Liquidity Risk Management Citigroup runs a centralized treasury model where the overall balance sheet is managed by Citigroup Treasury through Global Franchise Treasurers and Regional Treasurers.
Day-to-day liquidity and funding are managed by treasurers at the country and business level and are monitored by Corporate Treasury and Citi risk management.
Liquidity management is the responsibility of senior management through Citigroup’s Finance and Asset and Liability Committee (FinALCO) and is overseen by the Board of Directors through its Risk Management and Finance Committee.
Asset and liability committees are also established globally and for each region, country and/or major line of business.
Liquidity Measures and Stress Testing Citi uses multiple measures in monitoring its liquidity, including liquidity ratios, stress testing and liquidity limits, each as described below.
In broad terms, the structural liquidity ratio, defined as the sum of deposits, long-term debt and stockholders’ equity as a percentage of total assets, measures whether the asset base is funded by sufficiently long-dated liabilities.
Citi’s structural liquidity ratio was 73% at December 31, 2010, 71% at September 30, 2010, and 73% at December 31, 2009.
Another measure of Citi’s structural liquidity is cash capital.
Cash capital is a more detailed measure of the ability to fund the structurally illiquid portion of Citigroup’s balance sheet.
Cash capital measures the amount of long-term funding—or core customer deposits, long-term debt (over one year) and equity—available to fund illiquid assets.
Illiquid assets generally include loans (net of securitization adjustments), securities haircuts and other assets (i. e. , goodwill, intangibles, fixed assets).
At December 31, 2010, both the non-bank and the aggregate bank subsidiaries had a significant excess of cash capital.
In addition, as of December 31, 2010, the non-bank maintained liquidity to meet all maturing obligations significantly in excess ofa one-year period without access to the unsecured wholesale markets.
Liquidity stress testing is performed for each major entity, operating subsidiary and/or country.
Stress testing and scenario analyses are intended to quantify the potential impact of a liquidity event on the balance sheet and liquidity position, and to identify viable funding alternatives that can be utilized.
These scenarios include assumptions about significant changes in key funding sources, market triggers (such as credit ratings), potential uses of funding and political and economic conditions in certain countries.
These conditions include standard and stressed market conditions as well as firm-specific events.
A wide range of liquidity stress tests are important for monitoring purposes.
Some span liquidity events over a full year, some may cover an intense stress period of one month, and still other time frames may be appropriate.
These potential liquidity events are useful to ascertain potential mis-matches between liquidity sources and uses over a variety of horizons (overnight, one week, two week, one month, three month, one year), and liquidity limits are set accordingly.
To monitor the liquidity of a unit, those stress tests and potential mismatches may be calculated with varying frequencies, with several important tests performed daily.
Given the range of potential stresses, Citi maintains a series of Contingency Funding Plans on a consolidated basis as well as for individual entities.
These plans specify a wide range of readily available actions that are available in a variety of adverse market conditions, or idiosyncratic disruptions.
Credit Ratings Citigroup’s ability to access the capital markets and other sources of funds, as well as the cost of these funds and its ability to maintain certain deposits, is dependent on its credit ratings.
The table below indicates the current ratings for Citigroup and Citibank, N. A.  Citigroup’s Debt Ratings as of December 31, 2010
## Table 0 ##
(1) As a result of the Citigroup guarantee, changes in ratings for CFI are the same as those of Citigroup.
Basel III (Full Implementation) Citigroup’s Capital Resources Under Basel III (Full Implementation) Citi currently estimates that its effective minimum Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, Tier 1 Capital and Total Capital ratio requirements under the U. S.  Basel III rules, on a fully implemented basis and assuming a 3% GSIB surcharge, may be 10%, 11.5% and 13.5%, respectively.
Further, under the U. S.  Basel III rules, Citi must also comply with a 4% minimum Tier 1 Leverage ratio requirement and an effective 5% minimum Supplementary Leverage ratio requirement.
The following tables set forth the capital tiers, total risk-weighted assets, risk-based capital ratios, quarterly adjusted average total assets, Total Leverage Exposure and leverage ratios, assuming full implementation under the U. S.  Basel III rules, for Citi as of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014.
Citigroup Capital Components and Ratios Under Basel III (Full Implementation)
## Table 1 ##
(1) Restated to reflect the retrospective adoption of ASU 2014-01 for LIHTC investments, consistent with current period presentation.
(2) Under the Advanced Approaches framework eligible credit reserves that exceed expected credit losses are eligible for inclusion in Tier 2 Capital to the extent the excess reserves do not exceed 0.6% of credit risk-weighted assets, which differs from the Standardized Approach in which the allowance for credit losses is eligible for inclusion in Tier 2 Capital up to 1.25% of credit risk-weighted assets, with any excess allowance for credit losses being deducted in arriving at credit risk-weighted assets.
