Management’s discussion and analysis J. P.  Morgan Chase & Co.  $41.7 billion.
NII was reduced by a lower volume of commercial loans and lower spreads on investment securities.
As a component of NII, trading-related net interest income of $2.1 billion was up 13% from 2002 due to a change in the composition of, and growth in, trading assets.
The Firm’s total average interest-earning assets in 2003 were $590 billion, up 6% from the prior year.
The net interest yield on these assets, on a fully taxable-equivalent basis, was 2.10%, compared with 2.09% in the prior year.
Noninterest expense
## Table 0 ##
Compensation expense Compensation expense in 2003 was 6% higher than in the prior year.
The increase principally reflected higher performance-related incentives, and higher pension and other postretirement benefit costs, primarily as a result of changes in actuarial assumptions.
For a detailed discussion of pension and other postretirement benefit costs, see Note 6 on pages 89–93 of this Annual Report.
The increase pertaining to incentives included $266 million as a result of adopting SFAS 123, and $120 million from the reversal in 2002 of previously accrued expenses for certain forfeitable key employee stock awards, as discussed in Note 7 on pages 93–95 of this Annual Report.
Total compensation expense declined as a result of the transfer, beginning April 1, 2003, of 2,800 employees to IBM in connection with a technology outsourcing agreement.
The total number of full-time equivalent employees at December 31, 2003 was 93,453 compared with 94,335 at the prior year-end.
Occupancy expense Occupancy expense of $1.9 billion rose 19% from 2002.
The increase reflected costs of additional leased space in midtown Manhattan and in the South and Southwest regions of the United States; higher real estate taxes in New York City; and the cost of enhanced safety measures.
Also contributing to the increase were charges for unoccupied excess real estate of $270 million; this compared with $120 million in 2002, mostly in the third quarter of that year.
Technology and communications expense In 2003, Technology and communications expense was 11% above the prior-year level.
The increase was primarily due to a shift in expenses: costs that were previously associated with Compensation and Other expenses shifted, upon the commencement of the IBM outsourcing agreement, to Technology and communications expense.
Also contributing to the increase were higher costs related to software amortization.
For a further discussion of the IBM outsourcing agreement, see Support Units and Corporate on page 44 of this Annual Report.
Other expense Other expense in 2003 rose slightly from the prior year, reflecting higher Outside services.
For a table showing the components of Other expense, see Note 8 on page 96 of this Annual Report.
Surety settlement and litigation reserve The Firm added $100 million to the Enron-related litigation reserve in 2003 to supplement a $900 million reserve initially recorded in 2002.
The 2002 reserve was established to cover Enron-related matters, as well as certain other material litigation, proceedings and investigations in which the Firm is involved.
In addition, in 2002 the Firm recorded a charge of $400 million for the settlement of Enron-related surety litigation.
Merger and restructuring costs Merger and restructuring costs related to business restructurings announced after January 1, 2002, were recorded in their relevant expense categories.
In 2002, Merger and restructuring costs of $1.2 billion, for programs announced prior to January 1, 2002, were viewed by management as nonoperating expenses or “special items.
” Refer to Note 8 on pages 95–96 of this Annual Report for a further discussion of Merger and restructuring costs and for a summary, by expense category and business segment, of costs incurred in 2003 and 2002 for programs announced after January 1, 2002.
Provision for credit losses The 2003 Provision for credit losses was $2.8 billion lower than in 2002, primarily reflecting continued improvement in the quality of the commercial loan portfolio and a higher volume of credit card securitizations.
For further information about the Provision for credit losses and the Firm’s management of credit risk, see the discussions of net charge-offs associated with the commercial and consumer loan portfolios and the Allowance for credit losses, on pages 63–65 of this Annual Report.
Income tax expense Income tax expense was $3.3 billion in 2003, compared with $856 million in 2002.
The effective tax rate in 2003 was 33%, compared with 34% in 2002.
The tax rate decline was principally attributable to changes in the proportion of income subject to state and local taxes.
The following table reflects information about the Firm’s loans held for sale, principally mortgage-related:
## Table 1 ##
(a) 2004 results include six months of the combined Firm’s results and six months of heritage JPMorgan Chase results.2003 reflects the results of heritage JPMorgan Chase only.
Impaired loans JPMorgan Chase accounts for and discloses nonaccrual loans as impaired loans and recognizes their interest income as discussed previously for nonaccrual loans.
