Form 20-F
As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
March 15, 2007
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 20-F
|
|
|
(Mark One) |
|
|
o
|
|
REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OR
12(g) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
OR |
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006. |
|
OR |
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
OR |
|
o
|
|
SHELL COMPANY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
|
Date of event requiring this shell company report.... |
For the transition period from
to
Commission file number 001-16829
BAYER AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
BAYER CORPORATION*
(Translation of Registrants name into English)
Federal Republic of Germany
(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
Bayerwerk, Gebäude W11
Kaiser-Wilhelm-Allee
51368 Leverkusen, GERMANY
(Address of principal executive offices)
Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to
Section 12(b) of the Act.
|
|
|
Title of Each Class: |
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered: |
|
|
|
American Depositary Shares representing Bayer AG
ordinary shares of no par value
Bayer AG ordinary shares of no par value |
|
New York Stock Exchange
New York Stock Exchange** |
Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to
Section 12(g) of the Act.
None
(Title of class)
Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant
to Section 15(d) of the Act.
None
(Title of class)
Indicate the
number of outstanding shares of each of the issuers
classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period
covered by the annual report.
As of
December 31, 2006, 764,341,920 ordinary shares, of no par
value, of Bayer AG were outstanding.
Indicate by
check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as
defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.
Yes þ No o
If this report
is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the
registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Yes o No þ
Note
Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required
to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from their obligations under
those Sections.
Indicate by
check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports
required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.
Yes þ No o Not
applicable o.
Indicate by
check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer,
an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition
of accelerated filer and large accelerated filer in
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
þ Large accelerated
filer o Accelerated
filer o Non-accelerated
filer
Indicate by
check mark which financial statement item the registrant has
elected to follow:
Item 17 o Item 18 þ
If this is an
annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is
a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act).
Yes o No þ
(APPLICABLE ONLY
TO ISSUERS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDINGS DURING THE PAST
FIVE YEARS)
Indicate by
check mark whether the registrant has filed all documents and
reports required to be filed by Sections 12, 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to the
distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a court.
Yes o No o
|
|
* |
Bayer Corporation is also the name of a wholly-owned subsidiary
of the registrant in the United States. |
|
|
** |
Not for trading, but only in connection with the registration of
American Depositary Shares. |
TABLE OF CONTENTS
2
Defined Terms and Conventions
Bayer AG is a corporation organized under the laws of the
Federal Republic of Germany. As used in this annual report on
Form 20-F, unless
otherwise specified or required by the context, the term
Company, Bayer or Bayer AG
refers to Bayer AG and the terms we, us
and our refer to Bayer AG and, as applicable, Bayer
AG and its consolidated subsidiaries.
The names Bayer Schering Pharma or
Schering as used in this annual report on
Form 20-F always
refer to Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany, or its
predecessor, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany, respectively. The
reference to Bayer Schering Pharma AG or Schering AG also
includes business conducted by affiliated entities. Bayer
Schering Pharma AG and Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey,
are unaffiliated companies that have been totally independent of
each other for many years.
Due to rounding, numbers presented throughout this document may
not add up precisely to the totals we provide and percentages
may not precisely reflect the absolute figures.
Forward-Looking Information
This annual report on
Form 20-F contains
forward-looking statements that reflect our current plans and
expectations. As these statements are based on current plans,
estimates and projections, you should not place undue reliance
on them. We generally identify forward-looking statements with
words such as expect, intend,
anticipate, plan, believe,
estimate and similar expressions.
We caution you that known and unknown risks, uncertainties and
other factors may cause our actual future results, performance,
achievements, developments or financial position to be
materially different from any results, performance,
achievements, developments or financial position expressed or
implied by forward-looking statements. These factors include,
but are not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
cyclicality in our industries; |
|
|
|
reduced demand for older products in response to advances in
technology; |
|
|
|
increasingly stringent regulatory controls; |
|
|
|
increased raw materials prices; |
|
|
|
the expiration of patent protections; |
|
|
|
environmental liabilities and compliance costs; |
|
|
|
failure to compete successfully, integrate acquired companies or
develop new products and technologies; |
|
|
|
risks from hazardous materials; |
|
|
|
litigation and product liability claims; and |
|
|
|
fluctuations in currency exchange rates. |
A discussion of these and other factors that may affect our
actual future results, performance, achievements, developments
or financial position is contained in Item 3, Key
Information Risk Factors, various
Strategy sections in Item 4, Information on
the Company, Item 5, Operating and Financial Review
and Prospects and elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are
made, and we undertake no obligation to update publicly any of
them in light of new information or future events.
Enforceability of Civil Liabilities
We are a German corporation. All of our directors and executive
officers are residents of Germany. A substantial portion of our
assets and those of such individuals is located outside the
United States.
3
As a result, although a multilateral treaty to which both
Germany and the United States are a party guarantees service of
writs and other legal documents in civil cases if the current
address of the defendant is known, it may be difficult or
impossible for you to effect service of process upon these
persons from within the United States.
Also, because these persons and assets are outside the United
States, it may be difficult for you to enforce judgments against
them, even if these judgments are of U.S. courts and are
based on the civil liability provisions of the
U.S. securities laws.
If you wish to execute the judgment of a foreign court in
Germany, you must first obtain from a German court an order for
execution (Vollstreckungsurteil). A German court may
grant an order to execute a U.S. court judgment with
respect to civil liability under the U.S. securities laws
if that judgment is final as a matter of U.S. law. In
granting the order, the German court will not enquire whether
the U.S. court judgment was, as a matter of U.S. law,
correct. However, the German court must refuse to grant the
order if:
|
|
|
|
|
the U.S. court lacked jurisdiction, as determined under
German law; |
|
|
|
the person against whom the judgment was obtained did not
receive service of process adequate to permit a proper defense,
did not otherwise acquiesce in the original action and raises
the lack of service of process as a defense against the grant of
the execution order; |
|
|
|
the judgment would conflict with the final judgment of a German
court or with the final judgment of another foreign court that
is recognizable under German law; |
|
|
|
recognition of the judgment would violate an important principle
of German law, especially basic constitutional rights; or |
|
|
|
there is a lack of reciprocity between Germany and the
jurisdiction whose court rendered the original judgment. |
You should be aware that German courts hold certain elements of
some U.S. court judgments, for example, punitive damages,
to violate important principles of German law. Judgments for
ordinary compensatory damages are generally enforceable, unless
in an individual case one of the reasons described above would
prohibit enforcement.
If you bring an original action before a German court based on
the provisions of the U.S. securities laws and the German
court agrees to take jurisdiction over the case, the court will
decide the matter in accordance with the applicable
U.S. laws, to the extent that these do not violate
important principles of German law. However, the German court
may refuse to accept jurisdiction if another action is pending
before a U.S. or other foreign court in the same matter.
Furthermore, the German court might decide that, for a lawsuit
brought by a U.S. resident under U.S. law against a
defendant that, like Bayer, has a significant presence in the
United States, a U.S. court would be the more proper forum.
4
PART I
|
|
Item 1. |
Identity of Directors, Senior Management and
Advisors |
Not applicable.
|
|
Item 2. |
Offer Statistics and Expected Timetable |
Not applicable.
Selected Financial Data
We derived the following selected financial data for each of the
years in the five-year period ended December 31, 2006 from
our consolidated financial statements. We have prepared our
consolidated financial statements in accordance with
International Financial Reporting Standards, or IFRS and, where
indicated, in accordance with U.S. Generally Accepted
Accounting Standards, or U.S. GAAP. Since 2002, IFRS is the
term for the entire body of accounting standards issued by the
International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), replacing the
earlier International Accounting Standards, or IAS. Individual
accounting standards that the IASB issued prior to this change
in terminology continue to use the prefix IAS.
Note 41 to our consolidated financial statements included
in Item 18 of this annual report on
Form 20-F
describes the reconciliation of significant differences between
IFRS and U.S. GAAP.
In this annual report on
Form 20-F we have
translated certain euro amounts into U.S. dollar amounts at
the rate of $1.3197 =
1.00, the noon
buying rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on
December 29, 2006, the last currency trading day in
December 2006. We have translated these amounts solely for your
convenience, and you should not assume that, on that or any
other date, one could have converted these amounts of euros into
dollars at that or any other exchange rate.
5
The financial information presented below is only a summary. You
should read it together with the consolidated financial
statements included in Item 18.
|
|
|
Consolidated Income Statement Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
$ | |
|
|
(In millions, except per share data) | |
IFRS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales (continuing
operations)(a)
|
|
|
20,022 |
|
|
|
20,222 |
|
|
|
20,925 |
|
|
|
24,701 |
|
|
|
28,956 |
|
|
|
38,213 |
|
Operating result (continuing
operations)(a)
|
|
|
788 |
|
|
|
526 |
|
|
|
1,657 |
|
|
|
2,514 |
|
|
|
2,762 |
|
|
|
3,645 |
|
Non-operating
result(a)
|
|
|
(401 |
) |
|
|
(687 |
) |
|
|
(632 |
) |
|
|
(602 |
) |
|
|
(782 |
) |
|
|
(1,032 |
) |
Income before income
taxes(a)
|
|
|
387 |
|
|
|
(161 |
) |
|
|
1,025 |
|
|
|
1,912 |
|
|
|
1,980 |
|
|
|
2,613 |
|
Income
taxes(a)
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
(401 |
) |
|
|
(538 |
) |
|
|
(454 |
) |
|
|
(599 |
) |
Income (loss) after
taxes(a)
|
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
(87 |
) |
|
|
624 |
|
|
|
1,374 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
|
|
2,014 |
|
Income (loss) after taxes from discontinued
operations(a)
|
|
|
688 |
|
|
|
(1,204 |
) |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
Income (loss) after taxes total
|
|
|
1,078 |
|
|
|
(1,291 |
) |
|
|
682 |
|
|
|
1,595 |
|
|
|
1,695 |
|
|
|
2,237 |
|
Minority stockholders interest
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
1,075 |
|
|
|
(1,303 |
) |
|
|
685 |
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
2,221 |
|
|
Adjustment for financing expenses for the mandatory convertible
bond, net of tax effect
(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
Adjusted net income
(loss)(c)
|
|
|
1,075 |
|
|
|
(1,303 |
) |
|
|
685 |
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
1,755 |
|
|
|
2,316 |
|
Average number of shares in
issue(c)
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
746 |
|
|
|
746 |
|
|
Potential ordinary shares (mandatory convertible
bond)(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Adjusted weighted average number of shares issued and potential
ordinary
shares(c)
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
792 |
|
|
|
792 |
|
Operating result from continuing operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
per
share(a)(c)
|
|
|
1.08 |
|
|
|
0.72 |
|
|
|
2.27 |
|
|
|
3.44 |
|
|
|
3.49 |
|
|
|
4.60 |
|
Basic and diluted net income (loss) per
share(c)
|
|
|
1.47 |
|
|
|
(1.78 |
) |
|
|
0.94 |
|
|
|
2.19 |
|
|
|
2.22 |
|
|
|
2.92 |
|
Dividends per
share(c)
|
|
|
0.90 |
|
|
|
0.50 |
|
|
|
0.55 |
|
|
|
0.95 |
|
|
|
N/A |
(b) |
|
|
N/A |
(b) |
U.S. GAAP:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
1,277 |
|
|
|
(1,445 |
) |
|
|
653 |
|
|
|
1,327 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
353 |
|
|
Adjustment for guaranteed
dividend(d)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
Net income available to common stockholders
(d)
|
|
|
1,277 |
|
|
|
(1,445 |
) |
|
|
653 |
|
|
|
1,327 |
|
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
Basic and diluted net income (loss) per
share(d),(e)
|
|
|
1.75 |
|
|
|
(1.98 |
) |
|
|
0.89 |
|
|
|
1.82 |
|
|
|
0.33 |
|
|
|
0.43 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Prior year data have been adjusted to reflect the fact that the
Diagnostics division, the H.C. Starck business and the Wolff
Walsrode business are reported as discontinued operations. For
further information on these restatements, see Note 7.2 to
the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in
this annual report on
Form 20-F. |
|
(b) |
|
The dividend payment for 2006 has not yet been decided on. Our
Supervisory Board has accepted our Board of Managements
proposal to recommend at our Annual Stockholders Meeting a
dividend for 2006 of
1.00 per
share, for a total dividend of
764 million. |
|
(c) |
|
IAS 33 (Earnings per Share) provides that ordinary shares
that will be issued upon the conversion of a mandatorily
convertible instrument are included in the calculation of basic
earnings per share from the date the convertible instrument is
entered into. We therefore have added the shares to be issued
upon conversion of our mandatory convertible bond to our average
number of shares in issue. Because these shares are deemed
already to have been converted into equity for |
6
|
|
|
|
|
purposes of IAS 33, we have also adjusted our net income
(loss) for purposes of the per share calculations to exclude the
financing expenses (net of tax effect) we accrued on the
mandatorily convertible bond. |
|
(d) |
|
Under U.S. GAAP, net income available to common shareholders is
reduced by the guaranteed dividend payable to the minority
shareholders of Bayer Schering Pharma AG under the terms of the
Domination and Profit and Loss Transfer Agreement we entered
into with Bayer Schering Pharma AG. |
|
(e) |
|
According to SFAS No. 128 (Earnings per Share),
potential shares to be issued upon conversion of a mandatory
convertible bond are not to be included in the calculation of
basic earnings per share. The potential shares to be issued upon
conversion were not included in the computation of diluted
earnings per share for U.S. GAAP purposes because their effect
would be antidilutive. |
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
$ | |
|
|
(In millions) | |
IFRS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
40,966 |
|
|
|
37,516 |
|
|
|
37,588 |
|
|
|
36,722 |
|
|
|
55,891 |
|
|
|
73,759 |
|
Stockholders equity
|
|
|
14,666 |
|
|
|
11,290 |
|
|
|
10,943 |
|
|
|
11,157 |
|
|
|
12,851 |
|
|
|
16,959 |
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
26,300 |
|
|
|
26,226 |
|
|
|
26,645 |
|
|
|
25,565 |
|
|
|
43,040 |
|
|
|
56,800 |
|
of which noncurrent financial obligations
|
|
|
7,228 |
|
|
|
7,288 |
|
|
|
7,025 |
|
|
|
7,185 |
|
|
|
14,723 |
|
|
|
19,430 |
|
U.S. GAAP:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity
|
|
|
16,734 |
|
|
|
13,325 |
|
|
|
13,046 |
|
|
|
12,347 |
|
|
|
12,181 |
|
|
|
16,076 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
42,668 |
|
|
|
38,012 |
|
|
|
38,496 |
|
|
|
38,133 |
|
|
|
54,756 |
|
|
|
72,261 |
|
Dividends
The following table indicates the dividends per share paid from
2004 to 2006. Stockholders who are U.S. residents should be
aware that they will be subject to German withholding tax on
dividends received. See Item 10, Additional
Information Taxation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Total dividend (
in millions)
|
|
|
402 |
|
|
|
694 |
|
|
|
N/A |
(a) |
Dividend per share
()
|
|
|
0.55 |
|
|
|
0.95 |
|
|
|
N/A |
(a) |
Dividend per share ($)
|
|
|
0.68 |
|
|
|
1.18 |
|
|
|
N/A |
(a) |
|
|
(a) |
The dividend payment for 2006 has not yet been decided on. Our
Supervisory Board has accepted our Board of Managements
proposal to recommend at our Annual Stockholders Meeting a
dividend for 2006 of
1.00 per
share, for a total dividend of
764 million. |
See also Item 8, Financial Information
Dividend Policy and Liquidation Proceeds.
7
Exchange Rate Data
The following table shows, for the periods and dates indicated,
the exchange rate of the U.S. dollar to the euro based on
the noon buying rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Fluctuations in the exchange rate between the euro and the
U.S. dollar will affect the market price of our shares and
ADSs, the U.S. dollar amount received by holders of our
shares and ADSs on conversion by the Depositary of any cash
dividends paid in euro and the U.S. dollar translation of
our results of operations and financial condition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year |
|
Period End | |
|
Average | |
|
High | |
|
Low | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(U.S. dollar per euro) | |
2002
|
|
|
1.0485 |
|
|
|
0.9454 |
|
|
|
1.0485 |
|
|
|
0.8594 |
|
2003
|
|
|
1.2597 |
|
|
|
1.1321 |
|
|
|
1.2597 |
|
|
|
1.0361 |
|
2004
|
|
|
1.3538 |
|
|
|
1.2438 |
|
|
|
1.3625 |
|
|
|
1.1801 |
|
2005
|
|
|
1.1842 |
|
|
|
1.2449 |
|
|
|
1.3476 |
|
|
|
1.1667 |
|
2006
|
|
|
1.3197 |
|
|
|
1.2563 |
|
|
|
1.3327 |
|
|
|
1.1860 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous six months |
|
High | |
|
Low | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(U.S. dollar | |
|
|
per euro) | |
September 2006
|
|
|
1.2833 |
|
|
|
1.2648 |
|
October 2006
|
|
|
1.2773 |
|
|
|
1.2502 |
|
November 2006
|
|
|
1.3261 |
|
|
|
1.2705 |
|
December 2006
|
|
|
1.3327 |
|
|
|
1.3073 |
|
January 2007
|
|
|
1.3286 |
|
|
|
1.2904 |
|
February 2007
|
|
|
1.3246 |
|
|
|
1.2933 |
|
The exchange rate of the U.S. dollar to the euro based on
the noon buying rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on
February 28, 2007 was $1.3230 =
1.00. In this
annual report on
Form 20-F, we have
translated certain euro amounts into U.S. dollar amounts at
the rate of $1.3197 =
1.00, the noon
buying rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on
December 29, 2006, the last currency trading day in
December 2006.
Risk Factors
An investment in our shares or ADSs involves a significant
degree of risk. You should carefully consider these risk factors
and the other information in this annual report on
Form 20-F before
deciding to invest in our shares or ADSs. The risks described
below are the ones we consider material. However, they are not
the only ones that may exist. Additional risks not known to us
or that we consider immaterial may also have an impact on our
business operations. The occurrence of any of these events could
seriously harm our business, operating results and financial
condition. In that case, the trading price of our shares or ADSs
could decline and you could lose all or part of your
investment.
|
|
|
Failure to develop new products and production
technologies may harm our competitive position |
We devote substantial resources to research and development.
Because of the lengthy development process, technological
challenges, regulatory requirements and intense competition, any
of the products we are currently developing, or may begin to
develop in the future, may fail to become market-ready or fail
to achieve commercial success in a timely manner or at all. For
these reasons, we may be unable to meet our expectations and
targets with respect to products we are currently developing,
particularly in our Pharmaceuticals segment; Crop Protection and
BioScience business groups. Our competitive position could be
harmed, causing our results to suffer, if we are unsuccessful in
developing and marketing commercially viable new products and
production technologies.
The growing importance of plant biotechnology in the crop
protection field could reduce market demand for some of our
agrochemical products and, if our competitors rather than we
supply those biotechnological products, could lead to declines
in our revenues.
8
|
|
|
Regulatory controls and changes in public policy may
reduce the profitability of new or current products |
We must comply with a broad range of regulatory controls on the
testing, manufacturing and marketing of many of our products. In
some countries, including the United States, regulatory controls
have become increasingly demanding. We expect that this trend
will continue in the United States and will continue to expand
in other countries, particularly those of the European Union
(EU). Each of the risks relating to regulatory matters we
describe here, as well as others that we may not foresee, may
lead to material adverse effects on our financial condition and
results of operations.
Our life science businesses are subject to particularly strict
regulatory regimes. Increasing regulatory requirements, such as
those governing clinical or (eco-) toxicological trials, may
raise product development costs and the time it takes to bring
new products to market, thus reducing the overall financial
benefits deriving from these products. Failure to achieve
regulatory approval of new products in a timely manner or at all
can mean that we do not recoup our research and development
costs and/or commercial investment through sales of that product.
Pharmaceutical product prices in particular are subject to
controls or pressures in many markets. Some governments
intervene directly in setting prices. In addition, in some
markets major purchasers of pharmaceutical products (whether
governmental agencies or private health care providers) have the
economic power to exert substantial pressure on prices. Price
controls limit the financial benefits of growth in the
Pharmaceuticals segment and the introduction of new products. We
expect that price controls and pressures on pricing will remain
or increase, which may further limit our financial benefits from
the affected products.
Adverse effects of our products discovered after regulatory
approval or registration can lead to a withdrawal from the
market, due either to regulatory actions or our voluntary
decision to stop marketing the product. This can mean that the
affected product ceases to generate revenue, and related
expenses can lead to material losses. In particular, and as
described below, litigation resulting from negative effects of
our products can materially and adversely affect our financial
condition and results of operations.
EU legislation on chemicals such as the Registration,
Evaluation, Authorization of Chemicals (REACH) legislation
adopted in December 2006 by the European Commission, the
proposed regulation implementing the United Nations
Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of
Chemicals (GHS) and the proposed regulation replacing
directive 91/414/ EEC concerning the placing of plant protection
products on the market could mandate a significant increase in
the testing and assessment of all chemicals. This may lead to
increased costs and reduced operating margins for these
products. For more detailed information on these regulations,
see Item 4, Information on the Company
Business Governmental Regulation.
|
|
|
The loss of patent protection/ineffective patent
protection or patent expiration may reduce revenues |
We are involved in lawsuits to enforce our patent rights in our
products. In addition, generic manufacturers and others,
particularly in the United States, may seek marketing approval
for pharmaceutical or agricultural products currently under
patent protection by attacking the validity or enforceability of
a patent. If we are unsuccessful in defending our patent, our
product could be exposed to generic competition before the
patent expiration date. See Item 8, Financial
Information Legal Proceedings for a discussion
of patent-related proceedings.
We may also be required to defend ourselves against charges of
infringement of patent or proprietary rights of third parties.
This could result in a loss of rights to develop or make certain
products or require us to pay monetary damages or royalties or
license proprietary rights from third parties.
The extent of patent protection varies from country to country.
In some of the countries in which we operate, patent protection
may be significantly weaker than in the United States or the
European Union. Piracy of patent-protected intellectual property
has occurred in recent years, particularly in some Asian
countries. In particular, these countries could facilitate
competition within their markets from generic manufacturers who
would otherwise be unable to introduce competing products for a
number of years. We do not currently expect any proposed patent
law modifications to affect us materially.
9
After a patent expires the producer of the formerly patented
product is likely to face increased competition from generic
products entering the market. See Item 4, Information on
the Company Business Intellectual
Property Protection for a discussion of the scheduled
expiration dates of our significant patents.
In response to rising healthcare costs, many governments
(including many U.S. states) and private health care
providers, such as health maintenance organizations (HMOs) in
the United States, have instituted reimbursement schemes
favoring less expensive generic pharmaceuticals over brand-name
pharmaceuticals, as well as other cost controls. We expect that
the pressure for generic substitution will increase as a result
of the implementation of the Medicare prescription drug benefit
in 2006.
Reductions in the level of patent protections, and the
competition posed by generic products, can materially and
adversely affect our financial condition and results of
operations.
|
|
|
Potential liabilities due to cross-contamination |
A cross-contamination of our Crop Protection products especially
with highly active herbicides, can cause damages to the targeted
seeds and crops. Furthermore, even with
state-of-the-art
agricultural practices and grain handling processes, the
possibility remains that unintended trace amounts of genetically
modified organisms might appear in non-targeted crops and/or
foodstuffs. Those contaminations may result in increasing
regulations, product recalls and compensation claims, and could
also harm our reputation.
|
|
|
Cyclicality may reduce our operating margins or cause
operating losses |
The performance of our Materials and Systems segments is
affected by the cyclicality of the industries in which they
operate. Low periods in the business cycles are characterized by
decreasing demand and excess capacity. These factors lead to
price pressure and intense competition. This may result in
volatile operating margins across the business cycle and to
operating losses in these businesses. Expectations of growth,
especially in regions including China, Japan, Taiwan and India,
among others, may lead producers to increase their production
capacities. Future growth in demand may not be sufficient to
absorb those capacity additions without significant downward
pressure on prices, which can adversely affect our financial
condition and results of operations.
The agriculture sector is particularly subject to weather
conditions and fluctuations in commodity prices, which may lead
to a negative impact on our business results. For example, a
drought will often reduce demand for our fungicides products.
|
|
|
Our operating margins may decrease if we are not able to
pass increased raw material prices on to customers |
Our Materials and Systems segments use significant amounts of
petrochemical based raw materials and energy for manufacturing a
wide variety of our products. The prices of raw materials and
energy vary with market conditions and may be highly volatile.
Price increases for raw materials will lead to higher production
costs. There have been in the past, and may be in the future,
periods during which we are not able to pass all of those costs
on to our customers. This consequently leads to decreasing
profit margins and potentially to material adverse effects on
our financial condition and results of operations.
|
|
|
Shortages of our products due to capacity decreases may
reduce sales |
Production at some of our manufacturing facilities could be
adversely affected by, for example, technical failures, natural
disasters, regulatory rulings, terrorist attacks or supply
disruptions of key raw materials or intermediates. Production
capacities at one or more of our sites or major plants could
therefore decline temporarily or over the long term.
Our biological products business within the Pharmaceuticals
segment, in particular, generally employs complicated production
processes that are more subject to disruption than is the case
with other processes and therefore pose increased risk of
manufacturing problems, unplanned shutdowns and loss of products.
10
If in these or other cases we are unable to shift sufficient
production to other plants or draw on our inventories, we may
suffer declines in sales revenues and in our results, be exposed
to damages claims and suffer negative effects on our corporate
reputation. These may in turn have material adverse effects on
our financial condition and results of operations.
|
|
|
Risks from the handling of hazardous materials and
environmental liabilities could negatively impact our operating
results |
Bayers operations are subject to the operating risks
associated with chemical manufacturing, including the related
risks associated with filling, storage and transportation of raw
materials, products and wastes. These risks include, among other
things, the following hazards: pipeline and storage tank leaks
and ruptures; fires and explosions; malfunction and operational
failure; and releases, discharges or disposal of toxic and/or
hazardous substances resulting from these or other causes.
These operating risks have the potential to cause personal
injury, property damage and environmental contamination, and may
result in the shutdown of affected facilities, business
interruptions and the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.
Any of these events could negatively impact the reputation of
the company and lead to material adverse effects on our
financial condition and results of operations.
The environmental laws of various jurisdictions impose actual
and potential obligations on Bayer to remediate contaminated
sites. The costs of these environmental remediation obligations
could be material. In particular, our accruals for these
obligations may be insufficient if the underlying assumptions
prove incorrect or if we are held responsible for additional,
currently undiscovered, contamination. See Item 4,
Information on the Company Business
Governmental Regulation.
|
|
|
Disruptions in our information technology systems can lead
to disruptions in our business processes |
Bayer is increasingly dependent on information technology
systems to support a wide variety of key business processes as
well as internal and external communication. Significant
disruption of these systems due to e.g., technical
failures, errors or viruses can, despite all safety measures,
cause a loss of data and/or disruption of business processes
such as production, sales, distribution or accounting. This
could lead to loss of sales and to higher costs as we seek to
recover from events like this.
|
|
|
Failure to compete successfully or integrate newly
acquired businesses may reduce our operating profits |
Bayer operates in highly competitive industries. Our competitors
may realize significant product innovations or technical
advances, or intensify price competition. Any failure by us to
keep pace with these innovations or advances, or price
strategies, could materially harm our operating results and
financial condition.
We depend on third parties for the marketing of some of our
products, most notably in our Pharmaceuticals segment.
Therefore, our operating performance is influenced by the
quality of our partners marketing and sales performance.
From time to time, we acquire all or a portion of an established
business and combine it with our existing business units.
Integration of existing and newly acquired businesses requires
difficult decisions with respect to staffing levels, facility
consolidation and resource allocation. We must also plan
carefully to ensure that established product lines and brands
retain or increase their market position. If we fail to
effectively integrate a new business or if integration results
in significant unexpected costs, our results of operations could
suffer.
See Item 8, Financial Information Legal
Proceedings for a description of legal challenges to the
shareholder resolution on the domination and profit and loss
transfer agreement between Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin,
Germany and Bayer Schering GmbH, Leverkusen, Germany passed at
the Extraordinary Shareholders Meeting of Bayer Schering
Pharma AG held on September 13, 2006.
The amount of goodwill and other intangible assets on our
consolidated balance sheet has increased significantly in recent
years, primarily as a result of our recent acquisitions.
Although we do not currently have an indication of any
significant additional impairments, impairment testing under
IFRS 3 may lead to further
11
impairment charges in the future. Any significant impairment
charges would have a significant adverse effect on our results
of operations. For a detailed discussion of how we determine
whether an impairment has occurred, what factors could result in
an impairment and the increasing impact of impairment charges on
our results of operations see Item 5, Operating and
Financial Review and Prospects Critical Accounting
Policies Intangible assets and property, plant and
equipment.
|
|
|
Existing insurance coverage may turn out to be
inadequate |
We seek to cover losses resulting from foreseeable risks through
insurance coverage. Our insurance coverage, however, may not
fully cover the risks to which the company is exposed. This can
be the case with respect to insurance covering legal,
environmental and administrative claims, as discussed above, as
well as with respect to insurance covering other risks. For
certain risks, adequate insurance coverage may not be available
on the market or may not be available at reasonable conditions.
Any harm resulting from the materialization of these risks could
result in significant capital expenditures and expenses and in
liabilities, which could have material adverse effects on our
results of operations and financial condition.
|
|
|
Significant fluctuations in exchange rates affect our
financial results |
Bayer conducts a significant portion of its operations outside
the euro currency zone. Fluctuations in currencies of countries
outside the euro zone, especially the U.S. dollar and the
Japanese yen, can materially affect our revenue as well as our
operating results. For example, changes in currency exchange
rates may affect the relative prices at which our competitors
and we sell products in the same market, the cost of products
and services we require for our operations and other
euro-denominated items in our financial statements. These
fluctuations can harm our results. From time to time, we may use
financial instruments to hedge some of our exposure to foreign
currency fluctuations. Potential losses under these instruments
can be material. For further information about the instruments
we use, see Item 11, Quantitative and Qualitative
Disclosures about Market Risk.
|
|
|
Negative developments affecting the capital markets may
make additional contributions to our pension funds necessary,
and changes in the yield assumptions could have an impact on the
valuation of liabilities |
Plan assets to cover our future pension obligations are
comprised of equity, fixed-income instruments and other assets.
Declining capital returns can have a negative impact on the
funding status of our plans. Therefore, additional contributions
to the plans could be necessary in order to cover future pension
obligations. Additionally, changes in demographic assumptions
(e.g., compensation increase rates, retirement rates and
health care cost trends) or biometric assumptions (e.g.,
mortality rates) could also have a negative impact on the
funding status of our plans. For further details on underfunding
of pensions and other post-retirement benefit obligations, refer
to Note 25 to the consolidated financial statements
appearing elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F. Future
expenses or cash contributions that become necessary under our
pension or post-retirement benefit plans could have a material
adverse effect on our financial condition and results of
operations.
|
|
|
Litigation and administrative claims could harm our
operating results and cash flows |
We are involved in a number of legal proceedings and may become
involved in additional legal proceedings. These proceedings
include in particular claims alleging product liability, patent
infringement, breach of contract and antitrust violations. If
our opponents in these lawsuits obtain judgments against us or
if we determine to settle any of these lawsuits, we could be
required to pay substantial damages and related costs.
In cases where we consider it appropriate, we have established
provisions to cover potential litigation-related costs.
Increased risks currently result from litigation commenced in
the United States after we voluntarily withdrew Lipobay/
Baycol (cerivastatin) from the market, antitrust
proceedings relating to our polymers business and antitrust
proceedings associated with Bayers ciprofloxacin
anti-infective product,
Cipro®.
Since the existing insurance coverage with respect to
Lipobay/ Baycol is exhausted, it is possible
depending on the future progress of the litigation
that Bayer could face further payments that are not covered
12
by the provisions already established. We will regularly review
whether further accounting measures are necessary depending on
the progress of the litigation. Please see also
Existing insurance coverage may turn out to be inadequate.
Bayer expects that, in the course of the antitrust proceedings
relating to our polymers business, additional charges, which are
currently not quantifiable, will become necessary. Please see
Item 8, Financial Information Legal
Proceedings for a discussion of these proceedings.
|
|
|
Our transactions relating to LANXESS expose us to
continuing liability |
As of July 1, 2004 Bayer formed LANXESS AG as part of its
portfolio realignment by combining parts of its former Bayer
Chemicals and Bayer Polymers business. LANXESS became a legally
independent company on January 28, 2005.
Our liability for prior obligations of the LANXESS subgroup
following its spin-off is governed by both statutory and
contractual provisions. Under the German Transformation Act, all
entities that are parties to a spin-off are jointly and
severally liable for obligations of the transferor entity that
are established prior to the spin-off date. However, the company
to which the respective obligations were not assigned under the
Spin-Off and Acquisition Agreement, dated September 22,
2004, between Bayer AG and LANXESS AG ceases to be liable for
such obligations after a five-year period.
Under the Master Agreement between Bayer AG and LANXESS AG of
the same date, each of Bayer AG and LANXESS AG agreed to release
the other party from those liabilities each has assumed as
principal debtor under the Spin-Off and Acquisition Agreement.
The Master Agreement applies to all activities of Bayer AG and
LANXESS AG units throughout the world, subject to certain
conditions for the United States. For a description of these
agreements, please see Item 10, Additional
Information Material Contracts.
13
|
|
Item 4. |
Information on the Company |
HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMPANY
Bayer Aktiengesellschaft, or Bayer AG, is a stock corporation
(Aktiengesellschaft) organized under the laws of the
Federal Republic of Germany.
Bayer AG was incorporated in 1951 under the name
Farbenfabriken Bayer AG for an indefinite term and
adopted its present name in 1972. Bayer AGs registered
office (Sitz) and principal place of business are at the
Bayerwerk, 51368 Leverkusen, Germany. Its telephone number is
+49 (214) 30-1 and its home page on the World Wide Web
is at www.bayer.com. Reference to our website does not
incorporate the information contained on the website into this
annual report on
Form 20-F. The
headquarters of Bayer AGs U.S. subsidiary, Bayer
Corporation, are located at 100 Bayer Road, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania 15205-9741.
The major acquisitions and divestitures of the Bayer Group
during the last three years are listed below. For capital
expenditures (excluding acquisitions) for these years, please
refer to Item 5, Operating and Financial Review and
Prospects Liquidity and Capital Resources 2004, 2005
and 2006 Capital Expenditures. For capital
expenditures by individual business segment for the last three
years, refer to the segment data in Note 1 to our
consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this
annual report on
Form 20-F.
Our principal expenditures on acquisitions in the past
three years were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
In 2004, Bayer spent a total of
0.4 billion
on acquisitions. Of this amount, approximately
0.1 billion
was used for the purchase of Crompton Corporations
50 percent stake in the Gustafson joint venture (seed
treatment business) based in the United States, Canada and
Mexico, in which Bayer already held a 50 percent share. In
connection with the acquisition of Roches consumer health
business in 2005, Bayer acquired, by the end of 2004,
Roches 50 percent interest in the Bayer-Roche joint
venture that had been established in the United States in 1996.
The purchase price for the 50 percent equity interest was
0.2 billion.
Not included in the 2004 total acquisition amount is the initial
payment of
0.2 billion
we made for Roches consumer health business outside the
United States (except Japan), because, as of December 31,
2004, this business had not yet been transferred to Bayer. |
|
|
|
In 2005, we spent a total of
2.4 billion
on acquisitions. Roches consumer health business outside
the United States (except Japan) was acquired for approximately
2.1 billion.
Both this amount and the 2005 total acquisition amount include
the initial payment of
0.2 billion
we made in 2004 for Roches consumer health business
outside the United States (except Japan). Since January 2005,
the business involving non-prescription drugs and vitamins has
been part of Bayer HealthCares Consumer Care division. |
|
|
|
The remaining 2005 acquisition amount of approximately
0.3 billion
related primarily to expenses incurred in connection with a
license agreement for the active ingredient fipronil, and a
co-marketing and distribution agreement with Schering-Plough for
the cardiovascular drug
Zetia®.
Bayer Schering Pharma AG and Schering-Plough Corporation, New
Jersey are unaffiliated companies that have been totally
independent of each other for many years. |
|
|
|
In 2006, we spent a total of
15.4 billion
net of acquired cash and cash equivalents on acquisitions. With
effect from June 23, 2006, we acquired a majority of the
shares of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany (subsequently renamed
Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany), which is fully
consolidated in the Bayer Group financial statements beginning
on that date. The purchase price for 96.24 percent of the
shares (percentage of shares outstanding as of December 31,
2006) was
16.2 billion
and ancillary acquisition costs of
0.1 billion
were incurred. In addition, we assumed about
1 billion
in cash and cash equivalents and liabilities of
0.2 billion.
The acquired business activities concentrate in the areas
gynecology and andrology (major brands:
Yasmin®
and
Mirena®),
diagnostic imaging (major brand:
Magnevist®),
specialized therapeutics (major brands:
Betaferon®
and
Betaseron®)
and oncology. The EU and U.S. antitrust authorities have
unconditionally approved the transaction. For details on the
financing |
14
|
|
|
|
|
of this transaction, refer to Item 5, Operating and
Financial Review and Prospects Liquidity and Capital
Resources 2004, 2005 and 2006 Development of net
debt. |
|
|
|
The domination and profit and loss transfer agreement between
Bayer Schering Pharma AG and Bayer Schering GmbH, a wholly-owned
subsidiary of Bayer AG was approved at the Extraordinary General
Stockholders Meeting of Bayer Schering Pharma AG on
September 13, 2006 and became effective with its entry in
the commercial register of Bayer Schering Pharma AG on
October 27, 2006. On September 30, 2006, our interest
in Bayer Schering Pharma AGs voting capital amounted to
96.1 percent, thus exceeding the proportion required to effect a
squeeze-out of the minority stockholders, or forced
transfer of the Bayer Schering Pharma AG shares held by these
shareholders to Bayer Schering GmbH, as permitted under German
corporate law. A resolution approving the squeeze-out in
exchange for cash compensation determined in accordance with
German law was passed at an Extraordinary General
Shareholders Meeting of Bayer Schering Pharma AG held in
Berlin on January 17, 2007. |
|
|
|
The remaining amount spent on acquisitions in 2006 of
approximately
0.1 billion
was primarily related to the acquisition of the U.S. based
company Metrika, a manufacturer of diabetes monitoring systems. |
Our principal divestitures in the past three years were
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
In July 2004, we sold, pursuant to contractual
obligations, our 15 percent interest in the KWS Saat AG, a
seed company acquired as part of Aventis CropScience in 2002. |
|
|
|
In 2005, we divested our LANXESS subgroup, our plasma
operations and several CropScience operations. |
|
|
|
LANXESS: At the end of January 2005, the
LANXESS subgroup was spun off and ceased to be part of the Bayer
Group. As part of its portfolio realignment, Bayer had combined
its former Bayer Chemicals segment (except for Wolff Walsrode
and H.C. Starck) with parts of its former Bayer Polymers
business to form the LANXESS subgroup with economic effect from
July 1, 2004. LANXESS is reported as discontinued
operations prior to the spin-off. For further details refer to
Item 5, Operating and Financial Review and
Prospects Operating Results 2004, 2005 and
2006 Discontinued Operations and Note 7.2
to the consolidated financial statements contained elsewhere in
this annual report on
Form 20-F. |
|
|
Plasma: At the end of March 2005, Bayer
divested the U.S. plasma operations of its former
Biological Products division to two U.S. financial
investors for approximately
0.2 billion.
These operations are reported as discontinued operations. For
further details refer to Item 5, Operating and Financial
Review and Prospects Operating Results 2004, 2005
and 2006 Discontinued Operations and
Note 7.2 to the consolidated financial statements contained
elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F. |
|
|
|
|
|
In 2006, we sold our 49.9 percent interest in the
joint venture GE Bayer Silicones to the other partner General
Electric. Furthermore, we divested manufacturing facilities
formerly used by the Diagnostics and Diabetes Care businesses to
the U.K.-based Kimball Electronics Wales Limited; an Animal
Health vaccine factory in Cologne, Germany, to Intervet
International BV; and a number of active ingredients used by the
Crop Protection and the Environmental Science business groups. |
In 2006, we completed the process of entering into agreements to
divest our Diagnostics division and our H.C. Starck and Wolff
Walsrode businesses. As discussed below, these transactions are
expected to close or have already closed in 2007.
|
|
|
Diagnostics: At the end of June 2006, Bayer
signed an agreement with Siemens AG to sell the Diagnostics
division to Siemens for approximately
4.3 billion.
The transaction closed in January 2007. The Diagnostics division
is reported as discontinued operations prior to the sale. For
details refer to Item 5, Operating and Financial Review
and Prospects Operating Results 2004, 2005 and
2006 Discontinued Operations and Note 7.2
to the consolidated financial statements contained elsewhere in
this annual report on
Form 20-F. |
15
|
|
|
H.C. Starck: In November 2006, Bayer signed
an agreement with two financials investors, Advent International
and The Carlyle Group, concerning the sale of the H.C. Starck
business to them for approximately
1.2 billion.
The transaction closed in early February 2007. The H.C. Starck
business is reported as discontinued operations prior to the
sale. For details refer to Item 5, Operating and
Financial Review and Prospects Operating Results
2004, 2005 and 2006 Discontinued Operations and
Note 7.2 to the consolidated financial statements contained
elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F. |
|
|
Wolff Walsrode: In December 2006, Bayer
signed an agreement with The Dow Chemical Company concerning the
sale of the Wolff Walsrode business. The sale is subject to the
approval of the relevant antitrust authorities. Assuming these
approvals are received, we expect the closing of the transaction
to occur by the end of the first half of 2007. The Wolff
Walsrode business is reported as discontinued operations prior
to the sale. For details refer to Item 5, Operating and
Financial Review and Prospects Operating Results
2004, 2005 and 2006 Discontinued Operations and
Note 7.2 to the consolidated financial statements contained
elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F. |
16
BUSINESS
We are a global company offering a wide range of products,
including ethical pharmaceuticals and other health care
products, agricultural products and polymers. Bayer AG is
headquartered in Leverkusen, Germany and is the management
holding company of the Bayer Group, which includes approximately
430 consolidated subsidiaries.
Our business operations are organized in three subgroups:
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer HealthCare (consisting of the Pharmaceuticals
segment and the Consumer Health segment) develops, produces and
markets: |
|
|
|
prescription pharmaceuticals, including, among
others, medication for the treatment of multiple sclerosis,
hormonal preparations for fertility control and menopause
management, biological products, products for the treatment of
cancer and coronary heart disease, anti-infective products and
diagnostic imaging products; and |
|
|
over-the-counter
medications and nutritional supplements, blood glucose
monitoring systems, veterinary medicines and nutritionals and
grooming products for companion animals and livestock. |
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer CropScience (consisting of the Crop Protection
segment and the Environmental Science, BioScience segment)
develops, produces and markets: |
|
|
|
a comprehensive portfolio of fungicides, herbicides,
insecticides and seed treatment products to meet a wide range of
regional requirements; and |
|
|
a wide range of products for the green industry,
garden care, non-agricultural pest and weed control and
conventional seeds, and is active in plant biotechnology. |
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer MaterialScience (comprising the Materials segment
and the Systems segment) primarily develops, manufactures and
markets: |
|
|
|
high-quality plastic granules, sheets and
films; and |
|
|
polyurethanes for a wide variety of applications as
well as coating and adhesive raw materials and basic inorganic
chemicals. |
The following service organizations provide support functions to
the three subgroups, Bayer AG and third parties:
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer Business Services, which provides information
management, accounting, consulting and administrative services. |
|
|
|
Bayer Technology Services, which provides engineering
functions such as process development, process and plant
engineering, construction and optimization. |
|
|
|
Bayer Industry Services, which operates the Bayer
Chemical Park network of industrial facilities in Germany and
provides site-specific services in the areas of technology,
environmental protection, waste management, utility supply,
infrastructure, safety, chemical analysis and vocational
training to Bayer and non-Bayer companies. Bayer Industry
Services GmbH & Co. OHG is held by Bayer AG
(60 percent) and by LANXESS (40 percent). |
For the year ended December 31, 2006, Bayer reported total
sales from continuing operations of
28,956 million,
an operating result from continuing operations of
2,762 million
and net income of
1,683 million.
As of December 31, 2006, we employed 106,000 people
worldwide. The Groups total sales in 2006 based on
customer location, were as follow: 44 percent in Europe;
27 percent in North America; 16 percent in the Asia/
Pacific region; and 13 percent in the Latin America/
Africa/ Middle East region.
In 2006, due to the acquisition of the business of Schering AG,
Berlin, Germany and the divestiture of the Diagnostics division,
we changed our segment structure and reporting to reflect our
new corporate structure in compliance with IAS 14 (Segment
Reporting). We restated our segment reporting for 2004 and 2005,
17
accordingly. The changes in our segments are as follows: As of
January 1, 2006, the former Pharmaceuticals, Biological
Products segment has been renamed as the Pharmaceuticals
segment. The historical Bayer pharmaceuticals and biological
products businesses and the acquired Schering business form the
Pharmaceuticals segment. The former Consumer Care and Animal
Health segments were combined with the Diabetes Care division to
form the new segment Consumer Health. Due to the divesting activities
regarding
the H.C. Starck and Wolff Walsrode businesses, the Materials
segment comprises, beginning with the fourth quarter of 2006,
the Polycarbonates and Thermoplastic Polyurethanes business
units. The Diagnostics division as well as the H.C. Starck and
Wolff Walsrode businesses are reported as discontinued
operations.
The following table shows external sales from Bayers
continuing business activities by subgroup and reporting
segment, with a reconciliation to the Bayer Group.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage | |
|
|
|
Percentage | |
|
|
|
Percentage | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
of total sales | |
|
2005 | |
|
of total sales | |
|
2006 | |
|
of total sales | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
HealthCare
|
|
|
6,736 |
|
|
|
32.2 |
|
|
|
7,996 |
|
|
|
32.4 |
|
|
|
11,724 |
|
|
|
40.5 |
|
|
Pharmaceuticals(a)
|
|
|
3,961 |
|
|
|
18.9 |
|
|
|
4,067 |
|
|
|
16.5 |
|
|
|
7,478 |
|
|
|
25.8 |
|
|
Consumer Health
|
|
|
2,775 |
|
|
|
13.3 |
|
|
|
3,929 |
|
|
|
15.9 |
|
|
|
4,246 |
|
|
|
14.7 |
|
CropScience
|
|
|
5,946 |
|
|
|
28.4 |
|
|
|
5,896 |
|
|
|
23.9 |
|
|
|
5,700 |
|
|
|
19.7 |
|
|
Crop Protection
|
|
|
4,957 |
|
|
|
23.7 |
|
|
|
4,874 |
|
|
|
19.7 |
|
|
|
4,644 |
|
|
|
16.0 |
|
|
Environmental Science, BioScience
|
|
|
989 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
1,022 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
|
1,056 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
MaterialScience
|
|
|
7,566 |
|
|
|
36.2 |
|
|
|
9,446 |
|
|
|
38.2 |
|
|
|
10,161 |
|
|
|
35.1 |
|
|
Materials
|
|
|
2,217 |
|
|
|
10.6 |
|
|
|
2,837 |
|
|
|
11.4 |
|
|
|
2,925 |
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
|
Systems
|
|
|
5,349 |
|
|
|
25.6 |
|
|
|
6,609 |
|
|
|
26.8 |
|
|
|
7,236 |
|
|
|
25.0 |
|
Reconciliation
|
|
|
677 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
1,363 |
|
|
|
5.5 |
|
|
|
1,371 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
Total Sales from Continuing
Operations(b)
|
|
|
20,925 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
24,701 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
28,956 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The segments sales figures for 2006 include the acquired
business of Schering AG as of June 23, 2006. |
|
(b) |
|
In accordance with the accounting standard IFRS 5 and other
related standards, the financial information presented in this
annual report on
Form 20-F only
includes the continuing operations of the Bayer Group and its
segments, except where specific reference is made to
discontinued operations or Group total. Our revenues from
discontinued operations were
2,845 million
in 2006,
3,309 million
in 2005 and
8,833 million
in 2004. |
18
BAYER HEALTHCARE
With effect from June 30, 2006, we have changed our segment
reporting to reflect the new corporate structure resulting from
the acquisition of Schering and the divestiture of the
Diagnostics division. The names Bayer Schering
Pharma or Schering as used in this annual
report on
Form 20-F always
refer to Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany, or its
predecessor, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany, respectively. The
reference to Bayer Schering Pharma AG or Schering AG also
includes business conducted by affiliated entities. Bayer
Schering Pharma AG and Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey
are unaffiliated companies that have been totally independent of
each other for many years. The Diabetes Care division is now
combined with the former Consumer Care and Animal Health segment
in a new segment called Consumer Health, while the acquired
Schering business forms part of the Pharmaceuticals segment. The
Diagnostics division is reported as discontinued operations. For
details see Item 5, Operating and Financial Review and
Prospects Operating Results 2004, 2005 and
2006 Discontinued Operations. Due to the
divestiture of our U.S. Plasma business in 2005, we renamed
our Pharmaceutical, Biological Products segment as the
Pharmaceuticals segment on January 1, 2006.
PHARMACEUTICALS
Overview
With effect from June 23, 2006, we acquired a majority of
the shares of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany (subsequently renamed
Bayer Schering Pharma AG). The acquired business activities are
concentrated in the areas gynecology and andrology (major
brands:
Yasmin®
and
Mirena®),
diagnostic imaging (major brand:
Magnevist®),
specialized therapeutics (major brands:
Betaferon®
and
Betaseron®)
and oncology. The EU and U.S. antitrust authorities have
unconditionally approved the transaction. Since the
effectiveness of the domination and profit and loss transfer
agreement with respect to Bayer Schering Pharma AG following its
entry in the Commercial Register on October 27, 2006, the
combined pharmaceuticals business is led by Bayer Schering
Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany as the management company. For
details see History and Development of the
Company.
The Pharmaceuticals segment was initially comprised of the three
business units Oncology, Primary Care and Hematology/
Cardiology. We added the acquired Schering businesses to it and
now report the Pharmaceuticals segment as comprising the
following seven business units: Primary Care (a combination of
Bayer and Schering products, including the former andrology
business of Schering), Womens Health (former gynecology
business of Schering), Hematology/ Cardiology, Diagnostic
Imaging, Specialized Therapeutics, Oncology (a combination of
Bayer and Schering products) and Dermatology. The financial
results of the acquired Schering businesses are reflected in our
financial statements beginning on June 23, 2006.
The Pharmaceuticals segment focuses on the development and
marketing of ethical pharmaceuticals, i.e., medications
requiring a physicians prescription and sold under a
specific brand name.
19
The following table shows the segments performance for the
last three years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions except | |
|
|
percentages) | |
Total External net sales
|
|
|
3,961 |
|
|
|
4,067 |
|
|
|
7,478 |
|
|
Percentage of total sales from Group continuing operations
|
|
|
18.9 |
% |
|
|
16.5 |
% |
|
|
25.8 |
% |
|
External net sales by category of activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Primary
Care(a)
|
|
|
2,950 |
|
|
|
2,831 |
|
|
|
3,091 |
|
|
|
Womens
Health(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,320 |
|
|
|
Hematology/ Cardiology
|
|
|
967 |
|
|
|
1,201 |
|
|
|
1,142 |
|
|
|
Diagnostic
Imaging(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
697 |
|
|
|
Specialized
Therapeutics(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
678 |
|
|
|
Oncology(d)
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
432 |
|
|
|
Dermatology(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
118 |
|
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
399 |
|
|
|
475 |
|
|
|
563 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
For 2006, including the former andrology business of Schering AG. |
(b) |
|
Represents the former gynecology business of Schering AG. |
(c) |
|
Represents the respective acquired businesses of Schering AG. |
(d) |
|
For 2006, including the acquired oncology business of Schering
AG. |
The segments sales by region for the past three years are
as follows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Europe
|
|
|
1,577 |
|
|
|
1,600 |
|
|
|
3,046 |
|
North America
|
|
|
1,172 |
|
|
|
1,129 |
|
|
|
2,226 |
|
Asia/ Pacific
|
|
|
851 |
|
|
|
900 |
|
|
|
1,313 |
|
Latin America/ Africa/ Middle East
|
|
|
361 |
|
|
|
438 |
|
|
|
893 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
3,961 |
|
|
|
4,067 |
|
|
|
7,478 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20
The following table shows our sales during the past three years
from the products that account for the largest portion of
segment sales.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
Product(a) |
|
Sales | |
|
Segment Sales | |
|
Sales | |
|
Segment Sales | |
|
Sales | |
|
Segment Sales | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
|
|
millions) | |
|
|
|
millions) | |
|
|
|
millions) | |
|
|
Betaferon®/Betaseron®
(Specialized
Therapeutics)(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
535 |
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
Yasmin®/YAZ®/Yasminelle®
(Womens
Health)(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
Kogenate®
(Hematology/ Cardiology)
|
|
|
563 |
|
|
|
14.2 |
|
|
|
663 |
|
|
|
16.3 |
|
|
|
787 |
|
|
|
10.5 |
|
Adalat®
(Primary Care)
|
|
|
670 |
|
|
|
16.9 |
|
|
|
659 |
|
|
|
16.2 |
|
|
|
657 |
|
|
|
8.8 |
|
Ciprobay®/
Cipro®
(Primary Care)
|
|
|
837 |
|
|
|
21.2 |
|
|
|
525 |
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
|
|
513 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
|
Avalox®/
Avelox®
(Primary Care)
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
364 |
|
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
396 |
|
|
|
5.3 |
|
Levitra®
(Primary Care)
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
|
260 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
Mirena®
(Womens
Health)(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
Magnevist®
(Diagnostic
Imaging)(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
Glucobay®
(Primary Care)
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
7.3 |
|
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
Other
|
|
|
1,102 |
|
|
|
27.8 |
|
|
|
1,301 |
|
|
|
31.9 |
|
|
|
3,180 |
|
|
|
42.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
3,961 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,067 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,478 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Products are ranked by the fourth quarter 2006 sales. |
|
(b) |
|
Acquired as part of Scherings pharmaceutical business in
2006. |
Segment Strategy
Our goal is to establish the Pharmaceuticals segment as a strong
specialty business, i.e., a business that markets to
specialists rather than general practitioners, with a focus on
diseases that have a great need for improvement in diagnosis and
treatment.
The acquisition of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany in 2006 and the
creation of Bayer Schering Pharma was a major step in this
direction and considerably strengthened our business, adding to
our portfolio products in the areas of oral contraception,
diagnostics imaging and multiple sclerosis with well-established
market positions like
Yasmin®,
Magnevist®
and
Betaferon®.
The Schering product portfolio complements and significantly
expands our existing specialty care portfolio in the areas of
hemophilia and renal cell carcinoma with our products
Kogenate®
and
Nexavar®.
With respect to our Primary Care business we pursue a strategy
of value optimization. We continued our marketing alliance with
Schering-Plough in the U.S. market. (Please note that Bayer
Schering Pharma AG (formerly named Schering AG), Berlin,
Germany, and Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey, are
unaffiliated companies that have been totally independent of
each other for many years.) Outside the United States we have a
strong presence in the primary care market with the established
products
Avalox®/Avelox®,
Levitra®,
Adalat®,
Glucobay®
and
Ciprobay®/Cipro®.
The acquisition of marketing rights from GlaxoSmithKline for the
antihypertensive product
Pritor®
and
PritorPlus®
in certain European countries is aimed to further sustain our
primary care franchise.
We believe that one of the key drivers for the growth of our
Pharmaceuticals segment are its research and development
activities. As part of our strategy, Bayer HealthCare allocates
the largest part of its research and development budget to the
Pharmaceuticals segment. See Item 5, Operating and
Financial Review and Prospects Research and
Development. Life cycle management, licensing activities and
alliances continue to be
21
major elements of our strategy. We use these business
development activities in addition to research and development
to strengthen our portfolio. See sections
Research and Development and
Collaborations.
Major Products
Primary Care
Adalat®
is the trademark for nifedipine, a representative of the
dihydropyridine class of calcium antagonists. Calcium plays an
important role in the bodys regulation of blood pressure
and the supply of blood to the heart tissues. Calcium
antagonists can reduce blood pressure and improve blood supply
to the heart tissues.
Ciprofloxacin, marketed under the trademark
Cipro®,
mainly in the United States, and
Ciproxin®,
Ciproxine®,
Ciprobay®,
Ciproxina®,
Baycip®,
Ciflox®
and
Uniflox®
in other countries, is a broad-spectrum antimicrobial agent of
the fluoroquinolone class. Its main uses are in the treatment of
urinary tract infections and in severe hospital infections. It
is also approved for the treatment of anthrax. In June 2004,
market exclusivity for the active pharmaceutical ingredient in
Cipro®
expired in the United States.
Moxifloxacin, marketed under the trademark
Avelox®,
mainly in the United States, and
Avalox®,
Izilox®,
Actira®
and
Octegra®
in other countries, is an antibiotic used to treat common
bacterial respiratory tract infections. It is indicated for the
treatment of community-acquired pneumonia, acute exacerbations
of chronic bronchitis, acute sinusitis and uncomplicated skin
and skin structure infections.
Vardenafil, our erectile dysfunction medication marketed under
the trademark
Levitra®,
is marketed in the United States in co-operation with
GlaxoSmithKline and Schering-Plough. (Please note that Bayer
Schering Pharma AG (formerly named Schering AG), Berlin,
Germany, and Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey, are
unaffiliated companies that have been totally independent of
each other for many years.) We also jointly perform the related
life cycle management with these companies.
Acarbose, marketed under the trademarks
Glucobay®
and
Glucor®
in most countries,
Precose®,
in the United States, and
Prandase®,
mainly in Canada, is an oral antidiabetic product that delays
carbohydrate digestion.
Glucobay®
improves metabolic control in diabetics alone or in combination
with other antidiabetic drugs.
Womens Health
Yasmin®
is an oral contraceptive that contains the synthetic hormone
progestin drospirenone, developed by Bayer Schering Pharma AG,
Berlin, Germany.
Yasmin®
is currently available in over 100 countries. In March 2006, we
received marketing authorization in the United States for the
oral contraceptive
YAZ®,
a low-dose version of
Yasmin®
and we started to market the product in April 2006 in the United
States. In the meantime, the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) has expanded the registration for
YAZ®,
as an oral contraceptive that is also approved for the treatment
of the emotional and physical symptoms of premenstrual dysphoria
and for the treatment of moderate acne in women of at least
14 years of age.
Yasminelle®,
another low dose version of
Yasmin®
has been approved as an oral contraceptive in Europe in May 2006
and has been launched in several European countries since.
Mirena®,
our progestin-based intrauterine system (IUS), is a
long-term contraceptive that remains effective for five years.
Mirena®
was first launched in Europe in 1990 and is now also available
in the United States, Asia and Latin America.
Hematology/ Cardiology
Kogenate®
FS
(Kogenate®
Bayer in the EU) is a genetically-engineered recombinant
version of the protein FVIII. Patients with hemophilia A cannot
produce sufficient FVIII, and their blood therefore cannot clot
properly. Physicians use both plasma-derived and recombinant
FVIII to treat hemophilia A. Because recombinant products like
Kogenate®
do not derive from human donors, their users risk of
inadvertently contracting infections, such as HIV, hepatitis or
those caused by other viruses occasionally present in
plasma-derived products, is greatly reduced.
22
Diagnostic Imaging
Our magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast medium,
Magnevist®,
is an extracellular MRI contrast medium for cranial, spinal and
body applications for patients of all age groups.
For
Ultravist®
370, our X-ray contrast agent, the process of re-supplying the
product into the market was started in January 2007.
Specialized Therapeutics
Betaferon®
(marketed in the U.S. under the trademark
Betaseron®)
has received marketing authorization in the United States,
Europe and Japan for the treatment of all relapsing forms of
multiple sclerosis (MS), and, in the United States, Canada,
Australia and Europe, also for the treatment of patients who
have experienced a first clinical episode with diagnostic
features consistent with MS.
Markets and Distribution
The Pharmaceuticals segments principal markets are North
America, Western Europe and Asia (especially Japan).
We do not experience any significant seasonality in our markets
for the segments products.
We generally distribute our products through wholesalers,
pharmacies and hospitals as well as, to a limited extent,
directly to patients. Where appropriate, we actively seek to
supplement the efforts of our sales force through co-promotion
and co-marketing arrangements. In the United States, our
erectile dysfunction medication
Levitra®
(Vardenafil) is marketed and distributed jointly by
GlaxoSmithKline and Schering-Plough. (Please note that
Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey and the company acquired
by Bayer in June 2006, Bayer Schering Pharma AG (formerly named
Schering AG), Berlin, Germany, are unaffiliated companies that
have been totally independent of each other for many years.)
Schering-Plough also markets and distributes selected other of
our primary care pharmaceutical products in the United States,
including
Cipro®
and
Avelox®.
Furthermore, we are co-promoting selected Schering-Plough
oncology products for a specified period of time in the United
States and selected major European markets, e.g., in
Germany, France and Italy. We expect to cooperate in marketing
Schering-Ploughs
Zetia®
in Japan if approved by the Japanese regulatory authorities.
Additionally, we have a co-marketing agreement with Wyeth, Inc.,
for the oral contraceptive substance gestodene for Europe.
In October 2005, we entered into a strategic alliance with
Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical Inc., a Johnson & Johnson
subsidiary. In this alliance, Ortho-McNeil will contribute to
the development of Rivaroxaban
(BAY 59-7939) and
will later market and distribute Rivaroxaban in the United
States. Rivaroxaban is an oral direct Factor Xa inhibitor, being
developed for the prevention and treatment of thrombotic events.
In addition, Bayer is co-promoting Johnson &
Johnsons
Elmiron®,
a medication for the treatment of interstitial cystitis, in the
United States.
We produce active pharmaceutical ingredients for our ethical
pharmaceutical products at four locations: our primary
facilities in Wuppertal and Bergkamen, Germany, and two smaller
facilities in Spain and Mexico.
Recombinant FVIII products are produced at our facility in
Berkeley, California, under an exclusive license from Genentech.
Betaferon®
is sourced from Chiron, in Emeryville, California and Boehringer
Ingelheim, Germany for defined market regions.
We obtain raw materials for our active ingredients in ethical
pharmaceuticals in part from LANXESS AG and the rest from other
third parties mainly in Europe and Asia. For our
Kogenate®
product, we obtain raw materials and packaging materials from
diverse third-party suppliers in various countries around the
world. For the production of
Kogenate®
we use human albumin sourced from Talecris for the nutrition of
the cell lines.
In addition to the chemical production operations, we presently
operate production facilities for the formulation and packaging
of pharmaceutical and biotechnological products on three
continents. Our main such pharmaceutical production facilities
are in Berlin, Weimar and Leverkusen, Germany; Berkeley,
California; Garbagnate, Italy; Sao Paulo, Brazil; Madrid, Spain;
Turku, Finland and Seattle, Washington.
23
We maintain strategic reserves of many of our key products to
avoid shortages upon any breaks in the supply chain. Where a
required material is available from only one supplier, our
policy is to amass a strategic reserve, while mounting an
intensive search for potential alternative suppliers. We obtain
additional ingredients and packaging materials from diverse
suppliers in various countries around the world. For building
blocks and intermediates used to manufacture active ingredients
in ethical pharmaceuticals, we either approve several suppliers
or enter into global contracts. This also helps us to reduce the
effects of price volatility.
We encounter competition in all of our geographical markets from
large national and international competitors, such as:
|
|
|
|
|
Primary Care: Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline and Abbott Laboratories
(antibacterial products); Pfizer, Novartis, AstraZeneca and
Merck & Co (hypertension and coronary heart disease
therapy); Takeda, GlaxoSmithKline, Sanofi-Aventis and
Bristol-Myers Squibb (oral antidiabetics); Pfizer and Eli Lilly
(erectile dysfunction); |
|
|
|
Womens Health: Wyeth, Johnson & Johnson,
Novartis, Barr Laboratories and Watson Pharmaceuticals; |
|
|
|
Hematology/ Cardiology: Baxter, Wyeth and CSL Behring; |
|
|
|
Diagnostic Imaging: Bracco, Tyco Healthcare Group and Altana
(Nycomed acquired Altanas pharmaceuticals business
effective December 31, 2006) (X-ray and MRI contrast media
products) and Liebel-Flarsheim (contrast media application
technologies products); |
|
|
|
Specialized Therapeutics: Biogen Idec, Serono. |
Research and Development
The Research & Development function for the
Pharmaceuticals segment has been restructured as part of our
integration of Schering. (The names Bayer Schering
Pharma or Schering as used in this annual
report on
Form 20-F always
refer to Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany, or its
predecessor, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany, respectively. Bayer
Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany, and Schering-Plough
Corporation, New Jersey are unaffiliated companies that have
been totally independent of each other for many years.) It now
encompasses the functions Global Drug Discovery and Global
Development. We intend the changes in Research &
Development to leverage the combined assets of Schering and
Bayer to maximize both the output and effectiveness of our drug
discovery and development programs. Research programs and
activities will be consolidated into three major research and
development sites: Berlin and Wuppertal, Germany, and Berkeley,
California. The Berlin research group will take leadership for
diagnostic imaging, oncology and gynecology and andrology
research. Wuppertal will take leadership for the companys
hematology and cardiology research. Both locations have
significant capabilities and activities in target discovery,
lead generation and optimization, drug metabolism and
pharmacokinetics, toxicology and clinical pharmacology. Berkeley
will remain an important global research and development center
for protein-based biologics drug discovery and will continue to
be home of the
Kogenate®
biological manufacturing facility. Bayer HealthCares
U.S. research site in West Haven, Connecticut, and that of
Berlex Inc. (U.S. subsidiary of Bayer Schering Pharma AG,
Berlin, Germany) in Richmond, California, will be closed.
|
|
|
Status of Development of Selected Compounds in Clinical
Trials |
Continuing Development of Compounds in Phase II/ III
Clinical Trials
In 2006 we conducted clinical trials for several of our research
and development pipeline candidates. The compounds listed in the
table below with their respective indications represent a
snapshot of Bayers late stage pipeline of drug candidates
in Phase II and III of clinical trials, excluding drug
candidates of the acquired business of Schering AG, Berlin,
Germany. The full combined research and development pipeline is
currently under review and will be communicated at a later date.
The nature of drug discovery and development is such that not
all compounds can be expected to meet the pre-defined project
target profile. It is possible that any or all of the projects
listed below may have to be discontinued due to scientific
and/or commercial reasons and will not result in marketed
products. It is also
24
possible that the requisite FDA, European Medicines Agency
(EMEA) or other regulatory approval will not be granted for
these compounds.
|
|
|
|
|
Project |
|
Indication |
|
Status |
|
|
|
|
|
Avelox®
|
|
New indications |
|
In Phase III |
Nexavar®
|
|
Advanced renal cell carcinoma |
|
FDA approval |
|
|
Hepatocellular carcinoma |
|
In Phase III |
|
|
Malignant melanoma |
|
In Phase III |
|
|
NSCLC |
|
In Phase III |
|
|
Other cancer types |
|
In Phase II |
Rivaroxaban (BAY 59-7939)
|
|
VTE prevention |
|
In Phase III |
|
|
VTE treatment |
|
In Phase III |
|
|
Stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation |
|
In Phase III |
|
|
Acute Coronary Syndrome/ Myocardial Infarction |
|
In Phase II |
VEGF Trap
|
|
Treatment of eye diseases |
|
In Phase II |
The following is a description of the status of development of
Nexavar®
and Rivaroxaban, two major drug candidates that are in
Phase III clinical trials with respect to certain
indications:
Nexavar®
(sorafenib), co-developed by Bayer HealthCare and Onyx
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., is a novel multi-kinase inhibitor that
targets serine/threonine and receptor tyrosine kinases in both
the tumor cell and the tumor vasculature. At the end of 2005,
the FDA granted U.S. approval for
Nexavar®
for the treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma
(RCC). It was approved by the EMEA in July 2006 for the same
indication. During 2006,
Nexavar®
was approved in nearly 50 countries for the treatment of
advanced RCC.
In addition to the launch of
Nexavar®
for advanced RCC, we actively pursued our Phase III
clinical trial programs for the treatment of hepatocellular
carcinoma (HCC), malignant melanoma and non-small cell lung
cancer (NSCLC). In April 2006, the FDA and the EMEA both granted
orphan drug designation to
Nexavar®
for the treatment of HCC. Furthermore,
Nexavar®
received fast track status by the FDA for the
treatment of HCC and malignant melanoma. In February 2007, an
independent data monitoring committee (DMC) reviewed the
safety and efficacy data of the Phase III clinical trial on
the treatment of HCC with the conclusion that the trial met its
primary endpoint. The DMC recommended stopping the trial early
and Bayer and Onyx followed that recommendation. The companies
will continue discussions with health authorities worldwide
regarding the next steps in filing for approval for the
treatment of HCC, and intend to make those filings as rapidly as
possible. In December 2006, results were announced from the
Phase III malignant melanoma study evaluating the
combination of
Nexavar®
or placebo tablets with the chemotherapeutic agents carboplatin
and paclitaxel in patients with advanced malignant melanoma.
This trial did not meet its primary endpoint of improving
progression-free survival (PFS). Other tumor types are under
investigation in earlier stages of clinical development.
Rivaroxaban (BAY 59-7939) is a novel oral direct
Factor Xa inhibitor, being developed to meet currently unmet
clinical needs in the anticoagulation market for prevention and
treatment of thrombotic events. In October 2005, Bayer
HealthCare and the Johnson & Johnson subsidiary
Ortho-McNeil entered into an alliance under which Ortho-McNeil
is contributing to the development of Rivaroxaban, and initiated
Phase III clinical trials in December 2005 for the
prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after major
orthopedic surgery. In June 2006 we announced Phase III
clinical trials in the two chronic indications stroke prevention
in atrial fibrillation and treatment of VTE in a once-daily dose
regimen. Also in 2006, we began Phase II clinical trials in
the indication acute coronary syndrome/myocardial infarction.
25
The following is a description of the status of development of
ZK-EPO and
YAZ®,
two major drug candidates of the acquired Schering business that
are in Phase II and Phase III clinical trials with
respect to certain indications:
ZK-EPO is a novel epothilone specifically designed
to overcome limitations associated with other microtubule
stabilizing agents by combining high efficacy with a balanced
tolerability profile. The compound exhibits efficacy across a
broad spectrum of tumor models. Phase II clinical trials
have started and will examine the activity of ZK-EPO in
patients with various solid tumors, including several major
cancers such as non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), ovarian
cancer, prostate cancer and breast cancer.
Clinical studies for
YAZ®
in the indication acne treatment have demonstrated the
effectiveness of
YAZ®
in this indication. This effect is brought about by the
ingredient progestin drospirenone which has anti-androgenic
properties. FDA approval for
YAZ®
in the treatment of acne has been granted in January 2007.
YAZ®
is also examined in Phase III clinical trials as oral
contraceptive (OC) in long-cycle administration.
Continuing Development of Compounds prior to Phase II/
III Clinical Trials
Kogenate. Key research and product development
projects involving our
Kogenate®
product are
Kogenate®
Next Generation and
Kogenate®
Bio-Set, as well as gene therapy for hemophilia B. We
have identified five constructs for potential development of
products under the umbrella
Kogenate®
Next Generation. The evaluation of proteins as well as of
the technology is ongoing. We expect the optimization of drug
candidates to be completed by the end of 2007. Bayer has
performed Phase I clinical trials in the United States for
BAY 79-4980
(Kogenate®-FS
reconstituted with pegylated liposome diluent) under an
Investigational New Drug application process (IND) filed by
Bayer in April 2005 and accepted by the FDA. On May 18,
2005, Bayer entered into an early stage research and
collaboration agreement with Asklepios BioPharmaceutical, Inc.,
to develop gene therapy for the treatment of hemophilia.
Suspended and Discontinued Development of Compounds in
Phase II/ III Clinical Trials
Alfimeprase. Nuvelo and Bayer HealthCare announced
in December 2006 that the first Phase III clinical trial of
alfimeprase, a blood clot dissolver, in patients with acute
peripheral arterial occlusion (NAPA-2 trial: Novel Arterial
Perfusion with Alfimeprase-2) did not meet its primary endpoint
of avoidance of open vascular surgery within 30 days of
treatment. The companies also announced that the Phase III
clinical trial in catheter occlusion (SONOMA-2 trial: Speedy
Opening of Non-functional and Occluded catheters with Mini-dose
Alfimeprase-2) did not meet its primary endpoint of
re-establishment of a functional central venous access device
(CVAD) at 15 minutes post first infusion. In addition, the
companies announced that they are temporarily suspending
enrollment in the ongoing Phase III clinical trials, NAPA-3
and SONOMA-3, until further analyses and discussions with
outside experts and regulatory agencies are completed.
Trasylol®.
Bayer HealthCare has decided to end three ongoing clinical
studies investigating the safety and efficacy of
Trasylol®
(aprotinin injection) on transfusion requirements and blood loss
in adults undergoing: elective spinal fusion surgery,
pneumonectomy or esophagectomy for cancer, and radical or total
cystectomy in bladder cancer. Used prophylactically,
Trasylol®
is indicated to reduce blood loss and the need for blood
transfusion in patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass in the
course of coronary artery bypass graft surgery in patients who
are at an increased risk for blood loss and blood transfusion.
The
Trasylol®
labeling that was recently approved in the United States and is
in the approval process in the European Union and other
countries, includes a recommendation that in order to manage
possible anaphylactic reactions,
Trasylol®
should be administered only in surgical settings where
cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) can be rapidly initiated. The use
of CPB is not practical in non-cardiac surgical settings such as
the ones for which we ended the clinical studies.
See Update on
Trasylol®-marketed
product below for further information.
|
|
|
Bayer HealthCare posts information on clinical trials on
the internet |
Bayer HealthCare posts information on the clinical trials being
conducted by its Pharmaceuticals segment and Consumer Care
division on the internet. The database is intended to increase
the transparency of the clinical trials for physicians,
scientists and other interested parties. This measure is
consistent with the recommendations
26
in the position paper issued by pharmaceutical associations in
Europe, Japan and the United States, and the International
Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and Associations.
Collaborations
To supplement our internal efforts, we collaborate with several
companies in different stages of the typical pharmaceutical
research cycle. Our more significant collaborations are
described (in alphabetical order) in the table below.
|
|
|
Partner |
|
Objective |
|
|
|
Affimetrix
|
|
Understanding the disease mechanism and identifying new targets |
ARTEMIS Pharmaceuticals GmbH
|
|
In vivo validation of targets |
Avid
|
|
Radiopharmaceuticals compounds |
Bausch&Lomb
|
|
SEGRA ophthalmology |
ChemDiv
|
|
Synthesis of compounds |
ComGenex
|
|
Synthesis of compounds |
Genedata
|
|
Expressionist software |
Inpharmatica
|
|
Kinase SARfari in Silico Drug Discovery |
Monash University
|
|
New targets for gender health |
MorphoSys AG
|
|
Antibody diagnostics and therapeutics for cancer and other life
threatening diseases |
Neurosciences Victoria Ltd.
|
|
Treatment of neurodegenerative disorders |
Peregrine Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
|
|
Selective cancer diagnostics (vascular targeting agents) |
Proteros
|
|
X-ray structure analysis |
Seattle Genetics
|
|
Increasing the pool of potential drug candidates by biomolecules |
University Stanford/ Gambhir
|
|
New PET tracers |
Warner Chillcott
|
|
SEGRA for dermatology |
|
|
|
Product Development Collaborations |
The major collaborations in the area of product development are
described below:
Bayer and Onyx are co-developing
Nexavar®.
As part of this collaboration, Onyx is funding 50 percent
of the costs of development for this compound other than in
Japan. In return, Onyx has a 50 percent profit share in the
United States, where the companies co-promote the product. In
all markets outside Japan, Bayer has the contractual right to
market the product exclusively and will share profits equally
with Onyx. In Japan, Bayer has the contractual right to develop
and market the product exclusively and Onyx has the contractual
right to receive a royalty.
Bayer HealthCare and Ortho-McNeil, a subsidiary of
Johnson & Johnson, have concluded an agreement in
October 2005 to develop and market Rivaroxaban (BAY 59-7939) for
the prevention and treatment of thrombotic events.
In January 2006, we entered into an agreement with Nuvelo, Inc.,
for the global development and commercialization of alfimeprase,
a novel blood clot dissolver. See Research and
Development Status of
27
Development of Selected Compounds in Clinical
Trials Suspended and Discontinued Development of
Compounds in Phase II/ III Clinical Trials
Alfimeprase above for further information on alfimeprase.
|
|
|
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals |
In October 2006, we entered into a collaboration agreement with
Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for the global development and
commercialization of the VEGF Trap for the treatment of eye
diseases by local administration into the eye. The VEGF Trap for
the treatment of eye diseases, currently in Phase I and
Phase II clinical trials, is a protein that binds to or
traps the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)
and blocks its activity. Bayer has the contractual right to
market the drug outside the United States, if approved by the
competent authorities.
In September 2006, we agreed with AstraZeneca to co-develop and
co-promote the selective estrogen receptor downregulator (SERD)
for the treatment of hormonal dependent breast cancer. All
development costs and all profits will be shared equally. While
we will be the lead marketing partner in Europe, AstraZeneca has
the right to be the lead marketing partner in the United States.
In June 2006, we acquired Celera Genomics cathepsin S
inhibitor drug development program. These oral cathepsin S
inhibitors are small molecules with an innovative
mode-of-action that
have potential in the treatment of auto-immune diseases like
multiple sclerosis, Crohns, psoriasis and rheumatoid
arthritis. We have exclusive rights worldwide. The technology is
still in a pre-clinical stage.
|
|
|
Avid Radiopharmaceuticals |
In February 2006, we signed an option agreement with Avid
Radiopharmaceuticals for a positron emission tomography (PET)
imaging agent, which can be used for the diagnosis of
Alzheimers disease and other neurodegenerative diseases.
We can exercise this option for an exclusive license if a
currently ongoing
proof-of-concept study
is successful.
In August 1999, we in-licensed
Campath®
from L&I Partners L.P., which later was acquired by Genzyme
Corporation. Since then, we market
Campath®
worldwide in the area of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Several
studies for extension of this indication are ongoing.
Additionally, both partners are jointly developing
Campath®
for the indication in multiple sclerosis.
We entered into a collaboration in 1995 with Novartis Pharma AG
to jointly research and develop inhibitors of angiogenesis. Such
inhibitors are expected to exhibit anti-tumor activity by
cutting off the tumors blood supply. In January 2005, the
original cooperation agreement was amended by a
commercialization agreement that governs joint development and
global co-promotion of the lead compound PTK/ZK. All costs and
profits are shared equally. We are the lead marketing partner in
Europe, Novartis is the lead marketing partner in the United
States.
In October 2005, we in-licensed
TOCOSOL®
Paclitaxel from Sonus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
In January 2000, we entered into an agreement with Titan
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for the global rights to Spheramine. Under
this agreement Bayer is responsible for the manufacturing,
development and commercializa-
28
tion. Spheramine consists of dopamine-producing cells adhered to
spherical microscopic carriers, which are injected into the
brains of patients suffering from Parkinson disease.
We apply life cycle management measures to our marketed products
to expand the scope of possible treatment opportunities by
identifying new indications and improved formulations.
Adalat®
is a prime example of successful life cycle management:
twenty-one years after the patent protection for the active
ingredient nifedipine, its key component, expired, the drug
generated
657 million
in sales in 2006. Similarly, we are implementing life cycle
management measures, such as improved formulations and dosage
forms or identifying new indications, for other major
products.
Fludara®,
an oncological product which lost patent protection in the
United States in 2003, is another example of successful life
cycle management measures. The product generated
120 million
in sales in 2006, compared to
103 million
in the first year after loss of patent protection.
We supplement our portfolio of products emerging from our own
research and development with in-licensed products, both on a
global and a national level. Recent examples are the purchase of
the European business for Boehringer Ingelheims blood
pressure treatment telmisartan
(Pritor®
and
PritorPlus®)
from GlaxoSmithKline in January 2006. Also in January 2006, we
entered into an agreement with Nuvelo, Inc. for the global
development and commercialization of alfimeprase, a novel clot
dissolver. See Research and
Development Status of Development of Selected
Compounds in Clinical Trials Suspended and
Discontinued Development of Compounds in Phase II/ III
Clinical Trials Alfimeprase above for
further information on alfimeprase. Bayer will have the
contractual right to market the drug outside the United States,
if approved by the competent authorities. In October 2006, we
entered into a collaboration agreement with Regeneron
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. for the global development, and
commercialization of the VEGF Trap for the treatment of eye
disease by local administration into the eye, currently in
Phase I and Phase II clinical trials. Bayer will have
the contractual right to market the drug outside the United
States, if approved by the competent authorities.
See Product Development Collaborations.
Update on
Trasylol® -marketed
product
Trasylol®
Aprotinin, marketed under the trademark
Trasylol®,
is a natural proteinase inhibitor obtained from bovine lung
tissue. Used prophylactically, it is indicated to reduce
perioperative blood loss and the need for blood transfusion in
patients undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass in the course of
coronary artery bypass graft surgery who are at an increased
risk for blood loss and blood transfusion.
In January 2006, two papers were published in the medical
literature concerning
Trasylol®
(aprotinin). The New England Journal of Medicine
(NEJM) published an observational study in which Mangano
et al. proposed that aprotinin use was associated with an
increased incidence of cardiovascular events (myocardial
infarction and/or congestive heart failure), cerebrovascular
events (stroke, encephalopathy and/or coma), and renal events
(renal dysfunction and/or renal failure requiring dialysis) in
patients undergoing elective coronary-artery revascularization
with no history of cardiac surgery, vascular surgery or
angioplasty, and with an increased incidence of renal events in
patients undergoing complex coronary-artery surgery.
The journal Transfusion published an observational study
comparing the use of aprotinin and tranexamic acid in high
transfusion risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery with
cardiopulmonary bypass which reported that Our results
suggest that aprotinin use may be associated with worsening
renal function in patients with existing renal
dysfunction. Karkouti et al. did not find an
increased rate of cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events in
Trasylol®-treated
patients and reported comparable mortality rates between
patients who received
Trasylol®
and those who received tranexamic acid.
At the Advisory Committee meeting held by the Cardiovascular and
Renal Drugs Division of the FDA on September 21, 2006, the
data from Bayers internal databases and from the
observational study by Karkouti et al. (Mangano et al.
had not provided the FDA with unrestricted access to the
underlying data from their observational study) were reviewed
and the complex scientific issues surrounding the risk/benefit
profile of
29
Trasylol®
(aprotinin injection) were discussed in detail. At the end of
the session, the Advisory Committee affirmed (18-0 with 1
abstention) that the totality of clinical data presented at the
meeting supported acceptable safety and efficacy for
Trasylol®
among coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery patients.
On September 27, 2006, Bayer submitted a copy of a
preliminary report of an observational study concerning the
effects of aprotinin, aminocaproic acid and tranexamic acid in
patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery
commissioned by the company and performed by i3 Drug Safety to
the FDA, along with a copy of i3 Drug Safetys
March 3, 2006 study proposal. Bayer also notified other
regulatory authorities of the preliminary report. Bayer
acknowledged that it mistakenly did not inform the FDA about
this study prior to the Advisory Committee meeting. Data was not
shared immediately with the agency because it was preliminary in
nature and raised significant questions on the study population,
outcomes and methodology. Although the preliminary report noted
that, as compared with patients receiving lysine analogues,
aprotinin-treated patients had a higher relative risk of death,
serious kidney damage, congestive heart failure and strokes, the
authors concluded only that their findings support the
hypothesis that there is a higher risk of death and acute renal
failure in aprotinin recipients, when compared with those
receiving the lysine analogues. The company is now working with
the FDA, i3 Drug Safety and other experts to analyze the
preliminary report, to examine the underlying source data and to
fully understand the results. Bayer is committed to patient
safety. The company will continue to work closely with the FDA
to address questions regarding this study and the overall safety
and efficacy of
Trasylol®
(aprotinin injection).
Bayer had committed to making changes to the label regarding
hypersensitivity and renal events prior to the Advisory
Committee meeting in September 2006. On December 15, 2006,
the FDA approved Bayers label supplement reflecting new
safety information and prescribing information regarding
Trasylol®.
The label changes were related to limiting
Trasylol®
use to patients who are at an increased risk for blood loss and
blood transfusion in the setting of coronary bypass graft
surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass, contraindicating the
administration of
Trasylol®
to any patients with a known or suspected prior exposure to
Trasylol®
or other aprotinin-containing products within the previous
12 months, providing additional information on the
management and prevention of anaphylactic reactions, including
the administration of
Trasylol®
only in an operative setting where cardiopulmonary bypass
(CPB) may be rapidly initiated and highlighting the risk
for kidney dysfunction. In light thereof, Bayer decided to end
three ongoing clinical studies of the safety and efficacy of
Trasylol®
in additional indications in non-cardiac surgical settings in
which CPB is not practical. See Research and
Development Status of Development of Selected
Compounds in Clinical Trials Suspended and
Discontinued Development of Compounds in Phase II/ III
Clinical Trials
Trasylol®.
Bayer has been working and will continue to work closely with
regulatory authorities worldwide to address questions of product
safety.
In February 2007, another paper was published in the medical
literature concerning
Trasylol®
(aprotinin). The Journal of the American Medical Association
published an observational study in which Mangano et al.
posit that aprotinin may increase the risk of mortality during
the five-year period following coronary artery bypass graft
surgery.
Results of additional review and analysis of data or the
negative publicity associated with the studies or the regulatory
review process could lead to a material reduction in the volume
of
Trasylol®
sales and also potentially in liability claims, and this could
have a material adverse affect on revenues or results of
operations, at least at the Pharmaceuticals segment level.
30
CONSUMER HEALTH
Overview
As further explained in the introduction to
Business, we have changed our segment reporting with effect
from June 30, 2006 to reflect the new corporate structure
resulting from the acquisition of the business of Schering AG,
Berlin, Germany and the divestiture of the Diagnostics division.
The Diabetes Care division is now combined with the former
Consumer Care and Animal Health segment in a new segment called
Consumer Health. The previous years segment data has been
adjusted accordingly.
The following table shows the Consumer Health segments
performance in the last three years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions, except | |
|
|
percentages) | |
Total external net sales
|
|
|
2,775 |
|
|
|
3,929 |
|
|
|
4,246 |
|
|
Percentage of total sales from Group continuing operations
|
|
|
13.3 |
% |
|
|
15.9 |
% |
|
|
14.7 |
% |
|
External net sales by category of activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer Care
|
|
|
1,336 |
|
|
|
2,355 |
|
|
|
2,531 |
|
|
|
Diabetes Care
|
|
|
653 |
|
|
|
718 |
|
|
|
810 |
|
|
|
Animal Health
|
|
|
786 |
|
|
|
856 |
|
|
|
905 |
|
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
750 |
|
The segments sales by region for the past three years are
as follows. Segment data for 2004 and 2005 have been restated to
reflect the changed segment presentation described above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Europe
|
|
|
927 |
|
|
|
1,592 |
|
|
|
1,691 |
|
North America
|
|
|
1,235 |
|
|
|
1,321 |
|
|
|
1,463 |
|
Asia/ Pacific
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
301 |
|
|
|
336 |
|
Latin America/ Africa/ Middle East
|
|
|
426 |
|
|
|
715 |
|
|
|
756 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2,775 |
|
|
|
3,929 |
|
|
|
4,246 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31
The following table shows our sales during the past three years
from the products that account for the largest portion of
segment sales, restated as described above.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
Product |
|
Sales | |
|
Segment Sales | |
|
Sales | |
|
Segment Sales | |
|
Sales | |
|
Segment Sales | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
|
|
millions) | |
|
|
|
millions) | |
|
|
|
millions) | |
|
|
Ascensia®
(Diabetes Care)
|
|
|
627 |
|
|
|
22.6 |
|
|
|
701 |
|
|
|
17.8 |
|
|
|
788 |
|
|
|
18.6 |
|
Aspirin®
(Consumer
Care)(a)
|
|
|
454 |
|
|
|
16.4 |
|
|
|
453 |
|
|
|
11.5 |
|
|
|
465 |
|
|
|
11.0 |
|
Advantage®/Advantix®
(Animal Health)
|
|
|
206 |
|
|
|
7.4 |
|
|
|
249 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
6.5 |
|
Aleve®/Naproxen
(Consumer
Care)(b)
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
5.3 |
|
Canesten®
(Consumer Care)
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
162 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
Baytril®
(Animal Health)
|
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
162 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
Bepanthen®/Bepanthol®
(Consumer
Care)(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
Supradyn®
(Consumer
Care)(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
One-A-Day®
(Consumer Care)
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
Alka-Seltzer®
(Consumer Care)
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
Other
|
|
|
877 |
|
|
|
31.6 |
|
|
|
1,588 |
|
|
|
40.6 |
|
|
|
1,681 |
|
|
|
39.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2,775 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,929 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,246 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
CardioAspirin of our
Aspirin®
product family is also distributed by our Pharmaceuticals
segment. These figures do not include sales by the
Pharmaceuticals segment. The sales for
Aspirin®
and CardioAspirin, including the ones made by the
Pharmaceuticals segment, amount to
674 million
in 2006,
630 million
in 2005 and
601 million
in 2004. |
|
|
|
(b) |
|
As the product
Aleve®
was part of the former U.S. joint venture with Roche, sales
figures for 2004 only represent the Bayer portion of the joint
ventures sales. 2005 sales figures represent total sales
of the product after our acquisition of the remaining
50 percent of the U.S. joint venture from Roche.
Naproxen is the active ingredient included in products
marketed in the United States under the brand
Aleve®
and in other countries using different local brands, the latter
having been acquired as part of Roches consumer health
business in 2005. |
|
(c) |
|
Acquired as part of Roches consumer health business in
2005. |
Segment Strategy
The Consumer Health segment represents our three divisions
Consumer Care, Diabetes Care and Animal Health.
The objective of our Consumer Care division is to further
consolidate our strong global position in the consumer health
market for medicinal products that consumers may generally
purchase without a prescription
(over-the-counter/ OTC
products). The key element of our strategy in our Consumer Care
division is to exploit organic growth potential within our
significant Consumer Care categories by leveraging the strength
of our well-known brands (including
Aleve®,
Aspirin®,
Bepanthen®,
Canesten®,
One-A-Day®
and
Supradyn®).
We intend to drive expansion in high growth regions of the world
(such as Eastern Europe and Asia/ Pacific) and develop business
in new and emerging growth areas. We also intend to pursue
external growth opportunities through acquisitions and licensing
where the appropriate strategic fit can be found. In this
context we agreed in October 2006 to acquire the Western
medicines
over-the-counter cough
and cold portfolio business (including the transfer of personnel
and a manufacturing facility) of the Topsun Group in China. We
expect the transaction to close in 2007.
32
The Diabetes Care divisions objective is to create a
sustainable competitive advantage in the diabetes monitoring and
management market while allowing Diabetes Care to profitably
grow market share and expand its business. To achieve our
overall goal in the Diabetes Care division, we are expanding our
product offering by developing second and third generations of
meters and strips that are more intuitive and easier to use,
resulting in glucose testing with minimal pain for diabetic
patients, and broadening our portfolio through investments into
ancillary business opportunities. We intend to target our
marketing efforts in order to direct customers to improved
versions of our meters and to increase our competitiveness
through continuous improvement of our products, reductions in
our costs and operational efficiencies. We also plan to realign
our research and development activities and investments. To
support our objectives, we intend to continue to develop our
strategic partnerships in desired areas of expertise to
complement our in-house strengths.
Animal Health aims to be one of the leading suppliers in the
food animal and companion animal market and strives to be the
preferred partner for and provider of veterinary solutions. It
is part of our business strategy for Animal Health to sustain
its current profile by focusing on attractive countries and
markets. Furthermore, Animal Health pursues a policy of organic
growth by exploiting existing core brands through life cycle
management activities supported by new business development
activities. To complete the existing product portfolio, Animal
Health periodically evaluates the possibility of acquisitions or
strategic alliances. The Animal Health division collaborates
closely with our Pharmaceuticals segment and the Bayer
CropScience subgroup as well as other life science companies in
research and development in order to bring to the market new
active ingredients and products that combat diseases in animals.
Consumer Care
The analgesics market comprises pain relief products both in
oral form (for example, pills and tablets) and for topical use
(for example, ointments and salves). We concentrate primarily on
the oral products segment. Our consumer health products face
competition from prescription drugs, for example cyclooxygenase
(COX-II) inhibitor pain relievers and prescription non-steroidal
anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs).
Aspirin®
(Bayer®
Aspirin brand in the United States) is a non-steroidal
anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID). It is used for pain relief and,
in countries where so indicated, for the prevention of heart
attacks.
Aleve®
(also known as
Flanax®
and
Apronax®
in some Latin American countries) is a nonprescription strength
version of the analgesic naproxen sodium.
Aleve®
is a long-lasting pain reliever and can be used for fever
reduction. Our
Midol®
product family competes in the menstrual pain relief category.
CardioAspirin (e.g.,
Aspirin®
Protect in Germany and
Bayer®
Low Dose Aspirin Regimen in the United States) refers to
Bayers collective group of products (distributed by both
our Consumer Care division and our Pharmaceuticals segment
depending on whether local regulations require a prescription
for these products) that are professionally indicated for the
prevention of an myocardial infarction (MI), or heart attack in
either those individuals who have already had an initial MI
(secondary prevention) or in individuals deemed at risk for a
first MI by their physician (primary prevention).
Within the total cough and cold market, we concentrate on the
cold/flu remedy segment. This consumer health category faces
competition from non-medicinal remedies (for
example, nutritional or herbal products), as well as from
preventive medicines available by prescription or under
development.
Alka-Seltzer
Plus®,
marketed in the United States, is a product to relieve symptoms
accompanying the common cold.
Tabcin®,
primarily marketed in Latin America, is a product line similar
to Alka-Seltzer
Plus®.
Aleve®
Cold & Sinus is a long-lasting combination of
the analgesic naproxen sodium and nasal decongestant.
33
The dermatological category of our Consumer Care division is
not related to the Dermatology business unit of our
Pharmaceuticals segment.
The dermatological category includes a broad range of skin
treatments. Within this market, we focus on the antifungal,
wound healing and skin protection categories. Competition in
topical dermatologicals ranges from prescription antifungal
products to cosmetic emollients and locally marketed generic
products and low priced brands.
Canesten®
is a treatment for vaginal yeast infections, athletes foot
and other dermatological fungal problems.
Rid®
is a topical head lice treatment marketed only in the United
States.
Bepanthen®
is a topical wound healing brand with a sister brand
Bepanthol®
which is a skin protectant and emollient.
The gastrointestinal (GI) category includes antacids, anti-gas
products, digestives, laxatives and anti-diarrheals.
Alka-Seltzer®
is used for speedy relief of acid indigestion, sour stomach or
heartburn with headache, or body aches and pains.
Phillips®
Milk of Magnesia is a saline laxative used as an
overnight remedy for constipation and acid indigestion,
heartburn or sour stomach that may accompany it.
Rennie®
relieves symptoms of indigestion and is typically marketed
directly to the consumer.
Talcid®
is used for the relief of symptoms from heartburn and acid
indigestion.
The nutritionals category is very broad, encompassing vitamins,
minerals, multi-vitamins/minerals, herbals, sports nutrition and
specialty supplements in many different forms. Applicable
regulations vary greatly, both from country to country and
across nutritional segments (for example, herbals vs. vitamins).
As a general rule, however, regulation of nutritionals tends to
be less stringent than that of other consumer health products.
Bayers primary interests in the nutritionals field are in
the vitamin and mineral (especially multi-vitamins/minerals)
areas.
One-A-Day®
multivitamins offer a variety of special formulations, such as
Mens, Womens, 50 Plus, Maximum, Essential and
WeightSmart®
formulas.
Flintstones®
are multivitamin dietary supplements containing (depending on
type) 10-19 essential nutrients for children ages 2-12.
Supradyn®
is a multi vitamin/mineral brand,
Redoxon®,
a vitamin C brand, and
Berocca®,
a higher potency vitamin/mineral supplement.
In 2006, we launched various line extensions to our existing
brands.
Our Consumer Care division focuses on the consumer health market
for medicinal products that consumers may generally purchase
without a prescription.
The division experiences moderate seasonality, primarily due to
the cough/cold market.
The typical sales and marketing channels of the division outside
Europe are supermarket chains, drugstores and other mass
marketers. In Europe, however, pharmacies are the usual
distribution channel. Our principal markets are North America,
Europe, Asia and Latin American countries.
Consumer Care procures some high-volume raw materials internally
from within Bayer HealthCare. Our major externally procured
high-volume raw materials are: Naproxen (the active ingredient
of
Aleve®,
Flanax®
and
Apronax®),
ascorbic acid, citric acid, paracetamol and phenylephrine. Most
of these are readily available and are usually not subject to
significant price fluctuations. The supply of strategic
materials like Naproxen is secured by long term contracts.
Changes in crude oil and energy prices can affect a few key
items, such as phenol and acetic anhydride, basic materials for
our major ingredient acetylsalicylic acid, and aluminum foil. We
diversify
34
our raw materials sources internationally to help balance
business risk and generally seek long-term contracts with
manufacturers.
We regard Johnson & Johnson (including
Johnson & Johnsons recently acquired Pfizer OTC
business), Novartis and GlaxoSmithKline as our main competitors.
In certain areas we also encounter competition from other
companies such as Sanofi-Aventis, Procter & Gamble as
well as Schering-Plough and Wyeth.
Consumer Care focuses its development activities on identifying,
developing and launching products and initiatives that can
contribute to achieving business growth through:
|
|
|
|
|
efficient development of new products and indications to support
current brands; and |
|
|
|
product development, clinical and regulatory strategies, which
provide opportunity to capitalize on new technologies, expanded
label indications and reclassifications of products from those
for which a prescription is required to those dispensed
over-the-counter. |
The divisions primary research and development facilities
are located in Morristown, New Jersey and Gaillard, France.
Diabetes Care
The Diabetes Care division is headquartered in Tarrytown, New
York. We support customers by delivering innovative products and
services that empower people with diabetes to improve their
quality of life.
In the Diabetes Care division, we continue to expand the
Ascensia®
brand by introducing several new blood glucose monitoring
products. Our key products include two platforms, the multi test
platform and the single test strip platform. Our family of multi
test products include
Ascensia®
Breeze®,
Ascensia®
Confirm,
Ascensia®
Dex®
and
Ascensia®
Esprit. These products incorporate a 10-test disc to provide
greater convenience to patients who test their blood sugar
levels several times per day. Our family of single strip
products includes the Ascensia
Elite®,
Ascensia
Brio®,
Ascensia®
Entrust and
Ascensia®
Contour®
with its no coding feature for greater convenience and accuracy.
This platform serves a wide spectrum of patient needs.
Outside Europe we channel our Diabetes Care products to the
consumer market through supermarket chains, drugstores and other
mass marketers. In Europe, however, pharmacies are the usual
distribution channel. Our principal markets are North America,
Western Europe and Japan.
On a worldwide basis, the activities of the Diabetes Care
division are not subject to any significant seasonal effects.
We manufacture and/or assemble approximately one quarter (by
units) of our own products, with the balance coming from
Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) suppliers. We rely on
a supplier management process to supply raw materials,
sub-assemblies and finished goods, most of which are
contractually controlled and are not subject to significant
price fluctuations or changes in availability.
We do require some direct or OEM materials, the unavailability
of which would adversely impact our results of operations. These
materials include, for in-house manufacturing, customized
integrated circuits and sensors for the
Ascensia®
strips. In these instances, we maintain strategic reserves of
selected direct materials or finished products to avoid
interruptions in our customers continuous and reliable
supply. We maintain a global supplier base with the majority of
materials and products being sourced from South-East Asia.
35
Our primary competitors in the diabetes care market are: Roche
Diagnostics, Lifescan (a Johnson & Johnson company) and
Abbott Diagnostics.
Our Diabetes Care division focuses its research and development
activities primarily on strengthening its core product lines and
on expanding into high growth/high margin segments of the
market. We achieve this through internal development and
collaborations with suppliers of mass market, user-friendly
whole blood glucose monitoring systems. In addition, we are
actively researching a minimally invasive system that requires
only a small blood sample and has a short testing time. Beyond
these research and development projects we are investing in
technologies that will allow glucose monitoring without painful
invasive sampling of body fluids.
During 2006 the divisions headquarters as well as the
research and development facility were consolidated in
Tarrytown, New York.
Our research and development department continued to launch
several newer blood glucose monitoring systems during 2006,
including the
Ascensia®
system, and has been developing next generation systems that we
intend to introduce in 2007 and thereafter.
In July 2006 our Diabetes Care division acquired Metrika Inc.,
located in Sunnyvale, California. Metrika manufactures and
markets a new type of handheld diabetes monitoring system,
capable of measuring the long-term diabetes parameter HbA1c,
also known as glycated hemoglobin. Through this acquisition we
expanded our offerings in diabetes management.
Animal Health
Our Animal Health division researches, develops and markets new
products for the health care of animals. These products are
divided between the two business units Food Animal Products and
Companion Animal Products. This range of products is
supplemented by a line of farm hygiene products as well as
cosmetic care products for animals.
Bayer Animal Health provides parasiticides such as K9
Advantix®,
Advantage®,
Droncit®,
Bayticol®
and
Baycox®,
which are most commonly used for flea, tick, mosquito, tapeworm,
roundworm and coccidiosis control in cats, dogs, poultry, pigs
and other major livestock animals. We provide antimicrobials
such as
Baytril®,
which is used for the treatment of severe bacterial infections
in animals. Included in our global portfolio are biological
vaccines which prevent foot-and-mouth disease in livestock
animals and nutritionals, or feed additives, such as vitamins,
minerals and others which improve animal health and farm
productivity. Our farm hygiene products assist in farm
biosecurity management processes and include insecticides for
fly control, rodenticides against rats and disinfectants against
bacteria.
The Animal Health business covers worldwide markets, including
emerging markets such as China, Vietnam and others in South-East
Asia. We divide our marketing activities into two main business
areas: marketing for food animals, and marketing for companion
animals, including horses.
On a worldwide basis, the activities of the Animal Health
division are not subject to any significant seasonal effects.
Depending on national legislation, Animal Health products may be
available to end users on a prescription or non-prescription
basis. Consumers (pet owners) may purchase prescription products
directly from veterinarians or from pharmacies with a written
prescription issued from a licensed practicing veterinarian.
Also, based on national legislation, non-prescription products
may be available through retailers, drugstores and other
specialized marketers.
36
We currently obtain the active pharmaceutical ingredients for
our veterinary pharmaceutical products either within the Bayer
Group or from third parties worldwide. We obtain additional
ingredients and packaging materials from diverse suppliers on a
worldwide basis. As a rule, we approve our suppliers for each
required material. We take measures in order to assure
continuous product supply and to reduce the effects of price
volatility. This includes entering into long-term contracts or
building strategic reserves of the material in question.
Our main pharmaceutical production facilities devoted to
formulation and packaging of our products for shipment are Kiel,
Germany and Shawnee, Kansas.
Merial, Pfizer and Intervet are our main competitors, with
Merial and Pfizer being active in both companion animal and food
animal products and Intervet concentrating mainly on food animal
products.
The Animal Health division focuses its research and development
activities on antimicrobials, parasiticides and active
ingredients useful for the treatment of non-infectious diseases
in animals such as renal failure, pain management, oncology and
congestive heart failure. A particular goal of our research and
development efforts is to provide the market with innovative and
patent-protected products (new active ingredients, formulations
and application technologies).
The divisions primary research and development facilities
are located in Monheim, Germany and Kansas City, Missouri.
We currently have several products or product families in late
stages of development or awaiting regulatory approval. Major
products are:
|
|
|
|
|
Projects/Products |
|
Indication |
|
Status |
|
|
|
|
|
Imidacloprid Combinations
|
|
Control of fleas, ticks, heartworm and gastrointestinal worms in
cats and dogs |
|
Clinical development; one combination in launch in the United
States |
Emodepside
|
|
Gastrointestinal worms in cats and dogs |
|
Clinical Development; one indication in registration in the
United States |
Red mite control remedy
|
|
Red mite control in Poultry |
|
Submitted |
Baycox®
calves
|
|
Coccidiosis control in calves |
|
In registration |
Baytril®
swine (North America)
|
|
Antimicrobial infections in pigs |
|
In registration |
Veraflox®
(pradofloxacin)
|
|
Antimicrobial for dogs and cats |
|
In development in the United States; resubmission after initial
rejection in EU under evaluation |
Projects on non-infectious diseases
|
|
Renal failure and congestive heart failure in dog and cats |
|
Clinical development started |
37
BAYER CROPSCIENCE
The Bayer CropScience subgroup is presented in the reportable
segments Crop Protection and Environmental Science, BioScience.
CROP PROTECTION
Overview
Our Crop Protection segment markets chemical crop protection
products for the control of insects, weeds and plant diseases
and develops products for enhanced effectiveness against these
target pests.
