AMERICAN TOWER CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) Basis step-up from corporate restructuring represents the tax effects of increasing the basis for tax purposes of certain of the Company’s assets in conjunction with its spin-off from American Radio Systems Corporation, its former parent company.
At December 31, 2003, the Company had net federal and state operating loss carryforwards available to reduce future taxable income of approximately $0.9 billion and $1.5 billion, respectively.
If not utilized, the Company’s net operating loss carryforwards expire as follows (in thousands):
## Table 0 ##
SFAS No.109, “Accounting for Income Taxes,” requires that companies record a valuation allowance when it is “more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.
” At December 31, 2003, the Company has provided a valuation allowance of approximately $156.7 million, primarily related to net state deferred tax assets, capital loss carryforwards and the lost tax benefit and costs associated with our tax refund claims.
The Company has not provided a valuation allowance for the remaining net deferred tax assets, primarily its tax refund claims and federal net operating loss carryforwards, as management believes the Company will be successful with its tax refund claims and have sufficient time to realize these federal net operating loss carryforwards during the twenty-year tax carryforward period.
The Company intends to recover a portion of its deferred tax asset through its tax refund claims, related to certain federal net operating losses, filed during 2003 as part of a tax planning strategy implemented in 2002.
The recoverability of its remaining net deferred tax asset has been assessed utilizing stable state (no growth) projections based on its current operations.
The projections show a significant decrease in depreciation and interest expense in the later years of the carryforward period as a result of a significant portion of its assets being fully depreciated during the first fifteen years of the carryforward period and debt repayments reducing interest expense.
Accordingly, the recoverability of the net deferred tax asset is not dependent on material improvements to operations, material asset sales or other non-routine transactions.
Based on its current outlook of future taxable income during the carryforward period, management believes that the net deferred tax asset will be realized.
The realization of the Company’s deferred tax assets will be dependent upon its ability to generate approximately $1.0 billion in taxable income from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2023.
If the Company is unable to generate sufficient taxable income in the future, or carry back losses as described above, it will be required to reduce its net deferred tax asset through a charge to income tax expense, which would result in a corresponding decrease in stockholders’ equity.
Depending on the resolution of the Verestar bankruptcy proceedings described in note 2, the Company may be entitled to a worthless stock or bad debt deduction for its investment in Verestar.
No income tax benefit has been provided for these potential deductions due to the uncertainty surrounding the bankruptcy proceedings.13.
STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY Preferred Stock As of December 31, 2003 the Company was authorized to issue up to 20.0 million shares of $.01 par value preferred stock.
As of December 31, 2003 and 2002 there were no preferred shares issued or outstanding.
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements—(Continued) The Corporation will continue to repurchase shares, from time to time, in the open market or in private transactions through the Corporation’s approved repurchase programs.
The Corporation expects to continue to repurchase a number of shares of common stock at least equal to any shares issued under the Corporation’s employee stock plans.
At December 31, 2005, the Corporation had 690,000 shares authorized and 382,450 shares, or $96 million, outstanding of Bank of America 6.75% Perpetual Preferred Stock with a stated value of $250 per share.
Ownership is held in the form of depositary shares paying dividends quarterly at an annual rate of 6.75 percent.
On or after April 15, 2006, the Corporation may redeem Bank of America 6.75% Perpetual Preferred Stock, in whole or in part, at its option, at $250 per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends.
The Corporation also had 805,000 shares authorized and 700,000 shares, or $175 million, outstanding of Bank of America Fixed/Adjustable Rate Cumulative Preferred Stock with a stated value of $250 per share.
Ownership is held in the form of depositary shares paying dividends quarterly at an annual rate of 6.60 percent through April 1, 2006.
After April 1, 2006, the dividend rate on Fixed/Adjustable Rate Cumulative Preferred Stock will be a rate per annum equal to 0.50 percent plus the highest of the Treasury Bill Rate, the Ten Year Constant Maturity Rate, and the Thirty Year Constant Maturity Rate, as each term is defined in BAC’s Amended and Restated Certificate of Designations establishing the Fixed/Adjustable Rate Cumulative Preferred Stock.
The applicable rate per annum for any dividend period beginning on or after April 1, 2006 will not be less than 7.00 percent nor greater than 13.00 percent.
On or after April 1, 2006, the Corporation may redeem Bank of America Fixed/Adjustable Rate Cumulative Preferred Stock, in whole or in part, at its option, at $250 per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends.
