Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements Note 18.
Commitments, Contingencies and Guarantees Commitments The table below presents the firm’s commitments.
## Table 0 ##
1.
Commitments to extend credit are presented net of amounts syndicated to third parties.2.
Includes commitments associated with the former William Street credit extension program.3.
These agreements generally settle within three business days.4.
Consists of commitments under letters of credit issued by various banks which the firm provides to counterparties in lieu of securities or cash to satisfy various collateral and margin deposit requirements.
Commitments to Extend Credit The firm’s commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend with fixed termination dates and depend on the satisfaction of all contractual conditions to borrowing.
The total commitment amount does not necessarily reflect actual future cash flows because the firm may syndicate all or substantial portions of these commitments and commitments can expire unused or be reduced or cancelled at the counterparty’s request.
The firm generally accounts for commitments to extend credit at fair value.
Losses, if any, are generally recorded, net of any fees in “Other principal transactions.
” As of December 2012, approximately $16.09 billion of the firm’s lending commitments were held for investment and were accounted for on an accrual basis.
As of December 2012, the carrying value and the estimated fair value of such lending commitments were liabilities of $63 million and $523 million, respectively.
As these lending commitments are not accounted for at fair value under the fair value option or at fair value in accordance with other U. S.  GAAP, their fair value is not included in the firm’s fair value hierarchy in Notes 6, 7 and 8.
Had these commitments been included in the firm’s fair value hierarchy, they would have primarily been classified in level 3 as of December 2012.
Commercial Lending.
The firm’s commercial lending commitments are extended to investment-grade and noninvestment-grade corporate borrowers.
Commitments to investment-grade corporate borrowers are principally used for operating liquidity and general corporate purposes.
The firm also extends lending commitments in connection with contingent acquisition financing and other types of corporate lending as well as commercial real estate financing.
Commitments that are extended for contingent acquisition financing are often intended to be short-term in nature, as borrowers often seek to replace them with other funding sources.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements In addition, the outstanding principal and fair value of retained interests in the tables above relate to the following types of securitizations and vintage as described: · The outstanding principal amount and fair value of retained interests for U. S.  government agency-issued collateralized mortgage obligations as of December 2014 primarily relate to securitizations during 2014 and 2013, and as of December 2013 primarily relate to securitizations during 2013 and 2012.
· The outstanding principal amount and fair value of retained interests for other residential mortgage-backed obligations as of December 2014 primarily relate to resecuritizations during 2014, and prime and Alt-A securitizations during 2007, and as of December 2013 primarily relate to prime and Alt-A securitizations during 2007 and 2006.
·The outstanding principal amount and fair value of retained interests for other commercial mortgage-backed obligations as of December 2014 primarily relate to securitizations during 2014, and as of December 2013 primarily relate to securitizations during 2013.
· The outstanding principal amount and fair value of retained interests for CDOs, CLOs and other as of December 2014 primarily relate to securitizations during 2014 and 2007, and as of December 2013 primarily relate to securitizations during 2007.
In addition to the interests in the tables above, the firm had other continuing involvement in the form of derivative transactions with certain nonconsolidated VIEs.
The carrying value of these derivatives was a net asset of $115 million and $26 million as of December 2014 and December 2013, respectively.
The notional amounts of these derivatives are included in maximum exposure to loss in the nonconsolidated VIE tables in Note 12.
The tables below present the weighted average key economic assumptions used in measuring the fair value of retained interests and the sensitivity of this fair value to immediate adverse changes of 10% and 20% in those assumptions.
## Table 1 ##
As of December 2013
## Table 2 ##
1.
Due to the nature and current fair value of certain of these retained interests, the weighted average assumptions for constant prepayment and discount rates and the related sensitivity to adverse changes are not meaningful as of December 2014 and December 2013.
The firm’s maximum exposure to adverse changes in the value of these interests is the carrying value of $59 million and $86 million as of December 2014 and December 2013, respectively.
In the tables above: · Amounts do not reflect the benefit of other financial instruments that are held to mitigate risks inherent in these retained interests.
‰ Changes in fair value based on an adverse variation in assumptions generally cannot be extrapolated because the relationship of the change in assumptions to the change in fair value is not usually linear.
· The impact of a change in a particular assumption is calculated independently of changes in any other assumption.
In practice, simultaneous changes in assumptions might magnify or counteract the sensitivities disclosed above.
· The constant prepayment rate is included only for positions for which it is a key assumption in the determination of fair value.
· The discount rate for retained interests that relate to U. S.  government agency-issued collateralized mortgage obligations does not include any credit loss.
