U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

xANNUAL REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 20122013
Commission file number 0-12183

BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
 
Delaware No. 11-2644611
(State or other jurisdiction of
of incorporation or organization)
 
(IRS Employer
Identification No.)

734 Walt Whitman5115 Ulmerton Rd., Melville, New York 11747Clearwater, Florida 33760
(Address of principal executive offices)

(631) 421-5452(800) 537-2790
(Issuer's telephone number)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:Act:

Title of each ClassName of each Exchange on which registered
Common Stock, $.001 Par ValueNYSE AmexMKT Market

Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Exchange ActAct:
None

Indicate by check mark if the Company is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Yes: o     No x

Indicate by check mark if the Company is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.
Yes:  o     No x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (I) filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934 during the past 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:  x     No o

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant 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 (para 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months ( or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).
Yes:  x     No o

Indicate by checkmark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of 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 definition of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer” and “small reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act (Check one):
 
Large accelerated filer   o
Accelerated filer   o
Non-accelerated filer   o
Smaller reporting company   x
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes:  o     No x

The aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the stock was sold, or the average bid and asked prices of such stock, as of June 30, 2012,2013, the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was approximately $46,300,000.$52,558,000.

The number of shares of the registrant's $.001 par value common stock outstanding on the NYSE AmexMKT exchange as of March 4, 201314, 2014 was 17,788,17717,826,336

Company Symbol-BVX
Company SIC (Standard Industrial Code)-3841

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
 
None.
 


 
 

 
 
Bovie Medical Corporation
20122013 Form 10-K Annual Report

Table of Contents

Part I Page
Item 1
14
Item 1A
69
Item 1B
1415
Item 2
15
Item 315
Item 3
Legal Proceedings
16
Item 4
1716
   
Part II  
Item 5
1817
Item 6
2019
Item 7
2120
Item 7A
3228
Item 8
3228
Item 9
3228
Item 9A
3229
Item 9B
3329
   
Part III  
Item 10
30
Item 11
Executive Compensation
33
Item 1138
Item 12
4540
Item 13
4842
Item 14
4943
 4944
   
Part IV  
Item 15
F-2745
Item 15A
Financial Statements45
 
 
2

 
BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION
 
Cautionary Notes Regarding “Forward-Looking” Statements

This report contains statements that we believe to be “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.  Forward-looking statements give our current expectations or forecasts of future events.  Forward-looking statements generally can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “intend,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “project,” or “continue,” or similar words or the negative thereof.  From time to time, we also may provide oral or written forward-looking statements in other materials we release to the public.  Any or all of our forward-looking statements in this report and in any public statements we make could be materially different from actual results.  They can be affected by assumptions we might make or by known or unknown risks or uncertainties.  Consequently, we cannot guarantee any forward-looking statements.  Investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements.  Investors should also understand that it is not possible to predict or identify all such factors and should not consider the risk factors discussed in Item 1A below to be a complete statement of all potential risks and uncertainties.  Past performance is no guaranty of future results.
 
3

Part I

ITEM 1.
ITEM 1.  Business

General

Bovie Medical Corporation (“Company”, “Bovie”“Bovie Medical”, “we”, “us”, or “our”) was incorporated in 1982, under the laws of the State of Delaware and has its principal executive office at 734 Walt Whitman Road, Melville, New York 11747.5115 Ulmerton Rd., Clearwater, Florida, 33760.

We are actively engagedan energy-based medical device company specializing in the business of developing, manufacturing, and marketing a range of electrosurgical products and technologies as well as related medical products and devices with a strong emphasisused in electrosurgical generators and electrosurgical disposables. We sell a broad range of products designed for doctor’s offices, surgery centers and hospitals.hospitals worldwide. Our medical devices are marketed through both private labels and Bovie’s own well-respected brands (Bovie®, Aaron®, IDS™ and ICON™) to distributors throughout the world.  The Company also leverages its expertise through original equipment manufacturing (OEM) agreements with other medical device manufacturers.

We are also the developers of J-Plasma®, a patented new plasma-based surgical product. J-Plasma® utilizes a gas ionization process that produces a stable, focused beam of ionized gas that provides surgeons with greater precision, minimal invasiveness and an absence of conductive currents during surgery.  While currently in the early stages of commercialization, we believe that J-Plasma® has the potential to be a transformational product for surgeons.

Significant Subsidiaries

Aaron Medical Industries, Inc. is a wholly-owned Florida corporation based in Clearwater, Florida. It is principally engaged in the business of marketing our medical products.

Bovie Canada ulc (a wholly-owned subsidiary) is an Alberta, Canada Corporation which, prior to June 2010, operated a facility in Windsor, Ontario. This facility was consolidated into our U.S. operations. There was no activity in this entity during 2012 and 2011.  In December of 2012 Bovie Canada ulc was dissolved.

Industry

Healthcare reform has caused consolidation among providers, with hospitals merging, physician practices joining hospitals and institutions combining to form Accountable Care Organizations to manage patients on an interdisciplinary basis.  Although the medical device industry can be challenging and very competitive, we believe it will continue to have a positive long term growth outlooktrajectory with the number of surgical procedures performed increasing annually as a result of the aging “baby boomer” population. Additionally, we also anticipate a continued increase in minimally invasive surgical procedures due to ongoing advancements in technology coupled with continued overall pressure to reduce healthcare costs via a reduction in patient trauma and recovery time. Expanding global markets will also continue to provide growth opportunities for the medical device industry.

We believe that Bovie Medical has sustainable, competitive advantages in the medical device market for several reasons. We have a long history in electrosurgery. In fact our inspiration dates back to the first use of an electrosurgical generator in an operating room in the U.S. in 1926 where Dr. William T. Bovie was present. This has made the Bovie brand well known amongst surgeons the world over. In addition to having pioneered the field, Bovie is recognized for its outstanding product quality supported by strong engineering and research and development capabilities.

Business Strategy

We manufactureare pursuing a dual strategy that involves the continued development and market variousgrowth of our core medical products, both under private labeldevice business and the accelerated launch of our J-Plasma ® product.

Bovie brands (Bovie®, Aaron®, IDS™,Medical today offers a full line of office, surgery center and ICON™),hospital-based electrosurgical generators and accessories with state-of-the-art models, the most complete offering of any U.S. manufactured electrosurgical generator product. We will build upon this leadership position by continuing to distributors worldwide. Additionally,provide superior products under the well-known and highly-respected Bovie has original equipment manufacturing (OEM) agreementsbrands. New product introductions, enhancements and innovations are important elements of our strategy and will be supported by investments in research & development. In addition, we expect to continue to add product lines through our distributor network as part of our strategy to drive both organic and acquisition growth and to add value to our distribution partners. At the same time, we will work to leverage our significant know-how and the relationships already in place with other medical device manufacturers. These OEM and private label arrangements and our usesome of the Bovie brands allow usbiggest companies in the medical technology field to gain greaterbecome the OEM provider of choice to other industry participants in order to further increase our market share for the distribution of our products.share.
 
 
14


J-Plasma®

TableThe cornerstone of Contentsour growth strategy is the full launch of our J-Plasma® product, which utilizes a gas ionization process to produce a stable, focused beam of ionized gas that provides surgeons with greater precision, minimal invasiveness and an absence of conductive currents through the patient during surgery. FDA-approved since 2012, J-Plasma’s® retractable blade allows it to function as a cutting tool that leaves behind almost no tissue damage. Our main focus is to drive awareness and adoption of J-Plasma® initially amongst surgeons in the gynecological, dermatological and plastic surgery specialties, and then introduce the product to surgeons in other specialties including general surgery, colorectal surgery, oncology, urology and ENT.
 
Among our goals is that we strive to be a leader in advanced electrosurgical generators which can beAs of early 2014, J-Plasma® was being used in over two dozen sites in the different niche markets with minimally invasive surgical instruments as well as a pioneer in plasma technology and its various medical applications. In 2012, we continued the development of our new products Seal-N-Cut™, A1450™ generator, and additional devices for our J-Plasma™ product line.

Overall sales increased by approximately 8.9% from 2011 to 2012.

Our electrosurgery sales continued to trend  upward by approximately 4.7% in 2012 over 2011, mainly  in our generator sales. We also experienced an upward trend in our electrosurgery disposables of approximately 30%, due mainly to increased sales of our coated electrodes line in 2012 over 2011.

We also continue to see an upward trend in 2012 in third party product sales which we have introduced to our distributors as part of our strategic plan to maximize our distribution channels.  In 2011, we introduced a product line of medical room lighting products manufactured by Medical Illuminations International, Inc., a California based corporation. We intend to continue to identify and offer additional new third party products that fit our portfolio of products throughout 2013.

U.S. We are continuing to make substantial investments incurrently laying the developmentfoundation for a broader product launch by soliciting white papers, of which 7 are underway, recruiting a dedicated sales force and marketing of our J-Plasma™ technology, which may adversely affect our profitabilitybringing on world-class sales and cash flow in the next 12 to 24 months.  While wesurgeon training capabilities. We believe that these investments may generate additional revenues and profitsactions will enable us to significantly accelerate the growth of J-Plasma® sales in the future, there can be no assurance that J-Plasma will be successful or that such future revenues and profitability will be realized. Since June 2010 through December 31, 2012, we have invested approximately $1.6 million in the development and marketing of our J-Plasma™ technology.periods ahead.

Company Products

We group our products into three main categories: electrosurgery, cauteries, and other products. Information regarding sales by product categories and related percentages is included in the Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations section of this report and is incorporated by reference herein.

Electrosurgery Products

Electrosurgery is our largest product line and includes desiccators, generators, electrodes, electrosurgical pencils and various ancillary disposable products. These electrosurgical products are used during surgical procedures in gynecology, urology, plastic surgery, dermatology, veterinary, and other surgical markets for the cutting and coagulation of tissue. It is estimated that 80% of all surgical procedures performed worldwide are accomplished by electrosurgery. Our electrosurgery products fall under two categories, monopolar or bipolar. Monopolar products require the use of a grounding pad attached to the patient for the return of the electrical current, while bipolar products consist of two electrodes; one for the inbound current and one for the return current and therefore do not require the use of a grounding pad.

ICON GS (J-Plasma)

Our J-Plasma® technology is the foundation for the ICON GS plasma system, which utilizes a gas ionization process producing a stable thin focused beam of ionized gas that can be controlled in a wide range of temperatures and intensities, providing the surgeon greater precision, minimal invasiveness and an absence of conductive currents through the patient during surgery. Sales of J-Plasma began in 2013 and amounted to approximately $45,000. We continue to expand the development of this product line including enhancements to our proprietary handpieces and generator.
5


Aaron® 900 and Aaron® 940

These products are low powered (30 and 40 watt) high frequency desiccators. These units were designed primarily for dermatology and family practice physicians. The units are used mainly for removing small skin lesions and growths as well as for office based coagulation.

Aaron® 950

Bovie has developed a high frequency desiccator with cut capacity for outpatient surgical procedures. These generators allow physicians to change the power settings with one action. They were designed mainly for use in doctors’ offices and are utilized in a variety of specialties including dermatology, gynecology, family practice, urology, plastic surgery and ophthalmology.
  
2

Aaron ®1250U

We have also developed a 120-watt multipurpose electrosurgery generator. The unit features monopolar and bipolar functions with pad sensing. This generator was recently redesigned to allow one unit to work with a line voltage ranging from 100 – 240 VAC whereas previously there was a need for three different versions.

Aaron ®2250 / 3250 and IDS 200 / 300 / 400

Given the market interest in more powerful electrosurgical generators, we have developed 200, 300 and 400-watt multipurpose digital electrosurgery generators designed for the rapidly expanding surgi-center market and the hospital market. The digital hardware allows very high parallel data processing throughout the operation. All data is sampled and processed digitally. For the first time in electrosurgery, through digital technology, we are able to measure tissue impedance in real time (5,000 times a second). These units have been designed based on a digital feedback system. Bovie is using dedicated digital hardware instead of a general purpose controller for processing data. As the impedance varies, the power is adjusted to deliver a consistent clinical effect. The IDS™IDS 200 / Aaron® 2250 have the capability to do most procedures performed today in the surgi-centersurgery center or outpatient settings and were introduced in 2003. Although 200 watts is more than enough power to do most procedures in the operating room, 300 watts is considered the standard and believed to be what most hospitals and surgi-centerssurgery center will require. Therefore, we developed the IDS™IDS 300/ Aaron® 3250. The Bovie® IDS™IDS 400 is a 400 watt generator designed primarily for sale in the overseas markets. These units feature both monopolar and bipolar functions, have pad and tissue sensing, plus nine blended cutting settings.

The next generation of the above generators with the same power output, but with additional features will meet all of the current and impending regulatory requirements world-wide. The new units will be identified as the IDS-210 / 310 and Aaron 2350 / 3350.  These new generators, which received FDA 510k approval in March 2014, will give us the ability to compete in markets that we have previously been excluded from due to regulatory requirements.

ICON GI and ICON GP

The ICON™ICON product lines are innovative, custom designed specialty electrosurgical generators that incorporate an easy to use touch-screen interface which provides the user flexibility in achieving a desired effect through different digitally built-in modes.  In addition, the ICON™ICON product line was designed to improve safety and convenience by requiring the use of only split pads with digital technology to protect against pad burns. It features specialized error messaging to prevent misinterpretation and allows for quicker troubleshooting, and has specialized audible alerts to indicate improper cable connections. The ICON™ICON line represents a new foundation platform that can be readily expanded thereby reducing the development time and cost for future new specialized generators and also allowing the user to easily upgrade existing units. The ICON™ICON GI is designed for the gastrointestinal (“GI”) niche market, while the ICON™ICON GP is designed for a more general purpose market like hospital operating rooms, surgery centers, etc.

ICON VS

This generator expands further on our ICON™ICON platform which incorporates a flexible and simple user interface and allows for customization of the output modes for a variety of electrosurgical applications. This product, like the ICON™ICON GI and GP, its predecessor generators, was designed to add safety features and improve convenience in performing general purpose procedures and includes a vessel sealing component. This generator will also be used with our Seal-N-Cut handle and accessories. We have received 510k FDA clearance to market the ICON VS.

Resistick II

Resistick™Resistick II is a coating that is applied to stainless steel which resists eschar (scab or scar tissue caused by burning) during surgery. The coated electrodes continue the expansion of the Bovie® line of electrosurgical disposables.  We have seen a strong demand since the introduction of this product line in 2011.

Disposable Laparoscopic Instruments

Disposable laparoscopic instruments are available in over thirty different jaw patterns and lengths, including ratcheted and non-ratcheted and offer the physician the quality of a reusable instrument with the convenience of a disposable.  These instruments are used by physicians from a diverse group of specialties such as gynecology, general surgery and urology.
 
3

ICON GS (J-Plasma)

Our J-Plasma technology is the foundation for the ICON GS plasma system, which utilizes a gas ionization process producing a stable thin focused beam of ionized gas that can be controlled in a wide range of temperatures and intensities, providing the surgeon greater precision, minimal invasiveness and an absence of conductive currents during surgery. The development of this new gas system generator also includes the design of a new proprietary handpiece.

Prior to our acquiring the J-Plasma™ technology, a German-based company had licensed the same technology.  The license agreement was terminated but the German company has filed its own patent possibly using the J-Plasma™ technology as its basis.  Although we have filed for additional patent applications on enhancements outside of the original licensed technology, our management believes this German company may be infringing on our original patent and as a result, there is no assurance that there will not be future litigation or the possible loss of our competitive advantage.

Cauteries

Battery Operated Cauteries

Battery operated cauteries constitute our second largest product line. Cauteries were originally designed for precise hemostasis (to stop bleeding) in ophthalmology. The current use of cauteries has been substantially expanded to include sculpting woven grafts in bypass surgery, vasectomies, evacuation of subungual hematoma (bleeding from a smashed fingernail) and for arresting bleeding in many types of surgery. Battery operated cauteries are primarily sterile one-time use products. We manufacture one of the broadest lines of cauteries in the world, including but not limited to, a line of replaceable battery and tip cauteries, which are popular in overseas markets. The company has introduced an updated, patent pending line of battery operated cauteries designed to allow easier recycling of the alkaline batteries and to minimize accidental activation.
6


Other Products

Battery Operated Medical Lights

We manufacture a variety of specialty lighting instruments for use in ophthalmology as well as specialty lighting instruments for general surgery, hip replacement surgery and for the placement of endotracheal tubes in emergency and surgical procedures. We also manufacture and market physicians’ office use penlights.

Nerve Locator Stimulator

We manufacture a nerve locator stimulator primarily used for identifying motor nerves in hand and facial reconstructive surgery. This one time use instrument is a self-contained, battery-operated unit, that is individually packaged sterile, for one time use.

LED Medical Lighting from Medical Illumination International

Bovie Medical entered into an exclusive agreement with Medical Illumination International to market and sell their product line for distribution in the US medical market. These US manufactured lights are the same call point as our other physician and surgery center products and sales in 2013 totaled approximately $1,452,000.

Research and Development and New Products
 
Our research and development activities are an essential componentto our strategy of our efforts to developdeveloping new innovative products for introduction in the marketplace. New and improved products play a critical role in our sales growth. We continue to placeorganization, distribution network and our OEM customers. Our R&D emphasis is on the development ofcreating and developing proprietary products and product improvementsextensions to complement and expand our existing product lines. We maintainlines.. Through close working relationships with physicians and medical personnel in hospitals and universities, who assistwe are able to focus our resources on developing new products that meet current market needs. Bovie R&D teams are housed at our manufacturing and assembly hub in product researchClearwater, Florida and areas of development.at our manufacturing facilities in Bulgaria and China. Our researchR & D expenditures were approximately $1.3, $1.3 and development activities are primarily carried out internally.$1.2 million for the years 2013, 2012,  and  2011 respectively.


4

Aaron® 1450Derm 101 & Derm 102

The Aaron® 1450-RF is aDerm 101 and Derm 102 are slated to be released in the beginning of the second quarter of 2014 and will be introduced at the American Academy of Dermatology in late March 2014.  These products are 10 watt high frequency generator designeddesiccators for surgeryuse in family practice, aesthetics and dermatology settings.  They will compete with established high frequency desiccators that go up to 40 watts in power, but will be offered at a new price point.  The Derm 101 is priced for affordability by family practice doctors. The Derm 101 uses the same dermatology type tips and accessories as the larger units and should expand our market for both the units and the disposable stream.  The 10 watt maximum output is capable of accomplishing 95% of all dermatology procedures currently performed with the higher power units.  The Derm 101 and 102 have a universal power supply, meaning it can be plugged in virtually anywhere in the doctor office setting.  This unit operates at 4 MHz, eight times higher frequency than a standard electrosurgical generator which operates at approximately 500 KHz. This unit is intended to beworld, and meet or exceed the first in a family of 4MHz generators initially designed for several office based specialties.  The 1450-RF has been designed to include universal power control which allows the unit to be used in any power setting worldwide. In March 2011, the FDA identified deficiencies in the original 510k submission and outlined several unresolved issues that needed to be addressed. We continue to perform additional testing and evaluations to resolve the issues that were raised during the review. We plan to include this information in a new 510k submission.latest stringent international standards.

Seal-N-Cut Handle and Accessories

The Seal-N-Cut™ is a disposable endoscopic surgical handle that supports a pluralityvariety of electrical and mechanical modes. This technologically advanced endoscopic device will target the growing vessel and tissue sealing and cutting market. Although weWe have experienced significant delays in the development of this product for market due to modifications and improvements related to the product design,design. In addition, as previously disclosed in the November 2013 Settlement Agreement with Steven Livneh (the “Settlement Agreement”), we anticipate that we will re-submit our application for 510k approval during 2013.granted Steven Livneh an exclusive, transferrable, irrevocable license to make, have made, use, market and sell the Seal-N-Cut device in the People’s Republic of China (the “PRC”) and a non-exclusive, transferrable and irrevocable license to make, have made, use, market, and sell, Seal-N-Cut anywhere other than the PRC.  We and Mr. Livneh each agreed to pay the other a royalty equal to 3% of Net Sales (as defined in the Settlement Agreement) of Seal-N-Cut.

Sales & Marketing

TheExcluding J-Plasma® ,the majority of our products are marketed through medical distributors, which distribute to more than 6,000 hospitals, doctors offices, and other healthcare facilities. New distributors are contacted through responses to our advertising in international and domestic medical journals and domestic or international trade shows. International sales represented approximately 18%17% of total revenues in 2013, 18% in 2012 and 21% in both 2011 and 2010.2011. Our products are sold in more than 150 countries through local dealers which are coordinated by sales and marketing personnel at the Clearwater, Florida facility.

We have launched our new surgical suite J-Plasma® product lines and have establishedline in 2013 using a network of approximately 50 commission-based direct sales contractors to market and sell these products.  In 2014 we plan to enhance the marketing and sales of the J-Plasma® product line with a minimum of 10 direct/employed sales reps along with approximately 30 commissioned-based sales contractors.

Our business is generally not seasonal in nature.
7


Competition

We compete with numerous manufacturers and distributors of medical supplies and devices, many of which are large and well established. In addition,well-established. With the exception of J-Plasma™ and endoscopic instrumentation, which are sold directly to the end-user under our own brand, many of our products are private labeled.  The majority of the products in our core business are sold in various ways includingthrough distributors under the Bovie® or Aaron® label.  The balance is private labeling some of our productslabeled for major distributors who sell it under their label,own name. By having private labeling and selling the majority of our other products through distributors. Private labeling allows usbranded distribution we are able  to increase our position in the marketplace and thereby compete from two different approaches, throughwith much larger organizations.  While our Aaron® or Bovie® label, and our customers’ private label. Our private label customers distribute our products under their name through their internal sales force. Sellingforce, the majority of our other products are sold through distribution which increases our sales potential and helps level the playing field in regardsrelative to our largerlarge competitors as most of the companies we compete withthat sell direct. Domestically, we continue to believe that we have a substantial market share in the field of electrosurgical generator manufacturing which consists ofthrough our Company labelBovie branded and OEM units.

Our main competitors in electrosurgical and accessory markets are Valleylab (a division of Covidien), Conmed and Erbe Electromedizine; inElectromedizine.  In the battery operated cautery market, our main competitor is Medtronic Xomed, Inc.;Beaver Visitec, and in the endoscopic instrumentation market, it is Ethicon (a division of Johnson and Johnson) and Covidien Surgical Solutions (formally U.S. Surgical.Surgical, a division of Covidien). Currently, we are the only company with helium based plasma and retractable blade products. However, there are other argon plasma competitors, namely Conmed and Plasmajet, and other CO2 laser product competitors for our target market.  We believe our competitive position did not change in 2012.
5

2013.  
 
Intellectual Property

We rely on our intellectual property that we have developed or acquired over the years including patents, trade secrets, technical innovations, and various licensing agreements to provide our future growth and build our competitive position. We own 1518 patents and 168 trademarks in the U.S. and have had 12 patents issued outside the U.S. Some of our early patents are nearing the end of their patent term. We also have filed a number of U.S. and international patent applications for various new products. As we continue to expand our intellectual property portfolio we believe it is critical for us to continue to invest in filing patent applications to protect our technology, inventions, and improvements. However, we can give no assurance that competitors will not infringe on our patent rights or otherwise create similar or non-infringing competing products that are technically patentable in their own right.

Manufacturing and Suppliers

We are committed to producing the most technically advanced and highest quality products of their kind available on the highest quality and technical advancements. Wemarket.We manufacture the majority of our products on our premises in Clearwater, Florida which is certified under the ISO international quality standards and may bewhich is subject to continuing regulation and routine inspections by the FDA to determineensure compliance with regulations inrelating to our quality system, medical device reporting, and adherence to FDA restrictions on promoting products for unapproved or off-label uses. In addition, we are also subject to regulations under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Environmental Protection Act and other federal, state and local regulations.

We also have collaborative arrangements with three foreign suppliers under which we request the development of certain items and components, andwhich we purchase them pursuant to purchase orders. Our purchase order commitments are never more than one year in duration and are supported by orders fromcustomer orders.. Over the past several years we have expanded the use of our customers.Bulgarian supplier who manufactures a substantial number of our generator and accessory components. We anticipate expanding this relationship further to include the manufacturing of a large number of our plasma components as well as the manufacturing our new Derm 101 and 102 product lines.

Customers

We sell the majority of our current products through major distributors which include Cardinal Health, Independent Medical Co-Op Inc. (IMCO), McKesson Medical Surgical, Inc., Medline, National Distribution and Contracting Inc. (NDC) (Abco, Cida and Starline), Owens & Minor, and Physician Sales & Service (PSS) now a division of McKesson and have manufacturing agreements for private label of certain products with others.

Backlog

The value of unshipped factory orders is not material.

Employees

At December 31, 2012,2013, we had 147136 full-time employees consisting of 4which 5 were executive officers, 2119 supervisory personnel, 1210 sales personnel, and 110102 technical support, administrative, and production employees. None of our current employees areis covered by anya collective bargaining agreement, and we have never experienced a work stoppage. We consider our employee relations to be good.

ITEM 1A.


In addition to risks and uncertainties in the ordinary course of business, important risk factors that may affect us are discussed below.  Additional risks not presently known to us or that we currently believe are immaterial may also significantly impair our business operations.

Risks Related to Our Industry

The medical device industry is highly competitive and we may be unable to compete effectively.

The medical device industry is highly competitive. Many competitors in this industry are well-established, do a substantially greater amount of business, and have greater financial resources and facilities than we do.

Domestically, we believe we rank third in the number of units sold in the field of electrosurgical generator manufacturing and we sell our products and compete with other manufacturers in various ways. In addition to advertising, attending trade shows and supporting our distribution channels, we strive to enhance product quality and functionality, improve user friendliness, and expand product exposure.

We have also invested substantial resources to develop our J-Plasma™ technology. If we are unable to gain acceptance in the marketplace of J-Plasma™, our business and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected. From June of 2010 through December 31, 2013, we have invested approximately $2.9 million in the development and marketing of our J-Plasma™ technology.

We also compete by private labeling our products for major distributors under their label. This allows us to increase our position in the marketplace and thereby compete from two different approaches, our Aaron® or Bovie® label, and our customers’ private label. Our private label customers distribute our products under their name through their internal sales force. We believe our main competitors do not private label their products.

Lastly, at this time we sell the majority of our products through distributors. Many of the companies we compete with sell direct, thus competing directly with distributors they sometimes use.
Our main competitors in electrosurgical and accessory markets are Valleylab (a division of Covidien), Conmed and Erbe Electromedizine.  In the battery operated cautery market, our main competitor is Beaver Visitec, and in the endoscopic instrumentation market, it is Ethicon (a division of Johnson and Johnson) and Covidien Surgical Solutions (formally U.S. Surgical, a division of Covidien). Currently, we are the only company with helium based plasma and retractable blade products. However, there are argon plasma competitors, Conmed and Plasmajet, and CO2 laser competitors for our target market.  We believe our competitive position did not change in 2013.
Our industry is highly regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and international regulatory authorities, as well as other governmental, state and federal agencies which have substantial authority to establish criteria which must be complied with in order for us to continue in operation.

United States

Our products and research and development activities are subject to regulation by the FDA and other regulatory bodies. FDA regulations govern, among other things, the following activities:

·Product development
·Product testing
·Product labeling
·Product storage
·Pre-market clearance or approval
·Advertising and promotion
·Product traceability, and
·Product indications.

In the United States, medical devices are classified on the basis of control deemed necessary to reasonably ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device. Class I devices are subject to general controls. These controls include registration and listing, labeling, pre-market notification and adherence to the FDA Quality System Regulation. Class II devices are subject to general and special controls. Special controls include performance standards, post market surveillance, patient registries and FDA guidelines. Class III devices are those which must receive pre-market approval by the FDA to ensure their safety and effectiveness. Currently, we only manufacture Class I and Class II devices.  Pre-market notification clearance must be obtained for some Class I and most Class II devices when the FDA does not require pre-market approval. All of our products have been cleared by the pre-market notification process.
9


A pre-market approval application is required for most Class III devices. A pre-market approval application must be supported by valid scientific evidence to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the device. The pre-market approval application typically includes:

·Results of bench and laboratory tests, animal studies, and clinical studies
·A complete description of the device and its components; and
·A detailed description of the methods, facilities and controls used to manufacture the device, and proposed labeling.
The pre-market approval process can be expensive, uncertain and lengthy. A number of devices for which pre-market approval has been sought by other companies have never been approved for marketing.

International Regulation

To market products in the European Union, our products must bear the “CE” mark.  Manufacturers of medical devices bearing the CE mark have gone through a conformity assessment process that assures that products are manufactured in compliance with a recognized quality system and to comply with the European Medical Devices Directive.

Each device that bears a CE mark has an associated technical file that includes a description of the following:

·Description of the device and its components,
·A summary of how the device complies with the essential requirements of the medical devices directive,
·Safety (risk assessment) and performance of the device,
·Clinical evaluations with respect to the device,
·Methods, facilities and quality controls used to manufacture the device, and
·Proposed labeling for the device.

Manufacturing and distribution of a device is subject to ongoing surveillance by the appropriate regulatory body to ensure continued compliance with quality system and reporting requirements.

We began CE marking of devices for sale in the European Union in 1999. In addition to the requirement to CE mark, each member country of the European Union maintains the right to impose additional regulatory requirements.

Outside of the European Union, regulations vary significantly from country to country. The time required to obtain approval to market products may be longer or shorter than that required in the United States or the European Union. Certain European countries outside of the European Union do recognize and give effect to the CE mark certification. We are permitted to market and sell our products in those countries.

If we are unable to successfully introduce new products or fail to keep pace with competitive advances in technology, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. In addition, our research and development efforts rely upon investments and alliances, and we cannot guarantee that any previous or future investments or alliances will be successful.

Our research and development activities are an essential component of our efforts to develop new and innovative products for introduction in the marketplace. New and improved products play a critical role in our sales growth. We continue to place emphasis on the development of proprietary products, such as our J-Plasma™ technology,  and product improvements to complement and expand our existing product lines. We maintain close working relationships with physicians and medical personnel in hospitals and universities who assist in product research and areas of development. Our research and development activities are primarily conducted internally and are expensed as incurred. These expenses include direct expenses for wages, materials and services associated with the development of our products net of any reimbursements from customers. Research and development expenses do not include any portion of general and administrative expenses. Our Clearwater, Florida facility has been our flagship research and design location. We expect to continue making future investments to enable us to develop and market new technologies and products to further our strategic objectives and strengthen our existing business.  However, we cannot guarantee that any of our previous or future investments will be successful or that our new products such as J-Plasma™, will gain market acceptance, the failure of which would have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

The amount expended by us on research and development of our products during the years 2013, 2012 and 2011, totaled approximately $1.3, $1.3 and $1.2 million respectively. During the past three years, we invested substantial resources in the development and marketing of our J-Plasma™ technology, including the ICON™ GS plasma system, Endoscopic Modular Instruments and accompanying new generators. We have not incurred any direct costs relating to environmental regulations or requirements. For 2014, we expect the amount of our expenditures for research and development activities to remain similar to the level in 2013.
10


Even if we are successful in developing and obtaining approval for our new product candidates, there are various circumstances that could prevent the successful commercialization of the products.

Our ability to successfully commercialize our products will depend on a number of factors, any of which could delay or prevent commercialization, including:

 ●the regulatory approvals of our new products are delayed or we are required to conduct further research and development of our products prior to receiving regulatory approval;
 ●we are unable to build a sales and marketing group to successfully launch and sell our new products;
 ●we are unable to raise the additional funds needed to successfully develop and commercialize our products or acquire additional products for growth;
 ●we are required to allocate available funds to litigation matters;
 ●we are unable to manufacture the quantity of product needed in accordance with current good manufacturing practices to meet market demand, or at all;
 ●our product is determined to be ineffective or unsafe following approval and is removed from the market or we are required to perform additional research and development to further prove the safety and effectiveness of the product before re-entry into the market;
 ●competition from other products or technologies prevents or reduces market acceptance of our products;
 ●we do not have and cannot obtain the intellectual property rights needed to manufacture or market our products without infringing on another company’s patents; or
 ●we are unsuccessful in defending against patent infringement or other intellectual property rights, claims that could be brought against us, our products or technologies;

The failure to successfully acquire or develop and commercialize new products will adversely affect the future growth of our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our international operations subject us to foreign currency fluctuations and other risks associated with operating in foreign countries.

We operate internationally and enter into transactions denominated in foreign currencies. To date, we have not hedged our exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates, and as a result, we are subject to foreign currency transaction and translation gains and losses. We purchase goods and services in U.S. dollars and Euros. Foreign exchange risk is managed primarily by satisfying foreign denominated expenditures with cash flows or assets denominated in the same currency therefore we are subject to some foreign currency fluctuation risk. Our currency value fluctuations were not material for 2013.

Our operations and cash flows may be adversely impacted by healthcare reform legislation.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act were enacted into law in the U.S. in March 2010.  Among other initiatives, this legislation imposes a 2.3% excise tax on domestic sales of class I, II, and III medical devices beginning in 2013. Substantially all of our products are class I or class II medical devices. In the short term we do anticipate that this tax on medical devices will negatively affect our results of operations and cash flows by approximately $300,000 to $500,000 annually. However, since approximately 83% of our 2013 sales were derived in the U.S. we cannot predict if any additional regulations will be implemented at the federal or state level, or the effect of any future legislation or regulation in the U.S. or internationally.

Our operations may experience higher costs to produce our products as a result of changes in prices for oil, gasoline, and other commodities.

We use some plastics and other petroleum-based materials along with precious metals contained in electronic components as raw materials in many of our products. Prices of oil and gasoline also significantly affect our costs for freight and utilities. Oil, gasoline and precious metal prices are volatile and may increase, resulting in higher costs to produce and distribute our products. Due to the highly competitive nature of the healthcare industry and the cost-containment efforts of our customers we may be unable to pass along cost increases through higher prices. If we are unable to fully recover these costs through price increases or offset through other cost reductions, our results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Our manufacturing facilities are located in Clearwater, Florida and could be affected due to multiple risks from fire, hurricanes, physical changes in the planet due to climate change, and similar phenomena.

Our manufacturing facilities are located in Clearwater, Florida and could be affected by multiple weather risks, most notably hurricanes.  Although we carry property and casualty insurance and business interruption insurance, future possible disruptions of operations or damage to property, plant and equipment due to hurricanes or other weather risks could result in impaired production and affect our ability to meet our commitments to our customers and impair important business relationships, the loss of which could adversely affect our operations and profitability. We do however maintain a backup generator at our Clearwater facility and a disaster recovery plan is in place to help mitigate this risk.

We do not produce hazardous materials or emissions that would adversely impact the environment. We do however, have air conditioning units and consume electricity which could be impacted by climate change in the form of increased rates.  However, we do not believe the increase in expense from any rate increases, as a percentage of sales, would be material in the near term.
11


Risks related to global natural disasters (whether or not caused by climate change), unusual weather conditions, pandemic outbreaks, terrorist acts, and global political events

The occurrence of one or more natural disasters, such as hurricanes, tsunamis, fires, floods, and earthquakes (whether or not caused by climate change), unusual weather conditions, pandemic outbreaks, terrorist acts or disruptive global political events, such as civil unrest in countries in which our suppliers are located, or similar disruptions could impair our ability to purchase, receive, or replenish inventory which could result in lost sales and otherwise adversely and materially affect our operations and financial performance. These events also can have indirect consequences such as increases in fuel (or other energy) prices or a fuel shortage, or increases in the costs of insurance if they result in significant loss of property or other insurable damage.

Risks Relating to Our Business

We are subject to litigation proceedings that could materially and adversely affect our business.
6

Other Litigation

In addition to the litigation risks and proceedings mentioned below, we are currently involved and may in the future become subject to legal claims or proceedings related to securities, employment, customer or third party contracts, environmental regulations, or other matters (see Item 3 – Legal Proceedings). The costs involved in defending these claims have been substantial to date and we anticipate that we will incur substantial additional costs in our defense of these claims, which have had and may continue to have an adverse effect on our profitability.  In addition, if other claims are asserted against us, we may be required to defend against such  claims, or deem it necessary or advisable to initiate a legal proceeding to protect our rights, the expense and distraction of such a claim or proceeding, whether or not resolved in our favor, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results. Further, if a claim or proceeding were resolved against us or if we were to settle any such dispute, we may be required to pay damages and costs or refrain from certain activities, any of which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and operating results.

Intellectual Property Litigation or Trade Secrets

We have experienced certain allegations of infringement of intellectual property rights and use of trade secrets in the past and may receive other such claims, with or without merit, in the future. Previously, claims of infringement of intellectual property rights have sometimes evolved into litigation against us, and they may continue to do so in the future. It is inherently difficult to assess the outcome of litigation. Although we believe we have adequate defenses to these claims and that the outcome of the litigation will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, or results of operations, there can be no assurances that we will prevail. Any such litigation could result in substantial cost to us, significantly reduce our cash resources, and create a diversion of the efforts of our technical and management personnel, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results. If we are unable to successfully defend against such claims, we could be prohibited from future sales of the allegedly infringing product or products, which could materially and adversely affect our future growth.

