Private Equity segment.

(d) In November 2008, the Firm transferred $5.8 billion of higher quality credit card loans from the legacy Chase portfolio to a securitization trust previously established by Washington Mutual (‘‘the Trust’’).

As a result of converting higher credit quality Chase-originated on-book receivables to the Trust’s seller’s interest which has a higher overall loss rate reflective of the total assets within the Trust, approximately $400 million of incremental provision expense was recorded during the fourth quarter.

This incremental provision expense was recorded in the Corporate segment as the action related to the acquisition of Washington Mutual’s banking operations.

For further discussion of credit card securitizations, see Note 15 on pages 206---213 of this Annual Report.


Question: What's the sum of Interest on debt of After 5years, Fair value of plan assets of 2016, and Total assets of December 31, 2012 Total ?

def solution():
    # Define variables name and value
    interest_on_debt_after_5_years = 3427.0
    fair_value_of_plan_assets_2016 = 56530.0
    total_assets_december_31_2012 = 4721.0

    # Do math calculation to get the answer
    answer = interest_on_debt_after_5_years + fair_value_of_plan_assets_2016 + total_assets_december_31_2012

    return answer

We have derivative instruments with credit-risk-related contingent features.

For foreign exchange contracts with original maturities of at least five years, our derivative counterparties could require settlement if we default on our five-year credit facility.

For commodity contracts, our counterparties could require collateral posted in an amount determined by our credit ratings.

The fair value of foreign exchange and commodity contracts that have credit-risk-related contingent features that are in a net liability position at December 31, 2013 was $7.

At December 31, 2013, there was no collateral posted related to our derivatives.

Note 18 – Significant Group Concentrations of Risk Credit Risk Financial instruments involving potential credit risk are predominantly with commercial aircraft customers and the U. S.  government.

Of the $10,670 in gross accounts receivable and gross customer financing included in the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position as of December 31, 2013, $4,870 related predominantly to commercial aircraft customers ($924 of accounts receivable and $3,946 of customer financing) and $3,604 related to the U. S.  government.

Of the $4,020 in gross customer financing, $2,720 related to customers we believe have less than investment-grade credit including American Airlines, United/Continental Airlines, and Hawaiian Airlines who were associated with 11%, 9% and 8%, respectively, of our financing portfolio.

Financing for aircraft is collateralized by security in the related asset and in some instances security in other assets as well.

Other Risk As of December 31, 2013, approximately 38% of our total workforce was represented by collective bargaining agreements and approximately 1% of our total workforce was represented by agreements expiring in 2014.

Note 19 – Fair Value Measurements The following table presents our assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis and are categorized using the fair value hierarchy.

The fair value hierarchy has three levels based on the reliability of the inputs used to determine fair value.

Level 1 refers to fair values determined based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets.

Level 2 refers to fair values estimated using significant other observable inputs and Level 3 includes fair values estimated using significant unobservable inputs.

Money market funds and available-for-sale equity securities are valued using a market approach based on the quoted market prices of identical instruments.

Available-for-sale debt investments are primarily valued using an income approach based on benchmark yields, reported trades and broker/dealer quotes.

on consolidated debt as a percentage of total capital (as defined).

When considering debt covenants, we continue to have substantial borrowing capacity.

Contractual Obligations The following table summarizes our known obligations to make future payments pursuant to certain contracts as of December 31, 2014, and the estimated timing thereof.

|(Dollars in millions)|Total|Lessthan 1year|1-3years|3-5years|After 5years|
|Long-term debt (including current portion)|$8,950|$870|$1,356|$1,871|$4,853|
|Interest on debt-1|5,387|431|800|729|3,427|
|Pension and other postretirement cash requirements|10,965|477|1,080|1,972|7,436|
|Capital lease obligations|169|67|73|17|12|
|Operating lease obligations|1,503|226|386|271|620|
|Purchase obligations not recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position|131,549|47,249|37,187|20,505|26,608|
|Purchase obligations recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position|16,872|15,959|891|5|17|
|Total contractual obligations|$175,395|$65,279|$41,773|$25,370|$42,973|

(1) Includes interest on variable rate debt calculated based on interest rates at December 31, 2014.

Variable rate debt was 3% of our total debt at December 31, 2014.

Pension and Other Postretirement Benefits Pension cash requirements are based on an estimate of our minimum funding requirements, pursuant to ERISA regulations, although we may make additional discretionary contributions.

Estimates of other postretirement benefits are based on both our estimated future benefit payments and the estimated contributions to plans that are funded through trusts.

Purchase Obligations Purchase obligations represent contractual agreements to purchase goods or services that are legally binding; specify a fixed, minimum or range of quantities; specify a fixed, minimum, variable, or indexed price provision; and specify approximate timing of the transaction.

Purchase obligations include amounts recorded as well as amounts that are not recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position.

Approximately 4% of the purchase obligations disclosed above are reimbursable to us pursuant to cost-type government contracts.

Purchase Obligations Not Recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position Production related purchase obligations not recorded on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position include agreements for inventory procurement, tooling costs, electricity and natural gas contracts, property, plant and equipment, and other miscellaneous production related obligations.

The most significant obligation relates to inventory procurement contracts.

We have entered into certain significant inventory procurement contracts that specify determinable prices and quantities, and long-term delivery timeframes.

In addition, we purchase raw materials on behalf of our suppliers.

These agreements require suppliers and vendors to be prepared to build and deliver items in sufficient time to meet our production schedules.

The need for such arrangements with suppliers and vendors arises from the extended production planning horizon for many of our products.

A significant portion of these inventory commitments is supported by firm contracts and/or has historically resulted in settlement through reimbursement from customers for penalty payments to the supplier should the customer not take delivery.

These amounts are also included in our forecasts of costs for program and contract accounting.

Some inventory procurement contracts may include escalation adjustments.

In these limited cases, we have included our best estimate of the effect of the escalation adjustment in the amounts disclosed in the table above.

The estimated amount that will be amortized from Accumulated other comprehensive loss into net periodic benefit cost during the year ending December 31, 2018 is as follows:

||Pension|Other Postretirement Benefits|
|Recognized net actuarial loss/(gain)|$1,128|-$10|
|Amortization of prior service (credits)|-56|-126|
|Total|$1,072|-$136|

The accumulated benefit obligation (ABO) for all pension plans was $77,414 and $74,240 at December 31, 2017 and 2016.

Key information for our plans with ABO in excess of plan assets as of December 31 was as follows:

||2017|2016|
|Projected benefit obligation|$74,953|$76,586|
|Accumulated benefit obligation|71,975|74,081|
|Fair value of plan assets|$58,353|$56,530|

Assumptions The following assumptions, which are the weighted average for all plans, are used to calculate the benefit obligation at December 31 of each year and the net periodic benefit cost for the subsequent year.

|December 31,|2017|2016|2015|
|Discount rate:||||
|Pension|3.60%|4.00%|4.20%|
|Other postretirement benefits|3.30%|3.70%|3.80%|
|Expected return on plan assets|6.80%|6.80%|7.00%|
|Rate of compensation increase|5.30%|4.40%|4.00%|

The discount rate for each plan is determined based on the plans’ expected future benefit payments using a yield curve developed from high quality bonds that are rated as Aa or better by at least half of the four rating agencies utilized as of the measurement date.

The yield curve is fitted to yields developed from bonds at various maturity points.

Bonds with the ten percent highest and the ten percent lowest yields are omitted.

A portfolio of about 400 bonds is used to construct the yield curve.

