PNC PENSION PLAN ASSETS Assets related to our qualified pension plan (the Plan) are held in trust (the Trust).
Effective July 1, 2011, the trustee is The Bank of New York Mellon; prior to that date, the trustee was PNC Bank, National Association, (PNC Bank, N. A).
The Trust is exempt from tax pursuant to section 501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code (the Code).
The Plan is qualified under section 401(a) of the Code.
Plan assets consist primarily of listed domestic and international equity securities and US government, agency, and corporate debt securities and real estate investments.
Plan assets as of December 31, 2011 and 2010 include common stock of PNC.
PNC Common Stock was $11 million and $12 million at December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.
At December 31, 2011, this accounted for less than 1% of our total asset balance.
The Pension Plan Administrative Committee (the Committee) adopted a current Pension Plan Investment Policy Statement, including target allocations and allowable ranges, on August 13, 2008.
On February 25, 2010, the Committee amended the investment policy to include a dynamic asset allocation approach and also updated target allocation ranges for certain asset categories.
On March 1, 2011, the Committee amended the investment policy to update the target allocation ranges for certain asset categories.
The long-term investment strategy for pension plan assets is to: ?
Meet present and future benefit obligations to all participants and beneficiaries, ?
Cover reasonable expenses incurred to provide such benefits, including expenses incurred in the administration of the Trust and the Plan, ?
Provide sufficient liquidity to meet benefit and expense payment requirements on a timely basis, and ?
Provide a total return that, over the long term, maximizes the ratio of trust assets to liabilities by maximizing investment return, at an appropriate level of risk.
Under the dynamic asset allocation strategy, scenarios are outlined in which the Committee has the ability to make short to intermediate term asset allocation shifts based on factors such as the Plan’s funded status, the Committee’s view of return on equities relative to long term expectations, the Committee’s view on the direction of interest rates and credit spreads, and other relevant financial or economic factors which would be expected to impact the ability of the Trust to meet its obligation to beneficiaries.
Accordingly, the allowable asset allocation ranges have been updated to incorporate the flexibility required by the dynamic allocation policy.
The Plan’s specific investment objective is to meet or exceed the investment policy benchmark over the long term.
The investment policy benchmark compares actual performance to a weighted market index, and measures the contribution of active investment management and policy implementation.
This investment objective is expected to be achieved over the long term (one or more market cycles) and is measured over rolling five-year periods.
Total return calculations are timeweighted and are net of investment-related fees and expenses.
The asset strategy allocations for the Trust at the end of 2011 and 2010, and the target allocation range at the end of 2011, by asset category, are as follows: Asset Strategy Allocations
## Table 0 ##
The asset category represents the allocation of Plan assets in accordance with the investment objective of each of the Plan’s investment managers.
Certain domestic equity investment managers utilize derivatives and fixed income securities as described in their Investment Management Agreements to achieve their investment objective under the Investment Policy Statement.
Other investment managers may invest in eligible securities outside of their assigned asset category to meet their investment objectives.
The actual percentage of the fair value of total plan assets held as of December 31, 2011 for equity securities, fixed income securities, real estate and all other assets are 61%, 31%, 3%, and 5%, respectively.
We believe that, over the long term, asset allocation is the single greatest determinant of risk.
Asset allocation will deviate from the target percentages due to market movement, cash flows, investment manager performance and implementation of shifts under the dynamic allocation policy.
Material deviations from the asset allocation targets can alter the expected return and risk of the Trust.
On the other hand, frequent rebalancing to the asset allocation targets may result in significant transaction costs, which can impair the Trust’s ability to meet its investment objective.
Accordingly, the Trust portfolio is periodically rebalanced to maintain asset allocation within the target ranges described above.
From October 14, 2008 through December 31, 2009, PNC Bank, National Association (PNC Bank, N. A. )
participated in the TLGP-Transaction Account Guarantee Program.
Under this program, all non-interest bearing transaction accounts were fully guaranteed by the FDIC for the entire amount in the account.
Beginning January 1, 2010, PNC Bank, N. A.  ceased participating in the FDIC’s TLGP-Transaction Account Guarantee Program.
Dodd-Frank, however, extended for two years, beginning December 31, 2010, unlimited deposit insurance coverage for non-interest bearing transaction accounts held at all banks.
Therefore, eligible accounts at PNC Bank, N. A.  are again eligible for unlimited deposit insurance, through December 31, 2012.
Coverage under this extension is in addition to, and separate from, the coverage available under the FDIC’s general deposit insurance rules.
Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) As part of its effort to stabilize the US housing market, in March 2009 the Obama Administration published detailed guidelines implementing HAMP, and authorized servicers to begin loan modifications.
PNC began participating in HAMP through its then subsidiary National City Bank in May 2009 and directly through PNC Bank, N. A.  in July 2009, and entered into an agreement on October 1, 2010 to participate in the Second Lien Program.
HAMP was scheduled to terminate as of December 31, 2012; however, the Administration has announced that the HAMP program deadline will be extended to December 31, 2013.
Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP) Another part of its efforts to stabilize the US housing market is the Obama Administration’s Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP), which provided a means for certain borrowers to refinance their mortgage loans.
PNC began participating in HARP in May 2009.
In 2011, the Obama Administration revised the program to increase borrower eligibility and extended it for another twelve months with a new termination date of December 31, 2013.
KEY FACTORS AFFECTING FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE Our financial performance is substantially affected by a number of external factors outside of our control, including the following: ?
General economic conditions, including the continuity, speed and stamina of the moderate economic recovery in general and on our customers in particular, ?
The level of, and direction, timing and magnitude of movement in, interest rates and the shape of the interest rate yield curve, ?
The functioning and other performance of, and availability of liquidity in, the capital and other financial markets, ?
Loan demand, utilization of credit commitments and standby letters of credit, and asset quality, ?
Customer demand for non-loan products and services, ?
Changes in the competitive and regulatory landscape and in counterparty creditworthiness and performance as the financial services industry restructures in the current environment, ?
The impact of the extensive reforms enacted in the Dodd-Frank legislation and other legislative, regulatory and administrative initiatives, including those outlined elsewhere in this Report, and ?
The impact of market credit spreads on asset valuations.
In addition, our success will depend, among other things, upon: ?
Further success in the acquisition, growth and retention of customers, ?
Continued development of the geographic markets related to our recent acquisitions, including full deployment of our product offerings, ?
Closing the pending RBC Bank (USA) acquisition and integrating its business into PNC after closing, ?
Revenue growth and our ability to provide innovative and valued products to our customers, ?
Our ability to utilize technology to develop and deliver products and services to our customers, ?
Our ability to manage and implement strategic business objectives within the changing regulatory environment, ?
A sustained focus on expense management, ?
Managing the non-strategic assets portfolio and impaired assets, ?
Improving our overall asset quality and continuing to meet evolving regulatory capital standards, ?
Continuing to maintain and grow our deposit base as a low-cost funding source, ?
Prudent risk and capital management related to our efforts to maintain our desired moderate risk profile, ?
Actions we take within the capital and other financial markets, and ?
The impact of legal and regulatory contingencies.
For additional information, please see Risk Factors in Item 1A of this Report and the Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information section in this Item 7.
SUMMARY FINANCIAL RESULTS
## Table 1 ##
Loan Delinquencies We regularly monitor the level of loan delinquencies and believe these levels may be a key indicator of loan portfolio asset quality.
Measurement of delinquency status is based on the contractual terms of each loan.
Loans that are 30 days or more past due in terms of payment are considered delinquent.
Loan delinquencies exclude loans held for sale and purchased impaired loans, but include government insured or guaranteed loans.
Total early stage loan delinquencies (accruing loans past due 30 to 89 days) decreased by $252 million from December 31, 2010, to $1.6 billion at December 31, 2011.
Commercial lending early stage delinquencies declined by $245 million from December 31, 2010, while consumer lending delinquencies fell by $7 million.
Improvement in early stage delinquency levels was experienced across most loan classes, offset by modest increases in government insured, primarily other consumer education loans, and home equity.
Accruing loans past due 90 days or more are referred to as late stage delinquencies.
These loans are not included in nonperforming loans and continue to accrue interest because they are well secured by collateral, are in the process of collection and are reasonably expected to result in repayment or restoration to current status, or are managed in homogenous portfolios with specified charge-off timeframes adhering to regulatory guidelines.
These loans increased 10% from $2.7 billion at December 31, 2010, to $3.0 billion at December 31, 2011, reflecting higher government insured delinquent residential real estate and other consumer loans, primarily education loans, and higher delinquent home equity loans, partially offset by improvement in commercial lending delinquency levels, primarily commercial real estate.
The following tables display the delinquency status of our accruing loans past due at December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010.
Additional information regarding accruing loans past due is included in 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.
Accruing Loans Past Due 30 To 59 Days
## Table 2 ##
Accruing Loans Past Due 60 To 89 Days
## Table 3 ##
In September 2007, we reached a settlement with the United States Department of Justice in an ongoing investigation into financial relationships between major orthopaedic manufacturers and consulting orthopaedic surgeons.
