COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES (Note)	3 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies [Note Text Block]	Guarantees In connection with sales of businesses, property, equipment, forestlands and other assets, International Paper commonly makes representations and warranties relating to such businesses or assets, and may agree to indemnify buyers with respect to tax and environmental liabilities, breaches of representations and warranties, and other matters. Where liabilities for such matters are determined to be probable and reasonably estimable, accrued liabilities are recorded at the time of sale as a cost of the transaction. Brazil Goodwill Tax Matter: The Brazilian Federal Revenue Service has challenged the deductibility of goodwill amortization generated in a 2007 acquisition by Sylvamo do Brasil Ltda. ("Sylvamo Brazil"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, until the October 1, 2021 spin-off of the Printing Papers business after which it became a subsidiary of Sylvamo. Sylvamo Brazil received assessments for the tax years 2007-2015 totaling approximately $111 million in tax, and $375 million in interest, penalties, and fees as of March 31, 2023 (adjusted for variation in currency exchange rates). After an initial favorable ruling challenging the basis for these assessments, Sylvamo Brazil received subsequent unfavorable decisions from the Brazilian Administrative Council of Tax Appeals. Sylvamo Brazil has appealed these decisions and intends to appeal any future unfavorable administrative judgments to the Brazilian federal courts; however, this tax litigation matter may take many years to resolve. Sylvamo Brazil and International Paper believe the transaction underlying these assessments was appropriately evaluated, and that Sylvamo Brazil's tax position would be sustained, based on Brazilian tax law. This matter pertains to a business that was conveyed to Sylvamo as of October 1, 2021, as part of our spin-off transaction. Pursuant to the terms of the tax matters agreement entered into between the Company and Sylvamo, the Company will pay 60% and Sylvamo will pay 40%, on up to $300 million of any assessment related to this matter, and the Company will pay all amounts of the assessment over $300 million. Under the terms of the agreement, decisions concerning the conduct of the litigation related to this matter, including strategy, settlement, pursuit and abandonment, will be made by the Company. Sylvamo thus has no control over any decision related to this ongoing litigation. The Company intends to vigorously defend this historic tax position against the current assessments and any similar assessments that may be issued for tax years subsequent to 2015. The Brazilian government may enact a tax amnesty program that would allow Sylvamo Brazil to resolve this dispute for less than the assessed amount. As of October 1, 2021, in connection with the recording of the distribution of assets and liabilities resulting from the spin-off transaction, the Company established a liability representing the initial fair value of the contingent liability under the tax matters agreement. The contingent liability was determined in accordance with ASC 460 "Guarantees" based on the probability weighting of various possible outcomes. The initial fair value estimate and recorded liability as of December 31, 2022 was $48 million and remains this amount at March 31, 2023. This liability will not be increased in subsequent periods unless facts and circumstances change such that an amount greater than the initial recognized liability becomes probable and estimable. Environmental The Company has been named as a potentially responsible party (PRP) in environmental remediation actions under various federal and state laws, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). Many of these proceedings involve the cleanup of hazardous substances at large commercial landfills that received waste from many different sources. While joint and several liability is authorized under CERCLA and equivalent state laws, as a practical matter, liability for CERCLA cleanups is typically allocated among the many PRPs. There are other remediation costs typically associated with the cleanup of hazardous substances at the Company’s current, closed and formerly-owned facilities, and recorded as liabilities in the balance sheet. Remediation costs are recorded in the consolidated financial statements when they become probable and reasonably estimable. International Paper has estimated the probable liability associated with these environmental remediation matters, including those described herein, to be approximately $240 million ($248 million undiscounted) in the aggregate as of March 31, 2023. Other than as described below, completion of required environmental remedial actions is not expected to have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements. Cass Lake: One of the matters included above arises out of a closed wood-treatment facility located in Cass Lake, Minnesota. In June 2011, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) selected and published a proposed soil remedy at the site with an estimated cost of $46 million. In April 2020, the EPA issued a final plan concerning clean-up standards at a portion of the site, the estimated cost of which is included within the soil remedy referenced above. Kalamazoo River: The Company is a PRP with respect to the Allied Paper, Inc./Portage Creek/Kalamazoo River Superfund Site in Michigan. The EPA asserts that the site is contaminated by polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) primarily as a result of discharges from various paper mills located along the Kalamazoo River, including a paper mill formerly owned by St. Regis Paper Company (St. Regis). The Company is a successor in interest to St. Regis. •Operable Unit 5, Area 1: In March 2016, the Company and other PRPs received a special notice letter from the EPA (i) inviting participation in implementing a remedy for a portion of the site known as Operable Unit 5, Area 1, and (ii) demanding reimbursement of EPA past costs totaling $37 million, including $19 million in past costs previously demanded by the EPA. The Company responded to the special notice letter. In December 2016, the EPA issued a unilateral administrative order to the Company and other PRPs to perform the remedy. The Company responded to the unilateral administrative order, agreeing to comply with the order subject to its sufficient cause defenses. •Operable Unit 1: In October 2016, the Company and another PRP received a special notice letter from the EPA inviting participation in the remedial design (RD) component of the landfill remedy for the Allied Paper Mill, which is also known as Operable Unit 1. The Record of Decision (ROD) establishing the final landfill remedy for the Allied Paper Mill was issued by the EPA in September 2016. The Company responded to the Allied Paper Mill special notice letter in December 2016. In February 2017, the EPA informed the Company that it would make other arrangements for the performance of the RD. In the summer 2021, remedial action (RA) activities were initiated by the EPA. In October 2022, the Company received a unilateral administrative order to perform the RA. As a result, the Company increased its reserve by $27 million in the fourth quarter of 2022. The total reserve for the Kalamazoo River superfund site was $37 million as of March 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022. In addition, in December 2019, the United States published notice in the Federal Register of a proposed consent decree with NCR Corporation (one of the parties to the allocation/apportionment litigation described below), the State of Michigan and natural resource trustees under which NCR would make payments of more than $100 million and perform work in Operable Unit 5, Areas 2, 3, and 4 at an estimated cost of $136 million. In December 2020, the Federal District Court approved the proposed consent decree. The Company’s CERCLA liability has not been finally determined with respect to these or any other portions of the site, and except as noted above, the Company has declined to perform any work or reimburse the EPA at this time. As noted below, the Company is involved in allocation/apportionment litigation with regard to the site. Accordingly, it is premature to predict the outcome or estimate our maximum reasonably possible loss or range of loss with respect to this site. We have recorded a liability for future remediation costs at the site that are probable and reasonably estimable, and it remains reasonably possible that additional losses in excess of this recorded liability could be material. The Company was named as a defendant by Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP, Fort James Corporation and Georgia Pacific LLC (collectively, GP) in a contribution and cost recovery action for alleged pollution at the