Since corporate bond yields are generally not available at maturities beyond 30 years, it is assumed that spot rates will remain level beyond that 30-year point.

The present value of each plan’s benefits is calculated by applying the discount rates to projected benefit cash flows.

All bonds are U. S.  issues, with a minimum outstanding of $50.

The pension fund’s expected return on plan assets assumption is derived from a review of actual historical returns achieved by the pension trust and anticipated future long-term performance of individual asset classes.

While consideration is given to recent trust performance and historical returns, the assumption represents a long-term, prospective return.

The expected return on plan assets component of the net periodic benefit cost for the upcoming plan year is determined based on the expected return on plan assets assumption and the market-related value of plan assets (MRVA).

Since our adoption of the accounting standard for pensions in 1987, we have determined the MRVA based on a five-year moving average of plan assets.

As of December 31, 2017, the MRVA was approximately $2,260 less than the fair market value of assets.

and machine tooling to enhance manufacturing operations, and ongoing replacements of manufacturing and distribution equipment.

Capital spending in all three years also included spending for the replacement and enhancement of the company’s global enterprise resource planning (ERP) management information systems, as well as spending to enhance the company’s corporate headquarters and research and development facilities in Kenosha, Wisconsin.

Snap-on believes that its cash generated from operations, as well as its available cash on hand and funds available from its credit facilities will be sufficient to fund the company’s capital expenditure requirements in 2013.

In 2010, Snap-on acquired the remaining 40% interest in Snap-on Asia Manufacturing (Zhejiang) Co. , Ltd. , the company’s tool manufacturing operation in Xiaoshan, China, for a purchase price of $7.7 million and $0.1 million of transaction costs; Snap-on acquired the initial 60% interest in 2008.

See Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information.

Financing Activities Net cash used by financing activities was $127.0 million in 2012.

Net cash used by financing activities of $293.7 million in 2011 included the August 2011 repayment of $200 million of unsecured 6.25% notes upon maturity with available cash.

In December 2010, Snap-on sold $250 million of unsecured 4.25% long-term notes at a discount; Snap-on is using, and has used, the $247.7 million of proceeds from the sale of these notes, net of $1.6 million of transaction costs, for general corporate purposes, which included working capital, capital expenditures, repayment of all or a portion of the company’s $200 million, 6.25% unsecured notes that matured in August 2011, and the financing of finance and contract receivables, primarily related to SOC.

In January 2010, Snap-on repaid $150 million of unsecured floating rate debt upon maturity with available cash.

Proceeds from stock purchase and option plan exercises totaled $46.8 million in 2012, $25.7 million in 2011 and $23.7 million in 2010.

Snap-on has undertaken stock repurchases from time to time to offset dilution created by shares issued for employee and franchisee stock purchase plans, stock options and other corporate purposes.

In 2012, Snap-on repurchased 1,180,000 shares of its common stock for $78.1 million under its previously announced share repurchase programs.

As of 2012 year end, Snap-on had remaining availability to repurchase up to an additional $180.9 million in common stock pursuant to its Board of Directors’ (the “Board”) authorizations.

The purchase of Snap-on common stock is at the company’s discretion, subject to prevailing financial and market conditions.

Snap-on repurchased 628,000 shares of its common stock for $37.4 million in 2011; Snap-on repurchased 152,000 shares of its common stock for $8.7 million in 2010.

Snap-on believes that its cash generated from operations, available cash on hand, and funds available from its credit facilities, will be sufficient to fund the company’s share repurchases, if any, in 2013.

Snap-on has paid consecutive quarterly cash dividends, without interruption or reduction, since 1939.

Cash dividends paid in 2012, 2011 and 2010 totaled $81.5 million, $76.7 million and $71.3 million, respectively.

On November 1, 2012, the company announced that its Board increased the quarterly cash dividend by 11.8% to $0.38 per share ($1.52 per share per year).

Quarterly dividends declared in 2012 were $0.38 per share in the fourth quarter and $0.34 per share in the first three quarters ($1.40 per share for the year).

Quarterly dividends in 2011 were $0.34 per share in the fourth quarter and $0.32 per share in the first three quarters ($1.30 per share for the year).

Quarterly dividends in 2010 were $0.32 per share in the fourth quarter and $0.30 per share in the first three quarters ($1.22 per share for the year).


Question: What is the average amount of Weighted average partnership Units outstanding of 2007, and 2022 of Industrial SquareFeet 8,028 12,303 13,525 12,567 13,042 ?

def solution():
    # Define variables name and value
    weighted_average_partnership_units_2007 = 9204.0
    industrial_square_feet_2022 = 12350.0

    # Do math calculation to get the answer
    answer = (weighted_average_partnership_units_2007 + industrial_square_feet_2022) / 2

    return answer

Comparison of Year Ended December 31, 2006 to Year Ended December 31, 2005 Rental Revenue from Continuing Operations Overall, rental revenue from continuing operations increased from $602.1 million in 2005 to $743.5 million in 2006.

The following table reconciles rental revenue from continuing operations by reportable segment to total reported rental revenue from continuing operations for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively (in thousands):

Both of our reportable segments that comprise Rental Operations (office and industrial) are within the real estate industry; however, the same economic and industry conditions do not affect each segment in the same manner.

The primary causes of the increase in rental revenue from continuing operations, with specific references to a particular segment when applicable, are summarized below: ?

In 2006, we acquired 50 new properties and placed 27 development projects in service.

These 2006 acquisitions and developments are the primary factor in the overall increase in rental revenue for the year ended 2006 compared to 2005 as they provided incremental revenues of $73.8 million and $9.3 million respectively.

These acquisitions totaled $948.4 million on 8.6 million square feet and were 99% leased at December 31, 2006.  ?

Acquisitions and developments that were placed in service in 2005 provided $15.8 million and $11.2 million, respectively, of incremental revenue in 2006.  ?

Rental revenue includes lease termination fees.

Lease termination fees relate to specific tenants who pay a fee to terminate their lease obligations before the end of the contractual lease term.

Lease termination fees increased from $7.3 million in 2005 to $16.1 million in 2006.  ?

Our in-service occupancy increased from 92.7% at December 31, 2005, to 92.9% at December 31, 2006 and contributed to the remaining increase in rental revenue.

Equity in Earnings of Unconsolidated Companies Equity in earnings represents our ownership share of net income from investments in unconsolidated companies.

These joint ventures generally own and operate rental properties and develop properties.

These earnings increased from $29.5 million in 2005 to $38.0 million in 2006.

During 2006, our joint ventures sold 22 non-strategic buildings, with our share of the net gain recorded through equity in earnings totaling $18.8 million.

During the second quarter of 2005, one of our ventures sold three buildings, with our share of the net gain recorded through equity in earnings totaling $11.1 million.

Rental Expenses and Real Estate Taxes The following table reconciles rental expenses and real estate taxes by reportable segment to our total reported amounts in the statement of operations for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively (in thousands):

Rental expenses and real estate taxes for 2006 have increased from 2005 by $30.2 million and $10.9 million, respectively, as the result of acquisition and development activity in 2005 and 2006 as well as from an increase in occupancy over the past two years.

recognition and account for the continued operations of the property by applying the finance, installment or cost recovery methods, as appropriate, until the full accrual sales criteria are met.

Estimated future costs to be incurred after completion of each sale are included in the determination of the gain on sales.

Gains from sales of depreciated property are included in discontinued operations and the proceeds from the sale of these held-for-rental properties are classified in the investing activities section of the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

Gains or losses from our sale of properties that were developed or repositioned with the intent to sell and not for long-term rental are classified as gain on sale of Service Operation properties in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.