 Product Liability Litigation
Although we carry liability insurance, due to the nature of our products and their use by professionals, we may, from time to time, be subject to litigation from persons who sustain injury during medical procedures in hospitals, physicians offices or in clinics and defending such litigation is expensive, disruptive, time consuming and could adversely affect our business. We currently maintains product liability insurance with combined coverage limits of $10 million on a claims-made basis. There is no assurance that this coverage will be adequate to protect us from any possible liabilities (individually or in the aggregate) we might incur in connection with the sale or testing of our products. In addition, we may need increased product liability coverage as additional products are commercialized. This insurance is expensive and in the future may not be available on acceptable terms, if at all (see Item 3- Legal Proceedings).

Current challenges in the credit and capital markets may adversely affect our business and financial condition.
The economic conditions described below should also be considered when reviewing each of the subsequent paragraphs setting forth the various aspects of our business, operations, and products.

The continued global economic uncertainty and previous disruptions in credit markets, among other things, may materially limit credit availability in the credit and capital markets, lower levels of liquidity, cause increases in the rates of default and bankruptcy, and lower consumer and business spending. Although the ultimate outcome of these events cannot be predicted, they may have a material adverse effect on the Company and our ability to raise capital or borrow money in the credit markets and potentially to draw on our revolving credit facility or otherwise obtain financing.  Similarly, current or potential customers and suppliers may no longer be in business, may be unable to fund purchases or may decide to reduce purchases, all of which could lead to reduced demand for our products, reduced gross margins, and increased customer payment delays or defaults. Further, suppliers may not be able to supply us with needed raw materials on a timely basis, may increase prices or go out of business, which could result in our inability to meet customer demand in a timely manner or affect our gross margins. We are also limited in our ability to reduce costs to offset the results of a prolonged or severe economic downturn given certain fixed costs associated with our operations.
7

We dohistorically done a substantial amount of business with certain original equipment manufacturers (“OEM”) which as a group have produced substantial revenues for our Company. Loss of business from a major OEM customer will likely materially and adversely affect our business.

We manufacture the majority of our products on our premises in Clearwater, Florida. Labor-intensive sub-assemblies and labor-intensive products may be out-sourced to our specification. Although we sell through distributors, we market our products through national trade journal advertising, direct mail, distributor sales representatives and trade shows, under the Bovie name, the Bovie/Aaron name and private label. Major distributors include Cardinal Health, IMCO, McKesson Medical Surgical, Inc., Medline, NDC (Abco, Cida and Starline), Owens & Minor, and Physician Sales & Service. If any of these distributor relationships are terminated or not replaced, our revenue from the territories served by these distributors could be adversely affected.

We are also dependent on other OEM customers who have no legal obligation to purchase products from us. Should such customers fail to give us purchase orders for the product after development, our future business and value of related assets could be negatively affected. Furthermore, no assurance can be given that such customers will give sufficient high priority to our products. Finally, disagreements or disputes may arise between us and our customers, which could adversely affect production and sales of our products.

We rely on certain suppliers and manufacturers for raw materials and other products and are vulnerable to fluctuations in the availability and price of such products and services.

Fluctuations in the price, availability, and quality of the raw materials we use in our manufacturing could have a negative effect on our cost of sales and our ability to meet the demands of our customers. Inability to meet the demands of our customers could result in the loss of future sales. In addition, the costs to manufacture our products depend in part on the market prices of the raw materials used to produce them. We may not be able to pass along to our customers all or a portion of our higher costs of raw materials due to competitive and marketing pressures, which could decrease our earnings and profitability.

We also have collaborative arrangements with three key foreign suppliers under which we request the development of certain items and components and we purchase them pursuant to purchase orders. Our purchase order commitments are never more than one year in duration and are supported by orders from our customers. While we believe we could ultimately procure other sources for these components, should we experience any significant disruptions in this key supply chain, it could render us unable to meet the demands of our customers which as a result could adversely affect our earnings. Over the past few years we have expanded the use of our Bulgarian supplier who manufactures a substantial number of our generator and accessory components. We anticipate expanding this relationship further to include manufacturing a large number of our plasma components as well as manufacturing our new Derm 101 and 102 product lines.

If we are unable to protect our patents or other proprietary rights, or if we infringe on the patents or other proprietary rights of others, our competitiveness and business prospects may be materially damaged.

We own 1518 U.S. patents and 163 registered U.S. trademarks with some of our early patents nearing the expiration of their patent term. We also have several U.S. and international patent applications pending for various new products. We intend to continue to seek legal protection, primarily through patents, for our proprietary technology. Seeking patent protection is a lengthy and costly process, and there can be no assurance that patents will be issued from any pending applications, or that any claims allowed from existing or pending patents will be sufficiently broad or strong to protect our proprietary technology. There is also no guarantee that any patents we hold will not be challenged, invalidated or circumvented, or that the patent rights granted will provide competitive advantages to us. Our competitors have developed and may continue to develop and obtain patents for technologies that are similar or superior to our technologies. In addition, the laws of foreign jurisdictions in which we develop, manufacture or sell our products may not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as do the laws of the United States.
8


Adverse outcomes in current or future legal disputes regarding patent and other intellectual property rights could result in the loss of our intellectual property rights, subject us to significant liabilities to third parties, require us to seek licenses from third parties on terms that may not be reasonable or favorable to us, prevent us from manufacturing, importing or selling our products, or compel us to redesign our products to avoid infringing third parties’ intellectual property. As a result, our product offerings may be delayed, and we may be unable to meet customers’ requirements in a timely manner. Regardless of the merit of any related legal proceeding, we have incurred in the past and may be required to incur in the future substantial costs to prosecute, enforce or defend our intellectual property rights. Even in the absence of infringement by our products of third parties’ intellectual property rights, or litigation related to trade secrets, we have elected in the past and may in the future elect to enter into settlements to avoid the costs and risks of protracted litigation and the diversion of resources and management’s attention. However, if the terms of settlements entered into with certain of our competitors are not observed or enforced, we may suffer further costs and risks. Any of these circumstances could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and resources or results of operations. (See ITEM 3. Legal Proceedings)
12


Our ability to develop intellectual property depends in large part on hiring, retaining and motivating highly qualified design and engineering staff with the knowledge and technical competence to advance our technology and productivity goals. To protect our trade secrets and proprietary information, generally we have entered into confidentiality agreements with our employees, as well as with consultants and other parties. If these agreements prove inadequate or are breached, our remedies may not be sufficient to cover our losses.

DivestituresWe have been and may in the future become subject to litigation proceedings that could materially and adversely affect our business.

Other Litigation

In addition to the litigation risks and proceedings mentioned below, we have recently been involved and may in the future become subject to legal claims or proceedings related to securities, employment, customer or third party contracts, environmental regulations, or other matters. The costs involved in defending these claims have been substantial, which have had an adverse effect on our profitability.  In addition, if other claims are asserted against us, we may be required to defend against such  claims, or deem it necessary or advisable to initiate a legal proceeding to protect our rights, the expense and distraction of some ofsuch a claim or proceeding, whether or not resolved in our operations or product lines mayfavor, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We periodically evaluate the performance of our entire operations andoperating results. Further, if a claim or proceeding were resolved against us or if we were to settle any such dispute, we may sell, consolidate,be required to pay damages and costs or close a portionrefrain from certain activities, any of our business or product lines. Any divestitures may result in significant write-offs, including those related to goodwill and other intangible assets, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and operating results.

Intellectual Property Litigation or Trade Secrets

We have experienced certain allegations of infringement of intellectual property rights and use of trade secrets in the past and may receive other such claims, with or without merit, in the future. Previously, claims of infringement of intellectual property rights have sometimes evolved into litigation against us, and they may continue to do so in the future. It is inherently difficult to assess the outcome of litigation. Although we believe we have had adequate defenses to these claims and that the outcome of the litigation will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, or results of operations, there can be no assurances that we will prevail. Any such litigation could result in substantial cost to us, significantly reduce our cash resources, and create a diversion of the efforts of our technical and management personnel, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and resultsoperating results. If we are unable to successfully defend against such claims, we could be prohibited from future sales of operations. Divestituresthe allegedly infringing product or products, which could involve additional risks, including difficultiesmaterially and adversely affect our future growth.

Product Liability Litigation

Although we carry liability insurance, due to the nature of our products and their use by professionals, we may, from time to time, be subject to litigation from persons who sustain injury during medical procedures in hospitals, physician’s offices or in clinics and defending such litigation is expensive, disruptive, time consuming and could adversely affect our business. We currently maintain product liability insurance with combined coverage limits of $10 million on a claims-made basis. There is no assurance that this coverage will be adequate to protect us from any possible liabilities (individually or in the separation of operations, services, products and personnel,aggregate) we might incur in connection with the diversion of management’s attention from other business concerns, the disruptionsale or testing of our businessproducts. In addition, we may need increased product liability coverage as additional products are commercialized. This insurance is expensive and in the potential loss of key employees. Wefuture may not be successful in managing these or any other significant risks that we encounter in divesting a business or product line.available on acceptable terms, if at all.

Our business is subject to the potential for defects or failures associated with our products which could lead to recalls or safety alerts and negative publicity.

Manufacturing flaws, component failures, design defects, off-label uses or inadequate disclosure of product-related information could result in an unsafe condition or the injury or death of a patient. These problems could lead to a recall of, or issuance of a safety alert relating to, our products and result in significant costs and negative publicity. Due to the strong name recognition of our brands, an adverse event involving one of our products could result in reduced market acceptance and demand for all products within that brand, and could harm our reputation and our ability to market our products in the future. In some circumstances, adverse events arising from or associated with the design, manufacture or marketing of our products could result in the suspension or delay of our current regulatory reviews of our applications for new product approvals. We also may undertake voluntarily to recall products or temporarily shut down certain production lines based on internal safety and quality monitoring and testing data. Any of the foregoing problems could disrupt our business and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Current challenges in the credit and capital markets may adversely affect our business and financial condition.

The economic conditions described below should also be considered when reviewing each of the subsequent paragraphs setting forth the various aspects of our business, operations, and products.
13


The continued global economic uncertainty and previous disruptions in credit markets, among other things, may materially limit credit availability in the credit and capital markets, lower levels of liquidity, cause increases in the rates of default and bankruptcy, and lower consumer and business spending. Although the ultimate outcome of these events cannot be predicted, they may have a material adverse effect on the Company and our ability to raise capital or borrow money in the credit markets.  Similarly, current or potential customers and suppliers may no longer be in business, may be unable to fund purchases or may decide to reduce purchases, all of which could lead to reduced demand for our products, reduced gross margins, and increased customer payment delays or defaults. Further, suppliers may not be able to supply us with needed raw materials on a timely basis, may increase prices or go out of business, which could result in our inability to meet customer demand in a timely manner or affect our gross margins. We are also limited in our ability to reduce costs to offset the results of a prolonged or severe economic downturn given certain fixed costs associated with our operations.

We have incurred and may in the future incur impairments to goodwill orour long-lived assets.

We review our long-lived assets, including goodwill and other intangible assets, for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of these assets may not be recoverable. Additionally, if in any period our stock price decreases to the point where our fair value, as determined by our market capitalization, is less than the book value of our assets, this could also indicate a potential impairment and we may be required to record an impairment charge in that period, which could adversely affect our results of operations.
9


Our valuation methodology for assessing impairment requires management to make judgments and assumptions based on historical experience and to rely heavily on projections of future operating performance. We operate in highly competitive environments and projections of future operating results and cash flows may vary significantly from actual results. Additionally, if our analysis indicates potential impairment to goodwill or any othera long-lived intangible asset, we may be required to record additional charges to earnings in our financial statements, which could negatively impact our results of operations.

Risks Related to Our Industry
The medical device industry is highly competitive and we may be unable to compete effectively.
The medical device industry is highly competitive. Many competitors in this industry are well-established, do a substantially greater amount of business, and have greater financial resources and facilities than we do.

Domestically, we believe we rank third in the number of units sold in the field of electrosurgical generator manufacturing and we sell our products and compete with other manufacturers in various ways. In addition to advertising, attending trade shows and supporting our distribution channels, we strive to enhance product quality and functionality, improve user friendliness, and expand product exposure.

We have also invested substantial resources to develop our J-Plasma™ technology. If we are unable to gain acceptance in the marketplace of J-Plasma™, our business and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected. Since June of 2010 through December 31, 2012, we have invested approximately $1.6 million in the development and marketing of our J-Plasma™ technology.

We also compete by private labeling our products for major distributors under their label. This allows us to increase our position in the marketplace and thereby compete from two different approaches, our Aaron® or Bovie® label, and our customers’ private label. Our private label customers distribute our products under their name through their internal sales force. We believe our main competitors do not private label their products.

Lastly, at this time we sell the majority of our products through distributors. Many of the companies we compete with sell direct, thus competing directly with distributors they sometimes use.

Our main competitors in electrosurgical and accessory markets are Valleylab (a division of Covidien), Conmed and Erbe Electromedizine; in the battery operated cautery market is Medtronic Xomed, Inc.; and in the endoscopic instrumentation market is Ethicon and U.S. Surgical. Currently, we are the only company with helium based plasma products. However, there are other argon plasma competitors namely Conmed and Plasmajet, and other CO2 laser product competitors for our target market.  We believe our competitive position did not change in 2012.

Our industry is highly regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and international regulatory authorities, as well as other governmental, state and federal agencies which have substantial authority to establish criteria which must be complied with in order for us to continue in operation.
United States

Our products and research and development activities are subject to regulation by the FDA and other regulatory bodies. FDA regulations govern, among other things, the following activities:
·
Product development
·
Product testing
·
Product labeling
·
Product storage
·
Pre-market clearance or approval
·
Advertising and promotion
10

·
Product traceability, and
·
Product indications.
In the United States, medical devices are classified on the basis of control deemed necessary to reasonably ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device. Class I devices are subject to general controls. These controls include registration and listing, labeling, pre-market notification and adherence to the FDA Quality System Regulation. Class II devices are subject to general and special controls. Special controls include performance standards, post market surveillance, patient registries and FDA guidelines. Class III devices are those which must receive pre-market approval by the FDA to ensure their safety and effectiveness. Currently, we only manufacture Class I and Class II devices.  Pre-market notification clearance must be obtained for some Class I and most Class II devices when the FDA does not require pre-market approval. All of our products have been cleared by the pre-market notification process.

A pre-market approval application is required for most Class III devices. A pre-market approval application must be supported by valid scientific evidence to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of the device. The pre-market approval application typically includes:
·
Results of bench and laboratory tests, animal studies, and clinical studies
·
A complete description of the device and its components; and
·
A detailed description of the methods, facilities and controls used to manufacture the device, and proposed labeling.
The pre-market approval process can be expensive, uncertain and lengthy. A number of devices for which pre-market approval has been sought by other companies have never been approved for marketing.

International Regulation

To market products in the European Union, our products must bear the “CE” mark.  Manufacturers of medical devices bearing the CE mark have gone through a conformity assessment process that assures that products are manufactured in compliance with a recognized quality system and to comply with the European Medical Devices Directive.

Each device that bears a CE mark has an associated technical file that includes a description of the following:
·
Description of the device and its components,
·
A summary of how the device complies with the essential requirements of the medical devices directive,
·
Safety (risk assessment) and performance of the device,
·
Clinical evaluations with respect to the device,
·
Methods, facilities and quality controls used to manufacture the device, and
·
Proposed labeling for the device.
Manufacturing and distribution of a device is subject to ongoing surveillance by the appropriate regulatory body to ensure continued compliance with quality system and reporting requirements.

We began CE marking of devices for sale in the European Union in 1999. In addition to the requirement to CE mark, each member country of the European Union maintains the right to impose additional regulatory requirements.

Outside of the European Union, regulations vary significantly from country to country. The time required to obtain approval to market products may be longer or shorter than that required in the United States or the European Union. Certain European countries outside of the European Union do recognize and give effect to the CE mark certification. We are permitted to market and sell our products in those countries.
11

If we are unable to successfully introduce new products or fail to keep pace with competitive advances in technology, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. In addition, our research and development efforts rely upon investments and alliances, and we cannot guarantee that any previous or future investments or alliances will be successful.
Our research and development activities are an essential component of our efforts to develop new and innovative products for introduction in the marketplace. New and improved products play a critical role in our sales growth. We continue to place emphasis on the development of proprietary products, such as our J-Plasma™ technology,  and product improvements to complement and expand our existing product lines. We maintain close working relationships with physicians and medical personnel in hospitals and universities who assist in product research and areas of development. Our research and development activities are primarily conducted internally and are expensed as incurred. These expenses include direct expenses for wages, materials and services associated with the development of our products net of any reimbursements from customers. Research and development expenses do not include any portion of general and administrative expenses. Our Clearwater, Florida facility has been our flagship research and design location. We expect to continue making future investments to enable us to develop and market new technologies and products to further our strategic objectives and strengthen our existing business.  However, we cannot guarantee that any of our previous or future investments will be successful or that our new products such as J-Plasma™, will gain market acceptance, the failure of which would have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
The amount expended by us on research and development of our products during the years 2012, 2011 and 2010, totaled approximately $1.3, $1.2, and $1.9 million respectively. During the past three years, we invested substantial resources in the development and marketing of our J-Plasma technology, including the ICON GS plasma system, Endoscopic Modular Instruments and accompanying new generators, and the Aaron 1450 generator. We have not incurred any direct costs relating to environmental regulations or requirements. For 2013, we expect the amount of our expenditures for research and development activities to remain similar to the level in 2012.

Even if we are successful in developing and obtaining approval for our new product candidates, there are various circumstances that could prevent the successful commercialization of the products.

Our ability to successfully commercialize our products will depend on a number of factors, any of which could delay or prevent commercialization, including:
 ●the regulatory approvals of our new products are delayed or we are required to conduct further research and development of our products prior to receiving regulatory approval;
 ●we are unable to build a sales and marketing group to successfully launch and sell our new products;
 ●we are unable to raise the additional funds needed to successfully develop and commercialize our products or acquire additional products for growth;
 ●we are required to allocate available funds to litigation matters;
 ●we are unable to manufacture the quantity of product needed in accordance with current good manufacturing practices to meet market demand, or at all;
 ●our product is determined to be ineffective or unsafe following approval and is removed from the market or we are required to perform additional research and development to further prove the safety and effectiveness of the product before re-entry into the market;
 ●competition from other products or technologies prevents or reduces market acceptance of our products;
 ●we do not have and cannot obtain the intellectual property rights needed to manufacture or market our products without infringing on another company’s patents; or
 ●we are unsuccessful in defending against patent infringement or other intellectual property rights, claims that could be brought against us, our products or technologies;

The failure to successfully acquire or develop and commercialize new products will adversely affect the future growth of our business, financial condition and results of operations.
12

Our international operations subject us to foreign currency fluctuations and other risks associated with operating in foreign countries.

We operate internationally and enter into transactions denominated in foreign currencies. To date, we have not hedged our exposure to changes in foreign currency exchange rates, and as a result, we are subject to foreign currency transaction and translation gains and losses. We purchase goods and services in U.S. dollars and Euros. Foreign exchange risk is managed primarily by satisfying foreign denominated expenditures with cash flows or assets denominated in the same currency therefore we are subject to some foreign currency fluctuation risk. Our currency value fluctuations were not material for 2012.

Our operations and cash flows may be adversely impacted by healthcare reform legislation.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and Health Care and Education Affordability Reconciliation Act were enacted into law in the U.S. in March 2010.  Among other initiatives, this legislation imposes a 2.3% excise tax on domestic sales of class I, II, and III medical devices beginning in 2013. Substantially all of our products are class I or class II medical devices. In the short term we do anticipate that this tax on medical devices will negatively affect our results of operations and cash flows by approximately $300,000 to $500,000 annually. However, since approximately 82% of our 2012 sales were derived in the U.S. we cannot predict if any additional regulations will be implemented at the federal or state level, or the effect of any future legislation or regulation in the U.S. or internationally.
Our operations may experience higher costs to produce our products as a result of changes in prices for oil, gasoline, and other commodities.

We use some plastics and other petroleum-based materials along with precious metals contained in electronic components as raw materials in many of our products. Prices of oil and gasoline also significantly affect our costs for freight and utilities. Oil, gasoline and precious metal prices are volatile and may increase, resulting in higher costs to produce and distribute our products. Due to the highly competitive nature of the healthcare industry and the cost-containment efforts of our customers we may be unable to pass along cost increases through higher prices. If we are unable to fully recover these costs through price increases or offset through other cost reductions, our results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

Our manufacturing facilities are located in Clearwater, Florida and could be affected due to multiple risks from fire, hurricanes, physical changes in the planet due to climate change, and similar phenomena.
Our manufacturing facilities are located in Clearwater, Florida and could be affected by multiple weather risks, most notably hurricanes.  Although we carry property and casualty insurance and business interruption insurance, future possible disruptions of operations or damage to property, plant and equipment due to hurricanes or other weather risks could result in impaired production and affect our ability to meet our commitments to our customers and impair important business relationships, the loss of which could adversely affect our operations and profitability. We do however maintain a backup generator at our Clearwater facility and a disaster recovery plan is in place to help mitigate this risk.

We do not produce hazardous materials or emissions that would adversely impact the environment.   We do however, have air conditioning units and consume electricity which could be impacted by climate change in the form of increased rates.  However, we do not believe the increase in expense from any rate increases, as a percentage of sales, would be material in the near term.

Risks related to global natural disasters (whether or not caused by climate change), unusual weather conditions, pandemic outbreaks, terrorist acts, and global political events

The occurrence of one or more natural disasters, such as hurricanes, tsunamis, fires, floods, and earthquakes (whether or not caused by climate change), unusual weather conditions, pandemic outbreaks, terrorist acts or disruptive global political events, such as civil unrest in countries in which our suppliers are located, or similar disruptions could impair our ability to purchase, receive, or replenish inventory which could result in lost sales and otherwise adversely and materially affect our operations and financial performance. These events also can have indirect consequences such as increases in fuel (or other energy) prices or a fuel shortage, or increases in the costs of insurance if they result in significant loss of property or other insurable damage.
13

Risks Related to Our Stock

The market price of our stock has been and may continue to be highly volatile.

Our common stock is listed on the NYSE AmexMKT Market under the ticker symbol “BVX.”  The market price of our stock has been and may continue to be highly volatile, and announcements by us or by third parties may have a significant impact on our stock price. These announcements may include:

 our listing status on the NYSE AmexMKT Market;
 our operating results falling below the expectations of public market analysts and investors;
 developments in our relationships with or developments affecting our major customers;
 negative regulatory action or regulatory non-approval with respect to our new products;
 government regulation, governmental investigations, or audits related to us or to our products;
 developments related to our patents or other proprietary rights or those of our competitors; and
 changes in the position of securities analysts with respect to our stock.

The stock market has from time to time experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations, which have particularly affected the market prices for the medical technology sector companies, and which have often been unrelated to their operating performance.  These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

Historically, when the market price of a stock has been volatile, holders of that stock have often instituted securities class action litigation against the company that issued the stock.  If any of our stockholders brought a lawsuit against us, we could incur substantial costs defending the lawsuit.  The lawsuit could also divert the time and attention of our management.

In addition, future sales by existing stockholders, warrant holders receiving shares upon the exercise of warrants, or any new stockholders receiving our shares in any financing transaction may lower the price of our common stock, which could result in losses to our stockholders.  Future sales of substantial amounts of common stock in the public market, or the possibility of such sales occurring, could adversely affect prevailing market prices for our common stock or our future ability to raise capital through an offering of equity securities. Substantially all of our common stock is freely tradable in the public market without restriction under the Securities Act, unless these shares are held by our “affiliates”, as that term is defined in Rule 144 under the Securities Act.

We have no present intention to pay dividends on our common stock and, even if we change that policy, we may be unable to pay dividends on our common stock.

We currently do not anticipate paying any dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future. We currently intend to retain future earnings, if any, to finance operations and invest in our business. Any declaration and payment of future dividends to holders of our common stock will be at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on many factors, including our financial condition, earnings, capital requirements, level of indebtedness, statutory and contractual restrictions applying to the payment of dividends and other considerations that our board of directors deems relevant.
14


If we change that policy and commence paying dividends, we will not be obligated to continue paying those dividends and our shareholders will not be guaranteed, or have contractual or other rights, to receive dividends. If we commence paying dividends in the future, our board of directors may decide, in its discretion, at any time, to decrease the amount of dividends, otherwise modify or repeal the dividend policy or discontinue entirely the payment of dividends. Under the Ohio law, our board of directors may not authorize the payment of a dividend unless it is either paid out of our statutory surplus.

The low trading volume of our common stock may adversely affect the price of our shares.

Although our common stock is listed on the NYSE MKT exchange, our common stock has experienced low trading volume. Limited trading volume may subject our common stock to greater price volatility and may make it difficult for investors to sell shares at a price that is attractive to them.

We may in the future seek to raise funds through equity offerings, which could have a dilutive effect on our common stock.

In the future we may determine to raise capital through offerings of our common stock, securities convertible into our common stock or rights to acquire these securities or our common stock. For instance, we are authorized to issue up to 40,000,000 shares of common stock and up to 10,000,000 shares of preferred stock, of which 3,500,000 shares have been designated as Series A 6% Convertible Preferred Stock.  The result of sales of such securities, or the conversion of the Series A 6% Convertible Preferred Stock into shares of common stock, the exercise of warrants issued in connection with such offering or the triggering of anti-dilution provisions in such securities would ultimately be dilutive to our common stock by increasing the number of shares outstanding. We cannot predict the effect this dilution may have on the price of our common stock.  In addition, the shares of preferred stock may have rights which are senior or superior to those of the common stock, such as rights relating to voting, the payment of dividends, redemption or liquidation.
Exercise of warrants and options issued by us will dilute the ownership interest of existing stockholders.

As of December 31, 2012,2013, the warrants issued by us in April 2010 were exercisable for up to approximately 339,000942,856 shares of our common stock, representing approximately 2%5% of our then outstanding common stock.

As of December 31, 2012,2013, the warrants issued by us in December 2013 were exercisable for up to approximately 5,775,000 shares of our common stock, representing approximately 32% of our then outstanding common stock.

As of December 31, 2013, our outstanding stock options to our employees, officers, directors and consultants amounted to approximately 1.9 million shares of our common stock, representing approximately an additional 11% of our then outstanding common stock. 

The exercise of some or all of our warrants and stock options will dilute the ownership interests of existing stockholders. Any sales in the public market of the common stock issuable upon such conversion or exercise could adversely affect prevailing market prices of our common stock.
 
ITEM 1B.

There are no outstanding unresolved comments from the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
 
ITEM 2.  Properties
14

ITEM 2.

Bovie currently maintains the following locations:

·Our executive office at 734 Walt Whitman Road, Melville, New York, which is leased for approximately $1,500 per month.

·Aa 60,000 square foot facility which consists of office, warehousing, manufacturing and research space located at 5115 Ulmerton Rd., Clearwater, Florida. Monthly principal and interest payments are approximately $29,000 per month.

·A warehousing facility at 3200 Tyrone Blvd., St. Petersburg, Florida which is leased for approximately $14,000 per month under a lease that expires in October 2013.

·A separate warehouse facility in Clearwater, Florida that we lease for approximately $1,600 per month.

ITEM 3.

Livneh/Lican Development Settlement Agreement and Related Litigationresearch space located at 5115 Ulmerton Rd., Clearwater, Florida. Monthly principal and interest payments are approximately $29,000 per month. This facility presently houses our executive offices.

In December 2011, a settlement related to the then pending actions between the Company and certain affiliates, on the one hand, and Steve Livneh and certain affiliates, on the other hand,  which was the subject of prior disclosures, was structured and subsequently entered into on February 22, 2012. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”),2014, we agreed, among other things, to perform the following:  (i) make a $250,000 lump sum payment to Livneh ($50,000 of which wasclosed our executive offices located in Melville, New York. This facility had previously recorded and expensed), (ii) make 18 installment payments to Livneh in the amount of $23,222.22been leased for approximately $1,500 per month, (iii) reimburse Livneh for all unpaid expenses that Livneh incurred on behalf of the Company during the period of his employment and/or consultancy (from October 1, 2006 through August 11, 2010), (iv) pay Livneh $14,700, which represents the balance of the amounts due to Henvil Corp. Ltd. under a certain bill of sale, dated April 12, 2010, (v) transfer to Livneh the title of a certain automobile, (vi) transfer to Livneh all of the Company’s right and interest in certain Intellectual Property (as defined in the Settlement Agreement) pertaining to the Modular Ergonomic Grip (“MEG”), Modullion, RF Skin Resurfacing, Scannula, Double Jaw Forceps and Tip-On-Tube designs and trade name (collectively, the “Assigned Patents”), (vi) transfer to Livneh certain parts for the MEG device, (vii) grant Livneh an exclusive license to produce, market and sell the Seal-N-Cut device in the People’s Republic of China, (viii) pay to Livneh royalty payments of 3% on the Company’s Net Sales (as defined in the Settlement Agreement) of the Seal-N-Cut device outside the People’s Republic of China, and (ix) pay to Livneh a one-time royalty payment of 5% upon the closing of any sale by the Company of its right or interest in any Intellectual Property pertaining to the Seal-N-Cut device.  To secure the Company’s obligations, we granted Livneh a security interest in all of our rights and interest of the Company in the Seal-N-Cut device, including all Intellectual Property pertaining thereto. Since the loss was quantifiable and known in December 2011, we recognized this settlement loss in 2011 and all payments hereunder were accrued during the fourth quarter.month.

In exchange, Livneh agreed, among other things, to perform the following: (i) pay us royalty paymentsMarch 2014, we signed a lease for offices located in Purchase, New York. The leases is for 3,650 square feet of 3% on Livneh’s Net Sales of the Assigned Patents, excluding any Net Sales of the RF Skin Resurfacing or Tip-On-Tube, (ii) pay usoffice space with a one-time royalty payment of 5% upon the closing of any sale by Livneh, Henvil or Lican Development Ltd. of their right or interest in any Intellectual Property pertaining to the Assigned Patents, and (iii) pay us royalty payments of 3% on Livneh’s Net Sales of the Seal-N-Cut device in the People’s Republic of China.

As a result of the Settlement Agreement, we recorded an expense in the fourth quarter of 2011monthly cost of approximately $737,000 for the transfer of the MEG and the Modullion intellectual property.  We have also accrued expenses in approximate amounts for the transfer of related inventory and molds of $194,000 and an additional $27,000 for other various expenses.$8,500 per month.
 
 
15

The Settlement Agreement contained no admission of liability or wrongdoing by us, Mr. Andrew Makrides, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Moshe Citronowicz, the Company’s Senior Vice President, Livneh, Henvil or Lican.  Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, we, along with Mr. Makrides, Mr. Citronowicz, Livneh, Henvil and Lican agreed to dismiss the litigations with prejudice and they fully and finally released all claims known and unknown, foreseen and unforeseen, which they had against each other through the date of the Settlement Agreement.

ITEM 3.  Legal Proceedings
In July 2012, Steven Livneh and two of his related entities, Henvil Corp. Ltd. and Lican Development Ltd., commenced a new action against the Company, Andrew Makrides, and Moshe Citronowicz, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Tampa Division).  The complaint asserts, among other things, that (i) the defendants breached their obligations to the plaintiffs under the Settlement Agreement by allegedly failing to take certain actions that facilitated the plaintiffs’ marketing and sale of the Seal-N-Cut products in the People’s Republic of China (“PRC”), (ii) that defendants tortiously interfered with plaintiffs’ business relationships and expectations in PRC allegedly by, among other things, refusing to provide plaintiffs with an ICON VS generator and (iii) plaintiffs allegedly suffered damages as a result of defendants’ breaches and misrepresentations.  The complaint seeks, among other things, the following: (i) compensatory damages in excess of $10 million, (ii) an order directing Bovie to provide plaintiffs with an ICON VS generator, (iii) an assignment to plaintiffs of all patents identified in the Settlement Agreement, and (iv) rescission of the Settlement Agreement.  We believe the allegations to be frivolous and without merit, and we intend to defend the action vigorously.  On July 24, 2012, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and to compel arbitration.  The plaintiffs opposed the motion, and the motion was subsequently withdrawn as moot due to the non-availability of the stipulated arbitrator.  Discovery is now underway.

The outcome of this matter is uncertain, no range of potential loss can be estimated and accordingly no effect has been given to any loss that may result from the resolution of this matter in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

Stockholder Derivative Action

As previously reported, inIn September 2011, we werethe Company was served in a purported stockholder derivative action that was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida against the Company and certain of its present and former officers and directors. The complaint asserts, among other things, breach of fiduciary duties and bad faith in relation to the management of the Company.Company’s business. The complaint seeks, among other things, unspecified compensatory damages and various forms of equitable relief. The allegations in the derivative action appear to be based largely on the January 10, 2011 Livneh counterclaim described above.counterclaim.

On March 29, 2012, plaintiffs amended their complaint to remove one of the plaintiffs and replace it with another. The amended complaint assertsasserted essentially the same allegations as the original filing. We believe the allegations to be frivolous and without merit and we intend to defend the action vigorously. We are investigating whether there is a collusive connection between the derivative action and the previously settled lawsuit with Livneh. The outcome of this matter is uncertain, no range of potential loss can be estimated and accordingly no effect has been given to any loss that may result from the resolution of this matter in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

In May 2012, the Company, andtogether with the individual defendants, filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint based, in part, upon the plaintiff’s failure to make demand upon the boardBoard as required by applicable law. The motion was denied anddenied.

Since October 2013, the parties are proceeding with discovery.  The outcomehave been engaged in a Court-sanctioned mediation process.  In the context of the mediation process, the parties have discussed the terms of a potential settlement; however, a definitive agreement has not been signed at this matter is uncertain, no range of potential loss can be estimated and accordingly no effect has given to any loss that may result from the resolution of this matter in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.time.
16


Keen Action

In February 2012 we received notice that an action had been commenced against usconnection with the litigation previously disclosed in a filed 10Q and pending in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida bybetween the Company and Leonard Keen, ourthe Company’s former Vice President and General Counsel, related to his termination on December 9, 2011 and associated employment contract.August 8, 2013, following a jury trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Mr. Keen is demanding amounts outlined under his employment contract which provided forawarding him $622,500 in severance.  In addition, the payment of a base annual salary of not less than $187,500 as well as certain other payments and benefits. The employment agreement also provided for the payment, under certain circumstances, of a lump sum severance payment equal to three times base compensation plus certain other payments and benefits as set forth in the employment agreement under severance payment. Mr. Keen also asserts a claim concerning an alleged violation of Florida’s “Whistle Blower’s Act” and seeks specific performance of certain indemnification rights under his employment agreement.

On April 27, 2012, we filed an Answer and Counterclaims against Mr. Keen alleging violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(5), breaches of fiduciary duties, conversion, and fraud in the inducement.  The counterclaims seek monetary damages, including attorney’s fees, and a declarationjury determined that Mr. Keen’s previously issued 110,000 stock options should be reinstated and accelerated, and that the Company must indemnify Mr. Keen for any damages or costs he suffered in his capacity as an employee of Bovie pursuant to the terms of Mr. Keen’s prior employment agreement is unenforceable as violative of Florida law and public policy.with the Company.  Subsequent to the trial, the Court awarded Mr. Keen $241,310 in attorneys’ fees.  These amounts have been paid.

On May 21, 2012, plaintiff movedAmounts related to dismiss our second (breachthe verdict of fiduciary duty), third (breach of fiduciary duty),this case and fifth (fraudsubsequent attorney’s fee award were accrued and expensed in the inducement) counterclaims.  That motion was denied as moot on July 3, 2012, due to plaintiff’s filing of an Amended Complaint on the same day.2013.

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint repeats the same allegations as the original filing and also added Andrew Makrides, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, as a defendant and asserts additional claims concerning an alleged violation of ERISA and an alleged tortious interference with the plaintiff’s employment contract by Andrew Makrides.

On July 16, 2012, we served our Answer to the Amended Complaint and Counterclaims, which repeated the same counterclaims as our Answer and Counterclaims. On the same date, we also moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Plaintiff opposed the motion and also sought to renew his motion to dismiss our Second and Third Counterclaims (breach of fiduciary duty).

On September 27, 2012, the Court granted our motion in part and denied it in part and also denied Keen’s motion in its entirety.  Specifically, the Court dismissed Keen’s Second (breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing) and Eighth (tortious interference with employment contract) claims for relief.  Because the Eighth claim was the only one asserted against Andrew Makrides, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, he is no longer a party to the case.

On February 1, 2013, both parties moved for summary judgment on the surviving claims. The Court has not issued a decision on the motions as of the filing of this report.

We believe we have meritorious defenses against Mr. Keen’s claims and are vigorously defending this action. The outcome of this matter is uncertain and accordingly no effect has been given to any loss that may result from the resolution of this matter in the accompanying consolidated financial statements, however the range of potential loss is zero to approximately $600,000, plus possible attorney fees which are not determinable at this time.
Other Matters

In addition to the above, in the normal course of business, we are subject, from time to time, to legal proceedings, lawsuits and claims. Such matters are subject to many uncertainties, and outcomes are not predictable with assurance. Consequently, we are unable to ascertain the ultimate aggregate amountIf any of monetary liability or financial impact with respect to these matters as of December 31, 2012. These mattersarise in the future, it could affect the operating results of any one or more quarter when resolved in future periods.quarters.

ITEM 4.

Not Applicable.

PART II
 
 
1716


PART II
 
ITEM 5.
ITEM 5.  Market for Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters

Our common stock currently is traded on the NYSE Amex.MKT. The table shows the reported high and low bid prices for the common stock during each quarter of the last eight respective quarters. These prices do not represent actual transactions and do not include retail markups, markdowns or commissions.

