shutdown.
The customer, which primarily received products from the Tonnage Gases segment, filed for bankruptcy in May 2012 and announced the mill shutdown in August 2012.
Pension Settlement Loss Our U. S.  supplemental pension plan provides for a lump sum benefit payment option at the time of retirement, or for corporate officers, six months after the retirement date.
Pension settlements are recognized when cash payments exceed the sum of the service and interest cost components of net periodic pension cost of the plan for the fiscal year.
The participant’s vested benefit is considered fully settled upon cash payment of the lump sum.
We recognized $12.4 of settlement charges in 2013.
Advisory Costs During the fourth quarter of 2013, we incurred legal and other advisory fees of $10.1 ($6.4 after-tax, or $.03 per share) in connection with our response to the rapid acquisition of a large position in shares of our common stock by Pershing Square Capital Management LLC and its affiliates (Pershing Square).
These fees, which are reflected on the consolidated income statements as “Advisory costs,” include costs incurred before and after Pershing Square’s disclosure of its holdings and cover advisory services related to the adoption of the Shareholders Rights Plan, preparation for a potential proxy solicitation campaign, and entering into an agreement with Pershing Square.
Other Income (Expense), Net Items recorded to other income (expense), net arise from transactions and events not directly related to our principal income earning activities.
The detail of other income (expense), net is presented in Note 23, Supplemental Information, to the consolidated financial statements.2013 vs.  2012 Other income (expense), net of $70.2 increased $23.1, primarily due to higher gains from the sale of a number of small assets and investments and a favorable commercial contract settlement, partially offset by lower government grants.
Otherwise, no individual items were significant in comparison to the prior year.2012 vs.  2011 Other income (expense), net of $47.1 increased $5.4, primarily due to favorable foreign exchange and reimbursements from government grants for expense, partially offset by lower gains from the sale of assets.
Otherwise, no individual items were significant in comparison to the prior year.
Interest Expense
## Table 0 ##
2013 vs.  2012 Interest incurred increased $13.7.
The increase was driven primarily by a higher average debt balance for $41, partially offset by a lower average interest rate on the debt portfolio of $24.
The change in capitalized interest was driven by a decrease in project spending and a lower average interest rate.2012 vs.  2011 Interest incurred increased $15.7.
The increase was driven primarily by a higher average debt balance and debt issuance costs related to the Indura S. A.  acquisition, partially offset by the impact of a stronger dollar on the translation of foreign currency interest.
The change in capitalized interest was driven by an increase in project spending which qualified for capitalization.
Effective Tax Rate The effective tax rate equals the income tax provision divided by income from continuing operations before taxes.
Refer to Note 22, Income Taxes, to the consolidated financial statements for details on factors affecting the effective tax rate.2013 vs.  2012 On a GAAP basis, the effective tax rate was 22.8% and 21.9% in 2013 and 2012, respectively.
The current year rate includes income tax benefits of $73.7 related to the business restructuring and cost reduction plans and $3.7 for the advisory costs.
The prior year rate includes income tax benefits of $105.0 related to the business restructuring and cost reduction plans, $58.3 related to the second quarter Spanish tax ruling, and $3.7 related to the customer
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.  NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) (footnotes continued from previous page) (2) In 2004, $47 million related to additional probable insurance recoveries identified in the second quarter of 2004 based on our ongoing evaluation of the enforceability of our rights under the various insurance policies.
In 2003, $155 million related to additional probable insurance recoveries recognized in connection with the accrual for asbestos liabilities recorded upon the termination of the transaction to sell our Friction Materials business.
NARCO and Bendix asbestos related balances are included in the following balance sheet accounts:
## Table 1 ##
We are monitoring proposals for federal asbestos legislation pending in the United States Congress.
Due to the uncertainty as to whether proposed legislation will be adopted and as to the terms of any adopted legislation, it is not possible at this point in time to determine what impact such legislation would have on our asbestos liabilities and related insurance recoveries.
Other Matters Breed Technologies Inc.  v.  AlliedSignal—The plaintiff alleges fraud in connection with AlliedSignal’s (a predecessor to the Company) October 1997 sale of its safety restraints business to Breed and seeks compensatory damages of up to $375 million and punitive damages.
The trial commenced in January 2006 in Florida state court.
We believe plaintiff’s claims are without merit and expect to prevail in this matter.
Accordingly, we do not believe that a liability is probable of occurrence and reasonably estimable and have not recorded a provision for this matter in our financial statements.
