Edgar Filing: SUNPOWER CORP

form_10-q.htm

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

_____________________

FORM 10-Q

_____________________

x		QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

		For the quarterly period ended June 29, 2008

OR

o		TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from ______________ to ______________

Commission file number 000-51593

SunPower Corporation

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Delaware		94-3008969
(State or Other Jurisdiction of		(I.R.S. Employer
Incorporation or Organization)		Identification No.)

3939 North First Street, San Jose, California 95134

(Address of Principal Executive Offices and Zip Code)

(408) 240-5500

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

_____________________

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Sections 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 x No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large Accelerated Filer x

Accelerated Filer ¨

Non-accelerated filer ¨

(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Smaller reporting company ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ¨ No x

The total number of outstanding shares of the registrant’s class A common stock as of August 1, 2008 was 40,542,667.

The total number of outstanding shares of the registrant’s class B common stock as of August 1, 2008 was 44,533,287.

SunPower Corporation

INDEX TO FORM 10-Q

		Page
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION		3

Item 1.	Financial Statements (unaudited)	3

	Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007	3

	Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007	4

	Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the six months ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007	5

	Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements	6

Item 2.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	32

Item 3.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure About Market Risks	48

Item 4.	Controls and Procedures	49

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION		50

Item 1.	Legal Proceedings	50

Item 1A.	Risk Factors	50

Item 4.	Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders	84

Item 6.	Exhibits	85

Signature		86

Index to Exhibits		87

- 2 -

Table of Contents

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1.

Financial Statements

SunPower Corporation

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets

(In thousands, except share data)

(unaudited)

	June 29, 2008			December 30, 2007
Assets
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	189,542		$	285,214
Restricted cash, current portion		38,322			—
Short-term investments		37,233			105,453
Accounts receivable, net		249,459			138,250
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings		50,784			39,136
Inventories		200,268			140,504
Deferred project costs		23,067			8,316
Advances to suppliers, current portion		62,078			52,277
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		61,044			33,110
Total current assets		911,797			802,260
Restricted cash, net of current portion		45,516			67,887
Long-term investments		25,086			29,050
Property, plant and equipment, net		451,969			377,994
Goodwill		195,930			184,684
Intangible assets, net		45,623			50,946
Advances to suppliers, net of current portion		96,400			108,943
Other long-term assets		55,642			31,974
Total assets	$	1,827,963		$	1,653,738
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	187,847		$	119,869
Accounts payable to Cypress		5,409			4,854
Accrued liabilities		101,989			79,434
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings		33,074			69,900
Customer advances, current portion		15,340			9,250
Convertible debt		200,000			425,000
Total current liabilities		543,659			708,307
Convertible debt		225,000			—
Deferred tax liability		9,285			6,213
Customer advances, net of current portion		59,665			60,153
Other long-term liabilities		22,176			14,975
Total liabilities		859,785			789,648
Commitments and Contingencies (Note 8)
Stockholders’ Equity:
Preferred stock, $0.001 par value, 10,042,490 shares authorized; none issued and outstanding		—			—
Common stock, $0.001 par value, 375,000,000 shares authorized: 85,533,004 and 84,803,006 shares issued; 85,365,521 and 84,710,244 shares outstanding, at June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, respectively		85			85
Additional paid-in capital		935,028			883,033
Accumulated other comprehensive income		20,684			5,762
Accumulated earnings (deficit)		18,550			(22,815	)
		974,347			866,065
Less: shares of common stock held in treasury, at cost; 167,483 and 112,762 shares at June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, respectively		(6,169	)		(1,975	)
Total stockholders’ equity		968,178			864,090
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity	$	1,827,963		$	1,653,738

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

- 3 -

Table of Contents

SunPower Corporation

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations

(In thousands, except per share data)

(unaudited)

	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007
Revenue:
Systems	$	270,593		$	104,037		$	449,444		$	182,532
Components		112,158			69,729			207,008			133,581
Total revenue		382,751			173,766			656,452			316,113
Costs and expenses:
Cost of systems revenue		209,137			91,518			352,350			153,984
Cost of components revenue		80,584			52,456			157,752			99,912
Research and development		4,813			2,821			9,455			5,757
Sales, general and administrative		43,208			26,109			77,066			48,480
Purchased in-process research and development		—			—			—			9,575
Impairment of acquisition-related intangibles		—			14,068			—			14,068
Total costs and expenses		337,742			186,972			596,623			331,776
Operating income (loss)		45,009			(13,206	)		59,829			(15,663	)
Other income (expense):
Interest income		2,289			2,196			6,436			4,180
Interest expense		(1,411	)		(1,085	)		(2,875	)		(2,204	)
Other, net		(2,240	)		(517	)		(1,953	)		(243	)
Other income (expense), net		(1,362	)		594			1,608			1,733
Income (loss) before income taxes		43,647			(12,612	)		61,437			(13,930	)
Income tax provision (benefit)		15,039			(7,267	)		20,072			(9,825	)
Net income (loss)	$	28,608		$	(5,345	)	$	41,365		$	(4,105	)
Net income (loss) per share:
Basic	$	0.36		$	(0.07	)	$	0.52		$	(0.06	)
Diluted	$	0.34		$	(0.07	)	$	0.49		$	(0.06	)
Weighted-average shares:
Basic		79,412			75,123			79,188			74,428
Diluted		84,036			75,123			83,848			74,428

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

- 4 -

Table of Contents

SunPower Corporation

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows

(In thousands)

(unaudited)

	Six Months Ended
	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007 Note 1
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net income (loss)	$	41,365		$	(4,105	)
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash used in operating activities:
Depreciation		21,971			11,486
Impairment of long-lived assets		5,489			—
Amortization of intangible assets		8,351			14,551
Impairment of acquisition-related intangibles		—			14,068
Amortization of debt issuance costs		972			479
Stock-based compensation		33,115			23,833
Purchased in-process research and development		—			9,575
Share in net income of joint venture		(1,874	)		—
Excess tax benefits from stock-based award activity		(14,639	)		—
Deferred income taxes and other tax liabilities		20,734			(10,568	)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of effect of acquisitions:
Accounts receivable		(103,132	)		(215	)
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings		(10,144	)		(14,323	)
Inventories		(53,048	)		(49,438	)
Prepaid expenses and other assets		(25,032	)		(3,893	)
Deferred project costs		(14,751	)		990
Advances to suppliers		3,641			(15,586	)
Accounts payable and other accrued liabilities		81,811			17,910
Accounts payable to Cypress		555			2,993
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings		(38,886	)		11,503
Customer advances		4,130			(10,163	)
Net cash used in operating activities		(39,372	)		(903	)
Cash flows from investing activities:
Decrease (increase) in restricted cash		(15,951	)		4,711
Purchases of property, plant and equipment		(95,078	)		(107,585	)
Purchases of available-for-sale securities		(50,970	)		(25,555	)
Proceeds from sales or maturities of available-for-sale securities		121,921			16,496
Cash paid for acquisition, net of cash acquired		(13,484	)		(98,645)
Cash paid for investments in joint ventures and other private companies		(22,625	)		—
Net cash used in investing activities		(76,187	)		(210,578	)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Proceeds from exercises of stock options		2,335			4,969
Excess tax benefits from stock-based award activity		14,639			—
Purchases of stock for tax withholding obligations on vested restricted stock		(4,194	)		—
Proceeds from issuance of convertible debt		—			200,000
Convertible debt issuance costs		—			(6,030	)
Principal payments on line of credit and notes payable		—			(3,563	)
Net cash provided by financing activities		12,780			195,376
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents		7,107			861
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents		(95,672	)		(15,244	)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period		285,214			165,596
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period	$	189,542		$	150,352

Non-cash transactions:
Additions to property, plant and equipment acquired under accounts payable and other accrued liabilities	$	3,838		$	3,741
Change in goodwill relating to adjustments to acquired net assets		231			1,689
Issuance of common stock for purchase acquisition		—			111,266
Stock options assumed in relation to acquisition		—			21,280

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

- 5 -

Table of Contents

SunPower Corporation

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

(unaudited)

Note 1. THE COMPANY AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The Company

SunPower Corporation (together with its subsidiaries, the “Company” or “SunPower”), a majority-owned subsidiary of Cypress Semiconductor Corporation (“Cypress”), was originally incorporated in the State of California on April 24, 1985. In October 1988, the Company organized as a business venture to commercialize high-efficiency solar cell technologies. The Company designs, manufactures and markets high-performance solar electric power technologies. The Company’s solar cells and solar panels are manufactured using proprietary processes and technologies based on more than 15 years of research and development. The Company’s solar power products are sold through its components and systems business segments.

On November 10, 2005, the Company reincorporated in Delaware and filed an amendment to its certificate of incorporation to effect a 1-for-2 reverse stock split of the Company’s outstanding and authorized shares of common stock. All share and per share figures presented herein have been adjusted to reflect the reverse stock split.

In November 2005, the Company raised net proceeds of $145.6 million in an initial public offering (the “IPO”) of 8.8 million shares of class A common stock at a price of $18.00 per share. In June 2006, the Company completed a follow-on public offering of 7.0 million shares of its class A common stock, at a per share price of $29.50, and received net proceeds of $197.4 million. In July 2007, the Company completed a follow-on public offering of 2.7 million shares of its class A common stock, at a discounted per share price of $64.50, and received net proceeds of $167.4 million.

In February 2007, the Company issued $200.0 million in principal amount of its 1.25% senior convertible debentures to Lehman Brothers Inc. (“Lehman Brothers”) and lent 2.9 million shares of its class A common stock to an affiliate of Lehman Brothers. Net proceeds from the issuance of senior convertible debentures in February 2007 were $194.0 million. The Company did not receive any proceeds from the 2.9 million lent shares of its class A common stock, but received a nominal lending fee (see Note 10). In July 2007, the Company issued $225.0 million in principal amount of its 0.75% senior convertible debentures to Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (“Credit Suisse”) and lent 1.8 million shares of its class A common stock to an affiliate of Credit Suisse. Net proceeds from the issuance of senior convertible debentures in July 2007 were $220.1 million. The Company did not receive any proceeds from the 1.8 million lent shares of class A common stock, but received a nominal lending fee (see Note 10).

In January 2007, the Company completed the acquisition of PowerLight Corporation (“PowerLight”), a privately-held company which developed, engineered, manufactured and delivered large-scale solar power systems for residential, commercial, government and utility customers worldwide. These activities are now performed by the Company’s systems business segment. As a result of the acquisition, PowerLight became an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. In June 2007, the Company changed PowerLight’s name to SunPower Corporation, Systems (“SP Systems”), to capitalize on SunPower’s name recognition.

Cypress made a significant investment in the Company in 2002. On November 9, 2004, Cypress completed a reverse triangular merger with the Company in which all of the outstanding minority equity interest of SunPower was retired, effectively giving Cypress 100% ownership of all of the Company’s then outstanding shares of capital stock but leaving its unexercised warrants and options outstanding. After completion of the Company’s IPO in November 2005, Cypress held, in the aggregate, approximately 52.0 million shares of class B common stock. On May 4, 2007, Cypress completed the sale of 7.5 million shares of the Company’s class B common stock in an offering pursuant to Rule 144 of the Securities Act. Such shares converted to 7.5 million shares of class A common stock upon the sale. As of June 29, 2008, Cypress owned approximately 44.5 million shares of the Company’s class B common stock, which represented approximately 55% of the total outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock, or approximately 52% of such shares on a fully diluted basis after taking into account outstanding stock options (or 49% of such shares on a fully diluted basis after taking into account outstanding stock options and shares loaned to underwriters of the Company’s convertible indebtedness), and 90% of the voting power of the Company’s total outstanding common stock.

The condensed consolidated financial statements include purchases of goods and services from Cypress, including wafers, employee benefits and other Cypress corporate services and infrastructure costs. The expenses allocations have been determined based on a method that Cypress and the Company consider to be a reasonable reflection of the utilization of services provided or the benefit received by the Company. See Note 2 for additional information on the transactions with Cypress.

- 6 -

Table of Contents

The Company is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties including, but not limited to, an industry-wide shortage of polysilicon, potential downward pressure on product pricing as new polysilicon manufacturers begin operating and the worldwide supply of solar cells and panels increases, the possible reduction or elimination of government and economic incentives that encourage industry growth, the challenges of achieving our goal to reduce costs of installed solar systems by 50% by 2012 to maintain competitiveness, the continued availability of third-party financing for the Company’s customers, difficulties in maintaining or increasing the Company’s growth rate and managing such growth, and accurately predicting warranty claims.

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Fiscal Years

The Company reports on a fiscal-year basis and ends its quarters on the Sunday closest to the end of the applicable calendar quarter, except in a 53-week fiscal year, in which case the additional week falls into the fourth quarter of that fiscal year. Both fiscal 2008 and 2007 consist of 52 weeks. The second quarter of fiscal 2008 ended on June 29, 2008 and the second quarter of fiscal 2007 ended on July 1, 2007.

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) regarding interim financial reporting. The year-end Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets data was derived from audited financial statements. Accordingly, these financial statements do not include all of the information and footnotes required by generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements and should be read in conjunction with the Financial Statements and notes thereto included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2007.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Significant estimates in these financial statements include the “percentage-of-completion” revenue recognition method for construction projects, allowances for doubtful accounts receivable and sales returns, inventory write-downs, estimates for future cash flows and economic useful lives of property, plant and equipment, asset impairments, valuation of auction rate securities, certain accrued liabilities including accrued warranty reserves and income taxes and tax valuation allowances. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

In the opinion of management, the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements contain all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, which the Company believes are necessary for a fair statement of the Company’s financial position as of June 29, 2008 and its results of operations for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007 and its cash flows for the six months ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007. These condensed consolidated financial statements are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the entire year.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In September 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements” (“SFAS No. 157”). SFAS No. 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States ("U.S. GAAP"), and expands disclosures about fair value instruments. This statement does not require any new fair value measurements; rather, it applies other accounting pronouncements that require or permit fair value measurements. The provisions of this statement are to be applied prospectively at the beginning of the fiscal year in which this statement is initially applied, with any transition adjustment recognized as a cumulative effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings. The provisions of SFAS No. 157 were effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. In February 2008, the FASB released FASB Staff Position FAS 157-b—Effective Date of FASB Statement No. 157, delaying the effective date of SFAS No. 157 for one year for all nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities, except those that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring basis (at least annually). The Company does not presently hold any financial assets or financial liabilities that would require recognition under SFAS No. 157 other than available-for-sale investments and foreign currency derivatives. With the exception of investments and foreign currency derivatives held, this deferral makes SFAS No. 157 effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter of fiscal 2009. The adoption of the relevant provisions under SFAS No. 157 in the first quarter of fiscal 2008 did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations (see Note 5). The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact, if any, of the adoption of SFAS No. 157 on measurement of fair value of its nonfinancial assets, including goodwill, and nonfinancial liabilities.

In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” (“SFAS No. 159”), which provides companies an option to report selected financial assets and liabilities at fair value. SFAS No. 159 requires companies to provide information helping financial statement users to understand the effect of a company’s choice to use fair value on its earnings, as well as to display the fair value of the assets and liabilities a company has chosen to use fair value

- 7 -

Table of Contents

for on the face of the balance sheet. Additionally, SFAS No. 159 establishes presentation and disclosure requirements designed to simplify comparisons between companies that choose different measurement attributes for similar types of assets and liabilities. The statement was effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007 and was adopted by the Company in the first quarter of fiscal 2008. The Company did not elect the fair value option for any of its financial assets or liabilities, and therefore, the adoption of SFAS No. 159 had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141 (revised 2007), “Business Combinations” (“SFAS No. 141(R)”), which replaces SFAS No. 141, "Business Combinations" ("SFAS No. 141"). SFAS No. 141(R) will significantly change the accounting for business combinations in a number of areas including the treatment of contingent consideration, contingencies, acquisition costs, in-process research and development and restructuring costs. In addition, under SFAS No. 141(R), changes in deferred tax asset valuation allowances and acquired income tax uncertainties in a business combination after the measurement period will impact income tax expense. SFAS No. 141(R) is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008 and will be adopted by the Company for any purchase business combinations consummated subsequent to December 28, 2008.

In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, “Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial Statements — an amendment of Accounting Research Bulletin No. 51” (“SFAS No. 160”), which will change the accounting and reporting for minority interests, which will be recharacterized as noncontrolling interests and classified as a component of equity. This new consolidation method will significantly change the accounting for transactions with minority interest holders. SFAS No. 160 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008. The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact, if any, of the adoption of SFAS No. 160 on its financial position and results of operations.

In March 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 161, “Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities — an amendment of SFAS No. 133” (“SFAS No. 161”), which expands the disclosure requirements for derivative instruments and hedging activities. SFAS No. 161 specifically requires entities to provide enhanced disclosures addressing the following: (a) how and why an entity uses derivative instruments; (b) how derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted for under SFAS No. 133 and its related interpretations; and (c) how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position, financial performance, and cash flows. SFAS No. 161 is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after November 15, 2008. The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact, if any, of the adoption of SFAS No. 161 on its financial position, results of operations and disclosures.

In April 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position (“FSP”) FAS 142-3, “Determination of Useful Life of Intangible Assets” (“FSP FAS 142-3”), which amends the factors that should be considered in developing the renewal or extension assumptions used to determine the useful life of a recognized intangible asset under SFAS 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets.” FSP FAS 142-3 also requires expanded disclosure related to the determination of intangible asset useful lives. FSP FAS 142-3 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008. The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact, if any, of the adoption of FSP FAS 142-3 on its financial position and results of operations.

In May 2008, the FASB issued SFAS No. 162, “The Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles” (“SFAS No. 162”), which identifies the sources of accounting principles to be used in the preparation of financial statements of nongovernmental entities that are presented in conformity with U.S. GAAP. This Statement is effective 60 days following the SEC's approval of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board amendments to AU Section 411, “The Meaning of Present Fairly in Conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles.” The Company currently adheres to the hierarchy of U.S. GAAP as presented in SFAS No. 162, and does not expect its adoption will have a material impact on its financial position, results of operations and disclosures.

In May 2008, the FASB issued FSP APB 14-1, which clarifies the accounting for convertible debt instruments that may be settled in cash upon conversion. FSP APB 14-1 significantly impacts the accounting for instruments commonly referred to as Instruments B, Instruments C and Instruments X from Emerging Issue Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 90-19, “Convertible Bonds with Issuer Option to Settle for Cash upon Conversion,” and any other convertible debt instruments that allow settlement in any combination of cash and shares at the issuer’s option. The new guidance requires the issuer to separately account for the liability and equity components of the instrument in a manner that reflects interest expense equal to the issuer’s non-convertible debt borrowing rate. FSP APB 14-1 is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2008, and retrospective application will be required for all periods presented. The new guidance may have a significant impact on the Company’s outstanding convertible debt balance of $425.0 million, potentially resulting in significantly higher non-cash interest expense on our convertible debt (see Note 10). The Company is currently evaluating the potential impact of the new guidance on its results of operations and financial condition.

Revision of Statement of Cash Flow Presentation Related to Purchases of Property, Plant and Equipment

The Company has corrected its Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the six months ended July 1, 2007 to exclude the impact of purchases of property, plant and equipment that remain unpaid and as such are included in “accounts payable and other accrued liabilities” at the end of the reporting period. Historically, changes in “accounts payable and other

- 8 -

Table of Contents

accrued liabilities” related to such purchases were included in cash flows from operations, while the investing activity caption "Purchase of property, plant and equipment" included these purchases. As these unpaid purchases do not reflect cash transactions, the Company has revised its cash flow presentations to exclude them. The correction resulted in a decrease to the previously reported amount of cash used for operating activities of $3.7 million in the six months ended July 1, 2007, resulting from a reduction in the amount of cash used from the change in accounts payable and other accrued liabilities in that period. The corresponding correction in the investing section was to increase cash used for investing activities by $3.7 million in the six months ended July 1, 2007, as a result of the increase in the amount of cash used for purchases of property, plant and equipment in that period. These corrections had no impact on previously reported results of operations, working capital or stockholders’ equity of the Company. The Company concluded that these corrections were not material to any of its previously issued condensed consolidated financial statements, based on SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 99-Materiality.

Note 2. TRANSACTIONS WITH CYPRESS

Purchases of Imaging and Infrared Detector Products from Cypress

The Company purchased fabricated semiconductor wafers from Cypress at intercompany prices consistent with Cypress’ internal transfer pricing methodology. In December 2007, Cypress announced the planned closure of its Texas wafer fabrication facility that manufactured the Company’s imaging and infrared detector products. The planned closure is expected to be completed in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2008. The Company evaluated its alternatives relating to the future plans for this business and decided to wind-down its activities related to the imaging detector product line in the first quarter of fiscal 2008. Accordingly, in the three-months ended March 30, 2008, cost of revenue included a $2.2 million impairment charge to long-lived assets primarily related to manufacturing equipment located in the Texas wafer fabrication facility. The Company did not purchase wafers from Cypress in the three months ended June 29, 2008. Wafer purchases totaled $0.6 million for the six months ended June 29, 2008 and $1.6 million and $3.1 million for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively.

Administrative Services Provided by Cypress

Cypress has seconded employees and consultants to the Company for different time periods for which the Company pays their fully-burdened compensation. In addition, Cypress personnel render services to the Company to assist with administrative functions such as employee benefits and other Cypress corporate services and infrastructure. Cypress bills the Company for a portion of the Cypress employees’ fully-burdened compensation. In the case of the Philippines subsidiary, which entered into a services agreement for such secondments and other consulting services in January 2005, the Company pays the fully burdened compensation plus 10%. The amounts that the Company has recorded as general and administrative expenses in the accompanying statements of operations for these services was approximately $1.6 million and $2.1 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, and $0.4 million and $0.8 million for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively.

Leased Facility in the Philippines

In 2003, the Company and Cypress reached an understanding that the Company would build out and occupy a building owned by Cypress for its solar cell manufacturing facility in the Philippines. The Company entered into a lease agreement for this facility and a sublease for the land under which the Company paid Cypress at a rate equal to the cost to Cypress for that facility (including taxes, insurance, repairs and improvements). Under the lease agreement, the Company had the right to purchase the facility and assume the lease for the land from Cypress at any time at Cypress’ original purchase price of approximately $8.0 million, plus interest computed on a variable index starting on the date of purchase by Cypress until the sale to the Company, unless such purchase option was exercised after a change of control of the Company, in which case the purchase price would be at a market rate, as reasonably determined by Cypress. Rent expense paid to Cypress for this building and land was not material for the three months ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007. Rent expense paid to Cypress for this building and land was approximately $0.1 million in each of the six months ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007. In May 2008, the Company exercised its right to purchase the facility from Cypress and assumed the lease for the land from an unaffiliated third party for a total purchase price of $9.5 million. The lease for the land expires in May 2048 and is renewable for an additional 25 years.

Leased Headquarters Facility in San Jose, California

In May 2006, the Company entered into a lease agreement for its 43,732 square foot headquarters, which is located in a building owned by Cypress in San Jose, California, for $6.0 million over the five-year term of the lease. In December 2006 and July 2007, the Company amended the lease agreement, increasing the rentable square footage and the total lease obligations to 51,228 and $6.9 million, respectively, over the five-year term of the lease. In the event Cypress decides to sell the building, the Company has the right of first refusal to purchase the building at a fair market price which will be based on comparable sales in the area. Rent expense paid to Cypress for this facility was approximately $0.4 million and $0.7 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, and $0.3 million and $0.6 million for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively.

- 9 -

Table of Contents

2005 Separation and Service Agreements

In October 2005, the Company entered into a series of separation and services agreements with Cypress. Among these agreements are a master separation agreement, a sublease of the land and a lease for the building in the Philippines (see above); a three-year wafer manufacturing agreement for detector products at inter-company pricing; a three-year master transition services agreement under which Cypress would allow the Company to continue to utilize services provided by Cypress such as corporate accounting, legal, tax, information technology, human resources and treasury administration at Cypress’ cost; an asset lease under which Cypress leased certain manufacturing assets from the Company; an employee matters agreement under which the Company’s employees would be allowed to continue to participate in certain Cypress health insurance and other employee benefits plans; an indemnification and insurance matters agreement; an investor rights agreement; and a tax sharing agreement. All of these agreements, except the tax sharing agreement and the manufacturing asset lease agreement, became effective at the time of completion of the Company’s IPO in November 2005. Since the Company’s IPO, the Company has hired and continues to hire additional personnel to perform services previously provided by Cypress in preparation of the expiration of the three-year master transition services agreement.

Master Separation Agreement

In October 2005, the Company entered into a master separation agreement containing the framework with respect to the Company’s separation from Cypress. The master separation agreement provides for the execution of various ancillary agreements that further specify the terms of the separation.

Master Transition Services Agreement

The Company has also entered into a master transition services agreement which would govern the provisions of services provided by Cypress, such as: financial services; human resources; legal matters; training programs; and information technology.

For a period of three years following the Company’s November 2005 IPO or earlier if a change of control of the Company occurs, Cypress would provide these services and the Company would pay Cypress for services provided to the Company, at Cypress’ cost (which, for purposes of the master transition services agreement, will mean an appropriate allocation of Cypress’ full salary and benefits costs associated with such individuals as well as any out-of-pocket expenses that Cypress incurs in connection with providing the Company those services) or at the rate negotiated with Cypress. Cypress will have the ability to deny requests for services under this agreement if, among other things, the provisions of such services creates a conflict of interest, causes an adverse consequence to Cypress, requires Cypress to retain additional employees or other resources or the provision of such services become impracticable as a result or cause outside of the control of Cypress. In addition, Cypress will incur no liability in connection with the provision of these services. The master transition services agreement also contains provides indemnities by the Company for the benefit of Cypress.

Lease for Manufacturing Assets

In 2005 the Company entered into a lease with Cypress under which Cypress leased from the Company certain manufacturing assets owned by the Company and located in Cypress’ Texas manufacturing facility. The term of the lease was 27 months, and it expired on December 31, 2007. Under this lease, Cypress reimbursed the Company approximately $0.7 million representing the net book value of the assets divided by the life of the leasehold improvements.

Employee Matters Agreement

In October 2005, the Company entered into an employee matters agreement with Cypress to allocate assets, liabilities and responsibilities relating to its current and former U.S. and international employees and its participation in the employee benefits plans that Cypress currently sponsors and maintains.

The Company’s eligible employees generally will remain able to participate in Cypress’ benefit plans, as they may change from time to time. The Company will be responsible for all liabilities incurred with respect to the Cypress plans by the Company as a participating company in such plans. The Company intends to have its own benefit plans established by the time its employees are no longer eligible to participate in Cypress’ benefit plans. Once the Company has established its own benefit plans, the Company will have the ability to modify or terminate each plan in accordance with the terms of those plans and its policies. It is the Company’s intent that employees not receive duplicate benefits as a result of participation in its benefit plans and the corresponding Cypress benefit plans.

All of the Company’s eligible employees will be able to continue to participate in Cypress’ health plans, life insurance and other benefit plans as they may change from time to time, until the earliest of, (1) a change of control of the Company occurs, which includes such time as Cypress ceases to own at least a majority of the aggregate number of shares of all classes of our common stock then outstanding, (2) such time as the Company’s status as a participating company under the Cypress plans is not permitted by a Cypress plan or by applicable law, (3) such time as Cypress determines in its reasonable judgment that its status as

- 10 -

Table of Contents

a participating company under the Cypress plans has or will adversely affect Cypress, or its employees, directors, officers, agents, affiliates or its representatives, or (4) such earlier date as the Company and Cypress mutually agree. The Company’s employees are precluded from participating in Cypress’ stock option plans and stock purchase plans.

In July 2008, the Company transferred all accounts in the Cypress 401(k) Plan held by the Company’s employees to its recently established SunPower 401(k) Savings Plan.

Indemnification and Insurance Matters Agreement

The Company will indemnify Cypress and its affiliates, agents, successors and assigns from all liabilities arising from environmental conditions: existing on, under, about or in the vicinity of any of the Company’s facilities, or arising out of operations occurring at any of the Company’s facilities, including its California facilities, whether prior to or after the separation; existing on, under, about or in the vicinity of the Philippines facility which the Company occupies, or arising out of operations occurring at such facility, whether prior to or after the separation, to the extent that those liabilities were caused by the Company; arising out of hazardous materials found on, under or about any landfill, waste, storage, transfer or recycling site and resulting from hazardous materials stored, treated, recycled, disposed or otherwise handled by any of the Company’s operations or the Company’s California and Philippines facilities prior to the separation; and arising out of the construction activity conducted by or on behalf of us at Cypress’ Texas facility.

The indemnification and insurance matters agreement and the master transition services agreement also contains provisions governing the Company’s insurance coverage, which shall be under the Cypress insurance policies (other than our directors and officers insurance and insurance for our systems segment business, for which the Company intends to obtain its own separate policies) until the earliest of (1) a change of control of the Company occurs, which includes such time as Cypress ceases to own at least a majority of the aggregate number of shares of all classes of the Company’s common stock then outstanding, (2) the date on which Cypress’ insurance carriers do not permit the Company to remain on Cypress policies, (3) the date on which Cypress’ cost of insurance under any particular insurance policy increases, directly or indirectly, due to the Company's inclusion or participation in such policy, (4) the date on which the Company's coverage under the Cypress policies causes a real or potential conflict of interest or hardship for Cypress, as determined solely by Cypress or (5) the date on which Cypress and the Company mutually agree to terminate this arrangement. Prior to that time, Cypress will maintain insurance policies on the Company’s behalf, and the Company shall reimburse Cypress for expenses related to insurance coverage during this period. The Company will work with Cypress to secure additional insurance if desired and cost effective.

Investor Rights Agreement

The Company has entered into an investor rights agreement with Cypress providing for specified (1) registration and other rights relating to the Company’s shares of the Company’s common stock, (2) information and inspection rights, (3) coordination of auditing practices and (4) approval rights with respect to certain transactions.

Tax Sharing Agreement

The Company has entered into a tax sharing agreement with Cypress providing for each of the party’s obligations concerning various tax liabilities. The tax sharing agreement is structured such that Cypress will pay all federal, state, local and foreign taxes that are calculated on a consolidated or combined basis (while being a member of Cypress’ consolidated or combined group pursuant to federal, state, local and foreign tax law). The Company’s portion of such tax liability or benefit will be determined based upon its separate return tax liability as defined under the tax sharing agreement. Such liability or benefit will be based on a pro forma calculation as if the Company were filing a separate income tax return in each jurisdiction, rather than on a combined or consolidated basis with Cypress subject to adjustments as set forth in the tax sharing agreement.

After the date the Company ceases to be a member of Cypress’ consolidated group for federal income tax purposes and most state income tax purposes, as and to the extent that the Company becomes entitled to utilize on the Company’s separate tax returns portions of those credit or loss carryforwards existing as of such date, the Company will distribute to Cypress the tax effect, estimated to be 40% for federal income tax purposes, of the amount of such tax loss carryforwards so utilized, and the amount of any credit carryforwards so utilized. The Company will distribute these amounts to Cypress in cash or in the Company’s shares, at the Company’s option. As of December 30, 2007, the Company has $44.0 million of federal net operating loss carryforwards and approximately $73.5 million of California net operating loss carryforwards meaning that such potential future payments to Cypress, which would be made over a period of several years, would therefore aggregate approximately $19.1 million.

The majority of these net operating loss carryforwards were created by employee stock transactions. Because there is uncertainty as to the realizability of these loss carryforwards, the portion created by employee stock transactions are not reflected on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

- 11 -

Table of Contents

Upon completion of its follow-on public offering of common stock in June 2006, the Company is no longer considered to be a member of Cypress’ consolidated group for federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, the Company will be subject to the obligations payable to Cypress for any federal income tax credit or loss carryforwards utilized in its federal tax returns in subsequent periods, as explained in the preceding paragraph.

The Company will continue to be jointly and severally liable for any tax liability as governed under federal, state and local law during all periods in which it is deemed to be a member of the Cypress consolidated or combined group. Accordingly, although the tax sharing agreement allocates tax liabilities between Cypress and all its consolidated subsidiaries, for any period in which the Company is included in Cypress’ consolidated group, the Company could be liable in the event that any federal tax liability was incurred, but not discharged, by any other member of the group.

Subject to certain caveats, Cypress has obtained a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) to the effect that a distribution by Cypress of the Company’s class B common stock to Cypress stockholders will qualify as a tax-free distribution under Section 355 of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”). Despite such ruling, the distribution may nonetheless be taxable to Cypress under Section 355(e) of the Code if 50% or more of the Company’s voting power or economic value is acquired as part of a plan or series of related transactions that includes the distribution of the Company’s stock. The tax sharing agreement includes the Company’s obligation to indemnify Cypress for any liability incurred as a result of issuances or dispositions of the Company’s stock after the distribution, other than liability attributable to certain dispositions of the Company’s stock by Cypress, that cause Cypress’ distribution of shares of the Company’s stock to its stockholders to be taxable to Cypress under Section 355(e) of the Code.

The tax sharing agreement further provides for cooperation with respect to tax matters, the exchange of information and the retention of records which may affect the income tax liability of either party. Disputes arising between Cypress and the Company relating to matters covered by the tax sharing agreement are subject to resolution through specific dispute resolution provisions contained in the agreement.

Note 3. BUSINESS COMBINATION, GOODWILL AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS

Business Combination

On January 8, 2008, the Company completed the acquisition of Solar Solutions, a solar systems integration and product distribution company based in Faenza, Italy. Solar Solutions was a division of Combigas S.r.l., a petroleum products trading firm. Active since 2002, Solar Solutions distributes components such as solar panels and inverters, and offers turnkey solar power systems and standard system kits via a network of dealers throughout Italy. Prior to the acquisition, Solar Solutions had been a customer of the Company since fiscal 2006. As a result of the acquisition, Solar Solutions became a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. In connection with the acquisition, the Company changed Solar Solutions’ name to SunPower Italia S.r.l. (“SunPower Italia”). The acquisition of SunPower Italia was not material to the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

Goodwill

The following table presents the changes in the carrying amount of goodwill under the Company's reportable business segments:

(In thousands)	Components Business Segment		Systems Business Segment		Total
As of December 30, 2007	$	2,883	$	181,801	$	184,684
Goodwill acquired		10,284		—		10,284
Adjustments		962		—		962
As of June 29, 2008	$	14,129	$	181,801	$	195,930

Changes to goodwill during the six months ended June 29, 2008 resulted from the acquisition of SunPower Italia. Approximately $10.3 million had been allocated to goodwill within the components segment, which represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the underlying net tangible and intangible assets of SunPower Italia. SunPower Italia is a Euro functional currency subsidiary, therefore, the Company records a translation adjustment for the revaluation of the subsidiary’s goodwill and intangible assets into U.S. dollar. As of June 29, 2008, the cumulative translation adjustment increased the balance of goodwill by $0.8 million. Also during the six months ended June 29, 2008, the Company recorded an adjustment to increase goodwill by $0.2 million to adjust the value of acquired investments.

- 12 -

Table of Contents

In accordance with SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets,” (“SFAS No. 142”), goodwill will not be amortized but instead will be tested for impairment at least annually, or more frequently if certain indicators are present. The Company conducts its annual impairment test of goodwill as of the Sunday closest to the end of the third calendar quarter of each year. Based on its last impairment test as of September 30, 2007, the Company determined there was no impairment. There were no events or circumstances from that date through June 29, 2008 indicating that an interim assessment was necessary. In the event that management determines that the value of goodwill has become impaired, the Company will incur an accounting charge for the amount of the impairment during the fiscal quarter in which the determination is made.

Intangible Assets

The following tables present details of the Company's acquired identifiable intangible assets:

(In thousands)	Gross		Accumulated Amortization			Net
As of June 29, 2008
Patents and purchased technology	$	51,398	$	(25,976	)	$	25,422
Tradenames		2,215		(1,244	)		971
Backlog		11,787		(11,787	)		—
Customer relationships and other		25,612		(6,382	)		19,230
	$	91,012	$	(45,389	)	$	45,623

As of December 30, 2007
Patents and purchased technology	$	51,398	$	(20,630	)	$	30,768
Tradenames		1,603		(808	)		795
Backlog		11,787		(11,460	)		327
Customer relationships and other		23,193		(4,137	)		19,056
	$	87,981	$	(37,035	)	$	50,946

In connection with the acquisition of SunPower Italia, the Company recorded $2.7 million of intangible assets and $0.2 million of cumulative translation adjustment for acquired intangibles in the six months ended June 29, 2008. In connection with the acquisition of SP Systems, the Company recorded $79.5 million of intangible assets in the first quarter of fiscal 2007, of which $15.5 million was related to the PowerLight tradename. The determination of the fair value and useful life of the tradename was based on the Company’s strategy of continuing to market its systems products and services under the PowerLight brand. Based on the Company’s change in branding strategy and changing PowerLight’s name to SunPower Corporation, Systems, during the quarter ended July 1, 2007, the Company recognized an impairment charge of $14.1 million, which represented the net book value of the PowerLight tradename.

