Darlene P. Persons - Senior Vice President and Director of Investor Relations Ralph W. Babb - Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, President, Chairman of Capital Committee, Chairman of Special Preferred Stock Committee and Member of Management Policy Committee Karen L. Parkhill - Vice Chairman, Chief Financial Officer and Member of Management Policy Committee Lars C. Anderson - Vice Chairman of the Business Bank and Member of Management Policy Committee John M. Killian - Chief Credit Officer, Executive Vice President and Member of Management Policy Committee

John G. Pancari - Evercore Partners Inc., Research Division Steven A. Alexopoulos - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division Ken A. Zerbe - Morgan Stanley, Research Division Erika Penala - BofA Merrill Lynch, Research Division Robert Placet - Deutsche Bank AG, Research Division Craig Siegenthaler - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division Jennifer H. Demba - SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, Inc., Research Division Kenneth M. Usdin - Jefferies & Company, Inc., Research Division Brett D. Rabatin - Sterne Agee & Leach Inc., Research Division Jon G. Arfstrom - RBC Capital Markets, LLC, Research Division Stephen Scinicariello - UBS Investment Bank, Research Division Ryan M. Nash - Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Research Division Michael Rose - Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Research Division Brian Foran - Autonomous Research LLP Brian Klock - Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc., Research Division Matthew H. Burnell - Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Research Division Bob Ramsey - FBR Capital Markets & Co., Research Division Terence J. McEvoy - Oppenheimer & Co. Inc., Research Division Gary P. Tenner - D.A. Davidson & Co., Research Division

