UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
|
| | |
| þ | | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, or |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 20132016
|
| | |
| o | | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
Commission File No. 1-11083
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
| | |
| DELAWARE | | 04-2695240 |
| (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) | | (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
|
|
ONE300 BOSTON SCIENTIFIC PLACE, NATICK,WAY, MARLBOROUGH, MASSACHUSETTS 01760-153701752-1234 |
| (Address of principal executive offices) (zip code) |
(508) 650-8000683-4000
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
| | |
| COMMON STOCK, $.01 PAR VALUE PER SHARE | | NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE |
| (Title of each class) | | (Name of exchange on which registered) |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
NONE
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes: þ No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes: o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes: þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorted period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes: þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
| | | | | | |
Large accelerated filer þ | | Accelerated filer o | | Non-accelerated filer o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | | Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes: o No þ
The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates was approximately $12.3$31.6 billion based on the last reported sale price of $9.27$23.37 of the registrant’s common stock on the New York Stock Exchange on June 28, 2013,30, 2016, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter. (For this computation, the registrant has excluded the market value of all shares of common stock of the registrant reported as beneficially owned by executive officers, directors and the director emeritus of the registrant; such exclusion shall not be deemed to constitute an admission that any such person is an affiliate of the registrant.)
The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s common stock as of January 31, 20142017 was 1,324,192,809.1,363,488,640.
Documents Incorporated by Reference
Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with its 20142017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I
ITEM 1. BUSINESS
The Company
Boston Scientific Corporation is a worldwide developer, manufacturer and marketer of medical devices that are used in a broad range of interventional medical specialties. Our mission is to transform lives through innovative medical solutions that improve the health of patients around the world. When used in this report, the terms “we,” “us,” “our” and “the Company” mean Boston Scientific Corporation and its divisions and subsidiaries.
Our history began in the late 1960s when our co-founder, John Abele, acquired an equity interest in Medi-tech, Inc., a research and development company focused on developing alternatives to surgery. In 1969, Medi-tech introduced a family of steerable catheters used in some of the first less-invasive procedures performed. In 1979, John Abele joined with Pete Nicholas to form Boston Scientific Corporation, which indirectly acquired Medi-tech. This acquisition began a period of active and focused marketing, new product development, innovation, market development and organizational growth. Since then, we have advanced the practice of less-invasive medicine by helping physicians and other medical professionals diagnose and treat a varietywide range of diseases and medical conditions and improve patients’ quality of life by providing alternatives to surgery and other medical procedures that are typically traumatic to the body.
Our net sales have increased substantially since our formation over thirty years ago.formation. Our growth has been fueled in part by strategic acquisitions designed to improve our ability to take advantage of growth opportunities in the medical device industry.industry and to build depth of portfolio within our focus businesses. Our strategic acquisitions have helped us to add promising new technologies to our pipeline and to offer one of the broadest product portfolios in the world for use in less-invasive procedures.procedures in our target areas of Cardiovascular, Rhythm Management, and Medical Surgical. We believe that the depth and breadth of our product portfolio has also enabled us to compete more effectively in the current healthcare environment that seeks to improve outcomes and lower costs. Our strategy of cost containment,category leadership also enables us to compete in a changing contracting landscape and position our products with physicians, managed care, large buying groups, government contracting, hospitalgovernments, and consolidation among hospitals, while also expanding internationally and international expansion and will generally assist us in navigating throughmanaging the complexities of the global healthcare market, including healthcare reform.market.
Business Strategy
The
We operate following are our five strategic imperatives:
Strengthen Execution to Grow Share,
We believe that our success will be driven by our ability to consistently deliver initiatives that grow profitability and market share. We are focused on improving the speed and performance of our business units by adding new capabilities, processes, and innovative technologies.
Expand into High Growth Adjacencies,
We seek to diversify our product portfolio by realigning our research and development spend and focusing our business development investment toward higher growth opportunities. We are focused on executing on our committed growth adjacencies while increasing our access to developing technologies and solutions. Through this diversification we expect to increase our opportunity for growth in areas that complement our core businesses.
Drive Global Expansion,
By expanding our global commercial presence, we seek to increase revenue and market share, and strengthen our relationships with leading physicians and their clinical research programs. We are focused on expanding into emerging markets. We are focused on building new capabilities and innovative commercial models in countries whose economies and healthcare sectors are growing rapidly. We have local leadership teams with extensive in-country experience to help strengthen our position in these fast-growing regions.
Fund the Journey to Fuel Growth,
We are driving continuous improvement to expand our profitability, optimizing our manufacturing cost structure, reducing our corporate infrastructure and re-allocating spending to support our growth initiatives.
Develop Key Capabilities
We intend to develop key capabilities that enable us to deliver economic and customer focused products and solutions aligned to the needs of the marketplace. We are globally focused on building a culture of empowerment and engagement while improving our diversity.
Capabilities. We believe that our execution of these strategic imperatives will drive innovation, accelerate profitable revenue growth and increase stockholder value. Our approach to innovation combines internally-developed products and technologies with those we may obtain externally through strategic acquisitions and alliances. Our research and development efforts are focused largely on the development of next-generation and novel technology offerings across multiple programs and divisions. In addition, we have undertaken several strategic acquisitions to help us to continue to be a leader in the medical device industry. We expect to continue to invest in our core franchises, and also investigate opportunities to further expand our presence in, and diversify into, strategic growth adjacencies and new global markets. During the last several years, we have completed multiple acquisitions to strengthen our core franchises and expand into high growth adjacencies and global markets. To support the achievement of our strategic and organizational objectives, we have an Enterprise Risk Management program that coordinates a consolidated view of the key risks inherent in achieving our business strategies so we can anticipate and adapt to potential challenges to preserve and grow shareholder value. Our Board of Directors oversees risk management and focuses on the most significant risks facing the Company including strategic, operational, financial and legal and compliance risks
Products
During 2013,2016, our products were offered for sale by seven core businesses -businesses: Interventional Cardiology, Cardiac Rhythm Management, (CRM), Endoscopy, Peripheral Interventions, (PI), Urology and Women’sPelvic Health, Neuromodulation, and Electrophysiology (EP). In January 2011, we closed the sale of our Neurovascular business to Stryker Corporation (Stryker). We continued to generate sales from the Neurovascular business pursuant to our supply and distribution agreements with Stryker through mid-2013, when these agreements substantially completed.
Electrophysiology. During 2013,2016, we derived 2827 percent of our sales from our Interventional Cardiology business, 2722 percent of our sales from our CRMCardiac Rhythm Management business, 1817 percent of our sales from our Endoscopy business, 1112 percent of our sales from our Peripheral Interventions business, seven12 percent of our sales from our Urology and Women’sPelvic Health business, sixseven percent of our sales from our Neuromodulation business, and twothree percent of our sales from our Electrophysiology business. Approximately one percent of our 2013 sales were derived from the Neurovascular business that we sold to Stryker.
The following section describes certain of our product offerings:offerings. In addition, see Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations of this Annual Report for further information on our core businesses and products.
Cardiovascular
Interventional Cardiology
Drug-Eluting Coronary Stent Systems
Our broad, innovative product offerings have enabled us to become a leader in the global interventional cardiology market. This leadership is due in large part to our drug-eluting coronary stent product offerings. Coronary stents are tiny, mesh tubes used in the treatment of coronary artery disease, which are implanted in patients to prop open arteries and facilitate blood flow to and from the heart. We believe we have further enhanced the outcomes associated with the use of coronary stents, particularly the processes that lead to restenosis (the growth of neointimal tissue within an artery after angioplasty and stenting), through dedicated internalscientific research and external product development strategic alliances and scientific research of drug-eluting stent systems.
We market a broad portfolio of internally-developed and self-manufactured drug-eluting stents including the Promus® Element™ and Promus® Element™ Plus everolimus-eluting stents, as well as our TAXUS® Element™ and Ion™ paclitaxel-eluting stents. In addition, in Europe we market the SYNERGY™ Everolimus-Eluting Platinum Chromium Coronary Stent System featuring an ultra-thin abluminal (outer) bioabsorbable polymer coating. The SYNERGY Stent is unique in that both its proprietary polymer and everolimus drug coating dissipate by three months. This innovation has the potential to improve post-implant vessel healing and will eliminate long-term polymer exposure, which is a possible cause of late adverse events. In February 2013,addition, we received Conformite Europeenne (CE) Mark approvalmarket the Promus PREMIER™, Promus™ Element™ and in the fourth quarter of 2013, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clearance for our next-generation Promus PREMIER™Promus™ Element™ Plus Everolimus-Eluting Platinum ChromiumStents.
Other Coronary Stent System.Therapies
Core Coronary Technology
We market a broad line of products used to treat patients with atherosclerosis, a principal cause of coronary artery obstructive disease, which is characterized by a thickening of the walls of the coronary arteries and a narrowing of arterial openings caused by the progressive development of deposits of plaque. Our product offerings include balloon catheters, rotational atherectomy systems, guide wires, guide catheters, embolic protection devices, crossing and re-entry devices for the treatment of chronically occluded coronary vessels and diagnostic catheters used in percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) procedures.
Intraluminal Ultrasound ImagingPCI Guidance
We market a family of intraluminalintravascular catheter-directed ultrasound imaging catheters, fractional flow reserve (FFR) devices, and systems for use in coronary arteries and heart chambers as well as certain peripheral vessels. Our latest Intravascular Ultrasound Imaging catheter, OptiCross™, received regulatory approval in the third quarter of 2013 and has been launched in all major markets worldwide. We initiated the launch of our first FFR product, the COMET™ Pressure Guidewire, in the U.S., Europe, and Japan in 2016. The iLab®iLab™ Ultrasound Imaging System with Polaris Software continues as our flagship console and is compatible with our full line of imaging catheters. This system iscatheters and FFR devices and are designed to enhance the diagnosis and treatment of blocked vessels and heart disorders. Further, iLabThese systems have been placed in cardiology labs worldwide which provideand provided an installed base through which we expect to launch newcontinue to pull through products, including an integrated Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) device.the ongoing launch of our COMET™ FFR Pressure Guidewire.
Structural Heart TherapyTherapies
In January 2011, we completedStructural heart therapy is one of the fastest growing segments of the medical technology market and is highly synergistic with our Interventional Cardiology and Rhythm Management businesses. Through the acquisition of Sadra Medical, Inc. (Sadra). Through the acquisition of Sadra, in January 2011, we have developed a fully repositionable and retrievable device, the Lotus™ Valve System, for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to treat patients with severe aortic stenosis. The Lotus™ Valve System consistsemploys a unique Adaptive Seal™ feature designed to minimize the incidence of paravalvular regurgitation, a predictor of mortality. The Lotus™ Valve System is CE-marked in the European Union (EU). In the U.S. it is an investigational device and not available for commercial sale. At the end of 2015, we completed enrollment in our REPRISE III pivotal clinical trial. We have three valve sizes CE marked: 23, 25 and 27mm, and we are developing 21 and 29mm size valves to complete our size matrix. In September 2016, we commenced a limited launch of our next generation catheter and sheath, the Lotus EDGE™ Valve System, in Europe. In October 2016, we suspended our limited launch and initiated a voluntary removal of field inventory of the Lotus EDGE™ system due to reports that, in some cases, the device could not be fully locked during the procedure due to premature release of a stent-mounted tissue valve prosthesispin connecting the Lotus EDGE™ Valve to the delivery system. In February 2017, we initiated a voluntary removal of all Lotus™ Valve devices, including Lotus with Depth Guard™, from global commercial and catheter delivery system for guidance and placementclinical sites due to reports of the valve. The low-profile delivery system and introducer sheath are designed to enable accurate positioning, repositioning and retrieval at any time prior topremature release of a pin connecting the aortic valve implant. InLotus™ Valve to the delivery system. As with the prior announced suspension of our Lotus Edge™ Valve System device, we believe that the issue is caused by excess tension in the pin mechanism introduced during the manufacturing process. We expect to bring the Lotus™ Valve platform back to market in Europe and other regions in the fourth quarter of 2013, we received CE Mark approval and launched2017. We anticipate filing the Lotus™U.S. PMA submission for the Lotus Edge™ Valve System, the next generation platform, in Europe.the fourth quarter of 2017, with a U.S. launch planned for mid-2018.
In March 2011, we completed
Through the acquisition of Atritech, Inc. (Atritech). Atritech in March 2011, we have developed a novel device, the Watchman™ Left Atrial Appendage Closure (LAAC) Device, designed to close the left atrial appendage to reduce the risk of ischemic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Watchman Device has been commercially available internationally since 2009 and is the leading device in percutaneous LAAC globally. In March of 2015, Watchman Device received FDA approval to treat patients who are at an elevated risk of stroke, deemed suitable for ischemic stroke.warfarin, and have appropriate rationale to seek a non-pharmacologic alternative to warfarin. We believe that Watchman Device will be the only LAAC technology commercially available in the U.S. for multiple years, and in November 2015, we received CE Mark for our next generation device, Watchman FLX™ LAAC Device. Shortly after approval, we began a European initial market release of Watchman FLX™ Device. The WATCHMAN® Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology (WATCHMAN® LAA), developed by Atritech, isinitial market release was suspended near the end of the first quarter of 2016 due to a higher than expected rate of device provenembolization. Following an extensive data evaluation, we have decided to pursue certain design enhancements prior to returning a next generation device to market.
On December 12, 2016, we completed the acquisition of certain manufacturing assets and capabilities of the Neovasc, Inc. advanced biological tissue business and made a 15 percent equity investment in a randomized clinical trial to offer an alternative to anticoagulant drugs,Neovasc. With this acquisition, we will integrate certain manufacturing assets and is approvedbiologic tissue capabilities into our structural heart business for use in CE Mark countries. Additionally in August 2012, European regulators approved an expanded indication for the WATCHMAN® LAA Closure Device. The new indication offers patients with AF, and a contraindication to warfarin and the newer oral anticoagulants, a new treatment option for stroke reduction. In the first half of 2013, we submitted the resultsmanufacturing of the US IDE trial, PREVAIL, toLotus™ Valve System and future heart valve technologies within our Interventional Cardiology business.We began the FDA. The FDA Circulatory System Device Panel met in Decemberprocess of 2013 and voted favorably by a majority, Yes: 13, No:1, that there is reasonable assurance the device is safe, there is reasonable assurance of efficacy, and the benefits of the WATCHMAN® LAA Closure Device outweigh the risks. We expect FDA approval of the deviceintegrating Neovasc into our Interventional Cardiology business in the first halffourth quarter of 2014.2016 and expect to be substantially complete by the end of 2018.
Peripheral Interventions
We sell various products designed to treat patients with peripheral arterial disease (disease which appears in blood vessels other than in the heart and in the biliary tree), including a broad line of medical devices used in percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) and peripheral vascular stenting. Our peripheral product offerings include stents, balloon catheters, wires, peripheral embolization devices and vena cava filters. Our peripheral angioplasty balloon technology includes our next-generation Mustang™ PTA balloon,Balloon Catheter; our Coyote™ balloon catheter,Balloon Catheter, a highly deliverable and ultra-low profile balloon dilatation catheter designed for a wide range of peripheral angioplasty procedures,procedures; and our Charger™ PTA Balloon Catheter, a 0.035” percutaneous transluminal angioplasty balloon catheter designed for post-stent dilatation as well as conventional balloon angioplasty to open blocked peripheral arteries. With our Coyote, Mustang and Charger devices,Devices, we offer balloons across all size platforms. Our peripheral stent technology includes our EPIC™ self-expanding nitinol stent systemSelf-Expanding Nitinol Stent System, our Carotid WALLSTENT® stent system,WALLSTENT™ Stent System, and our Innova™ self-expanding stent system.Self-Expanding Stent System. In 2013,addition, we launchedmarket our 0.035" RubiconTMRubicon™ Support Catheter in both the United StatesU.S. and Europe, and received FDA clearance and CE Mark approval for DirexionTM torqueable microcatheter. In August 2013, we completed enrollment in our clinical trial evaluating the long-term safety and effectiveness of the Innova™ self-expanding stent system, expected to support regulatory submissions in the U.S., Canada and Japan. In October 2013, we began ourEurope. We are currently conducting a pivotal study designed to evaluate the safety and performance of the self-expanding Innova™ drug-eluting stent systemEluvia™ Drug-Eluting Vascular Stent System, which received CE Mark in February 2016 and is designed to treat Superficial Femoral Artery (SFA) lesions.patients with narrowing or blockages in the SFA or proximal popliteal artery (PPA). We are also conducting an additional study on the safety and effectiveness of our RANGER™ Drug-Coated Balloon.
In August 2014, we acquired the Interventional Division of Bayer AG (Bayer). The addition of Bayer innovative technologies supports our strategy to provide a comprehensive portfolio of leading solutions to treat peripheral vascular disease, including venous disease. The transaction included the leading AngioJet™ Thrombectomy System which is used in endovascular procedures to remove blood clots from blocked arteries and veins, and the JetStream™ Atherectomy System, used to remove plaque and thrombi from diseased arteries. We have since launched the AngioJet™ZelanteDVT™Thrombectomy Catheter to treat deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in large-diameter upper and lower limb peripheral veins, in the U.S. and Europe.
During the fourth quarter of 2012, we acquired Vessix Vascular, Inc. (Vessix), a developer of catheter-based renal denervation systems for the treatment of uncontrolled hypertension. Through the acquisition of Vessix, we added a second generation, highly differentiated technology to our hypertension strategy and launched this technology in Europe in May 2013. We plan to carefully examine the forthcoming available data from a competitor’s recently completed U.S. pivotal trial in renal denervation for treatment-resistant hypertension, with respect to which the competitor announced in January 2014 that it failed to meet its primary efficacy endpoint. We plan to work collaboratively with the scientific community to determine the next steps for the design of our Vessix clinical program.
We also sell products designed to treat patients with non-vascular disease (disease that appears outside the blood system)., primarily in interventional oncology. Our non-vascular suite of products includes biliary stents, drainage catheters and micro-puncture sets designed to treat, diagnose and ease various forms of benign and malignant tumors. We market our Direxion™ Torqueable Microcatheter in both the U.S. and Europe. In addition, we continue to market our extensive line of Interventional Oncologyinterventional oncology product solutions, including the recently launched Renegade®Renegade™ HI-FLO™ Fathom® microcatheterFathom™ Microcatheter and guidewire system and Interlock™ - 35 Fibered IDC™ and 18 Fibered IDC™ Occlusion System for peripheral embolization.
On December 31, 2015, we completed the acquisition of the interventional radiology business of CeloNova Biosciences (CeloNova). The acquisition includes drug-eluting microspheres designed to be loaded with chemotherapy drugs for delivery to cancerous tumors, and spherical embolic products used to treat uterine fibroids and other conditions. We are in the process of integrating CeloNova into our Peripheral Interventions business and expect to be substantially complete by the second half of 2017.
Rhythm Management
Cardiac Rhythm Management
We develop, manufacture and market a variety of implantable devices that monitor the heart and deliver electricity to treat cardiac abnormalities, including:
Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) systems used to detect and treat abnormally fast heart rhythms (tachycardia) that could result in sudden cardiac death, including the world's first and only commercially available subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator - the S-ICD® System,cardiac defibrillators (S-ICD), along with implantable transvenous cardiac defibrillators and implantable cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) systems used to treat heart failure; and
Implantable pacemaker systems used to manage slow or irregular heart rhythms (bradycardia), including implantable cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker (CRT-P) systems used to treat heart failure.
A key component of many ofIn addition, in most geographies, our implantable device systems isinclude our remote LATITUDE®LATITUDE™ Patient Management System, which enables physicians to monitor device performance remotely, while patients are in their homes, allowing for more frequent monitoring in order to guide treatment decisions.
We market several lines of ICD’s, including our INGENIO™DYNAGEN™ EL , DYNAGEN™ MINI, INOGEN™ EL and INOGEN™ MINI. MINI is the smallest, thinnest ICD and EL (extended longevity) is the longest lasting ICD due to our proprietary EnduraLife™ battery technology. In addition, we offer our EMBLEM™ MRI S-ICD System, which affords physicians the ability to treat patients who are at risk for sudden cardiac arrest without touching the heart or invading the vasculature. Our EMBLEM MRI S-ICD System offers greater longevity, LATITUDE™ Patient Management Remote Monitoring Technology and smaller size as compared to the first generation of S-ICD therapy. We also offer several lines of CRT-D systems, including our X4 line of quadripolar systems, a suite of ACUITY™ X4 Quadripolar LV Leads, and the ACUITY™ PRO Lead Delivery System. We initiated the full U.S. launch of our ACUITY™ X4 Quadripolar LV Leads in March 2016 and began global commercialization of the EMBLEM MRI S-ICD system in the second and third quarters of 2016. Our current generation of transvenous ICD and CRT-D pulse generators, DYNAGEN and INOGEN, when paired with our most current generation of bradycardia, heart failure, and ICD leads have MRI safe labeling in most major countries outside the U.S. In the U.S., we plan to finish enrollment in our High Voltage MRI approval trial, ENABLE MRI, in early 2017.
We market our ACCOLADE™ family of pacemaker systems in nearly all major markets around the world. Approval of our ACCOLADE Pacemaker family in the U.S. and, Europe and our INGENIO™ and ADVANTIO™ pacemakers are approved in EuropeJapan also includes approval for use of these products in patients in need of aundergoing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan.scans. We received FDA approval of our ACCOLADE MRI-Compatible Pacemaker and MRI-compatible Ingevity™ Bradycardia Lead in April of 2016. Our cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemaker product offerings include our INVIVE™ system,newest generation VISIONIST™ and VALITUDE™X4 Quadripolar CRT-P Devices, which isare built on the same platform as our high voltage cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator, isare enabled for remote patient monitoring, and includesinclude features that promote ease of use. Also during the first half of 2012, we completed the acquisition of Cameron Health, Inc. (Cameron). Cameron developed the world's first and only commercially available subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator - the S-ICD® System, which we believe is a differentiated technology that will provide us the opportunity to both increase our market share in the existing ICD market and expand that market over time. The S-ICD® system has CE Mark approval and during the third quarter of 2012 received FDA approval. With this technology, we are able to offer ouruse for physician customers an entirely new option to treat their patients who are at risk for sudden cardiac arrest. In the fourth quarter of 2013, we received CE Mark approval and performed first implants of our X4 line of quadripolar CRT-D systems, including AUTOGEN™ X4, DYNAGEN™ X4, and INOGEN™ X4 cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators, a suite of ACUITY™ X4 quadripolar LV leads and the ACUITY™ PRO lead delivery system.implantation.
Electrophysiology
Within our Electrophysiology business, we develop less-invasive medical technologies used in the diagnosis and treatment of rate and rhythm disorders of the heart. Included in our product offerings are steerable radio frequency (RF) generators, steerable RF ablation catheters, intracardiac ultrasound catheters, diagnostic catheters, delivery sheaths, and other accessories. Our leading products include the Blazer® and Blazer Prime® line of temperature ablation catheters, designed to deliver enhanced performance and responsiveness. Our cooled ablation portfolio includes our closed-loop irrigated catheter, the Chilli II® cooled ablation catheter, and the Health CanadaU.S. and CE Mark approved Blazer™ Open-Irrigated ablation catheterand IntellaNav™ Open-Irrigated Ablation Catheters with a unique Total Tip Cooling™ Design. The Blazer™ Open-Irrigated Catheter,Design and our latest radiofrequency ablation (RFA)closed-loop irrigated catheter, is designedthe Chilli II™ Cooled Ablation Catheter. In addition to treat a varietythese open-irrigated catheters, we began global commercialization of arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation, atrial flutter, ventricular tachycardiaour IntellaNav™ XP and other supraventricular tachycardias. In the third quarter of 2013, we received FDA approval for the IntellaTipIntellaNav™ MiFiTM XP catheter, with MicroFidelity sensor technology, representing a new generation of high-resolution ablation catheters for treatment of atrial flutter.
During the fourth quarter of 2012, we acquired Rhythmia Medical, Inc. (Rhythmia), a developer of next-generation mapping and navigation solutions for useCatheters in cardiac catheter ablations and other electrophysiology procedures, including atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. We received CE Mark approval for the Rhythmia technology during the second quarter of 20132016. Our IntellaTip MiFi™ XP and FDA approval duringIntellaNav MiFi XP Catheters include MicroFidelity (MiFi) sensor technology in the third quartercatheter tip. All of 2013our IntellaNav™ Catheters are designed to allow magnetic tracking when used with our Rhythmia™ Mapping System.
Our comprehensive diagnostic catheter portfolio includes Blazer™ Dx-20, Dynamic Tip™ and expect to launch the product in 2014. In November 2013, we completed the acquisitionViking™ Catheters. We have a full offering of the electrophysiology business of C.R. Bard Inc. (Bard EP). We believe that this transaction adds a strong commercial team and complementary portfolio of ablation catheters, diagnostic tools, and state of the art electrophysiology recording systems. We believe thatcapital equipment, including our LabSystem PRO™ Recording System, the Rhythmia Mapping System, Maestro™ RF Generators, and Bard EP acquisitions, as well asthe MetriQ™ pump. In 2015, the Rhythmia Mapping System and IntellaMap Orion™Mapping Catheter began full global commercialization, bringing to market a next generation system capable of high-density high-resolution mapping to improve procedure efficacy. In December of 2016, we began European commercialization of our other expected product launches, will help to position us to participate more competitively in the fast-growing Electrophysiology market.next generation Rhythmia™ HDX Mapping System.
MedSurg
Endoscopy
Gastroenterology and Pulmonary
We marketare dedicated to transforming the lives of patients by advancing the diagnosis and treatment of a broad range of productspulmonary and gastrointestinal conditions. We do this through the development of innovative devices for less invasive procedures, tailored services to diagnose, treatoptimize hospital operations and ease a varietypatient care, and programs in support of digestive diseases, including those affecting the esophagus, stomach, liver, pancreas, duodenum,education and colon.reimbursement. Common gastrointestinal (GI) disease states include esophagitis, portal hypertension, peptic ulcersesophageal disorders, GI strictures and bleeding, pancreatico-biliary disease and other associated conditions, as well as esophageal, biliary, pancreatic and coloniccolon cancer. Some of our product offerings include:
The SpyGlass™ DS System, made available in 2015, brings digital imaging, a wider field of view and a simpler set-up (compared to the legacy SpyGlass System), enabling cholangioscopy to play a greater role in the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatico-biliary diseases.
The AXIOS™ Stent and Electrocautery-Enhanced Delivery System for endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural drainage of pancreatic pseudo cysts, which provides a less invasive alternative to surgical pseudo cyst draining procedures and procedural time savings when compared to a non-electrocautery enhanced system. On April 2, 2015, we acquired Xlumena, Inc. (Xlumena), a medical device company that developed minimally invasive devices for Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) guided transluminal drainage of targeted areas within the gastrointestinal tract. We offercontinue to grow our presence in the Radial Jaw® 4 Single-Use Biopsy Forceps, which arefield of endoluminal surgery in the U.S. and expand internationally.
The WallFlex™ Biliary RX Fully Covered Stents System RMV is the first and currently only biliary metal stent to receive U.S. FDA clearance for an indication to treat benign biliary strictures due to chronic pancreatitis. This stent can be safely placed and removed for up to 12 months, providing additional treatment options for physicians managing their patients with this condition.
The Resolution 360™ Clip, launched in October 2016, and built on the market-leading technology of our legacy Resolution™ Clip, is a novel hemostatic clipping technology designed to stop and help prevent bleeding during endoscopic procedures. The device is constructed using a multi-wire braided catheter designed to enable collectionhealthcare professionals to rotate the device in small, controlled movements in both clockwise and counterclockwise directions. This design enables the clip to be maneuvered to the target area and more accurately placed at the site of large high-qualitya GI bleed or potential GI bleed.
The Acquire™ Endoscopic Ultrasound Fine Needle Biopsy (FNB) Device, initially launched in May 2016 and was in full launch as of January 2017, is designed to obtain larger tissue specimens. FNB devices are used during EUS procedures to collect tissue specimens without the need to use large channel therapeutic endoscopes. Our exclusive line of RX Biliary System™ devicesfor histological assessment and are useful when diagnosing diseases such as pancreatic cancer, liver cancer and stomach lesions. This new device is designed to provide greater accessobtain more tissue, providing physicians with confidence that the samples they extract may improve diagnostic yield to help determine the best course of treatment for a patient.
On November 22, 2016, we completed our acquisition of EndoChoice Holdings, Inc. (EndoChoice). EndoChoice is an Alpharetta, Georgia based company focused on the development and commercialization of infection control products, pathology services and single-use devices for physiciansspecialists treating a wide range of gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. We began the process of integrating EndoChoice into our Endoscopy business in the fourth quarter of 2016 and expect to diagnose and treat challenging conditionsbe substantially complete by the end of 2017.
On November 1, 2016, we acquired the bile ducts, such as removing gallstones, opening obstructed bile ducts and obtaining biopsies in suspected tumors. We also market the Spyglass® Direct VisualizationLumenR™ Tissue Retractor System for direct imaging of the pancreatico-biliary system.from LumenR LLC (LumenR), a privately held Newark, California based company. The Spyglass®LumenR™ Tissue Retractor System is currently in development for use during endoscopic resection of lesions in the first single-operator cholangioscopy device that offers clinicians a direct visualization of the pancreatico-biliary system and includes supporting devices for tissue acquisition, stone management and lithotripsy. Our products also include the WallFlex® family of stents, in particular, the WallFlex® Esophageal line and WallFlex® Biliary line for treatment of biliary strictures. We continue to conduct clinical research to determine if our clinical data can support expanded indications and thus benefit additional patients. In addition, within our hemostasis franchise, we offer our Resolution® Clip Device for gastrointestinal bleeding, engineered to enable opening and closing up to five times prior to deployment.colon, esophagus or stomach.
Interventional Bronchoscopy
We market devices to diagnose, treat and ease pulmonary disease systems within the airway and lungs. Our products are designed to help perform biopsies, retrieve foreign bodies from the airway, open narrowings of an airway, stop internal bleeding, and ease symptoms of some types of airway cancers. Our product line includes pulmonary biopsy forceps,forceps; transbronchial aspiration needles,needles; cytology brushes andbrushes; tracheobronchial stents used to dilate narrowed airway passages or for tumor management. In 2010, we completed our acquisition of Asthmatx, Inc., which added to our Endoscopy portfolio a less-invasive, catheter-based bronchial thermoplasty proceduremanagement; and the Alair™ Bronchial Thermoplasty System for the treatment of severe persistent asthma. The Alair® Bronchial Thermoplasty System, developed by Asthmatx, has CE Mark, China Food and Drug Administration and U.S. FDA approval and is the first device-based asthma treatment approved by the FDA. Beginning January 1, 2013, the America Medical Association (AMA) Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) editorial panel assigned category I CPT codes specifically for bronchial thermoplasty. The Category I CPT procedure codes are recognized by all public and private health insurance payers in the United States, which will allow physicians and hospitals to seek reimbursement for bronchial thermoplasty procedures. In addition, during the third quarter of 2013, the five-year data from the AIR2 clinical trial were published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, which showed that the Alair System provided long-term asthma control, demonstrated by a sustained reduction in the rate of severe exacerbations and emergency room visits over a five year period after treatment. We expect that the Alair technology will continue to strengthen our existing offering of pulmonary devices and contribute to future sales growth and diversification of the Endoscopy business.
Urology and Women’sPelvic Health
Our Urology and Women’sPelvic Health divisionbusiness develops, manufactures and sells devices to treat various urological and gynecological disorders.pelvic conditions. Within our Urology business, we sell a variety of products designed to treat patients with urinary stone disease and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). We offer a full line of stone management products, including ureteral stents, wires, lithotripsy devices, stone retrieval devices, sheaths, balloons and catheters. Within our Women'sPelvic Health business, we market a range of devices for the treatment of conditions such as femalestress urinary incontinence, pelvic floor reconstruction (rebuilding of the anatomy to its original state), and menorrhagia (excessive menstrual bleeding)., and uterine fibroids and polyps. We offer a full breadth of mid-urethral sling products, sling materials, graft materials, pelvic floor reconstruction kits, and suturing devices. We market our Genesys Hydro ThermAblator®ThermAblator™ (HTA) system, a next-generation endometrialSystem, an ablation system designed to ablate the endometrial lining of the uterus in premenopausal women with menorrhagia.menorrhagia, Symphion™ System for the removal of intrauterine fibroids and polyps.
On August 3, 2015, we completed the acquisition of the American Medical Systems male urology portfolio (AMS Portfolio Acquisition), which includes the men's health and prostate health businesses, from Endo International plc. The AMS male urology portfolio was integrated with our formerly named Urology and Women's Health business, and the joint businesses became Urology and Pelvic Health. The integration was substantially complete by the end of 2016.
7
On November 15, 2016, we completed the acquisition of the gynecology and urology portfolio of Distal Access, LLC (Distal), a Salt Lake City based company that designs minimally invasive medical devices. The portfolio includes the Resectr™ Tissue Resection Device, a single-use solution designed to remove uterine polyps. We began the process of integrating the Resectr device into our Urology and Pelvic Health business during the fourth quarter of 2016 and expect to be substantially complete by the end of 2017.
Neuromodulation
Within ourOur Neuromodulation business we marketoffers the Precision®PrecisionTM and Precision SpectraTM Spinal Cord Stimulator (SCS) systems,Systems, used for the management of chronic pain. This system delivers pain management by applying an electrical signal to mask pain signals traveling from the spinal cord to the brain. Our lead product offerings include the Infinion™ 16 Percutaneous Lead, the world's first and only 16-contact percutaneous lead, and our Linear™ 3-4 and Linear 3-6 Percutaneous Leads for use with our SCS systems, which are designed to provide physicians with more treatment options for their chronic pain patients. These leads provide the broadest range of percutaneous lead configurations in the industry. We received CE Mark approval for the Precision Spectra™ SCS System during the fourth quarter of 2012 and we commenced our U.S. commercial launch of the device during the first quarter of 2013 following FDA approval. The Precision SpectraTM SCS System is the world's first and only SCS system with 32 contacts and 32 dedicated power sources and is designed to provide improved pain relief to a wide range of patients who suffer from chronic pain. We believe that we continue to have a technologytechnological advantage compared to our competitors with proprietary features such as Multiple Independent Current Control and our Illumina 3D Proprietary Programming Software, which istogether are intended to allow the physician to target specific areas of pain and customize stimulation of nerve fibers more precisely. In May 2013,Additionally, in June 2015, we began our study designedlaunched the Precision Novi™ SCS System in Europe. The Precision Novi™ System offers patients and physicians the smallest 16-contact high capacity primary cell (PC), also referred to determine whether occipital nerve stimulation (ONS) using the Precision® System can safely and effectively treat chronic migraine when used in conjunction with anti-migraine medications.
In 2012, we received CE Mark approvalas non-rechargeable, device for the usetreatment of chronic pain.
We also have regulatory approval for our Vercise™ Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) System in various international regions such as Europe, Latin America and Asia Pacific for the treatment of Parkinson's disease, in Europe. We also began our U.S. pivotal study for the treatment of Parkinson's disease in 2013. We believe we have an exciting opportunity in DBS with the Vercise™ DBS System, which is designed to selectively stimulate targeted areas of the brain to customize therapy for patientstremor and minimize side effects of unwanted stimulation. In the fourth quarter of 2013, we announced CE Mark approval for our Vercise™ DBS System for the treatment of intractable primary and secondary dystonia, a neurological movement disorder characterized by involuntary muscle contractions.
Innovation
Our approach In September 2015, we gained CE-mark approvals for the Vercise™ PC DBS System with its Neural Navigator™ Programming Software. The system allows for programming flexibility, designed to innovation combines internally-developed products and technologies with those we may obtain externally through strategic acquisitions and alliances. Our research and development efforts are focused largely on the developmenttreat a greater range of next-generation and novel technology offerings across multiple programs and divisions.patients throughout their disease progression. In addition, we have undertaken strategic acquisitionsreceived CE Mark approval for the only commercially available Directional Lead powered by current steering. The Cartesia™ Directional Lead uses multi-directional stimulation for greater precision, intended to help enable usminimize side effects for patients. We are currently in a U.S. pivotal trial with our Vercise DBS System for the treatment of Parkinson’s disease and expect to continueenter the U.S. market with our Vercise DBS System by the end of 2017.
On July 27, 2016, we acquired Cosman Medical, Inc. (Cosman), a privately held manufacturer of radiofrequency ablation systems, expanding our Neuromodulation portfolio and offering physicians treating patients with chronic pain a wider choice of non-opioid therapeutic options. We are in the process of integrating Cosman into our Neuromodulation business, and expect the integration to be a leader insubstantially complete by the medical device industry. We expect to continue to invest in our core franchises, and also investigate opportunities to further expand our presence in, and diversify into, strategic growth adjacencies. We have closed several acquisitions targeting manyend of these areas. In 2011, we completed the acquisitions of Sadra Medical, Inc., Intelect Medical, Inc., ReVascular Therapeutics, Inc., and Atritech, Inc., and in 2012, we completed the acquisitions of Cameron Health Inc., BridgePoint Medical, Inc., Rhythmia Medical Inc., and Vessix Vascular Inc., all discussed above. In the fourth quarter of 2013, we completed the acquisition of the electrophysiology business of C.R. Bard Inc. There can be no assurance that technologies developed internally or acquired through acquisitions and alliances will achieve technological feasibility, obtain regulatory approvals or gain market acceptance, and any delay in the development or approval of these technologies may adversely impact our ability to drive future growth.2017.
Research and Development
Our investment in research and development is critical to driving our future growth. We expended $861$920 million on research and development in 2013, $8862016, $876 million in 2012,2015, and $895$817 million in 2011, representing approximately 12 percent of our net sales each year.2014. Our investment in research and development reflects:reflects the following:
regulatory compliance, clinical science, and internal research and development programs, regulatory design, and clinical science, as well as other programs obtained through our strategic acquisitions and alliances; and
engineering efforts whichthat incorporate customer feedback into continuous improvement efforts for currently marketed and next-generation products.
We have directed our development efforts toward regulatory compliance and innovative technologies designed to expand current markets or enter adjacent markets. We are transforming the wayhow we conduct research and development and are scrutinizing our cost structure, which we believe will enable increased development activity and faster concept to market timelines. Our approach to new product design and development is through focused, cross-functional teams. We believe that our formal process for technology and product development aids in our ability to offer and manufacture innovative products in a consistent and timely manner. Involvement of the research and development, clinical, quality, regulatory, manufacturing and marketingcross-functional teams early in the process is the cornerstone of our product development cycle. We believe this collaboration allows these teams to concentrate resources on the most viable and clinically relevant new products and technologies, and focus on bringing them to market in a timely and cost-effective manner. In addition to internal development, we work with hundreds of leading research institutions, universities and clinicians around the world to develop, evaluate and clinically test our products. We are expanding our collaborations to include research and development teams in emerging markets; these teams will focus on both global and local market requirements at a lower cost of development. We believe that a part of our future success will depend upon the strength of these development efforts.
Marketing and Sales
During 2013,2016, we marketed our products to over 13,000approximately 35,000 hospitals, clinics, outpatient facilities and medical offices in the U.S. and to approximately 100120 countries worldwide. The majority of our net sales are derived from countries in which we have direct sales organizations. We also have a network of distributors and dealers who offer our products in certain countries and markets, which accounts for our remaining sales.markets. We expect to continue to leverage our infrastructure in markets where commercially appropriate and use third partiesparty distributors in those markets where it is not economical or strategic to establish or maintain a direct presence. We are not dependent on any single institution and noNo single institution accounted for more than ten percent of our net sales in 20132016, 2015 or 2012;2014; however, large group purchasing organizations, hospital networks and other buying groups have become increasingly important to our business and represent a substantial portion of our net sales. We have a dedicated corporate sales organization in the U.S. focused principally on selling to major buying groups and integrated healthcare networks. We consistently strive to understand and exceed the expectations of our customers. Each of our businesses maintains dedicated sales forces and marketing teams focusingfocused on physicians who specialize in the diagnosis and treatment of different medical conditions. We believe that this focusedfocus on disease state management enables us to develop highly knowledgeable and dedicated sales representatives and to foster collaborative relationships with physicians. We believe that we have positive working relationships with physicians and others in the medical industry which enable us to gain a detailed understanding of new therapeutic and diagnostic alternatives and to respond quickly to the changing needs of physicians and their patients.
International Operations
International net sales accounted for approximately 4743 percent of our net sales in 2013.2016. Maintaining and expanding our international presence is an important component of our long-term growth strategy. Through our international presence, we seek to increase net sales and market share, leverage our relationships with leading physicians and their clinical research programs, accelerate the time to bring new products to market, and gain access to worldwide technological developments that we can implement across our product lines. WeIn addition, we are investing in infrastructure in emerging markets in order to introduce products and strengthen our sales capabilities and maximize our opportunities in these countries. A discussion of the risks associated with our international operations is included in Item 1A of this Annual Report.
As of December 31, 2013,2016, we had six principal international manufacturing facilities, including three in Ireland, two in Costa Rica and one in Puerto Rico. Approximately 5745 percent of our products sold worldwide during 2013manufactured in 2016 were manufacturedproduced at these facilities. Additionally, we maintain international research and development capabilities in Ireland, as well asPuerto Rico, Costa Rica, Germany, India and China. We operate physician training centers in France, Japan, South Africa, Germany, Italy and China.India.
Manufacturing and Raw Materials
We are focused on continuously improving our supply chain effectiveness, strengthening our manufacturing processes and increasing operational efficiencies within our organization. We believe by sourcing global manufacturing by technology capabilities, we are ablecontinually strive to improve the efficiency of our Sourcing Operations, and to partner with strategic suppliers to leverage the technical expertise of the broader market. By doing so, we seek to focus our existinginternal resources and concentrate on the development and commercial launch of new products, and the enhancement of existing products. We continue to implement new systems designed to provide improved quality, and reliability, service, greater efficiency and lower supply chain costs, and have substantially increasedcontinue our focus on process controls and validations, supplier controls, distribution controls and providing our operations teams with the training and tools necessary to drive continuous improvement in product quality. In addition, we remain focused on examining our operations and general business activities to identify cost-improvement opportunities in order to enhance our operational effectiveness.
Our products are designed and manufactured in technology centers around the world, either by us or third parties. In most cases, the manufacturing of our products is concentrated in one or a few locations. We consistently monitor our inventory levels, manufacturing and distribution capabilities, and maintain recovery plans to address potential disruptions that we may encounter. However, significant interruptions in the manufacturing of our products for an extended duration may result in loss of market share, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Many components used in the manufacturemanufacturing of our products are readily fabricated from commonly available raw materials or off-the-shelf items available from multiple supply sources; however, certain items are custom made to meet our specifications. We believe that in most cases, redundant capacity exists at our suppliers and that alternative sources of supply are available or could be developed within a reasonable period of time. We also have an on-going program to identify single-source components and to develop alternative back-up supplies and we regularly re-addressreaddress the adequacy and abilities of our suppliers to meet our needs.
In certain cases we may not be able to quickly establish additional or replacement suppliers for specific materials, components or products, largely due to the regulatory approval system and the complex nature of our manufacturing processes and those of our suppliers. A reduction or interruption in supply, an inability to develop and validate alternative sources if required, or a significant increase in the price of raw materials, components or products could adversely affect our operations and financial condition, particularly materials or components related to our CRM products and drug-eluting stent systems. In addition, our products require sterilization prior to sale and we utilize a mix of internal resources and third-party vendors to perform this service. We believe we have capabilities sufficient to sterilize our products; however, to the extent we or our third-party sterilizers are unable to sterilize our products, whether due to capacity, regulatory or other constraints, we may be unable to transition to other providers in a timely manner, which could have an adverse impact on our operations.
Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) promulgated new rules applicable to public companies like us that use certain minerals and metals, known as conflict minerals, in their products. The rules require us to undertake measures to understand the origin and, as need be, source of conflict minerals within our supply chain and to disclose, among other things, those measures and whether or not any such conflict minerals originated from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and adjoining countries. These requirements could, directly or indirectly, adversely affect the sourcing, availability and pricing of such minerals if they are found to be sourced from that region. In addition, we will incur additional costs to comply with the requirements, including with respect to measures undertaken to understand the origin and, as need be, source of conflict minerals used in our products.
Quality Assurance
We are committed to providing high quality products to our customers. To meet this commitment, we have implemented updated quality systems and concepts throughout our organization. Our quality system starts with the initial product specification and continues through the design of the product, component specification process and the manufacturing, sale and servicing of the product. Our quality system is intended to build in quality and process control and to utilize continuous improvement concepts throughout the product life. These systems are designed to enable us to satisfy the various international quality system regulations, including those of the FDA with respect to products sold in the U.S. All of our manufacturing facilities including our U.S. and European distribution centers are certified under the ISO13485 quality system standard, established by the International Standards Organization for medical devices, which requires, among other items, an implemented quality system that applies to component quality, supplier control, product design and manufacturing operations. This certification can be obtained only after a complete audit of a company’s quality system by an independent outside auditor. Maintenance of the certification requires that these facilities undergo periodic re-examination.
Environmental Regulation and Management
We are subject to various environmental laws, directives and regulations both in the U.S. and abroad. Our operations like those of other medical device companies, involve the use of substances regulated under environmental laws, primarily in manufacturing and sterilization processes. We do not believe that compliance with environmental laws will have a material impact on our capital expenditures, earnings or competitive position. However, given the scope and nature of these laws, there can be no assurance that environmental laws will not have a material impact on our results of operations. We assess potential environmental contingent liabilities on a regular basis. At present, we are not aware of any such liabilities that would have a material impact on our business.
We believe that sound environmental, health and safety performance contributes to our competitive strength while benefiting our customers, shareholdersstockholders and employees. We are focused on continuous improvement in these areas by reducing pollution, the depletion of natural resources, and our overall environmental footprint. Specifically, we are working to optimize energy and resource usage, ultimately reducing greenhouse gas emissions and waste. We are certified to the FTSE4Good Corporate Social Responsibility Index, managed by The Financial Times and the London Stock Exchange, which measures the performance of companies that meet globally recognized standards of corporate responsibility. This certification recognizes our dedication to those
standards, and it places us in a select group of companies with a demonstrated commitment to responsible business practices and sound environmental policies.
In 2013, we completed an initiative and
We have obtained ISO14001 certificationISO 14001:2004 certifications at our 14 major manufacturing plants and Tier 1 distribution centers around the world. ISO14001world, as well as our Corporate Headquarters in Marlborough, Massachusetts. ISO 14001:2004 is a globally recognized standard for Environmental Management Systems, established by the International Standards Organization, which provides a voluntary framework to identify key environmental aspects associated with our business. Using this environmental management system and the specific attributes of our certified locations in the United States,U.S., Ireland, Costa Rica and the Netherlands, we continue to improve our environmental performance and reduce our environmental footprint.
Competition
We encounter significant competition across our product lines and in each market in which we sell our products from various companies, some of which may have greater financial and marketing resources than we do. Our primary competitors include Abbott Laboratories; Medtronic Inc.; St. Jude Medical, Inc.;plc; and Cook Medical; as well as a wide range of medical device companies that sell a single or limited number of competitive products or participate in only a specific market segment. We also face competition from non-medical device companies, such as pharmaceutical companies, which may offer alternative therapies for disease states intended towhich could also be treated using our products.
We believe that our products and solutions compete primarily on their ability to deliver both clinical and economic outcomes for our customers; while also continuing to safely and effectively perform diagnostic and therapeutic procedures safely and effectively in a less-invasive manner, as well as to provide ease of use, comparative effectiveness, reliability and physician familiarity. In the current environment of managed care, with economically-motivated buyers, consolidation among healthcare providers, increased competition and declining reimbursement rates, we have been increasingly required to compete on the basis of price, value, reliability and efficiency.
We believe the current global economic conditions and healthcare reform measures could continue to put additional competitive pressure on us, including on our average selling prices, overall procedure rates and addressable market sizes. We recognize that our continued competitive success will depend upon our ability toto: offer products and solutions that offerprovide differentiated clinical and economic outcomes; create or acquire innovative, scientifically advanced technology;technologies; apply our technology and solutions cost-effectively and with superior quality across product lines and markets; develop or acquire proprietary products and solutions; attract and retain skilled personnel; obtain patent or other protection for our products; obtain required regulatory and reimbursement approvals; continually enhance our quality systems; manufacture and successfully market our products and solutions either directly or through outside parties; and supply sufficient inventory to meet customer demand.
Medical Device Regulatory Approvals
The medical devices that we manufacture and market are subject to regulation by numerous worldwide regulatory bodies, including the FDA and comparable international regulatory agencies. These agencies require manufacturers of medical devices to comply with applicable laws and regulations governing development, testing, manufacturing, labeling, marketing and distribution of medical devices. Devices are generally subject to varying levels of regulatory control, based on the risk level of the device.
In the U.S., authorization to commercially distribute a new device can generally can be met in one of three ways. The first process requires that a premarket notification (510(k)) be made to the FDA to demonstrate that the device is as safe and effective as, or substantially equivalent to, a legally marketed device, the “predicate” device. Applicants must submit performance data to establish substantial equivalence. In some instances, data from human clinical trials must also be submitted in support of a 510(k) premarket notification. If so, these data must be collected in a manner that conforms to the applicable Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) regulations. The FDA must issue a decision finding substantial equivalence before commercial distribution can occur. Changes to cleared devices that could not significantly affect the safety or effectiveness of the device can generally be made without additional 510(k) premarket notifications; otherwise, a new 510(k) is required.
The second process requires the submission of a premarket approval (PMA) application to the FDA to demonstrate that the device is safe and effective for its intended use. This approval process applies to most Class III devices, and generally requires clinical data to support the safety and effectiveness of the device, obtained in adherence with IDE requirements. The FDA will approve the PMA application if it finds that there is a reasonable assurance that the device is safe and effective for its intended purpose, and that the proposed manufacturing is in compliance with the Quality System Regulation (QSR). ThisFor novel technologies, the FDA will generally seek input from an advisory panel of medical experts and seek their views on the safety, effectiveness and benefit-risk of the device. The PMA process is generally more detailed, lengthier and more expensive than the 510(k) process.
The third process requires that an application for a Humanitarian Device Exemption (HDE) be made to the FDA for the use of a Humanitarian Use Device (HUD). An HUD is intended to benefit patients by treating or diagnosing a disease or condition that affects, or is manifested in, fewer than 4,000 individuals in the U.S. per year. The application submitted to the FDA for an HDE is similar in both form and content to a PMA application, but is exempt from the effectiveness requirements of a PMA. The HUD
provision of the regulation provides an incentive for the development of devices for use in the treatment or diagnosis of diseases affecting smaller patient populations.
In the European Union,Economic Area (EEA), we are required to comply with applicable medical device directives (includingMedical Device Directives, specifically the Medical Devices Directive and the Active Implantable Medical Devices Directive)Device Directive, and obtain CE Mark certificationCertification in order to market medical devices.devices within the EEA. The CE Mark is applied depending on device classification, either following approval from anthe appointed independent notified bodyNotified Body or declaration of conformity. Itthrough self-certification. CE Marking is an internationala symbol of adherencecompliance to quality assurance standards and compliance withthe applicable EuropeanEssential Requirements of the Medical Devices Directives. Directive and associated Standards. The EU regulatory bodies will finalize a new Medical Device Regulation (MDR) in 2017, which will replace the existing Directives and will provide three years for transition and compliance. The MDR will change several aspects of the existing regulatory framework, such as clinical data requirements, and introduce new ones, such as Unique Device Identification (UDI). We, and the Notified Bodies who will oversee compliance to the new MDR, face uncertainties as the MDR is rolled out and enforced by the Commission and EEA Competent Authorities, creating risks in several areas including the CE Marking process and data transparency in the upcoming years.
We are also required to comply with the regulations of each other country where we commercialize products before we can launch new products, such as the requirement that we obtain approval from the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (MHLW) and China Food and Drug Administration before we can launchAdministration. Many countries that previously did not have medical device regulations, or minimal such regulations, are now introducing them. For example, India is in the process of establishing new products in Japan and China, respectively.medical device regulations.
The FDA and other worldwide regulatory agencies and competent authorities actively monitor compliance to local laws and regulations through review and inspection of design and manufacturing practices, record keeping, reporting of adverse events,
labeling and promotional practices. The FDA can ban certain medical devices; detain or seize adulterated or misbranded medical devices; order repair, replacement or refund of these devices; and require notification of health professionals and others with regard to medical devices that present unreasonable risks of substantial harm to the public health. The FDA may also enjoin and restrain a company for certain violations of the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and the Safe Medical Devices Act pertaining to medical devices, or initiate action for criminal prosecution of such violations. Regulatory agencies and authorities in the countries where we do business can halt production in or distribution within their respective country, or otherwise take action in accordance with local laws and regulations.
International sales of medical devices manufactured in the U.S. that are not approved by the FDA for use in the U.S., or that are banned or deviate from lawful performance standards, are subject to FDA export requirements. Exported devices are subject to the regulatory requirements of each country to which the device is exported. Some countries do not have medical device regulations, but in most foreign countries, medical devices are regulated. Frequently, regulatory approval may first be obtained in a foreign country prior to application in the U.S. due to differing regulatory requirements; however, other countries, such as China for example, require approval in the country of origin first. Most countries outside of the U.S. require that product approvals be recertified on a regular basis, generally every five years. The recertification process requires that we evaluate any device changes and any new regulations or standards relevant to the device and, where needed, conduct appropriate testing to document continued compliance. Where recertification applications are required, they must be approved in order to continue selling our products in those countries.
Our global regulatory environment is becoming increasingly stringent, and unpredictable, which could increase the time, cost and complexity of obtaining regulatory approvals for our products. Several countries that did not have regulatory requirements for medical devices have established such requirements in recent years and other countries have expanded, or plan to expand, on existing regulations. Certain regulators are requiring local clinical data in addition to global clinical data. While harmonization of global regulations has been pursued, requirements continue to differ significantly among countries. We expect this global regulatory environment will continue to evolve, which could impact our ability to obtain future approvals for our products, or could increase the cost and time to obtain such approvals in the future.
Government Affairs
We maintain a global Government Affairs presence, headquartered in Washington, D.C., to actively monitor and advocate on myriad legislation and policies impacting us, both on a domestic and an international front. The Government Affairs office works closely with members of Congress and committee staff, the White House and Administration office,offices, state legislatures and regulatory agencies, and governments overseas on issues affecting our business. Our proactive approach and depth of political and policy expertise are aimed at having our positions heard by federal, state and global decision-makers, while also advancing our business objectives by educating policymakers on our positions, key priorities and the value of our technologies. The Government Affairs office also manages our political action committee and works closely with trade groups on issues affecting our industry and healthcare in general.
Healthcare Policies
Political, economic and regulatory influences around the globeworld continue subjectingto subject the healthcare industry to potential fundamental changes that could substantially affect our results of operations. Government and private sector initiatives related to limiting the growth of healthcare costs (including price regulation);, coverage and payment policies;policies, comparative effectiveness reviews of therapies;therapies, technology assessments;assessments, and health care delivery structure reforms, are continuing in many countries where we do business. We believe that these changes are causing the marketplace to put increased emphasis on the delivery of treatments that can reduce costs, improve efficiencies, and/or increase patient access. Although we believe our less-invasive products and technologies generate favorable clinical outcomes, value and cost efficiency, the resources necessary to demonstrate value to our customers, patients, payors,payers, and other stakeholders may be significant and new therapies may take a longer period of time to gain widespread adoption. In addition, the
The impact to our business of the United States’ Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's (ACA) provisions related to coverage expansion, payment reforms, and delivery system changes remains uncertain. Additionally,has been immaterial. The ACA and Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act were enacted into law in the ACAU.S. in 2010. The legislation imposed on medical device manufacturers a 2.3 percent excise tax on medical device manufacturers on U.S. sales of Class I, II and III medical devices beginning in January 2013. In December 2015, the Promise for Antibiotics and Therapeutics for Health Act, or PATH Act, was passed, which included legislation which temporarily suspended the 2.3 percent excise tax until December 31, 2017. We recorded $73 million of expense within our selling, generalhave substantially reinvested the amounts we would have expended on this tax into jobs, innovation, research and administrative expenses for 2013 as a result of this excise tax.development, collaborations with universities, and other initiatives that will help treat patients and drive revenue growth.
In addition, the federal
The Federal government, as part of the ACA, and certain state governments have enacted laws aimed at increasing transparency, or "sunshine," in relationships between medical device, biologics and pharmaceutical companies and healthcare professionals (HCPs). As a result, we are required by law to report many types of payments made and items of value provided to HCPs licensed by certain states. In addition, certainHCPs. Certain foreign jurisdictions are currently acting to implement similar laws. Failure to adhere to our policies, comply with requiredsunshine laws and/or implement and adhere to adequate policies and practices to address changes to legal and regulatory requirements could have a negative impact on our results of operations.
The federal election results in the U.S. may result in changes to insurance coverage, financing of insurance coverage in both the employer-sponsored insurance and individual markets, government programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, and federal sunshine laws. At this point, the impact of any such changes through repeal of, or major changes to, the ACA is unclear because specific changes in laws have not been enacted. Similarly, the status of the medical device tax after December 31, 2017 is not clear. While the specific policies that the new Administration and Congress may enact are not known, as noted below, we expect certain trends to continue placing pressure on pricing in the U.S.
We expect that pricing of medical devices will remain under pressure as governments and purchasers implementalternative payment reformsreform such as prospective payment systems for hospital care, preferential site of service payments, value-based purchasing, and accountable care organizations (ACOs). continue to take shape globally. We also expect marketplace changes to place pressure on medical device pricing globally as hospitals consolidate and large group purchasing organizations, hospital networks and other groups continue to seek to aggregate purchasing power. Similarly, governments are increasing the use of tenders, placing pressure on medical device pricing. Some governments also seek to limit the growth of healthcare costs through price regulation. Implementation of cost containment initiatives and healthcare reforms in significant markets such as the U.S., Japan and Europe and other markets may limit the price of, or the level at which reimbursement levelsis provided for, procedures using our products, which in turn may influence a hospital’s or physician's selection of products used to treat patients. In Japan, the government reviews reimbursement rate benchmarks every two years, which may significantly reduce reimbursement for procedures using our medical devices or deny coverage for those procedures.
We also expect marketplace changes to place pressure on medical device pricing as hospitals consolidate and large group purchasing organizations (GPOs), hospital networks and other groups that seek to aggregate purchasing power continue to take shape globally. Similarly, governments are increasing the use of tenders, placing pressure on medical device pricing.
In addition, patients and clinicians are becoming more informed on the risks and benefits of alternative treatments as comparative effectiveness research findings are beginning to be disseminated. Therefore, we believe that compelling clinical and economic data will become increasingly important to demonstrate efficacy and justify the economic benefits of technology purchases.
Third-Party Coverage and Reimbursement
Our products are purchased principally by hospitals, physicians and other healthcare providers around the world that typically bill various third-party payors,payers, including governmentalgovernment programs (e.g., Medicare and Medicaid in the United States),U.S.) and private insurance plans and managed care programs,payers, for the healthcare services provided to their patients.
Third-party payorspayers and governments may provideapprove or deny coverage for certain technologies and associated procedures based on independently determined assessment criteria. ReimbursementCoverage decisions by payorspayers for these servicestechnologies and associated procedures are based on a wide range of methodologies that may reflect the services' assessed resource costs, clinical outcomes and economic value. These reimbursement methodologiesvalue of the technologies and decisions confer different, and sometimes conflicting, levels of financial risk and incentives to healthcare providers and patients, and these methodologies and decisions are subject to frequent refinements. Third-party payors are also increasingly adjusting reimbursement rates, often downwards, and challenging the prices charged for medical products and services. There can be no assurance that our products will be automatically covered by third-party payors, that reimbursement will be available or, if available, that the third-party payors' coverage policies will not adversely affect our ability to sell our products profitably.associated procedures.
Proprietary Rights and Patent Litigation
We rely on a combination of patents, trademarks, trade secrets and non-disclosure agreements to protect our intellectual property. We generally file patent applications in the U.S. and foreign countries where patent protection for our technology is appropriate and available. As of December 31, 2013,2016, we held more than 16,00019,000 patents, and had approximately 7,2006,000 patent applications pending worldwide that cover various aspects of our technology. In addition, we hold exclusive and non-exclusive licenses to a
variety of third-party technologies covered by patents and patent applications. There can be no assurance that pending patent applications will result in the issuance of patents, that patents issued to or licensed by us will not be challenged or circumvented by competitors, or that these patents will be found to be valid or sufficiently broad to protect our technology or to provide us with a competitive advantage. In the aggregate, these intellectual property assets and licenses are of material importance to our business; however, we believe that no single patent, technology, trademark, intellectual property asset or license, except for those relating to our drug-eluting coronary stent systems, is material in relation to our business as a whole.
We rely on non-disclosure and non-competition agreements with employees, consultants and other parties to protect, in part, trade secrets and other proprietary technology. There can be no assurance that these agreements will not be breached, that we will have adequate remedies for any breach, that others will not independently develop equivalent proprietary information or that third parties will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets and proprietary knowledge.
There has been substantial litigation regarding patent and other intellectual property rights in the medical device industry, particularly in the areas in which we compete. We continue to defend ourselves against claims and legal actions alleging infringement of the patent rights of others. Adverse determinations in any patent litigation could subject us to significant liabilities to third parties, require us to seek licenses from third parties, and, if licenses are not available, prevent us from manufacturing, selling or using certain of our products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Additionally, we may find it necessary to initiate litigation to enforce our patent rights, to protect our trade secrets or know-how and to determine the scope and validity of the proprietary rights of others. Patent litigation can be costly and time-consuming, and there can be no assurance that our litigation expenses will not be significant in the future or that the outcome of litigation will be favorable to us. Accordingly, we may seek to settle some or all of our pending litigation, particularly to manage risk over time. Settlement may include cross licensing of the patents that are the subject of the litigation as well as our other intellectual property and may involve monetary payments to or from third parties.
We maintain an insurance policypolicies providing limited coverage against securities claims, and we are substantially self-insured with respect to product liability claims and fully self-insured with respect to intellectual property infringement claims. The absence of significant third-party insurance coverage increases our potential exposure to unanticipated claims or adverse decisions. See Item 3 and Note K – Commitments and Contingencies to our 20132016 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for a discussion of intellectual property, product liability and other litigation and proceedings in which we are involved. In management’s opinion, we are not currently involved in any legal proceeding other than those specifically identified in Note K, which, individually or in the aggregate, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, operations and/or cash flows.
Risk Management
We have an Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) program in which we provide coordinated oversight, control and continuous improvement of processes and tools used to identify and manage business risk. On an annual basis, we reassess our risks based on the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) ERM framework in the areas of strategic risk, financial risk, external risk, operational risk and compliance risk with the goal of achieving our business strategies and objectives. This assessment, which engages key individuals from our Board of Directors and management, provides increased visibility into the risks we face, highlights risk interdependencies, and seeks to improve overall risk management effectiveness. Employees
Current Economic Climate
Our results of operations could be substantially affected by global economic factors and local operating and economic conditions. Our customers may experience financial difficulties or be unable to borrow money to fund their operations which may adversely impact their ability or decision to purchase our products, particularly capital equipment, or to pay for our products they do purchase on a timely basis, if at all. We cannot predict to what extent global economic conditions, including the increased focus on healthcare systems and costs in the U.S. and abroad may negatively impact our average selling prices, our net sales and profit margins, procedural volumes and reimbursement rates from third-party payors.
Employees
As of December 31, 2013,2016, we had approximately 23,00027,000 employees, including approximately 10,00013,000 in operations; 7,0009,000 in selling, marketing and distribution; 4,000 in clinical, regulatory and research and development; and 2,0003,000 in administration. Of these employees, we employed approximately 11,00014,000 outside the U.S., approximately 6,0008,000 of whom are in the manufacturing operations function. We believe that the continued success of our business will depend, in part, on our ability to attract and retain qualified personnel, and we are committed to developing our people and providing them with opportunities to contribute to our growth and success.
Community Outreach
We are committed to making more possible inAdvancing Science to transform the lives of others and the communities where we live and work.all call home. We bring this commitment to life by supporting global, nationallocal, regional and localglobal health and education initiatives, striving to improve patient advocacy, adhering to strong ethical standards that deliver on our commitments, and minimizing our impact on the environment. A prominent example
We know that the world can be transformed when we apply the forces of our ongoing commitmentcompassion and the spirit of possibility to patients is our Closemake a difference in communities today and in the Gap program, which aims to eliminate cardiovascular care disparities by helping to ensure all patients - regardless of age, gender, race, ethnicity or primary language - receivefuture. When people have greater access to optimal cardiac care.
Tohealthcare and health information, and when children are given the opportunity to achieve this goal, Close the Gap provides awareness to the community about cardiovascular risk factors, teaches healthcare providers about cultural beliefsacademically, communities become healthy and barriers to treatment, and advocatesvibrant. For example, by working with Project HOPE (Health Opportunities for measures that help ensure all patients receive the cardiovascular care they need. By sponsoring programs and working via partnershipsPeople Everywhere) in 2016, thousands of people in the Ranchi District in India and in rural Johannesburg, South Africa were screened for chronic diseases, such as diabetes and hypertension. Not only were people informed about their health risks and educated about prevention, but new screening protocols were implemented and healthcare workers were trained to provide services well into the future.
Our focus on the next generation of innovators is evident in the over 150 Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) events and school programs we collaborated on with others to support the ever-curious minds of young learners around the world. Last year, more than 3,000 employee volunteers dedicated their time and talent to make a positive impact at more than 350 global community our Close the Gap program has helped these messages reach over one million people.events in 21 countries.
Through the Boston Scientific Foundation, establishedmore than 40 nonprofit organizations across the U.S. received nearly a million dollars in 2001, we fund non-profit organizationsgrant awards in our local U.S. communities. Community2016. These community grants focus on increasingare targeted to benefit disadvantaged populations by investing in programs that increase access to quality healthcare and improvingimprove educational opportunities, particularly with regardsrelated to science, technology, engineering and math (STEM)STEM education. In addition, the Foundation also provides scholarships to college-bound students of U.S. based Boston Scientific employees.
Seasonality
Our worldwide sales do not reflect any significant degree of seasonality; however, customer purchases have historically been lighterlower in the third quarter of the year, as compared to other quarters. This reflects, among other factors, lower demand during summer months in the northern hemisphere, particularly in European countries.
Available Information
Copies of our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), are available free of charge on our website (www.bostonscientific.com) as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file the material with or furnish it to the U.S. SEC. Printed copies of these posted materials are also available free of charge to shareholdersstockholders who request them in writing from Investor Relations, One300 Boston Scientific Place, Natick,Way, Marlborough, MA 01760-1537.01752-1234. Information on our website or linked to our website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report.
Safe Harbor for Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements that we may make from time to time, including statements contained in this Annual Report and information incorporated by reference into this Annual Report, constitute “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the Securities Act), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Forward-looking statements may be identified by words like “anticipate,” “expect,” “project,” “believe,” “plan,” “may,” “estimate,” “intend” and similar words. These forward-looking statements are based on our beliefs, assumptions and estimates using information available to us at the time and are not intended to be guarantees of future events or performance. These forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements regarding our financial performance; our business and results of operations; our business strategy and related financial returns; our growth initiatives, including our emerging markets strategy and investments; acquisitions and related payments, and the integration and impact of acquired businesses and technologies; the timing and impact of our restructuring and plant network optimization initiatives, including expected costs and cost savings; our intention not to pay dividends; our cash flow and use thereof; our outstanding accounts receivable in Europe; our estimates for the U.S. and worldwide CRM markets; our estimates for the worldwide coronary stent market; changes in the market and our market share for our businesses; procedural volumes and pricing pressures; competitive pressures facing our businesses; our royalty and other expenses; clinical trials, including timing and results; our product portfolio; product development and iterations; new and existing product launches, including their timing and acceptance, and their impact on the market, our market share and our business; our expectation to expand product launches internationally; competitive product launches; product performance and our ability to gain a competitive advantage; the strength of our technologies and pipeline; regulatory approvals, including their timing; our regulatory and quality compliance; compliance with laws, including environmental laws; expected research and development efforts and the allocation of research and development expenditures; our sales and marketing strategy, including the use of distributors and dealers; the impact resulting from the implementation of healthcare cost containment initiatives and healthcare reforms; third party coverage and reimbursement practices; the ability of our suppliers and sterilizers to meet our requirements; our ability to meet customer demand; goodwill and other intangible asset impairment analysis and charges; the effect of new accounting pronouncements on our financial results; the impact of healthcare reform legislation, including compliance with the Affordable Care Act; the effect of current global economic conditions; the effect of new and proposed tax laws, including the medical devise excise tax; the outcome and timing of transfer pricing and transactional-related matters pending before taxing authorities; our tax position and income tax reserves, and our ability to realize all our deferred tax assets; the outcome and impact of intellectual property, qui tamactions, governmental investigations and proceedings and litigation matters; adequacy of our reserves; the drivers and impact of our investment ratings; anticipated expenses and capital expenditures and our ability to finance
them; and our ability to meet the financial covenants contained in our credit facilities, or to renegotiate the terms of or obtain waivers for compliance with those covenants. If our underlying assumptions turn out to be incorrect, or if certain risks or uncertainties materialize, actual results could vary materially from the expectations and projections expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements. As a result, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any of our forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we do not intend to update any forward-looking statements even if new information becomes available or other events occur in the future.
The forward-looking statements in this Annual Report are based on certain risks and uncertainties, including the risk factors described in Item 1A under the heading “Risk Factors” and the specific risk factors discussed below and in connection with forward-looking statements throughout this Annual Report, which could cause actual results to vary materially from the expectations and projections expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements. These factors, in some cases, have affected and in the future could affect our ability to implement our business strategy and may cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by the forward-looking statements. These additional factors include, among other things, future political, economic, competitive, reimbursement and regulatory conditions; new product introductions; demographic trends; intellectual property; litigation and governmental investigations; financial market conditions; and future business decisions made by us and our competitors, all of which are difficult or impossible to predict accurately and many of which are beyond our control. We caution each reader of this Annual Report to consider carefully these factors.
The following are some of the important risk factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from our expectations in any forward-looking statements. For further discussion of these and other risk factors, see Item 1A - Risk Factors.
Our Businesses
Our ability to increase CRM net sales, including for both new and replacement units, expand the market and capture market share;
The volatility of the coronary stent market and our ability to increase our drug-eluting stent systems net sales, including with respect to our SYNERGY™, PROMUS® Element™ and Promus PREMIER™ and PROMUS™ Element™ stent systems, and capture market share;
The on-going impact on our business, including CRM and coronary stent businesses, of physician alignment to hospitals, governmental investigations and audits of hospitals, and other market and economic conditions on the overall number of procedures performed, including with respect to the drug-eluting coronary stent market the average number of stents used per procedure, and average selling prices;performed;
Competitive offerings and related declines in average selling prices for our products, particularly our drug-eluting coronary stent systems and our CRM products;
The performance of, and physician and patient confidence in, our products and technologies, including our coronary drug-eluting stent systems and CRM products, or those of our competitors;
The impact and outcome of ongoing and future clinical trials, including coronary stent and CRM clinical trials, and market studies undertaken by us, our competitors or other third parties, or perceived product performance of our or our competitors’competitors' products;
Variations in clinical results, reliability or product performance of our orand our competitors’competitor's products;
Our ability to timely and successfully acquire or develop, launch and supply new or next-generation products and technologies worldwide and across our businesses in line with our commercialization strategies in a timely and successful manner, including our S-ICD® system;system and the acquisition and integration of Neovasc, Inc., EndoChoice Holdings, Inc., the Resectr™ Tissue Resection Device from Distal Access, LLC, the LumenR™ Tissue Retractor System from LumenR LLC, Cosman Medical, Inc., the interventional radiology portfolio of CeloNova Biosciences, the American Medical Systems male urology portfolio and Xlumena, Inc.;
The effect of consolidation and competition in the markets in which we do business, or plan to do business;
Disruption in the manufacture or supply of certain components, materials or products, or the failure to timely secure alternative manufacturing or additional or replacement components, materials or products;products, in a timely manner;
Our ability to retain and attract key personnel, including in our cardiology and CRM sales force and other key cardiology and CRM personnel;
The impact of U.S. government sequestration, failure to increase the debt ceiling and/or future government shutdowns;
The impact of enhanced requirements to obtain regulatory approval in the United StatesU.S. and around the world, including the associated timing and cost of product approval; and
The impact of increased pressure on the availability and rate of third-party reimbursement for our products and procedures in the United StatesU.S. and around the world, including with respect to the timing and costs of creating and expanding markets for new products and technologies.
Regulatory Compliance and Litigation
The impact of healthcare policy changes and legislative or regulatory efforts in the United StatesU.S. and around the world to modify product approval or reimbursement processes, including a trend toward demonstrating clinical outcomes, comparative effectiveness and cost efficiency, as well as the impact of other healthcare reform legislation;
Risks associated with our regulatory compliance and quality systems and activities in the United StatesU.S. and around the world, including meeting regulatory standards applicable to manufacturing and quality processes;
Our ability to minimize or avoid future field actions or FDA warning letters relating to our products and processes and the on-going inherent risk of potential physician advisories related to medical devices;
The impact of increased scrutiny of and heightened global regulatory enforcement facing the medical device industry arising from political and regulatory changes, economic pressures or otherwise, including under U.S. Anti-Kickback Statute, U.S. False Claims Act (FCA) and similar laws in other jurisdictions; U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and/or similar laws in other jurisdictions;jurisdictions, and U.S. and foreign export control, trade embargo and custom laws;
Costs and risks associated with litigation;
The effect of our litigation and risk management practices, including self-insurance, and compliance activities on our loss contingencies, legal provision and cash flows;
The impact of, diversion of management attention as a result of, and costs to cooperate with, litigate and/or resolve, governmental investigations and our class action, product liability, contract and other legal proceedings; and
Risks associated with a failure to protect our intellectual property rights and the outcome of patent litigation.
Innovation and Certain Growth Initiatives
The timing, size and nature of our strategic growth initiatives and market opportunities, including with respect to our internal research and development platforms and externally available research and development platforms and technologies, and the ultimate cost and success of those initiatives and opportunities;
Our ability to complete planned clinical trials successfully, obtain regulatory approvals and launch new and next generation products in a timely manner consistent with cost estimates, including the successful completion of in-process projects from purchasedin-process research and development;
Our ability to identify and prioritize our internal research and development project portfolio and our external investment portfolio on profitable revenue growth opportunities as well as to keep them in line with the estimated timing and costs of such projects and expected revenue levels for the resulting products and technologies;
Our ability to successfully develop, manufacture and market new products and technologies in a timely and successful manner and the ability of our competitors and other third parties to develop products or technologies that render our products or technologies noncompetitive or obsolete;
The impact of our failure to succeed at or our decision to discontinue, write-down or reduce the funding of any of our research and development projects, including in-process projects from purchasedin-process research and development, in our growth adjacencies or otherwise;
Dependence on acquisitions, alliances or investments to introduce new products or technologies and to enter new or adjacent growth markets, and our ability to fund them or to fund contingent payments with respect to those acquisitions, alliances and investments; and
The failure to successfully integrate and realize the expected benefits from the strategic acquisitions, alliances and investments we have consummated or may consummate in the future.
International Markets
Our dependency on international net sales to achieve growth, including in emerging markets;
The impact of changes in our international structure and leadership;
Risks associated with international operations and investments, including the timing and collectability of customer payments, political and economic conditions, protection of our intellectual property, compliance with established and developing U.S. and foreign legal and regulatory requirements, including FCPA and/orand similar laws in other jurisdictions and U.S. and foreign export control, trade embargo and customscustom laws, as well as changes in reimbursement practices and policies;
Our ability to maintain or expand our worldwide market positions in the various markets in which we compete or seek to compete, including through investments in product diversification and emerging markets such as Brazil, Russia, India and China;
Our ability to execute and realize anticipated benefits from our investments in emerging markets; and
The potential effect of foreign currency fluctuations and interest rate fluctuations on our net sales, expenses and resulting margins.
Liquidity
Our ability to generate sufficient cash flow to fund operations, capital expenditures, global expansion initiatives, any litigation settlements and judgments, share repurchases and strategic investments and acquisitions as well as maintaining our investment grade ratings and managing our debt levels and covenant compliance;
Our ability to access the public and private capital markets when desired and to issue debt or equity securities on terms reasonably acceptable to us;
The unfavorable resolution of open tax matters, exposure to additional tax liabilities and the impact of changes in U.S. and international tax laws;
The impact of examinations and assessments by domestic and international taxing authorities on our tax provision, financial condition or results of operations;
The impact of goodwill and other intangible asset impairment charges, including on our results of operations; and
Our ability to collect outstanding and future receivables and/or sell receivables under our factoring programs.
Cost Reduction and Optimization Initiatives
Risks associated with significant changes made or expected to be made to our organizational and operational structure, pursuant to our 20142016 Restructuring plan and our 2011 Restructuring plan as expanded, as well as any further restructuring or optimization plans we may undertake in the future, and our ability to recognize benefits and cost reductions from such programs; and
Business disruption and employee distraction as we execute our global compliance program, restructuring and optimization plans and divestitures of assets or businesses and implement our other strategic and cost reduction initiatives.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
In addition to the other information contained in this Annual Report and the exhibits hereto, the following risk factors should be considered carefully in evaluating our business. Our business, financial condition, cash flows or results of operations could be materially adversely affected by any of these risks. This section contains forward-looking statements. You should refer to the explanation of the qualifications and limitations on forward-looking statements set forth at the end of Item 1 of this Annual Report. Additional risks not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also adversely affect our business, financial condition, cash flows or results of operations.
Declines in average selling prices for our products, particularly our drug-eluting coronary stent systems, may materially adversely affect our results of operations.
We have experienced pricing pressures across many of our businesses due to competitive activity, increased market power of our customers as the healthcare industry consolidates, economic pressures experienced by our customers, and the impact of managed care organizations and other third-party payors. Competitive pricing pressures have particularly affected our drug-eluting coronary stent system offerings. Continued declines in average selling prices of our products due to pricing pressures may have an adverse impact on our results of operations.
We derive a significant portion of our net sales from the sale of drug-eluting coronary stent systems and CRM products. Declines in market size, average selling prices, procedural volumes, and our share of the markets in which we compete; increased competition; market perceptions of studies published by third parties; or product launch delays may materially adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition, including potential future write-offs of our goodwill and other intangible assets balances.
