ASU No.2017-07 on January 1, 2018 using the retrospective transition method.
We expect the adoption of ASU No.2017-07 to result in an increase to consolidated operating profit of $471 million and $846 million for 2016 and 2017, respectively, and a corresponding decrease in non-operating income for each year.
We do not expect any impact to our business segment operating profit, our consolidated net earnings, or cash flows as a result of adopting ASU No.2017-07.
Intangibles-Goodwill and Other In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No.2017-04, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350), which eliminates the requirement to compare the implied fair value of reporting unit goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill (commonly referred to as Step 2) from the goodwill impairment test.
The new standard does not change how a goodwill impairment is identified.
We will continue to perform our quantitative and qualitative goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of each reporting unit to its carrying amount, but if we are required to recognize a goodwill impairment charge, under the new standard the amount of the charge will be calculated by subtracting the reporting unit’s fair value from its carrying amount.
Under the prior standard, if we were required to recognize a goodwill impairment charge, Step 2 required us to calculate the implied value of goodwill by assigning the fair value of a reporting unit to all of its assets and liabilities as if that reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination and the amount of the charge was calculated by subtracting the reporting unit’s implied fair value of goodwill from its actual goodwill balance.
The new standard is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted, and should be applied prospectively from the date of adoption.
We elected to adopt the new standard for future goodwill impairment tests at the beginning of the third quarter of 2017, because it significantly simplifies the evaluation of goodwill for impairment.
The impact of the new standard will depend on the outcomes of future goodwill impairment tests.
Derivatives and Hedging In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No.2017-12, Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815), which eliminates the requirement to separately measure and report hedge ineffectiveness.
The guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, with early adoption permitted.
We do not expect a significant impact to our consolidated assets and liabilities, net earnings, or cash flows as a result of adopting this new standard.
We plan to adopt the new standard January 1, 2019.
Leases In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No.2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), which requires the recognition of lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and disclosure of key information about leasing arrangements for both lessees and lessors.
The new standard is effective January 1, 2019 for public companies, with early adoption permitted.
The new standard currently requires the application of a modified retrospective approach to the beginning of the earliest period presented in the financial statements.
We are continuing to evaluate the expected impact to our consolidated financial statements and related disclosures.
We plan to adopt the new standard effective January 1, 2019.72 Note 2 – Earnings Per Share The weighted average number of shares outstanding used to compute earnings per common share were as follows (in millions):
## Table 0 ##
We compute basic and diluted earnings per common share by dividing net earnings by the respective weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the periods presented.
Our calculation of diluted earnings per common share also includes the dilutive effects for the assumed vesting of outstanding restricted stock units (RSUs), performance stock units (PSUs) and exercise of outstanding stock options based on the treasury stock method.
There were no significant anti-dilutive equity awards for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015.
Note 3 – Acquisitions and Divestitures Acquisition of Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation On November 6, 2015, we completed the acquisition of Sikorsky from United Technologies Corporation (UTC) and certain of UTC’s subsidiaries.
The purchase price of the acquisition was $9.0 billion, net of cash acquired.
As a result of the acquisition,
NOTES to CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 64 12.
BENEFIT PLANS AND OTHER POSTRETIREMENT BENEFITS Xcel Energy offers various benefit plans to its benefit employees.
Approximately 51 percent of benefiting employees are represented by several local labor unions under several collective-bargaining agreements.
At Dec.  31, 2004, NSP-Minnesota had 2,197 and NSP-Wisconsin had 414 bargaining employees covered under a collective-bargaining agreement, which expires at the end of 2007.
PSCo had 2,177 bargaining employees covered under a collective-bargaining agreement, which expires in May 2006.
SPS had 739 bargaining employees covered under a collective-bargaining agreement, which expires in October 2005.
Pension Benefits Xcel Energy has several noncontributory, defined benefit pension plans that cover almost all employees.
Benefits are based on a combination of years of service, the employee’s average pay and Social Security benefits.
Xcel Energy’s policy is to fully fund into an external trust the actuarially determined pension costs recognized for ratemaking and financial reporting purposes, subject to the limitations of applicable employee benefit and tax laws.
Pension Plan Assets Plan assets principally consist of the common stock of public companies, corporate bonds and U. S.  government securities.
In 2004, Xcel Energy completed a review of its pension plan asset allocation and adopted revised asset allocation targets.
The target range for our pension asset allocation is 60 percent in equity investments, 20 percent in fixed income investments, no cash investments and 20 percent in nontraditional investments, such as real estate, timber ventures, private equity and a diversified commodities index.
The actual composition of pension plan assets at Dec.  31 was:
## Table 1 ##
During 2003, Xcel Energy entered into a number of hedging arrangements within the pension trust designed to provide protection from a loss of asset value in the event of a broad decline in equity prices.
These arrangements were closed out in December 2004.
Xcel Energy bases its investment-return assumption on expected long-term performance for each of the investment types included in its pension asset portfolio.
