Overview of Our Earnings from 2002 through 2004
The global economic environment must be considered when evaluating our results over the last several years. Important factors for us included slow global economic growth, a weakening U.S. dollar, lower global interest rates, a mild U.S. recession that did not cause significantly higher credit losses, developments in three industries — power generation, property and casualty insurance and commercial aviation — that are significant to us, and escalating raw material prices. As the following pages show in detail, our diversification and risk management strategies enabled us to continue to grow during this challenging time.
Three segments whose operations have a significant effect on our consolidated results and reflect their changing economic environments are Energy, Insurance and Transportation.
- Energy (14% and 22% of consolidated three-year revenues and total segment profit, respectively) participated in the period of unprecedented U.S. power industry demand that peaked in 2002, a period often referred to as the “U.S. power bubble.” The return to normal demand levels is reflected in lower shipments of large heavy-duty gas turbines. In 2004, we sold 122 such units, compared with 175 in 2003 and 323 in 2002. We accurately foresaw the end of the bubble and took action to reduce the effect, right-sizing the business and growing and investing in other lines of the power generation business such as product services and wind energy. We believe the Energy segment is well positioned for its markets in 2005 and beyond.
- Insurance (17% and 4% of consolidated three-year revenues and total segment profit, respectively) was much like most of the property and casualty reinsurance industry, facing volatility throughout the period. In 2002, we recognized losses on our 1997–2001 business, increasing related reserves by $3.5 billion before tax. In 2003, our turnaround efforts started to pay off and we realized benefits from improved operations as earnings increased by $2.3 billion to a profit of $0.5 billion at GE Insurance Solutions. In 2004, improved core performance at GE Insurance Solutions reflecting the favorable pricing environment was more than offset by U.S. hurricane-related losses and continued adverse loss development, essentially all related to the 1997 through 2001 underwriting years.
- Transportation (10% and 14% of consolidated three-year revenues and total segment profit, respectively) continued to invest in market-leading technology and services. While the commercial aviation industry continues to face challenges and financial pressures that affect our commercial aviation business, our business model succeeds by diversification. Product services, the military engines business and our rail equipment and services business continued to be strong. Overall, Transportation reported segment profit that grew $0.6 billion in 2004 and $0.2 billion in 2003.
Results at two major segments, Healthcare and NBC Universal, reflected continued investment and growth over the last three years.
- Healthcare (8% and 9% of consolidated three-year revenues and total segment profit, respectively) continued to show strong growth as 2004 revenues and segment profit both rose about 50% since 2002. Our acquisitions of Amersham in 2004 and Instrumentarium in 2003 contributed $3.2 billion and $0.6 billion to Healthcare revenues and segment profit, respectively, in 2004. These acquisitions also expanded the breadth of our product and services offerings to the healthcare industry, positioning us well for continued growth.
- NBC Universal (6% and 10% of consolidated three-year revenues and total segment profit, respectively) also contributed a strong performance during the last three years as we continued to invest through acquisitions. Through the combination of NBC and VUE in 2004, and successful acquisitions of Telemundo and Bravo in 2002, we have created a diversified world-class media company. Earnings from the segment increased $0.6 billion in 2004 following a $0.3 billion increase in 2003.
Most of our other operations achieved operating results in line with our expectations in the 2002 to 2004 economic environment.
- Commercial and Consumer Finance (in total, 24% and 30% of consolidated three-year revenues and total segment profit, respectively) are large, profitable growth businesses in which we continue to invest with confidence. In a challenging economic environment, these businesses grew earnings by $0.9 billion and $1.0 billion in 2004 and 2003, respectively. Solid core growth, disciplined risk management and successful acquisitions have delivered these strong results.
- Infrastructure (2% of consolidated three-year revenues and total segment profit), with growth platforms such as security and water treatment, continued to grow significantly through acquisitions. We foresee dramatic revenue and earnings growth in these platforms through integration of these acquisitions, expanded distribution and new product introductions.
- Advanced Materials, Consumer & Industrial and Equipment & Other Services (in total, 19% and 7% of consolidated three-year revenues and total segment profit, respectively) are particularly sensitive to economic conditions and consequently were affected adversely by the U.S. recession in 2002 and by slow global growth in developed countries. Higher capacity, in combination with declining or weak volume growth in many of these industries, resulted in fierce competitive price pressures. Advanced Materials was hit particularly hard because of additional pressures from significant inflation in certain raw materials such as benzene and natural gas.