Good day, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Monserat, and I will be your conference operator today. At this time, I would like to welcome everyone to the Comerica 2013 Earnings Conference Call. [Operator Instructions] I would now like to turn the call over to your host, Ms. Darlene Persons. Ma'am, you may begin your conference. Darlene P. Persons: Thank you, Monserat. Good morning, and welcome to Comerica's Second Quarter 2013 Earnings Conference Call. Participating on this call will be our Chairman, Ralph Babb; Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer, Karen Parkhill; Vice Chairman of the Business Bank, Lars Anderson; and Chief Credit Officer, John Killian. A copy of our press release and presentation slides are available on the SEC's website, as well as in the Investor Relations section of our website, comerica.com. As we review our second quarter results, we will be referring to the slides, which provide additional detail on our earnings. Before we get started, I would like to remind you that this conference call contains forward-looking statements, and in that regard, you should be mindful of the risks and uncertainties that can cause future results to vary from expectations. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this presentation, and we undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements. I refer you to the Safe Harbor statement contained in this release issued today, as well as Slide 2 of this presentation, which I incorporate into this call, as well as our filings with the SEC. Also, this conference call will reference non-GAAP measures. And in that regard, I would direct you to the reconciliation of these measures within this presentation. Now I'll turn the call over to Ralph, who will begin on Slide 3. Ralph W. Babb: Good morning. Today, we reported second quarter 2013 earnings of $0.76 per share or $143 million compared to $0.70 per share or $134 million for the first quarter of 2013. Average loan growth, fee income growth, expense control and continued solid credit quality contributed to our 9% increase in earnings per share in the second quarter. Turning to Slide 4 and other highlights. Average total loans grew $276 million compared to the first quarter, and reflected an increase of $337 million or 1% in commercial loans. Our Middle Market business lines across all 3 of our major geographies were the key contributor to our loan growth in the second quarter. Overall, customers remain cautious but relatively more positive in this slow-growing economy. Average total deposits increased $756 million or 1% in the second quarter, primarily reflecting an increase of $570 million or 3% in noninterest-bearing deposits. Net interest income remained relatively stable in the second quarter, declining $2 million as the contribution from an additional day in the quarter and loan growth were offset by the decline in accretion on the acquired portfolio and the impact from continued shifting loan portfolio dynamics. The net interest margin decreased 5 basis points, primarily due to lower accretion on the acquired loan portfolio and lower loan yields due to the continued mix shift in the portfolio. Credit quality was solid in the second quarter, with net charge-offs of 15 basis points, which is the lowest level since the first quarter of 2007. Nonaccrual loans also decreased, as did watch list loans. These positive metrics are indicative of our strong credit culture and have resulted in a $3 million decrease in the provision for credit losses. Noninterest income increased $8 million in the second quarter to $208 million, reflecting broad-based growth in several categories, as well as an annual incentive received from our third-party credit card provider. Noninterest expenses of $416 million in the second quarter were unchanged from the first quarter, reflecting our continued tight expense controls. Our capital position continues to be a source of strength to support our growth. We repurchased 1.9 million shares in the second quarter under our share repurchase program, and combined with dividends, returned 72% of second quarter net income to shareholders. On July 2, the Federal Reserve approved its final version of the Basel III capital rules. We estimate that our June 30, 2013, Basel III Tier 1 Common ratio is 10.1% on a fully phased-in basis. This is well in excess of the minimum requirement to be considered well-capitalized, and assumes we elect to exclude most elements of accumulated other comprehensive income. Turning to Slide 5, and a look at our footprint. We are well-positioned in our primary markets, where our relationship-based approach and experience combined to make a positive difference for our customers. Our strategy is to have balance between our markets, and we are making meaningful progress. Texas continues to be a growth leader for the U.S. economy, with strong high-tech and energy sectors. Job growth is well above the U.S. average on a percent change year-over-year basis. We continue to leverage our standing in Texas as the largest U.S. commercial bank headquartered in the state. Average loans in Texas were up 7% year-over-year. California residential real estate markets are quickly improving, and home prices are increasing in all major metropolitan areas. Many homeowners are experiencing increased wealth, providing broad-based support to the state's economy. Job growth in California is above the U.S. average on a percent change year-over-year basis. Average loans in California were up 10% year-over-year and average deposits were up 4%. Increased auto production and sales have strengthened the Michigan economy. June auto sales reached the 15.9 million unit rate, the highest level in over 5 years. Residential real estate markets in Michigan are stabilizing statewide and home prices are increasing. And according to the National Association of Manufacturers, Michigan is the top state for manufacturing job creation from December 2009 to March 2013. Texas ranked second. Average loans in Michigan were relatively stable year-over-year, while deposits grew 5%. In closing, we remain focused on growing revenue in the slowly expanding economy. Our relationship strategy is working well in this low rate environment, as evidenced by growth of loans, deposits and fee income. Also contributing to our strong shareholder payout were our tight expense management and solid credit performance. And now I will turn the call over to Karen. Karen L. Parkhill: Thank you, Ralph, and good morning. Turning to Slide 6. As Ralph mentioned, total average loan growth was $276 million or 1% quarter-over-quarter, reflecting a continued increase in commercial loans and a slowing of the decline in Commercial Real Estate loans. As you can see, positive trends continued with period-end loans greater than the average in the second quarter. Period-end loans increased $392 million from the end of the first quarter to $45.5 billion. By line of business, Middle Market loans across all 3 major geographies were a key contributor to our loan growth in the second quarter. In fact, average loans grew $250 million in our National Dealer business and $213 million in our general Middle Market business. And looking at trends, loans in our general Middle Market business have increased 5 of the past 6 quarters, with the largest increases in the last 2 quarters. Somewhat offsetting that growth, we did have a $270 million decline in Corporate Banking, which is one of the most competitive segments and reflects our desire to maintain our pricing discipline. Loan yields, shown in the yellow diamonds, declined 7 basis points in the quarter, reflecting the expected decline in purchased loan accretion, as well as the continued mix shift of our portfolio. Total loan commitments increased almost $1 billion as of June 30, with commitments increasing in all major markets and nearly all business lines. Also, line utilization increased to 48.2% from 47.7% at the end of the first quarter. Finally, our loan pipeline increased to the highest levels since the first quarter of 2012. In fact, it is more than 10% higher than last quarter with increases noted in most business lines. Continuing with loans on Slide 7. By type, as opposed to line of business, average commercial loans were up $337 million and were the main driver of our loan growth. On the top portion of the bar, Mortgage Banker Finance, which provides mortgage warehouse lines, saw average loans increase almost $100 million this past quarter. As we have noted before, Mortgage Banker outstandings can be variable, and we expect that they will moderate as mortgage refinance volumes slow, in line with the Mortgage Bankers Association forecast. The pace of decline in Commercial Real Estate loans continued to slow. In fact, as depicted in the chart on the right, the combined commercial mortgage and real estate construction average loans decreased $67 million, down from a decrease of $106 million in the first quarter and $241 million in the fourth quarter of last year. Breaking the bar into pieces, developer Commercial Real Estate has stabilized at $3 billion and is showing signs that it is starting to grow. In fact, commitments to developers have increased for the past 6 quarters, and construction loans grew for the third consecutive quarter, up $102 million in the second quarter with demand improving. Offsetting that growth, projects are moving quickly to the permanent long-term financing market upon completion before the construction loan can be converted to a mini perm mortgage on our books. On the other hand, owner-occupied real estate, which makes up 72% of our Commercial Real Estate exposure, declined $131 million in the quarter. These real estate loans for the factories, warehouses and offices of our commercial customers continued to be impacted by amortization and refinancings to the long-term market. Our customers are growing and performing well, but remain cautious about expanding their facilities in the current economic environment. As shown on Slide 8, our total average deposits increased $756 million or 1% to $51.4 billion. Noninterest-bearing deposits grew $570 million, while interest-bearing deposits increased $186 million. Deposit pricing declined 2 basis points to 19 basis points, depicted in the yellow diamonds on the slide, as higher rate CDs matured and we have lowered rates on select products. Average deposits in our Financial Services division, which provide services to title and escrow companies, increased $228 million after contracting about $700 million in the first quarter. And deposits in our Corporate Banking business increased almost $400 million due to tax-related seasonality. The same seasonality also impacted period-end deposits, which decreased $862 million. Slide 9 provides details on our securities portfolio, which primarily consist of highly liquid, highly rated mortgage-backed securities. The MBS portfolio averaged $9.4 billion in the second quarter, down $235 million from the first quarter as we purposely slowed the reinvestment of prepayments in April and May due to the unattractive, low yields that were available. At period-end, the balance of the MBS portfolio was $9.3 billion. The decline was mainly due to the slowing of reinvestments, as well as a decline in the fair value of the portfolio as a result of rising rates. The net unrealized gain on the portfolio was $10 million, a decrease of $219 million pretax or $139 million after-tax, and was recorded through accumulated other comprehensive income or AOCI. With the rise in long rates and current rate expectations, we believe the pace of prepays will slow, with $500 million to $600 million in prepays expected in the third quarter. Consequently, at 4.1 years, the estimated duration on the portfolio increased from 3.4 years at the end of the first quarter. However, the expected duration under a 200 basis point rate shock remained relatively constant at about 5 years as a result of the composition of our portfolio and the fact that prepaid fees should stabilize. We will continue to manage our portfolio dynamically, taking into account many factors, including not only our loan and deposit expectations and the overall yields available, but also the duration and mark-to-market impact on our portfolio in a rising rate environment. Turning to Slide 10. Our net interest income was relatively stable, declining $2 million in the second quarter. We've summarized in the table on the right the major moving pieces. One additional day in the quarter added $4 million to net interest income. Loan growth contributed $2 million and helped offset the effects of the low-rate environment. Lower funding costs, including debt maturities in the second quarter, as well as lower deposit costs, added $1 million and provided a 1 basis point increase to the margin. Offsetting these positive contributions was a $4 million decline in accretion of the purchase discount on the acquired loan portfolio, which had a 3 basis point impact on the margin. We have about $38 million of total accretion remaining to be realized on the acquired portfolio. Accretion should continue to trend downward each quarter, and we expect to recognize about $25 million to $30 million in 2013. While we remain focused on holding loan spreads for new and renewed credit facilities, there are still mix shift dynamics impacting the portfolio. These include higher-yielding commercial mortgage loan shrinking, while lower-yielding C&I loans are growing and older fixed-rate loans are maturing. In addition, 30-day LIBOR declined over 0.5 basis point in the quarter. As a reminder, approximately 85% of our loans are floating rate, of which 75% are LIBOR-based, predominantly 30-day LIBOR. All of these factors combined had a $4 million or 2 basis point impact on the net interest margin. Dynamics in the securities portfolio, including prepayments that were reinvested at lower yields, as well as a lower average balance, had a $1 million or less than 1 basis point negative impact. And finally, average excess liquidity increased almost $300 million, decreasing the net interest margin by 1 basis point. We believe our asset-sensitive balance sheet remains well-positioned for rising rates. Based on our historical experience and asset liability model, we believe a 200 basis point increase in rates over a 1-year period, equivalent to 100 basis points on average, would result in more than a 10% increase in net interest income of approximately $185 million. Turning to the credit picture on Slide 11. Credit quality continues to be strong in the second quarter. Net charge-offs decreased to $17 million or 15 basis points of average loans. The charts on the right show our watch list loans declined $224 million and our nonperforming loans declined $44 million. With the decline in nonperforming loans, the allowance to NPLs increased to 130%. And the $613 million allowance covers our trailing 12 month net charge-off over 5x, as you can see on the lower left chart. As a result of the continued positive trends in our credit metrics, our provision for credit losses declined $3 million from the first quarter to $13 million. Finally, we received the annual Shared National Credit or SNC exam results at the end of June. They are reflected in our second quarter results and were not significant. Slide 12 outlines the $8 million increase in noninterest income. Second quarter customer-driven fees increased $4 million due to broad-based increases across most customer-driven fee income categories, including a $3 million increase in customer derivative income. This was partially offset by a $2 million decrease in service charges on deposit accounts from the seasonally high first quarter level. Noncustomer related categories increased $4 million to $20 million, primarily due to a $6 million annual incentive received from our third-party credit card provider. This was partially offset by a securities loss of $2 million. Turning to Slide 13. We continued to maintain tight expense control, which resulted in stable expenses in the second quarter. Salaries expense decreased $6 million, reflecting a slightly smaller workforce, seasonally higher stock compensation in the first quarter and decreases in incentive compensation. This was partially offset by the impact of merit increases and 1 additional day in the quarter. Offsetting the decline in salary expense in the second quarter, we had a $4 million write-down on other foreclosed assets and a $2 million increase in outside processing fees, primarily due to increased activity tied to revenue growth and the outsourcing of certain functions. Going forward, there are 3 extra days in the second half of the year, which will impact our salary expense. In addition, we expect to incur additional salary, software and consulting expenses related to regulatory compliance, predominantly stress testing, particularly as we migrate to becoming a full CCAR bank this year. In addition, occupancy expenses are typically seasonally higher in the second half of the year. Moving to Slide 14 and shareholder payout. In the second quarter, we repurchased 1.9 million shares under our share repurchase program. Combined with the dividends paid, we returned 72% of net income to our shareholders in the second quarter. We believe our shareholder payout is a reflection of our strong capital position. Shares repurchased were mostly offset by the impact of share dilution from warrant and employee options, resulting from the increase in our stock price during the quarter. We are pleased that the Basel III capital rules have been finalized. We believe we are already well above the required minimum to be considered well-capitalized, with an estimated Basel III Tier 1 Common capital ratio of 10.1% at June 30 on a fully phased-in basis, assuming we elect to exclude the impact of AOCI. Finally, turning to Slide 15 and our outlook. Our expectations for full year 2013 compared to full year 2012 remain unchanged from what we outlined on our call in April, with the exception of provision. We are now expecting the provision and net charge-off to decline from last year's levels, with both these levels in the second half of the year similar to the first half. Based on current trends, we believe we should see continued improvement in credit quality, partially offset by loan growth. In this slow-growing economy, we will continue to focus on the things we can control, allocating resources to our faster growing markets and industry segments, driving cross-sell opportunities and carefully managing expenses. In closing, we are pleased with our loan deposit and fee income growth, tight expense management, solid credit performance and strong shareholder payout. We remain keenly focused on delivering a growing bottom line. Now we are happy to answer your questions.

[Operator Instructions] Your first question comes from the line of John Pancari with Evercore Partners. John G. Pancari - Evercore Partners Inc., Research Division: I wanted to see if you can give us some color on loan pricing. What you're seeing in your markets, if you're seeing any ability there to price better, given the steepness in the curve, at all? Ralph W. Babb: Okay. Lars? Lars C. Anderson: Yes. John, so as you know, we typically price with the shorter end of the yield curve, as Karen mentioned earlier. So as you're seeing a steepening in the yield curve, that hasn't had as much kind of impact on us. Obviously, the hiccup in the leveraged loan market did move, I think, some activity like to the shorter end of the yield curve, which helps senior bank debt. But overall, I don't think the interest rate shifts have really had any significant impact on us. And as you know, LIBOR really hasn't significantly changed. So we're staying very focused on our existing strategy. We haven't changed our pricing strategy at all, John. John G. Pancari - Evercore Partners Inc., Research Division: Okay. Are you seeing any change in the competitiveness of some of your competing banks on that front at all or any room to improve pricing, just given any changes in the competitive landscape? Lars C. Anderson: Well, I would say that we have continued to see a very aggressive marketplace in terms of pricing. And if I look back a couple of quarters ago to today, I would say that it has gotten relatively more aggressive. We do see durations getting stretched on a number of facilities, and that's pretty active across a number of our businesses. So we're continuing to just focus on our discipline, our product, and what we do and feel very comfortable. We're getting the kinds of returns that are attractive to our shareholders, and we're going to stick to our guns with that, John. And -- but I don't see it as an opportunity for us to significantly increase spreads or yields, but I do think that we're very well-positioned with the businesses we have, the expertise we have, the markets that we have to continue to de-lever. And as you know, our loan spreads have largely held here over the last year. John G. Pancari - Evercore Partners Inc., Research Division: Okay. And then lastly, Karen, you're probably going to shoot me down on this. But on the margin, I wanted to see if we can get some just additional color on your thoughts there on the margin. Could we see a bottoming in the margin over the next couple of quarters here? And can you talk about the magnitude of compression that we might see? Karen L. Parkhill: I laughed, John, because you're right. In terms of the margin, as you know, it's extremely difficult to predict, and the key variable there is excess liquidity, which can bounce the margin up and down, and just very difficult for us to predict. I would say, on net interest income, which does drive the margin, that you will continue to see a decline in the accretion benefit. We've mentioned that we expect to see $25 million to $30 million this year. We've seen $18 million so far, and that means we will continue to see a decline in the next 2 quarters, and that will impact the margin. We do expect loan growth to offset the decline that we've seen on our portfolio loan yield. We do expect that to continue, but eventually wane, and it's just difficult to predict, eventually, when that will turn around.