All of our acquired identifiable intangible assets are subject to amortization. Aggregate amortization expense for intangible assets totaled $4.0 million and $8.4 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, and $7.7 million and $14.6 million for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively. As of June 29, 2008, the estimated future amortization expense related to intangible assets is as follows (in thousands):

2008 (remaining six months)	$	8,041
2009	15,461
2010	13,948
2011	4,152
2012	3,916
Thereafter	105
	$	45,623

- 13 -

Table of Contents

Note 4. BALANCE SHEET COMPONENTS

(In thousands)	June 29, 2008			December 30, 2007
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on contracts in progress and billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on contracts in progress consists of the following:
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on contracts in progress	$	50,784		$	39,136
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on contracts in progress		33,074			69,900
	$	17,710		$	(30,764	)
Contracts in progress:
Costs incurred to date	$	824,289		$	481,340
Estimated earnings to date		269,201			145,643
Contract revenue earned to date		1,093,490			626,983
Less: Billings to date, including earned incentive rebates		(1,075,780	)		(657,747	)
	$	17,710		$	(30,764	)
Inventories:
Raw materials(1)	$	98,534		$	89,604
Work-in-process		3,972			2,027
Finished goods		97,762			48,873
	$	200,268		$	140,504
(1) In addition to polysilicon and other raw materials for solar cell manufacturing, raw materials includes solar panels purchased from third-party vendors and installation materials for systems projects.

Prepaid expenses and other current assets:
VAT receivables, current portion	$	25,308		$	7,266
Deferred tax assets, current portion		8,438			8,437
Other receivables		16,458			9,946
Other prepaid expenses		10,840			7,461
	$	61,044		$	33,110
Property, plant and equipment, net:
Land and buildings	$	8,923		$	7,482
Manufacturing equipment		237,457			194,963
Manufacturing equipment held for sale(2)		768			—
Computer equipment		14,676			12,399
Furniture and fixtures		3,920			2,648
Leasehold improvements		130,425			113,801
Construction-in-process (manufacturing facility in the Philippines)		127,178			99,945
		523,347			431,238
Less: Accumulated depreciation(3)		(71,378	)		(53,244	)
	$	451,969		$	377,994

- 14 -

Table of Contents

(In thousands)	June 29, 2008		December 30, 2007
(2) During the three months ended March 30, 2008, certain manufacturing equipment with a net book value of $4.1 million were replaced with new processes. The Company determined that the expected realizable value for the resale of such manufacturing equipment is $0.8 million, therefore, the Company incurred an impairment charge of $3.3 million in the first quarter of fiscal 2008.
(3) Total depreciation expense was $11.9 million and $22.0 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, and $5.9 million and $11.5 million for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively.

Other long-term assets:
VAT receivable, net of current portion	$	15,422	$	24,269
Investments in joint ventures		14,803		5,304
Note receivable(4)		10,000		—
Other		15,417		2,401
	$	55,642	$	31,974
(4) In June 2008, the Company loaned $10.0 million to a third-party private company pursuant to a three-year interest-bearing note receivable that is convertible into equity at the Company’s option.

Accrued liabilities:
VAT payables	$	28,592	$	18,138
Employee compensation and employee benefits		14,858		15,338
Income taxes payable		15,316		11,106
Warranty reserves		13,393		10,502
Foreign exchange derivative liability		11,261		8,920
Other		18,569		15,430
	$	101,989	$	79,434

Note 5. INVESTMENTS

On December 31, 2007, the Company adopted SFAS No. 157, which refines the definition of fair value, provides a framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS No. 157 establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure fair value. The hierarchy assigns the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities ("Level 1") and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs ("Level 3"). Level 2 measurements are inputs that are observable for assets or liabilities, either directly or indirectly, other than quoted prices included within Level 1. The following table presents information about the Company’s available-for-sale securities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of June 29, 2008 and indicates the fair value hierarchy of the valuation techniques utilized by the Company to determine such fair value in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 157:

(In thousands)	Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Instruments (Level 1)		Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2)		Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)		Balance as of June 29, 2008
Asset
Money market funds	$	160,108	$	—	$	—	$	160,108
Corporate securities		—		33,244		25,086		58,330
Commercial paper		—		23,989		—		23,989
Total available-for-sale securities	$	160,108	$	57,233	$	25,086	$	242,427

Available-for-sale securities utilizing Level 3 inputs to determine fair value are comprised of auction rate securities which are bought and sold in the marketplace through a bidding process sometimes referred to as a “Dutch auction,” and which are classified as short-term investments or long-term investments and carried at their market values. After the initial issuance of the auction rate securities, the interest rate on the securities resets periodically, at intervals set at the time of issuance (e.g., every seven, twenty-eight, or thirty-five days; every six-months; etc.), based on the market demand at the reset period. The “stated” or

- 15 -

Table of Contents

“contractual” maturities for these securities generally are between 20 to 30 years. The Company classifies auction rate securities as available-for-sale securities under SFAS No. 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities” (“SFAS No. 115”).

At June 29, 2008, the Company had $25.1 million invested in auction rate securities as compared to $50.8 million invested in auction rate securities at December 30, 2007. These auction rate securities are typically over collateralized and secured by pools of student loans originated under the Federal Family Education Loan Program (“FFELP”) that are guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Education, and insured. In addition, all auction rate securities held are rated by one or more of the Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations (“NRSRO”) as triple-A. Beginning in February 2008, the auction rate securities market experienced a significant increase in the number of failed auctions, resulting from a lack of liquidity, which occurs when sell orders exceed buy orders, and does not necessarily signify a default by the issuer.

As of August 8, 2008, all of the Company’s auction rate securities invested in at June 29, 2008 had failed to clear at auctions. For failed auctions, the Company continues to earn interest on these investments at the maximum contractual rate as the issuer is obligated under contractual terms to pay penalty rates should auctions fail. Historically, failed auctions have rarely occurred, however, such failures could continue to occur in the future. In the event the Company needs to access these funds, the Company will not be able to do so until a future auction is successful, the issuer redeems the securities, a buyer is found outside of the auction process or the securities mature. Accordingly, auction rate securities at June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007 that were not sold in a subsequent period totaling $25.1 million and $29.1 million, respectively, are classified as long-term investments on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets, because they are not expected to be used to fund current operations and consistent with the stated contractual maturities of the securities.

The Company determined that use of a valuation model was the best available technique for measuring the fair value of its auction rate securities. The Company used an income approach valuation model to estimate the price that would be received to sell its securities in an orderly transaction between market participants ("exit price") as of June 29, 2008. The exit price was derived as the weighted average present value of expected cash flows over various periods of illiquidity, using a risk adjusted discount rate that was based on the credit risk and liquidity risk of the securities. While the valuation model was based on both Level 2 (credit quality and interest rates) and Level 3 inputs, the Company determined that the Level 3 inputs were the most significant to the overall fair value measurement, particularly the estimates of risk adjusted discount rates and ranges of expected periods of illiquidity. The valuation model also reflected the Company's intention to hold its auction rate securities until they can be liquidated in a market that facilitates orderly transactions. The following key assumptions were used in the valuation model:

· 5 years to liquidity;

· continued receipt of contractual interest which provides a premium spread for failed auctions; and

· discount rates ranging from 3.8% to 5.9%, which incorporate a spread for both credit and liquidity risk.

Based on these assumptions, the Company estimated that the auction rate securities would be valued at approximately 96% of their stated par value, representing a decline in value of approximately $1.0 million. The following table provides a summary of changes in fair value of the Company’s available-for-sale securities utilizing Level 3 inputs as of June 29, 2008:

(In thousands)	Auction Rate Securities

Balance at December 31, 2007	$	—
Transfers from Level 2 to Level 3		29,050
Purchases of auction rate securities		10,000
Unrealized loss included in other comprehensive income		(1,445	)
Balance at March 30, 2008		37,605
Sales of auction rate securities		(13,000	)
Unrealized gain included in other comprehensive income		481
Balance at June 29, 2008	$	25,086

In the second quarter of fiscal 2008, the Company sold auction rate securities with a carrying value of $12.5 million for their stated par value of $13.0 million. The

- 16 -

Table of Contents

following table summarizes the fair value and gross unrealized losses of the Company’s available-for-sale securities, aggregated by type of investment instrument and length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position:

	As of June 29, 2008
	Less than 12 Months					12 Months or Greater				Total
(In thousands)	Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses			Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses		Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses
Corporate securities	$	48,283	$	(1,054	)	$	—	$	—	$	48,283	$	(1,054	)

	As of December 30, 2007
	Less than 12 Months					12 Months or Greater				Total
(In thousands)	Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses			Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses		Fair Value		Gross Unrealized Losses
Corporate securities	$	25,536	$	(50	)	$	—	$	—	$	25,536	$	(50	)
Commercial paper		24,002		(2	)		—		—		24,002		(2	)
	$	49,538	$	(52	)	$	—	$	—	$	49,538	$	(52	)

Of the $1.1 million gross unrealized losses of the Company’s corporate securities, $1.0 million resulted from the decline in the estimated fair value of auction rate securities primarily due to their lack of liquidity. The decline in fair value for the remaining available-for-sale securities was primarily related to changes in interest rates. The Company has concluded that no other-than-temporary impairment losses occurred in the six months ended June 29, 2008 because the lack of liquidity in the market for auction rate securities and changes in interest rates are considered temporary in nature for which the Company has recorded an unrealized loss within comprehensive income (loss), a component of stockholders' equity. The Company has the ability and intent to hold these securities until a recovery of fair value. In addition, the Company evaluated the near-term prospects of the available-for-sale securities in relation to the severity and duration of the impairment. Based on that evaluation and the Company’s ability and intent to hold these investments for a reasonable period of time, the Company did not consider these investments to be other-than-temporarily impaired. If it is determined that the fair value of these securities is other-than-temporarily impaired, the Company would record a loss in its Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations in the future, which could be material.

The classification and contractual maturities of available-for-sale securities is as follows:

(In thousands)	June 29, 2008		December 30, 2007
Included in:
Cash equivalents	$	96,270	$	249,582
Short-term restricted cash(1)		38,322		—
Short-term investments		37,233		105,453
Long-term restricted cash(1)		45,516		67,887
Long-term investments		25,086		29,050
	$	242,427	$	451,972
Contractual maturities:
Due in less than one year	$	171,826	$	396,228
Due from one to two years (2)		2,382		4,994
Due from two to 30 years		68,219		50,750
	$	242,427	$	451,972

(1)	The Company provided security in the form of cash collateralized bank standby letters of credit for advance payments received from customers.

(2)	The Company classifies all available-for-sale securities that are intended to be available for use in current operations as short-term investments.

- 17 -

Table of Contents

Note 6. ADVANCES TO SUPPLIERS

The Company has entered into agreements with various polysilicon, ingot, wafer, solar cells and solar module vendors and manufacturers. These agreements specify future quantities and pricing of products to be supplied by the vendors for periods up to 12 years. Certain agreements also provide for penalties or forfeiture of advanced deposits in the event the Company terminates the arrangements (see Note 8). Under certain of these agreements, the Company is required to make prepayments to the vendors over the terms of the arrangements. As of June 29, 2008, advances to suppliers totaled $158.5 million, the current portion of which is $62.1 million.

The Company’s future prepayment obligations related to these agreements as of June 29, 2008 are as follows (in thousands):

2008 (remaining six months)	$	56,040
2009	78,006
2010	59,642
2011	19,792
	$	213,480

On June 30, 2008, the Company paid an advance of $5.6 million in accordance with the terms of an existing supply agreement.

Note 7. STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

During the preparation of its condensed consolidated financial statements for the six months ended June 29, 2008, the Company identified errors in its financial statements related to the year ended December 30, 2007, which resulted in $1.3 million overstatement of stock-based compensation expense. The Company corrected these errors in its condensed consolidated financial statements for the six months ended June 29, 2008, which resulted in a $1.3 million credit to income before income taxes and net income. The out-of-period effect is not expected to be material to estimated full-year 2008 results, and, accordingly has been recognized in accordance with APB 28, Interim Financial Reporting, paragraph 29 as the error is not material to any financial statements of prior periods.

The following table summarizes the consolidated stock-based compensation expense, by type of awards:

	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
(In thousands)	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007
Employee stock options	$	1,014		$	4,847		$	2,201		$	9,593
Restricted stock		10,229			3,266			18,130			4,520
Shares and options released from re-vesting restrictions		7,627			5,306			13,633			10,028
Change in stock-based compensation capitalized in inventory		(263	)		(189	)		(849	)		(308	)
Total stock-based compensation expense	$	18,607		$	13,230		$	33,115		$	23,833

In connection with the acquisition of SP Systems on January 10, 2007, 1.1 million shares of the Company’s class A common stock and 0.5 million stock options issued to employees of SP Systems, which were valued at $60.4 million, are subject to certain transfer restrictions and a repurchase option held by the Company. The Company is recognizing expense as the re-vesting restrictions of these shares lapse over the two-year period beginning on the date of acquisition. The value of shares released from such re-vesting restrictions are included in stock-based compensation expense in the table above.

The following table summarizes the consolidated stock-based compensation expense by line items in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations:

	Three Months Ended				Six Months Ended
(In thousands)	June 29, 2008		July 1, 2007		June 29, 2008		July 1, 2007
Cost of systems revenue	$	2,239	$	2,189	$	4,750	$	4,186
Cost of components revenue		2,890		1,009		4,093		1,262
Research and development		972		348		1,783		849
Sales, general and administrative		12,506		9,684		22,489		17,536
Total stock-based compensation expense before income taxes		18,607		13,230		33,115		23,833
Tax effect on stock-based compensation expense		—		—		—		—
Total stock-based compensation expense after income taxes	$	18,607	$	13,230	$	33,115	$	23,833

- 18 -

Table of Contents

Consolidated net cash proceeds from the issuance of shares in connection with exercises of stock options under the Company’s employee stock plans were $1.2 million and $2.3 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, and $3.0 million and $5.0 million for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively. The Company recognized an income tax benefit from stock option exercises of $10.2 million and $14.6 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively. No income tax benefit was realized from stock option exercises during the three and six months ended July 1, 2007. As required, the Company presents excess tax benefits from the exercise of stock options, if any, as financing cash flows rather than operating cash flows.

The following table summarizes the unrecognized stock-based compensation cost by type of awards:

(In thousands, except years)	As of June 29, 2008		Weighted-Average Amortization Period (in years)
Stock options	$	10,365		2.7
Restricted stock		103,227		3.0
Shares subject to re-vesting restrictions		15,423		0.5
Total unrecognized stock-based compensation cost	$	129,015

For stock options issued prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123(revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment” (“SFAS No. 123(R)”) and for performance based awards, the Company recognizes its stock-based compensation cost using the graded amortization method. For all other awards, stock-based compensation cost is recognized on a straight-line basis. Additionally, the Company issues new shares upon exercises of options by employees.

Valuation Assumptions

The Company estimates the fair value of its stock-based awards using the Black-Scholes valuation model (the "Black-Scholes model"). The determination of fair value of share-based payment awards on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes model is affected by the stock price as well as assumptions regarding a number of highly complex and subjective variables. These variables include, but are not limited to, expected stock price volatility over the term of the awards, and actual and projected employee stock option exercise behaviors.

Assumptions used in the determination of fair value of share-based payment awards using the Black-Scholes model were as follows:

	Three Months Ended			Six Months Ended
	July 1, 2007			July 1, 2007
Stock Option Plans:
Expected term		6.5 years			6.5 years
Risk-free interest rate			4.56%			4.62%
Volatility			90%			70.3%
Dividend yield			0%			0%

No stock options were granted in the six months ended June 29, 2008.

For the Three and Six Months Ended July 1, 2007:

The Company utilized the simplified method under the provisions of Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 107 (“SAB No. 107”) for estimating expected term, instead of its historical exercise data. The Company elected not to base the expected term on historical data because of the significant difference in its status before and after the effective date of SFAS No. 123(R). The Company was a privately-held company until its IPO, and the only available liquidation event for option holders was Cypress’s buyout of minority interests in November 2004. At all other times, optionees could not cash out on their vested options. From the time of the Company’s IPO in November 2005 through May 2006 when lock-up restrictions expired, a majority of the optionees were unable to exercise and sell vested options.

Because of the limited history of its stock trading publicly, the Company does not believe that its historical volatility would be representative of the expected volatility for its equity awards. Accordingly, the Company has chosen to use the historical volatility rates for a publicly-traded U.S.-based direct competitor as the basis for calculating the volatility for its granted options.

The interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant. Since the Company does not pay and does not expect to pay dividends, the expected dividend yield is zero.

- 19 -

Table of Contents

Equity Incentive Programs

Second Amended and Restated 2005 SunPower Corporation Stock Incentive Plan:

In May 2008, the Company’s stockholders approved an increase of 1.7 million shares and an automatic annual increase beginning in fiscal 2009 in the number of shares available for grant under the Company’s Second Amended and Restated 2005 SunPower Corporation Stock Incentive Plan under which the Company may issue incentive or non-statutory stock options, restricted stock awards, restricted stock units, or stock appreciation rights to directors, employees and consultants. The majority of shares issued are net of the minimum statutory withholding requirements that the Company pays on behalf of its employees. During the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, the Company withheld approximately 15,000 shares and 52,000 shares, respectively, to satisfy $0.9 million and $4.2 million, respectively, of employees’ tax obligations. The Company paid this amount in cash to the appropriate taxing authorities. Shares withheld are treated as common stock repurchases for accounting and disclosure purposes and reduce the number of shares outstanding upon vesting.

The following table summarizes the Company’s stock option activities:

	Shares (in thousands)			Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share
Outstanding as of December 30, 2007		3,701		$	5.44
Granted		—			—
Exercised		(703	)		3.32
Forfeited		(32	)		7.86
Outstanding as of June 29, 2008		2,966			5.92
Exercisable as of June 29, 2008		1,329			4.22

The following table summarizes the Company’s non-vested stock options and restricted stock activities thereafter:

	Stock Options					Restricted Stock Awards and Units
	Shares (in thousands)			Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share		Shares (in thousands)			Weighted- Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share
Outstanding as of December 30, 2007		2,454		$	6.29		1,174		$	68.74
Granted		—			—		579			79.48
Vested(1)		(786	)		4.13		(195	)		56.33
Forfeited		(31	)		7.45		(30	)		79.70
Outstanding as of June 29, 2008		1,637			7.30		1,528			78.58

(1) Restricted stock awards and units vested includes shares withheld on behalf of employees to satisfy the minimum statutory tax withholding requirements.

- 20 -

Table of Contents

Information regarding the Company’s outstanding stock options as of June 29, 2008 follows:

			Options Outstanding						Options Exercisable
Range of Exercise Price			Shares (in thousands)	Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Life (in years)	Weighted- Average Exercise Price per Share		Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in thousands)		Shares (in thousands)	Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Life (in years)	Weighted- Average Exercise Price per Share		Aggregate Intrinsic Value (in thousands)
$	0.04—	0.75	465	3.64	$	0.31	$	33,667	260	4.61	$	0.49	$	18,801
	0.88—	2.66	191	6.40		2.09	13,487		58	6.04		1.99	4,084
	3.30—	4.95	1,661	6.37		3.33	115,258		851	6.40		3.32	59,089
	7.00—	16.20	327	7.17		8.51	21,011		100	7.18		8.75	6,401
	17.00—	62.51	322	8.02		27.03	14,711		60	7.93		27.84	2,680
			2,966				$	198,134	1,329				$	91,055

The aggregate intrinsic value in the preceding table represents the total pre-tax intrinsic value, based on the Company’s closing stock price of $72.71 at June 29, 2008, which would have been received by the option holders had all option holders exercised their options as of that date. The total number of in-the-money options exercisable was 1.3 million shares as of June 29, 2008.

Stock Unit Plan:

As of June 29, 2008, the Company has granted approximately 236,000 stock units to 2,200 employees in the Philippines at an average unit price of $39.80 in relation to its 2005 Stock Unit Plan, under which participants are awarded the right to receive cash payments from the Company in an amount equal to the appreciation in the Company’s common stock between the award date and the date the employee redeems the award. A maximum of 300,000 stock units may be subject to stock unit awards granted under the 2005 Stock Unit Plan. Pursuant to a voluntary exchange offer that concluded in November 2007, approximately 53,000 stock units were exchanged for approximately 32,000 restricted stock units issued under the Company’s Second Amended and Restated 2005 SunPower Corporation Stock Incentive Plan. The Company conducted a second voluntary exchange offer that concluded in May 2008, in which approximately 109,000 stock units were exchanged for approximately 50,000 restricted stock units issued under the Company’s Second Amended and Restated 2005 SunPower Corporation Stock Incentive Plan. For the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, total compensation expense associated with the 2005 Stock Unit Plan was zero as compared to $0.4 million and $0.8 million in the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively.

Note 8. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Operating Lease Commitments

The Company leases its San Jose, California facility under a non-cancelable operating lease from Cypress, which expires in April 2011 (see Note 2). The lease requires the Company to pay property taxes, insurance and certain other costs. In addition, the Company leases its Richmond, California facility under a non-cancelable operating lease from an unaffiliated third party, which expires in September 2018. In December 2005, the Company entered into a 5-year operating lease from an unaffiliated third party for a solar panel assembly facility in the Philippines. The Company also has various lease arrangements, including its European headquarters located in Geneva, Switzerland under a lease that expires in September 2012, as well as sales and support offices in Southern California, New Jersey, Germany, Spain, Italy and South Korea, all of which are leased from unaffiliated third parties. Future minimum obligations under all non-cancelable operating leases as of June 29, 2008 are as follows (in thousands):

2008 (remaining six months)	$	2,547
2009		5,144
2010		4,839
2011		3,547
2012		3,140
Thereafter		24,651
	$	43,868

- 21 -

Table of Contents

Rent expense, including the rent paid to Cypress for the San Jose, California facility and the solar cell manufacturing facility in the Philippines (see Note 2), was $1.6 million and $3.5 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, and $0.8 million and $1.4 million for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively.

Purchase Commitments

The Company purchases raw materials for inventory, services and manufacturing equipment from a variety of vendors. During the normal course of business, in order to manage manufacturing lead times and help assure adequate supply, the Company enters into agreements with contract manufacturers and suppliers that either allow them to procure goods and services based upon specifications defined by the Company, or that establish parameters defining the Company’s requirements. In certain instances, these agreements allow the Company the option to cancel, reschedule or adjust the Company’s requirements based on its business needs prior to firm orders being placed. Consequently, only a portion of the Company’s recorded purchase commitments arising from these agreements are firm, non-cancelable and unconditional commitments.

The Company also has agreements with several suppliers, including joint ventures, for the procurement of polysilicon, ingots, wafers, solar cells and solar panels which specify future quantities and pricing of products to be supplied by the vendors for periods up to 12 years and provide for certain consequences, such as forfeiture of advanced deposits and liquidated damages relating to previous purchases, in the event that the Company terminates the arrangements (see Note 6).

At June 29, 2008, total obligations related to such supplier agreements was $3.5 billion and non-cancelable purchase orders related to equipment and building improvements totaled approximately $155.2 million. In addition, the Company has entered into agreements to purchase solar renewable energy certificates (“SRECs”) from solar installation owners in New Jersey. The Company primarily sells SRECs to entities that must either retire a certain volume of SRECs each year or face much higher alternative compliance payments. At June 29, 2008, total obligations related to future purchases of SRECs was $2.7 million.

Future minimum obligations under supplier agreements, non-cancelable purchase orders and SRECs as of June 29, 2008 are as follows (in thousands):

2008 (remaining six months)	$	302,461
2009		431,894
2010		534,751
2011		543,726
2012		344,639
Thereafter		1,532,215
	$	3,689,686

Joint Ventures

Woongjin Energy Co., Ltd (“Woongjin Energy”)

In the third quarter of fiscal 2006, the Company entered into an agreement with Woongjin Coway Co., Ltd. (“Woongjin”), a provider of environmental products located in Korea, to form Woongjin Energy, a joint venture to manufacture monocrystalline silicon ingots. Under the joint venture, the Company and Woongjin have funded the joint venture through capital investments. In addition, Woongjin Energy obtained a $33.0 million loan originally guaranteed by Woongjin. The Company supplies polysilicon and technology required for the silicon ingot manufacturing to the joint venture, and the Company procures the manufactured silicon ingots from the joint venture under a five-year agreement. Woongjin Energy began manufacturing in the third quarter of fiscal 2007. For the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, the Company paid $9.2 million and $15.0 million, respectively, to Woongjin Energy for manufacturing polysilicon into silicon ingots. As of June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, $4.0 million and $2.4 million, respectively, remained due and payable to Woongjin Energy.

In October 2007, the Company entered into an agreement with Woongjin and Woongjin Holdings Co., Ltd. (“Woongjin Holdings”), whereby Woongjin transferred its equity investment held in Woongjin Energy to Woongjin Holdings and Woongjin Holdings assumed all rights and obligations formerly owned by Woongjin under the joint venture agreement described above, including the $33.0 million loan guarantee. In January 2008, the Company and Woongjin Holdings provided Woongjin Energy with additional funding through capital investments in which the Company invested an additional $5.4 million in the joint venture.

As of June 29, 2008, the Company had an $11.7 million investment in the joint venture on its Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets which consisted of a 27.4% equity investment valued at $8.4 million and a $3.3 million convertible note that is convertible at the Company’s option into an additional 12.6% equity ownership in the joint venture. As of December 30, 2007, the Company had a $4.4 million investment in the joint venture on its Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets which consisted of a 19.9% equity investment valued at $1.1 million and a $3.3 million convertible note that is convertible at the Company’s option into an additional 20.1% equity ownership in the joint venture. The Company accounts for this investment in Woongjin Energy using the equity method of accounting, in which the entire investment is classified as “Other long-term assets” in the Condensed

- 22 -

Table of Contents

Consolidated Balance Sheets and the Company’s share of Woongjin Energy’s income totaling $1.3 million and $1.9 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, and none in each of the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, is included in “Other, net” in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. Neither party has contractual obligations to provide any additional funding to the joint venture.

In the first half of fiscal 2008, the Company conducted other related-party transactions with Woongjin Energy. For the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, the Company recognized zero and $0.6 million, respectively, in components revenue related to the sale of solar modules. As of June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, zero and $3.2 million, respectively, remained due and receivable from Woongjin Energy related to the sale of solar modules.

First Philec Solar Corporation (“First Philec Solar”)

In October 2007, the Company entered into an agreement with First Philippine Electric Corporation (“First Philec”) to form First Philec Solar, a joint venture to provide wafer slicing services of silicon ingots to the Company. The Company and First Philec have funded the joint venture through capital investments. The Company supplies silicon ingots and technology required for the slicing of silicon to the joint venture, and the Company procures the silicon wafers from the joint venture under a five-year wafering supply and sales agreement. This joint venture is located in the Philippines and became operational in the second quarter of fiscal 2008.

As of June 29, 2008, the Company had a $3.1 million investment in the joint venture on its Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets which consisted of a 20.6% equity investment. As of December 30, 2007, the Company had a $0.9 million investment in the joint venture on its Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets which consisted of a 16.9% equity investment. The Company accounts for this investment using the equity method of accounting, in which the entire investment is classified as “Other long-term assets” in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The Company periodically evaluates the qualitative and quantitative attributes of the joint ventures to determine whether the joint ventures need to be consolidated into the Company’s financial statements in accordance with FSP FASB Interpretation No. 46 “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities” (“FSP FIN 46(R)”).

NorSun AS (“NorSun”)

In January 2008, the Company entered into an Option Agreement with NorSun pursuant to which the Company will deliver cash advance payments to NorSun for the purchase of polysilicon under a long-term polysilicon supply agreement with NorSun, which NorSun will use to partly fund its portion of the equity investment in the joint venture with Swicorp Joussour Company and Chemical Development Company for the construction of a new polysilicon manufacturing facility in Saudi Arabia. The Company will provide a letter of credit or deposit funds in an escrow account to secure NorSun’s right to such advance payments. NorSun will initially hold a fifty percent equity interest in the joint venture. Under the terms of the Option Agreement, the Company may exercise a call option and apply the advance payments to purchase half, subject to certain adjustments, of NorSun’s fifty percent equity interest in the joint venture. The Company may exercise its option at any time until six months following the commercial operation of the Saudi Arabian polysilicon manufacturing facility. The Option Agreement also provides NorSun an option to put half, subject to certain adjustments, of its fifty percent equity interest in the joint venture to the Company. NorSun’s option is exercisable commencing July 1, 2009 through six months following commercial operation of the polysilicon manufacturing facility. The Company accounts for the put and call options as one instrument, which will be measured at fair value at each reporting period. The changes in the fair value of the combined option will be recorded as other income in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. The fair value of the combined option at June 29, 2008 was not material.

Product Warranties

The Company warrants or guarantees the performance of the solar panels that the Company manufactures at certain levels of power output for extended periods, usually 25 years. It also warrants that the solar cells will be free from defects for at least ten years. In addition, it passes through to customers long-term warranties from the original equipment manufacturers of certain system components. Warranties of 20 to 25 years from solar panel suppliers are standard, while inverters typically carry two-, five- or ten-year warranties. The Company maintains warranty reserves to cover potential liabilities that could result from these guarantees. The Company’s potential liability is generally in the form of product replacement or repair. Warranty reserves are based on the Company’s best estimate of such liabilities and are recognized as a cost of revenue. The Company continuously monitors product returns for warranty failures and maintains a reserve for the related warranty expenses based on historical experience of similar products as well as various other assumptions that are considered reasonable under the circumstances.

The Company generally warrants or guarantees systems installed for a period of five to ten years. The Company’s estimated warranty cost for each project is accrued and the related costs are charged against the warranty accrual when incurred. It is not possible to predict the maximum potential amount of future warranty-related expenses under these or similar contracts due to the conditional nature of the Company’s obligations and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular contract. Historically, warranty costs related to contracts have been within the range of management’s expectations.

- 23 -

Table of Contents

Provisions for warranty reserves charged to cost of revenue were $4.9 million and $9.8 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, and $1.4 million and $5.6 million during the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively. Activity within accrued warranty for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007 is summarized as follows:

	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
(In thousands)	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007
Balance at the beginning of the period	$	19,517		$	13,560		$	17,194		$	3,446
SP Systems accrued balance at date of acquisition		—			—			—			6,542
Accruals for warranties issued during the period		4,941			1,441			9,840			5,588
Warranty claims made during the period		(1,937	)		(687	)		(4,513	)		(1,262	)
Balance at the end of the period	$	22,521		$	14,314		$	22,521		$	14,314

The accrued warranty balance at June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007 includes $9.1 million and $6.7 million, respectively, of accrued costs primarily related to servicing the Company’s obligations under long-term maintenance contracts entered into under the systems segment and the balance is included in “Other long-term liabilities” in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

FIN 48 Uncertain Tax Positions

As of June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, total liabilities associated with FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, and Related Implementation Issues,” (“FIN 48”), uncertain tax positions were $5.7 million and $4.1 million, respectively, and are included in "Other long-term liabilities" on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, respectively, as they are not expected to be paid within the next twelve months. Due to the complexity and uncertainty associated with our tax positions, the Company cannot make a reasonably reliable estimate of the period in which cash settlement will be made for our liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions in "Other long-term liabilities."

Royalty Obligations

As of January 10, 2007, the Company assumed certain royalty obligations related to existing agreements entered into by PowerLight before the date of acquisition. In September 2002, PowerLight entered into a Technology Assignment and Services Agreement and other ancillary agreements, subsequently amended in December 2005, with Jefferson Shingleton and MaxTracker Services, LLC, a New York limited liability company controlled by Mr. Shingleton. Under the agreements, the PowerTracker®, now referred to as SunPower™ Tracker, was acquired through an assignment and acquisition of the patents associated with the product from Mr. Shingleton and the Company is obligated to pay Mr. Shingleton royalties on the tracker systems that it sells. In addition, several of the systems segment’s government awards require the Company to pay royalties based on specified formulas related to sales of products developed or enhanced from such government awards. The Company incurred royalty expense totaling $0.4 million and $1.0 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, and $0.6 million and $1.3 million during the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively, which were charged to cost of systems revenue. As of June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, the Company’s royalty liabilities totaled $0.3 million.

Indemnifications

The Company is a party to a variety of agreements pursuant to which it may be obligated to indemnify the other party with respect to certain matters. Typically, these obligations arise in connection with contracts and license agreements or the sale of assets, under which the Company customarily agrees to hold the other party harmless against losses arising from a breach of warranties, representations and covenants related to such matters as title to assets sold, negligent acts, damage to property, validity of certain intellectual property rights, non-infringement of third-party rights and certain tax related matters. In each of these circumstances, payment by the Company is typically subject to the other party making a claim to the Company pursuant to the procedures specified in the particular contract. These procedures usually allow the Company to challenge the other party’s claims or, in case of breach of intellectual property representations or covenants, to control the defense or settlement of any third-party claims brought against the other party. Further, the Company’s obligations under these agreements may be limited in terms of activity (typically to replace or correct the products or terminate the agreement with a refund to the other party), duration and/or amounts. In some instances, the Company may have recourse against third parties and/or insurance covering certain payments made by the Company.

- 24 -

Table of Contents

Legal Matters

From time to time the Company is a party to litigation matters and claims that are normal in the course of its operations. While the Company believes that the ultimate outcome of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company, the outcome of these matters is not determinable and negative outcomes may adversely affect the Company’s financial position, liquidity or results of operations.

Note 9. LINE OF CREDIT

In July 2007, the Company entered into a credit agreement with Wells Fargo and has entered into amendments to the credit agreement from time to time. As of June 29, 2008, the credit agreement provides for a $50.0 million unsecured revolving credit line, with a $50.0 million unsecured letter of credit subfeature, and a separate $150.0 million secured letter of credit facility. The Company may borrow up to $50.0 million and request that Wells Fargo issue up to $50.0 million in letters of credit under the unsecured letter of credit subfeature through April 4, 2009. Letters of credit issued under the subfeature reduce the Company’s borrowing capacity under the revolving credit line. The Company may request that Wells Fargo issue up to $150.0 million in letters of credit under the secured letter of credit facility through July 31, 2012. As detailed in the agreement, the Company will pay interest on outstanding borrowings and a fee for outstanding letters of credit. At any time, the Company can prepay outstanding loans. All borrowings must be repaid by April 4, 2009, and all letters of credit issued under the unsecured letter of credit subfeature expire on or before April 4, 2009 unless the Company provides by such date collateral in the form of cash or cash equivalents in the aggregate amount available to be drawn under letters of credit outstanding at such time. All letters of credit issued under the secured letter of credit facility expire no later than July 31, 2012. The Company concurrently entered into a security agreement with Wells Fargo, granting a security interest in a securities account and deposit account to secure its obligations in connection with any letters of credit that might be issued under the credit agreement. In connection with the credit agreement, SunPower North America, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, SP Systems, an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, and SunPower Systems SA, another indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, entered into an associated continuing guaranty with Wells Fargo. The terms of the credit agreement include certain conditions to borrowings, representations and covenants, and events of default customary for financing transactions of this type.

As of June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, 6 letters of credit totaling $41.5 million and 4 letters of credit totaling $32.0 million, respectively, were issued by Wells Fargo under the unsecured letter of credit subfeature. In addition, 22 letters of credit totaling $63.8 million and 8 letters of credit totaling $47.9 million, were issued by Wells Fargo under the secured letter of credit facility as of June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, respectively. On June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, cash available to be borrowed under the unsecured revolving credit line was $8.5 million and $18.0 million, respectively, and includes letter of credit capacities available to be issued by Wells Fargo under the unsecured letter of credit subfeature of $8.5 million and $8.0 million, respectively. Letters of credit available under the secured letter of credit facility at June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007 totaled $86.2 million and $2.1 million, respectively.

Note 10. SENIOR CONVERTIBLE DEBENTURES AND SHARE LENDING ARRANGEMENTS

February 2007 and July 2007 Debt Issuance

In February 2007, the Company issued $200.0 million in principal amount of its 1.25% senior convertible debentures. Interest on the February 2007 debentures is payable on February 15 and August 15 of each year, commencing August 15, 2007. The February 2007 debentures will mature on February 15, 2027. Holders may require the Company to repurchase all or a portion of their February 2007 debentures on each of February 15, 2012, February 15, 2017 and February 15, 2022, or if the Company experiences certain types of corporate transactions constituting a fundamental change. In addition, the Company may redeem some or all of the February 2007 debentures on or after February 15, 2012. The February 2007 debentures are initially convertible, subject to certain conditions, into cash up to the lesser of the principal amount or the conversion value. If the conversion value is greater than $1,000, then the excess conversion value will be convertible into common stock. The initial effective conversion price of the February 2007 debentures is approximately $56.75 per share, which represented a premium of 27.5% to the closing price of the Company's common stock on the date of issuance. The applicable conversion rate will be subject to customary adjustments in certain circumstances.

In July 2007, the Company issued $225.0 million in principal amount of its 0.75% senior convertible debentures. Interest on the July 2007 debentures is payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing February 1, 2008. The July 2007 debentures will mature on August 1, 2027. Holders may require the Company to repurchase all or a portion of their July 2007 debentures on each of August 1, 2010, August 1, 2015, August 1, 2020, and August 1, 2025, or if the Company is involved in certain types of corporate transactions constituting a fundamental change. In addition, the Company may redeem some or all of the July 2007 debentures on or after August 1, 2010. The July 2007 debentures are initially convertible, subject to certain conditions, into cash up to the lesser of the principal amount or the conversion value. If the conversion value is greater than $1,000, then the excess conversion value will be convertible into cash, common stock or a combination of cash and common stock, at the Company’s election. The initial effective conversion price of the February 2007 debentures is approximately $82.24 per share, which represented a premium of 27.5% to the closing price of the Company's common stock on the date of issuance. The applicable conversion rate will be subject to customary adjustments in certain circumstances.