Net sales from drug-eluting coronary stent systems represented approximately 16 percent of our consolidated net sales during 2013. In 2013, lower average selling prices driven by competitive and other pricing pressures and declines in procedural volumes resulted in a decline in our share of the U.S. drug-eluting stent market, as well as an overall decrease in the size of the market. There can be no assurance that these and other factors will not further impact our share of the U.S. or worldwide drug-eluting stent markets, that we will regain or gain share of the U.S. or worldwide drug-eluting stent markets, or that the size of the U.S. drug-eluting stent market will reach previous levels or will not decline further, all of which could materially adversely affect our results of operations or financial condition. In addition, a delay in the timing of the launch of next-generation products, the overall performance of, and continued physician confidence in, those products may result in a further decline in our market share and have an adverse impact on our results of operations.
Net sales from our CRM group represented approximately 27 percent of our consolidated net sales in 2013. Our CRM net sales declined in 2013 primarily due to the impact of average selling price pressures driven by governmental, competitive and other pricing pressures, partially offset by slight increases in unit volumes. There can be no assurance that the size of the CRM market will increase above existing levels or that we will be able to increase CRM market share or increase net sales in a timely manner, if at all. Decreases in market size or our share of the CRM market and decreases in net sales from our CRM products could have a significant impact on our financial condition or results of operations. In addition, our inability to increase our worldwide CRM net sales could result in future goodwill and other intangible asset impairment charges. Further, variability in the timing of the launch of next-generation products may result in excess or expired inventory positions and future inventory charges, or may result in a loss of market share and adversely impact our results of operations.
Consolidation in the healthcare industry could lead to increased demands for price concessions or limit or eliminate our ability to sell to certain of our significant market segments, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Because healthcare costs have risen significantly over the past decade, numerous initiatives and reforms by legislators, regulators and third-party payors to curb these costs have catalyzed a consolidation trend in the healthcare industry to aggregate purchasing power. As the healthcare industry consolidates, competition to provide products and services to industry participants has become and will continue to become more intense. This in turn has resulted in greater pricing pressures, decreased average selling prices, and the exclusion of certain suppliers from important market segments as group purchasing organizations, independent delivery networks and large single accounts continue to use their market power to consolidate purchasing decisions for hospitals. We expect that market demand, government regulation, third-party coverage and reimbursement policies, government contracting requirements, and societal pressures will continue to change the worldwide healthcare industry, resulting in further business consolidations and alliances among our customers, which may increase competition, exert further downward pressure on the prices of our products and may adversely impact our business, financial condition or results of operations.
We face intense competition and may not be able to keep pace with the rapid technological changes in the medical devices industry, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
The medical device markets in which we primarily participate are highly competitive. We encounter significant competition across our product lines and in each market in which our products are sold from various medical device companies, some of which may have greater financial and marketing resources than we do.do, including as a result of consolidation among our competitors in the healthcare industry. Our primary competitors include Abbott Laboratories; Medtronic Inc.; St. Jude Medical, Inc.plc; and Cook Medical, as well as a wide range of medical device companies that sell a single or limited number of competitive products or which participate in only a specific market segment. We also face competition from non-medical device companies, including pharmaceutical companies, which may offer alternative therapies for disease states intended to be treated using our products.
Additionally, the medical device markets in which we primarily participate are characterized by extensive research and development, and rapid technological change. Developments by other companies of new or improved products, processes or technologies may make our products or proposed products obsolete or less competitive and may negatively impact our net sales. We are required to devote continued efforts and financial resources to develop or acquire scientifically advanced technologies and products, apply our technologies cost-effectively across product lines and markets, obtain patent and other protection for our technologies and products, obtain required regulatory and reimbursement approvals and successfully manufacture and market our products consistent with our quality standards. If we fail to develop or acquire new products or enhance existing products, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. In addition, a delay in the timing of the launch of next-generation products, and the overall performance of, and continued physician confidence in, those products may result in declines in our market share and have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
We may experience declines in market size, average selling prices for our products, medical procedure volumes, and our share of the markets in which we compete, which may materially adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
We continue to experience pressures across many of our businesses due to competitive activity, increased market power of our customers as the healthcare industry consolidates, economic pressures experienced by our customers, and the impact of managed care organizations and other third-party payers. These and other factors may adversely impact market sizes, as well as our share of the markets in which we compete, the average selling prices for our products or medical procedure volumes. There can be no assurance that the size of the markets in which we compete will increase above existing levels, that we will be able to regain or gain market share or compete effectively on the basis of price or that the number of procedures in which our products are used will increase above existing levels. Decreases in market sizes or our market share and declines in average selling prices or procedural volumes could materially adversely affect our results of operations or financial condition.
Continued consolidation in the healthcare industry or additional governmental controls exerted over pricing in key markets
could lead to increased demands for price concessions or limit or eliminate our ability to sell to certain of our significant market segments, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Numerous initiatives and reforms by legislators, regulators and third-party payers to curb the rising cost of healthcare have catalyzed a consolidation of aggregate purchasing power. As the healthcare industry consolidates, competition to provide products and services is expected to continue to intensify, resulting in pricing pressures, decreased average selling prices, and the exclusion of certain suppliers from important market segments. We expect that market demand, government regulation, third-party coverage and reimbursement policies, government contracting requirements, and societal pressures will continue to change the worldwide healthcare industry, resulting in further business consolidations and alliances among our customers, which may increase competition, exert further downward pressure on the prices of our products and services and may adversely impact our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Healthcare cost containment pressures, government payment and delivery system reforms, changes in private payer policies, and marketplace consolidations could decrease the demand for our products, the prices which customers are willing to pay for those products and the number of procedures performed using our devices, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Our products are purchased principally by hospitals, physicians and other healthcare providers around the world that typically bill various third-party payers, including governmental programs (e.g., Medicare and Medicaid in the United States) and private health plans, for the healthcare services provided to their patients. Governments and payers may also institute changes in health care delivery systems that may reduce funding for services or encourage greater scrutiny of health care costs. The ability of customers to obtain appropriate reimbursement for their products and services from private and governmental third-party payers is critical to the success of medical technology companies because it affects which products customers purchase and the prices they are willing to pay. Reimbursement varies by country and can significantly impact the acceptance of new products and technologies. Even if we develop a promising new product, we may find limited demand for the product unless reimbursement approval is obtained from private and governmental third-party payers. Further legislative or administrative reforms to the reimbursement systems in the United States, Japan, or other countries in a manner that significantly reduces reimbursement for procedures using our medical devices or denies coverage for those procedures, including price regulation, competitive bidding and tendering, coverage and payment policies, comparative effectiveness of therapies, heightened clinical data requirements, technology assessments and managed-care arrangements, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations
We are subject to a number of market, business, financial, legal and regulatory risks and uncertainties with respect to our international operations whichthat could have a material impact on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
International net sales accounted for approximately 4743 percent of our global net sales in 2013,2016, with sales from emerging markets accounting for approximately eight10 percent. An important part of our growth strategy is to continue pursuing growth opportunities in net sales and market share outside of the U.S. by expanding global presence, including in in emerging markets. Our international operations are subject to a number of market, business and financial risks and uncertainties, including those related to political and economic conditions;instability; foreign currency exchange and interest rate fluctuations; competitive productsproduct offerings; local changes in health care financing and payment systems and health care delivery systems; local product preferences and requirements;requirements, including preferences for local manufacturers; workforce instability; less intellectual property protection;protection in certain countries than exists in the United States; and, in certain foreign countries, longer accounts receivable cycles. Such risks and uncertainties may adversely impact our ability to implement our growth strategy in these markets and, as a result, our sales growth, market share and operating profits from our international operations may be adversely affected.
Our international operations are subject to established and developing legal and regulatory requirements for medical devices in each country in which our products are marketed and sold. Most foreign countries have medical device regulations. Further, most countries outside of the U.S. require product approvals be renewed or recertified on a regular basis in order to continue to be marketed and sold there. In addition, several countries that previously did not have regulatory requirements for medical devices have established such requirements in recent years and other countries have expanded, or plan to expand, on existing regulations, including requiring local clinical data in addition to global clinical data. These factors have caused or may cause us to experience more uncertainty, risk, expense and delay in commercializing products in certain foreign jurisdictions, which could affect our ability to obtain approvals for our products in those jurisdictions and adversely impact our net sales, market share and operating profits from our international operations.
Further, international markets are increasingly being affected by economic pressure to contain healthcare costs, which can lead to more rigorous evidence requirements and lower reimbursement levelsrates for either our products directly or procedures in which our products are used. Governments and healthcare costs; andpayers may also institute changes in health care delivery systems that may reduce funding for services or encourage greater scrutiny of health care costs. In addition, certain international markets may also be affected by foreign government efforts to harmonizereference reimbursement rates andin other countries. All of these types of changes may ultimately reduce selling prices of our products or reduce the number of procedures in which our products are used, which may adversely impact our net sales, market share and operating profits from our international operations.
In addition, our international operations are subject to other established and developing U.S. and foreign legal and regulatory requirements, including the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and/or similar laws in other countries; and U.S. and foreign import and export controls and licensing requirements, trade protection and embargo measures and customs laws. Global businesses, including those in the medical device industry, are facing increasing scrutiny of, and heightened enforcement efforts with respect to, their international operations. Any alleged or actual failure to comply with legal and regulatory requirements may subject us to government scrutiny, civil and/or criminal proceedings, sanctions and other liabilities, which may have a material adverse effect on our international operations, financial condition, results of operations and/or liquidity.
Following a referendum in June 2016 in which voters in the United Kingdom (UK) approved an exit from the EU, the UK government is expected to initiate a process to withdraw from the EU (often referred to as “Brexit”) and begin negotiating the terms of the UK’s future relationship with the EU. A withdrawal could, among other outcomes, result in the deterioration of economic conditions, volatility in currency exchange rates, and increased regulatory complexities. These outcomes may adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Any significant changes in the political and economic, financial, competitive, legal and regulatory or reimbursement conditions where we conduct, or plan to expand, our international operations may have a material impact on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
If we are unable to manage our debt levels, maintain investment grade credit ratings at the three ratings agencies, or experience a disruption in our cash flows it could have an adverse effect on our cost of borrowing, financial condition or results of operations.
As part of our strategy to maximize stockholder value, we use financial leverage to reduce our cost of capital. Our outstanding debt balance was at $4.240$5.484 billion as of December 31, 20132016 and $4.256$5.677 billion as of December 31, 2012. In February 2012,2015. Although we currently have investment grade ratings at Moody's InvestorsInvestor Service, upgraded our corporate credit rating to Baa3, an investment-grade rating, and in July 2011, Fitch Ratings upgraded our corporate credit rating to BBB-, an investment-grade rating. In addition, Standard & Poor's Rating Service and Fitch Ratings, Services has maintained an investment-grade corporate credit rating for us since 2009. We believe these ratings reflect the strength of our product portfolio and cash flows, the reduction of our debt, and our improved financial fundamentals. Our inability to maintain investment grade credit ratings at the three ratings agencies, however, could increase our cost of borrowing funds in the future. Delays in our product development and new product launches disruption in our cash flow or our ability to continue to effectively manage our debt levels could have an adverse effect on our cost of borrowing, financial condition or results of operations. In addition, our credit and security facilities contain financial covenants that require us to maintain specified financial ratios.ratios and place other limits on our business. If we are unable to satisfy these covenants, we may be required to obtain waivers from our lenders and no assurance can be made that our lenders would grant such waivers on favorable terms or at all, and we could be required to repay any borrowings on demand.
We may record future goodwill impairment charges or other asset impairment charges related to one or more of our global reporting units, which could materially adversely impact our results of operations.
We test our goodwill balances during the second quarter of each year for impairment, or more frequently if indicators are present or changes in circumstances suggest that impairment may exist. We assess goodwill for impairment at the reporting unit level and, in evaluating the potential for impairment of goodwill, we make assumptions regarding estimated revenue projections, growth rates, cash flows and discount rates. Effective as of January 1, 2013, we reorganized our business from geographic regions to fully operationalized global business units. Our reorganization changed our reporting structure and changed the composition of our reporting units for goodwill impairment testing purposes. Following our reorganization from geographic regions to global business units and our reallocation of goodwill on a relative fair value basis, in the first quarter of 2013, as a result of our new organizational structure, we recorded a non-cash goodwill impairment charge of $423 million to write-down the goodwill to its implied fair value as of January 1, 2013. In the second quarter of 2012, as a result of revised estimates developed during our annual strategic planning process and analysis performed in conjunction with our 2012 annual goodwill impairment test we recorded a non-cash $3.602 billion ($3.579 billion after tax) impairment charge of the goodwill within our former Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA) reporting unit. Further, in the third quarter of 2012,2016, we performed an interim goodwill impairment test and recorded a non-cash $748 million (pre- and after-tax) charge associated with our former U.S. CRM reporting unit.
We have identified our global Neuromodulation reporting unit as being at higher risk of potential failure of the first step of the goodwill impairment test in future reporting periods. Our global Neuromodulation reporting unit holds $1.356 billion of allocated goodwill. The level of excess fair value over carrying value for this reporting unit identified during our annual goodwill impairment test was approximately 16 percent. Future changes infor all of our reporting units or inunits. In conjunction with our annual test, the structurefair value of our business as a result of future reorganizations, acquisitions or divestitures of assets or businesses could result in future impairments of goodwill within oureach reporting units, including global CRM. Further, the recoverability of our CRM-related amortizable intangibles ($4.374 billion globally as of December 31, 2013) is sensitiveunit exceeded its carrying value. Therefore, it was deemed not necessary to future cash flow assumptions and our global CRM business performance. The $4.374 billion of CRM-related amortizable intangibles are at higher risk of potential failure of the first step of the amortizable intangible recoverability test in future reporting periods. An impairment of a material portion of our CRM-related amortizable intangibles carrying value would occur ifproceed to the second step of the amortizable intangible test is required in a future reporting period.impairment test. Refer to Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates within our Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations contained in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a discussion of key assumptions used in our testing.
On a quarterly basis, we monitor the key drivers of fair value to detect events or other changes that would warrant an interim impairment test of our goodwill and intangible assets. Relatively small declines in the future performance and cash flows of a reporting unit or asset group, changes in our reporting units or in the structure of our business as a result of future reorganizations, acquisitions or divestitures of assets or businesses, or small changes in other key assumptions, may result in the recognition of significant asset impairment charges, which could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations.
Failure to integrate acquired businesses into our operations successfully could adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.
As part of our strategy to realign our business portfolio, we completed several acquisitions in 2013, 20122016, 2015 and 2011 in our strategic growth areas2014 and may pursue additional acquisitions in the future. Our integration of the operations of acquired businesses requires significant efforts, including corporate restructuring, the coordination of information technologies, research and development, sales and marketing, operations, regulatory, supply chain, manufacturing, quality systems and finance. These efforts result in additional expenses and involve significant amounts of management'smanagement time. Some of the factors that could affect the success of our acquisitions include, among others, the effectiveness of our due diligence process, our ability to execute our business plan for the acquired companies, the strength of the acquired companies' underlying technology, and ability to execute, results of clinical trials, regulatory approvals and reimbursement levels of the acquired products and related procedures, the continued performance of critical transition services, our ability to adequately fund acquired in-process research and development projects and retain key employees, and our ability to achieve synergies with our acquired companies, such as increasing sales of our products, achieving cost savings and effectively combining technologies to develop new products. In addition, foreign acquisitions involve unique risks, including those related to integration of operations across different geographies, cultures, and languages; currency risks; and risks associated with the economic, political, legal and regulatory environment in specific countries. Our failure to manage successfully and coordinate the growth of the combined acquired companies could have an adverse impact on our business and our future growth. In addition, we cannot be certain that the businesses we acquire will become profitable or remain
so, and if our acquisitions are not successful, we may record related asset impairment charges in the future.future or experience other negative consequences on our results.
We may not be successful in our strategy relating to future strategic acquisitions of, investments in, or alliances with, other companies and businesses, which have been a significant source of historical growth for us, and will be key to our diversification into new markets and technologies.
Our strategic acquisitions, investments and alliances are intended to further expand our ability to offer customers effective, high quality medical devices that satisfy their interventional needs. These acquisitions, investments and alliances have been a significant source of our growth. If we are unsuccessful in our acquisitions, investments and alliances, we may be unable to grow our business. These acquisitions, investments and alliances have been a significant source of our growth. The success of our strategy relating to future acquisitions, investments or alliances will depend on a number of factors, including:
our ability to identify suitable opportunities for acquisition, investment or alliance, if at all;
the ability of our due diligence process to uncover potential issues with target companies;
our ability to finance any future acquisition, investment or alliance on terms acceptable to us, if at all;
whether we are able to complete an acquisition, investmentacquisitions, investments or alliancealliances in a timely manner on terms that are satisfactory to us, if at all;
our ability to successfully integrate and operate acquired businesses;
our ability to successfully identify and retain key target employees;
our ability to comply with applicable laws and regulations, including foreign laws and regulations; and
intellectual property and litigation related to newly acquired technologies.
Any potential future acquisitions we consummate may be dilutive to our earnings and may require additional debt or equity financing, depending on their size or nature.
We may not realize the expected benefits from our restructuring and optimization initiatives; our long-term expense reduction programs may result in an increase in short-term expense; and our efforts may lead to [additional] unintended consequences.
On an on-going basis weWe monitor the dynamics of the economy, the healthcare industry and the markets in which we compete and assess opportunities for improved operational effectiveness and efficiency and to better align expenses with revenues, while preserving our ability to make investments in research and development projects, capital and our people that we believe are important to our long-term success. As a result of these assessments, we have undertaken various restructuring and optimization initiatives in order to enhance our growth potential and position us for long-term success. For example, in October 2013,June 2016, we announced a restructuring initiative (the “2014“2016 Restructuring plan”Plan”) intended to develop global commercialization, technology and manufacturing capabilities in key growth markets, build on the progress we have madeour Plant Network Optimization (PNO) strategy which is intended to address financial pressuressimplify our manufacturing plant structure by transferring certain production lines among facilities, and expand operational efficiencies in a changing global marketplace, further strengthensupport of our operational effectiveness and efficiency and support new growth investments.operating income margin goals. Key activities under the 20142016 Restructuring planPlan include continuedstrengthening global infrastructure through evolving global real estate and workplaces, developing global commercial and technical competencies, enhancing manufacturing and distribution expertise in certain regions, and continuing implementation of our ongoing plant network optimization strategy (aimed at simplifying our manufacturing plant structure, reducing manufacturing costs and improving gross margins); continued focus on driving operational efficiencies; and ongoing business and commercial model changes. Other activities under the plan involve rationalizing organizational reporting structures to streamline various functions, eliminate bureaucracy, increase productivity and better align resources to business strategies and marketplace dynamics.PNO strategy. Activities under the plan were initiated in the fourthsecond quarter of 20132016 and are expected to be substantially completed by the end of 2015. We estimate that the 20142018. The 2016 Restructuring plan willPlan is expected to result in total pre-tax charges of approximately $175 million to $225 million and reduce gross annual pre-tax operating expenses by approximately $115 million to $150 million to $200 million exiting 2015, and weby the end of 2020 as program benefits are realized. We expect a substantial portion of the savings to be reinvested in strategic growth initiatives. Expense reduction initiatives under the plan include various cost and efficiency improvement measures, which may include workforce reductions;movement of business activities, facility consolidations and closures, and the transfer of certain productionproduct lines and/orbetween manufacturing facilities, which, due to the closure of certain facilities and other efforts to streamline and better align resourceshighly regulated nature of our business, among other actions.industry, requires a significant investment in time and cost to create duplicate manufacturing lines, run product validations, and seek regulatory approvals. These measures could yield unintended consequences, such as distraction of our management and employees, business disruption, attrition beyond any planned reduction in workforce, inability to attract or retain key personnel, and reduced employee productivity. Attrition beyond any planned reduction in workforce or a material decrease in employee morale or productivity, which could negatively affect our business, sales, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, workforce reductions may subject us to the risk of litigation, which could result in substantial cost. Moreover, our restructuring and optimization initiatives result in charges and expenses that impact our operating results. We cannot guarantee that the activities under the 20142016 Restructuring planPlan or other restructuring and optimization initiatives that we may undertake in the future will result in the desired efficiencies and estimated cost savings.
Current domestic and international economic conditions could adversely affect our cash flows and results of operations.
Uncertainty about global economic conditions, including as a result of credit and sovereign debt issues, has caused and may continue to cause disruption in the financial markets, including diminished liquidity and credit availability. These conditions may adversely affect our suppliers, leading them to experience financial difficulties or to be unable to borrow money to fund their operations, which could cause disruptions in our ability to produce our products. Our customers may experience financial difficulties or be unable to borrow money to fund their operations, which may adversely impact their ability or decision to purchase our products, particularly capital equipment, or to pay for our products they do purchase on a timely basis, if at all. In addition, we have accounts receivable factoring programs in certain European countries. Continued deterioration of the global economy or increase in sovereign debt issues may impact our ability to transfer receivables to third parties in certain of those countries in the future. Third parties such as banks offering factoring programs in these countries are looking to reduce their exposure levels to government owned or supported debt. This could result in terminations of, or changes to the costs or credit limits of our existing factoring programs. Such terminations or changes could have a negative impact on our cash flow and days sales outstanding. Within Italy, Spain, and Portugal the number of days our receivables are outstanding continue to be above historical levels. While we believe we have adequate allowances for doubtful accounts related to these accounts receivables, there can be no assurance that further deterioration in the global economy or increase in sovereign debt issues may not prevent collection of these accounts receivables and adversely affect our cash flows and results of operations.
The strength and timing of economic recovery remains uncertain and there can be no assurance that there will not be further deterioration in the global economy. Accordingly, we cannot predict to what extent global economic conditions, including sovereign debt issues and increased focus on healthcare systems and costs in the U.S. and abroad, may continue to negatively impact our average selling prices, net sales and profit margins, procedural volumes and reimbursement rates from third party payors.payers. In addition, conditions in the financial markets and other factors beyond our control may adversely affect our ability to borrow money in the credit markets, access the capital markets and to obtain financing for acquisitions or other general corporate and commercial purposes.
Healthcare policy changes, including recently passed healthcare reform legislation, may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Political, economic and regulatorypolicy influences are subjectingleading the healthcare industry to potential fundamentalmake substantial structural and financial changes that could substantially affectwill continue affecting our results of operations. Government and private sector initiatives limiting the growth of healthcare costs (including price regulation), coverage and payment policies, comparative effectiveness of therapies, technology assessments and healthcare delivery structure reforms, are continuing in many countries where we do business. We believe that these changes are causing the marketplace to put increased emphasis on the delivery of more treatments that can reduce costs, improve efficiencies, and/or increase patient access. Although we believe our less-invasive products and technologies generate favorable clinical outcomes, value and cost efficiency, the resources necessary and evidence necessary to demonstrate value to our customers, patients, payors,payers, and other stakeholders may be significant and it may take a longer period of time to gain widespread adoption. Moreover, there can be no assurance that our strategies will succeed for every product.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act of 2010 were enacted into law in the U.S. in March 2010. As a U.S. headquartered company with significant sales in the United States, this healthcare reform law will materially impact us. Certain provisions of the law will not be effective until 2014 and 2015. While many of the law's programs and requirements are not fully established and the consequences are not fully understood, one provision, the medical device tax is having a direct impact.included in this law has materially affected us. The law imposed on medical device manufacturers a 2.3 percent excise tax on U.S. sales of Class I, II and III medical devices beginning in January 2013. Under the current administration, there may be a permanent repeal or an alteration of some or all elements of the ACA, but at this time it is not definite that a change will be enacted or what new healthcare provisions may be implemented. While the implementation of the medical device tax has been suspended until December 31, 2017, the status of the tax for sales after December 31, 2017 is not clear. The tax may continue to be suspended, or may be reinstated at the same or at a different level. Other provisions of this law, including comparative effectiveness research, and pilot programs to evaluate alternative payment methodologies and other changes to the payment systems, could meaningfully change the way healthcare is developed and delivered, and may adversely affect our business and results of operations.
Any changes in government policies that lower reimbursement for our products or reduce medical procedure volumes in countries in which we conduct business could adversely affect our business and results of operations. We cannot predict the specific healthcare programs and regulations that will be ultimately implemented by regional and national governments globally. However, any changes that lower reimbursements for either our products and/or procedures using our products, reduce medical procedure volumes or increase cost containment pressures on us or other participantsothers in the healthcare industrysector could adversely affect our business and results of operations.
Healthcare cost containment pressures, government payment and delivery system reforms, changes in private payer policies, and marketplace consolidations could decrease the demand for our products, the prices which customers are willing to pay for those products and the number of procedures performed using our devices, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Our products are purchased principally by hospitals, physicians and other healthcare providers around the world that typically bill various third-party payors, including governmental programs (e.g., Medicare and Medicaid in the United States) and private health plans, for the healthcare services provided to their patients. The ability of customers to obtain appropriate reimbursement for their products and services from private and governmental third-party payors is critical to the success of medical technology companies because it affects which products customers purchase and the prices they are willing to pay. Reimbursement varies by country and can significantly impact the acceptance of new products and technologies. Even if we develop a promising new product, we may find limited demand for the product unless reimbursement approval is obtained from private and governmental third-party payors. Further legislative or administrative reforms to the reimbursement systems in the United States, Japan, or other countries in a manner that significantly reduces reimbursement for procedures using our medical devices or denies coverage for those procedures, including price regulation, competitive pricing and tendering, coverage and payment policies, comparative effectiveness of therapies, technology assessments and managed-care arrangements, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Third-party payors for hospital services globally continue to implement policies to contain healthcare costs. The introduction of cost containment incentives, combined with closer scrutiny of healthcare expenditures by both private health insurers and employers, has resulted in increased discounts and contractual adjustments to hospital charges for services performed, led to increased physician employment by hospitals in the United States, led to hospital consolidation, and shifted services to the outpatient setting. Initiatives to limit the increase of healthcare costs, including price regulation, are also underway in several countries in which we do business. Hospitals or physicians may respond to these cost-containment pressures by substituting lower cost products or other therapies for our products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
We are subject to extensive and dynamic medical device regulation, which may impede or hinder the approval or sale of our products and, in some cases, may ultimately result in an inability to obtain approval of certain products or may result in the recall or seizure of previously approved products.
Our products, marketing, sales and development activities and manufacturing processes are subject to extensive and rigorous regulation by the FDA pursuant to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDC Act), by comparable agencies in foreign countries, and by other regulatory agencies and governing bodies. Under the FDC Act, medical devices must receive FDA clearance or approval or an exemption from such clearance or approval before they can be commercially marketed in the U.S. In the European Union, we are required to comply with applicable medical device directives (including the Medical Devices Directive and the Active Implantable Medical Devices Directive) and obtain CE Mark certification in order to market medical devices. The CE Mark is applied following approval from an independent notified body or declaration of conformity. The process of obtaining marketing approval or clearance from the FDA or by comparable agencies in foreign countries for new products, or with respect to enhancements or modifications to existing products, could:
take a significant period of time;
require the expenditure of substantial resources;
involve rigorous pre-clinical and clinical testing, as well as increased post-market surveillance;
require changes to products; and
result in limitations on the indicated uses of products.
In addition, exported devices are subject to the regulatory requirements of each country to which the device is exported. Some countries do not have medical device regulations, but in most foreign countries, medical devices are regulated. Frequently, regulatory approval may first be obtained in a foreign country prior to application in the U.S. due to differing regulatory requirements; however, other countries, such as China for example, require approval in the country of origin or legal manufacturer first. Most countries outside of the U.S. require that product approvals be renewed or recertified on a regular basis, generally every four to five years. The renewal or recertification process requires that we evaluate any device changes and any new regulations or standards relevant to the device and conduct appropriate testing to document continued compliance. Where renewal or recertification applications are required, they may need to be renewed and/or approved in order to continue selling our products in those countries. There can be no assurance that we will receive the required approvals for new products or modifications to existing products on a timely basis or that any approval will not be subsequently withdrawn or conditioned upon extensive post-market study requirements.
Our global regulatory environment is becoming increasingly stringent, and unpredictable, which could increase the time, cost and complexity of obtaining regulatory approvals for our products, as well as the clinical and regulatory costs of supporting those approvals. Several countries that did not have regulatory requirements for medical devices have established such requirements in recent years and other countries have expanded on existing regulations. Certain regulators are exhibiting less flexibility and are requiring local preclinical and clinical data in addition to global data. While harmonization of global regulations has been pursued, requirements continue to differ significantly among countries. We expect this global regulatory environment will continue to evolve, which could impact our ability to obtain future approvals for our products, or could increase the cost and time to obtain such approvals in the future.
The European Union regulatory bodies will finalize a new Medical Device Regulation (MDR) in 2017, which will replace the existing Directives and will provide three years for transition and compliance. The MDR will change several aspects of the existing regulatory framework, such as clinical data requirements, and introduce new ones, such as Unique Device Identification (UDI). We, and the Notified Bodies who will oversee compliance to the new MDR, face uncertainties as the MDR is rolled out and enforced by the Commission and EEA Competent Authorities, creating risks in several areas including the CE Marking process and data transparency in the upcoming years.
The FDA and other worldwide regulatory agencies actively monitor compliance with local laws and regulations through review and inspection of design and manufacturing practices, recordkeeping, reporting of adverse events, labeling and promotional practices. The FDA can ban certain medical devices; detain or seize adulterated or misbranded medical devices; order repair, replacement or refund of these devices; and require notification of health professionals and others with regard to medical devices that present unreasonable risks of substantial harm to the public health. The FDA can take action against a company that promotes "off-label" uses. The FDA may also enjoin and restrain a company for certain violations of the FDC Act and the Safe Medical Devices Actother amending Acts pertaining to medical devices, or initiate action for criminal prosecution of such violations. Any adverse regulatory action, depending
on its magnitude, may restrict a company from effectively marketing and selling its products, may limit a company's ability to obtain future premarket clearances or approvals, and could results in a substantial modification to the company's business practices and operations. International sales of medical devices manufactured in the U.S. that are not approved by the FDA for use in the U.S., or that are banned or deviate from lawful performance standards, are subject to FDA export requirements.
Regulations regarding the development, manufacture and sale of medical devices are evolving and subject to future change. We cannot predict what impact, if any, those changes might have on our business. Failure to comply with regulatory requirements could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product or manufacturer could result in fines, delays or suspensions of regulatory clearances or approvals, seizures or recalls of products, physician advisories or other field actions, operating restrictions and/or criminal prosecution. We may also initiate field actions as a result of a failure to strictly comply with our internal quality policies. The failure to receive product approval clearance on a timely basis, suspensions of regulatory clearances, seizures or recalls of products, physician advisories or other field actions, or the withdrawal of product approval by the FDA or by comparable agencies in foreign countries could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Our products including those of our cardiovascular businesses, are continually subject to clinical trials conducted by us, our competitors or other third parties, the results of which may be unfavorable, or perceived as unfavorable by the market, and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
As a part of the regulatory process of obtaining marketing clearance for new products and new indications for existing products, we conduct and participate in numerous clinical trials with a variety of study designs, patient populations and trial endpoints. Unfavorable or inconsistent clinical data from existing or future clinical trials conducted by us, by our competitors or by third parties, or the FDA's or the market's perception of this clinical data, may adversely impact our ability to obtain product approvals, our position in, and share of, the markets in which we participate and our business, financial condition, results of operations or future prospects.
Our future growth is dependent upon the development of new products and enhancement of existing products, which requires significant research and development, clinical trials and regulatory approvals, all of which aremay be very expensive and time-consuming and may not result in commercially viable products.
In order to develop new products and enhance existing products, we focus our research and development programs largely on the development of next-generation and novel technology offerings across multiple programs and businesses. The development of new products and enhanceenhancement of existing products requires significant investment in research and development, clinical trials and regulatory approvals. The results of our product development efforts may be affected by a number of factors, including our ability to anticipate customer needs, innovate, and develop new products, complete clinical trials, obtain regulatory approvals and reimbursement in the United States and abroad, manufacture products in a cost-effective manner, obtain appropriate intellectual property protection for our products, and gain and maintain market approval of our products. There can be no assurance that any products now in development or that we may seek to develop in the future will achieve technological feasibility, obtain regulatory approval or gain market acceptance. If we are unable to develop and launch new products and enhanced products, our ability to maintain or expand our market position in the markets in which we participate may be materially adversely impacted. Further, we are continuing to investigate, and have completed several acquisitions investments involving,that involve opportunities to further expand our presence in, and diversify into priority growth areas by accessing new products and technologies. There can be no assurance that our investments will be successful or we will be able to access new products and technologies on terms favorable to us, or that these products and technologies will achieve commercial feasibility, obtain regulatory approval or gain market acceptance. A delay in the development or approval of new products and technologies or our decision to reduce our investments may adversely impact the contribution of these technologies to our future growth.
Additionally, certain products or groups of products, in particular new products or enhancements of existing products, may have a disproportionate impact on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Failure to meet growth projections, poor clinical outcomes, increasing regulatory requirements, launch delays, and inability to effectively scale manufacturing and achieve targeted margins with respect to any of these products or groups of products in particular may materially adversely impact on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
26
The medical device industry and its customers are experiencing greatercontinue to face scrutiny and regulation by governmental authorities and are often the subject of numerous investigations, often involving marketing and other business practices or product quality issues including device recalls or advisories. These investigations could result in the commencement of civil and criminal proceedings; imposition of substantial fines, penalties and administrative remedies, including corporate integrity agreements, stipulated judgments or exclusion; divert the attentiondiversion of our employees and management; imposemanagement's attention; imposition of administrative costs and have an adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and liquidity; and may lead to greater governmental regulation in the future.
The medical devices we design, develop, manufacture and market are subject to rigorous regulation by the FDA and numerous other federal, state and foreign governmental authorities. These authorities have been increasing their scrutiny ofcontinue to highly scrutinize our industry. We have received, and in the future may receive, subpoenas and other requests for information from Congress and other state and federal governmental agencies, including, among others, the U.S. Department of Justice, the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the Department of Defense. WeDefense, as well as from foreign governments and agencies. The requests and/or subpoenas we have also received subpoenas and other requests for information from comparable international governmental agencies. These investigations relate primarily to financial arrangements with healthcare providers, regulatory compliance and sale and/or product promotional practices. We have cooperated with these investigationssubpoenas and responded to theseother requests for information, and expect to continue to do so in the future. We cannot predict when the investigationsa matter will be resolved, the outcome of these investigationsthe matter or theirits impact on us, and cooperation may involve significant costs, including document production costs. An adverse outcome in one or more of these investigationsany matter could include the commencement of an investigation, civil and criminal proceedings; substantial fines, penalties and administrative remedies, including exclusion from government reimbursement programs, entry into Corporate Integrity Agreements (CIAs) with governmental agencies and amendments to any existing CIAs. In addition, resolution of any of these mattersmatter could involve the imposition of additional and costly compliance obligations. For example, in 2009, we entered into a civil settlement with the DOJ regarding the DOJ's investigation relating to certain post-market surveys conducted by Guidant Corporation before we acquired Guidant in 2006. As part of the settlement, we entered into a 5-year CIA with the Office of Inspector General for HHS. The CIA requiresHHS, which required various provisions, including enhancements to certain compliance procedures related to financial arrangements with healthcare providers. The obligations imposed upon us by the CIACooperation with requests and cooperation with ongoing investigations involvefrom external agencies result in employee resource costs and diversion of employee focus. We may incur additional future costs to fulfill the obligations imposed upon us by the CIA. Further, the CIA, and ifIf any of the ongoingrequests or investigations continue over a long period of time, they could further divert the attention of management from the day-to-day operations of our business and impose significant additional administrative burdens on us. These potential consequences, as well as any adverse outcome from these requests or investigations, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.
In addition, certain foreign governments, state governments (including that of Massachusetts, where we are headquartered) and the U.S. federal government have enacted legislation aimed at increasing transparency of our interactions with healthcare providers. As a result, we are requiredan example, compliance with the U.S. Physician Payment Sunshine Act requires us by law to disclose payments and other transfers for value to healthcare providers licensed by certain states and, starting with payments or other transfers of value made on or after August 1, 2013, to all U.S. physicians and U.S. teaching hospitals at the U.S. federal level.level made after August 1, 2013. Any failure to comply with these legal and regulatory requirements could impact our business. In addition, we have and may continue to devote substantial additional time and financial resources to further develop and implement enhanced structure, policies, systems and processes to comply with enhanced legal and regulatory requirements, which may also impact our business.
Further, Supreme Court case law has clarifiedWe anticipate that the FDA's authority over medical devices preempts certain state tort laws, but recently federal appeals courtsgovernmental authorities will continue to scrutinize our industry closely, and that additional regulation may increase compliance and legal cost and exposure to litigation, and have determined that some state tort law claims remain, and legislation has been introduced at the federal level to allow state intervention, all of which could lead to increased and inconsistent regulation at the state level.additional adverse effects on our operations.
Changes in tax laws, unfavorable resolution of tax contingencies, or exposure to additional income tax liabilities could have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations and/or liquidity.
We are subject to income taxes as well as non-income based taxes, in both the U.S. and various foreign jurisdictions. We are subject to on-going tax audits in various jurisdictions. Tax authorities may disagree with certain positions we have taken and assess additional taxes. We regularly assess the likely outcomes of these audits in order to determine the appropriateness of our tax provision and have established contingency reserves for material, known tax exposures. However, the calculation of such tax exposures including potential tax audit adjustments related to transfer pricing methodology disputes.
We have received Noticesinvolves the application of Deficiency from the IRS reflecting proposed audit adjustments for Guidant Corporation for its 2001 through 2006 tax years and Boston Scientific Corporation for its 2006 and 2007 tax years. Subsequent to issuing these Notices, the IRS conceded a portion of its original assessment. The total incremental tax liability now asserted by the IRS for the applicable periods is $1.162 billion plus interest. The primary issue in dispute for all years is the transfer pricing in connection with the technology license agreements between domestic and foreign subsidiaries of Guidant. In addition, the IRS has proposed adjustments in connection with the financial terms of our Transaction Agreement with Abbott Laboratories pertaining to the sale of Guidant's vascular intervention business to Abbott in April 2006. We do not agree with the transfer pricing methodologies applied by the IRS or its resulting assessment and we believe that the IRS has exceeded its authority by attempting to adjust the terms of our negotiated third-party agreement with Abbott. In addition, we believe that the IRS positions with regard to these matters are inconsistent with the applicablecomplex tax laws and regulations in many jurisdictions, as well as interpretations as to the existing Treasury regulations.
We believe we have meritorious defenses for ourlegality under European Union state aid rules of tax filings and we have filed, or will timely file, petitions with the U.S. Tax Court contesting the Notices of Deficiency for the tax yearsadvantages granted in challenge. No payments on the net assessment would be required until the dispute is definitively resolved, which, based on experiences of other companies, could take several years. The IRS is currently examining the 2008 through 2010 tax years of Boston Scientific. During the first quarter of 2014 we were notified by the IRS of their intent to propose significant adjustments to our tax returns for these tax years based upon the same transfer pricing methodologies that are currently being contested in U.S. Tax Court for our tax years prior to 2008. As with the prior years, we disagree with the transfer pricing methodologies being applied by the IRS and we expect to contest any adjustments received through applicable IRS and judicial procedures, as appropriate. We believe that our income tax reserves associated with these matters are adequate and the final resolution will not have a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations. However, final resolution is uncertain and could have a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations.
Therecertain jurisdictions. Therefore, there can be no assurance that we will accurately predict the outcomes of these disputes or other tax audits or that issues raised by tax authorities will be resolved at a financial cost that does not exceed our related reserves, and the actual outcomes of these disputes and other tax audits could have a material impact on our results of operations or financial condition.
On July 19, 2016, we entered into a Stipulation of Settled Issues with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) intended to resolve certain transfer pricing issues, as well as certain issues related to our transaction with Abbott, for the 2001 through 2007 tax years. The Stipulation of Settled Issues is contingent upon IRS Office of Appeals (IRS Appeals) applying the same basis of settlement to all transfer pricing issues for the Company’s 2008, 2009, and 2010 tax years, and if applicable, review by the U.S. Congress Joint Committee on Taxation. In October 2016, we reached an agreement in principle with IRS Appeals as to the resolution of the
transfer pricing issues in 2008, 2009, and 2010 tax years, subject to additional calculations of tax as well as documentation to memorialize our agreement. The final resolution of these issues is contingent and if the Stipulation of Settled Issues is not finalized, it could have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.
Additionally, changes in tax laws or tax rulings could materially impact our effective tax rate. For example, proposals for fundamental U.S. corporate tax reform, if enacted, could have a significant adverse impact on our future results of operations. In addition, effective January 1, 2013Additionally, the Patient ProtectionU.S. Congress, government agencies in non-U.S. jurisdictions where we and Affordable Care Act imposesour affiliates do business, and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development have recently focused on issues related to the taxation of multinational corporations. One example is in the area of “base erosion and profit shifting,” where profits are claimed to be earned for tax purposes in low-tax jurisdictions, or payments are made between affiliates from a 2.3 percent excisejurisdiction with high tax on medical device manufacturers on U.S. salesrates to a jurisdiction with lower tax rates. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development has released several components of Class I, IIits comprehensive plan to create an agreed set of international rules for fighting base erosion and III medical devices; and for 2013 we recorded $73 million of expenses within our selling, general and administrative expenses asprofit shifting. As a result, the tax laws in the U.S. and other countries in which we and our affiliates do business could change on a prospective or retroactive basis, and any such changes could materially adversely affect our business.
Our operations in Puerto Rico and Costa Rica presently benefit from various tax incentives and grants. Unless these incentives and grants are extended, they will expire between 2023 and 2028. If we are unable to renew, extend, or obtain new incentive and grants, the expiration of this excise tax.the existing incentives and grants could have a material impact on our financial results in future periods.
We may not effectively be able to protect our intellectual property or other sensitive Company data, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
The medical device market in which we primarily participate is largely technology driven. Physician customers have historically moved quickly to new products and new technologies. As a result, intellectual property rights, particularly patents and trade secrets, play a significant role in product development and differentiation. However, intellectual property litigation is inherently complex and unpredictable and appellate courts can overturn lower court patent decisions. Furthermore, as our business increasingly relies on technology systems and infrastructure, our intellectual property, other proprietary technology and other sensitive Company data are potentially vulnerable to loss, damage or misappropriation. Finally, our ability to protect novel business models is uncertain.
Competing parties in our industry frequently file multiple suits to leverage patent portfolios across product lines, technologies and geographies and to balance risk and exposure between the parties. In some cases, several competitors are parties in the same proceeding, or in a series of related proceedings, or litigate multiple features of a single class of devices. These forces frequently drive settlement not only of individual cases, but also of a series of pending and potentially related and unrelated cases. In addition, although monetary and injunctive relief is typically sought, remedies and restitution are generally not determined until the conclusion of the trial court proceedings and can be modified on appeal. Accordingly, the outcomes of individual cases are difficult to time, predict or quantify and are often dependent upon the outcomes of other cases in other geographies.
SeveralA number of third parties have asserted that our current and former product offerings infringe patents owned or licensed by them. We have similarly asserted that products sold by our competitors infringe patents owned or licensed by us. Adverse outcomes in one or more of the proceedings against us could limit our ability to sell certain products in certain jurisdictions, or reduce our operating margin on the sale of these products and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.
Patents and other proprietary rights are and will continue to be essential to our business, and our ability to compete effectively with other companies will be dependent upon the proprietary nature of our technologies. We rely upon trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovations, strategic alliances and licensing opportunities to develop, maintain and strengthen our competitive position. We pursue a policy of generally obtaining patent protection in both the U.S. and abroad for patentable subject matter in our proprietary devices and attempt to review third-party patents and patent applications to the extent publicly available in order to develop an effective patent strategy, avoid infringement of third-party patents, identify licensing opportunities and monitor the patent claims of others. We currently own numerous U.S. and foreign patents and have numerous patent applications pending. We also are party to various license agreements pursuant to which patent rights have been obtained or granted in consideration for cash, cross-licensing rights or royalty payments. No assurance can be made that any pending or future patent applications will result in the issuance of patents, that any current or future patents issued to, or licensed by, us will not be challenged or circumvented by our competitors, or that our patents will not be found invalid. In addition, we may have to take legal action in the future to protect our patents, trade secrets or know-how or to assert them against claimed infringement by others. Any legal action of that type could be costly and time consuming and no assurances can be made that any lawsuit will be successful. We are generally involved as both a plaintiff and a defendant in a number of patent infringement and other intellectual property-related actions. The invalidation of key patents or proprietary rights that we own, or an unsuccessful outcome in lawsuits to protect our intellectual property, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
In addition, the laws of certain countries in which we market, and plan on manufacturing some of our products in the near future, some of our products do not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. If we are unable to protect our intellectual property in these countries, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Furthermore, our intellectual property, other proprietary technology and other sensitive Company data are potentially vulnerable to loss, damage or misappropriation from system malfunction, computer viruses, unauthorized access to our data or misappropriation or misuse thereof by those with permitted access, and other events. While we have invested to protect our intellectual property and other data, and continue to work diligently in this area, there can be no assurance that our precautionary measures will prevent breakdowns, breaches, cyber-attacks or other events. Such events could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, financial condition or results of operations.
We rely on the proper function, availability and security of information technology systems to operate our business and a cyber-attack or other breach of these systems could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
We rely on information technology systems to process, transmit, and store electronic information in our day-to-day operations. Similar to other large multi-national companies, the size and complexity of our information technology systems makes them vulnerable to a cyber-attack, malicious intrusion, breakdown, destruction, loss of data privacy, or other significant disruption. Our information systems require an ongoing commitment of significant resources to maintain, protect, and enhance existing systems and develop new systems to keep pace with continuing changes in information processing technology, evolving systems and regulatory standards, the increasing need to protect patient and customer information, and changing customer patterns. In addition, third parties may attempt to hack into our products to obtain data relating to patients or disrupt performance of our products or to access our proprietary information. Any failure by us to maintain or protect our information technology systems and data integrity, including from cyber-attacks, intrusions or other breaches, could result in the unauthorized access to patient data and personally identifiable information, theft of intellectual property or other misappropriation of assets, or otherwise compromise our confidential or proprietary information and disrupt our operations. In the U.S., Federal and State privacy and security laws require certain of our operations to protect the confidentiality of personal information including patient medical records and other health information. In Europe, the Data Protection Directive requires us to manage individually identifiable information in the EU and, the new General Data Protection Regulation may impose fines of up to four percent of our global revenue in the event of violations. Internationally, some countries have also passed laws that require individually identifiable data on their citizens to be maintained on local servers and that may restrict transfer or processing of that data. We believe that we meet the expectations of applicable regulations and that the ongoing costs and impacts of ensuring compliance with such rules are not material to our business. However, there is no guarantee that we will avoid enforcement actions by governmental bodies. Enforcement actions can be costly and interrupt regular operations of our business.Any of these events, in turn, may cause us to lose existing customers, have difficulty preventing, detecting, and controlling fraud, have disputes with customers, physicians, and other health care professionals, be subject to legal claims and liability, have regulatory sanctions or penalties imposed, have increases in operating expenses, incur expenses or lose revenues as a result of a data privacy breach or theft of intellectual property, or suffer other adverse consequences, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Pending and future intellectual property litigation could be costly and disruptive to us.
We operate in an industry that is susceptible to significant intellectual property litigation and, in recent years, it has been common for companies in the medical device field to aggressively challenge the patent rights of other companies in order to prevent the marketing of new devices.companies. We are currently the subject of various patent litigation proceedings and other proceedings described in more detail under Item 3. Legal Proceedings and Note K-K – Commitments and Contingencies to our 20132016 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report. Intellectual property litigation is expensive, complex and lengthy, and its outcome is difficult to predict. Adverse outcomes in one or more of these matters could have a material adverse effect on our ability to sell certain products and on our operating margins, financial condition, results of operation or liquidity. Pending or future patent litigation may result in significant royalty or other payments or injunctions that can prevent the sale of products and may significantly divert the attention of our technical and management personnel. In the event that our right to market any of our products is successfully challenged, we may be required to obtain a license on terms which may not be favorable to us, if at all. If we fail to obtain a required license or are unable to design around a patent, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
Pending and future product liability claims and other litigation, including private securities litigation, shareholderstockholder derivative suits and contract litigation, may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations or liquidity.
The design, manufacturemanufacturing and marketing of medical devices of the types that we produce entail an inherent risk of product liability claims. Many of the medical devices that we manufacture and sell are designed to be implanted in the human body for long periods of time or indefinitely. A number of factors could result in an unsafe condition or injury to, or death of, a patient with respect to these or other products that we manufacture or sell, including physician technique and experience in performing the surgical procedure, component failures, manufacturing flaws, design defects, off-label use or inadequate disclosure of product-related risks or product-related information. These factors could result in product liability claims, a recall of one or more of our products or a safety alert relating to one or more of our products. Product liability claims may be brought by individuals or by groups seeking to represent a class.
We are currently the subject of product liability litigation proceedings and other proceedings described in more detail under Item 3. Legal Proceedings and Note K-K – Commitments and Contingencies to our 20132016 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report. The outcome of litigation, particularly class action lawsuits, is difficult to assess or quantify. Plaintiffs in these types of lawsuits often seek recovery of very large or indeterminate amounts, including not only actual damages, but also punitive damages. The magnitude of the potential losses relating to these lawsuits may remain unknown for substantial periods of time. In addition, the cost to defend against any future litigation may be significant. Product liability claims, securities and commercial litigation and other litigation in the future, regardless of the outcome, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. Additionally, we maintain an insurance policy providing limited coverage against securities claims, and we are substantially self-insured with respect to product liability claims and fully self-insured with respect to intellectual property infringement claims. The fact that we do not maintain third-party insurance coverage for all categories of losses increases our exposure to unanticipated claims and adverse decisions, and these losses could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.
Any failure to meet regulatory quality standards applicable to our manufacturing and quality processes could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
As a medical device manufacturer, we are required to register our establishments and list our devices with the FDA and are subject to periodic inspection by the FDA for compliance with its Quality System Regulation requirements, which require manufacturers of medical devices to adhere to certain regulations, including testing, quality control and documentation procedures. In addition, the Federal Medical Device Reporting regulations require us to provide information to the FDA whenever there is evidence that reasonably suggests that a device may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or, if a malfunction were to occur, could cause or contribute to a death or serious injury. Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements is subject to continual review and is monitored rigorously through periodic inspections by the FDA which may result in observations on Form 483, and in some cases warning letters, that require corrective action. In the European Community, we are required to maintain certain International Standards Organization (ISO) certifications in order to sell our products and must undergo periodic inspections by notified bodies to obtain and maintain these certifications. Many other countries in which we do business have requirements similar to those of the US or the EU, and other foreign governments or agencies may subject us to periodic inspections as well.If we, or our manufacturers, fail to adhere to quality system regulations or ISO requirements, this could delay production of our products and lead to fines, difficulties in obtaining regulatory clearances, recalls, enforcement actions, including injunctive relief or consent decrees, or other consequences, which could, in turn, have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.
Interruption of our manufacturing operations could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Our products are designed and manufactured in technology centers around the world, either by us or third parties. In most cases, the manufacturing of our products is concentrated in one or a few locations. Factors such as a failure to follow specific internal protocols and procedures, equipment malfunction, environmental factors or damage to one or more of our facilities could adversely affect our ability to manufacture our products. In the event of an interruption in manufacturing, we may be unable to quickly move to alternate means of producing affected products or to meet customer demand. In the event of a significant interruption, for example, as a result of a failure to follow regulatory protocols and procedures, we may experience lengthy delays in resuming production of affected products due primarily to needs for regulatory approvals. As a result, we may experience loss of market share, which we may be unable to recapture, and harm to our reputation, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Disruptions in the supply of the materials and components used in manufacturing our products or the sterilization of our products by third-party vendors could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
We purchase many of the materials and components used in manufacturing our products from third-party vendors. Certain of these materials and components are purchased from single sources due to quality considerations, expertise, costs or constraints resulting from regulatory requirements. In certain cases we may not be able to establish additional or replacement vendors for such materials or components in a timely or cost effective manner, largely as a result of FDA regulations that require validation of materials and components prior to their use in our products and the complex nature of our and many of our vendors' manufacturing processes. A reduction or interruption in the supply of materials and components used in manufacturing our products; an inability to timely develop and validate alternative sources if required; or a significant increase in the price of such materials or components could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition, particularly materials or components related to our CRM products and drug-eluting stent systems.condition.
In addition, many of our products require sterilization prior to sale, and we utilize a mix of internal resources and third-party vendorscontract sterilizers to perform this service. To the extent we or our third-partycontract sterilizers are unable to sterilize our products, whether due to capacity, availability of materials for sterilization, regulatory or other constraints, we may be unable to transition to other vendorscontract sterilizer, sterilizer locations or sterilization methods in a timely or cost effective manner or at all, which could have an adverse impact on our results of operations and financial condition.
Moreover pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) promulgated new rules applicable to public companies like us that use certain minerals and metals, known as conflict minerals, in their products. The rules require us to undertake measures to understand the origin and, as need be, source of conflict minerals within our supply chain and to disclose, among other things, those measures and whether or not any such conflict minerals originated from the Democratic Republic of the Congo and adjoining countries. These requirements could, directly or indirectly, adversely affect the sourcing, availability and pricing of such minerals if they are found to be sourced from that region. In addition, we will incur additional costs to comply with the requirements, including with respect to measures undertaken to understand the origin and, as need be, source of conflict minerals used in our products.
Our share price has been volatile and may fluctuate, and accordingly, the value of an investment in our common stock may also fluctuate.
Stock markets in general, and our common stock in particular, have experienced significant price and volume volatility over recent years. The market price and trading volume of our common stock may continue to be subject to significant fluctuations due to factors described under this Item 1A entitled “Risk Factors,” as well as economic and geopolitical conditions in general, and also to variability in the prevailing sentiment regarding our operations or business prospects, as well as, among other things, changing investment priorities of our stockholders. SinceBecause the market price of our common stock fluctuates significantly, stockholders may not be able sell their shares at attractive prices.
If we are unable to attract or retain and focus key personnel, it could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results from operations.
We constantly monitor the dynamics of the economy, the healthcare industry and the markets in which we compete; and we continue to assess opportunities to improve operational effectiveness and better align expenses with revenues, while preserving our ability to make needed investments, research and development projects, capital and our people that we believe are essential to our long-term success. In our industry, there is substantial competition for key personnel in the regions in which we operate, and we may face increased competition for such employees, particularly in emerging markets as the trend toward globalization continues. If we are unableOur business depends to attracta significant extent on the continued service of senior management and other key personnel, the development of additional management personnel and the hiring of new qualified employees. There can be no assurance that we will be successful in a timely manner, includingretaining and developing existing personnel or recruiting new personnel. The loss of one or more key sales and other personnel who have critical industry experience and relationships in the regions in which we operate, including in emerging markets, it may have an adverse effect on our business andemployees, our ability to drive growth, including through execution of our strategic initiatives. Furthermore, some of theattract or develop additional qualified employees or any delay in hiring key personnel for whom we competecould have post-employment arrangements with their current or former employer that may impact our ability to hire them or expose us and them to claims. In addition, if we are unable to retain and focus our existing key personnel it may have anmaterial adverse effecteffects on our business, financial condition and results from operations. Moreover, we recently completed changes in our senior management structure, which may lead to inefficiencies in our ability to execute our strategic, cost-reduction and efficiency initiatives, which may have an adverse effect on our business andor results of operations.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
Our world headquarters is located in Natick,Marlborough, Massachusetts, with additional support provided from regional headquarters located in Singapore and Voisins-le-Bretonneux, France. On November 8, 2012 we announced that we would be consolidating our Natick, Massachusetts headquarters into our Marlborough, Massachusetts location, where we are in the process of establishing a new global headquarters campus. As of December 31, 2013,2016, our principal manufacturing and technology centers were located in Minnesota, California, and Indiana within the U.S;U.S.; as well as internationally in Ireland, Costa Rica and Puerto Rico. Our products are distributed worldwide from customer fulfillment centers in Massachusetts The Netherlands and Japan.the Netherlands. As of December 31, 2013,2016, we maintained 1213 principal manufacturing facilities, including sixseven in the U.S., three in Ireland, two in Costa Rica, and one in Puerto Rico, as well as various distribution and technology centers around the world. Many of these facilities produce and manufacture products for more than one of our divisions and include research facilities. The following is a summary of our facilities as of December 31, 20132016 (in approximate square feet):
| | | | | Owned * | | Leased ** | | Total | | Owned * | | Leased ** | | Total |
| U.S. | | 4,229,000 |
| | 1,489,000 |
| | 5,718,000 |
| | 4,256,000 |
| | 1,824,000 |
| | 6,080,000 |
|
| International | | 1,512,000 |
| | 1,041,000 |
| | 2,553,000 |
| | 1,522,000 |
| | 1,483,000 |
| | 3,005,000 |
|
| | | 5,741,000 |
| | 2,530,000 |
| | 8,271,000 |
| | 5,778,000 |
| | 3,307,000 |
| | 9,085,000 |
|
* Includes our principal manufacturing facilities in Minnesota, Ireland, Puerto Rico and one facility in Costa Rica; our customer fulfillment centers in Massachusetts, Thethe Netherlands and Japan; and our new global headquarters location in Marlborough, Massachusetts.
** Includes our principal manufacturing facilities in California, Indiana, and one facility in Costa Rica; our current global headquarters in Natick, Massachusetts; and our regional headquarters located in Singapore and Voisins-le-Bretonneux, France.
We regularly evaluate the condition and capacity of our facilities to ensure they are suitable for the development, manufacturing, and marketing of our products, and provide adequate capacity for current and expected future needs. Further, our 20142016 restructuring plan continues the implementation of our ongoing Plant Network Optimization (PNO) strategy, which is intended to simplify our manufacturing plant structure by transferring certain productions lines among facilities. Refer to Restructuring Initiatives within Results of Operations included in Item 7 of this Annual Report and Note H – Restructuring-related Activities to our 20132016 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
See Note K – Commitments and Contingencies to our 20132016 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report and incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
None.
PART II
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
Market Information
Our common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) under the symbol “BSX.” The following table provides the market range for the closing price of our common stock for each of the last eight quarters based on reported sales prices on the NYSE.
| | | 2013 | | High | | Low | |
| 2016 | | | High | | Low |
| First Quarter | | $ | 7.81 |
| | $ | 5.89 |
| | $ | 18.82 |
| | $ | 16.07 |
|
| Second Quarter | | 9.64 |
| | 7.09 |
| | 23.37 |
| | 18.94 |
|
| Third Quarter | | 11.99 |
| | 9.15 |
| | 24.48 |
| | 23.11 |
|
| Fourth Quarter | | 12.38 |
| | 11.18 |
| | 23.77 |
| | 20.09 |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| 2012 | | | | | |
| 2015 | | | | | |
| First Quarter | | $ | 6.36 |
| | $ | 5.30 |
| | $ | 18.07 |
| | $ | 13.22 |
|
| Second Quarter | | 6.31 |
| | 5.51 |
| | 18.51 |
| | 17.18 |
|
| Third Quarter | | 5.82 |
| | 4.97 |
| | 18.02 |
| | 15.78 |
|
| Fourth Quarter | | 5.82 |
| | 5.07 |
| | 18.94 |
| | 16.42 |
|
Holders
The closing price of our common stock on January 31, 20142017 was $13.53.$24.06. As of January 31, 2014,2017, there were 13,5349,573 holders of record of our common stock.
Dividends
We did not pay a cash dividend in 20132016 or 2012,2015, and currently we do not intend to pay cash dividends. We may consider declaring and paying a cash dividend in the future; however, there can be no assurance that we will do so.
Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans
Please see Item 1212. "Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters" under Part III of this Annual Report for information on where to find information required by Item 201(d) of Regulation S-K.
Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchases
DuringOn January 25, 2013, our Board of Directors approved and on January 29, 2013, we announced a program authorizing the repurchase of up to $1.0 billion of our common stock. During 2014 we used $500$125 million of cash generated from operations to repurchase approximately 51 million shares of our common stock pursuant to our share repurchase authorizations and during 2012, we used $600 million of cash generated from operations to repurchase approximately 10510 million shares of our common stock pursuant to our share repurchase authorizations discussed in Note L - Stockholders' Equity to our 2013 consolidated financial statements contained in Item 8 of this Annual Report.
The following table provides information with respect to purchases by Boston Scientific Corporation We made no share repurchases in 2016 or 2015. As of equity securities that are registered by us pursuant to Section 12 ofDecember 31, 2016, we had approximately $535 million remaining available under the Exchange Act, during the fourth quarter of 2013:
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| Period | Total Number of Shares Purchased | Average Price Paid per Share | Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs * | Approximate Dollar Value of Shares that May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs * |
| 10/01/13 - 10/31/13 | 4,200,000 |
| $ | 11.73 |
| 4,200,000 |
| $ | 835,205,581 |
|
| 11/01/13 - 11/30/13 | 14,750,093 |
| 11.89 |
| 14,750,093 |
| 659,535,953 |
|
| 12/01/13 - 12/31/13 | — |
| — |
| — |
| 659,535,953 |
|
| Total | 18,950,093 |
| $ | 11.85 |
| 18,950,093 |
| $ | 659,535,953 |
|
| | | | | |
| * On July 28, 2011, we announced that our Board of Directors had approved a program authorizing the repurchase of up to $1.0 billion of our common stock and re-approved approximately 37 million shares remaining under our previous share repurchase program. As of December 31, 2013, we had no remaining authorization available under our 2011 share repurchase program or previous repurchase programs. |
| On January 25, 2013, our Board of Directors approved a new program authorizing the repurchase of up to $1.0 billion of our common stock. As of December 31, 2013, we had approximately $660 million remaining available under the 2013 share repurchase program. |
Sale of Unregistered Securities
Between January 9, 2013 and February 26, 2013, inclusive, ten employees purchased 190 shares of our common stock for $1,328. The offering price per share on each date was the last reported sale price of our common stock on that date as reported on the NYSE. The issuance of such shares was pursuant to an exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities Act, pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act.repurchase program.
Stock Performance Graph
The graph below compares the five-year total return to stockholders on our common stock with the return of the Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 Stock Index and the S&P Health Care Equipment Index. The graph assumes $100 was invested in our common stock and in each of the named indices on December 31, 2008,2011, and that all dividends were reinvested.
Note: The stock price performance shown on the graph above is not indicative of future price performance. This graph shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section18Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
FIVE-YEAR SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
(in millions, except per share data)
Operating Data
| | | Year Ended December 31, | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 | | 2013 | | 2012 |
| Net sales | | $ | 7,143 |
| | $ | 7,249 |
| | $ | 7,622 |
| | $ | 7,806 |
| | $ | 8,188 |
| | $ | 8,386 |
| | $ | 7,477 |
| | $ | 7,380 |
| | $ | 7,143 |
| | $ | 7,249 |
|
| Gross profit | | 4,969 |
| | 4,900 |
| | 4,963 |
| | 5,207 |
| | 5,612 |
| | 5,962 |
| | 5,304 |
| | 5,170 |
| | 4,969 |
| | 4,900 |
|
| Total operating expenses | | 4,849 |
| | 8,768 |
| | 4,059 |
| | 5,863 |
| | 6,506 |
| | 5,515 |
| | 5,631 |
| | 5,471 |
| | 4,849 |
| | 8,768 |
|
| Operating income (loss) | | 120 |
| | (3,868 | ) | | 904 |
| | (656 | ) | | (894 | ) | | 447 |
| | (327 | ) | | (301 | ) | | 120 |
| | (3,868 | ) |
| Income (loss) before income taxes | | (223 | ) | | (4,107 | ) | | 642 |
| | (1,063 | ) | | (1,308 | ) | | 177 |
| | (650 | ) | | (509 | ) | | (223 | ) | | (4,107 | ) |
| Net income (loss) | | (121 | ) | | (4,068 | ) | | 441 |
| | (1,065 | ) | | (1,025 | ) | | 347 |
| | (239 | ) | | (119 | ) | | (121 | ) | | (4,068 | ) |
| Net income (loss) per common share: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Basic | | $ | (0.09 | ) | | $ | (2.89 | ) | | $ | 0.29 |
| | $ | (0.70 | ) | | $ | (0.68 | ) | | $ | 0.26 |
| | $ | (0.18 | ) | | $ | (0.09 | ) | | $ | (0.09 | ) | | $ | (2.89 | ) |
| Assuming dilution | | $ | (0.09 | ) | | $ | (2.89 | ) | | $ | 0.29 |
| | $ | (0.70 | ) | | $ | (0.68 | ) | | $ | 0.25 |
| | $ | (0.18 | ) | | $ | (0.09 | ) | | $ | (0.09 | ) | | $ | (2.89 | ) |
Balance Sheet Data
| | | As of December 31, | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2010 | | 2009 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 | | 2013 | | 2012 |
| Cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities | | $ | 217 |
| | $ | 207 |
| | $ | 267 |
| | $ | 213 |
| | $ | 864 |
| | $ | 196 |
| | $ | 319 |
| | $ | 587 |
| | $ | 217 |
| | $ | 207 |
|
| Working capital | | 1,187 |
| | 1,250 |
| | 1,298 |
| | 1,006 |
| | 1,577 |
| | (348 | ) | | 1,041 |
| | 760 |
| | 1,187 |
| | 1,250 |
|
| Total assets | | 16,571 |
| | 17,154 |
| | 21,290 |
| | 22,128 |
| | 25,177 |
| | 18,096 |
| | 18,133 |
| | 17,024 |
| | 16,549 |
| | 17,136 |
|
| Borrowings (short-term) | | 3 |
| | 4 |
| | 4 |
| | 504 |
| | 3 |
| | 64 |
| | 3 |
| | 403 |
| | 3 |
| | 4 |
|
| Borrowings (long-term) | | 4,237 |
| | 4,252 |
| | 4,257 |
| | 4,934 |
| | 5,915 |
| | 5,420 |
| | 5,674 |
| | 3,841 |
| | 4,215 |
| | 4,234 |
|
| Stockholders’ equity | | 6,539 |
| | 6,870 |
| | 11,353 |
| | 11,296 |
| | 12,301 |
| | 6,733 |
| | 6,320 |
| | 6,457 |
| | 6,539 |
| | 6,870 |
|
| Book value per common share | | $ | 4.95 |
| | $ | 5.07 |
| | $ | 7.84 |
| | $ | 7.43 |
| | $ | 8.14 |
| |
| Book value per common share* | | | $ | 4.94 |
| | $ | 4.69 |
| | $ | 4.86 |
| | $ | 4.95 |
| | $ | 5.07 |
|
*Book value per common share is calculated using shares outstanding as of December 31, for each year, respectively shown.
The data above include certain charges (credits) recorded in conjunction with goodwill and other intangible asset impairments, acquisitions, divestitures, restructuring and restructuring-related activities, debt extinguishment charges, amortization, pension termination charges, discrete tax items and/or litigation. The data above should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements, including the notes thereto, included in Item 8 of this Annual Report, as well as prior year Form 10-K filings.
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following discussion and analysis provides information management believes to be relevant to understanding the financial condition and results of operations of Boston Scientific Corporation and its subsidiaries. For full understanding of financial condition and results of operations, you should be read in conjunctionthis discussion along with theour consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes included in Item 8 of this Annual Report.
Executive Summary
Financial Highlights and Trends
In 2013,2016, we generated net sales of $7.143$8.386 billion, as compared to $7.249$7.477 billion in 2012, a decrease2015, an increase of $106$909 million, or one12 percent. Our net sales were unfavorably impacted by $156$99 million from foreign currency fluctuations in 20132016, as compared to 2012 and sales related to our divested Neurovascular business declined $64 million in 2013. Refer to Note C - Divestitures included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for additional information on the Neurovascular divestiture.2015. Excluding the impact of foreign currency and sales from divested businesses,exchange rates, our net sales increased $114 million,$1.008 billion, or two12 percent, as compared to the prior year. This increase was due primarily to constant currency increases in net sales from our Endoscopy business of $89 million, from our Neuromodulation business of $87 million, and from our Peripheral Interventions business of $43 million.These increases were partially offset by a constant currency decrease in net sales from our Interventional Cardiology business of $124 million.1 This increase included net sales of approximately $236 million in 2016, with no prior year period related net sales, due to the AMS Portfolio Acquisition and the EndoChoice Holdings, Inc. (EndoChoice) acquisition. Refer to the Business and Market Overview section for further discussion of our net sales results.by global business.
Our reported net lossincome in 20132016 was $121$347 million, or $0.09$0.25 per diluted share. Our reported results for 20132016 included goodwill and intangible asset impairment charges; acquisition-charges, acquisition-related net charges, restructuring and divestiture-relatedrestructuring-related net charges; restructuring- andcharges, litigation-related charges; debt extinguishment charges; discrete tax items;charges, and amortization expense (after-tax) of $1.112totaling $1.187 billion (after-tax), or $0.82$0.86 per share. Excluding these items, net income for 20132016 was $991 million,$1.534 billion, or $0.73$1.11 per shareshare.1.
Our reported net loss in 20122015 was $4.068 billion,$239 million, or $2.89$0.18 per share. Our reported results for 20122015 included goodwill and intangible asset impairment charges; acquisition-charges, acquisition-related net charges, restructuring and divestiture-relatedrestructuring-related net credits; restructuring- andcharges, litigation-related charges;charges, pension termination charges, debt extinguishment charges, discrete tax items;items, and amortization expense (after-tax) of $5.001totaling $1.506 billion (after-tax), or $3.55$1.11 per share. Excluding these items, net income for 20122015 was $933 million,$1.267 billion, or $0.66$0.93 per share1.
1Adjusted net sales growth rates, which exclude the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates, and adjusted net income and adjusted net income per share, which exclude certain items required by generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (U.S GAAP) are not prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Refer to Additional Information for a discussion of management’s use of these non-GAAP financial measures.
The following is a reconciliation of our results of operations prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (U.S. GAAP)U.S. GAAP to those adjusted results considered by management. Refer to Results of Operations for a discussion of each reconciling item:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, 2013 | |
| | | | | Tax | | | | Impact per | |
| in millions, except per share data | | Pre-Tax | | Impact | | After-Tax | | share | |
| GAAP net income (loss) | | $ | (223 | ) | | $ | 102 |
| | $ | (121 | ) | | $ | (0.09 | ) | |
| Non-GAAP adjustments: | | | | | | | | | |
| Goodwill and other intangible asset impairment charges | | 476 |
| | (8 | ) | | 468 |
| | 0.35 |
| * |
| Acquisition- and divestiture-related net charges | | 1 |
| | 3 |
| | 4 |
| | 0.00 |
| * |
| Restructuring-related charges | | 124 |
| | (36 | ) | | 88 |
| | 0.07 |
| * |
| Litigation-related charges | | 221 |
| | (72 | ) | | 149 |
| | 0.11 |
| * |
| Debt extinguishment charges | | 70 |
| | (26 | ) | | 44 |
| | 0.03 |
| * |
| Discrete tax items | | — |
| | (7 | ) | | (7 | ) | | (0.01 | ) | * |
| Amortization expense | | 410 |
| | (44 | ) | | 366 |
| | 0.27 |
| * |
| Adjusted net income | | $ | 1,079 |
| | $ | (88 | ) | | $ | 991 |
| | $ | 0.73 |
| |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, 2016 | |
| | | | | Tax | | | | Impact per | |
| in millions, except per share data | | Pre-Tax | | Impact | | After-Tax | | share | |
| GAAP net income (loss) | | $ | 177 |
| | $ | 170 |
| | $ | 347 |
| | $ | 0.25 |
| |
| Non-GAAP adjustments: | | | | | | | | | |
| Intangible asset impairment charges | | 11 |
| | (1 | ) | | 10 |
| | 0.01 |
|
|
| Acquisition-related net charges | | 136 |
| | (10 | ) | | 126 |
| | 0.09 |
|
|
| Restructuring and restructuring-related net charges | | 78 |
| | (17 | ) | | 61 |
| | 0.04 |
|
|
| Litigation-related net charges | | 804 |
| | (292 | ) | | 512 |
| | 0.37 |
|
|
| Amortization expense | | 545 |
| | (67 | ) | | 478 |
| | 0.35 |
|
|
| Adjusted net income | | $ | 1,751 |
| | $ | (217 | ) | | $ | 1,534 |
| | $ | 1.11 |
| |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, 2015 | |
| | | | | Tax | | | | Impact per | |
| in millions, except per share data | | Pre-Tax | | Impact | | After-Tax | | share | |
| GAAP net income (loss) | | $ | (650 | ) | | $ | 411 |
| | $ | (239 | ) | | $ | (0.18 | ) | |
| Non-GAAP adjustments: | | | | | | | | | |
| Intangible asset impairment charges | | 19 |
| | (3 | ) | | 16 |
| | 0.01 |
| * |
| Acquisition-related net charges | | 255 |
| | (33 | ) | | 222 |
| | 0.17 |
| * |
| Restructuring and restructuring-related net charges | | 83 |
| | (14 | ) | | 69 |
| | 0.05 |
| * |
| Litigation-related net charges | | 1,105 |
| | (400 | ) | | 705 |
| | 0.52 |
| * |
| Pension termination charges | | 44 |
| | (16 | ) | | 28 |
| | 0.02 |
| * |
| Debt extinguishment charges | | 45 |
| | (16 | ) | | 29 |
| | 0.02 |
| * |
| Discrete tax items | | — |
| | (9 | ) | | (9 | ) | | (0.01 | ) | * |
| Amortization expense | | 495 |
| | (49 | ) | | 446 |
| | 0.33 |
| * |
| Adjusted net income | | $ | 1,396 |
| | $ | (129 | ) | | $ | 1,267 |
| | $ | 0.93 |
| |
*Assumes dilution of 19.521.5 million shares for the year ended December 31, 20132015 for all or a portion of these non-GAAP adjustments.
1Sales growth rates that exclude the impact of sales from divested businesses and/or changes in foreign currency exchange rates and net income and net income per share excluding certain items required by GAAP are not prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Refer to Additional Information in this Item 7 for a discussion of management’s use of these non-GAAP financial measures.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, 2012 | |
| | | | | Tax | | | | Impact per | |
| in millions, except per share data | | Pre-Tax | | Impact | | After-Tax | | share | |
| GAAP net income (loss) | | $ | (4,107 | ) | | $ | 39 |
| | $ | (4,068 | ) | | $ | (2.89 | ) | |
| Non-GAAP adjustments: | | | | | | | | | |
| Goodwill and other intangible asset impairment charges | | 4,492 |
| | (46 | ) | | 4,446 |
| | 3.15 |
| ** |
| Acquisition- and divestiture-related net credits | | (50 | ) | | 14 |
| | (36 | ) | | (0.02 | ) | ** |
| Restructuring-related charges | | 160 |
| | (38 | ) | | 122 |
| | 0.09 |
| ** |
| Litigation-related charges | | 192 |
| | (74 | ) | | 118 |
| | 0.08 |
| ** |
| Discrete tax items | | — |
| | 2 |
| | 2 |
| | 0.00 |
| ** |
| Amortization expense | | 395 |
| | (46 | ) | | 349 |
| | 0.25 |
| ** |
| Adjusted net income | | $ | 1,082 |
| | $ | (149 | ) | | $ | 933 |
| | $ | 0.66 |
| |
** Assumes dilution of 7.7 million shares for the year ended December 31, 2012 for all or a portion of these non-GAAP adjustments.
1Sales growth rates that exclude the impact of sales from divested businesses and/or changes in foreign currency exchange rates and net income and net income per share excluding certain items required by GAAP are not prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Refer to Additional Information in this Item 7 for a discussion of management’s use of these non-GAAP financial measures.
Cash generatedprovided by operating activities was $1.082 billion$972 million in 2013,2016, as compared to $1.260 billioncash provided by operating activities of $600 million in 2012.2015. This increase in cash provided by operating activities was primarily driven by the increase in net income for 2016 compared to 2015. Our cash generated from operations continues to be a significant source of funds for investing in our growth, including acquisitions and returning value to shareholders by buying back shares ofstrategic alliances, managing our common stock pursuant tocontingencies and reducing our share repurchase authorizations discussed in Note L - Stockholders' Equity to our 2013 consolidated financial statements contained in Item 8 of this Annual Report. During 2013, we used $500 million of cash generated from operations to repurchase approximately 51 million shares of our common stock, as compared to 2012 in which $600 million of cash generated from operations was used to repurchase approximately 105 million shares of our common stock. debt levels.
As of December 31, 2013,2016, we had total debt of $4.240$5.484 billion, cash and cash equivalents of $217$196 million and a working capital deficit of $1.187 billion.$348 million. We hold investment-grade ratings with all three major credit-rating agencies. We believe our investment grade credit profile reflects the size and diversity of our product portfolio, our leading share position in several of our served markets, our strong cash flow, our solid financial fundamentals and our financial strategy.
Refer to Liquidity and Capital Resources for further discussion.
Business and Market Overview
Cardiovascular
Interventional Cardiology
Our Interventional Cardiology division develops manufactures and marketsmanufactures technologies for diagnosing and treating coronary artery disease and other cardiovascular disorders.disorders including structural heart conditions. Product offerings include coronary stents, including drug-eluting and bare metal stent systems, balloon catheters, rotational atherectomy systems, guide wires, guide catheters, embolic protection devices, crossing and re-entry devices for the treatment of chronically occluded coronary vessels, diagnostic catheters, used in percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty procedures, and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) imaging systems. Our structural heart product offerings include a device for transcatheter aortic valve replacement and a device designed to close the left atrial appendage in patients with atrial fibrillation that are at risk for ischemic stroke.
InOur worldwide net sales of Interventional Cardiology products were $2.281 billion for 2016, or approximately 27 percent of our consolidated net sales for the year. Our worldwide net sales of Interventional Cardiology products increased $248 million, or 12 percent, in 2016, as compared to 2015. Excluding the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates, which had a $34 million negative impact on our Interventional Cardiology net sales in 2016, as compared to 2015, net sales of these products increased $282 million, or 13 percent. This year-over-year increase was primarily related to sales of our drug-eluting stents, led by our ongoing global launch of the SYNERGY™ Stent, our WATCHMAN™ Device following the U.S. commercial launch during the first quarter of 2013, we received CE Mark approval2015 and launchedour Lotus™ Valve System in the EU, along with operational growth in our PCI Guidance System product offerings.