The following table shows Crop Protections performance for
the last three years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions, except | |
|
|
percentages) | |
Total External net sales
|
|
|
4,957 |
|
|
|
4,874 |
|
|
|
4,644 |
|
|
Percentage of total sales from Group continuing operations
|
|
|
23.7 |
% |
|
|
19.7 |
% |
|
|
16.0 |
% |
|
External net sales by category of activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insecticides
|
|
|
1,378 |
|
|
|
1,311 |
|
|
|
1,219 |
|
|
|
Fungicides
|
|
|
1,277 |
|
|
|
1,248 |
|
|
|
1,200 |
|
|
|
Herbicides
|
|
|
1,855 |
|
|
|
1,840 |
|
|
|
1,758 |
|
|
|
Seed Treatment
|
|
|
447 |
|
|
|
475 |
|
|
|
467 |
|
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
386 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
384 |
|
Crop Protections sales by region and totals for the past
three years are as follows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Europe
|
|
|
1,898 |
|
|
|
1,901 |
|
|
|
1,909 |
|
North America
|
|
|
979 |
|
|
|
1,076 |
|
|
|
996 |
|
Asia/ Pacific
|
|
|
820 |
|
|
|
811 |
|
|
|
772 |
|
Latin America/ Africa/ Middle East
|
|
|
1,260 |
|
|
|
1,086 |
|
|
|
967 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
4,957 |
|
|
|
4,874 |
|
|
|
4,644 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38
The following table shows the segments sales by major
products(a)
during the past three years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
Product |
|
Sales | |
|
Segment Sales | |
|
Sales | |
|
Segment Sales | |
|
Sales | |
|
Segment Sales | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
|
|
millions) | |
|
|
|
millions) | |
|
|
|
millions) | |
|
|
Confidor®/
Gaucho®/Admire®(b)(c)
(Insecticides/ Seed Treatment)
|
|
|
455 |
|
|
|
9.2 |
|
|
|
444 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
416 |
|
|
|
9.0 |
|
Folicur®/
Raxil®(b)
(Fungicides/ Seed Treatment)
|
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
8.1 |
|
|
|
327 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
|
Basta®/
Liberty®(b)
(Herbicides)
|
|
|
189 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
Puma®(b)
(Herbicides)
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
Flint®/
Stratego®/Sphere®(b)
(Fungicides)
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
Atlantis®
(Herbicides)
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
Proline®
(Fungicides)
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
Poncho®
(Seed Treatment)
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
Betanal®(b)
(Herbicides)
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
Temik®
(Insecticides)
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
Other
|
|
|
3,022 |
|
|
|
61.0 |
|
|
|
2,927 |
|
|
|
60.1 |
|
|
|
2,714 |
|
|
|
58.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
4,957 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,874 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,644 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The amounts shown represent sales by main active ingredient
group; for the sake of clarity, however, only the principal
brands and categories of activity are listed. |
|
(b) |
|
The main active ingredients contained in these products are also
used in products sold by the Environmental Science business
group. These figures do not include sales by the Environmental
Science business group. |
|
(c) |
|
The active ingredient imidacloprid contained in these products
is also used in the Animal Health segments
Advantage®
product. These figures do not include sales by the Animal Health
segment. |
Segment Strategy
Crop Protection aspires, together with Bayer CropSciences
Environmental Science, BioScience segment, to be a leading
partner in providing products and combined solutions for the
production of quality food, feed and fiber. We strive to build
long-term, consistent, predictable and mutually beneficial
partnerships with our customers and stakeholders. We aim to
fulfill our commitment to sustainable development and to achieve
long-term profitable growth.
Key factors in achieving our profitability targets are new
product launches, further portfolio optimization, fostering
marketing excellence and focus on cost management. In addition
to our ongoing performance programs, our newly launched cost
structure initiative is intended to further enhance efficiency
in all areas of Bayer CropScience. We expect this new initiative
for the most part to become effective in 2009.
With its Crop Protection business, Bayer CropScience strives to
maintain its leading position in the crop protection
industry1
by utilizing its broad regional representation and a
well-balanced portfolio comprising innovative, high-performance
insecticides, fungicides, herbicides and seed treatment products.
|
|
(1) |
This statement is based on 2005 sales data published in
AgriFutura, The newsletter of Phillips MCDougall-
Agriservices, No. 77 (March 2006) and the moving annual
total sales data 2005/2006 published in Cropnosis
Agrochemical Monitor 182 (December 2006); the respective
publications with data for the full year 2006 have not yet been
published as of March 12, 2007. |
39
We attempt to achieve these strategic objectives through the
continuous introduction of new products from our research and
development pipeline, our life cycle management and the
complementary activities of our Environmental Science and
BioScience businesses.
Major Products
Imidacloprid (major brands:
Confidor®
and
Admire®)
is an active ingredient in the chemical class of neonicotinoids.
It controls a broad range of pests, including sucking pests
(e.g., aphids and whiteflies) and biting pests
(e.g., leafminers and beetles), and is suitable for a
wide variety of application methods, including foliar spray,
soil drench, seed treatment and drip irrigation. Imidacloprid is
now marketed in more than 100 countries for use on a large
variety of crops such as vegetables, fruits, rice, corn,
soybeans and cereals.
Aldicarb (major brand:
Temik®)
is a broad-spectrum carbamate insecticide and nematicide in
granular form.
Temik®
is applied to soil to protect crop roots from insects and
nematodes and to protect against pests such as aphids or mites.
Temik®
is used on a large number of crops, such as cotton, citrus and
potatoes.
Deltamethrin (major brand:
Decis®)
is a broad-spectrum pyrethroid insecticide. It is used primarily
against biting insects and is also effective against various
sucking pests.
Decis®
is marketed in more than 100 countries for use on a wide range
of crops (including vegetables, cereals, cotton and soybeans).
Tebuconazole (major brand:
Folicur®)
is a broad-spectrum fungicide registered and sold in about 100
countries for use on numerous crops including cereals,
vegetables, fruits, rice, soybeans and peanuts.
Folicur®
is especially effective against Fusarium and rusts (in
particular, Asian soybean rust) as well as many other fungal
diseases in cereals and is available in many liquid or solid
formulations adapted to our customers needs.
Trifloxystrobin (major brand:
Flint®),
the active ingredient of the
Flint®
product family, is sold in more than 80 countries for
broad-spectrum disease control in cereals, grapes, rice,
soybeans and a wide range of fruit and vegetable crops. The
product range consists of solo products and several
co-formulations (e.g.,
Sphere®,
Stratego®
and
Nativo®),
all formulated to meet the specific requirements of highly
diverse crop production systems under various climatic
conditions. In addition to efficient disease control these
products offer crop safety and beneficial physiological effects
on yield, quality and shelf life of fruit and grain.
Prothioconazole (major brand:
Proline®)
is a broad-spectrum fungicide for use on cereals, canola
(oilseed rape), peanuts, soybeans and field vegetables. It
provides long-term protection by means of a uniform and stable
distribution in the leaves. Products containing prothioconazole
are effective against stem-based diseases, leaf diseases,
especially Septoria tritici, as well as ear diseases (Fusarium
spp) in cereals.
Glufosinate-ammonium (major brand:
Basta®),
Crop Protections best selling herbicide, is a
post-emergence herbicide with a broad-spectrum of efficacy
against annual and perennial weeds and grasses. It is primarily
used on perennial tree crops, vegetables and non-crop areas and
as a harvest aid. The product is also applied as
Liberty®
on herbicide-tolerant canola in Canada, in particular on
varieties such as BioSciences
InVigor®,
and as
Ignite®
on herbicide-tolerant cotton in the United States, such as
BioSciences
FiberMax®
cotton seeds.
Fenoxaprop-P-ethyl (major brand:
Puma®)
is used in more than 75 countries and is one of the leading
products used worldwide against grass weeds in cereals. It is
also used in rice, soybeans and canola and controls grass weed
problems under a wide range of climatic and soil conditions.
Mesosulfuron-methyl (major brand:
Atlantis®)
belongs to the latest generation of safened cereal herbicide
sulfonylureas. These products offer a broad and consistent grass
control performance in global wheat production. Our ongoing
development of new mesosulfuron-methyl combinations (major
brands:
Alister®
and
Olympus®
Flex) is expected to continue to position Crop Protection as
one of the leaders in cereal herbicides.
40
The insecticidal active ingredient imidacloprid (major brand:
Gaucho®)
is Crop Protections best selling seed treatment product.
It is marketed in over 70 countries for the treatment of early
season pests and soil and leaf pests in key crops such as corn,
cereals, cotton, sugar beet and soybeans.
Clothianidin (major brand:
Poncho®)
is an insecticidal active ingredient from the chemical class of
neonicotinoids, jointly developed by Sumitomo Chemical Takeda
Agro Co. Ltd. and Bayer CropScience AG. This active ingredient
was developed primarily for the control of the major soil and
early season pests in corn, sugar beet, cereals, canola and
sunflower.
Tebuconazole (major brand:
Raxil®)
is a fungicide registered in many countries including France,
Germany, the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada,
Argentina and Australia as a seed treatment to control seed and
soil-borne diseases in cereals.
Markets and Distribution
Europe has traditionally been our strongest market in Crop
Protection, accounting for about 40 percent of our sales in
this segment in 2006. Due to the fact that the major part of our
business is realized in the northern hemisphere, the business is
affected by the seasonality of the various crop and distribution
cycles.
Crop Protection obtains a significant part of its raw materials
from LANXESS, as well as from other non-Bayer companies, but
also obtains part of its raw materials from within the Bayer
Group. Some raw materials can be subject to price volatility
caused by fluctuations in the price of crude oil, energy or
transport costs.
Generally, we market our Crop Protection products through a two-
or three-step distribution system, depending on local market
conditions. Under this system, products are sold either to
wholesalers or directly to retailers.
Our main competitors in the Crop Protection business are
Syngenta, BASF, Dow AgroSciences, Monsanto and DuPont.
Crop Protection operates major research and development
facilities on three continents: Monheim (headquarters) and
Frankfurt, Germany; Lyon and Sophia Antipolis, France; Stilwell,
Kansas and Raleigh, North Carolina; and Yuki City, Japan.
While research is concentrated in specialized sites, development
activities range from central facilities to field testing
stations across the globe, enabling product testing in the
relevant geographical areas.
Crop Protection research and development is responsible for the
identification and development of innovative, safe and
economically sustainable solutions in crop protection. Research
covers activities to identify new active ingredients that can be
developed as insecticides, fungicides or herbicides and/or other
areas in modern crop protection. In addition to classical
chemistry, biology and biochemistry, modern technologies such as
combinatorial chemistry, ultra-high-throughput-screening,
genomics and bioinformatics play an important role in the
identification of new lead structures. Collaborations with third
parties supplement our internal research activities.
Once a compound is identified for development, its biological,
environmental and toxicological profile, as well as its economic
potential, is assessed. Suitable candidates are launched in the
market after having obtained the required regulatory approvals.
We actively support our products through continuous life cycle
management. This includes the development of new formulations
for existing active ingredients and products, e.g.,
expanding their applicability to additional crops or improving
handling and facilitating application of the product.
41
The following new active ingredients were launched in 2006 or
are expected to be launched by Crop Protection in 2007, subject
to regulatory approval.
|
|
|
|
|
New active ingredients |
|
Product Family |
|
Status |
|
|
|
|
|
Fluopicolide
|
|
Fungicides |
|
Launched in 2006 |
Flubendiamide
|
|
Insecticides |
|
Launch expected in 2007 |
Tembotrione
|
|
Herbicides |
|
Launch expected in 2007 |
Fluopicolide (major brand:
Infinito®)
belongs to a new chemical class named acylpicolides. Products
containing this novel chemical compound have been developed for
use to control oomycete diseases in potatoes, vegetables and
ornamentals. The new mode of action is intended to enable
farmers to control oomycete diseases that are resistant to
standard fungicides.
Flubendiamide (major brand:
Belt®)
represents a novel chemical family of substituted phthalic acid
diamides with potent insecticidal activity.
Belt®
is a new insecticide for foliar application in annual and
perennial crops, offering protection primarily against all major
Lepidoptera species.
Belt®
is being co-developed by Nihon Nohyaku Company and Bayer
CropScience for worldwide use on vegetables, fruits, cotton,
corn, beans, tea and a number of other crops.
Tembotrione (major brand:
Laudis®)
from the triketone chemical family is a new herbicide for foliar
application in corn plants.
Laudis®
is a leaf-active substance that eliminates the protection of
chlorophyll against UV light in weeds. Tembotrione is applied
together with a safener component which enables the corn plants
to metabolize the active substance and maintain the carotinoid
layer protecting the corn plant against UV light, thereby
offering a broad-spectrum weed control.
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, BIOSCIENCE
Overview
The two business groups Environmental Science and BioScience
together form the Environmental Science, BioScience segment.
The following table shows the segments performance for the
last three years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions, except | |
|
|
percentages) | |
Total External net sales
|
|
|
989 |
|
|
|
1,022 |
|
|
|
1,056 |
|
|
Percentage of total sales from Group continuing operations
|
|
|
4.7 |
% |
|
|
4.2 |
% |
|
|
3.7 |
% |
|
External net sales by category of activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental Science
|
|
|
678 |
|
|
|
694 |
|
|
|
714 |
|
|
|
BioScience
|
|
|
311 |
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
342 |
|
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
200 |
|
The segments sales by region and totals for the past three
years are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Europe
|
|
|
340 |
|
|
|
340 |
|
|
|
342 |
|
North America
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
452 |
|
|
|
461 |
|
Asia/ Pacific
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
Latin America/ Africa/ Middle East
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
989 |
|
|
|
1,022 |
|
|
|
1,056 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42
2006 sales of the segments material products were
148 million
for
Merit®/Premise®
(representing 14.0 percent of total segment sales; compared
to
143 million,
or 14.0 percent, in 2005 and
148 million,
or 15.0 percent, in 2004) and
86 million
for
K-Othrine®/Deltagard®
(representing 8.1 percent of total segment sales; compared
to
68 million,
or 6.7 percent, in 2005 and
66 million,
or 6.7 percent, in 2004). The foregoing amounts represent
sales by main active ingredient group, however we only listed
the principal brands. Apart from these two products, no product
of this segment accounted for more than 5 percent of total
segment sales in 2006, 2005 or 2004.
Segment Strategy
The segment Environmental Science, BioScience complements Bayer
CropScience by addressing specific market needs. Environmental
Science capitalizes on Crop Protections development and
production facilities and its pipeline of new active
ingredients. BioScience leverages on Crop Protections
customer base and biological competence in bringing seeds and
plant biotechnology products to the market.
Environmental Science is among the leading suppliers for
non-agricultural pest control solutions worldwide in terms of
sales. Our strategy is to strengthen our market position by
developing and marketing quality products and providing
solutions with health or hygiene benefits or that will allow
growth of healthier plants and lawns. Our objectives also
include the development of strong partnerships with our
customers and the focus on proximity innovations,
the ability to offer customized brand-connected solutions.
BioScience is internationally active in the research,
development and marketing of seeds and solutions derived from
plant biotechnology and breeding. Our strategic approach
comprises three business fields: In Agricultural Seeds, we focus
on delivering conventional and plant biotechnology seeds with
improved performance and quality, particularly in respect of our
three core crops cotton, canola (oilseed rape) and rice. In New
Business Ventures, we are developing plant-derived materials for
applications in fields such as nutrition, health and
biomaterials. In the Vegetables field, we believe that the
Nunhems unit of BioScience is among the leading developers and
suppliers of high-quality vegetable seed varieties. Within all
three business fields, we intend to pursue growth opportunities.
Environmental Science
Environmental Science serves non-crop professional and consumer
markets worldwide, by developing and marketing products for the
green industry (including the treatment of golf courses and
industrial vegetation management), lawn, garden and household
care, professional pest control, termite and vector control and
rural hygiene. Our product portfolio includes a wide range of
insecticides, fungicides and herbicides.
Merit®
and
Premise®
are our major imidacloprid-based insecticides.
Merit®
is used in the green industry, in particular in turf and
ornamentals. It controls a large spectrum of insects such as
grubs and cutworms.
Premise®
is a product for termite control.
K-Othrine®
and
Deltagard®
(our major deltamethrin-based brands) control a large spectrum
of flying and crawling insects. Deltamethrin has been used for
many years to control insect-borne diseases such as malaria and
is recommended by the World Health Organization for that purpose.
Maxforce®
is an insecticide used in passive treatment applications such as
gels and baits.
Maxforce®s
range of products includes the active ingredients fipronil,
hydramethylnone or imidacloprid and controls a large number of
crawling insects.
Our consumer-branded products intended for sale to
non-professional users and leisure gardeners are marketed under
the umbrella brands Bayer
Advanced®
in the United States and Bayer
Garden®
in Europe.
43
Environmental Sciences business is subject to seasonality.
This seasonality is particularly pronounced for the consumer
branded lawn and garden business.
Environmental Science obtains a significant part of its raw
materials from within the Bayer Group, but also enters into
agreements with non-Bayer companies. Some raw materials may be
subject to price volatility caused by fluctuations in the price
of crude oil, energy or transport costs.
Our products are sold in the non-crop professional and consumer
markets. For professional markets, products are sold to the
green industry, the pest control industry and the public health
and rural hygiene sectors. In the consumer business, lawn and
garden products are sold to consumers through specialized
distribution channels. Active ingredients are sold to marketers
of household products.
Dow AgroSciences, Syngenta, BASF and Scotts are our main
competitors in the overall Environmental Science business.
The molecules discovered by Crop Protection research are also
tested and evaluated in Environmental Science for potential
development. Molecules from other companies may be tested and
purchased if suitable. Development projects include passive
treatments (gels, baits) and formulations to control insects, as
well as new herbicide products and new mixtures of fungicides
for the turf and ornamental market segments.
In 2006, our key launches were the fungicide
Tartantm
(based on trifloxystrobin and triadimefon) and the insecticide
Forbidtm
(spiromesifen-based) in the green industry and the sprayable
Quickbayt®
(imidacloprid-based) for fly control in professional pest
control applications. In 2007 we expect to launch, among others,
Termite Killer Granules (imidacloprid-based) and
All-In-One Lawn Weed & Crabgrass Killer (based
on 2,4-D and dicamba)
for the pest and weed consumer market in the United States, and
the insecticide
Exemptor®
(thiacloprid-based) in the green industry in Europe.
BioScience
BioScience focuses on the research, development and marketing of
conventional and genetically enhanced seeds and other plant
biotechnology products.
With Nunhems
(Nunhems®),
BioScience is one of the leading developers and suppliers of
high-quality vegetable seed varieties that are marketed to
professional growers, plant propagators, seed dealers and the
fresh produce and food processing industries. The main crop
seeds are carrots, onions, melons, leeks and tomatoes.
FiberMax®
cotton seed brand is marketed in the United States, Greece,
Spain and Turkey as well as Brazil and Mexico.
FiberMax®
varieties offer cotton growers high performance in lint yield
and fiber quality as well as advanced technologies for insect
control and herbicide resistance.
InVigor®
hybrid canola varieties are available to farmers in Canada and
the United States.
InVigor®
hybrid canola varieties provide high yield and require less
cultivation, due to their tolerance to glufosinate-ammonium.
BioScience promotes the application of
Liberty®
herbicides, developed and marketed by our Crop Protection
segment, for use on
InVigor®
varieties.
Arize®
is the trademark for our hybrid rice seed offering a high-yield,
high quality solution requiring less seeds per hectare than
conventional rice. It has been introduced in India, the
Philippines, Indonesia, Brazil and Vietnam.
44
BioScience markets its seeds to growers, distributors and
processing industries. We distribute plant biotechnology traits
either through out-licensing to seed companies for incorporation
in their own commercial seeds or through our own seed companies,
mainly under either the
InVigor®
or
FiberMax®
brands. In some cases, traits are provided to other companies
that utilize the technology in their own research.
Due to the fact that the major part of our business is realized
in the northern hemisphere, the business is affected by the
seasonality of the crop and distribution cycles.
In the bio science business, Monsanto, DuPont/ Pioneer and
Syngenta are the market leaders.
The primary BioScience research facilities are located in Lyon,
France; Haelen, The Netherlands; Gent, Belgium; and Potsdam,
Germany. Our main development sites are in the United States,
Canada, Brazil, India and Australia.
Plant biotechnology research and development is predominantly
directed towards agronomic and quality improvement. The
technologies used include all relevant tools from
identifying the gene of interest to developing it
necessary to improve key crops (cotton, canola and rice) for
growers and industrial partners. Research activities range from
the exploration of novel agronomic traits to the discovery of
new plant-based specialty products for the nutrition, health and
biomaterials markets. This includes plants with improved stress
tolerance (e.g., drought resistance), health-promoting
canola oils and the manufacture of materials based on renewable
sources.
Our growth is supported by continuous new product introduction.
We launched eight new varieties of cotton and four rice
varieties in 2006. In 2007, we expect to launch several new
varieties of cotton and one of canola.
BAYER MATERIALSCIENCE
The Bayer MaterialScience subgroup is presented in the
reportable segments Materials and Systems.
MATERIALS
Overview
As described under History and Development of the
Company, we have divested our H.C. Starck business and are
in the process of divesting our Wolff Walsrode business. Both
businesses are reported as discontinued operations. For details
see Item 5, Operating and Financial Review and
Prospects Operating Results 2004, 2005 and
2006 Discontinued Operations. As the divestiture
of Wolff Walsrode has not yet been completed as of the date of
this annual report on
Form 20-F, details
on this business also appear in this section under
WOLFF WALSRODE (Discontinued Operation).
As a result of the divestiture of H.C. Starck and the pending
divestiture of Wolff Walsrode, our Materials segment now
comprises the business units Polycarbonates and Thermoplastic
Polyurethanes. The segment data appearing in the following
tables for 2004 and 2005 have been restated to reflect the
removal of H.C. Starck and Wolff Walsrode from the Materials
segment.
45
The following table shows the segments performance for the
last three years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions, except | |
|
|
percentages) | |
Total External net sales
|
|
|
2,217 |
|
|
|
2,837 |
|
|
|
2,925 |
|
|
Percentage of total sales from Group continuing operations
|
|
|
10.6 |
% |
|
|
11.4 |
% |
|
|
10.1 |
% |
|
External net sales by category of activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Polycarbonates
|
|
|
2,035 |
|
|
|
2,645 |
|
|
|
2,720 |
|
|
|
Thermoplastic Polyurethanes
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
514 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
The segments external sales, by region and in total, for
the past three years are as follows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Europe
|
|
|
863 |
|
|
|
1,063 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
North America
|
|
|
481 |
|
|
|
609 |
|
|
|
599 |
|
Asia/ Pacific
|
|
|
716 |
|
|
|
908 |
|
|
|
947 |
|
Latin America/ Africa/ Middle East
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2,217 |
|
|
|
2,837 |
|
|
|
2,925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales of the segments material products in 2006 were
1,443 million
for the
Makrolon®
product family (representing 49.3 percent of total segment
sales, compared to
1,513 million,
or 53.3 percent, in 2005 and
1,088 million,
or 49.1 percent, in 2004) and
563 million
for
Bayblend®
(representing 19.3 percent of total segment sales, compared
to
485 million,
or 17.1 percent, in 2005 and
360 million,
or 16.2 percent, in 2004). Apart from these two products,
no product of this segment accounted for more than
5 percent of total segment sales in 2006, 2005 or 2004.
Segment Strategy
Our goal is to continue expanding our global market positions by
exploiting the growth potential of our portfolio. The completion
of initial investment projects in Asia supports our strong
commitment to this fast growing region. We continue to look for
opportunities to further strengthen our position in the
Materials segment. We intend to enhance the segments
overall performance by making its research and development,
marketing and administration structures more efficient and
continuously improving its cost position.
We have recently started production in the first phase of our
new world-scale polycarbonate production plant in Asia, which
shares an integrated production site with the production of
diphenylmethane diisocyanate (MDI) discussed
under Bayer MaterialScience Systems
below. We believe that this plant will help Polycarbonates
(PCS) to improve its cost competitiveness and its access to
state-of-the-art
technology in this growth region. We plan further capacity
expansions to meet growing demand for polycarbonates. We plan to
monitor the product life cycles of current applications and to
allocate sufficient resources for product and application
development in growth segments. In addition to our current
expansion in China, we intend to evaluate potential business
opportunities in other regions on an ongoing basis in an effort
to extend our market coverage. In our Compounding business, we
intend to strengthen our business by increasing our geographic
coverage. For our semifinished products in Polycarbonate Films
and Sheets, we continue to strive for profitability with a focus
on products with strong growth prospects.
Thermoplastic Polyurethanes (TPU) continues to shift its
business focus towards high margin growth products. With this
new focus, TPU intends to reach and maintain higher levels of
profitability. With our acquisition of the Ure-Tech Group in
Taiwan, expected to be completed in the second quarter of 2007,
we intend to increase TPUs market share in Asia.
46
Polycarbonates
With its broad product portfolio, our business unit
Polycarbonates (Polycarbonates, Polycarbonate Blends,
Polycarbonate Films and Sheets) includes some of the leading
global suppliers and manufacturers of engineering polycarbonates
(based on capacity). Our Bayer Sheet Europe GmbH (formerly
Makroform GmbH) has a strong position as a supplier of
polycarbonate sheets. Our products have chemical and physical
properties that enable them to resist low or high operating
temperatures as well as corrosive chemicals and solvents.
|
|
|
Polycarbonates
(Makrolon®/APEC®) |
Polycarbonates are plastics that are transparent and highly
stable across a wide temperature range. Because of their light
weight, impact stability and design flexibility, polycarbonates
are used in the electrical/electronic industry in general and in
the field of optical data storage media (such as pre-recorded
and recordable CDs and DVDs), in particular and for injection
molding purposes. The construction industry is also a major user
of polycarbonates, for example, for polycarbonate sheet
applications.
Makrolon®
is our leading polycarbonate product range. Our other
polycarbonates include the
APEC®
product range for high temperature uses, for example as
components for automobile headlights.
|
|
|
Polycarbonate Blends
(Bayblend®/Makroblend®) |
Blend technology can transform a palette of a few basic polymers
into a wide range of new, advanced polymers with tailored
properties, creating user-specific solutions. Polycarbonate
blends are widely used in the automotive, electrical/electronic
and business machine industries. The
Bayblend®
product lines of amorphous, thermoplastic polymer blends based
on polycarbonate and ABS (acrylonitrile/butadiene/styrene) are
our leading blends for a broad range of applications.
Makroblend®
is our brand name for engineering thermoplastics blends based on
Polybutylene Terephthalate (PBT) or Polyethylene
Terephthalate (PET).
Polycarbonate films,
Makrofol®,
are made of our polycarbonate
Makrolon®
and are characterized by product attributes such as high heat
resistance, good printability and graphic quality. The
polycarbonate films of our
Makrofol®
range are used for applications such as instrument dials,
automotive heater control panels, nameplates and a variety of
film insert molding parts (a combination of a back printed and
formed foil with
Makrolon®
and
Bayblend®)
as well as for security identification cards.
Bayfol®
is the trade name of our films made of polycarbonate blends and
other polymers.
Bayfol®
CR films are noted for their strong chemical resistance and
enhanced flexibility compared with pure polycarbonate film. They
are both thermo formable and cold formable, with good electrical
insulating and dielectric properties, and are easily printable
with standard inks. Their main application areas are keypads or
housings in the information technology industry. Further
applications are in the area of IMD (In Mold Decoration)
technology and automotive interior applications.
|
|
|
Polycarbonate Sheets (Fabricated Products) |
We also produce solid and multiwall sheets with a broad range of
characteristics for a wide variety of applications. These
materials consist of polycarbonates, polycarbonate blends or
thermoplastic polyesters. We market our sheets as
Makrolon®,
Bayloy®,
Vivak®
and
Axpet®.
Makrolon®,
which accounts for the largest share of our revenues from
sheets, is a material with high impact resistance and can be
exposed to a wide range of temperatures.
47
We sell the products of our Polycarbonates business entities to
numerous customers worldwide. These customers include
injection-molding operators and a large number of
plastic-component manufacturers, whose products are
predominantly used in the automotive, electrical, electrical
engineering, construction, data technology, medical and leisure
industries. We have recently commenced polycarbonate production
at our new unit at the Bayer integrated polymers production site
in Caojing, China. The units initial capacity is 100,000
tons per year. The new plant represents the first time that
Bayer has installed a melt polycarbonate process on such a large
scale.
Depending on the region and the general economic situation,
sales of polycarbonates may show moderate seasonality.
Generally, sales are lower in the first quarter in all regions.
Bayer does not produce basic petrochemicals. The principal
petrochemical raw materials consumed by our Polycarbonates
business unit are acetone and phenol, supplied exclusively by
third parties. We do produce Bisphenol-A, which is a major
precursor of polycarbonate based on phenol and acetone. Our
costs are affected by fluctuations in raw material prices,
mainly driven by the price volatility of crude oil and benzene.
We typically procure third-party raw materials under long-term
contracts that contain cost-based and market price formulas,
which partially reduce raw material price fluctuation.
We market substantially all of our plastic products through
regional distribution channels, supported by regional competence
centers and by our head office. In addition, we also use trading
houses and local distributors to work with small volume
customers.
Our major global competitors are GE Plastics and Dow Chemical.
In the Asia/Pacific region we also compete with a number of local
competitors.
Our Polycarbonates business unit allocates resources for
research and development both to process and product
development, with the aim of constantly improving our
manufacturing processes and of developing new formulations and
applications of our products. The primary research and
development facilities are located in Krefeld-Uerdingen,
Leverkusen and Dormagen, Germany and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
The Polycarbonates business unit is also part of the new
polymers research and development center (PRDC), at Pudong,
China (near Shanghai) together with the other Bayer
MaterialScience (BMS) business units.
We are currently working further on the optimization of our new
polycarbonate melt manufacturing process. Other current projects
relate to the analysis of our existing manufacturing processes
to improve both product quality and cost performance.
In product development, we focus our activities on developing
new blends, refining material for optical data storage,
developing modified base materials for polycarbonate sheets and
modifying the surface of polycarbonates using various coating
technologies. Examples of our development areas are set forth in
the following table:
|
|
|
Product/ Brand Name |
|
Application |
|
|
|
Surface-modified
Makrolon®
|
|
Automotive, extrusion, architecture, electrical |
Improved
Makrolon®
ODS grade
|
|
New ODS formats, such as Blue Laser based disks and HD-DVD |
Extension of
Bayblend®
FR series
|
|
Business machines/ information technology |
Makrolon®
with improved flame retardant
|
|
Electrical, automotive |
Diffusor sheets for LCD Screens
|
|
Electrical/electronic |
In the area of polycarbonate films, we are developing value
added films (comprising new resins as well as surface-modified
films) to enter new market segments such as soft touch coated
Makrofol®
films interior parts used in the automotive industry and mobile
phone housings.
48
Thermoplastic Polyurethanes
Our Thermoplastic Polyurethanes business unit develops and
markets a wide variety of granules that serve as raw materials
for extrusion, blow molding, calandering and injection molding
processed products. Additionally, our subsidiaries Epurex Films
(Germany) and Deerfield Urethane (Massachusetts) manufacture
different grades of thermoplastic polyurethane films (TPU films).
Thermoplastic polyurethanes, or TPUs (TPU Resins and Films),
belong to the family of high-performance thermoplastic
elastomers and possess a combination of properties such as high
resilience, abrasion resistance and flexibility. We market our
thermoplastic polyurethanes granulates under the trademarks
Desmopan®,
Texin®
and
Desmomelt®.
TPU-containing elastomer compounds are also developed and
marketed cooperatively by BMS and PTS (Plastic Technologie
Service Marketing & Vertriebs GmbH) under the trademark
Desmoflex®.
Our TPU films are marketed under the trademarks
Walotex®,
Walopur®,
and
Platilon®
(Epurex Films) and
Dureflex®
(Deerfield Urethane). The acquisition of the Ure-Tech Group in
Taiwan, expected to be completed in the second quarter of 2007,
will add products under the trademark
Utechllan®
to our portfolio.
Our Thermoplastic Polyurethanes business entities (TPU Resins
and TPU Films) primarily serve customers in the sports and
leisure, automotive and engineering industries; other users
include the textile, cable and agricultural industries
(e.g., animal ear tags).
Temporary fluctuations in prices for raw materials and energy
can have an impact on the cost of our products. We secure our
most important chemical raw materials through long-term
contracts.
Our head office in Leverkusen, Germany, has global
responsibility for the business. We coordinate and carry out our
sales and marketing from Leverkusen, Germany, for the regions
Europe, Middle East, Africa and Latin America, from our regional
hubs in North America (Pittsburgh) and the Asia/ Pacific region
(Hong Kong), and through our various national subsidiaries.
We regard the following companies as the main competitors of our
TPU business entities:
TPU Resins: BASF/ Elastogran, Lubrizol/
Noveon, Huntsman, Dow Chemical;
TPU Films: Stevens Urethane, Fait Plast, Ding
Zing.
The bulk of research and development activities conducted by the
Thermoplastic Polyurethanes business entities consists of
developing high performance thermoplastic polyurethanes resins
and films, such as highly UV-stable and transparent grades for
foils in solar modules.
TPU Resins primary development facilities are located in
Dormagen, Germany and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The development
facilities of TPU Films are located in Bomlitz, Germany (Epurex
Films) and in Whately, Massachusetts (Deerfield Urethane).
SYSTEMS
Overview
Our segment Systems comprises the business units Polyurethanes;
Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants; and Inorganic Basic Chemicals.
49
The following table shows the segments performance for the
last three years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions, except | |
|
|
percentages) | |
Total External net sales
|
|
|
5,349 |
|
|
|
6,609 |
|
|
|
7,236 |
|
|
Percentage of total sales from Group continuing operations
|
|
|
25.6 |
% |
|
|
26.8 |
% |
|
|
25.0 |
% |
|
External net sales by category of activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Polyurethanes
|
|
|
3,872 |
|
|
|
4,792 |
|
|
|
5,182 |
|
|
|
Coatings Adhesives Sealants
|
|
|
1,237 |
|
|
|
1,330 |
|
|
|
1,488 |
|
|
|
Inorganic Basic Chemicals
|
|
|
218 |
|
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
403 |
|
|
|
Others
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
736 |
|
|
|
703 |
|
The segments external sales, by region and in total, for
the past three years are as follows.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Europe
|
|
|
2,494 |
|
|
|
3,035 |
|
|
|
3,302 |
|
North America
|
|
|
1,483 |
|
|
|
1,891 |
|
|
|
2,023 |
|
Asia/ Pacific
|
|
|
822 |
|
|
|
979 |
|
|
|
1,060 |
|
Latin America/ Africa/ Middle East
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
704 |
|
|
|
851 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
5,349 |
|
|
|
6,609 |
|
|
|
7,236 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 sales of the segments material products were
3,004 million
for
Desmodur®/Mondur®
products (representing 41.5 percent of total segment sales,
compared to
2,613 million,
or 39.5 percent, in 2005 and
2,242 million,
or 41.9 percent, in 2004) and
741 million
for
Arcol®
(representing 10.2 percent of total segment sales, compared
to
724 million,
or 11.0 percent, in 2005 and
536 million,
or 10.0 percent, in 2004). Apart from these two products,
no other product of the segment accounted for more than
5 percent of segment sales in 2006, 2005 and 2004.
Segment Strategy
Our goal is to continue expanding our global market positions by
exploiting the growth potential of our portfolio. The completion
of initial investment projects in Asia supports our strong
commitment to this fast growing region. We continue to look for
opportunities to further strengthen our position in the Systems
segment. We intend to enhance the segments overall
performance by making its research and development, marketing
and administration structures more efficient and continuously
improving its cost position.
We believe that the completion of the first phase of our world
scale diphenylmethane diisocyanate (MDI) production
facility in Asia will help Polyurethanes to improve its cost
competitiveness and its access to
state-of-the-art
technology in this growth region. We intend our focus on
quality, as well as on product and process innovation, to
enhance our penetration of the strong growing Asia markets. With
further increase of our MDI capacity, we intend to help meet the
increasing global demand for these products. Portfolio
management activities are planned in selected segments to
improve profitability by shifting the focus towards high value
products. Furthermore, we are planning to build a world-scale
production facility for toluene diisocyanate (TDI) in Asia.
The business unit Coatings, Adhesives and Sealants intends to
focus its activities on defending its market position in the
field of Base Modified Isocyanates. We intend to meet increasing
demand in growth regions by extension and/or adaptation of our
production facilities. In the field of Resins we intend to
strive for profitability improvement by focusing on modern
technologies and portfolio optimization. A stronger focus on
high margin products is expected to further contribute to this
goal.
50
Inorganic Basic Chemicals provides basic raw materials such as
chlorine and caustic soda to the business units Polyurethanes;
Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants; and Polycarbonates, as well as to
third parties, using its modern technology. In an effort to
ensure the best possible cost position and uninterrupted supply,
various strategic options to produce such basic raw materials or
to buy them from third parties are being pursued depending on
the specific characteristics of our production sites.
The entity New Business within BMS identifies and
evaluates market and technology trends across all of BMS
business units and devolves business ideas into projects to
develop new products and applications that extend beyond our
existing core business of the company.
Polyurethanes
Our Polyurethanes business entities (MDI, TDI, Polyether) focus
on the development, production and marketing of isocyanates and
polyol materials for polyurethane formulations and systems used
in producing a wide variety of polyurethane polymers for a broad
range of industrial and consumer applications.
Polyurethanes are polymers formed through the reaction of two
liquid chemicals: an isocyanate typically
diphenylmethane diisocyanate (MDI) or toluene diisocyanate
(TDI) and a polymeric alcohol such as polyether
polyols. We produce a range of different isocyanates and
polyether polyols under such brand names as
Desmodur®
and
Desmophen®.
The characteristics of a given polyurethane depend on both the
material components used as well as the precise proportion of
each in the mix.
Our customers use our isocyanates or polyether polyols, or both,
to create their own specific polyurethane formulations. In
addition, we design and evaluate custom blends to meet specific
customer requirements. The customer receives a
ready-to-use
two-component system. The precise formulation of each custom
blend is proprietary.
Typical applications for which our customers use our
polyurethane materials include furniture, mattresses, shoes,
automotive components, appliances, sport and leisure equipment
and construction.
Europe and the NAFTA nations remain the primary markets for our
Polyurethanes business entities, with the Asian market showing
the strongest prospects for future growth.
The predominant cushioning material for upholstered furniture
manufactured today is flexible polyurethane foam. For our
customers applications, we are currently aware of no
man-made or natural substitute materials that could replace
significant amounts of flexible polyurethane foams in
substantial quantity. Rigid polyurethane foam is used for
thermal insulation purposes in competition with other insulating
materials such as mineral fibers and polystyrene foam.
Polyurethane elastomers compete with other thermoplastic
materials on cost, performance and fit with the production mix
at the customers site.
In the automotive area, there is constant competition between
polyurethanes and other polymers in many applications due to the
required physical properties, costs, design or functional
requirements.
On a worldwide level, the Polyurethanes business entities
sales are not subject to significant seasonality. On the
regional level, business can display seasonality where, for
example, revenue depends on such seasonal industries as
construction and other outdoor applications.
The basic raw materials for our isocyanates and polyols are
petrochemical raw materials. We typically purchase these on the
open market mostly under long-term contracts, as Bayer generally
does not produce petrochemicals. However, through a global joint
venture with Lyondell, we have acquired a source for propylene
oxide, one of our key raw materials. These petrochemical raw
materials are subject to price fluctuation driven by supply and
demand factors and price volatility in the crude oil and
derivates markets.
51
The Polyurethanes business entities coordinate and carry out
their sales and marketing from the head office in Leverkusen,
Germany, and through our various national subsidiaries. Our key
account managers serve our globally active major customers
directly. To a much smaller degree we sell our products through
systems houses and traders. Systems houses are
focused regionally and typically serve smaller-volume customers.
To further increase efficiency along the supply chain, we have
established regional service centers. They act as a central
point of contact for customers on all issues concerning order
processing, logistics and billing.
Our main competitors for the Polyurethanes business entities are
BASF, Dow Chemical and Huntsman.
The business entities primary research and technical
development facilities are located in Dormagen and Leverkusen,
Germany; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, South Charleston, West
Virginia; Amagasaki, Japan; and Shanghai, China.
The main areas of innovation in the polyurethane field are
currently the development of new or improved polyether polyol
types and blends as well as the improvement of manufacturing
processes. The Polyurethanes business entities concentrate their
research and development efforts with respect to aromatic
isocyanates on improving existing products and technologies for
their manufacture. Our TDI facility in Caojing, China, that is
planned to come on stream in 2009, will use such improved
manufacturing processes. High-throughput experiments are used
for the development of new formulations and are intended to help
to reduce
time-to-market for new
products.
In product development, we focus our activities on extending the
applications for new composite materials. We also work to
improve flame resistance and thermal insulation properties. We
develop other materials for durability aspects using various
technologies as summarized in the following table:
|
|
|
Product/Brand Name |
|
Application |
|
|
|
Baypreg®
F
|
|
Automotive door trim carrier |
Multitec®
|
|
Bathtubs, hood/fender for agricultural vehicles |
Baydur®
|
|
Combinations with wood |
Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants
Our Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants business entities (Resins,
RES; Base and Modified Isocyanates, BMI) develop and market a
wide variety of products that serve as raw materials for
lacquers, coatings, sealants and adhesives.
Polyurethane lacquers are formed through the combination of an
isocyanates component with a polyol-like polyester,
polyacrylate-polyether- or polycarbonate-polyols. We offer a
variety of polyol components branded as
Desmophen®,
Rucote®
and
Bayhydrol®
(RES) and polyisocyanates such as
Desmodur®,
Desmodur®
BL,
Crelan®
and
Bayhydur®
(BMI). This variety enables us to provide custom-tailored
solutions for a number of different applications.
Our special material unit produces such specialty products as
Pergut®
(RES) for coatings and adhesives,
Impranil®,
our polyurethane coating systems for textiles, and
Baybond®
for glass fiber sizing.
52
Dispercoll®,
Desmocoll®
and
Baypren®
(RES) are our raw materials for adhesives. Their primary
users are shoe manufacturers, although we also have customers
from the automotive, furniture and building industries.
Our Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants business entities are a major
producer of raw materials for coatings and adhesives. The
primary ultimate end users of our products are the automotive,
furniture, plastics, construction and adhesives industries;
other users include the textile, shoe and building industries.
Generally, our revenue is not subject to significant
seasonality. Some of the individual markets and regions that we
serve experience seasonal fluctuation, such as the building
industry during the winter months or southern Europe during the
summer.
Temporary fluctuations in prices, such as the price of crude oil
or energy, can have a significant effect on the cost of our raw
materials. We secure our most important chemical raw materials
primarily through long-term contracts.
We coordinate and carry out our sales and marketing from our
head office in Leverkusen, Germany, and through our various
national subsidiaries. Our key account managers serve our
globally active major customers directly.
We regard the following companies as the chief competitors of
our Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants business entities.
|
|
|
|
|
Resin components (RES): Cytec, Cray Valley, DIC
(Dainippon Ink and Chemicals), DSM, Eternal, BASF; |
|
|
|
Aliphatic isocyanates (BMI): Rhodia, Degussa, BASF, Asahi
Kasei, NPU (Nippon Polyurethane Industry); |
|
|
|
Aromatic isocyanates (BMI): Dow Chemical, Mitsui
Chemicals, SAPICI. |
The Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants business entities focus their
research and development activities on developing products that
we can formulate into high performance coatings, adhesives and
sealants, such as aliphatic and aromatic polyisocyanates and
resin components. We are also exploring ways of reducing the
amount of solvent needed by technologies such as high solids and
waterborne and powder coatings systems.
We are working, together with the U.S. company InPhase
Technologies on the development of new photoactive polymers for
holographic data-storage applications. InPhases first
generation product will be a read-only memory storage medium
holding 300 GB of data.
In collaboration with the British coatings manufacturer E. Wood,
we are developing a polyurea system based on a special aliphatic
polyisocyanate. This new formulation is used for the
rehabilitation of drinking water pipes.
The business entities primary research and development
facilities are located in Leverkusen, Germany and Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania and Shanghai, China.
Inorganic Basic Chemicals
The business unit Inorganic Basic Chemicals (IBC) produces
inorganic basic chemicals such as chlorine, caustic soda,
hydrogen and hydrochloric acid. Its focus is on the safe and
cost-efficient supply of chlorine to internal and external
customers.
53
Inorganic basic chemicals are of major importance for Bayer
MaterialScience (BMS): about 70 percent of BMS sales
are dependent on chlorine. Chlorine is used for the production
of intermediates that are subsequently processed into a variety
of products, such as polyurethanes and polycarbonates. The four
IBC production sites in Leverkusen, Dormagen and
Krefeld-Uerdingen, Germany and Baytown, Texas have a total
chlorine capacity of around 1.4 million metric tons per
year. At sites where Bayer does not produce any chlorine, IBC
supports external chlorine procurement.
In addition to chlorine, sodium chloride electrolysis generates
caustic soda and hydrogen. These by-products, as far as they are
not used internally, are sold in external markets.
During the processing of chlorine into intermediate products,
hydrochloric acid may be produced. If it is not sold or used
internally, it is recycled in the hydrochloric acid electrolysis
units of IBC in Leverkusen and Dormagen, Germany and Baytown,
Texas.
In general, chlorine is supplied by pipeline to internal and
external customers located at Bayer sites where chlorine is
produced. IBC markets the caustic soda and hydrochloric acid
that is not used internally to customers from various industries
worldwide.
The main raw materials for chlorine production are sodium
chloride and electrical power. Sodium chloride is purchased on
the open market under long term contractual agreements and
therefore generally not subject to price volatility. Power is
purchased via Bayer Industry Services in Germany. In 2006, our
costs for electrical power increased by about 20 percent
due to increased market prices.
Our main competitors are Dow Chemical, Solvay, Akzo Nobel, BASF,
Vestolit, Ineos, Olin, PPG and Formosa Plastics.
Processes and plants are continuously enhanced and optimized
within IBC while keeping in mind environmental compatibility.
The main area of innovation in chlorine production is currently
the development of the Oxygen Depolarized Cathode
(ODC) in sodium chloride alkali (sodium chloride) and
hydrochloric acid membrane electrolysis to significantly reduce
power consumption. We intend to use this technology to supply
the isocyanate production in Caojing, China, with chlorine
beginning in 2008.
WOLFF WALSRODE (Discontinued Operation)
Overview
In December 2006, Bayer signed an agreement with Dow Chemical
Company concerning the sale of Bayers Wolff Walsrode
business. The sale is subject to the approval of the relevant
antitrust authorities. Assuming these approvals are received, we
expect the closing of the transaction to occur by the end of the
first half of 2007. The Wolff Walsrode business is reported as
discontinued operations prior to the sale. For details refer to
Item 5, Operating and Financial Review and
Prospects Operating Results 2004, 2005 and
2006 Discontinued Operations and Note 7.2
to the consolidated financial statements contained elsewhere in
this annual report on
Form 20-F.
The following table shows Wolff Walsrodes performance in
the last three years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
External net sales
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
334 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
54
We operate the Wolff Walsrode business primarily through Wolff
Walsrode AG, our wholly-owned subsidiary, assisted by other
companies of the Bayer Group. The Wolff Walsrode business
develops, produces and markets cellulose derivatives as well as
various sausage casings.
Major Products
Cellulose Derivatives
|
|
|
|
|
Walocel®M
is an additive that regulates water balance. It improves the
workability and adhesion of building materials such as tile
adhesives, plasters, mortars and dispersion paints. |
|
|
|
Walsroder®
NC serves in resin form in wood coatings and other
industrial coatings as well as in printing inks for flexible
packaging. It is also used as a component of nail polish and
other specialty items. |
|
|
|
Walocel®C
is used primarily as a thickener and binder in water-based
systems. It is used in pharmaceuticals, dairy products and
toothpaste, as well as in ceramics compounding, textile and
paper manufacture and oil drilling. |
Other
|
|
|
|
|
Under the brand name
Walsroder®,
we offer a wide range of sausage skins for industrial or
handcraft usage. |
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PROTECTION
To succeed, Bayer must continually seek new products that
provide our customers with better solutions for existing
problems and new solutions for emerging problems. This requires
us to expend significant effort on research, development,
manufacturing and marketing. To preserve the value of our
investment, we rely on the patent and trademark laws of the
jurisdictions where we do business. In addition, our production
technologies typically incorporate specialized proprietary
know-how.
We have both developed intellectual property internally and
acquired it as assignee through acquisitions. In addition, Bayer
may from time to time grant licenses to third parties to use our
patents and know-how, and may obtain licenses from others to
manufacture and sell products using their technology and
know-how.
Patents
We seek to protect our products with patents in major markets.
Depending on the jurisdiction, patent protection may be
available for:
|
|
|
|
|
individual active ingredients; |
|
|
|
specific compounds, formulations and combinations containing
active ingredients; |
|
|
|
manufacturing processes; |
|
|
|
intermediates useful in the manufacture of products; |
|
|
|
genomic research; and |
|
|
|
new uses for existing products. |
The protection that a patent provides varies from country to
country, depending on the type of claim granted, the scope of
the claims coverage and the legal remedies available for
enforcement. For example, although patent protection in the
United States is generally strong, under some circumstances,
U.S. law permits generic pharmaceuticals manufacturers to
seek regulatory approval of generic products before the patents
expire. See Item 8, Financial Information
Legal Proceedings. In addition, some developing countries
have announced plans to reduce patent protection for some drugs.
55
The advance of genomic research has accelerated our patent
filings for biological products. We typically seek protection
upon determining a genes function.
We currently hold thousands of patents, and have applications
pending for a significant number of new patents. Although
patents are important to our business, we believe that, with the
exception of the patents covering
Adalat®,
Avelox®,
Betaferon®,
Campath®,
Cipro®,
Leukine®,
Levitra®,
Magnevist®,
Mirena®,
Ultravist®
and
Yasmin®
and imidacloprid, no single patent (or group of related patents)
is material to our business as a whole.
|
|
|
Term and Expiration of Patents |
Patents are valid for varying periods, depending on the laws of
the jurisdiction granting the patent. In some jurisdictions,
patent protection begins from the date a patent application was
filed; in others, it begins on the date the patent is granted.
The European Union, the United States, Japan and certain other
countries extend or restore patent terms or provide
supplementary protection to compensate for patent term loss due
to regulatory review and substantial investments in product
research and development and regulatory approval. Our policy is
to obtain these extensions where possible.
Patent protection in our major markets for some of our key
products is scheduled to expire in the near term. Although the
expiration of a patent for an active ingredient normally results
in the loss of market exclusivity, we may continue to derive
commercial benefits from:
|
|
|
|
|
subsequently granted patents on processes and intermediates used
in manufacturing the active ingredient; |
|
|
|
patents relating to specific uses for the active ingredient; |
|
|
|
patents relating to novel compositions and formulations; and |
|
|
|
in certain markets (including the United States), market
exclusivity under laws other than patent laws. |
56
The following table sets forth the expiration dates in our major
markets of the patents covering
Adalat®,
Avelox®,
ciprofloxacin, imidacloprid, vardenafil, sorafenib,
Betaseron®,
Yasmin®,
Magnevist®,
Ultravist®,
Mirena®,
Campath®
and
Leukine®:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Market | |
|
|
| |
Product |
|
Germany | |
|
France | |
|
U.K. | |
|
Italy | |
|
Spain | |
|
Japan | |
|
U.S.A. | |
|
Canada | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Adalat®
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Crystal patent (Retard)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adalat®
CC (Coat Core)
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
Avelox®
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compound
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
Hydrochloride-Monohydrate
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
|
Tablet formulation
|
|
|
2019 |
|
|
|
2019 |
|
|
|
2019 |
|
|
|
2019 |
|
|
|
2019 |
|
|
|
2019 |
|
|
|
2019 |
|
|
|
2019 |
|
Ciprofloxacin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active ingredient
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
IV formulation
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
Tablet formulation
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
Imidacloprid
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
Vardenafil compound
|
|
|
2018 |
|
|
|
2018 |
|
|
|
2018 |
|
|
|
2018 |
|
|
|
2018 |
|
|
|
2018 |
|
|
|
2018 |
|
|
|
2018 |
|
Sorafenib compound
|
|
|
2020 |
|
|
|
2020 |
|
|
|
2020 |
|
|
|
2020 |
|
|
|
2020 |
|
|
|
2020 |
|
|
|
2022 |
|
|
|
2020 |
|
Betaseron®
product
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2008 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2016 |
|
Yasmin®
formulation
|
|
|
2020 |
(b) |
|
|
2020 |
(b) |
|
|
2020 |
(b) |
|
|
2020 |
(b) |
|
|
2020 |
(b) |
|
|
2020 |
(b) |
|
|
2020 |
(b) |
|
|
2020 |
(b) |
Magnevist®
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Formulation
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Method of use
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
|
|
Ultravist®
product
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mirena®
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Device (inserter)
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
Process
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2013 |
|
|
|
2013 |
|
Campath®
product
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
|
|
2015 |
|
|
|
2014 |
|
Leukine®
product
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2012 |
|
|
|
2017 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Including extension of the original patent term which was
scheduled to expire in 2001 by national supplementary protection
certificate until 2009 and later reduction of said extension
until 2007 under Italian Law No. 112/2002. The final
reduced term remains uncertain and falls within the jurisdiction
of an ordinary court. The law and its application by the Italian
Patent and Trademark office has been legally challenged and may
be subject to further legal challenges. |
|
(b) |
|
Composition comprising micronized drospirenone together with
ethinylestradiol. |
See Item 8, Financial Information Legal
Proceedings for a description of patent-related litigation
in which we are involved.
Trademarks
Our best-known trademarks include
Adalat®,
Aleve®,
Ascensia®,
Aspirin®,
Avalox®/
Avelox®,
Basta®/
Liberty®,
Betaferon®/Betaseron®,
Ciprobay®/
Cipro®,
Confidor®/
Gaucho®/
Admire®/
Merit®,
Flint®/
Stratego®/
Sphere®,
Kogenate®,
Levitra®,
Magnevist®,
Makrolon®
and
Yasmin®,
as well as the Bayer name itself and our distinctive Bayer
cross; and the corporate names Schering and
Medrad. (Please note that the rights to the name
Schering in the United States and Canada do not
belong to us but to Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey.
Schering-Plough Corporation and the company acquired by Bayer in
June 2006, Bayer Schering Pharma AG (formerly named Schering
AG), Berlin, Germany, are unaffiliated companies that have been
totally independent of each other for many years.) Trademark
protection varies widely throughout the world. In some
countries, trademark protection continues as long as the mark is
used. Other countries require registration of
57
trademarks. Registrations are generally for fixed but renewable
terms. Although our portfolio of trademarks is important to our
business, we do not believe that any single trademark is
material to Bayers business as a whole.
GOVERNMENTAL REGULATION
Our business is subject to significant governmental regulation.
Many of our products must be examined and approved by regulatory
agencies for safety, environmental impact and effectiveness
before we may market them. In addition, all our operations must
comply with applicable environmental regulations. Relevant
regulations are typically of a national scope, although within
the European Union (EU), a considerable degree of harmonization
exists. The EU institutions have created a common regulatory
framework that applies in all of the EU Member States (and that
sometimes allows EU Member States to adopt more detailed and
more stringent regulations), and has indirect harmonizing
effects in certain other European countries.
Product Regulation
The primary emphasis of product regulation is to assure the
safety and effectiveness of our products. In the United States,
the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates many of
our products, primarily in our HealthCare business. In addition,
our pharmaceutical facilities typically require regulatory
approval and are subject to periodic re-inspection. Comparable
regulatory frameworks are in place in other regions as well,
such as the EU, Japan, China and in most other industrialized
countries.
The Toxic Substance Control Act (TSCA) administered under
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) regulates product registrations, called
premanufacture notices (PMNs), for new industrial chemicals and
polymers and can also regulate existing chemicals under test
rules. In addition, the FDA food-contact regulations permit use
of many of our chemicals and materials in food-contact
applications. Furthermore, the EPA registers biocidal products
for use in antimicrobial applications in addition to those for
agricultural uses. For industrial chemicals and polymers in the
United States, in order to insure proper use and handling,
product safety is regulated by the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA). The OSHA Hazard Communication
Standard requires information concerning the hazards of
chemicals to be transmitted to our workers and customers through
material safety data sheets and precautionary product labels for
potential hazards from exposure to chemicals.
Similarly, in the EU as well as in other regions, there are
restrictive rules applicable to areas including the production,
marketing, processing, use and disposal of dangerous
substances and preparations, food and feeding stuffs and
the use of biocides.
Pharmaceutical products must be examined and approved by
regulatory agencies for safety and efficacy before we may market
them. Our pharmaceutical facilities require regulatory approval
and are subject to periodic re-inspection. All our operations
must comply with applicable quality and environmental
regulations. For more information on how regulatory requirements
may impact our business, refer to Item 3, Key
Information Risk Factors Regulatory
controls and changes in public policy may reduce the
profitability of new or current products.
The various regulatory authorities administer and execute
requirements covering the testing, safety, efficacy, labeling,
approval, manufacturing, marketing and post-marketing
surveillance of prescription pharmaceuticals. Pharmaceutical
products must receive regulatory approval before they can be
marketed. The regulatory requirements follow stringent standards
that vary by country. Before a drug can qualify for marketing
approval, a registration dossier must be submitted to a
regulatory authority for review and evaluation. The registration
dossier principally contains detailed information about the
safety, efficacy and quality of a new medication. It also
provides details about the manufacturing process, the production
facilities and information to be provided to patients. The
registration process can last from a few months to a few years
and depends on the nature of the medication under review, the
quality of the submitted data and the efficiency of the relevant
agency. If a drug meets the approval requirements, the
regulatory authority will grant a product license for marketing.
In some
58
countries, negotiation on pricing and reimbursement follow the
grant of the product license. The process of developing a
pharmaceutical product from discovery through testing,
registration and initial product launch can take approximately
ten years but this period varies considerably for different
products and countries. For marketed products, the
pharmaceutical company is required to monitor adverse reactions
and submit periodic reports on these reactions, if any, to the
appropriate authorities.
Within the EU three registration procedures with different
regional coverage are available: Centralized Procedure, Mutual
Recognition Procedure and National Procedure. In the Centralized
Procedure, after the dossier is submitted to the EMEA, the
Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use
(CHMP) carries out a scientific evaluation. The CHMP
opinion is then transmitted to the European Commission for its
opinion, which, if also favorable, results in a binding decision
for marketing authorization in all EU Member States. A company
is obliged to use the Mutual Recognition Procedure if it intends
to sell a medicinal product in more than one Member State, but
not necessarily throughout the entire EU. After a Marketing
Authorization has been granted for a product in one Member State
selected by the company (a so-called Reference Member
State, or RMS), this RMS has to produce an
Assessment Report. The Authorities in the other Member States
where the product is to be approved receive a copy of the
original dossier and a copy of the Assessment Report. They then
mutually recognize the decision of the RMS. A
National Procedure can be used if a company wishes to license a
product in just one Member State.
In recent years, the EMEA in the EU, the FDA in the United
States and the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare
(MHLW) in Japan have sought to shorten development and
registration times for pharmaceutical products by harmonizing
the individual requirements of the three regions. This
initiative is called the International Conference on
Harmonization. For the foreseeable future, however, we will need
to obtain a separate approval in each market.
Our Hematology/ Cardiology business unit markets, among others,
substances known as biologicals. Biologicals are
derived from biological sources (e.g., from human plasma
or from cell lines genetically engineered to produce a specific
protein). In the United States and other markets, biologicals
are regulated under specific sets of regulations that contain
unique requirements specifically for biologicals. For example,
in order to minimize the risk of infectious disease
transmission, human plasma-derived products require donor
screening and plasma testing, as well as multiple manufacturing
steps designed to remove viruses and other infectious agents.
Biological products are chemically complex, often depending on a
precise structure (e.g., the specific folding of a
molecule) for their effectiveness. Regulations require us to
subject these products to rigorous testing to ensure stability
throughout their shelf life. Because biological products cannot
withstand conventional sterilization techniques, we must use
special processes to ensure sterility. Under applicable
regulatory requirements, we must submit detailed documentation
to demonstrate appropriate controls over our manufacturing
facilities, including associated equipment and supporting
utilities such as water supply and climate control.
Prices for pharmaceuticals may be subject to governmental
interventions. Direct price controls as well as budgets or
patient contribution requirements affect the prices and may
result in price and profit differentials between markets.
Most Consumer Care products are subject to regulations similar
to those in the Pharmaceuticals segment. In the United States,
for example, the FDA and, in part, the Federal Trade Commission,
oversee the marketing, manufacturing and labeling of Consumer
Care products.
The products of the Diabetes Care division are in vitro
diagnostic (IVD) and medical device products, subject to
regulatory controls similar to those governing the development
and marketing of pharmaceutical products. In the United States,
the FDA regulates IVD products as medical devices, through its
Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH). All
manufacturers of medical devices must register their facilities
with the FDA. Registered establishments are subject to periodic
inspections by FDA investigators to ensure compliance with
quality standards.
59
Most IVD products require FDA clearance or approval before they
may be marketed. For devices requiring clearance, where possible
we seek to obtain it on the grounds that the new product is
substantially equivalent to a product the FDA has
already cleared. For truly new IVD products, we must submit
extensive data to the FDA based on actual clinical trials. FDA
clearance usually takes between two and eighteen months,
depending on the degree of novelty involved. After obtaining FDA
clearance, we must report all adverse incidents in which a
product was allegedly involved.
In the United States the FDA and, in part, the Federal Trade
Commission, oversee the marketing, manufacturing and labeling of
Diabetes Care products, while in the EU and in Japan, they are
regulated by the Conformité Européenne (CE) and
the MHLW, respectively. In the EU, two directives regulate these
products. The Medical Device Directive governs diagnostic
products that come in direct contact with the human body. The
IVD Directive, as the name implies, applies to products used
in vitro, that is those that do not come in direct contact
with the human body. In Japan, a special section of the
Pharmaceutical Affairs Law (PAL) regulates Diagnostic Care
products. The Japanese Ministry of Health is currently
implementing significant PAL reforms with which all
IVD manufacturers and their Japanese representatives must
comply. In Australia and Canada, the applicable laws and
regulations are similar to the European model. Many countries in
South America and Asia have regulatory requirements similar to
those promulgated either by the FDA or the European Commission.
All of these requirements involve product registration and
approval and the reporting of adverse incidents and corrective
actions.
Veterinary products must be examined and approved by regulatory
agencies for quality, safety and efficacy before marketing in
all countries. In the United States, the FDAs Center for
Veterinary Medicine is responsible for ensuring that animal
drugs are safe and effective for their intended uses and that
food from treated animals is safe for human consumption. Animal
health products are also regulated in the United States by the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the EPA.
In the EU, animal health products are subject to regulations
similar to those governing the pharmaceutical sector. The
Centralized Procedure is also governed by the EMEA, but the
committee responsible for animal health products is the
Committee for Medicinal Products for Veterinary Use. For details
on the registration procedure within the EU, refer
to Pharmaceutical Products.
In most countries, crop protection products must obtain
government regulatory approval prior to marketing. This
regulatory framework seeks to protect the consumer, the operator
and the environment. Strict standards are applied in the United
States, Japan and in the EU. Because humans may be exposed to
these products (for example, through residues on food), the
safety assessment considers human risk as well. If the product
is used on a food crop, a legal limit for chemical residue is
established.
It generally takes seven to nine years from discovery of a new
crop protection product until the dossier is submitted to the
appropriate regulatory authority for product approval.
Afterwards, the authorities usually need another two to four
years to evaluate the data submitted in order to decide whether
a registration can be granted. The relatively long evaluation
period, which may include new requirements imposed on a company
after it has submitted a dossier for approval, shortens a
companys utilizable patent protection time. In some
jurisdictions, part of the patent period lost due to the long
regulatory process can be regained through the granting of a
supplemental protection certificate.
The introduction of new regulations, data requirements or test
guidelines is a normal part of enhancing safety assessments for
crop protection products. However, unpredictable new
requirements and the imposition of deadlines have led to
numerous delays of registrations of crop protection products in
the past, especially in the authorization processes in the EU
and in the NAFTA countries. Therefore, Bayer CropScience must
anticipate new regulatory trends and must closely follow the
process of developing and requiring new data. Bayer CropScience
also actively participates in these processes by commenting on
draft regulations proposed by the
60
authorities (e.g., on the proposed replacing of the
European Directive 91/414/ EEC concerning the placing of crop
protection products on the market).
|
|
|
Environmental Science Products |
In both the professional and the consumer pest control business,
as in crop protection, our products must obtain regulatory
approval prior to marketing. In most countries, environmental
science products are regulated by authorities other than those
which regulate the crop protection products. The regulatory
requirements are often different from crop protection products,
due to different routes of exposure. Generally, there has been
an increase of regulatory requirements for environmental science
products, in particular in the United States, Europe and Japan.
To some extent, the regulatory dossiers developed for crop
protection products with the same active ingredients can also be
used for regulatory purposes in the environmental science area.
In the EU, certain products sold in the professional pest
control area, as well as pest control products available to
consumers, fall under the Biocidal Products Directive (BPD),
which requires that complete regulatory dossiers be developed
before placing these products or active substances for use in
such products on the EU market. Certain green industry products
and consumer lawn and garden products are governed by the Plant
Protection Directive, which requires authorization before
products can be placed on the market.
In the United States, registration of environmental science
products is granted by the EPA. There has been an increase of
registration requirements due to the implementation of the Food
Quality Protection Act (FQPA), which considers both dietary and
non-dietary exposure aspects. Certain food-related regulatory
requirements applicable to environmental science products exist
in other regions, notably in the EU.
The review period for registration depends on the country and
could vary from two to five years for a product containing a new
active ingredient. These regulatory procedures may lead to an
increase in the time period required for and costs involved in
developing new environmental science products.
Plant biotechnology products, marketed by our BioScience
business group, in particular those based on genetic
modification, are subject to specific regulatory oversight
covering environmental impact as well as use and trade of
products and derivatives in food and feed. The number of
countries that have regulatory frameworks concerning plant
technology is increasing each year and, in countries that
already have such regulations, the requirements are also
increasing or changing. The most important countries, based on
their importance to us as an agricultural center and/or trading
partner, include the United States, Canada, the EU, Japan,
Brazil, Argentina, Australia and China. In the United States,
the main regulatory authorities are the USDA, the FDA and the
EPA. The EU has implemented a set of new regulations including
the creation of a new EU Food Safety Authority. Similar
regulations have been implemented in Japan. Many Asian countries
have developed regulatory frameworks over the last few years,
most recently China, Taiwan, Korea and the Philippines. With the
Cartagena Protocol on BioSafety, which came into force in
September 2003, it is expected that more countries will
establish relevant regulatory frameworks over the next few years.
The timeframe for approvals varies substantially around the
world. The development of the regulatory dossier generally takes
two to three years. In the United States, Canada and Japan, the
review of a regulatory dossier will typically take another one
to two years. After over five years of moratoria and regulation
changes, the EU is now operating under its new procedures with
dossiers advancing slowly. To date the only significant progress
has been on importation uses. Approvals of biotechnology-derived
products for agricultural growing in the EU are not expected for
some time yet.
EU Regulations
We must comply with an increasing range of regulatory measures
concerning testing, manufacturing and marketing of our products.
In some countries, including the United States, regulatory
controls have become increasingly demanding. We expect this
trend to continue and expand to other countries. We are
monitoring further developments and participate in relevant
stakeholder processes such as internet consultations of the
61
European Commission, projects (e.g., EU research
projects, European Partnership for Alternative Approaches to
Animal Testing) and conferences.
Within the European Union a new regulation on chemicals
(Registration, Evaluation, Authorization of Chemicals, REACH)
has been adopted and will be enforced by June 2007. By this
legislation new regulatory requirements will be imposed on the
testing and assessment of chemicals. This may lead to increased
costs and reduced margins for some products, and may affect the
availability of certain chemicals. A strict project management
has been established to meet the regulatory requirements of the
REACH legislation.
In addition, the EU directive on emissions trading may affect
our business opportunities, especially in Europe. The directive
requires EU member states to meet the carbon dioxide emissions
targets set for each member state under EU legislation and based
on the Kyoto Protocol. Emissions levels have to be reduced by
21 percent in Germany and 7.5 percent in Belgium, in
each case based on 1990 carbon dioxide emissions levels.
Compliance and increasing prices for electricity may require
material capital expenditures in the future depending on
developments in the markets for emissions trading and energy.
A communication entitled European Environment and Health
Strategy was published by the European Commission in June
2003 (SCALE). The strategy is intended to reduce the burden of
disease caused by environmental factors in the EU by identifying
and preventing new health threats caused by environmental
factors. In furtherance of this strategy, the European
Commission adopted the European Environment and Health Action
Plan for 2004-2010 on June 9, 2004. Currently, specific
consequences of SCALE on our business cannot be estimated, but
we are monitoring further developments and participate in
relevant stakeholder processes (e.g., the Consultative
Forum organized by the European Commission in this context).
Health, Safety and Environmental Regulations
The production and distribution of Bayer products involves the
use, storage, transportation, handling and disposal of toxic and
hazardous materials. We are subject to increasingly stringent
environmental regulations, which address:
|
|
|
|
|
emissions into the air; |
|
|
|
discharges of waste water; |
|
|
|
incidental and other releases into the environment; |
|
|
|
generation, handling, storage, transportation, treatment and
disposal of hazardous and non-hazardous materials; and |
|
|
|
construction and operation of facilities. |
It is our policy to comply with all health, safety and
environmental requirements and to provide workplaces for
employees that are safe. We track, check and evaluate all
environmental legal initiatives and laws regarding their
potential impact on our current and past activities in order to
develop appropriate measures in a timely and effective manner.
When necessary, we incur capital expenditures to ensure this. We
expect that Bayer will continue to be subject to stringent
environmental regulation. Although we cannot predict future
expenditures, we believe that current spending trends will
continue.
We are subject to regulations that may require us to remove or
mitigate the effects of the disposal or release of chemical
substances into the environment. Under some of these
regulations, a current or previous owner or operator of property
may be held liable for the costs of remediation on, under, or in
the property, without regard as to whether it knew of or caused
the presence of the contaminants, regardless of whether the
contaminations resulted from common or best practices or
practices of third parties and regardless of whether the
practices were legal at the time they occurred. As many of our
industrial sites have long histories, we cannot predict the full
impact of these regulations on us. We cannot assure that all
soil or groundwater contamination will be discovered.
In the United States, we are subject to potential liability
under the U.S. Federal Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA, commonly
known as Superfund), the U.S. Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act and related state laws for
investigation and
clean-up costs at a
62
number of sites. At many of these sites, companies including
Bayer have been notified that the EPA, the state governing body
or private individuals consider such companies to be potentially
responsible parties under Superfund or related laws. The
proceedings relating to these sites are in various stages. The
clean-up process at
many sites is ongoing. We regularly review the liabilities for
these sites and have accrued those currently quantifiable costs.
It is difficult to estimate the future costs of environmental
protection and remediation because of uncertainties about the
status of regulations and their future developments. Taking into
consideration our experience and currently known facts, we
believe that capital expenditures and remedial actions to comply
with environmental regulations will not have a material adverse
effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash
flows. As of December 31, 2006, we had reserved
262 million
for environmental matters.
We believe that we are in substantial compliance with applicable
health, safety and environmental laws and regulations. We devote
considerable attention to the health and safety of our employees
and the protection of public health and the environment. As a
member of the International Council of Chemical Associations
(ICCA) and the American Chemistry Council, Bayer is
committed to the principles of the Responsible Care Global
Charter, the chemical industrys health, safety and
environmental performance improvement initiative.
While our compliance has not adversely affected our competitive
position or business, we cannot predict the impact of possible
future regulations. Although we have adopted measures to address
the stricter regulations, such as increasing the efficiency of
our internal research and development process in order to reduce
the impact of extended testing on
time-to-market,
stricter regulatory regimes could delay product development or
restrict marketing and sales.
ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
As the management holding company of the Bayer Group, Bayer AG
determines the long-term strategy for the Group and its
subgroups and prescribes guidelines and principles for the
corporate policy derived therefrom. Bayer AG holds equity
interests in the subgroup management companies and the service
companies (described below) and also in other domestic and
foreign entities. The Bayer Group is managed by the four-member
Board of Management of Bayer AG, which is supported by the
Corporate Center. The Board of Management is responsible for the
supervision of management and for the Groups financial
management.
The Corporate Center, which provides services to the Board of
Management and to the subgroup management companies, consists of
the following corporate center functions: the Corporate Office;
Communications; Investor Relations; Corporate Auditing;
Corporate Human Resources & Organization; Corporate
Development; Law & Patents, Insurance; Finance; Group
Accounting & Controlling; Governmental &
Product Affairs; and Regional Coordination.
The Bayer Group conducts its business operations in the three
subgroups Bayer HealthCare, Bayer CropScience and Bayer
MaterialScience. The subgroup management companies Bayer
HealthCare AG, Bayer CropScience AG and Bayer MaterialScience
AG, heading up the three subgroups, manage the business
activities of the domestic and foreign affiliates assigned to
them. Each subgroup is, within the framework of strategies,
goals and guidelines determined by the Bayer AG Board of
Management, an independent operating area with worldwide
business accountability and its own management. Each of the
subgroup management companies has entered into a domination and
profit and loss transfer agreement with Bayer AG.
Three service companies, Bayer Technology Services GmbH, Bayer
Business Services GmbH and Bayer Industry Services
GmbH & Co. OHG (in which Bayer AG owns a
60 percent stake and LANXESS owns a 40 percent stake),
provide support functions to the three subgroups as well as to
Bayer AG.
For more information on our current organizational structure,
see the introduction to Business.
63
Subsidiaries
The financial statements of the Bayer Group as of
December 31, 2006 included 432 fully or proportionally
consolidated companies, compared to 283 companies in 2005.
The increase of 148 companies is largely due to the
first-time inclusion of Schering AGs group companies in
the second quarter of 2006.
The following table lists Bayer AGs principal consolidated
subsidiaries for our continuing business as of December 31,
2006 and its beneficial ownership interest in each.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bayers | |
Company Name and Place of Business |
|
Interest | |
|
|
| |
|
|
(%) | |
Germany
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer Business Services GmbH, Leverkusen
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience AG, Monheim
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience Deutschland GmbH, Langenfeld
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience GmbH, Frankfurt
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer HealthCare AG, Leverkusen
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Industry Services GmbH & Co. OHG, Leverkusen
|
|
|
60 |
|
Bayer MaterialScience AG, Leverkusen
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Schering GmbH, Leverkusen
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin
|
|
|
96.2 |
|
Bayer Technology Services GmbH, Leverkusen
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Vital GmbH, Leverkusen
|
|
|
100 |
|
Schering Deutschland GmbH, Berlin
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
Other European Countries
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer Antwerpen Comm.V, Belgium
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Biologicals S.r.l., Italy
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Consumer Care AG, Switzerland
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience France S.A.S., France
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience Limited, U.K.
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience S.A., France
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
Bayer CropScience S.r.l., Italy
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer International S.A., Switzerland
|
|
|
99.7 |
|
Bayer Pharma SAS, France
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
Bayer Polyols S.N.C., France
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Polyurethanes B.V., The Netherlands
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Public Limited Company, U.K.
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer S.p.A., Italy
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer SP.Z.O.O., Poland
|
|
|
100 |
|
Quimica Farmaceutica Bayer, S.A., Spain
|
|
|
100 |
|
64
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bayers | |
Company Name and Place of Business |
|
Interest | |
|
|
| |
|
|
(%) | |
North America
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer Corporate and Business Services LLC, USA
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience Inc., Canada
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience LP, USA
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer HealthCare LLC, USA
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Inc., Canada
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer MaterialScience LLC, USA
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Pharmaceuticals Corporation, USA
|
|
|
100 |
|
BAYPO Limited Partnership, USA
|
|
|
100 |
|
Berlex Inc., USA
|
|
|
100 |
|
Medrad, Inc., USA
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
Asia/Pacific
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer Australia Limited, Australia
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
Bayer CropScience K.K., Japan
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer HealthCare Co. Ltd., China
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Korea Ltd., Republic of Korea
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer MaterialScience Limited, Hong Kong
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer MaterialScience Trading (Shanghai) Company Limited, China
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Thai Company Limited, Thailand
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
Bayer Yakuhin, Ltd., Japan
|
|
|
100 |
|
Nihon Schering K.K., Japan
|
|
|
100 |
|
Sumika Bayer Urethane Co., Ltd., Japan
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
Latin America/Africa/Middle East
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer (Proprietary) Limited, South Africa
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer de Mexico, S.A. de C.V., Mexico
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer S.A., Argentina
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
Bayer S.A., Brazil
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
Bayer Türk Kimya Sanayi Limited Sirketi, Turkey
|
|
|
100 |
|
Also included in the consolidated financial statements are the
following material associated companies:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bayers | |
Company Name and Place of Business |
|
Interest | |
|
|
| |
|
|
(%) | |
Lyondell Bayer Manufacturing Maasvlakte VOF, The Netherlands
|
|
|
50.0 |
|
Palthough Industries (1998) Ltd., Israel
|
|
|
25.0 |
|
PO JV, LP, USA
|
|
|
43.4 |
|
Polygal Plastics Industries Ltd., Israel
|
|
|
25.8 |
|
PROPERTY, PLANTS AND EQUIPMENT
We operate through a large number of offices, research and
development facilities and production sites throughout the
world. The principal executive offices of Bayer AG are located
in Leverkusen, Germany. Our key production facilities are
located in Germany and the United States. We also have other
properties, including office buildings, laboratories and
distribution centers throughout the world. For the major
research and development
65
facilities by segment please refer to Markets and
Distribution and Research and Development
for each of the segments.
Our policy is to acquire full ownership rights in our
manufacturing facilities whenever possible. We own most of our
manufacturing facilities and other properties. Where locally
applicable law does not permit this or acquisition of full
property rights is otherwise unfeasible, we acquire possessor
interests conferring substantially the same rights of use as
ownership (for example, German-law hereditary building rights or
Erbbaurechte and granted land-use rights in Asian
countries).
We believe that our production plants and manufacturing
facilities have capacities adequate for our current and
projected needs. In 2006, liabilities of
3 million
(2005:
7 million)
were secured by mortgages.
The acquisition of the business of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany
includes major production sites in Germany, Finland and the
United States. For further details on the acquisition, refer
to History and Development of the Company.
As part of the divestiture of the Diagnostics division, eight
sites with offices and production facilities located in five
countries ceased to be part of the Bayer Group. For further
details on the divestiture, refer to History and
Development of the Company and to Item 5, Operating
and Financial Review and Prospects Operating Results
2004, 2005 and 2006 Discontinued
Operations Diagnostics.
The following table summarizes our major facilities by subgroup:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Size of developed | |
|
|
|
|
property in | |
|
|
|
|
thousand square | |
|
|
Location |
|
meters | |
|
Major use |
|
|
| |
|
|
Bayer HealthCare
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leverkusen, Germany
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
Formulation and packaging of pharmaceutical products |
|
Wuppertal, Germany
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
Production of active ingredients for ethical pharmaceutical
products, research and development |
|
Berkeley, California
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
Production of recombinant FVIII |
|
Myerstown, Pennsylvania
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
Formulation and packaging of Consumer Care products |
|
Mishawaka, Indiana
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
Production of instruments for Diabetes Care division |
|
Bergkamen, Germany
|
|
|
505 |
|
|
Production of active pharmaceutical ingredients, administration |
|
Berlin-Wedding, Germany
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
Production and packaging of contrast media; packaging of solids;
research and development, offices |
|
Turku, Finland
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
Production of gynecological and andrological products, and
solids (Oncology); research and development, offices |
Bayer CropScience
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Monheim, Germany
|
|
|
650 |
|
|
Research and development of insecticidal and fungicidal active
ingredients, global Bayer CropScience headquarters |
|
Frankfurt, Germany
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
Research and development of herbicidal active ingredients,
manufacturing for Crop Protection and Environmental Science |
|
Dormagen, Germany
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
Manufacturing for Crop Protection and Environmental Science,
industrialization of new active ingredients |
|
Kansas City, Missouri
|
|
|
340 |
|
|
Manufacturing for Crop Protection and Environmental Science |
|
Haelen, The Netherlands
|
|
|
560 |
|
|
Research and development as well as production of seeds for
BioScience |
66
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Size of developed | |
|
|
|
|
property in | |
|
|
|
|
thousand square | |
|
|
Location |
|
meters | |
|
Major use |
|
|
| |
|
|
Bayer MaterialScience
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Krefeld-Uerdingen, Germany
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
Production of polycarbonates, diphenylmethane diisocyanates,
chlorine, caustic soda, hydrochloric acid and hydrogen |
|
Baytown, Texas
|
|
|
1,628 |
|
|
Production of base- and modified isocyanates, polycarbonates,
diphenylmethane diisocyanates, toluene diisocyanates, chlorine,
caustic soda, hydrochloric acid and hydrogen |
|
Dormagen, Germany
|
|
|
264 |
|
|
Production of modified isocyanates, resins, polycarbonate films,
toluene diisocyanates, polyether, thermoplastic polyurethanes,
chlorine, caustic soda, hydrochloric acid and hydrogen |
|
Antwerp, Belgium
|
|
|
639 |
|
|
Production of polycarbonates, aniline, nitrobenzene and polyether |
|
Brunsbüttel, Germany
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
Production of diphenylmethane diisocyanates, toluene
diisocyanates, chlorine, hydrochloric acid and hydrogen |
Since the end of 2003, Bayer MaterialScience has been expanding
capacities and establishing large-scale facilities at its
integrated production site in Caojing, China (near Shanghai), as
presented in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plant Capacity | |
|
Start-Up |
|
Status |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(in kt) | |
|
|
|
|
Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants
(Desmodur®
N)
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
April 2003 |
|
In operation |
Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants
(Desmodur®
L)
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
January 2005 |
|
In operation |
Polycarbonates (Compounding)
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
July 2005 |
|
In operation |
Polycarbonates (PCS Phase I)
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
September 2006 |
|
In operation |
Polyurethanes (MDI Phase I, MMDI-Splitter),
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
September 2006 |
|
In operation |
Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants (HDI-4)
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
February 2007 |
|
In operation |
Polyurethanes (MDI Phase II)
|
|
|
350 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Under construction |
Polycarbonates (PCS Phase II)
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
2008 |
|
Under construction |
Polyurethanes (TDI)
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Planning phase |
For information on environmental issues relating to Bayers
properties see Business Governmental
Regulation Health, Safety and Environmental
Regulations. Additional information regarding Bayers
property, plant and equipment is contained in Item 5,
Operating and Financial Review and Prospects
Liquidity and Capital Resources 2004, 2005 and
2006 Capital Expenditures and in
Note 18 to the consolidated financial statements appearing
elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
Item 4A. Unresolved
Staff Comments
None.
67
|
|
Item 5. |
Operating and Financial Review and Prospects |
Investors should read the following operating and financial
review and prospects together with the consolidated financial
statements and the notes to those financial statements included
elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F. We have
prepared these financial statements in accordance with IFRS,
which differs in some respects from U.S. GAAP. For a
reconciliation of net income and stockholders equity to
U.S. GAAP, see Note 41 to our consolidated financial
statements.
The forward-looking statements in this Item 5 are not
guarantees of future performance. They involve both risk and
uncertainty. Several important factors could cause our actual
results to differ materially from those anticipated by these
statements. Many of those factors are macroeconomic in nature
and are, therefore, beyond the control of our management. See
Forward-Looking Information.
We have based the presentation of our results in this section on
certain significant accounting assumptions. For a more detailed
description of these assumptions, see Critical
Accounting Policies, below.
In connection with IFRS 5, as well as the application of
related IFRS standards, the financial information presented in
this annual report on
Form 20-F for
2004, 2005 and 2006 only reflects continuing operations of the
Bayer Group and its segments, except where specific reference is
made to discontinued operations. The 2004 and 2005 figures for
operating result, non-operating result, operating expenses and
related key figures have been restated to give effect to this
form of presentation. For more details, refer to Note 2 to
the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in
this annual report on
Form 20-F.
OVERVIEW
We are a global company focusing on our strengths in the fields
of health care, nutrition and innovative materials. Our goal is
to strengthen the competitiveness of our businesses in the
HealthCare, CropScience and MaterialScience subgroups by
concentrating on the special needs of these businesses.
Bayer comprises the parent company, Bayer AG of Leverkusen,
Germany, and approximately 430 consolidated subsidiaries. We are
organized into three subgroups and, for reporting purposes,
structured into six reportable
segments Pharmaceuticals; Consumer Health; Crop
Protection; Environmental Science, BioScience; Materials and
Systems. For further information on our organizational
structure, see Item 4, Information on the
Company Business and
Organizational Structure.
With effect from June 23, 2006, we acquired a majority of
the shares of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany (subsequently renamed
Bayer Schering Pharma AG), which is fully consolidated in the
Bayer Group financial statements beginning on that date. (The
names Bayer Schering Pharma or Schering
as used in this annual report on
Form 20-F always
refer to Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany, or its
predecessor, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany, respectively. The
reference to Bayer Schering Pharma AG or Schering AG also
includes business conducted by affiliated entities. Bayer
Schering Pharma AG and Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey,
are unaffiliated companies that have been totally independent of
each other for many years.) In 2006, we completed the process of
entering into agreements to divest our Diagnostics division and
our H.C. Starck and Wolff Walsrode businesses. These
transactions are expected to close or have already closed in
2007. For our principal acquisitions and divestitures during the
last three years, refer to Item 4, Information on the
Company History and Development of the Company
and Note 7.2 to the consolidated financial statements
appearing elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The preparation of the financial statements for the Bayer Group
requires the use of estimates and assumptions. These affect the
classification and valuation of assets, liabilities, income,
expenses and contingent liabilities. Estimates and assumptions
mainly relate to the useful life of noncurrent assets, the
discounted cash flows used in impairment testing and the
establishment of provisions for litigation, pensions and other
benefits, taxes, environmental protection, inventory valuations,
sales allowances, product liability and guarantees.
68
Estimates are based on historical experience and other
assumptions that are considered reasonable under the
circumstances. Actual values may vary from the estimates. The
estimates and the assumptions are continually reviewed.
To enhance the information content of the estimates, certain
provisions that could have a material effect on the financial
position and results of operations of the Group are selected and
tested for their sensitivity to changes in the underlying
parameters. To reflect uncertainty about the likelihood of the
assumed events actually occurring, the impact of a
5 percent change in the probability of occurrence is
examined in each case. For long-term interest-bearing
provisions, the impact of a 1 percent change in the
interest rate used is analyzed. Analysis has not shown other
provisions to be materially sensitive. The interest sensitivity
of pension obligations is discussed in Note 25 to the
consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this
annual report on
Form 20-F.
Critical accounting and valuation policies and methods are those
that are both most important to the portrayal of the Bayer
Groups financial position, results of operations and cash
flows, and that require the application of difficult, subjective
and complex judgments, often as a result of the need to make
estimates about the effects of matters that are inherently
uncertain and may change in subsequent periods. The critical
accounting policies that we disclose will not necessarily result
in material changes to our financial statements in any given
period but rather contain a potential for material change. The
main accounting and valuation policies used by the Bayer Group
are outlined in Note 4.3 to the consolidated financial
statements appearing elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F. While
not all of the significant accounting policies require
difficult, subjective or complex judgments, the Company
considers that the following accounting policies should be
considered critical accounting policies.
Intangible assets and property, plant and equipment
As discussed in Notes 17 and 18 appearing elsewhere in this
annual report on
Form 20-F, at
December 31, 2006 the Bayer Group had intangible assets
with a net carrying amount of
24,034 million
including goodwill of
8,227 million,
and property, plant and equipment with a net carrying amount of
8,867 million.
Intangible assets with finite useful lives and property, plant
and equipment are amortized over their estimated useful lives.
The estimated useful lives are based on estimates of the period
during which the assets will generate revenue.
Intangible assets with finite useful lives and property, plant
and equipment are tested for impairment whenever events or
changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of
the assets may no longer be recoverable. Goodwill and intangible
assets with indefinite useful lives must be tested annually for
impairment. In compliance with IAS 36 (Impairment of Assets),
impairment losses are measured by comparing the carrying amounts
to the discounted cash flows expected to be generated by the
respective assets. Where it is not possible to estimate the
impairment loss for an individual asset, the loss is assessed on
the basis of the discounted cash flow for the cash-generating
unit to which the asset belongs. Estimating the discounted
future cash flows involves significant assumptions, especially
regarding future sales prices, sales volumes and costs. The
discounting process is also based on assumptions and estimations
relating to business-specific costs of capital, which in turn
are based on country risks, credit risks as well as additional
risks resulting from the volatility of the respective line of
business. The present value of future cash flows measures an
assets value based on our continuing use of the asset and
its retirement at the end of its useful life. Further
information on the procedure for impairment testing and the
residual carrying amounts of goodwill at the balance sheet date
is presented in Note 4.5 and Note 17 to the
consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this
annual report on
Form 20-F,
respectively.
To illustrate the Bayer Groups impairment loss measurement
on a segment level, if the actual present value of future cash
flows were 10 percent lower than the anticipated present
value, the net carrying amount of goodwill in the Crop
Protection segment as of December 31, 2006 would have to be
impaired by
146 million.
In the Systems segment, the net carrying amounts of goodwill and
intangible assets as of December 31, 2006 would have to be
impaired by
42 million.
We have focused our analysis on the Crop Protection and Systems
segments because we believe that these are the only of our
segments where impairments of goodwill and other intangibles
under the assumptions described above are reasonably likely to
have a material adverse effect on the results of operations of
the respective segments. If the weighted average cost of capital
used for the impairment test were
69
increased by 10 percent, assets of the Crop Protection and
Systems segment would have to be impaired by
85 million
or
34 million,
respectively. In quantifying our sensitivity analysis, we
modeled a 10 percent decline as a negative change up to
this magnitude is in our view reasonably likely. We do not now
believe that greater changes are reasonably likely given our
experiences in the Crop Protection and System segments.
Applying these policies, we recognized impairment charges in
each of the years 2006, 2005 and 2004. The following table sets
forth these charges based on their allocation to our continuing
businesses and our discontinued operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Impairment charges (continuing operations)
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
Impairment charges (discontinued operations)
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total impairment charges
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In 2004 and 2005, we recognized impairment charges largely as a
result of our decisions to close or relocate several facilities
and sites within our continuing businesses as part of our
strategic reorientation and focus on our core businesses.
The impairment charges within discontinued operations 2004
related to the sale of our plasma business
(24 million
in 2004) and the spin-off of the former LANXESS segment
(39 million
in 2004). We recorded an additional
24 million
impairment charge related to this business in 2004 based on
price negotiations with the purchaser. We updated our cash flow
assumptions for the LANXESS businesses as a result of sustained
pressure on its margins resulting from adverse foreign exchange
rates, ongoing consolidation in customers in the industries
LANXESS served, overcapacities in certain market segments and an
increase in competition, particularly from Asian suppliers. We
recognized an additional
39 million
in impairment charges for the spun off LANXESS businesses in
2004 due to further revisions of the economic assumptions within
the strategic business entities Performance Chemicals,
Engineering Plastics and Chemical Intermediates.
Impairment charges and write-downs on tangible assets in 2005
originated especially from our decision to shut down or to
relocate different production facilities and sites in the United
States in our continuing operations
(33 million).
Also, in 2005 capitalized marketing rights for our product,
Viadur®,
were impaired by
15 million
because of unfavorable market conditions related to the product
(e.g., additional competition from other
manufacturers). We revised this estimate in 2006 and wrote off
the remaining intangible asset of
19 million.
Impairment charges and write-downs in 2006 were predominantly
due to further restructurings of our sites in the United States
(14 million)
partly related to acquisitions as well as changes in plans for
the expansion of our chlorine alkali facilities in Baytown,
Texas
(31 million).
In addition, restructuring efforts pursued in the year 2006
within the Bayer CropScience subgroup and the Bayer Industry
Services GmbH & Co. OHG resulted in impairment charges
and write-downs on tangible assets of
19 million
and
30 million,
respectively. In 2006 the capitalized costs of an acquired
development project for the product alfimeprase within the Bayer
HealthCare subgroup were impaired by
41 million.
Within discontinued operations an impairment charge was
recognized within the H.C. Starck group for its battery business
in Canada
(17 million).
Although we believe that our estimates of the relevant expected
useful lives, our assumptions concerning the macroeconomic
environment and developments in the industries in which the
Bayer Group operates, and our estimations of the discounted
future cash flows, are appropriate, changes in assumptions or
circumstances could require changes in the analysis. This could
lead to additional impairment charges in the future or to
valuation write-backs should the trends we expect reverse.
Research and development
In addition to the in-house research and development activities,
various research and development collaborations and alliances
are maintained with third parties. These collaborations and
alliances involve provision of funding and/or payments for the
achievement of performance milestones. All research costs are
expensed as incurred. Since development projects are subject to
regulatory approval procedures and other
70
uncertainties, the conditions for the capitalization of
development costs incurred with respect to in-house research and
development activities before receipt of regulatory approvals
are not satisfied, and these costs are also expensed as
incurred. With respect to costs incurred in collaborations and
alliances with third parties, under IAS 38 (revised), which
entered into effect on January 1, 2005, milestone payments
relating to acquired assets in development must be capitalized
to the extent that they are related to the acquisition of the
related technology rights, even if uncertainties exist as to
whether the research and development will ultimately be
successful in producing a saleable product. If research and
development collaborations are embedded in contracts for a
strategic alliance, considerable judgment is involved in
determining whether milestone-based payments reflect the funding
of research and development or if they are related to the
acquisition of an underlying compound or other rights. Factors
considered in reaching this determination are (a) the
nature of the payment, for example whether it is related to
regulatory approval, a sales target or outsourced research and
development activities, and (b) the relative fair values of
the planned research and development activities compared to the
total value of the payment.
Net sales
We recognize revenue for product sales and the rendering of
services when:
|
|
|
|
|
the significant risks and rewards of ownership of the goods are
transferred to the customer, |
|
|
|
the company retains neither continuing managerial involvement to
the degree usually associated with ownership nor effective
control over the goods sold, |
|
|
|
the amount of revenue and costs incurred or to be incurred can
be measured reliably, and |
|
|
|
it is probable that the economic benefits associated with the
transaction will flow to the company. |
At the time revenue is recognized, we also record estimates for
revenue deductions including cash discounts, rebates and product
returns. Also, we record revenues net of items we collect on
behalf of third parties, such as sales taxes and goods and
service taxes. We report our net sales after deducting all sales
deductions from our gross revenue.
The majority of our sales deductions are subject to
formula-based determination using factors such as a fixed
percentage of the sales volume or gross sales proceeds.
Accordingly, estimates related to sales deductions are
predominantly based on historical experience, specific
contractual terms and future expectations of our sales
development in each of our business segments. We believe that
assumptions other than those that we discuss are not reasonably
likely to occur or not applicable to our business. We estimate
the potential for future variability in provisions for
anticipated sales deductions to be insignificant with respect to
our reported operating results. We have not made adjustments to
our provisions for rebates, cash discounts or returns for sales
made in prior periods that were material in relation to our
income before income taxes in any of the periods covered by the
financial statements included in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
Provisions for rebates were 1.6 percent of our total net
sales in 2006 (2005: 1.4 percent; 2004: 1.5 percent).
In addition to rebates, we offer cash discounts for prompt
payment in some countries. Our provisions for cash discounts
were less than 0.1 percent of total net sales as of
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004.
We deduct provisions for returned defective goods or related to
contractual arrangements to return saleable products on the date
of sale or at the time when the amount of future returns can be
reasonably estimated. If future product returns cannot be
reasonably estimated and are significant to the sale
transaction, both the recognition of revenues and of the related
cost of sales are deferred until an estimate may reasonably be
made or when the right to return the goods has expired.
Provisions for product returns were 0.1 percent of total
net sales in 2006 (2005: 0.3 percent; 2004:
0.3 percent).
Some of the Bayer Groups revenues are generated from
licensing agreements under which third parties are granted
rights to certain of our products and technologies. Upfront
payments and similar non-refundable payments received under
these agreements are recorded as other liabilities and
recognized in income over the estimated performance period
stipulated in the agreement. Milestone payments linked to the
achievement of a significant and substantive
technical/regulatory hurdle in the research and development
process, pursuant to collaborative agreements, are recognized as
revenue upon the achievement of the specified milestone. Revenues
71
are also derived from research and development collaborations
and co-promotion agreements. Such agreements may consist of
multiple elements and provide for varying consideration terms,
such as upfront, milestone and similar payments, which may be
complex and require significant analysis by management in order
to separate individual revenue components and recognize them on
the most appropriate dates. This may have to be done partially
on the basis of assumptions.
Pensions and other post-employment benefits
Group companies provide retirement benefits for most of their
employees, either directly or by contributing to
independently-administered funds. The way these benefits are
provided varies according to the legal, fiscal and economic
conditions of each country, the benefits generally being based
on the employees remuneration and years of service. The
obligations relate both to existing retirees pensions and
to pension entitlements of future retirees. Group companies
provide retirement benefits under defined contribution and/or
defined benefit plans. In the case of defined contribution
plans, the company pays contributions to publicly or privately
administered pension insurance plans on a mandatory, contractual
or voluntary basis. Once the contributions have been paid, the
company has no further payment obligations. All other retirement
benefit systems are defined benefit plans, which may be either
unfunded, i.e., financed by provisions (accruals), or
funded, i.e., financed through pension funds. Statistical
and actuarial methods are used to anticipate future events in
calculating the expenses and liabilities related to the plans.
These calculations include assumptions about the discount rate,
expected return on plan assets and rate of future compensation
increases.
The interest rate used to discount post-employment benefit
obligations to present value is derived from the yields of
senior, high-quality corporate bonds in the respective country
at the balance sheet date. These generally include AA-rated
securities. The discount rate is based on the yield of a
portfolio of bonds whose weighted residual maturities
approximately correspond to the duration necessary to cover the
entire benefit obligation. If AA-rated corporate bonds of equal
duration are not available, a discount rate equivalent to the
effective interest rate for government bonds at the balance
sheet date is used instead but increased by about 0.5 to
1.0 percentage point since corporate bonds generally
provide higher yields by virtue of their risk structure.
Determination of the discount rate is also based on a bond
portfolio corresponding to the expected cash outflows from the
pension plans. The average return of this bond portfolio serves
as our benchmark when determining the discount rate.
The assumption for the expected
return-on-assets
reflects a long-term global capital market return that
corresponds to the duration of the pension obligation, and a
diversified investment strategy. The investment policy of Bayer
Pensionskasse is geared toward regulatory compliance and toward
maintaining the risk structure corresponding to the benefit
obligations. To this end, Bayer Pensionskasse has developed a
strategic target portfolio commensurate with the risk profile.
This investment strategy focuses principally on stringent
management of downside risks rather than on maximizing absolute
returns. In other countries, too, the key criteria for the
funds investment strategies are the structure of the
benefit obligations and the risk profile. Other determinants are
risk diversification, portfolio efficiency and a
country-specific and global risk/return profile capable of
ensuring payment of all future benefits. The expected return is
applied to the fair market value of plan assets at each year end.
Statistical information such as withdrawal and mortality rates
is also used in estimating the expenses and liabilities under
the plans. Because of changing market and economic conditions,
the expenses and liabilities actually arising under the plans in
the future may differ materially from the estimates made on the
basis of these actuarial assumptions. The plan assets are
partially comprised of equity and fixed-income instruments.
Therefore, declining returns on equity markets and markets for
fixed-income instruments could necessitate additional
contributions to the plans in order to cover future pension
obligations. Also, higher or lower withdrawal rates or longer or
shorter life of participants may have an impact on the amount of
pension income or expense recorded in the future.
On December 31, 2006, the present value of our defined
benefit obligations for pensions and other post-employment
benefits payable under defined benefit plans was
16,708 million.
Note 25 to the consolidated financial statements appearing
elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F contains
an analysis of the
72
sensitivities of our defined benefit obligation to a
0.5 percent increase or decrease in any of our discount
rate, projected remuneration increases and projected future
benefit increases and the effects on our results of operations
in which these changes would result. It also sets forth the
changes in our accumulated actuarial losses related to changes
in these actuarial parameters.
Environmental provisions
The business of the Bayer Group is subject to a variety of laws
and regulations in the jurisdictions in which it operates or
maintains properties. Provisions for expenses that may be
incurred in complying with such laws and regulations are set
aside if environmental inquiries or remediation measures are
probable, the costs can be reliably estimated and no future
benefits are expected from such measures. Our provisions for
environmental protection measures amounted to
262 million
on December 31, 2006 and
279 million
on December 31, 2005.
It is difficult to estimate the future costs of environmental
protection and remediation because of many uncertainties,
particularly with regard to the status of laws, regulations and
the information available about conditions in the various
countries and at the individual sites. Significant factors in
estimating the costs include previous experiences in similar
cases, the conclusions in expert opinions we obtain regarding
our environmental programs, current costs and new developments
affecting costs, managements interpretation of current
environmental laws and regulations, the number and financial
position of third parties that may become obligated to
participate in any remediation costs on the basis of joint
liability, and the remediation methods which are likely to be
deployed. Changes in these assumptions could impact future
reported results. Subject to these factors, but taking into
consideration experience gained to date regarding environmental
matters of a similar nature, we believe our provisions to be
adequate based upon currently available information. There were
no significant changes in our assumptions or estimates that
impacted our statements of income in 2004, 2005 or 2006.
However, given the inherent difficulties in estimating
liabilities in the businesses in which we operate, especially
those for which the risk of environmental damage is relatively
greater (CropScience and MaterialScience), it remains possible
that material additional costs will be incurred beyond the
amounts accrued. It is possible that final resolution of these
matters may require expenditures to be made in excess of
established provisions, over an extended period of time and in a
range of amounts that cannot be reasonably estimated. Management
nevertheless believes that such additional amounts, if any,
would not have a material adverse effect on the Groups
financial position or results of operations. Further information
on environmental provisions can be found in Note 26.2 to
the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in
this annual report on
Form 20-F.
Litigation provisions
As a global company with a diverse business portfolio, the Bayer
Group is exposed to numerous legal risks, particularly in the
areas of product liability, patent disputes, tax assessments,
competition and antitrust law, and environmental matters. The
outcome of the currently pending and future proceedings cannot
be predicted with certainty. Thus, an adverse decision in a
lawsuit could result in additional costs that are not covered,
either wholly or partially, under insurance policies and that
could significantly impact the business and results of
operations of the Bayer Group. If the Bayer Group loses a case
in which it seeks to enforce its patent rights, a decrease in
future earnings could result as other manufacturers could be
permitted to begin to market products that the Bayer Group or
its predecessors had developed.
Litigation and other judicial proceedings as a rule raise
difficult and complex legal issues and are subject to many
uncertainties and complexities including, but not limited to,
the facts and circumstances of each particular case, issues
regarding the jurisdiction in which each suit is brought and
differences in applicable law. Upon resolution of any pending
legal matter, the Bayer Group may be forced to incur charges in
excess of the presently established provisions and related
insurance coverage. It is possible that the financial position,
results of operations or cash flows of the Bayer Group could be
materially affected by the unfavorable outcome of litigation.
Litigation and administrative proceedings are evaluated on a
case-by-case basis considering the available information,
including that from legal counsel, to assess potential outcomes.
Where it is considered probable that a future obligation will
result in an outflow of resources, a provision is recorded in
the amount of
73
the present value of the expected cash outflows if these are
deemed to be reliably measurable. These provisions cover the
estimated payments to plaintiffs, court fees, attorney costs and
the cost of potential settlements. We have in the past adjusted
existing provisions as proceedings have continued, been settled
or otherwise provided further information on which we could
review the likelihood of outflows of resources and their
measurability, and we expect to continue to do so in future
periods.
During 2004, we recorded the following litigation related
charges:
83 million
in respect of fines paid in antitrust proceedings for rubber and
urethane products,
47 million
with respect to the Lipobay/ Baycol proceedings and
16 million
with respect to the Phenylpropanolamine
(PPA) proceedings.
During 2005, we had operating charges based on our expected
payments totaling
336 million
related to our rubber-and urethane-related antitrust
proceedings, as well as charges in respect of our Lipobay/
Baycol proceedings
(43 million)
and our PPA proceedings
(62 million).
Provisions for litigation-related expenses totaled
434 million
on December 31, 2006. During 2006, we recorded
135 million
other operating expenses on the basis of expected payments,
which mainly relate to proceedings in connection with
Lipobay/ Baycol
(35 million),
to a patent infringement proceeding
(24 million)
and to proceedings in connection with former rubber product
lines
(51 million).
We refer to the antitrust proceedings in connection with
urethane products and rubber products collectively as antitrust
proceedings related to polymer products elsewhere in this annual
report on
Form 20-F.
Further details on legal risks and the related effects on our
results of operations are contained in Item 8 as well as in
Notes 32 and 41 to the consolidated financial
statements appearing elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
Income taxes
To compute provisions for taxes, estimates have to be made.
Estimates are also necessary to determine whether valuation
allowances are required against deferred tax assets. These
involve assessing the probabilities that deferred tax assets
resulting from deductible temporary differences and tax losses
can be utilized to offset taxable income.
Uncertainties exist with respect to the interpretation of
complex tax regulations and the amount and timing of future
taxable income. Given the wide range of international business
relationships and the long-term nature and complexity of
existing contractual agreements, differences arising between the
actual results and the assumptions made, or future changes to
such assumptions, could necessitate adjustments to tax income
and expense in future periods. The Group establishes what it
believes to be reasonable provisions for possible consequences
of audits by the tax authorities of the respective countries.
The amount of such provisions is based on various factors, such
as experience with previous tax audits and differing
interpretations of tax regulations by the taxable entity and the
responsible tax authority. Such differences of interpretation
may arise on a wide variety of issues depending on the
conditions prevailing in the respective Group companys
domicile. On December 31, 2006, net liabilities for current
tax payments amounted to
908 million,
and net deferred tax liabilities amounted to
3,141 million.
We reversed provisions in our U.S. subsidiary totaling
104 million
in 2005 that related to tax positions taken in periods that were
closed with the Internal Revenue Service.
Further information on income taxes is provided in Note 14
to the consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in
this annual report on
Form 20-F.
Acquisition accounting
We account for the acquired businesses using the purchase method
of accounting which requires that the assets acquired and
liabilities assumed be recorded at the date of acquisition at
their respective fair values. The application of the purchase
method requires certain estimates and assumptions especially
concerning the determination of the fair values of the acquired
intangible assets and property, plant and equipment as well as
the liabilities assumed at the date of the acquisition. Moreover
the useful lives of the acquired tangible and intangible assets
have to be determined. The judgments made in the context of the
purchase price allocation can materially impact our future
results of operations. Accordingly, for significant
acquisitions, we obtain assistance from third
74
party valuation specialists. The valuations are based on
information available at the acquisition date. Significant
judgments and assumptions made regarding the purchase price
allocation in the course of the acquisition of Schering AG,
Berlin, Germany included the following:
For intangible assets associated with products, product related
technology, and qualified in-process research and development
(IPR&D) we base our valuation on the expected future cash
flows using the Multi-Period Excess Earnings approach. This
method employs a discounted cash flow analysis using the present
value of the estimated after-tax cash flows expected to be
generated from the purchased intangible asset using risk
adjusted discount rates and revenue forecasts as appropriate.
The period of expected cash flows was based on the individual
patent protection, taking into account the term of the
products main patent protection and essential extension of
patent protection, as well as market entry of generics,
considering sales, volume, prices, potential defense strategies
and market development at patent expiry.