As the preceding comments about Healthcare, Insurance and NBC Universal illustrate, acquisitions and dispositions played an important role in our growth strategy. We integrate acquisitions as quickly as possible and only revenues and earnings from the date we complete the acquisition through the end of the fourth following quarter are attributed to such businesses. Acquisitions contributed $12.3 billion, $5.4 billion and $7.2 billion to consolidated revenues in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Our consolidated net earnings in 2004, 2003 and 2002 included approximately $1.2 billion, $0.5 billion and $0.6 billion, respectively, from acquired businesses. Dispositions affected our operations through lower revenues and earnings in 2004 of $3.4 billion and $1.2 billion, respectively, and in 2003 through lower revenues of $2.3 billion and higher earnings of $0.2 billion.
Significant matters relating to our Statement of Earnings, which appears on pages 57 and 58, are explained below.
GE SALES OF PRODUCT SERVICES were $25.8 billion in 2004, a 12% increase over 2003. Increases in product services in 2004 and 2003 were widespread, led by continued strong growth at Transportation, Healthcare, Infrastructure and Energy. Operating profit from product services was approximately $6.4 billion in 2004, up 21% from 2003, reflecting ongoing improvements at Transportation, Energy and Healthcare.
POSTRETIREMENT BENEFIT PLANS reduced pre-tax earnings by $1.2 billion and $0.2 billion in 2004 and 2003, respectively, after contributing $0.6 billion to pre-tax earnings in 2002. Costs of our principal pension plans increased in 2004 and 2003 primarily because of the effects of:
- Prior years investment losses (reducing pre-tax earnings by $0.6 billion in 2004 and $0.4 billion in 2003), and
- Lowering pension discount rates used to calculate 2004 and 2003 pension costs from 6.75% to 6.0% and 7.25% to 6.75%, respectively. Pre-tax earnings in 2004 and 2003 were $0.4 billion and $0.2 billion lower, respectively, because of these discount rate reductions.
Benefit costs for these plans in 2003 also increased as compared with 2002 because of plan changes resulting from union negotiations as well as increases in retiree medical and drug costs.
Considering current and expected asset allocations, as well as historical and expected returns on various categories of assets in which our plans are invested, we have assumed that long-term returns on our principal pension plan assets would be 8.5% throughout this period and in 2005. U.S. accounting principles provide for recognition of differences between assumed and actual returns over the average future service life of employees.
We believe our postretirement benefit costs will increase again in 2005 for a number of reasons, including further reduction in discount rates at December 31, 2004, continued recognition of prior years investment losses relating to our principal pension plans, and increases in retiree healthcare costs.
Our principal pension plans had a surplus of $6.7 billion at December 31, 2004. We will not make any contributions to the GE Pension Plan in 2005. To the best of our ability to forecast the next five years, we do not anticipate making contributions to that plan so long as expected investment returns are achieved. At December 31, 2004, the fair value of assets for our affiliate and other pension plans was $2.6 billion less than their respective projected benefit obligations. In 2004, we contributed $0.4 billion to such plans and expect to contribute $0.3 billion to these plans in 2005.
The funding status of our postretirement benefit plans and future effects on operating results depend on economic conditions and investment performance. See notes 5 and 6 for additional information about funding status, components of earnings effects and actuarial assumptions. See page 52 for discussion of pension assumptions.
GE OTHER COSTS AND EXPENSES are selling, general and administrative expenses, which increased 22% to $12.0 billion in 2004, following an 8% increase in 2003, substantially the result of acquisitions.
INTEREST ON BORROWINGS AND OTHER FINANCIAL CHARGES amounted to $12.0 billion, $10.9 billion and $10.2 billion in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively and included $0.1 billion in 2004 and 2003, and a reduction of $0.1 billion in 2002, related to the 2005 restatement. Substantially all of our borrowings are done through GECS, where interest expense was $11.5 billion, $10.3 billion and $9.9 billion in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. Changes over the three-year period reflected increased average borrowings, partially offset by the effects of lower interest rates. GECS average borrowings were $322.3 billion, $308.7 billion and $250.1 billion in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. GECS average composite effective interest rate was 3.6% in 2004, compared with 3.3% in 2003 and 4.0% in 2002. Proceeds of these borrowings were used in part to finance asset growth and acquisitions. In 2004, GECS average assets of $577.3 billion were 11% higher than in 2003, which in turn were 15% higher than in 2002. See page 43 for a discussion of interest rate risk management.
INCOME TAXES are a significant cost. As a global commercial enterprise, our tax rates are strongly affected by many factors, including our global mix of earnings, legislation, acquisitions, dispositions and tax characteristics of our income. Our tax returns are routinely audited and settlements of issues raised in these audits sometimes affect our tax provisions. Because of the number of variables affecting our reported tax results, we have prepared this section to facilitate an understanding of our income tax rates.
