Form 10-Q
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2010
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 1-4858
INTERNATIONAL FLAVORS & FRAGRANCES INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
New York
|
|
13-1432060 |
|
|
|
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.) |
521 West 57th Street, New York, N.Y. 10019-2960
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
Registrants telephone number, including area code (212) 765-5500
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for
such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months
(or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a
non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
(Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer þ
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
Number of shares outstanding as of July 23, 2010: 79,857,989
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM 1. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
INTERNATIONAL FLAVORS & FRAGRANCES INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
110,552 |
|
|
$ |
80,135 |
|
Trade receivables |
|
|
484,492 |
|
|
|
454,528 |
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts |
|
|
(8,496 |
) |
|
|
(10,263 |
) |
Inventories: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raw materials |
|
|
237,273 |
|
|
|
228,999 |
|
Work in process |
|
|
9,041 |
|
|
|
9,173 |
|
Finished goods |
|
|
208,294 |
|
|
|
206,805 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Inventories |
|
|
454,608 |
|
|
|
444,977 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
66,493 |
|
|
|
55,002 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
115,971 |
|
|
|
103,687 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Current Assets |
|
|
1,223,620 |
|
|
|
1,128,066 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, at cost |
|
|
1,234,109 |
|
|
|
1,265,885 |
|
Accumulated depreciation |
|
|
(752,068 |
) |
|
|
(764,592 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
482,041 |
|
|
|
501,293 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill |
|
|
665,582 |
|
|
|
665,582 |
|
Intangible assets, net |
|
|
51,870 |
|
|
|
54,948 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
136,143 |
|
|
|
129,720 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
167,626 |
|
|
|
165,165 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
2,726,882 |
|
|
$ |
2,644,774 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bank borrowings and overdrafts and current portion of long-term debt |
|
$ |
48,739 |
|
|
$ |
76,780 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
155,056 |
|
|
|
161,027 |
|
Accrued payroll and bonus |
|
|
59,576 |
|
|
|
49,022 |
|
Accrued taxes on income |
|
|
29,190 |
|
|
|
1,913 |
|
Dividends payable |
|
|
19,964 |
|
|
|
19,786 |
|
Restructuring and other charges |
|
|
19,315 |
|
|
|
18,914 |
|
Other current liabilities |
|
|
163,519 |
|
|
|
157,012 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Current Liabilities |
|
|
495,359 |
|
|
|
484,454 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
934,600 |
|
|
|
934,749 |
|
Deferred gains |
|
|
52,576 |
|
|
|
54,884 |
|
Retirement liabilities |
|
|
241,669 |
|
|
|
240,950 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
154,647 |
|
|
|
157,827 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Other Liabilities |
|
|
1,383,492 |
|
|
|
1,388,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and Contingencies (Note 13) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock 12 1/2¢ par value; authorized 500,000,000 shares; issued
115,761,840
shares as of June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009; and outstanding
79,860,012 and 79,157,393 shares as of June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 |
|
|
14,470 |
|
|
|
14,470 |
|
Capital in excess of par value |
|
|
100,502 |
|
|
|
110,374 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
2,430,322 |
|
|
|
2,339,205 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
|
|
(303,606 |
) |
|
|
(270,974 |
) |
Treasury stock, at cost - 35,901,828 shares as of June 30, 2010 and 36,604,447
shares as of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
(1,396,918 |
) |
|
|
(1,424,072 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Shareholders Equity |
|
|
844,770 |
|
|
|
769,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncontrolling interest |
|
|
3,261 |
|
|
|
2,907 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Shareholders Equity including noncontrolling interest |
|
|
848,031 |
|
|
|
771,910 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Shareholders Equity |
|
$ |
2,726,882 |
|
|
$ |
2,644,774 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
2
INTERNATIONAL FLAVORS & FRAGRANCES INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME
(AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
665,800 |
|
|
$ |
568,261 |
|
|
$ |
1,319,710 |
|
|
$ |
1,127,891 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of goods sold |
|
|
380,799 |
|
|
|
340,347 |
|
|
|
764,501 |
|
|
|
677,912 |
|
Research and development expenses |
|
|
55,844 |
|
|
|
44,248 |
|
|
|
108,475 |
|
|
|
91,578 |
|
Selling and administrative expenses |
|
|
119,523 |
|
|
|
96,032 |
|
|
|
227,532 |
|
|
|
188,918 |
|
Restructuring and other charges |
|
|
1,843 |
|
|
|
4,104 |
|
|
|
6,831 |
|
|
|
4,104 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
12,051 |
|
|
|
14,047 |
|
|
|
24,787 |
|
|
|
33,828 |
|
Other (income) expense, net |
|
|
2,107 |
|
|
|
1,569 |
|
|
|
4,871 |
|
|
|
406 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
572,167 |
|
|
|
500,347 |
|
|
|
1,136,997 |
|
|
|
996,746 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before taxes on income |
|
|
93,633 |
|
|
|
67,914 |
|
|
|
182,713 |
|
|
|
131,145 |
|
Taxes on income |
|
|
26,481 |
|
|
|
19,831 |
|
|
|
51,772 |
|
|
|
35,866 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
|
67,152 |
|
|
|
48,083 |
|
|
|
130,941 |
|
|
|
95,279 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments |
|
|
(24,820 |
) |
|
|
43,393 |
|
|
|
(35,896 |
) |
|
|
67,434 |
|
Gains (losses) on derivatives
qualifying as hedges |
|
|
(473 |
) |
|
|
(385 |
) |
|
|
(187 |
) |
|
|
1,196 |
|
Pension and postretirement net liability
adjustment |
|
|
1,659 |
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
3,451 |
|
|
|
2,275 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income |
|
$ |
43,518 |
|
|
$ |
91,542 |
|
|
$ |
98,309 |
|
|
$ |
166,184 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per share basic |
|
$ |
0.84 |
|
|
$ |
0.61 |
|
|
$ |
1.65 |
|
|
$ |
1.21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per share diluted |
|
$ |
0.83 |
|
|
$ |
0.60 |
|
|
$ |
1.63 |
|
|
$ |
1.20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of shares outstanding basic |
|
|
79,188 |
|
|
|
78,352 |
|
|
|
78,978 |
|
|
|
78,273 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of shares outstanding
diluted |
|
|
80,111 |
|
|
|
79,050 |
|
|
|
79,902 |
|
|
|
78,898 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends declared per share |
|
$ |
0.25 |
|
|
$ |
0.25 |
|
|
$ |
0.50 |
|
|
$ |
0.50 |
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
3
INTERNATIONAL FLAVORS & FRAGRANCES INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
130,941 |
|
|
$ |
95,279 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile to net cash provided by operations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
40,221 |
|
|
|
38,263 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(14,737 |
) |
|
|
7,165 |
|
Gain on disposal of assets |
|
|
(1,845 |
) |
|
|
(1,487 |
) |
Equity based compensation |
|
|
10,780 |
|
|
|
10,136 |
|
Changes in assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current receivables |
|
|
(53,766 |
) |
|
|
(61,681 |
) |
Inventories |
|
|
(30,384 |
) |
|
|
47,268 |
|
Current payables |
|
|
58,580 |
|
|
|
(27,461 |
) |
Other assets |
|
|
(21,818 |
) |
|
|
(18,142 |
) |
Other liabilities |
|
|
9,668 |
|
|
|
(1,803 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operations |
|
|
127,640 |
|
|
|
87,537 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to property, plant and equipment |
|
|
(37,013 |
) |
|
|
(18,545 |
) |
Purchase of investments |
|
|
(2,444 |
) |
|
|
(1,882 |
) |
Termination / maturity of net investment hedge |
|
|
1,668 |
|
|
|
(13,604 |
) |
Proceeds from disposal of assets |
|
|
1,438 |
|
|
|
835 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(36,351 |
) |
|
|
(33,196 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends paid to shareholders |
|
|
(39,631 |
) |
|
|
(39,338 |
) |
Net change in bank borrowings and overdrafts |
|
|
(33,637 |
) |
|
|
(25,878 |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of stock under stock-based
compensation plans |
|
|
14,674 |
|
|
|
1,507 |
|
Purchase of treasury stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,967 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(58,594 |
) |
|
|
(65,676 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(2,278 |
) |
|
|
(3,317 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
30,417 |
|
|
|
(14,652 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year |
|
|
80,135 |
|
|
|
178,467 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
110,552 |
|
|
$ |
163,815 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid |
|
$ |
26,614 |
|
|
$ |
40,436 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes paid |
|
$ |
30,715 |
|
|
$ |
24,002 |
|
See Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
4
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
These interim statements and managements related discussion and analysis should be read in
conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and their related notes and managements
discussion and analysis of results of operations and financial condition included in our 2009
Annual Report on Form 10-K (2009 Form 10-K). These interim statements are unaudited. The
year-end condensed balance sheet data was derived from audited financial statements, but does not
include all disclosures required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
of America. We have historically operated on a 52/53 week fiscal year ending on the Friday closest
to the last day of the quarter. For ease of presentation, December 31 and June 30 are utilized
consistently throughout this report and these financial statements and notes to represent the
period-end date. In the opinion of our management, all adjustments, including normal recurring
accruals, necessary for a fair presentation of the results for the interim periods have been made.
Note 1. Recent Accounting Pronouncements:
In January 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued authoritative
guidance revising certain disclosure requirements concerning fair value measurements. The guidance
requires an entity to disclose separately significant transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2 of
the fair value hierarchy and to disclose the reasons for such transfers. It will also require the
presentation of purchases, sales, issuances and settlements within Level 3, on a gross basis rather
than a net basis. These new disclosure requirements were effective for our first quarter of 2010,
except for the additional disclosure of Level 3 activity, which is effective for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2010. We did not have any such transfers into and out of Levels 1 and
2 during the three months and six months ended June 30, 2010. We are currently evaluating the full
impact of this guidance, but do not expect it to have a material impact on the disclosures in our
Consolidated Financial Statements in future filings.
Note 2. Reclassifications:
Certain reclassifications and revisions have been made to the prior years financial
statements to conform to the 2010 presentation. During 2009, the Company revised its method of
reporting Research and Development (R&D) credits to be properly reflected as a reduction in R&D
expense versus a reduction in income tax expense. The R&D revision increased the income tax
expense for the three months and six months ended June 30, 2009 in the amounts of $2.8 million and
$3.7 million, respectively. The 2009 revisions had no impact on net income.
Reclassifications, including their impact, on the Consolidated Statement of Income for the
three months and six months ended June 30, 2009 were as follows: Cost of goods sold increased $0.2
million and $0.3 million, respectively; R&D decreased $1.7 million and $3.7 million, respectively;
and Selling and Administrative increased $1.5 million and $3.4 million, respectively.