- 25 -

Table of Contents

The February 2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures are senior, unsecured obligations of the Company, ranking equally with all existing and future senior unsecured indebtedness of the Company. The February 2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures are effectively subordinated to the Company’s secured indebtedness to the extent of the value of the related collateral and structurally subordinated to indebtedness and other liabilities of the Company’s subsidiaries. The February 2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures do not contain any covenants or sinking fund requirements.

As of December 30, 2007, the closing price of the Company’s class A common stock equaled or exceeded 125% of the $56.75 per share initial effective conversion price governing the February 2007 debentures and the closing price of the Company’s class A common stock equaled or exceeded 125% of the $82.24 per share initial effective conversion price governing the July 2007 debentures, for 20 out of 30 consecutive trading days ending on December 30, 2007, thus satisfying the market price conversion trigger pursuant to the terms of the debentures. As of the first trading day of the first quarter in fiscal 2008, holders of the February 2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures were able to exercise their right to convert the debentures any day in that fiscal quarter. Therefore, since holders of the February 2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures were able to exercise their right to convert the debentures in the first quarter of fiscal 2008, the Company classified the $425.0 million in aggregate convertible debt as short-term debt in its Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 30, 2007. In addition, the Company wrote off $8.2 million and $1.0 million of unamortized debt issuance costs in the fourth fiscal quarter of 2007 and first fiscal quarter of 2008, respectively. No holders of the February 2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures exercised their right to convert the debentures in the first quarter of fiscal 2008.

For the quarter ended June 29, 2008, the closing price of the Company’s class A common stock equaled or exceeded 125% of the $56.75 per share initial effective conversion price governing the February 2007 debentures for 20 out of 30 consecutive trading days ending on June 29, 2008, thus satisfying the market price conversion trigger pursuant to the terms of the February 2007 debentures. As of the first trading day of the third quarter in fiscal 2008, holders of the February 2007 debentures are able to exercise their right to convert the debentures any day in that fiscal quarter. Therefore, since holders of the February 2007 debentures are able to exercise their right to convert the debentures in the third quarter of fiscal 2008, the Company classified the $200.0 million in aggregate convertible debt as short-term debt in its Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 29, 2008.

Because the closing stock price did not equal or exceed 125% of the initial effective conversion price governing the July 2007 debentures for 20 out of 30 consecutive trading days during the quarter ended June 29, 2008, holders of the debentures did not have the right to convert the debentures, based on the market price conversion trigger, any day in the third fiscal quarter beginning on June 30, 2008. Accordingly, the Company classified the $225.0 million in aggregate convertible debt as long-term debt in its Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 29, 2008. This test is repeated each fiscal quarter, therefore, if the market price conversion trigger is satisfied in a subsequent quarter, the debentures may again be re-classified as short-term debt.

As of June 29, 2008, the estimated fair value of the February 2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures was approximately $283.0 million and $261.9 million, respectively, based on quoted market prices. As of December 30, 2007, the estimated fair value of the February 2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures was approximately $465.6 million and $366.3 million, respectively, based on quoted market prices. The fair market value of the senior convertible debentures is expected to increase as interest rates fall and/or as the market price of our class A common stock increases. Conversely, the fair market value of the senior convertible debentures is expected to decrease as interest rates rise and/or as the market price of our class A common stock falls.

February 2007 Amended and Restated Share Lending Arrangement and July 2007 Share Lending Arrangement

Concurrent with the offering of the February 2007 debentures, the Company lent 2.9 million shares of its class A common stock, all of which are being borrowed by an affiliate of Lehman Brothers Inc. (“LBIE”), one of the underwriters of the February 2007 debentures. The lent shares are to be used to facilitate the establishment by investors in the February 2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures of hedged positions in the Company’s class A common stock. Under the share lending agreement, LBIE has the ability to offer any of the 1.0 million shares that remain in LBIE’s possession to facilitate hedging arrangements for subsequent purchasers of both the February 2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures and, with the Company’s consent, purchasers of securities the Company may issue in the future. Concurrent with the offering of the July 2007 debentures, the Company also lent 1.8 million shares of its class A common stock, all of which are being borrowed by an affiliate of Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC (“CSI”), one of the underwriters of the July 2007 debentures. The Company did not receive any proceeds from these offerings of class A common stock, but received a nominal lending fee of $0.001 per share for each share of common stock that is loaned pursuant to the share lending agreements described below.

Share loans under the share lending agreement will terminate and the borrowed shares must be returned to the Company under the following circumstances: (i) LBIE and CSI may terminate all or any portion of a loan at any time; (ii) the Company may terminate any or all of the outstanding loans upon a default by LBIE and CSI under the share lending agreement, including a breach by LBIE and CSI of any of its representations and warranties, covenants or agreements under the share lending agreement, or the bankruptcy of LBIE and CSI; or (iii) if the Company enters into a merger or similar business combination transaction with an unaffiliated third party (as defined in the agreement). In addition, CSI has agreed to return to the Company any borrowed shares in its possession on the date anticipated to be five business days before the closing of certain merger or similar business combinations described in the share lending agreement. Except in limited circumstances, any such shares returned to the Company cannot be re-borrowed.

- 26 -

Table of Contents

Any shares loaned to LBIE and CSI will be issued and outstanding for corporate law purposes and, accordingly, the holders of the borrowed shares will have all of the rights of a holder of the Company’s outstanding shares, including the right to vote the shares on all matters submitted to a vote of the Company’s stockholders and the right to receive any dividends or other distributions that the Company may pay or make on its outstanding shares of class A common stock.

While the share lending agreement does not require cash payment upon return of the shares, physical settlement is required (i.e., the loaned shares must be returned at the end of the arrangement). In view of this and the contractual undertakings of LBIE and CSI in the share lending agreement, which have the effect of substantially eliminating the economic dilution that otherwise would result from the issuance of the borrowed shares, the borrowed shares are not considered outstanding for the purpose of computing and reporting earnings per share. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the shares will nonetheless be issued and outstanding and will be eligible for trading on The Nasdaq Global Market.

Note 11. COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)

Comprehensive income (loss) is defined as the change in equity of a business enterprise during a period from transactions and other events and circumstances from non-owner sources. Comprehensive income (loss) includes unrealized gains and losses on the Company’s available-for-sale investments, foreign currency derivatives designated as cash flow hedges and cumulative translation adjustments. The components of comprehensive income (loss), net of tax, were as follows:

	Three Months Ended					Six Months Ended
(In thousands)	June 29, 2008		July 1, 2007			June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007
Net income (loss)	$	28,608	$	(5,345	)	$	41,365		$	(4,105	)
Other comprehensive income (loss):
Cumulative translation adjustment		1,924		1,561			12,329			1,897
Unrealized gain (loss) on investments, net of tax		469		—			(1,002	)		4
Unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives, net of tax		5,051		349			3,595			800
Total comprehensive income (loss)	$	36,052	$	(3,435	)	$	56,287		$	(1,404	)

Note 12. FOREIGN CURRENCY DERIVATIVES

The Company has non-U.S. subsidiaries that operate and sell the Company’s products in various global markets, primarily in Europe. As a result, the Company is exposed to risks associated with changes in foreign currency exchange rates. It is the Company’s policy to use various hedge instruments to manage the exposures associated with purchases of foreign sourced equipment, net asset or liability positions of its subsidiaries and forecasted revenues and expenses. The Company does not enter into foreign currency derivative financial instruments for speculative or trading purposes.

The Company calculates the fair value of its forward contracts based on market volatilities, spot rates and interest differentials from published sources. The following table presents information about the Company’s hedge instruments measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of June 29, 2008 and indicates the fair value hierarchy of the valuation techniques utilized by the Company to determine such fair value in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 157:

(In thousands)	Significant Other Observable Inputs (Level 2)
Asset
Foreign currency forward exchange contracts	$	586
Liability
Foreign currency forward exchange contracts	$	11,261

In accordance with SFAS No. 133, “Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities” (“SFAS No. 133”), the Company accounts for its hedges of forecasted foreign currency revenue and cost of revenue as cash flow hedges and hedges of firmly committed purchase contracts denominated in foreign currency as fair value hedges.

Cash Flow Hedges: Hedges of forecasted foreign currency denominated revenues are designated as cash flow hedges and changes in fair value of the effective portion of hedge contracts are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income in stockholders’ equity in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Amounts deferred in accumulated other comprehensive income are reclassified to other, net in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations in the periods in which the hedged exposure impacts earnings. The effective portion of unrealized losses recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income, net

- 27 -

Table of Contents

of tax, were losses of $0.3 million and $1.3 million for the six months ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007, respectively. As of June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, the Company had outstanding cash flow hedge forward contracts with an aggregate notional value of $6.9 million and $140.1 million, respectively. The maturity dates of the outstanding contracts do not extend beyond July 2008. At June 29, 2008, the Company discontinued a portion of an existing cash flow hedge of foreign currency revenue when it determined that it was probable the original forecasted transaction would not occur by the end of the originally specified time period. The amount of derivative loss, $0.8 million, was reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to other, net in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations as a result of the discontinuance of the cash flow hedge.

Fair Value Hedges: On occasion, the Company commits to purchase equipment in foreign currency, predominantly Euros. When these purchases are hedged and qualify as firm commitments under SFAS No. 133, they are designated as fair value hedges and changes in the fair value of the firm commitment derivative contract are recognized in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. Under fair value hedge treatment, the changes in the firm commitment on a spot to spot basis are recorded in property, plant and equipment, net, in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets and in other, net, in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. As of June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, the Company had no outstanding fair value hedges.

Both cash flow hedges and fair value hedges are tested for effectiveness each period on a spot to spot basis using the dollar-offset method. Both the excluded time value and any ineffectiveness, which were not significant for all periods, are recorded in other, net.

In addition, the Company began hedging the net balance sheet effect of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities in 2005 primarily for intercompany transactions, receivables from customers, prepayments to suppliers and advances received from customers. The Company records its hedges of foreign currency denominated monetary assets and liabilities at fair value with the related gains or losses recorded in other, net. The gains or losses on these contracts are substantially offset by transaction gains or losses on the underlying balances being hedged. As of June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, the Company held forward contracts with an aggregate notional value of $160.9 million and $62.7 million, respectively, to hedge the risks associated with foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.

Note 13. INCOME TAXES

The Company’s effective rate of income tax provision was 34% and 33% for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, and the effective rate of income tax benefit was 58% and 71% for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively. The tax provision for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 was primarily attributable to the consumption of non-stock net operating loss carryforwards, net of foreign income taxes in profitable jurisdictions where the tax rates are less than the U.S. statutory rate. The tax benefit for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007 was primarily the result of recognition of deferred tax assets to the extent of deferred tax liabilities created by the acquisition of SP Systems, net of foreign income taxes in profitable jurisdictions where the tax rates are less than the U.S. statutory rate.

Unrecognized Tax Benefits

On January 1, 2007, the Company adopted the provisions for FIN 48, which is an interpretation of SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes” (“SFAS No. 109”). FIN 48 prescribes a recognition threshold that a tax position is required to meet before being recognized in the financial statements and provides guidance on de-recognition, measurement, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure and transition issues. FIN 48 contains a two-step approach to recognizing and measuring uncertain tax positions accounted for in accordance with SFAS No. 109. The first step is to evaluate the tax position for recognition by determining if the weight of available evidence indicates that it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained on audit, including resolution of related appeals or litigation processes, if any. The second step is to measure the tax benefit as the largest amount that is more than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement.

The total amount of unrecognized tax benefits recorded in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at the date of adoption was approximately $1.1 million, which, if recognized, would affect the Company’s effective tax rate. The additional amount of unrecognized tax benefits accrued during the year ended December 30, 2007 was $3.1 million. A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits for the six months ended June 29, 2008 is as follows:

(In thousands)	June 29, 2008
Balance at December 30, 2007	$	4,172
Additions based on tax positions related to the current period		1,569
Balance at June 29, 2008	$	5,741

- 28 -

Table of Contents

Management believes that events that could occur in the next 12 months and cause a change in unrecognized tax benefits include, but are not limited to, the following:

•

commencement, continuation or completion of examinations of the Company’s tax returns by the U.S. or foreign taxing authorities; and

•

expiration of statutes of limitation on the Company’s tax returns.

The calculation of unrecognized tax benefits involves dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex global tax regulations. Uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the impact of legislative, regulatory and judicial developments, transfer pricing and the application of withholding taxes. Management regularly assesses the Company’s tax positions in light of legislative, bilateral tax treaty, regulatory and judicial developments in the countries in which the Company does business. Management determined that an estimate of the range of reasonably possible change in the amounts of unrecognized tax benefits within the next 12 months cannot be made.

Classification of Interest and Penalties

The Company accrues interest and penalties on tax contingencies as required by FIN 48 and SFAS No. 109. This interest and penalty accrual is classified as income tax provision (benefit) in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and was not material.

Tax Years and Examination

The Company files tax returns in each jurisdiction in which they are registered to do business. In the U.S. and many of the state jurisdictions, and in many foreign countries in which the Company files tax returns, a statute of limitations period exists. After a statute of limitations period expires, the respective tax authorities may no longer assess additional income tax for the expired period. Similarly, the Company is no longer eligible to file claims for refund for any tax that it may have overpaid. The following table summarizes the Company’s major tax jurisdictions and the tax years that remain subject to examination by these jurisdictions as of December 31, 2007:

Tax Jurisdictions	Tax Years
United States	2004 and onward
California	2003 and onward
Switzerland	2004 and onward
Philippines	2004 and onward

Additionally, while years prior to 2003 for the U.S. corporate tax return are not open for assessment, the IRS can adjust net operating loss and research and development carryovers that were generated in prior years and carried forward to 2003.

The IRS is currently conducting an audit of SP Systems’ federal income tax returns for fiscal 2005 and 2004. As of June 29, 2008, no material adjustments have been proposed by the IRS. If material tax adjustments are proposed by the IRS and acceded to by the Company, an adjustment to goodwill and income taxes payable may result.

Note 14. NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE

Basic net income (loss) per share is computed using the weighted-average of the combined class A and class B common shares outstanding. Diluted net income (loss) per share is computed using the weighted-average common shares outstanding plus any potentially dilutive securities outstanding during the period using the treasury stock method, except when their effect is anti-dilutive. Potentially dilutive securities include stock options, restricted stock and senior convertible debentures.

Holders of the Company’s senior convertible debentures may, under certain circumstances at their option, convert the senior convertible debentures into cash and, if applicable, shares of the Company’s class A common stock at the applicable conversion rate, at any time on or prior to maturity (see Note 10). Pursuant to EITF 90-19, “Convertible Bonds with Issuer Option to Settle for Cash upon Conversion” (“EITF 90-19”), the senior convertible debentures are included in the calculation of diluted net income (loss) per share if their inclusion is dilutive under the treasury stock method.

The following is a summary of all outstanding anti-dilutive potential common shares:

	As of
(In thousands)	June 29, 2008		July 1, 2007
Stock options		17		142
Restricted stock		301		300

- 29 -

Table of Contents

The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted weighted-average common shares:

	Three Months Ended				Six Months Ended
(In thousands)	June 29, 2008		July 1, 2007		June 29, 2008		July 1, 2007
Basic weighted-average common shares		79,412		75,123		79,188		74,428
Effect of dilutive securities:
Stock options		2,649		—		2,843		—
Restricted stock		361		—		329		—
Shares subject to re-vesting restrictions		410		—		406		—
February 2007 debentures		1,145		—		1,052		—
July 2007 debentures		59		—		30		—
Weighted-average common shares for diluted computation		84,036		75,123		83,848		74,428

Basic weighted-average common shares excludes 2.9 million shares of class A common stock lent to LBIE in connection with the February 2007 debentures and 1.8 million shares of class A common stock lent to CSI in connection with the July 2007 debentures (see Note 10).

Dilutive potential common shares includes approximately 1.1 million shares in each of the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 for the impact of the February 2007 debentures as the Company has experienced a substantial increase in its common stock price. Similarly, dilutive potential common shares includes approximately 59,000 shares and 30,000 shares for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, for the impact of the July 2007 debentures. Under the treasury stock method, such senior convertible debentures will generally have a dilutive impact on net income per share if the Company’s average stock price for the period exceeds the conversion price for the senior convertible debentures.

Note 15. SEGMENT AND GEOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

The Company operates in two business segments: systems and components. The systems segment generally represents sales directly to systems owners of engineering, procurement, construction and other services relating to solar electric power systems that integrate the Company’s solar panels and balance of systems components, as well as materials sourced from other manufacturers. The components segment primarily represents sales of the Company’s solar cells, solar panels and inverters to solar systems installers and other resellers. The Chief Operating Decision Maker (“CODM”), as defined by SFAS No. 131, “Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information” (“SFAS No. 131”), is the Company’s Chief Executive Officer. The CODM assesses the performance of both operating segments using information about their revenue and gross margin.

The following tables present revenue by geography and segment, gross margin by segment, revenue by significant customer and property, plant and equipment information based on geographic region. Revenue is based on the destination of the shipments. Property, plant and equipment are based on the physical location of the assets:

	Three Months Ended					Six Months Ended
(As a percentage of total revenue)		June 29, 2008		July 1, 2007		June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007
Revenue by geography:
United States		15	%	37	%		18	%		38	%
Europe:
Spain		66	%	38	%		60	%		31	%
Germany		8	%	8	%		8	%		11	%
Other		8	%	15	%		7	%		15	%
Rest of world		3	%	2	%		7	%		5	%
		100	%	100	%		100	%		100	%
Revenue by segment:
Systems		71	%	60	%		68	%		58	%
Components		29	%	40	%		32	%		42	%
		100	%	100	%		100	%		100	%
Gross margin by segment:
Systems		23	%	12	%		22	%		16	%
Components		28	%	25	%		24	%		25	%

- 30 -

Table of Contents

Significant Customers:

Three Months Ended

Six Months Ended

(As a percentage of total revenue)

June 29,

2008

July 1,

2007

June 29,

2008

July 1,

2007

Business Segment

Naturener Group

Systems

43%

30%

Sedwick Corporate, S.L.

Systems

19%

24%

SolarPack

Systems

34%

20%

MMA Renewable Ventures

Systems

10%

Elecnor

Systems

10%

Solon AG

Components

11%

* denotes less than 10% during the period

(In thousands)	June 29, 2008		December 30, 2007
Property, plant and equipment by geography:
United States	$	26,556	$	18,026
Philippines		425,393		359,968
Italy		20		—
	$	451,969	$	377,994

Note 16. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS

Florida Power & Light Project

In July 2008, SP Systems entered into an engineering, procurement and construction agreement (the “EPC Agreement”) with Florida Power and Light Company. The EPC Agreement sets forth the material terms and conditions pursuant to which SP Systems would design and construct a solar photovoltaic plant representing approximately 25 megawatts net power in DeSoto County, Florida. The EPC Agreement is a material revenue opportunity for SunPower on a consolidated basis.

Cypress Announced Decision to Pursue Tax-Free Distribution of the Company’s Class B Common Stock

Emmanuel Hernandez has communicated his intent to retire as Chief Financial Officer of the Company

In July 2008, the Company announced that Emmanuel Hernandez had communicated his intent to retire as Chief Financial Officer of the Company. Mr. Hernandez has agreed to remain fully engaged in his current role until a new Chief Financial Officer is appointed, into 2009 if needed. Mr. Hernandez was identified in the Company’s 2008 proxy statement as one of the Company’s named executive officers.

Acquisition of Solar Sales Pty Ltd.

In July 2008, the Company completed the acquisition of Solar Sales Pty Ltd. (“Solar Sales”), a solar systems integration and product distribution company based in Australia. Solar Sales distributes components such as solar panels and inverters via a national network of 30 dealers throughout Australia, and designs, builds and commissions large-scale commercial systems. As a result of the acquisition, Solar Sales became a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. The acquisition is not expected to be material to the Company’s consolidated financial condition and results of operations.

- 31 -

Table of Contents

Item 2.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Forward-looking statements are statements that do not represent historical facts. We use words such as ““may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “would,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential” and “continue” and similar expressions to identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q include, but are not limited to, our plans and expectations regarding our ability to obtain polysilicon ingots or wafers, future financial results, operating results, business strategies, projected costs, products, competitive positions and management’s plans and objectives for future operations, and industry trends. These forward-looking statements are based on information available to us as of the date of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and current expectations, forecasts and assumptions and involve a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated by these forward-looking statements. Such risks and uncertainties include a variety of factors, some of which are beyond our control. Please see “PART II. OTHER INFORMATION, Item 1A: Risk Factors” and our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission for additional information on risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as representing our views as of any subsequent date, and we are under no obligation, and expressly disclaim any responsibility, to update or alter our forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

The following information should be read in conjunction with the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and the accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Our fiscal quarters end on the Sunday closest to the end of the applicable calendar quarter. All references to fiscal periods apply to our fiscal quarters or fiscal year which end on the Sunday closest to the calendar quarter end.

Overview

We are a vertically integrated solar products and services company that designs, manufactures, markets and installs high-performance solar electric power technologies. Our solar cells and solar panels are manufactured using proprietary processes and technologies based on more than 15 years of research and development. We believe our solar cells have the highest conversion efficiency, a measurement of the amount of sunlight converted by the solar cell into electricity, of all the solar cells available for the mass market. Our solar power products are sold through our components business segment, or our components segment. In January 2007, we acquired PowerLight Corporation, or PowerLight, now known as SunPower Corporation, Systems, or SP Systems, which developed, engineered, manufactured and delivered large-scale solar power systems. These activities are now performed by our systems business segment, or our systems segment. Our solar power systems, which generate electricity, integrate solar cells and panels manufactured by us as well as other suppliers.

Components segment: Our components segment sells solar power products, including solar cells, solar panels and inverters, which convert sunlight to electricity compatible with the utility network. We believe our solar cells provide the following benefits compared with conventional solar cells:

·	superior performance, including the ability to generate up to 50% more power per unit area;

·	superior aesthetics, with our uniformly black surface design that eliminates highly visible reflective grid lines and metal interconnect ribbons; and

·	efficient use of silicon, a key raw material used in the manufacture of solar cells.

We sell our solar components products to installers and resellers for use in residential and commercial applications where the high efficiency and superior aesthetics of our solar power products provide compelling customer benefits. We also sell products for use in multi-megawatt solar power plant applications. In many situations, we offer a materially lower area-related cost structure for our customers because our solar panels require a substantially smaller roof or land area than conventional solar technology and half or less of the roof or land area of commercial solar thin film technologies. We sell our products primarily in Asia, Europe and North America, principally in regions where government incentives have accelerated solar power adoption.

We manufacture our solar cells at our two solar cell manufacturing facilities in the Philippines. We currently operate eight cell manufacturing lines in our solar cell manufacturing facilities, with a total rated manufacturing capacity of 254 megawatts per year. By the end of 2008, we plan to operate 12 solar cell manufacturing lines with an aggregate manufacturing capacity of 414 megawatts per year. We plan to begin production as soon as the first quarter of 2010 on the first line of our third solar cell manufacturing facility in Malaysia, which is expected to have an aggregate manufacturing capacity of more than 1 gigawatt per year when completed.

- 32 -

Table of Contents

We manufacture our solar panels at our solar panel assembly facility located in the Philippines. Our solar panels are also manufactured for us by a third-party subcontractor in China. We currently operate four solar panel manufacturing lines with a rated manufacturing capacity of 120 megawatts of solar panels per year. In addition, our SunPower branded inverters are manufactured for us by multiple suppliers.

Systems segment: Our systems segment generally sells solar power systems directly to system owners and developers. When we sell a solar power system it may include services such as development, engineering, procurement of permits and equipment, construction management, access to financing, monitoring and maintenance. We believe our solar systems provide the following benefits compared with competitors’ systems:

·	superior performance delivered by maximizing energy delivery and financial return through systems technology design;

·	superior systems design to meet customer needs and reduce cost, including non-penetrating, fast roof installation technologies; and

·	superior channel breadth and delivery capability including turnkey systems.

Our systems segment is comprised primarily of the business we acquired from SP Systems in January 2007. Our customers include commercial and governmental entities, investors, utilities and production home builders. We work with development, construction, system integration and financing companies to deliver our solar power systems to customers. Our solar power systems are designed to generate electricity over a system life typically exceeding 25 years and are principally designed to be used in large-scale applications with system ratings of typically more than 500 kilowatts. Worldwide, more than 450 SunPower solar power systems have been constructed or are under contract, rated in aggregate at more than 350 megawatts of peak capacity.

We have solar power system projects completed or in the process of being completed in various countries including Germany, Italy, Portugal, South Korea, Spain and the United States. We sell distributed rooftop and ground-mounted solar power systems as well as central-station power plants. Distributed solar power systems are typically rated at more than 500 kilowatts of capacity to provide a supplemental, distributed source of electricity for a customer’s facility. Many customers choose to purchase solar electricity from our systems under a power purchase agreement with a financing company which buys the system from us. In Europe, South Korea and the United States, our products and systems are typically purchased by a financing company and operated as a central station solar power plant. These power plants are rated with capacities of approximately one to 20 megawatts, and generate electricity for sale under tariff to private and public utilities.

We manufacture certain of our solar power system products at our manufacturing facilities in Richmond, California and at other facilities located close to our customers. Some of our solar power system products are also manufactured for us by third-party suppliers.

Relationship with Cypress Semiconductor Corporation, or Cypress

Cypress made a significant investment in SunPower in 2002. On November 9, 2004, Cypress completed a reverse triangular merger with us in which all of the outstanding minority equity interest of SunPower was retired, effectively giving Cypress 100% ownership of all of our then outstanding shares of capital stock but leaving our unexercised warrants and options outstanding. After completion of our initial public offering in November 2005, Cypress held, in the aggregate, 52.0 million shares of class B common stock. On May 4, 2007, Cypress completed the sale of 7.5 million shares of class B common stock in an offering pursuant to Rule 144 of the Securities Act. Such shares converted to 7.5 million shares of class A common stock upon the sale.

In April 2008, Cypress received a favorable ruling from the IRS with respect to certain tax issues arising under Section 355 of the Internal Revenue Code in connection with the potential tax-free spin-off to its stockholders of its ownership of SunPower class B common stock.

- 33 -

Table of Contents

As of June 29, 2008, Cypress owned approximately 44.5 million shares of class B common stock, which represented approximately 55% of the total outstanding shares of our common stock, or approximately 52% of such shares on a fully diluted basis after taking into account outstanding stock options (or 49% of such shares on a fully diluted basis after taking into account outstanding stock options and shares loaned to underwriters of our convertible indebtedness), and 90% of the voting power of our total outstanding common stock. Cypress, its successors in interest or its subsidiaries may convert their shares of class B common stock into shares of class A common stock on a one-for-one basis at any time.

Critical Accounting Policies

The Company’s critical accounting policies are disclosed in the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2007 and have not changed materially as of June 29, 2008, with the exception of the following:

Fair Value of Financial Instruments: Effective December 31, 2007, we adopted the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards, or SFAS, No. 157, “Fair Value Measurements,” or SFAS No. 157, which defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Our financial assets and financial liabilities that require recognition under SFAS No. 157 include available-for-sale investments and foreign currency derivatives. In determining fair value, we use various valuation techniques, including market and income approaches to value available-for-sale investments and foreign currency derivatives. SFAS No. 157 establishes a hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring that the observable inputs be used when available. Observable inputs are inputs that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability developed based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Company. Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect the Company’s assumptions about the assumptions market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability developed based on the best information available in the circumstances. As such, fair value is a market-based measure considered from the perspective of a market participant who holds the asset or owes the liability rather than an entity-specific measure. The hierarchy is broken down into three levels based on the reliability of inputs as follows:

	·		Level 1—Valuations based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the Company has the ability to access. Since valuations are based on quoted prices that are readily and regularly available in an active market, valuation of these products does not entail a significant degree of judgment. Financial assets utilizing Level 1 inputs include money market funds.
	·		Level 2—Valuations based on quoted prices in markets that are not active or for which all significant inputs are observable, directly or indirectly. Financial assets utilizing Level 2 inputs include some corporate securities, commercial paper and foreign currency forward exchange contracts.
	·		Level 3—Valuations based on inputs that are unobservable and significant to the overall fair value measurement. Financial assets utilizing Level 3 inputs include corporate securities comprised of auction rate securities. We use an income approach valuation model to estimate the price that would be received to sell our securities in an orderly transaction between market participants ("exit price"). The exit price is derived as the weighted average present value of expected cash flows over various periods of illiquidity, using a risk adjusted discount rate that is based on the credit risk and liquidity risk of the securities.

The availability of observable inputs can vary from instrument to instrument and to the extent that valuation is based on inputs that are less observable or unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment. Accordingly, the degree of judgment exercised by our management in determining fair value is greatest for instruments categorized in Level 3. In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, for disclosure purposes the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement in its entirety falls is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. In regards to our auction rate securities, the income approach valuation model was based on both Level 2 (credit quality and interest rates) and Level 3 inputs. We determined that the Level 3 inputs were the most significant to the overall fair value measurement, particularly the estimates of risk adjusted discount rates and ranges of expected periods of illiquidity.

Results of Operations for the Three Months and Six Months Ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007

Correction of Errors Identified in our Financial Statements for the Year Ended December 30, 2007

During the preparation of our condensed consolidated financial statements for the six months ended June 29, 2008, we identified errors in our financial statements related to the year ended December 30, 2007, which resulted in $1.3 million overstatement of stock-based compensation expense. We corrected these errors in our condensed consolidated financial statements for the six months ended June 29, 2008, which resulted in a $1.3 million credit to income before income taxes and net income. The out-of-period effect is not expected to be material to estimated full-year 2008 results, and, accordingly has been recognized in accordance with APB 28, Interim Financial Reporting, paragraph 29 as the error is not material to any financial statements of prior periods.

- 34 -

Table of Contents

Revenue

Revenue and the year-over-year change were as follows:

	Three Months Ended					Six Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands)	June 29, 2008		July 1, 2007		Year-over- Year Change	June 29, 2008		July 1, 2007		Year-over- Year Change
Systems revenue	$	270,593	$	104,037	160%	$	449,444	$	182,532	146%
Components revenue		112,158		69,729	61%		207,008		133,581	55%
Total revenue	$	382,751	$	173,766	120%	$	656,452	$	316,113	108%

We generate revenue from two business segments, as follows:

Systems Segment Revenue: Our systems revenue represents sales of engineering, procurement and construction, or EPC, projects and other services relating to solar electric power systems that integrate our solar panels and balance of systems components, as well as materials sourced from other manufacturers. In the United States where customers often utilize rebate and tax credit programs in connection with projects rated one megawatt or less of capacity, we typically sell solar systems rated up to one megawatt of capacity to provide a supplemental, distributed source of electricity for a customer’s facility. In Europe, South Korea and the United States, our systems are often purchased by third-party investors as central station solar power plants, typically rated from one to 20 megawatts, which generate electricity for sale under tariff to regional and public utilities. We also sell our solar systems under materials-only sales contracts in Asia, Europe and the United States. The balance of our systems revenues are generally derived from sales to new home builders for residential applications and maintenance revenue from servicing installed solar systems.

Systems segment revenue for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 were $270.6 million and $449.4 million, respectively, and accounted for 71% and 68%, respectively, of our total revenue. Systems segment revenue for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007 were $104.0 million and $182.5 million, respectively, and accounted for 60% and 58%, respectively, of our total revenue. Our systems segment revenue is largely dependent on the timing of revenue recognition on large construction projects and, accordingly, will fluctuate from period to period. For the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, our systems segment benefited from strong power plant scale demand in Europe, primarily in Spain, and reflected the significant completion of Spain based projects in the second quarter of fiscal 2008 before the expiration of the current feed-in tariff which is expected in September 2008.

Components Segment Revenue: Our components revenue represents sales of our solar cells, solar panels and inverters to solar systems installers and other resellers. Factors affecting our components revenue include unit volumes of solar cells and modules produced and shipped, average selling prices, product mix, product demand and the percentage of our construction projects sourced with SunPower solar panels sold through the systems segment which reduces the inventory available to sell through our components segment. We have experienced quarter-over-quarter unit volume increases in shipments of our solar power products since we began commercial production in the fourth quarter of 2004. From fiscal 2005 through the second quarter of fiscal 2008, we have experienced increases in average selling prices for our solar power products primarily due to the strength of end-market demand and favorable currency exchange rates. Accordingly, our components segment's average selling prices were slightly higher during the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 compared to the same period of 2007. Over the next several years, we expect average selling prices for our solar power products to decline as the market becomes more competitive, as certain products mature and as manufacturers are able to lower their manufacturing costs and pass on some of the savings to their customers.

Components segment revenue for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 were $112.2 million and $207.0 million, respectively, and accounted for 29% and 32%, respectively, of our total revenue. Components segment revenue for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007 were $69.7 million and $133.6 million, respectively, and accounted for 40% and 42%, respectively, of our total revenue. For the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, our components segment benefited from strong demand in the residential and small commercial roof-top markets through our dealer network in both Europe and the United States.

Total Revenue: During the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, our total revenue of approximately $382.8 million and $656.5 million, respectively, represented an increase of 120% and 108%, respectively, from total revenue reported in the comparable period of 2007. The increase in total revenue during the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 compared to the same period of 2007 is attributable to the systems business segment’s installation of more than 40 megawatts for several large-scale solar power plants in Spain in the first half of 2008, the components business segment’s continued increase in the demand for our solar cells and solar panels and the continued increases in unit production and unit shipments of both solar cells and solar panels as we have expanded our solar manufacturing capacity. During the first quarter of 2007, we had four solar cell manufacturing lines in operation with annual production capacity of 108 megawatts. Since then, we began commercial production on our 5th, 6th and 7th solar cell lines during the third and fourth quarters of fiscal 2007 and 8th solar cell line during the second quarter of fiscal 2008. Lines five and six have a rated solar cell production capacity of 33 megawatts per year and lines seven and eight have a rated solar cell production capacity of 40 megawatts per year.

- 35 -

Table of Contents

Concentrations: We have six customers that each accounted for more than 10 percent of our total revenue in one or more of the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007, as follows:

Significant Customers:

Three Months Ended

Six Months Ended

(As a percentage of total revenue)

June 29,

2008

July 1,

2007

June 29,

2008

July 1,

2007

Business Segment

Naturener Group

Systems

43%

30%

Sedwick Corporate, S.L.

Systems

19%

24%

SolarPack

Systems

34%

20%

MMA Renewable Ventures

Systems

10%

Elecnor

Systems

10%

Solon AG

Components

11%

* denotes less than 10% during the period

Effective February 6, 2008, the New York Stock Exchange, or NYSE, delisted the common stock of MuniMae, or MMA, the parent company of one of our systems segment customers, MMA Renewable Ventures, because MMA did not expect to file its audited 2006 financial statements by March 3, 2008, the deadline imposed by the NYSE. In connection with completing the restatement and filing their Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, MMA has disclosed that it incurred substantial accounting costs. In addition, MMA has disclosed that recent credit market disruption has negatively affected many aspects of MMA’s business. MMA Renewable Ventures accounted for less than 10% of our total revenue in the three and six months ended June 29, 2008. MMA Renewable Ventures accounted for 10% of our total revenue in the three months ended July 1, 2007 and less than 10% of our total revenue in the six months ended July 1, 2007. In the event MMA Renewable Ventures ceases to be a significant customer of ours or fails to pay us in a timely manner, it could have a significant adverse effect on our future results of operations.

International sales comprise the majority of revenue for both our systems and components segments. International sales represented approximately 85% and 82% of our total revenue for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, as compared to 63% and 62% of our total revenue for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively, and we expect international sales to remain a significant portion of overall sales for the foreseeable future. International sales as a percentage of our total revenue increased approximately 22% and 20% for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, compared to the same period of 2007, as our systems business segment significantly completed the construction of several large-scale solar power plants in Spain in the first half of fiscal 2008.

Cost of Revenue

Cost of revenue as a percentage of revenue and the year-over-year change were as follows:

	Three Months Ended							Six Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands)	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change
Cost of systems revenue	$	209,137		$	91,518		129%	$	352,350		$	153,984		129%
Cost of components revenue		80,584			52,456		54%		157,752			99,912		58%
Total cost of revenue	$	289,721		$	143,974		101%	$	510,102		$	253,896		101%
Total cost of revenue as a percentage of revenue		76	%		83	%			78	%		80	%
Total gross margin percentage		24	%		17	%			22	%		20	%

- 36 -

Table of Contents

Details to cost of revenue by segment and the year-over-year change were as follows:

	Systems Segment							Components Segment
	Three Months Ended							Three Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands)	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change
Amortization of purchased intangible assets	$	1,841		$	5,564		(67%)	$	1,066		$	1,123		(5%)
Stock-based compensation		2,239			2,189		2%		2,890			1,009		186%
Factory pre-operating costs		373			345		(8%)		466			1,233		(62%)
All other cost of revenue		204,684			83,420		145%		76,162			49,091		55%
Total cost of revenue	$	209,137		$	91,518		129%	$	80,584		$	52,456		54%
Total cost of revenue as a percentage of revenue		77	%		88	%			72	%		75	%
Total gross margin percentage		23	%		12	%			28	%		25	%

	Systems Segment							Components Segment
	Six Months Ended							Six Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands)	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change
Amortization of purchased intangible assets	$	4,009		$	10,510		(62%)	$	2,110		$	2,246		(6%)
Stock-based compensation		4,750			4,186		13%		4,093			1,262		224%
Impairment of long-lived assets		1,343			—		n.a.		4,146			—		n.a.
Factory pre-operating costs		640			530		21%		852			2,264		(62%)
All other cost of revenue		341,608			138,758		146%		146,551			94,140		56%
Total cost of revenue	$	352,350		$	153,984		129%	$	157,752		$	99,912		58%
Total cost of revenue as a percentage of revenue		78	%		84	%			76	%		75	%
Total gross margin percentage		22	%		16	%			24	%		25	%

During the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, our total cost of revenue was approximately $289.7 million and $510.1 million, respectively, which represented increases of 101% compared to total cost of revenue reported in the comparable period of 2007. The increase in total cost of revenue resulted from increased costs in all cost of revenue spending categories and corresponds with an increase of 120% and 108% in total revenue during the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, from total revenue reported in the comparable period of 2007.

