Icahn Enterprises L.P.: Form 10-Q for the period ended Sep 30, 2012
Filed with the SEC on Nov 7, 2012 and accepted by EDGAR at Nov 7, 2012, 17:00 ET.
Management's discussion and analysis
As filed, 131,983 characters, with its headings, lists and tables. Extracted from the main document; charts and exhibits are in the original on sec.gov.
The following discussion is intended to assist you in understanding our present business and the results of operations together with our present financial condition. This section should be read in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements and the accompanying notes contained in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012, and in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, or our 2011 Form 10-K.
Overview
Introduction
Icahn Enterprises L.P., or Icahn Enterprises, is a master limited partnership formed in Delaware on February 17, 1987. We own a 99% limited partner interest in Icahn Enterprises Holdings L.P., or Icahn Enterprises Holdings. Icahn Enterprises Holdings and its subsidiaries own substantially all of our assets and liabilities and conduct substantially all of our operations. Icahn Enterprises G.P. Inc., or Icahn Enterprises GP, our sole general partner, which is owned and controlled by Mr. Icahn, owns a 1% general partner interest in both us and Icahn Enterprises Holdings, representing an aggregate 1.99% general partner interest in us and Icahn Enterprises Holdings. As of September 30, 2012, affiliates of Mr. Icahn owned 97,183,300 of our depositary units which represented approximately 93.3% of our outstanding depositary units.
We are a diversified holding company owning subsidiaries engaged in the following operating businesses: Investment, Automotive, Energy, Gaming, Railcar, Food Packaging, Metals, Real Estate and Home Fashion. In addition to our operating businesses, we discuss the Holding Company, which includes the unconsolidated results of Icahn Enterprises and Icahn Enterprises Holdings, and investment activity and expenses associated with the activities of the Holding Company.
Rights Offering
In connection with a certain rights offering consummated during the first quarter of the year ending December 31, 2012, we distributed an aggregate 13,590,238 additional depositary units to unitholders that subscribed to the basic subscription rights and the over-subscription rights and we received proceeds of $500 million. Of these additional depositary units distributed pursuant to the rights offering, Mr. Icahn and his affiliates received 12,995,584 additional depositary units.
See Note 14, "Net Income Per LP Unit-Rights Offering," to the consolidated financial statements for additional information regarding the rights offering.
Debt Offerings
On January 17, 2012, February 6, 2012 and July 12, 2012, we issued an aggregate $1,000 million principal amount of the 8% Senior Unsecured Notes due 2018 (such notes are collectively referred to as the “2012 Additional Notes”). The 2012 Additional Notes constitute the same series of securities as the 8% Senior Unsecured Notes due 2018 for purposes of the indenture governing the notes and will vote together on all matters with such series. The 2012 Additional Notes have substantially identical terms as the 8% Senior Unsecured Notes due 2018. (The 8% Senior Unsecured Notes due 2018 together with the Senior Unsecured Notes due 2016 are collectively referred to as the "Initial Notes".) See Note 11, "Debt," for further discussion.
On October 23, 2012, CVR Refining LLC (“Refining LLC”) and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Coffeyville Finance Inc., completed a private offering of $500 million in aggregate principal amount of 6.50% Second Lien Secured Notes due 2022 (the "2022 Notes"). Approximating $348 million of the net proceeds was used to fund a completed and settled tender offer resulting in the purchase of approximately $323 million of the 9.0% First Lien Notes due April 1, 2015 and to settle accrued interest of approximately $2 million through October 23, 2012 and to pay related fees and expenses. A premium of approximately $23 million was incurred associated with the tender. See Note 20, "Subsequent Events-Energy," for further discussion.
Formation and Initial Public Offering of CVR Refining, LP
During the third quarter of 2012, in contemplation of an initial public offering, Coffeyville Resources, LLC (or CRLLC) formed CVR Refining Holdings, LLC, which in turn formed CVR Refining GP, LLC. CVR Refining Holdings, LLC and CVR Refining GP, LLC formed CVR Refining, LP (the “Refining Partnership”) which issued them a 100% limited partnership interest and a non-economic general partner interest, respectively. CVR Refining Holdings, LLC formed CVR Refining, LLC and CRLLC contributed its petroleum and logistics subsidiaries in October 2012, as well as its equity interests in Coffeyville Finance Inc., to CVR Refining, LLC.
On October 1, 2012, the Refining Partnership filed a registration statement on Form S-1 to effect an initial public offering of its common units representing limited partner interests (the “Offering”). The number of common units to be sold in the
Offering has not yet been determined. The Offering is subject to numerous conditions including, without limitation, market conditions, pricing, regulatory approvals, including clearance from the SEC, compliance with contractual obligations, and reaching agreements with the underwriters and lenders. Note 20, "Subsequent Events-Energy," to the consolidated financial statements for additional information regarding this initial public offering.
Acquisition of CVR Energy, Inc.
On April 18, 2012, IEP Energy LLC, or IEP Energy, a majority owned subsidiary of Icahn Enterprise, and certain other affiliates of Icahn Enterprises (or collectively, the IEP Parties), entered into a Transaction Agreement (or the Transaction Agreement) with CVR, with respect to IEP Energy's tender offer (or the Offer) to purchase all of the issued and outstanding shares of CVR's common stock for a price of $30 per share in cash, without interest, less any applicable withholding taxes, plus one non-transferable contingent cash payment right for each share of CVR common stock (or the CCP), which represents the contractual right to receive an additional cash payment per share if a definitive agreement for the sale of CVR is executed on or prior to August 18, 2013 and such transaction closes.
The Offer expired on May 4, 2012. On May 7, 2012, we announced the results of the Offer. A total of 48,112,317 shares of CVR common stock were validly tendered for $30 per share plus a contingent value right. As all of the terms and conditions of the Offer had been satisfied, IEP Energy accepted for payment all of the tendered shares, which represented approximately 55% of the outstanding shares of CVR common stock. Following the purchase of these shares, the IEP Parties owned approximately 70% of the outstanding shares of CVR common stock. Subsequent to the expiration of the Offer on May 4, 2012, IEP Energy extended the Offer through May 18, 2012. As a result of the extension of the Offer and subsequent additional purchases of CVR common stock by IEP Energy, the IEP Parties increased their ownership in CVR. As of September 30, 2012, IEP Energy owned approximately 82.0% of total outstanding common stock of CVR.
On May 7, 2012, affiliates of Mr. Icahn contributed 4,566,546 shares of CVR common stock to IEP Energy with an aggregate value of $137 million, resulting in a 6.4% non-controlling interest in IEP Energy. Pursuant to a contribution and exchange agreement dated August 24, 2012, affiliates of Mr. Icahn contributed their their interest in IEP Energy to us for an aggregate consideration of 3,288,371 of our depositary units based on a 20 trading-day volume weighted average price of our depositary units. As a result of this transaction, we directly own 82.0% of the total outstanding common stock of CVR as of August 24, 2012. This transaction was approved by the Audit Committee of the board of directors of Icahn Enterprises GP. The Audit Committee was advised by independent counsel and an independent financial advisor which rendered a fairness opinion.
Tender Offer - Oshkosh Corporation
On October 17, 2012, IEP Vehicles Sub LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“IEP Vehicles Sub”) and Icahn Enterprises Holdings L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (“Icahn Enterprises Holdings”, and together with IEP Vehicles Sub, the “Offeror”), filed a Schedule TO in connection with the offer by the Offeror to purchase for cash any and all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per share, of Oshkosh Corporation, a Wisconsin corporation (“Oshkosh”), at a price of $32.50 per share, without interest and less any required withholding taxes, if any (the “Offer”). Both IEP Vehicles Sub and Icahn Enterprises Holdings are co-bidders for all purposes in the Offer.
On October 26, 2012, the Oshkosh Board of Directors rejected the Offer and adopted a rights plan, or poison pill. In addition, on October 26, 2012, affiliates of the Offeror submitted a notice to Oshkosh of its intent to nominate a full slate of directors at Oshkosh's upcoming annual shareholder meeting.
Results of Operations
Consolidated Financial Results
The following tables summarize total revenues, net income (loss) and net income (loss) attributable to Icahn Enterprises for each of our reporting segments and our Holding Company for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, and 2011. Eliminations relate to the unrealized gains recorded by our Investment segment for its investment in Tropicana from the date of its acquisition of a controlling interest in Tropicana through the date that its investment in Tropicana was transferred to us. Refer to Note 3, “Operating Units,” to the consolidated financial statements for further discussion.
(in millions)
| Revenues Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Net Income (Loss) Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Icahn Enterprises Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment | $(62) | $(43) | $(69) | $(46) | $(27) | $(15) |
| Automotive | 1,600 | 1,734 | (10) | 34 | (8) | 25 |
| Energy(1) | 2,241 | — | 213 | — | 167 | — |
| Gaming | 177 | 175 | 22 | 21 | 15 | 12 |
| Railcar | 150 | 125 | 12 | 4 | 6 | 2 |
| Food Packaging | 86 | 86 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
| Metals | 236 | 272 | (5) | — | (5) | — |
| Real Estate | 24 | 25 | 6 | 8 | 6 | 8 |
| Home Fashion | 54 | 80 | (5) | (12) | (5) | (9) |
| Holding Company | (3) | (11) | (66) | (63) | (66) | (63) |
| Eliminations | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| $4,503 | $2,443 | $100 | $(52) | $85 | $(39) |
(in millions)
| Revenues Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Net Income (Loss) Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Net Income (Loss) Attributable to Icahn Enterprises Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment | $304 | $1,159 | $284 | $1,126 | $121 | $527 |
| Automotive | 5,083 | 5,273 | 55 | 148 | 38 | 108 |
| Energy(1) | 3,651 | — | 292 | — | 228 | — |
| Gaming | 488 | 477 | 36 | 29 | 25 | 15 |
| Railcar | 488 | 319 | 37 | (1) | 20 | (1) |
| Food Packaging | 253 | 255 | 4 | 9 | 3 | 6 |
| Metals | 872 | 839 | (21) | 11 | (21) | 11 |
| Real Estate | 69 | 70 | 17 | 15 | 17 | 15 |
| Home Fashion | 176 | 263 | (16) | (29) | (16) | (20) |
| Holding Company | 8 | 22 | (37) | (166) | (37) | (166) |
| Eliminations | — | (14) | — | (14) | — | (5) |
| $11,392 | $8,663 | $651 | $1,128 | $378 | $490 |
(1) We consolidated CVR effective May 4, 2012.
Overview
Our operating businesses are managed on a decentralized basis. Due to the structure of our business, we discuss the results of operations below by individual reportable segments. Refer to Note 15, "Segment Reporting," to the consolidated financial statements for a reconciliation of each of our reporting segment's results of operations to our consolidated results.
Refer to Note 3, “Operating Units,” to the consolidated financial statements for a description of each of our reporting segments.
Investment
Icahn Onshore LP, or the Onshore GP, and Icahn Offshore LP (or the Offshore GP and, together with the Onshore GP, the General Partners) act as general partner of Icahn Partners LP, or the Onshore Fund, and the Offshore Master Funds (as defined herein), respectively. The General Partners do not provide such services to any other entities, individuals or accounts. Interests in the Investment Funds (as defined below) are not offered to outside investors. Interests in the Investment Funds had been previously offered only to certain sophisticated and qualified investors on the basis of exemptions from the registration requirements of the federal securities laws and were not (and still are not) publicly available. The “Offshore Master Funds” consist of (i) Icahn Partners Master Fund LP (or Master Fund I), (ii) Icahn Partners Master Fund II LP (or Master Fund II) and (iii) Icahn Partners Master Fund III LP (or Master Fund III). The Onshore Fund and the Offshore Master Funds are collectively referred to herein as the “Investment Funds.”
Mr. Icahn, along with his affiliates, makes investments in the Investment Funds. As of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the total fair market value of investments in the Investment Funds made by Mr. Icahn and his affiliates was approximately $3.5 billion and $3.2 billion, respectively.
Incentive Allocations and Special Profits Interest Allocations
Historically, our Investment segment's revenues were affected by the combination of fee-paying assets under management, or AUM, and the investment performance of the Investment Funds. The General Partners' incentive allocations and special profits interest allocations earned from the Investment Funds were accrued on a quarterly basis and were allocated to the General Partners at the end of the Investment Funds' fiscal year (or sooner on redemptions) assuming there were sufficient net profits to cover such amounts. As more fully disclosed in a letter to investors in the Investment Funds filed with the SEC on Form 8-K on March 7, 2011, the Investment Funds returned all fee-paying capital to their investors during 2011. Payments were funded through cash on hand and borrowings under existing credit lines. As a result, no further incentive allocations or special profits interest allocations will accrue for periods subsequent to March 31, 2011.
The General Partners waived the special profits interest allocations and incentive allocations for our interests in the Investment Funds and Mr. Icahn's direct and indirect holdings.
We consolidate certain entities within our Investment segment. As a result, in accordance with U.S. GAAP, any special profits interest allocations, incentive allocations and earnings on investments in the Investment Funds are eliminated in consolidation. These eliminations have no impact on our net income; however, our allocated share of the net income from the Investment Funds includes the amount of these allocations and earnings.
As a result of the return of fee-paying capital as described above, a special profits interest allocation of $9 million was allocated to the General Partners at March 31, 2011. No further special profits interest allocation accrued in periods subsequent to March 31, 2011.
As a result of the return of fee-paying capital as described above, an incentive allocation of $7 million was allocated to the General Partners at March 31, 2011. No further incentive allocation will accrue in periods subsequent to March 31, 2011.
Our Interests in the Investment Funds
As of September 30, 2012, we had investments with a fair market value of approximately $2.3 billion in the Investment Funds.
Our share of the Investment Funds' net income or loss through our interests in the Investment Funds, excluding incentive allocations and special profits interest allocations earned, was losses of $27 million and $15 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and gains of $121 million and $516 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Results of operations for our Investment segment for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, prior to eliminations relating to its investment in Tropicana, are presented below:
(in millions)
| Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net (loss) gain from investment activities | $(81) | $(40) | $249 | $1,151 |
| Interest and dividend income | 19 | 20 | 56 | 80 |
| (62) | (20) | 305 | 1,231 | |
| Selling, general and administrative | 7 | 1 | 18 | 22 |
| (Loss) income before other income, net, interest expense and income taxes | $(69) | $(21) | $287 | $1,209 |
Returns
The following table sets forth performance information for the Investment Funds for the comparative periods presented. These returns represent a weighted-average composite of the average returns, net of expenses for the Investment Funds.
| Returns(1) Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment Funds | -1.2% | -0.9% | 5.0% | 19.8% |
(1) Returns for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 were gross of special profits interest allocations and incentive allocations, but net of expenses for the Investment Funds.
During the three months ended September 30, 2012, losses were primarily due to defensive short positions, partially offset by gains in certain core holdings. During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, gains were primarily due to our long exposure to the equity markets that were primarily driven by certain core holdings which were offset in part by our short positions.
During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, gains were primarily due to gains in one of our core holdings and portfolio hedge positions. These were gains were offset by losses in our other long equity positions resulting in a a small net loss for the three months ended September 30, 2011. During the nine months ended September 30, 2011, gains were primarily due to our long exposure to the equity markets that were primarily driven by certain core holdings as well as our portfolio hedge.
Since inception in November 2004, the Investment Funds' gross return is 169%, representing an annualized rate of return of 13% through September 30, 2012.
Net realized and unrealized losses on the investment activities of the Investment Funds increased by $41 million (103%) for the three months ended September 30, 2012 while net realized and unrealized gains decreased by $902 million (78%) for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the respective prior year periods. The changes over the respective periods were attributable to lower rates of return in the Investment Funds.
Interest and dividend income decreased by $1 million (5%) and $24 million (30%) for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. The decreases over the respective periods were primarily due to decreases in interest income resulting from a reduction in fixed-income investments.
Selling, general and administrative, or SG&A, increased by $6 million and decreased by $4 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. The increase for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011 was primarily due to the reversal of compensation expense attributable to the performance of a designated portfolio of assets within the Investment Funds during the three months ended September 30, 2011. The decrease for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011 was primarily due to a decrease in certain expenses associated with shareholder actions and the elimination of expenses attributable to outsourced fund administration during 2011.
Automotive
(in millions)
| Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net sales | $1,602 | $1,732 | $5,070 | $5,256 |
| Cost of goods sold | 1,390 | 1,469 | 4,327 | 4,415 |
| Gross margin | 212 | 263 | 743 | 841 |
| Selling, general and administrative | 137 | 184 | 524 | 558 |
| Restructuring | 5 | 3 | 19 | 4 |
| Impairment | 50 | — | 79 | 3 |
| 192 | 187 | 622 | 565 | |
| Income before other income, net, interest expense and income taxes | $20 | $76 | $121 | $276 |
Federal-Mogul's Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q contain a detailed description of its business, products, industry, operating strategy and associated risks. Federal-Mogul's filings with the SEC are available on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov (http://www.sec.gov).
Federal-Mogul is a leading global supplier of technology and innovation in vehicle and industrial products for fuel economy, emissions reduction, alternative energies, environment and safety systems. Federal-Mogul serves the world's foremost original equipment manufacturers (“OEM”) and servicers (“OES”) of automotive, light, medium and heavy-duty commercial vehicles, off-road, agricultural, marine, rail, aerospace, power generation and industrial equipment (collectively, “OE”), as well as the worldwide aftermarket. Federal-Mogul participates in both of these markets by leveraging its original equipment product engineering and development capability, manufacturing know-how, and expertise in managing a broad and deep range of replacement parts to service the aftermarket. Federal-Mogul believes that it is uniquely positioned to effectively manage the life cycle of a broad range of products to a diverse customer base.
Geographically, Federal-Mogul derived 39% of its sales in the United States and 61% internationally during the nine months ended September 30, 2012. Federal-Mogul has operations in established markets including Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the United States, and developing markets including Argentina, Brazil, China, Czech Republic, Hungary, India, Korea, Mexico, Poland, Russia, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey and Venezuela. The attendant risks of Federal-Mogul's international operations are primarily related to currency fluctuations, changes in local economic and political conditions, and changes in laws and regulations.
Federal-Mogul operates in an extremely competitive industry, driven by global vehicle production volumes and part replacement trends. Business is typically awarded to the supplier offering the most favorable combination of cost, quality, technology and service. Customers continue to require periodic cost reductions that require Federal-Mogul to continually assess, redefine and improve its operations, products, and manufacturing capabilities to maintain and improve profitability. Management continues to develop and execute initiatives to meet the challenges of the industry and to achieve its strategy for sustainable global profitable growth.
Effective September 1, 2012, Federal-Mogul began operating with two end-customer focused business units. The Powertrain (or “PT”) business unit focuses on original equipment products for automotive, heavy duty and industrial applications. The Vehicle Components Solutions (or “VCS”) business unit sells and distributes a broad portfolio of products in the global aftermarket, while also serving original equipment manufacturers with products including braking, chassis, wipers and other vehicle components. The new organizational model allows for a strong product line focus benefiting both original equipment and aftermarket customers and will enable the global Federal-Mogul teams to be responsive to customers' needs for superior products and to promote greater identification with Federal-Mogul premium brands. The division of the global Federal-Mogul business into two business units is expected to enhance management focus to capitalize on opportunities for organic or acquisition growth, profit improvement, resource utilization and business model optimization in line with the unique requirements of the two different customer bases.
Approximately 90% of our Automotive segment's PT business unit's revenue consists of sales to OEM customers, with the remaining 10% sold directly to our Automotive segment's VCS business unit for eventual distribution, by the VCS business unit, to customers in the independent aftermarket. Discussions with respect to our Automotive segment's PT business unit or OE business are interchangeably analogous. The performance of PT business unit is therefore highly correlated to regional OEM light and commercial vehicle production, together with the changes in the mix of technologies (such as between light vehicle gasoline and light vehicle diesel), and changes in demand for non-automotive and industrial applications. These drivers are enhanced by the rate at which Federal-Mogul gains new programs, which is itself affected by the rate at which the OEM's make improvements to emissions and fuel economy, some in response to regional regulations.
Approximately 75% of our Automotive segment's VCS' business unit consists of sales to customer in the independent aftermarket, with a further 10% being sold into the OES market, which essentially represents dealer supplied replacement parts, a feature more prevalent in Europe than in North America. The OES market is subject to the same general commercial characteristics as the aftermarket business. The remaining 15% of our Automotive segment's VCS business is comprised of sales to OEM's or tier 1 suppliers to OEM's. The performance of the VCS business unit is therefore highly correlated with factors that influence the different regional replacement parts markets around the world, including vehicle miles driven, the average age of vehicles on the road, the size of the regional vehicle parcs and consumer confidence. These drivers are enhanced by the relative strength of our Automotive segment's aftermarket brands and the breadth of the portfolio offered relative to the changing needs of the local markets.
The fundamental causes of the decline in sales and margin performance for our Automotive segment are the U.S. dollar strengthening, primarily against the euro, combined with reductions in virtually all areas of European vehicle production, reductions in demand for European non-automotive and industrial applications and lower U.S. heavy duty production. Although the U.S. passenger car market grew slightly during 2012, this only had a minor impact on our Automotive segment's sales given that the majority of our Automotive segment's OEM sales are to customers outside the U.S. During 2012, the European passenger car market also underwent a shift in demand away from diesel towards gasoline vehicles. As a result of this change, the diesel share of the passenger car market in Europe moved from 48% in the third quarter of 2011 to 46% in 2012.
Over 70% of our Automotive segment's European OEM business serves the light vehicle diesel and heavy duty markets, and given the generally greater technical complexity of these applications, the margins for these parts are generally higher than those serving light vehicle gasoline market. Therefore, not only were our Automotive segment's sales significantly impacted by the changes in European demand, but profits were disproportionately and adversely impacted due to those reductions occurring in some of the most profitable applications within those regions.
Net sales for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $130 million (8%) and $186 million (4%), respectively, as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. Approximately 5.5 percentage points and 5 percentage points of the sales decline over the respective periods, respectively, reflect the impact of the U.S. dollar strengthening, primarily against the euro, which reduce reported sales by $100 million and $258 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. Sales volumes decreased by $40 million and $67 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. The vast majority of the decline in sales volumes over the respective periods occurred in the PT business unit. Net favorable customer pricing increased sales by $10 million for each of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. This was primarily attributable to the non-recurrence of aftermarket customer incentives during the prior year third quarter.
Cost of goods sold for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $79 million (5%) and $88 million (2%), respectively, as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. The impact of the relative strength of the U.S. dollar decreased cost of products sold by $82 million and $216 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. Materials and services sourcing savings decreased cost of goods sold by $36 million and $79 million on a constant dollar basis, respectively. The reduction in materials, labor and overhead as a direct result of the reduction in sales volume was only $6 million and $178 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, due to adverse changes in regional and product mix. Furthermore, because reductions in direct labor lagged behind the reductions in manufacturing output, our Automotive segment reported unfavorable productivity of $30 million and $9 million, for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. In addition, depreciation was higher by $3 million and $10 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011.
Gross margin for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $51 million (15%) and $98 million (8%), respectively, as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. As a percent of net sales, gross margin was 13.2% and 15.2% for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. As a percent of net sales, gross margin was 14.7% and 16.0% for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The decline in gross margin as a percent of sales by approximately 2 percentage points for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011 mainly reflects the market driven decline in OEM volumes on the more profitable applications within the OE business, combined with reduction in direct labor, lagging behind the reductions in manufacturing output. These elements, when combined with a shift in the mix aftermarket products away from premium and towards mid-grade products, are reflected as unfavorable sales volumes / mix impact of $46 million, and unfavorable productivity of $30 million, including year-over-year labor and benefits inflation. Additional decreases were due to a net currency movement impact of $18 million and increased depreciation of $3 million. These decreases were partially offset by a favorable impact on margin of $36 million from materials and services sourcing savings and $10 million of favorable customer pricing, mainly attributable to the non-recurrence of prior year aftermarket customer incentives. The favorable impact on margins of new program launches for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011 was more than offset by the mix impact of production volume changes, primarily in Europe, and a shift in mix towards lower margin products, primarily in VCS, resulting in a net $116 million decrease in gross margin over the comparable periods. Other factors contributing to the decreased margin for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011 were unfavorable productivity of $19 million and currency movements of $42 million, partly offset by materials and services sourcing savings of $79 million.
SG&A for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $47 million ((25.5)%) and $34 million (6%) as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. The decrease for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 was primarily due to an pension curtailment gain of $51 million recorded in the third quarter of 2012. In July 2012, as a result of contract negotiations with a union at one of Federal-Mogul's U.S. manufacturing locations, the retiree medical benefits were modified for the location's active participants. Since this plan change reduced benefits attributable to employee service already rendered, it was treated as a negative plan amendment, which created a $13 million prior service credit in AOCI. The corresponding reduction in the average remaining future service period to the full eligibility date also triggered the recognition of a $51 million curtailment gain which was recognized in the consolidated statements of operations during the third quarter of 2012.
Federal-Mogul maintains technical centers throughout the world designed to integrate its leading technologies into advanced products and processes, to provide engineering support for all of its manufacturing sites and to provide technological expertise in engineering and design development providing solutions for customers and bringing new, innovative products to market. Included in SG&A were research and development costs, or R&D, including product and validation costs, of $45 million and $42 million for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and $133 million and $129 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
During the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, Federal-Mogul recorded $5 million and $3 million in restructuring charges, respectively. During the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, Federal-Mogul recorded $19 million and $4 million in restructuring charges, respectively. The restructuring charges for the three months ended September 30, 2012 consist of employee-related costs and were primarily related to corporate headcount reduction actions. The restructuring charges for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 consist of employee costs related to a restructuring plan announced in June 2012 ("Restructuring 2012") headcount reduction actions associated with the aftermarket and corporate unit.
In June 2012, Federal-Mogul announced Restructuring 2012 to reduce or eliminate capacity at several high-cost VCS facilities and transfer production to lower-cost locations. Restructuring 2012 is anticipated to be completed within two years. In connection with the initial phase of Restructuring 2012, Federal-Mogul recorded $8 million in restructuring charges for the nine months ended September 30, 2012, all of which pertain to employee costs. Federal-Mogul expects to incur restructuring charges related to Restructuring 2012 totaling approximately $37 million, of which $26 million relate to employee costs and $11 million relate to facility costs.
