In the following discussion, GCI, Inc. and its direct and indirect subsidiaries are referred to as “we,” “us” and “our.”

We were incorporated in Alaska in 1997 to affect the issuance of Senior Notes. As a wholly owned subsidiary of General Communication, Inc. ("GCI"), we received through our initial capitalization all ownership interests in subsidiaries previously held by GCI. The GCI and GCI, Inc. consolidated financial statements include substantially the same account activity.

GCI, an Alaska corporation, was incorporated in 1979. We offer the following services primarily in Alaska:

The consolidated financial statements include the consolidated accounts of GCI, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries, as well as a variable interest entity (“VIE”) in which we were the primary beneficiary, when on August 30, 2011, we provided certain loans and guarantees to Terra GCI Investment Fund, LLC (“TIF”). We account for non-controlling interests in consolidated subsidiaries for which our ownership is less than 100 percent. All significant intercompany transactions between non-regulated affiliates of our company are eliminated. Intercompany transactions generated between regulated and non-regulated affiliates of our company are not eliminated in consolidation.

Non-controlling interests represent the equity ownership interests in consolidated subsidiaries not owned by us. Non-controlling interest is adjusted for contributions, distributions, and earnings (loss) attributable to the non-controlling interest partners of the consolidated entities. Income and loss is allocated to the non-controlling interest based on the respective partnership agreements.

In September 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2011-08, “Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350).” The amendments in this update will allow an entity to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is necessary to perform the two-step quantitative goodwill impairment test. Under these amendments, an entity would not be required to calculate the fair value of a reporting unit unless the entity determines, based on a qualitative assessment, that it is more likely than not that its fair value is less than its carrying amount. The amendments include a number of events and circumstances for an entity to consider in conducting the qualitative assessment. This pronouncement is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of ASU 2011-08 is not expected to have a material impact on our income statements, financial position or cash flows.

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04 “Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”)” which amends current guidance to achieve common fair value measurement and disclosure requirements in GAAP and IFRS. The amendments generally represent clarification of FASB ASC Topic 820, but also include instances where a particular principle or requirement for measuring fair value or disclosing information about fair value measurements has changed. This pronouncement is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of ASU 2011-04 is not expected to have a material impact on our income statements, financial position or cash flows.

ASU 2009-13 “Revenue Recognition (Topic 605): Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements,” addresses the accounting for multiple deliverable arrangements to enable vendors to account for products or services (“deliverables”) separately rather than as a combined unit. Specifically, this guidance amends the criteria in Subtopic 605-25, “Revenue Recognition - Multiple-Element Arrangements”, for separating consideration in multiple-deliverable arrangements. This guidance establishes a selling price hierarchy for determining the selling price of a deliverable, which is based on: (a) vendor-specific objective evidence; (b) third-party evidence; or (c) estimates. This guidance also eliminates the residual method of allocation and requires that arrangement consideration be allocated at the inception of the arrangement to all deliverables using the relative selling price method. In addition, this guidance significantly expands required disclosures related to a vendor's multiple-deliverable revenue arrangements. The adoption of ASU 2009-13 on January 1, 2011, did not have a material impact on our income statements, financial position or cash flows.

Under ASU 2010-28 “Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): When to Perform Step 2 of the Goodwill Impairment Test for Reporting Units with Zero or Negative Carrying Amounts,” if the carrying amount of a reporting unit is zero or negative, an entity must assess whether it is more likely than not that goodwill impairment exists. To make that determination, an entity should consider whether there are adverse qualitative factors that could impact the amount of goodwill, including those listed in ASC 350-20-35-30 “When to Test Goodwill for Impairment.” As a result of the new guidance, an entity can no longer assert that a reporting unit is not required to perform the second step of the goodwill impairment test because the carrying amount of the reporting unit is zero or negative, despite the existence of qualitative factors that indicate goodwill is more likely than not impaired. The adoption of ASU 2010-28 on January 1, 2011, did not have a material impact on our income statements, financial position or cash flows.