For the valuation of brands the relief-from-royalty method was
applied which includes estimating the cost savings that result
from the companys ownership of trademarks and licenses on
which it does not have to pay royalties to a licensor. The
intangible asset is then recognized at the present value of
these savings. The brand-specific royalty rates were calculated
using a product-specific scoring model. The corporate brands
Schering and Medrad were assumed to have
an unlimited life. (Please note that the rights to the name
Schering in the United States and Canada do not
belong to us but to Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey.
Schering-Plough Corporation and the company acquired by Bayer in
June 2006, i.e., Bayer Schering Pharma AG (formerly named
Schering AG), Berlin, Germany, are unaffiliated companies that
have been totally independent of each other for many years.)
Product brands, however, were assumed to have limited lives
depending on the respective products life cycles. The
expected amortization of these assets is determined on the basis
of expected product-specific revenues.
The net carrying amount of acquired intangible assets
after a step-up of
11,745 million
resulting from the purchase price allocation was
12,042 million,
as of June 23, 2006. This figure includes
1,191 million
for IPR&D which relates to new compounds development as well
as new versions of existing drugs. The valuation of acquired
intangible assets is to a great extent based on anticipated cash
flows. Nevertheless it is not impossible that actual outcomes
vary significantly from such estimated future cash flows. In
particular, the estimation of discounted cash flows of
intangible assets under development and developed technologies
is subject to highly sensitive assumptions, which are closely
related to the nature of our pharmaceutical activities and whose
changes may have material consequences such as:
|
|
|
|
|
Outcome of research and development activities regarding
compound efficacy, results of clinical trials, etc.; |
|
|
|
Probability of obtaining regulatory approval in several
countries; |
|
|
|
Long-term sales forecast; |
|
|
|
Anticipation of selling price erosion rates after the end of
patent protection due to generic competition in the market; |
|
|
|
Behavior of competitors (launch of competing products, marketing
initiatives, etc.). |
Measures pursued in the course of restructuring efforts such as
the closing of facilities or changes in the planned use of
buildings, machinery or equipment may result in shortened useful
lives or impairments.
For land acquired in general the comparison approach was based
on the fair market values of properties situated in locations
similar to those of the acquired properties and utilized for
similar purposes. Unitary land values were derived from public
or official sources and expert appraisals such as those made by
advisory committees, contained in market reports or produced by
local real estate agents. For buildings that could be leased,
the income approach was predominantly applied, discounting
projected rental charges.
For technical equipment and machinery as well as for other
equipment the indirect cost approach was applied, utilizing
replacement costs. These costs are depreciated on a
straight-line basis over the assets economic
75
useful life according to an age analysis. Utilization and
condition of the related technical equipment and machinery were
reflected by adjustments and deduction for obsolescence.
The valuation of the patented finished goods on stock at date of
acquisition and work in process was based on the corresponding
selling price less estimated costs of completion or estimated
costs to make the sale.
The excess of the purchase price for Schering AG over the
estimated fair values of the net assets acquired is recorded as
goodwill amounting to
5,771 million
as of June 23, 2006. The
step-ups have led to a
corresponding deferred tax liability of
4,546 million
as of June 23, 2006, which will be amortized analogously to
the respective assets.
OPERATING RESULTS 2004, 2005 AND 2006
Introduction
|
|
|
Most significant drivers of our sales, results of
operations and cash flows in 2006 |
The most significant drivers of our sales, results of operations
and cash flows in 2006 were:
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition and divestiture activities particularly
our acquisition of Schering (The names Bayer Schering
Pharma or Schering as used in this annual
report on
Form 20-F always
refer to Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany, or its
predecessor, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany, respectively. The
reference to Bayer Schering Pharma AG or Schering AG also
includes business conducted by affiliated entities. Bayer
Schering Pharma AG and Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey,
are unaffiliated companies that have been totally independent of
each other for many years.); |
|
|
|
The general economic situation and the continued positive
business climates in the industries of some of our customers in
the course of 2006; and |
|
|
|
Raw materials, pricing i.e., the effects on
our results of operations of the increased prices of
petrochemical raw materials, other precursors and energy. |
In addition, we present charges and expenses in connection with
the transactions and other measures we have been taking as part
of the strategic reorientation of our business and the related
reorganization of our remaining businesses in order to assist
readers in understanding the effects of these measures on our
results of operations. Moreover, we separately disclose charges
relating to several major legal matters that we distinguish from
our ongoing operations. For details refer
to Expenses and gains relating to the
reorientation of our business and to other material unusual
effects.
76
|
|
|
Acquisition and divestiture activities |
|
|
|
Effects on net sales from acquisitions and divestitures |
Acquisitions and divestitures during 2006 and 2005 had a
positive effect on net sales in 2006 of
3,025 million,
and acquisitions and divestitures during 2005 and 2004 had a
positive effect on net sales in 2005 of
2,070 million.
These portfolio changes affected the comparison between the
three years sales figures as shown in the following two
tables:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in | |
|
|
2006 | |
|
|
from 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
millions) | |
Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
Schering AG, Germany
|
|
|
3,082 |
|
Other
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,106 |
|
|
|
|
|
Divestitures
|
|
|
|
|
Termination of distribution activities for Plasma in Canada
(divested in 2005)
|
|
|
(100 |
) |
Net sales to LANXESS (until spin-off on January 31,
2005, sales to LANXESS were classified as internal sales)
|
|
|
69 |
|
Disposition of several active ingredients, CropScience in 2005
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(81 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Net effects on sales
|
|
|
3,025 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
|
from 2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
millions) | |
Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
Roche consumer health business
|
|
|
1,061 |
|
Divestitures
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales to LANXESS after the spin-off on
January 31, 2005 (in 2004, sales to LANXESS were classified
as internal sales)
|
|
|
981 |
|
Other (net effect)
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net effects on sales
|
|
|
2,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on operating result from the purchase price allocation
in connection with the acquisition of Schering AG, Berlin,
Germany |
When we consolidated the acquired Schering businesses, we
allocated the purchase price for those businesses among the
assets and liabilities we acquired, in accordance with IFRS 3
(Business Combinations). Further details concerning these
allocations are set forth in Note 7.2 to the consolidated
financial statements appearing elsewhere in this annual report
on Form 20-F and
in Critical Accounting Policies
Acquisition accounting.
The purchase price allocation as of December 31, 2006
remains preliminary with respect to the restructuring plans
under consideration, the ongoing negotiations with Novartis
regarding
Betaferon®/Betaseron®
and other events occurring after the balance sheet date that
will improve our understanding of the fair values. One of the
effects of the purchase price allocation is an upward
revaluation or
step-up of
the acquired inventories and non-current assets. Most of the
non-current assets subject to the
step-up are intangible
assets related to production (e.g., patents, production
know-how, etc.). Our annual amortization charges will be
materially increased by
77
approximately
1 billion
per annum as a result of the
step-up for a weighted
average period of 14 years. This in turn will result in a
long-term increase in the cost of production of goods
manufactured after the acquisition date.
The step-up in value of
the acquired inventory of
848 million,
by contrast, will materially affect our results of operations in
the short term, as we will recognize the difference between the
sales prices of the affected inventory we sell and its
stepped-up values as
charges to our earnings in the periods in which the inventory is
sold. About 50 percent of the charges relating to the
inventory step-up have
been recognized in 2006 and the remaining ones are expected to
be recognized until 2008. See also Critical
Accounting Policies Acquisition accounting.
|
|
|
Effect on operating result from Schering AG integration |
In 2006, we incurred expenses totaling
179 million
in connection with the integration of Schering AG, Berlin,
Germany. This amount includes an offsetting gain of
74 million
from the related sale of a building. The expenses mainly relate
to severance and retention payments, restructuring activities
and accelerated asset depreciation, and external advisors.
|
|
|
Effect on cash flows from Schering AG acquisition |
The cash outflow in connection with the acquisition of Schering,
AG, Berlin, Germany totaled
15.2 billion,
including the purchase price for 96.24 percent of the
outstanding shares of Bayer Schering Pharma AG (as of
December 31, 2006), less the assumed cash and cash
equivalents of approximately
1 billion.
In addition, we assumed financial liabilities of
0.2 billion.
Fur further details refer to Liquidity and
Capital Resources 2004, 2005 and 2006 Cash
Flows Financing Activities.
|
|
|
General Economic Situation |
The dynamic pace of global economic growth established in 2005
continued into 2006, although the upswing slowed down somewhat
during the course of the year. Due to brisk demand for raw
materials, especially in Asia and the United States, coupled
with political instability in some oil-producing countries, the
price of oil rose significantly in the first half of 2006,
clouding the general economic picture. Economic expansion
nonetheless remained remarkably robust and became much more
broadly based as the year progressed, buoyed in the second half
by still favorable monetary conditions and relenting pressure
from oil prices. The positive economic trend spurred the
employment markets in the major industrialized countries, with
private consumption being strengthened as a result. Slackening
growth in the United States was partially offset by more rapid
expansion in Europe. Growth in the emerging economies remained
basically robust throughout the year.
The single most important factor that affects our costs is the
price of raw materials especially for our Materials and Systems
products. Petrochemical feedstocks are important raw materials
in many of our products, especially in our Materials and Systems
segments. We do not produce petrochemical raw materials. For
this reason and due to the volatility of oil and petroleum
commodity and futures markets in recent years, our single
greatest raw materials sensitivity is to fluctuations in the
price of petrochemicals and related derivative products. In
2006, these prices were approximately 9 percent above the
average prices in 2005. During the same period, the average
annual crude oil price (IPE Brent) increased by approximately
20 percent.
|
|
|
Expenses and gains relating to the reorientation of our
business and to other material unusual effects |
We have recorded a number of charges and expenses in recent
years in connection with the transactions and other measures we
have been taking as part of the strategic reorientation of our
business and the related reorganization of our remaining
businesses to concentrate on and refocus our core businesses.
These charges and expenses include selective divestitures of
businesses and assets that no longer fit our strategic plan,
such as the spin-off of LANXESS and the related reorganization
of portions of our remaining polymers activities, the
divestiture of our plasma business and the divestitures of a
number of operations within CropScience and related
restructuring and consolidation of CropSciences activities
in different countries. The reorganization also includes
78
the reorientation of our Pharmaceuticals segment, including the
restructuring of the research and development and other
pharmaceutical activities and ultimately the acquisition of
Schering AG, Berlin, Germany. Moreover, these charges also
include charges relating to several major legal matters that we
believe are sufficiently distinguishable from our normal
operating business that an understanding of their magnitudes may
enhance the comparability of our results of operations among
financial periods.
The following table sets forth charges and expenses relating to
these activities. We have presented them individually and in the
aggregate to assist readers in understanding their effects on
our results of operations in prior periods. Consistent with our
consolidated income statement presentation and in accordance
with IFRS 5 (Non-current Assets Held for Sale and
Discontinued Operations), the figures presented below are for
our continuing business only.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Description |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Impairment charges and write-downs
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(66 |
) |
Restructuring Charges and unscheduled amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Relating to HealthCare activities
|
|
|
(69 |
) |
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
Relating to CropSciences activities
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
(79 |
) |
|
Relating to MaterialScience activities
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
Relating to Others activities
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(82 |
) |
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
|
(200 |
) |
Portfolio changes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses relating to the integration of Schering AG,
Germany(a)
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(179 |
) |
|
Expenses relating to the integration of the Roche consumer
health business
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(71 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
(162 |
) |
Litigation related and other charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Arbitration proceedings in the United States relating to the
production of propylene oxide
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
Provisions in connection with antitrust litigation related to
polymer products
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(336 |
) |
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
Charges in connection with the termination of the co-promotion
agreement with GlaxoSmithKline for
Levitra®
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(106 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
One-time non-cash gain due to changes to our pension plans in
the United States and Germany
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
Litigation-related expenses in connection with HealthCare
products
|
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
(105 |
) |
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(120 |
) |
|
|
(334 |
) |
|
|
(205 |
) |
Total
|
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
(533 |
) |
|
|
(633 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
For details on charges relating to the Schering AG acquisition
refer to Acquisition and divestiture
activities. |
|
|
|
Impairment charges and write-downs |
In 2006, the charge of
66 million
resulted from the write-downs relating to our cancer drug
Viadur®
and an in-process research and development asset. In 2005,
impairment charges and write-downs related to
Viadur®.
In 2004, we did not incur material impairment charges or
write-downs.
79
In 2006, the restructuring charges resulted mainly from the
restructuring project in our CropScience business
(74 million),
restructuring activities at our MaterialSciences sites in
New Martinsville, West Virginia and Baytown, Texas
(55 million);
and from restructuring measures regarding the reorganization of
the business activities by Bayer Industry Services
(30 million).
In 2005, the restructuring charges related mainly to the
reorganization of our polyurethane business
(33 million),
restructuring measures for our CropScience activities in France
(23 million)
and for our pharmaceutical activities in Germany and the United
States
(22 million).
In 2004, the major charges related to restructuring of our
pharmaceutical research and development activities
(24 million) and
personnel reductions in connection with the Schering-Plough
alliance
(45 million).
(Bayer Schering Pharma AG and Schering-Plough Corporation, New
Jersey, are unaffiliated companies that have been totally
independent of each other for many years.)
Acquisition and disposition activities also affect our results
of operations, and are responsible for substantial fluctuations
in our results from year to year. In connection with our
strategic reorientation of our business and the related
reorganization of our remaining businesses to concentrate on and
refocus our core businesses, we have been disposing of numerous
businesses, investments and participations. Our most recent
transactions are described in Item 4, Information on the
Company History and Development of the Company.
Regarding the changes resulting from the acquisition of Schering
AG, Berlin, Germany refer to Acquisition and
divestiture activities.
In 2006, gains under Miscellaneous of
41 million
related to the divestment of a family of mature herbicide
products of our Crop Protection segment and the sale of an
in-process research and development asset of our Pharmaceuticals
segment. In 2004, the net negative effect under Miscellaneous of
26 million
included
77 million
in charges for the stock exchange listing of LANXESS and
51 million
in gains from sales of licenses.
|
|
|
Litigation related and other charges |
Our litigation related charges are described in Item 8,
Financial Information Legal Proceedings.
|
|
|
Changes in Exchange Rates |
Our net sales and our operating result are generally affected by
changes in exchange rates. Because a substantial portion of our
assets, liabilities, sales and earnings are denominated in
currencies other than the euro zone currency, we have exposure
to fluctuations in the values of these currencies relative to
the euro. These currency fluctuations, especially the
fluctuation of the value of the U.S. dollar relative to the
euro, but also fluctuations in the currencies of the countries
in which we have significant operations and/or sales, can have a
material impact on our results of operations. We face both
transaction risk, where our businesses generate sales in one
currency but incur costs relating to that revenue in a different
currency, and translation risk, which arises when we translate
the income statements of our subsidiaries into euro for
inclusion in our financial statements. We do not quantify the
effects on our financial statements of transaction risks.
Translation risks, which we do quantify and against which we do
not hedge, do not affect our local currency cash flows or
results of operations, but do affect our consolidated financial
statements. For further information on transaction and
translation risk, see Item 11, Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk Currency
Risk.
Changes in exchange rates were a significant driver of our
results of operations in recent years. In 2005 and 2006, these
changes were insignificant. The translation effects of exchange
rate changes on our sales in 2006 were immaterial (compared to
an increase of
0.3 billion
in 2005 and to a decrease of
0.9 billion
in 2004). The discussion of our operating results
in Bayer Group and Segment Data
includes sales figures adjusted for these translation
effects. These adjusted sales figures represent the sales that
we would have generated had the average exchange rates we used
to translate our non-euro denominated revenues into euros
remained constant in
80
the year under review as compared with the previous year. See
Note 4.2 to the consolidated financial statements appearing
elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F for the
exchange rates for the euro to other currencies important for
our results of operations.
Discontinued Operations
|
|
|
Reporting of Discontinued Operations |
In the financial statements and other financial information
included in this annual report on
Form 20-F, certain
business activities, that were divested or are in the process of
being divested, are reported under discontinued operations in
accordance with IFRS 5 and other applicable standards.
Therefore, the Groups financial reporting is based
primarily on continuing operations.
In 2006, the Diagnostics division as well as the H.C. Starck and
Wolff Walsrode businesses are presented in the balance sheet
line items Assets held for sale and discontinued
operations and Liabilities directly related to
assets held for sale and discontinued operations. In
accordance with IFRS 5, the previous years balance
sheet has not been adjusted for any of these businesses.
The income statement and net cash provided by (used in)
operating activities have been adjusted for the comparative
periods 2005 and 2004 to reflect all discontinued operations.
The individual items of the income statement such as sales,
functional costs and non-operating result reflect only
continuing operations of the Bayer Group for all years presented.
At the end of June 2006, Bayer signed an agreement to sell the
Diagnostics division to Siemens for approximately
4.3 billion.
The transaction was closed in January 2007. The Diagnostics
division is reported as discontinued operations prior to the
sale.
The Diagnostics division offered a wide portfolio of in-vitro
diagnostics products for evaluating and monitoring the therapy
of numerous diseases. In the field of laboratory testing, the
Advia®
product family included medium- and high-throughput systems for
immuno-diagnostics (the measurement of such substances as
proteins, steroids, drugs and antibodies in patients
blood), clinical chemistry, hematology and other diagnostic
disciplines. In the area of near patient testing, products for
use in the hospital and in physicians office laboratories
included trademarks such as the
Rapidtm
family,
Multistix®
and the
Clinitek®
line of instruments. In the area of molecular testing, the
product portfolio for virology infectious diseases included
quantitative analysis, genotyping and resistance testing.
The Diagnostics division had net sales of
1,526 million
in 2006,
1,433 million
in 2005 and
1,322 million
in 2004. Operating results of the Diagnostics division were
203 million
in 2006,
179 million
in 2005 and
109 million
in 2004. The income from discontinued operations after taxes
attributable to the Diagnostics division was
117 million
in 2006,
118 million
in 2005 and
71 million
in 2004.
In November 2006, Bayer signed an agreement with two financials
investors, Advent International and The Carlyle Group,
concerning the sale of the H.C. Starck business to them for
approximately
1.2 billion.
The transaction closed in early February 2007.
The H.C. Starck business comprised a broad portfolio of products
ranging from ceramic materials to metals such as tungsten,
molybdenum, tantalum and niobium and their alloys and compounds
for industrial customers in the aircraft, medical, chemical,
electronic, lighting, tooling and optical components industries.
The H.C. Starck business had net sales of
985 million
in 2006,
920 million
in 2005 and
703 million
in 2004. Operating results of the H.C. Starck business were
55 million
in 2006,
83 million
in 2005 and
69 million
in 2004. The income from discontinued operations after taxes
attributable to the H.C. Starck business was
32 million
in 2006,
46 million
in 2005 and
34 million
in 2004.
81
In December 2006, Bayer signed an agreement with The Dow
Chemical Company concerning the sale of the Wolff Walsrode
business. The sale is subject to the approval of the relevant
antitrust authorities. Assuming these approvals are received, we
expect the closing of the transaction to occur by the end of the
first half of 2007.
The Wolff Walsrode business develops, produces and markets
cellulose derivatives for use in building materials, industrial
coatings, flexible packaging ink and life sciences markets, as
well as in specialized industrial fields. See Item 4,
Information on the Company Business
WOLFF WALSRODE (Discontinued Operation).
The Wolff Walsrode business had net sales of
334 million
in 2006,
329 million
in 2005 and
328 million
in 2004. Operating results of the Wolff Walsrode business were
40 million
in 2006,
36 million
in 2005 and
40 million
in 2004. The income from discontinued operations after taxes
attributable to the Wolff Walsrode business was
20 million
in 2006,
20 million
in 2005 and
20 million
in 2004.
At the end of January 2005, we spun off the LANXESS subgroup to
our stockholders, LANXESS thereupon ceased to be part of the
Bayer Group. The shares of LANXESS AG have been listed on the
Frankfurt Stock Exchange since January 31, 2005.
The LANXESS subgroup was deconsolidated from the Bayer Group
effective January 31, 2005 and is no longer included in the
balance sheet as of December 31, 2005. Net earnings of the
LANXESS group for the month of January 2005 are recognized in
Bayer Group net income for 2005. In the income and cash flow
statements for 2005, as well as for the comparative period of
2004, LANXESS is reported under discontinued operations. Since
February 1, 2005, sales from Bayer companies to LANXESS are
reported as external net sales.
LANXESS had net sales of
503 million
in 2005 (for January only) and
6,053 million
in 2004. Operating results of LANXESS were
62 million
in 2005 (for January only) and
78 million
in 2004. The income from discontinued operations after taxes
attributable to LANXESS was
38 million
in 2005 (for January only) and minus
4 million
in 2004.
For a discussion of the risks and uncertainties that continue to
face us in connection with the LANXESS spin-off, please see
Item 3, Key Information Risk
Factors Our transactions relating to LANXESS expose
us to continuing liability and Item 10, Additional
Information Material contracts.
At the end of March 2005, Bayer divested the U.S. plasma
operations of its Biological Products division to two
U.S. financial investors, Cerberus Capital Management,
L.P., New York, New York and Ampersand Ventures, Wellesley,
Massachusetts by transferring those activities to Talecris
BioTherapeutics, Inc., a corporation formed by those two
investors. The agreement covers the products, facilities and
employees representing the plasma portion of the division. The
remaining portion, consisting of our
Kogenate®
business, is not affected by this agreement and, effective
January 1, 2006, forms part of our Pharmaceuticals segment.
2005 net earnings of minus
1 million
from the discontinued U.S. plasma operations as well as
purchase price adjustments are included in Bayer Group net
income through March 31, 2005. We reduced our purchase
price by
15 million
as a result of purchase price adjustments that occurred after we
divested our U.S. Plasma operations on March 31, 2005.
The purchase price adjustments determined pursuant to the final
sales agreement with the purchaser consisted of unfavorable
working capital adjustments of
42 million,
offset in part by contingent consideration received of
27 million.
To account for the final agreement signed at the end of March
2005, we show the continued
non-U.S. distribution
as part of our continuing operations. In our financial
statements for 2005 only the U.S. plasma business is
reflected in discontinued operations. Revenues from our
marketing activities for plasma products outside the United
States are reflected in sales from continuing operations of our
Pharmaceuticals segment.
The U.S. plasma operations had net sales of
124 million
in 2005 (through March 31 only) and
427 million
in 2004. Operating result of the U.S. plasma activities was
minus
2 million
in 2005 (through March 31 only) and
82
minus
97 million
in 2004. The loss from discontinued operations after taxes
attributable to the U.S. plasma operations was
1 million
in 2005 (through March 31 only) and
63 million
in 2004.
The following table sets forth net sales, operating result and
income (loss) from discontinued operations after tax
attributable to Diagnostics, H.C. Starck, Wolff Walsrode,
LANXESS and the U.S. activities of our former plasma
business for the three years under review. For further
information, refer also to Note 7.2 to the consolidated
financial statements appearing elsewhere in this annual report
on Form 20-F.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diagnostics | |
|
H.C. Starck | |
|
Wolff Walsrode | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
|
(Euros in millions) | |
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Net sales
|
|
|
1,322 |
|
|
|
1,433 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
|
|
703 |
|
|
|
920 |
|
|
|
985 |
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
334 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Affected segments
|
|
(Former Diagnostics,
Diabetes Care) |
|
Materials |
|
Materials |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
LANXESS | |
|
Plasma | |
|
Discontinued Operations | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
|
(Euros in millions) | |
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Net sales
|
|
|
6,053 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
427 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,833 |
|
|
|
3,309 |
|
|
|
2,845 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
358 |
|
|
|
298 |
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
Affected segments
|
|
(LANXESS) |
|
Pharmaceuticals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83
Bayer Group
The financial information presented for 2004, 2005 and 2006
reflects the continuing operations of the Bayer Group and its
segments, except where specific reference is made to
discontinued operations or Group total. In 2006, due to the
Schering acquisition and the discontinued Diagnostics division,
we changed our segment structure and reporting to reflect our
new corporate structure. We restated our segment reporting for
2004 and 2005 accordingly. The Diagnostics division and the H.C.
Starck and Wolff Walsrode businesses are reported as
discontinued operations. (The names Bayer Schering
Pharma or Schering as used in this annual
report on
Form 20-F always
refer to Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany, or its
predecessor, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany, respectively. Bayer
Schering Pharma AG also includes business conducted by
affiliated entities. Bayer Schering Pharma AG and
Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey are unaffiliated
companies that have been totally independent of each other for
many years.)
The following table shows the operating and financial results
for Bayer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
|
2004(a) |
|
Previous Year |
|
2005(a),(b) |
|
Previous Year |
|
2006(c) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
|
(Euros in millions) |
Net sales
|
|
|
20,925 |
|
|
|
18.0 |
|
|
|
24,701 |
|
|
|
17.2 |
|
|
|
28,956 |
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
9,839 |
|
|
|
14.7 |
|
|
|
11,289 |
|
|
|
21.2 |
|
|
|
13,681 |
|
|
as percentage of sales (%)
|
|
|
47.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47.2 |
|
Selling expenses
|
|
|
(4,783 |
) |
|
|
(9.7 |
) |
|
|
(5,247 |
) |
|
|
(24.5 |
) |
|
|
(6,534 |
) |
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
(1,772 |
) |
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
(1,729 |
) |
|
|
(32.9 |
) |
|
|
(2,297 |
) |
General administration expenses
|
|
|
(1,285 |
) |
|
|
(1.7 |
) |
|
|
(1,307 |
) |
|
|
(22.3 |
) |
|
|
(1,599 |
) |
Other operating income
|
|
|
802 |
|
|
|
(3.4 |
) |
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
(5.8 |
) |
|
|
730 |
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
(1,144 |
) |
|
|
(10.8 |
) |
|
|
(1,267 |
) |
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
(1,219 |
) |
Operating result
|
|
|
1,657 |
|
|
|
51.7 |
|
|
|
2,514 |
|
|
|
9.9 |
|
|
|
2,762 |
|
|
as percentage of sales (%)
|
|
|
7.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.5 |
|
Non-operating result
|
|
|
(632 |
) |
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
(602 |
) |
|
|
(29.9 |
) |
|
|
(782 |
) |
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
1,025 |
|
|
|
86.5 |
|
|
|
1,912 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
1,980 |
|
Income from continuing operations after taxes
|
|
|
624 |
|
|
|
120.2 |
|
|
|
1,374 |
|
|
|
11.1 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
Income from discontinued operations after taxes
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
(23.5 |
) |
|
|
169 |
|
Group net income (total)
|
|
|
685 |
|
|
|
133.1 |
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
2004 and 2005 data have been adjusted to reflect the fact that
the Diagnostics division, the H.C. Starck business and the Wolff
Walsrode business are reported as discontinued operations. For
further information on these restatements, see
Discontinued Operations and Note 7.2 to the
consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this
annual report on
Form 20-F. |
|
(b) |
|
The consumer health business acquired from Roche is reflected in
the income statement with effect from January 1, 2005. |
|
(c) |
|
The pharmaceuticals business acquired from Schering AG, Germany
is reflected in the income statement with effect from
June 23, 2006. |
84
The following table shows a geographical breakdown of our sales
from continuing operations based on where we sold our products.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
|
2004(a) |
|
Previous Year |
|
2005(a),(b) |
|
Previous Year |
|
2006(c) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
|
(Euros in millions) |
Europe
|
|
|
8,751 |
|
|
|
23.1 |
|
|
|
10,771 |
|
|
|
17.5 |
|
|
|
12,652 |
|
North America
|
|
|
5,790 |
|
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
|
6,496 |
|
|
|
19.8 |
|
|
|
7,779 |
|
Asia/ Pacific
|
|
|
3,509 |
|
|
|
16.1 |
|
|
|
4,073 |
|
|
|
13.2 |
|
|
|
4,610 |
|
Latin America/ Africa/ Middle East
|
|
|
2,875 |
|
|
|
16.9 |
|
|
|
3,361 |
|
|
|
16.5 |
|
|
|
3,915 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
2004 and 2005 data have been adjusted to reflect the fact that
the Diagnostics division, the H.C. Starck business and the Wolff
Walsrode business are reported as discontinued operations. For
further information on these restatements, see
Discontinued Operations and Note 7.2 to the
consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this
annual report on
Form 20-F. |
|
(b) |
|
The consumer health business acquired from Roche is reflected in
the income statement with effect from January 1, 2005. |
|
(c) |
|
The pharmaceuticals business acquired from Schering AG, Germany
is reflected in the income statement with effect from
June 23, 2006. |
Net sales represent the gross inflow of economic benefits that
are recognized upon the transfer of risk or rendering of
services to third parties. Net sales exclude rebates and
discounts that we give our customers, as well as the amounts
that we collect on behalf of third parties, such as sales taxes,
goods and services taxes and value added taxes. Net sales of the
Bayer Group rose by 17.2 percent, or
4,255 million,
to
28,956 million
in 2006, compared with
24,701 million
in 2005. Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our
non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2006
as compared with 2005, our net sales would have increased by
17.4 percent.
The acquired Schering AG business, which has been included in
our financial statements since June 23, 2006, accounted for
3.1 billion,
or 12.5 percent of the increase. Changes in our portfolio
of businesses, primarily relating to the acquisition of the
business of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany, accounted for a net
increase of
3,025 million
(12.2 percent) in our net sales (For the composition of the
changes in our portfolio,
see Introduction Acquisition and
divestiture activities). Without those portfolio changes,
our net sales grew by 5.0 percent, with this increase
primarily attributable to our HealthCare (plus 9.4 percent)
and MaterialScience (plus 7.0 percent) businesses. Sales of
our CropScience business fell slightly by 2.6 percent, when
considered without the portfolio changes.
Gross profit represents net sales after deducting cost of goods
sold. Cost of goods sold includes the production costs of goods
sold and the cost of goods purchased for resale. The cost of
goods sold and services provided increased by 13.9 percent
in 2006 to
15,275 million,
due mainly to the acquired Schering business
(1,338 million),
and also as a result of the overall growth in our businesses and
higher raw material costs. The ratio of cost of goods sold to
total net sales was 52.8 percent in 2006, compared with
54.3 percent in 2005.
Operating result represents gross profit after deducting selling
expenses, research and development expenses, general
administration expenses and other operating income and expenses.
85
Selling expenses increased by
1,287 million,
or 24.5 percent, to
6,534 million
in 2006, primarily due to inclusion of the Schering business
(956 million)
and also as a result of the overall growth in our businesses.
Due to the increase in the proportion of life science activities
in our portfolio (which include HealthCare and CropScience), for
which selling cost tend to be higher than in our other business,
the ratio of selling expenses to sales rose to
22.6 percent, from 21.2 percent in 2005.
Research and development expenses rose by
568 million,
or 32.9 percent, to
2,297 million
in 2006, mainly because of the inclusion of Schering activities
(552 million).
General administration expenses increased by
292 million,
or 22.3 percent, to
1,599 million
in 2006, due primarily to the acquired Schering business
(187 million).
Other operating income decreased by
45 million,
or 5.8 percent, to
730 million
in 2006. The Schering entities accounted for
86 million
of the total. Income in 2006 included gains from the sale of a
building
(74 million)
and the divestiture of low-volume product lines and active
ingredients of our CropScience business (totaling
47 million).
Whereas in 2005, other operating income included a one-time
non-cash gain of
238 million
from changes to our pension systems in the United States and
Germany.
Other operating expenses decreased by
48 million,
or 3.8 percent, to
1,219 million.
In 2006, other operating expenses mainly related to charges in
connection with the integration of the Schering business
(253 million).
Charges relating to restructuring activities include the project
initiated in summer 2006 in our CropScience business
(74 million),
restructuring activities at our MaterialScience sites in New
Martinsville, West Virginia and Baytown, Texas
(55 million)
and the reorganization of the business activities of Bayer
Industry Services
(30 million).
Litigation-related charges, totaling
205 million
(2005:
451 million),
mainly related to arbitration proceedings in the United States
in connection with the production of propylene oxide
(109 million),
to the pending antitrust litigation in polymer products
(44 million)
and to further charges in connection with HealthCare products
(59 million).
Furthermore, other operating expenses include write-downs of
66 million
relating to our cancer drug
Viadur®
and an in-process research and development asset. In 2005,
expenses included the establishment of provisions in connection
with antitrust proceedings involving products in the polymers
area
(336 million)
and litigation-related expenses in connection with HealthCare
products
(105 million).
Operating result improved by 9.9 percent to
2,762 million
in 2006, compared with
2,514 million
in 2005. The acquired Schering AG business accounted for minus
119 million.
Inventory step-up and
amortization related to the acquired long-lived assets decreased
our operating result from the Schering business by
551 million.
Non-operating result represents income and expenses from
investments in affiliated companies, interest income and
expenses, and other non-operating income and expenses.
Non-operating result declined by
180 million,
or 29.9 percent, to an expense of
782 million.
Net income from investments in affiliated companies improved
significantly from minus
22 million
in 2005 to
207 million
in 2006, while net interest expense rose to
728 million
due to the acquisition-related increase in debt in the middle of
the year. Interest expense of
370 million
relates to the financing of the acquisition of Schering AG,
Germany. The income from investments in affiliated companies
mainly comprises the gain of
236 million
from the sale of our 49.9 percent interest in the joint
venture GE Bayer Silicones.
|
|
|
Income Before Income Taxes |
Income before income taxes represents operating result plus
non-operating result. In 2006, the income before income taxes
was
1,980 million,
as compared with
1,912 million
in 2005.
Income taxes represent the income taxes paid or accrued in the
individual countries, plus deferred taxes. We recognized an
income tax charge of
454 million
in 2006, as compared with
538 million
in 2005. The tax rate
86
for our Group was 22.9 percent in 2006, as compared to
28.1 percent in 2005. The tax result was composed of income
taxes paid or payable of
763 million
as well as deferred taxes that led to a net income of
309 million.
The lower tax expense was due mainly to first-time recognition
of deferred tax assets for loss carry-forwards of
203 million.
|
|
|
Income from Discontinued Operations After Taxes |
According to IFRS 5 (Non-current Assets Held for Sale and
Discontinued Operations) the post-tax profit or loss of
discontinued operations and the post-tax gain or loss recognized
on the measurement to fair value less costs to sell or on the
disposal of the disposal group are reported separately in a
single line item on the income statement.
Income from discontinued operations after taxes amounted to
169 million
in 2006, compared to
221 million
in 2005. Income from discontinued operations after taxes relate
to the Diagnostics division and the H.C. Starck and Wolff
Walsrode businesses in all periods presented. In 2005, the
divested U.S. plasma operations and LANXESS are also
included in this figure. Due to the composition of the
discontinued operations group of business, the figures presented
are not comparable.
For details refer to Discontinued Operations
or to Note 7.2 to the consolidated financial statement
included elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
Net income represents income from continuing operations after
taxes plus income from discontinued operations after taxes minus
minority stockholders interest. Group income rose by
86 million
to
1,683 million
from net income of
1,597 million
in 2005. Income from continuing operations after taxes amounted
to
1,526 million
in 2006 and
1,374 million
in 2005. Income from discontinued operations after taxes was
169 million
in 2006 and
221 million
in 2005.
Net sales of the Bayer Group rose by 18.0 percent, or
3,776 million,
to
24,701 million
in 2005, compared with
20,925 million
in 2004. Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our
non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2005
as compared with 2004, our net sales would have increased by
16.7 percent. In comparison with 2004, price increases of
7.0 percent that were primarily attributable to
MaterialScience led to an increase of
1,472 million
in net sales. Changes in our portfolio of businesses, primarily
relating to the consumer health business acquired from Roche in
the first quarter of 2005 and our spin-off of LANXESS (leading
to a reclassification of sales to LANXESS from
inter-segment sales to external sales),
accounted for an increase of
2,070 million
(9.9 percent) in our net sales.
The cost of goods sold and services provided increased by
21.0 percent in 2005 to
13,412 million,
due mainly to the overall growth in our business, in particular
in our MaterialScience business, and due to the changes in our
portfolio, primarily relating to the acquired consumer health
business and the LANXESS spin-off (analogous to presenting sales
to LANXESS as external sales, cost of goods sold increased
because of related costs). The ratio of the cost of goods sold
to total net sales was 54.3 percent in 2005, compared with
53.0 percent in 2004. The single largest driver of this
increase was higher raw material prices.
Selling expenses increased by
464 million,
or 9.7 percent, to
5,247 million
in 2005, primarily due to higher marketing and distribution
costs in our HealthCare and MaterialScience businesses.
87
Research and development expenses declined by
43 million,
or 2.4 percent, to
1,729 million
in 2005, mainly because of our concentration on our strategic
core businesses within Bayer HealthCare and Bayer CropScience.
General administration expenses increased by
22 million,
or 1.7 percent, to
1,307 million
in 2005, due primarily to the acquisition of Roches
consumer health business. The resulting increase in cost could
only partly be offset by cost reduction measures.
Other operating income decreased by
27 million,
or 3.4 percent, to
775 million
in 2005. Income in 2005 included gains of
238 million
from changes to our pension systems in the United States and
Germany. In 2004, other operating income included
161 million
gains relating to pension and
51 million
in gains from sales of licenses.
Other operating expenses increased by
123 million,
or 10.8 percent, to
1,267 million.
The expenses included the establishment of provisions in
connection with antitrust proceedings involving products in the
polymers area
(336 million)
and litigation-related expenses in connection with HealthCare
products
(105 million).
Other operating expenses in 2004 included
139 million
in connection with a number of legal matters. Moreover, in 2004
before the adoption of IFRS 3, amortization of goodwill and
intangible assets with indefinite useful lives was
176 million.
Operating result improved by 51.7 percent, or
857 million,
to
2,514 million
in 2005, compared with
1,657 million
in 2004. The largest contributions to the growth in operating
result were made by the Materials
(330 million)
and Systems segments
(388 million)
and resulted largely from price increases.
Non-operating result improved by
30 million,
or 4.7 percent, to an expense of
602 million.
Net loss from investments in affiliated companies declined
significantly, while net interest expense rose due to the
acquisition-related increase in net debt at the beginning of the
year. The loss from affiliated companies mainly comprises an
equity-method loss of
47 million
(2004:
131 million)
from two production joint ventures with Lyondell.
|
|
|
Income Before Income Taxes |
In 2005 we had positive income before income taxes of
1,912 million,
as compared with
1,025 million
in 2004.
We recognized an income tax charge of
538 million
in 2005, as compared with
401 million
in 2004. The tax rate for our Group was 28.1 percent in
2005. The tax result was composed of income taxes paid or
payable of
463 million
as well as deferred taxes that led to a net charge of
75 million.
|
|
|
Income from Discontinued Operations After Taxes |
Income from discontinued operations after taxes amounted to
income of
221 million
in 2005, compared to
58 million
in 2004. Income from discontinued operations after taxes relate
to the Diagnostics division, H.C. Starck and Wolff Walsrode
business, as well as to the divested U.S. plasma operations
and LANXESS. The 2005 figure includes the income from our former
LANXESS segment for January 2005 as well as the income from the
U.S. activities of our former plasma business for the first
quarter 2005, including adjustments in connection with the
purchase price. We reduced our purchase price by
15 million
as a result of purchase price adjustments that occurred after we
divested our U.S. Plasma operations on March 31, 2005.
The purchase price adjustments determined pursuant to the final
sales agreement with the purchaser consisted of unfavorable
working capital adjustments of
42 million,
offset in part by contingent consideration received of
27 million.
For details refer to Discontinued Operations
or to Note 7.2 to the consolidated financial statement
included elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
88
Group income rose by
912 million
to
1,597 million
from a net income of
685 million
in 2004. Income from continuing operations after taxes amounted
to
1,374 million
in 2005 and
624 million
in 2004. Income from discontinued operations after taxes was
221 million
in 2005 and
58 million
in 2004.
Segment Data
In 2006, due to the acquisition of the business of Schering
AG, Berlin, Germany and the divestiture of the Diagnostics
division, we changed our segment structure and reporting to
reflect our new corporate structure in compliance with IAS 14
(Segment Reporting). We restated our segment reporting for 2004
and 2005, accordingly. The changes in our segments are as
follows: Due to the divestiture of our U.S. Plasma business
in 2005, the former Pharmaceuticals, Biological Products segment
has been renamed as the Pharmaceuticals segment with effect from
January 1, 2006. The historical Bayer pharmaceuticals and
biological products businesses and the acquired Schering
business form the Pharmaceuticals segment. The former Consumer
Care and Animal Health segments were combined with the Diabetes
Care division to form the new segment Consumer Health. Due to
the divestment activities regarding the H.C. Starck and Wolff
Walsrode businesses, the Materials segment comprises the
Polycarbonates and Thermoplastic Polyurethanes business units.
The Diagnostics division, as well as the H.C. Starck and Wolff
Walsrode businesses, are reported as discontinued operations.
See also Discontinued Operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2005 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2006(a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
|
(Euros in millions) |
Net sales (external)
|
|
|
3,961 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
4,067 |
|
|
|
83.9 |
|
|
|
7,478 |
|
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
52.6 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
(12.1 |
) |
|
|
51 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
399 |
|
|
|
19.0 |
|
|
|
475 |
|
|
|
18.5 |
|
|
|
563 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The acquired pharmaceuticals business of Schering AG is
reflected in the income statement with effect from June 23,
2006. |
89
The following table shows our sales during the past three years
from the products that account for the largest portion of
segment sales.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
|
|
|
Percentage of | |
Product(a) |
|
Sales | |
|
Segment Sales | |
|
Sales | |
|
Segment Sales | |
|
Sales | |
|
Segment Sales | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
|
|
millions) | |
|
|
|
millions) | |
|
|
|
millions) | |
|
|
Betaferon®/Betaseron®
(Specialized
Therapeutics)(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
535 |
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
Yasmin®/YAZ®/Yasminelle®
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Womens
Health)(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
Kogenate®
(Hematology/ Cardiology)
|
|
|
563 |
|
|
|
14.2 |
|
|
|
663 |
|
|
|
16.3 |
|
|
|
787 |
|
|
|
10.5 |
|
Adalat®
(Primary Care)
|
|
|
670 |
|
|
|
16.9 |
|
|
|
659 |
|
|
|
16.2 |
|
|
|
657 |
|
|
|
8.8 |
|
Ciprobay®/
Cipro®
(Primary Care)
|
|
|
837 |
|
|
|
21.2 |
|
|
|
525 |
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
|
|
513 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
|
Avalox®/
Avelox®
(Primary Care)
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
364 |
|
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
396 |
|
|
|
5.3 |
|
Levitra®
(Primary Care)
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
|
260 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
Mirena®
(Womens
Health)(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
Magnevist®
(Diagnostic
Imaging)(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
Glucobay®
(Primary Care)
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
7.3 |
|
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
Other
|
|
|
1,102 |
|
|
|
27.8 |
|
|
|
1,301 |
|
|
|
31.9 |
|
|
|
3,180 |
|
|
|
42.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
3,961 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,067 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,478 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Products are ranked by the fourth quarter 2006 sales. |
|
(b) |
|
Acquired as part of Schering AGs pharmaceutical business
in 2006. |
The 2006 sales figures include the acquired Schering business
beginning on June 23, 2006. The Bayer Group financial
statements do not include Schering results for the previous
years and for the period from January 1 through June 22,
2006. The commentaries given below on business developments
related to the products acquired from Schering are based on full
year data that do not form part of the Bayer Group financial
statements. Sales per product for the following discussion are
based on sales data for the years ended December 31, 2006
and 2005 as prepared by Schering. We refer to those unaudited
full-year figures as
year-on-year.
In some cases in the following discussion where the context
requires, we refer to the Schering sales from June 23, 2006
to December 31, 2006 as pro rata temporis.
The following table shows unaudited sales figures for the full
year 2006 and 2005 as prepared by Schering AG.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year-on-year sales per product (unaudited) |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in | |
|
|
millions) | |
Betaferon®/Betaseron®
(Specialized Therapeutics)
|
|
|
867 |
|
|
|
991 |
|
Yasmin®/YAZ®/Yasminelle®
(Womens Health)
|
|
|
586 |
|
|
|
794 |
|
Magnevist®
(Diagnostic Imaging)
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
323 |
|
Mirena®
(Womens Health)
|
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
301 |
|
Sales of the Pharmaceuticals segment rose by
3,411 million,
or 83.9 percent, to
7,478 million
in 2006, mainly due to the inclusion of the Schering business.
(The names Bayer Schering Pharma or
Schering as used in this annual report on
Form 20-F always
refer to Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany, or its
90
predecessor, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany, respectively. Bayer
Schering Pharma AG also includes business conducted by
affiliated entities. Bayer Schering Pharma AG and
Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey, are unaffiliated
companies that have been totally independent of each other for
many years.) Had the average exchange rates we used to translate
our non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in
2006 as compared with 2005, our net sales in this segment would
have increased by 84.5 percent. Changes in our portfolio of
businesses relating to the acquired Schering business in 2006
(3,082 million)
and to the termination of distribution activities in Canada for
our divested Plasma business (minus
100 million),
accounted for an increase of
2,982 million
(73.3 percent) in our net sales. Leaving aside those
portfolio changes, our net sales grew by 10.8 percent,
which was mainly attributable to our Primary Care and Oncology
business units.
Sales of the Primary Care business unit rose by 9.2 percent
in 2006, to
3,091 million.
This increase was due primarily to higher sales of
Levitra®
(plus 20.8 percent),
CardioAspirin®
(plus 18.1 percent) and
Avalox®/
Avelox®
(plus 8.8 percent). In addition, sales were boosted by the
inclusion of the blood pressure treatments
Pritor®
and
PritorPlus®,
for which we acquired the marketing rights for certain European
countries from GlaxoSmithKline in January 2006. Sales from the
andrology business acquired from Schering in 2006 were included
for the first time, amounting to
31 million
in 2006. Mounting competition from generic products led to a
slight 2.3 percent decline in sales of
Cipro®/Ciprobay®.
Sales of the Hematology/ Cardiology business unit receded by
4.9 percent to
1,142 million.
The effects of terminating our plasma distribution, primarily in
Canada at the end of March 2006, and markedly lower sales of
Trasylol®
(minus 33.5 percent) were nearly offset by the growth in
sales of
Kogenate®
(plus 18.7 percent). Two separate observational studies and
a follow-up study to
one of the observational studies reported on the possible link
between the administration of
Trasylol®(aprotinin),
our product for use during open-heart surgery, and severe renal
dysfunction and vasoconstriction (myocardial infarction and
stroke) or increased long-term mortality rates. We are currently
cooperating closely with the relevant regulatory authorities to
resolve these questions. For further details refer to
Item 4, Information on the Company
Business Bayer HealthCare
Pharmaceuticals Update on
Trasylol®-marketed
product.
Our Oncology business unit increased sales by
397 million
to
432 million.
This figure includes
238 million
in sales of the acquired oncology business of Schering AG as of
June 23, 2006 with the key products
Fludara®,
Androcur®
and
Campath®.
Our new cancer drug
Nexavar®,
first launched in December 2005, performed well in the market,
with sales of
130 million.
In our Womens Health business unit, which focuses on
contraception, we achieved pro rata temporis sales of
1,320 million.
The main growth driver was the oral contraceptive product family
Yasmin®/YAZ®/Yasminelle®,
year-on-year sales of
which were up by 35.5 percent in 2006.
Year-on-year sales of
our intrauterine system
Mirena®
also advanced by 23.9 percent.
Sales of the Diagnostic Imaging business unit were
697 million
(pro rata temporis).
Year-on-year sales of
our two main products
Magnevist®
and
Ultravist®
dropped by 1.5 and 10.5 percent, respectively, with lower
sales of the latter attributable to the voluntary withdrawal of
the 370 mgI/ml formulation. We resumed marketing of this
product in numerous countries in the first quarter of 2007. By
contrast, Medrad, which markets application technologies for
contrast agents worldwide, grew
year-on-year sales by
13.1 percent.
Sales of the Specialized Therapeutics business unit amounted to
678 million
(pro rata temporis). Sales of our top product
Betaferon®/Betaseron®
used to treat multiple sclerosis expanded by 14.3 percent
year-on-year.
The Dermatology business unit had sales of
118 million
(pro rata temporis), with improved performance by the
units two best-selling products,
Skinoren®
(plus 17.1 percent
year-on-year) and
Advantan®
(plus 10.6 percent
year-on-year).
Operating result of the Pharmaceuticals segment improved by
88 million,
or 18.5 percent, to
563 million,
with the acquired Schering business accounting for an operating
loss of
119 million.
Inventory step-up and
amortization related to the acquired long-lived assets decreased
our operating result from the Schering business by
551 million.
Without the changes in our portfolio of businesses, operating
result increases by
207 million,
due especially to improved sales performance by
Kogenate®,
Levitra®
and
Avalox®/Avelox®.
Operating result in 2006 was negatively affected by charges,
totaling
371 million,
primarily relating to expenses for the integration
91
of Schering
(179 million),
to litigation-related charges
(59 million)
and to write-downs relating to our cancer drug
Viadur®
and an in-process research and development asset (together
66 million).
The amount of
179 million
in connection with the Schering integration includes an
offsetting gain from a related sale of a building of
74 million.
Operating result in 2005 was negatively affected by charges,
totaling
140 million,
including charges in connection with the termination of our
co-promotion agreement with GlaxoSmithKline for
Levitra®
outside the United States
(106 million),
further litigation-related charges and measures relating to
restructuring projects and unscheduled amortization.
Sales of the Pharmaceuticals segment rose by
106 million,
or 2.7 percent, to
4,067 million
in 2005. Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our
non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2005
as compared with 2004, our net sales in this segment would have
increased by 1.7 percent.
We achieved growth in our sales of specialty products,
particularly
Trasylol®,
in the United States, and of
Avelox®
and
Levitra®
outside the United States. This enabled us partially to offset a
312 million
decline in sales due to the expiration of the U.S. patent
on our anti-infective
Cipro®
and the marketing and distribution of our primary care products
in the United States by Schering-Plough. (Bayer Schering Pharma
AG and Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey, are unaffiliated
companies that have been totally independent of each other for
many years.) Our sales of
Kogenate®
expanded, mostly in Europe and the United States, by
100 million,
or 17.8 percent, to
663 million.
In Europe and Canada, we benefited from the market introduction
of our
Bio-Set®
delivery device for more convenient infusion.
Operating result of the Pharmaceuticals segment improved by
76 million,
or 19.0 percent, to
475 million,
due mainly to improved cost structures and increases in sales as
discussed above. Operating result in 2005 was negatively
affected by charges, totaling
140 million,
including charges in connection with the termination of our
co-promotion agreement with GlaxoSmithKline for
Levitra®
outside the United States
(106 million),
further charges for Lipobay/ Baycol
(43 million)
and measures relating to restructuring projects and unscheduled
amortization in the United States and Germany
(40 million).
Those charges were partially offset by a one-time non-cash gain
of
49 million
due to changes to our pension plans in the United States and
Germany. In 2004, items with material impact on operating result
totaling minus
53 million
comprised mainly restructuring charges
(69 million),
Lipobay/ Baycol charges
(47 million),
gains from a license sale
(39 million)
and curtailment of pension plans
(24 million).
With effect from June 30, 2006, the former Consumer Care
and Animal Health segments were combined with the Diabetes Care
division in the new segment Consumer Health. The Diagnostics
division is reported as discontinued operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2005(a) |
|
Previous Year |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
|
(Euros in millions) |
Net sales (external)
|
|
|
2,775 |
|
|
|
41.6 |
|
|
|
3,929 |
|
|
|
8.1 |
|
|
|
4,246 |
|
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
16.7 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
(66.7 |
) |
|
|
7 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
67.4 |
|
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
The consumer health business acquired from Roche is reflected in
the income statement with effect from January 1, 2005. |
Sales of the Consumer Health segment rose by
317 million,
or 8.1 percent, to
4,246 million
in 2006. Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our
non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2006
as compared with 2005, our net sales in this segment would have
increased by 8.5 percent.
92
All divisions contributed to the improved performance of our
Consumer Health segment. Sales of the Consumer Care division
expanded by 7.5 percent to
2,531 million.
Among our top products,
Aleve®
(plus 27.5 percent),
Bepanthen®/Bepanthol®
(plus 14.9 percent) and
Canesten®
(plus 11.7 percent) posted the largest sales gains.
Sales of our Diabetes Care division saw a significant increase
by 12.8 percent to
810 million,
due mainly to the outstanding performance of our blood glucose
monitoring system
Ascensia®
Contour®
(plus 69.6 percent), which replaces the older Elite
systems in the
Ascensia®
product line, sales of which rose by 12.4 percent overall.
Sales of the Animal Health division rose by 5.7 percent to
905 million,
due primarily to the improved performance of our
Advantage®
product line (plus 10.4 percent) and the continued market
introduction of
Profender®.
For a table with changes in sales of our major products, please
refer to the relevant segment discussion in Item 4,
Information on the Company Business.
Operating result of the Consumer Health segment grew by
302 million,
or 67.4 percent, to
750 million.
This increase was attributable to positive sales development and
reduced production costs. Operating result for 2006 was
negatively affected by charges totaling
31 million,
with the primary charges being expenses for the integration of
the consumer health business acquired from Roche
(24 million)
and restructuring activities in the United States
(14 million).
The previous years operating result was primarily
negatively affected by charges, totaling
114 million,
related to integration activities and to litigation.
Sales of the Consumer Health segment rose by
1,154 million,
or 41.6 percent, to
3,929 million
in 2005. Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our
non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2005
as compared with 2004, our net sales in this segment would have
increased by 40.3 percent.
Sales of the Consumer Care division rose by
1,019 million,
or 76.3 percent, to
2,355 million
in 2005. The integration of the consumer health business
acquired from Roche proceeded more favorably than we had
anticipated. Large sales increases were recorded by products
integrated into our portfolio, especially
Bepanthen®/
Bepanthol®,
Rennie®
and
Supradyn®,
with the new activities accounting for sales of
1,061 million
in 2005. Without taking into account the sales attributable to
the acquired consumer health business, our segment sales
declined by 3.1 percent.
In the Diabetes Care division, sales increased by
10.0 percent to
718 million,
mainly due to strong growth in Europe.
Sales of the Animal Health division rose by
70 million,
or 8.9 percent, to
856 million
in 2005. The increase was mainly the result of a strong
performance by our
Advantage®
product line in the United States. Also contributing to growth
were the market introductions of our parasiticides
Advocate®
in Europe and Canada and
Profender®
in Europe.
Operating result of the Consumer Health segment stayed constant
at
448 million.
This was after the effect of acquiring inventories from Roche at
fair value, which decreased margins by
57 million.
In 2005, operating result was negatively affected by net charges
(in total
114 million,
2004:
30 million)
with material impact on operating result including charges of
71 million
related to the integration of the consumer health business
acquired from Roche, litigation-related expenses of
62 million
and charges of
19 million
in connection with the relocation of the Diabetes Care
headquarters. These charges were partially offset by a one-time
non-cash gain of
38 million
due to changes to our pension plans in the United States and
Germany.
93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2005 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
|
(Euros in millions) |
Net sales (external)
|
|
|
4,957 |
|
|
|
(1.7 |
) |
|
|
4,874 |
|
|
|
(4.7 |
) |
|
|
4,644 |
|
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
(1.4 |
) |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
(15.7 |
) |
|
|
59 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
386 |
|
|
|
37.8 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
(27.8 |
) |
|
|
384 |
|
Sales in the Crop Protection segment declined
230 million,
or by 4.7 percent, to
4,644 million
in 2006. Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our
non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2006
as compared with 2005, our net sales in this segment would have
decreased by 5.2 percent in 2006.
Sales of our Insecticides business unit fell by 7.0 percent
overall, to
1,219 million.
The decline was attributable to the adverse market environment
in Brazil, unfavorable regional weather conditions, increasing
competition from generics and divestitures of mature insecticide
products. Business with insecticides in China, however,
developed favorably. Worldwide sales of our new ketoenols
Oberon®
and
Envidor®
increased significantly. Sales of the Fungicides business unit
receded 3.8 percent to
1,200 million.
One reason for the decrease was the prolonged droughts in
Australia, parts of the United States and parts of Europe, which
led to a decrease in fungal infestation in these areas. Another
was the weakness of the farm economy in Brazil, which led to
declining acreages, particularly for soybeans. These effects
primarily impacted sales of our
Folicur®
and
Flint®
product lines. In the Herbicides business unit, sales dropped by
4.5 percent to
1,758 million.
Herbicide sales, too, were hampered by the drought conditions in
many regions and the increasing cultivation of genetically
modified corn and soybeans in the United States and Latin
America.
Atlantis®
and
Olympus®
performed strongly in the market, further strengthening our
position as one of the leading suppliers of cereal herbicides.
Business with our herbicides
Basta®
and
Liberty®
expanded considerably. Sales of our Seed Treatment business unit
dipped by 1.7 percent to
467 million.
Sales of our recently introduced seed treatment products
Poncho®,
EfA®,
Bariton®
and
Scenic®
compensated for the decline in sales due to the drought in
Australia and the European sugar market reform. For a table with
changes in sales of our major products, please refer to the
relevant segment discussion in Item 4, Information on
the Company Business.
Operating results of the Crop Protection segment decreased by
148 million,
or 27.8 percent, to
384 million.
The decrease in margins brought about by price erosion was only
partly compensated for by savings achieved through our cost
structure and efficiency improvement programs. Operating results
were affected by charges (in total
57 million)
relating to the restructuring program
(74 million),
which were partially offset by gains from the divestment of a
family of mature herbicide products
(25 million).
In 2005, operating results were affected by charges and gains
(amounting in total to a net gain of
7 million)
relating to expenses for restructuring measures, which were
offset by a one-time non-cash gain due to changes to our pension
plans in the United States and Germany.
Sales in the Crop Protection segment decreased by
83 million,
or 1.7 percent, to
4,874 million
in 2005. Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our
non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2005
as compared with 2004, our net sales in this segment would have
decreased by 4.3 percent in 2005.
In the Insecticides business unit, sales decreased by
4.9 percent to
1,311 million.
The continuing drought in southern Europe, Brazil and Australia
led to lower sales of some products. Furthermore, much lower
pest infestation diminished sales of our products, particularly
in the Asian-Pacific region. Sales in the Fungicides business
unit declined by 2.3 percent to
1,248 million.
Although Asian rust, a disease affecting soybean crop, persisted
in large areas of Brazil, business with our
Flint®
and
Folicur®
fungicides declined considerably due to
94
the extreme prolonged drought in the south of the country and
farmers economic predicament. Sales in the Herbicides
business unit decreased by 0.8 percent to
1,840 million.
Although unfavorable weather conditions impacted our sales in
southern Europe, aggregate sales of our new products
Atlantis®,
Hussar®,
MaisTer®
and
Olympus®
increased 16 percent. Sales of the Seed Treatment business
unit rose by 6.3 percent to
475 million,
largely due to the 2004 acquisition of the remaining 50-percent
interest in Gustafson.
Operating results of the Crop Protection segment grew by
146 million,
or 37.8 percent, to
532 million,
which was primarily attributable to the absence of scheduled
goodwill amortization of
98 million.
Operating results were affected by charges and gains (amounting
in total to a net gain of
7 million)
relating to restructuring measures in France
(20 million)
and the termination of research and development activities
(15 million),
which were offset by a one-time non-cash gain due to changes to
our pension plans in the United States and Germany
(46 million).
In the previous year, operating result was impacted by charges
(in total
42 million),
including in particular restructuring charges
(13 million)
and pension accruals
(14 million).
|
|
|
Environmental Science, BioScience |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2005 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
|
(Euros in millions) |
Net sales (external)
|
|
|
989 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
1,022 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
1,056 |
|
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
85.7 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
(53.8 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
49.1 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
26.6 |
|
|
|
200 |
|
Sales of the Environmental Science, BioScience segment expanded
by
34 million,
or 3.3 percent, to
1,056 million
in 2006. Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our
non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2006
as compared with 2005, our net sales in this segment would have
increased by 3.7 percent in 2006.
The Environmental Science business group saw sales rise by
2.9 percent to
714 million,
due especially to a strong performance by our products for
professional users. BioScience increased sales by
4.3 percent to
342 million,
mainly because of buoyant sales of vegetable and canola seed
products. For a table with changes in sales of our major
products, please refer to the relevant segment discussion in
Item 4, Information on the Company
Business.
Operating result of the Environmental Science, BioScience
segment improved by
42 million,
or 26.6 percent, to
200 million,
due to growth in business and cost savings in the Environmental
Science business group.
Sales of the Environmental Science, BioScience segment rose by
33 million,
or 3.3 percent, to
1,022 million
in 2005. Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our
non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2005
as compared with 2004, our net sales in this segment would have
increased by 2.1 percent in 2005.
The Environmental Science business group saw business expand by
2.4 percent to
694 million,
due in part to higher sales of
Premise®,
Revolver®
and K-O
Tab®.
Sales of Consumer Products remained constant. In the BioScience
business group, sales advanced by 5.5 percent to
328 million,
the main contributions to growth coming from
InVigor®
(canola seed) in North America,
FiberMax®
(cotton seed) in the United States and Europe, and the vegetable
seeds business.
Operating result of the Environmental Science, BioScience
segment improved by
52 million,
or 49.1 percent to
158 million,
due primarily to the expansion of the Professional Products
business and the absence of scheduled goodwill amortization of
36 million.
Operating result was affected by charges primarily relating to
the consolidation of smaller sites in the United States (charge
of
8 million)
and a one-time non-cash gain due to
95
changes to our pension plans in the United States and Germany
(9 million).
In the previous year, operating result included gains of
12 million
from a sale of biotechnology assets.
Due to the divestment activities regarding the H.C. Starck
and Wolff Walsrode businesses, the Materials segment comprises
the Polycarbonates and Thermoplastic Polyurethanes business
units. Both H.C. Starck and Wolff Walsrode are reported as
discontinuing operations. See also Discontinued
Operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2005 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
|
(Euros in millions) |
Net sales (external)
|
|
|
2,217 |
|
|
|
28.0 |
|
|
|
2,837 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
2,925 |
|
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
7.7 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
78.6 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
179.3 |
|
|
|
514 |
|
|
|
(43.8 |
) |
|
|
289 |
|
Sales in the Materials segment rose by
88 million,
or 3.1 percent, to
2,925 million
in 2006. Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our
non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2006
as compared with 2005, our net sales in this segment would have
increased by 3.4 percent. Sales in the Polycarbonates
business increased by 2.8 percent, with the increases
located particularly in Europe and Asia/ Pacific, due to higher
sales volumes despite heavy pressure on prices. The
Thermoplastic Polyurethanes business grew sales by
6.8 percent, mainly as a result of higher volumes. For a
table with changes in sales of our major products, please refer
to the relevant segment discussion in Item 4,
Information on the Company Business.
Operating result of the Materials segment decreased by
225 million,
or minus 43.8 percent, to
289 million,
mainly as a result of decreased margins caused by lower selling
prices and higher raw material costs, which were not offset by
the higher sales volumes. Fourth quarter 2006 earnings were
affected by the temporary production shortfalls in
Krefeld-Uerdingen, Germany (See also
Systems). The 2005 operating result included a gain
resulting from changes to our pension plans
(19 million).
Sales in the Materials segment grew by
620 million,
or 28.0 percent, to
2,837 million
in 2005. Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our
non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2005
as compared with 2004, our net sales in this segment would have
increased by 27.4 percent. Sales of our Polycarbonates
business increased by approximately 30 percent attributable
to slight volume growth and considerably higher selling prices
for some products.
Operating result of the Materials segment improved by
330 million,
or 179.3 percent, to
514 million,
mainly due to selling price increases that compensated not only
for higher raw material costs but also improved our margins.
Additionally, in 2005 the operating result included a gain
resulting from changes to our pension plans
(19 million).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2005 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
|
(Euros in millions) |
Net sales (external)
|
|
|
5,349 |
|
|
|
23.6 |
|
|
|
6,609 |
|
|
|
9.5 |
|
|
|
7,236 |
|
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
22.4 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
(2.8 |
) |
|
|
138 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
111.5 |
|
|
|
736 |
|
|
|
(4.5 |
) |
|
|
703 |
|
96
Sales of the Systems segment climbed by
627 million,
or 9.5 percent, to
7,236 million.
Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our non-euro
denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2006 as
compared with 2005, our net sales in this segment would have
increased by 9.7 percent. The growth was attributable to
both selling price and volume increases in all businesses. Sales
of our Polyurethanes business advanced by 8.1 percent,
while our Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants business posted a
gratifying 11.9 percent increase. For a table with changes
in sales of our major products, please refer to the relevant
segment discussion in Item 4, Information on the
Company Business.
Operating result of the Systems segment decreased by
33 million,
or minus 4.5 percent, to
703 million.
Higher selling prices and increases in volumes were largely able
to compensate for the rise in raw material costs, but earnings
were negatively affected by temporary production shortfalls in
Krefeld-Uerdingen, Germany, in the fourth quarter of 2006.
Operating result in 2006 was affected by net charges (totaling
218 million)
relating primarily to the arbitration proceedings in the United
States in connection with the production of propylene oxide
(109 million)
and to charges in connection with pending antitrust litigation
in polymer products
(44 million).
Furthermore, we incurred restructuring charges for our
U.S. sites in New Martinsville, West Virginia and Baytown,
Texas
(55 million).
Operating result in 2005 was affected by charges (totaling
62 million)
relating to the reorganization and to antitrust litigation. The
charges were partially offset by a one-time non-cash gain due to
changes to our pension plans in the United States and Germany.
2005 compared with 2004
Sales of the Systems segment increased by
1,260 million,
or 23.6 percent, to
6,609 million
in 2005. Had the average exchange rates we used to translate our
non-euro denominated revenues into euros stayed constant in 2005
as compared with 2004, our net sales in this segment would have
increased by 22.8 percent. Growth in net sales was
primarily attributable to our Polyurethanes business unit that
benefited from considerably higher selling prices. Sales growth
in the Inorganic Basic Chemicals business unit resulted from
higher market prices for sodium hydroxide solution and from
product sales to LANXESS. Prior to the spin-off of LANXESS, such
sales were recorded as inter-segment sales. Excluding the
additional sales due to the reclassification of sales to
LANXESS, this segments sales would have increased by
17.5 percent.
Operating result of the Systems segment improved by
388 million
to
736 million.
The growth was mainly attributable to higher selling prices,
which offset the rise in raw material costs. Operating result in
2005 was affected by net charges (totaling
62 million)
relating to the reorganization of the polyurethanes business
(33 million)
and to legal provisions in connection with antitrust litigation
related to polymer products
(66 million).
These charges were partially offset by a one-time non-cash gain
due to changes to our pension plans in the United States and
Germany
(47 million).
In the previous year operating result was impacted by legal
provisions of
27 million.
97
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES 2004, 2005 AND 2006
Cash Flows
In recent years, our primary source of liquidity has been cash
from operations. We use cash in investing activities primarily
for acquisitions as well as for additions to property, plant,
equipment and investments; these activities represented our
primary liquidity requirements. In 2004 and 2005, we used cash
in financing activities primarily to retire debt and pay
dividends. In 2006, we used cash provided by financing
activities primarily to finance the Schering acquisition. (The
names Bayer Schering Pharma or Schering
as used in this annual report on
Form 20-F always
refer to Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany, or its
predecessor, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany, respectively. The
reference to Bayer Schering Pharma AG or Schering AG also
includes business conducted by affiliated entities. Bayer
Schering Pharma AG and Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey,
are unaffiliated companies that have been totally independent of
each other for many years.) We believe that our working capital
levels are sufficient to fund our present requirements. The
proceeds from our divestitures and the net cash provided by
operating activities will mainly be used to retire debt maturing
in 2007. There are no material legal or economic restrictions on
the ability of member companies of the Bayer Group to transfer
funds to Bayer AG. For cash held in escrow accounts see
Financing Activities.
The following table summarizes our cash flows in each of the
last three years:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2005 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2006(b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
|
(Euros in millions) |
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities (net cash
flow, continuing
operations)(a)
|
|
|
1,959 |
|
|
|
64.7 |
|
|
|
3,227 |
|
|
|
21.7 |
|
|
|
3,928 |
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities (net cash
flow, discontinued
operations)(a)
|
|
|
491 |
|
|
|
(44.0 |
) |
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
275 |
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities (net cash
flow, total)
|
|
|
2,450 |
|
|
|
42.9 |
|
|
|
3,502 |
|
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
|
4,203 |
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities (total)
|
|
|
(814 |
) |
|
|
(113.9 |
) |
|
|
(1,741 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,730 |
) |
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities (total)
|
|
|
(761 |
) |
|
|
(147.2 |
) |
|
|
(1,881 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,199 |
|
Change in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
875 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(120 |
) |
|
|
(173.3 |
) |
|
|
(328 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
2,734 |
|
|
|
30.6 |
|
|
|
3,570 |
|
|
|
(7.8 |
) |
|
|
3,290 |
|
Change in scope of consolidation
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(196 |
) |
|
|
99.0 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
Exchange rate movements
|
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(45 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year
|
|
|
3,570 |
|
|
|
(7.8 |
) |
|
|
3,290 |
|
|
|
(11.4 |
) |
|
|
2,915 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
2004 and 2005 data have been adjusted to reflect the fact that
the Diagnostics division, the H.C. Starck business and the Wolff
Walsrode business are reported as discontinued operations. For
further information on these restatements, see
Operating Results 2004, 2005 and 2006
Discontinued Operations and Note 7.2 to the
consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this
annual report on
Form 20-F. |
|
(b) |
|
The pharmaceuticals business of Schering AG, Germany is
reflected in the financial statements with effect from
June 23, 2006. |
|
|
|
Cash from Operating Activities |
Net cash flow from continuing operations rose by
21.7 percent, or
701 million
including
483 million
from the Schering business for the period beginning on
June 23, 2006 to
3,928 million
in 2006. Tax payments of
763 million
(2005:
463 million)
had a negative effect. The 2005 figure contained tax payment
free gains of
98
238 million
from changes in our company pension plans in the United States
and Germany, while in 2006 the charges resulting from the
revaluation of assets from the Schering acquisition were not
tax-deductible. Net cash provided by operating activities from
our continuing operations in 2005 amounted to
3,227 million,
a 64.7 percent increase from the
1,959 million
in 2004. All of the subgroups posted significant
year-on-year growth in
cash flow. The overall increase resulted from both a better
business performance and a positive change in working capital.
Cash outflow for inventories in 2005 was much lower than in
2004, especially in MaterialScience. In addition, the cash
contribution from changes in accounts receivables improved
significantly from minus
359 million
in 2004 to
211 million
in 2005.
Net cash provided by operating activities from discontinued
operations relate to the Diagnostics division, the H.C. Starck
business and the Wolff Walsrode business in all periods
presented. In 2005 and 2004, the divested U.S. plasma
operations and LANXESS are also included in this figure. Net
cash provided by operating activities from discontinued
operations represented an inflow of
275 million
in 2006,
275 million
in 2005 and
491 million
in 2004. The total net cash flow from operating activities
amounted to
4,203 million
in 2006,
3,502 million
in 2005 and
2,450 in 2004,
respectively.
Net cash used in investing activities totaled
14.7 billion
in 2006, as compared to a net cash outflow of
1.7 billion
in 2005. This was chiefly attributable to disbursements totaling
15.2 billion
for the Schering acquisition, including the purchase price
payments for the 96.2 percent of Bayer Schering Pharma AG
shares outstanding as of December 31, 2006, less
approximately
1 billion
in assumed cash and cash equivalents. We also acquired the
biotech company Icon Genetics and the
U.S.-based Metrika for
a total of
75 million.
Cash outflows for additions to property, plant and equipment
(1,534 million)
and other intangible assets
(342 million)
totaled
1,876 million,
up
487 million
from the previous year. The outflows included
137 million
in capital expenditures made by Schering. Capital expenditures
for property, plant, equipment and intangible assets included,
among others, disbursements for the purchase of the European
marketing rights for the hypertension treatments
Pritor®
and
PritorPlus®
and expenditures for the expansion of our polymers production
facilities at the Caojing site, China (near Shanghai). Receipts
from sales of property, plant, equipment and other assets
totaled
185 million,
while the proceeds of divestitures amounted to
489 million.
At the end of 2006 we received an initial payment of
395 million
related to the sale of our Diagnostics division; this
transaction closed at the beginning of 2007.
Cash inflow from sales of noncurrent financial assets came to
850 million.
This figure primarily included the sale of our 49.9 percent
interest in GE Bayer Silicones to the other partner General
Electric
(431 million)
and the repayment of a loan made to the chemical company
Symrise. This loan had been granted in connection with the sale
of the Haarmann & Reimer group to the purchaser in 2002.
In 2005, net cash outflow from investing activities amounted to
1,741 million.
The cash outflow for acquisitions amounted to
2,188 million,
including approximately
1.9 billion
for the consumer health business of Roche in 2005. Cash outflow
for additions to property, plant, equipment and intangible
assets amounted to
1,389 million
in 2005. Cash inflows from sales of noncurrent financial assets
amounted to
1,189 million
in 2005. This figure primarily included the scheduled repayment
of loans from LANXESS, the expiration of currency-hedging
derivatives and the sale of the LANXESS mandatory convertible
bond with a nominal volume of
200 million.
Cash receipts from divestitures totaled
293 million,
mainly relating to the divestment of the plasma business in the
first quarter of 2005.
In 2004, the net cash outflow from investing activities amounted
to
814 million.
The cash outflow of
1,251 million
for additions to property, plant and equipment and
358 million
for acquisitions were partially offset by
200 million
in cash receipts from sales of property, plant and equipment and
divestitures,
90 million
in inflows related to noncurrent financial assets,
400 million
in interest and dividend receipts and
105 million
in inflows from current financial assets. The
358 million
in cash outflow for acquisitions comprised mainly the
100 million
purchase price for the remaining 50 percent of the shares
of Gustafson and
208 million
for the remaining 50 percent interest in the
U.S. joint venture with Roche, both of which we now wholly
own. The
90 million
cash inflow from sales of noncurrent financial assets comprised
mainly a
327 million
payment from
99
Aventis in connection with the 2002 acquisition of Aventis
CropScience, as well as outflows of around
200 million
for advance payments related to the acquisition of the Roche
consumer health business.
Net cash provided by financing activities was
10.2 billion
in 2006, mainly due to net borrowings of
10.7 billion
in connection with the financing of the acquisition of Schering
AG, Berlin, Germany, compared to net cash used in financing
activities of
1.9 billion
in 2005. The proceeds from the placement of 34 million new
shares amounted to
1.2 billion.
Cash outflows for dividend payments amounted to
535 million,
including a cash inflow of
176 million
resulting from the reimbursement of advance capital gains tax
payments made on intragroup dividends in 2004. Interest payments
rose to
1,155 million
primarily as a result of borrowings made to finance the Schering
acquisition.
On December 31, 2006 we had cash and cash equivalents of
2,915 million,
including
799 million
held in escrow accounts. Following the entry into force of the
domination and profit and loss transfer agreement between Bayer
Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany and Bayer Schering GmbH, an
amount of
710 million
was placed in escrow following the decision to effect a
squeeze-out of the remaining minority stockholders
of Bayer Schering Pharma AG. The remaining amount of
89 million
held in escrow accounts is earmarked exclusively for payments
relating to civil law settlements in antitrust proceedings. In
view of the restriction on its use, the
799 million
in cash and cash equivalents held in escrow accounts was not
deducted when calculating net debt. Net debt rose to
17.5 billion
as of December 31, 2006, due mainly to the financing of the
Schering acquisition. For a net debt reconciliation and details
on financing of the Schering acquisition, see
Development of net debt.
In 2005, the cash used in financing activities amounted to
1,881 million.
The 2005 outflow included
440 million
in dividend payments,
654 million
in net repayments of borrowings and
787 million
in interest payments. Taking advantage of favorable market
conditions, a subordinated hybrid bond with a maturity of
100 years was issued in the third quarter of 2005 in the
nominal amount of
1.3 billion
with a 5 percent coupon. At the same time, part of the
5.375 percent Bayer bond due on April 10, 2007 was
repurchased early. The repurchased volume had a face value of
approximately
860 million.
The higher interest payments were primarily attributable to a
one-time charge of
56 million
in connection with this transaction. Including marketable
securities and other instruments, the Group had liquid assets of
3,523 million
on December 31, 2005. Cash of
253 million
was deposited in escrow accounts to be used solely for payments
in connection with civil litigation settlements (See also
Item 8, Financial Information Legal
Proceedings).
In 2004, the cash used in financing activities amounted to
761 million.
The outflow contained a total of
559 million
in dividends paid to our stockholders and advance capital gains
tax payments on intra-Group dividends as well as
724 million
in interest payments. These outflows were partially offset by
512 million
in net borrowing and
10 million
in capital contributions to subsidiaries. On December 31,
2004, we had liquid assets of
3,599 million.
100
Development of net debt
In 2006, net debt (continuing operations) was at
17,473 million,
compared to
5,494 million
in 2005 and
4,891 million
in 2004. The following table sets forth the calculation of the
net debt figure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2004 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Noncurrent financial liabilities as per balance sheet (including
derivatives)
|
|
|
7,025 |
|
|
|
7,185 |
|
|
|
14,723 |
|
|
thereof mandatory convertible bond
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,276 |
|
|
thereof hybrid bond
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,268 |
|
|
|
1,247 |
|
Current financial liabilities as per balance sheet (including
derivatives)
|
|
|
2,166 |
|
|
|
1,767 |
|
|
|
5,078 |
|
Derivative receivables
|
|
|
(701 |
) |
|
|
(188 |
) |
|
|
(185 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents as per balance sheet less cash
earmarked for civil litigation settlements and the squeeze-out
|
|
|
(3,570 |
) |
|
|
(3,037 |
)(a) |
|
|
(2,116 |
)(b) |
Marketable securities and other instruments
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(233 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
Net debt* (continuing operations)
|
|
|
4,891 |
|
|
|
5,494 |
|
|
|
17,473 |
|
Net debt* (discontinued operations)
|
|
|
531 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
Net debt* (total)
|
|
|
5,422 |
|
|
|
5,494 |
|
|
|
17,539 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Cash and cash equivalents as per balance sheet
(3,290 million)
minus cash deposited in escrow accounts
(253 million)
equals
3,037 million. |
|
(b) |
|
Cash and cash equivalents as per balance sheet
(2,915 million)
minus cash deposited in escrow accounts
(799 million)
equals
2,116 million. |
|
* |
|
Net Debt is defined neither under IFRS nor under
U.S. GAAP and may not be comparable with measures of the
same or similar title that are reported by other companies.
Under SEC rules Net Debt is considered a non-GAAP
financial measure. It should not be considered as a substitute
for, or confused with, any IFRS or U.S. GAAP financial
measure. We believe the most comparable IFRS and U.S. GAAP
measures are noncurrent and current financial obligations. Bayer
defines Net Debt as described above and believes
that this measure provides investors, analysts and credit rating
agencies with useful information disclosing and summarizing the
status of the net financial borrowings due to third parties. We
believe that subtracting cash and cash equivalents from our
noncurrent and current financial obligations (that includes
liabilities from derivative financial instruments) and netting
this with the receivables resulting from derivative financial
instruments is appropriate in providing a useful measure of the
obligations associated with our outstanding debt. We thus
believe that Net Debt is an indicator of the Bayer
Groups creditworthiness. However, the subtraction of cash
and cash equivalents should not cause the reader to believe that
we have less debt than actually appears on our balance sheet.
For this reason, you should consider our net debt
measure in conjunction with the noncurrent and current financial
obligations recorded on our balance sheet. |
101
The disbursements for the acquisition of Schering AG, Berlin,
Germany in 2006 totaled
16.3 billion.
From Schering we assumed financial liabilities of
0.2 billion
and acquired cash and cash equivalents of approximately
1 billion.
In order to ensure that we would have available the required
funds to fully consummate the voluntary public cash takeover
offer for all shares of Schering AG at the time when the payment
obligations became due, the Company had entered into a bridge
facility and a syndicated credit facility in an amount of
7 billion
each. In order to repay the bridge facility and the short-term
portion of the syndicated credit facility, equity and debt
issuances as well as disposals were contemplated. Bayer issued
2.6 billion
Eurobonds and
0.5 billion
Sterling bonds under the multi-currency Euro Medium Term Note
(EMTN) program. Furthermore, Bayer Capital Corp., a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Bayer AG, issued a guaranteed
subordinated mandatory convertible bond due 2009 with an
aggregate nominal value of
2.3 billion.
The bond is convertible into shares of Bayer AG. We raised an
additional
1.2 billion
through the successful placement of 34 million new shares
of Bayer AG.
The following table shows the components of the acquisition
financing package and their status at year end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2006 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in billions) | |
Credit utilization:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bridge financing
(7 billion
facility)
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
Syndicated loan
(7 billion
facility)
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
Thereof due within one year
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
Bond issues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three-year floating Eurobond
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
Seven-year fixed-rate Eurobond
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
Twelve-year fixed-rate sterling bond
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
Mandatory convertible bond
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
Stock placement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
|
|
12.3 |
|
The remainder of the acquisition price for Schering AG was
financed mainly with liquid assets. In addition to fully
redeeming the bridge financing, we had also paid down the
syndicated
7.0 billion
loan to
5.7 billion
by the end of 2006.
In China, Bayer secured a RMB 6.1 billion
(0.6 billion)
credit line to finance the ongoing construction of a production
facility for polyurethane raw materials in Caojing, China (near
Shanghai).
As of December 31, 2006 we had noncurrent financial
liabilities of
14.7 billion,
including the
1.2 billion
hybrid bond issued in July 2005 and the
2.3 billion
mandatory convertible bond issued in April 2006 (for further
details on our noncurrent financial liabilities, see
Note 27 to the consolidated financial statements appearing
elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F).
Moodys treats 75 percent and Standard &
Poors treats 50 percent of the hybrid bond as equity.
Both rating agencies treat the mandatory convertible bond
entirely as equity. Unlike conventional borrowings, the hybrid
bond thus has only a limited effect on the Groups
rating-specific debt indicators, while the mandatory convertible
bond has no effect at all. This, together with the issuance of
new shares, completed the equity raising announced in connection
with the acquisition of Schering AG. The total
3.5 billion
thus raised is below the
4 billion
limit originally set.
Further portfolio adjustments were completed at the beginning of
2007. In January we closed the sale of the Diagnostics division
to Siemens for a purchase price of
4.3 billion.
The difference compared with the purchase price of
4.2 billion
communicated in July 2006 results mainly from a purchase price
adjustment due to the higher working capital at the Diagnostics
division at the time of sale. The transaction resulted in a cash
inflow of
0.4 billion
at the end of 2006, while the remaining
3.9 billion
was received at the beginning of 2007. We divested the H.C.
Starck business to the two financial investors, Advent
International and The Carlyle Group. The purchase price for the
H.C. Starck business was
1.2 billion,
consisting of a cash component of about
0.7 billion
and the assumption by the purchasers of financial liabilities
and pension commitments totaling about
0.5 billion.
102
The divestiture was closed at the beginning of February 2007. We
intend to use the cash inflows from these transactions, along
with the proceeds of the planned sale of the Wolff Walsrode
business to The Dow Chemical Company, to reduce net debt.
Financing Strategy
The financial management of the Bayer Group is conducted by the
management holding company Bayer AG. Finance is a global
resource, generally procured centrally and distributed within
the Group. The foremost objectives of our financial management
are to help in effecting a sustained increase in corporate value
and ensure the Groups creditworthiness and liquidity. That
means reducing our cost of capital, improving our financing cash
flow, optimizing our capital structure and effectively managing
risk.
Due to the increase in debt in connection with the acquisition
of Schering AG, Standard & Poors in July 2006
downgraded Bayer AGs long-term issuer rating from A with
stable outlook to BBB+ with positive outlook. Also in July 2006,
Moodys confirmed our current A3 rating, changing the
outlook from stable to negative. Bayer AGs short-term
ratings are A-2 (Standard & Poors) and P-2
(Moodys). These investment-grade ratings evidence a
continuing high level of the Groups creditworthiness.
Our financial strategy is geared toward the single-A rating
category in order to maintain our financial flexibility. We
therefore plan to use both the proceeds of divestitures and our
operating cash flows to further reduce net debt.
We generally pursue a prudent debt management strategy aimed at
ensuring flexibility by drawing on a balanced financing
portfolio to finance our activities. Chief among these
resources in keeping with our
requirements are a syndicated credit facility, a
multi-currency commercial paper program and a multi-currency
Euro Medium Term Note program. We also supplement our financing
with various structured products, such as an asset-backed
securities program.
We use financial derivatives to hedge against risks arising from
business operations or financial transactions, but do not employ
contracts in the absence of an underlying transaction. It is our
policy to diminish the default risk by selecting trading
partners with a high credit standing. We closely monitor the
execution of all transactions, which are conducted according to
Group-wide guidelines.
Further details of our risk management objectives and the ways
in which we hedge all the major types of transaction to which
hedge accounting is applied, along with procurement market,
credit, liquidity and cash flow risks, as they relate to our use
of financial instruments, are given in Note 30 to the
consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this
annual report on
Form 20-F.
At December 31, 2006, we had approximately
11.7 billion
of total lines of credit, of which
6.8 billion
was used and
4.9 billion
was unused and available for borrowing on an unsecured basis. To
provide flexible short- to medium-term funding, we established a
U.S. $8 billion global commercial paper program and a
10 billion
EMTN program. We issued
4.6 billion
under the EMTN program in years prior to 2006. In connection
with the acquisition of Schering AG in 2006, we issued
3.1 billion
bonds under the EMTN program. Holders of the bonds issued in
2006 have the right to demand the redemption of their bonds by
Bayer AG if both a change in control with respect to Bayer AG
occurs and its credit rating is downgraded within 120 days
after such change of control becomes effective. As of
December 31, 2006, U.S. $8 billion were available for
funding under the global commercial paper program and
approximately
2.3 billion
were available for funding under the EMTN program. The long-term
liabilities to banks principally comprise loans of
5.7 billion
in connection with the acquisition of Schering AG. The
agreements for these credit facilities contain provisions
entitling the participating banks to terminate the agreements in
the event of change of control with respect to Bayer AG and
demand repayment of any then-outstanding sums.
For details on lines of credit see Note 27 to our
consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this
annual report on
Form 20-F.
103
Capital Expenditures
We generally fund our capital expenditures with cash flows from
operating activities and, if such funds are not sufficient,
through other cash on hand and from the sale of liquid
investments, including cash equivalents and marketable
securities. We fund any further capital expenditures with
borrowings.
Capital expenditures amounted to
1.7 billion
in 2006, compared to
1.4 billion
in 2005 and
1.0 billion
in 2004.
We spent a total of
1.7 billion
for intangible assets and property, plant and equipment in 2006.
Besides the acquisition of Schering AG, which is not reported as
capital expenditures but as an acquisition, the focus of our
capital expenditures were our Material and Systems segments.
104
Our major capital expenditures since 2004 included:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year | |
|
Segment |
|
Description |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Pharmaceuticals |
|
Construction of a process development facility
(Kogenate®)
in Berkeley, California |
|
|
|
|
Crop Protection |
|
Installation of a production line for the new fungicide
Fandango, Kansas City, Kansas |
|
|
|
|
Materials |
|
Construction of a production facility for polycarbonate in
Caojing, Peoples Republic of China (PRC) |
|
|
|
|
Systems |
|
Expansion of isocyanate capacities in Tarragona, Spain; Baytown,
Texas, and Brunsbüttel, Germany |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction of production facility for
methylene-diphenyl-diisocyanate in Caojing, PRC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expansion of polyisocyanate capacity in Caojing, PRC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction of a production facility for
hexamethylene-diisocyanate in Caojing, PRC |
|
2005 |
|
|
Pharmaceuticals |
|
Construction of a clinical manufacturing facility for
Kogenate®
in Berkeley, California |
|
|
|
|
Consumer Health |
|
Expansion of a production facility in Jakarta, Indonesia |
|
|
|
|
Crop Protection |
|
Insourcing and relocation of products/intermediates in Dormagen,
Knapsack and Frankfurt, Germany |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product insourcing projects in Vapi and Ankleshwar, India |
|
|
|
|
Environmental Science, BioScience |
|
Expansion of greenhouse facilities in Haelen, The Netherlands |
|
|
|
|
Materials |
|
Construction of a polycarbonate compounding facility in Caojing,
PRC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expansion of the polycarbonate facility in Map Ta Phut, Thailand |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Start of capacity expansion projects for polycarbonate in
Caojing, PRC |
|
|
|
|
Systems |
|
Construction of a
Desmodur®-L
production facility in Caojing, PRC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Start of construction of a world-scale MDI production facility
in Caojing, PRC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Installation of a new plant for MDI specialty products in
Baytown, Texas |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capacity increase of the chlorine production facility in
Baytown, Texas |
|
2006 |
|
|
Pharmaceuticals |
|
Construction of a clinical manufacturing facility for
Kogenate®
in Berkeley, California |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expansion of a production facility in Beijing, PRC |
|
|
|
|
Consumer Health |
|
Expansion of a production facility in Jakarta, Indonesia |
|
|
|
|
Crop Protection |
|
Insourcing of intermediates in Knapsack, Germany |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expansion of warehouse, manufacturing and formulation plants in
Frankfurt and Dormagen, Germany |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expansion of fungicide production capacity in Dormagen, Germany |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site consolidation in Baranquilla, Columbia |
|
|
|
|
Environmental Science, BioScience |
|
Construction of a seed processing facility in Lethbridge, Canada |
|
|
|
|
Materials |
|
Expansion of the polycarbonate facility in Map Ta Phut, Thailand |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capacity expansion projects for polycarbonate in Caojing, PRC |
|
|
|
|
Systems |
|
Construction of a world-scale MDI production facility in
Caojing, PRC |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Installation of a new plant for MDI specialty products in
Baytown, Texas |
105
Commitments
|
|
|
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements |
We do not consider our unconsolidated entities that qualify as
special-purpose entities to be material and we do not have other
material off-balance sheet arrangements. For a description of
the contingencies relating to the LANXESS spin-off, see
Note 31 to our consolidated financial statements appearing
elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
|
|
|
Contractual Obligations and Commercial Commitments |
The table below summarizes all of the Groups contractual
and commercial obligations as of December 31, 2006. The
timing of payments for collaborative agreements assumes that
milestones or other conditions are met. We do not foresee any
material payment triggers or milestone payments in our current
collaborative arrangements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Year to | |
|
Three Years to | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Under | |
|
Less than | |
|
Less than Five | |
|
After | |
Contractual Obligations |
|
Total | |
|
One Year | |
|
Three Years | |
|
Years | |
|
5 Years | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Long-term debt, excluding capital leases
|
|
|
19,417 |
|
|
|
5,009 |
|
|
|
4,775 |
|
|
|
4,021 |
|
|
|
5,612 |
|
Capital leases without interest portion
|
|
|
384 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
229 |
|
Operating leases
|
|
|
559 |
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
Purchase obligations
|
|
|
507 |
|
|
|
467 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Other long-term liabilities (collaboration agreements)
|
|
|
956 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
307 |
|
Other
liabilities(a)
|
|
|
3,504 |
|
|
|
3,055 |
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total contractual obligations
|
|
|
25,327 |
|
|
|
8,916 |
|
|
|
5,611 |
|
|
|
4,399 |
|
|
|
6,401 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
Other liabilities comprise primarily guarantees of bills and
checks, payment guarantees and indirect financial guarantees;
commissions to customers and expense reimbursements; as well as
social security and payroll liabilities and other liabilities as
set forth in Note 29 to the consolidated financial
statements included elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F. |
Payments for guarantees and endorsements of bills and of
warranties of
136 million
have been excluded from the other commercial commitments table
above, as we do not expect to make any payments under these
commercial commitments.
Our future interest payments are not included in these figures.
Financial debt, including derivative receivables, amounted to
19,616 million
as of December 31, 2006. For details on the financing of
the acquisition of the business of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany,
see Development of net debt. For details on
our bonds and pension obligations see Note 27 and
Note 25, respectively, to our consolidated financial
statements appearing elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
In 2006, our minimum non-discounted future payments relating to
long-term lease and rental arrangements totaled
1.0 billion,
compared with
1.0 billion
in the previous year. Of this amount,
486 million
represented future payments under financial leases
(596 million
in 2005).
Our financial commitment for orders placed under purchase
agreements relating to planned or ongoing capital expenditure
projects totaled
507 million
in 2006. We expect to pay the majority of this amount in 2007.
In 2005, this figure was
294 million,
and in 2004,
142 million.
106
Under collective agreements on part-time work arrangements for
certain older employees, we have to accept applications for such
arrangements from a certain quota of the work force. Other
financial obligations that may arise from such work arrangements
in the future cannot be quantified, since the quota has already
been exceeded.
In addition, we have entered into research agreements with a
number of third parties. Under these agreements, we have agreed
to fund various research projects or to assume other
commitments. Our payments under these agreements are typically
based on the achievement of certain milestones or the
fulfillment of other specific conditions by our research
partners. In 2006, the total amount of these commitments was
956 million,
compared to
562 million
in 2005. For details on milestone payments see Note 31 to
our consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in
this annual report on
Form 20-F. For
details on lines of credit see Note 27 to our consolidated
financial statements appearing elsewhere in this annual report
on Form 20-F.
Borrowings
Our consolidated financial statements reflect borrowings as
financial obligations, which include debentures,
liabilities to banks, liabilities under lease agreements,
liabilities from the issuance of promissory notes, commercial
paper and other financial obligations. We have no restrictions
in the use of our borrowing. See the tables under
Commitments Contractual Obligations and Commercial
Commitments above for a summary of our current financial
obligations. See also Note 27 to our consolidated financial
statements appearing elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
Funding and Treasury Policies
We are exposed to interest rate risk. We are also exposed to
currency-related risks such as transaction exchange rate and
translation risk. To hedge our risks, we primarily use
over-the-counter
derivative instruments, particularly forward foreign exchange
contracts, foreign exchange option contracts, interest rate
swaps, interest and principal currency swaps and interest rate
option contracts.
Interest rate risk applies mainly to receivables and payables
with maturities of over one year. We primarily use interest rate
swaps to convert a portion of our fixed rate borrowings into, in
effect, floating rate borrowings. The bonds issued under our
EMTN program make up the largest portion of our fixed rate
borrowings. See also Note 27 to our consolidated financial
statements. In a normal interest rate environment, short-term
interest rates are lower than long-term interest rates. Thus,
floating rate debt generally leads to lower interest costs in
the long run. Short-term interest rate hedging contracts
(excluding principal currency swaps) totaled a nominal amount of
4.1 billion
in 2006,
0.4 billion
in 2005 and
0.1 billion
in 2004. In 2006, hedges maturing in more than one year
represented a nominal amount of
7.5 billion,
in 2005,
10.9 billion
and in 2004,
5.7 billion.
The cash and cash equivalents that we held on December 31,
2006 were mainly denominated in euro.
Because a substantial portion of Bayers assets,
liabilities, sales and earnings are denominated in currencies
other than euro zone currency, we have translation exposure to
fluctuations in the values of these currencies relative to the
euro. Since these effects do not have an impact on our cash
flows, we do not hedge these risks resulting from currency
fluctuations.
We also face transaction risk when our businesses generate
revenue in one currency but incur costs relating to that revenue
in a different currency. We hedge a portion of our transaction
currency risk through the use of derivative financial
instruments, particularly forward foreign exchange contracts,
currency swaps, currency options and interest and principal
currency swaps. Our Corporate Treasury department has the
central responsibility for managing our currency exposures and
using currency derivatives. We establish the maturity dates of
hedging contracts according to the anticipated cash flows of the
Bayer Group. Our policy is to use a mixture of instruments
depending upon our view of market conditions based on
fundamental and technical analysis. Our Board of Management has
provided clear guidance on how to limit and monitor cash flow
risks that result from this approach. As of December 31,
2006, we had entered into forward foreign exchange contracts,
currency swaps, currency swaps and interest and principal
currency swaps with a total notional value of
12.1 billion.
For more information on, including quantification of, these
risks, and our policies in managing them, see Item 11,
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk.
107
Inflation, Seasonality and Cyclicality
Inflation has not had a material effect on our operating results
in recent years. Seasonality does not materially affect our
business as a whole. However, several of our individual business
lines are subject to seasonal effects. In addition, a number of
our business groups are subject to cyclicality, either directly
or because of the effect of cyclicality on their customers
businesses. See the descriptions of our various business
segments in Item 4, Information on the Company for a
discussion of those businesses subject to seasonal or cyclical
effects.
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
The following table sets forth our total research and
development expenditures for our continuing businesses during
the last three full years.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2005 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
|
(Euros in millions) |
Research and development expenditures:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer HealthCare
|
|
|
878 |
|
|
|
(5.0 |
) |
|
|
834 |
|
|
|
71.0 |
|
|
|
1,426 |
|
|
Bayer CropScience
|
|
|
679 |
|
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
|
|
664 |
|
|
|
(7.5 |
) |
|
|
614 |
|
|
Bayer MaterialScience
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
Reconciliation
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
76.5 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total from Continuing Operations
|
|
|
1,772 |
|
|
|
(2.4 |
) |
|
|
1,729 |
|
|
|
32.9 |
|
|
|
2,297 |
|
|
As a percentage of sales
|
|
|
8.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.9 |
|
We typically allocate the largest portion of our research and
development expenses to our HealthCare businesses, primarily in
the Pharmaceuticals segment. In 2006, Pharmaceuticals accounted
for 54.7 percent of our total research and development
spending, mainly due to the inclusion of the acquired business
of Schering AG, Germany (2005: 39.3 percent; 2004:
41.8 percent). The Schering business is only reflected in
2006 research and development expenses as of June 23, 2006.
For a more detailed discussion of our research and development
activities and policies, see the descriptions of each business
groups research and development activities in Item 4,
Information on the Company Business. We
discuss our patents and other intellectual property protection
in Item 4, Information on the Company
Business Intellectual Property Protection.
BASIS OF PRESENTATION
We prepared the consolidated financial statements that appear
elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F in
accordance with IFRS. See Note 41 to our consolidated
financial statements for a reconciliation of the significant
differences between IFRS and U.S. GAAP.
Effects of new accounting pronouncements
|
|
|
Accounting standards applied for the first time in
2006 |
For description of the IFRS accounting standards, which were
applied for the first time in 2006, refer to Note 3 to our
consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this
annual report on
Form 20-F.
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 158 (Employers Accounting
for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Post-Retirement Plans), an
amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106, and 132R.
This standard will require employers to fully recognize the
obligations associated
108
with single-employer defined benefit pension, retiree healthcare
and other post-retirement plans in their financial statements.
In detail SFAS No. 158 requires an employer to
recognize in its statement of financial position an asset for a
plans overfunded status or a liability for a plans
underfunded status, to measure a plans assets and its
obligations that determine its funded status as of the end of
the employers fiscal year (with limited exceptions) and to
recognize changes in the funded status of a defined benefit
post-retirement plan in the year in which the changes occur.
Those changes will be reported in comprehensive income of a
business entity until they are amortized as a component of net
periodic benefit cost. The adjustments to adopt
SFAS No. 158 were recorded as a component of
accumulated other comprehensive income.
The impact due to the adoption of SFAS No. 158 as of
December 31, 2006 is summarized in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
|
|
| |
U.S. GAAP equity at December 31, 2006 prior to adoption of
SFAS No. 158
|
|
|
12,512 |
|
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 recognition of
actuarial gains/ losses
|
|
|
(3,350 |
) |
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 prior service cost
|
|
|
131 |
|
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 reversal of
additional minimum liability
|
|
|
2,667 |
|
Deferred taxes on the entries above
|
|
|
221 |
|
U.S. GAAP equity at December 31, 2006 after adoption of
SFAS No. 158
|
|
|
12,181 |
|
|
|
|
Newly issued accounting standards |
For description of newly issued IFRS accounting standards refer
to Note 3 to our consolidated financial statements
appearing elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
In June 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued FASB Interpretation No. 48
(Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes)
(FIN 48), which is an interpretation of FASB
Statement No. 109 (Accounting for Income Taxes).
FIN 48 prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement
attribute for the financial statement for recognition and
measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a
tax return.
The evaluation of a tax position in accordance with this
interpretation firstly requires the determination whether it is
more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained upon
examination, based on the technical merits of the position and
secondly the position is measured to determine the amount of
benefit to recognize in the financial statements. The
interpretation also provides guidance on derecognition,
classification, interest and penalties, disclosure, and
transition. FIN 48 is effective in fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2006. The provisions of FIN 48 are
to be applied to all tax positions upon initial adoption, with
the cumulative effect adjustment reported as an adjustment to
the opening balance of retained earnings. The Bayer Group is
currently evaluating the impact the standard will have on the
Groups financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 157 (Fair Value Measurements)
(FAS 157). FAS 157 defines fair value,
establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally
accepted accounting principles, and expands disclosures about
fair value measurements. FAS 157 will apply whenever
another standard requires (or permits) assets or liabilities to
be measured at fair value. The standard does not expand the use
of fair value to any new circumstances. FAS 157 is
effective for financial statements issued for financial years
beginning after November 15, 2007. The Bayer Group is
currently evaluating the impact the standard will have on the
Groups financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
109
|
|
Item 6. |
Directors, Senior Management and Employees |
Directors and Senior Management
In accordance with the German Stock Corporation Act
(Aktiengesetz), Bayer AG has both a Board of Management
(Vorstand) and a Supervisory Board (Aufsichtsrat).
The Board of Management is responsible for the management of our
business; the Supervisory Board supervises the Board of
Management and appoints its members. The two boards are
separate, and no individual may simultaneously be a member of
both boards.
Both the members of the Board of Management and the members of
the Supervisory Board owe a duty of loyalty and care to Bayer
AG. In exercising their duties, the applicable standard of care
is that of a diligent and prudent businessperson. Both the
members of the Board of Management and the members of the
Supervisory Board must take into account a broad range of
considerations when making decisions, including the interests of
Bayer AG and its stockholders as well as of our employees and
creditors.
The members of the Board of Management and the Supervisory Board
may be held personally liable to Bayer AG for breaches of their
duties of loyalty and care. Bayer AG must bring an action for
breach of duty against the Board of Management or Supervisory
Board upon a resolution of the stockholders passed at a
Stockholders Meeting by a simple majority of votes cast.
Furthermore, minority shareholders representing at least
1 percent of the companys share capital or shares
with a nominal value of
100,000 can file
an application in court requesting an action to be admitted
against members of either of the companys boards on behalf
of the company or in their own name.
With the exception of stockholders of companies that (unlike
Bayer AG) are under the control of another company, individual
stockholders of German companies cannot sue directors on behalf
of the company in a manner analogous to a stockholders
derivative action under U.S. law. Under German law,
directors may be liable for breach of duty to stockholders (as
opposed to a duty to the company itself) only where a breach of
duty to the company also constitutes a breach of a statutory
provision enacted specifically for the protection of
stockholders. As a practical matter, stockholders are able to
assert liability against directors for breaches of this sort
only in unusual circumstances.
Board of Management
The Board of Management is responsible for managing the business
of Bayer AG in accordance with the German Stock Corporation Act
and Bayer AGs Articles of Association. It also represents
Bayer AG in its dealings with third parties and in court.
According to the Articles of Association, the Board of
Management consists of a minimum of two members. The Supervisory
Board determines the number of and appoints the members of the
Board of Management. Members of the Board of Management are
appointed for a maximum term of five years and are eligible for
reappointment after the completion of their term in office.
Bayer AG is legally represented by two members of the Board of
Management acting together, or by one member of the Board of
Management together with a person possessing a special power of
attorney (Prokura).
The Board of Management must report regularly to the Supervisory
Board, particularly on proposed business policy and strategy, on
profitability and on the current business of Bayer AG, as well
as on any exceptional matters that may arise from time to time.
If not otherwise required by law, the Board of Management
decides with a simple majority of the votes cast. In case of
deadlock, the vote of the chairperson is the relevant vote.
Under certain circumstances, such as a serious breach of duty or
a vote of no confidence by the stockholders in an Annual
Stockholders Meeting, a member of the Board of Management
may be removed by the Supervisory Board prior to the expiration
of his/her term. A member of the Board of Management may not
deal with, or vote on, matters relating to proposals,
arrangements or contracts between him/herself and Bayer AG.
Individual members of the Board of Management serve as
representatives with primary responsibility for our various
corporate functions and as representatives for the various
geographic regions in which we operate.
110
The following table shows the members of our current Board of
Management as well as members who resigned in the course of the
financial year 2006, their ages, positions and the years in
which their current terms expire.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name and Age |
|
Position |
|
Current Term Expires |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Werner Wenning (60) |
|
Chairman |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
Dr. Udo Oels
(63)(a) |
|
Member |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
Klaus Kühn (55) |
|
Member |
|
|
2012 |
|
|
|
Dr. Richard Pott (53) |
|
Member |
|
|
2012 |
|
|
|
Dr. Wolfgang Plischke
(55)(b) |
|
Member |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(a) |
Until April 28, 2006. |
Werner Wenning became chairman of our Board of Management
in April 2002. He has served on the Board since 1997. Prior to
becoming chairman, he served as chief financial officer and was
a member of the Corporate Coordination and Human Resources
Committees. From 1996 until he joined the Board in 1997,
Mr. Wenning was head of Corporate Planning and Controlling.
In addition to his responsibilities on the Board, he is the
chairman of the supervisory board of Bayer Schering Pharma AG,
Berlin, Germany and a member of the supervisory board of Henkel
KGaA.
Dr. Udo Oels joined the Board of Management in 1996.
Prior to his resignation he was responsible on a Group level for
innovation, technology and environment. In addition to his
responsibilities on the Board, he was chairman of the
supervisory board of Bayer Technology Services and of Bayer
Industry Services as well as a member of the supervisory board
of Bayer Chemicals AG. He still is a member of the supervisory
board of ThyssenKrupp Services AG.
Klaus Kühn is Bayers chief financial officer.
Prior to joining the Board in May 2002, Mr. Kühn was
head of Bayers Finance function. Prior to that
appointment, he oversaw the spin-off of Bayers former Agfa
division. Before joining Bayer in 1998, Mr. Kühn
worked with Schering AG, Berlin, Germany most recently as head
of finance. In addition to his responsibilities on the Board, he
is chairman of the supervisory boards of Bayer CropScience AG
and Bayer Business Services GmbH and a member of the supervisory
board of Bayer Schering Pharma AG (formerly named Schering AG).
Dr. Richard Pott joined the Board in May 2002. He
had previously served as General Manager of our Specialty
Products business group. Before assuming responsibility for
Specialty Products, he served Bayer in a number of positions,
most recently as head of the Strategic Planning Department and
then as head of Corporate Planning and Controlling.
Dr. Pott oversees strategy and human resources and serves
as Arbeitsdirektor (that member of the Board responsible
for personnel and social issues within the company). In addition
to his responsibilities on the Board, he is the chairman of the
supervisory boards of each of Bayer HealthCare AG and Bayer
Industry Services GmbH & Co. OHG (member of the latter
since May 1, 2006). Until April 30, 2006, he was the
chairman of the supervisory board of Bayer MaterialScience AG.
Dr. Wolfgang Plischke joined the Board in March
2006. Prior to joining the Board, he was the General Manager of
our previous Pharmaceuticals division since January 2002 and a
member of the Bayer HealthCare Executive Committee responsible
for that division since July 2002. Before becoming the General
Manager of our previous Pharmaceuticals division, he had served
as head of that division in North America and had been a member
of the Executive Committee of Bayer Corporation since 2000. He
started his career in 1980 with Bayers subsidiary Miles
Diagnostics. In addition to his responsibility on the Board, he
became the chairman of the supervisory boards of Bayer
Technology Services and of Bayer MaterialScience AG shortly
after joining both boards as a member on May 1, 2006.
111
Under the German Stock Corporation Act, the German
Co-Determination Act (Mitbestimmungsgesetz) of 1976 and
our Articles of Association, the Supervisory Board consists of
20 members. The principal function of the Supervisory Board is
to supervise the Board of Management and to appoint its members.
The Supervisory Board oversees our business policy, corporate
planning and strategy. It also approves the annual budget and
the financial statements of Bayer AG and of the Bayer Group. The
Supervisory Board may not make management decisions, but the
Board of Managements Standard Operating Procedures
(Geschäftsordnung) may require the prior consent of
the Supervisory Board for specified transactions above a
specified threshold, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the acquisition or disposition of assets; |
|
|
|
the acquisition, disposition or encumbrance of real property; |
|
|
|
the acquisition or disposition of Company shares; and |
|
|
|
the issuance of bonds, entering into credit agreements, or grant
of guarantees, sureties (Bürgschaften) and loans,
except to subsidiaries. |
Our stockholders elect ten members of the Supervisory Board at
the Annual Stockholders Meeting. Pursuant to the
Co-Determination Act of 1976, our employees elect the remaining
ten members. The term of a Supervisory Board member expires at
the end of the Annual Stockholders Meeting in which the
stockholders discharge Supervisory Board members for the fourth
fiscal year following the year in which the member was elected.
There is no compulsory retirement age for members of the
Supervisory Board. However, in accordance with the German
Corporate Governance Code, Supervisory Board members are
encouraged to retire at the Annual Stockholders Meeting
following the members 72nd birthday.
Any member of the Supervisory Board elected by the stockholders
at the Annual Stockholders Meeting may be removed by a
vote of at least three quarters of the votes cast by the
stockholders in such meeting. Any member elected by the
employees may be removed by a majority of three quarters of the
votes cast by the employees. Unless otherwise required by law or
by the Articles of Association of Bayer AG, resolutions of the
Supervisory Board are passed by simple majority of the votes
cast. According to the Articles of Association, in the case of a
deadlock, a second vote is held in which the chairman of the
Supervisory Board is entitled to one additional vote. In order
to constitute a quorum, at least half of the total members of
the Supervisory Board must participate in the voting.
The following table shows the current members of our Supervisory
Board as well as members of the Supervisory Board who left the
Supervisory Board in the course of the financial year 2006,
their principal occupations, the year in which they were first
elected or appointed and memberships they hold on the
supervisory boards of other companies. Employee representatives
are identified by an asterisk.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First | |
|
Membership on other |
Name |
|
Position |
|
Principal Occupation |
|
Elected | |
|
Supervisory Boards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Dr. Manfred Schneider
|
|
Chairman |
|
Former chairman of the Management Board |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
Allianz SE, DaimlerChrysler AG, Linde AG,
Metro AG, RWE AG, TUI AG |
*Thomas de
Win(1)
|
|
Vice Chairman |
|
Chairman of the Bayer Central Works Council, Leverkusen |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
Bayer MaterialScience AG |
Dr. Paul Achleitner
|
|
Member |
|
Member of the management board, Allianz SE |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
Allianz Deutschland AG, Allianz Global Investors AG,
Allianz Lebensversicherungs-AG, Allianz Elementar
Versicherungs-AG, Allianz Elementar Lebensversicherungs-AG,
RWE AG |
112
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First | |
|
Membership on other |
Name |
|
Position |
|
Principal Occupation |
|
Elected | |
|
Supervisory Boards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Dr. Josef Ackermann
|
|
Member |
|
Chairman of the management board, Deutsche Bank AG |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
Deutsche Lufthansa AG, Linde AG, Siemens AG |
*Andreas
Becker(2)
|
|
Member |
|
Chairman of the Works Council of H.C. Starck |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
H.C. Starck GmbH |
*Willy
Beumann(3)
|
|
Member |
|
Chairman of the Works Council, Wuppertal Site |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
Bayer HealthCare AG |
*Karl-Josef Ellrich
|
|
Member |
|
Chairman of the Works Council, Dormagen Site, Chairman of the
Bayer Group Works Council, Leverkusen |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
Bayer CropScience AG |
*Dr. Thomas Fischer
|
|
Member |
|
Head of Process and Plant Safety, Bayer MaterialScience |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
Bayer MaterialScience AG |
*Erhard
Gipperich(4)
|
|
Vice Chairman |
|
Chairman of the Group and Central Works Councils of Bayer AG,
Leverkusen |
|
|
1998 |
|
|
|
*Peter
Hausmann(5)
|
|
Member |
|
North Rhine District Secretary of the German Mine, Chemical and
Power Workers Union |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Procter & Gamble Manufacturing GmbH |
*Thomas Hellmuth
|
|
Member |
|
Agricultural Engineer |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
|
Prof. Dr.-Ing. e.h. Hans-Olaf Henkel
|
|
Member |
|
Honorary professor of the University of Mannheim |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
Continental AG, DaimlerChrysler Aerospace AG, EPG AG, SMS GmbH,
Brambles Industries Ltd., Orange SA, Ringier AG |
*Reiner
Hoffmann(6)
|
|
Member |
|
Deputy Secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
Sasol Germany GmbH |
*Gregor
Jüsten(7)
|
|
Member |
|
Member of the Works Councils, Leverkusen Site |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
Dr. rer. pol. Klaus Kleinfeld
|
|
Member |
|
Chairman of the management board, Siemens AG |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
Alcoa Inc., Citigroup Inc. |
Dr. h.c. Martin Kohlhaussen
|
|
Member |
|
Chairman of the supervisory board, Commerzbank AG |
|
|
1992 |
|
|
Hochtief AG, ThyssenKrupp AG, Schering AG (until
September 13, 2006) |
John Christian Kornblum
|
|
Member |
|
Chairman of Lazard & Co. |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
Motorola Inc., ThyssenKrupp Technologies AG |
*Petra Kronen
|
|
Member |
|
Chairwoman of the Works Council, Uerdingen Site |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
Bayer MaterialScience AG |
*Hubertus Schmoldt
|
|
Member |
|
Chairman of German Mine, Chemical and Power Workers Union |
|
|
1995 |
|
|
Deutsche BP AG, DOW Olefinverbund GmbH, E.ON AG, RAG AG, RAG
Coal International |
*Dieter
Schulte(8)
|
|
Member |
|
Former Chairman of German Unions Federation |
|
|
1997 |
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First | |
|
Membership on other |
Name |
|
Position |
|
Principal Occupation |
|
Elected | |
|
Supervisory Boards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Dr.-Ing. Ekkehard D. Schulz
|
|
Member |
|
Chairman of the management board, ThyssenKrupp AG |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
AXA Konzern AG, Commerzbank AG, Deutsche Bahn AG,
MAN AG, RAG AG, RAG Beteiligungs-AG, RWE AG,
ThyssenKrupp Services AG, ThyssenKrupp Elevator AG,
ThyssenKrupp Technologies AG |
Dr.-Ing. e.h. Jürgen Weber
|
|
Member |
|
Chairman of the supervisory board, Deutsche Lufthansa AG |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
Allianz Lebensversicherungs-AG, Deutsche Bank AG, Deutsche
Post AG, Voith AG, LP Holding GmbH, Tetra Laval
Group, Willi Bogner GmbH & Co. KGaA |
*Siegfried
Wendlandt(9)
|
|
Member |
|
North Rhine District Secretary of German Mine, Chemical and
Power Workers Union |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
|
Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Ernst- Ludwig Winnacker
|
|
Member |
|
Secretary General of the European Research Council (ERC) |
|
|
1997 |
|
|
MediGene AG, KWS Saat AG, Wacker Chemie AG |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Vice Chairman of the Supervisory Board since March 2, 2006. |
|
(2) |
|
Resigned February 1, 2007. |
|
(3) |
|
First elected February 20, 2007. |
|
(4) |
|
Resigned January 31, 2006; Vice Chairman until resignation. |
|
(5) |
|
First elected April 28, 2006. |
|
(6) |
|
First elected October 11, 2006. |
|
(7) |
|
Elected February 1, 2006. |
|
(8) |
|
Resigned September 18, 2006. |
|
(9) |
|
Resigned April 28, 2006. |
|
|
|
Supervisory Board Committees |
Currently, the Supervisory Board has the following committees:
|
|
|
|
|
The Presidium was established pursuant to § 27
(3) of the Co-Determination Act and consists of the
chairman and vice chairman of the Supervisory Board, as well as
of one stockholder representative and one employee
representative. It serves as our mediation committee
(Vermittlungsausschuss) with respect to nominations to
the Board of Management. The purpose of this committee is to
nominate persons for election to the Board of Management by a
simple majority of the votes of the Supervisory Board in the
event that the Supervisory Board is unable to appoint members of
the Board of Management with the votes of at least a two thirds
majority of the Supervisory Board. Pursuant to § 9
(2) of the Standard Operating Procedures
(Geschäftsordnung) of the Supervisory Board, the
Presidium also prepares the general meetings of the full
Supervisory Board. The current members of the Presidium are
Mr. Schneider (chairman), Mr. Achleitner, Mr. de
Win (since March 2, 2006, succeeding Mr. Gipperich who
resigned January 31, 2006) and Mr. Schmoldt. |
|
|
|
The personnel committee (Personalausschuss) was
established pursuant to § 10 of the Standard Operating
Procedures of the Supervisory Board. The personnel committee
consists of four members of the Supervisory Board. The chairman
of the Supervisory Board acts as chairman of the personnel
committee. The main responsibility of the personnel committee is
the determination of the salary and further conditions of the
employment of Board of Management members, the legal
representation of the |
114
|
|
|
|
|
Company in affairs with Board of Management members pursuant to
§ 112 of the German Stock Corporation Act, the
approval of agreements with Supervisory Board members pursuant
to § 114 of the German Stock Corporation Act and the
approval of loans granted to Supervisory Board and Board of
Management members and other persons pursuant to § 89
and § 115 of the German Stock Corporation Act. The
current members of the personnel committee are
Mr. Schneider (chairman), Mr. Kohlhaussen,
Mr. Ellrich and Ms. Kronen. |
|
|
|
The audit committee (Prüfungsausschuss) was
established pursuant to § 11 of the Standard Operating
Procedures of the Supervisory Board. The audit committee
consists of six members of the Supervisory Board. The main
responsibilities of the audit committee are oversight of
financial accounting, risk management, the preparation of the
resolutions of the Supervisory Board with respect to the annual
financial statements, the review of all non-audit services to be
performed by the independent auditor, oversight over the
independent auditors including scope of services, fees and
schedules, the direct receipt of the audit reports, and the
direct receipt of reports of accounting irregularities. The
current members of the audit committee are Mr. Kohlhaussen
(chairman), Mr. Schneider, Mr. Fischer,
Mr. Henkel, Mr. Hausmann (as of April 29, 2006,
succeeding Mr. Wendlandt who was a member until
April 28, 2006) and Mr. de Win. |
|
|
|
The committee relating to issues in connection with the takeover
and integration of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany (Schering
Ausschuss) was established pursuant to § 8 of the
Standard Operating Procedures of the Supervisory Board. The
Schering committee consists of four members of the Supervisory
Board. Its main responsibilities are the oversight of the tender
offer for all shares including shares represented by American
Depositary Shares (ADS) in Schering as well as decisions
relating to the financing or refinancing of the takeover. The
Schering committee was established on March 23, 2006. The
current members of the Schering committee are
Mr. Schneider, Mr. Schmoldt, Mr. Schulz and
Mr. de Win. |
Share Ownership
Because the shares of Bayer AG are in bearer form, we cannot
obtain precise information as to their holders. To the best of
our knowledge, however, no member of the Supervisory Board or
the Board of Management beneficially owns shares of Bayer AG
totaling one percent or more of all outstanding shares.
Compensation
The members of the Board of Management receive a base salary and
a fixed supplement (both aggregated under the term fixed
salary), remuneration in kind and other benefits, and
variable compensation. The variable compensation comprises a
variable bonus and the possible payments from the participation
in long-term stock-based compensation programs. Since 2005, the
variable bonus for a given year is tied to the attainment of the
Group target based on EBITDA, which we define as operating
result plus depreciation and amortization. For the year 2006,
the variable bonus is calculated partly according to the
Groups EBITDA margin before special items adjusted to
exclude the impact of a number of what we regard as special
effects for this purpose (such as gains of divestitures,
impairment charges, expenses relating to the strategic
reorientation of our businesses and other material unusual
effects), and partly according to the average target attainment
of the HealthCare, CropScience and MaterialScience subgroups.
The latter is based mainly on the subgroups target
attainment concerning EBITDA, adjusted to exclude the impact of
unusual effects, as well as on a qualitative appraisal in
relation to the market and competitors.
The directly effected remuneration of members of the Board of
Management in 2006 amounted to
8,143,822 (2005:
7,064,828),
comprising
2,260,400 (2005:
1,985,580) in
base salaries and
1,096,556 (2005:
837,073) in
fixed supplements,
4,644,475 (2005:
4,085,754) in
variable bonuses plus
142,391 (2005:
156,421) of
remuneration in kind and other benefits. Remuneration in kind
mainly consists of the value assigned by German taxation
guidelines to certain benefits in kind such as for example the
use of a company car. Other benefits include, for example,
reimbursements for preventive medical checkups.
115
Members of the Board of Management were permitted to participate
in a cash-settlement-based stock option program, offered through
the year 2004, if they placed their personal investment in Bayer
Stock in a special deposit account. As part of this old program,
a total of 25,290 stock options with a fair value of
1,806,718 were
outstanding as of December 31, 2006.
Since 2005, the members of the Board of Management have
participated in the long-term stock-based compensation program
Aspire I (2005 and 2006 tranches). Participation in this
program is linked to membership of a Group Leadership Circle,
not to the contract of service as a member of the Board of
Management. Further details of this program are presented
in Employee Stock-Based Compensation
Programs Long-term incentive program for members of
the Board of Management and other senior executives
(Aspire I).
The entitlements earned in 2006 relate to the 2006 part of the
respective three-year-performance period of the long-term
stock-based compensation programs granted in current and
previous years. The changes in the value of previously existing
entitlements under long-term stock-based compensation programs
that were earned prior to 2006 are shown separately. They result
from the upward trend in the price of Bayer stock in 2006.
Additionally, the fair value of the stock-based compensation as
of the grant date is given separately.
The table below shows the remuneration components of those
individuals that were members of our Board of Management in the
course of 2006. In 2006, the remuneration of our chief financial
officer was raised in recognition of the special tasks of such a
position.
|
|
|
Remuneration of the Members of the Board of Management |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Werner | |
|
Klaus | |
|
Dr. Udo | |
|
Dr. Wolfgang | |
|
Dr. Richard | |
|
|
|
|
Wenning | |
|
Kühn | |
|
Oels(a) | |
|
Plischke(b) | |
|
Pott | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In Euros) | |
Base salary
|
|
|
748,872 |
|
|
|
412,236 |
|
|
|
343,526 |
|
|
|
343,530 |
|
|
|
412,236 |
|
|
|
2,260,400 |
|
Fixed supplement
|
|
|
325,132 |
|
|
|
316,366 |
|
|
|
142,205 |
|
|
|
142,206 |
|
|
|
170,647 |
|
|
|
1,096,556 |
|
Variable bonus
|
|
|
1,525,086 |
|
|
|
1,034,615 |
|
|
|
567,335 |
|
|
|
689,745 |
|
|
|
827,694 |
|
|
|
4,644,475 |
|
Remuneration in kind and other benefits
|
|
|
47,926 |
|
|
|
35,571 |
|
|
|
9,594 |
|
|
|
18,163 |
|
|
|
31,137 |
|
|
|
142,391 |
|
|
Directly effected remuneration
|
|
|
2,647,016 |
|
|
|
1,798,788 |
|
|
|
1,062,660 |
|
|
|
1,193,644 |
|
|
|
1,441,714 |
|
|
|
8,143,822 |
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entitlements earned in 2006
|
|
|
820,514 |
|
|
|
480,609 |
|
|
|
538,181 |
|
|
|
193,188 |
|
|
|
461,939 |
|
|
|
2,494,431 |
|
|
Change in value of entitlements earned
prior to 2006
|
|
|
339,733 |
|
|
|
229,617 |
|
|
|
104,125 |
|
|
|
66,262 |
|
|
|
164,952 |
|
|
|
904,689 |
|
|
|
(a) |
Until April 28, 2006. |
|
(b) |
Since March 1, 2006. |
In 2005, the remuneration components of those individuals that
were members of our Board of Management in the course of 2006
were as following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Werner | |
|
Klaus | |
|
Dr. Udo | |
|
Dr. Wolfgang | |
|
Dr. Richard | |
|
|
|
|
Wenning | |
|
Kühn | |
|
Oels(a) | |
|
Plischke(b) | |
|
Pott | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In Euros) | |
Base salary
|
|
|
748,872 |
|
|
|
412,236 |
|
|
|
412,236 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
412,236 |
|
|
|
1,985,580 |
|
Fixed supplement
|
|
|
325,132 |
|
|
|
170,647 |
|
|
|
170,647 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
170,647 |
|
|
|
837,073 |
|
Variable bonus
|
|
|
1,554,615 |
|
|
|
843,713 |
|
|
|
843,713 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
843,713 |
|
|
|
4,085,754 |
|
Remuneration in kind and other benefits
|
|
|
40,169 |
|
|
|
35,266 |
|
|
|
41,942 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,044 |
|
|
|
156,421 |
|
|
Directly effected remuneration
|
|
|
2,668,788 |
|
|
|
1,461,862 |
|
|
|
1,468,538 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,465,640 |
|
|
|
7,064,828 |
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entitlements earned in 2005
|
|
|
495,504 |
|
|
|
285,748 |
|
|
|
285,748 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
284,248 |
|
|
|
1,351,248 |
|
|
Change in value of entitlements earned
prior to 2005
|
|
|
169,289 |
|
|
|
99,693 |
|
|
|
99,693 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
98,055 |
|
|
|
466,730 |
|
|
|
(a) |
Until April 28, 2006. |
|
(b) |
Since March 1, 2006. |
116
The fair value of the stock-based compensation as of the grant
dates for the 2006 and 2005 Aspire program, respectively, is
shown in the following table. The entitlements earned in 2006
under the 2006 and 2005 Aspire program are included in the
preceding tables under Stock-based compensation:
Entitlements earned in 2006 and Stock-based
compensation: Entitlements earned in 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Werner | |
|
Klaus | |
|
Dr. Udo | |
|
Dr. Wolfgang | |
|
Dr. Richard | |
|
|
|
|
Wenning | |
|
Kühn | |
|
Oels(a) | |
|
Plischke(b) | |
|
Pott | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In Euros) | |
Fair value as of grant date of options granted under the Aspire
program
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in 2006
|
|
|
268,113 |
|
|
|
181,886 |
|
|
|
40,419 |
|
|
|
117,597 |
|
|
|
145,509 |
|
|
|
753,524 |
|
|
in 2005
|
|
|
253,636 |
|
|
|
137,652 |
|
|
|
137,652 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
137,652 |
|
|
|
666,592 |
|
|
|
(a) |
Until April 28, 2006. |
(b) |
Since March 1, 2006. |
Pension provisions for the current members of the Board of
Management amounted to
29,564,478
(2005:
32,218,996).
Active members of the Board of Management are entitled to
receive a pension from the age of 60 in an annual amount equal
to at least 30 percent of the last yearly fixed salary.
This percentage increases depending on years of service as a
Board of Management member and, according to the inception of
the respective service contract, is capped at between 60 and
80 percent. We refer to the maximum such percentage a
member of the Board of Management can reach as his final target
pension level.
We currently pay former and retired members of the Board of
Management a monthly pension equal to 80 percent of the
last monthly fixed salary received while in service. The
pensions paid to former members of the Board of Management or
their widows are normally reassessed every three years and
adjusted taking into account the development of consumer prices.
These amounts are in addition to any amounts they receive as a
result of their participation in the Bayer pension plan
described below. See Employee Pension Plan.
Current service cost for pension entitlements in 2006 and 2005
of those individuals that were members of our Board of
Management in the course of 2006 were as following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Werner | |
|
Klaus | |
|
Dr. Udo | |
|
Dr. Wolfgang | |
|
Dr. Richard | |
|
|
|
|
Wenning | |
|
Kühn | |
|
Oels(a) | |
|
Plischke(b) | |
|
Pott | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In Euros) | |
Current service cost for pension entitlements earned
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
in 2006
|
|
|
398,564 |
|
|
|
1,651,294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,644,517 |
|
|
|
233,284 |
|
|
|
3,927,659 |
|
|
in 2005
|
|
|
311,158 |
|
|
|
420,046 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
186,600 |
|
|
|
917,804 |
|
|
|
(a) |
Until April 28, 2006. |
(b) |
Since March 1, 2006. |
For active Board of Management members a general severance
indemnity clause, with the following main elements applies:
If a member of the Board of Management is not offered a new
service contract upon expiration of his existing service
contract because he is not reappointed to the Board of
Management, or if the member is removed from the Board of
Management in the absence of grounds for termination without
notice, he will receive a monthly allowance in an amount of
80 percent of his last monthly fixed salary for a period of
60 months from the date of expiration of his service
contract less any period for which the Board of Management
member was released from his duties on full pay.
If, in the event of a change of control of our company, the
service contract is terminated within 12 months
thereafter by mutual consent, due to its expiration,
or voluntarily by the Board of Management member in certain
circumstances such as a change of strategy the Board
of Management member will receive a monthly allowance in an
amount of 80 percent of his last monthly fixed salary for a
period of 60 months from the date of termination of his
service contract, not counting any period for which he was
released from his duties on full pay.
117
Pension entitlements are based on the final target pension
level. If the member of the Board of Management has not already
reached his final target pension level, his pension entitlement
will be supplemented up to this level.
Emoluments to retired members of the Board of Management and
their surviving dependents amounted to
10,924,768
(2005:
10,323,009).
Pension provisions for former members of the Board of Management
and their surviving dependents amounted to
117,866,846
(2005:
115,972,457).
As of December 31, 2006, no loans to members of the Board
of Management were outstanding, nor any repayments of such loans
occurred during the year.
The remuneration of the members of the Supervisory Board is
determined in accordance with Article 12 (most recently
amended at the Annual Stockholders Meeting on
April 29, 2005) of the Articles of Association of Bayer AG.
In addition to reimbursing expenses incurred in connection with
the exercise of their office, the company pays to each member of
the Supervisory Board a fixed remuneration of
60,000 per
year and a variable remuneration that is tied to the gross cash
flow as reported in the consolidated financial statements of the
Bayer Group for the recent fiscal year. For every
50 million
or part thereof by which the gross cash flow exceeds
3.1 billion,
a variable remuneration of
2,000 per
year is paid to each Supervisory Board member. However, in total
the variable remuneration per Supervisory Board member may not
exceed
30,000 per
year.
In accordance with the German Corporate Governance Codex,
however, the amount of remuneration reflects such special
functions as the Chairman and the Vice Chairman of the
Supervisory Board, as well as the membership in Supervisory
Board committees. The Chairman receives three times, the Vice
Chairman one-and-a-half times the fixed and variable
remuneration of the other members of the Supervisory Board
detailed above. The fixed and variable remuneration of members
who are also members of a Supervisory Board committee is
increased by one quarter of the fixed and variable remuneration
detailed above, and that of members who also chair a committee
is increased by a further quarter. Regardless of special
functions and committee membership however, in total, the fixed
and variable remuneration of any Supervisory Board member may
not exceed three times the fixed and variable remuneration
described in the preceding paragraph. Supervisory Board members
who have been members of the Supervisory Board or of one of its
committees for only a part of the fiscal year receive the
applicable remuneration on a pro rata basis.
No members of the Supervisory Board received any compensation or
other benefits for personally-performed services, especially
consultancy or agency services. The Company has purchased
insurance for the members of the Supervisory Board to cover
their legal liability arising from their service on the
Supervisory Board.
As of December 31, 2006, no loans to members of the
Supervisory Board were outstanding, nor any repayments of such
loans occurred during the year.
The following table shows the remuneration paid to individuals
that were members of the Supervisory Board in the course of
2006. Employee representatives, who receive salaries from us
unrelated to their service on the Supervisory Board, are
identified by an asterisk. The aggregate amount of the salaries
the employee representatives received in 2006 in their
capacities other than as members of the Supervisory Board is
647,813. Employee
118
representatives, who do not receive salaries from us unrelated
to their service on the Supervisory Board, are identified by two
asterisks.
|
|
|
Remuneration of the Members of the Supervisory Board |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed | |
|
Variable | |
|
|
|
|
Remuneration | |
|
Remuneration | |
|
Totals | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In Euros) | |
Dr. Paul Achleitner
|
|
|
75,000.00 |
|
|
|
37.500,00 |
|
|
|
112,500.00 |
|
Dr. Josef Ackermann
|
|
|
60,000.00 |
|
|
|
30,000.00 |
|
|
|
90,000.00 |
|
*Andreas
Becker(1)
|
|
|
60,000.00 |
|
|
|
30,000.00 |
|
|
|
90,000.00 |
|
*Karl-Josef Ellrich
|
|
|
75,000.00 |
|
|
|
37,500.00 |
|
|
|
112,500.00 |
|
*Dr. Thomas Fischer
|
|
|
75,000.00 |
|
|
|
37,500.00 |
|
|
|
112,500.00 |
|
*Erhard
Gipperich(2)
|
|
|
8,917.81 |
|
|
|
4,458.91 |
|
|
|
13,376.72 |
|
**Peter
Hausmann(3)
|
|
|
50,958.90 |
|
|
|
25,479.45 |
|
|
|
76,438.35 |
|
*Thomas Hellmuth
|
|
|
60,000.00 |
|
|
|
30,000.00 |
|
|
|
90,000.00 |
|
Prof. Dr.-Ing. e.h. Hans-Olaf Henkel
|
|
|
75,000.00 |
|
|
|
37,500.00 |
|
|
|
112,500.00 |
|
**Reiner
Hoffmann(4)
|
|
|
13,479.45 |
|
|
|
6,739.73 |
|
|
|
20,219.18 |
|
*Gregor
Jüsten(5)
|
|
|
54,904.11 |
|
|
|
27,452.05 |
|
|
|
82,356.16 |
|
Dr. rer. pol. Klaus Kleinfeld
|
|
|
60,000.00 |
|
|
|
30,000.00 |
|
|
|
90,000.00 |
|
Dr. h.c. Martin Kohlhaussen
|
|
|
105,000.00 |
|
|
|
52,500.00 |
|
|
|
157,500.00 |
|
John Christian Kornblum
|
|
|
60,000.00 |
|
|
|
30,000.00 |
|
|
|
90,000.00 |
|
*Petra Kronen
|
|
|
75,000.00 |
|
|
|
37,500.00 |
|
|
|
112,500.00 |
|
**Hubertus Schmoldt
|
|
|
86,671.23 |
|
|
|
43,335.62 |
|
|
|
130,006.85 |
|
Dr. Manfred Schneider
|
|
|
180,000.00 |
|
|
|
90,000.00 |
|
|
|
270,000.00 |
|
**Dieter
Schulte(6)
|
|
|
42,904.11 |
|
|
|
21,452.05 |
|
|
|
64,356.16 |
|
Dr.-Ing. Ekkehard D. Schulz
|
|
|
71,671.23 |
|
|
|
35,835.62 |
|
|
|
107,506.85 |
|
Dr.-Ing. e.h. Jürgen Weber
|
|
|
60,000.00 |
|
|
|
30,000.00 |
|
|
|
90,000.00 |
|
**Siegfried
Wendlandt(7)
|
|
|
24,246.58 |
|
|
|
12,123.29 |
|
|
|
36,369.87 |
|
*Thomas de Win
|
|
|
124,273.97 |
|
|
|
62,136.99 |
|
|
|
186,410.96 |
|
Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. Ernst-Ludwig Winnacker
|
|
|
60,000.00 |
|
|
|
30,000.00 |
|
|
|
90,000.00 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Resigned February 1, 2007. |
|
(2) |
Resigned January 31, 2006. |
|
(3) |
First elected on April 28, 2006. |
|
(4) |
First elected on October 11, 2006. |
|
(5) |
First elected February 1, 2006. |
|
(6) |
Resigned September 18, 2006. |
|
(7) |
Resigned April 28, 2006. |
|
|
|
Employee Stock-Based Compensation Programs |
Stock-based compensation in the Bayer Group is granted primarily
under standard programs and also on an individual agreement
basis.
Individual agreements enable the company to link remuneration
components to stock price or future stock price trends. Awards
under such agreements may be contingent upon the attainment of
agreed targets, or they may be based solely on length of service.
119
Standard programs exist for different groups of employees. The
program offered to members of the Board of Management and other
senior executives from 2001 through 2004 was essentially a stock
option program with variable stock-based awards. This program
provides for cash payments. Middle managers were offered a stock
incentive program, while other groups of employees were offered
a stock participation program.
A stock-based compensation program for top and middle
management, known as Aspire, was introduced in 2005.
It comprises two variants, which are described below. For other
managers and non-managerial employees, a stock participation
program has been offered since 2005, under which Bayer
subsidizes employee purchases of shares in the company.
As with other remuneration systems involving cash settlement,
awards to be made under the stock-based programs are covered by
provisions in the amount of the fair value of the obligations
existing as of the date of the financial statements
vis-à-vis the respective employee group. Adjustments to
provisions relating to all existing stock-based compensation
programs are recognized in the income statement.
The table below shows the change in provisions for the various
programs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Option | |
|
Stock Incentive | |
|
Participation | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
program | |
|
program | |
|
program | |
|
Aspire I | |
|
Aspire II | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
Additions
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
Utilization
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
Reversal
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Reclassification to current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
Currency effects
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses for stock-based compensation programs in 2006
were
65 million
(2005: 51 million),
including
51 million
(2005:
34 million)
for the Aspire programs and
4 million
in subsidies for the 2006 short-term stock participation program
(2005:
2 million
in subsidies for the 2005 short-term stock participation
program).
In 2006, provisions of
8 million
were recorded in the financial statements at the fair value of
obligations entered into under individual stock-based
compensation agreements. The obligations were measured in the
same way as those incurred under the standard programs. Expenses
for individual stock-based compensation agreements in 2006 were
6 million
(2005:
4 million).
The fair value of obligations under the standard stock-based
compensation programs and individual agreements has been
calculated using the Monte Carlo simulation method and the
following key parameters:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Dividend yield
|
|
|
2.27 |
% |
|
|
2.29 |
% |
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
2.92 |
% |
|
|
3.83 |
% |
Volatility of Bayer stock
|
|
|
38.00 |
% |
|
|
21.52 |
% |
Volatility of the EURO STOXX
50sm
|
|
|
19.55 |
% |
|
|
13.14 |
% |
Correlation between Bayer stock price and the EURO
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOXX
50sm
|
|
|
0.56 |
|
|
|
0.61 |
|
The expected exercise period is three to five years.
120
Long-term incentive program for members of the
Board of Management and other senior executives
(Aspire I)
To participate in Aspire I, members of the Board of
Management and other senior executives are required to purchase
a certain number of Bayer shares determined on the basis of
specific guidelines and to retain them for the full term of the
program.
A percentage of their annual base salary is defined as a target
for variable payments (Aspire target opportunity).
Depending on the performance of Bayer stock, both in absolute
terms and relative to the EURO
STOXX 50sm
benchmark index, participants are granted an award of between
0 percent and 200 percent of their individual target
opportunity.
Participants may ask for their Aspire award to be paid out in
cash immediately at the end of the three-year performance
period, or they may convert it into performance
units. These can then be redeemed within a two-year
exercise period for a cash payment that depends on the Bayer
stock price on the exercise date.
|
|
|
Long-term incentive program for middle management
(Aspire II) |
A variant of the Aspire program with the following modifications
is offered to middle management:
|
|
|
|
|
No personal investment in Bayer shares is required. |
|
|
|
The amount of the award in relation to the employees
personal Aspire target opportunity is based entirely on the
absolute performance of Bayer stock during the performance
period. |
|
|
|
The award varies between 0 percent and 150 percent of
the Aspire target opportunity. |
This variant of the Aspire program is not linked to the EURO
STOXX
50sm
index.
Stock Participation
Program (2006) for other managers and non-managerial
employees
Under this program, Bayer offered employees the opportunity to
purchase shares at a discount of 15 percent from the lowest
stock price for the day (Tagestiefstkurs) of
August 15, 2006. Employees could invest an amount of up to
10 percent of their annual base salary, but not more than
5,000.
The shares purchased under the 2006 Stock Participation Program
must be held in a special deposit account and may not be sold
prior to December 31, 2007. In 2006, employees acquired a
total of 474,003 Bayer shares under the 2006 Stock Participation
Program, leading to additional compensation expenses in an
amount of
3 million.
Bayer Industry Services GmbH & Co. OHG (BIS), held by
Bayer AG (60 percent) and by LANXESS (40 percent),
offered a different stock participation program. BIS offered its
managers and non-managerial employees the opportunity to
purchase Bayer shares and LANXESS shares in a ratio of 3:2, at a
discount of 50 percent from the lowest stock price for the
day (Tagestiefstkurs) of August 14, 2006. The total
discounted purchase of shares purchased by any one manager or
non-managerial employee under this stock participation program
was capped at an amount ranging between
600 and
2,000, depending
on the contract level of that manager or non-managerial
employee. The total granted discount per manager or
non-managerial employee ranged between
300 and
1,000.
The shares purchased under the BIS stock participation program
must be held in a special deposit account and may not be sold
prior to December 31, 2008. In 2006, BIS managers and
non-managerial employees acquired a total of 34,512 Bayer shares
under the BIS stock participation program, leading to an
additional compensation expense for us in an amount of
1 million.
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation programs 2000-2004 |
The stock-based compensation programs offered to the different
employee groups in 2000 through 2004 were all similar in their
respective structures. Provisions for the obligations under
these programs are recorded in the balance sheet and recognized
in the income statement at fair value. Entitlement to awards
under these programs is conditioned on retention of the Bayer
stock designated under the program for a certain time period.
121
The following table shows the programs applicable through
December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Option | |
|
Stock Incentive | |
|
Stock Participation | |
|
|
program | |
|
program | |
|
program | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Year of issue
|
|
|
2001-2004 |
|
|
|
2000-2004 |
|
|
|
2000-2004 |
|
Original term in years
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Retention period/distribution date in years from issue date
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2/6/10 |
|
|
|
2/6/10 |
|
Reference price
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Performance criteria
|
|
|
Yes |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
|
|
No |
|
|
|
|
Stock Option Program (2001-2004) |
A maximum personal investment in Bayer stock was defined for
each Board of Management member or other senior executive who
wished to participate in the Stock Option Program.
The Stock Option Program contains a three-year retention
condition. The retention period is followed by a two-year
exercise period, after which any option rights not exercised
expire. Eligibility to exercise option rights and the award to
which the holder is entitled depend on the absolute and relative
performance of Bayer stock.
For the tranches issued in 2001-2002, every participant received
one option for every 20 shares of their personal
investments placed in a special account. Each option originally
could reach a maximum value of 200 shares during the term
of the tranche, depending on the performance of Bayer stock,
both in absolute terms and relative to the EURO STOXX
50SM
index.
For the tranches issued in 2003 and 2004, participants received
up to three options per share for every share of their personal
investments placed in the special account. For each option, a
cash payment equivalent to the market price of one
Bayer share and an outperformance premium are
awarded at the exercise date subject to the attainment of
certain performance and outperformance targets, respectively.
None of the stock options issued under the 2001 tranche, which
expired on May 15, 2006, were exercised. Stock options
under the 2002 and 2003 tranches where partially exercised and
are currently still exercisable. As of December 31, 2006,
their intrinsic value was
4 million.
|
|
|
Stock Incentive Program (2000-2004) |
To participate in this program, each participant was required to
deposit shares with a maximum aggregate value of 50 percent
of his or her performance-related bonus for the preceding fiscal
year. The incentive award depends on the number of Bayer shares
deposited at the launch of each tranche and the overall
performance of Bayer stock. The Stock Incentive Program differed
from the Stock Option Program in that participants were
permitted to sell their shares during the term of the program,
although any shares sold did not count for purposes of
calculating the incentive awards on subsequent distribution
dates. The Stock Incentive Program runs for a ten-year period,
during which there are three incentive payment dates.
Incentive payments under the program are only made if Bayer
stock has outperformed the EURO STOXX
50SM
index on the respective incentive payment dates. For every ten
Bayer shares originally placed in their special account and
retained until the incentive payment date, participants receive
payments equal to the value of two shares after two years, the
value of four shares after six years and the value of additional
four shares after ten years.
|
|
|
Stock Participation Program (2000-2004) |
Under the Stock Participation Program, only half as many shares
as under the Stock Incentive Program are awarded per ten shares
deposited, but the award is not conditioned on any performance
criteria.
122
Employees who enter into employment with Bayer AG or its group
management companies on or after January 1, 2005, become
members of the BayerPLUS pension plan and must join
Bayer AGs new pension fund Rheinische
Pensionskasse (RPK), a mutual insurance company. As
a member of the RPK, an employee makes a mandatory
monthly contribution of 2 percent of his or her monthly
contribution-eligible income (up to the threshold
(Beitragsbemessungsgrenze) for the statutory pension
insurance (gesetzliche Rentenversicherung), which for
2006 was a salary of
5,250 per
month or
63,000 per
year) to the pension fund. These contributions are withheld from
the employees salary. Bayer AG and its group management
companies match the employees contribution. Upon
retirement, the employee is entitled to receive a monthly basic
pension payment (Grundrente) from the RPK
calculated on the basis of contributions made multiplied by
an age factor based on actuarial principles and including a
guaranteed interest rate of 2.75 percent. Entitlements
under this basic pension plan vest immediately. If the RPK
generates a surplus, the pension benefits paid will rise
accordingly.
Employees who entered into employment with Bayer AG or its group
management companies on or after January 1, 2005 and whose
annual contribution-eligible income exceeds the statutory
pension insurance threshold are entitled to receive an
additional monthly pension payment (Zusatzrente) from a
supplementary pension plan, for which book reserves are included
in the balance sheet. Under this plan, entitlements are
calculated in the same manner as under the RPK. Bayer AG
and its group management companies make a mandatory notional
contribution of 6 percent of that portion of the
employees income exceeding the statutory pension insurance
threshold (contribution-eligible income for purposes of the
supplementary pension plan) into the supplementary pension plan.
In addition, Bayer matches any contributions made by the
employee into the supplementary pension plan. The employee may
make a contribution of up to 9 percent of that
employees contribution-eligible income for purposes of the
supplementary pension plan. Entitlements based on employer
contributions vest after a period of five years. Entitlements
based under the supplementary pension plan on an employees
own contributions vest immediately.
Employees who entered into employment with Bayer AG or its group
management companies before January 1, 2005 became members
of the old pension plan (which is no longer open to new members)
and joined the Bayer-Pensionskasse. As a member of the
Bayer-Pensionskasse, an employee also makes a mandatory
monthly contribution of 2 percent of his or her monthly
contribution-eligible income (up to the statutory pension
insurance threshold). Employees whose annual
contribution-eligible income exceeds the annual statutory
pension insurance threshold are entitled to receive an
additional monthly pension payment (Zusatzrente) with
respect to that excess (up to an annual contribution-eligible
income of
111,000), for
which book reserves are included in the balance sheet. Starting
on January 1, 2006, the portion of the employees
contribution-eligible income in excess of
111,000 is
treated in the same manner as is contribution-eligible income of
new employees that exceeds the statutory pension insurance
threshold.
Key senior managers in leadership positions essential for the
Group (i.e., who shape the future of the Group as a
whole) are assigned to so-called Group Leadership Circles (GLC).
A managers assignment to a GLC depends on his/her position
and his/her reporting relationship at Group level. Members of
the Board of Management are assigned to GLC I. (Their pension
entitlements are discussed in Compensation.)
For GLC II and GLC III members (i.e., members
of our senior management), who are appointed after
March 18, 2005, a new pension contract applies in addition
to their entitlements under the pension plans described above:
Bayer AG matches the employees contributions (up to
9 percent of the respective contribution-eligible income)
at a 200 percent (GLC III) or 300 percent
(GLC II) level. These benefits are also financed by book
reserves. The pension contracts of GLC members appointed prior
to that date remain unchanged on a defined benefit
basis.
These changes for the German employees reflect the process of
moving from Defined Benefit to Defined Contribution plans. The
Bayer Group started this process in the 1990s and today Bayer
has introduced Defined Contribution plans for new employees in
all major countries. In the United States several of
Bayers current Defined Benefit plans were replaced with a
pure Defined Contribution plan effective January 1, 2006.
Pension entitlements under the modified Defined Benefit plans
were determined as of December 31, 2005 and frozen. For
further information, please refer to Note 25 to the
consolidated financial statements appearing elsewhere in this
annual report on
Form 20-F.
123
Employees
The following tables set forth the average number of employees*
in continuing operations during 2004, 2005 and 2006 by area of
primary activity and an approximate breakdown of employees as of
December 31, 2004, 2005 and 2006 by geographical region:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employees* by Activity Average For |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2005 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
Technology/ Manufacturing
|
|
|
42,282 |
|
|
|
(1.24 |
) |
|
|
41,757 |
|
|
|
7.95 |
|
|
|
45,076 |
|
Marketing
|
|
|
23,689 |
|
|
|
4.36 |
|
|
|
24,723 |
|
|
|
25.79 |
|
|
|
31,098 |
|
Administration
|
|
|
7,850 |
|
|
|
(1.03 |
) |
|
|
7,769 |
|
|
|
29.54 |
|
|
|
10,064 |
|
Research and development
|
|
|
8,532 |
|
|
|
(4.77 |
) |
|
|
8,125 |
|
|
|
27.46 |
|
|
|
10,356 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
82,353 |
|
|
|
(0.02 |
) |
|
|
82,374 |
|
|
|
17.26 |
|
|
|
96,594 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Breakdown by Region As of December 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
Change from |
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2005 |
|
Previous Year |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
|
(%) |
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
44,483 |
|
|
|
1.56 |
|
|
|
45,179 |
|
|
|
26.70 |
|
|
|
57,241 |
|
North America
|
|
|
14,900 |
|
|
|
(12.08 |
) |
|
|
13,100 |
|
|
|
31.30 |
|
|
|
17,200 |
|
Asia/ Pacific
|
|
|
11,500 |
|
|
|
14.78 |
|
|
|
13,200 |
|
|
|
31.06 |
|
|
|
17,300 |
|
Latin America/ Africa/ Middle East
|
|
|
9,600 |
|
|
|
10.42 |
|
|
|
10,600 |
|
|
|
29.25 |
|
|
|
13,700 |
|
Corporate
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
0.77 |
|
|
|
521 |
|
|
|
7.29 |
|
|
|
559 |
|
|
|
* |
Starting with the second quarter of 2006, the number of
employees was converted to fulltime equivalents, which means
part-time employees are included in proportion of their
contractual working hours. This presentation improves the
comparability of personnel expenses and employee numbers. |
Labor Relations
The union-organized employees at our German sites belong to
several unions, the most important of which is IG BCE, the
German Mining, Chemical and Energy Industrial Union. We do not
negotiate collective bargaining agreements directly with these
unions to cover our employees. Instead, in accordance with
German practice, unions negotiate agreements with industry-wide
employers associations, in our case, the German Chemical
Industry Association.
In Germany, employers associations and unions typically
negotiate collective bargaining agreements annually. However,
collective bargaining agreements may be entered into for longer
terms. A German collective bargaining agreement governs the
employment of all employees up to a certain level of
responsibility organized in the relevant union. At Bayer, even
the employees in those employee groups governed by collective
bargaining agreements who are not union members are granted
rights under the collective bargaining agreements by means of
reference in the individual agreements.
The current agreement covering our employees has a term of
19 months and began in June 2005. Negotiations for a new
agreement started at the beginning of 2007 but are not concluded
yet. Depending on the outcome of those negotiations, applicable
regulations may be implemented retroactively from January 2007.
It grants employees a salary increase of 2.7 percent over
the previous collectively-agreed monthly salary (monatliches
Tarifentgelt) for the term of the agreement. In addition, it
grants employees a lump-sum payment amounting to a certain
percentage of the previous monthly collectively-agreed salary.
The percentage varies between 24 and 32 percent, depending
on work schedules and shift. For Bayer AG, its group management
companies (except for Bayer Industry Services) and the majority
of Bayer AGs German affiliates, the lump-sum
124
payment under the current agreement was made in 2005. For Bayer
Industry Services the lump-sum payment was made in February 2006.
There are 13 pay grades, based on job description, for our
employees in positions governed by collective bargaining
agreements. Our management employees, who have individual
employment or service contracts, are organized in six contract
levels. The Chemical Industry has a union for academics
(Verband der Angestellten Akademiker (VAA)). Apart from a
specific collective bargaining agreement for young entry level
academics, management contracts at Bayer are not subject to
collective bargaining agreements.
Each Bayer site in Germany has a works council
(Betriebsrat), elected by all non-managerial employees.
Members serve a four-year term. The last elections took place in
April, 2006. The works councils facilitate communications
between management and staff at the site level. A joint works
council (Gesamtbetriebsrat) serves a similar purpose at
the company-wide level and the same applies to the Group works
council (Konzernbetriebsrat) at Group level,
Germany-wide. The rights and responsibilities of works councils
are set forth in the German Works Council Constitution Act
(Betriebsverfassungsgesetz). Within the given framework
of laws and collective bargaining agreements, works councils
have participatory rights on site and company level with respect
to managing staff-related issues as well as working conditions
such as:
|
|
|
|
|
working hours (namely, beginning and end of daily working hours); |
|
|
|
vacation guidelines; |
|
|
|
social services (e.g., subsidized cafeterias); and |
|
|
|
distribution guidelines for performance-related bonuses. |
A works council has generally no authority, however, to
negotiate with an employer on wage and salary compensation or
other issues included or typically included in collective
bargaining agreements between employers associations and
unions, unless the relevant collective bargaining agreement
provides otherwise. Under German labor law, employees may not
legitimately strike during the term of the collective bargaining
agreements. The provisions of the applicable collective
bargaining agreements determine whether the right to strike in
request of issues not covered by the applicable collective
bargaining agreements is also excluded during such term. Works
councils generally have no legal authority to call a work
stoppage. On the European level, we put in practice a customized
procedure for information and consultation of employee
representatives based on a voluntary agreement between Bayer AG
and the Group works council (Europaforum).
Associated with restructuring measures within the Bayer Group,
on November 7, 2003, the Board of Management and the
employee representative members of the Supervisory Board agreed
on principles for the extension of the existing agreement with
the joint works council dated December 12, 2000 for
safeguarding employment at several of our major German sites,
taking effect January 1, 2004. Collective agreements with
the competent representative bodies were signed June 30,
2004 and July 1, 2004 respectively. Under these principles,
an act of solidarity by all employees at German Bayer locations
allows us to maintain 1,000 full time equivalent
(FTE) positions more than previously planned. By reducing
performance-related variable income of all employees of German
sites covered by the agreement by up to 10 percent,
personnel costs for temporarily-unassigned employees are
covered. On the basis of these options for cost cuts, we agreed
that we would not, except in exceptional circumstances, lay off
employees at our Leverkusen, Dormagen, Krefeld-Uerdingen,
Elberfeld and Brunsbüttel sites for operational reasons
before December 31, 2007. If exceptional circumstances
arise that are beyond our control and lead to an overcapacity of
employees, we have agreed to negotiate with the joint works
council in order to find a solution that will serve the
interests of the company and the employees to the greatest
possible extent. In accordance with the agreements,
performance-related variable income for 2006 was reduced by
1.4 percent.
125
|
|
Item 7. |
Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions |
Major Shareholders
Under our Articles of Association, each of our ordinary shares
represents one vote. Major shareholders do not have different
voting rights.
Under the German Securities Trading Act
(Wertpapierhandelsgesetz; WpHG), holders of voting
securities of a listed German company must notify that company
of the level of their holding whenever it reaches, exceeds or
falls below specified thresholds. Until and throughout the
financial year 2006 these thresholds were 5, 10, 25,
50 and 75 percent of the companys outstanding voting
securities. As of the financial year 2007 these thresholds
are 3, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 50 and
75 percent of the companys outstanding voting
securities.
The Capital Group Companies, Inc. has notified us pursuant to
Section 21, Paragraph 1 of the German Securities
Trading Act that since September 19, 2006, it has held
10.0179 percent of the voting rights (representing
76,571,057 ordinary shares) in our company and that all of these
voting rights are attributable to it pursuant to
Section 22, Paragraph 1, Sentence 1, No. 6
in conjunction with Section 22, Paragraph 1, Sentence
2 and Sentence 3 of the German Securities Trading Act.
Section 22, Paragraph 1, Sentence 2 and 3 provides
that voting rights held by a subsidiary of the notifying company
are attributable to the notifying company.
The Capital Research and Management Company, which according to
our information is a subsidiary of Capital Group Companies, Inc.
has notified us that since November 8, 2006, it has held
10.0852 percent of the voting rights (representing
77,085,721 ordinary shares) in our company and that all of these
voting rights are attributable to it pursuant to
Section 22, Paragraph 1, Sentence 1, No. 6
of the German Securities Trading Act. We are unable to determine
on the basis of these notifications or otherwise, the total
percentage of voting rights in our company held by Capital Group
Companies, Inc. and Capital Research and Management Company
taken together.
Based on these notifications and any notifications we have
received pursuant to section 21(1) of the German Securities
Trading Act through February 28, 2007, as of that date we
are not aware of any other shareholder holding five percent or
more of our outstanding shares.
U.S. shareholders can hold our shares either directly or
indirectly through our sponsored American Depositary Receipt
(ADR) program with The Bank of New York as depositary.
Because our shares are in bearer form, we cannot obtain precise
information as to the identity of shareholders or the
distribution of our shares among them. From time to time,
however, we conduct surveys, using the assistance of shareholder
identification service providers. The results of these surveys
are based on an analysis of regulatory filings of institutions
with assets under management and known propensity to invest in
European equities and the chemical and pharmaceutical sectors,
cross-referenced with information provided by third parties and
ourselves. Our last such survey measured our worldwide
shareholder structure as of October 2006 and identified
61 percent (468,129,135 shares) of our total shares
outstanding. Due largely to the greater difficulty inherent in
learning details about shareholdings by individuals,
substantially all of the shareholders identified in the survey
were institutions. Of the 468,129,135 shares identified in
this survey, 37.9 percent were held by institutions located
in the United States (based on domicile of the shareholder),
27.0 percent were held by institutions located in Germany
and 20.8 percent were held by institutions located in the
United Kingdom. The rest of the shares identified in this survey
were held by institutions in Switzerland, France and other
countries, mainly in Europe. We believe that the major part of
the 39 percent of our shares for which owners were not
identified in this survey are held by retail shareholders
located all over the world, but predominantly in Germany.
Therefore, the regional percentages of the total outstanding
shares could be different from the results of the above survey.
Furthermore, while we cannot obtain precise information as to
the identity (and location) of the beneficial owners of the
shares held in our ADR program, the records of the depositary
under our ADR program show that as of February 28, 2007
there were 1,721 registered holders of our American Depositary
Shares (ADSs). We assume that these ADSs are owned by persons
resident in the United States. The ADSs are listed on the New
York Stock Exchange and each ADS represents one ordinary share.
As of February 28, 2007 the ADS holders collectively held
38,632,945 ADSs, or approximately 5.1 percent of our total
outstanding share capital.
126
To our knowledge, we are not directly or indirectly owned or
controlled by another corporation, by any government, or by any
other natural or legal person severally or jointly, and there
are no arrangements which may result in a change of control. See
also Item 6, Directors, Senior Management and
Employees Share Ownership.
Related Party Transactions
In the ordinary course of business, we purchase materials,
supplies and services from numerous companies throughout the
world. Members of Bayer AGs Supervisory Board are
affiliated with some of these companies. We conduct our
transactions with such companies on an arms length basis.
We do not consider the amounts involved in such transactions to
be material to our business and believe that these amounts are
not material to the business of the companies involved.
During our most recent full fiscal year and through the date of
this annual report on
Form 20-F, we have
not been involved in, and we do not currently anticipate
becoming involved in, any transactions that are material to us
or any of our related parties and that are unusual in their
nature or conditions. We have not made any outstanding loans to
or for the benefit of:
|
|
|
|
|
enterprises that, directly or indirectly, control or are
controlled by, or are under common control with, us (except at
arms length conditions in the ordinary course of business); |
|
|
|
enterprises in which we have significant influence or which have
significant influence over us (except at arms length
conditions in the ordinary course of business); |
|
|
|
shareholders beneficially owning a 10 percent or greater
interest in our voting power; |
|
|
|
key management personnel; or |
|
|
|
enterprises in which persons described above own, directly or
indirectly, a substantial interest in the voting power. |
Interests of Experts and Counsel
Not applicable.
|
|
Item 8. |
Financial Information |
Consolidated Financial Statements and Other Financial
Information
See Item 18, Financial Statements.
Legal Proceedings
Bayer is involved in a number of legal proceedings. As a global
company active in a wide range of life sciences and chemical
activities, Bayer may in the ordinary course of business become
involved in proceedings relating to such matters as:
|
|
|
|
|
product liability; |
|
|
|
competition and antitrust; |
|
|
|
patent validity and infringement; |
|
|
|
tax assessments; and |
|
|
|
past waste disposal practices and release of chemicals into the
environment. |
The following discussion, although not an exhaustive list of
claims or proceedings in which Bayer AG or its subsidiaries are
involved, nevertheless describes what Bayer believes to be the
most significant of those claims and proceedings. Subsequent
developments in any pending matter, as well as additional claims
that may arise from time to time, including additional claims
similar to those described below, could become significant to
127
Bayer. References to Bayer include claims or proceedings to
which Bayer AG and/or one or more of its subsidiaries is a
party. Bayer subsidiaries include Schering AG, Berlin, Germany
(now known as Bayer Schering Pharma AG) and its subsidiaries,
although matters historically involving the products, operations
or activities of Schering are discussed separately below.
(Please note that Bayer Schering Pharma AG and Schering-Plough
Corporation, New Jersey, are unaffiliated companies that have
been totally independent of each other for many years. The names
Bayer Schering Pharma or Schering as
used in this annual report on
Form 20-F always
refer to Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany, or its
predecessor, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany, respectively.)
Bayer cannot predict with certainty the outcome of any
proceedings in which Bayer is or may become involved. An adverse
decision in a lawsuit seeking damages from Bayer, or
Bayers decision to settle certain cases, could result in
monetary payments to the plaintiff and other costs and expenses.
If Bayer loses a case in which Bayer seeks to enforce its patent
rights or in which Bayer has been accused of infringing another
companys patent rights, Bayer will sustain a loss of
future revenue if Bayer no longer can sell the product covered
by the patent or command prices for the affected products that
reflect the exclusivity conferred by the patent. While payments
and other costs and expenses Bayer might have to bear as a
result of these actions are covered by insurance in some
circumstances, the coverage under some of these insurance
policies has (as indicated below) been exhausted, and other
payments may not be covered by Bayers insurance policies
in full or at all. Accordingly, each of the legal proceedings
described in the following discussion could be significant to
Bayer, and the payments, costs and expenses above those already
incurred or accrued could have a material adverse effect on
Bayers results of operations, financial position or cash
flows.
Product liability
proceedings
|
|
|
Lipobay/ Baycol litigation |
In August 2001 Bayer voluntarily ceased marketing the
anticholesterol product cerivastatin (marketed in the United
States and Canada under the trade name Baycol) in
response to reports of serious side effects in some patients.
Claims for compensation have been made against Bayer in several
countries. Many lawsuits were filed, primarily in the United
States and Canada. It is possible that additional lawsuits may
be filed in the United States and elsewhere.
U.S. litigation. As of February 12, 2007,
approximately 1,810 lawsuits remain pending in the United States
in both federal and state courts against Bayer, including
putative class actions. At one time, more than 14,000 lawsuits
were pending.
The actions in the United States have been based primarily on
theories of product liability, consumer fraud, predatory pricing
and unjust enrichment. These lawsuits seek remedies including
compensatory and punitive damages, disgorgement of funds
received from the marketing and sale of Baycol and the
establishment of a trust fund to finance the medical monitoring
of former Baycol users. Five U.S. cases have been
tried to date to final judgment, all of which resulted in
verdicts in Bayers favor.
Cases remain pending in the federal district court in Minnesota
and in multiple states. All cases are on behalf of individual
plaintiffs, except in Oklahoma and Illinois, where class actions
on behalf of multiple plaintiffs have been approved. Additional
cases seeking class certification remain pending. Certification
of a class is unrelated to a determination of Bayers
liability.
In January 2004, Bayer Corporation received a subpoena for
documents principally relating to Baycol from the Defense
Criminal Investigative Service of the U.S. Department of
Defense Inspector General followed by a related subpoena issued
by the U.S. Attorney for New Jersey in February 2006. The
U.S. Attorney for New Jersey subsequently advised Bayer
that Bayer did not need to respond to this subpoena. Prior to
the withdrawal of Baycol, Bayer had a contract with the
Department to provide it with a supply of Baycol. The
investigation is a joint Department of Defense/ Food and Drug
Administration inquiry relating to Baycol. Bayer is not
aware of any charges or complaints filed in connection with this
inquiry. Bayer believes it acted responsibly and fulfilled its
responsibilities to the U.S. government, and has cooperated
in the investigation, including by providing the information
requested. Local governmental authorities in several European
countries also initiated criminal
128
proceedings in connection with the withdrawal of Baycol.
The majority of these proceedings have been dismissed.
Since April 2004, Bayer also has received civil investigative
demands from 30 states seeking documents regarding the
marketing of Baycol. In January 2007, Bayer agreed,
without any admission of fault, to pay a total of
$8 million to settle civil allegations made by the
attorneys general of these 30 states that Bayer failed to
adequately disclose to consumers safety risks associated with
Baycol. Bayer also entered into a consent decree wherein
it agreed to publicly register Bayer-sponsored clinical studies
for Bayer products approved for marketing in the United States
in accordance with the International Committee of Medical
Journal Editors guidelines and to post information regarding
those studies on the Internet.
Litigation in other countries. As of February 12,
2007, approximately 60 actions remain pending against Bayer
companies in other countries, including class actions in Canada
for residents of all Canadian provinces, except for Québec,
who claim personal injury from Baycol other than
rhabdomyolysis. In November 2006, these class actions were
consolidated and will proceed in Manitoba. Separately, in 2004,
Bayer entered into settlement agreements covering Canadian
residents who allegedly contracted rhabdomyolysis. The deadline
for filing claims under the 2004 settlement agreements lapsed in
November 2006.
Impact of cerivastatin litigation on Bayer. Without
acknowledging any liability, during 2006 Bayer settled an
additional 69 cases worldwide resulting in agreements to pay
settlements of approximately U.S. $11.7 million. In
the United States, approximately 4,000 additional cases were
dismissed without payment during 2006. As of February 12,
2007, Bayer has settled a total of 3,152 cases worldwide
resulting in aggregate settlement payments of approximately
U.S. $1,159 million. Bayer will continue, on a
voluntary basis and without concession of liability, to offer
fair compensation to people who experienced serious side effects
while taking cerivastatin. After more than five years of
litigation Bayer is currently aware of fewer than 20 cases in
the United States that in Bayers opinion hold a potential
for settlement, although Bayer cannot rule out the possibility
that additional cases involving serious side effects from
cerivastatin may come to Bayers attention. In cases where
an examination of the facts indicates that cerivastatin played
no part in the patients medical situation, or where a
settlement is not achieved, Bayer will continue to defend itself
vigorously. Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses in these
actions.
Following a 2003 agreement reached with the majority of the
insurers in the cerivastatin litigation, Bayer began
establishing provisions reflecting an excess of expected
payments including defense costs over the expected insurance
coverage. Additional charges of
43 million
and
22.2 million
to the operating result were recorded in 2005 and 2006,
respectively, each in respect of settlements already concluded
or expected to be concluded and anticipated defense costs.
Due to the considerable uncertainty associated with the
cerivastatin litigation, it is currently not possible to
estimate the potential liability. Since the existing insurance
coverage is exhausted, Bayer could incur further costs that are
not covered by the provisions already established. Bayer will
regularly review the necessity of further provisions and related
charges to the operating result as the cerivastatin litigation
proceeds.
In the United States, Bayer co-promoted Baycol with
SmithKline Beecham Corporation. SmithKline Beecham Corporation
and Bayer have signed an allocation agreement under which
SmithKline Beecham has agreed to pay five percent of all
settlements and compensatory damage judgments arising out of
actions based on the sale or distribution of Baycol in
the United States, with each party responsible for paying its
own attorneys fees.
HIV/ HCV related actions
Since the 1980s, Bayer, as well as other fractionators of
plasma products, has been involved in lawsuits alleging that
hemophiliacs became infected with the human immunodeficiency
virus (HIV) and/or the hepatitis C virus (HCV) by
using allegedly infected clotting factor concentrates derived
from human plasma. All of the early HIV-related cases have been
resolved except for two which remain pending in Argentina and
three which are pending in Japan. In October 2006, an additional
HIV-related case was filed in Taiwan. In 2003, a putative class
action against Bayer and other manufacturers was filed in the
United States on behalf of U.S. residents claiming
129
compensation for HCV infections and
non-U.S. residents
claiming compensation for HIV and/or HCV infections. The court
denied the plaintiffs motion to certify a class. Since
2003, U.S. and
non-U.S. residents
have filed additional cases, involving multiple plaintiffs,
against Bayer and other manufacturers, claiming compensation for
HIV and/or HCV infections allegedly acquired through blood
plasma products manufactured in the United States. All of these
matters have been filed in or transferred to federal district
court in Illinois for coordinated proceedings. In January 2006,
the court granted defendants motion, on the basis of
forum non conveniens, to dismiss the claims of the eight
residents of the United Kingdom who are plaintiffs in one of the
cases. Plaintiffs appealed this ruling, and we are awaiting the
decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh
Circuit.
Bayer believes that it has meritorious defenses in the HIV/ HCV
litigation and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously.
Due to the considerable uncertainty associated with these
proceedings, it is currently not possible to estimate potential
liability and Bayer has and will regularly consider the need to
establish provisions as the proceedings continue.
|
|
|
Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) litigation |
In late 2000, Bayer voluntarily discontinued marketing
over-the-counter cough
and cold remedies containing the decongestant
phenylpropanolamine (PPA) in the United States in response
to a recommendation from the FDA that manufacturers voluntarily
discontinue marketing products containing PPA. The FDA issued
this recommendation after one epidemiological study suggested a
possible association between PPA and hemorrhagic stroke.
As of February 12, 2007, 79 lawsuits remained pending in
U.S. federal and state courts against Bayer. To date, three
state cases have proceeded to trial. Two have resulted in
defense verdicts for Bayer. In one case, the plaintiff was
awarded damages of U.S. $400,000. This case was settled in
July 2005 while on appeal.
Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses in these actions and
intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. As of
February 12, 2007, Bayer had settled 383 cases resulting in
payments of approximately U.S. $57.2 million, without
acknowledging any liability. Bayer will continue, on a voluntary
basis and without concession of liability, to offer fair
compensation to people who suffered hemorrhagic stroke while
taking a Bayer product containing PPA. Bayer recorded a charge
to the operating result in the total amount of
62 million
in 2005. In 2006, this amount was reduced by
15 million
due to an anticipated reduction in future PPA-related litigation
charges. Such charges were for settlements already concluded or
expected to be concluded, and defense costs which exceed the
amount of existing insurance coverage.
Given the number and nature of the outstanding cases, management
believes this matter no longer involves a material risk to Bayer
and, absent a significant adverse development, will no longer
report on its status.
Bayer Corporation remains a defendant in eight lawsuits filed in
various state and U.S. federal courts by or on behalf of
persons alleging injuries from the use of Bayer products
containing thimerosal, specifically immunoglobulin therapies. In
the second quarter of 2006, one case involving immunoglobulin
therapy was dismissed. Other cases involving thimerosal in
over-the-counter nasal
spray products also have been dismissed. Given the number and
nature of the remaining outstanding cases, management believes
the Thimerosal product liability cases no longer involve a
material risk to Bayer and, absent a significant adverse
development, will no longer report on the status of these cases.
Bayer is a defendant in three Alabama state court isocyanate
cases. Collectively the cases involve the claims of more than
1,600 plaintiffs who allege personal injuries (primarily
respiratory) caused by exposure to diphenylmethane diisocyanate
(MDI) from products supplied by Bayer and other
co-defendants. The products were used in underground coal mines
in Alabama where the plaintiffs worked. Bayers
co-defendants include two other MDI manufacturers, several
distributors and contracting companies that used MDI-containing
products in
130
those mines. Plaintiffs assert claims of negligence, wantonness,
outrage, failure to warn, misrepresentation, concealment, breach
of warranties and conspiracy. Punitive damages are sought. In
April 2006, the trial court entered an order sanctioning Bayer
for allegedly failing to properly respond to discovery, and
entered a default judgment holding Bayer liable for damages if
proven at trial. Following an appeal by Bayer, the Alabama
Supreme Court in July 2006 directed the trial court to vacate
its orders, and those orders subsequently were vacated.
Bayer is a defendant in a purported class action filed in
federal district court in Alabama. Bayers co-defendants
include isocyanate trade associations, MDI manufacturers,
several distributors and contracting companies that used
MDI-containing products in the underground coal mines where
plaintiffs worked. The case was filed by fifteen individual
plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a class of all similarly
situated coal miners in the United States seeking redress for
alleged personal injuries, declaratory and injunctive relief as
a result of their alleged exposure. Plaintiffs likewise allege
that they are entitled to medical monitoring for injuries that
may manifest themselves in the future as a result of past MDI
exposure.
Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses in these actions and
intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the
considerable uncertainty associated with these proceedings, it
is currently not possible to estimate potential liability.
Hormone Replacement Therapies
product litigation
Schering is one of several pharmaceutical companies named as
defendants in lawsuits filed in various U.S. federal and
state courts and at various times since July 2003 by plaintiffs
who used hormone replacement therapy (HRT) products.
Currently, 28 plaintiffs allege injury, including breast cancer,
ovarian cancer, stroke and pulmonary embolism, as a result of
their use of Schering HRT products. Cases involving 24 of these
plaintiffs have been consolidated in Federal multi-district
litigation involving similar cases against other manufacturers
of HRT products. Four cases are pending in state courts. Various
trials have been and are being conducted involving other
manufacturers, with findings both in favor of and against the
manufacturer defendants. To date, none of the cases involving
Schering have been tried. Schering intends to vigorously defend
the cases pending against it, and continues to monitor
developments in the cases involving these other manufacturers.
Due to the considerable uncertainly associated with these
proceedings, it is currently not possible to estimate potential
liability.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving former rubber-related lines of
business |
Government investigations. Bayer is or has been the
subject of criminal and civil investigations conducted by the
Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ),
the Directorate General for Competition of the European
Commission (EC), and the Canadian Competition Bureau (CCB)
(collectively, the Competition Authorities). The
Competition Authorities are or were investigating potential
violations of their respective antitrust or competition laws
involving certain of Bayers former rubber-related lines of
business.
Since September 2002, the DOJ has undertaken criminal grand jury
investigations of potential antitrust violations involving
Bayers former rubber chemicals, ethylene propylene diene
monomer (EPDM) synthetic rubber, and acrylonitrile
butadiene rubber (NBR) synthetic rubber lines of
business. To settle charges related to allegations that its
former rubber chemicals business unit engaged in
anti-competitive activities between 1995 and 2001, Bayer AG
pleaded guilty and paid a fine of U.S. $66 million. To
settle charges related to allegations that its former NBR
business unit engaged in anti-competitive activities between May
and December 2002, Bayer AG pleaded guilty and paid a fine of
U.S. $4.7 million. The two agreements resolve all
criminal charges against Bayer in the United States for
activities related to its former rubber chemicals and NBR
businesses. The DOJ closed its investigation into potential
antitrust violations involving EPDM in July 2006.
The CCB has also undertaken criminal investigations of potential
violations of Canadian competition laws involving Bayers
former rubber chemicals, EPDM and NBR lines of business. Bayer
is in the process of negotiating settlement agreements with the
CCB that would resolve all charges in Canada related to
allegations
131
that its former rubber chemicals and NBR business units engaged
in anti-competitive activities between 1995 and 2001 and between
May and December 2002, respectively. The CCB closed its
investigation into potential antitrust violations involving EPDM
in August 2006.
The DOJ and the CCB have also launched criminal investigations
of possible anti-competitive behavior involving a further
product attributable to the former rubber-related lines of
business. The DOJ and the CCB have granted conditional amnesty
from the imposition of criminal liability in connection with
these investigations. Conditional amnesty requires continued
cooperation by Bayer.
The EC has been conducting investigations of and initiated
respective proceedings regarding potential violations of
European competition laws involving Bayers former rubber
chemicals, EPDM and NBR lines of business. In December 2005, the
EC imposed on Bayer, and in March 2006 Bayer paid, a fine of
58.9 million
in concluding the rubber chemicals proceeding. The EC
investigation into potential antitrust violations involving NBR
remains ongoing. The EC closed its investigation into potential
competition law violations involving EPDM in July 2006. Bayer is
cooperating with the EC and the antitrust authorities of certain
member states of the EU with respect to their investigations of
possible anti-competitive behavior involving several additional
products attributable to Bayers former rubber-related
lines of business. The EC and certain member state authorities
have granted conditional amnesty from the imposition of fines in
connection with the investigations involving these additional
products. Conditional amnesty requires continued cooperation by
Bayer. In November 2006, the EC closed the proceeding related to
Butadiene Rubber and Emulsion-Styrene-Butadiene Rubber by
imposing fines against several companies and granting full
amnesty to Bayer. Bayer was not required to pay a fine in
connection with this proceeding.
Civil litigation. Bayer has been named, among others, as
a defendant in multiple putative class action lawsuits in
various state courts in the United States and as a defendant in
lawsuits including multiple putative class actions pending
before various federal courts in the United States. The actions
involve rubber chemicals, EPDM, NBR and polychloroprene rubber
(CR). In the state court actions, the plaintiffs have alleged
violations based on the defendants purported participation
in a conspiracy to fix prices and seek damages as indirect
purchasers of the allegedly affected products. In the federal
court actions, the plaintiffs have alleged the defendants
participation in a conspiracy to fix the prices and/or to
allocate markets and customers for the sale of the allegedly
affected products and seek damages as direct purchasers of those
products. Bayer has reached agreements or agreements in
principle to settle the majority of these court actions. The
federal rubber chemicals, EPDM, NBR and CR settlements, and a
number of the state rubber chemicals, EPDM, NBR and CR
settlements, have received final court approval. Other
settlement agreements must still be finalized, and then are
subject to court approval. The foregoing settlements do not
resolve all of the pending civil litigation with respect to the
aforementioned products, nor do they preclude the bringing of
additional claims.
In addition, Bayer recently has been named, but not served, in a
complaint filed in the Western District of Pennsylvania on
behalf of putative classes of direct purchasers of Butadiene
Rubber and Styrene-Butadiene Rubber alleging a conspiracy to fix
prices. Civil litigation in Europe is likely.
Bayer also has been named, among others, as a defendant in
multiple putative class action lawsuits in three Canadian
provinces. The actions involve rubber chemicals, EPDM, NBR and
CR. In the Canadian actions, the plaintiffs have alleged
violations based on the defendants alleged participation
in a conspiracy to fix prices, and the Canadian plaintiffs seek
damages as direct and indirect purchasers of the allegedly
affected products. These proceedings are at various stages, and
no class has been certified.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving polyester polyols, urethanes and
urethane chemicals |
Government investigation. Bayer Corporation was the
subject of a criminal antitrust investigation by the DOJ
involving allegations that it had engaged in anti-competitive
activities from February 1998 through December 2002 with respect
to adipic-based polyester polyols. Under the terms of a
September 2004 settlement agreement with the DOJ, Bayer
Corporation pleaded guilty and paid a fine of
U.S. $33 million. The agreement resolves all criminal
charges against Bayer Corporation in the United States for
activities related to its adipic-based polyester polyols
business. The CCB in Canada is conducting a similar
investigation. Bayer is in the process of negotiating a
settlement agreement with the CCB that would resolve all charges
in Canada related to
132
allegations that its adipic-based polyester polyols business
unit engaged in anti-competitive activities from February 1998
through December 2002.
Civil litigation. Bayer has been named, among others, as
a defendant in multiple putative class action lawsuits in
various state courts in the United States and as a defendant in
multiple putative class action lawsuits which have been
consolidated in federal district court in Kansas, involving
allegations of price fixing with respect to polyester polyols
and/or urethanes and urethane chemicals. Plaintiffs in the
federal court actions seek damages on behalf of direct
purchasers of polyester polyols and related polyurethane
systems, while plaintiffs in the state court actions seek
damages on behalf of indirect purchasers of products that
contain urethanes and urethane chemicals. These cases are at
various preliminary stages. Bayer has received final court
approval of its agreement to settle all of the federal direct
purchaser class action cases relating to polyester polyols (and
related systems). The foregoing settlement does not resolve all
the pending civil litigation with respect to the aforementioned
products, nor does it preclude the bringing of additional claims.
Bayer also has been named, among others, as a defendant in
putative class action lawsuits involving polyester polyols in
two Canadian courts, involving allegations of a price fixing
conspiracy. The Canadian plaintiffs seek damages on behalf of a
class of direct and indirect purchasers of the allegedly
affected products. These cases are at various preliminary
stages, and no class has been certified.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving polyether polyols and other precursors
for urethane end-use products |
Government investigation. On February 16, 2006,
Bayer Corporation was served with a subpoena by the DOJ seeking
information relating to the manufacture and sale of methylene
diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI), toluene diisocyanate (TDI) and
polyether polyols and related systems. Bayer Corporation is
cooperating with the DOJ in connection with the subpoena.
Civil litigation. Bayer has also been named, among
others, as a defendant in multiple putative class action
lawsuits which have been consolidated in federal district court
in Kansas, involving allegations of price fixing of, inter
alia, polyether polyols and certain other precursors for
urethane end-use products. Bayer has received final court
approval of its agreement to settle all of the federal direct
purchaser class action cases relating to polyether polyols, MDI
and TDI (and related systems). Approximately 25 percent of
the direct purchaser plaintiffs opted out of the class
settlement and reserved thereby the right to independently bring
an individual action in their own name to recover damages they
allegedly suffered. To date no such actions have been brought.
Bayer also has been named, among others, as a defendant in two
putative class action lawsuits pending in Quebec and Ontario,
respectively, involving allegations of price fixing of, inter
alia, polyether polyols and certain other precursors for
urethane end-use products. These matters are at an early stage,
and no class has been certified.
|
|
|
Impact of rubber-related and urethane-related antitrust
proceedings on Bayer |
Excluding the portion allocated to LANXESS, provisions in the
amount of
129 million
and
285 million
were accounted for as of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively, in respect of the previously described civil
proceedings. Bayer currently has a provision of
10 million
in respect of the rubber-related antitrust proceedings in
Europe, although a reliable estimate cannot be made as to the
actual amount of any additional losses or fines.
These provisions taken may not be sufficient to cover the
ultimate outcome of the above-described matters. The amount of
provisions established for civil claims was based on the
expected payments under the settlement agreements or agreements
in principle described above. In the case of settlements in
civil matters which have been asserted as class actions, members
of the putative classes have the right to opt out of
the class, meaning that they elect not to participate in the
settlement. Plaintiffs that opt out are not bound by the terms
of the settlement and have the right to independently bring
individual actions in their own names to recover damages they
allegedly suffered.
Bayer has and will continue to pursue settlements that in its
view are warranted, including with plaintiffs that elect or have
elected to opt out of the class action proceedings. In cases
where settlement is not achievable, Bayer will continue to
defend itself vigorously.
133
The financial risk associated with the rubber-related and
urethane-related antitrust proceedings described above beyond
the amounts already paid and the financial provisions already
established is currently not quantifiable due to the
considerable uncertainty associated with these proceedings.
Consequently, no provisions other than those described above
have been established. The Company expects that, in the course
of the regulatory proceedings and civil damages suits,
additional charges, which are currently not quantifiable, will
become necessary.
Additionally, Bayer and its former affiliate LANXESS AG entered
into a master agreement, dated September 22, 2004, pursuant
to which the parties, among other things, apportion between them
liability for certain of the antitrust proceedings described
above.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving Ciprofloxacin |
In January 1997, Bayer settled a patent infringement suit it
brought in the United States against Barr Laboratories, Inc.
This suit had arisen when Barr filed an Abbreviated New Drug
Application (ANDA) (IV) seeking regulatory approval of
a generic form of Bayers ciprofloxacin anti-infective
product, which Bayer sells in the United States under the
trademark
Cipro®.
Shortly after settling this suit, Bayer applied to the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for re-examination of its
patent. The Patent and Trademark Office reissued the patent in
February 1999. In addition, Bayers
Cipro®
patent was the subject of additional patent invalidity
challenges litigated in the U.S. federal district courts
and in each instance, the validity of Bayers patent was
upheld. The patent expired in December 2003.
Since July 2000, Bayer has been named as one of several
defendants in 39 putative class action lawsuits, one individual
lawsuit and one consumer protection group lawsuit (which has
since been dismissed) filed in a number of state and federal
courts in the United States. The plaintiffs in these suits
allege that they are direct or indirect purchasers of
Cipro®
who were damaged because Bayers settlement of the Barr
ANDA (IV) litigation prevented generic manufacturers from
selling a generic version of
Cipro®.
The plaintiffs allege that the settlement violated various
federal antitrust and state business, antitrust, unfair trade
practices, and consumer protection statutes, and seek treble
damages and injunctive relief. The Barr settlement is also the
subject of an antitrust investigation by the U.S. Federal
Trade Commission and a number of state attorneys general.
All the actions pending in federal court were consolidated in
federal district court in New York in a multidistrict litigation
(MDL) proceeding. In May 2004, Bayer moved for summary
judgment on all of plaintiffs antitrust claims in the
consolidated cases brought by direct purchaser and indirect
purchaser plaintiffs pending in that court, including certain
plaintiffs claims related to Bayers actions during
the prosecution of the
Cipro®
patent in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and its
enforcement against third party infringers. Bayer also moved to
dismiss those plaintiffs patent-related claims on grounds
that these claims do not state a claim for relief under the
antitrust laws. The direct purchaser plaintiffs filed a
cross-motion seeking summary judgment on certain liability
issues. In March 2005, the court entered summary judgment in
favor of Bayer and dismissed all of plaintiffs claims in
the MDL proceeding. Plaintiffs appealed this ruling, and a
decision by the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Second Circuit
is pending.
The remaining lawsuits consist of a class action lawsuit brought
on behalf of indirect purchasers in California state court, as
well as putative class action lawsuits in Florida, New York,
Kansas, Tennessee and Wisconsin. The New York and Wisconsin
cases were dismissed by the trial courts and plaintiffs appealed
the dismissals. On December 13, 2005, the New York
intermediate appellate court affirmed dismissal of the New York
class action suit. On January 19, 2006, plaintiffs moved
for leave to appeal that decision to the New York Court of
Appeals. On May 9, 2006, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals
reinstated the Wisconsin case. On June 8, 2006, Bayer
petitioned the Wisconsin Supreme Court for review of the Court
of Appeals decision. The Supreme Courts decision is
pending. The California and Kansas cases have been stayed. Bayer
Corporation filed an answer in the Florida state court action,
and there has been no subsequent activity in that case. A motion
to dismiss is pending in the Tennessee state court proceeding.
These cases may involve joint and several liability among the
defendants, in the aggregate allege substantial unquantified
damages and also seek treble and punitive damages and penalties.
Due to the considerable uncertainty associated with these
proceedings, it is currently not possible to estimate potential
liability. However,
134
Bayer believes that it have meritorious defenses to the
above-described proceedings and intends to continue to defend
itself vigorously. Bayer will regularly consider the need to
establish provisions as the proceedings continue.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving
Premise® |
Bayer is named as a defendant in a putative nationwide class
action pending in federal court in North Carolina. Plaintiffs
allege that Bayer conspired with intermediaries to fix the price
at which those intermediaries resold the Bayer product
Premise®
to pest control operators. In November, 2006, plaintiffs
voluntarily withdrew their further claim that Bayer conspired
with BASF Corporation to utilize an agency system for
distributing
Premise®
(and BASFs termiticide) in violation of the Sherman Act.
Plaintiffs assert that they are entitled to recover on behalf of
the proposed class a total amount in excess of
U.S. $200 million (subject to trebling and the
addition of plaintiffs attorneys fees, under the
antitrust laws). Bayer believes that it has meritorious defenses
in the proceedings involving
Premise®
and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the
considerable uncertainty associated with these proceedings, it
is currently not possible to estimate potential liability.
|
|
|
Average wholesale price manipulation proceedings |
Sixty-two pending lawsuits allege that a number of
pharmaceutical companies, including Bayer, manipulated the
average wholesale price (AWP) and/or Medicaid best price of
their products resulting in overcharges to Medicare
beneficiaries, Medicaid recipients, state governmental health
programs, private health plans and privately insured patients.
These suits generally seek damages, treble damages, disgorgement
of profits, restitution and attorneys fees. Some of these
purported class actions allege injury to patients or payors.
However, no class has yet been certified against Bayer. In
addition, suits have been filed by the attorneys general of
eight states as well as the City of New York and numerous New
York counties. These suits generally seek to recover for excess
costs incurred by the governmental entities and their
constituents as a result of the alleged overcharges. Discovery
is proceeding.
The claims of five states have been dismissed, in whole or in
part, based on Bayers settlement of earlier AWP
litigation. Bayer believes that it has meritorious defenses in
the remaining actions and intends to continue to defend itself
vigorously. Due to the considerable uncertainty associated with
these proceedings, it is currently not possible to estimate
potential liability. Bayer will regularly consider the need to
establish provisions as the proceedings continue.
|
|
|
Patent validity challenges and infringement
proceedings |
|
|
|
Proceedings involving Moxifloxacin |
In February 2004, Bayer received a notice letter pursuant to the
Hatch-Waxman Act from the generic manufacturers
Dr. Reddys Laboratories, Ltd. and
Dr. Reddys Laboratories, Inc. stating that they had
filed an ANDA with the U.S. FDA seeking regulatory
marketing approval for allegedly bioequivalent versions of
Avelox®,
Bayers respiratory tract anti-infective, prior to the
expiration of one or more patents covering
Avelox®
and/or its use. Dr. Reddys sought the approval for
its generic product prior to the expiration of three Bayer
patents protecting the active ingredient of
Avelox®,
moxifloxacin, which expire on December 8, 2011,
March 4, 2014, and December 5, 2016, respectively.
Bayer filed a patent infringement suit against
Dr. Reddys Laboratories, Ltd. and
Dr. Reddys Laboratories Inc. in the United States
District Court for the District of Delaware alleging
infringement of the first two U.S. patents listed above.
Dr. Reddys alleged that the patents are invalid, not
infringed and unenforceable.
A trial was held in August 2006. Dr. Reddys has
stipulated that its proposed generic product would infringe
certain of the patent claims in each of the patents which Bayer
is asserting in this case. A decision is pending. If the court
rules that the patents are invalid or unenforceable, the FDA may
grant approval immediately. If, on the other hand, the court
rules that the patents are not invalid or unenforceable, and the
ruling takes place before the FDA
30-month stay expires,
the FDA may not grant final approval until the original patents
have expired. The
135
court has extended the expiration of the
30-month stay until
October 21, 2007. Bayer believes that it has meritorious
claims and defenses in this action and intends to defend
Bayers patents vigorously.
Bayer received separate notice letters from two other generic
manufacturers, each stating that it had filed an ANDA seeking
regulatory marketing approval for a generic version of
Avelox®.
Each sought approval of its generic product to be effective
after the first two Bayer patents listed above had expired but
prior to the expiration of the third patent listed above. Bayer
has not filed actions against either manufacturer.
On February 24, 2006, Bayer received a notice letter
pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act from generic manufacturer Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., stating that it had filed an
Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) with the FDA
seeking regulatory marketing approval for allegedly
bioequivalent versions of
Vigamox®,
an ophthalmic preparation of Bayers anti-infective
compound moxifloxacin sold by Alcon Laboratories Inc. under
license from Bayer, prior to the expiration of one or more
patents covering moxifloxacin, and/or its use. The relevant
Bayer patents expire on December 8, 2011 and March 4,
2014. On April 5, 2006, Bayer HealthCare AG, Alcon, Inc.
and Alcon Manufacturing, Ltd. filed a patent infringement suit
against Teva in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Delaware. Teva has answered alleging invalidity and
non-infringement. A trial date has been set for
February 28, 2008. The two Bayer patents are the same as
those involved in the suit against Dr. Reddys
Laboratories, Ltd. and Dr. Reddys Laboratories, Inc.
above. Bayer believes it has meritorious claims and defenses in
this action and intends to defend Bayers patents
vigorously.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving
Kogenate® |
As previously reported, since 2003 Bayer had been party to
several lawsuits involving two affiliates of Aventis, A.
Nattermann & Cie GmbH and Aventis Behring LLC. The
suits related to certain Aventis patents which Bayer allegedly
uses or infringes in its manufacture and distribution of a
recombinant factor VIII product sold by Bayer as
Kogenate®
and a related agreement whereby Bayer supplies the finished
recombinant factor VIII product to Aventis. In February 2007,
the parties settled both disputes in full. In connection with
this settlement, Bayer extended the term of its supply agreement
with Aventis through 2017, and Bayer was granted a license to
intellectual property related to formulations of recombinant
Factor VIII.
|
|
|
Proceeding involving blood glucose monitors |
In August 2005, Abbott commenced a lawsuit in a federal district
court in California against Bayer and Roche Diagnostics alleging
infringement of two of Abbotts U.S. patents relating
to blood glucose monitoring devices. The Bayer product
originally accused of infringing the Abbott patents is the
Ascensia®
Contour®
system, which is supplied to Bayer by Matsushita. Matsushita is
contractually obligated to indemnify Bayer against the potential
liability with respect to this claim, as well as defense costs,
and management expects Bayer to be reimbursed by Matsushita for
a substantial portion of all such costs and liability, if any.
Abbott subsequently added claims of infringement of one of the
Abbott patents against Bayers DEX and Autodisc system. The
cost of the defense and liability, if any, will be borne by
Bayer, without indemnification by Matsushita, as these products
were designed and manufactured by Bayer. Bayer believes that it
has meritorious defenses against these claims and intends to
continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the considerable
uncertainty associated with this proceeding, it is currently not
possible to estimate potential liability.
|
|
|
Versant®
Diagnostic Assays related actions |
In two separate lawsuits, filed in federal court in 2004 and
2005, respectively, Gen-Probe Inc. alleged that Bayer, through
the marketing and sale of certain
Versant®
assays for the detection of hepatitis C and HIV-related
viruses, willfully infringed certain patents owned by Gen-Probe.
Gen-Probe sought recovery of an unspecified amount in damages,
which could have been subject to enhancement to up to three
times the amount of any actual damages found or assessed, as
well as injunctive relief. In June 2006, Bayer and Gen-Probe
resolved their patent litigation, with Bayer obligated to pay up
to U.S. $31.7 million, U.S. $5 million of
which was paid upon signing of the definitive settlement
agreement, U.S. $10.3 million of which was paid in
January 2007 and the balance of which may come due in 2008 as
royalties for future use of the patented technologies. Bayer
sold the products utilizing the patented technologies to Siemens
Medical Solutions Diagnostics as part of Bayers
divestiture of its
136
Diagnostics division. Bayer remains liable for the 2008 royalty
payment should Siemens continue on or after January 1, 2008
to make, import or sell these products. In conjunction with the
patent settlement, Gen-Probe and Bayer also resolved their
separate arbitration relating to their collaboration for viral
products. Neither party will be required to make payment to the
other as a result of this separate resolution.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving syringe injectors and related
products |
Continuing a dispute over the manufacturing, marketing and sale
of syringe injectors, in September 2004, Liebel-Flarsheim
Company and its parents, Mallinckrodt, Inc., and Tyco Healthcare
Group LP filed suit against Schering AGs Medrad subsidiary
alleging that some of Medrads front load syringe injectors
infringe four patents held by Liebel-Flarsheim. This suit
involves the same four patents that Liebel-Flarsheim et. al., in
a 1998 lawsuit, had alleged several other Medrad front load
injectors infringed. In October 2005, the court ruled that the
Medrad products at issue in the 1998 case would have infringed
the patents of Liebel-Flarsheim if those patents were valid, but
then held all four of those patents to be invalid for purposes
of both the 1998 and 2004 lawsuits. Each party is appealing the
material portions of the ruling unfavorable to it.
The Tyco plaintiffs in these cases have also filed two
additional declaratory judgment actions against Medrad. The
first seeks to invalidate patents covering certain Medrad CT
syringe injectors or alternatively establish that
Liebel-Flarsheims competing CT syringe injector does not
infringe Medrads patents. The second action, filed in
November 2006, seeks to invalidate other medical imaging or
scanning device patents held by Medrad. This latter lawsuit also
alleges antitrust violations by Medrad, claiming Medrad
improperly enforced a patent which it allegedly obtained from
the Patent Office through fraud. Medrad separately has brought
suit against Liebel-Flarsheim alleging that a Liebel-Flarsheim
MR syringe injector infringes a patent held by Medrad.
Bayer believes that it has meritorious defenses against these
claims and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. Due
to the considerable uncertainty associated with these
proceedings, it is currently not possible to estimate potential
liability.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving oral contraceptives |
In April 2005, Schering filed an ANDA IV suit against Barr
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Barr Laboratories, Inc. in
U.S. federal court alleging patent infringement by Barr for
its generic version of Scherings
Yasmin®
oral contraceptive product in the USA. In June, 2005, Barr filed
its counterclaims seeking to invalidate Scherings patent.
Schering is vigorously pursuing its claims and contesting the
counterclaims of Barr. This lawsuit is currently in the
discovery phase.
In January 2007, Schering received notice from Barr
Laboratories, Inc. that it has filed an ANDA IV application with
the U.S. FDA seeking approval of a generic version of
Scherings
YAZ®
oral contraceptive product. Barr will be prohibited from
marketing its generic version until after expiry in March 2009
of the three-year exclusivity period for marketing granted by
the FDA.
The Company highly values its
Yasmin®
and
YAZ®
oral contraceptive products and is deeply committed to
continuing its leadership position in oral contraception.
|
|
|
Betaseron®
supply related actions |
In October 2006, Schering filed a complaint in state court in
California against Novartis relating to matters arising out of a
1993 agreement with the former Chiron Corporation (now part of
Novartis) associated with Chirons contract manufacture and
supply of Scherings
Betaseron®
multiple sclerosis product and related rights which would allow
Schering to license an additional facility to manufacture and
supply
Betaseron®
in the United States. In December 2006, the parties signed a
non-binding settlement term sheet outlining the terms on which
they have agreed in principle to settle these matters. They have
also agreed to stay the lawsuit while negotiations on definitive
agreements are continuing.
137
Bayer AG and Bayer Corporation, along with two of their current
or former officers, have been named as defendants in a class
action lawsuit pending in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York. The lawsuit alleges violations of
the U.S. securities laws and asserts that the defendants
made false and misleading statements and omissions with respect
to the commercial prospects, safety and efficacy of Bayers
cerivastatin anticholesterol products and with respect to the
extent of the potential product liability exposure following
Bayers voluntary decision to cease marketing and to
withdraw these products in August 2001. Plaintiffs sought
unspecified damages on behalf of a class of all persons who
purchased Bayer AG stock (including Bayer AG American Depositary
Receipts) between August 4, 2000 and February 21, 2003
at allegedly inflated prices. On September 14, 2005, the
court dismissed with prejudice the claims of
non-U.S. purchasers
of Bayer AG stock on
non-U.S. exchanges.
On February 24, 2006, the court certified a class of all
persons who during the period from August 4, 2000 through
and including February 21, 2003 either (a) purchased
Bayer AG shares on the U.S. over the counter market or
purchased ADRs on the New York Stock Exchange, regardless of the
purchasers country of residence at the time of the
purchase; or (b) purchased Bayer AG shares or ADRs on any
other stock exchange, and the purchaser was a resident or
citizen of the United States at the time of purchase. Bayer
believes that it has meritorious defenses in this action and
intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the
considerable uncertainty associated with this proceeding, it is
currently not possible to estimate potential liability.
|
|
|
Schering AG shareholder litigation |
The shareholder resolution on the Domination and Profit and Loss
Transfer Agreement between Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Germany
(formerly named Schering AG) and Bayer Schering GmbH, passed at
the Extraordinary General Meeting of Bayer Schering Pharma AG
held on September 13, 2006, is subject to legal challenges
by dissenting unaffiliated Bayer Schering Pharma AG
shareholders. The plaintiffs are seeking to have the shareholder
resolution set aside or to have it declared null and void
(Anfechtungs- und Nichtigkeitsklagen). These actions are
based on alleged violations of procedural and substantive
requirements and of shareholder information rights.
Bayer Schering Pharma AG has commenced special proceedings
(Freigabeverfahren) to obtain a legally final judgment
stating that the shareholder actions do not prevent registration
of the Domination and Profit and Loss Transfer Agreement and
that any defects of the shareholder resolution do not affect the
validity of the registration.
Further, shareholders have made a motion in a local Berlin court
seeking to have the registration of the Domination and Profit
and Loss Transfer Agreement in the Commercial Register removed
(Amtslöschungsverfahren) based on an alleged abuse
of discretion by the competent court which entered the
Domination and Profit and Loss Transfer Agreement in the
Commercial Register in October 2006.
Several shareholders have initiated special court proceedings
(Spruchverfahren) with the Berlin District Court asking
the court to review the adequacy of the cash compensation
(Abfindung) and of the guaranteed dividend
(Ausgleich) offered under the Domination and Profit and
Loss Transfer Agreement. Should the court find in favor of the
shareholders it could increase the amount of the adequate cash
compensation and the guaranteed dividend required to be paid
under the Domination and Profit and Loss Transfer Agreement to
all unaffiliated shareholders, including those who previously
tendered their shares pursuant to the original cash compensation
offer.
Bayer believes that it has meritorious defenses in these actions
and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the
considerable uncertainty associated with these proceedings, it
is currently not possible to estimate potential liability or the
impact of an unfavorable outcome.
On January 17, 2007, the Extraordinary General Meeting of
Bayer Schering Pharma AG passed a resolution on the transfer of
shares of the unaffiliated shareholders in Bayer Schering Pharma
AG to Bayer Schering GmbH as the main shareholder in exchange
for adequate cash compensation (squeeze-out). If this resolution
on the transfer of shares is registered into the Commercial
Register prior to a legally final decision on the actions
directed against the resolution on the Domination and Profit and
Loss Transfer Agreement, the respective plaintiff
138
under the actions will not lose his/her standing to sue
according to the case law of the Federal Court of Justice
(Bundesgerichtshof) if that individual has a legal
interest in continuing the action in that specific case. The
shareholder resolution passed at the Extraordinary General
Meeting of Bayer Schering Pharma AG held on January 17,
2007, is subject to legal challenges by dissenting unaffiliated
Bayer Schering Pharma AG shareholders. The plaintiffs are
seeking to have the shareholder resolution set aside or to have
it declared null and void (Anfechtungs- und
Nichtigkeitsklagen).
Bayer is a defendant in asbestos cases in the United States
which allege that Bayer, along with other premises defendants,
employed contractors at industrial sites where they were exposed
to asbestos and were injured. Plaintiffs contend that Bayer
failed to warn or protect them from the known hazards of
asbestos during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. The majority of
cases are pending in West Virginia and Texas.
A Bayer subsidiary in the United States also is the legal
successor to entities that sold asbestos-containing products
from the 1940s until 1976 and is named as a defendant in
asbestos-related litigation. Bayer is and has been fully
indemnified for its costs with respect to this litigation by
Union Carbide. Union Carbide continues to accept Bayers
tender of these cases, and it defends and settles them in
Bayers name, in its own name and in the name of the
several predecessor companies to Bayer.
Bayer believes that it has meritorious defenses in these actions
and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. Without
acknowledging any liability, Bayer has settled a number of these
cases in the past. Bayer may, on a case-by-case basis, settle
additional cases for reasonable amounts when, in Bayers
judgment, settlement is economically feasible given the risks
and costs inherent in the litigation. Bayer has made what Bayer
believes to be appropriate provisions in light of Bayers
experience in handling these cases.
|
|
|
Other commercial proceedings |
As previously reported, an arbitration panel in May 2006 issued
a final award in favor of Lyondell Chemical Co. in respect of a
dispute with Bayer over interpretation of their joint venture
agreements for the manufacture of propylene oxide. Bayer is
seeking to vacate the final award in federal court, while
Lyondell is seeking to confirm the award as well as obtain
pre-award interest. Bayer has established provisions in this
regard that we believe at this stage of the proceeding to be
appropriate. Additionally, Bayer will regularly review the need
to establish provisions consistent with the arbitration ruling
and continuing business operations. In addition to seeking to
vacate the final award, in January 2007, Bayer filed suit
against Lyondell in the Delaware State Court of Chancery,
seeking equitable reformation of one of the license agreements
relating to the joint venture and restitution of certain monies
paid or, as a result of the final award, allegedly owing by
Bayer to Lyondell under that license agreement.
Bayer separately has notified Lyondell of its claim in
connection with Lyondells failure to compensate Bayer for
taking approximately 351 million pounds of propylene oxide
from Bayers share of capacity under the joint venture.
This dispute is proceeding to binding arbitration.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving Limagrain Genetics Corporation |
In July 2004, Bayer, as successor in interest to Rhone Poulenc
Inc., was served with a Notice of Arbitration by Limagrain
Genetics Corporation, Inc. Limagrain was seeking indemnification
from Bayer for liability Limagrain had incurred to a third
party, Midwest Oilseeds. This proposed liability arose from a
judgment entered against Limagrain, and upheld on appeal, for an
alleged breach of a 1986 contract to which Midwest Oilseeds and
a former business unit of Rhone Poulenc Inc. were parties.
Limagrain sought indemnification for more than
U.S. $60 million. A binding arbitration proceeding
between Limagrain and Bayer was held in October 2005, and the
arbitration panel in March 2006 denied all of Limagrains
claims. In a parallel proceeding in France, Limagrain has sued
Bayer, as successor in interest to Rhone Poulenc Agrochimie SA,
to recover the judgment
139
amount Limagrain is obligated to pay Midwest Oilseeds. Bayer
believes that it has meritorious defenses to this action and
intends to continue to defend itself vigorously.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving genetically modified rice |
Since August 2006, Bayer CropScience LP is party to multiple
lawsuits, including putative class actions, filed in
U.S. federal and state courts by rice farmers and
resellers. Plaintiffs allege that they have suffered economic
losses after traces of the genetically modified rice event
LLRICE601 were identified in samples of conventional long-grain
rice grown in the United States. This is alleged to have led to
various commercial damages, including a decline in the commodity
price for long-grain rice, costs associated with restrictions on
imports and exports, and costs to secure alternative supplies.
In December, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
entered an order establishing a single pretrial proceeding in
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Missouri for all federal cases involving LLRICE601.
After development, LLRICE601 had been further tested in
cooperation with third parties, including a breeding institute
in the United States. However, it was never selected for
commercialization. The U.S. Department of Agriculture and
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration have stated that
LLRICE601 does not pose a health risk and is safe for use in
food and feed and for the environment. In November 2006, the
USDA advised that it had deregulated LLRICE601. The USDA is
conducting an investigation in an effort to determine how
LLRICE601 became present in commercial rice grown in the United
States.
Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses and intends to
continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the considerable
uncertainty associated with these proceedings, it is currently
not possible to estimate potential liability.
During the past year, Bayer Corporation, as well as other major
employers within the pharmaceuticals industry, has been named in
lawsuits alleging that pharmaceutical sales representatives were
improperly classified as exempt employees under state and
federal wage and hour laws and, therefore, were improperly
denied overtime pay and other benefits such as meal and rest
periods. Two putative class and collective actions were filed
against Bayer Corporation and Bayer Pharmaceuticals Corporation
in federal district courts in California, and those actions have
been consolidated in one proceeding in the United States
District Court for the Central District of California. The
complaints seek back overtime pay and statutory damages,
penalties, interest, and attorneys fees, and some claims
purport to have been filed on behalf of a nationwide class of
sales representatives. The proceeding is at a preliminary stage.
Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses and intends to
vigorously defend this action. Due to the considerable
uncertainty associated with these proceedings, it is currently
not possible to estimate potential liability.
Dividend Policy and Liquidation Proceeds
Our stockholders may declare dividends at an ordinary Annual
Stockholders Meeting, which must be held within the first
eight months of each fiscal year.
Under German law, Bayer AG may pay dividends only from balance
sheet profits reflected in its unconsolidated financial
statements (as opposed to the consolidated financial statements
of the Bayer Group), as adopted and approved by the Board of
Management and the Supervisory Board. In determining the balance
sheet profits that may be distributed as dividends, the Board of
Management may under German law and the provisions of our
Articles of Association allocate to other retained earnings
(andere Gewinnrücklagen) the net income of Bayer AG
for the fiscal year that remains after deducting amounts to be
allocated to legal and statutory reserves (gesetzliche
Rücklagen) and losses carried forward. More than
50 percent of the net income may be allocated to other
retained earnings only if such retained earnings would then not
exceed 50 percent of our capital stock. The Board of
Management may also increase balance sheet profits when
preparing the financial statements with funds withdrawn from
retained earnings.
140
Our stockholders, in their resolution on the appropriation of
balance sheet profits, may carry forward balance sheet profits
in part or in full and may allocate additional amounts to
retained earnings. Profits carried forward will be automatically
incorporated in the balance sheet profits of the next fiscal
year and may be used in their entirety to pay dividends in the
next fiscal year. Amounts allocated to the retained earnings are
available for dividends only if and to the extent the retained
earnings have been dissolved by the Board of Management when
preparing the financial statements, thereby increasing the
balance sheet profits.
Dividends approved at an ordinary Annual Stockholders
Meeting are payable promptly after the meeting, unless otherwise
decided at the meeting. Because all of Bayer AGs shares
are in book-entry form represented by a global certificate
deposited with Clearstream Banking AG in Frankfurt am Main,
Germany, stockholders receive dividends through Clearstream for
credit to their deposit accounts. Additionally, the ordinary
Annual Stockholders Meeting may decide to distribute the
balance sheet profit partly or in total to the stockholders by
way of distribution in kind.
We expect to continue to pay dividends, although we can give no
assurance as to the payment of a dividend for any particular
year or as to the particular amounts that we may pay from year
to year.
Apart from liquidation as a result of insolvency proceedings,
Bayer AG may be liquidated only with the affirmative vote of the
majority of the votes cast, and with at least three-quarters of
the share capital present or represented at the
stockholders meeting actually voting on the resolution to
liquidate. In accordance with the German Stock Corporation Act,
upon a liquidation of Bayer AG, any liquidation proceeds
remaining after paying off all of Bayer AGs liabilities
would be distributed among the stockholders in proportion to the
total number of shares held by each stockholder.
See also Item 3, Key Information
Dividends.
Significant Changes
Except as discussed elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F, no
significant change has occurred since the date of the annual
financial statements included in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
Listing Details and Markets
American Depositary Shares (ADSs), each representing one of our
ordinary shares, are listed on the New York Stock Exchange and
trade under the symbol BAY. The depositary for the
ADSs is The Bank of New York.
The principal trading market for our ordinary shares is the
Frankfurt Stock Exchange. Our shares are traded on Xetra, the
computerized trading system integrated into the Frankfurt Stock
Exchange and operated by Deutsche Börse AG, in addition to
being traded on the auction market (floor) of the Frankfurt
Stock Exchange. Our shares are also listed on the other German
stock exchanges, including Berlin-Bremen, Düsseldorf,
Hamburg, Hanover, Stuttgart and Munich. In addition, our shares
are listed on the Barcelona, Madrid, London, Zurich and Tokyo
Stock Exchanges.
141
The table below sets forth, for the periods indicated, the
reported high and low closing prices for our shares on the
Frankfurt Stock Exchange (Xetra, Source: Bloomberg) and our ADSs
on the New York Stock Exchange.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frankfurt Stock | |
|
New York Stock | |
|
|
Exchange (b) | |
|
Exchange (b) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
High | |
|
Low | |
|
High | |
|
Low | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In euros) | |
|
(In dollars) | |
2002(a)
|
|
|
38.22 |
|
|
|
16.35 |
|
|
|
36.00 |
|
|
|
17.30 |
|
2003
|
|
|
22.09 |
|
|
|
9.63 |
|
|
|
29.41 |
|
|
|
11.24 |
|
2004
|
|
|
23.83 |
|
|
|
18.26 |
|
|
|
34.12 |
|
|
|
23.52 |
|
2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First quarter
|
|
|
26.82 |
|
|
|
22.02 |
|
|
|
35.61 |
|
|
|
30.84 |
|
|
Second quarter
|
|
|
28.62 |
|
|
|
24.79 |
|
|
|
34.94 |
|
|
|
31.16 |
|
|
Third quarter
|
|
|
30.84 |
|
|
|
26.78 |
|
|
|
38.50 |
|
|
|
31.85 |
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
|
35.92 |
|
|
|
27.86 |
|
|
|
42.87 |
|
|
|
33.70 |
|
Full year 2005
|
|
|
35.92 |
|
|
|
22.02 |
|
|
|
42.87 |
|
|
|
30.84 |
|
2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First quarter
|
|
|
36.37 |
|
|
|
31.70 |
|
|
|
44.31 |
|
|
|
37.60 |
|
|
Second quarter
|
|
|
36.75 |
|
|
|
30.56 |
|
|
|
47.73 |
|
|
|
38.05 |
|
|
Third quarter
|
|
|
40.20 |
|
|
|
35.32 |
|
|
|
51.40 |
|
|
|
44.34 |
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
|
40.92 |
|
|
|
38.83 |
|
|
|
54.00 |
|
|
|
49.37 |
|
Full year 2006
|
|
|
40.92 |
|
|
|
30.56 |
|
|
|
54.00 |
|
|
|
37.60 |
|
Previous six months
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 2006
|
|
|
40.20 |
|
|
|
37.83 |
|
|
|
51.07 |
|
|
|
47.89 |
|
|
October 2006
|
|
|
40.80 |
|
|
|
39.20 |
|
|
|
52.09 |
|
|
|
49.37 |
|
|
November 2006
|
|
|
40.45 |
|
|
|
38.93 |
|
|
|
52.62 |
|
|
|
50.24 |
|
|
December 2006
|
|
|
40.92 |
|
|
|
38.83 |
|
|
|
54.00 |
|
|
|
51.58 |
|
|
January 2007
|
|
|
45.20 |
|
|
|
40.20 |
|
|
|
59.18 |
|
|
|
52.05 |
|
|
February 2007
|
|
|
45.56 |
|
|
|
43.47 |
|
|
|
60.00 |
|
|
|
56.72 |
|
|
|
(a) |
From January 24, 2002 for New York Stock Exchange. |
|
|
(b) |
The spin-off of LANXESS from Bayer became legally effective on
January 28, 2005 and trading in the shares of LANXESS on
the Frankfurt Stock Exchange commenced on January 31, 2005.
Since January 31, 2005, Bayer shares have been traded ex
LANXESS on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange and since
February 8, 2005, Bayer ADSs have been traded ex LANXESS on
the New York Stock Exchange. The Bayer share prices presented
here for the Frankfurt Stock Exchange (Xetra) have been
retroactively adjusted by Bloomberg in October 2006. The Bayer
ADS prices presented here for the New York Stock Exchange have
not been retroactively adjusted for the spin-off. |
On February 28, 2007 the closing sales price per Bayer AG
ordinary share on Xetra was
43.47 and per
Bayer AG ADS on the New York Stock Exchange was U.S. $57.50.
The average daily volume of Bayer shares traded on the German
Stock Exchanges (Xetra and floors) for the years 2006, 2005 and
2004 was 5,610,944, 4,138,431 and 3,931,299 respectively. The
average daily trading volume of Bayer ADSs on the New York Stock
Exchange in 2006, 2005 and 2004 was 190,818, 110,548 and
134,025, respectively.
142
|
|
Item 10. |
Additional Information |
Memorandum and Articles of Association
In the following section we describe the material provisions of
our Articles of Association and German law to the extent that
they affect the rights of our stockholders. This description is
only a summary and does not provide a complete description of
all relevant provisions. An English translation of our Articles
of Association is filed as Exhibit 1.1 to this annual
report on
Form 20-F.
We are registered in the Commercial Register
(Handelsregister) maintained by the local court
(Amtsgericht) in Cologne, Germany, under the registration
number HRB 48248. Copies of our Articles of Association may be
obtained from the Commercial Register.
According to Article 2 of our Articles of Association, our
object and purpose is manufacturing, marketing and other
industrial activities or provision of services in the fields of
health care, agriculture, polymers and chemicals.
|
|
|
Members of the Board of Management and the Supervisory
Board |
Typically, neither the members of the Board of Management nor
members of the Supervisory Board may vote on matters in which
they have a material interest. Particularly, it is not
permissible for the members of either of our boards to vote on
compensation for themselves or any members of their body.
Pursuant to the German Stock Corporation Act
(Aktiengesetz), the compensation of Management Board
members is determined by the Supervisory Board. Our stockholders
have resolved to specify the amount of compensation of
Supervisory Board members in our Articles of Association. Any
increase or decrease of the Supervisory Board members
compensation requires a further stockholders resolution.
Pursuant to the German Stock Corporation Act, a Supervisory
Board member may not receive a loan from Bayer AG unless
approved by the Supervisory Board. A member of the Board of
Management may only receive a loan from us upon prior approval
by the Supervisory Board.
There is no compulsory retirement age for members of the
Supervisory Board. However, in accordance with the German
Corporate Governance Code, Supervisory Board members are
encouraged to retire at the Annual Stockholders Meeting
following the members 72nd birthday.
There is no share ownership requirement for the members of
either our Board of Management or Supervisory Board.
Like most German companies, Bayer does not stagger
the terms of office of the members of its Supervisory Board.
|
|
|
Rights, Preferences and Restrictions Attaching to our
Shares |
The principal means by which our stockholders may obtain
information on our company is through our audited annual
financial statements (Jahresabschluss), a report prepared
by our Board of Management discussing these financial
statements, certain risk factors and business trends
(Lagebericht), a report by our Supervisory Board and a
recommendation by our Board of Management regarding the
distribution of our earnings. We are required to make these
materials available for inspection at our principal offices
starting on the date when the Annual Stockholders Meeting
is convened. In addition, each shareholder is entitled to
receive a copy of these materials upon request.
143
Furthermore, each stockholder attending a stockholders
meeting is entitled to ask certain types of questions, which
members of our Board of Management, who are required to attend
the meeting, are obliged to answer. By contrast, our
stockholders have no right to inspect the books and records of
our company.
|
|
|
Dividend Rights and Other Distributions |
In accordance with the German Stock Corporation Act, the record
date for determining which holders of our shares are entitled to
the payment of dividends, if any, or other distributions,
whether in cash, stock or property, is the date of the Annual
Stockholders Meeting at which such dividends or other
distributions are declared. For a summary of our
stockholders dividend rights, please see Item 8,
Financial Information Dividend Policy and
Liquidation Proceeds.
Our stockholders vote at stockholders meetings. By
contrast, German corporate law does not allow stockholders to
approve matters by written consent in lieu of a meeting.
Each share entitles its holder to cast one vote at
stockholders meetings. In certain cases, a
stockholders right to cast a vote is excluded.
Stockholders may pass resolutions at a general
stockholders meeting by a simple majority of the votes
cast, unless a greater majority is required by law or by our
Articles of Association. Neither the German Stock Corporation
Act nor our Articles of Association provide for minimum quorum
requirements for passing resolutions at stockholders
meetings. The German Stock Corporation Act requires that
significant resolutions (i.e., those relating to
amendments to our Articles of Association, capital increases and
decreases, exclusion of stockholder pre-emptive rights, the
dissolution of our company, mergers or consolidations, the
transfer of substantially all of our assets, and certain other
significant matters) be passed with the affirmative vote of the
majority of the votes cast, and with at least three-quarters of
the share capital present or represented at the
stockholders meeting actually voting on such resolution.
Neither German law nor our Articles of Association restrict the
rights of our domestic, non-resident or foreign stockholders to
hold or vote their shares.
In case we are liquidated, any liquidation proceeds remaining
after our liabilities have been paid off are distributed among
our stockholders in proportion to the number of shares held by
them.
Under the German Stock Corporation Act, each stockholder of a
corporation generally has a pre-emptive right
(Bezugsrecht). Pre-emptive rights are preferential rights
to subscribe for issues by the corporation of new shares,
securities convertible into shares, securities with warrants to
purchase shares, or instruments granting a profit participation
right. The proportional share of the issue to which the
shareholder may subscribe is equal to the proportional share of
existing capital of the corporation that the shareholder holds.
Subscription rights are freely transferable and may be traded on
the German stock exchanges during the exercise period for these
rights. When authorizing a capital increase and a new issue of
shares, our stockholders may exclude pre-emptive rights, in
whole or in part. In addition, when creating authorized capital,
stockholders may authorize the Board of Management to exclude
the pre-emptive rights attaching to any shares issued pursuant
to the authorized capital. In addition to having to be approved
by the stockholders meeting, any exclusion or restriction
of pre-emptive rights requires a justification, which our Board
of Management has to set forth in a written report to our
stockholders. If our Board of Management increases our share
capital, it may exclude pre-emptive rights in accordance with
Article 4 of our Articles of Association.
Under the German Stock Corporation Act, individual stockholders
are generally not entitled to bring derivative actions on behalf
of or in the interest of our company if a member of our Board of
Management or
144
Supervisory Board violates his or her fiduciary duties.
Stockholders by a majority of the votes cast at a
stockholders meeting, however, may demand that an action
be brought by the Board of Management or the Supervisory Board
against a member who has allegedly violated his or her duties.
In addition, the stockholders meeting or stockholders
representing at least 10 percent of the companys
share capital or shares with a nominal value of
1,000,000, may
appoint special representatives to bring such action.
However, on November 1, 2005, the German Stock Corporation
Act was amended to facilitate derivative suits by individual
stockholders. Under the new law, minority stockholders
representing at least one percent of the companys share
capital or shares with a nominal value of
100,000 may now
file an application in court requesting that an action be
admitted against a member of either of the companys board
of management or supervisory board on behalf of the company in
their own name. The court must admit such stockholders
derivative suit if, among other things, there are facts that
justify a suspicion that the board members harmed the company
through actions conducted in bad faith or a fundamental
violation of the law or the Articles of Association, and an
enforcement of the claims would not be against the prevailing
interests of the company. Furthermore, the minority shareholders
must show that they have first demanded from the company that
action be brought and that such demand has been futile.
|
|
|
Stockholders Meetings Convocation and
Participation |
A stockholders meeting may be called by the Board of
Management or by stockholders who, in the aggregate, hold at
least 5 percent of our share capital. In addition, if
required in our interest, the Supervisory Board must call a
stockholders meeting. Stockholders holding in the
aggregate at least
500,000, or at
least 5 percent of our share capital, may require that
particular items be placed on the agenda of a stockholders
meeting. The Annual Stockholders Meeting must be held
within the first eight months of each fiscal year and is called
by the Board of Management, upon receipt of the Supervisory
Boards report on our annual financial statements.
Under our Articles of Association, in order to be eligible to
attend and vote at an Annual Stockholders Meeting, a
stockholder must register its participation with us by the end
of the seventh day prior to the day of the Annual
Stockholders Meeting, including proof of ownership of our
stock as of the 21st day prior to the Annual
Stockholders Meeting.
We are required to publish a notice of each ordinary or
extraordinary stockholders meeting in the electronic
Federal Gazette (elektronischer Bundesanzeiger) at least
thirty days prior to the deadline for stockholders
registration for the stockholders meeting. In addition, we
are required to publish a notice in one national, authorized
stock exchange journal.
We may not repurchase our own shares unless so authorized by a
resolution duly adopted by our stockholders at a general
stockholders meeting or in other very limited
circumstances set forth in the German Stock Corporation Act,
including for example in order to satisfy obligations under
employee stock participation plans. Any repurchase is subject to
various restrictions and conditions relating to, among other
things, the manner and timing of such purchase. Any
stockholders resolution that authorizes us to repurchase
shares may not be in effect for a period longer than
18 months. The German Stock Corporation Act limits share
repurchases to 10 percent of our share capital. Any resale
of repurchased shares must be effected on a stock exchange or in
a manner that treats all stockholders equally, unless otherwise
approved by the stockholders at the stockholders meeting
that authorized the repurchase of the shares.
On April 28, 2006, our stockholders authorized our Board of
Management to repurchase our own shares representing up to
10 percent of our outstanding share capital in one or more
steps on or before October 27, 2007. The repurchase may be
effected for various purposes, including to fulfill option
rights held by our executives or employees, or executives or
employees of our subsidiaries, on the basis of our stock option
programs.
145
The German Takeover Act (Wertpapiererwerbs- und
Übernahmegesetz), which came into effect on
January 1, 2002, provides that, while a tender offer for
the shares of a company is underway, the companys
management board may not take any action that may have the
effect of thwarting the success of the tender offer. Certain
defenses, however, are permitted. In particular, the
companys management board may: (i) search for a
white knight (i.e., a third party that is
willing to make a tender offer for the shares);
(ii) perform any acts that a diligent and conscientious
manager would perform in the absence of a tender offer; and
(iii) perform any acts that have been approved by the
companys supervisory board. In addition, the German
Takeover Act permits the stockholders meeting of the
company, provided no tender offer is currently underway, to
authorize the companys management board to take any
actions that may have the effect of frustrating the success of a
future tender offer, so long as the authorization is
sufficiently specific and falls within the competence of the
stockholders meeting. Any such authorization may remain in
effect for a maximum of 18 months. On July 26, 2006
the German Takeover Act was amended in the course of
implementing the E.U. takeover directive. Pursuant to the
takeover directive, companies may implement further
restrictions, such as the invalidity of certain shareholder
agreements or pre-emption rights vis-à-vis the bidder in
the course of takeover offers, by amending their articles of
association. We have not amended our articles of association in
this way.
For a description of disclosure requirements pursuant to
Section 21 of the German Securities Trading Act
(Wertpapierhandelsgesetz), please refer to Item 7,
Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions
Major Shareholders.
The German Securities Trading Act further requires the reporting
of dealings by certain persons carrying managerial
responsibilities and other persons close to them. Members of our
Board of Management and members of our Supervisory Board must
notify both us and the German Federal Financial Supervisory
Authority of any acquisitions and sales of our shares or
financial instruments linked to our shares in writing within
five business days. Transactions are exempt from the
notification obligations if the value of the shares or related
financial instruments acquired or sold does not exceed in the
aggregate
5,000 per
calendar year. This obligation also applies to certain relatives
of our board members, particularly, spouses, dependent children
and other relatives who have been living in the same household
for at least one year. In addition, we must publish on our
website all notifications we have thus received, keep them
posted for a period of at least one month and send proof of such
publication to the German Federal Financial Supervisory
Authority.
In addition, the German Takeover Act provides that a person who
has acquired 30 percent or more of the voting rights of an
issuer whose securities are admitted for trading on a German
stock exchange is deemed to have gained control of
the issuer and is required to publish this fact and to launch a
public tender offer for the outstanding shares.
Material contracts
Bayer AG (Bayer) and LANXESS AG (LANXESS) are party to a
spin-off and acquisition agreement dated September 22,
2004, which sets forth the assets and liabilities, including in
particular the entire equity interest in LANXESS GmbH,
transferred by Bayer to LANXESS by way of a spin-off pursuant to
section 123 (2) No. 1 of the German
Transformation Act (Umwandlungsgesetz). The spin-off,
which took retroactive economic effect as of July 1, 2004,
became legally effective upon its registration in the Commercial
Register (Handelsregister) for Bayer at the Local Court
of Cologne (Amtsgericht Köln) on January 28,
2005. Pursuant to the spin-off and acquisition agreement, all of
LANXESS no par value ordinary bearer shares were granted
to the stockholders of Bayer in the ratio of one LANXESS share
for every ten Bayer shares.
Bayer and LANXESS also entered into a master agreement, dated
September 22, 2004, pursuant to which Bayer and LANXESS
agreed on measures to ensure the formation of the LANXESS
subgroup as well as on provisions for the general apportionment
of liability as between the parties and special provisions
relating to the
146
apportionment of product liability, liability for environmental
contamination and liability for antitrust proceedings, in each
case arising under administrative, civil and criminal
proceedings and settlements thereof. The rules on general
apportionment of liability provide that Bayer is to indemnify
LANXESS and its affiliates with respect to liabilities of Bayer
or its affiliates arising by statute or by application of common
law and which were not allocated to LANXESS. In the area of
environmental contamination, liability is essentially
established based on the contamination of the properties used by
the relevant party or its affiliates on July 1, 2004,
subject to a ceiling on the liability of LANXESS and its
affiliates of
350 million.
Bayer is responsible for any claims asserted against LANXESS and
its affiliates to the extent to which such claims in total
exceed the ceiling. With respect to antitrust proceedings, each
party has agreed generally to bear all liability that relates to
those antitrust violations committed by it. With respect to
products sold by the former Rubber business group, Bayer
generally assumed 70 percent of liabilities arising from
antitrust proceedings and LANXESS assumed 30 percent.
LANXESS total liability arising from antitrust proceedings
with respect to products sold by the former Rubber business
group is generally limited to
100 million.
Bayer is responsible for any expenses in excess of this limit
incurred by LANXESS and its affiliates arising out of or in
connection with these proceedings. Finally, Bayer and LANXESS
will generally be liable for any claims arising out of or in
connection with defective products that the respective party or
its affiliates introduced to the market prior to
January 28, 2005.
|
|
|
Relating to the Schering AG acquisition |
On March 23, 2006, Bayer AG, as borrower, entered into
an unsecured Syndicated Facilities Agreement for an amount of
7,000 million.
Funds received under the Syndicated Facilities Agreement may
only be used for the purpose of financing or refinancing the
acquisition of the shares of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany,
including shares represented by American Depositary Receipts,
pursuant to the terms of the cash offer we made for Schering and
a subsequent squeeze-out and any costs, fees and expenses
associated therewith. The syndicated facility is divided into
two tranches in the amounts of
3,000 million
(Facility A) and
4,000 million
(Facility B). The Syndicated Facilities Agreement contains
standard covenants, such as negative pledge and information
covenants. The facility was filed as an exhibit to the
Schedule TO (Tender Offer) filed with the SEC on
April 13, 2006. The term of Facility A is
364 days, with an extension option of up to one additional
year, and the initial term of the Facility B is five years, in
each case from the date of the execution of the Syndicated
Facilities Agreement. The interest rate of the Facility A equals
the EURIBOR reference rate plus a margin of 0.35 percent,
and the interest rate of the Facility B equals the EURIBOR
reference rate plus a margin of 0.40 percent. After
December 31, 2006, the margin will be variable. Depending
on Bayer AGs credit rating, the margin may vary between
0.20 percent and 0.60 percent for Facility A and
between 0.25 percent and 0.65 percent for Facility B.
Under the Syndicated Facility Agreement, there was
4,000 million under Facility B outstanding as of the date
of publication of this annual report on
Form 20-F. Under
the Facility A, as of December 31, 2006,
1,700 million was outstanding, which was repaid in full on
January 10, 2007.
For more information on the financing of Schering AGs
acquisition refer to Item 5, Operating and Financial
Review and Prospects Liquidity and Capital Resources
2004, 2005 and 2006.
Exchange controls
There are currently no German foreign exchange control
restrictions on the payment of dividends on the shares or the
conduct of our operations.
Taxation
The following is a discussion of the material U.S. federal
income and German tax consequences to you as a Qualified Holder
of Bayer AG shares. This discussion is based upon existing
U.S. federal income and German tax law, including
legislation, regulations, administrative rulings and court
decisions, as in effect on the date of this annual report on
Form 20-F, all of
which are subject to change, possibly with retroactive effect.
For the purposes of this discussion, you are a Qualified
Holder if you are the beneficial owner of ordinary Bayer
AG shares and (1) are a resident of the United States for
purposes of the Convention Between the United States of America
and the Federal Republic of Germany for the Avoidance of Double
Taxation and the Prevention
147
of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income and Capital,
as amended (the Income Tax Treaty), which generally
includes an individual U.S. resident, a corporation created
or organized under the laws of the United States, any state
thereof or the District of Columbia and a partnership, estate or
trust, to the extent its income is subject to taxation in the
United States as the income of a U.S. resident, either in
its hands or in the hands of its partners or beneficiaries,
(2) do not hold Bayer AG shares as part of the business
property of a permanent establishment located in Germany or as
part of a fixed base located in Germany and used for the
performance of independent personal services and (3) if you
are not an individual, are not subject to the limitation on
benefits restrictions in the Income Tax Treaty. This discussion
assumes that you hold Bayer AG shares as capital assets. This
discussion does not address all aspects of U.S. federal
income and German taxation that may be relevant to you in light
of your particular circumstances. For example, this discussion
does not apply to Qualified Holders whose shares were acquired
pursuant to the exercise of an employee share option or
otherwise as compensation or who are subject to special
treatment under U.S. federal income tax laws such as
financial institutions, insurance companies, tax-exempt
organizations, holders of 10 percent or more of Bayer AG
shares, broker-dealers in securities or currencies, persons that
hold Bayer AG shares as part of a hedging or a
conversion transaction or as a position in a
straddle, and persons whose functional currency is
other than the U.S. dollar. This discussion also does not
address any aspects of state, local or
non-U.S. (other
than certain German) tax law. If a partnership holds Bayer AG
shares, the tax treatment of a partner generally will depend
upon the status of the partner and the activities of the
partnership. If a Qualified Holder is a partner in a partnership
that holds Bayer AG shares, the Holder is urged to consult its
own tax advisor regarding the specific tax consequences of the
purchase, ownership and disposition of the Bayer AG shares.
In general, for U.S. federal income tax purposes, if you
are a Qualified Holder of ADRs evidencing ADSs, you will be
treated as the owner of the Bayer AG shares represented by such
ADSs. Unless the context requires otherwise, all references in
this section to Bayer shares are deemed to refer
likewise to ADSs evidencing an ownership interest in Bayer AG
shares.
We urge you to consult your tax advisor as to the
U.S. federal income and German tax consequences of holding
Bayer AG shares, including the particular facts and
circumstances that may be unique to you, and as to any other tax
consequences of holding Bayer AG shares.
We were required under German law to withhold tax on dividends
in respect of the 2006 fiscal year in an amount equal to
20 percent of the gross amount paid to German resident and
non-resident stockholders, and we will be required to so
withhold on dividends in respect of the 2007 fiscal year.
A surtax on the German withholding tax is currently levied on
dividend distributions paid by a German resident company. The
rate of this surtax is 5.5 percent on the withholding tax
due. The surtax will equal 1.1 percent (5.5 percent x
20 percent) of the gross dividend. This results in a total
withholding tax rate on dividends of 21.1 percent.
As a Qualified Holder, you are eligible to receive a partial
refund of the withholding tax (including surtax) under the
Income Tax Treaty (subject to certain limitations), effectively
reducing the withholding tax (including surtax) to
15 percent of the gross amount of the dividend. Thus, for
each U.S. $100 of gross dividend paid by Bayer AG to you,
the dividend will be subject to net German withholding tax
(including surtax) of U.S. $15 under the Income Tax Treaty.
The net cash received per U.S. $100 of gross dividend thus
will be U.S. $85.
For U.S. federal income tax purposes, the gross amount of
dividends paid on your Bayer AG shares, without reduction for
German withholding tax, will be included in your gross income on
the date the dividends are received or treated as received by
you, translating dividends paid in euros into U.S. dollars
using the exchange rate in effect on that date. Subject to
certain exceptions for short-term and hedged positions, the
U.S. dollar amount of dividends paid on your Bayer AG
shares generally will be subject to U.S. taxation at a
maximum rate of 15 percent in respect of dividends received
before January 1, 2011 if you are an individual and the
dividends are qualified dividends. Dividends that we
pay generally will be treated as qualified dividends if we were
not, in the year prior to the year in which the dividend was
paid, and are not, in the year in which the dividend is paid, a
passive foreign investment company (PFIC). Based on
our audited financial statements and relevant market
148
and shareholder data, we believe that we were not treated as a
PFIC for U.S. federal income tax purposes with respect to
our 2006 taxable year. In addition, based on our audited
financial statements and current expectations regarding the
value and nature of our assets, the sources and nature of our
income, and relevant market data, we do not anticipate becoming
a PFIC for our 2007 taxable year. However, whether we in fact
are classified as a PFIC is a factual matter that must be
determined annually at the close of each taxable year.
Therefore, there can be no certainty as to our actual PFIC
status in any particular year until the close of the taxable
year in question.
If dividends paid in euros are converted into U.S. dollars
on the date you receive or are treated as receiving them, you
generally should not be required to recognize foreign currency
gain or loss in respect of such dividend. You will not be
entitled to the dividends received deduction with respect to any
dividends we pay.
German tax withheld from dividends will be treated, up to the
15 percent rate provided under the Income Tax Treaty, as a
foreign income tax that, subject to generally applicable
limitations under U.S. tax law, is eligible for credit
against your U.S. federal income tax liability, or, if you
have elected to deduct such taxes, generally may be deducted in
computing your taxable income for U.S. federal income tax
purposes.
To claim the refund reflecting the reduction of the German
withholding tax from 20 percent to 15 percent and the
refund of the 5.5 percent German surtax, when applicable,
you must submit (either directly, or, as described below,
through our U.S. transfer agent or the Depository Trust
Company) a claim for refund to the German tax authorities, with
the original bank voucher (or a certified copy thereof) issued
by the paying entity documenting the tax withheld within four
years from the end of the calendar year in which the dividend is
received. Claims for refunds are made on a special form, which
must be filed with the German tax authorities at the following
address: Bundeszentralamt für Steuern, An der
Küppe 1, 53225 Bonn, Germany. A refund claim form may
be obtained from the German tax authorities at the same address
as where applications are filed, from the Embassy of the Federal
Republic of Germany, 4645 Reservoir Road, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20007-1998 or from the Office of
International Operations, Internal Revenue Service, 1325
K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20225, Attention:
Taxpayer Service Division.
You also must submit to the German tax authorities certification
of your United States residency (IRS Form 6166). You
generally can obtain this certification by filing a request for
certification on IRS Form 8802, along with a user fee, with
the Internal Revenue Service, P.O. Box 42530, Philadelphia,
PA 19101-2530. You should consult your tax advisor and the
instructions for IRS Form 8802 for further details
regarding how to obtain this certification.
Our U.S. transfer agent will perform administrative
functions necessary to claim the refund reflecting the reduction
in German withholding tax from 20 percent to
15 percent and the refund of the 5.5 percent German
surtax, when applicable, for you. However, these arrangements
may be amended or revoked at any time in the future. Under the
current procedure, the U.S. transfer agent will prepare the
German claim for refund forms on your behalf and file them with
the German tax authorities. In order for the U.S. transfer
agent to file the claim for refund forms, the U.S. transfer
agent will prepare and mail to you, and will ask that you sign
and return to the U.S. transfer agent, (1) a statement
authorizing the U.S. transfer agent to perform these
procedures and agreeing that the German tax authorities may
inform the Internal Revenue Service of any refunds of German
taxes and (2) a written authorization to remit the refund
of withholding to an account other than yours. The
U.S. transfer agent will also require certification of your
United States residency (IRS Form 6166). The
U.S. transfer agent will attach the signed statement, the
IRS Form 6166 and the documentation issued by the paying
agency documenting the dividend paid and the tax withheld to the
claim for refund form and file them with the German tax
authorities.
A simplified refund procedure will be available to you if your
Bayer AG shares are registered with brokers participating in the
Depository Trust Company. Under this simplified refund
procedure, the Depository Trust Company will provide the German
tax authorities with electronic certification of your
U.S. taxpayer status based on information it receives from
its broker participants, and will claim a refund on your behalf.
If approved by the German tax authorities, a similar simplified
refund procedure may also be implemented by the
U.S. transfer agent in the future. Under such a simplified
refund procedure, following each dividend payment, the
U.S. transfer agent
149
would file a claim for refund automatically on your behalf if
you have instructed the U.S. transfer agent in writing to
file on your behalf.
The German tax authorities will issue refunds denominated in
euros. The refunds will be issued in the name of the
U.S. transfer agent or the Depository Trust Company, as the
case may be, which will then convert the refunds to dollars and
make corresponding refund payments to you or your broker. This
broker, in turn, will remit corresponding refund amounts to you.
If you receive a refund attributable to reduced withholding
taxes under the Income Tax Treaty, you may be required to
recognize foreign currency gain or loss for U.S. federal
income tax purposes, which will be treated as ordinary income or
loss for such purposes, to the extent that the U.S. dollar
value of the refund received or treated as received by you
differs from the U.S. dollar equivalent of the refund on
the date the dividend on which such withholding taxes were
imposed was received or treated as received by you.
|
|
|
Taxation of Capital Gains |
Under the Income Tax Treaty, you will not be liable for German
tax on capital gains realized or accrued on the sale or other
disposition of Bayer AG shares.
Upon a sale or other disposition of Bayer AG shares, you will
recognize capital gain or loss for U.S. federal income tax
purposes equal to the difference between the U.S. dollar
value of the amount realized and your U.S. dollar adjusted
tax basis in the Bayer AG shares. This gain or loss generally
will be U.S. source gain or loss, and will be treated as
long-term capital gain or loss if your holding period in the
Bayer AG shares exceeds one year. The net amount of long-term
capital gain recognized by an individual U.S. holder before
January 1, 2011 is generally subject to a taxation at a
maximum rate of 15 percent. The deductibility of capital
losses is subject to significant limitations.
|
|
|
German Gift and Inheritance Taxes |
The Convention between the United States of America and the
Federal Republic of Germany for the Avoidance of Double Taxation
with Respect to Taxes on Estates, Inheritances and Gifts, as
amended (the Estate Tax Treaty), provides that an
individual whose domicile is determined to be in the United
States for purposes, of such treaty will not be subject to
German inheritance and gift tax (the equivalent of the
U.S. federal estate and gift tax) on the individuals
death or making of a gift unless the Bayer AG shares
(1) are part of the business property of a permanent
establishment located in Germany or (2) are part of the
assets of a fixed base of an individual located in Germany and
used for the performance of independent personal services. An
individuals domicile in the United States, however, does
not prevent imposition of German inheritance and gift tax with
respect to an heir, donee or other beneficiary who is domiciled
in Germany at the time the individual died or the gift was made.
The Estate Tax Treaty also provides a credit against
U.S. federal estate and gift tax liability for the amount
of inheritance and gift tax paid in Germany, subject to certain
limitations, in a case where the shares are subject both to
German inheritance or gift tax and U.S. federal estate or
gift tax.
|
|
|
German Capital Tax (Vermögensteuer) |
The Income Tax Treaty provides that you will not be subject to
German capital tax (Vermögensteuer) with respect to
the Bayer AG shares. As a result of a judicial decision, the
German capital tax (Vermögensteuer) presently is not
imposed.
There are no German transfer, stamp or other similar taxes that
would apply to you upon receipt, purchase, holding or sale of
Bayer AG shares.
150
|
|
|
U.S. Information Reporting and Backup
Withholding |
Dividends on Bayer AG shares and payments of the proceeds of a
sale of Bayer AG shares paid within the United States or through
certain U.S.-related
financial intermediaries are subject to information reporting
and may be subject to backup withholding unless you (1) are
a corporation or other exempt recipient or (2) provide a
taxpayer identification number and certify that no loss of
exemption from backup withholding has occurred.
U.S. persons who are required to establish their exempt
status generally must file IRS
Form W-9 (Request
for Taxpayer Identification Number and Certification).
Non-U.S. holders
generally will not be subject to U.S. information reporting
or backup withholding. However, these holders may be required to
provide certification of
non-U.S. status
(generally on IRS
Form W-8BEN) in
connection with payments received in the United States or
through certain
U.S.-related financial
intermediaries.
Backup withholding is not an additional tax. Amounts withheld as
backup withholding may be credited against your
U.S. federal income tax liability. You may obtain a refund
of any excess amounts withheld under the backup withholding
rules by filing the appropriate claim for refund with the
Internal Revenue Service and furnishing any required information.
Documents on display
You can inspect the documents concerning Bayer AG mentioned in
this annual report during normal business hours at Bayer
AGs headquarters at the Bayerwerk, 51368 Leverkusen,
Germany, as well as at the headquarters of Bayer AGs
U.S. subsidiary, Bayer Corporation, 100 Bayer Road,
Pittsburgh, PA 15205-9741.
Significant Differences in Corporate Governance Practices
For a description of the significant ways in which our corporate
governance practices differ from those followed by
U.S. companies under the listing standards of the New York
Stock Exchange, please refer to our website at
http://www.bayer.com/en/
German-Corporate-Governance-Practices.aspx. (Reference to this
uniform resource locator or URL is made
as an inactive textual reference for informational purposes
only. The information found at this website is not incorporated
by reference into this document.)
|
|
Item 11. |
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market
Risk |
Market Risk
The global nature of our business exposes our operations,
financial results and cash flows to a number of risks, including
those listed below.
|
|
|
|
|
Currency exchange rate fluctuations. We are exposed to
fluctuations between the euro and other major world currencies.
The majority of our currency fluctuation risks are between the
euro and the U.S. dollar, between the euro and the Japanese
yen and between the euro and the Canadian dollar. |
|
|
|
Interest rate fluctuations. We are exposed to changes in
interest rates. Our primary interest rate exposure is to
fluctuations in short- and long-term European and
U.S. interest rates. |
|
|
|
Credit risk. We are exposed to credit risk with respect
to the counterparties in our transactions. |
|
|
|
Raw material, commodity and energy price fluctuations. We
are exposed to possible increases in raw material, commodity and
energy prices. We may not be able to pass any such increases on
to our customers. |
Any of these risks could harm our operating results and
financial condition.
From time to time, we enter into hedging arrangements to
mitigate our exposure to currency, interest and commodity price
risks. Our primary tools for hedging financial risks are
over-the-counter
derivative instruments, particularly forward foreign exchange
contracts, foreign exchange option contracts, interest rate
swaps and interest and principal currency swaps, interest rate
options, commodity price swaps and commodity price options. As a
matter of policy, we enter into these transactions only with
counterparties of high credit standing. We have
151
established uniform guidelines and internal controls for the use
of these derivatives. We use these instruments only to
economically hedge risks arising from our business operations
and from related investments and financing transactions. We do
not use derivatives for speculative purposes. A portion of our
transactions hedge anticipated risks from currency exchange and
raw material price fluctuations but do not qualify for hedge
accounting under IFRS and U.S. GAAP. Such transactions are
monitored closely and require authorization by our head of
finance, our risk committee (consisting of the head of Finance
and the heads of the major divisions within Finance) or the
Board of Management. Our Board of Management has provided us
with loss limits for all derivative transactions that do not
qualify for hedge accounting under IFRS and U.S. GAAP and
do not hedge other balance sheet items. All other derivative
transactions are either limited by volume or by hedging degree.
For example, we have a loss limit for the commodity hedges we
use to reduce volatility in future cash flows from anticipated
raw material purchases but which do not qualify for hedge
accounting.
Sensitivity analysis is a widely used risk measurement tool that
allows our management to make judgments regarding the potential
loss in future earnings, fair values or cash flows of market
risk sensitive instruments resulting from one or more selected
hypothetical changes in interest rates, foreign currency
exchange rates, commodity prices and other relevant market rates
or prices over a selected period of time. We use sensitivity
analysis because it provides reasonable risk estimates using
straightforward assumptions (for example, an increase in
interest rates). The risk estimates we provide below assume:
|
|
|
|
|
a simultaneous, parallel foreign exchange rates shift in which
the euro depreciates against all currencies by 10 percent; |
|
|
|
a simultaneous, parallel commodity price increase of
20 percent in all relevant commodities with respect to
which we hold derivatives; and |
|
|
|
a parallel shift of 100 basis points of the interest rate
yield curves in all currencies. |
We use our business experience, market information and
additional analytics to manage our risk exposure and mitigate
the limitations of our sensitivity analysis. We have found
sensitivity analysis to be a useful tool in achieving some of
our specific risk management objectives. Sensitivity analysis
offers an
easy-to-understand risk
exposure estimate that allows our managers, stockholders,
employees, suppliers and customers to appreciate an
approximation of the effect changing market conditions could
have on our business. Additionally, it allows our management
after becoming aware of the impact of immediate and substantial
changes to take the necessary steps to address such risks.
Sensitivity analysis is subject to material limitations,
consisting of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
The risk-mitigating effects caused by correlation and
diversification among different currencies, commodity prices and
interest rate areas or between these different risk exposures
are not taken into account. This may lead to an overestimation
of risk, since a simultaneous adverse shift in all currencies,
commodity prices and yield curves is highly unlikely. |
|
|
|
Unlike other more complex risk modeling concepts, it applies
only two shifts (up or down) in each risk category with the
direction causing the adverse outcome chosen. While it is
possible to apply more sophisticated risk measurement
techniques, it is our view that sensitivity analysis gives
decision makers in our non-financial businesses a sufficient
warning of potential losses. We may apply further detailed
analyses using the specific facts of a given situation to
determine if appropriate corrective actions are needed. |
|
|
|
Sensitivity analyses offer a snapshot of exposures
at and between specific dates in time. However, there is
continuous change in the Other Than Trading Portfolio. For
example, positions are continually being opened and closed,
assets and liabilities mature and new interest rates take
effect. We accept this limitation and whenever we believe that
more current information is required, produce either updated
sensitivity analyses or utilize other management reporting
options to understand in detail the effects of changing market
conditions. |
152
|
|
|
|
|
Sensitivity analyses do not provide an answer to the question of
how long a sharp rise or fall of market rates will
continue. Accordingly, we develop our own market direction
projections and obtain other professional predictions that we
then use in our financial planning and in modeling earnings
impacts. |
We continually refine our risk measurement and reporting
procedures, including a periodic re-examination of the
underlying assumptions and parameters utilized. Compared to the
last fiscal year, several portfolio changes have led to a change
in our market risk exposure. In particular the acquisition of
Schering AG, Berlin, Germany and the divestment of our
Diagnostics division and H.C. Starck changed the composition of
our exposure to fluctuations of foreign exchange rates and
interest rates as compared with the periods prior to these
transactions, as described below.
The sensitivity analyses included in the risk sections below
present the hypothetical loss in cash flows of financial
instruments and derivative financial instruments that we held as
of December 31, 2006 and 2005. These instruments were
subject to changes in foreign exchange rates, commodity prices
and interest rates. The range of sensitivities that we chose for
these analyses reflects our view of changes reasonably possible
over a one-year period.
Interest rate risk is the possibility that the total return (all
changes in fair value and interest rate performance) of a
financial instrument will change due to movements in market
rates of interest. This risk primarily affects debt with
maturities of more than one year. Items with these long
maturities are not of material significance to our operations,
but are relevant to our financial obligations.
We sometimes make loans to employees. Although a small
proportion of these loans are interest-free, they generally bear
interest at market-oriented, fixed rates. More than three
quarters of our loans to employees have terms of over five
years. All of these loans are real estate related, many of them
secured by real estate. None of these loans were provided to any
of the members of our Board of Management.
|
|
|
Derivative financial instruments |
Derivative financial instruments are our main method of interest
rate hedging. We use interest rate swaps to convert a portion of
our fixed rate borrowings into, in effect, floating rate debt.
We do this because, in a normal interest rate environment,
short-term interest rates are lower than long-term interest
rates. Thus, floating debt leads to lower interest costs in the
long-run. The derivatives we use to hedge interest rate risk are
primarily
over-the-counter
instruments, particularly interest rate swaps and, in rare
cases, options. Our Corporate Treasury department has central
responsibility for managing our interest rate exposures and
using interest rate derivatives. Our Board of Management has
provided clear guidance on how to limit and monitor cash flow
risks that result from this approach.
The notional amount of these derivatives is the
total nominal value of the underlying transactions. The
fair value of these derivatives is their repurchase
value, based on quoted prices or, in the case of contracts not
publicly traded, their values as determined by standard methods,
as of a given closing date. The table below shows the notional
amount and fair value of the interest rate derivatives we held
as of December 31, 2006 and 2005; the fair values quoted
disregard any compensating movements in the values of the
underlying transactions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional Amount | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
|
As of | |
|
As of | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Interest rate hedging contracts
|
|
|
11,327 |
|
|
|
11,633 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
At December 31, 2006, the notional amount of our short-term
interest rate hedging contracts (including interest rate swaps
and options) totaled
4.1 billion
(2005:
0.4 billion);
those maturing after more than one year totaled
7.5 billion
(2005:
10.9 billion).
Our divestments of the Diagnostics division and H.C. Starck in
early 2007, led to a reduction in the level of interest rate
risk compared to the level at the end of 2006 as we used most
153
of the net proceeds from these disposals to reduce debt. We do
not anticipate any further significant change in the level of
interest rate risk with respect to our current business
operations during 2007.
Financial debt including derivatives amounted to
19,616 million
as of December 31, 2006, compared to
8,764 million
as of December 31, 2005. The increase was due to the
acquisition of the business of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany. For
the calculation of debt and details on the Schering acquisition,
see Item 5, Operating and Financial Review and
Prospects Liquidity and Capital Resources 2004, 2005
and 2006 Development of net debt. Based on our
floating interest rate debt position at year-end 2006, a
hypothetical increase of 100 basis points, or one percent
per year, of the interest rates applicable to our debt
denominated in all currencies (holding currency rates constant),
effective beginning January 1, 2007, would have resulted in
an increase in our interest expense for the year ended
December 31, 2006 of
124 million
(2006 (based on year-end 2005 debt levels):
39.7 million).
Had the divestments in January 2007 occurred as of
December 31, 2006, this increase would have been reduced to
78 million.
Because we conduct our operations in many currencies, we face a
variety of risks associated with fluctuations in the relative
values of these currencies. The primary currencies with respect
to which we have material exchange rate risk are the
U.S. dollar, Japanese yen and the Canadian dollar. In
general, appreciation of the euro in relation to another
currency has an adverse effect on our reported revenues and
results, and depreciation of the euro has a positive effect.
Since we are not including anticipated cash flows in our
sensitivity analysis, the main impact of an adverse change
results from derivatives used to hedge our anticipated exposure
in foreign currencies. We therefore apply an adverse change in
currencies where the euro depreciates against all other
currencies by 10 percent.
We face transaction risk when our businesses generate revenue in
one currency but incur costs relating to that revenue in a
different currency. For example, an increase in the value of the
U.S. dollar relative to the euro will increase the euro
value of Bayers sales and earnings made in the dollar zone
and increase the competitiveness of its products produced in
Europe against products exported from the United States. Because
we enter into foreign exchange transactions for a significant
portion of our contracted and forecasted operational foreign
exchange exposures, we believe that a significant increase or
decrease in the exchange rate of the euro relative to other
major world currencies would not, in the short term, materially
affect our future cash flows. Over time, however, to the extent
that we cannot reflect these exchange rate movements in the
pricing of our products in local currency, they could harm our
cash flows.
Many of the companies of the Bayer Group are located outside the
euro zone. Because the euro is our financial reporting currency,
we translate the financial statements of these subsidiaries into
euro for inclusion in our consolidated financial statements.
Period-to-period
changes in the average exchange rate for a particular
countrys currency can significantly affect the translation
into euro of both revenues and operating income denominated in
that currency. Unlike the effect of exchange rate fluctuations
on transaction exposure, the effect of exchange rate translation
exposure does not affect our local currency cash flows. See
Note 30 to the consolidated financial statements appearing
elsewhere in this annual report on
Form 20-F.
Outside the euro zone, we hold significant assets, liabilities
and operations denominated in local currencies, most importantly
the U.S. dollar. Although we regularly assess and evaluate
the long-term currency risk inherent in these investments, we
generally undertake foreign exchange hedge transactions
addressing this type of risk only when we are considering
withdrawal from a specific venture and repatriating the funds
that our withdrawal generates. However, we reflect effects from
currency fluctuations on the translation of net asset amounts
into euro in our equity position.
154
The translation effects of currency fluctuations had no
measurable effects on our sales in 2006, compared to an increase
in our sales of
0.3 billion
in 2005 and a decrease of
0.9 billion
in 2004.
|
|
|
Derivative financial instruments |
To mitigate the impact of currency exchange fluctuations, we
regularly assess our transaction exposure to currency risks and
hedge a portion of those risks with derivative financial
instruments. Our Corporate Treasury department has central
responsibility for managing our currency exposures and using
currency derivatives. Our Board of Management has provided clear
guidance on how to limit and monitor cash flow risks that result
from this approach.
We relate the maturity dates of hedging contracts to the
anticipated cash flows of the Bayer Group. Our policy is
generally to use forward hedges and in some cases options
depending upon our view of market conditions based on
fundamental and technical analysis.
The table below shows the notional amounts and fair values of
the currency derivatives we held as of December 31, 2006
and 2005. We have included interest and principal currency swaps
in this presentation since they are primarily used to hedge
currency risks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional Amount | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
|
As of | |
|
As of | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Forward exchange contracts, currency swaps and interest and
principal currency swaps
|
|
|
5,532 |
|
|
|
11,990 |
|
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
98 |
|
Currency options
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
At December 31, 2006, we estimated that our aggregate
annual direct net transaction risk from sales and purchases in
foreign currencies was approximately
3.1 billion,
which consisted primarily of U.S. dollars
(U.S. $3.1 billion), Japanese yen
(¥50 billion) and Canadian dollars (CAN
$535 million). We do not anticipate a significant change in
these levels of risk with respect to our current business
operations during 2007. The increase in risk compared to
December 31, 2005
(2.5 billion)
is mainly related to the acquisition of the business of Schering
AG, Germany and divestments of H.C. Starck and our Diagnostics
division.
We applied a hypothetical adverse change of 10 percent in
foreign currency exchange rates, where the U.S. dollar,
Japanese yen and Canadian dollar simultaneously strengthened
against the euro using the year-end exchange rates of these
currencies as a basis. The estimated hypothetical loss in cash
flows of derivative and non-derivative financial instruments as
of December 31, 2006 would be
156 million
(2005:
85 million).
Of these
156 million,
111 million
are related to the U.S. dollar,
15 million
to the Japanese yen and
30 million
to other currencies.
157 million
of the estimated hypothetical loss in cash flow of
156 million
resulted from derivatives used to hedge our anticipated exposure
in foreign currencies. These transactions typically qualify for
hedge accounting. The offsetting position of
1 million
is attributable to an unhedged position from accounts
receivable. The impact of foreign currency exchange rate
fluctuations on our anticipated sales in foreign currencies is
not included in this calculation.
Credit risk is the possibility that the value of our assets may
become impaired if counterparties cannot meet their obligations
in transactions involving financial instruments. Since we do not
conclude master netting arrangements with our customers, the
total of the amounts recognized in assets represents our maximum
exposure to credit risk.
155
|
|
|
Raw Materials, Commodity and Energy Price Risks |
We operate in markets in which economic cyclicality often
affects raw material and product prices. Fluctuations in prices
and availability of raw materials, commodities and energies
affect major parts of our business. In order to secure our
supply of raw materials, we are party to long-term supply
contracts, buy additional quantities on the spot markets, and
enter into swap agreements to manage our supply/demand as
needed. The most important of our raw materials and energies
affected by price fluctuations are:
|
|
|
|
|
Benzene; |
|
|
|
Phenol; |
|
|
|
Acetone; |
|
|
|
Propylene oxide; |
|
|
|
Ethylene; |
|
|
|
Toluene; |
|
|
|
Electric power; and |
|
|
|
Steam. |
As these products are derived from crude oil, naphtha and
natural gas, their prices are affected by the volatility in the
markets for these underlying basic feedstocks. Sometimes,
however, their prices are decoupled from those for the
underlying basic feedstocks and instead driven by the global
supply and demand in the markets for these derivative products.
We typically use the following measures to avoid and manage
pricing risk in purchasing raw materials and energies:
|
|
|
|
|
coverage of recurrent requirements with long-term contracts to
reduce the price volatility of purchases on the spot markets; |
|
|
|
incorporating pricing formulas linked to economic indices and
pre-products into our contracts, rather than using published
prices; |
|
|
|
stock-keeping, flexibility in supply sources and, wherever
possible, other alternative production plants to limit risks
from raw material availability (only applicable to raw
materials); and |
|
|
|
hedging. |
|
|
|
Derivative financial instruments |
Facing increasing volatility in commodity and energy markets, we
started a price risk management program in 2003 designed to
reduce the variability of our expenditures for energy and
commodity purchases by entering into financial swaps, collars
and options on the
over-the-counter
markets. The gas and steam contracts for our major European
sites are linked to liquidly traded fuel oil and European
natural gas indices; the U.S. contracts are based on
U.S. natural gas indices. The majority of the hedges for
these contracts qualify for hedge accounting under IFRS and
U.S. GAAP. Our commodity hedges for petrochemical purchases
are typically linked to crude oil and naphtha, which are all
feedstock to the production process of the raw materials our
production depends on. These contracts are treated as trading
instruments for accounting purposes.
The strategy for economically hedging energy and commodity price
risks is based on contracts with a maturity of up to three
years. Our procurement departments have central responsibility
for managing our raw material, commodity and energy price risks.
All financial derivatives which are not directly executed with
suppliers in conjunction with purchasing agreements are executed
and managed by our Corporate Treasury department. Our Board of
Management has provided clear guidance on how to limit and
monitor cash flow risks that result from this approach.
156
The notional amount of these derivatives is the
nominal value of the underlying transactions. The fair
value of these derivatives is their repurchase value,
based on quoted prices or, in the case of contracts not publicly
traded, their values as determined by standard methods, as of a
given closing date. The table below shows the notional amount
and fair value of the financial derivatives we held as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005; the fair values quoted
disregard any compensating movements in the values of the
underlying transactions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional | |
|
|
|
|
Amount | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
|
As of | |
|
As of | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Commodity hedging contracts
|
|
|
416 |
|
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
(73 |
) |
Commodity option hedging contracts
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
At December 31, 2006, the notional amount of our commodity
and energy hedging contracts totaled
389 million
(2005:
465 million).
We do not anticipate a significant change in the level of
commodity and energy price risk with respect to our current
business operations during 2007.
We applied a hypothetical adverse change of 20 percent in
commodity and energy prices, where all prices simultaneously
decrease. The estimated hypothetical loss in cash flows of
derivative financial instruments as of December 31, 2006
would be
36 million
(2005:
66 million).
|
|
Item 12. |
Description of Securities Other Than Equity
Securities |
Not applicable.
157
PART II
|
|
Item 13. |
Defaults, Dividend Arrearages and Delinquencies |
None.
|
|
Item 14. |
Material Modifications to the Rights of Security Holders
and Use of Proceeds |
None.
|
|
Item 15. |
Controls and Procedures |
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Bayer AG management, with the participation of Bayer
AGs chief executive officer (CEO) and chief financial
officer (CFO), have conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness
of the design and operation of the Companys disclosure
controls and procedures as of December 31, 2006 and have
concluded that, as of such date, the Companys disclosure
controls and procedures were effective to provide reasonable
assurance that information required to be disclosed by us in the
reports we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported, within the time periods specified in the applicable
rules and forms, and that it is accumulated and communicated to
our management, including our chief executive officer and chief
financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions
regarding required disclosure.
There are inherent limitations to the effectiveness of any
system of disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well
designed, such as the possibility of human error and the
circumvention or overriding of the controls and procedures.
Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective may not
prevent or detect misstatements and can provide only reasonable
assurance of achieving their control objectives. In addition,
any determination of effectiveness of controls is not a
projection of any effectiveness of those controls to future
periods, as those controls may become inadequate because of
changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with the
policies or procedures may deteriorate.
Report of Bayer AGs Management on Internal Control
over Financial Reporting
Bayer AG management is responsible for establishing and
maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting.
Bayer AG management, with the participation of Bayer
AGs chief executive officer (CEO) and chief financial
officer (CFO), has conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness
of the Companys internal control over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2006. In conducting this evaluation, it
used the criteria established in the Internal
Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee
of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO)
and Control Objectives for Information and related Technology
(COBIT). Based on our evaluation under these criteria,
management has concluded that, as of December 31, 2006, the
Bayer Groups internal control over financial reporting is
effective to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation and fair
presentation of our published consolidated financial statements.
Bayer AG management has excluded the acquired Schering AG
business from its evaluation of internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2006 because it was acquired
by Bayer in June 2006. The total assets and total revenues of
the acquired Schering AG business represent approximately
9 percent, or
5 billion
(total assets excluding amount resulting from the purchase price
allocation) and 11 percent, or
3.1 billion,
respectively of the related consolidated financial statements
amounts as of, and for the year ended, December 31, 2006.
The management evaluation of the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006
has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers AG, Essen (PwC), an
independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in
their report which is included under Item 18 on page F-2.
158
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods
are subject to risk that controls may become inadequate because
of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with
the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
Attestation of the Registered Public Accounting
Firm
See report of PwC, an independent registered public accounting
firm, included under Item 18 on page F-2.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial
Reporting
There has been no change in our internal control over financial
reporting during 2006 that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control
over financial reporting.
|
|
Item 16A. |
Audit Committee Financial Expert |
Our Supervisory Board has determined that Dr. Schneider is
an audit committee financial expert, as that term is defined in
Item 16A(b) of
Form 20-F.
We have adopted a code of ethics, as that term is defined by
Item 16B(b) of
Form 20-F, that is
applicable to all of our employees, including our chief
executive officer, chief financial officer and chief accounting
officer. Our code of ethics is available on our website at
http://www.bayer.com/bayer-group/corporate-compliance/page1134.htm.
(Reference to this uniform resource locator or
URL is made as an inactive textual reference for
informational purposes only. The information found at this
website is not incorporated by reference into this document.)
|
|
Item 16C. |
Principal Accountant Fees and Services |
Independent Auditor Fees
Fees billed to the Company for professional services by its
principal accountant, PricewaterhouseCoopers, during the fiscal
years 2004, 2005 and 2006 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type of fees |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Euros in millions) | |
Audit fees
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Audit-related fees
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Tax fees
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Fees for other services
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
All other fees amounted to less than
500,000 in 2004. |
The audit-related services PricewaterhouseCoopers provided
related to acquisition/disposition due diligence, audits of
financial carve-out statements, reviews of Bayers
information system unrelated to audit and audits of employee
benefit plans. No services falling under the de
minimis exception of paragraph (c)(7)(i)(c) of
Rule 2-01 of
Regulation S-X
were provided to the Company by PricewaterhouseCoopers in 2004,
2005 and 2006.
159
|
|
|
Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policies |
All services provided by our auditor and companies affiliated
with our auditor must be pre-approved by the audit committee of
our Supervisory Board (Aufsichtsrat). The annual contract
conditions and fees relating to the audit of the financial
statements of the Bayer Group and Bayer AG must be approved by
the audit committee on a case-by-case basis. Other services may
be pre-approved by the audit committee within the authorities
the audit committee has adopted; if they fall outside these
authorities, they require case-by-case approval. Our policies
for these pre-approvals grant authority to management to engage
our auditor and companies affiliated with our auditor for:
|
|
|
|
|
Audit services up to an annual aggregate, which was
18 million
in 2004,
16 million
in 2005 and
26 million
in 2006 for Bayer Group and Bayer AG and which include the audit
of the consolidated financial statements of Bayer and its
affiliates; services necessary to provide audit opinions;
services in connection with the submission of reports to the
SEC; attest services for reports prepared on Bayers
internal control system and review of Bayers information
systems; accounting and disclosure advice in connection with the
annual audit; and audit services relating to the audit of
restated prior-year figures, if any. |
|
|
|
Audit-related services, which include acquisition/disposition
due diligence; audits of material companies acquired or to be
acquired, of carve-out statements relating to acquisitions or
dispositions, of closing balances for dispositions and of
employee benefit plans; procedures necessary to meet finance,
accounting or other regulatory reporting requirements; advice on
internal control systems; reviews of Bayers information
systems unrelated to audit; assistance in interpreting SEC
requirements; and evaluation of risk management. |
|
|
|
Tax advisory services, provided that the auditor or affiliate
does not act as a representative of Bayer and did not recommend
the transaction to which the tax advisory services relate; these
include tax planning and advice; assistance with tax compliance;
reviewing tax declarations; assistance in tax audits and
appeals; and tax appraisals. |
|
|
|
Other services, which include other risk management advice;
audits of valuations performed by other advisors; analysis or
review of business plans or planning processes (but not design
or implementation thereof); and other financial related advice. |
Pre-approval for the audit-related services, tax advisory
services and other services categories is only valid if these
services together aggregate below 66 percent of the annual
budget set for audit services. Any requests for services to be
provided by the auditor or an affiliate must be made through
Bayers accounting department, which will, if necessary,
prepare the individual approval applications. The accounting
department also notifies the audit committee of services
provided pursuant to the pre-approval policies, monitors the
pre-approval budget, notifies the chairman of the audit
committee once the 66 percent pre-approval threshold has
been reached and maintains records of all services provided by
the auditor and its affiliates.
|
|
Item 16D. |
Exemptions from the Listing Standards for Audit
Committees |
We rely on the exemption afforded by
Rule 10A-3(b)(1)(iv)(C)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. We
believe that such reliance does not materially adversely affect
the ability of our audit committee to act independently or to
satisfy the other requirements of
Rule 10A-3.
160
|
|
Item 16E. |
Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and
Affiliated Purchasers |
The following table sets forth certain information concerning
purchases by us of Bayer AG ordinary shares of no par value
during 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum Number | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(or Approximate | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of | |
|
Dollar Value) of | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased | |
|
Shares (or Units) | |
|
|
Total Number | |
|
Average Price | |
|
as Part of Publicly | |
|
that May Yet Be | |
|
|
of Shares | |
|
Paid per Share | |
|
Announced Plans | |
|
Purchased Under the | |
Period (2006) |
|
Purchased(a) | |
|
in Euro(b) | |
|
or Programs | |
|
Plans or Programs | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
January
|
|
|
22,773 |
|
|
|
37.01 |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
February
|
|
|
30,570 |
|
|
|
34.41 |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
March
|
|
|
35,293 |
|
|
|
34.27 |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
April
|
|
|
50,496 |
|
|
|
33.62 |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
May
|
|
|
53,487 |
|
|
|
36.90 |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
June
|
|
|
136,619 |
|
|
|
34.48 |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
July
|
|
|
26,989 |
|
|
|
35.71 |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
August
|
|
|
27,207 |
|
|
|
38.48 |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
September
|
|
|
38,472 |
|
|
|
38.52 |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
October
|
|
|
532,391 |
|
|
|
40.79 |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
November
|
|
|
24,817 |
|
|
|
40.10 |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
December
|
|
|
23,618 |
|
|
|
40.59 |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
[N/A] |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Relates to purchases of Bayer AG ordinary shares of no par value
made by Bayer or Bayers US subsidiaries to accommodate its
employee stock participation programs in Germany and the United
States. Purchases made by Bayer under the remaining employee
stock participation programs represent an amount that is
immaterial in the aggregate. Our Board of Management is
authorized until October 27, 2007 to purchase Bayer AG
ordinary shares representing up to 10 percent of
Bayers capital stock, including for the purpose of
accommodating Bayers Stock Participation Program. For
further information on our Stock Participation Program, see
Item 6, Directors, Senior Management and
Employees Compensation Employee
Stock-Based Compensation Program. |
|
(b) |
|
Average price paid per share includes commissions. |
As of December 31, 2006 none of our subsidiaries owned any
Bayer AG ordinary shares.
161
PART III
|
|
Item 17. |
Financial Statements |
We have responded to Item 18 in lieu of responding to this
item.
|
|
Item 18. |
Financial Statements |
See pages F-1 through F-139, incorporated herein by reference.
Documents filed as exhibits to this annual report on
Form 20-F:
|
|
|
Exhibit 1.1
|
|
Articles of Association (Satzung) of Bayer AG, as amended
to date, in English translation. |
Exhibit 2.1
|
|
The total amount of long-term debt securities Bayer AG
authorized under any instrument does not exceed 10 percent
of the total assets of the Company. Bayer AG agrees to furnish
to the Securities and Exchange Commission, upon its request, a
copy of any instrument defining the rights of holders of
long-term debt of Bayer AG or its subsidiaries for which
consolidated or unconsolidated financial statements are required
to be filed. |
Exhibit 4.1
|
|
Spin-Off and Acquisition Agreement, dated September 22,
2004, between Bayer AG and LANXESS AG, in English translation,
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Bayer AGs
Annual Report on Form 20-F for the Year Ended
December 31, 2004. |
Exhibit 4.2
|
|
Master Agreement, dated September 22, 2004, between Bayer
AG and LANXESS AG, in English translation, incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.2 to Bayer AGs Annual Report
on Form 20-F for the Year Ended December 31, 2004. |
Exhibit 4.3
|
|
7,000,000,000
Syndicated Facilities Agreement, dated 23 March 2006, by and
among Bayer AG; Citigroup Global Markets Limited and Credit
Suisse International, as Mandated Lead Arrangers; Citigroup
Global Markets Limited and Credit Suisse International, as
Bookrunners; and Citibank International plc, as Facility Agent,
incorporated by reference to the Schedule TO filed by Bayer
AG on April 13, 2006. |
Exhibit 8.1
|
|
Significant subsidiaries as of the end of the year covered by
this report as defined in rule 1-02(w) of Regulation S-X:
See Item 4, Information on the Company
Organizational Structure. |
Exhibit 12.1
|
|
Certification of the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
Exhibit 12.2
|
|
Certification of the Principal Financial Officer pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
Exhibit 13.1
|
|
Certification in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 1350
as adopted by § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
162
SIGNATURES
The registrant hereby certifies that it meets all of the
requirements for filing on
Form 20-F and that
it has duly caused and authorized the undersigned to sign this
annual report on its behalf.
BAYER AG
/s/ Werner Wenning
Name: Werner Wenning
|
|
Title: |
Chairman of the Board of Management |
/s/ Dr. Roland Hartwig
Name: Dr. Roland Hartwig
Date: March 15, 2007
163
BAYER GROUP
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-2 |
|
Consolidated Financial Statements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-4 |
|
|
|
|
|
F-5 |
|
|
|
|
|
F-6 |
|
|
|
|
|
F-7 |
|
|
|
|
F-8 |
|
F-1
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors
and Stockholders of Bayer AG
We have completed an integrated audit of Bayer AGs
consolidated financial statements and of its internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006 and audits
of its 2005 and 2004 consolidated financial statements in
accordance with International Auditing Standards and standards
of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United
States). Our opinions on the Bayer AG 2006, 2005 and 2004
financial statements and on its internal control over financial
reporting of 2006, based on our audits, are presented below.
Consolidated financial statements
We have audited the consolidated financial statements
(comprising consolidated balance sheets, statements of income,
statements of cash flows, statements of recognized income and
expense and notes) of Bayer AG as of December 31, 2006 and
2005 and for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2006. These consolidated financial statements
are the responsibility of the Board of Directors and management.
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
consolidated financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with International
Standards on Auditing and the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements
are free of material misstatement. An audit of consolidated
financial statements includes examining, on a test basis,
evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the
consolidated financial statements, assessing the accounting
principles used and significant estimates made by management,
and evaluating the overall consolidated financial statement
presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable
basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of
Bayer AG and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2006 and
2005, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for
each of the three years in the period ended December 31,
2006 in accordance with International Financial Reporting
Standards (IFRS).
IFRS vary in certain significant respects from accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America
and as allowed by Item 18 of
Form 20-F.
Information relating to the nature and effect of such
differences is presented in Note [41] to the consolidated
financial statements.
Internal control over financial reporting
Also in our opinion, managements assessment, included in
Item 15, Controls and Procedures Report of
Bayer AGs Management on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting, that Bayer AG maintained effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006
based on criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) and Control
Objectives for Information and related Technology (COBIT), is
fairly stated, in all material respects, based on those
criteria. Furthermore, in our opinion, the Company maintained,
in all material respects, effective internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2006 based on
criteria established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission (COSO) and Control Objectives for
Information and related Technology (COBIT). Bayer AGs
Board of Directors and management are responsible for
maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting
and management is responsible for the assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our
responsibility is to express opinions on managements
assessment and on the effectiveness of the Companys
internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We
conducted our audit of internal control over financial reporting
in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether effective internal control over
financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. An
audit of internal control over financial reporting includes
obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial
reporting, evaluating managements assessment, testing and
evaluating the design
F-2
and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing
such other procedures as we consider necessary in the
circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable
basis for our opinions.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that
transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of
financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the
company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
As described in Item 15, Controls and
Procedures Report of Bayer AGs Management on
Internal Control over Financial Reporting, Management has
excluded the acquired Schering AG business from its assessment
of internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2006 because Schering AG was acquired by
Bayer AG in a business combination during 2006. We have
also excluded the acquired Schering AG business from our audit
of internal controls over financial reporting. The total assets
and total revenues of the acquired Schering AG business
represent approximately 9 percent or
5 billion
(total assets excluding amount resulting from purchase price
allocation) and 11 percent or
3.1 billion,
respectively, of the related consolidated financial statement
amounts as of and for the year ended December 31, 2006.
Essen, Germany
March 14, 2007
PricewaterhouseCoopers
Aktiengesellschaft
Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft
|
|
|
/s/ ALBRECHT
P.
Albrecht
Wirtschaftsprüfer
(German Public Accountant) |
|
/s/ LINKE
V.
Linke
Wirtschaftsprüfer
(German Public Accountant) |
F-3
Bayer Group
Consolidated Statements of Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
Net sales
|
|
|
[8] |
|
|
|
20,925 |
|
|
|
24,701 |
|
|
|
28,956 |
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,086 |
) |
|
|
(13,412 |
) |
|
|
(15,275 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,839 |
|
|
|
11,289 |
|
|
|
13,681 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling expenses
|
|
|
[9] |
|
|
|
(4,783 |
) |
|
|
(5,247 |
) |
|
|
(6,534 |
) |
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,772 |
) |
|
|
(1,729 |
) |
|
|
(2,297 |
) |
General administration expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,285 |
) |
|
|
(1,307 |
) |
|
|
(1,599 |
) |
Other operating income
|
|
|
[10] |
|
|
|
802 |
|
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
[11] |
|
|
|
(1,144 |
) |
|
|
(1,267 |
) |
|
|
(1,219 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating result
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,657 |
|
|
|
2,514 |
|
|
|
2,762 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity-method loss
|
|
|
[13.1] |
|
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
Non-operating income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
483 |
|
|
|
632 |
|
|
|
931 |
|
Non-operating expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(976 |
) |
|
|
(1,224 |
) |
|
|
(1,688 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-operating result
|
|
|
[13] |
|
|
|
(632 |
) |
|
|
(602 |
) |
|
|
(782 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,025 |
|
|
|
1,912 |
|
|
|
1,980 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
[14] |
|
|
|
(401 |
) |
|
|
(538 |
) |
|
|
(454 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from continuing operations after taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
624 |
|
|
|
1,374 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from discontinued operations after taxes
|
|
|
[7.2] |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income after taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
682 |
|
|
|
1,595 |
|
|
|
1,695 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which attributable to minority interest
|
|
|
[15] |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which attributable to Bayer AG stockholders (net
income)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
685 |
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share
()
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From continuing operations
|
|
|
[16] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.86 |
|
|
|
1.88 |
|
|
|
2.00 |
|
|
Diluted*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.86 |
|
|
|
1.88 |
|
|
|
2.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
From continuing and discontinued operations
|
|
|
[16] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.94 |
|
|
|
2.19 |
|
|
|
2.22 |
|
|
Diluted*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.94 |
|
|
|
2.19 |
|
|
|
2.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 and 2005 figures restated |
|
* |
The ordinary shares to be issued upon conversion of the
mandatory convertible bond are treated as already issued shares. |
F-4
Bayer Group
Consolidated Balance Sheets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note | |
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
Noncurrent assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
[17] |
|
|
|
2,623 |
|
|
|
8,227 |
|
Other intangible assets
|
|
|
[17] |
|
|
|
5,065 |
|
|
|
15,807 |
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
[18] |
|
|
|
8,321 |
|
|
|
8,867 |
|
Investments in associates
|
|
|
[19] |
|
|
|
795 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
Other financial assets
|
|
|
[20] |
|
|
|
1,429 |
|
|
|
1,094 |
|
Other receivables
|
|
|
[21] |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
Deferred taxes
|
|
|
[14] |
|
|
|
1,698 |
|
|
|
1,205 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,130 |
|
|
|
35,897 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
[22] |
|
|
|
5,504 |
|
|
|
6,153 |
|
Trade accounts receivable
|
|
|
[23] |
|
|
|
5,204 |
|
|
|
5,802 |
|
Other financial assets
|
|
|
[20] |
|
|
|
447 |
|
|
|
401 |
|
Other receivables
|
|
|
[21] |
|
|
|
1,421 |
|
|
|
1,217 |
|
Claims for tax refunds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
726 |
|
|
|
581 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
[36] |
|
|
|
3,290 |
|
|
|
2,915 |
|
Assets held for sale and discontinued operations
|
|
|
[7.2] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,592 |
|
|
|
19,994 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,722 |
|
|
|
55,891 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity
|
|
|
[24] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital stock of Bayer AG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,870 |
|
|
|
1,957 |
|
Capital reserves of Bayer AG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,942 |
|
|
|
4,028 |
|
Other reserves
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,265 |
|
|
|
6,782 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,077 |
|
|
|
12,767 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity attributable to minority interest
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,157 |
|
|
|
12,851 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provisions for pensions and other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
[25] |
|
|
|
7,174 |
|
|
|
6,543 |
|
Other provisions
|
|
|
[26] |
|
|
|
1,340 |
|
|
|
1,464 |
|
Financial liabilities
|
|
|
[27] |
|
|
|
7,185 |
|
|
|
14,723 |
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
[29] |
|
|
|
516 |
|
|
|
449 |
|
Deferred taxes
|
|
|
[14] |
|
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
4,346 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,495 |
|
|
|
27,525 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other provisions
|
|
|
[26] |
|
|
|
3,009 |
|
|
|
3,765 |
|
Financial liabilities
|
|
|
[27] |
|
|
|
1,767 |
|
|
|
5,078 |
|
Trade accounts payable
|
|
|
[28] |
|
|
|
1,974 |
|
|
|
2,369 |
|
Tax liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
304 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
[29] |
|
|
|
2,016 |
|
|
|
3,055 |
|
Liabilities directly related to assets held for sale and
discontinued operations
|
|
|
[7.2] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
848 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,070 |
|
|
|
15,515 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity and liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,722 |
|
|
|
55,891 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-5
Bayer Group
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
Income after taxes from continuing operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
624 |
|
|
|
1,374 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
538 |
|
|
|
454 |
|
Non-operating result
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
632 |
|
|
|
602 |
|
|
|
782 |
|
Income taxes paid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(407 |
) |
|
|
(463 |
) |
|
|
(763 |
) |
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,729 |
|
|
|
1,608 |
|
|
|
1,913 |
|
Change in pension provisions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(393 |
) |
|
|
(501 |
) |
|
|
(295 |
) |
(Gains) losses on retirements of noncurrent assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
(133 |
) |
Non-cash effects of the remeasurement of acquired assets
(inventory work-down)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
429 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating cash flow before changes in net working capital
(gross operating cash flow)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,551 |
|
|
|
3,114 |
|
|
|
3,913 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Decrease (increase) in inventories
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(365 |
) |
|
|
(130 |
) |
|
|
(155 |
) |
Decrease (increase) in trade accounts receivable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(359 |
) |
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
(201 |
) |
(Decrease) increase in trade accounts payable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(117 |
) |
|
|
130 |
|
Changes in other working capital, other non-cash items
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
(net cash flow, continuing operations)
|
|
|
[33] |
|
|
|
1,959 |
|
|
|
3,227 |
|
|
|
3,928 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities (net cash
flow, discontinued operations)
|
|
|
[7.2] |
|
|
|
491 |
|
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
(net cash flow, total)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,450 |
|
|
|
3,502 |
|
|
|
4,203 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash outflows for additions to property, plant, equipment and
intangible assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,251 |
) |
|
|
(1,389 |
) |
|
|
(1,876 |
) |
Cash inflows from sales of property, plant, equipment and other
assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
Cash inflows from divestitures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
293 |
|
|
|
489 |
|
Cash inflows from noncurrent financial assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
1,189 |
|
|
|
850 |
|
Cash outflows for acquisitions less acquired cash
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(358 |
) |
|
|
(2,188 |
) |
|
|
(15,351 |
) |
Interest and dividends received
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
686 |
|
Cash inflows (outflows) from current financial assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
(202 |
) |
|
|
287 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
(total)
|
|
|
[34] |
|
|
|
(814 |
) |
|
|
(1,741 |
) |
|
|
(14,730 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital contributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,174 |
|
Bayer AG dividend, dividend payments to minority stockholders,
reimbursements of advance capital gains tax payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(559 |
) |
|
|
(440 |
) |
|
|
(535 |
) |
Issuances of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,393 |
|
|
|
2,005 |
|
|
|
13,931 |
|
Retirements of debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(881 |
) |
|
|
(2,659 |
) |
|
|
(3,216 |
) |
Interest paid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(724 |
) |
|
|
(787 |
) |
|
|
(1,155 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
(total)
|
|
|
[35] |
|
|
|
(761 |
) |
|
|
(1,881 |
) |
|
|
10,199 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in cash and cash equivalents due to business
activities (total)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
875 |
|
|
|
(120 |
) |
|
|
(328 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,734 |
|
|
|
3,570 |
|
|
|
3,290 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in cash and cash equivalents due to changes in scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(196 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Change in cash and cash equivalents due to exchange rate
movements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year
|
|
|
[36] |
|
|
|
3,570 |
|
|
|
3,290 |
|
|
|
2,915 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 and 2005 figures restated
F-6
Bayer Group
Consolidated Statements of Recognized Income and Expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, | |
|
Dec. 31, | |
|
Dec. 31, | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Changes in fair values of derivatives designated as hedges,
recognized in stockholders equity
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(59 |
) |
Changes in fair values of derivatives designated as hedges,
recognized in the income statement
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Changes in fair values of available-for-sale financial assets,
recognized in stockholders equity
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
Changes in fair values of available-for-sale financial
assets, recognized in the income statement
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revaluation surplus (IFRS 3)
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in actuarial gains (losses) relating to pensions and
other post-employment benefits, recognized in stockholders
equity
|
|
|
(740 |
) |
|
|
(1,207 |
) |
|
|
448 |
|
Exchange differences on translation of operations outside the
euro zone
|
|
|
(304 |
) |
|
|
857 |
|
|
|
(725 |
) |
Deferred taxes on valuation adjustments, recognized directly in
stockholders equity
|
|
|
251 |
|
|
|
470 |
|
|
|
(148 |
) |
Deferred taxes on valuation adjustments, removed from
stockholders equity and recognized in the income
statement
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation adjustments recognized directly in
stockholders equity
|
|
|
(655 |
) |
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
(477 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income after taxes
|
|
|
682 |
|
|
|
1,595 |
|
|
|
1,695 |
|
Total income and expense recognized in the financial
statements
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
1,712 |
|
|
|
1,218 |
|
|
of which attributable to minority interest
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
of which attributable to Bayer AG stockholders
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
1,706 |
|
|
|
1,211 |
|
F-7
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group
[1] Key Data by Business Segment
and Region
Key Data by Business Segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HealthCare | |
|
CropScience | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental | |
|
|
|
|
Consumer | |
|
|
|
Science, | |
|
|
Pharmaceuticals | |
|
Health | |
|
Crop Protection | |
|
BioScience | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Business Segments |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net sales (external)
|
|
|
4,067 |
|
|
|
7,478 |
|
|
|
3,929 |
|
|
|
4,246 |
|
|
|
4,874 |
|
|
|
4,644 |
|
|
|
1,022 |
|
|
|
1,056 |
|
Change
|
|
|
2.7 |
% |
|
|
83.9 |
% |
|
|
41.6 |
% |
|
|
8.1 |
% |
|
|
(1.7 |
)% |
|
|
(4.7 |
)% |
|
|
3.3 |
% |
|
|
3.3 |
% |
Change currency adjusted
|
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
|
84.5 |
% |
|
|
40.3 |
% |
|
|
8.5 |
% |
|
|
(4.3 |
)% |
|
|
(5.2 |
)% |
|
|
2.1 |
% |
|
|
3.7 |
% |
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Other operating income
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
475 |
|
|
|
563 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
384 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
200 |
|
Operating cash flow before changes in net working capital (gross
operating cash flow)
|
|
|
449 |
|
|
|
1,086 |
|
|
|
474 |
|
|
|
634 |
|
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
691 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
209 |
|
Capital invested
|
|
|
2,501 |
|
|
|
18,253 |
|
|
|
3,498 |
|
|
|
3,477 |
|
|
|
7,372 |
|
|
|
7,203 |
|
|
|
1,477 |
|
|
|
1,403 |
|
CFRoI
|
|
|
18.7 |
% |
|
|
10.5 |
% |
|
|
13.3 |
% |
|
|
18.2 |
% |
|
|
10.7 |
% |
|
|
9.5 |
% |
|
|
13.8 |
% |
|
|
14.5 |
% |
Net cash flow
|
|
|
481 |
|
|
|
1,053 |
|
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
473 |
|
|
|
699 |
|
|
|
748 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
Equity-method income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity-method investments
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
3,489 |
|
|
|
25,860 |
|
|
|
4,622 |
|
|
|
4,372 |
|
|
|
8,836 |
|
|
|
7,712 |
|
|
|
1,591 |
|
|
|
1,444 |
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
476 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
Amortization and depreciation
|
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
488 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
494 |
|
|
|
505 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
2,086 |
|
|
|
3,451 |
|
|
|
1,366 |
|
|
|
1,154 |
|
|
|
2,668 |
|
|
|
2,088 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
|
|
311 |
|
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
680 |
|
|
|
1,257 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
548 |
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
Number of employees (as of Dec. 31)
|
|
|
16,800 |
|
|
|
40,000 |
|
|
|
11,400 |
|
|
|
11,400 |
|
|
|
15,800 |
|
|
|
15,000 |
|
|
|
2,700 |
|
|
|
2,900 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MaterialScience | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing | |
|
|
Materials | |
|
Systems | |
|
Reconciliation | |
|
Operations | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Business Segments |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net sales (external)
|
|
|
2,837 |
|
|
|
2,925 |
|
|
|
6,609 |
|
|
|
7,236 |
|
|
|
1,363 |
|
|
|
1,371 |
|
|
|
24,701 |
|
|
|
28,956 |
|
Change
|
|
|
28.0 |
% |
|
|
3.1 |
% |
|
|
23.6 |
% |
|
|
9.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18.0 |
% |
|
|
17.2 |
% |
Change currency adjusted
|
|
|
27.4 |
% |
|
|
3.4 |
% |
|
|
22.8 |
% |
|
|
9.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16.7 |
% |
|
|
17.4 |
% |
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
(318 |
) |
|
|
(286 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other operating income
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
514 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
736 |
|
|
|
703 |
|
|
|
(349 |
) |
|
|
(127 |
) |
|
|
2,514 |
|
|
|
2,762 |
|
Operating cash flow before changes in net working capital (gross
operating cash flow)
|
|
|
473 |
|
|
|
364 |
|
|
|
781 |
|
|
|
802 |
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
3,114 |
|
|
|
3,913 |
|
Capital invested
|
|
|
2,706 |
|
|
|
2,789 |
|
|
|
4,791 |
|
|
|
4,691 |
|
|
|
2,848 |
|
|
|
1,541 |
|
|
|
25,193 |
|
|
|
39,357 |
|
CFRoI
|
|
|
19.0 |
% |
|
|
13.2 |
% |
|
|
17.1 |
% |
|
|
16.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.5 |
% |
|
|
12.1 |
% |
Net cash flow
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
324 |
|
|
|
871 |
|
|
|
957 |
|
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
3,227 |
|
|
|
3,928 |
|
Equity-method income (loss)
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
Equity-method investments
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
580 |
|
|
|
504 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
792 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
2,770 |
|
|
|
2,742 |
|
|
|
5,125 |
|
|
|
4,745 |
|
|
|
7,493 |
|
|
|
6,091 |
|
|
|
33,926 |
|
|
|
52,966 |
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
304 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
471 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
213 |
|
|
|
1,210 |
|
|
|
1,739 |
|
Amortization and depreciation
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
159 |
|
|
|
320 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
1,608 |
|
|
|
1,913 |
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
610 |
|
|
|
597 |
|
|
|
1,632 |
|
|
|
1,681 |
|
|
|
15,970 |
|
|
|
32,910 |
|
|
|
24,701 |
|
|
|
42,192 |
|
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
1,729 |
|
|
|
2,297 |
|
Number of employees (as of Dec. 31)
|
|
|
4,700 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
9,400 |
|
|
|
9,900 |
|
|
|
21,800 |
|
|
|
21,800 |
|
|
|
82,600 |
|
|
|
106,000 |
|
F-8
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Key Data by Business Segment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HealthCare | |
|
CropScience | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental | |
|
|
|
|
Consumer | |
|
|
|
Science, | |
|
|
Pharmaceuticals | |
|
Health | |
|
Crop Protection | |
|
BioScience | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Business Segments |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net sales (external)
|
|
|
3,961 |
|
|
|
4,067 |
|
|
|
2,775 |
|
|
|
3,929 |
|
|
|
4,957 |
|
|
|
4,874 |
|
|
|
989 |
|
|
|
1,022 |
|
Change
|
|
|
(9.4 |
)% |
|
|
2.7 |
% |
|
|
(1.5 |
)% |
|
|
41.6 |
% |
|
|
3.2 |
% |
|
|
(1.7 |
)% |
|
|
2.7 |
% |
|
|
3.3 |
% |
Change currency adjusted
|
|
|
(5.9 |
)% |
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
|
4.1 |
% |
|
|
40.3 |
% |
|
|
7.0 |
% |
|
|
(4.3 |
)% |
|
|
7.5 |
% |
|
|
2.1 |
% |
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Other operating income
|
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
399 |
|
|
|
475 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
386 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
Operating cash flow before changes in net working capital (gross
operating cash flow)
|
|
|
386 |
|
|
|
449 |
|
|
|
352 |
|
|
|
474 |
|
|
|
739 |
|
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
Capital invested
|
|
|
2,305 |
|
|
|
2,501 |
|
|
|
1,390 |
|
|
|
3,498 |
|
|
|
6,932 |
|
|
|
7,372 |
|
|
|
1,454 |
|
|
|
1,477 |
|
CFRoI
|
|
|
16.8 |
% |
|
|
18.7 |
% |
|
|
24.8 |
% |
|
|
13.3 |
% |
|
|
10.9 |
% |
|
|
10.7 |
% |
|
|
10.6 |
% |
|
|
13.8 |
% |
Net cash flow
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
481 |
|
|
|
546 |
|
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
637 |
|
|
|
699 |
|
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
Equity-method income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity-method investments
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
4,052 |
|
|
|
3,489 |
|
|
|
2,289 |
|
|
|
4,622 |
|
|
|
9,117 |
|
|
|
8,836 |
|
|
|
1,703 |
|
|
|
1,591 |
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Amortization and depreciation
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
592 |
|
|
|
494 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
2,138 |
|
|
|
2,086 |
|
|
|
968 |
|
|
|
1,366 |
|
|
|
2,450 |
|
|
|
2,668 |
|
|
|
360 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
740 |
|
|
|
680 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
571 |
|
|
|
548 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
Number of employees (as of Dec. 31)
|
|
|
18,400 |
|
|
|
16,800 |
|
|
|
8,300 |
|
|
|
11,400 |
|
|
|
16,400 |
|
|
|
15,800 |
|
|
|
2,800 |
|
|
|
2,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MaterialScience | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing | |
|
|
Materials | |
|
Systems | |
|
Reconciliation | |
|
Operations | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Business Segments |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net sales (external)
|
|
|
2,217 |
|
|
|
2,837 |
|
|
|
5,349 |
|
|
|
6,609 |
|
|
|
677 |
|
|
|
1,363 |
|
|
|
20,925 |
|
|
|
24,701 |
|
Change
|
|
|
17.3 |
% |
|
|
28.0 |
% |
|
|
14.4 |
% |
|
|
23.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.5 |
% |
|
|
18.0 |
% |
Change currency adjusted
|
|
|
23.2 |
% |
|
|
27.4 |
% |
|
|
18.8 |
% |
|
|
22.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.7 |
% |
|
|
16.7 |
% |
Intersegment sales
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
(263 |
) |
|
|
(318 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other operating income
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
324 |
|
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
802 |
|
|
|
775 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
514 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
736 |
|
|
|
(214 |
) |
|
|
(349 |
) |
|
|
1,657 |
|
|
|
2,514 |
|
Operating cash flow before changes in net working capital (gross
operating cash flow)
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
473 |
|
|
|
484 |
|
|
|
781 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
2,551 |
|
|
|
3,114 |
|
Capital invested
|
|
|
2,267 |
|
|
|
2,706 |
|
|
|
4,344 |
|
|
|
4,791 |
|
|
|
3,684 |
|
|
|
2,848 |
|
|
|
22,376 |
|
|
|
25,193 |
|
CFRoI
|
|
|
11.9 |
% |
|
|
19.0 |
% |
|
|
9.8 |
% |
|
|
17.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.8 |
% |
|
|
12.5 |
% |
Net cash flow
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
871 |
|
|
|
(67 |
) |
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
1,959 |
|
|
|
3,227 |
|
Equity-method income (loss)
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
(131 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
Equity-method investments
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
562 |
|
|
|
580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
792 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
2,513 |
|
|
|
2,770 |
|
|
|
4,724 |
|
|
|
5,125 |
|
|
|
5,796 |
|
|
|
7,493 |
|
|
|
30,194 |
|
|
|
33,926 |
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
304 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
821 |
|
|
|
1,210 |
|
Amortization and depreciation
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
326 |
|
|
|
320 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
1,729 |
|
|
|
1,608 |
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
610 |
|
|
|
1,475 |
|
|
|
1,632 |
|
|
|
15,608 |
|
|
|
15,970 |
|
|
|
23,510 |
|
|
|
24,701 |
|
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
1,772 |
|
|
|
1,729 |
|
Number of employees (as of Dec. 31)
|
|
|
4,400 |
|
|
|
4,700 |
|
|
|
8,900 |
|
|
|
9,400 |
|
|
|
21,800 |
|
|
|
21,800 |
|
|
|
81,000 |
|
|
|
82,600 |
|
F-9
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Key Data by Business Region
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latin America/ | |
|
|
Europe | |
|
North America | |
|
Asia/Pacific | |
|
Africa/Middle East | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Regions |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net sales (external) by market
|
|
|
8,751 |
|
|
|
10,771 |
|
|
|
12,652 |
|
|
|
5,790 |
|
|
|
6,496 |
|
|
|
7,779 |
|
|
|
3,509 |
|
|
|
4,073 |
|
|
|
4,610 |
|
|
|
2,875 |
|
|
|
3,361 |
|
|
|
3,915 |
|
Change
|
|
|
7.2 |
% |
|
|
23.1 |
% |
|
|
17.5 |
% |
|
|
(8.1 |
)% |
|
|
12.2 |
% |
|
|
19.8 |
% |
|
|
9.4 |
% |
|
|
16.1 |
% |
|
|
13.2 |
% |
|
|
12.7 |
% |
|
|
16.9 |
% |
|
|
16.5 |
% |
Change currency adjusted
|
|
|
7.2 |
% |
|
|
22.9 |
% |
|
|
17.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.3 |
% |
|
|
19.9 |
% |
|
|
15.1 |
% |
|
|
15.2 |
% |
|
|
15.0 |
% |
|
|
19.1 |
% |
|
|
10.5 |
% |
|
|
16.0 |
% |
Net sales (external) by point of origin
|
|
|
9,531 |
|
|
|
11,655 |
|
|
|
13,696 |
|
|
|
5,807 |
|
|
|
6,492 |
|
|
|
7,776 |
|
|
|
3,306 |
|
|
|
3,931 |
|
|
|
4,410 |
|
|
|
2,281 |
|
|
|
2,623 |
|
|
|
3,074 |
|
Change
|
|
|
7.7 |
% |
|
|
22.3 |
% |
|
|
17.5 |
% |
|
|
(8.0 |
)% |
|
|
11.8 |
% |
|
|
19.8 |
% |
|
|
9.8 |
% |
|
|
18.9 |
% |
|
|
12.2 |
% |
|
|
11.6 |
% |
|
|
15.0 |
% |
|
|
17.2 |
% |
Change currency adjusted
|
|
|
7.7 |
% |
|
|
22.1 |
% |
|
|
17.5 |
% |
|
|
0.1 |
% |
|
|
10.9 |
% |
|
|
19.9 |
% |
|
|
15.9 |
% |
|
|
18.0 |
% |
|
|
14.0 |
% |
|
|
19.2 |
% |
|
|
6.9 |
% |
|
|
16.5 |
% |
Interregional sales
|
|
|
3,129 |
|
|
|
3,536 |
|
|
|
4,315 |
|
|
|
1,303 |
|
|
|
1,485 |
|
|
|
1,795 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
210 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
228 |
|
Other operating income
|
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
397 |
|
|
|
474 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
227 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
889 |
|
|
|
1,167 |
|
|
|
1,581 |
|
|
|
281 |
|
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
821 |
|
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
296 |
|
|
|
395 |
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
204 |
|
Operating cash flow before changes in net working capital (gross
operating cash flow)
|
|
|
1,374 |
|
|
|
1,557 |
|
|
|
2,495 |
|
|
|
611 |
|
|
|
978 |
|
|
|
1,016 |
|
|
|
336 |
|
|
|
431 |
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
340 |
|
|
|
265 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
Equity-method income (loss)
|
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(100 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity-method investments
|
|
|
429 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
232 |
|
|
|
307 |
|
|
|
345 |
|
|
|
297 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
17,784 |
|
|
|
18,939 |
|
|
|
37,255 |
|
|
|
6,707 |
|
|
|
7,145 |
|
|
|
7,881 |
|
|
|
2,483 |
|
|
|
3,589 |
|
|
|
3,965 |
|
|
|
1,830 |
|
|
|
2,351 |
|
|
|
2,500 |
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
460 |
|
|
|
497 |
|
|
|
777 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
472 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
Amortization and depreciation
|
|
|
1,073 |
|
|
|
980 |
|
|
|
1,201 |
|
|
|
434 |
|
|
|
419 |
|
|
|
459 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
15,566 |
|
|
|
17,091 |
|
|
|
29,985 |
|
|
|
5,122 |
|
|
|
4,779 |
|
|
|
4,928 |
|
|
|
946 |
|
|
|
1,047 |
|
|
|
1,463 |
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
992 |
|
|
|
1,049 |
|
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
1,286 |
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
|
|
1,639 |
|
|
|
398 |
|
|
|
445 |
|
|
|
551 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
Number of employees (as of Dec. 31)
|
|
|
45,000 |
|
|
|
45,700 |
|
|
|
57,800 |
|
|
|
14,900 |
|
|
|
13,100 |
|
|
|
17,200 |
|
|
|
11,500 |
|
|
|
13,200 |
|
|
|
17,300 |
|
|
|
9,600 |
|
|
|
10,600 |
|
|
|
13,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation | |
|
Continuing Operations | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Regions |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net sales (external) by market
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,925 |
|
|
|
24,701 |
|
|
|
28,956 |
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.5 |
% |
|
|
18.0 |
% |
|
|
17.2 |
% |
Change currency adjusted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.7 |
% |
|
|
16.7 |
% |
|
|
17.4 |
% |
Net sales (external) by point of origin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,925 |
|
|
|
24,701 |
|
|
|
28,956 |
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.5 |
% |
|
|
18.0 |
% |
|
|
17.2 |
% |
Change currency adjusted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.7 |
% |
|
|
16.7 |
% |
|
|
17.4 |
% |
Interregional sales
|
|
|
(4,688 |
) |
|
|
(5,369 |
) |
|
|
(6,548 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other operating income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
802 |
|
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
(231 |
) |
|
|
(166 |
) |
|
|
(140 |
) |
|
|
1,657 |
|
|
|
2,514 |
|
|
|
2,762 |
|
Operating cash flow before changes in net working capital (gross
operating cash flow)
|
|
|
(110 |
) |
|
|
(117 |
) |
|
|
(116 |
) |
|
|
2,551 |
|
|
|
3,114 |
|
|
|
3,913 |
|
Equity-method income (loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
Equity-method investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
792 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
1,390 |
|
|
|
1,902 |
|
|
|
1,365 |
|
|
|
30,194 |
|
|
|
33,926 |
|
|
|
52,966 |
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
821 |
|
|
|
1,210 |
|
|
|
1,739 |
|
Amortization and depreciation
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
1,729 |
|
|
|
1,608 |
|
|
|
1,913 |
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
1,143 |
|
|
|
792 |
|
|
|
4,767 |
|
|
|
23,510 |
|
|
|
24,701 |
|
|
|
42,192 |
|
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,772 |
|
|
|
1,729 |
|
|
|
2,297 |
|
Number of employees (as of Dec. 31)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,000 |
|
|
|
82,600 |
|
|
|
106,000 |
|
F-10
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[2] General information
The consolidated financial statements of the Bayer Group as of
December 31, 2006 have been prepared pursuant
to Section 315a of the German Commercial Code
according to the International Financial Reporting Standards
(IFRS) of the International Accounting Standards Board
(IASB), London, which are recognized by the European Union, and
the Interpretations of the International Financial Reporting
Interpretations Committee (IFRIC), in effect at the closing date.
Bayer Aktiengesellschaft (Bayer AG) is a global enterprise based
in Germany. Its business activities in the fields of health
care, nutrition and high-tech materials are divided among the
Bayer HealthCare, Bayer CropScience and Bayer MaterialScience
subgroups, respectively. The activities of the various segments
are outlined in Note [6].
A Declaration of Conformity with the German Corporate Governance
Code has been issued pursuant to Section 161 of the German
Stock Corporation Act and made available to stockholders.
The Board of Management of Bayer AG approved the consolidated
financial statements of the Bayer Group on February 27,
2007 for submission to the companys Supervisory Board.
They were submitted to the Audit Committee of the Supervisory
Board on March 8, 2007 and approved by the Supervisory
Board at its meeting on March 12, 2007.
The financial statements of the consolidated companies are
prepared according to uniform recognition and valuation
principles. Valuation adjustments made for tax reasons are not
reflected in the Group statements. The financial statements of
the individual consolidated companies are prepared as of the
closing date for the Group statements.
The Group financial statements are based on the principle of the
historical cost of acquisition, construction or production, with
the exception of certain items such as available-for-sale
financial assets and derivative financial instruments, which are
reflected at fair value.
The consolidated financial statements of the Bayer Group are
drawn up in euros
(). Amounts are
stated in millions of euros
( million)
except where otherwise indicated.
The income statement is prepared using the
cost-of-sales method,
in which expenses are classified according to their function as
cost of goods sold, selling expenses, research and development
expenses, general administration expenses or other operating
expenses.
In the income statement and balance sheet, certain items are
combined for the sake of clarity and explained in the Notes.
Assets and liabilities are classified by maturity. They are
classified as current if they mature within one year or are held
for sale, and as noncurrent if they remain in the Bayer Group
for more than one year. Trade accounts receivable and payable,
claims for tax refunds, tax liabilities and inventories are
always presented as current items, deferred tax assets and
liabilities as noncurrent items.
In compliance with IFRS 5 (Non-current Assets Held for Sale and
Discontinued Operations), a distinction was made in 2006 between
continuing operations and discontinued operations or assets held
for sale. The discontinued operations are recognized as separate
line items in the balance sheet for fiscal 2006 and in the
income and cash flow statements for 2004, 2005 and 2006.
Depreciation of noncurrent assets allocable to discontinued
operations ceased when the respective divestiture was announced.
All data in these Notes refer to continuing operations, except
where otherwise indicated. Discontinued operations are described
in Note [7.2].
Changes in recognition and valuation principles are explained in
the Notes. The retrospective application of new or revised
standards requires except as otherwise provided in
the respective standard that earnings for the
preceding year and the opening balance sheet for the reporting
year be restated as if the new recognition and valuation
principles had been applied in the past. The financial
statements as of December 31, 2005 and 2004 have therefore
been restated in line with the new and revised standards applied
by the Bayer Group as of January 1, 2006.
F-11
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[3] Effects of new accounting
pronouncements
|
|
|
Accounting standards applied for the first time in
2006 |
In 2006 the following accounting standards and interpretations
had to be applied for the first time. None of the following
standards had a material impact on the Groups net assets,
financial position, results of operations or earnings per share
in the current period.
In August 2005, the IASB issued amendments to IAS 39 (Financial
Instruments: Recognition and Measurement) and IFRS 4 (Insurance
Contracts). The amendments are intended to insure that issuers
of financial guarantee contracts include the resulting
liabilities in their balance sheet. The amendments define a
financial guarantee contract as a contract that requires
the issuer to make specified payments to reimburse the holder
for a loss it incurs because a specified debtor fails to make
payment when due in accordance with the original or modified
terms of a debt instrument. The amendment is to be applied
for annual periods beginning on or after January 1, 2006.
In December 2004, the IFRIC issued the interpretation IFRIC 5
(Rights to Interests Arising From Decommissioning, Restoration
and Environmental Rehabilitation Funds), which specifies the
accounting treatment of cash reimbursements from funds set up to
cover costs of waste disposal, environmental remediation and
similar commitments. IFRIC 5 is to be applied for annual periods
beginning on or after January 1, 2006. The interpretation
is not relevant for the Bayer Group since it does not
participate in such funds.
In September 2005, the IFRIC issued IFRIC 6 (Liabilities arising
from Participating in a Specific Market Waste
Electrical and Electronic Equipment). IFRIC 6 clarifies when
certain producers of electrical goods will need to recognize a
liability for the cost of waste management relating to the
decommissioning of waste electrical and electronic equipment
(historical waste) supplied to private households. The amendment
is to be applied for annual periods beginning on or after
December 1, 2005.
In November 2005, the IFRIC issued IFRIC 7 (Applying the
Restatement Approach under IAS 29 Financial Reporting in
Hyperinflationary Economies). IFRIC 7 clarifies how comparative
amounts in financial statements should be restated when an
entitys functional currency becomes hyperinflationary.
IFRIC agreed that when hyperinflationary status is reached, an
entity must restate its financial statements as though the
economy had always been hyperinflationary. In addition, IFRIC 7
also provides guidance on how deferred tax items in the opening
balance sheet should be restated.
In March 2006, the IFRIC issued IFRIC 9 (Reassessment of
Embedded Derivatives). The interpretation addresses the timing
of when a contract must be assessed to determine if an embedded
derivative exists that needs to be separated and fair valued.
The IFRIC concluded that the assessment has to be carried out
only when the entity first enters into the contract. A
subsequent reassessment is prohibited unless there is a change
in terms of the contract that significantly modifies the cash
flows.
|
|
|
Newly issued accounting standards |
In July 2006, the IFRIC issued IFRIC 10 (Interim Financial
Reporting and Impairment). This interpretation addresses the
interaction between the requirements of IAS 34 (Interim
Financial Reporting) and the recognition of impairment losses on
goodwill under IAS 36 (Impairment of Assets) and investments in
equity instruments as well as financial assets carried at cost
under IAS 39 (Financial Instruments: Recognition and
Measurement). The IFRIC concluded that where an entity has
recognized an impairment loss in an interim period in respect of
goodwill or an investment in either an equity instrument or a
financial asset carried at cost, that impairment must not be
reversed in subsequent interim financial statements or in annual
financial statements. IFRIC 10 is to be applied for annual
periods beginning on or after November 1, 2006. The Bayer
Group does not believe that the application of this
interpretation will have a material impact on the Groups
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
F-12
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
In November 2006, the IFRIC issued IFRIC 11 (IFRS 2 Group and
Treasury Share Transactions). The interpretation addresses how
to apply IFRS 2 (Share-based Payment) to accounting for
share-based payment arrangements involving an entitys own
equity instruments. It also provides guidance on whether
share-based payment arrangements, in which suppliers of goods or
services of an entity are provided with equity instruments of
the entitys parent, should be accounted for as
cash-settled or equity-settled in the entitys financial
statements. IFRIC 11 is to be applied for annual periods
beginning on or after March 1, 2007. The Bayer Group is
currently evaluating the impact that application of the
interpretation may have on the Groups financial position,
results of operation or cash flows.
In November 2006, the IFRIC issued IFRIC 12 (Service Concession
Arrangements). Service concessions are arrangements whereby a
government or other public-sector entity grants contracts for
the supply of public services such as roads,
airports, prisons and energy and water supply and distribution
facilities to private-sector operators. IFRIC 12 is
to be applied for annual periods beginning on or after
January 1, 2008. The Bayer Group does not believe that the
application of this interpretation will have a material impact
on the Groups financial position, results of operations or
cash flows.
In August 2005, the IASB issued the new standard IFRS 7
(Financial Instruments: Disclosures), which is to be applied for
annual periods beginning on or after January 1, 2007. This
standard specifies the information on financial instruments that
is to be provided in the notes to the financial statements. IFRS
7 provides for financial instruments to be grouped into certain
categories and specific disclosures to be made for each
category, including the significance of the instruments and the
nature and extent of the risks associated with them. The new
standard will affect the nature and modality of financial
instrument disclosures in the financial statements of the Bayer
Group, but not the recognition or measurement of the instruments.
[4] Basic principles of the
consolidated financial statements
|
|
|
[4.1] Scope of consolidation
and consolidation methods |
The consolidated financial statements include those companies in
which Bayer AG directly or indirectly has a majority of the
voting rights (subsidiaries) or from which it is able to
derive the greater part of the economic benefit and bears the
greater part of the risk by virtue of its power to govern
corporate financial and operating policies, generally through an
ownership interest greater than 50 percent. Inclusion of
such companies accounts in the consolidated financial
statements begins when Bayer AG starts to exercise control over
the company and ceases when it is no longer able to do so.
However, associates in which Bayer AG exerts significant
influence, generally through an ownership interest between 20
and 50 percent, are accounted for by the equity method. The
cost of acquisition of an associate is adjusted annually by the
percentage of any change in its stockholders equity
corresponding to Bayers percentage interest in the
company. Any goodwill arising from the first-time inclusion of
companies at equity is accounted for in the same way as goodwill
relating to fully consolidated companies. Bayers share of
changes in these companies stockholders equities
that are recognized in their income statements
including write-downs of goodwill are recognized in
the Bayer Group consolidated income statement in the
non-operating result. Intercompany profits and losses for these
companies were not material in either 2006 or 2005. Further
details of the companies included at equity in the Group
financial statements are given in Note [19].
Subsidiaries that do not have a material impact on net assets or
results of operations, either individually or in aggregate, are
not consolidated. Further details of changes in the scope of
consolidation and the individual companies consolidated are
given in Note [7.1].
Capital consolidation is performed according to IAS 27
(Consolidated and Separate Financial Statements) by offsetting
the net carrying amounts of subsidiaries in the balance sheet
against their underlying equity as valued at the respective
acquisition dates. The identifiable assets and liabilities
(including contingent liabilities) of subsidiaries and joint
ventures are included at their fair values in proportion to
Bayers interest. Remaining differences are recognized as
goodwill.
F-13
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Intragroup sales, profits, losses, income, expenses, receivables
and payables are eliminated.
Deferred taxes are recognized for temporary differences related
to consolidation entries.
Joint ventures are included by proportionate consolidation
according to the same principles.
|
|
|
[4.2] Foreign currency
translation |
In the financial statements of the individual consolidated
companies, foreign currency receivables and payables are
translated at closing rates, irrespective of whether they are
exchange-hedged. Derivative financial instruments are stated at
fair value.
The majority of consolidated companies outside the euro zone are
to be regarded as foreign entities since they are financially,
economically and organizationally autonomous. Their functional
currencies according to IAS 21 (The Effects of Changes in
Foreign Exchange Rates) are thus the respective local currencies.
The assets and liabilities of foreign companies at the start and
end of the year are translated at closing rates. All changes
occurring during the year and all income and expense items are
translated at average rates for the year. Components of
stockholders equity are translated at the historical
exchange rates prevailing at the respective dates of their
first-time recognition in Group equity.
The differences between the resulting amounts and those obtained
by translating at closing rates are reflected in other
comprehensive income and stated separately in the tables in the
Notes under Exchange differences on translation of
operations outside the euro zone or Exchange
differences. When a company is deconsolidated, exchange
differences recognized in stockholders equity are removed
from equity and recognized in the income statement.
Acquisition-related goodwill and remeasurement amounts arising
at companies outside the euro zone are translated at the closing
rate on the acquisition date.
The exchange rates for major currencies against the euro varied
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Closing rate | |
|
Average rate | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
(1) | |
|
(1) | |
Argentina
|
|
ARS |
|
|
4.05 |
|
|
|
3.57 |
|
|
|
4.04 |
|
|
|
3.66 |
|
|
|
3.64 |
|
|
|
3.86 |
|
Brazil
|
|
BRL |
|
|
3.62 |
|
|
|
2.76 |
|
|
|
2.82 |
|
|
|
3.64 |
|
|
|
3.04 |
|
|
|
2.73 |
|
U.K.
|
|
GBP |
|
|
0.71 |
|
|
|
0.69 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
|
0.68 |
|
|
|
0.68 |
|
|
|
0.68 |
|
Japan
|
|
JPY |
|
|
139.65 |
|
|
|
138.90 |
|
|
|
156.93 |
|
|
|
134.40 |
|
|
|
136.86 |
|
|
|
146.04 |
|
Canada
|
|
CAD |
|
|
1.64 |
|
|
|
1.37 |
|
|
|
1.53 |
|
|
|
1.62 |
|
|
|
1.51 |
|
|
|
1.42 |
|
Mexico
|
|
MXN |
|
|
15.23 |
|
|
|
12.59 |
|
|
|
14.27 |
|
|
|
14.04 |
|
|
|
13.58 |
|
|
|
13.69 |
|
Switzerland
|
|
CHF |
|
|
1.54 |
|
|
|
1.56 |
|
|
|
1.61 |
|
|
|
1.54 |
|
|
|
1.55 |
|
|
|
1.57 |
|
U.S.A.
|
|
USD |
|
|
1.36 |
|
|
|
1.18 |
|
|
|
1.32 |
|
|
|
1.24 |
|
|
|
1.24 |
|
|
|
1.26 |
|
|
|
|
[4.3] Basic recognition and
valuation principles |
|
|
|
Net sales and other operating income |
Sales are recognized upon transfer of risk or rendering of
services to third parties if it is sufficiently probable that
the transactions economic benefit to the company will
actually be realized, and are reported net of sales taxes and
rebates.
Where sales of products or services involve the provision of
multiple elements which may contain different remuneration
arrangements such as prepayments, milestone payments
etc. for example research and development alliances
and co-promotion agreements they are assessed to
determine whether separate delivery of the individual elements
of such arrangements comprises more than one unit of accounting.
