because the put option was voided, we began accounting for the synthetic fuel joint ventures using the equity method of accounting.
Beginning March 26, 2004, as a result of adopting FIN 46(R), we have again consolidated the synthetic fuel joint ventures, and we reflect our partner’s share of the operating losses as minority interest.
Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) Placed-in-Service Challenge In July 2004, IRS field auditors issued a notice of proposed adjustment and later a Summary Report to PacifiCorp, the previous owner of the Facilities, that included a challenge to the placed-in-service dates of three of the four synthetic fuel facilities owned by one of our synthetic fuel joint ventures.
One of the conditions to qualify for tax credits under Section 29 of the Internal Revenue Code is that the production facility must have been placed in service before July 1, 1998.
We strongly believe that all the facilities meet the placed-in-service requirement.
Although we are engaged in discussions with the IRS and are confident this issue will be resolved in our favor and not result in a material charge to us, we cannot assure you as to the ultimate outcome of this matter.
If ultimately resolved against us we could be prevented from realizing projected future tax credits and cause us to reverse previously utilized tax credits, requiring payment of substantial additional taxes.
Since acquiring the plants, we have recognized approximately $435 million of tax credits from all four plants through December 31, 2004.
The tax credits recognized through December 31, 2004, associated with the three facilities in question totaled approximately $330 million.
On October 6, 2004, we entered into amendment agreements with our synthetic fuel partner that result in a shift in the allocation of tax credits between us.
On the synthetic fuel facility that is not being reviewed by the IRS, our partner increased its allocation of tax credits from approximately 50 percent to 90 percent through March 31, 2005, and pays a higher price per tax credit to us for that additional share of tax credits.
With respect to the three synthetic fuel facilities under IRS review, our partner reduced its allocation of tax credits from approximately 50 percent to an average of roughly 5 percent through March 31, 2005.
If the IRS’ placed-in-service challenge regarding the three facilities is not successfully resolved by March 31, 2005, our partner will have the right to return its ownership interest in those three facilities to us at that time.
We will have the flexibility to continue to operate at current levels, reduce production and/or sell an interest to another party.
If there is a successful resolution by March 31, 2005, our partner’s share of the tax credits from all four facilities will return to approximately 50 percent.
In any event, on March 31, 2005, our share of the tax credits from the one facility not under review will return to approximately 50 percent.8 DISCONTINUED OPERATIONS Senior Living Services During 2002, we completed the sale of 41 properties for $210 million and recorded an after-tax loss of $2 million.
On December 30, 2002, we entered into a definitive agreement to sell our senior living management business to Sunrise Senior Living, Inc.  (“Sunrise”) and to sell nine senior living communities to CNL Retirement Properties, Inc.  (“CNL”) and recorded an after-tax charge of $131 million.
We completed the sales to Sunrise and CNL, in addition to the related sale of a parcel of land to Sunrise in March 2003, for $266 million.
We recorded after-tax gains of $19 million in 2003.
Also, on December 30, 2002, we purchased 14 senior living communities for approximately $15 million in cash, plus the assumption of $227 million in debt, from an unrelated owner.
We had previously agreed to provide a form of credit enhancement on the outstanding debt related to these communities.
Management approved and committed to a plan to sell these communities within 12 months.
As part of that plan, on March 31, 2003, we acquired all of the subordinated credit-enhanced mortgage securities relating to the 14 communities in a transaction in which we issued $46 million of unsecured Marriott International, Inc.  notes, due April 2004.
In the 2003 third quarter, we sold the 14 communities to CNL for approximately $184 million.
We provided a $92 million acquisition loan to CNL in connection with the sale.
Sunrise currently operates, and will continue to operate, the 14 communities under long-term management agreements.
We recorded a gain, net of taxes, of $1 million.
The operating results of our senior living segment are reported in discontinued operations during the years ended January 2, 2004, and January 3, 2003, and the remaining assets and liabilities were classified as assets held for sale and liabilities of businesses held for sale, respectively, on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet at January 3, 2003.
The following table provides additional income statement and balance sheet information relating to the Senior Living Services business:
## Table 0 ##
The tax benefit in 2002 of $10 million associated with the loss on disposal includes $45 million of additional taxes related to goodwill with no tax basis.
Distribution Services In the third quarter of 2002, we completed a previously announced strategic review of our Distribution Services business and decided to exit that business.
We completed that exit during the fourth quarter of 2002 through a combination of transferring certain facilities, closing other facilities and other suitable arrangements.
In the year ended
16 FA I R VA LU E O F F I NA N C I A L I N S T RU M E N T S We believe that the fair values of current assets and current liabilities approximate their reported carrying amounts.
The fair values of noncurrent financial assets, liabilities and derivatives are shown below.
## Table 1 ##
We value notes and other receivables based on the expected future cash flows discounted at risk-adjusted rates.
We determine valuations for long-term debt and other long-term liabilities based on quoted market prices or expected future payments discounted at risk-adjusted rates.17 D E R I VAT I V E I N S T RU M E N T S During the year ended January 2, 2004, we entered into an interest rate swap agreement under which we receive a floating rate of interest and pay a fixed rate of interest.
The swap modifies our interest rate exposure by effectively converting a note receivable with a fixed rate to a floating rate.
The aggregate notional amount of the swap is $92 million, and it matures in 2010.
The swap is classified as a fair value hedge, and the change in the fair value of the swap, as well as the change in the fair value of the underlying note receivable, is recognized in interest income.
The fair value of the swap was a liability of approximately $3 million at December 31, 2004, and January 2, 2004.
The hedge is highly effective, and therefore, no net gain or loss was reported in earnings during the years ended December 31, 2004, and January 2, 2004.
At December 31, 2004, we had six outstanding interest rate swap agreements to manage interest rate risk associated with the residual interests we retain in conjunction with our timeshare note sales.
We are required by purchasers and/or rating agencies to utilize interest rate swaps to protect the excess spread within our sold note pools.
The aggregate notional amount of the swaps is $535 million, and they expire through 2022.
These swaps are not accounted for as hedges under FAS No.133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities.
” The fair value of the swaps is a net asset of approximately $3 million at December 31, 2004, a net asset of approximately $1 million at January 2, 2004, and a net liability of $2 million at January 3, 2003.
We recorded a $2 million net gain, $3 million net gain and $21 million net loss during the years ended December 31, 2004, January 2, 2004 and January 3, 2003, respectively.
These expenses were largely offset by income resulting from the change in fair value of the retained interests and note sale gains in response to changes in interest rates.
During the years ended December 31, 2004, and January 2, 2004, we entered into interest rate swaps to manage interest rate risk associated with forecasted timeshare note sales.
These swaps were not accounted for as hedges under FAS No.133.
The swaps were terminated upon the sale of the notes and resulted in a gain of $2 million during the year ended December 31, 2004, and a loss of $4 million during the year ended January 2, 2004.
These amounts were largely offset by changes in the note sale gains and losses.
During the years ended December 31, 2004, and January 2, 2004, we entered into forward foreign exchange contracts to manage the foreign currency exposure related to certain monetary assets denominated in pounds sterling.
The aggregate dollar equivalent of the notional amount of the contracts is $36 million at December 31, 2004.
The forward exchange contracts are not accounted for as hedges in accordance with FAS No.133.
The fair value of the forward contracts is approximately zero at December 31, 2004, and January 2, 2004.
We recorded a $3 million and $2 million net loss relating to these forward foreign exchange contracts for the years ended December 31, 2004 and January 2, 2004, respectively.
The net losses for both years were offset by income recorded from translating the related monetary assets denominated in pounds sterling into U. S.  dollars.
During fiscal years 2004 and 2003, we entered into foreign exchange option and forward contracts to hedge the potential volatility of earnings and cash flows associated with variations in foreign exchange rates.
The aggregate dollar equivalent of the notional amounts of the contracts is $36 million at December 31, 2004.
These contracts have terms of less than a year and are classified as cash flow hedges.