Income taxes on consolidated earnings before accounting changes were 17.9%, compared with 22.0% in 2003 and 20.0% in 2002. Our consolidated income tax rate was 4.1 percentage points lower in 2004 than 2003 because the 2004 tax benefits from favorable U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) settlements, the NBC Universal transaction, a partial reorganization of our aircraft leasing business and the sale of a majority interest in Gecis were greater than the tax benefits from certain business dispositions in 2003. Our consolidated income tax rate increased by 2.0 percentage points in 2003 because our tax benefits from 2003 business dispositions were less than our 2002 tax benefits from settlements with the IRS. Income tax rates for all three years were lower because of the increasing share of earnings from lower taxed global operations. A more detailed analysis of differences between the U.S. federal statutory rate and the consolidated rate, as well as other information about our income tax provisions, is provided in note 7. The nature of business activities and associated income taxes differ for GE and for GECS, and a separate analysis of each is presented in the paragraphs that follow.
Because GE tax expense does not include taxes on GECS earnings, the GE effective tax rate is best analyzed in relation to GE earnings excluding GECS. GE’s pre-tax earnings excluding GECS were $10.4 billion, $10.7 billion and $14.3 billion for 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. On this basis, GE’s effective tax rate was 19.0% in 2004, lower by 7.7 percentage points than the 26.7% rate in 2003 and 2002. The 2004 reduction was primarily a result of two items which decreased the 2004 GE tax rate by 7.2 percentage points – settling several issues with the IRS for the years 1985 through 1999 and tax benefits associated with the NBC Universal transaction. As part of the IRS settlements, we closed two significant issues: the 1997 tax-free exchange of the Lockheed Martin convertible preferred stock we received on the disposition of our Aerospace business in 1993, and a 1998 tax loss on the sale of a Puerto Rican subsidiary. The tax portion of these settlements is included in the line “IRS settlements of Lockheed Martin tax-free exchange/Puerto Rico subsidiary loss” in note 7. The tax benefits associated with the NBC Universal transaction are included in the line “All other – net” in note 7. The 2004 GE effective tax rate also reflects lower pre-tax income, primarily because of lower earnings at Energy and higher costs related to our principal pension plans. Partially offsetting these changes was the nonrecurrence of the 2003 tax benefit, discussed below, on the disposition of GE Superabrasives U.S., Inc.
The 2003 GE rate was reduced by 1.7 percentage points because certain reductions in pre-tax earnings – specifically, lower earnings at Energy and higher costs related to our principal pension plans – affected income taxed at higher than our average rate. The 2003 GE rate was also reduced by 1.0 percentage point (after adjusting for the effect of the lower earnings at Energy and higher costs related to our principal pension plans) from a tax benefit on the disposition of shares of GE Superabrasives U.S., Inc., included in the line “All other – net” in note 7. In 2002, GE entered into settlements with the IRS concerning certain export tax benefits. The effect of these settlements, the tax portion of which is included in the line “Tax on global activities including exports” in note 7, was a reduction of the GE tax rate of 2.7 percentage points. Also in 2002, GE entered into a tax-advantaged transaction to exchange certain assets for the cable network Bravo. The related reduction of 1.0 percentage point in the GE effective tax rate is reflected in the line “All other – net” in note 7.
GECS effective tax rate was 16.8% in 2004 and 2003 and negative 1.0% in 2002. The 2004 GECS rate reflects the net benefits, discussed below, of legislation and a partial reorganization of our aircraft leasing operation, which decreased the effective tax rate 1.6 percentage points and is included in the line “Tax on global activities including exports” in note 7; tax benefits from favorable IRS settlements, which decreased the effective tax rate 1.2 percentage points and are included in the line “All other – net” in note 7; and the low-taxed disposition of a majority interest in Gecis which decreased the effective tax rate 0.8 percentage points, and is included in the line “Tax on global activities including exports” in note 7. Offsetting these benefits was the nonrecurrence of the 2003 tax benefit on the disposition of shares of ERC Life Reinsurance Corporation (ERC Life).
As a result of the repeal of the extraterritorial income (ETI) taxing regime as part of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (the Act), the aircraft leasing operations of Commercial Finance no longer qualify for a reduced U.S. tax rate. However, the Act also extended to foreign aircraft leasing, the U.S. tax deferral benefits that were already available to GE’s other active foreign operations. As stated above, these legislative changes, coupled with a partial reorganization of our aircraft leasing business and a favorable Irish tax ruling, decreased GECS effective tax rate 1.6 percentage points.
