Adam Terelak : Afternoon. Thank you for the questions. I just want to clarify on capital and REG inflation. If you’re taking REG inflation this year, I mean, does that frontload any of that Basel impact? Clearly, you’ve got all of your inflation ahead of a credit risk flow, either input or output, then you pick one would be kind of just frontloading that impact. And so is it just a timing issue when it comes to this year’s REG inflation? And then secondly, I wanted to ask on the DTA writer. Obviously you’re taking €1.4 billion, I’m less interested on this year, but more how quickly that comes back through your capital. So you’ve given us your tax rate expectations, and what does your cash tax rate look like? I assume it’s significantly lower meaning more capital generation in the next few years. So any color on those would be great, thank you.
James von Moltke: Thanks, Adam. So on REG inflation, again, it’s one of the moving parts, as I mentioned, step off is a consideration in terms of how much comes on overnight from December to January? Yes, there is a little bit of netting in terms of higher floors, LGD and PD floors in the IRB going into Basel III implementation and ’25, but there are other things that move in the other direction. And hence my answer to Tom, which is lots of moving parts. Up risk is probably the only one that if you net it all out that is probably moved in the negative direction, but it includes that concept of bringing forward. On the DTA write up, a couple of things to say first of all, this year’s impact as was last year’s is really on the U.S. tax position, the U.S. tax loss carryforwards really encouraging given it reflects the enhancement of the value of a franchise.
Around cash taxes, look, because they’re disregarded the DTA itself is disregarded in the ratio. And then the gap earnings essentially reflect an accrual, the impact is relatively modest and over time as to the value of the cash of the tax shield reflected in your capital accounts. So I wouldn’t see that as a major driver of capital accretion. The other complexity that exists around this in the U.S. is, as you know, the U.S. is become as a jurisdiction for tax much more complicated over the past several years with the beat and the minimum tax level. So we’ve factored all of that into to our current estimate of the utilization of those tax characteristics. But as you can imagine, there’d be some considerable moving parts there as well.
Adam Terelak : But that one point forward should come into capital at some stage, but just need to be very, very patient for it.
James von Moltke: It’s over time — and there is a cash tax benefit that is accrued that is recognized over several years.
Adam Terelak : That’s fair. Thank you.
Operator: The next question comes from Magdalena Stoklosa from Morgan Stanley. Your question, please.
Magdalena Stoklosa: Thanks very much, I’ve got two. One is about the cost of FIC target and another one about volume. And what you see from the kind of client business perspective in corporate and PB. So maybe first on the cost of risk? I know we’ve discussed it a little bit already, but my first question really is, when you look at that range, and I know we’ve kind of talked about kind of various, what can what can get us to the bottom versus the top of the range a lot of macro assumptions. But what is your underlying base case macro? And it’s kind of underpinning that range? What is that scenario with key variables? And secondly, I’m very interested what you think about the kind of idiosyncratic risks as well as the sector ones.