As a percentage of total revenue, our total cost of revenue decreased to 76% and 78% in the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, compared to 83% and 80% for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively. This decrease in total cost of revenue as a percentage of total revenue is reflective of decreased costs of polysilicon beginning in the second quarter of fiscal 2008 and improved manufacturing economies of scale associated with markedly higher production volume. This decrease in total cost of revenue as a percentage of total revenue was partially offset by (i) one-time asset impairment charges of $5.5 million in the six months ended June 29, 2008 relating to the wind-down of our imaging detector product line and for the write-down of certain solar product manufacturing equipment which became obsolete due to new processes; (ii) a more favorable mix of business in our systems segment that benefited gross margin by approximately four percentage points during the six months ended July 1, 2007; and (iii) the $2.7 million settlement received from one of our suppliers in the components segment during the six months ended July 1, 2007 in connection with defective materials sold to us during 2006 that was reflected as a reduction to total cost of revenue.

Systems Segment: Our cost of systems revenue consists primarily of solar panels, mounting systems, inverters and subcontractor costs. Other factors contributing to cost of revenue include amortization of intangible assets, depreciation, provisions for warranty, salaries, personnel-related costs, freight, royalties and manufacturing supplies associated with contracting revenues. The cost of solar panels is the single largest cost element in our cost of systems revenue. We expect our cost of systems revenue to fluctuate as a percentage of revenue depending on many factors such as the cost of solar panels, the cost of inverters, subcontractor costs, freight costs and other project related costs. In particular, our systems segment generally experiences higher gross margin on construction projects that utilize SunPower solar panels compared to construction projects that utilize solar panels purchased from third parties. For the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, gross margin for the systems segment was $61.5 million

- 37 -

Table of Contents

and $97.1 million, respectively, or 23% and 22% of systems segment revenue, respectively. Gross margin for the systems segment was $12.5 million and $28.5 million for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively, or 12% and 16% of systems segment revenue, respectively. Gross margin in our systems segment increased eleven percentile points in the three months ended June 29, 2008 as compared to the three months ended July, 2007 and six percentile points in the six months ended June 29, 2008 as compared to the six months ended July, 2007 due to higher percentage of SunPower solar panels used in its projects as well as cost savings we realized from more efficient field implementation of our systems trackers.

Our systems segment sourced approximately 61% and 52% of its solar panel installations with SunPower products in the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, compared to 21% and 28% for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively. We expect that our systems segment will continue to source more than 50% of its projects with SunPower solar panels during the second half of fiscal 2008. Our cost of systems revenue will also fluctuate from period to period due to the mix of projects completed and recognized as revenue, in particular between large projects and large commercial installation projects that may or may not include SunPower solar panels. Our gross profit each quarter is affected by a number of factors, including the types of projects in process and their various stages of completion, the gross margins estimated for those projects in progress and the actual system group department overhead costs. Historically, revenues from materials-only sales contracts generate a higher gross margin percentage for our systems segment than revenue generated from turnkey contracts which generate higher revenue per watt from providing both materials as well as engineering, procurement and construction management services.

In connection with the acquisition of SP Systems in January 2007, there were $79.5 million of identifiable purchased intangible assets, of which $56.8 million was being amortized to cost of systems revenue on a straight-line basis over periods ranging from one to five years. As a result of our new branding strategy, during the quarter ended July 1, 2007, the PowerLight tradename asset with a net book value of $14.1 million was written off as an impairment of acquisition-related intangible assets. As such, the remaining balance of $41.2 million relating to purchased patents, technology and backlog will be amortized to cost of systems revenue on a straight-line basis over periods ranging from one to four years.

Almost all of our systems segment construction contracts are fixed price contracts. However, we have in several instances obtained change orders that reimburse us for additional unexpected costs due to various reasons. The systems segment also has long-term agreements for solar cell and panel purchases with several major solar panel manufacturers, some with liquidated damages and/or take-or pay-type arrangements. An increase in project costs, including solar panel, inverter and subcontractor costs, over the term of a construction contract could have a negative impact on our systems segment’s overall gross profit. Our systems segment gross profit may also be impacted by certain adjustments for inventory reserves. We are seeking to improve gross profit over time as we implement cost reduction efforts, improve manufacturing processes, and seek better and less expensive materials globally, as we grow the business to attain economies of scale on fixed costs. Any increase in gross profit based on these items, however, could be partially or completely offset by increased raw material costs or our inability to increase revenues in line with expectations, and other competitive pressures on gross margin.

Components Segment: Our cost of components revenue consists primarily of silicon ingots and wafers used in the production of solar cells, along with other materials such as chemicals and gases that are needed to transform silicon wafers into solar cells. Other factors contributing to cost of revenue include amortization of intangible assets, depreciation, provisions for estimated warranty, salaries, personnel-related costs, facilities expenses and manufacturing supplies associated with solar cell fabrication as well as factory pre-operating costs associated with our new solar cell manufacturing facility and solar panel assembly facility. Such pre-operating costs included compensation and training costs for factory workers as well as utilities and consumable materials associated with preproduction activities. For our solar panels, our cost of revenue includes the cost of solar cells and raw materials such as glass, frame, backing and other materials, as well as the assembly costs we pay to our third-party subcontractor in China. Additionally, within our own solar panel assembly facility in the Philippines we incur personnel-related costs, depreciation, utilities and other occupancy costs.

On November 9, 2004, Cypress completed a reverse triangular merger with us in which each share of our then outstanding capital stock not owned by Cypress was valued at $3.30 per share and exchanged for an equivalent number of shares of Cypress common stock. This merger effectively gave Cypress 100% ownership of all of our then outstanding shares of capital stock but left our unexercised warrants and options outstanding. As a result of that transaction, we were required to record Cypress’ cost of acquiring us in our financial statements, including its equity investment and pro rata share of our losses by recording intangible assets, including purchased technology, patents, trademarks and a distribution agreement. The fair value for these intangibles is being amortized as an element of cost of components revenue over two to six years on a straight-line basis.

Our components segment gross profit each quarter is affected by a number of factors, including average selling prices for our products, our product mix, our actual manufacturing costs, the utilization rate of our solar cell manufacturing facility and changes in amortization of intangible assets. To date, demand for our solar power products has been robust and our production output has increased allowing us to spread a significant amount of our fixed costs over relatively high production volume, thereby reducing our per unit fixed cost. Our solar panel assembly facility began production in the first quarter of 2007 and our second solar cell manufacturing facility began production in the third quarter of 2007. We currently operate eight solar cell manufacturing lines with total production capacity of 254 megawatts per year with the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th lines located in our second building in

- 38 -

Table of Contents

the Philippines that is expected to eventually house 12 solar cell production lines with a total factory output capacity of 466 megawatts per year. As we build additional manufacturing lines or facilities, our fixed costs will increase, and the overall utilization rate of our solar cell manufacturing and solar panel assembly facilities could decline, which could negatively impact our gross profit. This decline may continue until a line’s manufacturing output reaches its rated practical capacity.

Gross margin for the components segment was $31.6 million and $49.3 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, or 28% and 24% of components segment revenue, respectively. Gross margin for the components segment was $17.3 million and $33.7 million for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively, or 25% of components segment revenue for each of the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively. Gross margin in our components segment increased three percentile points in the three months ended June 29, 2008 as compared to the three months ended July, 2007 due to lower polysilicon costs, sequential growth in volume and modestly higher average selling prices. Gross margin in our components segment decreased one percentile point in the six months ended June 29, 2008 as compared to the six months ended July, 2007 due to increasing costs of raw materials through the first quarter ended March 30, 2008 and one-time asset impairment charges of $5.5 million incurred in the first quarter ended March 30, 2008.

From time to time, we enter into agreements whereby the selling price for certain of our solar power products is fixed over a defined period. An increase in our manufacturing costs over such a defined period could have a negative impact on our overall gross profit. Our gross profit may also be impacted by fluctuations in manufacturing yield rates and certain adjustments for inventory reserves. We expect our gross profit to increase over time as we improve our manufacturing processes and as we grow our business and leverage certain of our fixed costs. An expected increase in gross profit based on manufacturing efficiencies, however, could be partially or completely offset by increased raw material costs or decreased revenue.

Research and Development

Research and development expense as a percentage of revenue and the year-over-year change were as follows:

	Three Months Ended							Six Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands)	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change
Research & development	$	4,813		$	2,821		71%	$	9,455		$	5,757		64%
Research & development as a percentage of revenue		1	%		2	%			1	%		2	%

During the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, our research and development expense was $4.8 million and $9.5 million, respectively, which represents an increase of 71% and 64%, respectively, from research and development expense reported in the comparable period of fiscal 2007. Research and development expense consists primarily of salaries and related personnel costs, depreciation and the cost of solar cell and solar panel materials and services used for the development of products, including experiment and testing. The increase in research and development spending during the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 compared to the same period of fiscal 2007 resulted primarily from: (i) increases in salaries, benefits and stock-based compensation costs as a result of increased headcount; and (ii) additional material and equipment costs incurred for the development of our next generation of more efficient solar cells and thinner polysilicon wafers for solar cell manufacturing, as well as development of new processes to automate solar panel assembly operations. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in consulting service fees as well as by cost reimbursements received from various government entities in the United States.

Research and development expense is reported net of any funding received under contracts with governmental agencies because such contracts are considered collaborative arrangements. In the third quarter of 2007, we signed a Solar America Initiative agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy in which we were awarded $8.5 million in the first budgetary period. Total funding for the three-year effort is estimated to be $24.7 million. Our cost share requirement under this program, including lower-tier subcontract awards, is anticipated to be $27.9 million. Subject to final negotiations and settlement with the government agencies involved, our existing governmental contracts are expected to offset approximately $7.0 million to $10.0 million of our research and development expense in each of 2007, 2008 and 2009. This contract replaced our three-year cost-sharing research and development project with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, entered into in March 2005, to fund up to $3.0 million or half of the project costs to design the our next generation solar panels. Funding from government contracts offset our research and development expense by approximately $2.0 million and $3.7 million in the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, as compared to approximately $0.8 million and $1.0 million in the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively.

As a percentage of total revenue, research and development expense decreased to 1% in each of the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, compared to 2% in each of the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively, because these expenses increased at a substantially lower rate than the rate of growth in our revenue. We expect our research and

- 39 -

Table of Contents

development expense to continually increase in absolute dollars as we continue to develop new processes to further improve the conversion efficiency of our solar cells and reduce their manufacturing cost, and as we develop new products to diversify our product offerings.

Sales, General and Administrative

Sales, general and administrative expense as a percentage of revenue and the year-over-year change were as follows:

	Three Months Ended							Six Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands)	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change
Sales, general & administrative	$	43,208		$	26,109		65%	$	77,066		$	48,480		59%
Sales, general & administrative as a percentage of revenue		11	%		15	%			12	%		15	%

During the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, our sales, general and administrative expense was $43.2 million and $77.1 million, respectively, which represents an increase of 65% and 59%, respectively, from sales, general and administrative expense reported in the comparable period of fiscal 2007. Sales, general and administrative expense for our business consists primarily of salaries and related personnel costs, professional fees, insurance and other selling and marketing expenses. The increase in our sales, general and administrative expense during the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 compared to the same period of fiscal 2007 resulted primarily from higher spending in all areas of sales, marketing, finance and information technology to support the growth of our business, particularly increased headcount and payroll related expenses, including stock-based compensation, as well as increased expenses associated with deployment of a new enterprise resource planning system, legal and accounting services. During the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, stock-based compensation included in our sales, general and administrative expense was approximately $12.5 million and $22.5 million, respectively, as compared to approximately $9.7 million and $17.5 million in the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively. Also contributing to our increased sales, general and administrative expense in the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 compared to the same period of 2007 are substantial increases in headcount and sales and marketing spending to expand our value added reseller channel primarily in Europe and global branding initiatives.

As a percentage of total revenue, sales, general and administrative expense decreased to 11% and 12% in the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, compared to 15% in each of the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively, because these expenses increased at a substantially lower rate than the rate of growth in our revenue. We expect our sales, general and administrative expense to increase in absolute dollars as we expand our sales and marketing efforts, hire additional personnel and improve our information technology infrastructure to support our growth. However, assuming our revenue increases as we expect, over time we anticipate that our sales, general and administrative expense will continue to decrease as a percentage of revenue.

Purchased In-Process Research and Development, or IPR&D

Purchased in-process research and development expense as a percentage of revenue and the year-over-year change were as follows:

Three Months Ended

Six Months Ended

(Dollars in thousands)

June 29,

2008

July 1,

2007

Year-over-

Year Change

June 29,

2008

July 1,

2007

Year-over-

Year Change

Purchased in-process research and development

—

n.a.

—

9,575

n.a.

Purchased in-process research and development as a percentage of revenue

n.a.

For the six months ended July 1, 2007, we recorded an IPR&D charge of $9.6 million in connection with the acquisition of SP Systems in January 2007, as technological feasibility associated with the IPR&D projects had not been established and no alternative future use existed. No in-process research and development expense was recorded for the six months ended June 29, 2008.

- 40 -

Table of Contents

These IPR&D projects consisted of two components: design automation tool and tracking systems and other. In assessing the projects, we considered key characteristics of the technology as well as its future prospects, the rate technology changes in the industry, product life cycles and the various projects’ stage of development.

The value of IPR&D was determined using the income approach method, which calculated the sum of the discounted future cash flows attributable to the projects once commercially viable using a 40% discount rate, which were derived from a weighted-average cost of capital analysis and adjusted to reflect the stage of completion and the level of risks associated with the projects. The percentage of completion for each project was determined by identifying the research and development expenses invested in the project as a ratio of the total estimated development costs required to bring the project to technical and commercial feasibility. The following table summarizes certain information related to each project:

	Stage of Completion	Total Cost Incurred to Date		Total Remaining Costs
Design Automation Tool
As of January 10, 2007 (acquisition date)	8%	$	0.2 million	$	2.4 million
As of June 29, 2008	100%	$	1.4 million	$	—

Tracking System and Other
As of January 10, 2007 (acquisition date)	25%	$	0.2 million	$	0.6 million
As of June 29, 2008	100%	$	0.8 million	$	—

Status of IPR&D Projects:

At the close of the first quarter in fiscal 2008, the first release of the design automation tool software was deployed to production. As of June 29, 2008, we have incurred total project costs of $1.4 million, of which $1.2 million was incurred after the acquisition, and total costs to complete the project was $1.2 million less than the original estimate of $2.6 million. We completed the design automation tool project approximately two years and three quarters earlier than the original estimated completion date of December 2010.

We completed the tracking systems project in June 2007 and incurred total project costs of $0.8 million, of which $0.6 million was incurred after the acquisition. Both the actual completion date and the total projects costs were in line with the original estimates.

Impairment of Acquisition-Related Intangible Assets

Impairment of acquisition-related intangible assets as a percentage of revenue and the year-over-year change were as follows:

	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands)	June 29, 2008		July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change	June 29, 2008		July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change
Impairment of acquisition-related intangible assets	$	—	$	14,068		n.a.	$	—	$	14,068		n.a.
Impairment of acquisition-related intangible assets as a percentage of revenue		n.a.		8	%			n.a.		4	%

During the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, we recognized a charge for the impairment of acquisition-related intangible assets of $14.1 million. In June 2007, we changed our branding strategy and consolidated all of our product and service offerings under the SunPower tradename. To reinforce the new branding strategy, we formally changed the name of PowerLight to SunPower Corporation, Systems. The fair value of PowerLight tradenames was valued at $15.5 million at the date of acquisition and ascribed a useful life of 5 years. The determination of the fair value and useful life of the tradename was based on our previous strategy of continuing to market our systems products and services under the PowerLight brand. As a result of the change in our branding strategy, during the quarter ended July 1, 2007, the net book value of the PowerLight tradename of $14.1 million was written off as an impairment of acquisition-related intangible assets. As a percentage of revenues, impairment of acquisition related intangible assets was 8% and 4% in the three and six months ended July 1, 2007.

- 41 -

Table of Contents

Other Income (Expense), Net

Interest income, interest expense, and other, net as a percentage of revenue and the year-over-year change were as follows:

	Three Months Ended							Six Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands)	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change
Interest income	$	2,289		$	2,196		4%	$	6,436		$	4,180		54%
Interest income as a percentage of revenue		1	%		1	%			1	%		1	%
Interest expense	$	1,411		$	1,085		30%	$	2,875		$	2,204		30%
Interest expense as a percentage of revenue		—	%		1	%			—	%		1	%
Other, net	$	(2,240	)	$	(517	)	(333%)	$	(1,953	)	$	(243	)	(704%)
Other, net as a percentage of revenue		1	%		—	%			—	%		—	%

Interest income during the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007, primarily represents interest income earned on our cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash and investments during these periods. The increase in interest income of 4% and 54% during the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, compared to the same period of 2007, is primarily the effect of interest earned on $581.5 million in net proceeds from our class A common stock and convertible debenture offerings in February and July 2007.

Interest expense during the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007 relates to interest due on customer advance payments and convertible debt. The increase in our interest expense of 30% in each of the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, compared to the same period of 2007, is primarily due to interest related to the aggregate of $425.0 million in convertible debentures issued in February and July 2007. Our convertible debt was used in part to fund our capital expenditures for our manufacturing capacity expansion.

In May 2008, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, issued FASB Staff Position, or FSP, APB 14-1, which clarifies the accounting for convertible debt instruments that may be settled in cash upon conversion. FSP APB 14-1 significantly impacts the accounting for our convertible debt by requiring us to separately account for the liability and equity components of the convertible debt in a manner that reflects interest expense equal to our non-convertible debt borrowing rate. FSP APB 14-1 may result in significantly higher non-cash interest expense on our convertible debt. FSP APB 14-1 is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2008, and retrospective application will be required for all periods presented.

The following table summarizes the components of other, net:

	Three Months Ended						Six Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands)	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007
Write-off of unamortized debt issuance costs	$	—		$	—		$	(972	)	$	—
Amortization of debt issuance costs		—			(302	)		—			(479	)
Share in net income of joint venture		1,330			—			1,874			—
Gain (loss) on derivatives and foreign exchange		(3,584	)		(282	)		(2,828	)		169
Other income (expense), net		14			67			(27	)		67
Total other, net	$	(2,240	)	$	(517	)	$	(1,953	)	$	(243	)

Other, net during the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 consists primarily of losses from derivatives and foreign exchange and the write-off of unamortized debt issuance costs as a result of the market price conversion trigger on our senior convertible debentures being met in December 2007, offset slightly by our share in the net income of Woongjin Energy Co., Ltd, a joint venture. Other, net during the three and six months ended July 1, 2007 consists primarily of amortization of debt issuance costs and gains (losses) from derivatives and foreign exchange.

Historically through December 30, 2007, intercompany accounts payable denominated in U.S. dollars and held by our Euro functional currency entities were not expected to be settled in the foreseeable future. In accordance with SFAS No. 52, “Foreign Currency Translation,” or SFAS No. 52, gains and losses on the foreign currency translation of the intercompany accounts payable were recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) in stockholders’ equity in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Beginning in the first quarter of fiscal 2008, management has determined that intercompany accounts payable denominated in U.S. dollars and held by our Euro functional currency entities will be settled within the foreseeable future as a result of our new intercompany agreements. Therefore, gains and losses on the foreign currency translation of the intercompany accounts payable will be recognized as a component of other, net in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.

- 42 -

Table of Contents

Income Taxes

Income tax provision (benefit) as a percentage of revenue and the year-over-year change were as follows:

	Three Months Ended							Six Months Ended
(Dollars in thousands)	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007			Year-over- Year Change
Income tax provision (benefit)	$	15,039		$	(7,267	)	(307%)	$	20,072		$	(9,825	)	(304%)
Income tax provision (benefit) as a percentage of revenue		39	%		(4)	%			31	%		(3)	%

In the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, our income tax expense was provided primarily for foreign income taxes in certain jurisdictions where our operations are profitable. The Company’s interim period tax provision is estimated based on the expected annual worldwide tax rate and takes into account the tax effect of discrete items. In the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, our income tax benefit was primarily the result of recognition of deferred tax assets to the extent of deferred tax liabilities created by the acquisition of SP Systems in January 2007, net of foreign income taxes in profitable jurisdictions where the tax rates are less than the U.S. statutory rate.

For financial reporting purposes, income tax expense and deferred income tax balances were calculated as if we were a separate entity and had prepared our own separate tax return. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for temporary differences between financial statement and income tax bases of assets and liabilities. We recorded a valuation allowance to the extent our net deferred tax asset on all items except comprehensive income exceeded our net deferred tax liability. We expect it is more likely than not that we will not realize our net deferred tax asset as of June 29, 2008. In assessing the need for a valuation allowance, we consider historical levels of income, expectations and risks associated with the estimates of future taxable income and ongoing prudent and feasible tax planning strategies. In the event we determine that we would be able to realize additional deferred tax assets in the future in excess of the net recorded amount, or if we subsequently determine that realization of an amount previously recorded is unlikely, we would record an adjustment to the deferred tax asset valuation allowance, which would change income in the period of adjustment.

As described in Note 2 of Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, we will pay federal and state income taxes in accordance with the tax sharing agreement with Cypress. Effective with the closing of our public offering of common stock in June 2006, we are no longer eligible to file federal and most state consolidated tax returns with Cypress. Accordingly, we will be required to pay Cypress for any federal income tax credit or net operating loss carryforwards utilized in our federal tax returns in subsequent periods. Any payments we make to Cypress when we utilize certain tax attributes will be accounted for as an equity transaction with Cypress. As of December 30, 2007, we had federal net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $147.6 million. These federal net operating loss carryforwards will expire at various dates from 2011 to 2027. We had California state net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $73.5 million as of December 30, 2007, which expire at various dates from 2011 to 2017. We also had research and development credit carryforwards of approximately $3.9 million for both federal and state tax purposes.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

In February 2007, we raised $194.0 million net proceeds from the issuance of 1.25% senior convertible debentures. In July 2007, we raised $220.1 million net proceeds from the issuance of 0.75% senior convertible debentures and $167.4 million net proceeds from the completion of a follow-on offering of 2.7 million shares of our class A common stock.

Cash Flows

A summary of the sources and uses of cash and cash equivalents is as follows:

	Six Months Ended
(In thousands)	June 29, 2008			July 1, 2007
Net cash used in operating activities	$	(39,372	)	$	(903	)
Net cash used in investing activities		(76,187	)		(210,578	)
Net cash provided by financing activities		12,780			195,376
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents		7,107			861
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents	$	(95,672	)	$	(15,244	)

- 43 -

Table of Contents

Operating Activities

Net cash used in operating activities of $39.4 million for the six months ended June 29, 2008 was primarily the result of decreases in billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings of $38.9 million related to contractual timing of system project billings, increases in costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings of $10.1 million also related to contractual timing of system project billings, as well as increases in accounts receivable of $103.1 million, inventories of $53.0 million, prepaid expenses and other assets of $25.0 million and deferred project costs of $14.8 million. These items were partially offset by net income of $41.4 million, plus non-cash charges totaling $69.9 million for depreciation, impairment of long-lived assets, amortization, write-off of debt issuance costs and stock-based compensation expense, less non-cash income of $1.9 million for our equity share in net income of joint venture. In addition, these items were offset by increases in accounts payable and other accrued liabilities of $81.8 million and other changes in operating assets and liabilities totaling $14.3 million. The significant increases in substantially all of our current assets and current liabilities resulted from our substantial revenue increase in the six months ended June 29, 2008 compared to previous quarters which impacted net income and working capital.

Net cash used in operating activities of $0.9 million for the six months ended July 1, 2007 was primarily the result of increases in inventories of $49.4 million, advances to suppliers of $15.6 million, costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings of $14.3 million and other changes in operating assets and liabilities totaling $9.4 million. These items were partially offset by net loss of $4.1 million, plus non-cash charges totaling $74.0 million for depreciation, amortization, impairment of acquisition-related intangibles, purchased in-process research and development expense and stock-based compensation expense. In addition, these items were offset by increases in accounts payable and other accrued liabilities of $17.9 million. The significant increases in substantially all of our current assets and current liabilities resulted from the acquisition of SP Systems in January 2007, as well as our substantial revenue increase in the six months ended July 1, 2007 compared to previous quarters which impacted net income and working capital.

Investing Activities

Net cash used in investing activities was $76.2 million for the six months ended June 29, 2008, which primarily relates to capital expenditures of $95.1 million incurred during the six months ended June 29, 2008. Capital expenditures were mainly associated with manufacturing capacity expansion in the Philippines. Although the timing of our capital expansion plans may shift depending on many factors, we currently expect fiscal 2008 capital expenditures to be approximately $300.0 million, primarily related to continued expansion of our manufacturing capacity. Also during the six months ended June 29, 2008, (i) restricted cash increased by $16.0 million for additional collateral securing outstanding indebtedness to Wells Fargo related to the letter of credit line, to secure advance payments received from customers; (ii) we paid cash of $13.5 million for the acquisition of SunPower Italia, net of cash acquired; and (iii) we invested an additional $22.6 million in joint ventures and other private companies. Cash used in investing activities was partially offset by $71.0 million in proceeds received from the sales of available-for-sale securities, net of available-for-sale securities purchased during the period.

Net cash used in investing activities was $210.6 million for the six months ended July 1, 2007, which primarily relates to (i) capital expenditures of $107.6 million; (ii) cash paid of $98.6 million for the acquisition of SP Systems, net of cash acquired; and (iii) purchases of available-for-sale securities totaling $9.1 million, net of proceeds received from sales of available-for-sale securities during the period. Cash used in investing activities was partially offset by $4.7 million decrease in restricted cash.

Financing Activities

Net cash provided by financing activities for the six months ended June 29, 2008 reflects proceeds received of $2.3 million from stock option exercises and excess tax benefits totaling $14.6 million from the exercise of stock options, partially offset by cash paid of $4.2 million for treasury stock purchases that were used to pay withholding taxes on vested restricted stock. Net cash provided by financing activities for the six months ended July 1, 2007 primarily reflects $194.0 million in net proceeds from the issuance of $200.0 million in principal amount of 1.25% senior convertible debentures in February 2007. Also during the six months ended July 1, 2007, we paid $3.6 million on an outstanding line of credit and received $5.0 million in proceeds from stock option exercises.

Revision of Statement of Cash Flow Presentation Related to Purchases of Property, Plant and Equipment

We have corrected our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the six months ended July 1, 2007 to exclude the impact of purchases of property, plant and equipment that remain unpaid and as such are included in “accounts payable and other accrued liabilities” at the end of the reporting period. Historically, changes in “accounts payable and other accrued liabilities” related to such purchases were included in cash flows from operations, while the investing activity caption "Purchase of property, plant and equipment" included these purchases. As these unpaid purchases do not reflect cash transactions, we have revised our cash flow presentations to exclude them. The correction resulted in a decrease to the previously reported amount of cash used for operating activities of $3.7 million in the six months ended July 1, 2007, resulting from a reduction in the amount of cash used from the change in accounts payable and other accrued liabilities in that period. The corresponding correction in the investing section was to increase cash used for investing activities by $3.7 million in the six months ended July 1, 2007, as a

- 44 -

Table of Contents

result of the increase in the amount of cash used for purchases of property, plant and equipment in that period. These corrections had no impact on our previously reported results of operations, working capital or stockholders’ equity. We concluded that these corrections were not material to any of our previously issued condensed consolidated financial statements, based on SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 99-Materiality.

Debt and Credit Sources

In July 2007, we entered into a credit agreement with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, or Wells Fargo, that was amended from time to time, providing for a $50.0 million unsecured revolving credit line, with a $50.0 million unsecured letter of credit subfeature, and a separate $150.0 million secured letter of credit facility as of June 29, 2008. We may borrow up to $50.0 million and request that Wells Fargo issue up to $50.0 million in letters of credit under the unsecured letter of credit subfeature through April 4, 2009. Letters of credit issued under the subfeature reduce our borrowing capacity under the revolving credit line. Additionally, we may request that Wells Fargo issue up to $150.0 million in letters of credit under the secured letter of credit facility through July 31, 2012. As detailed in the agreement, we will pay interest on outstanding borrowings and a fee for outstanding letters of credit. At any time, we can prepay outstanding loans. All borrowings must be repaid by April 4, 2009, and all letters of credit issued under the unsecured letter of credit subfeature expire on or before April 4, 2009 unless we provide by such date collateral in the form of cash or cash equivalents in the aggregate amount available to be drawn under letters of credit outstanding at such time. All letters of credit issued under the secured letter of credit facility expire no later than July 31, 2012. We concurrently entered into a security agreement with Wells Fargo, granting a security interest in a securities account and deposit account to secure our obligations in connection with any letters of credit that might be issued under the credit agreement. In connection with the credit agreement, SunPower North America, Inc., our wholly-owned subsidiary, SP Systems, an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of ours, and SunPower Systems SA, another indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, entered into an associated continuing guaranty with Wells Fargo. The terms of the credit agreement include certain conditions to borrowings, representations and covenants, and events of default customary for financing transactions of this type.

In February 2007, we issued $200.0 million in principal amount of our 1.25% senior convertible debentures, or the February 2007 debentures, and received net proceeds of $194.0 million. Interest on the February 2007 debentures is payable on February 15 and August 15 of each year, commencing August 15, 2007. The February 2007 debentures will mature on February 15, 2027. Holders may require us to repurchase all or a portion of their February 2007 debentures on each of February 15, 2012, February 15, 2017 and February 15, 2022, or if we experience certain types of corporate transactions constituting a fundamental change. Any repurchase of the February 2007 debentures pursuant to these provisions will be for cash at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the February 2007 debentures to be repurchased plus accrued and unpaid interest. In addition, we may redeem some or all of the February 2007 debentures on or after February 15, 2012 for cash at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the February 2007 debentures to be redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest. See Note 10 of Notes to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

In July 2007, we issued $225.0 million in principal amount of our 0.75% senior convertible debentures, or the July 2007 debentures, and received net proceeds of $220.1 million. Interest on the July 2007 debentures is payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year, commencing February 1, 2008. The July 2007 debentures will mature on August 1, 2027. Holders may require us to repurchase all or a portion of their July 2007 debentures on each of August 1, 2010, August 1, 2015, August 1, 2020 and August 1, 2025, or if we experience certain types of corporate transactions constituting a fundamental change. Any repurchase of the July 2007 debentures pursuant to these provisions will be for cash at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the July 2007 debentures to be repurchased plus accrued and unpaid interest. In addition, we may redeem some or all of the July 2007 debentures on or after August 1, 2010 for cash at a redemption price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the July 2007 debentures to be redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest. See Note 10 of Notes to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

Liquidity

For the year ended December 30, 2007, the closing price of our class A common stock equaled or exceeded 125% of the $56.75 per share initial effective conversion price governing the February 2007 debentures and the closing price of our class A common stock equaled or exceeded 125% of the $82.24 per share initial effective conversion price governing the July 2007 debentures, for 20 out of 30 consecutive trading days ending on December 30, 2007, thus satisfying the market price conversion trigger pursuant to the terms of the debentures. As of the first trading day of the first quarter in fiscal 2008, holders of the February

- 45 -

Table of Contents

2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures were able to exercise their right to convert the debentures any day in that fiscal quarter. Therefore, since holders of the February 2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures were able to exercise their right to convert the debentures in the first quarter of fiscal 2008, we classified the $425.0 million in aggregate convertible debt as short-term debt in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 30, 2007. In addition, we wrote off $8.2 million and $1.0 million of unamortized debt issuance costs in the fourth fiscal quarter of 2007 and first fiscal quarter of 2008, respectively. No holders of the February 2007 debentures and July 2007 debentures exercised their right to convert the debentures in the first quarter of fiscal 2008.

For the quarter ended June 29, 2008, the closing price of our class A common stock equaled or exceeded 125% of the $56.75 per share initial effective conversion price governing the February 2007 debentures for 20 out of 30 consecutive trading days ending on June 29, 2008, thus satisfying the market price conversion trigger pursuant to the terms of the February 2007 debentures. As of the first trading day of the third quarter in fiscal 2008, holders of the February 2007 debentures are able to exercise their right to convert the debentures any day in that fiscal quarter. Therefore, since holders of the February 2007 debentures are able to exercise their right to convert the debentures in the third quarter of fiscal 2008, we classified the $200.0 million in aggregate convertible debt as short-term debt in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 29, 2008.

Because the closing stock price did not equal or exceed 125% of the initial effective conversion price governing the July 2007 debentures for 20 out of 30 consecutive trading days during the quarter ended June 29, 2008, holders of the debentures did not have the right to convert the debentures, based on the market price conversion trigger, any day in the third fiscal quarter beginning on June 30, 2008. Accordingly, we re-classified the $225.0 million in aggregate convertible debt from short-term debt to long-term debt in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 29, 2008. This test is repeated each fiscal quarter; therefore, if the market price conversion trigger is satisfied in a subsequent quarter, the debentures may again be re-classified as short-term debt.

As of June 29, 2008, we had cash and cash equivalents of $189.5 million as compared to $285.2 million as of December 30, 2007. In addition, we had short-term investments and long-term investments of $37.2 million and $25.1 million as of June 29, 2008, respectively, as compared to $105.4 million and $29.1 million as of December 30, 2007, respectively. Of these investments, we held five auction rate securities totaling $25.1 million as of June 29, 2008 as compared to ten auction rate securities totaling $50.8 million as of December 30, 2007. These auction rate securities are typically over collateralized and secured by pools of student loans originated under the Federal Family Education Loan Program, or FFELP, and are guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Education, and insured. In addition, all auction rate securities held are rated by one or more of the Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations, or NRSROs, as triple-A. Beginning in February 2008, the auction rate securities market experienced a significant increase in the number of failed auctions, resulting from a lack of liquidity, which occurs when sell orders exceed buy orders, and does not necessarily signify a default by the issuer. As of August 8, 2008, all auction rate securities invested in at June 29, 2008 had failed to clear at auctions. For failed auctions, we continue to earn interest on these investments at the maximum contractual rate as the issuer is obligated under contractual terms to pay penalty rates should auctions fail. Historically, failed auctions have rarely occurred, however, such failures could continue to occur in the future. In the event we need to access these funds, we will not be able to do so until a future auction is successful, the issuer redeems the securities, a buyer is found outside of the auction process or the securities mature. Accordingly, auction rate securities at June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007 that were not sold in a subsequent period totaling $25.1 million and $29.1 million, respectively, are classified as long-term investments on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets, because they are not expected to be used to fund current operations and consistent with the stated contractual maturities of the securities.

In the second quarter of fiscal 2008, we sold auction rate securities with a carrying value of $12.5 million for their stated par value of $13.0 million. We have concluded that no other-than-temporary impairment losses occurred in the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 because the lack of liquidity in the market for auction rate securities is considered temporary in nature. If it is determined that the fair value of these securities is other-than-temporarily impaired, we would record a loss in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations in the third quarter of 2008, which could be material.

We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents and funds available from the credit agreement with Wells Fargo will be sufficient to meet our working capital and capital expenditure commitments for at least the next 12 months. However, there can be no assurance that our liquidity will be adequate over time. If our capital resources are insufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements, we may seek to sell additional equity securities or debt securities or obtain other debt financing. The sale of additional equity securities or convertible debt securities would result in additional dilution to our stockholders. Additional debt would result in increased expenses and would likely impose new restrictive covenants like the covenants under the credit agreement with Wells Fargo. Financing arrangements may not be available to us, or may not be available in amounts or on terms acceptable to us.

We expect to experience growth in our operating expenses, including our research and development, sales and marketing and general and administrative expenses, for the foreseeable future to execute our business strategy. We may also be required to purchase polysilicon in advance to secure our wafer supplies or purchase third-party solar modules and materials in advance to support systems projects. We intend to fund these activities with existing cash and cash equivalents, cash generated from operations and, if necessary, borrowings under our credit agreement with Wells Fargo. These anticipated increases in operating

- 46 -

Table of Contents

expenses may not result in an increase in our revenue and our anticipated revenue may not be sufficient to support these increased expenditures. We anticipate that operating expenses, working capital and capital expenditures will constitute a significant use of our cash resources.

