hellotayssir/FinQA_TAT-QA_financial_finetuning_dataset huggingface dataset:
The following table details the Company’s sales by operating segment for fiscal years ended September 30, 2019 and 2018. The Company’s sales by geographic area based on the location of where the products were shipped or services rendered are as follows:
Substantially all Americas amounts are United States.
Table:
2019 | Americas | Europe | Asia | Total | % of total
 |  | (Amounts in thousands) |  |  | 
TS | $67,728 | $3,285 | $646 | $71,159 | 90%
HPP | 5,294 | 771 | 1,837 | 7,902 | 10%
Total | $72,522 | $4,056 | $2,483 | $79,061 | 100%
% of total | 92% | 5% | 3% | 100% | 
2018 |  |  |  |  | 
TS | $52,034 | $9,059 | $1,344 | $62,437 | 86%
HPP | 8,424 | 1,266 | 789 | 10,479 | 14%
Total | $60,458 | $10,325 | $2,133 | $72,916 | 100%
% of total | 83% | 14% | 3% | 100% | 


Question: What percentage of the company's 2019 sales are from Asia?
Answer: 3%
6. Property and Equipment, Net
Property and equipment, net was comprised of the following (amounts in millions):
Depreciation expense for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018, and 2017 was $124 million, $138 million, and $130 million, respectively.
Table:
 | At December 31, | 
 | 2019 | 2018
Land | $1 | $1
Buildings | 4 | 4
Leasehold improvements | 252 | 248
Computer equipment | 654 | 700
Office furniture and other equipment | 91 | 99
Total cost of property and equipment | 1,002 | 1,052
Less accumulated depreciation | (749) | (770)
Property and equipment, net | $253 | $282


Question: What was the change in the net cost of computer equipment between 2018 and 2019?
Answer: -46
Calculation: 654-700
Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
The majority of our accounts receivable are derived from sales to large multinational semiconductor manufacturers throughout the world, are recorded at their invoiced amount and do not bear interest.
In order to monitor potential credit losses, we perform ongoing credit evaluations of our customers' financial condition. An allowance for doubtful accounts is maintained based upon our assessment of the expected collectability of all accounts receivable. The allowance for doubtful accounts is reviewed and assessed for adequacy on a quarterly basis.
We take into consideration (1) any circumstances of which we are aware of a customer's inability to meet its financial obligations and (2) our judgments as to prevailing economic conditions in the industry and their impact on our customers. If circumstances change, and the financial condition of our customers is adversely affected and they are unable to meet their financial obligations, we may need to take additional allowances, which would result in an increase in our operating expense.
Activity related to our allowance for doubtful accounts receivable was as follows (in thousands):
Table:
 |  | Fiscal Year Ended | 
 | December 28, 2019 | December 29, 2018 | December 30, 2017
Balance at beginning of year | $185 | $200 | $299
Charges (reversals) to costs and expenses | 37 | (15) | (99)
Balance at end of year | $222 | $185 | $200


Question: How does the company monitor the potential credit loss?
Answer: we perform ongoing credit evaluations of our customers' financial condition
abiomed , inc . and subsidiaries notes to consolidated financial statements 2014 ( continued ) note 3 . acquisitions ( continued ) including the revenues of third-party licensees , or ( ii ) the company 2019s sale of ( a ) ecp , ( b ) all or substantially all of ecp 2019s assets , or ( c ) certain of ecp 2019s patent rights , the company will pay to syscore the lesser of ( x ) one-half of the profits earned from such sale described in the foregoing item ( ii ) , after accounting for the costs of acquiring and operating ecp , or ( y ) $ 15.0 million ( less any previous milestone payment ) . ecp 2019s acquisition of ais gmbh aachen innovative solutions in connection with the company 2019s acquisition of ecp , ecp acquired all of the share capital of ais gmbh aachen innovative solutions ( 201cais 201d ) , a limited liability company incorporated in germany , pursuant to a share purchase agreement dated as of june 30 , 2014 , by and among ecp and ais 2019s four individual shareholders . ais , based in aachen , germany , holds certain intellectual property useful to ecp 2019s business , and , prior to being acquired by ecp , had licensed such intellectual property to ecp . the purchase price for the acquisition of ais 2019s share capital was approximately $ 2.8 million in cash , which was provided by the company , and the acquisition closed immediately prior to abiomed europe 2019s acquisition of ecp . the share purchase agreement contains representations , warranties and closing conditions customary for transactions of its size and nature . purchase price allocation the acquisition of ecp and ais was accounted for as a business combination . the purchase price for the acquisition has been allocated to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed based on their estimated fair values . the acquisition-date fair value of the consideration transferred is as follows : acquisition date fair value ( in thousands ) .