The Firm excludes from impaired loans its small-balance, homogeneous consumer loans; loans carried at fair value or the lower of cost or fair value; debt securities; and leases.
The table below sets forth information about JPMorgan Chase’s impaired loans.
The Firm primarily uses the discounted cash flow method for valuing impaired loans:
## Table 2 ##
(a) 2004 results include six months of the combined Firm’s results and six months of heritage JPMorgan Chase results.
(b) When the discounted cash flows, collateral value or market price equals or exceeds the carrying value of the loan, then the loan does not require an allowance under SFAS 114.
(c) The allowance for impaired loans under SFAS 114 is included in JPMorgan Chase’s Allowance for loan losses.
Note 12 – Allowance for credit losses JPMorgan Chase’s Allowance for loan losses covers the wholesale (risk-rated) and consumer (scored) loan portfolios and represents management’s estimate of probable credit losses inherent in the Firm’s loan portfolio.
Management also computes an Allowance for wholesale lending-related commitments using a methodology similar to that used for the wholesale loans.
The Allowance for loan losses includes an asset-specific component and a formula-based component.
Within the formula-based component is a statistical calculation and an adjustment to the statistical calculation.
The asset-specific component relates to provisions for losses on loans considered impaired and measured pursuant to SFAS 114.
An allowance is established when the discounted cash flows (or collateral value or observable market price) of the loan is lower than the carrying value of that loan.
To compute the asset-specific component of the allowance, larger impaired loans are evaluated individually, and smaller impaired loans are evaluated as a pool using historical loss experience for the respective class of assets.
The formula-based component covers performing wholesale and consumer loans and is the product of a statistical calculation, as well as adjustments to such calculation.
These adjustments take into consideration model imprecision, external factors and economic events that have occurred but are not yet reflected in the factors used to derive the statistical calculation.
The statistical calculation is the product of probability of default and loss given default.
For risk-rated loans (generally loans originated by the wholesale lines of business), these factors are differentiated by risk rating and maturity.
For scored loans (generally loans originated by the consumer lines of business), loss is primarily determined by applying statistical loss factors and other risk indicators to pools of loans by asset type.
Adjustments to the statistical calculation for the risk-rated portfolios are determined by creating estimated ranges using historical experience of both loss given default and probability of default.
Factors related to concentrated and deteriorating industries are also incorporated into the calculation where relevant.
Adjustments to the statistical calculation for the scored loan portfolios are accomplished in part by analyzing the historical loss experience for each major product segment.
The estimated ranges and the determination of the appropriate point within the range are based upon management’s view of uncertainties that relate to current macroeconomic and political conditions, quality of underwriting standards, and other relevant internal and external factors affecting the credit quality of the portfolio.
The Allowance for lending-related commitments represents management’s estimate of probable credit losses inherent in the Firm’s process of extending credit.
Management establishes an asset-specific allowance for lending-related commitments that are considered impaired and computes a formula-based allowance for performing wholesale lending-related commitments.
These are computed using a methodology similar to that used for the wholesale loan portfolio, modified for expected maturities and probabilities of drawdown.
The allowance for credit losses is reviewed at least quarterly by the Chief Risk Officer of the Firm, the Risk Policy Committee, a risk subgroup of the Operating Committee, and the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of the Firm relative to the risk profile of the Firm’s credit portfolio and current economic conditions.
As of December 31, 2005, JPMorgan Chase deemed the allowance for credit losses to be appropriate (i. e. , sufficient to absorb losses that are inherent in the portfolio, including those not yet identifiable).
As a result of the Merger, management modified its methodology for determining the Provision for credit losses for the combined Firm.
The effect of conforming methodologies in 2004 was a decrease in the consumer allowance of $254 million and a decrease in the wholesale allowance (including both funded loans and lending-related commitments) of $330 million.
In addition, the Bank One seller’s interest in credit card securitizations was decertificated; this resulted in an increase to the provision for loan losses of approximately $1.4 billion (pre-tax) in 2004.
Management’s discussion and analysis JPMorgan Chase & C At December 31, 2005, the percentage of the investment-grade wholesale exposure, excluding HFS, remained relatively unchanged from December 31, 2004.
Derivative receivables of less than one year decreased as a result of the appreciation of the U. S. dollar on short-dated foreign exchange (“FX”) contracts.
The percentage of derivative exposure greater than 5 years increased from 42% to 56% at year-end 2005, primarily as a result of the reduction in shorter-dated exposure Wholesale credit exposure – selected industry concentration The Firm continues to focus on the management and diversification of industry concentrations, with particular attention paid to industries with actual or poten- tial credit concerns.