(3) As of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, Citi’s Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, Tier 1 Capital, and Total Capital ratios were the lower derived under the Basel III Advanced Approaches framework.
(4) Citi’s Basel III capital ratios and related components, on a fully implemented basis, are non-GAAP financial measures.
Citi believes these ratios and the related components provide useful information to investors and others by measuring Citi’s progress against future regulatory capital standards.
(5) Tier 1 Leverage ratio denominator.
(6) Supplementary Leverage ratio denominator.
ADDITIONAL CONSUMER AND CORPORATE CREDIT DETAILS Loans Outstanding
## Table 2 ##
Loans secured primarily by real estate.
Unearned income on consumer loans primarily represents unamortized origination fees, costs, premiums and discounts.
Prior to December 31, 2015, these items were more than offset by prepaid interest on loans outstanding issued by OneMain Financial.
The sale of OneMain Financial was completed on November 16, 2015.
Unearned income on corporate loans primarily represents interest received in advance but not yet earned on loans originated on a discount basis.
All periods exclude loans that are carried at fair value.
American International Group, Inc.  and Subsidiaries Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Continued
## Table 3 ##
(a) Includes the effect of out of period adjustments related to the accounting for certain interests in unit investment trusts.
For 2006, the effect was an increase of $32 million in both net investment income and operating income.
(b) Includes the effect of out of period adjustments related to the accounting for certain interests in unit investment trusts.
For 2006, the effect was an increase of $208 million and $137 million in net investment income and operating income, respectively.
Operating income also includes an out of period reduction in participating policyholder dividend reserves of $163 million, primarily as a result of tax remediation adjustments.
(c) Revenues include approximately $640 million of premiums from a single reinsurance transaction involving terminal funding business, which is offset by a similar increase of benefit reserves.
AIG transacts business in most major foreign currencies and therefore premiums reported in U. S.  dollars vary by volume and from changes in foreign currency translation rates.
The following table summarizes the effect of changes in foreign currency exchange rates on the growth of the Foreign Life Insurance & Retirement Services GAAP premiums for the year ended Decem-ber 31, 2006 and 2005:
Japan and Other 2006 and 2005 Comparison Total revenues for Japan and Other increased $743 millionin 2006, to $16.0 billion,compared to 2005.
Operating income grew $773 million, due to growth in the underlying retirement services businesses and realized capital gains of $406 million.
The 2006 results for the reporting unitwere negatively affected by the weakening of the Japanese Yen against the U. S.  dollar during 2006.
In addition, operating income was negativelyaffected by the continued runoff of the older, higher margin in-force business of AIG Star Life and AIG Edison Life.
Life insurance GAAP premiums declined in 2006 compared to 2005 primarily due to the effect of foreign exchange.
Foreign exchange negatively affected GAAP premiums by approximately $250 million, most notably as a result of the weakening in the Japanese Yen.
Life insurance operating income grew $445 million,primarily due to an increase of $368 million of realized capital gains.
Life insurancegrowthimproved due to an increase in single premium life insurance sales in Japan as a result of further bank deregulation effective in December 2005.
The expansion of the bank distribution platform for single premium life insurance products adds to the existing multiple distribution platforms in Japan, where AIG remains the leading foreign insurance provider.
Personal accident revenues grew $258 million or 7percent resulting in operating income growth of $71 million or 7percent.
Personal accident operating income includes the effect of higher terminations of certain accident and health policies in Japan which increased expenses by $54 million in 2006.
The higher terminations are a result of a change in the Japanese tax regulations that reduced the tax deduction for premiums.
AIG’s Japanese operations have experienced lower sales and higher terminations of these contracts.