Table:
 | total acquisition date fair value ( in thousands )
cash consideration | $ 15750
contingent consideration | 6000
total consideration transferred | $ 21750
.

Question: what portion of total consideration transferred for acquisition of ecp and ais is cash consideration?
Answer: 72.4%
Calculation: divide(15750, 21750)
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements - (Continued) Fiscal Years Ended May 26, 2019, May 27, 2018, and May 28, 2017 (columnar dollars in millions except per share amounts)  During fiscal 2019, we recognized the following pre-tax expenses for the Pinnacle Integration Restructuring Plan:
Included in the above results are $163.5 million of charges that have resulted or will result in cash outflows and $4.7 million in non-cash charges.
Table:
 | International | Pinnacle Foods | Corporate | Total
Other cost of goods sold | $— | $3.7 | $— | $3.7
Total cost of goods sold . | — | 3.7 | — | 3.7
Severance and related costs | 0.7 | 0.6 | 110.8 | 112.1
Accelerated depreciation | — | — | 4.7 | 4.7
Contract/lease termination . | — | 0.8 | 0.3 | 1.1
Consulting/professional fees . | 0.2 | — | 38.1 | 38.3
Other selling, general and administrative expenses . | 0.1 | — | 8.2 | 8.3
Total selling, general and administrative expenses | 1.0 | 1.4 | 162.1 | 164.5
Consolidated total | $1.0 | $5.1 | $162.1 | $168.2


Question: What is the ratio of International’s consolidated total to Pinnacle Foods’ consolidated total?
Answer: 0.2
Calculation: 1.0/5.1
Other Operating (Income) Expense, Net
Restructure and asset impairments primarily relate to our continued emphasis to centralize certain key functions. In addition, in 2019, we finalized the sale of our 200mm fabrication facility in Singapore and recognized restructure gains of $128 million. In 2017, we recognized net restructure gains of $15 million related to the sale of our Lexar assets; our assets associated with our 200mm fabrication facility in Singapore; and our 40% ownership interest in Tera Probe, Inc and assembly and test facility located in Akita, Japan.
Table:
For the year ended | 2019 | 2018 | 2017
(Gain) loss on disposition of property, plant, and equipment | $43 | $(96) | $(22)
Restructure and asset impairments | (29) | 28 | 18
Other | 35 | 11 | 5
 | $49 | $(57) | $1


Question: In 2017, what is the net restructure gains of $15 million related to?
Answer: the sale of our Lexar assets; our assets associated with our 200mm fabrication facility in Singapore; and our 40% ownership interest in Tera Probe, Inc and assembly and test facility located in Akita, Japan
30. Financial instruments and financial risk management continued
b) Credit risk continued
The composition of trade receivables at 31 December is as follows:
The Group closely monitors amounts due from customers and performs activities such as credit checks and reviews of payment history and has put in place appropriate credit approval limits. Based on these procedures, management assessed the quality of those receivables that are past due but not impaired as low risk.
The receivables’ provision is based on expected credit losses. The movement on the provision during the year is given in note 20. The value of impaired trade receivables is $1.4 million (2018 $0.9 million). For all other financial assets, the maximum exposure to credit risk is represented by the carrying amount.
Table:
 | 2019 | 2018
 | $ million | $ million
Neither impaired nor past due | 115.3 | 99.8
Past due but not impaired: |  | 
– Less than 30 days overdue | 8.6 | 16.8
– 30 to 60 days | 3.6 | 3.2
– Over 60 days | 1.2 | 3.6
Trade receivables | 128.7 | 123.4


Question: What was the percentage change in trade receivables?
Answer: 4.29
Calculation: (128.7-123.4)/123.4
entergy louisiana , llc management's financial discussion and analysis net revenue 2008 compared to 2007 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 . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2008 to 2007 . amount ( in millions ) .