Our Automotive segment recorded $50 million and $79 million of impairment charge for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively. Impairment charges for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 was $0 million and $3 million, respectively. The impairment charge for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 consisted of $17 million and $33 million, respectively, related to the identification of machinery and equipment that were no longer in use by Federal-Mogul and $33 million and $46 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 for the impairment of certain trademarks and brand names. The impairment charge for the three months ended September 30, 2012 related to certain trademarks and brand names were recorded as a result of our trademarks and brand names impairment analysis in accordance with FASB ASC 350, as of September 1, 2012, in conjunction with our goodwill impairment test that was precipitated by Federal-Mogul's reorganization as of September 1, 2012 (as further discussed below). In determining the impairment charge for machinery and equipment, we applied the probability weighted, expected present value techniques to the estimated future cash flows using assumptions a market participant would utilize and through the use of valuation specialists. In determining the impairment charge for trademarks and brand names, we used the prospective stream of hypothetical after-tax royalty cost savings discounted at rates that reflect the rates of return appropriate for these intangible assets.
During the first half of 2012, Federal-Mogul was organized into four business units (Powertrain Energy ("PTE"), Powertrain Sealing and Bearings ("PTSB"), Vehicle Safety and Protection ("VSP") and Global Aftermarket). These four business units represented our reporting units for our goodwill impairment analysis for our Automotive segment for the periods prior and during the second quarter of 2012. During the second quarter of 2012, Federal-Mogul's board of directors approved a restructuring plan to reduce or eliminate capacity at several high cost VSP facilities and transfer production to lower cost locations. As a result, we determined that this restructuring plan indicated that an impairment may have existed in one of our Automotive reporting units, VSP, which had a balance of $720 million of goodwill allocated to it as of June 30, 2012. In assessing whether we had an impairment in our VSP reporting unit, we considered certain trends of businesses comprising our VSP reporting unit, along with other quantitative and qualitative factors, and concluded that this restructuring event did not result in a goodwill impairment charge during the second quarter of 2012 for our VSP reporting unit.
During the third quarter of 2012, the board of directors of Federal-Mogul decided to segment Federal-Mogul's operating businesses into two business units, Powertrain and Vehicle Component Solutions ("VCS"). Powertrain will focus primarily on the manufacture and sale of powertrain products to original equipment manufacturers while VCS will consist of Federal-Mogul's global aftermarket as well as its brake, chassis and wipers businesses. Federal-Mogul has initiated several actions in connection with the creation of the two business units, including the hiring of a new Chief Executive Officer for the VCS group and the identification of facilities that will be managed by each business group.
As a result of the reorganization of Federal-Mogul's operating businesses into two business units as of September 1, 2012, the reporting units for our Automotive segment have also been reorganized accordingly and now consists of Powertrain and VCS. As a result of this reorganization, we were required to reassign our Automotive segment's existing goodwill balances to the new reporting units utilizing a relative fair value allocation approach in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 350. With the assistance of a third-party appraiser, we allocated $485 million and $620 million of goodwill based on their fair values as of September 1, 2012 to the Powertrain and VCS reporting units, respectively. This allocation excludes an allocation of $20 million of goodwill related to the BERU purchase as discussed, all of which been allocated to the Powertrain reporting unit. In addition, we evaluated the potential for goodwill impairment resulting from the reorganization of reporting units. In assessing whether we had an impairment in either of our Powertrain or VCS reporting units, we considered certain trends of businesses comprising our Powertrain and VCS reporting units, along with other quantitative and qualitative factors, and concluded that the business reorganization did not result in a goodwill impairment charge during the third quarter of 2012.
We note that our Automotive segment's VCS reporting unit's fair value exceeded its carrying value by less than 1%, and accordingly is deemed to be at risk of failing “Step 1” of a goodwill impairment analysis. Because our Automotive segment's VCS reporting unit's fair value exceeded its carrying value by such a small margin, we believe that it was prudent to perform a "Step 2" goodwill impairment analysis for our Automotive segment's VCS reporting unit. "Step 2" calculates the implied fair value of goodwill by deducting the fair value of all tangible and intangible assets, excluding goodwill, of the reporting unit, from the fair value of the reporting unit as determined in "Step 1". The implied fair value of goodwill determined in this "Step 2" is compared to the carrying value of goodwill. Given the complexity of the calculation, we have not yet finalized “Step 2” of its goodwill impairment assessment. To the extent that the finalization of our assessment of goodwill requires adjustment to the preliminary impairment charge, such adjustment would be recorded in the fourth quarter of 2012.
Energy
(in millions, except for barrel metrics)
| Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 Petroleum | Fertilizer | Corporate | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net sales | $2,335 | $75 | $— | $2,410 |
| Cost of goods sold | 1,815 | 42 | — | 1,857 |
| Selling, general and administrative | 19 | 8 | 7 | 34 |
| Income before other income, net, interest expense and income taxes | $501 | $25 | $(7) | $519 |
| Total crude oil throughput (barrels per day) | 192,563 |
| Refining margin adjusted for FIFO impact per crude oil throughput barrel | $33.44 |
(in millions, except for barrel metrics)
| Period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012 Petroleum | Fertilizer | Corporate | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net sales | $3,698 | $124 | $— | $3,822 |
| Cost of goods sold | 3,029 | 66 | — | 3,095 |
| Selling, general and administrative | 31 | 17 | 22 | 70 |
| Income before other income, net, interest expense and income taxes | $638 | $41 | $(22) | $657 |
| Total crude oil throughput (barrels per day) | 192,975 |
| Refining margin adjusted for FIFO impact per crude oil throughput barrel | $31.81 |
CVR's Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q contain a detailed description of its business, products, industry, operating strategy and associated risks. CVR's filings with the SEC are available on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov (http://www.sec.gov).
The following CVR entities are referenced elsewhere in this Report: Coffeyville Resources, LLC (or CRLLC); Coffeyville Resources Refining & Marketing, LLC (or CRRM) and Coffeyville Resources Nitrogen Fertilizers, LLC (or CRNF).
CVR is an independent petroleum refiner and marketer of high value transportation fuels in the mid-continental United States. CVR operates under two business units: petroleum and nitrogen fertilizer. In addition, CVR owns the general partner and approximately 70% of the common units of CVR Partners, LP, or CVR LP, a publicly traded limited partnership that is an independent producer and marketer of upgraded nitrogen fertilizers in the form of ammonia and urea ammonia nitrate, or UAN.
Our Energy segment's earnings and cash flows from its petroleum operations are primarily affected by the relationship between refined product prices and the prices for crude oil and other feedstocks. In the nitrogen fertilizer business, earnings and cash flows from operations are primarily affected by the relationship between nitrogen fertilizer product prices, on-stream factors and direct operating expenses.
Our Energy segment assesses its operating performance by comparing its refining margin against an industry refining margin benchmark. (Refining margin is net sales minus costs of goods sold, exclusive of certain direct operating expenses and depreciation and amortization.) The industry refining margin benchmark is calculated by assuming that two barrels of benchmark light sweet crude oil is converted into one barrel of conventional gasoline and one barrel of distillate. This benchmark is referred to as the 2-1-1 crack spread. Because CVR calculates the benchmark margin using the market value of NYMEX gasoline and heating oil against the market value of NYMEX WTI, the benchmark is referred to as the NYMEX 2-1-1 crack spread (“ 2-1-1 crack spread”.) The 2-1-1 crack spread is expressed in dollars per barrel and is a proxy for the per barrel margin that a sweet crude oil refinery would earn assuming it produced and sold the benchmark production of gasoline and distillate.
Refining margin is a non-GAAP measure that we believe is important to investors in evaluating the performance of our Energy segment's refineries as a general indication of the amount above our Energy segment's cost of product sold that it is able to sell refined products. Our Energy segment's calculation of refining margin may differ from similar calculations of other companies in its industry, thereby limiting its usefulness as a comparative measure. In order to derive the refining margin per crude oil throughput barrel, our Energy segment utilizes the total dollar figures for refining margin as derived above and divide by the applicable number of crude oil throughput barrels for the period. We believe that refining margin and refining margin per crude oil throughput barrel is important to enable investors to better understand and evaluate our Energy segment's ongoing operating results and allow for greater transparency in the review of our overall financial, operational and economic performance.
In assessing the operating performance of the nitrogen fertilizer business, CVR calculates plant gate price to determine its operating margin. Plant gate price refers to the unit price of nitrogen fertilizer, in dollars per ton, offered on a delivered basis, excluding shipment costs.
On August 31, 2012, CVR and Vitol Inc. ("Vitol") entered into an Amended and Restated Crude Oil Supply Agreement (the “Vitol Agreement”). The Vitol Agreement amends and restates the Crude Oil Supply Agreement between CVR and Vitol dated March 30, 2011, as amended (the “Previous Supply Agreement”). The terms of the Vitol Agreement provide that CVR will obtain all of the crude oil for CVR's two oil refineries through Vitol, other than crude oil that CVR acquires in Kansas, Missouri, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas, Wyoming and all states adjacent to such states and crude oil that is transported in whole or in part via railcar or truck. The Vitol Agreement has an initial term commencing on August 31, 2012 and extending through December 31, 2014 (the “Initial Term”). Following the Initial Term, the Vitol Agreement will automatically renew for successive one-year terms (each such term, a “Renewal Term”) unless either party provides the other with notice of nonrenewal at least 180 days prior to expiration of the Initial Term or any Renewal Term. Notwithstanding the foregoing, CVR has an option to terminate the Vitol Agreement effective December 31, 2013 by providing written notice of termination to Vitol on or before May 1, 2013. See Note 3, "Operating Units-Energy," to our consolidated financial statements for further discussion regarding this new agreement.
Net sales for the petroleum business for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012 was approximately $2.3 billion and $3.7 billion, respectively. For the three months ended September 30, 2012, CVR's petroleum business sold 403 million and 318 million gallons of gasoline and distillate, respectively, with an average sales price per gallon for gasoline and distillate of $3.03 and $3.15, respectively. For the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012, CVR's petroleum business sold 655 million and 530 million gallons of gasoline and distillate, respectively, with an average sales price per gallon for gasoline and distillate of $2.94 and $3.02, respectively.
For the three months ended September 30, 2012, the fertilizer business recognized net sales of $75 million, of which $18 million and $57 million were attributable to ammonia and UAN, respectively. For the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012, the fertilizer business recognized net sales of $124 million, of which $26 million and $98 million were attributable to ammonia and UAN, respectively. For the three months ended September 30, 2012, CVR sold 30,197 tons and 175,059 tons of ammonia and UAN, respectively, with an average plant gate price of $578 and $290, respectively. For the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012, CVR sold 44,108 and 283,880 tons of ammonia and UAN, respectively, with an average plant gate price of $573 and $309, respectively. Plant gate prices are prices at the designated delivery point less any freight cost we absorb to deliver the product. CVR believes plant gate price is meaningful because it sells products both at its plant gate (sold plant) and delivered to the customer's designated delivery site (sold delivered) and the percentage of sold plant versus sold delivered can change month-to-month or quarter-to-quarter. Ammonia sales for the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012 benefited from milder weather allowing for an earlier planting season in 2012. On-stream factors (total number of hours operated divided by total hours in the reporting period) for the gasification, ammonia and UAN units continue to demonstrate their reliability with the units reporting 99.1%, 98.4% and 96.9%, respectively, on-stream for the three months ended September 30, 2012. On-stream factors for the gasification, ammonia and UAN units continue to demonstrate their reliability with the units reporting 98.9%, 97.8% and 96.5%, respectively, on-stream for the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012.
Cost of goods sold for the petroleum business for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012 was approximately $1.8 billion and $3.0 billion, respectively. Cost of goods sold for the petroleum business includes cost of crude oil, other feedstocks and blendstocks, purchased products for resale, transportation distribution costs, costs associated with the actual operations of CVR's refineries (such costs are collectively referred to as "direct operating expenses") such as energy and utility costs, property taxes, catalyst and chemical costs, repairs and maintenance and labor and environmental compliance costs. In addition, cost of goods sold includes depreciation and amortization. The petroleum business' average cost per barrel of crude oil consumed for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012 was $87.80 and $86.88, respectively. Sales volume of refined fuels for the petroleum business for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012 was 17 million and 28 million barrels, respectively. The impact of FIFO accounting also impacted cost of product sold the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012. Under our FIFO accounting method, changes in crude oil prices can cause fluctuations in the inventory valuation of our crude oil, work in process and finished goods, thereby resulting in a favorable FIFO inventory impact when crude oil prices increase and an unfavorable FIFO inventory impact when crude oil prices decrease. For the three months ended September 30, 2012 and the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012, the petroleum business had an favorable FIFO inventory impact of $51 million and unfavorable FIFO inventory impact of $52 million, respectively.
Refining margin per barrel of crude oil throughput for the petroleum business was $36.31 and $30.01 for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012, respectively. Refining margin adjusted for FIFO impact for CVR's petroleum business was $33.44 and $31.85 per crude oil throughput barrel for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012. Gross profit per barrel for the petroleum business was $29.75 and $23.75 for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012, respectively. (For the three months ended September 30, 2012 and the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012, approximately $89 million and $136 million of direct operating expenses, respectively, and $35 million and $57 million of depreciation and amortization, respectively, are excluded in the calculation of the refining margin per barrel of crude oil throughput and gross profit per barrel related to the petroleum business).
The fertilizer business' cost of product sold for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012 was $42 million and $66 million, respectively. Cost of goods sold for the fertilizer business is primarily comprised of pet coke expense, freight expense, distribution expense, direct operating expenses and depreciation and amortization.
SG&A for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012 was $34 million and $70 million, respectively. Included in SG&A are staffing and integration costs related to the GWEC acquisition made in December 2011.
Gaming
(in millions)
| Other Revenues From Operations: | Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Casino | $133 | $140 | $393 | $384 |
| Room | 29 | 30 | 78 | 84 |
| Food and Beverage | 23 | 23 | 66 | 67 |
| Other | 8 | 7 | 19 | 18 |
| Gross revenues | 193 | 200 | 556 | 553 |
| Less promotional allowances | (22) | (25) | (66) | (76) |
| Net revenues | 171 | 175 | 490 | 477 |
| Other Expenses From Operations: | ||||
| Casino | 57 | 62 | 174 | 185 |
| Room | 10 | 10 | 28 | 25 |
| Food and Beverage | 11 | 10 | 30 | 29 |
| Other | 5 | 4 | 13 | 10 |
| Total other expenses from operations | 83 | 86 | 245 | 249 |
| Selling, general and administrative | 66 | 62 | 192 | 191 |
| Income before other income, net, interest expense and income taxes | $22 | $27 | $53 | $37 |
Tropicana's Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q contain a detailed description of its business, products, industry, operating strategy and associated risks. Tropicana's filings with the SEC are available on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov (http://www.sec.gov).
Uncertain economic conditions continue to adversely impact the gaming industry and Tropicana. We cannot predict whether, or how long, current market conditions will continue to persist. As published in a third party report, the Atlantic City market experienced year-over-year declines in casino revenue of 1.8% and 4.8% for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. Net revenues from Tropicana AC comprise approximately 49% of our Gaming segment's net revenues for each of the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011. Net revenues from Tropicana AC comprise approximately 44% of our Gaming segment's net revenues for each of the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.
Hurricane Sandy forced a city mandated five-day closure for all casinos in Atlantic City beginning on October 28, 2012. Although our Gaming segment does not believe that it incurred any significant damage to its Tropicana AC facility and reopened on November 2, 2012, regional storm damage in the northeast is likely to deter customers from visiting Atlantic City and Tropicana AC for some period of time. Our Gaming segment is currently assessing the effect that the storm and associated closure and loss of business, will have on its fourth quarter results from Tropicana AC.
Casino revenues are one of Tropicana's main performance indicators and account for a significant portion of its net revenues. The decrease in casino revenues for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011 was due to a decrease in consolidated table game volumes and table game hold percentage offset in part by an increase in consolidated slot hold percentage. Tropicana's consolidated table hold percentage was 16.9% for the three months ended September 30, 2012, a 0.7 percentage point decrease as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011 primarily due to volatility in the hold percentage associated with high end table games play at Tropicana AC. Consolidated gaming volumes for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011 decreased by 5.1% primarily due to lower table game volumes at Tropicana AC and lower slot volumes at all properties except Tropicana AC.
The increase in casino revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011 was primarily due to an increase in consolidated slot volumes. Tropicana's consolidated table hold percentage was 14.9% and 15.0% for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and was primarily due to a decrease in table hold percentage for Tropicana AC over the respective period. Table hold percentage for Tropicana AC was 13.0% and 13.4% for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Consolidated gaming volumes for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011 decreased by 0.3% primarily due to lower table volumes at Tropicana AC, offset in part by higher slot volumes in Tropicana AC and Baton Rouge.
Revenues from rooms for the three months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $1 million (3%) compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. The average daily room rate and occupancy across all of Tropicana's gaming properties were $74 and 69%, respectively, for the three months ended September 30, 2012 compared to $76 and 71%, respectively, for the three months ended September 30, 2011. Revenues from rooms for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $6 million (7%) compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The average daily room rate and occupancy across all of Tropicana's gaming properties were $70 and 65%, respectively, for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 compared to $72 and 69%, respectively, for the nine months ended September 30, 2011.
Other expenses from operations for the three months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $3 million (3)% as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011, primarily due to decreased gaming taxes on lower revenues as well as decreased payroll and related expenses. Other expenses from operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $4 million (2%) as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011 primarily due to certain cost-cutting measures, particularly in respect of payroll and related benefits, partially offset by increased gaming taxes on increased revenues.
SG&A increased by $4 million (6%) for the three months ended September 30, 2012 compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. This increase over the comparative periods is primarily due to lower expenses for the three months ended September 30, 2011 associated with the reduction of reserves of pre-bankruptcy emergence claims and escrow amounts of the predecessor company to Tropicana AC as well as increased marketing spending at Tropicana AC in 2012. SG&A increased by $1 million (1%) for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011. This increase is primarily due to increased marketing spend at Tropicana AC and reduction of reserves of pre-bankruptcy emergence claims and escrow amounts of the predecessor company to Tropicana AC, offset in part by decreased payroll and related benefits and decreased energy costs.
Railcar
(in millions)
| Manufacturing Operations: | Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net sales | $131 | $108 | $430 | $271 |
| Cost of goods sold | 103 | 98 | 347 | 251 |
| Gross margin | 28 | 10 | 83 | 20 |
| Leasing and Services Operations: | ||||
| Other revenues from operations | 21 | 18 | 58 | 52 |
| Other expenses from operations | 15 | 13 | 43 | 39 |
| Gross margin | 6 | 5 | 15 | 13 |
| Selling, general and administrative | 6 | 3 | 20 | 15 |
| Income before other income, net, interest expense and income taxes | $28 | $12 | $78 | $18 |
ARI's Annual Report on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q contain a detailed description of its business, products, industry, operating strategy and associated risks. ARI's filings with the SEC are available on the SEC's website at www.sec.gov (http://www.sec.gov).
The North American railcar market has been, and we expect it to continue to be highly cyclical. We have seen consistent improvements in the railcar manufacturing market over approximately the past two years. We cannot assure you that the railcar market will continue to improve or that railcar orders and shipments will continue to increase.
Railcar shipments for the three months ended September 30, 2012 were 1,460 railcars, including approximately 436 railcars to leasing customers, as compared to 1,340 railcars for the three months ended September 30, 2011, of which approximately 90 railcars were to leasing customers. Railcar shipments for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 were 5,870 railcars, including approximately 1,816 railcars to leasing customers, as compared to 3,060 railcars for the nine months ended September 30, 2011, of which approximately 90 railcars were to leasing customers. (Shipments of railcars for lease are excluded from manufacturing operations' net sales as they represent shipments to ARI's leasing business and AEP Leasing, which are eliminated in consolidation).
As of September 30, 2012, our Railcar segment a backlog of approximately 7,630 railcars, including approximately 3,560 railcars for lease customers as compared to a backlog of approximately 6,530 railcars as of December 31, 2011. In response to changes in customer demand, our Railcar segment continues to adjust production rates at its railcar manufacturing facilities.
Total manufacturing revenues for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 increased by $23 million (21%) and $159 million (59%), as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, respectively. The increase over the respective periods were due to an increase in railcar shipments, improved pricing and a shift in the sales mix to more tank railcars.
Combined leasing and services operations revenues for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 increased by $3 million (17%) and $6 million (12%), respectively. The increases over the respective periods were primarily attributable to increased railcars on lease with third parties. The addition of AEP Leasing in the third quarter of 2012 has not yet had a significant impact on our Railcar segment's results of operations.
A portion of our Railcar segment's manufacturing, leasing and services revenue is derived from companies affiliated with Mr. Icahn. Such revenues from companies affiliated with Mr. Icahn accounted for approximately 26% and 6% of total manufacturing, leasing and services revenues for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and approximately 13% and 6% of total manufacturing, leasing and services revenues for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. See Note 4, "Related Party Transactions-Railcar," to the consolidated financial statements for further discussion.
Gross margin from manufacturing operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 was $28 million and $83 million, respectively, as compared to $10 million and $20 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, respectively. Gross margin from manufacturing operations as a percentage of manufacturing operations revenues was 21% and 19% for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, as compared to 9% and 7% for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, respectively. The improvements over the respective periods were primarily due to improved sales mix and pricing, and operating leverages and efficiencies as a result of higher production volumes.
Gross margin from leasing and services operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 was $6 million and $15 million, respectively, as compared to $5 million and $13 million for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, respectively. Gross margin from leasing and services operations as a percentage of leasing and services operations revenues was 29% and 26% for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, as compared to 28% and 25% for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, respectively. The improvements over the respective periods were due to increased railcars on lease with third parties.
SG&A for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 increased by $3 million (100%) and $5 million (33%), as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, respectively. The increases over the respective periods were primarily due to increases in incentive compensation and stock-based compensation, which fluctuates with ARI's stock price.
Food Packaging
(in millions)
| Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net sales | $86 | $87 | $255 | $256 |
| Cost of goods sold | 66 | 66 | 196 | 193 |
| Gross margin | 20 | 21 | 59 | 63 |
| Selling, general and administrative | 11 | 11 | 35 | 33 |
| Income before other income, net, interest expense and income taxes | $9 | $10 | $24 | $30 |
Viskase currently operates eight manufacturing facilities and ten distribution centers throughout North America, Europe, South America and Asia and derives approximately 69% of total net sales from customers located outside the United States. Viskase has completed the construction of a shirring plant in the Philippines to serve the Asian market. The plant is operating on a limited basis and will be scaled up over several years in accordance with our growth expectations for the Asian market. The 2012 capital investment, including machinery, was $7 million for the Philippines project, with a total capital investment to date of $13 million on the project. We anticipate that an additional $3 million of equipment will be added during the remainder of 2012 through the year ending December 31, 2016.
Our Food Packaging segment is affected by changes in foreign exchange rates. In addition to those markets in which Viskase prices its products in U.S. dollars, it prices its products in certain of its foreign operations in euros and Brazilian reals. As a result, a decline in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to local currencies of profitable foreign subsidiaries can have a favorable effect on Viskase's profitability. Conversely, an increase in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to the local currencies of profitable foreign subsidiaries can have a negative effect on the profitability of our Food Packaging segment.
Net sales for the three months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $1 million (1%) compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. The decrease was due to a decrease of $5 million attributable to foreign currency translation, partially offset by increases attributable to volume of $2 million and price and product mix of $2 million. Net sales for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $1 million as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The decrease was due to a decrease of $16 million attributable to foreign currency translation, partially offset by increases attributable to volume of $10 million and price and product mix of $4 million.
Cost of goods sold for the three months ended September 30, 2012 remained flat at $66 million as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. Cost of goods sold for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 increased by $3 million (2%) compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011. Gross margin as a percent of net sales was 23% and 24% for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Gross margin as a percent of net sales was 23% and 25% for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Gross margin for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011 decreased by $1 million (5%) primarily due to higher raw material costs, rising energy prices, higher pension expense and depreciation expense, partially offset by improved manufacturing efficiencies. Gross margin for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011 decreased by $4 million (6%) primarily due to growth in unit volume, higher raw material costs, rising energy prices, higher pension and depreciation expense partially offset by foreign currency translation, and improved manufacturing efficiencies.
SG&A for the three months ended September 30, 2012 remained flat at $11 million as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. SG&A for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 increased by $2 million (6%) as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The increase for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 was primarily due to higher one-time employee costs, infrastructure spending for developing markets and pension expense, partially offset by a decrease in legal expenses and by foreign currency translation.
Metals
(in millions)
| Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net sales | $236 | $272 | $871 | $839 |
| Cost of goods sold | 239 | 267 | 881 | 806 |
| Gross margin | (3) | 5 | (10) | 33 |
| Selling, general and administrative | 7 | 6 | 21 | 19 |
| (Loss) income before other income, net, interest expense and income taxes | $(10) | $(1) | $(31) | $14 |
Summarized ferrous tons and non-ferrous pounds sold for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 are as follows:
| Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 (in 000s) | 2011 | Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ferrous tons sold | 358 | 385 | 1,246 | 1,211 |
| Non-ferrous pounds sold | 55,775 | 46,173 | 179,569 | 129,739 |
The scrap metals business is highly cyclical and is substantially dependent upon the overall economic conditions in the U.S. and other global markets. Ferrous and non-ferrous scrap has been historically vulnerable to significant declines in consumption and product pricing during prolonged periods of economic downturn or stagnation.
Net sales for the three months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $36 million (13%) as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. The decrease was due to lower comparable shipment volumes and selling prices in all product lines except brokerage, offset in part by an increase in sales from acquisitions and an increase in brokerage transactions. Slower global growth rates, economic uncertainty, a volatile price and weaker customer demand, and constrained supply of raw materials all contributed to the shortfall in sales for the three months ended September 30, 2012. Net sales for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 increased by $32 million (4%) as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The increase was primarily driven by acquisitions made during 2011, an increase in brokerage transactions and comparable non-ferrous shipment volumes, offset in part by lower selling prices in all product lines.
Ferrous shipments decreased by 27,000 gross tons (7%) and average pricing was $78 per gross ton (18%) lower during the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. Market prices for ferrous material were significantly lower during the three month period ended September 30, 2012 when compared to prices the three months ended September 30, 2011. Non-ferrous shipment volumes increased by 9,602,000 pounds (21%), though average selling price decreased by $0.25 per pound (21%), for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. The increase in non-ferrous shipment volumes was attributable to acquisitions made during 2011, offset in part by lower comparable volume from recycling yards for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. The decline in selling prices was attributed to lower market prices for non-ferrous materials and to a product mix shift to a higher proportion of lower priced aluminum material for the three months ended September 20, 2012 as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011.
