hellotayssir/FinQA_TAT-QA_financial_finetuning_dataset huggingface dataset:
the contracts were valued as of april 1 , 2002 , and an asset and a corresponding gain of $ 127 million , net of income taxes , was recorded as a cumulative effect of a change in accounting principle in the second quarter of 2002 . the majority of the gain recorded relates to the warrior run contract , as the asset value of the deepwater contract on april 1 , 2002 , was less than $ 1 million . the warrior run contract qualifies and was designated as a cash flow hedge as defined by sfas no . 133 and hedge accounting is applied for this contract subsequent to april 1 , 2002 . the contract valuations were performed using current forward electricity and gas price quotes and current market data for other contract variables . the forward curves used to value the contracts include certain assumptions , including projections of future electricity and gas prices in periods where future prices are not quoted . fluctuations in market prices and their impact on the assumptions will cause the value of these contracts to change . such fluctuations will increase the volatility of the company 2019s reported results of operations . 11 . commitments , contingencies and risks operating leases 2014as of december 31 , 2002 , the company was obligated under long-term non-cancelable operating leases , primarily for office rental and site leases . rental expense for operating leases , excluding amounts related to the sale/leaseback discussed below , was $ 31 million $ 32 million and $ 13 million in the years ended december 31 , 2002 , 2001and 2000 , respectively , including commitments of businesses classified as discontinued amounting to $ 6 million in 2002 , $ 16 million in 2001 and $ 6 million in 2000 . the future minimum lease commitments under these leases are as follows ( in millions ) : discontinued total operations .

Table:
 | total | discontinued operations
2003 | $ 30 | $ 4
2004 | 20 | 4
2005 | 15 | 3
2006 | 11 | 1
2007 | 9 | 1
thereafter | 84 | 1
total | $ 169 | $ 14
sale/leaseback 2014in may 1999 , a subsidiary of the company acquired six electric generating stations from new york state electric and gas ( 2018 2018nyseg 2019 2019 ) .
concurrently , the subsidiary sold two of the plants to an unrelated third party for $ 666 million and simultaneously entered into a leasing arrangement with the unrelated party .
this transaction has been accounted for as a sale/leaseback with operating lease treatment .
rental expense was $ 54 million , $ 58 million and $ 54 million in 2002 , 2001 and 2000 , respectively .
future minimum lease commitments are as follows ( in millions ) : in connection with the lease of the two power plants , the subsidiary is required to maintain a rent reserve account equal to the maximum semi-annual payment with respect to the sum of the basic rent ( other then deferrable basic rent ) and fixed charges expected to become due in the immediately succeeding three-year period .
at december 31 , 2002 , 2001 and 2000 , the amount deposited in the rent reserve account approximated .

Question: what percentage of total future minimum lease commitments is due in 2003?
Answer: 18%
Calculation: divide(30, 169)
In addition to the results reported in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“US GAAP” or “GAAP”), we also use certain non-GAAP measures such as EBITDA and adjusted EBITDA to evaluate operating performance and to facilitate the comparison of our historical results and trends.
These financial measures are not a measure of financial performance under US GAAP and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for net income (loss) as a measure of performance and net cash provided by operating activities as a measure of liquidity.
EBITDA is defined as net earnings before interest expense, income taxes, and depreciation and amortization. Adjusted EBITDA is comprised of EBITDA, adjusted for certain items as permitted or required under our credit facility as described in the reconciliations below.
These measures are a common measure of operating performance in the telecommunications industry and are useful, with other data, as a means to evaluate our ability to fund our estimated uses of cash. The following tables are a reconciliation of net income (loss) to Adjusted EBITDA:
The following tables are a reconciliation of net income (loss) to Adjusted EBITDA:
(a) Other, net includes the equity earnings from our investments, dividend income, income attributable to noncontrolling interests in subsidiaries, acquisition and transaction related costs including severance, non-cash pension and postretirement benefits and certain other miscellaneous items.
(b) Includes all cash dividends and other cash distributions received from our investments.
(c) Represents the redemption premium (discount) and write-off of unamortized debt issuance costs in connection with the redemption or retirement of our debt obligations.
(d) Represents intangible asset impairment charges recognized during the period.
(e) Represents compensation expenses in connection with the issuance of stock awards, which because of their non-cash nature, these expenses are excluded from adjusted EBITDA.
Table:
 |  |  |  | Year Ended December 31, | 
(In millions, unaudited) | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015
Net income (loss) | $ (20.0) | $ (50.5) | $ 65.3 | $ 15.2 | $ (0.7)
Add (subtract): |  |  |  |  | 
Interest expense, net of interest income | 136.7 | 134.5 | 129.8 | 76.8 | 79.6
Income tax expense (benefit) | (3.7) | (24.1) | (124.9) | 23.0 | 2.8
Depreciation and amortization | 381.2 | 432.6 | 291.8 | 174.0 | 179.9
EBITDA | 494.2 | 492.5 | 362.0 | 289.0 | 261.6
Adjustments to EBITDA: |  |  |  |  | 
Other, net (a) | (8.8) | 0.6 | 19.3 | (25.5) | (22.3)
Investment distributions (b) | 35.8 | 39.1 | 30.0 | 32.1 | 45.3
(Gain) loss on extinguishment of debt (c) | (4.5) | — | — | 6.6 | 41.2
Loss on impairment (d) | — | — | — | 0.6 | —
Non-cash, stock-based compensation (e) | 6.8 | 5.1 | 2.8 | 3.0 | 3.1
Adjusted EBITDA | $ 523.5 | $ 537.3 | $ 414.1 | $ 305.8 | $ 328.9