Table:
 | amount ( in millions )
2007 net revenue | $ 991.1
retail electric price | -17.1 ( 17.1 )
purchased power capacity | -12.0 ( 12.0 )
net wholesale revenue | -7.4 ( 7.4 )
other | 4.6
2008 net revenue | $ 959.2
the retail electric price variance is primarily due to the cessation of the interim storm recovery through the formula rate plan upon the act 55 financing of storm costs and a credit passed on to customers as a result of the act 55 storm cost financing , partially offset by increases in the formula rate plan effective october 2007 .
refer to "hurricane rita and hurricane katrina" and "state and local rate regulation" below for a discussion of the interim recovery of storm costs , the act 55 storm cost financing , and the formula rate plan filing .
the purchased power capacity variance is due to the amortization of deferred capacity costs effective september 2007 as a result of the formula rate plan filing in may 2007 .
purchased power capacity costs are offset in base revenues due to a base rate increase implemented to recover incremental deferred and ongoing purchased power capacity charges .
see "state and local rate regulation" below for a discussion of the formula rate plan filing .
the net wholesale revenue variance is primarily due to provisions recorded for potential rate refunds related to the treatment of interruptible load in pricing entergy system affiliate sales .
gross operating revenue and , fuel and purchased power expenses gross operating revenues increased primarily due to an increase of $ 364.7 million in fuel cost recovery revenues due to higher fuel rates offset by decreased usage .
the increase was partially offset by a decrease of $ 56.8 million in gross wholesale revenue due to a decrease in system agreement rough production cost equalization credits .
fuel and purchased power expenses increased primarily due to increases in the average market prices of natural gas and purchased power , partially offset by a decrease in the recovery from customers of deferred fuel costs. .

Question: what percent of the change in net revenue between 2007 and 2008 was due to purchased power capacity?
Answer: 37.6%
Calculation: subtract(959.2, 991.1), divide(-12.0, #0)
Inventories.
Inventories are stated at the lower-of-cost or net realizable value. Cost is determined using the first-in, first-out method. Finished products and work-in-process inventories include direct material costs and direct and indirect manufacturing costs. The Company records reserves for inventory that may be obsolete or in excess of current and future market demand. A summary of inventories is shown below:
Table:
(Dollars in Millions) | April 27, 2019 | April 28, 2018
Finished Products | $40.2 | $15.4
Work in Process | 9.4 | 14.6
Materials | 67.1 | 54.1
Total Inventories | $116.7 | $84.1


Question: What was the value of finished products in 2019 and 2018 respectively?
Answer: $40.2, $15.4
NOTE 4 – REMUNERATION TO AUDITORS APPOINTED AT THE PARENT COMPANY’S ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING
Under SEC regulations, the remuneration of the auditor of USD 0.7m (2018: USD 0.8m, 2017: USD 1.0m) is required to be presented as follows: Audit USD 0.6m (2018: USD 0.6m, 2017: USD 0.6m) and other audit-related services USD 0.1m (2018: USD 0.2m, 2017: USD 0.4m).
Our Audit Committee pre-approves all audit, audit-related and non-audit services not prohibited by law to be performed by our independent auditors and associated fees prior to the engagement of the independent auditor with respect to such services.
Table:
USDm | 2019 | 2018 | 2017
Audit fees |  |  | 
Fees payable to the Company's auditor for the audit of the Company's annual accounts | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.4
Audit of the Company's subsidiaries pursuant to legislation | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.2
Total audit fees | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6
Non-audit fees |  |  | 
Audit-related services | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.4
Tax services | 0.0 | - | -
Total non-audit fees | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.4
Total | 0.7 | 0.8 | 1.0


Question: What was the remuneration to the auditor in 2019?
Answer: USD 0.7m
10 Auditor’s Remuneration
The Group paid the following amounts to its auditor in respect of the audit of the historical financial information and for other non-audit services provided to the Group.
Table:
 | Year-ended 31 March 2019 | Year-ended 31 March 2018
 | $M | $M
Audit of the Financial Statements | 0.4 | 0.4
Subsidiary local statutory audits | 0.2 | 0.3
Total audit fees | 0.6 | 0.7
Other assurance services | 0.1 | 0.1
Total non-audit fees | 0.1 | 0.1


