hellotayssir/FinQA_TAT-QA_financial_finetuning_dataset huggingface dataset:
The breakout of product and service gross profit was as follows:
We assess the carrying value of our inventory on a quarterly basis by estimating future demand and comparing that demand against on-hand and on-order inventory positions. Forecasted revenues information is obtained from the sales and marketing groups and incorporates factors such as backlog and future consolidated revenues. This quarterly process identifies obsolete and excess inventory. Obsolete inventory, which represents items for which there is no demand, is fully reserved. Excess inventory, which represents inventory items that are not expected to be consumed during the next twelve quarters for our Semiconductor Test, Industrial Automation and System Test segments and next four quarters for our Wireless Test segment, is written-down to estimated net realizable value.
During the year ended December 31, 2019, we recorded an inventory provision of $15.2 million included in cost of revenues, primarily due to downward revisions to previously forecasted demand levels for certain products. Of the $15.2 million of total excess and obsolete provisions, $8.7 million was related to Semiconductor Test, $4.0 million was related to Wireless Test, $2.0 million was related to System Test, and $0.5 million was related to Industrial Automation.
During the year ended December 31, 2018, we recorded an inventory provision of $11.2 million included in cost of revenues, primarily due to downward revisions to previously forecasted demand levels for certain products. Of the $11.2 million of total excess and obsolete provisions, $6.8 million was related to Semiconductor Test, $2.5 million was related to Wireless Test, $1.2 million was related to System Test, and $0.7 million was related to Industrial Automation.
During the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, we scrapped $9.2 million and $7.0 million of inventory, respectively, and sold $3.2 million and $6.7 million of previously written-down or written-off inventory, respectively. As of December 31, 2019, we had inventory related reserves for amounts which had been written-down or written-off totaling $103.6 million. We have no pre-determined timeline to scrap the remaining inventory.
Table:
 | 2019 | 2018 | 2018-2019 Dollar/Point Change
 |  | (dollars in millions) | 
Product gross profit | $1,105.6 | $1,002.5 | $103.1
Percent of product revenues | 58.6% | 58.0% | 0.6
Service gross profit | $234.2 | $217.9 | $16.3
Percent of service revenues | 57.5% | 58.7% | (1.2)


Question: What are the types of gross profit in the table?
Answer: Product gross profit, Service gross profit
ADVANCED ENERGY INDUSTRIES, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (continued) (in thousands, except per share amounts) ADVANCED ENERGY INDUSTRIES, INC. NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS – (continued) (in thousands, except per share amounts)
The following table presents our net sales by extended warranty and service contracts recognized over time and our product and service revenue recognized at a point in time:
Table:
 |  | Years Ended December 31, | 
 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017
Product and service revenue recognized at point in time | $786,918 | $715,055 | $667,440
Extended warranty and service contracts recognized over time | 2,030 | 3,837 | 3,572
Total | $788,948 | $718,892 | $671,012


Question: What was the Product and service revenue recognized at point in time in 2019?
Answer: $786,918
B. Liquidity and Capital Resources
Our operations and strategic objectives require continuing capital investment, and our resources include cash on hand and cash provided by operations, as well as access to capital from bank borrowings and access to capital markets. Management believes that cash generated by or available to us should be sufficient to fund our capital and liquidity needs for at least the next 12 months.
Our future financial and operating performance, ability to service or refinance debt and ability to comply with covenants and restrictions contained in our debt agreements will be subject to future economic conditions, the financial health of our customers and suppliers and to financial, business and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. Furthermore, management believes that working capital is sufficient for our present requirements.
(*) including trade receivables classified as current asset based on operating cycle of two years.
The decrease in working capital as at March 31, 2019 as compared to March 31, 2018 was primarily the result of an increase in short-term borrowings amounting to $208.9 million as at March 31, 2019 from $152 million as at March 31, 2018 due to overdraft against restricted deposits and loan installments due within 12 months.
For additional information, please see Note 2(a) and Note 32 to our audited Consolidated Financial Statements appearing elsewhere in this annual report.
Table:
 |  | Year ended March 31, | 
 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017
 |  | (in thousands) | 
Current assets(*) | $351,597 | $339,562 | $362,477
Current liabilities | 318,672 | 239,327 | 316,101
Working capital | $32,925 | $100,235 | $46,376