ASU 2010-29 “Business Combinations (Topic 805): Disclosure of Supplementary Pro Forma Information for Business Combinations” specifies that if a public entity presents comparative financial statements, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. The amendments in this update also expand the supplemental pro forma disclosures under ASC 805 “Business Combinations” to include a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combination included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. The adoption of ASU 2010-29 on January 1, 2011, did not have a material impact on our income statements, financial position, cash flows or related disclosures.

We account for our regulated operations in accordance with the accounting principles for regulated enterprises. This accounting recognizes the economic effects of rate regulation by recording cost and a return on investment as such amounts are recovered through rates authorized by regulatory authorities. Accordingly, plant and equipment is depreciated over lives approved by regulators and certain costs and obligations are deferred based upon approvals received from regulators to permit recovery of such amounts in future years. Our cost studies and depreciation rates for our regulated operations are subject to periodic audits that could result in a change to recorded revenues.

We are a wholly owned subsidiary of GCI and, accordingly, are not required to present earnings per share. Our common stock is not publicly traded.

Cash equivalents consist of certificates of deposit which have an original maturity of three months or less at the date acquired and are readily convertible into cash.

Trade accounts receivable are recorded at the invoiced amount and do not bear interest. The allowance for doubtful receivables is our best estimate of the amount of probable credit losses in our existing accounts receivable. We base our estimates on the aging of our accounts receivable balances, financial health of specific customers, regional economic data, changes in our collections process, regulatory requirements and our customers' compliance with Universal Service Administrative Company ("USAC") rules. We review our allowance for doubtful receivables methodology at least annually.

Depending upon the type of account receivable our allowance is calculated using a pooled basis with an allowance for all accounts greater than 120 days past due, a specific identification method, or a combination of the two methods. When a specific identification method is used, past due balances over 90 days old and balances less than 90 days old but potentially uncollectible due to bankruptcy or other issues are reviewed individually for collectability. Account balances are charged off against the allowance when we feel it is probable the receivable will not be recovered. We do not have any off-balance-sheet credit exposure related to our customers.

Wireless handset inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market (net realizable value). Cost is determined using the average cost method. Handset costs in excess of the revenues generated from handset sales, or handset subsidies, are expensed at the time of sale. We do not recognize the expected handset subsidies prior to the time of sale because the promotional discount decision is made at the point of sale and/or because we expect to recover the handset subsidies through service revenue.

Inventories of other merchandise for resale and parts are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost is determined using the average cost method.

Property and equipment is stated at cost. Construction costs of facilities are capitalized. Equipment financed under capital leases is recorded at the lower of fair market value or the present value of future minimum lease payments at inception of the lease. Construction in progress represents transmission equipment and support equipment and systems not placed in service on December 31, 2011 that management intends to place in service during 2012.

Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method based upon the shorter of the estimated useful lives of the assets or the lease term, if applicable, in the following ranges:

	Asset Category		Asset Lives
	Telephony transmission equipment and distribution facilities		5-20 years
	Fiber optic cable systems		15-25 years
	Cable transmission equipment and distribution facilities		5-30 years
	Support equipment and systems		3-20 years
	Transportation equipment		5-13 years
	Property and equipment under capital leases		12-20 years
	Buildings		25 years
	Customer premise equipment		2-20 years

Amortization of property and equipment under capital leases is included in Depreciation and Amortization Expense on the Consolidated Income Statement.

Repairs and maintenance are charged to expense as incurred. Expenditures for major renewals and betterments are capitalized. Accumulated depreciation is removed and gains or losses are recognized at the time of sales or other dispositions of property and equipment.

Goodwill, cable certificates (certificates of convenience and public necessity) and wireless licenses are not amortized. Cable certificates represent certain perpetual operating rights to provide cable services. Wireless licenses represent the right to utilize certain radio frequency spectrum to provide wireless communications services. Goodwill represents the excess of cost over fair value of net assets acquired in connection with a business acquisition. Goodwill is not allocated to our reportable segments as our Chief Operating Decision Maker does not review a balance sheet by reportable segment to make decisions about resource allocation or evaluate reportable segment performance, however, goodwill is allocated to our reporting units for the sole purpose of the annual impairment test.

All other amortizable intangible assets are being amortized over 2 to 20 year periods using the straight-line method.

Cable certificates and wireless license assets are treated as indefinite-lived intangible assets and are tested annually for impairment or more frequently if events and circumstances indicate that the asset might be impaired. The impairment test consists of a comparison of the fair value of the asset with its carrying amount. If the carrying amount of the assets exceeds its fair value, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to that excess. After an impairment loss is recognized, the adjusted carrying amount of the asset becomes its new accounting basis. Impairment testing of our cable certificate and wireless license assets as of October 31, 2011 and 2010 used a direct value method.

Our goodwill is tested annually for impairment, and is tested for impairment more frequently if events and circumstances indicate that the assets might be impaired. We are required to determine goodwill impairment using a two-step process. The first step of the goodwill impairment test is used to identify potential impairment by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second step of the goodwill impairment test compares the implied fair value of the reporting unit's goodwill with the carrying amount of that goodwill. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit's goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of that goodwill, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to that excess. The implied fair value of goodwill is determined in the same manner as the amount of goodwill that would be recognized in a business combination. We use a discounted cash flow method to determine the fair value of our reporting units. This method requires us to make estimates and assumptions including projected cash flows and discount rate. These estimates and assumptions could have a significant impact on whether an impairment charge is recognized and also the magnitude of any such impairment charge.

During the third quarter of 2009, we changed the date of our annual impairment test from the last day of the fiscal year to the last day of the tenth month of the fiscal year for all of our indefinite-lived intangibles. As we grew, it became increasingly difficult to complete the various impairment analyses in a timely manner, therefore, we believed the change in accounting principle related to the annual testing date was preferable as it provided us additional time to complete the impairment test and report the results of that test in our annual filing on Form 10-K. We believe that the change to the annual testing date did not delay, accelerate or avoid an impairment charge. We determined that this change in accounting principle was preferable under the circumstances and it did not result in adjustments to our financial statements when applied retrospectively. We completed our annual review and no impairment charge was recorded for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 or 2009.

Long-lived assets, such as property, plant, and equipment, and purchased intangibles subject to amortization, are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset group may not be recoverable. Recoverability of an asset group to be held and used is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount of an asset group to estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to be generated by the asset group. If the carrying amount of an asset group exceeds its estimated undiscounted future cash flows, an impairment charge is recognized by the amount by which the carrying amount of the asset group exceeds the fair value of the asset group.

Debt issuance costs are deferred and amortized using the effective interest method. If a refinancing or amendment of a debt instrument is a substantial modification, all or a portion of the applicable debt issuance costs are written off. If a debt instrument is repaid prior to the maturity date we will write-off a proportional amount of debt issuance costs.

Other Assets primarily include long-term deposits, prepayments, and non-trade accounts receivable.

We record the fair value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation in the period in which it is incurred in Other Liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets if the fair value of the liability can be reasonably estimated. When the liability is initially recorded, we capitalize a cost by increasing the carrying amount of the related long-lived asset. In periods subsequent to initial measurement, period-to-period changes in the liability for an asset retirement obligation resulting from revisions to either the timing or the amount of the original estimate of undiscounted cash flows are recognized. Over time, the liability is accreted to its present value each period, and the capitalized cost is depreciated over the useful life of the related asset. Upon settlement of the liability, we either settle the obligation for its recorded amount or incur a gain or loss upon settlement.

The majority of our asset retirement obligations are the estimated cost to remove telephony transmission equipment and support equipment from leased property. Following is a reconciliation of the beginning and ending aggregate carrying amount of our liability for asset retirement obligations (amounts in thousands):

	Balance at December 31, 2009	$	12,514
Liability incurred			1,253
Accretion expense			289
Liability settled			(21)
	Balance at December 31, 2010		14,035
Liability incurred			613
Accretion expense			619
Liability settled			(44)
	Balance at December 31, 2011	$	15,223

During the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 we recorded additional capitalized costs of $613,000 and $1.3 million, respectively, in Property and Equipment in Service, Net of Depreciation.

