hellotayssir/FinQA_TAT-QA_financial_finetuning_dataset huggingface dataset:
12. Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of taxes, consisted of the following:
Reclassifications related to gains and losses on available-for-sale debt securities are included in "Interest and other expense, net". Refer to Note 3, "Financial Instruments" for the amount and location of reclassifications related to derivative instruments. Reclassifications of the defined benefit pension components of net periodic benefit cost are included in "Interest and other expense, net". Refer to Note 15, "Retirement Benefit Plans."
Table:
 | Net Unrealized Gains (Losses) on Derivative Instruments | Net Unrealized Gains (Losses) on Available for Sale Securities | Defined Benefit Pension Components | Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments | Total
Balances, January 31, 2017 | $14.6 | $1.5 | $(33.8) | $(160.8) | $(178.5)
Other comprehensive (loss) income before reclassifications | (24.5) | (0.6) | 4.3 | 86.3 | 65.5
Pre-tax losses (gains) reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income | (9.9) | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.1 | (8.6)
Tax effects | 3.2 | 0.1 | (0.7) | (4.8) | (2.2)
Net current period other comprehensive (loss) income | (31.2) | (0.2) | 4.5 | 81.6 | 54.7
Balances, January 31, 2018 | (16.6) | 1.3 | (29.3) | (79.2) | (123.8)
Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassifications | 20.6 | 0.7 | 14.7 | (58.3) | (22.3)
Pre-tax gains reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income | 12.1 | 1.3 | 0.3 | — | 13.7
Tax effects | (1.1) | — | (2.0) | 0.5 | (2.6)
Net current period other comprehensive income (loss) | 31.6 | 2.0 | 13.0 | (57.8) | (11.2)
Balances, January 31, 2019 | $15.0 | $3.3 | $(16.3) | $(137.0) | $(135.0)


Question: What is the average total balance from 2017 to 2019?
Answer: 145.77
Calculation: (178.5+123.8+135.0)/3
NOTE 4 - ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED EXPENSES
Accounts payable and accrued expenses consist of the following at:
On October 1 2019, the Company entered into an agreement with a consultant for toxicology studies. The consultant quoted a commitment of approximately $988,000 as an
estimate for the study. 50% of the total price is to be paid upon the signing of the agreement, 35% of the total price is to be upon completion of the in-life study, and the
remaining 15% of the total price is to be paid upon the issuance of the report. If the Company cancels the study the Company will be required to pay a cancelation fee. If the
cancelation happens prior to the arrival of the test animals then the Company will need to pay between 20% and 50% of the animal fees depending on when the cancellation
happens. If the cancellation occurs after the animals arrive but before the study begins then the company will be responsible for paying 50% of the protocol price plus a fee of
$7,000 per room/week for animal husbandry until the animals can be relocated or disposed of. If the Company cancels the study after it has begun then the Company will need to pay any fees for procured items for the study and any nonrecoverable expenses incurred by the vendor. As of December 31, 2019, the Company has paid $0 and there is a balance of $493,905 due.
Table:
 | December 31, 2019 | December 31, 2018
Accounting | $36,161 | $52,365
Research and development | 650,584 | 137,114
Legal | 15,273 | 32,161
Other | 163,029 | 10,048
Total | $865,047 | $231,688


Question: What is the company's total accounts payables and accrued expenses as at December 31, 2018?
Answer: $231,688
The amortized cost and fair value of cash equivalents, investments, and restricted investments with contractual maturities as of June 30, 2019, are as follows:
The Company has the ability, if necessary, to liquidate its investments in order to meet the Company’s liquidity needs in the next 12 months. Accordingly, those investments with contractual maturities greater than 12 months from the date of purchase nonetheless are classified as short-term on the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Table:
 | Cost | Fair Value
 |  | (in thousands)
Due in one year or less | $4,842,996 | $4,844,145
Due after one year through five years | 331,707 | 333,019
Due in more than five years | 41,612 | 41,756
 | $5,216,315 | $5,218,920


Question: What is the percentage of amortized cost of cash equivalents, investments, and restricted investments with contractual maturities that is due in more than five year in the total cost?
Answer: 0.8
Calculation: 41,612/5,216,315
28 SHARE BASED COMPENSATION PLANS
The compensation cost recognised with respect to all outstanding plans and by grant of shares, which are all equity settled instruments, is as follows:
(*) includes of 1,305,399 options granted towards Share Plan 2015 during twelve months ended March 31, 2019 at an average exercise price of $14.86 per share and average grant date fair value $2.6 per share.
(**) includes Restricted Share Unit (RSU) and Other share option plans. In respect of 211,567 units/options granted towards RSU during twelve months ended March 31, 2019, grant date fair value approximates intrinsic value $10.48 per share. (**) includes Restricted Share Unit (RSU) and Other share option plans. In respect of 211,567 units/options granted towards RSU during twelve months ended March 31, 2019, grant date fair value approximates intrinsic value $10.48 per share.
(***) includes 1,400,000 shares granted twelve months ended March 31, 2019 to management personnel at grant date fair value $10.08 per share.
Joint Stock Ownership Plan (JSOP)
In April 2012, the Company established a controlled trust called the Eros International Plc Employee Benefit Trust (“JSOP Trust”). The JSOP Trust purchased 2,000,164 shares of the Company out of funds borrowed from the Company and repayable on demand. The Company’s Board, Nomination and Remuneration Committee recommends to the JSOP Trust certain employees, officers and key management personnel, to whom the JSOP Trust will be required to grant shares from its holdings at nominal price. Such shares are then held by the JSOP Trust and the scheme is referred to as the “JSOP Plan.” The shares held by the JSOP Trust are reported as a reduction in stockholders’ equity and termed as ‘JSOP reserves’.
Table:
 |  | Year ended March 31 | 
 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017
 |  | (in thousands) | 
IPO India Plan | $1,198 | $1,572 | $2,140
JSOP Plan | — | 615 | 3,622
Option award scheme 2012 | — | 197 | 699
2014 Share Plan | 47 | (22) | 1,427
2015 Share Plan(*) | 3,059 | 100 | 328
Other share option awards(**) | 5,346 | 7,283 | 4,405
Management scheme (staff share grant) (***) | 11,911 | 8,173 | 10,850
 | $21,561 | $17,918 | $23,471


Question: What are the fiscal years included in the table?
Answer: 2019, 2018, 2017
Base Salary. The base salary for each NEO is determined on the basis of the following factors: scope of responsibilities, experience, skills, performance, expected future contribution, base salary levels in effect for comparable positions at the companies in the Peer Group (as described on page 42 below under “Use of Peer Group Compensation Data”) and other competitive market factors. Generally, the Committee reviews the base salary levels of our NEOs annually as part of the Company’s performance review process as well as upon a promotion or other change of position or level of responsibility. Merit-based increases to the base salaries of our NEOs (other than our CEO) are recommended by our CEO to the Committee, and all increases are based on the Committee’s (and in the case of our CEO, the Board’s) review and assessment of the factors described above.
The Compensation Committee reviews compensation levels at the beginning of each fiscal year and adjusts as needed based upon market data and executive achievement. The Committee reviewed the base salaries of our executive officers, including our NEOs, for fiscal year 2019 and increased the salaries of our CEO and CFO in light of their contributions in fiscal year 2018, including, among other considerations, the successful execution and integration of the AvComm and Wireless acquisition and to reflect the Committee’s review of current peer and market compensation data. Mr. Staley’s salary was also increased to reflect the Committee’s review of current peer and market compensation data as well as his contributions in fiscal year 2019, including the integration of AvComm and Wireless sales into our global sales organization. The Committee did not increase the salaries of any of our other NEOs because the Committee determined that the existing base salaries were appropriate for each of these NEOs.
Actual base salaries paid to our NEOs in fiscal year 2019 are set forth in the “Salary” column of the Fiscal 2019 Summary Compensation Table on page 44.
Table:
 | Fiscal Year 2018 | Fiscal Year 2019 | 
Named Executive Officer | Base Salary | Base Salary | Percentage Increase
Oleg Khaykin | $750,000 | $800,000 | 6.7%
Amar Maletira | $425,000 | $500,000 | 17.7%
Paul McNab | $435,000 | $435,000 | —
Luke Scrivanich | $372,000 | $372,000 | —
Gary Staley | $360,000 | $375,000 | 4.2%


Question: What is the difference in base salary between Paul McNab and Luke Scrivanch in 2018?
Answer: 63000
Calculation: ($435,000-$372,000)
Net Income Per Share
Basic net income per share is computed by dividing net income by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted net income per share is computed giving effect to all potentially dilutive common stock and common stock equivalents, including stock options, RSUs and common stock subject to repurchase.
The following table reconciles the shares used in calculating basic net income per share and diluted net income per share (in thousands):
Table:
 |  | Fiscal Year Ended | 
 | December 28, 2019 | December 29, 2018 | December 30, 2017
Weighted-average shares used in computing basic net income per share | 74,994 | 73,482 | 72,292
Add potentially dilutive securities | 2,292 | 1,700 | 1,947
Weighted-average shares used in computing basic and diluted net income per share | 77,286 | 75,182 | 74,239


Question: What was the Weighted-average shares used in computing basic net income per share in 2019, 2018 and 2017 respectively?
Answer: 74,994, 73,482, 72,292
NOTE 11 – INCOME TAXES
The components of loss before income taxes are as follows:
Table:
 | 2019 | 2018
Domestic | (1,698,689) | (2,468,805)
Foreign | (52,222) | (88,726)
Loss before income taxes | (1,750,911) | (2,557,531)


Question: What is the company's foreign loss before income tax in 2019?
Answer: 52,222
Property and Equipment, Net
Property and equipment, net, consisted of the following (in thousands):
Depreciation expense on property and equipment was $5.0 million, $6.4 million and $7.1 million for the years
ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively
Table:
 | Useful life (in years) | December 31, 2019 | December 31, 2018
Equipment | 1-3 | $22,702 | $49,804
Software | 1-3 | 726 | 4,088
Furniture and fixtures | 1-3 | 459 | 967
Leasehold improvements | 2-8 | 5,440 | 3,832
Construction in progress |  | -- | 160
Property and equipment, gross |  | 29,327 | 58,581
Less: accumulated depreciation |  | (21,671) | (51,589)
Property and equipment, net |  | $7,656 | $7,262


Question: What is the ratio of net property and equipment in 2019?
Answer: 60.49
Calculation: 7,656 thousand /(7,656 thousand + $5 million)
lkq corporation and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements ( continued ) note 5 . long-term obligations ( continued ) as part of the consideration for business acquisitions completed during 2007 , 2006 and 2005 , we issued promissory notes totaling approximately $ 1.7 million , $ 7.2 million and $ 6.4 million , respectively . the notes bear interest at annual rates of 3.0% ( 3.0 % ) to 6.0% ( 6.0 % ) , and interest is payable at maturity or in monthly installments . we also assumed certain liabilities in connection with a business acquisition during the second quarter of 2005 , including a promissory note with a remaining principle balance of approximately $ 0.2 million . the annual interest rate on the note , which was retired during 2006 , was note 6 . commitments and contingencies operating leases we are obligated under noncancelable operating leases for corporate office space , warehouse and distribution facilities , trucks and certain equipment . the future minimum lease commitments under these leases at december 31 , 2007 are as follows ( in thousands ) : years ending december 31: .

Table:
2008 | $ 42335
2009 | 33249
2010 | 25149
2011 | 17425
2012 | 11750
thereafter | 28581
future minimum lease payments | $ 158489
rental expense for operating leases was approximately $ 27.4 million , $ 18.6 million and $ 12.2 million during the years ended december 31 , 2007 , 2006 and 2005 , respectively .
we guaranty the residual values of the majority of our truck and equipment operating leases .
the residual values decline over the lease terms to a defined percentage of original cost .
in the event the lessor does not realize the residual value when a piece of equipment is sold , we would be responsible for a portion of the shortfall .
similarly , if the lessor realizes more than the residual value when a piece of equipment is sold , we would be paid the amount realized over the residual value .
had we terminated all of our operating leases subject to these guaranties at december 31 , 2007 , the guarantied residual value would have totaled approximately $ 24.0 million .
litigation and related contingencies on december 2 , 2005 , ford global technologies , llc ( 2018 2018ford 2019 2019 ) filed a complaint with the united states international trade commission ( 2018 2018usitc 2019 2019 ) against keystone and five other named respondents , including four taiwan-based manufacturers .
on december 12 , 2005 , ford filed an amended complaint .
both the complaint and the amended complaint contended that keystone and the other respondents infringed 14 design patents that ford alleges cover eight parts on the 2004-2005 .