Question: What are the items under Total audit fees in the table?
Answer: Audit of the Financial Statements, Subsidiary local statutory audits
RSUs
The Company’s RSUs include time-based RSUs, RSUs with performance conditions (“PSUs”), RSUs with market conditions (“MSUs”), and RSUs with both market and performance conditions (“MPSUs”). Vesting of awards with performance conditions or market conditions is subject to the achievement of pre-determined performance goals and the approval of such achievement by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors (the “Compensation Committee”). All awards include service conditions which require continued employment with the Company.
A summary of RSU activity is presented in the table below (in thousands, except per-share amounts):
(1) Amount reflects the number of awards that may ultimately be earned based on management’s probability assessment of the achievement of performance conditions at each reporting period.
The intrinsic value related to vested RSUs was $138.3 million, $90.0 million and $74.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018 and 2017, respectively. As of December 31, 2019, the total intrinsic value of all outstanding RSUs was $679.5 million, based on the closing stock price of $178.02. As of December 31, 2019, unamortized compensation expense related to all outstanding RSUs was $100.1 million with a weighted-average remaining recognition period of approximately three years.
Cash proceeds from vested PSUs with a purchase price totaled $16.6 million and $10.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. There were no proceeds for the year ended December 31, 2017.
Table:
 | Time-Based RSUs |  | PSUs and MPSUs |  | MSUs |  | Total | 
 | Number of Shares | Weighted- Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share | Number of Shares | Weighted- Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share | Number of Shares | Weighted- Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share | Number of Shares | Weighted- Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share
Outstanding at January 1, 2017 | 366 | $51.35 | 2,284 | $43.24 | 1,620 | $23.57 | 4,270 | $36.47
Granted | 81 | $94.25 | 585(1) | $62.72 | - | $- | 666 | $66.56
Vested | (175) | $48.35 | (597) | $41.94 | - | $- | (772) | $43.39
Forfeited | (14) | $61.8 | (6) | $49.82 | - | $- | (20) | $58.46
Outstanding at December 31, 2017 | 258 | $66.3 | 2,266 | $48.59 | 1,620 | $23.57 | 4,144 | $39.91
Granted | 133 | $114.36 | 630(1) | $85.06 | 600 | $68.48 | 1,363 | $80.62
Vested | (136) | $60.23 | (717) | $41.08 | - | $- | (853) | $44.13
Forfeited | (15) | $82.2 | (5) | $63.16 | (1) | $68.48 | (21) | $76.92
Outstanding at December 31, 2018 | 240 | $95.38 | 2,174 | $61.61 | 2,219 | $35.69 | 4,633 | $50.94
Granted | 52 | $142.32 | 512(1) | $99.88 | - | $- | 564 | $103.68
Vested | (103) | $81.53 | (656) | $53.72 | (324) | $23.57 | (1,083) | $47.34
Forfeited | (9) | $117.31 | (43) | $42.72 | (9) | $68.48 | (61) | $57.01
Outstanding at December 31, 2019 | 180 | $115.45 | 1,987 | $74.50 | 1,886 | $37.63 | 4,053 | $59.16


Question: From 2017 to 2019, for how many years was the intrinsic value related to vested RSUs more than $80 million?
Answer: 2
Calculation: $138.3 million##$90.0 million
Other non-current assets
Other non-current assets consisted of the following:
* As adjusted to reflect the impact of the full retrospective adoption of IFRS 15. See Note 2 for further details.
As of June 30, 2019 and 2018, the Group had certificates of deposit and time deposits totaling $3.7 million and $3.7 million which were classified as long-term and were included in security deposits. Included in the Group’s other non-current assets balance as of June 30, 2019 and 2018 were $7.1 million and $6.6 million respectively, of restricted cash used for commitments of standby letters of credit related to facility leases and were not available for the Group’s use in its operations.
Table:
 | As of June 30, | 
 | 2019 | 2018
 | (U.S. $ in thousands) | 
 |  | *As Adjusted
Marketable equity securities | $58,932 | $—
Non-marketable equity securities | 3,000 | —
Security deposits | 5,010 | 5,248
Other | 9,703 | 8,218
 | $76,645 | $13,466