In addition to the preferred stock described above, the Corporation had 35,045 shares authorized and 7,739 shares, or $1 million, outstanding of the Series B Preferred Stock with a stated value of $100 per share paying dividends quarterly at an annual rate of 7.00 percent.
The Corporation may redeem the Series B Preferred Stock, in whole or in part, at its option, at $100 per share, plus accrued and unpaid dividends.
All preferred stock outstanding has preference over our common stock with respect to the payment of dividends and distribution of our assets in the event of a liquidation or dissolution.
Except in certain circumstances, the holders of preferred stock have no voting rights.
The following table presents the changes in Accumulated OCI for 2005 and 2004.
## Table 1 ##
(1) Amounts shown are net-of-tax.
(2) The amount included in Accumulated OCI for terminated derivative contracts was a loss of $2.5 billion and a gain of $143 million, net-of-tax, at December 31, 2005 and 2004.
(3) Included in this line item are amounts related to derivatives used in cash flow hedge relationships.
These amounts are reclassified into earnings in the same period or periods during which the hedged forecasted transaction affects earnings.
Our borrowing costs and ability to raise funds are directly impacted by our credit ratings.
The credit ratings of Bank of America Corporation and Bank of America, N. A.  are reflected in the table below.
## Table 2 ##
Under normal business conditions, primary sources of funding for the parent company include dividends received from its banking and nonbanking subsidiaries, and proceeds from the issuance of senior and subordinated debt, as well as commercial paper and equity.
Primary uses of funds for the parent company include repayment of maturing debt and commercial paper, share repurchases, dividends paid to shareholders, and subsidiary funding through capital or debt.
The parent company maintains a cushion of excess liquidity that would be sufficient to fully fund the holding company and nonbank affiliate operations for an extended period during which funding from normal sources is disrupted.
The primary measure used to assess the parent company’s liquidity is the “Time to Required Funding” during such a period of liquidity disruption.
This measure assumes that the parent company is unable to generate funds from debt or equity issuance, receives no dividend income from subsidiaries, and no longer pays dividends to shareholders while continuing to meet nondiscretionary uses needed to maintain bank operations and repayment of contractual principal and interest payments owed by the parent company and affiliated companies.
Under this scenario, the amount of time the parent company and its nonbank subsidiaries can operate and meet all obligations before the current liquid assets are exhausted is considered the “Time to Required Funding.
” ALCO approves the target range set for this metric, in months, and monitors adherence to the target.
Maintaining excess parent company cash ensures that “Time to Required Funding” remains in the target range of 21 to 27 months and is the primary driver of the timing and amount of the Corporation’s debt issuances.
As of December 31, 2007 “Time to Required Funding” was 19 months compared to 24 months at December 31, 2006.
The reduction reflects the funding of the LaSalle acquisition for $21.0 billion in cash which closed on October 1, 2007.
We had anticipated in the fourth quarter of 2007 that the “Time to Required Funding” would decrease slightly below our target range as a result of the funding of the LaSalle acquisition.
We anticipate returning to our target range in 2008 due in part to the issuance of preferred stock in the first quarter of 2008.
For additional information on our recent preferred stock issuances, see the Preferred Stock discussion on page 69.
The primary sources of funding for our banking subsidiaries include customer deposits and wholesale market–based funding.
Primary uses of funds for the banking subsidiaries include growth in the core asset portfolios, including loan demand, and in the ALM portfolio.
We use the ALM portfolio primarily to manage interest rate risk and liquidity risk.
One ratio that can be used to monitor the stability of funding composition is the “loan to domestic deposit” ratio.
This ratio reflects the percent of loans and leases that are funded by domestic core deposits, a relatively stable funding source.
A ratio below 100 percent indicates that our loan portfolio is completely funded by domestic core deposits.
The ratio was 127 percent at December 31, 2007 compared to 118 percent at December 31, 2006.
The increase was primarily attributable to organic growth in the loan and lease portfolio, and a decision to retain a larger share of mortgage production on the Corporation’s balance sheet.
The strength of our balance sheet is a result of rigorous financial and risk discipline.
Our core deposit base, which is a low cost funding source, is often used to fund the purchase of incremental assets (primarily loans and securities), the composition of which impacts our loan to deposit ratio.
Mortgage-backed securities and mortgage loans have prepayment risk which must be managed.
Repricing of deposits is a key variable in this process.
The capital generated in excess of capital adequacy targets and to support business growth, is available for the payment of dividends and share repurchases.