Question: What are the various non-GAAP measures used for?
Answer: to evaluate operating performance and to facilitate the comparison of our historical results and trends
3.3 Fair value estimation The table below analyses the Group’s financial instruments carried at fair value as at 31 December 2019 by level of the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. Such inputs are categorised into three levels within a fair value hierarchy as follows:
Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (level 1);
Inputs other than quoted prices included within level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly (that is, as prices) or indirectly (that is, derived from prices) (level 2); and
Inputs for the asset or liability that are not based on observable market data (that is, unobservable inputs) (level 3).
The fair value of financial instruments traded in active markets is determined with reference to quoted market prices at the end of the reporting period. A market is regarded as active if quoted prices are readily and regularly available from an exchange, dealer, broker, industry group, pricing service, or regulatory agency, and those prices represent actual and regularly occurring market transactions on an arm’s length basis. These instruments are included in level 1.
The fair value of financial instruments that are not traded in an active market is determined by using valuation techniques. These valuation techniques maximise the use of observable market data where it is available and rely as little as possible on entity specific estimates. If all significant inputs required for evaluating the fair value of a financial instrument are observable, the instrument is included in level 2.
If one or more of the significant inputs are not based on observable market data, the instrument is included in level 3.
Specific valuation techniques used to value financial instruments mainly include: • Dealer quotes for similar instruments; • The fair value of interest rate swaps is calculated as the present value of the estimated future cash flows based on observable yield curves; and • Other techniques, such as discounted cash flow analysis, are used to determine fair value for financial instruments.
Table:
 | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total
 | RMB’Million | RMB’Million | RMB’Million | RMB’Million
As at 31 December 2019 |  |  |  | 
FVPL | 14,766 | 5,091 | 116,079 | 135,936
FVOCI | 74,707 | – | 7,014 | 81,721
OFA | – | 375 | – | 375
Other financial liabilities | – | 523 | 1,873 | 2,396
As at 31 December 2018 |  |  |  | 
FVPL | 10,875 | 5,009 | 81,993 | 97,877
FVOCI | 41,578 | – | 1,941 | 43,519
OFA | – | 2,032 | – | 2,032
Other financial liabilities | – | 40 | 4,466 | 4,506


Question: How much did the level 2 OFA change by from 2018 year end to 2019 year end?
Answer: -1657
Calculation: 375-2,032
Inventories
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost (first-in, first-out or weighted average cost) or net realizable value. Inventories are as follows (in thousands):
Table:
 | Fiscal year-end | 
 | 2019 | 2018
Purchased parts and assemblies | $134,298 | $137,566
Work-in-process | 174,550 | 186,240
Finished goods | 133,682 | 162,935
Total inventories | $442,530 | $486,741