2012 High  Low 
2013 High Low 
           
4th Quarter
 $3.79  $2.42  $3.06 $1.94 
3rd Quarter
  3.83   2.24  3.95 2.53 
2nd Quarter
  2.99   2.09  4.79 2.71 
1st Quarter
  3.26   2.16  3.81 2.26 

2011 High  Low 
2012 High Low 
           
4th Quarter
 $3.06  $1.90  $3.79 $2.42 
3rd Quarter
  3.66   2.02  3.83 2.24 
2nd Quarter
  3.35   2.55  2.99 2.09 
1st Quarter
  3.62   2.45  3.26 2.16 

On March 1, 2013,14, 2014, the closing bid for our common stock as reported by the NYSE AmexMKT exchange was $2.55$3.14 per share. As of March 1, 2013,14, 2014, the total number of stockholders of our common stock was approximately 3,500, of which approximately 2,800 are estimated to be stockholders whose shares are held in the name of their broker, stock depository or the escrow agent holding shares for the benefit of our stockholders and the balance are stockholders who keep their shares registered in their own name.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Equity Securities

On April 18, 2010,December 13, 2013 (the “Closing Date”), we entered into a securities purchase agreement (the “Securities Purchase Agreement”) with purchasers named thereincertain investors (the “Investors’) with respect to raise in the aggregate approximately $3 million in a private placement of common stock and warrantswhich Great Point Partners, LLC (“GPP”) acts as investment manager pursuant to Section 4(2)which the Company issued 3,500,000 shares of the Securities ActCompany’s Series A 6% Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series A Preferred Stock”) with a stated value of 1933, as amended, and/or Regulation D promulgated thereunder. Upon closing$2.00 per share (the “Offering”). The shares of Series A Preferred Stock are convertible, at the option of the transaction, we enteredholder, into a registration rights agreement with the purchasers and issued to the purchasers an aggregate of 571,429 shares of common stock aton a per share price of $5.25,one-for-one basis and warrants to acquire additionalvote with the shares of common stock ofon an as-converted basis. In addition, we issued 5.5 year warrants to purchase up to fifty percent5,250,000 shares of our common stock in the common shares acquired by each respective purchaseraggregate, at an exercise price of $6.00$2.387 per share.

share (the “Warrants”). The warrants are immediately exercisable and will terminate onWarrants may be exercised at any time from or after the fifthdate that is the six month anniversary of the issuance date. The exercise priceClosing Date, may be exercised on a cashless basis and contain customary, structural anti-dilution protection (i.e., stock splits, dividends, etc).
In conjunction with the Offering, we and the Investors also executed a Registration Rights Agreement (the “Registration Rights Agreement”) whereby we agreed to register, on behalf of the warrants is subject to adjustment so that, among other things, if we issue anyInvestors, the shares of common stock (including optionsissuable upon conversion of the Series A Preferred Stock and warrants, with standard exceptions), at a price that is lower thanupon exercise of the exercise price then in effect,Warrants, as well as the exercise price then in effect will be reducedcommon stock underlying the warrant issued to such lower price.
In connection with the private placement, we paid certain cash fees and issued a warrant toGilford Securities Incorporated (525,000 shares of common stock), the placement agent Rodman & Renshaw, LLC, forin the Offering (“Gilford”). Pursuant to the terms of the Registration Rights Agreement, the Company has agreed to file a registration statement within thirty days of the Closing Date and is required to obtain the effectiveness of such registration statement within ninety days of its filing. This registration was filed by us and declared effective by the SEC within the required time limits.
Pursuant to an agreement with Gilford, we agreed to issue Gilford a five year warrant to purchase an amount equal to 6% of 42,857 shares of common stockthe Series A Preferred Stock and Warrants sold in the Offering at an exercise price of $6.00$2.387 per share for its activity engaged on behalfand pay Gilford a cash payment equal to 6% of the Company. In addition, wepurchase price paid certain cash fees and issued a warrant to Gilford Securities Incorporated forby the purchase of 10,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $6.00 per share for its activity engaged on behalf of the Company.

The warrants contain provisions for a net cash settlementInvestors in the event that there is a fundamental transaction (contractually defined as a merger, sale of substantially all assets, tender offer or share exchange). Due to this contingent redemption provision, the warrants require liability classification and must be adjusted to fair value each reporting period.Offering.
 
 
1817


In connection with the Offering, Robert Gershon was appointed the Company’s Chief Executive Officer. Andrew Makrides assumed the role of the Company’s Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors.

At closing, George Kromer and August Lentricchia resigned from the Board.

Pursuant to the terms of the Securities Purchase Agreement, at closing, Mr. Gershon was appointed to our Board of Directors. In addition, GPP was granted the right to appoint two additional individuals to our Board of Directors (the “GPP Designees”). At closing, Ian Sheffield was appointed to the Board as a GPP Designee. The second GPP Designee has not yet been identified, and upon identification of the second GPP Designee, Michael Norman will step down from the Board.

At closing, each of Andrew Makrides, J. Robert Saron, Moshe Citronowicz and George Kromer (the “Voting Parties’), executed a Voting Agreement (the “Voting Agreement”) pursuant to which each of the Voting Parties agreed to vote the shares of common stock owned by them in favor of the GPP designees at our next annual meeting.

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans
 
 
Number of Securities
to be Issued
Upon Exercise of
Outstanding Options,
Warrants and Rights
(a)
  
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price of
Outstanding Options,
Warrants and Rights
(b)
  
Number of Securities
Remaining Available
for Future Issuance Under Equity
Compensation Plans (excluding
securities reflected in column (a))
 (c)
  
Number of Securities
to be Issued
Upon Exercise of
Outstanding Options,
Warrants and Rights
(a)
 
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price of
Outstanding Options,
Warrants and Rights
(b)
 
Number of Securities
Remaining Available
for Future Issuance Under Equity
Compensation Plans (excluding
securities reflected in column (a))
 (c)
 
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders  1,815,175  $3.71   416,500   1,567,046  $3.91   269,500 
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders  64,286(1)  6.61      900,000(1)  2.92  -- 
Warrants  338,571   6.00     
                   
TOTAL  2,218,032  $4.14   416,500   2,467,046  $3.55   269,500 

(1)  Includes an issuance during 2010 related to employee inducement stock option grants in the amounta re-instatement of 100,000 stock options originally granted in 2010 to Leonard Keen which were subsequently cancelled or forfeited due to Mr. Keen’s termination 85,714 forfeited andbut which are presently the subjectwere reinstated by court order in August 2013. Also includes a grant of litigation. In addition, during 2010, 30,000750,000 stock options on December 13, 2013, as an inducement for employment to our Chief Executive Officer, Robert Gershon. The remaining 50,000 stock options were issued to Jeff Rencher related to employeeprevious employment inducement as terms of his employment agreement. An additional 20,000 restricted stock options grantedgrants to Howard Stallard pursuant to an employment agreement dated October 1, 2006 and related to the Lican Development asset purchase agreement are also in this total.two individuals.
 
Dividend Policy
 
We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our common stock and we do not intend to pay cash dividends in the foreseeable future. We currently expect to retain any future earnings to fund the operation and expansion of our business.
 
 
1918

ITEM 6.  Selected Financial Data
ITEM 6.

The following selected consolidated financial data (presented in thousands, except per share amounts and employee data) are derived from our consolidated financial statements. This data should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto, and with Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
 
Year Ended December 31,
(in thousands, except per share amounts)
 
 2012  2011  2010  2009  2008  2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 
                          
Sales, net $27,671  $25,411  $24,230  $26,953  $28,097  $23,660  $27,671  $25,411  $24,230  $26,953 
Cost of sales  16,338   14,680   14,242   15,098   16,248   14,462   16,338   14,680   14,242   15,098 
                               
Gross Profit  11,333   10,731   9,988   11,855   11,849   9,198   11,333   10,731   9,988   11,855 
                               
Gain on legal settlement and cancellation of agreement  --   750   --   --   1,496   --   --   750   --   -- 
                               
Other costs:                               
Research and development  1,329   1,197   1,854   2,083   2,061   1,260   1,329   1,197   1,854   2,083 
Professional services  1,439   1,250   1,556   1,398   991   1,835   1,439   1,250   1,556   1,398 
Salaries and related costs  3,178   3,114   3,155   3,003   3,017   3,235   3,178   3,114   3,155   3,003 
Selling, general and administration  4,341   4,347   4,889   4,656   4,489   4,894   4,341   4,347   4,889   4,656 
Legal settlement  --   1,591   --   --   -- 
Legal awards and settlements  1,640   --   1,591   --   -- 
Asset impairment  --   --   1,286   --   --   --   --   --   1,286   -- 
                               
Total other costs  10,287   11,499   12,740   11,140   10,558   12,864   10,287   11,499   12,740   11,140 
                               
Income (loss) from operations  1,046   (18)  (2,752)  715   2,787   (3,666)   1,046   (18)  (2,752)   715 
                               
Other income and (expense):                               
Interest (expense) income  (232)  (237)  (223)  (52)  (10)
Change in fair value of liabilities, net  20   287   513   --   -- 
Interest Expense, net (237) (232) (237) (223) (52)
Issuance Cost (664) -- -- -- -- 
Fees associated with refinance (543) -- -- -- -- 
Change in fair value of derivative liabilities, net  (842)  20   287   513   -- 
Total other income (expense) net  (212)  50   290   (52)  (10)  (2,286)  (212)  50   290   (52)
                               
Income (loss) before income taxes  834   32   (2,462)  663   2,777   (5,952)   834   32   (2,462)  663 
                               
Benefit (provision) for income taxes  (217)  77   927   (67)  (945)  1,613   (217)  77   927   (67)
                               
Net income (loss) $617  $109  $(1,535) $596  $1,832  $(4,339)  $617  $109  $(1,535)  $596 
                               
Earnings (loss) per common share:                               
Basic $0.04  $0.01  $(0.09) $0.04  $0.11  $(0.25)  $0.04  $0.01  $(0.09)  $0.04 
Diluted $0.03  $0.01  $(0.09) $0.03  $0.11  $(0.25)  $0.03  $0.01  $(0.09)  $0.03 
                               
Balance Sheet Information:
                               
Cash and cash equivalents $4,162  $4,880  $3,827  $2,155  $2,565  $7,924  $4,162  $4,880  $3,827  $2,155 
Working capital $14,049  $14,095  $13,107  $10,741  $9,943  $16,910  $14,322  $14,095  $13,107  $10,741 
Total assets $28,183  $28,240  $27,786  $27,462  $26,725  $33,176  $28,183  $28,240  $27,786  $27,462 
Long-term liabilities $3,366  $3,734  $4,216  $3,958  $4,143  $8,934  $3,366  $3,734  $4,216  $3,958 
Stockholders’ equity $22,895  $22,117  $21,765  $21,031  $20,128  $19,071  $22,895  $22,117  $21,765  $21,031 
 
 
2019

 
ITEM 7.Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

You should read the following discussion and analysis in conjunction with our financial statements and related notes contained elsewhere in this report.  This discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions.  Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of a variety of factors discussed in this report and those discussed in other documents we file with the SEC.  In light of these risks, uncertainties and assumptions, readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such forward-looking statements.  These forward-looking statements represent beliefs and assumptions on as of the date of this report.  While we may elect to update forward-looking statements and at some point in the future, we specifically disclaim any obligation to do so, even if our estimates change.

Executive Level Overview

We are a medical device company engaged in manufacturing and marketing of electrosurgical devices. Our medical products include a wide range of devices including electrosurgical generators and accessories, cauteries, medical lighting, nerve locators and other products.

We internally divide our operations into three product lines; electrosurgical products, battery-operated cauteries and other products. The electrosurgical line sells electrosurgical products which include desiccators, generators, electrodes, electrosurgical pencils and various ancillary disposable products. These products are used in surgery for the cutting and coagulation of tissue. Battery-operated cauteries are used for precise hemostasis (to stop bleeding) in ophthalmology and in other fields. Our other revenues are derived from nerve locators, disposable and reusable penlights, medical lighting, license fees, development fees and other miscellaneous income.

Most of our products currently are marketed through medical distributors, which distribute to more than 6,000 hospitals, doctors offices, and other healthcare facilities. New distributors are contacted through responses to our advertising in international and domestic medical journals and domestic or international trade shows.   International sales represented 17.7%approximately 17% of total revenues in 2013, 18% in 2012 and 21% in 2011 and 2010.2011. Our products are sold in more than 150 countries through local dealers which are coordinated by sales and marketing personnel at the Clearwater, Florida facility. As mentioned previously for the launch of our new surgical suite product lines, we have established the use of a network of approximately 50 commission-based independent direct sales contractors to market these products. Our business is generally not seasonal in nature.  While international sales of the company have declined, we did see substantial growth in Latin America, as well as improvement in the Middle East and Africa.  The company was negatively impacted in Europe, where financial upheaval in the region gave downward pressure combined with some product being withdrawn from the market due to regulatory testing and requirements.  The company has received approval for compliant, new and improved 200 and 300 watt generators.  This will fill a portion of the lost product opportunity.

We strongly encourage investors to visit our website: www.boviemedical.com to view the most current news and to review our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Results of Operations –

Sales
 
  2012 vs. 2011   2011 vs. 2010   2013 vs. 2012  2012 vs. 2011
Sales by Product Line (in thousands)  2012   2011   Percent change   2011   2010   Percent change   2013   2012 Percent change  2012   2011 Percent change
Electrosurgical $17,697  $16,896   4.7%  $16,896  $15,956   5.9%  $13,174  $17,697 (25.6%) $17,697  $16,896 4.7%
Cauteries  7,014   6,268   11.9%   6,268   6,383   (1.8)%   6,972   7,014 (0.1%)  7,014   6,268 11.9%
Other  2,960   2,247   31.7%   2,247   1,891   18.8%   3,514   2,960 18.7%  2,960   2,247 31.7%
                                    
Total $27,671  $25,411   8.9%  $25,411  $24,230   4.9%  $23,660  $27,671 (14.5%) $27,671  $25,411 8.9%
                                    
Sales by Domestic and International (in thousands)                                    
Domestic $22,704  $19,972   13.7%  $19,972  $19,174   4.2%  $19,521  $22,704 (14.0%) $22,704  $19,972 13.7%
International  4,967   5,439   (8.7%)   5,439   5,056   7.6%   4,139   4,967 (16.7%)  4,967   5,439 (8.7%)
                                    
Total $27,671  $25,411   8.9%  $25,411  $24,230   4.9%  $23,660  $27,671 (14.5%) $27,671  $25,411 8.9%
 
 
2120

 
Overall sales decreased by 14.5% or approximately $4.0 million for the period ended December 31, 2013 when compared with the same period in 2012.  The decrease in sales was mainly attributable to a reduction in generator sales of approximately $4.9 million to two major OEM customers, which resulted from the contracts ending.  In addition, cautery sales decreased slightly or approximately $42,000 in 2013.  These decreases were partially offset by an increase of approximately $296,000 in the sale of electrodes, an increase of approximately $548,000 in our medical lighting sales, an increase of approximately $42,000 in the sale of J-Plasma products and a net increase in other sales of approximately $66,000 mainly the result of contractor development services.

Overall sales increased by 8.9% or approximately $2.3 million for the period endingended December 31, 2012 when compared towith the same period in 2011.  In 2012, we continued to experience an upward trend in our sales in all three areas of our business. The largest dollar increase of approximately $746,000 was in our cautery product line, which we attribute to us gaining market share due to a reduction in competitors in the marketplace. The next largest dollar increase was in our electrosurgical product line consisting of a $736,000 increase in electrosurgery generators sold primarily to a major OEM customer and approximately $65,000 increased sales of electrodes. We also increased our sales of third party medical lighting products by approximately $593,000 and various other products by approximately $120,000.

Our sales for the twelve months ended December 31, 2011 outpaced sales for the same period in 2010 by approximately $1.2 million, or 4.9%. The increase in sales has been driven mainly by increased demand for our electrosurgical generators both domestically and internationally which amounted to an approximate increase of $690,000 for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010. Sales of our new distribution products released this year, coated blades which are categorized as electrosurgical and medical lighting systems which are categorized as other products, amounted to increases of approximately $675,000 and $356,000 respectively for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010. However, increases in electrosurgical sales were offset by an approximate decrease of $425,000 related to discontinued sales of an OEM disposable electrosurgical device for the twelve month period compared to the same period in 2010. In addition cautery sales were down by approximately $115,000 for the current year ended compared to the same period in 2010. We continue to see increased demand for our third party medical lighting products and as part of our ongoing business strategy we will be bringing on more third party medical products to offer through our distribution channel.

Our ten largest customers accounted for approximately 66.3%60.9%, 64.6%66.3%, and 66.5%64.6% of net revenues for 2013, 2012, and 2011 respectively. In 2013, National Distribution & Contracting Inc. accounted for 13.1%, PSS World Medical accounted for 10.9% and 2010 respectively.McKesson Medical Surgical accounted for 10.3% of our sales. In 2012, National Distribution & Contracting Inc. accounted for 12.4% of our sales, while in 2011, no one customer accounted for over 10% of our sales.  In 2010 two customers, Arthrex, Inc. and National Distribution & Contracting Inc. each separately accounted for approximately  11% of total revenues.

Gross Profit

 Years ended December 31,  Years ended December 31,
(in thousands) 2012  2011  
Percent
change
12’vs 11’
  2010  
Percent
change
11’vs 10’
  2013 2012 
Percent
change
13’vs 12’
 2011 
Percent
change
12’vs 11’
Cost of sales $16,338  $14,680  11.3%  $14,242  3.1%  $14,462  $16,338 (11.5%) $14,680 11.3%
Cost of sales as a percentage of revenue  59.0%  57.8%     58.8%     61.1%  59.0%   57.8% 
                            
Gross profit $11,333  $10,731  5.6%  $9,988  7.4%  $9,198  $11,333 (18.8%) $10,731 5.6%
Gross profit as a percentage of revenue  41.0%  42.2% (1.2%)   41.2% 1.0%   38.8%  41.0%(2.2%)  42.2%(1.2%)

Our gross profit margin as a percentage of sales decreased by 18.8% or approximately $2.1 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 compared with the same period in 2012. This decrease was mainly attributed to the above mentioned decrease in overall sales, along with a 2.6% increase in labor costs as a percentage of sales, and a 1.6% increase in manufactured overhead as a percentage of sales. These increases were offset by a 2% decrease in material costs as a percentage of sales.

Our gross profit margin on a dollar basis increased by 5.6% or approximately $603,000 during the year ended December 31, 2012 compared towith the same period in 2011 as a result of the increased sales mentioned above. However, our gross profit as a percentage of sales decreased by approximately 1.2%. This decrease in gross profit percent was due to the product mix that was sold, specifically with the increased sales of our lower margin third party medical lighting sales. Additional contributing factors to the lower gross profit percentage were an 0.8% increase in labor costs as a percentage of sales from salary increases, increased medical insurance costs and increased overtime required to meet the increase in sales coupled with slight increases in material costs related to our other products sold.  These increases were partially offset by a 0.1% decrease in manufactured overhead cost.

We improved our gross profit margin on a dollar basis by 7.4% or approximately $742,000 during the year ended December 31, 2011, compared to the same period in 2010 as a result of a combination of increased sales mentioned above and a net reduction in some of our costs attributed to those sales. Our cost of sales as a percentage of sales decreased by 1.0% mainly as a result of reductions approximating $216,000 in direct and indirect labor costs and $141,000 eliminated from our consolidating the Canadian facility. The total of these cost savings was offset by approximately $103,000 due to higher material cost related to our third party medical lighting sales when compared to our manufactured product lines.
22

 
We do not anticipate any material impact to our gross profit, material costs, or other costs as a result of the effect of inflation or any material impact of changing prices on net revenue.

Other Gain (Loss)

Salient/Medtronic Settlement

On March 3, 2011, we entered into a settlement agreement related to the legal action with Salient Surgical Technologies, Inc. and Medtronic, Inc. The settlement called for us and related parties to immediately exit and not enter into the monopolar and bipolar saline-enhanced RF device business (including SEER™ and BOSS™) worldwide through February 2015. In exchange, Salient made a one-time payment to us of $750,000. As a condition, we will not be able to sell certain finished products, which as of the settlement date amounted to approximately $100,000 of our inventory.  We reserved for approximately $87,000 of our inventory related to the products in this settlement in the first quarter of 2011. The terms also include a provision outlining a possible OEM contract manufacturing relationship between Salient and our Company.

Research and development
 
 Year ended December 31,  Year ended December 31,
(in thousands) 2012  2011  Percent change 12’vs 11’  2010  Percent change 11’vs10’  2013 2012 Percent change 13’vs 12’ 2011 Percent change 12’vs11’
Research and Development expense $1,329  $1,197  11.0%  $1,854  (35.4%)  $1,260  $1,329 (5.2%) $1,197 11.0%
R&D expense as a percentage of revenue  4.8%  4.7%     7.7%     5.3%  4.8%   4.7% 
21

Our expenditures for R & D related activities decreased by 5.2% or approximately $69,000 for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared with the same period in 2012.  The decrease was mainly caused by a reduction of labor and material costs of approximately $68,000 and $37,000 respectively.  These decreases were partially offset by an increase of approximately $36,000 in R & D consulting costs.

Our expenditures for R & D related activities increased by 11.0% or approximately $132,000 for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared towith the same period in 2011.  A large portion of this increase was related to various consulting fees of approximately $72,000, of which $42,000 was incurred for the preliminary development and design phase for a product related to a potential OEM customer and the remaining $30,000 was incurred to expand the plasma product line and other new products. Additional expenditures to support the continued development of the J-Plasma product line included adding a new engineering position which increased costs by approximately $51,000 and increased material and lab costs of approximately $9,000.

We experienced a 35.4% decrease in research and development expenseProfessional services

  Year ended December 31,
(in thousands) 2013  2012 
Percent
change
13’vs 12’
 2011 
Percent
change
12’vs 11’
Professional services expense $1,835  $1,439 27.5% $1,250 15.1%
Professional services as a percentage of revenue  7.8%  5.2%   4.9% 

Professional services costs increased 27.5% or approximately $657,000$396,000 for the year ended 2011December 31, 2013 compared towith the same period in 2010. This 3% decrease as a percentage2012.  Legal fees, incurred in connection with litigation, increased over the prior year by approximately $321,000 and are the main reason for the increase in professional costs. We also had an approximate increase of sales, was primarily$75,000 related to stock based compensation costs due to the saline-enhanced RF device business product line and reductions in development costsimmediate vesting of approximately $300,000 in engineering costs and approximately $118,000 in product design, testing labs, and material related costs. In March of this yearoptions for the independent Board members that resigned as part of our legal settlement with Salient Surgical Technologies, Inc. we agreed to exit and not enter into the monopolar and bipolar saline-enhanced RF device business (SEER™ and BOSS™) worldwide through February 2015. We also had reductions of approximately $239,000equity raise in consulting fees associated with the development of our vessel sealing product as a result of our consolidating the Canadian operations to Florida.December 2013.   

Professional services

  Year ended December 31, 
(in thousands) 2012  2011  
Percent
change
12’vs 11’
  2010  
Percent
change
11’vs10’
 
Professional services expense $1,439  $1,250  15.1%  $1,556  (19.7%) 
Professional services as a percentage of revenue  5.2%  4.9%     6.4%   
23

Professional services costs increased 15.1% or approximately $189,000 for the year endingended December 31, 2012 compared towith the same period in 2011.  Legal fees, incurred in connection with the current litigations,litigation, increased over the prior year by approximately $215,000 and are the main reason for the increase in professional costs. We also had an approximate increase of $25,000 related to stock based compensation costs.   These increases were offset by a reduction in tax consulting fees due to the closing of our IRS audit in early 2011 of approximately $51,000.

Our professional costs decreased by 19.7% or approximately $306,000 for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to the same period in 2010, due mainly to a reductions in legal fees of approximately $70,000 related to settled cases and $99,000 in tax consulting fees due to the closing of our IRS audit earlier that year. In addition, we had savings of approximately $69,000 in other consulting costs from our nonrenewal of a consulting firm to support marketing of new products which we used in 2010. Various smaller savings were approximately $25,000 in internal control testing costs, $28,000 in patent related costs, and $15,000 in stock based compensation costs.

Salaries and related costs

 Year ended December 31,  Year ended December 31,
(in thousands) 2012  2011  
Percent
change
12’vs 11’
  2010  
Percent
change 11’vs.10’
  2013 2012 
Percent
change
13’vs 12’
 2011 
Percent
change 12’vs 11’
Salaries and related expenses $3,178  $3,114  2.1%  $3,155  (1.3%)  $3,235  $3,178 1.8% $3,114 2.1%
Salaries & related expenses as a percentage of revenue  11.5%  12.3%     13.0%     13.7%  11.5%   12.3% 
22

During 2013 we experienced a net increase of approximately 1.8% in salary and related costs, or approximately $57,000 when compared with the prior year.  The increase was primarily the result of the additional salary related to our new CEO who started in December 2013.

During 2012 we experienced a net increase of approximately 2.1% in salary and related costs, or approximately $64,000 when compared towith the same twelve month period ending at December 31, 2011.prior year.  In an effort to expand our sales both for our plasma line products domestically and our distribution products in domestic and international markets, our sales and marketing salaries and related costs increased by approximately $181,000. However, our salaries and related costs related to our in-house legal decreased by approximately $117,000.

Our salaries and related costs decreased overall by approximately $41,000, or 1.3% for the year ended December 31, 2011 when compared to the same period in 2010. Although we experienced an increase in our health insurance premiums of approximately $52,000, this increase was offset by a reduction in salaries related to the elimination of a marketing position for the sintered steel product line that we agreed to exit out of as part of the Salient Surgical Technologies, Inc. settlement.

Selling, general and administrative expenses

 Year ended December 31,  Year ended December 31,
(in thousands) 2012  2011  
Percent
change
12’vs 11’
  2010  
Percent
change
11’vs10’
  2013 2012 
Percent
change
13’ vs 12’
 2011 
Percent
change
12’ vs11’
SG&A expense $4,341  $4,347  (0.1%)  $4,889  (11.1%)  $4,894  $4,341 12.7% $4,347 (0.1%)
SG&A expense as a percentage of revenue  15.7%  17.1%     20.2%     20.7%  15.7%   17.1% 
Legal settlement  --  $1,591      --    
Loss on impairment of IP  --   --     $1,286    
             5.3%   
Legal awards and settlements  $1,640  $--   $1,591  

Selling, general and administrative costs increased by 12.7% or approximately $552,000 for the period ended December 31, 2013 compared with the same period in 2012.  One of the main reasons for the increase in cost was the 2.3% excise tax related to the Affordable Care Act instituted in the year 2013 which amounted to approximately $384,000. In addition, we had an increase in other marketing, shows and travel costs of approximately $266,000 related to our new J-Plasma line of products, an increase in general insurance of approximately $127,000, and an increase related to computers, data security, and other internal infrastructure of approximately $56,000. However, we experienced decreases in commissions, stockholder expense, advertising, amortization, rent expense, building maintenance, utilities, and other various overhead related costs all of which amounted to an offsetting decrease of approximately $205,000. In addition, although we had increased selling and marketing costs related to J-Plasma mentioned above, we experienced decreases in travel and marketing costs related to our distribution product lines of approximately $77,000.

Selling, general and administrative costs in dollars remained relatively the same, however itthey decreased as a percentage of sales by approximately 1.4% for the period endingended December 31, 2012 compared towith the same period in 2011.  We experienced some substantial decreases in our bank fees, obsolete inventory provisions, building maintenance and utilities, and other various overhead related costs coupled with a gain on disposition of assets all of which amounted to a decrease of approximately $219,000. Additional decreases in our selling, general and administrative costs included a $45,000 decrease in regulatory costs related to both our existing as well as our new products, a $58,000 decrease in amortization costs related to the Meg product line which was written off last year, and a $46,000 decrease in costs related to the 2011 one time legal settlement which was absent for the same period 2012.
24

  
In line with our efforts to expand sales, we increased selling and marketing costs over the prior period by approximately $129,000, which included trade shows costs, sales force travel both for international and domestic markets, and increased advertising for both our existing distribution products and our new J-Plasma line of products. Our increased sales in 2012 versus 2011 also translated into an increase of approximately $75,000 in commission expense. We also experience increases in our selling, general and administrative costs for computer and software upgrades, rental fees, general insurance from increasing our coverage limits, shareholder and stock exchange costs, and various other overhead related costs which all amounted to approximately $160,000.

Our selling, generalLegal Awards and administrative costs decreased by 11.1% overall or approximately $542,000Settlements

In connection with the litigation previously disclosed in a filed 10Q pending in the United States District Court for the year ended December 31, 2011 comparedMiddle District of Florida between the Company and Leonard Keen, the Company’s former Vice President and General Counsel, on August 8, 2013, following a jury trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Mr. Keen awarding him $622,500 in severance.  In addition, the jury determined that Mr. Keen’s previously issued 110,000 stock options should be reinstated and accelerated, and that the Company must indemnify Mr. Keen for any damages or costs he suffered in his capacity as an employee of Bovie pursuant to the same periodterms of Mr. Keen’s prior employment agreement with the Company.  Subsequent to the trial, the Court awarded Mr. Keen $241,310 in 2010. A large portion of our cost savings were from decreasesattorneys’ fees.  These amounts have been paid.
23


Amounts related to the suspensionverdict of the sintered steel product line as part of the Salient Surgical Technologies, Inc. settlement for approximate amounts of $131,000this case and subsequent attorney’s fee award were accrued and expensed in reduction in travel costs, $95,000 decrease in amortization expense,2013, and a $54,000 reduction in sintered steel marketing costs. Other large cost saving components included in the 11.1% overall reduction mentioned above were related to general overhead costs which included approximate amounts of $240,000 related to reductions from consolidating the Canadian operation to Florida, a $326,000 decrease in loss on disposition of assets incurred on the sale of our old building in late 2010, and $86,000 decrease in utilities and facility maintenance costs. We also experienced some decreases in our manufacturing rep training and other various selling expenses amountingamounted to approximately $71,000.$1.1 million.

We continued to increase sales of our new distribution product lines, coated electrodesA previously disclosed settlement, on November 21, 2013, we along with, Andrew Makrides and medical lighting systems during 2012,Moshe Cintronowitz entered into a Settlement Agreement and to introduce other new products under development and, as a result, we incurred approximate increases in selling costs of $41,000 for advertising, $99,000 for commission expense, and $21,000 for show and other marketing costs. In addition, during 2011, as our new products approached the completion phase we experienced an increase of approximately $68,000 in regulatory testing costs compared to the prior year. We also saw an increase in our general insurance costs of approximately $71,000 due to increases related to our directors and officer’s coverage and we expect this trend to continue in 2012 as we re-evaluate our coverage in other areas. As a result of settling one of our lawsuits we incurred an approximate increase of $83,000 in settlement expense in 2011 over 2010. Other various increases in cost in our year ended December 31, 2011 over the same period in 2010 include approximate amounts of $25,000 in shareholder and stock exchange related costs, $32,000 in our provision for obsolete inventory, and $21,000 inventory storage costs.

Legal Settlement

In December 2011, a settlement related to the then pending litigation with Steve Livneh and certain affiliated entities, was structured and subsequently signed on February 22, 2012Mutual General Release (the “Settlement Agreement”) with Steven Livneh, Henvil Corporation, Ltd., and Lican Developments, Ltd. (collectively, “Livneh”) in settlement of the previously disclosed action pending in the United States District Court, Middle District of Tampa, Docket No. 12-cv-1498 (the “Litigation”).  UnderWith few exceptions, the terms of the Agreement replace and supercede the terms of the Confidential Settlement Agreement and Mutual General Release entered into as of December 28, 2011, which was the subject of prior disclosures and formed the basis of the Litigation.
Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, we agreed to among other things, perform the following:pay Livneh a total of $400,000 in six separate installments beginning on December 10, 2013 and concluding on May 15, 2014.
We also agreed to (i) make a $250,000 lump sum paymentcertain upgrades to the ICON VS generator previously sold to Livneh, ($50,000(ii) sell Livneh three (3) additional ICON VS generators designated as “not for human use”, subject to certain terms and conditions, (iii) complete the testing and validation of which was previously recordedthe ICON VS generator within six months, (iv) sell Livneh up to 150 additional ICON VS generators for use on humans, subject to certain terms and expensed), (ii) make 18 installment paymentsconditions, and (v) to provide Livneh with various information relating to the ICON VS generator.  Upon execution of the Settlement Agreement, we delivered to Livneh invarious documentation relating to the amountICON VS generator and a set of $23,222.22 per month, (iii) reimbursesub-assemblies relating thereto.  We also executed a separate agreement with Livneh to provide support regarding the ICON VS generator for all unpaid expenses that Livneh incurred on our behalf during thea period of his employment and/or consultancy (from October 1, 2006 through August 11, 2010), (iv) pay Livneh $14,700, which represents the balanceone year after execution of the amounts due to Henvil Corp. Ltd. under a certain bill of sale, dated April 12, 2010, (v) transfer to Livneh the title of a certain automobile, (vi) transfer to Livneh all of our rights and interest in certain Intellectual Property (as defined in the Settlement Agreement) pertaining to the Modular Ergonomic Grip (“MEG”), Modullion, RF Skin Resurfacing, Scannula, Double Jaw Forceps and Tip-On-Tube designs and trade name (collectively, the “Assigned Patents”), (vi) transfer to Livneh certain parts for the MEG device, (vii) grantAgreement.
We granted Livneh an exclusive, transferable, irrevocable license to produce,make, have made, use, market, and sell the Seal-N-Cut device in the People’s Republic of China (viii)(“PRC”) and a non-exclusive, transferable, and irrevocable license to make, have made, use, market, and sell Seal-N-Cut anywhere other than PRC.  We and Livneh each agreed to pay to Livnehthe other a royalty payments ofequal to 3% on their Net Sales (as defined in the Settlement Agreement)agreement) of the Seal-N-Cut device outside the People’s Republic of China, and (ix) pay to Livneh a one-time royalty payment of 5% upon the closing of any sale by us of our right or interest in any Intellectual Property pertaining to the Seal-N-Cut device.  To secure our obligations, we granted Livneh a security interest in all of our rights and interest of the Company in the Seal-N-Cut device, including all Intellectual Property pertaining thereto. Since the loss was quantifiable and known in December 2011, we recognized this settlement loss in 2011 in accordance with GAAP and all payments hereunder were accrued during the fourth quarter.
25

In addition, in the fourth quarter of 2011, as a resultSeal-N-Cut.  Upon execution of the Settlement Agreement, we recorded an  expensetransferred to Livneh (i) three (3) Seal-N-Cut hand pieces, (ii) two final assembly test fixtures not utilized by the Company, (iii) a PK generator and footswitch, (iv) miscellaneous parts and materials, (v) various documents relating to Seal-N-Cut, and (vi) our rights to certain Seal-N-Cut molds.
The parties also exchanged mutual general releases and discontinued the Litigation.  The Settlement Agreement also provides that in the event of any dispute between the parties concerning the Settlement Agreement, no party would be entitled to recover lost profits, lost sales, business interruption damages, lost business opportunity damages, lost tax credits, lost benefit-of-the-bargain damages, consequential damages, incidental damages, special damages, punitive damages, or exemplary damages. Amounts related to this settlement were accrued and expensed in 2013, and amounted to approximately $737,000 for the transfer of the MEG and the Modullion intellectual property.  We have also accrued expenses in approximate amounts for the transfer of related inventory and molds of $194,000 and an additional $27,000 for other various expenses.$500,000.

The total financial impact of this Settlement Agreementthe award and settlement agreement to our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 20112013 was approximately $1.6 million.

Asset Impairment

In December 2010, after evaluating the future outlook of our patent related to our SEER product line, we determined that the asset value was impaired and further calculated the impairment loss to be approximately $1.3 million.  Subsequent to our assessment that the patent was impaired, as a condition of the March 3, 2011 settlement with Salient Surgical Technologies, Inc. and Medtronic, Inc., we are required to immediately exit and not enter into the monopolar and bipolar saline-enhanced RF device business (including SEER™ and BOSS™) worldwide through February 2015 (see Item 3. Legal Proceedings).  As a condition we will not be able to sell certain finished products, which as of the settlement date amounted to approximately $87,000 of our inventory.

Other Income

 Year ended December 31,  Year ended December 31,
(in thousands) 2012  2011  Percent change 12’vs 11’  2010  Percent change 11’vs.10’  2013 2012 
Percent
change
13’vs 12’
  2011 
Percent
change
12’vs 11’
Interest income $7  $12  (42.0%)  $15  (20.0%)  $7  $7 0.0%  $12 (42.0%)
Interest expense $(239) $(249) (4.0%)  $(238) 4.6%  $(244) $(239)0.02%  $(249)(4.0%)
Issuance cost $(664) - -  - -
Fees associated with refinance $(543)  - -   - -
Total other income (expense) $(232) $(237) (2.0%)  $(223) 6.3%  $(1,444) $(232)521.0%  $(237)(2.0%)
Other income (expense) as a percentage of revenue  (0.8%)  (0.9%)     (0.9%)     (6.1%)  (0.8%)    (0.9%) 
Change in fair value of liabilities, net $20  $287     $513  (44.1%) 
Change in fair value of derivative liabilities, net $(842) $20 (4137.7%)   $287 (93.0%)
Other gain as a percentage of sales  0.1%  1.1%     2.1%     (3.5%)  0.1%    1.1% 

Interest Expense

Net interest expense increase by approximately $1.2 million or 507.1% the year ended December 31, 2013 as compared with the same period in 2012.  The increase was mainly cause by the recognizing of the issuance costs of approximately $664,000 related to the warrants issued as part of the Great Point Partners equity financing mentioned below. In addition, as a result the high probability of refinancing our PNC debt, we accrued for the required amount of approximately $422,000, as of December 31, 2013, to pay off an embedded swap interest rate collar position and the accrued refinancing charges of approximately $121,000 for our previous refinancing. This interest rate collar was the result of our previous refinancing of the industrial revenue bonds on October 31, 2011 with PNC Bank.

