Exhibit 13

SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA	HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES INCORPORATED

Table 1 — Selected Financial Data

(1)	Due to the adoption of FASB Interpretation No. 46 “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities.”
(2)	Includes Federal Home Loan Bank advances, other long-term debt, and subordinated notes.
(3)	On a fully taxable equivalent (FTE) basis assuming a 35% tax rate.
(4)	Non-interest expense less amortization of intangibles divided by the sum of FTE net interest income and non-interest income excluding securities gains.
(5)	Reflects a $32.5 million reduction related to the issuance of $400 million REIT subsidiary preferred stock, of which $50 million was sold to the public.
(6)	Total equity minus intangible assets divided by total assets minus intangible assets.

30

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION	HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES INCORPORATED

INTRODUCTION

Huntington Bancshares Incorporated (we or our) is a multi-state diversified financial holding company organized under Maryland law in 1966 and headquartered in Columbus, Ohio. Through our subsidiaries, we provide full-service commercial and consumer banking services, mortgage banking services, automobile financing, equipment leasing, investment management, trust services, brokerage services, private mortgage insurance; reinsure credit life and disability insurance; and sell other insurance and financial products and services. Our banking offices are located in Ohio, Michigan, West Virginia, Indiana, and Kentucky. Certain activities are also conducted in Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Tennessee. We have a foreign office in the Cayman Islands and another in Hong Kong. The Huntington National Bank (the Bank), organized in 1866, is our only bank subsidiary.

The following discussion and analysis provides you with information we believe necessary for understanding our financial condition, changes in financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows and should be read in conjunction with the financial statements, notes, and other information contained in this report.

You should note the following discussion is divided into key segments:

	–	INTRODUCTION — Provides overview comments on important matters including risk factors, the now settled Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) investigation, any bank regulatory agreements, and critical accounting policies and the use of significant estimates. These are essential for understanding our performance and prospects.
	–	DISCUSSION OF RESULTS OF OPERATIONS — Reviews financial performance from a consolidated company perspective. It also includes a Significant Factors Influencing Financial Performance Comparisons section that summarizes key issues helpful for understanding performance trends. Key consolidated balance sheet and income statement trends are also discussed in this section.
	–	RISK MANAGEMENT AND CAPITAL — Discusses credit, market, liquidity, and operational risks, including how these are managed, as well as performance trends. It also includes a discussion of liquidity policies, how we fund ourselves, and related performance. In addition, there is a discussion of guarantees and/or commitments made for items such as standby letters of credit and commitments to sell loans, and a discussion that reviews the adequacy of capital including regulatory capital requirements.
	–	LINES OF BUSINESS DISCUSSION — Provides an overview of financial performance for each of our major lines of business and provides additional discussion of trends underlying consolidated financial performance.
	–	RESULTS FOR THE FOURTH QUARTER — Provides a discussion of results for the 2005 fourth quarter compared with the year-earlier quarter.

A reading of each section is important for you to understand fully the nature of our financial performance and prospects.

Forward-Looking Statements

This report, including Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, contains forward-looking statements. These include descriptions of products or services, plans or objectives for future operations, including any pending acquisitions, and forecasts of revenues, earnings, cash flows, or other measures of economic performance. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts.

By their nature, forward-looking statements are subject to numerous assumptions, risks, and uncertainties. A number of factors could cause actual conditions, events, or results to differ significantly from those described in the forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to, those set forth under Risk Factors of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, and other factors described in this report and from time to time in our other filings with the SEC.

You should understand forward-looking statements to be strategic objectives and not absolute forecasts of future performance. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made. We assume no obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect circumstances or events that occur after the date the forward-looking statements were made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

Risk Factors

We, like other financial companies, are subject to a number of risks, many of which are outside of our direct control, though efforts are made to manage those risks while optimizing returns. Among the risks assumed are: (1) credit risk, which is the risk that loan and lease customers or other counterparties will be unable to perform their contractual obligations, (2) market risk,

31

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS	HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES INCORPORATED

which is the risk that changes in market rates and prices will adversely affect our financial condition or results of operation, (3) liquidity risk, which is the risk that the parent company and/or the Bank will have insufficient cash or access to cash to meet operating needs, and (4) operational risk, which is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems, or external events. More information on risks is set forth in Risk Factors of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005.