Changes in their fair values are recorded as a component of other comprehensive income.
The fair value of the forward contracts is approximately zero and $1 million at December 31, 2004, and January 2, 2004, respectively.
During 2004, it was determined that certain derivatives were no longer effective in offsetting the hedged item.
Thus, cash flow hedge accounting treatment was discontinued and the ineffective contracts resulted in a loss of $1 million, which was reported in earnings for fiscal year 2004.
The remaining hedges were highly effective and there was no net gain or loss reported in earnings for the fiscal years 2004 and 2003.
As of December 31, 2004, there were no deferred gains or losses accumulated in other comprehensive income that we expect to reclassify into earnings over the next 12 months.18 CONTINGENCIES Guarantees We issue guarantees to certain lenders and hotel owners primarily to obtain long-term management contracts.
The guarantees generally have a stated maximum amount of funding and a term of five years or less.
The terms of guarantees to lenders generally require us to fund if cash flows from hotel operations are inadequate to cover annual debt service or to repay the loan at the end of the term.
The terms of the guarantees to hotel owners generally require us to fund if the hotels do not attain specified levels of operating profit.
Synthetic Fuel See Footnote No.2,“Synthetic Fuel,” and Footnote No.18, “Contingencies,” in this report for additional information regarding the Synthetic Fuel segment.
The tables that follow detail the impact of our Synthetic Fuel segment on our income from continuing operations for 2006, 2005 and 2004.
Our management evaluates the figures presented in the “Before Syn.
Fuel Impact” columns because management expects the Synthetic Fuel segment will no longer have a material impact on our business after the Internal Revenue Code synthetic fuel tax credit program expires at the end of 2007 and because the presentation reflects the results of our core Lodging operations.
Management also believes that these presentations facilitate the comparison of our results with the results of other lodging companies.
However, the figures presented in the “Before Syn.
Fuel Impact” columns are non-GAAP financial measures, may be calculated and/or presented differently than presentations of other companies, and are not alternatives to operating income, total tax (provision) benefit, income from continuing operations, or any other operating measure prescribed by U. S.  generally accepted accounting principles.2006 COMPARED TO 2005 For 2006, the synthetic fuel operation generated revenue of $165 million versus revenue of $421 million for the prior year, primarily reflecting significantly lower production in 2006 as a result of production suspensions instituted in response to high oil prices.
The $76 million operating loss for 2006 includes a $5 million charge reflecting the write-down of assets at the Alabama production facility as the adjacent mine was closed at year-end, and we did not anticipate operating the facility again at this location.
Gains and other income (expense) reflects either net earnout payments received or net earn-out payments made.
In 2006, net earn-out payments made totaled $15 million, while in 2005 net earn-out payments received totaled $32 million.
Lower minority interest income primarily reflects the redemption, early in 2006, of our partner’s interest in SAFE II.
Additionally, lower minority interest income in 2006 also reflects our buy-out in the 2006 fourth quarter of our partner’s interest in SAFE I.
Interest costs in 2006 of $4 million reflect the cost of hedges entered into during 2006 in response to high oil prices and the uncertainty surrounding the potential phase-out of tax credits.
Income from continuing operations for the Synthetic Fuel segment declined from $125 million in 2005 to $5 million in 2006, primarily as a result of both lower production in 2006 and the estimated 39 percent phase-out of tax credits due to high oil prices in 2006.
The table below details the impact of our Synthetic Fuel segment on our continuing operations for 2006 and 2005
## Table 2 ##
2005 COMPARED TO 2004 For 2005, the synthetic fuel operation generated revenue of $421 million versus revenue of $321 million for the prior year, primarily due to the consolidation of our synthetic fuel operations from the start of the 2004 second quarter, which resulted in the recognition of revenue for the entire 2005 year compared with only three quarters in 2004, as we accounted for the synthetic fuel operations using the equity method of accounting in the 2004 first quarter.
The $18 million increase in synthetic fuel income from continuing operations to $125 million from $107 million in 2004 is primarily due to our increased proportion of tax credits through May 31, 2005, associated with the SAFE II facilities that were then under IRS review and higher gains and other income, partially offset by our decreased proportion of tax credits through March 31, 2005, associated with the SAFE I facility that was not under IRS review.