Question: In which year was Purchased parts and assemblies larger?
Answer: 2018
Calculation: 137,566>134,298
Movements in ordinary share capital
Ordinary Shares
Ordinary shares entitle the holder to participate in dividends and the proceeds on the winding up of the company in proportion to the number of and amounts paid on the shares held. The fully paid ordinary shares have no par value and the company does not have a limited amount of authorised capital.
On a show of hands every member present at a meeting in person or by proxy shall have one vote and upon a poll each share shall have one vote.
Table:
 |  |  | Issue price | 
Details | Date | Shares | AU$US | $’000
Balance | 1 July 2017 | 130,215,813 |  | 125,177
Shares issued | 23 February 2018 | 69,129 | $8.52 | 458
Balance | 30 June 2018 | 130,284,942 |  | 125,635
Shares issued | 24 August 2018 | 69,129 | $8.46 | 423
Share issued | 24 August 2018 | 28,407 | $0.00 | -
Share issued | 21 December 2018 | 129,044 | $0.00 | -
Balance | 30 June 2019 | 130,511,522 |  | 126,058


Question: What are the dates that shares were issued?
Answer: 23 February 2018, 24 August 2018, 21 December 2018
30. RECONCILIATION OF LIABILITIES FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES (Cont’d)
Note: (1) The cash flows comprise the net amount of proceeds from borrowings and repayments of borrowings, net interest paid on borrowings, and settlement of swaps for bonds repaid in the statement of cash flows.
Table:
 | Bonds | Bank loans | Finance lease liabilities | Interest payable | Derivative financial instruments
Group - 2018 | S$ Mil | S$ Mil | S$ Mil | S$ Mil | S$ Mil
As at 1 April 2017 | 8,726.6 | 2,306.3 | 198.2 | 142.7 | (245.3)
Financing cash flows (1) | (506.2) | 222.6 | (28.3) | (379.9) | 61.4
Non-cash changes: |  |  |  |  | 
Fair value adjustments | (65.4) | - | - | - | 107.8
Amortisation of bond discount | 3.2 | - | - | - | -
Foreign exchange movements | (273.3) | (58.5) | (0.5) | (8.5) | 11.5
Acquisition of subsidiary | - | 31.3 | 8.7 | - | 
Additions of finance lease | - | - | 4.8 | - | -
Interest expense | - | - | - | 383.6 | -
Adjustment | - | - | (78.3) | - | -
 | (335.5) | (27.2) | (65.3) | 375.1 | 119.3
As at 31 March 2018 | 7,884.9 | 2,501.7 | 104.6 | 137.9 | (64.6)


Question: Which type of non-cash change has the largest impact in terms of the categories of liabilities that it affects?
Answer: Foreign exchange movements
Calculation: -
NOTE 26 – EARNINGS PER SHARE AND DIVIDEND PER SHARE
When calculating diluted earnings per share for 2018 and 2017, RSUs have been omitted as they are out-of-the-money and thus anti-dilutive, but the RSUs may potentially dilute earnings per share in the future. Please refer to note 3 for information on the RSU share options.
Table:
 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017
EARNINGS PER SHARE |  |  | 
Net profit/(loss) for the year (USDm) | 166.0 | -34.8 | 2.4
Million shares |  |  | 
Weighted average number of shares | 74.3 | 73.4 | 62.3
Weighted average number of treasury shares | -0.3 | -0.3 | -0.3
Weighted average number of shares outstanding | 74.0 | 73.1 | 62.0
Dilutive effect of outstanding share options | 0.0 | - | -
Weighted average number of shares outstanding incl. dilutive effect of share options | 74.0 | 73.1 | 62.0
Basic earnings/(loss) per share (USD) | 2.24 | -0.48 | 0.04
Diluted earnings/(loss) per share (USD) | 2.24 | -0.48 | 0.04


Question: What was the change in the Weighted average number of shares outstanding incl. dilutive effect of share options from 2018 to 2019?
Answer: 0.9
Calculation: 74.0-73.1
NOTE 7 – PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT
Property and equipment consist of the following (in thousands):
Depreciation expense was $8.6 million, $8.0 million, and $8.4 million in fiscal years ended February 28, 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively.
Fixed assets not yet in service consist primarily of capitalized internal-use software and certain tooling and other equipment that have not been placed into service.
Table:
 | February 28, | 
 | 2019 | 2018
Leasehold improvements | $3,522 | $3,157
LoJack system components and law enforcement |  | 
tracking units | 20,326 | 20,558
Plant equipment and tooling | 13,078 | 16,842
Office equipment, computers and furniture | 11,553 | 14,206
Software | 31,349 | 31,427
 | 79,828 | 86,190
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization | (58,641) | (69,585)
 | 21,187 | 16,605
Fixed assets not yet in service | 5,836 | 4,657
 | $27,023 | $21,262