Securities and Exchange Commission Formal Investigation

On June 26, 2003, we announced that the SEC staff was conducting a formal investigation into certain financial accounting matters, relating to fiscal years 2002 and earlier, and certain related disclosure matters.

On June 2, 2005, we announced that the SEC approved the settlement of their formal investigation. As a part of the settlement, the SEC instituted a cease and desist administrative proceeding and entered a cease and desist order, as well as filed a civil action in federal district court pursuant to which, without admitting or denying the allegations in the complaint, we, our chief executive officer, former chief financial officer, and former controller, consented to pay civil money penalties. We consented to pay a penalty of $7.5 million, which may be distributed pursuant to the Fair Fund provisions of Section 308(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This civil money penalty had no impact on our 2005 financial results, as reserves for this amount were established and expensed in 2004.

Formal Regulatory Supervisory Agreements and Pending Acquisition

On March 1, 2005, we announced entering into a formal written agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (FRBC), as well as the Bank entering into a formal written agreement with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), providing for a comprehensive action plan designed to enhance corporate governance, internal audit, risk management, accounting policies and procedures, and financial and regulatory reporting. The agreements called for independent third-party reviews, as well as the submission of written plans and progress reports by Management, and would remain in effect until terminated by the banking regulators.

On October 6, 2005, we announced that the OCC had terminated its formal written agreement with the Bank dated February 28, 2005, and that the FRBC written agreement remained in effect. We were verbally advised that we were in full compliance with the financial holding company and financial subsidiary requirements under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLB Act). This notification reflected that we and the Bank met both the “well-capitalized” and “well-managed” criteria under the GLB Act. We believe that the changes we have already made, and are in the process of making, will address the FRBC issues fully and comprehensively.

On January 27, 2004, we announced the signing of a definitive agreement to acquire Unizan Financial Corp. (Unizan), a financial holding company based in Canton, Ohio. On November 12, 2004, the companies jointly announced entering into an amendment to our January 26, 2004 merger agreement extending the term of the agreement for one year from January 27, 2005 to January 27, 2006. On the same date, we also announced that we withdrew our application with the FRBC to acquire Unizan. On October 24, 2005, we announced that, after consultation with the FRBC, we had re-filed our application to acquire Unizan. On January 26, 2006, we announced that the Federal Reserve Board had approved our merger application. The merger is scheduled to close March 1, 2006.

Critical Accounting Policies and Use of Significant Estimates

Our financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (GAAP). The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires us to establish critical accounting policies and make accounting estimates, assumptions, and judgments that affect amounts recorded and reported in our financial statements. Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this report lists significant accounting policies we use in the development and presentation of our financial statements. This discussion and analysis, the significant accounting policies, and other financial statement disclosures identify and address key variables and other qualitative and quantitative factors necessary for an understanding and evaluation of our company, financial position, results of operations, and cash flows.

An accounting estimate requires assumptions about uncertain matters that could have a material effect on the financial statements if a different amount within a range of estimates were used or if estimates changed from period to period. You should understand that estimates are made under facts and circumstances at a point in time, and changes in those facts and circumstances could produce actual results that differ from when those estimates were made. The most significant accounting estimates and their related application are discussed below. This analysis is included to emphasize that estimates are used in

32

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS	HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES INCORPORATED

connection with the critical and other accounting policies and to illustrate the potential effect on the financial statements if the actual amount were different from the estimated amount.

