each year end.

Holding all other assumptions constant, the effect of a 0.5 percentage-point decline in the return-on-assets assumption would increase our 2011 U.S. qualified pension plans’ pre-tax expense by approximately $49 million.

The discount rate used in calculating our U.S. defined benefit plan obligations as of December 31, 2010, is 5.9%, which represents a 0.4 percentage-point decrease from our December 31, 2009, rate of 6.3%. The discount rate for our U.S. defined benefit plans is based on a bond model constructed from a portfolio of high-quality corporate bonds rated AA or better for which the timing and amount of cash flows approximate the estimated payouts of the plans. For our international plans, the discount rates are set by benchmarking against investment grade corporate bonds rated AA or better, including where there is sufficient data, a yield curve approach. Holding all other assumptions constant, the effect of a 0.1 percentage-point decrease in the discount rate assumption would increase our 2011 U.S. qualified pension plans’ pre-tax expense by approximately $27 million and increase the U.S. qualified pension plans’ projected benefit obligations as of December 31, 2010, by approximately $221 million.

Asset Impairment Reviews—Long-Lived Assets

We review all of our long-lived assets, including goodwill and other intangible assets, for impairment indicators throughout the year and we perform detailed impairment testing for goodwill and indefinite-lived assets annually and for all other long-lived assets whenever impairment indicators are present. When necessary, we record charges for impairments of long-lived assets for the amount by which the fair value is less than the carrying value of these assets.

Examples of events or circumstances that may be indicative of impairment include:

• A significant adverse change in legal factors or in the business climate that could affect the value of the asset. For example, a successful challenge of our patent rights likely would result in generic competition earlier than expected.

• A significant adverse change in the extent or manner in which an asset is used. For example, restrictions imposed by the FDA or other regulatory authorities could affect our ability to manufacture or sell a product.

• A projection or forecast that demonstrates losses or reduced profits associated with an asset. This could result, for example, from a change in a government reimbursement program that results in an inability to sustain projected product revenues and profitability. This also could result from the introduction of a competitor’s product that results in a significant loss of market share or the inability to achieve the previously projected revenue growth, as well as the lack of acceptance of a product by patients, physicians and payers. For IPR&D projects, this could result from, among other things, a change in outlook based on clinical trial data, a delay in the projected launch date or additional expenditures to commercialize the product.

When determining fair value, any single estimate of fair value results from a complex series of judgments about future events and uncertainties and