James von Moltke: I’m not going to get drawn on go fix with the numbers if you’re — but we can we can talk a little bit more.
Christian Sewing : And on your green revenues, to be honest, I can’t tell you the exact number, we will get back to you. Because we have fortunately and very proud of that achieved our €200 billion goal as you have seen. We are also pretty confident that we can from here on take of the €500 billion, but we will provide you with these numbers when we get on March 2 in our Sustainability Deep Dive. So give us a little bit of time in order to come up with this number.
Stuart Graham : Sure. Thank you.
Christian Sewing : Thank you.
Operator: Next question comes from Jeremy Sigee from BNP. Your question, please.
Jeremy Sigee : Hello, thank you very much. Firstly, I just wanted to, if you’ll allow me to keep going a little bit on the moving parts around capital, just two specific points, please. So he could you put a range of numbers around that wholesale model impact that you’re expecting. If you could give us a rough range of what that could be, that’d be helpful. And then the second specific is, you had quite a big balance sheet reduction at year end. And I wondered whether you expect that to re-expand in Q1 just for sort of seasonal shrinkage and growth again? And then my other question is on the provisioning discussion and credit quality use. If I can play with other banks, including some of the U.S. banks, as well as European peers.
Some of the others talk much more about buffers for the sake of buffers over and above what they think is necessary, but just to play safe. Whereas, acknowledging that you’ve done an extremely good job of risk management, your provisioning seems to be more close to what you expect to happen. So I just wondered what your thoughts were about that sort of buffers discussion.
James von Moltke: Sure. Jeremy, thanks for the questions. And maybe I’ll go in reverse order. On the buffers, you’re absolutely right. We essentially stick to the model outcomes unless we see some compelling reasons to move on that. And we finished the year, we didn’t see a reason for that. And so the number you see is what we believe is necessary. And we’ve been consistent on that I think it served the company well and is in line with what is expected of us, certainly from an accounting perspective, and should also arguably for regulatory expected. On balance sheet reductions at the year there was seasonality as there always is in leveraged exposure in the markets business, and then a little bit of a short term decline in loans, particularly in the corporate bank.
And we’d expect some of that to come back in Q1, which is also why I think on the capital side, the step off is probably surprised us as on the upside and it was mostly in credit risk RWA. On ranging the wholesale IMI, I won’t be drawn on that because it’s a wide range, there’s uncertainties in the model, and it’s, in essence, our largest portfolio. So there’s a lot of work to do to tie that all down. And what we’re really focused on, as I mentioned earlier, is the timing, not just of that, but also of some offsets that we see coming into the into the capital calculation. So in essence, it’s the volatility, which is also why I think I don’t want to be drawn at this point into Stuart’s question about what is the net impact through the year, as you think about capital build.
And your first question about moving parts, really, I think I answered that and hopefully I’ve given you some color in the various answers as to what we’re dealing with. And I think Christian has been very clear about management’s sort of direction of travel once we have more clarity here on the various moving parts.
Jeremy Sigee : That’s helpful. Thank you.