Ferrous shipments increased by 35,000 gross tons (3%) and average pricing was $32 per gross ton (7%) lower during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The decrease in average pricing for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011 was largely driven by a significant market price decline that began in June 2012 and continues through the date of this Report. Non-ferrous shipment volumes increased by 49,830,000 pounds (38%), though average selling price decreased $0.18 per pound (15%) due to lower market pricing and a shift to a higher proportion of lower priced aluminum shipments made during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011.
Cost of goods sold for the three months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $28 million (10%) as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. The decrease over the respective periods was due to lower shipment volumes and lower ferrous and non-ferrous material purchase costs. Cost of goods sold for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 increased by $75 million (9%) as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The increase was primarily due to acquisitions made during 2011, an increase in comparable non-ferrous shipment volume and increased brokerage transactions as compared to the corresponding prior year period. This was partly offset by lower comparable ferrous shipment volumes and by lower material purchase costs attributable to lower market pricing over the respective periods. Gross margin, as a percentage of net sales, was a loss of 1% for the three months ended September 30, 2012 compared to income of 2% for the three months ended September 30, 2011. Gross margin, as a percentage of net sales, was a loss of 1% for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 compared to income of 4% for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The compressed margins during each of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the comparable prior year period were primarily driven by lower selling prices and continuing material supply constraints that drove scrap acquisition prices and inventory costs higher in relation to selling prices.
SG&A expense for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 increased $1 million (17%) and $2 million (11%) as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011, respectively. The increases in the respective periods were primarily due to higher manpower costs associated with acquisitions made during 2011.
Real Estate
(in millions)
| Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Real Estate revenues | $24 | $23 | $67 | $68 |
| Real Estate expenses | 13 | 12 | 38 | 39 |
| 11 | 11 | 29 | 29 | |
| Selling, general and administrative | 3 | 4 | 10 | 11 |
| Income before other income, net, interest expense and income taxes | $8 | $7 | $19 | $18 |
Real Estate revenues and expenses include results from resort operations, sales of residential units, and rental income and expenses, including income from financing leases. Sales of residential units are included in net sales in our consolidated financial statements. Results from resort and rental operations, including financing lease income, are included in other revenues from operations in our consolidated financial statements.
Revenues from our real estate operations for each of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011 are substantially derived from our resort and rental operations. Revenues from sales of residential units in our real estate development operations represent less than 10% of total Real Estate revenues for each of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011.
SG&A for each of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $1 million as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. The decrease over the respective periods was primarily due to lower operating expenses associated with certain property located in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Home Fashion
(in millions)
| Three Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 | 2011 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Net sales | $53 | $79 | $173 | $259 |
| Cost of goods sold | 47 | 76 | 156 | 241 |
| Gross margin | 6 | 3 | 17 | 18 |
| Selling, general and administrative | 9 | 14 | 28 | 45 |
| Restructuring | — | 2 | 2 | 5 |
| Impairment | 3 | — | 6 | — |
| 12 | 16 | 36 | 50 | |
| Loss before other income, net, interest expense and income taxes | $(6) | $(13) | $(19) | $(32) |
The business of WestPoint Home LLC (referred to as WPH) is significantly influenced by the overall economic environment, including consumer spending, at the retail level, for home textile products. Many of the larger retailers are customers of WPH. WPH will continue to realign its manufacturing operations and streamline its merchandising, sales and customer service divisions to improve its cost structure and better serve its customers. Given the uncertainty and volatility in the macroeconomic conditions, we cannot predict if WPH's financial performance will continue to improve.
Net sales for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $26 million (33%) and $86 million (33%), respectively, as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. The decreases in net sales for each of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 were primarily due to the effects of exiting certain unprofitable programs and customers.
Cost of goods sold for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $29 million (38%) and $85 million (35%), respectively, as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. The decreases in the cost of goods sold were primarily due to lower sales volume and lower commodity costs for each of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011.
Gross margin for the three months ended September 30, 2012 increased by $3 million (100%) as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. Gross margin for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $1 million (6%) as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011. Gross margin as a percentage of net sales was 11% for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to 4% for the three months ended September 30, 2011. Gross margin as a percentage of net sales was 10% for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to 7% for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The improvements of the gross margin as a percentage of net sales for each of the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011 were primarily due to the effects of exiting certain unprofitable programs and customers and lower commodity costs.
SG&A for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 decreased by $5 million (36%) and $17 million (38%), respectively, as compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. The decreases for each of the respective periods were primarily due to lower selling and administrative expenses due to cost-cutting initiatives and lower fulfillment costs due to lower sales volumes. WPH will continue to explore ways to lower its SG&A expenditures by ongoing review and investigation of the potential for further consolidation of its locations, reduction of headcount, and where appropriate by applying, as necessary, more stringent oversight of expense areas where potential savings have been identified.
Restructuring and impairment for the three months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011 increased by $1 million. Restructuring and impairment for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011 increased by $3 million. The increases over the respective periods was primarily due to the impairment of certain fixed assets held for sale, partially offset by the reduction in continuing costs of closed facilities. In recording the impairment charges related to its plants, WPH compared estimated net realizable values of property, plant and equipment to their current carrying values. Restructuring and impairment charges include severance, benefits and related costs, non-cash impairment charges related to plants that have been or will be closed and continuing costs of closed plants and transition expenses.
WPH anticipates incurring less than $1 million of additional restructuring costs for the remainder of 2012, particularly with respect to the carrying costs of closed facilities until such time as these locations are sold. Restructuring costs could be affected by, among other things, WPH's decision to accelerate or delay its restructuring efforts. As a result, actual costs incurred could vary materially from these anticipated amounts. If WPH's restructuring efforts are unsuccessful or its existing strategic manufacturing plans are amended, it may be required to record additional impairment charges related to the carrying value of long-lived assets.
Other Consolidated Results of Operations
Interest Expense
Interest expense for the three months ended September 30, 2012 increased by $33 million (31%) as compared to the three months ended September 30, 2011. Interest expense for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 increased by $56 million (17%) as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The increases over the comparable periods were primarily due to higher interest expense incurred on certain debt issued during the first and third quarter of 2012 and the inclusion of interest expense related to CVR's debt effective May 4, 2012, offset in part by lower interest expense incurred on due to broker balances.
Income Tax Expense
For the three months ended September 30, 2012, we recorded an income tax expense of $110 million on pre-tax income of $210 million compared to an income tax expense of $13 million on pre-tax loss of $39 million for the three months ended September 30, 2011. Our effective income tax rate was 52.4% and (33.3)% for the three months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
For the nine months ended September 30, 2012, we recorded an income tax benefit of $8 million on pre-tax income of $643 million compared to an income tax expense of $55 million on pre-tax income of approximately $1.2 billion for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. Our effective income tax rate was (1.2)% and 4.6% for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
The difference between the effective tax rate and statutory federal rate of 35% is principally due to changes in valuation allowances and partnership income not subject to taxation, as such taxes are the responsibility of the partners. In February, 2012, pursuant to a tax-free reorganization, WPH merged into a newly formed single member limited liability company owned by American Entertainment Properties Corp ("AEP"). Also, on May 4, 2012, AEP acquired a controlling interest in CVR. In conjunction with these two transactions, AEP re-evaluated the future estimated realization of its deferred tax assets which resulted in the release of approximately $159 million of its valuation allowance. The portion which is expected to be realized through current year ordinary income is included in the annual effective tax rate, and the remaining portion, which relates to the anticipated realization in future years and is recognized as a discrete event.
Additionally, in conjunction with Federal-Mogul's ongoing review of its actual results and anticipated future earnings, Federal-Mogul reassesses the possibility of releasing valuation allowances. The factors considered by management in its determination of the probability of the realization of the deferred tax assets include but are not limited to: recent adjusted historical financial results; historical taxable income; projected future taxable income; the expected timing of the reversals of existing temporary differences; and tax planning strategies. Based upon this assessment, Federal-Mogul has concluded based on available evidence that the deferred tax assets in Germany are more likely than not to be realized. Based upon this conclusion, a valuation allowance was reversed during the second quarter of 2012. The portion which is expected to be realized through current year ordinary income is included in the annual effective rate and the remaining portion relates to the anticipated realization in future years and is therefore recognized as a discrete event during the three months ended September 30, 2012.
On August 17, 2012, a 3% surtax levied on dividends and other certain distributions was enacted in France. Federal-Mogul has decided to use the lower undistributed tax rate, and therefore, the applicable deferred taxes have not been remeasured or recognized on any additional inside basis differences including prior undistributed earnings. Federal-Mogul is required to pay additional taxes at the applicable tax rate on all distributions of dividends and the additional taxes will be recorded as income tax expense in the period in which the dividend is declared.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Holding Company
As of September 30, 2012, the Holding Company had investments in the Investment Funds with a total fair market value of approximately $2.3 billion. As of September 30, 2012, our Holding Company had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $1.0 billion and total debt of approximately $4.1 billion.
We are a holding company. Our cash flow and our ability to meet our debt service obligations and make distributions with respect to depositary units likely will depend on the cash flow resulting from divestitures, equity and debt financings, interest income, returns on our interests in the Investment Funds and the payment of funds to us by our subsidiaries in the form of loans, dividends and distributions. We may pursue various means to raise cash from our subsidiaries. To date, such means include receipt of dividends from subsidiaries, obtaining loans or other financings based on the asset values of subsidiaries or selling debt or equity securities of subsidiaries through capital market transactions. To the degree any distributions and transfers are impaired or prohibited, our ability to make payments on our debt or distributions on our depositary units could be limited. The operating results of our subsidiaries may not be sufficient for them to make distributions to us. In addition, our subsidiaries are not obligated to make funds available to us, and distributions and intercompany transfers from our subsidiaries to us may be restricted by applicable law or covenants contained in debt agreements and other agreements.
As of September 30, 2012 based on covenants in the indenture governing our senior notes, we could incur approximately $1.5 billion in additional indebtedness. See Note 11, “Debt,” to the consolidated financial statements for additional information concerning credit facilities for us and our subsidiaries.
Acquisition of CVR Energy, Inc.
As discussed in Note 2, "Acquisition" on April 18, 2012, the IEP Parties entered into a Transaction Agreement with CVR, with respect to IEP Energy's Offer to purchase all of the issued and outstanding shares of CVR's common stock for a price of $30 per share in cash, without interest, less any applicable withholding taxes, plus one CCP, which represents the contractual right to receive an additional cash payment per share if a definitive agreement for the sale of CVR is executed on or prior to August 18, 2013 and such transaction closes.
The Offer expired on May 4, 2012. On May 7, 2012, we announced the results of the Offer. A total of 48,112,317 shares of CVR common stock were validly tendered for $30 per share plus a CCP. As all of the terms and conditions of the Offer had been satisfied, IEP Energy accepted for payment all of the tendered shares, which represented approximately 55% of the outstanding shares of CVR common stock. Following the purchase of these shares, the IEP Parties owned approximately 70% of the outstanding shares of CVR common stock. Subsequent to the expiration of the Offer on May 4, 2012, IEP Energy extended the Offer through May 18, 2012. As a result of the extension of the Offer and subsequent additional purchases of CVR common stock by IEP Energy, the IEP Parties increased their ownership in CVR. As of September 30, 2012, IEP Energy owned approximately 82.0% of total outstanding common stock of CVR.
Pursuant to the Transaction Agreement, for a period of 60 days CVR solicited proposals or offers from third parties to acquire it. The 60 day period began on May 24, 2012 and ended on July 23, 2012 without any qualifying offers.
On May 7, 2012, affiliates of Mr. Icahn contributed 4,566,546 shares of CVR common stock to IEP Energy with an aggregate value of $137 million, resulting in a 6.4% non-controlling interest in IEP Energy. Pursuant to a contribution and exchange agreement dated August 24, 2012, affiliates of Mr. Icahn contributed their interest in IEP Energy to us for an aggregate consideration of 3,288,371 of our depositary units based on a 20 trading-day volume weighted average price of our depositary units. As a result of this transaction, we directly own 82.0% of the total outstanding common stock of CVR as of August 24, 2012.
The total purchase price of the acquisition of a controlling interest in CVR on May 4, 2012 was approximately $2.1 billion.
Distributions on Depositary Units
On July 31, 2012, the board of directors declared a quarterly distribution of $0.35 per depositary unit, comprised of a combination of $0.10 payable in cash and $0.25 payable in depositary units. The distribution was paid on August 31, 2012 to depositary unitholders of record at the close of business on August 16, 2012. We calculated the depositary units to be distributed based on the 20 trading-day volume weighted-average price of our depositary units ended on July 31, 2012, resulting in 0.006277 of a unit to be distributed per depositary unit. To the extent that the aggregate units distributed to any holder included a fraction of a unit, that fractional unit was settled in cash. As a result, we distributed 627,651 depositary units on August 31, 2012 in connection with this distribution.
On April 30, 2012, the board of directors declared a quarterly distribution of $0.35 per depositary unit, comprised of a combination of $0.10 payable in cash and $0.25 payable in depositary units. The distribution was paid on May 31, 2012 to depositary unitholders of record at the close of business on May 16, 2012. We calculated the depositary units to be distributed based on the 20 trading-day volume weighted-average price of our depositary units ended on April 27, 2012, resulting in 0.005357 of a unit being distributed per depositary unit. To the extent that the aggregate units distributed to any holder included a fraction of a unit, that fractional unit was settled in cash. As a result, we distributed 532,190 depositary units on May 31, 2012 in connection with this distribution.
On February 28, 2012, the board of directors declared a quarterly distribution of $0.35 per depositary unit, comprised of a combination of $0.10 payable in cash and $0.25 payable in depositary units. The distribution was paid on March 30, 2012 to depositary unitholders of record at the close of business on March 15, 2012. We calculated the depositary units to be distributed based on the 20 trading-day volume weighted-average price of our depositary units ended on February 27, 2012, resulting in 0.006269 of a unit being distributed per depositary unit. To the extent that the aggregate units distributed to any holder included a fraction of a unit, that fractional unit was settled in cash. As a result, we distributed 619,585 depositary units on March 30, 2012 in connection with this distribution.
Rights and Debt Offerings
As discussed elsewhere in this Report, in connection with a certain rights offering consummated during the first quarter of 2012, we distributed an aggregate 13,590,238 additional depositary units to unitholders that subscribed to the basic subscription rights and the over-subscription rights and we received proceeds of $500 million. In addition, as discussed elsewhere in this Report, we issued an aggregate $1,000 million principal amount of the 2012 Additional Notes during the nine months ended September 30, 2012.
Borrowings
Debt consists of the following:
(in millions)
| September 30, 2012 | December 31, 2011 | |
|---|---|---|
| 8% senior unsecured notes due 2018 - Icahn Enterprises | $2,478 | $1,450 |
| 7.75% senior unsecured notes due 2016 - Icahn Enterprises | 1,050 | 1,050 |
| Senior unsecured variable rate convertible notes due 2013 - Icahn Enterprises | 556 | 556 |
| Debt facilities - Automotive | 2,737 | 2,737 |
| Debt facilities - Energy | 724 | — |
| Credit facilities - Energy | 125 | — |
| Debt facilities - Gaming | — | 49 |
| Credit facilities - Gaming | 171 | — |
| Senior unsecured notes - Railcar | 175 | 275 |
| Senior secured notes and revolving credit facility - Food Packaging | 214 | 214 |
| Mortgages payable - Real Estate | 72 | 75 |
| Other | 120 | 67 |
| Total debt | $8,422 | $6,473 |
See Note 11, “Debt,” to the consolidated financial statements contained elsewhere in this Report for additional information concerning terms, restrictions and covenants of our debt. As of September 30, 2012, we are in compliance with all debt covenants.
Contractual Commitments and Contingencies
During the first quarter of 2012, Tropicana repaid its Exit Facility in full and entered into Credit Facilities in the amount of $175 million. In addition, Tropicana terminated its Revolving Facility when the Exit Facility was repaid in full. Refer to Note 11, “Debt-Credit Facilities-Gaming," to the consolidated financial statements contained elsewhere in this Report for additional information.
During the third quarter of 2012, ARI repaid $100 million of its ARI Notes at a redemption rate of 101.875% of the principal amount of the ARI Notes to be repaid, plus any accrued and unpaid interest. Refer to Note 11, “Debt-Senior Unsecured Notes-Railcar," to the consolidated financial statements contained elsewhere in this Report for additional information.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, we issued an aggregate $1.0 billion in principal amount of the 8%
Senior Unsecured Notes due 2018. These notes constitute the same series of securities as the Initial Notes for purposes of the indenture governing the notes and vote together on all matters with such series. These notes have substantially identical terms as the Initial Notes.
On October 23, 2012, CVR Refining LLC ("Refining LLC") and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Coffeyville Finance Inc., completed a private offering of $500 million in aggregate principal amount of 6.50% the 2022 Notes. The 2022 Notes were issued at par. Refining LLC received approximately $493 million of cash proceeds, net of the underwriting fees, but before deducting other third-party fees and expenses associated with the offering. The 2022 Notes will be secured by substantially the same assets that secure the outstanding 10.875% Second Lien Notes due 2017, subject to exceptions, until such time that the outstanding Second Lien Notes have been discharged in full. Approximately $348 million of the net proceeds from the offering was used to purchase approximately $323 million of the 9.0% First Lien Notes due April 1, 2015 pursuant to a tender offer and to settle accrued interest of approximately $2 million through October 23, 2012 and to pay related fees and expenses. A premium of approximately $23 million was incurred associated with the tender.
CRLLC intends to use the remaining proceeds from the offering to either (1) purchase the remaining $124 million of existing First Lien Note, if any, tendered in the tender offer by November 5, 2012 or (2) redeem any remaining non-tendered First Lien Notes on November 23, 2012 pursuant to a notice of redemption issued on October 23, 2012. Any remaining proceeds will be used for general corporate purposes.
See Note 11, "Debt," and Note 20, "Subsequent Events-Energy," and to the consolidated financial statements for additional information regarding these debt offerings.
As a result of our acquisition of a controlling interest in CVR on May 4, 2012, we have added the following contractual commitments and contingencies, including the net debt offering issued on October 23, 2012 discussed above, with respect to CVR as of September 30, 2012 (in millions):
| 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | Thereafter | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Debt obligations, including capital leases | $1 | $1 | $1 | $448 | $126 | $270 | $847 |
| Interest payments | 16 | 24 | 65 | 45 | 24 | 12 | 186 |
| Operating lease obligations | 3 | 10 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 8 | 41 |
| Purchase obligations | 32 | 127 | 114 | 103 | 97 | 460 | 933 |
| Total | $52 | $162 | $188 | $602 | $253 | $750 | $2,007 |
In addition to the amounts in the table above, there are $27 million in standby letters of credit to secure transportation services for crude oil.
Except as discussed above, there were no other material changes in our contractual obligations or any other liabilities reflected in our consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2012 as compared to those reported in our 2011 Form 10-K.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We have off-balance sheet risk related to investment activities associated with certain financial instruments, including futures, options, credit default swaps and securities sold, not yet purchased. For additional information regarding these arrangements, refer to Note 7, “Financial Instruments,” to the consolidated financial statements contained elsewhere in this Report.
Consolidated Cash Flows
The following table summarizes cash flow information for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and cash and cash equivalents as of September 30, 2012 for each of our operating segments and our Holding Company:
(in millions)
| Nine Months Ended September 30, 2012 Cash Provided By (Used In) Operating Activities | Investing Activities | Financing Activities | September 30, 2012 Cash and Cash Equivalents | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Investment | $979 | $— | $(17) | $15 |
| Automotive | (76) | (327) | (26) | 541 |
| Energy(1) | 478 | (70) | (26) | 988 |
| Gaming | 69 | (28) | 117 | 250 |
| Railcar | 45 | (167) | (102) | 99 |
| Food Packaging | (6) | (35) | 1 | 26 |
| Metals | 16 | (18) | — | 37 |
| Real Estate | 31 | (1) | (3) | 65 |
| Home Fashion | 18 | 1 | — | 73 |
| Holding Company | (186) | (1,331) | 1,510 | 1,046 |
| $1,368 | $(1,976) | $1,454 | $3,140 |
(1) CVR was consolidated effective May 4, 2012.
Operating Activities
Net cash provided by operating activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 was primarily attributable to our Investment segment which had a change in cash held at consolidated affiliated partnerships and restricted cash of approximately $3.1 billion primarily related to the covering of securities sold, not yet purchased. This was offset in part by net cash used in investing transactions of approximately $1.3 billion and a net $0.8 billion used in connection with settlement of realized losses on derivative contracts. Additionally, our Energy segment had net cash provided by operating activities of $478 million primarily due to $393 million of net income before non-cash charges and changes in operating assets and liabilities of $85 million.
Our Holding Company paid interest on our debt of $241 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2012.
Investing Activities
Net cash used in investing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 was primarily due to our acquisition of CVR for approximately $1.3 billion, net of cash acquired. Additionally, capital expenditures were $617 million, of which $296 million was related to our Automotive segment and $168 million was related to our Railcar segment. Capital expenditures for our Railcar segment were $157 million for manufacturing railcars for lease to others, which are included in property, plant and equipment, net on our consolidated balance sheets. During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, the Holding Company purchased investments of $210 million, offset in part by proceeds from sales of investments of $170 million.
Financing Activities
Net cash provided financing activities for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 was primarily due to our Holding Company which had aggregate proceeds from the issuance of senior unsecured notes of approximately $1.0 billion and proceeds from a rights offering of $510 million. In addition, our Gaming segment had net cash provided by financing activities of $117 million primarily due to the issuance of its New Term Loan Facility offset in part by the repayment of its Exit Facility. During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, our Railcar segment repaid $100 million of its ARI Notes and we paid $31 million in distributions to holders of our depositary units. Additionally, our Investment segment distributed $17 million to a related party investor in the Investment Funds.
Discussion of Segment Liquidity and Capital Resources
Investment
The investment strategy utilized by the Investment segment is generally not heavily reliant on leverage. As of September 30, 2012, the ratio of the notional exposure of the Investment Funds' invested capital to net asset value of the Investment Funds was approximately 0.75 to 1.00 on the long side and 1.55 to 1.00 on the short side. The notional principal amount of an investment instrument is the reference amount that is used to calculate profit or loss on that instrument. The Investment Funds historically have had access to significant amounts of cash from prime brokers, subject to customary terms and market conditions.
As more fully disclosed in a letter to investors in the Investment Funds filed with the SEC on Form 8-K on March 7, 2011, the Investment Funds returned all fee-paying capital to their investors during 2011. Payments were funded through cash on hand and borrowings under existing credit lines.
Automotive
As of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the borrowing availability under the revolving credit facility was $461 million and $496 million, respectively. Federal-Mogul had $39 million and $38 million of letters of credit outstanding as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively, pertaining to the term loan credit facility. To the extent letters of credit associated with the revolving credit facility are issued, there is a corresponding decrease in borrowings available under this facility.
Federal-Mogul maintains investments in several non-consolidated affiliates, which are located in China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Korea, Turkey and the United States. Federal-Mogul's direct ownership in such affiliates ranges from approximately 2% to 50%. The aggregate investments in these affiliates were $257 million and $228 million at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.
Federal-Mogul's joint ventures are businesses established and maintained in connection with its operating strategy and are not special purpose entities. In general, Federal-Mogul does not extend guarantees, loans or other instruments of a variable nature that may result in incremental risk to Federal-Mogul's liquidity position. Furthermore, Federal-Mogul does not rely on dividend payments or other cash flows from its non-consolidated affiliates to fund its operations and, accordingly, does not believe that they have a material effect on Federal-Mogul's liquidity.
Federal-Mogul holds a 50% non-controlling interest in a joint venture located in Turkey. This joint venture was established in 1995 for the purpose of manufacturing and marketing automotive parts, including pistons, piston rings, piston pins, and cylinder liners to OE and aftermarket customers. Pursuant to the joint venture agreement, Federal-Mogul's partner holds an option to put its shares to a subsidiary of Federal-Mogul's at the higher of the current fair value or at a guaranteed minimum amount. The term of the contingent guarantee is indefinite, consistent with the terms of the joint venture agreement. However, the contingent guarantee would not survive termination of the joint venture agreement. The guaranteed minimum amount represents a contingent guarantee of the initial investment of the joint venture partner and can be exercised at the discretion of the partner. The total amount of the contingent guarantee, should all triggering events have occurred, approximated $59 million as of September 30, 2012. Federal-Mogul believes that this contingent guarantee is less than the estimated current fair value of the joint venture partners' interest in the affiliate. As such, the contingent guarantee does not give rise to a contingent liability and, as a result, no amount is recorded for this guarantee. If this put option were exercised, the consideration paid and net assets acquired would be accounted for in accordance with business combination accounting. Any value in excess of the guaranteed minimum amount of the put option would be the subject of negotiation between Federal-Mogul and its joint venture partner.
Federal-Mogul's subsidiaries in Brazil, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and the United States are party to accounts receivable factoring and securitization facilities. Gross accounts receivable transferred under these facilities were $187 million and $203 million as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. Of those gross amounts, $187 million and $202 million, respectively, qualify as sales as defined in FASB ASC Topic 860, Transfers and Servicing. The remaining transferred receivables were pledged as collateral and accounted for as secured borrowings and recorded in the consolidated balance sheets within accounts receivable, net and debt. Under the terms of these facilities, Federal-Mogul is not obligated to draw cash immediately upon the transfer of accounts receivable. As of both September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, Federal-Mogul had no outstanding transferred receivables for which cash had not yet been drawn. Proceeds from the transfers of accounts receivable qualifying as sales were $1.1 billion and $1.3 billion for the nine months ended September 30, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Certain of the facilities contain terms that require Federal-Mogul to share in the credit risk of the sold receivables. The maximum exposures to Federal-Mogul associated with certain of these facilities' terms were $19 million and $23 million at September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. Based on Federal-Mogul's analysis of the creditworthiness of its customers on which such receivables were sold and outstanding as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, Federal-Mogul estimated the loss to be immaterial.