–	TOTAL ALLOWANCES FOR CREDIT LOSSES — At December 31, 2005, the total allowances for credit losses (ACL) was $305.3 million and represented the sum of the allowance for loan and lease losses (ALLL) and the allowance for unfunded loan commitments and letters of credit (AULC). The amount of the ACL was determined by our judgments regarding the quality of the loan portfolio, including loan commitments. All known relevant internal and external factors that affected loan collectibility were considered. The ACL represents the estimate of the level of reserves appropriate to absorb inherent credit losses. We believe the process for determining the ACL considers all of the significant potential factors that could result in credit losses. However, the process includes judgmental and quantitative elements that may be subject to significant change. To the extent actual outcomes differ from our estimates, additional provision for credit losses could be required, which could adversely affect earnings or financial performance in future periods. At December 31, 2005, the ACL as a percent of total loans and leases was 1.25%. Based on the December 31, 2005 balance sheet, a 10 basis point increase in this ratio to 1.35% would require $25.1 million in additional reserves funded by additional provision for credit losses, which would have negatively impacted 2005 net income by approximately $16.3 million, or $0.07 per share. A discussion about the process used to estimate the ACL is presented in the Credit Risk section of Management’s Discussion and Analysis in this report.
–	FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS — A significant portion of our assets is carried at fair value, including securities, derivatives, and trading assets. Additionally, a smaller portion is carried at the lower of fair value or cost, including held-for-sale loans and mortgage servicing rights (MSRs). At December 31, 2005, approximately $4.9 billion of our assets were recorded at either fair value or at the lower of fair value or cost.

	The fair value of a financial instrument is defined as the amount at which the instrument could be exchanged in a current transaction between willing parties, other than in a forced or liquidation sale. The majority of assets reported at fair value are based on quoted market prices or on internally developed models that utilize independently sourced market parameters, including interest rate yield curves, option volatilities, and currency rates.
	We estimate the fair value of a financial instrument using a variety of valuation methods. Where financial instruments are actively traded and have quoted market prices, quoted market prices are used for fair value. When observable market prices do not exist, we estimate fair value. Our valuation methods consider factors such as liquidity and concentration concerns and, for the derivatives portfolio, counterparty credit risk. Other factors such as model assumptions, market dislocations, and unexpected correlations can affect estimates of fair value. Imprecision in estimating these factors can impact the amount of revenue or loss recorded for a particular position.

	Trading securities and securities available-for-sale
	Substantially all of our securities are valued based on quoted market prices. However, certain securities are less actively traded. These securities do not always have quoted market prices. The determination of their fair value, therefore, requires judgment, as this determination may require benchmarking to similar instruments or analyzing default and recovery rates. Examples include certain collateralized mortgage and debt obligations and high-yield debt securities.
	Our securities available-for-sale are valued using quoted market prices. Our derivative positions are valued using internally developed models based on observable market parameters — that is, parameters that are actively quoted and can be validated to external sources, including industry-pricing services.
	Loans held-for-sale
	The fair value of loans in the held-for-sale portfolio is generally based on observable market prices of similar instruments. If market prices are not available, fair value is based on the estimated cash flows, adjusted for credit risk. The credit risk adjustment is discounted using a rate that is appropriate for each maturity and incorporates the effects of interest rate changes.
	MSRs and other servicing rights
	MSRs and certain other servicing rights do not trade in an active, open market with readily observable prices. While sales of MSRs occur, the precise terms and conditions are typically not readily available. Therefore, we estimate the fair value of MSRs and certain other servicing rights using a discounted future cash flow model. For MSRs and certain other servicing rights, the model considers portfolio characteristics, contractually specified servicing fees and assumptions related to prepayments, delinquency rates, late charges, other ancillary revenues, costs to service, and other economic factors. Changes in the assumptions used may have a significant impact on the valuation of these financial instruments. We believe that the fair values and related assumptions used in the models are comparable to those used by other market participants. Note 5 of

33

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS	HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES INCORPORATED

	the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements contains an analysis of the impact to the fair value of MSRs resulting from changes in the estimates used by Management.

–

INCOME TAXES — The calculation of our periodic provision for income taxes is complex and requires the use of estimates and judgments. We have two accruals for income taxes: our accrued income taxes represent the net estimated amount currently due or to be received from taxing jurisdictions, including any reserve for potential examination issues, and is reported as a component of “accrued expenses and other liabilities” in our consolidated balance sheet; and our deferred income tax liability represents the estimated impact of temporary differences between how we recognize our assets and liabilities under GAAP, and how such assets and liabilities are recognized under the federal tax code.