Worldwide sales from our drug-eluting coronary stents were $1.199 billion during 2016, as compared to $1.074 billion during 2015, representing a significant portion of our Interventional Cardiology net sales. Our drug-eluting stent systems include our next generation SYNERGY Everolimus-Eluting Platinum Chromium Coronary Stent System and our Promus PREMIER™ Everolimus-Eluting Platinum Chromium Coronary Stent System, in Europe and other select geographies. In the fourth quarterboth of 2013, we received FDA approval and launched Promus PREMIER™ in the U.S. The Promus PREMIER™ Stent System iswhich are designed to provide physicians with improved drug-eluting stent performance in treating patients with coronary artery disease, featuringdisease. SYNERGY features an ultra-thin abluminal (outer) bioabsorbable polymer coating, while Promus PREMIER™ features a unique customized platinum chromium alloy stent architecture and an enhanced stent delivery system. We have also received CE MarkFDA approval for our next generation SYNERGY™ Everolimus-Eluting Platinum Chromium Coronary Stent System featuring an ultra-thin abluminal (outer) bioabsorbable polymer coating and have commenced a limited commercial launch. We expect to expand the launch in Europe in the first half of 2014. The SYNERGY Stent is unique in that its proprietary polymer and everolimus drug coating dissipate by three months. This innovation has the potential to improve post-implant vessel healing and eliminate long-term polymer exposure, a possible cause of late adverse events. We have completed patient enrollment in the EVOLVE II clinical trial, which is designed to further assess the safety and effectiveness of the SYNERGYSYNERGY™ Stent System and support U.S. Food and Drug Administrationtechnology and Japanese regulatory approvals for this technology.
Our worldwide net salesapproval in the fourth quarter of Interventional Cardiology products were $1.997 billion for the year ended December 31, 2013, or approximately 28 percent of our consolidated net sales for the year ended December 31, 2013. Our worldwide net sales of Interventional Cardiology products decreased $182 million, or eight percent, in 2013, as compared to 2012. Excluding the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates, which had a $58 million negative impact on our Interventional Cardiology net sales in 2013, as compared to 2012, net sales of these products decreased $124 million, or six percent. This decrease was primarily due to lower coronary stent system sales, partially offset by higher sales of our non-stent Interventional Cardiology products.
Our coronary stent system sales represent a significant portion of our Interventional Cardiology net sales. The following are the components of our worldwide coronary stent system sales:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended | | Year Ended |
| (in millions) | | December 31, 2013 | | December 31, 2012 |
| | | U.S. | | International | | Total | | U.S. | | International | | Total |
| Drug-eluting | | $ | 448 |
| | $ | 665 |
| | $ | 1,113 |
| | $ | 557 |
| | $ | 720 |
| | $ | 1,277 |
|
| Bare-metal | | 19 |
| | 45 |
| | 64 |
| | 24 |
| | 62 |
| | 86 |
|
| | | $ | 467 |
| | $ | 710 |
| | $ | 1,177 |
| | $ | 581 |
| | $ | 782 |
| | $ | 1,363 |
|
Worldwide net sales ofOur structural heart product offerings include our coronary stent systems, with the inclusion of bare-metal stent systems, were $1.177 billion or approximately 16 percent of our consolidated net sales in 2013. Our worldwide net sales of these products decreased $186 million, or 14 percent, in 2013, as compared to 2012. Our U.S. net sales of drug-eluting stent systems decreased $109 million, or 20 percent, in 2013, as compared to 2012. This decrease was primarily related to lower market share due to competitive launches in 2012, continued average selling price declines in the U.S. DES market asLotus™ Valve System, a result of continued competitive pressures and declines in procedural volumes. Our international drug-eluting stent system net sales decreased $55 million, or eight percent, in 2013, as compared to the previous year, due to continued lower market share related to competitive launches.
Historically, the worldwide coronary stent market has been dynamic and highly competitive with significant market share volatility. We believe that we will continue to maintain a strong position within the worldwide coronary stent market for a variety of reasons, including:
the performance benefits of our current and future technology;
the strength of our pipeline of drug-eluting stent products, which has shown favorable results in clinical trials to date;
the breadth and depth of our interventional cardiology product portfolio;
the broad and consistent long-term results of our clinical trials;
our overall position in the interventional medical device market and our experienced interventional cardiology sales force;
the strength of our clinical, selling, marketing and manufacturing capabilities; and
our increased presence and investment in rapidly growing emerging markets.
However, a decline in net sales from our drug-eluting stent systems could have a significant adverse impact on our operating results. Significant variables that may impact the size of the drug-eluting stent market and our position within this market include, but are not limited to:
the impact of competitive pricing pressure on average selling prices of drug-eluting stent systems available in the market;
the impact and outcomes of on-going and future clinical trials involving our or our competitors’ products, including those trials sponsored by our competitors or other third parties, or perceived product performance of our or our competitors’ products;
new product launches by our competitors;
our ability to timely and successfully launch new or next-generation products and technologies, in line with our commercialization strategies;
physician and patient confidence in our current and next-generation technology;
changes in the overall number of percutaneous coronary intervention procedures performed, drug-eluting stent penetration rates and the average number of stents used per procedure;
delayed or limited regulatory approvals and unfavorable reimbursement policies; and
the outcome of intellectual property litigation.
In January 2011, we completed the acquisition of Sadra Medical, Inc. Through our acquisition of Sadra, we have developed a fully repositionable and retrievable device for transcatheter aortic valve replacement, and our WATCHMAN™device designed to treatclose the left atrial appendage in patients with severe aortic stenosis.non-valvular atrial fibrillation who are at risk for ischemic stroke. The Lotus™Lotus Valve System consists of a stent-mounted tissue valve prosthesis and catheter delivery system for guidance and placement of the valve.
The low-profile deliveryoriginal Lotus Valve System as well as our next generation Lotus EDGE™ System are CE-marked in the European Union (EU), and in the U.S. they are investigational devices and not commercially available. In October 2016, we suspended our limited launch and initiated a voluntary removal of field inventory of the Lotus EDGE™ system and introducer sheath are designeddue to enable accurate positioning, repositioning and retrieval at any time priorreports that, in some cases, the device could not be fully locked during the procedure due to premature release of a pin connecting the aortic valve implant.Lotus EDGE™ Valve to the delivery system. In April 2013,February 2017, we completed enrollment in the REPRISE IIinitiated a voluntary removal of all Lotus™ Valve devices, including Lotus with Depth Guard™, from global commercial and clinical trialsites due to evaluate the safety and performancereports of premature release of a pin connecting the Lotus™ Valve System. In October 2013,to the delivery system. As with the prior announced suspension of our Lotus Edge™ Valve System device, we received CE Mark approvalbelieve that the issue is caused by excess tension in the pin mechanism introduced during the manufacturing process. We expect to bring the Lotus™ Valve platform back to market in Europe and launchedother regions in the fourth quarter of 2017. We anticipate filing the U.S. PMA submission for the Lotus ™Edge™ Valve System, the next generation platform, in Europe.
In 2013 and 2012, we recorded intangible asset impairment charges related to the Sadra in-process research and development intangible assets. Refer to Resultsfourth quarter of Operations2017, with a U.S. launch planned for further details.mid-2018.
In March 2011, we completed the acquisition of Atritech, Inc. Atritech developed a novel device designed to close the left atrial appendage in patients with atrial fibrillation who are at risk for ischemic stroke.
The WATCHMAN® Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology (WATCHMAN) is the first device provenstudied in a randomized clinical trial to offer an alternative to anticoagulant drugs,warfarin, and is marketed in CE-mark countries and other international countries, as well as the U.S. following FDA approval in March 2015. We believe that Watchman will be the only LAAC technology commercially available in the U.S. for multiple years. In November 2015, we received CE Mark countries. Infor our next generation device, Watchman FLX™. Shortly after approval, we began a European initial market release of Watchman FLX. The initial market release was suspended near the U.S.,end of the first quarter of 2016 due to a higher than expected rate of device embolization. Following an extensive data evaluation, we have decided to pursue potential design enhancements prior to returning a next generation device to market.
On December 12, 2016, we completed the PREVAIL trial to evaluate the safetyacquisition of certain manufacturing assets and efficacycapabilities of the WATCHMAN® deviceNeovasc, Inc. (Neovasc) advanced biological tissue business and made a 15 percent equity investment in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation versus long-term warfarin therapy. InNeovasc for a total upfront cash payment of $75
million. With this acquisition, we will integrate certain manufacturing assets and biologic tissue capabilities into our structural heart business for use in the first half of 2013, we submitted the resultsmanufacturing of the US IDE trial, PREVAIL, to the FDA. The FDA CirculatoryLotus Valve System Device Panel met in December of 2013 and voted favorably by a majority, Yes: 13, No:1, that there is reasonable assurance the device is safe, there is reasonable assurance of efficacy, and the benefits of the WATCHMAN® LAA Closure Device outweigh the risks.future heart valve technologies within our Interventional Cardiology business. We expect FDA approvalthis integration to be substantially completed by the end of the device in the first half of 2014. We are leveraging expertise from both our Electrophysiology and Interventional Cardiology businesses in the commercialization of the WATCHMAN® LAA Closure Device.2018.
Peripheral Interventions
Our PIPeripheral Interventions (PI) product offerings include stents, balloon catheters, wires, peripheral embolization devices and other devices used to diagnose and treat peripheral vascular disease. disease, along with products to treat, diagnose and ease various forms of cancer.
Our worldwide net sales of thesePI products were $789$1.011 billion for 2016, or approximately 12 percent of our consolidated net sales for the year. Our worldwide net sales of PI products increased $107 million, or 12 percent, in 2013,2016, as compared to $774 million in 2012, an increase of $15 million, or two percent.2015. Excluding the $28 million of negative impact from changes in foreign currency exchange rates, which had an $11 million negative impact on our worldwide PI net sales increased $43 million, or six percent, in 20132016, as compared to 2012. The2015, net sales of these products increased $118 million, or 12 percent. This year-over-year increase in worldwide PI net sales was primarily driven by revenues from our Atherectomy and Thrombectomy systems, as well as growth in our core PI franchises, particularly our stent franchise as a result of new product launches in stentsfollowing FDA approval and balloons, as well as the launch of the Vessix renal denervationour Innova™ Vascular self-expanding stent system in Europe.
During the fourth quarter of 2012,U.S. and Japan, our interventional oncology franchise and our drug-eluting product franchise.
On December 31, 2015, we completed the acquisition of Vessix, a developerthe interventional radiology business of catheter-based renal denervation systemsCeloNova Biosciences (CeloNova). The acquisition includes drug-eluting microspheres designed to be loaded with chemotherapy drugs for delivery to cancerous tumors, and spherical embolic products used to treat uterine fibroids and other conditions. We are in the treatmentprocess of uncontrolled hypertension. Throughintegrating CeloNova into our Peripheral Interventions business and expect to be substantially complete by the acquisitionsecond half of Vessix, we added a second generation, highly differentiated technology to our hypertension strategy and launched this technology in Europe in May 2013. We plan to carefully examine the forthcoming available data from a competitor’s recently completed U.S. pivotal trial in renal denervation for treatment-resistant hypertension, with respect to which the competitor announced in January 2014 that it failed to meet its primary efficacy endpoint. We plan to work collaboratively with the scientific community to determine the next steps for the design of our Vessix clinical program.2017.
Rhythm Management
Cardiac Rhythm Management
Our CRM divisionCardiac Rhythm Management (CRM) business develops, manufactures and markets a variety of implantable devices including implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) systems and implantable cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillators, including the world's first and only commercially available subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator, the S-ICD System, and pacemaker systems that monitor the heart and deliver electricity to treat cardiac abnormalities. WorldwideIn addition, in most geographies, we monitor device performance remotely, allowing for more frequent monitoring in order to guide treatment decisions.
Our worldwide net sales of our CRM products of $1.886were $1.850 billion representedfor 2016, or approximately 2722 percent of our consolidated net sales for 2013.the year. Our worldwide CRM net sales decreased $22of CRM products increased $43 million, or onetwo percent, in 2013,2016, as compared to the prior year.2015. Excluding the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates, which had a $17 million negative impact on our 2013 worldwide CRM net sales decreased $8 million, or less than one percent,in 2016, as compared to 2012. Our U.S. CRM2015, net sales of these products increased $3 million, or less than one percent, in 2013 as compared to 2012. Our international CRM net sales decreased $25$60 million, or three percent. This year-over-year increase was primarily driven by strong global pacemaker growth including the U.S. launch of the ACCOLADE™ family of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) safe pacemakers and the Ingevity™ MRI pacing lead in the U.S., global growth from our quadripolar cardiac resynchronization therapy pacemakers (CRT-P), global S-ICD sales growth and benefits from our sales collaboration agreement with Preventice Solutions, Inc., (Preventice). In the U.S., the fourth quarter of 2016 represented our second full quarter of U.S. MRI pacemaker commercialization, the third quarter of commercialization for our Acuity™ X4 Quadripolar LV Pacing Lead in both the cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator (CRT-D) and CRT-P franchises, and global commercialization of our EMBLEM™ MRI S-ICD system. These combined launches more than offset lower volumes of replacement procedures for our defibrillators due to their extended longevity and pressure from competitor high voltage MRI technologies primarily in the U.S. On April 30, 2015, we acquired a 27 percent ownership interest in 2013, as comparedPreventice, which includes 18.5 percent of Preventice's common stock. Preventice is a privately-held company headquartered in Minneapolis, MN, and a leading developer of mobile health solutions and services. In addition to 2012,the equity agreement, we entered into a commercial agreement with Preventice, under which we became Preventice’s exclusive, worldwide sales and included a $14 million negative impact from changesmarketing representative. In October 2016, we notified Preventice of our intent to terminate the commercial agreement and will transition the sales force back to Preventice in foreign currency exchange rates.2017 under the terms of the agreement.
The following are the components of our worldwide CRM net sales:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended | | Year Ended |
| (in millions) | | December 31, 2013 | | December 31, 2012 |
| | | U.S. | | International | | Total | | U.S. | | International | | Total |
| ICD systems | | $ | 850 |
| | $ | 505 |
| | $ | 1,355 |
| | $ | 858 |
| | $ | 521 |
| | $ | 1,379 |
|
| Pacemaker systems | | 267 |
| | 264 |
| | 531 |
| | 256 |
| | 273 |
| | 529 |
|
| CRM products | | $ | 1,117 |
| | $ | 769 |
| | $ | 1,886 |
| | $ | 1,114 |
| | $ | 794 |
| | $ | 1,908 |
|
The reduction in our worldwide CRM net sales during 2013 as compared to 2012 was principally the result of a decrease in net sales of our defibrillator systems due to the impact of average selling price pressures driven by governmental, competitive and other pricing pressures partially offset by slight increases in unit volumes. Our pacemaker system net sales increased less than one percent during 2013 as compared to 2012 due to the continued strong performance of our INGENIO family of pacemaker systems.
During the second quarter of 2012, we completed the acquisition of Cameron Health, Inc. Cameron developed the world's first and only commercially available subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator, the S-ICD® System, which we believe is a differentiated technology that will provide us the opportunity to both increase our market share in the existing ICD market and expand that market over time. The S-ICD® system has received CE Mark and FDA approval. We became supply constrained in early March 2013 and were only able to provide a very limited supply of S-ICD systems during the second and third quarters of 2013. We continued to make progress in our efforts to enhance the S-ICD supply chain; and in the fourth quarter of 2013 we were able to resume our launch of our S-ICD system.
Net sales from our CRM products represent a significant source of our overall net sales. Therefore, increases or decreases in our CRM net sales could have a significant impact on the results of our consolidated operations. Variables that may impact the size of the CRM market and/or our share of that market include, but are not limited to:
our ability to timely and successfully acquire or develop and launch new or next-generation competitive products and technologies worldwide, in line with our commercialization strategies, including the S-ICD® system;
new product launches by our competitors;
the on-going impact of physician alignment to hospitals, government investigations and audits of hospitals, and other market and economic conditions on the overall number of procedures performed and average selling prices;
our ability to retain and attract key members of our CRM sales force and other key CRM personnel;
the ability of CRM manufacturers to maintain the trust and confidence of the implanting physician community, the referring physician community and prospective patients in CRM technologies;
future product field actions or new physician advisories issued by us or our competitors;
variations in clinical results, reliability or product performance of our and our competitors’ products; and
delayed or limited regulatory approvals and unfavorable reimbursement policies.
During 2013, 2012 and 2011, we have recorded goodwill impairment charges related to our CRM business unit. Refer to Results of Operations for further discussion of these charges. |
| | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended |
| (in millions) | | December 31, 2016 | | December 31, 2015 |
| Defibrillator systems | | $ | 1,274 |
| | $ | 1,313 |
|
| Pacemaker systems | | 576 |
| | 494 |
|
| CRM products | | $ | 1,850 |
| | $ | 1,807 |
|
Electrophysiology
Our Electrophysiology business develops less-invasive medical technologies used in the diagnosis and treatment of rate and rhythm disorders of the heart. Our leading products include the Blazer™ line of ablation catheters, designed to deliver enhanced performance and responsiveness. responsiveness, and the Rhythmia™ Mapping System, a next-generation, catheter-based, 3-D cardiac mapping and navigation solution designed to help diagnose and treat a variety of arrhythmias.
Our Blazer™ line includes our next generation Blazer™ Prime ablation catheter, and our Blazer™ Open-Irrigated Catheter, launched in select European countries. Worldwideworldwide net sales of our Electrophysiology products were $155$243 million for 2016, or approximately three percent of our consolidated net sales for the year. Our worldwide net sales of Electrophysiology products increased $10 million, or four percent, in 2013,2016, as compared to $147 million in 2012, an increase of approximately $8 million, or five percent.2015. Excluding the $2 million negative impact from changes in foreign currency exchange rates, which had a $3 million negative impact on our worldwide Electrophysiology net sales increased $10 million, or seven percent, in 2013,2016, as compared to 2012. The increase in worldwide Electrophysiology2015, net sales of these products increased $13 million, or five percent. This year-over-year increase was due toprimarily driven by increased sales of our Rhythmia Mapping System and related products. In the acquisition of the electrophysiology business of C.R. Bard Inc. which produced $15 million of sales during the fourthfirst quarter of 2013.
During the fourth quarter2016, we initiated a full European launch of 2012,our Blazer IntellaNav™ OI Catheter which is used with our Rhythmia Mapping System and, in July of 2016, we completed the acquisition of Rhythmia Medical, Inc., a developer of next-generation mapping and navigation solutions for use in cardiac catheter ablations and other electrophysiology procedures, including atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. We received CE MarkFDA approval for the Rhythmia technology duringthis same catheter. In the second quarter of 2013 and2016, we received FDA approval during July 2013,for IntellaNav™ XP and expect to launch the product in 2014.
On November 1, 2013, we completed the acquisition of the electrophysiology business of C.R. Bard Inc. (Bard EP). We believeIntellaNav MiFi™ XP Navigation-Enabled Ablation Catheters that this transaction brings a strong commercial team and complementary portfolio of ablation catheters, diagnostic tools, and electrophysiology recording systems, and will allow us to better serve the global Electrophysiology market through a more comprehensive portfolio offering and sales infrastructure.
We believe thatare used with the Rhythmia Mapping System. We also received FDA approval for our Blazer™ Open Irrigated System with Atrial Flutter indication and Bard EP acquisitions, as well as our other expected product launches, will help to position us to participate more competitivelybegan full U.S. commercialization in the fast-growing Electrophysiology market.second quarter of 2016. Our global roll-out of our Rhythmia Mapping System, including early Europe commercialization of our next generation Rhythmia™ HDx System late in the fourth quarter, along with continued global expansion of our new navigation enabled therapeutic catheter portfolio, will continue as we expand our global Rhythmia installed base.
MedSurg
Endoscopy
Our Endoscopy division develops and manufactures devices to treat a variety of medical conditions including diseases of the digestive and pulmonary systems. Our worldwide net sales of theseEndoscopy products were $1.300$1.440 billion for 2016, or approximately 17 percent of our consolidated net sales for the year. Our worldwide net sales of Endoscopy products increased $134 million, or 10 percent, in 2013,2016, as compared to $1.252 billion in 2012, an increase of $48 million, or four percent.2015. Excluding the $41 million negative impact from changes in foreign currency exchange rates, which had a negative $9 million impact on our worldwide Endoscopy net sales increased $89 million, or seven percent, in 2013,2016 as compared to 2012.2015, net sales of these products increased $143 million, or 10 percent. This performanceyear-over-year increase was primarily the result ofdriven by growth across several of our key product franchises, including our hemostasis franchise on the continued adoption and utilization of our Resolution Clip for gastrointestinal bleeding; our biliary device franchise driven bywith our SpyGlass™ DS Direct Visualization System and our AXIOS Stent and Electrocautery-Enhanced Delivery System for endoscopic ultrasound platform and recent launches within our biliary access and retrieval product lines;ultrasound-guided transmural drainage of pancreatic pseudocysts; our metal stent franchise driven by our Biliary WallFlex® product family; and improved adoptionour hemostasis franchise, featuring our Resolution™ and Resolution 360™ Clips. This increase also includes revenue of approximately $10 million with no prior year period related net sales, due to the Alair® Bronchial Thermoplasty system.EndoChoice acquisition in November 2016, as described below.
In 2010,On November 22, 2016, we completed our acquisition of Asthmatx, Inc., which added toEndoChoice. EndoChoice is an Alpharetta, Georgia based company focused on the development and commercialization of infection control products, pathology services and single-use devices for specialists treating a wide range of gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. We began the process of integrating EndoChoice into our Endoscopy portfolio a less-invasive, catheter-based bronchial thermoplasty procedure forbusiness in the treatmentfourth quarter of severe persistent asthma. The Alair® Bronchial Thermoplasty System, developed by Asthmatx, has CE Mark, China Food2016 and Drug Administration and U.S. FDA approval and is the first device-based asthma treatment approvedexpect to be substantially complete by the FDA. Beginning Januaryend of 2017.
On November 1, 2013,2016, we acquired the America Medical Association Current Procedural Terminology editorial panel assigned category I CPT codes specificallyLumenR™ Tissue Retractor System from LumenR LLC (LumenR), a privately held Newark, California based company. The LumenR™ Tissue Retractor System is currently in development for bronchial thermoplasty. The Category I CPT procedure codes are recognized by all public and private health insurance payersuse during endoscopic resection of lesions in the United States, which will allow physicians and hospitals to seek reimbursementcolon, esophagus or stomach.
On April 2, 2015, we acquired Xlumena, Inc. (Xlumena), a medical device company that developed minimally invasive devices for bronchial thermoplasty procedures.Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) guided transluminal drainage of targeted areas within the gastrointestinal tract. In addition, during2016, we completed the third quarterintegration of 2013, the five-year data from the AIR2 clinical trial were published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, which showed that the Alair System provided long-term asthma control, demonstrated by a sustained reduction in the rate of severe exacerbations and emergency room visits over a five year period after treatment. We expect that the Alair technology will continue to strengthenXlumena into our existing offering of pulmonary devices and contribute to future sales growth and diversification of the Endoscopy business.
Urology and Women’sPelvic Health
Our Urology and Women’sPelvic Health division develops and manufactures devices to treat various urological and gynecological disorders.pelvic conditions, such as kidney stones, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), erectile dysfunction, male incontinence, pelvic floor disorders, abnormal uterine bleeding, and uterine fibroids and polyps. Our worldwide net sales of theseUrology and Pelvic Health products were $505$1.005 billion for 2016, or approximately 12 percent of our consolidated net sales for the year. Our worldwide net sales of Urology and Pelvic Health products increased $312 million, or 45 percent, in 2013,2016, as compared to $500 million in 2012, an increase of approximately $5 million, or one percent.2015. Excluding the $12 million negative impact from changes in foreign currency exchange rates, which had a negative $18 million impact on our worldwideUrology and Pelvic Health net sales in 2016, as compared to 2015, net sales of these products increased $330 million, or 45 percent. This year-over-year increase was primarily attributable to revenue of approximately $226 million with no prior year period related net sales, due to the AMS Portfolio Acquisition in August 2015, along with growth across all of our other global franchises, including our Pelvic Floor franchise as a result of market share gains primarily driven by a competitor exiting the market during the first quarter of 2016.
On November 15, 2016, we completed the acquisition of the gynecology and urology portfolio of Distal Access, LLC (Distal), a Salt Lake City based company that designs minimally invasive medical devices. The portfolio includes the Resectr™ Tissue Resection Device, a single-use solution designed to remove uterine polyps. We began the process of integrating the Resectr device into our Urology and Pelvic Health business during the fourth quarter of 2016 and expect to be substantially complete by the end of 2017.
On August 3, 2015, we completed the acquisition of the American Medical Systems male urology portfolio (AMS Portfolio Acquisition), which includes the men's health and prostate health businesses, from Endo International plc. The AMS male urology portfolio was integrated with our formerly named Urology and Women's Health net sales increased $17 million, or three percent, in 2013, as compared to 2012. The increase in worldwidebusiness, and the joint businesses became Urology and Women's Health net salesPelvic Health. The integration was primarily due to new product launches and growth insubstantially complete by the international business as a resultend of our global commercial expansion.2016.
Neuromodulation
Our Neuromodulation business offers the Precision®Precision™, Precision Spectra™, Precision Montage™ and Precision SpectraTMNovi™ Spinal Cord Stimulator systems,(SCS) Systems, used for the management of chronic pain.pain, and our Vercise™ Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) System in various international regions such as Europe, Latin America and Asia Pacific for the treatment of Parkinson's disease, tremor and intractable primary and secondary dystonia, a neurological movement disorder characterized by involuntary muscle contractions. Our worldwide net sales of Neuromodulation products were $453$556 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, or approximately seven percent of our consolidated net sales for the year ended December 31, 2016. Our worldwide net sales of Neuromodulation products increased $55 million, or 11 percent, in 2013,2016, as compared to $367 million in 2012, an increase of $86 million, or 23 percent.2015. Excluding the negative impact offrom changes in foreign currency exchange rates, of $1which had a negative $7 million impact on our Neuromodulation worldwide net sales in 2013 grew 24 percent2016, as compared to the prior year.2015, net sales of these products increased $62 million, or 12 percent. The year-over-year increase was primarily a resultdriven by share gains from our Montage™ System, continued adoption of strong sales of our Precision Spectra System. We received CE Mark approval for the Precision SpectraSpectra™ SCS System duringin the fourth quarter of 2012U.S. and we commenced our U.S. commercial launch of the device during the first quarter of 2013 following FDA approval. The Precision Spectra System is the world's first and only SCS system with 32 contacts and 32 dedicated power sources and is designed to provide improved pain relief to a wide range of patients who suffer from chronic pain.
During the third quarter of 2012, we received CE Mark approval for use of our Vercise™ Deep Brain Stimulation System for the treatment of Parkinson's diseaseincreased net sales in Europe, and we began our U.S. pivotal trial for the treatment of Parkinson's disease during the second quarter of 2013. During the fourth quarter of 2013, we received CE Mark approval for use ofdriven by our Vercise™ DBS System forSystems and non-rechargeable Precision Novi™ SCS System.
On July 27, 2016, we acquired Cosman Medical, Inc. (Cosman), a privately held manufacturer of radiofrequency ablation systems, expanding our Neuromodulation portfolio and offering physicians treating patients with chronic pain a wider choice of non-opioid therapeutic options. We are in the treatmentprocess of intractable primaryintegrating Cosman into our Neuromodulation business, and secondary dystonia. We believe we have an exciting opportunity in DBS withexpect the Vercise™ DBS System which is designedintegration to selectively stimulate targeted areasbe substantially complete by the end of the brain to customize therapy for patients and minimize side effects of unwanted stimulation.2017.
Emerging Markets
As part of our strategic imperatives to drive global expansion, described in Item 1 of this Annual Report, we are seeking to grow net sales and market share by expanding our global presence, including in Emerging Markets. We define Emerging Markets as including certain developing20 countries that we believe have strong growth potential based on their economic conditions, healthcare sectors, and our global capabilities, which currently include 20 countries.capabilities. We are seeking to expand our presence and strengthen relationships in order to grow net sales and market share within our Emerging Markets, and we have increased our investment in infrastructure in these countries in order to maximize opportunities. Our Emerging Markets revenue grew nine percent, as compared to the prior year, and was approximately eight10 percent of our consolidated net sales in 2013.
Restructuring Initiatives
On an on-going basis, we monitor2016. Excluding the dynamics of the economy, the healthcare industry, and the markets in which we compete; and we assess opportunities for improved operational effectiveness and efficiency and to better align expenses with revenues, while preserving our ability to make the investments in research and development projects, capital and our people that we believe are important to our long-term success. As a result of these assessments, we have undertaken various restructuring initiatives in order to enhance our growth potential and position us for long-term success. These initiatives are described below, and additional information can be found in Results of Operations and Note H – Restructuring-related Activities to our 2013 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report.
2014 Restructuring Plan
On October 22, 2013, our Board of Directors approved, and we committed to, a restructuring initiative (the 2014 Restructuring plan). The 2014 Restructuring plan is intended to build on the progress we have made to address financial pressures in a changing global marketplace, further strengthen our operational effectiveness and efficiency and support new growth investments. Key activities under the plan include continued implementation of our ongoing Plant Network Optimization strategy, continued focus on driving operational efficiencies and ongoing business and commercial model changes. The PNO strategy is intended to simplify our manufacturing plant structure by transferring certain production lines among facilities. Other activities involve rationalizing organizational reporting structures to streamline various functions, eliminate bureaucracy, increase productivity and better align resources to business strategies and marketplace dynamics. These activities were initiated in the fourth quarter of 2013 and are expected to be substantially completed by the end of 2015.
We estimate that the 2014 Restructuring plan will reduce gross annual pre-tax operating expenses by approximately $150 million to $200 million exiting 2015, and we expect a substantial portion of the savings to be reinvested in strategic growth initiatives. We estimate that the implementation of the 2014 Restructuring plan will result in total pre-tax charges of approximately $175 million to $225 million, of which approximately $160 million to $210 million is expected to result in future cash outlays. Refer to Results of Operations for further details on our restructuring charges.
2011 Restructuring Plan
On July 26, 2011, our Board of Directors approved, and we committed to, a restructuring initiative (the 2011 Restructuring plan) designed to strengthen operational effectiveness and efficiencies, increase competitiveness and support new investments, thereby increasing shareholder value. Key activities under the 2011 Restructuring plan included standardizing and automating certain processes and activities; relocating select administrative and functional activities; rationalizing organizational reporting structures; leveraging preferred vendors; and other efforts to eliminate inefficiency. Among these efforts, we expanded our ability to deliver best-in-class global shared services for certain functions and divisions at several locations in emerging markets. This action was intended to enable us to grow our global commercial presence in key geographies and take advantage of many cost-reducing and productivity-enhancing opportunities. In addition, we undertook efforts to streamline various corporate functions, eliminate bureaucracy, increase productivity and better align corporate resources to our key business strategies.
On January 25, 2013, our Board of Directors approved, and we committed to, an expansion of our 2011 Restructuring plan. The Expansion was intended to further strengthen our operational effectiveness and efficiencies and support new investments. Key activities under the Expansion included further initiatives to: standardize and automate certain processes and activities; relocate select administrative and functional activities; rationalize organizational reporting structures; expand shared services; and align expenses to revenues within certain divisions and geographic regions. In addition, they included further efforts to streamline various corporate functions, eliminate bureaucracy, increase productivity and better align corporate resources to our key business strategies.
The total 2011 Restructuring plan, including the Expansion (the Total Program), reduced gross annual pre-tax operating expenses by approximately $360 million exiting 2013. A substantial portion of the Total Program savings were reinvested in targeted areas for future growth, including strategic growth initiatives and emerging markets. Key activities under the Total Program were substantially completed by the end of 2013. Refer to Results of Operations for further details on our restructuring charges.
Neurovascular Divestiture
In January 2011, we closed the sale of our Neurovascular business to Stryker Corporation for a purchase price of $1.5 billion in cash. We received $1.450 billion during 2011, $10 million during 2012, $30 million during 2013 and received the final $10 million in January 2014. After the sale of our Neurovascular business to Stryker, we provided transitional services through a transition services agreement, and also manufactured and supplied products to Stryker through a supply agreement. These transition services and supply agreements substantially ended during 2013. We recorded Neurovascular revenue of $58 million during 2013, $122 million during 2012 and $141 million during 2011. Our sales related to our divested Neurovascular business have declined as the various transition services and supply agreements have terminated. We do not expect revenueimpact from our divested Neurovascular business to be significant in 2014. Divestiture-related gains or charges are excluded by management for purposes of evaluating operating performance. See Results of Operations and Note C - Divestitures for additional information.
Healthcare Reform
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act were enacted into law in the U.S. in 2010. Certain provisions of the law have yet to be implemented and there are many programs and requirements for which the details have not yet been fully established or consequences not yet fully understood; therefore, it is unclear what the full impact will be from the law. The legislation imposes on medical device manufacturers a 2.3 percent excise tax on U.S. sales of Class I, II and III medical devices beginning in January 2013. In 2013, we recorded $73 million within our selling, general and administrative expenses. Other provisions of this law, including Medicare provisions aimed at improving quality and decreasing costs, comparative effectiveness research, an independent payment advisory board, and pilot programs to evaluate alternative payment methodologies, could meaningfully change the way healthcare is developed and delivered, and will place a significant emphasis on clinical and economic data to demonstrate efficacy and justify the economic benefits of technology purchases.
Any changes in government policies that lower reimbursement for our products or reduce medical procedure volumesforeign currency exchange rates, which had a negative impact of 11 percent, net sales in countries in which we conduct business could adversely affect our business and results of operations. We cannot predict the specific healthcare programs and regulations that will be ultimately implemented by regional and national governments globally.these markets grew 20 percent.
We expect that pricing of medical devices will remain under pressure as alternative payment reform such as prospective payment systems for hospital care, value-based purchasing, and accountable care organizations (ACOs) continue to take shape globally. Some governments also seek to limit the growth of healthcare costs through price regulation. Implementation of cost containment initiatives and healthcare reforms in significant markets such as the U.S., Japan and Europe and other markets may limit the price of, or the level at which reimbursement is provided for our products, which in turn may influence a hospital’s or physician's selection of products used to treat patients. In Japan, the government reviews reimbursement rate benchmarks every two years, which may significantly reduce reimbursement for procedures using our medical devices or deny coverage for those procedures.
Results of Operations
Net Sales
Effective as of January 1, 2013, we reorganized our business from geographic regions to fully operationalized global business units. We have three new global reportable segments comprised of Cardiovascular, Rhythm Management, and MedSurg. We have restated the 2012 and 2011 information to conform to our new segment presentation.
We manage our global businesses on a constant currency basis, and we manage market risk from currency exchange rate changes at the corporate level. Management excludes the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates for purposes of reviewing revenue growth rates to facilitate an evaluation of current operating performance and comparison to past operating performance. To calculate revenue growth rates that exclude the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates, we convert current period and prior period net sales from local currency to U.S. dollars using standard internal currency exchange rates held constant for each year.
The following table provides our worldwide net sales by global business and the relative change on an as reported and constant currency basis. The constant currency growth rates in the tables below can be recalculated from our net sales presented in Note O - Segment Reporting to our consolidated financial statements contained in Item 8 of this Annual Report. Net sales that exclude the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates and net sales from divested businesses are not financial measures prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP and should not be considered in isolation from, or as a replacement for, the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure. Refer to Additional Information of this Item 7 for a further discussion of management’s use of this non-GAAP financial measure.
| | | | | | | 2013 versus 2012 | 2012 versus 2011 | | | | | 2016 versus 2015 | | 2015 versus 2014 |
| | Year Ended December 31, | As Reported Currency Basis | Constant Currency Basis | As Reported Currency Basis | Constant Currency Basis | Year Ended
December 31, | | As Reported
Currency
Basis | Constant
Currency
Basis | | As Reported
Currency
Basis | Constant
Currency
Basis |
| (in millions) | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 | |
| | | | | | | | | |
| Interventional Cardiology | $ | 1,997 |
| $ | 2,179 |
| $ | 2,495 |
| (8 | ) | % | (6 | ) | % | (13 | ) | % | (11 | ) | % | $ | 2,281 |
| $ | 2,033 |
| $ | 2,057 |
| | 12 | % | 13 | % | | (1 | )% | 7 | % |
| Peripheral Interventions | 789 |
| 774 |
| 731 |
| 2 |
| % | 6 |
| % | 6 |
| % | 8 |
| % | 1,011 |
| 904 |
| 850 |
| | 12 | % | 12 | % | | 6 | % | 13 | % |
| Cardiovascular | 2,786 |
| 2,953 |
| 3,226 |
| (6 | ) | % | (3 | ) | % | (8 | ) | % | (7 | ) | % | 3,292 |
| 2,937 |
| 2,907 |
| | 12 | % | 12 | % | | 1 | % | 9 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Cardiac Rhythm Management | 1,886 |
| 1,908 |
| 2,087 |
| (1 | ) | % | — |
| % | (9 | ) | % | (7 | ) | % | 1,850 |
| 1,807 |
| 1,912 |
| | 2 | % | 3 | % | | (5 | )% | 1 | % |
| Electrophysiology | 155 |
| 147 |
| 147 |
| 5 |
| % | 7 |
| % | — |
| % | 1 |
| % | 243 |
| 233 |
| 227 |
| | 4 | % | 5 | % | | 2 | % | 9 | % |
| Rhythm Management | 2,041 |
| 2,055 |
| 2,234 |
| (1 | ) | % | — |
| % | (8 | ) | % | (6 | ) | % | 2,093 |
| 2,040 |
| 2,139 |
| | 3 | % | 3 | % | | (5 | )% | 1 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Endoscopy | 1,300 |
| 1,252 |
| 1,187 |
| 4 |
| % | 7 |
| % | 5 |
| % | 7 |
| % | 1,440 |
| 1,306 |
| 1,323 |
| | 10 | % | 10 | % | | (1 | )% | 6 | % |
| Urology and Women’s Health | 505 |
| 500 |
| 498 |
| 1 |
| % | 3 |
| % | — |
| % | 1 |
| % | |
| Urology and Pelvic Health | | 1,005 |
| 693 |
| 535 |
| | 45 | % | 45 | % | | 30 | % | 36 | % |
| Neuromodulation | 453 |
| 367 |
| 336 |
| 23 |
| % | 24 |
| % | 9 |
| % | 9 |
| % | 556 |
| 501 |
| 472 |
| | 11 | % | 12 | % | | 6 | % | 8 | % |
| MedSurg | 2,258 |
| 2,119 |
| 2,021 |
| 7 |
| % | 9 |
| % | 5 |
| % | 6 |
| % | 3,001 |
| 2,500 |
| 2,330 |
| | 20 | % | 20 | % | | 7 | % | 13 | % |
| | | | | | | |
| Subtotal Core Businesses | 7,085 |
| 7,127 |
| 7,481 |
| (1 | ) | % | 2 |
| % | (5 | ) | % | (3 | ) | % | 8,386 |
| 7,477 |
| 7,376 |
| | 12 | % | 12 | % | | 1 | % | 8 | % |
| Divested Businesses | 58 |
| 122 |
| 141 |
| N/A |
| | N/A |
| | N/A |
| | N/A |
| | — |
| — |
| 4 |
| | N/A |
| N/A |
| | N/A |
| N/A |
|
| Worldwide | $ | 7,143 |
| $ | 7,249 |
| $ | 7,622 |
| (1 | ) | % | 1 |
| % | (5 | ) | % | (3 | ) | % | |
| Net Sales | | $ | 8,386 |
| $ | 7,477 |
| $ | 7,380 |
| | 12 | % | 12 | % | | 1 | % | 8 | % |
The constant currency growth rates in the table above can be recalculated from our net sales by reportable segment as presented in Note O - Segment Reporting to our 2013 consolidated financial statements contained in Item 8 of this Annual Report. Growth rates are based on actual, non-rounded amounts and may not recalculate precisely. Refer to Executive Summary for further discussion of our net sales and a comparison of our 20132016 and 20122015 net sales.
In 2012,2015, we generated net sales of $7.249$7.477 billion, as compared to $7.622$7.380 billion in 2011, a decrease2014, an increase of $373$97 million, or fiveone percent. Our net sales were unfavorably impacted by $123$505 million from foreign currency fluctuations in 20122015 as compared to 2011 and sales related to our divested Neurovascular business declined $19 million in 2012.2014. Excluding the impact of foreign currency and sales from divested businesses, our net sales decreased $232increased $606 million, or threeeight percent, as compared to the prior year. This decreaseincrease was due primarily to constant currency declinesincreases in net sales from our Urology and Pelvic Health business of $193 million, primarily due to the AMS Portfolio Acquisition; from our Interventional Cardiology business of $266 million primarily as a result of lower market share due to competitive launches in 2012, average selling price declines in the DES market as a result of competitive pressures and declines in procedural volumes; and declines in our CRM net sales of $145 million due to lower procedural volumes as a result of a contraction in the ICD market, lower average selling prices, and lower volumes. These decreases were partially offset by constant currency increases in net sales during 2012 from our Endoscopy business of $84 million,$150 million; from our Peripheral Interventions business of $56 million,$114 million; and net sales from our NeuromodulationEndoscopy business of $32 million, as compared to 2011.$79 million.
Gross Profit
Our gross profit was $4.969$5.962 billion in 2013, $4.9002016, $5.304 billion in 2012,2015, and $4.963$5.170 billion in 2011.2014. As a percentage of net sales, our gross profit increased to 69.671.1 percent in 2013,2016, as compared to 67.670.9 percent in 20122015 and 65.170.1 percent in 2011.2014. The following is a reconciliation of our gross profit margins and a description of the drivers of the change from period to period:
|
| | | | |
| | Year Ended December 31, |
| | 2013 | 2012 |
| Gross profit - prior year | 67.6 | % | 65.1 | % |
| Neurovascular divestiture | 0.5 | % | — | % |
| Manufacturing cost reductions | 1.9 | % | 1.4 | % |
| Transition-related inventory charges | (0.1 | )% | 0.7 | % |
| All other, including other inventory charges, other period expense and net impact of foreign currency | 0.6 | % | 0.7 | % |
| Sales mix and pricing | (0.9 | )% | (0.3 | )% |
| Gross profit - current year | 69.6 | % | 67.6 | % |
|
| | | | |
| | Year Ended
December 31, |
| | 2016 | 2015 |
| Gross profit - prior year | 70.9 | % | 70.1 | % |
| Manufacturing cost reductions | 2.0 | % | 1.8 | % |
| Sales pricing and mix | (0.1 | )% | (0.6 | )% |
| Inventory step-up due to acquisition accounting | (0.2 | )% | (0.4 | )% |
| Net impact of foreign currency | (0.9 | )% | 0.5 | % |
| All other, including other inventory charges and other period expense | (0.6 | )% | (0.5 | )% |
| Gross profit - current year | 71.1 | % | 70.9 | % |
The primary factor contributing to the increase in our gross profit margin for 2016, as compared to 2015, was the positive impact of cost reductions as a result of our restructuring and other process improvement programs. Partially offsetting these factors was the net negative impact of foreign currency fluctuations and other inventory charges and period expenses. The increase in our gross profit margin for 2013,2015, as compared to 2012, is2014, primarily the result ofresulted from manufacturing cost reductions fromas a result of our restructuring and other process improvement programs. Our gross profit margin was also positively impacted by lower sales related to our divested businesses, as these sales are at significantly lower gross profit margins. In addition, during the second quarter of 2013, we recorded a $16 million credit to cost of products sold related to the final retroactive pricing adjustment pursuant to our PROMUS® supply arrangement with Abbott for historical purchases of PROMUS® stent systems. This credit is included in the "all other" caption in the table above. Partially offsetting these factors was the net negative impact of pricing and sales mixdeclines related primarily to sales of our drug-eluting stent and CRM products.
In addition, in connection with the accounting for the AMS Portfolio Acquisition, we adjusted acquired inventory from manufacturing cost to fair value. The main factor contributing to the increasestep-up in ourvalue is amortized through gross profit margin during 2012, as compared to 2011, was the result of cost reductions from our restructuring and process improvement programs. Our gross margin was negatively impacted by declines inover an average selling prices related primarily to sales of our drug-eluting stent and CRM products; however, these declines were largely offset by the full conversion to our internally-developed and self-manufactured next-generation PROMUS® Element™ stent system during 2012. Our PROMUS® Element™ stent system has significantly higher gross margins than the prior generation PROMUS® stent system, which was supplied to us by Abbott Laboratories. Additionally, affecting our 2012 to 2011 comparison of gross margin was the impact of a one-time $50 million credit toestimated inventory turnover period. We recorded increased cost of products sold, related to a two-year retroactive pricing adjustment pursuant to our PROMUS® supply arrangement$22 million in 2016 and $36 million in 2015 associated with Abbott and product transition-related inventory charges of $54 million recorded in 2011.the step-up.
Operating Expenses
The following table provides a summary of certain of our operating expenses:
| |
| | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| | | | | % of Net | | | | % of Net | | | | % of Net | | | % of Net | | | % of Net | | | % of Net |
| (in millions) | | $ | | Sales | | $ | | Sales | | $ | | Sales | | $ | Sales | | $ | Sales | | $ | Sales |
| Selling, general and administrative expenses | | 2,674 |
| | 37.4 | | 2,535 |
| | 35.0 | | 2,487 |
| | 32.6 | | 3,099 |
| 37.0 | % | | 2,873 |
| 38.4 | % | | 2,902 |
| 39.3 | % |
| Research and development expenses | | 861 |
| | 12.0 | | 886 |
| | 12.2 | | 895 |
| | 11.7 | | 920 |
| 11.0 | % | | 876 |
| 11.7 | % | | 817 |
| 11.1 | % |
| Royalty expense | | 140 |
| | 2.0 | | 153 |
| | 2.1 | | 172 |
| | 2.3 | | 79 |
| 0.9 | % | | 70 |
| 0.9 | % | | 111 |
| 1.5 | % |
Selling, General and Administrative (SG&A) Expenses
In 2013,2016, our SG&A expenses increased $139$226 million, or fiveeight percent, as compared to 2012,2015, and were 240140 basis points higherlower as a percentage of net sales. This increasedecrease in SG&A as a percentage of sales was primarily driven primarily by the benefit of our increased investment related to acquisitions, strategic growthtargeted initiatives and our expansion efforts in emerging markets,focused on reducing SG&A, as well as $73the reduction in expenses resulting from the suspension of the Medical Device Excise Tax, which was substantially reinvested into our strategic growth initiatives. The Medical Device Excise Tax was temporarily suspended in December 2015 through December 31, 2017.
In 2015, our SG&A expenses decreased $29 million, or one percent, as compared to 2014, and were 90 basis points lower as a percentage of expense associated withnet sales. This decrease was driven by the new excise tax on U.S. salesimpacts of Class I, IIour foreign currency fluctuations and III medical devices that went into effect January 1, 2013. Partially offsetting these increases were declines in spending as a result of our restructuring and other cost reduction initiativesinitiatives. We recorded $78 million in 2015 and the impact of changes$72 million in foreign currency exchange rates.
In 2012, our SG&A expenses increased $48 million, or two percent, as compared to 2011, and were 240 basis points higher as a percentage of net sales. This increase was driven primarily by continued investments in acquisitions and in commercial resources and infrastructure for global expansion, particularly in emerging markets, and a non-recurring asset impairment charge as a result of a program termination. Also contributing2014 related to the year-over-year increase was a benefit recorded in 2011 as a result of a reversal of previously established allowances for doubtful accounts against long-outstanding receivables in Greece. These increases in SG&A were partially offset by declines in spending as a result of our restructuring and other cost reduction initiatives and the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates.Medical Device Excise Tax.
Research and Development (R&D) Expenses
In 2013, our R&D expenses decreased $25 million, or approximately three percent, as compared to 2012, and were 20 basis points lower as a percentage of net sales. The decrease was due primarily to our continued focus on cost reduction initiatives associated with our restructuring programs and the benefits from our strategy to transform our research and development efforts to be more effective and cost efficient. Partially offsetting the decrease was R&D funding for our acquisitions. We remain committed to advancing medical technologies and investing in meaningful research and development projects across our businesses. In 2016, our R&D expenses increased $44 million, or five percent, as compared to 2015, and were 70 basis points lower as a percentage of net sales. In 2015, our R&D expenses increased $59 million, or seven percent, as compared to 2014, and were 60 basis points higher as a percentage of net sales. The year-over-year increase in expenses was due primarily to investments across all of our businesses in order to maintain a healthy pipeline of new products that we believe will contribute to profitable sales growth.growth and increased cost related to recent acquisitions and alliances, partially offset by the favorable impact of foreign currency fluctuations.
Royalty Expense
In 2012,2016, our R&D expenses decreasedroyalty expense increased $9 million, or approximately one13 percent, as compared to 2011,2015 and were 50 basis points higher as a percentageremained flat at approximately one percent of net sales.sales for both periods. The slight decreaseincrease in overall spending in 2012royalty expense was primarily due to cost reduction initiatives associated withincreases in net sales of our restructuring programs, partially offset by increased R&D funding for our acquisitions.
Royalty Expensedrug-eluting coronary stent systems in 2016.
In 2013,2015, our royalty expense decreased $13$41 million, or nine37 percent, as compared to 2012,2014, and was ten60 basis points lower as a percentage of net sales. The decrease relates primarily to the renegotiation of a royalty agreement in the second quarter of 2014 that resulted in a lower sales of our royalty-bearing products within our Interventional Cardiology business.
In 2012, our royalty expense decreased $19 million, or 11 percent, as compared to 2011, and was 20 basis points lower as a percentage of net sales. The decrease relates primarily to lower sales of our royalty-bearing products within our Interventional Cardiology business.rate structure.
Amortization Expense
Our amortization expense was $410$545 million in 2013,2016, as compared to $395$495 million in 2012,2015, an increase of $15$50 million or four10 percent. ThisAmortization expense was $495 million in 2015, as compared to $438 million in 2014, an increase wasof $57 million or 13 percent. The increases in each period were primarily due primarily to certainamortizable intangible assets associated with our acquisitions of Bridgepoint, Rhythmia, and Vessix, which all took place in the fourth quarter of 2012 and electrophysiology business or C.R. Bard, Inc., which we acquired in the fourth quarter of 2013.
Amortization expense was $395 million in 2012, as compared to $421 million in 2011, a decrease of $26 million or six percent. This decrease was due primarily to certain intangible assets associated with our acquisition of Guidant Corporation in 2006 reaching the end of their useful lives during the second quarter of 2011.AMS Portfolio Acquisition on August 3, 2015.
Amortization expense is excluded by management for purposes of evaluating operating performance and assessing liquidity.performance.
GoodwillIntangible Asset Impairment Charges
Effective asWe have recorded intangible asset impairment charges, including impairments of January 1, 2013, we reorganized our business from geographic regions to fully operationalized global business units. Our reorganization changed our reporting structurein-process research and changed the compositiondevelopment, of our reporting units for goodwill impairment testing purposes. We identified the following new global reporting units effective as of January 1, 2013: Interventional Cardiology, Peripheral Interventions, Cardiac Rhythm Management, Electrophysiology, Endoscopy, Urology$11 million in 2016, $19 million in 2015 and Women's Health, and Neuromodulation. Refer to Critical Accounting Estimates for further discussion of the reorganization and the resulting global reporting units. The discussion below for 2013 relates to our global business reporting units and for 2012 and prior periods, relates to our former regional reporting units. For our 2012 and prior impairment assessments, we identified (i) six reporting units within the U.S., which included our CRM, Neuromodulation, Endoscopy, Urology and Women's Health, Electrophysiology, and Cardiovascular (consisting of Interventional Cardiology and Peripheral Interventions) franchises, which$195 million in aggregate made up the U.S. reportable segment and (ii) four international reporting units, including EMEA (consisting of Europe, Middle East and Africa), Japan, Asia Pacific and the Americas.
2013 Charge2014.
We test our goodwill balances during the second quarter of each year for impairment, or more frequently if indicators are present or changes in circumstances suggest that impairment may exist. Following our reorganization from regions to global business units and our reallocation of goodwill on a relative fair value basis, we conducted the first step of the goodwill impairment test for all new global reporting units as of January 1, 2013. The first step requires a comparison of the carrying value of the reporting units to the fair value of these units. The fair value of each new global reporting unit exceeded its carrying value, with the exception of the global CRM reporting unit. The global CRM reporting unit carrying value exceeded its fair value primarily due to the carrying value of its amortizable intangible assets. The carrying value of amortizable intangible assets allocated to the global CRM reporting unit was $4.636 billion as of January 1, 2013. In accordance with ASC Topic 350,See Intangibles—Note D - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets(Topic 350), we tested the global CRM amortizable intangible assets for impairment to our consolidated financial statements contained in conjunction with the interim goodwill impairment test of our global CRM reporting unit. We performed the impairment analysis of the amortizable intangible assets on an undiscounted cash flow basis, and concluded that these assets were not impaired.
The second step of the goodwill impairment test compares the estimated fair value of a reporting unit’s goodwill to its carrying value. We performed the second step of the goodwill impairment test on the global CRM reporting unit and recorded a non-cash goodwill impairment charge of $423 million ($421 million after-tax) to write-down the goodwill to its implied fair value as of January 1, 2013. The primary driverItem 8 of this impairment charge was our reorganization from geographic regions to global business units as of January 1, 2013, which changed the composition of our reporting units. As a result of the reorganization, any goodwill allocated to the global CRM reporting unit was no longer supported by the cash flows of other businesses. Under our former reporting unit structure, the goodwill allocatedAnnual Report on Form 10-K, for additional details related to our regional reporting units was supported by the cash flows from all businesses in each international region. The hypothetical tax structure of the global CRM business and the global CRM business discount rate applied were also contributing factors to the goodwillintangible asset impairment charge. We finalized the second step of the global CRM goodwill impairment test during the second quarter of 2013 and determined that no adjustments to the charge were required. After recording the impairment charge in the first quarter of 2013, there was no remaining goodwill allocated to the global CRM reporting unit.
The goodwill impairment charge taken during the first quarter of 2013 was determined on a global CRM basis pursuant to our new organizational structure. We used the income approach, specifically the discounted cash flow (DCF) method, to derive the fair value of the global CRM reporting unit. We completed a DCF model associated with our new global CRM business, including the amount and timing of future expected cash flows, tax attributes, the terminal value growth rate of approximately two percent and the appropriate market-participant risk-adjusted weighted average cost of capital (WACC) of approximately 12 percent.
In the second quarter of 2013, we performed our annual goodwill impairment test for all of our reporting units. In conjunction with our annual test, the fair value of each reporting unit exceeded its carrying value except CRM, for which no goodwill remains. Therefore, it was deemed not necessary to proceed to the second step of the impairment test. We have identified our global Neuromodulation reporting unit as being at higher risk of potential failure of the first step of the goodwill impairment test in future reporting periods. Our global Neuromodulation reporting unit holds $1.356 billion of allocated goodwill. The level of excess fair value over carrying value for this reporting unit identified during our annual goodwill impairment test was approximately 16 percent. Future changes in our reporting units or in the structure of our business as a result of future reorganizations, acquisitions or divestitures of assets or businesses could result in future impairments of goodwill within our reporting units including global CRM. Further, the recoverability of our CRM-related amortizable intangibles ($4.374 billion globally as of December 31, 2013) is sensitive to future cash flow assumptions and our global CRM business performance. The $4.374 billion of CRM-related amortizable intangibles are at higher risk of potential failure of the first step of the amortizable intangible recoverability test in future reporting periods. An impairment of a material portion of our CRM-related amortizable intangibles carrying value would occur if the second step of the amortizable intangible test is required in a future reporting period. Refer to Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates of this Item 7 for further discussion of our CRM-related intangible assets.
2012 Charges
During the second quarter of 2012, we performed our annual goodwill impairment test for all of our reporting units and concluded that the goodwill within our former EMEA reporting unit was impaired and recorded a charge of $3.602 billion ($3.579 billion after-tax). As a result of revised estimates developed during our annual strategic planning process and analysis performed in conjunction with our annual goodwill impairment test, we concluded that the revenue growth rates projected for the EMEA reporting unit were slightly lower than our previous estimates primarily driven by macro-economic factors and our performance in the European market. We updated short-term operating projections based on our most recent strategic plan for EMEA prepared by management. We reduced the EMEA long-term growth rates and terminal value growth rate projections and increased the discount rate within our 15-year DCF model for EMEA by approximately 100 basis points due to increased risk associated with our projections in this market primarily as a result of economic uncertainty in Europe. In addition, our expectations for future growth and profitability were lowered as compared to our previous estimates and reflected declines in average selling prices and volume pressures due to austerity measures.
In the third quarter of 2012, we performed an interim goodwill impairment test and recorded a non-cash $748 million (pre- and after-tax) charge associated with our former U.S. CRM reporting unit, primarily driven by a reduction in the estimated size of the U.S. CRM market, related adjustments to our business and other competitive factors, which led to lower projected U.S. CRM results compared to prior forecasts. The U.S. CRM market is dynamic, highly competitive and difficult to forecast; in the third quarter of 2012, we lowered our projections for the U.S. CRM market size and our future revenue levels within this market, primarily to reflect changes in expectations of average selling prices and unit growth, adjustments to our business and other competitive factors. The increased pricing pressure and lower unit volumes were primarily due to physician alignment with hospitals, efforts to reduce health care costs, focus on appropriate device usage, replacement volumes and competition, and were more impactful to the U.S. CRM business than previously estimated. In addition, we adjusted certain elements of our business and shifted investments to focus on areas expected to provide the highest future growth and financial return. As a result of these factors, we reduced the compound annual revenue growth rate of our 15 year DCF model for the U.S. CRM reporting unit by approximately 250 basis points.
2011 Charge
Based on market information that became available to us toward the end of the first quarter of 2011, we concluded that there was a reduction in the estimated size of the U.S. ICD market, which led to lower projected U.S. CRM results compared to prior forecasts and created an indication of potential impairment of the goodwill balance attributable to our former U.S. CRM business unit. Therefore, we performed an interim impairment test in accordance with U.S. GAAP and our accounting policies and recorded a non-deductible goodwill impairment charge of $697 million, on both a pre-tax and after-tax basis, associated with this business unit during the first quarter of 2011.charges.
Refer to Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates for a discussion of key assumptions used in our goodwill and intangible asset impairment testing and future events that could have a negative impact on the recoverability of our goodwill and amortizable intangible assets. GoodwillIntangible asset impairment charges do not impact our debt covenants or our cash flows, and are excluded by management for purposes of evaluating operating performance and assessing liquidity.
Intangible Asset Impairment Charges
2013 Charges
During the third quarter of 2013, we performed our annual impairment test of all in-process research and development projects,
and our indefinite lived core technology assets, and recorded no impairments based on the results of our testing. These indefinite-lived intangible assets are tested for impairment on an annual basis, or more frequently if impairment indicators are present, in accordance with U.S. GAAP and our accounting policies described in Note A – Significant Accounting Policies to our 2013 consolidated financial statements contained in Item 8 of this Annual Report.
During the second quarter of 2013 as a result of revised estimates developed in conjunction with our annual strategic planning process and annual goodwill impairment test, we performed an interim impairment test of our in-process research and development projects associated with certain of our acquisitions. Based on the results of our impairment analyses, we revised our expectations of the market size related to Sadra, and the resulting timing and amount of future revenue and cash flows associated with the technology acquired from Sadra. As a result of these changes, we recorded pre-tax impairment charges of $51 million to write-down the balance of these intangible assets to their fair value during the second quarter of 2013. During the second quarter of 2013, we also recorded an additional $2 million intangible asset impairment charge associated with changes in the amount of the expected cash flows related to certain other acquired in-process research and development projects.
2012 Charges
During the third quarter of 2012, we performed our annual impairment test of all in-process research and development projects, and our indefinite lived core technology assets. Based on the results of our annual test, we recorded total impairment charges of $13 million to write-down the balances of certain in-process projects to their fair value. These charges were primarily due to increased expectations in the cost to bring an in-process project to market in a certain geographic region and lower future revenue expectations associated with an in-process project.
During the second quarter of 2012, as a result of revised estimates developed in conjunction with our annual strategic planning process and annual goodwill impairment test, we performed an interim impairment test of our in-process research and development projects associated with our acquisition of Sadra Medical, Inc. Based on our impairment analysis, we revised our expectations of the required effort, time and cost involved in completing the in-process projects and bringing the related products to market. As a result of these changes, we recorded an impairment charge of $129 million to write-down the balance of these intangible assets to their fair value during the second quarter of 2012.
2011 Charges
During the third quarter of 2011, we recorded a $9 million intangible asset impairment charge attributable to lower projected cash flows associated with certain technologies. During the second quarter of 2011, we recorded a $12 million intangible asset impairment charge associated with changes in the timing and amount of the expected cash flows related to certain in-process research and development projects.
Intangible asset impairment charges are non-cash charges that are excluded by management for purposes of evaluating operating performance and assessing liquidity.
Contingent Consideration Expense
Certain of our acquisitions involve contingent consideration arrangements. Payment of additional consideration is generally contingent on the acquired company reaching certain performance milestones, including attaining specified revenue levels, achieving product development targets or obtaining regulatory approvals. In accordance with U.S. GAAP, we recognize a liability equal to the fair value of the contingent payments we expect to make as of the acquisition date. We re-measure this liability each reporting period and record changes in the fair value through a separate line item within our consolidated statements of operations. Increases or decreases in the fair value of the contingent consideration liability can result from changes in discount periods and rates, as well as changes in the timing and amount of revenue estimates or in the timing or likelihood of achieving regulatory, revenue or commercialization-based milestones.
We recorded a net expense related to the change in fair value of our contingent consideration liabilities of $4$29 million in 2013,2016, a net expense of $123 million in 2015 and a net benefit of $6$85 million in 2012 and a net expense of $7 million in 2011. Contingent consideration expense is excluded by management for purposes of evaluating performance. See2014. Refer to Note B – Acquisitions and Strategic Investments to our 2013 consolidated financial statements contained in Item 8 of this Annual Report for further discussion ofadditional details related to our contingent consideration associated with our acquisitions.expenses.
50Contingent consideration expense is excluded by management for purposes of evaluating operating performance.
Restructuring-related Activities and Charges
2014 Restructuring Plan
As of December 31, 2013, we have recorded costs of $30 million under the 2014 Restructuring Plan, of which $29 million has been recorded as restructuring charges and the remaining portion has been recorded through other lines within our consolidated statement of operations. Refer to Business and Market Overview and Note H – Restructuring-related Activities to our 2013 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for additional information on our restructuring initiatives.
2011 Restructuring Plan
As of December 31, 2013, we have recorded costs of $284 million since the inception of the 2011 Restructuring plan (as expanded), and are recording a portion of these expenses as restructuring charges and the remaining portion through other lines within our consolidated statements of operations. Refer to Business and Market Overview and Note H – Restructuring-related Activities to our 2013 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for additional information on our restructuring initiatives.
2010 Restructuring Plan
On February 6, 2010, our Board of Directors approved, and we committed to, a series of management changes and restructuring initiatives (the 2010 Restructuring plan) designed to focus our business, drive innovation, accelerate profitable revenue growth and increase both accountability and shareholder value. Key activities under the 2010 Restructuring plan included the restructuring of certain of our businesses and corporate functions; the re-alignment of our international structure to reduce our administrative costs and invest in expansion opportunities including significant investments in emerging markets; and the re-prioritization and diversification of our product portfolio. Activities under the 2010 Restructuring plan were initiated in the first quarter of 2010 and were complete by the end of 2012, and resulted in gross reductions in pre-tax operating expenses of approximately $250 million. A portion of these savings were reinvested into customer-facing positions and other commercial resources and infrastructure.
The execution of the 2010 Restructuring plan resulted in total pre-tax charges of $160 million, and required cash outlays of $145 million. We have recorded a portion of these expenses as restructuring charges and the remaining portion through other lines within our consolidated statements of operations.
Plant Network Optimization Program
In January 2009, our Board of Directors approved, and we committed to, a plant network optimization initiative (the Plant Network Optimization program), intended to simplify our manufacturing plant structure by transferring certain production lines among facilities and by closing certain other facilities. The Plant Network Optimization program was intended to improve our overall gross profit margins. The Plant Network Optimization program has resulted in annualized run-rate reductions of manufacturing costs of approximately $65 million exiting 2012. Activities under the Plant Network Optimization program were initiated in the first quarter of 2009 and were substantially completed during 2012.
The execution of the Plant Network Optimization program resulted in total pre-tax charges of $126 million and required cash outlays of $103 million. We have recorded a portion of these expenses as restructuring charges and the remaining portion through cost of products sold within our consolidated statements of operations.
In aggregate, we recorded restructuring charges pursuant to our restructuring plans of $101$28 million during 2013, $1362016, $26 million during 2012,2015, and $89$69 million during 2011.2014. In addition, we recorded expenses within other lines of our accompanying consolidated statements of operations related to our restructuring initiatives of $23$50 million during 2013, $242016, $57 million during 2012,2015, and $40$48 million during 2011.2014. Restructuring and restructuring-related costs are excluded by management for purposes of evaluating operating performance.
The 2016 Restructuring Plan is expected to result in total pre-tax charges of approximately $175 million to $225 million and reduce gross annual expenses by approximately $115 million to $150 million by the end of 2020 as program benefits are realized. The
2014 Restructuring Plan resulted in total pre-tax charges of $261 million and will reduce annual expenses by approximately $200 million. We expect a substantial portion of the savings to be reinvested in strategic growth initiatives.
We made cash payments of $82 million in 2016, $95 million in 2015, and $141112 million in 2013, $149 million in 2012, and $114 million in 20112014 associated with our restructuring initiatives.
See Note H - Restructuring Related– Restructuring-related Activities to our 2013 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for additional details related toon our restructuring plans.
Litigation-related Charges and Credits
During 2013, 2012 and 2011, weWe recorded net litigation-related charges in the amount of $221$804 million $192 millionin 2016, $1.105 billion in 2015, and $1.036 billion in 2014. The net charges recorded in 2016 include primarily amounts related to transvaginal surgical mesh product liability cases and claims. The net charges recorded in 2015 include amounts primarily related to transvaginal surgical mesh product liability cases and claims and the charge related to the Mirowski Family Venture LLC (Mirowski) lawsuit following a jury verdict that Guidant Corporation (Guidant) breached their license agreement with Mirowski. The net charges recorded in 2014 include a $600 million charge related to the agreement between our subsidiary, Guidant and Johnson & Johnson signed on February 13, 2015, to settle the breach of merger agreement lawsuit brought by Johnson & Johnson, stemming from our acquisition of Guidant. In exchange, we made aggregate payments totaling $600 million to Johnson & Johnson during 2015. The 2014 net charges also include amounts related to transvaginal surgical mesh product liability cases and claims and certain other items.$48 million, respectively. These
Litigation related charges and credits are excluded by management for purposes of evaluating operating performance.
We continue to assess certain litigation and claims to determine the amounts, if any, that management believes will be paid as a result of such claims and litigation and, therefore, additional losses may be accrued and paid in the future, which could materially adversely impact our operating results, cash flows and/or our ability to comply with our debt covenants. SeeRefer to Note K -– Commitments and Contingencies to our 2013 consolidated financial statements contained in Item 8 of this Annual Report for additional discussion of our litigation-related matters.material legal proceedings.
Pension Termination Charges
We recorded pension termination charges of $44 million during 2015 associated with the termination of the Guidant Retirement Plan, a frozen defined benefit plan. We do not expect to incur any additional charges in the future related to the termination of the Guidant Retirement Plan.
The pension termination charges are excluded by management for purposes of evaluating operating performance.
Gain on Divestiture
In January 2011, we closed the sale of our Neurovascular business to Stryker Corporation for a purchase price of $1.5 billion in cash. We received $1.450 billion during 2011, including an upfront payment of $1.426 billion, and $24 million which was placed into escrow and released throughout 2011 upon the completion of local closings in certain foreign jurisdictions. During 2012, we received an additional $10 million of consideration, which we recorded as a gain in our accompanying consolidated statements of operations. We received $30 million in 2013 and received the remaining $10 million of consideration in January 2014. Due to our continuing involvement in the operations of the Neurovascular business, the divestiture does not meet the criteria for presentation as a discontinued operation.Corporation. We recorded a pre-tax gain of $778$12 million during 20112014 associated with the transaction, a gain of $15 million during 2012 and a gain of $38 million during 2013.transaction. These divestiture-related gains are excluded by management for purposes of evaluating operating performance.
Interest Expense
Our interest expense increased to $324was $233 million in 2013,2016 with an average borrowing rate of 4.0 percent, as compared to $261$284 million in 2012. The increase was primarily due to $702015, with an average borrowing rate of 5.2 percent. Interest expense in 2015 included a pre-tax charge of approximately $45 million of associated with debt extinguishment charges, representing premiums, accelerated amortization of debt issuance costs and investor discount costs net of accelerated amortization of interest rate hedge gains related to the early extinguishment of $1.450$1.000 billion of debt during the thirdsecond quarter of 2013. 2015.
Our interest expense was $284 million in 2015, with an average borrowing rate of 5.2 percent, as compared to $216 million in 2014, with an average borrowing rates of 4.8 percent. The increase was primarily due to the pre-tax charge of approximately $45 million associated with debt extinguishment charges, along with incremental debt to finance the AMS Portfolio Acquisition offset by savings from refinancing our senior notes.
Debt extinguishment charges are excluded by management for purposes of evaluating operating performance. Including the debt extinguishment charges, our average borrowing rate was 6.9 percent in 2013 and 5.5 percent in 2012. Refer to Liquidity and Capital Resources, Note E – Fair Value Measurements and and Note F – Borrowings and Credit Arrangements to our 2013 consolidated financial statements contained in Item 8 of this Annual Report for information regarding our debt obligations.
Our interest expense decreased to $261 million in 2012, as compared to $281 million in 2011. The decrease in our interest expense was a result of lower average debt levels, due to repayment of $1.250 billion of debt during 2011, and the refinancing of our credit facility in April 2012 at lower average costs. Our average borrowing rate was 5.5 percent in 2012 and 5.4 percent in 2011.
Other, net
Our other, net reflected expense of $19$37 million in 2013, income2016, expense of $22$39 million in 2012,2015, and income of $19$8 million in 2011.2014. The following are the components of other, net:
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
| Interest income | | $ | 6 |
| $ | 5 |
| $ | 7 |
| | $ | 5 |
| $ | 5 |
| $ | 5 |
|
| Foreign currency losses | | (11 | ) | (18 | ) | (12 | ) | | (13 | ) | (21 | ) | (18 | ) |
| Net gains (losses) on investments | | (9 | ) | 37 |
| 27 |
| | (21 | ) | (9 | ) | 27 |
|
| Other expense, net | | (5 | ) | (2 | ) | (3 | ) | | (8 | ) | (14 | ) | (6 | ) |
| | | $ | (19 | ) | $ | 22 |
| $ | 19 |
| | $ | (37 | ) | $ | (39 | ) | $ | 8 |
|
During 2013,2016, we recognized net losses of $21 million due to equity method adjustments on investments and investment impairments which were partially offset by a gain on our Neovasc investment. During 2015, we recognized net losses of $9 million due to $7 million in investment impairments and $2 million for equity method adjustments on investments.investments and investment impairments. During 2012,2014, we recognized gains of $39$19 million associated with 2012 acquisitions in which wethe acquisition of IoGyn, Inc. related to previously held prior equity interests, which were partially offset byinvestments and other net losses of $2 milliongains related to our investment portfolio. During 2011, we recognized gainsportfolio of $38 million associated with 2011 acquisitions in which we held prior equity interests, which were partially offset by net losses of $11 million on our investment portfolio.$8 million. The acquisition-related gains from previously held investments are excluded by management for purposes of evaluating operating performance. Refer to Note B – Acquisitions and Strategic Investments to our consolidated financial statements contained in Item 8 of this Annual Report for information regarding our strategic investments.
Tax Rate
The following table provides a summary of our reported tax rate:
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| | | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
| Reported tax rate | | 46.0 | % | (1.0 | )% | 31.3 | % | | (95.9 | )% | 63.2 | % | 76.7 | % |
| Impact of certain receipts/charges* | | (35.4 | )% | 12.7 | % | (12.0 | )% | | 108.3 | % | (53.5 | )% | (64.5 | )% |
| | | 10.6 | % | 11.7 | % | 19.3 | % | | 12.4 | % | 9.7 | % | 12.2 | % |
*These receipts/charges are taxed at different rates than our effective tax rate.
The change in our reported tax rate for 2013,2016, as compared to 20122015 and 2011,2014, relates primarily to the impact of certain receipts and charges that are taxed at different rates than our effective tax rate. rate, including intangible asset impairment charges, acquisition-related net charges, contingent consideration, litigation-related net charges, restructuring-related net charges, pension termination charges and debt extinguishment charges, as well as the impact of certain discrete tax items.
In 2013,2016, these receipts and charges included goodwill and intangible asset impairment charges, acquisition- and divestiture-relatedacquisition-related net charges, litigation-litigation-related net charges and restructuring-related net charges. Our reported tax rate for 2016 was also affected by discrete items primarily related to the resolution of various uncertain tax positions through settlement or expiration of statute, offset by a charge related to changes in state apportionment.
In 2015, these receipts and charges included intangible asset impairment charges, acquisition-related net charges, litigation-related net charges, restructuring-related net charges, pension termination charges, and debt extinguishment charges. Our reported tax rate for 20132015 was also affected by discrete items primarily related to benefits due to settlement of various uncertain tax positions and reinstatement of certain tax legislation that has been retroactively applied.
In 2014, these receipts and charges included intangible asset impairment charges, acquisition- and divestiture-related net charges, litigation-related net charges and restructuring-related net charges. Our reported tax rate for 2014 was also affected by discrete tax items primarily related primarily to the resolution of various uncertain tax positions resulting from the expiration of the statute of limitations for assessing tax in certain jurisdictions and benefit due to reinstatement of certain tax legislation that has been retroactively applied. In 2012, these receipts and charges included goodwill and intangible asset impairment charges, acquisition- and divestiture-related net credits, and litigation- and restructuring-related charges. Our reported tax rate for 2012 was also affected by discrete tax items related primarily to the resolution of an uncertain tax position resulting from an unfavorable court ruling. Excluding the impact of these receipts and charges in 2013 and 2012, the change in our reported tax rate for 2013, as compared to 2012, is primarily the result of shifts in the geographic mix of our business. In 2011, these receipts and charges included a gain on our divestiture of the Neurovascular business, a non-deductible goodwill impairment charge, other intangible asset impairment charges and restructuring-, litigation- and acquisition-related charges and credits. Our reported tax rate was also affected by discrete tax items, related primarily to a release of valuation allowances resulting from a change in our expected ability to realize certain deferred tax assets, changes in various state tax laws, the resolution of various uncertain tax positions resultingdue to a favorable court ruling, offset by a charge due to translation gain on previously taxed income.
We are contesting in U.S. Tax Court significant proposed adjustments from closing agreements with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the resolution of various uncertain tax positions resulting from the expiration of the statute of limitations for assessing tax in certain jurisdictions, and the finalization related to its audit of our 2010 U.S. Federal tax return.
We have received Notices of Deficiency fromtransfer pricing methodologies for the IRS reflecting proposed audit adjustments for Guidant Corporation for its 2001 through 2006 tax years and Boston Scientific Corporation for its 2006 and 2007 tax years. Subsequent to issuing these Notices, theThe IRS conceded a portion of its original assessment. The total incremental tax liability now asserted by the IRS for the applicable periods is $1.162 billion plus interest. The primary issue in dispute for all years is thealso proposed similar transfer pricing in connection with the technology license agreements between domestic and foreign subsidiaries of Guidant. In addition, the IRS has proposed adjustments in connection with the financial terms of our Transaction Agreement with Abbott Laboratories pertaining to the sale of Guidant's vascular intervention business to Abbott in April 2006. We do not agree with the transfer pricing methodologies applied by the IRS or its resulting assessment and we believe that the IRS has exceeded its authority by attempting to adjust the terms of our negotiated third-party agreement with Abbott. In addition, we believe that the IRS positions with regard to these matters are inconsistent with the applicable tax laws and the existing Treasury regulations.
We believe we have meritorious defenses for our tax filings and we have filed, or will timely file, petitions with the U.S. Tax Court contesting the Notices of Deficiency for the tax years in challenge. No payments on the net assessment would be required until the dispute is definitively resolved, which, based on experiences of other companies, could take several years. The IRS is currently examining the 2008 through 2010 tax years of Boston Scientific. During the first quarter of 2014 we were notified by the IRS of their intent to propose significant adjustments to our tax returns for these tax years based upon the same transfer pricing methodologies that are currently being contested in U.S. Tax Court for our tax years prior to 2008. As with the prior years, weyears. We disagree with the transfer pricing methodologies being applied by the IRS
and we were scheduled to go to trial in the U.S. Tax Court in late July 2016. On July 19, 2016, we entered a Stipulation of Settled Issues with the IRS intended to resolve all of the aforementioned transfer pricing issues, as well as issues related to our transaction with Abbott, for the 2001 through 2007 tax years. The Stipulation of Settled Issues is contingent upon the IRS Office of Appeals (IRS Appeals) applying the same basis of settlement to all transfer pricing issues for the Company’s 2008, 2009, and 2010 tax years, and if applicable, review by the United States Congress Joint Committee on Taxation. In October 2016, we reached an agreement in principle with IRS Appeals as to the resolution of the transfer pricing issues in 2008, 2009, and 2010 tax years, subject to additional calculations of tax as well as documentation to memorialize our agreement. In the event that the conditions in the Stipulation of Settled Items are satisfied, we expect to contest any adjustments receivedmake net tax payments of approximately $275 million, plus interest through applicable IRS and judicial procedures, as appropriate.the date of payment. If finalized, payments related to the resolution are expected in the next nine to 18 months. We believe that our income tax reserves associated with these matters are adequate as of December 31, 2016 and we do not expect to recognize any additional charges related to resolution of this controversy. However, the final resolution willof these issues is contingent and if the Stipulation of Settled Issues is not have a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations. However, final resolution is uncertain andfinalized, it could have a material impact on our financial condition, or results of operations.operations, or cash flows.
See Note J - Income Taxes to our consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for additional details on our tax rate and our tax litigation.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Based on our current business plan, we believe our existing balance of cash and cash equivalents, future cash generated from operations and access to capital markets and credit facilities will be sufficient to fund our operations, invest in our infrastructure, pay our legal-related liabilities, pay taxes due, fund possible mergers and/or acquisitions and service and repay our existing debt. Please refer to our Contractual Obligations and Commitments table for additional details on our future payment obligations and commitments.
As of December 31, 2013,2016, we had $217$196 million of cash and cash equivalents on hand, comprised of $38$42 million invested in money market and government funds and $179$154 million in short-term time deposits and interest bearing and non-interest bearing bank accounts. We invest excess cash on hand in short-term financial instruments that earn market interest rates while mitigating principal risk through instrument and counterparty diversification, as well as what we believe to be prudent instrument selection. We limit our direct exposure to securities in any one industry or issuer. We also have full access to our $2.000$2.000 billion revolving credit facility and $300$240 million of available borrowings under our credit and security facility secured by our U.S. trade receivables as of December 31, 2016, both described below.