Question: How much were software in 2019?
Answer: 31,349
Cost of Revenues and Gross Margin
Cost of revenues in 2019 decreased by $4.3 million, or 16%, as compared to 2018. The decrease was primarily driven by a reduction in the number of global services and cloud infrastructure personnel, which led to a decrease of $2.2 million in compensation and benefits expense, including stock-based compensation expense, as compared to 2018. This reduction in headcount also contributed to a decrease in allocated facilities and information technology costs of $0.5 million in 2019. We also experienced a decrease of $0.9 million in hosting costs in 2019, due to a decline in the usage of our hosted platform as compared to 2018. Additionally, depreciation decreased $0.5 million in 2019, due to the nature and timing of capital expenditures and internal projects as compared to 2018.
Our gross margin decreased to 53% during 2019, as compared to 54% during 2018. This was primarily due to our revenues, net declining during the year at a slightly faster rate than the corresponding decrease in costs.
Table:
 | Years Ended December 31, |  | Change | 
 | 2019 | 2018 | $ | %
 |  | (dollars in thousands) |  | 
Cost of revenues | $22,843 | $27,154 | $(4,311) | (16)%
Gross profit | 26,193 | 31,477 | (6,284) | (17)
Gross margin | 53% | 54% |  | 


Question: What is the company's total cost of revenues in 2018 and 2019?
Answer: 49997
Calculation:  27,154 + 22,843
Under the 2019 Plan, the Compensation Committee set the following non-equity incentive target amounts, non-equity incentive compensation cap percentages and relative percentages weights for each plan component for each of our NEOs in 2019 who are participating in our incentive compensation plans. Under the 2019 Plan, the Compensation Committee set the following non-equity incentive target amounts, non-equity incentive compensation cap percentages and relative percentages weights for each plan component for each of our NEOs in 2019 who are participating in our incentive compensation plans.
As noted above, Messrs Richard, Robert and Bruce Leeds no longer participate in incentive compensation. In addition, as
Mr. Reinhold left Systemax as the Chief Executive Officer in January 2019, he did not participate in the 2019 NEO Plan.
Table:
Name | Target ($) | Cap (%) | Net Sales (%) | Adjusted Operating Income (%) | Strategic Objectives (%) | Corporate Governance (%) | Business Unit/Individual Objectives (%)
Barry Litwin | 1,113,750 | 111 | 20 | 60 | 18 | 4 | 0
Thomas Clark | 225,000 | 150 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100
Robert Dooley | 615,000 | 150 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100
Eric Lerner | 300,900 | 150 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100
Manoj Shetty | 241,535 | 150 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 100


Question: What is the incentive compensation received by Messrs Richard, Robert and Bruce Leeds respectively?
Answer: 0
entergy mississippi , inc . management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 16.5 million primarily due to lower other operation and maintenance expenses , higher net revenues , and a lower effective income tax rate , partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expenses . 2015 compared to 2014 net income increased $ 17.9 million primarily due to the write-off in 2014 of the regulatory assets associated with new nuclear generation development costs as a result of a joint stipulation entered into with the mississippi public utilities staff , subsequently approved by the mpsc , partially offset by higher depreciation and amortization expenses , higher taxes other than income taxes , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and lower net revenue . see note 2 to the financial statements for discussion of the new nuclear generation development costs and the joint stipulation . net revenue 2016 compared to 2015 net revenue consists of operating revenues net of : 1 ) fuel , fuel-related expenses , and gas purchased for resale , 2 ) purchased power expenses , and 3 ) other regulatory charges ( credits ) . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2016 to 2015 . amount ( in millions ) .

Table:
 | amount ( in millions )
2015 net revenue | $ 696.3
retail electric price | 12.9
volume/weather | 4.7
net wholesale revenue | -2.4 ( 2.4 )
reserve equalization | -2.8 ( 2.8 )
other | -3.3 ( 3.3 )
2016 net revenue | $ 705.4
the retail electric price variance is primarily due to a $ 19.4 million net annual increase in revenues , as approved by the mpsc , effective with the first billing cycle of july 2016 , and an increase in revenues collected through the storm damage rider .
see note 2 to the financial statements for more discussion on the formula rate plan and the storm damage rider .
the volume/weather variance is primarily due to an increase of 153 gwh , or 1% ( 1 % ) , in billed electricity usage , including an increase in industrial usage , partially offset by the effect of less favorable weather on residential and commercial sales .
the increase in industrial usage is primarily due to expansion projects in the pulp and paper industry , increased demand for existing customers , primarily in the metals industry , and new customers in the wood products industry. .

