Liquidity Monitoring and Measurement Stress Testing Liquidity stress testing is performed for each of Citi’s major entities, operating subsidiaries and/or countries.
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 expected and stressed market conditions as well as Companyspecific events.
Liquidity stress tests are conducted to ascertain potential mismatches between liquidity sources and uses over a variety of time horizons (overnight, one week, two weeks, one month, three months, one year) and over a variety of stressed conditions.
Liquidity limits are set accordingly.
To monitor the liquidity of an entity, these stress tests and potential mismatches are calculated with varying frequencies, with several tests performed daily.
Given the range of potential stresses, Citi maintains a series of contingency funding plans on a consolidated basis and for individual entities.
These plans specify a wide range of readily available actions for a variety of adverse market conditions or idiosyncratic stresses.
Short-Term Liquidity Measurement: Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) In addition to internal measures that Citi has developed for a 30-day stress scenario, Citi also monitors its liquidity by reference to the LCR, as calculated pursuant to the U. S.  LCR rules.
Generally, the LCR is designed to ensure that banks maintain an adequate level of HQLA to meet liquidity needs under an acute 30-day stress scenario.
The LCR is calculated by dividing HQLA by estimated net outflows over a stressed 30-day period, with the net outflows determined by applying prescribed outflow factors to various categories of liabilities, such as deposits, unsecured and secured wholesale borrowings, unused lending commitments and derivativesrelated exposures, partially offset by inflows from assets maturing within 30 days.
Banks are required to calculate an add-on to address potential maturity mismatches between contractual cash outflows and inflows within the 30-day period in determining the total amount of net outflows.
The minimum LCR requirement is 100%, effective January 2017.
In December 2016, the Federal Reserve Board adopted final rules which require additional disclosures relating to the LCR of large financial institutions, including Citi.
Among other things, the final rules require Citi to disclose components of its average HQLA, LCR and inflows and outflows each quarter.
In addition, the final rules require disclosure of Citi’s calculation of the maturity mismatch add-on as well as other qualitative disclosures.
The effective date for these disclosures is April 1, 2017.
## Table 0 ##
The table below sets forth the components of Citi’s LCR calculation and HQLA in excess of net outflows for the periods indicated: Note: Amounts set forth in the table above are presented on an average basis.
As set forth in the table above, Citi’s LCR increased both year-over-year and sequentially.
The increase year-over-year was driven by both an increase in HQLA and a reduction in net outflows.
Sequentially, the increase was driven by a slight reduction in net outflows, as HQLA remained largely unchanged.
Long-Term Liquidity Measurement: Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR) In the second quarter of 2016, the Federal Reserve Board, the FDIC and the OCC issued a proposed rule to implement the Basel III NSFR requirement.
The U. S. -proposed NSFR is largely consistent with the Basel Committee’s final NSFR rules.
In general, the NSFR assesses the availability of a bank’s stable funding against a required level.
A bank’s available stable funding would include portions of equity, deposits and long-term debt, while its required stable funding would be based on the liquidity characteristics of its assets, derivatives and commitments.
Standardized weightings would be required to be applied to the various asset and liabilities classes.
The ratio of available stable funding to required stable funding would be required to be greater than 100%.
While Citi believes that it is compliant with the proposed U. S.  NSFR rules as of December 31, 2016, it will need to evaluate any final version of the rules, which are expected to be released during 2017.
The proposed rules would require full implementation of the U. S.  NSFR beginning January 1, 2018.
8.
RETIREMENT BENEFITS Pension and Postretirement Plans The Company has several non-contributory defined benefit pension plans covering certain U. S.  employees and has various defined benefit pension and termination indemnity plans covering employees outside the U. S.  The U. S.  qualified defined benefit plan was frozen effective January 1, 2008 for most employees.
Accordingly, no additional compensation-based contributions have been credited to the cash balance portion of the plan for existing plan participants after 2007.
However, certain employees covered under the prior final pay plan formula continue to accrue benefits.
The Company also offers postretirement health care and life insurance benefits to certain eligible U. S.  retired employees, as well as to certain eligible employees outside the U. S.  The Company also sponsors a number of non-contributory, nonqualified pension plans.