Note 3. Net Income Per Share:
Net income per share is based on the weighted average number of shares outstanding. A
reconciliation of the shares used in the computation of basic and diluted net income per share is
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
(Shares in thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Basic |
|
|
79,188 |
|
|
|
78,352 |
|
|
|
78,978 |
|
|
|
78,273 |
|
Assumed dilution under stock plans |
|
|
923 |
|
|
|
698 |
|
|
|
924 |
|
|
|
625 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
80,111 |
|
|
|
79,050 |
|
|
|
79,902 |
|
|
|
78,898 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options and stock settled appreciation rights (SSARs) to purchase 249,000 shares and
1,913,000 shares were outstanding as of June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009, respectively, but were not
included in the computation of diluted net income per share for the respective periods since the
impact was anti-dilutive.
We have issued shares of Purchased Restricted Stock (PRS) which contain nonforfeitable
rights to dividends and thus are considered participating securities which are required to be
included in the computation of basic and diluted earnings per share pursuant to the two-class
method. We did not present the two-class method since the difference between
basic and diluted net income per share for both common shareholders and PRS shareholders was less
than $0.01 per share for each period and the number of PRS outstanding as of June 30, 2010 and 2009
was immaterial (approximately 0.6% of the total number of common shares outstanding). Net income
allocated to such PRS was $0.4 million and $0.8 million during the three and six months ended June
30, 2010, respectively and $0.3 million and $0.6 million during the three and six months ended June
30, 2009, respectively.
5
Note 4. Restructuring and Other Charges:
The Company has completed its previously announced negotiations with the Drogheda, Ireland
employee representatives regarding separation benefits related to the closure of the Companys
compounding facility at that location. Based upon the period-end estimates regarding the separation
agreements, the Company increased its provision for severance costs by approximately $4 million in
the first quarter of 2010. The balance of the restructuring charges in the first six months of 2010
was mainly due to accelerated depreciation and other restructuring related costs pertaining to the
rationalization of our Fragrance and Ingredients operations in Europe.
We expect to incur total costs related to
this restructuring plan of approximately $31-$34 million, consisting primarily of $18 million of employee termination costs,
$9-$12 million in plant shutdown and business transition costs and $4 million in accelerated depreciation of related fixed assets. The increase from our prior estimate reflects projected higher inventory write-offs and transition costs associated with a more complex operating environment,
due to higher activity levels, and potential incremental pension settlement costs.
Since the third quarter of 2009, we have recorded total
expenses of $24.0 million relating to this plan, of which $21.1 million was recorded to restructuring and other charges and $2.9 million
recorded to costs of sales and research, selling and administrative expenses.
The balance of the employee-related liabilities is expected to be utilized by the end of 2011
as obligations are satisfied. Change in restructuring liabilities during the six months ended June
30, 2010 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee- |
|
|
Related |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related |
|
|
and Other |
|
|
Total |
|
Balance December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
18,914 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
18,914 |
|
Additional charges |
|
|
3,894 |
|
|
|
2,937 |
|
|
|
6,831 |
|
Payments and other costs |
|
|
(3,493 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,493 |
) |
Non-cash charges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,937 |
) |
|
|
(2,937 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance June 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
19,315 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
19,315 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 5. Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, Net:
Goodwill by operating segment for both June 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
Amount |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Flavors |
|
$ |
319,479 |
|
Fragrances |
|
|
346,103 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
665,582 |
|
|
|
|
|
Trademark and other intangible assets consist of the following amounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Gross carrying value |
|
$ |
165,406 |
|
|
$ |
165,406 |
|
Accumulated amortization |
|
|
(113,536 |
) |
|
|
(110,458 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
51,870 |
|
|
$ |
54,948 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
Amortization expense for the three months ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009 was $1.5
million. Amortization expense for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009 was $3.1
million. Estimated annual amortization is $6 million for years 2010 through 2013 and $5 million
for 2014.
Note 6. Comprehensive Income:
Changes in the Accumulated other comprehensive income loss (AOCI) component of shareholders
equity were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated (losses) |
|
|
Pension and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
gains on derivatives |
|
|
postretirement net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Translation |
|
|
qualifying as hedges, |
|
|
liability adjustment, |
|
|
|
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
adjustments |
|
|
net of tax |
|
|
net of tax |
|
|
Total |
|
Balance December 31, 2009 |
|
$ |
(68,606 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,741 |
) |
|
$ |
(199,627 |
) |
|
$ |
(270,974 |
) |
Change |
|
|
(35,896 |
) |
|
|
(187 |
) |
|
|
3,451 |
|
|
|
(32,632 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance June 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
(104,502 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,928 |
) |
|
$ |
(196,176 |
) |
|
$ |
(303,606 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated (losses) |
|
|
Pension and |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
gains on derivatives |
|
|
postretirement net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Translation |
|
|
qualifying as hedges, |
|
|
liability adjustment, |
|
|
|
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
adjustments |
|
|
net of tax |
|
|
net of tax |
|
|
Total |
|
Balance December 31, 2008 |
|
$ |
(149,846 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,832 |
) |
|
$ |
(171,427 |
) |
|
$ |
(325,105 |
) |
Change |
|
|
67,434 |
|
|
|
1,196 |
|
|
|
2,275 |
|
|
|
70,905 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance June 30, 2009 |
|
$ |
(82,412 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,636 |
) |
|
$ |
(169,152 |
) |
|
$ |
(254,200 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 7. Borrowings:
Debt consists of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
Rate |
|
|
Maturities |
|
|
June 30, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
Bank borrowings and overdrafts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
48,739 |
|
|
$ |
76,780 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,739 |
|
|
|
76,780 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior notes - 2007 |
|
|
6.38 |
% |
|
|
2017-27 |
|
|
|
500,000 |
|
|
|
500,000 |
|
Senior notes - 2006 |
|
|
6.06 |
% |
|
|
2011-16 |
|
|
|
325,000 |
|
|
|
325,000 |
|
Bank borrowings |
|
|
0.41 |
% |
|
|
2012 |
|
|
|
75,143 |
|
|
|
75,166 |
|
Japanese Yen notes |
|
|
2.81 |
% |
|
|
2011 |
|
|
|
20,525 |
|
|
|
19,614 |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Deferred realized gains on interest rate swaps |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,925 |
|
|
|
14,953 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
934,600 |
|
|
|
934,749 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
983,339 |
|
|
$ |
1,011,529 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The estimated fair value at June 30, 2010 of our Senior Notes 2007 and Senior Notes 2006
was approximately $591 million and $360 million, respectively. The fair value of our Senior Notes
was calculated using discounted cash flows applying current interest rates and current credit
spreads based on our own credit risk. The estimated fair value of the remainder of our long-term
debt at June 30, 2010 approximated the carrying value.
7
Note 8. Income Taxes:
As of June 30, 2010, we had $67 million of gross unrecognized tax benefits recorded in Other
liabilities, that if recognized, would be recorded as a component of income tax expense and would
affect our effective tax rate.
We have consistently recognized interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits as
a component of income tax expense. At June 30, 2010, we had accrued $11 million of interest and
penalties.
We have several tax audits in process and have open tax years with various significant taxing
jurisdictions that range primarily from 2002 to 2009. Based on currently available information, we
do not believe the ultimate outcome of these tax audits and other tax positions related to open tax
years, when finalized, will have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of
operations or cash flows. We review uncertain tax positions on an ongoing basis and related
reserves are adjusted in light of changing facts and circumstances including the progress of tax
audits.
The Company has historically utilized bank guarantees to collateralize tax exposures related
to certain administrative proceedings. With the current turmoil in the credit markets, the Company
may be precluded from securing similar forms of collateral for unrecognized tax benefits. If this
situation occurs, the Company may be required to self-fund any future collateral obligations.
The effective tax rate for the three and six months ended June 30, 2010 was 28.3% compared
with 29.2% and 27.3% for the comparable periods in 2009. The reduction in the effective tax rate
in three months ended June 30, 2010 was mainly attributable to mix of earnings across the countries
in which the company operates and lower relative repatriation costs. A lower effective tax rate on
the restructuring charges also impacted the 2010 rate as compared to the three and six months ended
June 30, 2009.
Note 9. Equity Compensation Plans:
We have various plans under which our officers, senior management, other key employees and
directors may be granted equity-based awards, including PRS, restricted stock units (RSUs), SSARs
or stock options to purchase our common stock.
We offer a Long-Term Incentive Plan (LTIP) for senior management. LTIP plan awards are
based on meeting certain targeted financial and/or strategic goals established by the Compensation
Committee of the Board of Directors early in each three-year LTIP cycle. Beginning with the LTIP
2007-2009 cycle and each three-year cycle thereafter, the targeted payout is 50% cash and 50% IFF
stock. The number of shares for the 50% stock portion is determined by the closing share price on
the first trading day at the beginning of the cycle. Generally, the executive must remain employed
with IFF during the cycle to receive the payment.
Principal assumptions used in applying the Binomial model for SSARs granted during the six
months ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Weighted average fair value of SSARs granted
during the period |
|
$ |
10.41 |
|
|
$ |
6.99 |
|
Assumptions: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
|
2.5 |
% |
Expected volatility |
|
|
29.8 |
% |
|
|
31.2 |
% |
Expected dividend yield |
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
|
3.3 |
% |
Expected life, in years |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Termination rate |
|
|
1.09 |
% |
|
|
0.91 |
% |
Exercise multiple |
|
|
1.38 |
|
|
|
1.46 |
|
8
Stock option and SSAR activity for the six months ended June 30, 2010 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average |
|
(SHARE AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
Options/SSARs |
|
|
Exercise Price |
|
Balance at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
2,228 |
|
|
$ |
35.27 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(391 |
) |
|
$ |
34.04 |
|
Cancelled |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
$ |
43.13 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2010 |
|
|
1,831 |
|
|
$ |
35.50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
197 |
|
|
$ |
44.92 |
|
Exercised |
|
|
(173 |
) |
|
$ |
32.27 |
|
Cancelled |
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
$ |
35.47 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at June 30, 2010 |
|
|
1,817 |
|
|
$ |
36.82 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RSU and PRS activity for the six months ended June 30, 2010 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant Date Fair |
|
(SHARE AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
RSU |
|
|
Value Per Share |
|
Balance at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
978 |
|
|
$ |
37.42 |
|
Cancelled |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
$ |
41.16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2010 |
|
|
976 |
|
|
$ |
38.52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
281 |
|
|
$ |
45.95 |
|
Vested |
|
|
(193 |
) |
|
$ |
40.30 |
|
Cancelled |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
$ |
38.15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at June 30, 2010 |
|
|
1,052 |
|
|
$ |
37.29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant Date Fair |
|
(SHARE AMOUNTS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
PRS |
|
|
Value Per Share |
|
Balance at December 31, 2009 |
|
|
498 |
|
|
$ |
20.28 |
|
Granted |
|
|
39 |
|
|
$ |
22.90 |
|
Cancelled |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
$ |
15.24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2010 |
|
|
533 |
|
|
$ |
20.52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
174 |
|
|
$ |
22.46 |
|
Vested |
|
|
(180 |
) |
|
$ |
25.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at June 30, 2010 |
|
|
527 |
|
|
$ |
19.31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pre-tax expense related to all forms of equity compensation was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Restricted stock and RSUs |
|
$ |
4,990 |
|
|
$ |
4,736 |
|
|
$ |
10,109 |
|
|
$ |
8,824 |
|
Stock options and SSARs |
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
671 |
|
|
|
1,312 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity compensation expense |
|
$ |
5,319 |
|
|
$ |
5,377 |
|
|
$ |
10,780 |
|
|
$ |
10,136 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax benefits associated with share-based compensation of $2.0 million and $4.0 million were
recognized for the second quarter and first six months 2010, respectively, $1.7 million and $3.2
million for the second quarter and first six months 2009, respectively.