Question: What is the increase / (decrease) in the working capital from 2018 to 2019?
Answer: -67310
Calculation: 32,925 - 100,235
3.3 Trade receivables and contract assets
Recognition and measurement
All trade and other receivables recognised as current assets are due for settlement within no more than 30 days for marketing fees and within one year for trail commission. Trade receivables are measured on the basis of amortised cost.
It is the Group’s policy that all key partners who wish to trade on credit terms are subject to credit verification procedures.
Allowance for credit losses
iSelect applies the simplified approach and records lifetime expected losses on all trade receivables and contract assets. As a consequence, we do not track changes in credit risk, but recognise a loss allowance based on lifetime expected credit loss at each reporting date.
iSelect calculates its provision utilising historical credit loss experience, adjusted for other relevant factors, i.e. aging of receivables, credit rating of the debtor, etc. Debts that are known to be uncollectable are written off when identified. If an impairment allowance has been recognised for a debt that becomes uncollectable, the debt is written off against the provision. If an amount is subsequently recovered, it is credited against profit or loss.
As at 30 June 2019, expected credit losses are not considered material.
Contract assets
Contract assets are initially recognised for revenue earned from comparison, purchase support and referral services, as receipt of consideration is conditional on successful completion of a purchase between the customers and the product providers. Upon completion of sale and acceptance by the customer and the provider, invoices are issued to the provider for the amount receivable. These amounts invoiced are reclassified from contract assets to trade receivables. The trade receivable balance represents the Group’s unconditional right to receive the cash.
Key estimates – allowance for credit losses
We apply management judgement to estimate the expected credit losses for trade receivables and contract assets. Expected credit losses are assessed on an ongoing basis. Financial difficulties of the debtor, probability of default, delinquency in payments and credit ratings are utilised in this assessment.
Table:
 | CONSOLIDATED CONSOLIDATED | 
 | 2019 $’000 | 2018 $’000
Trade receivables | 6,165 | 4,952
Allowance for credit losses | - | (15)
Contract assets | 16,824 | 23,773
 | 22,989 | 28,710
The ageing analysis of trade rec The ageing analysis of trade receivables is as follows: |  | 
Current | 4,967 | 4,408
Past due 1 – 30 days | 1,024 | 291
Past due 31 – 90 days | 130 | 108
Past due 90+ days | 44 | 130
 | 6,165 | 4,937


Question: What is the percentage change in the trade receivables from 2018 to 2019?
Answer: 24.5
Calculation: (6,165-4,952)/4,952
Disaggregation of Revenue
The tables below present the Company’s revenue disaggregated by type of revenue. Refer to Note 13, Reportable Segment Information, for disaggregated revenue by type and reportable segment. The majority of the Company’s revenue is earned domestically, with revenue from customers outside the United States comprising less than 1% of total revenue.
Table:
 | Year Ended June 30, |  | 
 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017
Processing | $594,202 | $550,058 | $506,555
Outsourcing & Cloud | 405,359 | 361,922 | 327,738
Product Delivery & Services | 231,982 | 251,743 | 256,794
In-House Support | 321,148 | 307,074 | 297,203
Services & Support | 958,489 | 920,739 | $881,735
Total Revenue | $1,552,691 | $1,470,797 | $1,388,290


Question: What is the average processing revenue for 2018 and 2019?
Answer: 572130
Calculation: ($594,202+$550,058)/2
25feb201400255845 performance graph the following graph compares the performance of our common stock with that of the s&p 500 index and the s&p 500 healthcare equipment index . the cumulative total return listed below assumes an initial investment of $ 100 on december 31 , 2008 and reinvestment of dividends . comparison of five year cumulative total return 2008 2009 2010 2011 20132012 edwards lifesciences s&p 500 s&p 500 healthcare equipment december 31 .

Table:
total cumulative return | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013
edwards lifesciences | $ 158.05 | $ 294.23 | $ 257.32 | $ 328.19 | $ 239.34
s&p 500 | 126.46 | 145.51 | 148.59 | 172.37 | 228.19
s&p 500 healthcare equipment index | 120.83 | 117.02 | 123.37 | 145.84 | 186.00
.