In October 2011, a flood occurred at one of Federal-Mogul's manufacturing facilities in Ayutthaya, Thailand. This facility was partially submerged in the flood waters for a period of approximately six weeks, resulting in extensive damage to the facility and the loss of substantially all of its related equipment and inventory. A substantial portion of operations at the facility is currently suspended.
In addition to other coverage, Federal-Mogul believes its insurance policies provide for replacement of damaged property, sales value of destroyed inventory, reimbursement for losses due to interruption of business operations and reimbursement of expenditures incurred to restore operations. In February and April 2012, Federal-Mogul received $25 million and $5 million, respectively, in cash advances from its insurance carrier related to the flooding. Federal-Mogul has insurance recoverables of $0 million and $21 million recorded as of September 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.
Energy
As of September 30, 2012, CVR had no amounts outstanding and availability of $373 million under its ABL credit facility. CVR's availability under the ABL credit facility is reduced by outstanding letters of credit which, as of September 30, 2012, was $27 million. There were no borrowings under the ABL credit facility as of September 30, 2012. In addition, as of September 30, 2012, CVR LP had $25 million availability under its revolving credit facility.
As further discussed in Note 20, "Subsequent Events-Energy," on October 23, 2012, Refining LLC and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Coffeyville Finance Inc., completed a private offering of $500.0 million in aggregate principal amount of 6.50% the 2022 Notes. The 2022 Notes were issued at par. Refining LLC received approximately $493 million of cash proceeds, net of the underwriting fees, but before deducting other third-party fees and expenses associated with the offering. The 2022 Notes will be secured by substantially the same assets that secure the outstanding 10.875% Second Lien Notes due 2017, subject to exceptions, until such time that the outstanding Second Lien Notes have been discharged in full. On October 23, 2012, CVR repurchased approximately $323 million of its First Lien Notes pursuant to a tender offer and issued a notice of redemption to redeem the remaining $124 million of outstanding First Lien Notes not tendered, on November 23, 2012.
See Note 11, “Debt-Energy," and Note 20, "Subsequent Events-Energy," to our consolidated financial statements for further discussion regarding CVR's credit facilities.
CVR LP has a distribution policy in which it will generally distribute all of its available cash each quarter, within 45 days after the end of each quarter. The distributions will be made to all common unitholders. CRLLC currently holds approximately 70% of all common units outstanding. The amount of the distribution will be determined pursuant to its general partner's calculation of available cash for the applicable quarter. CVR, as the general partner and a non-economic interest holder, is not entitled to receive cash distributions. As a result of the general partner's distribution policy, funds held by CVR LP will not be available for CRLLC's use, and CRLLC as a unitholder will receive its applicable percentage of the distribution of funds within 45 days following each quarter. CVR LP does not have a legal obligation to pay distributions and there is no guarantee that it will pay any distributions on the units in any quarter.
CVR expects its petroleum business to spend approximately $80 million to $85 million (not including capitalized interest) on capital expenditures for the remainder of 2012. Of this amount, $20 million to $25 million is expected to be spent for the Coffeyville refinery which includes approximately $25 million of maintenance capital. Approximately $45 million to $50 million is expected to be spent on capital for the Wynnewood refinery. Included in the petroleum business expected capital spend is approximately $10 million for other non-refining transportation and storage projects.
During the first quarter of 2012, the Coffeyville refinery completed the second phase of a planned two-phase turnaround. CVR incurred total major scheduled turnaround expenses of approximately $13 million for the period May 5, 2012 through September 30, 2012. The Wynnewood refinery is scheduled to begin turnaround maintenance in the fourth quarter of 2012. CVR expects to incur approximately $100 million of expenses during 2012 related to the Wynnewood refinery. Turnaround expenditures are not included in capital spending summarized above.
The nitrogen fertilizer business expects capital expenditures for the remainder of 2012 (not including capitalized interest) to be $35 million to $50 million. Of this amount, $3 million to $5 million will be spent on maintenance projects and $33 million to $43 million will be spent on growth projects including $28 million to $33 million on the UAN expansion project.
CVR LP anticipates that the total capital spend associated with the UAN expansion will be approximately $125 million (including capitalized interest), of which $93 million had been spent through September 30, 2012. It is anticipated that the UAN expansion will be completed by January 1, 2013. Turnaround expenditures are expected to approximate $5 million and are not included in capital spending summarized above.
CVR's estimated capital expenditures are subject to change due to unanticipated increases/decreases in the cost, scope and completion time for its capital projects. For example, CVR may experience increases/decreases in labor or equipment costs necessary to comply with government regulations or to complete projects that sustain or improve the profitability of its refineries or nitrogen fertilizer plant. Capital spending for the nitrogen fertilizer business has been and will be determined by the board of directors of the general partner of CVR LP.
CVR believes that its cash flows from operations and existing cash and cash equivalents and improvements in its working capital, together with borrowings under its existing credit facilities as necessary, will be sufficient to satisfy the anticipated cash requirements associated with our existing operations for at least the next twelve months. However, its future capital expenditures and other cash requirements could be higher than CVR currently expects as a result of various factors. Additionally, CVR's ability to generate sufficient cash from its operating activities depends on its future performance, which is subject to general economic, political, financial, competitive, and other factors beyond its control. Depending on the needs of CVR's business contractual limitations and market conditions, it may from time to time seek to use equity securities, incur additional debt, modify the terms of our existing debt, issue debt securities, or otherwise refinance our existing debt. There can be no assurance that CVR will seek to do any of the foregoing or that it will be able to do any of the foregoing on terms acceptable to it or at all.
Gaming
Tropicana's cash flows are and will continue to be affected by a variety of factors, many of which are outside of its control, including regulatory restrictions, competition and other general business conditions. In March 2012, Tropicana repaid the Exit Facility with a portion of the proceeds from the New Term Loan Facility as discussed below. We believe that Tropicana will have sufficient liquidity through a combination of available cash, credit facilities and cash flow from its properties to fund its cash requirements and capital expenditures for its normal operating activities.
Part of Tropicana's overall strategy includes consideration of expansion opportunities in new gaming jurisdictions, underserved markets and acquisition and other strategic opportunities that may arise periodically. Tropicana may require additional funds in order to execute on such strategic growth, and may incur additional debt or issue additional equity to finance any such transactions. We cannot assure you that Tropicana will be able to incur such debt or issue any such additional equity on acceptable terms or at all.
In March 2012, Tropicana entered into credit facilities (the "Credit Facilities"), which consist of (i) a senior secured first lien term loan facility in an aggregate principal amount of $175 million, issued at a discount of 2% (the "New Term Loan Facility") and (ii) a cash collateralized letter of credit facility in a maximum aggregate amount of $15 million (the "Letter of Credit Facility"). Commencing on June 30, 2012, the New Term Loan Facility requires quarterly principal payments of 0.25% of the original principal amount with any remaining outstanding amounts due on the maturity date, March 16, 2018. The New Term Loan Facility is secured by substantially all of Tropicana's assets and is guaranteed by all of its domestic subsidiaries.
At the election of Tropicana and subject to certain conditions, the amount available under the New Term Loan Facility may be increased by up to $75 million, which increased amount may be comprised of additional term loans and up to $20 million of revolving loans. The Letter of Credit Facility provides for the issuance of letters of credit with an aggregate stated amount of up to $15 million, through a termination date of March 16, 2017. The letters of credit issued under the Letter of Credit Facility will be secured by cash collateral in an amount no less than 103% of the face amounts of such letters of credit.
The obligations under the New Term Loan Facility bear interest, at Tropicana's election, at an annual rate equal to either: (i) the sum of (a) the Adjusted LIBOR Rate (as defined in the New Term Loan Facility) (subject to a 1.50% floor); plus (b) a margin of 6.00%; or (ii) the sum of: (a) the alternate base rate, which is equal to the greatest of: (1) the corporate base rate of UBS AG, Stamford Branch; (2) the Federal Funds Effective Rate (as defined in the New Term Loan Facility) plus 0.50%; or (3) the Adjusted LIBOR Rate (as defined in the New Term Loan Facility) for one month plus 1.00% (all subject to a 2.50% floor); plus (b) a margin of 5.00%; such that, in either case, the applicable interest rate shall not be less than 7.50%. An additional 2% default rate also applies in certain instances described in the New Term Loan Facility. As of September 30, 2012, the interest rate was 7.5%.
A portion of the net proceeds from the New Term Loan Facility was used to repay in full the amounts outstanding under the Exit Facility, as discussed below, which totaled $108 million in repaid principal, accrued and unpaid interest and the applicable prepayment penalty, of which $58 million was eliminated in consolidation due to the fact that we had owned a portion of the Exit Facility. In addition, the Revolving Facility was terminated when the Exit Facility was repaid in full. Our Gaming segment recognized a $2 million loss on extinguishment of debt which includes a $1 million prepayment penalty and a $1 million write-off of unamortized debt issuance costs and discounts for the nine months ended September 30, 2012.
Material cash requirements for Tropicana for the remainder of 2012 are expected to include (i) principal and interest payments related to its New Term Facility of $4 million, (ii) maintenance capital expenditures expected to be between $10 million and $15 million, (iii) growth capital expenditures and (v) the potential construction and development costs related to Tropicana Aruba's permanent casino which is currently in the planning and design stages.
Home Fashion
On October 15, 2012, upon the expiration of a certain senior secured revolving credit facility of WPH, WPH entered into a new letter of credit facility, or the LC Facility, with a nationally recognized bank ("LC Issuer"). This one-year LC Facility has a $10 million credit line. Issuance of letters of credit under the LC Facility is subject to 0.50% annual fee on the outstanding face amount of the letters of credit issued under the LC Facility, which face amount as of October 15, 2012 was approximately $6 million. Obligations under the LC Facility are secured by a cash collateral account pledged by WPH to LC Issuer. The LC Facility does not contain any financial covenants. WPH has determined that its liquidity needs are sufficiently covered by existing and projected cash resources for the foreseeable future. In the future, WPH may explore other financing options as circumstances warrant.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Except as discussed below, there have been no other material changes to our critical accounting policies and estimates during the three months ended September 30, 2012 compared to those reported in our 2011 Form 10-K.
Energy
Derivative Instruments
Our Energy segment uses futures contracts, options and forward contracts primarily to reduce exposure to changes in crude oil prices, finished goods product prices and interest rates to provide economic hedges of inventory positions and anticipated interest payments on long-term debt. Although our Energy segment's management considers these derivatives economic hedges, our other derivative instruments do not qualify as hedges for hedge accounting purposes under ASC Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and accordingly are recorded at fair value in the balance sheet. Changes in the fair value of these derivative instruments are recorded into earnings as a component of other income (expense) in the period of change. The estimated fair values of forward and swap contracts are based on quoted market prices and assumptions for the estimated forward yield curves of related commodities in periods when quoted market prices are unavailable.
Railcar
We perform the annual goodwill impairment test as of March 1 of each year for our Railcar segment. For purposes of goodwill impairment testing, our Railcar segment's manufacturing reporting unit is the only reporting unit with allocated goodwill. We assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of the reporting unit is greater than its carrying amount. If, however, we had determined that it was more likely than not that the fair value of the reporting unit was less than its carrying amount, then we would perform the first step of the two-step goodwill impairment test. In evaluating whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of the reporting unit is greater than its carrying amount, we considered various qualitative and quantitative factors, including macroeconomic conditions, railcar industry trends and the fact that our railcar manufacturing reporting unit has historical positive operating cash flows that we anticipate will continue. After assessing these factors, we determined that it was more likely than not the fair value of our railcar manufacturing reporting unit was greater than its carrying amount, and therefore no further testing was necessary.
Automotive
During the first half of 2012, Federal-Mogul was organized into four business units (Powertrain Energy ("PTE"), Powertrain Sealing and Bearings ("PTSB"), Vehicle Safety and Protection ("VSP") and Global Aftermarket). These four business units represented our reporting units for our goodwill impairment analysis for our Automotive segment for the periods prior and during the second quarter of 2012. During the second quarter of 2012, Federal-Mogul's board of directors approved a restructuring plan to reduce or eliminate capacity at several high cost VSP facilities and transfer production to lower cost locations. As a result, we determined that this restructuring plan indicated that an impairment may have existed in one of our Automotive reporting units, VSP, which had a balance of $720 million of goodwill allocated to it as of June 30, 2012. In assessing whether we had an impairment in our VSP reporting unit, we considered certain trends of businesses comprising our VSP reporting unit, along with other quantitative and qualitative factors, and concluded that this restructuring event did not result in a goodwill impairment charge during the second quarter of 2012 for our VSP reporting unit.
During the third quarter of 2012, the board of directors of Federal-Mogul decided to segment Federal-Mogul's operating businesses into two business units, Powertrain and Vehicle Component Solutions ("VCS"). Powertrain will focus primarily on the manufacture and sale of powertrain products to original equipment manufacturers while VCS will consist of Federal-Mogul's global aftermarket as well as its brake, chassis and wipers businesses. Federal-Mogul has initiated several actions in connection with the creation of the two business units, including the hiring of a new Chief Executive Officer for the VCS group and the identification of facilities that will be managed by each business group.
As a result of the reorganization of Federal-Mogul's operating businesses into two business units as of September 1, 2012, the reporting units for our Automotive segment have also been reorganized accordingly and now consists of Powertrain and VCS. As a result of this reorganization, we were required to reassign our Automotive segment's existing goodwill balances to the new reporting units utilizing a relative fair value allocation approach in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 350. With the assistance of a third-party appraiser, we allocated $485 million and $620 million of goodwill based on their fair values as of September 1, 2012 to the Powertrain and VCS reporting units, respectively. This allocation excludes an allocation of $20 million of goodwill related to the BERU purchase as discussed, all of which been allocated to the Powertrain reporting unit. In addition, we evaluated the potential for goodwill impairment resulting from the reorganization of reporting units. In assessing whether we had an impairment in either of our Powertrain or VCS reporting units, we considered certain trends of businesses comprising our Powertrain and VCS reporting units, along with other quantitative and qualitative factors, and concluded that the business reorganization did not result in a goodwill impairment charge during the third quarter of 2012.
Reporting unit fair values are based upon consideration of various valuation methodologies, one of which is projecting future cash flows discounted at rates commensurate with the risks involved (“Discounted Cash Flow” or “DCF”). Assumptions used in a DCF require the exercise of significant judgment, including judgment about appropriate discount rates and terminal values, growth rates, and the amount and timing of expected future cash flows. The forecasted cash flows are based on current plans and for years beyond that plan, the estimates are based on assumed growth rates. We believe that our assumptions are consistent with the plans and estimates used to manage the underlying businesses. The discount rates, which are intended to reflect the risks inherent in future cash flow projections, used in a DCF are based on estimates of the weighted-average cost of capital (“WACC”) of a market participant. Such estimates are derived from our analysis of peer companies and consider the industry weighted average return on debt and equity from a market participant perspective.
We note that our Automotive segment's VCS reporting unit's fair value exceeded its carrying value by less than 1%, and accordingly is deemed to be at risk of failing “Step 1” of a goodwill impairment analysis. Because our Automotive segment's VCS reporting unit's fair value exceeded its carrying value by such a small margin, we believe that it was prudent to perform a "Step 2" goodwill impairment analysis for our Automotive segment's VCS reporting unit. "Step 2" calculates the implied fair value of goodwill by deducting the fair value of all tangible and intangible assets, excluding goodwill, of the reporting unit, from the fair value of the reporting unit as determined in "Step 1". The implied fair value of goodwill determined in this "Step 2" is compared to the carrying value of goodwill. Given the complexity of the calculation, we have not yet finalized “Step 2” of its goodwill impairment assessment. To the extent that the finalization of our assessment of goodwill requires adjustment to the preliminary impairment charge, such adjustment would be recorded in the fourth quarter of 2012.
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
In December 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-11, which amends FASB ASC Topic 210, Balance Sheet. This ASU requires companies to disclose both gross and net information about instruments and transactions eligible for offset in the statement of financial position as well as instruments and transactions subject to an agreement similar to a master netting arrangement. This guidance is effective retrospectively for interim and annual periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. We anticipate that the adoption of this guidance will have minimal impact to our current disclosures.
Forward-Looking Statements
Statements included in “Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” which are not historical in nature are intended to be, and are hereby identified as, “forward-looking statements” for purposes of the safe harbor provided by Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act of 1934, or by Public Law 104-67.
Forward-looking statements regarding management's present plans or expectations involve risks and uncertainties and changing economic or competitive conditions, as well as the negotiation of agreements with third parties, which could cause actual results to differ from present plans or expectations, and such differences could be material. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those discussed in this document. These statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those predicted. Also, please see "Risk Factors" in Part II, Item 1A in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and Part I, Item 1A in our 2011 Form 10-K.
Market risk
As filed, 12,102 characters, with its headings, lists and tables. Extracted from the main document; charts and exhibits are in the original on sec.gov.
Market risk is the risk of loss arising from adverse changes in market rates and prices, such as interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates and commodity prices. Our significant market risks are primarily associated with interest rates, equity prices and derivatives. Reference is made to Part II, Item 7A of our 2011 Form 10-K for disclosures relating to our interest rates, equity prices and derivatives. Except for the items discussed below, there have been no other material changes to our market risk during the nine months ended September 30, 2012.
Investment
The Investment Funds hold investments that are reported at fair value as of the reporting date, which include securities owned, securities sold, not yet purchased and derivatives as reported on our consolidated balance sheets. Based on their respective balances as of September 30, 2012, we estimate that in the event of a 10% adverse change in the fair value of these investments, the fair values of securities owned, securities sold, not yet purchased and derivatives would decrease by $450 million, $31 million and approximately $1.4 billion, respectively. However, as of September 30, 2012, we estimate that the impact to our share of the net gain from investment activities reported on our consolidated statement of operations would be significantly less than the change in fair value since we have an investment of approximately 40.3% in these Investment Funds, and the non-controlling interests in income would correspondingly offset approximately 59.7% of the change in fair value.
Automotive
Refer to Note 7, “Financial Instruments-Automotive,” to the consolidated financial statements for discussion regarding our Automotive segment's interest rate risk, commodity price risk and foreign currency risk.
The translated values of revenue and expense from our Automotive segment's international operations are subject to fluctuations due to changes in currency exchange rates. During nine months ended September 30, 2012, our Automotive segment derived 39% of its sales in the United States and 61% internationally. Of these international sales, 56% are denominated in the euro, with no other single currency representing more than 1%. To minimize foreign currency risk, our Automotive segment generally maintains natural hedges within its non-U.S. activities, including the matching of operational revenues and costs. Where natural hedges are not in place, our Automotive segment manages certain aspects of its foreign currency activities and larger transactions through the use of foreign currency options or forward contracts. Our Automotive segment estimates that a hypothetical 10% adverse movement of all foreign currencies in the same direction against the U.S. dollar during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 would have decreased net income attributable to Icahn Enterprises for our Automotive segment by approximately $5 million.
Energy
The risk inherent in our Energy segment's market risk sensitive instruments and positions is the potential loss from adverse changes in commodity prices and interest rates. None of our Energy segment's market risk sensitive instruments are held for trading.
Commodity Price Risk
Our Energy segment's petroleum business, as a manufacturer of refined petroleum products, and the nitrogen fertilizer business, as a manufacturer of nitrogen fertilizer products, all of which are commodities, have exposure to market pricing for products sold in the future. In order to realize value from our processing capacity, a positive spread between the cost of raw materials and the value of finished products must be achieved (i.e., gross margin or crack spread). The physical commodities that comprise raw materials and finished goods are typically bought and sold at a spot or index price that can be highly variable.
CVR uses a crude oil purchasing intermediary to purchase the majority of its non-gathered crude oil inventory for its Coffeyville refinery, which allows it to take title to and price its crude oil at locations in close proximity to its Coffeyville refinery, as opposed to the crude oil origination point, reducing its risk associated with volatile commodity prices by shortening the commodity conversion cycle time. The commodity conversion cycle time refers to the time elapsed between raw material acquisition and the sale of finished goods. In addition, CVR seeks to reduce the variability of commodity price exposure by engaging in hedging strategies and transactions that will serve to protect gross margins as forecasted in the annual operating plan. Accordingly, CVR uses commodity derivative contracts to economically hedge future cash flows (i.e., gross margin or crack spreads) and product inventories. In respect of hedging activities, CVR may enter into, or have entered into, derivative instruments which serve to:
- lock in or fix a percentage of the anticipated or planned gross margin in future periods when the derivative market offers commodity spreads that generate positive cash flows;
- hedge the value of inventories in excess of minimum required inventories; and
- manage existing derivative positions related to change in anticipated operations and market conditions.
Further, CVR intends to engage only in risk-mitigating activities directly related to its businesses.
Basis Risk
Basis risk is the market risk mismatch between a position in the spot asset and the corresponding futures contract. The effectiveness of CVR's derivative strategies is dependent upon the correlation of the price index utilized for the hedging activity and the cash or spot price of the physical commodity for which price risk is being mitigated. Basis risk can exist due to several factors, including time or location differences between the derivative instrument and the underlying physical commodity. CVR's selection of the appropriate index to utilize in a hedging strategy is a prime consideration in its basis risk exposure.
Examples of CVR's basis risk exposure are as follows:
- Time Basis - In entering over-the-counter swap agreements, the settlement price of the swap is typically the average price of the underlying commodity for a designated calendar period. This settlement price is based on the assumption that the underlying physical commodity will price ratably over the swap period. If the commodity does not move ratably over the periods, then weighted-average physical prices will be weighted differently than the swap price due to timing.
- Location Basis - In hedging NYMEX crack spreads, CVR may be subject to location basis as the settlement of NYMEX refined products (related more to New York Harbor cash markets) may differ from the prices of refined products in CVR's Group 3 pricing area.
Price and Basis Risk Management Activities
In the event CVR's inventories exceed its target base level of inventories, CVR may enter into commodity derivative contracts to manage price exposure to its inventory positions that are in excess of its base level. Excess inventories typically result from plant operations, such as a turnaround or other plant maintenance.
To reduce the basis risk between the price of products for Group 3 and that of the NYMEX associated with selling forward derivative contracts for NYMEX crack spreads, CVR may enter into basis swap positions to lock the price difference. If the difference between the price of products on the NYMEX and Group 3 (or some other appropriate price benchmark) is different than the value contracted in the swap, then CVR will receive from or owe to the counterparty the difference on each unit of product contracted in the swap, thereby locking in its margin. An example of how CVR uses basis swap occurs in the winter heating oil season. The risk associated with not hedging the basis when using NYMEX forward contracts to fix future margins is if the crack spread increases based on prices traded on NYMEX while Group 3 pricing remains flat or decreases positioning CVR to lose money on the derivative position while not earning an offsetting additional margin on the physical position based on the Group 3 pricing.
From time to time, CVR's petroleum business also holds various NYMEX positions through a third party clearing house. As of September 30, 2012, CVR had the following open commodity derivative contracts whose unrealized gains and losses were included in other (loss) income, net in the consolidated statements of operations. At September 30, 2012, CVR was net short 75 WTI crude oil contracts and short 25 heating oil contracts. At September 30, 2012, CVR's account balance maintained at the third-party clearing house totaled approximately $7 million which is reflected in other assets. As of September 30, 2012, CVR's NYMEX positions had an unrealized loss of less than $1 million. In addition, CVR entered into several commodity swap contracts with effective periods beginning in January 2012. The physical volumes are not exchanged and these contracts are net settled with cash. The contract fair value of the commodity swaps is reflected on the consolidated balance sheets with changes in fair value currently recognized in the consolidated statements of operations. At September 30, 2012, CVR had open commodity hedging instruments consisting of approximately 26 million barrels of crack spreads primarily to fix the margin on a portion of its future gasoline and distillate production. The fair value of the outstanding contracts at September 30, 2012 was a net unrealized loss of approximately $116 million. A change of $1.00 per barrel in the fair value of the crack spread swaps would result in an increase or decrease in the related fair values of the commodity hedging instruments of approximately $26 million.
Interest Rate Risk
On June 30 and July 1, 2011 CRNF entered into two floating-to-fixed interest rate swap agreements for the purpose of hedging the interest rate risk associated with a portion of its $125 million floating rate term debt which matures in April 2016. The aggregate notional amount covered under these agreements totals $63 million (split evenly between the two agreement dates) commencing on August 12, 2011 and expiring on February 12, 2016. Under the terms of the interest rate swap agreement entered into on June 30, 2011, CRNF will receive a floating rate based on three-month LIBOR and pay a fixed rate of 1.94%. Under the terms of the interest rate swap agreement entered into on July 1, 2011, CRNF will receive a floating rate based on three-month LIBOR and pay a fixed rate of 1.975%. Both swap agreements will be settled every 90 days. The effect of these swap agreements is to lock in a fixed rate of interest of approximately 1.96% plus the applicable margin paid to lenders over three-month LIBOR as governed by the CRNF credit agreement. At September 30, 2012, the effective rate was approximately 4.60%. The agreements were designated as cash flow hedges at inception and, accordingly, the effective portion of the gain or loss on the swap is reported as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (“AOCI”), and will be subsequently reclassified into interest expense when the interest rate swap transaction affects earnings. The ineffective portion of the gain or loss will be recognized immediately in current interest expense.
CVR LP still has exposure to interest rate risk on 50% of its $125 million floating rate term debt. A 1.0% increase over the Eurodollar floor spread of 3.5%, as specified in the credit agreement, would increase interest cost to CVR LP by approximately $625,000 on an annualized basis, thus decreasing income from operations by the same amount.
Gaming
Tropicana's primary exposure to market risk is interest rate risk associated with its New Term Loan Facility that bears interest based on floating rates. Based on Tropicana's borrowings as of September 30, 2012, assuming a 1% increase over the 7.5% floor specified in its New Term Loan Facility, Tropicana's annual interest cost would change by approximately $2 million.
Controls and procedures
As filed, 1,328 characters, with its headings, lists and tables. Extracted from the main document; charts and exhibits are in the original on sec.gov.
As of September 30, 2012, our management, including our Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of Icahn Enterprises' and our subsidiaries' disclosure controls and procedures pursuant to the Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) promulgated under the Exchange Act. Based upon that evaluation, our Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms, and include controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in such reports is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the first three quarters of 2012 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Risk factors
As filed, 146,853 characters, with its headings, lists and tables. Extracted from the main document; charts and exhibits are in the original on sec.gov.
Except as discussed below for risk factors related to our Automotive, Energy, Gaming and Railcar segments, there have been no other material changes to our risk factors during the nine months ended September 30, 2012 compared to those reported in our 2011 Form 10-K.
Automotive
Federal-Mogul’s actions to separate its business into two business units may result in additional costs.
Federal-Mogul is separating its business into two separate business units. One business unit will focus primarily on the manufacture and sale of powertrain products to original equipment manufacturers ("Powertrain" or "PT"), while the other will consist of Federal-Mogul’s global aftermarket as well as its brake, chassis and wipers businesses (“Vehicle Components Solutions” or "VCS"). Federal-Mogul has initiated several actions in connection with the creation of these two operating divisions, including the hiring of a Chief Executive Officer for VCS and the identification of facilities that will be managed by each business unit. This separation may result in additional costs and expenses both during and after separation. No assurance can be given that the separation of the business into these two business units will not have a material adverse impact on our Automotive segment's profitability and consolidated financial position.
Energy
Risks Relating to CVR's Petroleum Business
The price volatility of crude oil and other feedstocks, refined products and utility services may have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's earnings, profitability and cash flows.
Our Energy segment's financial results related to its petroleum business are primarily affected by the relationship, or margin, between refined product prices and the prices for crude oil and other feedstocks. When the margin between refined product prices and crude oil and other feedstock prices tightens, our Energy segment's earnings, profitability and cash flows are negatively affected. Refining margins historically have been volatile and are likely to continue to be volatile, as a result of a variety of factors including fluctuations in prices of crude oil, other feedstocks and refined products. Continued future volatility in refining industry margins may cause a decline in our Energy segment's results of operations, since the margin between refined product prices and crude oil and other feedstock prices may decrease below the amount needed for Energy operations to generate net cash flow sufficient for their needs. Although an increase or decrease in the price for crude oil generally results in a similar increase or decrease in prices for refined products, there is normally a time lag in the realization of the similar increase or decrease in prices for refined products. The effect of changes in crude oil prices on our Energy segment's results of operations therefore depends in part on how quickly and how fully refined product prices adjust to reflect these changes. A substantial or prolonged increase in crude oil prices without a corresponding increase in refined product prices, or a substantial or prolonged decrease in refined product prices without a corresponding decrease in crude oil prices, could have a significant negative impact on our Energy segment's earnings, results of operations and cash flows.
Our Energy segment's profitability is also impacted by the ability to purchase crude oil at a discount to benchmark crude oils, such as West Texas Intermediate crude oil, or WTI, as CVR does not produce any crude oil and must purchase all of the crude oil it refines. Crude oil differentials can fluctuate significantly based upon overall economic and crude oil market conditions. Declines in crude oil differentials can adversely impact refining margins, earnings and cash flows. For example, infrastructure and logistical improvements could result in a reduction of the WTI-Brent differential that has recently provided our Energy segment with increased profitability. In addition, CVR's purchases of crude oil, although based on WTI prices, have historically been at a discount to WTI because of CVR's proximity to the sources, existing logistics infrastructure and quality differences. Any change in the sources of CVR's crude oil, infrastructure or logistical improvements or quality differences could result in a reduction of its historical discount to WTI and may result in a reduction of CVR's cost advantage.
Refining margins are also impacted by domestic and global refining capacity. Continued downturns in the economy impact the demand for refined fuels and, in turn, generate excess capacity. In addition, the expansion and construction of refineries domestically and globally can increase refined fuel production capacity. Excess capacity can adversely impact refining margins, earnings and cash flows.
During 2011 and the nine months ended September 30, 2012, favorable crack spreads and access to a variety of price advantaged crude oils have resulted in EBITDA and cash flow generation that is higher than usual. Our Energy operations cannot assure you that these favorable conditions will continue and, in fact, crack spreads, refining margins and crude oil prices could decline, possibly materially, at any time. In particular, Enbridge Inc.'s purchase of 50% of the Seaway crude oil pipeline and the recent reversal of the pipeline to make it flow from Cushing to the U.S. Gulf Coast and the Seaway capacity expansion project may contribute to the decline of such favorable conditions by providing mid-continent producers with the ability to transport crude oil to Gulf Coast refiners in an economic manner. Since May 19, 2012, when crude oil began flowing through the Seaway Pipeline from Cushing to the Gulf Coast, volumes have steadily increased towards the current capacity of 150,000 bpd. Work is underway and on schedule to add incremental pumping capacity that would allow the existing Seaway Pipeline to transport up to 400,000 bpd by the first quarter of 2013. Moreover, the planned construction of a loop (twin) of the Seaway Pipeline, a new pipeline designed to parallel the existing right-of-way from Cushing to the Gulf Coast, is expected to more than double Seaway's capacity to 850,000 bpd by mid-2014. Any deterioration of the current favorable conditions would have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's earnings, results of operations and cash flows. Volatile prices for natural gas and electricity also affect our Energy operations' manufacturing and operating costs. Natural gas and electricity prices have been, and will continue to be, affected by supply and demand for fuel and utility services in both local and regional markets.
If CVR is required to obtain its crude oil supply without the benefit of a crude oil supply agreement, its exposure to the risks associated with volatile crude oil prices may increase and our Energy segment's liquidity may be reduced.
For 2011, CVR obtained approximately 65% of the crude oil for its Coffeyville refinery under a Crude Oil Supply Agreement (as amended, the “Supply Agreement”) with Vitol Inc. The Supply Agreement was amended and restated on August 31, 2012 to include the provision of crude oil intermediation services to our Wynnewood refinery. The agreement, whose initial term expires on December 31, 2014, minimizes the amount of in-transit inventory and mitigates crude oil pricing risks by ensuring pricing takes place extremely close to the time when the crude oil is refined and the yielded products are sold. If CVR were required to obtain its crude oil supply without the benefit of a supply intermediation agreement, its exposure to crude oil pricing risks may increase, despite any hedging activity in which CVR may engage, and the liquidity of our Energy segment would be negatively impacted due to the increased inventory and the negative impact of market volatility.
Disruption of CVR's ability to obtain an adequate supply of crude oil could reduce our Energy segment's liquidity and increase costs.
For the Coffeyville refinery, in addition to the crude oil CVR gathers locally in Kansas, Oklahoma, Missouri and Nebraska, CVR purchased an additional 80,000 to 90,000 bpd of crude oil to be refined into liquid fuels in 2011. For the period May 5, 2012 to September 30, 2012, CVR purchased approximately an additional 84,000 bpd of crude oil to be refined into liquid fuels in addition to the approximately 45,000 bpd of gathered crude oil. Although the Wynnewood refinery has historically acquired most of its crude oil from Texas and Oklahoma, it also purchases crude oil from other regions. Coffeyville obtains a portion of its non-gathered crude oil, approximately 19% in 2011, from foreign sources and Wynnewood obtained a small amount from foreign sources as well. The majority of these foreign sourced crude oil barrels were derived from Canada. The actual amount of foreign crude oil that CVR purchases is dependent on market conditions and will vary from year to year. CVR is subject to the political, geographic, and economic risks attendant to doing business with foreign suppliers. Disruption of production in any of these regions for any reason could have a material impact on other regions and our Energy segment's operations.
In the event that one or more of CVR's traditional suppliers becomes unavailable to it, it may be unable to obtain an adequate supply of crude oil, or it may only be able to obtain its crude oil supply at unfavorable prices. As a result, our Energy segment may experience a reduction in its liquidity and its results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
If CVR's access to the pipelines on which it relies for the supply of its feedstock and the distribution of its products is interrupted, its inventory and costs may increase and CVR may be unable to efficiently distribute its products.
If one of the pipelines on which either of the Coffeyville or Wynnewood refineries relies for supply of crude oil becomes inoperative, CVR would be required to obtain crude oil through alternative pipelines or from additional tanker trucks, which could increase its costs and result in lower production levels and profitability. Similarly, if a major refined fuels pipeline becomes inoperative, CVR would be required to keep refined fuels in inventory or supply refined fuels to its customers through an alternative pipeline or by additional tanker trucks, which could increase its costs and result in a decline in profitability.
The geographic concentration of our Energy segment's refineries and related assets creates an exposure to the risks of the local economy and other local adverse conditions. The location of CVR's refineries also creates the risk of increased transportation costs should the supply/demand balance change in our region such that regional supply exceeds regional demand for refined products.
As our Energy segment's refineries are both located in the southern portion of Group 3 of the PADD II region, it primarily markets its refined products in a relatively limited geographic area. As a result, it is more susceptible to regional economic conditions than the operations of more geographically diversified competitors, and any unforeseen events or circumstances that affect its operating area could also materially adversely affect our Energy segment's revenues and cash flows. These factors include, among other things, changes in the economy, weather conditions, demographics and population, increased supply of refined products from competitors and reductions in the supply of crude oil.
Should the supply/demand balance shift in CVR's region as a result of changes in the local economy discussed above, an increase in refining capacity or other reasons, resulting in supply in the region exceeding demand, it may have to deliver refined products to customers outside of the region and thus incur considerably higher transportation costs, resulting in lower refining margins, if any. Changes in market conditions could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
If sufficient Renewable Identification Numbers (“RINs”) are unavailable for purchase or if CVR has to pay a significantly higher price for RINs, or if CVR is otherwise unable to meet the EPA's Renewable Fuels Standard mandates, our Energy segment's business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
Pursuant to the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, (“EPA”) has promulgated the Renewable Fuel Standard (“RFS”) which requires refiners to blend “renewable fuels,” such as ethanol, with their petroleum fuels or purchase renewable energy credits, known as renewable identification numbers in lieu of blending. Under the RFS, the volume of renewable fuels that refineries like CVR's refineries are obligated to blend into their finished petroleum products increases annually over time until 2022. Beginning in 2011, CVR's Coffeyville refinery was required to blend renewable fuels into its gasoline and diesel fuel or purchase RINs in lieu of blending. The Wynnewood refinery is a small refinery under the RFS and has received a two-year extension to comply, which expires on January 1, 2013. CVR currently purchases RINs for some fuel categories on the open market, as well as waiver credits for cellulosic biofuels from the EPA, in order to comply with the RFS. CVR estimates that it will spend approximately $21 million in 2012 on RINs and waiver credits for Coffeyville. Existing laws or regulations could change, and the minimum volumes of renewable fuels that must be blended with refined petroleum products may increase. In the future, CVR may be required to purchase additional RINs on the open market and waiver credits from EPA in order to comply with the RFS. CVR cannot currently predict the future prices of RINs or waiver credits, but the costs to obtain the necessary number of RINs and waiver credits could be material. Additionally, because CVR does not produce renewable fuels, increasing the volume of renewable fuels that must be blended into its products displaces an increasing volume of its refineries' product pool, potentially resulting in lower earning and materially adversely affecting our Energy segment's cash flows
If CVR is unable to pass the costs of compliance with RFS on to its customers, our Energy segment's profits would be significantly lower. Moreover, if sufficient RINs are unavailable for purchase or if CVR has to pay a significantly higher price for RINs, or if CVR is otherwise unable to meet the EPA's RFS mandates, our Energy segment's business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
Our Energy segment's petroleum business' financial results are seasonal and generally lower in the first and fourth quarters of the year.
Demand for gasoline products is generally higher during the summer months than during the winter months due to seasonal increases in highway traffic and road construction work. As a result, our Energy segment's results of operations for the first and fourth calendar quarters are generally lower than for those for the second and third quarters. Further, reduced agricultural work during the winter months somewhat depresses demand for diesel fuel in the winter months. In addition to the overall seasonality of the petroleum business, unseasonably cool weather in the summer months and/or unseasonably warm weather in the winter months in the areas in which CVR sells its petroleum products could have the effect of reducing demand for gasoline and diesel fuel which could result in lower prices and reduce operating margins.
Our Energy segment faces significant competition, both within and outside of its industry. Competitors who produce their own supply of crude oil or other feedstocks, have extensive retail outlets, make alternative fuels or have greater financial resources than CVR does may have a competitive advantage over it.
The refining industry is highly competitive with respect to both crude oil and other feedstock supply and refined product markets. CVR may be unable to compete effectively with its competitors within and outside of its industry, which could result in reduced profitability. CVR competes with numerous other companies for available supplies of crude oil and other feedstocks and for outlets for its refined products. CVR is not engaged in the petroleum exploration and production business and therefore CVR does not produce any of its crude oil feedstocks. CVR does not have a retail business and therefore is dependent upon others for outlets for its refined products. CVR does not have any long-term arrangements (those exceeding more than a twelve-month period) for much of its output. Many of CVR's competitors obtain significant portions of their crude oil and other feedstocks from company-owned production and have extensive retail outlets. Competitors that have their own production or extensive retail outlets with brand-name recognition are at times able to offset losses from refining operations with profits from producing or retailing operations, and may be better positioned to withstand periods of depressed refining margins or feedstock shortages.
A number of CVR's competitors also have materially greater financial and other resources than it has. These competitors may have a greater ability to bear the economic risks inherent in all aspects of the refining industry. An expansion or upgrade of CVR's competitors' facilities, price volatility, international political and economic developments and other factors are likely to continue to play an important role in refining industry economics and may add additional competitive pressure on it.
In addition, CVR competes with other industries that provide alternative means to satisfy the energy and fuel requirements of its industrial, commercial and individual customers. There are presently significant governmental incentives and consumer pressures to increase the use of alternative fuels in the United States. The more successful these alternatives become as a result of governmental incentives or regulations, technological advances, consumer demand, improved pricing or otherwise, the greater the negative impact on pricing and demand for CVR's products and its profitability.
Changes in CVR's credit profile may affect its relationship with its suppliers, which could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's liquidity and its ability to operate its refineries at full capacity.
Changes in CVR's credit profile may affect the way crude oil suppliers view its ability to make payments and may induce them to shorten the payment terms for its purchases or require it to post security prior to payment. Given the large dollar amounts and volume of CVR's crude oil and other feedstock purchases, a burdensome change in payment terms may have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's liquidity and its ability to make payments to its suppliers. This, in turn, could cause CVR to be unable to operate its refineries at full capacity. A failure to operate CVR's refineries at full capacity could adversely affect our Energy segment's profitability and cash flows.
CVR's commodity derivative contracts may limit our Energy segment's potential gains, exacerbate potential losses and involve other risks.
CVR enters into commodity derivatives contracts to mitigate its crack spread risk with respect to a portion of its expected refined products production. The purpose of these hedging arrangements is to secure a minimum fixed cash flow stream on the volume of products hedged during the hedge term. However, its hedging arrangements may fail to fully achieve these objectives for a variety of reasons, including CVR's failure to have adequate hedging contracts, if any, in effect at any particular time and the failure of its hedging arrangements to produce the anticipated results. CVR may not be able to procure adequate hedging arrangements due to a variety of factors. Moreover, while intended to reduce the adverse effects of fluctuations in crude oil and refined product prices, such transactions may limit CVR's ability to benefit from favorable changes in margins. In addition, CVR's hedging activities may expose it to the risk of financial loss in certain circumstances, including instances in which:
- the volumes of our actual use of crude oil or production of the applicable refined products is less than the volumes subject to the hedging arrangement;
- the counterparties to CVR's futures contracts fail to perform under the contracts; or
- a sudden, unexpected event materially impacts the commodity or crack spread subject to the hedging arrangement.
As a result, the effectiveness of CVR's risk mitigation strategy could have a material adverse impact on our Energy segment's financial results and cash flows.
The adoption of derivatives legislation by the U.S. Congress could have an adverse effect on CVR's ability to hedge risks associated with our Energy segment's petroleum business.
The U.S. Congress has adopted the Dodd-Frank Act, comprehensive financial reform legislation that establishes federal oversight and regulation of the over-the-counter derivatives market and entities that participate in that market, and requires the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, or the CFTC, to institute broad new position limits for futures and options traded on regulated exchanges. The Dodd-Frank Act requires the CFTC and the SEC to promulgate rules and regulations implementing the new legislation. The rulemaking process is still ongoing, and CVR cannot predict the ultimate outcome of the rulemakings. New regulations in this area may result in increased costs and cash collateral requirements for derivative instruments CVR may use to hedge and otherwise manage its financial risks related to volatility in oil and gas commodity prices.
Existing design, operational, and maintenance issues associated with CVR's newly acquired Wynnewood refinery or other future acquisitions may not be identified immediately and may require additional unanticipated capital expenditures that could impact our Energy segment's financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
CVR's due diligence associated with asset acquisitions may result in assuming liabilities associated with unknown conditions or deficiencies, as well as known but undisclosed conditions and deficiencies that it may have limited, if any, recourse for cost recovery. In the case of Wynnewood, CVR has specific language in the Purchase and Sale Agreement that provides it with a limited amount of cost recovery for known, but undisclosed, operational and environmental conditions that had not been specifically scheduled with a very limited time for notice of the condition. Many acquisition agreements have similar terms, conditions and timing of cost recovery that may not become evident until sometime after cost recovery provisions, if any, have expired.
CVR must make substantial capital expenditures on its refineries and other facilities to maintain their reliability and efficiency. If CVR is unable to complete capital projects at their expected costs and/or in a timely manner, or if the market conditions assumed in its project economics deteriorate, our Energy segment's financial condition, results of operations or cash flows could be adversely affected.
Delays or cost increases related to the engineering, procurement and construction of new facilities, or improvements and repairs to CVR's existing facilities and equipment, could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Such delays or cost increases may arise as a result of unpredictable factors in the marketplace, many of which are beyond CVR's control, including:
- denial or delay in obtaining regulatory approvals and/or permits;
- unplanned increases in the cost of equipment, materials or labor;
- disruptions in transportation of equipment and materials;
- severe adverse weather conditions, natural disasters or other events (such as equipment malfunctions, explosions, fires or spills) affecting CVR's facilities, or those of its vendors and suppliers;
- shortages of sufficiently skilled labor, or labor disagreements resulting in unplanned work stoppages;
- market-related increases in a project's debt or equity financing costs; and/or
- nonperformance or force majeure by, or disputes with, our vendors, suppliers, contractors or sub-contractors.
CVR's refineries have been in operation for many years. Equipment, even if properly maintained, may require significant capital expenditures and expenses to keep it operating at optimum efficiency. For example, CVR has spent approximately $89 million on the most recently completed turnaround at the Coffeyville refinery and CVR estimtaes spending of approximately $100 million associated with the turnaround for the Wynnewood refinery is scheduled which began in the fourth quarter of 2012. These costs do not result in increases in unit capacities, but rather are limited to trying to maintain safe, reliable operations.
Any one or more of these occurrences noted above could have a significant impact on our Energy segment's business. If CVR were unable to make up the delays or to recover the related costs, or if market conditions change, it could materially and adversely affect our Energy segment's financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
CVR's plans to expand the gathering assets making up part of our supporting logistics businesses, which assist us in reducing our costs and increasing our processing margins, may expose our Energy segment to significant additional risks, compliance costs and liabilities.
CVR plans to continue to make investments to enhance the operating flexibility of its refineries and to improve its crude oil sourcing advantage through additional investments in its gathering and logistics operations. If CVR is able to successfully increase the effectiveness of its supporting logistics businesses, including its crude oil gathering operations, it believes it will be able to enhance its crude oil sourcing flexibility and reduce related crude oil purchasing and delivery costs. However, the acquisition of infrastructure assets to expand CVR's gathering operations may expose our Energy segment to risks in the future that are different than or incremental to the risks our Energy segment faces with respect to its refineries and existing gathering and logistics operations. The storage and transportation of liquid hydrocarbons, including crude oil and refined products, are subject to stringent federal, state, and local laws and regulations governing the discharge of materials into the environment, operational safety and related matters. Compliance with these laws and regulations could adversely affect our Energy segment's operating results, financial condition and cash flows. Moreover, failure to comply with these laws and regulations may result in the assessment of administrative, civil, and criminal penalties, the imposition of investigatory and remedial liabilities, the issuance of injunctions that may restrict or prohibit our operations, or claims of damages to property or persons resulting from our operations.
Any businesses or assets that CVR may acquire in connection with an expansion of our crude oil gathering operations could expose it to the risk of releasing hazardous materials into the environment. These releases would expose our Energy segment to potentially substantial expenses, including cleanup and remediation costs, fines and penalties, and third party claims for personal injury or property damage related to past or future releases. Accordingly, if CVR does acquire any such businesses or assets, our Energy segment could also incur additional expenses not covered by insurance which could be material.
More stringent trucking regulations may increase CVR's costs and negatively impact our Energy segment's results of operations.
In connection with the trucking operations conducted by CVR's crude gathering division, it operates as a motor carrier and therefore is subject to regulation by the U.S. Department of Transportation (the “U.S. DOT”) and various state agencies. These regulatory authorities exercise broad powers, governing activities such as the authorization to engage in motor carrier operations and regulatory safety, and hazardous materials labeling, placarding and marking. There are additional regulations specifically relating to the trucking industry, including testing and specification of equipment and product handling requirements. The trucking industry is subject to possible regulatory and legislative changes that may affect the economics of the industry by requiring changes in operating practices or by changing the demand for common or contract carrier services or the cost of providing truckload services. Some of these possible changes include increasingly stringent environmental regulations, changes in the hours of service regulations that govern the amount of time a driver may drive in any specific period, onboard black box recorder devices or limits on vehicle weight and size.
To a large degree, intrastate motor carrier operations are subject to state safety regulations that mirror federal regulations. Such matters as weight and dimension of equipment are also subject to federal and state regulations. Furthermore, from time to time, various legislative proposals are introduced, such as proposals to increase federal, state or local taxes, including taxes on motor fuels, which may increase our Energy segment's costs or adversely impact the recruitment of drivers. We cannot predict whether, or in what form, any increase in such taxes will be enacted or the extent to which they will apply to our Energy segment and its operations.
Risks Relating to CVR's Nitrogen Fertilizer Business
The nitrogen fertilizer business is, and nitrogen fertilizer prices are, cyclical and highly volatile, and the nitrogen fertilizer business has experienced substantial downturns in the past. Cycles in demand and pricing could potentially expose the nitrogen fertilizer business to significant fluctuations in its operating and financial results and have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
The nitrogen fertilizer business is exposed to fluctuations in nitrogen fertilizer demand in the agricultural industry. These fluctuations historically have had and could in the future have significant effects on prices across all nitrogen fertilizer products and, in turn, our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Nitrogen fertilizer products are commodities, the price of which can be highly volatile. The prices of nitrogen fertilizer products depend on a number of factors, including general economic conditions, cyclical trends in end-user markets, supply and demand imbalances, and weather conditions, which have a greater relevance because of the seasonal nature of fertilizer application. If seasonal demand exceeds the projections on which the nitrogen fertilizer business bases production, customers may acquire nitrogen fertilizer products from competitors, and the profitability of the nitrogen fertilizer business will be negatively impacted. If seasonal demand is less than expected, the nitrogen fertilizer business will be left with excess inventory that will have to be stored or liquidated.
Demand for nitrogen fertilizer products is dependent on demand for crop nutrients by the global agricultural industry. Nitrogen-based fertilizers are currently in high demand, driven by a growing world population, changes in dietary habits and an expanded use of corn for the production of ethanol. Supply is affected by available capacity and operating rates, raw material costs, government policies and global trade. A decrease in nitrogen fertilizer prices would have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
The costs associated with operating the nitrogen fertilizer plant are largely fixed. If nitrogen fertilizer prices fall below a certain level, the nitrogen fertilizer business may not generate sufficient revenue to operate profitably or cover its costs.
Unlike CVR's competitors, whose primary costs are related to the purchase of natural gas and whose costs are therefore largely variable, the nitrogen fertilizer business has largely fixed costs that are not dependent on the price of natural gas because it uses pet coke as the primary feedstock in the nitrogen fertilizer plant. As a result of the fixed cost nature of our Energy segment's operations, downtime, interruptions or low productivity due to reduced demand, adverse weather conditions, equipment failure, a decrease in nitrogen fertilizer prices or other causes can result in significant operating losses could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
A decline in natural gas prices could impact the nitrogen fertilizer business' relative competitive position when compared to other nitrogen fertilizer producers.
Most nitrogen fertilizer manufacturers rely on natural gas as their primary feedstock, and the cost of natural gas is a large component of the total production cost for natural gas-based nitrogen fertilizer manufacturers. The dramatic increase in nitrogen fertilizer prices in recent years has not been the direct result of an increase in natural gas prices, but rather the result of increased demand for nitrogen-based fertilizers due to historically low stocks of global grains and a surge in the prices of corn and wheat, the primary crops in the nitrogen fertilizer business' region. This increase in demand for nitrogen-based fertilizers has created an environment in which nitrogen fertilizer prices have disconnected from their traditional correlation with natural gas prices. A decrease in natural gas prices would benefit the nitrogen fertilizer business' competitors and could disproportionately impact our Energy segment's operations by making the nitrogen fertilizer business less competitive with natural gas-based nitrogen fertilizer manufacturers. A decline in natural gas prices could impair the nitrogen fertilizer business' ability to compete with other nitrogen fertilizer producers who utilize natural gas as their primary feedstock, and therefore have a material adverse impact on the cash flows of the nitrogen fertilizer business. In addition, if natural gas prices in the United States were to decline to a level that prompts those U.S. producers who have permanently or temporarily closed production facilities to resume fertilizer production, this would likely contribute to a global supply/demand imbalance that could negatively affect nitrogen fertilizer prices and therefore have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Any decline in U.S. agricultural production or limitations on the use of nitrogen fertilizer for agricultural purposes could have a material adverse effect on the sales of nitrogen fertilizer, and on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Conditions in the U.S. agricultural industry significantly impact the operating results of the nitrogen fertilizer business. The U.S. agricultural industry can be affected by a number of factors, including weather patterns and field conditions, current and projected grain inventories and prices, domestic and international population changes and demand for U.S. agricultural products and U.S. and foreign policies regarding trade in agricultural products.
State and federal governmental policies, including farm and biofuel subsidies and commodity support programs, as well as the prices of fertilizer products, may also directly or indirectly influence the number of acres planted, the mix of crops planted and the use of fertilizers for particular agricultural applications. Developments in crop technology, such as nitrogen fixation (the conversion of atmospheric nitrogen into compounds that plants can assimilate), could also reduce the use of chemical fertilizers and adversely affect the demand for nitrogen fertilizer. In addition, from time to time various state legislatures have considered limitations on the use and application of chemical fertilizers due to concerns about the impact of these products on the environment. Unfavorable state and federal governmental policies could negatively affect nitrogen fertilizer prices and therefore have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
A major factor underlying the current high level of demand for nitrogen-based fertilizer products is the expanding production of ethanol. A decrease in ethanol production, an increase in ethanol imports or a shift away from corn as a principal raw material used to produce ethanol could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
A major factor underlying the current high level of demand for nitrogen-based fertilizer products produced by the nitrogen fertilizer business is the expanding production of ethanol in the United States and the expanded use of corn in ethanol production. Ethanol production in the United States is highly dependent upon a myriad of federal and state legislation and regulations, and is made significantly more competitive by various federal and state incentives, mandated production of ethanol pursuant to federal renewable fuel standards, and permitted increases in ethanol percentages in gasoline blends, such as E15, a gasoline blend with 15% ethanol. However, a number of factors, including a continuing “food versus fuel” debate and studies showing that expanded ethanol production may increase the level of greenhouse gases in the environment, have resulted in calls to reduce subsidies for ethanol, allow increased ethanol imports and adopt temporary waivers of the current renewable fuel standard levels, any of which could have an adverse effect on corn-based ethanol production, planted corn acreage and fertilizer demand. Therefore, ethanol incentive programs may not be renewed, or if renewed, they may be renewed on terms significantly less favorable to ethanol producers than current incentive programs. For example, on December 31, 2011, Congress allowed both the 45 cents per gallon ethanol tax credit and the 54 cents per gallon ethanol import tariff to expire. Similarly, the EPA's waivers partially approving the use of E15 could be revised, rescinded or delayed. These actions could have a material adverse effect on ethanol production in the United States, which could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Further, most ethanol is currently produced from corn and other raw grains, such as milo or sorghum, especially in the Midwest. The current trend in ethanol production research is to develop an efficient method of producing ethanol from cellulose-based biomass, such as agricultural waste, forest residue, municipal solid waste and energy crops (plants grown for use to make biofuels or directly exploited for their energy content). If an efficient method of producing ethanol from cellulose-based biomass is developed, the demand for corn may decrease significantly, which could reduce demand for nitrogen fertilizer products and have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Nitrogen fertilizer products are global commodities, and the nitrogen fertilizer business faces intense competition from other nitrogen fertilizer producers.
The nitrogen fertilizer business is subject to intense price competition from both U.S. and foreign sources, including competitors operating in the Persian Gulf, the Asia-Pacific region, the Caribbean, Russia and the Ukraine. Fertilizers are global commodities, with little or no product differentiation, and customers make their purchasing decisions principally on the basis of delivered price and availability of the product. Furthermore, in recent years the price of nitrogen fertilizer in the United States has been substantially driven by pricing in the global fertilizer market. The nitrogen fertilizer business competes with a number of U.S. producers and producers in other countries, including state-owned and government-subsidized entities. Some competitors have greater total resources and are less dependent on earnings from fertilizer sales, which makes them less vulnerable to industry downturns and better positioned to pursue new expansion and development opportunities. The nitrogen fertilizer business' competitive position could suffer to the extent it is not able to expand its resources either through investments in new or existing operations or through acquisitions, joint ventures or partnerships, or otherwise compete successfully in the global nitrogen fertilizer market. An inability to compete successfully could result in a loss of customers, which could adversely affect the sales, profitability and the cash flows of the nitrogen fertilizer business and therefore have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
The nitrogen fertilizer business is seasonal, which may result in it carrying significant amounts of inventory and seasonal variations in working capital. Our inability to predict future seasonal nitrogen fertilizer demand accurately may result in excess inventory or product shortages.
The nitrogen fertilizer business is seasonal. Farmers tend to apply nitrogen fertilizer during two short application periods, one in the spring and the other in the fall. The strongest demand for nitrogen fertilizer products typically occurs during the planting season. In contrast, the nitrogen fertilizer business and other nitrogen fertilizer producers generally produce products throughout the year. As a result, the nitrogen fertilizer business and its customers generally build inventories during the low demand periods of the year in order to ensure timely product availability during the peak sales seasons. The seasonality of nitrogen fertilizer demand results in sales volumes and net sales being highest during the North American spring season and working capital requirements typically being highest just prior to the start of the spring season.
If seasonal demand exceeds projections, the nitrogen fertilizer business will not have enough product and its customers may acquire products from its competitors, which would negatively impact profitability. If seasonal demand is less than expected, the nitrogen fertilizer business will be left with excess inventory and higher working capital and liquidity requirements.
The degree of seasonality of the nitrogen fertilizer business can change significantly from year to year due to conditions in the agricultural industry and other factors. As a consequence of such seasonality, it is expected that the distributions CVR receives from the nitrogen fertilizer business will be volatile and will vary quarterly and annually.
Adverse weather conditions during peak fertilizer application periods may have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows, because the agricultural customers of the nitrogen fertilizer business are geographically concentrated.
The nitrogen fertilizer business' sales to agricultural customers are concentrated in the Great Plains and Midwest states and are seasonal in nature. The nitrogen fertilizer business' quarterly results may vary significantly from one year to the next due largely to weather-related shifts in planting schedules and purchase patterns. For example, the nitrogen fertilizer business generates greater net sales and operating income in the first half of the year, which is referred to herein as the planting season, compared to the second half of the year. Accordingly, an adverse weather pattern affecting agriculture in these regions or during the planting season could have a negative effect on fertilizer demand, which could, in turn, result in a material decline in the nitrogen fertilizer business' net sales and margins and otherwise have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. The nitrogen fertilizer business' quarterly results may vary significantly from one year to the next due largely to weather-related shifts in planting schedules and purchase patterns. As a result, it is expected that the nitrogen fertilizer business' distributions to holders of its common units (including CVR) will be volatile and will vary quarterly and annually.
The nitrogen fertilizer business' operations are dependent on third-party suppliers, including Linde, LLC ("Linde") which owns an air separation plant that provides oxygen, nitrogen and compressed dry air to its gasifiers, and the City of Coffeyville, which supplies the nitrogen fertilizer business with electricity. A deterioration in the financial condition of a third-party supplier, a mechanical problem with the air separation plant, or the inability of a third-party supplier to perform in accordance with its contractual obligations could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
The operations of the nitrogen fertilizer business depend in large part on the performance of third-party suppliers, including Linde for the supply of oxygen, nitrogen and compressed dry air, and the City of Coffeyville for the supply of electricity. With respect to Linde, operations could be adversely affected if there were a deterioration in Linde's financial condition such that the operation of the air separation plant located adjacent to the nitrogen fertilizer plant was disrupted. Additionally, this air separation plant in the past has experienced numerous short-term interruptions, causing interruptions in gasifier operations. With respect to electricity, in 2010, the nitrogen fertilizer business recently settled litigation with the City of Coffeyville regarding the price they sought to charge the nitrogen fertilizer business for electricity and entered into an amended and restated electric services agreement which gives the nitrogen fertilizer business an option to extend the term of such agreement through June 30, 2024. Should Linde, the City of Coffeyville or any of its other third-party suppliers fail to perform in accordance with existing contractual arrangements, operations could be forced to halt. Alternative sources of supply could be difficult to obtain. Any shutdown of operations at the nitrogen fertilizer plant, even for a limited period, could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Our Energy segment's nitrogen fertilizer results of operations, financial condition and cash flows may be adversely affected by the supply and price levels of pet coke.
The profitability of the nitrogen fertilizer business is directly affected by the price and availability of pet coke obtained from CVR's Coffeyville refinery pursuant to a long-term agreement and pet coke purchased from third parties, both of which vary based on market prices. Pet coke is a key raw material used by the nitrogen fertilizer business in the manufacture of nitrogen fertilizer products. If pet coke costs increase, the nitrogen fertilizer business may not be able to increase its prices to recover these increased costs, because market prices for nitrogen fertilizer products are not correlated with pet coke prices.
The nitrogen fertilizer business may not be able to maintain an adequate supply of pet coke. In addition, it could experience production delays or cost increases if alternative sources of supply prove to be more expensive or difficult to obtain. The nitrogen fertilizer business currently purchases 100% of the pet coke the Coffeyville refinery produces. Accordingly, if the nitrogen fertilizer business increases production, it will be more dependent on pet coke purchases from third party suppliers at open market prices. The nitrogen fertilizer business entered into a pet coke supply agreement with HollyFrontier Corporation which became effective on March 1, 2012. The initial term ends in 2013 and the agreement is subject to renewal. There is no assurance that the nitrogen fertilizer business would be able to purchase pet coke on comparable terms from third parties or at all.
The nitrogen fertilizer business relies on third-party providers of transportation services and equipment, which subjects it to risks and uncertainties beyond its control that may have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
The nitrogen fertilizer business relies on railroad and trucking companies to ship finished products to its customers. The nitrogen fertilizer business also leases railcars from railcar owners in order to ship its finished products. These transportation operations, equipment and services are subject to various hazards, including extreme weather conditions, work stoppages, delays, spills, derailments and other accidents and other operating hazards.
These transportation operations, equipment and services are also subject to environmental, safety and other regulatory oversight. Due to concerns related to terrorism or accidents, local, state and federal governments could implement new regulations affecting the transportation of the nitrogen fertilizer business' finished products. In addition, new regulations could be implemented affecting the equipment used to ship its finished products.
Any delay in the nitrogen fertilizer business' ability to ship its finished products as a result of these transportation companies' failure to operate properly, the implementation of new and more stringent regulatory requirements affecting transportation operations or equipment, or significant increases in the cost of these services or equipment could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Our Energy segment's nitrogen fertilizer business' results of operations are highly dependent upon and fluctuate based upon business and economic conditions and governmental policies affecting the agricultural industry. These factors are outside of our Energy segment's control and may significantly affect our Energy segment's profitability.
The nitrogen fertilizer business' results of operations are highly dependent upon business and economic conditions and governmental policies affecting the agricultural industry, which CVR cannot control. The agricultural products business can be affected by a number of factors. The most important of these factors in the United States are:
- weather patterns and field conditions (particularly during periods of traditionally high nitrogen fertilizer consumption);
- quantities of nitrogen fertilizers imported to and exported from North America;
- current and projected grain inventories and prices, which are heavily influenced by U.S. exports and world-wide grain markets; and
- U.S. governmental policies, including farm and biofuel policies, which may directly or indirectly influence the number of acres planted, the level of grain inventories, the mix of crops planted or crop prices.
International market conditions, which are also outside of the nitrogen fertilizer business' control, may also significantly influence its operating results. The international market for nitrogen fertilizers is influenced by such factors as the relative value of the U.S. dollar and its impact upon the cost of importing nitrogen fertilizers, foreign agricultural policies, the existence of, or changes in, import or foreign currency exchange barriers in certain foreign markets, changes in the hard currency demands of certain countries and other regulatory policies of foreign governments, as well as the laws and policies of the United States affecting foreign trade and investment.
Ammonia can be very volatile and extremely hazardous. Any liability for accidents involving ammonia or other products CVR produces or transports that cause severe damage to property or injury to the environment and human health could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. In addition, the costs of transporting ammonia could increase significantly in the future.
The nitrogen fertilizer business manufactures, processes, stores, handles, distributes and transports ammonia, which can be very volatile and extremely hazardous. Major accidents or releases involving ammonia could cause severe damage or injury to property, the environment and human health, as well as a possible disruption of supplies and markets. Such an event could result in civil lawsuits, fines, penalties and regulatory enforcement proceedings, all of which could lead to significant liabilities. Any damage to persons, equipment or property or other disruption of the ability of the nitrogen fertilizer business to produce or distribute its products could result in a significant decrease in operating revenues and significant additional cost to replace or repair and insure its assets, which could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. The nitrogen fertilizer facility periodically experiences minor releases of ammonia related to leaks from its equipment. It experienced more significant ammonia releases in August 2007 due to the failure of a high-pressure pump and in August and September 2010 due to a heat exchanger leak and a UAN vessel rupture (As referred to herein, UAN refers to an aqueous solution of urea and ammonium nitrate used as a fertilizer.) Similar events may occur in the future and could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
In addition, the nitrogen fertilizer business may incur significant losses or costs relating to the operation of railcars used for the purpose of carrying various products, including ammonia. Due to the dangerous and potentially toxic nature of the cargo, in particular ammonia, on board railcars, a railcar accident may result in fires, explosions and pollution. These circumstances may result in sudden, severe damage or injury to property, the environment and human health. In the event of pollution, the nitrogen fertilizer business may be held responsible even if it is not at fault and it complied with the laws and regulations in effect at the time of the accident. Litigation arising from accidents involving ammonia and other products CVR produces or transports may result in the nitrogen fertilizer business or it being named as a defendant in lawsuits asserting claims for large amounts of damages, which could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Given the risks inherent in transporting ammonia, the costs of transporting ammonia could increase significantly in the future. Ammonia is most typically transported by pipeline and railcar. A number of initiatives are underway in the railroad and chemical industries that may result in changes to railcar design in order to minimize railway accidents involving hazardous materials. In addition, in the future, laws may more severely restrict or eliminate the ability of the nitrogen fertilizer business to transport ammonia via railcar. If any railcar design changes are implemented, or if accidents involving hazardous freight increase the insurance and other costs of railcars, freight costs of the nitrogen fertilizer business could significantly increase.
Environmental laws and regulations on fertilizer end-use and application and numeric nutrient water quality criteria could have a material adverse impact on fertilizer demand in the future.
Future environmental laws and regulations on the end-use and application of fertilizers could cause changes in demand for the nitrogen fertilizer business' products. In addition, future environmental laws and regulations, or new interpretations of existing laws or regulations, could limit the ability of the nitrogen fertilizer business to market and sell its products to end users. From time to time, various state legislatures have proposed bans or other limitations on fertilizer products. In addition, a number of states have adopted or proposed numeric nutrient water quality criteria that could result in decreased demand for fertilizer products in those states. Similarly, a new final rule of the EPA establishing numeric nutrient criteria for certain Florida water bodies may require farmers to implement best management practices, including the reduction of fertilizer use, to reduce the impact of fertilizer on water quality. The rule has been challenged and may be replaced with a state rule imposing similar numeric nutrient criteria. Such laws, regulations or interpretations could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
If licensed technology were no longer available, the nitrogen fertilizer business may be adversely affected.
The nitrogen fertilizer business has licensed, and may in the future license, a combination of patent, trade secret and other intellectual property rights of third parties for use in its business. In particular, the gasification process it uses to convert pet coke to high purity hydrogen for subsequent conversion to ammonia is licensed from an affiliate of General Electric Company. The license, which is fully paid, grants the nitrogen fertilizer business perpetual rights to use the pet coke gasification process on specified terms and conditions and is integral to the operations of the nitrogen fertilizer facility. If this license or any other license agreements on which the nitrogen fertilizer business' operations rely were to be terminated, licenses to alternative technology may not be available, or may only be available on terms that are not commercially reasonable or acceptable. In addition, any substitution of new technology for currently licensed technology may require substantial changes to manufacturing processes or equipment and may have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
The nitrogen fertilizer business may face third-party claims of intellectual property infringement, which if successful could result in significant costs.
Although there are currently no pending claims relating to the infringement of any third-party intellectual property rights, in the future the nitrogen fertilizer business may face claims of infringement that could interfere with its ability to use technology that is material to its business operations. Any litigation of this type, whether successful or unsuccessful, could result in substantial costs and diversions of resources, which could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. In the event a claim of infringement against the nitrogen fertilizer business is successful, it may be required to pay royalties or license fees for past or continued use of the infringing technology, or it may be prohibited from using the infringing technology altogether. If it is prohibited from using any technology as a result of such a claim, it may not be able to obtain licenses to alternative technology adequate to substitute for the technology it can no longer use, or licenses for such alternative technology may only be available on terms that are not commercially reasonable or acceptable. In addition, any substitution of new technology for currently licensed technology may require the nitrogen fertilizer business to make substantial changes to its manufacturing processes or equipment or to its products, and could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
There can be no assurance that the transportation costs of the nitrogen fertilizer business' competitors will not decline.
The nitrogen fertilizer plant is located within the U.S. farm belt, where the majority of the end users of its nitrogen fertilizer products grow their crops. Many of its competitors produce fertilizer outside of this region and incur greater costs in transporting their products over longer distances via rail, ships and pipelines. There can be no assurance that competitors' transportation costs will not decline or that additional pipelines will not be built, lowering the price at which competitors can sell their products, which would have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Risks Related to CVR's Entire Business
Instability and volatility in the capital, credit and commodity markets in the global economy could negatively impact our Energy segment's business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Our business, financial condition and results of operations could be negatively impacted by difficult conditions and extreme volatility in the capital, credit and commodities markets and in the global economy. For example:
- Although CVR believes it has sufficient liquidity under its $400.0 million ABL credit facility (the “CVR ABL Credit Facility”) to operate both the Coffeyville and Wynnewood refineries, and that the nitrogen fertilizer business has sufficient liquidity under its revolving credit facility to run the nitrogen fertilizer business, under extreme market conditions there can be no assurance that such funds would be available or sufficient, and in such a case, CVR may not be able to successfully obtain additional financing on favorable terms, or at all.
- The CVR ABL Credit Facility, the indentures governing its notes and the nitrogen fertilizer business' revolving credit facility contain various covenants that must be complied with and, if CVR or CVR LP is not in compliance, there can be no assurance that CVR or CVR LP would be able to successfully amend the agreement in the future. Further, any such amendment could be very expensive.
- Market conditions could result in CVR's significant customers experiencing financial difficulties. CVR is exposed to the credit risk of its customers, and their failure to meet their financial obligations when due because of bankruptcy, lack of liquidity, operational failure or other reasons could result in decreased sales and earnings for Energy segment.
CVR's refineries and nitrogen fertilizer facility face operating hazards and interruptions, including unplanned maintenance or downtime. CVR could face potentially significant costs to the extent these hazards or interruptions cause a material decline in production and are not fully covered by its existing insurance coverage. Insurance companies that currently insure companies in the energy industry may cease to do so, may change the coverage provided or may substantially increase premiums in the future.
Our Energy segment's operations are subject to significant operating hazards and interruptions. If any of CVR's facilities, including its Coffeyville or Wynnewood refineries or the nitrogen fertilizer plant, experiences a major accident or fire, is damaged by severe weather, flooding or other natural disaster, or is otherwise forced to significantly curtail its operations or shut down, CVR could incur significant losses that could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. Conducting the majority of CVR's refining operations and all of its fertilizer manufacturing at a single location compounds such risks.
Operations at either or both of CVR's refineries and the nitrogen fertilizer plant could be curtailed or partially or completely shut down, temporarily or permanently, as the result of a number of circumstances, most of which are not within its control, such as:
- unplanned maintenance or catastrophic events such as a major accident or fire, damage by severe weather, flooding or other natural disaster;
- labor difficulties that result in a work stoppage or slowdown;
- environmental proceedings or other litigation that compel the cessation of all or a portion of the operations;
- state and federal agencies changing interpretations and enforcement of historical environmental rules and regulations; and
- increasingly stringent environmental regulations.
The magnitude of the effect on CVR of any shutdown will depend on the length of the shutdown and the extent of the plant operations affected by the shutdown. CVR's refineries require a planned maintenance turnaround every four to five years for each unit, and the nitrogen fertilizer plant requires a planned maintenance turnaround every two years. A major accident, fire, flood or other event could damage CVR's facilities or the environment and the surrounding community or result in injuries or loss of life. For example, the flood that occurred during the weekend of June 30, 2007 shut down CVR's Coffeyville refinery for seven weeks, shut down the nitrogen fertilizer facility for approximately two weeks and required significant expenditures to repair damaged equipment. In addition, the nitrogen fertilizer business' UAN plant was out of service for approximately six weeks after the rupture of a high pressure vessel in September 2010, which required significant expenditures to repair. CVR's Coffeyville refinery experienced an equipment malfunction and small fire in connection with its fluid catalytic cracking unit on December 28, 2010, which led to reduced crude oil throughput for approximately one month and required significant expenditures to repair. Similarly, the Wynnewood refinery experienced a small explosion and fire in its hydrocracker process unit due to metal failure in December 2010. In addition, on September 28, 2012, a boiler explosion occurred at the Wynnewood refinery, fatally injuring two employee. CVR launched an internal investigation into the cause of the boiler explosion, which occurred as operators were restarting a boiler that had been temporarily shut down as part of the refinery's turnaround process. Damage at the refinery was limited to the boiler. This matter is currently under investigation by the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which could impose penalties if it determines that a violation of Occupational Safety and Health Act (“OSHA”) standards has occurred. Scheduled and unscheduled maintenance could reduce our Energy segment's net income and cash flows during the period of time that any of its units is not operating. Any unscheduled future downtime could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
If CVR experiences significant property damage, business interruption, environmental claims or other liabilities, its business could be materially adversely affected to the extent the damages or claims exceed the amount of valid and collectible insurance available to it. CVR's property and business interruption insurance policies (that cover the Coffeyville refinery and nitrogen fertilizer plant) have a $1.0 billion limit, with a $2.5 million deductible for physical damage and a 45- to 60-day waiting period (depending on the insurance carrier) before losses resulting from business interruptions are recoverable. CVR is fully exposed to all losses in excess of the applicable limits and sub-limits and for losses due to business interruptions of fewer than 45 to 60 days. CVR's Wynnewood refinery, effective November 1, 2012, is insured with a $1.0 billion limit, $10.0 million property damage deductible and a 75 days waiting period deductible for business interruption. The property and business interruption insurance policies insuring Coffeyville and Wynnewood assets contain various sub-limits, exclusions, and conditions that could have a material adverse impact on the insurance indemnification of any particular catastrophic loss occurrence. For example, CVR's current property policy contains varying specific sub-limits of $128.5 million (for Coffeyville assets) and $115.0 million (for Wynnewood assets) for damage caused by flooding. Insurance policy language and terms maintained by CVR are generally consistent with standards for the energy and fertilizer manufacturing industries.
The insurance market for energy and fertilizer manufacturing industries is highly specialized with a finite aggregate capacity of insurance. It is currently not feasible to purchase insurance limits up to the maximum foreseeable loss occurrence due to insurance capacity constraints. CVR's insurance program is renewed annually, and its ability to maintain current levels of insurance is dependent on the conditions and financial stability of the commercial insurance markets serving its industries. Factors that impact insurance cost and availability include, but are not limited to: industry-wide losses, natural disasters, specific losses incurred by us, and the investment returns earned by the insurance industry. The energy insurance market underwrites many refineries having coastal hurricane risk exposure and off shore platforms, thus a significant hurricane occurrence could impact a number of refineries and have a catastrophic impact on the financial results of the entire insurance and reinsurance market serving CVR's industry. If the supply of commercial insurance is curtailed due to highly adverse financial results CVR may not be able to continue its present limits of insurance coverage, or obtain sufficient insurance capacity to adequately insure its risks for property damage or business interruption.
Environmental laws and regulations could require CVR to make substantial capital expenditures to remain in compliance or to remediate current or future contamination that could give rise to material liabilities.
CVR's operations are subject to a variety of federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations relating to the protection of the environment, including those governing the emission or discharge of pollutants into the environment, product specifications and the generation, treatment, storage, transportation, disposal and remediation of solid and hazardous wastes. Violations of these laws and regulations or permit conditions can result in substantial penalties, injunctive orders compelling installation of additional controls, civil and criminal sanctions, permit revocations and/or facility shutdowns.
In addition, new environmental laws and regulations, new interpretations of existing laws and regulations, increased governmental enforcement of laws and regulations or other developments could require CVR to make additional unforeseen expenditures. Many of these laws and regulations are becoming increasingly stringent, and the cost of compliance with these requirements can be expected to increase over time. The requirements to be met, as well as the technology and length of time available to meet those requirements, continue to develop and change. These expenditures or costs for environmental compliance could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and profitability.
CVR's facilities operate under a number of federal and state permits, licenses and approvals with terms and conditions containing a significant number of prescriptive limits and performance standards in order to operate. All of these permits, licenses, approval limits and standards require a significant amount of monitoring, record-keeping and reporting in order to demonstrate compliance with the underlying permit, license, approval or standard. Noncompliance or incomplete documentation of CVR's compliance status may result in the imposition of fines, penalties and injunctive relief. Additionally, due to the nature of CVR's manufacturing and refining processes, there may be times when CVR is unable to meet the standards and terms and conditions of these permits, licenses and approvals due to operational upsets or malfunctions, which may lead to the imposition of fines and penalties or operating restrictions that may have a material adverse effect on CVR's ability to operate its facilities and accordingly its financial performance.
Our Energy segment's businesses are subject to the occurrence of accidental spills, discharges or other releases of petroleum or hazardous substances into the environment. Past or future spills related to any of CVR's current or former operations, including its refineries, pipelines, product terminals, fertilizer plant or transportation of products or hazardous substances from those facilities, may give rise to liability (including strict liability, or liability without fault, and potential cleanup responsibility) to governmental entities or private parties under federal, state or local environmental laws, as well as under common law. For example, CVR could be held strictly liable under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), and similar state statutes for past or future spills without regard to fault or whether CVR's actions were in compliance with the law at the time of the spills. Pursuant to CERCLA and similar state statutes, CVR could be held liable for contamination associated with facilities CVR currently owns or operates (whether or not such contamination occurred prior to its acquisition thereof), facilities CVR formerly owned or operated (if any) and facilities to which CVR transported or arranged for the transportation of wastes or byproducts containing hazardous substances for treatment, storage or disposal.
The potential penalties and cleanup costs for past or future releases or spills, liability to third parties for damage to their property or exposure to hazardous substances, or the need to address newly discovered information or conditions that may require response actions could be significant and could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. In addition, CVR may incur liability for alleged personal injury or property damage due to exposure to chemicals or other hazardous substances located at or released from its facilities. CVR may also face liability for personal injury, property damage, natural resource damage or for cleanup costs for the alleged migration of contamination or other hazardous substances from its facilities to adjacent and other nearby properties.
On September 12, 2012, the EPA published in the Federal Register final revisions to its New Source Performance Standards for process heaters and flares at petroleum refineries. EPA originally issued final standards in June 2008, but the effective date of the regulation was stayed pending reconsideration of certain provisions. The final standards regulate emissions of nitrogen oxide from process heaters and emissions of sulfur dioxide from flares, as well as require certain work practice and monitoring standards for flares. CVR is reviewing the rule and expects to make any required capital expenditure to comply with the new requirements. CVR doe not believe that the costs of complying with the rule will be material.