Net interest expense decreased by approximately $5,000 or 2.0% for the year ended December 31, 2012 as compared towith the same period in 2011 primarily due to principal reductions during 2012 of our Industrial Revenue Bonds associated with the acquisition of our Clearwater, Florida facility.

Net interest expense increased by approximately $14,000 or 6.3% for the year ended December 31, 2011 as compared towith the same period in 2010 primarily due to the refinancing of the Industrial Revenue Bonds in late 2011.
24


Change in Fair Value of Derivative Liabilities

On December 13, 2013, we entered into a securities purchase agreement pursuant to which we issued 3,500,000 shares of our newly designated Series A 6% Convertible Preferred Stock with a stated value of $2.00 per share and 5,250,000 warrants to purchase our common stock, at an exercise price of $2.387 per share.  We also issued 525,000 warrants to the placement agent.  At December 13, 2013, the investor and placement agent warrants were valued at $4,383,750 and $438,375, respectively. The warrants are accounted for as derivative financial instruments at fair value and are re-valued each period.  At December 31, 2013, the investor and placement agent warrants were valued at $4,599,000 and $459,900, respectively, and we recognized an aggregate loss related to their change in value of $236,775.

In 2010, we issued warrants to investors and to our placement agent in connection with an equity offering.  The warrants issued to the investors contain anti-dilution protection in the event we issue securities at a price lower than the exercise price of the warrants.  As a result of the issuance of our Series A 6% Convertible Preferred Stock on December 13, 2013, the exercise price of the investor warrants issued in 2010 was reduced from $6.00 per share to $2.00 per share and the number of warrants was increased proportionately. The 2010 investor and placement agent warrants, which are accounted for as derivative financial instruments at fair value, of liabilities was related to the warrants associated with our equity issuance in April of 2010 and adjustment for the fair value of the Lican liability. The derivative warrant liability waswere valued at approximately $799,000 at the issuance date$690,000 and was valued at approximately $105,000 and $332,000$85,000 at December 31, 20112013 and December 31, 2010, respectively.  This resulted in2012, respectively, and we recognized a year-to-date gain of approximately $227,000 and $467,000 for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The Lican liability fair value was approximately $111,300 and $172,200 at December 31, 2011 and 2010.  This resulted in a gain of $61,000net loss for the year ended December 31, 2011.

Interest expense remained relatively similar from 2010 through 2012, with a slight increase in 2011 due2013 of $605,000, of which $613,000 was related to the refinancingreduction in the exercise price of our Industrial Revenue Bonds associated with the acquisitioninvestor warrants. For the year ended December 31, 2012, we recognized a gain of our Clearwater, Florida facility.  We expect that our interest expense for 2013 should be similar$20,000 related to the amount incurredchange in 2012.value of these warrants.
26


Income Taxes

Deferred income taxes reflect the impact of temporary differences between the amount of assets and liabilities recognized for financial reporting purposes and such amounts recognizedThe provision for income tax purposes.was a benefit of approximately $1.617 million vs. a charge of approximately $217,000 in 2012. The tax effects of these temporary differences representing the components of deferred tax assets (liabilities) at December 31 were approximately as follows (in thousands):
  2012  2011 
Deferred tax assets, current:      
U.S. net operating loss carryforwards $1,097  $980 
State net operating loss carryforwards  197   176 
Research and development credits  774   774 
AMT credits  73   73 
Accounts receivable  12   16 
Reserves  1   -- 
Inventory  --   1 
Charitable  9   9 
Accrued expenses  132   56 
Accrued Settlement  --   593 
Non-current estimate of loss and credit carryforwards  (2,295)  (2,178)
Total deferred tax assets, current  --   500 
         
Deferred tax assets, non-current:        
Investment in subsidiary  128   -- 
Loss and credit carryforwards  2,295   2,178 
Stock based compensation  95   70 
Total deferred tax assets, non- current  2,518   2,248 
         
Deferred tax liabilities, non-current:        
Inventory  (1)  -- 
State taxes (capital)  (4)  -- 
Property and equipment  (361)  (422)
Intangibles  (304)  (254)
Unrecognized tax benefit liability for non-current temporary differences  (49)  (63)
Total deferred tax liabilities, non-current  (719)  (739)
         
Net non-current deferred income tax asset $1,799  $1,509 

We consider all positive and negative evidence regarding the realization of deferred tax assets, including past operating results and future sources of taxable income. U.S. net operating losses will begin to expire in years beginning in 2019.

We assess the financial statement impact of an uncertain tax position taken or expected to be taken on an income tax return at the largest amount that is more-likely-than-not to be sustained upon audit by the relevant taxing authority. An uncertain income tax position will not be recognized in the financial statements unless it is more likely than not of being sustained. All of our positions arise from taxable temporary differences and, as such, the liability has been recognized in the net deferred tax asset, current and non-current items to which they relate.  The calculated amount of penalties and interest related to these timing differences were immaterial at December 31, 2012 and 2011.  In addition, because the amounts are related to temporary timing differences, there would be no material impact on our effective tax rate if recognized.
27

Below is a reconciliation of the statutory federal income tax rate to our effective tax rate for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010:2013 was 27.3% vs. 25.9% for 2012.

  2012  2011  2010 
Federal tax provision  34.0%  34.0%  34.0%
State taxes (net of federal benefit)  4.1%  (32.0%)  4.3%
Stock based compensation*  -   (27.8%)  0.5%
Research and development credits*  -   (78.0%)  5.0%
Warrant gains  -   (175.9%)  - 
Meals and entertainment  -   39.1%  - 
Other  (12.2%)  -   (6.1%)
   25.9%  (240.6%)  37.7%
* Net of IRS Exam adjustments for 2010

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Our working capital at December 31, 20122013 was $14.0approximately $17.0 million compared with $14.1$14.3 million at December 31, 2011.2012. Accounts receivable days sales outstanding were 3833 days and 3638 days at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively. The number of days worth of sales in inventory, which is the total inventory available for production divided by the 12-month average cost of materials, decreased 19increased 79 days to 218297 days equating to an inventory turn ratio of 1.26 at December 31, 2013 from 218 days and an inventory turn ratio of 1.43 at December 31, 2012 from 237 days and an inventory turn ratio of 1.32 at December 31, 2011.2012. The lowerhigher number of days worth of sales in inventory which translated into a higherlower inventory turnover rate is mainly due to the increasedecrease in sales related to our generator product lines which contain a greater number of component parts compared to all our other products.

For the year ended December 31, 2012,2013, net cash provided byused in operating activities was $165,000approximately $2.5 million compared with net cash provided by operating activities of $1.9 millionapproximately $165,000 in 2011.2012.

Net cash used in investing activities was approximately $753,000$588,000 for the year ended December 31, 20122013 compared to net cash used in investing activities was approximately $542,000$753,000 during 2011.2012. The change was due mainly to increaseda decrease in overall purchases of equipment, molds and test fixtures to support our new products.fixtures.

WeCash was provided from financing activities of approximately $6.9 million during year ended December 31, 2013 compared to cash used cash from financing activities of approximately $130,000 during year ended December 31, 2012 compared to cash used from financing activities of approximately $302,000 during year ended December 31, 2011.2012. The change resulted primarily from repaymentour $7 million financing in December 2013 (See Item 5: Recent Sales of Unregistered Equity Securities). In addition we received approximately $48,000 from the exercise of stock options. Reductions to our cash related to financing activities included repayments of principal on our industrial revenue bonds, which totaled approximately $130,000$162,000 in 20122013 compared to net repayments of long term debt and capital lease of $302,000$130,000 in 2011.2012.
25


We currently haveAt December 31, 2013, we had approximately $3.4$3.3 million outstanding under industrial revenue bonds which wewere previously used for the purchase and renovation of our Clearwater, Florida facility.  During 2011 theseThese bonds were refinanced in October 2011 through PNC Bank, N.A. The bonds, which are being amortized overhad a 20-year amortization term, balloon in November 2018 and bear interest at a fixed interest rate of 5.6%.  Scheduled maturities of this indebtedness are approximately $138,000, $146,000, $154,000, $163,000 and $172,000$72,000, $3.2 million for 2013 and 2014, 2015, 2016which included additional monthly principal payments and 2017, respectively and approximately $2.6 million thereafter.an accelerated balloon payment date pursuant to the forbearance amendment to our credit agreement dated October 22, 2013 mentioned below.

We had approximately $4.2 million in cash and cash equivalents at December 31, 2012. We believeOn October 22, 2013, we entered into an amendment to our cash on hand, as well as anticipated cash flows from operations, will be sufficient to meet our operating cash commitments for the next year. Should additional funds be required, we have secured additional borrowing capacitycredit facilities with PNC Bank.  (See below)
28

In addition,Pursuant the amendment, we continue to make substantial investments in the development and marketing ofterminated our J-Plasma™ technology, which may adversely affect our profitability and cash flow in the next 12 to 24 months.  While we believe that these investments may generate additional revenues and profits in the future, there can be no assurance that J-Plasma will be successful or that such future revenues and profitability will be realized. Since June of 2010 through December 31, 2012, we have invested approximately $1.6 million in the development and marketing of our J-Plasma™ technology.

We have a $6 million secured revolving line of credit. In addition, the amendment provided for changes to our mortgage note credit facility with PNC Bank, which at Decemberand previous amendment: (a) the definition of “adjusted EBITDA” contained in our credit agreement dated October 31, 2012 had a zero balance. Advances2011, as amended, relating to $4,000,000 in Pinellas County Industrial Development Revenue Bonds Series 2008 was amended to exclude the one-time payment on the judgment in favor of Leonard Keen in the approximate amount of $848,000, effective as of June 30, 2013; (b) in addition to the payments of principal and interest otherwise required under the $6 million linebonds, from November 1, 2013 through and including September 1, 2014, the Company shall make additional principal payments of credit are due$12,000 per month and redeem the bonds in full on demandOctober 1, 2014; and bear interest at(c) amended the covenant containing the adjusted EBITDA targets, as more fully set forth in the fourth amendment. The amendment also grants PNC a rate of daily LIBOR plus 1.75% and are secured by a perfected first security interest in all of our inventoryproperty and accounts receivable.equipment (excluding patents) as additional collateral to secure our obligations under the credit agreement. All other terms of our remaining credit agreement, as amended, remain in full force and effect.

In addition we have a separate additionalPursuant to the terms of the our previous amendment to our credit facility, with PNC Bankwe were required, among other things, to maintain a minimum adjusted EBITDA in at least the following amounts, for up to $1 million specific to financing new equipment purchases. This credit facility, as amended, providesthe following periods: (a) ($525,000) for a 1 year draw up to the conversion date of Octoberthree months including March 31, 2013; (b) ($1,100,000) for the six months ending June 30, 2013; (c) ($1,400,000) for the nine months ended September 30, 2013; and (d) ($1,550,000) for the twelve months ended December 31, 2013. PriorWe also were to maintain a Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio of at least the conversion dates amounts outstanding bear an interest ratefollowing at the end of daily LIBOR plus 2.25%.  Upon conversion, the term is 5 years and will bear an interest rate of daily LIBOR plus 2.50%. The note would be secured by a perfected first security interest infollowing periods: (i) 1.25:1.0 for the new equipment purchased. We did not draw on this line during 2012.three months ended March 31, 2014; (ii) 1.25:1.0 for the six months ended June 30, 2014; (iii) 1.25:1.0 for the nine months ended September 30, 2014.

Subsequent available borrowings for both these credit facilities are subject to a borrowing base utilizing a percentage of eligible receivables, inventories, and any assigned cash along with certain financial ratios, specifically maintaining: (i) a ratio of tangible net worth of less than 0.75 to 1.0 and (ii) a ratio of minimum fixed charge of 1.25 to 1.0 measured on a rolling four quarter basis.

At December 31, 2012,2013, we were in full compliance with the amended loan covenants and ratios for our credit facility.

On March 20, 2014, the Company entered into a transaction with The Bank of bothTampa, a Florida banking corporation (“Lender”) wherein Lender extended to the credit facilities. According to our most recent borrowing base calculation, we had approximately $4.0 million total availabilityCompany a mortgage loan in the principal amount of $3,592,000 (the “Loan”). The obligations under the $6.0 million credit line,Loan are secured by a first mortgage and security interest in the Company’s Clearwater, Florida facility as well as an assignment of the Company’s accounts receivable.  In addition, the Company pledged and interest in a certificate of deposit in the amount of $898,000 as additional collateral which we currently havedeclines on a zero balance. We also have available approximately $1.0 millionpro rata basis as principal is paid.  The initial maturity date of the Loan is March 20, 2017; however the Company has an option to extend the maturity date until March 20, 2022.

Borrowings under the equipment lineLoan bear interest at LIBOR plus 3.5%, with a fixed monthly principal payment of credit.$19,956.

The Loan documents contain customary financial covenants, including a covenant that the Company maintain a minimum liquidity of $750,000.  Although there is no Debt Service Coverage Ratio (as defined in the Loan Agreement) for the initial term of the Loan, should the Company desire to extend the Loan beyond three years, the Company must maintain a Debt Service Coverage Ratio for each of the preceding four quarters of not less than 1.0 to 1.0.  In the event the Loan is extended, the Debt Service Coverage Ratio must not be less than 1.2 to 1.0.

Simultaneously with the closing of the Loan, the Company redeemed those certain Industrial Revenue Bonds issued by the Pinellas County Industrial Development Authority and satisfied its obligations to its prior lender, PNC Bank, N.A (“PNC Bank”).  In connection with the redemption of the Bonds, the Company paid PNC Bank $3,188,332.51 to satisfy its existing credit facility.  In connection with the termination of the interest rates swap agreement with PNC Bank, the Company paid PNC Bank an additional $410,275.

Our future contractual obligations for agreements with initial terms greater than one year and agreements to purchase materials in the normal course of business are summarized as follows (in thousands):

Description Years Ending December 31,  Years Ending December 31, 
 2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  Thereafter  2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Thereafter 
Operating leases $228  $12  $-  $-  $-  $-  $12  $-  $-  $-  $-  $- 
Employment agreements  966   786   725   -   -   -   1,316   786   216   -   -   - 
Purchase Commitments  3,848   -   -   -   -   - 
Purchase commitments  3,080   -   -   -   -   - 
Long-term debt  138   146   154   163   172   2,646   3,257   -   -   -   -   - 
Total $5,180  $944  $879  $163  $172  $2,646  $7,665  $786  $216  $-  $-  $- 

Critical Accounting Estimates

In preparing the consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (U.S. GAAP), we have adopted various accounting policies. Our most significant accounting policies are disclosed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements.
26


The preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Our estimates and assumptions, including those related to inventories, intangible assets, property, plant and equipment, legal proceedings, research and development, warranty obligations, product liability, fair valued liabilities, sales returns and discounts, stock based compensation and income taxes are updated as appropriate, which in most cases is at least quarterly. We base our estimates on historical experience, or various assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances and the results form the basis for making judgments about the reported values of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses. Actual results may materially differ from these estimates.
29

 
Estimates are considered to be critical if they meet both of the following criteria: (1) the estimate requires assumptions about material matters that are uncertain at the time the accounting estimates are made, and (2) other materially different estimates could have been reasonably made or material changes in the estimates are reasonably likely to occur from period to period. Our critical accounting estimates include the following:

Inventory reserves

When necessary we maintain reserves for excess and obsolete inventory resulting from the potential inability to sell our products at prices in excess of current carrying costs. The markets in which we operate are highly competitive, with new products and surgical procedures introduced on an ongoing basis. Such marketplace changes may cause our products to become obsolete. We make estimates regarding the future recoverability of the costs of these products and record a provision for excess and obsolete inventories based on historical experience, and expected future trends. If actual product life cycles, product demand or acceptance of new product introductions are less favorable than projected by management, additional inventory write-downs may be required, which would unfavorably affect future operating results.

Long-lived assets
 
We review long-lived assets which are held and used, including property and equipment and intangible assets, for impairment whenever changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the assets may not be recoverable. Such evaluations compare the carrying amount of an asset to future undiscounted net cash flows expected to be generated by the asset over its expected useful life and are significantly impacted by estimates of future prices and volumes for our products, capital needs, economic trends and other factors that are inherently difficult to forecast. If the asset is considered to be impaired, we record an impairment charge equal to the amount by which the carrying value of the asset exceeds its fair value determined by either a quoted market price, if any, or a value determined by utilizing a discounted cash flow technique.

LiabilitiesDerivative liabilities valued at fair value

We generally do not use derivative financial instruments to hedge exposures to cash-flow risks or market-risks. However, certain financial instruments, such as warrants, which are indexed to our common stock, are classified as liabilities when either (a) the holder possesses rights to net-cash settlement or (b) physical or net-share settlement is not within our control.  In such instances, net-cash settlement is assumed for financial accounting and reporting purposes, even when the terms of the underlying contracts do not provide for net-cash settlement.  Such financial instruments are initially recorded, and continuously carried, at fair value.

Determining the fair value of these instruments involves judgment and the use of certain relevant assumptions including, but not limited to, interest rate risk, historical volatility and stock price, estimated life of the derivative, anti-dilution provisions, and conversion/redemption privileges.  The use of different assumptions or changes in those assumptions could have a material effect on the estimated fair value amounts.

Stock-based Compensation

Under our stock option plan, options to purchase common shares of the Company may be granted to key employees, officers and directors of the Company by the Board of Directors. The Company accounts for stock options in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718-10-10, Share-Based Payment, with compensation expense amortized over the vesting period based on the binomial lattice option-pricing model fair value on the grant date, which includes a number of estimates that affect the amount of our expense.
 
30

Litigation Contingencies

From time to time, we are exposed to claims and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business and use various methods to resolve these matters in a manner that we believe serves the best interest of the Company and our shareholders. There can be no assurance these actions or other third party assertions will be resolved without costly litigation, or in a manner that is not adverse to our financial position. We do not believe that any of the currently identified claims or litigation matters will have a material adverse impact on our results of operations, cash flows or financial condition. However, given uncertainties associated with any litigation, if our assessments prove to be wrong, or if additional information becomes available such that we estimate that there is a possible loss or possible range of loss associated with these contingencies, then we would record the minimum estimated liability, which could materially impact our results of operations, financial position and cash flows.
27


Income Taxes

The provision for income taxes includes federal, foreign, state and local income taxes currently payable and those deferred because of temporary differences between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities. Deferred tax assets or liabilities are computed based on the difference between the financial statement and income tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted marginal tax rates. Valuation allowances are recorded to reduce deferred tax assets when it is more likely than not that a tax benefit will not be realized. Deferred income tax expenses or credits are based on the changes in the asset or liability from period to period.

We have net operating loss and tax credit carry forwards available in certain jurisdictions to reduce future taxable income. Future tax benefits for net operating loss and tax credit carry forwards are recognized to the extent that realization of these benefits is considered more likely than not. This determination is based on the expectation that related operations will be sufficiently profitable or various tax, business and other planning strategies will enable us to utilize the operating loss and tax credit carry forwards. We cannot be assured that we will be able to realize these future tax benefits or that future valuation allowances will not be required. To the extent that available evidence raises doubt about the realization of a deferred income tax asset, a valuation allowance is established.

It is our policy to provide for uncertain tax positions and the related interest and penalties based upon management’s assessment of whether a tax benefit is more likely than not to be sustained upon examination by tax authorities. To the extent that the probable tax outcome of these uncertain tax positions changes, such changes in estimate will impact the income tax provision in the period in which such determination is made. At December 31, 2012,2013, we believe we have appropriately accounted for any unrecognized tax positions. To the extent we prevail in matters for which a liability for an unrecognized tax benefit is established or we are required to pay amounts in excess of the liability, our effective tax rate in a given financial statement period may be affected.

Since inception, we have been subject to tax by both federal and state taxing authorities. Until the respective statutes of limitations expire (which may be as much as 20 years while we have unused NOL’s), we are subject to income tax audits in the jurisdictions in which we operate.

Inflation

Inflation has not materially impacted the operations of our Company.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

We have no off-balance sheet arrangements at this time.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

See Note 7 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
 
ITEM 7AQuantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
31

ITEM 7A.

Our short-term investments consist of cash, cash equivalents and overnight investments. As such we do not believe we are exposed to significant interest rate risk. The primary objective of our investment activities is to preserve principal while at the same time maximizing yields without significantly increasing risk. To achieve this objective, we invest in highly liquid overnight money market investments. If a 10% change in interest rates were to have occurred on December 31, 2012,2013, this change would not have had a material effect on the fair value of our investment portfolio as of that date.

ITEM 8.

The information required by this item may be found beginning on page F-1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

ITEM 9.

There were no disagreements with our current accountants on accounting and financial disclosures.

ITEM 9A.

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We have carried out an evaluation, under the supervision of and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO), of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended), as of December 31, 2012.2013. Based upon that evaluation, our CEO and CFO concluded that, as of the end of that period, our disclosure controls and procedures are effective in providing reasonable assurance that (a) the information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and (b) such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our CEO and CFO, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and evaluating our disclosure controls and procedures, our management recognized that any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives, and our management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires us to evaluate annually the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting as of the end of each fiscal year, and to include a management report assessing the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting in all annual reports. There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended December 31, 20122013 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Securities Exchange Act as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, a company’s principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by a company’s board of directors, management and other personnel 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. Our internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that:
 
pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of our assets;
32


provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that our receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of our management and directors; and
 
provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our 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. 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.
 
Our management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2012.2013. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control — Integrated Framework.Framework (2013). Based on our assessment, our management has concluded that, as of December 31, 2012,2013, our internal control over financial reporting is effective based on those criteria.
 
ITEM 9B.

None.
29


Part III

ITEM 10.
ITEM 10.  Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance

BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE OF DIRECTORS

When considering whether directors and nominees have the experience, qualifications, attributes or skills, taken as a whole, to enable the Board of Directors (“Board”) to satisfy its oversight responsibilities effectively in light of the Company’s business and structure, the Governance and Nominating Committee focused primarily on each person’s background and experience as reflected in the information discussed in each of the directors’ individual biographies set forth immediately below.  We believe that our directors provide an appropriate mix of experience and skills relevant to the size and nature of our business.  As more specifically described in such person’s individual biographies set forth below, our directors possess relevant and industry-specific experience and knowledge in the medical, engineering and business fields, as the case may be, which we believe enhances the Board’s ability to oversee, evaluate and direct our overall corporate strategy.  The Governance and Nominating Committee annually reviews and makes recommendations to the Board regarding the composition and size of the Board so that the Board consists of members with the proper expertise, skills, attributes, and personal and professional backgrounds needed by the Board, consistent with applicable regulatory requirements.

The Governance and Nominating Committee believes that all directors, including nominees, should possess the highest personal and professional ethics, integrity, and values, and be committed to representing the long-term interests of our stockholders. The Governance and Nominating Committee will consider criteria including the nominee’s current or recent experience as a senior executive officer, whether the nominee is independent, as that term is defined in existing independence requirements of the NYSE Amex Market and the Securities and Exchange Commission, the business, scientific or engineering experience currently desired on the Board, geography, the nominee’s industry experience, and the nominee’s general ability to enhance the overall composition of the Board.

The Governance and Nominating Committee does not have a formal policy on diversity; however, in recommending directors, the Board and the Committee consider the specific background and experience of the Board members and other personal attributes in an effort to provide a diverse mix of capabilities, contributions and viewpoints which the Board believes enables it to function effectively as the Board of Directors of a company with our size and nature of business.
 
33

Set forth below is information regarding the executive officers, directors, and key employees of Bovie Medical Corporation as of March 18, 2013.14, 2014.

Name PositionDirector Since
Andrew Makrides Executive Chairman of the Board and CEODecember 1982
Robert GershonChief Executive Officer and DirectorDecember 2013
    
J. Robert Saron President, Chief Sales and Marketing Officer and DirectorAugust 1988
 
George Kromer, Jr.Research Analyst and DirectorOctober 1995
    
Michael Norman DirectorSeptember 2004
    
August LentricchiaIan Sheffield DirectorOctober 2007December 2013
    
Moshe Citronowicz Senior Vice PresidentN/A
    
Gary D. Pickett Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer, and SecretaryN/A
    
Michael Geraghty DirectorMarch 2011
    
Lawrence J. Waldman DirectorMarch 2011
Jeff RencherVice President of Sales & MarketingN/A

Directors serve for one-year terms and are elected at the annual stockholders’ meeting.
30


Andrew Makrides, Esq. age 71,72, Executive Chairman of the Board and CEO and member of the Board of Directors, received a Bachelor of Arts degree in Psychology from Hofstra University and a Juris Doctor Degree from Brooklyn Law School. He is a member of the Bar of the State of New York and practiced law from 1968 until joining Bovie Medical Corporation as a co-founder and Executive Vice President and director, in 1982. Mr. Makrides became President of the Company in 1985 and the CEO in December 1998 and has served as such until March 18, 2011 at which point he relinquished his position as President, but remained CEO.CEO until December 2013.  Mr. Makrides employment contract extends to December 31, 2015.2016.  Mr. Makrides has over 29 years of executive experience in the medical industry.

Mr. Gershon, age 47, has over 25 years of healthcare industry experience. On the operations side he ran the largest sales and marketing business at Covidien. With over $1B in P&L responsibility he consistently led an organization of over 600 people to double-digit revenue growth outpacing market category growth and capturing significant market share points during challenging healthcare economic conditions. He also was VP of sales and marketing at Henry Schein ($1.4B shared P&L for medical division/$115M full P&L for dialysis division) and earlier in his career spent over 13 years as a healthcare consultant for Booz, Allen, KPMG and two boutique consultancies where his practice focused on strategic planning, business development and mergers and acquisitions. Mr. Gershon received an MBA from J.L. Kellogg Graduate School of Management at Northwestern University and a BSBA degree from American University. Mr. Gershon’s employment contract extends to December 31, 2015.
J. Robert Saron, age 60,61, President, Chief Sales and Marketing Officer and Director, holds a Bachelor degree in Social and Behavioral Science from the University of South Florida. From 1988 to present Mr. Saron has served as a director of the Company. Mr. Saron has previously served on two industry boards.  He served as both director and president of the Health Care Manufacturing Management Council.  In 2011 Mr. Saron received the Leonard Berke Achievement award for ethics, mentoring, marketing skill, industry knowledge, contributions to the industry and contributions to HMMC.  He also served as a director of the Health Industry Distributors Association Education Foundation. Mr. Saron also received the Health Industry Distributors Association’s highest award in 2008, the Industry Award of Distinction, and in February 2013 was inducted into the Medical Distribution Hall of Fame.  Mr. Saron’s employment contract extends to December 31, 2015. Mr. Saron brings over 34 years of executive marketing and distribution experience in the medical industry.

George Kromer, Jr., age 72, became a director on October 1, 1995. On January 1, 2006, Mr. Kromer accepted an employment position with Bovie Medical Corporation as research analyst for the company in which he still maintains his capacity as a director. Mr. Kromer had been writing for business publications since 1980. In 1976, he received a Master’s Degree in health administration from Long Island University. He was engaged as a Senior Hospital Care Investigator for the City of New York Health & Hospital Corporation from 1966 to 1986. He also holds a Bachelor of Science Degree from Long Island University’s Brooklyn Campus and an Associate in Applied Science Degree from New York City Community College, Brooklyn, New York. Mr. Kromer has over 30 years of business analyst experience with a specialty in the medical industry.
34


Moshe Citronowicz, age 60,61, Senior Vice President came to the United States in 1978, and has worked in a variety of manufacturing and high technology industries. In October 1993, Mr. Citronowicz joined the Company as Vice President of Operations and served as our Chief Operating Officer until November 2011. Currently, he is serving as the Senior Vice President. Mr. Citronowicz’s employment contract extends to December 31, 2015.

Gary D. Pickett, CPA, age 61,62, holds an MBA from the University of Tampa, a BS degree in Accounting from Florida State University, and served five years as a field artillery officer in the United States Army.  Mr. Pickett joined as controller of Bovie in March 2006 and became Chief Financial Officer in October 2006.  During the five years prior to joining Bovie, Mr. Pickett held positions of Director of Financial Systems with Progress Energy Services of Raleigh, NC, Vice President and Controller of Progress Rail Services, a subsidiary of Progress Energy Services in Albertville, AL, each of which were non-affiliated with Bovie.  He has had extensive experience in Sarbanes-Oxley implementation as well as GAAP accounting and SEC Reporting. Mr. Pickett’s employment contract extends to June 2014.2015.

Michael Norman, CPA age 55,56, joined Bovie in 2004.  He manages the CPA firm, Michael Norman, CPA, PC since 1994 specializing in business financial planning as well as governmental and financial auditing. Mr. Norman is a member of the Nassau County Board of Assessors, Treasurer of the Don Monti Memorial Research Foundation and a Glen Cove City Councilman, all located on Long Island, New York. Mr. Norman provides the board with over 20 years of experience as a CPA and also serves as a member of our Audit Committee.

August Lentricchia,Ian Sheffield, age 58, is presently employed by Freedom Tax and Financial Services Bohemia37, currently serves as a Registered Representative since 2001.Vice President at Great Point Partners, Greenwich, CT. As part of his investment functions, he leads Great Point Partners' medical devices and diagnostics investing efforts in public companies. From 2008 through 2011, prior to joining Great Point, he served in various capacities at Versant Ventures, and prior to 2011 at Medtronic, and Procter & Gamble. He isholds a Series 7 securities licensed Registered RepresentativeB.S. from Miami University and investment consultant of HD Vest Investment Services. Additionally, Mr. Lentricchia is a licensed life, accident and health, and variable annuity agent in New York State, as well as a registered tax return preparer with the IRS. He received a BA degreean M.B.A. from the University of Arizona in 1977 and has received a Masters degree in Education from Dowling College in 2004. Mr. Lentricchia has over 25 years of financial and investment experienceHarvard Business School and also serves onas a member of our Audit Committee.

Lawrence J. Waldman, CPA age 66,67, has served as a director since March 2011 and is a certified public accountant. Mr. Waldman is currently the Partner-in-Charge of EisnerAmper LLP Commercial Audit Practice Development of the accounting firm EisnerAmper LLP.  He has over thirty-five years of experience in public accounting, including twenty-five years experience as an audit partner serving a wide range of clients.  Prior to joining EisnerAmper LLP, Mr. Waldman was the Partner-in-Charge of Commercial Audit Practice Development for Holtz Rubenstein Reminick, LLP. Mr. Waldman was the Managing Partner of the Long Island office of KPMG LLP from 1994 through 2006, the accounting firm where he started at in 1972.   Mr. Waldman is also thea former Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Long Island Power Authority and servesserved on the Finance and Audit Committee of the Board of Trustees.  He is currently the Treasurer of the Long Island Association as well as a member of its Board of Directors and Chairman of the Finance Committee.  In addition, Mr. Waldman is a member of the Board of Directors and Treasurer of each of the Long Island Angel Network and the Advanced Energy research Center at Stony Brook University and a member of the Dean’s Advisory Board of the Hofstra University Frank G. Zarb School of Business.  Mr. Waldman received his bachelor’s degree and MBA from Hofstra University where he is also an adjunct professor. Mr. Waldman also serves on our Audit Committee as its financial expert.

Michael Geraghty, age 65,66, has served as a director since March 2011 and is the Executive Vice President of Global Sales at Optos, Inc., a developer and manufacturer of retinal imaging devices for screening, detection and diagnosis of eye related conditions.  From 2005 through 2008, he was the President of International Sales at Gyrus Acmi where he first started in 2000 as Senior Vice President of Sales for Gyrus Medical.  Prior to this, Mr. Geraghty was the Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Everest Medical, Inc. and before that was the Director of Marketing for Advanced Products at Arthrocare Corporation.  Mr. Geraghty specializes in building independent direct sales teams in the medical device industry and has extensive domestic and international sales and marketing experience.  He received his bachelor’s degree from St. Mary’s University and graduate degree in Executive Sales Management from the University of Minnesota.
 
 
3531


Jeff Rencher, age 45, has workedInvolvement in the medical device industry for twenty years.  He began as a surgical device representative in 1993 and in 2000 was promoted to Regional Director for Gyrus Medical (currently Olympus Surgical).  In 2004 he was recruited by the CEO and Board of Directors of Inlet Medical in Minneapolis, MN as Vice President of Sales.  Following the acquisition of Inlet Medical by Cooper Surgical, Mr. Rencher was tasked to head the sales and marketing efforts of Opticon Medical which was acquired in 2010.  He joined Bovie Medical in 2010 as Vice President of Sales and Marketing for Surgical Products.  During his tenure at both Inlet and Opticon, he built a national sales force, created marketing material, coordinated medical studies with leading physicians and generated new sales through the sales channels he has developed over his multiple years in the industry.  He holds a BS in Biology from Tulane University, an Emergency Medical Technician Certificate and has completed a course in Medical Industry Management at St. Thomas University in Minneapolis, MN.Certain Legal Proceedings
None

Independent Board Members

The Board currently has four independent members, Michael Norman, August Lentricchia,Ian Sheffield, Michael Geraghty, and Lawrence Waldman, thatwho meet the existing independence requirements of the NYSE AmexMKT Market and the Securities and Exchange Commission and represent a majority of the board.

Board Leadership

The Board has no formal policy with respect to separation of the positions of Chairman and CEO or with respect to whether the Chairman should be a member of management or an independent director, and believes that these are matters that should be discussed and determined by the Board from time to time.  Currently,On December 13, 2013, Andrew Makrides servesresigned from his position as our ChairmanChief Executive Officer of the Company and CEO. GivenRobert Gershon was appointed as Chief Executive Officer of the fact thatCompany. Mr. Makrides, in his capacity as our CEOGershon is tasked with the responsibility of implementing our corporate strategy, we believe he is best suited for leading discussions, at the Board level, regarding performance relative to our corporate strategy, and this discussion accounts for a significant portion of the time devoted at our Board meetings.

Risk Management

The Board believes that risk management is an important component of the Company’s corporate strategy. While we assess specific risks at our committee levels, the Board, as a whole, oversees our risk management process, and discusses and reviews with management major policies with respect to risk assessment and risk management. The Board is regularly informed through its interactions with management and committee reports about risks we face in the course of our business. Finally, the Board believes the combined Chairman and CEO role assists us in our implementation of major policies addressing our risks. Our Audit Committee also takes an active role in risk assessment and risk management.
 
Audit Committee

The Audit Committee assists the Board in its general oversight of our financial reporting, internal controls, and audit functions, and is directly responsible for the appointment, compensation and oversight of the work of our independent registered public accounting firm. The Audit Committee reviews and discusses with management and our independent accountants the annual audited and quarterly financial statements (including the disclosures under “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”), reviews the integrity of the financial reporting processes, both internal and external, reviews the qualifications, performance and independence of our independent accountants, and prepares the Audit Committee Report included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K in accordance with rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Audit Committee has the power to investigate any matter brought to its attention within the scope of its duties. It also has the authority to retain counsel and advisors to fulfill its responsibilities and duties. The Audit Committee also acts as a qualified legal compliance committee.
36


Our Audit Committee consists of three independent members of the Board of Directors, Michael Norman CPA, August Lentricchia,Ian Sheffield, and Lawrence Waldman, CPA. As a smaller reporting company, we are required to have at least two independent members comprising our Audit Committee in accordance with Rule 10A-3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the rules of the NYSE Amex Exchange.  During 20122013 Lawrence Waldman, CPA served as the Audit Committee Chairman and financial expert. The Audit Committee meets as often as it determines necessary but not less frequently than once every fiscal quarter.

AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT
Our Audit Committee is composed of “independent” directors, as determined in accordance with Rule 10A-3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Audit Committee operates pursuant to a written charter adopted by the Board of Directors.
As described more fully in its charter, the purpose of the Audit Committee is to assist the Board of Directors with its oversight responsibilities regarding the integrity of our financial statements, our compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, assessing the independent registered public accounting firm’s qualifications, independence and performance for us. Management is responsible for preparation, presentation and integrity of our financial statements as well as our financial reporting process, accounting policies, internal accounting controls and disclosure controls and procedures. The independent registered public accounting firm is responsible for performing an independent audit of our consolidated financial statements in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and to issue a report thereon. The Audit Committee’s responsibility is to monitor and oversee these processes. The following is the Audit Committee’s report submitted to the Board of Directors for 2012.
As part of its oversight of the Company’s financial statements, the Audit Committee reviews and discusses with both management and the Company’s independent register public accountants all annual and quarterly financial statements prior to their issuance.  During fiscal 2012, management advised the Audit Committee that each set of financial statements reviewed had been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and management reviewed significant accounting and disclosure issues with the Audit Committee.  These reviews included discussion with the independent registered public accountants of matters required to be discussed pursuant to Public Account Oversight Board AU 380 (Communication With Audit Committees), including the quality of the Company’s accounting principles, the reasonableness of significant judgments and the clarity of disclosures in financial statements.  The Audit Committee also discussed with Kingery & Crouse, P.A. matters relating to its independence, including a review of audit and non-audit fees and the written disclosures and letter from Kingery & Crouse, P.A. to the Audit Committee pursuant to applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the independent accountants’ communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence.
In addition, the Audit Committee has met separately with management and with Kingery & Crouse, P. A.
Based on the review and discussions referred to above, the Audit Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the audited financial statements be included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 for filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The foregoing Audit Committee Report shall not be deemed incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and shall not otherwise be deemed filed under these acts, except to the extent we specifically incorporate by reference into such filings.