Certain of our network facilities are on property that requires us to have a permit and the permit contains provisions requiring us to remove our network facilities in the event the permit is not renewed. We expect to continually renew our permits and therefore cannot estimate any liabilities associated with such agreements. A remote possibility exists that we would not be able to successfully renew a permit, which could result in us incurring significant expense in complying with restoration or removal provisions.

All revenues are recognized when the earnings process is complete. Revenue recognition is as follows:

As an Eligible Telecommunications Carrier ("ETC"), we receive support from the Universal Service Fund ("USF") to support the provision of wireline local access and wireless service in high cost areas. On November 29, 2011, the FCC published a final rule to reform the methodology for distributing USF high cost support for voice and broadband services, as well as to the access charge regime for terminating traffic between carriers (“High Cost Order”). The High Cost Order divided support to Alaska between Urban and Remote areas. The High Cost Order was a significant program change that required a reassessment of our high cost support revenue recognition.

Prior to the High Cost Order program changes we accrued Remote and Urban estimated program revenue quarterly based on current line counts, the most current rates paid to us, our assessment of the impact of current FCC regulations, and our assessment of the potential outcome of FCC proceedings. Our estimated accrued revenue is subject to our judgment regarding the outcome of many variables and is subject to upward or downward adjustments in subsequent periods. Our ability to collect our accrued USF support is contingent upon continuation of the USF program and upon our eligibility to participate in that program, which is subject to change by future regulatory, legislative or judicial actions. We adjust revenue and the account receivable in the period the FCC makes a program change or we assess the likelihood that such a change has increased or decreased revenue.

The High Cost Order mandates that as of January 1, 2012, Remote high cost support will be based upon the total 2011 support disbursed to all subject Competitive Eligible Telecommunications Carrier (“CETCs”) (“Statewide Support Cap”). On January 1, 2012, the rates paid in the Remote areas are mandated and frozen by the USF and cannot exceed $250 per line per month on a study area basis. Line count growth that causes the Statewide Support Cap to be exceeded triggers a pro rata support payment reduction to all subject Alaska CETCs until the support is reduced down to the Statewide Support Cap amount.

The High Cost Order further mandates that on January 1, 2014, a freeze of Remote support will begin and subject CETC's support payments will be frozen at the monthly average of 2013 annual support. If a successor funding mechanism is operational on July 1, 2014, a 20% annual phase down will commence decreasing support 20% each annual period until no support is paid starting July 1, 2018. If a successor funding mechanism is not operational on July 1, 2014, the phase down will not begin and the subject CETCs will continue to receive the monthly average of 2013 annual support until a successor funding mechanism is operational. A subject CETC may not receive phase down support and support from a successor funding mechanism, one program or the other must be selected. At this time we cannot predict the likelihood of a successor funding mechanism being operational on July 1, 2014 nor can we predict whether we can or will participate in a successor funding mechanism.

As a result of the High Cost Order program changes for the areas designated Remote by the USF, beginning in the fourth quarter of 2011 we are accruing estimated program revenue based on current line counts and the rates mandated and frozen by the USF, reduced as needed by our estimate of the impact of the Statewide Support Cap. The Statewide Support Cap is the amount of total high cost support all CETCs in the Remote areas of Alaska may receive. When determining the estimated program revenue accrual we also consider our assessment of the impact of current FCC regulations and of the potential outcome of FCC proceedings. Our estimated accrued revenue is subject to our judgment regarding the outcome of many variables and is subject to upward or downward adjustment in subsequent periods.

The High Cost Order mandates that as of January 1, 2012, Urban high cost support payments will be frozen at the monthly average of the subject CETC's 2011 annual support. A 20% annual phase down will commence July 1, 2012, decreasing support 20% each annual period until no support is paid starting July 1, 2016. If a successor funding mechanism is not operational on July 1, 2014, the phase down will stop at 60% and the subject CETCs will continue to receive annual support payments at the 60% level until a successor funding mechanism is operational. Urban high cost support is no longer dependent upon line counts and line count filings are no longer required.