Under the terms of the settlement, we paid a civil settlement amount of $169.5 million and we recorded an expense in that amount.
No tax benefit has been recorded related to the settlement expense due to the uncertainty as to the tax treatment.
We intend to pursue resolution of this uncertainty with taxing authorities, but are unable to ascertain the outcome or timing for such resolution at this time.
For more information regarding the settlement, see Note 15.
In June 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Interpretation No.48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes – an interpretation of FASB Statement No.109, Accounting for Income Taxes (FIN 48).
FIN 48 addresses the determination of whether tax benefits claimed or expected to be claimed on a tax return should be recorded in the financial statements.
Under FIN 48, we may recognize the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position only if it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by the taxing authorities, based on the technical merits of the position.
The tax benefits recognized in the financial statements from such a position should be measured based on the largest benefit that has a greater than fifty percent likelihood of being realized upon ultimate settlement.
FIN 48 also provides guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and penalties on income taxes, accounting in interim periods and requires increased disclosures.
We adopted FIN 48 on January 1, 2007.
Prior to the adoption of FIN 48 we had a long term tax liability for expected settlement of various federal, state and foreign income tax liabilities that was reflected net of the corollary tax impact of these expected settlements of $102.1 million, as well as a separate accrued interest liability of $1.7 million.
As a result of the adoption of FIN 48, we are required to present the different components of such liability on a gross basis versus the historical net presentation.
The adoption resulted in the financial statement liability for unrecognized tax benefits decreasing by $6.4 million as of January 1, 2007.
The adoption resulted in this decrease in the liability as well as a reduction to retained earnings of $4.8 million, a reduction in goodwill of $61.4 million, the establishment of a tax receivable of $58.2 million, which was recorded in other current and non-current assets on our consolidated balance sheet, and an increase in an interest/penalty payable of $7.9 million, all as of January 1, 2007.
Therefore, after the adoption of FIN 48, the amount of unrecognized tax benefits is $95.7 million as of January 1, 2007, of which $28.6 million would impact our effective tax rate, if recognized.
The amount of unrecognized tax benefits is $135.2 million as of December 31, 2007.
Of this amount, $41.0 million would impact our effective tax rate, if recognized.
A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amounts of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows (in millions):
## Table 4 ##
We recognize accrued interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits in income tax expense in the Consolidated Statements of Earnings, which is consistent with the recognition of these items in prior reporting periods.
As of January 1, 2007, we recorded a liability of $9.6 million for accrued interest and penalties, of which $7.5 million would impact our effective tax rate, if recognized.
The amount of this liability is $19.6 million as of December 31, 2007.
Of this amount, $14.7 million would impact our effective tax rate, if recognized.
We expect that the amount of tax liability for unrecognized tax benefits will change in the next twelve months; however, we do not expect these changes will have a significant impact on our results of operations or financial position.
The U. S.  federal statute of limitations remains open for the year 2003 and onward with years 2003 and 2004 currently under examination by the IRS.
It is reasonably possible that a resolution with the IRS for the years 2003 through 2004 will be reached within the next twelve months, but we do not anticipate this would result in any material impact on our financial position.
In addition, for the 1999 tax year of Centerpulse, which we acquired in October 2003, one issue remains in dispute.
The resolution of this issue would not impact our effective tax rate, as it would be recorded as an adjustment to goodwill.
State income tax returns are generally subject to examination for a period of 3 to 5 years after filing of the respective return.
The state impact of any federal changes remains subject to examination by various states for a period of up to one year after formal notification to the states.
We have various state income tax returns in the process of examination, administrative appeals or litigation.
It is reasonably possible that such matters will be resolved in the next twelve months, but we do not anticipate that the resolution of these matters would result in any material impact on our results of operations or financial position.
Foreign jurisdictions have statutes of limitations generally ranging from 3 to 5 years.
Years still open to examination by foreign tax authorities in major jurisdictions include Australia (2003 onward), Canada (1999 onward), France (2005 onward), Germany (2005 onward), Italy (2003 onward), Japan (2001 onward), Puerto Rico (2005 onward), Singapore (2003 onward), Switzerland (2004 onward), and the United Kingdom (2005 onward).