From time to time, we engage in business transactions that may have an effect on our tax liabilities. Where appropriate, we have obtained opinions of outside experts and have assessed the relative merits and risks of the appropriate tax treatment of business transactions taking into account statutory, judicial, and regulatory guidance in the context of our tax position. However, changes to our estimates of accrued taxes can occur due to changes in tax rates, implementation of new business strategies, resolution of issues with taxing authorities regarding previously taken tax positions and newly enacted statutory, judicial, and regulatory guidance. Such changes could affect the amount of our accrued taxes and could be material to our results of operations.

34

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS	HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES INCORPORATED

Table 2 — Selected Annual Income Statements

N.M., not a meaningful value.

(1)	Due to adoption of FASB Interpretation No. 46 for variable interest entities.
(2)	Calculated assuming a 35% tax rate.
(3)	2001 reflects a $32.5 million reduction related to the issuance of $400 million REIT subsidiary preferred stock, of which $50 million was sold to the public.

35

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS	HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES INCORPORATED

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

This section provides a review of financial performance from a consolidated perspective. It also includes a Significant Factors Influencing Financial Performance Comparisons section that summarizes key issues important for a complete understanding of performance trends. Key consolidated balance sheet and income statement trends are discussed in this section. All earnings per share data are reported on a diluted basis. For additional insight on financial performance, this section should be read in conjunction with the Lines of Business Discussion.

Summary

2005 versus 2004

Earnings for 2005 were $412.1 million, or $1.77 per common share, up 3% and 4%, respectively, from $398.9 million, or $1.71 per common share, in 2004. The $13.2 million increase in net income primarily reflected:

	–	$152.4 million, or 14%, decline in non-interest expense, primarily reflecting a $128.1 million decline in operating lease expenses, a $9.9 million decline in SEC-related expenses, a $4.8 million decline in net occupancy expense, a $4.1 million decline in personnel costs, and a $2.9 million decline in Unizan system conversion expenses.
	–	$51.0 million, or 6%, increase in net interest income, reflecting a 6% increase in average earning assets, as the net interest margin of 3.33% was unchanged from the prior year. The increase in average earning assets reflected 10% growth in average total loans and leases, including 11% growth in average total consumer loans and 8% growth in average total commercial loans, partially offset by a 14% decline in average investment securities.
	–	$22.3 million decline in income tax expense as the effective tax rate for 2005 was 24.2%, down from 27.8% in 2004. The lower 2005 income tax expense reflected a combination of factors including the benefit of a federal tax loss carry back, partially offset by the net impact of repatriating foreign earnings.

Partially offset by:

	–	$186.3 million, or 23%, decline in non-interest income. Contributing to the decrease were a $148.7 million decline in operating lease income, a $23.8 million decline in securities gains as the current year had $8.1 million of securities losses and the prior year had $15.8 million of securities gains, a $13.0 million decline in gains on sales of automobile loans, a $17.0 million decline in other income reflecting primarily MSR-hedge related trading losses, and a $3.3 million decline in service charges on deposit accounts. These declines were partially offset by a $10.0 million increase in trust services income, a $9.4 million increase in mortgage banking income, and a $2.8 million increase in other service charges and fees.
	–	$26.2 million, or 48%, increase in the provision for credit losses, reflecting higher levels of non-performing assets and problem credits, as well as growth in the loan portfolio.

The ROA and ROE for 2005 were 1.26% and 16.0%, respectively, down slightly from 1.27% and 16.8%, respectively, in 2004.