site. NCR Corporation and Weyerhaeuser Company are also named as defendants in the suit. The suit seeks contribution under CERCLA for costs purportedly expended by plaintiffs ($79 million as of the filing of the complaint) and for future remediation costs. In June 2018, the Court issued its Final Judgment and Order, which fixed the past cost amount at approximately $50 million (plus interest to be determined) and allocated to the Company a 15% share of responsibility for those past costs. The Court did not address responsibility for future costs in its decision. In July 2018, the Company and each of the other parties filed notices appealing the Final Judgment and prior orders incorporated into that Judgment. On April 25, 2022, the appellate court reversed the Judgment of the Court, finding that the suit against the Company was time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations. On May 9, 2022, GP filed a petition for remaining with the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Sixth Circuit issued an order denying GP's petition on July 14, 2022. On November 14, 2022, GP filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court. The Company has filed a brief in opposition to this writ. Harris County: International Paper and McGinnis Industrial Maintenance Corporation (MIMC), a subsidiary of Waste Management, Inc. (WMI), are PRPs at the San Jacinto River Waste Pits Superfund Site in Harris County, Texas. The PRPs have been actively participating in the activities at the site and share the costs of these activities. In October 2017, the EPA issued a ROD selecting the final remedy for the site: removal and relocation of the waste material from both the northern and southern impoundments. The EPA did not specify the methods or practices needed to perform this work. The EPA’s selected remedy was accompanied by a cost estimate of approximately $115 million ($105 million for the northern impoundment, and $10 million for the southern impoundment). Subsequent to the issuance of the ROD, there have been numerous meetings between the EPA and the PRPs, and the Company continues to work with the EPA and MIMC/WMI to develop the remedial design. To this end, in April 2018, the PRPs entered into an Administrative Order on Consent (AOC) with the EPA, agreeing to work together to develop the remedial design for the northern impoundment. That remedial design work is ongoing. The AOC does not include any agreement to perform waste removal or other construction activity at the site. Rather, it involves adaptive management techniques and a pre-design investigation, the objectives of which include filling data gaps (including but not limited to post-Hurricane Harvey technical data generated prior to the ROD and not incorporated into the selected remedy), refining areas and volumes of materials to be addressed, determining if an excavation remedy is able to be implemented in a manner protective of human health and the environment, and investigating potential impacts of remediation activities to infrastructure in the vicinity. During the first quarter of 2020, through a series of meetings among the Company, MIMC/WMI, our consultants, the EPA and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), progress was made to resolve key technical issues previously preventing the Company from determining the manner in which the selected remedy for the northern impoundment would be feasibly implemented. As a result of these developments, the Company reserved the following amounts in relation to remediation at this site: (a) $10 million for the southern impoundment; and (b) $55 million for the northern impoundment, which represents the Company's 50% share of our estimate of the low end of the range of probable remediation costs. We submitted the Final Design Package for the southern impoundment to the EPA, and the EPA approved this plan May 7, 2021. The EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order for Remedial Action of the southern impoundment on August 5, 2021. An addendum to the Final 100% Remedial Design (Amended April 2021) was submitted to the EPA for the southern impoundment on June 2, 2022. This addendum incorporated additional data collected to date which indicated that additional waste material removal will be required, lengthening the time to complete the remedial action. With respect to the northern impoundment, the respondents submitted final component of the 90% remedial design to the EPA on November 8, 2022. Upon submittal of the final component, an updated engineering estimate was developed and the Company increased the reserved amount by approximately $21 million, which represents the Company's 50% share of our estimate of the low end of the range of probable remediation costs. While several key technical issues have been resolved, respondents still face significant challenges remediating this area in a cost-efficient manner and without a release to the environment, and therefore our discussions with the EPA on the best approach to remediation will continue. Because of ongoing questions regarding cost effectiveness, timing and gathering other technical data, additional losses in excess of our recorded liability are possible. The total reserve for the southern and northern impoundment was $95 million as of both March 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022. Asbestos-Related Matters We have been named as a defendant in various asbestos-related personal injury litigation, in both state and federal court, primarily in relation to the prior operations of certain companies previously acquired by the Company. The Company's total recorded liability with respect to pending and future asbestos-related claims was $107 million, net of estimated insurance recoveries and $105 million, net of estimated insurance recoveries as of March 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022, respectively. While it is reasonably possible that the Company may incur losses in excess of its recorded liability with respect to asbestos-related matters, we are unable to estimate any loss or range of loss in excess of such liability, and do not believe additional material losses are probable. Antitrust In March 2017, the Italian Competition Authority (ICA) commenced an investigation into the Italian packaging industry to determine whether producers of corrugated sheets and boxes violated the applicable European competition law. In April 2019, the ICA concluded its investigation and issued initial findings alleging that over 30 producers, including our Italian packaging subsidiary (IP Italy), improperly coordinated the production and sale of corrugated sheets and boxes. In August 2019, the ICA issued its decision and assessed IP Italy a fine of €29 million (approximately $31 million at the then-current exchange rates) which was recorded in the third quarter of 2019. We appealed the ICA decision and our appeal was denied in May 2021. We further appealed the decision to the Italian Council of State, and in March 2023 the Council of State largely upheld the ICA’s findings, but referred the calculation of IP Italy’s fine back to the ICA, finding that it was disproportionately high based on the conduct found. We are evaluating whether to further appeal the Italian Council of State decision to uphold the ICA’s findings. The Company and other producers also have been named in lawsuits, and we have received other claims, by a number of customers in Italy for damages associated with the alleged anticompetitive conduct. We do not believe material losses arising from such private lawsuits and claims are probable. GeneralThe Company is involved in various other inquiries, administrative proceedings and litigation relating to environmental and safety matters, personal injury, product liability, labor and employment, contracts, sales of property, intellectual property, tax, and other matters, some of which allege substantial monetary damages. Assessments of lawsuits and claims can involve a series of complex judgments about future events, can rely heavily on estimates and assumptions, and are otherwise subject to significant uncertainties. As a result, there can be no certainty that the Company will not ultimately incur charges in excess of presently recorded liabilities. The Company believes that loss contingencies arising from pending matters including the matters described herein, will not have a material effect on the consolidated financial position or liquidity of the Company. However, in light of the inherent uncertainties involved in pending or threatened legal matters, some of which are beyond the Company's control, and the large or indeterminate damages sought in some of these matters, a future adverse ruling, settlement, unfavorable development, or increase in accruals with respect to these matters could result in future charges that could be material to the Company's results of operations or cash flows in any particular reporting period.