DAC related to these accident

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Citigroup Inc./Citigroup Funding Inc.</td><td></td><td>-1</td><td colspan="3">Citibank, N.A.</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>Senior</td><td></td><td>Commercial</td><td></td><td></td><td>Long-</td><td></td><td>Short-</td><td></td></tr><tr><td></td><td>debt</td><td></td><td>paper</td><td></td><td></td><td>term</td><td></td><td>term</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Fitch Ratings (Fitch)</td><td>A</td><td>+</td><td>F1</td><td>+</td><td></td><td>A</td><td>+</td><td>F1</td><td>+</td></tr><tr><td>Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s)</td><td>A3</td><td></td><td>P-1</td><td></td><td></td><td>A1</td><td></td><td>P-1</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Standard & Poor’s (S&P)</td><td>A</td><td></td><td>A-1</td><td></td><td></td><td>A</td><td>+</td><td>A-1</td><td></td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="2">December 31, 2015</td><td colspan="2">December 31, 2014<sup>-1</sup></td></tr><tr><td>In millions of dollars, except ratios</td><td>Advanced Approaches</td><td>Standardized Approach</td><td>Advanced Approaches</td><td>Standardized Approach</td></tr><tr><td>Common Equity Tier 1 Capital</td><td>$146,865</td><td>$146,865</td><td>$136,597</td><td>$136,597</td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1 Capital</td><td>164,036</td><td>164,036</td><td>148,066</td><td>148,066</td></tr><tr><td>Total Capital (Tier 1 Capital + Tier 2 Capital)<sup>(2)</sup></td><td>186,097</td><td>198,655</td><td>165,454</td><td>178,413</td></tr><tr><td>Total Risk-Weighted Assets</td><td>1,216,277</td><td>1,162,884</td><td>1,292,605</td><td>1,228,488</td></tr><tr><td>Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio<sup>-3(4)</sup></td><td>12.07%</td><td>12.63%</td><td>10.57%</td><td>11.12%</td></tr><tr><td>Tier 1 Capital ratio<sup>-3(4)</sup></td><td>13.49</td><td>14.11</td><td>11.45</td><td>12.05</td></tr><tr><td>Total Capital ratio<sup>-3(4)</sup></td><td>15.30</td><td>17.08</td><td>12.80</td><td>14.52</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="5">December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>In millions of dollars</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2013</td><td>2012</td><td>2011</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer loans</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>In U.S. offices</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage and real estate<sup>-1</sup></td><td>$80,281</td><td>$96,533</td><td>$108,453</td><td>$125,946</td><td>$139,177</td></tr><tr><td>Installment, revolving credit, and other</td><td>3,480</td><td>14,450</td><td>13,398</td><td>14,070</td><td>15,616</td></tr><tr><td>Cards</td><td>112,800</td><td>112,982</td><td>115,651</td><td>111,403</td><td>117,908</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial and industrial</td><td>6,407</td><td>5,895</td><td>6,592</td><td>5,344</td><td>4,766</td></tr><tr><td>Lease financing</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$202,968</td><td>$229,860</td><td>$244,094</td><td>$256,763</td><td>$277,468</td></tr><tr><td>In offices outside the U.S.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage and real estate<sup>-1</sup></td><td>$47,062</td><td>$54,462</td><td>$55,511</td><td>$54,709</td><td>$52,052</td></tr><tr><td>Installment, revolving credit, and other</td><td>29,480</td><td>31,128</td><td>33,182</td><td>33,958</td><td>32,673</td></tr><tr><td>Cards</td><td>27,342</td><td>32,032</td><td>36,740</td><td>40,653</td><td>38,926</td></tr><tr><td>Commercial and industrial</td><td>21,679</td><td>22,561</td><td>24,107</td><td>22,225</td><td>21,915</td></tr><tr><td>Lease financing</td><td>427</td><td>609</td><td>769</td><td>781</td><td>711</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$125,990</td><td>$140,792</td><td>$150,309</td><td>$152,326</td><td>$146,277</td></tr><tr><td>Total consumer loans</td><td>$328,958</td><td>$370,652</td><td>$394,403</td><td>$409,089</td><td>$423,745</td></tr><tr><td>Unearned income<sup>-2</sup></td><td>825</td><td>-682</td><td>-572</td><td>-418</td><td>-405</td></tr><tr><td>Consumer loans, net of unearned income</td><td>$329,783</td><td>$369,970</td><td>$393,831</td><td>$408,671</td><td>$423,340</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate loans</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>In U.S. offices</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial and industrial</td><td>$41,147</td><td>$35,055</td><td>$32,704</td><td>$26,985</td><td>$20,830</td></tr><tr><td>Loans to financial institutions</td><td>36,396</td><td>36,272</td><td>25,102</td><td>18,159</td><td>15,113</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage and real estate<sup>-1</sup></td><td>37,565</td><td>32,537</td><td>29,425</td><td>24,705</td><td>21,516</td></tr><tr><td>Installment, revolving credit, and other</td><td>33,374</td><td>29,207</td><td>34,434</td><td>32,446</td><td>33,182</td></tr><tr><td>Lease financing</td><td>1,780</td><td>1,758</td><td>1,647</td><td>1,410</td><td>1,270</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$150,262</td><td>$134,829</td><td>$123,312</td><td>$103,705</td><td>$91,911</td></tr><tr><td>In offices outside the U.S.