The delivered elements
F-14
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
are separated if (a) they have value to the customer on a
stand-alone basis, (b) there is objective and reliable
evidence of the fair value of the undelivered element(s) and
(c) if the arrangement includes a general right of return
relative to the delivered element(s), delivery or performance of
the undelivered element(s) is considered probable and is
substantially in the control of the company. If all three
criteria are fulfilled, the appropriate revenue recognition
convention is then applied to each separate accounting unit.
Allocations to provisions for rebates to customers are
recognized in the period in which the related sales are
recorded. These amounts are deducted from net sales. Payments
relating to the sale or outlicensing of technologies or
technological expertise once the respective
agreements have become effective are immediately
recognized in income if all rights relating to the technologies
and all obligations resulting from them have been relinquished
under the contract terms and Bayer has no continuing obligation
to perform under the agreement. However, if rights to the
technologies continue to exist or obligations resulting from
them have yet to be fulfilled, the payments received are
recorded in line with the actual circumstances.
Contractually agreed upfront payments and similar non-refundable
payments received under these agreements are recorded as
deferred revenue and recognized in income over the estimated
performance period stipulated in the agreement. Non-refundable
milestone payments received that are linked to the achievement
of significant and substantive technological or regulatory
hurdles in the research and development process, pursuant to
collaborative agreements, are recognized as revenue upon the
achievement of the specified milestone. Revenues such as license
fees, rentals, interest income or dividends are recognized
according to the same principles.
|
|
|
Research and development expenses |
A substantial proportion of the Bayer Groups financial
resources is invested in research and development. In addition
to in-house research and development activities, especially in
the health care business, various research and development
collaborations and alliances are maintained with third parties
involving the provision of funding and/or payments for the
achievement of performance milestones.
For accounting purposes, research expenses are defined as costs
incurred for current or planned investigations undertaken with
the prospect of gaining new scientific or technical knowledge
and understanding. Development expenses are defined as costs
incurred for the application of research findings or specialist
knowledge to production, production methods, services or goods
prior to the commencement of commercial production or use.
According to IAS 38 (Intangible Assets), research costs cannot
be capitalized; development costs must be capitalized if, and
only if, specific, narrowly defined conditions are fulfilled.
Development costs must be capitalized if it is sufficiently
certain that the future economic benefits to the company will
also cover the respective development costs. Since development
projects are often subject to regulatory approval procedures and
other uncertainties, the conditions for the capitalization of
costs incurred before receipt of approvals are not normally
satisfied.
With respect to costs incurred in collaborations and alliances
with third parties, considerable judgment is involved in
assessing whether milestone-based payments simply reflect the
funding of research, in which case expensing is always required,
or whether, by making a milestone payment, an asset is acquired.
In the latter case, the relevant costs are capitalized.
The following costs in particular, by their very nature,
constitute research and development expenses: the appropriate
allocations of direct personnel and material costs and related
overheads for internal or external application technology,
engineering and other departments that provide the respective
services; costs for experimental and pilot facilities (including
depreciation of buildings or parts of buildings used for
research or development purposes); costs for clinical research;
regular costs for the utilization of third parties patents
for research and development purposes; other taxes related to
research facilities; and fees for the filing and registration of
self-generated patents that are not capitalized.
F-15
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The Bayer Group capitalizes the costs incurred in the
application development phase of in-house software development.
These costs are amortized over the useful life of the software
from the date it is placed in service.
|
|
|
Goodwill and other intangible assets |
Acquired intangible assets with the exception of
goodwill and other assets with indefinite useful
lives are recognized at cost and generally amortized
by the straight-line method over a period of 3 to 30 years,
depending on their estimated useful lives. Write-downs are made
for impairment losses. They are written back if the reasons for
the previous write-downs no longer apply. However, such
write-backs must not cause the carrying amount to exceed the
cost of acquisition. Amortization for 2006 has been allocated to
the respective functional cost items.
Since January 1, 2005, goodwill, including that arising on
acquisitions, has not been amortized. In accordance with IFRS 3
(Business Combinations) and the related revised versions of IAS
36 (Impairment of Assets) and IAS 38 (Intangible Assets),
goodwill, including that arising on acquisitions, is no longer
amortized, but in common with other intangible
assets with indefinite useful lives tested annually
for possible impairment. This is done more frequently if events
or changes in circumstances indicate a possible impairment.
Further details of the annual impairment test for goodwill are
given in Note [4.5].
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment |
Property, plant and equipment is carried at the cost of
acquisition or construction and where subject to
depletion depreciated over its estimated useful life
or written down if its value falls below its net carrying amount
(impairment loss).
The cost of acquisition comprises the acquisition price,
ancillary costs and subsequent acquisition costs less any
reduction received on the acquisition price. Where an obligation
exists to dismantle or remove the asset or restore a site to its
former condition at the end of the assets useful life, the
estimated cost of such dismantlement, removal or restoration is
added to the assets cost of acquisition and a
corresponding provision is recognized. The cost of
self-constructed property, plant and equipment comprises the
direct cost of materials, direct manufacturing expenses,
appropriate allocations of material and manufacturing overheads.
If the construction phase of property, plant or equipment
extends over a long period, the interest incurred on borrowed
capital up to the date of completion is capitalized as part of
the cost of acquisition or construction in accordance with IAS
23 (Borrowing Costs).
Expenses for the repair of property, plant and equipment, such
as ongoing maintenance costs, are normally charged to income.
The cost of acquisition or construction is capitalized
retroactively if the expenses related to the asset will result
in future economic benefits.
Property, plant and equipment is depreciated by the
straight-line method, except where depreciation based on actual
depletion is more appropriate. Depreciation for the year is
allocated to the respective functional cost items.
If an assets value falls below its net carrying amount,
the latter is reduced accordingly. In compliance with IAS 36
(Impairment of Assets), such impairment losses are measured by
comparing the carrying amounts to the discounted cash flows
expected to be generated by the respective assets. They are
written back if the reasons for the previous write-downs no
longer apply. However, such write-backs must not cause the
carrying amount to exceed the cost of acquisition. Further
details of impairment testing procedures are given in
Note [4.5].
When assets are sold, closed down, or scrapped, the difference
between the net proceeds and the net carrying amount of the
assets is recognized as a gain or loss in other operating income
or expenses, respectively.
F-16
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The following depreciation periods, based on the estimated
useful lives of the respective assets, are applied throughout
the Group:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
20 to |
50 years |
|
Outdoor infrastructure
|
|
|
10 to |
20 years |
|
Plant installations
|
|
|
6 to |
20 years |
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
6 to |
12 years |
|
Laboratory and research facilities
|
|
|
3 to |
5 years |
|
Storage tanks and pipelines
|
|
|
10 to |
20 years |
|
Vehicles
|
|
|
4 to |
8 years |
|
Computer equipment
|
|
|
3 to |
5 years |
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
4 to |
10 years |
|
In accordance with IAS 17 (Leases), assets leased on terms
equivalent to financing a purchase by a long-term loan (finance
leases) are capitalized at the lower of their fair value or the
present value of the minimum lease payments at the date of
addition. The leased assets are depreciated over their estimated
useful lives except where subsequent transfer of title is
uncertain, in which case they are depreciated over their
estimated useful lives or the respective lease terms, whichever
are shorter.
Financial assets comprise receivables, acquired equity and debt
instruments, cash and cash equivalents and derivative financial
instruments with positive fair values.
They are classified as financial assets and accounted for in
compliance with IAS 39 (Financial Instruments: Recognition and
Measurement), which specifies that financial assets must be
recognized in the consolidated financial statements if the Bayer
Group has a contractual right to receive cash or another
financial asset from another entity. Regular way purchases and
sales of financial assets are posted on the settlement date.
Financial assets are initially recognized at fair value plus
transaction costs. The transaction costs incurred for the
purchase of financial assets held at fair value through profit
or loss are expensed immediately. Interest-free or low-interest
receivables are initially reflected at the net present value of
the expected future cash flows. For purposes of subsequent
measurement, financial assets are allocated to the following
categories:
|
|
|
|
|
Financial assets held at fair value through profit or loss
comprise those financial assets that are held for trading.
This category comprises receivables from forward commodity
contracts and receivables from other derivative financial
instruments, which are included in other financial
assets, except where hedge accounting is used. Changes in
the fair value of financial assets in this category are
recognized in the income statement when the increase or decrease
in value occurs. |
|
|
|
Loans and receivables are non-derivative financial assets
that are not quoted in an active market. They are carried at
amortized cost. This category comprises trade accounts
receivable, the financial receivables and loans included in
other financial assets, the additional financial receivables and
loans reflected in miscellaneous receivables, and cash and cash
equivalents. Interest income from items assigned to this
category is determined using the effective interest method,
insofar as such items are not classified as current receivables
and the effect of discounting interest is not material. |
|
|
|
Held-to-maturity
financial assets are non-derivative financial assets, with
fixed or determinable payments, that are to be held for a fixed
period of time. They are accounted for at amortized cost using
the effective interest method.
Held-to-maturity
financial investments are recognized in other financial assets. |
|
|
|
Available-for-sale financial assets are those
non-derivative financial assets that are not assigned to any of
the above categories. In particular, they comprise equity
instruments recognized at fair value and debt instruments not to
be held to maturity, which are included in other financial
assets. Changes in the fair |
F-17
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
value of available-for-sale financial assets are recognized in
stockholders equity and not released to the income
statement until the assets are sold or impaired. Where possible,
a fair value for equity and debt securities is derived from
market data. Financial assets for which no market price is
available and whose fair value cannot be reliably estimated are
carried at amortized cost. |
If there are substantial, objective indications that loans and
receivables,
held-to-maturity
financial assets or available-for-sale financial assets are
impaired, their carrying amount is compared to the present value
of the expected future cash flows, discounted by the current
market rate of return on a comparable financial asset. If an
impairment is confirmed, they are written down by the difference
between the two amounts. Indications of impairment include the
fact that a company has been making an operating loss for
several years, a reduction in market value, a significant
deterioration in credit standing, material breach of contract, a
high probability of insolvency or other financial restructuring
of the debtor, or the disappearance of an active market for the
asset.
Previous write-downs are written back if the reasons for them no
longer apply. However, such write-backs must not cause the
carrying amount to exceed the cost of acquisition. No
write-backs are made for available-for-sale equity instruments.
Financial assets are derecognized when the contractual rights to
receive the cash flows from the financial assets expire or the
financial assets are transferred, together with all material
risks and benefits.
The management of financial and commodity price risks and, in
particular, the accounting treatment of derivative financial
instruments and hedging relationships involving them, are
explained in more detail in Note [30].
In accordance with IAS 2 (Inventories), inventories encompass
assets (finished goods and goods purchased for resale) that are
held for sale in the ordinary course of business, that are in
the process of production for such sale (work in process) or
that take the form of materials or supplies to be consumed in
the production process or in the rendering of services (raw
materials and supplies). Inventories are recognized at the lower
of acquisition or production cost calculated by the
weighted-average method and fair value less costs to
sell, which is the realizable sale proceeds under normal
business conditions less estimated production costs and selling
expenses.
Income taxes comprise all taxes levied on the Groups
taxable income. The remaining taxes, such as property,
electricity and other energy taxes, are included in the cost of
goods sold or in selling, research and development or general
administration expenses.
In compliance with IAS 12 (Income Taxes), deferred taxes are
calculated for temporary differences between the carrying
amounts of assets and liabilities in the IFRS balance sheet and
the balance sheet drawn up for tax purposes, for consolidation
measures, and for tax loss carryforwards likely to be realizable.
Deferred tax assets relating to deductible temporary differences
and tax loss carryforwards are recognized to the extent that it
is sufficiently probable that taxable income will be available
in the future to enable the tax loss carryforwards to be
utilized.
Deferred taxes are calculated at the rates which on
the basis of the statutory regulations in force, or already
enacted in relation to future periods, as of the closing
date are expected to apply in the individual
countries at the time of realization. Where legally permitted,
deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities are offset if
they relate to income taxes levied by the same taxation
authority.
Provisions are recognized for obligations arising from past
events that will probably give rise to a future outflow of
resources, provided that a reliable estimate can be made of the
amount of the obligation.
F-18
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The accounting and valuation principles for pension and other
post-employment benefit obligations are outlined in
Note [25].
Other provisions are measured in accordance with IAS 37
(Provisions, Contingent Liabilities and Contingent Assets) and,
where appropriate, IAS 19 (Employee Benefits), using the best
estimate of the extent of the expenditure that would be required
to meet the present obligation as of the reporting date. Where
the cash outflow to settle an obligation is not expected to
occur until after one year, the provision is recognized at the
present value of the expected cash outflow. Reimbursement
receivables from third parties are capitalized separately if
their realization is virtually certain.
If the projected obligation declines as a result of a change in
the estimate, the provision is reversed by the corresponding
amount and the resulting income recognized in the operating
expense item(s) in which the original charge was recognized.
Personnel commitments mainly include annual bonus payments,
vacation entitlements, service awards and other personnel costs.
Reimbursements to be received from the German authorities under
the senior part-time work program are recorded as receivables
and recognized in income as soon as the criteria for such
reimbursements are fulfilled. Sales-related commitments mainly
relate to the granting of rebates or discounts, acceptance of
product returns, and obligations regarding services already
received but not yet invoiced.
Litigation and administrative proceedings are evaluated on a
case-by-case basis considering the available information,
including that from legal counsel, to assess potential outcomes.
Where it is considered probable that a future obligation will
result in an outflow of resources, a provision is recorded in
the amount of the present value of the expected cash outflows if
these can be reliably estimated. These provisions cover the
estimated payments to plaintiffs, court fees, attorney costs and
the cost of potential settlements. Further details of legal
risks are given in Note [32].
Financial liabilities comprise primary financial liabilities and
negative fair values of derivative financial instruments.
Primary financial liabilities are recognized in the balance
sheet if the Bayer Group has a contractual obligation to
transfer cash or other financial assets to another party.
Initial recognition is at the fair value of the consideration
received or the value of payments received less any transaction
costs. In subsequent periods, primary financial liabilities are
measured at amortized cost using the effective interest method.
Liabilities relating to finance leases are carried at the
present value of the minimum future lease payments.
Derivative financial instruments are carried at fair value
through profit or loss unless hedge accounting is used. Negative
fair values of derivative financial instruments are included in
financial liabilities or other liabilities.
Financial liabilities are derecognized when the contractual
obligation is discharged, canceled or expires.
The management of financial and commodity price risks and, in
particular, the accounting treatment of derivative financial
instruments and hedging relationships involving them, are
explained in more detail in Note [30].
Under IAS 32 (Financial Instruments: Presentation), financial
instruments are only classified as equity if no contractual
obligation exists to repay the capital or deliver other
financial assets to the issuer. Where a third party holding a
(minority) interest in a consolidated subsidiary is
contractually entitled to terminate its participation and at the
same time claim repayment of its capital contribution, such
capital is recognized as a liability in the Group statements
even if it is classified as equity in the respective
jurisdiction. The redeemable capital of a minority stockholder
is recognized at the amount of such stockholders pro-rata
share of the subsidiarys net assets.
F-19
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
Other receivables and liabilities |
Accrued items, advance payments and non-financial assets and
liabilities are carried at amortized cost. They are amortized to
income by the straight-line method or according to performance
of the underlying transaction.
In accordance with IAS 20 (Accounting for Government Grants and
Disclosure of Government Assistance), grants and subsidies that
serve to promote investment are reflected in the balance sheet
under other liabilities and amortized to income over the useful
lives of the respective assets.
[4.4] Cash
flow statement
The cash flow statement shows how the liquidity of the Bayer
Group was affected by the inflow and outflow of cash and cash
equivalents during the year. The effects of changes in the scope
of consolidation are eliminated. Cash flows are classified by
operating, investing and financing activities in accordance with
IAS 7 (Cash Flow Statements). The cash and cash equivalents
shown in the balance sheet comprise cash, checks, balances with
banks and securities with original maturities of up to three
months.
The amounts reported by consolidated companies outside the euro
zone are translated at average exchange rates for the year, with
the exception of cash and cash equivalents, which are translated
at closing rates as in the balance sheet. The effect of changes
in exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents is shown
separately.
Cash and cash equivalents contain the proceeds from the
divestiture of discontinued operations and cash inflows from
these operations prior to divestiture. In principle, therefore,
the statement of cash flows must account for all cash inflows
and outflows for both continuing and discontinued operations.
However, IFRS 5 (Non-current Assets Held for Sale and
Discontinued Operations) specifies that cash flows from
operating, investing and financing activities be classified by
continuing and discontinued operations. The discontinued
operations shares of the cash flows from operating,
investing and financing activities are stated separately in
Note [7.2].
In both the balance sheet and the income statement, however, the
amounts corresponding to the components of the net operating
cash flow are shown for continuing operations only. This is the
case, for example, with the amounts of inventories, receivables
and payables recognized in the balance sheet that determine the
changes in working capital shown in the cash flow statement. The
income after taxes from continuing operations that is recognized
in the income statement forms the starting-point for the cash
flow statement. To ensure that the presentation of operating
activities in the cash flow statement is consistent with the
income statement and balance sheet, the net operating cash flow
from continuing operations is therefore stated first on the face
of the cash flow statement. The total net operating cash flow
from discontinued operations is shown in the next line, by
analogy with the presentation of income after taxes in the
income statement. The cash flows from continuing and
discontinued operations are added together to give the net
operating cash flow for the entire business.
[4.5] Procedure
used in global impairment testing and its impact
In accordance with IFRS 3 (Business Combinations) and the
related revised versions of IAS 36 (Impairment of Assets) and
IAS 38 (Intangible Assets), goodwill and other intangible assets
with indefinite useful lives are no longer amortized but tested
regularly for impairment.
Where goodwill or other indefinite-lived intangible assets
allocated to a cash-generating unit are not likely to generate
identifiable future economic benefits independently of other
assets, they must be tested for impairment annually, or more
frequently if events or changes in circumstances indicate a
possible impairment. This involves comparing the residual
carrying amount of each cash-generating unit to the recoverable
amount, which is the higher of the cash-generating units
fair value less costs to sell and its value in use. In the Bayer
Group, the strategic business entities the financial
reporting levels below the segments are defined as
the cash-generating units.
Where the carrying amount of a cash-generating unit exceeds the
recoverable amount, an impairment loss is recognized for the
difference. First, the goodwill of the relevant strategic
business entity is written down
F-20
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
accordingly. Any remaining impairment loss is allocated among
the other assets of the strategic business entity in proportion
to their net carrying amounts. This value adjustment is
recognized in the income statement under other operating
expenses.
The recoverable amount is determined from the present value of
future cash flows, based on continuing use of the asset by the
strategic business entity and its retirement at the end of its
useful life. The cash flow forecasts are derived from the
current long-term planning for the Bayer Group.
Bayer calculates the total cost of capital on the basis of the
debt/equity ratio using the weighted average cost of capital
(WACC) formula. The cost of equity corresponds to the
return expected by stockholders, while the cost of debt is based
on the conditions on which the company can obtain long-term
financing. Both components are derived from capital market
information.
To allow for the different risk and return profiles of the
principal businesses, the after-tax cost of capital is
calculated separately for each of the subgroups. The discount
rates used are 7.6 percent (2005: 7.4 percent) for
HealthCare, 7.9 percent (2005: 8.0 percent) for
CropScience and 7.3 percent (2005: 7.0 percent) for
MaterialScience.
[5] Critical accounting
policies
The preparation of the financial statements for the Bayer Group
requires the use of estimates and assumptions. These affect the
classification and valuation of assets, liabilities, income,
expenses and contingent liabilities. Estimates and assumptions
mainly relate to the useful life of noncurrent assets, the
discounted cash flows used in impairment testing and the
establishment of provisions for litigation, pensions and other
benefits, taxes, environmental protection, inventory valuations,
sales allowances, product liability and guarantees. Estimates
are based on historical experience and other assumptions that
are considered reasonable under the circumstances. Actual values
may vary from the estimates. The estimates and the assumptions
are continually reviewed.
To enhance the information content of the estimates, certain
provisions that could have a material effect on the financial
position and results of operations of the Group are selected and
tested for their sensitivity to changes in the underlying
parameters. To reflect uncertainty about the likelihood of the
assumed events actually occurring, the impact of a
5 percent change in the probability of occurrence is
examined in each case. For long-term interest-bearing
provisions, the impact of a 1 percent change in the
interest rate used is analyzed. Analysis has not shown other
provisions to be materially sensitive. The interest sensitivity
of pension obligations is discussed in Note [25].
Critical accounting and valuation policies and methods are those
that are both most important to the portrayal of the Bayer
Groups financial position, results of operations and cash
flows, and that require the application of difficult, subjective
and complex judgments, often as a result of the need to make
estimates about the effects of matters that are inherently
uncertain and may change in subsequent periods. The critical
accounting policies that we disclose will not necessarily result
in material changes to our financial statements in any given
period but rather contain a potential for material change. The
main accounting and valuation policies used by the Bayer Group
are outlined in Note [4.3]. While not all of the
significant accounting policies require difficult, subjective or
complex judgments, the Company considers that the following
accounting policies should be considered critical accounting
policies.
|
|
|
Intangible assets and property, plant and equipment |
As discussed in Notes [17] and [18] at December 31,
2006 the Bayer Group had intangible assets with a net carrying
amount of
24,034 million
including goodwill of
8,227 million,
and property, plant and equipment with a net carrying amount of
8,867 million.
Intangible assets with finite useful lives and property, plant
and equipment are amortized over their estimated useful lives.
The estimated useful lives are based on estimates of the period
during which the assets will generate revenue.
F-21
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Intangible assets with finite useful lives and property, plant
and equipment are tested for impairment whenever events or
changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of
the assets may no longer be recoverable. Goodwill and intangible
assets with indefinite useful lives must be tested annually for
impairment. In compliance with IAS 36 (Impairment of Assets),
impairment losses are measured by comparing the carrying amounts
to the discounted cash flows expected to be generated by the
respective assets. Where it is not possible to estimate the
impairment loss for an individual asset, the loss is assessed on
the basis of the discounted cash flow for the cash-generating
unit to which the asset belongs. Estimating the discounted
future cash flows involves significant assumptions, especially
regarding future sales prices, sales volumes and costs. The
discounting process is also based on assumptions and estimations
relating to business-specific costs of capital, which in turn
are based on country risks, credit risks as well as additional
risks resulting from the volatility of the respective line of
business. The present value of future cash flows measures an
assets value based on our continuing use of the asset and
its retirement at the end of its useful life. Further
information on the procedure for impairment testing and the
residual carrying amounts of goodwill at the balance sheet date
is presented in Note [4.5] and Note [17].
To illustrate the Bayer Groups impairment loss measurement
on a segment level, if the actual present value of future cash
flows were 10 percent lower than the anticipated present
value, the net carrying amount of goodwill in the Crop
Protection segment would have to be impaired by
146 million.
In the Systems segment, the net carrying amounts would have to
be impaired by
42 million.
We have focused our analysis on the Crop Protection and Systems
segments because we believe that these are the only of our
segments where impairments of goodwill and other intangibles
under the assumptions described above are reasonably likely to
have a material adverse effect on the results of operations of
the respective segments. If the weighted average cost of capital
used for the impairment test were increased by 10 percent,
assets of the Crop Protection and Systems segment would have to
be impaired by
85 million
or
34 million,
respectively. In quantifying our sensitivity analysis, we
modeled a 10 percent decline as a negative change up to
this magnitude is in our view reasonably likely. We do not now
believe that greater changes are reasonably likely given our
experiences in the Crop Protection and System segments.
Applying these policies, we recognized impairment charges in
each of the years 2006, 2005 and 2004. The following table sets
forth these charges based on their allocation to our continuing
businesses and our discontinued operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Impairment charges (continuing businesses)
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
Impairment charges (discontinued operations)
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total impairment charges
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In 2004 and 2005, we recognized impairment charges largely as a
result of our decisions to close or relocate several facilities
and sites within our continuing businesses as part of our
strategic reorientation and focus on our core businesses.
The impairment charges within discontinued operations 2004
related to the sale of our plasma business
(24 million
in 2004) and the spin-off of the former LANXESS segment
(39 million
in 2004). We recorded an additional
24 million
impairment charge related to this business in 2004 based on
price negotiations with the purchaser. We updated our cash flow
assumptions for the LANXESS businesses as a result of sustained
pressure on its margins resulting from adverse foreign exchange
rates, ongoing consolidation in customers in the industries
LANXESS served, overcapacities in certain market segments and an
increase in competition, particularly from Asian suppliers. We
recognized an additional
39 million
in impairment charges for the spun off LANXESS businesses in
2004 due to further revisions of the economic assumptions within
the strategic business entities Performance Chemicals,
Engineering Plastics and Chemical Intermediates.
F-22
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Impairment charges and write-downs on tangible assets in 2005
originated especially from our decision to shut down or to
relocate different production facilities and sites in the United
States in our continuing businesses
(33 million).
Also, in 2005 capitalized marketing rights for our product,
Viadur®,
were impaired by
15 million.
We revised this estimate in 2006 and wrote off the remaining
intangible asset of
19 million.
Impairment charges and write-downs in 2006 were predominantly
due to further restructurings of our sites in the United States
(14 million),
partly related to acquisitions, as well as changes in plans for
the expansion of our chlorine alkali facilities in Baytown,
Texas
(31 million).
In addition, restructuring efforts pursued in the year 2006
within the Bayer CropScience subgroup and the Bayer Industrial
Services GmbH & Co. OHG resulted in impairment charges
and write-downs on tangible assets of
19 million
and
30 million,
respectively. In 2006 the capitalized costs of an acquired
development project for the product alfimeprase within the Bayer
HealthCare subgroup were impaired by
41 million.
Within discontinued operations an impairment charge was
recognized within the H.C. Starck group for its Battery business
in Canada
(17 million).
Although we believe that our estimates of the relevant expected
useful lives, our assumptions concerning the macroeconomic
environment and developments in the industries in which the
Bayer Group operates, and our estimations of the discounted
future cash flows, are appropriate, changes in assumptions or
circumstances could require changes in the analysis. This could
lead to additional impairment charges in the future or to
valuation write-backs should the trends expected reverse.
In addition to the in-house research and development activities,
various research and development collaborations and alliances
are maintained with third parties. These collaborations and
alliances involve provision of funding and/or payments for the
achievement of performance milestones. All research costs are
expensed as incurred. Since development projects are subject to
regulatory approval procedures and other uncertainties, the
conditions for the capitalization of development costs incurred
with respect to in-house research and development activities
before receipt of regulatory approvals are not satisfied, and
these costs are also expensed as incurred. With respect to costs
incurred in collaborations and alliances with third parties,
under IAS 38 (revised), which entered into effect on
January 1, 2005, milestone payments relating to acquired
assets in development must be capitalized to the extent that
they are related to the acquisition of the related technology
rights, even if uncertainties exist as to whether the research
and development will ultimately be successful in producing a
saleable product. If research and development collaborations are
embedded in contracts for a strategic alliance, considerable
judgment is involved in determining whether milestone-based
payments reflect the funding of research and development or if
they are related to the acquisition of an underlying compound or
other rights. Factors considered in reaching this determination
are (a) the nature of the payment, for example whether it
is related to regulatory approval, a sales target or outsourced
research and development activities, and (b) the relative
fair values of the planned research and development activities
compared to the total value of the payment.
We recognize revenue for product sales and the rendering of
services when:
|
|
|
|
|
the significant risks and rewards of ownership of the goods are
transferred to the customer, |
|
|
|
the company retains neither continuing managerial involvement to
the degree usually associated with ownership nor effective
control over the goods sold, |
|
|
|
the amount of revenue and costs incurred or to be incurred can
be measured reliably, and |
|
|
|
it is probable that the economic benefits associated with the
transaction will flow to the company. |
At the time revenue is recognized, we also record estimates for
revenue deductions including cash discounts, rebates and product
returns. Also, we record revenues net of items we collect on
behalf of third parties, such as
F-23
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
sales taxes and goods and service taxes. We report our net sales
after deducting all sales deductions from our gross revenue.
The majority of our sales deductions are subject to
formula-based determination using factors such as a fixed
percentage of the sales volume or gross sales proceeds.
Accordingly, estimates related to sales deductions are
predominantly based on historical experience, specific
contractual terms and future expectations of our sales
development in each of our business segments. We believe that
assumptions other than those that we discuss are not reasonably
likely to occur or not applicable to our business. We estimate
the potential for future variability in provisions for
anticipated sales deductions to be insignificant with respect to
our reported operating results. We have not made adjustments to
our provisions for rebates, cash discounts or returns for sales
made in prior periods that were material in relation to our
income before income taxes in any of the periods covered by the
financial statements included in this annual report.
Provisions for rebates were 1.6 percent of our total net
sales in 2006 (2005: 1.4 percent; 2004: 1.5 percent).
In addition to rebates, we offer cash discounts for prompt
payment in some countries. Our provisions for cash discounts
were less than 0.1 percent of total net sales as of
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004.
We deduct provisions for returned defective goods or related to
contractual arrangements to return saleable products on the date
of sale or at the time when the amount of future returns can be
reasonably estimated. If future product returns cannot be
reasonably estimated and are significant to the sale
transaction, both the recognition of revenues and of the related
cost of sales are deferred until an estimate may reasonably be
made or when the right to return the goods has expired.
Provisions for product returns were 0.1 percent of total
net sales in 2006 (2005: 0.3 percent; 2004:
0.3 percent).
Some of the Bayer Groups revenues are generated from
licensing agreements under which third parties are granted
rights to certain of our products and technologies. Upfront
payments and similar non-refundable payments received under
these agreements are recorded as other liabilities and
recognized in income over the estimated performance period
stipulated in the agreement. Milestone payments linked to the
achievement of a significant and substantive
technical/regulatory hurdle in the research and development
process, pursuant to collaborative agreements, are recognized as
revenue upon the achievement of the specified milestone.
Revenues are also derived from research and development
collaborations and co-promotion agreements. Such agreements may
consist of multiple elements and provide for varying
consideration terms, such as upfront, milestone and similar
payments, which may be complex and require significant analysis
by management in order to separate individual revenue components
and recognize them on the most appropriate dates. This may have
to be done partially on the basis of assumptions.
|
|
|
Pensions and other post-employment benefits |
Group companies provide retirement benefits for most of their
employees, either directly or by contributing to
independently-administered funds. The way these benefits are
provided varies according to the legal, fiscal and economic
conditions of each country, the benefits generally being based
on the employees remuneration and years of service. The
obligations relate both to existing retirees pensions and
to pension entitlements of future retirees. Group companies
provide retirement benefits under defined contribution and/or
defined benefit plans. In the case of defined contribution
plans, the company pays contributions to publicly or privately
administered pension insurance plans on a mandatory, contractual
or voluntary basis. Once the contributions have been paid, the
company has no further payment obligations. All other retirement
benefit systems are defined benefit plans, which may be either
unfunded, i.e., financed by provisions (accruals), or
funded, i.e., financed through pension funds. Statistical
and actuarial methods are used to anticipate future events in
calculating the expenses and liabilities related to the plans.
These calculations include assumptions about the discount rate,
expected return on plan assets and rate of future compensation
increases.
The interest rate used to discount post-employment benefit
obligations to present value is derived from the yields of
senior, high-quality corporate bonds in the respective country
at the balance sheet date. These generally include AA-rated
securities. The discount rate is based on the yield of a
portfolio of bonds whose weighted
F-24
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
residual maturities approximately correspond to the duration
necessary to cover the entire benefit obligation. If AA-rated
corporate bonds of equal duration are not available, a discount
rate equivalent to the effective interest rate for government
bonds at the balance sheet date is used instead but increased by
about 0.5 to 1.0 percentage point since corporate bonds
generally provide higher yields by virtue of their risk
structure.
Determination of the discount rate is also based on a bond
portfolio corresponding to the expected cash outflows from the
pension plans. The average return of this bond portfolio serves
as benchmark when determining the discount rate.
The assumption for the expected
return-on-assets
reflects a long-term global capital market return that
corresponds to the duration of the pension obligation, and a
diversified investment strategy. The investment policy of Bayer
Pensionskasse is geared toward regulatory compliance and toward
maintaining the risk structure corresponding to the benefit
obligations. To this end, Bayer Pensionskasse has developed a
strategic target portfolio commensurate with the risk profile.
This investment strategy focuses principally on stringent
management of downside risks rather than on maximizing absolute
returns. In other countries, too, the key criteria for the
funds investment strategies are the structure of the
benefit obligations and the risk profile. Other determinants are
risk diversification, portfolio efficiency and a
country-specific and global risk/return profile capable of
ensuring payment of all future benefits. The expected return is
applied to the fair market value of plan assets at each year end.
Statistical information such as withdrawal and mortality rates
is also used in estimating the expenses and liabilities under
the plans. Because of changing market and economic conditions,
the expenses and liabilities actually arising under the plans in
the future may differ materially from the estimates made on the
basis of these actuarial assumptions. The plan assets are
partially comprised of equity and fixed-income instruments.
Therefore, declining returns on equity markets and markets for
fixed-income instruments could necessitate additional
contributions to the plans in order to cover future pension
obligations. Also, higher or lower withdrawal rates or longer or
shorter life of participants may have an impact on the amount of
pension income or expense recorded in the future.
On December 31, 2006, the present value of our defined
benefit obligations for pensions and other post-employment
benefits payable under defined benefit plans was
16,708 million.
Note [25] contains an analysis of the sensitivities of our
defined benefit obligation to a 0.5 percent increase or
decrease in any of our discount rate, projected remuneration
increases and projected future benefit increases and the effects
on our results of operations in which these changes would
result. It also sets forth the changes in our accumulated
actuarial losses related to changes in these actuarial
parameters.
The business of the Bayer Group is subject to a variety of laws
and regulations in the jurisdictions in which it operates or
maintains properties. Provisions for expenses that may be
incurred in complying with such laws and regulations are set
aside if environmental inquiries or remediation measures are
probable, the costs can be reliably estimated and no future
benefits are expected from such measures. Our provisions for
environmental protection measures amounted to
262 million
on December 31, 2006 and
279 million
on December 31, 2005.
It is difficult to estimate the future costs of environmental
protection and remediation because of many uncertainties,
particularly with regard to the status of laws, regulations and
the information available about conditions in the various
countries and at the individual sites. Significant factors in
estimating the costs include previous experiences in similar
cases, the conclusions in expert opinions we obtain regarding
our environmental programs, current costs and new developments
affecting costs, managements interpretation of current
environmental laws and regulations, the number and financial
position of third parties that may become obligated to
participate in any remediation costs on the basis of joint
liability, and the remediation methods which are likely to be
deployed. Changes in these assumptions could impact future
reported results. Subject to these factors, but taking into
consideration experience gained to date regarding environmental
matters of a similar nature, we
F-25
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
believe our provisions to be adequate based upon currently
available information. There were no significant changes in our
assumptions or estimates that impacted our statements of income
in 2004, 2005 or 2006.
However, given the inherent difficulties in estimating
liabilities in the businesses in which we operate, especially
those for which the risk of environmental damage is relatively
greater (CropScience and MaterialScience), it remains possible
that material additional costs will be incurred beyond the
amounts accrued. It is possible that final resolution of these
matters may require expenditures to be made in excess of
established provisions, over an extended period of time and in a
range of amounts that cannot be reasonably estimated. Management
nevertheless believes that such additional amounts, if any,
would not have a material adverse effect on the Groups
financial position or results of operations. Further information
on environmental provisions can be found in Note [26.2].
As a global company with a diverse business portfolio, the Bayer
Group is exposed to numerous legal risks, particularly in the
areas of product liability, patent disputes, tax assessments,
competition and antitrust law, and environmental matters. The
outcome of the currently pending and future proceedings cannot
be predicted with certainty. Thus, an adverse decision in a
lawsuit could result in additional costs that are not covered,
either wholly or partially, under insurance policies and that
could significantly impact the business and results of
operations of the Bayer Group. If the Bayer Group loses a case
in which it seeks to enforce its patent rights, a decrease in
future earnings could result as other manufacturers could be
permitted to begin to market products that the Bayer Group or
its predecessors had developed.
Litigation and other judicial proceedings as a rule raise
difficult and complex legal issues and are subject to many
uncertainties and complexities including, but not limited to,
the facts and circumstances of each particular case, issues
regarding the jurisdiction in which each suit is brought and
differences in applicable law. Upon resolution of any pending
legal matter, the Bayer Group may be forced to incur charges in
excess of the presently established provisions and related
insurance coverage. It is possible that the financial position,
results of operations or cash flows of the Bayer Group could be
materially affected by the unfavorable outcome of litigation.
Litigation and administrative proceedings are evaluated on a
case-by-case basis considering the available information,
including that from legal counsel, to assess potential outcomes.
Where it is considered probable that a future obligation will
result in an outflow of resources, a provision is recorded in
the amount of the present value of the expected cash outflows if
these are deemed to be reliably measurable. These provisions
cover the estimated payments to plaintiffs, court fees, attorney
costs and the cost of potential settlements. We have in the past
adjusted existing provisions as proceedings have continued, been
settled or otherwise provided further information on which we
could review the likelihood of outflows of resources and their
measurability, and we expect to continue to do so in future
periods.
During 2004, we recorded the following litigation related
charges:
83 million
in respect of fines paid in antitrust proceedings for rubber and
urethane products,
47 million
with respect to the Lipobay/ Baycol proceedings and
16 million
with respect to the Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) proceedings.
During 2005, we had operating charges based on our expected
payments totaling
336 million
related to our rubber-and urethane-related antitrust
proceedings, as well as charges in respect of our Lipobay/
Baycol proceedings
(43 million)
and our PPA proceedings
(62 million).
Provisions for litigation-related expenses totaled
434 million
on December 31, 2006. During 2006, we recorded
135 million
other operating expenses on the basis of expected payments,
which mainly relate to proceedings in connection with Lipobay/
Baycol
(35 million),
to patent infringement
(24 million)
and to proceedings in connection with former rubber product
lines
(51 million).
Further details on legal risks and the related effects on our
results of operations are contained in Note [41] as well as
in Note [32].
F-26
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
To compute provisions for taxes, estimates have to be made.
Estimates are also necessary to determine whether valuation
allowances are required against deferred tax assets. These
involve assessing the probabilities that deferred tax assets
resulting from deductible temporary differences and tax losses
can be utilized to offset taxable income.
Uncertainties exist with respect to the interpretation of
complex tax regulations and the amount and timing of future
taxable income. Given the wide range of international business
relationships and the long-term nature and complexity of
existing contractual agreements, differences arising between the
actual results and the assumptions made, or future changes to
such assumptions, could necessitate adjustments to tax income
and expense in future periods. The Group establishes what it
believes to be reasonable provisions for possible consequences
of audits by the tax authorities of the respective countries.
The amount of such provisions is based on various factors, such
as experience with previous tax audits and differing
interpretations of tax regulations by the taxable entity and the
responsible tax authority. Such differences of interpretation
may arise on a wide variety of issues depending on the
conditions prevailing in the respective Group companys
domicile. On December 31, 2006, net liabilities for current
tax payments amounted to
908 million,
and net deferred tax liabilities amounted to
3,141 million.
We reversed provisions in our U.S. subsidiary totaling
104 million
in 2005 that related to tax positions taken in periods that were
closed with the Internal Revenue Service.
Further information on income taxes is provided in
Note [14].
We account for the acquired businesses using the purchase method
of accounting which requires that the assets acquired and
liabilities assumed be recorded at the date of acquisition at
their respective fair values. The application of the purchase
method requires certain estimates and assumptions especially
concerning the determination of the fair values of the acquired
intangible assets and property, plant and equipment as well as
the liabilities assumed at the date of the acquisition. Moreover
the useful lives of the acquired tangible and intangible assets
have to be determined. The judgments made in the context of the
purchase price allocation can materially impact our future
results of operations. Accordingly, for significant
acquisitions, we obtain assistance from third party valuation
specialists. The valuations are based on information available
at the acquisition date.
Significant judgments and assumptions made regarding the
purchase price allocation in the course of the acquisition of
Schering AG, Berlin, Germany included the following:
For intangible assets associated with products, product related
technology, and qualified in-process research and development
(IPR&D) we base our valuation on the expected future cash
flows using the Multi-Period Excess Earnings approach. This
method employs a discounted cash flow analysis using the present
value of the estimated after-tax cash flows expected to be
generated from the purchased intangible asset using risk
adjusted discount rates and revenue forecasts as appropriate.
The period of expected cash flows was based on the individual
patent protection, taking into account the term of the
products main patent protection and essential extension of
patent protection, as well as market entry of generics,
considering sales, volume, prices, potential defense strategies
and market development at patent expiry.
For the valuation of brands the Relief-from-Royalty method was
applied which includes estimating the cost savings that result
from the companys ownership of trademarks and licenses on
which it does not have to pay royalties to a licensor. The
intangible asset is then recognized at the present value of
these savings. The brand-specific royalty rates were calculated
using a product-specific scoring model. The corporate brands
Schering and Medrad were assumed to have
an unlimited life. (Please note that the rights to the name
Schering in the United States and Canada do not
belong to us but to Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey.
Schering-Plough Corporation and the company acquired by Bayer in
June 2006, i.e. Bayer Schering Pharma AG (formerly named
Schering AG), Berlin, Germany, are unaffiliated companies that
have been totally independent of each other for many years.)
Product brands, however, were assumed to have limited lives
depending on the respective products
F-27
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
life cycles. The expected amortization of these assets is
determined on the basis of expected product-specific revenues.
The net carrying amount of acquired intangible assets
after a step-up of
11,745 million
resulting from the purchase price allocation was
12,042 million,
as of June 23, 2006. This figure includes
1,191 million
for IPR&D which relates to new compounds development as well
as new versions of existing drugs. The valuation of acquired
intangible assets is to a great extent based on anticipated cash
flows. Nevertheless it is not impossible that actual outcomes
vary significantly from such estimated future cash flows. In
particular, the estimation of discounted cash flows of
intangible assets under development and developed technologies
is subject to highly sensitive assumptions, which are closely
related to the nature of our pharmaceutical activities and whose
changes may have material consequences such as:
|
|
|
|
|
Outcome of research and development activities regarding
compound efficacy, results of clinical trails, etc.; |
|
|
|
Probability of obtaining regulatory approval in several
countries; |
|
|
|
Long-term sales forecast; |
|
|
|
Anticipation of selling price erosion rates after the end of
patent protection due to generic competition in the market; |
|
|
|
Behavior of competitors (launch of competing products, marketing
initiatives, etc.). |
Measures pursued in the course of restructuring efforts such as
the closing of facilities or changes in the planned use of
buildings, machinery or equipment may result in shortened useful
lives or impairments.
For land acquired in general the comparison approach was based
on the fair market values of properties situated in locations
similar to those of the acquired properties and utilized for
similar purposes. Unitary land values were derived from public
or official sources and expert appraisals such as those made by
advisory committees, contained in market reports or produced by
local real estate agents. For buildings that could be leased,
the income approach was predominantly applied, discounting
projected rental charges.
For technical equipment and machinery as well as for other
equipment the indirect cost approach was applied, utilizing
replacement costs. These costs are depreciated on a
straight-line basis over the assets economic useful life
according to an age analysis. Utilization and condition of the
related technical equipment and machinery were reflected by
adjustments and deduction for obsolescence.
The valuation of the patented finished goods on stock at date of
acquisition and work in process was based on the corresponding
selling price less estimated costs of completion or estimated
costs to make the sale.
The excess of the purchase price for Schering over the estimated
fair values of the net assets acquired is recorded as goodwill
amounting to
5,771 million,
as of June 23, 2006. The
step-ups have lead to
an according deferred tax liability of
4,546 million,
as of June 23, 2006, which will be amortized analogously to
the amortization of the respective assets.
[6] Segment reporting
In accordance with IAS 14 (Segment Reporting), a breakdown of
certain data in the financial statements is given by segment and
geographical region. The segments and regions are the same as
those used for internal reporting, allowing a reliable
assessment of risks and returns. The aim is to provide users of
the financial statements with information regarding the
profitability and future prospects of the Groups various
activities.
As of December 31, 2006 the Bayer Group comprised three
subgroups with operations subdivided into divisions
(HealthCare), business groups (CropScience) or business units
(MaterialScience). Their activities are aggregated into the six
reporting segments listed below according to economic
characteristics, products, production processes, customer
relationships and methods of distribution.
F-28
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The subgroups activities are as follows:
|
|
|
|
Subgroup / Segment |
|
Activities |
|
|
|
HealthCare
|
|
|
|
Pharmaceuticals |
|
Development, production and marketing of prescription
pharmaceuticals, such as for the treatment of hypertension,
cardiovascular diseases, infectious diseases, cancer and
multiple sclerosis, and for contraception |
|
Consumer Health |
|
Development, production and marketing of over-the-counter
medications, diagnostic products, nutritional supplements for
humans and animals, veterinary medicines and grooming products
for animals |
CropScience
|
|
|
|
Crop Protection |
|
Development, production and marketing of a comprehensive
portfolio of fungicides, herbicides, insecticides and seed
treatment products to meet a wide range of regional requirements |
|
Environmental Science, BioScience |
|
Development, production and marketing of a wide range of
products for the green industry, garden care, non-agricultural
pest and weed control, plant biotechnology, and conventional
seeds |
MaterialScience
|
|
|
|
Materials |
|
Development, production and marketing of high-quality plastics
granules, sheets and films |
|
Systems |
|
Development, production and marketing of polyurethanes for a
wide variety of applications and of coating and adhesive raw
materials; production and marketing of inorganic basic chemicals |
Effective January 1, 2006, the segment reporting for the
Bayer Group was aligned to the new structure of the Bayer Group.
It thus differs from the presentation used for fiscal 2005. The
Pharmaceuticals, Biological Products segment was renamed
Pharmaceuticals as of January 1, 2006, reflecting the
divestment of our plasma business in the United States. The
remaining activities of the former Biological Products division
were integrated into the Bayer Schering Pharma division. The
newly acquired business of Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin,
Germany, is included in the Pharmaceuticals segment along with
our existing pharmaceuticals operations. The businesses of the
Diabetes Care and Diagnostics divisions were previously combined
for reporting purposes, while the Consumer Care and Animal
Health divisions were reported as separate segments. Due to the
agreed divestiture of the Diagnostics Division, the Diabetes
Care division was combined with the Consumer Care and Animal
Health divisions to form a new Consumer Health segment in the
light of the similarities in their long-term financial
performance and their common focus on products that can be
promoted directly to consumers.
The segment table presents continuing operations only, and thus
no longer includes the Diagnostics division or the Wolff
Walsrode business or the H.C. Starck business. The prior-year
figures have been restated accordingly. Details of the
discontinued operations are given in Note [7.2].
The reconciliation eliminates intersegment items and reflects
income, expenses, assets and liabilities not allocable to
segments. These include in particular the Corporate Center, the
service companies and sideline operations.
The segment data are calculated as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
The intersegment sales reflect intragroup transactions effected
at transfer prices fixed on an arms-length basis. |
|
|
|
The operating cash flow before changes in net working capital
(gross operating cash flow) comprises the income after taxes
from continuing operations plus income taxes plus/minus
non-operating result minus income taxes paid plus depreciation
and amortization and write-downs, minus write-backs, plus/minus |
F-29
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
changes in pension provisions, minus gains/plus losses on
retirements of noncurrent assets, plus non-cash charges
resulting from the remeasurement of acquired assets. The change
in pension provisions includes the elimination of non-cash
components of the income from continuing operations after taxes.
It also contains benefit payments during the year. |
|
|
|
The net cash flow is the cash flow from operating activities as
defined in IAS 7 (Cash Flow Statements). |
|
|
|
The capital invested comprises all assets serving the respective
segment that are required to yield a return on their cost of
acquisition. Noncurrent assets are included at cost of
acquisition or construction throughout their useful lives
because the calculation of cash flow return on investment
(CFRoI) requires that depreciation and amortization be excluded.
Interest-free liabilities are deducted. The capital invested is
stated as of December 31. |
|
|
|
The CFRoI is the ratio of the operating cash flow before changes
in net working capital (gross operating cash flow) to the
average capital invested for the year and is thus a measure of
the return on capital employed. |
|
|
|
The equity items reflect the earnings and carrying amounts of
companies recognized at equity (associates). They are allocated
to the segments where possible. |
|
|
|
Details of capital expenditures, amortization and depreciation
are as shown in the tables detailing changes in the Groups
asset structure. The effects of the purchase price allocation
for Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Germany are reflected in
depreciation and amortization. |
|
|
|
Since financial management of Group companies is carried out
centrally by Bayer AG, financial liabilities are not allocated
directly to the respective segments. Consequently, the
liabilities shown for the individual segments do not include
financial liabilities. |
|
|
|
The number of employees is reported as full-time equivalents,
with part-time employees included in proportion to their
contractual working hours. The prior-year figures have been
restated accordingly. |
The table shows the regional breakdown of intangible assets and
property, plant and equipment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Germany
|
|
|
5,758 |
|
|
|
21,235 |
|
Finland
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1,503 |
|
France
|
|
|
1,311 |
|
|
|
1,200 |
|
United States
|
|
|
4,062 |
|
|
|
4,026 |
|
Others
|
|
|
4,877 |
|
|
|
4,937 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,009 |
|
|
|
32,901 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-30
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[7] Changes in the Bayer
Group
|
|
|
[7.1] Scope of
consolidation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other | |
|
|
|
|
Germany | |
|
countries | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Bayer AG and consolidated companies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
229 |
|
|
|
283 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Additions
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
160 |
|
Retirements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
342 |
|
|
|
432 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Companies included at equity (associates)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Additions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retirements
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in the number of fully consolidated companies in
2006 is primarily due to the inclusion of 155 group companies of
Bayer Schering Pharma AG since the second quarter.
Five joint ventures the same number as in the
previous year are included by proportionate
consolidation in compliance with IAS 31 (Interests in Joint
Ventures). Excluded from consolidation are 103 subsidiaries that
in aggregate are immaterial to the net worth, financial position
and earnings of the Bayer Group; they account for less than
0.3 percent of Group sales, less than 0.7 percent of
stockholders equity and less than 0.4 percent of
total assets.
The effect of joint ventures on the Group balance sheet and
income statement is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Current assets
|
|
|
21 |
|
Noncurrent assets
|
|
|
56 |
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
Noncurrent liabilities
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Net assets
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
59 |
|
Expenses
|
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) after taxes
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
While six companies are accounted for by the equity method, 39
associates of minor importance are stated at cost less
impairment charges.
A list of Bayer AGs direct and indirect holdings is
published in the electronic version of the German Federal
Gazette. It is also available directly from Bayer AG on request.
F-31
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The principal companies consolidated in the financial statements
are listed in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bayers | |
Company Name and Place of Business |
|
Interest (%) | |
|
|
| |
Germany
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer Business Services GmbH, Leverkusen
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience AG, Monheim
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience Deutschland GmbH, Langenfeld
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience GmbH, Frankfurt
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer HealthCare AG, Leverkusen
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Industry Services GmbH & Co. OHG, Leverkusen
|
|
|
60 |
|
Bayer MaterialScience AG, Leverkusen
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Schering GmbH, Leverkusen
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin
|
|
|
96.2 |
|
Bayer Technology Services GmbH, Leverkusen
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Vital GmbH, Leverkusen
|
|
|
100 |
|
Schering Deutschland GmbH, Berlin
|
|
|
100 |
|
Other European Countries
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer Antwerpen Comm.V, Belgium
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Biologicals S.r.l., Italy
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Consumer Care AG, Switzerland
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience France S.A.S., France
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience Limited, U.K.
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience S.A., France
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
Bayer CropScience S.r.l., Italy
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer International S.A., Switzerland
|
|
|
99.7 |
|
Bayer Pharma SAS, France
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
Bayer Polyols S.N.C., France
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Polyurethanes B.V., Netherlands
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Public Limited Company, U.K.
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer S.p.A., Italy
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer SP.Z.O.O., Poland
|
|
|
100 |
|
Quimica Farmaceutica Bayer, S.A., Spain
|
|
|
100 |
|
North America
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer Corporate and Business Services LLC, U.S.A.
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience Inc., Canada
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer CropScience LP, U.S.A.
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer HealthCare LLC, U.S.A.
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Inc., Canada
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer MaterialScience LLC, U.S.A.
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Pharmaceuticals Corporation, U.S.A.
|
|
|
100 |
|
BAYPO Limited Partnership, U.S.A.
|
|
|
100 |
|
Berlex Inc., U.S.A.
|
|
|
100 |
|
Medrad Inc., U.S.A.
|
|
|
100 |
|
F-32
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bayers | |
Company Name and Place of Business |
|
Interest (%) | |
|
|
| |
Asia/Pacific
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer Australia Limited, Australia
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
Bayer CropScience K.K., Japan
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer HealthCare Co. Ltd., China
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Korea Ltd., Republic of Korea
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer MaterialScience Limited, Hong Kong
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer MaterialScience Trading (Shanghai) Company Limited, China
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer Thai Company Limited, Thailand
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
Bayer Yakuhin, Ltd., Japan
|
|
|
100 |
|
Nihon Schering K.K., Japan
|
|
|
100 |
|
Sumika Bayer Urethane Co., Ltd., Japan
|
|
|
60 |
|
Latin America/ Africa/ Middle East
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer (Proprietary) Limited, South Africa
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer de Mexico, S.A. de C.V., Mexico
|
|
|
100 |
|
Bayer S.A., Argentina
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
Bayer S.A., Brazil
|
|
|
99.9 |
|
Bayer Türk Kimya Sanayi Limited Sirketi, Turkey
|
|
|
100 |
|
Also included in the consolidated financial statements are the
following material associates, which are accounted for by the
equity method:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bayers | |
Company Name and Place of Business |
|
Interest (%) | |
|
|
| |
Lyondell Bayer Manufacturing Maasvlakte VOF, Netherlands
|
|
|
50 |
|
Palthough Industries (1998) Ltd., Israel
|
|
|
25 |
|
PO JV, LP, U.S.A.
|
|
|
43.4 |
|
Polygal Plastics Industries Ltd., Israel
|
|
|
25.8 |
|
The following domestic subsidiaries availed themselves in 2006
of certain exemptions granted under Sections 264,
paragraph 3 and 264 b, No. 4 of the German Commercial
Code regarding the preparation, auditing and publication of
financial statements:
|
|
|
Company Name |
|
Place of Business |
|
|
|
Bayer 04 Immobilien GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer 04 Leverkusen Fußball GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer 04 Mobilien GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer Beteiligungsverwaltungsgesellschaft mbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer Bitterfeld GmbH
|
|
Greppin |
Bayer Business Services GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer Chemicals AG
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer CropScience AG
|
|
Monheim |
Bayer Direct Services GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer Gastronomie GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer Gesellschaft für Beteiligungen mbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer HealthCare AG
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer Industry Services GmbH & Co. OHG
|
|
Leverkusen |
F-33
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
Company Name |
|
Place of Business |
|
|
|
Bayer Innovation GmbH
|
|
Düsseldorf |
Bayer Kaufhaus GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer MaterialScience AG
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer MaterialScience Customer Services GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer Schering GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer Technology Services GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayer Vital GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Bayfin GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Case Tech GmbH & Co. KG
|
|
Bomlitz |
Chemion Logistik GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Drugofa GmbH
|
|
Köln |
DYNEVO GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
EPUREX Films GmbH & Co. KG
|
|
Bomlitz |
Erste K-W-A Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Euroservices Bayer GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Generics Holding GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
GeWoGe Gesellschaft für Wohnen und Gebäudemanagement
mbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
GP Grenzach Produktions GmbH
|
|
Grenzach |
ICON Genetics GmbH
|
|
München |
KVP Pharma+Veterinär-Produkte GmbH
|
|
Kiel |
Probis GmbH
|
|
Bomlitz |
Sportrechte Vermarktungs- und Verwertungs-GmbH & Co. oHG
|
|
Leverkusen |
Travel Board GmbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
Wolff Cellulosics GmbH & Co. KG
|
|
Bomlitz |
Wolff Walsrode AG
|
|
Walsrode |
Zweite K-W-A Beteiligungsgesellschaft mbH
|
|
Leverkusen |
|
|
|
[7.2] Business combinations
and other acquisitions; divestments and discontinued
operations |
Acquisitions are accounted for by the purchase method in
accordance with IFRS 3 (Business Combinations), the results of
the acquired businesses therefore being included in the
consolidated financial statements as from the respective dates
of acquisition. The purchase prices of acquisitions of companies
domiciled outside the euro zone are translated at the exchange
rates in effect at the respective dates of acquisition.
A total of
15,357 million
was spent for acquisitions in 2006. The purchase prices of the
acquired companies or businesses were settled in cash. Goodwill
arising on these acquisitions totaled
5,804 million
and is subject to an annual impairment test.
|
|
|
Acquisition of Schering AG, Berlin, Germany |
In June 2006, the wholly owned subsidiary Bayer Schering GmbH
(at that time Dritte BV GmbH) acquired a majority interest in
Schering AG, Berlin, Germany, which is included in full in the
consolidated financial statements of the Bayer Group as of
June 23, 2006. On that date Bayer Schering GmbH held
87.99 percent of the voting capital of Schering AG. This
was preceded by a public takeover offer issued to stockholders
of Schering AG by Bayer Schering GmbH on April 13, 2006.
The European Commission cleared the acquisition on May 24,
2006; approval from the U.S. antitrust authorities was
granted on April 21, 2006.
F-34
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
On July 31, 2006, Bayer Schering GmbH and Schering AG, as a
dependent company, concluded a domination and profit and loss
transfer agreement, which was approved by an Extraordinary
Stockholders Meeting of Schering AG on September 13,
2006. This agreement took effect on October 27, 2006 when
it was entered in the commercial register for the headquarters
of Schering AG. Schering AG was renamed Bayer Schering Pharma AG
effective December 29, 2006.
By December 31, 2006, Bayer Schering GmbH had raised its
holding in the voting capital of Bayer Schering Pharma AG to
96.24 percent through the addition of further shares. The
shares in Bayer Schering Pharma AG were purchased in tranches
involving total cash outflows of
16,271 million,
less total acquisition-related cash and cash equivalents of
1,025 million.
The ancillary costs of the acquisition amounted to about
71 million.
The Extraordinary Stockholders Meeting of Bayer Schering
Pharma AG on January 17, 2007 resolved to squeeze-out the
remaining minority stockholders. Pursuant to this resolution,
the shares held by minority stockholders will be transferred to
the majority stockholder Bayer Schering GmbH in return for cash
compensation of
98.98 per
share. Liabilities for anticipated cash compensation payments
and guaranteed dividends to the minority stockholders raise the
purchase price by
736 million
to
17,007 million.
At the time they were acquired, the activities of Bayer Schering
Pharma AG and its subsidiaries (referred to here collectively as
Schering) focused on the areas of gynecology and
andrology, diagnostic imaging, specialized therapeutics,
oncology, and the dermatology business operated by the Intendis
group.
In fiscal 2006, Schering contributed
3,082 million
to Bayer Group sales. It had a net negative effect of
119 million
on the operating result after integration and restructuring
expenses of
179 million
and charges of
551 million
from the purchase price allocation. Income after taxes of the
acquired business for the period since the date of first-time
consolidation was minus
37 million.
If Schering had already been acquired effective January 1,
2006, the Bayer Group would have had sales of
31,689 million
in 2006. Income after taxes would have amounted to
1,448 million,
taking into account the effects of the revaluation of acquired
assets and the financing costs for the full year. Earnings per
share from continuing and discontinued operations would have
been 1.90.
F-35
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The purchase price allocation to the acquired assets and assumed
liabilities at the date of acquisition is shown in the table.
Including the acquired cash and cash equivalents and the
ancillary acquisition costs, it resulted in the net cash outflow
shown below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Carrying Amount | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
at the Date of First- | |
|
Fair-Value | |
|
Net Carrying Amount | |
|
|
Time Consolidation | |
|
Adjustment | |
|
After the Acquisition | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Acquired assets and assumed liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
364 |
|
|
|
5,407 |
|
|
|
5,771 |
|
Other intangible assets
|
|
|
297 |
|
|
|
11,745 |
|
|
|
12,042 |
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
1,123 |
|
|
|
453 |
|
|
|
1,576 |
|
Other noncurrent assets
|
|
|
233 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
232 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
837 |
|
|
|
848 |
|
|
|
1,685 |
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
1,671 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,671 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
1,025 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,025 |
|
Pensions and other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
(345 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(345 |
) |
Other provisions
|
|
|
(1,078 |
) |
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
|
(1,156 |
) |
Financial liabilities
|
|
|
(243 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(243 |
) |
Other liabilities
|
|
|
(690 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(690 |
) |
Deferred taxes
|
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
(4,841 |
) |
|
|
(4,546 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net assets
|
|
|
3,489 |
|
|
|
13,533 |
|
|
|
17,022 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interests
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which are ancillary acquisition costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71 |
|
Acquired cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,025 |
|
Liabilities to minority stockholders
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
736 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash outflow for the acquisition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,246 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fair-value adjustment reflects the differences between the
previous net carrying amounts and the respective fair values in
the acquirers balance sheet at the date of acquisition.
The purchase price allocation reflects all information with
respect to revaluation amounts calculated as of the date of
acquisition, but has not yet been completed. Therefore, changes
may yet be made in the allocation of the purchase price to the
individual assets.
The goodwill remaining after the purchase price allocation is
attributable to a number of factors. Apart from general
synergies in administration processes and infrastructures, such
factors also include significant cost savings in the R&D,
marketing, sales, procurement and production functions. In
addition, the acquisition strengthens the Bayer Groups
global market position in the pharmaceuticals business.
F-36
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The fair values of the acquired intangible assets are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value | |
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Company names
|
|
|
725 |
|
Product-related brand names
|
|
|
940 |
|
Product-related technologies
|
|
|
9,118 |
|
IPR&D projects
|
|
|
1,191 |
|
Software
|
|
|
68 |
|
Company names are not amortized as they have no definite useful
life. Product-related brand names are amortized over average
periods of 18 years. The projected average useful life is
14 years for product-related technologies and 16 years
for IPR&D projects. The residual useful life of acquired
property, plant and equipment carried at fair value is
determined in accordance with the principles set forth in
Note [4.3]. The amortization of the adjustment for
first-time consolidation of inventories is based on inventory
turnover of the respective products. The useful lives and
amortization periods are reflected analogously in deferred taxes.
In addition to the acquisition of the majority of the shares of
Bayer Schering Pharma AG, the following significant acquisitions
were made in 2006:
Effective January 9, 2006 Bayer Innovation GmbH acquired
the biotech company Icon Genetics AG, Munich, Germany. Icon
Genetics discovers innovative methods for the development and
use of engineered plants to produce therapeutically active
substances. The purchase price was
18 million.
On July 6, 2006, Bayer HealthCare LLC, U.S.A., acquired
Metrika Inc., Sunnyvale, California, for
57 million.
Metrika manufactures and markets the A1CNow+ appliance to
monitor long-term blood glucose levels in diabetics.
These and further smaller acquisitions affected the Groups
assets and liabilities as of the dates of acquisition as shown
in the table. Including acquired cash and cash equivalents, they
resulted in the following net outflow:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Acquired assets and assumed liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
33 |
|
Other intangible assets
|
|
|
75 |
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
6 |
|
Other assets
|
|
|
10 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
1 |
|
Provisions
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Financial liabilities
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Other liabilities
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Deferred taxes
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Purchase price
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which are ancillary acquisition costs
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents acquired
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash outflow for acquisitions
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
|
|
F-37
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
Acquisitions after the closing date |
Between the closing date and the approval of the annual
financial statements for publication, Bayer HealthCare AG,
Leverkusen, acquired the
over-the-counter cough
and cold products portfolio of the Topsun Group, Shanghai,
China. The purchase price is approximately
103 million
plus contingent payments of around
19 million
subject to fulfillment of certain performance criteria. The
agreement also comprises the transfer of the Gaitianli
manufacturing facility in Qidong and the national sales force,
and has been submitted to the regulatory authorities for
approval. Chief among the products to be acquired from Topsun is
the market-leading White &
Black®
brand.
Further, in October 2006 Bayer MaterialScience agreed to acquire
Taiwans Ure-Tech Group, the largest producer of
thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) in the Asia-Pacific region.
The transfer of this business had not yet taken place by the
date on which these financial statements were approved for
publication.
Since January 2005, the worldwide Roche consumer health business
with non-prescription drugs and vitamins has been part of the
Consumer Care division of Bayer HealthCare. The transaction
includes the global consumer health activities of Roche, with
the exception of Japan, including the five production sites in
Grenzach, Germany; Gaillard, France; Pilar, Argentina;
Casablanca, Morocco and Jakarta, Indonesia. Among the brands
acquired are
Aleve®,
Bepanthen®,
Redoxon®,
Rennie®
and
Supradyn®.
The merger puts Bayer among the largest global suppliers of
prescription-free medicines.
The acquired business contributed in 2005
1,061 million
to Group sales. Since the sales forces, distribution function
and support functions such as
controlling have been combined in the Groups
legal entities, it is not practicable to separately identify an
operating result of the former Roche business.
The acquisition price for the worldwide consumer health business
of Roche, including the assumption of net financial liabilities,
was approximately
2,338 million,
including about
208 million
for the purchase of the remaining 50 percent interest in
the U.S. joint venture with Roche. This purchase was
completed in 2004 in an economically and legally separate
transaction. The acquisition of the remaining global business
was accomplished in 2005 by way of a
2,130 million
cash transfer, of which
200 was paid in
advance at the end of 2004, and the assumption of some
46 million
in net financial liabilities. The ancillary costs of the
acquisition amounted to about
28 million.
The assets and goodwill acquired were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
Acquisition costs excluding assumption of debt
|
|
|
2,056 |
|
Ancillary acquisition costs
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase price
|
|
|
2,084 |
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of acquired net assets
|
|
|
1,440 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
644 |
|
Goodwill is attributable to a number of factors, including
significant synergies that the Bayer Group expects to achieve by
acquiring the Roche OTC business. Apart from general
administrative processes and infrastructure synergies, these
comprise significant savings in sales and marketing costs, for
example. The acquisition also strengthens the Bayer Groups
global market position in the OTC sector. Of the
644 million
in recognized goodwill,
183 million
is tax-deductible.
F-38
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The purchase price can be allocated among the acquired assets
and assumed liabilities at the date of acquisition as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Carrying Amount | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prior to the | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
Net Carrying Amount | |
|
|
Acquisition | |
|
Adjustments | |
|
After the Acquisition | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Acquired assets and assumed liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other intangible assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,142 |
|
|
|
1,142 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
644 |
|
|
|
644 |
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
Other current assets (excluding liquid assets)
|
|
|
255 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
264 |
|
Liquid assets
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28 |
|
Pensions and other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
Other provisions
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
Financial liabilities
|
|
|
(74 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(74 |
) |
Other liabilities
|
|
|
(129 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(129 |
) |
Deferred taxes
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(68 |
) |
|
|
(62 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,084 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which are ancillary acquisition costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28 |
|
Assumed net financial liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash outflow for the acquisition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,130 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The expected useful lives of the acquired intangible assets are
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value | |
|
Useful life | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
(years) | |
Trademarks
|
|
|
1,055 |
|
|
|
20-30 |
|
Marketing and customer-related rights
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
20-30 |
|
Software and technologies
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
5-8 |
|
In addition to the acquisition of the Roche consumer health
business, the following significant acquisitions or other
transactions were made in 2005:
In connection with the acquisition of Aventis CropScience
Holding, S.A., France, in 2002, the antitrust authorities
required Bayer to divest some of the operations acquired from
Aventis. In this connection, the business with the active
ingredient Fipronil was sold to BASF AG, Ludwigshafen, Germany,
in 2003. On January 31, 2005, Bayer CropScience AG,
Monheim, Germany, signed an agreement with BASF to license back
the rights to this product for agricultural applications in
certain countries outside of Europe and the United States, for
125 million.
On February 10, 2005, Bayer CropScience GmbH, Frankfurt am
Main, Germany, and Bayer CropScience LP, Research Triangle Park,
North Carolina, United States, acquired various intangible
assets and the property, plant and equipment required for the
production of cotton seeds from Associated Farmers Delinting,
Inc., a regional cotton seed producer based in Littlefield,
Texas, for
9 million.
On July 8, 2005, Bayer South East Asia Pte Ltd., Singapore,
received marketing rights for the cardiovascular drug
Zetia®
to the value of
100 million
under a co-marketing and distribution agreement with
Schering-Plough.
F-39
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
(Bayer Schering Pharma AG and Schering-Plough Corporation, New
Jersey, are unaffiliated companies that have been totally
independent of each other for many years.)
Bayer MaterialScience LLC, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, acquired
Polythane Systems, Inc. (PSI), Spring, Texas, on August 31,
2005, for
20 million.
PSI is a leading American supplier of polyurethane spray foam
systems for roof insulation.
The total net assets and goodwill acquired in the above
acquisitions and transactions and a number of smaller ones is
comprised as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
Acquisition costs
|
|
|
276 |
|
Ancillary acquisition costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase price
|
|
|
276 |
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of acquired net assets
|
|
|
259 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
17 |
|
The acquisitions and other transactions affected the
Groups assets and liabilities as of the dates of
acquisition as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Acquired assets and assumed liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
Other intangible assets
|
|
|
242 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
17 |
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
4 |
|
Other financial assets
|
|
|
3 |
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase price
|
|
|
276 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which are ancillary acquisition costs
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed net financial liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash outflow for the business combinations and other
acquisitions
|
|
|
276 |
|
|
|
|
|
Divestitures
In 2006 the Bayer Group made the following significant
divestitures, the proceeds of which totaled
525 million.
On November 30, 2006 Bayer sold its 49.9 percent
interest in the GE Bayer Silicones joint venture to its partner
General Electric. The sale of this interest generated proceeds
of
431 million.
On April 3, 2006, Bayer Diagnostics Manufacturing Limited,
Bridgend, U.K., divested its production facilities and
activities to Kimball Electronics Wales Limited. The businesses
divested comprise the manufacture of appliances for the
Diagnostics and diabetes care market.
To strengthen the focus on its core business, the Bayer
CropScience subgroup divested various active ingredients and
related rights in its Crop Protection segment in 2006, including
Asulam®,
a herbicide that was marketed as
Asulox®
and
Asilan®.
Total proceeds of divestitures by Bayer CropScience in fiscal
2006 were
47 million.
F-40
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The divestitures affected the Groups assets and
liabilities as of the respective dates of divestiture as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Divested assets and liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
2 |
|
Other intangible assets
|
|
|
5 |
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
16 |
|
Financial assets
|
|
|
195 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
26 |
|
Other assets and liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
Net gain/loss on divestitures
|
|
|
281 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total sale price
|
|
|
525 |
|
|
|
|
|
Divested cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash inflow from the divestitures
|
|
|
525 |
|
|
|
|
|
The Bayer Group made the following significant divestitures, the
proceeds of which totaled
87 million,
in 2005:
The Bayer CropScience subgroup divested a number of activities
in 2005 to strengthen the focus on its core business. These
included Philagro Holding S.A., France, and EqSeeds Comercia de
Sementes Ltda., Brazil. Bayer CropScience also divested the
businesses with various active ingredients together with the
related rights, including the acaricide and insecticide Amitraz,
which it marketed as
Mitac®.
CropScience also sold its site in Hauxton, United Kingdom, in
December 2005, and BCS S.A., France, divested its interest in
Holdisa S.r.l., Italy. The selling prices of the operations
divested by Bayer CropScience in fiscal 2005 totaled
80 million.
The remaining
7 million
relates to several minor divestitures in the Bayer Group.
The divestitures affected the Groups assets and
liabilities as of the respective dates of divestiture as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Divested assets and liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
Other intangible assets
|
|
|
5 |
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
13 |
|
Other financial assets
|
|
|
7 |
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
3 |
|
Pensions and other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
Other provisions
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Net gain on divestitures
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total selling price
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net divested financial liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash inflow from the divestitures
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued
operations
On June 29, 2006, Bayer AG concluded an agreement with
Siemens AG on the sale of the Diagnostics business. This
transaction closed on January 2, 2007.
F-41
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
On November 23, 2006 an agreement was concluded to divest
the activities of the H.C. Starck Group, formerly assigned to
the Materials segment, to a consortium of two financial
investors, Advent International and The Carlyle Group. This
business was transferred to the new owners on February 1,
2007.
An agreement was signed on December 18, 2006 to sell the
companies of the Wolff Walsrode group, which operates
principally in the field of cellulose chemistry, to The Dow
Chemical Company, U.S.A. Wolff Walsrode also was formerly
assigned to the Materials segment. Pending the approval of the
antitrust authorities, the transfer of this business is expected
to take place in the first half of 2007.
The Diagnostics activities, H.C. Starck and Wolff Walsrode are
recognized as discontinued operations in 2006. The corresponding
information is provided from the standpoint of the Bayer Group,
not for the purpose of separately portraying either the
discontinued operations or the remaining operations of Bayer.
On January 28, 2005 the spin-off of LANXESS from Bayer AG
was entered in the commercial register and thus took legal
effect. In March 2005, the plasma operations of the Bayer
HealthCare subgroup in the United States were divested. The
LANXESS and plasma operations were recognized as discontinued
operations in 2005.
A breakdown of the results of discontinued operations is given
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LANXESS | |
|
Plasma business | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
Net sales
|
|
|
6,053 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
427 |
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
(4,635 |
) |
|
|
(345 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(309 |
) |
|
|
(91 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Selling expenses
|
|
|
(846 |
) |
|
|
(62 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(56 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
(126 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
General administration expenses
|
|
|
(263 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other operating income (expenses) net
|
|
|
(105 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(93 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating result
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-operating result
|
|
|
(84 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) after taxes
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current income (loss) (before taxes)
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current income (loss) (after taxes)
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from the sale (before taxes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(90 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from the sale (after taxes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-42
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diagnostics | |
|
H.C. Starck | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
Net sales
|
|
|
1,322 |
|
|
|
1,433 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
|
|
703 |
|
|
|
920 |
|
|
|
985 |
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
(577 |
) |
|
|
(652 |
) |
|
|
(660 |
) |
|
|
(535 |
) |
|
|
(738 |
) |
|
|
(806 |
) |
Selling expenses
|
|
|
(370 |
) |
|
|
(370 |
) |
|
|
(394 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
(51 |
) |
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
(118 |
) |
|
|
(120 |
) |
|
|
(124 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(28 |
) |
General administration expenses
|
|
|
(95 |
) |
|
|
(95 |
) |
|
|
(94 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
) |
Other operating income (expenses) net
|
|
|
(53 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating result
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-operating result
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) after taxes
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current income (loss) (before taxes)
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current income (loss) (after taxes)
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from the sale (before taxes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from the sale (after taxes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-43
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wolff Walsrode | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
Net sales
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
8,833 |
|
|
|
3,309 |
|
|
|
2,845 |
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
(223 |
) |
|
|
(225 |
) |
|
|
(233 |
) |
|
|
(6,279 |
) |
|
|
(2,051 |
) |
|
|
(1,699 |
) |
Selling expenses
|
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
(1,359 |
) |
|
|
(542 |
) |
|
|
(490 |
) |
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(329 |
) |
|
|
(176 |
) |
|
|
(160 |
) |
General administration expenses
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(417 |
) |
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
(145 |
) |
Other operating income (expenses) net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(250 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(53 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating result
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
358 |
|
|
|
298 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-operating result
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(105 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
343 |
|
|
|
285 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
(122 |
) |
|
|
(116 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) after taxes
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current income (loss) (before taxes)
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
285 |
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(67 |
) |
|
|
(130 |
) |
|
|
(116 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current income (loss) (after taxes)
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
237 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from the sale (before taxes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(90 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from the sale (after taxes)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-44
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The separate asset and liability line items in the balance sheet
reflect the following amounts pertaining to the discontinued
operations as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diagnostics | |
|
H.C. Starck | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Noncurrent assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
822 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill and other intangible assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
383 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
356 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300 |
|
Other noncurrent assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15 |
|
Deferred taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
700 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
506 |
|
Trade accounts receivable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
422 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
162 |
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets held for sale and discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,522 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,067 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
233 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provisions for pensions and other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
182 |
|
Other provisions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
Financial liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other noncurrent liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other provisions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
Financial liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58 |
|
Trade accounts payable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29 |
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities directly related to assets held for sale and
discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
332 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
358 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-45
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wolff | |
|
|
|
|
Walsrode | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Noncurrent assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill and other intangible assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
424 |
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
850 |
|
Other noncurrent assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59 |
|
Deferred taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,498 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
802 |
|
Trade accounts receivable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
637 |
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets held for sale and discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
336 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,925 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provisions for pensions and other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
297 |
|
Other provisions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37 |
|
Financial liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other noncurrent liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
467 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other provisions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
131 |
|
Financial liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66 |
|
Trade accounts payable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
119 |
|
Other current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities directly related to assets held for sale and
discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
848 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-46
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Discontinued operations affected the Group cash flow statements
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LANXESS | |
|
Plasma business | |
|
Diagnostics | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
(80 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
246 |
|
|
|
264 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
(253 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
206 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(93 |
) |
|
|
(97 |
) |
|
|
(107 |
) |
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
(246 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(153 |
) |
|
|
(167 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
H.C. Starck | |
|
Wolff Walsrode | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
491 |
|
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
275 |
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
(55 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(429 |
) |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
(179 |
) |
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(62 |
) |
|
|
(297 |
) |
|
|
(96 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes to the Statements of Income
[8] Net sales
Sales revenues are derived primarily from product deliveries.
Total reported net sales increased by
4,255 million,
or 17.2 percent, from 2005 to
28,956 million.
While volumes increased by
1,145 million,
or 4.7 percent, adverse shifts in exchange rates trimmed
sales by
47 million,
or 0.2 percent. Changes in selling prices contributed
132 million,
or 0.5 percent, to the growth in business. Portfolio
changes boosted sales by
3,025 million,
or 12.2 percent.
Portfolio changes led to the following changes in sales compared
with the previous year:
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
Schering AG, Germany
|
|
|
3,082 |
|
Other
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,106 |
|
|
|
|
|
Divestitures
|
|
|
|
|
Cessation of plasma distribution in Canada (divested in 2005)
|
|
|
(100 |
) |
BCS active ingredients
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(150 |
) |
|
|
|
|
LANXESS sales revenues (January 1 31, 2005)
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net effect of portfolio changes
|
|
|
3,025 |
|
|
|
|
|
In 2005 total reported net sales increased by
3,776 million
(+18.0 percent) from 2004, to
24,701 million.
A
39 million
(-0.2 percent) decrease in volume was offset by a
273 million
(+1.3 percent) positive impact of shifts in exchange rates.
Changes in selling prices contributed
1,472 million
(+7.0 percent), to the growth in
F-47
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
business. Acquisitions boosted sales by
2,070 million
(+9.9 percent). Acquisitions and divestitures during 2005
and 2004 affected the comparison between the two years
sales figures by the following amounts:
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
Roche Consumer Health business
|
|
|
1,061 |
|
Gustafson (remaining 50 percent acquired in 2004)
|
|
|
25 |
|
Other
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,093 |
|
|
|
|
|
Divestitures
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Net sales to LANXESS after the spin-off on January 31,
2005(1)
|
|
|
981 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
981 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net effect of portfolio changes
|
|
|
2,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
A trading relationship now exists between the Bayer Group and
the LANXESS Group as separate enterprises following the spin-off
of what was previously the LANXESS subgroup of Bayer. The
relevant agreements are concluded on an arms-length basis.
Under these agreements, the Bayer Group supplies goods and
services to the LANXESS Group. Some of the transactions relate
to products, such as chlorine or caustic soda solution, that are
supplied to LANXESS by the MaterialScience subgroup. Others are
service transactions in the areas of IT systems development and
application support, IT infrastructure, site services and
engineering services. Prior to the spin-off, the resulting
revenues were recorded as intragroup sales and eliminated in the
consolidation. |
Breakdowns of net sales by segments and by regions are given in
the table in Note [1].
[9] Selling expenses
Selling expenses include
594 million
in shipping and handling costs in 2006 (2005:
578 million;
2004:
532 million).
They also include advertising and promotion costs, expensed in
the period in which they are incurred. These costs amount to
1,484 million
for 2006 (2005:
1,206 million;
2004:
947 million).
[10] Other operating income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Gains from sales of intangibles, property, plant and equipment
and from divestitures
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
Write-backs of receivables and other assets
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
Reversals of unutilized provisions
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
Recognition of exchange rate hedges
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
Miscellaneous operating income
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
416 |
|
|
|
288 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
802 |
|
|
|
775 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other operating income for 2006 includes
86 million
in connection with the first-time consolidation of the group
companies of Schering AG, Germany. Total other operating income
is composed of a large number of individually immaterial items
pertaining to subsidiaries. In the previous year it was decided
to modify several of Bayers largest pension plans in the
United States, replacing defined-benefit plans with purely
defined-contribution plans. This resulted in one-time income of
248 million
in 2005, which was recognized in miscellaneous operating income.
In fiscal 2004, income of
105 million
was realized from a restructuring of global pension obligations.
F-48
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[11] Other operating expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Amortization and write-downs of acquired goodwill
|
|
|
(166 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses from sales of intangibles, property, plant and equipment
and from divestitures
|
|
|
(126 |
) |
|
|
(126 |
) |
|
|
(31 |
) |
Write-downs of trade accounts receivable
|
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
(165 |
) |
|
|
(138 |
) |
Expenses related to significant legal risks
|
|
|
(149 |
) |
|
|
(451 |
) |
|
|
(205 |
) |
Recognition of exchange rate hedges
|
|
|
(76 |
) |
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(126 |
) |
Miscellaneous operating expenses
|
|
|
(541 |
) |
|
|
(467 |
) |
|
|
(719 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,144 |
) |
|
|
(1,267 |
) |
|
|
(1,219 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other operating expenses for 2006 contain restructuring expenses
of
408 million
(2005:
162 million;
2004:
123 million),
including
179 million
in connection with integration of Schering AG. Further details
of restructuring expenses are given in Note [26.3].
Other operating expenses for 2006 also include write-downs on
development and marketing agreements for the drug alfimeprase
and the product
Viadur®
totaling
60 million.
Further details can be found in Note [17]. As a result of a
change in the plan to expand the chlor-alkali production
facilities in Baytown, Texas, a write-down of
31 million
on facilities under construction is recorded under miscellaneous
operating expenses, which also include a large number of
individually immaterial items totaling
220 million
pertaining to subsidiaries.
In the previous year, miscellaneous operating expenses included
106 million
incurred in connection with the termination of the co-promotion
agreement with GlaxoSmithKline for
Levitra®.
[12] Personnel
expenses/employees
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Wages and salaries
|
|
|
4,347 |
|
|
|
4,309 |
|
|
|
5,216 |
|
Social expenses and expenses for pensions and other benefits
|
|
|
1,236 |
|
|
|
1,009 |
|
|
|
1,414 |
|
of which for defined-contribution pension
plans
|
|
|
272 |
|
|
|
320 |
|
|
|
392 |
|
of which for defined-benefit pension plans
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,583 |
|
|
|
5,318 |
|
|
|
6,630 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personnel expenses increased by
1,312 million
to
6,630 million
in 2006 (2005:
5,318 million;
2004:
5,583 million),
with the first-time consolidation of the Schering AG group
accounting for
805 million.
Changes in exchange rates reduced personnel expenses by
23 million.
In fiscal 2005 pension expenses were diminished by one-time
income of
248 million
resulting from the modification of pension plans in the United
States.
Pension expense in fiscal 2004 was diminished by one-time income
of
105 million
resulting mainly from changes in the basic conditions for the
plan covering health care costs in the United States. These
changes require participating employees to assume a greater
share of the costs through higher co-payments and proportionate
contributions. In addition, a ceiling was introduced for the
annual contributions payable by companies.
The personnel expenses shown here do not include the interest
portion of personnel-related provisions (particularly pension
provisions), which is included in the non-operating result as
other non-operating expense (see Note [13.3]).
F-49
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The average number of employees classified by corporate
functions is shown in the table. Employees of the Schering AG
group are included for the first time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Marketing
|
|
|
23,689 |
|
|
|
24,723 |
|
|
|
31,098 |
|
Technology/ Manufacturing
|
|
|
42,282 |
|
|
|
41,757 |
|
|
|
45,076 |
|
Research and development
|
|
|
8,532 |
|
|
|
8,125 |
|
|
|
10,356 |
|
Administration
|
|
|
7,850 |
|
|
|
7,769 |
|
|
|
10,064 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
82,353 |
|
|
|
82,374 |
|
|
|
96,594 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which trainees
|
|
|
2,545 |
|
|
|
2,547 |
|
|
|
2,715 |
|
The employees of joint ventures are included in the above
figures in proportion to Bayers interests in the
respective companies. The total number of people employed by
joint ventures in 2006 was 67 (2005: 62; 2004: 31).
As of 2006, the number of employees is reported as full-time
equivalents, with part-time employees included in proportion to
their contractual working hours. The prior-year figures have
been restated accordingly.
[13] Non-operating result
The non-operating result was minus
782 million
in 2006 (2005: minus
602 million;
2004: minus
632 million),
comprising equity-method loss of
25 million
(2005:
10 million;
2004:
139 million),
non-operating expenses of
1,688 million
(2005: 1,224;
2004:
976 million)
and non-operating income of
931 million
(2005:
632 million;
2004:
483 million).
The total non-operating result is detailed in the categories
income (loss) from investments in affiliated
companies net, interest expense net and
other non-operating expense net as provided below.
[13.1] Income
(loss) from investments in affiliated companies
net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net loss from investments in associates (equity-method loss)
|
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Write-downs of investments in affiliated companies
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
Losses from the sale of investments in affiliated companies
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends from affiliated companies and income from profit and
loss transfer agreements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Gains from the sale of investments in affiliated companies
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(143 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The income from investments in affiliated companies mainly
comprised an equity-method loss of
55 million
(2005:
47 million;
2004:
131 million)
from two production joint ventures with Lyondell and
equity-method income of
28 million
(2005:
35 million;
2004: equity-method loss of
8 million)
received from GE Bayer Silicones prior to the sale of our
interest. In addition, this divestiture contributed
236 million
to income from investments in affiliated companies. For further
details see Note [7.2].
Further details of the companies included at equity in the Group
financial statements are given in Note [19].
F-50
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[13.2] Interest
expense net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest and similar expenses
|
|
|
(654 |
) |
|
|
(909 |
) |
|
|
(1,381 |
) |
Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from other financial assets
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Other interest and similar income
|
|
|
414 |
|
|
|
564 |
|
|
|
643 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(227 |
) |
|
|
(338 |
) |
|
|
(728 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This item mainly comprises interest expense for financial
liabilities, value adjustments relating to interest-rate hedging
transactions, and interest income from investments. Interest
expense of
370 million
incurred for financing of the acquisition of Schering AG,
Germany in 2006 is included here.
Finance leases are capitalized under property, plant and
equipment in compliance with IAS 17 (Leases). The interest
portion of the lease payments, amounting to
20 million
(2005:
17 million;
2004:
20 million),
is reflected in interest expense.
Interest expense incurred to finance the construction phase of
major investment projects is not included here. Such interest
expense, amounting in 2006 to
12 million
(2005:
4 million;
2004:
3 million),
is capitalized as part of the cost of acquisition or
construction of the property, plant or equipment concerned,
based on an average capitalization rate of 5 percent (2005:
4 percent; 2004: 4 percent).
[13.3] Other
non-operating expense net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-portion of interest-bearing provisions
|
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
|
(234 |
) |
|
|
(223 |
) |
Net exchange loss
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
Miscellaneous non-operating expenses
|
|
|
(71 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Miscellaneous non-operating income
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(262 |
) |
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
(261 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-operating expenses mainly comprise the interest
portion of pension and other personnel-related provisions for
the continuing operations amounting to
218 million
(2005:
228 million;
2004:
217 million)
and commitment fees of
21 million
incurred for credit lines granted in connection with the
acquisition of Schering AG.
F-51
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[14] Income taxes
This item comprises the income taxes paid or accrued in the
individual countries, plus deferred taxes.
The breakdown of income taxes by origin is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Income taxes paid or accrued
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany
|
|
|
(90 |
) |
|
|
(143 |
) |
|
|
(139 |
) |
Other countries
|
|
|
(317 |
) |
|
|
(320 |
) |
|
|
(624 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(407 |
) |
|
|
(463 |
) |
|
|
(763 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from temporary differences
|
|
|
(160 |
) |
|
|
(178 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
from tax loss carryforwards
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
321 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(75 |
) |
|
|
309 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
(401 |
) |
|
|
(538 |
) |
|
|
(454 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The reduction in tax expense was principally due to the
first-time recognition of deferred tax assets on loss
carryforwards relating to structural changes in the Bayer Group,
which were agreed to with the relevant taxing authorities. In
fiscal 2006 changes in tax rates decreased deferred tax expense
by
1 million
(2005:
2 million;
2004:
5 million).
The deferred tax assets and liabilities are allocable to the
various balance sheet items as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Deferred | |
|
|
|
Deferred | |
|
|
Deferred | |
|
Tax | |
|
Deferred | |
|
Tax | |
|
|
Tax Assets | |
|
Liabilities | |
|
Tax Assets | |
|
Liabilities | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Intangible assets
|
|
|
159 |
|
|
|
983 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
5,164 |
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
780 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
936 |
|
Financial assets
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
277 |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
377 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
482 |
|
|
|
374 |
|
Receivables
|
|
|
123 |
|
|
|
344 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
526 |
|
Other assets
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Pension provisions
|
|
|
1,522 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
1,431 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
Other provisions
|
|
|
666 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
791 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
726 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
592 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Tax loss carryforwards
|
|
|
1,047 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,217 |
|
|
|
|
|
Valuation allowance for tax loss carryforwards
|
|
|
(261 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(85 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,603 |
|
|
|
3,185 |
|
|
|
4,857 |
|
|
|
7,998 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which noncurrent
|
|
|
3,443 |
|
|
|
2,365 |
|
|
|
2,989 |
|
|
|
6,813 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Set-off
|
|
|
(2,905 |
) |
|
|
(2,905 |
) |
|
|
(3,652 |
) |
|
|
(3,652 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,698 |
|
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
1,205 |
|
|
|
4,346 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In 2006, deferred tax assets of
225 million
(2005:
9 million)
and deferred tax liabilities of
4,113 million
(2005:
47 million)
relate to changes in the scope of consolidation and
acquisitions. Deferred tax liabilities of
F-52
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
4,546 million
were recognized in connection with the acquisition of Schering
AG, Germany. Between the acquisition date and year end,
213 million
tax impacts related the amortizations have been recorded through
our income statement.
Utilization of tax loss carryforwards from previous years
diminished the amount of income taxes paid or accrued in 2006 by
97 million
(2005:
96 million;
2004:
34 million).
The value of existing tax loss carryforwards by expiration date
is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
One year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
Two years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
Three years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60 |
|
Four years
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
Five years and thereafter
|
|
|
2,714 |
|
|
|
3,075 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,718 |
|
|
|
3,225 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets of
1,132 million
(2005:
786 million;
2004:
499 million)
are recognized on the
2,981 million
(2005:
2,031 million;
2004:
1,282 million)
in tax loss carryforwards, including
25 million
(2005: nil)
added as a result of acquisitions without impacting income. It
is considered that sufficient income will be available in the
future to utilize these tax assets. The recognition of these
amounts resulted in deferred tax income of
321 million
(2005:
103 million;
2004:
166 million).
No deferred tax assets are recognized on loss carryforwards
totaling
244 million
(2005:
687 million)
that can theoretically be utilized over more than one year.
Deferred tax assets relating to deductible temporary differences
and tax loss carryforwards are carried at the amount considered
sufficiently likely to be recoverable in the future by
offsetting against actual taxable income. In light of operating
losses recently experienced in certain jurisdictions,
consideration was given to the taxable income available to the
Group along with prudent and feasible tax planning strategies.
Based on the results of this assessment, valuation allowances of
85 million
for 2006 and
261 million
for 2005 were recorded against deferred taxes relating to loss
carryforwards. These valuation allowances relate primarily to
certain types of operating loss carryforwards, capital loss
carryforwards, foreign tax credit carryforwards and charitable
contribution carryforwards.
Deferred taxes have not been recognized for temporary
differences of
6,486 million
(2005:
4,283 million)
relating to earnings of foreign subsidiaries, either because
these profits are not subject to taxation or because they are to
be reinvested for an indefinite period. Deferred tax liabilities
of
21 million
are recognized for
686 million
in retained earnings available for distribution at foreign
subsidiaries. If deferred taxes were recognized for the
remaining temporary differences, the liability would be based on
the respective withholding tax rates only, taking into account
the German tax rate of 5 percent on corporate dividends
where applicable.
The increase in tax loss carryfowards and the associated
deferred tax assets relating to continuing operations in 2005 is
attributable to the earnings-neutral spin-off of the LANXESS
subgroup effective January 31, 2005, which gave rise to
458 million
of tax loss carryforwards and
183 million
of deferred tax assets. The additional carryforwards arose
because tax regulations required that the spin-off balance sheet
of LANXESS as of January 31, 2005 reflects the amount of
loss carryforwards assigned to the operations that were actually
spun off, and this amount differed from that previously assigned
to the respective discontinued operations of the Bayer Group on
the basis of origin. The LANXESS data for 2004 are presented
from the standpoint of the Bayer Group as part of the segment
reporting for that year and are not intended to portray either
these discontinued operations or the continuing operations of
Bayer as separate entities. The
560 million
change in tax loss carryforwards compared with the prior year
also results from completed tax audits and from losses to be
declared on the spin-off
F-53
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
of the LANXESS subgroup. Deferred tax assets were not recognized
in relation to
224 million
of the increase in loss carryforwards.
We recently entered into a closing agreement with the Internal
Revenue Service in the United States (IRS) for the tax years
1992 through 1998 resulting in certain adjustments to our
federal income tax liability for those years. Accordingly, our
fiscal year 2005 tax provision has been reduced by
104 million
as a result of reversing previously established reserves in
excess of the additional tax liability assessed by the IRS for
the 1992-2002 tax years.
The actual tax expense for 2006 is
454 million
(2005:
538 million;
2004:
401 million).
This figure differs by 241 million (2005:
133 million;
2004:
45 million)
from the expected tax expense of
695 million
(2005:
671 million;
2004:
356 million)
that would result from applying to the pre-tax income of the
Group a tax rate of 35.1 percent (2005: 35.1 percent;
2004: 34.7 percent), which is the weighted average of the
theoretical tax rates for the individual Group companies.
The reconciliation of theoretical to actual income tax expense
(income) for the Group is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
% | |
|
( million) | |
|
% | |
|
( million) | |
|
% | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Theoretical income tax expense (income)
|
|
|
356 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
671 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
695 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
Reduction in taxes due to tax-free income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-free income from affiliated companies and
divestiture proceeds
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
(84 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(99 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(107 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Utilization of off-balance-sheet loss carryforwards
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
First-time recognition of previously unrecognized deferred tax
assets on loss carryforwards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(203 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
Reversion of tax provision
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(104 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in taxes due to non-tax-deductible expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Write-downs on investments
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Amortization of goodwill
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses related to litigation
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Other tax effects
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual income tax expense (income)
|
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
538 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
454 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective tax rate in %
|
|
|
39.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
[15] Income attributable to
minority interest
Minority interest in income amounted to
22 million
(2005:
21 million;
2004:
13 million),
and minority interest in losses to
10 million
(2005:
23 million;
2004:
16 million).
[16] Earnings per share from
continuing and discontinued operations
Earnings per share are determined according to IAS 33 (Earnings
per Share) by dividing net income by the average number of
shares. The number of ordinary shares to be taken into account
for this purpose is increased by those issued for the capital
increase in July 2006 and the potential shares that would be
issued upon exercise of the rights under the mandatory
convertible bond issued in April 2006. The financing expenses
for the mandatory
F-54
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
convertible bond are added back to net income. In computing
earnings per share, the ordinary shares to be issued upon
exercise of the conversion rights from this bond issue are
counted along with the already issued shares, so basic and
diluted earnings per share are identical. Further information on
the capital increase is given in Note [24] and further
information on the mandatory convertible bond is given in
Note [27].
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Income after taxes
|
|
|
682 |
|
|
|
1,595 |
|
|
|
1,695 |
|
Income attributable to minority interest
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
Income attributable to Bayer AG stockholders
|
|
|
685 |
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
Income from discontinued operations
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
169 |
|
Financing expenses for the mandatory convertible bond, net of
tax effects
( million)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72 |
|
Adjusted income after taxes from continuing
operations
( million)
|
|
|
627 |
|
|
|
1,376 |
|
|
|
1,586 |
|
Adjusted net income
( million)
|
|
|
685 |
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
1,755 |
|
Weighted average number of issued ordinary shares
|
|
|
730,341,920 |
|
|
|
730,341,920 |
|
|
|
746,456,988 |
|
|
Potential shares to be issued upon conversion of the mandatory
convertible bond
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,300,595 |
|
Adjusted weighted average total number of issued and potential
ordinary shares
|
|
|
730,341,920 |
|
|
|
730,341,920 |
|
|
|
791,757,583 |
|
Basic earnings per share
()
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from continuing operations
|
|
|
0.86 |
|
|
|
1.88 |
|
|
|
2.00 |
|
from continuing and discontinued operations
|
|
|
0.94 |
|
|
|
2.19 |
|
|
|
2.22 |
|
Diluted earnings per share
()
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from continuing operations
|
|
|
0.86 |
|
|
|
1.88 |
|
|
|
2.00 |
|
from continuing and discontinued operations
|
|
|
0.94 |
|
|
|
2.19 |
|
|
|
2.22 |
|
Under the German Stock Corporation Act, the sum available for
payment of the dividend is determined from the balance sheet
profit shown in the annual financial statements for Bayer AG
prepared in accordance with the German Commercial Code.
The dividend paid for the 2005 fiscal year was
0.95 per
share, compared with
0.55 for 2004.
The proposed dividend for fiscal 2006 is
1.00 per
share. Payment of the proposed dividend is contingent upon
approval by the stockholders at the Annual Stockholders
Meeting and has not been recognized as a liability in the
consolidated financial statements of the Bayer Group.
Notes to the Balance Sheets
In compliance with IFRS 5 (Non-current Assets Held for Sale and
Discontinued Operations), the information in the Notes to the
Balance Sheets pertaining to 2006 refers to continuing
operations, while that pertaining to 2005 includes the assets
and liabilities of the discontinued operations.
In the tables in the following Notes, the assets and liabilities
held for sale as of December 31, 2006 are shown in the
separate line items reclassifications to current
assets (both under gross carrying amounts and under
accumulated depreciation/amortization and write-downs),
reclassifications to current liabilities or
allocations to discontinued operations.
F-55
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[17] Goodwill and other
intangible assets
Changes in intangible assets in 2006 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing | |
|
|
|
|
|
Other | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and | |
|
|
|
|
|
Rights and | |
|
|
|
|
Acquired | |
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution | |
|
Production | |
|
IPR&D | |
|
Advance | |
|
|
|
|
Goodwill | |
|
Patents | |
|
Trademarks | |
|
Rights | |
|
Rights | |
|
Projects | |
|
Payments | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Gross carrying amounts, December 31, 2005
|
|
|
2,623 |
|
|
|
1,705 |
|
|
|
2,127 |
|
|
|
880 |
|
|
|
1,990 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,108 |
|
|
|
11,433 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
5,804 |
|
|
|
8,880 |
|
|
|
1,666 |
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,218 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
17,921 |
|
Capital Expenditures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
343 |
|
Retirements
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
(72 |
) |
Reclassifications to current assets
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(397 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(313 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
(857 |
) |
Transfers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(53 |
) |
|
|
(54 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
(156 |
) |
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
|
(80 |
) |
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(141 |
) |
|
|
(516 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross carrying amounts, December 31, 2006
|
|
|
8,227 |
|
|
|
10,115 |
|
|
|
3,688 |
|
|
|
818 |
|
|
|
1,994 |
|
|
|
1,317 |
|
|
|
2,039 |
|
|
|
28,198 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated amortization and write-downs, December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
312 |
|
|
|
667 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,595 |
|
|
|
3,745 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retirements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(57 |
) |
Reclassifications to current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(210 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(149 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(72 |
) |
|
|
(433 |
) |
Amortization and write-downs in 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
533 |
|
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
of which write-downs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
Write-backs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(115 |
) |
|
|
(188 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated amortization and write-downs, December 31,
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,021 |
|
|
|
526 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
828 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
1,518 |
|
|
|
4,164 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net carrying amounts, December 31, 2006
|
|
|
8,227 |
|
|
|
9,094 |
|
|
|
3,162 |
|
|
|
588 |
|
|
|
1,166 |
|
|
|
1,276 |
|
|
|
521 |
|
|
|
24,034 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For further information on acquisitions and divestitures, see
Note [7.2].
F-56
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Details of the impairment testing procedure for goodwill are
given in Note [4.5]. The residual carrying amounts of
goodwill for the operating subgroups and reporting segments are
shown in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Environmental | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer | |
|
|
|
Crop | |
|
Science, | |
|
|
|
|
Pharmaceuticals | |
|
Health | |
|
HealthCare | |
|
Protection | |
|
BioScience | |
|
CropScience | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net carrying amounts, January 1, 2005
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
1,145 |
|
|
|
415 |
|
|
|
1,560 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
644 |
|
|
|
644 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Retirements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(43 |
) |
Amortization and write-downs in 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net carrying amounts, December 31, 2005
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
895 |
|
|
|
897 |
|
|
|
1,165 |
|
|
|
415 |
|
|
|
1,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
5,772 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
5,796 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Retirements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
Reclassifications to current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization and write-downs in 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
(92 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net carrying amounts, December 31, 2006
|
|
|
5,727 |
|
|
|
863 |
|
|
|
6,590 |
|
|
|
1,136 |
|
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
1,525 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-57
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Materials | |
|
Systems | |
|
MaterialScience | |
|
Reconciliation | |
|
Bayer Group | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net carrying amounts, January 1, 2005
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,866 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
661 |
|
Retirements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(44 |
) |
Amortization and write-downs in 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net carrying amounts, December 31, 2005
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,623 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,804 |
|
Retirements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
Reclassifications to current assets
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
Amortization and write-downs in 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(156 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net carrying amounts, December 31, 2006
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,227 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In January 2006, Bayer HealthCare and Nuvelo Inc. concluded a
global development and marketing agreement for the drug
alfimeprase. Nuvelo received an advance payment of
41 million
to secure the global marketing rights to this product outside
the United States. Accordingly, this amount was capitalized as
an intangible asset at the start of 2006. In December 2006,
Bayer HealthCare and Nuvelo Inc. announced that two
Phase III clinical studies with alfimeprase had failed to
achieve primary and key secondary end-points. As a result, this
asset was written off. In 2006, the
19 million
value of the marketing and commercialization rights to
Viadur®
was written off, continuing the action taken in 2005, when a
write-down of
15 million
was made on intangible assets related to this product. It has
been confirmed that
Viadur®
would not have long-term viability in the market.
Over the next five years, amortization of the intangible assets
recognized in 2006 is expected to be as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated Amortization of Intangible Assets |
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
2007
|
|
|
1,324 |
|
2008
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
2009
|
|
|
1,416 |
|
2010
|
|
|
1,240 |
|
2011
|
|
|
1,177 |
|
Possible future acquisitions and/or divestments of intangible
assets are not taken into account in computing these amounts and
may therefore cause them to vary.
F-58
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Changes in intangible assets in 2005 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing | |
|
|
|
|
|
Rights | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and | |
|
|
|
|
|
and | |
|
|
|
|
Acquired | |
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution | |
|
Production | |
|
IPR&D | |
|
Advance | |
|
|
|
|
Goodwill | |
|
Patents | |
|
Trademarks | |
|
Rights | |
|
Rights | |
|
Projects | |
|
Payments | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Gross carrying amounts, December 31, 2004
|
|
|
2,470 |
|
|
|
1,634 |
|
|
|
1,029 |
|
|
|
626 |
|
|
|
1,933 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,953 |
|
|
|
9,645 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
661 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
1,068 |
|
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
2,045 |
|
Capital Expenditures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
96 |
|
Retirements
|
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
(68 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(154 |
) |
|
|
(284 |
) |
Transfers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Elimination of accumulated amortization prior to the application
of IFRS 3
|
|
|
(643 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(643 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
576 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross carrying amounts, December 31, 2005
|
|
|
2,623 |
|
|
|
1,705 |
|
|
|
2,127 |
|
|
|
880 |
|
|
|
1,990 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,108 |
|
|
|
11,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated amortization and write-downs, December 31, 2004
|
|
|
604 |
|
|
|
602 |
|
|
|
331 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
510 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,441 |
|
|
|
3,693 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retirements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(53 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(129 |
) |
|
|
(187 |
) |
Amortization and write-downs in 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
622 |
|
|
of which write-downs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Write-backs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfers
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Elimination of accumulated amortization prior to the application
of IFRS 3
|
|
|
(643 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(643 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated amortization and write-downs, December 31,
2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
312 |
|
|
|
667 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,595 |
|
|
|
3,745 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net carrying amounts, December 31, 2005
|
|
|
2,623 |
|
|
|
970 |
|
|
|
1,691 |
|
|
|
568 |
|
|
|
1,323 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
513 |
|
|
|
7,688 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Following the publication of IFRS 3 (Business Combinations) and
the revised standards IAS 36 (Impairment of Assets) and IAS 38
(Intangible Assets), goodwill and other intangible assets with
indefinite useful lives are no longer amortized as of
January 1, 2005 but tested regularly for impairment. There
are no accumulated value adjustments for goodwill. The
respective adjustments made in 2005 are shown in the line
Elimination of accumulated amortization prior to the
application of IFRS 3.
F-59
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[18] Property, plant and
equipment
Changes in property, plant and equipment in 2006 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction in | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Progress and | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Furniture, | |
|
Advance | |
|
|
|
|
Land | |
|
Plant | |
|
Fixtures | |
|
Payments to | |
|
|
|
|
and | |
|
Installations | |
|
and Other | |
|
Vendors and | |
|
|
|
|
Buildings | |
|
and Machinery | |
|
Equipment | |
|
Contractors | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Gross carrying amounts, December 31, 2005
|
|
|
7,014 |
|
|
|
12,913 |
|
|
|
1,960 |
|
|
|
910 |
|
|
|
22,797 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Acquisitions
|
|
|
784 |
|
|
|
507 |
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
1,582 |
|
Capital Expenditures
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
913 |
|
|
|
1,596 |
|
Retirements
|
|
|
(165 |
) |
|
|
(264 |
) |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(638 |
) |
Reclassifications to current assets
|
|
|
(467 |
) |
|
|
(1,029 |
) |
|
|
(636 |
) |
|
|
(80 |
) |
|
|
(2,212 |
) |
Transfers
|
|
|
233 |
|
|
|
487 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
(795 |
) |
|
|
54 |
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
(262 |
) |
|
|
(469 |
) |
|
|
(70 |
) |
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
|
(860 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross carrying amounts, December 31, 2006
|
|
|
7,267 |
|
|
|
12,514 |
|
|
|
1,566 |
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
22,318 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated depreciation and write-downs, December 31, 2005
|
|
|
3,857 |
|
|
|
9,156 |
|
|
|
1,463 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,476 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Retirements
|
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
(237 |
) |
|
|
(171 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(506 |
) |
Reclassifications to current assets
|
|
|
(252 |
) |
|
|
(678 |
) |
|
|
(432 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,362 |
) |
Depreciation and write-downs in 2006
|
|
|
276 |
|
|
|
774 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
1,322 |
|
|
of which write-downs
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
Write-backs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfers
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
(117 |
) |
|
|
(313 |
) |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(481 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated depreciation and write-downs, December 31,
2006
|
|
|
3,670 |
|
|
|
8,703 |
|
|
|
1,049 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
13,451 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net carrying amounts, December 31, 2006
|
|
|
3,597 |
|
|
|
3,811 |
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
942 |
|
|
|
8,867 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In connection with the closure of the Bayer MaterialScience
subgroups diphenylmethane diisocyanate production facility
in New Martinsville, West Virginia, a write-down of
9 million
was recorded for assets that are no longer required. Further, a
change in the plan to expand the chlor-alkali production
facility in Baytown, Texas, resulted in a write-down of
31 million
on construction work in process.
Capitalized property, plant and equipment includes assets with a
total net value of
273 million
(2005:
316 million)
held under finance leases. The gross carrying amounts of these
assets total
780 million
(2005:
868 million).
These assets are mainly plant installations and machinery with a
carrying amount of
187 million
(gross amount:
635 million)
and buildings with a carrying amount of
80 million
(gross amount:
121 million).
Also included are assets with a carrying amount of
48 million
(2005:
202 million)
leased to other parties under operating leases as defined in IAS
17 (Leases). The decline compared with the previous year is
mainly due to the divestment of the Diagnostics business, for
which operating leases exist. The gross carrying amount of
assets classified as operating lease was
69 million
(2005:
589 million);
their depreciation in 2006 amounted to
5 million
(2005:
72 million).
However, if under the relevant agreements the lessee is to be
regarded as the
F-60
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
economic owner of the assets and the lease therefore constitutes
a finance lease, a receivable is recognized in the balance sheet
in the amount of the discounted future lease payments.
Changes in property, plant and equipment in 2005 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction in | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Progress and | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Furniture, | |
|
Advance | |
|
|
|
|
Land | |
|
Plant | |
|
Fixtures | |
|
Payments to | |
|
|
|
|
and | |
|
Installations | |
|
and Other | |
|
Vendors and | |
|
|
|
|
Buildings | |
|
and Machinery | |
|
Equipment | |
|
Contractors | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Gross carrying amounts, December 31, 2004
|
|
|
6,562 |
|
|
|
12,021 |
|
|
|
1,873 |
|
|
|
505 |
|
|
|
20,961 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
155 |
|
Capital Expenditures
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
885 |
|
|
|
1,292 |
|
Retirements
|
|
|
(176 |
) |
|
|
(304 |
) |
|
|
(239 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(728 |
) |
Transfers
|
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
284 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
(549 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
322 |
|
|
|
623 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
1,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross carrying amounts, December 31, 2005
|
|
|
7,014 |
|
|
|
12,913 |
|
|
|
1,960 |
|
|
|
910 |
|
|
|
22,797 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated depreciation and write-downs, December 31, 2004
|
|
|
3,610 |
|
|
|
8,292 |
|
|
|
1,397 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,299 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
Retirements
|
|
|
(148 |
) |
|
|
(270 |
) |
|
|
(211 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(634 |
) |
Depreciation and write-downs in 2005
|
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
757 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1,213 |
|
of which write-downs
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
Write-backs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfers
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
392 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
592 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated depreciation and write-downs, December 31,
2005
|
|
|
3,857 |
|
|
|
9,156 |
|
|
|
1,463 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,476 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net carrying amounts, December 31, 2005
|
|
|
3,157 |
|
|
|
3,757 |
|
|
|
497 |
|
|
|
910 |
|
|
|
8,321 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-61
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[19] Investments in
associates
Changes in the carrying amounts of the Groups interests in
associates included at equity were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net carrying amounts, Jan. 1
|
|
|
744 |
|
|
|
795 |
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
Other additions
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Retirements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(195 |
) |
Reclassifications to current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Equity-method loss after taxes
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net carrying amounts, Dec. 31
|
|
|
795 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For strategic reasons, the Bayer MaterialScience subgroup holds
or is responsible for interests in companies that are included
at equity in the consolidated financial statements of the Bayer
Group. As part of the forward integration strategy of the
Polycarbonates business unit, minority interests in two Israeli
companies were purchased in 1998: a 26 percent interest in
Polygal and a 25 percent interest in Palthough. Both of
these companies manufacture polycarbonate sheets for industrial,
agricultural and other uses, mainly from polycarbonate
(Makrolon®)
granules supplied by Bayer. Two members of each companys
board of directors are Bayer Group employees.
In 2000, Bayer acquired the polyols business and parts of the
propylene oxide (PO) production operations of Lyondell
Chemicals. The strategic objective is to ensure access to
patented technologies and safeguard the long-term supply of PO,
a starting product for polyurethane, at reasonable prices. As
part of this strategy, two joint ventures have been established
to produce PO: PO JV Delaware U.S.A. (Bayers
interest: 43 percent) and Lyondell Bayer Manufacturing
Maasvlakte VOF, Netherlands (Bayers interest:
50 percent). The PO facility in Maasvlakte near Rotterdam,
Netherlands, which came on stream in 2003, is a world-scale
production facility using Lyondells patented PO/ SM
technology. Both facilities are operated by Lyondell. Bayer
benefits from fixed long-term supply quotas/volumes of PO based
on fixed price components.
The difference between the equity interest in the underlying net
assets of associates and their at-equity accounting values is
12 million
(2005:
12 million).
It mainly relates to acquired goodwill.
In 2006 Bayer sold its 49.9 percent interest in the GE
Bayer Silicones joint venture, which had been included in the
consolidated financial statements at equity, to its partner
General Electric. The sale of this interest generated proceeds
of
431 million.
The divestiture thus contributed a gain of
236 million
to income from investments in affiliated companies.
F-62
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The following tables present a summary of the aggregated income
statement and balance sheet data for the associates included at
equity in the consolidated financial statements of the Bayer
Group.
Aggregated income statement data of associates included at
equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net sales
|
|
|
1,335 |
|
|
|
1,593 |
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
320 |
|
Net loss
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
Bayers share of net loss
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss from interests in associates included at equity
(equity-method loss)
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aggregated balance sheet data of associates included at
equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Noncurrent assets
|
|
|
1,478 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
Current assets
|
|
|
469 |
|
|
|
253 |
|
Noncurrent liabilities
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
218 |
|
Stockholders equity
|
|
|
1,619 |
|
|
|
1,125 |
|
Bayers share of stockholders equity
|
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
507 |
|
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net carrying amount of associates included at equity
|
|
|
795 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The item miscellaneous mainly comprises differences
arising from adjustments of data to Bayers uniform
accounting policies, purchase price allocations and their
amortization in income, and impairment losses.
[20] Other financial assets
Other financial assets are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
of which | |
|
|
|
of which | |
|
|
Total | |
|
current | |
|
Total | |
|
current | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Loans and receivables
|
|
|
595 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
of which pertaining to associates
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Available-for-sale financial assets
|
|
|
500 |
|
|
|
233 |
|
|
|
395 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
of which debt instruments
|
|
|
239 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
of which equity instruments
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Held-to-maturity financial investments
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Receivables from commodity derivative contracts
|
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Receivables from other derivative financial instruments
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
Receivables under lease agreements
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,876 |
|
|
|
447 |
|
|
|
1,495 |
|
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-63
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Marketable securities and other instruments that were recognized
separately at a total amount of
233 million
in 2005, are now reflected in available-for-sale financial
assets.
A vendor loan granted in connection with the sale of
Haarmann & Reimer to the investor EQT in 2002 was
repaid by the chemicals group Symrise in the fourth quarter of
2006, reducing loans and receivables by
220 million.
In 2006, impairment losses of
2 million
(2005:
7 million)
were recognized on loans and receivables and an impairment
charge of
22 million
(2005:
33 million)
was recognized on available-for-sale financial assets.
Write-backs amounted to
2 million
(2005:
3 million)
for loans and receivables and
3 million
(2005:
2 million)
for available-for-sale financial assets.
The available-for-sale financial assets as of December 31,
2006 and December 31, 2005 comprise:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Equity | |
|
Debt | |
|
Equity | |
|
Debt | |
|
|
instrument | |
|
instrument | |
|
instrument | |
|
instrument | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Acquisition costs less impairment losses recognized in the
income statement
|
|
|
233 |
|
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
315 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
Fair value adjustments recognized in stockholders equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
losses
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
gains
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recognized fair value
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
239 |
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Further information on the accounting for receivables from
derivative financial instruments is given in Note [30].
Lease agreements in which the other party, as lessee, is to be
regarded as the economic owner of the leased assets (finance
leases) give rise to accounts receivable in the amount of the
discounted future lease payments. These receivables amount to
61 million
(2005:
109 million),
while the interest portion pertaining to future years amounts to
10 million
(2005:
18 million).
The sharp decline in fiscal 2006 is mainly due to the
presentation of the Diagnostics activities as discontinued
operations.
F-64
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The lease payments are due as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Lease payments
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
2007
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
2011 or later
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
Interest component
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
2007
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
2011 or later
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
Receivables under finance leases
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
2007
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
2011 or later
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Lease payments
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
2011
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
2012 or later
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
Interest component
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
2011
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
2012 or later
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
Receivables under finance leases
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
2012 or later
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
|
|
F-65
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[21] Other receivables
Other receivables, less write-downs of
11 million
(2005:
14 million),
comprise:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
of which | |
|
|
|
of which | |
|
|
Total | |
|
current | |
|
Total | |
|
current | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Benefit plan assets in excess of obligations
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
Payroll receivables
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Royalties receivable
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
Interest receivable
|
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
Miscellaneous receivables
|
|
|
1,193 |
|
|
|
1,039 |
|
|
|
985 |
|
|
|
859 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,620 |
|
|
|
1,421 |
|
|
|
1,382 |
|
|
|
1,217 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest receivable consists mainly of interest earned or
accrued that is not due to be received until after the balance
sheet date.
There were no other receivables from associates (2005:
7 million).
Miscellaneous receivables include
160 million
(2005:
210 million)
in accrued income, of which
146 million
(2005:
193 million)
represents current assets.
[22] Inventories
Inventories comprised:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Raw materials and supplies
|
|
|
902 |
|
|
|
1,004 |
|
Work in process, finished goods and goods purchased for resale
|
|
|
4,595 |
|
|
|
5,145 |
|
Advance payments
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,504 |
|
|
|
6,153 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of the inventories totaling
6,153 million
as of December 31, 2006 (2005:
5,504 million),
910 million
(2005:
814 million)
were carried at fair value less costs to sell.
The changes in the inventory reserve, which are reflected in the
cost of goods sold, were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Balance as of January 1
|
|
|
(311 |
) |
|
|
(340 |
) |
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Additions expensed
|
|
|
(166 |
) |
|
|
(180 |
) |
Deductions due to reversal or utilization
|
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
Reclassifications to current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46 |
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of December 31
|
|
|
(340 |
) |
|
|
(311 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-66
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[23] Trade accounts
receivable
Trade accounts receivable as of December 31, 2006 include
5,756 million
(2005:
5,162 million)
maturing within one year and
46 million
(2005:
42 million)
maturing after one year. Of the total,
25 million
(2005:
36 million)
was receivable from associates and
5,777 million
(2005:
5,168 million)
from other customers.
Changes in write-downs of trade accounts receivable were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Balance as of January 1
|
|
|
(273 |
) |
|
|
(334 |
) |
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Additions expensed
|
|
|
(158 |
) |
|
|
(145 |
) |
Deductions due to reversal or utilization
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
152 |
|
Reclassifications to current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of December 31
|
|
|
(334 |
) |
|
|
(305 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[24] Changes in
Stockholders Equity
The components of stockholders equity and their changes
during 2005 and 2006 are shown in the following table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity | |
|
Equity | |
|
|
|
|
Capital | |
|
Capital | |
|
|
|
Attributable to | |
|
Attributable to | |
|
|
|
|
Stock of | |
|
Reserves of | |
|
Other | |
|
Bayer AG | |
|
Minority | |
|
Stockholders | |
|
|
Bayer AG | |
|
Bayer AG | |
|
Reserves | |
|
Stockholders | |
|
Interest | |
|
Equity | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Dec. 31, 2004
|
|
|
1,870 |
|
|
|
2,942 |
|
|
|
6,020 |
|
|
|
10,832 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
10,943 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spin-off of LANXESS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,059 |
) |
|
|
(1,059 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(1,078 |
) |
Capital contributions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other changes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,304 |
|
|
|
1,304 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
1,292 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005
|
|
|
1,870 |
|
|
|
2,942 |
|
|
|
6,265 |
|
|
|
11,077 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
11,157 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital contributions
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
1,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,173 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,173 |
|
Other changes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
521 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006
|
|
|
1,957 |
|
|
|
4,028 |
|
|
|
6,782 |
|
|
|
12,767 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
12,851 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The capital stock of Bayer AG totals
1,957 million
(2005:
1,870 million)
and is divided into 764,341,920 (2005: 730,341,920) no-par
bearer shares. Each share confers one voting right. On
July 6, 2006, 34 million new shares were placed with
German and international institutional investors by means of an
accelerated bookbuilding process. The proceeds of this capital
increase were around
1,182 million
less
9 million
for bank charges. The issue price of the new shares, which carry
full entitlement to the dividend for fiscal 2006, was
34.75 per
share. The related 4.7 percent cash increase in the
companys capital stock was approved by the Supervisory
Board and implemented on the basis of the authorization granted
by the Annual Stockholders Meeting on April 28, 2006
(Authorized Capital II).
Authorized capital of
465 million
was approved by the Annual Stockholders Meeting on
April 28, 2006. It expires on April 27, 2011. It can
be used to increase the capital stock by issuing new no-par
bearer shares against cash contributions or contributions in
kind, but capital increases against contributions in kind may
not exceed a total of
370 million.
Stockholders must normally be granted subscription rights.
However, subject to the approval of the Supervisory Board, the
Board of Management is authorized to exclude subscription rights
for the
F-67
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
stockholders with respect to any excess shares remaining after
rights have been allocated (fractional amounts) and also to the
extent necessary to grant subscription rights for new shares to
holders of convertible bonds or bonds with attached warrants or
mandatory convertible bonds issued by Bayer AG or its Group
companies, who would be entitled to subscription rights upon
exercise of the conversion rights or warrants. In addition the
Board of Management is authorized to exclude stockholders
subscription rights, subject to the approval of the Supervisory
Board, in cases where an increase in capital against
contributions in kind is carried out for the purpose of
acquiring companies, parts of companies, participating interests
in companies or other assets.
Further authorized capital was also approved by the Annual
Stockholders Meeting on April 28, 2006. The Board of
Management is authorized until April 27, 2011 to increase
the capital stock, subject to the approval of the Supervisory
Board, by up to a total of
186 million
in one or more installments by issuing new no-par bearer shares
against cash contributions. Of this amount,
87.04 million
was used for the capital increase effected on July 6, 2006.
The remaining authorized capital thus stood at
98.96 million
on the balance sheet date. Under the resolution adopted by the
Annual Stockholders Meeting, stockholders must normally be
granted subscription rights. However, the Board of Management is
authorized to exclude subscription rights for stockholders with
respect to one or more capital increases out of the Authorized
Capital II, subject to the approval of the Supervisory
Board, provided that such capital increase does not exceed
10 percent of the capital stock existing at the time this
authorization becomes effective or the time this authorization
is exercised, for purposes of issuing new shares against cash
contributions at a price that is not significantly below the
market price of shares in the company that are already listed on
the stock exchange at the time the issue price is finally
determined. Shares acquired on the basis of an authorization of
the Stockholders Meeting and sold pursuant to
Section 71, Paragraph 1, No. 8, Sentence 5 of the
German Stock Corporation Act in conjunction with
Section 186, Paragraph 3, Sentence 4 of that Act
during the term of this authorization shall count toward the
above 10 percent limit. Shares issued or to be issued to
service bonds with conversion rights, attached warrants or
mandatory conversion rights shall also count toward this limit
where such bonds were issued during the term of this
authorization and stockholders subscription rights were
excluded by application of Section 186, Paragraph 3,
Sentence 4 of the German Stock Corporation Act.
Conditional capital of
186.88 million,
corresponding to 73,000,000 shares, exists to service the
conversion rights contained in a mandatory convertible bond
issued by Bayer Capital Corporation B.V. on April 6, 2006.
F-68
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The components of stockholders equity and their changes
during 2005 and 2006 are shown in the following table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated Other | |
|
|
|
|
Retained Earnings | |
|
Comprehensive Income | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revaluation | |
|
Other Retained | |
|
|
|
Exchange | |
|
Measurement | |
|
Cash Flow | |
|
Other | |
|
|
Surplus | |
|
Earnings | |
|
Net Income | |
|
Differences | |
|
of Securities | |
|
Hedges | |
|
Reserves | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Dec. 31, 2004
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
7,235 |
|
|
|
685 |
|
|
|
(2,003 |
) |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
6,020 |
|
Spin-off of LANXESS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,438 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
379 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,059 |
) |
Changes in stockholders equity not recognized in net
income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in fair value of securities and cash flow hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Changes in actuarial gains (losses) relating to pensions and
other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,207 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,207 |
) |
Exchange differences on translation of operations outside the
euro zone
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
849 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
849 |
|
Deferred taxes on valuation adjustments offset directly against
stockholders equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
470 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
470 |
|
Other changes in stockholders equity
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfer of changes recognized in income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
5,064 |
|
|
|
685 |
|
|
|
(775 |
) |
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
5,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividend payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(402 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(402 |
) |
Allocation to retained earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
283 |
|
|
|
(283 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
283 |
|
|
|
(685 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(402 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in stockholders equity recognized in net
income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
5,347 |
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
(775 |
) |
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
6,265 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in stockholders equity not recognized in net
income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in fair value of securities and cash flow hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
|
(66 |
) |
Changes in actuarial gains (losses) relating to pensions and
other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
448 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
448 |
|
Exchange differences on translation of operations outside the
euro zone
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(720 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(720 |
) |
Deferred taxes on valuation adjustments offset directly against
stockholders equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(166 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
(148 |
) |
Other changes in stockholders equity
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transfer of changes recognized in income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
5,633 |
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
(1,495 |
) |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
5,793 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividend payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(694 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(694 |
) |
Allocation to retained earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
903 |
|
|
|
(903 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
903 |
|
|
|
(1,597 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(694 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in stockholders equity recognized in net
income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
6,536 |
|
|
|
1,683 |
|
|
|
(1,495 |
) |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
6,782 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-69
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The effect of the revaluation of assets relating to acquisitions
made in stages is recognized in equity in compliance with IFRS 3
(Business Combinations). If an enterprise is acquired in several
stages, all assets and liabilities of the company have to be
completely revalued on the date on which the acquiring company
gains control and recognized at fair value. If the new fair
value of the assets already held by the acquiring company
exceeds their carrying amount, the carrying amount must be
increased accordingly. This adjustment is recognized in a
separate equity item (revaluation surplus) and thus has no
effect on net income. The revaluation surplus of
62 million
reported under stockholders equity in 2005 was entirely
due to the acquisition of the remaining 50 percent interest
in an OTC joint venture with Roche in the United States that was
established in 1996. In 2006 the
4 million
portion of the revaluation surplus that relates to scheduled
amortization/depreciation of the respective assets was
transferred to retained earnings.
The retained earnings contain prior years undistributed
income of consolidated companies.
Under IAS 19 (Employee Benefits), which contains an option for
the accounting treatment of actuarial gains and losses from
defined benefit plans, all such gains and losses are recognized
in the retained earnings of the Bayer Group. Changes in fair
values of cash flow hedges and available-for-sale financial
assets are recognized in other comprehensive income.
The components of third-party minority interests in Group equity
and their changes during 2006 and 2005 are shown in the
following table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity | |
|
|
Attributable | |
|
|
to Minority | |
|
|
Interest | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
January 1
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
Spin-off of LANXESS
|
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Changes in stockholders equity not recognized in net
income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in fair value of securities and cash flow hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in actuarial gains (losses) relating to pensions and
other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences on translation of operations outside the
euro zone
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
Deferred taxes on valuation adjustments offset directly against
stockholders equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other changes in stockholders equity
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividend payments
|
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
Allocation to retained earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in stockholders equity recognized in net
income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority stockholders interest mainly comprises third
parties shares in the equity of the consolidated
subsidiaries Sumika Bayer Urethane Co. Ltd., Japan; Bayer
CropScience Limited, India; Bayer Polymers Co., Ltd., China;
Berlimed, S.A., Spain; Bayer CropScience Nufarm Ltd., United
Kingdom; Justesa Imagen, S.A., Spain; and Bayer Diagnostics
India Limited, India.
F-70
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[25] Provisions for pensions and
other post-employment benefits
The provisions for pensions and other post-employment benefits
are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Post-Employment | |
|
|
|
|
Pensions | |
|
Benefits | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Germany
|
|
|
5,657 |
|
|
|
5,304 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
5,815 |
|
|
|
5,443 |
|
Other countries
|
|
|
832 |
|
|
|
587 |
|
|
|
527 |
|
|
|
513 |
|
|
|
1,359 |
|
|
|
1,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
6,489 |
|
|
|
5,891 |
|
|
|
685 |
|
|
|
652 |
|
|
|
7,174 |
|
|
|
6,543 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Group companies provide retirement benefits for most of their
employees, either directly or by contributing to independently
administered funds.
The way these benefits are provided varies according to the
legal, fiscal and economic conditions of each country, the
benefits generally being based on the employees
remuneration and years of service. The obligations relate both
to existing retirees pensions and to pension entitlements
of future retirees.
Group companies provide retirement benefits under defined
contribution and/or defined benefit plans.
In the case of defined contribution plans, the company
pays contributions to publicly or privately administered pension
insurance plans on a mandatory, contractual or voluntary basis.
Once the contributions have been paid, the company has no
further payment obligations.
The regular contributions constitute expenses for the year in
which they are due and as such are included in the functional
cost items, and thus in the operating result. In 2006, these
expenses totaled
392 million
(2005:
320 million;
2004:
272 million).
All other retirement benefit plans are defined benefit
plans, which may be either unfunded, i.e. financed by
provisions (accruals), or funded, i.e. financed through
pension funds.
All income and expenses relating to funded defined benefit plans
apart from interest cost and the expected return on plan assets
are recognized in the Group operating result. Interest cost and
the expected return on plan assets are reflected in the
non-operating result.
Actuarial gains and losses from defined benefit plans and
deductions in connection with asset limitation are recognized
entirely as pension provisions via the statement of changes in
stockholders equity and shown in a separate statement of
recognized income and expense, so they have no impact on profit
or loss.
Early retirement payments and certain other benefits to retirees
are also included here, since these obligations are similar in
character to pension obligations.
The costs for defined-benefit pension plans for the continuing
and discontinued operations are comprised as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany | |
|
Other Countries | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
Current service cost
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
270 |
|
|
|
260 |
|
|
|
271 |
|
Past service cost
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
Interest cost
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
432 |
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
674 |
|
|
|
654 |
|
|
|
696 |
|
Expected return on plan assets
|
|
|
(262 |
) |
|
|
(237 |
) |
|
|
(270 |
) |
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
(237 |
) |
|
|
(262 |
) |
|
|
(484 |
) |
|
|
(474 |
) |
|
|
(532 |
) |
Plan curtailments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(317 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(317 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
Plan settlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
342 |
|
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
(206 |
) |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
420 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
406 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-71
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Expenses for other post-employment benefit obligations comprised:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany | |
|
Other Countries | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
Current service cost
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Past service cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
Interest cost
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
Expected return on plan assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
Plan curtailments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
Plan settlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expenses for pension plans assigned to assets held for sale in
2006 comprised service cost of
14 million
(2005:
14 million;
2004:
14 million),
service cost for prior years of
nil (2005:
nil; 2004: minus
11 million),
interest cost of
20 million
(2005:
21 million;
2004:
19 million)
for entitlements earned in previous years, expected returns on
plan assets amounting to
10 million
(2005:
9 million;
2004:
6 million)
and income of
37 million
(2005:
45 million,
2004: nil) from
plan curtailments.
The present value of defined benefit obligation is calculated in
accordance with IAS 19 (Employee Benefits) by the projected unit
credit method. The future benefit obligations are valued by
actuarial methods on the basis of a prudent assessment of the
relevant parameters. The fair value of plan assets is deducted
from the present value of the obligation for pensions and other
post-employment benefits. The obligations and plan assets are
valued at regular intervals of not more than three years. For
all major plans, comprehensive actuarial valuations are
performed annually as of December 31.
The difference between the defined benefit
obligation after deducting the fair value of plan
assets and the net liability recognized in the
balance sheet is attributable to unrecognized past service cost.
Plan assets in excess of the benefit obligation are reflected in
other receivables, subject to the asset limitation specified in
IAS 19 (Employee Benefits).
Benefits expected to be payable after retirement are spread over
each employees entire period of employment, allowing for
future changes in remuneration.
Changes in provisions for pensions and other post-employment
benefits were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Balance as of January 1
|
|
|
6,219 |
|
|
|
7,174 |
|
Acquisitions and changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
341 |
|
Additions
|
|
|
1,849 |
|
|
|
497 |
|
Utilization
|
|
|
(615 |
) |
|
|
(565 |
) |
Reversal
|
|
|
(403 |
) |
|
|
(519 |
) |
Reclassifications to current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(297 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
(88 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of December 31
|
|
|
7,174 |
|
|
|
6,543 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-72
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
In 2005, provisions for pensions and other post-employment
benefits were influenced mainly by the restructuring of
Bayers global pension systems and especially the
modification of several of its largest pension plans in the
United States, replacing defined-benefit plans with purely
defined-contribution plans. In 2006, by contrast, the main
impact came from structural adjustments to the Bayer
Groups portfolio. Reclassifications to current liabilities
totaled
297 million,
while additions to provisions as a result of the acquisition of
the business of Schering AG, Germany amounted to
345 million.
Changes in value caused by actuarial gains and losses are shown
as reversals or additions.
F-73
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The status of unfunded and funded defined benefit obligations,
computed using the appropriate parameters, is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Other Post- | |
|
|
|
|
Employment | |
|
|
Pension | |
|
Benefit | |
|
|
Obligations | |
|
Obligations | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Defined benefit obligation as of January 1
|
|
|
8,866 |
|
|
|
10,256 |
|
|
|
184 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
1,703 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current service cost
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
432 |
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Employee contributions
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan changes
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan settlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net actuarial (gain) loss
|
|
|
1,160 |
|
|
|
(487 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits paid
|
|
|
(436 |
) |
|
|
(489 |
) |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
Plan curtailments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassifications to current assets/liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(293 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defined benefit obligation as of December 31
|
|
|
10,256 |
|
|
|
11,357 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets as of January 1
|
|
|
4,373 |
|
|
|
4,599 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,497 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual return on plan assets
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan settlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employer contributions
|
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
325 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Employee contributions
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits paid
|
|
|
(436 |
) |
|
|
(489 |
) |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
Reclassifications to current assets/liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets as of December 31
|
|
|
4,599 |
|
|
|
6,053 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded status as of December 31
|
|
|
(5,657 |
) |
|
|
(5,304 |
) |
|
|
(158 |
) |
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized past service cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized transition obligation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset limitation due to uncertainty of obtaining future benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net recognized liability as of December 31
|
|
|
(5,657 |
) |
|
|
(5,304 |
) |
|
|
(158 |
) |
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts recognized in the balance sheet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid benefit assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provisions for pensions and other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
(5,657 |
) |
|
|
(5,304 |
) |
|
|
(158 |
) |
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net recognized liability as of December 31
|
|
|
(5,657 |
) |
|
|
(5,304 |
) |
|
|
(158 |
) |
|
|
(139 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-74
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Countries | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Other Post- | |
|
|
|
|
Employment | |
|
|
Pension | |
|
Benefit | |
|
|
Obligations | |
|
Obligations | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Defined benefit obligation as of January 1
|
|
|
3,807 |
|
|
|
4,269 |
|
|
|
724 |
|
|
|
878 |
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
405 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27 |
|
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current service cost
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Employee contributions
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan changes
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
Plan settlements
|
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net actuarial (gain) loss
|
|
|
262 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
54 |
|
Benefits paid
|
|
|
(198 |
) |
|
|
(211 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
Plan curtailments
|
|
|
(317 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
Reclassifications to current assets/liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(155 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
403 |
|
|
|
(251 |
) |
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
(89 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defined benefit obligation as of December 31
|
|
|
4,269 |
|
|
|
4,348 |
|
|
|
878 |
|
|
|
864 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets as of January 1
|
|
|
2,841 |
|
|
|
3,485 |
|
|
|
286 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
307 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual return on plan assets
|
|
|
321 |
|
|
|
421 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
Plan settlements
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Employer contributions
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
Employee contributions
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits paid
|
|
|
(198 |
) |
|
|
(211 |
) |
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
Reclassifications to current assets/liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(150 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets as of December 31
|
|
|
3,485 |
|
|
|
3,804 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
|
|
357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded status as of December 31
|
|
|
(784 |
) |
|
|
(544 |
) |
|
|
(519 |
) |
|
|
(507 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized past service cost
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Unrecognized transition obligation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset limitation due to uncertainty of obtaining future benefits
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net recognized liability as of December 31
|
|
|
(795 |
) |
|
|
(549 |
) |
|
|
(527 |
) |
|
|
(513 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts recognized in the balance sheet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid benefit assets
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provisions for pensions and other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
(832 |
) |
|
|
(587 |
) |
|
|
(527 |
) |
|
|
(513 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net recognized liability as of December 31
|
|
|
(795 |
) |
|
|
(549 |
) |
|
|
(527 |
) |
|
|
(513 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-75
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Other Post- | |
|
|
|
|
Employment | |
|
|
Pension | |
|
Benefit | |
|
|
Obligations | |
|
Obligations | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Defined benefit obligation as of January 1
|
|
|
12,673 |
|
|
|
14,525 |
|
|
|
908 |
|
|
|
1,036 |
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
2,108 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33 |
|
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current service cost
|
|
|
260 |
|
|
|
271 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
654 |
|
|
|
696 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
Employee contributions
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan changes
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
Plan settlements
|
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net actuarial (gain) loss
|
|
|
1,422 |
|
|
|
(488 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
54 |
|
Benefits paid
|
|
|
(634 |
) |
|
|
(700 |
) |
|
|
(95 |
) |
|
|
(91 |
) |
Plan curtailments
|
|
|
(317 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
Reclassifications to current assets/liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(448 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
403 |
|
|
|
(251 |
) |
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
(89 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defined benefit obligation as of December 31
|
|
|
14,525 |
|
|
|
15,705 |
|
|
|
1,036 |
|
|
|
1,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets as of January 1
|
|
|
7,214 |
|
|
|
8,084 |
|
|
|
286 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
Acquisitions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,804 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual return on plan assets
|
|
|
651 |
|
|
|
537 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
Plan settlements
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Employer contributions
|
|
|
482 |
|
|
|
498 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
Employee contributions
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits paid
|
|
|
(634 |
) |
|
|
(700 |
) |
|
|
(95 |
) |
|
|
(91 |
) |
Reclassifications to current assets/liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(166 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
372 |
|
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets as of December 31
|
|
|
8,084 |
|
|
|
9,857 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
|
|
357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded status as of December 31
|
|
|
(6,441 |
) |
|
|
(5,848 |
) |
|
|
(677 |
) |
|
|
(646 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized past service cost
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
Unrecognized transition obligation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset limitation due to uncertainty of obtaining future benefits
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net recognized liability as of December 31
|
|
|
(6,452 |
) |
|
|
(5,853 |
) |
|
|
(685 |
) |
|
|
(652 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts recognized in the balance sheet
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prepaid benefit assets
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provisions for pensions and other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
(6,489 |
) |
|
|
(5,891 |
) |
|
|
(685 |
) |
|
|
(652 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net recognized liability as of December 31
|
|
|
(6,452 |
) |
|
|
(5,853 |
) |
|
|
(685 |
) |
|
|
(652 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-76
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Of the defined benefit obligation for pensions,
5,067 million
(2005:
5,516 million)
relates to unfunded benefit obligations while
10,638 million
(2005:
9,009 million)
relates to funded benefit obligations. Of the defined benefit
obligation for other post-employment benefits,
328 million
(2005:
341 million)
relates to unfunded benefit obligations while
675 million
(2005:
695 million)
relates to funded benefit obligations.
Of the funded pension plans, total overfunding of individual
plans amounts to
89 million
(2005:
41 million)
while underfunding amounts to
870 million
(2005:
966 million).
Similarly, other funded post-employment benefit obligations of
individual funds are underfunded by
318 million
(2005:
336 million).
The Bayer Group has set up funded pension plans for its
employees in many countries. Since the legal and tax
requirements and economic conditions may vary considerably
between countries, assets are managed according to
country-specific principles.
Bayer Pensionskasse VvaG (Bayer Pensionskasse) in Germany is by
far the most significant of the pension funds. This legally
independent fund is a private insurance company and is therefore
subject to the German Law on the Supervision of Private
Insurance Companies. Since Bayer guarantees the commitments of
Bayer Pensionskasse, it is classified as a defined benefit plan
for IFRS purposes. The fair value of the plan assets includes
real estate leased by Bayer which is recognized at a fair value
of
54 million
(2005:
56 million).
Bayer AG has undertaken to provide profit-sharing capital in the
form of an interest-bearing loan totaling
150 million
for the Bayer Pensionskasse. The entire amount was drawn as of
December 31, 2005 and 2006.
The investment policy of Bayer Pensionskasse is geared to
compliance with regulatory provisions and to the risk structure
resulting from its obligations. In light of capital market
movements, Bayer Pensionskasse has therefore developed a
strategic target investment portfolio aligned to its risk
structure. Its investment strategy focuses principally on
stringent management of downside risks rather than on maximizing
absolute returns. It is anticipated that this investment policy
can generate a return that enables it to meet its long-term
commitments.
A large proportion of the benefit obligations of Bayer Schering
Pharma AG, Germany, which was acquired during the year, are
covered by Schering Altersversorgung Treuhand Verein. Its
investment strategy allows the use of derivatives; all currency
risks are fully hedged. A risk management system simulates worst
case scenarios for defined portfolios on the basis of historical
price data.
For plan assets in other countries, too, the key investment
strategy criteria are the structure of the benefit obligations
and the risk profile. Other determinants are risk
diversification, portfolio efficiency and a country-specific and
global balance of opportunity and risk capable of ensuring the
payment of all future benefits.
At year end, plan assets to cover pension obligations were
allocated as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan Assets as of December 31 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Germany | |
|
Other Countries | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Target for | |
|
|
|
Target for | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2007 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2007 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(in %) | |
Equity securities (directly held)
|
|
|
0.04 |
|
|
|
13.36 |
|
|
|
13.10 |
|
|
|
50.98 |
|
|
|
50.84 |
|
|
|
49.09 |
|
Debt securities
|
|
|
53.75 |
|
|
|
41.68 |
|
|
|
42.14 |
|
|
|
41.26 |
|
|
|
40.46 |
|
|
|
41.24 |
|
Special securities funds
|
|
|
25.65 |
|
|
|
26.13 |
|
|
|
22.62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
Real estate and special real estate funds
|
|
|
12.13 |
|
|
|
8.92 |
|
|
|
12.92 |
|
|
|
1.58 |
|
|
|
3.03 |
|
|
|
3.14 |
|
Other
|
|
|
8.43 |
|
|
|
9.91 |
|
|
|
9.22 |
|
|
|
6.18 |
|
|
|
5.66 |
|
|
|
6.52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations in Germany to pay early retirement benefits are
funded entirely by provisions.
F-77
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
At year end, plan assets to cover other post-employment benefit
obligations were allocated as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plan Assets as of December 31 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
Germany | |
|
Other Countries | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Target for | |
|
|
|
Target for | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2007 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2007 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
Equity securities (directly held)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56.10 |
|
|
|
56.80 |
|
|
|
53.00 |
|
Debt securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
35.40 |
|
|
|
35.30 |
|
|
|
35.00 |
|
Special securities funds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate and special real estate funds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.50 |
|
|
|
7.90 |
|
|
|
12.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
100.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At the closing dates, plan assets included roughly the same
weightings of Bayer shares as the major stock indices.
All defined benefit plans necessitate actuarial computations and
valuations. These are based not only on life expectancy and
staff fluctuation, but also on the following parameters, which
vary from country to country according to economic conditions.
The weighted parameters used to value pension obligations as of
December 31 of the respective year were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other | |
|
|
|
|
Germany | |
|
Countries | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
Pension obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate
|
|
|
4.25 |
|
|
|
4.60 |
|
|
|
5.50 |
|
|
|
5.65 |
|
|
|
4.60 |
|
|
|
4.90 |
|
Projected future remuneration increases
|
|
|
2.50 |
|
|
|
2.60 |
|
|
|
4.00 |
|
|
|
4.10 |
|
|
|
2.75 |
|
|
|
2.85 |
|
Projected future benefit increases
|
|
|
1.25 |
|
|
|
1.50 |
|
|
|
2.75 |
|
|
|
2.45 |
|
|
|
1.45 |
|
|
|
1.60 |
|
Other post-employment benefit obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate
|
|
|
3.25 |
|
|
|
4.30 |
|
|
|
6.00 |
|
|
|
6.25 |
|
|
|
5.65 |
|
|
|
6.00 |
|
The following weighted parameters were used to value the cost of
pensions and other post-employment benefits:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other | |
|
|
|
|
Germany | |
|
Countries | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
|
in % | |
Pension obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
4.25 |
|
|
|
5.75 |
|
|
|
5.50 |
|
|
|
5.20 |
|
|
|
4.60 |
|
Projected future remuneration increases
|
|
|
2.50 |
|
|
|
2.50 |
|
|
|
4.10 |
|
|
|
4.00 |
|
|
|
2.95 |
|
|
|
2.75 |
|
Projected future benefit increases
|
|
|
1.25 |
|
|
|
1.25 |
|
|
|
2.70 |
|
|
|
2.75 |
|
|
|
1.40 |
|
|
|
1.45 |
|
Expected return on plan assets
|
|
|
5.50 |
|
|
|
5.25 |
|
|
|
7.50 |
|
|
|
7.50 |
|
|
|
6.35 |
|
|
|
6.10 |
|
Other post-employment benefit obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate
|
|
|
3.25 |
|
|
|
3.25 |
|
|
|
6.00 |
|
|
|
6.00 |
|
|
|
5.40 |
|
|
|
5.65 |
|
Expected return on plan assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.25 |
|
|
|
8.25 |
|
|
|
8.25 |
|
|
|
8.25 |
|
The expected long-term return on plan assets is determined on
the basis of published and internal capital market reports and
forecasts for each asset class.
F-78
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Altering individual parameters by 0.5 percentage points
while leaving the other parameters unchanged would impact
pension and other post-employment benefit obligations as of year
end 2006 as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany | |
|
Other Countries | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
0.5 | |
|
0.5 | |
|
0.5 | |
|
0.5 | |
|
0.5 | |
|
0.5 | |
|
|
Percentage | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
Point | |
|
Point | |
|
Point | |
|
Point | |
|
Point | |
|
Point | |
|
|
Increase | |
|
Decrease | |
|
Increase | |
|
Decrease | |
|
Increase | |
|
Decrease | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Pension obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in discount rate
|
|
|
(771 |
) |
|
|
865 |
|
|
|
(273 |
) |
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
(1,044 |
) |
|
|
1,160 |
|
Change in projected future remuneration increases
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
(132 |
) |
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
(182 |
) |
Change in projected future benefit increases
|
|
|
568 |
|
|
|
(531 |
) |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
638 |
|
|
|
(562 |
) |
Other post-employment benefit obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in discount rate
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
43 |
|
Altering individual parameters by 0.5 percentage points
while leaving the other parameters unchanged would impact
pension expense as of year end 2007 as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany | |
|
Other Countries | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
0.5 | |
|
0.5 | |
|
0.5 | |
|
0.5 | |
|
0.5 | |
|
0.5 | |
|
|
Percentage | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Percentage | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
Point | |
|
Point | |
|
Point | |
|
Point | |
|
Point | |
|
Point | |
|
|
Increase | |
|
Decrease | |
|
Increase | |
|
Decrease | |
|
Increase | |
|
Decrease | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Pension obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in discount rate
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
9 |
|
Change in projected future remuneration increases
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
Change in projected future benefit increases
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
Change in expected return on plan assets
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
48 |
|
Other post-employment benefit obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in discount rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
Change in expected return on plan assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
F-79
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Provisions are also set up for the obligations of Group
companies, particularly in the United States, to provide
post-employment benefits in the form of health care cost
payments to retirees. The valuation of health care costs is
based on the assumption that they will increase at a rate of
11 percent (assumption in 2005: 10 percent), which
should decline to 9 percent by 2008 (assumption in 2005:
8 percent by 2007). The table shows the impact of a one
percentage point change in the assumed rate of cost increases:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase of One | |
|
Decrease of One | |
|
|
Percentage Point | |
|
Percentage Point | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Impact on pension expense
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
Impact on other post-employment benefit obligations
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
(60 |
) |
The following employer contributions were made in 2006 and 2005,
and are expected to be made in 2007, in connection with defined
benefit obligations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany | |
|
Other Countries | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
2007 | |
|
|
|
2007 | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
Projected | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
Projected | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Pensions obligations
|
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
325 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
Other post-employment benefit obligations
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
354 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
387 |
|
|
|
229 |
|
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pensions and other post-employment benefits payable in the
future are estimated as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany | |
|
Other Countries | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Other Post- | |
|
|
|
Other Post- | |
|
|
|
Other Post- | |
|
|
|
|
Employment | |
|
|
|
Employment | |
|
|
|
Employment | |
|
|
Pension | |
|
Benefit | |
|
Pension | |
|
Benefit | |
|
Pension | |
|
Benefit | |
|
|
Obligations | |
|
Obligations | |
|
Obligations | |
|
Obligations | |
|
Obligations | |
|
Obligations | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
2007
|
|
|
528 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
719 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
2008
|
|
|
544 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
739 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
2009
|
|
|
566 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
771 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
2010
|
|
|
587 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
808 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
2011
|
|
|
609 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
850 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
2012 - 2016
|
|
|
3,378 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
1,327 |
|
|
|
312 |
|
|
|
4,705 |
|
|
|
324 |
|
F-80
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The actuarial gains and losses related to defined benefit
obligations and plan assets, recognized in a separate statement
of recognized income and expense outside of profit or loss, and
the deductions in connection with asset limitation due to the
uncertainty of obtaining future benefits, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pensions Obligations | |
|
|
Pension Obligations Germany | |
|
Other Countries | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Defined benefit obligation
|
|
|
8,099 |
|
|
|
8,866 |
|
|
|
10,256 |
|
|
|
11,357 |
|
|
|
3,746 |
|
|
|
3,807 |
|
|
|
4,269 |
|
|
|
4,348 |
|
Fair value of plan assets
|
|
|
4,240 |
|
|
|
4,373 |
|
|
|
4,599 |
|
|
|
6,053 |
|
|
|
2,675 |
|
|
|
2,841 |
|
|
|
3,485 |
|
|
|
3,804 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded status
|
|
|
(3,859 |
) |
|
|
(4,493 |
) |
|
|
(5,657 |
) |
|
|
(5,304 |
) |
|
|
(1,071 |
) |
|
|
(966 |
) |
|
|
(784 |
) |
|
|
(544 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated actuarial gains (losses) relating to benefit
obligation as of January 1
|
|
|
(670 |
) |
|
|
(1,119 |
) |
|
|
(1,682 |
) |
|
|
(2,842 |
) |
|
|
(98 |
) |
|
|
(304 |
) |
|
|
(421 |
) |
|
|
(692 |
) |
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Newly arisen during the year due to changes in actuarial
parameters
|
|
|
(610 |
) |
|
|
(575 |
) |
|
|
(1,122 |
) |
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
(249 |
) |
|
|
(161 |
) |
|
|
(265 |
) |
|
|
46 |
|
Newly arisen during the year due to experience adjustments
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(45 |
) |
Allocations to discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34 |
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
(1,119 |
) |
|
|
(1,682 |
) |
|
|
(2,842 |
) |
|
|
(2,293 |
) |
|
|
(304 |
) |
|
|
(421 |
) |
|
|
(692 |
) |
|
|
(657 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated actuarial gains (losses) relating to plan
assets
as of January 1
|
|
|
(753 |
) |
|
|
(735 |
) |
|
|
(786 |
) |
|
|
(693 |
) |
|
|
(631 |
) |
|
|
(315 |
) |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(125 |
) |
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Newly arisen during the year
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
(154 |
) |
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
159 |
|
Allocations to discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(19 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
(735 |
) |
|
|
(786 |
) |
|
|
(693 |
) |
|
|
(846 |
) |
|
|
(315 |
) |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(125 |
) |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset limitation due to uncertainty of obtaining future
benefits as of January 1
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Newly arisen during the year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
Allocations to discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-81
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Post-Employment | |
|
|
Benefit Obligations | |
|
|
Other Countries | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Defined benefit obligation
|
|
|
886 |
|
|
|
724 |
|
|
|
878 |
|
|
|
864 |
|
Fair value of plan assets
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
|
286 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
|
|
357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded status
|
|
|
(623 |
) |
|
|
(438 |
) |
|
|
(519 |
) |
|
|
(507 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated actuarial gains (losses) relating
to benefit obligation as of January 1
|
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
(259 |
) |
|
|
(259 |
) |
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the
scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Newly arisen during the year due to changes
in actuarial parameters
|
|
|
(190 |
) |
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
(71 |
) |
Newly arisen during the year due to
experience adjustments
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Allocations to discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
(259 |
) |
|
|
(259 |
) |
|
|
(311 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated actuarial gains (losses) relating
to plan assets as of January 1
|
|
|
(92 |
) |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
(41 |
) |
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the
scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Newly arisen during the year
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
17 |
|
Allocations to discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset limitation due to uncertainty of
obtaining future benefits as of January 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the
scope of consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Newly arisen during the year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allocations to discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-82
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Post-Employment Benefit | |
|
|
Pension Obligations Total | |
|
Obligations Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Defined benefit obligation
|
|
|
11,845 |
|
|
|
12,673 |
|
|
|
14,525 |
|
|
|
15,705 |
|
|
|
1,088 |
|
|
|
908 |
|
|
|
1,036 |
|
|
|
1,003 |
|
Fair value of plan assets
|
|
|
6,915 |
|
|
|
7,214 |
|
|
|
8,084 |
|
|
|
9,857 |
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
|
286 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
|
|
357 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded status
|
|
|
(4,930 |
) |
|
|
(5,459 |
) |
|
|
(6,441 |
) |
|
|
(5,848 |
) |
|
|
(825 |
) |
|
|
(622 |
) |
|
|
(677 |
) |
|
|
(646 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated actuarial gains (losses) relating to benefit
obligation as of January 1
|
|
|
(768 |
) |
|
|
(1,423 |
) |
|
|
(2,103 |
) |
|
|
(3,534 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
(259 |
) |
|
|
(259 |
) |
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Newly arisen during the year due to changes in actuarial
parameters
|
|
|
(859 |
) |
|
|
(736 |
) |
|
|
(1,387 |
) |
|
|
487 |
|
|
|
(190 |
) |
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
(71 |
) |
Newly arisen during the year due to
experience adjustments
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Allocations to discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
(1,423 |
) |
|
|
(2,103 |
) |
|
|
(3,534 |
) |
|
|
(2,950 |
) |
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
(259 |
) |
|
|
(259 |
) |
|
|
(311 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated actuarial gains (losses) relating to plan assets
as of January 1
|
|
|
(1,384 |
) |
|
|
(1,050 |
) |
|
|
(990 |
) |
|
|
(818 |
) |
|
|
(92 |
) |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
(41 |
) |
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Newly arisen during the year
|
|
|
248 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
17 |
|
Allocations to discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
(1,050 |
) |
|
|
(990 |
) |
|
|
(818 |
) |
|
|
(831 |
) |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset limitation due to uncertainty of obtaining future
benefits as of January 1
|
|
|
1,058 |
|
|
|
1,065 |
|
|
|
1,067 |
|
|
|
1,075 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes due to divestitures and changes in the scope of
consolidation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Newly arisen during the year
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allocations to discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exchange differences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31
|
|
|
1,065 |
|
|
|
1,067 |
|
|
|
1,075 |
|
|
|
1,065 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In Germany, no unrealized actuarial gains/losses or deductions
due to asset limitation do exist in relation to other
post-employment benefit obligations.
F-83
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The various categories of provisions changed as follows in 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personnel | |
|
Environmental | |
|
|
|
Trade-Related | |
|
Legal | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxes | |
|
Commitments | |
|
Remediation | |
|
Restructuring | |
|
Commitments | |
|
Risks | |
|
Miscellaneous | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
803 |
|
|
|
1,485 |
|
|
|
279 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
648 |
|
|
|
663 |
|
|
|
379 |
|
|
|
4,349 |
|
|
of which current
|
|
|
431 |
|
|
|
837 |
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
588 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
3,009 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
347 |
|
|
|
447 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
197 |
|
|
|
1,187 |
|
Additions
|
|
|
616 |
|
|
|
1,090 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
896 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
771 |
|
|
|
3,738 |
|
Utilization
|
|
|
(488 |
) |
|
|
(1,005 |
) |
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
(55 |
) |
|
|
(745 |
) |
|
|
(383 |
) |
|
|
(463 |
) |
|
|
(3,183 |
) |
Reversal
|
|
|
(133 |
) |
|
|
(89 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
(125 |
) |
|
|
(482 |
) |
Reclassifications to current liabilities
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
(168 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
(43 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(212 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
1,089 |
|
|
|
1,792 |
|
|
|
262 |
|
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
769 |
|
|
|
434 |
|
|
|
687 |
|
|
|
5,229 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which current
|
|
|
870 |
|
|
|
1,081 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
763 |
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
536 |
|
|
|
3,765 |
|
The expected disbursements out of the provisions recognized in
the 2005 and 2006 balance sheets are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
|
( million) | |
Expected disbursements
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected disbursements |
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
3,009 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
3,765 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
231 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
466 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
125 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
275 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
81 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
125 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
229 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
88 |
|
|
2011 or later |
|
|
674 |
|
|
2012 or later |
|
|
510 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,349 |
|
|
|
|
|
5,229 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The provisions are partly offset by claims for refunds in the
amount of
90 million
(2005:
116 million),
which are recognized as receivables. They relate mainly to
environmental measures and to claims out of the provisions for
legal risks. Further details of legal risks are given in
Note [32].
Personnel commitments mainly include annual bonus payments,
vacation entitlements, service awards and other personnel costs.
Also reflected here are the obligations under the stock-based
compensation programs.
|
|
[26.1] |
Stock-based compensation |
Stock-based compensation in the Bayer Group is granted primarily
under standard programs and also on an individual agreement
basis.
Individual agreements enable the company to link remuneration
components to stock price or future stock price trends. Awards
under such agreements may be contingent upon the attainment of
agreed targets, or they may be based solely on length of service.
Standard programs exist for different groups of employees. The
program offered to members of the Board of Management and other
senior executives from 2001 through 2004 was essentially a stock
option program with
F-84
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
variable stock-based awards. This program provides for cash
payments. Middle managers were offered a stock incentive
program, while other groups of employees were offered a stock
participation program.
A stock-based compensation program for top and middle
management, known as Aspire, was introduced in 2005.
It comprises two variants, which are described below. For other
managers and non-managerial employees, a stock participation
program has been offered since 2005, under which Bayer
subsidizes employee purchases of shares in the company.
As with other remuneration systems involving cash settlement,
awards to be made under the stock-based programs are covered by
provisions in the amount of the fair value of the obligations
existing as of the date of the financial statements
vis-à-vis the respective employee group. Adjustments to
provisions relating to all existing stock-based compensation
programs are recognized in the income statement.
The table below shows the change in provisions for the various
programs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock | |
|
Stock | |
|
Stock | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option | |
|
Incentive | |
|
Participation | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Program | |
|
Program | |
|
Program | |
|
Aspire I | |
|
Aspire II | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
December 31, 2005
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
Additions
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
Utilization
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
Reversal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reclassifications to current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2006
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses for stock-based compensation programs in 2006
were
65 million
(2005:
51 million),
including
51 million
(2005:
34 million)
for the Aspire programs and
4 million
in subsidies for the 2006 short-term stock participation program
(2005:
2 million
in subsidies for the 2005 short-term stock participation
program).
In 2006, provisions of
8 million
were recorded in the financial statements at the fair value of
obligations entered into under individual stock-based
compensation agreements. The obligations were measured in the
same way as those incurred under the standard programs. Expenses
for individual stock-based compensation agreements in 2006 were
6 million
(2005:
4 million).
The fair value of obligations under the standard stock-based
compensation programs and individual agreements has been
calculated using the Monte Carlo simulation method and the
following key parameters:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Dividend yield
|
|
|
2.27 |
% |
|
|
2.29 |
% |
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
2.92 |
% |
|
|
3.83 |
% |
Volatility of Bayer stock
|
|
|
38.00 |
% |
|
|
21.52 |
% |
Volatility of the EURO
STOXX 50sm
|
|
|
19.55 |
% |
|
|
13.14 |
% |
Correlation between Bayer stock price and the EURO
STOXX 50sm
|
|
|
0.56 |
|
|
|
0.61 |
|
The expected exercise period is three to five years.
F-85
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
Long-term incentive program for members of the Board of
Management and other senior executives (Aspire I) |
To participate in Aspire I, members of the Board of
Management and other senior executives are required to purchase
a certain number of Bayer shares determined on the basis of
specific guidelines and to retain them for the full term of the
program.
A percentage of their annual base salary is defined as a target
for variable payments (Aspire target opportunity).
Depending on the performance of Bayer stock, both in absolute
terms and relative to the EURO
STOXX 50sm
benchmark index, participants are granted an award of between
0 percent and 200 percent of their individual target
opportunity.
Participants may ask for their Aspire award to be paid out in
cash immediately at the end of the three-year performance
period, or they may convert it into performance
units. These can then be redeemed within a two-year
exercise period for a cash payment that depends on the Bayer
stock price on the exercise date.
|
|
|
Long-term incentive program for middle management
(Aspire II) |
A variant of the Aspire program with the following modifications
is offered to middle management:
|
|
|
|
|
No personal investment in Bayer shares is required. |
|
|
|
The amount of the award in relation to the employees
personal Aspire target opportunity is based entirely on the
absolute performance of Bayer stock during the performance
period. |
|
|
|
The award varies between 0 percent and 150 percent of
the Aspire target opportunity. |
This variant of the Aspire program is not linked to the EURO
STOXX 50sm
index.
|
|
|
Stock Participation Program (2006) for other managers
and non-managerial employees |
Under this program, Bayer offered employees the opportunity to
purchase shares at a discount of 15 percent on the lowest
stock price for the day (Tagestiefstkurs) of August 15,
2006. Employees could invest an amount of up to 10 percent
of their annual base salary, but not more than
5,000.
The shares purchased under the 2006 Stock Participation Program
must be held in a special deposit account and may not be sold
prior to December 31, 2007. In 2006, employees acquired a
total of 474,003 Bayer shares under the 2006 Stock Participation
Program, leading to additional compensation expenses in an
amount of
3 million.
Bayer Industry Services GmbH & Co. OHG (BIS), held by
Bayer AG (60 percent) and by LANXESS (40 percent),
offered a different stock participation program. BIS offered its
managers and non-managerial employees the opportunity to
purchase Bayer shares and LANXESS shares in a ratio of 3:2, at a
discount of 50 percent from the lowest stock price for the
day (Tagestiefstkurs) of August 14, 2006. The total
discounted purchase of shares purchased by any one manager or
non-managerial employee under this stock participation program
was capped at an amount ranging between
600 and
2,000 depending
on the contract level of that manager or non-managerial
employee. The total granted discount per manager or
non-managerial employee ranged between
300 and
1,000.
The shares purchased under the BIS stock participation program
must be held in special deposit account and may not be sold
prior to December 31, 2008. In 2006, BIS managers and
non-managerial employees acquired a total of 34,512 Bayer shares
under the BIS stock participation program, leading to an
additional compensation expense for us in an amount of
1 million.
F-86
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation programs 2000-2004 |
The stock-based compensation programs offered to the different
employee groups in 2000 through 2004 were all similar in their
respective structures. Provisions for the obligations under
these programs are recorded in the balance sheet and recognized
in the income statement at fair value. Entitlement to awards
under these programs is conditioned on retention of the Bayer
stock designated under the program for a certain time period.
The following table shows the programs applicable through
December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Option | |
|
Stock Incentive | |
|
Stock Participation | |
|
|
Program | |
|
Program | |
|
Program | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Year of issue |
|
|
2000 - 2004 |
|
|
|
2000 - 2004 |
|
|
|
2000 - 2004 |
|
Original term in years
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Retention period/distribution date in years from issue date
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2/6/10 |
|
|
|
2/6/10 |
|
Reference price
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Performance criteria
|
|
|
Yes |
|
|
|
Yes |
|
|
|
No |
|
|
|
|
Stock Option Program (2001-2004) |
A maximum personal investment in Bayer stock was defined for
each Board of Management member or other senior executive who
wished to participate in the Stock Option Program.
The Stock Option Program also contains a three-year retention
condition. The retention period is followed by a two-year
exercise period, after which any option rights not exercised
expire. Eligibility to exercise option rights and the award to
which the holder is entitled depend on the absolute and relative
performance of Bayer stock.
For the tranches issued in 2001-2002, every participant received
one option for every 20 shares of their personal
investments placed in a special account. Each option originally
could reach a maximum value of 200 shares during the term
of the tranche, depending on the performance of Bayer stock,
both in absolute terms and relative to the EURO
STOXX 50sm
index.
For the tranches issued in 2003 and 2004, participants received
up to three options per share for every share of their personal
investments placed in the special account. For each option, a
cash payment equivalent to the market price of one
Bayer share and an outperformance premium are
awarded at the exercise date subject to the attainment of
certain performance and outperformance targets, respectively.
None of the stock options issued under the 2001 tranche, which
expired on May 15, 2006, were exercised. Stock options
under the 2002 and 2003 tranches where partially exercised and
are currently still exercisable. As of December 31, 2006,
their intrinsic value was
4 million.
|
|
|
Stock Incentive Program (2000-2004) |
To participate in this program, each participant was required to
deposit shares with a maximum aggregate value of 50 percent
of his or her performance-related bonus for the preceding fiscal
year. The incentive award depends on the number of Bayer shares
deposited at the launch of each tranche and the overall
performance of Bayer stock. The Stock Incentive Program differed
from the Stock Option Program in that participants were
permitted to sell their shares during the term of the program,
although any shares sold did not count for purposes of
calculating the incentive awards on subsequent distribution
dates. The Stock Incentive Program runs for a ten-year period,
during which there are three incentive payment dates.
Incentive payments under the program are only made if Bayer
stock has outperformed the EURO
STOXX 50sm
index on the respective incentive payment dates. For every ten
Bayer shares originally placed in their special account and
retained until the incentive payment date, participants receive
payments equal to the
F-87
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
value of two shares after two years, the value of four shares
after six years and the value of additional four shares after
ten years.
|
|
|
Stock Participation Program (2000-2004) |
Under the Stock Participation Program, only half as many shares
as under the Stock Incentive Program are awarded per ten shares
deposited, but the award is not conditioned on any performance
criteria.
|
|
[26.2] |
Environmental protection |
The Groups activities are subject to extensive laws and
regulations in the jurisdictions in which it does business and
maintains properties. Compliance with environmental laws and
regulations may require Bayer to remove or mitigate the effects
of the disposal or release of chemical substances at various
sites. Under some of these laws and regulations, a current or
previous owner or operator of property may be held liable for
the costs of removal or remediation of hazardous substances on,
under, or in its property, without regard to whether the owner
or operator knew of, or caused the presence of the contaminants,
and regardless of whether the practices that resulted in the
contamination were legal at the time they occurred. As many of
the production sites have an extended history of industrial use,
it is impossible to predict precisely what effect these laws and
regulations will have on the Group in the future.
As is typical for companies involved in the chemical and related
industries, soil and groundwater contamination has occurred in
the past at some of the sites, and might occur or be discovered
at other sites. Group companies are subject to claims brought by
United States Federal or State regulatory agencies and other
private entities and individuals regarding the remediation of
sites that they own, formerly owned or operated, where materials
were produced specifically for them by contract manufacturers or
where waste from their operations was treated, stored or
disposed of.
In particular, a potential liability exists under the
U.S. Federal Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation, and Liability Act, commonly known as
Superfund, the U.S. Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act and related state laws for investigation and
remediation costs at a number of sites. At most of these sites,
numerous companies, including Bayer, have been notified that the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, state governing body
or private individuals consider such companies to be potentially
responsible parties under Superfund or related laws. At other
sites, Bayer is the sole responsible party. The proceedings
relating to these sites are in various stages. In most cases
remediation measures have already been initiated.
Provisions for environmental remediation as of December 31,
2006 amounted to
262 million
(2005:
279 million).
The material components of the provisions for environmental
remediation costs primarily relate to land reclamation,
rehabilitation of contaminated sites, recultivation of
landfills, and redevelopment and water protection measures. The
provisions for environmental remediation costs are recorded on a
discounted basis where environmental assessments or clean-ups
are probable, the costs can be reasonably estimated and no
future economic benefit is expected to arise from these
measures. The above amount of provisions represents anticipated
future remediation payments totaling
345 million
(2005:
363 million),
discounted at risk-free average rates of between
3.0 percent and 10.0 percent. These discounted amounts
will be paid out over the period of remediation of the relevant
sites, which is expected to be 40 years.
Further information on the inherent difficulties involved in
accurately estimating environmental obligations is provided in
Note [5].
|
|
[26.3] |
Restructuring charges |
Restructuring charges of
408 million
were incurred in 2006 for closures of facilities and relocation
of business activities. At year end, provisions of
196 million
existed that are expected to be utilized as the respective
restructuring measures are implemented. The total charges
include
149 million
in severance payments, a total of
87 million
in accelerated amortization/depreciation and write-downs of
intangible assets,
F-88
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
property, plant and equipment, and
172 million
in other expenses. Most of the charges taken for severance
payments and other expenses in 2006 will lead to disbursements
in 2007.
Bayer CropScience introduced a restructuring program, named the
NEW project, in August 2006 to optimize cost
structures and raise efficiency. Restructuring expenses of
74 million
are recognized for this in 2006, including
19 million
in write-downs and
22 million
in personnel-related expenses. As of December 31, 2006
provisions for this program amounted to
38 million.
The NEW project mainly affected North America, Japan and
Germany, especially through capacity reductions at the
production sites in Kansas City, Missouri and Institute, West
Virginia in the United States and concentration of global
research activities in the United States and Japan. In Germany,
production plants were closed at the Dormagen and Griesheim
sites.
During 2006 the Bayer HealthCare subgroup carried out the
decision taken in the third quarter of 2005 to relocate the
headquarters of its Diabetes Care Division from Elkhart,
Indiana, to Tarrytown, New York. This resulted in total current
expenditures of
14 million
in 2006, comprising moving costs, refurbishments and expenses
for the transformation of the global sales, marketing and
procurement structures. In 2005, a write-off of
12 million
was taken for the buildings in Elkhart used by this division,
and provisions of
7 million
were recorded for severance payments to employees.
In connection with the closure of the Bayer MaterialScience
subgroups diphenylmethane diisocyanate production facility
in New Martinsville, West Virginia, a write-down of
9 million
was recorded for assets that are no longer required. Further
expenses of
6 million
were recognized for severance payments and other shutdown
expenses.
The human resources function was reorganized effective October
2006 as part of our drive to make administrative functions more
competitive. Expenses of
27 million
were recognized in 2006 for the realignment of the human
resources departments at Group companies and the establishment
of an HR Shared Center Europe in Leverkusen, Germany.
Alongside this, the acquisition of Schering AG, Germany
necessitates extensive restructuring measures in connection with
the integration process, both now and in the future, in order to
consolidate the Bayer Groups pharmaceuticals activities
and harmonize the operation of this business in the interests of
the entire Group. This includes amalgamating all key functions,
especially research and development, procurement, production,
sales, marketing and administration. The principal integration
activities are as follows:
The global research and development activities previously
performed by Bayer Schering Pharma AG and Bayers
HealthCare subgroup at various sites are to be consolidated at
the Berlin and Wuppertal sites in Germany and at Berkeley,
California, in the United States.
Moreover, in most countries the local subsidiaries of Bayer
Schering Pharma AG will be transferred to the existing Bayer
organizations. The field forces and marketing functions of these
Bayer Schering Pharma AG subsidiaries and the Pharmaceuticals
division of Bayer HealthCare will be merged to form local Bayer
Schering Pharma AG divisions. Detailed plans are currently being
drawn up and are dependent on the progress of the integration
process.
The administrative structures of Bayer Schering Pharma AG will
be merged into the global structures of the Bayer Group.
Following its integration into the Bayer Group, Bayer Schering
Pharma AG in common with other Group
companies will utilize the central functions
provided by the corporate center of Bayer AG in its role as
holding company for the Group.
Total restructuring expenses for Schering amounted to
179 million
in 2006. Of this,
109 million
comprised provisions for measures to be taken as part of the
restructuring. The restructuring provisions recorded in
connection with the integration of Schering include severance
payments of
85 million
and other charges of
24 million.
In addition, the restructuring measures for Schering in 2006
resulted in
19 million
in accelerated amortization/depreciation and write-downs of
intangible assets, property, plant and equipment.
F-89
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
We anticipate further restructuring expenses in the future as
the integration process proceeds and the related projects are
decided upon and implemented. These costs cannot be quantified
accurately at present since they depend on detailed decisions
that have not yet been made. A major part of the expenses for
these projects is likely to be incurred in 2007. At present we
assume possible future restructuring expenses of up to
1 billion
for the restructuring of the acquired Schering AG business, but
that could increase or decrease depending of future decisions.
Restructuring provisions changed as follows during the year:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments | |
|
Other Costs | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Balance as of January 1, 2006
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
Changes in the scope of consolidation
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
Additions
|
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
Utilization
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(55 |
) |
Reversal
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
Reclassifications to current liabilities
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
Exchange differences
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of December 31, 2006
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The other costs are mainly demolition expenses and other charges
related to the abandonment of production facilities.
|
|
[27] |
Financial liabilities |
Financial liabilities comprise the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
of which | |
|
|
|
of which | |
|
|
Total | |
|
current | |
|
Total | |
|
current | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Bonds and notes
|
|
|
6,953 |
|
|
|
336 |
|
|
|
11,852 |
|
|
|
2,137 |
|
Liabilities to banks
|
|
|
703 |
|
|
|
602 |
|
|
|
6,805 |
|
|
|
2,273 |
|
Liabilities under finance leases
|
|
|
468 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
384 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
Commercial paper
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities from derivative financial instruments
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Other financial liabilities
|
|
|
486 |
|
|
|
483 |
|
|
|
573 |
|
|
|
568 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,952 |
|
|
|
1,767 |
|
|
|
19,801 |
|
|
|
5,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The maturities of financial liabilities were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
|
( million) | |
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in |
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
1,767 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
5,078 |
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2,152 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
254 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
262 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
4,567 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
486 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
32 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
4,029 |
|
|
2011 or later
|
|
|
4,249 |
|
|
2012 or later |
|
|
5,841 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,952 |
|
|
|
|
|
19,801 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-90
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
As in the previous year, there were no financial liabilities to
associates.
U.S. dollar-denominated financial liabilities amounted to
1.8 billion
(2005:
1.3 billion)
and accounted for 8.9 percent (2005: 15.0 percent) of
total financial liabilities. No assets of the Group are pledged
against financial liabilities.
Short-term borrowings (excluding the short-term portion of
debentures) amounted to
2.9 billion
(2005:
1.4 billion)
with a weighted average interest rate of 3.8 percent (2005:
7.7 percent). The Bayer Groups financial liabilities
are primarily unsecured and of equal priority.
Further information on the accounting for receivables from
derivative financial instruments is given in Note [30].
Bonds and notes include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective | |
|
Stated | |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, | |
|
Dec. 31, | |
Rate | |
|
Rate | |
|
|
|
Nominal Volume |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
Bayer AG |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.515% |
|
|
|
5.375% |
|
|
Eurobonds 2002/2007 |
|
EUR 2,137 million |
|
|
2,098 |
|
|
|
2,137 |
|
|
6.075% |
|
|
|
6.000% |
|
|
Eurobonds 2002/2012 |
|
EUR 2,000 million |
|
|
2,104 |
|
|
|
2,010 |
|
|
5.155% |
|
|
|
5.000% |
|
|
Hybrid bonds 2005/2105 (2015) |
|
EUR 1,300 million |
|
|
1,268 |
|
|
|
1,247 |
|
|
floating |
|
|
|
floating |
|
|
Eurobonds 2006/2009 |
|
EUR 1,600 million |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,596 |
|
|
4.621% |
|
|
|
4.500% |
|
|
Eurobonds 2006/2013 |
|
EUR 1,000 million |
|
|
|
|
|
|
993 |
|
|
5.774% |
|
|
|
5.625% |
|
|
Sterling bonds 2006/2018 |
|
GBP 250 million |
|
|
|
|
|
|
368 |
|
|
5.541% |
|
|
|
5.625% |
|
|
Sterling bonds 2006/2018 (second tranche) |
|
GBP 100 million |
|
|
|
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
variable |
|
|
|
variable |
|
|
Bonds (private placement) 2003/2006 |
|
EUR 250 million |
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
variable |
|
|
|
variable |
|
|
Bonds (private placement) 2004/2006 |
|
EUR 50 million |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.502% |
|
|
|
3.490% |
|
|
Bonds (private placement) 2004/2008 |
|
EUR 20 million |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
0.160% |
|
|
|
0.160% |
|
|
Bonds (private placement) 2005/2006 |
|
JPY 5 billion |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer Capital Corp. B.V. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.117% |
|
|
|
6.625% |
|
|
Mandatory convertible bond 2006/2009 |
|
EUR 2,300 million |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,276 |
|
Bayer Corporation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.180% |
|
|
|
7.125% |
|
|
Notes 1995/2015 |
|
USD 200 million |
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
6.670% |
|
|
|
6.650% |
|
|
Notes 1998/2028 |
|
USD 350 million |
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
6.210% |
|
|
|
6.200% |
|
|
Bonds 1998/2028 (2008) |
|
USD 250 million |
|
|
213 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
4.043% |
|
|
|
3.750% |
|
|
Bonds (private placement) 2004/2009 |
|
EUR 460 million |
|
|
456 |
|
|
|
458 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,953 |
|
|
|
11,852 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In July 2005 Bayer AG issued a
100-year subordinated
hybrid bond with an issue volume of
1.3 billion.
This issue matures in 2105 and has a fixed coupon of
5 percent in the first ten years. Thereafter, interest is
calculated quarterly at a floating rate (three-month EURIBOR
plus 280 basis points). After the first ten years, Bayer AG
has a quarterly option to redeem the bonds at face value. The
issue price was 98.812 percent and interest is paid in
arrears.
In May 2006 Bayer AG launched further bond issues under its
multi-currency Euro Medium Term Note (EMTN) program as part
of the financing of the acquisition of Schering AG, Germany. The
first of these was a three-year floating rate note in a nominal
amount of
1,600 million
which bears interest at 0.225 percent about the
3-month EURIBOR rate.
The second issue, which has a face value of
1,000 million,
has a coupon of 4.5 percent and matures in seven years. A
third bond, denominated in sterling (GBP) was also issued
with a face
F-91
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
value of GBP 250 million. A second tranche with a face
value of GBP 100 million was subsequently issued. This bond
has a coupon of 5.625 percent and matures in 2018. The
entire issue has been swapped into euros.
In April 2006 Bayer Capital Corp. B.V. issued a subordinated
mandatory convertible bond with a face value of
2,300 million
as part of the financing of the Schering AG acquisition. This
issue, which was placed with institutional investors, carries a
6.625 percent coupon and matures on June 1, 2009.
Investors may convert the bond into a variable number of Bayer
AG shares up to the expiration date, depending on the movement
of the share price within in a set band. If the share price
exceeds or falls below the band, the bond will be converted into
a fixed number of shares. Conversion is mandatory after three
years.
In February 1998 Bayer Corporation issued notes of
U.S.$350 million with a coupon of 6.65 percent and
notes of U.S.$250 million with a coupon of
6.20 percent to eligible institutional investors. The first
of these issues has a maturity of 30 years. The notes are
redeemable, in whole or in part, at the option of Bayer
Corporation at any time upon not less than 30 but not more than
60 days notice. The second issue has combined call
and put options giving the lead manager the right to repurchase
the notes, and the investors the right to cash them, after ten
years. At that time, the lead manager can reset the interest
rate and remarket the bonds for a further period of
20 years, such that they would mature in 2028. If investors
exercise their put option, the bonds will be redeemed in 2008.
Interest on both issues is paid semi-annually.
The long-term liabilities to banks principally comprise a
syndicated loan of
4 billion
in connection with the acquisition of the business of Schering
AG. This credit facility is provided by a syndicate of eleven
banks and bears a variable interest rate (EURIBOR plus a margin
based on Bayers credit rating from 2007). This credit
facility has a fixed term until March 2011 but can be repaid in
full or in part at any time on Bayers request.
At December 31, 2006 the Group had approximately
11.7 billion
(2005:
5.4 billion)
of total lines of credit, of which
6.8 billion
(2005:
0.7 billion)
was used and
4.9 billion
(2005:
4.7 billion)
was unused and thus available for borrowing on an unsecured
basis.
Liabilities under finance leases are recognized as financial
liabilities if the leased assets are capitalized under property,
plant and equipment. They are stated at the present values of
the minimum future lease payments. Lease payments totaling
486 million
(2005:
596 million),
including
102 million
(2005:
128 million)
in interest, are to be made to the respective lessors in future
years.
F-92
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Leasing liabilities mature as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Lease payments
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
2007
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
2011 or later
|
|
|
327 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
596 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
Interest component
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
2007
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
2011 or later
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
Liabilities under finance leases
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
2007
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
2011 or later
|
|
|
288 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
468 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Lease payments
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
2011
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
2012 or later
|
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
486 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
Interest component
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
2011
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
2012 or later
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
| |
Liabilities under finance leases
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
2011
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
2012 or later
|
|
|
229 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
384 |
|
|
|
|
|
Lease payments under operating leases in 2006 amounted to
187 million
(2005:
122 million).
[28] Trade accounts payable
Trade accounts are payable mainly to third parties. Trade
accounts payable as of December 31, 2006 include
2,359 million
(2005:
1,973 million)
maturing within one year and
10 million
(2005:
1 million)
maturing after one year. Of the total,
39 million
(2005:
26 million)
is payable to associates and
2,330 million
(2005:
1,948 million)
to other suppliers.
F-93
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[29] Other liabilities
Other liabilities are comprised as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
of which | |
|
|
|
of which | |
|
|
Total | |
|
current | |
|
Total | |
|
current | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Accrued interest on liabilities
|
|
|
424 |
|
|
|
424 |
|
|
|
561 |
|
|
|
561 |
|
Payroll liabilities
|
|
|
232 |
|
|
|
162 |
|
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
Liabilities for social expenses
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
114 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
License liabilities
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Advance payments received and drafts accepted
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
Liabilities from commodity futures contracts
|
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
Liabilities to minority stockholders
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
756 |
|
|
|
736 |
|
Miscellaneous liabilities
|
|
|
1,447 |
|
|
|
1,245 |
|
|
|
1,603 |
|
|
|
1,380 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,532 |
|
|
|
2,016 |
|
|
|
3,504 |
|
|
|
3,055 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The total amount includes
561 million
(2005:
424 million)
in accrued interest, representing expenses attributable to the
fiscal year but not due to be paid until after the closing date.
Liabilities for social expenses include, in particular, social
insurance contributions that had not been paid by the closing
date.
As in the previous year, there were no other liabilities to
associates.
Miscellaneous liabilities include
421 million
(2005:
511 million)
in accrued expenses, of which
248 million
(2005:
362 million)
is current. Accrued expenses include
47 million
(2005:
59 million)
in grants and subsidies received from governments. The amount
reversed and recognized income was
15 million
(2005:
12 million).
The miscellaneous liabilities also include guarantees,
commissions to customers, and expense reimbursements.
Based on the takeover offer made in connection with the
domination agreement with Bayer Schering Pharma AG, in the
fourth quarter of 2006 an obligation of
736 million
arose toward the remaining minority stockholders to purchase
their minority interest. This is reflected in other current
liabilities and not in equity attributable to minority interest.
Liabilities to minority stockholders also contain LANXESS
AGs 40 percent share amounting to
20 million
in the capital of Bayer Industry Services GmbH & Co.
OHG.
Further information on the accounting for liabilities from
derivative financial instruments is given in Note [30].
Liabilities of
392 million
(2005:
313 million)
were secured, including
3 million
(2005:
7 million)
by mortgages.
[30] Financial Instruments
[30.1] Management
of financial and commodity price risks
As a global company, Bayer is exposed in the normal course of
business to currency, interest rate, procurement market and
credit risks that could affect its net assets, financial
position and results of operations.
It is company policy to use derivative financial instruments to
minimize or eliminate the risks associated with operating
activities and the resulting financing requirements. Derivative
financial instruments are used almost exclusively to hedge
realized or forecasted transactions. The use of derivative
financial instruments is subject to strict internal controls
based on centrally defined mechanisms and uniform guidelines.
The derivatives
F-94
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
used are mainly
over-the-counter
instruments, particularly forward exchange contracts, option
contracts, interest rate swaps, cross-currency interest-rate
swaps, commodity swaps and commodity option contracts concluded
with banks of first-class credit standing.
The various risk classes and risk management systems are
outlined below:
Exposure to currency risk arises mainly when receivables,
liabilities, cash and cash equivalents or forecasted
transactions are denominated in a currency other than the
companys local currency or will be denominated in such a
currency in the planned course of business. The principal
currency risks to which the Bayer Group is exposed involve the
U.S. dollar, the British pound sterling and the euro.
Currency risk is monitored and analyzed systematically and is
managed centrally by the central finance department. The scope
of hedging is evaluated regularly and defined in a Directive.
Recorded foreign currency operating items and financial items
are normally fully exchange-hedged.
The anticipated foreign currency exposure from forecasted
transactions in the next twelve months is hedged on a basis
agreed between the Group Management Board, the central finance
department and the operating units. A significant proportion of
contractual and foreseeable currency risks are hedged through
forward exchange contracts, currency options and currency swaps.
An interest rate risk the possibility that the value
of a financial instrument (fair value risk) or future cash flows
from a financial instrument (cash flow risk) will change due to
movement in market interest rates applies mainly to
assets and liabilities with maturities of more than one year.
Such long maturities are only of material significance in the
case of financial assets and liabilities.
Interest rate risk is analyzed centrally in the Bayer Group and
managed by the central finance department using a mix of fixed
and variable interest rates defined by the management and
subject to regular review. Derivatives mainly
interest rate swaps, cross-currency interest-rate swaps and
interest options are employed to preserve the target
structure of the portfolio.
The Bayer Group operates in markets in which the prices of raw
material commodities and products often fluctuate. Such
fluctuations can affect business operations. The procurement
departments of the subgroups are responsible for managing these
price risks on the basis of internal directives and centrally
determined limits, which are subject to constant review.
Commodity swaps and commodity options, in particular, are
employed to hedge changes in the prices of crude oil, naphtha
and benzene feedstocks and of natural gas. These instruments are
also used in the case of long-term, fixed-price supply contracts.
In the Bayer Group credit risk arises from the possibility of
asset impairment occurring because counterparties cannot meet
their obligations in transactions involving financial
instruments. Since the Bayer Group does not conclude master
netting arrangements with its customers, the total amounts
recognized in assets represent the maximum exposure to credit
risk.
To minimize the credit risk, predefined exposure limits are
observed and transactions are only conducted with counterparties
of first-class credit standing.
F-95
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
[30.2] |
Primary financial instruments |
The amount of financial liabilities recognized in the balance
sheet is
162 million
(2005:
37 million)
below their fair value, which is determined mainly by
discounting future cash flows. The fair value of a primary
financial instrument is the price at which it could be exchanged
in a current transaction between knowledgeable, willing parties
in an active market. The remaining receivables and liabilities
and cash and cash equivalents have such short terms that there
is no significant discrepancy between their fair values and
carrying amounts.
|
|
[30.3] |
Economic hedges and hedge accounting with derivative
financial instruments |
The Bayer Group uses derivative financial instruments to
mitigate the risk of changes in exchange rates, interest rates
and commodity prices. Many transactions constitute economic
hedges but do not qualify for hedge accounting under IAS 39
(Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement). Changes in
the fair value of these derivative financial instruments are
recognized directly in the income statement: fair value changes
on forward exchange contracts and currency options are reflected
in exchange gains and losses, those on interest-rate swaps and
interest-rate options in interest income and expense, and those
on commodity futures and commodity options in other operating
income and expenses. The fair values of derivatives are
determined from quoted market prices or using recognized
mathematical valuation methods.
Changes in the fair values of derivative financial instruments
designated as fair value hedges are recognized along with the
underlying transaction.
Changes in the fair value of the effective portion of
derivatives designated as cash flow hedges are initially
recognized not in the income statement, but in
stockholders equity as other comprehensive income. They
are released to the income statement when the underlying
transaction is realized. The effects of hedging forecasted
transactions denominated in foreign currencies and the effects
of commodity hedges are recognized in other operating income and
expense at the date of realization. If a derivative is sold or
ceases to qualify for hedge accounting, the amount reflected in
other comprehensive income continues to be recognized in this
item until the forecasted transaction is realized. If the
forecasted transaction is no longer probable, the amount
previously recognized in other comprehensive income is released
to the income statement.
The income and expense from the derivatives and the underlying
transactions reflected in the non-operating result are shown
separately. Income and expense are not offset.
F-96
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The fair value of hedged transactions at year end was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Fair Value | |
|
|
|
Fair Value | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Notional | |
|
Positive | |
|
Negative | |
|
Notional | |
|
Positive | |
|
Negative | |
|
|
Amount | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
Amount | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
Fair Value | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
Currency hedging of recorded transactions
|
|
|
4,759 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
(105 |
) |
|
|
10,305 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forward exchange contracts
|
|
|
3,600 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
8,960 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
(19 |
) |
of which FV hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which CF hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency options
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
of which FV hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which CF hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cross-currency interest-rate swaps
|
|
|
1,115 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(70 |
) |
|
|
1,269 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
of which FV hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which CF hedges
|
|
|
460 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
965 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency hedging of forecasted transactions |
|
|
942 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
1,761 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forward exchange contracts
|
|
|
817 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
1,761 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
of which FV hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which CF hedges
|
|
|
809 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
1,201 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
Currency options
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which FV hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which CF hedges
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate hedging of recorded transactions |
|
|
11,327 |
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
11,633 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
(157 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swaps
|
|
|
10,327 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
|
10,633 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
(156 |
) |
of which FV hedges
|
|
|
5,533 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
5,708 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
(145 |
) |
of which CF hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate options
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
of which FV hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which CF hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity price hedging
|
|
|
465 |
|
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
(209 |
) |
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
(225 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forward commodity contracts
|
|
|
416 |
|
|
|
210 |
|
|
|
(125 |
) |
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
(149 |
) |
of which FV hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which CF hedges
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(70 |
) |
Commodity option contracts
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
(84 |
) |
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
(76 |
) |
of which FV hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which CF hedges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
17,493 |
|
|
|
482 |
|
|
|
(420 |
) |
|
|
24,088 |
|
|
|
379 |
|
|
|
(415 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of which short-term derivative financial instruments
|
|
|
5,443 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
(161 |
) |
|
|
15,484 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
(57 |
) |
|
for currency hedging
|
|
|
4,872 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
(155 |
) |
|
|
11,101 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
for interest rate hedging
|
|
|
350 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,127 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
for commodity hedging
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
256 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
F-97
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Fair value hedges are used to eliminate the risk of changes in
fair value, especially on fixed-interest borrowings, by
obtaining a variable interest rate. Essentially these fair value
hedges comprise the
2 billion
bond issued in 2002 and the
1.3 billion
bond issued in 2005, along with the bond issued in 2002, which
was partially repurchased in 2005 and has a remaining principal
amount of
2.1 billion.
The ineffective portion of fair value hedges amounts to
3 million
(2005: nil).
As in the previous year, there are no effects resulting from
premature termination of fair value hedges entered into on the
basis of firm commitments.
Fluctuations in future cash flows from forecasted foreign
currency transactions are avoided by means of cash flow hedges.
Cash flow hedges are also used to partially limit the risk of
fluctuations in future cash flows resulting from price
fluctuations on procurement markets. They relate to planned
transactions or the risk of price fluctuations in procurement
transactions with total notional volumes of
1,761 million
and
389 million
(2005:
942 million
or
465 million)
respectively.
Other comprehensive income decreased in 2006 by
43 million
(2005:
9 million)
due to negative changes in the fair values of derivatives
designated as cash flow hedges, while
9 million
in expense (2005:
3 million
in income) was removed from other comprehensive income and
released to the income statement. The ineffective portion of
hedges totaling
5 million
(2005:
6 million)
is recognized in income.
An amount of
38 million
will probably be reclassified from other comprehensive income to
the income statement within the next twelve months. All
forecasted transactions are considered highly probable.
[31] Commitments and
contingencies
Contingent liabilities as of December 31, 2006 amounted to
136 million.
They result entirely from liabilities assumed on behalf of third
parties and comprise:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Issuance and endorsement of bills
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Guarantees
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other commitments
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
Miscellaneous
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contingent liabilities refer to the potential occurrence of
future events that would create an obligation. Although such
events are regarded as improbable on the reporting date, they
cannot be ruled out entirely.
Litigation and administrative proceedings are evaluated on a
case-by-case basis considering the available information,
including that from legal counsel, to assess potential outcomes.
Where it is considered probable that a future obligation will
result in an outflow of resources, a provision is recorded in
the amount of the present value of the expected cash outflows if
these are deemed to be reliably measurable. Litigation and other
judicial proceedings as a rule raise difficult and complex legal
issues and are subject to many uncertainties and complexities
including, but not limited to, the facts and circumstances of
each particular case, issues regarding the jurisdiction in which
each suit is brought and differences in applicable law. Further
details of legal risks are given in Note [32].
Under the German Transformation Act, Bayer AG and LANXESS AG are
jointly and severally liable for all obligations of Bayer AG
that existed on January 28, 2005. To the extent that
certain obligations were not assigned
F-98
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
to Bayer AG under the Spin-off and Acquisition Agreement, dated
September 22, 2004, between Bayer AG and LANXESS AG, Bayer
AG ceases to be liable for such obligations after a five-year
period. The Master Agreement, entered into between the same
parties contemporaneously with the Spin-off and Acquisition
Agreement, includes corresponding indemnification obligations of
Bayer AG and LANXESS AG. It also contains provisions dealing
with the apportionment of liabilities arising from product
liability claims, environmental claims and antitrust violations
as between the contracting parties.
In addition to provisions, other liabilities and contingent
liabilities, there are also other financial commitments. Further
financial commitments also exist, mainly under long-term lease
and rental agreements.
Minimum non-discounted future payments relating to operating
leases total
559 million
(2005:
452 million).
The respective payment obligations mature as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
|
( million) | |
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in |
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
148 |
|
|
2007
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
106 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
88 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
74 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
66 |
|
|
2011 or later
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
2012 or later |
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
452 |
|
|
|
|
|
559 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial commitments resulting from orders already placed under
purchase agreements related to planned or ongoing capital
expenditure projects total
507 million
(2005:
294 million).
The increase is principally attributable to
174 million
resulting from the first-time consolidation of the Schering AG
group.
Of these payments,
467 million
is due in 2007.
In addition, the Group has entered into research agreements with
a number of third parties under which Bayer has agreed to fund
various research projects or has assumed other commitments based
on the achievement of certain milestones or other specific
conditions. The total amount of such funding and other
commitments is
956 million
(2005:
562 million).
At December 31, 2006, the remaining payments expected to be
made to these parties, assuming the milestones or other
conditions are met, were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
|
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
|
|
( million) | |
Maturing in
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturing in |
|
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
168 |
|
|
2007
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
198 |
|
|
2008
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
116 |
|
|
2009
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
79 |
|
|
2010
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
88 |
|
|
2011 or later
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
2012 or later |
|
|
307 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
562 |
|
|
|
|
|
956 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The rise in financial commitments relating to alliances in the
reporting year is attributable in part to a development and
marketing agreement concluded in 2006 between Bayer HealthCare
and Nuvelo Inc. for the drug alfimeprase, a cooperation
agreement signed in the fourth quarter with Regeneron
Pharmaceuticals on the
F-99
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
development and commercialization of a treatment for severe eye
diseases, and the commitments acquired with Schering AG.
As a global company with a diverse business portfolio, the Bayer
Group (including Bayer Schering Pharma AG, which previously was
named Schering AG) is exposed to numerous legal risks,
particularly in the areas of product liability, competition and
antitrust law, patent disputes, tax assessments, and
environmental matters. The outcome of any current or future
proceedings cannot be predicted with certainty. It is therefore
possible that legal or regulatory judgments could give rise to
expenses that are not covered, or not fully covered, by
insurers compensation payments and could significantly
affect our revenues and earnings. (Please note that Bayer
Schering Pharma AG and Schering-Plough Corporation, New Jersey,
are unaffiliated companies that have been totally independent of
each other many years. The names Bayer Schering
Pharma or Schering as used in this annual
report always refer to Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin,
Germany, or its predecessor, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany,
respectively.)
Legal proceedings currently considered to involve material risks
are outlined below. The litigation referred to does not
necessarily represent an exhaustive list.
As of February 12, 2007, the number of Lipobay/ Baycol
cases pending against Bayer worldwide was approximately 1,870
(approximately 1,810 of them in the United States, including
several class actions). As of February 12, 2007, Bayer had
settled 3,152 Lipobay/ Baycol cases worldwide without
acknowledging any liability and resulting in settlement payments
of approximately U.S.$1,159 million. Bayer will continue to
offer fair compensation to people who experienced serious side
effects while taking Lipobay/ Baycol, on a voluntary basis and
without concession of liability. In the United States, five
cases have been tried to date, all of which were found in
Bayers favor.
After more than five years of litigation we are currently aware
of fewer than 20 pending cases in the United States that in our
opinion hold a potential for settlement, although we cannot rule
out the possibility that additional cases involving serious side
effects from Lipobay/ Baycol may come to our attention. In
addition, there could be further settlements of cases outside of
the United States.
In the fiscal year 2006, Bayer recorded a
35 million
charge to the operating result in respect of settlements already
concluded or expected to be concluded and anticipated defense
costs.
Since the existing insurance coverage is exhausted, it is
possible depending on the future progress of the
litigation that Bayer could face further payments
that are not covered by the accounting measures already taken.
We will regularly review the possibility of further accounting
measures depending on the progress of the litigation.
A group of stockholders has filed a class-action lawsuit
claiming damages against Bayer AG and Bayer Corporation and two
current and certain former managers. The suit alleges that Bayer
violated U.S. securities laws by making misleading
statements, prior to the withdrawal of Lipobay/ Baycol from the
market, about the products commercial prospects and, after
its withdrawal, about the related potential financial liability.
In 2005 the court dismissed with prejudice the claims of
non-U.S. purchasers
of Bayer AG stock on
non-U.S. exchanges.
Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses and will defend
itself vigorously.
39 putative class action lawsuits, one individual lawsuit and
one consumer protection group lawsuit (which has been dismissed)
against Bayer involving the medication
Cipro®
have been filed since July 2000 in the United States. The
plaintiffs are suing Bayer and other companies also named as
defendants, alleging that a settlement to end patent litigation
reached in 1997 between Bayer and Barr Laboratories, Inc.
violated antitrust regulations.
F-100
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The plaintiffs claim the alleged violation prevented the
marketing of generic ciprofloxacin as of 1997. In particular,
they are seeking triple damages under U.S. law. After the
settlement with Barr the patent was the subject of a successful
re-examination by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and
of successful defenses in U.S. federal courts. It has since
expired.
All the actions pending in federal court were consolidated in
federal district court in New York in a multidistrict litigation
(MDL) proceeding. In 2005 the court had granted
Bayers motion for summary judgment and dismissed all of
plaintiffs claims in the MDL proceeding. The plaintiffs
are appealing this decision. Further cases are pending before
various state courts. Bayer believes that it has meritorious
defenses and intends to defend itself vigorously.
|
|
|
Rubber, polyester polyols, urethane |
|
|
|
Proceedings involving product lines of the former Rubber
Business Group |
A number of investigations and proceedings by the respective
authorities in the U.S., Canada and the E.U. concerning alleged
anticompetitive conduct involving certain products in the rubber
field have been resolved, while others remain pending. In the
United States, Bayer AG has paid fines in two cases on the basis
of agreements reached with the U.S. Department of Justice.
In December 2005, the E.U. Commission imposed a fine of
59 million
for antitrust violation in the area of rubber chemicals. The
respective amount was paid at the end of March 2006. In July and
August 2006 the U.S. Department of Justice, the E.U.
Commission and the CCB notified Bayer AG that they had closed
the respective EPDM proceedings. In November 2006 the E.U.
Commission closed the proceeding related to BR/ ESBR by imposing
fines against several companies and granting full amnesty to
Bayer.
Numerous civil claims for damages including class actions are
pending in the United States, and proposed class proceedings in
Canada, against Bayer AG and certain of its subsidiaries as well
as other companies. The lawsuits involve rubber chemicals, EPDM,
NBR and polychloroprene rubber (CR). Bayer has reached agreement
to settle the bulk of the U.S. actions. The majority of
these agreements have received court approval. These settlements
do not resolve all of the pending civil litigation with respect
to the aforementioned products, nor do they preclude the
bringing of additional claims. However, as previously reported,
Bayer has settled the actions which management believes to be
material. In addition, a putative class action against Bayer AG
and certain of its subsidiaries, as well as other companies,
recently has been filed alleging claims of anticompetitive
activities involving two additional rubber products,
polybutadiene rubber (BR) and styrene butadiene rubber
(SBR). Respective litigation in Europe is likely.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving polyester polyols, urethanes and
urethane chemicals |
In Canada an investigation is pending against Bayer for alleged
anticompetitive conduct relating to adipic-based polyester
polyols. In the United States, Bayer Corporation paid a fine on
the basis of an agreement reached with the U.S. Department
of Justice in 2004.
A number of civil claims for damages including class actions
have been filed in the United States against Bayer involving
allegations of unlawful collusion on prices for certain
polyester polyol, urethanes and urethane chemicals product
lines. Similar actions are pending in Canada with respect to
polyester polyols.
Bayer has reached agreements or agreements in principle to
settle certain of the U.S. actions. These agreements or
agreements in principle partly remain subject to court approval.
These settlements do not resolve all of the pending civil
litigations with respect to the aforementioned products, nor do
they preclude the bringing of additional claims.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving polyether polyols and other precursors
for urethane end-use products |
Bayer has been named as a defendant in multiple putative class
action lawsuits in the United States and Canada involving
allegations of price fixing for, inter alia, polyether
polyols and certain other precursors for
F-101
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
urethane end-use products. In the United States Bayer has
settled with a class of direct purchasers of polyether polyols,
MDI and TDI (and related systems) representing approximately
75 percent of the direct purchasers, which settlement has
been approved by the court. The remaining direct purchasers
opted out of this settlement and have the right to bring their
own actions. To date no such actions have been brought. In
Canada, the class action lawsuit on behalf of direct and
indirect purchasers of polyether polyols, MDI and TDI (and
related systems) continues. In February 2006 Bayer was served
with a subpoena from the U.S. Department of Justice seeking
information relating to the manufacture and sale of this product.
|
|
|
Impact of these antitrust proceedings on Bayer |
Excluding the portion allocated to LANXESS, the provisions with
respect to the described civil proceedings were reduced from
285 million
in 2005 to
129 million
as of December 31, 2006, due to settlement payments.
Bayer will continue to pursue settlements that in its view are
warranted. In cases where settlement is not achievable, Bayer
will continue to defend itself vigorously.
The financial risk associated with the proceedings described
above, beyond the amounts already paid and the financial
provisions already established, is currently not quantifiable
due to the considerable uncertainty associated with these
proceedings. Consequently, no provisions other than those
described above have been established. The company expects that,
in the course of the regulatory proceedings and civil damages
suits, additional charges, which are currently not quantifiable,
will become necessary.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving genetically modified rice |
Since August 2006, Bayer CropScience LP is party to multiple
lawsuits, including putative class actions, filed in
U.S. federal and state courts by rice farmers and
resellers. Plaintiffs allege that they have suffered economic
losses after traces of the genetically modified rice event
LLRICE601 were identified in samples of conventional long-grain
rice grown in the U.S. This is alleged to have led to
various commercial damages, including a decline in the commodity
price for long-grain rice, costs associated with restrictions on
imports and exports, and costs to secure alternative supplies.
All the actions pending in federal court were consolidated in
December in federal district court in Missouri in a
multidistrict litigation (MDL) proceeding.
After development, LLRICE601 had been further tested in
cooperation with third parties, including a breeding institute
in the U.S. However, it was never selected for
commercialization. The U.S. Department of Agriculture and
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration have stated that
LLRICE601 does not pose a health risk and is safe for use in
food and feed and for the environment. In November 2006, the
USDA advised that it had deregulated LLRICE601. The USDA is
conducting an investigation in an effort to determine how
LLRICE601 became present in commercial rice grown in the United
States.
Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses and intends to
continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the considerable
uncertainty associated with these proceedings, it is currently
not possible to estimate potential liability.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving oral contraceptives |
In April 2005, Bayer Schering Pharma filed an ANDA IV suit
against Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Barr Laboratories Inc. in
U.S. federal court alleging patent infringement by Barr for
the intended generic version of Bayer Schering Pharmas
Yasmin®
oral contraceptive product in the United States. In June 2005
Barr filed its counterclaim seeking to invalidate Bayer Schering
Pharmas patent. This lawsuit is currently in the discovery
phase.
F-102
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
In January 2007, Bayer Schering Pharma received notice from Barr
Laboratories, Inc. that it has filed an ANDA IV application with
the U.S. FDA seeking approval of a generic version of Bayer
Schering Pharmas
YAZ®
oral contraceptive product. Barr will be prohibited from
marketing its generic version until after expiry in March 2009
of the exclusivity period for marketing granted by FDA.
Bayer highly values its
Yasmin®
and
Yaz®
oral contraceptive products and is deeply committed to
continuing its leadership position in oral contraception.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving propylene oxide |
In May 2006 a U.S. arbitration panel issued a final award
in favor of Lyondell Chemical Co. in respect of a dispute with
Bayer over interpretation of their Joint Venture Agreement for
the manufacture of propylene oxide. Bayer is seeking to vacate
the final award, while Lyondell is seeking to confirm the award
as well as obtain pre-award interest. Bayer has established
provisions in this regard that it believes at this stage of the
proceedings to be appropriate. In addition to seeking to vacate
the final award, in January 2007 Bayer filed suit against
Lyondell in a U.S. court of justice seeking equitable
reformation of an agreement and restitution of certain monies
paid or, as a result of the final award, allegedly owing by
Bayer to Lyondell in connection with the panel award.
Bayer has separately notified Lyondell of its claim in
connection with Lyondells affiliate to compensate Bayer
for using certain quantities of propylene oxide from
Bayers share of capacity under the Joint Venture. This
dispute is proceeding to binding arbitration.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving syringe injectors and related
products |
In November 1998, Liebel-Flarsheim Company and its parent,
Mallinckrodt, Inc., filed suit against Bayer Schering Pharma
AGs Medrad subsidiary alleging that some of Medrads
front load syringe injections infringe four patents held by
Liebel-Flarsheim. In October 2005, the court ruled in favor of
Medrad. The ruling stated that the Medrad products would have
infringed the patents of Liebel-Flarsheim if those patents were
valid, but then held all four of those patents to be invalid.
Each party is appealing the material portions of the ruling
unfavorable to it. In September 2004 Liebel-Flarsheim Company
and its parent, Mallinckrodt, Inc., filed a second suit alleging
that a further product of Medrad infringes the same group of
four patents. Based on the October 2005 decision in the first
case the court also dismissed this case in October 2005, but
again each party appealed the material portions of the ruling
unfavorable to it.
The plaintiffs in these cases have also filed two additional
declaratory judgment actions against Medrad. Medrad separately
has brought suit against Liebel-Flarsheim alleging that a
Liebel-Flarsheim MR syringe injector infringes a patent held by
Medrad.
Bayer believes it has meritorious arguments in all proceedings
and intends to defend itself vigorously against any claim raised.
|
|
|
Patent and contractual disputes |
In the U.S. Abbott has commenced a lawsuit against Bayer
and another party alleging infringement of two of Abbotts
patents relating to blood glucose monitoring devices. This also
relates to
Ascensia®
Contour®
Systems which are supplied by a Japanese manufacturer. The
manufacturer is contractually obligated to indemnify Bayer
against the potential liability with respect to this claim, as
well as defense costs, and management expects Bayer to be
reimbursed for a substantial portion of all such costs and
liability, if any.
Limagrain Genetics Corporation has filed suit against
Bayer as legal successor to
Rhône-Poulenc for indemnity against liabilities
to third parties arising from breach of contract.
F-103
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
In another dispute, Bayer has filed suit against several
companies in the U.S. alleging patent infringement in
connection with moxifloxacin. These companies are defending the
action, claiming, among other things, that the patents are
invalid and not enforceable.
Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses in these patent and
contractual disputes and will defend itself vigorously.
|
|
|
Product liability and other litigation |
Legal risks also arise from product liability lawsuits other
than those concerning Lipobay/ Baycol. Numerous actions are
pending against Bayer seeking damages for plaintiffs resident
outside of the United States who claim to have been become
infected with HIV or HCV (hepatitis C virus) through blood
plasma products. Further actions have been filed by
U.S. residents who claim to have become infected with HCV.
Bayer, together with other manufacturers, wholesalers and users,
is a defendant in Alabama, United States, in cases seeking
damages, including one
U.S.-wide putative
class action, for personal injuries alleging health damages
through exposure to diphenylmethane diisocyanate (MDI) used
in coal mines.
Bayer, like a number of other pharmaceutical companies in the
United States, has several lawsuits pending against it in which
plaintiffs, including states, are seeking damages, punitive
damages and/or disgorgement of profits, alleging manipulation in
the reporting of wholesale prices and/or best prices.
The shareholder resolution on the domination and profit and loss
transfer agreement between Bayer Schering Pharma AG and Bayer
Schering GmbH passed at the Extraordinary Stockholders
Meeting of Bayer Schering Pharma AG held on September 13, 2006 is subject to legal
challenges. Dissenting stockholders are seeking to have the
stockholder resolution set aside or to have it declared null and
void. Several stockholders have initiated proceedings asking the
court to review the adequacy of the costs compensation
(Abfindung) and of the guaranteed dividend (Ausgleich). Bayer
Schering GmbH has commenced special proceedings
(Freigabeverfahren) to obtain a judgment that the stockholder
actions do not prevent registration of the domination and profit
and loss transfer agreement and that any defects of the
stockholder resolution do not affect the validity of the
registration. One stockholder has brought a suit in Berlin,
Germany, seeking to have registration of the agreement in the
Commercial Register removed (Amtslöschungsverfahren).
A further risk may arise from asbestos litigation in the United
States. In the majority of these cases, the plaintiffs allege
that Bayer and co-defendants employed third parties on their
sites in past decades without providing them with sufficient
warnings or protection against the known dangers of asbestos.
One Bayer affiliate in the United States is the legal successor
to companies that sold asbestos products until 1976. Should
liability be established, Union Carbide has to completely
indemnify Bayer.
Bayer, among others, is named as a defendant in a putative
nationwide class action pending in federal court in North
Carolina, United States, which alleges violations of antitrust
laws in the marketing of a certain pest control product
(Premise®).
Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses in these product
liability and other proceedings and will defend itself
vigorously.
|
|
|
Liability considerations following the LANXESS
spin-off |
The liability situation following the spin-off of the LANXESS
subgroup is governed by both statutory and contractual
provisions. Under the German Transformation Act, all entities
that are parties to a spin-off are jointly and severally liable
for obligations of the transferor entity that are established
prior to the spin-off date. Bayer AG and LANXESS AG are thus
jointly and severally liable for a time period of 5 years
for all obligations of Bayer AG that existed on January 28,
2005.
F-104
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Notes to the Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
[33] |
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities |
Since the annual financial statements as of December 31,
2006, the cash flow statement starts from income after taxes
from continuing operations and not from the operating result.
The prior-year figures have been restated accordingly. The
operating cash flow before changes in net working capital (gross
operating cash flow) for 2006 of
3,913 million
(2005:
3,114 million;
2004:
2,551 million)
is the cash surplus from operating activities before any changes
in working capital. The cash flows by segments and regions are
shown in the table in Note [1].
The net operating cash flow of
3,928 million
(2005:
3,227 million;
2004:
1,959 million)
from continuing operations takes account of changes in working
capital and other net assets. The
275 million
net cash flow from the discontinued operations comprises
operating income from the H.C. Starck and Wolff Walsrode
business units and the Diagnostics Division. The previous
years figure of
275 million
(2004:
491 million)
also includes the plasma business and LANXESS. The total net
operating cash flow amounted to
4,203 million
in 2006 (2005:
3,502 million;
2004:
2,450 million),
with the acquired Schering AG business contributing
483 million.
A new line Non-cash effects of the remeasurement of
acquired assets (inventory work-down) has been inserted in
the cash flow statement in order to eliminate the effects of the
Schering purchase price allocation from operating cash flow
before changes in net working capital (gross operating cash
flow). Thus, the non-cash effect of the work-down of the
step-up from the
remeasurement of Schering inventories to fair value as of
June 23, 2006, the date of acquisition, on the operating
cash flow before changes in net working capital (gross operating
cash flow) is reversed. For 2006 an amount of
429 million
is transferred from Decrease/increase in inventories
to this new line. These non-cash effects do not impact cash flow.
|
|
[34] |
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
In fiscal 2006 there was a net cash outflow of
14,730 million
(2005:
1,741 million;
2004:
814 million)
for investing activities, consisting principally of
15,246 million
in disbursements for the acquisition of Schering AG, Germany.
The latter amount comprised the purchase price for the
96.2 percent of the shares of Bayer Schering Pharma AG
acquired through December 31, 2006, less acquired cash of
1,025 million.
A total of
75 million
was paid to acquire the biotech company Icon Genetics and the
U.S. company Metrika. Further details of acquisitions and
divestitures are given in Note [7.2].
Cash outflows for additions to property, plant and equipment and
intangible assets in 2006 came to
1,876 million
(2005:
1,389 million;
2004:
1,251 million).
The 2006 figure includes
137 million
in capital expenditures of Schering. Also included are the
acquisition of the European marketing rights to the hypertension
products
Pritor®
and
PritorPlus®
and payments in connection with the expansion of the production
facilities for polymers at Caojing, near Shanghai, China.
Sales of property, plant and equipment and other assets resulted
in a cash inflow of
185 million
(2005:
105 million;
2004:
124 million),
while the inflow from divestitures amounted to
489 million
(2005:
293 million;
2004:
76 million).
An advance payment of
395 million
on the sale of the Diagnostics business, which was completed at
the start of 2007, was received at the end of 2006.
Cash inflows from noncurrent financial assets totaling
850 million
(2005:
1,189 million;
2004:
90 million)
mainly related to the sale of the 49.9 percent interest in
GE Bayer Silicones to the existing joint venture partner General
Electric and the repayment by the Symrise chemical group of a
vendor loan granted in connection with the divestiture of the
Haarmann & Reimer group in 2002.
In the previous year, cash outflows for investing activities
mainly comprised the payment of approximately
1.9 billion
for the Roche consumer health business. Receipts from noncurrent
financial assets came to
1.2 billion,
mainly from the scheduled repayment of loans by LANXESS and the
expiration of derivative
F-105
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
contracts. Cash inflows from divestitures in 2005 totaled
293 million
(2004:
76 million)
and resulted largely from the sale of the plasma operations in
the United States.
|
|
[35] |
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
In fiscal 2006 there was a net cash inflow of
10,199 million
(2005: net cash outflow of
1,881 million;
2004: net cash outflow of
761 million)
from financing activities. This inflow was primarily
attributable to net borrowings of
10.7 billion
to finance the acquisition of Schering AG, Germany. A further
cash inflow of
1,174 million
resulted mainly from the placement of 34 million new Bayer
AG shares.
Cash outflows for dividend payments less the
176 million
refund of advance capital gains tax payments made on intragroup
dividends in 2004 amounted to
535 million
(2005:
440 million;
2004:
559 million).
Interest expense increased to
1,155 million
(2005:
787 million;
2004:
724 million)
and related principally to the borrowings in connection with the
acquisition of Schering AG, Germany.
|
|
[36] |
Cash and cash equivalents |
Cash and cash equivalents comprise cash, checks and balances
with banks. In accordance with IAS 7 (Cash Flow Statements) this
item also includes securities with original maturities of up to
three months, reflecting their high liquidity. Cash and cash
equivalents amounted to
2,915 million
as of December 31, 2006 (2005:
3,290 million;
2004:
3,570 million).
Cash of
799 million
(2005:
253 million)
has been deposited in escrow accounts. The amount comprises
710 million
transferred to a guarantee account in light of the resolved
squeeze-out of the remaining minority stockholders of Bayer
Schering Pharma AG, and
89 million
(2005:
253 million)
to be used exclusively for payments relating to antitrust fines
and civil law settlements.
Other information
The following fees for the services of the auditor of the
consolidated financial statements, PricewaterhouseCoopers
Aktiengesellschaft Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, were
recognized as expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Financial statements auditing
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Audit-related services and other audit work
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Tax consultancy
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Other services rendered to Bayer AG or subsidiaries
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fees for the auditing of financial statements mainly
comprise those for the audits of the consolidated financial
statements of the Bayer Group and the financial statements of
Bayer AG and its German subsidiaries. Fees for audit-related
services and other audit work primarily relate to the
preparation of expert reports and audit work in connection with
acquisitions and divestitures, audits of the internal control
system including project audits in connection with the
implementation of new IT systems, and auditor review of interim
financial statements.
In the course of the operating business, materials, inventories
and services are sourced from a large number of business
partners around the world. These include companies in which an
interest is held, and companies with which members of the
Supervisory Board of Bayer AG are associated. Transactions with
these companies are
F-106
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
carried out on an arms length basis. Business with such
companies was not material from the viewpoint of the Bayer
Group. The Bayer Group was not a party to any transaction of an
unusual nature or structure that was material to it or to
companies or persons closely associated with it, nor does it
intend to be party to such transactions in the future.
The following transactions were undertaken with related parties
included in the financial statements of the Bayer Group at
equity or cost less impairment charges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Income
|
|
|
229 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
Receivables
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
(68 |
) |
|
|
(127 |
) |
Transactions with related parties mainly comprised trade in
goods and services. In fiscal 2006 there were also financial
receivables from related parties amounting to
43 million
(2005:
39 million).
Further information on business transactions with companies in
which a significant interest is held and which are included in
the consolidated financial statements at equity
(associates) is given in Note [19].
|
|
[39] |
Total remuneration of the Board of Management and the
Supervisory Board and loans |
The remuneration of the Supervisory Board amounted to
2,337,041 (2005:
1,989,000),
including
779,014 (2005:
459,000) in
variable components.
In 2006, the remuneration of the individual members of the Board
of Management was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Werner | |
|
Klaus | |
|
Dr. Udo | |
|
Dr. Wolfgang | |
|
Dr. Richard | |
|
|
|
|
Wenning | |
|
Kühn | |
|
Oels* | |
|
Plischke** | |
|
Pott | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
Base salary
|
|
|
748,872 |
|
|
|
412,236 |
|
|
|
343,526 |
|
|
|
343,530 |
|
|
|
412,236 |
|
|
|
2,260,400 |
|
Fixed supplement
|
|
|
325,132 |
|
|
|
316,366 |
|
|
|
142,205 |
|
|
|
142,206 |
|
|
|
170,647 |
|
|
|
1,096,556 |
|
Variable bonus
|
|
|
1,525,086 |
|
|
|
1,034,615 |
|
|
|
567,335 |
|
|
|
689,745 |
|
|
|
827,694 |
|
|
|
4,644,475 |
|
Remuneration in kind and other benefits
|
|
|
47,926 |
|
|
|
35,571 |
|
|
|
9,594 |
|
|
|
18,163 |
|
|
|
31,137 |
|
|
|
142,391 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Directly effected remuneration
|
|
|
2,647,016 |
|
|
|
1,798,788 |
|
|
|
1,062,660 |
|
|
|
1,193,644 |
|
|
|
1,441,714 |
|
|
|
8,143,822 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation entitlements earned in 2006
|
|
|
820,514 |
|
|
|
480,609 |
|
|
|
538,181 |
|
|
|
193,188 |
|
|
|
461,939 |
|
|
|
2,494,431 |
|
Change in value of stock-based compensation entitlements earned
prior to 2006
|
|
|
339,733 |
|
|
|
229,617 |
|
|
|
104,125 |
|
|
|
66,262 |
|
|
|
164,952 |
|
|
|
904,689 |
|
|
|
|
* |
|
member of the Board of Management until April 28, 2006 |
** |
|
member of the Board of Management effective March 1, 2006 |
F-107
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
In 2005, the remuneration components of those individuals that
were members of our Board of Management in the course of 2006
were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Werner | |
|
Klaus | |
|
Dr. Udo | |
|
Dr. Wolfgang | |
|
Dr. Richard | |
|
|
|
|
Wenning | |
|
Kühn | |
|
Oels* | |
|
Plischke** | |
|
Pott | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
Base salary
|
|
|
748,872 |
|
|
|
412,236 |
|
|
|
412,236 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
412,236 |
|
|
|
1,985,580 |
|
Fixed supplement
|
|
|
325,132 |
|
|
|
170,647 |
|
|
|
170,647 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
170,647 |
|
|
|
837,073 |
|
Variable bonus
|
|
|
1,554,615 |
|
|
|
843,713 |
|
|
|
843,713 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
843,713 |
|
|
|
4,085,754 |
|
Remuneration in kind and other benefits
|
|
|
40,169 |
|
|
|
35,266 |
|
|
|
41,942 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,044 |
|
|
|
156,421 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Directly effected remuneration
|
|
|
2,668,788 |
|
|
|
1,461,862 |
|
|
|
1,468,538 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,465,640 |
|
|
|
7,064,828 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation entitlements earned in 2005
|
|
|
495,504 |
|
|
|
285,748 |
|
|
|
285,748 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
284,248 |
|
|
|
1,351,248 |
|
Change in value of stock-based compensation entitlements earned
prior to 2005
|
|
|
169,289 |
|
|
|
99,693 |
|
|
|
99,693 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
98,055 |
|
|
|
466,730 |
|
|
|
|
* |
|
member of the Board of Management until April 28, 2006 |
** |
|
member of the Board of Management effective March 1, 2006 |
The fair value of the stock-based compensation as of the grant
dates for 2006 and 2005, respectively, is shown in the following
table. The entitlements earned in 2006 under the 2006 and 2005
stock-based compensation are included in the preceding tables
under Stock-based compensation entitlements earned in
2006 and Stock-based compensation entitlements
earned in 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Werner | |
|
Klaus | |
|
Dr. Udo | |
|
Dr. Wolfgang | |
|
Dr. Richard | |
|
|
|
|
Wenning | |
|
Kühn | |
|
Oels* | |
|
Plischke** | |
|
Pott | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
Fair value of newly granted stock-based compensation as of grant
date
in 2006 |
|
|
268,113 |
|
|
|
181,886 |
|
|
|
40,419 |
|
|
|
117,597 |
|
|
|
145,509 |
|
|
|
753,524 |
|
in 2005 |
|
|
253,636 |
|
|
|
137,652 |
|
|
|
137,652 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
137,652 |
|
|
|
666,592 |
|
|
|
|
* |
|
member of the Board of Management until April 28, 2006 |
** |
|
member of the Board of Management effective March 1, 2006 |
The current service cost for pension entitlements of the
individual members of the Board of Management was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Werner | |
|
Klaus | |
|
Dr. Udo | |
|
Dr. Wolfgang | |
|
Dr. Richard | |
|
|
|
|
Wenning | |
|
Kühn | |
|
Oels* | |
|
Plischke** | |
|
Pott | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
|
(In ) | |
Current service cost for pension entitlements earned
in 2006 |
|
|
398,564 |
|
|
|
1,615,294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,644,517 |
|
|
|
233,284 |
|
|
|
3,927,659 |
|
in 2005 |
|
|
311,158 |
|
|
|
420,046 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
186,600 |
|
|
|
917,804 |
|
|
|
|
* |
|
member of the Board of Management until April 28, 2006 |
** |
|
member of the Board of Management effective March 1, 2006 |
Further details are provided in the Compensation Report included
in the Management Report.
F-108
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Emoluments to retired members of the Board of Management and
their surviving dependents amounted to
10,924,768
(2005:
10,323,009).
Pension provisions for these individuals, amounting to
117,866,846
(2005:
115,972,457) are
reflected in the balance sheet.
There were no loans to members of the Board of Management or the
Supervisory Board outstanding as of December 31, 2006, nor
any repayments of such loans during the year.
The divestment of Bayers Diagnostics business to Siemens
for
4.3 billion,
which was agreed in June 2006, was completed in January 2007.
This amount exceeds the purchase price of
4.2 billion
announced in July 2006, mainly because of the transfer of higher
working capital. After taxes the divestiture proceeds amounted
to about
3.6 billion,
which was used to reduce our financial debt.
The Extraordinary Stockholders Meeting of Bayer Schering
Pharma AG resolved on January 17, 2007, to effect a
squeeze-out of the remaining minority stockholders.
99.62 percent of the votes cast were in favor of the
resolution. The decision means the shares still held by minority
stockholders will be transferred to the main stockholder, Bayer
Schering GmbH, a wholly owned subsidiary of Bayer AG, in return
for cash compensation of
98.98 per
share. Unaffiliated dissenting shareholders have brought court
actions to have the shareholder resolution set aside or to have
it declared null and void.
We sold H.C. Starck to Advent International and The Carlyle
Group. With the closing on February 1, 2007, the two
financial investors take control of the Goslar, Germany-based
producer of metal and ceramic powders, specialty chemicals and
components made from engineering ceramics and refractory metals.
The antitrust authorities in the United States and the European
Union approved the agreed divestiture on November 23, 2006.
The transaction volume amounts to roughly
1.2 billion.
F-109
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
[41] U.S. GAAP information
The Groups consolidated financial statements have been
prepared in accordance with IFRS, which as applied by the Group,
differs in certain significant respects from U.S. GAAP. The
effects of the application of U.S. GAAP to net income/loss
and stockholders equity are set out in the tables below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes | |
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
|
(U.S. $ million(*)) | |
Income after taxes reported under IFRS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
682 |
|
|
|
1,595 |
|
|
|
1,695 |
|
|
|
2,237 |
|
Business combinations
|
|
|
a |
|
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
Pensions and other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
b |
|
|
|
(325 |
) |
|
|
(450 |
) |
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
(222 |
) |
In-process research and development
|
|
|
c |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
(1,375 |
) |
|
|
(1,815 |
) |
Asset impairment
|
|
|
d |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Early retirement program
|
|
|
e |
|
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(36 |
) |
Revaluation surplus
|
|
|
f |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
g |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
h |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
Deferred tax effect on U.S. GAAP adjustments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income after taxes reported under U.S. GAAP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
653 |
|
|
|
1,327 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
353 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted earnings per share under U.S. GAAP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.89 |
|
|
|
1.82 |
|
|
|
0.33 |
|
|
|
0.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Notes | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
|
(U.S. $ million(*)) | |
Stockholders equity reported under IFRS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,157 |
|
|
|
12,851 |
|
|
|
16,959 |
|
Business combinations
|
|
|
a |
|
|
|
1,013 |
|
|
|
950 |
|
|
|
1,254 |
|
Pensions and other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
b |
|
|
|
691 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
c |
|
|
|
(87 |
) |
|
|
(1,454 |
) |
|
|
(1,919 |
) |
Asset impairment
|
|
|
d |
|
|
|
(138 |
) |
|
|
(114 |
) |
|
|
(150 |
) |
Early retirement program
|
|
|
e |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
Revaluation surplus
|
|
|
f |
|
|
|
(62 |
) |
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(77 |
) |
Minority interest
|
|
|
g |
|
|
|
(80 |
) |
|
|
(84 |
) |
|
|
(111 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
h |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Deferred tax effect on U.S. GAAP adjustments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(267 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity reported under U.S. GAAP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,347 |
|
|
|
12,181 |
|
|
|
16,076 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-110
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
|
(U.S. $ million(*)) | |
Components of stockholders equity in accordance with
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. GAAP:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital stock of Bayer AG
|
|
|
1,870 |
|
|
|
1,957 |
|
|
|
2,583 |
|
Capital reserves of Bayer AG
|
|
|
2,942 |
|
|
|
4,028 |
|
|
|
5,316 |
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
10,224 |
|
|
|
9,684 |
|
|
|
12,780 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized market value adjustment on securities
available for sale (net of taxes of
(7) million,
(6) million
and U.S. $(8) million)
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
Unrealized market value adjustment on cash flow
hedges (net of taxes of
(6) million,
13 million
and U.S. $17 million)
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
Recognition of actuarial gains/ losses and prior
service cost (net of taxes
1,288 million
and U.S. $1,700 million)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,926 |
) |
|
|
(2,542 |
) |
Additional minimum pension liability (net of taxes
of
1,289 million)
|
|
|
(1,920 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Translation differences
|
|
|
(808 |
) |
|
|
(1,567 |
) |
|
|
(2,067 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
12,347 |
|
|
|
12,181 |
|
|
|
16,076 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(*) |
|
The 2006 U.S. dollar figures have been translated at an
exchange rate of
1.0000 =
U.S. $1.3197 which is the noon buying rate of the Federal
Reserve Bank of New York on December 29, 2006, the last
currency trading day in December 2006. Such
translations should not be construed as representations that the
euro amounts represent, or have been or could be converted into,
United States dollars at that or any other rate. |
a. Business
combinations
In accordance with IFRS existing prior to the adoption of
IAS 22 (revised 1993) on January 1, 1995, the Group
wrote-off all goodwill directly to equity. The adoption of IAS
22 (revised 1993) did not require reinstatement of goodwill
previously written off to equity, therefore a difference exists
between IFRS and U.S. GAAP with respect to the recognition
of goodwill and amortization before January 1, 1995.
Beginning March 31, 2004, goodwill and intangible assets
deemed to have an indefinite useful life are no longer amortized
under IFRS but tested for impairment on an annual basis, or more
frequently if events or changes in circumstances indicate that
they might be impaired. Therefore, after March 31, 2004
there is no amortization charge under IFRS relating to goodwill
and the indefinite lived intangibles. Under U.S. GAAP,
cessation of amortization of goodwill and indefinite lived
intangibles was adopted in 2002 under SFAS No. 142.
The adjustments recorded in 2004 reverse the amortization
expense recognized under IFRS on the Groups IFRS goodwill
in the amount of
181 million,
and the amortization expense recorded under IFRS on the Bayer
Cross intangible asset with indefinite useful life
in the amount of
11 million
in 2004.
For U.S. GAAP in 2006 and 2005 an adjustment to recognize
additional amortization expense was recorded in the amount of
2 million
and
4 million
relating to separately identified intangible assets acquired
before March 31, 2004. For IFRS purposes these assets were
recorded as part of goodwill as the recognition criteria for
separately identified intangible assets were not met. As a
result of the LANXESS spin-off in January 2005, the Company
eliminated an existing U.S. GAAP net equity difference
(decrease in net equity) at December 31, 2004 in the amount
of
32 million.
F-111
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Additionally, the adjustment in 2006 reflects the differences
which arose in applying the purchase method under U.S. GAAP
regarding the acquisition of the Schering AG. Employee
termination and other exit costs in the amount of
81 million
recorded under IFRS were reversed for U.S. GAAP purposes,
as they qualified to be recognized under
EITF 95-3
(Recognition of Liabilities in Connection with a Purchase
Business Combination) and were considered liabilities assumed in
a business combination and included in the allocation of the
acquisition cost.
Furthermore, differences in the accounting for the Domination
and Profit and Loss transfer agreement resulted in a reduction
of U.S. GAAP equity and goodwill in the amount of
96 million.
b. Pension and other
post-employment benefits
Under IFRS, pension costs and similar obligations are accounted
for in accordance with IAS 19 (Employee Benefits).
Effective January 1, 2005, the Company adopted the
additional recognition option for actuarial gains and losses
provided under IAS 19 as amended 2004 (Employee Benefits).
Under U.S. GAAP, defined benefit plans are accounted for in
accordance with SFAS No. 87 (Employers
Accounting for Pensions), SFAS No. 88 (Employers
Accounting for Settlements and Curtailments of Defined Benefit
Pension Plans and for Termination Benefits),
SFAS No. 106 (Employers Accounting for
Postretirement Benefits Other Than Pensions) and, effective for
fiscal year ending 2006, SFAS No. 158 (Employers
Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement
Plans), an amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106,
and 132R. The adjustments between IFRS and U.S. GAAP
relating to the accounting for pension and other post-employment
benefits at the Company comprise the following:
|
|
|
1. Under IFRS, due to the retrospective application of IAS
19 (amended 2004), actuarial gains and losses arising from
valuing the assets and liabilities of the Companys pension
and post employment defined benefit plans at fair value are
recognized immediately in the statement of recognized income and
expense for all periods presented. These actuarial gains and
losses are not recognized in the income statement in subsequent
periods. Under U.S. GAAP, prior to the adoption of
SFAS No. 158 in 2006, these differences were not
recognized on the balance sheet or within stockholders
equity, and were recognized in the income statement only when
they exceeded 10 percent of the greater of the projected
benefit plan obligation or the market-related value of plan
assets. Beginning with the adoption of SFAS No. 158,
previously unrecognized actuarial gains and losses are
recognized immediately within stockholders equity (other
comprehensive income). Accordingly, upon the adoption of SFAS
No. 158 all existing IFRS to U.S. GAAP differences in
equity, except for amounts due to past service costs
unrecognized under IFRS, are eliminated. Differences will
continue to exist in the recognition of expenses in the income
statement as the recognition of actuarial gains and losses was
not impacted by the adoption of SFAS No. 158 and
actuarial gains and losses continue to be recognized into the
income statement in accordance with SFAS No. 87 and
SFAS No. 106. |
|
|
2. Under SFAS No. 87, prior to the adoption of
SFAS No. 158, an additional minimum liability was
required to be reported and recognized in certain instances when
the accumulated benefit obligation exceeded the fair value of
plan assets. If an additional minimum liability was recognized,
a contra amount was recognized first as an intangible asset up
to the amount of unrecognized prior service costs, with any
excess being reported in other comprehensive income. In 2006,
2005 and 2004 the recognition of an additional minimum liability
of
2,705 million,
3,265 million
and
1,024 million
respectively, resulted in the recognition of an intangible asset
in the amount of
38 million,
56 million
and nil,
respectively. The additional minimum liability and intangible
asset recognized in 2006 were eliminated according to the
adoption of SFAS No. 158. |
|
|
3. In 2004 the Company amended its retiree medical plan.
Under IFRS, this plan amendment qualified either as a negative
plan amendment for fully vested employees or a plan curtailment
for unvested or partially vested employees. Gains resulting from
negative plan amendments relating to fully vested employees and
plan curtailments are recognized in income when they occur.
Under U.S. GAAP, the retiree medical plan amendment is
considered a negative plan amendment in accordance with
SFAS No. 106 and |
F-112
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
the reduction in benefit obligation is first reduced by any
existing unrecognized prior service cost resulting from previous
plan benefit improvements and then reduced by any remaining
transition obligations. The remaining gain is recognized as a
prior service cost over the remaining years of service until the
benefit becomes vested. The related adjustment recorded in 2004
amounted to
139 million
(thereof
11 million
related to discontinued operations) and reflects the reversal of
prior service costs and curtailments recognized under IFRS
within other operating income and income from
discontinued operations, respectively, which are either
not permitted to be recorded under U.S. GAAP or are to be
recorded on a deferred basis. Further, other changes relating to
certain benefit plans in 2004 resulted in a curtailment of these
plans under both IFRS and U.S. GAAP. For IFRS purposes, a
curtailment gain of
62 million
was recognized in other operating income. However,
for U.S. GAAP purposes, the
62 million
gain recognized under IFRS has been reversed, as the entire gain
was offset by existing unrecognized actuarial losses. In
aggregate, a total of
201 million
(thereof
11 million
related to discontinued operations) of income recognized under
IFRS in other operating income in connection with
plan amendments in 2004 have been reversed under U.S. GAAP. |
|
|
4. In 2005, the Company replaced several defined benefit
plans with defined contribution plans. As a result of this
change, active employees participating in these plans will cease
accruing pension benefits under these plans which results in a
curtailment of the plan obligation. In addition, as a result of
a reduction in headcount relating to the disposal of the Plasma
business, a curtailment of plan obligation occurred. Under IFRS,
curtailment gains of
327 million
(thereof
45 million
related to discontinued operations) were recognized in
other operating income and income from
discontinued operations, respectively, as a result of
these changes. However, for U.S. GAAP purposes,
308 million
(thereof
45 million
related to discontinued operations) of the gains recognized
under IFRS have been reversed, as the gains were partially
offset by existing unrecognized actuarial losses. Furthermore,
the Company amended certain benefit plans granting additional
benefits for services periods rendered previously. Under IFRS,
these prior service costs are recognized over the remaining
vesting period or, where benefits are already vested, are to be
recognized immediately. Under U.S. GAAP, these prior
service costs are to be recognized over the remaining service
lives of the active employees. The reversal of prior service
costs which are recognized earlier under IFRS, offset with the
amortization of negative prior service costs under
U.S. GAAP relating to the 2004 amendment of the retiree
medical plan, resulted in a reversal of a net gain in the amount
of
1 million
for U.S. GAAP purposes. Furthermore, as a result of the
LANXESS spin-off in January 2005, the Company eliminated an
existing U.S. GAAP net equity difference at
December 31, 2004 in the amount of
345 million
(decrease in net equity) and
104 million
(increase in net equity) related to actuarial gains and losses
and additional minimum liability, respectively. |
|
|
5. In 2006, curtailments of plan obligations occurred from
the Company having entered into agreements to divest the
Diagnostics Division and the H.C. Starck and Wolff Walsrode
businesses as well as from the reduction of headcount relating
to certain restructuring measures. Under IFRS, as a result of
these events, curtailment gains of
10 million
and
37 million
were recognized in other operating income and
income from discontinued operations, respectively.
However, for U.S. GAAP purposes,
8 million
and
37 million
of the gains recognized in other operating income
and income from discontinued operations,
respectively, were reversed as the gains were either not
permitted to be recognized, until the point of time when the
divestment of the businesses occurred, or were offset by
existing unrecognized actuarial losses. The reversal of prior
service costs recognized earlier under IFRS, offset with the
amortization of negative prior service costs under
U.S. GAAP resulted in a reversal of a net loss in the
amount of
1 million
in fiscal year 2006. |
F-113
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The following is a reconciliation of the balance sheet and
income statement amounts recognized for IFRS and U.S. GAAP
for pension plans and other post-employment benefit plans
(prepared on a continuing operations basis):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Pension and OPEB benefits:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net liability recognized for IFRS
|
|
|
(7,137 |
) |
|
|
(6,505 |
) |
Difference in unrecognized actuarial gains and losses/ asset
limitation
|
|
|
4,046 |
|
|
|
3,299 |
|
Difference in unrecognized prior service cost
|
|
|
(146 |
) |
|
|
(127 |
) |
Additional minimum liability under SFAS No. 87
|
|
|
(3,265 |
) |
|
|
(2,660 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net liability recognized for U.S. GAAP before adoption
of SFAS No. 158
|
|
|
(6,502 |
) |
|
|
(5,993 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 recognition of
actuarial gains/ losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,292 |
) |
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 prior service cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
131 |
|
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 reversal of
additional minimum liability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,660 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net liability recognized for U.S. GAAP after adoption of
SFAS No. 158
|
|
|
(6,502 |
) |
|
|
(6,494 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Pension and OPEB benefits:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost recognized for IFRS
|
|
|
352 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
|
454 |
|
Difference in recognition of actuarial amounts
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
Difference in recognition of prior service amounts
|
|
|
128 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Difference in pension curtailment and settlement costs
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost recognized for U.S. GAAP
|
|
|
654 |
|
|
|
610 |
|
|
|
582 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net U.S. GAAP income statement and equity differences
regarding the above identified GAAP differences on pensions and
other post-employment benefits relating to discontinued
operations amounted to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net U.S. GAAP income statement difference on pensions
and other post-employment benefit plans
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net U.S. GAAP equity difference on pensions and other
post-employment benefits before adoption of
SFAS No. 158
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 recognition of
actuarial gains/ losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58 |
|
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 prior service cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 reversal of
additional minimum liability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Net U.S. GAAP equity difference on pensions and other
post-employment benefits after adoption of
SFAS No. 158
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Total U.S. GAAP income statement difference on pensions
and other post-employment benefits
|
|
|
325 |
|
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
F-114
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Total U.S. GAAP equity difference on pensions and other
post-employment benefits before adoption of
SFAS No. 158
|
|
|
(691 |
) |
|
|
(563 |
) |
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 recognition of
actuarial gains/ losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,350 |
|
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 prior service cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(131 |
) |
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 reversal of
additional minimum liability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,667 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total U.S. GAAP equity difference on pensions and other
post-employment benefits after adoption of
SFAS No. 158
|
|
|
(691 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
c. In-Process Research
and Development
In a business combination, IFRS requires in-process research and
development (IPR&D) to be recognized separately
from goodwill if the recognition criteria of an intangible asset
are met. Under U.S. GAAP, IPR&D is considered to be a
separate asset that needs to be written-off immediately
following a business combination, as the feasibility of the
acquired research and development has not been fully tested and
the technology has no alternative future use.
During 2002, IPR&D has been identified for U.S. GAAP
purposes in connection with the Aventis CropScience and Visible
Genetics acquisitions. Fair value determinations were used to
establish
138 million
of IPR&D related to both acquisitions, which was expensed
immediately for U.S. GAAP purposes. In 2006, additional
IPR&D expense arose for U.S. GAAP purposes, primarily
from the acquisition of Schering AG, in the amount of
1,311 million.
Deferred tax liabilities recognized under IFRS relating to these
IPR&D projects in the amount of
485 million
were eliminated for U.S. GAAP resulting in an offsetting
decrease in goodwill.
Effective January 1, 2005, IFRS requires that assets in
development acquired outside a business combination are
capitalized if certain criteria are met. Under U.S. GAAP
such assets in development are expensed immediately unless they
have alternative future use. During 2006, acquired assets in
development of
71 million
were expensed under U.S. GAAP and predominantly related to
a license and collaboration agreement with Regeneron
Pharmaceuticals Inc.
(60 million).
Furthermore, the adjustments in 2006, 2005 and 2004 reflect the
sale of IPR&D which was capitalized under IFRS in previous
periods but expensed under U.S. GAAP as well as the
reversal of amortization of IPR&D recorded under IFRS. The
net impact of these adjustments resulted in an increase of
U.S. GAAP net income in the amount of
7 million,
8 million
and
38 million in 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
The total additional net IPR&D (expense)/income in 2006,
2005 and 2004 was
(1,375) million,
8 million
and
38 million,
respectively.
d. Asset
impairments
While the triggering events under both IFRS and U.S. GAAP
that require an impairment test to be performed on long-lived
assets are the same, there is a difference in the indicators of
an impairment. Under IFRS, impairments on long-lived assets are
recognized when the recoverable amount of an asset is less than
its carrying amount. An assets recoverable amount is the
higher of its net selling price, which is the sales price less
costs of disposal, and value in use, which is the estimated
discounted cash flows from the use and disposal of the asset.
Under U.S. GAAP, a two-step model is used in accordance
with SFAS No. 144 (Accounting for the Impairment or
Disposal of Long-lived Assets). The first step is an analysis of
an assets carrying value as compared to the sum of its
undiscounted cash flows. Only if the undiscounted cash flows are
less than the assets carrying value will an impairment be
indicated, in which case the loss is measured as the difference
between the assets carrying value and its fair value.
F-115
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
In 2003 a net equity difference resulted from the reversal of
impairment charges relating to goodwill recognized under IFRS in
the amount of
63 million
and the recognition of net additional impairments relating to
long lived assets under U.S. GAAP in the amount of
218 million.
These adjustments resulted from differences in applying the
impairment provisions under IFRS and U.S. GAAP. IAS 36
requires that an impairment loss of a cash generating unit first
be allocated to reduce the carrying amount of goodwill allocated
to the unit and, second, to other assets of the unit on a
pro-rata basis based on the carrying amounts of each asset in
the unit. However, U.S. GAAP requires that long lived
assets, other than goodwill and indefinite lived intangible
assets, first be analyzed and impaired under SFAS No. 144.
Subsequently, U.S. GAAP requires goodwill and indefinite
lived intangible assets to be evaluated for impairment under
SFAS No. 142 (Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets).
The adjustment recorded in 2004 is comprised of the recognition
of an
18 million
goodwill impairment loss recognized under U.S. GAAP
resulting from the annual goodwill impairment test on strategic
business units (SBU) within Bayers subgroup
MaterialScience
(6 million
relating to the Materials segment and
12 million
relating to the Systems segment). Under IFRS no impairment loss
was recognized on these SBUs as they were fully written
off in previous periods. Additionally, in 2004, goodwill
assigned to the SBU RheinChemie (LANXESS segment) was fully
impaired under both IFRS and U.S. GAAP. Due to the fact
that goodwill ceased to be amortized for U.S. GAAP purposes
effective January 1, 2002, an additional
11 million
goodwill impairment loss was required to be recorded under
U.S. GAAP. Finally, the 2004 adjustment is comprised of the
reversal of depreciation expense in the amount of
22 million
recorded under IFRS on long lived assets that were impaired
under U.S. GAAP in prior years.
The
23 million
adjustment recorded in 2006 and 2005 reflects the reversal of
depreciation expense recorded under IFRS on long lived assets
that were impaired under U.S. GAAP in prior years.
Furthermore, as a result of the LANXESS spin-off in January
2005, the Company eliminated an existing U.S. GAAP net
equity difference at December 31, 2004 in the amount of
10 million
(decrease in net equity).
e. Early retirement
program
The Company offers an early retirement program to its employees
that provides an employee with the opportunity to work fulltime
for a period of up to two and a half years (the active
period) and receive fifty percent of his or her base
salary for up to five years (i.e., including a period of
up to two and a half years of non-work (the inactive
period)), plus additional bonus payments during each of
those five years. Under IFRS, the company immediately accrued
and expensed a portion of the related early retirement benefit
obligation for certain qualified employees who participate or
are expected to participate in this program in future periods.
Prior to 2005 for U.S. GAAP, the Company accrued such early
retirement benefits over the employees remaining service
lives for participating employees that signed an early
retirement agreement. Beginning in 2005, the company adopted
EITF 05-5
(Accounting for Early Retirement or Postemployment Programs with
Specific Features Such As Terms Specified in
Altersteilzeit Early Retirement Arrangements), which requires
the Company to recognize the salary component of this plan
beginning when the participating employees begin the early
retirement period until the end of their active period while the
bonus component is recognized beginning when the participating
employee signs the early retirement agreement until the end of
their active period.
As a result of the LANXESS spin-off in January 2005, the Company
eliminated an existing U.S. GAAP net equity difference at
December 31, 2004 in the amount of
30 million
(decrease in net equity).
f. Revaluation
surplus
In December 2004 the Group purchased the remaining
50 percent interest in their Roche OTC joint venture
investment in the U.S. The Group has fully consolidated
this investment as of December 31, 2004 in accordance with
IFRS 3 (Business Combinations), which is applicable for all
business combinations with an agreement date after
March 31, 2004. IFRS 3 requires that previously acquired
assets and liabilities must be revalued and adjusted to fair
value at the point in time in which an acquirer obtains control
resulting from an additional exchange transaction. The Group
adjusted the fair value of the previously acquired interest in
the net assets of the
F-116
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
50 percent joint venture and recorded a
66 million
revaluation surplus that was recorded within equity. The
resulting increase in the asset balances
(65.5 million
trademarks and
0.5 million
registration rights) will be depreciated and/or amortized over
the remaining useful life of those assets. The
66 million
revaluation surplus is reversed for U.S. GAAP purposes, as
under U.S. GAAP previously acquired assets and liabilities
are not revalued at the time an acquirer obtains control through
an additional exchange transaction. Additional amortization
expense recorded under IFRS on the stepped up assets is reversed
under U.S. GAAP and amounted to
4 million
in 2006 and 2005, respectively.
g. Minority
interest
IAS 1 (revised) requires minority interests to be included
in the determination of the Companys net income/loss and
total equity. Under U.S. GAAP, minority interests are
deducted in the determination of U.S. GAAP net income/loss
and excluded from total equity.
h. Other
There are differences between IFRS and U.S. GAAP in
relation to restructuring provisions, environmental provisions,
accounting for realized and unrealized losses on available for
sale securities, and accounting for the abandonment of
long-lived assets before the end of their previously estimated
useful life. Furthermore, differences arose due to the different
transitional rules provided by the share based payment standards
IFRS 2 and FAS 123R which the Company elected to adopt on
January 1, 2005.
None of these differences are individually significant for the
Group and are therefore shown as a combined total.
As a result of the LANXESS spin-off in January 2005, the Company
eliminated an existing U.S. GAAP net equity difference at
December 31, 2004 in the amount of
1 million
(increase in net equity) related to environmental provisions.
Additional U.S. GAAP disclosures
|
|
|
Goodwill and other intangible assets |
Effective January 1, 2002, the Group began applying the
provisions of SFAS No. 142, which requires that goodwill no
longer be amortized over its estimated useful life. The Group
must instead identify and value its reporting units for the
purpose of assessing, at least annually, potential impairment of
goodwill allocated to each reporting unit. Goodwill must be
evaluated for impairment between these annual tests if events or
changes in circumstances indicate that goodwill might be
impaired. The Group allocates goodwill resulting from business
combinations to the reporting units that are expected to benefit
from the synergies of the combination.
The testing of goodwill for impairment involves two steps:
|
|
|
|
|
The first step is to compare each reporting units fair
value with its carrying amount including goodwill. If a
reporting units carrying amount exceeds its fair value,
this indicates that its goodwill may be impaired and the second
step is required. |
|
|
|
The second step is to compare the implied fair value of the
reporting units goodwill with the carrying amount of its
goodwill. The implied fair value is computed by allocating the
reporting units fair value to all of its assets and
liabilities in a manner that is similar to a purchase price
allocation in a business combination in accordance with SFAS
No. 141. The remaining unallocated purchase price is the
implied fair value of the reporting units goodwill. If the
implied fair value of goodwill is less than its carrying value,
the difference is recorded as an impairment. |
The Group also reassessed the useful lives of existing
recognized intangible assets. Intangible assets deemed to have
indefinite useful lives are no longer amortized, instead they
are tested annually for potential impairment, or more frequently
if events or changes in circumstances indicate that the asset
might be impaired. Intangible
F-117
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
assets with finite useful lives continue to be amortized over
their useful lives. No changes in useful lives were made as a
result of this reassessment.
In 2003 the Group identified the reporting units as either
divisions (or business groups, or business units), which are
comprised of strategic business entities, or the strategic
business entities themselves. Beginning in 2004, due to the
portfolio realignment of the Bayer Group, which resulted in the
spin-off of the LANXESS subgroup in January 2005, the reporting
units are currently comprised of either divisions, business
groups or business units that are comprised of strategic
business units.
In 2004 as a result of the deterioration in business conditions
in some area of operations, the Group recorded pre-tax
impairment charges totaling approximately
46 million
for property, plant and equipment,
49 million
for goodwill and
2 million
for intangible assets, which were recognized within other
operating expenses.
In 2006 and 2005, no impairment charges relating to goodwill or
intangible assets were recognized as part of the global
impairment test.
The Group uses a discounted cash flow model to determine the
fair value of its reporting units and asset groups. The cash
flow forecasts were derived from the current long-term planning
for the Bayer Group. The discount rate was determined from
in-house analyses of the weighted average cost of capital
(WACC). The cost of equity corresponds to the return
expected by the stockholders and is computed from capital market
information. The cost of debt used in calculating WACC is based
on the terms for a ten-year corporate bond issue.
The following table represents significant differences relating
to goodwill and intangible assets between IFRS und
U.S. GAAP:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Goodwill:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Differences in carrying amount of goodwill written-off directly
to equity before January 1, 1995
|
|
|
454 |
|
|
|
407 |
|
FAS 142 and IFRS 3 transition differences
|
|
|
507 |
|
|
|
507 |
|
Differences on account of IPR&D included in goodwill under
IFRS
|
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(53 |
) |
Differences in impairments
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Purchase price and purchase price allocation differences
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(532 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Differences in carrying amount of goodwill
|
|
|
882 |
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAS 142 and IFRS 3 transition differences
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
IPR&D from acquisitions, expensed under U.S. GAAP
|
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
(1,400 |
) |
Differences in impairments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase price and purchase price allocation differences
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Revaluation surplus
|
|
|
(62 |
) |
|
|
(58 |
) |
Additional Minimum Liabilities
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other differences
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Differences in carrying amount of other intangible assets
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
(1,410 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total U.S. GAAP increase in intangible assets
|
|
|
913 |
|
|
|
(1,081 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business Combination
The following unaudited pro forma financial information reflects
the consolidated results of operations of the Bayer Group as
though the acquisition of the Schering AG business had taken
place on January 1, 2006 and 2005,
F-118
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
respectively, after giving effect to: (a) purchase
accounting adjustments, including amortization of identifiable
intangible assets and the work down of inventories that were
recorded at fair value in the opening balance sheet;
(b) estimated additional interest expense due to issuance
of debt issued in connection with the acquisition (refer to
Note [27]); and (c) excluding non-recurring expenses
directly attributable to the acquisition, representing primarily
acquired research and development in process.
The pro forma financial information is not necessarily
indicative of the results of operations as it would have been
had the transaction been effected on the assumed date.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bayer Group Pro Forma Totals |
|
(Unaudited) | |
|
(Unaudited) | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
|
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Net sales
|
|
|
30,112 |
|
|
|
31,689 |
|
Income after tax
|
|
|
782 |
|
|
|
1,255 |
|
Earnings per share
|
|
|
1.07 |
|
|
|
1.68 |
|
In-Process Research and Development
Within the acquisition of Schering AG, Germany, a significant
amount of the purchase price was allocated to the technology
related to current research and development activities. These
development projects are either within phase II or III
of the clinical trials. As all of these projects target specific
diseases there generally is no alternative use aside of the
intended disease target. To determine the fair value of these
projects discounted cash flow models were used, taking into
account the estimated remaining development expenses as well as
risk adjusted future cash inflows. For each project an
individual percentage of realization was determined based on the
projects current phase and the projects specifics.
The risk adjusted cash flows for each project were discounted
using a term-equivalent WACC to derive the fair values of each
project. For valuation purposes the term of life of the
technology related to research and development projects is based
on the duration of patent protection and data protection,
respectively.
The following details the project specifics of two of the larger
development projects acquired. Remaining acquired in-process
research and development projects are considered individually
immaterial to warrant additional disclosure.
DUB-OC (gynecology)
The pill consists of estradiolvalerate/dienogest and will be the
first oral contraceptive specifically designed for contraception
in the late reproductive years and to introduce natural estrogen
in oral contraception. A potential additional benefit is the
effect on dysfunctional uterine bleeding (DUB). Bayer Schering
Pharma AG plans to launch the product in the year 2010. The
patent protection is expected to end in year 2020. Based on the
current phase and the projects specifics the cash flows
were risk adjusted using a percentage of realization of 54
percent.
Paccocath (oncology)
Paccocath is a medical device based on paclitaxel for the
treatment of in-stent-restenosen (ISR). The product launch is
expected to take place in the year 2008 in Europe, in 2011 in
Japan and in 2013 in U.S.A. For all regions the estimated
duration of patent protection is until the year 2022. Based on
the current phase and the projects specifics the cash
flows were risk adjusted using a percentage of realization
between 50 percent and 81 percent for the different regions.
As discussed in Note [7], the disposal of the
U.S. based plasma activities of the former Biological
Products Division has been accounted for as a discontinued
operation in 2005 and 2004 under IFRS. In December 2004, Bayer
entered into an agreement with Talecris BioTherapeutics, Inc. to
sell the plasma business in 2005. The
F-119
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
terms of this agreement and the related supply and distribution
agreements resulted in the continuation of significant cash
flows between the disposed component and Bayers ongoing
operations. Accordingly, for U.S. GAAP purposes, the plasma
business was not accounted for as a discontinued operation under
FAS 144. For U.S. GAAP purposes, the results of
operations of the plasma business have been included in income
from continuing operations for all periods presented. As a
result, income from continuing operations under U.S. GAAP
has decreased by
1 million
and
63 million
in 2005 and 2004, respectively.
For U.S. GAAP purposes, sales from discontinued operations
are
2,845 million,
3,185 million
and
8,406 million
in 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The operating result of
discontinued operations is
269 million,
337 million
and
282 million
in 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Gains or losses on
disposal were not incurred in the periods presented.
The following presents income from continuing operation and
discontinued operation under U.S. GAAP:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
|
(U.S.$ million) | |
Income (loss) after tax from continuing operations
|
|
|
546 |
|
|
|
1,128 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
Discontinued operations net of tax
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) after tax reported under U.S. GAAP
|
|
|
653 |
|
|
|
1,327 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
353 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Earnings per Share |
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
|
(U.S.$ million(*)) | |
Income (loss) after tax reported under U.S. GAAP
|
|
|
653 |
|
|
|
1,327 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
|
|
353 |
|
Guaranteed dividend
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
Net income available to common stockholders
|
|
|
653 |
|
|
|
1,327 |
|
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
Weighted average number of shares outstanding
|
|
|
730,341,920 |
|
|
|
730,341,920 |
|
|
|
746,456,988 |
|
|
|
746,456,988 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share under U.S. GAAP
|
|
|
0.89 |
|
|
|
1.82 |
|
|
|
0.33 |
|
|
|
0.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
546 |
|
|
|
1,128 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
Guaranteed dividend
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
Net income available to common shareholders from continuing
operations
|
|
|
546 |
|
|
|
1,128 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
Weighted average number of shares outstanding
|
|
|
730,341,920 |
|
|
|
730,341,920 |
|
|
|
746,456,988 |
|
|
|
746,456,988 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share under U.S. GAAP from continuing
operations
|
|
|
0.75 |
|
|
|
1.55 |
|
|
|
0.14 |
|
|
|
0.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from discontinuing operations
|
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
Weighted average number of shares outstanding
|
|
|
730,341,920 |
|
|
|
730,341,920 |
|
|
|
746,456,988 |
|
|
|
746,456,988 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings per share under U.S. GAAP from
discontinuing operations
|
|
|
0.14 |
|
|
|
0.27 |
|
|
|
0.19 |
|
|
|
0.25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
According to IAS 33 (Earnings per Share) the potential shares to
be issued upon the conversion of the mandatory convertible bond
are to be included in the calculation of basic and diluted
earnings per share. However, under U.S. GAAP, according to SFAS
No. 128 (Earnings per Share), potential shares to be issued
upon
F-120
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
conversion of the mandatory convertible bond are not to be
included in the calculation of basic earnings per share (for
terms of the mandatory convertible bond refer to
Note [27]). The potential shares to be issued upon
conversion were not included in the computation of diluted
earnings per share for U.S. GAAP purposes, because their effect
would be antidilutive. Furthermore, under U.S. GAAP, net income
available to common shareholders is reduced by the guaranteed
dividend payable under the terms of the Domination and Profit
and Loss Transfer Agreement.
|
|
|
Classification differences |
Under IAS 1 (Presentation of Financial Statements) the Bayer
Group is required to classify deferred tax assets and
liabilities as noncurrent. The current portion of these line
items is shown in Note [14].
For U.S. GAAP purposes, the U.S. based plasma
activities would not be presented in the line items assets
held for sale and discontinued operations and
liabilities directly related to assets held for sale and
discontinued operations. Asset and liability information
relating to the plasma business accounting for as discontinued
operations under IFRS is presented in Note [7.2].
As discussed in Note [29], under IFRS a shareholders
right to put its shares back to the issuer at any time for a
consideration must be recognized as a liability of the issuer
even if the legal form of the shares gives the holder the right
to a residual interest in the issuers assets. Accordingly,
Bayer classified
20 million
and
39 million
of minority shareholdings in consolidated subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, as liabilities.
Under U.S. GAAP, such minority shareholdings would be
classified as minority interest. Furthermore, as discussed in
Note [7.2] and Note [29], under IFRS the Company
recognized a current liability in the amount of
736 million
in relation to the obligation for payment of a cash compensation
(710 million)
and of the guaranteed dividend
(26 million)
offered under the Domination and Profit and Loss Transfer
Agreement. Under U.S. GAAP,
710 million
of this amount would be classified within mezzanine equity. The
Domination and Profit and Loss Transfer Agreement entitles Bayer
to exercise full operational control and receive one hundred
percent of the future earnings of Schering. Under the Domination
and Profit and Loss Transfer Agreement Bayer is required to
offer the shareholders of the remaining outstanding shares cash
compensation per share of
89.36, or to pay
a guaranteed annual dividend. With respect to the tender offer
still open at year end 2006 and the Domination and Profit and
Loss Transfer Agreement being effective, the remaining
outstanding shares were recognized as if they had been acquired
in total at year end 2006. Under IFRS, a corresponding liability
of aforementioned
736 million
was recorded equal to the fair value of the expected guaranteed
dividend payments and the cash compensation for the
future legal transfer of the shares held by minority
shareholders to Bayer. Because of the tender feature and the
impending squeeze-out proceeding, the liability is recorded as a
current liability.
The Bayer Group recorded pension expense of
846 million
in 2006,
527 million
in 2005 and
624 million
in 2004 for its defined benefit and defined contribution plans.
Of the total amount of pension expense recorded an amount of
182 million
in 2006,
197 million
in 2005 and
209 million
in 2004 was recorded within other net non-operating expense
under IFRS. These amounts would be classified as operating
expense under U.S. GAAP.
Under IAS 19(R), the net underfunded pension obligation is
classified as a noncurrent liability. Beginning in 2006,
SFAS No. 158 requires that for defined benefit plans
that are underfunded or unfunded, a current liability be
presented. The current portion for underfunded plans is
represented by the difference between the expected benefit
payments to be made over the next 12 months and the fair
value of plan assets. For unfunded plans the current portion is
represented by the expected benefit payments to be made over the
next 12 months. Therefore, for U.S. GAAP purposes the
Company would classify
325 million
of the U.S. GAAP pension obligation as a current liability
as of December 31, 2006.
SFAS No. 130 (Reporting Comprehensive Income)
established standards for the reporting and display of
comprehensive income and its components. Comprehensive income
includes net income and all changes in equity
F-121
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
during a period arising from non-owner sources, such as foreign
currency items and unrealized gains and losses on securities
available-for-sale. The additional disclosures required under
U.S. GAAP are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
|
( million) | |
Net income (loss) under U.S. GAAP
|
|
|
653 |
|
|
|
1,327 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
Other comprehensive income (loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized market value adjustment on available-for-sale
securities (net of taxes of
(2) million,
(6) million
and
2 million,
respectively)
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
Unrealized market value adjustment on cash flow hedges (net of
taxes of
(18) million,
6 million,
and
16 million)
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(43 |
) |
Reclassification adjustment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net realized (gains)/losses on sales of securities (net of taxes
of nil,
nil, and
nil,
respectively)
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net realized (gains)/losses on sales of cash flow hedges (net of
taxes of
(1)million,
nil and
3 million,
respectively)
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Additional minimum pension liability (net of taxes of
155 million,
916 million
and
(217) million,
respectively)
|
|
|
(232 |
) |
|
|
(1,373 |
) |
|
|
325 |
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
(398 |
) |
|
|
1,359 |
|
|
|
(759 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) under U.S. GAAP
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
1,310 |
|
|
|
(200 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Presented below are the disclosures required by
SFAS No. 132 (Employers Disclosures about
Pensions and Other Post-Retirement Benefits) and
SFAS No. 158 (Employers Accounting for Defined
Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans), that have not
yet been presented elsewhere in the document.
The net estimated amortization of prior service cost/credits and
actuarial gains/losses in the next fiscal year is expected to
decrease by approximately
15 million.
The additional minimum liability in the amount of
2,667 (2005:
3,209 million;
2004:
1,024 million)
is charged against stockholders equity. Additionally, an
intangible asset in the amount of
38 million
(2005:
56 million;
2004: nil) was
recorded due to the recognition of the additional minimum
liability. In 2006, both the additional minimum liability and
the intangible asset were reversed as part of the implementation
of SFAS No. 158.
The accumulated benefit obligation for the German defined
benefit pension plan was
11,213 million
and
9,919 million
at December 31, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
Information for Pension Plans with an Accumulated Benefit Obligation in Excess of Plan Assets |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Projected benefit obligation
|
|
|
10,256 |
|
|
|
9,931 |
|
Accumulated benefit obligation
|
|
|
9,919 |
|
|
|
9,684 |
|
Fair value of plan assets
|
|
|
4,599 |
|
|
|
4,487 |
|
F-122
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
The accumulated benefit obligation for the defined benefit
pension plans in other countries was
4,156 million
and
3,957 million
at December 31, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
Information for Pension Plans with an Accumulated Benefit Obligation in Excess of Plan Assets |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Projected benefit obligation
|
|
|
3,920 |
|
|
|
1,599 |
|
Accumulated benefit obligation
|
|
|
3,722 |
|
|
|
1,428 |
|
Fair value of plan assets
|
|
|
3,198 |
|
|
|
1,011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
Information for Pension Plans with an Accumulated Benefit Obligation in Excess of Plan Assets |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Projected benefit obligation
|
|
|
14,176 |
|
|
|
11,530 |
|
Accumulated benefit obligation
|
|
|
13,641 |
|
|
|
11,112 |
|
Fair value of plan assets
|
|
|
7,797 |
|
|
|
5,498 |
|
Prior to the adoption of FAS 123R in January 1, 2005,
the Group applied Accounting Principles Board Opinion
No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees (ABP 25) and related
interpretations in accounting for its stock compensation
program. SFAS No. 123 (Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation) would result in the same accounting treatment for
the Groups stock incentive plans as was applied under
APB 25 as Bayers stock compensation plans are
variable plans. Hence the additional pro forma disclosures
required under SFAS No. 123 do not apply. The adoption of
FAS 123R did not have a material impact on the Groups
financial position or results of operations.
|
|
|
Proportional consolidation |
The Group accounts for its investment in 5 joint ventures
in 2006 using the proportional consolidation method, which is
the benchmark treatment specified under IAS 31 (Interests
in Joint Ventures). Under U.S. GAAP, investments in joint
ventures generally are accounted for under the equity method.
The differences in accounting treatment between proportional
consolidation and the equity method of accounting have no impact
on the Groups consolidated stockholders equity or
net income. Rather, they relate solely to matters of
classification and display. The SEC permits the omission of such
differences in classification and display in the reconciliation
to U.S. GAAP provided certain criteria have been met.
Condensed financial information relating to the Groups
pro-rata interest in joint ventures accounted for using the
proportional consolidation method is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Information |
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Current assets
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
Noncurrent assets
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
Pension provisions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other provisions
|
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(23 |
) |
Financial liabilities
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
Remaining liabilities
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
F-123
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statement of Income Information |
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net sales
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
Operating result
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statement of Cash Flow Information |
|
Dec. 31, 2005 | |
|
Dec. 31, 2006 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
( million) | |
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Self-insurance
Various Group companies are self-insured to different degrees.
The maximum amount of any Group companys self-insurance is
for general liability up to
10 million
per occurrence, for environmental liability up to
25 million
per occurrence, and for product liability up to
200 million
per occurrence, including claims against our
U.S. subsidiary.
Consolidated financial statements and other financial
information
See Item 18, Financial Statements.
Legal Proceedings
Bayer is involved in a number of legal proceedings. As a global
company active in a wide range of life sciences and chemical
activities, Bayer may in the ordinary course of business become
involved in proceedings relating to such matters as:
|
|
|
|
|
product liability; |
|
|
|
competition and antitrust; |
|
|
|
patent validity and infringement; |
|
|
|
tax assessments; and |
|
|
|
past waste disposal practices and release of chemicals into the
environment. |
The following discussion, although not an exhaustive list of
claims or proceedings in which Bayer AG or its subsidiaries are
involved, nevertheless describes what Bayer believes to be the
most significant of those claims and proceedings. Subsequent
developments in any pending matter, as well as additional claims
that may arise from time to time, including additional claims
similar to those described below, could become significant to
Bayer. References to Bayer include claims or proceedings to
which Bayer AG and/or one or more of its subsidiaries is a
party. Bayer subsidiaries include Schering AG, Berlin, Germany
(now known as Bayer Schering Pharma AG) and its subsidiaries,
although matters historically involving the products, operations
or activities of Schering are discussed separately below.
(Please note that Bayer Schering Pharma AG and Schering-Plough
Corporation, New Jersey, are unaffiliated companies that have
been totally independent of each other for many years. The names
Bayer Schering Pharma or Schering as
used in this annual report on
Form 20-F always
refer to Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Berlin, Germany, or its
predecessor, Schering AG, Berlin, Germany, respectively.)
Bayer cannot predict with certainty the outcome of any
proceedings in which Bayer is or may become involved. An adverse
decision in a lawsuit seeking damages from Bayer, or
Bayers decision to settle certain cases, could result in
monetary payments to the plaintiff and other costs and expenses.
If Bayer loses a case in which Bayer seeks to enforce its patent
rights or in which Bayer has been accused of infringing another
F-124
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
companys patent rights, Bayer will sustain a loss of
future revenue if Bayer no longer can sell the product covered
by the patent or command prices for the affected products that
reflect the exclusivity conferred by the patent. While payments
and other costs and expenses Bayer might have to bear as a
result of these actions are covered by insurance in some
circumstances, the coverage under some of these insurance
policies has (as indicated below) been exhausted, and other
payments may not be covered by Bayers insurance policies
in full or at all. Accordingly, each of the legal proceedings
described in the following discussion could be significant to
Bayer, and the payments, costs and expenses above those already
incurred or accrued could have a material adverse effect on
Bayers results of operations, financial position or cash
flows.
|
|
|
Product liability proceedings |
|
|
|
Lipobay/ Baycol litigation |
In August 2001 Bayer voluntarily ceased marketing the
anticholesterol product cerivastatin (marketed in the United
States and Canada under the trade name Baycol) in
response to reports of serious side effects in some patients.
Claims for compensation have been made against Bayer in several
countries. Many lawsuits were filed, primarily in the United
States and Canada. It is possible that additional lawsuits may
be filed in the United States and elsewhere.
U.S. litigation. As of February 12, 2007,
approximately 1,810 lawsuits remain pending in the United States
in both federal and state courts against Bayer, including
putative class actions. At one time, more than 14,000 lawsuits
were pending.
The actions in the United States have been based primarily on
theories of product liability, consumer fraud, predatory pricing
and unjust enrichment. These lawsuits seek remedies including
compensatory and punitive damages, disgorgement of funds
received from the marketing and sale of Baycol and the
establishment of a trust fund to finance the medical monitoring
of former Baycol users. Five U.S. cases have been
tried to date to final judgment, all of which resulted in
verdicts in Bayers favor.
Cases remain pending in the federal district court in Minnesota
and in multiple states. All cases are on behalf of individual
plaintiffs, except in Oklahoma and Illinois, where class actions
on behalf of multiple plaintiffs have been approved. Additional
cases seeking class certification remain pending. Certification
of a class is unrelated to a determination of Bayers
liability.
In January 2004, Bayer Corporation received a subpoena for
documents principally relating to Baycol from the Defense
Criminal Investigative Service of the U.S. Department of
Defense Inspector General followed by a related subpoena issued
by the U.S. Attorney for New Jersey in February 2006. The
U.S. Attorney for New Jersey subsequently advised Bayer
that Bayer did not need to respond to this subpoena. Prior to
the withdrawal of Baycol, Bayer had a contract with the
Department to provide it with a supply of Baycol. The
investigation is a joint Department of Defense/ Food and Drug
Administration inquiry relating to Baycol. Bayer is not
aware of any charges or complaints filed in connection with this
inquiry. Bayer believes it acted responsibly and fulfilled its
responsibilities to the U.S. government, and has cooperated
in the investigation, including by providing the information
requested. Local governmental authorities in several European
countries also initiated criminal proceedings in connection with
the withdrawal of Baycol. The majority of these
proceedings have been dismissed.
Since April 2004, Bayer also has received civil investigative
demands from 30 states seeking documents regarding the
marketing of Baycol. In January 2007, Bayer agreed,
without any admission of fault, to pay a total of
$8 million to settle civil allegations made by the
attorneys general of these 30 states that Bayer failed to
adequately disclose to consumers safety risks associated with
Baycol. Bayer also entered into a consent decree wherein
it agreed to publicly register Bayer-sponsored clinical studies
for Bayer products approved for marketing in the United States
in accordance with the International Committee of Medical
Journal Editors guidelines and to post information regarding
those studies on the Internet.
F-125
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Litigation in other countries. As of February 12,
2007, approximately 60 actions remain pending against Bayer
companies in other countries, including class actions in Canada
for residents of all Canadian provinces, except for Québec,
who claim personal injury from Baycol other than
rhabdomyolysis. In November 2006, these class actions were
consolidated and will proceed in Manitoba. Separately, in 2004,
Bayer entered into settlement agreements covering Canadian
residents who allegedly contracted rhabdomyolysis. The deadline
for filing claims under the 2004 settlement agreements lapsed in
November 2006.
Impact of cerivastatin litigation on Bayer. Without
acknowledging any liability, during 2006 Bayer settled an
additional 69 cases worldwide resulting in agreements to pay
settlements of approximately U.S. $11.7 million. In
the United States, approximately 4,000 additional cases were
dismissed without payment during 2006.
As of February 12,
2007, Bayer has
settled a total of 3,152 cases worldwide, resulting in aggregate settlement payments of
approximately U.S. $1,159 million. Bayer will
continue, on a voluntary basis and without concession of
liability, to offer fair compensation to people who experienced
serious side effects while taking cerivastatin. After more than
five years of litigation Bayer is currently aware of fewer than
20 cases in the United States that in Bayers opinion hold
a potential for settlement, although Bayer cannot rule out the
possibility that additional cases involving serious side effects
from cerivastatin may come to Bayers attention. In cases
where an examination of the facts indicates that cerivastatin
played no part in the patients medical situation, or where
a settlement is not achieved, Bayer will continue to defend
itself vigorously. Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses in
these actions.
Following a 2003 agreement reached with the majority of the
insurers in the cerivastatin litigation, Bayer began
establishing provisions reflecting an excess of expected
payments including defense costs over the expected insurance
coverage. Additional charges of
43 million
and
22.2 million
to the operating result were recorded in 2005 and 2006,
respectively, each in respect of settlements already concluded
or expected to be concluded and anticipated defense costs.
Due to the considerable uncertainty associated with the
cerivastatin litigation, it is currently not possible to
estimate the potential liability. Since the existing insurance
coverage is exhausted, Bayer could incur further costs that are
not covered by the provisions already established. Bayer will
regularly review the necessity of further provisions and related
charges to the operating result as the cerivastatin litigation
proceeds.
In the United States, Bayer co-promoted Baycol with
SmithKline Beecham Corporation. SmithKline Beecham Corporation
and Bayer have signed an allocation agreement under which
SmithKline Beecham has agreed to pay five percent of all
settlements and compensatory damage judgments arising out of
actions based on the sale or distribution of Baycol in
the United States, with each party responsible for paying its
own attorneys fees.
Since the 1980s, Bayer, as well as other fractionators of
plasma products, has been involved in lawsuits alleging that
hemophiliacs became infected with the human immunodeficiency
virus (HIV) and/or the hepatitis C virus (HCV) by
using allegedly infected clotting factor concentrates derived
from human plasma. All of the early HIV-related cases have been
resolved except for two which remain pending in Argentina and
three which are pending in Japan. In October 2006, an additional
HIV-related case was filed in Taiwan. In 2003, a putative class
action against Bayer and other manufacturers was filed in the
United States on behalf of U.S. residents claiming
compensation for HCV infections and
non-U.S. residents
claiming compensation for HIV and/or HCV infections. The court
denied the plaintiffs motion to certify a class. Since
2003, U.S. and
non-U.S. residents
have filed additional cases, involving multiple plaintiffs,
against Bayer and other manufacturers, claiming compensation for
HIV and/or HCV infections allegedly acquired through blood
plasma products manufactured in the United States. All of these
matters have been filed in or transferred to federal district
court in Illinois for coordinated proceedings. In January 2006,
the court granted defendants motion, on the basis of
forum non conveniens, to dismiss the claims of the eight
residents of the United Kingdom who are plaintiffs in one of the
cases. Plaintiffs
F-126
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
appealed this ruling, and we are awaiting the decision of the
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
Bayer believes that it has meritorious defenses in the HIV/HCV
litigation and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously.
Due to the considerable uncertainty associated with these
proceedings, it is currently not possible to estimate potential
liability and Bayer has and will regularly consider the need to
establish provisions as the proceedings continue.
|
|
|
Phenylpropanolamine (PPA) litigation |
In late 2000, Bayer voluntarily discontinued marketing
over-the-counter cough
and cold remedies containing the decongestant
phenylpropanolamine (PPA) in the United States in response
to a recommendation from the FDA that manufacturers voluntarily
discontinue marketing products containing PPA. The FDA issued
this recommendation after one epidemiological study suggested a
possible association between PPA and hemorrhagic stroke.
As of February 12, 2007, 79 lawsuits remained pending in
U.S. federal and state courts against Bayer. To date, three
state cases have proceeded to trial. Two have resulted in
defense verdicts for Bayer. In one case, the plaintiff was
awarded damages of U.S. $400,000. This case was settled in
July 2005 while on appeal.
Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses in these actions and
intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. As of
February 12, 2007, Bayer had settled 383 cases resulting in
payments of approximately U.S. $57.2 million, without
acknowledging any liability. Bayer will continue, on a voluntary
basis and without concession of liability, to offer fair
compensation to people who suffered hemorrhagic stroke while
taking a Bayer product containing PPA. Bayer recorded a charge
to the operating result in the total amount of
62 million
in 2005. In 2006, this amount was reduced by
15 million
due to an anticipated reduction in future PPA-related litigation
charges. Such charges were for settlements already concluded or
expected to be concluded, and defense costs which exceed the
amount of existing insurance coverage.
Given the number and nature of the outstanding cases, management
believes this matter no longer involves a material risk to Bayer
and, absent a significant adverse development, will no longer
report on its status.
Bayer Corporation remains a defendant in eight lawsuits filed in
various state and U.S. federal courts by or on behalf of
persons alleging injuries from the use of Bayer products
containing thimerosal, specifically immunoglobulin therapies. In
the second quarter of 2006, one case involving immunoglobulin
therapy was dismissed. Other cases involving thimerosal in
over-the-counter nasal
spray products also have been dismissed. Given the number and
nature of the remaining outstanding cases, management believes
the Thimerosal product liability cases no longer involve a
material risk to Bayer and, absent a significant adverse
development, will no longer report on the status of these cases.
Bayer is a defendant in three Alabama state court isocyanate
cases. Collectively the cases involve the claims of more than
1,600 plaintiffs who allege personal injuries (primarily
respiratory) caused by exposure to diphenylmethane diisocyanate
(MDI) from products supplied by Bayer and other
co-defendants. The products were used in underground coal mines
in Alabama where the plaintiffs worked. Bayers
co-defendants include two other MDI manufacturers, several
distributors and contracting companies that used MDI-containing
products in those mines. Plaintiffs assert claims of negligence,
wantonness, outrage, failure to warn, misrepresentation,
concealment, breach of warranties and conspiracy. Punitive
damages are sought. In April 2006, the trial court entered an
order sanctioning Bayer for allegedly failing to properly
respond to discovery, and entered a default judgment holding
Bayer liable for damages if proven at trial. Following an appeal
by Bayer, the Alabama
F-127
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Supreme Court in July 2006 directed the trial court to vacate
its orders, and those orders subsequently were vacated.
Bayer is a defendant in a purported class action filed in
federal district court in Alabama. Bayers co-defendants
include isocyanate trade associations, MDI manufacturers,
several distributors and contracting companies that used
MDI-containing products in the underground coal mines where
plaintiffs worked. The case was filed by fifteen
(15) individual plaintiffs on behalf of themselves and a
class of all similarly situated coal miners in the United States
seeking redress for alleged personal injuries, declaratory and
injunctive relief as a result of their alleged exposure.
Plaintiffs likewise allege that they are entitled to medical
monitoring for injuries that may manifest themselves in the
future as a result of past MDI exposure.
Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses in these actions and
intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the
considerable uncertainty associated with these proceedings, it
is currently not possible to estimate potential liability.
|
|
|
Hormone Replacement Therapies product litigation |
Schering is one of several pharmaceutical companies named as
defendants in lawsuits filed in various U.S. federal and
state courts and at various times since July 2003 by plaintiffs
who used hormone replacement therapy (HRT) products.
Currently, 28 plaintiffs allege injury, including
breast cancer, ovarian cancer, stroke and pulmonary embolism, as
a result of their use of Schering HRT products. Cases involving
24 of these plaintiffs have been consolidated in
Federal multi-district litigation involving similar cases
against other manufacturers of HRT products. Four cases are
pending in state courts. Various trials have been and are being
conducted involving other manufacturers, with findings both in
favor of and against the manufacturer defendants. To date, none
of the cases involving Schering have been tried. Schering
intends to vigorously defend the cases pending against it, and
continues to monitor developments in the cases involving these
other manufacturers. Due to the considerable uncertainly
associated with these proceedings, it is currently not possible
to estimate potential liability.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving former rubber-related lines of
business |
Government investigations. Bayer is or has been the
subject of criminal and civil investigations conducted by the
Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice
(DOJ), the Directorate General for Competition of
the European Commission (EC), and the Canadian
Competition Bureau (CCB) (collectively, the
Competition Authorities). The Competition
Authorities are or were investigating potential violations of
their respective antitrust or competition laws involving certain
of Bayers former rubber-related lines of business.
Since September 2002, the DOJ has undertaken criminal grand jury
investigations of potential antitrust violations involving
Bayers former rubber chemicals, ethylene propylene diene
monomer (EPDM) synthetic rubber, and acrylonitrile
butadiene rubber (NBR) synthetic rubber lines of
business. To settle charges related to allegations that its
former rubber chemicals business unit engaged in
anti-competitive activities between 1995 and 2001, Bayer AG
pleaded guilty and paid a fine of U.S. $66 million. To
settle charges related to allegations that its former NBR
business unit engaged in anti-competitive activities between May
and December 2002, Bayer AG pleaded guilty and paid a fine of
U.S. $4.7 million. The two agreements resolve all
criminal charges against Bayer in the United States for
activities related to its former rubber chemicals and NBR
businesses. The DOJ closed its investigation into potential
antitrust violations involving EPDM in July 2006.
The CCB has also undertaken criminal investigations of potential
violations of Canadian competition laws involving Bayers
former rubber chemicals, EPDM and NBR lines of business. Bayer
is in the process of negotiating settlement agreements with the
CCB that would resolve all charges in Canada related to
allegations that its former rubber chemicals and NBR business
units engaged in anti-competitive activities between 1995 and
F-128
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
2001 and between May and December 2002, respectively. The CCB
closed its investigation into potential antitrust violations
involving EPDM in August 2006.
The DOJ and the CCB have also launched criminal investigations
of possible anti-competitive behavior involving a further
product attributable to the former rubber-related lines of
business. The DOJ and the CCB have granted conditional amnesty
from the imposition of criminal liability in connection with
these investigations. Conditional amnesty requires continued
cooperation by Bayer.
The EC has been conducting investigations of and initiated
respective proceedings regarding potential violations of
European competition laws involving Bayers former rubber
chemicals, EPDM and NBR lines of business. In December 2005, the
EC imposed on Bayer, and in March 2006 Bayer paid, a fine of
58.9 million
in concluding the rubber chemicals proceeding. The EC
investigation into potential antitrust violations involving NBR
remains ongoing. The EC closed its investigation into potential
competition law violations involving EPDM in July 2006. Bayer is
cooperating with the EC and the antitrust authorities of certain
member states of the EU with respect to their investigations of
possible anti-competitive behavior involving several additional
products attributable to Bayers former rubber-related
lines of business. The EC and certain member state authorities
have granted conditional amnesty from the imposition of fines in
connection with the investigations involving these additional
products. Conditional amnesty requires continued cooperation by
Bayer. In November 2006, the EC closed the proceeding related to
Butadiene Rubber and Emulsion-Styrene-Butadiene Rubber by
imposing fines against several companies and granting full
amnesty to Bayer. Bayer was not required to pay a fine in
connection with this proceeding.
Civil litigation. Bayer has been named, among others, as
a defendant in multiple putative class action lawsuits in
various state courts in the United States and as a defendant in
lawsuits including multiple putative class actions pending
before various federal courts in the United States. The actions
involve rubber chemicals, EPDM, NBR and polychloroprene rubber
(CR). In the state court actions, the plaintiffs
have alleged violations based on the defendants purported
participation in a conspiracy to fix prices and seek damages as
indirect purchasers of the allegedly affected products. In the
federal court actions, the plaintiffs have alleged the
defendants participation in a conspiracy to fix the prices
and/or to allocate markets and customers for the sale of the
allegedly affected products and seek damages as direct
purchasers of those products. Bayer has reached agreements or
agreements in principle to settle the majority of these court
actions. The federal rubber chemicals, EPDM, NBR and CR
settlements, and a number of the state rubber chemicals, EPDM,
NBR and CR settlements, have received final court approval.
Other settlement agreements must still be finalized, and then
are subject to court approval. The foregoing settlements do not
resolve all of the pending civil litigation with respect to the
aforementioned products, nor do they preclude the bringing of
additional claims.
In addition, Bayer recently has been named, but not served, in a
complaint filed in the Western District of Pennsylvania on
behalf of putative classes of direct purchasers of Butadiene
Rubber and Styrene-Butadiene Rubber alleging a conspiracy to fix
prices. Civil litigation in Europe is likely.
Bayer also has been named, among others, as a defendant in
multiple putative class action lawsuits in three Canadian
provinces. The actions involve rubber chemicals, EPDM, NBR and
CR. In the Canadian actions, the plaintiffs have alleged
violations based on the defendants alleged participation
in a conspiracy to fix prices, and the Canadian plaintiffs seek
damages as direct and indirect purchasers of the allegedly
affected products. These proceedings are at various stages, and
no class has been certified.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving polyester polyols, urethanes and
urethane chemicals |
Government investigation. Bayer Corporation was the
subject of a criminal antitrust investigation by the DOJ
involving allegations that it had engaged in anti-competitive
activities from February 1998 through December 2002 with respect
to adipic-based polyester polyols. Under the terms of a
September 2004 settlement agreement with the DOJ, Bayer
Corporation pleaded guilty and paid a fine of
U.S. $33 million. The agreement resolves all criminal
charges against Bayer Corporation in the United States for
activities related to its adipic-based polyester polyols
business. The CCB in Canada is conducting a similar
investigation. Bayer is in the
F-129
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
process of negotiating a settlement agreement with the CCB that
would resolve all charges in Canada related to allegations that
its adipic-based polyester polyols business unit engaged in
anti-competitive activities from February 1998 through December
2002.
Civil litigation. Bayer has been named, among others, as
a defendant in multiple putative class action lawsuits in
various state courts in the United States and as a defendant in
multiple putative class action lawsuits which have been
consolidated in federal district court in Kansas, involving
allegations of price fixing with respect to polyester polyols
and/or urethanes and urethane chemicals. Plaintiffs in the
federal court actions seek damages on behalf of direct
purchasers of polyester polyols and related polyurethane
systems, while plaintiffs in the state court actions seek
damages on behalf of indirect purchasers of products that
contain urethanes and urethane chemicals. These cases are at
various preliminary stages. Bayer has received final court
approval of its agreement to settle all of the federal direct
purchaser class action cases relating to polyester polyols (and
related systems). The foregoing settlement does not resolve all
the pending civil litigation with respect to the aforementioned
products, nor does it preclude the bringing of additional claims.
Bayer also has been named, among others, as a defendant in
putative class action lawsuits involving polyester polyols in
two Canadian courts, involving allegations of a price fixing
conspiracy. The Canadian plaintiffs seek damages on behalf of a
class of direct and indirect purchasers of the allegedly
affected products. These cases are at various preliminary
stages, and no class has been certified.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving polyether polyols and other precursors
for urethane end-use products |
Government investigation. On February 16, 2006,
Bayer Corporation was served with a subpoena by the DOJ seeking
information relating to the manufacture and sale of methylene
diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI), toluene diisocyanate (TDI) and
polyether polyols and related systems. Bayer Corporation is
cooperating with the DOJ in connection with the subpoena.
Civil litigation. Bayer has also been named, among
others, as a defendant in multiple putative class action
lawsuits which have been consolidated in federal district court
in Kansas, involving allegations of price fixing of, inter
alia, polyether polyols and certain other precursors for
urethane end-use products. Bayer has received final court
approval of its agreement to settle all of the federal direct
purchaser class action cases relating to polyether polyols, MDI
and TDI (and related systems). Approximately 25 percent of
the direct purchaser plaintiffs opted out of the class
settlement and reserved thereby the right to independently bring
an individual action in their own name to recover damages they
allegedly suffered. To date no such actions have been brought.
Bayer also has been named, among others, as a defendant in two
putative class action lawsuits pending in Quebec and Ontario,
respectively, involving allegations of price fixing of, inter
alia, polyether polyols and certain other precursors for
urethane end-use products. These matters are at an early stage,
and no class has been certified.
|
|
|
Impact of rubber-related and urethane-related antitrust
proceedings on Bayer |
Excluding the portion allocated to LANXESS, provisions in the
amount of
129 million
and
285 million
were accounted for as of December 31, 2006 and 2005,
respectively, in respect of the previously described civil
proceedings. Bayer currently has a provision of
10 million
in respect of the rubber-related antitrust proceedings in
Europe, although a reliable estimate cannot be made as to the
actual amount of any additional losses or fines.
These provisions taken may not be sufficient to cover the
ultimate outcome of the above-described matters. The amount of
provisions established for civil claims was based on the
expected payments under the settlement agreements or agreements
in principle described above. In the case of settlements in
civil matters which have been asserted as class actions, members
of the putative classes have the right to opt out of
the class, meaning that they elect not to participate in the
settlement. Plaintiffs that opt out are not bound by the terms
of the settlement and have the right to independently bring
individual actions in their own names to recover damages they
allegedly suffered.
F-130
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Bayer has and will continue to pursue settlements that in its
view are warranted, including with plaintiffs that elect or have
elected to opt out of the class action proceedings. In cases
where settlement is not achievable, Bayer will continue to
defend itself vigorously.
The financial risk associated with the rubber-related and
urethane-related antitrust proceedings described above beyond
the amounts already paid and the financial provisions already
established is currently not quantifiable due to the
considerable uncertainty associated with these proceedings.
Consequently, no provisions other than those described above
have been established. The Company expects that, in the course
of the regulatory proceedings and civil damages suits,
additional charges, which are currently not quantifiable, will
become necessary.
Additionally, Bayer and its former affiliate LANXESS AG entered
into a master agreement, dated September 22, 2004, pursuant
to which the parties, among other things, apportion between them
liability for certain of the antitrust proceedings described
above.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving Ciprofloxacin |
In January 1997, Bayer settled a patent infringement suit it
brought in the United States against Barr Laboratories, Inc.
This suit had arisen when Barr filed an Abbreviated New Drug
Application (ANDA) (IV) seeking regulatory
approval of a generic form of Bayers ciprofloxacin
anti-infective product, which Bayer sells in the United States
under the trademark
Cipro®.
Shortly after settling this suit, Bayer applied to the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for re-examination of its
patent. The Patent and Trademark Office reissued the patent in
February 1999. In addition, Bayers
Cipro®
patent was the subject of additional patent invalidity
challenges litigated in the U.S. federal district courts
and in each instance, the validity of Bayers patent was
upheld. The patent expired in December 2003.
Since July 2000, Bayer has been named as one of several
defendants in 39 putative class action lawsuits, one individual
lawsuit and one consumer protection group lawsuit (which has
since been dismissed) filed in a number of state and federal
courts in the United States. The plaintiffs in these suits
allege that they are direct or indirect purchasers of
Cipro®
who were damaged because Bayers settlement of the Barr
ANDA (IV) litigation prevented generic manufacturers from
selling a generic version of
Cipro®.
The plaintiffs allege that the settlement violated various
federal antitrust and state business, antitrust, unfair trade
practices, and consumer protection statutes, and seek treble
damages and injunctive relief. The Barr settlement is also the
subject of an antitrust investigation by the U.S. Federal
Trade Commission and a number of state attorneys general.
All the actions pending in federal court were consolidated in
federal district court in New York in a multidistrict litigation
(MDL) proceeding. In May 2004, Bayer moved for summary
judgment on all of plaintiffs antitrust claims in the
consolidated cases brought by direct purchaser and indirect
purchaser plaintiffs pending in that court, including certain
plaintiffs claims related to Bayers actions during
the prosecution of the
Cipro®
patent in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and its
enforcement against third party infringers. Bayer also moved to
dismiss those plaintiffs patent-related claims on grounds
that these claims do not state a claim for relief under the
antitrust laws. The direct purchaser plaintiffs filed a
cross-motion seeking summary judgment on certain liability
issues. In March 2005, the court entered summary judgment in
favor of Bayer and dismissed all of plaintiffs claims in
the MDL proceeding. Plaintiffs appealed this ruling, and a
decision by the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Second Circuit
is pending.
The remaining lawsuits consist of a class action lawsuit brought
on behalf of indirect purchasers in California state court, as
well as putative class action lawsuits in Florida, New York,
Kansas, Tennessee and Wisconsin. The New York and Wisconsin
cases were dismissed by the trial courts and plaintiffs appealed
the dismissals. On December 13, 2005, the New York
intermediate appellate court affirmed dismissal of the New York
class action suit. On January 19, 2006, plaintiffs moved
for leave to appeal that decision to the New York Court of
Appeals. On May 9, 2006, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals
reinstated the Wisconsin case. On June 8, 2006, Bayer
petitioned the Wisconsin Supreme Court for review of the Court
of Appeals decision. The Supreme Courts decision is
pending. The California and Kansas cases have been stayed. Bayer
Corporation filed an
F-131
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
answer in the Florida state court action, and there has been no
subsequent activity in that case. A motion to dismiss is pending
in the Tennessee state court proceeding.
These cases may involve joint and several liability among the
defendants, in the aggregate allege substantial unquantified
damages and also seek treble and punitive damages and penalties.
Due to the considerable uncertainty associated with these
proceedings, it is currently not possible to estimate potential
liability. However, Bayer believes that it have meritorious
defenses to the above-described proceedings and intends to
continue to defend itself vigorously. Bayer will regularly
consider the need to establish provisions as the proceedings
continue.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving
Premise® |
Bayer is named as a defendant in a putative nationwide class
action pending in federal court in North Carolina. Plaintiffs
allege that Bayer conspired with intermediaries to fix the price
at which those intermediaries resold the Bayer product
Premise®
to pest control operators. In November, 2006, plaintiffs
voluntarily withdrew their further claim that Bayer conspired
with BASF Corporation to utilize an agency system for
distributing
Premise®
(and BASFs termiticide) in violation of the Sherman Act.
Plaintiffs assert that they are entitled to recover on behalf of
the proposed class a total amount in excess of
U.S. $200 million (subject to trebling and the
addition of plaintiffs attorneys fees, under the
antitrust laws). Bayer believes that it has meritorious defenses
in the proceedings involving
Premise®
and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the
considerable uncertainty associated with these proceedings, it
is currently not possible to estimate potential liability.
|
|
|
Average wholesale price manipulation proceedings |
Sixty-two pending lawsuits allege that a number of
pharmaceutical companies, including Bayer, manipulated the
average wholesale price (AWP) and/or Medicaid best
price of their products resulting in overcharges to Medicare
beneficiaries, Medicaid recipients, state governmental health
programs, private health plans and privately insured patients.
These suits generally seek damages, treble damages, disgorgement
of profits, restitution and attorneys fees. Some of these
purported class actions allege injury to patients or payors.
However, no class has yet been certified against Bayer. In
addition, suits have been filed by the attorneys general of
eight states as well as the City of New York and numerous New
York counties. These suits generally seek to recover for excess
costs incurred by the governmental entities and their
constituents as a result of the alleged overcharges. Discovery
is proceeding.
The claims of five states have been dismissed, in whole or in
part, based on Bayers settlement of earlier AWP
litigation. Bayer believes that it has meritorious defenses in
the remaining actions and intends to continue to defend itself
vigorously. Due to the considerable uncertainty associated with
these proceedings, it is currently not possible to estimate
potential liability. Bayer will regularly consider the need to
establish provisions as the proceedings continue.
|
|
|
Patent validity challenges and infringement
proceedings |
|
|
|
Proceedings involving Moxifloxacin |
In February 2004, Bayer received a notice letter pursuant to the
Hatch-Waxman Act from the generic manufacturers
Dr. Reddys Laboratories, Ltd. and
Dr. Reddys Laboratories, Inc. stating that they had
filed an ANDA with the U.S. FDA seeking regulatory
marketing approval for allegedly bioequivalent versions of
Avelox®,
Bayers respiratory tract anti-infective, prior to the
expiration of one or more patents covering
Avelox®
and/or its use. Dr. Reddys sought the approval for
its generic product prior to the expiration of three Bayer
patents protecting the active ingredient of
Avelox®,
moxifloxacin, which expire on December 8, 2011,
March 4, 2014, and December 5, 2016, respectively.
Bayer filed a patent infringement suit against
Dr. Reddys Laboratories, Ltd. and
Dr. Reddys Laboratories Inc. in the United States
District Court for the District of Delaware alleging
F-132
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
infringement of the first two U.S. patents listed above.
Dr. Reddys alleged that the patents are invalid, not
infringed and unenforceable.
A trial was held in August 2006. Dr. Reddys has
stipulated that its proposed generic product would infringe
certain of the patent claims in each of the patents which Bayer
is asserting in this case. A decision is pending. If the court
rules that the patents are invalid or unenforceable, the FDA may
grant approval immediately. If, on the other hand, the court
rules that the patents are not invalid or unenforceable, and the
ruling takes place before the FDA
30-month stay expires,
the FDA may not grant final approval until the original patents
have expired. The court has extended the expiration of the
30-month stay until
October 21, 2007. Bayer believes that it has meritorious
claims and defenses in this action and intends to defend
Bayers patents vigorously.
Bayer received separate notice letters from two other generic
manufacturers, each stating that it had filed an ANDA seeking
regulatory marketing approval for a generic version of
Avelox®.
Each sought approval of its generic product to be effective
after the first two Bayer patents listed above had expired but
prior to the expiration of the third patent listed above. Bayer
has not filed actions against either manufacturer.
On February 24, 2006, Bayer received a notice letter
pursuant to the Hatch-Waxman Act from generic manufacturer Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., stating that it had filed an
Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) with the FDA
seeking regulatory marketing approval for allegedly
bioequivalent versions of
Vigamox®,
an ophthalmic preparation of Bayers anti-infective
compound moxifloxacin sold by Alcon Laboratories Inc. under
license from Bayer, prior to the expiration of one or more
patents covering moxifloxacin, and/or its use. The relevant
Bayer patents expire on December 8, 2011 and March 4,
2014. On April 5, 2006, Bayer HealthCare AG, Alcon, Inc.
and Alcon Manufacturing, Ltd. filed a patent infringement suit
against Teva in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Delaware. Teva has answered alleging invalidity and
non-infringement. A trial date has been set for
February 28, 2008. The two Bayer patents are the same as
those involved in the suit against Dr. Reddys
Laboratories, Ltd. and Dr. Reddys Laboratories, Inc.
above. Bayer believes it has meritorious claims and defenses in
this action and intends to defend Bayers patents
vigorously.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving
Kogenate® |
As previously reported, since 2003 Bayer had been party to
several lawsuits involving two affiliates of Aventis, A.
Nattermann & Cie GmbH and Aventis Behring LLC. The
suits related to certain Aventis patents which Bayer allegedly
uses or infringes in its manufacture and distribution of a
recombinant factor VIII product sold by Bayer as
Kogenate®
and a related agreement whereby Bayer supplies the finished
recombinant factor VIII product to Aventis. In February 2007,
the parties settled both disputes in full. In connection with
this settlement, Bayer extended the term of its supply agreement
with Aventis through 2017, and Bayer was granted a license to
intellectual property related to formulations of recombinant
Factor VIII.
|
|
|
Proceeding involving blood glucose monitors |
In August 2005, Abbott commenced a lawsuit in a federal district
court in California against Bayer and Roche Diagnostics alleging
infringement of two of Abbotts U.S. patents relating
to blood glucose monitoring devices. The Bayer product
originally accused of infringing the Abbott patents is the
Ascensia®
Contour®
system, which is supplied to Bayer by Matsushita. Matsushita is
contractually obligated to indemnify Bayer against the potential
liability with respect to this claim, as well as defense costs,
and management expects Bayer to be reimbursed by Matsushita for
a substantial portion of all such costs and liability, if any.
Abbott subsequently added claims of infringement of one of the
Abbott patents against Bayers DEX and Autodisc system. The
cost of the defense and liability, if any, will be borne by
Bayer, without indemnification by Matsushita, as these products
were designed and manufactured by Bayer. Bayer believes that it
has meritorious defenses against these claims and intends to
continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the considerable
uncertainty associated with this proceeding, it is currently not
possible to estimate potential liability.
F-133
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
Versant®
Diagnostic Assays related actions |
In two separate lawsuits, filed in federal court in 2004 and
2005, respectively, Gen-Probe Inc. alleged that Bayer, through
the marketing and sale of certain
Versant®
assays for the detection of hepatitis C and HIV-related
viruses, willfully infringed certain patents owned by Gen-Probe.
Gen-Probe sought recovery of an unspecified amount in damages,
which could have been subject to enhancement to up to three
times the amount of any actual damages found or assessed, as
well as injunctive relief. In June 2006, Bayer and Gen-Probe
resolved their patent litigation, with Bayer obligated to pay up
to U.S. $31.7 million, U.S. $5 million of
which was paid upon signing of the definitive settlement
agreement, U.S. $10.3 million of which was paid in
January 2007 and the balance of which may come due in 2008 as
royalties for future use of the patented technologies. Bayer
sold the products utilizing the patented technologies to Siemens
Medical Solutions Diagnostics as part of Bayers
divestiture of its Diagnostics division. Bayer remains liable
for the 2008 royalty payment should Siemens continue on or after
January 1, 2008 to make, import or sell these products. In
conjunction with the patent settlement, Gen-Probe and Bayer also
resolved their separate arbitration relating to their
collaboration for viral products. Neither party will be required
to make payment to the other as a result of this separate
resolution.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving syringe injectors and related
products |
Continuing a dispute over the manufacturing, marketing and sale
of syringe injectors, in September 2004, Liebel-Flarsheim
Company and its parents, Mallinckrodt, Inc., and Tyco Healthcare
Group LP filed suit against Schering AGs Medrad subsidiary
alleging that some of Medrads front load syringe injectors
infringe four patents held by Liebel-Flarsheim. This suit
involves the same four patents that Liebel-Flarsheim et. al., in
a 1998 lawsuit, had alleged several other Medrad front load
injectors infringed. In October 2005, the court ruled that the
Medrad products at issue in the 1998 case would have infringed
the patents of Liebel-Flarsheim if those patents were valid, but
then held all four of those patents to be invalid for purposes
of both the 1998 and 2004 lawsuits. Each party is appealing the
material portions of the ruling unfavorable to it.
The Tyco plaintiffs in these cases have also filed two
additional declaratory judgment actions against Medrad. The
first seeks to invalidate patents covering certain Medrad CT
syringe injectors or alternatively establish that
Liebel-Flarsheims competing CT syringe injector does not
infringe Medrads patents. The second action, filed in
November 2006, seeks to invalidate other medical imaging or
scanning device patents held by Medrad. This latter lawsuit also
alleges antitrust violations by Medrad, claiming Medrad
improperly enforced a patent which it allegedly obtained from
the Patent Office through fraud. Medrad separately has brought
suit against Liebel-Flarsheim alleging that a Liebel-Flarsheim
MR syringe injector infringes a patent held by Medrad.
Bayer believes that it has meritorious defenses against these
claims and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. Due
to the considerable uncertainty associated with these
proceedings, it is currently not possible to estimate potential
liability.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving oral contraceptives |
In April 2005, Schering filed an ANDA IV suit against Barr
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Barr Laboratories, Inc. in
U.S. federal court alleging patent infringement by Barr for
its generic version of Scherings
Yasmin®
oral contraceptive product in the U.S.A. In June, 2005, Barr
filed its counterclaims seeking to invalidate Scherings
patent. Schering is vigorously pursuing its claims and
contesting the counterclaims of Barr. This lawsuit is currently
in the discovery phase.
In January 2007, Schering received notice from Barr
Laboratories, Inc. that it has filed an ANDA IV application with
the U.S. FDA seeking approval of a generic version of
Scherings
YAZ®
oral contraceptive product. Barr will be prohibited from
marketing its generic version until after expiry in March 2009
of the three-year exclusivity period for marketing granted by
the FDA.
The Company highly values its
Yasmin®
and
YAZ®
oral contraceptive products and is deeply committed to
continuing its leadership position in oral contraception.
F-134
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
|
|
|
Betaseron®
supply related actions |
In October 2006, Schering filed a complaint in state court in
California against Novartis relating to matters arising out of a
1993 agreement with the former Chiron Corporation (now part of
Novartis) associated with Chirons contract manufacture and
supply of Scherings
Betaseron®
multiple sclerosis product and related rights which would allow
Schering to license an additional facility to manufacture and
supply
Betaseron®
in the United States. In December 2006, the parties signed a
non-binding settlement term sheet outlining the terms on which
they have agreed in principle to settle these matters. They have
also agreed to stay the lawsuit while negotiations on definitive
agreements are continuing.
Bayer AG and Bayer Corporation, along with two of their current
or former officers, have been named as defendants in a class
action lawsuit pending in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York. The lawsuit alleges violations of
the U.S. securities laws and asserts that the defendants
made false and misleading statements and omissions with respect
to the commercial prospects, safety and efficacy of Bayers
cerivastatin anticholesterol products and with respect to the
extent of the potential product liability exposure following
Bayers voluntary decision to cease marketing and to
withdraw these products in August 2001. Plaintiffs sought
unspecified damages on behalf of a class of all persons who
purchased Bayer AG stock (including Bayer AG American
Depositary Receipts) between August 4, 2000 and
February 21, 2003 at allegedly inflated prices. On
September 14, 2005, the court dismissed with prejudice the
claims of
non-U.S. purchasers
of Bayer AG stock on
non-U.S. exchanges.
On February 24, 2006, the court certified a class of all
persons who during the period from August 4, 2000 through
and including February 21, 2003 either (a) purchased
Bayer AG shares on the U.S. over the counter market or
purchased ADRs on the New York Stock Exchange, regardless of the
purchasers country of residence at the time of the
purchase; or (b) purchased Bayer AG shares or ADRs on any
other stock exchange, and the purchaser was a resident or
citizen of the United States at the time of purchase. Bayer
believes that it has meritorious defenses in this action and
intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the
considerable uncertainty associated with this proceeding, it is
currently not possible to estimate potential liability.
|
|
|
Schering AG shareholder litigation |
The shareholder resolution on the Domination and Profit and Loss
Transfer Agreement between Bayer Schering Pharma AG, Germany
(formerly named Schering AG) and Bayer Schering GmbH,
passed at the Extraordinary General Meeting of Bayer Schering Pharma
AG, held on
September 13, 2006, is subject to legal challenges by
dissenting unaffiliated Bayer Schering Pharma AG shareholders.
The plaintiffs are seeking to have the shareholder resolution
set aside or to have it declared null and void (Anfechtungs-
und Nichtigkeitsklagen). These actions are based on alleged
violations of procedural and substantive requirements and of
shareholder information rights.
Bayer Schering Pharma AG has commenced special proceedings
(Freigabeverfahren) to obtain a legally final judgment
stating that the shareholder actions do not prevent registration
of the Domination and Profit and Loss Transfer Agreement and
that any defects of the shareholder resolution do not affect the
validity of the registration.
Further, shareholders have made a motion in a local Berlin court
seeking to have the registration of the Domination and Profit
and Loss Transfer Agreement in the Commercial Register removed
(Amtslöschungsverfahren) based on an alleged abuse
of discretion by the competent court which entered the
Domination and Profit and Loss Transfer Agreement in the
Commercial Register in October 2006.
Several shareholders have initiated special court proceedings
(Spruchverfahren) with the Berlin District Court asking
the court to review the adequacy of the cash compensation
(Abfindung) and of the guaranteed dividend
(Ausgleich) offered under the Domination and Profit and
Loss Transfer Agreement. Should the court find in favor of the
shareholders it could increase the amount of the adequate cash
compensation and the guaranteed dividend required to be paid
under the Domination and Profit and Loss Transfer Agreement to
all
F-135
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
unaffiliated shareholders, including those who previously
tendered their shares pursuant to the original cash compensation
offer.
Bayer believes that it has meritorious defenses in these actions
and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the
considerable uncertainty associated with these proceedings, it
is currently not possible to estimate potential liability or the
impact of an unfavorable outcome.
On January 17, 2007, the Extraordinary General Meeting of
Bayer Schering Pharma AG passed a resolution on the
transfer of shares of the unaffiliated shareholders in Bayer
Schering Pharma AG to Bayer Schering GmbH as the main
shareholder in exchange for adequate cash compensation
(squeeze-out). If this resolution on the transfer of shares is
registered into the Commercial Register prior to a legally final
decision on the actions directed against the resolution on the
Domination and Profit and Loss Transfer Agreement, the
respective plaintiff under the actions will not lose his/her
standing to sue according to the case law of the Federal Court
of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) if that individual has a
legal interest in continuing the action in that specific case.
The shareholder resolution passed at the Extraordinary General
Meeting of Bayer Schering Pharma AG held on
January 17, 2007, is subject to legal challenges by
dissenting unaffiliated Bayer Schering Pharma AG shareholders.
The plaintiffs are seeking to have the shareholder resolution
set aside or to have it declared null and void (Anfechtungs-
und Nichtigkeitsklagen).
Bayer is a defendant in asbestos cases in the United States
which allege that Bayer, along with other premises defendants,
employed contractors at industrial sites where they were exposed
to asbestos and were injured. Plaintiffs contend that Bayer
failed to warn or protect them from the known hazards of
asbestos during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s. The majority of
cases are pending in West Virginia and Texas.
A Bayer subsidiary in the United States also is the legal
successor to entities that sold asbestos-containing products
from the 1940s until 1976 and is named as a defendant in
asbestos-related litigation. Bayer is and has been fully
indemnified for its costs with respect to this litigation by
Union Carbide. Union Carbide continues to accept Bayers
tender of these cases, and it defends and settles them in
Bayers name, in its own name and in the name of the
several predecessor companies to Bayer.
Bayer believes that it has meritorious defenses in these actions
and intends to continue to defend itself vigorously. Without
acknowledging any liability, Bayer has settled a number of these
cases in the past. Bayer may, on a case-by-case basis, settle
additional cases for reasonable amounts when, in Bayers
judgment, settlement is economically feasible given the risks
and costs inherent in the litigation. Bayer has made what Bayer
believes to be appropriate provisions in light of Bayers
experience in handling these cases.
|
|
|
Other commercial proceedings |
As previously reported, an arbitration panel in May 2006 issued
a final award in favor of Lyondell Chemical Co. in respect of a
dispute with Bayer over interpretation of their joint venture
agreements for the manufacture of propylene oxide. Bayer is
seeking to vacate the final award in federal court, while
Lyondell is seeking to confirm the award as well as obtain
pre-award interest. Bayer has established provisions in this
regard that it believes at this stage of the proceeding to be
appropriate. Additionally, Bayer will regularly review the need
to establish provisions consistent with the arbitration ruling
and continuing business operations. In addition to seeking to
vacate the final award, in January 2007, Bayer filed suit
against Lyondell in the Delaware State Court of Chancery,
seeking equitable reformation of one of the license agreements
relating to the joint venture and restitution of certain monies
paid or, as a result of the final award, allegedly owing by
Bayer to Lyondell under that license agreement.
F-136
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Bayer separately has notified Lyondell of its claim in
connection with Lyondells failure to compensate Bayer for
taking approximately 351 million pounds of propylene oxide
from Bayers share of capacity under the joint venture.
This dispute is proceeding to binding arbitration.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving Limagrain Genetics Corporation |
In July 2004, Bayer, as successor in interest to Rhone Poulenc
Inc., was served with a Notice of Arbitration by Limagrain
Genetics Corporation, Inc. Limagrain was seeking indemnification
from Bayer for liability Limagrain had incurred to a third
party, Midwest Oilseeds. This proposed liability arose from a
judgment entered against Limagrain, and upheld on appeal, for an
alleged breach of a 1986 contract to which Midwest Oilseeds and
a former business unit of Rhone Poulenc Inc. were parties.
Limagrain sought indemnification for more than
U.S. $60 million. A binding arbitration proceeding
between Limagrain and Bayer was held in October 2005, and the
arbitration panel in March 2006 denied all of Limagrains
claims. In a parallel proceeding in France, Limagrain has sued
Bayer, as successor in interest to Rhone Poulenc Agrochimie SA,
to recover the judgment amount Limagrain is obligated to pay
Midwest Oilseeds. Bayer believes that it has meritorious
defenses to this action and intends to continue to defend itself
vigorously.
|
|
|
Proceedings involving genetically modified rice |
Since August 2006, Bayer CropScience LP is party to multiple
lawsuits, including putative class actions, filed in
U.S. federal and state courts by rice farmers and
resellers. Plaintiffs allege that they have suffered economic
losses after traces of the genetically modified rice event
LLRICE601 were identified in samples of conventional long-grain
rice grown in the United States. This is alleged to have led to
various commercial damages, including a decline in the commodity
price for long-grain rice, costs associated with restrictions on
imports and exports, and costs to secure alternative supplies.
In December, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
entered an order establishing a single pretrial proceeding in
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Missouri for all federal cases involving LLRICE601.
After development, LLRICE601 had been further tested in
cooperation with third parties, including a breeding institute
in the United States. However, it was never selected for
commercialization. The U.S. Department of Agriculture and
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration have stated that
LLRICE601 does not pose a health risk and is safe for use in
food and feed and for the environment. In November 2006, the
USDA advised that it had deregulated LLRICE601. The USDA is
conducting an investigation in an effort to determine how
LLRICE601 became present in commercial rice grown in the United
States.
Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses and intends to
continue to defend itself vigorously. Due to the considerable
uncertainty associated with these proceedings, it is currently
not possible to estimate potential liability.
During the past year, Bayer Corporation, as well as other major
employers within the pharmaceuticals industry, has been named in
lawsuits alleging that pharmaceutical sales representatives were
improperly classified as exempt employees under state and
federal wage and hour laws and, therefore, were improperly
denied overtime pay and other benefits such as meal and rest
periods. Two putative class and collective actions were filed
against Bayer Corporation and Bayer Pharmaceuticals Corporation
in federal district courts in California, and those actions have
been consolidated in one proceeding in the United States
District Court for the Central District of California. The
complaints seek back overtime pay and statutory damages,
penalties, interest, and attorneys fees, and some claims
purport to have been filed on behalf of a nationwide class of
sales representatives. The proceeding is at a preliminary stage.
Bayer believes it has meritorious defenses and intends to
vigorously defend this action. Due to the considerable
uncertainty associated with these proceedings, it is currently
not possible to estimate potential liability.
F-137
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
Effect of new accounting pronouncements
|
|
|
Accounting standards applied for the first time in
2006 |
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 158 (Employers Accounting
for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Post-Retirement Plans), an
amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106, and 132R.
This standard will require employers to fully recognize the
obligations associated with single-employer defined benefit
pension, retiree healthcare and other post-retirement plans in
their financial statements. In detail SFAS No. 158
requires an employer to recognize in its statement of financial
position an asset for a plans overfunded status or a
liability for a plans underfunded status, to measure a
plans assets and its obligations that determine its funded
status as of the end of the employers fiscal year (with
limited exceptions) and to recognize changes in the funded
status of a defined benefit post-retirement plan in the year in
which the changes occur. Those changes will be reported in
comprehensive income of a business entity until they are
amortized as a component of net periodic benefit cost.
Impact due to the adoption of SFAS No. 158
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
( million) | |
U.S. GAAP equity at December 31, 2006 prior to adoption of
SFAS No. 158
|
|
|
12,512 |
|
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 recognition of
actuarial gains/(losses)
|
|
|
(3,350 |
) |
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 prior service cost
|
|
|
131 |
|
Adoption of SFAS No. 158 reversal of
additional minimum liability
|
|
|
2,667 |
|
Deferred taxes on the entries above
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. GAAP equity at December 31, 2006 after adoption of
SFAS No. 158
|
|
|
12,181 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Newly issued accounting standards |
In June 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued FASB Interpretation No. 48
(Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes)
(FIN 48), which is an interpretation of FASB
Statement No. 109 (Accounting for Income Taxes).
FIN 48 prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement
attribute for the financial statement for recognition and
measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a
tax return.
The evaluation of a tax position in accordance with this
interpretation firstly requires the determination whether it is
more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained upon
examination, based on the technical merits of the position and
secondly the position is measured to determine the amount of
benefit to recognize in the financial statements. The
interpretation also provides guidance on derecognition,
classification, interest and penalties, disclosure, and
transition. FIN 48 is effective in fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2006. The provisions of FIN 48 are
to be applied to all tax positions upon initial adoption, with
the cumulative effect adjustment reported as an adjustment to
the opening balance of retained earnings. The Bayer Group is
currently evaluating the impact the standard will have on the
Groups financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
F-138
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Bayer
Group (Continued)
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 157 (Fair Value Measurements)
(FAS 157). FAS 157 defines fair value,
establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally
accepted accounting principles, and expands disclosures about
fair value measurements. FAS 157 will apply whenever
another standard requires (or permits) assets or liabilities to
be measured at fair value. The standard does not expand the use
of fair value to any new circumstances. FAS 157 is
effective for financial statements issued for financial years
beginning after November 15, 2007. The Bayer Group is
currently evaluating the impact the standard will have on the
Groups financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
Leverkusen, March 13, 2007
Bayer Aktiengesellschaft
The Board of Management
F-139