These plans, which are unfunded, provide supplemental defined pension benefits to certain U. S.  employees.
With the exception of certain employees covered under the prior final pay plan formula, the benefits under these plans were frozen in prior years.
The plan obligations, plan assets and periodic plan expense for the Company鈥檚 most significant pension and postretirement benefit plans (Significant Plans) are measured and disclosed quarterly, instead of annually.
The Significant Plans captured approximately 90% of the Company鈥檚 global pension and postretirement plan obligations as of December 31, 2016.
All other plans (All Other Plans) are measured annually with a December 31 measurement date.
Net (Benefit) Expense The following table summarizes the components of net (benefit) expense recognized in the Consolidated Statement of Income for the Company鈥檚 pension and postretirement plans, for Significant Plans and All Other Plans:
## Table 1 ##
(1) Losses and gains due to curtailment, settlement and special termination benefits relate to repositioning and divestiture actions.
The estimated net actuarial loss and prior service (benefit) cost that will be amortized from Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) into net expense in 2017 are approximately $233 million and $(2) million, respectively, for defined benefit pension plans.
For postretirement plans, the estimated 2017 net actuarial loss and prior service (benefit) cost amortizations are approximately $28 million and $(9) million, respectively.
Results of Operations
## Table 2 ##
(1) Revenues from rental property increased primarily from the combined effect of (i) the acquisition of operating properties during 2008 and 2009, providing incremental revenues for the year ended December 31, 2009 of $29.3 million, as compared to the corresponding period in 2008 and (ii) the completion of certain development and redevelopment projects and tenant buyouts providing incremental revenues of approximately $7.4 million, for the year ended December 31, 2009, as compared to the corresponding period in 2008, which was partially offset by (iii) a decrease in revenues of approximately $8.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, as compared to the corresponding period in 2008, primarily resulting from the sale of certain properties during 2008 and 2009, and (iv) an overall occupancy decrease from the consolidated shopping center portfolio from 93.1% at December 31, 2008 to 92.2% at December 31, 2009.
(2) Rental property expenses increased primarily due to (i) operating property acquisitions during 2008 and 2009, (ii) the placement of certain development properties into service, which resulted in lower capitalization of carry costs, and (iii) an increase in snow removal costs during 2009 as compared to 2008, partially offset by (iv) a decrease in insurance costs during 2009 as compared to 2008 and (v) operating property dispositions during 2008 and 2009.
(3) Depreciation and amortization increased primarily due to (i) operating property acquisitions during 2008 and 2009, (ii) the placement of certain development properties into service and (iii) tenant vacates, partially offset by operating property dispositions during 2008 and 2009.
Mortgage and other financing income decreased $3.3 million to $15.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, as compared to $18.3 million for the corresponding period in 2008.
This decrease is primarily due to a decrease in interest income during 2009 resulting from the repayment of certain mortgage receivables during 2009 and 2008.
Management and other fee income decreased approximately $5.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, as compared to the corresponding period in 2008.
This decrease is primarily due to a decrease in property management fees of approximately $5.8 million for 2009, due to lower revenues attributable to lower occupancy and the sale of certain properties during 2008 and 2009, partially offset by an increase in other transaction related fees of approximately $0.6 million recognized during 2009.
General and administrative expenses decreased approximately $6.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, as compared to the corresponding period in 2008.
This decrease is primarily due to a reduction in force during 2009 as a result of implementing the Company’s core business strategy of focusing on owning and operating shopping centers and a shift away from certain non-strategic assets along with a lack of transactional activity.
Interest, dividends and other investment income decreased approximately $23.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, as compared to the corresponding period in 2008.
This decrease is primarily due to (i) a decrease in realized gains of approximately $8.2 million during 2009 resulting from the sale of certain marketable securities during the corresponding period in 2008 as compared to 2009, and (ii) a decrease in interest and dividend income of approximately $14.8 million during 2009, as compared to the corresponding period in 2008, primarily resulting from the sale of investments in marketable securities and reductions in dividends declared from certain marketable securities during 2009 and 2008.
Other expense, net decreased approximately $1.3 million to $0.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, as compared to $2.2 million for the corresponding period in 2008.