Your next question comes from the line of Steven Alexopoulos with JP Morgan. Steven A. Alexopoulos - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: I wanted to start, regarding the slowdown of the reinvestment of securities in 2Q, where are you able to reinvest today, and have you started reinvesting that cash? Karen L. Parkhill: Yes, Steve. We have started to reinvest. When rates did rise last month, we did move back in the market to purchase securities. Today, we're seeing yields in the 2.20 to 2.50 range. Steven A. Alexopoulos - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: And what duration would that be, Karen? Karen L. Parkhill: Similar duration to what we've got on the portfolio. Steven A. Alexopoulos - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: Okay. And I'm curious, what impact has the stock market -- [indiscernible] and as the yield curve's steepening, what impact has that had on confidence, if any, of your business customers? Have you seen anything? Ralph W. Babb: Lars, you want to comment on that? Lars C. Anderson: Sure, yes. Steven, frankly, we haven't really seen a significant change in terms of, I would say, the wealth effect in terms of business owners. Where I think we've seen more activity there would probably be in our Wealth business. You may have noticed that our Wealth loan portfolio had nice growth, up almost $80 million. Our fiduciary fees, asset management fees continued to grow. Part of that, frankly, we have a -- we continued to enhance our collaboration, cross-sell across our platform and continue to work with those customers. Because if you think about it, many of our Middle Market companies that are private, privately-owned, they're feeling better. There are companies that are de-leveraging. They're creating liquidity and they're thinking about exit plans. And that's where we bring expertise to the table. So I think that, that's one of the areas where we've been able to really benefit, and I think that, that showed up in our numbers. But to answer your question specifically for business customers that we would see, say, in Middle Market banking, no, I haven't seen that. Ralph W. Babb: I think you're still seeing a lot of uncertainty out there, just to add to what Lars was saying. And people were waiting and watching to see what's going to happen, and they're doing quite well on their current operations, but they just don't want to invest until they know what the outlook's going to be, including the many uncertainties that are there on particular items that will affect their earnings. Lars C. Anderson: Yes. I'd say cautious optimism is probably a pretty good description of the way they're feeling, but still dampening the investment at this point. Steven A. Alexopoulos - JP Morgan Chase & Co, Research Division: That's helpful. Karen, just a final one for you. Can you help us think about the dollars of incremental expense related to the stress test, now that you'll be a CCAR bank? Karen L. Parkhill: Yes, we will have dollars related to consulting expenses, additional headcount and some software expenses. I'm not giving out the exact dollar, but I will say that related to increased regulatory expenses, we will be spending about $15 million annually, a year just related to regulatory expenses. Some of that is already in our run rate, but not all of it.

Your next question comes from the line of Ken Zerbe with Morgan Stanley. Ken A. Zerbe - Morgan Stanley, Research Division: First question, just in terms of loan growth, obviously, we see your guidance that it's going to be slower, that's fine. My question, though, is how should we think about the interplay between Mortgage Banker, which has actually held up pretty well this quarter, and I guess my suspicion is just given the rising rates, given the slowdown refis, that actually could fall pretty materially in the back-half of the year versus growth in the rest of the portfolio? Ralph W. Babb: Lars? Lars C. Anderson: Yes. Absolutely, Ken. Yes, obviously, with a rising interest rate environment on mortgage rates, I think the 30 years is up now 4.5%. So that's clearly going to have, we believe, an impact to Mortgage Banking Association, as they're projecting a 39% decline in mortgage apps in the second half of the year, and clearly, we think that could help, would moderate some of our outstandings. I would underscore a couple of things though, Ken, that I think are important. Our business continues to become more granular. We continue to add more mortgage companies, which I think with those expanded facilities and commitments that we're seeing, that gives us a little bit more kind of insulation on the downside also. If you look at the volumes that we're doing today, if you go back a couple of quarters, our purchase volumes were 30%. Last quarter, and I'm talking about the first quarter, they were 50%. In the second quarter, they were 60%. That general migration towards a purchase volume concentration, I think, helps us, positions us well. We have very strong relationships with some large national builders that are giving us some good volume. And in addition to it, we're in some good growth markets like Texas, where the housing market continues to expand and we expect to gain more of the purchase volumes. So yes, could we see some moderation? I think it's a good observation, but I think we're going to manage the business to position ourselves for the long haul. We have great customers, some of the best cross-sell we have in the bank, and certainly, in the Business Bank in that particular business. Ken A. Zerbe - Morgan Stanley, Research Division: Understood. And then, when we think about the timing of the potential decline, I mean, is there enough carryover business from second quarter that locked in at the lower rates or should we actually see a pretty -- the steep declines starting fairly soon, meaning third quarter, and then, maybe stable in fourth? Lars C. Anderson: Yes. I'd say that, that would be very difficult to tell. There's a number of dynamics that actually impact the outstandings on these facilities, including the investor and the investor market. So I really couldn't give you a number there that would be helpful. Ken A. Zerbe - Morgan Stanley, Research Division: Understood. But even with that decline in mind, do you guys still believe that slow but positive total loan growth is achievable in the third and fourth quarter, correct? Karen L. Parkhill: We have not changed our loan growth outlook, that is correct.

Next question comes from the line of Erika Penala with Bank of America Merrill Lynch. Erika Penala - BofA Merrill Lynch, Research Division: I just wanted to follow up on some of John's questions. I think -- or actually, my first follow-up question is, on the liquidity side, Karen, I appreciate that you've started to reinvest into this higher loan rate environment. How should we think about the proper level of liquidity for the bank going forward? Karen L. Parkhill: We are positioned well with liquidity for the rising loan growth environment. We like that position because we do want to ultimately reinvest in loans. From an overall liquidity perspective, we are feeling very comfortable. We currently have a little bit less than $3 billion on deposit with the Fed, and that moves up and down depending on our overall balance sheet position. I don't know if you need more color, Erika. Erika Penala - BofA Merrill Lynch, Research Division: I guess I'm just wondering, if I look at average balances, your cash with the Fed is about 7% of earning assets. If loan growth is normalizing and there are more reinvestment opportunities, can that level go down, and hopefully, margin? Karen L. Parkhill: It certainly could go down. One of the things that we need to be mindful of, though, is the potential new rules coming out -- or new rules coming out on liquidity. Those have been proposed by the Basel committee, but have not yet been written in the United States, so we will be paying close attention to those and making sure that we are ultimately compliant with them. Ralph W. Babb: I think the thing I would add to that as well is, things pick up and people get more positive, you will see that excess liquidity go down because people will begin to use it again to invest for the future, not only the consumer but also, our business customers. Erika Penala - BofA Merrill Lynch, Research Division: I see. And the -- just switching topics a little bit. It seems like, given your reinvestment rate on the securities book, we should expect that we've, perhaps, hit a bottom on your bond yield, but could you remind us exactly where you're originating new loans in both Corporate Banking and Middle Market in terms of your spread to LIBOR? Karen L. Parkhill: We don't give the origination yields out. But you should know that we are very focused on holding or increasing spreads everywhere that we can on new and renewed loans. It is something that we track every month and we have been successful. Lars C. Anderson: Yes. And Erika, I would just reinforce that, and I know you know this, but we take very much of a relationship approach. We're not just looking at the individual credit. We're looking at the entire relationship and what they're really bringing to Comerica, and the ability for that customer relationship to generate shareholder value. So that's -- obviously, credit is a key component of it, but we really take a relationship-type approach when valuing our customers. Erika Penala - BofA Merrill Lynch, Research Division: Understood. And just 1 more question before I step out of the queue. Karen, have you given us an update on under the Basel III proposed rules, what your liquidity coverage ratio would be? Karen L. Parkhill: We have not given that because the rules are really just proposed at the Basel level and still have a long way to go. They have yet to be written in the United States. We, and many other banks, if the rules are passed as drafted under Basel, would need to add liquidity. And it is something that we are very focused on, but we're waiting for rules to come in the United States.

