Jason Tyler: Well, we would have appetite, frankly, because it’s an attractive thing to do, but at the same time, we feel like we’ve harvested just about everything that’s there. I’m glad you asked the follow-up because as soon as I finished, I realized Gerard, and now you might be interested in just a little bit more color – corporate bonds within the $2 billion was about half, munis and mortgage-backed securities were about a quarter each, just so you know. But it’s an attractive time to go after something like that given the yield curve and the ability to change non-HQLA assets to HQLA assets, pick up capital, pick up liquidity and no impact from an economic perspective, and in fact making it positive.
Steven Chubak: That’s great. Thanks for taking my follow-up.
Operator: Thank you. We’ll next go to Mike Brown from KBW.
Mike Brown: Great. Hey, good morning. I just wanted to follow up on one of the capital and ensure purchase questions from earlier. I looked at your capital ratios – you’re well above your minimums, which is consistent with how you’ve always managed the capital, but you’ve got a number of tailwinds on that front, and Jason, you mentioned that you plan to resume the buybacks at some point. But I guess it seems to me that there’s really no time like the present, so my question is, should we expect the share repurchases to engage in a more meaningful way in the first quarter? When we think about the full year, what are the guardrails we should consider for your capital ratios as we think about modeling capital return from here?
Jason Tyler: Sure, so we won’t comment more on timing, and if I get to the guardrails, it’s instructive, I think, to look–and again, none of these are 100% determinative, they’re just part of how we think about it, but these are the factors we think about. Look at the absolute levels, which tells you to look at history, look at where we are relative to peers and then relative to regulatory perspectives – we look at those things. Then the other dynamic is that RWA has been less predictable than pre-COVID, and we used our balance sheet to be there for our clients. We were one of the few institutions that actually let RWA increase over the last several years, and it’s because we wanted–our clients had loan demand and they wanted us to be there in FX activity and set lending, and we did that because we had–it was because we were able to, because we had the capital strength and flexibility to do that.
That’s the thing that we’re also looking forward on, to make sure that we’re not missing any significant changes in client demand that might impact our behavior. But you’re right in that sitting at 10:8, it’s a much better position, and then back to this concept of $1.4 billion in AOCI pulling a par over the next several years, plus the return on equity in the business is still attractive, so we’re still each quarter accreting capital, so no reason we won’t be in the market at some point.
Mike Brown: If I can just follow up on that, Jason, the loan balances were down about 2.5% sequentially. It sounds like–I guess, how are you thinking about that loan demand from here? Our view is it sounded like it was kind of softer going forward, but you kind of alluded to the fact that maybe you wanted to be there to meet client demand, so are you expecting that loan demand to pick up here in 2023? Then I guess just one other follow-on on the capital side, how do you think about inorganic actions here in terms of capital allocation? Do you see any other opportunities to change your strategic asset mix and scale so that perhaps that could be another avenue that you’d consider on the capital allocation front?