9
Note 10. Segment Information:
We are organized into two business segments, Flavors and Fragrances; these segments align with
the internal structure used to manage these businesses. Accounting policies used for segment
reporting are described in Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included in
our 2009 Form 10-K. We evaluate the performance of these segments, which we refer to as business
units, based on operating profit before interest expense, other income (expense), net and income
taxes.
The Global expenses caption represents corporate and headquarters-related expenses which
include legal, finance, human resources, certain incentive compensation expenses and other
administrative expenses that are not allocated to individual business units.
Our reportable segment information was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Global |
|
|
|
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
Flavors |
|
|
Fragrances |
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
304,323 |
|
|
$ |
361,477 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
665,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating profit |
|
$ |
64,507 |
|
|
$ |
65,374 |
|
|
$ |
(22,090 |
) |
|
$ |
107,791 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,051 |
) |
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,107 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before taxes on income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
93,633 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Global |
|
|
|
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
Flavors |
|
|
Fragrances |
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
269,768 |
|
|
$ |
298,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
568,261 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating profit |
|
$ |
54,594 |
|
|
$ |
37,743 |
|
|
$ |
(8,807 |
) |
|
$ |
83,530 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,047 |
) |
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,569 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before taxes on income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
67,914 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Global |
|
|
|
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
Flavors |
|
|
Fragrances |
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
604,492 |
|
|
$ |
715,218 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,319,710 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating profit |
|
$ |
126,084 |
|
|
$ |
121,389 |
|
|
$ |
(35,102 |
) |
|
$ |
212,371 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(24,787 |
) |
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,871 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before taxes on income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
182,713 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Global |
|
|
|
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
Flavors |
|
|
Fragrances |
|
|
Expenses |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales |
|
$ |
535,889 |
|
|
$ |
592,002 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,127,891 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating profit |
|
$ |
107,434 |
|
|
$ |
74,535 |
|
|
$ |
(16,590 |
) |
|
$ |
165,379 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(33,828 |
) |
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(406 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before taxes on income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
131,145 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales are attributed to individual regions based upon the destination of product delivery.
Net sales related to the U.S. for the three months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 were $158.1
million and $139.1 million, respectively and for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 were
$309.0 million and $280.3 million, respectively. Net sales attributed to all foreign countries in
total for the three months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 were $507.7 million and $429.2 million,
respectively and for the six months ended June 30, 2010 and 2009 were $1,010.7 million and $847.6
million, respectively. No non-U.S. country had net sales in any period presented greater than 7%
of total consolidated net sales.
11
Note 11. Retirement Benefits:
Pension expense included the following components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Plans |
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Service cost for benefits earned |
|
$ |
910 |
|
|
$ |
1,180 |
|
|
$ |
1,820 |
|
|
$ |
2,360 |
|
Interest cost on projected benefit obligation |
|
|
5,990 |
|
|
|
5,985 |
|
|
|
11,979 |
|
|
|
11,970 |
|
Expected return on plan assets |
|
|
(6,042 |
) |
|
|
(6,042 |
) |
|
|
(12,084 |
) |
|
|
(12,084 |
) |
Net amortization and deferrals |
|
|
1,812 |
|
|
|
1,584 |
|
|
|
3,624 |
|
|
|
3,168 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defined benefit plans |
|
|
2,670 |
|
|
|
2,707 |
|
|
|
5,339 |
|
|
|
5,414 |
|
Defined contribution and other retirement plans |
|
|
1,825 |
|
|
|
1,784 |
|
|
|
3,737 |
|
|
|
3,783 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total pension expense |
|
$ |
4,495 |
|
|
$ |
4,491 |
|
|
$ |
9,076 |
|
|
$ |
9,197 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-U.S. Plans |
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Service cost for benefits earned |
|
$ |
2,637 |
|
|
$ |
2,040 |
|
|
$ |
5,194 |
|
|
$ |
4,023 |
|
Interest cost on projected benefit obligation |
|
|
8,601 |
|
|
|
7,136 |
|
|
|
17,012 |
|
|
|
14,272 |
|
Expected return on plan assets |
|
|
(10,838 |
) |
|
|
(9,350 |
) |
|
|
(21,439 |
) |
|
|
(18,701 |
) |
Net amortization and deferrals |
|
|
1,345 |
|
|
|
698 |
|
|
|
2,690 |
|
|
|
1,395 |
|
(Gain)/loss due to settlements and curtailments |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Defined benefit plans |
|
|
1,775 |
|
|
|
524 |
|
|
|
3,520 |
|
|
|
989 |
|
Defined contribution and other retirement plans |
|
|
1,226 |
|
|
|
1,022 |
|
|
|
2,197 |
|
|
|
2,053 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total pension expense |
|
$ |
3,001 |
|
|
$ |
1,546 |
|
|
$ |
5,717 |
|
|
$ |
3,042 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During 2010, we may contribute an estimated $12 million to our U.S. pension plans and up to
$16 million to our non-U.S. pension plans. In the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, no
contributions were made to our qualified U.S. pension plan. In the three and six months ended June
30, 2010, $3.5 million and $7.8 million of contributions were made to the non-U.S. plans,
respectively. In the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, no benefit payments were made with
respect to our non-qualified U.S. pension plan.
The financial returns of our investment trusts during the first half of 2010 continue to be
generally in line with the markets by asset class. We had little exposure to financial institution
equities and had no direct investments in sub-prime related assets.
Expense recognized for postretirement benefits other than pensions included the following
components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended June 30, |
|
|
Six Months Ended June 30, |
|
(DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Service cost for benefits earned |
|
$ |
410 |
|
|
$ |
441 |
|
|
$ |
820 |
|
|
$ |
882 |
|
Interest on benefit obligation |
|
|
1,643 |
|
|
|
1,556 |
|
|
|
3,286 |
|
|
|
3,112 |
|
Net amortization and deferrals |
|
|
(489 |
) |
|
|
(565 |
) |
|
|
(978 |
) |
|
|
(1,130 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total postretirement benefit expense |
|
$ |
1,564 |
|
|
$ |
1,432 |
|
|
$ |
3,128 |
|
|
$ |
2,864 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We expect to contribute $6 million to our postretirement benefit other than pension plans in
2010. In the three and six months ended June 30, 2010, $1.3 million and $2.6 million of
contributions were made, respectively.
12
Note 12. Financial Instruments:
Fair Value
Accounting guidance on fair value measurements specifies a hierarchy of valuation techniques
based on whether the inputs to those valuation techniques are observable or unobservable.
Observable inputs reflect market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs
reflect our market assumptions. These two types of inputs create the following fair value
hierarchy:
|
|
|
Level 1Quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets. |
|
|
|
|
Level 2Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted
prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active;
and model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs and significant
value drivers are observable in active markets. |
|
|
|
|
Level 3Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more
significant inputs or significant value drivers are unobservable. |
This hierarchy requires us to use observable market data, when available, and to minimize the
use of unobservable inputs when determining fair value.
When available, we generally use quoted market prices to determine fair value, and classify
such items in Level 1. We determine the fair value of structured liabilities (where performance is
linked to structured interest rates, inflation or currency risks) using the LIBOR (London InterBank
Offer Rate) swap curve and forward interest and exchange rates at period end. Such instruments are
classified as Level 2 based on the observability of significant inputs to the model. The fair
value of these liabilities, net was approximately $4.6 million at June 30, 2010. We do not have
any instruments classified as Level 3.
The market valuation adjustments include a bilateral or own credit risk adjustment applied
to reflect our own credit risk when valuing all liabilities measured at fair value, in accordance
with the requirements under the accounting guidance. The methodology is consistent with that
applied in generating counterparty credit risk adjustments, but incorporates our own credit risk as
observed in the credit default swap market. As for counterparty credit risk, our own credit risk
adjustments include the impact of credit risk mitigants. The estimated change in the fair value of
these liabilities due to such changes in our own credit risk (or instrument-specific credit risk)
was immaterial as of June 30, 2010.
Derivatives
We periodically enter into foreign currency forward contracts with the objective of reducing
exposure to cash flow volatility associated with our intercompany loans, foreign currency
receivables and payables, and anticipated purchases of certain raw materials used in operations.
These contracts generally involve the exchange of one currency for a second currency at a future
date, have maturities not exceeding twelve months and are with counterparties which are major
international financial institutions.
In 2003, we executed a 10-year Yen U.S. dollar currency swap related to the monthly sale and
purchase of products between the U.S. and Japan which has been designated as a cash flow hedge.
In 2005, we entered into an interest rate swap agreement effectively converting the fixed rate
on our long-term Japanese Yen borrowings to a variable short-term rate based on the Tokyo InterBank
Offering Rate (TIBOR) plus an interest markup. This swap was designated as a fair value hedge. Any
amounts recognized in interest expense for both periods presented have been insignificant.
In February 2009, we paid $16 million to close out the $300 million U.S. Dollar (USD) LIBOR
to European InterBank Offer Rate (EURIBOR) interest rate swap. As this swap was designated as a
net investment hedge, $12 million of the loss was deferred in AOCI where it will remain until the
Euro net investment is divested and $4 million was included as a component of interest expense
during the six months ended June 30, 2009.
13
In May 2009 we entered into a forward currency contract which qualified as a net investment
hedge, in order to protect a portion of our net European investment from foreign currency risk. We
recognized a $1.6 million loss
during the year ended December 31, 2009, which was deferred as a component of AOCI. The
ineffective portion of this net investment hedge was not material. This forward currency contract
matured before the end of the second quarter of 2009. Upon its maturity, we entered into an
intercompany loan payable in the amount of 40 million Euros in order to protect a portion of our
net European investment from foreign currency risk. This intercompany loan was designated as a net
investment hedge and experienced no ineffectiveness while outstanding. We recognized a $3.1
million loss during the year ended December 31, 2009, which was deferred as a component of AOCI.
In March 2010, we entered into three forward currency contracts which qualified as net
investment hedges, in order to protect a portion of our net European investments from foreign
currency risk. Two of these three forward currency contracts matured; one during the three months
ended June 30, 2010 and the other during the three months ended March 31, 2010.