Question: As of June 30, 2019, what is the amount of certificates of deposit and time deposits?
Answer: $3.7 million
18. Revenue
Effective September 1, 2018, the Company adopted ASU 2014-09, Revenue Recognition (Topic 606). The new standard is a comprehensive new revenue recognition model that requires the Company to recognize revenue in a manner which depicts the transfer of goods or services to its customers at an amount that reflects the consideration the Company expects to receive in exchange for those goods or services.
Prior to the adoption of the new standard, the Company recognized substantially all of its revenue from contracts with customers at a point in time, which was generally when the goods were shipped to or received by the customer, title and risk of ownership had passed, the price to the buyer was fixed or determinable and collectability was reasonably assured (net of estimated returns). Under the new standard, the Company recognizes revenue over time for the majority of its contracts with customers which results in revenue for those customers being recognized earlier than under the previous guidance. Revenue for all other contracts with customers continues to be recognized at a point in time, similar to recognition prior to the adoption of the standard.
Additionally, the new standard impacts the Company’s accounting for certain fulfillment costs, which include upfront costs to prepare for manufacturing activities that are expected to be recovered. Under the new standard, such upfront costs are recognized as an asset and amortized on a systematic basis consistent with the pattern of the transfer of control of the products or services to which to the asset relates.
The following table presents the effect of the adoption of the new revenue guidance on the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of August 31, 2019 (in thousands):
(1) Differences primarily relate to the timing of revenue recognition for over time customers and certain balance sheet reclassifications.
(2) Differences primarily relate to the timing of recognition and recovery of fulfillment costs and certain balance sheet reclassifications.
(3) Included within accrued expenses on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
(4) Differences included in contract liabilities as of September 1, 2018.
Table:
 | August 31, 2019 | 
 | As reported | Balance without the adoption of ASU 2014-09
Assets |  | 
Contract assets (1) | $911,940 | $—
Inventories, net (1) | $3,023,003 | $3,761,591
Prepaid expenses and other current assets(1)(2) | $501,573 | $514,769
Deferred income taxes(1) | $198,827 | $202,791
Liabilities |  | 
Contract liabilities(2)(3) | $511,329 | $—
Deferred income(2)(3)(4) | $— | $521,035
Other accrued expenses(3)(4) | $1,877,908 | $1,868,201
Deferred income taxes(1) | $115,818 | $111,304
Equity |  | 
Retained earnings(1)(2) | $2,037,037 | $1,885,360


Question: How many segments as reported exceed $2,000,000 thousand?
Answer: 2
Calculation: Inventories, net##Retained earnings
entergy texas , inc . and subsidiaries management 2019s financial discussion and analysis results of operations net income 2017 compared to 2016 net income decreased $ 31.4 million primarily due to lower net revenue , higher depreciation and amortization expenses , higher other operation and maintenance expenses , and higher taxes other than income taxes . 2016 compared to 2015 net income increased $ 37.9 million primarily due to lower other operation and maintenance expenses , the asset write-off of its receivable associated with the spindletop gas storage facility in 2015 , and higher net revenue . net revenue 2017 compared to 2016 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 . following is an analysis of the change in net revenue comparing 2017 to 2016 . amount ( in millions ) .

Table:
 | amount ( in millions )
2016 net revenue | $ 644.2
net wholesale revenue | -35.1 ( 35.1 )
purchased power capacity | -5.9 ( 5.9 )
transmission revenue | -5.4 ( 5.4 )
reserve equalization | 5.6
retail electric price | 19.0
other | 4.4
2017 net revenue | $ 626.8
the net wholesale revenue variance is primarily due to lower net capacity revenues resulting from the termination of the purchased power agreements between entergy louisiana and entergy texas in august 2016 .
the purchased power capacity variance is primarily due to increased expenses due to capacity cost changes for ongoing purchased power capacity contracts .
the transmission revenue variance is primarily due to a decrease in the amount of transmission revenues allocated by miso .
the reserve equalization variance is due to the absence of reserve equalization expenses in 2017 as a result of entergy texas 2019s exit from the system agreement in august 2016 .
see note 2 to the financial statements for a discussion of the system agreement. .

Question: based on analysis of the change in net revenue what was the percentage change in the net revenue from 2016 to 2017
Answer: -2.7%
Calculation: subtract(626.8, 644.2), divide(#0, 644.2)