2004 versus 2003

Earnings for 2004 were $398.9 million, or $1.71 per common share, up 7% and 6%, respectively, from $372.4 million, or $1.61 per common share, in 2003. The $26.6 million increase in net income primarily reflected:

	–	$108.9 million, or 66%, decline in the provision for credit losses, reflecting lower levels of non-performing assets and problem credits, only partially offset by the impact of loan growth.
	–	$107.9 million, or 9%, decline in non-interest expense, primarily reflecting a $156.8 million decline in operating lease expenses, a $15.3 million loss on early extinguishment of debt expense in 2003, a $5.6 million decline in professional services, and declines in equipment, marketing, telecommunications, and printing and supplies. These declines were partially offset by a $38.5 million increase in personnel costs, a $13.5 million increase in net occupancy expense, a $6.7 million increase in SEC/regulatory-related expenses, and $3.6 million of Unizan system conversion expenses, as the prior year did not have these expenses.
	–	$62.4 million, or 7%, increase in net interest income, reflecting a 13% increase in average earning assets, partially offset by the negative impact of a 16 basis point, or an effective 5%, decline in the net interest margin to 3.33% from 3.49%. The increase in average earning assets reflected 11% growth in average total loans and leases, including 16% growth in average total consumer loans, 4% growth in average total commercial loans, and a 25% increase in average investment securities.

36

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS	HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES INCORPORATED

Partially offset by:

	–	$250.6 million, or 23%, decline in non-interest income. Contributing to the decrease were a $202.6 million decline in operating lease income, a $25.9 million decline in mortgage banking income, a $25.8 million decline in gains on sales of automobile loans, and the fact that 2003 benefited from a $13.1 million gain on sale of branch offices. Partially offsetting these declines were $10.5 million of higher securities gains, a $5.8 million increase in trust income, and a $3.3 million increase in service charges on deposits.
	–	$15.4 million increase in income tax expense as the effective tax rate for 2004 was 27.8%, up from 26.4% in 2003.

The ROA and ROE for 2004 were 1.27% and 16.8%, respectively, down from 1.29% and 17.0%, respectively, in 2003.

Results Of Operations

Significant Factors Influencing Financial Performance Comparisons

Earnings comparisons from 2003 through 2005 were impacted by a number of factors, some related to changes in the economic and competitive environment, while others reflected specific management strategies or changes in accounting practices. Those key factors are summarized below.

	1.	AUTOMOBILE LEASES ORIGINATED THROUGH APRIL 2002 ARE ACCOUNTED FOR AS OPERATING LEASES. — Automobile leases originated before May 2002 are accounted for using the operating lease method of accounting because they do not qualify as direct financing leases. Operating leases are carried in other assets with the related rental income, other revenue, and credit recoveries reflected as operating lease income, a component of non-interest income. Under this accounting method, depreciation expenses, as well as other costs and charge-offs, are reflected as operating lease expense, a component of non-interest expense. With no new operating leases originated since April 2002, the operating lease assets have declined rapidly. It is anticipated that the level of operating lease assets and related operating lease income and expense will decline to a point of diminished materiality sometime in 2006. However, until that point is reached, and since operating lease income and expense represented a significant percentage of total non-interest income and expense, respectively, throughout these reporting periods, their downward trend influenced total revenue, total non-interest income, and total non-interest expense trends.

		In contrast, automobile leases originated since April 2002 are accounted for as direct financing leases, an interest earning asset included in total loans and leases with the related income reflected as interest income and included in the calculation of the net interest margin. Credit charge-offs and recoveries are reflected in the ALLL, with related changes in the ALLL reflected in the provision for credit losses. The relative newness and rapid growth of the direct financing lease portfolio resulted in higher reported automobile lease growth rates than in a more mature portfolio, especially in 2002 through 2004. To better understand overall trends in automobile lease exposure, it is helpful to compare trends in the combined total of direct financing leases plus operating leases.

	2.	MORTGAGE SERVICING RIGHTS (MSRS) AND RELATED HEDGING. — Interest rate levels throughout this period have remained low by historical standards, though they have generally been rising in 2004 and 2005. They have also been volatile, with increases in one quarter followed by declines in another and vice versa. This has impacted the valuation of MSRs, which can be volatile when rates change.