All activities and proceeds received from the development and sale of these buildings are classified in the operating activities section of the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

Net Income Per Common Share Basic net income per common share is computed by dividing net income available for common shareholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period.

Diluted net income per common share is computed by dividing the sum of net income available for common shareholders and the minority interest in earnings allocable to Units not owned by us, by the sum of the weighted average number of common shares outstanding and minority Units outstanding, including any dilutive potential common equivalents for the period.

The following table reconciles the components of basic and diluted net income per common share (in thousands):

||2007|2006|2005|
|Basic net income available for common shareholders|$217,692|$145,095|$309,183|
|Minority interest in earnings of common unitholders|14,399|14,238|29,649|
|Diluted net income available for common shareholders|$232,091|$159,333|$338,832|
|Weighted average number of common shares outstanding|139,255|134,883|141,508|
|Weighted average partnership Units outstanding|9,204|13,186|13,551|
|Dilutive shares for stock-based compensation plans -1|1,155|1,324|818|
|Weighted average number of common shares and potential dilutive common equivalents|149,614|149,393|155,877|

(1) Excludes the effect of outstanding stock options, as well as the Exchangeable Senior Notes (“Exchangeable Notes”) issued in 2006, that have an anti-dilutive effect on earnings per share for the periods presented.

A joint venture partner in one of our unconsolidated companies has the option to convert a portion of its ownership in the joint venture to our common shares.

The effect of this option on earnings per share was anti-dilutive for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005.

Federal Income Taxes We have elected to be taxed as a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) under the Internal Revenue Code.

To qualify as a REIT, we must meet a number of organizational and operational requirements, including a requirement to distribute at least 90% of our adjusted taxable income to our stockholders.

Management intends to continue to adhere to these requirements and to maintain our REIT status.

As a REIT, we are entitled to a tax deduction for some or all of the dividends we pay to shareholders.

Accordingly, we generally will not be subject to federal income taxes as long as we distribute an amount equal to or in excess of our taxable income currently to shareholders.

We are also generally subject to federal income taxes on any taxable income that is not currently distributed to its shareholders.

If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we will be subject to federal income taxes and may not be able to qualify as a REIT for four subsequent taxable years.

schedule, excluding the leases in properties designated as held-for-sale, at December 31, 2016 (in thousands, except percentage data and number of leases):

* Annualized rental revenue represents average annual base rental payments, on a straight-line basis for the term of each lease, from space leased to tenants at the end of the most recent reporting period.

Annualized rental revenue excludes additional amounts paid by tenants as reimbursement for operating expenses.

Information on current market rents can be difficult to obtain, is highly subjective and is often not directly f comparable between properties.

As a result, we believe the increase or decrease in net efffective rent on lease renewals, as previously defined, is the most objective and meaningful relationship between rents on leases expiring in the near-term and current market rents.

Acquisition Activity Our decision process in determining whether or not to acquire a target property or portfolio involves several factors, including expected rent growth, multiple yield metrics, property locations and expected demographic growth in each location, current occupancy of the target properties, tenant profile and remaining terms of the in-place leases in the target properties.

We pursue both brokered and non-brokered acquisitions, and it is dif W ficult to predict which f markets and product types may present acquisition opportunities that align with our strategy.

Because of the numerous factors considered in our acquisition decisions, we do not establish specific target yields for future acquisitions.

Due to increased market prices and lower acquisition yields for the class and quality of assets that meet our investment criteria, we have shifted our near term focus from acquisitions to new development activities.

In addition to the 14 properties acquired from the Quantico Joint VVenture, we also acquired three other properties for a total of 17 properties during the year ended December 31, 2016 and two properties during the year ended December 31, 2015.

The following table summarizes the acquisition price, percent leased at time of acquisition and in-place yields by product type for these acquisitions (in thousands, except percentage data):


Question: What's the average of US SBU in 2014, 2013, and 2012? (in million)

def solution():
    # Define variables name and value
    us_sbu_2014 = 3826
    us_sbu_2013 = 3630
    us_sbu_2012 = 3736
    const_3 = 3

    # Do math calculation to get the answer
    answer = (us_sbu_2014 + us_sbu_2013 + us_sbu_2012) / const_3

    return answer

The contracts were valued as of April 1, 2002, and an asset and a corresponding gain of $127 million, net of income taxes, was recorded as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle in the second quarter of 2002.

The majority of the gain recorded relates to the Warrior Run contract, as the asset value of the Deepwater contract on April 1, 2002, was less than $1 million.

The Warrior Run contract qualifies and was designated as a cash flow hedge as defined by SFAS No.133 and hedge accounting is applied for this contract subsequent to April 1, 2002.

The contract valuations were performed using current forward electricity and gas price quotes and current market data for other contract variables.

The forward curves used to value the contracts include certain assumptions, including projections of future electricity and gas prices in periods where future prices are not quoted.

Fluctuations in market prices and their impact on the assumptions will cause the value of these contracts to change.

Such fluctuations will increase the volatility of the Company’s reported results of operations.11.

COMMITMENTS, CONTINGENCIES AND RISKS OPERATING LEASES—As of December 31, 2002, the Company was obligated under long-term non-cancelable operating leases, primarily for office rental and site leases.

Rental expense for operating leases, excluding amounts related to the sale/leaseback discussed below, was $31 million $32 million and $13 million in the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001and 2000, respectively, including commitments of businesses classified as discontinued amounting to $6 million in 2002, $16 million in 2001 and $6 million in 2000.

The future minimum lease commitments under these leases are as follows (in millions):

SALE/LEASEBACK—In May 1999, a subsidiary of the Company acquired six electric generating stations from New York State Electric and Gas (‘‘NYSEG’’).

Concurrently, the subsidiary sold two of the plants to an unrelated third party for $666 million and simultaneously entered into a leasing arrangement with the unrelated party.

This transaction has been accounted for as a sale/leaseback with operating lease treatment.

Rental expense was $54 million, $58 million and $54 million in 2002, 2001 and 2000, respectively.

Future minimum lease commitments are as follows (in millions): In connection with the lease of the two power plants, the subsidiary is required to maintain a rent reserve account equal to the maximum semi-annual payment with respect to the sum of the basic rent (other then deferrable basic rent) and fixed charges expected to become due in the immediately succeeding three-year period.

At December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, the amount deposited in the rent reserve account approximated

The estimated fair values of the Company’s debt and derivative financial instruments as of December 31, 2002 and 2001 are as follows (in millions):

| | December 31, 2002| December 31, 2001|
| | Carrying Amount| Fair Value| Carrying Amount| Fair Value|
|Assets:|||||
|Foreign currency forwards and swaps, net|$17|$17|$14|$14|
|Energy derivatives, net|201|201|7|7|
| Liabilities:|||||
|Non-recourse debt|17,658|20,447|16,857|17,064|
|Recourse debt|5,804|3,895|5,401|4,730|
|Tecons|978|284|978|626|
|Interest rate swaps|557|557|166|166|
|Interest rate caps and floors, net|115|115|72|72|

Amounts in the table above include the carrying amount and fair value of financial instruments of discontinued operations and assets held for sale, except for preferred stock with mandatory redemption of one of our discontinued operations that has a carrying amount of $22 million.