The following provides a summary and description of our net cash inflows (outflows) for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122016, 2015 and 2011:2014:
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
| Cash provided by operating activities | | $ | 1,082 |
| $ | 1,260 |
| $ | 1,008 |
| | $ | 972 |
| $ | 600 |
| $ | 1,269 |
|
| Cash provided by (used for) investing activities | | (475 | ) | (579 | ) | 776 |
| |
| Cash used for financing activities | | (596 | ) | (744 | ) | (1,728 | ) | |
| Cash used for investing activities | | | (887 | ) | (2,186 | ) | (745 | ) |
| Cash provided by (used for) financing activities | | | (206 | ) | 1,322 |
| (150 | ) |
Operating Activities
During 2013,2016, cash provided by operating activities was $972 million, as compared to $600 million in 2015, an increase of $372 million or 62 percent. This increase was primarily driven by the increase in net income for 2016 compared to 2015, partially offset by approximately $100 million increase in litigation-related payments. During 2016, we made litigation-related payments primarily associated with the transvaginal surgical mesh product liability cases and to Mirowski.
Refer to Note K – Commitments and Contingencies for additional information on litigation-related matters.
During 2015, we generated $1.082 billion$600 million of cash from operating activities, as compared to $1.260$1.269 billion in 2012,2014, a decrease of $178 million.$669 million, or 53 percent. This reductiondecrease was primarily due to the impact$600 million of increased levels of accounts receivable of approximately $100 million, payments related to debt extinguishment of approximately $70 million and net payments associated with litigation of approximately $50 million; partially offset by a final cash receipt associated with our Promus® supply agreement with Abbott.Johnson & Johnson.
During 2012, we generated $1.260 billion from operating activities, as compared to $1.008 billion in 2011, an increase of $252 million. This increase was driven primarily by accounts receivable and inventory reductions, which generated $103 million; the impact of litigation-related payments of approximately $300 million to the U.S. Department of Justice in 2011; and lower tax-related net cash outflows of approximately $40 million during 2012. Partially offsetting these items was the impact of lower operating profit in 2012 and a $35 million increase in restructuring-related payments as compared to 2011. Our cash provided by operating activities in 2011 also included proceeds of approximately $80 million related to the termination of our outstanding interest rate derivative contracts and the receipt of a $75 million manufacturing cost true-up payment from Abbott in accordance with our supply agreement.
Investing Activities
During 2013,2016, cash used for investing activities was $475$887 million. Our investing activities primarily included capital expenditures$408 million of $245payments, net of cash acquired, for acquisitions including Cosman, EndoChoice, LumenR, Distal and Neovasc; along with $376 million in purchases of property, plant and a $274equipment and $132 million payment for the acquisition of C.R. Bard's electrophysiology business. These expenditures werepayments related to strategic investments, partially offset by $53 million of proceeds received from the sale of our Natick,one of two buildings located in Quincy, Massachusetts headquartersfor $29 million. We intend to invest approximately $300 million in March 2013. We are currently in the processpurchases of consolidating our Natick, Massachusetts headquarters into our Marlborough, Massachusetts location, where we are establishing a new global headquarters campus. We expect to incur total capital expenditures of approximately $250 millionproperty, plant and equipment during 2014.2017.
During 2012,2015, cash used for investing activities was $579$2.186 billion. Our investing activities included $1.734 billion of payments net of cash acquired, for acquisitions, including the AMS Portfolio Acquisition, CeloNova and Xlumena; along with $266 million of payments related to strategic investments, including equity investments in Preventice, Inc. and Frankenman Medical Equipment Company. Cash used for investing activities also included purchases of property, plant and equipment of $247 million.
During 2014, cash used for investing activities was $745 million. Our investing activities included capital expenditures$486 million of $226 million and payments, for the acquisitionsnet of Cameron Health Inc., Bridgepoint Medical Inc., Rhythmia Medical Inc., and Vessix Vascular Inc., totaling $367 million.
During 2011, cash provided by investing activities was comprised primarily of proceeds from the sale of our Neurovascular business to Stryker. We received $1.440 billion of net cash proceeds during 2011 related to the sale of this business. This cash inflow was partially offset by payments of $370 millionacquired, for acquisitions consummated during 2011;including IoGyn and capital expendituresthe Interventional Division of $304Bayer AG; along with purchases of property, plant and equipment of $259 million.
Financing Activities
Our cash flows from financing activities reflect issuances and repayments of debt, proceeds frompayments of acquisition-related contingent consideration, and cash used to new share settle and stock issuances related to our equity incentive programs, and repurchases of common stock pursuant to our authorized repurchase programs,as discussed in Note L - Stockholders' Equity to our 2013 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report. Additionally, our financing activities included $160$65 million of contingent payments primarilyin 2016, $156 million of payments in 2015 and $34 million of payments in 2014 associated with our acquisitionprevious acquisitions.
Our liquidity plans are subject to a number of Sadrarisks and clinical milestones achieved by the Vessix™ Renal Denervation System.uncertainties, including those described in Item 1A. Risk Factors of this Annual Report, some of which are outside our control. Macroeconomic conditions, adverse litigation outcomes and other risk and uncertainties could limit our ability to successfully execute our business plans and adversely affect our liquidity plans.
Debt
We had total debt of $4.240$5.484 billion as of December 31, 20132016 and $4.256$5.677 billion as of December 31, 2012. During2015 which consisted of the third quarterfollowing:
Revolving Credit Facility
In April 2015, we entered into a new $2.000 billion revolving credit facility (the 2015 Facility) with a global syndicate of commercial banks and terminated our previous $2.000 billion revolving credit facility. The 2015 Facility matures in April 2020. There were no amounts borrowed under our current or prior revolving credit facility as of December 31, 2016 or December 31, 2015.
Term Loans
As of December 31, 2016, we had an aggregate $750 million outstanding under our unsecured term loan facilities and $1.000 billion outstanding under these facilities as of December 31, 2015. These facilities include an unsecured term loan facility entered into in August 2013 (2013 Term Loan) which had $150 million outstanding as of December 31, 2016 and $250 million outstanding as of December 31, 2015, along with an unsecured term loan credit facility entered into in April 2015 (2015 Term Loan) which had $600 million outstanding as of December 31, 2016 and $750 million outstanding as of December 31, 2015.
Our revolving credit facility and our term loan facilities require that we refinanced our public debt obligations maturingmaintain certain financial covenants as outlined in June 2014Note F – Borrowings and January 2015 (see Senior NotesCredit Arrangements below). to our consolidated financial statements contained in Item 8 of this Annual Report. As of and through December 31, 2016, we were in compliance with the required covenants. Any inability to maintain compliance with these covenants could require us to seek to renegotiate the terms of our credit facility or seek waivers from compliance with these covenants, both of which could result in additional borrowing costs. Further, there can be no assurance that our lenders would agree to such new terms or grant such waivers.
Senior Notes
We had senior notes outstanding of $4.650 billion as of December 31, 2016 and as of December 31, 2015. Our senior notes were issued in public offerings, are redeemable prior to maturity and are not subject to any sinking fund requirements. Our senior notes are unsecured, unsubordinated obligations and rank on parity with each other. These notes are effectively junior to borrowings under our credit and security facility, to the extent if borrowed by our subsidiaries, and to liabilities of our subsidiaries.
On January 12, 2017, we used our existing credit facilities to repay the $250 million plus interest of our senior notes due in January 2017.
The debt maturity schedule for the significant components of our debt obligations as of December 31, 20132016 is as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | |
| (in millions) | 2014 | | 2015 | | 2016 | | 2017 | | 2018 | | Thereafter | | Total |
| Senior notes | $ | — |
| | $ | 400 |
| | $ | 600 |
| | $ | 250 |
| | $ | 600 |
| | $ | 1,950 |
| | $ | 3,800 |
|
| Term Loan | — |
| | — |
| | 80 |
| | 80 |
| | 240 |
| | — |
| | 400 |
|
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 400 |
| | $ | 680 |
| | $ | 330 |
| | $ | 840 |
| | $ | 1,950 |
| | $ | 4,200 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | |
| (in millions) | 2017 | | 2018 | | 2019 | | 2020 | | 2021 | | Thereafter | | Total |
| Senior Notes | $ | 250 |
| | $ | 600 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 1,450 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,350 |
| | $ | 4,650 |
|
| Term Loans | — |
| | 225 |
| | 150 |
| | 375 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 750 |
|
| | $ | 250 |
| | $ | 825 |
| | $ | 150 |
| | $ | 1,825 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,350 |
| | $ | 5,400 |
|
|
| |
| Note: | The table above does not include unamortized discounts associated with our senior notes, or amounts related to interest rate contracts used to hedge the fair value of certain of our senior notes.notes or debt issuance costs. |
Other Arrangements
In July 2011, Fitch Ratings upgradedWe maintained a $300 million credit and security facility secured by our corporate credit rating to BBB-, an investment-grade rating; and in February 2012, Moody’s Investors Service upgraded our corporate credit rating to Baa3, an investment-grade rating. In addition, Standard & Poor's Ratings Services has maintained an investment-grade corporate credit rating for us since 2009. We believe our investment grade credit profile reflects the size and diversity of our product portfolio, our share position in several of our served markets, our strong cash flow, our solid financial fundamentals and our financial strategy.
Revolving Credit Facility
We maintain a $2.0 billion revolving credit facility,U.S. trade receivables maturing in April 2017, with a global syndicate of commercial banks. Eurodollar and multicurrency loans under this revolving credit facility bear interest at LIBOR plus an interest margin of between 0.875 percent and 1.475 percent, based on our corporate credit ratings and consolidated leverage ratio (1.275 percent, as of December 31, 2013). In addition, we are required to pay a facility fee based on our credit ratings, consolidated leverage ratio, and the total amount of revolving credit commitments, regardless of usage, under the agreement (0.225 percent, as of December 31, 2013). There were no amounts borrowed under our revolving credit facility as of December 31, 2013 or December 31, 2012.
Our revolving credit facility agreement in place as of December 31, 2013 requires that we maintain certain financial covenants, as follows:
|
| | | |
| Covenant
Requirement
| | Actual as of December 31, 2013 |
Maximum leverage ratio (1) | 3.5 times | | 2.5 times |
Minimum interest coverage ratio (2) | 3.0 times | | 5.2 times |
| |
(1) | Ratio of total debt to consolidated EBITDA, as defined by the credit agreement, for the preceding four consecutive fiscal quarters. |
| |
(2) | Ratio of consolidated EBITDA, as defined by the credit agreement, to interest expense for the preceding four consecutive fiscal quarters. |
The credit agreement provides for an exclusion from the calculation of consolidated EBITDA, as defined by the agreement, through the credit agreement maturity, of any non-cash charges and up to $500 million in restructuring charges and restructuring-related expenses related to our current or future restructuring plans. As of December 31, 2013, we had $234 million of the restructuring charge exclusion remaining. In addition, any cash litigation payments (net of any cash litigation receipts), as defined by the agreement, are excluded from the calculation of consolidated EBITDA and any new debt issued to fund any tax deficiency payments is excluded from consolidated total debt, as defined in the agreement, provided that the sum of any excluded net cash litigation payments and any new debt issued to fund any tax deficiency payments shall not exceed $2.300 billion in the aggregate. As of December 31, 2013, we had approximately $2.185 billion of the combined legal and debt exclusion remaining. As of and through December 31, 2013, we were in compliance with the required covenants.
Any inability to maintain compliance with these covenants could require us to seek to renegotiate the terms of our credit facilities or seek waivers from compliance with these covenants, both of which could result in additional borrowing costs. Further, there can be no assurance that our lenders would agree to such new terms or grant such waivers.
Term Loan
In August 2013, we entered into a new $400 million, unsecured term loan facility. Term loan borrowings under this facility bear interest at LIBOR plus an interest margin of between 1.0 percent and 1.75 percent (currently 1.5 percent), based on our corporate credit ratings and consolidated leverage ratio. The term loan borrowings are payable over a five-year period, with quarterly principal payments of $20 million commencing in the first quarter of 2016 and the remaining principal amount due at the final maturity date in August 2018, and are repayable at any time without premium or penalty. Our term loan facility requires that we comply with certain covenants, including financial covenants with respect to maximum leverage and minimum interest coverage; the maximum leverage ratio requirement is 3.5 times, our actual leverage ratio as of December 31, 2013 is 2.5 times and the minimum interest coverage ratio requirement is 3.0 times, our actual interest coverage ratio as of December 31, 2013 is 5.2 times.June 9, 2017. We had $400borrowings of $60 million outstanding under this facility as of December 31, 20132016 and no borrowings outstanding as of December 31, 2012.
Senior Notes
We had senior notes outstanding2015. On February 7, 2017, we amended the terms of $3.800 billion and $4.200 billion as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. In August 2013, we issued $600 million of 2.650% senior notes due in 2018, and $450 million of 4.125% senior notes due in 2023. In September 2013, we used the proceeds, together with borrowings under our new $400 million term loan facility, to prepay $600 million of senior notes maturing in June 2014 and $850 million maturing in January 2015. We recorded a one-time charge of $70 million ($44 million after-tax) for premiums, accelerated amortization of debt issuance costs and investor discount costs net of accelerated amortization of interest rate hedge gains related to the early debt extinguishment. Our senior notes are publicly registered securities, are redeemable prior to maturity and are not subject to any sinking fund requirements. Our senior notes are unsecured, unsubordinated obligations and rank on parity with each other. These notes are effectively junior to borrowings under ourthis credit and security facility, and liabilities of our subsidiaries (see Other Arrangements below).
Other Arrangements
We also maintain a credit and security facility secured by our U.S. trade receivables. In June 2013, we extended the maturity of this facility through June 2015, subject to further extension, reduced the size ofincluding increasing the facility from $350 millionsize to $300 million and added$400 million. This amendment retained a maximum leverage covenant consistent with our $2.0 billion revolving credit facility. Thesimilar maximum leverage ratio requirement is 3.5 times and our actual leverage ratio as of December 31, 2013 is 2.5 times. We had no borrowings outstanding under thisextended the facility as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012.maturity to February 2019.
We also have accounts receivable factoring programs in certain European countries that we account for as sales under Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification® (ASC) Topic 860, Transfers and Servicing. These agreements provide for the sale of accounts receivable to third parties, without recourse, of up to approximately $312$391 million as of December 31, 2013. We have no retained interests in the transferred receivables, other than collection and administrative responsibilities and, once sold, the accounts receivable are no longer available to satisfy creditors in the event of bankruptcy.2016. We de-recognized $146$152 million of receivables as of December 31, 20132016 at an average interest rate of 3.31.8 percent,, and $191$151 million as of December 31, 20122015 at an average interest rate of 1.6 percent. Within Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece the number of days our receivables are outstanding has increased above historical levels. We believe we have adequate allowances for doubtful accounts related to our Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece accounts receivable; however, we continue to monitor the European economic environment for collectibility issues related to our outstanding receivables.2.4 percent.
In addition, we have uncommitted credit facilities with a commercial Japanese bank that provide for borrowings, promissory notes discounting and receivables factoring of up to 21.021.000 billion Japanese yen (approximately $200$180 million as of December 31, 2013)2016). We de-recognized $147$149 million of notes receivable as of December 31, 20132016 at an average interest rate of 1.81.6 percent and $182$132 million of notes receivable as of December 31, 20122015 at an average interest rate of 1.6 percent.percent. De-recognized accounts and notes receivable are excluded from trade accounts receivable, net in the accompanying audited consolidated balance sheets included in Item 8 of this Annual Report.sheets.
As of December 31, 2013, weWe had outstanding letters of credit of $78 million, as compared to $9444 million as of December 31, 2012, which consisted primarily2016 and as of bank guarantees and collateral for workers' compensation insurance arrangements.December 31, 2015. As of December 31, 20132016 and 2012,2015, none of the beneficiaries had drawn upon the letters of credit or guarantees; accordingly, we have not recognized a related liability for our outstanding letters of credit in our consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2013 or 2012.guarantees. We believe we will generate sufficient cash from operations to fund these paymentsarrangements and intend to fund these paymentsarrangements without drawing on the letters of credit.credit,
56For additional details related to our debt, including our revolving credit facility, term loans, senior notes and other arrangements, see Note F – Borrowings and Credit Arrangements to our consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report.
Equity
During 20132016 we received $74$111 million in proceeds from stock issuances related to our stock option and employee stock purchase plans, as compared to $21114 million in both 20122015 and 2011.$60 million 2014. Proceeds from the exercise of employee stock options and employee stock purchases vary from period to period based upon, among other factors, fluctuations in the trading price of our common stock and in the exercise and stock purchase patterns of employees.
In July 2011, our Board of Directors approved a share repurchase program authorizing the repurchase of up toWe repurchased $1.0 billion in shares of our common stock and re-approved approximately 3710 million shares remaining under a previous share repurchase program. On January 25, 2013, our Board of Directors approved a new share repurchase program authorizing the repurchase of up tofor $1.0 billion in shares of our common stock. Throughout 2013, we repurchased approximately 51 million shares of our common stock for $500 million. During 2012, we repurchased approximately 105125 million shares of our common stock for $600 million. During 2011, we repurchased approximately 82 million shares of our common stock for $492 million. Repurchased shares are available for reissuance under our equity incentive plans and for general corporate purposes, including acquisitions.during 2014. No share repurchases were made in 2016 or 2015. As of December 31, 2013,2016, we had completed our share repurchase program authorized in 2011 and previous share repurchase programs. We had remaining approximately $660$535 million authorized under our 2013 share repurchase program as of December 31, 2013.program. There were approximately 238248 million shares in treasury as of December 31, 20132016 and187 million shares in treasury as of December 31, 2012.2015.
Stock-based compensation expense related to our stock equity compensation and ownership plans was $105$116 million in 2013,2016, $108107 million in 2012,2015, and $128103 million in 2011.2014. Stock-based compensation expense varies from period to period based upon, among other factors: the timing, number and fair value of awards granted during the period; forfeiture levels related to unvested awards; and employee contributions to our employee stock purchase plan.
Contractual Obligations and Commitments
The following table provides a summary of certain information concerning our obligations and commitments to make future payments, and is based on conditions in existence as of December 31, 2013.2016.
| | | | | | | |
(in millions) | | 2014 | | 2015 | | 2016 | | 2017 | | 2018 | | Thereafter | | Total | | 2017 | | 2018 | | 2019 | | 2020 | | 2021 | | Thereafter | | Total |
| Long-term debt obligations | | $ | — |
| | $ | 400 |
| | $ | 680 |
| | $ | 330 |
| | $ | 840 |
| | $ | 1,950 |
| | $ | 4,200 |
| | $ | 250 |
| | $ | 825 |
| | $ | 150 |
| | $ | 1,825 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,350 |
| | $ | 5,400 |
|
| Interest payments (1) | | 220 |
| | 217 |
| | 173 |
| | 138 |
| | 131 |
| | 1,020 |
| | 1,899 |
| | 224 |
| | 216 |
| | 194 |
| | 151 |
| | 111 |
| | 899 |
| | 1,795 |
|
| Operating lease obligations (1) | | 64 |
| | 51 |
| | 43 |
| | 29 |
| | 25 |
| | 42 |
| | 254 |
| |
| Lease obligations (1) | | | 66 |
| | 60 |
| | 42 |
| | 34 |
| | 25 |
| | 64 |
| | 291 |
|
| Purchase obligations (1) | | 265 |
| | 24 |
| | 8 |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | 6 |
| | 306 |
| | 321 |
| | 52 |
| | 39 |
| | 19 |
| | 12 |
| | 15 |
| | 458 |
|
| Minimum royalty obligations (1) | | 2 |
| | 2 |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 1 |
| | 1 |
| | 9 |
| | 1 |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 2 |
| | 1 |
| | 1 |
| | 8 |
|
| Unrecognized tax benefits | | 27 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 27 |
| |
| Legal reserves | | | 1,062 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 1,062 |
|
| Unrecognized tax benefits (2) | | | 577 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 577 |
|
| | | $ | 578 |
| | $ | 694 |
| | $ | 906 |
| | $ | 501 |
| | $ | 997 |
|
| $ | 3,019 |
| | $ | 6,695 |
| | $ | 2,501 |
| | $ | 1,155 |
| | $ | 426 |
| | $ | 2,031 |
| | $ | 149 |
| | $ | 3,329 |
| | $ | 9,591 |
|
| |
| (1) | In accordance with U.S. GAAP, these obligations relate to expenses associated with future periods and are not reflected in our consolidated balance sheets. |
| |
| (2) | Includes accrued interest and penalties and other related items. |
The amounts in the table above with respect to operating lease obligations represent amounts pursuant to contractual arrangements for the lease of property, plant and equipment used in the normal course of business. Purchase obligations relate primarily to non-cancellable inventory commitments and capital expenditures entered in the normal course of business. Royalty obligations reported above represent minimum contractual obligations under our current royalty agreements. The table above does not reflectinclude $584 million of unrecognized tax benefits and $197 million of $1.069 billion,accrued interest and penalties, and other related items because the timing of whichtheir future cash settlement is uncertain. Refer to Note J –- Income Taxes to our 2013 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for more information on these unrecognized tax benefits. In addition, the table above does not reflect our accrual for legal matters that are probable and estimable of $961 million due to the timing of payment being uncertain. Refer to Note K – Commitments and Contingencies to our consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for more information on our legal accrual.
With certain of our acquisitions, we acquired in-process research and development projects that require future funding to complete the projects. The primary basis for determining the technological feasibility or completion of these projects is obtaining regulatory approval to market the underlying products in an applicable geographic region. We estimate that the total remaining cost to complete the in-process research and development projects we acquired in 2011-2013 is between $200$25 million and $250 million and we expect material net$50 million. Net cash inflows from the projects currently in development are expected to commence in 20142017 through 2018,2030, following the respective launches of these technologies in the U.S., Europe and Japan regions.Japan. Certain of our acquisitions also involve the potential payment of contingent consideration. The table above does not reflect any such obligations, as the timing and amounts are uncertain. See Note B – Acquisitions and Strategic Investments to our 2013 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for the estimated maximum potential amount of future contingent consideration we could be required to pay associated with prior acquisitions and the fair value of our contingent consideration liabilities as of December 31, 2013.2016.
Legal Matters
The medical device market in which we primarily participate is largely technology driven. AsFor a result, intellectual property rights, particularly patents and trade secrets, play a significant role in product development and differentiation. Over the years, there has been litigation initiated against us by others, including our competitors, claiming that our current or former product offerings infringe patents owned or licensed by them. Intellectual property litigation is inherently complex and unpredictable. In addition, competing parties frequently file multiple suits to leverage patent portfolios across product lines, technologies and geographies and to balance risk and exposure between the parties. In some cases, several competitors are parties in the same proceeding, or in a series of related proceedings, or litigate multiple features of a single class of devices. These forces frequently drive settlement not only for individual cases, but also for a series of pending and potentially related and unrelated cases. Although monetary and injunctive relief is typically sought, remedies and restitution are generally not determined until the conclusion of the trial court proceedings and can be modified on appeal. Accordingly, the outcomes of individual cases are difficult to time, predict or quantify and are often dependent upon the outcomes of other cases in other geographies.
During recent years, we successfully negotiated closure of several long-standing legal matters and have received favorable legal rulings in several other matters; however, there continues to be outstanding intellectual property litigation. Adverse outcomes in one or more of these matters could have a material adverse effect on our ability to sell certain products and on our operating margins, financial position, results of operations and/or liquidity.
In the normal course of business, product liability, securities and commercial claims are asserted against us. Similar claims may be asserted against us in the future related to events not known to management at the present time. We maintain an insurance policy providing limited coverage against securities claims, and we are substantially self-insured with respect to product liability claims and fully self-insured with respect to intellectual property infringement claims. The absence of significant third-party insurance coverage increases our potential exposure to unanticipated claims or adverse decisions. Product liability claims, securities and commercial litigation, and other legal proceedings in the future, regardless of their outcome, could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and/or liquidity.
In addition, like other companies in the medical device industry, we are subject to extensive regulation by national, state and local government agencies in the United States and other countries in which we operate. From time to time we are the subject of qui tam actions and governmental investigations often involving regulatory, marketing and other business practices. These qui tam actions and governmental investigations could result in the commencement of civil and criminal proceedings, substantial fines, penalties and administrative remedies and have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and/or liquidity.
Our accrual for legal matters that are probable and estimable was $607 million as of December 31, 2013 and $491 million as of December 31, 2012, and includes certain estimated costs of settlement, damages and defense. We continue to assess certain litigation and claims to determine the amounts, if any, that management believes will be paid as a result of such claims and litigation and, therefore, additional losses may be accrued and paid in the future, which could materially adversely impact our operating results, cash flows and/or our ability to comply with our debt covenants.
See further discussion of our material legal proceedings insee Note K – Commitments and Contingencies to our 2013 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our financial results are affected by the selection and application of accounting policies.policies and methods. We have adopted accounting policies to prepare our consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP. We describe these accounting policies in Note A–Significant Accounting Policies to our 2013 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report.
To prepare our consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, management makes estimates and assumptions that may affect the reported amounts of our assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent liabilities as of the date of our financial statements and the reported amounts of our revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Our actual results may differ from these estimates. We consider estimates to be critical if (i) we are required to make assumptions about material matters that are uncertain at the time of estimation or if (ii) materially different estimates could have been made or it is reasonably likely that the accounting estimate will change from period to period. The following are areas requiringconsidered to be critical and require management’s judgment that we consider critical:
judgment: Revenue Recognition, Bad Debt Reserves, Inventory Provisions, Valuation of Contingent Consideration Liabilities and Intangible Assets, Goodwill Valuation, Legal and Product Liability Accruals and Income Taxes.
58See Note A – Significant Accounting Policies to our consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for additional information related to our accounting policies and our consideration of these critical accounting areas. In addition, see Note B – Acquisitions and Strategic Investments and Note D - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets for further discussion on the valuation of goodwill and intangible assets and contingent consideration; Note J - Income Taxes for further discussion on income tax related matters and Note K – Commitments and Contingencies for further discussion on legal and product liability matters.
Revenue Recognition
We generally allow our customers to return defective, damaged and, in certain cases, expired products for credit. We base our estimate for sales returns upon historical trends and record these amounts as a reduction of revenue when we sell the initial product. In addition, we may allow customers to return previously purchased products for next-generation product offerings. For these transactions, we defer recognition of revenue on the sale of the earlier generation product based upon an estimate of the amount to be returned when the next-generation products are shipped to the customer. Uncertain timing of next-generation product approvals, variability in product launch strategies, product recalls and variation in product utilization all affect our estimates related to sales returns and could cause actual returns to differ from these estimates.
Many of our CRM product offerings combine the sale of a device with our LATITUDE®LATITUDE™ Patient Management System, which represents a future service obligation. For revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables, where the sale of a device is combined with a future service obligation, we defer revenue on the undelivered element and recognize this revenue over the related service period. WeGenerally, we do not have vendor specific objective evidence of selling price available related to our future service obligations; therefore, we determine our estimates of selling price using third party evidence when available; otherwise, we use our best estimate of selling price. We allocate arrangement consideration using the relative selling price method. The use of alternative estimates of fair value could result in a different amount of revenue deferral.
Inventory Provisions
We base our provisions for excess, expired and obsolete inventory primarily on our estimates of forecasted net sales. A significant change in the timing or level of demand for our products as compared to forecasted amounts may result in recording additional provisions for excess, expired and obsolete inventory in the future. Further, the industry in which we participate is characterized by rapid product development and frequent new product introductions. Uncertain timing of next-generation product approvals, variability in product launch strategies, product recalls and variation in product utilization all affect our estimates related to excess, expired and obsolete inventory.
Valuation of Intangible Assets and Contingent Consideration Liabilities
We base the fair value of identifiable intangible assets acquired in a business combination, including in-process research and development, on detailed valuations that use information and assumptions provided by management, which consider management’s best estimates of inputs and assumptions that a market participant would use. Further, for those arrangements that involve potential future contingent consideration, we record on the date of acquisition a liability equal to the fair value of the estimated additional consideration we may be obligated to make in the future. We re-measure this liability each reporting period and record changes in the fair value through a separate line item within our consolidated statements of operations. Increases or decreases in the fair value of the contingent consideration liability can result from changes in discount periods and rates, as well as changes in the timing and amount of revenue estimates or in the timing or likelihood of achieving regulatory, revenue or commercialization-based milestones. The use of alternative valuation assumptions, including estimated revenue projections; growth rates; cash flows and discount rates and alternative estimated useful life assumptions, or probabilities surrounding the achievement of clinical, regulatory or revenue-based milestones could result in different purchase price allocations, amortization expense, and contingent consideration expense in current and future periods.
We review intangible assets subject to amortization quarterly to determine if any adverse conditions exist or a change in circumstances has occurred that would indicate impairment or a change in the remaining useful life. If an impairment indicator exists, we test the intangible asset for recoverability. If the carrying value of the intangible asset is not recoverable as discussed in Note A - Significant Accounting Policies,, we will write the carrying value down to fair value in the period identified. We generally calculate fair value of our intangible assets as the present value of estimated future cash flows we expect to generate from the asset using a risk-adjusted discount rate. In determining our estimated future cash flows associated with our intangible assets, we use estimates and assumptions about future revenue contributions, cost structures and remaining useful lives of the asset (asset group). The use of alternative assumptions, including estimated cash flows, discount rates, and alternative estimated remaining useful lives could result in different calculations of impairment. In addition, we test our indefinite-lived intangible assets at least annually for impairment and reassess their classification as indefinite-lived assets.assets, or more frequently if change in circumstance or indicators exist. We
assess qualitative factors to determine whether the existence of events and circumstances indicate that it is more likely than not that our indefinite-lived intangible assets are impaired. If we conclude that it is more likely than not that the asset is impaired, we then determine the fair value of the intangible asset and perform the quantitative impairment test by comparing the fair value with the carrying value in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 350, Intangibles-GoodwillIntangibles - Goodwill and Other.Other (Topic 350). If the carrying value exceeds the fair value of the indefinite-lived intangible asset, we write the carrying value down to the fair value.
Goodwill Valuation of CRM-related Amortizable Intangible Assets
Certain of our amortizable intangible assets that relate to our CRM business ($4.374 billion globally as of December 31, 2013) are at higher risk of potential failure of the first step of the amortizable intangible recoverability test in future reporting periods. Key assumptions we have made in determining the recoverability of these assets include how we grouped our assets for purposes of measuring cash flows, the estimated life of those cash flows and our expectations for the amount of cash flows generated by these assets over their remaining useful life.
For purposes of testing the CRM-related amortizable intangible assets, we grouped the intangible assets with the other assets and liabilities of the global CRM reporting unit, as a result of having identified the CRM reporting unit as the lowest level of identifiable cash flows because our CRM core technology, which is the primary asset within the CRM asset group, is utilized by all CRM revenue-generating products. As a result, we include cash flows generated by our CRM products in our recoverability analysis through the core technology useful life, which is estimated to end in 2031. We determined the useful life of the core technology based on our expectation of the period during which the technology is expected to contribute to the cash flows of our business. Our core technology represents know-how, patented and unpatented technology, testing methodologies and hardware that is integral to our current and future CRM product generations. This core technology includes battery and capacitor technology, lead technology, software algorithms and interfacing for shocking and pacing used in each therapy franchise.
The recoverability of our CRM-related amortizable intangible assets is sensitive to future cash flow assumptions and our global CRM business performance. The amount of future cash flows within our recoverability analysis include our future projections of revenue, expenses and capital expenditures, which are based on our most recent operational budgets, long range strategic plans and other estimates. These future cash flow assumptions consider the significant investments we have made to renew the CRM reporting unit's product portfolio within its existing core franchises and to develop what we believe to be unique innovative solutions that utilize our core technology; the increased impact to the CRM reporting unit from emerging markets; and demographic trends toward an aging population. Further, while our CRM revenue has declined over the last three years as a result of factors specific to our CRM business and contraction in the overall CRM market, we believe our CRM revenue will return to low growth over the remaining useful life of our CRM amortizing intangible assets. Events specific to our CRM business included the 2010 product ship hold actions and resulting market share losses, and lower replacement volumes due to historical product recalls. We believe that the contraction in the CRM market was primarily due to lower procedural volumes principally due to a focus on appropriate device usage and increased pressure on selling prices; however, we believe that there has been a recent trend toward stabilization in procedural volumes across the market.
We continue to perform thorough reviews of the CRM market and our recent business results within the market, and consider the impacts on future expectations of performance to determine if any adverse conditions exist or a change in circumstances has occurred that would indicate impairment or a change in the remaining useful life.
Goodwill Valuation
Effective as of January 1, 2013, we reorganized our business from geographic regions to fully operationalized global business units. Our reorganization changed our reporting structure and changed the composition of our reporting units for goodwill impairment testing purposes. Following the reorganization, based on information regularly reviewed by our chief operating decision maker, we have three new global reportable segments consisting of: Cardiovascular, Rhythm Management, and MedSurg. We determined our new global reporting units by identifying our operating segments and assessing whether any components of these segments constituted a business for which discrete financial information is available and whether segment management regularly reviews the operating results of any components. Through this process, we identified the following new global reporting units as of January 1, 2013: Interventional Cardiology, Peripheral Interventions, Cardiac Rhythm Management, Electrophysiology, Endoscopy, Urology and Women's Health, and Neuromodulation.
To determine the amount of goodwill within our new global reporting units, on a relative fair value basis we reallocated $1.764 billion of goodwill previously allocated to our former Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA), Asia Pacific, Japan, and Americas international reporting units to our new global reporting units. In addition, we reallocated the goodwill previously allocated to the former U.S. divisional reporting units to each respective new global reporting unit, with the exception of the goodwill allocated to the former U.S. Cardiovascular reporting unit. The $2.380 billion of goodwill allocated to the former U.S. Cardiovascular reporting unit was reallocated between the new global Interventional Cardiology and global Peripheral Interventions reporting units on a relative fair value basis.
We allocate any excess purchase price over the fair value of the net tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired in a business combination to goodwill. We test our goodwill balances during the second quarter of each year for impairment, or more frequently if indicators are present or changes in circumstances suggest that impairment may exist. In performing the assessment, we utilize the two-step approach prescribed under ASC Topic 350, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other. The first step requires a comparison of the carrying value of the reporting units, as defined, to the fair value of these units. We assess goodwill for impairment at the reporting unit level, which is defined as an operating segment or one level below an operating segment, referred to as a component. We determineIn 2016, we identified six operating segments including Interventional Cardiology, Peripheral Interventions, Rhythm Management, Endoscopy, Urology and Pelvic Health, and Neuromodulation for purposes of identifying our reporting units by first identifying our operating segments, andunits. We then assessassessed whether any components of these segments constitute a business for which discrete financial information is available and where segment management regularly reviews the operating results of that component. We aggregate components within an operating segment that have similar economic characteristics. identified Rhythm Management as having two components: Cardiac Rhythm Management and Electrophysiology.
For our 20132016, 2015 and 2014 annual impairment assessment we identified seven reporting units, includingwhich align to our seven core businesses: Interventional Cardiology, Peripheral Interventions, Cardiac Rhythm Management, Electrophysiology, Endoscopy, Urology and Women'sPelvic Health and Neuromodulation. For our 20122016 annual impairment assessment we aggregated the Cardiac Rhythm Management and 2011 impairment assessments, we identified sixElectrophysiology reporting units, withincomponents of the U.S., including our CRM, Neuromodulation, Endoscopy, Urology and Women's Health, Electrophysiology, and Cardiovascular (consisting of Interventional Cardiology and Peripheral Interventions) franchises. In addition, we identified four internationalRhythm Management operating segment, based on the criteria prescribed in FASB ASC Topic 350. These reporting units including EMEA, Japan, Asia Pacificwere aggregated due to a reorganization that commenced in 2015 that resulted in integrated leadership, shared resources and consolidation of certain sites in 2016.
In performing the goodwill impairment assessment, we utilize both the optional qualitative assessment and the Americas.two-step approach prescribed under
When allocating goodwill from business combinations to ourFASB ASC Topic 350. Beginning in 2016, the qualitative assessment was used for testing certain reporting units where fair value has historically exceeded carrying value by greater than 100%. All other reporting units were tested using the two-step approach described below. The qualitative assessment requires an evaluation of whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of the reporting unit is less than its carrying amount based on an assessment of relevant events including macroeconomic factors, industry and market conditions, cost factors, overall financial performance and other entity-specific factors. After assessing the totality of events, if it is determined that it is not more likely than not that the fair value of the reporting unit is less than its carrying value, the first and second steps of the goodwill impairment test are unnecessary. If it is determined that impairment is more likely than not, then we assignperform the first step of the two-step impairment test. In 2016, for all reporting units tested using the optional qualitative assessment, we concluded that it was not necessary to perform the first step of the two-step goodwill toimpairment test. The first step requires a comparison of the carrying value of the reporting units that we expect to benefit from the respective business combination at the time of acquisition. In addition, for purposes of performing our goodwill impairment tests, assets and liabilities, including corporate assets, which relate to a reporting unit’s operations, and would be considered in determining its fair value are allocated to the individualof these units.
For our 2016, 2015 and 2014 annual impairment assessment, for those reporting units. We allocate assets and liabilities not directly related tounits for which a specific reporting unit, but from which the reporting unit benefits, based primarily on the respective revenue contribution of each reporting unit.
During 2013, 2012, and 2011,quantitative test was performed, we used only the income approach, specifically the DCFdiscounted cash flow (DCF) method, to derive the fair value of each of our reporting units in preparing our goodwill impairment assessments. This approach calculates fair value by estimating the after-tax cash flows attributable to a reporting unit and then discounting these after-tax cash flows to a present value using a risk-adjusted discount rate. We selected this method as being the most meaningful in preparing our goodwill assessments because we believe the income approach most appropriately measures our income producing assets. We have considered using the market approach and cost approach but concluded they are not appropriate in valuing our reporting units given the lack of relevant market comparisons available for application of the market approach and the inability to replicate the value of the specific technology-based assets within our reporting units for application of the cost approach. Therefore, we believe that the income approach represents the most appropriate valuation technique for which sufficient data are available to determine the fair value of our reporting units.
In applying the income approach to our accounting for goodwill, we make assumptions about the amount and timing of future expected cash flows, terminal value growth rates and appropriate discount rates. The amount and timing of future cash flows within our DCF analysis is based on our most recent operational budgets, long range strategic plans and other estimates. The terminal value growth rate is used to calculate the value of cash flows beyond the last projected period in our DCF analysis and reflects our best estimates for stable, perpetual growth of our reporting units. We use estimates of market-participant risk-adjusted WACCweighted-average cost of capital (WACC) as a basis for determining the discount rates to apply to our reporting units’ future expected cash flows.
If the carrying value of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, we then perform the second step of the goodwill impairment test to measure the amount of impairment loss, if any. If the carrying value of a reporting unit is zero or negative, we evaluate whether
it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists. If we determine adverse qualitative factors exist that would indicate it is more likely than not an impairment exists, we then perform the second step of the goodwill test. The second step of the goodwill impairment test compares the estimated fair value of a reporting unit’s goodwill to its carrying value. If we were unable to complete the second step of the test prior to the issuance of our financial statements and an impairment loss was probable and could be reasonably estimated, we would recognize our best estimate of the loss in our current period financial statements and disclose that the amount is an estimate. We would then recognize any adjustment to that estimate in subsequent reporting periods, once we have finalized the second step of the impairment test.
Although we use consistent methodologies in developing the assumptions and estimates underlying the fair value calculations used in our impairment tests, these estimates are uncertain by nature and can vary from actual results. The use of alternative valuation assumptions, including estimated revenue projections, growth rates, cash flows and discount rates could result in different fair value estimates.
We have identifiedIn the second quarter of 2016, we performed our annual goodwill impairment test for all of our reporting units and concluded the fair value of each reporting unit exceeded its carrying value. Because our global NeuromodulationElectrophysiology reporting unit was identified as being at higher risk of potential failuregoodwill impairment during our 2015 annual test, it was tested for impairment on a stand-alone basis in the second quarter of 2016, immediately prior to aggregating it with our global Cardiac Rhythm Management reporting unit. The fair value of the first stepstand-alone global Electrophysiology reporting unit exceeded the carrying value by approximately 36 percent. In comparison, the global Electrophysiology reporting unit had excess fair value of approximately 28 percent as of our 2015 annual test. As of the date of our 2016 annual goodwill impairment test, in future reporting periods. Ourthe aggregated global Neuromodulation reporting unit holds $1.356 billion of allocated goodwill. The level ofElectrophysiology and Cardiac Rhythm Management operating segment (Rhythm Management) had excess fair value over carrying value for this reporting unit identified during our annual goodwill impairment testof approximately 70 percent and held $292 million of allocated goodwill. As such, it was approximately 16 percent. Future changesnot deemed at higher risk of future impairment. Changes in our reporting units or in the structure of our business as a result of future reorganizations, acquisitions or divestitures of assets or businesses could result in future impairments of goodwill within our reporting units,units.
Refer to Note D - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets to our consolidated financial statements contained in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional details related to our annual goodwill impairment tests.
Legal and Product Liability Accruals
In the normal course of business, we are involved in various legal and regulatory proceedings, including global CRM.
On a quarterly basis, we monitorintellectual property, breach of contract, securities litigation and product liability suits. In some cases, the key drivers of fair value to detect events or other changes that would warrant an interim impairment test of our goodwill and intangible assets. The key variables that drive the cash flows of our reporting units and amortizable intangibles are estimated revenue growth rates and levels of profitability. Terminal value growth rate assumptions,claimants seek damages, as well as the WACC rate applied are additional key variables for reporting unit cash flows. These assumptions are subject to uncertainty, including our ability to grow revenue and improve profitability levels. Relatively small declines in the future performance and cash flows of a reporting unitother relief, which, if granted, could require significant expenditures or asset group or small changes in other key assumptions may result in the recognition of significant asset impairment charges. For example, keeping all other variables constant, an increase in the WACC applied of 80 basis points or a 200 basis point decrease in the terminal value growth rate would require that we perform the second step of the goodwill impairment test for the global Neuromodulation reporting unit. The estimates used for our future cash flows and discount rates represent management's best estimates, which we believe to be reasonable, but future declines in business performance may impair the recoverability of our goodwill and intangible asset balances.
Future events that could have a negative impact on the levels of excess fair value over carrying value of our reporting units and/or amortizable intangible assets include, but are not limited to:
decreases in estimated market sizes or market growth rates due to greater-than-expected declines in procedural volumes, pricing pressures, reductions in reimbursement levels, product actions, and/or competitive or disruptive technology developments;
declines in our market share and penetration assumptions due to increased competition, an inability to develop or launch new and next-generation products and technology features in line with our commercialization strategies, and market and/or regulatory conditions that may cause significant launch delays or product recalls;
decreases in our forecasted profitability due to an inability to successfully implement and achieve timely and sustainable cost improvement measures consistent with our expectations, increases in our market-participant tax rate, and/or changes in tax laws;
negative developments in intellectual property litigation that may impact our ability to marketsell our products. We accrue anticipated costs of settlement, damages, losses for product liability claims and, under certain productsconditions, costs of defense, based on historical experience or increaseto the extent specific losses are probable and estimable. Otherwise, we expense these costs as incurred. If the estimate of a probable loss is a range and no amount within the range is more likely, we accrue the minimum amount of the range. Litigation and product liability matters are inherently uncertain and the outcomes of individual matters are difficult to predict and quantify. As such, significant judgment is required in determining our costs to sell certain products;
the level of success of on-goinglegal and future research and development efforts, including thoseproduct liability accruals. Our estimates related to recent acquisitions,our legal and increases inproduct liability accruals may change as additional information becomes available to us, including information related to the researchnature or existence of claims against us; trial court or appellate proceedings; and development costs necessary to obtain regulatory approvals and launch new products;
the level of success in managing the growth of acquired companies, achieving sustained profitability consistent with our expectations, establishing government and third-party payer reimbursement, supplying the market, and increases in the costs and time necessary to integrate acquired businesses into our operations successfully;
changes in our reporting unitsmediation, arbitration or in the structure of our business as a result of future reorganizations, acquisitions or divestitures of assets or businesses; and
increases in our market-participant risk-adjusted WACC.
Negative changes in one or more of these factors, among others, could result in additional impairment charges.settlement proceedings.
Income Taxes
We provide for potential amounts due in various tax jurisdictions. In the ordinary course of conducting business in multiple countries and tax jurisdictions, there are many transactions and calculations where the ultimate tax outcome is uncertain. JudgmentTherefore, judgment is required based on individual facts, circumstances and information available in determining our worldwide income tax provision.whether or not based on technical merits, the position will be sustained upon examination. In our opinion, we have made adequate provisions for income taxes in determining our worldwide income tax position for all years subject to audit. Although we believe our estimates are reasonable, the final outcome of these matters may be different from that which we have reflected in our historical income tax provisions and accruals. Such differences could have a material impact on our income tax provision and operating results.
We reduce our deferred tax assets by a valuation allowance if, based upon the weight of available evidence, it is more likely than not that we will not realize some portion or all of the deferred tax assets. We consider relevant evidence, both positive and negative, to determine the need for a valuation allowance. Information evaluated includes our financial position and results of operations for the current and preceding years, the availability of deferred tax liabilities and tax carrybacks, as well as an evaluation of currently available information about future years.
New Accounting Pronouncements
Standards Implemented
ASC Update No. 2013-02
In February 2013, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2013-02, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reporting of Amounts Reclassified out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income. Update No. 2013-02 requires that entities provide information about amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income by component. The amendment also requires entities to present significant amounts by the respective line items of net income, either on the face of the income statement or in the notes to the financial statements for amounts required to be reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income in their entirety in the same reporting period. For other amounts that are not required to be reclassified to net income in their entirety, a cross-reference is required to other disclosures that provide additional details about those amounts. We adopted Update No. 2013-02 beginning in our first quarter ended March 31, 2013. Update No. 2013-02 is related to presentation only and its adoption did not impact our results of operations or financial position. See our Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) and Note PQ - Changes in Other Comprehensive IncomeNew Accounting Pronouncements to our 2013 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for the required disclosures under Update No. 2013-02.
ASC Update No. 2013-01
In January 2013, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2013-01, Balance Sheet (Topic 210): Clarifying the Scope of Disclosures about Offsetting Assetsadditional information on Standards Implemented since December 31, 2015 and Liabilities. Update No. 2013-01 clarifies the FASB's intent about requiring enhanced disclosures about certain financial instruments and derivative instruments that are offset in the statement of financial position or that are subject to enforceable master netting arrangements or similar agreements. We adopted Update No. 2013-01 beginning in our first quarter ended March 31, 2013. See Note E - Fair Value Measurements to our 2013 consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report for the required disclosures under Update No. 2013-01.
Standards to be Implemented
ASC Update No. 2013-11
In July 2013, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2013-11, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists. Update No. 2013-11 requires that entities present an unrecognized tax benefit, or portion of an unrecognized tax benefit, as a reduction to a deferred tax asset in the financial statements for a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward, with certain exceptions. We are required to adopt Update No. 2013-11 for our first quarter ending March 31, 2014. Update No. 2013-11 is related to presentation only and its adoption will not impact our results of operations or financial position.Implemented.
Additional Information
Use of Non-GAAP Financial Measures by Boston Scientific
To supplement our consolidated financial statements presented on a GAAP basis, we disclose certain non-GAAP financial measures, including adjusted net income and adjusted net income per share that exclude certain amounts, and revenue growth ratesadjusted net sales that exclude the impact of sales from divested businesses and/or changes in foreign currency exchange rates. These non-GAAP financial measures are not in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States.
The GAAP financial measure most directly comparable to adjusted net income is GAAP net income (loss) and the GAAP financial measure most directly comparable to adjusted net income per share is GAAP net income (loss) per share. To calculate revenue growth ratesadjusted net sales that exclude the impact ofsales from divested businesses and/or changes in foreign currency exchange rates, we convert actual net sales from local currency to U.S. dollars using constant foreign currency exchange rates in the current and prior period and/or eliminate the net sales from businesses that were divested during the period. The GAAP financial measure most directly comparable to this non-GAAP financial measure and the non-GAAP financial measure that excludesconstant currency growth rate and/or growth rates excluding sales from divested businessesbusiness is growth rate percentages using net sales on a GAAP basis. Reconciliations of each of these non-GAAP financial measures to the corresponding GAAP financial measure are included in the accompanying schedules.relevant sections of this Annual Report.
Management uses these supplemental non-GAAP financial measures to evaluate performance period over period, to analyze the underlying trends in our business, to assess our performance relative to our competitors, and to establish operational goals and forecasts that are used in allocating resources. In addition, management uses these non-GAAP financial measures to further its understanding of the performance of our operating segments. The adjustments excluded from our non-GAAP financial measures are consistent with those excluded from our operating segments’ measures of net sales and profit or loss. These adjustments are excluded from the segment measures that are reported to our chief operating decision maker that are used to make operating decisions and assess performance.
We believe that presenting adjusted net income, adjusted net income per share, and revenue growth ratesadjusted net sales that exclude certain amounts, such as sales from divested businesses and/or the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates, in addition to the corresponding GAAP financial measures, provides investors greater transparency to the information used by management for its financial and operational decision-making and allows investors to see our results “through the eyes” of management. We further believe that providing this information assists our investors in understanding our operating performance and the methodology used by management to evaluate and measure such performance.
The following is an explanation of each of the adjustments that management excluded as part of these non-GAAP financial measures as well as reasons for excluding each of these individual items:
Adjusted Net Income and Adjusted Net Income per Share
Goodwill and other intangible
Intangible asset impairment charges - This amount represents (a) a non-cash write-down of our goodwill balance attributable to our global Cardiac Rhythm Management reporting unit in the first quarter of 2013; (b) non-cash write-downs of certain intangible asset balances during 2016, 2015 and 2014.We review intangible assets subject to amortization quarterly to determine if any adverse conditions exist or a change in circumstances has occurred that would indicate impairment and test our indefinite-lived intangible assets at least annually for impairment. If we determine the carrying value of the amortizable intangible asset is not recoverable or we conclude that it is more likely than not that the indefinite-live asset is impaired, we will write the carrying value down to fair value in the second quarter of 2013; (c) a non-cash write-down of our goodwill balance attributable to our former U.S. Cardiac Rhythm Management reporting unit in the third quarter of 2012; (d) a non-cash write-down of our goodwill balance attributable to our former EMEA reporting unit in the second quarter of 2012; and (e) non-cash write-downs of certain intangible asset balances in the second and third quarters of 2012.period identified. We removeexclude the impact of non-cash impairment charges from our operating performance to assist in assessing our cash generated from operations. We believe this is a critical metric for us in measuring our ability to generate cash and invest in our growth. Therefore, these charges are excluded from management's assessment of operating performance and are alsofrom our operating segments' measures of profit and loss used for making operating decisions and assessing performance. Accordingly, management has excluded intangible asset impairment charges for purposes of calculating these non-GAAP financial measures to facilitate an evaluation of our current operating performance and a comparison to our past operating performance, particularly in terms of liquidity.performance.
Acquisition- and divestiture related net charges (credits) - These adjustments may consist of (a) contingent consideration fair value adjustments; (b) gains on previously held investments; (c) purchased and/or funded in-process research and development expenses incurred outside of a business combination; (d) due diligence, other fees, inventory step-up amortization, and integration and exit costs; and (c)(e) separation costs and gains primarily associated with the sale of our Neurovascular business in January 2011. The contingent consideration adjustments represent accounting adjustments to state contingent consideration liabilities at their estimated fair value. These adjustments can be highly variable depending on the assessed likelihood and amount of future contingent consideration payments. Due diligence, other fees, inventory step-up amortization, and integration and exit costs include legal, tax, severance and other expenses associated with prior and potential future acquisitions and divestitures that can be highly variable and not representative of on-goingongoing operations. Separation costs and gains on the sale of a business unit primarily represent those associated with the Neurovascular divestiture and are not representative of on-goingongoing operations. Accordingly, management excluded these amounts for purposes of calculating these non-GAAP financial measures to facilitate an evaluation of our current operating performance and a comparison to our past operating performance.
Restructuring and restructuring-related net charges (credits) - These adjustments represent primarily severance and other direct costs associated with our 2014 Restructuring program and 2011 Restructuring program.restructuring plans. These costsrestructuring plans each consist of distinct initiatives that are excluded by management in assessing our operating performance, as well asfundamentally different from our operating segments' measuresongoing, core cost reduction initiatives in terms of, profitamong other things, the frequency with which each action is performed and loss used for making operating decisionsthe required planning, resourcing, cost and assessing performance. Accordingly,timing. Examples of such initiatives include the movement of business activities, facility consolidations and closures, and the transfer of product lines
between manufacturing facilities, which, due to the highly regulated nature of our industry, requires a significant investment in time and cost to create duplicate manufacturing lines, run product validations, and seek regulatory approvals. Restructuring initiatives generally take approximately two years to complete and have a distinct project timeline that begins subsequent to approval by our Board of Directors. In contrast to our ongoing cost reduction initiatives, restructuring initiatives typically result in duplicative cost and exit costs over this period of time, are one-time shut downs or transfers, and are not considered part of our core, ongoing operations. Because these restructuring plans are incremental to the core activities that arise in the ordinary course of our business, management excluded these costs for purposes of calculating these non-GAAP financial measures to facilitate an evaluation of our current operating performance and a comparison to our past operating performance.
Litigation-related net charges (credits) - These adjustments include certain significant product liability and other litigation-related charges and credits. We record these charges and credits, which we consider to be unusual or infrequent and significant, within the litigation-related charges line in our consolidated statement of operations; all other legal and product liability charges, credits and costs are recorded within selling general and administrative expenses. These amounts are excluded by management in assessing our operating performance, as well as from our operating segments' measures of profit and loss used for making operating decisions and assessing performance. Accordingly, management excluded these amounts for purposes of calculating these non-GAAP financial measures to facilitate an evaluation of our current operating performance and a comparison to our past operating performance.
64Debt extinguishment charges - This item represents premiums, accelerated amortization of debt issuance costs and investor discount costs net of interest rate hedge gains related to the early extinguishment of $1.0 billion of senior notes during the second quarter of 2015. These adjustments are not expected to recur and do not reflect expected ongoing operating results. Accordingly, management excluded these amounts for purposes of calculating these non-GAAP financial measures to facilitate an evaluation of our current operating performance and a comparison to our past operating performance.
Pension termination charges - This item represents charges associated with the termination of the Guidant Retirement Plan, a frozen defined benefit plan. These charges are not expected to recur after 2015 and do not reflect expected ongoing operating results. Accordingly, management has excluded these amounts for purposes of calculating these non-GAAP financial measures to facilitate an evaluation of our current operating performance and a comparison to our past operating performance.
Amortization expense - We record intangible assets at historical cost and amortize them over their estimated useful lives. Amortization expense is excluded from management's assessment of operating performance and is also excluded from our operating segments' measures of profit and loss used for making operating decisions and assessing performance. Accordingly, management has excluded amortization expense for purposes of calculating these non-GAAP financial measures to facilitate an evaluation of our current operating performance and a comparison to our past operating performance.
Discrete tax items - These items represent adjustments of certain tax positions, which were initially established in prior periods in conjunction with the purchase accounting for an acquisition or as a result of intangible asset impairment charges; acquisition-, divestiture-, restructuring- or litigation-related charges or credits. These adjustments do not reflect expected on-going operating results. Accordingly, management excluded these amounts for purposes of calculating these non-GAAP financial measures to facilitate an evaluation of our current operating performance and a comparison to our past operating performance.
Debt extinguishment charge - This item represents premiums, accelerated amortization of debt issuance costs and investor discount costs net of interest rate hedge gains related to the early extinguishment of $1.450 billion of debt during the third quarter of 2013. These adjustments are not expected to recur and do not reflect expected on-going operating results. Accordingly, management excluded these amounts for purposes of calculating these non-GAAP financial measures to facilitate an evaluation of our current operating performance and a comparison to our past operating performance.
Amortization expense - Amortization expense is a non-cash expense and does not impact our liquidity or compliance with the covenants included in our credit facility agreement. Management removes the impact of amortization from our operating performance to assist in assessing our cash generated from operations. We believe this is a critical metric for measuring our ability to generate cash and invest in our growth. Therefore, amortization expense is excluded from management's assessment of operating performance and is also excluded from the measures management uses to set employee compensation. Accordingly, management has excluded amortization expense for purposes of calculating these non-GAAP financial measures to facilitate an evaluation of our current operating performance, particularly in terms of liquidity.
Revenue Growth RatesAdjusted Net Sales Excluding the Impact of Sales from Divested Businesses and/or Changes in Foreign Currency Exchange Rates
Sales from divested businesses and/or changes in foreign currency exchange rates -
Sales from divested businesses are primarily associated with the Neurovascular divestiture and are not representative of on-goingongoing operations. The impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates is highly variable and difficult to predict. Accordingly, management excludes the impact of sales from divested businesses and/or changes in foreign currency exchange rates for purposes of reviewing revenue growth ratesadjusted net sales to facilitate an evaluation of our current operating performance and a comparison to our past operating performance.
Adjusted net income, adjusted net income per share and revenue growth ratesadjusted net sales that exclude certain amounts, such as the sales from divested businesses and/or the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates, are not in accordance with U.S. GAAP and should not be considered in isolation from or as a replacement for the most directly comparable GAAP financial measures. Further, other companies may calculate these non-GAAP financial measures differently than we do, which may limit the usefulness of those measures for comparative purposes.
Rule 10b5-1 Trading Plans by Executive Officers
Periodically, certain of our executive officers adopt written stock trading plans in accordance with Rule 10b5-1 under the Exchange Act and our own Stock Trading Policy. A Rule 10b5-1 Trading Plan is a written document that pre-establishes the amount, prices and dates (or formulas for determining the amounts, prices and dates) of future purchases or sales of our stock, including shares issued upon exercise of stock options or vesting of deferred stock units. These plans are entered into at a time when the person is not in possession of material non-public information about the Company.
On November 26, 2013, Michael P. Phalen, our Executive Vice President and President, MedSurg, entered into acompany. We disclose details regarding individual Rule 10b5-1 Trading Plan. Mr. Phalen’s plan coversPlans on the sale of sharesInvestor Relations section of our stock to be acquired upon (A) exercise of 162,000 stock options and (B) vesting of deferred stock units representing 29,582 shares (the amount to be sold will be net of shares withheld to satisfy applicable tax withholding obligations upon vesting). Transactions under Mr. Phalen’s plan are based upon pre-established dates and stock price thresholds. Mr. Phalen’s plan will terminate on the earlier of (among other things) December 31, 2014 and the date all shares subject to the plan have been sold. Any transaction under Mr. Phalen’s plan will be disclosed publicly through appropriate filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.website.
On November 26, 2013, David A. Pierce, our Senior Vice President and President, Endoscopy, entered into a Rule 10b5-1 Trading Plan. Mr. Pierce’s plan covers the sale of shares of our stock to be acquired upon vesting of deferred stock units representing 23,422 shares (the amount to be sold will be net of shares withheld to satisfy applicable tax withholding obligations upon vesting). Transactions under Mr. Pierce’s plan are based upon pre-established dates and stock price thresholds. Mr. Pierce’s plan will terminate on the earlier of (among other things) December 31, 2014 and the date all shares subject to the plan have been sold. Any transaction under Mr. Pierce’s plan will be disclosed publicly through appropriate filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
As the management of Boston Scientific Corporation, we are responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. We designed our internal control process to provide reasonable assurance to management and the Board of Directors regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
We assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013.2016. In making this assessment, we used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control–Integrated Framework (1992(2013 framework). Based on our assessment, we believe that, as of December 31, 2013,2016, our internal control over financial reporting is effective at a reasonable assurance level based on these criteria.
Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has issued an audit report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. This report in which they expressed an unqualified opinion is included below.
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| | /s/ Michael F. Mahoney | | /s/ Daniel J. Brennan | |
| | | | | |
| | | Michael F. Mahoney | | | Daniel J. Brennan | |
| | | President and Chief Executive Officer | | | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer | |
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Shareholders of Boston Scientific Corporation
We have audited Boston Scientific Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2016 based on criteria established in Internal Control-IntegratedControl---Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (1992 framework), as applicable2013 framework (the COSO criteria). Boston Scientific Corporation’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, Boston Scientific Corporation maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2016, based on the COSO criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Boston Scientific Corporation as of December 31, 20132016 and 2012,2015, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 20132016 of Boston Scientific Corporation and our report dated February 26, 201423, 2017 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Boston, Massachusetts
February 23, 2017
February 26, 2014
ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
We develop, manufacture and sell medical devices globally and our earnings and cash flows are exposed to market risk from changes in currency exchange rates and interest rates. We address these risks through a risk management program that includes the use of derivative financial instruments. We operate the program pursuant to documented corporate risk management policies. We do not enter derivative transactions for speculative purposes. Gains and losses on derivative financial instruments substantially offset losses and gains on underlying hedged exposures. Furthermore, we manage our exposure to counterparty risk on derivative instruments by entering into contracts with a diversified group of major financial institutions and by actively monitoring outstanding positions.
Our currency risk consists primarily of foreign currency denominated firm commitments, forecasted foreign currency denominated intercompany and third-party transactions and net investments in certain subsidiaries. We use both nonderivative (primarily European manufacturing operations) and derivative instruments to manage our earnings and cash flow exposure to changes in currency exchange rates. We had currency derivative instruments outstanding in the contract amount of $4.516$4.100 billion as of December 31, 20132016 and $4.411$3.547 billion as of December 31, 2012.2015. We recorded $264$199 million of other assets and $55$26 million of other liabilities to recognize the fair value of these derivative instruments as of December 31, 2013,2016, as compared to $121$237 million of other assets and $57$23 million of other liabilities as of December 31, 2012.2015. A ten percent appreciation in the U.S. dollar’s value relative to the hedged currencies would increase the derivative instruments’ fair value by $257 million as of December 31, 20132016 and $270$155 million as of December 31, 2012.2015. A ten percent depreciation in the U.S. dollar’s value relative to the hedged currencies would decrease the derivative instruments’ fair value by $314$223 million as of December 31, 20132016 and by $319$189 million as of December 31, 2012.2015. Any increase or decrease in the fair value of our currency exchange rate sensitive derivative instruments would be substantially offset by a corresponding decrease or increase in the fair value of the hedged underlying asset, liability or forecasted transaction, resulting in minimal impact on our consolidated statements of operations.
Our interest rate risk relates primarily to U.S. dollar borrowings partially offset by U.S. dollar cash investments. We have historically used interest rate derivative instruments to manage our earnings and cash flow exposure to changes in interest rates. We entered into interest rate derivative contracts having a notional amount of $450 million in the fourth quarter of 2013 to convert fixed-rate debt associated with certain of our senior notes into floating-rate debt. We recorded $1 million of other assets and $8 million of other liabilities to recognize the fair value of these derivative instruments as of December 31, 2013. We hadhave no interest rate derivative instruments outstanding as of December 31, 2012. A one-percentage point increase in interest rates would have decreased the derivative instruments’ fair value by $41 million as of December 31, 2013. A one-percentage point decrease in interest rates would have increased the derivative instruments’ fair value by $37 million as of December 31, 2013.2016. As of December 31, 2013, $3.3932016, $4.670 billion of our outstanding debt obligations was at fixed interest rates, representing approximately 8085 percent of our total debt.
See Note E – Fair Value Measurements to our 20132016 consolidated financial statements contained in Item 8 of this Annual Report for further information regarding our derivative financial instruments.
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Shareholders of Boston Scientific Corporation
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Boston Scientific Corporation as of December 31, 20132016 and 2012,2015, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), stockholders'stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2013.2016. Our audits also included the financial statement schedule listed in the Index at Item 15(a)2. These financial statements and schedule are the responsibility of the Company'sCompany’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and schedule based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Boston Scientific Corporation at December 31, 20132016 and 2012,2015, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2013,2016, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Boston Scientific Corporation'sCorporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013,2016, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (1992(2013 framework), as applicable and our report dated February 26, 201423, 2017 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Boston, Massachusetts
February 23, 2017
February 26, 2014
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
| | | | Year Ended December 31, | Year Ended December 31, |
| in millions, except per share data | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
| | | | | |
| Net sales | $ | 7,143 |
| $ | 7,249 |
| $ | 7,622 |
| $ | 8,386 |
| $ | 7,477 |
| $ | 7,380 |
|
| Cost of products sold | 2,174 |
| 2,349 |
| 2,659 |
| 2,424 |
| 2,173 |
| 2,210 |
|
| Gross profit | 4,969 |
| 4,900 |
| 4,963 |
| 5,962 |
| 5,304 |
| 5,170 |
|
| | | |
| Operating expenses: | | |
| Selling, general and administrative expenses | 2,674 |
| 2,535 |
| 2,487 |
| 3,099 |
| 2,873 |
| 2,902 |
|
| Research and development expenses | 861 |
| 886 |
| 895 |
| 920 |
| 876 |
| 817 |
|
| Royalty expense | 140 |
| 153 |
| 172 |
| 79 |
| 70 |
| 111 |
|
| Amortization expense | 410 |
| 395 |
| 421 |
| 545 |
| 495 |
| 438 |
|
| Goodwill impairment charges | 423 |
| 4,350 |
| 697 |
| |
| Intangible asset impairment charges | 53 |
| 142 |
| 21 |
| 11 |
| 19 |
| 195 |
|
| Contingent consideration expense (benefit) | 4 |
| (6 | ) | 7 |
| 29 |
| 123 |
| (85 | ) |
| Restructuring charges | 101 |
| 136 |
| 89 |
| 28 |
| 26 |
| 69 |
|
| Litigation-related charges | 221 |
| 192 |
| 48 |
| 804 |
| 1,105 |
| 1,036 |
|
| Pension termination charges | | — |
| 44 |
| — |
|
| Gain on divestiture | (38 | ) | (15 | ) | (778 | ) | — |
| — |
| (12 | ) |
| | 4,849 |
| 8,768 |
| 4,059 |
| 5,515 |
| 5,631 |
| 5,471 |
|
| Operating income (loss) | 120 |
| (3,868 | ) | 904 |
| 447 |
| (327 | ) | (301 | ) |
| | | |
| Other (expense) income: | | |
| Other income (expense): | | |
| Interest expense | (324 | ) | (261 | ) | (281 | ) | (233 | ) | (284 | ) | (216 | ) |
| Other, net | (19 | ) | 22 |
| 19 |
| (37 | ) | (39 | ) | 8 |
|
| (Loss) income before income taxes | (223 | ) | (4,107 | ) | 642 |
| |
| Income (loss) before income taxes | | 177 |
| (650 | ) | (509 | ) |
| Income tax (benefit) expense | (102 | ) | (39 | ) | 201 |
| (170 | ) | (411 | ) | (390 | ) |
| Net (loss) income | $ | (121 | ) | $ | (4,068 | ) | $ | 441 |
| |
| Net income (loss) | | $ | 347 |
| $ | (239 | ) | $ | (119 | ) |
| | | |
| Net (loss) income per common share — basic | $ | (0.09 | ) | $ | (2.89 | ) | $ | 0.29 |
| |
| Net (loss) income per common share — assuming dilution | $ | (0.09 | ) | $ | (2.89 | ) | $ | 0.29 |
| |
| Net income (loss) per common share — basic | | $ | 0.26 |
| $ | (0.18 | ) | $ | (0.09 | ) |
| Net income (loss) per common share — assuming dilution | | $ | 0.25 |
| $ | (0.18 | ) | $ | (0.09 | ) |
| | | |
| Weighted-average shares outstanding | | |
| Basic | 1,341.2 |
| 1,406.7 |
| 1,509.3 |
| 1,357.6 |
| 1,341.2 |
| 1,324.3 |
|
| Assuming dilution | 1,341.2 |
| 1,406.7 |
| 1,519.0 |
| 1,377.2 |
| 1,341.2 |
| 1,324.3 |
|
See notes to the consolidated financial statements.
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
| | | | | | | |
| | As of December 31, |
| in millions, except share and per share data | 2013 | | 2012 |
| | | | |
| ASSETS | | | |
| Current assets: | | | |
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 217 |
| | $ | 207 |
|
| Trade accounts receivable, net | 1,307 |
| | 1,217 |
|
| Inventories | 897 |
| | 884 |
|
| Deferred income taxes | 288 |
| | 433 |
|
| Prepaid expenses and other current assets | 302 |
| | 281 |
|
| Total current assets | 3,011 |
| | 3,022 |
|
| Property, plant and equipment, net | 1,546 |
| | 1,564 |
|
| Goodwill | 5,693 |
| | 5,973 |
|
| Other intangible assets, net | 5,950 |
| | 6,289 |
|
| Other long-term assets | 371 |
| | 306 |
|
| TOTAL ASSETS | $ | 16,571 |
| | $ | 17,154 |
|
| | | | |
| LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY | | | |
| Current liabilities: | | | |
| Current debt obligations | $ | 3 |
| | $ | 4 |
|
| Accounts payable | 246 |
| | 232 |
|
| Accrued expenses | 1,348 |
| | 1,284 |
|
| Other current liabilities | 227 |
| | 252 |
|
| Total current liabilities | 1,824 |
| | 1,772 |
|
| Long-term debt | 4,237 |
| | 4,252 |
|
| Deferred income taxes | 1,402 |
| | 1,713 |
|
| Other long-term liabilities | 2,569 |
| | 2,547 |
|
| | | | |
| Commitments and contingencies |
| |
|
| | | | |
| Stockholders’ equity: | | | |
| Preferred stock, $0.01 par value - authorized 50,000,000 shares, none issued and outstanding |
| |
|
|
| Common stock, $0.01 par value - authorized 2,000,000,000 shares; issued 1,560,302,634 shares as of December 31, 2013 and 1,542,347,188 shares as of December 31, 2012 | 16 |
| | 15 |
|
| Treasury stock, at cost - 238,006,570 shares as of December 31, 2013 and 186,635,532 shares as of December 31, 2012 | (1,592 | ) | | (1,092 | ) |
| Additional paid-in capital | 16,579 |
| | 16,429 |
|
| Accumulated deficit | (8,570 | ) | | (8,449 | ) |
| Accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of tax: | | | |
| Foreign currency translation adjustment | (16 | ) | | (26 | ) |
| Unrealized gain on derivative financial instruments | 141 |
| | 34 |
|
| Unrealized costs associated with certain retirement plans | (19 | ) | | (41 | ) |
| Total stockholders’ equity | 6,539 |
| | 6,870 |
|
| TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY | $ | 16,571 |
| | $ | 17,154 |
|
See notes to the consolidated financial statements.
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Accumulated |
| | | | | | | | | Additional | | | | Other |
| | | Common Stock | | Treasury | | Paid-In | | Accumulated | | Comprehensive |
| in millions, except share data | | Shares Issued | | Par Value | | Stock | | Capital | | Deficit | | Income (Loss) |
| Balance as of December 31, 2010 | | 1,520,780,112 |
| | $ | 15 |
| |
|
| | $ | 16,232 |
| | $ | (4,822 | ) | | $ | (129 | ) |
| Comprehensive income | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| Net income | | | | | |
| | | | 441 |
| | |
| Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| Foreign currency translation adjustment | | | | | |
| | | | | | (8 | ) |
| Net change in derivative financial instruments | | | | | |
| | | | | | 17 |
|
| Net change in certain retirement plans | |
|
| |
| |
| |
|
| |
| | (18 | ) |
| Impact of stock-based compensation plans, net of tax | | 10,226,278 |
| |
| |
| | 117 |
| | | | |
| Acquisition of treasury stock | |
|
| |
|
| | $ | (492 | ) | |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2011 | | 1,531,006,390 |
| | $ | 15 |
| | $ | (492 | ) | | $ | 16,349 |
| | $ | (4,381 | ) | | $ | (138 | ) |
| Comprehensive income | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| Net loss | | | | | |
| | | | (4,068 | ) | | |
| Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax | | | | | |
| | | |
| | |
| Foreign currency translation adjustment | | | | | |
| | | | | | 32 |
|
| Net change in derivative financial instruments | | | | | |
| | | | | | 82 |
|
| Net change in certain retirement plans | |
|
| |
| |
| |
|
| |
| | (9 | ) |
| Impact of stock-based compensation plans, net of tax | | 11,340,798 |
| |
| |
| | 80 |
| | | | |
| Acquisition of treasury stock | |
|
| |
|
| | (600 | ) | |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2012 | | 1,542,347,188 |
| | $ | 15 |
| | $ | (1,092 | ) | | $ | 16,429 |
| | $ | (8,449 | ) | | $ | (33 | ) |
| Comprehensive income | | |
| | |
| |
|
| | |
| | |
| | |
|
| Net loss | | |
| | |
| |
|
| | |
| | (121 | ) | | |
|
| Other comprehensive income, net of tax | | |
| | |
| |
|
| | |
| |
|
| | |
|
| Foreign currency translation adjustment | | |
| | |
| |
|
| | |
| | |
| | 10 |
|
| Net change in derivative financial instruments | | |
| | |
| |
|
| | |
| | |
| | 107 |
|
| Net change in certain retirement plans | |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| | 22 |
|
| Impact of stock-based compensation plans, net of tax | | 17,955,446 |
| | 1 |
| |
|
| | 150 |
| | |
| | |
|
| Acquisition of treasury stock | |
|
| |
|
| | (500 | ) | |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2013 | | 1,560,302,634 |
| | $ | 16 |
| | $ | (1,592 | ) | | $ | 16,579 |
| | $ | (8,570 | ) | | $ | 106 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
See notes to the consolidated financial statements.
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Net (loss) income | | $ | (121 | ) | | $ | (4,068 | ) | | $ | 441 |
| |
| Other comprehensive income (loss): | | | | | | | |
| Net income (loss) | | | $ | 347 |
| | $ | (239 | ) | | $ | (119 | ) |
| Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax: | | | | | | | |
| Foreign currency translation adjustment | | 10 |
| | 32 |
| | (8 | ) | | (25 | ) | | (16 | ) | | (22 | ) |
| Net change in unrealized gains and losses on derivative financial instruments, net of tax | | 107 |
| | 82 |
| | 17 |
| | (45 | ) | | (67 | ) | | 78 |
|
| Net change in certain retirement plans | | 22 |
| | (9 | ) | | (18 | ) | |
| Net change in available-for-sale securities | | | (6 | ) | | — |
| | — |
|
| Net change in unrealized costs associated with certain retirement plans | | | (11 | ) | | 27 |
| | (18 | ) |
| Total other comprehensive income (loss) | | 139 |
| | 105 |
| | (9 | ) | | (87 | ) | | (56 | ) | | 38 |
|
| Total comprehensive income (loss) | | $ | 18 |
| | $ | (3,963 | ) | | $ | 432 |
| | $ | 260 |
| | $ | (295 | ) | | $ | (81 | ) |
See notes to the consolidated financial statements.