Governance and Nominating Committee

The Governance and Nominating Committee is responsible for matters relating to the corporate governance of our company and the nomination of members of the board and committees thereof. During 2012,2013, our Governance and Nominating Committee consisted of three independent members of the Board of Directors, Michael Norman CPA who serves as Chairman, August Lentricchia,Lawrence Waldman, and Michael Geraghty. The Governance and Nominating Committee meets as often as it determines necessary, but not less than once a year.
 
 
3732

 
Compensation Committee

The Compensation Committee is responsible for overseeing our compensation and employee benefit plans (including those involving the issuance of our equity securities) and practices, including formulating, evaluating, and approving the compensation of our executive officers and reviewing and recommending to the full Board of Directors the compensation of our Chief Executive Officer.  During 2012, our Compensation Committee consisted of three independent members of the Board of Directors, Michael Norman CPA, August LentricchiaIan Sheffield who serves as Chairman, and Lawrence Waldman, CPA. The Compensation Committee meets as often as it determines necessary, but not less than once a year.

Code of Ethics

On March 30, 2004 Bovie adopted a Code of Ethics for executive employees.

A copy of the code of ethics which expressly includes the CEO and CFO, will be provided without charge to any person upon request to Bovie Medical Corporation, 734 Walt Whitman Road, Melville, NY 11747,5115 Ulmerton Rd., Clearwater, Florida, 33760 Attn: Andrew Makrides.Gary Pickett.

ITEM 11.
ITEM 11.  Executive Compensation Discussion and Analysis

General Compensation Philosophy

The primary objective of our compensation program for employees, including our compensation program for executive officers, is to attract, retain, and motivate qualified individuals and reward them in a manner that is fair to all stockholders. We strive to provide incentives for every employee that rewards them for their contribution to the Company.

Our compensation program is designed to be competitive with other employment opportunities and to align the interests of all employees, including executive officers, with the long-term interests of our stockholders. Historically, for our executive officers, we link a much higher percentage of total compensation to incentive compensation such as stock based compensation than we do for other employees.

With these objectives in mind, our Board has built executive and non-executive compensation programs that consist of two principal elements - base salary and grants of stock options and/or shares of restricted stock.

Compensation Program
 
Base Salary
 
We pay base salaries to our Named Executive Officers (as defined below) in order to provide a consistent, minimum level of pay that sustained individual performance warrants. We also believe that a competitive annual base salary is important to attract and retain an appropriate caliber of talent for each position over time.

The annual base salaries of our Named Executive Officers are determined by our Compensation Committee and approved by the Board of Directors. All salary decisions are based on each Named Executive Officer's level of responsibility, experience and recent and past performance, as determined by the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee does not benchmark its base salaries in any way, nor do they presently employ the services of a compensation consultant.
33


Stock Options
 
The second component of executive compensation is equity grants which have mainly come in the form of stock options. We believe that equity ownership in our Company is important to provide our Named Executive Officers with long-term incentives to better align interests of executives with the interests of stockholders and build value for our stockholders. In addition, the equity compensation is designed to attract and retain the executive management team. Stock options have value only if the stock price increases over time and, therefore, provide executives with an incentive to build Bovie's value. This characteristic ensures that the Named Executive Officers have a meaningful portion of their compensation tied to future stock price increases and rewards management for long-term strategic planning through the resulting enhancement of the stock price.
 
38

Stock option awards to Named Executive Officers are entirely discretionary. The CEO and Director of Strategic Development recommend to the Compensation Committee which individuals should be awarded stock options. The Compensation Committee considers the prior contribution of these individuals and their expected future contributions to our growth then formulates and presents the recommended allocation of stock option awards to the Board of Directors for approval. The Board of Directors approves or, if necessary, modifies the Committee’s recommendations.
 
Perquisites and Other Benefits
 
Our Named Executive Officers are eligible for the same health and welfare programs and benefits as the rest of our employees in their respective locations. In addition, our CEO, Chairman of the Board and President and Chief Sales and Marketing Officer, and Senior Vice President each receive an automobile allowance of approximately $6,000, $6,000, $6,000 and $3,000$6,000 per year respectively.
 
Our Named Executive Officers are entitled to participate in and receive employer contributions to Bovie's 401(k) Savings Plan. However, during January of 2009 management made the decision to suspend the employer 401(k) match, which as of December 31, 20122013 has not been re-instated. For more information on employer contributions to the 401(k) Savings Plan see the Summary Compensation Table and its footnotes.
 
Tax and Accounting Considerations

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), places a limit of $1,000,000 on the amount of compensation that we may deduct as a business expense in any year with respect to each of our most highly paid executives unless, among other things, such compensation is performance-based and has been approved by stockholders. The non-performance-based compensation paid to our executive officers for the 2012 fiscal year did not exceed the $1 million limit per executive officer. Accounting considerations also play an important role in the design of our executive compensation program. Accounting rules, such as FASB ASC Topic 718-10-10, Share-Based Payment, require us to expense the cost of our stock option grants which reduces the amount of our reported profits. Because of option expensing and the impact of dilution on our stockholders, we pay close attention to the number and value of the shares underlying stock options we grant.
 
 
3934

 
Compensation of Named Executive Officers

The following table sets forth the compensation paid to each of our Named Executive Officers for the three years ended December 31, 20122013 for services to our Company in all capacities:
 
Summary Compensation Table

Name
And
Principal
Position
Year 
Salary
($)
  
Bonus
($)
  
Stock
Awards
($)
  
Option
Awards
($)
*
  
Non-
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Compensa- tion
Earnings
($)
  
Change
in
Pension
Value and
Nonqual-
 ified
Deferred
 compen-
 sation
Earnings
($)
  
All
Other
Compen-
Sation
($)
  
Total
($)
 
(a)(b) (c)  (d)  (e)  (f)  (g)  (h)  (i)  (j) 
Andrew Makrides2012 $209,791   --   --  $28,500(18)  --   --  $18,876(1) $257,167 
Chairman of the2011 $205,252   --   --   --   --   --  $18,823(9) $224,075 
Board and CEO2010 $205,252   --   --   --   --   --  $19,542(6) $224,794 
                                  
Gary D.2012 $118,380   --   --  $9,500(8)  --   --  $397(2) $128,277 
Pickett2011 $109,331   --   --   --   --   --  $374(15) $109,705 
CFO, Treasurer, Secretary2010 $101,970   --   --  $9,800(7)  --   --  $374(10) $112,144 
                                  
J. Robert Saron2012 $297,143   --   --  $28,500(19)  --   --  $22,008(3) $347,651 
President,  2011 $290,651   --   --   --   --   --  $19,321(12) $309,972 
Chief Sales and Marketing Officer and
Director
2010 $290,651   --   --   --   --   --  $9,159(11) $299,810 
                                  
Moshe2012 $199,922   --   --  $28,500(20)  --   --  $14,150(4) $242,572 
Citronowicz2011 $212,199   --   --   --   --   --  $16,534(14) $228,733 
Senior Vice President2010 $213,549   --   --   --   --   --  $15,327(13) $228,876 
                                  
Jeff Rencher2012 $160,064   --   --  $164,500(21)  --   --  $15,698(17) $340,262 
V.P. Sales &2011 $150,000   --   --   --   --   --  $12,982(5) $162,982 
Marketing2010 $70,000(16)  --   --  $19,500(22)  --   --  $538(23) $90,038 
 
Name And
Principal Position
 Year 
Salary
($)
  
Bonus
($)
  
Stock
Awards
($)
  
Option
Awards
($)
#
   
Non-
Equity
Incentive
Plan
Compensa- tion
Earnings
($)
  
Change
in
Pension
Value and
Nonqual-
 ified
Deferred
 compen-
 sation
Earnings
($)
  
All
Other
Compen-
Sation
($)
  
Total
($)
 
(a) (b) (c)  (d)  (e)  (f)   (g)  (h)  (i)  (j) 
                                     
Robert Gershon* 2013 $6,731  $50,000  $--  $572,250(1) $--  $--  $121(2) $629,102 
CEO and 2012  --   --   --   --    --   --   --    -- 
Director 2011  --   --   --   --    --   --   --    -- 
                                     
Gary D. 2013 $120,970   --   --   --    --   --  $397(3) $121,324 
Pickett 2012 $118,380   --   --  $9,500(4)  --   --  $397(5) $128,277 
CFO, Treasurer, Secretary 2011 $109,331   --   --   --    --   --  $374(6) $109,705 
                                     
Andrew Makrides** 2013 $215,515   --   --   --    --   --  $15,793(7) $231,308 
Executive Chairman 2012 $209,791   --   --  $28,500(8)  --   --  $18,876(9) $257,167 
of the Board 2011 $205,252   --   --   --    --   --  $18,823(10) $224,075 
                                     
J. Robert Saron 2013 $305,184   --   --   --    --   --  $20,557(11) $325,741 
President, Chief Sales & 2012 $297,143   --   --  $28,500(12)  --   --  $22,008(13) $347,651 
Marketing Officer & Director 2011 $290,651   --   --   --    --   --  $19,321(14) $309,972 
                                     
Moshe 2013 $204,775   --   --   --    --   --  $14,807(15) $219,582 
Citronowicz 2012 $199,922   --   --  $28,500(16)  --   --  $14,150(17) $242,572 
Senior Vice President 2011 $212,199   --   --   --    --   --  $16,534(18) $228,733 


___________
*  Assumed role as CEO on December 13, 2013
**  CEO until December 13, 2013
# These columns represent the grant date fair value of the awards as calculated in accordance with FASB ASC 718 (Stock Compensation).  Pursuant to SEC rule changes effective February 28, 2010, we are required to reflect the total grant date fair values of the option grants in the year of grant, rather than the portion of this amount that was recognized for financial statement reporting purposes in a given fiscal year which was required under the prior SEC rules, resulting in a change to the amounts reported in prior Annual Reports.

(1) This amount includes: car allowance of $6,310; life insurance premiums of $456; and health insurance premiums of $12,110.

(2) This amount includes: life insurance premiums of $397.

(3) This amount includes: car allowance of $6,310; life insurance premiums of $512; and health insurance premiums of $15,186.
 
 
4035


(1)  On December 13, 2013, a total of 750,000 options were granted to Mr. Gershon with a fair value of $0.763 per option.
 
(4) This amount includes: car allowance of $1,395; life insurance premiums of $512; and health insurance premiums of $12,243.
(2)  This amount includes a car allowance of $121.34.

(5) This amount includes: life insurance premiums of $479; and health insurance premiums of $12,503.
(3)  This amount includes life insurance premiums of $397.

(6) This amount includes: car allowance of $6,310; life insurance premiums of $440; and health insurance premiums of $12,792.
(4)  On July 12, 2012 a total of 10,000 options were granted to Mr. Pickett with a fair value of $0.95 per option.

(7) In 2010 a total of 10,000 options were granted to Mr. Pickett on July 8, 2010 with a fair value of $0.98 per option.
(5)  This amount includes life insurance premiums of $397.

(8) On July 12, 2012 a total of 10,000 options were granted to Mr. Pickett with a fair value of $0.95 per option.
(6)  This amount includes life insurance premiums of $374.

(9) This amount includes: car allowance of $6,309; life insurance premiums of $441; and health insurance premiums of $12,073.
(7)  This Amount Includes: car allowance of $6,310; life insurance premium of $456; and health insurance premiums of $9,027.

(10) This amount includes life insurance premiums of $374.
(8)  On July 12, 2012 a total of 30,000 options were granted to Mr. Makrides with a fair value of $0.95 per option.

(11) This amount includes: car allowance of $6,310; life insurance premiums of $479; and health insurance premiums of $2,370.
(9)  This Amount Includes: car allowance of $6,310; life insurance premium of $456; and health insurance premiums of $12,110.

(12) This amount includes: car allowance of $6,309; life insurance premiums of $479; and health insurance premiums of $12,533.
(10)  This Amount Includes: car allowance of $6,309; life insurance premium of $441; and health insurance premiums of $12,073.

(13) This amount includes: car allowance of $6,310; life insurance premiums of $479; and health insurance premiums of $8,538.
(11)  This Amount Includes: car allowance of $6,310; life insurance premium of $512; and health insurance premiums of   $13,735.

(14) This amount includes: car allowance of $5,824; life insurance premiums of $479; and health insurance premiums of $10,231.
(12)  On July 12, 2012 a total of 30,000 options were granted to Mr. Saron with a fair value of $0.95 per option.

(15) This amount includes: life insurance premiums of $374.
(13)  This Amount Includes: car allowance of $6,310; life insurance premium of $512; and health insurance premiums of $15,186.

(16) This amount represents a partial year as Mr. Rencher was hired on June 28, 2010.
(14)  This Amount Includes: car allowance of $6,309; life insurance premium of $479; and health insurance premiums of $12,533.

(17) This amount includes: life insurance premiums of $511 and health insurance premiums of $15,187.
(15)  This Amount Includes: car allowance of $3,155; life insurance premium of $512; and health insurance premiums of $11,140.

(18) On July 12, 2012 a total of 30,000 options were granted to Mr. Makrides
(16)  On July 12, 2012 a total of 30,000 options were granted to Mr. Citronowicz with a fair value of $0.95 per option.

(19) On July 12, 2012 a total of 30,000 options were granted to Mr. Saron with a fair value of $0.95 per option.
(17)  This Amount Includes: car allowance of $1,395; life insurance premium of $512; and health insurance premiums of $12,243.

(20) On July 12, 2012 a total of 30,000 options were granted to Mr. Citronowicz with a fair value of $0.95 per option.

(18)  This Amount Includes: car allowance of $5,824; life insurance premium of $479; and health insurance premiums of $10,231.
(21) On May 21, 2012, July 12, 2012 and October 8, 2012 options of 20,000, 10,000 and 100,000 respectively  were granted to Mr. Rencher.  The three issuances had a fair value per option of $1.05, $0.95 and $1.34 respectively.

(22) On June 25, 2010 a total of 30,000 options were granted to Mr. Rencher with a fair value of $0.65 per option.

(23) This amount includes: life insurance premiums of $538.

 
4136


Employment Agreements and Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control

At December 31, 2012,2013, employment contracts with Mr. Makrides, Mr. Gershon, Mr. Saron, and Mr. Citronowicz, which are set to expire in December 2016 for Mr. Makrides and December 31, 2015 for the others, contain an automatic extension for a period of one year after the initial term unless we provide the executives with appropriate 60 days written notice pursuant to the contracts.  The employment agreements provide, among other things, that the executive may be terminated as follows:

 (a)Upon the death of the executive, in which case the executive’s estate shall be paid the basic annual compensation due the employee pro-rated through the date of death.

 (b)By the resignation of the executive at any time upon at least thirty (30) days prior written notice to Bovie in which case Bovie shall be obligated to pay the employee the basic annual compensation due him pro-rated to the effective date of termination.

 (c)By Bovie, “for cause” if during the term of the employment agreement the employee violates the non-competition provisions of his employment agreement, or is found guilty in a court of law of any crime of moral turpitude in which case the contract would be terminated and provisions for future compensation forfeited.

 (d)By Bovie, without cause, with the majority approval of the Board of Directors, for Mr. Makrides, Mr. Gershon, Mr. Saron, and Mr. Citronowicz at any time upon at least thirty (30) days prior written notice to the executive. In this case Bovie shall be obligated to pay the executive compensation in effect at such time, including all bonuses, accrued or prorated, and expenses up to the date of termination. Thereafter for Messrs Makrides, Saron, and Citronowicz for the period remaining under the contract, Bovie shall pay the executive the salary in effect at the time of termination payable weekly until the end of their contract.

 (e)If Bovie fails to meet its obligations to the executive on a timely basis, or if there is a change in the control of Bovie, the executive may elect to terminate his employment agreement. Upon any such termination or breach of any of its obligations under the employment agreement, Bovie shall pay the executiveMr. Makrides, Mr. Saron and Mr. Citronowicz a lump sum severance equal to three times the annual salary and bonus in effect the month preceding such termination or breach as well as any other sums which may be due under the terms of the employment agreement up to the date of termination. Mr. Gershon shall be paid two times his annual salary and bonus in effect the month preceding such termination or breach as well as any other sums which may be due under the terms of the employment agreement up to the date of termination.

We have an employment contract with Mr. Pickett to serve as Chief Financial Officer which has a current expiration date of June 2014.2015.  In the event of a change of control, the contract provides that Mr. Pickett will receive salary and bonus in effect up to the date of the remaining portion of the contract.

Additionally, we have an employment agreement with Mr. Rencher to serve as V.P. of Sales & Marketing which has a current expiration date of September 2013. In the event of a change of control, Mr. Rencher’s contract provides that he receive a lump sum severance payment in the amount of $160,000.

There are no other employment contracts that have non-cancelable terms in excess of one year.
 
42

Grants of Plan-BasedEquity Based Awards
 
NameGrant Date 
All Other Option
Awards:
Number of Securities
Underlying Options
  
Exercise or Base
Price of Option
Awards
($/Sh)
***
  
Grant Date Fair Value
of Stock and Option
Awards
($)
 
(a)(b) (c)  (d)  (e) 
Andrew MakridesJuly 12, 2012  30,000  $2.54  $28,500 
Gary PickettJuly 12, 2012  10,000  $2.54  $9,500 
J. Rob SaronJuly 12, 2012  30,000  $2.54  $28,500 
Moshe CitronowiczJuly 12, 2012  30,000  $2.54  $28,500 
Jeffery RencherJuly 12, 2012  10,000  $2.54  $9,500 
Jeffery RencherMay 21, 2012  20,000  $2.79  $21,000 
Jeffery RencherOctober 8, 2012  100,000  $3.79  $134,000 
Name Grant Date 
All Other Option
Awards:
Number of Securities
Underlying Options
  
Exercise or Base
Price of Option
Awards
($/Sh)
***
  
Grant Date Fair Value
of Stock and Option
Awards
($)
 
(a) (b) (c)  (d)  (e) 
               
Robert Gershon December 13, 2013  750,000  $2.09  $572,500 
 
Options Exercises During Fiscal 20122013

There were no options exercised during the year ended December 31, 20122013 by the Named Executive Officers.
37

 
Outstanding Equity Awards
 
The following table presents information with respect to each unexercised stock option held by our Named Executive Officers as of December 31, 2012:2013:

 Outstanding Equity Awards at 12/31/12 Outstanding Equity Awards at 12/31/13 
Name 
# of Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(# Exercisable)
  
# of Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(# Unexercisable)
  
Option
Exercise
Price
($/sh)
 
Option
Expiration
Date 10 Years
After Grant
Date
 
# of Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(# Exercisable)
 
# of Securities
Underlying
Unexercised
Options
(# Unexercisable)
 
Option
Exercise
Price
($/sh)
 
Option
Expiration
Date 10 Years
After Grant
Date
 
Andrew Makrides  25,000   --   3.25 9/29/2013  25,000   --   3.25 9/29/2013 
  25,000   --   2.13 9/23/2014  25,000   --   2.13 9/23/2014 
  25,000   --   2.25 5/5/2015  25,000   --   2.25 5/5/2015 
  --   30,000   2.54 7/12/2022  6,000   24,000   2.54 7/12/2022 
J. Robert Saron  12,500   --   3.25 9/29/2013  12,500   --   3.25 9/29/2013 
  12,500   --   2.13 9/23/2014  12,500   --   2.13 9/23/2014 
  12,500   --   2.25 5/5/2015  12,500   --   2.25 5/5/2015 
  --   30,000   2.54 7/12/2022  6,000   24,000   2.54 7/12/2022 
Moshe Citronowicz  --   30,000   2.54 7/12/2022  6,000   24,000   2.54 7/12/2022 
Gary Pickett
  17,143   2,857   8.66 1/12/2017  17,143   2,857   8.66 1/12/2017 
  4,286   714   7.10 3/29/2017  4,286   714   7.10 3/29/2017 
  5,357   7,143   8.32 10/26/2019  7,143   5,357   8.32 10/26/2019 
  2,587   7,413   2.46 7/08/2020  4,286   5,714   2.46 7/08/2020 
  --   10,000   2.54 7/12/2022  2,000   8,000   2.54 7/12/2022 
Jeff Rencher  --   30,000   6.00 6/25/2020
  --   20,000   2.79 05/21/2022
  --   10,000   2.54 7/12/2022
  --   100,000   3.79 10/08/2022
Robert Gershon -- 750,000 2.09 12/13/2023 
 
43

Compensation of Non-Employee Directors

The following is a table showing the director compensation for the year ended December 31, 2012:2013:

Name 
Fees
Earned
Or Paid
In Cash
($)
  
Stock
Awards
($)
  
Option
Awards
($)
***
  
Non-Equity
Incentive
Plan
Compensa-
tion
($)
  
Change in Pension
Value and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
($)
  
All
Other
Compensa-
tion
($)
  
Total
($)
  
Fees
Earned
Or Paid
In Cash
($)
  
Stock
Awards
($)
  
Option
Awards
($)
***
  
Non-Equity
Incentive
Plan
Compensa-
tion
($)
  
Change in Pension
Value and
Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
Earnings
($)
  
All
Other
Compensa-
tion
($)
  
Total
($)
 
(a) (b)  (c)  (d)  (e)  (f)  (g)  (h)  (b)  (c)  (d)  (e)  (f)  (g)  (h) 
                      
Lawrence       $6,880(1)                   $10,920(1)           
Waldman $13,000   0  $18,720(2)  0   0   0  $38,600  $21,500   0  $17,450(2) 0   0   0  $49,870 
Michael         $5,160(3)                         $9,100(3)               
Norman $4,000   0  $3,120(4)  0   0   0  $12,280  $3,500   0  $6,980(4) 0   0   0  $19,580 
August         $5,160(5)                         $9,100(5)               
Lentricchia $4,000   0  $3,120(6)  0   0   0  $12,280 
Michael         $5,160(7)                
Geraghty $3,000   0  $3,120(8)  0   0   0  $11,280 
Steve
MacLaren *
 $1,500   0  $7,800(9)  0   0   0  $9,300 
Greg
Konesky *
 $1,500   0  $7,800(10)  0   0   0  $9,300 
Lentricchia* $3,500   0  $6,980(6) 0   0   0  $19,580 
Michael Geraghty
 $3,500   0  $9,100(7) 0   0   0  $12,600 
Ian Sheffield ** $0   0  $0   0   0   0  $0 
_______
*Mr. MacLaren and Mr. Konesky resigned from the board in March of 2012.
*Mr. Lentricchia resigned from the board in December 2013.

**Mr. Sheffield was appointed to the Board in December 2013.
***
***These columns represent the grant date fair value of the awards as calculated in accordance with FASB ASC 718 (Stock Compensation).  Pursuant to SEC rule changes effective February 28, 2010, we are required to reflect the total grant date fair values of the option grants in the year of grant, rather than the portion of this amount that was recognized for financial statement reporting purposes in a given fiscal year which was required under the prior SEC rules, resulting in a change to the amounts reported in prior Annual Reports.

38

 
(1)
On May 21, 2012, 8,000July 16, 2013, 12,000 ten year stock options with an exercise price of $2.79$2.97 and calculated option fair value of $0.86$0.91 were granted to Mr. Waldman.
 
(2)
On July 12, 2012 24,000December 9, 2013 25,000 ten year stock options with an exercise price of $2.54$2.20 and calculated option fair value of $0.78$0.698 were granted to Mr. Waldman.
 
(3)
On May 21, 2012, 6,000July 16, 2013, 10,000 ten year stock options with an exercise price of $2.79$2.97 and calculated option fair value of $0.86$0.91 were granted to Mr. Norman.
 
(4)
On July 12, 2012 4,000December 9, 2013 10,000 ten year stock options with an exercise price of $2.54$2.20 and calculated option fair value of $0.78$0.698 were granted to Mr. Norman.
 
(5)
On May 21, 2012, 6,000July 16, 2013, 10,000 ten year stock options with an exercise price of $2.79$2.97 and calculated option fair value of $0.86$0.91 were granted to Mr. Lentricchia.
 
(6)
On July 12, 2012 4,000December 9, 2013 10,000 ten year stock options with an exercise price of $2.54$2.20 and calculated option fair value of $0.78$0.698 were granted to Mr. Lentricchia.
 
(7)
On May 21, 2012, 6,000 ten year stock options with an exercise price of $2.79 and calculated option fair value of $0.86 were granted to Mr. Geraghty.
(8)
On July 12, 2012 4,000 ten year stock options with an exercise price of $2.54 and calculated option fair value of $0.78 were granted to Mr. Geraghty.
(9)
On July 12, 201216, 2013, 10,000 ten year stock options with an exercise price of $2.54$2.97 and calculated option fair value of $0.78$0.91 were granted to Mr. MacLaren as compensation for past services as a director.Geraghty.
(10)
On July 12, 2012 10,000 ten year stock options with an exercise price of $2.54 and calculated option fair value of $0.78 were granted to Mr. Konesky as compensation for past services as a director.

44


Directors' compensation is determined by the Board of Directors based upon recommendations from the Compensation Committee. A Board member’s service year begins upon stockholders approval at the annual meeting and continues until the next annual meeting. The Board periodically grants directors stock options in order to assure that they have proper incentives and an opportunity for an ownership interest in common with other stockholders. In 2011, the Board decided to add cash payments as a compensation method. Independent board members receive $500 per meeting for attendance in any and all telephonic meetings for that month and $1,000 per meeting for attendance at any in person board meetings for that month. In addition, the Chairman of our Audit Committee receives a monthly stipend of $1,500,$3,000, plus a one-time grant of 20,00025,000 stock options.

Our Board of Directors presently consists of Robert Gershon, J. Robert Saron, Andrew Makrides, George Kromer, Jr., Michael Norman, August Lentricchia,Ian Sheffield, Lawrence Waldman, and Michael Geraghty.

In 2003, the Board of Directors adopted and stockholders approved Bovie’s 2003 Executive and Employee Stock Option Plan covering a total of 1,200,000 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of options to be granted under the Plan.  In 2001, the Board of Directors adopted the 2001 Executive and Employee Stock Option Plan which reserved for issuance 1,200,000 stock options.

On October 30, 2007, stockholders approved and the Board of Directors adopted an amendment to the 2003 Executive and Employee Stock Option Plan to increase the maximum aggregate number of shares of common stock reserved for issuance under the 2003 Plan from 1.2 million shares (already reserved against outstanding options) to 1.7 million shares, or an increase of 500,000 shares of common stock for future issuance pursuant to the terms of the plan. Except for the increase in the number of shares covered by the plan, the plan remains otherwise unchanged from its present status. In 2011, the Board of Directors granted 25,000 options to purchase a like number of shares of common stock.

In July of 2012, the shareholders approved the 2012 Executive and Employee Stock Option Plan covering a total of 750,000 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of options to be granted under the plan. At December 31, 20122013 approximately 416,500269,500 remain to be issued in this plan.

There have been no changes in the pricing of any options previously or currently awarded.
Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors is responsible for determining the compensation of executive officers of the Company, as well as compensation awarded pursuant to the Company’s equity incentive plans.

Until December 13, 2013, our Compensation Committee consisted of three independent members of the Board of Directors, August Lentricchia who serves as Chairman, Michael Norman CPA, and Lawrence Waldman. Following the resignation of Mr. August Lentricchia and the appointment of Ian Sheffield to the Board of Directors on December 13, 2013, our Compensation Committee consisted of three independent members of the Board of Directors, Michael Norman CPA, Ian Sheffield who serves as Chairman, and Lawrence Waldman.

No member of the Compensation Committee is or has been an officer or employee of the Company or any of its subsidiaries. In addition, no member of the Compensation Committee had any relationships with the Company or any other entity that require disclosure under the proxy rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC.

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

Our Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K with management. Based on our Compensation Committee’s review of and the discussions with management with respect to the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, our Compensation Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in our Proxy Statement and in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 20122013 for filing with the SEC.   During 2012,the majority of 2013, our Compensation Committee consisted of three independent members of the Board of Directors, Michael Norman CPA, August Lentricchia who serves as Chairman, and Lawrence Waldman, CPA.  Ian Sheffield, our independent director, replaced August Lentricchia upon his resignation from the Board in December of 2013.

ITEM 12.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

See “ITEM 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder Matters”.
45

 
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners

The following table sets forth certain information as of March 18, 2013,14, 2014, with respect to the beneficial ownership of the Company’s common stock by its executive officers, directors, all persons known by the Company to be the beneficial owners of more than 5% of its outstanding shares and by all officers and directors as a group.
 
 Number of Shares  
   Nature ofPercentage of
Name and AddressTitleOwned (i)OwnershipOwnership (i)
     
RENN Universal Growth Investment TrustCommon2,309,542(xiii)2,309,542 (xii)Beneficial13.0%
Frost National Bank    
8201 Preston Road, Ste 540    
Dallas, Texas 75206    
     
Andrew Makrides
Common674,213(ii)Beneficial3.8%
734 Walt Whitman Road    
Melville, NY 11746Andrew MakridesCommon680,213 (ii)Beneficial3.8%
5115 Ulmerton Rd.    
George KromerCommon326,508(iii)Beneficial1.8%
P.O. Box 188
Farmingville, NY 11738
J. Robert SaronCommon424,819(iv)Beneficial2.4%
5115 Ulmerton Rd.    
Clearwater, FL 33760    
Mike NormanCommon85,001(vi)Beneficial0.5%
734 Walt Whitman Road
Melville, NY 11746    
     
Moshe CitronowiczRobert GershonCommon406,504 (v)-- (iii)Beneficial2.3%0.0%
5115 Ulmerton Rd.    
Clearwater, FL 33760    
    
Gary PickettJ. Robert SaronCommon29,373 (vii)430,819 (iv)Beneficial0.2%2.4%
5115 Ulmerton Rd.
    
Clearwater, FL 33760    
August LentricchiaCommon14,100 (viii)Beneficial0.1%
734 Walt Whitman Road
Melville, NY 11746    
     
Lawrence WaldmanCommon2,143 (ix)Beneficial0.0%
734 Walt Whitman Road    
Melville, NY 11746Mike NormanCommon135,000 (vi)Beneficial0.8%
5115 Ulmerton Rd.    
Michael E. GeraghtyCommon2,143 (x)Beneficial0.0%
734 Walt Whitman Road
Melville, NY 11746
Jeff RencherCommon- (xi)Beneficial0.0%
5115 Ulmerton Rd.    
Clearwater, FL 33760    
Moshe CitronowiczCommon412,504 (v)Beneficial2.3%
5115 Ulmerton Rd.
Clearwater, FL 33760
Gary PickettCommon38,429 (vii)Beneficial0.2%
5115 Ulmerton Rd.
Clearwater, FL 33760
Ian SheffieldCommon-- (viii)Beneficial0.0%
5115 Ulmerton Rd.
Clearwater, FL 33760
Lawrence WaldmanCommon14,953 (ix)Beneficial0.1%
5115 Ulmerton Rd.
Clearwater, FL 33760
Michael E. GeraghtyCommon5,476 (x)Beneficial0.0%
5115 Ulmerton Rd.
Clearwater, FL 33760
     
Officers and Directors as a group (10 persons) 10.8%9.5%  1,964,804 (xii)1,717,394 (xi)  
             
40

 
(i)Based on 17,826,336 outstanding shares of Common Stock and 2,467,046 outstanding options to acquire a like number of shares of Common Stock as of March 14, 2014, of which officers and directors owned a total of 324,358 options and 1,393,036 shares at December 31, 2013.  We have calculated the percentages on the basis of the amount of outstanding securities plus, for each person or group, any securities that person or group has current or future right to acquire pursuant to options, warrants, conversion privileges or other rights.

(ii)Includes 599,213 shares and 81,000 vested options out of a total of 105,000 ten year options owned by Mr. Makrides to purchase shares of Common Stock of the Company. Exercise prices for his options range from $2.13 for 25,000 shares to $3.25 for 25,000 shares.

(iii)Includes zero vested options out of a total of 750,000 ten year options owned by Mr. Gershon, exercisable at $2.09 per share. These options vest equally over a four year period.

(iv)Includes 387,319 shares and 43,500 vested options out of a total of 67,500 ten year options owned by Mr. Saron, exercisable at prices ranging from $2.13 per share for 12,500 shares, and $3.25 per share for 12,500 shares.
(v)Includes 412,504 shares plus 6,000 vested out of a total of 30,000 ten year options owned by Mr. Citronowicz exercisable at $2.54 per shares.

(vi)Includes 135,000 vested ten year options out of a total 135,000 ten year options owned by Mr. Norman exercisable at prices ranging from $2.13 for 25,000 shares to $8.66 for 12,500 shares.

(vii)Includes 38,429 vested ten year options out of a total 57,500 ten year options owned by Mr. Pickett exercisable at prices ranging from $2.46 for 10,000 shares to $8.66 for 20,000 shares. These options vest over a 5 and 7 year period.

(viii)Mr. Sheffield became a Board member in December 2013.  He does not own any shares of Bovie stock and has not been granted any options as of this date.

(ix)Includes 14,953 vested ten year options out of a total of 76,500 options owned by Mr. Waldman exercisable at a prices ranging from $2.20 for 25,000 shares to $2.97 for 12,000 shares.  These options vest over a period of 3 and 7 years.

(x)Includes 5,476 vested ten year options out of a total of 27,500 options owned by Mr. Geraghty exercisable at a prices ranging from $2.20 for 10,000 shares to $2.81 for 7,500 shares.  These options vest over a period of 3 and 7 years.

(xi)Includes 324,358 vested ten year options out of a total of 1,249,000 ten year outstanding options and 1,393,036 shares owned by all Executive Officers and directors as a group. The last date options can be exercised is December 13, 2023.

(xii)RENN Capital Group, Inc. ("RENN") is an investment advisor to RENN Universal Growth Investment Trust ("RUSGIT"), RENN Global Entrepreneurs Fund Inc. ("RENN Global") and RENN Entrepreneurial Fund Ltd. ("RENN Entrepreneurial") and has shared voting power over these shares.  The shares of common stock are owned of record as follows:  RUSGIT - 1,600,000; RENN Global - 550,000; RENN Entrepreneurial - 159,542.   Russell Cleveland is the President of each of RENN, RUGIT, RENN Global and RENN Entrepreneurial and may be deemed to be the beneficial owner of the shares of common stock.  Mr. Cleveland disclaims any such beneficial ownership.
 
4641

(i) Based on 17,809,677 outstanding shares of Common Stock and 1,889,461 outstanding options to acquire a like number of shares of Common Stock as of March 18, 2012, of which officers and directors owned a total of 318,660 options and 1,646,144 shares at December 31, 2012.  We have calculated the percentages on the basis of the amount of outstanding securities plus, for each person or group, any securities that person or group has current or future right to acquire pursuant to options, warrants, conversion privileges or other rights.

(ii) Includes 599,213 shares and 75,000 vested options out of a total of 105,000 ten year options owned by Mr. Makrides to purchase shares of Common Stock of the Company. Exercise prices for his options range from $2.13 for 25,000 shares to $3.25 for 25,000 shares.

(iii) Includes 251,508 shares and 75,000 vested options out of a total of 100,000 ten year options owned by Mr. Kromer, exercisable at prices ranging from $2.13 per share for 25,000 shares, and $3.25 per share for 25,000 shares.

(iv) Includes 387,319 shares and 37,500 vested options out of a total of 67,500 ten year options owned by Mr. Saron, exercisable at prices ranging from $2.13 per share for 12,500 shares, and $3.25 per share for 12,500 shares.

(v) Includes 406,504 shares plus zero vested out of a total of 30,000 ten year options owned by Mr. Citronowicz exercisable at $2.54 for 30,000 shares.

(vi) Includes 85,001 vested ten year options out of a total 115,000 ten year options owned by Mr. Norman exercisable at prices ranging from $2.13 for 25,000 shares to $8.66 for 12,500 shares.

(vii) Includes 29,373 vested ten year options out of a total 57,500 ten year options owned by Mr. Pickett exercisable at prices ranging from $2.46 for 10,000 shares to $8.66 for 20,000 shares. These options vest over a 5 and 7 year period.

(viii) Includes 1,600 Shares owned by Mr. Lentricchia and 12,500 vested ten year options out of a total 37,500 ten year options issued to Mr. Lentricchia exercisable at prices ranging from $2.46 for 10,000 shares to $8.32 for 10,000 shares. These options vest over a period of 3 and 7 years.

(ix) Includes 2,143 vested ten year options out of a total of 39,500 options owned by Mr. Waldman exercisable at a prices ranging from $2.54 for 24,000 shares to $2.81 for 7,500 shares.  These options vest over a period of 3 and 7 years.

(x) Includes 2,143 vested ten year options out of a total of 17,500 options owned by Mr. Geraghty exercisable at a prices ranging from $2.54 for 4,000 shares to $2.81 for 7,500 shares.  These options vest over a period of 3 and 7 years.

(xi) Mr. Rencher has zero vested ten year options out of a total of 160,000 options issued exercisable at a prices ranging from $2.54 for 10,000 shares to $6.00 for 30,000 shares.  His options vest over a period of 5 years with the exception of his $6.00 options which vest based upon various sales targets.