As of December 31, 2002, discontinued operations and assets held for sale had non-recourse debt with a carrying amount and fair value of $3,415 million and $4,994 million, respectively, foreign currency forwards and swaps, net (assets), with a carrying amount and fair value of $13 million, interest rate swaps (liabilities) with a carrying amount and fair value of $103 million and interest rate caps and floors, net (liabilities), with a carrying amount and fair value of $43 million.

The fair value estimates presented herein are based on pertinent information as of December 31, 2002 and 2001.

The Company is not aware of any factors that would significantly affect the estimated fair value amounts since December 31, 2002.21.

NEW ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS Asset retirement obligations.

In June 2001, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued SFAS No.143, ‘‘Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations.

’’ SFAS No.143, which is effective January 1, 2003, requires entities to record the fair value of a legal liability for an asset retirement obligation in the period in which it is incurred.

When a new liability is recorded beginning in 2003, the entity will capitalize the costs of the liability by increasing the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset.

The liability is accreted to its present value each period, and the capitalized cost is depreciated over the useful life of the related asset.

Upon settlement of the liability, an entity settles the obligation for its recorded amount or incurs a gain or loss upon settlement.

The Company will adopt SFAS No.143 effective January 1, 2003.

The Company has completed a detailed assessment of the specific applicability and implications of SFAS No.143.

The scope of SFAS No.143 includes primarily active ash landfills, water treatment basins and the removal or dismantlement of certain plant and equipment.

As of December 31, 2002, the Company had a recorded liability of approximately $15 million related to asset retirement obligations.

Upon adoption of SFAS No.143, the Company will record an additional liability of approximately $13 million, a net asset of approximately $9 million, and a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle of approximately $2 million, after income taxes.

Proforma net (loss) income and (loss) earnings per share have not been presented for the years ended December 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000 because the proforma application of SFAS No.143 to prior periods would result in proforma net (loss) income and (loss) earnings per share not materially different from the actual amounts reported for those periods in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.

Review of Consolidated Results of Operations

Components of Revenue, Cost of Sales and Operating Margin—Revenue includes revenue earned from the sale of energy from our utilities and the production of energy from our generation plants, which are classified as regulated and non-regulated on the Consolidated Statements of Operations, respectively.

Revenue also includes the gains or losses on derivatives associated with the sale of electricity.

Cost of sales includes costs incurred directly by the businesses in the ordinary course of business.

Examples include electricity and fuel purchases, O&M costs, depreciation and amortization expense, bad debt expense and recoveries, general administrative and support costs (including employee-related costs directly associated with the operations of the business).

Cost of sales also includes the gains or losses on derivatives (including embedded derivatives other than foreign currency embedded derivatives) associated with the purchase of electricity or fuel.

Operating margin is defined as revenue less cost of sales.

In March 2013, the Secretariat of Energy released Resolution 95/2013, which affects the remuneration of generators whose sales prices had been frozen since 2003.

This regulation is applicable to generation companies with certain exceptions.

It defined a compensation system based on compensating for fixed costs, non-fuel variable costs and an additional margin.

Resolution 95/2013 converted the Argentine electric market to an "average cost" compensation scheme.

Thermal units must achieve an availability target, which varies by technology, in order to receive full fixed cost revenues.

The Resolution also established that all fuels, except coal, are to be provided by CAMMESA.

Thermoelectric natural gas plants not affected by the Resolution, such as TermoAndes, are able to purchase gas directly from the producers for Energy Plus sales.

In May 2014, the Argentine government passed Resolution No.529/214 ("Resolution 529") which retroactively updated the prices of Resolution 95/2013 to February 1, 2014, changed target availability and added a remuneration for non-periodic maintenance.

This remuneration is aimed to cover the expenses that the generator incurs when performing major maintenances in its units.

Since 2014, this resolution has been updated annually, the most recent of which was issued in March 2016.

On February 2, 2017, the Ministry of Energy issued Resolution 19/2017 establishing changes to the Energia Base price framework.

Effective in February 2017, the framework will maintain the current tolling agreement structure, as fuels will continue to be sourced by CAMMESA.

A key change will be introduced to the tariff structure which will now have prices set in USD and also eliminates all future non-cash retention of margins.

In December 2015, the finance minister lifted foreign currency controls, allowing the peso to float under the administration of Argentinean Central Bank.

The newly freed currency fell by more than 30%.

Over the course of 2016, the Argentinean Peso devalued by approximately 22%.

At December 31, 2016, all transactions at our businesses in Argentina were translated using the official exchange rate published by the Argentine Central Bank.

See Note 7—Financing Receivables in Item 8.

—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Form 10-K for further information on the long-term receivables.

Further weakening of the Argentine Peso and local economic activity could cause significant volatility in our results of operations, cash flows, the ability to pay dividends to the Parent Company, and the value of our assets.

Key Financial Drivers — Financial results are likely to be driven by many factors including, but not limited to: ?

FX exposure to fluctuations of the Argentine Peso ?

Timely collection of FONINVEMEM installment and outstanding receivables (See Note 7—Financing Receivables in Item 8.

—Financial Statements and Supplementary Data for further discussion) ?

Level of gas prices for contracted generation (Energy Plus) Brazil SBU Our Brazil SBU has generation and distribution businesses.

Tietê and Eletropaulo are publicly listed companies in Brazil.

AES has a 24% economic interest in Tietê and a 17% economic interest in Eletropaulo.

These businesses are consolidated in our financial statements as we maintain control over their operations.

Generation — Operating installed capacity of our Brazil SBU totals 2,658 MW in AES Tietê plants, located in the state of S?o Paulo.

As of December 31, 2016, Tietê represents approximately 10% of the total generation capacity in the state of S?o Paulo and is one of the largest generation companies in Brazil.

We also have another generation plant, AES Uruguaiana, located in southern Brazil with an installed capacity of 640 MW.

The following table lists our Brazil SBU generation facilities:


Question: What is the sum of purchased impaired in the range of 200 and 3000 in 2011? (in million)

def solution():
    # Define variables
    purchased_impaired_value1 = 712
    purchased_impaired_value2 = 2764

    # Add both values
    answer = purchased_impaired_value1 + purchased_impaired_value2

    return answer

RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS See Note 1 Accounting Policies in the Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Report for additional information on the following recent accounting pronouncements that are relevant to our business, including a description of each new pronouncement, the required date of adoption, our planned date of adoption, and the expected impact on our consolidated financial statements.

All of the following pronouncements were issued by the FASB unless otherwise noted.

SFAS 160, “Accounting and Reporting of Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements, an Amendment of ARB No.51” ?

In November 2007, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin No.109, ?

In June 2007, the AICPA issued Statement of Position 07-1, “Clarification of the Scope of the Audit and Accounting Guide “Investment Companies” and Accounting by Parent Companies and Equity Method Investors for Investments in Investment Companies.

” The FASB issued a final FSP in February 2008 which indefinitely delays the effective date of AICPA SOP 07-1.  ?

(“FSP”) FIN 46(R) 7, “Application of FASB Interpretation No.46(R) to Investment Companies” ?

FSP FIN 48-1, “Definition of Settlement in FASB Interpretation (“FIN”) No.48” ?

SFAS 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities – Including an amendment of FASB Statement No.115” The following were issued during 2006: ?

SFAS 158, “Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans – an amendment of FASB Statements No.87, 88, 106 and 132(R)”(“SFAS 158”) ?

FIN 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes – an interpretation of FASB Statement No.109” ?

FSP FAS 13-2, “Accounting for a Change or Projected Change in the Timing of Cash Flows Relating to Income Taxes Generated by a Leveraged Lease Transaction” ?

SFAS 156, “Accounting for Servicing of Financial Assets – an amendment of FASB Statement No.140” ?