· Expected credit loss assumptions are reflected in the discount rate for the remainder of retained interests.
Unrecognized Tax Benefits The firm recognizes tax positions in the financial statements only when it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained on examination by the relevant taxing authority based on the technical merits of the position.
A position that meets this standard is measured at the largest amount of benefit that will more likely than not be realized on settlement.
A liability is established for differences between positions taken in a tax return and amounts recognized in the financial statements.
As of December 2014 and December 2013, the accrued liability for interest expense related to income tax matters and income tax penalties was $101 million and $410 million, respectively.
The firm recognized interest expense and income tax penalties of $45 million, $53 million and $95 million for 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
It is reasonably possible that unrecognized tax benefits could change significantly during the twelve months subsequent to December 2014 due to potential audit settlements.
However, at this time it is not possible to estimate any potential change.
The table below presents the changes in the liability for unrecognized tax benefits.
This liability is included in “Other liabilities and accrued expenses.
” See Note 17 for further information.
## Table 3 ##
1.
Included in “Other assets.
” See Note 13.2.
If recognized, the net tax benefit would reduce the firm’s effective income tax rate.
Regulatory Tax Examinations The firm is subject to examination by the U. S.  Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and other taxing authorities in jurisdictions where the firm has significant business operations, such as the United Kingdom, Japan, Hong Kong, Korea and various states, such as New York.
The tax years under examination vary by jurisdiction.
The firm does not expect completion of these audits to have a material impact on the firm’s financial condition but it may be material to operating results for a particular period, depending, in part, on the operating results for that period.
The table below presents the earliest tax years that remain subject to examination by major jurisdiction.
## Table 4 ##
The U. S.  Federal examinations of fiscal 2008 through calendar 2010 were finalized, but the settlement is subject to review by the Joint Committee of Taxation.
The examinations of 2011 and 2012 began in 2013.
New York State and City examinations of fiscal 2004 through 2006 were finalized during 2014.
The examinations of fiscal 2007 through 2010 began in 2013.
The United Kingdom examinations of fiscal 2008 through 2011 were finalized during 2014.
All years including and subsequent to the years in the table above remain open to examination by the taxing authorities.
The firm believes that the liability for unrecognized tax benefits it has established is adequate in relation to the potential for additional assessments.
In January 2013, the firm was accepted into the Compliance Assurance Process program by the IRS.
This program allows the firm to work with the IRS to identify and resolve potential U. S.  federal tax issues before the filing of tax returns.
The 2013 tax year is the first year that was examined under the program, and remains subject to postfiling review.
The firm was also accepted into the program for the 2014 and 2015 tax years.
Management’s Discussion and Analysis Scenario Analyses.
We conduct scenario analyses including as part of the Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR) and Dodd-Frank Act Stress Tests (DFAST) as well as our resolution and recovery planning.
See “Equity Capital Management and Regulatory Capital — Equity Capital Management” below for further information.
These scenarios cover short-term and longterm time horizons using various macroeconomic and firmspecific assumptions, based on a range of economic scenarios.
We use these analyses to assist us in developing our longer-term balance sheet management strategy, including the level and composition of assets, funding and equity capital.
Additionally, these analyses help us develop approaches for maintaining appropriate funding, liquidity and capital across a variety of situations, including a severely stressed environment.
Balance Sheet Allocation In addition to preparing our consolidated statements of financial condition in accordance with U. S.  GAAP, we prepare a balance sheet that generally allocates assets to our businesses, which is a non-GAAP presentation and may not be comparable to similar non-GAAP presentations used by other companies.
We believe that presenting our assets on this basis is meaningful because it is consistent with the way management views and manages risks associated with the firm’s assets and better enables investors to assess the liquidity of the firm’s assets.
The table below presents our balance sheet allocation.

<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="4"> Commitment Amount by Period of Expiration as of December 2012</td><td colspan="2">Total Commitmentsas of December</td></tr><tr><td><i>in millions</i></td><td> 2013</td><td> 2014-  2015</td><td> 2016-  2017</td><td> 2018-  Thereafter</td><td> 2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Commitments to extend credit<sup>1</sup></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial lending:<sup>2</sup></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Investment-grade</td><td> $ 7,765</td><td> $11,632</td><td> $33,620</td><td> $ 719</td><td> $ 53,736</td><td>$ 51,281</td></tr><tr><td>Non-investment-grade</td><td> 2,114</td><td> 4,462</td><td> 9,833</td><td> 4,693</td><td> 21,102</td><td>14,217</td></tr><tr><td>Warehouse financing</td><td> 556</td><td> 228</td><td> —</td><td> —</td><td> 784</td><td>247</td></tr><tr><td>Total commitments to extend credit</td><td> 10,435</td><td> 16,322</td><td> 43,453</td><td> 5,412</td><td> 75,622</td><td>65,745</td></tr><tr><td>Contingent and forward starting resale and securities borrowing agreements<sup>3</sup></td><td> 47,599</td><td> —</td><td> —</td><td> —</td><td> 47,599</td><td>54,522</td></tr><tr><td>Forward starting repurchase and secured lendingagreements<sup>3</sup></td><td> 6,144</td><td> —</td><td> —</td><td> —</td><td> 6,144</td><td>17,964</td></tr><tr><td>Letters of credit<sup>4</sup></td><td> 614</td><td> 160</td><td> —</td><td> 15</td><td> 789</td><td>1,353</td></tr><tr><td>Investment commitments</td><td> 1,378</td><td> 2,174</td><td> 258</td><td> 3,529</td><td> 7,339</td><td>9,118</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td> 4,471</td><td> 53</td><td> 31</td><td> 69</td><td> 4,624</td><td>5,342</td></tr><tr><td> Total commitments</td><td> $70,641</td><td> $18,709</td><td> $43,742</td><td> $9,025</td><td> $142,117</td><td>$154,044</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> As of December 2014  Type of Retained Interests</td><td></td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td>Mortgage-Backed</td><td> Other<sup></sup></td><td> <sup>1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of retained interests</td><td>$ 2,370</td><td> $ 59</td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average life (years)</td><td>7.6</td><td> 3.6</td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Constant prepayment rate</td><td>13.2%</td><td> N.M.</td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Impact of 10% adverse change</td><td>$ -33</td><td> N.M.</td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Impact of 20% adverse change</td><td>-66</td><td> N.M.</td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Discount rate</td><td>4.1%</td><td> N.M.</td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Impact of 10% adverse change</td><td>$ -50</td><td> N.M.</td><td> </td></tr><tr><td>Impact of 20% adverse change</td><td>-97</td><td> N.M.</td><td> </td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">As of December 2013 Type of Retained Interests</td><td></td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td>Mortgage-Backed</td><td>Other<sup></sup></td><td><sup>1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>Fair value of retained interests</td><td>$3,641</td><td>$ 86</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average life (years)</td><td>8.3</td><td>1.9</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Constant prepayment rate</td><td>7.5%</td><td>N.M.</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Impact of 10% adverse change</td><td>$ -36</td><td>N.M.</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Impact of 20% adverse change</td><td>-64</td><td>N.M.</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Discount rate</td><td>3.9%</td><td>N.M.</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Impact of 10% adverse change</td><td>$ -85</td><td>N.M.</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Impact of 20% adverse change</td><td>-164</td><td>N.M.</td><td></td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">As of December</td></tr><tr><td><i>$ in millions</i></td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td></tr><tr><td>Balance, beginning of year</td><td>$ 1,765</td><td>$2,237</td><td>$1,887</td></tr><tr><td>Increases based on tax positions related to the current year</td><td>204</td><td>144</td><td>190</td></tr><tr><td>Increases based on tax positions related to prior years</td><td>263</td><td>149</td><td>336</td></tr><tr><td>Decreases based on tax positions related to prior years</td><td>-241</td><td>-471</td><td>-109</td></tr><tr><td>Decreases related to settlements</td><td>-1,112</td><td>-299</td><td>-35</td></tr><tr><td>Acquisitions/(dispositions)</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-47</td></tr><tr><td>Exchange rate fluctuations</td><td>-8</td><td>5</td><td>15</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, end of year</td><td>$ 871</td><td>$1,765</td><td>$2,237</td></tr><tr><td>Related deferred income tax asset<sup>1</sup></td><td>172</td><td>475</td><td>685</td></tr><tr><td>Net unrecognized tax benefit<sup>2</sup></td><td>$ 699</td><td>$1,290</td><td>$1,552</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> Jurisdiction</td><td> As of December 2014</td></tr><tr><td>U.S. Federal</td><td> 2008</td></tr><tr><td>New York State and City</td><td> 2007</td></tr><tr><td>United Kingdom</td><td> 2012</td></tr><tr><td>Japan</td><td> 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Hong Kong</td><td> 2006</td></tr><tr><td>Korea</td><td> 2010</td></tr></table>

Question: What was the total amount of Investment-grade, Non-investment-grade, Warehouse financing and Letters of credit in 2013? (in million)