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td>TargetAllocationRange</td><td colspan="2">Percentageof PlanAssetsbyStrategy at December 31</td></tr><tr><td> PNC Pension Plan</td><td></td><td>2011</td><td> 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Asset Category</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Domestic Equity</td><td>20-40%</td><td>41%</td><td>40%</td></tr><tr><td>International Equity</td><td>10-25%</td><td>21%</td><td>21%</td></tr><tr><td>Private Equity</td><td>0-10%</td><td>3%</td><td>2%</td></tr><tr><td>Total Equity</td><td>40-70%</td><td>65%</td><td>63%</td></tr><tr><td>Domestic Fixed Income</td><td>20-40%</td><td>20%</td><td>24%</td></tr><tr><td>High Yield Fixed Income</td><td>0-15%</td><td>12%</td><td>10%</td></tr><tr><td>Total Fixed Income</td><td>20-55%</td><td>32%</td><td>34%</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate</td><td>0-10%</td><td>3%</td><td>3%</td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>0-5%</td><td>0%</td><td>0%</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td></td><td>100%</td><td>100%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Year ended December 31</td><td>2011</td><td>2010</td></tr><tr><td>Net income (millions)</td><td>$3,071</td><td>$3,397</td></tr><tr><td>Diluted earnings per common share</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Continuing operations</td><td>$5.64</td><td>$5.02</td></tr><tr><td>Discontinued operations</td><td></td><td>.72</td></tr><tr><td>Net income</td><td>$5.64</td><td>$5.74</td></tr><tr><td>Return from net income on:</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Average common shareholders’ equity</td><td>9.56%</td><td>10.88%</td></tr><tr><td>Average assets</td><td>1.16%</td><td>1.28%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Amount</td><td colspan="2">Percent of Total Outstandings</td></tr><tr><td>Dollars in millions</td><td> Dec. 31 2011</td><td>Dec. 31 2010</td><td>Dec. 31 2011</td><td>Dec. 31 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>$122</td><td>$251</td><td>.19%</td><td>.45%</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>96</td><td>128</td><td>.59</td><td>.71</td></tr><tr><td>Equipment lease financing</td><td>22</td><td>37</td><td>.34</td><td>.58</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>173</td><td>159</td><td>.52</td><td>.47</td></tr><tr><td>Residential real estate</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Non government insured</td><td>180</td><td>226</td><td>1.24</td><td>1.41</td></tr><tr><td>Government insured</td><td>122</td><td>105</td><td>.84</td><td>.66</td></tr><tr><td>Credit card</td><td>38</td><td>46</td><td>.96</td><td>1.17</td></tr><tr><td>Other consumer</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Non government insured</td><td>58</td><td>95</td><td>.30</td><td>.56</td></tr><tr><td>Government insured</td><td>207</td><td>165</td><td>1.08</td><td>.97</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$1,018</td><td>$1,212</td><td>.64</td><td>.81</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">Amount</td><td colspan="2">Percent of Total Outstandings</td></tr><tr><td>Dollars in millions</td><td> Dec. 31 2011</td><td>Dec. 31 2010</td><td>Dec. 31 2011</td><td>Dec. 31 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial</td><td>$47</td><td>$92</td><td>.07%</td><td>.17%</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial real estate</td><td>35</td><td>62</td><td>.22</td><td>.35</td></tr><tr><td>Equipment lease financing</td><td>5</td><td>2</td><td>.08</td><td>.03</td></tr><tr><td>Home equity</td><td>114</td><td>91</td><td>.34</td><td>.27</td></tr><tr><td>Residential real estate</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Non government insured</td><td>72</td><td>107</td><td>.50</td><td>.67</td></tr><tr><td>Government insured</td><td>104</td><td>118</td><td>.72</td><td>.74</td></tr><tr><td>Credit card</td><td>25</td><td>32</td><td>.63</td><td>.82</td></tr><tr><td>Other consumer</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Non government insured</td><td>21</td><td>32</td><td>.11</td><td>.19</td></tr><tr><td>Government insured</td><td>124</td><td>69</td><td>.65</td><td>.41</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$547</td><td>$605</td><td>.34</td><td>.40</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td>Balance at January 1, 2007</td><td>$95.7</td></tr><tr><td>Increases related to prior periods</td><td>27.4</td></tr><tr><td>Decreases related to prior periods</td><td>-5.5</td></tr><tr><td>Increases related to current period</td><td>21.9</td></tr><tr><td>Decreases related to settlements with taxing authorities</td><td>-1.3</td></tr><tr><td>Decreases related to lapse of statue of limitations</td><td>-3.0</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at December 31, 2007</td><td>$135.2</td></tr></table>

Question: What will home equity be like in 2012 if it develops with the same increasing rate as current? (in million)
Answer: 142.813
Reasoning program: subtract(114,91), divide(#0,91), add(#1,const_1), multiply(#2,114)