The next question comes from the line of Matt O'Connor with Deutsche Bank. Robert Placet - Deutsche Bank AG, Research Division: This is Rob Placet on Matt's team. First question, as it relates to the decline in period-end DDA balances this quarter, you pointed to some seasonality. I guess what specifically caused the seasonal drop this quarter? Ralph W. Babb: Lars? Karen L. Parkhill: They were mainly tax-related seasonality due to company building up liquidity in order to pay certain tax bills, and that's why you saw a decline at period end, too. Robert Placet - Deutsche Bank AG, Research Division: Okay. And then looking at expenses as it relates to your comments for personnel and occupancy expenses in the second half of the year, I was wondering if you could talk to the magnitude of the increase in those categories. And then is it safe to say that the level of expenses should drift higher versus the $416 million level this quarter? Karen L. Parkhill: Yes, we do expect expenses to be slightly higher, and that's due to 3 additional days in the second half than we've had in the first half, as well as increased headcount mostly related to stress tests and the fact that our occupancy expenses are seasonally higher in the second half than they are in the first half.

The next question comes from the line of Craig Siegenthaler with Credit Suisse. Craig Siegenthaler - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: Just a quick question on the $80 million premium amortization balance. What was the quarterly run rate that impacted net interest income in the second quarter? Karen L. Parkhill: Can you repeat your question, please? Craig Siegenthaler - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: Yes. On the premium amortization, I was wondering what the second quarter impact to that was, just thinking about that on a go-forward basis as durations could potentially extend. Karen L. Parkhill: Yes, so about $9 million. Craig Siegenthaler - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: Got it. And does the duration of the premium amortization sort of match the available-for-sale securities portfolio? Karen L. Parkhill: When we look at premium amortization every quarter, it is something that as interest rates have increased and the duration on our portfolio extends, we expect could increase a little bit, if that answers your question. Craig Siegenthaler - Crédit Suisse AG, Research Division: No, it does. And just one follow-up. What was the period-ending mortgage banker balance? And if you don't have that, maybe you can help us think about what was the quarterly change in the mortgage banker balance on a period-end basis, not an average basis? Ralph W. Babb: Okay. Yes, so mortgage banking finance on a period-end basis was up $374 million. That was against an average of $78 million. One of the things that I would remind you is that, oftentimes, the ending period balances do spike. Typically, mortgage companies build up their inventory throughout the month and at the end of the quarter, would then sell off to investors. So the change was $374 million. And the ending balance for mortgage banker finance was $2.4 billion.

The next question comes from the line of Jennifer Demba with SunTrust Robinson. Jennifer H. Demba - SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, Inc., Research Division: A question on the decline in Corporate Banking loan balances in the second quarter. You indicated it was largely competitively driven. I was wondering if you could give us some more color on that. And is it a trend that you expect to continue in that bucket? Ralph W. Babb: Lars? Lars C. Anderson: Okay. Well, as I've shared on previous conference calls, as we look at the competitive landscape from a pricing structure, including duration of credit, as you go to the upper segments, clearly, Corporate Banking, that's where we've seen the most competition, frankly. And as we look back over the past quarter, it's been a tough market. It's been very, very aggressive. There's clearly excess liquidity. If you look at some of the syndicated credit market, there is a significant oversubscription in those facilities. And frankly, we're a company that is just not going to overreach. We are not going to trade off credit quality nor relationship pricing for volume. And so at times, you've got to make a difficult short-term decision on some credits. But I think for the long term, we're very well positioned. We've got some great customers in both U.S. banking and international. And I think from a long-term perspective, it's a great growth business for us. But in the short run, it's challenging. We are not going to overreach. This is not the time to do that. Jennifer H. Demba - SunTrust Robinson Humphrey, Inc., Research Division: What do you think will offset that largely, Lars. Is it Middle Market and Dealer? Lars C. Anderson: Yes. We're very fortunate that we have a diversified geography between Michigan, Texas, California, with unique businesses even embedded in those markets, whether it's Automotive, Energy, Environmental Services, Technology and Life Sciences. And if you think about some of those businesses from a long-term perspective, they look very attractive. I think Energy, Technology and Life Sciences, you saw growth in Environmental Services this quarter. Our Small Business had its fourth consecutive quarter of growth. Wealth Management grew. And we continue to have a very stable growth in just kind of our general Middle Market. What I'd say is non-industry specific. And you put on top of all of that, what we're beginning to see is this turn in kind of our Commercial Real Estate line of business. The story looks pretty attractive for the long haul, I think, for us.