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWSBALANCE SHEETS
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended December 31, |
| in millions | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 |
| Operating Activities | | | |
| Net (loss) income | $ | (121 | ) | $ | (4,068 | ) | $ | 441 |
|
| Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to cash provided by operating activities | | | |
| Gain on sale of businesses | (38 | ) | (15 | ) | (778 | ) |
| Depreciation and amortization | 689 |
| 683 |
| 717 |
|
| Deferred income taxes | (223 | ) | (166 | ) | 46 |
|
| Stock-based compensation expense | 105 |
| 108 |
| 128 |
|
| Goodwill impairment charges | 423 |
| 4,350 |
| 697 |
|
| Intangible asset impairment charges | 53 |
| 142 |
| 21 |
|
| Net losses (gains) on investments and notes receivable | 9 |
| (37 | ) | (27 | ) |
| Contingent consideration expense (income) | 4 |
| (6 | ) | 7 |
|
| Payment of contingent consideration in excess of amounts established in purchase accounting | (5 | ) | (8 | ) | — |
|
| Other, net | 31 |
| (7 | ) | (7 | ) |
| Increase (decrease) in cash flows from operating assets and liabilities: | | | |
| Trade accounts receivable | (101 | ) | 37 |
| 42 |
|
| Inventories | (7 | ) | 66 |
| (54 | ) |
| Other assets | 91 |
| (68 | ) | (60 | ) |
| Accounts payable and accrued expenses | (37 | ) | (131 | ) | (271 | ) |
| Other liabilities | 209 |
| 380 |
| 106 |
|
| Cash provided by operating activities | 1,082 |
| 1,260 |
| 1,008 |
|
| | | | |
| Investing Activities | | | |
| Property, plant and equipment | | | |
| Purchases of property, plant and equipment | (245 | ) | (226 | ) | (304 | ) |
| Proceeds on disposals | 53 |
| 16 |
| 16 |
|
| Acquisitions | | | |
| Payments for acquisitions of businesses, net of cash acquired | (274 | ) | (366 | ) | (370 | ) |
| Divestitures | | | |
| Proceeds from business divestitures, net of costs | 30 |
| 10 |
| 1,440 |
|
| Other investing activity | | | |
| Payments for investments and acquisitions of certain technologies | (44 | ) | (22 | ) | (11 | ) |
| Proceeds from investments and collections of notes receivable | 5 |
| 9 |
| 5 |
|
| Cash (used for) provided by investing activities | (475 | ) | (579 | ) | 776 |
|
| | | | |
| Financing Activities | | | |
| Debt | | | |
| Payments of contingent consideration amounts previously established in purchase accounting | (160 | ) | (146 | ) | (7 | ) |
| Proceeds from long-term borrowings, net of debt issuance costs | 1,440 |
|
|
|
|
| Payments on long-term borrowings | (1,450 | ) | (10 | ) | (1,250 | ) |
| Proceeds from borrowings on credit facilities | 340 |
| 371 |
| 565 |
|
| Payments on borrowings from credit facilities | (340 | ) | (380 | ) | (565 | ) |
| Equity |
|
| | |
| Payments for acquisitions of treasury stock | (500 | ) | (600 | ) | (492 | ) |
| Proceeds from issuances of shares of common stock | 74 |
| 21 |
| 21 |
|
| Cash used for financing activities | (596 | ) | (744 | ) | (1,728 | ) |
| | | | |
| Effect of foreign exchange rates on cash | (1 | ) | 3 |
| (2 | ) |
| | | | |
| Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents | 10 |
| (60 | ) | 54 |
|
| Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period | 207 |
| 267 |
| 213 |
|
| Cash and cash equivalents at end of period | $ | 217 |
| $ | 207 |
| $ | 267 |
|
| | | | |
| Supplemental Information | | | |
| Cash paid for income taxes, net | $ | 67 |
| $ | 97 |
| $ | 138 |
|
| Cash paid for interest | 329 |
| 255 |
| 277 |
|
| Fair value of contingent consideration recorded | — |
| 467 |
| 287 |
|
|
| | | | | | | |
| | As of December 31, |
| in millions, except share and per share data | 2016 | | 2015 |
| | | | |
| ASSETS | | | |
| Current assets: | | | |
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 196 |
| | $ | 319 |
|
| Trade accounts receivable, net | 1,472 |
| | 1,275 |
|
| Inventories | 955 |
| | 1,016 |
|
| Deferred and prepaid income taxes | 75 |
| | 496 |
|
| Other current assets | 541 |
| | 365 |
|
| Total current assets | 3,239 |
| | 3,471 |
|
| Property, plant and equipment, net | 1,630 |
| | 1,490 |
|
| Goodwill | 6,678 |
| | 6,473 |
|
| Other intangible assets, net | 5,883 |
| | 6,194 |
|
| Other long-term assets | 666 |
| | 505 |
|
| TOTAL ASSETS | $ | 18,096 |
| | $ | 18,133 |
|
| | | | |
| LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY | | | |
| Current liabilities: | | | |
| Current debt obligations | $ | 64 |
| | $ | 3 |
|
| Accounts payable | 447 |
| | 209 |
|
| Accrued expenses | 2,312 |
| | 1,970 |
|
| Other current liabilities | 764 |
| | 248 |
|
| Total current liabilities | 3,587 |
| | 2,430 |
|
| Long-term debt | 5,420 |
| | 5,674 |
|
| Deferred income taxes | 18 |
| | 735 |
|
| Other long-term liabilities | 2,338 |
| | 2,974 |
|
| | | | |
| Commitments and contingencies |
| |
|
| | | | |
| Stockholders’ equity: | | | |
| Preferred stock, $0.01 par value - authorized 50,000,000 shares, none issued and outstanding |
| |
|
|
| Common stock, $0.01 par value - authorized 2,000,000,000 shares; issued 1,609,670,817 shares as of December 31, 2016 and 1,594,213,786 shares as of December 31, 2015 | 16 |
| | 16 |
|
| Treasury stock, at cost - 247,566,270 shares as of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015 | (1,717 | ) | | (1,717 | ) |
| Additional paid-in capital | 17,014 |
| | 16,860 |
|
| Accumulated deficit | (8,581 | ) | | (8,927 | ) |
| Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax: | | | |
| Foreign currency translation adjustment | (79 | ) | | (54 | ) |
| Unrealized gain on derivative financial instruments | 107 |
| | 152 |
|
| Unrealized loss on available-for-sale securities | (6 | ) | | — |
|
| Unrealized costs associated with certain retirement plans | (21 | ) | | (10 | ) |
| Total stockholders’ equity | 6,733 |
| | 6,320 |
|
| TOTAL LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY | $ | 18,096 |
| | $ | 18,133 |
|
See notes to the consolidated financial statements.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Accumulated |
| | | | | | | | | Additional | | | | Other |
| | | Common Stock | | Treasury | | Paid-In | | Accumulated | | Comprehensive |
| in millions, except share data | | Shares Issued | | Par Value | | Stock | | Capital | | Deficit | | Income (Loss) |
| Balance as of December 31, 2013 | | 1,560,302,634 |
| | $ | 16 |
| | $ | (1,592 | ) | | $ | 16,579 |
| | $ | (8,570 | ) | | $ | 106 |
|
| Net loss | | | | | | | | | | (119 | ) | | |
| Changes in other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Foreign currency translation adjustment | | | | | | | | | | | | (22 | ) |
| Net change in derivative financial instruments | | | | | | | | | | | | 78 |
|
| Net change in certain retirement plans | | | | | | | | | | | | (18 | ) |
| Impact of stock-based compensation plans, net of tax | | 14,715,602 |
| | — |
| | | | 124 |
| | | | |
| Acquisition of treasury stock | | | | | | (125 | ) | | | | | | |
| Balance as of December 31, 2014 | | 1,575,018,236 |
| | $ | 16 |
| | $ | (1,717 | ) | | $ | 16,703 |
| | $ | (8,689 | ) | | $ | 144 |
|
| Net loss | | |
| | |
| | | | |
| | (239 | ) | | |
|
| Changes in other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax | | |
| | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|
| Foreign currency translation adjustment | | |
| | |
| | | | |
| | |
| | (16 | ) |
| Net change in derivative financial instruments | | |
| | |
| | | | |
| | |
| | (67 | ) |
| Net change in certain retirement plans | | | | | | | | | | | | 27 |
|
| Impact of stock-based compensation plans, net of tax | | 19,195,550 |
| | — |
| |
|
| | 157 |
| | |
| | |
|
| Rounding | | | | | | | | | | 1 |
| | |
| Balance as of December 31, 2015 | | 1,594,213,786 |
| | $ | 16 |
| | $ | (1,717 | ) | | $ | 16,860 |
| | $ | (8,927 | ) | | $ | 88 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Net income | | | | | | | | | | 347 |
| | |
| Changes in other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Foreign currency translation adjustment | | | | | | | | | | | | (25 | ) |
| Net change in derivative financial instruments | | | | | | | | | | | | (45 | ) |
| Net change in available-for-sale securities | | | | | | | | | | | | (6 | ) |
| Net change in certain retirement plans | | | | | | | | | | | | (11 | ) |
| Impact of stock-based compensation plans, net of tax | | 15,457,031 |
| |
|
| | | | 153 |
| | |
| | |
|
| Rounding | | | | — |
| | | | 1 |
| | (1 | ) | |
|
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2016 | | 1,609,670,817 |
| | $ | 16 |
| | $ | (1,717 | ) | | $ | 17,014 |
| | $ | (8,581 | ) | | $ | 1 |
|
See notes to the consolidated financial statements.
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS |
| | | | | | | | | |
| | Year Ended December 31, |
| in millions | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
| Operating Activities | | | |
| Net income (loss) | $ | 347 |
| $ | (239 | ) | $ | (119 | ) |
| Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to cash provided by operating activities | | | |
| Gain on sale of businesses | — |
| — |
| (12 | ) |
| Gain on sale of property, plant and equipment | (11 | ) | — |
| — |
|
| Depreciation and amortization | 815 |
| 769 |
| 725 |
|
| Deferred and prepaid income taxes | (305 | ) | (532 | ) | (397 | ) |
| Stock-based compensation expense | 116 |
| 107 |
| 103 |
|
| Intangible asset impairment charges | 11 |
| 19 |
| 195 |
|
| Net losses (gains) on investments and notes receivable | 21 |
| 9 |
| (27 | ) |
| Contingent consideration expense (benefit) | 29 |
| 123 |
| (85 | ) |
| Payment of contingent consideration in excess of amounts established in purchase accounting | (57 | ) | (57 | ) | (103 | ) |
| Pension termination charges | — |
| 44 |
| — |
|
| Inventory step-up amortization | 22 |
| 36 |
| 9 |
|
| Other, net | (12 | ) | 41 |
| 18 |
|
| Increase (decrease) in operating assets and liabilities, net of acquisitions: | | | |
| Trade accounts receivable | (216 | ) | (17 | ) | 53 |
|
| Inventories | 40 |
| 3 |
| (81 | ) |
| Other assets | (253 | ) | (23 | ) | (33 | ) |
| Accounts payable and accrued expenses | 553 |
| (20 | ) | 620 |
|
| Other liabilities | (128 | ) | 337 |
| 403 |
|
| Cash provided by operating activities | 972 |
| 600 |
| 1,269 |
|
| | | | |
| Investing Activities | | | |
| Purchases of property, plant and equipment | (376 | ) | (247 | ) | (259 | ) |
| Proceeds on disposals of property, plant and equipment | 29 |
| — |
| — |
|
| Payments for acquisitions of businesses, net of cash acquired | (408 | ) | (1,734 | ) | (486 | ) |
| Proceeds from business divestitures, net of costs | — |
| — |
| 12 |
|
| Payments for investments and acquisitions of certain technologies | (132 | ) | (266 | ) | (26 | ) |
| Proceeds from investments and collections of notes receivable | — |
| 61 |
| 14 |
|
| Cash used for investing activities | (887 | ) | (2,186 | ) | (745 | ) |
| | | | |
| Financing Activities | | | |
| Payments of contingent consideration amounts previously established in purchase accounting | (65 | ) | (156 | ) | (34 | ) |
| Proceeds from long-term borrowings, net of debt issuance costs | — |
| 2,580 |
| — |
|
| Payments on long-term borrowings | (250 | ) | (1,150 | ) | — |
|
| Proceeds from borrowings on credit facilities | 630 |
| 565 |
| 810 |
|
| Payments on borrowings from credit facilities | (570 | ) | (565 | ) | (810 | ) |
| Payments for acquisitions of treasury stock | — |
| — |
| (125 | ) |
| Cash used to net share settle employee equity awards | (62 | ) | (66 | ) | (51 | ) |
| Proceeds from issuances of shares of common stock | 111 |
| 114 |
| 60 |
|
| Cash provided by (used for) financing activities | (206 | ) | 1,322 |
| (150 | ) |
| | | | |
| Effect of foreign exchange rates on cash | (2 | ) | (4 | ) | (4 | ) |
| | | | |
| Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents | (123 | ) | (268 | ) | 370 |
|
| Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period | 319 |
| 587 |
| 217 |
|
| Cash and cash equivalents at end of period | $ | 196 |
| $ | 319 |
| $ | 587 |
|
| | | | |
| Supplemental Information | | | |
| Cash paid for income taxes, net | $ | 94 |
| $ | 80 |
| $ | 74 |
|
| Cash paid for interest | 233 |
| 283 |
| 221 |
|
| Fair value of contingent consideration recorded in purchase accounting | 50 |
| 63 |
| 3 |
|
See notes to the consolidated financial statements.
NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE A – SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Principles of Consolidation
Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Boston Scientific Corporation and our wholly-owned subsidiaries, after the elimination of intercompany transactions. We assess the terms of our investment interests to determine if any of our investees meet the definition of a variable interest entity (VIE). For any VIEs, we perform an analysis to determine whether our variable interests give us a controlling financial interest in a VIE. The analysis identifies the primary beneficiary of a VIE as the enterprise that has both 1) the power to direct activities of a VIE that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance and 2) the obligation to absorb losses of the entity or the right to receive benefits from the entity. Based on our assessments under the applicable guidance, we did not have significantcontrolling financial or operating interests in any VIEs and therefore did not consolidate any VIEs during the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012,for 2016, 2015, and 2011.2014.
On January 3, 2011, we closed the sale of our Neurovascular business to Stryker Corporation (Stryker). Due to our continuing involvement in the operations of the Neurovascular business following the divestiture, the divestiture did not meet the criteria for presentation as a discontinued operation and, therefore, the results of the Neurovascular business arewere included in our results of operations for all periods presented.2014. Refer to Note C – Divestitures for a description of this business divestiture.
Basis of Presentation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements of Boston Scientific Corporation have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (U.S. GAAP) and with the instructions to Form 10-K and Article 10 of Regulation S-X.
Reclassification
Effective as of January 1, 2013, we reorganized our business from geographic regions to fully operationalized global business units. Our reorganization changed our reporting structure and changed the composition of our reporting units. We have reclassifiedAdditionally, certain prior year amountsbalances related to conformdebt issuance costs have been restated to reflect our adoption of Accounting Standards Codification Update No. 2015-03, Interest-Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the current year’s presentation. SeePresentation of Debt Issuance Costs. Amounts reclassified from other long-term assets to long-term debt were not material. Refer to Note DQ - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets and Note O – Segment ReportingNew Accounting Pronouncements for further details.additional information on our adoption of the accounting pronouncement.
Subsequent Events
We evaluate events occurring after the date of our accompanying consolidated balance sheets for potential recognition or disclosure in our financial statements. We did not identify any material subsequent events requiring adjustment to our accompanying consolidated financial statements (recognized subsequent events). Those items requiring disclosure (unrecognized subsequent events) in the financial statements have been disclosed accordingly. Refer to Note J– Income Taxes F – Borrowings and Credit Arrangements and Note K–K – Commitments and Contingencies for more information.further details. In addition, in February 2017, we initiated a voluntary removal of all Lotus™ Valve devices, including Lotus with Depth Guard™, from global commercial and clinical sites due to reports of premature release of a pin connecting the Lotus Valve to the delivery system.
Accounting Estimates
To prepare our consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, management makes estimates and assumptions that may affect the reported amounts of our assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent liabilities as of the date of our financial statements and the reported amounts of our revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Our actual results may differ from these estimates. Refer to Critical Accounting Estimates included in Item 7 of this Annual Report for further discussion.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
We record cash and cash equivalents in our consolidated balance sheets at cost, which approximates fair value. Our policy is to invest excess cash in short-term marketable securities earning a market rate of interest without assuming undue risk to principal, and we limit our direct exposure to securities in any one industry or issuer. We consider all highly liquid investments purchased with a remaining maturity of three months or less at the time of acquisition to be cash equivalents.
We record available-for-sale investments at fair value and exclude unrealized gains and temporary losses on available-for-sale securities from earnings, reporting such gains and losses, net of tax, as a separate component of stockholders’ equity, until realized. We compute realized gains and losses on sales of available-for-sale securities based on the average cost method, adjusted for any other-than-temporary declines in fair value. We held no available-for-sale securities during 2013, 2012,Refer to Investments in Publicly Traded and 2011.Privately Held Entitiesbelow for additional details.
Concentrations of Credit Risk
Financial instruments that potentially subject us to concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents, derivative financial instrument contracts and accounts and notes receivable. Our investment policy limits exposure to concentrations of credit risk and changes in market conditions. Counterparties to financial instruments expose us to credit-related losses in the event of nonperformance. We transact our financial instruments with a diversified group of major financial institutions with investment grade credit ratings and actively monitor their credit ratings and our outstanding positions to limit our credit exposure. We provide credit, in the normal course of business, to hospitals, healthcare agencies, clinics, doctors' offices and other private and governmental institutions and generally do not require collateral. We record our accounts receivable in our consolidated balance sheets at net realizable value. We perform on-going credit evaluations of our customers and maintain allowances for potential credit losses, based on historical information and management's best estimates. Amounts determined to be uncollectible are written off against this reserve. We recorded write-offs of uncollectible accounts receivable of $12$11 million in 2013, $72016, $16 million in 2012,2015, and $13$15 million in 2011.2014. We are not dependent on any single institution and no single customer accounted for more than ten percent of our net sales in 2013, 2012, or 20112016, 2015, and 2014 or accounts receivable at December 31, 20132016 or 2012;2015; however, large group purchasing organizations, hospital networks and other buying groups have become increasingly important to our business and represent a substantial portion of our U.S. net sales.
We closely monitor outstanding receivables for potential collection risks, including those that may arise from economic conditions, in both the U.S. and international economies. Our European sales to government-owned or supported customers in Southern Europe, specifically Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal are subject to an increased number of days outstanding above historical levelsrelative to other countries prior to payment. Historically, receivable balances with certain publicly-owned hospitals in these countries accumulate over a period of time and are then subsequently settled as large lump sum payments. While we believe our allowance for doubtful accounts in these countries is adequate as of December 31, 2013,2016, if significant changes were to occur in the payment practices of these European governments or if government funding becomes unavailable, we may not be able to collect on receivables due to us from these customers and our write-offs of uncollectible amounts may increase. As of December 31, 2013, our net receivables in these countries greater than 180 days past due totaled approximately $95 million, of which approximately $50 million were past due greater than 360 days.
Revenue Recognition
We generate revenue primarily from the sale of single-use medical devices, and present revenue net of sales taxes in our consolidated statements of operations. We sell our products primarily through a direct sales force. In certain international markets, we sell our products through independent distributors. We consider revenue to be realized or realizable and earned when all of the following criteria are met: persuasive evidence of a sales arrangement exists; delivery has occurred or services have been rendered; the price is fixed or determinable; and collectibilitycollectability is reasonably assured. Revenue is recognized upon passage of title and risk of loss to customers, unless a consignment arrangement exists or we are required to provide additional services, and provided we can form an estimate for sales returns. We recognize revenue from consignment arrangements based on product usage, or implant, which indicates that the sale is complete. Many of our Cardiac Rhythm Management (CRM) product offerings combine the sale of a device with our LATITUDE® Patient Management System, which represents a future service obligation. For revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables, where the sale of a device is combined with a future service obligation, we defer revenue on the undelivered element and recognize this revenue over the related service period. WeMany of our Cardiac Rhythm Management (CRM) product offerings combine the sale of a device with our LATITUDE™ Patient Management System, which represents a future service obligation. Generally, we do not have vendor specific objective evidence of selling price available related to our future service obligations; therefore, we determine our estimates of selling price using third party evidence when available; otherwise, we use our best estimate of selling price. We allocate arrangement consideration using the relative selling price method.
We generally allow our customers to return defective, damaged and, in certain cases, expired products for credit. We base our estimate for sales returns upon historical trends and record the amount as a reduction to revenue when we sell the initial product. In addition, we may allow customers to return previously purchased products for next-generation product offerings. For these transactions, we defer recognition of revenue on the sale of the earlier generation product based upon an estimate of the amount of product to be returned when the next-generation products are shipped to the customer.
We also offer sales rebates and discounts to certain customers. We treat sales rebates and discounts as a reduction of revenue and classify the corresponding liability as current. We estimate rebates for products where there is sufficient historical information available to predict the volume of expected future rebates. If we are unable to estimate the expected rebates reasonably, we record a liability for the maximum rebate percentage offered. We have entered certain agreements with group purchasing organizations to sell our products to participating hospitals at negotiated prices. We recognize revenue from these agreements following the same revenue recognition criteria discussed above.
Warranty Obligations
We offer warranties on certain of our product offerings. The majority of our warranty liability relates to implantable devices offered by our CRM business, which include defibrillator and pacemaker systems. Our CRM products come with a standard limited warranty covering the replacement of these devices. We offer a full warranty for a portion of the period post-implant, and a partial warranty for a period of time thereafter. We estimate the costs that we may incur under our warranty programs based on the number of units sold, historical and anticipated rates of warranty claims and cost per claim, and record a liability equal to these estimated costs as cost of products sold at the time the product sale occurs. We assess the adequacy of our recorded warranty liabilities on a quarterly basis and adjust these amounts as necessary.
Changes in our product warranty accrual during 2013, 2012,2016, 2015, and 20112014 consisted of the following (in millions):
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Beginning balance | | $ | 26 |
| | $ | 30 |
| | $ | 43 |
| | $ | 23 |
| | $ | 25 |
| | $ | 28 |
|
| Provision | | 12 |
| | 8 |
| | 9 |
| | 25 |
| | 15 |
| | 9 |
|
| Settlements/ reversals | | (10 | ) | | (12 | ) | | (22 | ) | | (26 | ) | | (17 | ) | | (12 | ) |
| Ending balance | | $ | 28 |
| | $ | 26 |
| | $ | 30 |
| | $ | 22 |
| | $ | 23 |
| | $ | 25 |
|
Inventories
We state inventories at the lower of first-in, first-out cost or market. We base our provisions for excess, expired and obsolete inventory primarily on our estimates of forecasted net sales. A significant change in the timing or level of demand for our products as compared to forecasted amounts may result in recording additional provisions for excess, expired and obsolete inventory in the future. Further, the industry in which we participate is characterized by rapid product development and frequent new product introductions. Uncertain timing of next-generation product approvals, variability in product launch strategies, product recalls and variation in product utilization all affect our estimates related to excess, expired and obsolete inventory. Approximately 40 percent of our finished goods inventory as of December 31, 20132016 and 2012December 31, 2015 was at customer locations pursuant to consignment arrangements or held by sales representatives.
Property, Plant and Equipment
We state property, plant, equipment, and leasehold improvements at historical cost. We charge expenditures for maintenance and repairs to expense and capitalize additions and improvements that extend the life of the underlying asset. We provide for depreciation using the straight-line method at rates that approximate the estimated useful lives of the assets. We depreciate buildings andover a 20 to 40 year life; building improvements over a 20 to 40 year life;the remaining useful life of the building structure; equipment, furniture and fixtures over a three to ten year life; and leasehold improvements over the shorter of the useful life of the improvement or the term of the related lease. Depreciation expense was $279$270 million in 2013, $2882016, $274 million in 2012,2015 and $296$287 million in 2011.2014.
Valuation of Business Combinations
We allocate the amounts we pay for each acquisition to the assets we acquire and liabilities we assume based on their fair values at the dates of acquisition, including identifiable intangible assets and in-process research and development which either arise from a contractual or legal right or are separable from goodwill. We base the fair value of identifiable intangible assets acquired in a business combination, including in-process research and development, on detailed valuations that use information and assumptions provided by management, which consider management’s best estimates of inputs and assumptions that a market participant would use. We allocate any excess purchase price over the fair value of the net tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired to goodwill. Transaction costs associated with these acquisitions are expensed as incurred through selling, general and administrative costs.
In those circumstances where an acquisition involves a contingent consideration arrangement, we recognize a liability equal to the fair value of the contingent payments we expect to make as of the acquisition date. We re-measure this liability each reporting period and record changes in the fair value through a separate line item within our consolidated statements of operations. Increases or decreases in the fair value of the contingent consideration liability can result from changes in discount periods and rates, as well as changes in the timing and amount of revenue estimates or in the timing or likelihood of achieving regulatory, revenue or commercialization-based milestones.
Indefinite-lived Intangibles, including In-Process Research and Development
Our indefinite-lived intangible assets that are not subject to amortization primarily include acquired balloon and other technology, which is foundational to our continuing operations within the Cardiovascular market and other markets within interventional medicine, and in-process research and development intangible assets acquired in a business combination. Our in-process research and development represents intangible assets acquired in a business combination that are used in research and development activities but have not yet reached technological feasibility, regardless of whether they have alternative future use. The primary basis for determining the technological feasibility or completion of these projects is obtaining regulatory approval to market the underlying products in an applicable geographic region. We classify in-process research and development acquired in a business combination as an indefinite-lived intangible asset until the completion or abandonment of the associated research and development efforts. Upon completion of the associated research and development efforts, we will determine the useful life of the technology and begin amortizing the assets to reflect their use over their remaining lives. Upon permanent abandonment, we would write-off the remaining carrying amount of the associated in-process research and development intangible asset.
We test our indefinite-lived intangible assets at least annually during the third quarter for impairment and reassess their classification as indefinite-lived assets.assets; in addition, we review our indefinite-lived assets for classification and impairment more frequently if changes in circumstances or indicators exist. We assess qualitative factors to determine whether the existence of events and circumstances indicate that it is more likely than not that our indefinite-lived intangible assets are impaired. If we conclude that it is more likely than not that the asset is impaired, we then determine the fair value of the intangible asset and perform the quantitative impairment test by comparing the fair value with the carrying value in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification® (ASC) Topic 350, Intangibles - Goodwill and Other (Intangibles-Goodwill and Other.Topic 350). If the carrying value exceeds the fair value of the indefinite-lived intangible asset, we write the carrying value down to the fair value.
We use the income approach to determine the fair values of our in-process research and development. This approach calculates fair value by estimating the after-tax cash flows attributable to an in-process project over its useful life and then discounting these after-tax cash flows back to a present value. We base our revenue assumptions on estimates of relevant market sizes, expected market growth rates, expected trends in technology and expected levels of market share. In arriving at the value of the in-process projects, we consider, among other factors: the in-process projects’ stage of completion; the complexity of the work completed as of the acquisition date; the costs already incurred; the projected costs to complete; the contribution of other acquired assets; the expected regulatory path and introduction dates by region; and the estimated useful life of the technology. We apply a market-participant risk-adjusted discount rate to arrive at a present value as of the date of acquisition.
We test our See Note D - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets for more information related to indefinite-lived intangibles, including in-process research and development intangible assets acquired in a business combination for impairment at least annually during the third quarter,2016, 2015, and more frequently if events or changes in circumstances indicate that the assets may be impaired.2014.
For asset purchases outside of business combinations, we expense any purchased research and development assets as of the acquisition date.
Amortization and Impairment of Intangible Assets
We record intangible assets at historical cost and amortize them over their estimated useful lives. We use a straight-line method of amortization, unless a method that better reflects the pattern in which the economic benefits of the intangible asset are consumed or otherwise used up can be reliably determined. The approximate useful lives for amortization of our intangible assets are as follows: patents and licenses, two to 20 years; definite-lived technology-related, five to 25 years; customer relationships, five to 25 years; other intangible assets, various.
We review intangible assets subject to amortization quarterly to determine if any adverse conditions exist or a change in circumstances has occurred that would indicate impairment or a change in the remaining useful life. Conditions that may indicate impairment include, but are not limited to, a significant adverse change in legal factors or business climate that could affect the value of an asset, a product recall, or an adverse action or assessment by a regulator. If an impairment indicator exists, we test the intangible asset for recoverability. For purposes of the recoverability test, we group our amortizable intangible assets with other assets and liabilities at the lowest level of identifiable cash flows if the intangible asset does not generate cash flows independent of other assets and liabilities. If the carrying value of the intangible asset (asset group) exceeds the undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and eventual disposition of the intangible asset (asset group), we will write the carrying value down to the fair value in the period identified.
We generally calculate fair value of our intangible assets as the present value of estimated future cash flows we expect to generate from the asset using a risk-adjusted discount rate. In determining our estimated future cash flows associated with our intangible assets, we use estimates and assumptions about future revenue contributions, cost structures and remaining useful lives of the asset (asset
group). See Note D - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets for more information related to impairments of intangible assets during 2013, 2012,2016, 2015, and 2011.2014.
For patents developed internally, we capitalize costs incurred to obtain patents, including attorney fees, registration fees, consulting fees, and other expenditures directly related to securing the patent.
Goodwill Valuation
Effective as of January 1, 2013, we reorganized our business from geographic regions to fully operationalized global business units. Our reorganization changed our reporting structure and changed the composition of our reporting units for goodwill impairment testing purposes. Following the reorganization, based
Based on information regularly reviewed by our chief operating decision maker, we have three new global reportable segments consisting of:comprised of Cardiovascular, Rhythm Management, and MedSurg. We determined our new global reporting units by identifying our operating segments and assessing whether any components of these segments constituted a business for which discrete financial information is available and whether segment management regularly reviews the operating results of any components. Through this process, we identified the following new global reporting units as of January 1, 2013:units: Interventional Cardiology, Peripheral Interventions, Cardiac Rhythm Management, Electrophysiology, Endoscopy, Urology and Women'sPelvic Health, and Neuromodulation. The discussion below for 2013 relates to our global business reporting units and for 2012 and prior periods relates to our former regional reporting units.
We allocate any excess purchase price over the fair value of the net tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired in a business combination to goodwill. We test our goodwill balances during the second quarter of each year for impairment, or more frequently if indicators are present or changes in circumstances suggest that impairment may exist. In performing the assessment, we utilize the two-step approach prescribed under ASC Topic 350, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350). The first step requires a comparison of the carrying value of the reporting units, as defined, to the fair value of these units. We assess goodwill for impairment at the reporting unit level, which is defined as an operating segment or one level below an operating segment, referred to as a component. We determineIn 2016, we identified six operating segments including Interventional Cardiology, Peripheral Interventions, Rhythm Management, Endoscopy, Urology and Pelvic Health, and Neuromodulation. For purposes of identifying our reporting units, by first identifying our operating segments, andwe then assessassessed whether any components of these segments constitute a business for which discrete financial information is available and where segment management regularly reviews the operating results of that component. We aggregate components within an operating segment that have similar economic characteristics. identified Rhythm Management as having two components: Cardiac Rhythm Management and Electrophysiology.
For our 20132016, 2015 and 2014 annual impairment assessment we identified seven reporting units, includingwhich align to our seven core businesses: Interventional Cardiology, Peripheral Interventions, Cardiac Rhythm Management, Electrophysiology, Endoscopy, Urology and Women'sPelvic Health and Neuromodulation. ForAs noted above, for our 20122016 annual impairment assessment we aggregated the Cardiac Rhythm Management and 2011 impairment assessments, we identified sixElectrophysiology reporting units, withincomponents of the U.S., including our CRM, Neuromodulation, Endoscopy, Urology and Women's Health, Electrophysiology, and Cardiovascular (consisting of Interventional Cardiology and Peripheral Interventions) franchises, whichRhythm Management operating segment, based on the criteria prescribed in aggregate make up the U.S. reportable segment. In addition, we identified four internationalFASB ASC Topic 350. These reporting units including EMEA, Japan, Asia Pacificwere aggregated due to a reorganization that commenced in 2015 that resulted in integrated leadership, shared resources and consolidation of certain sites in 2016.
In performing the goodwill impairment assessment for 2016, we utilized both the optional qualitative assessment and the Americas.two-step approach prescribed under FASB ASC Topic 350. Beginning in 2016, the qualitative assessment was used for testing certain reporting units where fair value has historically exceeded carrying value by greater than 100%. All other reporting units were tested using the two-step approach. The qualitative assessment requires an evaluation of whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of the reporting unit is less than its carrying amount based on an assessment of relevant events including macroeconomic factors, industry and market conditions, cost factors, overall financial performance and other entity-specific factors. After assessing the totality of events, if it is determined that it is not more likely than not that the fair value of the reporting unit is less than its carrying value, the first and second steps of the goodwill impairment test are unnecessary. If it is determined that impairment is more likely than not, then we perform the first step of the two-step impairment test. In 2016, for all reporting units tested using the optional qualitative assessment, we concluded that it was not necessary to perform the first step of the two-step goodwill impairment test. The first step requires a comparison of the carrying value of the reporting units to the fair value of these units.
When allocating goodwill from business combinations to our reporting units, we assign goodwill to the reporting units that we expect to benefit from the respective business combination at the time of acquisition. In addition, for purposes of performing our goodwill impairment tests, assets and liabilities, including corporate assets, which relate to a reporting unit’s operations, and would be considered in determining its fair value, are allocated to the individual reporting units. We allocate assets and liabilities not directly related to a specific reporting unit, but from which the reporting unit benefits, based primarily on the respective revenue contribution of each reporting unit.
During 2013, 2012,
For our 2016, 2015, and 2011, 2014 annual impairment assessments, for those reporting units for which a quantitative test was performed,
we used only the income approach, specifically the DCFDiscounted Cash Flow (DCF) method, to derive the fair value of each of our reporting units in preparing our goodwill impairment assessments.units. This approach calculates fair value by estimating the after-tax cash flows attributable to a reporting unit and then discounting these after-tax cash flows to a present value using a risk-adjusted discount rate. We selected this method as being the most meaningful in preparing our goodwill assessments because we believe the income approach most appropriately measures our income producing assets. We have considered using the market approach and cost approach but concluded they are not appropriate in valuing our reporting units given the lack of relevant market comparisons available for application of the market approach and the inability to replicate the value of the specific technology-based assets within our reporting units for application
of the cost approach. Therefore, we believe that the income approach represents the most appropriate valuation technique for which sufficient data are available to determine the fair value of our reporting units.
In applying the income approach to our accounting for goodwill, we make assumptions about the amount and timing of future expected cash flows, terminal value growth rates and appropriate discount rates. The amount and timing of future cash flows within our DCF analysis is based on our most recent operational budgets, long range strategic plans and other estimates. The terminal value growth rate is used to calculate the value of cash flows beyond the last projected period in our DCF analysis and reflects our best estimates for stable, perpetual growth of our reporting units. We use estimates of market-participant risk-adjusted WACCweighted average cost of capital (WACC) as a basis for determining the discount rates to apply to our reporting units’ future expected cash flows.
If the carrying value of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, we then perform the second step of the goodwill impairment test to measure the amount of impairment loss, if any. If the carrying value of a reporting unit is zero or negative, we evaluate whether it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists. If we determine adverse qualitative factors exist that would indicate it is more likely than not an impairment exists, we then perform the second step of the goodwill test. The second step of the goodwill impairment test compares the estimated fair value of a reporting unit’s goodwill to its carrying value. If we were unable to complete the second step of the test prior to the issuance of our financial statements and an impairment loss was probable and could be reasonably estimated, we would recognize our best estimate of the loss in our current period financial statements and disclose that the amount is an estimate. We would then recognize any adjustment to that estimate in subsequent reporting periods, once we have finalized the second step of the impairment test. SeeRefer to Note D - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets to our consolidated financial statements for discussion ofadditional details related to our annual goodwill impairment charges.test.
Investments in Publicly Traded and Privately Held Entities
We account for our publicly traded investments as available-for-sale securities based on the quoted market price at the end of the reporting period. Unrealized holding gains or losses during the period, net of tax, are recorded to accumulated other comprehensive income/loss. We compute realized gains and losses on sales of available-for-sale securities at fair value based on the average cost method, adjusted for any other-than-temporary declines in fair value. As of December 31, 2016, we held $20 million of available-for-sale securities. We account for our investments in privately held entities, for which fair value is not readily determinable, in accordance with ASC Topic 323, Investments – Equity Methodno available-for-sale securities during 2015 and Joint Ventures.
2014. We account for investments in entities over which we have the ability to exercise significant influence under the equity method if we hold 50 percent or less of the voting stock and the entity is not a VIE in which we are the primary beneficiary.beneficiary in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 323, Investments - Equity Method and Joint Ventures (Topic 323). We record these investments initially at cost, and adjust the carrying amount to reflect our share of the earnings or losses of the investee, including all adjustments similar to those made in preparing consolidated financial statements. The book value of investments that we accounted for under the equity method of accounting was $18 million as of December 31, 2013 and $16 million as of December 31, 2012. We account for investments in entities in which we have less than a 20 percent ownership interest under the cost method of accounting if we do not have the ability to exercise significant influence over the investee. The aggregate carrying amount of our cost method investments was investee in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 325$20 million,Investments - Other as of December 31, 2013 and $13 million as of December 31, 2012.. In addition, we hadhave notes receivable from certain companies of that we account for in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 320$13 million, Investments - Debt and Equity Securities (Topic 320). Refer to Note B – Acquisitions and Strategic Investments asfor additional details on the balances of December 31, 2013our equity and cost method investments.$5 million as of December 31, 2012.
Each reporting period, we evaluate our investments to determine if there are any events or circumstances that are likely to have a significant adverse effect on the fair value of the investment. Examples of such impairment indicators include, but are not limited to: a significant deterioration in earnings performance; recent financing rounds at reduced valuations; a significant adverse change in the regulatory, economic or technological environment of an investee; or a significant doubt about an investee’s ability to continue as a going concern. If we identify an impairment indicator, we will estimate the fair value of the investment and compare it to its carrying value. Our estimation of fair value considers all available financial information related to the investee, including valuations based on recent third-party equity investments in the investee. If the fair value of the investment is less than its carrying value, the investment is impaired and we make a determination as to whether the impairment is other-than-temporary. We deem an impairment to be other-than-temporary unless we have the ability and intent to hold an investment for a period sufficient for a market recovery up to the carrying value of the investment. Further, evidence must indicate that the carrying value of the investment is recoverable within a reasonable period. For other-than-temporary impairments, we recognize an impairment loss equal to the difference between an investment’s carrying value and its fair value. Impairment losses on our investments are included in other, net in our consolidated statements of operations.
Income Taxes
We utilize the asset and liability method of accounting for income taxes. Under this method, we determine deferred tax assets and liabilities based on differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of our assets and liabilities. We measure deferred tax assets and liabilities using the enacted tax rates and laws that will be in effect when we expect the differences to reverse. We reduce our deferred tax assets by a valuation allowance if, based upon the weight of available evidence, it is more likely than not that we will not realize some portion or all of the deferred tax assets. We consider relevant evidence, both positive and negative, to determine the need for a valuation allowance. Information evaluated includes our financial position and results of operations for the current and preceding years, the availability of deferred tax liabilities and tax carrybacks, as well as an evaluationestimates of currentlythe impact of future taxable income and available information about future years.prudent and feasible tax-planning strategies.
We dohave not provideprovided U.S. income taxes and foreign withholding taxes on unremittedthe undistributed earnings of our foreign subsidiaries whereas of December 31, 2016 because we haveintend to permanently reinvest such earnings outside the U.S. As of December 31, 2016, the cumulative amount of excess financial reporting basis over the tax basis of investments in foreign subsidiaries that is indefinitely reinvested is approximately $9.8 billion. Generally, such earnings in our foreign operations.amounts become subject to U.S. taxation upon the remittance of dividends and under certain other circumstances. It is not practicable to estimate the amount of income taxes payable on the earnings that are indefinitely reinvesteddeferred tax liability related to investments in these foreign operations. Unremitted earnings of our foreign subsidiaries that we have indefinitely reinvested in foreign operations are $11.902 billion as of December 31, 2013 and $11.041 billion as of December 31, 2012.subsidiaries.
We provide for potential amounts due in various tax jurisdictions. In the ordinary course of conducting business in multiple countries and tax jurisdictions, there are many transactions and calculations where the ultimate tax outcome is uncertain. JudgmentTherefore, judgment is required based on individual facts, circumstances and information available in determining our worldwide income tax provision.whether or not based on technical merits, the position will be sustained upon examination. In our opinion, we have made adequate provisions for income taxes in determining our worldwide income tax position for all years subject to audit. Although we believe our estimates are reasonable, the final outcome of open tax matters may be different from that which we have reflected in our historical income tax provisions and accruals. Such differences could have a material impact on our income tax provision and operating results. See Note J - Income Taxes for further information and discussion of our income tax provision and balances.
Legal and Product Liability Costs
WeIn the normal course of business, we are involved in various legal and regulatory proceedings, including intellectual property, breach of contract, securities litigation and product liability suits. In some cases, the claimants seek damages, as well as other relief, which, if granted, could require significant expenditures or impact our ability to sell our products. We are also the subject of certain governmental investigations, which could result in substantial fines, penalties, and administrative remedies. We maintain an insurance policy providing limited coverage against securities claims, and we are substantially self-insured with respect to product liability claims and fully self-insured with respect to intellectual property infringement claims. We generally record losses for claims in excess of the limits of purchased insurance in earnings at the time and to the extent they are probable and estimable. We accrue anticipated costs of settlement, damages, losses for general product liability claims and, under certain conditions, costs of defense, based on historical experience or to the extent specific losses are probable and estimable. Otherwise, we expense these costs as incurred. If the estimate of a probable loss is a range and no amount within the range is more likely, we accrue the minimum amount of the range. We analyze litigation settlements to identify each element of the arrangement. We allocate arrangement consideration to patent licenses received based on estimates of fair value, and capitalize these amounts as assets if the license will provide an on-going future benefit. We record certain legal and product liability charges, credits and costs of defense, which we consider to be unusual or infrequent and significant as litigation-related charges within our consolidated statements of operations; all other legal and product liability charges, credits and costs are recorded within selling, general and administrative expenses. See Note K -– Commitments and Contingencies for discussion of our individual material legal proceedings.
Costs Associated with Exit Activities
We record employee termination costs in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 712,Compensation - Nonretirement and Postemployment Benefits(Topic 712), if we pay the benefits as part of an on-going benefit arrangement, which includes benefits provided as part of our domesticestablished severance policypolicies or that we provide in accordance with international statutory requirements. We accrue employee termination costs associated with an on-going benefit arrangement if the obligation is attributable to prior services rendered, the rights to the benefits have vested, the payment is probable and we can reasonably estimate the liability. We account for employee termination benefits that represent a one-time benefit in accordance with FASBASC Topic 420,Exit or Disposal Cost ObligationsObligations (Topic 420). We record such costs into expense over the employee’s future service period, if any.
Other costs associated with exit activities may include contract termination costs, including costs related to leased facilities to be abandoned or subleased, consultant fees and impairments of long-lived assets, andassets. The costs are expensed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 420 and FASB ASC Topic 360, Property, Plant, and Equipment. and are included in restructuring charges in our consolidated statement of operations. Additionally, costs directly related to our active restructuring initiatives, including program
management costs, accelerated depreciation, and costs to transfer product lines among facilities are included within costs of products sold and selling, general and administrative expenses in our consolidated statement of operations. See Note H – Restructuring-related Activities for further information and discussion of our restructuring plans.
Translation of Foreign Currency
We translate all assets and liabilities of foreign subsidiaries from local currency into U.S. dollars using the year-end exchange rate, and translate revenues and expenses at the average exchange rates in effect during the year. We show the net effect of these translation adjustments in our consolidated financial statements as a component of accumulated other comprehensive loss.income. For any significant foreign subsidiaries located in highly inflationary economies, we would re-measure their financial statements as if the functional currency were the U.S. dollar. We did not record any highly inflationary economy translation adjustments in 2013, 20122016, 2015 or 2011.2014.
Foreign currency transaction gains and losses are included in other, net in our consolidated statements of operations, net of losses and gains from any related derivative financial instruments. We recognized net foreign currency transaction losses of $11$13 million in 2013, $182016, $21 million in 2012,2015, and $12$18 million in 2011.2014.
Financial Instruments
We recognize all derivative financial instruments in our consolidated financial statements at fair value in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging(Topic 815), and we present assets and liabilities associated with our derivative financial instruments on a gross basis in our financial statements. In accordance with FASB ASC Topic 815, for those derivative instruments that are designated and qualify as hedging instruments, the hedging instrument must be designated, based upon the exposure being hedged, as a fair value hedge, cash flow hedge, or a hedge of a net investment in a foreign operation. The accounting for changes in the fair value (i.e. gains or losses) of a derivative instrument depends on whether it has been designated and qualifies as part of a hedging relationship and, further, on the type of hedging relationship. Our derivative instruments do not subject our earnings or cash flows to material risk, as gains and losses on these derivatives generally offset losses and gains on the item being hedged. We do not enter into derivative transactions for speculative purposes and we do not have any non-derivative instruments that are designated as hedging instruments pursuant to FASB ASC Topic 815.815. Refer to Note E – Fair Value Measurements for more information on our derivative instruments.
Shipping and Handling Costs
We generally do not bill customers for shipping and handling of our products. Shipping and handling costs of $97$101 million in 2013, $1052016, $93 million in 2012,2015, and $100$100 million in 20112014 are included in selling, general and administrative expenses in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations.expenses.
Research and Development
We expense research and development costs, including new product development programs, regulatory compliance and clinical research as incurred. Refer to Indefinite-lived Intangibles,, includingIn-Process Research and Development for our policy regarding in-process research and development acquired in connection with our business combinations and asset purchases.
Employee Retirement Plans
In connection with
Following our 2006 acquisition of Guidant Corporation, we sponsor the Guidant Retirement Plan, a frozen noncontributory defined benefit plan covering a select group of current and former employees. The funding policy for the plan is consistent with U.S. employee benefit and tax-funding regulations. Plan assets, which are maintained in a trust, consist primarily of fixed-income instruments. Further, we sponsorsponsored the Guidant Supplemental Retirement Plan, a frozen, nonqualifiednon-qualified defined benefit plan for certain former officers and employees of Guidant. The plan was partially frozen as of September 25, 1995 and completely frozen as of May 31, 2007, and was terminated effective December 1, 2014. During 2015, we finalized the termination process and settled the plan’s obligations. As a result, we recorded pension termination charges of $44 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. The Guidant Supplemental Retirement Plan was partially funded through a Rabbi Trust that contains segregated company assets used to pay the benefit obligations related to the plan. In addition, certain current and former employees of Guidant are eligible to receive a portion of their healthcare retirement benefits under a frozen defined benefit plan.
In addition, we
We also maintain an Executive Retirement Plan, a defined benefit plan covering executive officers and division presidents.presidents and certain persons that may have served in these roles. Participants may retire with unreduced benefits once retirement conditions have been satisfied. We alsoIn addition, we maintain retirement plans covering certain international employees.
We use a December 31 measurement date for these plans and record the underfunded portion as a liability, recognizing changes in the funded status through other comprehensive income (OCI). The outstanding obligation as of December 31, 20132016 and 20122015 is as follows:
| | | | | As of December 31, 2013 | | As of December 31, 2012 | | As of December 31, 2016 |
(in millions) | | Projected
Benefit
Obligation (PBO) | | Fair value of Plan Assets | | Underfunded
PBO Recognized | | Projected
Benefit
Obligation (PBO) | | Fair value of Plan Assets | | Underfunded
PBO Recognized | | Accumulated Benefit Obligation (ABO) | | Projected
Benefit
Obligation (PBO) | | Fair value of Plan Assets | | Underfunded
PBO Recognized |
| Executive Retirement Plan | | $ | 10 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 10 |
| | $ | 13 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 13 |
| | $ | 15 |
| | $ | 17 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 17 |
|
| Guidant Retirement Plan (frozen) | | 120 |
| | 114 |
| | 6 |
| | 131 |
| | 87 |
| | 44 |
| |
| Guidant Supplemental Retirement Plan (frozen) | | 31 |
| | — |
| | 31 |
| | 34 |
| | — |
| | 34 |
| | 32 |
| | 32 |
| | — |
| | 32 |
|
| Guidant Healthcare Retirement Benefit Plan (frozen) | | 3 |
| | — |
| | 3 |
| | 5 |
| | — |
| | 5 |
| |
| International Retirement Plans | | 84 |
| | 52 |
| | 32 |
| | 85 |
| | 43 |
| | 42 |
| | 93 |
| | 103 |
| | 54 |
| | 49 |
|
| | | $ | 248 |
| | $ | 166 |
| | $ | 82 |
| | $ | 268 |
| | $ | 130 |
| | $ | 138 |
| | 140 |
| | $ | 152 |
| | $ | 54 |
| | $ | 98 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | As of December 31, 2015 |
(in millions) | | Accumulated Benefit Obligation (ABO) | | Projected
Benefit
Obligation (PBO) | | Fair value of Plan Assets | | Underfunded
PBO Recognized |
| Executive Retirement Plan | | $ | 12 |
| | $ | 14 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 14 |
|
| Guidant Supplemental Retirement Plan (frozen) | | 33 |
| | 33 |
| | — |
| | 33 |
|
| International Retirement Plans | | 76 |
| | 84 |
| | 52 |
| | 32 |
|
| | | $ | 121 |
| | $ | 131 |
| | $ | 52 |
| | $ | 79 |
|
The value of the Rabbi Trust assets used to pay the Guidant Supplemental Retirement Plan benefits included in our accompanying consolidated financial statements was approximately $17$8 million as of December 31, 20132016 and $21$11 million as of December 31, 2012.2015.
A rollforward of the changes in the pension benefit obligation for our funded retirement plans during 2016 and 2015 is as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2016 | | 2015 |
| Beginning obligations | | $ | 131 |
| | $ | 138 |
|
| Service and interest costs | | 10 |
| | 9 |
|
| Actuarial gain (loss) | | 10 |
| | (5 | ) |
| Plan amendments | | 7 |
| | — |
|
| Benefits paid | | (5 | ) | | (5 | ) |
| Foreign currency exchange | | (1 | ) | | (6 | ) |
| Ending obligation | | $ | 152 |
| | $ | 131 |
|
The critical assumptions associated with our employee retirement plans as of December 31, 20132016 are as follows:
| | | | | Expected Return on Plan Assets | | Long-Term Healthcare | | Rate of | | Expected Return on Plan Assets | | Rate of |
| | Discount Rate | | Cost Trend Rate | | Compensation Increase | Discount Rate | | Compensation Increase |
| Executive Retirement Plan | 4.50% | | | | | | 3.00% | 3.50% | | | | 3.00% |
| Guidant Retirement Plan (frozen) | 5.00% | | 5.50% | | | | | |
| Guidant Supplemental Retirement Plan (frozen) | 4.75% | | | | | | | 4.00% | | | | |
| Guidant Healthcare Retirement Benefit Plan (frozen) | 1.00% - 2.00% | | | | 5.00% | | | |
| International Retirement Plans | 0.75% - 3.70% | | 2.75% - 4.10% | | | | 3.00% | 0.50% - 2.13% | | 3.00% - 4.10% | | 2.50% - 6.78% |
We base our discount rate on the rates of return available on high-quality bonds with maturities approximating the expected period over which benefits will be paid. The rate of compensation increase is based on historical and expected rate increases. We review external data and historical trends in healthcare costs to determine healthcare cost trend rate assumptions. We base our rate of expected return on plan assets on historical experience, our investment guidelines and expectations for long-term rates of return. Our international pension plan assets are invested in a variety of securities, primarily equity securities and government bonds. These securities are considered Level 1 fair value investments and are valued at quoted market prices.
A rollforward of the changes in the fair value of plan assets for our funded retirement plans during 20132016 and 20122015 is as follows: | | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2016 | | 2015 |
| Beginning fair value | | $ | 130 |
| | $ | 115 |
| | $ | 52 |
| | $ | 191 |
|
| Actual return on plan assets | | 25 |
| | 11 |
| | (1 | ) | | 1 |
|
| Employer contributions | | 32 |
| | 20 |
| | 7 |
| | 6 |
|
| Benefits paid | | (15 | ) | | (13 | ) | | (5 | ) | | (145 | ) |
| Net transfers in (out) | | — |
| | — |
| |
| Foreign currency exchange | | (6 | ) | | (3 | ) | | 1 |
| | (1 | ) |
| Ending fair value | | $ | 166 |
| | $ | 130 |
| | $ | 54 |
| | $ | 52 |
|
We also sponsor a voluntary 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan for eligible employees. We match 200 percent of employee elective deferrals for the first two percent of employee eligible compensation, and 50 percent of employee elective deferrals greater than two percent, but not exceeding six percent, of employee eligible compensation. Total expense for our matching contributions to the plan was $59$72 million in 2013, $632016, $69 million in 2012,2015, and $65$63 million in 2011.2014.
Net Income (Loss) per Common Share
We base net income (loss) per common share upon the weighted-average number of common shares and common stock equivalents outstanding during each year. Potential common stock equivalents are determined using the treasury stock method. We exclude stock options whose effect would be anti-dilutive from the calculation.
NOTE B – ACQUISITIONS
Over the past three years, we have completed several acquisitions as part of our strategic initiatives, and have acquired technologies in the areas of cardiology, structural heart therapy, atrial fibrillation, peripheral vascular disease, hypertension, cardiac rhythm management, electrophysiology, endoscopic pulmonary intervention, and deep brain stimulation. AND STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS
Our consolidated financial statements include the operating results for each acquired entity from its respective date of acquisition. We do not present pro forma financial information for these acquisitions given their results are not material to our consolidated financial statements. Transaction costs associated with these acquisitions were expensed as incurred and are not material for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 or 2011.2016, 2015, and 2014.
2013 Acquisition
2016 Acquisitions
Neovasc, Inc.'s Advanced Biological Tissue Business
On December 12, 2016, we completed the acquisition of certain manufacturing assets and capabilities of the Neovasc, Inc. (Neovasc) advanced biological tissue business for a total upfront cash payment of $68 million. With this acquisition, we will integrate certain manufacturing assets and biologic tissue capabilities into our structural heart business for use in the manufacturing of the Lotus™ Valve System and future heart valve technologies within our Interventional Cardiology business. We began the process of integrating Neovasc into our Interventional Cardiology business in the fourth quarter of 2016 and expect to be substantially complete by the end of 2018.
EndoChoice Holdings, Inc.
On November 1, 2013,22, 2016, we completed our acquisition of EndoChoice Holdings, Inc. (EndoChoice) for $8.00 per share or approximately $214 million. In addition, total consideration for the acquisition also included repayment of Endochoice's existing senior term loan facility totaling $43 million, and related acquisition fees and expenses. EndoChoice is an Alpharetta, Georgia based company focused on the development and commercialization of infection control products, pathology services and single-use devices for specialists treating a wide range of gastrointestinal (GI) conditions. We began the process of integrating EndoChoice into our Endoscopy business in the fourth quarter of 2016 and expect to be substantially complete by the end of 2017.
Distal Access, LLC's Gynecology and Urology Portfolio
On November 15, 2016, we completed the acquisition of the electrophysiology businessgynecology and urology portfolio of C.R. Bard Inc. (Bard EP)Distal Access, LLC (Distal), a Salt Lake City based company that designs minimally invasive medical devices for $274an upfront cash payment of $20 million plus a potential $35 million in cash.future consideration based on future sales through 2020 in addition to regulatory and product launch milestones. The portfolio includes the Resectr™ Tissue Resection Device, a single-use solution designed to remove uterine polyps. We believe that this transaction addsbegan the process of integrating the Resectr device into our Urology and Pelvic Health business during the fourth quarter of 2016 and expect to be substantially complete by the end of 2017.
LumenR™ Tissue Retractor System
On November 1, 2016, we acquired the LumenR™ Tissue Retractor System from LumenR LLC (LumenR), a strong commercial teamprivately held Newark, California based company for an upfront cash payment of $30 million plus a potential $70 million in future consideration based on future sales through the third quarter of 2026 in addition to development and complementarytechnology transfer milestones. The LumenR™ Tissue Retractor System is currently in development for use during endoscopic resection of lesions in the colon, esophagus or stomach.
Cosman Medical, Inc.
On July 27, 2016, we acquired Cosman Medical, Inc. (Cosman), a privately held manufacturer of radiofrequency ablation systems, expanding our Neuromodulation portfolio and offering physicians treating patients with chronic pain a wider choice of ablation catheters, diagnostic tools,non-opioid therapeutic options. Total consideration was comprised of $71 million in up-front cash plus related fees and electrophysiology recording systems, which we believe will allow usexpenses, and a potential additional $20 million in consideration based on future sales through June 30, 2019. We are in the process of integrating Cosman into our Neuromodulation business, and expect the integration to better servebe substantially complete by the global Electrophysiology market through a more comprehensive portfolio offering and sales infrastructure.end of 2017.
Purchase Price Allocation
We accounted for this acquisitionthese acquisitions as a business combination and, in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards CodificationFASB ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations (Topic 850), we recorded the assets acquired and liabilities assumed at their respective fair values as of the acquisition date. The components of the aggregate preliminary purchase price are as follows (in millions):
|
| | | |
| Cash, net of cash acquired | $ | 366 |
|
| Fair value of contingent consideration | 50 |
|
| Fair value of debt repaid | 43 |
|
| | $ | 459 |
|
The following summarizes the preliminary purchase price allocation for our 2016 acquisitions as of December 31, 2016, (in millions):
|
| | | |
| Goodwill | $ | 208 |
|
| Amortizable intangible assets | 228 |
|
| Inventory | 11 |
|
| Property, plant and equipment | 6 |
|
| Other net liabilities | (2 | ) |
| Deferred income taxes | 8 |
|
| | $ | 459 |
|
We allocated a portion of the preliminary purchase price to specific intangible asset categories as follows:
|
| | | | | | | |
| | Amount
Assigned (in millions) | | Weighted
Average
Amortization
Period (in years) | | Range of Risk-
Adjusted Discount
Rates used in
Purchase Price
Allocation |
| Amortizable intangible assets: | | | | | |
| Technology-related | $ | 176 |
| | 9-13 | | 11% - 20% |
| Customer relationships | 51 |
| | 9-13 | | 11% - 12% |
| Other intangible assets | 1 |
| | 4 | | 11% |
| | $ | 228 |
| | | | |
2015 Acquisitions
Interventional Radiology Business of CeloNova Biosciences
On December 31, 2015, we completed the acquisition of the interventional radiology business of CeloNova Biosciences (CeloNova), for an upfront payment of $70 million and additional payments contingent on regulatory and sales milestones. The acquisition includes drug-eluting microspheres designed to be loaded with chemotherapy drugs for delivery to cancerous tumors, and spherical embolic products used to treat uterine fibroids and other conditions. We are in the process of integrating CeloNova into our Peripheral Interventions business and expect to be substantially complete by the second half of 2017.
AMS Portfolio Acquisition
On August 3, 2015, we completed the acquisition of the American Medical Systems male urology portfolio (AMS Portfolio Acquisition), which includes the men's health and prostate health businesses, from Endo International plc. Total consideration was comprised of $1.616 billion in up-front cash plus related fees and expenses, and a potential additional $50 million in consideration based on 2016 sales. The AMS male urology portfolio was integrated with our formerly named Urology and Women's Health business, and the joint businesses became Urology and Pelvic Health. The integration was substantially complete by the end of 2016. In addition, as part of the acquisition agreement, we made a $60 million Series B non-voting preferred stock investment in the women's health business of Endo Health Solutions, a wholly owned subsidiary of Endo International, plc., representing the remaining Women's Health business of the American Medical Systems' Portfolio. This investment was subsequently repaid in the fourth quarter of 2015.
Xlumena, Inc.
On April 2, 2015, we acquired Xlumena, Inc. (Xlumena), a medical device company that developed minimally invasive devices for Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) guided transluminal drainage of targeted areas within the gastrointestinal tract. The purchase agreement called for an upfront payment of $63 million, an additional payment of $13 million upon FDA clearance of the HOT AXIOS™ Product, and further sales-based milestones based on sales achieved through 2018. In 2016, we completed the integration of Xlumena into our Endoscopy business.
In addition, we completed other acquisitions during 2015 for total consideration of $6 million in cash at closing plus contingent consideration of up to $1 million.
Purchase Price Allocation
We accounted for these acquisitions as business combinations and, in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 850, we have recorded the assets acquired and liabilities assumed at their respective fair values as of the acquisition dates. The components of the aggregate purchase prices are as follows (in millions):
|
| | | |
| Cash, net of cash acquired | $ | 1,735 |
|
| Fair value of contingent consideration | 63 |
|
| | $ | 1,798 |
|
The following summarizes the aggregate purchase price allocation for the 2015 acquisitions as of December 31, 2015 (in millions):
|
| | | |
| Goodwill | $ | 573 |
|
| Amortizable intangible assets | 1,074 |
|
| Indefinite-lived intangible assets | 6 |
|
| Inventory | 103 |
|
| Property, plant and equipment | 43 |
|
| Other net assets | 42 |
|
| Deferred income taxes | (43 | ) |
| | $ | 1,798 |
|
We allocated a portion of the purchase price to specific intangible asset categories as follows:
|
| | | | | | | |
| | Amount
Assigned (in millions) | | Weighted
Average
Amortization
Period (in years) | | Range of Risk-
Adjusted Discount
Rates used in
Purchase Price
Allocation |
| Amortizable intangible assets: | | | | | |
| Technology-related | $ | 431 |
| | 11-13 | | 14% - 23% |
| Customer relationships | 625 |
| | 12-13 | | 14% - 15% |
| Other intangible assets | 18 |
| | 13 | | 14% |
| Indefinite-lived intangible assets: | | | | | |
| In-process research & development | $ | 6 |
| | N/A | | 17% |
| | $ | 1,080 |
| | | | |
2014 Acquisitions
Interventional Business of Bayer AG
On August 29, 2014, we completed the acquisition of the Interventional Division of Bayer AG (Bayer), for a total cash consideration of $414 million. We believe that this acquisition enhances our ability to offer physicians and healthcare systems a more complete portfolio of solutions to treat challenging vascular conditions. The transaction includes the AngioJet™ Thrombectomy System and the Fetch® 2 Aspiration Catheter, which are used in endovascular procedures to remove blood clots from blocked arteries and veins, and the JetStream™ Atherectomy System, used to remove plaque and thrombi from diseased arteries. In 2016, we completed the integration of Bayer into our Peripheral Interventions and Interventional Cardiology businesses.
IoGyn, Inc.
On May 7, 2014, we completed the acquisition of the remaining fully diluted equity of IoGyn, Inc. (IoGyn). Prior to the acquisition, we held a 28 percent minority interest in IoGyn in addition to notes receivable of approximately $8 million. Total consideration was comprised of a net cash payment of $65 million at closing to acquire the remaining 72 percent of IoGyn equity and repay outstanding debt. IoGyn has developed the Symphion™® (ASC)System, a next generation system for hysteroscopic intrauterine tissue removal including fibroids (myomas) and polyps. In March 2014, IoGyn received U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) approval for the system and in October 2014, we began a limited market release of the system in the United States. We integrated the operations of the IoGyn business into our Urology and Pelvic Health business.
In addition, we completed other acquisitions during 2014 for total consideration of $7 million cash at closing plus contingent consideration of up to $4 million.
Purchase Price Allocation
We accounted for these acquisitions as business combinations and, in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations850, we have recorded the assets acquired and liabilities assumed at their respective fair values as of the acquisition date. The components of the aggregate preliminary purchase price for the acquisition consummated in 2013our 2014 acquisitions are as follows (in millions):
| | | Cash, net of cash acquired | $ | 274 |
| $ | 479 |
|
| Fair value of contingent consideration | — |
| |
| Fair value of prior interests | — |
| 31 |
|
| Fair value of debt assumed | — |
| |
| | $ | 274 |
| $ | 510 |
|
Total consideration forIn addition, prior to the 2013 acquisition included initial $274of IoGyn, we had an equity interest in IoGyn and held $8 million of cash payments,notes receivables. We re-measured our previously-held investments to their estimated acquisition-date fair value of $31 million and recorded a gain of $19 million in other, net, in the accompanying consolidated statements of cash acquired, at closingoperations during the second quarter of 2014. We measured the fair values of the transaction.previously-held investments based on the liquidation preferences and priority of the equity interest and debt, including accrued interest.
The following summarizes the aggregate preliminary purchase price allocation for the 2013 acquisitionour 2014 acquisitions as of December 31, 2013 (in millions):2014:
| | | Goodwill | $ | 140 |
| $ | 210 |
|
| Amortizable intangible assets | 112 |
| 263 |
|
| Indefinite-lived intangible assets | — |
| |
| Inventory | | 23 |
|
| Property, plant and equipment | | 17 |
|
| Prepaid Transaction Service Agreement | | 5 |
|
| Other net assets | 19 |
| (1 | ) |
| Deferred income taxes | 3 |
| (7 | ) |
| | $ | 274 |
| $ | 510 |
|
We allocated a portion of the preliminary purchase price to specific intangible asset categories as of the respective acquisition dates as follows:
| | | | Amount
Assigned (in millions) | | Weighted
Average
Amortization
Period (in years) | | Range of Risk-
Adjusted Discount
Rates used in
Purchase Price
Allocation | Amount
Assigned (in millions) | | Weighted
Average
Amortization
Period (in years) | | Range of Risk-
Adjusted Discount
Rates used in
Purchase Price
Allocation |
| Amortizable intangible assets: | | | | | | | | | | |
| Technology-related | $ | 82 |
| | 10 | | 11.5% | $ | 233 |
| | 10 - 14 | | 14 - 18 % |
| Customer relationships | 30 |
| | 7 | | 11.5% | 29 |
| | 10 | | 18% |
| Other intangible assets | | 1 |
| | 2 | | 14% |
| | $ | 112 |
| | $ | 263 |
| |
OurFor our 2016, 2015 and 2014 acquisitions, our technology-related intangible assets consist of technical processes, intellectual property, and institutional understanding with respect to products and processes that we will leverage in future products or processes and will carry forward from one product generation to the next. We used the income approach and relief from royalty approach to derive the fair value of the technology-related intangible assets, and are amortizing them on a straight-line basis over their assigned estimated useful lives.
In-process research and development represents the estimated fair value of acquired in-process research and development projects that have not yet reached technological feasibility. These indefinite-lived intangible assets are tested for impairment on an annual basis, or more frequently if impairment indicators are present, in accordance with U.S. GAAP and our accounting policies. Upon completion of the associated research and development efforts, we will determine the useful life of the technology and begin amortizing the assets to reflect their use over their remaining lives. The primary basis for determining the technological feasibility or completion of these projects is obtaining regulatory approval to market the underlying products.
Customer relationships represent the estimated fair value of the non-contractual customer, payor and distributor relationships. Customer relationships are direct relationships with physicians and hospitals performing procedures with the acquired products, payor relationships are contracts and relationships with healthcare payors relating to reimbursement of services and distributor relationships are relationships with third parties used to sell the acquired products, bothall as of the acquisition date. These relationships were valued separately from goodwill asbecause there is a history and pattern of conducting relationshipsbusiness with the customers and distributors on a contractual basis.distributors. We used the income approach or the replacement cost and lost profits methodology to derive the fair value of the customer relationships. The customer relationships intangible assets are beingamortized on a straight-line basis over their assigned estimated useful lives.
Other intangible assets primarily include acquired tradenames. These tradenames include brand names that we expect to continue using in our product portfolio and related marketing materials. The tradenames are valued using a relief from royalty methodology and are amortized on a straight-line basis over their assigned estimated useful lives.
We believe that the estimated intangible asset values represent the fair value at the datesdate of acquisition and do not exceed the amount a third party would pay for the assets. These fair value measurements are based on significant unobservable inputs, including management estimates and assumptions and, accordingly, are classified as Level 3 within the fair value hierarchy prescribed by FASB ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures.
We recorded the excess of the aggregate purchase price over the estimated fair values of the identifiable assets acquired as goodwill, the majority of which is deductible for tax purposes.goodwill. Goodwill was established due primarily to synergies expected to be gained from the integration of this business intoleveraging our existing operations as well as revenue and cash flow projections associated with future technologies, and has been allocated to our reportable segments based on the relative expected benefit. SeeOf the goodwill recorded, approximately $116 million, based on preliminary estimates, related to our 2016 acquisitions is deductible for tax purposes. Of the goodwill recorded related to our 2015 acquisitions $449 million is deductible for tax purposes and $160 million of the recorded goodwill related to our 2014 acquisitions is deductible for tax purposes. Refer to Note D - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets for more information related to goodwill allocated to our reportable segments.
2012 Acquisitions
Cameron Health, Inc.
On June 8, 2012, we completed the acquisition of the remaining equity of Cameron Health, Inc. (Cameron). Cameron has developed the world's first and only commercially available subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator - the S-ICD® system. The S-ICD® system has received CE Mark approval and is sold in CE marked countries. In addition, in late September 2012, we received U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for the S-ICD® system, and commenced a limited commercial launch of this system in the United States during the fourth quarter of 2012. We are integrating the operations of the Cameron business into our CRM business. Total consideration includes an initial $150 million cash payment at closing of the transaction, a payment of $150 million upon FDA approval of the S-ICD® system and up to an additional $1.05 billion of potential payments upon achievement of specified revenue-based milestones over a six-year period following FDA approval. Due to our receipt of FDA approval of Cameron's S-ICD® system, we paid the related $150 million milestone payment to the former shareholders of Cameron during the fourth quarter of 2012.
BridgePoint Medical, Inc.
On October 4, 2012, we completed the acquisition of 100 percent of the fully diluted equity of BridgePoint Medical, Inc. (BridgePoint), a developer of catheter-based systems to treat coronary chronic total occlusions (CTOs). BridgePoint has the only U.S. approved crossing and re-entry system indicated for use in coronary CTOs. The system has also received CE Mark approval and TGA approval in Australia and is currently sold in Europe, Australia and the U.S. We have integrated the operations of the BridgePoint business into our Interventional Cardiology business. Total consideration includes an initial $20 million at closing of the transaction and up to an additional $90 million of revenue-based earnouts and milestones through 2016.
Rhythmia Medical, Inc.
On October 8, 2012, we completed the acquisition of 100 percent of the fully diluted equity of Rhythmia Medical, Inc. (Rhythmia). Rhythmia is a developer of next-generation mapping and navigation solutions for use in cardiac catheter ablations and other electrophysiology procedures, including atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter. We received CE Mark approval for the Rhythmia technology during the second quarter of 2013 and received FDA approval during July 2013. We are integrating the operations of the Rhythmia business into our Electrophysiology business. Total consideration includes an initial $90 million at closing of the transaction and up to an additional $175 million of regulatory and revenue-based milestones and revenue-based earnouts through 2017.
Vessix Vascular, Inc.
On November 19, 2012, we completed the acquisition of 100 percent of the fully diluted equity of Vessix Vascular, Inc. (Vessix). Vessix is a developer of a therapy to treat uncontrolled hypertension, or high blood pressure. The Vessix Vascular V2 Renal Denervation System™ has received CE Mark in Europe and TGA approval in Australia. Vessix has initiated the REDUCE-HTN post-market surveillance study and launched the product in CE Mark countries in 2013. We are integrating the operations of the Vessix business into our Peripheral Interventions business. Total consideration includes an initial $125 million at closing of the transaction and up to an additional $300 million of clinical and revenue-based milestones and revenue-based earnouts through 2016.
Purchase Price Allocation
The components of the aggregate purchase price for acquisitions consummated in 2012 are as follows (in millions):
|
| | | |
| Cash, net of cash acquired | $ | 367 |
|
| Fair value of contingent consideration | 467 |
|
| Fair value of prior interests | 79 |
|
| Fair value of debt assumed | 9 |
|
| | $ | 922 |
|
Total consideration for the 2012 acquisitions included initial $367 million cash payments, net of cash acquired, at closing of the transactions, with potential payments of up to an additional $1.615 billion based upon achievement of certain regulatory- and commercialization-related milestones and revenue through 2018. As of the respective acquisition dates, we recorded total contingent consideration liabilities of $467 million, representing the estimated fair value of the contingent consideration we expected to pay to the former shareholders of the acquired companies. The fair value of the contingent consideration liabilities was estimated by discounting, to present value, contingent payments expected to be made. In certain circumstances, we utilized a probability-weighted approach or monte carlo revenue simulation model to determine the fair value of contingent consideration.
Prior to the acquisition of Cameron, we had an equity interest in Cameron and held $40 million of notes receivable. We re-measured our previously held investments to their estimated acquisition-date fair value of $79 million and recorded a gain of $39 million in other, net in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations during the second quarter of 2012. We measured the fair values of the previously held investments based on the liquidation preferences and priority of the equity interests and debt, including accrued interest. In addition, we prepaid the assumed debt obligation of Cameron for approximately $9 million during the second quarter of 2012.
The following summarizes the aggregate purchase price allocation for the 2012 acquisitions as of December 31, 2012 (in millions):
|
| | | |
| Goodwill (non-deductible for tax purposes) | $ | 566 |
|
| Amortizable intangible assets | 189 |
|
| Indefinite-lived intangible assets | 132 |
|
| Other net assets | 15 |
|
| Deferred income taxes | 20 |
|
| | $ | 922 |
|
We allocated a portion of the final purchase price to specific intangible asset categories as of the respective acquisition dates as follows:
|
| | | | | | | |
| | Amount
Assigned (in millions) | | Weighted
Average
Amortization
Period (in years) | | Range of Risk-
Adjusted Discount
Rates used in
Purchase Price
Allocation |
| Amortizable intangible assets: | | | | | |
| Technology-related | $ | 187 |
| | 8 | | 14% to 28% |
| Customer relationships | 2 |
| | 5 | | 14% |
| Indefinite-lived intangible assets: | | | | | |
| In-process research and development | 132 |
| | | | 14% to 28% |
| | $ | 321 |
| | | | |
Our technology-related intangible assets consist of technical processes, intellectual property, and institutional understanding with respect to products and processes that we will leverage in future products or processes and will carry forward from one product generation to the next. The technology-related intangible assets are being amortized on a straight-line basis over their assigned estimated useful lives. In-process research and development represents the estimated fair value of acquired in-process research and development projects which have not yet reached technological feasibility.
2011 Acquisitions
Sadra Medical, Inc.
On January 4, 2011, we completed the acquisition of the remaining fully diluted equity of Sadra Medical, Inc. (Sadra). Prior to the acquisition, we held a 14 percent equity ownership in Sadra. Sadra is developing a fully repositionable and retrievable device for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to treat patients with severe aortic stenosis. The Lotus™ Valve System consists of a stent-mounted tissue valve prosthesis and catheter delivery system for guidance and placement of the valve. The low-profile delivery system and introducer sheath are designed to enable accurate positioning, repositioning and retrieval at any time prior to release of the aortic valve implant. The acquisition was intended to broaden and diversify our product portfolio by expanding into the structural heart market. In October 2013, we received CE Mark approval and launched the Lotus™ Valve System in Europe.
We have integrated the operations of the Sadra business into our Interventional Cardiology business. Total consideration included a net cash payment of $193 million at closing to acquire the remaining 86 percent of Sadra and certain regulatory- and revenue-based milestones.
Intelect Medical, Inc.
On January 5, 2011, we completed the acquisition of the remaining fully diluted equity of Intelect Medical, Inc. (Intelect). Prior to the acquisition, we held a 15 percent equity ownership in Intelect. Intelect is developing advanced visualization and programming technology for deep-brain stimulation. We have integrated the operations of the Intelect business into our Neuromodulation business. The acquisition was intended to leverage the core architecture of the VerciseTM platform and advance our technology in the field of deep-brain stimulation. In May 2013, we received CE Mark approval for the GUIDETM DBS System. We paid $60 million at the closing of the transaction using cash on hand to acquire the remaining 85 percent of Intelect. There is no contingent consideration related to the Intelect acquisition.
ReVascular Therapeutics, Inc.
On February 15, 2011, we completed the acquisition of 100 percent of the fully diluted equity of ReVascular Therapeutics, Inc. (RVT). RVT has developed the TRUEPATH™ intraluminal chronic total occlusion crossing device enabling endovascular treatment in cases that typically cannot be treated with standard endovascular devices. This acquisition complements our portfolio of devices for lower extremity peripheral artery disease and we have integrated the operations of RVT into our Peripheral Interventions business. Total consideration included a cash payment of $19 million at closing of the transaction and potential payments of up to $16 million through 2014 that are contingent upon the achievement of certain regulatory- and commercialization-based milestones and revenue.
Atritech, Inc.
On March 3, 2011, we completed the acquisition of 100 percent of the fully diluted equity of Atritech, Inc. (Atritech). Atritech has developed a device designed to close the left atrial appendage of the heart. The WATCHMAN® Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology, developed by Atritech, is the first device proven to offer an alternative to anticoagulant drugs for patients with atrial fibrillation and at high risk for stroke, and is marketed in CE Mark countries. The acquisition was intended to broaden our portfolio of less-invasive devices for cardiovascular care by expanding into the areas of atrial fibrillation and structural heart therapy. We have integrated the operations of the Atritech business and are leveraging expertise from both our Electrophysiology and Interventional Cardiology divisions in the commercialization of the WATCHMAN® device. Total consideration included a net cash payment of $98 million at closing of the transaction and potential payments up to $275 million through 2015 that are contingent upon achievement of certain regulatory-based milestones and revenue.
Purchase Price Allocation
The components of the aggregate purchase price as of the acquisition date for acquisitions consummated in 2011 are as follows (in millions):
|
| | | |
| Cash, net of cash acquired | $ | 370 |
|
| Fair value of contingent consideration | 287 |
|
| Prior investments | 55 |
|
| | $ | 712 |
|
Prior to our acquisition of the remaining equity ownership in Sadra and Intelect, we held equity interests in these companies of 14 percent and 15 percent, respectively, carried at an aggregate value of $11 million, and a note receivable carried at a value of $6 million. As a result of re-measuring these previously held investments to fair value, estimated at $55 million as of the respective acquisition dates, we recorded a gain of $38 million in other, net in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations during the first quarter of 2011. We measured the fair values of the previously held investments based on a pro-rata allocation of the consideration paid for the controlling interests acquired less an estimated minority interest discount in certain circumstances after considering previous financing rounds and liquidation preferences of the equity interests.
The following summarizes the aggregate purchase price allocation for the 2011 acquisitions (in millions):
|
| | | |
| Goodwill (non-deductible for tax purposes) | $ | 266 |
|
| Amortizable intangible assets | 97 |
|
| Indefinite-lived intangible assets | 470 |
|
| Deferred income taxes | (121 | ) |
| | $ | 712 |
|
We allocated the aggregate purchase price to specific intangible asset categories as follows:
|
| | | | | | | |
| | Amount
Assigned (in millions) | | Weighted
Average
Amortization
Period (in years) | | Range of Risk-
Adjusted Discount
Rates used in
Purchase Price
Allocation |
| Amortizable intangible assets | | | | | |
| Technology-related | $ | 97 |
| | 7 | | 23% - 25% |
| Indefinite-lived intangible assets | | | | | |
| Purchased research and development | 470 |
| | | | 23% - 30% |
| | $ | 567 |
| | | | |
Contingent Consideration
Certain of our acquisitions involve contingent consideration arrangements. Payment of additional consideration is generally contingent on the acquired company reaching certain performance milestones, including attaining specified revenue levels, achieving product development targets and/or obtaining regulatory approvals. In accordance with U.S. GAAP, we recognize a liability equal to the fair value of the contingent payments we expect to make as of the acquisition date. We re-measure this liability each reporting period and record changes in the fair value through a separate line item within our consolidated statements of operations.
ChangesWe recorded a net expense related to the changes in fair value of our contingent consideration liabilityliabilities of $29 million during 2016, net expense related to the changes in fair value of our contingent consideration liabilities of $123 million during 2015, and a net benefit related to the change in fair value of our contingent consideration liabilities of $85 million during 2014. We made contingent consideration payments of $122 million in 2016, $213 million in 2015 and $137 million in 2014.
Changes in the fair value of our contingent consideration liabilities were as follows (in millions):
|
| | | |
| Balance as of December 31, 2011 | $ | (358 | ) |
| Amounts recorded related to new acquisitions | (467 | ) |
| Other amounts recorded related to prior acquisitions | 2 |
|
| Net fair value adjustments | 6 |
|
| Payments made | 154 |
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2012 | $ | (663 | ) |
| Amounts recorded related to new acquisitions | — |
|
| Other amounts recorded related to prior acquisitions | 1 |
|
| Net fair value adjustments | (4 | ) |
| Payments made | 165 |
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2013 | $ | (501 | ) |
|
| | | |
| Balance as of December 31, 2014 | $ | 274 |
|
| Amounts recorded related to new acquisitions | 63 |
|
| Other amounts recorded related to prior acquisitions | (1 | ) |
| Fair value adjustment | 123 |
|
| Contingent payments related to prior period acquisition | (213 | ) |
| Balance as of December 31, 2015 | $ | 246 |
|
| Amounts recorded related to new acquisitions | 50 |
|
| Other amounts recorded related to prior acquisitions | 1 |
|
| Fair value adjustment | 29 |
|
| Contingent payments related to prior period acquisition | (122 | ) |
| Balance as of December 31, 2016 | $ | 204 |
|
As of December 31, 2013,2016, the maximum amount of future contingent consideration (undiscounted) that we could be required to make associated withpay was approximately $1.308 billion.