</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial and industrial</td><td>$78,420</td><td>$79,239</td><td>$82,663</td><td>$82,939</td><td>$79,764</td></tr><tr><td>Loans to financial institutions</td><td>28,704</td><td>33,269</td><td>38,372</td><td>37,739</td><td>29,794</td></tr><tr><td>Mortgage and real estate<sup>-1</sup></td><td>5,106</td><td>6,031</td><td>6,274</td><td>6,485</td><td>6,885</td></tr><tr><td>Installment, revolving credit, and other</td><td>20,853</td><td>19,259</td><td>18,714</td><td>14,958</td><td>14,114</td></tr><tr><td>Lease financing</td><td>238</td><td>356</td><td>527</td><td>605</td><td>568</td></tr><tr><td>Governments and official institutions</td><td>4,911</td><td>2,236</td><td>2,341</td><td>1,159</td><td>1,576</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$138,232</td><td>$140,390</td><td>$148,891</td><td>$143,885</td><td>$132,701</td></tr><tr><td>Total corporate loans</td><td>$288,494</td><td>$275,219</td><td>$272,203</td><td>$247,590</td><td>$224,612</td></tr><tr><td>Unearned income<sup>-3</sup></td><td>-660</td><td>-554</td><td>-562</td><td>-797</td><td>-710</td></tr><tr><td>Corporate loans, net of unearned income</td><td>$287,834</td><td>$274,665</td><td>$271,641</td><td>$246,793</td><td>$223,902</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans—net of unearned income</td><td>$617,617</td><td>$644,635</td><td>$665,472</td><td>$655,464</td><td>$647,242</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan losses—on drawn exposures</td><td>-12,626</td><td>-15,994</td><td>-19,648</td><td>-25,455</td><td>-30,115</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans—net of unearned incomeand allowance for credit losses</td><td>$604,991</td><td>$628,641</td><td>$645,824</td><td>$630,009</td><td>$617,127</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans—net of unearned income<sup>-4</sup></td><td>2.06%</td><td>2.50%</td><td>2.97%</td><td>3.92%</td><td>4.69%</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for consumer loan losses as a percentage oftotal consumer loans—net of unearned income<sup>-4</sup></td><td>3.01%</td><td>3.68%</td><td>4.34%</td><td>5.57%</td><td>6.45%</td></tr><tr><td>Allowance for corporate loan losses as a percentage oftotal corporate loans—net of unearned income<sup>-4</sup></td><td>0.96%</td><td>0.89%</td><td>0.97%</td><td>1.14%</td><td>1.31%</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td><i>(in millions)</i></td><td>GAAP Premiums</td><td>Net Investment Income</td><td>Realized Capital Gains (Losses)</td><td>Total Revenues</td><td>Operating Income</td></tr><tr><td>2004</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Japan and Other:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Life insurance</td><td>$4,469</td><td>$1,371</td><td>$-134</td><td>$5,706</td><td>$1,079</td></tr><tr><td>Personal accident</td><td>3,307</td><td>96</td><td>16</td><td>3,419</td><td>932</td></tr><tr><td>Group products</td><td>1,229</td><td>378</td><td>-42</td><td>1,565</td><td>133</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>312</td><td>1,011</td><td>4</td><td>1,327</td><td>236</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>68</td><td>142</td><td>—</td><td>210</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$9,385</td><td>$2,998</td><td>$-156</td><td>$12,227</td><td>$2,393</td></tr><tr><td>Asia:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Life insurance</td><td>$10,469</td><td>$2,676</td><td>$497</td><td>$13,642</td><td>$2,098</td></tr><tr><td>Personal accident</td><td>994</td><td>83</td><td>17</td><td>1,094</td><td>260</td></tr><tr><td>Group products<i><sup>(c)</sup></i></td><td>986</td><td>53</td><td>14</td><td>1,053</td><td>90</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>83</td><td>23</td><td>—</td><td>106</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>1</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$12,532</td><td>$2,836</td><td>$528</td><td>$15,896</td><td>$2,455</td></tr><tr><td>Total Foreign Life Insurance & Retirement Services:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Life insurance</td><td>$14,938</td><td>$4,047</td><td>$363</td><td>$19,348</td><td>$3,177</td></tr><tr><td>Personal accident</td><td>4,301</td><td>179</td><td>33</td><td>4,513</td><td>1,192</td></tr><tr><td>Group products<i><sup>(c)</sup></i></td><td>2,215</td><td>431</td><td>-28</td><td>2,618</td><td>223</td></tr><tr><td>Individual fixed annuities</td><td>395</td><td>1,034</td><td>4</td><td>1,433</td><td>243</td></tr><tr><td>Individual variable annuities</td><td>68</td><td>143</td><td>—</td><td>211</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$21,917</td><td>$5,834</td><td>$372</td><td>$28,123</td><td>$4,848</td></tr></table>

Question: What is the average amount of Group products of GAAP Premiums, and Commercial and industrial In U.S. offices of December 31, 2012 ?
Answer: 14107
Reasoning program: add(1229.0,26985.0), divide(#0,const_2)