NOTE 1 – SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
General Information
The Company
Perrigo Company plc was incorporated under the laws of Ireland on June 28, 2013 and became the successor registrant of Perrigo Company, a Michigan corporation, on December 18, 2013 in connection with the acquisition of Elan Corporation, plc ("Elan"). Unless the context requires otherwise, the terms "Perrigo," the "Company," "we," "our," "us," and similar pronouns used herein refer to Perrigo Company plc, its subsidiaries, and all predecessors of Perrigo Company plc and its subsidiaries.
We are dedicated to making lives better by bringing Quality, Affordable Self-Care Products that consumers trust everywhere they are sold. We are a leading provider of over-the-counter ("OTC") health and wellness solutions that enhance individual well-being by empowering consumers to proactively prevent or treat conditions that can be self-managed. We are also a leading producer of generic prescription pharmaceutical topical products such as creams, lotions, and gels as well as nasal sprays and inhalers.
Basis of Presentation
The accompanying unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles ("GAAP") for interim financial information and with the instructions to Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all of the information and footnotes required by GAAP for complete financial statements. The unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and footnotes included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019. In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals and other adjustments) considered necessary for a fair presentation of the unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements have been included and include our accounts and the accounts of all majority-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
Segment Reporting
Our reporting and operating segments are as follows:
|
|
•
|
Consumer Self-Care Americas ("CSCA") comprises our consumer self-care business (OTC, contract manufacturing, infant formula, and oral self-care categories and our divested animal health category) in the U.S., Mexico and Canada.
|
|
|
•
|
Consumer Self-Care International ("CSCI") comprises our branded consumer self-care business primarily in Europe, our consumer self-care businesses in the United Kingdom and Australia, and our divested liquid licensed products business in the United Kingdom.
|
|
|
•
|
Prescription Pharmaceuticals ("RX") comprises our prescription pharmaceuticals business in the U.S., predominantly generics, and our pharmaceuticals and diagnostic businesses in Israel.
|
Reclassifications
Certain prior period amounts have been reclassified from other current assets to other non-current assets on our balance sheet as of June 27, 2020 to conform to the current period presentation. Such reclassification had no impact on net income or earnings per share.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 1
Recent Accounting Standard Pronouncements
Below are recent Accounting Standard Updates ("ASU") that we are still assessing to determine the effect on our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. We do not believe that any other recently issued accounting standards could have a material effect on our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. As new accounting pronouncements are issued, we will adopt those that are applicable under the circumstances.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recently Issued Accounting Standards Not Yet Adopted
|
Standard
|
|
Description
|
|
Effective Date
|
|
Effect on the Financial Statements or Other Significant Matters
|
ASU 2018-14: Compensation-Retirement Benefits-Defined Benefit Plans-General (Subtopic 715-20): Disclosure Framework-Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Defined Benefit Plans
|
|
This guidance amends ASC 715 to add, remove, and clarify disclosure requirements related to defined benefit pension and other post-retirement plans.
|
|
December 31, 2020
|
|
We are currently evaluating the implications of adoption to related disclosures in our Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
ASU 2019-12: Income Taxes (Topic 740): Simplifying the Accounting for Income Taxes
|
|
This guidance enhances and simplifies various aspects of the income tax accounting guidance in ASC 740.
|
|
January 1, 2021
|
|
We are currently evaluating the implications of adoption on our Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
Recently Adopted Accounting Standard Update
On January 1, 2020, we adopted ASU 2016-13 Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments ("ASC 326"), which replaces the incurred loss methodology with an expected loss methodology that is referred to as the Current Expected Credit Loss ("CECL") methodology. The measurement of expected credit losses under the CECL methodology is applicable to financial assets measured at amortized cost.
We adopted ASC 326 using the modified retrospective method for all financial assets measured at amortized cost, which includes trade receivables and contract assets. The cumulative effect of adopting ASC 326 was not material.
Allowance for Credit Losses
Expected credit losses on trade receivables and contract assets are measured collectively by geographic location. The estimate of expected credit losses considers historical credit loss information that is adjusted for current conditions and for reasonable and supportable forecasts. Historical credit loss experience provides the primary basis for estimation of expected credit losses. Adjustments to historical loss information may be made for significant changes in a geographic location’s economic conditions. Receivables that do not share risk characteristics are evaluated on an individual basis. These receivables are not included in the collective evaluation.
The allowance for credit losses is a valuation account that is deducted from the instruments’ cost basis to present the net amount expected to be collected. Trade receivables and contract assets are charged off against the allowance when the balance is no longer deemed collectible.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 1
The following table presents the allowance for credit losses activity (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
Beginning balance
|
$
|
7.1
|
|
|
$
|
6.7
|
|
Provision for credit losses, net
|
0.2
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
Receivables written-off
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
Recoveries collected
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Currency translation adjustment
|
—
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
Ending balance
|
$
|
6.2
|
|
|
$
|
6.2
|
|
NOTE 2 – REVENUE RECOGNITION
Revenue is recognized when or as a customer obtains control of promised products. The amount of revenue recognized reflects the consideration we expect to be entitled to receive in exchange for these products.
Disaggregation of Revenue
We generated net sales in the following geographic locations(1) (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
U.S.
|
$
|
848.7
|
|
|
$
|
768.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,750.3
|
|
|
$
|
1,537.4
|
|
Europe(2)
|
311.8
|
|
|
315.8
|
|
|
684.4
|
|
|
656.7
|
|
All other countries(3)
|
58.6
|
|
|
64.6
|
|
|
125.4
|
|
|
129.4
|
|
Total net sales
|
$
|
1,219.1
|
|
|
$
|
1,149.0
|
|
|
$
|
2,560.1
|
|
|
$
|
2,323.5
|
|
(1) Derived from the location of the entity that sells to a third party.
(2) Includes Ireland net sales of $7.8 million and $11.5 million for the three and six months ended June 27, 2020, respectively, and $6.9 million and $12.1 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2019, respectively.
(3) Includes net sales generated primarily in Israel, Mexico, Australia and Canada.
Product Category
We re-aligned our product categories in our CSCA and CSCI segments as of December 31, 2019. The re-alignment standardizes our categories and product level detail to provide consistency. This transformative step will optimize the way in which management reports and evaluates our business.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 2
The following is a summary of our net sales by category (in millions); the comparative periods reflect the product category re-alignment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
CSCA(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Upper respiratory
|
$
|
116.7
|
|
|
$
|
121.2
|
|
|
$
|
271.3
|
|
|
$
|
254.0
|
|
Digestive health
|
112.1
|
|
|
106.3
|
|
|
219.0
|
|
|
208.6
|
|
Pain and sleep-aids
|
97.7
|
|
|
91.3
|
|
|
218.1
|
|
|
182.6
|
|
Nutrition
|
88.6
|
|
|
85.9
|
|
|
190.8
|
|
|
185.5
|
|
Healthy lifestyle
|
81.5
|
|
|
86.1
|
|
|
167.3
|
|
|
162.1
|
|
Oral self-care
|
63.2
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
118.5
|
|
|
—
|
|
Skincare and personal hygiene
|
42.9
|
|
|
45.8
|
|
|
89.6
|
|
|
91.3
|
|
Vitamins, minerals, and supplements
|
6.4
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
|
12.8
|
|
|
12.5
|
|
Animal health
|
—
|
|
|
22.3
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
41.9
|
|
Other CSCA(2)
|
18.5
|
|
|
17.0
|
|
|
40.8
|
|
|
25.4
|
|
Total CSCA
|
627.6
|
|
|
582.1
|
|
|
1,328.2
|
|
|
1,163.9
|
|
CSCI
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Skincare and personal hygiene
|
97.6
|
|
|
105.7
|
|
|
192.3
|
|
|
207.6
|
|
Upper respiratory
|
45.5
|
|
|
49.9
|
|
|
129.6
|
|
|
121.8
|
|
Healthy lifestyle
|
40.5
|
|
|
48.7
|
|
|
84.1
|
|
|
96.0
|
|
Pain and sleep-aids
|
40.2
|
|
|
39.4
|
|
|
87.0
|
|
|
79.8
|
|
Vitamins, minerals, and supplements
|
38.5
|
|
|
41.1
|
|
|
87.0
|
|
|
86.9
|
|
Oral self-care
|
20.4
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
43.6
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
Digestive health
|
5.1
|
|
|
6.8
|
|
|
11.1
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
Other CSCI(3)
|
33.3
|
|
|
34.1
|
|
|
69.1
|
|
|
68.8
|
|
Total CSCI
|
321.1
|
|
|
327.5
|
|
|
703.8
|
|
|
678.3
|
|
RX
|
270.4
|
|
|
239.4
|
|
|
528.1
|
|
|
481.3
|
|
Total net sales
|
$
|
1,219.1
|
|
|
$
|
1,149.0
|
|
|
$
|
2,560.1
|
|
|
$
|
2,323.5
|
|
(1) Includes net sales from our OTC contract manufacturing business.
|
|
(2)
|
Consists primarily of diagnostic products and other miscellaneous or otherwise uncategorized product lines and markets, none of which is greater than 10% of the segment net sales.
|
|
|
(3)
|
Consists primarily of liquid licensed products, our distribution business and other miscellaneous or otherwise uncategorized product lines and markets, none of which is greater than 10% of the segment net sales.
|
While the majority of revenue is recognized at a point in time, certain of our product revenue is recognized on an over time basis. Predominately, over time customer contracts exist in contract manufacturing arrangements, which occur in both the CSCA and CSCI segments. Contract manufacturing revenue was $64.5 million and $114.0 million for the three and six months ended June 27, 2020, respectively, and $65.8 million and $133.1 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2019, respectively.
We also recognize a portion of the store brand OTC product revenues in the CSCA segment on an over time basis; however, the timing difference between over time and point in time revenue recognition for store brand contracts is not significant due to the short time period between the customization of the product and shipment or delivery.
Contract Balances
The following table provides information about contract assets from contracts with customers (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance Sheet Location
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
Short-term contract assets
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
$
|
22.7
|
|
|
$
|
26.3
|
|
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 3
NOTE 3 – ACQUISITIONS AND DIVESTITURES
Acquisitions During the Six Months Ended June 27, 2020
Oral Care Assets of High Ridge Brands
On April 1, 2020, we acquired the oral care assets of High Ridge Brands for total purchase consideration of $113.0 million, subject to customary post-closing adjustments, including a working capital settlement. After post-closing adjustments as of June 27, 2020, total cash consideration paid was $106.0 million, net of $2.0 million that we allocated as prepayment of contract consideration for transitional services to be received related to the transaction.
This acquisition includes the children’s oral care value brand, Firefly®, in addition to the REACH® and Dr. Fresh® brands, and a licensing portfolio. The U.S. operations, which represent a significant portion of the business, will be reported in our CSCA segment and the remaining non-U.S. operations will be reported in our CSCI segment.
During the three and six months ended June 27, 2020, we incurred $2.6 million and $4.1 million of general transaction costs (legal, banking and other professional fees), respectively. The amounts were recorded in Administration expenses within the CSCA segment.
The acquisition of the oral care assets of High Ridge Brands was accounted for as a business combination and has been reported in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations as of the acquisition date. From April 1, 2020 through June 27, 2020, the acquisition generated Net sales of $19.8 million and Net loss of $3.5 million, which included $2.6 million of transaction costs and $1.6 million related to inventory costs stepped up to acquisition date fair value.
We are in the process of gathering significant relevant information needed to complete the valuation for the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. As a result, the initial accounting for the acquisition is incomplete. The provisional acquisition amounts recognized for assets acquired and liabilities assumed will be finalized as soon as possible but no later than one year from the acquisition date. The final determination may result in asset and liability fair values and tax bases that differ from the preliminary estimates and require changes to the preliminary amounts recognized.
The following table summarizes the consideration paid for the oral care assets of High Ridge Brands and the provisional amounts of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oral Care Assets of High Ridge Brands
|
Cash consideration
|
$
|
106.0
|
|
|
|
Estimated fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed:
|
|
Net working capital
|
$
|
22.2
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
0.7
|
|
Definite-lived intangible assets
|
66.8
|
|
Goodwill
|
16.3
|
|
Net assets acquired
|
$
|
106.0
|
|
The goodwill of $16.3 million arising from the acquisition consists largely of the anticipated growth from new product sales, sales to new customers, the assembled workforce, and the synergies expected from combining the operations of the oral care assets of High Ridge Brands into Perrigo. Preliminarily, goodwill of $14.6 million and $1.7 million was allocated to our CSCA and CSCI segments, respectively. We are currently evaluating the tax deductibility of the provisional goodwill. We expect some portion to be deductible for income tax purposes. The definite-lived intangible assets acquired consisted of trademarks and trade names, exclusive license agreements, and customer relationships subject to a weighted average useful life of approximately 18 years.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 3
Dexsil®
On February 13, 2020, we acquired Dexsil®, a silicon supplement brand, from RXW Group Nv, for total cash consideration paid of approximately $8.0 million. The transaction was accounted for as an asset acquisition, in which we capitalized the consideration paid as a brand-named intangible asset. We began amortizing the brand intangible over a 25-year useful life. Operating results attributable to the product are included within our CSCI segment.
Steripod®
On January 3, 2020, we acquired Steripod®, a leading toothbrush accessory brand and innovator in the toothbrush protector market, from Bonfit America Inc. Total consideration paid was $26.0 million. The transaction was accounted for as an asset acquisition, in which we capitalized $24.9 million as a brand-named intangible asset. The remainder of the purchase price was allocated to working capital. We began amortizing the brand intangible over a 25-year useful life. Operating results attributable to the product are included within our CSCA segment.