SFAS 155, “Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments – an amendment of FASB Statements No.133 and 140” ?

The Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) of the FASB issued EITF Issue 06-4, “Accounting for Deferred Compensation and Postretirement Benefit Aspects of Endorsement Split-Dollar Life Insurance Arrangements” STATUS OF DEFINED BENEFIT PENSION PLAN We have a noncontributory, qualified defined benefit pension plan (“plan” or “pension plan”) covering eligible employees.

Benefits are derived from a cash balance formula based on compensation levels, age and length of service.

Pension contributions are based on an actuarially determined amount necessary to fund total benefits payable to plan participants.

Consistent with our investment strategy, plan assets are currently approximately 60% invested in equity investments with most of the remainder invested in fixed income instruments.

Plan fiduciaries determine and review the plan’s investment policy.

We calculate the expense associated with the pension plan in accordance with SFAS 87, “Employers’ Accounting for Pensions,” and we use assumptions and methods that are compatible with the requirements of SFAS 87, including a policy of reflecting trust assets at their fair market value.

On an annual basis, we review the actuarial assumptions related to the pension plan, including the discount rate, the rate of compensation increase and the expected return on plan assets.

Neither the discount rate nor the compensation increase assumptions significantly affects pension expense.

The expected long-term return on assets assumption does significantly affect pension expense.

The expected long-term return on plan assets for determining net periodic pension cost for 2007 was 8.25%, unchanged from 2006.

Under current accounting rules, the difference between expected long-term returns and actual returns is accumulated and amortized to pension expense over future periods.

Each one percentage point difference in actual return compared with our expected return causes expense in subsequent years to change by up to $4 million as the impact is amortized into results of operations.

The table below reflects the estimated effects on pension expense of certain changes in assumptions, using 2008 estimated expense as a baseline.

|Change in Assumption|EstimatedIncrease to 2008PensionExpense(In millions)|
|.5% decrease in discount rate|$1|
|.5% decrease in expected long-term return on assets|$10|
|.5% increase in compensation rate|$2|

We currently estimate a pretax pension benefit of $26 million in 2008 compared with a pretax benefit of $30 million in

The following tables display the delinquency status of our loans and our nonperforming assets at December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010.

(a) Past due loan amounts exclude purchased impaired loans as they are considered current loans due to the accretion of interest income.

(b) Past due loan amounts at December 31, 2011, include government insured or guaranteed residential real estate mortgages, totaling $.1 billion for 30 to 59 days past due, $.1 billion for 60 to 89 days past due and $2.1 billion for 90 days or more past due.

Past due loan amounts at December 31, 2010, include government insured or guaranteed residential real estate mortgages, totaling $.1 billion for 30 to 59 days past due, $.1 billion for 60 to 89 days past due and $2.0 billion for 90 days or more past due.

(c) Past due loan amounts at December 31, 2011, include government insured or guaranteed other consumer loans, totaling $.2 billion for 30 to 59 days past due, $.1 billion for 60 to 89 days past due and $.3 billion for 90 days or more past due.

Past due loan amounts at December 31, 2010, include government insured or guaranteed other consumer loans, totaling $.2 billion for 30 to 59 days past due, $.1 billion for 60 to 89 days past due and $.2 billion for 90 days or more past due.

RAYMOND JAMES FINANCIAL, INC.  AND SUBSIDIARIES Management's Discussion and Analysis 57 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.

The following table provides certain of those disclosures for the periods indicated below.

The disclosures for years ended September 30, 2016 and 2015 have been revised from those previously reported to conform to our current presentation which includes the impact of the deconsolidation of certain VIEs (see Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Form 10-K for additional information regarding the deconsolidation).

||Year ended September 30,|
||2017|2016|2015|
|RJF return on average assets|1.9%|1.9%|2.0%|
|RJF return on average equity|12.2%|11.3%|11.5%|
|Average equity to average assets|15.9%|16.6%|17.7%|
|Dividend payout ratio|20.3%|21.9%|21.0%|

RJF return on average assets is computed as net income attributable to RJF for the year indicated, divided by average assets for each respective fiscal year.

Average assets is computed by adding the total assets as of each quarter-end date during the indicated fiscal year, plus the beginning of the year total, divided by five.

RJF return on average equity is 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.

Average equity to average assets is computed as average equity divided by average assets as calculated in the above explanations.

Dividend payout ratio is 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 and Risk Management sections of this MD&A 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 management framework.

This framework includes senior management’s review of short- and long-term cash flow forecasts, review of monthly capital expenditures, monitoring of the availability of alternative sources of financing, and 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 and maintains our relationships with various lenders.

The objective of this framework is 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 provided by operating activities during the year ended September 30, 2017 was $1.31 billion.

In addition to operating cash flows related to net income, other increases in cash from operations included: ?

A $1.43 billion decrease in assets segregated pursuant to regulations and other segregated assets, primarily resulting from the decrease in client cash balances in part due to a significant number of client accounts from the September 2016 Alex.

Brown acquisition electing into our RJBDP program during the current fiscal year.  ?

$189 million of proceeds from sales of securitizations and loans held for sale, net of purchases and originations of loans and securitizations.  ?

Accrued compensation, commissions and benefits increased $160 million as a result of the increased financial results we achieved in fiscal year 2017.


Question: What is the ratio of Attritional for Current Year to the total in 2013?

def solution():
    # Define variables name and value
    attritional_current_year = 781.8
    total_2013 = 833.6

    # Do math calculation to get the answer
    answer = (attritional_current_year / total_2013) * 100

    return answer

allows us to repurchase shares at times when we may otherwise be prevented from doing so under insider trading laws or because of self-imposed trading blackout periods.

Subject to applicable regulations, we may elect to amend or cancel this repurchase program or the share repurchase parameters at our discretion.

As of December 31, 2018, we have repurchased an aggregate of 4,510,000 shares of common stock under this program.

Credit Facilities and Short-Term Debt We have an unsecured revolving credit facility of $2.25 billion that expires in June 2023.

In March 2018, AWCC and its lenders amended and restated the credit agreement with respect to AWCC’s revolving credit facility to increase the maximum commitments under the facility from $1.75 billion to $2.25 billion, and to extend the expiration date of the facility from June 2020 to March 2023.

All other terms, conditions and covenants with respect to the existing facility remained unchanged.

Subject to satisfying certain conditions, the credit agreement also permits AWCC to increase the maximum commitment under the facility by up to an aggregate of $500 million, and to request extensions of its expiration date for up to two, one-year periods.

Interest rates on advances under the facility are based on a credit spread to the LIBOR rate or base rate in accordance with Moody Investors Service’s and Standard & Poor’s Financial Services’ then applicable credit rating on AWCC’s senior unsecured, non-credit enhanced debt.

The facility is used principally to support AWCC’s commercial paper program and to provide up to $150 million in letters of credit.

Indebtedness under the facility is considered “debt” for purposes of a support agreement between the Company and AWCC, which serves as a functional equivalent of a guarantee by the Company of AWCC’s payment obligations under the credit facility.

AWCC also has an outstanding commercial paper program that is backed by the revolving credit facility, the maximum aggregate outstanding amount of which was increased in March 2018, from $1.60 billion to $2.10 billion.