In addition, in 2005 production was slightly lower and raw materials prices were higher than in 2004.
Gains and other income represents net earn-out payments received.
Minority interest increased from a benefit of $40 million in 2004 to a benefit of $47 million in 2005, primarily as a result of the change in the method of accounting for our synthetic fuel operations.
For 2004, minority interest reflects our partner’s share of the synthetic fuel losses from March 26, 2004 (when we began consolidating the ventures due to the adoption of FIN 46(R)) through year-end.
For 2005, minority interest represents our partner’s share of the synthetic fuel losses for the entire year.

<table><tr><td>  <i>($ in millions)</i> </td><td> 2004 </td><td>2003</td><td>2002</td></tr><tr><td>Income Statement Summary</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Sales</td><td>$—</td><td>$184</td><td>$802</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-tax income on operations</td><td>$—</td><td>$11</td><td>$37</td></tr><tr><td>Tax provision</td><td>—</td><td>-4</td><td>-14</td></tr><tr><td>Income on operations, net of tax</td><td>$—</td><td>$7</td><td>$23</td></tr><tr><td>Pre-tax gain (loss) on disposal</td><td>$—</td><td>$31</td><td>$-141</td></tr><tr><td>Tax (provision) benefit</td><td>—</td><td>-12</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>Gain (loss) on disposal, net of tax</td><td>$—</td><td>$19</td><td>$-131</td></tr><tr><td>Balance Sheet Summary</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Property, plant and equipment</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$434</td></tr><tr><td>Goodwill</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>115</td></tr><tr><td>Other assets</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>54</td></tr><tr><td>Liabilities</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>317</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>2004</td><td>2003</td></tr><tr><td><i>($ in millions)</i></td><td>Carrying Amount</td><td>Fair Value</td><td>Carrying Amount</td><td>Fair Value</td></tr><tr><td>Notes and other long-term assets</td><td>$1,702</td><td>$1,770</td><td>$1,740</td><td>$1,778</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt and other long-term liabilities</td><td>$848</td><td>$875</td><td>$1,373</td><td>$1,487</td></tr><tr><td>Derivative instruments</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$-1</td><td>$-1</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">2006</td><td colspan="3">2005</td></tr><tr><td> <i>($ 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>$1,011</td><td>$-76</td><td>$1,087</td><td>$555</td><td>$-144</td><td>$699</td></tr><tr><td>Gains and other income (expense)</td><td>59</td><td>-15</td><td>74</td><td>181</td><td>32</td><td>149</td></tr><tr><td>Interest income, provision for loan losses and interest expense</td><td>-76</td><td>-4</td><td>-72</td><td>-55</td><td>—</td><td>-55</td></tr><tr><td>Equity in earnings (losses)</td><td>3</td><td>—</td><td>3</td><td>36</td><td>—</td><td>36</td></tr><tr><td>Income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest</td><td>997</td><td>-95</td><td>1,092</td><td>717</td><td>-112</td><td>829</td></tr><tr><td>Tax (provision) benefit</td><td>-348</td><td>32</td><td>-380</td><td>-261</td><td>23</td><td>-284</td></tr><tr><td>Tax credits</td><td>62</td><td>62</td><td>—</td><td>167</td><td>167</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total tax (provision) benefit</td><td>-286</td><td>94</td><td>-380</td><td>-94</td><td>190</td><td>-284</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations before minority interest</td><td>711</td><td>-1</td><td>712</td><td>623</td><td>78</td><td>545</td></tr><tr><td>Minority interest</td><td>6</td><td>6</td><td>—</td><td>45</td><td>47</td><td>-2</td></tr><tr><td>Income from continuing operations</td><td>$717</td><td>$5</td><td>$712</td><td>$668</td><td>$125</td><td>$543</td></tr></table>

Question: Which year is the value of Income from continuing operations for As Reported higher?
Answer: 2006