As a result of the High Cost Order program changes for the areas considered to be Urban by the USF we apply the proportional performance revenue recognition method to account for the impact of the declining payments while our level of service provided and associated costs remain constant. Included in the calculation are the scheduled Urban high cost support payments from October 2011 through June 2014 net of our Urban accounts receivable balance at September 30, 2011. An equal amount of this result will be recognized as Urban support revenue each period. At this time we cannot predict the likelihood of a successor funding mechanism being operational on July 1, 2014; therefore we have not included projected support payments beyond June 2014.

For both Remote and Urban high cost support revenue our ability to collect our accrued USF support is contingent upon continuation of the USF program and upon our eligibility to participate in that program, which is subject to change by future regulatory, legislative or judicial actions. We adjust revenue and the account receivable in the period the FCC makes a program change or we assess the likelihood that such a change has increased or decreased revenue. We do not recognize revenue until our ETC status has been approved by the RCA.

Our Consumer segment occasionally receives reimbursements for video services costs to promote suppliers' services, called cooperative advertising arrangements. The supplier payment is classified as a reduction of selling, general and administrative expenses if it reimburses specific, incremental and identifiable costs incurred to resell the suppliers' services. If the supplier payment is unspecific, the payment is classified as a reduction to cost of goods sold (exclusive of depreciation and amortization expense) (“Cost of Goods Sold”). Recognition occurs upon receipt of the payment because collection is not assured.

We expense advertising costs in the year during which the first advertisement appears. Advertising expenses were $4.2 million, $4.3 million and $4.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

Scheduled operating lease rent increases are amortized over the expected lease term on a straight-line basis. Rent holidays are recognized on a straight-line basis over the operating lease term (including any rent holiday period).

Leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of their economic lives or the lease term. We may amortize a leasehold improvement over a term that includes assumption of a lease renewal if the renewal is reasonably assured. Leasehold improvements acquired in a business combination are amortized over the shorter of the useful life of the assets or a term that includes required lease periods and renewals that are deemed to be reasonably assured at the date of acquisition. Leasehold improvements that are placed in service significantly after and are not contemplated at or near the beginning of the lease term are amortized over the shorter of the useful life of the assets or a term that includes required lease periods and renewals that are deemed to be reasonably assured at the date the leasehold improvements are purchased. Leasehold improvements made by us and funded by landlord incentives or allowances under an operating lease are recorded as deferred rent and amortized as reductions to lease expense over the lease term.

Material interest costs incurred during the construction period of non-software capital projects are capitalized. Interest costs incurred during the development period of a software capital project are capitalized. Interest is capitalized in the period commencing with the first expenditure for a qualifying capital project and ending when the capital project is substantially complete and ready for its intended use. We capitalized interest cost of $3.7 million, $1.1 million and $548,000 during the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.

GCI, Inc., as a wholly owned subsidiary and member of the GCI controlled group of corporations, files its income tax returns as part of the consolidated group of corporations under GCI. Accordingly, all discussions regarding income taxes reflect the consolidated group's activity. Our income tax expense and deferred income tax assets and liabilities are presented herein using the separate-entity method.

Income taxes are accounted for using the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for their future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax basis. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable earnings in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. A valuation allowance is recognized if it is more likely than not that some portion or the entire deferred tax asset will not be realized.

We currently use the Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model to value stock options granted to employees. We use these values to recognize stock compensation expense for stock options. Compensation expense is recognized in the financial statements for share-based awards based on the grant date fair value of those awards. Share-based compensation expense includes an estimate for pre-vesting forfeitures and is recognized over the requisite service periods of the awards on a straight-line basis, which is generally commensurate with the vesting term. See Note 9, “Stockholder's Equity” of this Form 10-K for information on the assumptions we used to calculate the fair value of share-based compensation.