As of December 31, 2005, the top 10 industries remained predominantly unchanged from year-end 2004, with the exception of Oil and gas, which replaced Media.
Below are summaries of the top 10 industry con- centrations as of December 31, 2005 and 2004.
## Table 3 ##
Noninvestment-grade
## Table 4 ##
(a) Based upon December 31, 2005, determination of Top 10 industries.
(b) During the second quarter of 2005, the Firm revised its industry classification for educational institutions to better reflect risk correlations and enhance the Firm’s management of industry risk, resulting in an increase to State and municipal governments and a decrease to Retail and consumer services.
(c) HFS loans primarily relate to securitization and syndication activities.
(d) Credit exposure is net of risk participations and excludes the benefit of credit derivative hedges and collateral held against derivative receivables or loans.
At December 31, 2005 and 2004, collateral held against derivative receivables excludes $27 billion and $32 billion, respectively, of cash collateral as a result of the Firm electing to report the fair value of derivative assets and liabilities net of cash received and paid, respectively, under legally enforceable master netting agreements.
(e) Represents notional amounts only; these credit derivatives do not qualify for hedge accounting under SFAS 13

<table><tr><td>(in millions)</td><td>2003</td><td>2002</td><td>Change</td></tr><tr><td>Compensation expense</td><td>$11,695</td><td>$10,983</td><td>6%</td></tr><tr><td>Occupancy expense</td><td>1,912</td><td>1,606</td><td>19</td></tr><tr><td>Technology and communications expense</td><td>2,844</td><td>2,554</td><td>11</td></tr><tr><td>Other expense</td><td>5,137</td><td>5,111</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Surety settlement and litigation reserve</td><td>100</td><td>1,300</td><td>-92</td></tr><tr><td>Merger and restructuring costs</td><td>—</td><td>1,210</td><td>NM</td></tr><tr><td>Total noninterest expense</td><td>$21,688</td><td>$22,764</td><td>-5%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Year ended December 31, (in millions)<sup>(a)</sup></td><td>2005</td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td></tr><tr><td>Net gains on sales of loans held for sale</td><td>$596</td><td>$368</td><td>$933</td></tr><tr><td>Lower of cost or fair value adjustments</td><td>-332</td><td>39</td><td>26</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>December 31, (in millions)<sup>(a)</sup></td><td> 2005</td><td>2004</td></tr><tr><td>Impaired loans with an allowance</td><td>$1,095</td><td>$1,496</td></tr><tr><td>Impaired loans without an allowance<sup>(b)</sup></td><td>80</td><td>284</td></tr><tr><td>Total impaired loans</td><td>$1,175</td><td>$1,780</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for impaired loans under SFAS 114<sup>(c)</sup></td><td>$257</td><td>$521</td></tr><tr><td>Average balance of impaired loans during the year</td><td>1,478</td><td>1,883</td></tr><tr><td>Interest income recognized on impairedloans during the year</td><td>5</td><td>8</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2">Noninvestment-grade</td><td></td><td></td><td>Collateral held against</td></tr><tr><td>As of December 31, 2005</td><td>Credit</td><td></td><td>Investment</td><td></td><td></td><td>Net charge-offs/</td><td>Credit</td><td>derivative</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions, except ratios)</td><td>exposure</td><td><sup>(d)</sup></td><td>grade</td><td>Noncriticized</td><td>Criticized</td><td>(recoveries)</td><td>derivative hedges<sup>(e)</sup></td><td>receivables(d)</td></tr><tr><td> Top 10 industries<sup>(a)</sup></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Banks and finance companies</td><td>$53,579</td><td></td><td>88%</td><td>$6,462</td><td>$232</td><td>$-16</td><td>$-9,490</td><td>$-1,482</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate</td><td>29,974</td><td></td><td>55</td><td>13,226</td><td>276</td><td>—</td><td>-560</td><td>-2</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer products</td><td>25,678</td><td></td><td>71</td><td>6,791</td><td>590</td><td>2</td><td>-927</td><td>-28</td></tr><tr><td>Healthcare</td><td>25,435</td><td></td><td>79</td><td>4,977</td><td>243</td><td>12</td><td>-581</td><td>-7</td></tr><tr><td>State and municipal governments<sup>(b)</sup></td><td>25,328</td><td></td><td>98</td><td>409</td><td>40</td><td>—</td><td>-597</td><td>-1</td></tr><tr><td>Utilities</td><td>20,482</td><td></td><td>90</td><td>1,841</td><td>295</td><td>-4</td><td>-1,624</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Retail and consumer services<sup>(b)</sup></td><td>19,920</td><td></td><td>75</td><td>4,654</td><td>288</td><td>12</td><td>-989</td><td>-5</td></tr><tr><td>Oil and gas</td><td>18,200</td><td></td><td>77</td><td>4,267</td><td>9</td><td>—</td><td>-1,007</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Asset managers</td><td>17,358</td><td></td><td>82</td><td>2,949</td><td>103</td><td>-1</td><td>-25</td><td>-954</td></tr><tr><td>Securities firms and exchanges</td><td>17,094</td><td></td><td>89</td><td>1,833</td><td>15</td><td>—</td><td>-2,009</td><td>-1,525</td></tr><tr><td>All other</td><td>282,802</td><td></td><td>82</td><td>47,966</td><td>3,081</td><td>-82</td><td>-12,073</td><td>-1,996</td></tr><tr><td>Total excluding HFS</td><td>$535,850</td><td></td><td>81%</td><td>$95,375</td><td>$5,172</td><td>$-77</td><td>$-29,882</td><td>$-6,000</td></tr><tr><td>Held-for-sale<sup>(c)</sup></td><td>17,552</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total exposure</td><td>$553,402</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td colspan="2">Noninvestment-grade</td><td></td><td></td><td>Collateral held against</td></tr><tr><td>As of December 31, 2004</td><td>Credit</td><td></td><td>Investment</td><td></td><td></td><td>Net charge-offs/</td><td>Credit</td><td>derivative</td></tr><tr><td>(in millions, except ratios)</td><td>exposure</td><td><sup>(d)</sup></td><td>grade</td><td>Noncriticized</td><td>Criticized</td><td>(recoveries)</td><td>derivative hedges<sup>(e)</sup></td><td>receivables(d)</td></tr><tr><td> Top 10 industries<sup>(a)</sup> Banks and finance companies</td><td>$55,840</td><td></td><td>90%</td><td>$5,348</td><td>$187</td><td>$6</td><td>$-11,695</td><td>$-3,464</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate</td><td>25,761</td><td></td><td>62</td><td>9,036</td><td>765</td><td>9</td><td>-800</td><td>-45</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer products</td><td>21,251</td><td></td><td>68</td><td>6,267</td><td>479</td><td>85</td><td>-1,189</td><td>-50</td></tr><tr><td>Healthcare</td><td>21,890</td><td></td><td>79</td><td>4,321</td><td>249</td><td>1</td><td>-741</td><td>-13</td></tr><tr><td>State and municipal governments</td><td>19,728</td><td></td><td>97</td><td>592</td><td>14</td><td>—</td><td>-394</td><td>-18</td></tr><tr><td>Utilities</td><td>21,132</td><td></td><td>85</td><td>2,316</td><td>890</td><td>63</td><td>-2,247</td><td>-27</td></tr><tr><td>Retail and consumer services</td><td>21,573</td><td></td><td>76</td><td>4,815</td><td>393</td><td>—</td><td>-1,767</td><td>-42</td></tr><tr><td>Oil and gas</td><td>14,420</td><td></td><td>81</td><td>2,713</td><td>51</td><td>9</td><td>-1,282</td><td>-26</td></tr><tr><td>Asset managers</td><td>20,199</td><td></td><td>79</td><td>4,192</td><td>115</td><td>-15</td><td>-80</td><td>-655</td></tr><tr><td>Securities firms and exchanges</td><td>18,034</td><td></td><td>88</td><td>2,218</td><td>17</td><td>1</td><td>-1,398</td><td>-2,068</td></tr><tr><td>All other</td><td>295,902</td><td></td><td>82</td><td>48,150</td><td>5,122</td><td>27</td><td>-15,607</td><td>-2,893</td></tr><tr><td>Total excluding HFS</td><td>$535,730</td><td></td><td>82%</td><td>$89,968</td><td>$8,282</td><td>$186</td><td>$-37,200</td><td>$-9,301</td></tr><tr><td>Held-for-sale<sup>(c)</sup></td><td>6,440</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Total exposure</td><td>$542,170</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

Question: what would pre-tax interest income be , in billions , for 2003 , based on the return on interest bearing assets?