The following table provides the aggregate credit facility commitments, letter of credit sub-limit under the revolving credit facility and commercial paper limit, as well as the available capacity for each as of December 31, 2018 and 2017:

||2018|2017|2016|
|Total common shareholders' equity|40.4%|41.0%|42.1%|
|Long-term debt and redeemable preferred stock at redemption value|52.4%|49.6%|46.4%|
|Short-term debt and current portion of long-term debt|7.2%|9.4%|11.5%|
|Total|100%|100%|100%|

The weighted average interest rate on AWCC short-term borrowings for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 was approximately 2.28% and 1.24%, respectively.

Capital Structure The following table provides the percentage of our capitalization represented by the components of our capital structure as of December 31:

The effective income tax rate from continuing operations for the years ended December 31 varies from the U. S.  statutory federal income tax rate as follows:

||Percentage of Pretax Earnings|
||2017|2016|2015|
|Statutory federal income tax rate|35.0%|35.0%|35.0%|
|Increase (decrease) in tax rate resulting from:||||
|State income taxes (net of federal income tax benefit)|0.8%|0.6%|0.7%|
|Foreign income taxed at lower rate than U.S. statutory rate|-11.6%|-10.2%|-17.1%|
|Resolution and expiration of statutes of limitation of uncertain tax positions|-6.5%|-3.1%|-0.7%|
|Permanent foreign exchange losses|-0.6%|-8.2%|-4.6%|
|Research credits, uncertain tax positions and other|-1.0%|3.4%|1.1%|
|Revaluation of U.S. deferred income taxes|-41.5%|—%|—%|
|TCJA - Transition Tax|41.4%|—%|—%|
|Effective income tax rate|16.0%|17.5%|14.4%|

The Company’s effective tax rate for each of 2017, 2016 and 2015 differs from the U. S.  federal statutory rate of 35.0% due principally to the Company’s earnings outside the United States that are indefinitely reinvested and taxed at rates lower than the U. S.  federal statutory rate.

The effective tax rate of 16.0% in 2017 includes 500 basis points of net tax benefits related to the revaluation of net U. S.  deferred tax liabilities from 35.0% to 21.0% due to the TCJA and release of reserves upon statute of limitation expiration, partially offset by income tax expense related to the Transition Tax on foreign earnings due to the TCJA and changes in estimates associated with prior period uncertain tax positions.  ?

The effective tax rate of 17.5% in 2016 includes 350 basis points of net tax benefits from permanent foreign exchange losses and the release of reserves upon the expiration of statutes of limitation and audit settlements, partially offset by income tax expense related to repatriation of earnings and legal entity realignments associated with the Separation and changes in estimates associated with prior period uncertain tax positions.  ?

The effective tax rate of 14.4% in 2015 includes 290 basis points of net tax benefits from permanent foreign exchange losses, releases of valuation allowances related to foreign operating losses and the release of reserves upon the expiration of statutes of limitation, partially offset by changes in estimates associated with prior period uncertain tax positions.

The Company made income tax payments related to both continuing and discontinued operations of $689 million, $767 million and $584 million in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

Current income taxes payable related to both continuing and discontinued operations has been reduced by $85 million, $99 million, and $147 million in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, for tax deductions attributable to stock-based compensation, of which, the excess tax benefit over the amount recorded for financial reporting purposes for both continuing and discontinued operations was $55 million, $50 million and $88 million, respectively.

The excess tax benefits realized have been recorded as increases to additional paid-in capital for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 and are reflected as a financing cash inflow in the accompanying Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

As a result of the adoption of ASU 2016-09, Compensation—Stock Compensation, the excess tax benefit for the year ended December 31, 2017 has been recorded as a reduction to the current income tax provision and is reflected as an operating cash inflow in the accompanying Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows.

Included in deferred income taxes related to continuing operations as of December 31, 2017 are tax benefits for U. S.  and nonU.

S.  net operating loss carryforwards totaling $502 million ($283 million of which the Company does not expect to realize and have corresponding valuation allowances).

Certain of the losses can be carried forward indefinitely and others can be carried forward to various dates from 2018 through 2037.

In addition, the Company had general business and foreign tax credit carryforwards related to continuing operations of $171 million ($30 million of which the Company does not expect to realize and have corresponding valuation allowances) as of December 31, 2017, which can be carried forward to various dates from 2018 to 2027.

In addition, as of December 31, 2017, the Company had $12 million of valuation allowances related to other deferred tax asset balances that are not more likely than not of being realized.

As of December 31, 2017, gross unrecognized tax benefits related to continuing operations totaled $737 million ($736 million, net of the impact of $104 million of indirect tax benefits offset by $103 million associated with potential interest and penalties).

The following table presents the incurred losses and LAE for the U. S.  Reinsurance segment for the periods indicated.

Incurred losses decreased by 13.6% to $825.1 million in 2015 compared to $954.5 million in 2014, primarily due to an increase in favorable development of $147.6 million on prior year attritional losses in 2015 compared to 2014 related to treaty property, treaty casualty, marine lines of business and less year over year development on A&E reserves.

This favorable development was partially offset by the increase in current year attritional losses of $7.3 million resulting primarily from $14.2 million related to the explosion at the Chinese port of Tianjin.

Current year catastrophe losses were $16.7 million in 2015 mainly due to the US storms ($16.2 million).

The $12.5 million of current year catastrophe losses in 2014 related to the Japan snowstorm ($7.8 million) and Hurricane Odile ($4.7 million).

Incurred losses increased by 17.2% to $954.5 million in 2014 compared to $814.7 million in 2013, primarily due to the increase in current year attritional losses of $151.5 million resulting primarily from the impact of the increase in premiums earned and less favorable development of $61.2 million on prior years’ attritional losses in 2014 compared to 2013, mainly related to an increase in A&E reserves.

This increase was partially offset by a decrease in current year catastrophe losses (outlined above) and favorable development of $33.5 million on prior year catastrophe losses in 2014 compared to 2013, mainly related to Superstorm Sandy.

The $51.8 million of current year catastrophe losses in 2013 were mainly due to U. S.  Storms ($44.8 million), the European floods ($5.0 million) and the Canadian Floods ($2.0 million).

Commission and brokerage expenses increased by 5.8% to $493.3 million in 2015 compared to $466.3 million in 2014.

The variance was primarily due to the impact of changes in the mix of business.

Segment other underwriting expenses increased to $50.1 million in 2015 from $45.6 million in 2014.

The increase was primarily due to the impact of changes in the mix of business and higher employee benefit costs.


Question: In the year with largest amount of Net income, what's the sum ofNet income and Depreciation and amortization? (in thousands)

def solution():
    # Define variables name and value
    net_income = 114612
    depreciation_and_amortization = 91503

    # Do math calculation to get the answer
    answer = net_income + depreciation_and_amortization

    return answer

Insurance recoveries received in 2005 were insignificant.

Excluding these items, funds from operations in 2004 and 2003 would have been $156.0 million and $140.5 million, respectively.5) The SEC has stated that EBITDA is a non-GAAP measure as calculated in the table below.

Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP measure that means net income or loss plus interest expense, income taxes, depreciation and amortization, impairment provisions, and nonrecurring expenses.

Adjusted EBITDA is presented because we believe that it provides useful information to investors regarding our ability to service debt and because it approximates a key covenant in material notes.

Adjusted EBITDA should not be considered an alternative measure of operating results or cash flow from operations as determined in accordance with GAAP.

Adjusted EBITDA as presented may not be comparable to other similarly titled measures used by other REITs.

The reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to net income for the periods presented is as follows:

Preferred share dividends consist of dividends paid on our outstanding Series A preferred shares and Series B preferred shares.

Our Series A preferred shares were redeemed in full in June 2003.

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto appearing in “Item 8.

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this report.