The next question comes from the line of Ken Usdin with Jefferies. Kenneth M. Usdin - Jefferies & Company, Inc., Research Division: A couple more questions on loans. Can you just remind us of the typical seasonal pattern of Dealer Floor Plan and just how underlying trends are going in that business? Ralph W. Babb: Lars? Lars C. Anderson: Sure. Well, typically, what you would see, if you look at the calendar year -- over the years, you would see that inventories would build as you headed earlier in the year in the spring, and then you would see a very active sales season as you headed through the summer. That is both at -- frankly, the consumers are very active in buying, and also, you have an interest in our dealers and clearing the past year's model and making room for the new year model. So that's the typical seasonality that you would see in the business. But we didn't see that last year. So you've got to kind of keep that in mind. Now the second part of your question was about utilization rates. Utilization rates today are at near-record levels for us and I think for the industry, which is a reflection of the strength of the auto industry. You saw June's numbers come out, and annualized sales were 15.9 million units, which I think is very positive. One of the things that I keep a very close eye on is, as those inventories build, is how rapidly they're turning. And what we're seeing is inventories turn in that high 50 to low 60 to 80 kind of range, which over a long period of time is a very healthy number. So I like our business, I like the way that we're positioned and our inventory is turning and our business -- our dealers are doing very, very well. One note I would point out is that our margins on new models and used are getting compressed. It's a very competitive marketplace out there. Kenneth M. Usdin - Jefferies & Company, Inc., Research Division: Yes. And my second question is regarding -- on the Commercial Real Estate business, I'm just wondering how much more runoff you foresee. I know you point out in the deck that the rate of decline continues to slow, but we're still down another $300 million when I look at that total commercial loan number at $9 billion. So at what point do we get to stabilization there? Lars C. Anderson: Yes. So I think it's important to break apart the total commercial loan portfolio because you both have owner-occupied real estate, which frankly, if you think about a big part of our portfolio, Middle Market Banking, these are companies that are delevering. Their credit facilities are owner-occupied or amortizing. Maybe they're even paying them off. And the financing to those same companies is showing up in the expansion of other financing in Middle Market Banking, like revolving credit facilities, import, export facilities. So that could continue to decline. We just really don't know. I think as owner-occupied, as Middle Market companies begin to reinvest in the facilities and expand, then we'll see that grow. The other half of that Commercial Real Estate portfolio is really the professional developer, and this is what we oftentimes talk about. It's very focused on, oftentimes, multi-family. It's urban market oriented. It's the construction portfolio that Karen referenced earlier, as well as our national developer business that does business with some of the best and biggest homebuilders in the country, as well as REITs. And that part of our business, we're actually seeing growth. So I think that, that's very positive for us. And I would expect our Commercial Real Estate professional developer business to continue to grow as we get down on the road. We have very good pipelines in that business. Kenneth M. Usdin - Jefferies & Company, Inc., Research Division: Okay, great. And last quick one just on, Ralph, your earlier comment about companies hopefully using their deposit at some point to invest. Karen mentioned that a lot of this quarter's deposit outflows were more seasonal. But I'm just wondering, underneath the surface, are you seeing any suggestion that companies are, in fact, either drawing down deposits to invest or contemplating drawing down deposits to invest versus taking up the incremental loan? Ralph W. Babb: I think we've seen it in some businesses. I wouldn't call it a trend, but it has, at least, shown a glimmer of hope that investment is starting. Whether it's trend or not, we just don't know. Lars C. Anderson: I think that's right. Where you primarily have seen a reduction in deposit balances has been in general Middle Market Banking. And frankly, that's when -- where we're seeing good, stable loan growth. So I think a number of those companies are putting now liquidity to work.

Your next question comes from the line of Brett Rabatin with Sterne Agee. Brett D. Rabatin - Sterne Agee & Leach Inc., Research Division: I was just hoping to follow up on capital and the provision. From a capital perspective, I was wondering, now that we're getting closer to having full clarity on ratios, what do you think about capital and sort of where things might normalize over the next few years? And then secondly, I just wanted to ask about the provision, and thinking about the guidance for a lower provision for the year and the back half of the year, assuming loan growth is moderate or slow as you indicated, if the provision level might be similar than it was relative to 2Q anyway. Ralph W. Babb: Karen, you want to talk about capital? Karen L. Parkhill: Sure. On capital, we are feeling good that now that the final rules are out, that our capital clearly complies with the rules if they were fully phased in and they don't fully phase in until 2019. So we remain very well capitalized. In terms of where things should normalize, we expect to continue to be well capitalized. And as our capital does grow, we expect to hopefully continue to pay back to shareholders. Does that answer... Ralph W. Babb: John, do you want to... John M. Killian: Talk about provision? Sure, I'd be glad to. I think it's helpful to look at the major proponents of the provision to get a more full understanding of this. So at 15 basis points, net charge-offs are well within the normal ranges, and we expect them to be similar for the rest of the year. We've made great progress in reducing NPLs, but they should still trend a little lower. They're 471 at the end of the second quarter versus 515 at the end of the first. We do expect loan growth to partially offset some of this improvement, which leads us to the bottom line that we expect net charge-offs and provision to look very similar in the second half of the year to our actual results in the first half. Brett D. Rabatin - Sterne Agee & Leach Inc., Research Division: Okay. And maybe a better way to ask it is just that the relative level, assuming you're growing and where the reserve is today, even the credit is improving, would that provision not increase a little bit in the back half of the year relative to the second quarter? John M. Killian: Very difficult to predict how much loan growth we're going to see, so we're pretty comfortable with the guidance that we've instituted today.

Your next question comes from the line of Jon Arfstrom with RBC Capital Markets. Jon G. Arfstrom - RBC Capital Markets, LLC, Research Division: Just a bigger picture loan growth question and then one follow-up. Just a question on the period-end loans being a bit higher, even the Mortgage Banker Finance and then the large increase in the pipeline that you discussed. Is there anything specific going on there? And what's the driver? Ralph W. Babb: Lars? Lars C. Anderson: Yes. Jon, I don't think there's anything that is specific on pretty much what you pointed out. It's what you would typically see. Mortgage Banking Finance and National Dealer were the 2 big drivers for the increase at the end of the quarter. Other than that, I would say it was business as usual. Jon G. Arfstrom - RBC Capital Markets, LLC, Research Division: Okay. And then the pipeline? Lars C. Anderson: Yes. The pipeline was up 10%. It was very broad based in terms of the growth. I think that, that was very positive. And in fact, there was kind of a reverse correlation in the number of businesses that maybe did not grow for the quarter. You saw some pretty good pickups in the pipeline. So I think that, that's a real positive. International finance was up, Technology and Life Sciences, National Dealer Services, Entertainment, Energy, our Middle Market businesses in Texas and Michigan, as well as U.S. banking. So it was very broad based, and we're encouraged with that. If you put that back against the fact that we increased our commitments for the whole portfolio by almost $1 billion in linked quarter, I think that, that paints a pretty positive picture, though, against what's going to be a competitive environment. Jon G. Arfstrom - RBC Capital Markets, LLC, Research Division: Okay. And then just -- this may be subtle but probably monumental from my point of view in that Michigan's no longer your largest loan market for the first time ever, I believe. How is the Michigan pipeline? You seemed pretty optimistic in terms of your prepared comments, but the balances have been a little bit flat. I'm curious how the pipeline is and how you view the loan growth potential of that market. Ralph W. Babb: Michigan is a critical market for us long term. We have very high market shares, great long-term kind of relationships. And as you noted, I mean, in terms of total loan growth, we did not grow in Michigan, though, for the quarter, but in commercial loan growth, we did grow for the quarter. The automotive industry is certainly positively impacting that, so I feel great about the Michigan market. We've got some great bankers, great relationships. But it's clearly closely tied to the automotive industry. So it is -- continues to be a very large Middle Market business, though, for Comerica, and it's going to continue to be an important point of growth for us, I think, in the long haul. It's just not likely to have the same growth rates that you would find in Texas.