Question: what was the cumulative percentage return for five year period ended 2013?
Answer: 139.34%
Calculation: subtract(239.34, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management
The following table summarizes the beneficial owners of more than 5% of the Company’s voting securities and the securities of the Company beneficially owned by the Company’s directors and officers as of April 27, 2020.
Table:
Name and address of Beneficial Owner | Amount of Beneficial Ownership | Percent of Beneficial Ownership
Garo H. Armen (1) | 4,741,323 (2) | 36%
Robert B. Stein (1) | 502,500 (3) | 4%
Khalil Barrage (1) | 380,000 (4) | 3%
Alexander K. Arrow (1) | 671,799 (5) | 6%
Larry N. Feinberg 808 North St., Greenwich, CT 06831 | 800,000 (6) | 7%
Brian J. Corvese (1) | 145,000 (7) | 1%
David A. Lovejoy | 668,037 (8) | 6%
Josh Silverman (1) | 140,000 (9) | 1%
Strategic Bio Partners LLC (10) 777 Third Avenue 30th Floor New York, NY 10017 | 1,895,945 (11) | 17%
All directors and executive officers as a group (6 persons) | 6,580,622 (12) | 44%


Question: What is the amount and percent of beneficial ownership owned by Khalil Barrage?
Answer: 380,000, 3%
The reconciliation of the United Kingdom statutory tax rate to the Company’s effective tax rate included in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations is as follows:
Although the Company’s parent entity is organized under Jersey law, our affairs are, and are intended to be, managed and controlled ongoing in the United Kingdom. Therefore, the Company is resident in the United Kingdom for tax purposes. The Company’s parent entity is domiciled in the United Kingdom and its earnings are subject to 19%, 19% and 20% statutory tax rate for the years ended March 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively.
The Company’s effective tax rate differs from the statutory rate each year primarily due to windfall tax benefits on equity award exercises, the valuation allowance maintained against the Company’s net deferred tax assets, the jurisdictional earnings mix, tax credits, withholding taxes, and other permanent differences primarily related to non-deductible expenses.
Table:
 |  | Year ended March 31,  | 
 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017
Tax at statutory rate | 19.0% | 19.0% | 20.0%
U.S. state taxes, net of federal | 31.1 | 14.1 | (1.0)
Foreign rate differential   | 26.3 | 36.8 | (39.3)
Meals and entertainment   | (11.4) | (3.1) | (7.4)
Branch income / loss   | (0.6) | 0.4 | 0.9
Share-based compensation | 172.3 | 105.3 | (4.0)
Foreign exchange   | — | — | (24.8)
Non-deductible interest expense   | — | — | (3.3)
Tax credits | 7.7 | 8.1 | 15.6
Unremitted earnings   | (3.8) | (1.2) | —
Change in valuation allowance   | (249.9) | (110.7) | 124.7
Deferred tax true-ups   | (3.5) | 8.4 | (12.4)
Tax reserves   | (4.9) | (21.5) | (117.7)
Provision to return   | (0.1) | 0.4 | (0.7)
Withholding taxes   | (2.6) | (3.5) | —
Other foreign taxes   | — | — | (6.7)
Non-deductible expenses   | (5.2) | (2.4) | (10.6)
Deferred tax rate change   | (6.3) | (77.8) | (1.3)
Acquisition related costs   | (7.6) | — | —
Other   | (0.5) | (0.2) | —
Effective Tax Rate   | (40.0)% | (27.9)% | (68.0)%


Question: What is the reason for the company's effective tax to differ from the statutory rate?
Answer: primarily due to windfall tax benefits on equity award exercises, the valuation allowance maintained against the Company’s net deferred tax assets, the jurisdictional earnings mix, tax credits, withholding taxes, and other permanent differences primarily related to non-deductible expenses.
2022 the ability to identify suitable acquisition candidates and the ability to finance such acquisitions , which depends upon the availability of adequate cash reserves from operations or of acceptable financing terms and the variability of our stock price ; 2022 our ability to integrate any acquired business 2019 operations , services , clients , and personnel ; 2022 the effect of our substantial leverage , which may limit the funds available to make acquisitions and invest in our business ; 2022 changes in , or the failure to comply with , government regulations , including privacy regulations ; and 2022 other risks detailed elsewhere in this risk factors section and in our other filings with the securities and exchange commission . we are not under any obligation ( and expressly disclaim any such obligation ) to update or alter our forward- looking statements , whether as a result of new information , future events or otherwise . you should carefully consider the possibility that actual results may differ materially from our forward-looking statements . item 1b . unresolved staff comments . item 2 . properties . our corporate headquarters are located in jacksonville , florida , in an owned facility . fnf occupies and pays us rent for approximately 86000 square feet in this facility . we lease office space as follows : number of locations ( 1 ) .