(xii) Includes 318,660 vested ten year options out of a total of 729,500 ten year outstanding options and 1,646,144 shares owned by all Executive Officers and directors as a group. The last date options can be exercised is October 8, 2022.

 (xiii) RENN Capital Group, Inc. ("RENN") is an investment advisor to RENN Universal Growth Investment Trust ("RUSGIT"), RENN Global Entrepreneurs Fund Inc. ("RENN Global") and RENN Entrepreneurial Fund Ltd. ("RENN Entrepreneurial") and has shared voting power over these shares.  The shares of common stock are owned of record as follows:  RUSGIT - 1,600,000; RENN Global - 550,000; RENN Entrepreneurial - 159,542.   Russell Cleveland is the President of each of RENN, RUGIT, RENN Global and RENN Entrepreneurial and may be deemed to be the beneficial owner of the shares of common stock.  Mr. Cleveland disclaims any such beneficial ownership.
47

 
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance
 
Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 requires our officers and directors, and persons who own more than ten percent of a registered class of our equity securities, to file reports of ownership and changes in ownership with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Officers, directors and greater than ten-percent shareholders are required by SEC regulation to furnish us with copies of all Section 16(a) forms they file.
 
Based solely on a review of the copies of such forms furnished to us, we believe that during the year ended December 31, 20122013 all officers, directors and ten percent beneficial owners who were subject to the provisions of Section 16(a) complied with all of the filing requirements during the year.

ITEM 13.

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions

Our policy is that employees, non-employees, and third parties must obtain authorization from the appropriate department executive manager, for any business relationship or proposed business transaction in which they or an immediate family member has a direct or indirect interest, or from which they or an immediate family member may derive a personal benefit (a “related party transaction”). The maximum dollar amount of related party transactions that may be approved as described above in this paragraph in any calendar year is $120,000. Any related party transactions that would bring the total value of such transactions to greater than $120,000 must be referred to the Audit Committee to determine the procedure for approval, and then have the recommendations presented to the Board of Directors for approval.

Steven MacLaren, a former director of Bovie, is president and a shareholder of Ronin Consulting Group, Inc., a company which provides various financial and analytical project consulting services to Bovie. Mr. MacLaren resigned from the board in March 2012. Ronin Consulting Group, Inc. was paid consulting fees approximating $20,000 during the time period that Mr. MacLaren was acting as a director in 2012, and $80,000 in 2011 and 2010, respectively.

Greg Konesky a former director of Bovie provided consulting services related to research and development of certain products and was paid fees during the time period that he was acting as a director approximating $7,500, $30,000, and $30,000 during 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively. On March 23, 2012 Mr. Konesky resigned from the board.

A relative of Moshe Citronowicz, Bovie’s Senior Vice President, is considered a related party. Arik Zoran, is a consultant of the Company doing business as AR Logic, Inc., which is a consulting firm owned by Arik Zoran, Mr. Citronowicz’s brother. During January 2011, we entered into a three year consulting services agreement with AR Logic that provides for a monthly retainer for engineering support for our existing generator product line and a separate hourly based fee structure for additional consulting related to new product lines. The consulting rates are consistent with rates of an arms length transaction. AR Logic was paid consulting fees of approximately $266,600, $223,500 and $171,700 during 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Previous to 2011, Mr. Zoran was an employee in charge of the engineering department and was paid inclusive of benefits $192,014 for 2010.

A second relative of Mr. Citronowicz is considered a related party. Yechiel Tsitrinovich is also a brother of Mr. Citronowicz, and acts as a consultant to the Company related to research and development of certain products. Mr. Tsitrinovich has a royalty contract with us related to the creation and design of a proprietary technology that is used in some of our generators. Mr. Tsitrinovich was paid a combination of consulting fees and royalties on previous product designs approximating $72,890, $77,218, and $85,310 for 2013, 2012, and $65,654 for 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.

Independent Board Members

The Board currently has four independent members, Michael Norman, August Lentricchia,Ian Sheffield, Michael Geraghty, and Lawrence Waldman who meet the existing independence requirements of the NYSE AmexMKT Market and the Securities and Exchange Commission.
 
 
4842

 
ITEM 14.

The following table sets forth the aggregate fees billed to us for fiscal years ended December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 by our current accountants, Kingery & Crouse P.A. (in(in thousands) :

 2012  2011  2013 2012 
Audit fees (1) $124  $135  $120  $124 
             
Non-Audit fees:             
Audit related fees(2)  11   11   10   11 
Tax fees(3)  --   --   --   -- 
All other fees(4)  --   --   --   -- 
Total fees billed $135  $146  $130  $135 

(1) Audit fees consist of fees billed for professional services rendered for the audit of Bovie’s annual financial statements and reviews of its interim consolidated financial statements included in quarterly reports and other services related to statutory and regulatory filings or engagements.

(2) Audit related fees consist of fees billed for assurance and related services that are reasonably related to the performance of the audit or reviews of Bovie’s consolidated financial statements and are not reported under “Audit Fees”.

(3) Tax fees consist of fees billed for professional services rendered for tax compliance and tax advice (domestic and international). These services include assistance regarding federal, state and international tax compliance, acquisitions and international tax planning.

(4) All other fees consist of fees for products and services other than the services reported above.
43


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, in Melville, New YorkClearwater, Florida on April 1, 2013.March 31, 2014.

 Bovie Medical Corporation
  
 By: /s/ ANDREW MAKRIDES
/s/ Robert Gershon
 Andrew MakridesRobert Gershon
 Chief Executive Officer and
 (Principal Executive Officer)
  
 By: /s/ GARY
/s/ Gary D. PICKETTPickett
 Gary D. Pickett
 Chief Financial Officer,
 Treasurer, and Secretary
 (Principal Financial 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.
  
49

Name Title Date
     
Directors:    
     
/s/ ANDREW MAKRIDES
Andrew Makrides
 
Chief Executive Officer and Chairman
of the Board
 April 1, 2013March 31, 2014
Andrew Makrides    
/s/  J. ROBERT SARON
J. Robert Saron
President, Chief Sales and Marketing
Officer and Director
April 1, 2013
     
/s/ GEORGE KROMERROBERT GERSHON Chief Executive Officer and Director 
April 1, 2013
March 31, 2014
George KromerRobert Gershon
/s/ J. ROBERT SARONPresident, Chief Sales and Marketing Officer and DirectorMarch 31, 2014
J. Robert Saron    
     
/s/ MICHAEL NORMAN Director 
April 1, 2013
March 31, 2014
Michael Norman    
     
/s/ AUGUST LENTRICCHIAIAN SHEFFIELD Director 
April 1, 2013
March 31, 2014
August LentricchiaIan Sheffield    
     
/s/ LAWRENCE J. WALDMAN Director 
April 1, 2013
March 31, 2014
Lawrence J. Waldman    
     
/s/ MICHAEL GERAGHTY Director 
April 1, 2013
March 31, 2014
Michael Geraghty    

44

PART II

ITEM 15.

The financial statements and exhibits filed as part of this annual report on Form 10-K are provided below:

ITEM 15A.
ITEM 15A.  Financial Statements

BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS  Page

Page
Report of Independent Registered Certified Public Accounting FirmF-1
  
Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 20122013 and 20112012F-2
  
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011F-4
  
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity and Comprehensive Income (Loss) for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011F-5
  
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011F-6
  
Notes to Consolidated Financial StatementsF-7
 
 
5045

 
[LETTERHEADLETTER HEAD OF KINGERY & CROUSE, P.A.]

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of Bovie Medical Corporation:

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Bovie Medical Corporation (the “Company”), as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and comprehensive income (loss), and of cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010.2011.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financials based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States of America).  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.  The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting.  Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no opinion.  Our audits included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and 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 financial position of the Company as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years  ended December 31, 2013, 2012  2011  and 20102011  in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

/s/ Kingery & Crouse, P.A.
Certified Public Accountants  
Tampa, FL
April 1, 2013
March 31, 2014
 
 
F - 1F-1


BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
DECEMBER 31, 20122013 AND 20112012
(in thousands)
 
ASSETS  2012   2011 
Current assets:        
         
Cash and cash equivalents $4,162  $4,880 
Trade accounts receivable, net  2,874   2,216 
Inventories, net  7,984   8,178 
Prepaid expenses and other current assets  951   710 
Deferred income tax assets, net  --   500 
         
Total current assets  15,971   16,484 
         
Property and equipment, net  7,229   7,176 
Brand name and trademark  1,510   1,510 
Purchased technology, net  664   752 
License rights, net  --   26 
Deferred income tax assets, net  1,799   1,509 
Other assets  1,010   783 
Total assets $28,183  $28,240 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.

F - 2


BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
DECEMBER 31, 2012 AND 2011
(Continued) (in thousands)

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY

LIABILITIES 2012  2011 
Current liabilities:      
       
Accounts payable $803  $1,085 
Accrued payroll  118   88 
Accrued vacation  186   149 
Current portion of bonds payable to bank  138   130 
Current portion of settlement  232   587 
Accrued and other liabilities  445   350 
         
Total current liabilities  1,922   2,389 
         
         
Bonds payable to bank, net of current portion  3,281   3,420 
Settlement liability, net of current portion  --   209 
Derivative liabilities  85   105 
         
Total liabilities  5,288   6,123 
         
Commitments and Contingencies (see Note 12)        
         
STOCKHOLDER’S EQUITY:
        
         
Preferred stock, par value $.001; 10,000,000 shares authorized; none issued or outstanding  --   -- 
Common stock, par value $.001 par value; 40,000,000 shares authorized; 17,781,538 and 17,760,724  issued and 17,638,459 and 17,617,645 outstanding on December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively  18   18 
Additional paid-in capital  25,517   25,356 
Deficit  (2,640)  (3,257)
         
Total stockholders' equity  22,895   22,117 
         
Total Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity $28,183  $28,240 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
F - 3

BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012, 2011 AND 2010
(in thousands)
  2012  2011  2010 
Sales, net $27,671  $25,411  $24,230 
Cost of sales  16,338   14,680   14,242 
Gross Profit  11,333   10,731   9,988 
             
Gain on legal settlement  --   750   -- 
             
Other costs:            
Research and development  1,329   1,197   1,854 
Professional services  1,439   1,250   1,556 
Salaries and related costs  3,178   3,114   3,155 
Selling, general and administration  4,341   4,347   4,889 
Legal settlement  --   1,591   -- 
Asset impairment  --   --   1,286 
Total other costs  10,287   11,499   12,740 
             
Income (loss) from operations  1,046   (18)  (2,752)
             
Other income (expense):            
Interest expense, net  (232)  (237)  (223)
Gain on change in fair value of liabilities, net  20   287   513 
Total other income (expense),  net  (212)  50   290 
             
Income (loss) before income taxes  834   32   (2,462)
             
Provision for current income taxes  --   --   (7)
Benefit (provision) for deferred income taxes  (217)  77   934 
Total benefit (provision) for income taxes - net  (217)  77   927 
             
Net income (loss) $617  $109  $(1,535)
             
Earnings (loss) per common share:            
Basic $0.04  $0.01  $(0.09)
Diluted $0.03  $0.01  $(0.09)
             
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding - basic
  17,631   17,597   17,367 
             
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding adjusted for dilutive securities  17,787   17,669   17,367 
ASSETS  2013   2012 
Current assets:        
         
Cash and cash equivalents $7,924  $4,162 
Trade accounts receivable, net  1,990   2,874 
Inventories, net  8,415   7,543 
Current portion of deposits  948   714 
Prepaid expenses and other current assets  545   951 
         
Total current assets  19,822   16,244 
         
Property and equipment, net  7,063   7,229 
Brand name and trademark  1,510   1,510 
Purchased technology, net  575   664 
Deferred income tax assets, net  3,412   1,799 
Deposits, net of current portion  120   133 
Other assets  674   604 
Total assets $33,176  $28,183 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
 
 
F - 4F-2

 
BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOMEBALANCE SHEETS
(LOSS)
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012, 20112013 AND 20102012
(in(Continued) (in thousands)

          Accumulated       
        Additional  Other       
  Common  Paid-in  Comprehensive       
  Shares  Par Value  Capital  Income (Loss)  Deficit  Total 
                   
January 1, 2010  16,951  $17  $22,934  $(89) $( 1,831) $21,031 
                         
Options exercised  46   -   39   -   -   39 
                         
Stock based compensation  -   -   163   -   -   163 
                         
Stock swap to acquire options  (6)  -   (30)  -   -   (30)
                         
Equity Issuance  572   1   2,766   -   -   2,767 
                         
Fair value of  warrants issued in connection with equity raise  -   -   (799)  -   -   (799)
                         
Tax benefit from share based payments  -   -   40   -   -   40 
                         
Net loss  -   -   -   -   (1,535)  (1,535)
Foreign currency remeasurement  -   -   -   89   -   89 
Comprehensive loss  -   -   -   -   -   (1,446)
                         
December 31, 2010  17,563   18   25,113   -   (3,366)  21,765 
                         
Options exercised  69   -   39   -   -   39 
                         
Stock based compensation  -   -   132   -   -   132 
                         
Stock swap to acquire options  (14)  -   (39)  -   -   (39)
                         
Non Cash elimination of Lican Restricted Stock Liability          111           111 
                         
Net income  -   -��  -   -   109   109 
                         
December 31, 2011  17,618   18   25,356   -   (3,257)  22,117 
                         
Options exercised  28   -   20   -   -   20 
                         
Stock based compensation  -   -   161   -   -   161 
                         
Stock swap to acquire options  (7)  -   (20)  -   -   (20)
                         
Net income  -   -   -   -   617   617 
                         
December 31, 2012  17,639  $18  $25,517  $-  $(2,640) $22,895 
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY

 The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
F - 5

BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2012, 2011 AND 2010
(in thousands)
  2012  2011  2010
Cash flows from operating activities:
        
Net income (loss) $617  $109  $(1,535)
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:            
Depreciation and amortization of property and equipment  742   753   734 
Amortization of intangible assets  115   172   273 
Provision for (recovery of) inventory obsolescence  (93)  37   (8)
Loss (gain) on disposal of fixed assets  (41)  --   326 
Loss on impairment Bovie Canada  --   --   54 
Loss on impairment of intangible assets  --   --   1,286 
Stock-based compensation  161   132   163 
Non cash other income – warrants  (20)  (227)  (513)
Non cash other income – Lican derivatives  --   (61)  -- 
Non cash legal settlement  --   954   -- 
Provision (benefit) for deferred income taxes  210   (76)  (934)
Change in assets and liabilities:            
Trade receivables  (658)  (126)  451 
Prepaid expenses and other current assets  (241)  257   (47)
Inventories  287   (719)  (822)
Deposits  (227)  (111)  (281)
Accounts payable  (284)  134   362 
Settlement liability  (564)  731   -- 
Accrued and other liabilities  94   (30)  (56)
Accrued payroll  30   (12)  23 
Accrued vacation  37   (20)  (2)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities  165   1,897   (526)
             
Cash flows from investing activities:            
Purchases of property and equipment  (753)  (542)  (201)
Proceeds from sale of property and equipment  --   --   633 
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities  (753)  (542)  432 
             
Cash flows from financing activities:            
Proceeds from mortgage note payable to bank  (net of amounts in escrow)  --   --   36 
Proceeds from private placement (net of costs of $233)  --   --   2,767 
Net change in line of credit  --   --   (1,000)
Repayments of capital lease payable  --   (111)  -- 
Proceeds from sales of common stock  --   --   9 
Proceeds from long-term debt  --   3,549   -- 
Repayments of long-term debt  (130)  (3,740)  (135)
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities  (130)  (302)  1,677 
             
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents  --   --   89 
             
Net change in cash and cash equivalents  (718)  1,053   1,672 
             
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year  4,880   3,827   2,155 
             
Cash and cash equivalents  at end of year $4,162  $4,880  $3,827 
Cash paid for:            
Interest paid, net $232  $237  $223 
Income taxes $--  $--  $-- 
             
             
Noncash financing activities during year ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010:            
Equipment financed with loan $--  $--  $111 
LIABILITIES 2013  2012 
Current liabilities:      
       
Accounts payable $1,060  $803 
Accrued payroll  172   118 
Accrued vacation  200   186 
Current portion of bonds payable to bank  72   138 
Accrued-litigation settlement  541   232 
Accrued and other liabilities  867   445 
         
Total current liabilities  2,912   1,922 
         
Bonds payable to bank, net of current portion  3,185   3,281 
Derivative liabilities - warrants  5,749   85 
         
Total liabilities  11,846   5,288 
         
Commitments and Contingencies (see Note 13)        
         
Series A 6% convertible preferred stock, par value $0.001; 3,500,000 shares        
authorized and issued; preference in liquidation - $7,000,000  2,259   -- 
         
STOCKHOLDER’S EQUITY:
        
         
Preferred stock, par value $.001; 10,000,000 shares authorized;  --   -- 
Common stock, par value $.001 par value; 40,000,000 shares authorized; 17,826,336 and 17,781,538  issued and 17,683,257 and 17,638,459 outstanding on December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively  18   18 
Additional paid-in capital  28,687   25,517 
Deficit  (9,634)  (2,640)
         
Total stockholders' equity  19,071   22,895 
         
Total Liabilities and Stockholders' Equity $33,176  $28,183 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
 
 
F - 6F-3

BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013, 2012 AND 2011
(in thousands)
  2013  2012  2011 
Sales, net $23,660  $27,671  $25,411 
Cost of sales  14,462   16,338   14,680 
Gross Profit  9,198   11,333   10,731 
             
Gain on legal settlement  --   --   750 
             
Other costs:            
Research and development  1,260   1,329   1,197 
Professional services  1,835   1,439   1,250 
Salaries and related costs  3,235   3,178   3,114 
Selling, general and administration  4,894   4,341   4,347 
Legal awards and settlement  1,640   --   1,591 
Total other costs  12,864   10,287   11,499 
             
Income (loss) from operations  (3,666)  1,046   (18)
             
Other income (expense):            
Interest expense, net  (237)  (232)  (237)
Issuance cost  (664)  --   -- 
Fees associated with refinance  (543)  --   -- 
Gain (loss) on change in fair value of derivative liabilities  (842)  20   287 
Total other income (expense),  net  (2,286)  (212 )  50 
             
Income (loss) before income taxes  (5,952)  834   32 
             
Provision for current income taxes  --   --   -- 
Benefit (provision) for deferred income taxes  1,613   (217)  77 
Total benefit (provision) for income taxes - net  1,613   (217)  77 
             
Net income (loss) $(4,339) $617  $109 
             
Earnings (loss) per common share:            
Basic $(0.25) $0.04  $0.01 
Diluted $(0.25) $0.03  $0.01 
             
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding - basic  17,670   17,631   17,597 
             
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding adjusted for dilutive securities  17,670   17,787   17,669 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of Contentsthe consolidated financial statements.
F-4

BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013, 2012 AND 2011
(in thousands)
        Additional       
  Common  Paid-in       
  Shares  Par Value  Capital  Deficit  Total 
                
January 1, 2011  17,563  $18  $25,113  $(3,366) $21,765 
                     
Options exercised  69   -   39   -   39 
                     
Stock based compensation  -   -   132   -   132 
                     
Stock swap to acquire options  (14)  -   (39)  -   (39)
                     
Lican restricted stock liability settled          111       111 
                     
Net income  -   -   -   109   109 
                     
December 31, 2011  17,618   18   25,356   (3,257)  22,117 
                     
Options exercised  28   -   20   -   20 
                     
Stock based compensation  -   -   161   -   161 
                     
Stock swap to acquire options  (7)  -   (20)  -   (20)
                     
Net income  -   -   -   617   617 
                     
December 31, 2012  17,639   18   25,517   (2,640)  22,895 
                     
Options exercised  51   -   70   -   70 
                     
Stock based compensation  -   -   506   -   506 
                     
Stock swap to acquire options  (6)  -   (22)  -   (22)
                     
Convertible preferred stock – beneficial conversion feature          2,616       2,616 
                     
Deemed dividend on convertible preferred stock              (2,616)  (2,616) 
                     
Accretion on convertible preferred stock              (39)  (39)
                     
Net loss  -   -   -   (4,339)  (4,339)
                     
December 31, 2013  17,684  $18  $28,687  $(9,634) $19,071 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
F-5

BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013, 2012 AND 2011
(in thousands)
  2013  2012  2011
Cash flows from operating activities:
        
Net income (loss) $(4,339) $617  $109 
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:            
Depreciation and amortization of property and equipment  739   742   753 
Amortization of intangible assets  88   115   172 
Provision for (recovery of) inventory obsolescence  12   (93)  37 
Loss (gain) on disposal of fixed assets  16   (41)  -- 
Stock-based compensation  506   161   132 
Non cash other income – warrants  842   (20)  (227)
Non cash finance costs allocated to warrants  42   --   -- 
Non cash other income – Lican  --   --   (61)
Non cash legal settlement  --   --   954 
Provision (benefit) for deferred income taxes  (1,613)  210   (76)
Change in assets and liabilities:            
Trade receivables  884   (658)  (126)
Prepaid expenses and other current assets  406   (241)  257 
Inventories  (884)  287   (719)
Deposits  (234)  (227)  (111)
Accounts payable  257   (284)  134 
Litigation settlement liability  309   (564)  731 
Accrued and other liabilities  365   94   (30)
Accrued payroll  54   30   (12)
Accrued vacation  14   37   (20)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities  (2,536)  165   1,897 
             
Cash flows from investing activities:            
Purchases of property and equipment  (588)  (753)  (542)
Net cash used in investing activities  (588)  (753)  (542)
             
Cash flows from financing activities:            
Proceeds from convertible preferred stock and warrants  7,000   --   -- 
Repayments of capital lease payable  --   --   (111)
Proceeds from sales of common stock  48   --   -- 
Proceeds from long-term debt  --   --   3,549 
Repayments of long-term debt  (162)  (130)  (3,740)
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities  6,886   (130)  (302)
             
Net change in cash and cash equivalents  3,762   (718)  1,053 
             
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year  4,162   4,880   3,827 
             
Cash and cash equivalents  at end of year $7,924  $4,162  $4,880 
Cash paid for:            
Interest paid, net $195  $232  $237 
Income taxes $--  $--  $-- 
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial statements.
F-6

 
BOVIE MEDICAL CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

NOTE 1.DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS

Bovie Medical Corporation (“Bovie”) was incorporated in 1982, under the laws of the State of Delaware and is a medical device company engaged in the manufacturing and marketing of electrosurgical devices.  Our medical products include a wide range of devices including electrosurgical generators and accessories, cauteries, medical lighting, nerve locators and other products.

NOTE 2.SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

Consolidated Financial Statements

The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Bovie and its wholly owned subsidiaries, Aaron Medical Industries, Inc., BVX Holdings LLC, and Bovie Holdings, Inc. (which in turn prior to June 30, 2010 owned 100% of Bovie Canada ulc) and Jump Agentur Fur Electrotechnik Gmbh (“JAG”), (collectively, the “Company” or “we”, “our” or “us”). All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.

Use of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements

The preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires us to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements. The reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period may be affected by the estimates and assumptions we are required to make. Estimates that are critical to the accompanying consolidated financial statements relate principally to the adequacy of our inventory allowances and the recoverability of certain intangibles and our deferred income tax assets.  In addition, stock-based compensation and the fair value of certain warrants represent significant estimates as such expense is derived from a formula that uses various assumptions to estimate the future but unknown value of our common stock.  The markets for the Company’s products are characterized by intense price competition, rapid technological development, evolving standards and short product life cycles, all of which could impact the future realization of our assets. Estimates and assumptions are reviewed periodically and the effects of revisions are reflected in the period that they are determined to be necessary. It is at least reasonably possible that the Company’s estimates could change in the near term with respect to these matters.

Cash and Cash Equivalents

Holdings of highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less are considered to be cash equivalents.

Fair Values of Financial Instruments and Concentration of Credit Risk

The carrying amounts of our financial instruments included in current assets and liabilities approximate fair value due to their short term nature.  In addition, we believe the book values of our bonds payable and capital lease payable approximates their fair values as the terms of such obligations approximate the terms at which similar types of borrowing arrangements could be currently obtained.

Financial instruments, which potentially subject us to significant concentrations of credit risk, consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents, and trade accounts receivable. With respect to cash, we frequently maintain cash and cash equivalent balances in excess of federally insured limits. We have not experienced any losses in such accounts.
  
F - 7

See Note 6 for discussion of fair market value measurements of other liabilities.

With respect to receivables, our ten largest customers accounted for approximately 72%58%, 62%72% and 61%62% of trade receivables as of December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively, and 66.3%60.9%, 64.6%66.3% and 66.5%64.6% of net revenues for the respective years then ended. In 2013, three customers accounted for more than 10% of our sales, National Distribution & Contracting Inc., PSS World Medical, and McKesson Medical Surgical, who had 13.1%, 10.9% and 10.3% respectively. In 2012, National Distribution & Contracting Inc. accounted for 12.4% of our sales, while in 2011, no one customer accounted for over 10% of our sales.  In 2010 two customers, Arthrex, Inc. and National Distribution & Contracting Inc. each separately accounted for approximately 11% of total revenues.  All of these entities are customers of our U.S. operations.  We perform ongoing credit evaluations of our customers and generally do not require collateral because we believe we have procedures in place to limit potential for significant losses, and because of the nature of our customer base.

Derivative Financial Instruments

We generally do not use derivative financial instruments to hedge exposures to cash-flow risks or market-risks. However, certain financial instruments, such as warrants, which are indexed to our common stock, are classified as liabilities when either (a) the holder possesses rights to net-cash settlement or (b) physical or net-share settlement is not within our control.  In such instances, net-cash settlement is assumed for financial accounting and reporting purposes, even when the terms of the underlying contracts do not provide for net-cash settlement.  Such financial instruments are initially recorded, and continuously carried, at fair value.

Determining the fair value of these instruments involves judgment and the use of certain relevant assumptions including, but not limited to, interest rate risk, historical volatility and stock price, estimated life of the derivative, anti-dilution provisions, and conversion/redemption privileges.  The use of different assumptions or changes in those assumptions could have a material effect on the estimated fair value amounts.
F-7


Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

Our credit terms for our billings range from net 10 days to net 30 days, depending on the customer agreement.  Accounts receivable are determined to be past due if payments are not made in accordance with such agreements and an allowance is recorded for accounts that become three months past due or sooner if there are other indicators that the receivables may not be recovered.  Customary collection efforts are initiated and receivables are written off when we determine they are not collectible and abandon these collection efforts. We gave negotiated sales volume discounts, which amounted to approximately $523,000, $565,000 $520,000 and $522,000$520,000 for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively. Sales are reported net of all discounts.

We evaluate the allowance for doubtful accounts on a regular basis for adequacy based upon our periodic review of the collectability of the receivables in light of historical experience, adverse situations that may affect our customers’ ability to pay, estimated value of any underlying collateral and prevailing economic conditions.  This evaluation is inherently subjective, as it requires estimates that are susceptible to significant revision as more information becomes available.  Substantially all of the receivables included in the accompanying balance sheets were recovered subsequent to the respective year ends.  Because of this, and because historical losses on accounts receivable have not been material, management believes that the allowances for doubtful accounts of approximately $32,000$39,000 and $20,000$32,000 at December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, respectively, are, or were, adequate to provide for possible bad debts.

Inventories and Repair Parts

Inventories are stated at the lower of average cost or market. Finished goods and work-in-process inventories include material, labor, and overhead costs. Factory overhead costs are allocated to inventory manufactured in-house based upon cost of materials.

We monitor usage reports to determine if the carrying value of any items should be adjusted due to lack of demand for the item and adjust the inventory for estimated obsolescence or unusable inventory equal to the difference between the cost of inventory and the estimated market value based upon assumptions about future demand and market conditions. If actual market conditions are less favorable than those projected by management, additional inventory write-downs may be required.

Inventories at December 31, 20122013 and 20112012 were as follows (in(in thousands):

  2012  2011 
       
Raw materials $5,133  $5,126 
Work in process  1,294   1,865 
Finished goods  2,016   1,739 
Gross inventories  8,443   8,730 
Less: reserve for obsolescence  (459)  (552)
         
Net inventories $7,984  $8,178 
F - 8

  2013  2012 
       
Raw materials $5,470  $5,133 
Work in process  882   853 
Finished goods  2,455   2,016 
Gross inventories  8,807   8,002 
Less: reserve for obsolescence  (392)  (459)
         
Net inventories $8,415  $7,543 
 
During 2012,2013, the reserves for raw materials inventory and related costs of sales decreased by approximately $93,000.$67,000 due to disposing of old inventory. In 2011 and 2010,2012, the reservesreserve and related cost of sales increaseddecreased by approximately $37,000 and decreased by $8,400 respectively$93,000 as a result of changes in estimates regarding the recoverability of certain types of our inventory. There are no reserves for finished goods or work in progress as of December 31, 20122013 and 2011.2012.

Property and Equipment

These assets are recorded at cost.  Depreciation and amortization are provided for using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets. The amortization of leasehold improvements is based on the shorter of the lease term or the life of the improvement. Betterments and large improvements, which extend the life of the asset, are capitalized, whereas maintenance and repairs and small improvements are expensed as incurred. The estimated useful lives are: machinery and equipment, 3-10 years; buildings, 39 years; molds, 7-15 years and furniture and fixtures, 5-10 years.

Intangible Assets

These assets consist of licenses, purchased technology and brand name and trademarks.  The licenses and purchased technology (other intangibles) are being amortized by the straight-line method over a 5-17 year period commencing with the date they were placed in service. Estimated aggregate amortization expense for the five years ending December 31, 20172018 is expected to approximate $664,000.$577,000.

Brand name and trademark qualifies as an indefinite-lived intangible asset and is not subject to amortization.  Intangibles with indefinite lives are analyzed for impairment annually or more frequently if events and circumstances indicate that the asset may be impaired.  If impaired, an impairment loss is recognized in an amount equal to the excess of the asset's carrying value over its fair value.
F-8


Other Long-Lived Assets

We review other long-lived assets for recoverability if events or changes in circumstances indicate that the assets may have been impaired. This circumstance exists when the carrying amount of the asset exceeds the sum of the undiscounted cash flows expected to result from its use and eventual disposition.  In those cases an impairment loss is recognized to the extent that the assets’ carrying amount exceeds its fair value.  Any impairment losses are not restored in the future if the fair value increases. At December 31, 2012,2013, we believe the remaining carrying values of our long-lived assets are recoverable.

Revenue Recognition

Revenue is recognized when title has been transferred to the customer, which is generally at the time of shipment. The following policies apply to our major categories of revenue transactions:

 ·
Sales to customers are evidenced by firm purchase orders. Title and the risks and rewards of ownership are transferred to the customer when the product is shipped. Payment by the customer is due under fixed payment terms.

 ·
Product returns are only accepted at our discretion and in accordance with our “Returned Goods Policy.” Historically, the level of product returns has not been significant. We accrue for sales returns, rebates and allowances based upon an analysis of historical customer returns and credits, rebates, discounts and current market conditions.

 ·
Our terms of sale to customers generally do not include any obligations to perform future services. Limited warranties are generally provided for sales and provisions for warranty are provided at the time of product sale based upon an analysis of historical data.

 ·
Amounts billed to customers related to shipping and handling charges are included in net sales. Shipping and handling costs included in cost of sales were approximately $104,000, $128,000 and $129,000 in 2013, 2012 and $121,000 in 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.
 
F - 9

We have no consignment inventory with customers but we do have inventory of approximately $441,000 and $800,000, respectively located at contract manufacturers that produce components for us.

Advertising Costs

All advertising costs are expensed as incurred. The amounts of advertising costs were approximately $305,000, $277,000, $305,000, and $276,000$305,000 for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively.

Stock-Based Compensation

We account for stock-based compensation in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718, Compensation-Stock Compensation. ASC 718 requires recognizing compensation costs for all share-based payment awards made to employees and directors based upon the awards’ grant date fair value. The standard covers employee stock options, restricted stock, and other equity awards. For stock options, we use a binomial lattice option-pricing model to estimate the grant date fair value of stock option awards, and recognize compensation cost on a straight-line basis over the awards’ vesting periods.

Litigation Contingencies

From time to time, we are exposed to claims and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business and use various methods to resolve these matters in a manner that we believe serves the best interest of the Company and our stockholders. There can be no assurance these actions or other third party assertions will be resolved without costly litigation, or in a manner that is not adverse to our financial position. We do not believe that any of the currently identified claims or litigation matters will have a material adverse impact on our results of operations, cash flows or financial condition. However, given uncertainties associated with any litigation, if our assessments prove to be wrong, or if additional information becomes available such that we estimate that there is a possible loss or possible range of loss associated with these contingencies, then we would record the minimum estimated liability, which could materially impact our results of operations, financial position and cash flows.

Tax Effects of Stock-Based Compensation
 
We will only recognize a tax benefit from windfall tax deductions for stock-based awards in additional paid-in capital if an incremental tax benefit is realized after all other tax attributes currently available have been utilized.
F-9


Net Earnings (Loss) Per Common Share

We compute basic earnings (loss) per share by dividing net income (loss) by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the reporting period.  Diluted earnings (loss) per share gives effect to all potential dilutive shares outstanding (in our case, stock options that are in the money) during the period.  The number of dilutive shares is calculated using the treasury method which reduces the effective number of shares by the amount of shares we could purchase with the proceeds of assumed exercises. In 2013, the net loss per share the employee stock options and warrants are excluded from diluted net loss per common share calculations as of such dates because they are anti-dilutive and results in basic and diluted loss per share to be equivalent.
During the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, we reported net income per share and, accordingly, common equivalent shares outstanding as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, which consisted of employee stock options and warrants issued in connection with our private placement were included. During periodsThe number of net loss per share these employee stock options and warrants are excluded from diluted net loss per common share calculations as of such dates because they are anti-dilutive and resultsequivalents at December 31, 2013, not included in basic and diluted loss per share to be equivalent.the computation was approximately 12,900,000.

Research and Development Costs

With the exception of development costs that are purchased from another enterprise and have alternative future use, research and development expenses are charged to operations as incurred.

F - 10


Research and Development Costs for Others

For research and development activities that are partially or completely funded by other parties, and when the obligation is incurred solely to perform contractual services, expenses are charged to cost of sales and all revenues resulting from such activities are shown as sales. We have expended $1.3 million, $1.3 million, and $1.2 million for the years ended 2013, 2012, and 2011 respectively.
 
Income Taxes

The provision for income taxes includes federal, foreign, state and local income taxes currently payable and those deferred because of temporary differences between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities. Deferred tax assets or liabilities are computed based on the difference between the financial statement and income tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted marginal tax rates. Valuation allowances are recorded to reduce deferred tax assets when it is more likely than not that a tax benefit will not be realized. Deferred income tax expenses or credits are based on the changes in the asset or liability from period to period.

We have net operating loss and tax credit carryforwardscarry-forwards available in certain jurisdictions to reduce future taxable income. Future tax benefits for net operating loss and tax credit carry forwards are recognized to the extent that realization of these benefits is considered more likely than not. This determination is based on the expectation that related operations will be sufficiently profitable or that various tax, business and other planning strategies will enable us to utilize the operating loss and tax credit carry forwards. We cannot be assured that we will be able to realize these future tax benefits or that future valuation allowances will not be required. To the extent that available evidence raises doubt about the realization of a deferred income tax asset, a valuation allowance is established.

It is our policy to provide for uncertain tax positions and the related interest and penalties based upon management’s assessment of whether a tax benefit is more likely than not to be sustained upon examination by tax authorities. To the extent that the probable tax outcome of these uncertain tax positions changes, such changes in estimate will impact the income tax provision in the period in which such determination is made. At December 31, 2012,2013, we believe we have appropriately accounted for any unrecognized tax benefits. To the extent we prevail in matters for which a liability for an unrecognized tax benefit is established or we are required to pay amounts in excess of the liability, our effective tax rate in a given financial statement period may be affected.

Since inception, we have been subject to tax by both federal and state taxing authorities. Until the respective statutes of limitations expire (which may be as much as 20 years while we have unused NOL’s), we are subject to income tax audits in the jurisdictions in which we operate.

Foreign Currency Transactions

The United States dollar is the functional currency of the Company’s operations in the United States and has also been determined to be the functional currency for the Company’s Canadian subsidiary, which was closed and consolidated to the Clearwater, Florida facility in 2010. We use the re-measurement method in converting the foreign subsidiary’s financial statements into U.S. dollars.  Monetary assets and liabilities denominated in a foreign currency are converted at the current rate, while nonmonetary assets, liabilities, and shareholder equity accounts are converted at the appropriate historical rate. Revenue and expenses are converted at the weighted-average exchange rate for the period. Any gain or loss as a result of re-measurement is included in current period income unless the investment in the subsidiary is not expected to be recovered in the foreseeable future.  As our investment in the Canadian subsidiary was not expected to be recovered in the near future, we reflected the net gains and losses from the re-measurement as other accumulated comprehensive loss in the accompanying 2010 statement of stockholders’ equity and comprehensive income (loss).    For the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, we had no comprehensive income or loss.

Reclassifications

Certain amounts in our prior years’ financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation.
 
