Note 12.
Shareholders’ Equity Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss: Accumulated other comprehensive loss included the following components as of December 31:
## Table 0 ##
The net after-tax unrealized loss on available-for-sale securities of $1.64 billion and $5.21 billion as of December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, respectively, included $635 million and $1.39 billion, respectively, of net after-tax unrealized losses related to securities reclassified from securities available for sale to securities held to maturity.
The decrease in the losses related to transfers compared to December 31, 2008 resulted from amortization and from the recognition of losses from other-than-temporary impairment on certain of the securities.
Additional information is provided in note 3.
For the year ended December 31, 2009, we realized net gains of $368 million from sales of available-for-sale securities.
Unrealized pre-tax gains of $46 million were included in other comprehensive income at December 31, 2008, net of deferred taxes of $18 million, related to these sales.
For the year ended December 31, 2008, we realized net gains of $68 million from sales of available-for-sale securities.
Unrealized pre-tax gains of $71 million were included in other comprehensive income at December 31, 2007, net of deferred taxes of $28 million, related to these sales.
For the year ended December 31, 2007, we realized net gains of $7 million on sales of available-for-sale securities.
Unrealized pre-tax losses of $32 million were included in other comprehensive income at December 31, 2006, net of deferred taxes of $13 million, related to these sales.
Preferred Stock: In October 2008, in connection with the U. S.  Treasury’s capital purchase program, we issued 20,000 shares of our Series B fixed-rate cumulative perpetual preferred stock, $100,000 liquidation preference per share, and a warrant to purchase 5,576,208 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $53.80 per share, to Treasury, and received aggregate proceeds of $2 billion.
The aggregate proceeds were allocated to the preferred stock and the warrant based on their relative fair values on the date of issuance.
As a result, approximately $1.88 billion and $121 million, respectively, were allocated to the preferred stock and the warrant.
The difference between the initial value of $1.88 billion allocated to the preferred stock and the liquidation amount of $2 billion was intended to be charged to retained earnings and credited to the preferred stock over the period that the preferred stock was outstanding, using the effective yield method.
For 2008 and 2009, these charges to retained earnings reduced net income available to common shareholders by $4 million and $11 million, respectively, and reduced basic and diluted earnings per common share for those periods.
These calculations are presented in note 22.
The preferred shares qualified as tier 1 regulatory capital, and paid cumulative quarterly dividends at a rate of 5% per year.
For 2008 and 2009, the accrual of dividends on the preferred shares reduced net income available to common shareholders by $18 million and $46 million, respectively, and reduced basic and diluted earnings per common share for those periods.
These calculations are presented in note 22.
The warrant was immediately
The following table presents a summary of future minimum lease payments under non-cancelable capital and operating leases as of December 31, 2009.
Future minimum rental commitments have been reduced by aggregate sublease rental commitments of $65 million for capital leases and $77 million for operating leases.
The decrease in future operating lease payments compared to amounts reported in prior years generally resulted from adjustments of and changes to existing leases, as well as the inclusion of cancelation options related to certain leases in the U. S.  and Europe.
## Table 1 ##
Note 20.
Expenses In June 2009, the Staff of the SEC provided State Street Bank with a “Wells” notice related to the SEC’s ongoing investigation into disclosures and management by SSgA of certain of its active fixed-income strategies during 2007 and prior periods.
Subsequent to the receipt of the Wells notice, we engaged in discussions with the SEC and other governmental and regulatory authorities regarding a potential settlement of this matter.
Based on such discussions during the fourth quarter of 2009, we determined it appropriate to increase our reserve, initially established in 2007 to address litigation exposure and other costs associated with SSgA’s management of these fixed-income strategies, by $250 million, to take into account such a potential settlement with these governmental authorities and the other ongoing litigation related to the active fixed-income strategies.
As a result, we recorded a provision of $250 million in our 2009 consolidated statement of income related to our estimate of this legal exposure.
We settled regulatory inquiries related to this exposure in February 2010, which settlement is more fully described in note 10.
During 2007 and 2008, the liquidity and pricing issues in the fixed-income securities markets adversely affected the market value of the securities in certain accounts managed by SSgA.
These accounts, which are offered to retirement plans, allow participants to purchase and redeem units at a constant net asset value regardless of volatility in the underlying value of the assets held by the account.
The accounts enter into contractual arrangements with independent third-party financial institutions that agree to make up any shortfall in the account if all the units are redeemed at the constant net asset value.
The financial institutions have the right, under certain circumstances, to terminate this guarantee with respect to future investments in the account.
During 2008, in reaction to the aforementioned issues, the third-party guarantors considered terminating their financial guarantees with the accounts.
