111  / SERVICE EXCELLENCE Maintaining and operating the leased assets according to specific contractual obligations outlined in the terms of the lease agreements and industry standards is the Company’s responsibility. The rigour of the contractual terms of the lease agreements and industry standards are such that the Company has limited discretion over the maintenance activities associated with these assets. As such, the Company concluded these terms do not provide the Company with the power to direct the activities of the variable interest entities in a way that has a significant impact on the entities’ economic performance. The financial exposure to the Company as a result of its involvement with the variable interest entities is equal to the fixed lease payments due to the trusts. In 2019, lease payments after tax were $15 million. Future minimum lease payments, before tax, of $138 million will be payable over the next 11 years. The Company does not guarantee the residual value of the assets to the lessor; however, it must deliver to the lessor the assets in good operating condition, subject to normal wear and tear, at the end of the lease term. As the Company’s actions and decisions do not significantly affect the variable interest entities’ performance, and the Company’s fixed price purchase option is not considered to be potentially significant to the variable interest entities, the Company is not considered to be the primary beneficiary, and does not consolidate these variable interest entities. Additionally, the Company is the sole beneficiary of an independent voting trust that holds 100% of the equity interest in CMQ U.S. The trust is governed by a single trustee who is responsible for all day-to-day decisions of CMQ U.S. The Company has no substantive participating or kick-out rights and therefore lacks the power to direct the activities of CMQ U.S. As a result, CMQ U.S. is considered to be a variable interest entity, however, the Company is not considered to be the primary beneficiary and, therefore, does not consolidate this variable interest entity. In the normal course of its operations, the Company becomes involved in various legal actions, including claims relating to injuries and damage to property. The Company maintains provisions it considers to be adequate for such actions. While the final outcome with respect to actions outstanding or pending at December 31, 2019 cannot be predicted with certainty, it is the opinion of management that their resolution will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial position or results of operations. However, an unexpected adverse resolution of one or more of these legal actions could have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial position, results of operations or liquidity in a particular quarter or fiscal year. At December 31, 2019, the Company had committed to total future capital expenditures amounting to $664 million and operating expenditures relating to supplier purchase obligations, such as locomotive maintenance and overhaul agreements, as well as agreements to purchase other goods and services amounting to approximately $3.1 billion for the years 2020–2032, of which CP estimates approximately $2.7 billion will be incurred in the next five years. Commitments related to leases, including minimum annual payments for the next five years and thereafter, are included in Note 21. On July 6, 2013, a train carrying petroleum crude oil operated by Montréal Maine and Atlantic Railway (“MMAR”) or a subsidiary, Montréal Maine & Atlantic Canada Co. (“MMAC” and collectively the “MMA Group”), derailed in Lac-Mégantic, Québec. The derailment occurred on a section of railway owned and operated by the MMA Group and while the MMA Group had custody and control of the train. Following the derailment, MMAC sought court protection in Canada under the  Companies’ Creditors Arrangement Act  and MMAR filed for bankruptcy in the U.S. Plans of arrangement were approved in both Canada and the U.S. (the “Plans”), providing for the distribution of approximately $440 million amongst those claiming derailment damages. A number of legal proceedings, set out below, were commenced in Canada and the U.S. against CP and others: On December 11, 2017, the AGQ Action, the Class Action and the Promutuel Action were consolidated. These consolidated claims are currently scheduled for a joint liability trial commencing September 28, 2020, followed by a damages trial, if necessary. (1) Québec's Minister of Sustainable Development, Environment, Wildlife and Parks ordered various parties, including CP, to clean up the derailment site and served CP with a Notice of Claim for $95 million for those cleanup costs. CP appealed the cleanup order and contested the Notice of Claim with the Administrative Tribunal of Québec. These proceedings are stayed pending determination of the Attorney General of Québec (“AGQ”) action (paragraph 2 below). (2) The AGQ sued CP in the Québec Superior Court claiming $409 million in damages, which was amended and reduced to $315 million (the “AGQ Action”). The AGQ Action alleges that: (i) CP exercised custody or control over the petroleum crude oil until its delivery to Irving Oil and was negligent in that custody and control; and (ii) CP is vicariously liable for the acts and omissions of the MMA Group. (3) A class action in the Québec Superior Court on behalf of persons and entities residing in, owning or leasing property in, operating a business in, or physically present in Lac-Mégantic at the time of the derailment was certified against CP on May 8, 2015 (the "Class Action"). Other defendants including MMAC and, Mr. Thomas Harding ("Harding") were added to the Class Action on January 25, 2017. The Class Action seeks unquantified damages, including for wrongful death, personal injury, and property damage. (4) Eight subrogated insurers sued CP in the Québec Superior Court claiming approximately $16 million in damages, which was amended and reduced to $14 million (the “Promutuel Action”), and two additional subrogated insurers sued CP claiming approximately $3 million in damages (the “Royal Action”). Both actions contain similar allegations as the AGQ Action. The actions do not identify the subrogated parties, and therefore overlap with the claims process under the Plans is unclear. The Royal Action is stayed pending determination of the consolidated proceedings described below. (5) Forty-eight plaintiffs (all individual claims joined in one action) sued CP, MMAC and Harding in the Québec Superior Court claiming approximately U.S. $5 million in damages for economic loss and pain and suffering, and asserting similar allegations as in the Class Action and the AGQ Action. The plaintiffs opted-out of the Class Action and all but two are also plaintiffs in litigation against CP, described in paragraph 7 below. This action is stayed pending determination of the consolidated claims described above. (6) The MMAR U.S. estate representative commenced an action against CP in November 2014 in the Maine Bankruptcy Court claiming that CP failed to abide by certain regulations and seeking damages for MMAR’s loss in business value (as yet unquantified). This action asserts that CP knew or ought to have known that the shipper misclassified the petroleum crude oil and therefore should have refused to transport it. (7) The class and mass tort action commenced against CP in June 2015 in Texas (on behalf of Lac-Mégantic residents and wrongful death representatives) and the wrongful death and personal injury actions commenced against CP in June 2015 in Illinois and Maine, were all transferred and consolidated in 26. Commitments and contingencies Commitments Legal proceedings related to Lac-Mégantic rail accident