Xcel Energy considers the actual historical returns achieved by its asset portfolio over the past 20-year or longer period, as well as the long-term return levels projected and recommended by investment experts.
The historical weighted average annual return for the past 20 years for the Xcel Energy portfolio of pension investments is 12.8 percent, which is greater than the current assumption level.
The pension cost determinations assume the continued current mix of investment types over the long term.
The Xcel Energy portfolio is heavily weighted toward equity securities and includes nontraditional investments that can provide a higher-than-average return.
As is the experience in recent years, a higher weighting in equity investments can increase the volatility in the return levels actually achieved by pension assets in any year.
Investment returns in 2002 were below the assumed level of 9.5 percent, but in 2003 investment returns exceeded the assumed level of 9.25 percent, and in 2004 investment returns exceeded the assumed level of 9.0 percent.
Xcel Energy continually reviews its pension assumptions.
In 2005, Xcel Energy changed the investment-return assumption to 8.75 percent to reflect general return expectations for various asset classes in the marketplace.
Statement of Operations Analysis — Continuing Operations The following discussion summarizes the items that affected the individual revenue and expense items reported in the consolidated statements of income.
Electric Utility, Short-Term Wholesale and Commodity Trading Margins Electric fuel and purchased power expenses tend to vary with changing retail and wholesale sales requirements and cost changes in fuel and purchased power.
Due to fuel and purchased energy cost-recovery mechanisms for customers in most states, the fluctuations in these costs do not materially affect electric utility margin.
Xcel Energy has two distinct forms of wholesale sales: short-term wholesale and commodity trading.
Short-term wholesale refers to energy-related purchase and sales activity, and the use of financial instruments associated with the fuel required for, and energy produced from, Xcel Energy’s generation assets or the energy and capacity purchased to serve native load.
Commodity trading is not associated with Xcel Energy’s generation assets or the energy and capacity purchased to serve native load.
Short-term wholesale and commodity trading activities are considered part of the electric utility segment.
Short-term wholesale and commodity trading margins reflect the estimated impact of regulatory sharing of margins, if applicable.
Commodity trading revenues are reported net of related costs (i. e. , on a margin basis) in the consolidated statements of income.
Commodity trading costs include purchased power, transmission, broker fees and other related costs.
The following table details the revenue and margin for base electric utility, short-term wholesale and commodity trading activities:
## Table 2 ##
Detail of our mortgage loans held for investment and the related allowance, excluding unamortized deferred fees and costs of $5.3 million and $7.1 million at April 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, is as follows:
## Table 3 ##
We recorded a provision for loan loss of $47.8 million during fiscal year 2010, compared to $63.9 million in the prior year.
Our allowance for loan losses as a percent of mortgage loans was 13.7%, or $93.5 million, at April 30, 2010, compared to 10.2%, or $84.1 million, at April 30, 2009.
This allowance represents our best estimate of credit losses inherent in the loan portfolio as of the balance sheet dates.
FISCAL YEAR 2009 COMPARED TO FISCAL YEAR 2008 Interest income earned on mortgage loans held for investment for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2009 decreased $28.5 million, or 38.1%, from fiscal year 2008, primarily as a result of non-performing loans.
Our provision for loan losses increased $21.9 million from fiscal year 2008 primarily due to declines in residential home prices and higher projected delinquencies.
Compensation and benefits decreased $66.5 million, or 57.6%, primarily due to severance-related costs recorded in fiscal year 2008, coupled with benefits in fiscal year 2009 resulting from the staff reductions.
Other expenses increased $18.3 million primarily due to an $11.9 million write-down of REO property during fiscal year 2009.
Income Taxes on Continuing Operations Our effective tax rate for continuing operations was 38.9% for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2009, compared to 39.3% in fiscal year 2008.
DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS Effective November 1, 2008, we sold H&R Block Financial Advisors, Inc.  (HRBFA) to Ameriprise Financial, Inc.  HRBFA and its direct corporate parent are presented as discontinued operations in the consolidated financial statements for all periods presented.
Our discontinued operations also include our former mortgage loan origination and servicing business, as well as three smaller lines of business previously reported in our Business Services segment.
FISCAL 2010 COMPARED TO FISCAL 2009 – The net loss from discontinued operations for fiscal year 2010 was $9.7 million compared to a net loss of $27.4 million in the prior year.
The decline in losses was due to a loss on the disposition of HRBFA totaling $12.2 million in fiscal year 2009 compared with a gain of $6.2 million in fiscal year 2010 relating to post-disposition purchase price adjustments.
FISCAL 2009 COMPARED TO FISCAL 2008 – The pretax loss of our discontinued operations for fiscal year 2009 was $47.6 million compared to a loss of $1.2 billion in the prior year.
The loss from discontinued operations for fiscal year 2008 included significant losses from our former mortgage loan businesses, including losses relating to loan repurchase obligations of $582.4 million and impairments of residual interests of $137.8 million.