Contractual Obligations

The following summarizes our contractual obligations at June 29, 2008:

	Payments Due by Period
(In thousands)	Total		2008 (remaining 6 months)			2009 – 2010		2011 – 2012	Beyond 2012
Obligation to Cypress	$	5,409	$	5,409	$	—	$	—	$	—
Customer advances		75,005		16,288		26,717		16,000		16,000
Interest on customer advances		1,983		686		1,297		—		—
Convertible debt		425,000		—		—		—		425,000
Interest on convertible debt		78,759		2,094		8,375		8,375		59,915
Lease commitments		43,868		2,547		9,983		6,687		24,651
Utility obligations		750		—		—		—		750
Royalty obligations		272		272		—		—		—
Non-cancelable purchase orders		155,186		152,352		2,834		—		—
Purchase commitments under agreements		3,534,500		150,109		963,811		888,365		1,532,215
Total	$	4,320,732	$	329,757	$	1,013,017	$	919,427	$	2,058,531

Customer advances and interest on customer advances relate to advance payments received from customers for future purchases of solar power products or supplies. Convertible debt and interest on convertible debt relate to the aggregate of $425.0 million in principal amount of our senior convertible debentures. For the purpose of the table above, we assume that (1) no holders of the February 2007 debentures will exercise their right to convert the debentures as a result of the market price conversion trigger being met in the second quarter of fiscal 2008 and (2) all holders of the convertible debt will hold the debentures through the date of maturity in fiscal 2027 and upon redemption, the values of the convertible debt are equal to the aggregate principal amount of $425.0 million with no premiums. Lease commitments primarily relate to our 5-year lease agreement with Cypress for our headquarters in San Jose, California, an 11-year lease agreement with an unaffiliated third party for our administrative, research and development offices in Richmond, California, a 5-year lease agreement with an unaffiliated third party for a solar panel assembly facility in the Philippines and other leases for various office space. Utility obligations relate to our 11-year lease agreement with an unaffiliated third party for our administrative, research and development offices in Richmond, California. Royalty obligations result from several of the systems segment government awards and existing agreements. Non-cancelable purchase orders relate to purchase commitments for equipment and building improvements for our solar cell manufacturing and solar panel assembly facilities. Purchase commitments under agreements relate to arrangements entered into with suppliers of polysilicon, ingots, wafers, solar cells and solar modules as well as agreements to purchase solar renewable energy certificates from solar installation owners in New Jersey. These agreements specify future quantities and pricing of products to be supplied by the vendors for periods up to 12 years and there are certain consequences, such as forfeiture of advanced deposits and liquidated damages relating to previous purchases, in the event that we terminate the arrangements.

As of June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, total liabilities associated with FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, and Related Implementation Issues,” or FIN 48, uncertain tax positions were $5.7 million and $4.1 million, respectively, and are included in other long-term liabilities on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets at June 29, 2008 and December 30, 2007, respectively, as they are not expected to be paid within the next twelve months. Due to the complexity and uncertainty associated with our tax positions, we cannot make a reasonably reliable estimate of the period in which cash settlement will be made for our liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions in other long-term liabilities, therefore, they have been excluded from the table above.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

See Note 1 of Notes to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for a description of certain other recent accounting pronouncements including the expected dates of adoption and effects on our results of operations and financial condition.

- 47 -

Table of Contents

Item 3.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure About Market Risk

Interest Rate Risk

Our exposure to market risks for changes in interest rates relates primarily to our cash equivalents, restricted cash and investment portfolio and convertible debt.

As of June 29, 2008, our investment portfolio consisted of a variety of financial instruments, including, but not limited to, money market funds, commercial paper and corporate securities. These investments are generally classified as available-for-sale and, consequently, are recorded on our balance sheet at fair market value with their related unrealized gain or loss reflected as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income in stockholders’ equity. Due to the relatively short-term nature of our investment portfolio, we do not believe that an immediate 10% increase in interest rates would have a material effect on the fair market value of our portfolio. Since we believe we have the ability to liquidate this portfolio, we do not expect our operating results or cash flows to be materially affected to any significant degree by a sudden change in market interest rates on our investment portfolio.

Auction rate securities are variable rate debt instruments with interest rates that, unless they fail to clear at auctions, are reset approximately every seven days, twenty-eight days, thirty-five days or six-months. The “stated” or “contractual” maturities for these securities generally are between 20 to 30 years. The auction rate securities are classified as available for sale under SFAS No. 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities,” or SFAS No. 115, and are recorded at fair value. Typically, the carrying value of auction rate securities approximates fair value due to the frequent resetting of the interest rates. At June 29, 2008, we had $25.1 million invested in auction rate securities. As of August 8, 2008, all auction rate securities invested in at June 29, 2008 had failed to clear at auctions. These auction rate securities are typically over collateralized and secured by pools of student loans originated under the FFELP and are guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Education, and insured. In addition, all auction rate securities held are rated by one or more of the NRSROs as triple-A. We continue to earn interest on these investments at the maximum contractual rate as the issuer is obligated under contractual terms to pay penalty rates should auctions fail. In the second quarter of fiscal 2008, we sold auction rate securities with a carrying value of $12.5 million for their stated par value of $13.0 million. We have concluded that no other-than-temporary impairment losses occurred in the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 because the lack of liquidity in the market for auction rate securities is considered temporary in nature. We will continue to analyze our auction rate securities each reporting period for impairment and may be required to record an impairment charge if the issuer of the auction rate securities is unable to successfully close future auctions or does not redeem the securities.

The fair market value of our 1.25% senior convertible debentures issued in February 2007 and 0.75% senior convertible debentures issued in July 2007 is subject to interest rate and market price risk due to the convertible feature of the debentures. The fair market value of the senior convertible debentures will increase as interest rates fall and decrease as interest rates rise. In addition, the fair market value of the senior convertible debentures will increase as the market price of our class A common stock increases and decrease as the market price falls. The interest and market value changes affect the fair market value of the senior convertible debentures but do not impact our financial position, cash flows or results of operations due to the fixed nature of the debt obligations. As of June 29, 2008, the estimated fair value of the senior convertible debentures was approximately $544.9 million based on quoted market prices. A 10% increase in quoted market prices would increase the estimated fair value of the senior convertible debentures to approximately $599.4 million as of June 29, 2008 and a 10% decrease in the quoted market prices would decrease the estimated fair value of the senior convertible debentures to $490.4 million.

Equity Price Risk

Our exposure to equity price risk relate to investments held in private companies. Nonpublicly traded investments of $5.0 million are accounted for using the cost method and $14.8 million are accounted under APB Opinion No. 18, “The Equity Method of Accounting for Investments in Common Stock.” These strategic investments in third parties are subject to risk of changes in market value, which if determined to be other than temporary, could result in realized impairment losses. We generally do not attempt to reduce or eliminate our market exposure in these cost and equity method investments. We periodically reviews the carrying value of such investments to determine if any valuation adjustments are appropriate under the applicable accounting pronouncements.

Foreign Currency Exchange Risk

Our exposure to adverse movements in foreign currency exchange rates is primarily related to sales to European customers that are denominated in Euros and procurement of certain capital equipment in Euros. Our Switzerland subsidiary has exposure to adverse movements in foreign currency exchange rates primarily related to inventory purchases that are denominated in U.S. dollars. Revenue generated outside the United States represented approximately 85% and 82% of our total revenue for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, respectively, as compared to 63% and 62% of our total revenue for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007, respectively. A hypothetical change of 10% in foreign currency exchange rates as of June 29, 2008 could impact our condensed consolidated financial statements or results of operations by $0.7 million based on our outstanding forward contracts of $167.8 million. We currently conduct hedging activities, which involve the use of currency forward contracts. We cannot predict the impact of future exchange rate fluctuations on our business and operating results. In the past, we have experienced an adverse impact on our revenue and profitability as a result of foreign currency fluctuations. We believe that we may have increased risk associated with currency fluctuations in the future.

- 48 -

Table of Contents

Item 4.

Controls and Procedures

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We maintain “disclosure controls and procedures,” as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms, and that such information 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. In designing and evaluating our disclosure controls and procedures, management recognized that disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the disclosure controls and procedures are met. Additionally, in designing disclosure controls and procedures, our management necessarily was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible disclosure controls and procedures. The design of any disclosure controls and procedures also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions.

Based on their evaluation as of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and subject to the foregoing, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There were no material changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

- 49 -

Table of Contents

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

From time to time we are a party to litigation matters and claims that are normal in the course of our operations. While we believe that the ultimate outcome of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on us, the outcome of these matters is not determinable and negative outcomes may adversely affect our financial position, liquidity or results of operations.

ITEM 1A: RISK FACTORS

The following discussion of risk factors contains “forward-looking statements” as discussed in “Item 2: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” These risk factors may be important to understanding any statement in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q or elsewhere. The following information should be read in conjunction with “PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION, Item 2: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION, Item 1: Financial Statements” and the accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.

Our operations and financial results are subject to various risks and uncertainties, including those described below, that could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and trading price of our common stock. Although we believe that we have identified and discussed below the key risk factors affecting our business, there may be additional risks and uncertainties that are not presently known or that are not currently believed to be significant that may also adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and trading price of our class A common stock.

Risks Related to Our Business

The solar power industry is currently experiencing an industry-wide shortage of polysilicon. This shortage poses several risks to our business, including possible constraints on revenue growth and possible decreases in our gross margins and profitability.

Polysilicon is an essential raw material in our production of solar cells. Polysilicon is created by refining quartz or sand. Polysilicon is melted and grown into crystalline ingots by companies specializing in ingot growth. We procure silicon ingots from these suppliers on a contractual basis and then slice the ingots into wafers. The ingots are sliced and the wafers are processed into solar cells in our Philippines manufacturing facility. We also purchase wafers and polysilicon from third-party vendors.

There is currently an industry-wide shortage of polysilicon, which has resulted in significant price increases. Increases in polysilicon prices have in the past increased our manufacturing costs and may impact our manufacturing costs and net income in the future. With these price increases, demand for solar cells has also increased, and many of our principal competitors have announced plans to add additional manufacturing capacity. As this additional solar cell manufacturing capacity becomes operational, it may increase the demand for polysilicon in the near-term and further exacerbate the current shortage of polysilicon. Polysilicon is also used in the semiconductor industry generally and any increase in demand from that sector will compound the shortage of polysilicon. The production of polysilicon is capital intensive and adding additional capacity requires significant lead time. We are aware that several new facilities for the manufacture of polysilicon are under construction, but we believe that the supply imbalance will not be remedied in the near-term. We expect that polysilicon demand will continue to outstrip supply through much of 2008 and potentially for a longer period, but we expect that the average market price of polysilicon will decrease over time as new manufacturers enter the market.

Although we have arrangements with vendors for the supply of what we believe will be an adequate amount of silicon ingots through 2010, our purchase orders are sometimes non-binding in nature. Our estimates regarding our supply needs may not be correct and our purchase orders or our contracts may be cancelled by our suppliers. Additionally, the volume and pricing associated with these purchase orders and contracts may be changed by our suppliers based on market conditions or for other reasons. If our suppliers were to cancel our purchase orders or change the volume or pricing associated with them, we may be unable to meet customer demand for our products, which could cause us to lose customers, market share and revenue. This would have a material negative impact on our business and operating results. If our manufacturing yields decrease significantly, we add manufacturing capacity faster than currently planned or our suppliers cancel or fail to deliver, we may not have made adequate provision for our polysilicon needs for our manufacturing plans through 2010.

In addition, since some of our silicon ingot and wafer arrangements are with suppliers who do not themselves manufacture polysilicon but instead purchase their requirements from other vendors, these suppliers may not be able to obtain sufficient polysilicon to satisfy their contractual obligations to us.

- 50 -

Table of Contents

There are a limited number of polysilicon suppliers. Many of our competitors also purchase polysilicon from our suppliers. Some of them also have inter-locking board members with their polysilicon suppliers or have entered into joint ventures or binding supply contracts with their suppliers. Additionally, a substantial amount of our future polysilicon requirements are expected to be sourced by new suppliers that have not yet proven their ability to manufacture large volumes of polysilicon. In some cases we expect that new entrants will provide us with polysilicon, ingots and wafers. The failure of these new entrants to produce adequate supplies of polysilicon, ingots and/or wafers in the quantities and quality we require could adversely affect our ability to grow production volumes and revenues and could also result in a decline in our gross profit margins. Since we have committed to significantly increase our manufacturing output, an inadequate supply of polysilicon would harm us more than it would harm some of our competitors.

Additionally, the steps we have taken to further increase the efficiency of our polysilicon utilization are unproven at volume production levels and may not enable us to realize the cost reductions we anticipate. Given the current polysilicon shortage, we believe the efficient use of polysilicon will be critical to our ability to reduce our manufacturing costs. We continue to implement several measures to increase the efficient use of polysilicon in our manufacturing process. For example, we are developing processes to utilize thinner wafers which require less polysilicon and improved wafer-slicing technology to reduce the amount of material lost while slicing wafers, otherwise known as kerf loss. Although we have implemented production using thinner wafers and anticipate further reductions in wafer thickness, these methods may have unforeseen negative consequences on our yields or our solar cell efficiency or reliability once they are put into large-scale commercial production, or they may not enable us to realize the cost reductions we hope to achieve.

Our inability to obtain sufficient polysilicon, ingots or wafers at commercially reasonable prices or at all for any of the foregoing reasons, or otherwise, would adversely affect our ability to meet existing and future customer demand for our products and could cause us to make fewer shipments, lose customers and market share and generate lower than anticipated revenue, thereby seriously harming our business, financial condition and results of operations.

As polysilicon supply increases, the corresponding increase in the global supply of solar cells and panels may cause substantial downward pressure on the prices of SunPower products, resulting in lower revenues and earnings.

The scarcity of polysilicon has resulted in the underutilization of solar panel manufacturing capacity at many competitors or potential competitors to SunPower, particularly in China. As additional polysilicon becomes available over the next 6 to 24 months, we expect solar panel production globally to increase. Decreases in polysilicon pricing and increases in solar panel production could each result in substantial downward pressure on the price of solar cells and panels, including SunPower products. Such price reductions could have a negative impact on our revenue and earnings, and materially adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Long-term, firm commitment supply agreements with polysilicon, ingot or wafer suppliers could result in insufficient or excess inventory or place us at a competitive disadvantage.

We manufacture our solar cells utilizing ingots and wafers manufactured by third parties, which in turn use polysilicon for their manufacturing process. We are seeking to address the current polysilicon shortage by negotiating multi-year, binding contractual commitments directly with polysilicon suppliers, and supplying such polysilicon to third parties which provide us ingots and wafers. Under such polysilicon agreements, we may be required to purchase a specified quantity of polysilicon, ingots or wafers at fixed prices, in some cases subject to upward inflation-related adjustments over a set period of time, which is often a period of several years. We also may be required to make substantial prepayments to these suppliers against future deliveries. For example, in July 2007 we entered into a long-term supply agreement with Hemlock Semiconductor Corporation, or Hemlock, a manufacturer of polysilicon. The agreement requires us to purchase an amount of silicon that is expected to support more than two gigawatts of solar cell production at fixed prices from 2010 to 2019. We are also required to make material aggregate cash prepayments to Hemlock prior to 2010 in three equal installments. Such prepayments will be used to fund the expansion of Hemlock’s polysilicon manufacturing capacity and will be credited against future deliveries of polysilicon to us. The Hemlock agreement, or any other “take or pay” agreement we enter into, allows the supplier to invoice us for the full purchase price of polysilicon we are under contract to purchase each year, whether or not we actually order the required volume. If for any reason we fail to order the required annual volume under the Hemlock or similar agreements, the resulting monetary damages could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

We do not obtain contracts or commitments from customers for all of the solar panels manufactured with the polysilicon purchased under such firm commitment contracts. Instead, we rely on our long-term internal forecasts to determine the timing of our production schedules and the volume and mix of products to be manufactured, including the estimated quantity of polysilicon, ingots and wafers needed. The level and timing of orders placed by customers may vary for many reasons. As a result, at any particular time, we may have insufficient or excess inventory, which could render us unable to fulfill customer orders or increase our cost of production. In addition, we have negotiated the fixed prices under these supply contracts based on our long-term projections of the future price of polysilicon. If the market price of polysilicon in future periods is less than the price we have committed to pay either because of new technological developments or any other reason, our cost of production could be comparatively higher than that of competitors who buy polysilicon on the open market. This would place us at a competitive disadvantage to these competitors, and could materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.

- 51 -

Table of Contents

Long-term contractual commitments also expose us to specific counter-party risk, which can be magnified when dealing with suppliers without a long, stable production and financial history. For example, if one or more of our contractual counterparties is unable or unwilling to provide us with the contracted amount of polysilicon, wafers or ingots, we could be required to attempt to obtain polysilicon in the open market, which could be unavailable at that time, or only available at prices in excess of our contracted prices. In addition, in the event any such supplier experiences financial difficulties, it may be difficult or impossible, or may require substantial time and expense, for us to recover any or all of our prepayments. Any of the foregoing could materially harm our financial condition and results of operations.

The reduction or elimination of government and economic incentives could cause our revenue to decline and harm our financial results.

The market for on-grid applications, where solar power is used to supplement a customer’s electricity purchased from the utility network or sold to a utility under tariff, depends in large part on the availability and size of government and economic incentives that vary by geographic market. Because our sales are into the on-grid market, the reduction or elimination of government and economic incentives in one or more of these markets would adversely affect the growth of this market or result in increased price competition, either of which could cause our revenue to decline and harm our financial results.

Today, the cost of solar power exceeds retail electric rates in many locations. As a result, federal, state and local government bodies in many countries, most notably Spain, the United States, Germany, Italy, South Korea, Canada, Japan, Portugal, Greece and France, have provided incentives in the form of feed-in tariffs, rebates, tax credits and other incentives and mandates to end users, distributors, system integrators and manufacturers of solar power products to promote the use of solar energy in on-grid applications and to reduce dependency on other forms of energy. These government economic incentives could be reduced, expire or be eliminated altogether reducing demand for our products in the affected markets. In fact, some solar program incentives expire, decline over time, are limited in total funding or require renewal of authority.

For example, in the United States, the federal investment tax credit for solar installations expires in its current form at year-end 2008. Without an extension of the federal investment tax credit, many commercial customers and third-party financiers will not contract to purchase solar systems. In addition, Spain’s feed-in tariff expires in late September 2008. The government has proposed a new, reduced, draft feed-in tariff to continue solar support after the current tariff expires. Demand in Spain has been significantly reduced as a result of uncertainty in the new tariff’s level of reduction and timing of implementation.

For the three months ended June 29, 2008, 15% and 66% of our total revenue was generated in the United States and Spain, respectively, as compared to 37% and 38%, respectively, of our total revenue for the three months ended July 1, 2007. For the six months ended June 29, 2008, 18% and 60% of our total revenue was generated in the United States and Spain, respectively, as compared to 38% and 31%, respectively, of our total revenue for the six months ended July 1, 2007.

In California, the California Solar Initiative is designed to lower the stated rebate level as market penetration increases. If system ASPs do not decline as the rebate levels decline, demand may decline in California. Net metering and other operational policies in California or other markets could limit the amount of solar power installed there.

Reductions in, or eliminations or expirations of, governmental incentives such as these could result in decreased demand for and lower revenue from our products. Changes in the level or structure of a renewable portfolio standard and similar mandates could also result in decreased demand for and lower revenue or revenue growth from our products.

The execution of our growth strategy for our systems segment is dependent upon the continued availability of third-party financing arrangements for our customers.

For many of our projects, our customers have entered into agreements to finance the power systems over an extended period of time based on energy savings generated by our solar power systems, rather than pay the full capital cost of purchasing the solar power systems up front. For these types of projects, many of our customers choose to purchase solar electricity under a power purchase agreement with a financing company that purchases the system from us. In the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, approximately 55% and 52%, respectively, of our total revenue was derived from sales of systems to financing companies that engage in power purchase agreements with end-users of electricity, as compared to 26% and 22%, respectively, of our total revenue for the three and six months ended July 1, 2007.

Of such systems sales to financing companies that engage in power purchase agreements with end-users of electricity, 5% and 95% of systems sales were derived in the United States and Spain, respectively, in the three months ended June 29, 2008 as compared to 37% and 62%, respectively, of systems sales for the three months ended July 1, 2007. For the six months ended June 29, 2008, 6% and 94% of systems sales to financing companies that engage in power purchase agreements with end-users of electricity were derived in the United States and Spain, respectively, as compared to 36% and 42%, respectively, of systems sales for the six months ended July 1, 2007. These structured finance arrangements are complex and may not be feasible in many situations. In addition, customers opting to finance a solar power system may forgo certain tax advantages associated with an outright purchase on an accelerated basis which may make this alternative less attractive for certain potential customers. If

- 52 -

Table of Contents

customers are unwilling or unable to finance the cost of our products, or if the parties that have historically provided this financing cease to do so, or only do so on terms that are substantially less favorable for us or these customers, our revenue and growth will be adversely affected.

The success of our systems segment will depend in part on the continuing formation of such financing companies and the potential revenue source they represent. In deciding whether to form and invest in such financing companies, potential investors weigh a variety of considerations, including their projected return on investment. Such projections are based on current and proposed federal, state and local laws, particularly tax legislation. Changes to these laws, including amendments to existing tax laws or the introduction of new tax laws, tax court rulings as well as changes in administrative guidelines, ordinances and similar rules and regulations could result in different tax consequences which may adversely affect an investor’s projected return on investment, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

MMA Renewable Ventures (a subsidiary of MuniMae, or MMA), is a customer of our systems segment, accounting for less than 10% of our total revenue in the three and six months ended June 29, 2008. MMA Renewable Ventures accounted for 10% of our total revenue in the three months ended July 1, 2007 and less than 10% of our total revenue in the six months ended July 1, 2007. MMA Renewable Ventures is a financing company that purchases systems from us and engages in power purchase agreements with end-users of electricity. Effective February 6, 2008, the New York Stock Exchange, or NYSE, delisted the common stock of MMA because MMA did not expect to file its audited 2006 financial statements by March 3, 2008, the deadline imposed by the NYSE. In connection with completing the restatement and filing the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, MMA has disclosed that it incurred substantial accounting costs. In addition, MMA has disclosed that recent credit market disruption has negatively affected many aspects of MMA’s business. In the event MMA Renewable Ventures ceases to be a customer of ours or fails to pay us in a timely manner, it could have a significant adverse effect on our future results of operations.

We may be unable to achieve our goal of reducing the cost of installed solar systems by 50 percent by 2012, which may negatively impact our ability to sell our products in a competitive environment, resulting in lower revenues, gross margins and earnings.

To reduce the cost of installed solar systems by 50 percent by 2012, as compared against the cost in 2006, we will have to achieve cost savings across the entire value chain from designing to manufacturing to distributing to selling and ultimately to installing solar systems. We have identified specific areas of potential savings and are pursuing targeted goals. However, such cost savings are dependent upon decreasing silicon prices and lowering manufacturing costs. As part of our announced strategy, we have entered into long-term silicon supply agreements to promote an adequate supply of raw material as well as to reduce the overall cost of such raw material. Additionally, we are increasing production capacity at our existing manufacturing facilities while seeking to improve efficiencies. We also expect to develop additional manufacturing capacity. As a result, we expect these improvements will decrease our per unit production costs. However, if we are unsuccessful in our efforts to reduce the cost of installed solar systems by 50 percent by 2012, our revenues, gross margins and earnings may be negatively impacted in the competitive environment and particularly in the event that governmental and fiscal incentives are reduced or an increase in the global supply of solar cells and solar panels causes substantial downward pressure on prices of our products.

We may not be able to increase or sustain our recent growth rate, and we may not be able to manage our future growth effectively.

We may not be able to continue to expand our business or manage future growth. We plan to significantly increase our production capacity between 2008 and 2010. To do so will require successful execution of expanding our existing manufacturing facilities, developing new manufacturing facilities, ensuring delivery of adequate polysilicon and ingots, developing more efficient wafer-slicing methods, maintaining adequate liquidity and financial resources, and continuing to increase our revenues from operations. Expanding our manufacturing facilities or developing facilities may be delayed by difficulties such as unavailability of equipment or supplies or equipment malfunction. Ensuring delivery of adequate polysilicon and ingots is subject to many market risks including scarcity, significant price fluctuations and competition. Maintaining adequate liquidity is dependent upon a variety of factors including continued revenues from operations and compliance with our indentures and credit agreements. In addition, following any tax-free spin-off of our shares by Cypress, our ability to issue equity for financing purposes would be subject to limits as described in “Our agreements with Cypress require us to indemnify Cypress for certain tax liabilities. These indemnification obligations or related considerations may limit our ability to obtain additional financing, participate in future acquisitions or pursue other business initiatives.” If we are unsuccessful in any of these areas, we may not be able to achieve our growth strategy and increase production capacity as planned during the foreseeable future.

Prior to our acquisition, SP Systems experienced significant revenue growth due primarily to the development and market acceptance of its PowerGuard® roof system, the acquisition and introduction of its PowerTracker® ground and elevated parking systems, its development of other technologies and increasing global interest and demand for renewable energy sources, including solar power generation. As a result, SP Systems increased its revenues in a relatively short period of time. Its annual revenue increased from $50.9 million in 2003 to $87.6 million in 2004 to $107.8 million in 2005 to $243.4 million in 2006. As a result of our acquisition involving SP Systems, our systems segment revenue for the year ended December 30, 2007 was $464.2 million and for the three and six months ended June 29, 2008 was $270.6 million and $449.4 million, respectively. We may not experience similar growth of our total revenue or even similar growth of our systems segment revenue in future periods. Accordingly, investors should not rely on the results of any prior quarterly or annual period as an indication of our future operating performance.

- 53 -

Table of Contents

Our recent expansion has placed, and our planned expansion and any other future expansion will continue to place, a significant strain on our management, personnel, systems and resources. We plan to purchase additional equipment to significantly expand our manufacturing capacity and to hire additional employees to support an increase in manufacturing, research and development and our sales and marketing efforts. We had approximately 4,660 full-time employees as of June 29, 2008, and we anticipate that we will need to hire a significant number of highly skilled technical, manufacturing, sales, marketing, administrative and accounting personnel. The competition for qualified personnel is intense in our industry. We may not be successful in attracting and retaining sufficient numbers of qualified personnel to support our anticipated growth. To successfully manage our growth and handle the responsibilities of being a public company, we believe we must effectively:

•

hire, train, integrate and manage additional qualified engineers for research and development activities, sales and marketing personnel, and financial and information technology personnel;

•

retain key management and augment our management team, particularly if we lose key members;

•

continue to enhance our customer resource management and manufacturing management systems;

•

implement and improve additional and existing administrative, financial and operations systems, procedures and controls, including the need to update and integrate our financial internal control systems in SP Systems and in our Philippines facility with those of our San Jose, California headquarters;

•

expand and upgrade our technological capabilities; and

•

manage multiple relationships with our customers, suppliers and other third parties.

We may encounter difficulties in effectively managing the budgeting, forecasting and other process control issues presented by rapid growth. If we are unable to manage our growth effectively, we may not be able to take advantage of market opportunities, develop new solar cells and other products, satisfy customer requirements, execute our business plan or respond to competitive pressures.

Since we cannot test our solar panels for the duration of our standard 25-year warranty period, we may be subject to unexpected warranty expense; if we are subject to warranty and product liability claims, such claims could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

The possibility of future product failures could cause us to incur substantial expense to repair or replace defective products. We have agreed to indemnify our customers and our distributors in some circumstances against liability from defects in our solar cells. A successful indemnification claim against us could require us to make significant damage payments, which would negatively affect our financial results.

In our components segment, our current standard product warranty for our solar panels includes a 10-year warranty period for defects in materials and workmanship and a 25-year warranty period for declines in power performance as well as a one-year warranty on the functionality of our solar cells. We believe our warranty periods are consistent with industry practice. Due to the long warranty period and our proprietary technology, we bear the risk of extensive warranty claims long after we have shipped product and recognized revenue. We have sold solar cells only since late 2004. Any increase in the defect rate of our products would cause us to increase the amount of warranty reserves and have a corresponding negative impact on our results. Although we conduct accelerated testing of our solar cells and have several years of experience with our all back contact cell architecture, our solar panels have not and cannot be tested in an environment simulating the 25-year warranty period. As a result, we may be subject to unexpected warranty expense, which in turn would harm our financial results.

Like other retailers, distributors and manufacturers of products that are used by consumers, we face an inherent risk of exposure to product liability claims in the event that the use of the solar power products into which our solar cells and solar panels are incorporated results in injury. We may be subject to warranty and product liability claims in the event that our solar power systems fail to perform as expected or if a failure of our solar power systems results, or is alleged to result, in bodily injury, property damage or other damages. Since our solar power products are electricity producing devices, it is possible that our products could result in injury, whether by product malfunctions, defects, improper installation or other causes. In addition, since we only began selling our solar cells and solar panels in late 2004 and the products we are developing incorporate new technologies and use new installation methods, we cannot predict whether or not product liability claims will be brought against us in the future or the effect of any resulting negative publicity on our business. Moreover, we may not have adequate resources in the event of a successful claim against us. We have evaluated the potential risks we face and believe that we have appropriate levels of insurance for product liability claims. We rely on our general liability insurance to cover product liability claims and have not obtained separate product liability insurance. However, a successful warranty or product liability claim against us that is not covered by insurance or is in excess of our available insurance limits could require us to make significant payments of damages. In addition, quality issues can have various other ramifications, including delays in the recognition of revenue, loss of revenue, loss of future sales opportunities, increased costs associated with repairing or replacing products, and a negative impact

- 54 -

Table of Contents

on our goodwill and reputation, which could also adversely affect our business and operating results. Our exposure to warranty and product liability claims is expected to increase significantly in connection with our planned expansion into the new home development market.

Warranty and product liability claims may result from defects or quality issues in certain third-party technology and components that our systems segment incorporates into its solar power systems, particularly solar cells and panels, over which it has no control. While its agreements with its suppliers generally include warranties, such provisions may not fully compensate us for any loss associated with third-party claims caused by defects or quality issues in such products. In the event we seek recourse through warranties, we will also be dependent on the creditworthiness and continued existence of these suppliers.

Our current standard warranty for our solar power systems differs by geography and end-customer application and includes either a one, two or five year comprehensive parts and workmanship warranty, after which the customer may typically extend the period covered by its warranty for an additional fee. Due to the warranty period, we bear the risk of extensive warranty claims long after we have completed a project and recognized revenues. Future product failures could cause us to incur substantial expenses to repair or replace defective products. While we generally pass through manufacturer warranties we receive from our suppliers to our customers, we are responsible for repairing or replacing any defective parts during our warranty period, often including those covered by manufacturers’ warranties. If the manufacturer disputes or otherwise fails to honor its warranty obligations, we may be required to incur substantial costs before we are compensated, if at all, by the manufacturer. Furthermore, our warranties may exceed the period of any warranties from our suppliers covering components included in our systems, such as inverters.

Prior to our acquisition of SP Systems, one of SP System’s major panel suppliers at the time, AstroPower, Inc., filed for bankruptcy in February 2004. SP Systems had installed solar systems incorporating over 30,000 AstroPower panels, of which approximately 12,000 panels were still under warranty as of June 29, 2008. The majority of these warranties expire by 2022. While we have not experienced a significant number of warranty or other claims related to the installed AstroPower panels, we may in the future incur significant unreimbursable expenses in connection with the repair or replacement of these panels, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. In addition, another major supplier of solar panels notified us of a product defect that may affect a substantial number of panels installed by SP Systems between 2002 and September 2006. If the supplier does not perform its contractual obligations to remediate the defective panels, we will be exposed to those costs it would incur under the warranty with SP Systems’ customers.

The competitive environment in which our systems business operates often requires us to arrange financing for our customer’s projects and/or undertake post-sale customer obligations. If we are unable to arrange adequate financing or if our post-sale customer obligations are more costly than expected, our revenue and financial results could be materially adversely affected.

We arrange third-party financing for most of our end customer’s solar projects that we install through our systems segment. Additionally, we are often required as a condition of financing or at the request of our end customer to undertake certain post-sale obligations such as:

•

System output performance guaranties;

•

System maintenance;

•

Liquidated damage payments or customer termination rights if the system we are constructing is not commissioned within specified timeframes;

•

Guaranties of certain minimum residual value of the system at specified future dates; and

•

System put-rights whereby we could be required buy-back a customer’s system at fair value on specified future dates.

Such financing arrangements and post-sale obligations involve complex accounting analyses and judgments regarding the timing of revenue and expense recognition and in certain situations these factors may require us to defer revenue recognition until projects are completed, which could adversely affect revenue and profits in a particular period.

In addition, under our power purchase business model, branded as our SunPower Access™ PPA program, we often execute power purchase agreements directly with the end-user customer purchasing solar electricity, with the expectation that we will later assign the power purchase agreement to a financier. Under such arrangements, the financier separately contracts with SunPower to build and acquire the solar system, and then sells the electricity to the end-user customer under the assigned power purchase agreement. When executing power purchase agreements with the end-user customers, SunPower seeks to mitigate the risk that a financier will not be available for the project by allowing termination of the power purchase agreement in such event without penalty. However, SunPower may not always be successful in negotiating for penalty-free termination rights for failure to secure financing, and certain end-user customers have required substantial financial penalties in exchange for such rights.

- 55 -

Table of Contents

If we are unable to arrange adequate financing or if our post-sale customer obligations are more costly than expected, our revenue and financial results could be materially adversely affected.

Our systems segment acts as the general contractor for our customers in connection with the installations of our solar power systems and is subject to risks associated with construction, cost overruns, delays and other contingencies tied to performance bonds and letters of credit, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Our systems segment acts as the general contractor for our customers in connection with the installation of our solar power systems. All essential costs are estimated at the time of entering into the sales contract for a particular project, and these are reflected in the overall price that we charge our customers for the project. These cost estimates are preliminary and may or may not be covered by contracts between us or the other project developers, subcontractors, suppliers and other parties to the project. In addition, we require qualified, licensed subcontractors to install most of our systems. Shortages of such skilled labor could significantly delay a project or otherwise increase our costs. Should miscalculations in planning a project or defective or late execution occur, we may not achieve our expected margins or cover our costs. Also, some systems customers require performance bonds issued by a bonding agency or letters of credit issued by financial institutions. Due to the general performance risk inherent in construction activities, it has become increasingly difficult recently to secure suitable bonding agencies willing to provide performance bonding, and obtaining letters of credit requires adequate collateral because we have not obtained a credit rating. In the event we are unable to obtain bonding or sufficient letters of credit, we will be unable to bid on, or enter into, sales contracts requiring such bonding.

In addition, some of our larger systems customers require that we pay substantial liquidated damages for each day or other period its solar installation is not completed beyond an agreed target date, up to and including the return of the entire project sale price. This is particularly true in Europe, where long-term, fixed feed-in tariffs available to investors are typically set during a prescribed period of project completion, but the fixed amount declines over time for projects completed in subsequent periods. We face material financial penalties in the event we fail to meet the September completion deadlines, including but not limited a full refund of the contract price paid by the customers. In certain cases we do not control all of the events which could give rise to these penalties, such as reliance on the local utility to timely complete electrical substation construction.

In addition, investors often require that the solar power system generate specified levels of electricity in order to maintain their investment returns, allocating substantial risk and financial penalties to us if those levels are not achieved, up to and including the return of the entire project sale price. Furthermore, our customers often require protections in the form of conditional payments, payment retentions or holdbacks, and similar arrangements that condition its future payments on performance. Delays in solar panel or other supply shipments, other construction delays, unexpected performance problems in electricity generation or other events could cause us to fail to meet these performance criteria, resulting in unanticipated and severe revenue and earnings losses and financial penalties. Construction delays are often caused by inclement weather, failure to timely receive necessary approvals and permits, or delays in obtaining necessary solar panels, inverters or other materials. All such risks could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

A limited number of components customers are expected to continue to comprise a significant portion of our revenues and any decrease in revenue from these customers could have a significant adverse effect on us.

Even though our customer base is expected to increase and our revenue streams to diversify, a substantial portion of our net revenues could continue to depend on sales to a limited number of customers. Currently, our largest components segment customers are Solon and Conergy. The loss of sales to either of these customers would have a significant negative impact on our business. Our agreements with these customers may be cancelled if we fail to meet certain product specifications or materially breach the agreement or in the event of bankruptcy, and our customers may seek to renegotiate the terms of current agreements or renewals. Most of the solar panels we sell to the European market in our components business are sold to small numbers of German customers, and this may continue into the foreseeable future.

Our operating results will be subject to fluctuations and are inherently unpredictable; if we fail to meet the expectations of securities analysts or investors, our stock price may decline significantly.

We have incurred net losses from inception through 2005 and for the quarter ended July 1, 2007. On June 29, 2008, we had accumulated earnings of approximately $18.5 million. To maintain our profitability, we will need to generate and sustain higher revenue while maintaining reasonable cost and expense levels. We do not know if our revenue will grow, or if it will grow sufficiently to outpace our expenses, which we expect to increase as we expand our manufacturing capacity. We may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or an annual basis. Our quarterly revenue and operating results will be difficult to predict and have in the past fluctuated from quarter to quarter. It is possible that our operating results in some quarters will be below market expectations. In particular, our systems segment is difficult to forecast and is susceptible to large fluctuations in financial results. The amount, timing and mix of sales of our systems segment, often for a single medium or large-scale project, may cause large fluctuations in our revenue and other financial results. Further, our revenue mix of high margin material sales versus lower margin projects in the systems business segment can fluctuate dramatically quarter to quarter, which may adversely

- 56 -

Table of Contents

affect our revenue and financial results in any given period. Finally, our ability to meet project completion schedules for an individual project and the corresponding revenue impact under the percentage-of-completion method of recognizing revenue, may similarly cause large fluctuations in our revenue and other financial results. This may cause us to miss analysts’ guidance or any future guidance announced by us.

