## Table 0 ##
(1) Represents anticipated repayment date; final legal maturity date is March 15, 2043.
(2) Represents anticipated repayment date; final legal maturity date is March 15, 2048.
(3) In connection with our acquisition of MIPT on October 1, 2013, we assumed approximately $1.49 billion aggregate principal amount of secured notes, $250.0 million of which we repaid in August 2014.
The GTP Notes have anticipated repayment dates beginning June 15, 2016.
(4) Assumed in connection with our acquisition of BR Towers and denominated in BRL.
The BR Towers Debenture amortizes through October 2023.
The BR Towers Credit Facility amortizes through January 15, 2022.
(5) Assumed by us in connection with the Unison Acquisition, and have anticipated repayment dates of April 15, 2017, April 15, 2020 and April 15, 2020, respectively, and a final maturity date of April 15, 2040.
(6) Denominated in MXN.
(7) Denominated in ZAR and amortizes through March 31, 2020.
(8) Denominated in COP and amortizes through April 24, 2021.
(9) Reflects balances owed to our joint venture partners in Ghana and Uganda.
The Ghana loan is denominated in GHS and the Uganda loan is denominated in USD.
(10) On February 11, 2015, we redeemed all of the outstanding 4.625% Notes in accordance with the terms thereof.
(11) Includes payments under non-cancellable initial terms, as well as payments for certain renewal periods at our option, which we expect to renew because failure to renew could result in a loss of the applicable communications sites and related revenues from tenant leases.
(12) Primarily represents our asset retirement obligations and excludes certain other non-current liabilities included in our consolidated balance sheet, primarily our straight-line rent liability for which cash payments are included in operating lease payments and unearned revenue that is not payable in cash.
(13) Excludes $26.6 million of liabilities for unrecognized tax positions and $24.9 million of accrued income tax related interest and penalties included in our consolidated balance sheet as we are uncertain as to when and if the amounts may be settled.
Settlement of such amounts could require the use of cash flows generated from operations.
We expect the unrecognized tax benefits to change over the next 12 months if certain tax matters ultimately settle with the applicable taxing jurisdiction during this timeframe.
However, based on the status of these items and the amount of uncertainty associated with the outcome and timing of audit settlements, we are currently unable to estimate the impact of the amount of such changes, if any, to previously recorded uncertain tax positions.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements.
We have no material off-balance sheet arrangements as defined in Item 303(a)(4)(ii) of SEC Regulation S-K.  Interest Rate Swap Agreements.
We have entered into interest rate swap agreements to manage our exposure to variability in interest rates on debt in Colombia and South Africa.
All of our interest rate swap agreements have been designated as cash flow hedges and have an aggregate notional amount of $79.9 million, interest rates ranging from 5.74% to 7.83% and expiration dates through April 2021.
In February 2014, we repaid the Costa Rica Loan and subsequently terminated the associated interest rate swap agreements.
Additionally, in connection with entering into the Colombian Credit Facility in October 2014, we terminated our pre-existing interest rate
Summary of Troubled Debt Restructurings
## Table 1 ##
(a) Includes credit cards and certain small business and consumer credit agreements whose terms have been restructured and are TDRs.
However, since our policy is to exempt these loans from being placed on nonaccrual status as permitted by regulatory guidance as generally these loans are directly charged off in the period that they become 180 days past due, these loans are excluded from nonperforming loans.
(b) Accruing loans have demonstrated a period of at least six months of performance under the restructured terms and are excluded from nonperforming loans.
Total TDRs increased $545 million or 33% during 2011 to $2.2 billion as of December 31, 2011.
Of this total, nonperforming TDRs totaled $1.1 billion, which represents approximately 32% of total nonperforming loans.
However, as the economy has continued to slowly improve, the amount of TDRs returning to performing status has been increasing as noted below.
TDRs that have returned to performing (accruing) status are excluded from nonperforming loans.
These loans have demonstrated a period of at least six months of consecutive performance under the restructured terms.
These TDRs increased $228 million or 42% during 2011 to $771 million as of December 31, 2011.
This increase reflects the further seasoning and performance of the TDRs.
See Note 5 Asset Quality and Allowances for Loan and Lease Losses and Unfunded Loan Commitments and Letters of Credit in the Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Report for additional information.