We are required to report the benefits associated with tax deductions in excess of recognized compensation cost as a financing cash flow rather than as an operating cash flow.

Stock options issued in exchange for non-employee services are accounted for based upon the fair value of the consideration or services received or the fair value of the equity instruments issued using the Black-Scholes-Merton method, whichever is more reliably measurable.

The fair value determined using these principles is charged to operating expense over the shorter of the term for which non-employee services are provided, if stated, or the stock option vesting period.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with the accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Significant items subject to estimates and assumptions include the allowance for doubtful receivables, unbilled revenues, accrual of the USF high cost Remote area program support, share-based compensation, inventory at lower of cost or market, reserve for future customer credits, valuation allowances for deferred income tax assets, depreciable and amortizable lives of assets, the carrying value of long-lived assets including goodwill, cable certificates and wireless licenses, our effective tax rate, purchase price allocations, deferred lease expense, asset retirement obligations, the accrual of Cost of Goods Sold, depreciation and the accrual of contingencies and litigation. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

The accounting estimates related to revenues from the USF high cost Remote area program are dependent on various inputs including our estimate of the Statewide Support Cap, our assessment of the impact of new FCC regulations, and the potential outcome of FCC proceedings. These inputs are subjective and based on our judgment regarding the outcome of certain variables and are subject to upward or downward adjustment in subsequent periods. Effective in the fourth quarter of 2011, we changed our high cost support revenue recognition methodology due to the High Cost Order. See Note 1(q) Revenue Recognition, of this Form 10-K for information.

Effective in the second quarter of 2010, we changed our USF high cost area program support accrual methodology due to a change in our estimate of the current amounts expected to be paid to us. The effect of this change in estimate was a revenue increase of $4.7 million, a net income increase of $3.1 million, and a basic and diluted net income per share increase of $0.06 for the year ended December 31, 2010.

Financial instruments that potentially subject us to concentrations of credit risk are primarily cash and cash equivalents and accounts receivable. Excess cash is invested in high quality short-term liquid money instruments. At December 31, 2011 and 2010, substantially all of our cash and cash equivalents were invested in short-term liquid money instruments. At December 31, 2011 and 2010, cash balances were in excess of Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insured limits.

We do not have any major customers for the year ended December 31, 2011, see Note 10, “Industry Segment Data” of this Form 10-K. Our customers are located primarily throughout Alaska. Because of this geographic concentration, our growth and operations depend upon economic conditions in Alaska.

Internally used software, whether purchased or developed, is capitalized and amortized using the straight-line method over an estimated useful life of five years. We capitalize certain costs associated with internally developed software such as payroll costs of employees devoting time to the projects and external direct costs for materials and services. Costs associated with internally developed software to be used internally are expensed until the point the project has reached the development stage. Subsequent additions, modifications or upgrades to internal-use software are capitalized only to the extent that they allow the software to perform a task it previously did not perform. Software maintenance and training costs are expensed in the period in which they are incurred. The capitalization of software requires judgment in determining when a project has reached the development stage.

Certain of our customers have guaranteed levels of service. If an interruption in service occurs we do not recognize revenue for any portion of the monthly service fee that will be refunded to the customer or not billed to the customer due to these service level agreements.

Additionally, we have provided certain guarantees to U.S. Bancorp Community Development Corporation (“US Bancorp”), our tax credit investor in TIF. We have guaranteed the delivery of $30.7 million of New Markets Tax Credits (“NMTC”) to US Bancorp, as well as certain loan and management fee payments between our subsidiaries and the VIE, of which we are the primary beneficiary. In the event that the tax credits are not delivered or certain payments not made, we are obligated to provide prompt and complete payment of these obligations. Please refer to Note 12, Non-controlling Interest, of this Form 10-K, for more information about our NMTC transaction.

We report sales, use, excise, and value added taxes assessed by a governmental authority that is directly imposed on a revenue-producing transaction between us and a customer on a net basis in our Income Statements. We report a certain surcharge on a gross basis in our consolidated income statements of $5.4 million, $5.2 million and $4.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.