This decrease is primarily due to (i) the receipt of fewer shares of Sears Holding Corp.  common stock received as partial settlement of Kmart pre-petition claims during 2008,

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td>In billions of dollars</td><td>Dec. 31, 2016</td><td>Sept. 30, 2016</td><td>Dec. 31, 2015</td></tr><tr><td>HQLA</td><td>$403.7</td><td>$403.8</td><td>$389.2</td></tr><tr><td>Net outflows</td><td>332.5</td><td>335.3</td><td>344.4</td></tr><tr><td>LCR</td><td>121%</td><td>120%</td><td>113%</td></tr><tr><td>HQLA in excess of net outflows</td><td>$71.3</td><td>$68.5</td><td>$44.8</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="6">Pension plans</td><td colspan="6">Postretirement benefit plans</td></tr><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">U.S. plans</td><td colspan="3">Non-U.S. plans</td><td colspan="3">U.S. plans</td><td colspan="3">Non-U.S. plans</td></tr><tr><td>In millions of dollars</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Qualified plans</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Benefits earned during the year</td><td>$3</td><td>$4</td><td>$6</td><td>$154</td><td>$168</td><td>$178</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$10</td><td>$12</td><td>$15</td></tr><tr><td>Interest cost on benefit obligation</td><td>520</td><td>553</td><td>541</td><td>282</td><td>317</td><td>376</td><td>25</td><td>33</td><td>33</td><td>94</td><td>108</td><td>120</td></tr><tr><td>Expected return on plan assets</td><td>-886</td><td>-893</td><td>-878</td><td>-287</td><td>-323</td><td>-384</td><td>-9</td><td>-3</td><td>-1</td><td>-86</td><td>-105</td><td>-121</td></tr><tr><td>Amortization of unrecognized</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Prior service (benefit) cost</td><td>—</td><td>-3</td><td>-3</td><td>-1</td><td>2</td><td>1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-10</td><td>-11</td><td>-12</td></tr><tr><td>Net actuarial loss</td><td>160</td><td>139</td><td>105</td><td>69</td><td>73</td><td>77</td><td>-1</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>30</td><td>43</td><td>39</td></tr><tr><td>Curtailment loss (gain)<sup>(1)</sup></td><td>13</td><td>14</td><td>—</td><td>-2</td><td>—</td><td>14</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>-1</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Settlement loss (gain)<sup>(1)</sup></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>6</td><td>44</td><td>53</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Special termination benefits<sup>-1</sup></td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>9</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td><td>—</td></tr><tr><td>Net qualified plans (benefit) expense</td><td>$-190</td><td>$-186</td><td>$-229</td><td>$221</td><td>$281</td><td>$324</td><td>$15</td><td>$30</td><td>$32</td><td>$38</td><td>$46</td><td>$41</td></tr><tr><td>Nonqualified plans expense</td><td>$40</td><td>$43</td><td>$45</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td><td>$—</td></tr><tr><td>Total net (benefit) expense</td><td>$-150</td><td>$-143</td><td>$-184</td><td>$221</td><td>$281</td><td>$324</td><td>$15</td><td>$30</td><td>$32</td><td>$38</td><td>$46</td><td>$41</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td>2009 (all amounts in millions)</td><td>2008</td><td>Increase/ (Decrease)</td><td>% change</td></tr><tr><td>Revenues from rental property -1</td><td>$786.9</td><td>$758.7</td><td>$28.2</td><td>3.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Rental property expenses: -2</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Rent</td><td>$14.1</td><td>$13.4</td><td>$0.7</td><td>5.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Real estate taxes</td><td>112.4</td><td>98.0</td><td>14.4</td><td>14.7%</td></tr><tr><td>Operating and maintenance</td><td>110.1</td><td>104.7</td><td>5.4</td><td>5.2%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td>$236.6</td><td>$216.1</td><td>$20.5</td><td>9.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Depreciation and amortization -3</td><td>$227.7</td><td>$206.0</td><td>$21.7</td><td>10.5%</td></tr></table>

Question: Does Net actuarial loss keeps increasing each year between 2014 and 2016?
Answer: yes