The table below details the impact of our Synthetic Fuel segment on our continuing operations for 2005 and 2004.
## Table 0 ##
New Accounting Standards FAS No.123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment” Under our 2002 Comprehensive Stock and Cash Incentive Plan (“the Comprehensive Plan”), we currently award to participating employees (1) stock options to purchase our Class A Common Stock (“Stock Option Program”), (2) stock appreciation rights for our Class A Common Stock, and (3) restricted stock units of our Class A Common Stock.
As noted in Footnote No.1,“Basis of Presentation,” under the heading “New Accounting Pronouncements,” we adopted FAS No.123(R),“Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation,” (“FAS No.123(R)”) using the modified prospective transition method at the beginning of our 2006 first quarter.
In accordance with the modified prospective transition method, we did not restate our Consolidated Financial Statements for prior periods to reflect the impact of FAS No.123(R).
For all share-based awards granted after the date we adopted FAS No.123(R) and for the unvested portion of previously granted share-based awards that were outstanding on that date, FAS No.123(R) requires that we measure compensation costs related to our share-based payment transactions at fair value on the grant date and that we recognize those costs in the financial statements over the vesting period during which the employee provides service in exchange for the award.
Previously, under FAS No.123 and APB Opinion No.25, we accounted for our share-based employee compensation plans using the intrinsic value method under the recognition and measurement principles of “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,” (“APB Opinion No.25”) and recognized share-based compensation expense for all awards except for our Stock Option Program awards.
Share-based compensation expense totaled $62 million and $47 million for 2004 and 2005, respectively.
Under FAS No.123(R), we recorded share-based compensation expense of $108 million in 2006.
Deferred compensation costs related to unvested awards totaled $168 million at yearend 2006, and the weighted average period over which the costs are expected to be recognized is two years.
Deferred compensation costs related to unvested awards totaled $137 million at year-end 2005.
FAS No.123(R) requires that share-based compensation expense be recognized over the period from the grant date to the date on which the award is no longer contingent on the employee providing additional service (the “substantive vesting period”).
In periods prior to the adoption of FAS No.123(R), we showed share-based compensation expense in our pro forma disclosure only for option awards to retirement-eligible employees over the awards’ stated vesting period.
In periods prior to the adoption of FAS No.123(R), we recorded share-based compensation expense for our other awards to retirement-eligible employees over the awards’ stated vesting period.
With the adoption of FAS No.123(R), we continue to follow the stated vesting period for the unvested portion of awards granted prior to adoption of FAS No.123(R) and follow the substantive vesting period for awards granted after the adoption of FAS No.123(R).
In connection with the adoption of FAS No.123(R), we reviewed, among other things, our forfeiture and volatility assumptions.
Estimated volatilities for 2006 were based on the historical share-price volatility for a period equal to the stock option’s or share appreciation right’s expected lives, ending on the day of grant, and calculated based on weekly data.
The weighted average expected stock option or share appreciation right terms for 2006 were a product of the lattice-based binomial valuation model that uses suboptimal exercise factors to calculate the expected terms.
In August 2005, the Board of Directors amended the Comprehensive Plan to provide participants the ability, during a limited time frame in 2005, to elect to accelerate the schedule for distribution of certain vested deferred shares.
The amendment did not alter the previously established vesting schedule.
In 2005, we also changed from using the Black-Scholes option pricing method to estimate the fair value of each stock option or share appreciation right on the grant date, to using the binomial valuation method to improve the estimate of fair value.
In 2005, we changed the method in which we issue sharebased awards to our key employees.
In prior years, share-based compensation for key employees consisted primarily of stock options.
Upon consideration of several factors, we began in 2005 to award key employees a combination of stock options and restricted stock units.
Therefore, this change resulted in an increase in restricted stock expense.
The adoption of FAS No.123(R) in 2006 resulted in the recognition of incremental share-based compensation costs in 2006 of $39 million, a reduction in net income of $25 million (net of tax benefits of $14 million) and a reduction of both basic and diluted
Audit of Employee Stock Ownership Plan Transaction The IRS is currently auditing the Company’s federal tax returns for the 2000, 2001 and 2002 fiscal years.
As part of that audit, the IRS is reviewing a leveraged employee stock ownership plan (“ESOP”) feature of the Company’s Employees’ Profit Sharing, Retirement and Savings Plan and Trust (the “Plan”) that was implemented in a transaction (the “ESOP Transaction”) on June 13, 2000.
Principal and interest on the debt related to the transaction was forgiven over a 26-month period as a mechanism for funding Company contributions of elective deferrals and matching contributions to the Plan.
The Company claimed federal income tax deductions for the forgiven principal on the debt in the amount of $1 billion over that period, along with forgiven interest on the debt.
The benefit related to the tax deductions was reflected in equity and did not flow through the provision for income taxes.
Based on discussions with the IRS during the course of the audit, the IRS may seek to disallow some or all of the deductions related to the ESOP Transaction, and may seek to impose other taxes, penalties, and interest, including excise taxes for prohibited transactions under Section 4975 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
In a January 19, 2007, letter to the Company, the U. S.  Department of Labor confirmed that it is reviewing the ESOP Transaction.
The Company has retained counsel to assist with the audit process and to respond to any claims or assessments the IRS or Department of Labor issues.
Although we are early in the process of closing this audit, we do not expect the result of the audit to have a material impact on either equity for any lost deductions or earnings for interest or penalties, if any, related to the ESOP Transaction.19 | LEASES We have summarized our future obligations under operating leases at year-end 2006, below:
## Table 1 ##
Most leases have initial terms of up to 20 years and contain one or more renewal options, generally for five- or 10-year periods.
These leases provide for minimum rentals and additional rentals based on our operations of the leased property.
The total minimum lease payments above include $460 million, representing obligations of consolidated subsidiaries that are nonrecourse to Marriott International, Inc.  As discussed in Footnote No.8,“Acquisitions and Dispositions,” we became secondarily liable for annual rent payments for certain of these hotels when we acquired the Renaissance Hotel Group N. V.  in 1997.
We continue to manage 16 of these hotels under new long-term management agreements; however, due to certain provisions in the management agreements, we account for these contracts as operating leases.
CTF has placed approximately $89 million in trust accounts to cover possible shortfalls in cash flow necessary to meet rent payments under these leases.
In turn, we released CTF affiliates from their guarantees in connection with these leases.
Approximately $69 million remained in these trust accounts at year-end 2006.
Minimum lease payments relating to these leases, which are not reflected in the $1,481 million above, are as follows: $35 million in 2007; $35 million in 2008; $36 million in 2009; $36 million in 2010; $32 million in 2011; and $214 million thereafter, for a total of $388 million.
Rent expense associated with operating leases consisted of:
## Table 2 ##
We have summarized our future obligations under capital leases at year-end 2006, below:
## Table 3 ##
The accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet for year-end 2006, included $81 million in the “Liabilities of assets held for sale” caption that represented the present value of net minimum lease payments associated with one property that was “held for sale,” and it also included $7 million in the “Long-term debt” caption that represented the present value of net minimum lease payments associated with other capital leases.
The accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet for year-end 2005 included $9 million in the “Long-term debt” caption and $1 million in the “Current portion of long-term debt” caption that represented the present value of net minimum lease payments associated with capital leases.20 | BUSINESS SEGMENTS We are a diversified hospitality company with operations in six business segments: 3 North American Full-Service Lodging, which includes the Marriott Hotels & Resorts, JW Marriott Hotels & Resorts, Marriott Conference Centers, Renaissance Hotels & Resorts, and Renaissance ClubSport brands located in the continental United States and Canada; 3 North American Limited-Service Lodging, which includes the Courtyard, Fairfield Inn, SpringHill Suites, Residence Inn, TownePlace Suites and Marriott ExecuStay brands located in the continental United States and Canada; 3 International Lodging, which includes Marriott Hotels & Resorts, JW Marriott Hotels & Resorts, Renaissance Hotels & Resorts, Courtyard, Fairfield Inn, Residence Inn, Ramada International and Marriott Executive Apartments brands located outside the continental United States and Canada;
Loan Activity.
From time to time, we make loans to owners of hotels that we operate or franchise.
Loan collections, net of loan advances, amounted to $35 million in 2018, compared to net collections of $94 million in 2017.
At year-end 2018, we had $131 million of senior, mezzanine, and other loans outstanding, compared to $149 million outstanding at year-end 2017.
Equity Method Investments.
Cash outflows of $72 million in 2018, $62 million in 2017, and $13 million in 2016 for equity method investments primarily reflect our investments in several joint ventures.
Financing Activities Cash Flows Debt.
Debt increased by $1,109 million in 2018, to $9,347 million at year-end 2018 from $8,238 million at year-end 2017, primarily due to the issuance of our Series X, Y, Z, and AA Notes, partially offset by the maturity of our Series S Notes ($330 million) and lower outstanding commercial paper ($126 million).
See Footnote 10.
Long-Term Debt for additional information on the debt issuances.
Our financial objectives include diversifying our financing sources, optimizing the mix and maturity of our long-term debt, and reducing our working capital.
At year-end 2018, our long-term debt had a weighted average interest rate of 3.3 percent and a weighted average maturity of approximately 4.8 years.
The ratio of our fixed-rate long-term debt to our total long-term debt was 0.7 to 1.0 at year-end 2018.
See the “Cash Requirements and Our Credit Facility,” caption in this “Liquidity and Capital Resources” section for more information on our Credit Facility.
Share Repurchases.
We purchased 21.5 million shares of our common stock in 2018 at an average price of $130.67 per share, 29.2 million shares in 2017 at an average price of $103.66 per share, and 8.0 million shares in 2016 at an average price of $71.55 per share.
At year-end 2018, 10.7 million shares remained available for repurchase under Board approved authorizations, and on February 15, 2019, our Board of Directors further increased our common stock repurchase authorization by 25 million shares.
For additional information, see “Fourth Quarter 2018 Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities” in Part II, Item 5.
Dividends.
Our Board of Directors declared the following quarterly cash dividends in 2018: (1) $0.33 per share declared on February 9, 2018 and paid March 30, 2018 to shareholders of record on February 23, 2018, (2) $0.41 per share declared on May 4, 2018 and paid June 29, 2018 to shareholders of record on May 18, 2018, (3) $0.41 per share declared on August 9, 2018 and paid September 28, 2018 to shareholders of record on August 23, 2018, and (4) $0.41 per share declared on November 8, 2018 and paid December 31, 2018 to shareholders of record on November 21, 2018.
Our Board of Directors declared a cash dividend of $0.41 per share on February 15, 2019, payable on March 29, 2019 to shareholders of record on March 1, 2019.
Contractual Obligations and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements Contractual Obligations The following table summarizes our contractual obligations at year-end 2018:
## Table 4 ##
(1) Includes principal as well as interest payments.
The preceding table does not reflect Transition Tax payments totaling $507 million as a result of the 2017 Tax Act.
In addition, the table does not reflect unrecognized tax benefits at year-end 2018 of $559 million.
In addition to the purchase obligations noted in the preceding table, in the normal course of business we enter into purchase commitments to manage the daily operating needs of the hotels that we manage.
Since we are reimbursed from the cash flows of the hotels, these obligations have minimal impact on our net income and cash flow.
Reconciliation of U. S.  Federal Statutory Income Tax Rate to Actual Income Tax Rate The following table reconciles the U. S.  statutory tax rate to our effective income tax rate for the last three fiscal years:

<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">2005</td><td colspan="3">2004</td></tr><tr><td> ( <i>$ in millions</i> )</td><td>As Reported</td><td>Syn. Fuel Impact</td><td>Before Syn. Fuel Impact</td><td>As Reported</td><td>Syn. Fuel Impact</td><td>Before Syn. Fuel Impact</td></tr><tr><td>Operating income (loss)</td><td>$555</td><td>$-144</td><td>$699</td><td>$477</td><td>$-98</td><td>$575</td></tr><tr><td>Gains and other income (expense)</td><td>181</td><td>32</td><td>149</td><td>164</td><td>28</td><td>136</td></tr><tr><td>Interest income, provision for loan losses and interest expense</td><td>-55</td><td>—</td><td>-55</td><td>55</td><td>—</td><td>55</td></tr><tr><td>Equity in earnings (losses)</td><td>36</td><td>—</td><td>36</td><td>-42</td><td>-28</td><td>-14</td></tr><tr><td>Income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest</td><td>717</td><td>-112</td><td>829</td><td>654</td><td>-98</td><td>752</td></tr><tr><td>Tax (provision) benefit</td><td>-261</td><td>23</td><td>-284</td><td>-244</td><td>21</td><td>-265</td></tr><tr><td>Tax credits</td><td>167</td><td>167</td><td>—</td><td>144</td><td>144</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total tax (provision) benefit</td><td>-94</td><td>190</td><td>-284</td><td>-100</td><td>165</td><td>-265</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations before minority interest</td><td>623</td><td>78</td><td>545</td><td>554</td><td>67</td><td>487</td></tr><tr><td>Minority interest</td><td>45</td><td>47</td><td>-2</td><td>40</td><td>40</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations</td><td>$668</td><td>$125</td><td>$543</td><td>$594</td><td>$107</td><td>$487</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> Fiscal Year</td><td> ($ in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>$143</td></tr><tr><td>2008</td><td>139</td></tr><tr><td>2009</td><td>129</td></tr><tr><td>2010</td><td>122</td></tr><tr><td>2011</td><td>115</td></tr><tr><td>Thereafter</td><td>833</td></tr><tr><td>Total minimum lease payments where we are the primary obligor</td><td>$1,481</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>  <i>($ in millions)</i> </td><td> 2006</td><td> 2005</td><td> 2004</td></tr><tr><td>Minimum rentals</td><td>$253</td><td>$211</td><td>$216</td></tr><tr><td>Additional rentals</td><td>109</td><td>86</td><td>93</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$362</td><td>$297</td><td>$309</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> Fiscal Year</td><td>($ in millions)</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>$9</td></tr><tr><td>2008</td><td>79</td></tr><tr><td>2009</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>2010</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>2011</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>Thereafter</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td>Total minimum lease payments</td><td>99</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Amount representing interest</td><td>-11</td></tr><tr><td>Present value of net minimum lease payments</td><td>$88</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td></td><td>Payments Due by Period</td></tr><tr><td>($ in millions)</td><td>Total</td><td>Less Than1 Year</td><td>1-3 Years</td><td>3-5 Years</td><td>After5 Years</td></tr><tr><td>Debt<sup>-1</sup></td><td>$10,483</td><td>$1,074</td><td>$4,392</td><td>$2,054</td><td>$2,963</td></tr><tr><td>Capital lease obligations<sup>-1</sup></td><td>230</td><td>13</td><td>26</td><td>26</td><td>165</td></tr><tr><td>Operating leases where we are the primary obligor</td><td>2,073</td><td>171</td><td>315</td><td>292</td><td>1,295</td></tr><tr><td>Purchase obligations</td><td>286</td><td>153</td><td>116</td><td>17</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Other noncurrent liabilities</td><td>136</td><td>3</td><td>28</td><td>20</td><td>85</td></tr><tr><td>Total contractual obligations</td><td>$13,208</td><td>$1,414</td><td>$4,877</td><td>$2,409</td><td>$4,508</td></tr></table>

Question: Which element for As Reported exceeds 20% of total in 2004?