Table:
state | number of locations ( 1 )
california | 44
texas | 21
florida | 18
georgia new york | 10
new jersey | 8
illinois massachusetts | 7
alabama arizona minnesota north carolina | 6
other | 64
( 1 ) represents the number of locations in each state listed .
we also lease approximately 72 locations outside the united states .
we believe our properties are adequate for our business as presently conducted .
item 3 .
legal proceedings .
in the ordinary course of business , the company is involved in various pending and threatened litigation matters related to operations , some of which include claims for punitive or exemplary damages .
the company believes that no actions , other than the matters listed below , depart from customary litigation incidental to its business .
as background to the disclosure below , please note the following : 2022 these matters raise difficult and complicated factual and legal issues and are subject to many uncertainties and complexities .
2022 the company reviews these matters on an on-going basis and follows the provisions of statement of financial accounting standards no .
5 , accounting for contingencies ( 201csfas 5 201d ) , when making accrual and disclosure decisions .
when assessing reasonably possible and probable outcomes , the company bases decisions on the assessment of the ultimate outcome following all appeals. .

Question: what percentage of total leased locations are located in united states?
Answer: 47.1%
Calculation: add(72, 64), divide(64, #0)
TERM DEPOSITS
An analysis of the Group’s term deposits by currencies are as follows:
The effective interest rate for the term deposits of the Group with initial terms of over three months to three years during the year ended 31 December 2019 was 3.57% (2018: 4.08%).
Term deposits with initial terms of over three months were neither past due nor impaired. As at 31 December 2019, the carrying amounts of the term deposits with initial terms of over three months approximated their fair values.
Table:
 | As at 31 December | 
 | 2019 | 2018
 | RMB’Million | RMB’Million
Included in non-current assets: |  | 
RMB term deposits | 19,000 | –
Included in current assets: |  | 
RMB term deposits | 28,598 | 55,180
USD term deposits | 16,325 | 6,349
Other currencies | 1,988 | 1,389
 | 46,911 | 62,918
 | 65,911 | 62,918


Question: How much did the total term deposits change by between 2018 year end and 2019 year end?
Answer: 2993
Calculation: 65,911-62,918
The Corporation’s segment profit (loss) is reported in two operating segments: Canadian broadband services and American broadband services. The reporting structure reflects how the Corporation manages its business activities to make decisions about resources to be allocated to the segments and to assess their performance.
The Canadian and American broadband services segments provide a wide range of Internet, video and telephony services primarily to residential customers as well as business services across their coverage areas. The Canadian broadband services activities are carried out by Cogeco Connexion in the provinces of Québec and Ontario and the American broadband services activities are carried out by Atlantic Broadband in 11 states: Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Maine, Maryland, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia.
The previously reported Business ICT services segment, comprised of the Cogeco Peer 1 operations, is now reported in discontinued operations following the sale on April 30, 2019 of the Cogeco Peer 1 subsidiary. Information about the discontinued segment is provided in Note 8.
The Corporation and its chief operating decision maker assess the performance of each operating segment based on its segment profit (loss), which is equal to revenue less operating expenses. The other expenses, except for management fees, financial expense and income taxes, are reported by segment solely for external reporting purposes.
(1) Revenue by geographic market includes $1,294,967 in Canada and $1,036,853 in the United States. (2) Comprised of restructuring costs within the Canadian broadband services segment and acquisition and integration costs related to the FiberLight network acquisition in the American broadband services segment.
Table:
Year ended August 31, 2019 | Canadian broadband services | American broadband services | Inter-segment eliminations and other | Consolidated
(In thousands of Canadian dollars) | $ | $ | $ | $
Revenue (1) | 1,294,967 | 1,036,853 | — | 2,331,820
Operating expenses | 606,286 | 571,208 | 26,486 | 1,203,980
Management fees – Cogeco Inc. | — | — | 19,900 | 19,900
Segment profit (loss) | 688,681 | 465,645 | (46,386) | 1,107,940
Integration, restructuring and acquisition costs (2) | 9,299 | 1,851 | — | 11,150
Depreciation and amortization | 254,345 | 226,301 | 79 | 480,725
Financial expense |  |  |  | 175,502
Profit before income taxes |  |  |  | 440,563
Income taxes |  |  |  | 83,655
Profit for the year from continuing operations |  |  |  | 356,908
Acquisition of property, plant and equipment | 241,940 | 192,605 | — | 434,545