In connection with sales of businesses, property, equipment, forestlands and other assets, International Paper commonly makes representations and warranties relating to such businesses or assets, and may agree to indemnify buyers with respect to tax and environmental liabilities, breaches of representations and warranties, and other matters. Where liabilities for such matters are determined to be probable and reasonably estimable, accrued liabilities are recorded at the time of sale as a cost of the transaction.

Brazil Goodwill Tax Matter: The Brazilian Federal Revenue Service has challenged the deductibility of goodwill amortization generated in a 2007 acquisition by Sylvamo do Brasil Ltda. ("Sylvamo Brazil"), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, until the October 1, 2021 spin-off of the Printing Papers business after which it became a subsidiary of Sylvamo. Sylvamo Brazil received assessments for the tax years 2007-2015 totaling approximately $111 million in tax, and $375 million in interest, penalties, and fees as of March 31, 2023 (adjusted for variation in currency exchange rates). After an initial favorable ruling challenging the basis for these assessments, Sylvamo Brazil received subsequent unfavorable decisions from the Brazilian Administrative Council of Tax Appeals. Sylvamo Brazil has appealed these decisions and intends to appeal any future unfavorable administrative judgments to the Brazilian federal courts; however, this tax litigation matter may take many years to resolve. Sylvamo Brazil and International Paper believe the transaction underlying these assessments was appropriately evaluated, and that Sylvamo Brazil's tax position would be sustained, based on Brazilian tax law.