Net of applicable tax benefits, the loss from discontinued operations for fiscal year 2009 was $27.4 million compared to a loss of $754.6 million in fiscal year 2008.
Our effective tax rate for discontinued operations was 42.5% and 35.3% for the fiscal years 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Our effective tax rate increased primarily due to a tax benefit recorded in conjunction with the sale of HRBFA.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES We consider the estimates discussed below to be critical to understanding our financial statements, as they require the use of significant judgment and estimation in order to measure, at a specific point in time, matters that are inherently uncertain.
Specific risks for these critical accounting estimates are described in the following paragraphs.
We have reviewed and discussed each of these estimates with the Audit Committee of our Board

<table><tr><td></td><td>2017</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average common shares outstanding for basic computations</td><td>287.8</td><td>299.3</td><td>310.3</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average dilutive effect of equity awards</td><td>2.8</td><td>3.8</td><td>4.4</td></tr><tr><td>Weighted average common shares outstanding for diluted computations</td><td>290.6</td><td>303.1</td><td>314.7</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> </td><td>2004</td><td> 2003</td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities</td><td>69%</td><td>75%</td></tr><tr><td>Debt securities</td><td>19</td><td>14</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate</td><td>4</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>Cash</td><td>1</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Nontraditional investments</td><td>7</td><td>8</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>100%</td><td>100%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> </td><td>Base Electric Utility</td><td>Short-Term Wholesale</td><td>Commodity Trading</td><td>Consolidated Totals</td></tr><tr><td> </td><td colspan="4">(Millions of Dollars)</td></tr><tr><td> 2007</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Electric utility revenues (excluding commodity trading)</td><td>$7,611</td><td>$227</td><td>$—</td><td>$7,838</td></tr><tr><td>Electric fuel and purchased power-utility</td><td>-3,930</td><td>-207</td><td>—</td><td>-4,137</td></tr><tr><td>Commodity trading revenues</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>289</td><td>289</td></tr><tr><td>Commodity trading expenses</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-279</td><td>-279</td></tr><tr><td>Gross margin before operating expenses</td><td>$3,681</td><td>$20</td><td>$10</td><td>$3,711</td></tr><tr><td>Margin as a percentage of revenues</td><td>48.4%</td><td>8.8%</td><td>3.5%</td><td>45.7%</td></tr><tr><td> 2006</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Electric utility revenues (excluding commodity trading)</td><td>$7,387</td><td>$201</td><td>$—</td><td>$7,588</td></tr><tr><td>Electric fuel and purchased power-utility</td><td>-3,925</td><td>-178</td><td>—</td><td>-4,103</td></tr><tr><td>Commodity trading revenues</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>610</td><td>610</td></tr><tr><td>Commodity trading expenses</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-590</td><td>-590</td></tr><tr><td>Gross margin before operating expenses</td><td>$3,462</td><td>$23</td><td>$20</td><td>$3,505</td></tr><tr><td>Margin as a percentage of revenues</td><td>46.9%</td><td>11.4%</td><td>3.3%</td><td>42.8%</td></tr><tr><td> 2005</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Electric utility revenues (excluding commodity trading)</td><td>$7,038</td><td>$196</td><td>$—</td><td>$7,234</td></tr><tr><td>Electric fuel and purchased power-utility</td><td>-3,802</td><td>-120</td><td>—</td><td>-3,922</td></tr><tr><td>Commodity trading revenues</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>730</td><td>730</td></tr><tr><td>Commodity trading expenses</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-720</td><td>-720</td></tr><tr><td>Gross margin before operating expenses</td><td>$3,236</td><td>$76</td><td>$10</td><td>$3,322</td></tr><tr><td>Margin as a percentage of revenues</td><td>46.0%</td><td>38.8%</td><td>1.4%</td><td>41.7%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td rowspan="2">Outstanding  Principal Balance</td><td colspan="2">Loan Loss Allowance</td><td rowspan="2">% 30+ Days  Past Due</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Amount</td><td>% of Principal</td></tr><tr><td>As of April 30, 2010:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Purchased from SCC</td><td>$434,644</td><td>$82,793</td><td> 19.1%</td><td> 37.8%</td></tr><tr><td>All other</td><td>249,040</td><td>10,742</td><td> 4.3%</td><td> 8.9%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$683,684</td><td>$93,535</td><td> 13.7%</td><td> 27.3%</td></tr><tr><td>As of April 30, 2009:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Purchased from SCC</td><td>$531,233</td><td>$78,067</td><td>14.7%</td><td>28.7%</td></tr><tr><td>All other</td><td>290,604</td><td>6,006</td><td>2.1%</td><td>4.4%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$821,837</td><td>$84,073</td><td>10.2%</td><td>20.2%</td></tr></table>

Question: As As the chart 2 shows,which year is the value of the Commodity trading revenues for Commodity Trading the lowest?
Answer: 2007