Question: What are the average Operating expenses from Canadian and American broadband services for year ended August 31, 2019?
Answer: 588747
Calculation: (606,286+571,208 ) / 2
shareholder return performance the line graph below compares the annual percentage change in ball corporation fffds cumulative total shareholder return on its common stock with the cumulative total return of the dow jones containers & packaging index and the s&p composite 500 stock index for the five-year period ended december 31 , 2011 . it assumes $ 100 was invested on december 31 , 2006 , and that all dividends were reinvested . the dow jones containers & packaging index total return has been weighted by market capitalization . total return to stockholders ( assumes $ 100 investment on 12/31/06 ) total return analysis .

Table:
 | 12/31/2006 | 12/31/2007 | 12/31/2008 | 12/31/2009 | 12/31/2010 | 12/31/2011
ball corporation | $ 100.00 | $ 104.05 | $ 97.04 | $ 121.73 | $ 161.39 | $ 170.70
dj us containers & packaging | $ 100.00 | $ 106.73 | $ 66.91 | $ 93.98 | $ 110.23 | $ 110.39
s&p 500 | $ 100.00 | $ 105.49 | $ 66.46 | $ 84.05 | $ 96.71 | $ 98.75
copyright a9 2012 standard & poor fffds , a division of the mcgraw-hill companies inc .
all rights reserved .
( www.researchdatagroup.com/s&p.htm ) copyright a9 2012 dow jones & company .
all rights reserved. .

Question: what is the roi of an investment in ball corporation from 2006 to 2008?
Answer: 2.96%
Calculation: subtract(97.04, const_100), divide(#0, const_100)
2019 Compared to 2018
Net Sales. Net sales increased 9%, or $651 million, in 2019 compared to 2018. Net sales of products (hardware and software) increased 8% and net sales of services increased 20% in 2019 compared to 2018. Our net sales by operating segment for 2019 and 2018 were as follows (dollars in thousands):
Table:
 | 2019 | 2018 | %Change
NorthAmerica | $6,024,305 | $5,362,981 | 12%
EMEA | 1,526,644 | 1,530,241 | —
APAC | 180,241 | 186,914 | (4%)
Consolidated | $7,731,190 | $7,080,136 | 9%


Question: What is the average Net sales of North America for 2018 and 2019?
Answer: 5693643
Calculation: (6,024,305+5,362,981) / 2
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Our common stock is listed on NASDAQ under the symbol ‘‘CSGS’’. On January 31, 2020, the number of holders of record of common stock was 126.
Stock Price Performance
The following graph compares the cumulative total stockholder return on our common stock, the Russell 2000 Index, and our Standard Industrial Classification (“SIC”) Code Index: Data Preparation and Processing Services during the indicated five-year period. The graph assumes that $100 was invested on December 31, 2014, in our common stock and in each of the two indexes, and that all dividends, if any, were reinvested.
Table:
 |  |  | As of December 31, |  |  | 
 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019
CSG Systems International, Inc. | $100.00 | $146.72 | $200.85 | $185.42 | $137.31 | $227.96
Russell 2000 Index | 100.00 | 95.59 | 115.95 | 132.94 | 118.30 | 148.49
Data Preparation and Processing Services | 100.00 | 110.52 | 129.67 | 159.46 | 174.32 | 245.10


Question: As of December 2019, which is the best performing stock?
Answer: Data Preparation and Processing Services