On August 14, 2012, the EPA sent both the Wynnewood and Coffeyville refineries letters regarding the EPA's recently issued enforcement alert entitled EPA Enforcement Targets Flaring Efficiency Violations and the EPA's related effort to conduct compliance evaluations and, where warranted, bring enforcement actions against petroleum refining companies that operate flares that are in noncompliance. Because the EPA has not specifically told CVR that its operations are in non-compliance, CVR cannot currently predict whether it may have to incur costs related to this EPA initiative.
In March 2004, Coffeyville Resources Refining & Marketing, LLC (“CRRM”) and Coffeyville Resources Terminal, LLC (“CRT”) entered into a Consent Decree (the “2004 Consent Decree”) with the EPA and the Kansas Department of Health and
Environment (the “KDHE”) to resolve air compliance concerns raised by the EPA and KDHE related to Farmland Industries Inc.'s prior ownership and operation of the Coffeyville crude oil refinery and the now closed Phillipsburg terminal facilities. Under the 2004 Consent Decree, CRRM agreed to install controls to reduce emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter from its FCCU by January 1, 2011. In addition, pursuant to the 2004 Consent Decree, CRRM and CRT assumed cleanup obligations at the Coffeyville refinery and the now-closed Phillipsburg terminal facilities.
In March 2012, CRRM entered into a “Second Consent Decree” with the EPA, which replaces the 2004 Consent Decree (other than the clean up obligations). The Second Consent Decree gives CRRM more time to install the FCCU controls from the 2004 Consent Decree and expands the scope of the settlement so that it is now considered a “global settlement” under the EPA's “National Petroleum Refining Initiative.” Under the National Petroleum Refining Initiative, the EPA identified industry-wide noncompliance with four “marquee” issues under the Clean Air Act: New Source Review, Flaring, Leak Detection and Repair, and Benzene Waste Operations NESHAP. The National Petroleum Refining Initiative has resulted in most U.S. refineries (representing more than 90% of the US refining capacity) entering into consent decrees imposing civil penalties and requiring the installation of pollution control equipment and enhanced operating procedures. The EPA has indicated that it will seek to have all refiners enter into “global settlements” pertaining to all “marquee” issues. Under the Second Consent Decree, Coffeyville Resources was required to pay a civil penalty of approximately $0.7 million and is required to complete the installation of FCCU controls required under the 2004 Consent Decree, the remaining costs of which are expected to be approximately $49.0 million, of which approximately $47.0 million is expected to be capital expenditures and complete a voluntary environmental project that will reduce air emissions and conserve water at an estimated cost of approximately $1.2 million. The incremental capital expenditures associated with the Second Consent Decree would not be material and will be limited primarily to the retrofit and replacement of heaters and boilers over a five to seven year timeframe. The Second Consent Decree was entered by the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas on April 19, 2012.
Wynnewood Refining Company, LLC (“WRC”) has not entered into a global settlement with the EPA and the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (the “ODEQ”) under the National Petroleum Refining Initiative, although it had discussions with the EPA and ODEQ about doing so. Instead, WRC entered into a Consent Order (the “Wynnewood Consent Order”) with ODEQ in August 2011 addressing some, but not all of the traditional marquee issues under the EPA's National Petroleum Refining Initiative and addressing certain historic Clean Air Act compliance issues that are generally beyond the scope of a traditional global settlement. Under the Wynnewood Consent Order, WRC agreed to pay a civil penalty, install certain controls, enhance certain compliance programs, and undertake additional testing and auditing. The remaining costs of complying with the Wynnewood Consent Order past 2012, other than costs associated with a scheduled turnaround, are not expected to be material.
In August 2012, Wynnewood received a letter from ODEQ alleging certain potential air quality emission violations. Wynnewood responded in September 2012 that it is not subject to any penalties for these alleged violations because they are covered by the Wynnewood Consent Order. Wynnewood hopes to settle these alleged violations, but there can be no assurance that the matter will settle and if it does not, Wynnewood will contest the alleged violations.
A number of factors could affect CVR's ability to meet the requirements imposed by either the Second Consent Decree or the Wynnewood Consent Order and could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Three of CVR's facilities, including its Coffeyville refinery, the now-closed Phillipsburg terminal (which operated as a refinery until 1991), and the Wynnewood refinery have environmental contamination. CVR has assumed Farmland's (a predecessor company) responsibilities under certain Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) administrative orders related to contamination at or that originated from the Coffeyville refinery and the Phillipsburg terminal. The Wynnewood refinery is required to conduct investigations to address potential off-site migration of contaminants from the west side of the property. Other known areas of contamination at the Wynnewood refinery have been partially addressed but corrective action has not been completed, and limited portions of the Wynnewood refinery have not yet been investigated to determine whether corrective action is necessary. If significant unknown liabilities are identified at any of CVR's facilities, that liability could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows and may not be covered by insurance.
CVR may incur future liability relating to the off-site disposal of hazardous wastes. Companies that dispose of, or arrange for the transportation or disposal of, hazardous substances at off-site locations may be held jointly and severally liable for the costs of investigation and remediation of contamination at those off-site locations, regardless of fault. CVR could become involved in litigation or other proceedings involving off-site waste disposal and the damages or costs in any such proceedings could be material.
CVR may be unable to obtain or renew permits necessary for our Energy segment's operations, which could inhibit its ability to do business.
CVR holds numerous environmental and other governmental permits and approvals authorizing operations at its facilities. Future expansion of CVR's operations is also predicated upon securing the necessary environmental or other permits or approvals. A decision by a government agency to deny or delay issuing a new or renewed material permit or approval, or to revoke or substantially modify an existing permit or approval, could have a material adverse effect on its ability to continue operations and on our Energy segment's financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. For example, WRC's waste water permit has expired and is in the renewal process. At this time the facility is operating under its expired permit terms and conditions (called a permit shield) until the ODEQ renews the permit. The renewal permit may contain different terms and conditions that would require unplanned or unanticipated costs.
Climate change laws and regulations could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows.
Various regulatory and legislative measures to address greenhouse gas emissions (including CO 2, methane and nitrous oxides) are in different phases of implementation or discussion. In the aftermath of its 2009 “endangerment finding” that greenhouse gas emissions pose a threat to human health and welfare, the EPA has begun to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. In October 2009, the EPA finalized a rule requiring certain large emitters of greenhouse gases to inventory and annually report their greenhouse gas emissions to the EPA. In accordance with the rule, CVR has begun monitoring its greenhouse gas emissions and have already reported the emissions to the EPA for the year ended 2011. In May 2010, the EPA finalized the “Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule,” which established new greenhouse gas emissions thresholds that determine when stationary sources, such as the refineries and the nitrogen fertilizer plant, must obtain permits under Prevention of Significant Deterioration, or PSD, and Title V programs of the federal Clean Air Act. The significance of the permitting requirement is that, in cases where a new source is constructed or an existing source undergoes a major modification, the facility would need to evaluate and install best available control technology, or BACT, to control greenhouse gas emissions. A major modification resulting in a significant expansion of production at the nitrogen fertilizer plant or one of our refineries that could cause a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions could necessitate the installation of BACT controls. The EPA's endangerment finding, Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule and certain other greenhouse gas emission rules have been challenged and are subject to extensive litigation. In December 2010, the EPA reached a settlement agreement with numerous parties under which it agreed to promulgate New Source Performance Standards (“NSPS”) to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from petroleum refineries by November 2012.
At the federal legislative level, Congressional passage of legislation adopting some form of federal mandatory greenhouse gas emission reduction, such as a nationwide cap-and-trade program, does not appear likely at this time, although it could be adopted at a future date. It is also possible that Congress may pass alternative climate change bills that do not mandate a nationwide cap-and-trade program and instead focus on promoting renewable energy and energy efficiency.
In addition to potential federal legislation, a number of states have adopted regional greenhouse gas initiatives to reduce CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions. In 2007, a group of Midwest states, including Kansas (where CVR's Coffeyville refinery and the nitrogen fertilizer facility are located), formed the Midwestern Greenhouse Gas Reduction Accord, which calls for the development of a cap-and-trade system to control greenhouse gas emissions and for the inventory of such emissions. However, the individual states that have signed on to the accord must adopt laws or regulations implementing the trading scheme before it becomes effective, and it is unclear whether Kansas still intends to do so.
The implementation of EPA greenhouse gas regulations or potential federal, state or regional programs to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will result in increased costs to (i) operate and maintain CVR's facilities, (ii) install new emission controls on its facilities and (iii) administer and manage any greenhouse gas emissions program. Increased costs associated with compliance with any future legislation or regulation of greenhouse gas emissions, if it occurs, may have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
In addition, climate change legislation and regulations may result in increased costs not only for our Energy segment's business but also for users of its refined and fertilizer products, thereby potentially decreasing demand for its products. Decreased demand for CVR's products may have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
CVR is subject to strict laws and regulations regarding employee and process safety, and failure to comply with these laws and regulations could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and profitability.
CVR is subject to the requirements of OSHA and comparable state statutes that regulate the protection of the health and safety of workers, and the proper design, operation and maintenance of our refinery equipment. In addition, OSHA and certain environmental regulations require that CVR maintain information about hazardous materials used or produced in its operations and that it provide this information to employees and state and local governmental authorities. Failure to comply with these requirements, including general industry standards, record keeping requirements and monitoring and control of occupational exposure to regulated substances, may result in significant fines or compliance costs, which could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Security breaches and other disruptions could compromise CVR's information and expose it to liability, which would cause Energy operations' business and reputation to suffer.
In the ordinary course of our business, CVR collects and stores sensitive data, including intellectual property, CVR's proprietary business information and that of its customers and suppliers, and personally identifiable information of its employees, in its facilities and on its networks. The secure processing, maintenance and transmission of this information is critical to CVR's operations. Despite CVR's security measures, its information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable to attacks by hackers or breached due to employee error, malfeasance or other disruptions. Any such breach could compromise CVR's networks and the information stored there could be accessed, publicly disclosed, lost or stolen. Any such access, disclosure or other loss of information could result in legal claims or proceedings, disrupt our Energy segment's operations, damage CVR's reputation, and cause a loss of confidence, which could adversely affect its business.
Deliberate, malicious acts, including terrorism, could damage CVR's facilities, disrupt its operations or injure employees, contractors, customers or the public and result in liability to its.
Intentional acts of destruction could hinder CVR's sales or production and disrupt its supply chain. CVR's facilities could be damaged or destroyed, reducing its operational production capacity and requiring it to repair or replace its facilities at substantial cost. Employees, contractors and the public could suffer substantial physical injury for which CVR could be liable. Governmental authorities may impose security or other requirements that could make CVR's operations more difficult or costly. The consequences of any such actions could adversely affect our Energy segment's operating results, financial condition and cash flows.
Both the petroleum and nitrogen fertilizer businesses depend on significant customers and the loss of one or several significant customers may have a material adverse impact on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
The petroleum and nitrogen fertilizer businesses both have a significant concentration of customers. The five largest customers of the petroleum business represented 36% of CVR's petroleum sales for period May 5, 2012 to September 30, 2012. Further, the top five ammonia customers of the nitrogen fertilizer business represented approximately 60% of its ammonia sales for the period May 5, 2012 to September 30, 2012, and the top five UAN customers of the nitrogen fertilizer business represented approximately 49% of its UAN sales for the same period. Several significant petroleum, ammonia and UAN customers each account for more than 10% of sales of petroleum, ammonia and UAN, respectively. Given the nature of our Energy segment's business, and consistent with industry practice, CVR does not have long-term minimum purchase contracts with any of its customers. The loss of one or several of these significant customers, or a significant reduction in purchase volume by any of them, could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
The acquisition and expansion strategy of CVR's petroleum business and the nitrogen fertilizer business involves significant risks.
Both CVR's petroleum business and the nitrogen fertilizer business will consider pursuing acquisitions and expansion projects in order to continue to grow and increase profitability. However, acquisitions and expansions involve numerous risks and uncertainties, including intense competition for suitable acquisition targets, the potential unavailability of financial resources necessary to consummate acquisitions and expansions, difficulties in identifying suitable acquisition targets and expansion projects or in completing any transactions identified on sufficiently favorable terms and the need to obtain regulatory or other governmental approvals that may be necessary to complete acquisitions and expansions. In addition, any future acquisitions and expansions may entail significant transaction costs and risks associated with entry into new markets and lines of business.
The nitrogen fertilizer business is in the process of expanding its nitrogen fertilizer plant, which is expected to allow it the flexibility to upgrade all of its ammonia production to UAN. This expansion is premised in large part on the historically higher margin that UAN has received compared to ammonia. If the premium that UAN currently earns over ammonia decreases, this expansion project may not yield the economic benefits and accretive effects that are currently anticipated.
In addition to the risks involved in identifying and completing acquisitions described above, even when acquisitions are completed, integration of acquired entities can involve significant difficulties, such as:
- unforeseen difficulties in the integration of the acquired operations and disruption of the ongoing operations of our business;
- failure to achieve cost savings or other financial or operating objectives contributing to the accretive nature of an acquisition;
- strain on the operational and managerial controls and procedures of CVR's petroleum business and the nitrogen fertilizer business, and the need to modify systems or to add management resources;
- difficulties in the integration and retention of customers or personnel and the integration and effective deployment of operations or technologies;
- assumption of unknown material liabilities or regulatory non-compliance issues;
- amortization of acquired assets, which would reduce future reported earnings;
- possible adverse short-term effects on our Energy segment's cash flows or operating results; and
- diversion of management's attention from the ongoing operations of CVR's business.
In particular, CVR is in the process of integrating Wynnewood Energy Company, LLC and its subsidiary into CVR Energy, Inc.'s internal control framework, and testing of these new controls is not yet complete.
In addition, in connection with any potential acquisition or expansion project involving the nitrogen fertilizer business, the nitrogen fertilizer business will need to consider whether the business it intends to acquire or expansion project it intends to pursue could affect the nitrogen fertilizer business' tax treatment as a partnership for federal income tax purposes. If the nitrogen fertilizer business is otherwise unable to conclude that the activities of the business being acquired or the expansion project would not affect CVR LP's treatment as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, the nitrogen fertilizer business may elect to seek a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS. Seeking such a ruling could be costly or, in the case of competitive acquisitions, place the nitrogen fertilizer business in a competitive disadvantage compared to other potential acquirers who do not seek such a ruling. If the nitrogen fertilizer business is unable to conclude that an activity would not affect its treatment as a partnership for federal income tax purposes, and is unable or unwilling to obtain an IRS ruling, the nitrogen fertilizer business may choose to acquire such business or develop such expansion project in a corporate subsidiary, which would subject the income related to such activity to entity-level taxation, which would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to the unitholders and would likely cause a substantial reduction in the value of the nitrogen fertilizer business common units.
Failure to manage these acquisition and expansion growth risks could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. There can be no assurance that CVR will be able to consummate any acquisitions or expansions, successfully integrate acquired entities, or generate positive cash flow at any acquired company or expansion project.
Our Energy segment's internally generated cash flows and other sources of liquidity may not be adequate for its capital needs.
Refining businesses such as CVR's are capital intensive, and working capital needs may vary significantly over relatively short periods of time. For instance, crude oil price volatility can significantly impact working capital on a week-to-week and month-to-month basis. If CVR cannot generate adequate cash flow or otherwise secure sufficient liquidity to meet our Energy segment's working capital needs or support its short-term and long-term capital requirements, it may be unable to meet its debt obligations, pursue its business strategies or comply with certain environmental standards, which would have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's business and results of operations. As of September 30, 2012, CVR had cash and cash equivalents of $988 million and $373 million available under the ABL Credit Facility (and had letters of credit outstanding of approximately $27 million). Crude oil price volatility can significantly impact working capital on a week-to-week and month-to-month basis.
A substantial portion of CVR's workforce is unionized and it is subject to the risk of labor disputes and adverse employee relations, which may disrupt its business and increase its costs.
As of September 30, 2012, approximately 59% of the employees at the Coffeyville refinery and 63% of the employees at the Wynnewood refinery were represented by labor unions under collective bargaining agreements. At Coffeyville, the collective bargaining agreement with six Metal Trades Unions (which covers union members who work directly at the Coffeyville refinery) is effective through March 2013, and the collective bargaining agreement with United Steelworkers (which covers the balance of CVR's unionized employees, who work in the terminal and related operations) is effective through
March 2015, and automatically renews on an annual basis thereafter unless a written notice is received sixty days in advance of the relevant expiration date. The collective bargaining agreement with the International Union of Operating Engineers with respect to the Wynnewood refinery expires in June 2015. CVR may not be able to renegotiate its collective bargaining agreements when they expire on satisfactory terms or at all. A failure to do so may increase our Energy segment's costs. In addition, CVR's existing labor agreements may not prevent a strike or work stoppage at any of its facilities in the future, and any work stoppage could negatively affect our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
New regulations concerning the transportation of hazardous chemicals, risks of terrorism and the security of chemical manufacturing facilities could result in higher operating costs.
The costs of complying with future regulations relating to the transportation of hazardous chemicals and security associated with the refining and nitrogen fertilizer facilities may have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows. Targets such as refining and chemical manufacturing facilities may be at greater risk of future terrorist attacks than other targets in the United States. As a result, the petroleum and chemical industries have responded to the issues that arose due to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001 by starting new initiatives relating to the security of petroleum and chemical industry facilities and the transportation of hazardous chemicals in the United States. Future terrorist attacks could lead to even stronger, more costly initiatives that could result in a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Compliance with and changes in the tax laws could adversely affect CVR's performance.
CVR is subject to extensive tax liabilities, including United States and state income taxes and transactional taxes such as excise, sales/use, payroll, franchise and withholding taxes. New tax laws and regulations are continuously being enacted or proposed that could result in increased expenditures for tax liabilities in the future.
CVR's significant indebtedness may affect its ability to operate its business, and may have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
As of September 30, 2012, after giving effect to the issuance of new second lien notes and the tender offer for and redemption of all of CVR's first lien notes, CVR had outstanding $223 million of second lien notes issued by Coffeyville Resources, $500 million of second lien notes issued by CVR Refining, LLC, and $27 million of issued but undrawn letters of credit (leaving borrowing availability of $373 million under the CVR ABL Credit Facility), and CVR LP, its consolidated subsidiary that operates the nitrogen fertilizer plant, had $125.0 million in outstanding term loan borrowings and borrowing availability of $25.0 million under its revolving credit facility.
CVR and its subsidiaries may be able to incur significant additional indebtedness in the future. If new indebtedness is added to CVR's current indebtedness, the risks described below could increase. CVR's level of indebtedness could affect our Energy segment's operations in several ways, including the following:
- a significant portion of our Energy segment's cash flows could be used to service our indebtedness;
- a high level of debt would increase our Energy segment's vulnerability to general adverse economic and industry conditions;
- the covenants contained in the agreements governing CVR's outstanding indebtedness will limit its ability to borrow additional funds, dispose of assets, pay distributions and make certain investments;
- a high level of debt may place our Energy segment at a competitive disadvantage compared to its competitors that are less leveraged, and therefore may be able to take advantage of opportunities that its indebtedness would prevent us from pursuing;
- CVR's debt covenants may also affect its flexibility in planning for, and reacting to, changes in the economy and in our industry;
- a high level of debt may make it more likely that a reduction in CVR's borrowing base following a periodic redetermination could require it to repay a portion of its then-outstanding bank borrowings; and
- a high level of debt may impair CVR's ability to obtain additional financing in the future for working capital, capital expenditures, debt service requirements, acquisitions, general corporate or other purposes.
In addition, borrowings under the CVR ABL Credit Facility, CVR LP's credit facility and other credit facilities that CVR or its subsidiaries may enter into in the future may bear interest at variable rates. If market interest rates increase, such variable-rate debt will create higher debt service requirements, which could adversely affect our Energy segment's cash flow.
In addition to CVR's debt service obligations, our Energy segment's operations require substantial investments on a continuing basis. CVR's ability to make scheduled debt payments, to refinance its obligations with respect to its indebtedness and to fund capital and non-capital expenditures necessary to maintain the condition of its operating assets, properties and systems software, as well as to provide capacity for the growth of its business, depends on its financial and operating performance. General economic conditions and financial, business and other factors affect our Energy segment's operations and our future performance. Many of these factors are beyond CVR's control. Our Energy segment may not be able to generate sufficient cash flows to pay the interest on its debt, and future working capital, borrowings or equity financing may not be available to pay or refinance such debt.
In addition, CVR is subject to covenants contained in agreements governing its present and future indebtedness. These covenants include, and will likely include, restrictions on certain payments, the granting of liens, the incurrence of additional indebtedness, dividend restrictions affecting subsidiaries, asset sales, transactions with affiliates and mergers and consolidations. Any failure to comply with these covenants could result in a default under the indentures governing its secured notes, the CVR ABL Credit Facility, CVR LP's credit facility and the agreements governing CVR's other indebtedness. Upon a default, unless waived, the holders of its notes and the lenders under the CVR ABL Credit Facility and CVR LP's credit facility would have all remedies available to a secured lender, and could elect to terminate their commitments, cease making further loans, institute foreclosure proceedings against it or its subsidiaries' assets, and force CVR and its subsidiaries into bankruptcy or liquidation, subject to the intercreditor agreements. In addition, any defaults could trigger cross defaults under other or future credit agreements or indentures. Our Energy segment's operating results may not be sufficient to service its indebtedness or to fund its other expenditures and it may not be able to obtain financing to meet these requirements.
CVR may not be able to generate sufficient cash to service all of its indebtedness and may be forced to take other actions to satisfy its obligations under its indebtedness that may not be successful.
CVR's ability to satisfy its debt obligations will depend upon, among other things:
- its future financial and operating performance, which will be affected by prevailing economic conditions and financial, business, regulatory and other factors, many of which are beyond its control; and
- its future ability to borrow under the CVR ABL Credit Facility and CVR LP's ability to borrow under its revolving credit facility, the availability of which depends on, among other things, compliance with the covenants in the CVR ABL Credit Facility and CVR LP's credit facility.
CVR cannot offer any assurance that its businesses will generate sufficient cash flow from operations, or that it will be able to draw under the CVR ABL Credit Facility, or that CVR LP will be able to draw under its revolving credit facility, or from other sources of financing, in an amount sufficient to fund CVR's liquidity needs. In addition, CVR's board of directors may in the future elect to pay a special or regular dividend, engage in share repurchases or pursue other strategic options including acquisitions of other business or asset purchases, which would reduce cash available to service its debt obligations.
If CVR's cash flows and capital resources are insufficient to service its indebtedness, it may be forced to reduce or delay capital expenditures, sell assets, seek additional capital or restructure or refinance its indebtedness. These alternative measures may not be successful and may not permit CVR to meet its scheduled debt service obligations. CVR's ability to restructure or refinance its debt will depend on the condition of the capital markets and its financial condition at such time. Any refinancing of CVR's debt could be at higher interest rates and may require it to comply with more onerous covenants, which could further restrict its business operations, and the terms of existing or future debt agreements may restrict it from adopting some of these alternatives. In addition, in the absence of adequate cash flows or capital resources, CVR could face substantial liquidity problems and might be required to dispose of material assets or operations, or sell equity, in order to meet our debt service and other obligations. CVR may not be able to consummate those dispositions for fair market value or at all. The CVR ABL Credit Facility, CVR LP's credit facility and the indentures governing its notes may restrict, or market or business conditions may limit, its ability to avail itself of some or all of these options. Furthermore, any proceeds that CVR could realize from any such dispositions may not be adequate to meet its debt service obligations when due.
The borrowings under the CVR ABL Credit Facility and CVR LP's credit facility bear interest at variable rates and other debt CVR incurs could likewise be variable-rate debt. If market interest rates increase, variable-rate debt will create higher debt service requirements, which could adversely affect CVR's cash flow. While CVR may enter into agreements limiting its exposure to higher interest rates, any such agreements may not offer complete protection from this risk.
Covenants in CVR's debt instruments could limit its ability to incur additional indebtedness and engage in certain transactions, which could adversely affect our Energy segment's liquidity and its ability to pursue its business strategies.
The CVR ABL Credit Facility, the indentures governing CVR's debt and any other debt instruments that CVR or its subsidiaries may enter into in the future, will contain, a number of restrictive covenants that will impose significant operating and financial restrictions on it and its subsidiaries and may limit its ability to engage in acts that may be in the long-term best interest of the Energy segment, including restrictions on it and its subsidiaries' ability to, among other things to:
- incur, assume or guarantee additional debt or issue redeemable stock or preferred stock;
- make distributions or prepay, redeem, or repurchase certain debt;
- enter into agreements that restrict distributions from restricted subsidiaries;
- incur liens;
- sell or otherwise dispose of assets, including capital stock of subsidiaries;
- enter into transactions with affiliates; and
- merge, consolidate or sell substantially all of its assets.
Any of these restrictions could limit CVR's ability to plan for or react to market conditions and could otherwise restrict corporate activities. Any failure to comply with these covenants could result in a default under the CVR ABL Credit Facility CVR LP's credit facility and the indentures governing the notes. Upon a default, unless waived, the holders of CVR's notes and the lenders under the CVR ABL Credit Facility and CVR LP's credit facility would have all remedies available to a secured lender, and could elect to terminate their commitments, cease making further loans, institute foreclosure proceedings against it assets, and force CVR into bankruptcy or liquidation, subject to the intercreditor agreements. In addition, a default under the CVR ABL Credit Facility or the indentures governing the notes would trigger a cross default under its other agreements and could trigger a cross default under the agreements governing its future indebtedness. Our Energy segment's operating results may not be sufficient to service its indebtedness or to fund its other expenditures and it may not be able to obtain financing to meet these requirements.
Despite its significant indebtedness, CVR may still be able to incur significantly more debt, including secured indebtedness. This could intensify the risks described above.
CVR and CVR LP may be able to incur substantially more debt in the future, including secured indebtedness. Although the CVR ABL Credit Facility and the indentures governing CVR's other debt contain restrictions on its incurrence of additional indebtedness, and CVR LP's credit facility contains restrictions on its incurrence of additional indebtedness, these restrictions are subject to a number of qualifications and exceptions and, under certain circumstances, indebtedness incurred in compliance with these restrictions could be substantial. In particular, CVR can incur additional indebtedness so long as its fixed charge coverage ratio (as defined in the indentures) exceeds 2:1. Also, these restrictions may not prevent CVR from incurring obligations that do not constitute indebtedness. To the extent such new debt or new obligations are added to CVR's existing indebtedness, the risks described above could substantially increase.