Your next question comes from the line of Steve Scinicariello with UBS. Stephen Scinicariello - UBS Investment Bank, Research Division: Yes. Just a real quick question on the loan portfolio mix shift dynamics. Just kind of curious, given some of the turning that you're starting to see in the Commercial Real Estate segments, and do you necessarily need higher rates for that kind of headwind to turn into a tailwind? Or I'm just kind of curious how you're thinking about those portfolio dynamics going forward. Karen L. Parkhill: Yes. There are several things that are going on in the portfolio dynamics that we've talked about before. We've got -- although we only have 15% of our portfolio in fixed-rate loans, those do continue to mature. And we do have the mix shift that you talked about with Commercial Real Estate continuing to come down and C&I continuing to come up. That will eventually turn. As it turns, it will have a positive impact on both our loan growth and on our net interest income. Stephen Scinicariello - UBS Investment Bank, Research Division: Got you. And so just given some of the trends that you're seeing, Lars, do you feel that's something that might be able to kind of happen in this year or is it something maybe farther out? Lars C. Anderson: Well, frankly, in terms of the loan growth in our Commercial Real Estate line of business, I think a longer -- a higher longer-term rate is going to benefit us. You're going to see less activity of our developers moving their balances to the long-term financing market, and I think that's a real plus for us. It's interesting, cap rates have not moved at all. They continue to be very low, so it continues to be a very active market, and we're well positioned in the right markets. Stephen Scinicariello - UBS Investment Bank, Research Division: Got you, got you. And then lastly for me, just on that jump in the pipeline, definitely good to see that. And would you characterize the pipeline still about 2/3 coming from new customers still? Lars C. Anderson: Yes, it's actually declined just a little bit on new customers, just slightly. But I'd say largely, it's still slanted towards new customer relationships. But as I cautioned in the past, just looking at the percentage on pipelines of new versus existing is a little tricky because when you look at the pull-through of the pipeline, it tends to be at much higher multiples with existing customers versus new. And I'm talking multiples of 5x more likely to close business with an existing customer than with a new. But not a material shift, just slight.

Your next question comes from the line of Ryan Nash with Goldman Sachs. Ryan M. Nash - Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Research Division: Just a couple of quick follow-ups. First, Karen, you mentioned that premium amortization was $9 million in the quarter. Can you give us the quarter-over-quarter comparison? What was it the quarter prior? Karen L. Parkhill: We were about the same quarter-to-quarter. Ryan M. Nash - Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Research Division: Great. And in terms of your sensitivity to higher rates, I think you talked about roughly $185 million from 200-basis-point uptick. Can you just remind us, first, what are some of the underlying assumptions for that? And I know you have a slide that you put out in the quarter where you showed it could vary from 145 to 220, depending on what happens with some of the underlying assumptions. And given that we saw a 4% deposit outflows this quarter, I understand some of that is seasonal, how sensitive are we to further outflows of non-interest-bearing deposits? Karen L. Parkhill: Yes, okay. Our rate sensitivity, as you know, is dynamic and does change. It has moved up over the last few quarters because we have greater non-interest-bearing deposits and greater amounts of floating rate loans. And I did share that chart sort of intra-quarter that showed the dynamics and the movement. On the sensitivities, yes, our interest rate sensitivity is based on the assumptions we put into it. Some of the key assumptions in that number are that we do expect deposits to decline. We do expect to have a mix shift in our deposits from non-interest-bearing to interest-bearing as customers search for yield. So we do expect continued loan growth. We expect our securities portfolio to remain relatively stable, but we do expect our excess liquidity to decline but still remain in an excess liquidity position. When we showed the rate sensitivity intra-quarter, we did show that, that interest rate sensitivity could range depending on different deposit outflows and different loan growth. And those sensitivities yielded somewhere between $150 million increase to over $200 million increase depending on the various assumptions that we put in. Ryan M. Nash - Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Research Division: And can you just give us a sense of what you're assuming for competition in those underlying assumptions? I mean, I would assume that if we are to see a pickup, we could see further easing of standards and competition potentially compress spreads, but I would just be interested to hear your underlying assumption. Karen L. Parkhill: Yes, we do assume that rates remain fairly steady from where they are today. There would be a little bit of competition built into that and so a little bit of pressure, but not a lot. Ryan M. Nash - Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Research Division: Okay. And if I could just get one quick follow-up. How much did loan utilization change x the warehouse? Karen L. Parkhill: X the warehouse... Lars C. Anderson: Okay. Yes. If you actually take out the warehouse, we were relatively stable.

The next question comes from the line of Michael Rose with Raymond James. Michael Rose - Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Research Division: Just trying to get a sense on the employee count and kind of where we see that bottoming, where you're still trimming and what areas are you hiring and plan to hire going forward? Karen L. Parkhill: Yes. Our employee count is now just a little over -- a little under 9,000 employees versus slightly over last quarter. So there was a small change in employee count. We are hiring, as we mentioned, to help us work on the stress testing capital plan requirement. At the same time, as we see normal attrition and we try to be focused on being as efficient as possible everywhere that we can. Ralph W. Babb: And we're very focused on our growing markets and making sure that in our appropriate products, we have the necessary expertise and people in place to capitalize on it. Lars C. Anderson: Ralph, an example of that would be we are continuing to invest in our Technology and Life Sciences office. We opened a new office in Houston. We have a new one opening in New York. We're continuing to invest in our general Middle Market businesses and core markets.

Our next question comes from the line of Brian Foran with Autonomous. Brian Foran - Autonomous Research LLP: Just coming back to this capital question and what's the right level to run out long term. When I think about the Basel III progression, we kind of all came to grips a couple of years ago with the minimums and then this kind of buffer on the buffer concept emerged where banks would have to carry an extra 50 bps or so for mostly AOCI risk. With the AOCI opt out, I really should not kind of given the spot level you're going to run down to. But with the AOCI opt out, do you kind of get to throw away that buffer on the buffer concept or are there enough other things like the stress test uncertainty every year that you feel like even without AOCI to worry about it, it makes sense to carry an extra buffer? Ralph W. Babb: I think you will have an extra buffer. The question is how much for us, longer term, as an individual bank. And we need some time to look at that as it phases in. And I think we will eventually get back to where we were before the downturn where we looked at and actually shared what our -- where we wanted to be from a capital standpoint so that investors understood what we were thinking about for payouts longer term.