Given the uncertainty inherent in litigation, it is not possible to estimate the range of possible loss that might result from an adverse resolution of this matter.
Allen, et.
al.
v.  Honeywell Retirement Earnings Plan—This represents a purported class action lawsuit in which plaintiffs seek unspecified damages relating to allegations that, among other things, Honeywell impermissibly reduced the pension benefits of employees of Garrett Corporation (a predecessor entity) when the plan was amended in 1983 and failed to calculate certain benefits in accordance with the terms of the plan.
In the third quarter of 2005, the U. S.  District Court for the District of Arizona ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on these claims and in favor of Honeywell on virtually all other claims.
We strongly disagree with, and intend to appeal, the Court’s adverse ruling.
No class has yet been certified by the Court in this matter.
In light of the merits of our arguments on appeal and substantial affirmative defenses which have not yet been considered by the Court, we continue to expect to prevail in this matter.
Accordingly, we do not believe that a liability is probable of occurrence and reasonably estimable and have not recorded a provision for this matter in our financial statements.
Given the uncertainty inherent in litigation, it is not possible to estimate the range of possible loss that might result from an adverse resolution of this matter.
Although we expect to prevail in the Breed and Allen matters discussed above, an adverse outcome in either matter could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or operating
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.  NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) less than the accumulated benefit obligation at the end of the plan year.
In 2005, we recorded a noncash adjustment to equity through accumulated other nonowner changes of $16 million ($26 million on a pretax basis) which increased the minimum pension liability.
In 2004, we recorded a non-cash adjustment to equity through accumulated other nonowner changes of $15 million ($19 million on a pretax basis) which increased the additional minimum pension liability.
In 2003, we recorded a non-cash adjustment to equity through accumulated other nonowner changes of $369 million ($604 million on a pretax basis) to reduce the additional minimum pension liability by $304 million and reinstate a portion of the pension assets ($300 million) written off in the prior year’s minimum pension liability adjustment.
This 2003 adjustment resulted from an increase in our pension assets in 2003 due to the improvement in equity markets and our contribution of $670 million to our U. S.  plans.
Our U. S.  pension plans assets were $12.0 and $11.5 billion and our non-U.
S.  pension plans assets were $2.6 and $1.6 billion at December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Our asset allocation and target allocation for our pension plans assets are as follows:
## Table 2 ##
2004, respectively.
An independent fiduciary holds and makes all investment decisions with respect to the Honeywell common stock.
Our asset investment strategy focuses on maintaining a diversified portfolio, using various asset classes, in order to achieve our long-term investment objectives on a risk adjusted basis.
Our actual invested positions in various securities change over time based on short and longer-term investment opportunities.
To achieve our objectives, our U. S.  investment policy requires that our U. S.  Master Retirement Trust be invested as follows: (a) no less than 30 percent be invested in fixed income securities; (b) no more than 10 percent in high-yield securities; (c) no more than 10 percent in private real estate investments; and (d) no more than 6 percent in other investment alternatives involving limited partnerships of various types.
There is no stated limit on investments in publically-held U. S.  and international equity securities.
Our non-U.
S.  investment policies are different for each country, but the long-term investment objectives remain the same.
Our general funding policy for qualified pension plans is to contribute amounts at least sufficient to satisfy regulatory funding standards.
In 2004 and 2003, we made voluntary contributions of $40 and $670 million, respectively, to our U. S.  defined benefit pension plans to improve the funded status of our plans.
Assuming that actual plan asset returns are consistent with our expected rate of 9 percent in 2006 and beyond, and that interest rates remain constant, we would not be required to make any contributions to our U. S.  pension plans for the foreseeable future.
We expect to make voluntary contributions of approximately $45 million in cash in 2006 to certain of our U. S.  plans for government contracting purposes.
We also expect to contribute approximately $150 million in cash in 2006 to our non-U.
S.  defined benefit pension plans primarily related to funding requirements of recently acquired companies.
These contributions do not reflect benefits to be paid directly from Company assets.
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL INC.  NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued) (Dollars in millions, except per share amounts) Commodity Price Risk Management—Our exposure to market risk for commodity prices can result in changes in our cost of production.
We mitigate our exposure to commodity price risk through the use of long-term, firm-price contracts with our suppliers and forward commodity purchase agreements with third parties hedging anticipated purchases of several commodities (principally natural gas).
Forward commodity purchase agreements are marked-to-market, with the resulting gains and losses recognized in earnings when the hedged transaction is recognized.