Acquisition Accounted for as a Business Combination During the Year Ended December 31, 2019
Ranir Global Holdings, LLC
On July 1, 2019, we acquired 100% of the outstanding equity interest in Ranir Global Holdings, LLC ("Ranir"), a privately-held company, for total base consideration of $750.0 million in a debt-free, cash-free transaction. After post-closing adjustments, total cash consideration paid was $747.7 million, net of $11.5 million cash acquired. We funded the transaction with cash on hand and borrowings under the 2018 Revolver (as defined in Note 10).
Ranir is headquartered in Grand Rapids, Michigan and is a leading global supplier of private label and branded oral self-care products. Ranir's U.S. operations are reported in our CSCA segment and its non-U.S. operations are reported in our CSCI segment.
The acquisition of Ranir was accounted for as a business combination and has been reported in our Consolidated Statements of Operations as of the acquisition date. From July 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019, Ranir generated Net sales of $151.4 million and had $7.6 million of Net income, which is inclusive of a non-recurring charge of $5.7 million related to inventory costs stepped up to acquisition date fair value.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 3
The following table summarizes the consideration paid for Ranir and the amounts of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ranir
|
Purchase price paid
|
$
|
759.2
|
|
|
|
Assets acquired:
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
$
|
11.5
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
40.6
|
|
Inventories
|
59.0
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
4.0
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
40.8
|
|
Operating lease assets
|
3.7
|
|
Goodwill
|
292.7
|
|
Definite-lived intangibles:
|
|
Developed product technology, formulations, and product rights
|
$
|
48.6
|
|
Customer relationships and distribution networks
|
260.0
|
|
Trademarks, trade names, and brands
|
41.0
|
|
Indefinite-lived intangibles:
|
|
In-process research and development
|
39.7
|
|
Total intangible assets
|
$
|
389.3
|
|
Other non-current assets
|
2.8
|
|
Total assets
|
$
|
844.4
|
|
Liabilities assumed:
|
|
Accounts payable
|
$
|
17.6
|
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
7.7
|
|
Payroll and related taxes
|
5.5
|
|
Accrued customer programs
|
5.7
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
45.9
|
|
Other non-current liabilities
|
2.8
|
|
Total liabilities
|
$
|
85.2
|
|
Net assets acquired
|
$
|
759.2
|
|
The goodwill of $292.7 million arising from the acquisition consists largely of the anticipated growth from new product sales, sales to new customers, the assembled workforce, and the synergies expected from combining the operations of Perrigo and Ranir. Goodwill of $212.6 million and $80.1 million was allocated to our CSCA and CSCI segments, respectively. We expect $252.3 million to be deductible for income tax purposes. The definite-lived intangible assets acquired consisted of trademarks and trade names, developed product technologies, and customer relationships. Trademarks and trade names were assigned useful lives that ranged from 20 to 25 years. Developed product technologies were assigned 10-year useful lives and customer relationships were assigned 24-year useful lives. Customer relationships were valued using the multi-period excess earnings method. Trademarks and trade names, developed technology, and in-process research and development ("IPR&D") were valued using the relief from royalty method. Significant judgment was applied in estimating the fair value of the intangible assets acquired, which involved the use of significant estimates and assumptions with respect to the timing and amounts of cash flow projections, including revenue growth rates, projected profit margins, and discount rates.
During the three months ended June 27, 2020, we completed the allocation by tax jurisdiction and finalized the Ranir opening balance sheet. We recorded measurement period adjustments to the valuation of Deferred income tax liabilities of $1.7 million and a small adjustment to other non-current assets. Therefore, goodwill was adjusted to $292.7 million.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 3
Acquisitions During the Six Months Ended June 29, 2019
Generic Product Acquisition
On May 17, 2019, we purchased the Abbreviated New Drug Application ("ANDA") for a generic product used to relieve pain, for $15.7 million in cash, which we capitalized as a developed product technology intangible asset. We launched the product during the third quarter of 2019 and began amortizing it over a 20-year useful life. Operating results attributable to the product are included within our RX segment.
Budesonide Nasal Spray and Triamcinolone Nasal Spray
On April 1, 2019, we purchased product ANDAs and other records and registrations of Budesonide Nasal Spray, a generic equivalent of Rhinocort Allergy®, and Triamcinolone Nasal Spray, a generic equivalent of Nasacort Allergy®, from Barr Laboratories, Inc. ("Barr"), a subsidiary of Teva Pharmaceuticals, for $14.0 million in cash. We previously developed and marketed the products in collaboration with Barr under a development, marketing and commercialization agreement that originated in August 2003. Under this prior agreement, we paid Barr a percentage of net income from products sold by Perrigo in the U.S. By purchasing the assets from Barr and terminating the original development, marketing and commercialization agreement, we are now entitled to 100% of the income from sales of the product. Operating results attributable to these products are included within our CSCA segment. The intangible assets acquired are classified as developed product technology with a 10-year useful life.
Pro Forma Impact of Business Combinations
The following table presents unaudited pro forma information as if the Ranir acquisition had occurred on January 1, 2018 and as if the acquisition of the oral care assets of High Ridge Brands had occurred on January 1, 2019 and had been combined with the results reported in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for all periods presented (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
(Unaudited)
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
Net sales
|
$
|
1,219.1
|
|
|
$
|
1,239.6
|
|
|
$
|
2,589.7
|
|
|
$
|
2,515.5
|
|
Net income
|
$
|
63.8
|
|
|
$
|
4.3
|
|
|
$
|
173.1
|
|
|
$
|
72.7
|
|
The unaudited pro forma information is presented for information purposes only and is not indicative of the results that would have been achieved if the acquisition had taken place at such time. The unaudited pro forma information presented above includes adjustments primarily for amortization charges for acquired intangible assets, depreciation of property, plant and equipment that have been revalued, certain acquisition-related charges, and related tax effects.
Divestitures During the Six Months Ended June 27, 2020
Rosemont Pharmaceuticals Business
On June 19, 2020, we completed the sale of our U.K.-based Rosemont Pharmaceuticals business, a generic prescription pharmaceuticals manufacturer focused on liquid medicines, to a U.K.-headquartered private equity firm for cash consideration of £155.6 million (approximately $195.0 million). The sale resulted in a pre-tax loss of $17.4 million recorded in our CSCI segment in Other (income) expense, net on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. The charge included professional fees and a $46.4 million write-off of foreign currency translation adjustment from Accumulated other comprehensive income.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 4
NOTE 4 – GOODWILL AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS
Goodwill
Changes in the carrying amount of goodwill, by reportable segment, were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
|
Purchase accounting adjustments
|
|
Business acquisitions
|
|
Business divestitures
|
|
Currency translation adjustments
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
CSCA
|
|
$
|
1,899.1
|
|
|
$
|
(10.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
14.6
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
(4.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,899.2
|
|
CSCI(1)
|
|
1,203.7
|
|
|
12.0
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
(115.6
|
)
|
|
(11.3
|
)
|
|
1,090.5
|
|
RX(2)
|
|
1,013.9
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
1,014.5
|
|
Total goodwill
|
|
$
|
4,116.7
|
|
|
$
|
1.6
|
|
|
16.3
|
|
|
$
|
(115.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(14.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
4,004.2
|
|
(1) We had accumulated goodwill impairments of $868.4 million as of each of December 31, 2019 and June 27, 2020.
(2) We had accumulated goodwill impairments of $109.2 million as of each of December 31, 2019 and June 27, 2020.
During the three months ended June 27, 2020, our BCS reporting unit had an indication of potential impairment which was driven by a decrease in forecasted cash flows in the second half of 2020 related to impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic. Goodwill remaining in this reporting unit was $961.0 million as of June 27, 2020. We prepared an impairment test as of June 27, 2020 and determined that the fair value of the BCS reporting unit exceeded net book value by less than 10%, consistent with our last annual impairment test as of October 1, 2019. While no impairment was recorded as of June 27, 2020, future developments such as deterioration in business performance or market multiples could reduce the fair value of this reporting unit and lead to impairment in a future period.
Intangible Assets
Intangible assets and related accumulated amortization consisted of the following (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 27, 2020
|
|
December 31, 2019
|
|
Gross
|
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
|
Gross
|
|
Accumulated
Amortization
|
Indefinite-lived intangibles:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trademarks, trade names, and brands
|
$
|
3.8
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
18.8
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
In-process research and development
|
38.5
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
50.0
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total indefinite-lived intangibles
|
$
|
42.3
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
68.8
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Definite-lived intangibles:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distribution and license agreements and supply agreements
|
$
|
133.4
|
|
|
$
|
81.1
|
|
|
$
|
126.7
|
|
|
$
|
81.1
|
|
Developed product technology, formulations, and product rights
|
1,306.9
|
|
|
709.1
|
|
|
1,392.8
|
|
|
755.3
|
|
Customer relationships and distribution networks
|
1,821.0
|
|
|
727.7
|
|
|
1,805.6
|
|
|
671.4
|
|
Trademarks, trade names, and brands
|
1,421.9
|
|
|
285.7
|
|
|
1,353.5
|
|
|
250.1
|
|
Non-compete agreements
|
5.1
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
6.5
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
Total definite-lived intangibles
|
$
|
4,688.3
|
|
|
$
|
1,808.5
|
|
|
$
|
4,685.1
|
|
|
$
|
1,763.9
|
|
Total intangible assets
|
$
|
4,730.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,808.5
|
|
|
$
|
4,753.9
|
|
|
$
|
1,763.9
|
|
We recorded amortization expense of $72.2 million and $145.4 million for the three and six months ended June 27, 2020, respectively, and $73.6 million and $149.0 million for the three and six months ended June 29, 2019, respectively.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 4
Generic Product
During the three months ended June 29, 2019, we identified impairment indicators for a certain definite-lived intangible asset related to changes in pricing and competition in the market, which lowered the projected cash flows we expect to generate from the asset. We recorded an asset impairment of $27.8 million in our RX segment.
In-process R&D ("IPR&D")
We recorded an impairment charge of $4.1 million on a certain IPR&D asset during the six months ended June 29, 2019, due to changes in projected development and regulatory timelines for a product in our CSCA segment.
NOTE 5 – INVENTORIES
Major components of inventory were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
Finished goods
|
$
|
569.8
|
|
|
$
|
530.3
|
|
Work in process
|
196.7
|
|
|
186.9
|
|
Raw materials
|
268.2
|
|
|
250.1
|
|
Total inventories
|
$
|
1,034.7
|
|
|
$
|
967.3
|
|
NOTE 6 – FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS
On January 1, 2020, we adopted ASU 2018-13: Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework-Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement ("Topic 820"). The amendments in this ASU remove disclosure requirements in Topic 820 related to the amount of, and reasons for, transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, the policy for timing of transfers between levels, and the valuation processes for Level 3 fair value measurements. Additionally, Topic 820 adds disclosure requirements for the changes in unrealized gains and losses for the period included in other comprehensive income for recurring Level 3 fair value measurements held at the end of the reporting period, and the range and weighted average of significant unobservable inputs used to develop Level 3 fair value measurements. We have amended certain of our quantitative Level 3 fair value measurement disclosures to add the range and weighted average of significant unobservable inputs used.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 6
The table below summarizes the valuation of our financial instruments carried at fair value by the applicable pricing categories (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 27, 2020
|
|
December 31, 2019
|
|
|
Level 1
|
|
Level 2
|
|
Level 3
|
|
Level 1
|
|
Level 2
|
|
Level 3
|
Measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities
|
|
$
|
4.1
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
6.6
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
|
—
|
|
|
14.1
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
|
—
|
|
Cross-currency swap
|
|
—
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
26.3
|
|
|
—
|
|
Foreign currency forward contract NIH
|
|
—
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Funds associated with Israeli severance liability
|
|
—
|
|
|
14.4
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
14.6
|
|
|
—
|
|
Royalty Pharma contingent milestone
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
99.0
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
95.3
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
4.1
|
|
|
$
|
36.9
|
|
|
$
|
99.0
|
|
|
$
|
6.6
|
|
|
$
|
45.2
|
|
|
$
|
95.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
3.0
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
8.4
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Contingent consideration payments
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
12.1
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
11.9
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
3.0
|
|
|
$
|
12.1
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
8.4
|
|
|
$
|
11.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill(1)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
1,013.1
|
|
Definite-lived intangible assets(2)
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
23.3
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
1,036.4
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
During the year ended December 31, 2019, goodwill with a carrying amount of $1,122.3 million was written down to a fair value of $1,013.1 million.
|
|
|
(2)
|
During the year ended December 31, 2019, definite-lived intangible assets with a carrying amount of $55.3 million were written down to a fair value of $23.3 million.
|
There were no transfers within Level 3 fair value measurements during the three and six months ended June 27, 2020 or the year ended December 31, 2019.
Foreign Currency Forward Contract Net Investment Hedge
We value this foreign currency forward contract designated as a net investment hedge based on the notional amount, contractual rate, and observable market inputs, such as currency exchange rates and credit risk.