Question: what is the net change in net revenue during 20016 for entergy mississippi , inc.?
Answer: 9.1
Calculation: subtract(705.4, 696.3)
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Cash flows from operations provided a source of funds of $1,066 million, $1,058 million and $1,310 million during the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively. This increase was driven primarily by lower employee annual incentive payments, lower retailer investments and lower restructuring payments, partially offset by working capital timing and higher interest and tax payments during the year ended December 31, 2019.
We provide for additional liquidity through several sources, including maintaining an adequate cash balance, access to global funding sources and a committed revolving credit facility. The following table provides a summary of the major sources of liquidity for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017:
Of the $454 million in cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2019, approximately $383 million was held in jurisdictions outside the U.S. We regularly review the amount of cash and cash equivalents held outside of the U.S. to determine the amounts necessary to fund the current operations of our foreign operations and their growth initiatives and amounts needed to service our U.S. indebtedness and related obligations.
Table:
(IN MILLIONS) | 2019 | 2018 | 2017
Net cash from operating activities | $1,066 | $1,058 | $1,310
Cash and short-term marketable securities | $454 | $524 | $656
Revolving credit facility | $850 | $850 | $575


Question: What are the additional sources for additional liquidity?
Answer: maintaining an adequate cash balance, access to global funding sources and a committed revolving credit facility
Trade Receivables, Net
The carrying amounts reported in the Consolidated Balance Sheets for Trade receivables, net approximate their fair value because of their short-term nature.
A summary of Trade receivables, net of allowance for doubtful accounts is as follows (in millions):
In addition to the amounts above, we have unbilled receivables that we do not expect to collect within the next year included in Other non-current assets in our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Billings for these receivables are based on contractual terms. Refer to Note 11 — Other Non-Current Assets.
Table:
 | December 31, | 
 | 2019 | 2018
Trade receivables — billed | $136.6 | $136.6
Trade receivables — unbilled | 39.8 | 37.0
Trade receivables | 176.4 | 173.6
Allowance for doubtful accounts | (1.3) | (1.3)
Trade receivables, net | $175.1 | $172.3


Question: How many years did Trade receivables, net exceed $150 million?
Answer: 2
Calculation: 2019##2018
performance graph the table below compares the cumulative total shareholder return on our common stock with the cumulative total return of ( i ) the standard & poor 2019s 500 composite stock index ( 201cs&p 500 index 201d ) , ( ii ) the standard & poor 2019s industrials index ( 201cs&p industrials index 201d ) and ( iii ) the standard & poor 2019s consumer durables & apparel index ( 201cs&p consumer durables & apparel index 201d ) , from december 31 , 2007 through december 31 , 2012 , when the closing price of our common stock was $ 16.66 . the graph assumes investments of $ 100 on december 31 , 2007 in our common stock and in each of the three indices and the reinvestment of dividends . performance graph 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 s&p 500 index s&p industrials index s&p consumer durables & apparel index the table below sets forth the value , as of december 31 for each of the years indicated , of a $ 100 investment made on december 31 , 2007 in each of our common stock , the s&p 500 index , the s&p industrials index and the s&p consumer durables & apparel index and includes the reinvestment of dividends. .

Table:
 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012
masco | $ 55.78 | $ 71.52 | $ 67.12 | $ 52.15 | $ 92.49
s&p 500 index | $ 63.45 | $ 79.90 | $ 91.74 | $ 93.67 | $ 108.55
s&p industrials index | $ 60.60 | $ 72.83 | $ 92.04 | $ 91.50 | $ 105.47
s&p consumer durables & apparel index | $ 66.43 | $ 90.54 | $ 118.19 | $ 127.31 | $ 154.72
in july 2007 , our board of directors authorized the purchase of up to 50 million shares of our common stock in open-market transactions or otherwise .
at december 31 , 2012 , we had remaining authorization to repurchase up to 24 million shares .
during the first quarter of 2012 , we repurchased and retired one million shares of our common stock , for cash aggregating $ 8 million to offset the dilutive impact of the 2012 grant of one million shares of long-term stock awards .
we have not purchased any shares since march 2012. .

Question: what was the percentage cumulative return of masco for the five year period ending 2012?
Answer: -7.51%
Calculation: subtract(92.49, 100), divide(#0, 100)