ALLOWANCES FOR LOAN AND LEASE LOSSES AND UNFUNDED LOAN COMMITMENTS AND LETTERS OF CREDIT We recorded $1.6 billion in net charge-offs for the full year of 2011, compared to $2.9 billion in the full year of 2010.
Commercial lending net charge-offs fell from $1.6 billion in the full year of 2010 to $712 million in the full year of 2011.
Consumer lending net charge-offs declined from $1.3 billion in the full year of 2010 to $927 million in the full year of 2011.
Loan Charge-Offs And Recoveries
## Table 2 ##
Total net charge-offs are significantly lower than they would have been otherwise due to the accounting treatment for purchased impaired loans.
This treatment also results in a lower ratio of net charge-offs to average loans.
See Note 6 Purchased Impaired Loans in the Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Report for additional information on net charge-offs related to these loans.
We maintain an ALLL to absorb losses from the loan portfolio and determine this allowance based on quarterly assessments of the estimated probable credit losses incurred in the loan portfolio.
We maintain the ALLL at a level that we believe to be appropriate to absorb estimated probable credit losses incurred in the loan portfolio as of the balance sheet date.
While we make allocations to specific loans and pools of loans, the total reserve is available for all loan and lease losses.
Although quantitative modeling factors as discussed below are constantly changing as the financial strength of the borrower and overall economic conditions change, there were no significant changes during the full year of 2011 to the methodology we follow to determine our ALLL.
We establish specific allowances for loans considered impaired using methods prescribed by GAAP.
All impaired loans are subject to individual analysis, except leases and large groups of smaller-balance homogeneous loans which may include, but are not limited to, credit card, residential mortgage, and consumer installment loans.
Specific allowances for individual loans (including commercial and consumer TDRs) are determined based on an analysis of the present value of expected future cash flows from the loans discounted at their effective interest rate, observable market price, or the fair value of the underlying collateral.
Allocations to non-impaired commercial loan classes are based on PD and LGD credit risk ratings.
Our pool reserve methodology is sensitive to changes in key risk parameters such as PDs, LGDs and EADs.
In general, a given change in any of the major risk parameters will have a corresponding change in the pool reserve allocations for non-impaired commercial loans.
Our commercial loans are the largest category of credits and are most sensitive to changes in the key risk parameters and pool reserve loss rates.
To illustrate, if we increase the pool reserve LGD by 5% for all categories of non-impaired commercial loans, then the aggregate of the ALLL and allowance for unfunded loan commitments and letters of credit would increase by $72 million.
The majority of the commercial portfolio is secured by collateral, including loans to asset-based lending customers that continue to show demonstrably lower loss given default.
Further, the large investment grade or equivalent portion of the loan portfolio has performed well and has not been subject to significant deterioration.
Additionally, guarantees on loans greater than $1 million and owner guarantees for small business loans do not significantly impact our ALLL.
Allocations to non-impaired consumer loan classes are based upon a roll-rate model which uses statistical relationships, calculated from historical data that estimate the movement of loan outstandings through the various stages of delinquency and ultimately charge-off.
The ALLL is lower than it would have been otherwise due to the accounting treatment for purchased impaired loans.
This treatment also results in a lower ratio of ALLL to total loans.
Loan loss reserves on the purchased impaired loans were not carried over on the date of acquisition.
As of December 31, 2011, we have established reserves of $998 million for purchased impaired loans.
A portion of the ALLL related to qualitative and measurement factors has been assigned to loan categories.
These factors include, but are not limited to, the following: ?
Industry concentrations and conditions, ?
Recent credit quality trends, ?
Recent loss experience in particular portfolios, ?
Recent macro economic factors, ?
Changes in risk selection and underwriting standards, and ?
Timing of available information.
In addition to the ALLL, we maintain an allowance for unfunded loan commitments and letters of credit.
We report this allowance as a liability on our Consolidated Balance Sheet.
We maintain the allowance for unfunded loan commitments and letters of credit at a level we believe is appropriate to absorb estimated probable losses on these unfunded credit facilities.
We determine this amount using estimates of the probability of the ultimate funding and losses related to those credit exposures.
This methodology is very similar to the one we use for determining our ALLL.
We refer you to Note 5 Asset Quality and Allowances for Loan and Lease Losses and Unfunded Loan Commitments and Letters of Credit in the Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 of this Report for further information on key asset quality indicators that we use to evaluate our portfolio and establish the allowances.
Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td>Contractual Obligations</td><td>2015</td><td>2016</td><td>2017</td><td>2018</td><td>2019</td><td>Thereafter</td><td>Total</td></tr><tr><td>Long-term obligations, excluding capital leases</td><td>888,810</td><td>753,045</td><td>700,608</td><td>1,787,451</td><td>3,159,286</td><td>7,188,751</td><td>14,477,951</td></tr><tr><td>Cash interest expense</td><td>550,000</td><td>517,000</td><td>485,000</td><td>399,000</td><td>315,000</td><td>654,000</td><td>2,920,000</td></tr><tr><td>Capital lease payments (including interest)</td><td>15,589</td><td>14,049</td><td>12,905</td><td>12,456</td><td>10,760</td><td>173,313</td><td>239,072</td></tr><tr><td>Total debt service obligations</td><td>1,454,399</td><td>1,284,094</td><td>1,198,513</td><td>2,198,907</td><td>3,485,046</td><td>8,016,064</td><td>17,637,023</td></tr><tr><td>Operating lease payments-11</td><td>574,438</td><td>553,864</td><td>538,405</td><td>519,034</td><td>502,847</td><td>4,214,600</td><td>6,903,188</td></tr><tr><td>Other non-current liabilities-12-13</td><td>11,082</td><td>20,480</td><td>5,705</td><td>13,911</td><td>4,186</td><td>1,860,071</td><td>1,915,435</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$2,039,919</td><td>$1,858,438</td><td>$1,742,623</td><td>$2,731,852</td><td>$3,992,079</td><td>$14,090,735</td><td>$26,455,646</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>In millions</td><td> Dec. 31 2011</td><td>Dec. 31 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer lending:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Real estate-related</td><td>$1,492</td><td>$1,087</td></tr><tr><td>Credit card (a)</td><td>291</td><td>331</td></tr><tr><td>Other consumer</td><td>15</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>Total consumer lending</td><td>1,798</td><td>1,422</td></tr><tr><td>Total commercial lending</td><td>405</td><td>236</td></tr><tr><td>Total TDRs</td><td>$2,203</td><td>$1,658</td></tr><tr><td>Nonperforming</td><td>$1,141</td><td>$784</td></tr><tr><td>Accruing (b)</td><td>771</td><td>543</td></tr><tr><td>Credit card (a)</td><td>291</td><td>331</td></tr><tr><td>Total TDRs</td><td>$2,203</td><td>$1,658</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Year endedDecember 31Dollars in millions</td><td>Charge-offs</td><td>Recoveries</td><td>Net Charge-offs</td><td>Percent of Average Loans</td></tr><tr><td> 2011</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>$700</td><td>$332</td><td>$368</td><td>.62%</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>464</td><td>105</td><td>359</td><td>2.14</td></tr><tr><td>Equipment lease financing</td><td>35</td><td>50</td><td>-15</td><td>-.24</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>484</td><td>48</td><td>436</td><td>1.30</td></tr><tr><td>Residential real estate</td><td>153</td><td>11</td><td>142</td><td>.95</td></tr><tr><td>Credit card</td><td>235</td><td>23</td><td>212</td><td>5.62</td></tr><tr><td>Other consumer</td><td>193</td><td>56</td><td>137</td><td>.79</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$2,264</td><td>$625</td><td>$1,639</td><td>1.08</td></tr><tr><td>2010</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>$1,227</td><td>$294</td><td>$933</td><td>1.72%</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>670</td><td>77</td><td>593</td><td>2.90</td></tr><tr><td>Equipment lease financing</td><td>120</td><td>56</td><td>64</td><td>1.02</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>488</td><td>41</td><td>447</td><td>1.28</td></tr><tr><td>Residential real estate</td><td>406</td><td>19</td><td>387</td><td>2.19</td></tr><tr><td>Credit card</td><td>335</td><td>20</td><td>315</td><td>7.94</td></tr><tr><td>Other consumer</td><td>246</td><td>49</td><td>197</td><td>1.74</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$3,492</td><td>$556</td><td>$2,936</td><td>1.91</td></tr></table>

Question: Which year is home equity for recoveries the highest?
Answer: 2011