Risks Related to the Limited Partnership Structure Through Which CVR Currently Holds Its Interest in the Nitrogen Fertilizer Business
The board of directors of CVR LP, general partner has adopted a policy to distribute all of the available cash the nitrogen fertilizer business generates on a quarterly basis, which could limit its ability to grow and make acquisitions.
The current policy of the board of directors of CVR LP's general partner is to distribute all of the available cash CVR LP generates on a quarterly basis to its unitholders. As a result, CVR LP's general partner will rely primarily upon external financing sources, including commercial bank borrowings and the issuance of debt and equity securities, to fund acquisitions and expansion capital expenditures at the nitrogen fertilizer business. As a result, to the extent it is unable to finance growth externally, CVR LP's cash distribution policy will significantly impair its ability to grow. As of September 30, 2012, CVR owned approximately 70% of CVR LP's outstanding common units, and public unitholders owned the remaining 30% of CVR LP's common units.
In addition, because the current policy of the board of directors of CVR LP's general partner is to distribute all of the available cash CVR LP generates each quarter, growth may not be as fast as that of businesses that reinvest their available cash to expand ongoing operations. To the extent CVR LP issues additional units in connection with any acquisitions or expansion capital expenditures, the payment of distributions on those additional units will decrease the amount CVR LP distributes on each outstanding unit. There are no limitations in the partnership agreement on CVR LP's ability to issue additional units, including units ranking senior to the common units that CVR own. The incurrence of additional commercial borrowings or other debt to finance CVR LP's growth strategy would result in increased interest expense, which, in turn, would reduce the available cash that CVR LP has to distribute to unitholders, including CVR.
CVR LP may not have sufficient available cash to pay any quarterly distribution on CVR's common units. Furthermore, CVR LP is not required to make distributions to holders of its common units on a quarterly basis or otherwise, and may elect to distribute less than all of its available cash.
CVR LP may not have sufficient available cash each quarter to pay any distributions to its common unitholders, including CVR. Furthermore, the partnership agreement does not require it to pay distributions on a quarterly basis or otherwise. Although the current policy of the board of directors of CVR LP's general partner is to distribute all available cash CVR LP generates each quarter, the board may at any time, for any reason, change this policy or decide not to make any distribution. The amount of cash CVR LP will be able to distribute on its common units principally depends on the amount of cash it generates from operations, which is directly dependent upon operating margins, which have been volatile historically. Operating margins at the nitrogen fertilizer business are significantly affected by the market-driven UAN and ammonia prices it is able to charge customers and pet coke-based gasification production costs, as well as seasonality, weather conditions, governmental regulation, unplanned maintenance or downtime at the nitrogen fertilizer plant and global and domestic demand for nitrogen fertilizer products, among other factors. In addition:
- CVR LP's credit facility, and any credit facility or other debt instruments it may enter into in the future, may limit the distributions that CVR LP can make. The credit facility provides that CVR LP can make distributions to holders of common units only if it is in compliance with leverage ratio and interest coverage ratio covenants on a pro forma basis after giving effect to any distribution, and there is no default or event of default under the facility. In addition, any future credit facility may contain other financial tests and covenants that must be satisfied. Any failure to comply with these tests and covenants could result in the lenders prohibiting CVR LP distributions.
- The amount of available cash for distribution to unitholders depends primarily on cash flow, and not solely on the profitability of the nitrogen fertilizer business, which is affected by non-cash items. As a result, CVR LP may make distributions during periods when it records losses and may not make distributions during periods when it records net income.
- The actual amount of available cash will depend on numerous factors, some of which are beyond CVR LP's control, including UAN and ammonia prices, operating costs, global and domestic demand for nitrogen fertilizer products, fluctuations in working capital needs, and the amount of fees and expenses incurred by CVR.
If CVR LP were to be treated as a corporation, rather than as a partnership, for U.S. federal income tax purposes or if CVR LP were otherwise subject to entity-level taxation, CVR LP's cash available for distribution to its common unitholders, including to CVR, would be reduced, likely causing a substantial reduction in the value of CVR LP's common units, including the common units held by CVR.
During 2011, and in each taxable year thereafter, current law requires CVR LP to derive at least 90% of its annual gross income from certain specified activities in order to continue to be treated as a partnership, rather than as a corporation, for U.S. federal income tax purposes. CVR LP may not find it possible to meet this qualifying income requirement, or may inadvertently fail to meet this qualifying income requirement. If CVR LP were to be treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes, it would pay U.S. federal income tax on all of its taxable income at the corporate tax rate, which is currently a maximum of 35%, it would likely pay additional state and local income taxes at varying rates, and distributions to CVR LP's common unitholders, including to CVR, would generally be taxed as corporate distributions.
In addition, current U.S. federal income tax treatment of publicly traded partnerships, including CVR LP, may be modified at any time by legislation, administrative rulings or judicial authority. Any such change may cause CVR LP to be treated as a corporation for U.S. federal income tax purposes or otherwise subject CVR LP to entity-level taxation. For example, members of Congress have considered substantive changes to the existing U.S. federal income tax laws that affect publicly traded partnerships. Any modification to the U.S. federal income tax laws or interpretations thereof may or may not be applied retroactively and could make it more difficult or impossible for CVR LP to be treated as a partnership for U.S. federal income tax purposes. CVR is unable to predict whether any of these changes or other proposals will ultimately be enacted.
If CVR LP were to be treated as a corporation, rather than as a partnership, for U.S. federal income tax purposes or if CVR LP were otherwise subject to entity-level taxation, CVR LP's cash available for distribution to its common unitholders, including to CVR, and the value of CVR LP's common units, including the common units held by CVR, could be substantially reduced.
CVR may have liability to repay distributions that are wrongfully distributed to it.
Under certain circumstances, CVR may, as a holder of common units in CVR LP, have to repay amounts wrongfully returned or distributed to it. Under the Delaware Revised Uniform Limited Partnership Act, CVR LP may not make a distribution to unitholders if the distribution would cause its liabilities to exceed the fair value of its assets. Delaware law provides that for a period of three years from the date of an impermissible distribution, limited partners who received the distribution and who knew at the time of the distribution that it violated Delaware law will be liable to CVR for the distribution amount.
Public investors own approximately 30% of the nitrogen fertilizer business as a result of the initial public offering of common units representing limited partner interest of CVR LP. Although CVR owns the majority of CVR LP's common units and the nitrogen fertilizer general partner, the general partner owes a duty of good faith to public unitholders, which could cause it to manage the nitrogen fertilizer business differently than if there were no public unitholders.
As a result of the initial public offering of common units representing limited partner interest of CVR LP, public investors own approximately 30% of CVR LP's common units. CVR is no longer entitled to receive all of the cash generated by the nitrogen fertilizer business or freely borrow money from the nitrogen fertilizer business to finance operations at the refinery, as CVR has in the past. Furthermore, although CVR owns CVR LP's general partner and continue to own the majority of CVR LP's common units, CVR LP's general partner is subject to certain fiduciary duties, which may require the general partner to manage the nitrogen fertilizer business in a way that may differ from CVR's best interests.
CVR cannot own or operate a fertilizer business other than CVR LP without the consent of CVR LP's general partner.
CVR and CVR LP have entered into an agreement in order to clarify and structure the division of corporate opportunities. Under this agreement, CVR has agreed not to engage in the production, transportation or distribution, on a wholesale basis, of fertilizers in the contiguous United States, subject to limited exceptions (fertilizer restricted business) without the consent of CVR LP's general partner.
CVR LP is managed by the executive officers of its general partner, some of whom are employed by and serve as part of the senior management team of CVR and its affiliates. Conflicts of interest could arise as a result of this arrangement.
CVR LP is managed by the executive officers of its general partner, some of whom are employed by and serve as part of the senior management team of CVR. Furthermore, although CVR LP has entered into a services agreement with CVR under which it compensates CVR for the services of its management, CVR's management is not required to devote any specific amount of time to the nitrogen fertilizer business and may devote a substantial majority of their time to the business of CVR. Moreover, CVR may terminate the services agreement at any time, subject to a 180-day notice period. In addition, key executive officers of CVR, including its chief operating officer, chief financial officer and general counsel, will face conflicts of interest if decisions arise in which CVR LP and CVR have conflicting points of view or interests.
CVR LP's general partner has limited its liability in the partnership agreement and replaced default fiduciary duties with contractual corporate governance standards set forth therein, thereby restricting the remedies available to unitholders, including CVR, for actions that, without such replacement, might constitute breaches of fiduciary duty.
CVR LP's partnership agreement contains provisions that restrict the remedies available to its unitholders, including CVR, for actions that might otherwise constitute breaches of fiduciary duty. For example, the partnership agreement:
- permits the general partner to make a number of decisions in its individual capacity, as opposed to its capacity as general partner, thereby entitling it to consider only the interests and factors that it desires, and imposes no duty or obligation on the general partner to give any consideration to any interest of, or factors affecting, any limited partner;
- provides that the general partner shall not have any liability to unitholders for decisions made in its capacity as general partner so long as it acted in good faith, meaning it believed that the decision was in the best interests of CVR LP;
- generally provides that affiliated transactions and resolutions of conflicts of interest not approved by the conflicts committee of the board of directors of the general partner and not involving a vote of unitholders must be on terms no less favorable to CVR LP than those generally being provided to or available from unrelated third parties or be “fair and reasonable” to CVR LP, as determined by its general partner in good faith, and that, in determining whether a transaction or resolution is “fair and reasonable,” the general partner may consider the totality of the relationships between the parties involved, including other transactions that may be particularly advantageous or beneficial to affiliated parties, including CVR;
- provides that the general partner and its officers and directors will not be liable for monetary damages to common unitholders, including CVR, for any acts or omissions unless there has been a final and non-appealable judgment entered by a court of competent jurisdiction determining that the general partner or its officers or directors acted in bad faith or engaged in fraud or willful misconduct or, in the case of a criminal matter, acted with knowledge that the conduct was criminal; and
- provides that in resolving conflicts of interest, it will be presumed that in making its decision, the general partner or its conflicts committee acted in good faith, and in any proceeding brought by or on behalf of any holder of common units, the person bringing or prosecuting such proceeding will have the burden of overcoming such presumption.
With respect to the common units that CVR own, CVR has agreed to become bound by the provisions in its partnership agreement, including the provisions discussed above.
CVR LP may issue additional common units and other equity interests without the approval of its common unitholders, which would dilute the existing ownership interests and rights to receive distributions from CVR LP.
Under CVR LP's partnership agreement, CVR LP is authorized to issue an unlimited number of additional interests without a vote of the unitholders. The issuance of additional common units or other equity interests of equal or senior rank will have the following effects:
- CVR's proportionate ownership interest will decrease;
- the amount of cash distributions on each common unit will decrease;
- the ratio of CVR's taxable income to distributions may increase;
- the relative voting strength of each previously outstanding unit will be diminished; and
- the market price of the common units may decline.
In addition, CVR LP's partnership agreement does not prohibit the issuance by CVR's subsidiaries of equity interests, which may effectively rank senior to the common units that CVR owns.
As a stand-alone public company, the nitrogen fertilizer business is exposed to risks relating to evaluations of controls required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.
The nitrogen fertilizer business is in the process of evaluating its internal controls systems to allow management to report on, and CVR's independent auditors to audit, its internal control over financial reporting. It will be performing the system and process evaluation and testing (and any necessary remediation) required to comply with the management certification and auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and under current rules is to comply with Section 404 for the year ended December 31, 2012. Upon completion of this process, the nitrogen fertilizer business may identify control deficiencies of varying degrees of severity under applicable SEC and Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”) rules and regulations that remain unremediated. Although the nitrogen fertilizer business produces financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, internal accounting controls may not currently meet all standards applicable to companies with publicly traded securities. As a publicly traded partnership, it will be required to report, among other things, control deficiencies that constitute a “material weakness” or changes in internal controls that, or that are reasonably likely to, materially affect internal control over financial reporting. A “material weakness” is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.
If the nitrogen fertilizer business fails to implement the requirements of Section 404 in a timely manner, it might be subject to sanctions or investigation by regulatory authorities such as the SEC. If it does not implement improvements to its disclosure controls and procedures or to its internal controls in a timely manner, its independent registered public accounting firm may not be able to certify as to the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting pursuant to an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. This may subject the nitrogen fertilizer business to adverse regulatory consequences or a loss of confidence in the reliability of its financial statements. It could also suffer a loss of confidence in the reliability of its financial statements if its independent registered public accounting firm reports a material weakness in its internal controls, if it does not develop and maintain effective controls and procedures or if it is otherwise unable to deliver timely and reliable financial information. Any loss of confidence in the reliability of its financial statements or other negative reaction to its failure to develop timely or adequate disclosure controls and procedures or internal controls could result in a decline in the price of its common units, which would reduce the value of CVR's investment in the nitrogen fertilizer business. In addition, if the nitrogen fertilizer business fails to remedy any material weakness, its financial statements may be inaccurate, it may face restricted access to the capital markets and the price of its common units may be adversely affected, which would reduce the value of its investment in the nitrogen fertilizer business.
Risks Related to the Wynnewood Acquisition
Challenges in operating the Wynnewood refinery and/or newly enlarged combined business or difficulties in successfully integrating the businesses of CVR and WEC within the expected time frame could adversely affect our Energy segment's future results following the Wynnewood Acquisition.
As a result of the Wynnewood Acquisition, CVR doubled its number of refineries from one to two and increased its refining throughput capacity by over 50%. The ultimate success of the Wynnewood Acquisition will depend, in large part, on CVR's ability to successfully expand the scale and geographic scope of its operations across state lines and to realize the anticipated benefits, including synergies, cost savings, innovation and operational efficiencies, from combining the businesses of CVR and WEC. To realize these anticipated benefits, the business of WEC must be successfully integrated into CVR. This integration will be complex and time-consuming.
The failure to integrate successfully and to manage successfully the challenges presented by the integration process may result in the combined company not achieving the anticipated benefits of the merger. Potential difficulties that may be encountered in the integration process include the following:
- the inability to successfully integrate the business of WEC into CVR in a manner that permits the combined company to achieve the full revenue and cost savings anticipated to result from the merger;
- complexities associated with managing the larger, more complex, combined business;
- integrating personnel from the two companies while maintaining focus on providing consistent, high-quality service;
- potential unknown liabilities and unforeseen expenses associated with the Wynnewood Acquisition; and
- performance shortfalls at one or both of the companies as a result of the diversion of management's attention caused by completing the Wynnewood Acquisition and integrating the companies' operations.
Even if CVR is able to successfully integrate the business operations of WEC, there can be no assurance that this integration will result in the realization of the full benefits of the expected synergies, cost savings, innovation and operational efficiencies or that these benefits will be achieved within the anticipated time frame.
The future results of our Energy segment will suffer if CVR does not effectively manage its expanded operations following the Wynnewood Acquisition.
Following the Wynnewood Acquisition, the size of CVR's business increased significantly and its existing management and operational infrastructure is responsible for operating two refineries located in different states. The combined company's future success depends, in part, upon its ability to manage this expanded business, which will pose substantial challenges for management, including challenges related to the management and monitoring of new operations and associated increased costs and complexity. There can be no assurances that the combined company will be successful or that it will realize the expected operating efficiencies, cost savings, revenue enhancements and other benefits currently anticipated from the Wynnewood Acquisition.
CVR has incurred and is expected to continue to incur substantial expenses related to the Wynnewood Acquisition and the integration of WEC.
CVR has incurred and is expected to continue to incur substantial expenses in connection with the Wynnewood Acquisition and the integration of WEC. There are a large number of processes, policies, procedures, operations, technologies and systems that must be integrated, including purchasing, accounting and finance, sales, billing, payroll, pricing, revenue management, maintenance, marketing and benefits. While CVR has assumed that a certain level of expenses would be incurred, there are many factors beyond its control that could affect the total amount or the timing of the integration expenses. Moreover, many of the expenses that will be incurred are, by their nature, difficult to estimate accurately. These expenses could, particularly in the near term, exceed the savings that the combined company expects to achieve from the elimination of duplicative expenses and the realization of economies of scale and cost savings. These integration expenses likely will result in the combined company taking significant charges against earnings following the completion of the Wynnewood Acquisition, and the amount and timing of such charges are uncertain at present.
The risks associated with U.S. government contracts differ from the risks associated with typical commercial contracts and could have a material adverse effect on the business and operations of the combined company.
Since 1996, WEC has been party to a contract (renewed annually) with the United States government to sell jet fuel to Mid-Continent Air Force bases. This contract accounted for 3% of WEC's fuel sales in 2011. U.S. government contracts contain provisions and are subject to laws and regulations that provide the government with rights and remedies not typically found in commercial contracts. In the event that WEC is found to have violated certain laws or regulations, WEC could be subject to penalties and sanctions, including, in the most serious cases, potential suspension or debarment from conducting future business with the U.S. government. As a result of the need to comply with these laws and regulations, WEC could also be subject to increased risks of governmental investigations, civil fraud actions, criminal prosecutions, whistleblower law suits and other enforcement actions. By way of example, civil False Claims Act actions could subject CVR to treble penalties, and CVR could be subject to fines of up to $12,000 for each claim submitted to the U.S. government.
U.S. government contracts are subject to modification, curtailment or termination by the U.S. government with little notice, either for convenience or for default as a result of WEC's failure to perform under the applicable contract. If the U.S. government terminates this contract as a result of WEC's default, WEC could be liable for additional costs the U.S. government incurs in acquiring undelivered goods or services from another source and any other damages it suffers. Additionally, WEC cannot assign prime U.S. government contracts without the prior consent of the U.S. government contracting officer, and WEC is required to register with the Central Contractor Registration Database.
There can be no assurance that CVR will maintain this jet fuel contract with the United States Government in the future.
CVR may not have identified all risks associated with the Wynnewood Acquisition and a significant liability may still arise after the closing of the Wynnewood Acquisition. CVR's rights to indemnification under the acquisition agreement related to the Wynnewood Acquisition may not fully protect it and may be difficult to enforce.
The Wynnewood refinery may have unexpected deficiencies and/or CVR may become responsible for unexpected liabilities that CVR failed or were unable to discover in the course of performing due diligence in connection with the Wynnewood Acquisition. The acquisition agreement entered into in connection with the Wynnewood Acquisition requires the seller to indemnify CVR under certain circumstances. However CVR's rights to indemnification are limited and CVR cannot assure you that the indemnification, even if obtained, will be enforceable, collectible or sufficient in amount, scope or duration to fully cover a valid claim and/or offset the possible liabilities associated with the business or property acquired. The indemnification provisions in the acquisition agreement related to the Wynnewood Acquisition may also be difficult to enforce. Any of these liabilities, individually or in the aggregate, could have a material adverse effect on our Energy segment's business, financial condition and results of operations.
Risks Related to CVR Refining, LP
The initial public offering of CVR Refining, LP (the “Refining IPO”) may not occur on the terms described herein or at all.
A registration statement on Form S-1 with respect to the potential initial public offering of CVR Refining, LP was filed on October 1, 2012 and is currently under review by the SEC. However, there can be no assurance that the Refining IPO will occur in the manner described in this report or at all. The consummation of the Refining IPO is subject to numerous factors, including many factors outside of CVR's control, including regulatory approval, market conditions, reaching agreements with underwriters and potential lenders, the political and economic environment in the United States, board approval at CVR Energy, and many other factors. The board of directors of CVR Energy may elect at any time, for any reason or no reason at all, not to proceed with the Refining IPO, notwithstanding that a registration statement has been filed with the SEC with respect to the Refining IPO. Accordingly, you should not assume that the Refining IPO will occur in the manner described herein or at all.
Gaming - Risks Related to Tropicana's Indebtedness
A significant portion of Tropicana's indebtedness is subject to floating interest rates, which may expose it to higher interest payments.
A substantial portion of Tropicana's indebtedness is subject to floating interest rates, which makes it more vulnerable in the event of adverse economic conditions, increases in prevailing interest rates, or a downturn in its business. As of September 30, 2012, approximately $171 million of its indebtedness, which represents the outstanding balance under its New Term Loan Facility, was subject to floating interest rates. Tropicana currently has no hedging arrangements in place to mitigate the impact of higher interest rates.
Tropicana's indebtedness could adversely affect its business, financial condition and results of operations and prevent it from fulfilling its obligations under the terms of its indebtedness.
Tropicana's indebtedness could adversely affect its business, financial condition and results of operations and prevent it from fulfilling its obligations under the terms of its indebtedness. The terms of the New Term Loan Facility require it to comply with a first lien net leverage ratio and a total net leverage ratio. The New Term Loan Facility contains mandatory prepayment provisions from proceeds received by it and its subsidiaries as a result of asset sales, the incurrence of indebtedness and issuance of equity, casualty events and excess cash flow (subject in each case to certain exceptions). In addition, other covenants in the New Term Loan Facility may restrict its flexibility. Such covenants include limitations on indebtedness, liens, investments, acquisitions, asset sales, dividends and other restricted payments, and affiliate and extraordinary transactions. Additionally, there may be factors beyond its control that could affect its ability to meet debt service requirements. Tropicana's ability to meet debt service requirements will depend on its future performance and its ability to sustain sales conditions in the markets in which it operates, the economy generally, and other factors that are beyond its control. Tropicana may need to refinance all or a portion of its indebtedness on or before maturity. Tropicana cannot assure that its businesses will generate sufficient cash flow from operations or that future borrowings will be available in amounts sufficient to enable it to pay its indebtedness or to fund its other liquidity needs. We cannot assure you that Tropicana will be able to refinance any of its indebtedness on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If Tropicana is unable to make scheduled debt payments or comply with the other provisions of its debt instruments, its lenders will be permitted under certain circumstances to accelerate the maturity of the indebtedness owing to them and exercise other remedies provided for in those instruments and under applicable law.
Railcar - Risks Related to our Railcar Segment's Leasing Business
Our Railcar segment's entry into the railcar leasing market may use significant amounts of cash, requiring additional capital and it may be unable to arrange capital on favorable terms or re-market railcars from expiring leases on favorable terms, which could adversely affect our Railcar segment's business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our Railcar segment will utilize existing cash to manufacture railcars it leases to customers, while cash from lease revenues will be received over the term of the lease or leases relating to those railcars. Depending upon the number of railcars that our Railcar segment leases and the amount of cash used in its other operations, its cash balances could be depleted, requiring it to seek additional capital. Our Railcar segment's inability to secure additional capital, on commercially reasonable terms, or at all may limit its ability to support operations, maintain or expand its existing business, or take advantage of new business opportunities. Our Railcar segment could also experience defaults on leases that could further constrain cash.
The failure to enter into commercially favorable railcar leases, re-lease or sell railcars upon lease expiration and successfully manage existing leases could materially adversely affect our Railcar segment's business, financial condition and results of operations. Our Railcar segment's ability to re-lease or sell leased railcars profitably is dependent upon several factors, including the cost of and demand for leases or ownership of newer or specific use models, and the availability in the market of other used or new railcars.
A downturn in the industries in which our Railcar segment's lessees operate and decreased demand for railcars could also increase its exposure to re-marketing risk because lessees may demand shorter lease terms or newer railcars, requiring it to re-market leased railcars more frequently. Furthermore, the resale market for previously leased railcars has a limited number of potential buyers. Our Railcar segment's inability to re-lease or sell leased railcars on favorable terms could result in lower lease rates, lower lease utilization percentages and reduced revenues.
Figures reported in this filing
Standardized line items from the XBRL in this filing, for the period ended 2012-09-30. Comparative periods it repeats are left out.
| Line item | Period | Value | XBRL concept |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revenue | 3 months2012-07-01 to 2012-09-30 | $4.50bn | us-gaap:Revenues |
| Revenue | 9 months2012-01-01 to 2012-09-30 | $11.39bn | us-gaap:Revenues |
| Cost of revenue | 3 months2012-07-01 to 2012-09-30 | $3.70bn | us-gaap:CostOfGoodsSold |
| Cost of revenue | 9 months2012-01-01 to 2012-09-30 | $9.00bn | us-gaap:CostOfGoodsSold |
| Selling, general and administrative | 3 months2012-07-01 to 2012-09-30 | $284.0m | us-gaap:SellingGeneralAndAdministrativeExpense |
| Selling, general and administrative | 9 months2012-01-01 to 2012-09-30 | $930.0m | us-gaap:SellingGeneralAndAdministrativeExpense |
| Interest expense | 3 months2012-07-01 to 2012-09-30 | $138.0m | us-gaap:InterestExpense |
| Interest expense | 9 months2012-01-01 to 2012-09-30 | $383.0m | us-gaap:InterestExpense |
| Income tax | 3 months2012-07-01 to 2012-09-30 | $110.0m | us-gaap:IncomeTaxExpenseBenefit |
| Income tax | 9 months2012-01-01 to 2012-09-30 | −$8.0m | us-gaap:IncomeTaxExpenseBenefit |
| Net income | 3 months2012-07-01 to 2012-09-30 | $85.0m | us-gaap:NetIncomeLoss |
| Net income | 9 months2012-01-01 to 2012-09-30 | $378.0m | us-gaap:NetIncomeLoss |
| Diluted shares (weighted) | 3 months2012-07-01 to 2012-09-30 | 102,000,000 shares | us-gaap:WeightedAverageNumberOfDilutedSharesOutstanding |
| Diluted shares (weighted) | 9 months2012-01-01 to 2012-09-30 | 105,000,000 shares | us-gaap:WeightedAverageNumberOfDilutedSharesOutstanding |
| Operating cash flow | 9 months2012-01-01 to 2012-09-30 | $1.37bn | us-gaap:NetCashProvidedByUsedInOperatingActivities |
| Cash and equivalents | At period end2012-09-30 | $3.14bn | us-gaap:CashAndCashEquivalentsAtCarryingValue |
| Total assets | At period end2012-09-30 | $24.33bn | us-gaap:Assets |
| Total liabilities | At period end2012-09-30 | $14.53bn | us-gaap:Liabilities |
| Shareholders' equity | At period end2012-09-30 | $4.78bn | us-gaap:StockholdersEquity |
Source: SEC EDGAR, the filing index for accession 0000813762-12-000064. Last ingested by Listed: Nov 11, 2026, 03:42 ET. Listed shows no prices and gives no investment advice.