Contingent consideration liabilities are remeasured to fair value each reporting period using projected revenues, discount rates, probabilities of payment and projected payment dates. The recurring Level 3 fair value measurements of our acquisitions is approximately $2.1 billion.contingent consideration liabilities include the following significant unobservable inputs:
|
| | | | |
| Contingent Consideration Liability | Fair Value as of December 31, 2016 | Valuation Technique | Unobservable Input | Range |
| R&D and Commercialization-based Milestone | $46 million | Discounted Cash Flow | Discount Rate | 2% - 3% |
| Projected Year of Payment | 2017 - 2021 |
| Revenue-based Payments | $60 million | Discounted Cash Flow | Discount Rate | 11% - 15% |
| Projected Year of Payment | 2017 - 2026 |
| $98 million | Monte Carlo | Revenue Volatility | 25% |
| Risk Free Rate | LIBOR Term and Cost of Debt Structure |
| Projected Year of Payment | 2017 - 2022 |
Increases or decreases in the fair value of our contingent consideration liability can result from changes in discount periods and rates, as well as changes in the timing and amount of revenue estimates or in the timing or likelihood of achieving regulatory-, revenue- orR&D, regulatory and commercialization-based, milestones. The recurring Level 3 fair value measurements of our contingent consideration liability include the following significant unobservable inputs:
|
| | | | |
Contingent Consideration Liability | Fair Value as of December 31, 2013 | Valuation Technique | Unobservable Input | Range |
R&D, Regulatory and Commercialization-based Milestones | $84 million | Probability Weighted Discounted Cash Flow | Discount Rate | 0.8% - 1.0% |
Probability of Payment | 85% |
Projected Year of Payment | 2014 |
Revenue-based Payments | $126 million | Discounted Cash Flow | Discount Rate | 12% - 15% |
Probability of Payment | 0% - 100% |
Projected Year of Payment | 2014 - 2017 |
$291 million | Monte Carlo | Revenue Volatility | 13% - 26% |
Risk Free Rate | LIBOR Term Structure |
Projected Year of Payment | 2014-2018 |
Contingent consideration liabilities are remeasured to fair value each reporting period using projected revenues, discount rates, probabilities of payment and projected payment dates.revenue-based milestones. Projected contingent payment amounts related to some of our R&D, regulatory-regulatory and commercialization-based milestones and certain revenue-based milestones are discounted back to the current period using a discounted cash flow (DCF) model. Other revenue-based payments are valued using a monte carloMonte Carlo valuation model, which simulates future revenues during the earn out-period using management's best estimates. Projected revenues are based on our most recent internal operational budgets and long-range strategic plans. Increases in projected revenues and probabilities of payment may result in higher fair value measurements. Increases in discount rates and the time to payment may result in lower fair value measurements. Increases or decreases in any of those inputs together, or in isolation, may result in a significantly lower or higher fair value measurement.
Strategic Investments
On April 30, 2015, we acquired a 27 percent ownership interest in Preventice Solutions, Inc. (Preventice), which includes 18.5 percent of Preventice's common stock. Preventice is a privately-held company headquartered in Minneapolis, MN, and a leading developer of mobile health solutions and services. In addition to the equity agreement, we entered into a commercial agreement with Preventice, under which we have become Preventice’s exclusive, worldwide sales and marketing representative. In October 2016, we notified Preventice of our intent to terminate the commercial agreement and will transition the sales force back to Preventice in 2017 under the terms of the agreement.
On April 13, 2015, we acquired 25 percent of the common stock of Frankenman Medical Equipment Company (Frankenman). Frankenman is a privately-held company headquartered in Suzhou, China, and is a local market leader in surgical staplers. Additionally, we entered into co-promotional and co-selling agreements with Frankenman to commercialize selected products jointly in China. We believe this alliance will enable us to reach more clinicians and treat more patients in China by providing access to training on less invasive endoscopic technologies with clinical and economic benefits.
We are accounting for our investments in Preventice and Frankenman, as well as certain of our other strategic investments, as equity method investments, in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 323.
The aggregate carrying amount of our strategic investments as of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, were comprised of the following categories:
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | As of |
| | | December 31, 2016 | December 31, 2015 |
| Equity method investments | | $ | 265 |
| $ | 173 |
|
| Cost method investments | | 20 |
| 45 |
|
| Available-for-sale securities | | 20 |
| — |
|
| Notes receivable | | 42 |
| 30 |
|
| | | $ | 347 |
| $ | 248 |
|
As of December 31, 2016, the book value of our equity method investments exceeded our share of the book value of the investees’ underlying net assets by approximately $200 million, which represents amortizable intangible assets and in-process research and development, corresponding deferred tax liabilities, and goodwill. The net losses from our equity method adjustments, presented within the Other, net caption of our consolidated statement of operations were $17 million in 2016 and were immaterial in 2015 and 2014.
NOTE C – DIVESTITURES
In January 2011, we closed the sale of our Neurovascular business to Stryker Corporation for a purchase price of $1.500$1.500 billion in cash. We received $1.450 billion during 2011, including an upfront paymentAt the time of $1.426 billion, and $24 million which was placed into escrow and released throughout 2011 upon the completion of local closings in certain foreign jurisdictions. We received an additional $10 million during 2012, $30 million during the second quarter of 2013 and we received the final $10 million of consideration in January 2014. Duedivestiture, due to our continuing involvement in the operations of the Neurovascular business following the divestiture,transaction, the divestiture did not meet the criteria for presentation as a discontinued operation. We recorded a gain of $38 million ($26 million after-tax) during 2013, a gain of $15 million ($12 million after tax) during 2012 and a gain of $778 million ($545 million after-tax) during 2011 associated with the transaction.
We recorded revenue related to the Neurovascular business following its divestiture of $58 million in 2013, $122 million in 2012 and $141 million in 2011. Our sales related to our divested Neurovascular business have declined as the various transition services and supply agreements have terminated.
We recorded a gain of $12 million during 2014 associated with the transaction and we recorded revenue related to the Neurovascular business following its divestiture of $4 million in 2014.
NOTE D – GOODWILL AND OTHER INTANGIBLE ASSETS
The gross carrying amount of goodwill and other intangible assets and the related accumulated amortization for intangible assets subject to amortization and accumulated write-offs of goodwill as of December 31, 20132016 and 2012 is as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | As of December 31, 2013 | | As of December 31, 2012 |
| | | Gross Carrying | | Accumulated Amortization/ | | Gross Carrying | | Accumulated Amortization/ |
| (in millions) | | Amount | | Write-offs | | Amount | | Write-offs |
| Amortizable intangible assets | | | | | | | | |
| Technology-related | | $ | 8,272 |
| | $ | (3,342 | ) | | $ | 8,020 |
| | $ | (3,005 | ) |
| Patents | | 513 |
| | (326 | ) | | 559 |
| | (352 | ) |
| Other intangible assets | | 845 |
| | (479 | ) | | 810 |
| | (428 | ) |
| | | $ | 9,630 |
| | $ | (4,147 | ) | | $ | 9,389 |
| | $ | (3,785 | ) |
| Unamortizable intangible assets | | | | | | | | |
| Goodwill | | $ | 15,593 |
| | $ | (9,900 | ) | | $ | 15,450 |
| | $ | (9,477 | ) |
| Technology-related | | 197 |
| | | | 242 |
| | |
| | | $ | 15,790 |
| | $ | (9,900 | ) | | $ | 15,692 |
| | $ | (9,477 | ) |
In addition, we had $270 million and $443 million of in-process research and development intangible assets as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively. During the third quarter of 2013, we reclassified approximately $45 million of core technology not previously subject to amortization to amortizable intangible assets due to projected changes in the market for this technology. We tested the intangible asset for impairment prior to this reclassification and determined that the asset was not impaired.
2013 Reorganization
We assess goodwill for impairment at the reporting unit level, which is defined as an operating segment or one level below an operating segment, referred to as a component. Effective as of January 1, 2013, we reorganized our business from geographic regions to fully operationalized global business units. Our reorganization changed our reporting structure and changed the composition of our reporting units for goodwill impairment testing purposes. Following the reorganization, based on information regularly reviewed by our chief operating decision maker, we have three new global reportable segments consisting of: Cardiovascular, Rhythm Management, and MedSurg. We determined our new global reporting units by identifying our operating segments and assessing whether any components of these segments constituted a business for which discrete financial information is available and whether segment management regularly reviews the operating results of any components. Through this process, we identified the following new global reporting units effective as of January 1, 2013: Interventional Cardiology, Peripheral Interventions, Cardiac Rhythm Management, Electrophysiology, Endoscopy, Urology and Women's Health, and Neuromodulation. The discussion below for 2013 relates to our global business reporting units and for 2012 and prior periods, relates to our former regional reporting units. For our 2012 and 2011 assessments, we identified (i) six reporting units within the U.S., which included our CRM, Neuromodulation, Endoscopy, Urology and Women's Health, Electrophysiology, and Cardiovascular (consisting of Interventional Cardiology and Peripheral Interventions) franchises, and (ii) four international reporting units, including EMEA, Japan, Asia Pacific and the Americas.
To determine the amount of goodwill within our new global reporting units, on a relative fair value basis we reallocated $1.764 billion of goodwill previously allocated to our former Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA), Asia Pacific, Japan, and Americas international reporting units to our new global reporting units. In addition, we reallocated the goodwill previously allocated to the former U.S. divisional reporting units to each respective new global reporting unit, with the exception of the goodwill allocated to the former U.S. Cardiovascular reporting unit. The $2.380 billion of goodwill allocated to the former U.S. Cardiovascular reporting unit was reallocated between the new global Interventional Cardiology and global Peripheral Interventions reporting units on a relative fair value basis.
The following represents our goodwill balance by new global reportable segment. We restated the prior period information to conform to the current presentation:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| (in millions) | | Cardiovascular | | Rhythm Management | | MedSurg | | Total |
| Balance as of December 31, 2011 | | $ | 4,542 |
| | $ | 1,661 |
| | $ | 3,558 |
| | $ | 9,761 |
|
| Purchase price adjustments | | — |
| | (1 | ) | | — |
| | (1 | ) |
| Goodwill acquired | | 186 |
| | 327 |
| | 50 |
| | 563 |
|
| Goodwill written off | | (1,479 | ) | | (1,410 | ) | | (1,461 | ) | | (4,350 | ) |
| Balance as of December 31, 2012 | | $ | 3,249 |
| | $ | 577 |
| | $ | 2,147 |
| | $ | 5,973 |
|
| Purchase price adjustments | | 3 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3 |
|
| Goodwill acquired | | — |
| | 140 |
| | — |
| | 140 |
|
| Goodwill written off | | — |
| | (423 | ) | | — |
| | (423 | ) |
| Balance as of December 31, 2013 | | $ | 3,252 |
| | $ | 294 |
| | $ | 2,147 |
| | $ | 5,693 |
|
The 2012 and 2013 purchase price adjustments relate primarily to adjustments in taxes payable and deferred income taxes, including changes in the liability for unrecognized tax benefits.
Goodwill Impairment Testing and Charges
2013 Charges
We test our goodwill balances during the second quarter of each year for impairment, or more frequently if indicators2015 are present or changes in circumstances suggest that impairment may exist. Following our reorganization from regions to global business units and our reallocation of goodwill on a relative fair value basis, we conducted the first step of the goodwill impairment test for all new global reporting units as of January 1, 2013. The first step requires a comparison of the carrying value of the reporting units to the fair value of these units. The fair value of each new global reporting unit exceeded its carrying value, with the exception of the global CRM reporting unit. The global CRM reporting unit carrying value exceeded its fair value primarily due to the carrying value of its amortizable intangible assets. The carrying value of amortizable intangible assets allocated to the global CRM reporting unit was $4.636 billion as of January 1, 2013. In accordance with ASC Topic 350, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other, we tested the global CRM amortizable intangible assets for impairment in conjunction with the interim goodwill impairment test of our global CRM reporting unit. We performed the impairment analysis of the amortizable intangible assets on an undiscounted cash flow basis, and concluded that these assets were not impaired.
The second step of the goodwill impairment test compares the estimated fair value of a reporting unit’s goodwill to its carrying value. We performed the second step of the goodwill impairment test on the global CRM reporting unit and recorded a non-cash goodwill impairment charge of $423 million ($421 million after-tax) to write-down the goodwill to its implied fair value as of January 1, 2013. The primary driver of this impairment charge was our reorganization from geographic regions to global business units as of January 1, 2013, which changed the composition of our reporting units. As a result of the reorganization, any goodwill allocated to the global CRM reporting unit was no longer supported by the cash flows of other businesses. Under our former reporting unit structure, the goodwill allocated to our regional reporting units was supported by the cash flows from all businesses in each international region. The hypothetical tax structure of the global CRM business and the global CRM business discount rate applied were also contributing factors to the goodwill impairment charge. We finalized the second step of the global CRM goodwill impairment test during the second quarter of 2013, in accordance with ASC Topic 350, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other, and determined that no adjustments to the charge were required. After recording the impairment charge in the first quarter of 2013, there was no remaining goodwill allocated to the global CRM reporting unit.
The goodwill impairment charge taken during the first quarter of 2013 was determined on a global CRM basis pursuant to our new organizational structure. We used the income approach, specifically the DCF method, to derive the fair value of the global CRM reporting unit. We completed a DCF model associated with our new global CRM business, including the amount and timing of future expected cash flows, tax attributes, the terminal value growth rate of approximately two percent and the appropriate market-participant risk-adjusted weighted average cost of capital (WACC) of approximately 12 percent.
In the second quarter of 2013, we performed our annual goodwill impairment test for all of our reporting units. In conjunction with our annual test, the fair value of each reporting unit exceeded its carrying value except CRM, for which no goodwill remains. Therefore, it was deemed not necessary to proceed to the second step of the impairment test. We have identified our global Neuromodulation reporting unit as being at higher risk of potential failure of the first step of the goodwill impairment test in future reporting periods. Our global Neuromodulation reporting unit holds $1.356 billion of allocated goodwill. The level of excess fair value over carrying value for this reporting unit identified during our annual goodwill impairment test was approximately 16 percent. Future changes in our reporting units or in the structure of our business as a result of future reorganizations, acquisitions or divestitures of assets or businesses could result in future impairments of goodwill within our reporting units including global CRM. Further, the recoverability of our CRM-related amortizable intangibles ($4.374 billion globally as of December 31, 2013) is sensitive to future cash flow assumptions and our global CRM business performance. The $4.374 billion of CRM-related amortizable intangibles are at higher risk of potential failure of the first step of the amortizable intangible recoverability test in future reporting periods. An impairment of a material portion of our CRM-related amortizable intangibles carrying value would occur if the second step of the amortizable intangible test is required in a future reporting period. Refer to Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates within our Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations contained in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a discussion of key assumptions used in our testing.
On a quarterly basis, we monitor the key drivers of fair value to detect events or other changes that would warrant an interim impairment test of our goodwill and intangible assets. The key variables that drive the cash flows of our reporting units and amortizable intangibles are estimated revenue growth rates and levels of profitability. Terminal value growth rate assumptions, as well as the WACC rate applied are additional key variables for reporting unit cash flows. These assumptions are subject to uncertainty, including our ability to grow revenue and improve profitability levels. Relatively small declines in the future performance and cash flows of a reporting unit or asset group or small changes in other key assumptions may result in the recognition of significant asset impairment charges. For example, keeping all other variables constant, an increase in the WACC applied of 80 basis points or a 200 basis point decrease in the terminal value growth rate would require that we perform the second step of the goodwill impairment test for the global Neuromodulation reporting unit. The estimates used for our future cash flows and discount rates represent management's best estimates, which we believe to be reasonable, but future declines in business performance may impair the recoverability of our goodwill and intangible asset balances.
Future events that could have a negative impact on the levels of excess fair value over carrying value of our reporting units and/or amortizable intangible assets include, but are not limited to:
decreases in estimated market sizes or market growth rates due to greater-than-expected declines in procedural volumes, pricing pressures, reductions in reimbursement levels, product actions, and/or competitive or disruptive technology developments;
declines in our market share and penetration assumptions due to increased competition, an inability to develop or launch new and next-generation products and technology features in line with our commercialization strategies, and market and/or regulatory conditions that may cause significant launch delays or product recalls;
decreases in our forecasted profitability due to an inability to successfully implement and achieve timely and sustainable cost improvement measures consistent with our expectations, increases in our market-participant tax rate, and/or changes in tax laws;
negative developments in intellectual property litigation that may impact our ability to market certain products or increase our costs to sell certain products;
the level of success of on-going and future research and development efforts, including those related to recent acquisitions, and increases in the research and development costs necessary to obtain regulatory approvals and launch new products;
the level of success in managing the growth of acquired companies, achieving sustained profitability consistent with our expectations, establishing government and third-party payer reimbursement, supplying the market, and increases in the costs and time necessary to integrate acquired businesses into our operations successfully;
changes in our reporting units or in the structure of our business as a result of future reorganizations, acquisitions or divestitures of assets or businesses; and
increases in our market-participant risk-adjusted WACC.
Negative changes in one or more of these factors, among others, could result in additional impairment charges.
2012 Charges
In the second quarter of 2012, we performed our annual goodwill impairment test for all of our reporting units and concluded that the goodwill within our former EMEA reporting unit was impaired and recorded a charge of $3.602 billion ($3.579 billion after-tax). As a result of revised estimates developed during our annual strategic planning process and analysis performed in conjunction with our annual goodwill impairment test, we concluded that the revenue growth rates projected for the EMEA reporting unit were slightly lower than our previous estimates primarily driven by macro-economic factors and our performance in the European market. We updated short-term operating projections based on our most recent strategic plan for EMEA prepared by management. We reduced the EMEA long-term growth rates and terminal value growth rate projections and increased the discount rate within our 15-year DCF model for EMEA by approximately 100 basis points due to increased risk associated with our projections in this market primarily as a result of economic uncertainty in Europe. In addition, our expectations for future growth and profitability were lowered as compared to our previous estimates and reflected declines in average selling prices and volume pressures due to austerity measures. We finalized the second step of the EMEA goodwill impairment test during the third quarter of 2012, in accordance with ASC Topic 350, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other, and there were no adjustments to the charge upon finalization.
In the third quarter of 2012, we performed an interim goodwill impairment test and recorded a non-cash $748 million (pre- and after-tax) charge associated with our former U.S. Cardiac Rhythm Management (U.S. CRM) reporting unit, primarily driven by a reduction in the estimated size of the U.S. CRM market, related adjustments to our business and other competitive factors, which led to lower projected U.S. CRM results compared to prior forecasts. The U.S. CRM market is dynamic, highly competitive and difficult to forecast; in the third quarter of 2012, we lowered our projections for the U.S. CRM market size and our future revenue levels within this market, primarily to reflect changes in expectations of average selling prices and unit growth, adjustments to our business and other competitive factors. The increased pricing pressure and lower unit volumes were primarily due to physician alignment with hospitals, efforts to reduce health care costs, focus on appropriate device usage, replacement volumes and competition, and were more impactful to the U.S. CRM business than previously estimated. In addition, we adjusted certain elements of our business and shifted investments to focus on areas expected to provide the highest future growth and financial return. As a result of these factors, we reduced the compound annual revenue growth rate of our 15 year DCF model for the U.S. CRM reporting unit by approximately 250 basis points. We finalized the second step of the U.S. CRM goodwill impairment test during the fourth quarter of 2012, in accordance with ASC Topic 350, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other, and there were no adjustments to the charge upon finalization.
2011 Charge
Based on market information that became available to us toward the end of the first quarter of 2011, we concluded that there was a reduction in the estimated size of the U.S. ICD market, which led to lower projected U.S. CRM results compared to prior forecasts and created an indication of potential impairment of the goodwill balance attributable to our former U.S. CRM business unit. Therefore, we performed an interim impairment test in accordance with U.S. GAAP and our accounting policies and recorded a non-deductible goodwill impairment charge of $697 million, on both a pre-tax and after-tax basis, associated with this business unit during the first quarter of 2011.
The following is a rollforward of accumulated goodwill write-offs by global reportable segment:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| (in millions) | | Cardiovascular | | Rhythm Management | | MedSurg | | Total |
| Accumulated write-offs as of December 31, 2011 | | $ | — |
| | $ | (5,127 | ) | | $ | — |
| | (5,127 | ) |
| Goodwill written off | | (1,479 | ) | | (1,410 | ) | | (1,461 | ) | | (4,350 | ) |
| Accumulated write-offs as of December 31, 2012 | | $ | (1,479 | ) | | $ | (6,537 | ) | | (1,461 | ) | | $ | (9,477 | ) |
| Goodwill written off | | — |
| | (423 | ) | | — |
| | (423 | ) |
| Accumulated write-offs as of December 31, 2013 | | $ | (1,479 | ) | | $ | (6,960 | ) | | $ | (1,461 | ) | | $ | (9,900 | ) |
Intangible Asset Impairment Charges
On a quarterly basis, we monitor for events or other potential indicators of impairment that would warrant an interim impairment test of our intangible assets. The recoverability of our CRM-related amortizable intangibles ($4.374 billion globally as of December 31, 2013) are sensitive to changes in future cash flow assumptions and our global CRM business performance. The $4.374 billion of CRM-related amortizable intangibles are at higher risk of potential failure of the first step of the amortizable intangible recoverability test in future reporting periods. An impairment of a material portion of our CRM-related amortizable intangibles carrying value would occur if the second step of the amortizable intangible test is required in a future reporting period. See Goodwill Impairment Charges above for discussion of future events that could have a negative impact on the levels of excess fair value over carrying value of our CRM-related amortizable intangible assets.
2013 Charges
During the third quarter of 2013, we performed our annual impairment test of all in-process research and development projects, and our indefinite lived core technology assets, and recorded no impairments based on the results of our testing.
During the second quarter of 2013 as a result of revised estimates developed in conjunction with our annual strategic planning process and annual goodwill impairment test, we performed an interim impairment test of our in-process research and development projects associated with certain of our acquisitions. Based on the results of our impairment analyses, we revised our expectations of the market size related to Sadra Medical, Inc. (Sadra), and the resulting timing and amount of future revenue and cash flows associated with the technology acquired from Sadra. As a result of these changes, we recorded pre-tax impairment charges of $51 million to write-down the balance of these intangible assets to their fair value during the second quarter of 2013. During the second quarter of 2013, we also recorded an additional $2 million intangible asset impairment charge associated with changes in the amount of the expected cash flows related to certain other acquired in-process research and development projects.
In-process research and development fair value is measured using projected revenues, projected expenses, discount rates, and
probability of expected launch. The nonrecurring Level 3 fair value measurements of the impairment analysis performed in the second quarter of 2013 included the following significant unobservable inputs:
|
| | | | |
Intangible Asset | Fair Value as of Second Quarter 2013 | Valuation Technique | Unobservable Input | Rate |
In-Process R&D | $178 million | Income Approach - Excess Earnings Method | Discount Rate | 16.5% |
2012 Charges
During the third quarter of 2012, we performed our annual impairment test of all in-process research and development projects, and our indefinite lived core technology assets. Based on the results of our annual test, we recorded total impairment charges of $13 million ($10 million after-tax) to write-down the balances of certain in-process projects to their fair value. These charges were primarily due to increased expectations in the cost to bring an in-process project to market in a certain geographic region and lower future revenue expectations associated with an in-process project.
In-process research and development fair value is measured using projected revenues, projected expenses, discount rates, and probability of expected launch. The nonrecurring Level 3 fair value measurements of the impairment charges taken in the third quarter of 2012 included the following significant unobservable inputs:
|
| | | | |
Intangible Asset | Fair Value as of Third Quarter 2012 | Valuation Technique | Unobservable Input | Range |
In-Process R&D | $26 million | Income Approach - Excess Earnings Method | Discount Rate | 20%-25% |
During the second quarter of 2012, as a result of revised estimates developed in conjunction with our annual strategic planning process and annual goodwill impairment test, we performed an interim impairment test of our in-process research and development projects associated with our acquisition of Sadra Medical, Inc. Based on our impairment analysis, we revised our expectations of the required effort, time and cost involved in completing the in-process projects and bringing the related products to market. As a result of these changes, we recorded an impairment charge of $129 million ($110 million after-tax) to write-down the balance of these intangible assets to their fair value during the second quarter of 2012.
The nonrecurring Level 3 fair value measurements of the impairment charges taken in the second quarter of 2012 included the following significant unobservable inputs:
|
| | | | |
Intangible Asset | Fair Value as of Second Quarter 2012 | Valuation Technique | Unobservable Input | Range |
In-Process R&D | $184 million | Income Approach - Excess Earnings Method | Discount Rate | 20% |
2011 Charges
During the third quarter of 2011, we recorded a $9 million intangible asset impairment charge attributable to lower projected cash flows associated with certain technologies. During the second quarter of 2011, we recorded a $12 million intangible asset impairment charge associated with changes in the timing and amount of the expected cash flows related to certain in-process research and development projects.
The intangible asset category and associated write downs recorded in 2013, 2012 and 2011 were as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | As of December 31, 2016 | | As of December 31, 2015 |
| | | Year Ended December 31, | | Gross Carrying | | Accumulated Amortization/ | | Gross Carrying | | Accumulated Amortization/ |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | Amount | | Write-offs | | Amount | | Write-offs |
| Amortizable intangible assets | | | | | | | | | |
| Technology-related | | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 9 |
| | $ | 9,123 |
| | $ | (4,468 | ) | | $ | 8,948 |
| | $ | (4,054 | ) |
| Purchased research and development | | 53 |
| | 142 |
| | 12 |
| |
| Patents | | | 529 |
| | (374 | ) | | 520 |
| | (358 | ) |
| Other intangible assets | | | 1,583 |
| | (722 | ) | | 1,529 |
| | (610 | ) |
| | | $ | 53 |
| | 142 |
| | $ | 21 |
| | $ | 11,235 |
| | $ | (5,564 | ) | | $ | 10,997 |
| | $ | (5,022 | ) |
| Unamortizable intangible assets | | | | | | | | | |
| Goodwill | | | $ | 16,578 |
| | $ | (9,900 | ) | | $ | 16,373 |
| | $ | (9,900 | ) |
| In-process research and development (IPR&D) | | | 92 |
| | — |
| | 99 |
| | — |
|
| Technology-related | | | 120 |
| | — |
| | 120 |
| | — |
|
| | | | $ | 16,790 |
| | $ | (9,900 | ) | | $ | 16,592 |
| | $ | (9,900 | ) |
Estimated amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years based upon our intangible asset portfolio as of December 31, 2013 is as follows:
|
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | Estimated Amortization Expense |
| Fiscal Year | | (in millions) |
| |
| 2014 | | $ | 433 |
|
| 2015 | | 441 |
|
| 2016 | | 441 |
|
| 2017 | | 440 |
|
| 2018 | | 441 |
|
Our technology-related intangible assets that are not subject to amortization represent technical processes, intellectual property and/or institutional understanding acquired through business combinations that are fundamental to the on-going operations of our business and have no limit to their useful life. Our technology-related intangible assets that are not subject to amortization are comprised primarily of certain acquired balloon and other technology, which is foundational to our continuing operations within the Cardiovascular market and other markets within interventional medicine. We assess our indefinite-lived intangible assets at least annually for impairment and reassess their classification as indefinite-lived assets. We assess qualitative factors to determine whether the existence of events and circumstances indicate that it is more likely than not that our indefinite-lived intangible assets are impaired. If we conclude that it is more likely than not that the asset is impaired, we then determine the fair value of the intangible asset and perform the quantitative impairment test by comparing the fair value with the carrying value in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 350.
The following represents our goodwill balance by global reportable segment:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| (in millions) | | Cardiovascular | | Rhythm Management | | MedSurg | | Total |
| Balance as of December 31, 2014 | | $ | 3,426 |
| | $ | 290 |
| | $ | 2,182 |
| | $ | 5,898 |
|
| Purchase price adjustments | | 2 |
| | 2 |
| | (2 | ) | | 2 |
|
| Goodwill acquired | | 23 |
| | — |
| | 550 |
| | 573 |
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2015 | | $ | 3,451 |
| | $ | 292 |
| | $ | 2,730 |
| | $ | 6,473 |
|
| Purchase price adjustments | | — |
| | (2 | ) | | (1 | ) | | (3 | ) |
| Goodwill acquired | | 62 |
| | — |
| | 146 |
| | 208 |
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2016 | | $ | 3,513 |
| | $ | 290 |
| | $ | 2,875 |
| | $ | 6,678 |
|
The 2016 and 2015 purchase price adjustments relate primarily to adjustments in taxes payable and deferred income taxes, including changes in the liability for unrecognized tax benefits.
Goodwill Impairment Testing
We test our goodwill balances during the second quarter of each year for impairment, or more frequently if indicators are present or changes in circumstances suggest that impairment may exist.
In performing the goodwill impairment assessment, we utilize both the optional qualitative assessment and the two-step approach prescribed under FASB ASC Topic 350Intangibles-Goodwill and Other.. Beginning in 2016, the qualitative assessment was used for testing certain reporting units where fair value has historically exceeded the carrying value by greater than 100%. All other reporting units were tested using the two-step approach. In 2016, for all reporting units tested using the optional qualitative assessment, we concluded that it was not necessary to perform the first step of the two-step goodwill test. For all reporting units tested under the two step approach, we concluded that the fair value of each reporting unit exceeded its carrying value. Because our global Electrophysiology reporting
unit was identified as being at higher risk of potential goodwill impairment during our 2015 annual test, it was tested for impairment on a stand-alone basis in the second quarter of 2016, immediately prior to aggregating it with our global Cardiac Rhythm Management reporting unit. The fair value of the stand-alone global Electrophysiology reporting unit exceeded the carrying value by approximately 36 percent. In comparison, the global Electrophysiology reporting unit had excess fair value of approximately 28 percent as of our 2015 annual test. As of the date of our 2016 annual goodwill impairment test, the aggregated global Electrophysiology and Cardiac Rhythm Management operating segment (Rhythm Management) had excess fair value over carrying value of approximately 70 percent and held $292 million of allocated goodwill. As such, it was not deemed at higher risk of future impairment. Changes in our reporting units or in the structure of our business as a result of future reorganizations, acquisitions or divestitures of assets or businesses could result in future impairments of goodwill within our reporting units.
Refer to Note A - Significant Accounting Policies and Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates within Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations contained in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a discussion of key assumptions used in our testing.
On a quarterly basis, we monitor the key drivers of fair value to detect events or other changes that would warrant an interim impairment test of our goodwill. The key variables that drive the cash flows of our reporting units and amortizable intangibles are estimated revenue growth rates and levels of profitability. Terminal value growth rate assumptions, as well as the weighted average cost of capital (WACC) rate applied, are additional key variables for reporting unit cash flows. These assumptions are subject to uncertainty, including our ability to grow revenue and improve profitability levels. Relatively small declines in the future performance and cash flows of a reporting unit or asset group or small changes in other key assumptions may result in the recognition of significant goodwill impairment charges. For example, as of the date of our annual goodwill impairment test, keeping all other variables constant, a combined increase of 50 basis points in the WACC along with a simultaneous decrease of 150 basis points in the long term growth rate applied would require that we perform the second step of the goodwill impairment test for our global Electrophysiology reporting unit. The estimates used for our future cash flows and discount rates represent management's best estimates, which we believe to be reasonable, but future declines in business performance may result in impairment of our goodwill. Future events or factors could have a negative impact on the levels of excess fair value over carrying value of our reporting units and negative changes in one or more of these events or factors could result in impairment charges.
The following is a rollforward of accumulated goodwill write-offs by global reportable segment:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| (in millions) | | Cardiovascular | | Rhythm Management | | MedSurg | | Total |
| Accumulated write-offs as of December 31, 2014 | | $ | (1,479 | ) | | $ | (6,960 | ) | | $ | (1,461 | ) | | $ | (9,900 | ) |
| Goodwill written off | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Accumulated write-offs as of December 31, 2015 | | $ | (1,479 | ) | | $ | (6,960 | ) | | (1,461 | ) | | $ | (9,900 | ) |
| Goodwill written off | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Accumulated write-offs as of December 31, 2016 | | $ | (1,479 | ) | | $ | (6,960 | ) | | $ | (1,461 | ) | | $ | (9,900 | ) |
Intangible Asset Impairment Charges
Unamortizable intangible assets are tested for impairment on an annual basis during the third quarter of each year, or more frequently if impairment indicators are present, in accordance with U.S. GAAP and our accounting policies described in Note A – Significant Accounting Policies of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. In addition, on a quarterly basis, we monitor all intangible assets for events or other potential indicators of impairment that would warrant an interim impairment test.
The intangible asset category and associated write downs recorded in 2016, 2015 and 2014 were as follows:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Amortizable intangible assets | | $ | 4 |
| | $ | 9 |
| | $ | 107 |
|
| In-process research and development | | 7 |
| | 10 |
| | 88 |
|
| | | $ | 11 |
| | 19 |
| | $ | 195 |
|
2014 Charges
During the fourth quarter of 2014, as a result of revised estimates in conjunction with our annual operating plan, we performed an interim impairment test of in-process research and development projects associated with certain of our acquisitions. Based on our impairment assessment, and lower expected future cash flows associated with our intangible assets, we recorded an impairment charge of $18 million to write-down the balances of these in-process projects to their fair value, which was determined to be zero.
During the third quarter of 2014, we performed our annual impairment test of all in-process research and development projects, and our indefinite lived core technology assets. Based on the results of our annual test, we recorded total impairment charges of $4 million to write-down the balances of certain in-process projects to their fair value. In addition, as a result of revised estimates in conjunction with our annual operating plan, we performed an interim impairment test of core technology associated with certain of our acquisitions, and recorded an impairment charge of $8 million, for a total of $12 million of impairment charges in the third quarter of 2014.
During the second quarter of 2014, as a result of revised estimates developed in conjunction with our annual strategic planning process and annual goodwill impairment test, we performed an interim impairment test of our in-process research and development projects and core technology assets associated with certain of our acquisitions. Based on our impairment assessment, and lower expected future cash flows associated with our intangible assets, we recorded impairment charges of $110 million. The impairment charges were due to changes in our clinical strategy and lower estimates of the European and global hypertension markets, and the resulting amount of future revenue and cash flows associated with our hypertension technology; as a result, we recorded impairment charges of $67 million related to these technology intangible assets. In addition, in the second quarter of 2014, due to revised expectations and timing as a result of the announcement of a third FDA Circulatory System Devices Panel, we recorded impairment charges of $35 million related to the in-process research and development intangible assets acquired from Atritech, Inc. (Atritech). We also recorded an $8 million intangible asset impairment charge associated with changes in the amount of the expected cash flows related to certain other acquired in-process research and development projects.
During the first quarter of 2014, as a result of lower estimates of the resistant hypertension market following the announcement of data from a competitor's clinical trial, we performed an interim impairment test of our hypertension-related in-process research and development projects and core technology assets. The impairment assessments were based upon probability-weighted cash flows of potential future scenarios. Based on our impairment assessment, and lower expected future cash flows associated with our hypertension-related intangible assets, we recorded impairment charges of $55 million in the first quarter of 2014 to write-down the balance of these intangible assets to their fair value.
The nonrecurring Level 3 fair value measurements of our intangible asset impairment analysis included the following significant unobservable inputs:
|
| | | | | |
| Intangible Asset | Valuation Date | Fair Value | Valuation Technique | Unobservable Input | Rate |
| Technology-related (amortizable) | September 30, 2015 | $8 million | Income Approach -Excess Earnings Method | Discount Rate | 10% |
| In-Process R&D | June 30, 2015 | $6 million | Income Approach - Excess Earnings Method | Discount Rate | 16.5 - 20% |
| In-Process R&D | September 30, 2014 | $16 million | Income Approach - Excess Earnings Method | Discount Rate | 16.5 - 20% |
| In-Process R&D | June 30, 2014 | $83 million | Income Approach - Excess Earnings Method | Discount Rate | 16.5 - 20% |
| Technology-related (amortizable) | June 30, 2014 | $8 million | Income Approach - Excess Earnings Method | Discount Rate | 15% |
| In-Process R&D | March 31, 2014 | $6 million | Income Approach - Excess Earnings Method | Discount Rate | 20% |
Technology-related (amortizable)
| March 31, 2014 | $64 million | Income Approach - Excess Earnings Method | Discount Rate | 15% |
Estimated amortization expense for each of the five succeeding fiscal years based upon our intangible asset portfolio as of December 31, 2016 is as follows:
|
| | | | |
| | | |
| | | Estimated Amortization Expense |
| Fiscal Year | | (in millions) |
| |
| 2017 | | $ | 535 |
|
| 2018 | | 525 |
|
| 2019 | | 523 |
|
| 2020 | | 519 |
|
| 2021 | | 481 |
|
NOTE E – FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities
We develop, manufacture and sell medical devices globally and our earnings and cash flows are exposed toaddress market risk from changes in foreign currency exchange rates and interest rates. We address these risksrates through a risk management program that includes the use of derivative financial instruments, and we operate the program pursuant to documented corporate risk management policies. We recognize all derivative financial instruments in our consolidated financial statements at fair value in accordance with ASC Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging. In accordance with Topic 815, for those derivative instruments that are designated and qualify as hedging instruments, the hedging instrument must be designated, based upon the exposure being hedged, as a fair value hedge, cash flow hedge, or a hedge of a net investment in a foreign operation. The accounting for changes in the fair value (i.e. gains or losses) of a derivative instrument depends on whether it has been designated and qualifies as part of a hedging relationship and, further, on the type of hedging relationship. Our derivative instruments do not subject our earnings or cash flows to material risk, as gains and losses on these derivatives generally offset losses and gains on the item being hedged. We do not enter into derivative transactions for speculative purposes and we do not have any non-derivative instruments that are designated as hedging instruments pursuant to FASB ASC Topic 815.815.
Currency Hedging
We are exposed to currency risk consisting primarily of foreign currency denominated monetary assets and liabilities, forecasted foreign currency denominated intercompany transactions and third-party transactions and net investments in certain subsidiaries. We manage our exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates on a consolidated basis to take advantage of offsetting transactions. We use both derivative instruments, (currency forward and option contracts), and non-derivative transactions (primarily European manufacturing and distribution operations) to reduce the risk that our earnings and cash flows associated with these foreign currency denominated balances and transactions will be adversely affected by foreign currency exchange rate changes.
Currently or Previously Designated Foreign Currency Hedges
All of our designated currency hedge contracts outstanding as of December 31, 20132016 and December 31, 20122015 were cash flow hedges under Topic 815 intended to protect the U.S. dollar value of our forecasted foreign currency denominated transactions. We record the effective portion of any change in the fair value of foreign currency cash flow hedges in other comprehensive income (OCI) until the related third-party transaction occurs. Once the related third-party transaction occurs, we reclassify the effective portion of any related gain or loss on the foreign currency cash flow hedge to earnings. In the event the hedged forecasted transaction does not occur, or it becomes no longer probable that it will occur, we reclassify the amount of any gain or loss on the related cash flow hedge to earnings at that time. We had currency derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges outstanding in the contract amount of $2.5642.271 billion as of December 31, 20132016 and $2.4691.458 billion as of December 31, 2012.2015.
We recognized net gains of $36$133 million during 20132016 on our cash flow hedges, as compared to $39213 million of net lossesgains during 2012,2015, and $95105 million of net lossesgains during 2011.2014. All currency cash flow hedges outstanding as of December 31, 20132016 mature within 3660 months. As of December 31, 2013,2016, $139102 million of net gains, net of tax, were recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI) to recognize the effective portion of the fair value of any currency derivative instruments that are, or previously were, designated as foreign currency cash flow hedges, as compared to net gains of $31145 million as of December 31, 2012.2015. As of December 31, 2013,2016, $7563 million of net gains, net of tax, may be reclassified to earnings within the next twelve months.
The success of our hedging program depends, in part, on forecasts of transaction activity in various currencies (primarily Japanese yen, Euro, British pound sterling, Australian dollarEuro and Canadian dollar)Japanese yen). We may experience unanticipated currency exchange gains or losses to the extent that there are differences between forecasted and actual activity during periods of currency volatility. In addition, changes in foreign currency exchange rates related to any unhedged transactions may impact our earnings and cash flows.
Non-designated Foreign Currency Contracts
We use currency forward contracts as a part of our strategy to manage exposure related to foreign currency denominated monetary assets and liabilities. These currency forward contracts are not designated as cash flow, fair value or net investment hedges under FASB ASC Topic 815;815; are marked-to-market with changes in fair value recorded to earnings; and are entered into for periods consistent with currency transaction exposures, generally less than one year. We had currency derivative instruments not designated as hedges under FASB ASC Topic 815 outstanding in the contract amount of $1.9521.830 billion as of December 31, 20132016 and $1.9422.090 billion as of December 31, 2012.2015.
Interest Rate Hedging
Our interest rate risk relates primarily to U.S. dollar borrowings, partially offset by U.S. dollar cash investments. We have historically used interest rate derivative instruments to manage our earnings and cash flow exposure to changes in interest rates by converting fixed-rate debt into floating-rate debt or floating-rate debt into fixed-rate debt or fixed-rate debt into floating-rate debt. We had no interest rate derivative instruments outstanding as of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.
We designate these derivative instruments either as fair value or cash flow hedges under FASB ASC Topic 815.815. We record changes in the value of fair value hedges in interest expense, which is generally offset by changes in the fair value of the hedged debt obligation. Interest payments made or received related to our interest rate derivative instruments are included in interest expense. We record the effective portion of any change in the fair value of derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges as unrealized gains or losses in OCI, net of tax, until the hedged cash flow occurs, at which point the effective portion of any gain or loss is reclassified to earnings. We record the ineffective portion of our cash flow hedges in interest expense. In the event the hedged cash flow does not occur, or it becomes no longer probable that it will occur, we reclassify the amount of any gain or loss on the related cash flow hedge to interest expense at that time.
InDuring the fourthfirst quarter of 2013,2015, we entered intoterminated interest rate derivative contracts designated as fair value hedges having a notional amount of $450 million to convert fixed-rate debt into floating-rate debt and received total proceeds of approximately $35 million, which we designated as fair value hedges, and had $450included approximately $7 million outstanding as of December 31, 2013.net accrued interest receivable. We assessed at inception, and re-assessre-assessed on an
ongoing basis, whether the interest rate derivative contracts arewere highly effective in offsetting changes in the fair value of the hedged fixed rate debt. We had no fair value hedges outstanding during 2016 and recognized no gains or losses in interest expense during 2016. During 2015, we recognized, in interest expense, a $7 million gain on our hedged debt obligation, and an $8 million loss on our hedged debt and an $8 million gain on the related interest rate derivative contract during 2013, resultingderivatives contracts. This resulted in a $1 millionimmaterial net lossgains recorded in earningsearning due to ineffectiveness. We had noineffectiveness in 2015.
During the second quarter of 2015, we entered into forward starting interest rate derivative contracts having a notional amount of $450 million to hedge interest rate risk associated with a planned issuance of fixed-rate senior notes, which we designated as cash flow hedges. These hedges were terminated during the second quarter at the time we issued the fixed-rate senior notes and we received total proceeds of approximately $11 million. We had no amount outstanding under these hedges as of December 31, 2012.2016 and December 31, 2015. We assessed, at inception, and re-assessed, on an ongoing basis, whether the cash flow derivative contracts were highly effective in offsetting changes in interest rates. The gain on this derivative contract was recorded within accumulated other comprehensive income, and is being amortized into earnings as a reduction to interest expense over the life of the related senior notes.
In prior years, weWe are amortizing the gains and losses on previously terminated certain interest rate derivative contracts,instruments, including fixed-to-floating interest rate contracts designated as fair value hedges, and floating-to-fixedforward starting interest rate derivative contracts and treasury locks designated as cash flow hedges. We amortize the gains and losses of these derivative instruments upon terminationhedges into earnings as a reductioncomponent of interest expense over the remaining term of the hedged debt, in accordance with Topic 815. The carrying amount of certain of our senior notes included unamortized gains of $5451 million as of December 31, 20132016 and $6463 million as of December 31, 2012,2015, and immaterial unamortized losses of $2 million as of December 31, 20132016 and$3 million as of December 31, 2012, related to the fixed-to-floating interest rate contracts.2015. In addition, we had pre-tax net gains within AOCI related to terminated floating-to-fixedforward starting interest rate derivative contracts and treasury locks of $39 million as of December 31, 20132016, and $410 million as of December 31, 2012.2015. The net gains that we recognized in earnings related to previously terminated interest rate derivatives were $1013 million in 2013, $112016, $13 million in 2012,2015, and were not material$9 million in 2011.2014. As of December 31, 2013,2016, $913 million of net gains may be reclassified to earnings within the next twelve months from amortization of our previously terminated interest rate derivative contracts.
Counterparty Credit Risk
We do not have significant concentrations of credit risk arising from our derivative financial instruments, whether from an individual counterparty or a related group of counterparties. We manage our concentration of counterparty credit risk on our derivative instruments by limiting acceptable counterparties to a diversified group of major financial institutions with investment grade credit ratings, limiting the amount of credit exposure to each counterparty, and by actively monitoring their credit ratings and outstanding fair values on an on-going basis. Furthermore, none of our derivative transactions are subject to collateral or other security arrangements and none contain provisions that are dependent on our credit ratings from any credit rating agency.
We also employ master netting arrangements that reduce our counterparty payment settlement risk on any given maturity date to the net amount of any receipts or payments due between us and the counterparty financial institution. Thus, the maximum loss due to counterparty credit risk by counterparty is limited to the unrealized gains in such contracts net of any unrealized losses should any of these counterparties fail to perform as contracted. Although these protections do not eliminate concentrations of credit risk, as a result of the above considerations, we do not consider the risk of counterparty default to be significant.
Fair Value of Derivative Instruments
The following presents the effect of our derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges under Topic 815 on our accompanying consolidated statements of operations during 2013, 20122016, 2015 and 20112014 (in millions):
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | Amount of Pre-tax Gain (Loss) Recognized in OCI (Effective Portion) | | Amount of Pre-tax Gain (Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings (Effective Portion) | | Location in Statement of Operations |
| Year Ended December 31, 2013 | | | | | |
| Interest rate hedge contracts | $ | — |
| | $ | 1 |
| | Interest expense |
| Currency hedge contracts | 207 |
| | 36 |
| | Cost of products sold |
| | $ | 207 |
| | $ | 37 |
| | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2012 | | | | | |
| Interest rate hedge contracts | $ | — |
| | $ | 2 |
| | Interest expense |
| Currency hedge contracts | 95 |
| | (39 | ) | | Cost of products sold |
| | $ | 95 |
| | $ | (37 | ) | | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | |
| Interest rate hedge contracts | $ | — |
| | $ | 1 |
| | Interest expense |
| Currency hedge contracts | (66 | ) | | (95 | ) | | Cost of products sold |
| | $ | (66 | ) | | $ | (94 | ) | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | Amount of Pre-tax Gain (Loss) Recognized in OCI (Effective Portion) | | Amount of Pre-tax Gain (Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings (Effective Portion) | | Location in Statement of Operations |
| Year Ended December 31, 2016 | | | | | |
| Interest rate contracts | $ | — |
| | $ | 1 |
| | Interest expense |
| Currency hedge contracts | 65 |
| | 133 |
| | Cost of products sold |
| | $ | 65 |
| | $ | 134 |
| | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2015 | | | | | |
| Interest rate contracts | $ | 11 |
| | $ | 2 |
| | Interest expense |
| Currency hedge contracts | 98 |
| | 213 |
| | Cost of products sold |
| | $ | 109 |
| | $ | 215 |
| | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2014 | | | | | |
| Interest rate contracts | $ | — |
| | $ | 1 |
| | Interest expense |
| Currency hedge contracts | 227 |
| | 105 |
| | Cost of products sold |
| | $ | 227 |
| | $ | 106 |
| | |
The amount of lossgain (loss) recognized in earnings related to the ineffective portion of our hedging relationships was $1 millionimmaterial in 2013 and de minimus in 2012. In 2011, we recognized a $5 million gain related to the ineffective portion of hedging relationships.all periods presented.
Net gains and losses on currency hedge contracts not designated as hedging instruments were offset by net losses and gains from foreign currency transaction exposures, as shown in the following table:
| | | in millions | | Year Ended | | Location in Statement of Operations | |
| | December 31, | | |
| | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | | |
| (in millions) | | | | | Location in Statement of Operations |
| | Year Ended December 31, | |
| | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 | | |
| Gain (loss) on currency hedge contracts | | $ | 102 |
| | $ | 23 |
| | $ | 12 |
| | Other, net | | $ | (20 | ) | | $ | 48 |
| | $ | 52 |
| | Other, net |
| Gain (loss) on foreign currency transaction exposures | | (113 | ) | | (41 | ) | | (24 | ) | | Other, net | | 7 |
| | (69 | ) | | (70 | ) | | Other, net |
| Net foreign currency gain (loss) | | $ | (11 | ) | | $ | (18 | ) | | $ | (12 | ) | | | $ | (13 | ) | | $ | (21 | ) | | $ | (18 | ) | |
FASB ASC Topic 815 requires all derivative instruments to be recognized at their fair values as either assets or liabilities on the balance sheet. We determine the fair value of our derivative instruments using the framework prescribed by FASB ASC Topic 820Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, by considering the estimated amount we would receive or pay to transfer these instruments at the reporting date and by taking into account current interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, the creditworthiness of the counterparty for the assets and our creditworthiness for liabilities. In certain instances, we may utilize financial models to measure fair value. Generally,In doing so, we use inputs that include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets; quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active; other observable inputs for the asset or liability; and inputs derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data by correlation or other means. As of December 31, 2013,2016 we have classified all of our derivative assets and liabilities within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy prescribed by Topic 820, as discussed below, because these observable inputs are available for substantially the full term of our derivative instruments.
The following are the balances of our derivative assets and liabilities as of December 31, 20132016 and December 31, 2012:2015:
| | | | | As of | | As of |
| | | December 31, | | December 31, | | December 31, | | December 31, |
| (in millions) | Location in Balance Sheet (1) | 2013 | | 2012 | Location in Balance Sheet (1) | 2016 | | 2015 |
| Derivative Assets: | | | | | | | | |
| Designated Hedging Instruments | | | | | | | | |
| Currency hedge contracts | Prepaid and other current assets | $ | 117 |
| | $ | 25 |
| Other current assets | $ | 98 |
| | $ | 138 |
|
| Currency hedge contracts | Other long-term assets | 120 |
| | 63 |
| Other long-term assets | 65 |
| | 66 |
|
| Interest rate contracts | Prepaid and other current assets | 1 |
| | — |
| |
| | | 238 |
| | 88 |
| | 163 |
| | 204 |
|
| Non-Designated Hedging Instruments | | | | | | | | |
| Currency hedge contracts | Prepaid and other current assets | 27 |
| | 33 |
| Other current assets | 36 |
| | 33 |
|
| Total Derivative Assets | | $ | 265 |
| | $ | 121 |
| | $ | 199 |
| | $ | 237 |
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| Derivative Liabilities: | | | | | | | | |
| Designated Hedging Instruments | | | | | | | | |
| Currency hedge contracts | Other current liabilities | $ | 13 |
| | $ | 20 |
| Other current liabilities | $ | 3 |
| | $ | 1 |
|
| Currency hedge contracts | Other long-term liabilities | 19 |
| | 10 |
| Other long-term liabilities | 4 |
| | — |
|
| Interest rate contracts | Other long-term liabilities | 8 |
| | — |
| |
| | | 40 |
| | 30 |
| | 7 |
| | 1 |
|
| Non-Designated Hedging Instruments | | | | | | | | |
| Currency hedge contracts | Other current liabilities | 23 |
| | 27 |
| Other current liabilities | 19 |
| | 22 |
|
| Total Derivative Liabilities | | $ | 63 |
| | $ | 57 |
| | $ | 26 |
| | $ | 23 |
|
| |
| (1) | We classify derivative assets and liabilities as current when the remaining term of the derivative contract is one year or less. |
Other Fair Value Measurements
Recurring Fair Value Measurements
On a recurring basis, we measure certain financial assets and financial liabilities at fair value based upon quoted market prices, where available. Where quoted market prices or other observable inputs are not available, we apply valuation techniques to estimate fair value. Topic 820 establishes a three-level valuation hierarchy for disclosure of fair value measurements. The categorization of financial assets and financial liabilities within the valuation hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the measurement of fair value. The three levels of the hierarchy are defined as follows:
Level 1 – Inputs to the valuation methodology are quoted market prices for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 – Inputs to the valuation methodology are other observable inputs, including quoted market prices for similar assets or liabilities and market-corroborated inputs.
Level 3 – Inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable inputs based on management’s best estimate of inputs market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability at the measurement date, including assumptions about risk.
Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis consist of the following as of December 31, 20132016 and December 31, 2012:
2015:
| | | | As of December 31, 2013 | | As of December 31, 2012 | As of December 31, 2016 | | As of December 31, 2015 |
| (in millions) | Level 1 | | Level 2 | | Level 3 | | Total | | Level 1 | | Level 2 | | Level 3 | | Total | Level 1 | | Level 2 | | Level 3 | | Total | | Level 1 | | Level 2 | | Level 3 | | Total |
| Assets | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Money market and government funds | $ | 38 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 38 |
| | $ | 39 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 39 |
| $ | 42 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 42 |
| | $ | 118 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 118 |
|
| Available-for-sale-securities | | 20 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 20 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Currency hedge contracts | — |
| | 264 |
| | — |
| | 264 |
| | — |
| | 121 |
| | — |
| | 121 |
| — |
| | 199 |
| | — |
| | 199 |
| | — |
| | 237 |
| | — |
| | 237 |
|
| Interest rate contracts | — |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| | $ | 38 |
| | $ | 265 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 303 |
| | $ | 39 |
| | $ | 121 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 160 |
| $ | 62 |
| | $ | 199 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 261 |
| | $ | 118 |
| | $ | 237 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 355 |
|
| Liabilities | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Currency hedge contracts | $ | — |
| | $ | 55 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 55 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 57 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 57 |
| $ | — |
| | $ | 26 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 26 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 23 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 23 |
|
| Accrued contingent consideration | — |
| | — |
| | 501 |
| | 501 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 663 |
| | 663 |
| — |
| | — |
| | 204 |
| | $ | 204 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 246 |
| | 246 |
|
| Interest rate contracts | — |
| | 8 |
| | — |
| | 8 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 63 |
| | $ | 501 |
| | $ | 564 |
| | — |
| | $ | 57 |
| | $ | 663 |
| | $ | 720 |
| $ | — |
| | $ | 26 |
| | $ | 204 |
| | $ | 230 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 23 |
| | $ | 246 |
| | $ | 269 |
|
Our investments in money market and government funds are classified within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy because they are valued using quoted market prices. These investments are classified as cash and cash equivalents within our accompanying consolidated balance sheets, in accordance with U.S. GAAP and our accounting policies.
In addition to $38$42 million invested in money market and government funds as of December 31, 2013,2016, we had $31$19 million in short-term time deposits and $148$135 million in interest bearing and non-interest bearing bank accounts. In addition to $39$118 million invested in money market and government funds as of December 31, 2012,2015, we had $31 million in short-term time deposits and $168170 million in interest bearing and non-interest bearing bank accounts.
On December 1, 2016, we signed a subscription agreement to acquire 11,817,000 shares of Neovasc’s common stock for $0.60 per share or $7 million. The subscription agreement was accounted for as a derivative forward contract, in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 815, until the settlement date. On December 12, 2016, the contract was settled, and we acquired the shares of Neovasc’s common stock for $7 million. The fair value of the shares purchased on the settlement date was $26 million. Therefore, we recognized a gain of $12 million, net of tax, in earnings on the forward contract during 2016. Subsequently, we are accounting for the investment as an available-for-sale security, in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 320.
Our recurring fair value measurements using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) relate solely to our contingent consideration liability. Refer to Note B -– Acquisitions and Strategic Investments for a discussion of the changes in the fair value of our contingent consideration liability.liability and additional details on our Neovasc strategic investment.
Non-Recurring Fair Value Measurements
We hold certain assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis in periods subsequent to initial recognition. The fair value of a cost method investment is not estimated if there are no identified events or changes in circumstances that may have a significant adverse effect on the fair value of the investment. The aggregate carrying amountRefer to Note B - Acquisitions and Strategic Investments for a discussion of our cost method investments was $20 million as of December 31, 2013 and $13 million as of December 31, 2012.
During 2013 and 2012, we recorded losses of $476 million and $4.492 billion, respectively, to adjust our goodwill and certain other intangible asset balances to their fair value. Refer to Note D - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, for further detailed information related to these charges and significant unobservable inputs.strategic investments.
The fair value of our outstanding debt obligations was $4.6025.739 billion as of December 31, 20132016 and $4.7935.887 billion as of December 31, 2012,2015, which was determined by using primarily quoted market prices for our publicly-registered senior notes, classified as Level 1 within the fair value hierarchy. Refer to Note F – Borrowings and Credit Arrangements for a discussion of our debt obligations.
NOTE F – BORROWINGS AND CREDIT ARRANGEMENTS
We had total debt of $4.2405.484 billion as of December 31, 20132016 and $4.2565.677 billion as of December 31, 2012. During the third quarter of 2013, we refinanced our public debt obligations maturing in June 2014 and January 2015 (see Senior Notes below).2015. The debt maturity schedule for the significant components of our debt obligations as of December 31, 20132016 is as follows:
| | | (in millions) | 2014 | | 2015 | | 2016 | | 2017 | | 2018 | | Thereafter | | Total | 2017 | | 2018 | | 2019 | | 2020 | | 2021 | | Thereafter | | Total |
| Senior notes | $ | — |
| | $ | 400 |
| | $ | 600 |
| | $ | 250 |
| | $ | 600 |
| | $ | 1,950 |
| | $ | 3,800 |
| $ | 250 |
| | $ | 600 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 1,450 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,350 |
| | $ | 4,650 |
|
| Term loan | — |
| | — |
| | 80 |
| | 80 |
| | 240 |
| | — |
| | 400 |
| |
| Term loans | | — |
| | 225 |
| | 150 |
| | 375 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 750 |
|
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 400 |
| | $ | 680 |
| | $ | 330 |
| | $ | 840 |
| | $ | 1,950 |
| | $ | 4,200 |
| $ | 250 |
| | $ | 825 |
| | $ | 150 |
| | $ | 1,825 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2,350 |
| | $ | 5,400 |
|
|
| | | |
| | Note: | | The table above does not include unamortized discounts associated with our senior notes, or amounts related to interest rate contracts used to hedge the fair value of certain of our senior notes.notes or debt issuance costs. |
Revolving Credit Facility
We maintainOn April 10, 2015, we entered into a $2.0new $2.000 billion revolving credit facility maturing in April 2017,(the 2015 Facility) with a global syndicate of commercial banks.banks and terminated our previous $2.000 billion revolving credit facility. The 2015 Facility matures on April 10, 2020. Eurodollar and multicurrency loans under this revolving credit facilitythe 2015 Facility bear interest at LIBOR plus an interest margin of between 0.8750.900 percent and 1.4751.500 percent,, based on our corporate credit ratings and consolidated leverage ratio (1.275(1.300 percent, as of December 31, 2013)2016). In addition, we are required to pay a facility fee based on our credit ratings, consolidated leverage ratio, and the total amount of revolving credit commitments, regardless of usage, under the agreement (0.225(0.200 percent, as of December 31, 2013)2016). The 2015 Facility contains covenants which, among other things, require that we maintain a minimum interest coverage ratio of 3.0 times consolidated EBITDA and a maximum leverage ratio of 4.5 times consolidated EBITDA for the first four fiscal quarter-ends following the closing of the AMS Portfolio Acquisition on August 3, 2015, and decreasing to 4.25 times, 4.00 times, and 3.75 times consolidated EBITDA for the next three fiscal quarter-ends after such four fiscal quarter-ends, respectively, and then to 3.50 times for each fiscal quarter-end thereafter. There were no amounts borrowed under our current and prior revolving credit facilityfacilities as of December 31, 20132016 or December 31, 2012.2015.
Our revolving credit facility agreement in place as of December 31, 20132016 requires that we maintain certain financial covenants, as follows:
|
| | | |
| | Covenant Requirement as of December 31, 2016 | | Actual as of December 31, 20132016 |
| Maximum leverage ratio (1) | 3.54.0 times | | 2.52.4 times |
| Minimum interest coverage ratio (2) | 3.0 times | | 5.29.8 times |
| |
| (1) | Ratio of total debt to consolidated EBITDA, as defined by the credit agreement, for the preceding four consecutive fiscal quarters. |
| |
| (2) | Ratio of consolidated EBITDA, as defined by the credit agreement, to interest expense for the preceding four consecutive fiscal quarters. |
The credit agreement for the 2015 Facility provides for an exclusion from the calculation of consolidated EBITDA, as defined by the credit agreement, through the credit agreement maturity, of any non-cash charges and up to $500620 million in restructuring charges and restructuring-related expenses related to our current or future restructuring plans. As of December 31, 2013,2016, we had $234$485 million of the restructuring charge exclusion remaining. In addition, any cash litigation payments (net of any cash litigation receipts), as defined by the agreement, are excluded from the calculation of consolidated EBITDA and any new debt issued to fund any tax deficiency payments is excluded from consolidated total debt, as defined in the agreement, provided that the sum of any excluded net cash litigation payments and any new debt issued to fund any tax deficiency payments shall not exceed $2.300$2.000 billion in the aggregate. As of December 31, 2013,2016, we had approximately $2.185 billion$885 million of the combined legal and debt exclusion remaining.
As of and through December 31, 2013,2016, we were in compliance with the required covenants.
Any inability to maintain compliance with these covenants could require us to seek to renegotiate the terms of our credit facilitiesfacility or seek waivers from compliance with these covenants, both of which could result in additional borrowing costs. Further, there can be no assurance that our lenders would agree to such new terms or grant such waivers.
Term LoanLoans
In August 2013,As of December 31, 2016, we entered into a new $400had an aggregate $750 million outstanding under our unsecured term loan facility.facilities and $1.000 billion outstanding under these facilities as of December 31, 2015. These facilities include an unsecured term loan facility entered into in August 2013 (2013 Term Loan) which had $150 million outstanding as of December 31, 2016 and $250 million outstanding as of December 31, 2015, along with an unsecured term loan borrowingscredit facility entered into in April 2015 (2015 Term Loan) which had $600 million outstanding as of December 31, 2016 and $750 million outstanding as of December 31, 2015.
Borrowings under this facilitythe 2013 Term Loan bear interest at LIBOR plus an interest margin of between 1.0 percent and 1.75 percent (currently 1.5 percent), based on our corporate credit ratings and consolidated leverage ratio. The term loan borrowings are payable over a five-year period, with quarterly principal paymentsWe repaid $150 million of $20 million commencingour 2013 Term Loan facility in the firstfourth quarter of 20162015 and repaid an additional $100 million during the second quarter of 2016. As a result and in accordance with the credit agreement, the outstanding balance of $150 million is the remaining principal amount due at the final maturity date in August 2018, and2018.The 2013 Term Loan borrowings are repayable at any time without premium or penalty. Our term loan facility requires that we comply with certain covenants, including financial covenants with respect to maximum leverage and minimum interest coverage;coverage, consistent with the 2015 Term Loan Facility. The maximum leverage ratio requirement is 3.54.0 times, our actual leverage ratio as of December 31, 20132016 is 2.52.4 times, and the minimum interest coverage ratio requirement is 3.0 times, our actual interest coverage ratio as of December 31, 20132016 is 5.29.8 times. We had $400
On April 10, 2015, we entered into a new $750 million outstandingunsecured term loan credit facility which matures on August 3, 2020. The 2015 Term Loan was funded on August 3, 2015 and was used to partially fund the AMS Portfolio Acquisition, including the payment of fees and expenses. Term loan borrowings under this facility bear interest at LIBOR plus an interest margin of between 1.00 percent and 1.75 percent (currently 1.50 percent), based on our corporate credit ratings and consolidated leverage ratio. We repaid $150 million of our 2015 Term Loan during the second quarter of 2016. The remaining 2015 Term Loan requires quarterly principal payments of $38 million commencing in the third quarter of 2018, and the remaining principal amount is due at the final maturity date of August 3, 2020. The 2015 Term Loan agreement requires that we comply with certain covenants, including financial covenants with respect to maximum leverage and minimum interest coverage, consistent with our revolving credit facility. The maximum leverage ratio requirement is 4.0 times, our actual leverage ratio as of December 31, 20132016 is 2.4 times, and no borrowings outstandingthe minimum interest coverage ratio requirement is 3.0 times, our actual interest coverage ratio as of December 31, 2012.2016 is 9.8 times.
Senior Notes
We had senior notes outstanding of $3.800$4.650 billion and $4.200 billion as of December 31, 20132016 and December 31, 2012, respectively.2015. In August 2013,May 2015, we issuedcompleted the offering of$1.850 billion in aggregate principal amount of senior notes consisting of $600 million in aggregate principal amount of 2.650%2.850% notes due 2020, $500 million in aggregate principal amount of 3.375% notes due 2022 and $750 million in aggregate principal amount of 3.850% notes due 2025. The net proceeds from the offering of the notes, after deducting underwriting discounts and estimated offering expenses, were approximately $1.830 billion. We used a portion of the net proceeds from the senior notes offering to redeem $400 million aggregate principal amount of our 5.500% notes due in 2018,November 2015 and $450$600 million aggregate principal amount of 4.125%our 6.400% notes due June 2016. The remaining senior notes due in 2023. In September 2013, we used theoffering proceeds, together with borrowings under our new $400 million term loan facility,the 2015 Term Loan, were used to prepay $600 million of senior notes maturing in June 2014 and $850 million maturing in January 2015.fund the AMS Portfolio Acquisition. We recorded a one-time charge of $70$45 million ($44 million after-tax)in interest expense, during the second quarter of 2015, for premiums, accelerated amortization of debt issuance costs, and investor discount costs net of accelerated amortization of interest rate hedge gains related to the early debt extinguishment.
Our senior notes are publicly registered securities,were issued in public offerings, are redeemable prior to maturity and are not subject to any sinking fund requirements. Our senior notes are unsecured, unsubordinated obligations and rank on parity with each other. These notes are effectively junior to borrowings under our credit and security facility, to the extent if borrowed by our subsidiaries, and to liabilities of our subsidiaries (see Other Arrangements below).
On January 12, 2017, we used our existing credit facilities to repay the $250 million plus interest of our senior notes due in January 2017.
Our senior notes consist of the following as of December 31, 2013:
2016:
| | | | Amount (in millions) | | Issuance Date | | Maturity Date | | Semi-annual Coupon Rate | Amount (in millions) | | Issuance Date | | Maturity Date | | Semi-annual Coupon Rate |
| November 2015 Notes | $ | 400 |
| | November 2005 | | November 2015 | | 5.500% | |
| June 2016 Notes | 600 |
| | June 2006 | | June 2016 | | 6.400% | |
| January 2017 Notes | 250 |
| | November 2004 | | January 2017 | | 5.125% | $ | 250 |
| | November 2004 | | January 2017 | | 5.125% |
| October 2018 Notes | 600 |
| | August 2013 | | October 2018 | | 2.650% | 600 |
| | August 2013 | | October 2018 | | 2.650% |
| January 2020 Notes | 850 |
| | December 2009 | | January 2020 | | 6.000% | 850 |
| | December 2009 | | January 2020 | | 6.000% |
| May 2020 Notes | | 600 |
| | May 2015 | | May 2020 | | 2.850% |
| May 2022 Notes | | 500 |
| | May 2015 | | May 2022 | | 3.375% |
| May 2025 Notes | | 750 |
| | May 2015 | | May 2025 | | 3.850% |
| October 2023 Notes | 450 |
| | August 2013 | | October 2023 | | 4.125% | 450 |
| | August 2013 | | October 2023 | | 4.125% |
| November 2035 Notes | 350 |
| | November 2005 | | November 2035 | | 6.250% | 350 |
| | November 2005 | | November 2035 | | 6.250% |
| January 2040 Notes | 300 |
| | December 2009 | | January 2040 | | 7.375% | 300 |
| | December 2009 | | January 2040 | | 7.375% |
| | $ | 3,800 |
| | | | | | | $ | 4,650 |
| | | | | | |
Our $2.24.050 billion of senior notes issued in 2009, 2013 and 20132015 contain a change-in-control provision, which provides that each holder of the senior notes may require us to repurchase all or a portion of the notes at a price equal to 101 percent of the aggregate repurchased principal, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if a rating event, as defined in the indenture, occurs as a result of a change-in-control, as defined in the indenture. Any other credit rating changes may impact our borrowing cost, but do not require us to repay any borrowings.
The interest rate payable on our November 2015 Notes is currently 6.25 percent and the interest rate payable on our November 2035 Notes is currently 7.00 percent. Corporate credit rating improvements may result in a decrease in the adjusted interest rate on our November 2015 and November 2035 Notes to the extent that our lowest credit rating is above BBB- or Baa3. The interest rates on our November 2015 and November 2035 Notes will be permanently reinstated to the issuance rate if the lowest credit ratings assigned to these senior notes is either A- or A3 or higher.
Other Arrangements
We also maintainmaintained a $300 million credit and security facility secured by our U.S. trade receivables. Inreceivables maturing on June 2013,9, 2017. The credit and security facility required that we extended the maturity of this facility through June 2015, subject to further extension, reduced the size of the facility from $350 million to $300 million and addedmaintain a maximum leverage covenant consistent with our revolving credit facility. The maximum leverage ratio requirement is 3.5was 4.0 times and our actual leverage ratio as of December 31, 2013 is 2.52016 was 2.4 times. We had no borrowings of $60 million outstanding under this facility as of December 31, 20132016 and no borrowings outstanding as of December 31, 2012.2015. On February 7, 2017, we amended the terms of this credit and security facility, including increasing the facility size to $400 million. This amendment retained a similar maximum leverage ratio requirement and extended the facility maturity to February 2019.
We have accounts receivable factoring programs in certain European countries that we account for as sales under FASB ASC Topic 860, Transfers and ServicingServicing. . These agreements provide for the sale of accounts receivable to third parties, without recourse, of up to approximately $312391 million as of December 31, 2013.2016. We have no retained interests in the transferred receivables, other than collection and administrative responsibilities and, once sold, the accounts receivable are no longer available to satisfy creditors in the event of bankruptcy. We de-recognized $146152 million of receivables as of December 31, 20132016 at an average interest rate of 3.31.8 percent, and $191151 million as of December 31, 20122015 at an average interest rate of 1.62.4 percent. Within Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece the number of days our receivables are outstanding has increased above historical levels. We believe we have adequate allowances for doubtful accounts related to our Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece accounts receivable; however, we continue to monitor the European economic environment for any collectibility issues related to our outstanding receivables.
In addition, we have uncommitted credit facilities with a commercial Japanese bank that provide for borrowings, promissory notes discounting and receivables factoring of up to 21.0 billion Japanese yen (approximately $200180 million as of December 31, 2013)2016). We de-recognized $147149 million of notes receivable as of December 31, 20132016 at an average interest rate of 1.81.6 percent and $182132 million of notes receivable as of December 31, 20122015 at an average interest rate of 1.6 percent. De-recognized accounts and notes receivable are excluded from trade accounts receivable, net in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.
As of December 31, 2013,2016 and December 31, 2015, we had outstanding letters of credit of $78$44 million, as compared to $94 million as of December 31, 2012, which consisted primarily of bank guarantees and collateral for workers' compensation insurance arrangements. As of December 31, 20132016 and 2012,2015, none of the beneficiaries had drawn upon the letters of credit or guarantees; accordingly, we have not recognized a related liability for our outstanding letters of credit in our consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 20132016 or 2012. We believe we will generate sufficient cash from operations to fund these payments and intend to fund these payments without drawing on the letters of credit.2015.
NOTE G – LEASES AND OTHER PURCHASE OBLIGATIONS
Rent expense amounted to $77 million in 2013, $80 million in 20122016, $76 million in 2015 and $9076 million in 2011.2014.
Our obligations under noncancelable capital leases were not material as of December 31, 2013 and 2012.
Future minimum rental commitments as of December 31, 20132016 under other noncancelableall noncancellable lease agreements, areincluding capital leases, were as follows (in millions):
| | | 2014 | $ | 64 |
| |
| 2015 | 51 |
| |
| 2016 | 43 |
| |
| 2017 | 29 |
| $ | 66 |
|
| 2018 | 25 |
| 60 |
|
| 2019 | | 42 |
|
| 2020 | | 34 |
|
| 2021 | | 25 |
|
| Thereafter | 42 |
| 64 |
|
| | |
| |
|
| | $ | 254 |
| $ | 291 |
|
| | |
| |
|
Future minimum purchase obligations as of December 31, 2016, were as follows (in millions):
|
| | | |
| 2017 | $ | 321 |
|
| 2018 | 52 |
|
| 2019 | 39 |
|
| 2020 | 19 |
|
| 2021 | 12 |
|
| Thereafter | 15 |
|
| | |
| | $ | 458 |
|
| | |
|
NOTE H – RESTRUCTURING-RELATED ACTIVITIES
On an on-going basis, weWe monitor the dynamics of the economy, the healthcare industry, and the markets in which we compete;compete and we continue to assess opportunities for improved operational effectiveness and efficiency, and better alignment of expenses with revenues, while preserving our ability to make the investments in research and development projects, capital, and our people that we believe are essential to our long-term success. As a result of these assessments, we have undertaken various restructuring initiatives in order to enhance our growth potential and position us for long-term success. These initiatives are described below.
2016 Restructuring Plan
On June 6, 2016, our Board of Directors approved, and we committed to, a restructuring initiative (the 2016 Restructuring Plan). The 2016 Restructuring Plan is intended to develop global commercialization, technology and manufacturing capabilities in key growth markets, build on our Plant Network Optimization (PNO) strategy which is intended to simplify our manufacturing plant structure by transferring certain production lines among facilities, and expand operational efficiencies in support of our operating income margin goals. Key activities under the 2016 Restructuring Plan include strengthening global infrastructure through evolving global real estate and workplaces, developing global commercial and technical competencies, enhancing manufacturing and distribution expertise in certain regions, and continuing implementation of our PNO strategy. These activities initiated in the second quarter of 2016 and are expected to be substantially completed by the end of 2018.
The implementation of the 2016 Restructuring Plan is expected to result in total pre-tax charges of approximately $175 million to $225 million, and approximately $160 million to $210 million of these charges are estimated to result in cash outlays, of which we have made payments of $27 million in 2016. We have recorded related costs of $47 million in 2016, and recorded a portion of these expenses as restructuring charges and the remaining portion through other lines within our consolidated statements of operations.
The following table provides a summary of our estimates of costs associated with the 2016 Restructuring Plan through the end of 2018 by major type of cost:
|
| |
| Type of cost | Total estimated amount expected to be incurred |
| Restructuring charges: | |
| Termination benefits | $65 million to $80 million |
| Other (1) | $15 million to $25 million |
| Restructuring-related expenses: | |
| Other (2) | $95 million to $120 million |
| $175 million to $225 million |
(1) Consists primarily of consulting fees and costs associated with contract cancellations.
(2) Comprised of other costs directly related to the 2016 Restructuring Plan, including program management, accelerated depreciation, and costs to transfer product lines among facilities.
2014 Restructuring Plan
On October 22, 2013, our Board of Directors approved, and we committed to, a restructuring initiative (the 2014 Restructuring plan)Plan). The 2014 Restructuring plan is intended to buildPlan built on the progress we have made to address financial pressures in a changing global marketplace, further strengthen itsstrengthened our operational effectiveness and efficiency and supportsupported new growth investments. Key activities under the plan includeincluded continued implementation of our ongoing Plant Network Optimization (PNO)PNO strategy, continued focus on driving operational effectiveness and efficiencies and ongoing business and commercial model changes. The PNO strategy is intended to simplifysimplified our manufacturing plant structure by transferring certain production lines among facilities. Other activities involveinvolved rationalizing organizational reporting structures to streamline various functions, eliminate bureaucracy, increase productivity and better align resources to business strategies and marketplace dynamics. These activities were initiated in the fourth quarter of 2013 and are expected to bewere substantially completed by the end of 2015.
2015, except for certain actions associated with our PNO strategy, which were completed by the end of 2016.
We estimate that theThe implementation of the 2014 Restructuring plan will resultPlan resulted in total pre-tax charges of approximately $175261 million toand $225244 million, of which approximately $160 million to $210 million is expected to result in future cash outlays. We have recorded related costs of $30 million in the fourth quarter of 2013, and are recording a portion of these expenses as restructuring charges and the remaining portion through other lines within our consolidated statementstatements of operations.
The following table provides a summary of our estimates oftotal costs associated with the 2014 Restructuring plan through December 31, 2016 by major type of cost:
|
| |
| Type of cost | Total estimated amount expected to be incurred
|
| Restructuring charges: | |
| Termination benefits | $100 million to $12091 million |
| Other (1) | $5 million to $1534 million |
| Restructuring-related expenses: | |
| Other (2) | $70 million to $90136 million |
| | $175 million to $225261 million |
(1) Consists primarily of consultantconsulting fees and costs associated with contractual cancellations.
(2) Comprised of other costs directly related to the 2014 Restructuring plan, including program management, accelerated depreciation, and costs to transfer product lines among facilities.
2011 Restructuring Plan
On July 26, 2011, our Board of Directors approved, and we committed to, a restructuring initiative (the 2011 Restructuring plan) designed to strengthen operational effectiveness and efficiencies, increase competitiveness and support new investments, thereby increasing shareholder value. Key activities under the 2011 Restructuring plan included standardizing and automating certain processes and activities; relocating select administrative and functional activities; rationalizing organizational reporting structures; leveraging preferred vendors; and other efforts to eliminate inefficiency. Among these efforts, we expanded our ability to deliver best-in-class global shared services for certain functions and divisions at several locations in emerging markets. This action was intended to enable us to grow our global commercial presence in key geographies and take advantage of many cost-reducing and productivity-enhancing opportunities. In addition, we undertook efforts to streamline various corporate functions, eliminate bureaucracy, increase productivity and better align corporate resources to our key business strategies. On January 25, 2013, our Board of Directors approved, and we committed to, an expansion of the 2011 Restructuring plan (the Expansion). The Expansion was intended to further strengthen our operational effectiveness and efficiencies and support new investments. Activities under the 2011 Restructuring plan were initiated in the third quarter of 2011 and all activities, including those related to the Expansion, were substantially completed by the end of 2013.
The 2011 Restructuring plan, including the Expansion, is estimated to result in total pre-tax charges of approximately $285 million to $295 million, and approximately $270 million to $280 million of these charges is estimated to result in cash outlays, of which we have made payments of $268 million to date. We have recorded related costs of $284 million since the inception of the plan, and recorded a portion of these expenses as restructuring charges and the remaining portion through other lines within our consolidated statements of operations.
The following provides a summary of our expected total costs associated with the 2011 Restructuring plan, including the Expansion, by major type of cost:
|
| |
Type of cost | Total estimated amount expected to
be incurred
|
Restructuring charges: | |
Termination benefits | $135 million to $140 million |
Other (1) | $110 million to $113 million |
Restructuring-related expenses: | |
Other (2) | $40 million to $42 million |
| $285 million to $295 million |
| |
(1) | Includes primarily consulting fees, net fixed asset write-offs and costs associated with contractual cancellations. |
| |
(2) | Comprised of other costs directly related to the 2011 Restructuring plan, including the Expansion, such as program management, accelerated depreciation, retention and infrastructure-related costs. |
2010 Restructuring Plan
On February 6, 2010, our Board of Directors approved, and we committed to, a series of management changes and restructuring initiatives (the 2010 Restructuring plan) designed to focus our business, drive innovation, accelerate profitable revenue growth and increase both accountability and shareholder value. Key activities under the plan included the restructuring of certain of our businesses and corporate functions; the re-alignment of our international structure to reduce our administrative costs and invest in expansion opportunities including significant investments in emerging markets; and the re-prioritization and diversification of our product portfolio. Activities under the 2010 Restructuring plan were initiated in the first quarter of 2010 and were complete by the end of 2012.