Question: what was the average rental expense from 2005 to 2007 in millions
Answer: 19.4
Calculation: add(27.4, 18.6), add(#0, 12.2), add(#1, const_3), divide(#2, const_2)
Export sales from the U.S. during the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 were $531.8, $578.0 and $512.5, respectively. In the year ended December 31, 2019, these exports were shipped primarily to Asia (33%), Europe (24%), Canada (18%), Middle East (13%) and other (12%).
Sales to customers outside the U.S. accounted for a significant portion of Roper’s revenues. Sales are attributed to geographic areas based upon the location where the product is ultimately shipped. Roper’s net revenues for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017 are shown below by region, except for Canada, which is presented separately as it is the only country in which Roper has had greater than 4% of total revenues for any of the three years presented:
Table:
 | Application Software | Network Software & Systems | Measurement & Analytical MeasurementSolutions | Process Technologies | Total
2019 |  |  |  |  | 
Canada | $   41.0 | $   71.1 | $   81.4 | $   28.9 | $ 222.4
Europe | 188.8 | 36.7 | 307.2 | 113.8 | 646.5
Asia | 3.5 | 18.8 | 185.0 | 108.0 | 315.3
Middle East | 8.6 | 37.5 | 13.1 | 44.4 | 103.6
Rest of the world | 25.8 | 9.5 | 45.3 | 55.2 | 135.8
Total | $ 267.7 | $ 173.6 | $ 632.0 | $ 350.3 | $ 1,423.6
2018 |  |  |  |  | 
Canada | $   38.5 | $   58.5 | $   79.3 | $   35.0 | $    211.3
Europe | 188.6 | 12.2 | 361.7 | 117.5 | 680.0
Asia | 3.2 | 11.0 | 220.3 | 115.4 | 349.9
Middle East | 4.7 | 48.6 | 14.4 | 34.4 | 102.1
Rest of the world | 29.5 | 7.8 | 42.5 | 55.0 | 134.8
Total | $  264.5 | $  138.1 | $  718.2 | $  357.3 | $  1,478.1
2017 |  |  |  |  | 
Canada | $   26.6 | $   52.9 | $   72.9 | $   34.7 | $    187.1
Europe | 176.5 | 11.0 | 310.6 | 98.1 | 596.2
Asia | 2.4 | 7.3 | 205.9 | 109.8 | 325.4
Middle East | 4.8 | 58.8 | 13.4 | 35.5 | 112.5
Rest of the world | 23.2 | 6.1 | 42.0 | 48.7 | 120.0
Total | $  233.5 | $  136.1 | $  644.8 | $  326.8 | $  1,341.2


Question: What is the ratio of net revenue from the Application Software segment to the Process Technologies segment in 2018?
Answer: 0.74
Calculation: 264.5/357.3
shareowner return performance graph the following performance graph and related information shall not be deemed 201csoliciting material 201d or to be 201cfiled 201d with the sec , nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any future filing under the securities act of 1933 or securities exchange act of 1934 , each as amended , except to the extent that the company specifically incorporates such information by reference into such filing . the following graph shows a five year comparison of cumulative total shareowners 2019 returns for our class b common stock , the standard & poor 2019s 500 index , and the dow jones transportation average . the comparison of the total cumulative return on investment , which is the change in the quarterly stock price plus reinvested dividends for each of the quarterly periods , assumes that $ 100 was invested on december 31 , 2008 in the standard & poor 2019s 500 index , the dow jones transportation average , and our class b common stock. .

Table:
 | 12/31/2008 | 12/31/2009 | 12/31/2010 | 12/31/2011 | 12/31/2012 | 12/31/2013
united parcel service inc . | $ 100.00 | $ 107.75 | $ 140.39 | $ 145.84 | $ 151.44 | $ 221.91
standard & poor 2019s 500 index | $ 100.00 | $ 126.45 | $ 145.49 | $ 148.55 | $ 172.30 | $ 228.09
dow jones transportation average | $ 100.00 | $ 118.59 | $ 150.30 | $ 150.31 | $ 161.56 | $ 228.42
.

Question: what was the difference in percentage total cumulative return on investment for united parcel service inc . compared to the dow jones transportation average for the five years ended 12/31/2013?
Answer: -6.51%
Calculation: subtract(221.91, const_100), divide(#0, const_100), subtract(228.42, const_100), divide(#2, const_100), subtract(#1, #3)
Property, plant and equipment, net
Property, plant and equipment, net consisted of the following at December 31, 2019 and 2018 (in thousands):
We periodically assess the estimated useful lives of our property, plant and equipment whenever applicable facts and circumstances indicate a change in the estimated useful life of an asset may have occurred. During the year ended December 31, 2019, we revised the estimated useful lives of certain core Series 6 manufacturing equipment from 10 years to 15 years. Such revision was primarily due to the validation of certain aspects of our Series 6 module technology, including the nature of the manufacturing process, the operating and maintenance cost profile of the manufacturing equipment, and the technology’s compatibility with our long-term module technology roadmap. We expect the revised useful lives to reduce depreciation by approximately $15.0 million per year. Depreciation of property, plant and equipment was $176.4 million, $109.1 million, and $91.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018, and 2017, respectively.
Table:
 | 2019 | 2018
Land | $14,241 | $14,382
Buildings and improvements . | 664,266 | 567,605
Machinery and equipment . | 2,436,997 | 1,826,434
Office equipment and furniture . | 159,848 | 178,011
Leasehold improvements | 48,772 | 49,055
Construction in progress | 243,107 | 405,581
Property, plant and equipment, gross | 3,567,231 | 3,041,068
Accumulated depreciation . | (1,386,082) | (1,284,857)
Property, plant and equipment, net | $2,181,149 | $1,756,211


Question: What is the difference between land from 2018 to 2019?
Answer: -141
Calculation: 14,241 - 14,382
4. Segmental information
IFRS 8 ‘Operating segments’ requires the Group to determine its operating segments based on information which is provided internally. Based on the internal reporting information and management structures within the Group, it has been determined that there is only one operating segment, being the Group, as the information reported includes operating results at a consolidated Group level only. This reflects the nature of the business, where the major cost is to support the IT platforms upon which all of the Group’s customers are serviced. These costs are borne centrally and are not attributable to any specific customer type or revenue stream. There is also considered to be only one reporting segment, which is the Group, the results of which are shown in the Consolidated income statement.
Management has determined that there is one operating and reporting segment based on the reports reviewed by the Operational Leadership Team (‘OLT’) which is the chief operating decision-maker (‘CODM’). The OLT is made up of the Executive Directors and Key Management and is responsible for the strategic decision-making of the Group.
The OLT primarily uses the statutory measures of Revenue and Operating profit to assess the performance of the one operating segment. To assist in the analysis of the Group’s revenue-generating trends, the OLT reviews revenue at a disaggregated level as detailed within note 5. The revenue from external parties reported to the OLT is measured in a manner consistent with that in the income statement.
A reconciliation of the one segment’s Operating profit to Profit before tax is shown below.
Following the application of IFRS 16, profit before tax for the year ended 31 March 2018 has been restated (note 2).
Table:
 | 2019 | (Restated) 2018
 | £m | £m
Total segment Revenue | 355.1 | 330.1
Total segment Operating profit | 243.7 | 221.3
Finance costs – net | (10.2) | (10.6)
Profit on the sale of subsidiary | 8.7 | –
Profit before tax | 242.2 | 210.7


Question: What are the components in the table which are considered when reconciliating total segment revenue to profit before tax?
Answer: Total segment Operating profit, Finance costs – net, Profit on the sale of subsidiary
b. Employee Performance Rights Plan
The Employee Performance Rights Plan (the Rights Plan) was approved by shareholders at the Company’s AGM on 23 November 2017. Under the Rights Plan, awards are made to eligible executives and other management personnel who have an impact on the Group’s performance. Rights Plan awards are granted in the form of performance rights over shares, which vest over a period of three years subject to meeting performance measures and continuous employment with the Company. Each performance right is to subscribe for one ordinary share upon vesting and, when issued, the shares will rank equally with other shares.
Performance rights issued under the Employee Performance Rights Plan are valued on the same basis as those issued to KMP, which is described in Note 16(d).
1. The vesting date for rights granted on 2 July 2017 and 2 July 2018 is the date on which the Board notifies the executive that the rights have vested, after the outcomes for the measurement period have been determined and satisfaction of performance conditions have been assessed. This is likely to be 31 August 2020 and 31 August 2021 respectively.
No performance rights vested or lapsed during the financial year. The number of performance rights issued and outstanding at 30 June 2018 was 355,316, consisting solely of the performance rights granted on 2 July 2017.
The weighted average contractual life of outstanding performance rights at the end of the financial year is 1.77 years (2018: 2.17 years).
Table:
Performance rights issued and outstanding at 30 June 2019 |  |  |  | 
Grant Date | Vesting Date1 | Fair Value per Right $ | Rights Granted | No. of Rights at 30/6/2019
2 Jul 2017 | 31 Aug 2020 | 3.815 | 355,316 | 355,316
2 Jul 2018 | 31 Aug 2021 | 3.01 | 530,652 | 530,652
Total |  |  | 885,968 | 885,968


Question: What was the total number of rights granted?
Answer: 885,968