This matter pertains to a business that was conveyed to Sylvamo as of October 1, 2021, as part of our spin-off transaction. Pursuant to the terms of the tax matters agreement entered into between the Company and Sylvamo, the Company will pay 60% and Sylvamo will pay 40%, on up to $300 million of any assessment related to this matter, and the Company will pay all amounts of the assessment over $300 million. Under the terms of the agreement, decisions concerning the conduct of the litigation related to this matter, including strategy, settlement, pursuit and abandonment, will be made by the Company. Sylvamo thus has no control over any decision related to this ongoing litigation. The Company intends to vigorously defend this historic tax position against the current assessments and any similar assessments that may be issued for tax years subsequent to 2015. The Brazilian government may enact a tax amnesty program that would allow Sylvamo Brazil to resolve this dispute for less than the assessed amount. As of October 1, 2021, in connection with the recording of the distribution of assets and liabilities resulting from the spin-off transaction, the Company established a liability representing the initial fair value of the contingent liability under the tax matters agreement. The contingent liability was determined in accordance with ASC 460 "Guarantees" based on the probability weighting of various possible outcomes. The initial fair value estimate and recorded liability as of December 31, 2022 was $48 million and remains this amount at March 31, 2023. This liability will not be increased in subsequent periods unless facts and circumstances change such that an amount greater than the initial recognized liability becomes probable and estimable.

The Company has been named as a potentially responsible party (PRP) in environmental remediation actions under various federal and state laws, including the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). Many of these proceedings involve the cleanup of hazardous substances at large commercial landfills that received waste from many different sources. While joint and several liability is authorized under CERCLA and equivalent state laws, as a practical matter, liability for CERCLA cleanups is typically allocated among the many PRPs. There are other remediation costs typically associated with the cleanup of hazardous substances at the Company’s current, closed and formerly-owned facilities, and recorded as liabilities in the balance sheet.