Our next question comes from the line of Brian Klock with Keefe, Bruyette, Woods. Brian Klock - Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc., Research Division: And really just maybe just a quick follow-up on capital. I think we've asked you every question we possibly can on the past hour. So maybe I guess Karen and Ralph, thinking about the buyback, and obviously, buffers are -- now you guys have a significant amount of excess capital still, at least in my opinion, even when you get to Basel III. I guess maybe talk about the idea and your thought process with the buyback. And obviously, it was somewhat of a no-brainer when the stock is below tangible book, but given the run in the shares this year, I guess how are you thinking about the incremental capital you're deploying, the return you're getting on that growth organically versus the buyback and then even thinking about the potential for acquisitions, so maybe you can kind of talk about now how you're thinking about the buyback going forward. Ralph W. Babb: Karen, you want to start? Karen L. Parkhill: Sure, happy to. So we are disciplined around our buyback. We do look at it as a use of capital. And like any other competing use of capital, it should have an internal rate of return above our cost of capital. We do have an analysis and a model that looks at that, and we are disciplined about it. We're not going to tell you what the output of that model is, but we will say at the current stock price, we feel very comfortable continuing to buy back our stock. Brian Klock - Keefe, Bruyette, & Woods, Inc., Research Division: Okay. And then I guess Ralph, I guess what do you think about potentials for acquisitions versus organic? Ralph W. Babb: Well, first of all, I would say as I've said in the past, I'm very comfortable with where our footprint is today, both in California and Texas and Michigan. And therefore, internal growth is a very good strategy for us. That's not to say that there wouldn't be possibilities for an acquisition if it were in the right places in one of those markets from that standpoint. And then you'd have to look at it from all of the other focuses as well, price and the culture of the given potential acquisition and whether it fits in that market.

The next question comes from the line of Matt Burnell with Wells Fargo Securities. Matthew H. Burnell - Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Research Division: Sorry to pile on but 2 quickies here. You mentioned the trends in dealer finance all looked very positive. You've seen 19 -- nearly 20% year-over-year growth in that portfolio. I guess I'm just curious what your outlook is over the next year for demand in that business. Do you -- are you expecting continued high teens growth in that business or is there the potential that, that could slow down? Ralph W. Babb: Yes. So just from an accuracy perspective, there's actually about a 24% year-over-year growth in the portfolio. But it's a business that if we look at it historically, we're running at numbers that were like 2008 both from outstandings perspective utilization. We feel very comfortable with that as a company where it is today. I'm expecting, as we talked about earlier, that some of the seasonality will moderate some of those balances as we head into next year. But clearly, 2014's annual sales rate on auto sales is going to have an impact on the outstandings likely for our dealers and will impact us on the longer term in terms of our growth profile of the business. Matthew H. Burnell - Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Research Division: Lars, you mentioned earlier you expected prepayment fees to stabilize. And I guess I'm just curious, over the last couple of years, as you've seen increased competition for Middle Market loans, have you been -- have your competitors been forcing you to move away from prepayment fees on some of your commitments or have you held pretty firm on that? Lars C. Anderson: It's -- when I refer to structure, that's one of those things that go into that basket. That's a good insight. We obviously try to build in a prepayment penalty into every transaction and every relationship we can because there is a cost of liquidity associated with it. But it's part of the larger pricing of the overall relationship that we have. But I would say from a general industry perspective that, that is clearly kind of an area that has given along with durations and advanced rates and a number of other areas. But for us, we've really stayed the course. We've been very disciplined. And frankly, we could have had a lot more growth in some of our businesses if we were willing to kind of reach outside of our traditional risk management, relationship pricing box, but that's what got us here. We think it positions us well for the long haul. And frankly, our customers appreciate what we deliver, so I think we're well positioned.

The next question comes from the line Bob Ramsey with FBR. Bob Ramsey - FBR Capital Markets & Co., Research Division: Just real quick, a couple of questions on the guidance. The net interest income expectation where that's trended lower. If you strip out the purchase accounting accretion piece of that, is there a sort of core net interest income? Has it reached a level where the growth offsets expected compression? Or would that continue to trend lower as well? Ralph W. Babb: Karen? Karen L. Parkhill: Yes. That's difficult to say. But as you've seen in the last couple of quarters, the vast majority of our decline on net interest income has been due to accretion. And so the other impacts on the portfolio have been slowing, and at some point, should turn. Bob Ramsey - FBR Capital Markets & Co., Research Division: Okay. And then last question, maybe if you could expand a little bit on the loan growth expectation. I mean, the commentary overall seems to be that market conditions are improving and that line utilization is up. You've got a record pipeline, and yet, you all are saying you expect growth at a slower pace going forward. And I just was hoping maybe you could reconcile those 2 points of view. Karen L. Parkhill: Yes. Keep in mind that our outlook is a full year to full year outlook. So when we look at 2011 and 2012, we did have robust loan growth. And in 2012 to 2013, we're expecting continued loan growth but at a slower pace than the prior year. So that would be our overall outlook. And yes, we do have some positive signs that we talked about on loan growth going forward through the back half of the year, but remember that, that's against the backdrop of a slow economy and a very competitive environment, under which we expect to maintain our pricing structure discipline. Lars C. Anderson: Yes. And Karen, and one last thing I'd add on to that. You mentioned line utilization being -- remember, line utilization, when you adjust really for the end of period dealer Mortgage Banker Finance, it was really flat.

Your next question comes from the line of Terry McEvoy with Oppenheimer. Terence J. McEvoy - Oppenheimer & Co. Inc., Research Division: Just one last thing on my list. In the release, it was mentioned that the provision connected to the Mortgage Banker Finance book increased in the second quarter. I was wondering, did the rapid move up in rates pose additional credit risk to those borrowers? And have you taken a closer look at that customer base with a potential of weeding through some of those weaker borrowers that could add to the potential decline in that book in the back half of this year? Ralph W. Babb: John? John M. Killian: Terry, no, it really wouldn't add to the additional risk in that business. Our Mortgage Banker Finance business is completely a warehouse business. So to the extent that their loan balances are up in the reserve methodology, they get a higher standard loss factor. But there's no real impact other than that.

Your final question comes from the line of Gary Tenner with D.A. Davidson. Gary P. Tenner - D.A. Davidson & Co., Research Division: Guys, I'll let you off the hook. I think all my questions have been answered at this point.

And that does close our Q&A presentation. I'd now like to turn this call back to Mr. Ralph Babb for closing remarks. Ralph W. Babb: I would just like to thank everybody for being on the call this morning and their interest in Comerica. We appreciate it very much and hope everyone has a good day. Thank you.

And ladies and gentlemen, this concludes today's presentation. We thank you for joining. You may now disconnect.