 
F - 11F-10

 
NOTE 3.TRADE ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE

As of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, trade accounts receivable were as follows (in(in thousands):

 2012  2011  2013 2012 
Trade accounts receivable $2,906  $2,236  $2,029  $2,906 
Less: allowance for doubtful accounts  (32)  (20)  (39)  (32)
             
Trade accounts receivable, net $2,874  $2,216  $1,990  $2,874 

NOTE 4.PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT

As of December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, property, plant and equipment consisted of the following (in(in thousands):
 
 2012  2011  2013  2012 
            
Land $1,600  $1,600  $1,600  $1,600 
Machinery and equipment  3,648   3,601  3,892   3,648 
Building and improvements  3,854   3,733   3,868   3,854 
Furniture and fixtures  2,002   1,770   1,984   2,002 
Leasehold improvements  384   384   2   384 
Molds  1,192   1,088   1,383   1,192 
  12,680   12,176   12,729   12,680 
Less: accumulated depreciation and amortization  (5,451)  (5,000)  (5,666)  (5,451)
             
Net property, plant, and equipment $7,229  $7,176  $7,063  $7,229 

NOTE 5.INTANGIBLE ASSETS

At December 31, 20122013 and 2011,2012, intangible assets consisted of the following (in(in thousands):

 2012  2011  2013 2012 
           
Brand name and trademark (life indefinite) $1,510  $1,510  $1,510  $1,510 
             
Purchased technology (9-17 year lives) $1,441  $1,441  $1,441  $1,441 
Less: accumulated amortization  (777)  (689)  (866)  (777)
             
Purchased technology, net $664  $752  $575  $664 
        
        
License rights (5 year life) $316  $316 
Less: accumulated amortization  (316)  (290)
        
License rights, net $--  $26 

With respect to our trademark and brand name, we continue to market products, release new products and product extensions and maintain and promote these trademarks and brand name in the marketplace through legal registration and such methods as advertising, medical education and trade shows.  It is our belief that these trademarks and brand names will generate cash flow for an indefinite period of time.  Therefore, we believe our trademarks and brand name intangible assets are recoverable.not impaired.

Amortization expense amounts for the next five years are approximately $145,000 in 2014 and $108,000 for 2015 through 2018.

During 2011, certain intangible assets were transferred in conjunction with our settlement agreement with Mr. Livneh (See Note 12)13).
 
 
F - 12F-11


NOTE 6.CAPITAL STOCK
TableCommon Stock - Holders of Contentscommon stock are entitled to one vote for each share held of record on each matter submitted to a vote of shareholders. Holders of our common stock do not have a cumulative voting right, which means that the holders of more than one half of our outstanding shares of common stock, subject to the rights of the holders of preferred stock, can elect all of our directors, if they choose to do so. In this event, the holders of the remaining shares of common stock would not be able to elect any directors. Subject to the prior rights of any class or series of preferred stock which may from time to time be outstanding, if any, holders of common stock are entitled to receive ratably, dividends when, as, and if declared by our Board of Directors out of funds legally available for that purpose and, upon our liquidation, dissolution, or winding up, are entitled to share ratably in all assets remaining after payment of liabilities and payment of accrued dividends and liquidation preferences on the preferred stock, if any. Holders of common stock have no preemptive rights and have no rights to convert their common stock into any other securities. The outstanding common stock is duly authorized and validly issued, fully-paid, and non-assessable. Except as otherwise required by Delaware law, and subject to the rights of the holders of preferred stock, all stockholder action is taken by the vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of common stock present at a meeting of shareholders at which a quorum consisting of a majority of the outstanding shares of common stock is present in person or by proxy. Shares repurchased are held as treasury shares and used for general corporate purposes including, but not limited to, satisfying obligations under our employee benefit plans. Treasury stock is recorded at cost.

Preferred Stock - We are authorized to issue 10 million shares of preferred stock, par value $0.001 per share. We may issue preferred stock in one or more series and having the rights, privileges, and limitations, including voting rights, conversion rights, liquidation preferences, dividend rights and preferences and redemption rights, as may from time to time be determined by our Board of Directors. Preferred stock may be issued in the future in connection with acquisitions, financings, or other matters, as our Board of Directors deems appropriate. In the event that we determine to issue any shares of preferred stock, a certificate of designation containing the rights, privileges, and limitations of this series of preferred stock will be filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware. The effect of this preferred stock designation power is that our Board of Directors alone, subject to Federal securities laws, applicable blue sky laws, and Delaware law, may be able to authorize the issuance of preferred stock which could have the effect of delaying, deferring, or preventing a change in control of our company without further action by our shareholders, and may adversely affect the voting and other rights of the holders of our common stock. The issuance of preferred stock with voting and conversion rights may also adversely affect the voting power of the holders of our common stock, including the loss of voting control to others.
Series A 6% Convertible Preferred Stock - During December 2013, our Board of Directors approved a Certificate of Designation of Preferences, Rights, and Limitations of Series A 6% Convertible Preferred Stock, which Certificate was filed with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware on December 13, 2013.  The following is a summary of the rights, privileges and preferences of the Series A Preferred Stock:
Number of Shares. The number of shares of Preferred Stock designated as Series A Preferred Stock is 3,500,000 (which shall not be subject to increase without the written consent of all of the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock).
Stated Value: The initial Stated Value of each share of Series A Preferred Stock is $2.00 (as adjusted pursuant to the Certificate of Designations).
Conversion: The Series A Preferred Stock shall be convertible at the option of the holder, into common stock on a one-for-one basis, subject to adjustments for stock dividends, splits, combinations and similar events as described in the form of Certificate of Designations. In addition, the Company has the right to require the holders to convert to common stock under certain enumerated circumstances.
Redemption: At any time after the 48 month anniversary of the date of issuance of the Series A Preferred Stock, each share of Series A Preferred Stock shall be redeemable at the option of the holder thereof, for an amount equal to the Stated Value (the “Redemption Amount”). The Company shall pay the Redemption Amount as follows: (i) one third of such amount not later than five business days following the applicable Redemption Date (as defined in the Certificate of Designations); (ii) one third of such amount one year following the applicable Redemption Date; and (iii) one third of such amount two years following the applicable Redemption Date; provided, however, that if the applicable Redemption Date is a date following the eighty fourth (84th) anniversary of the issuance of the Series A Preferred Stock, the entire redemption amount shall be payable in one single payment.
F-12

Dividends: Dividends shall accrue on each share of Series A Preferred Stock at the rate of 6% of the stated value per year, compounded annually, whether or not declared. The holders of the Series A Preferred Stock, following notice, have the right to be paid an amount equal to one third of all accrued and unpaid dividends on the following dates: (i) the 48th month following the issuance of the Series A Preferred Stock; (ii) the 60h month following the issuance of the Series A Preferred Stock and (iii) the 72nd month following the issuance of the Series A Preferred Stock.
Voting Rights: Except as described in the Certificate of Designations, holders of the Series A Preferred Stock will vote together with holders of the Company common stock on all matters, on an as-converted to common stock basis, and not as a separate class or series (subject to limited exceptions).
Liquidation Preferences. In the event of any liquidation or winding up of the Company prior to and in preference to any Junior Securities (including common stock), the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock will be entitled to receive in preference to the holders of the Company common stock a per share amount equal to the Stated Value (as adjusted pursuant to the Certificate of Designations).
THE FOREGOING SUMMARY OF THE RIGHTS, PRIVILEGES AND PREFERENCES OF THE SERIES A PREFERRED STOCK IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO THE CERTIFICATE OF DESIGNATIONS.
 
NOTE 6.7.FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTSCONVERTIBLE PREFERRED STOCK AND WARRANTS

2013 Financing

On December 13, 2013, the Company entered into a securities purchase agreement with certain investors for the private placement, for aggregate gross proceeds of $7,000,000, of 3,500,000 shares of the Company’s newly-designated Series A 6% Convertible Preferred Stock (the “Series A Preferred Stock” – see Note 6) and warrants to purchase 5,250,000 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $2.387 per share.

The shares of Series A Preferred Stock, which have a stated liquidation value of $2.00, are convertible at any time, at the option of the holder, into shares of common stock on a one-for-one basis and vote with the shares of common stock on an as-converted basis. The holders of the Series A Preferred Stock may request redemption of their shares at their stated value of $2.00 per share, beginning on December 13, 2017. The Series A Preferred Stock accrues dividends at the rate of 6% per annum, whether or not declared by the Board of Directors.

The Warrants may be exercised at any time on or after June 13, 2014 and expire on June 13, 2019. They may be exercised on a cashless basis and contain customary anti-dilution protection in the event of stock splits, stock dividends or similar events.

In connection with the placement of the Series A Preferred Stock and warrants, we also issued warrants to purchase 525,000 shares of our common stock, with the same terms as the investor warrants, to the placement agent and paid cash fees to the placement agent of $420,000, equal to six percent of the purchase price paid by the investors in the offering.  We also incurred other cash fees related to the offering of $202,145.

The warrants contain a provision that may require net cash settlement in the event that there is a Fundamental Transaction (contractually defined as a merger, sale of substantially all assets, tender offer or share exchange). Because of this contingent redemption provision, the warrants require liability classification in accordance with FASB ASC 480-10, Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity and do not meet all of the established criteria for equity classification in FASB ASC 815-40, Derivatives and Hedging – Contracts in Entity’s Own Equity. Accordingly, the warrants are recorded as derivative liabilities at fair value. Changes in the fair value of the warrants are charged or credited to income each period.

The warrants issued to the investors and to the placement agent were valued using a binomial lattice model, because that model embodies all of the relevant assumptions that address the features underlying these instruments. Significant assumptions used in the model included the market price of our common stock on the date of valuation, an expected dividend yield of zero, the remaining period to the expiration date of the warrants, expected volatility of our common stock over the remaining life of the warrants of 46% - 48% estimated based on a review of our historical volatility, and risk-free rates of return based on constant maturity rates published by the U.S. Federal Reserve, applicable to the remaining life of the warrants.  At December 13, 2013 and December 31, 2013, the investor warrants were valued at $4,383,750 and $4,599,000, respectively, and the placement agent warrants were valued at $438,375 and $459,900, respectively. The aggregate change in value of the investor and placement agent warrants between December 13, 2013 and December 31, 2013 of $236,775 was recorded in income as a non-operating loss.
F-13


The Company and the investors also executed a Registration Rights Agreement whereby the Company agreed to register the shares of common stock issuable upon conversion of the Series A Preferred Stock and upon exercise of the Warrants, as well as the common stock underlying the warrants issued to the placement agent. Pursuant to the terms of the Registration Rights Agreement, the Company agreed to file a registration statement within thirty days of the closing date and was required to obtain the effectiveness of such registration statement within ninety days of its filing. In the event that the required filing and effectiveness dates are not met or if the registration statement, once effective, fails to remain effective for a continuous period of 30 days or for a cumulative total of 60 days in any 12 month period, then the Company is required to pay to each investor an amount in cash, as liquidated damages and not as a penalty, equal to 1% of the aggregate purchase price paid by such investor for its Preferred Stock and Warrants; and on each monthly anniversary of each such event (if the applicable event has not been cured by such date) until the applicable event is cured, a further 1% of the purchase price, subject to a maximum payment of 10% of the purchase price. The required registration statement was filed on January 10, 2014 and became effective on January 28, 2014. Accordingly, the Company will not be required to pay any liquidated damages to the investors, unless the registration statement fails to remain continuously effective for the periods specified by the Registration Rights Agreement.  The Company does not presently anticipate being required to make any such payments.
The gross proceeds of the offering of $7,000,000 were first allocated to the fair value of the warrants issued to the investors, with the balance of the proceeds allocated to the Series A Preferred Stock.  The aggregate costs of the offering of $1,060,520, including the cash fees paid of $622,145 and the fair value of the placement agent warrants of $438,375, were allocated between the Series A Preferred Stock and the warrants based on the gross proceeds allocated to each instrument, as follows:

  
Proceeds
Allocated
  
Expenses
Allocated
 
       
Series A Preferred Stock $2,616,250  $396,369 
Investor Warrants  4,383,750   664,151 
  $7,000,000  $1,060,520 

Because the warrants are recorded as a liability at fair value, the portion of the expenses allocated to the warrants was expensed and is included in other income (expense) section in our Statement of Operations.

In accordance with ASC 470-20-25-5, the company recognized a beneficial conversion feature related to the Series A Preferred Stock, The beneficial conversion feature, which was limited to $2,616,250, the proceeds initially allocated to the Series A Preferred Stock, was credited to additional paid-in capital. Because the Series A Preferred Stock is not mandatorily redeemable but can be immediately converted by the holder, the discount recognized by the allocation of proceeds to the beneficial conversion feature was immediately accreted and recognized as a dividend to the preferred shareholders, in accordance with ASC 470-20-35-7c.

Because the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock may request redemption on or after December 13, 2017, the preferred stock has conditions for its redemption that are not within the control of the Company.  Accordingly, the carrying amount of the Series A Preferred Stock of $2,616,250, net of the expenses allocated to the preferred stock of $396,369, was recorded outside of stockholders’ equity, as mezzanine equity, in accordance with ASC 480-10-S99.  The net carrying amount of the Series A Preferred Stock is being accreted to its redemption value over the four year period to when the holders may request redemption, using an effective interest method. For the period ended December 31, 2013, additional accretion of $38,887 was recognized and the net carrying amount of the Series A Preferred Stock at December 31, 2013 was $2,258,767.
2010 Financing

On April 18, 2010, we entered into a securities purchase agreement for the private placement of 571,429 shares of common stock and 285,714 warrants to purchase common stock at an exercise price of $6.00 per share, for aggregate gross proceeds of approximately $3 million. In connection with the private placement, we paid certain cash fees and also issued 34,286 and 10,000 warrants to the placement agents, at an exercise price of $6.00 per share.
The warrants are exercisable at any time and will expire on April 18, 2015. The exercise price of the warrants issued to the investors is subject to adjustment so that, among other things, if we issue any shares of common stock (including options and warrants, with standard exceptions), at a price that is lower than the exercise price then in effect, the exercise price then in effect will be reduced to such lower price. As a result of the 2013 financing described above, the exercise price of the investor warrants issued in 2010 was reduced to $2.00 per share and the number of warrants increased by 571,428 to 857,142. The number of placement agent warrants and their exercise price were not affected.
F-14


The warrants contain a provision that may require net cash settlement in the event that there is a Fundamental Transaction (contractually defined as a merger, sale of substantially all assets, tender offer or share exchange). Because of this contingent redemption provision, the warrants require liability classification in accordance with FASB ASC 480-10, Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity and do not meet all of the established criteria for equity classification in FASB ASC 815-40, Derivatives and Hedging – Contracts in Entity’s Own Equity. Accordingly, the warrants are recorded as derivative liabilities at fair value. Changes in the fair value of the warrants are charged or credited to income each period.

The warrants are valued using a binomial lattice model. Significant assumptions used in the model at December 31, 2013 included the market price of our common stock, an expected dividend yield of zero, the remaining period to the expiration date of the warrants, expected volatility of our common stock over the remaining life of the warrants of 43%, estimated based on a review of our historical volatility, and risk-free rates of return of 0.36% based on constant maturity rates published by the U.S. Federal Reserve, applicable to the remaining life of the warrants. We also take into consideration a probability assumption for anti-dilution. At December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the fair value of the investor and placement agent warrants was approximately $690,000 and $85,000, respectively.
On March 31, 2014, the Company entered into an agreement with an existing warrant holder pursuant to which the Company repurchased warrants exercisable into 142,857 shares of Common Stock for an aggregate purchase price of $420,571.01.

Reconciliation of changes in fair value

Certain assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2012 and 2011 are measured in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 820-10-05, Fair Value Measurements.  FASB ASC Topic 820-10-05 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands the disclosure requirements regarding fair value measurements for financial assets and liabilities as well as for non-financial assets and liabilities that are recognized or disclosed at fair value on a recurring basis in the financial statements.
 
The statement requires fair value measurement be classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories:
 
Level 1: Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets that are accessible at the measurement date for identical, unrestricted assets or liabilities;
 
Level 2: Quoted prices in markets that are not active, or inputs which are observable, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the asset or liability; and
 
Level 3: Prices or valuation techniques that require inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable (i.e., supported by little or no market activity).
 
The following table summarizes our financial instrumentsAssets and liabilities measured at fair value asare classified in their entirety based on the lowest level of December 31, 2012 (in thousands):

  
December 31, 2012
Fair Value Measurements
 
  Total  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3 
Assets:            
Cash and equivalents – United States
 $4,162  $4,162  $  $ 
Cash and equivalents - Foreign currency
  --   --       
                 
Total assets
 $4,162  $4,162  $  $ 
                 
Derivative Liabilities:
                
Warrant liability (1)
 $85  $  $  $85 
                 
Total liabilities
 $85  $  $  $85 
input that is significant to their fair value measurement. Our derivative financial instruments that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis are all measured at fair value using Level 3 inputs. Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities.
 
The following table summarizes our financial instrumentsrepresents a reconciliation of the changes in fair value of warrants measured at fair value as ofusing Level 3 inputs during the year ended December 31, 2011 (in thousands):2013: 

  
December 31, 2011
Fair Value Measurements
 
  Total  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3 
Assets:            
Cash and equivalents – United States
 $4,870  $4,870  $  $ 
Cash and equivalents - Foreign currency
  10   10       
                 
Total assets
 $4,880  $4,880  $  $ 
                 
Derivative Liabilities:
                
Warrant liability (1)
 $105  $  $  $105 
                 
Total liabilities
 $105  $  $  $105 
(in $ thousands) 2013 Investor Warrants  2013 Placement Agent Warrants  2010 Investor Warrants  2010 Placement Agent Warrants  Total 
                
Balance, December 31, 2012 $-  $-  $71  $14  $85 
                     
Issuances – December 13, 2013  4,384   438   -   -   4,822 
                     
Fair value adjustments:                    
Effect of change in exercise price  -   -   613   -   613 
Change in fair value  215   22   5   (13)  229 
                     
Balance, December 31, 2013 $4,599  $460  $689  $1  $5,749 

 
F - 13F-15

(1)On April 18, 2010, we entered into a securities purchase agreement with purchasers named therein to raise in the aggregate of approximately $3 million in a private placement of common stock and warrants pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and/or Regulation D promulgated thereunder. Upon closing of the transaction, we entered into a registration rights agreement with the buyers and issued to the buyers an aggregate of 571,429 shares of common stock at a per share price of $5.25, and warrants to acquire additional shares of common stock of up to 50% of the common shares acquired by each respective buyer at an exercise price of $6.00 per share.
The warrants are immediately exercisable and will terminate on the fifth anniversary of the issuance date. The exercise price of the warrants is subject to adjustment so that, among other things, if we issue any shares of common stock (including options and warrants, with standard exceptions), at a price that is lower than the exercise price then in effect, the exercise price then in effect will be reduced to such lower price.
In connection with the private placement, we paid certain cash fees and issued a warrant to the placement agent, Rodman & Renshaw, LLC, for the purchase of 42,857 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $6.00 per share for its activity engaged on behalf of the Company. In addition, the Company paid certain cash fees and issued a warrant to Gilford Securities Incorporated for the purchase of 10,000 shares of common stock at an exercise price of $6.00 per share for its activity engaged on behalf of the Company.
The warrants issued contained provisions for a net cash settlement in the event that there is a fundamental transaction (contractually defined as a merger, sale of substantially all assets, tender offer or share exchange). Due to this contingent redemption provision, the warrants require liability classification according to FASB ASC 480-10, Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity and must be recorded at fair value each reporting period. These warrants required classification as liabilities at inception and ongoing measurement at fair value each reporting period thereafter.

The warrants are valued using a binomial lattice valuation methodology because that model embodies all of the relevant assumptions that address the features underlying these instruments. Significant assumptions used in this model at December 31, 2012 included an expected remaining life of 3 years, an expected dividend yield of zero, estimated volatility of 43%, and risk-free rates of return of 0.36%. For the risk-free rates of return, we use the published yields on zero-coupon Treasury Securities with maturities consistent with the remaining term of the warrants and volatility is based on a weighted average of the historical volatility of our stock price and peer company stock price volatility. We also take into consideration a probability assumption for anti-dilution.

Changes in Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) (in thousands):
Description 
Year Ended
December 31,
2012
  
Year Ended
December 31,
2011
 
       
Beginning balance
 
$
105
 
 
$
504
 
Purchases, issuances, and settlements
 
 
--
 
 
 
--
 
Reduced Lican liability from settlement
  
--
   
(111)
 
Total gain included in earnings (2)
 
 
(20)
 
 
 
(288)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ending balance
 
$
85
 
 
$
105
 
(2)Gains for the period ended December 31, 2012 related to the revaluation of equity based liabilities. The gains related to the warrant liability portion were calculated from the date of the warrant issuance (April 18, 2010) through December 31, 2012. These gains and losses are reflected in our consolidated statements of operations as a component of other income (expense).
F - 14

 
NOTE 7.8.RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

In June 2011,January 2013, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): PresentationASU 2013-01, "Clarifying the Scope of Comprehensive Income which requiresDisclosures about Offsetting Assets and Liabilities." ASU 2013-01 clarifies the scope of ASU 2011-11 to apply to derivative instruments that are offset or subject to an entity to present the total of comprehensive income, the components of net income, and the components of other comprehensive income either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive incomeenforceable master netting arrangement or in two separate but consecutive statements. In both choices, an entity is required to present each component of net income along with total net income, each component of other comprehensive income along with a total for other comprehensive income, and a total amount for comprehensive income. ASU 2011-05 eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of stockholders’ equity. The amendments in ASU 2011-05 do not change the items that must be reported in other comprehensive income or when an item of other comprehensive income must be reclassified to net income. ASU 2011-05similar agreement. This clarified guidance is effective for our fiscal yearsannual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2012. Early adoption is permitted. We have adopted this new guidance2013 and itsubsequent interim periods. The revised requirements of ASU 2013-01 did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In May 2011,July 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (Topic 820): Amendments2013-11, “Presentation of an unrecognized tax benefit when a net operating loss carry-forward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carry-forward exists.” ASU 2013-11 requires companies to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirementspresent a deferred tax asset net of related unrecognized tax benefits if there is a net operating loss or other tax carry-forwards that would apply in U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards to providesettlement of the uncertain tax position. To the extent that an uncertain tax position would not be settled through a consistent definitionreduction of fair value and ensure thata net operating loss or other tax carry-forwards, the fair value measurement and disclosure requirements are similar between U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards. ASU 2011-04 changes certain fair value measurement principles and enhances the disclosure requirements, mainly for level 3 fair value measurements. ASU 2011-04unrecognized tax benefit will be presented as a liability. The guidance is effective for ourthe fiscal yearsyear beginning January 1, 2012. Early2014, with early adoption is not permitted. We have adopted this new guidance and itThe requirements of ASU 2013-11 did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-08, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other an update that amends the accounting guidance on goodwill impairment testing. The amendments in this accounting standard update are intended to reduce complexity and costs by allowing an entity the option to first assess qualitative factors in its evaluation about the likelihood of goodwill impairment to determine whether it is necessary to perform the two-step quantitative goodwill impairment test of a reporting unit. In addition the amendments include a number of events and circumstances for an entity to consider in conducting the qualitative assessment. ASU No. 2011-08 is effective for our fiscal years beginning after January 1, 2012 with early adoption permitted. We have adopted this new guidance and it did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11 which amended the disclosure requirements regarding offsetting assets and liabilities of derivatives, sale and repurchase agreements, reverse sale and repurchase agreements, and securities borrowing and securities lending arrangements. The enhanced disclosures will require entities to provide both net and gross information for these assets and liabilities. The amendment is effective for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 2013. The Company does not anticipate that this amendment will have a material impact on its financial statements.

In July 2012, the FASB issued ASU No. 2012-02, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Testing Indefinite-Lived Intangible Assets for Impairment. This update simplifies the guidance for testing the impairment of indefinite-lived intangible assets other than goodwill. The amendments in ASU 2012-02 allow an organization the option to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is necessary to perform the quantitative impairment test. An organization electing to perform a qualitative assessment is no longer required to calculate the fair value of an indefinite-lived intangible asset unless the organization determines, based on a qualitative assessment, that it is “more likely than not” that the asset is impaired. The amendment is effective for annual and interim impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after September 15, 2012. We have adopted this new guidance and it did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
F - 15

 
We have reviewed all other recently issued standards and have determined they will not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements, or do not apply to our operations.

NOTE 8.9.LINE OF CREDITLONG TERM DEBT

Line of Credit

We have a $6 million secured revolving line of credit facility with PNC Bank N.A., which at December 31, 2012 had a zero balance. Advances under the $6 million line of credit are due on demand and bear interest at a rate of daily LIBOR plus 1.75% and are secured by a perfected first security interest in our inventory and accounts receivable.

In addition, we have a separate additional credit facility with PNC Bank N.A. for up to $1 million specific to financing new equipment purchases. This credit facility provides for a 1 year draw up to the conversion date of October 31, 2013.  Prior to the conversion date amounts outstanding will bear an interest rate of daily LIBOR plus 2.25%.  Once the note is converted the term will be 5 years and will bear an interest rate of daily LIBOR plus 2.50%. The note would be secured by a perfected first security interest in the new equipment purchased. We did not draw on this line during 2012.

Subsequent available borrowings for both these credit facilities are subject to a borrowing base utilizing a percentage of eligible receivables, inventories, and any assigned cash along with certain financial ratios, specifically maintaining: (i) a ratio of tangible net worth of less than 0.75 to 1.0 and (ii) a ratio of minimum fixed charge of 1.25 to 1.0 measured on a rolling four quarter basis.
At December 31, 2012, we were in full compliance with the loan covenants and ratios of both the credit facilities. According to our most recent borrowing base calculation, we had approximately $4.0 million total availability under the $6.0 million credit line, of which we currently have a zero balance. We also have available approximately $1.0 million under the equipment line of credit.

Mortgage Note Payable

We currently haveAt December 31, 2013, we had approximately $3.4$3.3 million borrowed underoutstanding industrial revenue bonds which wewere previously used for the purchase and renovation of our Clearwater, Florida facility.  During 2011, theseThese bonds were refinanced in October 2011 through PNC Bank, N.A. The bonds, which are being amortized overhad a 20-year amortization term, balloon in November 2018 and bear interest at a fixed interest rate of 5.6%.  Scheduled maturities of this indebtedness are shown below:approximately $72,000, $3.2 million for 2013 and 2014, which included additional monthly principal payments and an accelerated balloon payment date pursuant to the forbearance amendment to our credit agreement dated October 22, 2013 mentioned below.

  Years Ending December 31, 
  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  Thereafter 
Mortgage scheduled maturities $138  $146  $154  $163  $172  $2,646 
On October 22, 2013, we entered into an amendment to our credit facilities with PNC Bank.  Pursuant the amendment, we terminated our revolving line of credit. In addition, the amendment provided for changes to our mortgage note credit facility and previous amendment: (a) the definition of “adjusted EBITDA” contained in our credit agreement dated October 31, 2011, as amended, relating to $4,000,000 in Pinellas County Industrial Development Revenue Bonds Series 2008 was amended to exclude the one-time payment on the judgment in favor of Leonard Keen in the approximate amount of $848,000, effective as of June 30, 2013; (b) in addition to the payments of principal and interest otherwise required under the bonds, from November 1, 2013 through and including September 1, 2014, the Company shall make additional principal payments of $12,000 per month and redeem the bonds in full on October 1, 2014; and (c) amended the covenant containing the adjusted EBITDA targets, as more fully set forth in the fourth amendment. The amendment also grants PNC a security interest in all of our property and equipment (excluding patents) as additional collateral to secure our obligations under the credit agreement. All other terms of our remaining credit agreement, as amended, remain in full force and effect.

Pursuant to the terms of the our previous amendment to our credit facility, we were required, among other things, to maintain a minimum adjusted EBITDA in at least the following amounts, for the following periods: (a) ($525,000) for the three months including March 31, 2013; (b) ($1,100,000) for the six months ending June 30, 2013; (c) ($1,400,000) for the nine months ended September 30, 2013; and (d) ($1,550,000) for the twelve months ended December 31, 2013. We also were to maintain a Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio of at least the following at the end of the following periods: (i) 1.25:1.0 for the three months ended March 31, 2014; (ii) 1.25:1.0 for the six months ended June 30, 2014; (iii) 1.25:1.0 for the nine months ended September 30, 2014.
F-16


At December 31, 2013, we were in full compliance with the amended loan covenants and ratios for our credit facility.

On March 20, 2014, the Company entered into a transaction with The Bank of Tampa, a Florida banking corporation (“Lender”) wherein Lender extended to the Company a mortgage loan in the principal amount of $3,592,000 (the “Loan”). The obligations under the Loan are secured by a first mortgage and security interest in the Company’s Clearwater, Florida facility as well as an assignment of the Company’s accounts receivable.  In addition, the Company pledged and interest in a certificate of deposit in the amount of $898,000 as additional collateral which declines on a pro rata basis as principal is paid.  The initial maturity date of the Loan is March 20, 2017; however the Company has an option to extend the maturity date until March 20, 2022.
Borrowings under the Loan bear interest at LIBOR plus 3.5%, with a fixed monthly principal payment of $19,956.
The Loan documents contain customary financial covenants, including a covenant that the Company maintain a minimum liquidity of $750,000.  Although there is no Debt Service Coverage Ratio (as defined in the Loan Agreement) for the initial term of the Loan, should the Company desire to extend the Loan beyond three years, the Company must maintain a Debt Service Coverage Ratio for each of the preceding four quarters of not less than 1.0 to 1.0.  In the event the Loan is extended, the Debt Service Coverage Ratio must not be less than 1.2 to 1.0.

Simultaneously with the closing of the Loan, the Company redeemed those certain Industrial Revenue Bonds issued by the Pinellas County Industrial Development Authority and satisfied its obligations to its prior lender, PNC Bank, N.A (“PNC Bank”).  In connection with the redemption of the Bonds, the Company paid PNC Bank $3,188,332.51 to satisfy its existing credit facility.  In connection with the termination of the interest rates swap agreement with PNC Bank, the Company paid PNC Bank an additional $410,275.

Our future contractual obligations for agreements with initial terms greater than one year and agreements to purchase materials in the normal course of business are summarized as follows (in thousands):

Description Years Ending December 31, 
  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  Thereafter 
Long-term debt  $3,257   -   -   -   -   - 
NOTE 9.10.TAXES AND NET OPERATING LOSS CARRYFORWARDS

During 2010, our 2008 and 2009 federal tax returns were selected for examination by the United States Internal Revenue Service (“the IRS”). The exam was concluded in March, 2011. As a result of the IRS exam, our federal net operating loss carryforwardscarry-forwards were reduced by approximately $350,000 and R&D credits were reduced by approximately $55,000.
 
 
F - 16F-17

 
Deferred income taxes reflect the impact of temporary differences between the amount of assets and liabilities recognized for financial reporting purposes and such amounts recognized for income tax purposes. The tax effects of these temporary differences representing the components of deferred tax assets (liabilities) at December 31 were approximately as follows (in thousands):
 
 2012  2011  2013 2012 
Deferred tax assets, current:           
U.S. net operating loss carryforwards $1,097  $980 
State net operating loss carryforwards  197   176 
U.S. net operating loss carry-forwards $2,026  $1,097 
Settlements 204 -- 
State net operating loss carry-forwards  363   197 
Research and development credits  774   774   876   774 
AMT credits  73   73   75   73 
Accounts receivable  12   16   15   12 
Reserves  1   --   --   1 
Inventory  --   1   --   -- 
Charitable  9   9   12   9 
Accrued expenses  132   56   281   132 
Accrued Settlement  --   593   --   -- 
Non-current estimate of loss and credit carryforwards  (2,295)  (2,178)
Non-current estimate of loss and credit carry-forwards  (3,852)  (2,295)
Total deferred tax assets, current  --   500   --   -- 
               
Deferred tax assets, non-current:               
Investment in subsidiary  128   --   128   128 
Loss and credit carryforwards  2,295   2,178 
Loss and credit carry-forwards  3,852   2,295 
Stock based compensation  95   70   158   95 
Total deferred tax assets, non- current  2,518   2,248   4,138   2,518 
               
Deferred tax liabilities, non-current:               
Inventory  (1)  --   1   (1)
State taxes (capital)  (4)  --   (3)  (4)
Property and equipment  (361)  (422)  (346)  (361)
Intangibles  (304)  (254)  (365)  (304)
Unrecognized tax benefit liability for non-current temporary differences  (49)  (63)  (13)  (49)
Total deferred tax liabilities, non- current  (719)  (739)
Total deferred tax liabilities, non-current  (726)  (719)
               
Net non-current deferred income tax asset $1,799  $1,509  $3,412  $1,799 

We consider all positive and negative evidence regarding the realization of deferred tax assets, including past operating results and future sources of taxable income. U.S. net operating losses will begin to expire in years beginning in 2019.

TheWe assess the financial statement impact of an uncertain tax position taken or expected to be taken on an income tax return is recognized in the financial statements at the largest amount that is more-likely-than-not to be sustained upon audit by the relevant taxing authority. An uncertain income tax position will not be recognized in the financial statements unless it is more likely than not of being sustained. All of our positions arise from taxable temporary differences and, as such, the liability has been recognized in the net deferred tax asset, current and non-current items to which they relate.  The calculated amount of penalties and interest related to these timing differences were immaterial at December 31, 20122013 and 2011.  In addition, because the amounts are related to temporary timing differences, there would be no material impact on our effective tax rate if recognized.2012.  
F-18

 
Below is a reconciliation of the statutory federal income tax rate to our effective tax rate for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 2010:2011:

 2012  2011  2010  2013  2012  2011 
Federal Tax Provision  34.0%  34.0%  34.0%
Federal tax provision  34.0%  34.0%  34.0%
State taxes (net of federal benefit)  4.1%  (32.0%)  4.3%  2.6%  4.1%  (32.0) %
Stock based compensation*  -   (27.8%)  0.5%  -   --   (27.8) %
Research and development credits*  -   (78.0%)  5.0%  -   --   (78.0) %
Warrant Gains  -   (175.9%)  - 
Meals and Entertainment  -   39.1%  - 
Warrant gains  -   --   (175.9) %
Meals and entertainment  -   --   39.1%
Other  (12.2%)  -   (6.1%)  (9.3)%  (12.2)%  -- 
  25.9%  (240.6%)  37.7%  27.3%  25.9%  (240.6) %
_________
* Net of IRS Exam adjustments for 2010
F - 17

 
NOTE 10.11.RETIREMENT PLAN

The Company provides a tax-qualified profit-sharing retirement plan under section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code for the benefit of eligible employees with an accumulation of funds for retirement on a tax-deferred basis and provides for annual discretionary contribution to individual trust funds.

All employees are eligible to participate. The employees may make voluntary contributions to the plan up to the maximum percentage allowed by the Internal Revenue Code. Vesting in employee matching contributions is graded and depends on the years of service. After three years from their date of hire, the employees are 100% vested.  The Company makes matching contributions of 50% of the employee contributions up to a total of 3% of participant payroll. Beginning 2009 through 20122013 the Company’s management suspended the matching contribution as a cost cutting measure.

NOTE 11.12.OTHER RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

Compensation of Non-Employee Directors

We compensate our board members with a combination of both stock options and cash payments. During the year ended December 31, 2012, we granted 82,000 stock options to board members having a fair value of approximately $66,000 and we paid $27,000 in cash amounts to our independent directors as consideration for their service on our Board of Directors. We pay $1,000 cash for in person board meetings and $500 cash payments for telephonic board meetings. In addition, the Chairman of our Audit Committee receives a monthly stipend of $1,500, plus a one-time grant of 20,000 stock options. Prior to 2011, we compensated our board members with stock options only.  For the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, we granted stock options in the amounts of 15,000 and 54,160 respectively, which had fair values of approximately $20,250 and $53,100, respectively.

Research and Development Consulting Services

A relative of Moshe Citronowicz, Bovie’s Senior Vice President, is considered a related party. Arik Zoran Mr. Citronowicz’s brother is a consultant of the owner ofCompany doing business as AR Logic, Inc., which is a consulting firm that provides consulting services to the Company.owned by Arik Zoran, Mr. Citronowicz’s brother. During January 2011, we entered into a three year consulting services agreement with AR Logic that provides for a monthly retainer for engineering support for our existing generator product line and a separate hourly based fee structure for additional consulting related to new product lines. The consulting rates are consistent with rates of an arms length transaction. AR Logic was paid consulting fees of approximately $266,600, $223,500 and $171,700 during 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Previous to 2011, Mr. Zoran was an employee in charge of the engineering department and was paid inclusive of benefits $192,014 for 2010.

A second relative of Mr. Citronowicz is considered a related party. Yechiel Tsitrinovich is also a brother of Mr. Citronowicz, and acts as a consultant to the Company related to research and development of certain products. Mr. Tsitrinovich has a royalty contract with us related to the creation and design of a proprietary technology that is used in some of our generators. Mr. Tsitrinovich was paid a combination of consulting fees and royalties on previous product designs approximating $72,890, $77,218, and $85,310 for 2013, 2012, and $65,654 for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.
F - 18


Professional Services

A former director of Bovie who resigned in March 2012, is president and a shareholder of Ronin Consulting Group, Inc., a company which provides various financial and analytical project consulting services to Bovie. During the time period that Mr. MacLaren was a director for the Company, Ronin Consulting Group, Inc. was paid fees of approximately $20,000 $80,000 and $80,000 during 2012, 2011 and 2010,2011, respectively.