The execution of the 2010 Restructuring plan resulted in total pre-tax charges of $160 million, and required cash outlays of $145 million. We have recorded a portion of these expenses as restructuring charges and the remaining portion through other lines within our consolidated statements of operations.
The following provides a summary of our costs associated with the 2010 Restructuring plan by major type of cost:
|
| |
Type of cost | Total amount incurred |
Restructuring charges: | |
Termination benefits | $90 million |
Fixed asset write-offs | $11 million |
Other (1) | $51 million |
Restructuring-related expenses: | |
Other (2) | $8 million |
| $160 million |
| |
(1) | Includes primarily consulting fees and costs associated with contractual cancellations. |
| |
(2) | Comprised of other costs directly related to the 2010 Restructuring plan, including accelerated depreciation and infrastructure-related costs. |
Plant Network Optimization Program
In January 2009, our Board of Directors approved, and we committed to, a Plant Network Optimization program, intended to simplify our manufacturing plant structure by transferring certain production lines among facilities and by closing certain other facilities. The program was intended to improve our overall gross profit margins. Activities under the Plant Network Optimization program were initiated in the first quarter of 2009 and were substantially completed during 2012.
The Plant Network Optimization program resulted in total pre-tax charges of $126 million, and resulted in cash outlays of $103 million. We have recorded a portion of these expenses as restructuring charges and the remaining portion through cost of products sold within our consolidated statements of operations.
The following provides a summary of our costs associated with the Plant Network Optimization program by major type of cost:
|
| |
Type of cost | Total amount incurred |
Restructuring charges: | |
Termination benefits | $30 million |
| |
Restructuring-related expenses: | |
Accelerated depreciation | $22 million |
Transfer costs (1) | $74 million |
| $126 million |
| |
(1) | Consists primarily of costs to transfer product lines among facilities, including costs of transfer teams, freight, idle facility and product line validations. |
In aggregate, we recorded restructuring charges pursuant to our restructuring plans of $10128 million during 2013,2016, $13626 million during 2012,2015, and $8969 million during 2011.2014. In addition, we recorded expenses within other lines of our accompanying consolidated statements of operations related to our restructuring initiatives of $2350 million during 2013,2016, $2457 million during 2012,2015, and $4048 million during 2011.2014.
The following presents these costs (credits) by major type and line item within our accompanying consolidated statements of operations, as well as by program:
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2013 | | | | | | | | | |
| (in millions) | Termination Benefits | | Accelerated Depreciation | | Net (Gain) on Fixed Asset Disposals | | Other | | Total |
| Restructuring charges | $ | 60 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | (15 | ) | | $ | 56 |
| | $ | 101 |
|
| Restructuring-related expenses: | | | | | | | | | |
| Selling, general and administrative expenses | — |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | 20 |
| | 23 |
|
| | — |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | 20 |
| | 23 |
|
| | $ | 60 |
| | $ | 3 |
| | $ | (15 | ) | | $ | 76 |
| | $ | 124 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| (in millions) | Termination Benefits | | Accelerated Depreciation | | Net (Gain) on Fixed Asset Disposals | | Other | | Total |
| 2014 Restructuring plan | $ | 29 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 1 |
| | $ | 30 |
|
| 2011 Restructuring plan | 37 |
| | 3 |
| | (15 | ) | | 75 |
| | 100 |
|
| 2010 Restructuring plan | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Plant Network Optimization program | (6 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (6 | ) |
| | $ | 60 |
| | $ | 3 |
| | $ | (15 | ) | | $ | 76 |
| | $ | 124 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, 2012 | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2016 | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| (in millions) | Termination Benefits | | Accelerated Depreciation | | Transfer Costs | | Fixed Asset Write-offs | | Other | | Total | Termination Benefits | | Accelerated Depreciation | | Transfer Costs | | Fixed Asset Write-Offs | | Other | | Total |
| Restructuring charges | $ | 79 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 14 |
| | $ | 43 |
| | $ | 136 |
| $ | 19 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | 7 |
| | $ | 28 |
|
| Restructuring-related expenses: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Cost of products sold | — |
| | — |
| | 8 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 8 |
| — |
| | — |
| | 34 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 34 |
|
| Selling, general and administrative expenses | — |
| | 2 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 14 |
| | 16 |
| — |
| | 5 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 11 |
| | 16 |
|
| | — |
| | 2 |
| | 8 |
| | — |
| | 14 |
| | 24 |
| — |
| | 5 |
| | 34 |
| | — |
| | 11 |
| | 50 |
|
| | $ | 79 |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | 8 |
| | $ | 14 |
| | $ | 57 |
| | $ | 160 |
| $ | 19 |
| | $ | 5 |
| | $ | 34 |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | 18 |
| | $ | 78 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| (in millions) | Termination
Benefits | | Accelerated
Depreciation | | Transfer
Costs | | Fixed Asset
Write-offs | | Other | | Total | Termination Benefits | | Accelerated Depreciation | | Transfer Costs | | Fixed Asset Write-Offs | | Other | | Total |
| 2011 Restructuring plan | $ | 78 |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 14 |
| | $ | 55 |
| | $ | 149 |
| |
| 2010 Restructuring plan | 1 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 2 |
| | 3 |
| |
| Plant Network Optimization program | — |
| | — |
| | 8 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 8 |
| |
| 2016 Restructuring plan | | $ | 24 |
| | $ | 1 |
| | $ | 15 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 7 |
| | $ | 47 |
|
| 2014 Restructuring plan | | $ | (5 | ) | | $ | 4 |
| | 19 |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | 11 |
| | $ | 31 |
|
| | $ | 79 |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | 8 |
| | $ | 14 |
| | $ | 57 |
| | $ | 160 |
| $ | 19 |
| | $ | 5 |
| | $ | 34 |
| | $ | 2 |
| | $ | 18 |
| | $ | 78 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, 2011 | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2015 | | | | | | | | | | |
| (in millions) | Termination Benefits | | Accelerated Depreciation | | Transfer Costs | | Fixed Asset Write-offs | | Other | | Total | Termination Benefits | | Accelerated Depreciation | | Transfer Costs | | Other | | Total |
| Restructuring charges | $ | 55 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 34 |
| | $ | 89 |
| $ | 23 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 3 |
| | $ | 26 |
|
| Restructuring-related expenses: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Cost of products sold | — |
| | 9 |
| | 27 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 36 |
| — |
| | — |
| | 31 |
| | — |
| | 31 |
|
| Selling, general and administrative expenses | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 4 |
| | 4 |
| — |
| | 3 |
| | — |
| | 23 |
| | 26 |
|
| | — |
| | 9 |
| | 27 |
| | — |
| | 4 |
| | 40 |
| — |
| | 3 |
| | 31 |
| | 23 |
| | 57 |
|
| | $ | 55 |
| | $ | 9 |
| | $ | 27 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 38 |
| | $ | 129 |
| $ | 23 |
| | $ | 3 |
| | $ | 31 |
| | $ | 26 |
| | $ | 83 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| (in millions) | Termination
Benefits | | Accelerated
Depreciation | | Transfer
Costs | | Fixed Asset
Write-offs | | Other | | Total | Termination
Benefits | | Accelerated
Depreciation | | Transfer
Costs | | Other | | Total |
| 2011 Restructuring plan | $ | 21 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 14 |
| | $ | 35 |
| |
| 2010 Restructuring plan | 24 |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 24 |
| | 49 |
| |
| Plant Network Optimization program | 10 |
| | 8 |
| | 27 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 45 |
| |
| 2014 Restructuring plan | | $ | 27 |
| | $ | 3 |
| | $ | 31 |
| | $ | 26 |
| | $ | 87 |
|
| Substantially complete restructuring plan | | (4 | ) | | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | (4 | ) |
| | $ | 55 |
| | $ | 9 |
| | $ | 27 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 38 |
| | $ | 129 |
| $ | 23 |
| | $ | 3 |
| | $ | 31 |
| | $ | 26 |
| | $ | 83 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2014 | | | | | | | | | |
| (in millions) | Termination Benefits | | Accelerated Depreciation | | Transfer Costs | | Other | | Total |
| Restructuring charges | $ | 42 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 27 |
| | $ | 69 |
|
| Restructuring-related expenses: | | | | | | | | | |
| Cost of products sold | — |
| | — |
| | 24 |
| | — |
| | 24 |
|
| Selling, general and administrative expenses | — |
| | 5 |
| | — |
| | 19 |
| | 24 |
|
| | — |
| | 5 |
| | 24 |
| | 19 |
| | 48 |
|
| | $ | 42 |
| | $ | 5 |
| | $ | 24 |
| | $ | 46 |
| | $ | 117 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| (in millions) | Termination
Benefits | | Accelerated
Depreciation | | Transfer Costs | | Other | | Total |
| 2014 Restructuring plan | $ | 41 |
| | $ | 5 |
| | $ | 24 |
| | $ | 43 |
| | $ | 113 |
|
| Substantially complete restructuring plan | 1 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 3 |
| | 4 |
|
| | $ | 42 |
| | $ | 5 |
| | $ | 24 |
| | $ | 46 |
| | $ | 117 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Termination benefits represent amounts incurred pursuant to our on-going benefit arrangements and amounts for “one-time” involuntary termination benefits, and have been recorded in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 712Compensation – Non-retirement Postemployment Benefits and FASB ASC Topic 420Exit or Disposal Cost Obligations. We expect to record additional termination benefits related to our restructuring initiatives in 2014 when we identify with more specificity the job classifications, functions and locations of the remaining head count to be eliminated.. Other restructuring costs, which represent primarily contractual cancellations and consulting fees and costs related to contract cancellations, are being recorded as incurred in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 420.420. Accelerated depreciation is being recorded over the adjusted remaining useful life of the related assets and production line transfer costs are being recorded as incurred.
WeAs of December 31, 2016, we have incurred cumulative restructuring charges related to our 2016 Restructuring Plan and our 2014 Restructuring plan, 2011 Restructuring plan, 2010 Restructuring plan and Plant Network Optimization programPlan of $456$153 million and restructuring-related costs of $144$155 million since we committed to each plan.the plans. The following presents these costs by major type and by plan:
| | | (in millions) | 2014 Restructuring plan | | 2011
Restructuring plan | | 2010
Restructuring plan | | Plant
Network Optimization | | Total | 2016 Restructuring Plan | | 2014 Restructuring Plan | | Total |
| Termination benefits | $ | 29 |
| | $ | 136 |
| | $ | 90 |
| | $ | 30 |
| | $ | 285 |
| 24 | | $ | 91 |
| | $ | 115 |
|
| Fixed asset write-offs | — |
| | (1 | ) | | 11 |
| | — |
| | 10 |
| — |
| | 2 |
| | 2 |
|
| Other | — |
| | 110 |
| | 51 |
| | — |
| | 161 |
| 4 |
| | 32 |
| | 36 |
|
| Total restructuring charges | 29 |
| | 245 |
| | 152 |
| | 30 |
| | 456 |
| 28 |
| | 125 |
| | 153 |
|
| Accelerated depreciation | — |
| | 5 |
| | — |
| | 22 |
| | 27 |
| 1 |
| | 12 |
| | 13 |
|
| Transfer costs | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 74 |
| | 74 |
| 15 |
| | 75 |
| | 90 |
|
| Other | 1 |
| | 34 |
| | 8 |
| | — |
| | 43 |
| 3 |
| | 49 |
| | 52 |
|
| Restructuring-related expenses | 1 |
| | 39 |
| | 8 |
| | 96 |
| | 144 |
| 19 |
| | 136 |
| | 155 |
|
| | $ | 30 |
| | $ | 284 |
| | $ | 160 |
| | $ | 126 |
| | $ | 600 |
| $ | 47 |
| | $ | 261 |
| | $ | 308 |
|
We made cash payments of $141$82 million in 20132016 associated with restructuring initiatives, pursuant to these plans, and haveas of December 31, 2016 we had made total cash payments of $516$271 million related to our 2016 Restructuring Plan and 2014 Restructuring plan, 2011 Restructuring plan, 2010 Restructuring plan and Plant Network Optimization programPlan since committing to each plan. Each of thesethe plans. These payments waswere made using cash generated from operations, and are comprised of the following:
| | | (in millions) | 2014 Restructuring plan | | 2011
Restructuring plan | | 2010
Restructuring plan | | Plant
Network Optimization | | Total | 2016 Restructuring Plan | | 2014 Restructuring Plan | | Total |
| Year Ended December 31, 2013 | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2016 | | | | | | |
| Termination benefits | $ | — |
| | $ | 61 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 1 |
| | $ | 62 |
| 8 |
| | $ | 24 |
| | $ | 32 |
|
| Transfer costs | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| 15 |
| | 19 |
| | 34 |
|
| Other | — |
| | 79 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 79 |
| 4 |
| | 12 |
| | 16 |
|
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 140 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 1 |
| | $ | 141 |
| $ | 27 |
| | $ | 55 |
| | $ | 82 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Program to Date | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Termination benefits | $ | — |
| | $ | 124 |
| | $ | 90 |
| | $ | 30 |
| | $ | 244 |
| 8 |
| | 93 |
| | $ | 101 |
|
| Transfer costs | — |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 73 |
| | 73 |
| 15 |
| | 74 |
| | 89 |
|
| Other | — |
| | 144 |
| | 55 |
| | — |
| | 199 |
| 4 |
| | 77 |
| | 81 |
|
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 268 |
| | $ | 145 |
| | $ | 103 |
| | $ | 516 |
| $ | 27 |
| | $ | 244 |
| | $ | 271 |
|
Our restructuring liability is primarily comprised of accruals for termination benefits. The following is a rollforward of the termination benefit liability associated with our 2016 Restructuring Plan, our 2014 Restructuring plan, 2011 Restructuring plan, 2010 Restructuring planPlan and Plant Network Optimization program, since the inception of the respectiveour substantially complete restructuring plan, which is reported as a component of accrued expenses included in our accompanying consolidated balance sheets:
| | | | | Restructuring Plan Termination Benefits | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Plant Network | | | Restructuring Plan Termination Benefits |
| (in millions) | | 2014 | | 2011 | | 2010 | | Optimization | | Total | 2016 Restructuring Plan | | 2014 Restructuring Plan | | Substantially complete restructuring plan | | Total |
| Accrued as of December 31, 2010 | | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 21 |
| | $ | 26 |
| | $ | 47 |
| |
| Accrued as of December 31, 2014 | | — |
| | 39 |
| | 4 |
| | 43 |
|
| Charges | | — |
| | 21 |
| | 24 |
| | 10 |
| | 55 |
| — |
| | 27 |
| | (4 | ) | | 23 |
|
| Cash payments | | — |
| | (3 | ) | | (39 | ) | | (3 | ) | | (45 | ) | — |
| | (37 | ) | | — |
| | (37 | ) |
| Accrued as of December 31, 2011 | | — |
| | 18 |
| | 6 |
| | 33 |
| | 57 |
| |
| Accrued as of December 31, 2015 | | — |
| | 29 |
| | — |
| | 29 |
|
| Charges | | — |
| | 78 |
| | 1 |
| | — |
| | 79 |
| 24 |
| | (5 | ) | | — |
| | 19 |
|
| Cash payments | | — |
| | (60 | ) | | (4 | ) | | (24 | ) | | (88 | ) | (8 | ) | | (24 | ) | | — |
| | (32 | ) |
| Accrued as of December 31, 2012 | | — |
| | 36 |
| | 3 |
| | 9 |
| | 48 |
| |
| Charges | | 29 |
| | 37 |
| | — |
| | (6 | ) | | 60 |
| |
| Cash payments | | — |
| | (61 | ) | | — |
| | (1 | ) | | (62 | ) | |
| Other | | — |
| | — |
| | (3 | ) | | (2 | ) | | (5 | ) | |
| Accrued as of December 31, 2013 | | $ | 29 |
| | $ | 12 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 41 |
| |
| Accrued as of December 31, 2016 | | $ | 16 |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | — |
| | $ | 16 |
|
In addition to our accrual for termination benefits, we had ana $86 million liability as of December 31, 20132016 and a $53 million liability as of December 31, 20122015 for other restructuring-related items.
NOTE I – SUPPLEMENTAL BALANCE SHEET INFORMATION
Components of selected captions in our accompanying consolidated balance sheets are as follows:
Trade accounts receivable, net
| | | | | As of | | As of |
| (in millions) | | December 31, 2013 | December 31, 2012 | | December 31, 2016 | December 31, 2015 |
| Accounts receivable | | $ | 1,419 |
| $ | 1,336 |
| | $ | 1,591 |
| $ | 1,394 |
|
| Less: allowance for doubtful accounts | | (81 | ) | (88 | ) | | (73 | ) | (75 | ) |
| Less: allowance for sales returns | | (31 | ) | (31 | ) | | (46 | ) | (44 | ) |
| | | $ | 1,307 |
| $ | 1,217 |
| | $ | 1,472 |
| $ | 1,275 |
|
The following is a rollforward of our allowance for doubtful accounts for 2013, 20122016, 2015 and 2011:2014:
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
| Beginning balance | | $ | 88 |
| $ | 81 |
| $ | 83 |
| | $ | 75 |
| $ | 76 |
| $ | 81 |
|
| Net charges to expenses | | 5 |
| 14 |
| 11 |
| | 9 |
| 15 |
| 10 |
|
| Utilization of allowances | | (12 | ) | (7 | ) | (13 | ) | | (11 | ) | (16 | ) | (15 | ) |
| Ending balance | | $ | 81 |
| $ | 88 |
| $ | 81 |
| | $ | 73 |
| $ | 75 |
| $ | 76 |
|
During the first quarter of 2011, we reversed $20 million of previously established allowances for doubtful accounts against long-outstanding receivables in Greece. These receivables had previously been fully reserved as we had determined that they had a high risk of being uncollectible due to the economic situation in Greece. During the first quarter of 2011, the Greek government converted these receivables into bonds, which we were able to monetize, reducing our allowance for doubtful accounts as a credit to selling, general and administrative expenses.
Inventories
| | | | | As of | | As of |
| (in millions) | | December 31, 2013 | December 31, 2012 | | December 31, 2016 | December 31, 2015 |
| Finished goods | | $ | 598 |
| $ | 598 |
| | $ | 625 |
| $ | 706 |
|
| Work-in-process | | 90 |
| 70 |
| | 94 |
| 102 |
|
| Raw materials | | 209 |
| 216 |
| | 236 |
| 208 |
|
| | | $ | 897 |
| $ | 884 |
| | $ | 955 |
| $ | 1,016 |
|
Prepaids and other current assets
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | As of |
| (in millions) | | December 31, 2016 | December 31, 2015 |
| Prepaid expenses | | $ | 58 |
| $ | 57 |
|
| Restricted cash | | 243 |
| 54 |
|
| Other | | 240 |
| 254 |
|
| | | $ | 541 |
| $ | 365 |
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
| | | | | As of | | As of |
| (in millions) | | December 31, 2013 | December 31, 2012 | | December 31, 2016 | December 31, 2015 |
| Land | | $ | 81 |
| $ | 81 |
| | $ | 91 |
| $ | 86 |
|
| Buildings and improvements | | 917 |
| 873 |
| | 981 |
| 981 |
|
| Equipment, furniture and fixtures | | 2,461 |
| 2,348 |
| | 2,955 |
| 2,793 |
|
| Capital in progress | | 211 |
| 218 |
| | 338 |
| 202 |
|
| | | 3,670 |
| 3,520 |
| | 4,365 |
| 4,062 |
|
| Less: accumulated depreciation | | 2,124 |
| 1,956 |
| | 2,735 |
| 2,572 |
|
| | | $ | 1,546 |
| $ | 1,564 |
| | $ | 1,630 |
| $ | 1,490 |
|
Accrued expenses
| | | | | As of | | As of |
| (in millions) | | December 31, 2013 | December 31, 2012 | | December 31, 2016 | December 31, 2015 |
| Legal reserves | | $ | 84 |
| $ | 100 |
| | $ | 1,062 |
| $ | 773 |
|
| Payroll and related liabilities | | 488 |
| 452 |
| | 572 |
| 504 |
|
| Accrued contingent consideration | | 148 |
| 120 |
| | 63 |
| 119 |
|
| Other | | 628 |
| 612 |
| | 615 |
| 574 |
|
| | | $ | 1,348 |
| $ | 1,284 |
| | $ | 2,312 |
| $ | 1,970 |
|
Other long-term liabilities
| | | | | As of | | As of |
| (in millions) | | December 31, 2013 | December 31, 2012 | | December 31, 2016 | December 31, 2015 |
| Accrued income taxes | | | $ | 781 |
| $ | 1,253 |
|
| Legal reserves | | $ | 523 |
| $ | 391 |
| | 961 |
| 1,163 |
|
| Accrued income taxes | | 1,283 |
| 1,215 |
| |
| Accrued contingent consideration | | 353 |
| 543 |
| | 141 |
| 127 |
|
| Other long-term liabilities | | 410 |
| 398 |
| | 455 |
| 431 |
|
| | | $ | 2,569 |
| $ | 2,547 |
| | $ | 2,338 |
| $ | 2,974 |
|
NOTE J – INCOME TAXES
Our income (loss) before income taxes consisted of the following:
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
| Domestic | | $ | (774 | ) | $ | (1,265 | ) | $ | (437 | ) | | $ | (1,019 | ) | $ | (1,623 | ) | $ | (1,263 | ) |
| Foreign | | 551 |
| (2,842 | ) | 1,079 |
| | 1,196 |
| 973 |
| 754 |
|
| | | $ | (223 | ) | $ | (4,107 | ) | $ | 642 |
| | $ | 177 |
| $ | (650 | ) | $ | (509 | ) |
The related provision (benefit)benefit for income taxes consisted of the following:
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
| Current | | | | |
| Federal | | $ | 46 |
| $ | 33 |
| $ | 45 |
| | $ | 31 |
| $ | 59 |
| $ | (2 | ) |
| State | | (9 | ) | — |
| 8 |
| | 6 |
| 3 |
| (5 | ) |
| Foreign | | 105 |
| 139 |
| 91 |
| | 136 |
| 132 |
| 111 |
|
| | | 142 |
| 172 |
| 144 |
| | 173 |
| 194 |
| 104 |
|
| | | | | |
| Deferred | | | | |
| Federal | | (212 | ) | (204 | ) | 86 |
| | (337 | ) | (545 | ) | (458 | ) |
| State | | (17 | ) | (7 | ) | (8 | ) | | (14 | ) | (41 | ) | (23 | ) |
| Foreign | | (15 | ) | — |
| (21 | ) | | 8 |
| (19 | ) | (13 | ) |
| | | (244 | ) | (211 | ) | 57 |
| | (343 | ) | (605 | ) | (494 | ) |
| | | $ | (102 | ) | $ | (39 | ) | $ | 201 |
| | $ | (170 | ) | $ | (411 | ) | $ | (390 | ) |
The reconciliation of income taxes at the federal statutory rate to the actual provision (benefit)benefit for income taxes is as follows:
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| | | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | | 2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
| U.S. federal statutory income tax rate | | (35.0 | )% | (35.0 | )% | 35.0 | % | | 35.0 | % | (35.0 | )% | (35.0 | )% |
| State income taxes, net of federal benefit | | (7.9 | )% | (0.2 | )% | 0.5 | % | | (1.7 | )% | (4.8 | )% | (6.5 | )% |
| State law changes on deferred tax | | — | % | — | % | (1.2 | )% | |
| Effect of foreign taxes | | (63.4 | )% | (3.7 | )% | (63.7 | )% | | (99.1 | )% | (34.4 | )% | (29.1 | )% |
| Non-deductible acquisition expenses | | 3.5 | % | — | % | (1.9 | )% | |
| Acquisition-related | | | 9.4 | % | 6.0 | % | (7.5 | )% |
| Research credit | | (12.2 | )% | — | % | (3.4 | )% | | (15.0 | )% | (4.4 | )% | (7.0 | )% |
| Valuation allowance | | (12.0 | )% | 0.3 | % | (2.9 | )% | | (42.2 | )% | 2.3 | % | 4.0 | % |
| Divestitures | | — | % | — | % | 25.4 | % | |
| Goodwill impairment charges | | 65.2 | % | 36.4 | % | 38.0 | % | |
| Compensation-related | | | 6.4 | % | 1.6 | % | 0.7 | % |
| Non-deductible expenses | | 10.7 | % | 0.1 | % | 5.7 | % | | 9.3 | % | 2.4 | % | 1.9 | % |
| Uncertain domestic tax positions | | 7.0 | % | 0.8 | % | 5.6 | % | | 5.5 | % | 2.7 | % | 2.0 | % |
| Other, net | | (1.9 | )% | 0.3 | % | (5.8 | )% | | (3.5 | )% | 0.4 | % | (0.2 | )% |
| | | (46.0 | )% | (1.0 | )% | 31.3 | % | | (95.9 | )% | (63.2 | )% | (76.7 | )% |
| | | | | |
We had net deferred tax assets of $62 million as of December 31, 2016 and net deferred tax liabilities of $1.074264 million as of December 31, 2015. Gross deferred tax liabilities of $1.760 billion as of December 31, 20132016 and $1.237$1.875 billion as of December 31, 2012. Gross deferred tax liabilities of $2.203 billion as of December 31, 2013 and $2.310 billion as of December 31, 20122015 relate primarily to goodwill and intangible assets acquired in connection with our prior acquisitions. Gross deferred tax assets of $1.1291.822 billion as of December 31, 20132016 and $1.0731.611 billion as of December 31, 20122015 relate primarily to the establishment of inventory and product-related reserves; litigation, product liability and other reserves and accruals; stock-based compensation;compensation related accruals; net operating loss carryforwards and tax credit carryforwards; and the federal benefit of uncertain tax positions.
We reduce our deferred tax assets by a valuation allowance if, based upon the weight of available evidence, it is more likely than not that we will not realize some portion or all of the deferred tax assets. We consider relevant evidence, both positive and negative, to determine the need for a valuation allowance. Information evaluated includes our financial position and results of operations for the current and preceding years, the availability of deferred tax liabilities and tax carrybacks, as well as an evaluation of currently available information about future years.
Significant components of our deferred tax assets and liabilities are as follows:
| | | | | As of December 31, | | As of December 31, |
(in millions) | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2016 | | 2015 |
| | | | | | |
Deferred Tax Assets: | | | | | | | | |
| Inventory costs, intercompany profit and related reserves | | $ | 116 |
| | $ | 136 |
| |
| Inventory costs and related reserves | | | $ | 37 |
| | $ | 49 |
|
| Tax benefit of net operating loss and credits | | 513 |
| | 497 |
| | 798 |
| | 742 |
|
| Reserves and accruals | | 221 |
| | 300 |
| | 228 |
| | 232 |
|
| Restructuring-related charges and purchased research and development | | 17 |
| | 13 |
| |
| Restructuring-related charges | | | 14 |
| | 17 |
|
| Litigation and product liability reserves | | 198 |
| | 48 |
| | 752 |
| | 689 |
|
| Unrealized gains and losses on derivative financial instruments | | — |
| | — |
| |
| Investment write-down | | 15 |
| | 13 |
| | 17 |
| | 7 |
|
| Compensation related | | 143 |
| | 171 |
| | 142 |
| | 138 |
|
| Federal benefit of uncertain tax positions | | 166 |
| | 157 |
| | 238 |
| | 197 |
|
| Other | | 39 |
| | 54 |
| | 42 |
| | 39 |
|
| | | 1,428 |
| | 1,389 |
| | 2,268 |
| | 2,110 |
|
| Less valuation allowance | | (299 | ) | | (316 | ) | | (446 | ) | | (499 | ) |
| | | 1,129 |
| | 1,073 |
| | 1,822 |
| | 1,611 |
|
Deferred Tax Liabilities: | | | | | | | | |
| Property, plant and equipment | | 78 |
| | 101 |
| | 42 |
| | 44 |
|
| Unrealized gains and losses on derivative financial instruments | | 80 |
| | 21 |
| | 67 |
| | 82 |
|
| Intangible assets | | 2,045 |
| | 2,187 |
| | 1,651 |
| | 1,749 |
|
| Other | | — |
| | 1 |
| |
| | | 2,203 |
| | 2,310 |
| | 1,760 |
| | 1,875 |
|
Net Deferred Tax Liabilities | | $ | 1,074 |
| | $ | 1,237 |
| |
| | | | | | |
Net Deferred Tax Assets / (Liabilities) | | | 62 |
| | (264 | ) |
| | | | | | |
| Prepaid on intercompany profit | | | 75 |
| | 63 |
|
| Net Deferred Tax Assets / (Liabilities) and Prepaid on Intercompany Profit | | | $ | 137 |
| | $ | (201 | ) |
Our deferred tax assets, deferred tax liabilities and liabilitiesprepaid on intercompany profit, are included in the following locations within our accompanying consolidated balance sheets (in millions):
| | | | Location in | | As of December 31, | Location in | As of December 31, |
| Component | Balance Sheet | | 2013 | | 2012 | Balance Sheet | 2016 | 2015 |
| Current deferred tax asset | Deferred income taxes | | $ | 288 |
| | $ | 433 |
| |
| Current deferred tax asset and prepaid on intercompany profit | | Deferred income taxes | $ | 75 |
| $ | 496 |
|
| Non-current deferred tax asset | Other long-term assets | | 42 |
| | 54 |
| Other long-term assets | 80 |
| 40 |
|
Deferred Tax Assets | | | 330 |
| | 487 |
| |
| Deferred Tax Assets and Prepaid on Intercompany Profit | | | 155 |
| 536 |
|
| | | | |
| Current deferred tax liability | Other current liabilities | | 2 |
| | 11 |
| Other current liabilities | — |
| 2 |
|
| Non-current deferred tax liability | Deferred income taxes | | 1,402 |
| | 1,713 |
| Deferred income taxes | 18 |
| 735 |
|
Deferred Tax Liabilities | | | 1,404 |
| | 1,724 |
| | 18 |
| 737 |
|
Net Deferred Tax Liabilities | | | $ | 1,074 |
| | $ | 1,237 |
| |
| | | | |
| Net Deferred Tax Assets / (Liabilities) and Prepaid on Intercompany Profit | | | $ | 137 |
| $ | (201 | ) |
As of December 31, 2013,2016, we had U.S. federal and state tax net operating loss carryforwards and tax credits, the tax effect of which was $216 million, as compared to $184 million as$724 million. As of December 31, 2012.2015, we had U.S. federal and state tax net operating loss carryforwards and tax credits, the tax effect of which was $500 million. In addition, we had foreign tax net operating loss carryforwards and tax credits, the tax effect of which was $313$172 million as of December 31, 2013,2016, as compared to $341$273 million as of December 31, 2012.2015. These tax attributes will expire periodically beginning in 2014. 2017. The tax effect of both U.S. federal and state tax net operating loss carryforwards and tax credits and foreign tax net operating loss carryforwards and tax credits as of December 31, 2015 was
previously disclosed in the amounts of $624 million and $288 million, respectively. We are updating these amounts to reflect unrecognized tax benefits that reduce the amounts.
The current accounting standard for stock-based compensation prohibits the recognition of windfall tax benefits from stock-based compensation deducted for tax return purposes until realized through a reduction of income taxes payable. We have $76 million and $32 million of U.S. tax net operating loss and credits as of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015, respectively. These amounts were not included in the gross deferred tax balances as of December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.
After consideration of all positive and negative evidence, we believe that it is more likely than not that a portion of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. As a result, we established a valuation allowance of $299$446 million as of December 31, 20132016 and $316$499 million as of December 31, 2012.2015, representing a decrease of $53 million. The decrease in the valuation allowance as of December 31, 2013,2016, as compared to December 31, 2012,2015, is primarily attributable primarily due to greater than expectedthe release of valuation allowance related to certain foreign tax net operating losses which expired in 2016. The release was offset by an increase to the valuation allowance related to federal and state tax credits and state tax net operating loss utilization as well as a change in judgment related to expected ability to realize certain deferred tax assets.carryforwards. The income tax impact of the unrealized gain or loss component of other comprehensive income and stockholders' equity was a charge of $72$9 million in 2013,2016, a charge of $43$25 million in 2012,2015, and a benefitcharge of $1$21 million in 2011.2014.
We dohave not provideprovided U.S. income taxes and foreign withholding taxes on unremittedthe undistributed earnings of our foreign subsidiaries whereas of December 31, 2016 because we haveintend to permanently reinvest such earnings outside the U.S. As of December 31, 2016, the cumulative amount of excess financial reporting basis over the tax basis of investments in foreign subsidiaries that is indefinitely reinvested is approximately $9.8 billion. Generally, such earnings in our foreign operations. We doamounts become subject to U.S. taxation upon the remittance of dividends and under certain other circumstances. It is not believe it is practicable to estimate the amount of income taxes payable on the earnings that are indefinitely reinvesteddeferred tax liability related to investments in these foreign operations due to the complexities of this calculation. Unremitted earnings of our foreign subsidiaries that we have indefinitely reinvested in foreign operations were $11.902 billion as of December 31, 2013 and $11.041 billion as of December 31, 2012.subsidiaries.
We obtain tax incentives through Free Trade Zone Regime offered in Costa Rica which allows 100% exemption from income tax in the first eight years of operations and 50% exemption in the following four years. This tax incentive resulted in income tax savings of $6123 million, for 2016, $7 million, for 2015, and $27 million for the years 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively.2014. The tax incentive for 100% exemption from income tax is expected to expire in 2015.2023. The impact of per share earnings is $0.09 for 2016 and immaterial for 2013, 2012,2015 and 2011.2014.
As of December 31, 2013,2016, we had $1.069$1.095 billion of gross unrecognized tax benefits, of which a net $9391.006 billion, if recognized, would affect our effective tax rate. As of December 31, 2015, we had $1.056 billion of gross unrecognized tax benefits, of which a net $900 million, if recognized, would affect our effective tax rate. As of December 31, 2012,2014, we had $1.0521.047 billion of gross unrecognized tax benefits, of which a net $902903 million, if recognized, would affect our effective tax rate. A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits is as follows (in millions):
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Beginning Balance | | $ | 1,052 |
| | $ | 987 |
| | $ | 965 |
| | $ | 1,056 |
| | $ | 1,047 |
| | $ | 1,102 |
|
| Additions based on positions related to the current year | | 58 |
| | 54 |
| | 104 |
| | 47 |
| | 32 |
| | 44 |
|
| Additions based on positions related to prior years | | 45 |
| | 43 |
| | 8 |
| | 14 |
| | 38 |
| | 3 |
|
| Reductions for tax positions of prior years | | (40 | ) | | (27 | ) | | (72 | ) | | (17 | ) | | (36 | ) | | (87 | ) |
| Settlements with taxing authorities | | (15 | ) | | (1 | ) | | (3 | ) | | (3 | ) | | (18 | ) | | (5 | ) |
| Statute of limitation expirations | | (31 | ) | | (4 | ) | | (15 | ) | | (2 | ) | | (7 | ) | | (10 | ) |
| Ending Balance | | $ | 1,069 |
| | $ | 1,052 |
| | $ | 987 |
| | $ | 1,095 |
| | $ | 1,056 |
| | $ | 1,047 |
|
We are subject to U.S. Federal income tax as well as income tax of multiple state and foreign jurisdictions. We have concluded all U.S. federal income tax matters through 2000, all foreign income tax matters through 2002 and substantially all material state local and foreignlocal income tax matters through 2003.2005.
We have received Notices of Deficiency from the IRSInternal Revenue Service (IRS) reflecting proposed audit adjustments for Guidant Corporation for its 2001 through 2006 tax years and Boston Scientific Corporation for its 2006 and 2007 tax years. Subsequent to issuing these Notices, the IRS conceded a portion of its original assessment. The total incremental tax liability now asserted by the IRS for the applicable periods is $1.162$1.162 billion plus interest. The primary issue in dispute for all years is the transfer pricing in connectionassociated with the technology license agreements between domestic and foreign subsidiaries of Guidant. In addition, the IRS has proposed adjustments in connection with the financial terms of our Transaction Agreement with Abbott Laboratories pertaining to the sale of Guidant's vascular intervention business to Abbott in April 2006. During 2014,
we received a Revenue Agent Report from the IRS reflecting significant proposed audit adjustments to our 2008, 2009, and 2010 tax years based upon the same transfer pricing methodologies that the IRS applied to our 2001 through 2007 tax years.
We do not agree with the transfer pricing methodologies applied by the IRS or its resulting assessment and we believe that the IRS has exceeded its authority by attempting to adjust the terms of our negotiated third-party agreement with Abbott. In addition, we believe that the IRS positions with regard to these matters are inconsistent with the applicable tax laws and the existing Treasury regulations.
assessment. We believe we have meritorious defenses for our tax filings and we have filed or will timely file, petitions with the U.S. Tax Court (Tax Court) contesting the Notices of Deficiency for the 2001 through 2007 tax years in challenge. No payments onchallenge and submitted a letter to the net assessment would be required untilIRS Office of Appeals (IRS Appeals) protesting the dispute is definitively resolved, which, based on experiences of other companies, could take several years. The IRS is currently examiningRevenue Agent Report for the 2008 through 2010 tax years and requesting an administrative appeal hearing. The issues in dispute were scheduled to be heard in Tax Court in late July 2016. On July 19, 2016, we entered into a Stipulation of Boston Scientific. DuringSettled Issues with the first quarterIRS intended to resolve all of 2014the aforementioned transfer pricing issues, as well as the issues related to our transaction with Abbott. The Stipulation of Settled Issues is contingent upon IRS Appeals applying the same basis of settlement to all transfer pricing issues for the Company’s 2008, 2009, and 2010 tax years, and if applicable, review by the U.S. Congress Joint Committee on Taxation. In October 2016, we were notified byreached an agreement in principle with IRS Appeals as to the resolution of the transfer pricing issues in 2008, 2009, and 2010 tax years, subject to additional calculations of tax as well as documentation to memorialize our agreement.
In the event that the conditions in the Stipulation of Settled Items are satisfied, we expect to make net tax payments to the IRS of their intentapproximately $275 million, plus interest through the date of payment. If finalized, payments related to propose significant adjustmentsthe resolution are expected in the next nine to our tax returns for these tax years based upon the same transfer pricing methodologies that are currently being contested in U.S. Tax Court for our tax years prior to 2008. As with the prior years, we disagree with the transfer pricing methodologies being applied by the IRS and we expect to contest any adjustments received through applicable IRS and judicial procedures, as appropriate.18 months. We believe that our income tax reserves associated with these matters are adequate as of December 31, 2016 and we do not expect to recognize any additional charges related to resolution of this controversy. However, the final resolution willof these issues is contingent and if the Stipulation of Settled Issues is not have a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations. However, final resolution is uncertain andfinalized, it could have a material impact on our financial condition, or results of operations.operations, or cash flows.
We recognize interest and penalties related to income taxes as a component of income tax expense. We had $402$572 million accrued for gross interest and penalties as of December 31, 20132016 and $364$500 million as of December 31, 2012.2015. The increase in gross interest and penalties was the result of $38$72 million was recognized in our consolidated statements of operations. We recognized $22 million ofnet tax expense related to interest and penalties related to income taxesof $46 million in 2013, recognized $342016, $37 million in 20122015 and released $18$26 million in 2011.2014.
It is reasonably possible that within the next 12 months we will resolve multiple issues including transfer pricing and transactionaltransactional- related issues with foreign, federal and state taxing authorities, in which case we could record a reduction in our balance of unrecognized tax benefits of up to $27 million.approximately $758 million.
In September 2013, Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service issued final regulations regarding the deduction and capitalization of expenditures related to tangible property under Internal Revenue Code Sections (“IRC”) 162, 167 and 263(a). These regulations apply to amounts paid to acquire, produce, or improve tangible property as well as dispositions of such property. The general effective date is tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2014. We have evaluated these regulations and determined that they will not have a material impact on our results of operations.
NOTE K – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
The medical device market in which we primarily participate is largely technology driven. As a result, intellectual property rights, particularly patents and trade secrets, play a significant role in product development and differentiation. Over the years, there has been litigation initiated against us by others, including our competitors, claiming that our current or former product offerings infringe patents owned or licensed by them. Intellectual property litigation is inherently complex and unpredictable. In addition, competing parties frequently file multiple suits to leverage patent portfolios across product lines, technologies and geographies and to balance risk and exposure between the parties. In some cases, several competitors are parties in the same proceeding, or in a series of related proceedings, or litigate multiple features of a single class of devices. These forces frequently drive settlement not only for individual cases, but also for a series of pending and potentially related and unrelated cases. Although monetary and injunctive relief is typically sought, remedies and restitution are generally not determined until the conclusion of the trial court proceedings and can be modified on appeal. Accordingly, the outcomes of individual cases are difficult to time, predict or quantify and are often dependent upon the outcomes of other cases in other geographies.
During recent years, we successfully negotiated closure of several long-standing legal matters and have received favorable legal rulings in several other matters; however, there continues to be outstanding intellectual property litigation. Adverse outcomes in one or more of these matters could have a material adverse effect on our ability to sell certain products and on our operating margins, financial position, results of operations and/or liquidity.
In the normal course of business, product liability, securities and commercial claims are asserted against us. Similar claims may be asserted against us in the future related to events not known to management at the present time. We maintain an insurance policy providing limited coverage against securities claims, and we are substantially self-insured with respect to product liability claims and fully self-insured with respect to intellectual property infringement claims. The absence of significant third-party insurance coverage increases our potential exposure to unanticipated claims or adverse decisions. Product liability claims, securities and commercial litigation, and other legal proceedings in the future, regardless of their outcome, could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and/or liquidity.
In addition, like other companies in the medical device industry, we are subject to extensive regulation by national, state and local government agencies in the United States and other countries in which we operate. From time to time we are the subject of qui
tam actions and governmental investigations often involving regulatory, marketing and other business practices. These qui tam actions and governmental investigations could result in the commencement of civil and criminal proceedings, substantial fines, penalties and administrative remedies and have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and/or liquidity.
We record losses for claims in excess of the limits of purchased insurance in earnings at the time and to the extent they are probable and estimable. In accordance with FASB ASC Topic 450, Contingencies, we accrue anticipated costs of settlement, damages, losses for general product liability claims and, under certain conditions, costs of defense, based on historical experience or to the extent specific losses are probable and estimable. Otherwise, we expense these costs as incurred. If the estimate of a probable loss is a range and no amount within the range is more likely, we accrue the minimum amount of the range.
Our accrual for legal matters that are probable and estimable was $607 million$2.023 billion as of December 31, 20132016 and $491 million$1.936 billion as of December 31, 2012,2015, and includes certain estimated costs of settlement, damages and defense. The increase in our legal accrual was primarily due to litigation-related charges recorded during the year. During 2013, 20122016, 2015 and 2011,2014, we recorded litigation-related net charges in the amount of $221$804 million, $192 million,$1.105 billion, and $48 million,$1.036 billion, respectively. We continue to assess certain litigation and claims to determine the amounts, if any, that management believes will be paid as a result of such claims and litigation and, therefore, additional losses may be accrued and paid in the future, which could materially adversely impact our operating results, cash flows and/or our ability to comply with our debt covenants.
In management's opinion, we are not currently involved in any legal proceedings other than those specifically identified below, which, individually or in the aggregate, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, operations and/or cash flows. Unless included in our legal accrual or otherwise indicated below, a range of loss associated with any individual material legal proceeding cannot be estimated.
Patent Litigation
On September 22, 2009, Cordis Corporation, Cordis LLC and Wyeth Corporation filed a complaint for patent infringement against Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. and us alleging that the PROMUS® coronary stent system, supplied to us by Abbott, infringes a patent (the Llanos patent) owned by Cordis and Wyeth. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey seeking monetary and injunctive relief. In August 2010, Cordis filed an amended complaint to add an additional patent and in September 2010, we filed counterclaims of invalidity and non-infringement. On October 26, 2011, the District Court granted Cordis' motion to add the Promus Element stent system to the case. On February 6, 2012, the District Court granted our motion to stay the action until the conclusion of the reexaminations against the Llanos patents that are pending in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
On May 19, 2005, G. David Jang, M.D. filed suit against us alleging breach of contract relating to certain patent rights covering stent technology. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California seeking monetary damages and rescission of contract. After a Markman ruling relating to the Jang patent rights, Dr. Jang stipulated to the dismissal of certain claims alleged in the complaint with a right to appeal and the parties subsequently agreed to settle the other claims. In May 2007, Dr. Jang filed an appeal with respect to the remaining patent claims and in July 2008, the Court of Appeals vacated the District Court's consent judgment and remanded the case back to the District Court for further clarification. In August 2011, the District Court entered a stipulated judgment that we did not infringe the Jang patent. Dr. Jang filed an appeal on September 21, 2011 and on August 22, 2012, the Court of Appeals vacated the District Court's judgment and remanded the case to the District Court for further proceedings.
On MayJuly 8, 2015, a jury found that our Express Stent family did not literally infringe a Jang patent, but that the stents infringed under the doctrine of equivalents. The court reserved judgment until the conclusion of further proceedings related to the doctrine of equivalents finding. On September 29, 2015, the court ruled that our Express Stent family did not infringe under the doctrine of equivalents and, on October 30, 2015, the court entered judgment in our favor. On November 25, 2010,2015, Dr. Jang filed suit against Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc.a motion for judgment as a matter of law on literal infringement and/or for a new trial. On February 3, 2016, the court denied Dr. Jang’s motion for a new trial and us alleging breachjudgment as a matter of contract relating to certain patent rights covering stent technology. In October 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware entered judgment in favor of us on the pleadings.law. Dr. Jang filed an appeal on August 28, 2012. On September 5, 2013, the Courta notice of Appeals for the Third Circuit vacated the ruling and remanded the case to the District Court.appeal.
On September 27, 2010, Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc., Boston Scientific Ltd., Endovascular Technologies, Inc. and we filed suit against Taewoong Medical, Co., Ltd., Standard Sci-Tech, Inc., EndoChoice, Inc. and Sewoon Medical Co., Ltd for infringement of three patents on stents for use in the GI system (the Pulnev and Hankh patents) and against Cook Medical Inc. (and related entities) for infringement of the same three patents and an additional patent (the Thompson patent). The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief. In December 2010, we amended our complaint to add infringement of six additional Pulnev patents. In January 2011, the defendants filed a counterclaim of invalidity and unenforceability. In DecemberSeptember 2011, we amended the complaint to add Chek-Med Systems d/b/a GI Supply as a defendant. On December 22, 2016 the following defendants were dismissed: Taewoong Medical Co., Ltd., GI Supply, Inc., Standard Sci-Tech, Inc., Endochoice, Inc. and Sewoon Medical Co. Trial against the remaining parties is scheduled to begin September 11, 2017.
On October 30, 2015, a subsidiary of Boston Scientific filed suit against Edwards Lifesciences Corporation and Edwards Lifesciences Services GmbH in Düsseldorf District Court in Germany for patent infringement. We allege that Edwards’ SAPIEN™ 3 heart valve infringes our patent related to adaptive sealing technology. On February 25, 2016, we extended the action to allege infringement of a second patent related to adaptive sealing technology. The trial began on February 7, 2017.
On May 17, 2010, Dr. Luigi TelliniNovember 9, 2015, Edwards Lifesciences, LLC filed suitan invalidity claim against one of our subsidiaries, Sadra Medical, Inc., in the High Court of Justice, Chancery Division Patents Court in the United Kingdom, alleging that a European patent owned by Sadra relating to a repositionable heart valve is invalid. On January 15, 2016, we filed our defense and counterclaim for a declaration
that our European patent is valid and infringed by Edwards. On February 25, 2016, we amended our counterclaim to allege infringement of a second patent related to adaptive sealing technology. A trial was held from January 18 to January 27, 2017.
On November 23, 2015, Edwards Lifesciences PVT, Inc. filed a patent infringement action against us and certainone of our subsidiaries, Guidant Italia S.r.l. and Boston Scientific S.p.A.,Medizintechnik GmbH, in the Civil Tribunal in Milan, ItalyDistrict Court of Düsseldorf, Germany alleging certain of our Cardiac Rhythm Management products infringe an Italiana European patent (the Tellini patent)(Spenser) owned by Dr. Tellini and seeking monetary damages. In January 2011, Dr. Tellini refiled amended claims after his initial claims were dismissed without prejudice to refile.Edwards is infringed by our Lotus™ Transcatheter Heart Valve System. The trial began on February 7, 2017.
On May 16, 2013, Vascular Solutions, Inc. filed suit against us, alleging that its Guidezilla™ guide extension catheter infringes three U.S. patents owned by Vascular Solutions. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota seeking monetary and injunctive relief. On May 28, 2013 Vascular Solutions filed an amended complaint adding an allegation of copyright infringement. On June 10, 2013, Vascular SolutionsNovember 23, 2015, Edwards Lifesciences Corporation filed a motion requesting a preliminary injunction. On July 11, 2013 we answered the amended complaint and filed a counterclaimpatent infringement action against Vascular Solutions, alleging that its Guideliner™ guide extension catheter infringes a U.S. patent owned by us. On December 12, 2013, the District Court granted the motion for a preliminary injunction and on December 26, 2013, we filed an appeal.
On August 2, 2013, Medtronic Ardian Luxembourg S.a.r.l. filed a complaint against Boston Scientific Corporationus and Boston Scientific Medizintechnik GmbH in the Düsseldorf District Court inof Düsseldorf, Germany alleging that the sale of our Vessix renal denervation product infringes a Germanan European patent (Bourang) owned by Medtronic Ardian. A hearingEdwards is scheduled for August 12, 2014.infringed by our Lotus Transcatheter Heart Valve System. The trial began on February 7, 2017.
On September 23, 2013, Kardiametrics, LLCApril 19, 2016, a subsidiary of Boston Scientific filed a complaintsuit against Edwards Lifesciences Corporation in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware for patent infringement. We allege that Edwards’ SAPIEN™ 3 valve infringes a patent related to adaptive sealing technology. On June 9, 2016, Edwards filed a counterclaim alleging that the saleour Lotus Transcatheter Heart Valve System infringes three patents owned by Edwards. On October 12, 2016, Edwards filed a petition for inter partes review of our FilterWire EZ Embolic Protection System, Sterling balloon catheters, Carotid NexStentpatent with the U.S. Patent and Carotid Wallstent products infringe two patents (the Azizi patents) owned by Kardiametrics. On January 24, 2014, we filed a motionTrademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The trial has been set to dismiss the case or in the alternative to stay the case pending an arbitration.begin on July 30, 2018.
On February 18, 2014, Atlas IP, LLCApril 19, 2016, a subsidiary of Boston Scientific filed a complaintsuit against Edwards Lifesciences Corporation in the United States District Court for the SouthernCentral District of FloridaCalifornia for patent infringement. We allege that Edwards’ aortic valve delivery systems infringe eight of our catheter related patents. On October 13, 2016, Edwards filed a petition for inter partes review of one asserted patent with the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The trial has been set to begin on May 29, 2018.
On April 26, 2016, Edwards Lifesciences PVT, Inc. filed a patent infringement action against us and one of our subsidiaries, Boston Scientific Medizintechnik GmbH, in the District Court of Düsseldorf, Germany alleging a European patent (Spenser) owned by Edwards is infringed by our Lotus Transcatheter Heart Valve System. The trial began on February 7, 2017.
On October 27, 2016, Edwards Lifesciences PVT, Inc. filed a patent infringement action against us and one of our subsidiaries, Boston Scientific, LTD, in the Federal Court of Canada alleging that three Canadian patents (Spenser) owned by Edwards are infringed by our Lotus Transcatheter Heart Valve System.
On October 28, 2016, the saleRegents of the University of California filed a patent infringement action against us in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California alleging that two U.S. patents (Lesh) owned by the Regents of the University of California are infringed by certain of our LATITUDE® Patient Management Systemcatheters and implantableother devices that communicate with the LATITUDE® device infringeused to treat atrial fibrillation.
On November 29, 2016 Nevro Corp. filed a patent (the Fischer patent)infringement action against us and one of our subsidiaries, Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California alleging that six U.S. patents (Alataris) owned by Atlas. Nevro Corp. are infringed by our spinal cord stimulation systems.
On December 9, 2016, the Company and Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation, filed a patent infringement action against Nevro Corp. in United States District Court for the District of Delaware alleging that ten U.S. patents owned by Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation are infringed by Nevro’s Senza™ Spinal Cord Stimulation System.
On December 22, 2016, Edwards Lifesciences PVT, Inc. and Edwards Lifesciences SA (AG) filed a plenary summons against Boston Scientific Limited and Boston Scientific Group Public Company in the High Court of Ireland alleging that a European patent (Spenser) owned by Edwards is infringed by our Lotus Transcatheter Heart Valve System.
Product Liability Litigation
Fewer than tenNo individual lawsuits remain pending in various state and federalcourt jurisdictions against Guidant alleging personal injuries associated with defibrillators or pacemakers involved in certain 2005 and 2006 product communications. Further, we are aware of approximately 308 Guidant product liability lawsuits pending in international jurisdictions associated with defibrillators or pacemakers, including devices involved in the 2005 and 2006 product communications. SixFour of these suits are pending in Canada and were filed as class actions, fourinvolving certain models of Guidant pacemakers, three of which are stayed pending the outcome of twoone lead class actions. On April 10, 2008, the Justice of Ontario Court certified a class of persons in whom defibrillators were implanted in Canada and a class of family members with derivative claims.action. On May 8, 2009, the Justice of Ontario Court certified a class of persons in whom pacemakers were implanted in Canada and a class of family members with derivative claims. In each case, these matters generally seek monetary damages from us. The parties in the defibrillatorThis class action have reached an agreement in principle to settle the matter for approximately $3 million. The presiding judge has set an approval hearing for this settlement forbeen inactive since 2011. On March 24, 2014.2014, the Ontario Superior Court approved a $3 million settlement of a class action involving certain models of Guidant defibrillators. We believe Guidant has satisfied its obligations pursuant to the settlement agreement.
As of February 25, 2014, there were over 18,00021, 2017, approximately 43,000 product liability cases or claims related to transvaginal surgical mesh products designed to treat stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse pendinghave been asserted against us. The pending cases are pending in various federal and state courts in the United States and include eight putative class actions. There were also over tenfewer than 20 cases in Canada, inclusive of one certified and three putative class actions.actions, and fewer than 20 claims in the United Kingdom. Generally, the plaintiffs allege personal injury associated with use of our transvaginal surgical mesh products. The plaintiffs assert design and manufacturing claims, failure to warn, breach of warranty, fraud, violations of state consumer protection laws and loss of consortium claims. Over 1,7003,100 of the cases have been specially assigned to one judge in state court in Massachusetts. On February 7, 2012, the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation (MDL) established MDL-2326 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia and transferred the federal court transvaginal surgical mesh cases to MDL-2326 for coordinated pretrial proceedings. In addition, in October 2012, the Attorney General for the State of California informed us that their office and certain other state attorneys general offices intended to initiate a civil investigation into our sale of transvaginal surgical mesh products. During the fourth quarter of 2013, we received written discovery requests from certain state attorneys general offices.offices regarding our transvaginal surgical mesh products. We are respondinghave responded to those requests. As of February 21, 2017, we have entered into master settlement agreements in principle or are in the final stages of entering one with certain plaintiffs' counsel to resolve an aggregate of approximately 31,000 cases and claims. The master settlement agreements provide that the settlement and distribution of settlement funds to participating claimants are conditional upon, among other things, achieving minimum required claimant participation thresholds. Of the approximately 31,000 cases and claims approximately 12,000 have met the conditions of the settlement and are final. All settlement agreements were entered into solely by way of compromise and without any admission or concession by us of any liability or wrongdoing.
On or about January 12, 2016, Teresa L. Stevens filed a claim against us and three other defendants asserting for herself, and on behalf of a putative class of similarly-situated women, that she was harmed by a vaginal mesh implant that she alleges contained a counterfeit or adulterated resin product that we imported from China. The complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, before the same Court that is hearing the mesh MDL. The complaint, which alleges Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) violations, fraud, misrepresentation, deceptive trade practices and unjust enrichment, seeks both equitable relief and damages under state and federal law. On January 26, 2016, the Court issued an order staying the case and directing the plaintiff to submit information to allow the FDA to issue a determination with respect to her allegations. In addition, we are in contact with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of West Virginia, and are responding voluntarily to their requests in connection with that office’s review of the allegations concerning the use of mesh resin in the complaint. We deny the plaintiff’s allegations and intend to defend ourselves vigorously.
We have established a product liability accrual for known and estimated future cases and claims asserted against us as well as with respect to the actions that have resulted in verdicts against us and the costs of defense thereof associated with our transvaginal surgical mesh products. While we believe that our accrual associated with this matter is adequate, changes to this accrual may be required in the future as additional information becomes available. WeWhile we continue to engage in discussions with plaintiffs’ counsel regarding potential resolution of pending cases and claims and intend to vigorously contest the cases and claims asserted against us; however,that do not settle, the final resolution of the cases and claims is uncertain and could have a material impact on our results of operations, financial condition and/or liquidity. Initial trials involving our transvaginal surgical mesh products have resulted in both favorable and unfavorable judgments for us. We do not believe that the judgment in any one trial is representative of potential outcomes of all cases or claims related to our transvaginal surgical mesh products.
Governmental Investigations and Qui Tam Matters
On June 27, 2008, the Republic of Iraq filed a complaint against our wholly-owned subsidiary, BSSA France, and 92 other defendants in the U.S. District Court of the Southern District of New York. The complaint alleges that the defendants acted improperly in connection with the sale of products under the United Nations Oil for Food Program. The complaint also alleges Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) violations, conspiracy to commit fraud and the making of false statements and improper payments, and it seeks monetary and punitive damages. A hearing on the pending motion to dismiss was held on October 26, 2012, and on February 6, 2013, the District Court dismissed the complaint with prejudice on standing and jurisdictional grounds. The plaintiff filed an appeal, which is pending.
On March 12, 2010, we received a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) from the Civil Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) requesting documents and information relating to reimbursement advice offered by us relating to certain CRM devices. We are cooperating with the request.
On August 3, 2012, we were served with a qui tam complaint that had previously been filed under seal against Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corp. in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on March 2, 2011. On August 8, 2012, we learned that the federal government had previously declined to intervene in this matter. The relators’ complaint, now unsealed, alleges that Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corp. violated the federal and various states' false claims acts through submission of fraudulent bills for implanted devices, under-reporting of certain adverse events, and promotion of off-label uses. On September 10, 2012, the relators filed an amended complaint revising and restating certain of the claims in the original complaint. Our motion to dismiss, filed subsequently, was denied on May 31, 2013, and on June 28, 2013, we answered the amended complaint and brought certain counterclaims arising from relators’ unauthorized removal of documents from the business during their employments, which the relators moved to dismiss on July 22, 2013. The Court denied relators’ motion to dismiss the counterclaims on September 4, 2014.
On May 5, 2014, we were served with a subpoena from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General. The subpoena seeks information relating to the launch of the Cognis and Teligen line of devices in 2008, the performance of those devices from 2007 to 2009, and the operation of the Physician Guided Learning Program. We are cooperating with this request. On May 6, 2016, a qui tam lawsuit in this matter was unsealed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. At the same time, we learned that the U.S. Government and the State of California had earlier declined to intervene in that lawsuit on April 15, 2016. The complaint was served on us on July 21, 2016. On October 7, 2016, the plaintiff/relator served an Amended Complaint that dropped the allegations relating to the Physician Guided Learning Program.
On February 23, 2015, a judge for the Court of Modena (Italy) ordered a trial for Boston Scientific SpA and three of its employees, as well as numerous other defendants charged in criminal proceedings. The charges arise from allegations that the defendants made improper donations to certain health care providers and other employees of the Hospital of Modena in order to induce them to conduct unauthorized clinical trials, as well as related government fraud in relation to the financing of such clinical trials. A trial began on February 24, 2016 and is ongoing. We deny these allegations and intend to defend ourselves vigorously.
On December 1, 2015, the Brazilian governmental entity known as CADE (the Administrative Council of Economic Defense), served a search warrant on the offices of our Brazilian subsidiary, as well as on the Brazilian offices of several other major medical device makers who do business in Brazil, in furtherance of an investigation into alleged anti-competitive activity with respect to certain tender offers for government contracts. We are cooperating fully with CADE’s inquiry.
On December 14, 2016, we learned that the Associacao Brasileira de Medicina de Grupo d/b/a ABRAMGE filed a Complaint against the Company, Arthrex and Zimmer Biomet Holdings, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. This Complaint, which ABRAMGE never served against the Company, alleges that the defendants or their agents paid kickbacks to health care providers in order to increase sales and prices, and are liable under a variety of common law theories. On February 6, 2017, ABRAMGE filed and served an Amended Complaint on the Company and the other defendants. The Amended Complaint does not contain any material changes in the allegations against the Company. We deny these allegations and intend to defend ourselves vigorously if ABRAMGE serves the Complaint.
Other Proceedings
In June of 2016, Guidant asserted three arbitrations claims, which are pending, related to three insurance policies for indemnity arising out of previously incurred and satisfied liabilities tied to allegedly defective cardiac rhythm management devices, which Guidant had manufactured. Guidant has claimed indemnities against such liabilities under insurance policies which it purchased for the 2004 policy year. The three insurance policies were issued respectively by Markel (Bermuda), Zurich (now Swiss Re International SE, UK Branch) and Swiss Re.
On November 2, 2015, Acacia Research Corporation (ARC) filed an arbitration demand with the American Arbitration Association alleging that the Company breached an agreement relating to the sale of patents from the Company to ARC. The hearing began on February 20, 2017.
Refer to Note J - Income Taxes for information regarding our tax litigation.
Matters Concluded Since December 31, 2015
On September 25, 2006, Johnson & Johnson22, 2014, The Board of Trustees for the University of Alabama filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama alleging that the sale of our cardiac resynchronization therapy devices infringe a patent owned by the University of Alabama. On August 21, 2015, the court ordered a stay pending our requests for inter partes review of all claims related to the patent before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). Our requests were rejected on September 24, 2015 and October 19, 2015. On March 7, 2016, the USPTO granted our reconsideration motion and initiated an inter partes review and, on March 29, 2016, the District Court stayed the case pending a decision in the inter partes review. On October 6, 2016 the parties reached a settlement agreement. On October 19, 2016, the case was dismissed with prejudice.
On March 12, 2010, we received a Civil Investigative Demand (CID) from the Civil Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) requesting documents and information relating to reimbursement advice offered by us relating to certain CRM devices. On February 9, 2016, the DOJ informed us that we are no longer required to retain documents and information relating to the CID.
On July 11, 2014, we were served with a subpoena from the U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey. The subpoena seeks information relating to BridgePoint Medical, Inc., which we acquired in October 2012, including information relating to its sale of CrossBoss™ and Stingray™ products, educational and training activities that relate to those sales and our acquisition of BridgePoint Medical. On August 20, 2015, the court unsealed a qui tam lawsuit brought by a former employee named Robin Levy against the company as well as a decision by the U.S. Attorney for New Jersey declining to intervene in the lawsuit. The lawsuit alleges that the company violated the federal and various state false claims acts through seeking to upcode Chronic Total Occlusion (“CTO”) procedures and requiring in-patient treatment and purchases of coronary stents in order for physicians to receive training on the CTO procedure. On January 26, 2016, the Court dismissed the qui tam lawsuit.
On March 18, 2015, Denise Fretter and Maria Korsgaard, claiming to represent a class of current and former female field sales employees at Boston Scientific Neuromodulation Corporation (BSNC), filed a lawsuit against BSNC in the U.S. District Court
for the Central District of California. The plaintiffs allege gender discrimination in pay, promotions and differential treatment against them and the putative class. On February 6, 2016, the parties entered into a confidential settlement agreement, and the case has been dismissed.
On April 24, 2014, Dr. Qingsheng Zhu and Dr. Julio Spinelli, acting jointly on behalf of the stockholder representative committee of Action Medical, Inc. (Action Medical), filed a lawsuit against us Guidant and Abbott Laboratoriesour subsidiary, Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc. (CPI), in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The stockholder representatives alleged that we and CPI breached a contractual duty to pursue development and commercialization of certain patented heart pacing methods and devices and to return certain patents. On March 15, 2016, the Court granted summary judgment in our favor as to all of plaintiffs’ claims for damages. The parties subsequently reached a resolution on the remaining claim and counterclaim concerning specific performance, and the case was dismissed on June 29, 2016.
On February 18, 2014, Atlas IP, LLC filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The complaint allegesFlorida alleging that Guidant breached certain provisionsthe sale of the amended merger agreement between Johnson & Johnsonour LATITUDE™ Patient Management System and Guidant (Merger Agreement) as well as the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing. The complaint further allegesimplantable devices that Abbott and we tortiously interferedcommunicate with the Merger AgreementLATITUDE™ Device infringe a patent owned by inducing Guidant's breach. The complaint seeks certain factual findings, damages in an amount no less than $5.5 billion and attorneys' fees and costs. In August 2007,Atlas. On July 9, 2014, the judgeDistrict Court granted our motion to transfer venue to the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. On January 12, 2015, Atlas dismissed the tortious interference claims against us and Abbott and the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing claim against Guidant.its complaint. On June 20, 2011, Guidant filed a motion for summary judgment, and the hearing on this motion was held on July 25, 2012.
On October 5, 2007, Dr. Tassilo BonzelSeptember 22, 2015, Atlas IP LLC filed a complaint against Pfizer, Inc.in Federal Court in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada alleging that the sale of our LATITUDE™ Patient Management System and our Schneider subsidiaries andimplantable devices that communicate with the LATITUDE™ Device infringe certain claims of a Canadian patent owned by Atlas. OnOctober 25, 2016, the claim against us in the District Court in Kassel, Germany alleging that a 1995 license agreement related to a catheter patent is invalid under German law and seeking monetary damages. In June 2009, the District Court dismissed all but one of Dr. Bonzel's claims and in October 2009, he added new claims. We opposed the addition of the new claims. The District Court ordered Dr. Bonzel to select the claims he would pursue and in January 2011, he made that selection. A hearing is scheduled for March 28, 2014.Canada was dismissed.
On September 28, 2011, we served a complaint against Mirowski Family Ventures LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana for a declaratory judgment that we have paid all royalties owed and did not breach any contractual or fiduciary obligations arising out of a license agreement. Mirowski answered and filed counterclaims requesting damages. On May 13, 2013, Mirowski Family Ventures served us with a complaint alleging breach of contract in Montgomery County Circuit Court, Maryland, and they amended this complaint on August 1, 2013. On July 29, 2013, the Indiana case was dismissed. On September 10, 2013, we removed the case to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. AOn June 5, 2014, the District Court granted Mirowski’s motion to remand the case back to the Montgomery County Circuit Court. On September 24, 2014, following a jury verdict against us, the Montgomery County Circuit Court Maryland is pending.
Referentered a judgment that we breached our license agreement with Mirowski and awarded damages of $308 million. On October 28, 2014, the Montgomery County Circuit Court denied our post-trial motions seeking to Note J - Income Taxes for information regarding our tax litigation.
Matters Concluded Since December 31, 2012
overturn the judgment. On February 1, 2008, Wyeth Corporation and Cordis Corporation filed an amended complaint for patent infringement against Abbott Laboratories, adding us and Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. as additional defendants to the complaint. The suit alleged that the PROMUS® coronary stent system, supplied to us by Abbott, infringes three U.S. patents (the Morris patents) owned by Wyeth and licensed to Cordis. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey seeking monetary and injunctive relief. Wyeth and Cordis subsequently withdrew their infringement claim as to one of the patents, and the District Court found the remaining two patents invalid. Wyeth and CordisNovember 19, 2014, we filed an appeal and on June 26, 2013,with the Maryland Court of Appeals forSpecial Appeals. On January 29, 2016, the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court’s judgment in favorMaryland Court of Boston Scientific. On October 13, 2013, Wyeth’s motion for rehearing or rehearing en banc was denied. The deadline for further appeals lapsed on January 13, 2014.
On December 4, 2009, we, along with Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc., filed a complaint for patent infringement against Cordis Corporation alleging that its Cypher Mini™ stent product infringes a U.S. patent (the Jang patent) owned by us. In April 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware granted summary judgment that Cordis willfully infringed the Jang patent. After a trial on damages in May 2011, the jury found in favor of Boston Scientific for lost profits of approximately $18.5 million and royalties of approximately $1 million. On March 13, 2012, the District Court granted our motion for enhanced damages, resulting in a total damages award of approximately $41 million. On February 12, 2013, the Court ofSpecial Appeals affirmed the District Court's judgment in favor of Boston Scientific.
On November 17, 2009, Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. filed suit against OrbusNeich Medical, Inc. and certain of its subsidiaries in the Hague District Court in the Netherlands alleging that OrbusNeich's saledecision of the Genous stent infringesMontgomery County Circuit Court. On February 2, 2016, we filed a patent owned by us (the Keith patent) and seeking monetary damages and injunctive relief.motion for reconsideration, which was denied. On March 13, 2012,July 12, 2016, the HagueMaryland Court of Appeals denied our requestpetition for preliminary relief.certiorari. On April 2, 2013, the Hague Court of Appeals found the Keith patent invalid.
In December 2007,July 26, 2016, we were informed by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of Texas that it was conducting an investigation of allegations related to improper promotion of biliary stents for off-label uses. The allegations were set forthpaid $366 million in a qui tam complaint, which named us and certain of our competitors. Following the federal government's decision not to intervene in the case, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas unsealed the complaint. In March 2012, the District Court issued its opinion ordering that all claims against us be dismissed, some of which were dismissed with prejudice and some of which were dismissed without prejudice to the relator's right to amend those claims. On September 14, 2012, the relator filed and served an amended complaint restating the claims that the District Court dismissed without prejudice. On January 17, 2013, the District Court granted our motion to dismiss with prejudice allsatisfaction of the relator's remaining claims against us,judgment and on May 13, 2013,interest, subject to a right of rescission should the deadline for further appeals lapsed.
judgment be reversed. On October 17, 2008, we received a subpoena from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Inspector General, requesting information related to the alleged use of a skin adhesive in certain of our CRM products. In early 2010, we learned that this subpoena was related to a qui tam action filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York. The Department of Justice intervened in the case in 2010. In October 2013 we entered into a settlement agreement with the parties pursuant to which we agreed to pay $30 million to the DOJ and $1 million in legal fees to Mr. Allen’s counsel, and7, 2016 we filed a joint motionPetition for Writ of Certiorari with the parties to dismissUnited States Supreme Court. On February 21, 2017, the case. The judge dismissed the case on October 31, 2013.Court denied our petition.
On January 15, 2010, Cordis Corporation filed a complaint against us and Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc. alleging that the PROMUS® coronary stent system, supplied to us by Abbott Laboratories, infringes three patents (the Fischell patents) owned by Cordis. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware and sought monetary and injunctive relief. We filed counterclaims of invalidity and non-infringement. The District Court found that the PROMUS stent system does not infringe the Fischell patents and that our sales of this product were authorized. On May 13, 2013, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the District Court’s judgment in favor of Boston Scientific. The deadline for further appeals lapsed on August 12, 2013.
On October 21, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts unsealed a qui tam complaint that related to the subject matter of a U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts investigation, which investigation has been discontinued and is described below, after the federal government declined to intervene in the matter. Subsequently, on January 30, 2012, the relator filed an amended complaint. On July 5, 2012, the District Court issued an opinion and order dismissing the amended complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On July 12, 2012, the relator appealed the judgment of dismissal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit. On May 31, 2013, the Court of Appeals rejected the relator's appeal and affirmed the dismissal of the amended complaint. The deadline for further appeals lapsed on August 29, 2013.
On March 16, 2009, OrbusNeich Medical, Inc. filed suit against us in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, alleging that our VeriFLEX™ (Liberté®) bare-metal coronary stent system infringes two U.S. patents (the Addonizio and Pazienza patents) owned by it. The complaint also alleged breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secrets and sought monetary and injunctive relief. In September 2009, OrbusNeich filed an amended complaint against us alleging additional state law claims. In March 2010, the District Court dismissed OrbusNeich's unjust enrichment and fraud claims, but denied our motion to dismiss the remaining state law claims. OrbusNeich amended its complaint in April 2010 to add another patent (another Addonizio patent). In January 2011, OrbusNeich amended its complaint to drop its misappropriation of trade secret, statutory and unfair competition claims and in July 2011, it further amended its complaint to include allegations that our ION™ coronary stent system infringes two additional patents. On February 24, 2012, the District Court granted our motion to stay the patent claims, and on June 4, 2012, the District Court stayed the breach of contract claim, in each case, pending re-examination of the patents in suit. In addition, in February 2013, Orbus International B.V. filed suits against us and two Dutch subsidiaries in the Hague District Court in the Netherlands and Orbus Medical GmbH filed suit against us and one of our subsidiaries in the Dusseldorf District Court in Germany. In March 2013, Orbus Medical Inc. and Orbus International B.V. filed suit against us and two of our Irish subsidiaries in the Irish Commercial Court in Dublin, Ireland. Each of these matters alleges that our sale of stent systems using the Element design infringe European patents owned by Orbus Medical Inc. and licensed to other Orbus entities. In one Dutch matter, Orbus sought cross-border, preliminary injunctive relief, which the court denied on July 9, 2013. In the other Dutch matter, Orbus sought damages and injunctive relief. In one German matter, Orbus sought preliminary injunctive relief, which the Dusseldorf District Court granted on April 30, 2013. On that same date, we appealed the injunction to the Court of Appeals of Dusseldorf. In the other German matter, Orbus sought damages and injunctive relief. In the Irish matter, Orbus sought damages and injunctive relief. In March 2013, two of our subsidiaries filed suit against Orbus Medical Inc. in the English High Court seeking a declaration that the sale of the stent systems with the Element design does not infringe two Orbus patents and seeking to have the two patents found
invalid. On June 5, 2013, Orbus cancelled one of the two UK patents. On September 15, 2013, the parties entered into a settlement agreement that resolves all stent-related cases brought by the parties in Germany, the Netherlands, Ireland, the United Kingdom and the United States. The agreement includes a one-time payment from us to OrbusNeich, with no future financial obligations.
On March 22, 2010, we received a subpoena from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts seeking documents relating to the former Market Development Sales Organization that operated within our CRM business. On October 21, 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts unsealed a qui tam complaint that related to the subject matter of the U.S. Attorney's investigation, after the federal government declined to intervene in the matter. Subsequently, on January 30, 2012, the relator filed an amended complaint. The District Court case has been concluded and is described above. On October 30, 2013, the U.S. Attorney’s office informed us that the government was discontinuing its investigation.
NOTE L – STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
Preferred Stock
We are authorized to issue 50 million shares of preferred stock in one or more series and to fix the powers, designations, preferences and relative participating, option or other rights thereof, including dividend rights, conversion rights, voting rights, redemption terms, liquidation preferences and the number of shares constituting any series, without any further vote or action by our stockholders. As of December 31, 20132016 and 2012,2015, we had no shares of preferred stock issued or outstanding.
Common Stock
We are authorized to issue 2.0 billion shares of common stock, $0.01 par value per share. Holders of common stock are entitled to one vote per share. Holders of common stock are entitled to receive dividends, if and when declared by the Board of Directors, and to share ratably in our assets legally available for distribution to our stockholders in the event of liquidation. Holders of common stock have no preemptive, subscription, redemption, or conversion rights. The holders of common stock do not have cumulative voting rights. The holders of a majority of the shares of common stock can elect all of the directors and can control our management and affairs.
In July 2011, our Board of Directors approved a share repurchase program authorizing the repurchase of up to $1.0 billion in shares of our common stock and re-approved approximately 37 million shares remaining under a previous share repurchase program. On January 25, 2013, our Board of Directors approved a new stock repurchase program authorizing the repurchase of up to $1.0 billion of our common stock. Throughout 2013, we repurchased approximately 51 millionWe did not repurchase any shares of our common stock for $500 million.during 2016 or 2015. During 2012,2014, we repurchased approximately 10510 million shares of our common stock for $600 million. During 2011, we repurchased approximately 82 million shares of our common stock for $492125 million. Repurchased shares are available for reissuance under our equity incentive plans and for general corporate purposes, including acquisitions. As of December 31, 2013,2016, we had completed our share repurchase program authorized in 2011 and previous share repurchase programs. We had remaining $660$535 million authorized under our 2013 share repurchase program as of December 31, 2013.program. There were approximately 238248 million shares in treasury as of December 31, 20132016 and187 million shares in treasury as of December 31, 2012.2015.
NOTE M – STOCK OWNERSHIP PLANS
Employee and Director Stock Incentive Plans
In March and May 2011, our Board of Directors and stockholders, respectively, approved our 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the 2011 LTIP), authorizing up to 146 million shares of our common stock. The 2011 LTIP covers officers, directors, employees and consultants, and provides for the grant of restricted or unrestricted common stock, deferred stock units (DSU), options to acquire our common stock, stock appreciation rights, performance awards (market-based and performance-based DSUs) and other stock and non-stock awards. Shares reserved under our current and former stock incentive plans totaled approximately 242150 million as of December 31, 2013, which includes 50 million shares that are reserved, but are not issuable, under frozen equity long-term incentive plans. The 2011 LTIP covers officers, directors, employees and consultants and provide for the grant of various incentives, including qualified and nonqualified stock options, deferred stock units, stock grants, share appreciation rights, performance-based awards and market-based awards.2016. The Executive Compensation and Human Resources Committee of the Board of Directors, consisting of independent, non-employee directors, may authorize the issuance of common stock and authorize cash awards under the 2011 LTIP in recognition of the achievement of long-term performance objectives established by the Committee.
Nonqualified options issued to employees are generally granted with an exercise price equal to the market price of our stock on the grant date, vest over a four-year service period, and have a ten-year contractual life. In the case of qualified options, if the recipient owns more than ten percent of the voting power of all classes of stock, the option granted will be at an exercise price of 110 percent of the fair market value of our common stock on the date of grant and will expire over a period not to exceed five years. Non-vested stock awards, (includingincluding restricted stock awards and deferred stock units, issued to employees are generally granted with an exercise price of zero and typically vest in five equal annual installments. These awards represent our commitment to issue shares to recipients after the vesting period. Upon each vesting date, such awards are no longer subject to risk of forfeiture and we issue shares of our common stock to the recipient.