ALCO determines prudent parameters for wholesale market-based borrowing and regularly reviews the funding plan for the bank subsidiaries to ensure compliance with these parameters.
The contingency funding plan for the banking subsidiaries evaluates liquidity over a 12-month period in a variety of business environment scenarios assuming different levels of earnings performance and credit ratings as well as public and investor relations factors.
Funding exposure related to our role as liquidity provider to certain off-balance sheet financing entities is also measured under a stress scenario.
In this analysis, ratings are downgraded such that the off-balance sheet financing entities are not able to issue commercial paper and backup facilities that we provide are drawn upon.
In addition, potential draws on credit facilities to issuers with ratings below a certain level are analyzed to assess potential funding exposure.
We originate loans for retention on our balance sheet and for distribution.
As part of our “originate to distribute” strategy, commercial loan originations are distributed through syndication structures, and residential mortgages originated by Consumer Real Estate are frequently distributed in the secondary market.
In connection with our balance sheet management activities, we may retain mortgage loans originated as well as purchase and sell loans based on our assessment of market conditions.
Regulatory Capital At December 31, 2007, the Corporation operated its banking activities primarily under three charters: Bank of America, N. A. , FIA Card Services, N. A.  and LaSalle Bank, N. A.
As a regulated financial services company, we are governed by certain regulatory capital requirements.
At December 31, 2007 and 2006, the Corporation, Bank of America, N. A. , and FIA Card Services, N. A. , were classified as “well-capitalized” for regulatory purposes, the highest classification.
At December 31, 2007, LaSalle Bank, N. A.  was also classified as “well-capitalized” for regulatory purposes.
There have been no conditions or events since December 31, 2007 that management believes have changed the Corporation’s, Bank of America, N. A.
’s, FIA Card Services, N. A.
’s, and LaSalle Bank, N. A.
’s capital classifications.
Table 19 SOP 03-3 Portfolio – Residential Mortgage State Concentrations
## Table 3 ##
(1) Represents additional net charge-offs for 2008 had the portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3.
Residential Mortgage The residential mortgage SOP 03-3 portfolio outstandings were $9.9 billion at December 31, 2008 and comprised 24 percent of the total SOP 03-3 portfolio.
Those loans with a refreshed FICO score lower than 620 represented 26 percent of the residential mortgage SOP 03-3 portfolio at December 31, 2008.
Refreshed LTVs greater than 90 percent after consideration of purchase accounting adjustments and refreshed LTVs greater than 90 percent based on the unpaid principal balance represented 58 percent and 82 percent of the residential mortgage portfolio.
California represented approximately 56 percent of the outstanding residential mortgage SOP 03-3 portfolio and Florida represented approximately eight percent at December 31, 2008.
Had the acquired portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3 the residential mortgage portfolio would have recorded additional net charge-offs of $438 million.
The table above presents outstandings net of purchase accounting adjustments and net charge-offs had the portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3, by certain state concentrations.
Home Equity The home equity SOP 03-3 outstandings were $14.2 billion at December 31, 2008 and comprised 34 percent of the total SOP 03-3 portfolio.
Those loans with a refreshed FICO score lower than 620 represented 19 percent of the home equity SOP 03-3 portfolio at December 31, 2008.
Refreshed CLTVs greater than 90 percent repre sented 80 percent of the home equity portfolio after consideration of purchase accounting adjustments.
Refreshed CLTVs greater than 90 percent based on the unpaid principal balance represented 88 percent of the home equity portfolio at December 31, 2008.
California represented approximately 36 percent of the outstanding home equity SOP 03-3 portfolio and Florida represented approximately seven percent at December 31, 2008.
Had the acquired portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3 the home equity portfolio would have recorded additional net charge-offs of $1.5 billion.
The table below presents outstandings net of purchase accounting adjustments and net charge-offs had the portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3, by certain state concentrations.
Discontinued Real Estate The discontinued real estate SOP 03-3 portfolio outstandings were $18.1 billion at December 31, 2008 and comprised 42 percent of the total SOP 03-3 portfolio.
Those loans with a refreshed FICO score lower than 620 represented 32 percent of the discontinued real estate SOP 03-3 portfolio at December 31, 2008.
Refreshed LTVs and CLTVs greater than 90 percent represented 40 percent of the discontinued real estate portfolio after consideration of purchase accounting adjustments.
Refreshed LTVs and CLTVs greater than 90 percent based on the unpaid principal balance represented 73 percent of the discontinued real estate portfolio at December 31, 2008.