Remediation costs are recorded in the consolidated financial statements when they become probable and reasonably estimable. International Paper has estimated the probable liability associated with these environmental remediation matters, including those described herein, to be approximately $240 million ($248 million undiscounted) in the aggregate as of March 31, 2023. Other than as described below, completion of required environmental remedial actions is not expected to have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements.

Cass Lake: One of the matters included above arises out of a closed wood-treatment facility located in Cass Lake, Minnesota. In June 2011, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) selected and published a proposed soil remedy at the site with an estimated cost of $46 million. In April 2020, the EPA issued a final plan concerning clean-up standards at a portion of the site, the estimated cost of which is included within the soil remedy referenced above.

•Operable Unit 5, Area 1: In March 2016, the Company and other PRPs received a special notice letter from the EPA (i) inviting participation in implementing a remedy for a portion of the site known as Operable Unit 5, Area 1, and (ii) demanding reimbursement of EPA past costs totaling $37 million, including $19 million in past costs previously demanded by the EPA. The Company responded to the special notice letter. In December 2016, the EPA issued a unilateral administrative order to the Company and other PRPs to perform the remedy. The Company responded to the unilateral administrative order, agreeing to comply with the order subject to its sufficient cause defenses.

•Operable Unit 1: In October 2016, the Company and another PRP received a special notice letter from the EPA inviting participation in the remedial design (RD) component of the landfill remedy for the Allied Paper Mill, which is also known as Operable Unit 1. The Record of Decision (ROD) establishing the final landfill remedy for the Allied Paper Mill was issued by the EPA in September 2016. The Company responded to the Allied Paper Mill special notice letter in December 2016. In February 2017, the EPA informed the Company that it would make other arrangements for the performance of the RD. In the summer 2021, remedial action (RA) activities were initiated by the EPA. In October 2022, the Company received a unilateral administrative order to perform the RA. As a result, the Company increased its reserve by $27 million in the fourth quarter of 2022. The total reserve for the Kalamazoo River superfund site was $37 million as of March 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022.

In addition, in December 2019, the United States published notice in the Federal Register of a proposed consent decree with NCR Corporation (one of the parties to the allocation/apportionment litigation described below), the State of Michigan and natural resource trustees under which NCR would make payments of more than $100 million and perform work in Operable Unit 5, Areas 2, 3, and 4 at an estimated cost of $136 million. In December 2020, the Federal District Court approved the proposed consent decree.

The Company’s CERCLA liability has not been finally determined with respect to these or any other portions of the site, and except as noted above, the Company has declined to perform any work or reimburse the EPA at this time. As noted below, the Company is involved in allocation/apportionment litigation with regard to the site. Accordingly, it is premature to predict the outcome or estimate our maximum reasonably possible loss or range of loss with respect to this site. We have recorded a liability for future remediation costs at the site that are probable and reasonably estimable, and it remains reasonably possible that additional losses in excess of this recorded liability could be material.

The Company was named as a defendant by Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP, Fort James Corporation and Georgia Pacific LLC (collectively, GP) in a contribution and cost recovery action for alleged pollution at the site. NCR Corporation and Weyerhaeuser Company are also named as defendants in the suit. The suit seeks contribution under CERCLA for costs purportedly expended by plaintiffs ($79 million as of the filing of the complaint) and for future remediation costs. In June 2018, the Court issued its Final Judgment and Order, which fixed the past cost amount at approximately $50 million (plus interest to be determined) and allocated to the Company a 15% share of responsibility for those past costs. The Court did not address responsibility for future costs in its decision. In July 2018, the Company and each of the other parties filed notices appealing the Final Judgment and prior orders incorporated into that Judgment. On April 25, 2022, the appellate court reversed the Judgment of the Court, finding that the suit against the Company was time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations. On May 9, 2022, GP filed a petition for remaining with the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Sixth Circuit issued an order denying GP's petition on July 14, 2022. On November 14, 2022, GP filed a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court. The Company has filed a brief in opposition to this writ.

In October 2017, the EPA issued a ROD selecting the final remedy for the site: removal and relocation of the waste material from both the northern and southern impoundments. The EPA did not specify the methods or practices needed to perform this work. The EPA’s selected remedy was accompanied by a cost estimate of approximately $115 million ($105 million for the northern impoundment, and $10 million for the southern impoundment). Subsequent to the issuance of the ROD, there have been numerous meetings between the EPA and the PRPs, and the Company continues to work with the EPA and MIMC/WMI to develop the remedial design.

not include any agreement to perform waste removal or other construction activity at the site. Rather, it involves adaptive management techniques and a pre-design investigation, the objectives of which include filling data gaps (including but not limited to post-Hurricane Harvey technical data generated prior to the ROD and not incorporated into the selected remedy), refining areas and volumes of materials to be addressed, determining if an excavation remedy is able to be implemented in a manner protective of human health and the environment, and investigating potential impacts of remediation activities to infrastructure in the vicinity.

During the first quarter of 2020, through a series of meetings among the Company, MIMC/WMI, our consultants, the EPA and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), progress was made to resolve key technical issues previously preventing the Company from determining the manner in which the selected remedy for the northern impoundment would be feasibly implemented. As a result of these developments, the Company reserved the following amounts in relation to remediation at this site: (a) $10 million for the southern impoundment; and (b) $55 million for the northern impoundment, which represents the Company's 50% share of our estimate of the low end of the range of probable remediation costs.

We submitted the Final Design Package for the southern impoundment to the EPA, and the EPA approved this plan May 7, 2021. The EPA issued a Unilateral Administrative Order for Remedial Action of the southern impoundment on August 5, 2021. An addendum to the Final 100% Remedial Design (Amended April 2021) was submitted to the EPA for the southern impoundment on June 2, 2022. This addendum incorporated additional data collected to date which indicated that additional waste material removal will be required, lengthening the time to complete the remedial action.

With respect to the northern impoundment, the respondents submitted final component of the 90% remedial design to the EPA on November 8, 2022. Upon submittal of the final component, an updated engineering estimate was developed and the Company increased the reserved amount by approximately $21 million, which represents the Company's 50% share of our estimate of the low end of the range of probable remediation costs. While several key technical issues have been resolved, respondents still face significant challenges remediating this area in a cost-efficient manner and without a release to the environment, and therefore our discussions with the EPA on the best approach to remediation will continue. Because of ongoing questions regarding cost effectiveness, timing and gathering other technical data, additional losses in excess of our recorded liability are possible. The total reserve for the southern and northern impoundment was $95 million as of both March 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022.

We have been named as a defendant in various asbestos-related personal injury litigation, in both state and federal court, primarily in relation to the prior operations of certain companies previously acquired by the Company. The Company's total recorded liability with respect to pending and future asbestos-related claims was $107 million, net of estimated insurance recoveries and $105 million, net of estimated insurance recoveries as of March 31, 2023 and December 31, 2022, respectively. While it is reasonably possible that the Company may incur losses in excess of its recorded liability with respect to asbestos-related matters, we are unable to estimate any loss or range of loss in excess of such liability, and do not believe additional material losses are probable.

In March 2017, the Italian Competition Authority (ICA) commenced an investigation into the Italian packaging industry to determine whether producers of corrugated sheets and boxes violated the applicable European competition law. In April 2019, the ICA concluded its investigation and issued initial findings alleging that over 30 producers, including our Italian packaging subsidiary (IP Italy), improperly coordinated the production and sale of corrugated sheets and boxes. In August 2019, the ICA issued its decision and assessed IP Italy a fine of €29 million (approximately $31 million at the then-current exchange rates) which was recorded in the third quarter of 2019. We appealed the ICA decision and our appeal was denied in May 2021. We further appealed the decision to the Italian Council of State, and in March 2023 the Council of State largely upheld the ICA’s findings, but referred the calculation of IP Italy’s fine back to the ICA, finding that it was disproportionately high based on the conduct found. We are evaluating whether to further appeal the Italian Council of State decision to uphold the ICA’s findings. The Company and other producers also have been named in lawsuits, and we have received other claims, by a number of customers in Italy for damages associated with the alleged anticompetitive conduct. We do not believe material losses arising from such private lawsuits and claims are probable.