During the second quarter of 2010, we entered into four forward currency contracts which
qualified as net investment hedges, in order to mitigate a portion of our net European investments
from foreign currency risk.
During the second quarter of 2010, we entered into several forward currency contracts which
qualified as cash flow hedges. The objective of these hedges is to protect the currency risk
associated with forecasted US Dollar (USD) denominated raw material purchases made by Euro (EUR)
functional entities which result from changes in the EUR/USD exchange rate.
14
The following tables show the Companys derivative instruments measured at fair value (Level 2 of
the fair value hierarchy) as reflected in the Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009 (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
Fair Value of |
|
|
Fair Value of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives |
|
|
Derivatives Not |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Designated as |
|
|
Designated as |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hedging |
|
|
Hedging |
|
|
Total Fair |
|
|
|
Instruments |
|
|
Instruments |
|
|
Value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative assets (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency contracts |
|
$ |
4.2 |
|
|
$ |
5.1 |
|
|
$ |
9.3 |
|
Interest rate swap |
|
$ |
0.1 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4.3 |
|
|
$ |
5.1 |
|
|
$ |
9.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative liabilities (b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency contracts |
|
$ |
4.8 |
|
|
$ |
1.6 |
|
|
$ |
6.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Fair Value of |
|
|
Fair Value of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives |
|
|
Derivatives Not |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Designated as |
|
|
Designated as |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hedging |
|
|
Hedging |
|
|
Total Fair |
|
|
|
Instruments |
|
|
Instruments |
|
|
Value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative assets (a) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency contracts |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
Interest rate swap |
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
$ |
0.2 |
|
|
$ |
0.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative liabilities (b) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency contracts |
|
$ |
4.5 |
|
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
|
$ |
5.4 |
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Derivative assets are recorded to Prepaid expenses and other current assets in the Consolidated
Balance Sheet. |
|
(b) |
|
All derivative liabilities are recorded as Other current liabilities in the Consolidated
Balance Sheet. |
15
The following table shows the effect of the Companys derivative instruments which were not
designated as hedging instruments in the Consolidated Statements of Income for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009 (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Gain or (Loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recognized in Income on |
|
|
Location of Gain |
|
|
|
Derivative |
|
|
or (Loss) |
|
Derivatives Not Designated as |
|
For the three months |
|
|
Recognized in |
|
Hedging Instruments under |
|
ended June 30, |
|
|
Income on |
|
ASC 815 |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Derivative |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency contract |
|
$ |
16.3 |
|
|
$ |
4.1 |
|
|
Other (income) expense, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Gain or (Loss) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recognized in Income on |
|
|
Location of Gain |
|
|
|
Derivative |
|
|
or (Loss) |
|
Derivatives Not Designated as |
|
For the six months ended |
|
|
Recognized in |
|
Hedging Instruments under |
|
June 30, |
|
|
Income on |
|
ASC 815 |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Derivative |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency contract |
|
$ |
14.4 |
|
|
$ |
7.1 |
|
|
Other (income) expense, net |
Most of these net gains offset any recognized losses arising from the revaluation of the related
intercompany loans during the same respective periods.
16
The following table shows the effect of the Companys derivative instruments designated as
cash flow and net investment hedging instruments in the Consolidated Statements of Income for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2010 and June 30, 2009 (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Gain or |
|
|
|
Amount of Gain or |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) Reclassified |
|
|
|
(Loss) Recognized in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
from Accumulated |
|
|
|
OCI on Derivative |
|
|
Location of Gain or |
|
|
OCI into Income |
|
|
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
|
(Loss) Reclassified |
|
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
|
|
For the three months |
|
|
from Accumulated |
|
|
For the three months |
|
|
|
ended June 30, |
|
|
OCI into Income |
|
|
ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Derivatives in Cash Flow Hedging Relationships (*): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cross currency swap (1) |
|
$ |
(0.5 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.4 |
) |
|
Other (income) expense, net |
|
$ |
(0.3 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.1 |
) |
Forward currency contract |
|
$ |
1.0 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
Other (income) expense, net |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives in Net Investment Hedging Relationships (*): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forward currency contract |
|
$ |
4.2 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
4.7 |
|
|
$ |
(0.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(0.3 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Gain or |
|
|
|
Amount of Gain or |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) Reclassified |
|
|
|
(Loss) Recognized in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
from Accumulated |
|
|
|
OCI on Derivative |
|
|
Location of Gain or |
|
|
OCI into Income |
|
|
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
|
(Loss) Reclassified |
|
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
|
|
For the six months |
|
|
from Accumulated |
|
|
For the six months |
|
|
|
ended June 30, |
|
|
OCI into Income |
|
|
ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
(Effective Portion) |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives in Cash Flow
Hedging Relationships
(*): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cross currency swap (1) |
|
$ |
(0.2 |
) |
|
$ |
1.2 |
|
|
Other (income) expense, net |
|
$ |
(0.6 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.3 |
) |
Forward currency contract |
|
$ |
1.0 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
Other (income) expense, net |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives in Net
Investment Hedging
Relationships (*): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forward currency contract |
|
$ |
4.8 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
5.6 |
|
|
$ |
1.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(0.6 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Ten year swap executed in 2003 |
|
(*) |
|
No ineffectiveness was experienced in the above noted cash flow hedge during the three and six
months ended June 30, 2010. The ineffective portion of the net investment hedge was not material
during the three and six months ended June 30, 2010. |
Note 13. Commitments and Contingencies:
The Company accrues for contingencies related to litigation in accordance with ASC 450-20,
Loss Contingencies, which requires the Company to assess contingencies to determine the degree of
probability and range of possible loss. An estimated loss contingency is accrued in the Companys
consolidated financial statements if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the
amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Because litigation is inherently unpredictable and
unfavorable resolutions could occur, assessing contingencies is highly sensitive and requires
judgments about future events. The Company regularly reviews contingencies to determine the
adequacy of accruals. The amount of ultimate loss may differ from these estimates and further
events may require the Company to increase the amounts it has accrued on any matter. It is possible
that cash flows or results of operations could be materially affected in any particular period by
the unfavorable resolution of one or more of these contingencies.
Popcorn Flavor Litigation
We are party to a number of lawsuits and claims related primarily to flavoring supplied by us
and by other third party suppliers, in most instances to manufacturers of butter flavored popcorn.
A total of fourteen actions involving 228 claimants are currently pending against us and other
flavor suppliers and related companies based on similar claims of alleged respiratory illness. In
certain cases, plaintiffs are unable to demonstrate that they have suffered a compensable loss as a
result of such exposure, or that injuries incurred in fact resulted from exposure to our flavor
products. In most of the complaints, the damages sought by the plaintiffs are not alleged at the
pleading stage and may not be specified until a much later time in the proceeding, if at all.
During the six months ended June 30, 2010, there have been two new actions filed involving ten
claimants and two actions involving four claimants have been settled for a net out-of-pocket amount
which is not material to us including insurance recovery, and three other cases have been
consolidated with other pending cases. In addition, 55 claimants were voluntarily dismissed from
continuing cases based on a determination that their claims lacked merit.
18
At each balance sheet date, or more frequently as conditions warrant, we review the status of
each pending claim, as well as our insurance coverage for such claims with due consideration given
to potentially applicable deductibles, retentions and reservation of rights under insurance
policies with respect to all these matters. The liabilities are recorded at managements best
estimate of the outcome of the lawsuits and claims, taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances of the individual matters as well as past experience on similar matters. Amounts
accrued are also based upon our historical experience with these claims, including claims which
have been closed with no liability as well as claims settled to date. Settled claims, since the
inception of the flavor-related claims, have not been material to us in any reporting period after
giving effect to insurance recovery. At each balance sheet date, the key issues that management
assesses are whether it is probable that a loss as to asserted or unasserted claims has been
incurred and if so, whether the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. We are not able to
provide an amount or range of estimated loss in excess of the liability currently accrued at the
balance sheet date as to asserted and unasserted claims because such estimate cannot reasonably be
made.
While the ultimate outcome of any litigation cannot be predicted, management believes that
adequate provision has been made with respect to all known claims. Based on information presently
available and in light of the merits of our defenses and the availability of insurance, we do not
expect the outcome of the above cases, singly or in the aggregate, to have a material adverse
effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. There can be no assurance
that future events will not require us to increase the amount we have accrued for any matter or
accrue for a matter that has not been previously accrued.
We periodically assess our insurance coverage for all known claims, taking into account
aggregate coverages by occurrence, limits of coverage, self-insured retentions and deductibles,
historical claims experience and claims experience with insurers.
We record the expected liability with respect to these claims in Other liabilities and
expected recoveries from our insurance carrier group in Other assets. We believe that realization
of the insurance receivable is probable due to the terms of the insurance policies and the payment
experience to date of the carrier group as it relates to these claims.
Patent Claims
A complaint, captioned V. Mane Fils S.A. v. International Flavors and Fragrances, Inc. was
filed in U.S. District Court in the District of New Jersey in May 2006, and alleges that the
Company has and continues to infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 5,725,856 and 5,843,466, relating to a
flavor ingredient that may provide a cooling effect. The Company answered the complaint by denying
liability, asserting that both patents are invalid and various other defenses. In June 2008,
plaintiff amended its complaint to add claims for violations of the Lanham Act, tortuous
interference and unfair competition. The Company answered the amended complaint by denying all
liability. In connection with the patent claims, the plaintiff seeks monetary damages, damages for
alleged willful infringement, injunctive relief and fees, costs and interest. In connection with
the additional claims, plaintiff also seeks monetary damages, punitive damages and fees and costs.
In May 2010, following reexamination of the patents in question by the U.S. Patent Office, all of
the patent claims, initially rejected in the reexamination proceeding, were reallowed. The Company
and the plaintiff have each filed motions for summary judgment with respect to various claims. No
trial date has been scheduled. The Company denies the allegations and will defend its position in
Court.
We analyze our liability on a regular basis and accrue for litigation loss contingencies when
they are probable and estimable. During the second quarter 2010, we recorded a provision related to
this case which is reflected in Other Liabilities. The Company is unable to reasonably estimate the
amount or realistic range of potential loss above its recorded liability, if any, that might result
if the outcome of this matter is unfavorable. Based on present information, the Company believes
that its ultimate liability, if any, arising from this proceeding would not have a material adverse
effect on its financial position or liquidity; however, due to the unpredictability regarding the
litigation process, such claims, if ultimately resolved against us, could potentially have a
material adverse effect on our cash flows or results of operations in a particular period. An
adverse outcome could also potentially affect our ability to sell one or more flavor products to
the extent the Court ultimately issued an injunction related to the patents. The Company disputes
the allegations of wrongdoing, believes it has meritorious defenses and is vigorously defending all
claims.