Overview We are an equity real estate investment trust specializing in the ownership, management, development and redevelopment of retail and mixed-use properties.

As of December 31, 2005, we owned or had a majority interest in 103 community and neighborhood shopping centers and mixed-use properties comprising approximately 17.6 million square feet.

Our properties are located primarily in densely populated and affluent communities in strategic metropolitan markets in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions of the United States, as well as in California, and one apartment complex in Maryland.

In total, the 103 commercial properties were 96.3% leased at December 31, 2005.

A joint venture in which we own a 30% interest owned four neighborhood shopping centers totaling approximately 0.5 million square feet as of December 31, 2005.

In total, the joint venture properties in which we own an interest were 97.4% leased at December 31, 2005.

We have paid quarterly dividends to our shareholders continuously since our founding in 1962 and have increased our dividends per common share for 38 consecutive years.

(4) Includes $3.1 million and $8.0 million of insurance recoveries in 2004 and 2003, respectively, attributable to rental income lost at Santana Row as a result of the August 2002 fire.

Excluding these items, funds from operations available for common shareholders in 2004 and 2003 would have been $145.6 million and $123.3 million, respectively.

(5) The SEC has stated that EBITDA is a non-GAAP measure as calculated in the table below.

Adjusted EBITDA is a non-GAAP measure that means net income or loss plus net interest expense, income taxes, depreciation and amortization, gain or loss on sale of real estate and impairments of real estate if any.

(6) Fixed charges consist of interest on borrowed funds (including capitalized interest), amortization of debt discount and expense and the portion of rent expense representing an interest factor.

Preferred share dividends consist of dividends paid on preferred shares and preferred stock redemption costs.

Our Series A preferred shares were redeemed in full in June 2003 and our Series B preferred shares were redeemed in full in November 2006.

Overview We are an equity real estate investment trust specializing in the ownership, management, development and redevelopment of high quality retail and mixed-use properties.

As of December 31, 2006, we owned or had a majority interest in 111 community and neighborhood shopping centers and mixed-use properties comprising approximately 18.8 million square feet.

Our properties are located primarily in densely populated and affluent communities in strategic metropolitan markets in the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions of the United States, as well as in California.

In total, these 111 commercial properties were 96.5% leased at December 31, 2006.

A joint venture in which we own a 30% interest owned four neighborhood shopping centers totaling approximately 0.7 million square feet as of December 31, 2006.

In total, the joint venture properties in which we own an interest were 98.7% leased at December 31, 2006.

We have paid quarterly dividends to our shareholders continuously since our founding in 1962 and have increased our dividends per common share for 39 consecutive years.

| Property, City, State, Zip Code| Year Completed| Year Acquired| Square Feet-1 /Apartment Units| Average Rent Per Square Foot| Percentage Leased-2| Principal Tenant(s)|
|Mount Vernon/South Valley/7770 Richmond HwyAlexandria, VA 22306-3(6)(12)|1966-1974|2003/2006|565,000|$15.32|95%|Shoppers Food WarehouseBed, Bath & BeyondMichaelsHome DepotTJ MaxxGold’s Gym|
|Old Keene MillSpringfield, VA 22152|1968|1976|92,000|$33.35|97%|Whole FoodsWalgreens|
|Pan AmFairfax, VA 22031|1979|1993|227,000|$18.41|100%|MichaelsMicroCenterSafeway|
|Pentagon RowArlington, VA 22202-12|2001-2002|1998/2010|296,000|$33.69|99%|Harris TeeterBed,Bath & BeyondBally Total FitnessDSW|
|Pike 7 PlazaVienna, VA 22180-6|1968|1997|164,000|$38.11|100%|DSWStaplesTJ Maxx|
|Shoppers’ WorldCharlottesville, VA 22091-12|1975-2001|2007|169,000|$11.92|94%|Whole FoodsStaples|
|Shops at Willow LawnRichmond, VA 23230|1957|1983|480,000|$16.02|88%|KrogerOld NavyRoss Dress For LessStaples|
|Tower Shopping CenterSpringfield, VA 22150|1960|1998|112,000|$24.04|91%|Talbots|
|Tyson’s StationFalls Church, VA 22043-12|1954|1978|49,000|$39.43|100%|Trader Joe’s|
|Village at ShirlingtonArlington, VA 22206-7|1940, 2006-2009|1995|255,000|$33.22|98%|AMC LoewsCarlyle Grand CaféHarrisTeeter|
| Total All Regions—Retail-14||| 18,286,000| $22.77| 94%||
| Total All Regions—Residential||| 903 units|| 95%||

(1) Represents the physical square footage of the commercial portion of the property, which may differ from the gross leasable square footage used to express percentage leased.

Some of our properties include office space which is included in this square footage but is not material in total.

(2) Retail percentage leased is expressed as a percentage of rentable commercial square feet occupied or subject to a lease under which rent is currently payable and includes square feet covered by leases for stores not yet opened.

Residential percentage leased is expressed as a percentage of units occupied or subject to a lease.

(3) All or a portion of this property is owned pursuant to a ground lease.

(4) We own the controlling interest in this center.

(5) We own a 90% general and limited partnership interests in these buildings.

(6) We own this property in a “downREIT” partnership, of which a wholly owned subsidiary of the Trust is the sole general partner, with third party partners holding operating partnership units.

(7) All or a portion of this property is subject to a capital lease obligation.

(8) We own a 64.1% membership interest in this property.

(9) 50% of the ownership of this property is in a “downREIT” partnership, of which a wholly owned subsidiary of the Trust is the sole general partner, with third party partners holding operating partnership units.

(10) Properties acquired through the Taurus Newbury Street JV II Limited Partnership or a joint venture arrangement with affiliates of a discretionary fund created and advised by ING Clarion Partners.

(11) The Trust controls Melville Mall through a 20 year master lease and secondary financing to the owner.

Because the Trust controls the activities that most significantly impact this property and retains substantially all of the economic benefit and risk associated with it, we consolidate this property and its operations.

Properties We employ a variety of assets in the management and operation of our rail business.

Our rail network covers 23 states in the western two-thirds of the U. S.


Question: what is the average price of the increased electricity usage per gwh?

def solution():
    # Define variables name and value
    increased_revenue = 18.9 * 1000000
    increased_usage = 1046

    # Calculate the average price of the increased electricity usage per GWh
    answer = increased_revenue / increased_usage

    return answer

Entergy Corporation and Subsidiaries Notes to Financial Statements 145 The fair value of debt securities, summarized by contractual maturities, as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 are as follows:

During the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, proceeds from the dispositions of securities amounted to $2,571 million, $1,652 million, and $1,583 million, respectively.

During the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, gross gains of $80 million, $26 million, and $5 million, respectively, and gross losses of $30 million, $20 million, and $4 million, respectively, were reclassified out of other comprehensive income into earnings.

Other-than-temporary impairments and unrealized gains and losses Entergy evaluates unrealized losses at the end of each period to determine whether an other-than-temporary impairment has occurred.

Effective January 1, 2009, Entergy adopted an accounting pronouncement providing guidance regarding recognition and presentation of other-than-temporary impairments related to investments in debt securities.

The assessment of whether an investment in a debt security has suffered an other-than-temporary impairment is based on whether Entergy has the intent to sell or more likely than not will be required to sell the debt security before recovery of its amortized costs.

Further, if Entergy does not expect to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the debt security, an other-than-temporary impairment is considered to have occurred and it is measured by the present value of cash flows expected to be collected less the amortized cost basis (credit loss).