In addition, our quarterly operating results will also be affected by a number of other factors, including:

•

the average selling price of our solar cells, solar panels and solar power systems;

•

the availability and pricing of raw materials, particularly polysilicon;

•

the availability, pricing and timeliness of delivery of raw materials and components, particularly solar panels and balance of systems components, including steel, necessary for our solar power systems to function;

•

the rate and cost at which we are able to expand our manufacturing and product assembly capacity to meet customer demand, including costs and timing of adding personnel;

•

construction cost overruns, including those associated with the introduction of new products;

•

the impact of seasonal variations in demand and/or revenue recognition linked to construction cycles and weather conditions;

•

timing, availability and changes in government incentive programs;

•

unplanned additional expenses such as manufacturing failures, defects or downtime;

•

acquisition and investment related costs;

•

unpredictable volume and timing of customer orders, some of which are not fixed by contract but vary on a purchase order basis;

•

the loss of one or more key customers or the significant reduction or postponement of orders from these customers;

•

geopolitical turmoil within any of the countries in which we operate or sell products;

•

foreign currency fluctuations, particularly in the Euro, Philippine peso or South Korean won;

•

the effect of currency hedging activities;

•

our ability to establish and expand customer relationships;

•

changes in our manufacturing costs;

•

changes in the relative sales mix of our systems, solar cells and solar panels;

•

the availability, pricing and timeliness of delivery of other products, such as inverters and other balance of systems materials necessary for our solar power products to function;

•

our ability to successfully develop, introduce and sell new or enhanced solar power products in a timely manner, and the amount and timing of related research and development costs;

•

the timing of new product or technology announcements or introductions by our competitors and other developments in the competitive environment;

•

the willingness of competing solar cell and panel suppliers to continue product sales to our systems segment;

•

increases or decreases in electric rates due to changes in fossil fuel prices or other factors; and

•

shipping delays.

- 57 -

Table of Contents

We base our planned operating expenses in part on our expectations of future revenue, and a significant portion of our expenses will be fixed in the short-term. If revenue for a particular quarter is lower than we expect, we likely will be unable to proportionately reduce our operating expenses for that quarter, which would harm our operating results for that quarter. This may cause us to miss analysts’ guidance or any guidance announced by us. If we fail to meet or exceed analyst or investor expectations or our own future guidance, even by a small amount, our stock price could decline, perhaps substantially.

Our solar cell production lines are located in our manufacturing facilities in the Philippines, and if we experience interruptions in the operation of these production lines or are unable to add additional production lines, it would likely result in lower revenue and earnings than anticipated.

We currently have eight solar cell manufacturing lines in production which are located at our manufacturing facilities in the Philippines. If our current or future production lines were to experience any problems or downtime, we would be unable to meet our production targets and our business would suffer. If any piece of equipment were to break down or experience downtime, it could cause our production lines to go down. We have started operations in our second solar cell manufacturing facility nearby our existing facility in the Philippines. This expansion has required and will continue to require significant management attention, a significant investment of capital and substantial engineering expenditures and is subject to significant risks including:

•

we may experience cost overruns, delays, equipment problems and other operating difficulties;

•

we may experience difficulties expanding our processes to larger production capacity;

•

our custom-built equipment may take longer and cost more to engineer than planned and may never operate as designed; and

•

we are incorporating first-time equipment designs and technology improvements, which we expect to lower unit capital and operating costs, but this new technology may not be successful.

If we experience any of these or similar difficulties, we may be unable to complete the addition of new production lines on schedule in order to expand our manufacturing facilities and our manufacturing capacity could be substantially constrained. If this were to occur, our per-unit manufacturing costs would increase, we would be unable to increase sales or gross margins as planned and our earnings would likely be materially impaired.

Our systems segment recognizes revenue on a “percentage-of-completion” basis and upon the achievement of contractual milestones and any delay or cancellation of a project could adversely affect our business.

Our systems segment recognizes revenue on a “percentage-of-completion” basis and, as a result, the revenue from this segment is driven by the performance of our contractual obligations, which is generally driven by the timelines of installation of our solar power systems at customer sites. The percentage-of-completion method of accounting for revenue recognition is inherently subjective because it relies on management estimates of total project cost as a basis for recognizing revenue and profit. Accordingly, revenue and profit we have recognized under the percentage-of-completion method are potentially subject to adjustments in subsequent periods based on refinements in estimated costs of project completion that could materially impact our future revenue and profit.

In connection with our acquisition of SP Systems, we do not recognize revenue from intercompany sales by our components segment to our systems segment. Instead, the sale of our solar panels used for construction projects are included in system segment revenues. This could result in unpredictability of revenue and, in the near term, a revenue decrease. As with any project-related business, there is the potential for delays within any particular customer project. Variation of project timelines and estimates may impact our ability to recognize revenue in a particular period. Moreover, incurring penalties involving the return of the contract price to the customer for failure to timely install one project could negatively impact our ability to continue to recognize revenue on a “percentage-of-completion” basis generally for other projects. In addition, certain customer contracts may include payment milestones due at specified points during a project. Because our systems segment usually must invest substantial time and incur significant expense in advance of achieving milestones and the receipt of payment, failure to achieve such milestones could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

We established a captive solar panel assembly facility, and, if this panel manufacturing facility is unable to produce high quality solar panels at commercially reasonable costs, our revenue growth and gross margin could be adversely affected.

We currently run four solar panel assembly lines in the Philippines with 120 megawatts of production capacity. This factory commenced commercial production during the fourth quarter of 2006. Much of the manufacturing equipment and technology in this factory is new and ramping to achieve their full rated capacity. In the event that this factory is unable to ramp production with commercially reasonable yields and competitive production costs, our anticipated revenue growth and gross margin will be adversely affected.

- 58 -

Table of Contents

Expansion of our manufacturing capacity has and will continue to increase our fixed costs, which increase may have a negative impact on our financial condition if demand for our products decreases.

We have recently expanded, and plan to continue to expand, our manufacturing facilities. For example, on May 19, 2008, we announced plans to construct our third solar cell manufacturing facility based in Malaysia. At capacity, the facility will have nameplate production capacity of more than 1 gigawatt. Initial production is scheduled to begin as early as the first quarter of 2009. As we build additional manufacturing lines or facilities, our fixed costs will increase. If the demand for our solar power products or our production output decreases, we may not be able to spread a significant amount of our fixed costs over the production volume, thereby increasing our per unit fixed cost, which would have a negative impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

We depend on a third-party subcontractor in China to assemble a significant portion of our solar cells into solar panels and any failure to obtain sufficient assembly and test capacity could significantly delay our ability to ship our solar panels and damage our customer relationships.

Historically, we have relied on Jiawei, a third-party subcontractor in China, to assemble a significant portion of our solar cells into solar panels and perform panel testing and to manage packaging, warehousing and shipping of our solar panels. We do not have a long-term agreement with Jiawei and we typically obtain its services based on short-term purchase orders that are generally aligned with timing specified by our customers’ purchase orders and our sales forecasts. If the operations of Jiawei were disrupted or its financial stability impaired, or if it should choose not to devote capacity to our solar panels in a timely manner, our business would suffer as we may be unable to produce finished solar panels on a timely basis. In addition, we supply inventory to Jiawei and we bear the risk of loss, theft or damage to our inventory while it is held in its facilities.

As a result of outsourcing a significant portion of this final step in our production, we face several significant risks, including:

•

limited assembly and testing capacity and potentially higher prices;

•

limited control over delivery schedules, quality assurance and control, manufacturing yields and production costs; and

•

delays resulting from an inability to move production to an alternate provider.

The ability of our subcontractor to perform assembly and test is limited by its available capacity. We do not have a guaranteed level of production capacity with our subcontractor, and our production needs for solar panels may differ from our forecasts provided to Jiawei. Other customers of Jiawei that are larger and better financed than we are, or that have long-term agreements in place, may induce Jiawei to reallocate capacity to them. Any reallocation could impair our ability to secure the supply of solar panels that we need for our customers. In addition, interruptions to the panel manufacturing processes caused by a natural or man-made disaster could result in partial or complete disruption in supply until we are able to shift manufacturing to another facility. It may not be possible to obtain sufficient capacity or comparable production costs at another facility. Migrating our design methodology to a new third-party subcontractor or to a captive panel assembly facility could involve increased costs, resources and development time. Utilizing additional third-party subcontractors could expose us to further risk of losing control over our intellectual property and the quality of our solar panels. Any reduction in the supply of solar panels could impair our revenue by significantly delaying our ability to ship products and potentially damage our relationships with existing customers.

If we do not achieve satisfactory yields or quality in manufacturing our solar cells, our sales could decrease and our relationships with our customers and our reputation may be harmed.

The manufacture of solar cells is a highly complex process. Minor deviations in the manufacturing process can cause substantial decreases in yield and in some cases, cause production to be suspended or yield no output. We have from time to time experienced lower than anticipated manufacturing yields. This often occurs during the production of new products or the installation and start-up of new process technologies or equipment. For example, we recently acquired a building to house our second solar cell manufacturing facility near our existing facility. As we expand our manufacturing capacity and bring additional lines or facilities into production, we may experience lower yields initially as is typical with any new equipment or process. We also expect to experience lower yields as we continue the initial migration of our manufacturing processes to thinner wafers. If we do not achieve planned yields, our product costs could increase, and product availability would decrease resulting in lower revenues than expected.

Additionally, products as complex as ours may contain undetected errors or defects, especially when first introduced. For example, our solar cells and solar panels may contain defects that are not detected until after they are shipped or are installed because we cannot test for all possible scenarios. These defects could cause us to incur significant re-engineering costs, divert the attention of our engineering personnel from product development efforts and significantly affect our customer relations and business reputation. If we deliver solar cells or solar panels with errors or defects, including cells or panels of third-party manufacturers, or if there is a perception that such solar cells or solar panels contain errors or defects, our credibility and the market acceptance and sales of our products could be harmed.

- 59 -

Table of Contents

Existing regulations and policies and changes to these regulations and policies may present technical, regulatory and economic barriers to the purchase and use of solar power products, which may significantly reduce demand for our products and services.

The market for electricity generation products is heavily influenced by foreign, U.S. federal, state and local government regulations and policies concerning the electric utility industry, as well as policies promulgated by electric utilities. These regulations and policies often relate to electricity pricing and technical interconnection of customer-owned electricity generation. In the U.S. and in a number of other countries, these regulations and policies are being modified and may continue to be modified. Customer purchases of, or further investment in the research and development of, alternative energy sources, including solar power technology, could be deterred by these regulations and policies, which could result in a significant reduction in the potential demand for our solar power products. For example, without a regulatory mandated exception for solar power systems, utility customers are often charged interconnection or standby fees for putting distributed power generation on the electric utility network. These fees could increase the cost to our customers of using our solar power products and make them less desirable, thereby harming our business, prospects, results of operations and financial condition.

We anticipate that our solar power products and their installation will be subject to oversight and regulation in accordance with national and local ordinances relating to building codes, safety, environmental protection, utility interconnection and metering and related matters. It is difficult to track the requirements of individual states and design equipment to comply with the varying standards. Any new government regulations or utility policies pertaining to our solar power products may result in significant additional expenses to us and our resellers and their customers and, as a result, could cause a significant reduction in demand for our solar power products.

We will continue to be dependent on a limited number of third-party suppliers for key components for our solar systems products during the near-term, which could prevent us from delivering our products to our customers within required timeframes, which could result in installation delays, cancellations, liquidated damages and loss of market share.

In addition to our reliance on a small number of suppliers for our solar cells and panels, we rely on third-party suppliers for key components for our solar power systems, such as inverters that convert the direct current electricity generated by solar panels into alternating current electricity usable by the customer. For the six months ended June 29, 2008, two suppliers accounted for most of our inverter purchases for domestic projects, two suppliers accounted for most of our inverter purchases for European projects and one supplier accounted for all of the inverter purchases for our Asia projects. In addition, one vendor supplies all of the foam required to manufacture our PowerGuard® roof system.

If we fail to develop or maintain our relationships with our limited suppliers, we may be unable to manufacture our products or our products may be available only at a higher cost or after a long delay, which could prevent us from delivering our products to our customers within required timeframes and we may experience order cancellation and loss of market share. To the extent the processes that our suppliers use to manufacture components are proprietary, we may be unable to obtain comparable components from alternative suppliers. The failure of a supplier to supply components in a timely manner, or to supply components that meet our quality, quantity and cost requirements, could impair our ability to manufacture our products or decrease their costs. If we cannot obtain substitute materials on a timely basis or on acceptable terms, we could be prevented from delivering our products to our customers within required timeframes, which could result in installation delays, cancellations, liquidated damages and loss of market share, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

We obtain capital equipment used in our manufacturing process from sole suppliers and if this equipment is damaged or otherwise unavailable, our ability to deliver products on time will suffer, which in turn could result in order cancellations and loss of revenue.

Some of the capital equipment used in the manufacture of our solar power products and in our wafer-slicing operations have been developed and made specifically for us, is not readily available from multiple vendors and would be difficult to repair or replace if it were to become damaged or stop working. In addition, we currently obtain the equipment for many of our manufacturing processes from sole suppliers and we obtain our wafer-slicing equipment from one supplier. If any of these suppliers were to experience financial difficulties or go out of business, or if there were any damage to or a breakdown of our manufacturing or wafer-slicing equipment at a time when we are manufacturing commercial quantities of our products, our business would suffer. In addition, a supplier’s failure to supply this equipment in a timely manner, with adequate quality and on terms acceptable to us, could delay our capacity expansion of our manufacturing facility and otherwise disrupt our production schedule or increase our costs of production.

Acquisitions of other companies or investments in joint ventures with other companies could adversely affect our operating results, dilute our stockholders’ equity, or cause us to incur additional debt or assume contingent liabilities.

To increase our business and maintain our competitive position, we may acquire other companies or engage in joint ventures in the future. Acquisitions and joint ventures involve a number of risks that could harm our business and result in the acquired business or joint venture not performing as expected, including:

- 60 -

Table of Contents

•

insufficient experience with technologies and markets in which the acquired business is involved, which may be necessary to successfully operate and integrate the business;

•

problems integrating the acquired operations, personnel, technologies or products with the existing business and products;

•

diversion of management time and attention from the core business to the acquired business or joint venture;

•

potential failure to retain key technical, management, sales and other personnel of the acquired business or joint venture;

•

difficulties in retaining relationships with suppliers and customers of the acquired business, particularly where such customers or suppliers compete with us;

•

reliance upon joint ventures which we do not control;

•

subsequent impairment of the acquired assets, including intangible assets; and

•

assumption of liabilities including, but not limited to, lawsuits, tax examinations, warranty issues, etc.

We may decide that it is in our best interests to enter into acquisitions or joint ventures that are dilutive to earnings per share or that negatively impact margins as a whole. In addition, acquisitions or joint ventures could require investment of significant financial resources and require us to obtain additional equity financing, which may dilute our stockholders’ equity, or require us to incur additional indebtedness.

To the extent that we invest in upstream suppliers or downstream channel capabilities, we may experience competition or channel conflict with certain of our existing and potential suppliers and customers. Specifically, existing and potential suppliers and customers may perceive that we are competing directly with them by virtue of such investments and may decide to reduce or eliminate their supply volume to us or order volume from us. In particular, any supply reductions from our polysilicon, ingot or wafer suppliers could materially reduce manufacturing volume.

For example, as a result of our acquisition of SP Systems, we now directly compete with some of our own suppliers of solar cells and panels. As a result, the acquisition could cause one or more solar cell and panel suppliers to reduce or terminate their business relationship with us. Since the acquisition closed, we have discontinued our purchasing relationship with certain suppliers of panels. Other reductions or terminations, which may be significant, could occur. Any such reductions or terminations could adversely affect our ability to meet customer demand for solar power systems, and materially adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition, which would likely materially adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. We will use commercially reasonable efforts to replace any lost solar cells or panels with our own inventory to mitigate the impact on us. However, such replacements may not be sufficient to fully address solar supply shortfalls, and in any event could negatively impact our revenue and earnings as we forego selling such inventory to third parties.

Similarly, in 2007, we entered into a joint venture agreement to form a new company in the Philippines named First Philec Solar Corporation, and, in 2006, we entered into a joint venture agreement to form a new company in South Korea named Woongjin Energy. First Philec Solar was formed to perform wafer-slicing operations for us, and Woongjin Energy was formed to convert polysilicon that we provide into silicon ingots that we will procure under a five-year agreement. First Philec Solar began manufacturing in the second quarter of fiscal 2008, and Woongjin Energy began manufacturing in the third quarter of fiscal 2007. Because these are not wholly owned subsidiaries, they have their own respective employees and management teams, and we do not control their operations. While we have long-term supply agreements with both First Philec Solar and Woongjin Energy, we significantly depend on their performing under the agreements. If they or our other third-party vendors increase their prices or decrease or discontinue their shipments to us, as a result of equipment malfunctions, competing purchasers or otherwise, and we are unable to obtain substitute wafers and ingots from other vendors on acceptable terms, or we are unable to increase our own wafer-slicing and develop our own ingot-pulling operations on a timely basis, our sales may decrease, our costs may increase or our business could otherwise be harmed.

In July 2008, Cypress’ Board of Directors authorized management to proceed with Cypress’ plan to pursue the tax-free distribution of the class B common stock of SunPower held by Cypress, with the objective of having the transaction completed by the end of fiscal 2008, or sooner if possible. Following any such spin-off, our ability to issue equity, including to acquire companies or assets, would be subject to limits as described in “Our agreements with Cypress require us to indemnify Cypress for certain tax liabilities. These indemnification obligations or related considerations may limit our ability to obtain additional financing, participate in future acquisitions or pursue other business initiatives.” To the extent these limits prevent us from pursuing acquisitions or investments that we would otherwise pursue, our growth and strategy could be impaired.

We could be adversely affected by violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws.

The U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act ("FCPA") and similar anti-bribery laws in other jurisdictions generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to non-U.S. officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. Our policies mandate compliance with these anti-bribery laws. We operate in many parts of the world that have experienced governmental corruption to some degree and, in certain circumstances, strict compliance with anti-bribery laws may conflict with local customs and practices. We train our key staff concerning FCPA issues, and we also inform many of our partners, subcontractors, agents and others who work for us or on our behalf that they must comply with FCPA requirements. We

- 61 -

Table of Contents

cannot assure you that our internal controls and procedures always will protect us from the reckless or criminal acts committed by our employees or, in particular, our subcontractors and agents. If we are found to be liable for FCPA violations (either due to our own acts or our inadvertence, or due to the acts or inadvertence of others), we could suffer from criminal or civil penalties or other sanctions which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We have significant international activities and customers, and plan to continue these efforts, which subject us to additional business risks, including logistical complexity and political instability.

For the six months ended June 29, 2008, a substantial portion of our sales were made to customers outside of the United States. Historically, we have had significant sales in Spain, Germany, Austria, Italy and South Korea. We currently have eight solar cell production lines in operation, which are located at our manufacturing facilities in the Philippines. In addition, a majority of our assembly functions have historically been conducted by a third-party subcontractor in China. Risks we face in conducting business internationally include:

•

multiple, conflicting and changing laws and regulations, export and import restrictions, employment laws, regulatory requirements and other government approvals, permits and licenses;

•

difficulties and costs in staffing and managing foreign operations as well as cultural differences;

•

difficulties and costs in recruiting and retaining individuals skilled in international business operations;

•

increased costs associated with maintaining international marketing efforts;

•

potentially adverse tax consequences associated with our permanent establishment of operations in more countries;

•

inadequate local infrastructure;

•

financial risks, such as longer sales and payment cycles and greater difficulty collecting accounts receivable; and

•

political and economic instability, including wars, acts of terrorism, political unrest, boycotts, curtailments of trade and other business restrictions.

We particularly face risks associated with political and economic instability and civil unrest in the Philippines. In addition, in the Asia/Pacific region generally, we face risks associated with tensions between countries in that region, such as political tensions between China and Taiwan, the ongoing discussions with North Korea regarding its nuclear weapons program, potentially reduced protection for intellectual property rights, government-fixed foreign exchange rates, relatively uncertain legal systems and developing telecommunications infrastructures. In addition, some countries in this region, such as China, have adopted laws, regulations and policies which impose additional restrictions on the ability of foreign companies to conduct business in that country or otherwise place them at a competitive disadvantage in relation to domestic companies.

In addition, although base wages are lower in the Philippines than in the United States, wages for our employees in the Philippines are increasing, which could result in increased costs to employ our manufacturing engineers. As of June 29, 2008, approximately 88% of our employees were located in the Philippines. We also are faced with competition in the Philippines for employees, and we expect this competition to increase as additional manufacturing companies enter the market and expand their operations. In particular, there may be limited availability of qualified manufacturing engineers. We have benefited from an excess of supply over demand for college graduates in the field of engineering in the Philippines. If this favorable imbalance changes due to increased competition, it could affect the availability or cost of qualified employees, who are critical to our performance. This could increase our costs and turnover rates.

Currency fluctuations in the Euro, Philippine peso or the South Korean won relative to the U.S. dollar could decrease revenue or increase expenses.

During the three and six months ended June 29, 2008, approximately 85% and 82%, respectively, of our total revenue was generated outside the United States as compared to approximately 63% and 62%, respectively, during the three and six months ended July 1, 2007. We presently have currency exposure arising from sales, capital equipment purchases, prepayments and customer advances denominated in foreign currencies. A majority of our revenue is denominated in Euros, including fixed price agreements with Solon and Conergy, and a significant portion is denominated in U.S. dollars, while a portion of our costs are incurred and paid in Euros and a smaller portion of our expenses are paid in Philippine pesos and Japanese yen. In addition, our prepayments to Wacker-Chemie AG, a polysilicon supplier, and our customer advances from Solon are denominated in Euros.

We are exposed to the risk of a decrease in the value of the Euro relative to the U.S. dollar, which would decrease our total revenue. Changes in exchange rates between foreign currencies and the U.S. dollar may adversely affect our operating margins. For example, if these foreign currencies continue to appreciate against the U.S. dollar, it will make it more expensive in terms of

- 62 -

Table of Contents

U.S. dollars to purchase inventory or pay expenses with foreign currencies. In addition, currency devaluation can result in a loss to us if we hold deposits of that currency as well as make our products, which are usually purchased with U.S. dollars, relatively more expensive than products manufactured locally. An increase in the value of the U.S. dollar relative to foreign currencies could make our solar cells more expensive for international customers, thus potentially leading to a reduction in our sales and profitability. Furthermore, many of our competitors will be foreign companies that could benefit from such a currency fluctuation, making it more difficult for us to compete with those companies. We currently conduct hedging activities, which involve the use of currency forward contracts and options. We cannot predict the impact of future exchange rate fluctuations on our business and operating results. In the past, we have experienced an adverse impact on our total revenue and profitability as a result of foreign currency fluctuations.

Our current tax holidays in the Philippines will expire within the next several years.

We currently benefit from income tax holiday incentives in the Philippines in accordance with our subsidiary’s registrations with the Board of Investments and Philippine Economic Zone Authority, which provide that we pay no income tax in the Philippines for four years under our Board of Investments non-pioneer status and Philippine Economic Zone Authority registrations, and six years under our Board of Investments pioneer status registration. Our current income tax holidays expire in 2010, and we intend to apply for extensions. However, these tax holidays may or may not be extended. We believe that as our Philippine tax holidays expire, (a) gross income attributable to activities covered by our Philippine Economic Zone Authority registrations will be taxed at a 5% preferential rate, and (b) our Philippine net income attributable to all other activities will be taxed at the statutory Philippine corporate income tax rate of 32%. Fiscal 2007 was the first year for which profitable operations benefitted from the Philippine tax ruling.

Our systems segment sales cycles for projects can be longer than our components segment sales cycle for our solar cells and panels and may require significant upfront investment which may not ultimately result in signing of a sales contract and could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Our systems segment sales cycles, which measure the time between its first contact with a customer and the signing of a sales contract for a particular project, vary substantially and average approximately eight months. Sales cycles for our systems segment are lengthy for a number of reasons, including:

•

our customers often delay purchasing decisions until their eligibility for an installation rebate is confirmed, which generally takes several months;

•

the long time required to secure adequate financing for system purchases on terms acceptable to customers; and

•

the customer’s review and approval processes for system purchases are lengthy and time consuming.

As a result of these long sales cycles, we must make significant upfront investments of resources in advance of the signing of sales contracts and the receipt of any revenues, most of which are not recognized for several additional months following contract signing. Accordingly, we must focus our limited resources on sales opportunities that we believe we can secure. Our inability to enter into sales contracts with potential customers after we make such an investment could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

We generally do not have long-term agreements with our customers and accordingly could lose customers without warning.

In our components segment, our solar cells and solar panel products are generally not sold pursuant to long-term agreements with customers, but instead are sold on a purchase order basis. In our systems segment, we typically contract to perform large projects with no assurance of repeat business from the same customers in the future. Although we believe that cancellations on our purchase orders to date have been insignificant, our customers may cancel or reschedule purchase orders with us on relatively short notice. Cancellations or rescheduling of customer orders could result in the delay or loss of anticipated sales without allowing us sufficient time to reduce, or delay the incurrence of, our corresponding inventory and operating expenses. In addition, changes in forecasts or the timing of orders from these or other customers expose us to the risks of inventory shortages or excess inventory. This, in addition to the completion and non-repetition of large systems projects, in turn could cause our operating results to fluctuate.

Our systems segment could be adversely affected by seasonal trends and construction cycles.

Our systems segment is subject to significant industry-specific seasonal fluctuations. Its sales have historically reflected these seasonal trends with the largest percentage of total revenues being realized during the last two calendar quarters. Low seasonal demand normally results in reduced shipments and revenues in the first two calendar quarters. There are various reasons for this seasonality, mostly related to economic incentives and weather patterns. For example, in European countries with feed-in tariffs, the construction of solar power systems may be concentrated during the second half of the calendar year, largely due to the annual reduction of the applicable minimum feed-in tariff and the fact that the coldest winter months are January through March. In the United States, customers will sometimes make purchasing decisions towards the end of the year in order to take advantage of tax credits or for other budgetary reasons.

- 63 -

Table of Contents

In addition, to the extent we are successful in implementing our strategy to enter the new home development market, we expect the seasonality of our business and financial results to become more pronounced as sales in this market are often tied to construction market demands which tend to follow national trends in construction, including declining sales during cold weather months.

The new homebuilder residential market may increase our exposure to certain risks.

Our systems segment is active in the residential market by selling our systems to large production homebuilders. As part of this strategy, we developed SunTile®, a product that integrates a solar panel into a roof tile. The current credit crisis and demand decline in the housing market in the United States is adversely affecting sales of new homes and may have a negative impact on our near term ability to generate material revenue and earnings in this market.

The residential construction market has also characteristics that may increase our exposure to certain risks we currently face or expose us to new risks. These risks include increased seasonality, sensitivity to interest rates and other macroeconomic conditions, as well as enhanced legal exposure. In particular, new home developments often result in class action litigation when one or more homes within a development experiences construction problems. Unlike our systems segment commercial business, where we typically act as the general contractor, we will be generally acting as subcontractor to homebuilders overseeing the development projects. In many instances subcontractors may be held liable for work of the homebuilder or other subcontractors. In addition, homebuilders often require onerous indemnification obligations that effectively allocate most of the potential liability from homeowner or class action lawsuits to subcontractors, including us. Insurance policies for residential work have significant limitations on coverage that may render such policies inapplicable to these lawsuits. If we are not successful in entering the new residential construction market, or if as a result of the litigation and indemnification risks associated with such market, we incur significant costs, our business and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

If we fail to successfully develop and introduce new products and services or increase the efficiency of our products, we will not be able to compete effectively, and our ability to generate revenues will suffer; technological changes in the solar power industry could render our solar power products uncompetitive or obsolete, which could reduce our market share and cause our sales to decline.

As we introduce new or enhanced products or integrate new technology into our products, we will face risks relating to such transitions including, among other things, technical challenges, disruption in customers’ ordering patterns, insufficient supplies of new products to meet customers’ demand, possible product and technology defects arising from the integration of new technology and a potentially different sales and support environment relating to any new technology. Our failure to manage the transition to newer products or the integration of newer technology into our products could adversely affect our business’ operating results and financial results.

The solar power market is characterized by continually changing technology requiring improved features, such as increased efficiency and higher power output and improved aesthetics. This will require us to continuously develop new solar power products and enhancements for existing solar power products to keep pace with evolving industry standards and changing customer requirements. Technologies developed by our direct competitors, including thin film solar panels, concentrating solar cells, solar thermal electric and other solar technologies, may provide power at lower costs.

Our failure to further refine our technology and develop and introduce new solar power products could cause our products to become uncompetitive or obsolete, which could reduce our market share and cause our sales to decline. We will need to invest significant financial resources in research and development to maintain our market position, keep pace with technological advances in the solar power industry and effectively compete in the future.

Evaluating our business and future prospects may be difficult due to our limited history in producing and shipping solar cells and solar panels in commercial volumes.

There is limited historical information available about our company upon which investors can base their evaluation of our business and prospects. Although we began to develop and commercialize high-efficiency solar cell technology for use in solar concentrators in 1988 and began shipping product from our pilot manufacturing facility in 2003, we shipped our first commercial A-300 solar cells from our Philippines manufacturing facility in late 2004. Relative to the entire solar industry, we have shipped only a limited number of solar cells and solar panels and have recognized limited revenue. Our future success will require us to continue to scale our Philippines facilities significantly beyond their current capacity and successfully build and deploy our new solar cell manufacturing facility in Malaysia. In addition, our business model, technology and ability to achieve satisfactory manufacturing yields at higher volumes are unproven at significant scale. As a result, investors should consider our business and prospects in light of the risks, expenses and challenges that we will face as an early-stage company seeking to develop and manufacture new products in a rapidly growing market.

- 64 -

Table of Contents

Our reliance on government programs to partially fund our research and development programs could impair our ability to commercialize our solar power products and services and increase our research and development expenses.

We intend to continue our policy of selectively pursuing contract research, product development and market development programs funded by various agencies of the federal and state governments to complement and enhance our own resources. Funding from government grants is generally recorded as an offset to our research and development expense. During the six months ended June 29, 2008 and July 1, 2007, funding from government grants, agreements and contracts offset approximately 28% and 15%, respectively, our total research and development expense, excluding in-process research and development. In addition, in the third quarter of 2007, we signed a Solar America Initiative agreement with the U.S. Department of Energy in which we were awarded $8.5 million in the first budgetary period. Total funding for the three-year effort is estimated to be $24.7 million. Our cost share requirement under this program, including lower-tier subcontract awards, is anticipated to be $27.9 million.

These government agencies may not continue their commitment to programs relevant to our development projects. Moreover, we may not be able to compete successfully to obtain funding through these or other programs. A reduction or discontinuance of these programs or of our participation in these programs would materially increase our research and development expenses, which would adversely affect our profitability and could impair our ability to develop our solar power products and services. In addition, contracts involving government agencies may be terminated or modified at the convenience of the agency. Many of our systems segment government awards also contain royalty provisions that require it to pay certain amounts based on specified formulas. Government awards are subject to audit and governmental agencies may dispute its royalty calculations. Any such dispute could result in fines, increased royalty payments, cancellation of the agreement or other penalties, which could have material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Our systems segment government-sponsored research contracts require that we provide regular written technical updates on a monthly, quarterly or annual basis, and, at the conclusion of the research contract, a final report on the results of our technical research. Because these reports are generally available to the public, third parties may obtain some aspects of its sensitive confidential information. Moreover, the failure to provide accurate or complete reports may provide the government with rights to any intellectual property arising from the related research. Funding from government awards also may limit when and how we can deploy our products and services developed under those contracts. For example, government awards may require that the manufacturing of products developed with federal funding be substantially conducted in the United States. In addition, technology and intellectual property that we develop with government funding provides the government with “march-in” rights. March-in rights refer to the right of the government or a government agency to require us to grant a license to the developed technology or products to a responsible applicant or, if it refuses, the government may grant the license itself. The government can exercise its march-in rights if it determines that action is necessary because we fail to achieve practical application of the technology or because action is necessary to alleviate health or safety needs, to meet requirements of federal regulations or to give the United States industry preference. In addition, government awards may include a provision providing the government with a nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license to practice or have practiced each subject invention developed under an award throughout the world by or on behalf of the government. Additional rights to technical data may be granted to the government in recognition of funding.

Because the markets in which we compete are highly competitive, we may not be able to compete successfully and we may lose or be unable to gain market share.

Our components solar products compete with a large number of competitors in the solar power market, including BP Solar International Inc., Evergreen Solar, Inc., First Solar, Inc., Kyocera Corporation, Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Motech Industries, Inc., Q-Cells AG, Sanyo Corporation, Sharp Corporation, SolarWorld AG and Suntech Power Holdings Co., Ltd. In addition, universities, research institutions and other companies such as First Solar have brought to market alternative technologies such as thin films and concentrators, which may compete with our technology in certain applications. We expect to face increased competition in the future. Further, many of our competitors are developing and are currently producing products based on new solar power technologies that may ultimately have costs similar to, or lower than, our projected costs.

Our systems solar power products and services also compete against other power generation sources including conventional fossil fuels supplied by utilities, other alternative energy sources such as wind, biomass, CSP and emerging distributed generation technologies such as micro-turbines, sterling engines and fuel cells. In the large-scale on-grid solar power systems market, we will face direct competition from a number of companies that manufacture, distribute, or install solar power systems. Many of these companies sell our products as well as their own or those of other manufacturers. Our systems segment primary competitors in the United States include BP Solar International, Inc., a subsidiary of BP p.l.c., Conergy Inc., DT Solar, EI Solutions, Inc., GE Energy, a subsidiary of General Electric Corporation, Schott Solar, Inc., Solar Integrated Technologies, Inc., SPG Solar, Inc., Sun Edison LLC, Sunlink Corporation, SunTechnics Installation & Services, Inc., Thompson Technology Industries, Inc. and WorldWater & Power Corporation. Our systems segment primary competitors in Europe include BP Solar, City Solar AG, Conergy (through its subsidiaries AET Alternitive Energie Technik GmbH, SunTechnics Solartechnik GmbH and voltwerk AG), PV-Systemtechnik Gbr, SAG Solarstrom AG, Solon AG and Taufer Solar GmbH. In addition, we will occasionally compete with distributed generation equipment suppliers such as Caterpillar, Inc. and Cummins, Inc. Other existing and potential competitors in

- 65 -

Table of Contents

the solar power market include universities and research institutions. We also expect that future competition will include new entrants to the solar power market offering new technological solutions. As we enter new markets and pursue additional applications for our systems products and services, we expect to face increased competition, which may result in price reductions, reduced margins or loss of market share.

Competition is intense, and many of our competitors have significantly greater access to financial, technical, manufacturing, marketing, management and other resources than we do. Many also have greater name recognition, a more established distribution network and a larger installed base of customers. In addition, many of our competitors have well-established relationships with our current and potential suppliers, resellers and their customers and have extensive knowledge of our target markets. As a result, these competitors may be able to devote greater resources to the research, development, promotion and sale of their products and respond more quickly to evolving industry standards and changing customer requirements than we will be able to. Consolidation or strategic alliances among such competitors may strengthen these advantages and may provide them greater access to customers or new technologies. Following any separation of our company from Cypress, customer perception of these differences may be magnified. We may also face competition from some of our systems segment resellers, who may develop products internally that compete with our systems product and service offerings, or who may enter into strategic relationships with or acquire other existing solar power system providers. To the extent that government funding for research and development grants, customer tax rebates and other programs that promote the use of solar and other renewable forms of energy are limited, we will compete for such funds, both directly and indirectly, with other renewable energy providers and their customers.

If we cannot compete successfully in the solar power industry, our operating results and financial condition will be adversely affected. Furthermore, we expect competition in systems markets to increase, which could result in lower prices or reduced demand for our systems services and have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

We expect to continue to make significant capital expenditures, particularly in our manufacturing facilities, and if adequate funds are not available or if the covenants in our credit agreements impair our ability to raise capital when needed, our ability to expand our manufacturing capacity and our business will suffer.

We expect to continue to make significant capital expenditures, particularly in our manufacturing facilities, including, for example, through building purchases or long-term leases. On May 19, 2008, we announced plans to construct our third solar cell manufacturing facility in Malaysia with an expected nameplate rating in excess of one gigawatt of annual generating capacity. The Malaysian Industrial Development Authority, or MIDA, is arranging an incentive package for SunPower to promote SunPower’s investment in the new manufacturing plant. The incentive package is conditional upon SunPower meeting certain capital investment, employment, and research and development expenditure commitments.