	–	Since the second quarter of 2002, we have generally retained the servicing on mortgage loans we originate and sell. MSR values are very sensitive to movements in interest rates as expected future net servicing income depends on the projected outstanding principal balances of the underlying loans, which can be greatly reduced by prepayments. Prepayments usually increase when mortgage interest rates decline and decrease when mortgage interest rates rise. Thus, as interest rates decline, less future income is expected and the value of MSRs declines. We recognize impairment when the valuation is less than the recorded book value. We recognize temporary impairment due to changes in interest rates through a valuation reserve and record a direct write-down of the book value of MSRs for other-than-temporary declines in valuation. Changes and fluctuations in interest rate levels between quarters resulted in some quarters reporting an MSR temporary impairment, with others reporting a recovery of previously recognized MSR temporary impairment. Such swings in MSR valuations have significantly impacted quarterly mortgage banking income trends throughout this period.
	–	Prior to 2004, we used investment securities as the primary method of offsetting MSR temporary valuation changes. Beginning in 2004, we have used trading account assets. The valuations of trading and investment securities generally react to interest rate changes in an opposite direction compared with changes in MSR valuations. As a

37

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS	HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES INCORPORATED

		result, changes in interest rate levels that impacted MSR valuations also resulted in securities or trading gains or losses. As such, in quarters where an MSR impairment was recognized, investment securities and/or trading account assets were sold, typically resulting in a gain on sale or trading income, and vice versa. Investment securities gains or losses are reflected in the income statement in a single non-interest income line item, whereas trading gains or losses are a component of other non-interest income on the income statement (see Tables 3 and 7).

	3.	THE SALE OF AUTOMOBILE LOANS. — Beginning in 2003, a key strategy has been to lower our credit exposure to automobile loans and leases to 20% or less of total credit exposure, primarily by selling automobile loans. This objective was achieved during the 2005 first quarter. These sales of loans impacted results in a number of ways including: lower growth rates in automobile, total consumer, and total loans; and lower net interest income than otherwise would be the case if the loans were not sold. In addition, during 2004 such sales resulted in the generation of significant gains as large pools of automobile loans were sold in order to achieve the objective, with such gains reflected in non-interest income. In the 2005 second quarter, we entered into an arrangement to sell 50%-75% of automobile loan production to a third party on an on-going basis and retain the loan servicing as part of a strategy to maintain automobile loans and leases total credit exposure. While this flow-sale program resulted in modest gains in 2005, we view such gains as recurring given their on-going nature (see Table 3).
	4.	SIGNIFICANT C&I AND CRE CHARGE-OFFS AND RECOVERIES. — A single commercial credit recovery in the 2004 second quarter on a loan previously charged off in the 2002 fourth quarter, favorably impacted the 2004 second quarter and full year provision expense (see Table 17), as well as middle-market commercial and industrial, total commercial, and total net charge-offs for the 2004 second quarter and full year period (see Table 19). In addition, in the 2005 first quarter, a single large commercial credit was charged-off. This impacted 2005 first quarter and full year period total net charge-offs and provision expense (see Tables 3, 17, and 19).
	5.	EXPENSES AND ACCRUALS ASSOCIATED WITH THE SEC FORMAL INVESTIGATION AND BANKING REGULATORY FORMAL WRITTEN AGREEMENTS. — On June 26, 2003, we announced that the SEC staff was conducting a formal investigation into certain financial accounting matters, relating to fiscal years 2002 and earlier, and certain related disclosure matters. In addition, on March 1, 2005, we announced entering into a formal written agreement with the FRBC, as well as the Bank entering into a formal written agreement with the OCC, providing for a comprehensive action plan designed to enhance corporate governance, internal audit, risk management, accounting policies and procedures, and financial and regulatory reporting. On June 2, 2005, we announced that the SEC approved the settlement of their formal investigation. As a part of the settlement, we consented to pay a penalty of $7.5 million. This civil money penalty had no impact on our 2005 financial results, as reserves for this amount were established and expensed in 2004. These matters resulted in certain expenses and accruals as detailed below: