pre_text: notes to consolidated financial statements regulatory tax examinations the firm is subject to examination by the u.s . internal revenue service ( irs ) and other taxing authorities in jurisdictions where the firm has significant business operations , such as the united kingdom , japan , hong kong , korea and various states , such as new york . the tax years under examination vary by jurisdiction . the firm believes that during 2013 , certain audits have a reasonable possibility of being completed . the firm does not expect completion of these audits to have a material impact on the firm 2019s financial condition but it may be material to operating results for a particular period , depending , in part , on the operating results for that period . the table below presents the earliest tax years that remain subject to examination by major jurisdiction . jurisdiction december 2012 u.s . federal 1 2005 new york state and city 2 2004 .
post_text: 1 . irs examination of fiscal 2008 through calendar 2010 began during 2011 . irs examination of fiscal 2005 , 2006 and 2007 began during 2008 . irs examination of fiscal 2003 and 2004 has been completed , but the liabilities for those years are not yet final . the firm anticipates that the audits of fiscal 2005 through calendar 2010 should be completed during 2013 , and the audits of 2011 through 2012 should begin in 2013 . 2 . new york state and city examination of fiscal 2004 , 2005 and 2006 began in 2008 . 3 . japan national tax agency examination of fiscal 2005 through 2009 began in 2010 . the examinations have been completed , but the liabilities for 2008 and 2009 are not yet final . all years subsequent to the above remain open to examination by the taxing authorities . the firm believes that the liability for unrecognized tax benefits it has established is adequate in relation to the potential for additional assessments . in january 2013 , the firm was accepted into the compliance assurance process program by the irs . this program will allow the firm to work with the irs to identify and resolve potential u.s . federal tax issues before the filing of tax returns . the 2013 tax year will be the first year examined under the program . note 25 . business segments the firm reports its activities in the following four business segments : investment banking , institutional client services , investing & lending and investment management . basis of presentation in reporting segments , certain of the firm 2019s business lines have been aggregated where they have similar economic characteristics and are similar in each of the following areas : ( i ) the nature of the services they provide , ( ii ) their methods of distribution , ( iii ) the types of clients they serve and ( iv ) the regulatory environments in which they operate . the cost drivers of the firm taken as a whole 2014 compensation , headcount and levels of business activity 2014 are broadly similar in each of the firm 2019s business segments . compensation and benefits expenses in the firm 2019s segments reflect , among other factors , the overall performance of the firm as well as the performance of individual businesses . consequently , pre-tax margins in one segment of the firm 2019s business may be significantly affected by the performance of the firm 2019s other business segments . the firm allocates assets ( including allocations of excess liquidity and cash , secured client financing and other assets ) , revenues and expenses among the four reportable business segments . due to the integrated nature of these segments , estimates and judgments are made in allocating certain assets , revenues and expenses . transactions between segments are based on specific criteria or approximate third-party rates . total operating expenses include corporate items that have not been allocated to individual business segments . the allocation process is based on the manner in which management currently views the performance of the segments . goldman sachs 2012 annual report 195 .
table: Jurisdiction As of  December 2012
table: U.S. Federal<sup>1</sup> 2005
table: New York State and City<sup>2</sup> 2004
table: United Kingdom 2007
table: Japan<sup>3</sup> 2008
table: Hong Kong 2005
table: Korea 2008
question: Analyse this data from a financial earnings document. how many years longer is the u.s . federal exam than the new york state and city exam?