Although we were not statutorily or contractually obligated to do so, we elected to purchase approximately $2.49 billion of asset- and mortgage-backed securities from these accounts that had been identified as presenting increased risk in the then current market environment, which we classified in investment securities available for sale in our consolidated statement of condition, and to contribute an aggregate of $450 million to the accounts to improve the ratio of the market value of the accounts’ portfolio holdings to the book value of the accounts.
Accordingly, we recorded a provision of $450 million in our 2008 consolidated statement of income to provide for this infusion.
Loans and Lease Financing U. S.  and non-U.
S.  loans and lease financing, and average loans and lease financing, were as follows for the years ended December 31 (excluding the allowance for losses):
## Table 2 ##
U. S.  commercial and financial loans at December 31, 2009 and 2008 included approximately $600 million and $800 million, respectively, of commercial real estate loans acquired in 2008 pursuant to indemnified repurchase agreements with an affiliate of Lehman.
The loans, which are primarily collateralized by direct and indirect interests in commercial real estate, were recorded at their then current fair value on the date acquired.
Fair value represented management’s expectation, as of the date of acquisition, with respect to future collection of principal and interest, using appropriate market discount rates as of the date of acquisition.
As of the date of acquisition, management considered it probable that all contractual payments would not be collected, and accordingly reflected that assumption in the measurement of the loans’ aggregate fair value.
Pursuant to current accounting standards, management is required to periodically reassess its cash flow expectations with respect to these loans, and recognize the impact of any changes in expected future cash flows in consolidated results of operations through an adjustment to a valuation allowance and, in some cases, an adjustment to the yield of the loans.
If expected future cash flows from these loans are adversely affected by further deterioration of conditions in the commercial real estate markets or by other factors, we could be required to record additional adjustments to the valuation allowance in our consolidated results of operations.
We define past-due loans as loans on which principal or interest payments are over 90 days delinquent, but for which interest continues to be accrued.
Although a portion of these commercial real estate loans is 90 days or more contractually past-due, we do not report them as past-due loans, because under current accounting standards, the interest earned on these loans is based on an accretable yield resulting from management’s expectations with respect to the future cash flows for each loan relative to both the timing and collection of principal and interest as of the reporting date, not the loans’ contractual payment terms.
These cash flow estimates are updated quarterly to reflect changes in management’s expectations, which consider market conditions.
We generally place loans on non-accrual status once principal or interest payments are 60 days past due, or earlier if management determines that full collection is not probable.
Loans 60 days past due, but considered both well-secured and in the process of collection, may be excluded from non-accrual status.
For loans placed on non-accrual status, revenue recognition is suspended.
At December 31, 2009, approximately $2.3 million of the aforementioned commercial real estate loans had been placed by management on non-accrual status, as the yield associated with these loans, determined when the loans were acquired, was deemed to be non-accretable.
This determination was based on management’s expectations of the future collection of principal and interest from the loans.
Future changes in expectations with respect to collection of principal and interest on these loans could result in additional non-accrual loans and provisions for loan losses.
There were no non-accrual loans at year-end 2008, 2007, 2006 or 2005.
We use a variety of derivative financial instruments to support our customers’ needs, conduct trading activities and manage our interest-rate and currency risk.
These activities are designed to create trading revenue and to hedge potential earnings volatility.
In addition, we provide services related to derivatives in our role as both a manager and a servicer of financial assets.
Our customers use derivatives to manage the financial risks associated with their investment goals and business activities.
With the growth of cross-border investing, customers have an increasing need for foreign exchange forward contracts to convert currency for international investments and to manage the currency risk in their international investment portfolios.
As an active participant in the foreign exchange markets, we provide foreign exchange forward contracts and options in support of these customer needs.
As part of our trading activities, we assume positions in the foreign exchange and interest-rate markets by buying and selling cash instruments and using derivatives, including foreign exchange forward contracts, foreign exchange and interest-rate options and interest-rate swaps.
As of December 31, 2009, the aggregate notional amount of these derivatives was $588.86 billion, of which $565.66 billion were foreign exchange forward and spot contracts.
In the aggregate, long and short foreign exchange forward positions are closely matched to minimize currency and interest-rate risk.
All foreign exchange contracts are valued daily at current market rates.
Additional information about trading derivatives is provided in note 16 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8.
As noted above, we use a variety of risk measurement tools and methodologies, including value-at-risk, or VaR, which is an estimate of potential loss for a given period within a stated statistical confidence interval.
We use a risk measurement system to estimate VaR daily.
We have adopted standards for estimating VaR, and we maintain capital for market risk in accordance with applicable regulatory guidelines.