For debt securities held as of January 1, 2009 for which an other-than-temporary impairment had previously been recognized but for which assessment under the new guidance indicates this impairment is temporary, Entergy recorded an adjustment to its opening balance of retained earnings of $11.3 million ($6.4 million net-of-tax).

Entergy did not have any material other-than-temporary impairments relating to credit losses on debt securities in 2009.

The assessment of whether an investment in an equity security has suffered an other-than-temporary impairment continues to be based on a number of factors including, first, whether Entergy has the ability and intent to hold the investment to recover its value, the duration and severity of any losses, and, then, whether it is expected that the investment will recover its value within a reasonable period of time.

Entergy's trusts are managed by third parties who operate in accordance with agreements that define investment guidelines and place restrictions on the purchases and sales of investments.

Non-Utility Nuclear recorded charges to other income of $86 million in 2009, $50 million in 2008, and $5 million in 2007, resulting from the recognition of the other-than-temporary impairment of certain equity securities held in its decommissioning trust funds.

ENTERGY NEW ORLEANS BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDING As a result of the effects of Hurricane Katrina and the effect of extensive flooding that resulted from levee breaks in and around the New Orleans area, on September 23, 2005, Entergy New Orleans filed a voluntary petition in bankruptcy court seeking reorganization relief under Chapter 11 of the U. S.  Bankruptcy Code.

On May 7, 2007, the bankruptcy judge entered an order confirming Entergy New Orleans' plan of reorganization.

With the receipt of CDBG funds, and the agreement on insurance recovery with one of its excess insurers, Entergy New Orleans waived the conditions precedent in its plan of reorganization and the plan became effective on May 8, 2007.

Following are significant terms in Entergy New Orleans' plan of reorganization:

As a result of the accounting for uncertain tax positions, the amount of the deferred tax assets reflected in the financial statements is less than the amount of the tax effect of the federal and state net operating loss carryovers, tax credit carryovers, and other tax attributes reflected on income tax returns.

Because it is more likely than not that the benefit from certain state net operating and capital loss carryovers will not be utilized, a valuation allowance of $66 million and $13 million has been provided on the deferred tax assets relating to these state net operating and capital loss carryovers, respectively.

Significant components of accumulated deferred income taxes and taxes accrued for the Registrant Subsidiaries as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 are as follows:

Entergy Mississippi, Inc.  Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis 327 2010 Compared to 2009 Net revenue consists of operating revenues net of: 1) fuel, fuel-related expenses, and gas purchased for resale, 2) purchased power expenses, and 3) other regulatory charges (credits).

Following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2010 to 2009.

||Amount (In Millions)|
|2009 net revenue|$536.7|
|Volume/weather|18.9|
|Other|-0.3|
|2010 net revenue|$555.3|

The volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 1,046 GWh, or 8%, in billed electricity usage in all sectors, primarily due to the effect of more favorable weather on the residential sector.

Gross operating revenues, fuel and purchased power expenses, and other regulatory charges (credits) Gross operating revenues increased primarily due to an increase of $22 million in power management rider revenue as the result of higher rates, the volume/weather variance discussed above, and an increase in Grand Gulf rider revenue as a result of higher rates and increased usage, offset by a decrease of $23.5 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to lower fuel rates.

Fuel and purchased power expenses decreased primarily due to a decrease in deferred fuel expense as a result of prior over-collections, offset by an increase in the average market price of purchased power coupled with increased net area demand.

Other regulatory charges increased primarily due to increased recovery of costs associated with the power management recovery rider.

Other Income Statement Variances 2011 Compared to 2010 Other operation and maintenance expenses decreased primarily due to: x a $5.4 million decrease in compensation and benefits costs primarily resulting from an increase in the accrual for incentive-based compensation in 2010 and a decrease in stock option expense; and x the sale of $4.9 million of surplus oil inventory.

The decrease was partially offset by an increase of $3.9 million in legal expenses due to the deferral in 2010 of certain litigation expenses in accordance with regulatory treatment.

Taxes other than income taxes increased primarily due to an increase in ad valorem taxes due to a higher 2011 assessment as compared to 2010, partially offset by higher capitalized property taxes as compared with prior year.

Depreciation and amortization expenses increased primarily due to an increase in plant in service.

Interest expense decreased primarily due to a revision caused by FERC’s acceptance of a change in the treatment of funds received from independent power producers for transmission interconnection projects.

Entergy New Orleans, Inc.  Management’s Financial Discussion and Analysis 350 Also in addition to the contractual obligations, Entergy New Orleans has $53.7 million of unrecognized tax benefits and interest net of unused tax attributes and payments for which the timing of payments beyond 12 months cannot be reasonably estimated due to uncertainties in the timing of effective settlement of tax positions.

See Note 3 to the financial statements for additional information regarding unrecognized tax benefits.

The planned capital investment estimate for Entergy New Orleans reflects capital required to support existing business.

The estimated capital expenditures are subject to periodic review and modification and may vary based on the ongoing effects of regulatory constraints, environmental compliance, market volatility, economic trends, changes in project plans, and the ability to access capital.

Management provides more information on long-term debt and preferred stock maturities in Notes 5 and 6 and to the financial statements.

As an indirect, wholly-owned subsidiary of Entergy Corporation, Entergy New Orleans pays dividends from its earnings at a percentage determined monthly.

Entergy New Orleans’s long-term debt indentures contain restrictions on the payment of cash dividends or other distributions on its common and preferred stock.

Sources of Capital Entergy New Orleans’s sources to meet its capital requirements include: x internally generated funds; x cash on hand; and x debt and preferred stock issuances.

Entergy New Orleans may refinance, redeem, or otherwise retire debt and preferred stock prior to maturity, to the extent market conditions and interest and dividend rates are favorable.

Entergy New Orleans’s receivables from the money pool were as follows as of December 31 for each of the following years:

See Note 4 to the financial statements for a description of the money pool.

Entergy New Orleans has obtained short-term borrowing authorization from the FERC under which it may borrow through October 2013, up to the aggregate amount, at any one time outstanding, of $100 million.

See Note 4 to the financial statements for further discussion of Entergy New Orleans’s short-term borrowing limits.

The long-term securities issuances of Entergy New Orleans are limited to amounts authorized by the City Council, and the current authorization extends through July 2012.

Entergy Louisiana’s Ninemile Point Unit 6 Self-Build Project In June 2011, Entergy Louisiana filed with the LPSC an application seeking certification that the public necessity and convenience would be served by Entergy Louisiana’s construction of a combined-cycle gas turbine generating facility (Ninemile 6) at its existing Ninemile Point electric generating station.

Ninemile 6 will be a nominally-sized 550 MW unit that is estimated to cost approximately $721 million to construct, excluding interconnection and transmission upgrades.

Entergy Gulf States Louisiana joined in the application, seeking certification of its purchase under a life-of-unit power purchase agreement of up to 35% of the capacity and energy generated by Ninemile 6.

The Ninemile 6 capacity and energy is proposed to be allocated 55% to Entergy Louisiana, 25% to Entergy Gulf States Louisiana, and 20% to Entergy New Orleans.

In February 2012 the City Council passed a resolution authorizing Entergy New Orleans to purchase 20% of the Ninemile 6 energy and capacity.

If approvals are obtained from the LPSC and other permitting agencies, Ninemile 6 construction is

Equity Compensation Plan Information The following table summarizes the equity compensation plan information as of December 31, 2011.

Information is included for equity compensation plans approved by the stockholders and equity compensation plans not approved by the stockholders.