19
Environmental
Over the past approximately 20 years, various federal and state authorities and private
parties have claimed that we are a Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) as a generator of waste
materials for alleged pollution at a number
of waste sites operated by third parties located principally in New Jersey and have sought to
recover costs incurred and to be incurred to clean up the sites.
We have been identified as a PRP at ten facilities operated by third parties at which
investigation and/or remediation activities may be ongoing. We analyze our liability on a regular
basis and accrue for environmental liabilities when they are probable and estimable. At June 30,
2010, we estimated our share of the total future costs for these sites to be less than $5 million.
While joint and several liability is authorized under federal and state environmental laws, we
believe that the amounts we have paid and anticipate paying in the future for clean-up costs and
damages at all sites are not and will not be material to our financial condition, results of
operations or liquidity. This conclusion is based upon, among other things, the involvement of
other PRPs at most sites, the status of the proceedings, including various settlement agreements
and consent decrees, the extended time period over which payment will likely be made and an
agreement reached in July 1994 with three of our liability insurers pursuant to which defense costs
and indemnity amounts payable by us in respect of the sites will be shared by the insurers up to an
agreed amount.
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
Overview
We are a leading creator and manufacturer of flavor and fragrance compounds used to impart or
improve the flavor or fragrance in a wide variety of consumer products. The precise size of the
global market for flavors and fragrances is difficult to determine because the industry is highly
fragmented, both geographically and along product lines; there are a limited number of publicly
traded companies in the industry; certain customers maintain in-house capabilities fulfilling a
portion of their flavor or fragrance needs; and the quality and depth of market information in
developing regions of the world is limited.
IFF is organized into two business units that reflect our Flavor and Fragrance businesses.
Flavor compounds are sold to the food and beverage industries for use in consumer products such as
prepared foods, beverages, dairy, food and confectionery products. The fragrance business unit
consists of three fragrance categories: functional fragrances, including fragrance compounds for
personal care (e.g., soaps) and household products (e.g., detergents, softeners, cleaning agents,
candles and air fresheners); fine fragrance and beauty care, including perfumes, colognes and
toiletries; and ingredients, consisting of natural and synthetic ingredients that can be combined
with other materials to create unique functional and fine fragrance compounds. Major fragrance
customers include the cosmetics industry, including perfume and toiletries manufacturers, and the
household products industry, including manufacturers of soaps, detergents, fabric care, household
cleaners and air fresheners. Approximately 55% of our ingredient production is consumed internally;
the balance is sold to third party customers.
The under-pinning of structural growth for the flavor and fragrance industry is population
growth, an expanding middle class and technology. Changing social habits resulting from factors
such as increases in personal income, leisure time, health and wellness and urbanization stimulate
demand for consumer products utilizing flavors and fragrances. These developments also drive the
creation and development of new molecules, technologies and/or solutions that facilitate and
improve the end-use consumption of flavors and fragrances in consumer products.
Flavors and fragrances are generally:
|
|
|
created for the exclusive use by a specific customer; |
|
|
|
sold in powder or liquid form, in amounts ranging from a few pounds to several tons
depending on the nature of the end product in which they are used; |
|
|
|
a small percentage of the volume and cost of the end product sold to the consumer;
and |
|
|
|
a major factor in directing consumer preference for consumer packaged goods. |
20
The flavors and fragrances industry is impacted by macroeconomic factors in all product
categories and geographic regions. Such factors include the impact of currency on the price of raw
materials and operating costs, as well as on translation of reported results.
In addition, IFF is susceptible to margin pressures due to customers cost improvement
programs and input cost increases. However, these pressures can often be mitigated through a
combination of product reformulation, sourcing strategies and material substitution plus internal
cost containment efforts, and the development of innovative and streamlined solutions and
processes.
STRATEGIC DRIVERS
To increase shareholder value, we pursue and develop a value-creation model that encompasses
three main elements: investing in research & development to identify and commercialize new,
innovative materials and delivery systems; maintaining a deep understanding of both consumer
preferences and consumer product brands; and excellence in our creative capabilities. Our goal is
to deliver differentiated solutions that enable our customers brands to win in the marketplace.
In order to pursue these strategies, our organization is focused on ensuring that we
efficiently create, produce, and sell unique, superior, and economically competitive products
through our world class integration of research and development, consumer insight, creativity, via
excellence in execution. We believe we are well positioned to achieve success by targeting
strategically important global and regional customers in both developed and emerging markets;
attracting, developing and retaining top talent; investing in research and development; and
fostering a culture of innovation, accountability and continuous improvement.
Operations
Comparison of Second Quarters of 2010 and 2009
Sales Commentary
Second quarter 2010 sales totaled $666 million, an increase of 17% from the prior year
quarter. The significant growth (+17% in local currency (LC) terms) reflects higher volume in both
businesses and continued strong success in driving new business, which accounted for approximately
40% of the LC sales growth. The higher volumes were driven by a recovery in demand, lower base
period comparisons in the second quarter 2009, primarily in Fine Fragrances and Ingredients, and
some element of re-stocking across both businesses.
On a reported basis, Flavors sales increased 13%; excluding the impact of foreign currency
translation, sales for the Flavors business increased 11% from the prior year period. Two thirds of
the improvement was driven by higher volume (including elements of re-stocking) with the balance
due to net new wins. Solid LC growth was experienced across all product categories, led by
Beverages. Double digit growth was seen in Europe, Africa and Middle East (EAME) and Greater Asia
as a result of higher volumes and new business particularly in the Beverage, Savory, and
Confectionery categories. Growth in both regions benefited from investments made last year to
strengthen our commercial and development capabilities. Sales in North America were up 7% driven by
higher volume in Confectionery and Beverages, partially offset by weakness in Dairy sales. Latin
America had solid growth, up 4% in LC as volume recovery in Confectionery and Savory and new net
wins more than offset the effects of non-strategic business lost in the second half of 2009.
Fragrance sales increased significantly, up 21% on a reported basis and 23% in LC terms.
Approximately 60% of the improvement is due to increased volume, primarily in Fine Fragrance and
Ingredients, with the balance attributable to new business. Volume gains are attributable to a
bounce back in demand, mainly in Fine Fragrance and Ingredients, lower base period comparisons, and
some elements of re-stocking. Overall, Fine and Beauty Care LC sales increased 37% versus last
year, driven by new business that was supported by increased customer promotional activities, a
recovery in demand, and low prior year sales levels. LC Functional Fragrance sales increased 12%,
driven by continued strong fabric care performance. All regions delivered double-digit LC sales
gains, led by EAME (Fine Fragrance and Ingredients) and Greater Asia (Functional Fragrance and
Beauty Care).
21
Sales performance by region and product category in comparison to the prior year quarter in
both reported dollars and local currency, where applicable, was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% Change in Sales-Second Quarter 2010 vs Second Quarter 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
Fine & |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beauty Care |
|
|
Functional |
|
|
Ingredients |
|
|
Total Frag. |
|
|
Flavors |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America |
|
Reported |
|
|
24 |
% |
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
25 |
% |
|
|
19 |
% |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EAME |
|
Reported |
|
|
47 |
% |
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
22 |
% |
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
Local Currency |
|
|
55 |
% |
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
29 |
% |
|
|
29 |
% |
|
|
18 |
% |
|
|
25 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latin America |
|
Reported |
|
|
34 |
% |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
26 |
% |
|
|
19 |
% |
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
Local Currency |
|
|
31 |
% |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
27 |
% |
|
|
18 |
% |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater Asia |
|
Reported |
|
|
26 |
% |
|
|
24 |
% |
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
18 |
% |
|
|
19 |
% |
|
|
Local Currency |
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
22 |
% |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
19 |
% |
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
Reported |
|
|
36 |
% |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
17 |
% |
|
|
Local Currency |
|
|
37 |
% |
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
24 |
% |
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
17 |
% |
|
|
|
North America Fine & Beauty Care sales growth was driven primarily by higher volume,
weak year ago comparison levels, and some elements of re-stocking. The strong performance in
Ingredients reflects broad-based volume gains and weak market conditions last year. The
improvement in Functional Fragrance sales was driven by new wins in Home Care and Fabric Care
categories. Flavors business growth was due to higher Confectionery, Savory and Beverage
volume. |
|
|
|
EAME showed strong sales gains across all categories, led by net new wins and demand
recovery in Fine Fragrance and Ingredients as well as higher volume and new wins in EAME and
Greater Asia for Flavors, notably within the Beverage, Savory, and Confectionery categories.
Customer re-stocking also supported growth across most categories. |
|
|
|
Latin America sales performance was driven by a strong recovery in Fine & Beauty Care and
Ingredients and new wins and volume recovery in Confectionery and Savory for Flavors that
more than offset the effects of non-strategic business lost last year. |
|
|
|
Greater Asia delivered double-digit LC sales growth in all categories, except Ingredients,
whose growth was 7%. Fine & Beauty Care gains were driven by new wins in Hair Care and
Toiletries as well as demand recovery for Fine Fragrance off a weak prior year base. We
continue to experience strong growth in Fabric and Personal Wash within Functional Fragrances
while Flavor sales growth was driven by new product introductions and volume growth in
Savory, Beverage and Confectionery. |
While we believe that the impact of re-stocking is an important driver of year-over-year sales
growth, it is not possible to specifically quantify the impact either in total or by category. We
have, however, seen evidence that the benefit from this driver has slowed through the course of the
second quarter of 2010.
Consolidated Operating Results
The percentage relationship of cost of goods sold and other operating expenses to reported
sales is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three months |
|
|
|
ended June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Cost of goods sold |
|
|
57.2 |
% |
|
|
59.9 |
% |
Research and development expenses |
|
|
8.4 |
% |
|
|
7.8 |
% |
Selling and administrative expenses |
|
|
18.0 |
% |
|
|
16.9 |
% |
Cost of goods sold includes the cost of materials and manufacturing expenses; raw materials
generally constitute 70% of the total. Research and development (R&D) expenses are for the
development of new materials and delivery systems, new flavor and fragrance compounds, technical
product support, compliance with governmental regulations, and help in maintaining relationships
with customers who are often dependent on technological advances. Selling and administrative
expenses support our sales and operating levels.
22
Cost of goods sold, as a percentage of sales, decreased to 57.2% in 2010 compared to 59.9%
during 2009. The improvement versus 2009 is principally attributable to favorable input costs, with
the balance due to better absorption resulting from higher volumes and continued margin recovery
efforts.
R&D expenses increased approximately $12 million from the prior year. The increase is due to
higher incentive compensation accruals of $6 million, lower R&D credits of $2 million, and currency
movements of $1 million. The remaining amount is due to targeted investments to support our
strategic growth initiatives and lower prior period base comparison resulting from a significant
curtailment in 2009 spend due to the prevailing economic crisis.
Selling and administrative expenses (S&A), as a percentage of sales, increased to 18.0% of
sales compared to 16.9% of sales in the second quarter of 2009. Overall spending increased $23
million versus the prior year quarter mainly driven by higher provisions for incentive compensation
of $12 million. The remainder of the increase is attributable to
litigation related costs, investments and spending to support the higher level of business
activity, unfavorable foreign
currency movements and lower prior period base spending resulting from a significant curtailment in
2009 due to the prevailing economic crisis.
Interest Expense
In the second quarter of 2010, interest expense totaled $12.1 million compared to $14.0
million in 2009. The reduction is due to certain debt repayments of more than $210 million made
during the second half of 2009 in connection with an advance prepayment of a Japanese Yen term loan
and certain private placement loans. Average cost of debt was 4.8% for the 2010 period compared to
4.6% in 2009.
Other (Income) Expense, Net
Other expense of $2.1 million in the second quarter of 2010 increased $0.5 million versus
other expense of $1.6 million in 2009, mainly due to higher losses on foreign exchange transactions
compared to the prior year.
Income Taxes
The effective tax rate was 28.3% for the three months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to a
rate of 29.2% in the prior year quarter. The reduction in the effective tax rate in 2010 was
mainly attributable to mix of earnings across the countries in which the company operates and lower
relative repatriation costs. A lower effective tax rate on the restructuring charges also impacted
the 2010 rate.
Operating Results by Business Unit
We evaluate the performance of business units based on operating profit before interest
expense, other income (expense), net and income taxes. See Note 10 to our Consolidated Financial
Statements for the reconciliation to Income before taxes.
Flavors
In the second quarter 2010, Flavors operating profit totaled $65 million, or 21.2% as a
percentage of sales, compared to $55 million or 20.2% in 2009. The improvement in profitability
was mainly driven by strong sales growth and associated absorption, favorable input costs and the
continued efforts in our margin improvement initiatives. These improvements were partially offset
by higher incentive compensation costs and investments in R&D.
Fragrances
Fragrance operating profit for the second quarter of 2010 was $65 million or 18.1%, as a
percentage of sales, compared to $38 million or 12.6% reported in 2009. The improvement in profit
was driven by higher volumes and lower input costs plus good cost leverage on R&D, selling and
administrative expenses. The 2010 period includes $2
million of restructuring related charges related to the rationalization of our European
fragrance manufacturing footprint and higher incentive compensation expense. The restructuring
charge in the second quarter of 2009 was $5 million. These improvements were partially offset by
higher incentive compensation costs.
23
Global Expenses
Global expenses represent corporate and headquarters-related expenses which include
legal, finance, human resources and other administrative expenses that are not allocated to an
individual business unit. In 2010, Global expenses for the second quarter were $22 million
compared to $9 million during the second quarter of 2009. The increase is primarily due to higher
incentive compensation accruals plus litigation related costs.
Comparison of First Six Months of 2010 and 2009
Sales Commentary
The first half 2010 sales totaled $1,320 million, an increase of 17% from the first half of
2009. The significant acceleration of growth (+15% in local currency (LC) terms) from the greater
levels reported in the second half of 2009 reflects higher volumes in both businesses and continued
strong success in driving new business with both new and existing customers, which accounted for
more than 40% of the LC sales growth. The higher volumes were driven by recovery in demand, lower
base period comparisons in the first half of 2009, primarily in Fine Fragrances, Ingredients, and
Home Care, and some element of re-stocking across both businesses. Foreign currency movements
added 2% to year-over-year sales growth in the first half of 2010.
On a reported basis Flavor sales increased 13%; excluding the impact of foreign currency
translation, sales for the Flavors business increased 10% from the prior year period. Approximately
60% of the improvement was driven by higher volume (including some elements of re-stocking) with
the remaining due to net new business. Solid growth was experienced across all product categories.
Double digit LC growth was seen in EAME and Greater Asia as a result of higher volumes and new
business particularly in the Beverage, Confectionery, and Savory categories. Growth in both
regions benefited from investments made last year to strengthen our commercial and development
capabilities. Sales in North America were up 3% due to higher volume and new business in Beverages
and Confectionery. Latin America had solid growth, up 5% in LC as new wins and volume recovery in
Confectionery and Savory more than offset the effects of non-strategic business lost in the second
half of 2009.
Fragrance sales increased significantly, up 21% on a reported basis and 20% in LC terms.
Approximately 55% of the improvement was driven by increased volume (including weak prior year base
sales in Fine Fragrance and Ingredients), with the balance due to net new business. Volume gains is
attributable to a bounce back in demand driven by increased customer promotional activities, mainly
in Fine Fragrance, lower base period comparisons, and re-stocking decisions. Overall, Fine and
Beauty Care LC sales increased 32% versus last year, driven new business, a recovery in demand, and
low prior year activity levels. LC Functional Fragrance sales increased 11%, driven by continued
strong Fabric Care and Home Care performance. All regions delivered double-digit LC sales gains,
led by EAME (Fine Fragrance and Ingredients) and Greater Asia (Fine & Beauty Care and Functional).
Sales performance by region and product category in comparison to the first six months of the
prior year in both reported dollars and local currency, where applicable, was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% Change in Sales- Six Months 2010 vs 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
Fine & |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beauty Care |
|
|
Functional |
|
|
Ingredients |
|
|
Total Frag. |
|
|
Flavors |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America |
|
Reported |
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
16 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EAME |
|
Reported |
|
|
42 |
% |
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
28 |
% |
|
|
24 |
% |
|
|
16 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
Local Currency |
|
|
42 |
% |
|
|
9 |
% |
|
|
29 |
% |
|
|
25 |
% |
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latin America |
|
Reported |
|
|
36 |
% |
|
|
7 |
% |
|
|
18 |
% |
|
|
18 |
% |
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
Local Currency |
|
|
31 |
% |
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
18 |
% |
|
|
16 |
% |
|
|
5 |
% |
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater Asia |
|
Reported |
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
28 |
% |
|
|
9 |
% |
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
Local Currency |
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
26 |
% |
|
|
8 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
16 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
Reported |
|
|
33 |
% |
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
22 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
17 |
% |
|
|
Local Currency |
|
|
32 |
% |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
10 |
% |
|
|
15 |
% |
24
|
|
North America Fine & Beauty sales growth was driven primarily by new wins, weak year
ago comparison levels, and some elements of re-stocking. The strong performance in
Ingredients reflects broad-based volume gains and weak market conditions last year.
Functional Fragrance sales were up due to strong Personal Wash growth with a smaller
contribution from Fabric Care volume. Beverages sales led the growth in the Flavors business,
with Savory and Confectionery also showing strong performance. |
|
|
|
EAME showed strong sales gains across most categories, led by net new wins and demand
recovery in Fine Fragrance and Ingredients as well as higher volume and new wins for Flavors,
notably within the Beverage category. Re-stocking also supported growth across most
categories. |
|
|
|
Latin America sales performance was driven by a strong recovery in Fine & Beauty Care, new
wins in Fabric Care and Home Care categories, and new wins and volume recovery in
Confectionery and Savory for Flavors that more than offset the effects of non-strategic
business lost last year. |
|
|
|
Greater Asia delivered double-digit LC sales growth in all categories, except Ingredients,
whose growth was 8%. Fine & Beauty Care gains were driven by new wins in Hair Care and
Toiletries as well as demand recovery for Fine Fragrance off a weak prior year base. We
continue to experience strong growth in Fabric Care and Home Care within Functional
Fragrances while Flavor sales growth was driven by new product introductions and volume
growth mainly in Savory and Beverage. |
While we believe that the impact of re-stocking is an important driver of year-over-year sales
growth, it is not possible to specifically quantify the impact either in total or by category. We
have, however, seen evidence that the benefit from this driver has slowed through the course of the
second quarter of 2010.
Consolidated Operating Results
The percentage relationship of cost of goods sold and other operating expenses to reported
sales is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended |
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Cost of goods sold |
|
|
57.9 |
% |
|
|
60.1 |
% |
Research and development expenses |
|
|
8.2 |
% |
|
|
8.1 |
% |
Selling and administrative expenses |
|
|
17.2 |
% |
|
|
16.7 |
% |
Cost of goods sold includes the cost of materials and manufacturing expenses; raw materials
generally constitute 70% of the total. Research and development (R&D) expenses are for the
development of new materials and delivery systems, new flavor and fragrance compounds, technical
product support, compliance with governmental regulations, and help in maintaining relationships
with customers who are often dependent on technological advances. Selling and administrative
expenses support our sales and operating levels.
Cost of goods sold, as a percentage of sales, decreased to 57.9% in 2010 compared to 60.1%
during 2009. The improvement in the first six months of 2010 versus the prior year period is mainly
attributable to favorable input costs combined with better absorption resulting from higher volumes
and continued margin recovery efforts. This improvement was partially offset by inventory
write-offs and transition costs associated with the rationalization of our Fragrance and
Ingredients operations in Europe.
R&D expenses increased approximately $17 million from the prior year. The increase is due to
higher incentive compensation accruals of $9 million and lower R&D credits of $1 million. The
remaining increase is due to higher basic research, targeted investments to support strategic
growth initiatives, and lower prior period base comparison resulting from a significant curtailment
in 2009 spend due to the prevailing economic crisis.
Selling and administrative expenses (S&A), as a percentage of sales, increased to 17.2% of
sales compared to 16.7% for the first six months of 2009. Overall spending increased $39 million
versus the prior year, mainly driven by higher provisions for incentive compensation of $21
million. The remaining variance is due to litigation related costs, planned investments to support
growth, unfavorable foreign currency movements, and lower prior period base spending in 2009 due to
the prevailing economic crisis.
25
Restructuring and Other Charges
Restructuring and other charges primarily consist of separation costs for employees, including
severance, outplacement and other benefit costs.
The Company has completed its previously announced negotiations with the Drogheda, Ireland
employee representatives regarding separation benefits related to the closure of the Companys
compounding facility at that location. Based upon the latest estimates regarding the separation
agreements, the Company increased its provision for severance costs by approximately $4 million in
the first quarter of 2010. The balance of the restructuring charges in the first six months of 2010
expense is mainly due to accelerated depreciation and other restructuring related costs pertaining
to the rationalization of our Fragrance and Ingredients operations in Europe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring Charges |
|
|
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
(In Thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Flavors |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(363 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(363 |
) |
Fragrances |
|
|
1,843 |
|
|
|
4,849 |
|
|
|
6,831 |
|
|
|
4,849 |
|
Global |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(382 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(382 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,843 |
|
|
$ |
4,104 |
|
|
$ |
6,831 |
|
|
$ |
4,104 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Expense
In the first six months of 2010, interest expense totaled $24.8 million compared to $33.8
million in 2009. The 2009 amount includes $4 million of interest paid on the close-out of a
cross-currency interest rate swap classified as a net investment hedge. The additional reduction
versus 2009 reflects certain debt repayments of more than $210 million made during the second half
of 2009 in connection with an advance prepayment of a Japanese Yen term loan and certain private
placement loans. Average cost of debt was 4.9% for the 2010 period compared to 5.2% in 2009.
Other (Income) Expense, Net
Other expense of $4.9 million in the first six months of 2010 increased $4.5 million versus
other expense of $0.4 million in 2009, mainly due to higher losses on foreign exchange transactions
and losses recorded on our mark-to-market adjustments on the investments for the deferred
compensation plans, compared to gains in the prior year.
Income Taxes
The effective tax rate was 28.3% for the six months ended June 30, 2010 as compared to a rate
of 27.3% in the prior year. A lower effective tax rate on the restructuring charges had a greater
relative impact on the 2010 rate due to the higher amounts recorded in 2009.
Operating Results by Business Unit
We evaluate the performance of business units based on operating profit before interest
expense, other income (expense), net and income taxes. See Note 10 to our Consolidated Financial
Statements for the reconciliation to Income before taxes.
Flavors
In the first six months of 2010, Flavors operating profit totaled $126 million, or 20.9% as a
percentage of sales, compared to $107 million or 20.0% in 2009. The improvement in profitability
was mainly driven by strong sales growth and better absorption, improving input costs and the
benefits of our cost control initiatives. These improvements were partially offset by targeted
investments in R&D and higher incentive compensation costs.
Fragrances
Fragrance operating profit for the first six months of 2010 was $121 million or 17.0%, as a
percentage of sales, compared to $75 million or 12.6% reported in 2009. The improvement in profit
was driven by higher volumes and lower input costs plus benefits associated with cost reduction
initiatives implemented last year. The 2010 period includes $7 million of restructuring related
charges related to the rationalization of our European fragrance manufacturing footprint compared
to $5 million in the prior year period. Higher incentive compensation expense and lower R&D credits
reduced operating profit in the first six months of 2010 compared to the prior year period.
26
Global Expenses
Global expenses represent corporate and headquarters-related expenses which include
legal, finance, human resources and other administrative expenses that are not allocated to an
individual business unit. In 2010, Global expenses for the first six months were $35 million
compared to $17 million during the first six months of 2009. The increase is primarily due to
higher incentive compensation accruals plus litigation related costs.
Financial Condition
Cash and cash equivalents totaled $110.6 million at June 30, 2010 compared to $80.1 million at
December 31, 2009. Working capital of $728.3 million at June 30, 2010 increased $84.7 million
compared to $643.6 million at December 31, 2009. Additions to property, plant and equipment for
the six month period ended June 30, 2010 totaled $37.0 million. Gross additions to property, plant
and equipment are expected to approximate 4% of sales for the full year 2010.
Operating cash flows in the first six months of 2010 were an inflow of $127.6 million,
compared to an inflow of $87.5 million in the prior year period. The improvement reflects higher
earnings in the current year period combined with improvements in working capital management that
began in the second half of 2009. The large improvement in core working capital was driven by
accounts payable reflecting a more disciplined approach in our purchase to pay process and to a
lesser extent due to higher purchasing activity. The improvement in receivables is primarily due
to a reduction in our past due accounts, and to a lesser extent, geographical sales mix and average
customer payment terms. These benefits were partially offset by the effect of higher sales
activity. The change in our inventory in 2009 resulted from our planning process, improvement
initiatives and a rebalancing of purchased due to reduced sales volume. In 2010 our inventory
movement is mainly due to higher raw material purchases supporting the increased sales volume.
At June 30, 2010, we had $983 million of debt outstanding comparable to the $1,012 million
outstanding at December 31, 2009.
In February 2009, we closed out the $300 million USD London InterBank Offer Rate (LIBOR) to
European InterBank Offer Rate (EURIBOR) interest rate swap for $16 million, of which a $12 million
loss was deferred in AOCI where it will remain until the Euro net investment is divested and $4
million was included in earnings as a component of interest expense during the first quarter of
2009.
The Company pays a quarterly cash dividend of $0.25 per share to shareholders, which was
unchanged as of quarter end in both 2010 and 2009. We funded a single quarterly dividend payment
in each of the first two quarters of 2010 and 2009. On July 27, 2010, the Companys Board of
Directors has authorized an 8% increase in the Companys quarterly cash dividend to $0.27 per share
from the previous quarterly rate of $.25 per share.
No shares were repurchased on the open market during the six months ended June 30, 2010.
The Company leverages its credit worthiness to collateralize tax exposures related to certain
administrative proceedings. With the current turmoil in the credit markets, the Company may be
precluded from securing similar forms of collateral for unrecognized tax benefits. If this
situation occurs, the Company may be required to self-fund any future collateral obligations.
We continue to generate strong operating cash flows and our multi-year revolving credit
agreement (the Facility) remains in place. Cash flows from operations and availability under our
existing credit facilities are expected to be sufficient to fund our currently anticipated normal
capital spending and other expected cash requirements for at least the next eighteen months.
As of June 30, 2010 we had total borrowings under the Facility of $122 million. The amount
which we are able to draw down on under the Facility is limited by financial covenants as described
in more detail below. At June 30, 2010 we had a remaining overall borrowing capacity of $729
million. However, our drawdown capacity on the facility was limited by our remaining lending
capacity of $713 million at June 30, 2010.
27
The Facility contains the most restrictive covenants requiring us to maintain, at the end of
each fiscal quarter, a ratio of net debt for borrowed money to adjusted EBITDA in respect of the
previous 12-month period of not more than 3.25 to 1. At June 30, 2010, we were in compliance with
all financial and other covenants. At June 30, 2010 our Net Debt/ Adjusted EBITDA (1)
was 1.76 to 1 as defined by the debt agreements, well below the financial covenants of existing
outstanding debt. Failure to comply with the financial and other covenants under these agreements
would constitute default and would allow the lenders to accelerate the maturity of all indebtedness
under the related agreement. If such acceleration were to occur, we would not have sufficient
liquidity available to repay the indebtedness. We would likely have to seek amendments under the
agreements for relief from the financial covenants or repay the debt with proceeds from the
issuance of new debt or equity, and/or asset sales, if necessary. We may be unable to amend the
agreements or raise sufficient capital to repay such obligations in the event the maturities are
accelerated.
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Adjusted EBITDA and Net Debt, which are non-GAAP measures used for these covenants,
are calculated in accordance with the definition in the debt agreements. In this context, these
measures are used solely to provide information on the extent to which we are in compliance with
debt covenants and may not be comparable to adjusted EBITDA and Net Debt used by other companies.
Reconciliations of adjusted EBITDA to net income and net debt to total debt are as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 Months Ended June 30, |
|
(In Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
231.2 |
|
|
$ |
202.0 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
52.8 |
|
|
|
71.0 |
|
Income taxes |
|
|
97.0 |
|
|
|
49.1 |
|
Depreciation |
|
|
74.2 |
|
|
|
68.1 |
|
Amortization |
|
|
6.2 |
|
|
|
6.2 |
|
Specified items (1) |
|
|
26.4 |
|
|
|
21.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA |
|
$ |
487.8 |
|
|
$ |
417.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Specified items for the 12 months ended June 30, 2010 of $26.4 million consist
of restructuring charges ($21.0 million) and employee separation costs ($5.4 million). Specified
items for the 12 months ended June 30, 2009 of $21.1 million consist principally of restructuring
charges ($16.3 million) implementation costs related to our global shared services project ($2.1
million) and employee separation costs ($0.9 million). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
(In Millions) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Total debt |
|
$ |
983.3 |
|
|
$ |
1,214.3 |
|
Adjustments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred gain on interest rate swaps |
|
|
(13.9 |
) |
|
|
(15.9 |
) |
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(110.6 |
) |
|
|
(163.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net debt |
|
$ |
858.8 |
|
|
$ |
1,034.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cautionary Statement Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995
Statements in this Quarterly Report, which are not historical facts or information, are
forward-looking statements within the meaning of The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995. Such forward-looking statements are based on managements current assumptions, estimates and
expectations. Certain of such forward-looking information may be identified by such terms as
expect, anticipate, believe, outlook, guidance, may and similar terms or variations
thereof. All information concerning future revenues, tax rates or benefits, interest and other
savings, earnings and other future financial results, financial position, or events constitutes
forward-looking information. Such forward-looking statements are based on a series of expectations,
assumptions, estimates and projections about the Company, are not guarantees of future results,
performance or events, and involve significant risks, uncertainties and other factors, including
assumptions and projections, for all forward periods. Actual results of the Company may differ
materially from any future results, performance or events expressed or implied by such
forward-looking statements. Such factors include, among others, the following: general economic and
business conditions in the Companys markets, especially given the current disruption in global economic
conditions,
28
including economic and recessionary pressures; energy and commodity prices; decline in
consumer confidence and spending; significant fluctuations in the value of the U.S. dollar;
population health and political uncertainties, and the difficulty in projecting the short and
long-term effects of global economic conditions; movements in interest rates; continued volatility
and deterioration of the capital and credit markets, including continued disruption in the
commercial paper market, and any adverse impact on our cost of and access to capital and credit;
fluctuations in the price, quality and availability of raw materials; the Companys ability to
implement its business strategy, including the achievement of anticipated cost savings,
profitability and growth targets; the impact of currency fluctuation or devaluation in the
Companys principal foreign markets, especially given the current disruptions to such currency
markets, and the impact on the availability, effectiveness and cost of the Companys hedging and
risk management strategies; the outcome of uncertainties related to litigation; the impact of
possible pension funding obligations and increased pension expense on the Companys cash flow and
results of operations; and the effect of legal and regulatory proceedings, as well as restrictions
imposed on the Company, its operations or its representatives by U.S. and foreign governments. The
Company intends its forward-looking statements to speak only as of the time of such statements and
does not undertake or plan to update or revise them as more information becomes available or to
reflect changes in expectations, assumptions or results. The Company can give no assurance that
such expectations or forward-looking statements will prove to be correct. An occurrence of, or any
material adverse change in, one or more of the risk factors or risks and uncertainties referred to
in this report or included in our other periodic reports filed with the Commission could materially
and adversely impact our operations and our future financial results.
Any public statements or disclosures by IFF following this report that modify or impact any of
the forward-looking statements contained in or accompanying this report will be deemed to modify or
supersede such outlook or other forward-looking statements in or accompanying this report.
Non-GAAP Financial Measures
The Company uses certain non-GAAP financial operating measures. For example, we exclude the
effects of exchange rate fluctuations when discussing our historical performance. Such information
is supplemental to information presented in accordance with GAAP and is not intended to represent a
presentation in accordance with GAAP. In discussing our historical and expected future results and
financial condition, we believe it is meaningful for investors to be made aware of and to be
assisted in a better understanding of, on a period-to-period comparative basis, of financial
amounts both including and excluding these identified items, as well as the impact of exchange rate
fluctuations on operating results and financial condition. We believe such additional non-GAAP
information provides investors with an overall perspective of the period-to-period performance of
our core business. In addition, management internally reviews each of these non-GAAP measures to
evaluate performance on a comparative period-to-period basis in terms of absolute performance,
trends and expected future performance with respect to our core continuing business. A material
limitation of these non-GAAP measures is that such measures do not reflect actual GAAP amounts. We
compensate for such limitations by presenting the accompanying reconciliation to the most directly
comparable GAAP measure. These non-GAAP measures may not be comparable to similarly titled measures
used by other companies.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
There are no material changes in market risk from the information provided in the Companys
2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
The Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer with the assistance of other members
of our management, have evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as of
the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. Based on such evaluation, the
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and
procedures are effective as of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
We have established controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be
disclosed in the reports that we file or submit under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the
Securities and Exchange Commissions rules and forms and is accumulated and communicated to
management, including the principal executive officer and the
principal financial officer, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
The Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have also concluded that there have
not been any changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended June
30, 2010 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal
control over financial reporting.
29
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1A. Risk Factors
There have been no material changes in the risk factors previously disclosed in the Companys
2009 Form 10-K.
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Popcorn Flavor Litigation.
In September 2001, the Company was named as a defendant in a purported class action brought
against it in the Circuit Court of Jasper County, Missouri, on behalf of employees of a plant owned
and operated by Gilster-Mary Lee Corp. in Jasper, Missouri (Benavides case). The
plaintiffs alleged that they sustained respiratory injuries in the workplace due to the use by
Gilster-Mary Lee of a BBA and/or IFF flavor. For purposes of reporting these actions, BBA and/or
IFF are referred to as the Company.
In January 2004, the Court ruled that class action status was not warranted. As a result of
this decision, each of the 47 plaintiff cases was to be tried separately. Subsequently, eight cases
were tried to a verdict, four verdicts resulted for the plaintiffs and 4 verdicts resulted for the
Company, all of which were appealed by the losing party. Subsequently all plaintiff cases related
to the Benavides case, including those on appeal, were settled.
Fourteen actions based on similar claims of alleged respiratory illness due to workplace
exposure to flavor ingredients are currently pending against the Company and other flavor suppliers
and related companies.
In July 2004, the Company and another flavor supplier were named defendants, and subsequently
9 third and fourth party defendants were added, in a lawsuit by four former workers (and two
spouses for loss of consortium) at a Ridgeway, Illinois factory in an action brought in the Circuit
Court for the Second Judicial Circuit, Gallatin County, Illinois ( Batteese case). In August
2006, the Company and another flavor supplier were named defendants in a lawsuit by ten current and
former employees of the Gilster-Mary Lee facility in Jasper, Missouri in the Missouri Circuit Court
of Jasper County ( Arles case) and 1 former employees in the same Court ( Bowan
case).
In January 2007, the Company and another flavor supplier were named defendants in a lawsuit in
Hamilton County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas by 57 current and former employees (plus 28 spousal
loss of consortium claims) of two separate Marion, Ohio factories ( Aldrich case). In June
2007, the Company and another flavor supplier were named defendants in a lawsuit filed in Hamilton
County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas by 17 current and former employees (plus six spousal loss of
consortium claims) of a Marion, Ohio facility ( Arnold case). In July 2007, the Company and
another flavor manufacturer were named defendants in a lawsuit filed in Hamilton County, Ohio Court
of Common Pleas by 35 current and former workers (plus 13 spousal loss of consortium claims) of two
Marion, Ohio facilities ( Adamson case). In July 2007, the Company was joined as a defendant
in a case filed in June 2005 against five companies and a trade association in the 8th
Judicial District Court of Montana by the widow of the former owner/operator of a popcorn business
in Montana ( Yatsko case).
In March 2008, the Company and another flavor supplier were named defendants in two lawsuits
in the Hamilton County, Ohio Court of Common Pleas, one by nine current and former employees and
the spouses of two such employees of a popcorn plant in Marion, Ohio ( Ferguson case) and
the other by ten current and former employees and three spouses of such employees of the same plant
( Brown case). In August 2008, the Company and seven other flavor and material suppliers
were named defendants in a lawsuit by nine plaintiffs (plus eight loss of consortium claims) in the
Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas ( Auld case).
In September 2009, the Company, another flavor supplier and an employer were named as
defendants in a law suit by the child of a worker at a Ridgeway, Illinois factory in an action
brought in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois ( Patton case). In December 2009, the
Company, five other flavor manufacturers and five microwave popcorn manufacturers and distributors
were named defendants in a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Iowa
(and in an identical suit in case the Iowa suit was found to be an incorrect jurisdiction was filed
in May 2010
in Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, Central District) by a consumer of
microwave popcorn and her husband ( Daughetee case).
30
In January 2010, the Company was named as a defendant in a law suit by four former workers
(and their spouses) at a Ridgeway, Illinois factory in an action brought in the U.S. District Court
for the Southern district of Illinois ( Barker case). In May 2010, the Company and 36 other
companies, many flavor and ingredient suppliers, were named defendants in a law suit by an employee
(and his spouse) at a Forest park, Georgia food plant in an action brought in the State Court of
Clayton County, Georgia ( Anderson case).
The Company believes that all IFF and BBA flavors at issue in these matters meet the
requirements of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and are safe for handling and use by workers
in food manufacturing plants when used according to specified safety procedures. These procedures
are detailed in instructions that IFF and BBA provided to all their customers for the safe handling
and use of their flavors. It is the responsibility of IFFs customers to ensure that these
instructions, which include the use of appropriate engineering controls, such as adequate
ventilation, prior handling procedures and respiratory protection for workers, are followed in the
workplace.
At each balance sheet date, or more frequently as conditions warrant, the Company reviews the
status of each pending claim, as well as its insurance coverage for such claims with due
consideration given to potentially applicable deductibles, retentions and reservation of rights
under its insurance policies, and the advice of its outside legal counsel and a third party expert
in modeling insurance deductible amounts with respect to all these matters. While the ultimate
outcome of any litigation cannot be predicted, management believes that adequate provision has been
made with respect to all known claims. Based on information presently available and in light of the
merits of its defenses and the availability of insurance, the Company does not expect the outcome
of the above cases, singly or in the aggregate, to have a material adverse effect on the Companys
financial condition, results of operation or liquidity. There can be no assurance that future
events will not require the Company to increase the amount it has accrued for any matter or accrue
for a matter that has not been previously accrued. See Note 13 of the Notes to the Consolidated
Financial Statements.
Patent Claims.
A complaint, captioned V. Mane Fils S.A. v. International Flavors and Fragrances, Inc. was
filed in U.S. District Court in the District of New Jersey in May 2006, and alleges that the
Company has and continues to infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 5,725,856 and 5,843,466, relating to a
flavor ingredient that may provide a cooling effect. The Company answered the complaint by denying
liability and asserting that both patents are invalid and various other defenses. In June 2008,
plaintiff amended its complaint to add claims for violations of the Lanham Act, tortious
interference and unfair competition. The Company answered the amended complaint by denying all
liability. In connection with the patent claims, the plaintiff seeks monetary damages, damages for
alleged willful infringement, injunctive relief and fees, costs and interest. In connection with
the additional claims, plaintiff also seeks monetary damages, punitive damages, fees and costs. In
May 2010, following reexamination of the patents in question by the U.S. Patent Office, all of the
patent claims, initially rejected in the reexamination proceeding, were reallowed. The Company and
the plaintiff have each filed motions for summary judgment with respect to various claims. No trial
date has been scheduled. The Company denies the allegations and will defend its position in Court.
The Company is unable to reasonably estimate the amount of loss, if any, related to this
proceeding above its current accrual. Based on present information, the Company believes that its
ultimate liability, if any, arising from this proceeding would not have a material adverse effect
on its financial position or liquidity; however, due to the unpredictability regarding the
litigation process, such claim, if ultimately resolved against us, could potentially have a
material adverse effect on our cash flows or financial results in a particular period. An adverse
outcome could also potentially affect our ability to sell one or more flavor products to the extent
the Court ultimately issued an injunction related to the patents. The Company disputes the
allegations of wrongdoing, believes it has meritorious defenses and is vigorously defending all
claims.
Environmental
Over the past 20 years, various federal and state authorities and private parties have claimed
that the Company is a Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) as a generator of waste materials for
alleged pollution at a number of waste sites operated by third parties located principally in New
Jersey and have sought to recover costs incurred and to be incurred to clean up the sites.
31
The Company has been identified as a PRP at ten facilities operated by third parties at which
investigation and/or remediation activities may be ongoing. The Company analyzes its liability on a
regular basis. The Company accrues for environmental liabilities when they are probable and
estimable. The Company estimates its share of the total future cost for these sites to be less than
$5 million.
While joint and several liability is authorized under federal and state environmental laws,
the Company believes the amounts it has paid and anticipates paying in the future for clean-up
costs and damages at all sites are not and will not be material to the Companys financial
condition, results of operations or liquidity. This conclusion is based upon, among other things,
the involvement of other PRPs at most sites, the status of proceedings, including various
settlement agreements and consent decrees, the extended time period over which payments will likely
be made and an agreement reached in July 1994 with three of the Companys liability insurers
pursuant to which defense costs and indemnity amounts payable by the Company in respect of the
sites will be shared by the insurers up to an agreed amount.
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
(c) Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
|
|
The Company has not purchased any shares during the second quarter of 2010. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased |
|
|
Maximum Number |
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Average |
|
|
as Part of Publicly |
|
|
of Shares That May |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Price Paid |
|
|
Announced |
|
|
Yet Be Purchased |
|
|
|
Purchased |
|
|
per Share |
|
|
Program |
|
|
Under the Program |
|
April 1 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 1 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 1 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shares purchased |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
Item 6. Exhibits
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
|
International Flavors & Fragrances Inc.s 2010 Stock Award and
Incentive Plan, incorporated by reference to Appendix A of the
Companys definitive proxy statement on Schedule 14A filed with the
SEC on March 9, 2010. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.1 |
|
|
Certification of Douglas D. Tough pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.2 |
|
|
Certification of Kevin C. Berryman pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
Certification of Douglas D. Tough and Kevin C. Berryman pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002. |
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned
thereunto duly authorized.
INTERNATIONAL FLAVORS & FRAGRANCES INC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dated: August 5, 2010 |
By: |
/s/ Douglas D. Tough
|
|
|
|
Douglas D. Tough |
|
|
|
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
Dated: August 5, 2010 |
By: |
/s/ Kevin C. Berryman
|
|
|
|
Kevin C. Berryman |
|
|
|
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
33
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
|
International Flavors & Fragrances Inc.s 2010 Stock Award and
Incentive Plan, incorporated by reference to Appendix A of the
Companys definitive proxy statement on Schedule 14A filed with the
SEC on March 9, 2010. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.1 |
|
|
Certification of Douglas D. Tough pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31.2 |
|
|
Certification of Kevin C. Berryman pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
Certification of Douglas D. Tough and Kevin C. Berryman pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002. |
34