The increase in the effective tax rate from 2002 to 2003 reflects the nonrecurrence of the 2002 losses at GE Insurance Solutions and GE Equity as well as certain 2002 IRS settlements discussed below, partially offset by a 2.5 percentage point decrease because of the 2003 tax benefit on the disposition of shares of ERC Life.
GECS 2002 effective tax rate reflects the effects of pre-tax losses at GE Insurance Solutions and GE Equity, which reduced the effective tax rate of GECS by 16.2 percentage points, the effects of lower taxed earnings from global operations and favorable tax settlements with the IRS. The benefits of these settlements, which reduced the GECS rate 4.0 percentage points (excluding the GE Insurance Solutions and GE Equity losses), are included in the line “All other – net” in note 7.
Global Risk Management
A disciplined approach to risks is important in a diversified organization such as ours in order to ensure that we are executing according to our strategic objectives and that we only accept risks for which we are adequately compensated. It is necessary for us to manage risk at the individual transaction level, and to consider aggregate risk at the customer, industry, geography and collateral-type levels, where appropriate.
GE’s Board of Directors oversees the risk management process through clearly established delegation of authority. Board meeting agendas are jointly developed with management to cover the same risk topics as our Corporate Risk Committee reviews, including environmental, compliance, liquidity, credit, market and event risks.
GECS Board of Directors oversees the risk management process for financial services, including the approval of all significant acquisitions and dispositions and the establishment of borrowing and investment approval limits delegated to the Investment Committee of the Board, the Chairman, the Chief Financial Officer and the Chief Risk Officer. All participants in the risk management process must comply with these approval limits.
The GECS Chief Risk Officer is responsible, through the Corporate Risk Function, for establishing standards for the measurement, reporting and limiting of risk; for managing and evaluating risk managers; for approving risk management policies and for reviewing major risk exposures and concentrations across the organization. The GECS Corporate Risk Function analyzes certain business risks and assesses them in relation to aggregate risk appetite and approval limits set by the GECS Board of Directors.
Threshold responsibility for identifying, quantifying and mitigating risks is assigned to our individual businesses. Because the risks and their interdependencies are complex, we apply a Six Sigma-based analytical approach to each major product line that monitors performance against external benchmarks, proactively manages changing circumstances, provides early warning detection of risk and facilitates communication to all levels of authority. Other corporate functions such as Financial Planning and Analysis, Treasury, Legal and our Corporate Audit Staff support business-level risk management. Businesses that, for example, hedge risk with derivative financial instruments must do so using our centrally-managed Treasury function, providing assurance that the business strategy complies with our corporate policies and achieves economies of scale. We review risks periodically with business-level risk managers, senior management and our Board of Directors.
GECS employs about 10,000 dedicated risk professionals, including 2,700 involved in collection activities and 1,400 specialized asset managers who evaluate leased asset residuals and remarket off-lease equipment.
GE and GECS manage a variety of risks including liquidity, credit, market and event risks.
- Liquidity risk is the risk of being unable to accommodate liability maturities, fund asset growth and meet contractual obligations through access to funding at reasonable market rates. Additional information about our liquidity and how we manage this risk can be found on page 40 and in notes 18 and 28.
- Credit risk is the risk of financial loss arising from a customer or counterparty’s failure to meet its contractual obligations. We face credit risk in our lending and leasing activities (see pages 40 and 50 and notes 1, 12, 13 and 30) and derivative financial instruments activities (see note 28).
- Market risk is the potential loss in value of investment and other asset and liability portfolios, including financial instruments, caused by changes in market variables, such as interest and currency exchange rates and equity and commodity prices. We are exposed to market risk in the normal course of our business operations as a result of our ongoing investing and funding activities. We attempt to mitigate the risks to our various portfolios arising from changes in interest and currency exchange rates in a variety of ways that often include offsetting positions in local currencies or use of derivatives. Additional information about how we mitigate the risks to our various portfolios from changes in interest and currency exchange rates can be found on page 43 and in note 28.
- Event risk is that body of risk beyond liquidity, credit and market risk. Event risk includes the possibility of adverse occurrences both within and beyond our control. Examples of event risk include natural disasters, availability of necessary materials, guarantees of product performance and business interruption. This type of risk is often insurable, and success in managing this risk is ultimately determined by the balance between the level of risk retained or assumed and the cost of transferring the risk to others. The decision as to the appropriate level of event risk to retain or cede is evaluated in the framework of business decisions. Additional information about how we mitigate event risk can be found in note 30.
 |
 |
 |