Edward Spehar : Sure. So first of all, on unassigned funds. If you look at our dividend capacity for this year for BLIC, it’s $527 million, and that’s down from about $1.5 billion previously. And the reason for that is that in the prior year, the gating factor was prior year statutory operating gain and the most recent, it’s unassigned funds. I think the key point here, though, is that we’ve talked about a $300 million expectation of dividends for this year. So we obviously have a lot of capacity to be able to deliver on the cash flows that we’re talking about. I guess on the net loss to norm stat discussion, we do disclose that, obviously, in the supplement that you can see the walk. And one of the big things that we’ve talked about is how we manage the VA risk.
So we’re looking at gains and hedges that are both realized and unrealized. And so what you’re just seeing come through the statutory line will be the realized gains and losses as well as the CTE70 reserve movements, which, again, are different than the target that we’re talking about when we’re looking at CTE98 and RBC.
Operator: . And our next question coming from the line of Erik Bass Autonomous Research.
Erik Bass : First, I was hoping you could quantify the NAIC interest change — interest rate change benefit on stat earnings in RBC this quarter?
Edward Spehar : Erik, it’s Ed. So we said we had norm stat earnings of approximately $200 million. That was all due to VA, and it was really driven by the MRP change. We’ve said in the past, I think we’ve said at one point, $200 million to $250 million. I think maybe another point we said $250 million to $300 million, I would say it’s in the middle of those. It was around $250 million.
Erik Bass : Got it. And then can you talk about policyholder behavior experience when Shield policies mature? And how much of those contracts are rolling into a new Shield policy versus lapsing or being exchanged for an annuity — a new annuity contract with another carrier?
Edward Spehar : Yes. Sure, Erik. So we have a high shock lapse assumption for Shield when you get out of the guarantee period. And as David alluded to in his prior — in the response to the prior question, that is a dynamic assumption. And so when we look at that shock lapse in the current rate environment, it is about as close to what you could be on an assumption. So that’s why we’re saying it’s very much in line with what we would expect. And we don’t assume a high percentage rolling into new Shield contract.
Erik Bass : Got it. I guess, do you have any sense of how much that is or how much of your new sales are coming from kind of, I guess, churn? Maybe it isn’t the right word, but essentially exchanges into new business?
David Rosenbaum: Yes. Erik, this is David. I don’t have a number, but I would say that just kind of qualitatively, we do retain some of the business, whether that’s from renewals or internal exchanges. So we do, do that. But as Ed mentioned, we do have a lapse assumption — a shock lapse assumption built into our pricing. And the experience has been tracking right in line with that assumption.
Operator: And our next question coming from Ryan Krueger with KBW.
Ryan Krueger : Could you talk about or/and quantify new business strain in the current quarter?