## Table 4 ##
(1) Represents additional net charge-offs for 2008 had the portfolio not been subject to SOP 03-3.

<table><tr><td>Years ended December 31,</td><td>Federal</td><td>State</td></tr><tr><td>2004 to 2008</td><td>$1,451</td><td>$483,578</td></tr><tr><td>2009 to 2013</td><td>12,234</td><td>66,666</td></tr><tr><td>2014 to 2018</td><td>10,191</td><td>235,589</td></tr><tr><td>2019 to 2023</td><td>903,010</td><td>728,139</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$926,886</td><td>$1,513,972</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> (Dollars in millions)<sup>(1)</sup></td><td>Securities</td><td>Derivatives -2</td><td>Other</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2003 (Restated)</td><td>$-70</td><td>$-2,094</td><td>$-270</td><td>$-2,434</td></tr><tr><td>Net change in fair value recorded in Accumulated OCI</td><td>1,088</td><td>-294</td><td>-18</td><td>776</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Net gains (losses) reclassified into earnings<sup>(3)</sup></td><td>1,215</td><td>-109</td><td>—</td><td>1,106</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2004 (Restated)</td><td>-197</td><td>-2,279</td><td>-288</td><td>-2,764</td></tr><tr><td>Net change in fair value recorded in Accumulated OCI</td><td>-1,907</td><td>-2,225</td><td>48</td><td>-4,084</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Net gains (losses) reclassified into earnings<sup>(3)</sup></td><td>874</td><td>-166</td><td>—</td><td>708</td></tr><tr><td> Balance, December 31, 2005</td><td>$-2,978</td><td>$-4,338</td><td>$-240</td><td>$-7,556</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5"> December 31, 2007</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3"> Bank of America Corporation</td><td colspan="2"> Bank of America, N.A.</td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Senior Debt</td><td> Subordinated Debt</td><td> Commercial Paper</td><td> Short-term Borrowings</td><td> Long-term Debt</td></tr><tr><td>Moody’s Investors Service</td><td>Aa1</td><td>Aa2</td><td>P-1</td><td>P-1</td><td>Aaa</td></tr><tr><td>Standard & Poor’s</td><td>AA</td><td>AA-</td><td>A-1+</td><td>A-1+</td><td>AA+</td></tr><tr><td>Fitch Ratings</td><td>AA</td><td>AA-</td><td>F1+</td><td>F1+</td><td>AA</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">December 31, 2008 Outstandings</td><td colspan="2"> Year Ended December 31, 2008  SOP 03-3 Net Charge-offs<sup>-1</sup></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td> Amount</td><td>Percent of Total</td><td> Amount</td><td> Percent of Total</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>California</td><td>$5,598</td><td>56.3%</td><td>$177</td><td>40.4%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Florida</td><td>771</td><td>7.7</td><td>103</td><td>23.5</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Virginia</td><td>553</td><td>5.6</td><td>14</td><td>3.2</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Maryland</td><td>251</td><td>2.5</td><td>6</td><td>1.4</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Texas</td><td>147</td><td>1.5</td><td>5</td><td>1.1</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Other U.S. / Foreign</td><td>2,629</td><td>26.4</td><td>133</td><td>30.4</td><td></td></tr><tr><td> Total SOP 03-3 residential mortgage loans</td><td>$9,949</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$438</td><td> 100.0</td><td> %</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">December 31, 2008 Outstandings</td><td colspan="2"> Year Ended December 31, 2008  SOP 03-3 Net Charge-offs<sup>-1</sup></td><td></td></tr><tr><td> (Dollars in millions)</td><td> Amount</td><td>Percent of Total</td><td> Amount</td><td> Percent of Total</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>California</td><td>$5,133</td><td>36.2%</td><td>$744</td><td>49.8%</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Florida</td><td>914</td><td>6.5</td><td>186</td><td>12.4</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Arizona</td><td>629</td><td>4.4</td><td>79</td><td>5.3</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Virginia</td><td>532</td><td>3.8</td><td>42</td><td>2.8</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Colorado</td><td>404</td><td>2.9</td><td>22</td><td>1.5</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Other U.S. / Foreign</td><td>6,551</td><td>46.2</td><td>421</td><td>28.2</td><td></td></tr><tr><td> Total SOP 03-3 home equity loans</td><td>$14,163</td><td>100.0%</td><td>$1,494</td><td> 100.0</td><td> %</td></tr></table>

Question: at december 31 , 2003 , what was the ratio of the company net federal operating loss carry forwards to the state
Answer: 0.6