We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially in the foreseeable future as we expand our manufacturing operations, hire additional personnel, pay more or make advance payments for raw material, especially polysilicon, increase our sales and marketing efforts, invest in joint ventures and acquisitions, and continue our research and development efforts with respect to our products and manufacturing technologies. We expect total capital expenditures of approximately $300.0 million in 2008 as we continue to increase our solar cell and solar panel manufacturing capacity. These expenditures would be greater if we decide to bring capacity on line more rapidly. We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents, cash generated from operations and, if necessary, borrowings under our credit agreement with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., or Wells Fargo, and/or potential availability of future sources of funding will be sufficient to fund our capital and operating expenditures over the next 12 months. However, if our financial results or operating plans change from our current assumptions, or if the holders of our outstanding convertible debentures elect to convert the debentures, we may not have sufficient resources to support our business plan. For more information on our credit agreement with Wells Fargo and our outstanding convertible debentures, please see “Debt and Credit Sources” and “Liquidity” within “Item 2: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” If our capital resources are insufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements, we may seek to sell additional equity securities or debt securities or obtain other debt financing. We may also issue equity securities in the future to suppliers of raw materials in order to secure adequate materials to satisfy our production needs. The sale of additional equity securities or convertible debt securities would result in additional dilution to our stockholders. Cypress Semiconductor Corporation, which retains voting control over us, may be unwilling to permit us to engage in dilutive financing events for tax-related or other reasons. In addition, following any tax-free spin-off of our shares by Cypress, our ability to issue equity for financing purposes would be subject to limits as described in “Our agreements with Cypress require us to indemnify Cypress for certain tax liabilities. These indemnification obligations or related considerations may limit our ability to obtain additional financing, participate in future acquisitions or pursue other business initiatives.” Additional debt would result in increased expenses and could require us to abide by covenants that would restrict our operations. Our credit facilities contain customary covenants and defaults, including, among others, limitations on dividends, incurrence of indebtedness and liens and mergers and acquisitions and may restrict our operating flexibility. If adequate funds are not available on acceptable terms, our ability to fund our operations, develop and expand our manufacturing operations and distribution network, maintain our research and development efforts or otherwise respond to competitive pressures would be significantly impaired. See also “Risk Factors - We currently have a significant amount of debt outstanding. Our substantial indebtedness, along with our other contractual commitments, could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations, as well as our ability to meet any of our payment obligations under the debentures and our other debt.”

- 66 -

Table of Contents

The demand for products requiring significant initial capital expenditures such as our solar power products and services are affected by general economic conditions, such as increasing interest rates that may decrease the return on investment for certain customers or investors in projects, which could decrease demand for our systems products and services and which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

The United States and international economies have recently experienced a period of slow economic growth. A sustained economic recovery is uncertain. In particular, terrorist acts and similar events, continued turmoil in the Middle East or war in general could contribute to a slowdown of the market demand for products that require significant initial capital expenditures, including demand for solar cells and solar power systems and new residential and commercial buildings. If the economic recovery slows down as a result of the recent economic, political and social turmoil, or if there are further terrorist attacks in the United States or elsewhere, we may experience decreases in the demand for our solar power products, which may harm our operating results.

We have benefited from historically low interest rates in recent years, as these rates have made it more attractive for our customers to use debt financing to purchase our solar power systems. Interest rates have fluctuated recently and may eventually continue to rise, which will likely increase the cost of financing these systems and may reduce an operating company’s profits and investors’ expected returns on investment. This risk is becoming more significant to our systems segment, which is placing increasing reliance upon direct sales to financial institutions which sell electricity to end customers under a power purchase agreement. This sales model is highly sensitive to interest rate fluctuations and the availability of liquidity, and would be adversely affected by increases in interest rates or liquidity constraints. Rising interest rates may also make certain alternative investments more attractive to investors, and therefore lead to a decline in demand for our solar power systems, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

One of our key products, the PowerTracker®, now referred to as SunPower tracker, was acquired through an assignment and acquisition of the patents associated with the product from a third-party individual, and if we are unable to continue to use this product, our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition would be materially harmed.

In September 2002, PowerLight entered into a Technology Assignment and Services Agreement and other ancillary agreements, subsequently amended in December 2005, with Jefferson Shingleton and MaxTracker Services, LLC, a New York limited liability company controlled by Mr. Shingleton. These agreements form the basis for its intellectual property rights in its PowerTracker® products. Under such agreements, as later amended, Mr. Shingleton assigned to PowerLight all right, title and interest in his MaxTracker ™, MaxRack ™, MaxRack Ballast ™ and MaxClip ™ products and all related intellectual property rights. Mr. Shingleton is obligated to provide consulting services to PowerLight related to such technology until December 31, 2012 and is required to assign to PowerLight any enhancements he makes to the technology while providing such consulting services. Mr. Shingleton retains a first security interest in the patents and patent applications assigned until the earlier of the expiration of the patents, full payment by PowerLight to Mr. Shingleton of all of the royalty obligations under the Technology Assignment and Services Agreement, or the termination of the Technology Assignment and Services Agreement. In the event of PowerLight’s’ default under the Technology Assignment and Services Agreement, MaxTracker Services and Mr. Shingleton may terminate the agreements and the related assignments and cause the intellectual rights assigned to it to be returned to Mr. Shingleton or MaxTracker Services, including patents related to SunPower tracker. In addition, upon such termination, PowerLight must grant Mr. Shingleton a perpetual, non-exclusive, royalty-free right and license to use, sell, and otherwise exploit throughout the world any intellectual property MaxTracker Services or Mr. Shingleton developed during the provision of consulting services to PowerLight. Events of default by PowerLight which could enable Mr. Shingleton or Max Tracker Services to terminate the agreements and the related assignments and cause the intellectual rights assigned to it to be returned to Mr. Shingleton or MaxTracker Services include the following:

•

if PowerLight files a petition in bankruptcy or equivalent order or petition under the laws of any jurisdiction;

•

if a petition in bankruptcy or equivalent order or petition under the laws of any jurisdiction is filed against it which is not dismissed within 60 days of such filing;

•

if PowerLight’s assets are assigned for the benefit of creditors;

•

if PowerLight voluntarily or involuntarily dissolves;

•

if PowerLight fails to pay any amount due under the agreements when due and does not remedy such failure to pay within 10 days of written notice of such failure to pay; or

•

if PowerLight defaults in the performance of any of its material obligations under the agreements when required (other than payment of amounts due under the agreements), and such failure is not remedied within 30 days of written notice to it of such default from Mr. Shingleton or MaxTracker Services. However, if such a default can reasonably be cured after the 30-day period, and PowerLight commences cure of such default within 30-day period and diligently prosecutes that cure to completion, such default does not trigger a termination right unless and until PowerLight ceases commercially reasonable efforts to cure such default.

- 67 -

Table of Contents

If we are unable to continue to use and sell SunPower tracker as a result of the termination of the agreements and the related assignment or any other reason, our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition would be materially harmed.

We are dependent on our intellectual property, and we may face intellectual property infringement claims that could be time-consuming and costly to defend and could result in the loss of significant rights.

From time to time, we, our respective customers or third-parties with whom we work may receive letters, including letters from various industry participants, alleging infringement of their patents. Although we are not currently aware of any parties pursuing or intending to pursue infringement claims against us, we cannot assure investors that we will not be subject to such claims in the future. Additionally, we are required by contract to indemnify some of our customers and our third-party intellectual property providers for certain costs and damages of patent infringement in circumstances where our solar cells are a factor creating the customer’s or these third-party providers’ infringement liability. This practice may subject us to significant indemnification claims by our customers and our third-party providers. We cannot assure investors that indemnification claims will not be made or that these claims will not harm our business, operating results or financial condition. Intellectual property litigation is very expensive and time-consuming and could divert management’s attention from our business and could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results or financial condition. If there is a successful claim of infringement against us, our customers or our third-party intellectual property providers, we may be required to pay substantial damages to the party claiming infringement, stop selling products or using technology that contains the allegedly infringing intellectual property, or enter into royalty or license agreements that may not be available on acceptable terms, if at all. Parties making infringement claims may also be able to bring an action before the International Trade Commission that could result in an order stopping the importation into the United States of our solar cells. Any of these judgments could materially damage our business. We may have to develop non-infringing technology, and our failure in doing so or in obtaining licenses to the proprietary rights on a timely basis could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We have filed, and, may continue to file claims against other parties for infringing our intellectual property that may be very costly and may not be resolved in our favor.

To protect our intellectual property rights and to maintain our competitive advantage, we have, and may continue to, file suits against parties who we believe infringe our intellectual property. Intellectual property litigation is expensive and time consuming and could divert management’s attention from our business and could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results or financial condition, and our enforcement efforts may not be successful. Our participation in intellectual property enforcement actions may negatively impact our financial results.

We may not be able to prevent others from using the SunPower name or similar marks in connection with their solar power products which could adversely affect the market recognition of our name and our revenue.

“SunPower” is our registered trademark in the United States and the European Community for use with solar cells and solar panels. We are seeking similar registration of the “SunPower” trademark in foreign countries but we may not be successful in some of these jurisdictions. In the foreign jurisdictions where we are unable to obtain this registration or have not tried, others may be able to sell their products using trademarks compromising or incorporating “SunPower,” which could lead to customer confusion. In addition, if there are jurisdictions where another proprietor has already established trademark rights in marks containing “SunPower,” we may face trademark disputes and may have to market our products with other trademarks, which also could hurt our marketing efforts. We may encounter trademark disputes with companies using marks which are confusingly similar to the SunPower mark which if not resolved favorably could cause our branding efforts to suffer. In addition, we may have difficulty in establishing strong brand recognition with consumers if others use similar marks for similar products.

We hold registered trademarks for SunPower®, PowerLight®, PowerGuard®, PowerTracker®, SunTile®, PowerTilt® and Smarter Solar® in certain countries. We have not registered, and may not be able to register, these trademarks in other key countries.

We rely substantially upon trade secret laws and contractual restrictions to protect our proprietary rights, and, if these rights are not sufficiently protected, our ability to compete and generate revenue could suffer.

We seek to protect our proprietary manufacturing processes, documentation and other written materials primarily under trade secret and copyright laws. We also typically require employees and consultants with access to our proprietary information to execute confidentiality agreements. The steps taken by us to protect our proprietary information may not be adequate to prevent misappropriation of our technology. In addition, our proprietary rights may not be adequately protected because:

•

people may not be deterred from misappropriating our technologies despite the existence of laws or contracts prohibiting it;

•

policing unauthorized use of our intellectual property may be difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and we may be unable to determine the extent of any unauthorized use; and

- 68 -

Table of Contents

•

the laws of other countries in which we market our solar cells, such as some countries in the Asia/Pacific region, may offer little or no protection for our proprietary technologies.

Reverse engineering, unauthorized copying or other misappropriation of our proprietary technologies could enable third parties to benefit from our technologies without paying us for doing so. Any inability to adequately protect our proprietary rights could harm our ability to compete, to generate revenue and to grow our business.

We may not obtain sufficient patent protection on the technology embodied in the solar cells or solar system components we currently manufacture and market, which could harm our competitive position and increase our expenses.

Although we substantially rely on trade secret laws and contractual restrictions to protect the technology in the solar cells and solar system components we currently manufacture and market, our success and ability to compete in the future may also depend to a significant degree upon obtaining patent protection for our proprietary technology. As of June 29, 2008, including the United States and foreign countries, we owned 85 issued patents, jointly owned another four patents, and had over 120 pending patent applications across the entire company. These patent applications cover aspects of the technology in the solar cells we currently manufacture and market. Material patents that relate to our systems products and services primarily relate to our rooftop mounting products and ground-mounted tracking products. We intend to continue to seek patent protection for those aspects of our technology, designs, and methodologies and processes that we believe provide significant competitive advantages.

Our patent applications may not result in issued patents, and even if they result in issued patents, the patents may not have claims of the scope we seek. In addition, any issued patents may be challenged, invalidated or declared unenforceable. The term of any issued patents would be 20 years from their filing date and if our applications are pending for a long time period, we may have a correspondingly shorter term for any patent that may issue. Our present and future patents may provide only limited protection for our technology and may not be sufficient to provide competitive advantages to us. For example, competitors could be successful in challenging any issued patents or, alternatively, could develop similar or more advantageous technologies on their own or design around our patents. Also, patent protection in certain foreign countries may not be available or may be limited in scope and any patents obtained may not be as readily enforceable as in the United States, making it difficult for us to effectively protect our intellectual property from misuse or infringement by other companies in these countries. Our inability to obtain and enforce our intellectual property rights in some countries may harm our business. In addition, given the costs of obtaining patent protection, we may choose not to protect certain innovations that later turn out to be important.

If our ability to effectively obtain patents is decreased due to changes in patent laws or changes in the rules propagated by the US Patent and Trademark Office, or if we need to re-file some of our patent applications due to newly discovered prior art, the value of our patent portfolio and the revenue we derive from products protected by the patents may significantly decrease.

Current legislation is being considered which would make numerous changes to the patent laws, including forcing patent litigation to be filed in the defendant’s home venue, reducing damage awards for infringement, limiting enhanced damages, an expanded post-grant opposition procedure, expanding rights for third parties to submit prior art and changing to a first-to-file system. Additionally, based on situations such as newly discovered prior art, we may need to seek re-examination some of our patent applications. If our ability to effectively obtain patents is decreased due to these or similar changes, or if we need to re-file some of our patent applications due to newly discovered prior art, the value of our patent portfolio and the revenue we derive from products protected by the patents may significantly decrease.

Our success depends on the continuing contributions of our key personnel.

We rely heavily on the services of our key executive officers and the loss of services of any principal member of our management team could adversely impact our operations. In addition, our technical personnel represent a significant asset and serve as the source of our technological and product innovations. We believe our future success will depend upon our ability to retain these key employees and our ability to attract and retain other skilled managerial, engineering and sales and marketing personnel. However, we cannot guarantee that any employee will remain employed at the Company for any definite period of time since all of our employees, including our key executive officers, serve at-will and may terminate their employment at any time for any reason.

In July 2008, Emmanuel Hernandez has communicated his intent to retire as Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Hernandez has agreed to remain fully engaged in his current role until a new Chief Financial Officer is appointed, into 2009 if needed. Mr. Hernandez was previously identified in our 2008 proxy statement as one of the our named executive officers.

We may be harmed by liabilities arising out of our acquisition of SP Systems and the indemnity the selling stockholders have agreed to provide may be insufficient to compensate us for these damages.

On January 10, 2007, we completed our acquisition of SP Systems, formerly known as PowerLight Corporation. SP Systems’ former stockholders made representations and warranties to us in the acquisition agreement, including those relating to

- 69 -

Table of Contents

the accuracy of its financial statements, the absence of litigation and environmental matters and the consents needed to transfer permits, licenses and third-party contracts in connection with our acquisition of SP Systems. To the extent that we are harmed by a breach of these representations and warranties, SP Systems’ former stockholders have agreed to indemnify us for monetary damages from an escrowed proceeds account. In most cases we are required to absorb approximately the first $2.4 million before we are entitled to indemnification.

As of December 30, 2007, the escrow proceeds account was comprised of approximately $23.7 million in cash and approximately 0.7 million shares of our class A common stock, with a total aggregate value of $118.1 million. Following the first anniversary of the closing date, we authorized the release of approximately one-half of the original escrow amount, leaving approximately $12.9 million in cash and approximately 0.4 million shares of our class A common stock, with a total aggregate value of $38.9 million as of June 29, 2008. Our rights to recover damages under several provisions of the acquisition agreement also expired on the first anniversary of the closing date. As a result, we are now entitled to recover only limited types of losses, and our recovery will be limited to the amount available in the escrow fund at the time of a claim. The amount available in the escrow fund will be progressively reduced to zero on each anniversary of the closing date over a period of five years since the date of acquisition. We may incur liabilities from this acquisition which are not covered by the representations and warranties set forth in the agreement or which are non-monetary in nature. Consequently, our acquisition of SP Systems may expose us to liabilities for which we are not entitled to indemnification or our indemnification rights are insufficient.

Charges to earnings resulting from the application of the purchase method of accounting to the acquisition may adversely affect the market value of our class A common stock.

In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards, or SFAS, No. 141, “Business Combinations”, or SFAS No. 141, we accounted for the acquisition using the purchase method of accounting. Further, a portion of the purchase price paid in the acquisition has been allocated to in-process research and development. Under the purchase method of accounting, we allocated the total purchase price to SP Systems’ net tangible assets and intangible assets based on their fair values as of the date of completion of the acquisition and recorded the excess of the purchase price over those fair values as goodwill. We will incur amortization expense over the useful lives of amortizable intangible assets acquired in connection with the acquisition. In addition, to the extent the value of goodwill and long lived assets becomes impaired, we may be required to incur material charges relating to the impairment of those assets. Further, we may be impacted by nonrecurring charges related to reduced gross profit margins from the requirement to adjust SP Systems’ inventory to fair value. Finally, we will incur ongoing compensation charges associated with assumed options, equity held by employees of SP Systems and subjected to equity restriction agreements, and restricted stock granted to employees of our SP Systems business. We estimate that these charges will be approximately $75.0 million in the aggregate, a majority of which will be recognized in the first two years beginning on January 10, 2007 and lesser amounts in the succeeding two years. Any of the foregoing charges could have a material impact on our results of operations.

In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141 (revised 2007), “Business Combinations”, or SFAS No. 141(R), which replaces SFAS No. 141. SFAS No. 141(R) will significantly change the accounting for business combinations in a number of areas including the treatment of contingent consideration, contingencies, acquisition costs, in-process research and development and restructuring costs. In addition, under SFAS No. 141(R), changes in deferred tax asset valuation allowances and acquired income tax uncertainties in a business combination after the measurement period will impact income tax expense. SFAS No. 141(R) is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2008 and will be adopted for any purchase business combinations consummated subsequent to December 28, 2008.

Our headquarters and other facilities, as well as the facilities of certain of our key subcontractors, are located in regions that are subject to earthquakes and other natural disasters.

Our headquarters, including research and development operations, our manufacturing facilities and the facilities of our subcontractor upon which we rely to assemble and test our solar panels are located in countries that are subject to earthquakes and other natural disasters. Our headquarters and research and development operations are located in California, our manufacturing facilities are located in the Philippines, and the facilities of our subcontractor for assembly and test of solar panels are located in China. Since we do not have redundant facilities, any earthquake, tsunami or other natural disaster in these countries could materially disrupt our production capabilities and could result in our experiencing a significant delay in delivery, or substantial shortage, of our solar cells.

Compliance with environmental regulations can be expensive, and noncompliance with these regulations may result in adverse publicity and potentially significant monetary damages and fines.

We are required to comply with all foreign, U.S. federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding pollution control and protection of the environment. In addition, under some statutes and regulations, a government agency, or other parties, may seek recovery and response costs from operators of property where releases of hazardous substances have occurred or are ongoing, even if the operator was not responsible for such release or otherwise at fault. We use, generate and discharge toxic, volatile and otherwise hazardous chemicals and wastes in our research and development and manufacturing activities. Any failure by us to control the use of, or to restrict adequately the discharge of, hazardous substances could subject us to potentially

- 70 -

Table of Contents

significant monetary damages and fines or suspensions in our business operations. In addition, if more stringent laws and regulations are adopted in the future, the costs of compliance with these new laws and regulations could be substantial. To date such laws and regulations have not had a significant impact on our operations, and we believe that we have all necessary permits to conduct their respective operations as they are presently conducted. If we fail to comply with present or future environmental laws and regulations, however, we may be required to pay substantial fines, suspend production or cease operations. Under our separation agreement with Cypress, we will indemnify Cypress from any environmental liabilities associated with our operations and facilities in San Jose, California and the Philippines.

We maintain self-insurance for certain indemnities we have made to our officers and directors.

Our certificate of incorporation, by-laws and indemnification agreements require us to indemnify our officers and directors for certain liabilities that may arise in the course of their service to us. We primarily self-insure with respect to potential indemnifiable claims. Although we have insured our officers and directors against certain potential third-party claims for which we are legally or financially unable to indemnify them, we intend to primarily self-insure with respect to potential third-party claims which give rise to direct liability to such third-party or an indemnification duty on our part. We currently pool our resources with those of Cypress for self-insurance purposes. Following any separation of our company from Cypress this would no longer be possible and we would be subject to heightened self-insurance risk. If we were required to pay a significant amount on account of these liabilities for which we self-insure, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be seriously harmed.

Changes to financial accounting standards may affect our combined results of operations and cause us to change our business practices.

We prepare our financial statements to conform with U.S. GAAP. These accounting principles are subject to interpretation by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, the SEC and various bodies formed to interpret and create appropriate accounting policies. A change in those policies can have a significant effect on our combined reported results and may affect our reporting of transactions completed before a change is announced. Changes to those rules or the questioning of current practices may adversely affect our reported financial results or the way we conducts our business. For example, accounting policies affecting many aspects of our business, including rules relating to employee stock option grants and existing joint ventures, have recently been revised, or new guidance relating to outstanding convertible debt are being proposed.

The Financial Accounting Standards Board, or the FASB, and other agencies have made changes to U.S. GAAP, that required U.S. companies, starting in the first quarter of fiscal 2006, to record a charge to earnings for employee stock option grants and other equity incentives. We may have significant and ongoing accounting charges resulting from option grant and other equity awards that could reduce our net income or increase our net loss. In addition, since we have historically used equity-related compensation as a component of our total employee compensation program, the accounting change could make the use of equity-related compensation less attractive to us and therefore make it more difficult to attract and retain employees. In December 2003, the FASB issued the FASB Staff Position FASB Interpretation No. 46 “Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities”, or FSP FIN 46(R). The accounting method under FSP FIN 46(R) may impact our accounting for certain existing or future joint ventures or project companies for which we retain an ownership interest. In the event that we are deemed the primary beneficiary of a Variable Interest Entity (VIE) subject to the accounting of FSP FIN 46(R), we may have to consolidate the assets, liabilities and financial results of the joint venture. This could have an adverse impact on our financial position, gross margin and operating results.

With respect to our existing debt securities, we are not required under U.S. GAAP as presently in effect to record any interest or other expense in connection with our obligation to deliver upon conversion a number of shares (or an equivalent amount of cash) having a value in excess of the outstanding principal amount of the debentures. We refer to this obligation as our “net share obligation”. The accounting method for net share settled convertible securities such as ours is currently under consideration by the FASB. In May 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position APB 14-1, which clarifies the accounting for convertible debt instruments that may be settled in cash upon conversion. FSP APB 14-1 significantly impacts the accounting for our existing debt securities by requiring us to separately account for the liability and equity components of our existing debt securities in a manner that reflects interest expense equal to our non-convertible debt borrowing rate. The new guidance is expected to cause us to incur additional interest expense and potentially increase our cost of capital equipment and future depreciation expense due to capitalized interest, thereby reducing our operating results. FSP APB 14-1 is effective for fiscal years and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2008, and retrospective application will be required for all periods presented.

In addition, because the 1.8 million shares of class A common stock loaned to an affiliate of Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC in July 2007 must be returned to us prior to August 1, 2027, we believe that under U.S. GAAP as presently in effect, the borrowed shares will not be considered outstanding for the purpose of computing and reporting our earnings per share. We have a similar belief with respect to the 2.9 million shares of class A common stock we loaned to an affiliate of Lehman Brothers Inc. in connection with our February 2007 offering of 1.25% senior convertible debentures due 2027. This accounting method is also subject to change. If we become required to treat the borrowed shares as outstanding for purposes of computing earnings per share, our earnings per share would be reduced. Any reduction in our earnings per share could cause our stock price to decrease, possibly significantly.

- 71 -

Table of Contents

If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, current and potential stockholders could lose confidence in our financial reporting, which could harm our business and the trading price of our common stock.

Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires us to evaluate and report on our internal control over financial reporting and have our independent registered public accounting firm annually attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. We have in the past discovered, and may in the future discover, areas of our internal controls that need improvement. We are complying with Section 404 by strengthening, assessing and testing our system of internal controls to provide the basis for our report. However, the continuous process of strengthening our internal controls and complying with Section 404 is expensive and time consuming, and requires significant management attention. We cannot be certain that these measures will ensure that we will maintain adequate control over our financial processes and reporting, or that we or our independent registered public accounting firm will be able to provide the attestation and opinion required under Section 404 in our Annual Reports on Form 10-K. If we or our independent registered public accounting firm discover a material weakness, the disclosure of that fact, even if quickly remedied, could reduce the market’s confidence in our financial statements and harm our stock price. In addition, future non-compliance with Section 404 could subject us to a variety of administrative sanctions, including the suspension or delisting of our common stock from The Nasdaq Global Market and the inability of registered broker-dealers to make a market in our common stock, which would further reduce our stock price.

The development of a unified system of control over financial reporting may take a significant amount of management’s time and attention and, if not completed in a timely manner, could negatively impact us.

Prior to our acquisition of SP Systems in January 2007, SP Systems was not required to report on the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting because it was not subject to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. In August 2006, the audit committee of SP Systems received a letter from that company’s independent auditors identifying certain material weaknesses in that company’s internal control over financial reporting relating to that company’s audits of its Consolidated Financial Statements for 2005, 2004 and 2003. These material weaknesses included problems with financial statement close processes and procedures, inadequate accounting resources, unsatisfactory application of the percentage-of-completion accounting method, inaccurate physical inventory counts, incorrect accounting for complex capital transactions and inadequate disclosure of related party transactions. In addition, SP Systems had to restate its 2004 and 2003 financial statements to correct previously reported amounts primarily related to its contract revenue, contract costs, accrued warranty, California state sales taxes and inventory items. In July 2007, subsequent to our acquisition of SP Systems, its independent auditors completed their audit of SP Systems’ 2006 financial statements. In connection with that audit, our audit committee received a letter from the independent auditors of SP Systems identifying significant deficiencies in SP Systems’ internal control over financial reporting.

As we would for any other significant deficiencies identified by our external auditors from time to time, we have begun remediation efforts with respect to the significant deficiencies identified by SP Systems’ independent auditors. Although initiated, our plans to improve these internal controls and processes are not complete. While we expect to complete this remediation process as quickly as possible, doing so depends on several factors beyond our control, including the hiring of additional qualified personnel and, as a result, we cannot at this time estimate how long it will take to complete the steps identified above. Our management will continue to evaluate the effectiveness of the control environment in our systems segment as well the Company overall and will continue to develop and enhance internal controls. We cannot assure investors that the measures we have taken to date or any future measures will remediate the significant deficiencies reported by the Company’s independent auditors. Any failure to develop or maintain effective controls, or any difficulties encountered in their implementation or improvement, could harm our operating results or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations and may result in a restatement of our prior period financial statements. Ineffective internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which would likely have a negative effect on the trading price of our securities.

Our report on internal control over financial reporting in our annual reports on Form 10-K for the fiscal years ended December 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006 did not include an assessment of SP Systems’ internal controls. We are not required to include SP Systems, which now makes up our systems segment, in our report on internal controls until our annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 28, 2008. Unanticipated factors may hinder the effectiveness or delay the integration of our combined internal control systems post-acquisition. We cannot be certain as to whether we will be able to establish an effective, unified system of internal controls over financial reporting in a timely manner, or at all.

- 72 -

Table of Contents

Our credit agreement with Wells Fargo contains covenant restrictions that may limit our ability to operate our business.

Our Credit Agreement with Wells Fargo contains, and any of our other future debt agreements may contain, covenant restrictions that limit our ability to operate our business, including restrictions on our ability to:

• incur additional debt or issue guarantees;

• create liens;

• make certain investments or acquisitions;

• enter into transactions with our affiliates;

• sell certain assets;

• redeem capital stock or make other restricted payments;

• declare or pay dividends or make other distributions to stockholders; and

• merge or consolidate with any person.

In addition, our credit agreement contains additional affirmative and negative covenants that are more restrictive than those contained in the indenture governing the debentures. Our ability to comply with these covenants is dependent on our future performance, which will be subject to many factors, some of which are beyond our control, including prevailing economic conditions.

As a result of these covenants, our ability to respond to changes in business and economic conditions and to obtain additional financing, if needed, may be significantly restricted, and we may be prevented from engaging in transactions that might otherwise be beneficial to us. In addition, our failure to comply with these covenants could result in a default under the debentures and our other debt, which could permit the holders to accelerate such debt. If any of our debt is accelerated, we may not have sufficient funds available to repay such debt.

If the recent worsening of credit market conditions continues or increases, it could have a material adverse impact on our investment portfolio and on our sales of residential solar systems.

Recent U.S. sub-prime mortgage defaults have had a significant impact across various sectors of the financial markets, causing global credit and liquidity issues. Beginning in February 2008, the auction rate securities market experienced a significant increase in the number of failed auctions, resulting from a lack of liquidity, which occurs when sell orders exceed buy orders, and does not necessarily signify a default by the issuer. As of June 29, 2008, we held five auction rate securities totaling $25.1 million. As of August 8, 2008, all auction rate securities invested in at June 29, 2008 had failed to clear at auctions. These auction rate securities are typically over collateralized and secured by pools of student loans originated under the Federal Family Education Loan Program, or FFELP, and are guaranteed by the U.S. Department of Education, and insured. In addition, all auction rate securities held are rated by one or more of the Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations, or NRSRO, as triple-A. For failed auctions, we continue to earn interest on these investments at the maximum contractual rate as the issuer is obligated under contractual terms to pay penalty rates should auctions fail. In the event we need to access these funds, we will not be able to do so until a future auction is successful, the issuer redeems the securities, a buyer is found outside of the auction process or the securities mature. If these auction rate securities are unable to successfully clear at future auctions or issuers do not redeem the securities, we may be required to adjust the carrying value of the securities and record an impairment charge. If we determine that the fair value of these auction rate securities is temporarily impaired, we would record a temporary impairment within Condensed Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss), a component of stockholders' equity. If it is determined that the fair value of these securities is other-than-temporarily impaired, we would record a loss in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations, which could materially adversely impact our results of operations and financial condition.

Sales of our solar systems to new homebuilders, residential and commercial customers is also affected by the availability of credit financing and the general strength of the housing market and the overall economy. Continued distress in the credit markets, the housing market and the overall economy could materially adversely impact our results of operations and financial condition.

We are in the process of implementing a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system to manage our worldwide financial, accounting and operations reporting.

We have been preparing for the ERP system implementation for over a year and are taking appropriate measures to ensure the successful and timely implementation including but not limited to hiring qualified consultants and performing extensive testing. However, implementations of this scope have inherent risks that in the extreme could lead to a disruption in our financial, accounting and operations reporting as well as the inability to obtain access to key financial data.

- 73 -

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Our Debentures and Class A Common Stock

Conversion of our outstanding debentures will dilute the ownership interest of existing stockholders, including holders who had previously converted their debentures.

To the extent we issue class A common stock upon conversion of debentures, the conversion of some or all of such debentures will dilute the ownership interests of existing stockholders, including holders who had previously converted their debentures. Any sales in the public market of the class A common stock issuable upon such conversion could adversely affect prevailing market prices of our class A common stock. In addition, the existence of our outstanding debentures may encourage short selling of our common stock by market participants who expect that the conversion of the debentures could depress the price of our class A common stock.

As of the first trading day of the third quarter in fiscal 2008, holders of the 1.25% outstanding debentures were able to exercise their right to convert the debentures any day in that fiscal quarter because the closing price of our class A common stock on at least 20 of the last 30 trading days during the fiscal quarter ending June 29, 2008 has equaled or exceeded $70.94, which represents more than 125% of the applicable conversion price for our 1.25% outstanding debentures. Because the closing price of our class A common stock on at least 20 of the last 30 trading days during the fiscal quarter ending June 29, 2008 did not equal or exceed $102.80, or 125% of the applicable conversion price governing the 0.75% outstanding debentures, holders of the 0.75% outstanding debentures are unable to exercise their right to convert the debentures, based on the stock trading price trigger, any day in the third fiscal quarter beginning on June 30, 2008. This test is repeated each fiscal quarter, and prior to August 1, 2025, holders of our outstanding debentures may only exercise their right to convert during a fiscal quarter in which this test is met. After August 1, 2025, the debentures are convertible at any time.

In the event of conversion by holders of the outstanding debentures, the principal amount must be settled in cash and to the extent that the conversion obligation exceeds the principal amount of any debentures converted, we must satisfy the remaining conversion obligation of the February 2007 debentures in shares of our class A common stock, and we maintain the right to satisfy the remaining conversion obligation of the July 2007 debentures in shares of our class A common stock or cash. We intend to fund such obligations, if any, through existing cash and cash equivalents, cash generated from operations and, if necessary, borrowings under our credit agreement with Wells Fargo and/or potential availability of future sources of funding.

Substantial future sales or other dispositions of our class A or class B common stock or other securities, or short selling activity, could cause our stock price to fall.

Sales of our class A common stock in the public market or sales of any of our other securities, or the perception that such sales could occur, could cause the market price of our class A common stock to decline. As of June 29, 2008, we had approximately 40.8 million shares of class A common stock outstanding, and Cypress owned the 44.5 million outstanding shares of our class B common stock, representing approximately 55% of the total outstanding shares of our common stock. Cypress, its successors in interest and its subsidiaries may convert their shares of our class B common stock into class A common stock at any time. Subject to applicable United States federal and state securities laws, Cypress may sell or distribute to its stockholders any or all of the shares of our common stock that it owns, which may or may not include the sale of a controlling interest in us. In late 2006, Cypress announced that it was exploring ways in which to allow its stockholders to fully realize the value of its investment in our company. Since that date, Cypress has made public statements and taken actions that are consistent with these announcements. In July 2008, Cypress announced that its Board of Directors had authorized management to pursue the tax-free distribution to its stockholders of our class B common stock, with the objective of having the transaction completed by the end of 2008, or sooner if possible. In August 2008, Cypress’ Board of Directors further authorized management to take additional steps in anticipation of the proposed spin-off and sell up to 3.0 million shares of SunPower class B common stock held by Cypress prior to the completion date of the proposed spin-off. Such a distribution would significantly change the profile of our stockholders.

If Cypress elects to convert its shares of our class B common stock into shares of our class A common stock, an additional 44.5 million shares of our class A common stock will be available for sale, subject to customary sales restrictions. In addition, except in limited circumstances, Cypress has the right to cause us to register the sale of its shares of our class B common stock or class A common stock under the Securities Act. Registration of these shares under the Securities Act would result in these shares, other than shares purchased by our affiliates, becoming freely tradable without restriction under the Securities Act.

If Cypress distributes to its stockholders the shares of our class B common stock that it owns, substantially all of these shares would be eligible for immediate resale in the public market. We are unable to predict whether significant amounts of our common stock would be sold in the open market in anticipation of, or after, any such distribution. If a number of our new stockholders chose to sell their shares, or if there were a perception that such sales might occur, this might cause volatility in the trading volume, and downward pressure on the market price of, our common stock. We also are unable to predict whether a sufficient number of buyers for shares of our common stock would be in the market at that time.

- 74 -

Table of Contents

Some of the aggregate of approximately 4.7 million shares of class A common stock that we lent to underwriters of our debenture offerings are being held by such underwriters to facilitate later hedging arrangements of future purchases for debentures in the after-market. These shares may be freely sold into the market by the underwriters at any time, and such sales could depress our stock price. In addition, any hedging activity facilitated by our debenture underwriters would involve short sales or privately negotiated derivatives transactions. These or other similar transactions could further negatively affect our stock price.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports about us, our business or our market, or if they change their recommendations regarding our stock adversely, our securities prices and trading volumes could decline.

The trading markets for our class A common stock and debentures are influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts publish about us, our business or our market. If one or more of the analysts who cover us change their recommendation regarding our stock adversely, our stock and debenture prices would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts cease coverage of our company or fail to regularly publish reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause our securities prices or trading volumes to decline.

The price of our class A common stock, and therefore of our outstanding debentures, may fluctuate significantly, and a liquid trading market for our class A common stock may not be sustained.

Our class A common stock has a limited trading history in the public markets, and during that period has experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations. In addition, if Cypress distributes to its stockholders its shares of our class B common stock, the prior performance of our class A common stock may not be indicative of the performance of our common stock after the distribution by Cypress to its stockholders of its shares of our class B common stock. The trading price of our class A common stock could be subject to wide fluctuations due to the factors discussed in this risk factors section. In addition, the stock market in general, and The Nasdaq Global Market and the securities of technology companies and solar companies in particular, have experienced severe price and volume fluctuations. These trading prices and valuations, including our own market valuation and those of companies in our industry generally, may not be sustainable. These broad market and industry factors may decrease the market price of our class A common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. Because the debentures are convertible into our class A common stock, volatility or depressed prices of our class A common stock could have a similar effect on the trading price of these debentures. In addition, in the past, following periods of volatility in the overall market and the market price of a company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against these companies. This litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

The difference in the voting rights of our class A and our class B common stock may reduce the value and liquidity of our class A common stock.

The rights of class A and class B common stock are substantially similar, except with respect to voting, conversion and other protective provisions. The class B common stock is entitled to eight votes per share and the class A common stock is entitled to one vote per share. Following any tax-free spin-off of our shares by Cypress, our class B common stock would be freely tradable in the market. The difference in the voting rights of our class A and class B common stock could reduce the value of our class A common stock to the extent that any investor or potential future purchaser of our common stock ascribes value to the right of our class B common stock to eight votes per share. In addition, following a tax-free spin-off, we would be subject to the risk that an investor could acquire a degree of influence over our affairs disproportionate to its economic investment by accumulating class B common stock.

Delaware law and our certificate of incorporation and bylaws contain anti-takeover provisions that could delay or discourage takeover attempts that stockholders may consider favorable.

Provisions in our restated certificate of incorporation and bylaws may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control or changes in our management. These provisions include the following:

• the right of the board of directors to elect a director to fill a vacancy created by the expansion of the board of directors;

• the prohibition of cumulative voting in the election of directors, which would otherwise allow less than a majority of stockholders to elect director candidates;

• the requirement for advance notice for nominations for election to the board of directors or for proposing matters that can be acted upon at a stockholders’ meeting;

• the ability of the board of directors to issue, without stockholder approval, up to approximately 10.0 million shares of preferred stock with terms set by the board of directors, which rights could be senior to those of common stock; and

• in the event that Cypress distributes to its stockholders the shares of our common stock that it owns or Cypress, its successors in interest and its subsidiaries otherwise no longer collectively own shares of our common stock equal to at least 40% of the shares of all classes of our common stock then outstanding and Cypress is no longer consolidating us for accounting purposes:

- 75 -

Table of Contents

• our board of directors will be divided into three classes of directors, with the classes to be as nearly equal in number as possible;

• no action can be taken by stockholders except at an annual or special meeting of the stockholders called in accordance with our bylaws, and stockholders may not act by written consent;

• stockholders may not call special meetings of the stockholders; and

• our board of directors will be able to alter our bylaws without obtaining stockholder approval.