Another former director of Bovie who resigned in March 2012, provides consulting services related to research and development of certain products and was paid fees during the time period that he was acting as a director of approximately $7,500 $30,000, and $30,000, during 2012 2011, and 2010,2011, respectively.

F-19

NOTE 12.13.OTHER COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Property and Rental Agreements

We arewere obligated under an operating lease for a manufacturing and warehouse facility in St. Petersburg, Florida which lease requiresrequired monthly payments of approximately $14,000, and expiresexpired on October 31, 2013. We also lease a separate warehouse facility in Clearwater (under a month-to-month arrangement requiring monthly payments of approximately $1,600), and our executive offices in New York (under a month-to-month arrangement requiring monthly payments of approximately $1,500).

The following is a schedule of approximate future minimum lease payments under operating leases as of December 31, 2012 (in2013 (in thousands):

2013 $228 
2014  12  $12 
2015  --   -- 
        
Total $240  $12 

Rent expense for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 approximated $228,000, $256,000 and $281,000,$256,000, respectively.

Purchase Commitments

At December 31, 2012,2013, we had non-cancelable purchase commitments for inventories totaling approximately $3.8$3.1 million, substantially all of which is expected to be purchased by the end of 2013.2014.

Employment Agreements

At December 31, 2012,2013, we were obligated under three employment agreements which have expiration dates between June 20142015 and December 2015.2016. Approximate future minimum payments under these agreements are as follows as of December 31, 2012 (in2013 (in thousands):

2013 $966 
2014  786  $1,316 
2015  725   786 
2016  216 
       
Total $2,477  $2,318 
 
 
F - 19F-20

 
During 2011,At December 31, 2013, employment contracts with Mr. Makrides, Mr. Gershon, Mr. Saron, and Mr. Citronowicz, which are set to expire in December 2016 for Mr. Makrides and December 31, 2015 for the others, contain an automatic extension for a period of one year after the initial term unless we provide the executives with appropriate 60 days written notice pursuant to the contracts.  The employment agreements provide, among other things, that the executive may be terminated Leonard Keen as our V.P. and General Counsel. The termination of Mr. Keen’s employment is presently the subject of litigation (See “Litigation” below). The agreements with our Chief Executive Officer, our President and Chief Sales and Marketing Officer, and our Senior Vice President contain the following provisions:follows:

 ·(a)Clauses that allow for continuous automatic extensionsUpon the death of one year unless timely written notice terminating the contract is provided to such officers (as definedexecutive, in which case the agreements).executive’s estate shall be paid the basic annual compensation due the employee pro-rated through the date of death.

 ·(b)ClausesBy the resignation of the executive at any time upon at least thirty (30) days prior written notice to Bovie in which requirecase Bovie shall be obligated to pay the Companyemployee the basic annual compensation due him pro-rated to make lump sum paymentsthe effective date of termination.

(c)By Bovie, “for cause” if during the term of the employment agreement the employee violates the non-competition provisions of his employment agreement, or is found guilty in a court of law of any crime of moral turpitude in which case the contract would be terminated and provisions for future compensation forfeited.

(d)By Bovie, without cause, with the majority approval of the Board of Directors, for Mr. Makrides, Mr. Gershon, Mr. Saron, and Mr. Citronowicz at any time upon at least thirty (30) days prior written notice to the executive. In this case Bovie shall be obligated to pay the executive compensation in effect at such officers equaltime, including all bonuses, accrued or prorated, and expenses up to three times theirthe date of termination. Thereafter for Messrs Makrides, Saron, and Citronowicz for the period remaining under the contract, Bovie shall pay the executive the salary and bonus in effect at the time of any change in control and/or breachtermination payable weekly until the end of the agreements by the Company.  The 2013 base salaries for these three officers are expected to approximate $725,000.their contract.

Additionally, the employment agreement with our V.P. Sales & Marketing contains a clause which requires the Company to make a lump sum severance payment in the amount of $160,000 at the time of any change in control and/or breach of the agreements by the Company.
(e)If Bovie fails to meet its obligations to the executive on a timely basis, or if there is a change in the control of Bovie, the executive may elect to terminate his employment agreement. Upon any such termination or breach of any of its obligations under the employment agreement, Bovie shall pay Mr. Makrides, Mr. Saron and Mr. Citronowicz a lump sum severance equal to three times the annual salary and bonus in effect the month preceding such termination or breach as well as any other sums which may be due under the terms of the employment agreement up to the date of termination. Mr. Gershon shall be paid two times his annual salary and bonus in effect the month preceding such termination or breach as well as any other sums which may be due under the terms of the employment agreement up to the date of termination.

Litigation

Livneh/Lican Development Settlement Agreement and Related Litigation

We have an employment contract with Mr. Pickett to serve as Chief Financial Officer which has a current expiration date of June 2015.  In December 2011, a settlement related to the then pending actions between the Company and certain affiliates, on the one hand, and Steve Livneh and certain affiliates, on the other hand,  which was the subject of prior disclosures, was structured and subsequently entered into on February 22, 2012. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”), we agreed, among other things, to perform the following:  (i) make a $250,000 lump sum payment to Livneh ($50,000 of which was previously recorded and expensed), (ii) make 18 installment payments to Livneh in the amount of $23,222.22 per month, (iii) reimburse Livneh for all unpaid expenses that Livneh incurred on behalf of the Company during the period of his employment and/or consultancy (from October 1, 2006 through August 11, 2010), (iv) pay Livneh $14,700, which represents the balance of the amounts due to Henvil Corp. Ltd. under a certain bill of sale, dated April 12, 2010, (v) transfer to Livneh the titleevent of a certain automobile, (vi) transferchange of control, the contract provides that Mr. Pickett will receive salary and bonus in effect up to Livneh all of the Company’s right and interest in certain Intellectual Property (as defined in the Settlement Agreement) pertaining to the Modular Ergonomic Grip (“MEG”), Modullion, RF Skin Resurfacing, Scannula, Double Jaw Forceps and Tip-On-Tube designs and trade name (collectively, the “Assigned Patents”), (vi) transfer to Livneh certain parts for the MEG device, (vii) grant Livneh an exclusive license to produce, market and sell the Seal-N-Cut device in the People’s Republic of China, (viii) pay to Livneh royalty payments of 3% on the Company’s Net Sales (as defined in the Settlement Agreement) of the Seal-N-Cut device outside the People’s Republic of China, and (ix) pay to Livneh a one-time royalty payment of 5% upon the closing of any sale by the Company of its right or interest in any Intellectual Property pertaining to the Seal-N-Cut device.  To secure the Company’s obligations, we granted Livneh a security interest in all of our rights and interest of the Company in the Seal-N-Cut device, including all Intellectual Property pertaining thereto. Since the loss was quantifiable and known in December 2011, we recognized this settlement loss in 2011 and all payments hereunder were accrued during the fourth quarter.

In exchange, Livneh agreed, among other things, to perform the following: (i) pay us royalty payments of 3% on Livneh’s Net Sales of the Assigned Patents, excluding any Net Sales of the RF Skin Resurfacing or Tip-On-Tube, (ii) pay us a one-time royalty payment of 5% upon the closing of any sale by Livneh, Henvil or Lican Development Ltd. of their right or interest in any Intellectual Property pertaining to the Assigned Patents, and (iii) pay us royalty payments of 3% on Livneh’s Net Sales of the Seal-N-Cut device in the People’s Republic of China.

As a result of the Settlement Agreement, we recorded an expense in the fourth quarter of 2011 of approximately $737,000 for the transfer of the MEG and the Modullion intellectual property.  We also accrued expenses in approximate amounts for the transfer of related inventory and molds of $194,000 and an additional $27,000 for other various expenses.

The Settlement Agreement contained no admission of liability or wrongdoing by us, Mr. Andrew Makrides, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Moshe Citronowicz, the Company’s Senior Vice President, Livneh, Henvil or Lican.  Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, we, along with Mr. Makrides, Mr. Citronowicz, Livneh, Henvil and Lican agreed to dismiss the litigations with prejudice and they fully and finally released all claims known and unknown, foreseen and unforeseen, which they had against each other through the date of the Settlement Agreement.
F - 20

In July 2012, Steven Livneh and two of his related entities, Henvil Corp. Ltd. and Lican Development Ltd., commenced a new action against the Company, Andrew Makrides, and Moshe Citronowicz, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Tampa Division).  The complaint asserts, among other things, that (i) the defendants breached their obligations to the plaintiffs under the Settlement Agreement by allegedly failing to take certain actions that facilitated the plaintiffs’ marketing and saleremaining portion of the Seal-N-Cut products in the People’s Republic of China (“PRC”), (ii)contract.

There are no other employment contracts that defendants tortiously interfered with plaintiffs’ business relationships and expectations in PRC allegedly by, among other things, refusing to provide plaintiffs with an ICON VS generator and (iii) plaintiffs allegedly suffered damages as a result of defendants’ breaches and misrepresentations.  The complaint seeks, among other things, the following: (i) compensatory damageshave non-cancelable terms in excess of $10 million, (ii) an order directing Bovie to provide plaintiffs with an ICON VS generator, (iii) an assignment to plaintiffs of all patents identified in the Settlement Agreement, and (iv) rescission of the Settlement Agreement.  We believe the allegations to be frivolous and without merit, and we intend to defend the action vigorously.  On July 24, 2012, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint and to compel arbitration.  The plaintiffs opposed the motion, and the motion was subsequently withdrawn as moot due to the non-availability of the stipulated arbitrator.  Discovery is now underway.one year.

The outcome of this matter is uncertain, no range of potential loss can be estimated and accordingly no effect has been given to any loss that may result from the resolution of this matter in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.Litigation

Stockholder Derivative Action

As previously reported, inIn September 2011, we werethe Company was served in a purported stockholder derivative action that was filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida against the Company and certain of its present and former officers and directors. The complaint asserts, among other things, breach of fiduciary duties and bad faith in relation to the management of the Company.Company’s business. The complaint seeks, among other things, unspecified compensatory damages and various forms of equitable relief. The allegations in the derivative action appear to be based largely on the January 10, 2011 Livneh counterclaim described above.counterclaim.

On March 29, 2012, plaintiffs amended their complaint to remove one of the plaintiffs and replace it with another. The amended complaint assertsasserted essentially the same allegations as the original filing. We believe the allegations to be frivolous and without merit and we intend to defend the action vigorously. We are investigating whether there is a collusive connection between the derivative action and the previously settled lawsuit with Livneh. The outcome of this matter is uncertain, no range of potential loss can be estimated and accordingly no effect has been given to any loss that may result from the resolution of this matter in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.

In May 2012, the Company, andtogether with the individual defendants filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint based, in part, upon the plaintiff’s failure to make demand upon the board as required by applicable law. The motion was denied anddenied.

Since October 2013, the parties are proceeding with discovery.  The outcomehave been engaged in a Court-sanctioned medication process.  In the context of the mediation process, the parties have discussed the terms of a potential settlement, however, a definitive agreement has not been signed at this matter is uncertain, no range of potential loss can be estimated and accordingly no effect has given to any loss that may result from the resolution of this matter in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.time.
 
F-21


Keen Action

In February 2012 we received notice that an action had been commenced against usconnection with the previously disclosed litigation pending in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida bybetween the Company and Leonard Keen, ourthe Company’s former Vice President and General Counsel, related to his termination on December 9, 2011 and associated employment contract.August 8, 2013, following a jury trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Mr. Keen is demanding amounts outlined under his employment contract which provided forawarding him $622,500 in severance.  In addition, the payment of a base annual salary of not less than $187,500 as well as certain other payments and benefits. The employment agreement also provided for the payment, under certain circumstances, of a lump sum severance payment equal to three times base compensation plus certain other payments and benefits as set forth in the employment agreement under severance payment. Mr. Keen also asserts a claim concerning an alleged violation of Florida’s “Whistle Blower’s Act” and seeks specific performance of certain indemnification rights under his employment agreement.
F - 21

On April 27, 2012, we filed an Answer and Counterclaims against Mr. Keen alleging violations of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(5), breaches of fiduciary duties, conversion, and fraud in the inducement.  The counterclaims seek monetary damages, including attorney’s fees, and a declarationjury determined that, Mr. Keen’s previously issued 110,000 stock options should be reinstated and accelerated, and that the Company must indemnify Mr. Keen for any damages or costs he suffered in his capacity as an employee of Bovie pursuant to the terms of Mr. Keen’s prior employment agreement is unenforceable as violative of Florida law and public policy.with the Company.  Subsequent to the trial, the Court awarded Mr. Keen $241,310 in attorneys’ fees.  These amounts have been paid.

On May 21, 2012, plaintiff moved to dismiss our second (breach of fiduciary duty), third (breach of fiduciary duty), and fifth (fraud in the inducement) counterclaims.  That motion was denied as moot on July 3, 2012, due to plaintiff’s filing of an Amended Complaint on the same day.

Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint repeats the same allegations as the original filing and also adds Andrew Makrides, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, as a defendant and asserts additional claims concerning an alleged violation of ERISA and an alleged tortious interference with the plaintiff’s employment contract by Andrew Makrides.

On July 16, 2012, we served our AnswerAmounts related to the Amended Complaint and Counterclaims, which repeated the same counterclaims as our Answer and Counterclaims.  On the same date, we also moved to dismiss the Amended Complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and lack of subject matter jurisdiction.  Plaintiff opposed the motion and also sought to renew his motion to dismiss our Second and Third Counterclaims (breach of fiduciary duty).

On September 27, 2012, the Court granted our motion in part and denied it in part and also denied Keen’s motion in its entirety.  Specifically, the Court dismissed Keen’s Second (breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing) and Eighth (tortious interference with employment contract) claims for relief.  Because the Eighth claim was the only one asserted against Andrew Makrides, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, he is no longer a party to the case.

On February 1, 2013, both parties moved for summary judgment on the surviving claims. The Court has not issued a decision on the motions as of the filingverdict of this report.

We believe we have meritorious defenses against Mr. Keen’s claimscase and are vigorously defending this action. The outcome of this matter is uncertainsubsequent attorney’s fee award were accrued and accordingly no effect has been given to any loss that may result from the resolution of this matterexpensed in the accompanying consolidated financial statements, however the range of potential loss is zero to approximately $600,000, plus possible attorney fees which are not determinable at this time.
2013.

In addition to the above, in the normal course of business, we are subject, from time to time, to legal proceedings, lawsuits and claims. Such matters are subject to many uncertainties, and outcomes are not predictable with assurance. Consequently, we are unable to ascertain the ultimate aggregate amountIf any of monetary liability or financial impact with respect to these matters as of December 31, 2012. These mattersarise in the future, it could affect the operating results of any one or more quarter when resolved in future periods.quarters.
 
We expense costs of litigation related to contingencies in the periods in which the costs are incurred.

NOTE 13.14.GAIN FROM LEGAL SETTLEMENT

On March 3, 2011, we entered into a settlement agreement related to the legal action with Salient Surgical Technologies, Inc. and Medtronic, Inc. The settlement called for us and related parties to immediately exit and not enter into the monopolar and bipolar saline-enhanced RF device business (including SEER™SEER and BOSS™BOSS) worldwide through February 2015. In exchange, Salient made a one-time payment to us of $750,000. As a condition, we will not be able to sell certain finished products, which as of the settlement date amounted to approximately $100,000 of our inventory.  We reserved for approximately $87,000 of our inventory related to the products in this settlement in the first quarter of 2011. The terms also include a provision outlining a possible OEM contract manufacturing relationship between Salient and our Company.

NOTE 14.15.STOCK OPTIONS

On October 30, 2007, our stockholders approved and the Board of Directors adopted an amendment to the 2003 Executive and Employee Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”) to increase the maximum aggregate number of shares of common stock reserved for issuance under the  Plan from 1.2 million shares (already reserved against outstanding options) to 1.7 million shares. Except for the increase in the number of shares covered by the Plan, the Plan remained otherwise unchanged. In 2001, the Board of Directors adopted the 2001 Executive and Employee Stock Option Plan which reserved for issuance 1,200,000 stock options. Stock options typically have a ten-year life and currently vest over a seven year period.
F - 22


In July of 2012, the stockholders approved the 2012 Share Incentive Plan covering a total of 750,000 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of options to be granted under the plan. At December 31, 20122013 approximately 416,500269,500 remain to be issued in this plan.
F-22


The status of our stock options and stock awards are summarized as follows:
 
 Number  
Weighted
Average
  Number  
Weighted
Average
 
 
Of
Options
  
Exercise
Price
  
Of
Options
  
Exercise
Price
 
            
Outstanding at December 31, 2010  1,948,260  $3.79 
        
Granted  25,000  $2.81 
Exercised  (69,000) $0.57 
Cancelled  (371,414) $3.52 
Outstanding at December 31, 2011  1,532,846  $3.99   1,532,846  $3.99 
                
Granted  379,500  $2.90   379,500  $2.90 
Exercised  (28,000) $0.70   (28,000) $0.70 
Cancelled  (4,885) $7.33   (4,885) $7.33 
Outstanding at December 31, 2012  1,879,461  $3.81   1,879,461  $3.81 
                
Exercisable at December 31, 2012  1,232,894  $3.73 
Granted  897,000  $2.36 
Reinstated  94,285  $7.00 
Exercised  (51,000) $1.38 
Cancelled  (352,700) $3.13 
Outstanding at December 31, 2013  2,467,046  $3.55 
        
Exercisable at December 31, 2013  1,174,885  $4.34 
 
     
Weighted
Average
   
Exercise
Prices
  
Number
Outstanding
 
Remaining
Contractual
Life
 
Options
Exercisable
 
         
$2.13   125,000 1 year  125,000 
$2.25   319,000 2 years  319,000 
$2.41   30,000 1 year  30,000 
$2.93   35,000 2 years  35,000 
$2.95   2,500 1 year  2,500 
$6.93   20,000 3 years  20,000 
$7.10   12,125 5 years  11,410 
$7.18   50,000 6 years  50,000 
$7.33   131,190 6 years  95,603 
$7.68   7,500 5 years  7,500 
$8.66   97,857 5 years  86,071 
$6.60   500 6 years  500 
$8.32   68,214 6 years  39,285 
$7.85   7,500 6 years  4,286 
$6.00   30,000 7 years  - 
$7.45   100,000 7 years  100,000 
$3.08   10,000 7 years  4,287 
$2.46   74,160 7 years  48,926 
$1.89   50,000 7 years  21,429 
$2.80   10,000 8 years  2,857 
$2.81   15,000 8 years  4,286 
$2.79   46,000 9 years  20,667 
$2.54   228,500 9 years  58,500 
$3.79   100,000 9 years  20,000 
$6.00   50,000 10 years  27,778 
$2.50   10,000 10 years  - 
$2.97   42,000 10 years  20,000 
$2.20   45,000 10 years  20,000 
$2.09   750,000 10 years  - 
     2,467,046    1,174,885 

 
F - 23F-23

 
The following table summarizes information about our options outstanding at December 31, 2012:
     
Weighted
Average
   
Exercise Prices  
Number
Outstanding
 
Remaining
Contractual
Life
 Options Exercisable 
         
$0.70   7,000 1 year  7,000 
$0.75   21,500 1 year  21,500 
$1.30   25,000 1 year  25,000 
$2.13   125,000 2 years  125,000 
$2.25   322,500 3 years  322,500 
$2.41   40,000 2 years  40,000 
$2.93   35,000 3years  35,000 
$2.95   2,500 2 years  2,500 
$3.25   331,700 1 years  331,700 
$6.93   20,000 4 years  20,000 
$7.10   12,125 6 years  10,696 
$7.18   50,000 7 years  50,000 
$7.33   131,190 7 years  77,809 
$7.68   7,500 6 years  5,357 
$8.66   97,857 6 years  70,714 
$6.60   500 7 years  500 
$8.32   68,214 7 years  29,643 
$7.85   7,500 7 years  3,214 
$6.00   30,000 8 years  - 
$7.45   14,286 8 years  14,286 
$3.08   10,000 8 years  2,858 
$2.46   65,589 8 years  19,759 
$1.89   50,000 8 years  14,286 
$2.80   10,000 9 years  1,429 
$2.81   15,000 9 years  2,143 
$2.79   46,000 10 years  - 
$2.54   233,500 10 years  - 
$3.79   100,000 10 years  - 
            
            
     1,879,461    1,232,894 

The number and weighted average grant-date fair values of options non-vested at the beginning and end of 2012,2013, as well as options granted, vested and forfeited during the year was as follows:

  
Number
Of
Options
  
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
 
Non-vested at January 1, 2012  337,734  $2.12 
Granted in 2012  379,500  $1.03 
Vested in 2012  (65,782) $2.50 
Forfeited in 2012  (4,885) $2.82 
         
Non-vested at December 31, 2012  646,567  $1.43 
F - 24

  
Number
Of
Options
  
Weighted
Average
Grant Date
Fair Value
 
Non-vested at January 1, 2013  646,567  $1.43 
Granted in 2013  897,000  $0.75 
Reinstated 2013  94,285  $3.32 
Vested in 2013  (340,691) $1.87 
Forfeited in 2013  (5,000) $0.95 
         
Non-vested at December 31, 2012  1,292,161  $0.98 
 
Common shares required to be issued upon the exercise of stock options and warrants would be issued from our authorized and unissued shares. We calculated the fair value of issued options utilizing a binomial lattice with an expected life calculated via the simplified method as we do not have sufficient history to determine actual expected life.

The grant date fair value of options granted in 2013 was estimated on the grant date using both binomial and trinomial lattice option-pricing model and the following assumptions: expected volatility of 43% - 47%, expected term of 3-5 years, risk-free interest rates of 0.4% - 0.6%, and expected dividend yield of 0%.
 
The grant date fair value of options granted in 2012 was estimated on the grant date using a binomial lattice option-pricing model and the following assumptions: expected volatility of 41-43%41% - 43%, expected term of 5 years, risk-free interest rate of 0.4%, and expected dividend yield of 0%.
 
The grant date fair value of options granted in 2011 was estimated on the grant date using a binomial lattice option-pricing model and the following assumptions: expected volatility of 41-42%41% - 42%, expected term of 7 years, risk-free interest raterates of 1.8-2.6%1.8% - 2.6%, and expected dividend yield of 0%.
The grant date fair value of options granted in 2010 was estimated on the grant date using a binomial lattice option-pricing model and the following assumptions: expected volatility of 42-43%, expected term of 7 years, risk-free interest rate of 1.1-2.27%, and expected dividend yield of 0%.
Expected volatility is based on a weighted average of the historical volatility of the Company's stock and peer company volatility. The weighting percentages relative to our stock and the peer group was adjusted in 2010 to a 50%/50% weighting. We believe that due to our relatively low trading volume, we cannot calculate a true measurement of our volatility using just our price history alone. Therefore, we include in our calculation a peer group volatility factor. Previous to 2010 we used a weighting of 75% to 25% in favor of the peer group as our price history contained large erratic price swings that were not indicative of our true volatility. Our peer group has remained relatively the same throughout our calculations year over year. The average expected life was calculated using the simplified method as we believe we do not have sufficient history. The risk-free rate is based on the rate of U.S. Treasury zero-coupon issues with a remaining term equal to the expected life of the options. The Company uses historical data to estimate pre-vesting forfeiture rates.

As of December 31, 2012,2013, the aggregate intrinsic value of all stock options outstanding and expected to vest was approximately $194,000$637,000 and the aggregate intrinsic value of currently exercisable stock options was approximately $175,000.$8,000.  The intrinsic value of each option share is the difference between the fair market value of our common stock and the exercise price of such option share to the extent it is “in-the-money”.  Aggregate intrinsic value represents the value that would have been received by the holders of in-the-money options had they exercised their options on the last trading day of the year and sold the underlying shares at the closing stock price on such day.  The intrinsic value calculation is based on the $2.42$2.15 closing stock price of our common stock on December 31, 2012,2013, the last trading day of 2012.2013.  The total number of in-the-money options outstanding and exercisable as of December 31, 20122013 was approximately 555,000.925,000.

The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 was approximately $76,000, $58,000 $157,000 and $198,000,$157,000, respectively.  Intrinsic value of exercised shares is the total value of such shares on the date of exercise less the cash received from the option holder to exercise the options.  The total cash proceeds received from the exercise of stock options was approximately zero,$48,000, zero and $9,000zero due to the utilization of stock swaps only for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011and 2010,and 2011, respectively.

The total fair value of options granted during the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 was approximately $672,000, $390,000 $33,000 and $496,000,$33,000, respectively. The total fair value of option shares vested during the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, 2011, and 20102011 was approximately $637,000, $164,000 $248,000 and $121,000,$248,000, respectively.

During the year ended December 31, 2012,2013, we issued 20,81444,798 common shares in exchange for 28,00051,000 employee and non-employee stock options and 7,1866,202 common shares (via a stock swap). Net proceeds from the issuance of common shares along with the shares received in the stock swap exercises were zeroapproximately $48,000 for the year ended December 31, 2012.2013.
 
 
F - 25F-24

 
Stock compensation cost recognized for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 was approximately $506,000, $161,000 $132,000 and $163,000,$132,000, respectively.  As of December 31, 2012,2013, there was approximately $608,500$964,200 of total unrecognized stock-based compensation cost, related to unvested stock options granted under the Amended Plan.  This cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of approximately 5 years.

Allocation of stock based compensation expense for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 2011 and 20102011 was as follows (in(in thousands):

 2012  2011  2010  2012 2012 2011 
                
Cost of sales $16  $16  $16  $12  $16  $16 
Research and development  37   11   33   34   37   11 
Salaries and related costs  108   105   114   460   108   105 
                   
Total $161  $132  $163  $506  $161  $132 

NOTE 15.16.GEOGRAPHIC AND SEGMENT INFORMATION

In 2010, we had two reportable business segments, our main operations, Bovie Medical Corporation located in the United States and Bovie Canada ulc, our Canada operations located in Windsor, Canada. During 2010 we closed the Canadian facility and consolidated the operations to the parent company located in Clearwater, Florida therefore the 2010 amounts represent only a partial year for Bovie Canada ulc. Because Bovie Canada ulc operations represented a loss greater than 10% of our consolidated net income (on an absolute value basis) we are required to report certain information broken out by segment in the table listed below for the year ended December 31, 2010 (in thousands).

  
Bovie
Medical
Corp
  
Bovie
Canada
 
  2010  2010 
       
Sales, net $24,189  $41 
Gross profit $10,088  $(100)
Operating expenses $12,499  $241 
Net income (loss) $(1,194) $(341)

While internationalInternational sales in 2013, 2012 and 2011 and 2010 were 17.7%17.2%, 21%17.7% and 21% of sales, respectively, substantially all of these sales are denominated in U.S. dollars.
 
F - 26


NOTE 16.17.SELECTED QUARTERLY INFORMATION (UNAUDITED)

The following table sets forth certain unaudited quarterly data for each of the four quarters in the years ended December 31, 2012,2013 and 2011,2012, respectively. The data has been derived from the Company's unaudited consolidated financial statements that, in management's opinion, include all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring adjustments) necessary for a fair presentation of such information when read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto.  The results of operations for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of the results of operations for any future period.
 
  First  Second  Third  Fourth 
Year ended December 31, 2013 Quarter  Quarter  Quarter  Quarter 
Total revenue $5,696  $6,042  $5,794  $6,128 
Gross profit $2,151  $2,230  $2,249  $2,568 
Net income (loss) (2) (4) $(409) $(1,119) $(341) $(2,470)
Diluted earnings (loss) per share $(0.02) $(0.06) $(0.02) $(0.14)
Year ended December 31, 2012                
Total revenue $6,733  $7,440  $6,671  $6,827 
Gross profit $2,796  $2,856  $2,894  $2,787 
Net income (loss) (3) $187  $152  $(7) $285 
Diluted earnings per share (1) $0.01  $0.01  $--  $0.02 
  First  Second  Third  Fourth 
Year ended December 31, 2012 Quarter  Quarter  Quarter  Quarter 
Total revenue $6,733  $7,440  $6,671  $6,827 
Gross profit $2,796  $2,856  $2,894  $2,787 
Net income (loss) (3)
 $187  $152  $(7) $285 
Diluted earnings (loss) per share (1)
 $0.01  $0.01  $--  $0.02 
Year ended December 31, 2011                
Total revenue $6,156  $6,841  $6,256  $6,158 
Gross profit $2,433  $3,045  $2,606  $2,647 
Net income (loss) (2)
 $492  $429  $63  $(875)
Diluted earnings per share (1)
 $0.03  $0.02  $0.00  $(0.05)
_________________
(1)Quarterly income (loss) per share may not equal the annual reported amounts due to period roundings.
(2) Fourth quarter loss was mainly the result of recognizing a legal settlement loss.loss, financing cost and refinancing of debt costs.
(3) Fourth quarter gain was mainly the result of recognizing a gain on fair value of warrants and an increase in our deferred tax asset.
(4)Second quarter loss was mainly the result of recognizing a legal settlement loss.

F-25


NOTE 17.18.OTHER SUBSEQUENT EVENT

On March 14, 2013, we20, 2014, the Company entered into amendeda transaction with The Bank of Tampa, a Florida banking corporation (“Lender”) wherein Lender extended to the Company a mortgage loan in the principal amount of $3,592,000 (the “Loan”). The obligations under the Loan are secured by a first mortgage and restated employment agreements (collectively,security interest in the “AmendedCompany’s Clearwater, Florida facility as well as an assignment of the Company’s accounts receivable.  In addition, the Company pledged and Restated Employment Agreements”)interest in a certificate of deposit in the amount of $898,000 as additional collateral which declines on a pro rata basis as principal is paid.  The initial maturity date of the Loan is March 20, 2017; however the Company has an option to extend the maturity date until March 20, 2022.

Borrowings under the Loan bear interest at LIBOR plus 3.5%, with Andrew Makrides, our Chief Executive Officer, J. Robert Saron, our President and Chief Sales and Marketing Officer, and Moshe Citronowicz, our Senior Vice President. a fixed monthly principal payment of $19,956.
The Amended And Restated Employment Agreements provideLoan documents contain customary financial covenants, including a covenant that the Company maintain a minimum liquidity of $750,000.  Although there is no Debt Service Coverage Ratio (as defined in the Loan Agreement) for the initial Base Salariesterm of $215,515, $305,184 and $204,777the Loan, should the Company desire to extend the Loan beyond three years, the Company must maintain a Debt Service Coverage Ratio for each of Messers Makrides, Saron and Citronowicz, respectively, and provide for salary increases and annual bonuses as it may, in sole and exclusive discretionthe preceding four quarters of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. The Amended and Restated Employment Agreements provide for customary vacation, medical, dental and life insurance benefits as well as reimbursement of certain business expenses. All three agreements have a term beginning on March 14, 2013 and concluding on December 31, 2015 and shall be automatically extended for additional one year terms, unless we provide the executive with written notice of termination within nine months of the expiration of the current term then in effect.not less than 1.0 to 1.0.  In the event of a change of controlthe Loan is extended, the Debt Service Coverage Ratio must not be less than 1.2 to 1.0.

Simultaneously with the closing of the Loan, the Company orredeemed those certain Industrial Revenue Bonds issued by the Pinellas County Industrial Development Authority and satisfied its obligations to its prior lender, PNC Bank, N.A (“PNC Bank”).  In connection with the redemption of the Bonds, the Company paid PNC Bank $3,188,332.51 to satisfy its existing credit facility.  In connection with the termination of any onethe interest rates swap agreement with PNC Bank, the Company paid PNC Bank an additional $410,275.
On March 31, 2014, the Company entered into an agreement with an existing warrant holder pursuant to which the Company repurchased warrants exercisable into 142,857 shares of the three executives without cause (as these terms are defined in eachCommon Stock for an aggregate purchase price of the Amended and Restated Employment Agreements), we are obligated to pay a lump sum severance equal to three (3) times that terminated executive’s then Base Salary, as well as any other sums which may be due up to the date of such termination. For additional information related to this event see our Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 20, 2013.$420,571.01.

EXHIBIT
F-26

EXHIBIT INDEX

3.1 Articles of Incorporation of the Registrant (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's report on Form 10-K/A filed March 31, 2011)
3.2 Bylaws of the Registrant (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's report on Form 10-K/A filed March 31, 2011)
4.13.3 Specimen CommonCertificate of Designation of Preferences, Rights and Limitations of Series A 6% Convertible Preferred Stock Certificate (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-3 filed November 24, 2004)
10.12001 Statutory and Non-Statutory Stock Option Plan (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed July 16, 2001)
10.22003 Key Services Stock Option Plan (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed May 12, 2006)
10.3Employment Agreement dated June 18, 2007 betweenof Bovie Medical Corporation and Gary Pickett (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K/A filed November 30, 2009)
10.4Loan Agreement between Pinellas County Industrial Development Authority and Bovie Medical Corporation dated as of November 1, 2008 (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K/A filed May 12, 2009)
10.5Memorandum of Agreement between Pinellas County Industrial Development Authority & Bovie Medical Corporation dated November 13, 2008 (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K/A filed May 12, 2009)
10.6Securities Purchase Agreement, dated April 18, 2010, by and among Bovie Medical Corporation and the investors listed on the Schedule of Buyers attached thereto (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed April 20, 2010)December 16, 2013)
10.74.1 Form of Registration Rights Agreement by and among Bovie Medical Corporation and the investors listed on the signature pages theretoWarrant (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed April 20, 2010)December 16, 2013)
10.810.1 Form of Warrant issued to the Buyers under the Securities Purchase Agreement (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed April 20, 2010)December 16, 2013)
10.910.2 Form of Warrant issued to Rodman & Renshaw, LLC and Gilford Securities Inc.Registration Rights Agreement (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed April 20, 2010)December 16, 2013)
10.1010.3 First Amendment to LoanForm of Voting Agreement dated October 31, 2011, by and between the Company and Pinellas County Industrial Development Authority (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K filed March 29, 2012)
10.11Credit Agreement dated October 31, 2011, by and between the Company and PNC Bank, National Association (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K filed March 29, 2012)
10.12Revolving Loan Agreement, dated October 31, 2011, by and between the Company and PNC Bank, National Association (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K filed March 29, 2012)
10.13Non-Revolving Equipment Line of Credit Note, dated October 31, 2011, by and between the Company and PNC Bank, National Association (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K filed March 29, 2012)
10.14Revolving Line of Credit Note, dated October 31, 2011, by and between the Company and PNC Bank, National Association (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K filed March 29, 2012)
10.15Equipment Line Loan Agreement, dated October 31, 2011, by and between the Company and PNC Bank, National Association (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K filed March 29, 2012)
10.16Security Agreement (Revolving Loan), dated October 31, 2011, by and between the Company and PNC Bank, National Association (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K filed March 29, 2012)
10.17Security Agreement (Equipment Loan), dated October 31, 2011, by and between the Company and PNC Bank, National Association (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K filed March 29, 2012)
10.18Security Agreement (Bond Swap), dated October 31, 2011, by and between the Company and PNC Bank, National Association (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K filed March 29, 2012)
10.19Mortgage and security Agreement, dated October 31, 2011, by and between the Company and New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K filed March 29, 2012)
10.20Assignment of Rents, Leases and Profits, dated October 31, 2011, by and between the Company and New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K filed March 29, 2012)
10.21Environmental Indemnity Agreement, dated October 31, 2011, by and between the Company and New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 10-K filed March 29, 2012)
10.22Confidential Settlement Agreement and Mutual General Release, dated February 22, 2012, by and among the Company, Andrew Makrides, Moshe Citronowicz, Steve Livneh, Henvil Corp. Ltd. and Lican Developments Ltd. (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed February 28, 2012)December 16, 2013)
10.2310.4 Third Amendment to Loan Documents,Employment Agreement dated October 18, 2012, byMarch 14, 2013 between Bovie Medical Corporation and between the Company and PNC Bank, National AssociationRobert Gershon (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed October 26, 2012)March 20, 2013)
10.24Second Amendment to Credit Documents, dated October 18, 2012, between the Company and PNC Bank, National Association (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed October 26, 2012)
10.252012 Share Incentive Plan (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A filed May 22, 2012)
10.2610.5 Employment Agreement dated March 14, 2013 between Bovie Medical Corporation and Andrew Makrides (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed March 20, 2013)
10.2710.6 Employment Agreement effective March 14, 2013 between Bovie Medical Corporation and J. Robert Saron (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed March 20, 2013)
10.2810.7 Employment Agreement effective March 14, 2013 between Bovie Medical Corporation and Moshe Citronowicz (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed March 20, 2013)
10.8Loan Agreement (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed March 24, 2014)
10.9Mortgage, Security agreement, Financial Statement and Assignment (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed March 24, 2014)
10.10Promissory Note (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed March 24, 2014)
10.11Assignment of Rents, Leases and Profits and Contracts (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed March 24, 2014)
10.12Security Agreement (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed March 24, 2014)
10.13Environmental Indemnity Agreement (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s report on Form 8-K filed March 24, 2014)
14.1 Bovie Medical Corporation Code of Ethics (Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's report on Form 10-K/A filed March 31, 2011)
 List of Subsidiaries*
* Filed herewith
Certification pursuant to Section 302 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Certification pursuant to Section 302 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Certification pursuant to Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Certification pursuant to Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
101.INS **XBRL Instance Document
101.SCH **XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
101.CAL **XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
101.DEF **XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document
101.LAB **XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document
101.PRE **XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document
* Filed herewith.
** XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language) information is furnished and not filed or a part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of Sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, is deemed not filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and otherwise is not subject to liability under these sections.
 
 
F - 29
46