The following presents the impact of stock-based compensation on our consolidated statements of operations for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122016, 2015 and 2011:2014:
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions, except per share data) | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Cost of products sold | | $ | 8 |
| | $ | 15 |
| | $ | 25 |
| | $ | 6 |
| | $ | 7 |
| | $ | 6 |
|
| Selling, general and administrative expenses | | 79 |
| | 69 |
| | 74 |
| | 90 |
| | 81 |
| | 79 |
|
| Research and development expenses | | 18 |
| | 24 |
| | 29 |
| | 20 |
| | 19 |
| | 18 |
|
| | | 105 |
| | 108 |
| | 128 |
| | 116 |
| | 107 |
| | 103 |
|
| Less: income tax benefit | | (29 | ) | | (32 | ) | | (34 | ) | |
| Income tax benefit | | | (29 | ) | | (28 | ) | | (28 | ) |
| | | $ | 76 |
| | $ | 76 |
| | $ | 94 |
| | $ | 87 |
| | $ | 79 |
| | $ | 75 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Net impact per common share - basic | | $ | 0.06 |
| | $ | 0.05 |
| | $ | 0.06 |
| | $ | 0.06 |
| | $ | 0.06 |
| | $ | 0.06 |
|
| Net impact per common share - assuming dilution | | $ | 0.06 |
| | $ | 0.05 |
| | $ | 0.06 |
| | $ | 0.06 |
| | $ | 0.06 |
| | $ | 0.06 |
|
Stock Options
We generally use the Black-Scholes option-pricing model to calculate the grant-date fair value of stock options granted to employees under our stock incentive plans. We calculated the fair value for options granted during 2013, 20122016, 2015 and 20112014 using the following estimated weighted-average assumptions:
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Options granted (in thousands) | | 1,992 |
| | 4,726 |
| | 16,311 |
| | 4,186 |
| | 4,441 |
| | 4,943 |
|
| Weighted-average exercise price | | $ | 7.44 |
| | $ | 6.23 |
| | $ | 7.11 |
| | $ | 17.46 |
| | $ | 16.49 |
| | $ | 13.02 |
|
| Weighted-average grant-date fair value | | $ | 2.84 |
| | $ | 2.60 |
| | $ | 3.07 |
| | $ | 5.60 |
| | $ | 5.54 |
| | $ | 5.07 |
|
| Black-Scholes Assumptions | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Expected volatility | | 36 | % | | 43 | % | | 42 | % | | 30 | % | | 31 | % | | 37 | % |
| Expected term (in years, weighted) | | 5.9 |
| | 5.9 |
| | 6.1 |
| | 6.0 |
| | 6.0 |
| | 6.0 |
|
| Risk-free interest rate | | 0.89% - 1.72% |
| | 0.95% - 1.15% |
| | 1.16% - 2.61% |
| | 1.14% - 2.08% |
| | 1.49% - 1.92% |
| | 1.69% - 2.09% |
|
Expected Volatility
We use our historical volatility and implied volatility as a basis to estimate expected volatility in our valuation of stock options.
Expected Term
We estimate the expected term of options using historical exercise and forfeiture data. We believe that this historical data areprovides the best estimate of the expected term of new option grants.
Risk-Free Interest Rate
We use yield rates on U.S. Treasury securities for a period approximating the expected term of the award to estimate the risk-free interest rate in our grant-date fair value assessment.
Expected Dividend Yield
We have not historically paid cash dividends to our shareholdersstockholders and currently do not intend to pay cash dividends. Therefore, we have assumed an expected dividend yield of zero in our grant-date fair value assessment.
Information related to stock options for 2013, 20122016, 2015 and 20112014 under stock incentive plans is as follows:
| | | | | Stock Options (in thousands) | | Weighted Average Exercise Price | | Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life (in years) | | Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in millions) | | Stock Options (in thousands) | | Weighted Average Exercise Price | | Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Life (in years) | | Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in millions) |
| Outstanding as of December 31, 2010 | | 60,374 |
| | $ | 14 |
| | | | | |
| Outstanding as of December 31, 2013 | | | 44,892 |
| | $ | 12 |
| | | | |
| Granted | | 16,311 |
| | 7 |
| | | | | | 4,943 |
| | 13 |
| | | | |
| Exercised | | (18 | ) | | 7 |
| | | | | | (4,418 | ) | | 8 |
| | | | |
| Cancelled/forfeited | | (15,746 | ) | | 12 |
| | | | | | (5,909 | ) | | 17 |
| | | | |
| Outstanding as of December 31, 2011 | | 60,921 |
| | $ | 13 |
| | | | | |
| Outstanding as of December 31, 2014 | | | 39,508 |
| | $ | 11 |
| | | | |
| Granted | | 4,726 |
| | 6 |
| | | | | | 4,441 |
| | 16 |
| | | | |
| Exercised | | — |
| | — |
| | | | | | (9,040 | ) | | 9 |
| | | | |
| Cancelled/forfeited | | (10,766 | ) | | 15 |
| | | | | | (3,820 | ) | | 25 |
| | | | |
| Outstanding as of December 31, 2012 | | 54,881 |
| | $ | 12 |
| | | |
| Outstanding as of December 31, 2015 | | | 31,089 |
| | $ | 11 |
| | |
| Granted | | 1,992 |
| | 7 |
| | | | | | 4,186 |
| | 17 |
| | |
| Exercised | | (7,221 | ) | | 8 |
| | | | | | (6,612 | ) | | 12 |
| | |
| Cancelled/forfeited | | (4,760 | ) | | 21 |
| | | | | | (2,019 | ) | | 21 |
| | |
| Outstanding as of December 31, 2013 | | 44,892 |
| | $ | 12 |
| | 5.2 | | $ | 137 |
| |
| Exercisable as of December 31, 2013 | | 32,927 |
| | $ | 13 |
| | 4.3 | | 77 |
| |
| Expected to vest as of December 31, 2013 | | 11,433 |
| | 7 |
| | 7.6 | | 58 |
| |
| Total vested and expected to vest as of December 31, 2013 | | 44,360 |
| | $ | 12 |
| | 5.1 | | $ | 135 |
| |
| Outstanding as of December 31, 2016 | | | 26,644 |
| | $ | 11 |
| | 5.8 | | $ | 281 |
|
| Exercisable as of December 31, 2016 | | | 17,293 |
| | $ | 9 |
| | 4.4 | | $ | 226 |
|
| Expected to vest as of December 31, 2016 | | | 8,664 |
| | 16 |
| | 8.3 | | 51 |
|
| Total vested and expected to vest as of December 31, 2016 | | | 25,957 |
| | $ | 11 |
| | 5.7 | | $ | 277 |
|
The total intrinsic value of stock options exercised was $64 million in 2016, $69 million in 2015 and $24 million in 2013 and less than $1 million in 2012 and 2011.2014.
Non-Vested Stock
We value restricted stock awards and DSUs based on the closing trading value of our shares on the date of grant. Information related to non-vested stock awards during 2013, 2012,2016, 2015 and 20112014 is as follows:
| | | | | Non-Vested Stock Award Units (in thousands) | | Weighted Average Grant- Date Fair Value | | Non-Vested Stock Award Units (in thousands) | | Weighted Average Grant- Date Fair Value |
| Balance as of December 31, 2010 | | 33,284 |
| | $ | 9 |
| |
| Balance as of December 31, 2013 | | | 37,339 |
| | $ | 7 |
|
| Granted | | 14,640 |
| | 7 |
| | 7,072 |
| | 13 |
|
| Vested (1) | | (10,344 | ) | | 10 |
| | (11,205 | ) | | 7 |
|
| Forfeited | | (4,004 | ) | | 6 |
| | (2,671 | ) | | 8 |
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2011 | | 33,576 |
| | $ | 8 |
| |
| Balance as of December 31, 2014 | | | 30,535 |
| | $ | 9 |
|
| Granted | | 17,073 |
| | 6 |
| | 6,606 |
| | 16 |
|
| Vested (1) | | (10,158 | ) | | 9 |
| | (11,607 | ) | | 8 |
|
| Forfeited | | (3,898 | ) | | 7 |
| | (1,770 | ) | | 10 |
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2012 | | 36,593 |
| | $ | 7 |
| |
| Balance as of December 31, 2015 | | | 23,764 |
| | $ | 11 |
|
| Granted | | 13,913 |
| | 8 |
| | 6,132 |
| | 17 |
|
| Vested (1) | | (10,307 | ) | | 8 |
| | (10,045 | ) | | 10 |
|
| Forfeited | | (2,860 | ) | | 7 |
| | (1,054 | ) | | 13 |
|
| Balance as of December 31, 2013 | | 37,339 |
| | $ | 7 |
| |
| Balance as of December 31, 2016 | | | 18,797 |
| | $ | 14 |
|
| |
| (1) | The number of restricted stock units vested includes shares withheld on behalf of employees to satisfy statutory tax withholding requirements. |
The total vesting date fair value of stock award units that vested was approximately $80179 million in 2013,2016, $60186 million in 20122015 and $71146 million in 2011.2014.
Market-based DSU Awards
During 2013, 20122016, 2015 and 2011,2014, we granted target market-based DSU awards to certain members of our senior management team. The attainmentnumber of market-based DSUsshares ultimately issued to the recipient is based on the total shareholder return (TSR) of our common stock as compared to the TSR of the common stock of the other companies in the S&P 500 Health Care Index over a three-year performance period and measured in three annual performance cycles.period. In addition, award recipients must remain employed by us throughout the three-year performance period to attain the full amount of the market-based DSUs that satisfied the market performance criteria.
We determined the fair value of the 2013 target market-based DSU awards to be approximately $8$6 million for 2016, $7 million for 2015 and the fair values of the 2012 and 2011 market-based awards to be approximately $8$6 million. for 2014. We determined these fair values based on Monte Carlo simulations as of the date of grant, utilizing the following assumptions:
| | | | | 2013 | | 2012 | 2011 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| | | Awards | | Awards | | Awards | | Awards | | Awards |
| Stock price on date of grant | | $ | 7.39 |
| | $ | 6.28 |
| $ | 7.16 |
| | $ | 17.26 |
| | $ | 16.31 |
| | $ | 13.08 |
|
| Measurement period (in years) | | 3.0 |
| | 3.0 |
| 3.0 |
| | 2.9 |
| | 3.0 |
| | 3.0 |
|
| Risk-free rate | | 0.34 | % | | 0.38 | % | 1.10 | % | | 0.90 | % | | 0.98 | % | | 0.66 | % |
We recognize the expense on these awards in our consolidated statements of operations on a straight-line basis over the three-year measurement period.
Free Cash Flow Performance-based DSU Awards
During 20132016, 2015 and 2012,2014, we granted target free cash flow performance-based DSU awards to certain members of our senior management team. The attainment of these performance-based DSUs is based on our 2013 and 2012 adjusted free cash flow (FCF) measured against our internal 2013 and 2012 annual financial plan performance for FCF, respectively.FCF. FCF is measured over a one-year performance period beginning January 1, 20131st of each year and ending December 31, 2013 for the 2013 awards and January 1, 2012 and ending December 31, 2012 for the 2012 awards.31st. The number of performance-based DSUs as to which the performance criteria under this program shall be determined to have been satisfied will be in a range of 0% to 150% of the target number of performance-based DSUs awarded to the participant. In addition, award recipients must remain employed by us throughout a three-year service
period (inclusive of the one-year performance period) to attain the full amount of the performance-based DSUs that satisfied the performance criteria.
We determined the fair value of the 20132016 FCF awards to be approximately $98 million, based on the closing stock price at December 31, 20132016 and an achievement of approximately 100%114% of the target payout, which is subject to approval by the Executive Compensation and Human Resources Committee of our Board of Directors.payout. The per unit fair value is $12.0221.63, which is the closing stock price on December 31, 2013.2016. We determined the fair value of the 20122015 FCF awards to be approximately $7$6 million and the per unit fair value was $5.73.$18.44, and we determined the fair value of the 2014 FCF awards to be approximately $5 million and the per unit fair value was $13.25.
We recognize the expense on these awards in our consolidated statements of operations over the vesting period which is three years after the date of grant.
Expense Attribution
We recognize compensation expense for our stock using a straight-line method over the substantive vesting period. Most of our stock awards provide for immediate vesting upon death or disability of the participant. In addition, our stock grants to employees provide for accelerated vesting of our stock-based awards, other than performance-based and market-based awards, upon retirement. In accordance with the terms of our stock grants, for employees who will become retirement eligible prior to the vest date we expense stock-based awards, other than performance-based and market-based awards, over the greater of one year or the period between grant date and retirement-eligibility. The performance-based and market-based awards discussed above do not contain provisions that would accelerate the full vesting of the awards upon retirement-eligibility.
We recognize stock-based compensation expense for the value of the portion of awards that are ultimately expected to vest. FASB ASC Topic 718, Compensation – Stock Compensation requires forfeitures to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. The term “forfeitures” is distinct from “cancellations” or “expirations” and represents only the unvested portion of the surrendered stock-based award. We have applied, based on an analysis of our historical forfeitures, a weighted-average annual forfeiture rate of approximately nineeight percent to all unvested stock-based awards as of December 31, 2013,2016, which represents the portion that we expect will be forfeited each year over the vesting period. We re-evaluate this analysis annually, or more frequently if there are significant changes in circumstances, and adjust the forfeiture rate as necessary. Ultimately, we will only recognize expense for those shares that vest.
Unrecognized Compensation Cost
We expect to recognize the following future expense for awards outstanding as of December 31, 2013:2016:
| | | | | Unrecognized Compensation Cost (in millions)(1) | | Weighted Average Remaining Vesting Period (in years) | | Unrecognized Compensation Cost (in millions)(1) | | Weighted Average Remaining Vesting Period (in years) |
| Stock options | | $ | 17 |
| | | | $ | 27 |
| | |
| Non-vested stock awards | | 166 |
| | | | 136 |
| | |
| | | $ | 183 |
| | 1.4 | | $ | 163 |
| | 1.3 |
| |
| (1) | Amounts presented represent compensation cost, net of estimated forfeitures. |
Employee Stock Purchase Plans
Our global employee stock purchase plan provides for the granting of options to purchase up to 3550 million shares of our common stock to all eligible employees. Under the global employee stock purchase plan, we grant each eligible employee, at the beginning of each six-month offering period, an option to purchase shares of our common stock equal to not more than ten percent of the employee’s eligible compensation or the statutory limit under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Such options may be exercised generally only to the extent of accumulated payroll deductions at the end of the offering period, at a purchase price equal to 85 percent of the fair market value of our common stock at the beginning or end of each offering period, whichever is less. As of December 31, 2013,2016, there were approximately 815 million shares available for future issuance under the employee stock purchase plan.
Information related to shares issued or to be issued in connection with the employee stock purchase plan based on employee contributions and the range of purchase prices is as follows:
| | (shares in thousands) | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Shares issued or to be issued | | 3,833 |
| | 3,979 |
| | 3,830 |
| | 2,337 |
| | 2,529 |
| | 2,618 |
|
| Range of purchase prices | | $5.01 - $7.96 | | $4.82 - $5.16 | | $4.81 - $6.22 | | $15.29 - $18.39 |
| | $11.24 - $15.13 |
| | $10.12 - $11.04 |
|
We use the Black-Scholes option-pricing model to calculate the grant-date fair value of shares issued under the employee stock purchase plan. We recognize expense related to shares purchased through the employee stock purchase plan ratably over the offering period. We recognized $711 million in expense associated with our employee stock purchase plan in 2013,2016, $49 million in 20122015 and $58 million in 2011.2014.
NOTE N – WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING
| | | | | Year Ended
December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Weighted average shares outstanding - basic | | 1,341.2 |
| 1,406.7 |
| 1,509.3 |
| | 1,357.6 |
| | 1,341.2 |
| | 1,324.3 |
|
| Net effect of common stock equivalents | | — |
| — |
| 9.7 |
| | 19.6 |
| | — |
| | — |
|
| Weighted average shares outstanding - assuming dilution | | 1,341.2 |
| 1,406.7 |
| 1,519.0 |
| | 1,377.2 |
| | 1,341.2 |
| | 1,324.3 |
|
We generated net losses in 2013 and 2012. Our weighted-average shares outstanding for earnings per share calculations excluded common stock equivalents of 1922 million in 2015 and 824 million in 2014 due to our net loss positions in 2013 and 2012, respectively.positions.
Weighted-average shares outstanding, assuming dilution, also excludes the impact of less than 1 million stock options for 2016, 162 million stock options for 2013,2015 and 5912 million stock options for 2012, and 62 million for 2011,2014, due to the exercise prices of these stock options being greater than the average fair market value of our common stock during the year.
NOTE O – SEGMENT REPORTING
Effective January 1, 2013, we reorganized our business from geographic regions to fully operationalized global business units. Following the reorganization, based on information regularly reviewed by our chief operating decision maker, weWe have three new reportable segments comprised of: Cardiovascular, Rhythm Management, and MedSurg. Our reportable segmentsMedSurg, which represent an aggregateaggregation of our operating segments. We have restated the 2012 and 2011 information to conform to our new global reportable segment presentation.
Each of our reportable segments generates revenues from the sale of medical devices. We measure and evaluate our reportable segments based on segment net sales and operating income, excluding the impact of changes in foreign currency and sales from divested businesses. Sales generated from reportable segments and divested businesses, as well as operating results of reportable segments and corporate expenses, are based on internally-derived standard currency exchange rates, which may differ from year to year, and do not include intersegment profits. We restatedAs needed, we restate segment information for the prior periodsperiod based on our internally-derived standard currency exchange rates used for the current period in order to remove the impact of foreign currency exchange fluctuations. Based on information regularly reviewed by our chief operating decision maker following our reorganization, we also restated certain expenses associated with our manufacturing and corporate operations.fluctuation. We exclude from segment operating income certain corporate-related expenses and certain transactions or adjustments that our chief operating decision maker considers to be non-recurring and/or non-operational, such as amounts related to goodwill and other intangible asset impairment charges; acquisition-, divestiture-, litigation-, restructuring- and litigation-relatedrestructuring-related net charges and credits; pension termination charges; and amortization expense. Although we exclude these amounts from segment operating income, they are included in reported consolidated operating income (loss) and are included in the reconciliation below.
A reconciliation of the totals reported for the reportable segments to the applicable line items in our accompanying consolidated statements of operations is as follows:
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Net sales | | | | (restated) | | (restated) | | | | | | |
| Interventional Cardiology | | $ | 2,055 |
| | $ | 2,179 |
| | $ | 2,444 |
| | $ | 2,524 |
| | $ | 2,242 |
| | $ | 2,092 |
|
| Peripheral Interventions | | 812 |
| | 769 |
| | 713 |
| | 1,093 |
| | 975 |
| | 861 |
|
| Cardiovascular | | 2,867 |
| | 2,948 |
| | 3,157 |
| | 3,617 |
| | 3,217 |
| | 2,953 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Cardiac Rhythm Management | | 1,919 |
| | 1,927 |
| | 2,072 |
| | 1,994 |
| | 1,934 |
| | 1,922 |
|
| Electrophysiology | | 157 |
| | 147 |
| | 145 |
| | 261 |
| | 248 |
| | 228 |
|
| Rhythm Management | | 2,076 |
| | 2,074 |
| | 2,217 |
| | 2,255 |
| | 2,182 |
| | 2,150 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Endoscopy | | 1,331 |
| | 1,242 |
| | 1,158 |
| | 1,565 |
| | 1,422 |
| | 1,343 |
|
| Urology and Women's Health | | 513 |
| | 496 |
| | 491 |
| |
| Urology and Pelvic Health | | | 1,065 |
| | 735 |
| | 542 |
|
| Neuromodulation | | 454 |
| | 367 |
| | 336 |
| | 574 |
| | 512 |
| | 474 |
|
| MedSurg | | 2,298 |
| | 2,105 |
| | 1,985 |
| | 3,204 |
| | 2,669 |
| | 2,359 |
|
| Net sales allocated to reportable segments | | 7,241 |
| | 7,127 |
| | 7,359 |
| | 9,076 |
| | 8,068 |
| | 7,462 |
|
| Sales generated from business divestitures | | 58 |
| | 122 |
| | 140 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 4 |
|
| Impact of foreign currency fluctuations | | (156 | ) | | — |
| | 123 |
| | (690 | ) | | (591 | ) | | (86 | ) |
| | | $ | 7,143 |
| | $ | 7,249 |
| | $ | 7,622 |
| | $ | 8,386 |
| | $ | 7,477 |
| | $ | 7,380 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 |
| Depreciation expense | | | | (restated) |
| | (restated) |
|
| Cardiovascular | | $ | 111 |
| | $ | 106 |
| | $ | 116 |
|
| Rhythm Management | | 99 |
| | 108 |
| | 105 |
|
| MedSurg | | 73 |
| | 74 |
| | 73 |
|
| Depreciation expense allocated to reportable segments | | 283 |
| | 288 |
| | 294 |
|
| Impact of foreign currency fluctuations | | (4 | ) | | — |
| | 2 |
|
| | | $ | 279 |
| | $ | 288 |
| | $ | 296 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 |
| Income (loss) before income taxes | | | | (restated) | | (restated) |
| Cardiovascular | | $ | 710 |
| | $ | 739 |
| | $ | 829 |
|
| Rhythm Management | | 232 |
| | 242 |
| | 320 |
|
| MedSurg | | 724 |
| | 637 |
| | 565 |
|
| Operating income allocated to reportable segments | | 1,666 |
| | 1,618 |
| | 1,714 |
|
| Corporate expenses and currency exchange | | (314 | ) | | (258 | ) | | (254 | ) |
| Goodwill and intangible asset impairment charges and acquisition-, divestiture-, litigation-, and restructuring-related net charges | | (822 | ) | | (4,833 | ) | | (135 | ) |
| Amortization expense | | (410 | ) | | (395 | ) | | (421 | ) |
| Operating income (loss) | | 120 |
| | (3,868 | ) | | 904 |
|
| Other expense, net | | (343 | ) | | (239 | ) | | (262 | ) |
| | | $ | (223 | ) | | $ | (4,107 | ) | | $ | 642 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Depreciation expense | | | | | | |
| Cardiovascular | | $ | 122 |
| | $ | 116 |
| | $ | 120 |
|
| Rhythm Management | | 83 |
| | 94 |
| | 92 |
|
| MedSurg | | 74 |
| | 73 |
| | 75 |
|
| Depreciation expense allocated to reportable segments | | 279 |
| | 283 |
| | 287 |
|
| Impact of foreign currency fluctuations | | (9 | ) | | (9 | ) | | — |
|
| | | $ | 270 |
| | $ | 274 |
| | $ | 287 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | As of December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | | 2012 |
| Total assets | | | | (restated) |
|
| Cardiovascular | | $ | 1,545 |
| | $ | 1,535 |
|
| Rhythm Management | | 1,343 |
| | 1,350 |
|
| MedSurg | | 1,026 |
| | 967 |
|
| Total assets allocated to reportable segments | | 3,914 |
| | 3,852 |
|
| Goodwill | | 5,693 |
| | 5,973 |
|
| Other intangible assets, net | | 5,950 |
| | 6,289 |
|
| All other corporate assets | | 1,014 |
| | 1,040 |
|
| | | $ | 16,571 |
| | $ | 17,154 |
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Income (loss) before income taxes | | | | | | |
| Cardiovascular | | $ | 1,137 |
| | $ | 972 |
| | $ | 767 |
|
| Rhythm Management | | 404 |
| | 328 |
| | 289 |
|
| MedSurg | | 1,045 |
| | 856 |
| | 746 |
|
| Operating income allocated to reportable segments | | 2,586 |
| | 2,156 |
| | 1,802 |
|
| Corporate expenses and currency exchange | | (565 | ) | | (486 | ) | | (308 | ) |
| Intangible asset impairment charges; pension termination charges; and acquisition- and divestiture-related net charges, litigation-related net charges, and restructuring- and restructuring-related net charges | | (1,029 | ) | | (1,502 | ) | | (1,357 | ) |
| Amortization expense | | (545 | ) | | (495 | ) | | (438 | ) |
| Operating income (loss) | | 447 |
| | (327 | ) | | (301 | ) |
| Other expense, net | | (270 | ) | | (323 | ) | | (208 | ) |
| | | $ | 177 |
| | $ | (650 | ) | | $ | (509 | ) |
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | As of December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2016 | | 2015 |
| Total assets | | | | |
| Cardiovascular | | $ | 1,748 |
| | $ | 1,583 |
|
| Rhythm Management | | 1,250 |
| | 1,279 |
|
| MedSurg | | 1,499 |
| | 1,141 |
|
| Total assets allocated to reportable segments | | 4,497 |
| | 4,003 |
|
| Goodwill | | 6,678 |
| | 6,473 |
|
| Other intangible assets, net | | 5,883 |
| | 6,194 |
|
| All other corporate assets | | 1,038 |
| | 1,463 |
|
| | | $ | 18,096 |
| | $ | 18,133 |
|
Enterprise-Wide Information (based on actual currency exchange rates)
| | | | | Year Ended December 31, | | Year Ended December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Net sales | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Interventional Cardiology | | $ | 1,997 |
| | $ | 2,179 |
| | $ | 2,495 |
| | $ | 2,281 |
| | $ | 2,033 |
| | $ | 2,057 |
|
| Cardiac Rhythm Management | | 1,886 |
| | 1,908 |
| | 2,087 |
| | 1,850 |
| | 1,807 |
| | 1,912 |
|
| Endoscopy | | 1,300 |
| | 1,252 |
| | 1,187 |
| | 1,440 |
| | 1,306 |
| | 1,323 |
|
| Peripheral Interventions | | 789 |
| | 774 |
| | 731 |
| | 1,011 |
| | 904 |
| | 850 |
|
| Urology and Women’s Health | | 505 |
| | 500 |
| | 498 |
| |
| Urology and Pelvic Health | | | 1,005 |
| | 693 |
| | 535 |
|
| Neuromodulation | | 453 |
| | 367 |
| | 336 |
| | 556 |
| | 501 |
| | 472 |
|
| Electrophysiology | | 155 |
| | 147 |
| | 147 |
| | 243 |
| | 233 |
| | 227 |
|
| | | 7,085 |
| | 7,127 |
| | 7,481 |
| | 8,386 |
| | 7,477 |
| | 7,376 |
|
| Sales generated from divested businesses | | 58 |
| | 122 |
| | 141 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 4 |
|
| | | $ | 7,143 |
| | $ | 7,249 |
| | $ | 7,622 |
| | $ | 8,386 |
| | $ | 7,477 |
| | $ | 7,380 |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| United States | | $ | 3,743 |
| | $ | 3,756 |
| | $ | 4,010 |
| | $ | 4,759 |
| | $ | 4,229 |
| | $ | 3,885 |
|
| Japan | | 744 |
| | 931 |
| | 951 |
| | 750 |
| | 602 |
| | 678 |
|
| Other countries | | 2,598 |
| | 2,440 |
| | 2,520 |
| | 2,877 |
| | 2,646 |
| | 2,813 |
|
| | | 7,085 |
| | 7,127 |
| | 7,481 |
| | 8,386 |
| | 7,477 |
| | 7,376 |
|
| Sales generated from divested businesses | | 58 |
| | 122 |
| | 141 |
| | — |
| | — |
| | 4 |
|
| | | $ | 7,143 |
| | $ | 7,249 |
| | $ | 7,622 |
| | $ | 8,386 |
| | $ | 7,477 |
| | $ | 7,380 |
|
| | | | | As of December 31, | | As of December 31, |
| (in millions) | | 2013 | | 2012 | | 2011 | | 2016 | | 2015 | | 2014 |
| Long-lived assets | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| United States | | $ | 998 |
| | $ | 1,065 |
| | $ | 1,141 |
| | $ | 1,082 |
| | $ | 1,018 |
| | $ | 1,002 |
|
| Ireland | | 240 |
| | 252 |
| | 231 |
| | 181 |
| | 170 |
| | 197 |
|
| Other foreign countries | | 308 |
| | 247 |
| | 298 |
| | 367 |
| | 302 |
| | 308 |
|
| Property, plant and equipment, net | | 1,546 |
| | 1,564 |
| | 1,670 |
| | 1,630 |
| | 1,490 |
| | 1,507 |
|
| Goodwill | | 5,693 |
| | 5,973 |
| | 9,761 |
| | 6,678 |
| | 6,473 |
| | 5,898 |
|
| Other intangible assets, net | | 5,950 |
| | 6,289 |
| | 6,473 |
| | 5,883 |
| | 6,194 |
| | 5,606 |
|
| | | $ | 13,189 |
| | $ | 13,826 |
| | $ | 17,904 |
| | $ | 14,191 |
| | $ | 14,157 |
| | $ | 13,011 |
|
NOTE P – CHANGES IN OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
The following table provides the reclassifications out of other comprehensive income for the years ended December 31, 20132016 and December 31, 2012.2015. Amounts in the chart below are presented net of tax.
| | | Year Ended December 31, 2013 | | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2016 | | |
| (in millions) | Foreign currency translation adjustments | Unrealized gains/losses on derivative financial instruments | Defined benefit pension items / Other | Total | Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments | Unrealized Gains/Losses on Derivative Financial Instruments | Unrealized Gains/Losses on Available-for-Sale Securities | Defined Benefit Pension Items / Other | Total |
| Beginning Balance | $(26) | $34 | $(41) | $(33) | $(54) | $152 | $— | $(10) | $88 |
| Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassifications | 10 | 130 | 31 | 171 | |
| Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications | | (25) | 40 | (6) | (17) | (8) |
| (Gain)/Loss reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income | — | (23) | (9) | (32) | — | (85) | — | 6 | (79) |
| Net current-period other comprehensive income | 10 | 107 | 22 | 139 | (25) | (45) | (6) | (11) | (87) |
| Ending Balance | $(16) | $141 | $(19) | $106 | $(79) | $107 | $(6) | $(21) | $1 |
| | | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2012 | | |
| (in millions) | Foreign currency translation adjustments | Unrealized gains/losses on derivative financial instruments | Defined benefit pension items / Other | Total | |
| Beginning Balance | $(58) | $(48) | $(32) | $(138) | |
| Other comprehensive income (loss) before reclassifications | 32 | 59 | 1 | 92 | |
| (Gain)/Loss reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income | — | 23 | (10) | 13 | |
| Net current-period other comprehensive income | 32 | 82 | (9) | 105 | |
| Ending Balance | $(26) | $34 | $(41) | $(33) | |
|
| | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2015 | | | | |
| (in millions) | Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments | Unrealized Gains/Losses on Derivative Financial Instruments | Defined Benefit Pension Items / Other | Total |
| Beginning Balance | $(38) | $219 | $(37) | $144 |
| Other comprehensive income/(loss) before reclassifications | (16) | 70 | (3) | 51 |
| (Gain)/Loss reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income | — | (137) | 30 | (107) |
| Net current-period other comprehensive income | (16) | (67) | 27 | (56) |
| Ending Balance | $(54) | $152 | $(10) | $88 |
The income tax impact of the amounts in other comprehensive income for unrealized gains/losses on derivative financial instruments before reclassifications was an expense of $7723 million in the year ended December 31, 20132016 and an expense of $3639 million in the year ended December 31, 2012.2015. The gains and losses on derivative financial instruments reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income were reduced by income tax impacts of $1448 million in the year ended December 31, 20132016 and $1478 million in the year ended December 31, 2012.2015. Refer to Note E – Fair Value Measurements for further detail on the reclassifications related to derivatives.
The income tax impact of the amounts in other comprehensive income for defined benefit and pension items before reclassifications was an expensea benefit of $15$9 million in the year ended December 31, 20132016 and an expensea benefit of $1$2 million in the year ended December 31, 2012.2015. The gains and losses on defined benefit and pension items reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income were reduced by income tax impacts of $2 million in 2016 and $617 million in the year ended December 31, 20132015.
The gains and losses on available-for-sale securities were reduced by immaterial income tax impacts in 2016. Refer to $8 millionNote E – Fair Value Measurements infor further detail on the year ended December 31, 2012.gains and losses on available-for-sale securities.
NOTE Q – NEW ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
From time to time, new accounting pronouncements are issued by the FASB or other standard setting bodies. Recently issued standards typically do not require adoption until a future effective date. Prior to their effective date, we evaluate the pronouncements to determine the potential effects of adoption on our consolidated financial statements.
Standards Implemented Since December 31, 2015
ASC Update No. 2013-022015-05
In February 2013,April 2015, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2013-02,2015-05, Comprehensive IncomeIntangibles - Goodwill and Other - Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement. Update No. 2015-05 provides accounting guidance on how customers should treat cloud computing arrangements. If a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license, then the customer should account for the software license element of the arrangement consistent with the acquisition of other software licenses. If a cloud computing arrangement does not include a software license, the customer should account for the arrangement as a service contract. Update No. 2015-05 is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015 and interim periods within those reporting periods. We elected to adopt the amendments prospectively to all arrangements entered into or materially modified after the effective date. The adoption of Update No. 2015-05 did not have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
ASC Update No. 2015-12
In July 2015, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2015-12, Plan Accounting: Defined Benefit Pension Plans (Topic 220)960), Defined Contribution Pension Plans (Topic 962), and Health and Welfare Benefit Plans (Topic 965). Update No. 2015-12 has three parts. Part I designates contract value as the only required measure for fully benefit-responsive investment contracts. Part II simplifies the investment disclosure requirements under Topics 820, 960, 962, and 965 for employee benefits plans and Part III provides an alternative measurement date for fiscal periods that do not coincide with a month-end date. Update No. 2015-12 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2015. The adoption of Update No. 2015-12 did not have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
ASC Update No. 2015-16
In September 2015, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2015-16, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Reporting of Amounts Reclassified out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive IncomeSimplifying the Accounting for Measurement - Period Adjustments. Update No. 2013-022015-16 eliminates the requirement to restate prior period financial statements for measurement period adjustments following a business combination. Update No. 2015-16 requires that entities provide information about amounts reclassified outthe cumulative impact of accumulated other comprehensive income by component.a measurement period adjustment (including the impact on prior periods) be recognized in the reporting period in which the adjustment is identified. The amendment also requires entities to present significant amounts byprior period impact of the respective line items of net income,adjustment should be either presented separately on the face of the income statement or disclosed in the notes to the financial statements for amounts required to be reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income in their entirety in the same reporting period. For other amounts that are not required to be reclassified to net income in their entirety, a cross-reference is required to other disclosures that provide additional details about those amounts. We adoptednotes. Update No. 2013-022015-16 is effective for fiscal years beginning in our first quarter ended March 31, 2013.after December 15, 2015. The adoption of Update No. 2013-02 is related to presentation only and its adoption2015-16 did not impact our financial position or results of operations or financial position. See our Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) and operations.Note M - Changes in Other Comprehensive Income to our 2013 consolidated financial statements for the required disclosures under Update No. 2013-02.
ASC Update No. 2013-012015-17
In January 2013,November 2015, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2013-01,2015-17, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Balance Sheet (Topic 210): Clarifying the ScopeClassification of Disclosures about Offsetting Assets and LiabilitiesDeferred Taxes. . Update No. 2013-01 clarifies the FASB's intent about requiring enhanced disclosures about certain financial instruments2015-17 requires that deferred tax liabilities and derivative instruments that are offsetassets be classified as noncurrent in thea classified statement of financial position. It is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016; however, earlier application is permitted. We elected to early adopt Update No. 2015-17 on a prospective basis during the first quarter of 2016; as such, prior periods were not retrospectively adjusted. The adoption of Update No. 2015-17 did not have a material impact on our financial position or that are subject to enforceable master netting arrangements or similar agreements. We adopted Update No. 2013-01 beginning in our first quarter ended March 31, 2013. See Note E - Fair Value Measurements to our 2013 consolidated financial statements for the required disclosures under Update No. 2013-01.results of operations.
Standards to be Implemented
ASC Update No. 2013-112016-07
In July 2013,March 2016, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2013-11,2016-07, Investments - Equity Method and Joint Ventures (Topic 323). When a previously held investment qualifies for equity method accounting due to an increase in ownership interest or influence, Update No. 2016-07 eliminates the requirement for investors to adjust results retroactively as if the equity method had been in effect during prior periods the investment was held. Instead, it requires investors to adopt the equity method of accounting as of the date the investment becomes qualified for equity method accounting. We elected to early adopt Update No. 2016-07 on a prospective basis. The adoption of Update No. 2016-07 did not impact our financial position or results of operations.
Standards to be Implemented
ASC Update No. 2014-09
In May 2014, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606). Update No. 2014-09 provides enhancements to the quality and consistency of how revenue is reported while also improving comparability in the financial statements of companies using International Financial Reporting Standards and U.S. GAAP. The core principle requires entities to recognize revenue in a manner that depicts the transfer of goods or services to customers in amounts that reflect the consideration an entity expects to be entitled to in exchange for those goods or services. In July 2015, the FASB voted to approve a one year deferral, making the standard effective for public entities for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017.
In March 2016, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2016-08, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net). The purpose of Update No. 2016-08 is to clarify the guidance on principal versus agent considerations. It includes indicators that help to determine whether an entity controls the specified good or service before it is transferred to the customer and to assist in determining when the entity satisfied the performance obligation and as such, whether to recognize a gross or a net amount of consideration in their consolidated statement of operations.
In April 2016, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2016-10, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing. Update No. 2016-10 clarifies that entities are not required to assess whether promised goods or services are performance obligations if they are immaterial in the context of the contract. Update No. 2016-10 also addresses how to determine whether promised goods or services are separately identifiable and permits entities to make a policy election to treat shipping and handling costs as fulfillment activities. In addition, it clarifies key provisions in Topic 606 related to licensing.
In May 2016, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2016-11, Revenue Recognition (Topic 605) and Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815). Update No. 2016-11 rescinds previous SEC comments that were codified in Topic 605, Topic 932 and Topic 815. Upon adoption of ASC 606, certain SEC comments including guidance on accounting for shipping and handling fees and costs and consideration given by a vendor to a customer should not be relied upon.
In May 2016, the FASB also issued ASC Update No. 2016-12, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients. Update No. 2016-12 provides clarity around collectibility, presentation of sales taxes, non-cash consideration, contract modifications at transition and completed contracts at transition. Update No. 2016-12 also includes a technical correction within ASC 606 related to required disclosures if the guidance is applied retrospectively upon adoption.
In December 2016, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2016-20, Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. Update No. 2016-20 allows entities not to make quantitative disclosures about remaining performance obligations in certain cases and requires entities that use any of the optional exemptions to expand their qualitative disclosures. Update No. 2016-20 also clarifies other areas of the new revenue standard, including disclosure requirements for prior period performance obligations, impairment guidance for contract costs and the interaction of impairment guidance in ASC 340-40 with other guidance elsewhere in the Codification.
We expect to adopt Topic 606, and the aforementioned updates, effective January 1, 2018. We established a cross-functional implementation team consisting of representatives from all of our business divisions and regions. During 2016 we analyzed the impact of the standard on our contract portfolio by reviewing a representative sample of our contracts to identify potential differences that would result from applying the requirements of the new standard. The implementation team has apprised both management and the audit committee of project status on a recurring basis.
We have not finalized our assessment of the impact of Topic 606. We continue to analyze performance obligations, variable consideration and disclosures. Additionally, we are monitoring updates issued by the FASB. During the first half of 2017, we expect to substantially complete our impact assessment and initiate efforts to redesign impacted processes, policies and controls.
ASC Update No. 2016-01
In January 2016, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2016-01, Financial Instruments-Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. It is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early application of certain provisions is permitted. Update 2016-01 requires entities to measure equity investments that do not result in consolidation and are not accounted for under the equity method at fair
value with changes recognized in net income. However, an entity may choose to measure equity investments that do not have readily determinable fair values at cost minus impairment, if any, plus or minus changes resulting from observable price changes in orderly transactions for the identical or a similar investment of the same issuer. It also simplifies the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment. Update 2016-01 also requires separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset and liability. The adoption of Update No. 2016-01 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.
ASC Update No. 2016-02
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842). It is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Earlier application is permitted. Update No. 2016-02 is intended to increase the transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing lease asset and lease liabilities on the balance sheet, including those previously classified as operating leases under current U.S. GAAP, and disclosing key information about leasing arrangements. We are in the process of determining the effect that the adoption of this standard will have on our financial position and results of operations.
ASC Update No. 2016-09
In March 2016, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2016-09, Compensation- Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting. This update is effective for annual reporting periods after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal periods. Early adoption is permitted. The purpose of the update is to simplify several areas of the accounting for share-based payment transactions, including the income tax consequences, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, and classification on the statement of cash flows. Upon adoption in 2017, a cumulative effect adjustment of an amount still being determined will be recorded to retained earnings for windfall tax benefits not previously recognized and all future windfall tax benefits will be recognized through income tax expense. We estimate the benefit to income tax expense to be between $20 million and $30 million in 2017 with the majority of the benefit occurring during the first quarter of 2017 due to vesting of the Company’s annual grants. Beginning in the first quarter of 2017, we will disclose the actual effect that the adoption has on our financial position and results of operations.
ASC Update No. 2016-13
In June 2016, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments. The update is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. The purpose of Update No. 2016-13 is to replace the current incurred loss impairment methodology for financial assets measured at amortized cost with a methodology that reflects expected credit losses and requires consideration of a broader range of reasonable and supportable information, including forecasted information, to develop credit loss estimates. We are in the process of determining the effect that the adoption will have on our financial position and results of operations.
ASC Update No. 2016-15
In August 2016, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments. The update is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. The purpose of Update No. 2016-15 is to reduce the diversity in practice in presentation and classification of the following items within the statement of cash flows: debt prepayments, settlement of zero coupon debt instruments, contingent consideration payments, insurance proceeds, securitization transactions and distributions from equity method investees. The update also addresses classification of transactions that have characteristics of more than one class of cash flows. We are in the process of determining the effect that the adoption will have on our financial position and results of operations.
ASC Update No. 2016-16
In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU Update No. 2016-16, Income Taxes (Topic 740): PresentationIntra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other Than Inventory. The update is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted as of the beginning of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss,annual reporting period for which financial statements (interim or a Tax Credit Carryforward Existsannual) have not been issued or made available for issuance. The purpose of Update No. 2016-16 is to allow an entity to recognize the income tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset other than inventory when the transfer occurs, as
opposed to waiting until the asset is sold to an outside party. We are in the process of determining the effect that the adoption will have on our financial position and results of operations.
ASC Update No. 2016-17
In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU Update No. 2016-17, Consolidation (Topic 810): Interests Held through Related Parties That Are under Common Control. The update is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The purpose of Update No. 2013-112016-17 is to amend the consolidation guidance from ASU Update No. 2015-02 on how a reporting entity that is the single decision maker of a variable interest entity (VIE) should treat indirect interests in the entity held through related parties that are under common control with the reporting entity when determining whether it is the primary beneficiary of that VIE. The amendment requires that entities present an unrecognized tax benefit,a single decision maker include those indirect interests held through related parties that are under common control with the single decision maker on a proportionate basis consistent with indirect interests held through other related parties. Update No. 2016-17 is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position or portionresults of an unrecognized tax benefit,operations.
ASC Update No. 2016-18
In November 2016, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2016-18, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted Cash. The update is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The purpose of Update No. 2016-18 is to clarify guidance and presentation related to restricted cash in the statement of cash flows. The amendment requires beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows to include cash and cash equivalents as well as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents. We are in the process of determining the effect that the adoption will have on our financial position and results of operations.
ASC Update No. 2016-19
In December 2016, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2016-19, Technical Corrections and Improvements. The purpose of Update No. 2016-19 is primarily to clarify or correct unintended application of guidance that affects a reduction towide variety of topics in the ASC. The update is effective immediately for most of the amendments. Six amendments in Update No. 2016-19 clarify guidance or correct references in the ASC are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within those fiscal years. Early application is permitted. We are in the process of determining the effect that the adoption will have on our financial position and results of operations.
ASC Update No. 2017-01
In January 2017, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2017-01, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a deferred tax assetBusiness. The update is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those periods. Early adoption is permitted, including for interim or annual periods in which the financial statements have not been issued or made available for a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward, with certain exceptions. We are required to adoptissuance. The purpose of Update No. 2013-11 for our first quarter ending March 31, 2014.2017-01 is to change the definition of a business to assist entities with evaluating when a set of transferred assets and activities is a business. The adoption of Update No. 2013-112017-01 is relatednot expected to presentation only and its adoption will nothave a material impact on our financial position or results of operations or financial position.operations.
ASC Update No. 2017-04
In January 2017, the FASB issued ASC Update No. 2017-04, Intangibles - Goodwill and Other Topics (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment. The update is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those periods. Early adoption is permitted for interim or annual goodwill impairment tests performed on testing dates after January 1, 2017. The purpose of Update No. 2017-04 is to reduce the cost and complexity of evaluating goodwill for impairment. It eliminates the need for entities to calculate the impaired fair value of goodwill by assigning the fair value of a reporting unit to all of its assets and liabilities as if that reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination. Under this amendment, an entity will perform its goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. An impairment charge is recognized for the amount by which the carrying value exceeds the reporting unit's fair value. We anticipate early adopting Update No. 2017-04 in fiscal year 2017 on a prospective basis.
129
No other new accounting pronouncements, issued or effective, during the period had, or is expected to have, a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
QUARTERLY RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
(in millions, except per share data)
(unaudited)
(unaudited)
| | | | | Three Months Ended | | Three Months Ended |
| | | March 31, | | June 30, | | Sept 30, | | Dec 31, | | Mar 31, | | June 30, | | Sept 30, | | Dec 31, |
| 2013 | | | | | | | | | |
| 2016 | | | | | | | | | |
| Net sales | | $ | 1,761 |
| | $ | 1,809 |
| | $ | 1,735 |
| | $ | 1,838 |
| | $ | 1,964 |
| | $ | 2,126 |
| | $ | 2,105 |
| | $ | 2,191 |
|
| Gross profit | | 1,183 |
| | 1,279 |
| | 1,225 |
| | 1,283 |
| | 1,391 |
| | 1,487 |
| | 1,511 |
| | 1,572 |
|
| Operating income (loss) | | (330 | ) | | 220 |
| | 103 |
| | 127 |
| | 293 |
| | (334 | ) | | 348 |
| | 140 |
|
| Net income (loss) | | (354 | ) | | 130 |
| | (5 | ) | | 108 |
| | 202 |
| | (207 | ) | | 228 |
| | 124 |
|
| Net income (loss) per common share - basic | | $ | (0.26 | ) | | $ | 0.10 |
| | $ | 0.00 |
| | $ | 0.08 |
| | $ | 0.15 |
| | $ | (0.15 | ) | | $ | 0.17 |
| | $ | 0.09 |
|
| Net income (loss) per common share - assuming dilution | | $ | (0.26 | ) | | $ | 0.10 |
| | $ | 0.00 |
| | $ | 0.08 |
| | $ | 0.15 |
| | $ | (0.15 | ) | | $ | 0.17 |
| | $ | 0.09 |
|
| 2012 | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| 2015 | | | | | | | | | |
| Net sales | | $ | 1,866 |
| | $ | 1,828 |
| | $ | 1,735 |
| | $ | 1,821 |
| | $ | 1,768 |
| | $ | 1,843 |
| | $ | 1,888 |
| | $ | 1,978 |
|
| Gross profit | | 1,235 |
| | 1,250 |
| | 1,177 |
| | 1,238 |
| | 1,248 |
| | 1,303 |
| | 1,349 |
| | 1,405 |
|
| Operating income | | 196 |
| | (3,587 | ) | | (594 | ) | | 115 |
| |
| Net income | | 113 |
| | (3,578 | ) | | (664 | ) | | 60 |
| |
| Net income per common share - basic | | $ | 0.08 |
| | $ | (2.51 | ) | | $ | (0.48 | ) | | $ | 0.04 |
| |
| Net income per common share - assuming dilution | | $ | 0.08 |
| | $ | (2.51 | ) | | $ | (0.48 | ) | | $ | 0.04 |
| |
| Operating income (loss) | | | 24 |
| | 219 |
| | (299 | ) | | (271 | ) |
| Net income (loss) | | | (1 | ) | | 102 |
| | (198 | ) | | (142 | ) |
| Net income (loss) per common share - basic | | | $ | (0.00 | ) | | $ | 0.08 |
| | $ | (0.15 | ) | | $ | (0.11 | ) |
| Net income (loss) per common share - assuming dilution | | | $ | (0.00 | ) | | $ | 0.08 |
| | $ | (0.15 | ) | | $ | (0.11 | ) |
Our reported results for 20132016 included goodwill and intangible asset impairment charges;charges, acquisition-, divestiture-litigation-, litigation-restructuring and restructuring-related charges;charges, and amortization expense (after tax) of: $176 million in the first quarter, $580 million in the second quarter, $140 million in the third quarter and $291 million in the fourth quarter. These after-tax net charges consisted primarily of: $512 million of litigation-related net charges and $478 million of amortization expense.
Our reported results for 2015 included intangible asset impairment charges, acquisition-, litigation-, restructuring and restructuring-related charges, pension termination charges, debt extinguishment charges;charges, discrete tax items and amortization expense (after tax) of: $578$287 million in the first quarter, $117$192 million in the second quarter, $235$524 million in the third quarter and $182$504 million in the fourth quarter. These after-tax net charges consisted primarily of: goodwill impairment$705 million of litigation-related net charges attributable to our reorganization from geographic regions to global business units asand $446 million of January 1, 2013, which changed the composition of our reporting units; amortization expense; and litigation-related charges.expense.
Our reported results for 2012 included goodwill and intangible asset impairment charges; acquisition and divestiture- related net credits, litigation- and restructuring-related charges; discrete tax items and amortization expense (after tax) of: $107 million in the first quarter, $3.817 billion in the second quarter, $885 million in the third quarter and $192 million in the fourth quarter. These charges consisted primarily of: goodwill impairment charges attributable to our former Europe, Middle East, and Africa (EMEA) and former U.S. Cardiac Rhythm Management (U.S. CRM) reporting units and write-downs of certain intangible asset balances; net acquisition-related gains primarily associated with previously-held equity interests and contingent consideration fair value adjustments; gains associated with the divestiture of the Neurovascular business; restructuring and restructuring-related costs attributable to our 2011 Restructuring plan, 2010 Restructuring plan and Plant Network Optimization program; litigation-related charges; and discrete tax benefits related to certain tax positions taken in a prior period.
ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
None.
ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (CFO), evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 20132016 pursuant to Rule 13a-15(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Disclosure controls and procedures are designed to ensure that material information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms and ensure that such material information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our CEO and CFO, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Based on their evaluation, our CEO and CFO concluded that as of December 31, 2013,2016, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective.
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Management’s annual report on our internal control over financial reporting is contained in Item 7 of this Annual Report.
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
The report of Ernst & Young LLP on our internal control over financial reporting is contained in Item 7 of this Annual Report.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
During the quarter ended December 31, 2013,2016, there were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION
None.
PART III
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
The information required by this Item is set forth in our Proxy Statement for the 20142017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the SEC within 120 days of December 31, 2013,2016, and is incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K by reference.
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The information required by this Item is set forth in our Proxy Statement for the 20142017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the SEC within 120 days of December 31, 2013,2016, and is incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K by reference.
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
The information required by this Item is set forth in our Proxy Statement for the 20142017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the SEC within 120 days of December 31, 2013,2016, and is incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K by reference.
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE
The information required by this Item is set forth in our Proxy Statement for the 20142017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the SEC within 120 days of December 31, 2013,2016, and is incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K by reference.
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
The information required by this Item is set forth in our Proxy Statement for the 20142017 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the SEC within 120 days of December 31, 2013,2016, and is incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K by reference.
PART IV
ITEM 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
(a)(1) Financial Statements.
The response to this portion of Item 15 is set forth under Item 8.
(a)(2) Financial Statement Schedules.
The response to this portion of Item 15 (Schedule II) follows the signature page to this report. All other financial statement schedules are not required under the related instructions or are inapplicable and therefore have been omitted.
(a)(3) Exhibits (* documents filed or furnished with this report, ** certain schedules and exhibits omitted pursuant to Item 601(b)(2) of Regulation S-K. We agree to furnish supplementally a copy of any omitted schedule or exhibit to the SEC upon request, # compensatory plans or arrangements)
|
| | |
| | | |
EXHIBIT NO. | TITLE |
| | | |
| | | |
| 2.1 | | Purchase Agreement among American Medical Systems Holdings, Inc., Endo Health Solutions Inc. and the Company, dated as of March 2, 2015 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 30, 2015, File No. 1-11083).** |
| | |
| 3.1 | | Restated By-laws of the Company (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 19, 2011, File No. 1-11083)
|
| | | |
| 3.2 | | Third Restated Certificate of Incorporation (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 3.2, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
| 4.1 | | Specimen Certificate for shares of the Company's Common Stock (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1, Registration No. 33-46980).
|
| | | |
| 4.2 | | Description of Capital Stock contained in Exhibits 3.1 and 3.2.
|
| | | |
| 4.3 | | Indenture dated as of June 25, 2004 between the Company and JPMorgan Chase Bank (formerly The Chase Manhattan Bank) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 25, 2004, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
| 4.4 | | Indenture dated as of November 18, 2004 between the Company and J.P. Morgan Trust Company, National Association, as Trustee (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 18, 2004, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
| 4.5 | | Form of First Supplemental Indenture dated as of April 21, 2006 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 99.4, Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 21, 2006, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
| 4.6 | | Form of Second Supplemental Indenture dated as of April 21, 2006 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 99.6, Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 21, 2006, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
| 4.7 | | Form of Global Security for the 5.125% Notes due 2017 in the aggregate principal amount of $250,000,000 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 18, 2004, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
4.8 | | Form of Global Security for the 5.50% Notes due 2015 in the aggregate principal amount of $400,000,000, and form of Notice to the holders thereof (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 17, 2005 and Exhibit 99.5, Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 21, 2006, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
|
| | |
4.94.8 | | Form of Global Security for the 6.25% Notes due 2035 in the aggregate principal amount of $350,000,000, and form of Notice to holders thereof (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 17, 2005 and Exhibit 99.7, Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 21, 2006, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
4.104.9 | | Indenture dated as of June 1, 2006 between the Company and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Trustee (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 9, 2006, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
4.114.10 | | Form of Global Security for the 6.40% Notes due 2016 in the aggregate principal amount of $600,000,000 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 9, 2006, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
4.12 | | 6.000% Senior Note due January 15, 2020 in the aggregate principal amount of $850,000,000 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2009, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
4.134.11 | | 7.375% Senior Note due January 15, 2040 in the aggregate principal amount of $300,000,000 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.4, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2009, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
4.144.12 | | 2.650% Senior Note due October 1, 2018 in the aggregate principal amount of $500,000,000 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 8, 2013, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
4.154.13 | | 4.125% Senior Note Due October 1, 2023 in the aggregate principle amount of $450,000,000 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 8, 2013, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
| 4.14 | | 2.850% Senior Notes due 2020 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 12, 2015, File No. 1-11083). |
| | |
| 4.15 | | 3.375% Senior Notes due 2022 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 12, 2015, File No. 1-11083). |
| | |
| 4.16 | | 3.850% Senior Notes due 2025 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.4, Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 12, 2015, File No. 1-11083). |
| | |
| 4.17 | | Indenture dated as of May 29, 2013, between Boston Scientific Corporation and U.S. National Bank Association, as trustee (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1, Registration Statement on Form S-3 (File No 333-188918) filed on May 29, 2013). |
| | | |
| 10.1 | | Form of Amended and Restated Credit and Security Agreement dated as of November 7, 2007 by and among Boston Scientific Funding LLC, the Company, Old Line Funding, LLC, Victory Receivables Corporation, The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., New York Branch and Royal Bank of Canada (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 7, 2007, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
10.2 | | Form of Amendment No. 1 to Amended and Restated Credit and Security Agreement and Restatement of Amended Fee Letters dated as of August 6, 2008 by and among Boston Scientific Funding LLC, the Company, Old Line Funding, LLC, Victory Receivables Corporation, The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., New York Branch and Royal Bank of Canada (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
10.3 | | Form of Amendment No. 2 to Amended and Restated Credit and Security Agreement and Restatement of Amended Fee Letters dated as of August 5, 2009 by and among Boston Scientific Funding LLC, the Company, Old Line Funding, LLC, Victory Receivables Corporation, The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., New York Branch and Royal Bank of Canada (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2009, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
10.4 | | Form of Amendment No. 3 to Amended and Restated Credit and Security Agreement and Restatement of Amended Fee Letters dated as of August 4, 2010 by and among Boston Scientific Funding LLC, the Company, Old Line Funding, LLC, Victory Receivables Corporation, The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., New York Branch and Royal Bank of Canada. (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.4, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
10.5 | | Form of Amendment No. 4 to Amended and Restated Credit and Security Agreement and Restatement of Amended Fee Letters dated as of October 29, 2010 by and among Boston Scientific Funding LLC, the Company, Old Line Funding, LLC, Victory Receivables Corporation, Liberty Street Funding LLC, The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., New York Branch, The Bank of Nova Scotia and Royal Bank of Canada (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.7, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
|
| | |
10.6 | | Form of Amendment No. 5 to Amended and Restated Credit and Security Agreement and Restatement of Amended Fee Letters dated as of August 3, 2011 by and among Boston Scientific Funding LLC, the Company, Old Line Funding, LLC, Victory Receivables Corporation, Liberty Street Funding LLC, The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., New York Branch; The Bank of Nova Scotia and Royal Bank of Canada (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
10.7 | | Form of Amendment No. 6 to Amended and Restated Credit and Security Agreement, Amendment #2 to Amended and Restated Receivables Sale Agreement and Restatement of Amended Fee Letter, dated as of June 29, 2012, by and among Boston Scientific Funding LLC; the Company; Old Line Funding, LLC; Royal Bank of Canada; Liberty Street Funding LLC; and The Bank of Nova Scotia (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 29, 2012, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
10.8 | | Form of Amendment No. 7 to Amended and Restated Credit and Security Agreement, Amendment #3 to Amended and Restated Receivables Sale Agreement, dated as of June 28, 2013, by and among Boston Scientific Funding LLC, the Company, Old Line Funding, LLC, Royal Bank of Canada, Liberty Street Funding LLC, and The Bank of Nova Scotia (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 28, 2013, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
10.9 | | Form of Omnibus Amendment dated as of December 21, 2006 among the Company, Boston Scientific Funding Corporation, Variable Funding Capital Company LLC, Victory Receivables Corporation and The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., New York Branch (Amendment No. 1 to Receivables Sale Agreement and Amendment No. 9 to Credit and Security Agreement) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Annual Report on 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
10.1010.2 | | Form of Amended and Restated Receivables Sale Agreement dated as of November 7, 2007 between the Company and each of its Direct or Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiaries that Hereafter Becomes a Seller Hereunder, as the Sellers, and Boston Scientific Funding LLC, as the Buyer (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 7, 2007, File No. 1-11083). |
| | | |
10.1110.3 | | Credit Agreement dated as of April 18, 2012 by and among the Company, the several lenders parties thereto, and Bank of America, N.A., as Syndication Agent, and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 18, 2012, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
10.1210.4 | | Credit Agreement dated as of April 10, 2015 by and among Boston Scientific Corporation, the several lenders parties thereto, Bank of America, N.A., as Syndication Agent and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 14, 2015, File No. 1-11083). |
| | |
|
| | |
| 10.5 | | First Amendment, dated as of October 23, 2015, to the Credit Agreement, dated as of April 10, 2015, among Boston Scientific Corporation, the several lenders party thereto, Bank of America, N.A., as Syndication Agent, and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., as Administrative Agent.* |
| | |
| 10.6 | | License Agreement among Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cook Incorporated and the Company dated July 9, 1997, and related Agreement dated December 13, 1999 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.6, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
10.1310.7 | | Amendment between Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and the Company dated November 23, 2004 modifying July 9, 1997 License Agreement among Angiotech Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cook Incorporated and the Company (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 23, 2004, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
10.1410.8 | | Sale and Purchase Agreement dated October 28, 2010, as amended, between the Company and Stryker Corporation (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.11, Annual Report on Form 10-K for year ended December 31, 2010 and Exhibit 10.6, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2011, File No.1-11083).
|
| | |
10.15 | | Amendment No. 3 to Sale and Purchase Agreement dated November 1, 2011, between the Company and Stryker Corporation (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.13, Annual Report on Form 10-K for year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
10.16 | | Amendment No. 4 to Sale and Purchase Agreement dated December 1, 2011, between the Company and Stryker Corporation (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.14, Annual Report on Form 10-K for year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
|
| | |
10.17 | | Transaction Agreement, dated as of January 8, 2006, as amended, between the Company and Abbott Laboratories (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.47, Exhibit 10.48, Exhibit 10.49 and Exhibit 10.50, Annual Report on Form 10-K for year ended December 31, 2005 and Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 7, 2006, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
10.1810.9 | | Form of Settlement Agreement and Non-Exclusive Patent Cross-License dated January 29, 2010 by and between the Company and Boston Scientific Scimed, Inc., andamong Johnson & Johnson, Guidant LLC and the Company, dated as of February 13, 2015 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated January 29, 2010, File No.1-11083).
|
| | |
10.19 | | Form of Plea Agreement and Sentencing Stipulations executed as of February 24, 2010 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.66, Annual Report on Form 10-K for year ended December 31, 2009, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
10.20 | | Form of Corporate Integrity Agreement between the Office of Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services and the Company (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.67, Annual Report on Form 10-K for year ended December 31, 2009, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | |
10.21 | | Decision and Order of the Federal Trade Commission in the matter of Boston Scientific Corporation and Guidant Corporation finalized August 3, 2006 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5,2.1, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended SeptemberMarch 30, 2006,2015, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
10.2210.10 | | Guidant Corporation 1994 Stock Plan, as amended (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.46, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.23 | | Guidant Corporation 1996 Nonemployee Directors Stock Plan, as amended (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.47, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.24 | | Guidant Corporation 1998 Stock Plan, as amended (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.48, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.25 | | Form of Guidant Corporation Option Grant (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.49, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.26 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2006 Global Employee Stock Ownership Plan, as amended and restated, effective July 1, 2011 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.27, Annual Report on Form 10-K for year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.27 | | Form of Amendment of the Boston Scientific Corporation Amended and Restated 2006 Global Employee Stock Ownership Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.28 | | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement (Non-Employee Directors) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2004, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.2910.11 | | Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement (Non-Employee Directors) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.6, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2004, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.3010.12 | | Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement (Non-Employee Directors) under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2012, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.3110.13 | | Form of Boston Scientific Corporation Excess Benefit Plan, as amended (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 29, 2005 and Exhibit 10.4, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 16, 2008, File No. 1-11083).#
|
|
| | |
| | | |
10.3210.14 | | Form of Trust under the Boston Scientific Corporation Excess Benefit Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 29, 2005, File No. 1-11083).# |
| | | |
10.3310.15 | | Boston Scientific Corporation Deferred Bonus Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 11, 2010, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.3410.16 | | Boston Scientific Corporation Executive Retirement Plan as Amended and Restated, effective August 1, 2012 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2012, File No. 1-11083).# |
| | |
10.35 | | Form of 2010 Performance Share Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 15, 2009, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.36 | | Form of 2011 Performance Share Program (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 14, 2010, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.37 | | Form of 2012 Total Shareholder Return Performance Share Program (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 16, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.38 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2013 Annual Bonus Plan, effective as of January 1, 2013 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.4, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 30, 2012, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.39 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2013 Total Shareholder Return Performance Share Program (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 30, 2012, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.40 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2013 Free Cash Flow Performance Share Program (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.6, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 30, 2012, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.41 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan, Amended and Restated, effective as of January 1, 2011 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.39, Annual Report on Form 10-K for year ended December 31, 2010, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.4210.17 | | Amendment to Boston Scientific Corporation 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan, Amended and Restated, effective as of January 1, 2011 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.44, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.4310.18 | | Form of Second Amendment of Boston Scientific Corporation 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan, Amended and Restated (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2012, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.44 |
| | |
| 10.19 | | Form of Third Amendment of the Boston Scientific Corporation 401(k) Retirement Savings Plan, Amended and Restated (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.4510.20 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2000 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.20, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1999, Exhibit 10.18, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2001, Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 22, 2004, Exhibit 10.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 9, 2005, and Exhibit 10.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 16, 2008, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.4610.21 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2003 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as Amended and Restated, Effective June 1, 2008 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2008, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
|
| | |
10.4710.22 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.49, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.4810.23 | | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement (vesting over three years) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2004, File No. 1-11083).# |
| | | |
10.4910.24 | | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement (vesting over four years) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2004, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.5010.25 | | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement (vesting over two years) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.20, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.5110.26 | | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement (Executive) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 12, 2006, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.52 | | Form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement (Executive) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 12, 2006, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.53 | | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement (Special) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 12, 2006, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.54 | | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement dated July 1, 2005 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 1, 2005, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.5510.27 | | Form of Stock Option Agreement (with one year service requirement for vesting upon Retirement) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.6, Quarterly Report on Form 10-K10-Q dated September 30, 2010, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.5610.28 | | Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2004, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.57 | | Form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement (Special) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.4, Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 12, 2006, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.58 | | Form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.4, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2004, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.59 | | Form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement (vesting over five years) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.16, Annual Report on 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.60 | | Form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement (vesting over two years) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.24, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.61 | | Form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement (Non-Employee Directors) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.7, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 10, 2004, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.62 | | Form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement dated July 1, 2005 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 1, 2005, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.63 | | Form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement (with one year service requirement for vesting upon Retirement) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
|
| | |
10.64 | | Form of Performance Share Unit Award Agreement (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.41, Annual Report on Form 10-K for year ended December 31, 2009, File No 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.65 | | Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement (Non-Employee Directors) under the 2003 and 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plans (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.4, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.6610.29 | | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.6710.30 | | Form of Performance Share Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Total Shareholder Return) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.70, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.6810.31 | | Form of Performance Share Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Free Cash Flow) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.71, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.6910.32 | | Form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Special) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.72, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.70 | | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Kucheman) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.73, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
|
| | |
10.71 | | Form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Kucheman) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.74, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.72 | | Form of Performance Share Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Kucheman - Total Shareholder Return) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.75, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.73 | | Form of Performance Share Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Kucheman - Free Cash Flow) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.76, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.74 | | Form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Kucheman - Special) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.77, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.75 | | Form of Indemnification Agreement between the Company and certain Directors and Officers (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.61, Annual Report on Form 10-K for year ended December 31, 2010, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.7610.33 | | Form of Change in Control Agreement between the Company and certain Executive Officers (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 15, 2009, File No. 1-11083).# |
| | | |
10.7710.34 | | Form of Offer Letter between the Company and Timothy A. Pratt dated April 9, 2008 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2010, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
|
| | |
10.7810.35 | | Form of Offer Letter dated September 6, 2011 between the Company and Michael F. Mahoney, as supplemented September 13, 2011 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 19, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.7910.36 | | Form of Amendment, dated February 14, 2012, to Offer Letter dated September 6, 2011 between the Company and Michael F. Mahoney, as supplemented September 13, 2011 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.100, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.8010.37 | | Form of Offer Letter dated September 6, 2011by and between the Company and William H. KuchemanJoseph M. Fitzgerald dated February 27, 2014 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current2.1, Quarterly Report on Form 8-K dated September 19, 2011,10-Q for the quarter ended March 30, 2015, File No. 1-11083).#
. # |
| | | |
10.8110.38 | | Form of Amendment, dated February 14, 2012, to Offer Letter dated September 6, 2011by and between the Company and William H. KuchemanKevin J. Ballinger dated December 14, 2012 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.102, Annual2.1, Quarterly Report on Form 10-K10-Q for the yearquarter ended December 31, 2011,March 30, 2015, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.8210.39 | | Letter Agreement, dated October 30, 2012, between William H. Kucheman and the Company (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 30, 2012, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.83 | | Form of Consulting Agreement between William H. Kucheman and the Company (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 30, 2012, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.84 | | Form of Offer Letter dated November 30, 2011 between the Company and Supratim Bose (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.113, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 3, 2012, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.85 | | The Boston Scientific Deferred Compensation Option Program (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1, Registration No. 333-98755).#
|
| | | |
10.8610.40 | | Boston Scientific Corporation Domestic Relocation Policy Tier 5 Executive Officer Homeowner, effective January 2007 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.118, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012, File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.8710.41 | | Form of Letter to Key Management Personnel re: Change in Control Agreement (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 28, 2013, File No. 1-11083).
|
| | | |
10.8810.42 | | Transition and Separation Agreement effective December 31, 2013 between the Company and Jeffrey D. Capello (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 22, 2013 File No. 1-11083). #
|
| | |
10.89 | | Form of Offer Letter by and between the Company and Daniel J. Brennan, dated October 22, 2013 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 24, 2013 File No. 1-11083). #
|
| | | |
10.9010.43 | | Boston Scientific Corporation Annual Bonus Plan Performance Period January 1 - December 31, effective October 2013 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 22, 2013 File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.91 | | Boston Scientific Corporation Total Shareholder Return Performance Share Program, Performance Period January 1, 2014 - December 31, 2016 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 22, 2013 File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.9210.44 | | Boston Scientific Corporation Free Cash Flow Performance Share Program, Performance Period January 1, 2014 - December 31, 2014 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 22, 2013 File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
|
| | |
10.93 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2013 Annual Bonus Plan Performance Period January 1 - December 31, effective July 2013 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2013 File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.9410.45 | | Form of 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan Global Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2013 File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.9510.46 | | Form of 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan Global Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.4, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2013 File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.96 |
| | |
| 10.47 | | Boston Scientific Corporation Severance Pay and Layoff Notification Plan, as amended and restated (Bridge Plan), effective August 1, 2013 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2013 File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | |
10.97 | | Boston Scientific Corporation U.S. Severance Plan for Exempt Employees, as amended and restated, effective August 1, 2013 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.6, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2013 File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.9810.48 | | Boston Scientific Corporation Non-Employee Director Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated, effective January 1, 2009 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 28, 2008, File No. 1-11083).# |
| | |
| 10.49 | | Boston Scientific Corporation Non-Employee Director Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated, effective January 1, 2014 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.6, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2013 File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.99*10.50 | | Form of Performance Share Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (2014 Total Shareholder Return) incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.99, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
10.100*10.51 | | Form of Performance Share Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (2014 Free Cash Flow) incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.100, Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 File No. 1-11083).#
|
| | | |
11*10.52 | | Statement regarding computation of per share earnings (included in Note N - Weighted Average Shares OutstandingBoston Scientific Corporation 2006 Global Employee Stock Ownership Plan, as amended and restated, effective July 1, 2014 (incorporated herein by reference to the Company's 2013 consolidated financial statementsExhibit 10.1, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the yearquarter ended December 31, 2013 included in Item 8)June 30, 2014, File No. 1-11083).
# |
| | | |
| 10.53 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2015 Annual Bonus Plan, effective as of January 1, 2015 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 28, 2014, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.54 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2015 Total Shareholder Return Performance Share Program (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 28, 2014, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.55 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2015 Free Cash Flow Performance Share Program (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Current Report on Form 8-K dated October 28, 2014, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.56 | | Boston Scientific Corporation Executive Retirement Plan, as amended and restated effective August 1, 2016 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 25, 2016, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.57 | | Form of Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Non-Employee Directors) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.58 | | Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Non-Employee Directors) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.59 | | Form of Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Non-Employee Directors) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.60 | | Form of Performance Share Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Total Shareholder Return) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.4, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
|
| | |
| 10.61 | | Form of Performance Share Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Free Cash Flow) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.62 | | First Amendment to Boston Scientific Corporation Deferred Bonus Plan, effective January 1, 2015 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.6, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2014, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.63 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2016 Annual Bonus Plan, effective as of January 1, 2016 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K filed October 5, 2015, File No. 001-11083).# |
| | |
| 10.64 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2016 Total Shareholder Return Performance Share Program (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current Report on Form 8-K filed October 5, 2015, File No. 001-11083)# |
| | |
| 10.65 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2016 Free Cash Flow Performance Share Program (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Current Report on Form 8-K filed October 5, 2015, File No. 001-11083)# |
| | |
| 10.66 | | Form of Performance Share Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Total Shareholder Return) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2015, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.67 | | Form of Performance Share Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Free Cash Flow) (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2015, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.68 | | Form of Offer Letter by and between the Company and Edward Mackey dated December 24, 2014 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2016, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.69 | | Form of Global Non-Qualified Stock Option Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2016, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.70 | | Form of Global Deferred Stock Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2016, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.71 | | Form of 2016 Performance Share Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Total Shareholder Return) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.4, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2016, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.72 | | Form of 2016 Performance Share Unit Award Agreement under the 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (Free Cash Flow) (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.5, Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2016, File No. 1-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.73 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2017 Annual Bonus Plan, effective as of January 1, 2017 (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.1, Current Report on Form 8-K filed November 22, 2016, File No. 001-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.74 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2017 Total Shareholder Return Performance Share Program (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.2, Current Report on Form 8-K filed November 22, 2016, File No. 001-11083). # |
| | |
| 10.75 | | Boston Scientific Corporation 2017 Free Cash Flow Performance Share Program (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 10.3, Current Report on Form 8-K filed November 22, 2016, File No. 001-11083). # |
| | |
|
| | |
| 12* | | Statement regarding computation of ratios of earnings to fixed charges.
|
| | | |
| 21* | | List of the Company'sBoston Scientific's subsidiaries as of February 14, 2014.
10, 2017. |
| | | |
| 23* | | Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, Ernst & Young LLP.
LLP |
| | | |
| 31.1* | | Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
| | | |
| 31.2* | | Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
| | | |
| 32.1* | | Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
| | | |
| 32.2* | | Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
| | | |
|
| | |
| 101* | | Interactive Data Files Pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T: (i) the Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122016, 2015 and 2011;2014; (ii) the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) as of December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014; (iii) the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 20132016 and 2012; (iii)2015; (iv) the Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122016, 2015 and 2011; (iv) the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) as of December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011;2014; (v) the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2013, 20122016, 2015 and 2011;2014; (vi) the notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements; and (vii) Schedule II - Valuation and Qualifying Accounts |
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
|
| | | | |
| | | | | |
Dated: February 26, 201423, 2017 | | Boston Scientific Corporation |
| | | | | |
| | | By: | | /s/ Daniel J. Brennan |
| | | | | |
| | | | | Daniel J. Brennan |
| | | | | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
| | | | | (duly authorized officer and principal financial and accounting officer) |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
|
| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Dated: February 26, 2014 | | By: | | /s/ Katharine T. Bartlett |
| | | | |
| | | | Katharine T. Bartlett |
| | | | Director |
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
Dated: February 26, 201423, 2017 | | By: | | /s/ Daniel J. Brennan |
| | | | | |
| | | | | Daniel J. Brennan |
| | | | | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
| | | | | (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Dated: February 26, 2014 | | By: | | /s/ Bruce L. Byrnes |
| | | | |
| | | | Bruce L. Byrnes |
| | | | Director |
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
Dated: February 26, 201423, 2017 | | By: | | /s/ Nelda J. Connors |
| | | | | |
| | | | | Nelda J. Connors |
| | | | | Director |
| | | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Dated: February 26, 201423, 2017 | | By: | | /s/ Charles J. Dockendorff |
| | | | |
| | | | Charles J. Dockendorff |
| | | | Director |
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| Dated: February 23, 2017 | | By: | | /s/ Yoshiaki Fujimori |
| | | | |
| | | | Yoshiaki Fujimori |
| | | | Director |
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| Dated: February 23, 2017 | | By: | | /s/ Donna A. James |
| | | | |
| | | | Donna A. James |
| | | | Director |
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| Dated: February 23, 2017 | | By: | | /s/ Kristina M. Johnson, Ph.D. |
| | | | | |
| | | | | Kristina M. Johnson, Ph.D. |
| | | | | Director |
| | | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Dated: February 26, 201423, 2017 | | By: | | /s/ Ernest Mario, Ph.D. /s/ Edward J. Ludwig |
| | | | | |
| | | | | Ernest Mario, Ph. D.Edward J. Ludwig |
| | | | | Director |
| | | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Dated: February 26, 201423, 2017 | | By: | | /s/ Stephen P. MacMillan |
| | | | |
| | | | Stephen P. MacMillan |
| | | | Director |
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| Dated: February 23, 2017 | | By: | | /s/ Michael F. Mahoney |
| | | | | |
| | | | | Michael F. Mahoney |
| | | | | Director, Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer |
| | | | | (Principal Executive Officer) |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Dated: February 26, 2014 | | By: | | /s/ N.J. Nicholas, Jr. |
| | | | |
| | | | N.J. Nicholas, Jr. |
| | | | Director |
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
Dated: February 26, 2014 | | By: | | /s/ Pete M. Nicholas |
| | | | |
| | | | Pete M. Nicholas |
| | | | Director, Founder, Chairman of the Board |
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
Dated: February 26, 2014 | | By: | | /s/ Uwe E. Reinhardt, Ph.D. |
| | | | |
| | | | Uwe E. Reinhardt, Ph.D. |
| | | | Director |
| | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
Dated: February 26, 201423, 2017 | | By: | | /s/ David J. Roux |
| | | | | |
| | | | | David J. Roux |
| | | | | Director |
| | | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
Dated: February 26, 201423, 2017 | | By: | | /s/ John E. Sununu |
| | | | | |
| | | | | John E. Sununu |
| | | | | Director |
| | | | | |
|
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| Dated: February 23, 2017 | | By: | | /s/ Ellen M. Zane |
| | | | |
| | | | Ellen M. Zane |
| | | | Director |
| | | | |
Schedule II
VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
(in millions)
| | | Description | | Balance at
Beginning of Year | | Charges to
Costs and Expenses (a) | | Deductions to
Allowances for
Uncollectible Accounts (b) | | Charges to
(Deductions from)
Other Accounts (c) | | Balance at End of Year | | Balance at
Beginning of Year | | Charges to
Costs and Expenses (a) | | Deductions to
Allowances for
Uncollectible Accounts (b) | | Charges to
(Deductions from)
Other Accounts (c) | | Balance at End of Year |
| Year Ended December 31, 2013: | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2016: | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Allowances for uncollectible accounts and sales returns and allowances | | $ | 119 |
| | 5 |
| | (12 | ) | | — |
| | $ | 112 |
| | $ | 119 |
| | 9 |
| | (11 | ) | | 2 |
| | $ | 119 |
|
| Year Ended December 31, 2012: | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2015: | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Allowances for uncollectible accounts and sales returns and allowances | | $ | 116 |
| | 14 |
| | (7 | ) | | (4 | ) | | $ | 119 |
| | $ | 105 |
| | 15 |
| | (16 | ) | | 15 |
| | $ | 119 |
|
| Year Ended December 31, 2011: | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Year Ended December 31, 2014: | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Allowances for uncollectible accounts and sales returns and allowances | | $ | 125 |
| | 11 |
| | (13 | ) | | (7 | ) | | $ | 116 |
| | $ | 112 |
| | 10 |
| | (15 | ) | | (2 | ) | | $ | 105 |
|
(a) Represents allowances for uncollectible accounts established through selling, general and administrative expenses.
(b) Represents actual write-offs of uncollectible accounts.
(c) Represents net change in allowances for sales returns, recorded as contra-revenue.