VaR is estimated for a 99% one-tail confidence interval and an assumed one-day holding period using a historical observation period of two years.
A 99% one-tail confidence interval implies that daily trading losses should not exceed the estimated VaR more than 1% of the time, or less than three business days out of a year.
The methodology uses a simulation approach based on historically observed changes in foreign exchange rates, interest rates (domestic and foreign) and foreign exchange implied volatilities, and takes into account the resulting diversification benefits provided from the mix of our trading positions.
Like all quantitative risk measures, VaR is subject to limitations and assumptions inherent in our methodology.
Our methodology gives equal weight to all market-rate observations regardless of how recently the market rates were observed.
The estimate is calculated using static portfolios consisting of trading positions held at the end of each business day.
Therefore, implicit in the VaR estimate is the assumption that no intraday actions are taken by management during adverse market movements.
As a result, the methodology does not include risk associated with intraday changes in positions or intraday price volatility.
The following table presents VaR with respect to our trading activities, for trading positions held during the periods indicated, as measured by our VaR methodology.
The generally lower total VaR amounts compared to component VaR amounts primarily relate to diversification benefits across risk types.
Amounts presented for 2008 have been restated to conform to current-year methodology.
VALUE-AT-RISK

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td>(In millions)</td><td>2009</td><td>2008</td><td>2007</td></tr><tr><td>Foreign currency translation</td><td>$281</td><td>$68</td><td>$331</td></tr><tr><td>Net unrealized loss on hedges of net investments in non-U.S. subsidiaries</td><td>-14</td><td>-14</td><td>-15</td></tr><tr><td>Net unrealized loss on available-for-sale securities</td><td>-1,636</td><td>-5,205</td><td>-678</td></tr><tr><td>Net unrealized loss on fair value hedges of available-for-sale securities</td><td>-113</td><td>-242</td><td>-55</td></tr><tr><td>Losses from other-than-temporary impairment on available-for-sale securities related to factors other than credit</td><td>-159</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Losses from other-than-temporary impairment on held-to-maturity securities related to factors other than credit</td><td>-387</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Minimum pension liability</td><td>-192</td><td>-229</td><td>-146</td></tr><tr><td>Net unrealized loss on cash flow hedges</td><td>-18</td><td>-28</td><td>-12</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>$-2,238</td><td>$-5,650</td><td>$-575</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> (In millions)</td><td>Capital Leases</td><td> Operating Leases</td><td> Total</td></tr><tr><td>2010</td><td>$74</td><td>$229</td><td>$303</td></tr><tr><td>2011</td><td>75</td><td>184</td><td>259</td></tr><tr><td>2012</td><td>72</td><td>158</td><td>230</td></tr><tr><td>2013</td><td>72</td><td>132</td><td>204</td></tr><tr><td>2014</td><td>73</td><td>108</td><td>181</td></tr><tr><td>Thereafter</td><td>785</td><td>222</td><td>1,007</td></tr><tr><td>Total minimum lease payments</td><td>1,151</td><td>$1,033</td><td>$2,184</td></tr><tr><td>Less amount representing interest payments</td><td>-413</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Present value of minimum lease payments</td><td>$738</td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td> (In millions)</td><td> 2009</td><td> 2008</td><td> 2007</td><td> 2006</td><td> 2005</td></tr><tr><td>U.S.:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial and financial</td><td>$6,239</td><td>$6,397</td><td>$9,402</td><td>$3,480</td><td>$2,298</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased receivables</td><td>786</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Lease financing</td><td>408</td><td>407</td><td>396</td><td>415</td><td>404</td></tr><tr><td>Total U.S.</td><td>7,433</td><td>6,804</td><td>9,798</td><td>3,895</td><td>2,702</td></tr><tr><td>Non-U.S.:</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Commercial and financial</td><td>471</td><td>890</td><td>4,420</td><td>3,137</td><td>1,854</td></tr><tr><td>Purchased receivables</td><td>1,596</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Lease financing</td><td>1,308</td><td>1,437</td><td>1,584</td><td>1,914</td><td>1,926</td></tr><tr><td>Total non-U.S.</td><td>3,375</td><td>2,327</td><td>6,004</td><td>5,051</td><td>3,780</td></tr><tr><td>Total loans</td><td>$10,808</td><td>$9,131</td><td>$15,802</td><td>$8,946</td><td>$6,482</td></tr><tr><td>Average loans and lease financing</td><td>$9,703</td><td>$11,884</td><td>$10,753</td><td>$7,670</td><td>$6,013</td></tr></table>

Question: Which Non-U.S. makes up more than 30% of the total in 2009?
Answer: 1012.5
Reasoning program: multiply(3375,0.3)