Interest Rate Risk Management—We use a combination of financial instruments, including medium-term and short-term financing, variable-rate commercial paper, and interest rate swaps to manage the interest rate mix of our total debt portfolio and related overall cost of borrowing.
At December 31, 2005 and 2004, interest rate swap agreements designated as fair value hedges effectively changed $681 and $1,218 million, respectively, of fixed rate debt at an average rate of 6.15 and 6.42 percent, respectively, to LIBOR based floating rate debt.
Our interest rate swaps mature through 2007.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments—The carrying value of cash and cash equivalents, trade accounts and notes receivables, payables, commercial paper and short-term borrowings contained in the Consolidated Balance Sheet approximates fair value.
Summarized below are the carrying values and fair values of our other financial instruments at December 31, 2005 and 2004.
The fair values are based on the quoted market prices for the issues (if traded), current rates offered to us for debt of the same remaining maturity and characteristics, or other valuation techniques, as appropriate.
## Table 3 ##
Note 18—Capital Stock We are authorized to issue up to 2,000,000,000 shares of common stock, with a par value of one dollar.
Common shareowners are entitled to receive such dividends as may be declared by the Board, are entitled to one vote per share, and are entitled, in the event of liquidation, to share ratably in all the assets of Honeywell which are available for distribution to the common shareowners.
Common shareowners do not have preemptive or conversion rights.
Shares of common stock issued and outstanding or held in the treasury are not liable to further calls or assessments.
There are no restrictions on us relative to dividends or the repurchase or redemption of common stock.
In November 2005, Honeywell’s Board authorized the Company to repurchase up to $3 billion of its common stock.
As of December 31, 2005, approximately $2.6 billion of additional shares may yet be purchased under this program.
The amount and timing of repurchases may vary depending on market conditions and the level of other investing activities.

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Interest incurred</td><td>$167.6</td><td>$153.9</td><td>$138.2</td></tr><tr><td>Less: Capitalized interest</td><td>25.8</td><td>30.2</td><td>22.7</td></tr><tr><td>Interest Expense</td><td>$141.8</td><td>$123.7</td><td>$115.5</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> December 31, </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> 2005 </td><td> 2004 </td></tr><tr><td>Other current assets</td><td>$171</td><td>$150</td></tr><tr><td>Insurance recoveries for asbestos related liabilities</td><td>1,302</td><td>1,412</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$1,473</td><td>$1,562</td></tr><tr><td>Accrued liabilities</td><td>$520</td><td>$744</td></tr><tr><td>Asbestos related liabilities</td><td>1,549</td><td>2,006</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$2,069</td><td>$2,750</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> Percentage of Plans Assets at December 31, </td><td> Long-term Target Allocation </td></tr><tr><td> Asset Category </td><td> 2005 </td><td> 2004 </td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Equity securities</td><td>63%</td><td>61%</td><td>40-65%</td></tr><tr><td>Debt securities, including cash</td><td>31</td><td>33</td><td>30-45</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate</td><td>4</td><td>4</td><td>2-8</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>2</td><td>2</td><td>2-6</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>100%</td><td>100%</td><td></td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2"> December 31, 2005 </td><td colspan="2"> December 31, 2004 </td></tr><tr><td></td><td> Carrying Value </td><td> Fair Value </td><td> Carrying Value </td><td> Fair Value </td></tr><tr><td> Assets</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Long-term receivables</td><td>$306</td><td>$285</td><td>$237</td><td>$218</td></tr><tr><td>Interest rate swap agreements</td><td>9</td><td>9</td><td>39</td><td>39</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign currency exchange contracts</td><td>3</td><td>3</td><td>22</td><td>22</td></tr><tr><td>Forward commodity contracts</td><td>18</td><td>18</td><td>10</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td> Liabilities</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Long-term debt and related current maturities</td><td>$-4,077</td><td>$-4,291</td><td>$-5,025</td><td>$-5,411</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign currency exchange contracts</td><td>-5</td><td>-5</td><td>-6</td><td>-6</td></tr><tr><td>Forward commodity contracts</td><td>-1</td><td>-1</td><td>-2</td><td>-2</td></tr></table>

Question: In the year with the most Interest rate swap agreements, what is the growth rate of Forward commodity contracts?
Answer: 0.8
Reasoning program: add(18,18), add(10,10), subtract(#0,#1), add(10,10), divide(#2,#3)