It is possible that we could implement additional measures that could delay or prevent a change of control in preparation for a possible tax-free spin-off by Cypress. Until such time as Cypress distributes to its stockholders the shares of our common stock that it owns or Cypress, its successor in interest and its subsidiaries otherwise collectively own less than 40% of the shares of all classes of our common stock then outstanding and Cypress is no longer consolidating us for accounting purposes, the affirmative vote of at least 75% of the then-authorized number of members of our board of directors will be required to: (1) adopt, amend or repeal our bylaws or certificate of incorporation; (2) appoint or remove our chief executive officer; (3) designate, appoint or allow for the nomination or recommendation for election by our stockholders of an individual to our board of directors; (4) change the size of our board of directors to be other than in the range of five to seven members; (5) form a committee of our board of directors or establish or change a charter, committee responsibilities or committee membership of any committee of our board of directors; (6) adopt any stockholder rights plan, “poison pill” or other similar arrangement; or (7) approve any transactions that would involve a merger, consolidation, restructuring, sale of substantially all of our assets or any of our subsidiaries or otherwise result in any person or entity obtaining control of us or any of our subsidiaries. Cypress may at any time in its sole discretion waive this requirement to obtain such a supermajority vote of our board of directors.

In addition, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, or the DGCL. These provisions may prohibit large stockholders, in particular those owning 15% or more of our outstanding voting stock, from merging or combining with us. These provisions in our restated certificate of incorporation, bylaws and under Delaware law could discourage potential takeover attempts and could reduce the price that investors might be willing to pay for shares of our common stock in the future and result in the market price being lower than they would without these provisions.

Provisions of our outstanding debentures could discourage an acquisition of us by a third party.

Certain provisions of our outstanding debentures could make it more difficult or more expensive for a third party to acquire us. Upon the occurrence of certain transactions constituting a fundamental change, holders of our outstanding debentures will have the right, at their option, to require us to repurchase, at a cash repurchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest on the debentures, all of their debentures or any portion of the principal amount of such debentures in integral multiples of $1,000. We may also be required to issue additional shares of our class A common stock upon conversion of such debentures in the event of certain fundamental changes.

We currently have a significant amount of debt outstanding. Our substantial indebtedness, along with our other contractual commitments, could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations, as well as our ability to meet any of our payment obligations under the debentures and our other debt.

We currently have a significant amount of debt and debt service requirements. As of June 29, 2008, after giving effect to our July 2007 offering of debentures, we had $425.0 million of outstanding debt for borrowed money.

This level of debt could have significant consequences on our future operations, including:

• making it more difficult for us to meet our payment and other obligations under the debentures and our other outstanding debt;

• resulting in an event of default if we fail to comply with the financial and other restrictive covenants contained in our debt agreements, which event of default could result in all of our debt becoming immediately due and payable;

• reducing the availability of our cash flow to fund working capital, capital expenditures, acquisitions and other general corporate purposes, and limiting our ability to obtain additional financing for these purposes;

• subjecting us to the risk of increased sensitivity to interest rate increases on our indebtedness with variable interest rates, including borrowings under our new credit facility;

• limiting our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, and increasing our vulnerability to, changes in our business, the industry in which we operate and the general economy; and

• placing us at a competitive disadvantage compared to our competitors that have less debt or are less leveraged.

- 76 -

Table of Contents

Any of the above-listed factors could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and our ability to meet our payment obligations under the debentures and our other debt.

In addition, we also have significant contractual commitments for the purchase of polysilicon, some of which involve prepayments, and we may enter into additional, similar agreements in the future. These commitments could have an adverse effect on our liquidity and our ability to meet our payment obligations under the debentures and our other debt.

Our ability to meet our payment and other obligations under our debt instruments depends on our ability to generate significant cash flow in the future. This, to some extent, is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative and regulatory factors as well as other factors that are beyond our control. We cannot assure investors that our business will generate cash flow from operations, or that future borrowings will be available to us under our existing or any future credit facilities or otherwise, in an amount sufficient to enable us to meet our payment obligations under our outstanding debentures and our other debt and to fund other liquidity needs. If we are not able to generate sufficient cash flow to service our debt obligations, we may need to refinance or restructure our debt, including our outstanding debentures, sell assets, reduce or delay capital investments, or seek to raise additional capital. If we are unable to implement one or more of these alternatives, we may not be able to meet our payment obligations under the debentures and our other debt and other obligations.

As of June 29, 2008, we had cash and cash equivalents of $189.5 million, while the aggregate outstanding principal balance due under the debentures was $425.0 million. For more information about our convertible debentures, please see “Liquidity” within “Item 2: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” See also “Risk Factors - We expect to continue to make significant capital expenditures, particularly in our manufacturing facilities, and if adequate funds are not available or if the covenants in our credit agreements impair our ability to raise capital when needed, our ability to expand our manufacturing capacity and our business will suffer.”

Our outstanding debentures are effectively subordinated to any existing and future secured indebtedness and structurally subordinated to existing and future liabilities and other indebtedness of our subsidiaries.

Our outstanding debentures are our general, unsecured obligations and rank equally in right of payment with all of our existing and future unsubordinated, unsecured indebtedness. All of our $425.0 million in outstanding principal amount of debentures rate equally in right of payment. Our outstanding debentures are effectively subordinated to our existing and any future secured indebtedness we may have to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness, and structurally subordinated to any existing and future liabilities and other indebtedness of our subsidiaries. These liabilities may include indebtedness, trade payables, guarantees, lease obligations and letter of credit obligations. The debentures do not restrict us or our subsidiaries from incurring indebtedness, including senior secured indebtedness in the future, nor do they limit the amount of indebtedness we can issue that is equal in right of payment.

The terms of our outstanding debentures do not contain restrictive covenants and provide only limited protection in the event of a change of control.

The indentures under which our outstanding debentures were issued do not contain restrictive covenants that would protect holders from several kinds of transactions that may adversely affect them. In particular, the indentures do not contain covenants that will limit our ability to pay dividends or make distributions on or redeem our capital stock or limit our ability to incur additional indebtedness and, therefore, may not protect holders of our debentures in the event of a highly leveraged transaction or other similar transaction. The requirement that we offer to repurchase our outstanding debentures upon a change of control is

- 77 -

Table of Contents

limited to the transactions specified in the definitions of a “fundamental change” in the indentures. Similarly, the circumstances under which we are required to adjust the conversion rate upon the occurrence of a “non-stock change of control” are limited to circumstances where a debenture is converted in connection with such a transaction as set forth in the indentures.

Accordingly, subject to restrictions contained in our other debt agreements, we could enter into certain transactions, such as acquisitions, refinancings or recapitalizations, that could affect our capital structure and the value of the debentures and our class A common stock but would not constitute a fundamental change under the debentures.

We may be unable to repurchase the debentures for cash when required by the holders, including following a fundamental change.

Holders of our outstanding debentures have the right to require us to repurchase such debentures on specified dates or upon the occurrence of a fundamental change prior to maturity as described in the indentures governing such debentures. We may not have sufficient funds to make the required repurchase in cash at such time or the ability to arrange necessary financing on acceptable terms. In addition, our ability to repurchase the debentures in cash may be limited by law or the terms of other agreements relating to our debt outstanding at the time, including our current credit facility which limits our ability to purchase the debentures for cash in certain circumstances. If we fail to repurchase the debentures in cash as required by the indenture governing the debentures, it would constitute an event of default under each indenture governing our outstanding debentures, which, in turn, would constitute an event of default under our credit facility and the other indenture.

Some significant restructuring transactions may not constitute a fundamental change, in which case we would not be obligated to offer to repurchase our outstanding debentures.

Upon the occurrence of a fundamental change, holders of our debentures will have the right to require us to repurchase their debentures. However, the fundamental change provisions of our indentures will not afford protection to holders of debentures in the event of certain transactions. For example, transactions such as leveraged recapitalizations, refinancings, restructurings or acquisitions initiated by us, as well as stock acquisitions by certain companies, would not constitute a fundamental change requiring us to repurchase the debentures. In the event of any such transaction, holders of debentures would not have the right to require us to repurchase their debentures, even though each of these transactions could increase the amount of our indebtedness, or otherwise adversely affect our capital structure or any credit ratings, thereby adversely affecting the holders of our debentures.

The adjustment to the conversion rates of our outstanding debentures upon the occurrence of certain types of fundamental changes may not adequately compensate holders for the lost option time value of their debentures as a result of such fundamental change.

If certain types of fundamental changes occur prior to August 1, 2010 with respect to our 0.75% debentures or prior to February 13, 2012 with respect to our 1.25% debentures, we may adjust the conversion rate of the debentures to increase the number of shares issuable upon conversion. The number of additional shares to be added to the conversion rate will be determined based on the date on which the fundamental change becomes effective and the price paid per share of our class A common stock in the fundamental change as described in the indentures for such debentures. Although this adjustment is designed to compensate holders for the lost option value of their debentures as a result of certain types of fundamental changes, the adjustment is only an approximation of such lost value based upon assumptions made at the time when their debentures were issued and may not adequately compensate them for such loss. In addition, with respect to our 0.75% debentures, if the price paid per share of our class A common stock in the fundamental change is less than $64.50 or more than $155.00 (subject to adjustment), or if such transaction occurs on or after August 1, 2010, there will be no such adjustment. Moreover, in no event will the total number of shares issuable upon conversion as a result of this adjustment exceed 15.5039 per $1,000 principal amount of the 0.75% debentures, subject to adjustment for stock splits, combinations and the like. With respect to our 1.25% debentures, if the price paid per share of our class A common stock in the fundamental change is less than $44.51 or more than $135.00 (subject to adjustment), or if such transaction occurs on or after February 15, 2012, there will be no such adjustment. Moreover, in no event will the total number of shares issuable upon conversion as a result of this adjustment exceed 22.4668 per $1,000 principal amount of the 1.25% debentures, subject to adjustment for stock splits, combinations and the like.

There is currently no public market for our outstanding debentures, and an active trading market may not develop for these debentures. The failure of a market to develop for our debentures could adversely affect the liquidity and value of our debentures.

We do not intend to apply for listing of the debentures on any securities exchange or for quotation of the debentures on any automated dealer quotation system. Although we have been advised by the underwriters that the underwriters intend to make a market in the debentures, none of the underwriters is obligated to do so and may discontinue market making at any time without notice. No assurance can be given as to the liquidity of the trading market, if any, for the debentures.

- 78 -

Table of Contents

An active market may not develop for any of our outstanding debentures, and there can be no assurance as to the liquidity of any market that may develop for the debentures. If active, liquid markets do not develop for our debentures, the market price and liquidity of the affected debentures may be adversely affected. Any of the debentures may trade at a discount from their initial offering price.

The liquidity of the trading market and future trading prices of our debentures will depend on many factors, including, among other things, the market price of our class A common stock, prevailing interest rates, our operating results, financial performance and prospects, the market for similar securities and the overall securities market, and may be adversely affected by unfavorable changes in these factors. Historically, the market for convertible debt has been subject to disruptions that have caused volatility in prices. It is possible that the market for our debentures will be subject to disruptions which may have a negative effect on the holders of these debentures, regardless of our operating results, financial performance or prospects.

Upon any conversion of our outstanding debentures, we will pay cash in lieu of issuing shares of our class A common stock with respect to an amount up to the principal amount of debentures converted. We retain the right to satisfy any remaining conversion obligation, in whole or part, in additional shares of class A common stock or, in the case of our 0.75% debentures, in cash, based upon a predetermined formula. Therefore, upon conversion, holders of our debentures may not receive any shares of our class A common stock, or may receive fewer shares than the number into which their debentures would otherwise be convertible.

Upon any conversion of debentures, we will pay cash in lieu of issuing shares of our common stock with respect to an amount up to the principal amount of debentures converted. We retain the right to satisfy any remaining conversion obligation, in whole or part, in additional shares of our class A common stock or, in the case of our 0.75% debentures, in cash, with respect to the conversion value in excess thereof, based on a daily conversion value (as defined herein) calculated based on a proportionate basis for each day of the 20 trading day conversion period. Accordingly, upon conversion of debentures, holders may not receive any shares of our class A common stock. In addition, because of the 20 trading day calculation period, in certain cases, settlement will be delayed until at least the 26th trading day following the related conversion date. Moreover, upon conversion of debentures, holders may receive less proceeds than expected because the price of our class A common stock may decrease (or not appreciate as much as they may expect) between the conversion date and the day the settlement amount of their debentures is determined. Further, as a result of cash payments, our liquidity may be reduced upon conversion of the debentures. In addition, in the event of our bankruptcy, insolvency or certain similar proceedings during the conversion period, there is a risk that a bankruptcy court may decide a holder’s claim to receive such cash and/or shares could be subordinated to the claims of our creditors as a result of such holder’s claim being treated as an equity claim in bankruptcy.

As of the first trading day of the third quarter in fiscal 2008, holders of the 1.25% outstanding debentures were able to exercise their right to convert the debentures any day in that fiscal quarter because the closing price of our class A common stock on at least 20 of the last 30 trading days during the fiscal quarter ending June 29, 2008 has equaled or exceeded $70.94, which represents more than 125% of the applicable conversion price for our 1.25% outstanding debentures. Because the closing price of our class A common stock on at least 20 of the last 30 trading days during the fiscal quarter ending June 29, 2008 did not equal or exceed $102.80, or 125% of the applicable conversion price governing the 0.75% outstanding debentures, holders of the 0.75% outstanding debentures are unable to exercise their right to convert the debentures, based on the stock trading price trigger, any day in the third fiscal quarter beginning on June 30, 2008. This test is repeated each fiscal quarter, and prior to August 1, 2025, holders of our outstanding debentures may only exercise their right to convert during a fiscal quarter in which the test was met. After August 1, 2025, the debentures are convertible at any time.

As of March 30, 2008, we had cash and cash equivalents of $189.5 million, while the aggregate outstanding principal balance due under the debentures was $425.0 million. For more information about our convertible debentures, please see “Liquidity” within “Item 2: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

The conditional conversion features of our outstanding debentures could result in holders receiving less than the value of the class A common stock into which a debenture would otherwise be convertible.

At certain times, the debentures are convertible into cash and, if applicable, shares of our class A common stock only if specified conditions are met. If these conditions are not met, holders will not be able to convert their debentures at that time, and, upon a later conversion, holders may not be able to receive the value of the class A common stock into which the debentures would otherwise have been convertible had such conditions been met.

- 79 -

Table of Contents

The conversion rate of our outstanding debentures may not be adjusted for all dilutive events that may adversely affect their trading prices or the class A common stock issuable upon conversion of these debentures.

The conversion rates of our outstanding debentures are subject to adjustment upon certain events, including the issuance of stock dividends on our class A common stock, the issuance of rights or warrants, subdivisions, combinations, distributions of capital stock, indebtedness or assets, cash dividends and issuer tender or exchange offers. The conversion rates will not be adjusted for certain other events, including, for example, upon the issuance of additional shares of stock for cash, any of which may adversely affect the trading price of our debentures or the class A common stock issuable upon conversion of the debentures. Even if the conversion price is adjusted for a dilutive event, such as a leveraged recapitalization, it may not fully compensate holders for their economic loss.

Holders of our debentures will not be entitled to any rights with respect to our class A common stock, but they will be subject to all changes made with respect to our class A common stock.

Holders of our debentures will not be entitled to any rights with respect to our class A common stock (including, without limitation, voting rights and rights to receive any dividends or other distributions on our class A common stock), but they will be subject to all changes affecting our class A common stock. Holders will have rights with respect to our class A common stock only if they convert their debentures, which they are permitted to do only in limited circumstances. For example, in the event that an amendment is proposed to our certificate of incorporation or bylaws requiring stockholder approval and the record date for determining the stockholders of record entitled to vote on the amendment occurs prior to delivery of our class A common stock to holders, they will not be entitled to vote on the amendment, although they will nevertheless be subject to any changes in the powers, preferences or rights of our class A common stock.

Our outstanding debentures may not be rated or may receive lower ratings than anticipated.

We do not intend to seek a rating on any of our outstanding debentures. However, if one or more rating agencies rates these debentures and assigns them a rating lower than the rating expected by investors, or reduces their ratings in the future, the market price of the affected debentures and our class A common stock could be reduced.

Risks Related to Our Relationship with Cypress Semiconductor Corporation

As long as Cypress controls us, the ability of our other stockholders to influence matters requiring stockholder approval will be limited.

As of June 29, 2008, Cypress owned all 44.5 million shares of outstanding our class B common stock, representing approximately 55% of the total outstanding shares of our common stock, or approximately 52% of such shares on a fully diluted basis after taking into account outstanding options (or 49% of such shares on a fully diluted basis after taking into account outstanding stock options and loaned shares to underwriters of our convertible indebtedness), and 90% of the voting power of our outstanding capital stock.

Shares of our class A common stock and our class B common stock have substantially similar rights, preferences and privileges except with respect to certain voting and conversion rights and other protective provisions. Shares of our class B common stock are entitled to eight votes per share of class B common stock, and shares of our class A common stock are entitled to one vote per share of class A common stock. Cypress, its successors in interest or its subsidiaries may convert their shares of our class B common stock into shares of our class A common stock on a one-for-one basis at any time. Prior to a tax-free distribution by Cypress of its shares of our class B common stock to its stockholders, the class B common shares will automatically convert into shares of class A common stock if such shares are transferred to a person other than Cypress, its successors in interest or its subsidiaries. In most circumstances in the event that Cypress owns less than 40% of the shares of all classes of our common stock then outstanding, each outstanding share of class B common stock will automatically convert into one share of class A common stock. By virtue of its ownership of class B common stock, Cypress is able to elect all of the members of our board of directors.

In addition, until such time as Cypress distributes to its stockholders the shares of our common stock that it owns or Cypress, its successors in interest and its subsidiaries otherwise collectively own less than 40% of the shares of all classes of our common stock then outstanding and Cypress is no longer consolidating us for accounting purposes, Cypress will have the ability to take stockholder action without the vote of any other stockholder and, by virtue of the voting power afforded the shares of our class B common stock, investors will not be able to affect the outcome of any stockholder vote during this period. As a result, Cypress will have the ability to control all matters affecting us, including:

• the composition of our board of directors and, through the board of directors, any determination with respect to the combined company’s business plans and policies, including the appointment and removal of officers;

• any determinations with respect to mergers and other business combinations;

- 80 -

Table of Contents

• our acquisition or disposition of assets;

• our financing activities;

• changes to the agreements providing for our separation from Cypress;

• the allocation of business opportunities that may be suitable for us;

• the payment of dividends on our class A common stock; and

• the number of shares available for issuance under our stock plans.

For the reasons described above, Cypress may be unwilling to support certain corporate transactions proposed by us that could dilute its ownership below 40%, including financings or acquisitions effected through the issuance of our securities. In addition, Cypress may have tax-related or other objectives that cause it to be unwilling to support these or other transactions that dilute its ownership below 50%. Cypress’s voting control may also discourage transactions involving a change of control of SunPower, including transactions in which holders of our class A common stock might otherwise receive a premium for their shares over the then current market price. Cypress is not prohibited from selling a controlling interest in us to a third party and may do so without approval of holders of our class A common stock and without providing for a purchase of our class A common stock. Accordingly, shares of our class A common stock may be worth less than they would be if Cypress did not maintain voting control over us.

Our agreements with Cypress require us to indemnify Cypress for certain tax liabilities. These indemnification obligations or related considerations may limit our ability to obtain additional financing, participate in future acquisitions or pursue other business initiatives.

We have entered into a tax sharing agreement with Cypress, under which we and Cypress agree to indemnify one another for certain taxes and similar obligations that the other party could incur under certain circumstances. In general, we will be responsible for taxes relating to our business. Furthermore, we may be held jointly and severally liable for taxes determined on a consolidated basis for the entire Cypress group for any particular taxable year that we are a member of the group even though Cypress is required to indemnify us for its taxes pursuant to the tax sharing agreement. As of June 2006, we ceased to be a member of the Cypress consolidated group for federal income tax purposes and most state income tax purposes. Thus, to the extent that we become entitled to utilize on our separate tax returns portions of those credit or loss carryforwards existing as of such date, we will distribute to Cypress the tax effect (estimated to be 40% for federal and state income tax purposes) of the amount of such tax loss carryforwards so utilized and the amount of any credit carryforwards so utilized. We will distribute these amounts to Cypress in cash or in our shares, at our option. Accordingly, we will be subject to the obligations payable to Cypress for any federal income tax credit or loss carryforwards utilized in our federal tax returns. As of December 30, 2007, we had $44.0 million of federal net operating loss carryforwards and approximately $73.5 million of California net operating loss carryforwards, meaning that such potential future payments to Cypress, which would be made over a period of several years, would therefore aggregate to approximately $19.1 million. The majority of these net operating loss carryforwards were created by employee stock transactions. Because there is uncertainty as to the realizability of these loss carryforwards, the portion created by employee stock transactions are not reflected on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. If these losses were reflected on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets, to the extent the deductions were not matched against previous stock-based compensation charges, the loss carryforwards would be accounted for as an increase to deferred tax assets and stockholders’ equity.

Subject to certain caveats, Cypress has obtained a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) to the effect that a distribution by Cypress of the our class B common stock to Cypress stockholders will qualify as a tax-free distribution under Section 355 of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Code”). Despite such ruling, the distribution may nonetheless be taxable to Cypress under Section 355(e) of the Code if 50% or more of our voting power or economic value is acquired as part of a plan or series of related transactions that includes the distribution of our stock. The tax sharing agreement includes our obligation to indemnify Cypress for any liability incurred as a result of issuances or dispositions of our stock after the distribution, other than liability attributable solely to certain dispositions of our stock by Cypress, that cause Cypress’ distribution of shares of our stock to its stockholders to be taxable to Cypress under Section 355(e) of the Code. Under current law, following a distribution by Cypress and for up to two years thereafter (or possibly longer if we are acting pursuant to a preexisting plan), our obligation to indemnify Cypress will be triggered only if we issue stock or otherwise participate in one or more transactions other than the distribution in which 50% or more of our voting power or economic value is acquired in financing or acquisition transactions that are part of a plan or series of related transactions that includes the distribution. If such an indemnification obligation is triggered, the extent of our liability to Cypress will generally equal the product of (a) Cypress’ top marginal federal and state income tax rate for the year of the distribution, and (b) the difference between the fair market value of our class B common stock distributed to Cypress stockholders and Cypress’ tax basis in such stock as determined on the date of the distribution.

- 81 -

Table of Contents

For example, under the current tax rules, if Cypress was to make a complete distribution of its shares of our class B common stock, and our total outstanding capital stock at the time of such distribution were 84 million shares, unless we qualified for one of several safe harbor exemptions available under the Treasury Regulations, in order to avoid our indemnification obligation to Cypress, we could not, for up two years (or possibly longer if we are acting pursuant to a preexisting plan) from the date of Cypress’ distribution, issue 84 million or more shares of our class A common stock, nor could we participate in one or more transactions (excluding the distribution itself) in which 42 million or more shares of our then-existing class A common stock were to be acquired in connection with a plan or series of related transactions that includes the distribution. In addition, these limits could be lower depending on certain actions that we or Cypress might take before or after a distribution. If we were to participate in such a transaction, assuming Cypress distributed 44.5 million shares, Cypress’ top marginal income tax rate was 40% for federal and state income tax purposes, the fair market value of our class B common stock was $80.00 per share and Cypress’ tax basis in such stock was $5.00 per share on the date of their distribution, then our liability under our indemnification obligation to Cypress would be approximately $1.3 billion.

In order to preserve various options for the separation of our two companies, we and Cypress may seek to preserve Cypress’ ownership of our company at certain levels. Any such effort could limit our ability to use our equity to raise capital, pursue acquisitions, compensate employees or engage in other business initiatives. In addition, our ability to use our equity to obtain additional financing or to engage in acquisition transactions for a period of time after a tax-free distribution of our shares by Cypress will be restricted if we can only sell or issue a limited amount of our stock before triggering our obligation to indemnify Cypress for taxes it incurs under Section 355(e) of the Code. Separation of the two companies is dependent, to a large degree, on the tax efficient provisions within the tax law. Changes to these provisions, either through change of statute or judicial interpretation, may render the separation strategy less attractive.

Third parties may seek to hold us responsible for liabilities of Cypress.

Under our separation agreements with Cypress, Cypress will indemnify us for claims and losses relating to liabilities related to Cypress’ business and not related to our business. However, if those liabilities are significant and we are ultimately held liable for them, we cannot assure investors that we will be able to recover the full amount of our losses from Cypress.

Our inability to resolve any disputes that arise between us and Cypress with respect to our past and ongoing relationships may harm our business.

Disputes may arise between Cypress and us in a number of areas relating to our past and ongoing relationships, including:

•

labor, tax, employee benefit, indemnification and other matters arising from our separation from Cypress;

•

employee retention and recruiting;

•

business combinations involving us;

•

pricing for transitional services;

•

sales or distributions by Cypress of all or any portion of its ownership interest in us;

•

the nature, quality and pricing of services Cypress has agreed to provide us; and

•

business opportunities that may be attractive to both Cypress and us.

We may not be able to resolve any potential conflicts, and even if we do, the resolution may be less favorable than if we were dealing with an unaffiliated party.

The agreements we entered into with Cypress may be amended upon agreement between the parties. While we are controlled by Cypress, we may not have the leverage to negotiate amendments to these agreements if required on terms as favorable to us as those we would negotiate with an unaffiliated third party.

Our ability to operate our business effectively may suffer if we are unable to cost-effectively establish our own administrative and other support functions in order to operate as a stand-alone company after the expiration of our services agreements with Cypress.

As a subsidiary of Cypress, we have relied on administrative and other resources of Cypress to operate our business. In connection with our initial public offering, we entered into various service agreements to retain the ability for specified periods to use these Cypress resources. These agreements will expire upon the earlier of November 2009 or a change of control of our company. We will need to operate our own administrative and other support systems or contract with third parties to replace Cypress’ systems. These services may not be provided at the same level as when we were a wholly owned subsidiary of Cypress, and we may not be able to obtain the same benefits that we received prior to the separation. Any failure or significant downtime in our own administrative systems or in Cypress’ administrative systems during the transitional period could result in unexpected costs, impact our results and/or prevent us from paying our suppliers or employees and performing other administrative services on a timely basis.

Some of our directors and executive officers may have conflicts of interest because of their ownership of Cypress common stock, options to acquire Cypress common stock or their positions as executives or directors at Cypress.

Some of our directors and executive officers own Cypress common stock and/or options to purchase Cypress common stock. In addition, some of our directors are executive officers and/or directors of Cypress. Ownership of Cypress common stock and options to purchase Cypress common stock by our directors and officers and the presence of executive officers or directors of Cypress on our board of directors could create, or appear to create, conflicts of interest with respect to matters involving both us and Cypress. For example, corporate opportunities may arise that concern both of our businesses, such as the potential acquisition of a particular business or technology that is complementary to both of our businesses. In these situations, our amended and

- 82 -

Table of Contents

restated certificate of incorporation provides that directors and officers who are also directors or officers of Cypress have no duty to communicate or present such corporate opportunity to us unless it is specifically applicable to the solar energy business and not applicable to or reasonably related to any business conducted by Cypress, have the right to deal with such corporate opportunity in their sole discretion and shall not be liable to us or our stockholders for breach of fiduciary duty by reason of the fact that such director or officer pursues or acquires such corporate opportunity for itself or for Cypress. In addition, we have not established at this time procedural mechanisms to address all actual or perceived conflicts of interest of these directors and officers and expect that our board of directors, in the exercise of its fiduciary duties, will determine how to address any actual or perceived conflicts of interest on a case-by-case basis. If any corporate opportunity arises and if our directors and officers do not pursue it on our behalf pursuant to the provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, we may not become aware of, and may potentially lose, a significant business opportunity.

Because Cypress is not obligated to distribute to its stockholders or otherwise dispose of our common stock that it owns, we will continue to be subject to the risks described above relating to Cypress’ control of us if Cypress does not complete such a transaction.

Cypress is not obligated to distribute to its stockholders or otherwise dispose of the shares of our class B common stock that it beneficially owns, although it might elect to do so in the future. Completion of any distribution transaction could be contingent upon, among other things, the receipt of a favorable tax ruling from the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, and/or a favorable opinion of Cypress’ tax advisor as to the tax-free nature of such a transaction for U.S. federal income tax purposes. The provisions allowing for a tax efficient distribution may be amended by legislative or judicial interpretation in the future, affecting Cypress’ willingness to distribute or dispose of our class B common stock. In July 2008, Cypress announced that its Board of Directors had authorized management to pursue the tax-free distribution to its stockholders of our class B common stock, with the objective of having the transaction completed by the end of 2008, or sooner if possible. In August 2008, Cypress’ Board of Directors further authorized management to take additional steps in anticipation of the proposed spin-off and sell up to 3.0 million shares of SunPower class B common stock held by Cypress prior to the completion date of the proposed spin-off.

Unless and until such a distribution occurs or Cypress otherwise disposes of shares so that it, its successors in interest and its subsidiaries collectively own less than 40% of the shares of all classes of our common stock then outstanding, we will continue to face the risks described above relating to Cypress’ control of us and potential conflicts of interest between Cypress and us. We may be unable to realize potential benefits that could result from such a distribution by Cypress, such as greater strategic focus, greater access to capital markets, better incentives for employees and more accountable management, although we cannot guarantee that we would realize any of these potential benefits if such a distribution did occur. In addition, speculation by the press, investment community, our customers, our competitors or others regarding whether Cypress intends to complete such a distribution or otherwise dispose of its controlling interest in us could harm our business or lead to volatility in our stock price.

So long as Cypress continues to hold a controlling interest in us or is otherwise a significant stockholder, the liquidity and market price of our class A common stock may be adversely impacted. In addition, there can be no assurance that Cypress will distribute or otherwise dispose of any of its remaining shares of our class B common stock.

Cypress may not complete its proposed spin-off of our class B common stock.

In April 2008, Cypress announced that it received a favorable ruling from the Internal Revenue Service with respect to certain tax issues relating to a potential spin-off to its stockholders of its current ownership of the class B common stock of SunPower. In July 2008, Cypress announced that its Board of Directors had authorized management to pursue the tax-free distribution to its stockholders of our class B common stock, with the objective of having the transaction completed by the end of 2008, or sooner if possible. Cypress’ Board of Directors has not definitively determined to effect such a distribution and has not established a record date for the payment to its stockholders of a dividend of our class B common stock. The proposed distribution may not be effected for a number of reasons, including if unexpected challenges arise in connection with the necessary steps required for the distribution. In addition, Cypress’ Board of Directors may reconsider the proposed distribution under certain circumstances, including if a significant change in the trading price of either Cypress or SunPower common stock were to occur. Any decision not to pursue the proposed distribution could adversely affect the trading price for our common stock.

Cypress’ ability to replace our board of directors may make it difficult for us to recruit independent directors.

Cypress may at any time replace our entire board of directors. Furthermore, some actions of our board of directors require the approval of 75% of our directors except to the extent this condition is waived by Cypress. As a result, unless and until Cypress, its successors in interest and its subsidiaries collectively own less than 40% of the shares of all classes of our common stock then outstanding and Cypress is no longer consolidating us for accounting purposes, Cypress could exercise significant control over our board of directors. As such, individuals who might otherwise accept a board position at SunPower may decline to serve, and Cypress may be able to control important decisions made by our Board of Directors.

- 83 -

Table of Contents

Item 4.

Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

At our Annual Meeting of Stockholders on May 8, 2008, stockholders (1) elected each of the director nominees; (2) ratified the appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 28, 2008; (3) approved the Second Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation 2005 Stock Incentive Plan that (a) increased the number of shares of class A common stock reserved for issuance under the stock plan by 1,700,000, (b) provided, beginning in 2009, for the automatic annual increase in the total number of shares of class A common stock reserved for issuance under the stock plan, (c) made certain changes to the permitted qualifying criteria for performance-based equity awards under the stock plan, (d) made certain changes to the compensation of directors under the stock plan, and (e) made certain other conforming and technical amendments to the stock plan; and (4) approved the Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation Annual Key Employee Bonus Plan. Each holder of shares of class A common stock was entitled to one vote for each share of class A common stock held as of the record date of March 12, 2008, and each holder of shares of class B common stock was entitled to eight votes for each share of class B common stock held as of such date. After giving effect to the increased voting power of class B common stock, all of which was held by Cypress, the voting results were as follows:

1.	Proposal One — Election of Directors:

	Number of Votes
	For	Withheld
W. Steve Albrecht	386,310,192	1,134,550
Betsy S. Atkins	386,414,648	1,030,094
T. J. Rodgers	386,564,818	879,923
Thomas H. Werner	386,575,016	869,725
Pat Wood III	386,481,353	963,389

2.	Proposal Two — Ratification of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP:

Number of Votes
For	Against	Abstain	Broker Non-Votes
387,043,732	121,059	279,950	0

3.	Proposal Three — Approval of the Second Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation 2005 Stock Incentive Plan:

Number of Votes
For	Against	Abstain	Broker Non-Votes
361,922,345	16,240,587	288,695	8,993,115

4.	Proposal Four — Approval of the Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation Annual Key Employee Bonus Plan:

Number of Votes
For	Against	Abstain	Broker Non-Votes
386,183,068	924,985	336,688	0

- 84 -

Table of Contents

Item 6.

Exhibits

Exhibit Number		Description
3.1		Form of Restated Certificate of Incorporation of SunPower Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.(i)2 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1/A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 15, 2005).
3.2		Form of By-laws of SunPower Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.(ii)2 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1/A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 11, 2005).
10.1†		Fourth Amendment to Credit Agreement, dated April 4, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.
10.2†		First Amendment to Security Agreement: Deposit Account, dated April 4, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.
10.3†		Securities Account Control Agreement: Securities Account, dated April 4, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.
10.4†		Addendum to Security Agreement: Securities Account, dated April 4, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.
10.5		Joinder to Continuing Guaranty, dated April 4, 2008, by SunPower Systems SA.
10.6		Third Amendment to Lease, dated April 7, 2008, between SunPower Corporation and Cypress Semiconductor Corporation.
10.7		Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation Annual Key Employee Bonus Plan.
10.8		Second Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation 2005 Stock Incentive Plan and forms of agreements thereunder (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 9, 2008).
10.9		Offer Letter, dated May 13, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Marty Neese.
10.10†		First Amendment to Ingot and Wafer Agreement, dated May 14, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Jiawei SolarChina Co., Ltd.
10.11		Fifth Amendment to Credit Agreement, dated May 19, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.
10.12†		Amended and Restated Addendum to Security Agreement: Securities Account, dated May 19, 2008, between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank National Association.
10.13		Third Amendment to Lease, dated May 23, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation, Systems and FPOC, LLC.
31.1		Certification by Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a).
31.2		Certification by Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a).
32.1		Certification Furnished Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A cross (†) indicates that confidential treatment has been requested for portions of the marked exhibits.

- 85 -

Table of Contents

SIGNATURE

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereto duly authorized.

	SUNPOWER CORPORATION

Dated: August 8, 2008	By:	/s/ EMMANUEL T. HERNANDEZ

		Emmanuel T. Hernandez
		Chief Financial Officer

- 86 -

Table of Contents

Index to Exhibits

Exhibit Number		Description
3.1		Form of Restated Certificate of Incorporation of SunPower Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.(i)2 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1/A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 15, 2005).
3.2		Form of By-laws of SunPower Corporation (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.(ii)2 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1/A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 11, 2005).
10.1†		Fourth Amendment to Credit Agreement, dated April 4, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.
10.2†		First Amendment to Security Agreement: Deposit Account, dated April 4, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.
10.3†		Securities Account Control Agreement: Securities Account, dated April 4, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.
10.4†		Addendum to Security Agreement: Securities Account, dated April 4, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.
10.5		Joinder to Continuing Guaranty, dated April 4, 2008, by SunPower Systems SA.
10.6		Third Amendment to Lease, dated April 7, 2008, between SunPower Corporation and Cypress Semiconductor Corporation.
10.7		Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation Annual Key Employee Bonus Plan.
10.8		Second Amended and Restated SunPower Corporation 2005 Stock Incentive Plan and forms of agreements thereunder (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 9, 2008).
10.9		Offer Letter, dated May 13, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Marty Neese.
10.10†		First Amendment to Ingot and Wafer Agreement, dated May 14, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Jiawei SolarChina Co., Ltd.
10.11		Fifth Amendment to Credit Agreement, dated May 19, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association.
10.12†		Amended and Restated Addendum to Security Agreement: Securities Account, dated May 19, 2008, between SunPower Corporation and Wells Fargo Bank National Association.
10.13		Third Amendment to Lease, dated May 23, 2008, by and between SunPower Corporation, Systems and FPOC, LLC.
31.1		Certification by Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a).
31.2		Certification by Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a).
32.1		Certification Furnished Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A cross (†) indicates that confidential treatment has been requested for portions of the marked exhibits.

- 87 -