Royalty Pharma Contingent Milestone Receipts
The table below summarizes the change in fair value of the Royalty Pharma contingent milestone (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
Beginning balance
|
$
|
96.9
|
|
|
$
|
83.6
|
|
|
$
|
95.3
|
|
|
$
|
323.2
|
|
Payments received
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
(250.0
|
)
|
Change in fair value
|
2.1
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
15.9
|
|
Ending balance
|
$
|
99.0
|
|
|
$
|
89.1
|
|
|
$
|
99.0
|
|
|
$
|
89.1
|
|
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 6
We value our contingent milestone payment from Royalty Pharma using a modified Black-Scholes Option Pricing Model ("BSOPM"). Key inputs in the BSOPM are the estimated volatility and rate of return of royalties on global net sales of Tysabri® that are received by Royalty Pharma until the contingent milestones are resolved. As of June 27, 2020, volatility and the estimated fair value of the milestones had a positive relationship such that higher volatility translates to a higher estimated fair value of the contingent milestone payments. Rate of return and the estimated fair value of the milestones had an inverse relationship, such that a lower rate of return correlates with a higher estimated fair value of the contingent milestone payments. We assess volatility and rate of return inputs quarterly by analyzing certain market volatility benchmarks and the risk associated with Royalty Pharma achieving the underlying projected royalties. The table below represents the volatility and rate of return:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
Volatility
|
37.5
|
%
|
|
30.0
|
%
|
Rate of return
|
6.91
|
%
|
|
7.99
|
%
|
During the three and six months ended June 27, 2020, the fair value of the Royalty Pharma contingent milestone payment related to 2020 increased by $2.1 million and $3.7 million, respectively, to $99.0 million, which is recorded on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets within Prepaid expenses and other current assets. The adjustments were driven by higher volatility, higher projected global net sales of Tysabri® compared to the estimates in the prior period, and the estimated probability of achieving the earn-out. During the three and six months ended June 29, 2019, the fair value of the Royalty Pharma contingent milestone payments increased by $5.5 million and$15.9 million, respectively. These increases were driven by higher projected global net sales of Tysabri® and the estimated probability of achieving the earn-out.
The Royalty Pharma payments from Biogen for Tysabri® were $337.5 million in 2018, which triggered the $250.0 million milestone payment received during the first quarter of 2019. There is no contingent milestone based on 2019 sales of Tysabri®. In order for us to receive the remaining contingent milestone payment of $400.0 million, Royalty Pharma payments from Biogen for Tysabri® sales in 2020 must exceed $351.0 million. If Royalty Pharma payments from Biogen for Tysabri® sales do not meet the prescribed threshold in 2020, we will write off the $99.0 million asset and record a loss. If the prescribed threshold is exceeded, we will increase the asset to $400.0 million and recognize income of $301.0 million in Change in financial assets on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Contingent Consideration Payments
The table below summarizes the change in fair value of contingent consideration payments (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
Beginning balance
|
$
|
13.0
|
|
|
$
|
12.4
|
|
|
$
|
11.9
|
|
|
$
|
15.3
|
|
Changes in value
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
Settlements and other adjustments
|
—
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
—
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
Ending balance
|
$
|
12.1
|
|
|
$
|
12.1
|
|
|
$
|
12.1
|
|
|
$
|
12.1
|
|
Contingent consideration represents milestone payment obligations obtained through product acquisitions, which are valued using estimates based on probability-weighted outcomes, sensitivity analysis, and discount rates reflective of the risk involved. The estimates are updated quarterly and the liabilities are adjusted to fair value depending on a number of assumptions, including the competitive landscape and regulatory approvals that may impact the future sales of a product.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 6
As of June 27, 2020, the contingent consideration payments liability was primarily comprised of sales-based milestones related to an IPR&D asset acquired in a prior transaction in our RX segment. The contingent consideration payments liability also included certain event-based milestones, which were immaterial. The fair value of our contingent consideration sales-based milestones as of June 27, 2020, was calculated using the following significant unobservable inputs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 27, 2020
|
|
Valuation Technique
|
|
Unobservable Input
|
|
Range (Weighted Average)(1)
|
Contingent consideration payments: sales-based milestones
|
Discounted cash flow
|
|
Projected royalties
|
|
$
|
37.0
|
|
|
|
|
Projected year of payment of sales-based milestones
|
|
2021 - 2036 (2027)
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate
|
|
26.0
|
%
|
|
|
(1)
|
Unobservable inputs were weighted based on the relative estimated milestone payments.
|
The discount rate of 26.0% was based on our assessment of the rate of return and development and commercialization risk of the related IPR&D project. We reevaluate the significant unobservable inputs of the sales-based milestones quarterly based on project developments and changes in contingent elements of the liability.
Fixed Rate Long-term Debt
Our fixed rate long-term debt consisted of the following (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
|
Level 1
|
|
Level 2
|
|
Level 1
|
|
Level 2
|
Public Bonds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying Value (excluding discount)
|
$
|
3,350.0
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
2,600.0
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Fair value
|
$
|
3,497.5
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
2,618.4
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Private placement note
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying value (excluding premium)
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
151.5
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
151.4
|
|
Fair value
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
154.4
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
168.4
|
|
The fair values of our public bonds for all periods were based on quoted market prices. The fair values of our private placement note for all periods were based on interest rates offered for borrowings of a similar nature and remaining maturities.
The carrying amounts of our other financial instruments, consisting of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable, short-term debt, revolving credit agreements, promissory notes related to our equity method investment in Kazmira, and variable rate long-term debt, approximate their fair value.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 7
NOTE 7 – INVESTMENTS
The following table summarizes the measurement category, balance sheet location, and balances of our equity securities (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Measurement Category
|
|
Balance Sheet Location
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
Fair value method
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
$
|
4.1
|
|
|
$
|
6.6
|
|
Fair value method(1)
|
|
Other non-current assets
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
Equity method
|
|
Other non-current assets
|
|
$
|
70.5
|
|
|
$
|
17.8
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Measured at fair value using the Net Asset Value practical expedient.
|
The following table summarizes the expense (income) recognized in earnings of our equity securities (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
Six Months Ended
|
Measurement Category
|
|
Income Statement Location
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
Fair value method
|
|
Other (income) expense, net
|
|
$
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
1.8
|
|
$
|
2.5
|
|
|
$
|
7.9
|
|
Equity method
|
|
Other (income) expense, net
|
|
$
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.0
|
)
|
$
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.7
|
)
|
On June 17, 2020, we announced our entrance into the cannabidiol (“CBD”) market through a strategic investment in and long-term supply agreement with Kazmira LLC ("Kazmira"), a leading supplier of hemp-based CBD products free of tetrahydrocannabinol (“THC-free”) based in Watkins, Colorado. In addition to the supply agreement, we acquired an approximate 20% equity stake in Kazmira for $50.0 million with $15.0 million paid at close of the transaction and the balance due within 18 months thereafter. Our minority equity investment initiates the first phase of the partnership in which we will collaborate to scale-up Kazmira’s facilities and laboratories, in accordance with current Good Manufacturing Practices, to produce THC-free CBD from industrial hemp that meets our standards for reliability and consistency. In the second phase of the partnership, we will work to launch THC-free hemp-based CBD products in a number of global markets, while leveraging our supply agreement with Kazmira, which is exclusive for the U.S. store brand market. We will report our equity method earnings from Kazmira in our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements on a quarterly lag.
NOTE 8 – DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES
Foreign Currency Forward Contract Net Investment Hedge
On June 19, 2020, we entered into a foreign currency forward contract designated as a net investment hedge of the GBP currency exposure of our net investment in certain of our U.K. operations. The hedge has a notional basis of £155.0 million ($194.5 million).
Cross Currency Swaps
On August 15, 2019, we entered into a cross-currency swap designated as a net investment hedge to hedge the EUR currency exposure of our net investment in European operations. This agreement is a contract to exchange floating-rate Euro payments for floating-rate U.S. dollar payments. The payments are based on a notional basis of €450.0 million ($498.0 million) and settle quarterly.
Interest Rate Swaps
There were no active designated or non-designated interest rate swaps as of June 27, 2020 and December 31, 2019.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 8
Foreign Currency Forwards
Foreign currency forward contracts were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional Amount
|
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
Israeli Shekel (ILS)
|
|
$
|
351.2
|
|
|
$
|
712.7
|
|
European Euro (EUR)
|
|
165.7
|
|
|
157.6
|
|
United States Dollar (USD)
|
|
64.0
|
|
|
92.4
|
|
British Pound (GBP)
|
|
51.2
|
|
|
86.9
|
|
Danish Krone (DKK)
|
|
47.9
|
|
|
51.7
|
|
Swedish Krona (SEK)
|
|
35.8
|
|
|
42.0
|
|
Canadian Dollar (CAD)
|
|
31.1
|
|
|
41.3
|
|
Chinese Yuan (CNY)
|
|
16.7
|
|
|
20.9
|
|
Polish Zloty (PLZ)
|
|
15.3
|
|
|
21.5
|
|
Mexican Peso (MPX)
|
|
12.5
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
Switzerland Franc (CHF)
|
|
5.7
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Norwegian Krone (NOK)
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
Romanian New Leu (RON)
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
2.3
|
|
Other
|
|
7.6
|
|
|
7.5
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
810.9
|
|
|
$
|
1,257.2
|
|
The maximum term of our forward currency exchange contracts is 18 months.
Effects of Derivatives on the Financial Statements
The below tables indicate the effects of all derivative instruments on the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. All amounts exclude income tax effects.
The balance sheet location and gross fair value of our outstanding derivative instruments were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset Derivatives
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Balance Sheet Location
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
Designated derivatives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
$
|
8.0
|
|
|
$
|
1.0
|
|
Cross-currency swap
|
Other non-current assets
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
26.3
|
|
Foreign currency forward contract NIH
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total designated derivatives
|
|
|
$
|
16.4
|
|
|
$
|
27.3
|
|
Non-designated derivatives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
$
|
6.1
|
|
|
$
|
3.3
|
|
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liability Derivatives
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Balance Sheet Location
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
Designated derivatives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
$
|
1.9
|
|
|
$
|
4.7
|
|
Non-designated derivatives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
$
|
1.1
|
|
|
$
|
3.7
|
|
The following tables summarize the effect of derivative instruments designated as hedging instruments in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income ("AOCI") (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
June 27, 2020
|
Instrument
|
|
Amount of Gain/(Loss) Recorded in OCI
|
|
Classification of Gain/(Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings
|
|
Amount of Gain/(Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings
|
|
Classification of Gain/(Loss) Recognized into Earnings Related to Amounts Excluded from Effectiveness Testing
|
|
Amount of Gain/(Loss) Recognized in Earnings on Derivatives Related to Amounts Excluded from Effectiveness Testing
|
Cash flow hedges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
$
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
Net investment hedges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cross-currency swap
|
|
$
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
$
|
1.8
|
|
Foreign currency forward contract NIH
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
$
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.8
|
|
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
June 27, 2020
|
Instrument
|
|
Amount of Gain/(Loss) Recorded in OCI(1)
|
|
Classification of Gain/(Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings
|
|
Amount of Gain/(Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings
|
|
Classification of Gain/(Loss) Recognized into Earnings Related to Amounts Excluded from Effectiveness Testing
|
|
Amount of Gain/(Loss) Recognized in Earnings on Derivatives Related to Amounts Excluded from Effectiveness Testing
|
Cash flow hedges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treasury locks
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
$
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
—
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
—
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
|
9.9
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
—
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
$
|
9.9
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.7
|
|
Net investment hedges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cross-currency swap
|
|
$
|
(18.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
$
|
4.6
|
|
Foreign currency forward contract NIH
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
$
|
(17.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.6
|
|
(1) Net loss of $7.4 million is expected to be reclassified out of AOCI into earnings during the next 12 months.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
June 29, 2019
|
Instrument
|
|
Amount of Gain/(Loss) Recorded in OCI
|
|
Classification of Gain/(Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings
|
|
Amount of Gain/(Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings
|
|
Classification of Gain/(Loss) Recognized into Earnings Related to Amounts Excluded from Effectiveness Testing
|
|
Amount of Gain/(Loss) Recognized in Earnings on Derivatives Related to Amounts Excluded from Effectiveness Testing
|
Cash flow hedges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
$
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
$
|
(1.0
|
)
|
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
June 29, 2019
|
Instrument
|
|
Amount of Gain/(Loss) Recorded in OCI
|
|
Classification of Gain/(Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings
|
|
Amount of Gain/(Loss) Reclassified from AOCI into Earnings
|
|
Classification of Gain/(Loss) Recognized into Earnings Related to Amounts Excluded from Effectiveness Testing
|
|
Amount of Gain/(Loss) Recognized in Earnings on Derivatives Related to Amounts Excluded from Effectiveness Testing
|
Cash flow hedges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
$
|
(1.0
|
)
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
|
—
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(2.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
$
|
(2.2
|
)
|
The amounts of (income)/expense recognized in earnings related to our non-designated derivatives on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
Non-Designated Derivatives
|
|
Income Statement
Location
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
|
Other (income) expense, net
|
|
$
|
(17.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(13.1
|
)
|
|
|
Interest expense, net
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
(14.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(11.3
|
)
|
The classification and amount of gain/(loss) recognized in earnings on fair value and hedging relationships were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
June 27, 2020
|
|
|
Net Sales
|
|
Cost of Sales
|
|
Interest Expense, net
|
|
Other (Income) Expense, net
|
Total amounts of income and expense line items presented on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations in which the effects of fair value or cash flow hedges are recorded
|
|
$
|
1,219.1
|
|
|
$
|
784.4
|
|
|
$
|
33.4
|
|
|
$
|
14.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The effects of cash flow hedging:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain (loss) on cash flow hedging relationships
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of gain or (loss) reclassified from AOCI into earnings
|
|
$
|
0.4
|
|
|
$
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Amount excluded from effectiveness testing recognized using a systematic and rational amortization approach
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of gain or (loss) reclassified from AOCI into earnings
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
June 27, 2020
|
|
|
Net Sales
|
|
Cost of Sales
|
|
Interest Expense, net
|
|
Other (Income) Expense, net
|
Total amounts of income and expense line items presented on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations in which the effects of fair value or cash flow hedges are recorded
|
|
$
|
2,560.1
|
|
|
$
|
1,642.2
|
|
|
$
|
63.6
|
|
|
$
|
16.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The effects of cash flow hedging:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain (loss) on cash flow hedging relationships
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of gain or (loss) reclassified from AOCI into earnings
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Amount excluded from effectiveness testing recognized using a systematic and rational amortization approach
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
0.7
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Treasury locks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of gain or (loss) reclassified from AOCI into earnings
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of gain or (loss) reclassified from AOCI into earnings
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
June 29, 2019
|
|
|
Net Sales
|
|
Cost of Sales
|
|
Interest Expense, net
|
|
Other (Income) Expense, net
|
Total amounts of income and expense line items presented on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations in which the effects of fair value or cash flow hedges are recorded
|
|
$
|
1,149.0
|
|
|
$
|
718.2
|
|
|
$
|
31.2
|
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The effects of cash flow hedging:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain (loss) on cash flow hedging relationships
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of gain or (loss) reclassified from AOCI into earnings
|
|
$
|
0.1
|
|
|
$
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Amount excluded from effectiveness testing recognized using a systematic and rational amortization approach
|
|
$
|
0.1
|
|
|
$
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of gain or (loss) reclassified from AOCI into earnings
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
June 29, 2019
|
|
|
Net Sales
|
|
Cost of Sales
|
|
Interest Expense, net
|
|
Other (Income) Expense, net
|
Total amounts of income and expense line items presented on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations in which the effects of fair value or cash flow hedges are recorded
|
|
$
|
2,323.5
|
|
|
$
|
1,443.9
|
|
|
$
|
59.8
|
|
|
$
|
5.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The effects of cash flow hedging:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain (loss) on cash flow hedging relationships
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency forward contracts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of gain or (loss) reclassified from AOCI into earnings
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
$
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Amount excluded from effectiveness testing recognized using a systematic and rational amortization approach
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of gain or (loss) reclassified from AOCI into earnings
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
(1.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
NOTE 9 – LEASES
The balance sheet locations of our lease assets and liabilities were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
Balance Sheet Location
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
Operating
|
|
Operating lease assets
|
|
$
|
136.7
|
|
|
$
|
129.9
|
|
Finance
|
|
Other non-current assets
|
|
27.7
|
|
|
27.6
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
$
|
164.4
|
|
|
$
|
157.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
Balance Sheet Location
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
Current
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
|
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
$
|
32.0
|
|
|
$
|
32.0
|
|
Finance
|
|
Current indebtedness
|
|
5.8
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
Non-Current
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
|
|
Other non-current liabilities
|
|
109.5
|
|
|
101.7
|
|
Finance
|
|
Long-term debt, less current portion
|
|
19.0
|
|
|
21.1
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
$
|
166.3
|
|
|
$
|
158.2
|
|
The below table shows our lease assets and liabilities by reporting segment (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
Operating
|
|
Financing
|
|
Operating
|
|
Financing
|
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
CSCA
|
|
$
|
22.0
|
|
|
$
|
22.4
|
|
|
$
|
16.2
|
|
|
$
|
16.8
|
|
|
$
|
22.2
|
|
|
$
|
22.8
|
|
|
$
|
16.3
|
|
|
$
|
16.6
|
|
CSCI
|
|
34.7
|
|
|
41.6
|
|
|
5.6
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
|
35.4
|
|
|
42.4
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
2.9
|
|
RX
|
|
32.6
|
|
|
35.1
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
34.0
|
|
|
36.3
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
Unallocated
|
|
47.4
|
|
|
30.8
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
|
49.9
|
|
|
32.2
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
136.7
|
|
|
$
|
129.9
|
|
|
$
|
27.7
|
|
|
$
|
27.6
|
|
|
$
|
141.5
|
|
|
$
|
133.7
|
|
|
$
|
24.8
|
|
|
$
|
24.5
|
|
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 9
Lease expense was as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
Operating leases(1)
|
|
$
|
11.2
|
|
|
$
|
11.2
|
|
|
$
|
23.7
|
|
|
$
|
23.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finance leases
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
$
|
1.1
|
|
|
$
|
0.7
|
|
|
$
|
2.2
|
|
|
$
|
1.3
|
|
Interest
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
Total finance leases
|
|
$
|
1.3
|
|
|
$
|
0.8
|
|
|
$
|
2.6
|
|
|
$
|
1.5
|
|
(1) Includes short-term leases and variable lease costs, which are immaterial.
The annual future maturities of our leases as of June 27, 2020 are as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Leases
|
|
Finance Leases
|
|
Total
|
2020
|
|
$
|
19.3
|
|
|
$
|
2.4
|
|
|
$
|
21.7
|
|
2021
|
|
31.0
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
|
37.1
|
|
2022
|
|
23.9
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
27.3
|
|
2023
|
|
18.2
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
20.1
|
|
2024
|
|
15.8
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
17.2
|
|
After 2024
|
|
52.2
|
|
|
14.3
|
|
|
66.5
|
|
Total lease payments
|
|
160.4
|
|
|
29.5
|
|
|
189.9
|
|
Less: Interest
|
|
18.9
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
23.6
|
|
Present value of lease liabilities
|
|
$
|
141.5
|
|
|
$
|
24.8
|
|
|
$
|
166.3
|
|
Our weighted average lease terms and discount rates are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
Weighted-average remaining lease term (in years)
|
|
|
|
|
Operating leases
|
|
6.66
|
|
|
6.59
|
|
Finance leases
|
|
9.68
|
|
|
9.43
|
|
Weighted-average discount rate
|
|
|
|
|
Operating leases
|
|
3.87
|
%
|
|
4.19
|
%
|
Finance leases
|
|
3.38
|
%
|
|
4.35
|
%
|
Our lease cash flow classifications are as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
Cash paid for amounts included in the measurement of lease liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
Operating cash flows for operating leases
|
|
$
|
20.4
|
|
|
$
|
23.0
|
|
Operating cash flows for finance leases
|
|
$
|
0.4
|
|
|
$
|
0.2
|
|
Financing cash flows for finance leases
|
|
$
|
2.0
|
|
|
$
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leased assets obtained in exchange for new finance lease liabilities
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
|
$
|
7.8
|
|
Leased assets obtained in exchange for new operating lease liabilities
|
|
$
|
23.1
|
|
|
$
|
12.8
|
|
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 10
NOTE 10 – INDEBTEDNESS
Total borrowings outstanding are summarized as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
Term loan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019 Term loan due August 15, 2022
|
|
|
$
|
600.0
|
|
|
$
|
600.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes and Bonds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Coupon
|
Due
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.500%
|
March 15, 2021
|
|
|
280.4
|
|
|
280.4
|
|
|
3.500%
|
December 15, 2021
|
|
|
309.6
|
|
|
309.6
|
|
|
5.105%
|
July 28, 2023(1)
|
|
|
151.5
|
|
|
151.4
|
|
|
4.000%
|
November 15, 2023
|
|
|
215.6
|
|
|
215.6
|
|
|
3.900%
|
December 15, 2024
|
|
|
700.0
|
|
|
700.0
|
|
|
4.375%
|
March 15, 2026
|
|
|
700.0
|
|
|
700.0
|
|
|
3.150%
|
June 15, 2030
|
|
|
750.0
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
5.300%
|
November 15, 2043
|
|
|
90.5
|
|
|
90.5
|
|
|
4.900%
|
December 15, 2044
|
|
|
303.9
|
|
|
303.9
|
|
|
Total notes and bonds
|
|
|
3,501.5
|
|
|
2,751.4
|
|
Other financing
|
60.7
|
|
|
24.6
|
|
Unamortized premium (discount), net
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
7.3
|
|
Deferred financing fees
|
(19.4
|
)
|
|
(14.1
|
)
|
Total borrowings outstanding
|
4,142.5
|
|
|
3,369.2
|
|
|
Current indebtedness
|
(606.5
|
)
|
|
(3.4
|
)
|
Total long-term debt less current portion
|
$
|
3,536.0
|
|
|
$
|
3,365.8
|
|
(1) Debt denominated in euros subject to fluctuations in the euro-to-U.S. dollar exchange rate.
We are in compliance with all covenants under our debt agreements as of June 27, 2020.
Revolving Credit Agreements
On March 8, 2018, we entered into a $1.0 billion revolving credit agreement maturing on March 8, 2023 (the "2018 Revolver"). There were no borrowings outstanding under the 2018 Revolver as of June 27, 2020 or December 31, 2019.
Term Loans
On March 8, 2018, we refinanced the €350.0 million outstanding under the previous term loan with the proceeds of a new €350.0 million ($431.0 million) term loan, maturing on March 8, 2020 (the "2018 Term Loan"). During the three and six months ended June 29, 2019, respectively, we made $12.4 million and $24.7 million in scheduled principal repayments on the 2018 Term Loan. On August 15, 2019, we refinanced the €284.4 million ($317.1 million) outstanding under the 2018 Term Loan with the proceeds of a new $600.0 million term loan, maturing on August 15, 2022.
Notes and Bonds
2020 Notes
On June 19, 2020, Perrigo Finance Unlimited Company, a public unlimited company incorporated under the laws of Ireland ("Perrigo Finance") and an indirect wholly-owned finance subsidiary of Perrigo whose primary purpose is to finance the business and operations of Perrigo and its affiliates, issued $750.0 million in aggregate principal amount of 3.150% Senior Notes due 2030 (the “2020 Notes") and received net proceeds of $737.1 million
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 10
after fees and market discount. Interest on the 2020 Notes is payable semi-annually in arrears on June 15 and December 15 of each year, beginning on December 15, 2020. The 2020 Notes will mature on June 15, 2030. The 2020 Notes are governed by a base indenture and a third supplemental indenture (collectively, the "2020 Indenture"). The 2020 Notes are fully and unconditionally guaranteed on a senior unsecured basis by Perrigo and no other subsidiary of Perrigo guarantees the 2020 Notes. There are no restrictions under the 2020 Notes on Perrigo's ability to obtain funds from its subsidiaries. Perrigo Finance may redeem the 2020 Notes in whole or in part at any time for cash at the make-whole redemption prices described in the 2020 Indenture. On July 6, 2020, the proceeds of the 2020 Notes were used to fund the redemption of Perrigo Finance's $280.4 million of 3.500% Senior Notes due March 15, 2021 and $309.6 million of 3.500% Senior Notes due December 15, 2021. The balance will be used for general corporate purposes which may include the repayment or redemption of additional indebtedness.
Other Financing
We have overdraft facilities available that we use to support our cash management operations. We report any balances outstanding in the above table under "Other financing". The balance outstanding under the facilities was $1.5 million as of June 27, 2020. There were no borrowings outstanding under the facilities as of December 31, 2019.
We incurred debt of $35.0 million related to our equity method investment in Kazmira pursuant to two Promissory Notes, with $4.0 million to be settled in November 2020, $6.0 million to be settled in May 2021, and the remaining balance of $25.0 million to be settled in November 2021 (refer to Note 7).
We have financing leases that are reported in the above table under "Other financing" (refer to Note 9).
NOTE 11 – EARNINGS PER SHARE AND SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY
Earnings per Share
A reconciliation of the numerators and denominators used in the basic and diluted earnings per share ("EPS") calculation is as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
Numerator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
$
|
60.6
|
|
|
$
|
9.0
|
|
$
|
167.0
|
|
|
$
|
72.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding for basic EPS
|
136.4
|
|
|
136.0
|
|
136.3
|
|
|
136.0
|
|
Dilutive effect of share-based awards
|
1.1
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding for diluted EPS
|
137.5
|
|
|
136.5
|
|
137.3
|
|
|
136.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anti-dilutive share-based awards excluded from computation of diluted EPS
|
1.5
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
Shareholders' Equity
Share Repurchases
In October 2018, our Board of Directors authorized up to $1.0 billion of share repurchases with no expiration date, subject to the Board of Directors’ approval of the pricing parameters and amount that may be repurchased under each specific share repurchase program. We did not repurchase any shares during the three and six months ended June 27, 2020 and June 29, 2019.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 12
NOTE 12 – ACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
Changes in our AOCI balances, net of tax were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value of Derivative Financial Instruments, net of tax
|
|
Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments
|
|
Post-Retirement and Pension Liability Adjustments, net of tax
|
|
Total AOCI
|
Balance at December 31, 2019
|
$
|
12.7
|
|
|
$
|
132.9
|
|
|
$
|
(6.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
139.4
|
|
OCI before reclassifications
|
(8.3
|
)
|
|
(51.9
|
)
|
|
(3.1
|
)
|
|
(63.3
|
)
|
Amounts reclassified from AOCI
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
46.4
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
44.6
|
|
Other comprehensive income (loss)
|
$
|
(10.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(5.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(3.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(18.7
|
)
|
Balance at June 27, 2020
|
$
|
2.6
|
|
|
$
|
127.4
|
|
|
$
|
(9.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
120.7
|
|
NOTE 13 – INCOME TAXES
The effective tax rates were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
15.6
|
%
|
|
66.6
|
%
|
|
10.5
|
%
|
|
32.5
|
%
|
The effective tax rate for the three and six months ended June 27, 2020 decreased compared to the prior period primarily due to additional interest and depreciation deductions provided for in the U.S. Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security ("CARES") Act and the exclusion of a one-time impairment to definite lived intangibles recorded in 2019.
We recorded a valuation allowance against all U.S. deferred tax assets as of December 31, 2016. We have continued to maintain a full valuation allowance against all U.S. deferred tax assets since and intend to continue maintaining this valuation allowance until there is sufficient evidence to support the reversal of all or some portion of these allowances. Given our current earnings and anticipated future earnings, we believe there is a reasonable possibility that within the next twelve months, sufficient positive evidence may become available that all or a portion of the valuation allowance against the U.S. deferred tax assets will no longer be needed. Release of the valuation allowance would result in the recognition of certain deferred tax assets and a decrease to income tax expense in the period of the release. The exact timing and amount of the valuation allowance release are subject to change on the basis of the level of profitability that we actually achieve.
IRS Audit of Fiscal Years Ended June 29, 2013, June 28, 2014, and June 27, 2015
In connection with its audits of Perrigo Company, a Michigan corporation and wholly-owned indirect subsidiary of Perrigo Company plc, for the fiscal years ended June 29, 2013, June 28, 2014, and June 27, 2015 the IRS issued a draft Notice of Proposed Adjustment ("NOPA") on August 22, 2019, reducing Perrigo Company’s deductible interest expense for fiscal tax years 2014-2015 on $7.5 billion in debts owed by it to Perrigo Company plc. A final NOPA was issued in early May 2020 without change. The debts were incurred in connection with the Elan merger transaction in 2013. The final NOPA caps the interest rate on the debts for U.S. federal tax purposes at 130.0% of the Applicable Federal Rate (a blended rate reduction of 4.0% per annum), on the stated ground that the loans were not negotiated on an arms’-length basis. The final NOPA proposes a reduction in gross interest expense of approximately $480.0 million for fiscal years 2014 and 2015. If the IRS were to prevail in its proposed adjustment, the Company estimates an increase in tax expense of approximately $170.0 million, excluding interest and penalties, for fiscal years ended June 28, 2014 through June 27, 2015. In addition, we expect the IRS to seek similar adjustments for the period from June 28, 2015 through December 31, 2018 with potential section 163(j) carryover impacts beyond December 2018. If those further adjustments were sustained, based on preliminary calculations and subject to further analysis, the Company's current best estimate is that the additional tax expense will not exceed $200.0 million, excluding interest and penalties. No further adjustments beyond this period are expected. The Company strongly disagrees with the IRS position, as reflected in its detailed written response to the
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 13
draft NOPA on September 20, 2019. At this stage, we are unable to estimate the liability, if any, associated with this matter.
IRS Audit of Fiscal Years ended June 27, 2009, June 26, 2010, June 25, 2011, and June 30, 2012
On August 15, 2017, we filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Western District of Michigan to recover $163.6 million of Federal income tax, penalties, and interest assessed and collected by the IRS, plus statutory interest thereon from the dates of payment, for the fiscal tax years ended June 27, 2009, June 26, 2010, June 25, 2011, and June 30, 2012 (the “2009 tax year,” “2010 tax year,” “2011 tax year,” and “2012 tax year,” respectively). In response to our complaint, the United States District Court for Western District of Michigan scheduled a trial date for late May 2020 which has been delayed due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. The IRS audits of those years culminated in the issuances of two statutory notices of deficiency: (1) on August 27, 2014 for the 2009 and 2010 tax years and (2) on April 20, 2017 for the 2011 and 2012 tax years. The statutory notices of deficiency both included un-agreed income adjustments related principally to transfer pricing adjustments regarding the purchase, distribution, and sale of store-brand OTC pharmaceutical products in the United States. In addition, the statutory notice of deficiency for the 2011 and 2012 tax years included the capitalization of certain expenses that were deducted when paid or incurred in defending against certain patent infringement lawsuits. We fully paid the assessed amounts of tax, interest, and penalties set forth in the statutory notices and filed timely claims for refund on June 11, 2015 and June 7, 2017 for the 2009-2010 tax years and 2011-2012 tax years, respectively. Upon the disallowance of such refund claims, we timely filed the above complaint, which seeks refunds of tax, interest, and penalties of $37.2 million for the 2009 tax year, $61.5 million for the 2010 tax year, $40.2 million for the 2011 tax year, and $24.7 million for the 2012 tax year, for a total of $163.6 million. The amounts sought in the complaint for the 2009 and 2010 tax years were recorded as deferred charges in Other non-current assets on our balance sheet during the three months ended March 28, 2015, and the amounts sought in the complaint for the 2011 and 2012 tax years were recorded as deferred charges in Other non-current assets on our balance sheet during the three months ended July 1, 2017. The total cumulative deferred charge that the Company is seeking to receive in this litigation is approximately $101.8 million, which reflects (i) a deduction of $29.7 million from the total reflected above due to overpayments credited to succeeding years and (ii) the impact of a previously conceded royalty due to Perrigo U.S. on all omeprazole sales that equates to 24.0% of the above refund claims. That 24.0% concession would also apply to any omeprazole adjustments that may be asserted by the IRS for future years.
IRS Audit of Fiscal Years Ended December 31, 2011, December 31, 2012, and December 31, 2013
On April 26, 2019, we received a revised NOPA from the IRS regarding transfer pricing positions related to the IRS audit of Athena for the years ended December 31, 2011, December 31, 2012, and December 31, 2013. The NOPA carries forward the IRS's theory from its 2017 draft NOPA that when Elan took over the future funding of Athena's in-process research and development after acquiring Athena in 1996, Elan should have paid a substantially higher royalty rate for the right to exploit Athena’s intellectual property, rather than rates based on transfer pricing documentation prepared by Elan's external tax advisors. The NOPA proposes a payment of $843.0 million, which represents additional tax and a 40.0% penalty. This amount excludes consideration of offsetting tax attributes and any potential interest that may be imposed. We strongly disagree with the IRS position and will pursue all available administrative and judicial remedies, including those available under the U.S. - Ireland Income Tax Treaty to alleviate double taxation. Accordingly, on April 14, 2020, we filed a request for Competent Authority Assistance with the IRS and we are waiting for notification of its acceptance. No payment of the additional amounts is required until the matter is resolved administratively, judicially, or through treaty negotiation.
On December 22, 2016, we received a NOPA from the IRS regarding the deductibility of litigation costs related to the IRS audit of Athena for the years ended December 31, 2011, December 31, 2012, and December 31, 2013. We strongly disagree with the IRS’s position asserted in the NOPA and are contesting it.
Irish Revenue Audit of Fiscal Years Ended December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2013
On October 30, 2018, we received an audit finding letter from the Irish Office of the Revenue Commissioners (“Irish Revenue”) for the years ended December 31, 2012 and December 31, 2013. The audit finding letter relates to the tax treatment of the 2013 sale of the Tysabri® intellectual property and other assets related to Tysabri® to Biogen Idec from Elan Pharma. The consideration paid by Biogen to Elan Pharma took the form of an upfront payment and future contingent royalty payments. Irish Revenue issued a Notice of Amended
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 13
Assessment (“NoA”) on November 29, 2018 which assesses an Irish corporation tax liability against Elan Pharma in the amount of €1,636 million, not including interest or any applicable penalties.
We strongly disagree with this assessment and believe that the NoA is without merit and incorrect as a matter of law. We filed an appeal of the NoA on December 27, 2018 and will pursue all available administrative and judicial avenues as may be necessary or appropriate. In connection with that, Elan Pharma was granted leave by the Irish High Court on February 25, 2019 to seek judicial review of the issuance of the NoA by Irish Revenue. The judicial review filing is based on our belief that Elan Pharma's legitimate expectations as a taxpayer have been breached, not on the merits of the NoA itself. The High Court held a hearing in June 2020 regarding the judicial review proceedings and we are now awaiting the Court's judgment. If the judgment is favorable, the NoA will be invalidated and Irish Revenue will not be able to re-issue the NoA. The proceedings before the Tax Appeals Commission have been stayed until a decision on the judicial review application has been made. If the judicial review proceedings are ultimately unsuccessful in establishing that Irish Revenue's issuance of the NoA breached our legitimate expectations, Elan Pharma will reactivate its appeal to challenge the merits of the NoA before the Tax Appeals Commission.
Israel Tax Authority Audit of Fiscal Year Ended June 27, 2015 and Calendar Years Ended December 31, 2015 through December 31, 2017
The Israel Tax Authority is auditing our fiscal year ended June 27, 2015, and calendar years ended December 31, 2015, December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2017.
Although we believe that our tax estimates are reasonable and that we prepare our tax filings in accordance with all applicable tax laws, the final determination with respect to any tax audit and any related litigation could be materially different from our estimates or from our historical income tax provisions and accruals. The results of an audit or litigation could have a material effect on operating results and/or cash flows in the periods for which that determination is made. In addition, future period earnings may be adversely impacted by litigation costs, settlements, penalties, and/or interest assessments, which could be material.
Based on the final resolution of tax examinations, judicial or administrative proceedings, changes in facts or law, expirations of statute of limitations in specific jurisdictions or other resolutions of, or changes in, tax positions - one or more of which may occur within the next twelve months - it is reasonably possible that unrecognized tax benefits for certain tax positions taken on previously filed tax returns may change materially from those recorded as of June 27, 2020. However, we are not able to estimate a reasonably possible range of how these events may impact our unrecognized tax benefits in the next twelve months.
NOTE 14 – CONTINGENCIES
In view of the inherent difficulties of predicting the outcome of various types of legal proceedings, we cannot determine the ultimate resolution of the matters described below. We establish reserves for litigation and regulatory matters when losses associated with the claims become probable and the amounts can be reasonably estimated. The actual costs of resolving legal matters may be substantially higher or lower than the amounts reserved for those matters. For matters where the likelihood or extent of a loss is not probable or cannot be reasonably estimated as of June 27, 2020, we have not recorded a loss reserve. If certain of these matters are determined against us, there could be a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. We currently believe we have valid defenses to the claims in these lawsuits and intend to defend these lawsuits vigorously regardless of whether or not we have a loss reserve. Other than what is disclosed below, we do not expect the outcome of the litigation matters to which we are currently subject to, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.
Price-Fixing Lawsuits
Perrigo is a defendant in several cases in the generic pricing multidistrict litigation MDL No. 2724 (United States District Court for Eastern District of Pennsylvania). This multidistrict litigation, which has many cases that do not include Perrigo, includes class action and opt-out cases for federal and state antitrust claims, as well as complaints filed by various of the States alleging violations of state antitrust laws.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 14
On July 14, 2020, the court issued an order designating the following cases to proceed on a more expedited basis than the other cases in MDL No. 2724: (a) the States’ May 2019 case alleging an overarching conspiracy involving more than 120 products (which does not name Perrigo a defendant) and (b) class actions alleging “single drug” conspiracies involving Clomipramine, Pravastatin, and Clobetasol. Perrigo is a defendant in the Clobetasol cases but not the others.
Class Action Complaints
(a) Single Drug Conspiracy Class Actions
We have been named as a co-defendant with certain other generic pharmaceutical manufacturers in a number of class actions alleging single-product conspiracies to fix or raise the prices of certain drugs and/or allocate customers for those products starting, in some instances, as early as June 2013. The class actions were filed on behalf of putative classes of (a) direct purchasers, (b) end payors, and (c) indirect resellers. The products in question are Clobetasol gel, Desonide, and Econazole. The court denied motions to dismiss each of the complaints alleging “single drug” conspiracies involving Perrigo, and the cases are proceeding in discovery. As noted above, the Clobetasol cases have been designated to proceed on a more expedited schedule than the other cases. That schedule has not yet been set.
(b) “Overarching Conspiracy” Class Actions
The same three putative classes, including (a) direct purchasers, (b) end payors, and (c) indirect resellers, have filed two sets of class action complaints alleging that Perrigo and other manufacturers (and some individuals) entered into an “overarching conspiracy” that involved allocating customers, rigging bids and raising, maintaining, and fixing prices for various products. Each class brings claims for violations of Sections 1 and 3 of the Sherman Antitrust Act as well as several state antitrust and consumer protection statutes.
Filed in June 2018, and later amended in December 2018 (with respect to direct purchasers) and April 2019 (with respect to end payors and indirect resellers), the first set of “overarching conspiracy” class actions include allegations against Perrigo and approximately 27 other manufacturers involving 135 drugs with allegations dating back to March 2011. The allegations against Perrigo concern only two formulations (cream and ointment) of one of the products at issue, Nystatin. The court denied motions to dismiss the first set of “overarching conspiracy” class actions, and they are proceeding in discovery. None of these cases are included in the group of cases on a more expedited schedule pursuant to the court’s July 14, 2020 order.
In December 2019, both the end payor and indirect reseller class plaintiffs filed a second set of "overarching conspiracy” class actions against Perrigo, dozens of other manufacturers of generic prescription pharmaceuticals, and certain individuals dating back to July 2009 (end payors) or January 2010 (indirect resellers). The Direct Purchaser plaintiffs filed their second round overarching conspiracy complaint in February 2020 with claims dating back to July 2009. This second set of overarching complaints allege conspiracies relating to the sale of various products that are not at issue in the earlier-filed overarching conspiracy class actions, the majority of which Perrigo neither makes nor sells. The indirect reseller complaint alleges that Perrigo conspired in connection with its sales of Imiquimod cream, Desonide cream and ointment, and Hydrocortisone Valerate cream. The end payor and direct purchaser complaints allege that Perrigo conspired in connection with its sale of the following drugs: Betamethasone Dipropionate, Bromocriptine Mesylate, Ciclopirox, Clindamycin Phosphate, Fenofibrate, Halobetasol Proprionate, Hydrocortisone Valerate, Permethrin, and Triamcinolone Acetonide. Perrigo has not yet responded to the complaints, and responses are currently stayed.
On March 11, 2020, the indirect reseller plaintiffs filed a motion to amend their second round December 2019 complaint. The proposed amended complaint adds additional products and allegations to the original complaint. Perrigo is discussed in connection with allegations concerning one additional drug, Betamethasone Dipropionate lotion. Responses to this complaint are currently stayed pending court order.
Opt-Out Complaints
On January 22, 2018, Perrigo was named a co-defendant along with 35 other manufacturers in a complaint filed by three supermarket chains alleging that defendants conspired to fix prices of 31 generic prescription
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 14
pharmaceutical products starting in 2013. On December 21, 2018, an amended complaint was filed that adds additional products and allegations against a total of 39 manufacturers for 33 products. The only allegations specific to Perrigo relate to Clobetasol, Desonide, Econazole, Nystatin cream, and Nystatin ointment. Perrigo moved to dismiss this complaint on February 21, 2019. The motion was denied on August 15, 2019. The case is proceeding in discovery. On February 3, 2020, the plaintiffs requested leave to file a second amended complaint. The proposed amended complaint adds dozens of additional products and allegations to the original complaint. Perrigo is discussed in connection with allegations concerning an additional drug, Fenofibrate. Defendants opposed the motion for leave to file a second amended complaint and the court has yet to rule on the issue.
On August 3, 2018, a large managed care organization filed a complaint against Perrigo alleging price-fixing and customer allocation concerning 17 different products among 27 manufacturers including Perrigo. The only allegations specific to Perrigo concern Clobetasol. Perrigo moved to dismiss this complaint on February 21, 2019. Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint in April 2019 that adds additional products and allegations. The amended allegations that concern Perrigo include: Clobetasol, Desonide, Econazole, and Nystatin. The motion to dismiss was denied on August 15, 2019. The case is proceeding in discovery.
On January 16, 2019, a similar suit was brought by a health insurance carrier in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota alleging a conspiracy to fix prices of 30 products among 30 defendants. The only allegations specific to Perrigo concern Clobetasol gel, Desonide, Econazole, Nystatin cream, and Nystatin ointment. Perrigo has not yet responded to the complaint, and responses are currently stayed.
On July 18, 2019, 87 health plans filed a Praecipe to Issue Writ of Summons in Pennsylvania state court to commence an action against 53 generic pharmaceutical manufacturers and 17 individuals, alleging antitrust violations concerning generic pharmaceutical drugs. While Perrigo was named as a defendant, no complaint has been filed and the precise allegations and products at issue have not been identified. Proceedings in the case, including the filing of a complaint, have been stayed at the request of the plaintiffs.
On December 11, 2019, a health care service company filed a complaint against Perrigo and 38 other pharmaceutical companies alleging an overarching conspiracy to fix, raise or stabilize prices of dozens of products, most of which Perrigo neither makes nor sells. The product conspiracies allegedly involving Perrigo focus on the same products as those involved in other multi-district litigation ("MDL") complaints naming Perrigo: Clobetasol, Desonide, Econazole, and Nystatin cream/ointment. Perrigo has not yet responded to the complaint, and responses are currently stayed.
On December 16, 2019, a Medicare Advantage claims recovery company filed a complaint against Perrigo and 39 other pharmaceutical companies alleging an overarching conspiracy to fix, raise or stabilize prices of dozens of products, most of which Perrigo neither makes nor sells. The product conspiracies allegedly involving Perrigo focus on the same products as those involved in other MDL complaints naming Perrigo: Clobetasol, Desonide, and Econazole. The complaint was originally filed in the District of Connecticut but will be consolidated into the MDL. Perrigo has not yet had the opportunity to respond to the complaint, and responses are currently stayed.
On December 23, 2019, several counties in New York filed an amended complaint against Perrigo and 28 other pharmaceutical companies alleging an overarching conspiracy to fix, raise or stabilize prices of dozens products, most of which Perrigo neither makes nor sells. The product conspiracies allegedly involving Perrigo focus on the same products as those involved in other MDL complaints naming Perrigo: Clobetasol, Desonide, Econazole, and Nystatin. The complaint was originally filed in New York State court but was removed to federal court and will likely be consolidated into the MDL. Perrigo has not yet responded to the complaint, and responses are currently stayed.
On December 27, 2019, a healthcare management organization filed a complaint against Perrigo and 25 other pharmaceutical companies alleging an overarching conspiracy to fix, raise or stabilize prices of dozens of products, most of which Perrigo neither makes nor sells. The product conspiracies allegedly involving Perrigo focus on the same products as those involved in other MDL complaints naming Perrigo: Clobetasol, Desonide, Econazole, and Nystatin. The complaint was filed originally in the Northern District of California but will be consolidated into the MDL. Perrigo has not yet responded to the complaint, and responses are currently stayed.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 14
On March 1, 2020, Harris County of Texas filed a complaint against Perrigo New York, Inc. and 29 other pharmaceutical companies alleging an overarching conspiracy to fix, raise or stabilize prices of dozens of products, most of which Perrigo neither makes nor sells. The products at issue that plaintiffs claim Perrigo manufacturers or sells include: Adapalene, Betamethasone Dipropionate, Ciclopirox, Clindamycin, Clobetasol, Desonide, Econazole, Ethinyl Estradiol/Levonorgestrel, Fenofibrate, Fluocinolone, Fluocinonide, Gentamicin, Glimepiride, Griseofulvin, Halobetasol Propionate, Hydrocortisone Valerate, Ketoconazole, Mupirocin, Nystatin, Olopatadine, Permethrin, Prednisone, Promethazine, Scopolamine, and Triamcinolone Acetonide. The complaint was originally filed in the Southern District of Texas but has been transferred to the MDL. Harris County amended its complaint in May 2020. Perrigo has not yet responded to the complaint, and responses are currently stayed.
In May 2020, seven health plans filed a writ of summons in the Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas in Philadelphia concerning an as-yet unfiled complaint against Perrigo, three dozen other manufacturers, and seventeen individuals, concerning alleged antitrust violations in connection with the pricing and sale of generic prescription pharmaceutical products. No complaint has yet been filed, so the precise allegations and products at issue are not yet clear. In addition, Defendants are in the process of being served, and proceedings in the case will likely be stayed.
On June 9, 2020, a health insurance carrier filed a complaint against Perrigo New York, Inc. and 25 other manufacturers alleging an overarching conspiracy to allocate customers and/or fix, raise or stabilize prices of dozens of products, most of which Perrigo neither makes nor sells. The product conspiracies allegedly involving Perrigo focus on the same products as those involved in other MDL complaints naming Perrigo: Clobetasol, Desonide, Econazole, and Nystatin. The complaint was filed in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and will be transferred into the MDL. Perrigo has not yet responded to the complaint, and responses are currently stayed.
State Attorney General Complaint
On June 10, 2020, the Connecticut Attorney General’s office filed a lawsuit on behalf of Connecticut and 50 other states and territories against Perrigo, and 35 other generic pharmaceutical manufacturers, and certain individuals (including one former and one current Perrigo employee), alleging an overarching conspiracy to allocate customers and/or fix, raise or stabilize prices of eighty products. The allegations against Perrigo focus on the following drugs: Adapalene Cream, Ammonium Lactate cream and lotion, Betamethasone dipropionate lotion, Bromocriptine tablets, Calcipotriene Betamethasone Dipropionate (Cal Beta Dip) Ointment, Ciclopirox cream and solution, Clindamycin solution, Desonide cream and ointment, Econazole cream, Erythromycin Base Alcohol solution, Fluticasone cream and lotion, Halobetasol cream and ointment, Hydrocortisone Acetate suppositories, Hydrocortisone Valerate cream, Imiquimod cream, Methazolamide tablets, Nystatin ointment, Prochlorperazine suppositories, Promethazine HCL suppositories, Tacrolimus ointment, and Triamcinolone cream and ointment. The Complaint was filed in the District of Connecticut, but is being transferred into the MDL. Perrigo has not yet responded to the complaint, and responses are currently stayed.
Canadian Class Action Complaint
In June 2020, an end payor filed a class action in Ontario, Canada against Perrigo and 29 other manufacturers alleging an overarching conspiracy to allocate customers and/or fix, raise or stabilize prices of dozens of products, most of which Perrigo neither makes nor sells. The product conspiracies allegedly involving Perrigo focus on the same products as those involved in other MDL complaints naming Perrigo: Clobetasol, Desonide, Econazole, and Nystatin. Perrigo has not yet responded to the complaint.
At this stage, we cannot reasonably estimate the outcome of the liability if any, associated with the claims listed above.
Securities Litigation
In the United States (cases related to events in 2015-2017)
On May 18, 2016, a shareholder filed a securities case against us and our former CEO, Joseph Papa, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey (Roofers’ Pension Fund v. Papa, et al.). The plaintiff purported to represent a class of shareholders for the period from April 21, 2015 through May 11, 2016, inclusive. The original
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 14
complaint alleged violations of Securities Exchange Act sections 10(b) (and Rule 10b‑5) and 14(e) against both defendants and 20(a) control person liability against Mr. Papa. In general, the allegations concerned the actions taken by us and the former executive to defend against the unsolicited takeover bid by Mylan in the period from April 21, 2015 through November 13, 2015. The plaintiff also alleged that the defendants provided inadequate disclosure concerning alleged integration problems related to the Omega acquisition in the period from April 21, 2015 through May 11, 2016. On July 19, 2016, a different shareholder filed a securities class action against us and our former CEO, Joseph Papa, also in the District of New Jersey (Wilson v. Papa, et al.). The plaintiff purported to represent a class of persons who sold put options on our shares between April 21, 2015 and May 11, 2016. In general, the allegations and the claims were the same as those made in the original complaint filed in the Roofers' Pension Fund case described above. On December 8, 2016, the court consolidated the Roofers' Pension Fund case and the Wilson case under the Roofers' Pension Fund case number. In February 2017, the court selected the lead plaintiffs for the consolidated case and the lead counsel to the putative class. In March 2017, the court entered a scheduling order.
On June 21, 2017, the court-appointed lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint that superseded the original complaints in the Roofers’ Pension Fund case and the Wilson case. In the amended complaint, the lead plaintiffs seek to represent three classes of shareholders: (i) shareholders who purchased shares during the period from April 21, 2015 through May 3, 2017 on the U.S. exchanges; (ii) shareholders who purchased shares during the same period on the Tel Aviv exchange; and (iii) shareholders who owned shares on November 12, 2015 and held such stock through at least 8:00 a.m. on November 13, 2015 (the final day of the Mylan tender offer) regardless of whether the shareholders tendered their shares. The amended complaint names as defendants us and 11 current or former directors and officers of Perrigo (Mses. Judy Brown, Laurie Brlas, Jacqualyn Fouse, Ellen Hoffing, and Messrs. Joe Papa, Marc Coucke, Gary Cohen, Michael Jandernoa, Gerald Kunkle, Herman Morris, and Donal O’Connor). The amended complaint alleges violations of Securities Exchange Act sections 10(b) (and Rule 10b‑5) and 14(e) against all defendants and 20(a) control person liability against the 11 individuals. In general, the allegations concern the actions taken by us and the former executives to defend against the unsolicited takeover bid by Mylan in the period from April 21, 2015 through November 13, 2015 and the allegedly inadequate disclosure throughout the entire class period related to purported integration problems related to the Omega acquisition, alleges incorrect reporting of organic growth at the Company and at Omega, alleges price fixing activities with respect to six generic prescription pharmaceuticals, and alleges improper accounting for the Tysabri® royalty stream. The amended complaint does not include an estimate of damages. During 2017, the defendants filed motions to dismiss, which the plaintiffs opposed. On July 27, 2018, the court issued an opinion and order granting the defendants’ motions to dismiss in part and denying the motions to dismiss in part. The court dismissed without prejudice defendants Laurie Brlas, Jacqualyn Fouse, Ellen Hoffing, Gary Cohen, Michael Jandernoa, Gerald Kunkle, Herman Morris, Donal O’Connor, and Marc Coucke. The court also dismissed without prejudice claims arising from the Tysabri® accounting issue described above and claims alleging incorrect disclosure of organic growth described above. The defendants who were not dismissed are Perrigo Company plc, Joe Papa, and Judy Brown. The claims (described above) that were not dismissed relate to the integration issues regarding the Omega acquisition, the defense against the Mylan tender offer, and the alleged price fixing activities with respect to six generic prescription pharmaceuticals. The defendants who remain in the case (the Company, Mr. Papa, and Ms. Brown) have filed answers denying liability, and the discovery stage of litigation has begun. We intend to defend the lawsuit vigorously.
On November 14, 2019, the court granted the lead plaintiffs’ motion and certified three classes for the case: (i) all those who purchased shares between April 21, 2015 through May 2, 2017 inclusive on a U.S. exchange and were damaged thereby; (ii) all those who purchased shares between April 21, 2015 through May 2, 2017 inclusive on the Tel Aviv exchange and were damaged thereby; and (iii) all those who owned shares as of November 12, 2015 and held such stock through at least 8:00 a.m. on November 13, 2015 (whether or not a person tendered shares in response to the Mylan tender offer) (the "tender offer class"). Defendants filed a petition for leave to appeal in the Third Circuit challenging the certification of the tender offer class. On April 30, 2020, the Third Circuit denied leave to appeal. The District Court has approved the issuance of a notice of the pendency of the class action.
Unless otherwise noted, each of the lawsuits discussed in the following sections is pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey and has been assigned to the same judges hearing the Roofers’ Pension Fund case. The allegations in the complaints relate to events during certain portions of the 2015 through 2017 calendar years, including the period of the Mylan tender offer. All but one of these lawsuits allege violations of
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 14
federal securities laws, but none are class actions. One lawsuit (Highfields) alleges only state law claims. We intend to defend all these lawsuits vigorously.
Carmignac, First Manhattan and Similar Cases. The following seven cases were filed by the same law firm and generally make the same factual assertions but, at times, differ as to which securities laws violations they allege:
|
|
|
Case
|
Date Filed
|
Carmignac Gestion, S.A. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
11/1/2017
|
First Manhattan Co. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
2/16/2018; amended 4/20/2018
|
Nationwide Mutual Funds, et al. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
10/29/2018
|
Schwab Capital Trust, et al. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
1/31/2019
|
Aberdeen Canada Funds -- Global Equity Fund, et al. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
2/22/2019
|
Principal Funds, Inc., et al. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
3/5/2020
|
Kuwait Investment Authority, et al. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
3/31/2020
|
The original complaints in the Carmignac case and the First Manhattan case named Perrigo, Mr. Papa, Ms. Brown, and Mr. Coucke as defendants. Mr. Coucke was dismissed as a defendant after the plaintiffs agreed to apply the July 2018 ruling in the Roofers' Pension Fund case to these two cases. The complaints in each of the other cases name only Perrigo, Mr. Papa, and Ms. Brown as defendants.
Each complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) (and Rule 10b-5 thereunder) and all cases except Aberdeen assert claims under Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act against all defendants, as well as control person liability under Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act against the individual defendants. The control person claims against the individual defendants are limited to the period from April 2015 through April 2016 in the Carmignac case. The complaints in the Carmignac and First Manhattan cases also assert claims under Section 18 of the Exchange Act.
Each complaint alleges inadequate disclosures concerning the valuation and integration of Omega, the financial guidance we provided, our reporting about the generic prescription pharmaceutical business and its prospects, and the activities surrounding the efforts to defeat the Mylan tender offer during 2015, and, in each of the cases other than Carmignac, alleged price fixing activities with respect to six generic prescription pharmaceuticals. The First Manhattan complaint also alleges improper accounting for the Tysabri® asset. With the exception of Carmignac, each of these cases relates to events during the period from April 2015 through May 2017. Many of the allegations in these cases overlap with the allegations of the June 2017 amended complaint in the Roofers’ Pension Fund case, though the Nationwide Mutual, Schwab Capital, Aberdeen, Principal Funds and Kuwait complaints do not include the factual allegations that the court dismissed in the July 2018 ruling in the Roofers' Pension Fund case.
After the court issued its July 2018 opinion in the Roofers’ Pension Fund case, the parties in Carmignac and First Manhattan conferred and agreed that the ruling in the Roofers’ Pension Fund case would apply equally to the common allegations in their cases. The later filed cases adopted a similar posture. The defendants in the Carmignac and other cases listed above filed motions to dismiss addressing the additional allegations in such cases. On July 31, 2019, the court granted such motions to dismiss in part and denied them in part. That ruling applies to each of the above cases. The defendants have filed (or with respect to the most recent cases intend to file) answers in each case denying liability. Each case other than Kuwait Investment Authority is currently in the discovery phase, and the plaintiffs in the latter case are expected to participate in discovery activities with the other plaintiffs.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 14
Mason Capital, Pentwater and Similar Cases. The following eight cases were filed by the same law firm and generally make the same factual allegations:
|
|
|
Case
|
Date Filed
|
Mason Capital L.P., et al. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
1/26/2018
|
Pentwater Equity Opportunities Master Fund Ltd., et al. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
1/26/2018
|
WCM Alternatives: Event-Drive Fund, et al. v. Perrigo Co., plc, et al.
|
11/15/2018
|
Hudson Bay Master Fund Ltd., et al. v. Perrigo Co., plc, et al.
|
11/15/2018
|
Discovery Global Citizens Master Fund, Ltd., et al. v. Perrigo Co. plc, et al.
|
12/18/2019
|
York Capital Management, L.P., et al. v. Perrigo Co. plc, et al.
|
12/20/2019
|
Burlington Loan Management DAC v. Perrigo Co. plc, et al.
|
2/12/2020
|
Universities Superannuation Scheme Limited v. Perrigo Co. plc, et al.
|
3/2/2020
|
The complaints in the Mason Capital case and the Pentwater case originally named Perrigo and 11 current or former directors and officers of Perrigo as defendants. In the July 2018 Roofers’ Pension Fund ruling, the court dismissed without prejudice each of the defendants other than Perrigo, Mr. Papa and Ms. Brown from that case; these plaintiffs later agreed that this ruling would apply to their cases as well. The complaints in each of the other cases in the above table name only Perrigo, Mr. Papa, and Ms. Brown as defendants.
Each complaint asserts claims under Section 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act against all defendants, as well as control person liability under Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act against the individual defendants. The complaints in the WCM case and the Universities Superannuation Scheme case also assert claims under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder.
Each complaint alleges inadequate disclosure during the tender offer period in 2015 and at various times concerning valuation and integration of Omega, the financial guidance provided by us during that period, alleged price fixing activities with respect to six generic prescription pharmaceuticals, and alleged improper accounting for the Tysabri® asset. The WCM complaint also makes these allegations for the period through May 2017 and the Universities Superannuation Scheme complaint also concerns certain times during 2016. Many of the factual allegations in these cases overlap with the allegations of the June 2017 amended complaint in the Roofers’ Pension Fund case, and the Mason Capital and Pentwater cases include factual allegations similar to those in the Carmignac case described above.
After the court issued its July 2018 opinion in the Roofers’ Pension Fund case, the parties in each of the above cases conferred and agreed that the ruling in the Roofers’ Pension Fund case would apply equally to the common allegations in their cases. The defendants in each of these cases have filed answers denying liability, and each of the cases is currently in the discovery phase.
Harel Insurance and TIAA-CREF Cases. The following two cases were filed by the same law firm and generally make the same factual allegations relating to the period from February 2014 through May 2017 (in the Harel case) and from August 2014 through May 2017 (in the TIAA-CREF case):
|
|
|
Case
|
Date Filed
|
Harel Insurance Company, Ltd., et al. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
2/13/2018
|
TIAA-CREF Investment Management, LLC., et al. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
4/20/2018
|
The complaints in the Harel and TIAA-CREF cases originally named Perrigo and 13 current or former directors and officers of Perrigo as defendants (adding two more individual defendants not sued in the other cases described in this section). In the July 2018 Roofers’ Pension Fund ruling, the court dismissed without prejudice 8 of the 11 defendants other than Perrigo, Mr. Papa and Ms. Brown from that case. These plaintiffs later agreed that that ruling would apply to these cases as well and also dismissed their claims against the two additional individuals that only these plaintiffs had named as defendants.
Each complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder against all defendants, as well as control person liability under Section 20(a) of the Securities
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 14
Exchange Act against the individual defendants. The complaint in the Harel case also asserts claims based on Israeli securities laws.
Each of the complaints alleges inadequate disclosure around the tender offer events in 2015 and at various times during the relevant periods concerning valuation and integration of Omega, the financial guidance provided by us during that period, alleged price fixing activities with respect to six generic prescription pharmaceuticals, and alleged improper accounting for the Tysabri® asset from February 2014 until the withdrawal of past financial statements in April 2017.
After the court issued its July 2018 opinion in the Roofers’ Pension Fund case, the parties in the Harel and TIAA-CREF cases conferred and agreed that such ruling would apply equally to the common allegations in their cases. The defendants in each of these cases have filed answers denying liability, and each of the cases is currently in the discovery phase.
Other Cases Related to Events in 2015-2017. Certain allegations in the following three cases also overlap with the allegations of the June 2017 amended complaint in the Roofers' Pension Fund case and with allegations in one or more of the other individual cases described in the sections above:
|
|
|
Case
|
Date Filed
|
Sculptor Master Fund (f/k/a OZ Master Fund, Ltd.), et al. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
2/6/2019
|
Highfields Capital I LP, et al. v. Perrigo Company plc, et al.
|
6/4/2020
|
BlackRock Global Allocation Fund, Inc., et al. v. Perrigo Co. plc, et al.
|
4/21/2020
|
Each of the above complaints names Perrigo, Mr. Papa, and Ms. Brown as defendants.
The Sculptor Master Fund (formerly OZ) complaint asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 thereunder against all defendants, as well as control person liability under Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act against the individual defendants. The parties have agreed that the court's rulings in July 2018 in the Roofers' Pension Fund case and in July 2019 in the Carmignac and related cases will apply to this case as well. The defendants have filed answers denying liability. The plaintiffs are participating in the discovery proceedings in the Roofers' Pension Fund case and the various individual cases described above.
The BlackRock Global complaint also asserts claims under Securities Exchange Act section 10(b) (and SEC Rule 10b-5) and section 14(e) against all defendants and section 20(a) control person claims against the individual defendants largely based on the same events during the period from April 2015 through May 2017. Plaintiffs contend that the defendants provided inadequate disclosure during the tender offer period in 2015 and point to disclosures at various times during the period concerning valuation and integration of Omega, the financial guidance provided by us during that period, alleged price fixing activities with respect to six generic prescription pharmaceuticals, alleged lower performance in the generic prescription drug business during 2015 and alleged improper accounting for the Tysabri® asset. The parties have begun discussions about the schedule for how this case should proceed.
The Highfields federal case complaint asserted claims under Sections 14(e) and 18 of the Securities Exchange Act against all defendants, as well as control person liability under Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act against the individual defendants. As originally filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, the Highfields complaint also alleged claims under the Massachusetts Unfair Business Methods Law (chapter 93A) and Massachusetts common law claims of tortious interference with prospective economic advantage, common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment. The factual allegations generally were similar to the factual allegations in the Amended Complaint in the Roofers' Pension Fund case described above, except that the Highfields plaintiffs did not include allegations about alleged collusive pricing of generic prescription drugs. In March 2020, the District of Massachusetts court granted defendants’ motion and transferred the case to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey so that the activities in the case could proceed in tandem with the other cases in the District of New Jersey described above. After the transfer, in June 2020, the Highfields plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their federal lawsuit. The same Highfields plaintiffs the same day then filed a new lawsuit in Massachusetts State Court asserting the same factual allegations as in their federal lawsuit and alleging only Massachusetts state law claims under the Massachusetts Unfair Business Methods Law (chapter 93A) and Massachusetts common law claims of tortious interference with prospective economic
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 14
advantage, common law fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment. Defendants have until September 2020 to move to dismiss the claims or to answer.
In Israel (cases related to events in 2015-2017)
Because our shares are traded on the Tel Aviv exchange under a dual trading arrangement, we are potentially subject to securities litigation in Israel. Three cases were filed; one was voluntarily dismissed in each of 2017 and 2018 and one was stayed in 2018. We are consulting Israeli counsel about our response to these allegations and we intend to defend this case vigorously.
On June 28, 2017, a plaintiff filed a complaint in Tel Aviv District Court styled Israel Elec. Corp. Employees’ Educ. Fund v. Perrigo Company plc, et al. The lead plaintiff seeks to represent a class of shareholders who purchased Perrigo stock on the Tel Aviv exchange during the period from April 24, 2015 through May 3, 2017 and also a claim for those that owned shares on the final day of the Mylan tender offer (November 13, 2015). The amended complaint names as defendants the Company, Ernst & Young LLP (the Company’s auditor), and 11 current or former directors and officers of Perrigo (Mses. Judy Brown, Laurie Brlas, Jacqualyn Fouse, Ellen Hoffing, and Messrs. Joe Papa, Marc Coucke, Gary Cohen, Michael Jandernoa, Gerald Kunkle, Herman Morris, and Donal O’Connor). The complaint alleges violations under U.S. securities laws of Securities Exchange Act sections 10(b) (and Rule 10b‑5) and 14(e) against all defendants and 20(a) control person liability against the 11 individuals or, in the alternative, under Israeli securities laws. In general, the allegations concern the actions taken by us and our former executives to defend against the unsolicited takeover bid by Mylan in the period from April 21, 2015 through November 13, 2015 and the allegedly inadequate disclosure concerning purported integration problems related to the Omega acquisition, alleges incorrect reporting of organic growth at the Company, alleges price fixing activities with respect to six generic prescription pharmaceuticals, and alleges improper accounting for the Tysabri® royalty stream. The plaintiff indicates an initial, preliminary class damages estimate of 2.7 billion NIS (approximately $760.0 million at 1 NIS = 0.28 cents). After the other two cases filed in Israel were voluntarily dismissed, the plaintiff in this case agreed to stay this case pending the outcome of the Roofers’ Pension Fund case in the U.S. (described above). The Israeli court approved the stay, and this case is now stayed. We intend to defend the lawsuit vigorously.
In the United States (cases related to Irish Tax events)
On January 3, 2019, a shareholder filed a complaint against the Company, our CEO Murray Kessler, and our former CFO Ronald Winowiecki in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Masih v. Perrigo Company, et al.). Plaintiff purported to represent a class of shareholders for the period November 8, 2018 through December 20, 2018, inclusive. The complaint alleged violations of Securities Exchange Act section 10(b) (and Rule 10b‑5) against all defendants and section 20(a) control person liability against the individual defendants. In general the allegations contended that the Company, in its Form 10‑Q filed November 8, 2018, disclosed information about an October 31, 2018 audit finding letter received from Irish tax authorities but failed to disclose enough material information about that letter until December 20, 2018, when we filed a current report on Form 8‑K about Irish tax matters. The plaintiff did not provide an estimate of class damages. The Court selected lead plaintiffs and changed the name of the case to In re Perrigo Company plc Sec. Litig. The lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on April 12, 2019, which named the same defendants, asserted the same class period, and invoked the same Exchange Act sections. The amended complaint generally repeated the allegations of the original complaint with a few additional details and adds that the defendants also failed to timely disclose the Irish tax authorities’ Notice of Amended Assessment received on November 29, 2018. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on May 3, 2019. On May 31, 2019, the plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint, which asserted a longer class period (March 1, 2018 through December 20, 2018) and added one additional individual defendant, former CEO Uwe Roehrhoff. In general, the second amended complaint contends that Perrigo’s disclosures about the Irish tax audit were inadequate beginning with Perrigo’s 10-K filed on March 1, 2018 through December 20, 2018 and repeats many of the allegations of the April 2019 amended complaint. The second amended complaint alleges violations of Securities Exchange Act section 10(b) (and SEC Rule 10b-5) against all defendants and section 20(a) control person liability against the three individual defendants. All defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss, and the motion was fully briefed. On January 23, 2020, the court granted the motion to dismiss in part and denied it in part, dismissing Mr. Roehrhoff as a defendant and dismissing allegations of inadequate disclosures related to the audit by Irish Revenue during the period March 2018 through October 30, 2018. The court permitted the plaintiffs to pursue their claims against us, Mr. Kessler, and Mr. Winowiecki related to disclosures after Perrigo received the October 30, 2018 audit findings letter and later events through December 20, 2018. The Defendants filed answers on February 13, 2020 denying
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 14
liability, and the Court held a scheduling conference on February 28, 2020, and issued a scheduling order on March 3, 2020. Discovery on the remaining issues is underway. Plaintiffs have filed a motion for class certification. We intend to defend the lawsuit vigorously.
In Israel (cases related to Irish Tax events)
On December 31, 2018, a shareholder filed an action against the Company, our CEO Murray Kessler, and our former CFO Ronald Winowiecki in Tel Aviv District Court (Baton v. Perrigo Company plc, et. al.). The case is a securities class action brought in Israel making similar factual allegations for the same period as those asserted in the In re Perrigo Company plc Sec. Litig case in New York federal court. This case alleges that persons who invested through the Tel Aviv stock exchange can assert claims under Israeli securities law that will follow the liability principles of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act. The plaintiff does not provide an estimate of class damages. In 2019, the court granted two requests by Perrigo to stay the proceedings pending the resolution of proceedings in the United States. Perrigo filed a further request for a stay in February 2020, and the court granted the stay indefinitely. We intend to defend the lawsuit vigorously.
Claim Arising from the Omega Acquisition
On December 16, 2016, we and Perrigo Ireland 2 brought an arbitral claim ("Claim") against Alychlo NV ("Alychlo") and Holdco I BE NV (together the "Sellers") in accordance with clause 26.2 of the Share Purchase Agreement dated November 6, 2014 ("SPA") and the rules of the Belgian Centre for Arbitration and Mediation ("CEPANI"). Our Claim relates to the accuracy and completeness of information about Omega provided by the Sellers as part of the sale process, the withholding of information by the Sellers during that process and breaches of Sellers’ warranties. We are seeking monetary damages from the Sellers. The Sellers served their respective responses to the Claim on February 20, 2017. In its response, Alychlo has asserted a counterclaim for monetary damages contending that we breached a warranty in the SPA and breached the duty of good faith in performing the SPA. Alychlo subsequently filed papers seeking permission to introduce an additional counterclaim theory of recovery related to the Irish tax issues disclosed by the Company such that if the position of the Irish tax authorities prevails, Alychlo would have further basis for its counterclaim against Perrigo. In June 2019, the Tribunal denied permission for Alychlo to introduce the additional counterclaim and dismissed certain aspects of the original Alychlo counterclaim. There can be no assurance that our Claim will be successful, and the Sellers deny liability for the Claim. To the extent that aspects of Alychlo’s counterclaim survived the Tribunal’s ruling in June 2019, we deny that Alychlo is entitled to any relief (including monetary relief). The arbitration proceedings are confidential as required by the SPA and the rules of the CEPANI.
Other Matters
Our Board of Directors received a shareholder demand letter dated October 30, 2018 relating to the allegations in the securities cases and price fixing lawsuits described above. The letter demands that the Board of Directors initiate an action against certain current and former executives and Board members to recover damages allegedly caused to the Company. In response, the Company reminded the shareholder that any derivative claim can only proceed in accordance with Irish law, the law that governs the Company’s internal affairs. The shareholder responded that he would file a lawsuit asserting derivative claims.
On October 2, 2019, the shareholder filed a derivative action in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey styled Krueger derivatively on behalf of nominal defendant Perrigo Company plc v. Alford, et al. The case was assigned to the same judges who are handling the Roofers' Pension Fund securities class action and related opt out cases described above. In addition to the Company, the lawsuit names as defendants current Board members Alford, Classon, Karaboutis, Kindler, O’Connor, Parker, and Samuels, current CEO Kessler, former Board members Smith, Brlas, Cohen, Fouse, Hoffing, Jandernoa, Kunkle, and Morris, former CEO Hendrickson, former CEO Papa, former CFO Brown, former CFO Winowiecki, and former Executive Vice Presidents Boothe and Coucke. The lawsuit seeks to authorize the shareholder to pursue claims on behalf of the Company against all the individual defendants for breach of their fiduciary duties and for unjust enrichment, and against the current director defendants, former director Mr. Smith, and current CEO Mr. Kessler for violations of Securities Exchange Act §§ 14(a) (proxy statement disclosures) and 29(b) (disgorgement as a result of alleged violations of § 14(a)). The complaint alleges that the following events indicate that the individuals in their respective capacities failed to exercise appropriate control over the management of the Company and made inadequate public disclosures
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 14
concerning the integration of Omega after acquisition; the Company’s past and prospective organic growth; the defense against the Mylan 2015 tender offer; the alleged collusive pricing activities regarding generic prescription products; the accounting by the Company for the Tysabri® royalty stream; the 2018 Irish tax audit including potential liabilities for Irish taxes; and the April 2019 assertion of tax liabilities by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (many of these factual events also underlie the multiple securities cases discussed earlier in this Note 14). All defendants have filed motions to dismiss asserting various reasons to dismiss. Plaintiff filed his opposition in March 2020. Defendants’ filed replies in support of dismissal in June 2020. The motions are fully briefed and pending. We intend to defend the lawsuit vigorously.
Talcum Powder
The Company has been named, together with other manufacturers, in product liability lawsuits in state courts in California, Florida, Missouri and Illinois and in the Southern District of Mississippi alleging that the use of body powder products containing talcum powder causes mesothelioma and lung cancer due to the presence of asbestos. The Company has been named in 32 individual lawsuits seeking compensatory and punitive damages and has accepted a tender for a portion of the defense costs and liability from a retailer for one additional matter. The Company has not manufactured or sold the types of talcum powder products described in such lawsuits since 1999. The Company has several defenses and intends to aggressively defend these lawsuits.
Ranitidine
After regulatory bodies announced worldwide that ranitidine may potentially contain N-nitrosodimethylamine ("NDMA"), a known environmental contaminant, the Company promptly began testing its externally-sourced ranitidine API and ranitidine-based products. On October 8, 2019, the Company halted shipments of the product based upon preliminary results and on October 23, 2019, the Company made the decision to conduct a voluntary retail market withdrawal.
In February 2020, the resulting actions involving Zantac and other ranitidine products were transferred for coordinated pretrial proceedings to a Multi-District Litigation (In re Zantac/Ranitidine Products Liability Litigation MDL No. 2924) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. This MDL now includes three master complaints. The Company is named in two of those: the Master Personal Injury Complaint and the Consolidated Consumer Class Action Complaint.
As of July 15, 2020, the Company has been named in twenty-one of the MDL’s consolidated personal injury lawsuits in various federal courts alleging that plaintiffs developed various types of cancers or are placed at higher risk of developing cancer as a result of ingesting products containing ranitidine. The Company is named in these lawsuits with manufacturers of the national brand Zantac® and other manufacturers of ranitidine products distributors, repackagers, and/or retailers. Plaintiffs seek compensatory and punitive damages, and in some instances seek applicable remedies under state consumer protection laws. The Company has also been named in a Complaint brought by the New Mexico Attorney General based on the following theories: violation of a New Mexico public nuisance statute, NMSA 30-8-1 to -14; common law nuisance; and negligence and gross negligence. The Company is named in this lawsuit with manufacturers of the national brand Zantac® and other manufacturers of ranitidine products and/or retailers. Some of the Company’s retailer customers are seeking indemnity from the Company for a portion of their defense costs and liability relating to these and other consolidated cases. We intend to defend all of these lawsuits vigorously.
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 15
NOTE 15 – RESTRUCTURING CHARGES
We periodically take action to reduce redundant expenses and improve operating efficiencies. Restructuring activity includes severance, lease exit costs, and related consulting fees. The following reflects our restructuring activity (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
June 29,
2019
|
Beginning balance
|
$
|
16.0
|
|
|
$
|
20.5
|
|
|
$
|
19.6
|
|
|
$
|
24.0
|
|
Additional charges
|
1.1
|
|
|
12.2
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
18.1
|
|
Payments
|
(7.3
|
)
|
|
(9.0
|
)
|
|
(10.8
|
)
|
|
(18.0
|
)
|
Non-cash adjustments
|
—
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
Ending balance
|
$
|
9.8
|
|
|
$
|
24.0
|
|
|
$
|
9.8
|
|
|
$
|
24.0
|
|
The charges incurred during the three and six months ended June 27, 2020 were primarily associated with actions taken to streamline the organization.
The charges incurred during the three and six months ended June 29, 2019 were primarily associated with the reorganization of our executive management team and other actions taken to streamline the organization. Of the amount recorded during the six months ended June 29, 2019, $9.8 million related primarily to the sales force reorganization in France within the CSCI segment.
There were no other material restructuring programs that significantly impacted any other reportable segments for the three and six months ended June 27, 2020 or June 29, 2019. All charges are recorded in Restructuring expense on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. The remaining $9.8 million liability for employee severance benefits is expected to be paid within the next year.
NOTE 16 – SEGMENT INFORMATION
Our segments reflect the way in which our management makes operating decisions, allocates resources, and manages the growth and profitability of the Company.
The tables below show select financial measures by reporting segment (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
|
June 27,
2020
|
|
December 31,
2019
|
CSCA
|
|
$
|
4,981.5
|
|
|
$
|
3,990.2
|
|
CSCI
|
|
4,675.9
|
|
|
4,682.7
|
|
RX
|
|
2,470.9
|
|
|
2,628.5
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
12,128.3
|
|
|
$
|
11,301.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
June 27, 2020
|
|
June 29, 2019
|
|
Net
Sales
|
|
Operating Income (Loss)
|
|
Intangible Asset Amortization
|
|
Net
Sales
|
|
Operating Income (Loss)
|
|
Intangible Asset Amortization
|
CSCA
|
$
|
627.6
|
|
|
$
|
106.3
|
|
|
$
|
12.6
|
|
|
$
|
582.1
|
|
|
$
|
107.8
|
|
|
$
|
9.3
|
|
CSCI
|
321.1
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
|
38.4
|
|
|
327.5
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
43.0
|
|
RX
|
270.4
|
|
|
47.8
|
|
|
21.2
|
|
|
239.4
|
|
|
14.7
|
|
|
21.3
|
|
Unallocated
|
—
|
|
|
(47.2
|
)
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
(64.6
|
)
|
|
—
|
|
Total
|
$
|
1,219.1
|
|
|
$
|
117.4
|
|
|
$
|
72.2
|
|
|
$
|
1,149.0
|
|
|
$
|
55.0
|
|
|
$
|
73.6
|
|
Perrigo Company plc - Item 1
Note 16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended
|
|
June 27, 2020
|
|
June 29, 2019
|
|
Net
Sales
|
|
Operating Income (Loss)
|
|
Intangible Asset Amortization
|
|
Net
Sales
|
|
Operating Income (Loss)
|
|
Intangible Asset Amortization
|
CSCA
|
$
|
1,328.2
|
|
|
$
|
230.8
|
|
|
$
|
26.2
|
|
|
$
|
1,163.9
|
|
|
$
|
202.0
|
|
|
$
|
19.3
|
|
CSCI
|
703.8
|
|
|
35.6
|
|
|
76.7
|
|
|
678.3
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
|
87.1
|
|
RX
|
528.1
|
|
|
99.4
|
|
|
42.5
|
|
|
481.3
|
|
|
75.3
|
|
|
42.6
|
|
Unallocated
|
—
|
|
|
(102.7
|
)
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
(125.1
|
)
|
|
—
|
|
Total
|
$
|
2,560.1
|
|
|
$
|
263.1
|
|
|
$
|
145.4
|
|
|
$
|
2,323.5
|
|
|
$
|
157.3
|
|
|
$
|
149.0
|
|
NOTE 17 – SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
Redemption of Senior Notes
On July 6, 2020, the proceeds of the 2020 Notes were used to fund the redemption of Perrigo Finance's $280.4 million of 3.500% Senior Notes due March 15, 2021 and $309.6 million of 3.500% Senior Notes due December 15, 2021. In connection with the redemption we incurred early redemption costs of $19.0 million which will be included in Loss on extinguishment of debt on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations in the third quarter of 2020.